Q: What is speaking in tongues?

A: Here is the reader’s digest version:

Are they only never studied languages? Not necessarily. The Holy Spirit can do a variety of things that don’t necessary match our expectations (or demands). But Biblically speaking, tongues do seem to be human languages which the speakers could not have known naturally. The only exception I know is 1 Cor 13:1 where Paul suggests (tongue in cheek), that if he spoke I the tongues of men and angels without love that even that would be worthless.

What in the world are they blabbering in charismatic churches? I would caution you about calling it blabbering. That is offensive to our Pentecostal brothers. I don’t believe they are real languages and I think it can be verified with a good deal of certainty that they are not human languages. However, that doesn’t mean it is mere gibberish. Often when a person is frightened, or surprised, or overjoyed, syllables pour forth from their lips that are inarticulate. The joy inside them, or anger, or fear, flows forth in sounds. I suspect that is what is mostly involved in Pentecostal glossolalia. Although you must recognize that such a broad phenomenon might have multiple causes, some pure, some not.

Do they just make up sounds? Sometimes (often), yes. In addition to the phenomenon I’ve described in my previous answer, when a person is first taught to speak in tongues, it is common for the leader to say something like, "Just speak whatever sounds come to your mind... let it flow... you will learn to let the Holy Spirit take control of your tongue.” It is quite often a learned behavior/skill.

What does Baptism in the Holy Spirit have to do with tongues? The only two times baptism of the Holy Spirit is clearly identified in the N.T. is Acts 2 & 10. In both cases the evidence of spirit baptism was the speaking in tongues. Both occasions were for verification of a new people group the gospel was breaking into. Thus, when baptism of the Holy Spirit is used by God for verification (which may be rare given the paucity of new people groups entering the church), one would expect it to be accompanied by tongues. (Although you could lose a lot of money betting on what the Holy Spirit would do next). However, I am convinced that the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit” is an umbrella term that covers a number of phenomena, including water immersion, conversion in general, special empowerment, and verification of new people groups.

Interpreters? I’m all for them. They are commanded when tongues is practiced. Some will not use them when exercising tongues privately, which is the dominant use of tongues today. However, 1 Cor 14:4, used to justify this self-edification, is badly misused. This text criticizes those who use tongues for self-gratification. What other spiritual gift is commended or private, personal edification? Prophecy? Teaching? Giving? Administration? You see my point. If there is no interpreter in the public assembly there should be no tongues.

Are there no angelic tongues? As near as I can tell, no. 1 Cor 13:1 is both hyperbolic and hypothetical.

How should the gift be used? It might be profitably used in a number of ways, all guided by the Spirit. But the two that stand out are edification of the church and evidence for unbelievers in the assembly.

top | home