Introduction
“Relax. Start to repeat some sounds. La, la, la, la…” That was my instruction in tongue-speaking. I never could get the hang of it, even though I wanted very much to experience it. We are going to look at tongue-speaking this morning through the only text in scripture that gives instruction about it.
Text
6 Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? 7 If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? 8 And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? 9 So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air.
The first characteristic we learn about tongue-speaking is that it is not intelligible to those who hear it. Paul does not say, “If I speak in tongues a language that you do not understand then I am not benefiting you.” He says, “If I speak in tongues, you will not understand.” Tongue-speaking alone is like blowing into a wind or brass instrument without making any distinct notes. It is mere noise. To speak in tongues is mere speaking into the air.
10 There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, 11 but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me.
Someone might say to Paul, but I am speaking a language that has meaning. Paul’s response is “so what.” If the hearer cannot understand the language, it is still gibberish to him.
12 So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church.
Speaking in tongues may be spectacular; it may be a thrilling experience for the speaker; but what matters is how well the church is being built up. Another trait to note is that tongue-speaking alone, without being accompanied with interpretation, is not a bodybuilding gift. This is a key contrast made between tongues and prophecy. Go back to verse 4: The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. Paul does not say that the tongue-speaker builds up the church in one way and the prophesier another way. Tongues builds up the individual who is speaking, but other gifts of communication are needed to build up the church.
Speaking of other gifts, there is one gift that would allow for tongues to be spoken in worship. That is the gift of interpretation of tongues.
13 Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 15 What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also.
These verses reveal another insight into tongue-speaking. The speaker himself does not know what he is saying unless he has the additional gift of interpretation. If the speaker always knows what he is saying, he does not need to pray for the power to interpret. Furthermore, Paul would not go to such length contrasting prophesy with tongues. He would merely say to the Corinthians that whenever someone speaks in tongues, he should then explain what he just said.
Someone may object. How could Paul say that the one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, if the speaker’s mind is “unfruitful”? After all, the very reason the hearers are not built up is that their minds also are unfruitful. Evidently, the answer is found in the words “my spirit.” The person’s spirit is praying and/or singing and thus he is being built up.
Though Paul uses the personal pronoun “I,” his dilemma is not how he can benefit from speaking in tongues but how he can benefit his brothers and sisters. His spirit praying is of no value to the worshipping community. He will pray and sing with his mind so his brothers and sisters can join with him in worship.
16 Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17 For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up.
Here we see another aspect of tongues. Personal tongue-speaking is prayer to God. We can’t be certain that it is limited to thanksgiving, but it is, nonetheless, an expression to God. Verse 2 says that “one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.” The tongues that Paul is speaking here is not a communications tool to reach the lost or to build up fellow believers. It is for the speaker’s personal benefit in relating to God.
18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19 Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
As if he has not made his point clear enough, communicating for the benefit of the church body is a lot more important than speaking in tongues. But don’t miss the other remark, that Paul likes the gift. He does not disparage tongue-speaking, just the misuse of it.
20 Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. 21 In the Law it is written, “By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord.” 22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. 23 If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?
This is a tough passage to follow, but Paul is not contradicting himself as he may seem. The verse Paul is quoting comes from Isaiah 28:11-12. In that passage, the prophet was rebuking the leaders of God’s covenant people for their rejection of his prophetic message. Indeed, they were mocking Isaiah for what they considered childish teaching. Isaiah responds that a time will come when the only words they hear will be unintelligible because they have rejected the clear words of God. The reason the words will be unintelligible is because they will be taken into captivity to a foreign land. At that time, the strange tongues will be a sign of judgment against them for failing to heed God’s clear words of warning. They will not be able to learn even simple teaching because it comes to them in strange tongues and sounds like gibberish.
The Corinth believers have the wrong idea about tongues. They think their speaking in tongues is a spectacular sign for unbelievers that will make them respond, “God must be here.” It is a sign, all right, but a sign like the one Isaiah spoke of – a sign of judgment; a sign that, because of unbelief, the praises spoken to God seem but gibberish. In Romans 1:18ff, Paul speaks of the wrath of God that is revealed against the unrighteous who “suppress the truth.” They see the evidence of God about them in creation and suppress the knowledge that is self-evident. What does God do? He gives them up to further mental and spiritual darkness as judgment against them. Their ignorance and depravity become a sign against them. In the same way, the tongues of the church are a negative sign of God’s judgment, that leads the rejecters of truth further away from God. So Paul is saying to them, “You are not drawing unbelievers to God, but away from him by your tongue-speaking.” Unbelievers are not going to come in and say, “Wow! God must be in this place.” They are going to say, “These people are crazy!”
How then is prophecy a sign for believers? Whereas tongues is a sign to unbelievers of judgment, prophecy is a sign for believers of their acceptance by God. Thinking back to Isaiah, their was the remnant of the faithful who did listen to Isaiah when he prophesied. Thus, his prophecy became a sign of God’s favor to them.
In the Corinth Church, at least some of the believers are thinking that tongue-speaking is the sign of God’s presence and favor. Paul does not deny the legitimacy of tongues, but he is making the point that prophecy, not tongues, is the sign of God’s presence in the gathered assembly. Speaking forth God’s word so that it is understood and builds up the body – that is the true sign that “the Spirit is in this place,” not the sound of gibberish.
We looked at verses 24 and 25 last week which bring the argument to a close by presenting the effect of prophecy – declaring clearly God’s word. Again, this is the great advantage of prophecy over tongues; the hearer hears the message, is convicted, and turns to God, not away from him as tongues is likely to cause him to do.
We have been hit with a lot of information. Let me summarize what we have learned about tongues. One, it is not intelligible to hearers. Unless someone has the gift to interpret the tongues, no one understands what is being said, not even the speaker. Two, without interpretation, it is a gift that builds up only the speaker, and not the church. For these two reasons, speaking in tongues is not to be done publicly. Three, tongue-speaking is a form of prayer. The speaker is speaking to God rather than to people (although that which is accompanied by interpretation may be different). It is neither a witnessing nor a discipling tool. Indeed, it hinders evangelism, rather than helps.
This information seems evident enough, except when comparing it with the tongues spoken in the book of Acts. At Pentecost, the apostles (and perhaps others) spoke in tongues that were the languages of the different nationalities present. The hearers took notice precisely because they could understand what was being spoken. There are only two other times that Luke, who wrote Acts, records tongues being spoken: in Acts 10 where the Gentile centurion Cornelius and his household speak in tongues after hearing Peter present the gospel; and in Acts 19 where Paul finds twelve men in Ephesus who had received the baptism of John (the Baptist) but had not heard the full gospel; upon his laying hands upon them, they received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues, as well as prophesied.
It is not that difficult to understand what is going in Acts and how the role and nature of tongues are simply different from the tongues that Paul is addressing with the Corinth Church. Luke wrote Acts to record the beginning of a new age – the age of the Holy Spirit and of the Church. When Peter gave his famous sermon at Pentecost, he explained that the tongues being spoken were signs that the final days of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit had come. A new work of God has occurred, and such a work must be attested by signs of power, of which tongues were one element. Note that the tongues spoken were effective signs that drew the attention of hearers because they could be understood. Here, tongue-speaking truly was a sign to the unbeliever that God was present.
In the case of Cornelius and his household, tongue speaking was a sign to them as the speakers that the Holy Spirit had come upon them; even more so, it was a sign to the Church (which was composed only of Jews and their relations the Samaritans) that the gospel was even for gentiles. Peter would later give an account of what happened to the Jerusalem council of apostles and elders as evidence that even gentiles could receive the gospel. As for the Ephesian men, they had been told only the message that John the Baptist had given. They did not know about the Holy Spirit and the new age that had come at Pentecost. By being empowered to speak in tongues and to prophesy, they learned (and all the other early Christians learned who read Luke’s record) about the power of the new Spirit age that had come.
The point of this is that Luke did not write a manual for Christian living. What happened at Pentecost and in Cornelius’ home were not illustrations for the normal Christian life. They are meant to be evidence of the work of the Spirit in establishing the church of Jesus Christ and extending the gospel to other lands and people. No longer was the covenant of God to be identified with one group of people and centered in one territory. Now, the letters written to the churches are another matter. Paul is writing to the Corinth Church about daily, practical issues. And in chapter 14, he is addressing the worship life of the congregation, particularly the role of tongues. By the description that Paul gives, it is clear that he is speaking of a different form of tongues, perhaps the form that tongue-speaking took after Pentecost. There is no record of the kind of tongue-speaking that occurred at Pentecost happening again. Even in the case of Cornelius and the Ephesus episode, there is no indication that intelligible languages were being spoken.
Now then, does the gift of tongue-speaking still exist? The answer in much of the church, and especially in the Reformed branch, is “no.” The signs and wonders that occurred at the beginning of the church age were, as we just discussed, for the purpose of inaugurating the age of the Holy Spirit and the Church. After the church was established; after it had been made clear that the church was to include all peoples throughout the world; and after all the scriptures had been given, then the time for signs and wonders passed away with the passing of the apostles. And, indeed, historically it is shown that such phenomenon did recede so that it is only at the beginning of the 1900s that such signs began to spread again and be accepted by the mainstream church.
I find the view, that miraculous gifts have ceased, to be logical. I have yet to hear, however, a convincing biblical presentation that would make me “close the book” on such gifts as tongues. When scripture expressly states, “do not forbid speaking in tongues” (v. 39), I hesitate holding a view that forbids speaking in tongues. In missionary settings where the gospel is penetrating new people groups, especially those that believe in spirits, the Spirit may very well show special signs to authenticate the gospel.
Having said that, my guess is that if tongue-speaking all along had followed the principles given in this chapter, they may not be controversial today. They are these:
Tongue-speaking should be for private use alone. Without interpretation, it has no place in the church. We should not be encouraging its practice; rather, we should promote gifts that build up the body. We should not regard tongue-speaking as a special anointing of the Holy Spirit. It is no more significant than the gift of administration and less significant than the gift of mercy, both of which are listed as spiritual gifts. Better than tongue-speaking is hearing and communicating the revealed Word of God, i.e. the Scriptures.
I am sympathetic to the charismatic movement. I lived in a charismatic community for a year. I know what they want. They want to experience the presence of God. They don’t want to just go through the motions of religion. And it seems that the tongue-speaker is experiencing something. I think this is also what is behind much of the growth in “special effects” that are becoming popular in worship. The pulpit area is giving way to the stage, complete with theatrical lighting and multi-media systems that rival concert arenas. I am not talking about projecting the words of songs or sermon outlines, but of the use of lighting, sound, and visual media to create the experience of an outpouring of the Spirit. Such churches guarantee exciting, dynamic worship services, and they deliver. People feel that God is in those sanctuaries.
But listen. You will experience "something" if you have ears to hear (through the scriptures) the grace of God; you will be moved if you contemplate the cross of Christ (even without watching the movie!); you will experience power if you grasp what God's grace means for you; you will experience excitement if you meditate upon God's Word and through that Word envision God's glory and the glory he has prepared for you; you will experience power when you catch God's vision for the spread of his kingdom on earth, and you act on faith in obedience to his Word. We Christians have become too much like our American culture which has taught us that we need entertainment for life to be exciting. And so we try and bring a manufactured excitement into our churches to make us feel the presence of God. What we need is the clear teaching of God's Word and the concerted effort to hear, meditate, and obey that same Word. If the hearing and obeying of God's Word becomes our primary experience, then we will have our fill of experiencing the presence of God. Then our tongues will gladly sing our great Redeemer's praise.
