There Is No Command in the Bible to Seek to "Speak in Tongues" - by Evangelist John R. Rice

Found here. Our comments in bold.
------------------

We realize that our blog has addressed tongues before, but whenever we find a novel interpretation we feel compelled to examine it.

Below is an excerpt taken from longer presentation. 

We note that in the below excerpt the author does not quote a Scripture in defense of his position. In fact, in reviewing the entire article, he never does quote a relevant Scripture that speaks to his point.

We deal extensively with tongues here.
----------------

There is not a single command in the Bible to talk in tongues. (This is his premise. He will never cite a verse that tells us this. In fact, he merely asserts it without any proof at all.)

You say, "But over in I Corinthians 14 Paul said, 'I would that ye all spake with tongues.' " Yes, "I would you all could talk in several languages like I do." He did not talk there about a miracle, he didn't talk about the gift of tongues. What Paul rebuked there was not a gift of tongues; he was rebuking ordinary languages used in services where people did not understand them. (The author makes some undocumented assertions.

This is the novel interpretation we mentioned, that there is tongues and there is the gift of tongues. But the author does not back up this distinction between the spiritual gift of tongues and simple conversing in other languages. He simply pulls it out of thin air. 

Let's set up Paul's teaching by going back to 1 Corinthians chapter 12 where he first mentions tongues:

1Co. 12:1, 7-10 Now about spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant...

7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8 To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.

We see that Paul's intent is to teach about spiritual gifts, equating them with manifestions of the Spirit. He goes on to list them, but only one is coupled with the term "gift" - - healing. Does this mean that the others in the list are not spiritual gifts? For example, are there natural miraculous powers, separate from the gift of miraculous powers? Of course not.

Let's continue:

1Co. 12:28-31 And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But eagerly desire the greater gifts. And now I will show you the most excellent way.

Now Paul gives a different list. Crucially, he sums up his thought with "but eagerly desire the greater gifts." That is, everything he has mentioned is a spiritual gift! There is no hint that Paul is making a distinction between natural abilities and spiritual gifts.

So now we arrive at the verse cited by the author, 1Co. 14:5:

I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.

Hmm. The author quoted only half the verse. The other half mentions prophecy. Is there a natural ability to prophesy, separate from the spiritual gift? 

We would assert that it is plain Paul did not change horses in mid-sentence. He did not go from talking about natural abilities to the spiritual gifts. So the author simply makes an assertion but does not back it up.)

(...)

Now, it is true that tongues is a miraculous gift, a gift of the Spirit, and I will go into that more in detail later. (Ah, so there is a spiritual gift of tongues. We wonder where he will "go into more detail later, because there's only a few more paragraphs left in this article. We also looked in his next sermon and he does not explain the spiritual gift there.)

But I want you to think about this: it is a miracle and miracles are rather rare. (Undocumented statement.)

On this matter of talking in tongues, here is the one case in the Bible where they spake with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance -- at Pentecost. (If we were to accept the author's premise, we would say he is making an Argument From Silence.)

They "began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Yes, it is true that there is only one place that the Bible uses the phrase "the Spirit gave them utterance." It now falls to the author to demonstrate that this phrase is uniquely descriptive of the gift of tongues as apart from other mentions of tongues.

Let's actually quote the verse: Ac. 2:4: 

All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

First we note that this word [utterance/enabled] is found three times, and only in Acts [Ac. 2:4, 2:14, 26:25]. 

Let's quote Ac. 2:14:

Then Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed the crowd: “Fellow Jews and all of you who live in Jerusalem, let me explain this to you; listen carefully to what I say.

"Addressed" is the word in question. We of course know that Peter spoke according to the Spirit of God, but it was the content and not the language that is relevant. We know this because of the third occurrence of the word, Ac. 26:25:

“I am not insane, most excellent Festus,” Paul replied. “What I am saying is true and reasonable.

"What I am saying" is the same Greek word. Paul was not referring to speaking in tongues, he was referring to the content of his words. 

In addition, Peter explains what happened to the assembled crowd. Ac. 2:17-18:

“In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy."

Peter tells the crowd that these things happened according to the prophecy spoken by Joel regarding the widespread outpouring of the Holy Spirit. There is no statement here regarding a limited and isolated manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

We would therefore resist the idea that the word "utterance" is required to appear in the text in order for it to be the gift of tongues.)

Now, we have two other cases where people spoke in their languages. One is Acts, chapter 10. Cornelius and his household talked in other languages. (Let's actually quote the passage. Ac. 10:44-47:

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”

With the text in front of us we see 

• The Holy Spirit came upon the gentile hearers
• The Jewish believers didn't think the gentiles could receive the Holy Spirit
• Speaking in tongues was regarded as evidence that proved they did receive the Holy Spirit
• Peter notes that these gentiles received the same Holy Spirit in the same way they had.

But for reasons unknown the author thinks it wasn't miraculous.)

And we have the case in Acts 19 where some people in Ephesus talked in various languages, but the Bible doesn't say, "...as the Spirit gave utterance," and it doesn't say it is a miracle, (Apparently the author wants a formula. He thinks that the the Bible must mention "utterance" in order for it to be miraculous tongues. Again he tries to make a distinction between natural language and miraculous occurrence, but his reason is trivial.

Again, let's actually quote the verse. Ac. 19:6: 

When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.

Ahhh, so this is why the author didn't quote the verse. It says "the Holy Spirit came upon them." That sounds miraculous to us. The direct result was they "spoke in tongues and prophesied." Hmm. Was the prophecy also not miraculous? 

What we actually have here is a sign and wonder, manifesting as miraculous speech, both in tongues and prophecy.) 

and neither does it say it was a gift of tongues. (Well, it wouldn't because it isn't the gift of tongues. These particular miraculous tongues were specifically given as a sign to the apostles that the Holy Spirit had indeed been poured out on all flesh.)

So I have no right to suppose it, and to add it in. (The author confuses the gift of tongues with the miraculous occurrence of tongues. The two are not the same.)

But if these three cases in the Bible were all the miraculous gift, that still is not very many. (Argument From Silence.)

There are many, many times that people are filled with the Holy Ghost, but if there were only three cases when they talked in tongues, at least it still shows what I am saying: miracles are not an everyday occurrence.

(...)

So there are not many miracles. Miracles are special, unusual, infrequent. So there are not many cases of talking in tongues. This was a miracle and there was only a special occasion for it at Pentecost. (This means the author thinks that the tongues of 1 Corinthians were not miraculous. Apparently the only tongues speaking miracle was Pentecost. He gives no reason or documentation at all for this assertion.)