Speaking of Tongues… - by Amy Spreeman

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

We have spent a lot of time searching for a coherent biblical explanation for the cessation of the "miraculous" spiritual gifts. We have yet to find one.

Today we shall examine Ms. Spreeman's attempt to refute contemporary tongues. This is relatively short at 690 words, which means she ends up explaining precious little. She quotes precisely two Scriptures, neither of which come to bear on her effort to refute contemporary tongues. The balance of her presentation will be made up of various claims and assertions, using pejorative phrases to make her case.

The author will be focused on private prayer language. She will pretty much avoid explaining general tongues. And she doesn't even understand what charismatics believe.

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

--------------------------- 

I recently received a letter from a women’s ministry asking about speaking in tongues, after several of the group’s members discussed their own personal experiences praying to God in a private prayer language. Additionally, because the New Testament seems to be encouraging tongue-speaking in church, they asked if this gift was still alive and practiced biblically today. Great questions!

Tongues that sound like unintelligible speech or gibberish (All tongues in the early church sounded like unintelligible speech or gibberish until interpreted.)

became popular in the late 1800s with the rise of Pentecostal and Charismatic movements, after many centuries in which the Church was largely silent regarding such practices. Biblically, the gift of tongues was given by the Holy Spirit as a sign gift. (This phrase is not found in the Bible.)

 Along with other miraculous gifts (All spiritual gifts are miraculous by definition.)

given to believers such as healing and raising the dead, sign gifts (This phrase is not found in the Bible.)

served to authenticate the message of Christ and point people to His divine authority. (Jesus did not practice "sign gifts," He was God in the flesh expressing His inherent power.

At this point we need to distinguish between signs/wonders and the spiritual gifts. Signs/wonders are used [in part] to authenticate the Gospel message while spiritual gifts build up the Body.)

In Acts 2:4-21, the gift of tongues consisted of real human languages. The Holy Spirit enabled believers to speak languages they had never learned so that people from many nations could hear the Gospel in their own language. Some observers thought the speakers sounded like they were drunk, but Peter corrected them and explained what was actually taking place. He told them that Joel’s prophecy (Joel 2:28) was manifesting in that miraculous moment. (Let's quote Peter: 

Acts 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."

So, Ms. Spreeman, tell us about this Scripture and the pouring out of the Spirit. Oh. You won't.)

Scripture also gives specific instructions regarding tongues in the church: “If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church” (1 Corinthians 14:27-28). This passage suggests that tongues were not intended as a private prayer language but as a means of communicating God’s truth to others. (Tongues also provide personal edification [1Co. 14:4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.], i.e., private tongues.)

In Scripture, tongues functioned as a sign for unbelievers (1 Corinthians 14:22) and consistently pointed people to the Gospel (Acts 2:6-11). (And also for the edification of the saints: 

1Co. 14:12-13 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. 1Co. 14:13 For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says.)

When Paul addressed the Corinthian church, he was correcting practices that had become disorderly and confusing. His emphasis was that Christian worship should be characterized by clarity, intelligibility, and order.

Jesus also taught His followers how to pray, and how not to pray. In the Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9-13, Luke 11:2-4), He modeled clear and understandable communication with the Father. In fact, Jesus specifically warned against meaningless repetition:

“And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:7). 

The Greek word translated “meaningless repetition” is battalogeo, which carries the idea of babbling, empty phrases, or repetitive speech without understanding. Throughout Scripture, God’s people are encouraged to pray and worship with understanding rather than unintelligible utterances. (It is a long stretch indeed to suppose that Jesus was preemptively refuting the very tongues Paul would teach about decades later.

The author continues to characterize tongues as meaningless or unintelligible. The former is biblically untrue, the latter is biblically true until interpretation.)

Some proponents of modern tongues point to 1 Corinthians 13:1, where Paul mentions the “tongues of men and of angels,” as evidence for a heavenly prayer language. However, whenever angels speak in Scripture, they do so in understandable language. (Why would angels speak to men in tongues? It is nonsense to claim that angels would speak to humans in tongues.

But what happens in heaven is an entirely different matter. This man [thought to be Paul himself], what did he hear?

2Co. 12:3-4 And I know that this man — whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows — 4 was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell.

What are those inexpressible things he heard? Certainly the words of heaven must be overwhelming to human beings.)

There is no example of an angel communicating in an unintelligible heavenly tongue. (Nonsense statement. If it's unintelligible it can't be communication. And why would the Bible write down what angels said in tongues? Why would angels even speak in tongues to humans? The author's statement is truly vapid.)

Likewise, Jesus, the apostles, the psalmists, and other biblical writers prayed in clear, understandable language. (This is another nonsense statement. 

Why would Jesus and these others pray in tongues? Especially since the biblical writers were writing, not speaking? And didn't the apostles speak in tongues at Pentecost? Did the author forget?

Does the author even understand that tongues is a post-Pentecost spiritual gift?)

It is also worth noting that tongue-like phenomena are not unique to Charismatic Christianity. Similar experiences can be found in various non-Christian religions and spiritual practices, which means that an experience alone is not sufficient proof that something is from God. (No charismatic claims this.)

Scripture must always be our standard for evaluating spiritual claims. 

Finally, whenever someone shares experiences such as speaking in tongues, visions, or hearing voices, I do not immediately question the sincerity of their experience. Such experiences may feel very real to them. Rather, I try to gently point them back to Scripture and discuss what God’s Word teaches about these things whenever the opportunity arises. (So what do the Scriptures say about tongues? The author quoted a single verse about tongues, which did not bolster her case.)

Are these experiences truly from God? No one can say with absolute certainty about any particular person’s experience. While I won’t question the sincerity of those who have had such experiences, the key question remains: Are these practices biblical? (Answer the question. Are tongues a spiritual gift? Does it persist? Why or why not?)

Scripture must be our final authority. If we cannot clearly support a spiritual experience or practice from the Bible—rightly interpreted and in context—then we should not pursue or promote it as normative for the Christian life. (Indeed, rightly interpreted. We wait for the author to perform her duty. Oh. She's done.)