The holy spirit and speaking in tongues

THE HOLY SPIRIT AND SPEAKING IN TONGUES
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Acts 19:6 6WhenPaul placed his hands on them, the
Holy Spiritcame on them, and they spokein tongues
and prophesied.
NOTE:The tongues may have been a foreign language or a private language
spokento God, but the prophesying is a speaking in their own language forall
who speak that language to hear and understand. Paul makes it clearthat
prophecy is the greaterof the two. He writes in 1 Corinthians 14:1-40 "Pursue
love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especiallythat you may prophesy.
For one who speaks in a tongue speaks notto men but to God; for no one
understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, the
one who prophesies speaksto people for their upbuilding and encouragement
and consolation. The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the
one who prophesies builds up the church. Now I want you all to speak in
tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greaterthan
the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church
may be built up. ..."
STUDYLIGHT RESOURCES
Adam Clarke Commentary

They spake with tongues, and prophesied - They receivedthe miraculous gift
of different languages;and in those languages they taught to the people the
greatdoctrines of the Christian religion; for this appears to be the meaning of
the word προεφητευον, prophesied, as it is used above.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Bibliography
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "The Adam Clarke
Commentary". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/acts-
19.html. 1832.
return to 'Jump List'
Albert Barnes'Notes onthe Whole Bible
And when Paul laid his hands … - See the notes on Acts 8:17.
And they spake with tongues - See the notes on Acts 2:4; Acts 10:46.
And prophesied - See the notes on Acts 2:17; Acts 11:27.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Barnes, Albert. "Commentaryon Acts 19:6". "Barnes'Notes onthe New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/acts-
19.html. 1870.

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible
And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them;
and they spake with tongues and prophesied. And they were in all about
twelve men.
It is a mistake to make another Pentecostout of this. Walkersaid that "This
was the same phenomenon witnessedon Pentecostand at the house of
Cornelius";[11]but in neither case was the phenomenon due to the imposition
of apostolic hands. This is therefore clearly something else. As Lange
declared:"The true baptism ... and not the imposition of hands ... (is among)
the conditions upon which the gift of the Spirit depends."[12]Bruner, who did
an incredible amount of study on this, said:
Peterdoes not contrastthe gift of the Spirit and baptism; he joins them ... It is
one of the major purposes of Acts to show that baptism and the gift of the
Holy Spirit belong indissolubly together. This is the speciallessonof Acts 8
and Acts 19.[13]
Ramsayseems to be correctwhen he supposed that:
Luke's purpose in dwelling on this episode is to show that even Apollos'
teaching at Corinth was Pauline in characterand owed its effectiveness
largely to the ideas of Paul, learned through Paul's two disciples (Aquila and
Priscilla).[14]
Certainly the episode before us, so closelyconnectedwith Apollos' instruction
by Aquila and Priscilla, casts Paulin the role of correcting those who had
been inadequately taught, and whose baptism had been for a purpose other
than that of bringing them "into Christ."

Before leaving this, it should be inquired what application this has for the
Christians today and for those who desire to declare the whole counselof God.
DISCIPLES NEEDINGRE-BAPTISM
Are there any today whose baptism was so defective or inadequate that they
should be baptized again"into the Lord Jesus"? The answerwithout any
doubt whatever is affirmative. And who are they? (1) Those who were
baptized in infancy, or at a time in childhood so early that no adequate
understanding of the ordinance was possible. Millions today have never in any
sense obeyedthe apostolic injunction to "have yourselves baptized" as Peter
commanded (Acts 2:38)[15] That passagemakesit absolutely clearthat the
convert must consciously, andof his own will, submit to Christian baptism. If
infant baptism is adequate, then baptism without faith, confession, or
repentance is valid; and this we hold to be absolutelyimpossible of
acceptance. (2)Those whose baptism was by some actionother than the
immersion submitted to by Christ, taught by the apostles, andpracticedby
the apostolic church, which actionwas denominated by the Holy Spirit as a
figure of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6:3-5), making
it certain that forms of baptism (so-called)without such a likeness are invalid.
(3) Those whose baptism was an action initiated by others, not themselves, or
whose baptism was in their hearts undertaken for any unscriptural purpose,
such as (a) merely going with the group, (b) primarily to please parents,
husband, wife, or other persons, or (c) any purpose other than that of
surrendering the soul to the Lord as commanded in the gospeland for the
purpose of coming "into Christ," receiving the forgiveness ofsins and the
promise of the Holy Spirit. (4) Those whose baptism was understood by
themselves as having no connectionwith salvation, or as being, in their view,
absolutely unnecessary, irrelevant, or unessential. (5) Those whose baptism,
instead of being "into Christ," was into some organizationunknown to the
Scripture, operating contrary to New Testamentauthority, and constituting
some kind of fellowship other than that of Christians "in Christ."
This writer earnestly prays that all who read these lines will ask himself in all
humility, "Was I Scripturally baptized?" If the answeris negative, the re-
baptism of these twelve disciples at Ephesus, long ago, provides an inspiring

example of what should be done. There was nothing wrong with their
baptism, exceptthat it had been for the wrong purpose; but that was enough
to invalidate it. One hundred sixty-nine times, in the writings of Paul alone,
the New Testamentuses the expression"in Christ," "in him," or its
equivalent;[16] and that says as loudly as it could be said that this purpose of
Christian baptism is absolutelyvital and should be honored by all men
(Romans 6:3-5; Galatians 3:26,27).
[11] W. R. Walker, Studies in Acts (Joplin, Missouri: College Press), p. 53.
[12] John PeterLange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1866), p. 350.
[13] Frederick Dale Bruner, A Theologyofthe Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishers, 1971), p. 169.
[14] Sir William M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: BakerBook House, 1959), p. 216.
[15] Vine's Greek Dictionary(Old Tappan, New Jersey.:Fleming H. Revell
Company, 1962), p. 97.
[16] John Mackay, God's Order(New York: The MacmillanCompany),
1953), p. 97.
Copyright Statement
James Burton Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene
Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Bibliography
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Coffman
Commentaries on the Old and New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/acts-19.html. Abilene
Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them,.... They having been before
baptized, not by him, but by John, or one of his disciples, in the name of the
Lord Jesus;just as Peterand John laid their hands upon the believing
Samaritans, who had been before baptized by Philip, Acts 8:14 and the same
extraordinary effects followed:
the Holy Ghostcame on them; in his extraordinary gifts, whose specialgrace
they had before an experience of:
and they spake with tongues; with other tongues, or in other languages, which
they had never learned, or had been used to, as the disciples did at the day of
"Pentecost":and prophesied; preached, having an extraordinary gift at once,
of explaining the prophecies of the Old Testament, and also foretold things to
come.
Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernisedand adapted
for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rightes Reserved,
Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard
Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Bibliography
Gill, John. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "The New John Gill Exposition of
the Entire Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/acts-
19.html. 1999.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
they spake with tongues, etc. — See on Acts 10:44, Acts 10:45.

Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text
scannedby Woodside Bible Fellowship.
This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-BrownCommentary is in the
public domain and may be freely used and distributed.
Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.;Fausset,A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Acts
19:6". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/acts-19.html. 1871-8.
People's New Testament
When Paul had laid his hands on them. It seemedproper that these men
should enjoy, not only the ordinary influence of the Spirit, but that some
spiritual gifts should be imparted, such as were given by the laying on of
apostolic hands. Compare Acts 8:17; Romans 1:11.
Spake with tongues. Of this ancient gift we learn (1) it edified only the speaker
(1 Corinthians 14:4); (2) to benefit others an interpreter was needed(1Co.
14:5-27);(3) God could understand (1 Corinthians 14:2). This gift
disappearedat an early date from the church.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that
is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website.

Original work done by Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 atThe
RestorationMovementPages.
Bibliography
Johnson, BartonW. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "People'sNew Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pnt/acts-19.html. 1891.
Robertson's WordPictures in the New Testament
When Paul had laid his hands upon them (επιτεντος αυτοις του Παυλου
χειρας — epithentos autois tou Paulou cheiras). Genitive absolute of second
aoristactive participle of επιτιτημι — epitithēmi This actof laying on of the
hands was done in Samaria by Peterand John (Acts 8:16) and in Damascus in
the case ofPaul (Acts 9:17) and was followedas here by the descentof the
Holy Spirit in supernatural power.
They spake with tongues (ελαλουν γλωσσαις — elaloun glōssais). Inchoative
imperfect, beganto speak with tongues as in Jerusalemat Pentecostandas in
Caesarea before the baptism.
Prophesied(επροπητευον— eprophēteuon). Inchoative imperfect again,
beganto prophesy. The speaking with tongues and prophesying was external
and indubitable proof that the Holy Spirit had come on these twelve
uninformed disciples now fully won to the service of Jesus as Messiah. But this
baptism in water did not “convey” the Holy Spirit nor forgiveness ofsins.
Paul was not a sacramentalist.
Copyright Statement

The Robertson's WordPictures of the New Testament. Copyright �
Broadman Press 1932,33,Renewal1960. All rights reserved. Used by
permission of Broadman Press (Southern BaptistSunday SchoolBoard)
Bibliography
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Robertson's WordPictures of
the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rwp/acts-19.html. Broadman
Press 1932,33. Renewal1960.
John Trapp Complete Commentary
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on
them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
Ver. 6. And prophesied] By a divine and evident inspiration they expounded
the writings of the prophets, and also foretold future events.
Copyright Statement
Text Courtesyof BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliography
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". John Trapp Complete
Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/acts-
19.html. 1865-1868.

Greek TestamentCriticalExegeticalCommentary
6.] See ch. Acts 8:17; Acts 10:46, and note on ch. Acts 2:4; and on ἐπροφ., ch.
Acts 11:27, note.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Alford, Henry. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". Greek TestamentCritical
ExegeticalCommentary.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hac/acts-19.html. 1863-1878.
Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomonof the New Testament
Acts 19:6. καὶ, and) A very similar instance occurs, ch. Acts 8:12; Acts 8:15-
16, in the case ofsome persons who had been at first baptized in the name of
JESUS, and afterwards receivedthe Holy Ghost.— ἦλθε) came promptly.—
ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς, upon them) Therefore they knew now from the effectthat there is
(the presence of)the Holy Ghost, Acts 19:2.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Bengel, JohannAlbrecht. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". Johann Albrecht
Bengel's Gnomonof the New Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jab/acts-19.html. 1897.

Matthew Poole's EnglishAnnotations on the Holy Bible
Laid his hands upon them; thereby ordaining and authorizing of them to
preach the gospel.
The Holy Ghostcame on them; in those extraordinary gifts of tongues, &c.,
whereby they were fitted to preach the gospelunto any nation or people unto
whom they should be sent.
Prophesied;they prophesied, either in its proper sense, being enabled to
foretell things that were to come; or in a larger and more improper sense,
praising and magnifying of God, and declaring the hidden mysteries of the
gospel;expounding the Scriptures, especiallythe prophecies concerning
Christ, as 1 Corinthians 14:1.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Poole, Matthew, "Commentaryon Acts 19:6". Matthew Poole's English
Annotations on the Holy Bible.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/acts-19.html. 1685.
Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament
The Holy Ghostcame on them; with his miraculous power, as he had done on
other disciples.
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
Edwards, Justin. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Family Bible New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/fam/acts-
19.html. American TractSociety. 1851.
Cambridge Greek Testamentfor Schools andColleges
6. ἦλθεν τὸ πνεῦμα τ. ἅ. ἐπ' αὐτούς, the Holy Ghost came upon them. The gift
of the Holy Ghostto these disciples appears to have been a specialprovision of
the Spirit for the greatwork which was to change Ephesus, from the city
wholly devoted to the goddess Diana, into the centre of Christian life
throughout the westof Asia Minor for severalcenturies.
ἐλάλουν τε γλώσσαις, and they spake with tongues. A Pentecostaloutpouring;
for as in Jerusalemthe gift wrought its effectamong the Jews then gathered
there from every quarter, so was the Spirit given in this greatcentre of
Gentile activity that a like result might follow, and that the amazement and
marvel at such a powermight win attention to the message andgain converts
to Christ.
καὶ ἐπροφήτευον, and prophesied. Probably in this case to be understood of
the expositionof Old Testamentprophecy, and of the power of preaching
bestowedon them by the gift of the Holy Ghost. The foretelling of future
events would be no such help to the cause of Christ as would the powerof
prophecy in this other sense.
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
"Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Cambridge Greek Testamentfor Schools and
Colleges".https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cgt/acts-19.html.
1896.
Whedon's Commentary on the Bible
6. Spake with tongues—We have here a miniature Pentecost,a new
outpouring of the charismatic Spirit upon a new twelve.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Whedon's Commentary on
the Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/acts-19.html.
1874-1909.
William Godbey's Commentary on the New Testament
6. “And Paul, laying hands on them, the Holy Ghost came on them, and they
continued to speak with tongues and prophecy.” Conversionis indispensable
to discipleship. Hence these disciples had been converted under the ministry
of Apollos. Paul not only leads them didactically and ceremonially out of the
Johanic into the Christian dispensation, but inaugurates a regular holiness
meeting for their sanctification, culminating in their spiritual illumination and
preparation for the experience which they, in due time, receive on their knees
at the altar, while Paul prays for them and lays hands on them. Here we have
clearNew Testamentprecedentand Apostolicalauthority for the secondwork
of grace. There is no evasionof the issue. The Holy Ghost calls no sinner

“disciple.” Hence these were all converted before Paul arrived. When, under
the ministry of Paul, the Holy Ghost came on them, even imparting His
extraordinary gifts, i. e., “tongues and prophecy,” clearly confirming the fact
of their sanctification, as these spiritual gifts are normal only to the sanctified.
We should still retain the imposition of hands while praying for people, that
they may be imbued with the Holy Ghost. It is certainly safe to follow New
Testamentprecedentand Apostolic practice. The innate impressibility of the
human spirit through the physical organismis beyond our comprehension.
God help us meekly to walk in the footprints of our predecessors.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Godbey, William. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "William Godbey's
Commentary on the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ges/acts-19.html.
PeterPett's Commentary on the Bible
‘And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them,
and they spoke with tongues, and prophesied.’
But the Holy Spirit did not come on them until Paul laid his hands on them
and identified them with the Christian church. It was necessarythat this be
so, so that it would be crystal clearthat initially the disciples of John had only
‘receivedthe Spirit’ on becoming united with the Christian church through
the laying on of hands of an Apostle.

The laying on of hands is always a mark of identification. Where it takes place
under the strict direction of God the result will always be that the Holy Spirit
comes on the one who has hands laid on him if he has not previously known
the Spirit. It canalso result in a specialenduement with the Spirit on one
chosenby God. But it is not the laying on of hands that ensures either. It is the
fact that Godhas made His will known, and His people then identify those
whom God has chosen. Once Godhas made His will knownthe identification
by holy men of that one will ensure the coming of the enduement of power.
But where the will of God is lacking, any laying on of hands will be an empty
ceremony.
This incident is similar to that with the Samaritans Acts 8:16-17, and in
contrastwith that of Cornelius Acts 11:44, in that the coming of the Holy
Spirit is delayed until the recipients have been directly identified with an
Apostle by the laying on of hands. This would seemto be because both were
examples of distinct bodies who already saw themselves as worshipping the
God of Israeland who were both therefore in dangerof being satisfiedwith
what they were and thus not uniting with the whole church of God. Thus in
both casesit had to be made clearthat their receptionof the Spirit came
though the one true church of Jesus Christ founded by the Apostles. For
Cornelius and his group the word which gave life came directly through an
Apostle and there was therefore no danger of schism.
We also learn that when the Holy Spirit came on these men they ‘spoke with
tongues and prophesied’. This would identify them with Pentecost, and with
Cornelius and his men, for the same thing happened in both cases. Theytoo
were being receivedby God on the same basis as both Jew and Gentile,
through the receptionof the Spirit. It was sealing the fact that the disciples of
John were now being united in the body of Christ, and that without that union
what they had experiencedwas only partial and insufficient.
We have no reasonfor assuming that such an experience of the coming of the
Holy Spirit on men as witnessedby tongues and prophecy was commonplace
for Paul. It is the first time in Acts that he is associatedwith such an
experience. Seeing the effect of the Holy Spirit coming on the men
accompaniedby tongues and prophecy would be seenby him as a fulfilment of

Pentecostbefore his eyes, a reminder that what Pentecosthadbrought for
men was still as realthere in Ephesus as it was previously. We note that while
all spoke in praise of God, only some spoke in tongues. But the tongues were
necessaryso that they might all recognise thatthey were entering into the
same experience as the infant church had at Jerusalem. Theytoo were being
‘baptised into the body of Christ’ (1 Corinthians 12:13). The remainder
praised and glorified God in their own language. In this case we are not told
whether the tongues were identifiable to anyone, but the group, even though
small, may well have been multi-racial. It may even be that the prophesying
was in Greek or Aramaic while the tongues were their own native tongues,
and that the fact of their spontaneous praise in this way was really the
important sign(both tongues and prophesying are mentioned together).
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "PeterPett's Commentary on the
Bible ". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/acts-19.html.
2013.
Expository Notes ofDr. Thomas Constable
As with the new converts in Samaria, these Ephesiandisciples received the
Holy Spirit when an apostle, this time Paul, laid his hands on them (cf. Acts
8:17). They did not receive the Spirit by waterbaptism. In Samaria, this
identification of the coming of the Spirit with Peterand John first
authenticated God"s giving of the Spirit in a non-Jewishcontext. Here the

identification of the coming of the Spirit with Paul authenticated God"s giving
of the Spirit in a town in which demonic religious activity flourished (cf. Acts
19:13-19). As subsequent events would show, the Jesus whomPaul preached
was the more powerful deity. These former disciples of John receivedthe Holy
Spirit when Paul laid his hands on them thus obviously connecting their
endowment with Paul"s messageandapostolic authority. There was no delay
in the Spirit coming on Cornelius when he believed, and Peterdid not have to
lay his hands on him to impart the Spirit ( Acts 10:44).
There are some interesting parallels betweenSpirit baptism as it took place in
Ephesus in this chapter and how it occurredin Samaria in chapter8.
1.
Word is preached to the Samaritans (by Philip); many become disciples and
are baptized ( Acts 8:4-13).
1.
God"s Word is proclaimed to the men at Ephesus (earlier by Apollos?); some
become disciples and are baptized (John"s baptism, Acts 18:24-26).
2.
Peterand John come to Samaria and see that the presence of the Spirit is not
evident in the disciples" lives ( Acts 8:14-16).
2.
Paul comes to Ephesus and notes that the presence ofthe Spirit is not evident
in the disciples" lives ( Acts 19:1-5).
3.

Peterand John lay hands on the disciples;the Holy Spirit comes upon them (
Acts 8:17).
3.
Paul lays his hands on the disciples;the Holy Spirit comes upon them ( Acts
19:6).
4.
Peterand John"s ministry engagesthe interest of the magicianSimon ( Acts
8:20-24).
4.
Paul"s ministry stimulates the interest of exorcists;the sevensons of Sceva (
Acts 19:13).
5.
A conflict arises betweenPeterand Simon. Simon is overwhelmed ( Acts 8:20-
24).
5.
A conflict arises betweenthe exorcists and demons. The exorcists are
overwhelmed ( Acts 19:14-16).
6.
Peterand John preach in many of the Samaritan villages before returning to
Jerusalem( Acts 8:25).
6.

All those in Asia hear the Word of the Lord as a result of Paul"s teaching (
Acts 19:10).
7.
Many miracles are performed among the Samaritans by Philip ( Acts 8:6-8).
7.
Paul performs specialmiracles by the powerof God ( Acts 19:11-12)." [Note:
Harm, pp35-36.]
The phenomenon of the separate conversionand Spirit baptism experiences of
some Christians that Luke recordedin Acts may need further clarification. It
seems that God wanted to highlight the fulfillment of Jesus" promise that He
would send the Holy Spirit to be in and with believers ( John 14:16-18;John
14:26;John 15:26). To do so God made the coming of the Spirit obvious until
the church generally appreciatedthe fact that it normally occurredat the time
of regeneration.
"This story has often been used as the basis for doctrines about the reception
of gifts of the Spirit subsequent to conversion;but it has no real connection
with these. RatherPaul was dealing with an unusual situation which required
specialtreatment....
". . . it is safe to saythat the New Testamentdoes not recognize the possibility
of being a Christian apart from possessionofthe Spirit ( John 3:5; Acts 11:17;
Romans 8:9; 1 Corinthians 12:3; Galatians 3:2; 1 Thessalonians1:5 f.; Titus
3:5; Hebrews 6:4; 1 Peter1:2; 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:13)." [Note: Marshall,
The Acts . . ., p305. See also Wiersbe, 1:481.]

"It should be noted that the reception of the Holy Spirit [by Christians] in
Acts does not follow any setpattern. He came into believers before baptism (
Acts 10:44), at the time of or after baptism ( Acts 8:12-16;Acts 19:6), and by
the laying on of apostolic hands ( Acts 8:17; Acts 19:6). Yet Paul declared(
Romans 8:9) that anyone without the Holy Spirit is not a Christian. Quite
obviously the transitional Book ofActs is not to be used as a doctrinal source
on how to receive the Holy Spirit (cf. comments on tongues, 1 Corinthians
13:8 to 1 Corinthians 14:25)." [Note:Toussaint, " Acts ," p409. Cf. Harm,
p38.]
"Ephesus was a polyglot city of the Roman Empire. There were many
languages spokenthere, just as there had been in Jerusalemon the Day of
Pentecost. Eastand Westmet all along that coast....These menwere now able
to give the goodnews about Christ to the entire city." [Note: McGee, 4:597.]
This is the lastreference to speaking in tongues in Acts (cf. Acts 2:4; Acts
10:46;1 Corinthians 12:10;1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 12:30;1
Corinthians 13:1; 1 Corinthians 13:8; 1 Corinthians 14). Is this gift still in the
church today? Some charismatic Christians believe that it is. They argue
mainly from experience, having heard someone, perhaps themselves, speak in
what others refer to as tongues. In most caseswhatthey call tongues is
gibberish, not knownlanguages. This is different from what the New
Testamentidentified as tongues, namely, known languages (cf1Corinthians12;
1 Corinthians 14). In a few cases people have apparently spokenin known
languages thatthey have not studied, the type of tongues-speaking that the
New Testamentdescribes.
The real issue is what the New Testamentsays about tongues, not what one
may have experienced. It says that they would pass awayor cease of
themselves, as in petering out ( 1 Corinthians 13:8, middle voice of pauo).

When would this happen? The New Testamentdoes not specifywhen, but it
implies that they would peter out before prophecy would end (lit. be
terminated [by God], passive voice of katargeo, 1 Corinthians 13:8). I do not
believe that any one verse indicates that tongues would cease ordid cease in
the apostolic period. However, I think it is safe to conclude that they did for
two reasons. (Similarly we believe the doctrine of the Trinity not because
there is a verse that clearly teaches it but because many verses leadus to
conclude that God exists as a triune being.) First, other New Testament
passagesimply that they would and did cease then( Ephesians 2:20; Hebrews
2:3-4). Second, the early church fathers wrote that tongues peteredout in the
early history of the church even though there were rare instances of the
phenomenon after that. [Note:Origen (ca185-ca254 A.D.), "AgainstCelsus,"
7:8 in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 4:614;Chrysostom(347-407A.D.),
"Homily12on Matthew ," in The Nicene and Post-NiceneFathers, 10:77;
idem, "Homily14onRomans ," ibid, 11:447;idem, "Homily29
on1Corinthians," ibid, 12:168;idem, "Homily6 on1Corinthians," ibid, 12:31;
Augustine (354-430A.D.), "On Baptism, Against the Donatists," 3:16:21 ,
ibid, 4:443; idem, "The Epistle of St. John ," 6:10 , ibid, 7:497-98;idem, "The
Epistle of1John. Homily," 6:10 , ibid, 7:497-98;idem, "The Answer to the
Letters of Petition, to Donatist," 2:32:74 , ibid, 4:548;and idem, "On the
Gospelof St. John , Tractate," 32:7 , ibid, 7:195. See also Dillow, Speaking in
..., pp147-64 , for further information about the historical cessationofthe gift
of tongues.]
Speaking in Tongues in Acts
Reference
Speakers
Audience
Time

Purpose
Acts 2:1-4
The Twelve
and possibly others
Unsaved Jews
After salvation
To validate for Jews the coming of the Spirit
Acts 10:44-47
Gentiles
SavedJews
Same time as salvation
To validate for Jews God"s acceptance ofGentiles
Acts 19:1-7
Disciples ofJohn the Baptist
Jews and Gentiles
Same time as salvation
To validate for Jews Paul"s message
How can we explain the instances of people speaking in languages they have
not studied today? It may be that God occasionallygives people this ability
today, though the evidence of this happening is rare. Practicallyno one,
including respectedcharismatic leaders, claims that the ability to speak in a
language that one has not studied exists today as it did in New Testament
times. Obviously the ability to graspa foreign language readily as one studies
it is not the New Testamentgift of tongues.

God evidently gave the gift of prophesying to eachof these Ephesian disciples
to enable them to assume leadership of the church and the church"s mission.
This gift involves speaking forth the Word of God and leading the worship of
God.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Constable, Thomas. DD. "Commentaryon Acts 19:6". "Expository Notes of
Dr. Thomas Constable".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dcc/acts-19.html. 2012.
Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Acts 19:6. And they spake with tongues. The immediate effectof their
baptism, after that Paul had laid his hands upon them, was the visible
presence ofthe Holy Ghostamong them manifesting itself in the form of
supernatural gifts. These gifts took the form of ‘speaking with tongues’ and
‘prophesying.’ Of the last of these it is uncertain whether the miraculous
influence showeditself in what we terra a strange and peculiar powerof
preaching, an especialgiftfor the purpose of winning men to the side of
Christ, or whether it included as well an insight into futurity, the prediction of
future events; possibly both these powers were conferredon these ‘twelve.’
We have very little knowledge ofthe gift of speaking with tongues. Notlong
after this incident was that famous 14th chapter of the first Corinthian letter

written, which really contains all we know on this mysterious subject (the
various questions have been discussedpreviously in an Excursus on the
PentecostMiracle ofthe 2d chapter of these ‘Acts’) which St. Paul wrote. The
passagein the first Corinthian epistle was written some two years later, or two
and a half years at most after this incident. He must, among other instances of
the exercise ofthis gift of tongues, have had this specialone in his mind. We
can therefore lay down with some certainty the following conclusions
respecting the nature of the gift then conferred on these disciples of John the
Baptist:—
It did not edify any beyond the man who spoke (1 Corinthians 14:4). To be of
any service, it needed a speciallygifted interpreter (1 Corinthians 14:5-27).
Men did not as a rule understand it, though God did (1 Corinthians 14:2). He
who used this gift was to those who listened to him as a barbarian or a
foreigner(1 Corinthians 14:11). It was therefore no power of speaking in a
language which had not been studied in the ordinary way, but it was clearly
an ecstatic utterance of rapturous devotion. There were phenomena certainly
attending the first exercise ofthe gift on ‘the Pentecost’morning (Acts 2)
which could not have been subsequently repeated;for while at ‘Pentecost’the
speakers were understoodin their ecstatic utterances by men of various
nationalities, the accountof the 14th chapter of the first Corinthian epistle
clearly tells us that all speaking with tongues without an interpreter was
utterly unintelligible. This mysterious powerremained, however, but a very
little seasonamong men. At a very early date in the history of the Church, it
appears to have ceasedaltogether.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography

Schaff, Philip. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Schaff's Popular Commentary
on the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/acts-19.html. 1879-90.
The Expositor's Greek Testament
Acts 19:6. καὶ ἐπιθ. αὐτοῖς τοῦ π. τὰς χ., see above on Acts 8:16.— ἐλάλουν τε
γλ. καὶ προεφ.: the imperfects may mean that they began to speak, orthat the
exercise ofthe gifts mentioned continued. The two gifts are discussedin 1
Corinthians 12:10; 1 Corinthians 12:14, in an Epistle which was written
probably during this stay at Ephesus—no doubt the gifts are specially
mentioned because the bestowalof such gifts distinguished Christian Baptism
from that of John. McGiffert, p. 286, while admitting the accuracyof the
accountas a whole, thinks that its representationis moulded, as in 8, in
accordancewith the work of Peterand John in Samaria;so too Hilgenfeld
refers the accountto his “authorto Theophilus,” who also, in Acts 8:16,
narrates that the baptised Samaritans receivedthe Holy Ghost by the laying
on of Peter’s hands. This is in some respects notunlike the older view of Baur,
who held that the narrative was introduced to parallel Paul’s dignity and
work with that of Peterin Acts 10:44—the first speaking with tongues in 2 is
narrated in relation to Jews, the secondin relation to Gentiles, 10, and the
third in relation to a kind of middle class, half-believers like the Samaritans!
(so Zeller and Schneckenburger). But not only does this require us to identify
2 with 10 and 19, the speaking oftongues at Pentecostwith subsequent
bestowalofthe gift, but it seems strange that a narrative should not have been
constructedmore free from liability to misconceptionand misinterpretation if
the leading purpose of its introduction had been as supposed above.
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
Nicol, W. Robertson, M.A., L.L.D. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". The
Expositor's Greek Testament.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/egt/acts-19.html. 1897-1910.
George Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary
Imposed his hands on them, by which imposition of hands, was given the Holy
Ghostin the sacramentof confirmation. (Witham)
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Haydock, George Leo. "Commentaryon Acts 19:6". "George Haydock's
Catholic Bible Commentary".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hcc/acts-19.html. 1859.
Mark Dunagan Commentary on the Bible
Acts 19:6 "And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit
came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied"
"Paulhad laid his hands upon them" Again we find spiritual gifts being
bestowedthrough the hands of an apostle (Acts 8:17). The very fact that Paul
laid his hands upon them after their baptism seems to reinforce the conclusion
that when Paul was asking them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit?", he was
asking them if they receivedthe miraculous manifestations of the Spirit. In the
early church, when the New Testamenthad not yet been written, it would
make perfect sense for spiritual gifts to be common among new Christians, for

they immediately needed revelationfrom God on so many topics and subjects.
"They spake with tongues, and prophesied""The verbs are imperfect in tense,
implying continuous exercise ofthe gifts" (Reese p. 673). We should
remember that prophesy (the ability to speak by inspiration) went hand in
hand with the gift of tongues. If one was present, then so was the other (1
Corinthians 14:1-3; 26). When the spiritual gifts were truly operational, we
never find a congregationjust having the gift of tongues. If a congregation
had true tongue speakers (people who could speak miraculously in foreign
languages theyhad never studied Acts 2:6-11); then it also had prophets.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Dunagan, Mark. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Mark Dunagan
Commentaries on the Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dun/acts-19.html. 1999-2014.
E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes
the Holy Ghost. Both arts. App-101.
on. Greek. epi. App-104.
spake. Greek.laleo. App-121.
prophesied. See App-189.
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "E.W. Bullinger's
Companion bible Notes".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/acts-19.html. 1909-1922.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them;
and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them;
and they spake with tongues, and prophesied - (see the notes at Acts 10:44-46.)
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.;Fausset,A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Acts
19:6". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible -
Unabridged". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfu/acts-
19.html. 1871-8.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(6) They spake with tongues, and prophesied.—Better, they were speaking
with tongues and prophesying, the verbs implying continuous action. As to the
nature and relation of the two gifts, see Notes on Acts 2:4; Acts 10:46. Here all
the facts of the case confirm the view which has there been stated. The mere
powerof speaking foreignlanguages withoutlearning them, as other men

learn, seems a much less adequate result of the new gift than that which we
find in the new enthusiasm and intensity of spiritual joy, of which the gift of
tongues was the natural expression. It is not without interest to remember that
the discussionofthe two gifts in 1 Corinthians 14, in which the connectionof
the “tongues”with jubilant and ecstatic praise is unmistakable (1 Corinthians
14:14-16), was written not very long after this incident, and while the facts
must yet have been fresh in St. Paul’s memory. On the “laying on of hands,”
which was the “outwardand visible sign” of the “inward and spiritual grace,”
see Notes onActs 8:14-18, where the laying-on of hands is followedby a gift of
the Holy Ghost.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "Ellicott's Commentary
for EnglishReaders".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/acts-19.html. 1905.
Treasuryof Scripture Knowledge
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them;
and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
laid
6:6; 8:17-19;9:17; 1 Timothy 5:22; 2 Timothy 1:6
the Holy Ghost

2:4; 10:45,46;13:2; 1 Corinthians 12:8-11,28-30
and prophesied
1 Corinthians 14:1-25
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Acts 19:6". "The Treasury of Scripture
Knowledge". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/acts-19.html.
The Bible Study New Testament
Paul placed his hands on them. The specialgifts the Spirit gives were only
transmitted in this way [through an apostle, or with an apostle present]. Paul
lays his hands on them (compare Acts 8:17; Romans 1:11.) They spoke in
strange tongues. Languagessound strange to one who does not understand
them. This gift: (1) God understood (1 Corinthians 14:2); (2) helped only the
speaker(1 Corinthians 14:4); (3) had to be explained to benefit others (1
Corinthians 14:5-27). All Christians have the Spirit living in them (Romans
8:9); but not all Christians receivedthe specialgifts the Spirit gives (1
Corinthians 12:4-7).
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES

Acts 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came
on them, and they beganspeaking with tongues and prophesying
KJV Acts 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost
came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them -
Compare the similar evidence of receptionof the Holy Spirit when (1) the
Samaritans believed (read Acts 8:15-17+, especially"Thenthey began laying
their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit.") and (2) when
the Gentiles in Cornelius' householdbelieved (read Acts 11:15-18+)
There were also spiritual results associatedwith Ananias laying his hands on
Saul (Paul) at his conversion...
So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him
said, “BrotherSaul, the Lord Jesus, who appearedto you on the road by
which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be
filled with the Holy Spirit.” And immediately there fell from his eyes
something like scales, andhe regained his sight, and he got up and was
baptized; (Acts 9:17-18+)
Marshallon laid hands upon - It seems more likely that the laying on of hands
should be understood as a specialactof fellowship, incorporating the people
concernedinto the fellowship of the church. This was necessaryin the case of
the Samaritanconverts in chapter8 to make it quite clearthat they were
acceptedfully into the Jewishchurch centred on Jerusalem;and it was
necessaryin the present instance to make it clearto these members of a semi-
Christian group that they were now becoming part of the universal church.
The fact that the story demonstrates that Paul had the same authority as Peter
and John to convey the gift of the Spirit is probably merely a secondarymotif.
The effectof the baptism w as to produce ‘charismatic’ manifestations of the
Spirit (Acts 2:4, 17f+.;Acts 10.46+). It is clearfrom the other stories of
conversionin Acts that such manifestations took place spasmodicallyand
were not the generalrule (Acts 8:17+; Acts 8:39+;Acts 13:52+;Acts 16:34+);
in the present case some unusual gift was perhaps needed to convince this

group of ‘semi-Christians’that they were now fully members of Christ’s
church. (Tyndale New TestamentCommentaries – Acts)
RelatedResources:
And they beganspeaking with tongues and prophesying - This was
verification that they had receivedthe Holy Spirit.
A T Robertsonon prophesying - Inchoative imperfect again, beganto
prophesy. The speaking with tongues and prophesying was external and
indubitable proof that the Holy Spirit had come on these twelve uninformed
disciples now fully won to the service of Jesus as Messiah. Butthis baptism in
waterdid not "convey" the Holy Spirit nor forgiveness ofsins. Paul was not a
sacramentalist
As Kent Hughes says "This was a mini-Pentecost. We see the Pentecost
experience four times in the book of Acts: to Jewishbelievers in Jerusalem, to
the Samaritans through Philip, to the Gentiles by Peter, and here to dispersed
Jews through Paul." (Preaching the Word - Acts)
Stanley Toussaint - The subject of tongues in Acts confirms Paul's statement
that tongues "are a sign... for unbelievers" (cf.1 Cor. 14:22). The purpose of
tongues was to overcome unbelief. It should also be noted that the receptionof
the Holy Spirit in Acts does not follow any setpattern. He came into believers
before baptism (Acts 10:44), at the time of or after baptism (Acts 8:12-16;
19:6), and by the laying on of apostolic hands (Acts 8:17; 19:6). Yet Paul
declared(Ro 8:9) that anyone without the Holy Spirit is not a Christian. Quite
obviously the transitional Book ofActs is not to be used as a doctrinal source
on how to receive the Holy Spirit (cf. comments on tongues, 1 Cor. 13:8-
14:25). (Bible Knowledge Commentary)
SPEAKING IN TONGUES
IN THE BOOKOF ACTS
Passage
Tongues-Speakers

Audience
Relatedto Salvation
Purpose
Acts 2:1-4
The 12 Apostles and others
Unsaved Jews
After salvation
To validate (for Jews)the fulfillment of Joel2
Acts 10:44-47
Gentiles (Cornelius and his household)
SavedJews (Peterand others)who doubted God's plan
The same time as salvation
To validate (for Jews)God's acceptanceofGentiles
Acts 19:1-7
About 12 Old Testamentbelievers
Jews who needed confirmation of the message
The same time as salvation
To validate (for Jews)Paul's message
Source:Stanley Toussaint - BKC

PastorStevenJ. Cole FlagstaffChristianFellowship123 S. BeaverStreet
Flagstaff, Arizona 86001 www.fcfonline.org
TESTING TONGUES
(Various Scriptures)
By
Steven J. Cole
(From a sermon when I was the pastorof Lake GregoryCommunity Church,
Crestline, California, June 15, 1986)
© StevenJ. Cole, 1986
Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture Quotations are from the New American
Standard Bible © The LockmanFoundation
1
June 15, 1986
Testing Tongues
(SelectedScriptures)The summer of 1969 I lived near UCLA in Westwood. In
Westwoodvillage that summer a number of smiling, energetic young people
would approach you on the streets and ask if you knew about chanting. They
would then launch into testimonies of how their lives had been changedby
chanting. I remember a wholesome looking girl who told me that she had
chanted for a new Corvette and had gottenit. She had been alienatedfrom
her parents, but since she startedchanting the relationship had been restored.
Some of my friends went to their meetings, which reminded them of Campus
Crusade’s “CollegeLife” evangelistic meetings. The room was filled with
happy, singing people of all ages who testified how chanting had changedtheir
lives. They were members of the Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist sect, and they all
chanted a prayer in some foreign language. I tell that story to make the point
that we live in a day when experience is seenas the supreme test of reality. “If
it’s realfor you, then it’s real.” “If it feels good, do it.” “If I experiencedit
with my ownsenses, thenit must be real.” These are some popular

expressions ofour existentialistculture. Truth is seenas relative to a person’s
experience. There was no doubt that these people were having a spiritual
experience which was greatly affecting their lives. The problem was that their
experience was not basedupon the truth of God’s Word, and thus was
demonic and dangerous. The Bible claims to be the infallible and absolute
guide for how we ought to think and act. It is the final authority and test of
reality (Matt. 4:4; John 10:35; 17:17;2 Tim. 3:16-17;2 Pet. 1:20-21). With
regard to any experience, the question is not, did I have an experience, but
rather, did I have a biblical experience? This is especiallytrue with regard to
speaking in tongues. Many are having this experience. The question is, are
they having a biblical experience?
2
Speaking in tongues is not strictly a Christian phenomenon. Non-Christian
cults such as the Jehovah’s Witnessesand Mormons claim to speak in tongues.
Article Sevenof the Mormon Articles of Faith states, “We believe in the gift of
tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, etc.”
(James E. Talmage, A Study of the Articles of Faith [Salt Lake City: The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1972], p. 217.)The Encyclopedia
Britannica cites many instances oftongues speaking in pagancults. One man
reports that in East Africa, many people possessedby demons speak in fluent
Swahili or English, although under normal circumstances they do not
understand either language. Ecstatic speechis found among the
Mohammedans and the Eskimos of Greenland. The Roman poet Virgil (70-19
B.C.)refers to the tongues speaking of the Sibylline priestess on the isle of
Delos (these examples cited by JosephDillow, Speaking in Tongues:Seven
Crucial Questions [Zondervan, 1975], pp. 172-173). Since atleastsome
tongues speaking is not from the Holy Spirit, we need to be carefulto testany
experience of tongues by the Scriptures to determine if it is valid. We are told
to test the spirits to see whether they are from God (1 John 4:1). Concerning
prophetic utterances we are told to examine them carefully and hold fast to
that which is good(1 Thess. 5:19-21). Tonguesmust be testedfor validity
againstthe biblical criteria. I want to give you some biblical guidelines by
which you can testany experience of tongues speaking to tell whether it is of
the Lord or not. TESTS FOR BIBLICAL TONGUES:1. Biblical tongues are

foreign languages,not gibberish. I considerthis to be a major point which
undermines most current tongues speaking. Since I developedthis last week, I
am not going to go into it in depth here. But let me briefly review. First, the
tongues in Acts 2 are clearlyforeign languages, notecstatic utterances.Men
from various locations, visiting Jerusalemfor the Day of Pentecost, heardthe
band of disciples speaking in their own languages,eventhough the speakers
had never learned
3
these languages (Acts 2:4, 6, 8, 11). It was not a miracle of hearing, but of
speaking. If the tongues in 1 Corinthians are substantially different from the
tongues in Acts, then the burden of proof is upon those making that claim.
Paul and Luke (the author of Acts) were close friends, both familiar with the
tongues at Jerusalemand at Corinth. Yet both use the same Greek words to
describe the events, without any explanation of differences. The Greek word
used for tongues means foreign languages inevery other New Testamentand
Greek Old Testamentoccurrence. The word“interpret” used in connection
with tongues means to translate or give the sense of something. Ecstatic
utterances do not make sense to anyone. Only language, whichhas structure
and grammar, has meaning and thus can be translated. Interpreting tongues
as foreign languages fits consistentlywith every occurrence ofthe word in
reference to the gift of tongues in the New Testament. So I believe that if
tongues are valid, they will be translatable foreign languages, notmeaningless
nonsense syllables. It is interesting that 73 percent of those who speak in
tongues claim that their tongue is a foreignlanguage (Dillow, p. 178). In his
book, They Speak With Other Tongues (Spire Books, 1964, pp. 17-20), John
Sherrill tells of Harald Bredesen, a ReformedChurch pastor, speaking in
Polishand in ancient Arabic. I have readand heard of other accounts of
tongues speakersspeaking in foreignlanguages. However, Dillow (writing in
1975)states thatevery study to that date had failed to turn up a legitimate
instance of a foreign language by those who speak in tongues. Dillow spoke in
a Sunday Schoolclass Marla and I attended in Dallas. Three of his friends
who spoke in tongues allowedhim to tape record them. He played the tape for
us. One speaker, we allagreed, sounded like he was speaking in German,
another in French, and the third in Chinese. Dillow took the tapes to experts

in these languages and askedif there was any resemblance. The experts
replied that there were occasionalsyllables which sounded like words in those
languages, but that the tongues speaking was just meaningless gibberish. J.
Rodman Williams, a modern charismatic scholar, admits that there are no
concrete data (from tape recordings, for example)
4
of tongues being an unlearned foreign language (in EvangelicalDictionaryof
Theology[edited by Walter Elwell, Baker, 1984], p. 206). He argues that
biblical tongues are neither foreign languages norecstatic utterances.Rather
they are what he calls “spiritual” languages.If someone says that he heard a
person speaking in his own language, this occurs because the Holy Spirit
immediately interpreted what was said. Thus it was not a hearing of but a
hearing in one’s own language. The tongues both in Acts and 1 Corinthians
were utterances of the Holy Spirit, understoodonly when interpreted by the
Holy Spirit (ibid.). He claims that speaking in tongues is not irrational but
suprarational utterance. He is not disturbed by linguists who claim that
tongues speaking has no observable language structure, for if such were the
case, speaking in tongues would not be spiritual but rational speech. He sees
tongues speaking as transpsychical, belonging to the realm of the spirit (ibid.,
p. 207). But Williams is begging the question. His view allows no way to verify
any experience of tongues speaking, because the one doing it can say, “It was a
‘spiritual’ utterance, and if you didn’t understand it or thought it sounded
like gibberish, you just weren’t in tune with the Holy Spirit.” It doesn’t seem
to fit God’s characterand power to have such a crucialmiracle, which served
to substantiate the authenticity of the apostles and the gospelmessage, be a
totally unverifiable thing that took place in the heads of those present, not in
the actuallanguages spoken. Williams calls tongues “the vehicle of
communication par excellence betweenman and God ... the language of
transcendentprayer and praise” (ibid., p. 206). But if it is “communication”
and “language,” itshould have the mark of language, whichis structure. A
linguist can readily discern the difference betweenmeaningful communication
and nonsense syllables, evenif he doesn’t know the particular language. To
call meaningless gibberisha “language” or“spiritual communication”
stretches credulity. Furthermore, Williams has to bend the obvious meaning

of the accountin Acts 2:4-11 to saythat the speakersreallyweren’t using
translatable foreign languages.As I pointed out last week, a number of verses
in 1 Corinthians 13 and 14 also fit better with
5
translatable languages, notecstatic utterances or“spiritual” utterances, as
Williams calls them (cf. 13:1; 14:10-11, 21). So the first test of biblical tongues
is that it must be translatable foreignlanguages, notgibberish. If Williams is
correctin stating that there are no concrete data of an unknown language
being spoken, most of the tongues speaking in our day is invalidated. 2.
Biblical tongues are not pushed as a necessityfor every believer. This point is
so obvious, biblically, that I find it incredible that anyone could disagree. Note
1 Cor. 12:30: “All do not speak with tongues, do they?” The Greek text
requires a negative reply. In the context of chapter 12 Paul is arguing that the
body is many members, not one member. While we are one body, we all have
different gifts, sovereignlybestowedby the Holy Spirit (12:11, 18, 24, 28). One
member of the body is not to envy another member: “If they were all one
member, where would the body be?” (v. 19). Paul puts the gift of tongues at
the end of the list (12:28, 30)to show its relative importance to the body, and
then takes all of 14:1-25 to argue that prophecy is more important than
tongues, because it builds the body. In spite of this, many charismatics argue
that speaking in tongues is for every believer. The way they get around the
obvious meaning of 1 Corinthians 12 is to say that not all Christians have the
gift of tongues to be exercisedin the church meetings. But all can and should
have a “prayer language” foruse in personaldevotions, receivedwhen the
believer receives the baptism of the Spirit. There are two matters to sort out
here: the baptism of the Spirit, and the so-called“prayerlanguage.” The
charismatic movement believes that the baptism of the Spirit is a distinct
experience, either at the moment of salvationor subsequent to salvation, when
the believeris filled with the presence and power of the Holy Spirit (Williams,
ibid., p. 205). Williams writes, “Baptismwith the Holy Spirit is understood to
result from ‘the gift of the Holy Spirit,’ wherein the Spirit is freely ‘poured
out,’ ‘falls upon,’ ‘comes on,’ ‘anoints,’‘endues’ the believer with ‘power
from on high.’ This event/experience is the moment of initiation into the
Spirit-filled life” (ibid.).

6
I believe in the absolute need of every believer for the enabling and powerof
the Holy Spirit. I believe in the need for the Spirit’s anointing for us all. But I
think that to call that anointing “the baptism of the Spirit” is a misnomer. It is
not just a quibbling over words, though, because it is important that we use
biblical words as the Bible uses them. Let’s briefly look at how the term
“baptism of the Spirit” is used in the Bible. John the Baptist predicted that
Jesus would baptize His followers with the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11). Just
before His ascension, Jesus toldthe apostles to wait in Jerusalemfor what the
Father had promised, “Which,” He said, “you heard of from Me; for John
baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many
days from now” (Acts 1:4-5). That baptism took place on the Dayof Pentecost
(even though the term is not used in Acts 2). In Acts 8, the Samaritans
believed through Philip’s preaching. Peterand John were summoned from
Jerusalem. When they arrived, they prayed for them to receive the Holy
Spirit. Although the text doesn’tsay so directly, we can safelyassume that
they spoke in tongues as the manifestation of receiving the Spirit (Acts 8:17-
18, “saw”). In Acts 10, the Gentiles at Cornelius’s house believe, receive the
Holy Spirit immediately, and speak in tongues (10:44-46). In Acts 11:15-17,
Peteris giving an accountof this event, and he equates it to the same thing
that happened to the Jews on the Day of Pentecost, andties both into Jesus’
words about the baptism of the Spirit. In Acts 19:1-6, Paul comes upon some
men who had been baptized with John’s baptism, but had never heard of the
Holy Spirit. They were “Old Testament” believers. When Paul told them of
the Lord Jesus, theywere baptized in His name, the Holy Spirit came upon
them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Charismatics use these
passagesto argue that the baptism of the Spirit is in some casessubsequent to
salvation, and that it is always accompaniedby the sign of speaking in
tongues. But I think they are misunderstanding these Scriptures. If these were
the only verses in the Bible on the subject, I would have to agree with the
charismatic interpretation. But there
7

are some other verses that we must integrate with Acts. In Romans 8:9 Paul
states that if you do not have the Spirit dwelling in you, you do not belong to
Christ. In 1 Cor. 12:13 he states that we all (including the carnalCorinthians)
have been baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ. Furthermore, we are
never commanded to be baptized with the Spirit. The filling of the Spirit is
commanded as an on-going, repeatedexperience (Eph. 5:18; Acts 2:4; 4:31).
But the baptism of the Spirit is not an experience atall. It is a spiritual fact in
which the believer both receives the Holy Spirit and is baptized by the Spirit
into the body of Christ at the moment of salvation. If you believe in Jesus
Christ as Savior, then you have been baptized in, with or by (same Greek
word) the Holy Spirit. How then do I explain the Book ofActs? Acts is a
transitional book, linking the old dispensationof the law with the new
dispensationof the Spirit. In the old dispensation, not all believers received
the indwelling Spirit. Those who did receive the Spirit could lose Him (Ps.
51:11;1 Sam. 16:14). But in the new dispensation, all believers receive the
Holy Spirit. In Acts 2 we see the Jewishbelievers receiving the Spirit; in Acts
8 the Samaritans;in Acts 10, the Gentiles;and in Acts 19, those awayfrom
Palestine, in a pagan city, representing “the uttermost part of the earth.” This
is the pattern laid out by our Lord in Acts 1:8. It was necessaryforthe
apostles to be presentbecause the keys to the kingdom were given to the
apostles through Peter(Matt. 16:18-19). Thus in the case ofthe Samaritans,
the Lord did not give them the Spirit at the moment of believing because the
apostles were not present. Their authority was required to open the age ofthe
Spirit to this new people group. In Acts 10, with Peterpresent, the Gentiles
receivedthe Spirit immediately upon believing. In Acts 19, the men were not
really believers in the Lord Jesus until Paul spoke to them, at which point they
receivedthe Spirit. In eachcase, tongues wasthe authenticating sign of a new
group receiving the Spirit. But there is no indication of that sign
accompanying any other conversionin Acts (such as the women at Philippi,
the believers in Thessalonica,orthe islanders on Malta). Once the Spirit was
given to the Jews, the Samaritans, the Gentiles, and to those outside of the
Jewishnation (Acts 19), the transition from the old dispensationof God
working solelythrough the na
8

tion Israelunder the law to the new dispensation of God working through the
church composedofevery tongue and tribe and nation was complete. The
authenticating sign of tongues to affirm the transition was no longerneeded as
the signof the baptism of the Spirit. Even if we assume that Acts is normative
for the baptism of the Spirit and tongues, modern charismatic practice does
not conform to it. In Acts, all the believers receivedthe baptism at once, and
seemingly all spoke in tongues at once. But Paul forbids the Corinthians to
speak all at once (1 Cor. 14:27). Furthermore, exceptfor Acts 2, none of the
groups were seeking the baptism or tongues as an experience subsequent to
salvation. It was a sovereignactof God. The Bible gives no command (except
for the exceptionalevent at Pentecost)for believers to seek the Holy Spirit or
the gift of tongues. (Jesus’words in Luke 11:13 were spokenbefore
Pentecost.)The other matter which I need to speak to is the so-called“prayer
language.” Charismaticsargue that while not every believer has the gift of
tongues for public ministry, every believer can and should have a personal
prayer language forprivate devotions. This seems to be basedon Paul’s
private use of tongues (1 Cor. 14:1819, 28--see lastweek’s message)and on
Rom. 8:26: “And in the same way the Spirit helps our weakness;for we do not
know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with
groanings too deep for words.” Concerning the private use of tongues, I think
we must saythat it is legitimate for those who have the true gift (foreign
languages). This personis exhorted to pray for the ability to interpret his
tongue, so that he will be benefited even more (1 Cor. 14:13). Concerning
Rom. 8:26, it is far from clearthat the verse is referring to tongues. If it is, it is
the only verse in Romans to do so, and neither tongues nor spiritual gifts are
anywhere in the context. There may be some commentators who take it as
tongues, but I could not find any who do so. Also, it is not the personwho is
speaking in groanings too deep for words, but the Spirit Himself, interceding
before the Father. The word “groanings” means aninarticulate groaning (cf.
Rom. 8:22), not a foreign language. To build a whole centraldoctrine of the
spiritual life (that every be
9
liever is to have a prayer language)on one unclear verse, especiallywhen the
doctrine contradicts the specific, clearteaching of Paul elsewhere that tongues

are a spiritual gift only for a few, seems risky at best. Thus biblical tongues
are foreignlanguages, notgibberish; and they are not pushed as a necessary
experience for every believer. 3. Biblical tongues are not to be sought as a
means to spirituality. The Corinthians spoke in tongues but were carnal and
immature. If tongues were a means to spirituality or spiritual growth,
somewhere the Bible would command us to seek the gift. But it does not. As I
mentioned lastweek, Paul’s wish that all believers spoke in tongues (1 Cor.
14:5) does not contradictwhat he stateda few verses earlier, that all do not
speak in tongues (12:30). He is merely expressing a wish because speaking in
tongues is a legitimate gift of the Spirit, just as in 7:7 he expresses his wish
that all could be single, because that gift enables a person to have more time to
serve the Lord. If everybody should seek the gift of tongues, then everybody
should seek the gift of celibacy!The Bible does not teachthat spiritual
maturity comes through a supernatural experience with the Spirit which
instantly transports us to a higher plane of spiritual victory (such as the
socalled“baptismof the Spirit”). That notion is very appealing, to be quite
frank. But it is not biblical. Neither does the Bible indicate that spiritual
growth comes through continued speaking in tongues. How does spiritual
growth take place? We are exhorted to walk (not leap, run, or fly) by means of
the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:16). We are told to discipline ourselves for the purpose
of godliness (1 Tim. 4:7-8). There is effort and steadfastness requiredon our
part (1 Tim. 4:10,15, 16). It is an on-going, gradual process whichwill not be
complete until we meet Jesus Christface to face (Phil. 3:1214). At the same
time we are assuredthat we all have been made complete in Christ (Col. 2:10).
Every believer has been enriched with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly
places in Christ Jesus (Eph. 1:3). “His divine power has granted us everything
pertaining
10
to life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1:3). “We were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1
Cor. 12:13). While we need to learn to appropriate all the riches which are
ours in Christ Jesus, we do not need to tarry or wait or plead with God for the
gift of the Spirit or tongues. It is not a mark of spirituality which we must
seek. If God gives it, He gives it sovereignlyto some according to His purpose,
for the building up of the church. Many godly saints in the pastwere mightily

used of God but did not speak in tongues:our Lord Himself, John the Baptist,
Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, George Whitefield, George Muller,
Hudson Taylor, D. L. Moody, and Billy Graham, to name a few. You are not
missing one of God’s blessings if you do not speak in tongues. Thus biblical
tongues are foreign languages, notgibberish; they are not pushed as a
necessaryexperience for every believer; they are not to be soughtas a means
to spirituality. 4. Biblical tongues in a church gathering must be in conformity
with certain guidelines. Paul spells these out in the passagewe will covernext
week, 1 Cor. 14:26-40, so I will only mention them briefly now. While I believe
that the tongues speaking in Acts and in 1 Corinthians are both the same
phenomenon (foreign languages), there are a number of differences in terms
of the practice of the gift which are not observed in our day. If Acts describes
the transition to the new dispensationof the Spirit, then 1 Corinthians
prescribes the order to be followedduring that dispensation. In other words, 1
Corinthians, written to the church, is the guide for the practice of tongues, not
Acts which describes how the gift came to the church. In Acts, the tongues
were outside the church; in 1 Corinthians tongues were in the church meeting.
In Acts, tongues accompaniedthe initial receiving of the Spirit; in 1
Corinthians, they were subsequent to receiving the Spirit. In Acts, it was a
large group all speaking atonce; in 1 Corinthians, it was to be one at a time,
by two or three at most. In Acts, there is no interpretation recorded;in 1
Corinthians it must be accompaniedby interpretation. In Acts, it came on
everybody in the group in an uncontrollable fashion and seems a bit chaotic;
in 1 Corinthians, not all had it, it was control
11
lable, and it was to be done in an orderly manner. In Acts, there is no mention
of love or edifying others; in 1 Corinthians, it can be done only if done in love
to edify others. Many times when I have been in charismatic churches these
guidelines are ignored. Everybody speaksin tongues at once for their own
edification, there is no interpretation, and it is not orderly. Obviously these
folks were having an experience, but it was not a biblical experience!Also, if
tongues are of the Lord, they will not be divisive to the church. When a group
of people start pushing tongues on everybody else in disregardof these
biblical guidelines, it splits the church. That is not of the Lord, who prayed

that His church may be one, that the world would know that the Fathersent
Him. Churches which exclude someone who practices tongues in line with
these guidelines are equally divisive. I know of churches where anybody who
speaks in tongues is suspectedas being under demonic influence. That
excludes the charismatic brother, just as much as those who gatheraround
charismatic gifts exclude the non-charismatic brother. The basis of our unity
is not to be our view of the gift of tongues, but rather our common Lord (Eph.
4:1-6). ConclusionYou may be wondering: If most speaking in tongues today
is not the biblical gift, how do you explain it? Why is God seeminglyblessing
charismatic churches? Why do those who practice tongues seemto get such a
blessing from it? I’ve heard testimonies of renewedlove for the Lord, new zeal
in prayer, new power over sin, all as a result of the “baptism of the Spirit”
and tongues. Again, let me emphasize that the Bible must be our testof
reality, not experience. If the tongues experiencedin our day are not in line
with the biblical gift, they are not valid, no matter what the seeming results.
Obviously I cannotdeal with every situation here. But let me offer a few
observations. First, God works with imperfect vessels. If He waited for us all
to arrive at a point of doctrinal or personalperfection, His work would not get
done. Many charismatic brothers and sisters have a
12
sincere love for the Lord Jesus, andHe works with them in spite of their
mistakenview of the gift of tongues. Also, many charismatics have a real
dependence upon the Holy Spirit, even though their terminology may be
incorrect. They call it the baptism of the Spirit; I think that biblically it is the
filling of the Spirit. But I would rather have somebodymistaken in his
terminology and complete in his yieldedness than correctin his terminology
and halfway in his yieldedness. The Pharisees knew the Scriptures, but they
lackedreality with God. May that never be said of us! I believe God blesses
many charismatic people and churches because they have a fervency for the
Lord that non-charismatics have lost. I’d much rather worship in a
charismatic church where there is a fervent love for the Lord Jesus than in
many noncharismatic churches which have theologicalaccuracybut have lost
their first love. In my opinion, most of the tongues speaking in our day is
purely psychological. Some rare casesmay be demonic, some rare cases may

be of the Lord. I think there are spiritual dangers in the psychologically
explained tongues. Satanloves for us to substitute anything counterfeit in the
place of Christ. Many who think that they are praying “in the Spirit” (in
tongues)are just babbling gibberish, no matter how happy it makes them feel.
There is a realdanger of substituting that kind of purely psychological
activity for the discipline of prayer and Bible study which lead to solid
spiritual growth. One former charismatic pastor who came to question and
then to abandon the gifts of tongues and prophecy, wrote about the process of
his struggle, I think I realized (in my heart at least)that my tongues were not
a linguistically definable language. And now the argument came to me with
renewedforce. No one could listen to me speaking tongues and then marvel
that the mighty acts of God were being proclaimed in an understandable
language. And so this fact alone was enoughto invalidate the gift for me. I
suppose that I could have sidestepped this line of reasoning by taking refuge
in the idea that tongues are not necessarilya known language. But even so, I
still had to admit that the
13
Scriptures teachthat tongues are a miraculous gift. What happened on the
day of Pentecostwas a miracle! ... Therefore, evenif tongues aren’t
necessarilya knownlanguage, I still had to ask myself, “Is there any evidence
that my tongues speechis of a miraculous nature? Is there any indication that
my utterances originatedwith the Holy Spirit and not just my own mind?
(Neil Babcox, A Searchfor Charismatic Reality [Multnomah Press, 1985],
pp.63-64.)After he came to the conclusionthat his tongues were not of the
Holy Spirit, this pastorstill had trouble quitting. Speaking in tongues had
seemedlike such an enriching aspectof his personal devotions. He writes,
However, I soonbeganto realize that speaking in tongues was not as edifying
as I had previously thought. How could it be, since I was uttering words and
phrases of my own invention? Therefore, I was beginning to understand that,
far from being a deeperdimension of prayer, praying in tongues was an
evasion--a failure to grapple with the profundities of prayer (ibid., p. 65). I
don’t share any of these things to club anybody who speaks in tongues. It
would be a gross misuse of this messageif those of you who do not speak in
tongues used it to club those who do. I share it because I believe it is crucial to

base our experiences onthe Word of God. I believe that the church will be
strongerand the Lord’s work will go forth in greatestpowerwhenwe order
our lives in accordancewith His Word. Most of you who read this may not
practice tongues. Don’t getsmug about “having the truth.” Learn from your
charismatic brothers to be fervent for the Lord. If you do speak in tongues, I
ask you to evaluate your experience by Scripture. Above all, let us all pursue
love.
14
DiscussionQuestions 1. Do you agree that it is wrong to divide the church
along charismatic lines? How canthis be avoided in a specific situation where
both elements are in a church? 2. What would you say to someone who
pointed to the obviously goodresults in his spiritual life due to his experience
with tongues? 3. Would you rather be in a church that had correctdoctrine on
tongues but was restrainedin devotion for the Lord or one which emphasized
tongues but was fervent in devotion for the Lord? Why? 4. Discuss:If the
Holy Spirit left your life today, how soonwould you discoverthat fact? What
about if He left our church? How can we depend on Him more? Copyright
1986, StevenJ. Cole, All Rights Reserved.
LEHMAN STRAUSS
Speaking in Tongues
RelatedMedia
Introduction
This is not the final chapter to be written on the subject of speaking in
tongues. Men (and women)will be having their say until our Lord returns to
settle this matter once and for all time. It is difficult to say how, when and

where the modern tongues movement began. In the many pamphlets and
books I have examined opinions differ. We do know that the phenomenon of
tongues-speaking is widespread, and it is likely that no issue in Christendom
has causedas wide a split in its ranks in modern times as has speaking in
tongues.
All Bible-believing Christians who study the Word of Godare in agreement
that the gift of tongues is present in the inspired Scriptures. In the New
Testamenttwo lists of gifts appear in which the gift of tongues is included. In
1 Corinthians 12:8-11 “kinds of tongues” and “the interpretation of tongues”
are saidto be sovereignlybestowedgifts of the Holy Spirit. In 1 Corinthians
12:28-30 “tongues”appears in the list of gifts. We call them “spiritual gifts”
from the Greek wordcharisma, suggesting that the gift is a bestowmentof
God’s grace. It is not a natural ability that one might develop, but rather a
specialgift as those appearing in the above mentioned passages in First
Corinthians.
The Holy Spirit is sovereignin the distribution of these gifts. Following the
listing of the gifts, Paul adds, “But all these workeththat one and the selfsame
Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (1 Corinthians 12:11). No
one personhas all the gifts, nor are we to seek the gifts. We must be careful
that we do not confuse the Spirit as a gift to the believer with the gifts the
Spirit gives to believers. Every believer has received the gift of the Spirit, but
not every believer has receivedthe gifts which the Spirit bestows.
The Meaning of Speaking in Tongues
In my travels many persons have approachedme with questions about
tongues. Some of them ask about its meaning. The term that is used to identify
the tongues movement is “glossolalia,” made up of two Greek words, glossa
(language or tongue) and lalia (speech). It therefore means speaking in
languages ortongues. Glossologyis that department of anthropology which
has to do with the study and classificationoflanguages and dialects.
The word glossa appears in the Greek New Testament not less than fifty
times. It is used to refer to the physical organ of the tongue as in James 3:5;
once in reference to the flames of fire shapedlike tongues (Acts 2:3); at least

once in a metaphorical sense whenreferring to speechas in the statement,
“my tongue (speech)was glad(joyous)” (Acts 2:26). As far as I understand the
remaining usages ofthe word it always means a language.
When our Lord predicted the gift of tongues (the only mention of tongues in
the four Gospelrecords)He said, “And these signs shall follow them that
believe; In my name they shall castout devils; they shall speak with new
tongues” (Mark 16:17). The adjective “new” (Gr. kainos)canonly mean they
were going to speak in languages new to them, that is, languages they had not
learned or used until that time. If I saythe Russianlanguage is “new” to me, I
do not mean that I never knew there was sucha language, but rather its use
by me is new to me because Ican neither speak it nor understand it when I
hear others speak it. On the other hand the German language is not altogether
“new” to me because I can both read and speak it with a small degree of
understanding.
In Acts 2:4 Luke uses a different adjective when he says, “they beganto speak
with other tongues.” The word “other” (Gr. heteros)simply means that they
spoke in languagesdifferent from the normal language they were used to. The
context substantiates this. Notice the surprised reactionon the part of the
hearers—“Andthey were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another,
Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man
in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:7,8). Every man heard
them speak in his own language (Acts 2:6). Here the word “language”is the
translation of dialekto from which our word “dialect” comes. The two words
glossa (tongue)and dialektos (language)are used synonymously, making it
obvious that the disciples were speaking in known languagesotherthan the
language native to them. In verses 9-11 the languages are then identified. It
was a miraculous phenomenon which enabled the disciples to speak in
languages whichthey had never learned. Here in this Acts passage we have
tongues-speaking in its pure and unperverted form as God gave it.
The following verses in the Book of the Revelationshould be examined
carefully (Revelation5:9; 7:9; 10:11;11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15). In eachpassage
where the word “tongue” is mentioned it means one of the languages
associatedwith the various nationalities and races. I see no reasonwhy anyone

should raise a question as to the tongues in those passages in Mark, Acts and
Revelationmeaning languages.
But the more serious problems arise in the interpretation of the twenty-one
references to tongues in 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14. There are those who
tell us that the tongues in First Corinthians are ecstatic utterances notknown
in any country on earth. They base their conclusionon the term “unknown”
which appears in 1 Corinthians 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, and 27. But the reader of
this chapter in God’s Word must not fail to observe that the word “unknown”
in every place where it appears is in italicized letters, which means that it does
not occurin any Greek manuscript but was inserted by translators. The Holy
Spirit did not direct Paul to write that the tongue is unknown.
I find no warrant for changing the meaning of tongues in First Corinthians. In
every other place where the word is used it means languages. Why then
should the meaning be changedin First Corinthians? I know of no textual
license that will warrant changing the meaning of the word. All the usages of
tongues in Paul’s treatment of the subject refer to foreign languages. “So
likewise ye, exceptye utter by the tongue words easyto be understood, how
shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into air” (1 Corinthians
14:9).
There is no reasonfor anyone to speak exceptto converse intelligibly. The
Greek word laleo means “I speak.” The word is never used for mere sound or
noise. Nor is it used for a mere mumbling or muttering of unintelligible
gibberish. The tongues-speaking in the New Testamentwas in the native
languages ofhearing people. The supernatural phenomenon which took place
at Pentecostwas the exercise ofa gift whereby many people from many
countries, gatheredat Jerusalem, heard God’s message in their own language.
This was indeed a miracle of God.
It would be an arbitrary and strange interpretation of Scripture that would
make tongues-speaking in the New Testamentanything other than known
languages. There is no trace of Scriptural evidence that tongues were ever
heard by anyone as incoherent, incomprehensible babbling.
The Ministry of Speaking in Tongues

At this point in our study we shall pursue an examination of the reasons why
God gave the gift of speaking in tongues.
First, to communicate the Gospelmessage. Withunmistakable clarity Paul
says, “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them
that believe not . . . ” (1 Corinthians 14:22). The word “sign” (Gr. semeion) in
the New Testamentis often associatedwith the conveying of a Divinely-given
messageto unbelievers. This is the emphasis in John 20:30, 31 where we read,
“And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence ofHis disciples, which
are not written in this book:But these are written, that ye might believe that
Jesus is the Christ, the Sonof God; and that believing ye might have life
through His name.” The signs (miracles)were never performed without
purpose, but because ofthe messagethey communicated.
The true function of the gift of tongues is “for a sign . . . to them that believe
not.” To exercise the gift when unbelievers were not present would be
exercising the gift above the purpose for which it was given. The gifts were
never given for the self-satisfactionorself-gloryof the recipients. The one
upon whom the gift was bestowedwas merelyan instrument through whom
God wanted to communicate His message.
Becauseofthe abuse and misuse of tongues in the Corinthian Assembly Paul
states its purpose. The spiritual immaturity of the saints in Corinth calledfor
instruction, so in the middle of his discourse on tongues he writes, “Brethren,
be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in
understanding be men” (1 Corinthians 14:20). The Greek wordfor “men”
(teleios)means mature. In their misuse of speaking in tongues they were
showing their immaturity, a behaviour pattern which characterizedthe
believers at Corinth. The Apostle reminded them that they remained “babes
in Christ” (3:1).
Their failure to grow up spiritually resulted from their neglectedstudy of the
Scriptures. The Epistle to the Hebrews stressesthis point. “Forwhen for the
time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teachyou againwhich be
the first principles of the oracles ofGod; and are become such as have need of
milk, and not of strong meat. Forevery one that useth milk is unskillful in the

word of righteousness;for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them
that are of full age, even those who by reasonof use have their senses
exercisedto discernboth goodand evil” (Hebrews 5:12-14). Peterwrote, “As
newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow
thereby” (I Peter 2:2). One will find confusion and license where the study of
God’s Word is neglected.
Now let us return to 1 Corinthians 14:20. Immediately upon rebuking them
with the words, “Brethren, be not children in understanding,” Paul adds, “In
the law it is written . . . ” (Vs. 21), thereby pointing out their weakness,
namely, their failure to acquaint themselves with that which was written in
the Old TestamentScriptures. They had failed to study God’s Word,
therefore they had become victims of arresteddevelopment.
Speaking in tongues was a gift bestowedby the Holy Spirit, but it, or any
other gift, can be misused. Speaking in tongues was no mark of spirituality,
because the Corinthian church was unspiritual, having manifested carnality
(3:1-3) and even gross sin (5:1). And so Paul points them to a Scripture they
should have known, saying, “In the law it is written, With men of other
tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will
they not hearme, saith the Lord” (12:21).
Paul is here referring to a prophecy God had given through Isaiah. The nation
of Israel had failed to heed God’s message whichHe gave through their own
prophets, so the Lord told them that at a future time they will hear His
messagethrough tongues (languages)otherthan their own. “Forwith
stammering lips and anothertongue will He speak to this people “ (Isaiah
28:11). Thus Paul sees in this Isaiahprophecy the gift of tongues as a sign to
Israel. The words “this people” in Isaiah 28:11, in its context, canrefer only to
Israel. The abuse of tongues-speaking in Corinth did not arise from the belief
in speaking in tongues, but rather in the neglectof the Scriptures which teach
its proper use.
This purpose of the gift of tongues, namely to communicate God’s messageto
Israel, is verified in the three passagesin Acts where speaking in tongues is
mentioned. In Acts 2 tongues-speaking wasusedas a missionary or

evangelistic toolin fulfillment of Isaiah28:11. There was no need for the
disciples to learn other languages before they could communicate the Gospel.
God overcame the language barrier through the miracle-gift of tongues. On
the day of Pentecostthere were “Jews outof every nation under heaven” (Acts
2:5). And when the disciples “beganto speak with other tongues, as the Spirit
gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4), the hearers respondedwith the question,
“And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?”
(Acts 2:8). Observe that they were “Jews”from other countries who spoke
many languages and dialects, and yet eachheard the Gospelin his own
tongue. Isaiah’s prophecy was being fulfilled.
In Acts 10:46 the secondmention of speaking in tongues occurs. The occasion
againwas to communicate the Gospel, this time for the purpose of effecting
the conversionof Cornelius and his house. This event cannotbe totally
disassociatedfrom PentecostbecausePeter, whenrelating this experience,
said, “And as I beganto speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the
beginning” (Acts 11:15). At the house of Cornelius tongues-speaking was a
sign to Jews ata time when the Gospelwas being communicated (Acts 10:44-
46).
In Acts 19:6 there appears the third passagein Acts in which speaking in
tongues is recorded. Again its purpose was missionaryand evangelistic. When
Paul came to Ephesus he encounteredtwelve disciples of John the Baptist. He
askedthem, “Did you receive the Holy Ghost when (not since)you believed?”
(Acts 19:2, see the R.V.). These atEphesus consideredthemselves to be
Christians because they had heard through Apollos the messageofJohn. You
see, there is a belief unto salvationand a belief that does not result in
salvation. The latter is a mere academic, intellectualbelief that even Satan
and the demons have (James 2:19. cf. Mark 5:7). Doubtless there are people
today who have an historicalfaith in Jesus Christ as a man and even the Son
of God, but who have not been saved. Paul suspectedthat such was the case
with the disciples of John whom he met at Ephesus. When he learned they
were not saved, he told them they must trust Christ for their salvation. We
can understand the confusion they might have experienced, therefore some
evidential sign was necessary. “And when Paul had laid his hands upon them,
the Holy Ghostcame upon them; and they spake with tongues, and

prophesied” (Acts 19:6). Again the purpose for speaking in tongues is obvious,
namely, to communicate the Gospelmessage.
These are the only instances of tongues-speaking recordedin the Bible, except
the passage in First Corinthians. None of the later Epistles mention speaking
in tongues. The gift was used only in the transitional period betweenLaw and
Grace. The sign gifts continued through the period of the Apostles while the
New Testamentwas in the process ofbeing written.
Second, to confirm the Gospelmessage. It was not merely a communicating
sign but a confirmatory sign as well. When the Apostles used the gift of
tongues it was because they did not have what you and I have today, the
completed Word of God, God’s full and final revelationto man. When they
went about preaching the Gospel, their messagewas confirmedby the exercise
of the sign gifts. Tongues-speakingvindicated both the message andthe
messenger. “Trulythe signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all
patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds” (2 Corinthians 12:12). If
one could find an Apostle living today who saw the bodily-resurrected Lord
Jesus, he would not be exercising the sign gifts because he would have what
you and I have, and what Peter, Paul and John did not have, the completed
written Word of God. Now that we have the Scriptures we do not need
miracles to confirm God’s message.
Signs were for the Jews rather than for Gentiles. “Forthe Jews require a sign
. . . ” (1 Corinthians 1:22). Repeatedlyit was the Jews who askedfor a sign.
“Then certainof the Scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master,
we would see a sign from Thee” (Matthew 12:38). Again, “The Phariseesalso
with the Sadducees came,and tempting desired Him that He would shew them
a sign from heaven” (Matthew 16 :1). “Thenansweredthe Jews and said unto
Him, What sign shewestThouunto us, seeing that Thou doest these things?”
(John 2:18). “They saidtherefore unto Him, What signshewestThou then,
that we may see and believe Thee? What dost Thou work?” (John 6:30). All
these who askedfor a sign were Jews, andtheir insistence upon signs will at
last be their sad undoing.

During the Tribulation the Antichrist will appear, “whose coming is after the
working of Satan with all powerand signs and lying wonders” (II
Thessalonians 2:9), and at that time many Jews will be deceived into receiving
the Antichrist as their Messiah.
Let us who are Christ’s not be seeking signs as did the unbelieving Jews. We
who are the Lord’s have the Holy Scriptures, so let us “walk by faith, not by
sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7). Whenever the gift of tongues was exercisedJews
were present, tongues-speaking being usedeither to communicate the Gospel
or else to confirm to the Jews that the Gentiles were worthy of salvation and
should therefore have the Gospelalso. Such confirmations are seenin Acts
10:45 and 19:6. “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord
working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen”
(Mark 16:20).
If anyone denies the messageofGod’s written Word today, there is no other
court of appeal. In the days of the Apostles, the New Testamentbeing yet
unwritten, the Holy Spirit supported their messageby accompanying it with
signs. But after those holy and inspired men completed writing the New
Testament, suchconfirmations were no longer necessary. The rich man in
Hell askedAbraham to send Lazarus from the dead that he might witness to
his five unsaved brothers, hoping that such a sign(or miracle) would lead
them to repent. But Abraham replied, “If they hear not Moses andthe
prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead”
(Luke 16:27-31). The Pentecostalsignushered in a new age before the New
Testamentwas written. But if men rejectGod’s inspired Word now, they need
not look for any supernatural signs.
A significant New Testamentpassage whichadds to the factthat the sign gifts
were given to confirm the Gospelmessageis Hebrews 2:3,4:“How shall we
escape, ifwe neglectso greatsalvation;which at the first began to be spoken
by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him; God also
bearing them witness, both with signs, and with divers miracles, and gifts of
the Holy Ghostaccording to His own will?” If the Epistle to the Hebrews was
written between65 and 70 A.D. it would be obvious that the people to whom

the messagewas “confirmed” with signs and gifts were that generation
immediately following our Lord’s death.
The MistakesAbout Speaking in Tongues
As an introduction to this part of our study, I want you to see Paul’s
introduction to the subject of spiritual gifts. And incidentally, this is the only
place in the entire Bible where spiritual gifts are discussed. The Apostle
writes, “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you
ignorant” (1 Corinthians 12:1). In the Authorized Version the word “gifts” is
in italicized letters, telling us that it did not appearin any of the Greek
manuscripts but was inserted by translators. Paul actuallysaid to the
Corinthians, “I don’t want you to be ignorant about pneumatica” (the
spirituals), meaning of course the spiritual gifts.
Now the Corinthians were not ignorant of the fact of the spiritual gifts, for the
Apostle had alreadysaid to them, “Ye come behind in no gift” (1:7). When he
said, “I would not have you ignorant”, he was not speaking about their
ignorance of the existence of the gifts, but rather about their ignorance of the
right exercise ofthe gifts. They were wellinformed as to what the spiritual
gifts were, but they were ignorant about the proper use of the gifts, as is
evidenced by the mistakes they made in their exercise ofthem.
Before Paul launches into a discussionofthe spiritual gifts, he reminds them
of how easilythey were led astray. He says, “ye know that ye were gentiles,
carried awayunto these dumb idols, even as ye were led” (12:2). In substance
he is saying, “Before youtell me about your experience let me remind you of
your lack of spirituality (3:1), and therefore your inability to discern between
the Holy Spirit and false spirits” (2:15). Becausetheywere carnal, “babes in
Christ” (3:1), their exercise ofthe gifts were self-induced by fleshly energy,
not by the Holy Spirit. All Christians do not use their gifts properly, so that a
Christian’s use of a gift might not be in accordwith the Word of God.
Mistakes canbe made by any of us in the exercise ofa gift.
(1) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is synonymous with the
baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is unscriptural teaching which says that all who
are baptized by the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues. The Scriptures state

The holy spirit and speaking in tongues

The holy spirit and speaking in tongues

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a The holy spirit and speaking in tongues

Similar a The holy spirit and speaking in tongues (20)

Más de GLENN PEASE

Más de GLENN PEASE (20)

Último

Último (20)

The holy spirit and speaking in tongues