With New Tongues

Here is a topic that must be approached gently. Having come originally from a more
conservative and, if I may use the word, “legalistic” denomination, finding the freedom
of the true Gospel was a delight; a most liberating experience. It was an obvious freedom:
we are not saved by our works, but by grace; and the works that do come, they are a
pleasure, because they are a natural outpouring of the love that we have for the Father
and for our fellow man. Christ taught that on this principle, on these two commandments,
hung all of the Law and the prophets. (Mat 22:40) For some people, obedience to a
perfect and just Father may seem like a restriction at first, until they come to realize the
true delight this service entails. Many of my non-Christian friends tell me that their
biggest concern with Christianity is that “there is this huge guy in the air, looking down
on earth to punish us when we do wrong things.”

What an awful impression the supposed followers of Christ have given the world if this is
the case! Yes, everything we do and say is recorded, and yes, accounts will be made, but
that is NEVER to be the focus of a Christian. There was a time when Yah’s people were
spiritual “barbarians,” morally destitute from 400 years of slavery in Egypt, and the
Father, knowing they would naturally abuse the true freedom of love, gave a set of strict
rules and regulations regarding every aspect of behavior, in order to train them for true
holiness by revealing to them such imperfections of religion and character that needed to
be put away. In the 1800s, this process was repeated – as the new SDA church emerged
from the reformation churches which refused to throw off their slavish clinging to Roman
traditions, the Roman day of worship and various other regulations put on believers by
the traditions of man. The principles that were involved in those reformations are still
applicable, of course, and were given for our best good – but the motive now is not to be
justified by those dos and don’ts (not that it ever truly was)... As we see value in them,
we will naturally desire to do what is best for our bodies, minds and spirits, if we are truly
converted to the Christ-nature.

This may seem like a strange way to begin a discussion on the subject of “tongues,” in
the Bible, but I do it this way to indicate my awareness that some may view this article as
an attempt to “take away” from their faith experience. It is the same way the Sabbath may
be viewed by some at first as a meaningless and unnecessary restriction – while in truth it
is a celebration of freedom from the world and from sin. A Christian does not “improve”
along the lines of evolutionary thinking, but he or she will “grow.” We do not start out
perfect in understanding and knowledge, but are ever “reaching forth unto those things
which are before,” (Phl 3:13) and cutting away those things which are found to not be in
 line with Yah’s standard for us. It can be a painful process, for the kherev is sharp, but it
is Christ Himself who brings that sword, and we must learn to rejoice in all things. At the
same time, it is much easier to bring someone UP to the standard of Christianity from a
more restrictive background that to bring someone DOWN from an “ecstatic” experience
into the peaceful, quiet joy of eternal life. “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are
heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Mat 11:28)

The spirits of my tongue-speaking (and non-Sabbathkeeping) friends may already be

withdrawing from the flow of this article, but I pray my readers will consider carefully
this study. If I am wrong, I will submit, but it must be shown from the Scripture where I
have made my error and, taking the advice of a good friend, I have determined to look at
EVERY incident of the word and context in order to compose this article – so the only
error possible would be a mis-interpretation on my part, and anyone who has read my
Bible Contradictions page knows that my method is generally to examine closely the
verses both before and after the passage in question in order to get at what is truly being
communicated. I do not ask the reader to “trust” me, only to use this article as incentive
to study for yourself. Whether to see if you agree, or whether to prove me wrong: read to
the end – it will conclude on a higher note – and by all means, study!

I recently did a mini survey. The question was: “When did Yah first give mankind the gift
of tongues.” I got two answers: 1) Don’t know and 2) At Pentecost. Well, let’s look at this
second reply, and see if this is so. First of all, there are only two words in all of Scripture
than I can find which means “tongues.” Even more specifically, there is only one in each
of the Testaments. Only one word, “lashown” is used in Hebrew, and one word, “glossa”
is used in Greek. The word “dialektos” IS used a couple times for the singular, “tongue,”
in the New Testament, but the meaning of this is most obvious from cases like Acts 2:8,
since the same Greek word is used in Acts 1:19, 21:40 and so on to mean “native
language.” In every case of the occurrence of the word tongues (9 times in the O.T. and
25 times in the N.T.), the definition is the same according to Strong’s Lexicon, and reads
as follows:

Lashown: Hebrew (03956)

1) tongue
1a) tongue (of men)
1a1) tongue (literal)
1a2) tongue (organ of speech)
 1b) language
1c) tongue (of animals)
1d) tongue (of fire)
1e) wedge, bay of sea (tongue-shaped)

Glossa: Greek (1100)

1) the tongue, a member of the body, an organ of speech

2) a tongue
1a) the language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations

Now there is another gift of tongues mentioned by some modern churches, that of
“Glossolalia,” or literally – Tonguespeaking, but this is not mentioned anywhere in the
Bible. Some will protest that it is, but I promise we will deal with ALL those verses used
to both support and rebut the doctrine. If I miss a single one, please contact me and I will
revise this article immediately. Some may say, “It doesn’t matter what your interpretation
of the Bible is, I have been speaking in tongues for years, so I KNOW it is true.” I submit
to you that to base your faith on a tradition of ANY kind is dangerous, if it is not strongly
rooted in the Word. I do not speak of “my interpretation” as if I were qualified to interpret
the Word – but I will merely present the Scriptures, perhaps some thoughts on them, and
then the work is the Spirit’s, not mine, to convince, convict and so on. But this aspect is
discussed herein also.

According to ALL those shades of meaning above, the only definition Scripturally given
to the word “tongues” is “languages” when not actually speaking of the physical organ or
a “bay of sea.” If another meaning is implied in the Word, we will look at that shortly. For
now, it is sufficient to quote a couple of verses to see the first time the gift of tongues was
given to mankind: “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘Of every tree of
the garden thou mayest freely eat.’” (Gen 2:16) “And out of the ground the LORD God
formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to
see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was
the name thereof.” (Gen 2:19) As with all the other spiritual gifts (prophecy, miracles,
discerning of spirits etc.), the gift of language was given to man at Creation, and shortly
thereafter.

A friend of mine said that this was not the same gift given at Pentecost, since Satan could
understand the tongue Adam spoke, therefore it wasn’t the “hidden prayer language”
discussed in the New Testament. If this is the case, then the gift of tongues as it is used
there wasn’t given at Pentecost either. Consider what that gift was: “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.” (Acts 2:5,6) This was not a secret
prayer language given at Pentecost either. If such a one was given, it’s not mentioned
here. And... we will examining possible “other” interpretations in a brief moment.

Now, during the first age, there was only one language spoken by man and angel, and Yah
would communicate with them both this way. Angels and men could also speak to each
other in this one tongue (Gen 3:1, Gen 11:1). This went on, even after the fall, until the
time of the tower of Babel. “And the LORD said, ‘Behold, the people is one, and they
have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from
them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their
language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.’ So the LORD scattered
them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.”
(Gen 11:6-8) This was a second bestowing of “tongues,” or diverse languages.

Now we come to Pentecost. As most Christians hopefully realize, every single incident
worthy of note in the New Testament is a dramatic and significant fulfillment of
something prophesied in the Old. Pentecost was a most important event, and was actually
the fulfillment of a prophecy and a shadow. The shadow was described in Leviticus...
well, actually it was first described in Genesis, and is called a “burnt offering.” Consider
that in Genesis 22, Abraham is told to offer his son as a burnt offering, and this, we are
told, is a foreshadowing of Christ being offered by the Father as an atonement for sin.
The concept of this burnt offering is then later described in Leviticus in this way: “Speak
unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the
commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do
against any of them: [or] if the priest that is anointed do sin according to the sin of the
people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without
blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering. Even the whole bullock shall he carry forth
without the camp unto a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn him on the
wood with fire: where the ashes are poured out shall he be burnt.” (Lev 4:2,3,12)

Notice that a sacrifice made for sin was a burnt offering. if Christ came to fulfill the law
perfectly, both after the manner of Leviticus and Genesis, He also would need to be a
burnt offering. But in both cases, we read that the sacrifice was not killed by the fire. It
was slain beforehand and it’s “blood was poured out.” (Lev 4:7) This was the part of
Christ’s sacrifice that we could SEE. Now, the burning, the fire, this was the sign (the
earthly symbol) that the sacrifice was accepted, for it is the smoke of the burning that is a
“sweet savor unto the LORD.” (Lev 4:31) The fire of Pentecost, basically, was the sign of
the acceptance by the Father of the atonement for man. Consider when Mary Magdalene
saw Christ raised, He said to her, “Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my
Father.” (John 20:17) Though He had died, He had not yet presented His sacrifice to the
Father – there had not yet been a sign of the acceptance by Heaven – there was not yet a
“burnt offering.”

There is much more to say on this topic, but I am not trying here to establish anything
except the reason why Pentecost happened the way it did. Consider in Exodus 29, a burnt
offering was used to sanctify priests, and according to Peter, Christians are “a chosen
generation, a royal priesthood.” (1 Pet 2:9) Christ’s death was our sin offering AND our
sanctification offering, to present us blameless before Yah as priests forever – and
Pentecost’s fire was the sign that his burnt atonement was accepted by the Throne.

Now, the gift of tongues given at Pentecost – the WHY it happened was to fulfill the
shadow, as explained above, and the WAY it happened was to fulfill prophecy. “And also
upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.” (Joel
2:29) “For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all
nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory.” (Isa 66:18) And this was
done in a most dramatic fashion, for the Jews were there at the time of Pentecost from
“out of every nation under heaven.”

Acts is clear what the purpose of these tongues were for. “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 marveled, 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.’” (Acts 2:6-11)

The gift of tongues was to proclaim the Gospel to all nations, as Isaiah said in times past,
and “Then they that gladly received [Peter’s] word were baptized: and the same day there
were added unto them about three thousand souls.” (Acts 2:41) Amen! But remember
also that the only ones who thought they were babbling as if drunk were “others,
mocking.” (Acts 2:13) Let us not make that same mistake of thinking that the gift of
tongues here is some “mysterious God-language” that none others (including Satan) can
comprehend.

Neither was this gift restricted to the book of Acts. It was spoken of from the Gospels all
the way down to Revelation. “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name
shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues.” (Mark 16:17) John also
wrote, “And He said unto me, ‘Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and
nations, and tongues, and kings.’” (Rev 10:11) Did John personally already know “many
tongues?” Considering he started out his ministry as an uneducated fisherman, not likely.
Of course, working with and for Christ has an educational effect on an individual – but it
seems much more likely that he is speaking of using this supernatural gift to aid him in
his mission. Notice the common theme, though... in Mark and in Revelation, the gift of
languages is always, always given to spread the Gospel.

“What about the other uses?” my friends may ask. Well, we shall consider here if there
were indeed other uses spoken of in Scripture. Before we do, however, it might be well if
we re-emphasized here that there is nothing wrong with emotions. Many Charismatics
consider the use of tongues to be vital to getting the “feeling” of the Spirit, and while
there is nothing wrong with feelings – Yah is a God of emotions as well as justice (Isa
1:18, Hsa 6:4, Mic 6:3, Mat 9:36, Mar 1:41, Mar 6:34, John 11:35) – we should not and
we CAN not base our Spiritual experience upon feelings. This is a grave error. “The heart
is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? For out of the
heart proceeds evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness,
blasphemies.” (Jer 17:9, Mark 15:19) Emotions are natural, and healthy, and human, but
if our feelings do not match up with the principles of Scripture – it doesn’t matter how
much we “believe” something, or how long we have been doing it, or if the whole world
agrees with it – it’s wrong.

Well, from what I have heard, most of the doctrine of speaking or praying in tongues (in a
manner not to evangelize) is rooted in the book of 1 Corinthians. This is one of the main
verses, “For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto
God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he
that prophesieth speaketh unto men [to] edification, and exhortation, and comfort.” (1
Cor 14:2,3)

Notice, I usually take out the words enclosed in the [] brackets when quoting the Bible,
because the words added often enhance the flow of the KJV text. In this case, I left them
in for a very special reason. Whenever you look for the phrase “unknown tongue” in
Scripture, you will find exactly six occurrences of the phrase. These are: 1Cr 14:2,4,13,
14, 19 and 27. That’s right... ALL uses of the phrase “unknown tongue” are found in that
one chapter. Even more strikingly, in every single occurrence, the word “unknown”
appears in [] brackets. This means that the word [unknown] was not in the text that Paul
wrote. It was added to hopefully enhance meaning, and in a way it has. Because of the
translation, however, this had led to some problems. We will come back to it in a brief
moment, but I would like to give another example of a similar situation first, if my reader
will allow.

“And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth.” (Gen 9:1) Sounds good, right? The earth’s population had just been
destroyed by the flood, and so Noah and his family were commanded to start the ball
rolling again. No problem there. Now look at this: “So God created man in His own
image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. And God
blessed them, and God said unto them, ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,
and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air,
and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.’” (Gen 1:27,28) NOW... it looks
like we may have a problem.

This particular verse has caused some trouble, due to the word “replenish,” because it
looks as if there was a time of population before Adam and Eve! This has led to such
doctrinal errors as the “gap theory,” and few other lesser-known mis-applications of the
Word. The problem is solved in this simple way – just remember what year the KJV was
translated! In the 1600s, the word “replenish” did NOT mean to RE-fill. It simply meant
“to fill.” Even today, if you look at the Strong’s Lexicon, you find the word is from the
Hebrew “malé,” (04390), and it has several meanings, none of them bearing the
connotation of “replacement.” The point here is that a single word, wrongly used, can
throw off an entire chapter, book... maybe even Testament.

With that in mind, let us look at the word “unknown” very carefully in that context.
Looking at the Corinthian verses, we find that someone speaking an unknown language
speaks “not unto men, but unto God,” and “speaketh mysteries.” The question becomes,
does this mean the individual that is praying does not understand his own prayer? Let’s
read the entire chapter. Verse 4: “He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth
himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.” Verse 6: “Now, brethren, if I come
unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either
by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?” Verse 17: “For thou
verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.” Interesting, right? In each case,
Paul is speaking of OTHER people not understanding the prayer. This seems not to be the
case in verse 14, but I will get to that in a moment.

Let’s look at what the word “edify” means in this context. According to Strong’s it
means, “to build (up from the foundation)” or “to promote growth in Christian wisdom...
to grow in wisdom and piety.” In other words, it is to strengthen the wisdom of the hearer.
Paul says, “If you pray in another language, what does it profit those around you who
don’t understand?” Now let us look at this VERY carefully... if those who hear and
don’t understand are not edified, is the person praying who hears but does not understand
edified? A friend I was talking to about this told me once, “Yes, the individual praying is
edified, even though he doesn’t know what he is saying. It isn’t important that he know.”
To that I would reply, “So why is it important that the rest of the church know what he is
saying, if the understanding isn’t a part of the edification?” Paul says, in all these cases –
if we do not understand the prayer, we will not be edified by it, so let those praying in
tongues (languages) not known to those around them be silent. If you are familiar with
church history, you’ll realize that this is exactly the problem that the Corinthian church
had.

Now we bring in verse 14: “For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but
my understanding is unfruitful.” This seems to indicate that Paul’s Spirit prays, and his
understanding is unfruitful... in other words, it seems to say that even though Paul’s
“understanding” doesn’t benefit from the prayer, his spirit will. This is a key verse,
because if we can understand what he is saying HERE, the rest of this mystery should fall
into place. As in ALL good Scriptural mysteries, the answer is usually just a single verse
away. Let us look at verse 14 again, this time, adding verse 13 before it, and 15 after it.

Behold: “Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may
interpret. For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding
is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the
understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding
also.” (1 Cor 13:13-15)

What did Paul say in verse 15? “I will pray with the understanding also when I pray
with an “unknown” tongue.” Even if he should SING in the spirit, he will sing with the
understanding also. How then is it that he says his “understanding is unfruitful?” The
answer is simple – he is talking about the understanding of other people. This is WHY he
needs to pray also that he can interpret. We need only read verse 13 to have this made
clear... if you are going to speak, sing or pray in a language that God has given to you to
evangelize in, but no one else around you knows it, pray to interpret also, or else, “if I
pray in an unknown tongue, MY spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.” No
one else can understand him! If you are London, and you start praying in Chinese, you
will be edified, but no one else around you can put an “Amen” to your “Our Father” in
good conscience, because they have NO idea what you just said! Your understanding is
unfruitful. Remember, we are dealing with 15th all it be known what is spoken? for ye
shall speak into the air.” Here again, as in verse two, some confusion arises, because
verse 2 says that someone speaking in tongues speaks “unto God, for NO MAN
understandeth him.” Those who have accepted the tongues doctrine will wave those
words and say, “See? Those who speak in tongues are understood by NO MAN, it didn’t
say ‘no man in the immediate area.’” Verse 9 says he speaks into the air, again seeming to
imply that nobody but God can understand – anywhere on earth. Well, once the reader
understands what the gift of tongues IS (an evangelism tool) from my first section here,
the meanings of this can be rightly read – but for those who do believe there is another
kind (as seems to be indicated in verses like 18 and 19 of this chapter), we can examine
this.

Perhaps this can be cleared up if we see how the expression “no man” is used in the
Bible. This seems like a reasonable approach, doesn’t it? Here is one example, and it’s a
common one. John the Baptist said of Christ, “He that cometh from above is above all: he
that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: He that cometh from heaven is
above all. And what He hath seen and heard, that He testifieth; and no man receiveth His
testimony.” (John 3:31,32) What is this? John is cursing Christ’s ministry even before it
has begun? There are some who say, “The Bible says it, I believe it, That settles it.”
That’s a good attitude to have – however, if the Word gives us an impression like this, the
command is to “search” the Scripture, to go a level deeper, and see if our understanding
has been “unfruitful” for just a moment. We only need to read one verse further in John:
“He that hath received His testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.” (John 3:33)
Now it makes a little more sense... NO MAN receives Christ’s testimony (in general, for
many are called, but few “chosen”), BUT those who do set their seal that Yah is true.
That, I hope, makes more sense to the readers of John.

It would be more convincing to look at the way the actual author, Paul, used the phrase.
Here is yet another example, “For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth
and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church.” (Eph 5:29) Is this absolutely true? Has no
man ever cut his flesh in satanic rebellion? Has no man ever taken dangerous drugs to
the hurt of his temple? Has no man ever committed adultery, or fornication, and thereby
sinned “against his own body?” (1 Cor 6:18) The answer to all of these is yes, of course.
“But Paul said NO MAN,” the protester is forced to point out. Yes, but again, here we
need intelligent faith. No man, as used by John, and as used by Paul, in some cases
means, “generally, in this instance or set of instances.” We cannot latch onto words in the
Scripture, irrespective of the spirit and context of the passage – our theology just cannot
afford it. Remember the word “replenish?”

There is also another verse that seems to support the “praying in tongues” belief (and yes,
I am truly going to examine every single passage and/or reference I am aware of). In his
letter to the Romans, the apostle to the Gentiles writes, “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth
our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself
maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth
the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the
saints according to the will of God.” (Rom 8:26,27) A tonguespeaker will say, “Here,
then, is proof! We know NOT what we ought to pray, therefore the Spirit must make the
intercession for us. How can you say we always know what we are praying? Don’t you
see? It means we MUST pray in a tongue even we (and others around us) don’t
understand, in order to really be connecting with God on the highest level.”

Well, I don’t know about that – I’d like to (before I present any other Scriptures) merely
point out that the groanings of the Spirit CANNOT BE UTTERED. Paul and James are
both extremely opposed to uninterpreted babbling of any kind. (1 Tim 6:20, 2 Tim 2:16,
James 1:26) I don’t see how people can say that we don’t understand what we are
PRAYING in that passage above. We pray, and we’re not sure what to pray for, and the
Spirit searches our hearts, this is true, but we are to have perfect control over EVERY
word our tongue utters at every time. This is Scriptural principle, and should be in
“Christianity 101,” and is made plain in James 3:1-13. “But when we are praying in the
Spirit, wouldn’t the Spirit protect us from saying evil things? We are IN the Spirit, after
all,” an opposer may ask.

When we start talking like that, however, we have left Scripture behind, and are now in
the land of “Assumption.” We will get into this later (if such a language even exists), but
at this point I would like to provide a “second witness” to Romans 8:26,27, and it will
show you EXACTLY what that Scripture means, with (I pray) no questions remaining.

“It came to pass after this also, that the children of Moab, and the children of Ammon,
and with them other beside the Ammonites, came against Jehoshaphat [the king of Judah
at the time] to battle. And Jehoshaphat feared, and set himself to seek the LORD, and
proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah. And Judah gathered themselves together, to ask
help of the LORD: even out of all the cities of Judah they came to seek the LORD. And
Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation of Judah and Jerusalem, in the house of the LORD,
before the new court, And said, ‘O LORD God of our fathers, art not thou God in
heaven? and rulest not thou over all the kingdoms of the heathen? and in thine hand is
there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee? O our God, wilt thou
not judge them [our enemies]? for we have no might against this great company that
cometh against us; neither know we what to do: but our eyes are upon thee.’” (2
Chronicles 20:1,3,4-6,12)

“Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray
for as we ought,” wrote Paul. I hope my reader is beginning to see the true application
here, as “Scripture interprets Scripture.” Let us continue to read, it gets better.
“Then upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son of Jeiel, the son of
Mattaniah, a Levite of the sons of Asaph, came the Spirit of the LORD in the midst of
the congregation; And he said, ‘Hearken ye, all Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem,
and thou king Jehoshaphat, Thus saith the LORD unto you, Be not afraid nor dismayed
by reason of this great multitude; for the battle is not yours, but God’s!’” (2 Chronicles
20:14,15) Let no man say the Spirit did not descend upon human beings until Pentecost!
But now look at this: did not the Spirit make intercession for the kingdom of Judah? Did
It not search the hearts of the king and his people, and present the trembling petition
before the Throne? Did it not answer in a dramatic way? Read the rest of that chapter...
the Spirit answered with fire, and miracles, and Judah was held safe by the might of Yah,
even against so great a multitude.

Paul was absolutely right. Sometimes, we just don’t know what to pray – but the Spirit
makes intercession for us, and we’ll say the right thing, or someone will be convicted to
say a word to us, as in the example above – or maybe He will even send an angel! But...
the point is, in all cases in Scripture, in all the principles of Scripture, the Spirit has
replied in a way that was understood. And when the promise was then brought to
fulfillment, there was rejoicing to see the deliverance of Yah! “Then they returned [after
the “battle”], every man of Judah and Jerusalem, and Jehoshaphat in the forefront of
them, to go again to Jerusalem with joy; for the LORD had made them to rejoice over
their enemies. (2 Ch 20:27) Do you see why if someone who was given the gift of
another language was praying, there needed to be an interpreter? So the people could
understand and rejoice! Don’t make the mistake of thinking that the individual that was
praying also needed the interpreter... Someone speaking in a foreign tongue is “edifying
himself” just fine.

“But how can you say this,” a reader may say. “I have seen this, I have DONE this, and I
didn’t understand, but I was closer to God because of it.” I have a simple question –
“How do you know?” They will invariably reply, “I felt it, of course.” Ouch. I’d direct
this person to read my articles on Creation and Evolution. A faith based upon FEELINGS
is just as dead as a faith without works. We cannot judge our “spirituality” by what we
feel! This is one of the cardinal sins of modern churches, and I cannot be too fierce
against this awful falsehood. “But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged
of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.” (1 Cor 4:3) Have we been
guilty of this in the past? Judging even our own selves, and taking away that authority
that belongs only to Christ? Have we been guilty of judging as a man, and not following
Christ’s advice? For Messiah taught, “Judge not according to the appearance, but judge
righteous judgment.” (John 7:24) Judge, He says, but do it in the right way – according to
the Word of Yah. Yes, at some point we have all been guilty of missing this mark, but
come, let us be faithful Christians, and confess it, and repent of it... and put it away.

Now, there are some Christians that are even worse about the matter. Instead of saying we
CAN pray in tongues, or we CAN speak in tongues impossible to be understood by all
men, they say we MUST speak in tongues to show that we have been baptized by the
spirit! This is... outrageous. The Bible throws so many Scriptures at this shadow-doctrine
that it should make the false teacher’s head spin. Here is a brief list, and then we can go
into discussion of it, if indeed there is anything else to say thereafter:

“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.” (1 Cor 14:5) Oh, my... not all spoke in tongues! Are we going to
accuse some of the faithful, first century Christians of not being baptized by the Holy
Spirit? Here it is even clearer: “For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to
another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to
another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to
another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to
another the interpretation of tongues.” (1 Cr 12:8-10) Notice the word “some” there...
Here is another Scripture that is like it: “Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with
tongues? do all interpret?” (1 Cr 12:30) What is the implied answer to this question? Was
it a test of fellowship?

Look at the list of the gifts of the spirit given by Paul in another place: “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.” (1 Cor
12:28) See how the Charismatics have turned this list upside down! “You may not be an
apostle,” they say, “you may not prophesy, certainly only a few heal, and of course not all
are good at organization, but you’d better be able to speak with tongues, or you don’t
have the Holy Spirit!” Oh, the blindness... oh, the deception. Ezekiel 9 says that those
who are sealed unto eternal life are they who “sigh and cry” for the abominations in
Jerusalem. Who will take up this lament?

Charismatics constantly point to the book of Acts, and declare that every incident of
baptism by the Holy Spirit led to a speaking in tongues. Let’s go through Acts (if my
reader will bear with me a little longer) and see what this book said on every incident
where the Holy Spirit fell on people and the word “tongues” described the result:
“And they [the apostles] were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with
other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance... and [onlookers] were confounded,
because that every man heard them speak in his own language.” (Acts 2:4,6)

“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 10:45,46)

“And when Paul had laid [his] hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they
spake with tongues, and prophesied.” (Acts 19:6)

Three incidents, three different times, three different sets of onlookers. But I want
something very significant to be noticed. In each of the cases, the onlookers realized that
those baptized with the Holy Ghost spoke in tongues, but in each of the cases also, the
listeners understood what the speakers were saying. The diverse crowd of Jews “heard
them speak in [their] own language.” The witnesses with Peter heard them speak with
tongues “and magnify God.” Those upon whom Paul laid his hands spake with tongues
“and prophesied.” In each case, that could only have been determined if they spoke in a
real, human language that at least one member of the crowd could understand.

Let us be even more clear. “How do you know that in at least one of these incidents, it
was merely assumed that the speakers were magnifying God, because they were
speaking in tongues?” Well, that’s a rather circular argument, but Yah will leave nothing
to question. Read what Peter said when he was describing the “tonguespeaking”
mentioned in Acts 19:6. “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us
at the beginning.” (Acts 11:15) We’ve already seen that at Pentecost, the apostles spoke
in tongues for the specific purpose of being understood by the diverse gathering of Jews
– are we really to conclude that this second incident is different in spite of Peter’s
contention that the Spirit fell on them in the exact same manner?

Before we move back to whether or not someone CAN speak in non-human languages,
let’s first conclude the matter of whether a Christian MUST as a test of fellowship, for
that is the far more treacherous poison. If there are a group of Christians out there judging
the faith-experience of others in a way not specifically prescribed by the Word, it needs to
be rebuked “with breath like fire.” Consider another incident in Acts. Actually, we can
consider several incidents in which the Holy Spirit fell upon someone and they did NOT
speak with tongues. “And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were
assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the
word of God with boldness.” (Acts 4:31) “Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said
unto them, ‘Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel...’” (Acts 4:8) And so on, and so
on.

Some may say, “Yes, but those men all had already had their first experience with the
Spirit. You must speak in tongues when you are baptized with the Holy Ghost.” Well,
now they’re changing their story a little, at least from what I have heard. But let’s see if
even that is true. Here is a highlight from the story of the conversion of Paul: “And
Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said,
‘Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest,
hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.’ And
immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight
forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. And when he had received meat, he was
strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.
And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.” (Acts
9:17-20) I don’t see a mention of tongues there, although Paul did receive his sight back,
and was filled with the Holy Ghost, as his actions immediately following indicated. I also
find it strange that it is ONLY in the book of Acts these few occasions are even
mentioned. Mighty mysterious, if speaking in tongues is the test of a Spirit-filled
Christian.

Now let’s see what the TRUE test of a Spirit-filled believer is. It is NOT tongues, let’s get
that clear right off the bat and settle it now. “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.” (1 Cor 14:22) So let the believers stop asking
for that as a sign. The gift of tongues was given for a sign to unbelievers, that they could
hear the Gospel preached in their own language, irrespective of the background of the
teacher. Here is the true test: “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye
have love one to another.” (John 13:35) It isn’t prophecy, it isn’t tongues, it isn’t
teaching or governmental skills. The true test of a disciple is LOVE, the true “covenant
love” that leads to the obedience to Yah’s commands (John 14:15), and that unites the
convert with those similarly awaiting the return of Christ Yahshua. (Acts 2:42, 1 Cor
6:17, Eph 4:4, Phil 1:27)

“And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all
knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not
charity (love), I am nothing. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they
shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall
vanish away.” (1 Cor 13:2,8) Love is the test – should all the other gifts pass away:
prophecy, tongues, everything... love will remain.

Now the question becomes, even if we don’t HAVE to speak in tongues, what of those
who do? What of those who have had the experience? Does Scripture invalidate their
faith-encounter? A delicate matter indeed, and we need to “lay the axe to the root,” not
contending with the individuals themselves (for that is the Spirit’s job), but examining the
doctrine. We must not beat at the branches of the tree, for humans are not the enemy, but
go to the very core and ask the real question: “IS there a secret prayer language?”

If you’re looking for one, you’ll find it. A tongue-believer can easily take a verse like this
and run away with it: “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have
not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.” (1 Cor 13:1) “Aha! So
Paul speaks with the tongues of men AND angels! How can you argue with the plain
word of Scripture?” Well, let’s just see what the word “though” means the way Paul uses
it. Here are a couple other verses: “For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ,
yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.”
(1 Cor 4:15) “And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my
body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. (1 Cor 13:3) Two other
examples, both from that very book, one from that very chapter, declare that “though”
means IF. No Christian had “ten thousand instructors,” Paul did not give his body to be
burned (he was beheaded), and Paul did NOT speak with the tongues of men and of
angels (except that angels can, of course, understand regular human speech). His point
was simple, and it was this: Even if he spoke every language conceivable, it wouldn’t
profit him anything if he did not have love (charity).

Now, Paul DID say to the members of the Corinthian church, “I thank my God, I speak
with tongues more than ye all.” (1 Cor 14:18) Does that mean that Paul spoke in tongues
more often that the church members? Did it mean he spoke stranger and more “secret”
languages than others because he was an apostle? Maybe the explanation is simpler. Paul
was an extremely well educated man. He was THE most active evangelist (at least in
terms of ministry scope) of the early church, and the fact that he knew many languages
was an invaluable asset to the apostle. That Paul was extremely schooled in linguistics,
theology and various other disciplines is adequately attested to in the New Testament.
“But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded [bewildered/confused] the
Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.” (Acts 9:22) “And as he
thus spake for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, ‘Paul, thou art beside thyself; much
learning doth make thee mad!’” (Acts 26:24)
We’ve dealt with the passage in Romans about the Spirit interceding for us (which It
does), and Paul allegedly speaking with a tongue known only to Yah and/or the angels
(which he didn’t). Are there any verses left to even hint at a mysterious language? I know
there are many Scriptures against it: “For there is nothing hid, which shall not be
manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad.” (Mark
4:22, Luke 8:17) “Jesus answered him, ‘I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the
synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said
nothing.’” (John 18:20)

Nothing is secret – Christians are to be OPEN before the world. I have heard this said,
“We must pray in tongues about certain things, because if we don’t, Satan, who
understands English, will know what we asked the Father for!” I have to tell my readers,
my spirit recoiled from this statement. YES Satan will know what we asked the Father
for! Good. I want him to. What can he do to stop it? I am not exalting myself above him,
for he is still a very powerful being... but he is a defeated foe, and is not something a
Christian should be hiding from! Are we Christians, reborn into the image of our
Redeemer, or are we toy soldiers, hiding in dark closets from the devil? I say to you:
when a Spirit-filled Christian prays to his Heavenly Father, demons tremble. Let them
know what we said, let them know exactly how we are going to help the Holy Spirit rip
the souls of men from their helpless grasp, and lead them into the gates of New
Jerusalem. “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.” (Rom 16:20) Was THIS not Paul’s message to
the churches? Let Satan know that the children of Zion are no cowards!

So were are we left? It really comes down to this: the arguments can be given, the
doctrines refuted, but... if we are not crucified with Christ, it will be impossible to do
anything with the information – convinced or not. A lot of Christians believe in the
tongues movement, and a lot don’t. The Scripture has It’s answer as to which of these is
accurate, the writings of the early church fathers AFTER the 1st century have their
answers (there is no historical mention of Tongues in the early church after the New
Testament was completed), and now it comes down to each of us, on a barren plane, face
to face with Christ.

But I promised I would end this article on an upnote – and so I shall. There IS a true gift
of tongues. Yes, the first gift was given to the Apostles to evangelize, but with the spread
of Christianity, there is little need for it in that form (although we cannot rule it’s
presence OUT as an evangelistic tool – 1 Cor 14:39. Were I suddenly dropped into the
middle of France, I would not be surprised if, by a miracle, I could share the Gospel with
the natives). At the same time, Scripture promises us that believers will speak in “new
tongues.” There is a language of Babylon, and that is the language every non-converted
citizen of planet earth speaks. “And it was given unto [Satan/the beast] to make war with
the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and
tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names
are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”
(Rev 13:7,8) Is there any doubt remaining that the power of life and death is in the
tongue? (as per Proverbs 18:21)

If we speak the language of Babylon (confusion), we are already overcome. I refer to

Christians using words of doubt, words of fear, words of discouragement. Those such as
these are already under the power of the Dragon and the first beast – they are speaking
the language of their kingdom, the world. Now a Spirit-filled, fully-converted, born-again
Christian is different. He will speak of Victory, confidence and hope. He will have the
testimony, the words of Christ Yahshua, and will say with the confidence born of Grace,
“I shall not fail nor be discouraged.” (Isa 42:4) There is no glory in the self, or in what the
individual is capable of. “But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord
Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” (Gal 6:14)

“The world, the kingdom of shadows, is crucified unto me,” declares the Christian. We
don’t speak their language anymore. You will not hear those walking in the Spirit say, “I
cannot.” “It is too difficult.” You will rarely hear them say, “I try.” We do not try, as if we
could accomplish anything worthwhile through our feeble efforts. Christ accomplishes
through us. “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.” (Phil 4:13) We
are more than conquerors through Him, but we don’t even break a sweat – the Holy Spirit
in us does the striving. When we speak the truth in love, we will THEN be speaking the
true language of Heaven. This is the true Gift of Tongues. “These are the things that ye
shall do; Speak ye every man the truth to his neighbour; execute the judgment of truth
and peace in your gates.” (Zech 8:16) “And these signs shall follow them that believe: In
my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues.” (Mark 16:17)

David.

Further notes: I must confess that I was rather single-minded in my examination of the
verses concerning the words “tongue” or “tongues.” Especially in chapter 14 of 1
Corinthians, I tended to stick to the citations themselves, and the verses immediately
before and after. As it was, I neglected to read the entire passage as a whole, but since I
have done so, many of the points I brought up above have become even more clear – the
meanings more vivid.
I may eventually rewrite this article, improving its overall clarity, so that Paul’s meaning
in the verses (already obvious enough) could be more readily shown here, but for now I
will simply include the new findings as notes here at the end.

A. 1 Cor 14:10-11 reads: “There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and
none of them is without signification. Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I
shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto
me.” This comes right before verse 12, which encourages believers to seek excellence in
edifying the church. It occurs to me here that Paul is only continuing the already strong
emphasis that those who speak with unknown tongues would be unintelligible to others.
To follow his precise example above – if I speak a language another does not understand
(see verse 6), we will appear as “barbarians” to each other. We will NOT, however,
appear as barbarians to ourselves. As in all cases that can be found where Paul is
speaking of the “understanding being unfruitful,” the individual knows what he or she is
saying, the Apostle’s concern is for the understanding of others.

B. In the course of my article above, I used this example: “If you are London, and you
start praying in Chinese, you will be edified, but no one else around you can put an
“Amen” to your “Our Father” in good conscience, because they have NO idea what you
just said! Your understanding is unfruitful. Remember, we are dealing with 15th century
grammar here.”

Had I taken the time I might have, I would have seen that Paul has already supplied this
idea in verse 16: “Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth
the room of the unlearned say ‘Amen’ at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth
not what thou sayest?” I need not have bothered to come up with the analogy, the writer
of the book itself has already made his own meaning abundantly clear.

C. Reading further in the book, I find that Paul quotes an interesting text, “In the law it is
written: ‘With men of other tongues and other lips I will speak to this people; And yet, for
all that, they will not hear Me,’ says the Lord.” (1 Cor 14:21) This is another explanation
of what tongues are FOR – and reading the chapter as a whole will lead you naturally into
the meaning of Paul’s writings, “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, NOT to them that
believe, but to them that believe not...” (verse 22) Exhaustively is it shown that the
purpose of tongues was for nothing else but to share the Gospel with those who knew not
the language of the speaker. With the gift of tongues YAH will speak to “other people.” (1
Cor 14:21, Isa 28:11) People will not speak to HIM that way; see how the world has
reversed each and every precious gift of the Spirit.
D. Finally, to even more conclusively rule out the concept of a “prayer language,” as if
note C had not done so already, we can read how Paul begins to round out his discussion
of the spiritual gift. “But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and
let him speak to himself, and to God.” (1 Cor 14:28) Well, for one thing, most
tonguespeaking churches aren’t doing this anyway, but even those who DO use it as a
specialized prayer language in private are incorrect in doing so according to this verse,
for Paul says a person speaking or singing or praying in tongues speaks “to himself AND
to God.” Yah almighty is not the only one that understands a person praying who has the
true gift of evangelistic languages... the individual spoke to and understood himself just
fine.

And so I find that this study has been a lesson for myself also. I am always reminding
people not to take things out of context, but it seems that I was being shown a still wider
application. Even examining the verses just above and before the quotation in question
may not yield the best possible results. The letters and books were not written in
segmented portions as we have them now, and were meant to be taken as a whole. Should
the reader take the time to examine an entire chapter, passage or book, the meanings
become still more clear, and the Holy Spirit can instruct the eager student in the true ways
of the Father. I hope my article here has encouraged those who read it to seek the truth in
the Text itself, but may they learn from the lesson I received also, and truly endeavor to
get the full meaning of the Word, as accurately as possible. I am sure we will find that the
Book is always clearer, simpler, and more logical than we initially believed.

David.

csdadventism@gmail.com