The Issue of "Tongues"- Part 1

(I will state at the outset of this series that I have been very influenced by Victor Budgen's book The Charismatics and the Word of God. Many of his thoughts have become such a part of my understanding that I can write and have written upon the subject without specifically referencing any particular portion of his book. However, his work upon the subject has so helped to shape my thinking that many of the ideas mentioned in these articles will have had their source in his writing.)

The issue of tongues or glossalalia in the church is a matter of much debate in our age. Unfortunately, the debate often centers upon personal experience as the test of validity and truth. One person argues for the modern use of tongues in worship on the basis of a wonderful experience that he personally enjoyed. Another argues against the use of tongues on the basis that his experience was harmful or traumatic. In both cases, the most important focus has been missed. Our inquiry into the issue must not center upon personal experience, but upon the truth of God’s Word. It is to this end that I write this. I wish to look into the Scriptures and see what they say about the gift of tongues. May the reader come to that conclusion so essential to our walk with the Lord- I must believe what the Bible says, not what I want the Bible to say. May the Holy Spirit bless His Word.

TONGUES AND “ANGELIC” LANGUAGES

We must first understand that the Scriptures teach that tongues were real human languages. They were not simply “ecstatic utterances” devoid of earthly meaning.

Some object to this assertion on the basis that the King James translation of the Scriptures repeatedly refers to the gift of tongues as unknown tongues. For example, I Corinthians 14:2 reads- “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” The objection is that since the gift is described as “unknown” it must not be a human language. The flaw in this argument is that the word “unknown” in this passage is an italicized word, indicating that the word is not in the original Greek language. It is obvious error to attempt to prove a biblical doctrine based on a word that is not part of the text! Even if the word was in the original Greek, it does not necessarily follow that the “unknown” would prove that the tongue was not a human language. There are many human languages in the world today. In fact, there are about 6,600! Due to the fact that I can only fluently speak English, it can be properly said that the other languages are unknown to me. I do not know how to speak them. I cannot understand them when they are spoken. I cannot read them. In a very true sense, they are “unknown tongues” to me. Yet, just because they are unknown to me does not mean that they are anything other than ordinary human languages!

Some point to I Corinthians 13:1 to prove that tongues were and are not ordinary human languages. Paul states, “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” Because the words “tongues of men and of angels” are recorded, the argument is that Paul understood the gift of tongues to include a “heavenly language” that was something different from the language of men. Once again, the argument fails. What Paul is expressing is a hypothetical case, not a definitive description of the gift. Paul is pointing out the primacy of love. He is saying, “Even if I were able to do the impossible in terms of actions, if I did those actions without love it would be meaningless.” Other may object to this understanding of the passage, claiming that it is simply an attempt to explain away the teaching of Scripture. However, if we look at the very next verse, it becomes exceedingly clear that this interpretation is correct. “And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.” Paul states several other conditions which are clearly impossible in this verse (understanding all mysteries, having all knowledge, having all faith), theoretically stating that even if all these impossible conditions were met, without love they are meaningless. Verse three reinforces this interpretation where Paul says, “And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.” When read in total, as Paul intended the passage to be read, we see that Paul is supposing himself to hypothetically meet all of the conditions presented here. He is pointing out that even if he were able to do all of this (which is clearly impossible), without love it is meaningless. The point to remember is that a hypothetical statement clearly pointing out the uselessness of loveless fantastic conditions impossible to meet is no text to be using to base an entire doctrine on.

Why did Paul even mention tongues of angels? The most likely reason is rooted in the fact that the supposed glossalalia of speaking in the tongues of angels was very prevalent in various cults in the area of Corinth. It seems as though the spurious gift was even perhaps considered something to be used in the Corinthian church. Paul’s inclusion of the phrase “tongues of angels” is likely an ad hominem conditional argument based upon the fixation many had with it. This is not unheard of in Scripture.

Furthermore, there is no Biblical evidence that proves angels speak in a language different from human language. Every time they appear in Scripture, they speak in human tongue. Though it is remotely possible that they do speak a different language, it is serious error to base a doctrine upon mere conjecture.