Should I speak in tongues?
Grace and Clarity in Controversy
The Pathway Podcast
Should I speak in tongues?
‘Yes, Maybe, Probably not’
Welcome to our first of several conversations in a short series called ‘Grace and Clarity in Controversy’. This article is a summary of our Pathway Podcast episode 1, a podcast of Lakewood Evangelical Church, where we aim to ‘reproduce faithful followers of Christ’!
Should I speak in tongues? This week Jarrod and I sat down to discuss this controversial doctrine. Here is a summary breakdown of our conversation in 4 parts; EFCA, Yes, Maybe, Probably Not.
We live in a world with loud voices on opposing sides. Whether it be political convictions, parenting philosophies, or the great divide of creamy and crunchy peanut butter, many believe these things to be very black and white. Through Christian history, keenly experienced today in our American setting, the same is true of the opinions around the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues. Some enthusiastically endorse and emphasize it as a central part of their faith. Others understand the gift to be a tool of the early church, ceasing with the completion of the Scripture, and not to be practiced ever.
EFCA
Our denomination, the Evangelical Free Churches of America (EFCA), has no official position on this doctrine or other miraculous gifts. However, that does NOT mean there are no boundaries. Article 6 of our confession of faith, speaking of the Holy Spirit, says this, “He also indwells, illuminates, guides, equips and empowers believers for Christ-like living and service.” (footnote 1)
The Scriptures teach we are indeed a Spirit and supernatural people. When you trust in the gospel of Christ, you are made a new person, forgiven, and accepted by faith. At that moment of time, at conversion, you are also indwelt by the Holy Spirit.
Greg Strand comments,
“We believe that regeneration/conversion (Tit. 3:5) and Spirit-baptism (1 Cor. 12:13) occur simultaneously when one by grace through faith in Christ (Eph. 2:8-9) becomes a Christian...
We do not believe that a post-conversion baptism of the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in tongues is required to live a full life. Other than this theological conviction, the EFCA is on a continuum from cessationist to continuationist, on this side of classic Pentecostalism.” (2)
Strand finishes with 3 practical realities of the EFCA:
1. On this issue the EFCA does not have an official policy.
2. The EFCA allows a parameter of belief and expression, but wherever one falls on that continuum that person/church is anchored in the inspired, inerrant, authoritative and sufficient Scripture.
Some churches within the EFCA are cessationists, i.e. they believe the miraculous gifts have ceased. They were signs to authenticate the message/messenger, but once the canon was completed they were no longer necessary.
Other churches within the EFCA are continuationists, i.e. they believe the miraculous gifts continue to operate in that they were a mark of the presence of the kingdom of God – in the person of Jesus Christ the King – and they are an ongoing mark today of the presence of the kingdom.
3. No churches within the EFCA are classic Pentecostal, i.e. they believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit which happens after conversion and is evidenced by speaking in tongues.
Application – Within the parameters stated above, belief and expression are determined by and dependent on the local EFC church. (3)
That’s all fine and dandy. But where does that put us at Lakewood? I’m glad you asked, here are 3 ways to consider the question as Jarrod and I chewed on it in the episode.
Yes
Arguments for the ceasing of miraculous gifts are exegetically weak. (This is a very divisive statement!) The often-debated text of 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 states that tongues will cease when the ‘perfect’ comes. To insert this refers to the completed canon of Scripture and not the return of Christ takes some hermeneutical gymnastics. For a fuller consideration of the dialogue, consider Wayne Grudem’s helpful surveying of it. (4)
Operating on the assumed reality of miraculous gifts today, should you speak in tongues? Yes, here is why: “Gifts are not the manifestation of human skill and ability and talent; they are ‘the manifestation of the Spirit’ for the strengthening of the church (1 Cor. 12:7). Hence, the gifts exercised can be ascribed only to the work of the Holy Spirit, to his sovereign will (1 Cor. 12:11).” (5)
As we observe the practice in the Scriptures, God gives ability and gifting for men and women to speak other languages so their hearing audience could understand and respond to the gospel, Acts 2 probably being the most famous example. It seems the biblical accounts of tongues never includes speaking ‘gibberish’ and many have left that practice and tradition when faced with the data of it in the Scriptures. (6)
Through church history, especially in foreign missions' contexts, there have been countless stories of missionaries entering a region and people with no access to the Word of God, and no ability in the cultural language... and then God miraculously provided the gift of tongues to proclaim Christ crucified.
We don’t determine the gifts we receive. If God places you in an opportunity to speak the good news of Jesus, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that He could gift you a tongue to speak to the needy soul in front of you.
Maybe
Here is where we start to pump the brakes, or rather, God pumps the breaks. One of the key reasons the Apostle Paul addressed spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is because this port city church was abusing their gifts. In fact, many who believe tongues have ceased, or those who would profess to be cautiously open to them, have this central gripe with tongues today... they are often abused.
“Pride lurks behind every corner and manifests itself in unexpected ways. The Corinthians were also prone to boast in the gifts that they exercised, particularly those who had the flashy and spontaneous gift of speaking in other tongues.” (7)
In addition to pride there are the endless examples of the gift of tongues seeking to be forced and produced by the human will. A quick YouTube search shows many stirring themselves into a frenzy, gibbering away, even crying hysterically to manufacture a spiritual language of prayer or prophecy.
We don’t need to even go there to put up a yellow caution flag to say maybe. The Apostle Paul also says maybe in 1 Cor. 14...
Speaking in tongues has a way of building yourself up and not the church (v.4), they are not a sign for believers but unbelievers (v.22), and if there is no one to interpret you won’t be serving or helping anyone when you speak (v.28).
There are clear guard rails in Scripture to how the gift was used, so maybe you should speak in them, maybe not. Context, wisdom, and the clear direction of the Spirit would be the determining factors.
Probably Not
Ultimately, should you speak in tongues? Probably not! This is a bit of a ‘hot take’ especially considering I’m operating on the basis that the gift of tongues does continue AND Paul clearly outlines orderly worship and use of tongues in 1 Cor. 14:26-28. Here are 5 considerations that would lead to your refraining.
1) Like our brothers and sisters who believe tongues have ceased, I agree that the early Church, as we read of it in the Scriptures, was in an era of transition and newness. The Christian message of Jesus dying and rising again was in its infancy to the known world. Often the sign of tongues (among others) was a confirming, validating, and powerful gift that stamped approval and validity to Gospel proclamation. In the Scriptures and even among later examples through Church history, the gift of tongues is primarily used in an evangelistic endeavor, especially in contexts of language barriers. As Paul said, tongues are a sign for unbelievers (1 Cor. 14:22).
2) We can’t deny there are clear instructions for the local church. Paul encourages his readers to ‘earnestly desire the higher gifts.’ (1 Cor. 12:31). Concluding his corrections about spiritual gifts Paul says, ‘do not forbid speaking in tongues.’ (1 Cor. 14:39). Flatly restricting the gift seems to go beyond the clear teaching of Paul. Yet, I still say, probably not.
Immediately after encouraging readers to desire the higher gifts, Paul elaborates his instruction by informing the Corinthian church that there is something better than tongues, miracles and healing, etc... and that is the way of love. Often quoted at weddings, 1 Corinthians 13, lays out an argument that love should be the gift that is sought above all because everything else will pass, tongues included. If you are not seeking the greatest gift of love, you probably should not be speaking in tongues.
3) Connected to this is a humble and thoughtful approach to the local church God has placed you in. If you speak but no one understands, are you really building up the church or speaking into the air? (1 Cor. 14:9). If there is no interpreter, you should probably not speak in tongues (14:28). There is little prescriptive evidence in the context that would suggest you speak in tongues first and wait around to see if someone understands and can explain to the congregation. In fact, verse 28 seems to argue the opposite, make sure there is someone to interpret, if not, keep quiet.
4) Paul also seems to put a higher emphasis on clarity from God’s Word, even a clear prophetic word, rather than tongues (1 Cor. 14:1, 3, 5, 19, 24-25). Plainly said, we have something better than a tongue or even a miracle, we have the revealed Word of God in the Bible. More sure, more steady, more reliable than our human attempts to convey truth from tongue or prophecy, we have the Scriptures. The entire Bible has been breathed out by God’s voice, and it is everything we need for a life of faith (2 Tim. 3:16-17).
5) We haven’t mentioned much by way of the tradition of tongues that seeks to not communicate Christ crucified through the venue of spoken human language but rather speaks ‘gibberish’ or a spiritual language of prayer or prophecy. This seems very contrary to God’s desire for clarity and building up the church as it’s been seen in Scripture (Acts 2, 1 Cor. 14:19).
This is very anecdotal, however, many share in print, video, and by way of personal story that speaking this way makes them ‘feel’ closer to the Lord. I praise God for the ways that He engages us as whole people, body, mind, and soul. Our emotions matter and so do our experiences. But they are not the litmus test of our closeness to God. Closeness to God is not found in experience, but in abiding (John 15). As a pastor I’ve seen many fall away when they don’t ‘feel’ it. If you are speaking in tongues to seek an experience, you probably should not. You are grounded and secure in your relationship with God, not based on experience, feeling, or performance. You are secure because of the active obedience and the sacrificial death, and literal resurrection of Jesus Christ on your behalf.
Footnotes:
EFCA statement of Faith: https://www.efca.org/sof
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology, pgs. 1031-1047
Schreiner, Thomas. New Testament Theology, pg. 486
A personal story from R.C. Sproul. https://learn.ligonier.org/articles/zeal-without-knowledge
Schreiner, Thomas. New Testament Theology, pg. 524