Common Arguments Against Speaking In Tongues
Rock of Offence Commentary
The Real World
Many of us tend to take an idealistic view of the church. We desperately want to believe that everyone out there is in pursuit of the truth. Unfortunately, this is not the real world. As we get closer to the end-times, the conditions get worse. The early apostles warned us that men would get worse and worse (2 Tim. 3:13). There are some that want to win an argument at any cost--even if it mutilates and destroys the context of God's Word. The practice of distorting Scripture exists mainly because it's not the truth being defended, but the doctrines of men placed on an equal level with Scripture (Matt. 15:7-9). The modern church is full of such practices.
Most of us want to believe the best of people. Yet, the church in some sectors has become like the world. To some, Christian ministry is just another occupation. It's unfortunate, but religion represents influence, power, pride and money. Anyone who doesn't think these are powerful corrupting forces are fooling themselves. It's spoiled the testimony of the church since the Middle Ages. Some of the reformers, like Martin Luther were angered at how the established church of his time used people's religious devotion to gain wealth and to protect their individual power-base. Luther was so angry that he wrote his famous "95 Thesis" and nailed it on the cathedral door in Wittenburg, Germany in 1517.
Organized religion really hasn't changed much since the days of Christ. Only the names and methods have changed. Many of the arguments against the gifts of the Spirit are in defense of ministry reputation, rather than the Bible. Then, there are those who examine the Scriptures and honestly see different things. We have so many different types of "theology" in the church that disagreement is almost certain. Reformed theology allegorically interprets parts of the Bible, especially prophecy. These folks honestly look at certain Biblical issues and believe they have God's viewpoint. Then, you have the Calvinists, where the same thing can be said. There's also the complex area of Roman Catholicism and its various beliefs. "Christian Orthodoxy" is divided into hundreds of belief systems like this. It creates an atmosphere of confusion and the differences are irreconcilable. Everyone takes a firm stand on what they believe God says. If all that isn't bad enough we now have various English translations of the Bible that take certain liberties with the text. One pastor told me, "The more we move toward an "English friendly" version of the Bible, the more we move away from the intent of the original languages of God's Word." The Bible is our standard. Our faith gets skewed when the standard that we base our faith on is corrupted. If you're a new believer looking for truth today--God help you.
I said all of this for a reason. I believe the enemy is behind most of these practices. It gives us the feeling that everyone's beliefs are valid. All you need to do is find the one belief that "fits" your lifestyle the best. Some of us are troubled by the moral relativism in the world where everyone "does their own thing" as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. What we fail to see is the same thing exists in the church. It's called "spiritual relativism"--where everyone chooses their beliefs and the church they attend based on comfort level or family tradition.
Common Arguments About Tongues
In this study, I want Scripture to stand on its own merit. In this way I believe most questions get answered.
On some arguments I give brief responses that include the comments of Saint Paul. Some answers are the same because they address different arguments based on the same Scriptural misconception.
ARGUMENT: Tongues were only used for the evangelistic purpose of setting up the early church
This argument ignores the intercessory expression of "praying in tongues" where we are speaking not to men, but to God alone. The last time I looked, God didn't need to be evangelized, yet he does desire our prayers. This special usage is for our private prayer life and not designed for public evangelistic purposes. Praying in tongues can be performed alone without anyone else being present. (1 Cor. 14:2 1 Cor. 14:14 Romans 8:26-27)
ARGUMENT: Tongues is only a sign for unbelievers
Again, the same answer applies. This position ignores all the other expressions that Saint Paul taught. It not only ignores praying in tongues (praying with the spirit) where we are speaking not to men, but to God alone--but also "singing with the spirit" and "blessing with the spirit" (1 Cor. 14:14-17). Unbelievers do not need to be present when we "pray in tongues" (pray with the spirit). This usage is uniquely designed for our intercessory prayer life. Unbelievers are usually not with you in your prayer closet. Praying in tongues can be performed alone without anyone else being present. It's a sacred relationship and communication between you and God. (1 Cor. 14:2 1 Cor. 14:14 Romans 8:26-27)
ARGUMENT: Tongues have passed away because we now have the Scriptures in print and don't need them anymore.
This is a very old argument. It is based on the Scripture below:
"Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away." (1 Cor 13:8-10)
This is perhaps the easiest argument to address. Some critics believe that Paul's words describing "that which is perfect" refers to the Bible being made available to us in print. This is a common belief among a group of Christians known as "cessationists". Yet, when you view the context of all of Saint Paul's writings, he repeatedly wrote about the soon return of our Lord. When you examine Paul's New Testament writings in the Bible, "that which is perfect" refers to one thing--when Jesus Christ (the perfect one) returns He gives us "perfect knowledge" that makes speaking in tongues unnecessary. Tongues are not discontinued until our Lord Jesus returns at the end of the age. It is dishonest and nonsensical to apply "that which is perfect" to the advent of the printed Bible. Why? In addition to "tongues ceasing" with the arrival of the Bible, this Scripture also says "knowledge shall vanish away." Has knowledge vanished? Has knowledge been "done away" with? If it hasn't--then "that which is perfect" hasn't come yet--and tongues haven't ceased.
This whole argument is built on the wrong belief that tongues function only as known earthly languages used only for the evangelistic purposes of communicating the gospel. The critics think this because the early church didn't have the printed Scriptures as we do--and that God used tongues as a temporary solution to this problem. This misinformation is made credible by suppressing other facts. It totally ignores the spiritual expression of "praying in tongues" (which is also a form of "speaking in tongues"-praying is speaking to God), where we're speaking not to men, but to God alone. Using tongues in our intercessory prayer life is never to be confused with the public ministry use of the gift where an interpreter is required. These two expressions are performed for entirely different purposes. This argument also reveals another dirty little secret. Critics desperately want the whole subject of tongues to be "done away with" because it interferes with their religious world-view.
ARGUMENT: Tongues are no longer needed because the original apostles have all died.
To address this argument we have to look at the whole picture. Speaking in tongues is an administration of the Holy Spirit that came into existence on the day of Pentecost when He came to indwell believers. It began the Church-Age. We must ask ourselves some questions. Is the Holy Spirit still indwelling believers today? Are there still unbelievers in the world? Do we still pray? Do we still need the Holy Spirit's help in prayer as Romans 8:26-27 suggests? If not, what other issues in Paul's epistle to the Romans no longer apply? If you answered these questions correctly, then the Holy Spirit's administration of tongues is still valid for the modern church because the Church Age hasn't ended yet because Jesus hasn't returned. Tongues, along with the other nine spiritual gifts are exclusively given for use during the Church Age. It has nothing to do with the death of the original apostles. It is part of the "things of the Spirit of God", which apply to the Church Age Christian. The critic's position is that tongues is only a sign for the original apostles-so they would know when the Holy Spirit was present. Yet, it ignores that fact that tongues are also a sign for the unbeliever. And, once again, it ignores Paul's teaching on "praying in tongues" in the intercessory prayer life of the believer.
ARGUMENT: Tongues should be ignored because the Corinthian church spoke in tongues and Paul accused them of being carnal.
The validity of an "administration of the Holy Spirit" never depends on the spiritual maturity of believers in the church or their conduct. It stands as an independent truth regardless of how God's people live. This argument has no merit in the discussion other than to be used as a "smoke and mirrors" tactic. It's like saying that Christ's salvation isn't important because some of his people sin and act in an unrighteous manner from time to time. The salvation provided by Jesus Christ is true, even if no one on earth believes in it. It's the same with the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues.
This is also a veiled attempt to discredit (by association) everything Paul said about tongues in his epistles to the Corinthians. These epistles contain the most damaging information to critics--so it's no surprise that they would like to diminish Paul's writings on this topic.
Then, there is the testimony of Scirpture: Tongues represent a spiritual way to speak (pray) to God. And, Paul considered speaking in tongues important and practiced it more than the Corinthians-so the carnality argument has no meaning.
"For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries." (1 Cor 14:2)
(Saint Paul said) "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all" (1 Cor 14:18)
Important Note: To gain an advantage in the discussion, opponents attempt to falsely label speaking in tongues as an outward indication of spiritual maturity. They pretend to take this position because some of its supporters think this way. Yet, the Scriptures do not teach this anywhere. If someone can redefine speaking in tongues as some kind of "badge of spirituality", then it can be easily invalidated by drawing attention to the apparent "carnal" condition of the believers who practice it. This argument is just another false persuasive speech maneuver.
ARGUMENT: Tongues are jibberish and should be rejected
While attending college, I took courses in psychology. During this time, I had been a Christian for 4 years and was beginning to look at the Bible concerning the subject of tongues. Halfway through one of my classes, we began a study on the practice of "glossolalia". The teacher spent three weeks examining the subject. It was a study about "religious people" who practiced their beliefs by speaking in tongues, which they defined as "ecstatic speech driven by extreme emotionalism". If you know anything at all about the psychiatric community, you know that they are not friendly toward true Christian beliefs, though some psychologists are believers in Christ.
The science of psychology is the champion of natural thinking, so any rejection of truly spiritual issues should be expected. Spiritual things, or as Saint Paul called them, "the things of the Spirit" (1 Cor. 2:14) are diametrically opposed to natural things because they are "supernatural" and "spiritually discerned" (Saint Paul's words). Psychology will never be able to understand or explain them. Pure psychology generally rejects the supernatural because they can't explain it in cold, hard scientific terms. Political forces trained in the root principles of psychology are at the forefront of the assault on Christian beliefs and values in public life. Because this ideology is successful at removing God from our schools, immorality and wickedness is running amok in our society. And then, we want to use these same principles to describe a godly gift? This should tell the reader something important.
Some opponents of speaking in tongues (mostly highly trained theologians) will pull the discussion into the psychological arena where tongues are considered "ecstatic speech driven by emotionalism". Again, the goal is not to honestly examine the Bible topic of speaking in tongues-but to discredit the practice by any means. They use the science of psychology in order to define tongues for their listeners. However, their definition originates from the godless area of science and not from the Bible. By using its psychological definition, critics can then discredit this gift of the Holy Spirit by equating it to "extreme emotionalism", gibberish or nonsense. Once again, this is a dishonest persuasive speech maneuver.
Generally, students of the Bible that honor the "gifts of the Spirit" will never use psychological terms to describe these things because they are demeaning and un-scriptural. Anytime you hear someone claim that they only want a "truthful examination of speaking in tongues", yet resort to defining it in psychological terms--they've got a hidden agenda. When you hear the terms "ecstatic uterrance" or "emotionalism", you're about to get a teaching that's biased against the gifts of the Spirit.
How To Defeat A Scriptural Truth
Below is a sample plan for defeating any truth or ideology. I've watched this format used by both leaders and individual Christians to assault Bible topics they don't approve of. A similar method is used in world politics and journalism. I make every attempt not to use these tactics in my writings. Its important if we're to recognize some of the clever and worldly practices used by skilled theologians against believers in these last days.
- Never perform a frontal attack--start with an attitude of agreement
- Honor the subject at the start of the discussion-it disarms opponents
- Agree that Bible talks about the subject and give references-it disarms opponents
- Incrementally and slowly begin to cast the subject in a negative light
- Change the subject slightly toward something related--this creates a diversion to break your opponents concentration. While on this "side issue" make sure you use examples that subtly associates the original subject to spiritually negative things. Use this direction-changing method several times during the course of the discussion.
- Return to the original topic
- Begin to make it "guilty by association"--emphasize how others misuse it. Subtly link the subject to popular cults or anti-Christian groups that may use a counterfeit version of the topic being discussed.
- Take Scriptures related to your discussion out of context to prove the unbiblical nature of the topic. Be creative. Leave out any Scriptures and facts that weaken your argument.
- Subtly suggest that its supporters suffer from ignorance or spiritual immaturity. Use examples that appeal to both the pride and shame of the listeners.
- Subtly link those who defend the subject to selfish motivation, seeking an experience or emotionalism. Emphasize the "ungodliness" of these attributes.
- Use slander by suggesting that Satan has motivated supporters of the belief in the past.
- Use derogatory and demeaning terms to describe the topic. This effectively shames and discourages anyone seeking the truth about it.
- Sum things up by declaring that God may have operated that way in the past--but obviously doesn't anymore.
- Tell your audience that they've heard the Word of God and suggest that anyone who disagrees is being motivated by a self-seeking agenda, or by Satan himself.
May the Lord Jesus Christ grant all of us the ability to walk in truth.
III John 1:4
|
