From the Hellenistic era, Plato (429 - 347 B.C.) wrote of his acquaintance with religious ecstatic speech in his works the Phaedrus, the Ion, and the Timaeus. He remarks that the speaker was oblivious to what he was saying: "Even as they who deliver oracles and the soothsayers say many and excellent things, but know nothing of what they utter." (NPNF2, v. 12, p. 169). Plato remarks on the recipients altered state of consciousness resulting in the inability to function normally. He considered them possessed by an external force. At times he mentions that other manifestations appeared alongside the ecstatic speech, sometimes including physical healing. Virgil (70 - 19 B.C.) in the Aeneid, makes reference to the Sibylline priestess of Delos who engaged in ecstatic speech as part of her religious rituals. In the Greek mystery religions, especially the Osiris cult, glossolalia was a common occurrence. Here the Greek terms pneu:ma (pneuma = "spirit") and lalei:n glwvssais (lalein glossais = "to speak in tongues") are used. This evidence shows that tongues-speaking was not an entirely new phenomenon in New Testament times.

The New Testament

The gift of tongues appears in several places of the New Testament. First, that the gift would be manifested in the New Testament is prophesied by Jesus in Mark 16:17 ("they shall speak with new tongues"; Greek: glwvssaiV lalhvsousin kainai:V). The first occurrence of tongue-speaking is recorded in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit came upon the twelve apostles. Men from fifteen different nations were gathered in Jerusalem on that day of Pentecost and each of them heard the gospel in his own tongue. The second occurrence of tongues is recorded in Acts 10 when the gentile convert, Cornelius, spoke in tongues after he received and accepted the gospel Peter preached to him. The next instance is in Acts 19:1-6 when the Ephesian converts spoke in tongues at their receiving of baptism into Jesus. Finally, those in the Church of Corinth are given the gifts of tongues as recorded in 1 Cor. 12-14. There may have been other churches who received the gift of tongues, but the New Testament does not record any. The closest reference is St. Paul's mention of the gift of prophecy present in the church of Rome (Rom. 12:6).

Unlike the tongues which occurred in the Greek mystery religions, the tongues of the New Testament raise a question concerning the form in which the tongues appeared, that is, whether they were in foreign languages or unintelligible ecstatic utterances of no known linguistic origin. Acts 2 indicates that the tongues of Pentecost came in the form of foreign languages, or at the least, the tongues were heard as if they were foreign languages. The other accounts in Acts are not explicit as to form, but seem to follow the form of tongues given at Pentecost, especially since Peter, after hearing Cornelius speak in tongues, states that his experience was the same as the apostles' experience at Pentecost (Acts 11:15).

The specific instances of tongues in the New Testament set the gift apart from the tongues of the Greek religious cults, since the latter are known to be exclusively ecstatic utterances not foreign languages. Yet, the possibility that New Testament tongues could also have come in the form of ecstatic utterances is suggested in the account of tongues at the church of Corinth, as noted by the following points:

1. The tongues-speaker at Corinth is said to speak "mysteries to God" (that no one else understands (1 Cor. 14:2). This means that tongues were not exclusively for men to hear, but were also a form of communication with God. It would make little sense for such private communication to be in the form of an earthly foreign language, since one native language would be no better than another in communicating with God. Moreover, Paul acknowledges the existence of the "tongues of angels" in 1 Cor. 13:1, implying that the heavenly beings have a language all their own. If the tongues of Corinth were similar to this angelic language, it would be a Spirit-inspired language for communication with God. In Romans 8:26-27, Paul teaches that the Spirit, even on a non-miraculous plane, intercedes to God for the Christian with "groanings too deep for words."

2. The tongues-speaker at Corinth is said to edify himself (1 Cor. 14:4). Although the primary purpose of tongues was not self-edification but church-edification, nevertheless, when spoken in private it served a viable function for those who desired to strengthen their relationship with God.

3. The tongues at Corinth required someone to interpret, either the person who spoke the tongue (1 Cor. 14:13) or another person present in the assembly (1 Cor. 14: 27-28). This was not true of the three tongues instances recorded in the book of Acts. This suggests that the tongues at Corinth were of such an other-worldly linguistic origin that no one on earth could understand them without a special interpreter.

4. The tongues at Corinth are not associated with a "language" but to a "sound" (Greek: fwnw:n "phonon") (1 Cor. 14:10-11). This contrasts with the tongues at Pentecost which were heard as a "language" (Greek: dialevktw/ "dialektos") (Acts 2:6, 8; cf., Acts 1:19; 21:40; 22:2; 26:14).

5. Tongues at Corinth were used to give thanks to God (1 Cor. 14:16-17). This shows again that tongues were not used exclusively for preaching the gospel to pagans, as in Acts 2, but were also used for devotion.

6. Tongues were also a private gift, a gift which Paul himself says he used (1 Cor. 14:18-19). A private use, as noted above, implies a special language between God and man, similar to the angels.

7. In 1 Cor. 14:23, Paul states that an unbeliever or ungifted person hearing everyone speak in tongues would determine they were all "insane." Although not definite, an ecstatic utterance might be more susceptible to such an accusation than the linguistically based nature of a foreign tongue.

Other facts, however, do not rule out the conclusion that tongues were in the form of foreign languages:

1. As indicated in Acts 2:5-11, each locale of the world had a specific language. The Corinthians would have spoken the language common to their area, which would have been Greek. Any language outside that area would have been foreign to them. If the gift of tongues were in the form of a foreign language, God could have inspired any of the other regional languages to be spoken in the Corinthian church. In such cases, the foreign language tongue would not have been understood without an interpreter.

2. When Paul warns of the misuse of tongues in 1 Cor. 14:21, he quotes from Isaiah 28:11. The context of Isaiah 28 indicates that the tongues in view are foreign languages, namely the language of the Assyrian invaders. As Paul quotes the passage to the Corinthians he does not feel the need to explain whether there is a difference between the form of tongues among the Corinthians and the foreign languages of the Assyrians, except that it is implicitly understood that the latter did not speak under the power of the Holy Spirit. By quoting Isaiah 28:11 Paul seems to assume the Corinthians know that tongues come in the form of foreign languages.

3. In 1 Cor. 12 and 13 as well, Paul apparently does not see the necessity to redefine the form or nature of tongues after Pentecost before giving guidelines for its use in 1 Cor. 14. If there had been a major difference between the tongues of Acts 2 and the tongues of 1 Cor. 12-14, it seems reasonable to assume that Paul would have given some explanation to the reader, unless, of course, the transition from foreign languages to ecstatic utterances is relatively unimportant to Paul.

4. The word "tongue" is consistently used in the New Testament to refer to a common, or foreign, language. The same is true in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew. The phenomenon of ecstatic utterance is not developed at all in the Bible.

5. The word "interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:5: diermhneuvh/) in the New Testament always refers to the interpretation of a foreign language (cf., John 1:38, 42; 9:7; Hebrews 7:2).

6. On Paul's third missionary journey, around 53-56 A.D., Acts 19 records that the twelve Ephesians spoke in tongues. According to estimates of chronology gleaned from the historical narratives of the New Testament, the tongues at Ephesus were spoken at the approximate time 1 Corinthians was written. Since the Ephesians were speaking in tongues as a continual fulfillment of the events at Pentecost, it would be strange for Paul to be dealing with one kind of tongues with the Ephesians and another kind with the Corinthians, especially when Paul gives no clear indication of such a change.

From this opposing evidence, it remains a possibility that there were two different forms of tongues in the New Testament, foreign languages and ecstatic utterances. A third possibility also exists, however. Biblical tongues may have always come in the form of a Spirit-inspired ecstatic utterance. Such utterances would have no known linguistic background. They would be classed as a spiritual or heavenly language. As directed by the Holy Spirit, at various times the ecstatic utterance could be interpreted by the hearers as a known language, as such as occurred at Pentecost. In the account of Acts 2:6-8, stress is laid on the fact that the men assembled heard the language of their respective nation being spoken. It is also implied by the words in Acts 2:4 ("they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues") and Acts 2:6 ("hearing them speak") that the twelve apostles were all speaking at once. One would expect confusion in such a scene, but each man heard the plurality of apostles speak in his own language. Hence, it is possible that the apostles were speaking in a heavenly utterance while the Spirit made their utterances intelligible to each man present. Support for this possibility comes from the distinctive words used in Acts 2:6. After stating that the apostles spoke in other tongues, Acts 2:6 describes the incident as:

" And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were bewildered, because they were each one hearing them speak in his own language."

The word "sound" is used to describe the tongues-speech. It is from the Greek word phonee and refers to a voice, noise or sound, but not specifically a language. "Sound" is in the Greek singular, which if significant would mean that the tongues-speaking of the twelve apostles was considered as one unit of speech, and thus suggests that they all spoke at one time. In addition, "sound" is a Greek feminine noun which matches the feminine noun "tongues" in Acts 2:4. The word "language" in Acts 2:6 is the Greek word dialektos, (ijdiva/ dialevktw/ = "one's own language") which refers to a specific language. With all this information we can postulate that a simultaneous sound came from the mouths of the apostles, but when it reached the ears of the audience it was transformed into specific languages, as directed by the Holy Spirit for each man present. This transfer from sound to language would also explain why men from fifteen different nationalities heard all their dialects from only twelve apostles. With tongues issued as one sound but heard as different languages, hypothetically, there could have been fifty nations present at Pentecost and all would have heard their own language from only twelve apostles.

In the church of Corinth, tongues would have continued as a heavenly sound but it would now require the assistance of an inspired interpreter to put the meaning in a known language, whereas at Pentecost the Holy Spirit alone put the inspired utterance in a known language. If there was no interpreter in Corinth, then the heavenly sound would be spoken to God alone and subsequently edify the individual. It is not surprising, then, that in 1 Cor. 14:10-11 Paul associates tongues with the same Greek word for "sound" as used in Acts 2:6, rather than describing tongues as a "language."

Post- New Testament

After the New Testament age, one of the first accounts of tongue-speaking comes from a movement of spiritual excitement under the leadership of Montanus, circa 156. A self-claimed recipient of God's revelation, Montanus reacted against the institutionalized church of his day. His millennial teachings and strict asceticism were not favored by the Church, which was seeking to make a distinction between apostolic and post-apostolic times. Morever, the Church recognized only its bishops as the true representatives of the apostles in contradistinction to street prophets such as Montanus. This initial struggle between the Church and the charismata would set the stage for many centuries to come.

Among the early Fathers of the Church, only a few address the issue of tongue-speaking. Polycarp (69 - 159), who knew John the Apostle, writes of having deep forms of prayer, but he says nothing about tongues. Justin Martyr (110 - 165), in his famous Dialogue with Trypho, wrote about the continuance of the gifts of the Holy Spirit but he does not include tongues as one of those gifts. Irenaeus (120 - 202), a student of Polycarp, wrote in Against Heresies that he "heard of" some in the Church who spoke in different kinds of language. Since Irenaeus was a contemporary of Montanus it is likely that he was referring to him. Irenaeus writes of no personal experience of tongue-speaking. Tertullian (160 - 220) is assumed to have embraced tongue-speaking, since in his earlier life he was associated with the Montanists. In Tertullian Against Marcion he prescribes tongue-speaking to his followers, but gives no personal testimony of having such an experience himself.

Eusebius (260 - 340), in his Ecclesiastical History, fills his writing with sarcasm and ridicule of a certain sect of tongue-speakers. Origen (185 - 254), in his Apologetic to Celsus makes reference to "strange, fanatical and quite unintelligible words" spoken by some in the Church. He also makes reference to the continuation of the signs "from the beginning of Christ's ministry," but it is not explicit that Origen included tongue-speaking in these gifts. Others who supported tongue-speaking but give no personal testimony of the experience themselves include: Novatian, bishop of Rome from 251 to 253; Hilary of Poitiers (300 - 367), and Ambrose of Milan (340 - 397). The Egyptian monk Pochomius (292 -348) is reported to have spoken the "language of angels" and another instance of Greek and Latin of which he supposedly had no time to learn.

From the third century onwards, with the decline of Montanist influence and the persistent reluctance of the Church Fathers, tongues were no longer regarded as a common practice. Most of the references to tongues concerned why the phenomenon which occurred in biblical times was no longer happening (Kelsey, p. 39). The fall of the western part of the Roman Empire during the fifth century produced two strands of Catholic Christianity. Experiences such as visions, tongues and other such phenomenon, were more compatible with the eastern than the western tradition. Forced to take over the responsibilities of the state, the church of the west became more practical minded and authoritarian. The church in the east, however, not having great secular responsibilities, developed its faith more mystically. Thus, the west generally interpreted tongues as a sign of demon possession. Still, in the east there is little documented evidence of tongues for a definitive judgment of its validity.(Culpepper, p. 40)

In the fifth century, Chrysostom (344 - 407), bishop of Constantinople, formalized the prohibition against tongues: He writes:

" This whole phenomenon is very obscure, but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such then as used to occur but now no longer take place. And why do they not happen now? Why look now, the cause too of the obscurity hath produced us again another question: namely, why did they then happen, and now do so no more?" (Homilies on First Corinthians, xxix, 1, NPNF2, v. 12, p. 168).

Even at the mention of tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:28, Chrysostom writes:

"...Divers kinds of tongues." Seest thou where he hath set this gift, and how he every where assigns it the last rank?" (Homily xxxii, NPNF2, v. 12, p. 187)

During the same time, Augustine (354 - 430), who set the mold for western Christianity for seven hundred years, elaborates on the cessation of tongues:

" In the earliest times, 'the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spake with tongues' which they had not learned, 'as the Spirit gave them utterance.' These were signs adapted to the time for there behooved to be that betokening of the Spirit in all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening and it passed away."

To Augustine, tongues were a special apostolic dispensation for evangelizing and no more. In referring to the baptism of the Spirit he wrote:

"For the Holy Spirit is not only given by the laying on of hands amid the testimony of temporal sensible miracles, as was given in former days to be the credentials of rudimentary faith, and for the extension of the first beginning of the church. For who expects in these days that those on whom hands are laid that they may receive the Holy Ghost should forthwith being to speak with tongues?" (Homilies on 1 John VI 10; NPNF2, v. 7, pp. 497-498).

Again, Augustine writes:

" ...whereas even now the Holy Ghost is received, yet no one speaks in the tongues of all nations, because the Church herself already speaks the languages of all nations: since whoever is not in the Church receives not the Holy Ghost." (The Gospel of John, Tractate 32).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7