Start Praying in Tongues

[Don]

Believers do not need a sign! I will ask you why does the unbeliever need tongues as a sign?

Silly question. 1 Cor 14:22.

You added "to ourselves!" The scriptures do not say that! It says to each other!

I added nothing. 1 Cor 14:28.

Tongues in the church assembly is not to be done without the interpretation. But Paul spoke in tongue more than all...if he did not speak in tongues in church where did he speak in tongues?

Anywhere he preached. The better question is: Where does scripture say Paul prayed in languages privately?

My point was what you answered the first part of this post! If you can believe the Holy Spirit can pray for us (without us praying) and we do not know what he is saying as in Rom. 8...then why do you have a problem with the Holy Spirit praying through us and we do not understand him?

Where does scripture say that the Holy Spirit prays through us?

Look at the many times "pray in the spirit" is used; 1 Cor 14 says "my spirit prayeth". We pray with the spirit. We pray as the spirit leads. But if there's scripture that says the Holy Spirit prays through us, please show me.

 

[awaken]

Silly question. 1 Cor 14:22.

What do you believe that scripture is saying? What sign do unbeliever need? How is tongues a sign to unbelievers?

I added nothing. 1 Cor 14:28.

It does not say you are a barabarian in that verse if you speak to God in tongues! It tells you if you do not have the interpretation then you speak between you and God! KEEP IT PRIVATE!

Anywhere he preached. The better question is: Where does scripture say Paul prayed in languages privately?

Tongues is not for preaching! That is not the purpose of tongues!
Vs. 18 he says he speaks in tongues more than any in the church! BUT YET..in church he would rather speak where everyone would understand!
Vs. 14 He tells us that tongues is praying with the spirit!
vs. 2 It says tongues is speaking to God!
vs. 15-6 tells us two ways of praying (with our spirit/which is tongue according to vs. 14) and with our understanding (which is where we and others know what we are saying according to vs. 19).
Paul says he speaks with tongues(praying with the spirit according to vs. 14). Seems simple!

Where does scripture say that the Holy Spirit prays through us?

Acts 2 tells us that when we pray in tongues it is the Holy Spirit that gives the utterance. A manifestation of the Holy Spirit is just that! The Holy Spirit manifesting himself through the believer!

Look at the many times "pray in the spirit" is used; 1 Cor 14 says "my spirit prayeth". We pray with the spirit. We pray as the spirit leads. But if there's scripture that says the Holy Spirit prays through us, please show me.

Tongues is a language we do not know or have learned. We are praying something we do not understand unless he gives us the interpretaion! If we are praying with our own understanding then why does he ask us to pray for the interpretation in verse 13?

 

[Don]

What do you believe that scripture is saying? What sign do unbeliever need? How is tongues a sign to unbelievers?

See Acts 2. Unbelievers heard those speaking each in their own language, magnifying God; and subsequently were receptive to the preaching.

It does not say you are a barabarian in that verse if you speak to God in tongues! It tells you if you do not have the interpretation then you speak between you and God! KEEP IT PRIVATE!

Make up your mind. First you say that I added "to ourselves" in that verse; I then proved you wrong. Now you want to say that it doesn't say we are barbarians; just a few verses before (1 Cor 14:11) it says that if we don't understand what is said, we shall be as barbarians.

Tongues is not for preaching! That is not the purpose of tongues!
Vs. 18 he says he speaks in tongues more than any in the church! BUT YET..in church he would rather speak where everyone would understand!
Vs. 14 He tells us that tongues is praying with the spirit!
vs. 2 It says tongues is speaking to God!
vs. 15-6 tells us two ways of praying (with our spirit/which is tongue according to vs. 14) and with our understanding (which is where we and others know what we are saying according to vs. 19).
Paul says he speaks with tongues(praying with the spirit according to vs. 14). Seems simple!

You are incorrect. Verse 15-16 doesn't tell us two ways of praying; it tells us pray with the spirit and with the understanding. You need to read the preceeding verses to understand this better.

Acts 2 tells us that when we pray in tongues it is the Holy Spirit that gives the utterance. A manifestation of the Holy Spirit is just that! The Holy Spirit manifesting himself through the believer!

Acts 2 also indicates that we should be seeing fire above our heads....

Tongues is a language we do not know or have learned. We are praying something we do not understand unless he gives us the interpretaion! If we are praying with our own understanding then why does he ask us to pray for the interpretation in verse 13?

BECAUSE TONGUES ARE A SIGN FOR UNBELIEVERS. The unbeliever needs the interpretation--just as in Acts 2, where they heard those speaking in each of their own languages.

Further, he goes on in 1 Cor 14 to say that if an unbeliever comes upon those speaking in tongues, without an interpreter, the unbeliever will think everyone is mad/insane.

 

[InTheLight]

If you go back and read the thread and other threads on tongues...most ask the question "why would God give you a prayer language that you do not understand or know what you are praying? BUT YET! They will say it is ok for the Holy Spirit to pray for you when you do not know what to pray.

I think this is directed towards me (possibly others.) Anyway it is a leading question because the wording of the question has been completely changed. The entire premise has been recast.

No one said "prayer language" the phrase was "unknown language". I believe there is a distinction. No one said that people deliberately pray when they don't know what to pray for. Furthermore, no one said God is giving the believer an unknown language. And no one said that the Holy Spirit prays "for you".

Here is my question, once again:

If the person praying in unknown languages doesn't know what he is saying and God is all knowing.....why would God have a conversation with himself?


Another thing is the phrase in Romans 8:26, "groanings which cannot be uttered". That could be interpreted, "unspoken groanings" as in the HCSB, or "unexpressed groanings", or "groanings that are not put into words". Or, if you like, nothing verbal is said. No tongues.

 

[awaken]

See Acts 2. Unbelievers heard those speaking each in their own language, magnifying God; and subsequently were receptive to the preaching.

Peter preached not the ones speaking in tongues! What kind of sign was that to the unbelievers? When they saw the disciples speaking in tongues...how was that a sign?

Make up your mind. First you say that I added "to ourselves" in that verse; I then proved you wrong. Now you want to say that it doesn't say we are barbarians; just a few verses before (1 Cor 14:11) it says that if we don't understand what is said, we shall be as barbarians.

We are not barbarians to ourselves! This is showing how we come acoss to others without the interpretation!

You are incorrect. Verse 15-16 doesn't tell us two ways of praying; it tells us pray with the spirit and with the understanding. You need to read the preceeding verses to understand this better.

Yes! you do have to read verses 14-19 to get the full context!
Lets go through this again!
Vs. 2 says we are speaking to God when we speak in tongues, right?
vs. 14 says speaking in tongue is praying with our spirit, right?
vs. 15 says he will pray with his spirit (tongues,vs.14) AND he will pray with his understanding (Paul explains futher what praying in his understanding is in vs.19).
He also says in vs. 18 that we give thanks. That is praying, right?

Acts 2 also indicates that we should be seeing fire above our heads....

That is a cop out to my explanation! Address my post and do not dance around it!
I do not see fire on the heads in chapter 8,10 and 19.. do you?
Once the Holy Spirit was poured out as Acts 1:8 says! It is here to stay!
Why would he pour it out again? It is available to ALL believers!
Jesus died on the cross once! WHy should that be repeated? Salvation is now available to all that call upon the name of the Lord, right?

BECAUSE TONGUES ARE A SIGN FOR UNBELIEVERS. The unbeliever needs the interpretation--just as in Acts 2, where they heard those speaking in each of their own languages.

What kind of sign was that to the unbelivers? A sign of judgement or sign that the disciples had received the power of the Holy Spirit???? What do you understand the sign to be to the unbeliever?

Further, he goes on in 1 Cor 14 to say that if an unbeliever comes upon those speaking in tongues, without an interpreter, the unbeliever will think everyone is mad/insane.

Paul is correcting praying in the spirit in public without the interpretation! If you were to pray in Spanish when I am English...it would not benefit me!
So how would tongues be a sign to the unbeliever if he has the interpretation?

 

[Yeshua1]

The possibilities God gives every true believer. Mark 16 gives instruction for all generations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weoA3cLMnUY

mary NEVER spoke in other tongues that was recorded in bible...

Neither did jesus!

We are NEVER commanded to seek to speak in tongues, not to be baptised in HS, but ARE commanded to be refilled by HS!

Do yuo hold that you can get bit by Cobras and be OK, can drink poison and feel fine?

 

[awaken]

I think this is directed towards me (possibly others.) Anyway it is a leading question because the wording of the question has been completely changed. The entire premise has been recast.

No one said "prayer language" the phrase was "unknown language". I believe there is a distinction. No one said that people deliberately pray when they don't know what to pray for. Furthermore, no one said God is giving the believer an unknown language. And no one said that the Holy Spirit prays "for you".

Here is my question, once again:

If the person praying in unknown languages doesn't know what he is saying and God is all knowing.....why would God have a conversation with himself?


Another thing is the phrase in Romans 8:26, "groanings which cannot be uttered". That could be interpreted, "unspoken groanings" as in the HCSB, or "unexpressed groanings", or "groanings that are not put into words". Or, if you like, nothing verbal is said. No tongues.

A leading question that...if answered honestly would clear up your question!

I ask you to answer the question with an honest answers...If Romans 8 is speaking of the Holy Spirit praying for us without us opening our mouth...who is he praying too? Do we know what he is saying to the Father?

If you can not answer the question just say so!

 

[Steadfast Fred]

I am not sure that "they all began to speak in other tongues" in Acts is including Mary as one of those speaking in tongues.


According to 1 Corinthians 14, where Paul was speaking of tongues, he said that it was not permitted for woman to speak. Women were not permitted to speak in tongues.


Back to Acts and Pentecost.... "as the Spirit gave them utterance". Since it is forbidden for women to speak, I do not believe Mary was given the utterance that wondrous day in the Upper Room. It was only men who were given the utterance.

And Luke confirms this...

"How hear we every man in our own tongue?" It was the men who were speaking in tongues, not the women. Women were not permitted to speak in tongues... they were not given the utterance.

 

[InTheLight]

A leading question that...if answered honestly would clear up your question!

I ask you to answer the question with an honest answers...If Romans 8 is speaking of the Holy Spirit praying for us without us opening our mouth...who is he praying too? Do we know what he is saying to the Father?

If you can not answer the question just say so!

I am assuming the Holy Spirit is interceding for us and speaking directly to the Father without the person opening his mouth or uttering words. I would not use the phrase "praying for us" I would use the phrase "helping us pray" or "leading us to prayer".

As to whether or not we know what the Holy Spirit is saying...yes, we DO know, otherwise we are not participating.

For example, when I say my nightly prayers I do not vocalize them. I'll be praying my prayer list and then, BAM!, out of nowhere comes something I am told I should pray for and off I go. When I am praying for this person and/or issue I feel empowered and the prayer thoughts gush out. This is what I think Paul is describing in Romans 8:26, not an unknown language.

 

[awaken]

I am assuming the Holy Spirit is interceding for us and speaking directly to the Father without the person opening his mouth or uttering words. I would not use the phrase "praying for us" I would use the phrase "helping us pray" or "leading us to prayer".

But it says "that cannot be uttered"!

As to whether or not we know what the Holy Spirit is saying...yes, we DO know, otherwise we are not participating.

How do we know what he is saying? If we do not know what to pray and he prays without our vocal cords?

For example, when I say my nightly prayers I do not vocalize them. I'll be praying my prayer list and then, BAM!, out of nowhere comes something I am told I should pray for and off I go. When I am praying for this person and/or issue I feel empowered and the prayer thoughts gush out. This is what I think Paul is describing in Romans 8:26, not an unknown language.

Really, It says he prays when WE KNOW NOT WHAT WE SHOULD PRAY FOR AS WE OUGHT! You are speaking of praying for what you know!

 

[awaken]

I am not sure that "they all began to speak in other tongues" in Acts is including Mary as one of those speaking in tongues.


According to 1 Corinthians 14, where Paul was speaking of tongues, he said that it was not permitted for woman to speak. Women were not permitted to speak in tongues.


Back to Acts and Pentecost.... "as the Spirit gave them utterance". Since it is forbidden for women to speak, I do not believe Mary was given the utterance that wondrous day in the Upper Room. It was only men who were given the utterance.

And Luke confirms this...

"How hear we every man in our own tongue?" It was the men who were speaking in tongues, not the women. Women were not permitted to speak in tongues... they were not given the utterance.

So you are saying a woman can not pray in church? But they can prophesy according to scripture in church with there head covered! Your interpretation contradicts scripture!
I could give Many other reasons why this is not true if you would like! But that one statement should prove you wrong!

 

[InTheLight]

But it says "that cannot be uttered"!

"Cannot be uttered" = No vocalization.

" but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words." [ESV]

"but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with unspoken groanings." [HCSB]

"But the Holy Spirit prays for us with groanings that cannot be expressed in words." [NLT]

How do we know what he is saying? If we do not know what to pray and he prays without our vocal cords?

The little voice in your head.

Really, It says he prays when WE KNOW NOT WHAT WE SHOULD PRAY FOR AS WE OUGHT! You are speaking of praying for what you know!

No I'm not. I'm saying I was praying what I had on my mind. The thought of praying for Aunt Minnie never crossed my mind until the Holy Spirit brought it up and led me with the correct prayer thoughts. I was being told to pray for Aunt Minnie by the Holy Spirit and I was given the proper prayer.

 

[Steadfast Fred]

So you are saying a woman can not pray in church? But they can prophesy according to scripture in church with there head covered! Your interpretation contradicts scripture!
I could give Many other reasons why this is not true if you would like! But that one statement should prove you wrong!

I never said a woman cannot pray! I said it is not permitted for them to speak in tongues. And Paul said the same thing in 1 Corinthians 14:34

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

The context reveals that it was not permitted for women to speak in tongues.

I have not contradicted Scripture at all.

 

[awaken]

"Cannot be uttered" = No vocalization.

" but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words." [ESV]

"but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with unspoken groanings." [HCSB]

"But the Holy Spirit prays for us with groanings that cannot be expressed in words." [NLT]

I do not know if you realize it but I am agreeing with you! I am not saying the Holy Spirit is praying through tongues here!
But the Holy Spirit is praying without us KNOWING WHAT WE ARE TO PRAY FOR, right?

The little voice in your head.

I do not have voices in my head! I am seriously asking a question! If we do not know what to pray for and the Holy Spirit prays for us, how do we know what he is praying? Or do we have to know...can we just trust that he will!

No I'm not. I'm saying I was praying what I had on my mind. The thought of praying for Aunt Minnie never crossed my mind until the Holy Spirit brought it up and led me with the correct prayer thoughts. I was being told to pray for Aunt Minnie by the Holy Spirit and I was given the proper prayer.

But it does not say that he gives us the prayer! Scriptures says he prays for us WITH GROANINGS WHICH CAN NOT BE UTTERED! He is doing the praying, not us!

 

[awaken]

I never said a woman cannot pray! I said it is not permitted for them to speak in tongues. And Paul said the same thing in 1 Corinthians 14:34

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

The context reveals that it was not permitted for women to speak in tongues.

I have not contradicted Scripture at all.

THat is not referring to tongues! In verse 35 it says if they want to learn anything let them ask their husbands at home! It has to do with disrupting the service! You have to know the background to understand that scripture!

But I will add to the defense that all spoke in tongues in Acts...

Luke is talking about the apostles, and Luke refers to them as "they" and "them" through Acts 1:14. In Acts 1:14 we see other people besides the apostles, all joined together constantly in prayer. In Acts 1:15 the focus shifts, beginning with "In those days." The focus is now on "the believers," and we're told that they were a group numbering about 120. Peter stood up among them as a spokesperson and said that a new apostle must be chosen from among them (obviously not from among the remaining 11 apostles, but from among the rest of the believers). Then Acts 2:1 says, "When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place," which is referring back to a group that had previously been mentioned. What group was the focus of the preceding passages? The 120 believers. The 120 believers were all together in one place, and they all spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost.

 

[InTheLight]

I do not know if you realize it but I am agreeing with you! I am not saying the Holy Spirit is praying through tongues here!
But the Holy Spirit is praying without us KNOWING WHAT WE ARE TO PRAY FOR, right?

Initially, yes. But obviously we are aware of what the Spirit leads us to pray for.

I do not have voices in my head!

I think you know what I meant by that...

I am seriously asking a question! If we do not know what to pray for and the Holy Spirit prays for us, how do we know what he is praying? Or do we have to know...can we just trust that he will!

Please stop saying the Holy Spirit "prays for us". The Bible says in Romans 8:26 the Holy Spirit "helps us" and "intercedes for us", doesn't say it does all the praying.

But it does not say that he gives us the prayer! Scriptures says he prays for us WITH GROANINGS WHICH CAN NOT BE UTTERED! He is doing the praying, not us!

Bible says he helps us in our weakness when we don't know how to pray. It says he intercedes for us. He is leading our prayers. We DO know what he is saying.

 

[awaken]

Please stop saying the Holy Spirit "prays for us". The Bible says in Romans 8:26 the Holy Spirit "helps us" and "intercedes for us", doesn't say it does all the praying.

It says it HELPS our infirmities! But is say '..the Spirit ITSELF maketh intercession for us with groanings which CAN NOT BE UTTERED.' So the Spirit is praying for us!

Bible says he helps us in our weakness when we don't know how to pray. It says he intercedes for us. He is leading our prayers. We DO know what he is saying.

It does not say that! You added to it!

"Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infimities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God"

It is plain here that HE does the praying because HE knows the perfect will of God! All of it is done without utterance!

 

[Matt22:37-39]

Tongues “Will Cease”

In 1 Corinthians 13:8 Paul made an interesting, almost startling, statement: “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.” In the expression “love never fails,” the Greek word translated “fails” means “to decay” or “to be abolished.” Paul was not saying that love is invincible or that it cannot be rejected. He was saying that love is eternal—that it will be applicable forever and will never be passé. Tongues, however, “will cease.” The Greek verb used in 1 Corinthians 13:8 means “to cease permanently,” and implies that when tongues ceased, they would never start up again.

Here is the question that this passage poses for the contemporary charismatic movement: if tongues were supposed to cease, has that already happened, or is it yet future? Charismatic believers insist that none of the gifts have ceased yet, so the cessation of tongues is yet future. Most non-charismatics insist that tongues have already ceased, passing away with the apostolic age. Who is right?

It should be noted that 1 Corinthians 13:8 itself does not say when tongues were to cease. Although 1 Corinthians 13:9-10 teaches that prophecy and knowledge will cease when the “perfect” (i.e., the eternal state) comes, the language of the passage—particularly the middle voice of the Greek verb translated “will cease”—puts tongues in a category apart from these gifts. Paul writes that while prophecy and knowledge will be “done away” (passive voice) by “the perfect,” the gift of tongues “will cease” in and of itself (middle voice) prior to the time that “the perfect” arrives. When did this cessation of tongues take place? The evidence of Scripture and history indicate that tongues ceased in the apostolic age.

Evidence from Scripture

What biblical or theological evidence is there that tongues have ceased? First, the gift of tongues was a miraculous, revelatory gift, and the age of miracles and revelation ended with the apostles. The last recorded miracles in the New Testament occurred around A.D. 58, with the healings on the island of Malta (Acts 28:7-10). From A.D. 58 to 96, when John finished the book of Revelation, no miracle is recorded. Miracle gifts like tongues and healing are mentioned only in 1 Corinthians, an early epistle. Two later epistles, Ephesians and Romans, both discuss gifts of the Spirit at length—but no mention is made of the miraculous gifts. By that time miracles were already looked on as something in the past (Heb. 2:3-4). Apostolic authority and the apostolic message needed no further confirmation. Before the first century ended, the entire New Testament had been written and was circulating through the churches.

Charismatic believers insist
that none of the gifts have ceased…
non-charismatics insist that tongues
have already ceased.…
Who is right?

The revelatory gifts had ceased to serve any purpose. And when the apostolic age ended with the death of the Apostle John, the signs that identified the apostles had already become moot (cf. 2 Cor. 12:12).

Second, tongues were intended as a sign to unbelieving Israel (1 Cor. 14:21-22; cf. Is. 28:11-12). They signified that God had begun a new work that encompassed the Gentiles. The Lord would now speak to all nations in all languages. The barriers were down. And so the gift of languages symbolized not only the curse of God on a disobedient nation, but also the blessing of God on the whole world.

Tongues were therefore a sign of transition between the Old and New Covenants. With the establishment of the church, a new day had dawned for the people of God. God would speak in all languages. But once the period of transition was past, the sign was no longer necessary.

Third, the gift of tongues was inferior to other gifts. It was given primarily as a sign (1 Cor. 14:22) and was also easily misused to edify self (1 Cor. 14:4). The church meets for the edification of the body, not self-gratification or personal experience-seeking. Therefore, tongues had limited usefulness in the church, and so it was never intended to be a permanent gift.

The Evidence from History

The evidence of history also indicates that tongues have ceased. It is significant that tongues are mentioned only in the earliest books of the New Testament. Paul wrote at least twelve epistles after 1 Corinthians and never mentioned tongues again. Peter never mentioned tongues; James never mentioned tongues; John never mentioned tongues; neither did Jude. Tongues appeared only briefly in Acts and 1 Corinthians as the new message of the gospel was being spread. But once the church was established, tongues were gone. They stopped. The later books of the New Testament do not mention tongues again, and neither did anyone in the post-apostolic age.

Chrysostom and Augustine—the greatest theologians of the eastern and western churches—considered tongues obsolete. Writing in the fourth century, Chrysostom stated categorically that tongues had ceased by his time and described the gift as an obscure practice. Augustine referred to tongues as a sign that was adapted to the apostolic age. In fact, during the first five hundred years of the church, the only people who claimed to have spoken in tongues were followers of Montanus, who was branded as a heretic.

The next time any significant tongues-speaking movement arose within Christianity was in the late seventeenth century. A group of militant Protestants in the Cevennes region of southern France began to prophecy, experience visions, and speak in tongues. The group, sometimes called the Cevennol prophets, is remembered for its political and military activities, not its spiritual legacy. Most of their prophecies went unfulfilled. They were rabidly anti-Roman Catholic, and advocated the use of armed force against the Roman Catholic church. Many of them were consequently persecuted and killed by Rome.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Jansenists, a group of Roman Catholic loyalists who opposed the Reformers’ teaching on justification by faith, also claimed to be able to speak in tongues in the 1700s.

Another group that practiced a form of tongues was the Shakers, an American sect with Quaker roots that flourished in the mid-1700s. Mother Ann Lee, founder of the sect, regarded herself as the female equivalent of Jesus Christ. She claimed to be able to speak in seventy-two languages. The Shakers believed sexual intercourse was sinful, even within marriage. They spoke in tongues while dancing and singing in a trancelike state.

Then in the early nineteenth century, Scottish Presbyterian pastor Edward Irving and members of his congregation practiced speaking in tongues and prophesying. Irvingite prophets often contradicted each other, their prophecies failed to come to pass, and their meetings were characterized by wild excesses. The movement was further discredited when some of their prophets admitted to falsifying prophecies and others even attributed their “giftedness” to evil spirits. This group eventually became the Catholic Apostolic Church, which taught many false doctrines, embracing several Roman Catholic doctrines and creating twelve apostolic offices.

All of those supposed manifestations of tongues were identified with groups that were heretical, fanatical, or otherwise unorthodox. The judgment of biblically orthodox believers who were their contemporaries was that all those groups were aberrations. Surely that should also be the assessment of any Christian who is concerned with truth. Thus, we conclude that from the end of the apostolic era to the beginning of the twentieth century there were no genuine occurrences of the New Testament gift of tongues. They had ceased, as the Holy Spirit said they would (1 Cor. 13:8). The gift of tongues is not for today.

Adapted from John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992). For a fuller treatment of the gift of tongues, consult this resource.

 

[awaken]

Tongues “Will Cease”

In 1 Corinthians 13:8 Paul made an interesting, almost startling, statement: “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away.” In the expression “love never fails,” the Greek word translated “fails” means “to decay” or “to be abolished.” Paul was not saying that love is invincible or that it cannot be rejected. He was saying that love is eternal—that it will be applicable forever and will never be passé. Tongues, however, “will cease.” The Greek verb used in 1 Corinthians 13:8 means “to cease permanently,” and implies that when tongues ceased, they would never start up again.

Here is the question that this passage poses for the contemporary charismatic movement: if tongues were supposed to cease, has that already happened, or is it yet future? Charismatic believers insist that none of the gifts have ceased yet, so the cessation of tongues is yet future. Most non-charismatics insist that tongues have already ceased, passing away with the apostolic age. Who is right?

It should be noted that 1 Corinthians 13:8 itself does not say when tongues were to cease. Although 1 Corinthians 13:9-10 teaches that prophecy and knowledge will cease when the “perfect” (i.e., the eternal state) comes, the language of the passage—particularly the middle voice of the Greek verb translated “will cease”—puts tongues in a category apart from these gifts. Paul writes that while prophecy and knowledge will be “done away” (passive voice) by “the perfect,” the gift of tongues “will cease” in and of itself (middle voice) prior to the time that “the perfect” arrives. When did this cessation of tongues take place? The evidence of Scripture and history indicate that tongues ceased in the apostolic age.

Evidence from Scripture

What biblical or theological evidence is there that tongues have ceased? First, the gift of tongues was a miraculous, revelatory gift, and the age of miracles and revelation ended with the apostles. The last recorded miracles in the New Testament occurred around A.D. 58, with the healings on the island of Malta (Acts 28:7-10). From A.D. 58 to 96, when John finished the book of Revelation, no miracle is recorded. Miracle gifts like tongues and healing are mentioned only in 1 Corinthians, an early epistle. Two later epistles, Ephesians and Romans, both discuss gifts of the Spirit at length—but no mention is made of the miraculous gifts. By that time miracles were already looked on as something in the past (Heb. 2:3-4). Apostolic authority and the apostolic message needed no further confirmation. Before the first century ended, the entire New Testament had been written and was circulating through the churches.

Charismatic believers insist
that none of the gifts have ceased…
non-charismatics insist that tongues
have already ceased.…
Who is right?

The revelatory gifts had ceased to serve any purpose. And when the apostolic age ended with the death of the Apostle John, the signs that identified the apostles had already become moot (cf. 2 Cor. 12:12).

Second, tongues were intended as a sign to unbelieving Israel (1 Cor. 14:21-22; cf. Is. 28:11-12). They signified that God had begun a new work that encompassed the Gentiles. The Lord would now speak to all nations in all languages. The barriers were down. And so the gift of languages symbolized not only the curse of God on a disobedient nation, but also the blessing of God on the whole world.

Tongues were therefore a sign of transition between the Old and New Covenants. With the establishment of the church, a new day had dawned for the people of God. God would speak in all languages. But once the period of transition was past, the sign was no longer necessary.

Third, the gift of tongues was inferior to other gifts. It was given primarily as a sign (1 Cor. 14:22) and was also easily misused to edify self (1 Cor. 14:4). The church meets for the edification of the body, not self-gratification or personal experience-seeking. Therefore, tongues had limited usefulness in the church, and so it was never intended to be a permanent gift.

The Evidence from History

The evidence of history also indicates that tongues have ceased. It is significant that tongues are mentioned only in the earliest books of the New Testament. Paul wrote at least twelve epistles after 1 Corinthians and never mentioned tongues again. Peter never mentioned tongues; James never mentioned tongues; John never mentioned tongues; neither did Jude. Tongues appeared only briefly in Acts and 1 Corinthians as the new message of the gospel was being spread. But once the church was established, tongues were gone. They stopped. The later books of the New Testament do not mention tongues again, and neither did anyone in the post-apostolic age.

Chrysostom and Augustine—the greatest theologians of the eastern and western churches—considered tongues obsolete. Writing in the fourth century, Chrysostom stated categorically that tongues had ceased by his time and described the gift as an obscure practice. Augustine referred to tongues as a sign that was adapted to the apostolic age. In fact, during the first five hundred years of the church, the only people who claimed to have spoken in tongues were followers of Montanus, who was branded as a heretic.

The next time any significant tongues-speaking movement arose within Christianity was in the late seventeenth century. A group of militant Protestants in the Cevennes region of southern France began to prophecy, experience visions, and speak in tongues. The group, sometimes called the Cevennol prophets, is remembered for its political and military activities, not its spiritual legacy. Most of their prophecies went unfulfilled. They were rabidly anti-Roman Catholic, and advocated the use of armed force against the Roman Catholic church. Many of them were consequently persecuted and killed by Rome.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Jansenists, a group of Roman Catholic loyalists who opposed the Reformers’ teaching on justification by faith, also claimed to be able to speak in tongues in the 1700s.

Another group that practiced a form of tongues was the Shakers, an American sect with Quaker roots that flourished in the mid-1700s. Mother Ann Lee, founder of the sect, regarded herself as the female equivalent of Jesus Christ. She claimed to be able to speak in seventy-two languages. The Shakers believed sexual intercourse was sinful, even within marriage. They spoke in tongues while dancing and singing in a trancelike state.

Then in the early nineteenth century, Scottish Presbyterian pastor Edward Irving and members of his congregation practiced speaking in tongues and prophesying. Irvingite prophets often contradicted each other, their prophecies failed to come to pass, and their meetings were characterized by wild excesses. The movement was further discredited when some of their prophets admitted to falsifying prophecies and others even attributed their “giftedness” to evil spirits. This group eventually became the Catholic Apostolic Church, which taught many false doctrines, embracing several Roman Catholic doctrines and creating twelve apostolic offices.

All of those supposed manifestations of tongues were identified with groups that were heretical, fanatical, or otherwise unorthodox. The judgment of biblically orthodox believers who were their contemporaries was that all those groups were aberrations. Surely that should also be the assessment of any Christian who is concerned with truth. Thus, we conclude that from the end of the apostolic era to the beginning of the twentieth century there were no genuine occurrences of the New Testament gift of tongues. They had ceased, as the Holy Spirit said they would (1 Cor. 13:8). The gift of tongues is not for today.

Adapted from John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992). For a fuller treatment of the gift of tongues, consult this resource.

Get passed 1 Cor. 1:7-8 and we will discuss whether they have ceased or not!

 

[Thomas Helwys]

A yes or no answer is best for this question....
Does the Holy Spirit pray for us in Rom 8 and we do not know what he is praying? Yes or no???

I have already answered you. You really do need help.