Misconceptions on Speaking in Tongues – Part III6 min read

You are currently viewing Misconceptions on Speaking in Tongues – Part III<span class="wtr-time-wrap after-title"><span class="wtr-time-number">6</span> min read</span>

Unifying speaking in tongues from Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12

Some claim that the two narratives mentioned in Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12 have differences and therefore they cannot be viewed as one narrative that is mentioned twice. On the contrary, there are several parallels between the two narratives. In discussing whether the context behind Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12 are similar, one must examine the terminology used in both narratives.

Examining the original Greek

The Greek word genos is used for kinds. Genos, more generally, refers to a group, family or nation[1]. Languages with common origins or derivatives are called “families” in linguistics. Therefore, St. Paul and Luke refer to different languages not different types of speech. Furthermore, St. Luke mentions several languages in Acts 2:9-11 (the language of the Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Mesopotamians, Judeans, Cappadocians, Asian languages, Phrygians, Pamphylians, Egyptians and Libyans). Thereby his references to different genos refer to different existing languages and thereby debunked the claim that the “different kinds of tongues” mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:10 refer to both real and unintelligible languages.

Besides using the same terminology, the context of speaking in tongues from Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 12 is also the same. Both narratives mention[2] how:

  1. The Holy Spirit is the source for this gift (Acts 2:4, 18; 10:44-46 and 1 Cor. 12:1, 7, 11)
  2. The gift is not limited to the apostles (Acts 1:15; 10:46; 19:6; 1 Cor. 12:30; 14:18)
  3. The gift is a linguistic gift and not gibberish babble (Acts 2:4, 9–11; 1 Cor. 12:30; 14:2, 5)
  4. The message is translatable in existing languages (Acts 2:9–11, 1 Cor. 12:10; 14:5, 13)
  5. The gift was a miraculous gift as a sign for unbelieving Jews (Acts 2:5, 12, 14, 19; 1 Cor. 14:21–22; cf. Isa. 28:11–12)

Pentecostals use several other Biblical examples to back their concept of speaking in tongues: Acts 10:46 and Acts 19:6. The claim Pentecostalism makes is that the gift of speaking in tongues in Acts 2 differs from the one mentioned in Acts 10:46 and Acts 19:6. The question is whether this is the case or not.

Context derived from terminology

The Greek text in Acts 2:4 reads: “lalein heterais glossais” (to speak in other tongues). In Acts 10:46 the Greek text reads: “lalounton glossais” (speaking in tongues), and in Acts 19:6 the Greek text reads: “elaloun te glossais” (they were speaking in tongues). Lalein, lalounton and elaloun are all different conjugations of the Greek verb for speaking, laleo.

This means that in all three instances, Acts 2:4, 10:46 and 19:6, read the same text and in the same context. In addition, in Peter’s testimony about his experience with God regarding what foods are clean and unclean (cf. Acts 10:9-16) he mentioned how as he began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon the ones listening.

He further mentioned how the Holy Spirit descended on the Gentiles in exactly the same way as on the apostles (Acts 11:15-17). The Greek text in Acts 11:15 also uses lalein for speaking. The Greek words laleo (to speak) and glossa (tongues) are both used together in Acts (2:4, 11; 10:46 and 19:6) and in 1 Corinthians these terms are also used together (1 Corinthians 12:30; 13:1; 14:2, 4-6, 13, 18-19, 21, 27 and 39)[3].

The authors of the books of Acts and Corinthians: St. Luke and St. Paul

It must be noted that St. Luke was a close companion of St. Paul. This is seen in multiple books of the New Testament. St. Luke uses “we” several times when he is describing St. Paul’s missionary trips. The fact that he is speaking about St. Paul and himself as “we” means that he is not only his “colleague” as an apostle, but rather a close companion.

St. Paul mentions him as his “fellow-labourer” (Philemon 1:23-24) and the “beloved physician” (Colossians 4:14). In the period of St. Paul’s imprisonment before his execution in Rome, St. Luke was the only one that was with him (2 Timothy 4:11, cf. Acts 28:16). Therefore, as St. Paul and St. Luke were companions in preaching the Gospel, they had the same definition of speaking in tongues. This excludes the possibility that the tongues mentioned in Acts 2 are of a different type or nature than the one mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14.

Cessationism and Pentecostalism

There are two “groups” of opinions about whether speaking in tongues is still relevant in the twenty-first century. These two groups are Cessationism and Pentecostalism.

Cessationists would define speaking in tongues as an ability to speak an existing yet foreign language through the help of God, whereas Pentecostals would define speaking in tongues as speaking in spiritual human-foreign languages. For Cessationists, speaking in tongues was speaking in already existing languages foreign to the disciples and apostles for the edification and evangelism of the Church. For Pentecostals, however, speaking in tongues is seen as an essential practice within a Christian’s spiritual life.

Defining Pentecostalism is beyond the scope of this article; however, the consensus is that the emphasis within Pentecostalism lies on the “works of the Holy Spirit”[6]. In Pentecostalism, there are two “types” of Christians: Those baptized in the Spirit and are spiritually mature and able to speak in tongues, and those unbaptized in the Spirit and thereby spiritually immature and unable to speak in tongues[7].

As Busenitz mentioned in his review, most arguments have been about when speaking in tongues ceased rather than what speaking in tongues meant in the eyes of the Church Fathers.

Summary of previous conclusions

Having examined the two narratives of speaking in tongues in the New Testament, the above-mentioned analysis can be summarized as follows:

  • The speaking in tongues on the day of Pentecost can also be viewed as restoring the consequences of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9). Humanity tried to escape God’s wrath by building a tower and thereby protecting themselves from God. God interfered and He “confused the language of all the earth” (Genesis 11:9). Where all tongues were scattered at the Tower of Babel, the tongues of humanity were united at Pentecost, as mentioned by Jacob of Serugh (521 AD)[4].
  • When examining the two narratives where speaking in tongues is mentioned, one can see that the narratives of Acts 2:1-8 and 1 Corinthians 14:1-25 do not contradict each other, but rather carry the same meaning. The disciples and apostles needed to preach the Gospel to every corner of the planet and they were able to overcome the linguistic barrier by God’s power. God made the listeners hear the disciples and apostles in their own native existing The emphasis here is on speaking in existing languages.
  • Cessationists argue that after the first century speaking in tongues ceased, whereas Pentecostals argue that speaking in tongues ceased for a while, but appeared again in the twentieth century. Both groups defend their ideology using both Biblical and patristical arguments[5].

 

Resources:

  1. “Strong’s Greek: 1085. Γένος (Genos).” Bible Hub, biblehub.com/greek/1085.html/‎
  2. ‎Macarthur, John. Strange Fire. Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2013, p. 141.‎
  3. ‎ibid, pp. 139-140. ‎
  4. ‎Kollamparampil, Thomas. Jacob of Serugh, Select Festal Homilies. Dharmaram Publications, 1997, pp. 353-369.‎
  5. Busenitz, Nathan. The Gift of Tongues: Comparing the Church Fathers with Contemporary Pentecostalism, 2006, pp. 1-2. ‎
  6. ‎Gooren, Henri. “An Introduction to Pentecostalism: Global Charismatic Christianity.” Ars Disputandi, vol. 4, no. 1, 2004, pp. 206–09.
  7. J. Hollenweger, Walter. The Pentecostals. Hendrickson Pub, 1988, p. 9.‎

 

Find the other articles in this series here:

Misconceptions on Speaking in Tongues Part I
Misconceptions on Speaking in Tongues Part II
Misconceptions on Speaking in Tongues Part IV

 

Leave a Reply