Y Safle

Tyler wrote to me concerning a scriptural basis for the separate kinds of tongues. Tongues speaking in the Bible relates to a phenomenon seen in the New Testament whereby the apostles and early Christians could speak in languages that they had not learned. In at least one case - on the day of Pentecost - they were apparently understood.

Now controversy over tongues has periodically arisen in the Church as various groups have claimed to have rediscovered this gift. The argument made is that gifts from God are beyond recall, and until this world is replaced by the next, Christians may speak in tongues.

If you are not a Christian, why would you care about this? I suppose that if a miracle such as that on the day of Pentecost were to happen again then people ought to sit up and take notice. I’ll write more on that at a later date (use the “tongues” category RSS feed to pick it up).

But if you are a Charismatic Christian, as Tyler is, then the questions you will have are likely more over how tongues speaking should be handled in public church services. Tyler wrote:

As stated before, in 1 Cor 14: 27-28 27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that BY COURSE; and let one interpret. 28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. These two types of tongues are distinguishable in the fact that a message from God that needs interpretation in a worship service is ordered by God BY COURSE. Thus messages in a worship service are prophecies when interpreted, but praying in tongues alone is different and is just prayer.

With respect, this passage does not state this. This passage says:

“if any man speak in an unknown tongue… by course”.

Man does the ordering, not God.

The question then must be asked: “what were Corinthian services like, that they warranted this instruction?”

The answer is complicated by our distance from the events and culture, but clearly to maintain that pentecostal understanding of the passage we must believe that God was giving people messages for the congregation one after another (more then three per meeting). These messages must have been going uninterpreted.

God, as we hear so often, is not the author of confusion. I therefore believe that the Corinthian error was something else.

It is apparent that the Corinthians had a huge problem with Spiritual pride. Pride pervaded their theological discussions and stand points, it invaded their morality and here it seems it had affected the church too.

It seems credible that Corinthian church services had fallen into a shambles that we would not recognise today, even in what we would consider “dodgy” churches. It would seem that the Corinthians held a service which disintegrated into a “I’m more spiritual then you” session of excesses.

One major excess was the issue of tongues speaking. The directions that Paul gives (quoted above) give us the largest clue as to what the excesses were, viz :

1. Tongues speaking was being practised widely amongst the “Spirituals”
2. There were multiple tongues (more then three we must presume)
3. Tongues were not happening by course (people were talking at the same time and talking over each other).
4. The tongues were going uninterpreted

Now Paul never says these tongues are merely human babble. He never disputes that these are authentic tongues. From this we can gather some important information about what tongues is and is not:

1. Tongues is under our control and not God’s. This is seen by the very fact that instruction is given. If the tongues are at God’s whim and under his direct control then no instruction would be necessary.
2. Tongues in a Church service are regulated, not because they are prophecy, but because they were being seriously abused by proud Christians.
3. The instruction to speak “by course” is given, not to describe a “holy hush”, but to make sure that two people do not pray in tongues at the same time together. I am aware that in some cultures, group prayer involves many people all praying at the same time. I see nothing wrong with this (it is a cultural issue), but it would seem that 1st Century Christian culture dictated that prayers be prayed one after another - the point of group prayer being that a communal amen could be said to any prayer.
4. The interpretation of a tongue is given for the sake of the community.

Now having gleaned these points from the passage, we might look at Charismatic worship and try and find comparable particulars.

One direct counterpart apparently is the charismatic practise of praying in tongues communally. Many tongues speakers pray aloud in their tongues together with no interpretation.

As usual, however, this is not directly comparable. For a start, most Charismatics pray in tongues not out of pride but out of concern. In this the motive is very different to that of the Corinthians.

Secondly, the prayer in tongues is not a fight to be the loudest, but more of a private prayer time spent in public.

For these two reasons I see no reason to directly censure the use of such praying in tongues in public, based on Corinthians.

The practise of giving a “message” in tongues in a church service (where the message is prophetic in nature and intent) seemes to have no counterpart in scripture and thus seems errant.

Where tongues speaking is carried out with a sense of pride it is clearly censured by scripture.