The Toronto Blessing and the Laughing Revival*

By Gary E. Gilley

Something happened on January 10, 1994, at a Vineyard Church near the Pearson International Airport in Toronto that was unique in the history of professing Christianity. While some point back to somewhat similar phenomena during the Welsh Revivals, Cane Ridge Revivals (1800-1801), Charles Finney (1800s), and even the Great Awakening (1734-47), all of these pale in comparison to the claims of the "Laughing Revival" that received its energy, if not origin, on that cold day in Canada.

Supporters say that on this occasion the Holy Spirit was poured out on that small congregation, resulting in spontaneous, uncontrollable laughter. Thus began a "revival" that continues to this day and has impacted churches throughout the world. Hundreds of thousands of visitors, including thousands of pastors, have attended the services at the Toronto Airport Vineyard (now called the Airport Christian Fellowship) in hopes of catching and transporting the spirit of this revival. And it seems to be working. Churches across the globe are claiming similar experiences, which, in addition to "holy laughter," include shaking, making animal noises, swooning, and being stuck in "Holy Ghost glue." It has been reported by some that up to seven thousand churches in Great Britain alone have experienced something similar to the Holy Laughter Revival.

Rodney Howard-Browne, a South African minister associated with the Word-Faith Movement, is the recognized "Father" of holy laughter. He claims to have had his first experience with these phenomena in 1979, while challenging God to "touch me" or Howard-Browne was going "to come up there and touch You." God apparently responded by causing him to feel as if his body was on fire and he broke out in uncontrollable laughter (see Howard-Browne's book, The Touch of God). In 1989, while preaching in New York State, his congregation fell under the same power. Soon Howard-Browne began influencing others, but on a small scale. Then, while preaching at Carpenter's Home Church in Lakeland, Florida, in 1993, laughter in the Spirit once again broke out bringing Howard-Browne out of obscurity. One of his disciples was Pastor Randy Clark from St. Louis, Missouri.

It was Clark (who had already experienced strange phenomenon in his church) who preached the revival sermon in Toronto that ignited the whole movement. The Revival has since spread like wildfire, especially in Vineyard and Charismatic circles, and in recent years has penetrated all kinds of denominations. Howard-Browne, who continues to be a leader of this movement, calls himself a "Holy Ghost Bartender," who thus dispenses the "new wine" of joy that leads to people being "drunk in the Spirit." He claims to find the Biblical base for his teaching in Acts 2, at the day of Pentecost. But a careful study of that text does not reveal anything like what is happening today. The apostles were not laughing uncontrollably, they were not barking like dogs, they were not stuck to the floor in Holy Ghost glue, they were not being "slain in the Spirit." They simply preached the gospel and their listeners heard it in their own language.

Recently, the Association of Vineyard Fellowships expelled the Airport Vineyard Fellowship from its association for "going over the edge." Even the Vineyard has recognized that the Revival has gone too far and is now trying to distance itself from it. What criteria the Vineyard could possibly use to do this is unknown. A criterion unused by either group is found in Isaiah 8:16,19-20:

Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples … And when they say to you, "Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter," should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living? To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn.

John Arnott, the pastor of the Airport Vineyard Fellowship, tells his followers that they are not to even entertain the thought that they might become involved in any kind of counterfeit revival. Yet, the apostle John warned us to Test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world (I John 4:1).

Wild Experiences Coming Out of Toronto

One of Howard-Browne's books has a section titled "Holy Ghost Glue." In it he recounts the story of a wealthy woman who got "stuck" in the spirit. As Howard-Browne tells it:

"She was lying there from noon until 1:30 … At 1:30, she tried to get up. She wanted to get up. She couldn't. All she could do was flap her hands. So she was lying there flapping away -- flap, flap, flap, flap … 2:30, 3:30, 4:30 … At 4:30 the woman was still saying, 'I can't get up. I'm stuck to the floor.'"

She flapped so long that, as Howard-Browne put it, he ended up "walking out on the Holy Spirit":

"I turned to the pastor and said, 'Look, I haven't had either breakfast or lunch. It's 4:30. I'm not stuck and you're not stuck. These people are going to stay here with her, so let's go have a meal before the night service.' The ushers told us later that at 6 o'clock the woman finally peeled herself off the carpet. Then it took her an hour to crawl from the center of the church auditorium to the side wall. She had been stuck to the floor for six hours!" (Manifesting the Holy Spirit, pp. 26,27).

Another experience from John Arnott:

"When Randy Clark preached at the Airport Vineyard, the pastor claimed that 'almost 80 percent of the people were on the floor. … It was like an explosion. We saw people literally being knocked off their feet by the Spirit of God. … Others shook and jerked. Some danced, some laughed. Some lay on the floor as if dead for hours. People cried and shouted'" (The Father's Blessing, by John Arnott, pp. 71-72).

Prophecies and Revelations

In a message titled "Receiving the Spirit's Power," revival leader Carol Arnott (John Arnott's wife) claims she had a conversation with the Holy Spirit. During the dialogue, the spirit that spoke with her communicated sorrow over being separated from Jesus:

"'You know, the Father, and Jesus and I have been together for all of eternity. But when Jesus went back to heaven to be with God the Father, I came to earth.' And He said, 'I am so lonely for Jesus.' He said, 'So that when people really, really love Jesus, and really honor Him, and really worship Him,' He said, 'I love to be around those kinds of people.' … He misses Jesus, and He misses the Father" (Counterfeit Revival, p. 111).

Rarely is the self-gratifying orientation of "Counterfeit Revivalists" more prominent than in John Arnott's book The Father's Blessing. In a section titled "Jesus Wants a Love Affair with You," Arnott describes how Jesus appeared to a woman and fulfilled all her fantasies. Jesus laughed with the woman as together they ran around with arms stretched out like airplanes; Jesus lay on the ground with the woman and played Legos; then Jesus played with her hair and met her deepest needs and desires (pp. 20-22).

Bizarre claims from The Father's Blessings

(1) A delightful woman came to Toronto from Europe. She came from an extremely theological and intellectual background -- "too much thinking," she said. While under God's power she had a vision. Much to her surprise, Jesus took her through events of her childhood, and they relived them together.

This woman used to play soccer, and Jesus told her gently that she took the glory for herself. So she wept and repented, then they played soccer together. She laughed and laughed at His long robe, then she asked Him to be the goalkeeper. He was so strong, He knocked all the balls away. But then He let her have a goal, and she laughed some more.

Then Jesus told her she always acted like a boy. She said this was true because her father wanted a boy, and it hurt her. But Jesus showed her that He wanted her to be a girl. She explains that she saw, like a movie before her eyes, the yard she used to play in as a child. She had a pretty flowered dress on, and they danced together, and her hair blew in the wind. Jesus told her, "You know, forever -- I wanted you as a girl." And she cried and cried. "It was so wonderful because He planned me to be a girl. It was so beautiful."

Another evening Jesus showed her herself as a baby, and He tickled her. She laughed and laughed, and baby noises came out of her. Another time, she was one year old. She was holding a toy, but she couldn't play with it because she didn't know how. And she looked into the eyes of Jesus and asked Him to explain how to play with this toy. And He took time and told her (pp. 123-124).

(2) Carol (Arnott's wife) has often prayed for me (John Arnott), and I would stand there trying to receive from God, yet not feeling anything. I would say, "Honey, is the Holy Spirit flowing in?"
She would say, "Yes, just receive." Then she would say, "Whoops, where did you go?"
"What do you mean?"
"Well, you went somewhere, and God's anointing for you came back on me."
Some of you who minister know what that feels like. When you are praying for someone else and they do not receive, the anointing comes back to you and you just about fall over -- either you or the person who is helping you.
I asked Carol why I didn't receive, and she told me that I was trying to stay in control. I argued with her, but she was more convincing: "You will not surrender; you will not give yourself to God" (p. 125).

(3) Carol Arnott gives this vision, which could have been taken right out of a Disney movie. -- The scene changed, and I was walking, holding His arm. I kept looking around thinking, "Gee, I don't recognize this place. I wonder where I am? This doesn't look familiar at all." Then I happened to look down, and I thought, "Oh, it's gold! Oh, my goodness, I am walking on the streets of gold. This is heaven! I'm the bride of Christ. I am marrying Jesus." This is the wedding day. Lord, this is incredible. I was standing in an open spot when Jesus walked up and said, "Carol, may I have the first dance?" I thought, "Oh, no, I can't dance. My wedding veil is too long." As soon as I thought that, out of nowhere came cardinals and blue jays -- all these little birds -- and they picked up my veil, and I danced with Jesus (pp. 164-165).

(4) John Arnott writes: It is no coincidence that we have seen people prophetically acting like lions, oxen, eagles and even warriors. In Steve Witt's church in St. Johns, New Brunswick, I saw all four of those manifestations happening at the same time -- the ox, the eagle, the lion and the man (warrior). The lion and eagle manifestations accompanied prophesying. The man who was acting out the part of the warrior had both hands gripped together around the hilt of a sword, and he was swinging it. These warrior actions give the observer a real feel of battlefield action. The people who were doing this were mostly credible pastors or leaders. I was astonished but sensed the awesome presence of God.

One lady who played the keyboard and weighed about 115 pounds was on all fours, snorting and pawing the ground like an angry ox or bull. It was obvious that she was surprised and a bit frightened by what was happening, but at the same time she seemed determined to follow the Spirit's leading (p. 178).

It is almost impossible to keep up on the bizarre claims coming out of Toronto. The Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship has an excellent Web site, however, complete with live and taped videos of their services and the most recent manifestations. Most recently, the church is claiming that many at their meetings, both at home and in South Africa, are receiving gold fillings in their teeth!

Perhaps a quote by Rodney Howard-Browne might help us understand how and why "Christians" can be so gullible:

"I'd rather be in a church where the devil and the flesh are manifesting than in a church where nothing is happening because people are too afraid to manifest anything. Every time there is a move of God, a few people will get excited, go overboard, and get in the flesh. Other believers will get upset, saying that couldn't be of God. Don't worry about it either. Rejoice because at least something is happening … If someone comes in the meeting, rolls around on the floor, laughs in the Holy Spirit, and does it in the flesh, at least he's not getting drunk or taking dope" (No Laughing Matter, p. 66).

In contrast, A.W. Tozer takes the Biblical position:

"Any of it [teaching] that is good is in the Word of God, and any that is not in the Word of God is not good. I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I'd ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow him out and say, 'I'm awfully sorry, you don't bring any references with you'" (Counterfeit Revival, p. 67).

---

* This report has been excerpted and or adapted from an article by the same name in the October 1999, Think on These Things, Southern View Chapel, Springfield, IL, Gary Gilley, Pastor.

Speaking in Tongues*

The issue of "speaking in tongues" plays an important role in our days, and we should consider some of the reasons why Bible-based Christians cannot join this movement. Several points, which we will discuss briefly, condemn the present-day tongues movement as not being of God.

(1) 1 Corinthians is the only epistle that mentions speaking in tongues. This phenomenon has nothing to do with "praying in the Spirit" (Rom. 8; Eph. 5; Jude 20). Therefore, "speaking in tongues" is not essential, as some claim, for the life of faith of a Christian.

(2) In the Scriptures, "tongues" always mean languages that really exist(ed). The Greek word "glossa" is also used in the phrase "tongues, as of fire" (Acts 2:2), to indicate the tongue as a member of the human body. It is further used in Revelation 5:9: "every tribe, tongue, and people ..." to represent the different populations on the earth, with their different languages.

(3) Someone may speak in tongues (a foreign language), but this is never a proof that such a person is filled with, or even indwelt by, the Holy Spirit, let alone a spiritual believer (cf. 1 Cor. 1:5; 3:1).

(4) The gift of tongues is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the sense that He gives this gift through sovereign grace to some in the Assembly and He works in them (1 Cor. 12).

(5) As a gift of the Spirit, tongues receives the last place in 1 Corinthians 12:28 (which presents the order of importance from apostles and downwards) because its possibility to edify is very limited (1 Cor. 14), except in gospel work on the mission front. Paul, in his travels, spoke in foreign languages certainly using his spiritual gifts but not in his home assembly.

(6) Only the apostles and some of those converted by their ministry spoke in tongues. Generally speaking, the sign-gifts are limited to the apostles (apart from the Lord, of course). See Acts 2:43; 3:7-9; 5:12, 15; 9:40; 19:11.

(7) The signs are given as proofs and characteristics of the work of an apostle (2 Cor. 12:12). Apostles must have been with the Lord during His earthly ministry or have seen the Lord in the glory, as happened to Paul (Acts 1:21-26; 9:3; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8).

(8) The signs and miracles, including tongues, were given by God to confirm His Word (Mk. 16:17; Heb. 2:3-4; Jn. 2:23-25). The passage in Hebrews 2 refers to sign-gifts as something of the past, already past when this epistle was written (a few years before the destruction of the temple in 70 AD).

(9) Speaking in tongues is, therefore, a sign for the unbelievers (1 Cor. 14: 19-25) so they could understand what was being said (v.23). [The gift of healing is similar. We find in the New Testament that it is used only for the benefit of unbelievers (especially among the Jews, who looked for signs) to reach their conscience, to confirm the Word that was preached, and to establish the new testimony. We do not read about any healing of believers; in fact, to the contrary (see 1 Cor. 11:30; 1 Tim. 5:23; 2 Tim. 4:20; Gal. 4:13-14; 2 Cor. 12:7).]

(10) Speaking in tongues is only described in the book of Acts, in the three cases when new groups of believers were introduced into the Assembly (or Church) -- the Jews in ch. 2, the Gentiles in ch. 10, and the disciples of John the Baptist in Acts 19:6. All spoke in different languages, and that, without having asked for it!

(11) With the progression of the testimony in the book of Acts, the number of signs and miracles diminishes quickly.

(12) Scripture presents two cases when signs and wonders take place. Most commonly, they are characteristic for the very beginning of a new dispensation. By way of exception, they also occur as a unique and temporary testimony to warn the professing people of God of soon-coming judgments. Moses, Joshua, our Lord, the twelve apostles, and the seventy that were sent out, were only sent to Israel and would fit in the first category (beginning of a new dispensation), whereas Elijah and Elisha fit in the second category (warning of judgment). The past testimony of signs and wonders, at the beginning of the Christian era, as well as a future testimony after the rapture of the Church, takes place within the borders of the Roman Empire.

(13) The completion of the revelation of the Word of God put an end to the special revelations, prophecies, and sign-gifts, including speaking in tongues (1 Cor. 13:8-10). We cannot discuss in detail in this report 1 Corinthians 12-14 (see report titled Biblical Tongues), but note that we should distinguish the gifts of prophecy and revelation of the beginning (Eph. 2:20), when the Word of God was not yet completed, from the gift of prophecy for edification (building up) which still continues to the present time (1 Cor. 13:8), the Word being now complete. [It is remarkable that the apostle Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, uses two different verbs in the Greek text to indicate a distinction between prophecy and knowledge on the one hand, which shall be done away with, and speaking in tongues on the other, of which he says "they shall cease" (1 Cor. 13:8). This last verb we could also translate with "pause," because they will function again at the introduction of the millennial reign.]

(14) Speaking in tongues is also presented in the New Testament as a fulfillment of Joel 2 and Isaiah 28 (1 Cor. 14:21) and, therefore, is intimately linked with Israel or the Jews. In Acts 2 and 19, and also in Corinth, the Jews are addressed by different tongues. Thus, they heard the Word of their God spoken to them with "pagan" tongues, something very exceptional. After the introduction of believing Gentiles into the Church, and after the formal closing of the Jewish dispensation (illustrated at the end of Acts 28 and implemented in the year 70 AD with the destruction of the temple), there are no more sign-gifts, at least not on behalf of God. [The enemy will fool people through an energy of error, allowed by God, in the coming days of apostasy (2 Thess. 2:8-12); however, a similar spirit of error is already at work, referred to as the mystery of iniquity.] God will give them again in the near future, connected with Israel: by the two witnesses in Jerusalem (Rev. 11) and, at the beginning of the coming millennial reign (Isa. 32; 53; Ps. 103), connected with a special healing of Israel.

(15) With regard to speaking in tongues (as well as any speaking), it is stated in 1 Corinthians 14:34 that women should be silent in the local assembly. Therefore, besides the arguments already given to show that speaking in tongues as a gift of God was limited to the beginning of the Church, we now come to a command of God, given at the beginning, but still valid for today. Yet, when these "gifts" are displayed today, mostly women are involved. [This is not said to discriminate against women! It is a matter of obedience to the Lord Jesus and of submission to the authority of His Word.]

(16) In religious movements and cults, such as Christian Science, Theosophy, Adventism, and all kinds of Pentecostals and Charismatics, women play an important role, either in the start of such a movement or in its emotional practices. The Holy Spirit should control emotions, which is often not so. Genesis 2-3 and 1 Timothy 2:11-15 indicate the place God has given to women; these passages also show how the enemy attacks God's order.

(17) Wrong use of speaking in tongues, even in the days of the apostles, was caused either by ignorance (1 Cor. 14:38), by lack of experience (1 Cor. 12:1), because of spiritual imperfection or immaturity (1 Cor. 2:6-16), or even willful abuse (1 Cor. 4:19).

(18) Unbelievers can do signs (Mt. 7:22; Rev. 13; 2 Th. 2:9; 2 Chr. 18:21; Acts 16:16). Furthermore, so-called speaking in tongues has been practiced in the past (even before the early days of the Church) by unbelievers and false teachers, as well as in our days: Plato, Virgil, before Christian Era; Irving, 19th century; Mormons, Buddhists, Spiritists, besides so-called Charismatics, in past and present days.

(19) True believers can place themselves under wrong, diabolical influences, as occurred to Peter (Mt. 16:21-23).

(20) The tongues at the beginning of the Christian era were real languages that could be verified. Today, those who pretend to speak in languages (tongues) do not know what language they speak nor what they say. Sometimes they try to justify themselves by saying that they are speaking in the tongues of angels (because nobody can check this).

(21) Often there is no interpretation, in contrast to Paul's instructions in 1 Corinthians 14. In reality, uncontrolled expressions that nobody can translate are pronounced; sometimes even curses are uttered, though in a language none of those present understands. If they give interpretations, they may contradict each other, or they are sometimes much longer than the tongue-spoken message, or they are very subjective, instead of glorifying Christ.

(22) A key passage is 1 Corinthians 14:15. This verse shows the one praying, singing, or speaking in tongues (and in context this refers to men in the public meetings of the local assembly) must himself understand what he speaks.

(23) To heed this principle would be very beneficial for many Christians today, who are involved in all kinds of manmade systems and may be placing themselves (often without realizing it) under demonic influences. Even so-called "singing in tongues" is practiced today.

Conclusion

Speaking in tongues, when practiced according to the Bible, is a sign from God given to warn unbelievers of impending judgment. Because of this point, Scripture provides limiting conditions for its use within the Church, including the requirement that an interpretation should be given (also in the case of a visitor speaking a foreign language).

Furthermore, tongues were a characteristic of apostolic ministry, to confirm the Word of God in a time when the Church was not yet established in all its diversity and when the revealed Word of God was not yet completed. The destruction of the temple closed the days of the Jewish era. With the establishment of the new Christian testimony, which included Jewish Christians, the exercise of the sign-gifts, including speaking in tongues, simply stopped. (On the foundation of the apostles and prophets of the New Testament, Ephesians 2:20; Paul's ministry completed the Word of God and closed the period in which God gave revelations.) Therefore, the modern-day tongues movement must be rejected as a demonic influence which serves several purposes:

(1) To keep believers in ignorance and spiritual immaturity;

(2) To suggest that right now, in a day of small things like in Zechariah 4:10, we can have the same "great things of God" (Acts 2:11) as in the early days of the Church;

(3) To suggest that we are not under Gods dealings in discipline, because of decline and disobedience;

(4) To sow discord among Christians, while creating outward unity;

(5) To mobilize emotions, which are not controlled by the Spirit and Word of God.

Several Errors Often Accompany Speaking in Tongues Today:

(1) Often this practice goes together with introducing, defending, or propagating false teachings concerning the Person and Work of Christ;

(2) Women play a dominating role, forsaking the role assigned to them in the Word of God;

(3) There is a lack of true spiritual growth in the tongue-speaking movement;

(4) There is ignorance with regard to doctrinal or moral evil;

(5) There are many conflicts and dissensions because of a carnal condition.

The Lord has given His people the ability to understand His thoughts (1 Cor. 2:15) provided there is a true spiritual attitude (1 Cor. 2:6). When a Christian is speaking in tongues without knowing what he is saying, then this conflicts with his Christian position. It is also crucial, in our days of ruin in the Christian profession, to make sure from which source, Christ or Satan, one receives instructions, influences, or directives. James 3 is quite clear about the possibility of two different sources or fountains (cf. 1 Cor. 12:1-3; 1 Jn. 4:1-3).

Finally, the instructions in 2 Timothy 2 give much help for our days. Are we going to be real servants of the Lord? Are we willing to maintain His rights in the midst of the Christian profession where His authority has been rejected (not always doctrinally, but often practically) by human arrangements or religious systems in which Christ is not honored as Lord? If we reject His authority and rights, we deliver ourselves to God's governmental dealings, as a consequence of our disobedience (compare Rom. 1:24-32, Gal. 6:7). This will ultimately be the case for the so-called charismatic movement, when God will send an energy of error. 2 Thessalonians 2:9 gives the prophetic fulfillment after the rapture, but the principle applies today as well. May it please the Lord to keep us for His own glory, because of His Name!

---

* Adapted and used by permission of: "THE HOLY SCRIPTURES"/P.O. Box 677/HAWKESBURY, Ontario/Canada K6A 3C8/Alfred E. Bouter (ed.).

Doctrinal Distinctives of the Charismatic Movement*

By Gary E. Gilley

The focus of the Pentecostal and charismatic movements has always been centered on shared experiences, not theology. This is especially true of those in the charismatic movement, which transcends all denominations. Thus, for example, there are Catholic charismatics, who believe in a sacramental form of salvation, and there are Lutheran charismatics, who believe that infant baptism is redemptive, and there are Baptist charismatics, who believe they are saved through faith alone. While these three types of charismatics might vary widely in their views of the fundamentals of their faith, what they have in common is an experience -- the experience of speaking in tongues. While all charismatics do not personally speak in tongues, all would accept the validity of tongues-speaking. This experience does have a doctrinal framework, of course, which could be expressed in the following two statements:

1) The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a second work of grace that brings power in the life of the believer.

2) The evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues.

The logical conclusion of these statements is that a person who has not been baptized by the Holy Spirit is a "second class" Christian and is not experiencing the power of God in his life. If the charismatics are correct, an important ingredient is missing from the spiritual life of most Christians. If they are wrong, then they have elevated a questionable at best, or at worst, a fraudulent practice to the centerpiece of Christian living. If the baptism of the Holy Spirit is truly a subsequent experience, with the evidence of speaking in tongues, then all Christians should seek this baptism. If it is not, then this theology should be exposed and denounced. One cannot have it both ways.

The Biblical foundation for the unique theological position of charismatics is found almost entirely in the book of Acts. Four passages are critical:

Acts 2:1-8 -- The day of Pentecost where tongues were first spoken.
Acts 8:14-18 -- In Samaria where the new believers did not receive the Holy Spirit until the apostles came, even though there is no record of tongues being spoken.
Acts 10:44-48 -- At Cornelius' house when the Gentiles received the Spirit.
Acts 19:1-7 -- When John's disciples received the Spirit at conversion and spoke in tongues.

A careful study of the above passages, and others, will reveal that it is extremely difficult to base doctrine on the book of Acts. Acts is a book of history, tracing the transitional nature of the early church. Note the transitional nature and the diversity of the reception of the Holy Spirit in these four passages. For example, there is no speaking in tongues in Acts 8; no wind or fire except in Acts 2; some, who were already saved, received the Spirit, along with some new converts; etc. However now, according to Romans 8:9 and I Corinthians 12:13, the Holy Spirit is always received at the moment of conversion.

It should also be noted that most converts, even in the book of Acts, did not speak in tongues. The following believers apparently did not speak in tongues: 3000 at Pentecost (2:41); 5000 men (4:4); the eunuch (8:35-38); Saul (9:3-18); Sergius Paulus (13:7-12); at Antioch (13:43); Lydia (16:14,15); Philippian jailer (16:27-34); Berea and Thessalonica (17:4,12); Athens (17:34); Crispus (18:8); and at Ephesus (19:18).

The epistles clearly teach that the purpose of Spirit baptism is to bring us into the body of Christ -- Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:26,27; Ephesians 4:5 (one baptism); Colossians 2:12; I Corinthians 12:13 (as well as verses 14-26 pointed out that not all speak in tongues).

So how do charismatics deal with the apostolic teaching that Spirit baptism occurs at the moment of conversion, brings us into the body of Christ, and is not accompanied with tongues? They deal with it by teaching that there are actually two Spirit baptisms in the New Testament. This view holds that the first baptism, called the baptism of repentance, happens to all believers and brings them into the body of Christ. The second baptism is the baptism with the Holy Spirit, or endowment with power, which is signified by tongues. The first is baptism by the Holy Spirit; the second is with the Holy Spirit.

The charismatic position is that when Paul referred to tongues in I Corinthians 12-14, he was speaking to believers who had received the first baptism (by the Spirit) and were, thus, already part of the body of Christ. As part of the body of Christ, some had received the gift of speaking in tongues -- but not all. Obviously then, not every believer will receive the gift of speaking in tongues. On the other hand, when a Christian has received the second baptism (with the Holy Spirit) the evidence will be speaking in tongues as a SIGN of that experience. Therefore, according to this view, some Christians have the gift of tongues, but all Christians who have received the second baptism will evidence this fact with at least an initial experience of speaking in tongues.

It is easy to see that a poor understanding of the book of Acts is overturning the clear teaching of the epistles. Even Acts refutes this "two-baptism" view when in 11:17 Luke declares the tongues "experiences" of chapters 2 and 10, which were signs, as gifts. Tongues, in the early church, were "sign-gifts." (See below for a discussion of sign gifts.)

In addition, opposition to the charismatic position is found in Ephesians 4:5, which says that there is only one baptism. The distinction between "by" and "with" cannot be sustained. The same Greek preposition "en" is used both in I Corinthians 12:13 and in Acts 1:5. In I Corinthians 12:7-13, we are told that God has already given the gifts as He wills. He tells us that we do not all have the same gifts (read 12:4, 7-11, 14-18 and 28-31). In all of the New Testament, only I Corinthians 12:13 explains the purpose of the baptism of the Spirit, which is to bring us into the body (church) of Christ. To claim that its purpose is to give us power from God, and is evidenced by speaking in tongues, is without Biblical basis.

The Purpose of Biblical Tongues

The New Testament is clear that tongues were actual foreign languages -- not incoherent gibberish. Acts 2:4-8 is the only passage in the New Testament that sheds light on the nature of tongues. At that event, those who heard tongues spoken by the apostles were able to understand them in their own language. The apostles apparently spoke in languages they did not understand -- but they spoke in known languages, understandable to the listeners.

Why did God use tongues in the early church? Much debate has taken place over this question. The major theories are presented in the following few paragraphs, with a short commentary following each theory:

The First Theory: Church Edification

The idea is that the gift of tongues was, and is, given for the edifying of other believers. However, the whole purpose of I Corinthians 14:1-19 is to emphasize that tongues were worthless for this purpose.

The Second Theory: Evangelization

At Pentecost, it was Peter's gospel message -- not tongues -- that brought people to Christ. With Cornelius (Acts 10), it was new Christians who spoke in tongues and no unsaved people were present. At Ephesus, there was no indication that any unsaved people were present when tongues were spoken (Acts 19:6). Tongues at Corinth were clearly not evangelistic. In fact, Paul remarked that unbelievers observing them would likely be repelled, just as they were at Pentecost (I Corinthians 14:23 and Acts 2:13).

The Third Theory: Proof of Spirit Baptism

In the New Testament, many believers are said to be filled with the Holy Spirit, with no mention of speaking in tongues. Spiritual baptism always has reference to our baptism into Christ. The difference between baptism and filling is found in Ephesians 5:18. We are commanded to be filled; therefore, it is not universal among Christians, whereas baptism is.

The Fourth Theory: Devotional

Paul said that he would rather pray and sing with the Spirit AND the mind than with just the Spirit alone (I Corinthians 14:14-15). The purpose of tongues is as a sign (Mark 16:17), not for personal spiritual growth.

The Fifth Theory: Condemnation

According to I Corinthians 14:21, which quotes Isaiah 28:11,12, tongues were a sign to the nation of Israel that God was bringing judgment upon them for their sinfulness and rejection of Christ.

The Sixth Theory: Apostolic Authentication

Since, on the testimony of Jesus, tongues were a sign, it remains only to determine what they were a sign of (Mark 16:17). In II Corinthians 12:11-13, Paul appeals to signs and wonders as the proofs of the apostolic office. If that is what they were, then that is their purpose. No unusual manifestation of the Spirit's presence (no sign) ever occurred except in the presence of an apostle or by those who had been directly ministered to by an apostle.

A combination of the final two theories rings true. Tongues, as a sign gift, point out two things: the judgment of Israel, and in a secondary sense, to the authority of the apostles.

Support for the Apostolic Authentication Theory

There are five facts that show the distinctive character of the apostolic office:

1) the church was founded upon them (Ephesians 2:20);
2) they were eyewitnesses of Christ's resurrection (Acts 1:22 and I Corinthians 15:7-9);
3) they were special authorized agents (Luke 6:13);
4) the fact of their appointment was authenticated by signs; the absence of miracles would invalidate the claim of one who asserted that he was an apostle (II Corinthians 12:12 and Acts 5:11-13); and
5) the fact of their apostolic authority (II Peter 3:2, 15-16; I Corinthians 4:12 and II Thessalonians 3:6,14).

Tongues as a sign

Mark 16:17-20 -- Signs were to be manifested by the apostles and by those to whom they ministered. In verse 20, Mark already (by AD 68) considered these signs past.

Acts 2:14-21; 4:3 -- Only the apostles spoke in tongues or performed signs on these occasions.

Acts 8:13 -- Phillip was not an apostle, but had the apostles' "hands" lain upon him (6:6). However, his converts performed no signs or wonders. Only when apostles came from Jerusalem and laid hands upon Philip's converts was there any unusual demonstration of the Spirit's presence in them (8:15-17).

Note: Acts records new groups (Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles and Old Testament believers) in the initial act of receiving the Holy Spirit, which would later be the mark of all Christians (Romans 8:9).

Acts 10 -- God employed a series of supernatural visions in order to have Peter be the one to present the Gospel to Cornelius.

Acts 19 – Acts 19:2 would be better translated, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" These men were not yet converted. In 19:6, tongues came to authenticate Paul as an apostle.

II Corinthians 12:12 -- Some at Corinth who had been converted under Paul received the gift of tongues to validate Paul's claim to apostleship.

All signs are temporary

Jesus predicted signs only in association with the apostolic ministry. Mark considered the signs as past (AD 68). Hebrews 2:3-4 was written around the same time and also considered the signs as past.

The last recorded miracles in the New Testament took place about AD 58 (Acts 28:3-9). In AD 60, Epaphroditus became sick, but he was not healed miraculously (Philippians 2:25-30). About AD 62, Timothy had a stomach ailment, which remained uncured (I Timothy 5:23). Around AD 64, one of Paul's associates was so seriously ill that Paul had to leave him behind, uncured (II Timothy 4:20). Yet earlier, Paul had been instrumental even in restoring life to the dead.

Some gifts were temporary

All signs may be considered as spiritual gifts, but not all spiritual gifts were signs. The gifts of miracles, healings, and tongues were sign gifts. All the sign gifts were temporary (compare Acts 11:17 with Mark 16). As with the miracles of Jesus, they served to authenticate the position and authority of the apostles.

Support for the Judgment Upon Israel Theory

The argument runs as follows: God had warned Israel on several occasions (Isaiah 28:11,12; 33:19; Deuteronomy 28:49,50; Jeremiah 5:15) that when they found themselves invaded and surrounded by those speaking in languages they did not understand, it was a sign to them that they were being judged by God for their disobedience. When, at Pentecost and in the early years of the church, tongues were spoken in the presence of Jews, it would be a sign to them that judgment was coming because of their rejection of the Messiah. That judgment came with the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple, and the scattering of the Jewish people in AD 70. At that point, the purpose of tongues (as a sign to disobedient Israel) had been fulfilled, and therefore, tongues ceased. This was the primary purpose for tongues.

Tongues Have Ceased

Biblical Evidence

I Corinthians 13:8-10 -- Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part, and we prophecy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

This passage was written around AD 55, and clearly states that tongues shall cease. The question is, when? The answer to that question is often seen as hinging on the meaning of the word "perfect" in the text.

What is "that which is perfect"? - - Three views:

1) The Rapture (a view often held by tongue speakers)

However, the term "that which is perfect" cannot refer to the Lord because of the neuter articles. It can be translated "when the perfect thing arrives." This view also contradicts other Scripture, which states that there will be prophecy after the rapture -- during the Tribulation (Revelation 11:3-13) and during the Millennial Age (Joel 2:28).

2) The Canon

Not even the New Testament allows us to know fully, there is much that we still do not know.

3) The Eternal State

This is when we will see face to face, and is the best understanding of "perfect." The passage is therefore teaching that both prophecy and supernatural knowledge will cease forever at the point when God ushers in the eternal state. But carefully notice that tongues is not named among those gifts that are said to be made inoperative by the arrival of the perfect. Therefore, tongues could cease prior to this event. With prophecy and knowledge the verb "shall cease," meaning "to lay aside" or "render inoperative" is used. With tongues a different verb is used meaning "to stop" or "they will be done away." It carries with it the idea of a natural cessation.

It is also important to note the voice changes: "will be done away," is in the passive voice, meaning that they will be forced to stop by an outside agent (i.e. that which is perfect). However, "cease" is in the middle voice, which allows for the possibility that they could cease in and of themselves -- naturally -- when their purpose is fulfilled.

I Corinthians 13:8-10 does not give definitive evidence that tongues have ceased and are no longer operative today -- but it strongly allows for such a view. Paul implies that tongues will cease when their purpose is fulfilled. If, as demonstrated above, the purpose of tongues was to authenticate the apostles and their message, and to serve as a sign to Israel of judgment for rejecting their Messiah, then tongues have fulfilled their purpose. Phrased another way, since there are no longer apostles to authenticate, and since Israel has already been judged (in AD 70), tongues no longer have a purpose in the church today. Tongues cessation should then be expected with the passing of the apostles and the judgment of Israel. Both the testimonies of Scripture and of church history verify this fact. There is no record of anyone speaking in tongues in the New Testament after AD 70.

Church History Evidence (Church history does not prove any doctrinal issues. However, in this case, church history verifies what we would expect from a study of the New Testament: That tongues, having fulfilled their purpose, ceased to exist by AD 70, and were not found in the history of the church.)

Apostolic Fathers

It is significant that the gift of tongues is rarely alluded to, hinted at, or found, in the Apostolic Fathers. The Fathers wrote to defend Christianity, to correct Christians, to explain doctrines, etc. after the death of the apostles. Yet they did not mention tongues in a favorable light, and for the most part, totally ignored them.

Some examples:

Justin Martyr (AD 100-165) wrote about spiritual gifts but did not mention tongues. He never mentions anyone speaking in tongues.

Montanus (AD 126-180) did speak in tongues, but was regarded as demon-possessed by Christians of his day (refer to the section "History of Tongues," Think on These Things, Vol. 5, Issue 3).

Irenaeus (AD 140-203) said he had heard that some spoke in tongues. He had, however, been influenced by the Montanists and did not speak in tongues himself nor apparently witness anyone that did.

Tertulian (AD 150-222) was converted to Montanism for a period of time. He wrote about one lady who spoke in tongues and was a Montanist. This was the last witness to tongues-speaking by any of the Church Fathers.

Origen (AD 185-253) said that in his day no one spoke in tongues.

Chrysostom (AD 347-407) made no mention of tongues being spoken in his day.

Augustine (AD 354-430) did not write of tongues being spoken during his life.

Half-Way Summary

If, as has been demonstrated, the gift of tongues has fulfilled the purpose for which it was designed, and therefore, has ceased, what is going on today? That is, how do we explain the present day phenomenon of speaking in tongues if the Holy Spirit is no longer bestowing this gift upon people? What is the origin of speaking in tongues in the modern church?

Certainly there is more than one origin. Tongues can be demonic, as is demonstrated by documented tongues-speaking in pagan religions. Tongues can be faked for the purpose of peer-approval. After all, if you attend a church that teaches that speaking in tongues is a sign of spiritual maturity, the pressure to conform could be enormous.

It appears that the majority of tongues-speaking in the modern church is a learned response. In other words, people are being taught, either directly or indirectly, how to speak in tongues. Let's take a look at this theory.

Characteristics of the Modern Tongues Movement

The nature of tongues:

Clearly, tongues in the New Testament were languages, understandable by those who knew the language being spoken. This is not the case today. Linguists have described modern tongues as a form of ecstatic speech, similar to that which occurs all over the world in many religious practices. Interestingly, the first Pentecostals believed they were speaking in foreign languages for the purpose of propagating the gospel on the mission field. Some early Pentecostals even rushed to foreign countries without any language training, and began preaching the gospel, trusting that the listeners understood them. When it became obvious that they were not understood, these zealous missionaries had to come home and revise their understanding of this phenomenon (see Christian History Magazine, "The Rise of Pentecostalism," Vol. XVII, page 2).

The absence of spontaneity:

Contrary to the spontaneous and surprising reception of tongues in the book of Acts, modern day promoters of tongues present formulas and instructions designed to teach people how to speak in tongues. Usually these instructions include a prescription to begin by making sounds of some kind, such as by repetition of a phrase.

Charismatics present speaking in tongues as an act of faith. It is something that you must knowingly begin, and trust that God will continue. Larry Christenson, a charismatic Lutheran, said:

"In order to speak in tongues, you have to quit praying in English ...You simply lapse into silence and resolve to speak not a syllable of any language you have ever learned. Your thoughts are focused on Christ, and then you simply lift up your voice and speak out confidently, in faith that the Lord will take the sound you give Him and shape it into a language. You take no thought of what you are saying. As far as you are concerned it is just a series of sounds. The first sounds will sound strange and unnatural to your ear, and they may be halting and inarticulate (have you ever heard a baby learning to talk?)" (quoted by Robert Gromacki, The Modern Tongues Movement, p. 41).

Harold Bredesen gave these instructions to tongues seekers at Yale:

"1. Think visually and concretely, rather than abstractly: for example, try to visualize Jesus as a person.

2. Consciously yield your voices and organs of speech to the Holy Spirit.

3. Repeat certain elementary sounds, such as 'bah-bah-bah,' or something similar. Bredesen then laid his hands on the hand of each seeker, prayed for him, and the seeker did actually speak in tongues" (quoted by Gromacki, p. 42).

John Kildahl, in an interesting book entitled The Psychology of Speaking in Tongues, explains it this way:

"When I hypnotize someone, I begin by saying 'Lie back ... Shut your eyes ... Relax ... Breathe deeply … And listen to the sounds of your breathing as you relax, you can feel yourself getting tired and drowsy.' A sample of a tongues leader teaching someone to speak in tongues is, 'The Lord is in your presence ... He is with you now ... Open yourself to Him ... Let all your anxieties flow out of you ... The Lord wants to give you the gift of His Holy Spirit ... Open your mouth, and He will give you utterance.' The hypnotist has essentially a two-pronged strategy: that of sensory deprivation and of developing a special kind of relationship, in other words, a relationship of dependence and trust" (Gromacki, p. 37).

Disillusionment:

Christenson cites two universal temptations in regards to tongues. One is artificiality -- the temptation to think, "I am just making this up." He says to repel this temptation with all vigor. The second temptation is ineffectuality -- when the enthusiasm of tongues has dimmed, a person may begin to neglect or cease to use tongues. Christenson says that every gift of God involves stewardship, and, therefore, one must resolve to use it all the rest of his life. This amounts to saying that the "gift" which was sought and begun by artificial means, must be continued at all costs, even when common sense says it is a hollow mockery.

In addition, Kildahl claims that when tongues are an important life goal, there is always a relationship to a leader or a group that conveys a feeling of acceptance and belonging. If confidence is lost in the authority figure then quite often the person will stop speaking in tongues. Kildahl, in his studies, said he "found no tongue-speaker who was unrelated to a glossolalia authority figure that he esteemed. Those who had spoken in tongues, but were now indifferent to it in this research, had in each case had a falling out with the leader of the tongue-speaking group" (The Psychology of Speaking in Tongues, p. 53).

The Modern Gift of Interpretation:

If tongues-speaking is problematic, the interpretation of tongues is more so. While tongues can be faked, or explained as a heavenly language, interpretations are not so easily handled. The interpretation of tongues is the supernatural ability to understand and interpret a message, in an unknown language to the interpreter, for the benefit and edification of the body of Christ (I Corinthians 14:5-19). The progression should be: God gives a message in tongues to Joe who speaks that message at a church service, but doesn't understand it. Bill is then given the ability to understand what Joe has said and relays it to the church.

It is at this point that the modern gift of tongues breaks down most dramatically. A number of studies have been done that are anything but supportive of the charismatic position. Tongues-speaking has been recorded and then played back to those claiming the gift of interpretation. In every experiment of this nature, each interpreter interpreted these recorded messages differently. In one instance, John 3:3 was recited in the German language, but the interpreter claimed that Acts 19:2 had been recited in French. Another time Psalm 23 was recited in Hebrew, but the interpretation had nothing to do with Psalm 23. Sometimes the interpretation contradicts the clear teaching of the Lord. Interpretation has always been found wanting (see the Handbook on Tongues, pp. 80,95).

Kildahl and his researchers taped several people speaking in tongues for interpreters:

"In no instance was there any similarity in the several interpretations … When confronted with the disparity between their interpretations, the interpreters offered the explanation that God gave to one person one interpretation of the speech and to another person another interpretation" (The Psychology of Speaking in Tongues, p. 73).

Such studies poke gaping holes in views held by charismatics and reveal tongues for what they are -- a learned response, not a supernatural gift from the Holy Spirit.

Natural Explanations

Kildahl offers the following possible explanations for the modern tongue movement:

A motor automatism -- Some tongues are the result of a trance-like condition.

Ecstasy -- Some tongues result from a strong and unusual emotional excitement.

Hypnosis -- Due to repeated suggestions as to what is expected of one and the repeated appeals to yield oneself to the "power," many writers have concluded that hypnotism is frequently involved in causing tongues.

Psychic catharsis -- Kildahl found that anxiety was a prerequisite for developing the ability to speak in tongues. Additionally, persons with a low level of emotional stability tended to be extreme in their affirmation of the benefits of glossolalia.

Kildahl, p. 40: Research proved that glossolalists are more submissive, suggestible and dependent in the presence of authority figures than non-tongue-speakers. This was important because one has to follow a leader's suggestions to be hypnotized. Research also proved that tongue speakers think about some benevolent authority person when they began to speak in tongues.

Kildahl, page 54: Hypnotizability requires that the subject be trusting enough to turn himself over to someone else and place his destiny in his hands. If one can be hypnotized, then one is able under proper conditions to learn to speak in tongues.

Kildahl, page 74: It is our definite opinion that those who have the necessary psychological characteristics can learn to speak in tongues. This gives rise to the question, "If it is truly a gift of the Holy Spirit, why must it be demonstrated and taught?" I have observed the same routine everywhere I have been:

1) A meeting devoted to intense concentration on tongue speaking, followed by
2) An atmosphere of heightened suggestibility to the words of the tongue speaker leader, after which
3) The initiate is able to make the sounds he is instructed to make. It is the same procedure that a competent hypnotist employs. I have reached the conclusion that tongue speaking is a learned phenomenon.

Other Matters

Why the present interest in tongues?

In our society, there is a seemingly strong desire for a genuine religious expression in the midst of the pressures of a secularized society. People are longing for an authentic relationship with God, but they are not nearly as interested in knowing God in truth. If spiritual maturity can be attained attending emotionally-charged meetings and receiving instantaneous supernatural experiences that deliver spirituality, why do the hard work of Scripture study, memorization, prayer, and walking by the Spirit? The charismatic movement has offered a shortcut to godliness. That this shortcut is really a detour leading people to a dead end, is often not recognized until one has traveled far down this detour and has come face to face with disillusionment. By then, however, many have hopelessly lost their way and know of no scriptural compass to guide them safely back to the path of truth.

"Forbid not to speak in tongues" (I Corinthians 14:39).

Charismatics will often throw the above words in the face of one who disagrees with their view on tongues. But it must be remembered that these words were written in AD 55 to a group of people who had received this gift from the Holy Spirit to authenticate the apostleship of Paul, AND to warn Israel that judgment was coming for their rejection of the Messiah. The Holy Spirit had not yet ceased giving the gift. The purpose for the gift was still alive and well.

The Affects of Charismatic Doctrine Upon Other Areas of Theology

Charismatic doctrine undermines the teachings of Scripture and authentic Christian living. Below is an outline of how the teachings of the charismatics taint, to some degree, every doctrine found in the Word of God. The following are some examples:

Theology in General

Those who teach charismatic doctrines tend to downplay theology. John Wimber said, "When are we going to see a generation who doesn't try to understand this book (the Bible), but just believes it?"

Charismatic doctrine places experience above truth of Scripture. Jack Deere said, "The idea that fallen humanity, can arrive at pure biblical objectivity in determining all their practices and beliefs is an illusion" (Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, p. 46). His solution? Experience and modern prophesies.

Both Paul Cain and John Wimber are credited with coining the phrase, "God will offend your mind to reveal your heart" (The Father's Blessing, p. 182). This is a reference to the charismatic view that the Holy Spirit will often do an end run around our rational thinking ability, including the understanding of Scripture, to reveal truth to us. John Arnott teaches, "Do not take control, do not resist, do not analyze; just surrender to His love. You can analyze the experience later; just let it happen" (The Father's Blessing, p. 127). This is a sure recipe for disaster.

Bibliology

There are several concerns here:

Charismatic doctrines undermine the authority of Scripture -- Take, for example, a quote from this charismatic author: Ultimately this doctrine (the sufficiency of Scripture) is demonic even (though) Christian theologians have been used to perfect it (Spiritual Warfare, page 11).

They believe in extra-Biblical revelation – "Today, after years of practical experiences and intense study on the subject of God's speaking, I am convinced that God does indeed speak apart from the Bible, though never in contradiction to it. And He speaks to all of His children, not just to specially gifted prophetic people. And He will speak to us all in amazing detail" (Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, by Jack Deere, p. 214).

This is the error of all cults as well as the Roman Catholic Church. If God is still giving revelation today, how are we to discern when God is speaking and when He is not? The charismatics tell us that as long as the revelation does not contradict Scripture, then we can be assured that it is from God. However, that leaves the door wide open for every kind of error. For example, the Roman Catholic Church's doctrines of purgatory and Mariology, while they may contradict Scripture, for the most part simply add to the divine revelation. The Mormon's view that the Book of Mormon is the story of the gospel coming to America is the same type of error.

It is also their belief that prophets today make mistakes -- "Anyone who has experience in helping to nurture 'baby prophets' realizes that they have difficulty in distinguishing the words that the Spirit speaks from those that come from their own hearts or even from evil sources. At first they make many mistakes" (Some Said It Thundered, page XIV). "Prophets are, of course, human beings. As such, they can make mistakes and lie. They need not cease to be prophets for their mistakes and failings" (ibid., page XVI).

As can be seen from these quotes, the charismatic view of revelation would throw the believer into a sea of subjectivity. God considered the authenticity of His Word so important that He required the death penalty for Old Testament prophets whose prophecies did not come true (Deut. 18:20). How do we discern which prophet is right and which has made a mistake? When do we know that a prophet has spoken truthfully or has lied? Are we at the mercy of fresh revelation or can we still go to the Scriptures to find, "Thus says the Lord"? While charismatics give lip service to the authority of Scripture, in practice, their "words of knowledge," prophetic revelations, and messages in tongues reign supreme. Thus, the undermining of the Word of God is perhaps the greatest error that charismatics have fostered among God's people.

Soteriology

Since charismatics are found in every type of denomination and church background, there tend to be many gospel messages among charismatics. Even in denominations such as the Vineyard Church, the gospel often takes such a backseat to the "gifts and phenomenon of the Spirit" that the content of the gospel is muted at best. For example, in John Wimber's book on evangelism, Power Evangelism, he never once discusses what the gospel is. The book is devoted instead to what Wimber believes to be the only authentic method of New Testament evangelism, something he calls "power evangelism." In Wimber's mind "proclamation evangelism," in which a person is shown from Scripture the message of salvation, just won't work. In Wimber's view, to win substantial numbers of people to Christ, one must first soften them up by performing some miracle, or by giving a "word of knowledge." Not only does power evangelism miss the boat Scripturally, it also serves to confuse the unsaved. The emphasis is upon signs and wonders rather than Christ and Him crucified. Most are being attracted to the show rather than the cross.

Ecclesiology

Many within charismatic circles hold to some form of dominion theology, which confuses the church with Israel and teaches that we are looking for a latter day revival that will sweep multitudes into the kingdom and transform society before the return of Christ (i.e., Reconstructionism). In addition, the majority of charismatics are highly, and unbiblically, ecumenical. Many are actively pursuing reunification with the Roman Catholic Church, and some even consider the Pope to be an evangelical Christian. The purpose of the church is often distorted as they concentrate on the showy gifts (miracles, tongues, prophecies) rather than the balanced functioning of the body.

Eschatology

Some charismatics are not looking for the return of Christ, but for the "latter rain," in which they believe there will be a special outpouring of the Spirit that restores the supernatural gifts to the church and bring a great revival. They do not believe that Christ can return until the world is prepared for Him by the "latter rain."

Earl Paulk says that the pretribulational rapture position is a "heresy" inspired by Satan to rock the church to sleep. His view is not based upon a thorough study of Scripture, but on a supposedly new revelation from God (Biblical Perspectives, Vol. 4, #4, page 6).

Pneumatology

Many believe in a second work of grace often called the "baptism of the Holy Spirit." This baptism gives the believer special powers and gifts. Others, such as the Vineyard Movement, would not agree with the term "baptism of the Holy Spirit," but teach essentially the same thing. They say the evidence of the Holy Spirit at work in our lives is powers, signs, and wonders.

Angelology/Demonology

Angels, demons, and "spiritual warfare" are popular today in charismatic circles. Based upon experience, rather than Scripture, a whole new theology has been developed concerning angels and demons that completely misrepresents the teachings of the Word. (See our report on "Spiritual Warfare" for a better understanding of this subject).

In conclusion, the charismatic movement is not just a harmless segment within evangelical Christianity, but a devastating error that undermines many of the cardinal truths of the Word of God.

---

* This report has been excerpted and or adapted from two articles by the same name (Parts I & II) in the August and September 1999, Think on These Things, Southern View Chapel, Springfield, IL, Gary Gilley, Pastor.

Biblical Tongues*

Introduction

In 1 Corinthians 13:1-3, tongues of men refer to understandable human languages; the tongues of angels may refer to the medium by which angels communicate in heaven. Paul does not say that it is possible or desirable to speak with the tongues of angels, rather, he says that if such a thing were possible, it is not (nor is any other "gift") the mark of the Spirit of Christ -- genuine love is that mark (1 Cor. 13 describes Christian love).

other tongues (Acts 2:4), heterais glossai -- that is,

Other than their native tongues. Each one began to speak in a language that he had not acquired and yet it was a real language and understood by those from various lands familiar with them. It was not jargon, but intelligible language. Jesus had said that the gospel was to go to all the nations and here the various tongues of earth were spoken. One might conclude that this was the way in which the message was to be carried to the nations, but future developments disprove it. This is a third miracle (the sound, the tongues like fire, the untaught languages). There is no blinking the fact that Luke so pictures them. One need not be surprised if this occasion marks the fulfilment of the Promise of the Father. But one is not to confound these miraculous signs with the Holy Spirit. They are merely proof that he has come to carry on the work of his dispensation. The gift of tongues came also on the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts 10:44-47; 11:15-17), the disciples of John at Ephesus (Acts 19:6), the disciples at Corinth (I Cor. 14:1-33). It is possible that the gift appeared also at Samaria (Acts 8:18). But it was not a general or a permanent gift. Paul explains in 1Cor. 14:22 that "tongues" were a sign to unbelievers and were not to be exercised unless one was present who understood them and could translate them. This restriction disposes at once of the modern so-called tongues which are nothing but jargon and hysteria. It so happened that here on this occasion at Pentecost there were Jews from all parts of the world, so that some one would understand one tongue and some another without an interpreter such as was needed at Corinth. The experience is identical in all four instances and they are not for edification or instruction, but for adoration and wonder and worship. As the Spirit gave them utterance (kathos to pneuma edidou apophtheggesthai autois). This is precisely what Paul claims in I Cor. 12:10,28, but all the same without an interpreter the gift was not to be exercised (I Cor. 14:6-19). Paul had the gift of tongues, but refused to exercise it except as it would be understood. Note the imperfect tense here (edidou). Perhaps they did not all speak at once, but one after another. Apophtheggesthai is a late verb (LXX of prophesying, papyri). Lucian uses it of the ring of a vessel when it strikes a reef. It is used of eager, elevated, impassioned utterance. In the N.T. only here, verse 14 and 26:25. Apophthegm is from this verb. (A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, III.21, 22. Broadman. See RWP in Online Bible.)

own language (Acts 2:6, &c.), tei idiai dialektoi -- that is,

Locative case. Each one could understand his own language when he heard that. Every one that came heard somebody speaking in his native tongue. (Ibid, 23.)

tongues (various locations), glossa -- that is,

the language used by a particular people in distinction from that of other nations: Acts ii.11...; new tongues which the speaker has not learned previously, Mk. xvi. 17... 1 Co. xii. 10...; to speak with tongues; this, as appears from 1 Co. xiv. 7 sqq., is the gift of men who, rapt in an ecstasy and no longer quite masters of their own reason and consciousness, pour forth their glowing spiritual emotions in strange utterances, rugged, dark, disconnected, quite unfitted to instruct or to influence the minds of others: Acts x. 46; xix. 6; 1 Cor xii. 30; xiii.1; xiv. 2, 4-6, 13, 18, 23, 27, 39... (J.H. Thayer, The New Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, 118.)

divers kinds of tongues (1 Cor. 12:10), gene glosson -- that is,

No word for "divers" in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, gene) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker(#14:4) and was intelligible to God (14:2,28). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (14:13): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern "tongues," but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See on Acts 2:13-21; 10:44-46; 19:6. (Robertson, IV.170.)

interpretation of tongues (1 Cor. 12:10), hermeneia glosson -- that is,

Old word, here only and 14:26 in N.T., from hermeneuo from Hermes (the god of speech). Cf. on diermeneuo in Luke 24:27; Acts 9:36. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it. (Ibid.)

speak with the tongues (1 Cor. 13:1), tais glossais -- that is,

Instrumental case. Mentioned first because really least and because the Corinthians put undue emphasis on this gift. (Robertson, IV.177.)

all spake with tongues (1 Cor. 14:5) -- that is,

Translate, "Now I wish you all to speak with tongues (so far am I from thus speaking through having any objection to tongues), but rather IN ORDER THAT (as my ulterior and higher wish for you) ye should prophesy." Tongues must therefore mean languages, not ecstatic, unintelligible rhapsodie (as NEANDER fancied): for Paul could never "wish" for the latter in their behalf. (Jameson/Fausset/Brown, III.Part 3.323. Eerdmans.)

Hastings points out that "It is significant that the Pauline notices of 'tongue-speech' are concerned only with the Corinthian Church." Mystical, ecstatic, even demonic utterances in supposed communication with the gods were not uncommon in Corinth. Ecstatic utterances had invaded the church from the pagan worship so prevalent in the city (1 Cor. 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, 26, 27, including all the verses having unknown added by the translators). 1 Cor. 14:9 refers to the physical tongue of man; 1 Cor 14:23, plural with a plural pronoun, refers to the Corinthian ecstatic utterances. Observe that chapter 14 contains a mixture of the word tongues: vv. 2, 4, 13, 19, 26 & 27, pagan ecstatic utterances; vv. 5, 6, 18 & 22, actual ethnic languages. (Encyclopaedia, III.371a; The Pulpit Commentary, XIX.397; The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible, by Spiros Zodhiates, 1436, 1438.)

Therefore, Paul says that he desires that they would indeed be able to supernaturally speak with other ethnic languages as he can, but on the other hand, he is soundly renouncing and rebuking the ecstatic utterances which were actually taking place in this church.

Overview

Let us make a quick overview of three main points from 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14 (covered in more detail later in this report):

First, notice Paul anchors tongues firmly in the law of Moses by citing tongues' Old Testament foundation, their time-frame, and purpose, 14:21, 22, which we will develop shortly. Furthermore, Paul refers to Moses' command for women to remain silent in the church assembly and to learn from their own husbands, 14:34, 35. (A result of the fall is that the husband is commanded to instruct his wife, Gen. 3:16; Eph. 5:22; 1 Pet. 3:1. Thus, for a woman to instruct men in the church is a direct effort to overthrow God's word.) The command is followed immediately with, If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that these things that Paul writes to the church are the commandments of God, v. 37.

Second, notice Paul's list of "gifts," 12:8-10 and v. 28; tongues (ethnic languages) is listed last, showing that they were the least desirable of all the gifts (cf. 14:5). Whatever is done in the church is for one purpose only: to edify the church -- the individual is to excel in building up the church, 14:12. Paul is quite clear in 14:4: The Corinthian ecstatic utterance was for self-edification, and was connected with the pride that Paul had to deal with in this letter. Paul makes a contrast -- prophesying (preaching the whole counsel of God, Jesus Christ in His entirety, Ac. 20:27; Rev. 19:10) edifies the church, while ecstatic utterances edify the individual (it makes one feel good).

Third, we see that tongues (both ethnic languages and the Corinthian ecstatic utterance) had to be interpreted for the profit of the entire assembly, vv. 5, 13, 27, 28; thus, if there was no interpretation for what was spoken, neither ethnic languages nor ecstatic utterance was permitted. In addition, Paul clearly and absolutely forbids women from taking any part in the speaking or interpretation of tongues; it is confusion, 14:33-35. What is needed in the church is clear -- distinct and easily understood speaking, 14:7-12. Therefore, Paul, without actually telling them to stop the ecstatic utterances, placed severe enough restriction on them that, if they would obey him, they would stop. Notice the connection that we will come back to, 14:8 -- he connects tongues with the trumpet that sounded the alarm as in the Old Testament, Ezekiel 3 and 33, etc. God's messenger is to sound the trumpet of warning midst sin and evil. If the trumpet cannot be understood, what good is it?

In Paul's first letter to Corinth, he dealt with situations that developed in this church with "the gifts." In chapter 12:1, Paul starts his address on the subject of spiritual gifts; thus, chapter 13 cannot be taken out of context from chapters 12 and 14. These three chapters (12-14) were written to deal with the outside influence of the ecstatic utterances flooding into the church from the pagan temple worship of Aphrodite. Paul made it clear to the Corinthians that their speech (glossa) had no spiritual significance before the Christian God (1 Cor. 14:6-11). Furthermore, in these three chapters, Paul points out the difference between the real tongues and the ecstatic utterances that were taking place. Obviously, what was going on at Corinth was causing problems because Paul, in 12-14, is not exhorting its practice; rather, he lists its restrictions and regulations.

Spiritual Defined

It is important to understand that these three chapters (12-14 of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians) are dealing with a problem: misunderstood spirituality. 1 Corinthians 12:1, spiritual -- Paul follows the same line of thought as he did in Galatians 6:1; these Corinthians were misunderstanding what it meant to be spiritual. Because of the carry-over of the pagan idea of worship (and thus spirituality), they were associating the pagan ecstatic utterance with spirituality and communion with the heavenly Father. Notice that the word gifts is added by the translators; therefore, Paul writes the whole passage (chaps. 12-14) to clear up the misunderstanding associated with spirituality. (True spirituality is defined in chapter 13; see also 1 Jn. 3:14.)

Tongues & God's Law

Paul firmly anchored tongues (ethnic languages, not ecstatic speech) in the law, as clearly revealed in the Old Testament; therefore, we must do the same. Tongues were a warning to unbelieving Jews of God's soon coming, and even present, national judgment; tongues were a sign for those who knew God's Old Testament law; tongues were a call to the nation that had forsaken its God, a call to repent and turn from its sin and back to the Lord God through Christ, 14: 21, 22 -- Tongues were for a sign not to them that believe already the truth of God's Word, but to those who believed not. The clear preaching of God's Word, prophesying, was for believers.

Here, as in all places, our final authority for all that is believed, said, and practiced must be God's Word (2 Tim. 3:16). Christ Himself commanded us to search the Scriptures that we might find the truth of a matter (Jn. 5:39, 46, 47). Both Paul and Christ were referring to searching the Old Testament Scriptures to confirm any and every doctrine, because there were no New Testament Scriptures when Christ spoke and Paul wrote. The Old Testament was safely kept in the Synagogues. The Bereans were commended as being more noble than those in Thessalonica, because they searched the Old Testament Scriptures daily to confirm what they were being taught by Paul (Ac. 17:11). Should we not do the same? Therefore, we must reach back to the Old Testament, as Paul does here, to find the truth about tongues.

Isaiah & Tongues

Isaiah says that if anyone speaks not according to the law and to the testimony (of the prophets), there is no light in him (Is. 8:20; see also Lk. 24:44-48). Paul, by quoting Isaiah 28:11-12 in 1 Corinthians 14:20-22, rebukes the Corinthians for not understanding the Old Testament Scriptures in their use of "the gift of tongues." Charismatic "Christians" today should tremble in fear of the Lord as they read the passage Paul used to instruct the first generation of Christians.

Isaiah 28 takes place in the latter years of Hezekiah, King of Judah, 705-701 BC. Before his rule (722 BC), Assyria invaded Palestine and the Northern Kingdom. Ephraim was destroyed. Now, many years later, Isaiah warns the people of the Southern Kingdom, Judah, that the same thing will happen to them (cf. Jer. 3:7-10). But instead of trusting in the Lord for their deliverance from Assyria, Judah makes a deal with Egypt. Their unity with pagan Egypt brings an influx of heathen practices into the congregation of the Lord, and their hearts turn from Him. In vv. 7-8, God's prophet points to the leaders of Judah, and tells the world that they are involved in wicked, evil practices -- a drunken party. The leaders mock Isaiah and his warning concerning their spiritual condition. Not liking to be addressed as irresponsible children, even though they are childish, they call his teaching childishly simple. As far as they are concerned, Isaiah, a legalist preacher, speaks down to them as one would to a minor, and, considering themselves "free adults," they resent Isaiah, and sneer at his warning.

The prophet, in vv. 11-13, deals with them in the very point of their sarcasm (he continues to speak to them as children, using their scorn for God's Word against them) as he makes his prophetic announcement of coming judgment, vv. 14ff. Since the people will not listen to God as He speaks to draw them back to His Word with plain and simple words that they understand and use daily (including the weather, v. 2 & Dt. 28:24), He will speak to them in a language they cannot understand, Assyrian. Now they will need an interpreter to understand the other "tongues," languages (Is. 10:5-6). When they hear the stammering lips and another tongue on the streets of Jerusalem, as well as throughout the land (i.e., the Assyrian language which they understood not), they will know that God's judgment is upon them according to Isaiah's warning. The another tongue was a sure sign pointing them directly back to Isaiah's warning of the coming judgment at which they had mocked and sneered.

Moses & Tongues

The warning goes back well before Isaiah. We find the basic law for Isaiah's warning (and Paul's) in Deuteronomy 28:15-68 (36, 49). There Moses points out to the congregation of the Lord (the seed of Israel) that one result of God's people rejecting the Lord as their King would be servitude to a people whose tongue (language) they would not understand, which is genuine, lawful, Biblical tongues. If God's people will not serve the Biblical God as their King, whose Word is easily understood (Dt. 30:14, Rom. 10:8), they will serve the heathen, whose words they cannot understand, 47-49. Therefore, let us not suppose for a moment that the rebellious Jews who Isaiah and Paul spoke to, did not make the connection of Deuteronomy 28:45-68. There is no way they could have missed the connection, but knowing human nature as we do (we have it), they ignored the facts. "Other tongues" was the result of rejecting God's rule (total authority) over them (cf. 1 Sam. 8). This fact is well established in the Word of God, and will not change.

Deuteronomy 28:15-68 was fulfilled at least three times: First, it was fulfilled when Assyria moved against God's people in fulfillment of Isaiah's warning (2 Kg. 15:5, 23, 24; 18:11; 1 Chr. 5:26. One of the symbols of Assyria was a winged lion -- see Dt. 28:49); Second, it was fulfilled when God moved his servant's army, Babylon, against His people (Jer. 25:9); Third, it was fulfilled when God sent Titus against Jerusalem in AD 70.

The stammering lips and another tongue was/is God's judicial sign of judgment upon his people because they harden their hearts against the simple truths of which Moses and the prophet Isaiah spoke.

In Isaiah's day, the judgment came in the form of Assyria, and the speaking of the Assyrian language on the streets of Judah pointed to Isaiah's prophecy being fulfilled -- they could not understand the language without an interpreter. In Jeremiah's day, the tongues were Chaldean. In Paul's day, God's people had again degenerated into an apostate nation, and had rejected the true Prophet, Christ the Messiah, and His warnings. No doubt, if He had come as a worldly king with military might or as an elite man of some kind, they might have listened to Him, but He did not. He came as a humble servant of God; He came with a simple and plain message that the common man could readily understand, identify with, and accept, and the elite rejected and killed Him. Christ warned of the horrible judgment that would come as the result of their rejection of the Son (Mt. 21-24). In fact, He said that the former judgments would be nothing compared to the one that was coming, 24:21, 22. Assyria, as terrible as it was, would pale compared to the punishment in store for the rejection and crucifixion of Christ.

Signs & Tongues

After the crucifixion of the Son of God, and before the final destruction of the Jewish nation, the sign of tongues re-appeared. To the Jews who knew the law (Dt. 28) and the prophets (Is. 28), it meant only one thing -- judgment. Other tongues (ethnic languages) were not new to them; it had happened in the past. In the middle of Paul's significant warning concerning the proper use of tongues (1 Cor. 14), we have his reference to Isaiah, 14:21. Paul clearly identifies tongues in the same context as did Isaiah -- a sure sign of judgment for rejecting God's warning. The Roman language that would be spoken on the streets of Jerusalem would not be understood without an interpreter.

Thus, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish came upon the Jews first, in the form of Assyria, Babylon, and Rome for their refusal to glorify God, the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ, with their personal, religious, social, and national lives. Paul clearly tells us that God, being no respecter of persons, will also send indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish against the Gentiles for the same offense.

Similarities

Something that is quite amazing in the passage we are considering is the context in which Paul quotes Isaiah's warning, and the resistance (even anger) exhibited by the Jewish leaders against Isaiah, accusing him of treating them like children (cf. Isaiah 28). Both Isaiah and Paul are dealing with immature people who claimed to be God's people; however, they were children whose pride and rebellion caused them to harden against being treated like and spoken to as children.

Children

Our Lord said, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven (Mk. 10:15). It is not hard at all to follow this call to humility and conversion, as the gospel of the kingdom goes out from the very first day that Christ taught it, to the last days of Paul as he taught i. (Mt. 3:2; Ac. 28:31). The idea of becoming as little children would have struck at the very heart of the rebellious nation, as once again the religious leaders became hostile at the thought of being treated like children. In fact, having to put on the spirit of a child is enough to make any "natural man" hostile. But not only is childishness required in order to enter into the kingdom of heaven, but it is required to advance in His kingdom. Stephen told the religious leaders (as did every other preacher of the gospel, including Christ) that they were the same pious, rebellious, stiff-necked, proud, hardhearted, hypocritical men as were their fathers who mocked and sneered at Isaiah's instruction (Ac. 7:51-60).

Moving to the middle of Paul's instruction in chp. 14, v. 20, we see that his warning against childishness fits in with the situation in which Isaiah spoke (1 Cor. 14:21 & Is. 28:11). Isaiah was rejected by the Jewish leaders because he was treating them like children; Paul tells the folks at Corinth, "Don't continue in your childish attitudes as your fathers did in Isaiah's time. Grow up! Remember, the reason for other tongues is to speak to a rebellious, stubborn, stiff-necked people who will not hear the plain, easily understood Word of God. When your fathers rejected the clear, plain message of repentance toward God and faith in Christ, they had to listen to other tongues: an ethnic and unintelligible language of a foreign invader. Your fathers needed an interpreter to understand what was being said." Paul's thought continues: "The another tongue Isaiah referred to had nothing to do with salvation or with being spiritual; rather, it is a sign of judgment which is either already here or is coming."

Also, notice Paul's indictment against this church for being childish (1 Cor. 13:11, 14:20). The supernatural ability to speak an unknown (to the speaker) foreign language was being used with pride, as a child would be lifted up with pride over abilities he had and he considered superior to another's abilities. Paul points out that childishness is only commendable in the matter of malice, not in understanding. He tells them to grow up. Again, the connection is significant as he moves from this exhortation into the quote from Isaiah. The context of both Paul and Isaiah has to do with childishness and maturity.

Paul's 13 Guidelines

Note some significant points made by Paul as he tries to instruct this worldly, immature, and childish church concerning the proper use of tongues. Remember, the ecstatic utterances from the pagan worship had infiltrated this church, and was being mistaken for something godly and spiritual. We have already noted Paul's distinction between their ecstatic speech and true spirituality. We will not cover the whole chapter (1 Cor. 14) but will quickly mention thirteen guidelines which Paul establishes for the proper use of tongues:

1) The other tongues, as used in chapter 14, is the power given by the Holy Spirit to speak in a literal, foreign language, unknown to the speaker -- an obvious fact from the passage. Referring back to either the situation with the Assyrians or with the Romans, the context of chapter 14 would be something like this: The people did not understand Rome's language, for it was unknown. A person not knowing Rome's language has the supernatural ability from God to speak it. Those around him do not understand Rome's language either, so the speaker needs an interpreter to translate his words into a common language, so his hearers can understand him. Paul says it is crazy to speak in a language that requires an interpreter when one can speak in the common language and present a message easily understood by all (1 Cor. 14:1-12).

In all three cases, Assyrian, Chaldean, and Roman, tongues were a foreign language for which the hearers needed an interpreter to understand (Dt. 28:49; Is. 28:11; cf. all of Acts, esp. chap. 2). Anything other than this scenario of an actual foreign language would have to be the ecstatic speech carried over from paganism, which Paul vehemently stands against. He tells the immature Christians at Corinth to quit seeking the childish things and grow up, e.g., "Sure, it makes one feel good to be able to supernaturally speak in a foreign language not understood by others, but what good is it to speak in mysteries that only God can understand? It's so much better to speak in the common language of those present." Paul says that he would rather speak five words in easily understood language than ten thousand words unintelligible to his hearers (1 Cor. 14:19).

If it were not so obviously fraud against their hearers, we could find it amusing that those who claim supernatural gifts of speaking in tongues must have interpreters when they go to foreign countries to speak. How can they claim the supernatural gift of tongues is from God if they cannot even preach the gospel in an unknown (to them) native tongue? In other words, their tongues are not foreign languages, but are ecstatic utterances, a hold-over from the ecstatic utterance that had invaded the Corinthian church from the pagan worship so prevalent in that city.

2) Prophecy, not tongues, was to be desired, 14:1-5. The desirable thing is the ability to explain the practical applications of God's Word, which alone will build God's people. Everything done within the church is to be for the benefit of the body of believers. The purpose of the public assembly is to admonish one another, to build up and strengthen one another, and to be an encouragement and help (Heb. 10:25). When we consider the true purpose of tongues (warning of God's wrath upon the rebellious Jewish nation), we can see how tongues would not "edify" a church. They would edify an individual and lead to vast amounts of pride, e.g., "I'm special because God is using me to speak to that person about God's judgment to come." (Yes, I see 14:5, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying. We will see more of this as we continue.)

3) Tongues were not spontaneous, 14:2, 28, 32, etc. There were several conditions that had to be met.

4) 14:8 is an interesting comparison -- speech is compared to a trumpet that sounds an alarm (Num. 10:5; Jer. 4:19; 6:17; 42:14). Paul calls tongues an uncertain trumpet, an uncertain alarm for battle. In fact, anything not easily understood would leave the people unprepared for battle -- the battle was a spiritual one, as well as one against personal, social, religious, and national evil and wickedness.

5) [T]ongues were for a sign ... to them which believe not. When the hardened, unbelieving Jew heard the tongues (supernatural speaking in a foreign language that was not his native tongue), the tongues would speak to him of the coming judgment against his hardness and rebellion (because he would know the lesson taught by both Moses and Isaiah, v. 22).

6) However, to the unlearned (those not knowing the law of Moses) and to the unbelieving Gentile (who also would not know the law), tongues would be madness, v. 23.

7) It was to be the preaching of the gospel of Christ and of eternal judgment to come that would cause the visitor to believe, v. 24. It is the clear, easily understood presentation of the gospel that reveals the heart, causing conviction and conversion, vv. 24, 25 (1 Cor. 1:21; Heb. 4:12, 13).

Looking through Acts, we see that in every instance of tongues there were unbelieving Jews present -- that is, unbelieving in the gospel (Ac. 2), unbelieving in the Holy Spirit (we have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost, Ac. 19:2), or unbelieving that the gospel should go to the Gentiles (Ac. 10).

1 Corinthians 12-14: The purpose of Paul's instruction is to clear up the misunderstanding of what is spiritual. The Corinthians were under the delusion that the ecstatic utterances from pagan worship were a sign of being in close fellowship with the Holy God of heaven and earth. First, Paul said the supernatural ability to speak in an unlearned and unknown foreign language was the least important of all the gifts. Why do we need to speak in a foreign tongue when our message can be so much more effective in the common language? Paul's second guideline was to only use what will edify the complete body of believers within the church -- the ability to speak in a foreign tongue edified only the speaker. Third, tongues (ethnic languages) must be interpreted by a man who speaks them -- a message in a foreign language that cannot be understood by the hearers is useless. It would be absurd to use a supernatural ability to speak in another language that the hearers cannot comprehend, 14:5. Fourth, the ability to speak in an unknown foreign language was to warn the hardened unbelieving Jews that judgment was on its way -- soon he would witness on the streets of his own hometown an invading army whose language he would need an interpreter to understand. This was backed up by the law and the prophets. Judgment was coming upon the Jewish nation for rejecting the plain, clear, child-like message of God (the Messiah), which had been in their own language and easily understood. Obviously then, there had to be an unbelieving Jew present for supernatural tongues (ethnic languages) to be of God (see Mt. 23:34-39).

Continuing with Paul's instructions:

8) Speaking in a foreign language could not be uncontrolled, for it always had to be planned, orderly, and subject to the speaker, 14:32-34, 40.

9) At the most, there could only be three speakers, and then only one at a time could speak, vv. 2, 27.

10) Furthermore, there had to be a person present who could translate what was said into the common language of the assembly, v. 28. If there was no one who could translate (explain) what was said, then either the speaker had to do it (v. 5), or he had to keep quiet.

11) As already mentioned, there had to be an unbelieving Jew present because when the speaker spoke in the foreign language of that Jew's birth, that unbelieving Jew would understand and know from the law and the prophets about the judgment to come against his unbelief, v. 22. As the speaker spoke in the unbelieving Jew's language, for the rest of the church to understand, either an interpreter or the speaker himself must explain what was said.

12) Probably one of the more important restrictions placed by Paul on the use of tongues is found in vv. 34-35: tongues were, without exception, absolutely forbidden to women in the churches. The purpose of tongues was to "preach" to the unbelieving (yet knowledgeable of Moses) Jew, and he would know that women were forbidden to take any speaking or leadership authority in the assembly of God's people; they were required to be under subjection to their own husbands in their homes (Eph. 5:22-24; 1 Tim. 2:11-12). The situation at the city of Corinth makes this a very important point: Corinth was famous for its immorality with its temple prostitutes (one thousand were kept in the temple). One of the signs that these prostitutes (priestesses) were in close communion with their gods was their ecstatic utterances during the temple rituals of sexual orgies. Thus, we have Paul's firm statement, for it is a shame for women to speak in church, v. 35, referring to either preaching or usurping authority over the men of the church (of course, preaching is the exercise of authority based upon God's Word). The ability to speak in the foreign language of that unbelieving Jew's birth was a sign to him; however, to an unbelieving Jew, a woman was little better than a slave. (Only Christianity elevates women to the status of respect and honor, 1 Pet. 3:7.) Under no circumstances would an unbelieving Jew in Paul's day have listened to a woman speak from any position in a Christian assembly -- a woman speaking would completely destroy the purpose of tongues. (The Jewish man thanked God for three things every day: that he wasn't a publican, that he wasn't a Gentile, and that he wasn't a woman.)

13) Tongues were not to be forbidden, 14:39. In Paul's day, before the judgment against Jerusalem of which tongues spoke, tongues were needed, and to forbid them would be to forbid the Spirit of God from expressing his warning message of judgment through his chosen vessel. Judgment was at the door; Jerusalem was on the very threshold of being completely overturned, heaped up in a pile, burned, and, as Josephus says, her foundations plowed with a yoke of oxen. The Israelite/Jewish race, as known in the Old Testament, was on the verge of extinction, so God continued to send warnings to that race right up to the day Jerusalem was sealed by Rome with millions inside.

Pray

In addition, notice these two points about v. 14: first, pray in this verse does not mean "addressed to God" as in Matthew 21:22, etc.; rather, it means "to offer prayers, to pray, (everywhere of prayers to the gods, or to God)" as in Matthew 6:5, where the Pharisees depended on their loud, long public prayers to be heard by the Lord (cf. Mk. 12:40). The word pray (1 Cor. 14:14) can refer to either empty words spoken into the air, or meaningful words. It is used twice in Matthew 6:5, once for proper and once for improper prayer ( The New Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon, 545). Therefore, claiming that pray (ecstatic utterance) in v. 14 is words spoken to the Father stretches the context beyond Scriptural recognition. Scripture is clear: there is no direct approach to the Father through words or any other means. All who come to the Father must come through Christ (Jn. 14:6, 13, etc.). Therefore, the only prayer which the Father hears is through Christ. Second, my spirit, not the Holy Spirit -- in other words, "My spirit can, by some circumstance, be moved to an utterance." (Many leaders know how to use emotions to produce their desired effects, e.g., ecstatic utterances and/or large "gifts." Note Paul's final remark on this subject, vv. 37, 38.)

Conclusion

The best thing is to testify of Christ, preach the gospel, apply his Word to the whole of life and thought, and do not forbid tongues, as long as they meet the conditions established by Paul to prevent their misuse (chaps. 12-14). Of course, those conditions cannot be met today, but if tongues were "active" today, they no doubt would be something like Paul laid out in 1 Cor. 14:18.

Ecstatic utterances at Corinth were a carry-over from the pagan temple worship. Biblical tongues was the supernatural ability to speak an unknown foreign language: As God's warning message was delivered in the Christian assemblies in tongues, it spoke to the hearts of the unbelieving Jewish hearers. The result was to be their repentance of sin and turning to the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul said, "You are proud of your spirituality, but let me show you what true spirituality really is." Then he moves into chapter 13: True spirituality is defined as humility and love for one another shown by actions, not by any "supernatural ability" one might think he has (see all of 1 John). Love is shown by rejoicing over someone's conversion, by encouraging others when the person takes a stand for Christ, by unity among the body of Christ, by a willingness to do for one another, by Biblical rebuke and correction when required, and by a genuine family spirit among the body of believers (1 Cor. 12:12-31; 13:1-13).

The pagan's definition of close, spiritual contact with their gods (ecstatic utterances) had crept into the Corinthian church, and the people claimed spirituality and love for God because they could imitate the pagans. Paul points out that what they had was not true spirituality (chapter 13).

American "Christianity," as a whole, is as paganized as was Corinth's and Israel's of old. America's religious leaders, as Israel's of old, have ignored God's warnings, united with pagans, and have mocked and are mocking God's Word and God's men. Judgment is surely coming.

---

* Adapted from the December 1997 issue of The Biblical Examiner; used by permission.