@Fritzpw_Admin
IS SPEAKING IN TONGUES STILL RELEVANT?
A Theological and Scriptural Analysis
Speaking in tongues (Greek: glōssais lalein, “to speak in languages”) remains a contentious subject in many Christian circles, with views ranging from full continuation to total cessation. To assess whether tongues are still relevant, we must examine its origin, its purpose, its theological trajectory in the canon, and the spiritual implications for the believer and the church. We begin not with experience, but with the Word of God, anchored in context, verbs, and the unchanging center of Christian doctrine: the cross of Christ.
-
Tongues Originated as a Supernatural Sign to Authenticate the Gospel Among Nations
The first mention of tongues appears in Acts 2:4, where the Spirit descended at Pentecost and the disciples began lalein heterais glōssais (to speak in other tongues), as the Spirit edidou apophthengesthai (was giving them utterance). This was not random ecstatic speech, but intelligible, ethnic languages (glōssai) understood by diaspora Jews (Acts 2:6–11). The miracle demonstrated the reversal of Babel (Genesis 11) and fulfilled Isaiah 28:11, which Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 14:21 to describe tongues as a sign “to unbelievers.” -
Tongues Served as a Transitional Marker in the Spread of the Gospel to Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles
In Acts 10:46 and Acts 19:6, tongues appear again, but each time as a Spirit-authenticated moment of inclusion into the new covenant community. It validated the Gentile inclusion (Acts 10, Cornelius) and marked the Ephesian disciples’ full reception of the Spirit (Acts 19). In each of these cases, tongues were not a private devotional practice but a public sign confirming that those who believed in Jesus were incorporated into the body of Christ through the same Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13). -
Paul Acknowledged the Gift of Tongues, but Warned of Its Abuse and Limited Its Use
In 1 Corinthians 12–14, Paul deals explicitly with glossolalia within the church at Corinth, a spiritually immature body obsessed with showy gifts (1 Corinthians 3:1). Paul does not forbid tongues (1 Corinthians 14:39), but he demotes them below prophecy (14:5) and lays out strict regulations: they must be interpreted (14:13), limited to two or three speakers (14:27), and exercised in order (14:40). His verb choice in 1 Corinthians 13:8 is key: glōssai pausontai (tongues will cease), future middle indicative. This verb suggests tongues would cease of themselves, independently from other gifts like knowledge (gnōsis), which he says would be “done away with” (katargēthēsetai). -
Tongues Had a Temporary, Foundational Role in the Church Age, Not a Perpetual Norm
Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 13:10, “when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away with,” has stirred debate. Some argue “the perfect” (to teleion) refers to the completed canon or maturity of the Church, while others claim it points to the eschaton. Either way, the function of tongues was tied to revelation and authentication, both of which were foundational. Ephesians 2:20 describes the Church as built on the foundation (themelios) of the apostles and prophets, with Christ as cornerstone. Foundations, once laid, are not re-laid. -
Nowhere in the Later Epistles Is Tongues Encouraged or Commanded
In the post-Acts letters—Romans, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, the Pastorals. Paul never urges tongues, never commands them, and never even mentions them in pastoral instruction. Romans 12:6–8, a list of spiritual gifts for the body, excludes tongues. The absence is not accidental, it reflects their fading role as the revelatory foundation was being completed and the gospel extended to the ends of the earth. No command exists for believers to seek tongues; the command is to be filled with the Spirit (Ephesians 5:18) and let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly (Colossians 3:16). -
The Centrality of the Cross Supersedes All Charismatic Expression
Paul’s theology is cruciform. In 1 Corinthians 1:22–24, he rebukes both Jews who seek signs and Greeks who seek wisdom, saying “we preach Christ crucified.” He does not say “we speak in tongues.” The Spirit glorifies Christ, not gifts (John 16:14). Tongues without the cross is noise (1 Corinthians 13:1). The Spirit was not poured out so men could chase ecstatic utterances, but so they would proclaim with boldness the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus (Acts 4:31). -
What Replaces Tongues in the Life of the Spirit-Filled Believer?
Not silence, but clarity. Not unintelligible syllables, but the Spirit’s fruit (Galatians 5:22–23), spiritual discernment (Hebrews 5:14), intercession through groanings too deep for words (Romans 8:26), and bold proclamation of the Word (2 Timothy 4:2). The call is not to perform signs, but to abide in the Word and bear fruit that remains (John 15:8). The true mark of Spirit-baptism is not glossolalia, but gospel obedience (Acts 5:32) and witness unto death (Acts 1:8).
Conclusion: Is Tongues Still Relevant?
Tongues served a real, miraculous, and purposeful role in redemptive history, verifying the Spirit’s arrival, authenticating gospel inclusion, and signaling the eschatological age. But their role was transitional, sign-based, and foundational, tied to the apostolic era. In that sense, tongues are no longer normative or necessary for the Church’s mission. To make tongues central is to miss the greater work of the Spirit: the magnification of Christ, the proclamation of His Word, and the sanctification of His people. Let us seek not tongues, but truth. Not signs, but submission. Not noise, but the cross.
Can we agree on this?
J.