Regarding the matter of speaking in tongues...
A lot of research has been done on the subject. Some claim that speaking in tongues is an evidence that one is indwelled with the Holy Spirit (i.e. - 'saved'). Some go as far as to say that if one has not spoken in tongues then that one is not even saved! The references they often use are:
"I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying." (I Cor 14:5)
-and-
"Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues." (I Cor 14:39)
These are legitimate arguments within the context they are written; but, for the above application they are being taken ‘out of context’. Furthermore, the original meaning of the Greek word which is translated as "tongue(s)" is ignored.
To begin this study we must first go to the first occurrence of speaking in 'tongues' as recorded in Scripture.
"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2:4)
The Greek word here translated as 'tongues' is the word ‘glowssa'.
It is the word from which we get the English word 'glossary'. It literally means 'organ of speech' or 'tongue' – and in this context simply means ‘dialect’ or ‘language’. Since everyone speaks with their physical tongues (and since this would not have been an astounding supernatural occurrence that would have gotten the attention of people from at least 17 nations (since the phrase 'Jews and proselytes' could refer to those of MANY native languages in the region) who were present in Jerusalem in Acts Chapter 2), we can easily confirm that the meaning in context here is that of 'languages'. Strong's Concordance specifically defines this word as meaning "The language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations."
This word, by the way, is also the same word that appears 21 times in I Corinthians, where it is translated as 'tongue(s)' in every instance.
Contrary to certain beliefs and teachings, however, these are not 'unknown' or 'angelic' utterances as some would suppose. The proof for this statement is also found in Acts Chapter 2:5-11:
"And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God."
In verse 6 the Greek word 'dialektos' is translated as 'language'. Its meaning is equated to that of 'tongues' used in the surrounding verses and is also defined in Strong's Concordance as "conversation, speech, discourse, language; or, the tongue or language peculiar to any people." Clearly, in either context it is referring to a speech that can be understood by one who speaks the language as a native.
Furthermore, referring back again to I Corinthians, Paul writes:
"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." (I Cor 12:28)
Notice that the word 'tongues' here is preceded by the modifying expression "diversities of." This also indicates that this particular manifestation of the Spirit refers to speaking in various languages not of one's own native land. "Diversities" simply means "of a different origin or dialect" here.
Another side note:
In Elizabethan English (used for the 1611 translation of the "Textus Receptus" into English by the King James appointed translators), the word 'tongue' the context in which it is used throughout the New Testament simply meant 'languages.' It had no stand-alone ‘divine relevance’, but was a word of common speech for the day. Oddly enough, in their fervor to preserve the doctrine of 'tongues', the NKJV, NIV, and many other translators of ‘modern’ English version of the Bible failed to update this word to its modern-day meaning of ‘known languages.'
Tongues as a sign:
From here we will look at what Scripture has to say about tongues as a sign and for whom signs were meant.
"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." (I Cor 14:22)
In this passage, again, the word 'glowssa' is used. Here Paul makes it clear that the act of speaking in other languages will be for a sign to the unbelievers. This was an 'attention-getter' for the Jews of the day.
How do we know this?
Because, the Apostle Paul noted earlier in I Corinthians that:
"For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:" (I Cor 1:22)
He did this logically so that the meaning of 'signs' would be clear as he continued to address them throughout the letter. So by deduction, the very sign of 'tongues' (along with other miraculous signs performed by the apostles) were for the unbelieving Jews only in this context. The Greeks (or Gentiles) were to be given the Gospel by reasoning with them, for they sought after 'wisdom.'
In Acts 1:8 one can find the geographic and demographic direction that the Lord gives to His disciples regarding the spreading of the Gospel:
"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."
Jews were found in their highest concentration in the city of Jerusalem. Judea was a province of Rome that was primarily Jewish and covered roughly the same land area as that which was promised to Abram (Abraham) by God in Genesis 13:14 & c. Samaria was the area to the North where the ten and one-half tribes of Israel went away with Jeroboam I around 931 B.C., and contained much of the original Hebrew nation, but had since corrupted itself with the influence of many pagan and ‘world religions’. The 'uttermost part of the earth' in the Book of Acts includes the cities of Asia Minor, most of southern Europe, northern Africa, and the Mediterranean islands.
Once all of the Jewish and Hebrew nations and remnants had been witnessed to, the sign of tongues ceased to be necessary since the sphere of Jewish influence that 'require a sign' would have been evangelized according to Acts 1:8. A clear evidence of this is found in the Book of Acts. The last major instance of men being saved and then speaking in tongues is during the final part of Peter's Jewish ministry in Acts Chapter 10 as follows:
"And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God." (Acts 10:45-46a)
Notice here also that the purpose of this gift is the magnification of God. The listeners understood the message and comprehended that its meaning was to Glorify God, and not to edify men. There is no mention here, nor anywhere else in the Bible, that the 'gift of tongues' is a required evidence of salvation.
The manifestation of 'tongues' does appear once more in the Book of Acts and one might contend that this is in violation of the argument 'tongues' are a sign only to the Jews, since after Chapter 12, the text shifts to Paul's ministry, which is largely to the Gentiles. However, a careful examination of the entire chapter reveals that these of whom Luke writes were originally baptized by John - This being so, they were obviously of Judean or Samaritan nationality, and were, therefore, descendants of the Children of Israel. Further evidence of this is that they went immediately into the synagogues (where no Gentile was permitted) and proclaimed Christ as Lord and Savior.
Summary
As we have just seen, following the ministry to the Jews and all of the remnants of the Hebrew nations, 'tongues' are no longer mentioned as a Spiritual manifestation in Scripture. We have also seen that the word 'tongues' is actually a translation of a Greek word ('glowssa') that means 'spoken language or dialect' and does not refer to a ‘divine’ or ‘angelic’ language. A comprehensive reading of I Corinthians along with Acts Chapter 2 reveals that this particular manifestation was for the expressed purpose of: (1) spreading the Gospel to all lands in all languages, and (2) giving a sign to the Jews that they might believe.
In His Love,
Dr. Jack L. Burton
A lot of research has been done on the subject. Some claim that speaking in tongues is an evidence that one is indwelled with the Holy Spirit (i.e. - 'saved'). Some go as far as to say that if one has not spoken in tongues then that one is not even saved! The references they often use are:
"I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying." (I Cor 14:5)
-and-
"Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues." (I Cor 14:39)
These are legitimate arguments within the context they are written; but, for the above application they are being taken ‘out of context’. Furthermore, the original meaning of the Greek word which is translated as "tongue(s)" is ignored.
To begin this study we must first go to the first occurrence of speaking in 'tongues' as recorded in Scripture.
"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2:4)
The Greek word here translated as 'tongues' is the word ‘glowssa'.
It is the word from which we get the English word 'glossary'. It literally means 'organ of speech' or 'tongue' – and in this context simply means ‘dialect’ or ‘language’. Since everyone speaks with their physical tongues (and since this would not have been an astounding supernatural occurrence that would have gotten the attention of people from at least 17 nations (since the phrase 'Jews and proselytes' could refer to those of MANY native languages in the region) who were present in Jerusalem in Acts Chapter 2), we can easily confirm that the meaning in context here is that of 'languages'. Strong's Concordance specifically defines this word as meaning "The language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations."
This word, by the way, is also the same word that appears 21 times in I Corinthians, where it is translated as 'tongue(s)' in every instance.
Contrary to certain beliefs and teachings, however, these are not 'unknown' or 'angelic' utterances as some would suppose. The proof for this statement is also found in Acts Chapter 2:5-11:
"And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God."
In verse 6 the Greek word 'dialektos' is translated as 'language'. Its meaning is equated to that of 'tongues' used in the surrounding verses and is also defined in Strong's Concordance as "conversation, speech, discourse, language; or, the tongue or language peculiar to any people." Clearly, in either context it is referring to a speech that can be understood by one who speaks the language as a native.
Furthermore, referring back again to I Corinthians, Paul writes:
"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." (I Cor 12:28)
Notice that the word 'tongues' here is preceded by the modifying expression "diversities of." This also indicates that this particular manifestation of the Spirit refers to speaking in various languages not of one's own native land. "Diversities" simply means "of a different origin or dialect" here.
Another side note:
In Elizabethan English (used for the 1611 translation of the "Textus Receptus" into English by the King James appointed translators), the word 'tongue' the context in which it is used throughout the New Testament simply meant 'languages.' It had no stand-alone ‘divine relevance’, but was a word of common speech for the day. Oddly enough, in their fervor to preserve the doctrine of 'tongues', the NKJV, NIV, and many other translators of ‘modern’ English version of the Bible failed to update this word to its modern-day meaning of ‘known languages.'
Tongues as a sign:
From here we will look at what Scripture has to say about tongues as a sign and for whom signs were meant.
"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." (I Cor 14:22)
In this passage, again, the word 'glowssa' is used. Here Paul makes it clear that the act of speaking in other languages will be for a sign to the unbelievers. This was an 'attention-getter' for the Jews of the day.
How do we know this?
Because, the Apostle Paul noted earlier in I Corinthians that:
"For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:" (I Cor 1:22)
He did this logically so that the meaning of 'signs' would be clear as he continued to address them throughout the letter. So by deduction, the very sign of 'tongues' (along with other miraculous signs performed by the apostles) were for the unbelieving Jews only in this context. The Greeks (or Gentiles) were to be given the Gospel by reasoning with them, for they sought after 'wisdom.'
In Acts 1:8 one can find the geographic and demographic direction that the Lord gives to His disciples regarding the spreading of the Gospel:
"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."
Jews were found in their highest concentration in the city of Jerusalem. Judea was a province of Rome that was primarily Jewish and covered roughly the same land area as that which was promised to Abram (Abraham) by God in Genesis 13:14 & c. Samaria was the area to the North where the ten and one-half tribes of Israel went away with Jeroboam I around 931 B.C., and contained much of the original Hebrew nation, but had since corrupted itself with the influence of many pagan and ‘world religions’. The 'uttermost part of the earth' in the Book of Acts includes the cities of Asia Minor, most of southern Europe, northern Africa, and the Mediterranean islands.
Once all of the Jewish and Hebrew nations and remnants had been witnessed to, the sign of tongues ceased to be necessary since the sphere of Jewish influence that 'require a sign' would have been evangelized according to Acts 1:8. A clear evidence of this is found in the Book of Acts. The last major instance of men being saved and then speaking in tongues is during the final part of Peter's Jewish ministry in Acts Chapter 10 as follows:
"And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God." (Acts 10:45-46a)
Notice here also that the purpose of this gift is the magnification of God. The listeners understood the message and comprehended that its meaning was to Glorify God, and not to edify men. There is no mention here, nor anywhere else in the Bible, that the 'gift of tongues' is a required evidence of salvation.
The manifestation of 'tongues' does appear once more in the Book of Acts and one might contend that this is in violation of the argument 'tongues' are a sign only to the Jews, since after Chapter 12, the text shifts to Paul's ministry, which is largely to the Gentiles. However, a careful examination of the entire chapter reveals that these of whom Luke writes were originally baptized by John - This being so, they were obviously of Judean or Samaritan nationality, and were, therefore, descendants of the Children of Israel. Further evidence of this is that they went immediately into the synagogues (where no Gentile was permitted) and proclaimed Christ as Lord and Savior.
Summary
As we have just seen, following the ministry to the Jews and all of the remnants of the Hebrew nations, 'tongues' are no longer mentioned as a Spiritual manifestation in Scripture. We have also seen that the word 'tongues' is actually a translation of a Greek word ('glowssa') that means 'spoken language or dialect' and does not refer to a ‘divine’ or ‘angelic’ language. A comprehensive reading of I Corinthians along with Acts Chapter 2 reveals that this particular manifestation was for the expressed purpose of: (1) spreading the Gospel to all lands in all languages, and (2) giving a sign to the Jews that they might believe.
In His Love,
Dr. Jack L. Burton
Have a question, comment, or suggestion?
Please feel free to visit the CONTACT PAGE and send and email.
-OR-
Stop by the BLOG PAGE where you can comment on a variety of topics.