But the Scriptures record not one single person ever preaching in other tongues.

     Church history records no such occurrance either.

     Either the Apostles made a horrible mistake, by completely neglecting this wonderful Gift, or the Anti-tongues argument is wrong, and tongues were not given to preach the Gospel with.

     I think the Bible and the Apostles were right, and the Anti-tongues argument is wrong.  But you have to make up your own mind for yourself.

     Some might ask, "Well, didn't they preach the Gospel in other tongues on the Day of Pentecost?"

     No.    

     The Bible identifies specifically what the 120 said in other tongues:  "...we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God."  (vs. 11).

     Notice that the hearers did not say, "We do hear in our own tongues of the Most High God sending His only begotten Son.  We hear that he bore our sins, and was crucified at a place called Calvary.  We hear of a new covenant between God and man, sealed with the precious blood of His Son.  We hear that whosoever believeth on Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life...We repent right now and accept Jesus Christ as our Savior.  Can we be baptized?"

     No.

     They heard none of that. 

      We know they heard none of that because after the speaking in tongues was over with, Peter still had to stand up and preach the Gospel to them, in a lengthy sermon, in the Hebrew tongue.  Acts 2:14-40.

     At Pentecost, the Anti-tongues adherents picture the assembled believers as standing up, one after the other, preaching the Gospel in Arabic, Mesopotamian, in Asian Languages, and so on.  But no such thing took place.

     The Holy Spirit came upon the believers, and they spoke with other tongues "as the Spirit gave them utterance."  They spoke specifically of "the wonderful works of God."   They were using other tongues simply to praise God, when passersby began to notice and recognize their native languages being spoken. 

     The 120 believers at Pentecost used their ability to speak in tongues in the same way Paul used his, and in the same way he instructed you and I to use ours:   

 

     "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.  What is it then?   I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also:  I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also."  I Cor. 14:14,15.

     Paul--the only Apostle who gives us instructions about tongues--tells us that he himself prayed in other tongues, and he sang and worshipped God in other tongues.  And he instructs us to do the same.

     He never once preached or taught in other tongues.  He never recommended that anyone else go to a foreign land and preach or teach in other tongues.

     In fact, we have no record of the individuals at Pentecost, and no record of Paul or anyone else, ever attempting to identify the foreign language they were speaking in.    

     The only uses the Bible gives us for speaking in tongues is prayer and praise.  Nowhere does it tell us to preach in other tongues. 

     Do you know why the Early Church never used speaking in tongues to preach the Gospel?

    Because it is impossible to preach in other tongues.

     Remember, the Gift of Tongues involves receiving the supernatural ability to speak in another language.  The recepient of the Gift does not receive the ability to understand the language.  For instance, Paul tells us that when he prayed or sang in other tongues, he did not understand what he was saying, "...my understanding is unfruitful."  (I Cor. 14:15).

     Paul and the other Early Christians spoke in other languages, but they could not understand or read those languages.  

       Imagine that you are an English-speaking person.  You know no other language.  Then the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and gives you the ability to speak in the Arabic language.

     You can speak in Arabic.

     But you can not understand Arabic.

     And you can not read Arabic.

     Not one word.

     Tell me how you are going to travel to Egypt for instance, and preach the Gospel to them in your God-given ability to speak Arabic.

     You obtain a visa, and buy an airline ticket to Cairo.  The plane lands at Cairo International Airport.  You go through security, and are stopped.  The security person asks you in Arabic: 

     ";lsdne ieihng; wooi9n wlit?" 

     You have no idea what he has just asked you.  Not one clue.  You speak Arabic, but you do not understand it.

     He may have asked  you:

     "Do you have anything to declare?"

     Or,

     "How many bags did you bring with you?"

     "Are you here for business or pleasure?"

     Or he might have said to you,

     "Hey fella, you could really use a breath mint!"

     Not knowing what else to do, you take a chance and exercise your gift of speaking in the Arabic tongue. 

     You reply:  

     ";liena;wshng ikon e w ihg alw ;hewih;ljjjurfri."

     What did you just say to him?

     Did you say,

     "I have nothing to declare...

     I have five bags...

     I'm here for pleasure...

     or...fella, I don't need a breath mint as bad as you need come deoderant!"

     You have no idea what he said, or what you replied to him.

     No clue.

     But assume you are somehow able to get through security.

     Things get no easier.

     You wander from the airport, and you take a leizurely walk through the old part of downtown Cairo.

     A merchant call out to you in a frantic voice,

     "lfbmeujdlhg jhjjig ooegnl kslghnrji."

     You have no idea what he just said.

     He could have said,

     "I have the finest silks in all of Egypt!" 

     Or,

     "Get out of the way!  A stone has fallen off a nearby building and will hit you in the head and kill you if you don't move!"

     You try to figure out exactly where you are in this ancient city of millions of Egyptians.  The street signs and billboards do you no good--they're all in Arabic!  And you can't understand a word of it.   

     Let's say you somehow begin preaching in Arabic in the town square.  How long do you preach?  Twenty minutes?  An hour?  How do you know when your sermon is over? 

     Not knowing what else to do, you stop in mid sentence and motion for people to come forward who want to give their lives to Christ.  Several peaople come forward, and each of them start asking you questions:

     "lbfjgsdak jegjoewgj ll kn ikl  m kjkeljkle;?"

     "klrgli;?"

     ",mdjheriog vkj m,dkek?"

     You don't know what they just asked you.

     You can't help them.

     For that matter, you don't even know what you just preached.  Did you preach from the Old Testament or New Testament?  Was your sermon about salvation, holiness, tithing, End-Time prophecy, or the Fall of Adam? 

     You are absolutely helpless.

     Why?

     Because you don't understand or read the language, you simply speak it.

     You would quickly find that it is impossible to preach or evangelize in other tongues.

     So what do you do with your "other tongue?"

     The same thing the 120 and Paul did with theirs.  You pray and worship God with it.

     The Second Claim of the Anti-tongues Argument:

     Does all genuine speaking in tongues occur only in known human languages?

     We have already proven that speaking in tongues was never used, and can never reliably be used, for anything except prayer and praise.  Since speaking in tongues is used only for human-to-God communication, there is no logical reason for God to limit speaking in tongues to known human languages. 

     Paul, the only Apostle who taught in his Epistles specifically about speaking in tongues acknowledged the possibility of speaking in non-human, angelic languages:  

       "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels..."  I Cor. 13:1.             

     Clearly, sometimes speaking in tongues occurred in known human languages, and sometimes it took place in angelic languages.

     It helps us to note also that there is no recorded attempt of the 120, including the Apostles, and later the Apostle Paul, to identify the specific foreign language in which they spoke in other tongues.  Nor did they try to ascertain whether their "tongue" was a known language, or an angelic one.

     If they made no such effort, why should we?

     If this was of no concern to them, why should it be to us? 

     It was entirely possible, then and now, to be inspired of the Holy Spirit to speak in tongues in prayer and in praise, using a language that is a known one, an ancient one no longer spoken, or in an obscure dialect spoken by only a handful of people far from you, or even one spoken by angels in Heaven. 

    The Third and Final Part of the Anti-tongues argument:

     Every time people spoke in other tongues, they did so as a "sign to the Jews."

    (Sigh....)

     Will the nonsensical arguments ever end?   

     This part of the Anti-tongues argument is as unscriptural as their "preaching in tongues" error, and their "only in known tongues" mistake.   

     They base their error on a sliver of the 14th chapter of First Corinthians.  And even that sliver is taken completely out of context.

     Allow me to provide the needed context:

     Paul is giving instructions to the Corinthian Church on various issues.  In Chapters 12, 13, and 14, he defines the nine Gifts of the Spirit, and gives instructions on how they are to be accommodated.

     As he is giving these instructions, he lets us know that speaking in tongues had actually been prophesied beforehand by the Prophet Isaiah, centuries before Pentecost.  He quotes the prophecy from the Old Testament: 

     Vs. 21:  "In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord."

 

 In the next verse he explains: 

     Vs. 22:  "Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not..." 

     Putting these two Scriptures together, and ignoring the rest of First Corinthians, the Anti-tongues argument is: 

     "See!  Paul said tongues are a sign to the Jews.  True speaking in tongues will occur only if unbelieving Jews are present to hear them."   

      Actually, no.

     We just read it.

     Paul didn't say that tongues are a sign to only unbelieving Jews.  He wrote that tongues were a sign "...to them that believe not..."  Tongues can be a sign to unbelieving Jews and/or to unbelieving Gentiles alike.

     If speaking in tongues were a sign to only Jews, and Jews had to be present before speaking in tongues could be exercised, he would have made this clear.

      Notice what Paul did not write:

• In 14:13, Paul does not write, "I will pray with the spirit, only when unbelieving Jews are present of course.  And I will sing with the spirit, but only when unbelieving Jews are near."
• In 14:27, Paul does not write, "If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret,  And by the way, no speaking in tongues at all unless unbelieving Jews are present."
• In 14:39, "Paul does not write, "Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues--unless of course there are no unbelieving Jews present.  Then go ahead and forbid it."

     To interpret this Scripture to mean that no speaking in tongues can take place unless unbelieving Jews or unbelieving Gentiles are present to hear them, is contradicted by Paul's other instructions concerning speaking in tongues. 

     And frankly, the Anti-tongues interpretation of this makes no sense. 

• Are we actually to believe that Paul would not pray to God in other tongues, unless an unbelieving Jew or Gentile were present with him in his prayer closet?
• Did Paul sing to God in other tongues in his devotions, only when unbelieving Jews or Gentiles were present to hear those private devotions?

     Of course not.

     This anti-Tongues interpretation is absurd.

     What about the other Apostles, and the other recorded examples of speaking in tongues.  Did they occur only when unbelieving Jews or Gentiles were present?

     See for yourself:

     Peter preached the Gospel to the assembled Gentiles in Cornelius' house, and they believed.  In the middle of Peter's sermon, "...the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word...on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.  For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God..." (vs. 44-46).

     Every person present in the room was already a Christian before coming there, or was born-again in that instant.  Now you have a room full of Christians, speaking in tongues, with no unbelieving Jews or Gentiles to hear them.  But Peter didn't frantically call out: 

     "No! No! No, My Brethren!  Do not speak in tongues unless unbelievers are present!" 

     Another example from Scriptures that prove that genuine speaking in tongues can occur with no unbelievers present, is given to us in the account of Paul's ministry in Ephesus.  

     In Ephesus, Paul found 12 of John the Baptist's disciples.  He preached the Gospel to them, and they believed and were baptized.  They were full-fledged Christians.  Note what happened next: 

     "And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.  And all the men were about twelve."  (Acts 19:6,7).    

     Where were the "unbelieving Jews" in this case?  There were none.  The only ones present were Paul and twelve born-again, baptized Christians.

     Paul didn't stop them from speaking in tongues.

     And he didn't say, 

     "Wait a minute!  None of that tongues stuff unless unbelieving Jews or Gentiles are present.  Hold it a minute while I go round up some unbelievers!" 

     No.

     If Paul meant by "a sign to them that believe not..." that speaking in tongues is to be allowed only when unbelieving Jews or Gentiles are present, then he violated his own instruction, didn't he?  They certainly spoke in tongues here, and there were absolutely no unbelievers of any kind present.

     See how absurd these anti-tongues arguments become when compared with Scripture?

     Someone might ask, "Well, are tongues a sign to unbelieving Jews or Gentiles?"

     They can be.

     We have already seen Scriptural incidents in which they are not:

• When Paul or another believer was praying in tongues in private alone, tongues were obviously not a sign to unbelievers.
• And when used in private devotions to worship and praise the Lord, they clearly are a sign to no one but the believer and the Lord.
• Tongues were not a sign to unbelievers at Cornelius' house.
• Tongues were not a sign to unbelievers when Paul ministered to the 12 at Ephesus.

     So Scriptures and common sense limit the use of tongues for a sign to unbelievers to some manifestations of tongues in a public service.  

     Then what is meant by tongues being a sign to unbelievers?

     I've seen this happen in one form or another, a number of times.

     You see, true speaking in tongues and interpretation is very powerful.  These gifts are riveting to observe.  Speaking a message in tongues and interpreting it in a public service can have a mighty, convicting effect on an unbeliever.  I've seen it take place in my own ministry.

     In 2ooo, I was in a service in my home church.  I arrived just before the service, and we sat in our usual place.  I wasn't scheduled to minister that morning.

     A friend we'll call Sally served on the praise and worship team.  Before going to the platform, she introduced to us her grown son who was visiting her from out of town for a few days.  He had never seen his mother sing in a worship service, so he had come to do so.  He sat down in the row behind us, and the service began.

     As the praise and worship started to wind down, a very strong message in tongues came upon me.  The pastor knew me well, and knew of my background with Sister Goodwin.  And he had given me permission to approach the platform whenever I had something from the Lord.  So as the worship ended, I went to the platform, and he handed me the microphone.

     I spoke out the message in tongues.  And since no other interpreter was present, I interpreted the message myself.

     The message had quite a powerful anointing in it.  It spoke, among other things, of Christ bearing our griefs and sorrows at Calvary, and that anyone who needed it could rise up and receive healing from past hurts if they would do so by faith.  I finished the message and returned to my seat.

     The service continued on as normal with receiving an offering, and the pastor preaching a sermon.  It wasn't an evangelistic sermon, but he gave an altar call at the end of it anyway to anyone who wanted to accept Christ.

     To my surprise, Sally's grown son went to the front and accepted Jesus Christ as his Savior.  Praise the Lord.  I had spoken to him only briefly, and Sally had never even mentioned the son to me.  So I had no idea he was unsaved.

     Sally told me the next Sunday that after the service she had asked her son, "What caused you to accept Christ today?  Was it the praise and worship?"

     Her son replied, "The music was good, but that wasn't it.

     She asked, "Was it the Pastor's sermon?"

     He said, "It was ok, but that wasn't it."

     Puzzled, she asked, "Well, what was it?"

     He replied, "I don't know.  I don't understand it.  But when that guy [me] got up there and spoke in that foreign language, and then translated it, I just somehow knew I had to get right with God!"

     Praise the Lord.

     You see, speaking in tongues worked that morning as a sign to an unbeliever.  A sign that brought him under the conviction of the Holy Spirit, and which lead him to surrender his life to Jesus Christ.

     I have seen speaking in tongues accompanied by the interpretation of tongues have a very powerful, convicting effect on unbelievers.

     In Joe Jordan's biography of the Goodwins, a former staff member of their church relates a similar incident.  At the end of a service, Sister Goodwin spoke out a message in tongues, but Dad had no interpretation for it. 

     After the close of the service, a Jewish man walked up to the platform.  He told her that her message had been very beautiful, and asked her where she had learned what he called "High Hebrew."  She replied that she did not know how to speak any kind of Hebrew.  The man said she must know how to speak it, because she had done so only minutes before.

     He told her that in the message, she had called him by his full Jewish name, told him that Jesus Christ had died for him, and that this message was a sign to him that Jesus Christ was the Jewish messiah.  He had come forward to ask her how she had known his full Jewish name.     

     Sister Goodwin proceeded to explain the Gift of Speaking in tongues and the interpretation of tongues.  And she instructed him to do what the message had told him to do.

     When he realized that this had been a supernatural message from God, that she did not speak Hebrew, and did not know his Jewish name, he gave his heart to Christ.  And he went on to serve Christ, the Jewish Messiah, for many years until finally going Home.

     Tongues in this instance did exactly what Paul said they would sometimes do--they served as a convicting sign, this time to an unbelieving Jewish man.

     I have also seen speaking a message through tongues and interpretation have a stirring effect on born-again Christians who have grown weary in the faith, and have gotten off into unbelief.  In other words, they were unbelieving Believers.

     I've ministered in tongues and interpretation in services in which the powerful anointing present in genuine tongues and interpretation has served as a sign to such unbelieving Believers, exposing to them their backslidden and faithless state, and stirring them to rededicate their lives to Christ and to be renewed in the faith.

     In conclusion:

     My Brethren, I have proven in this post that the Anti-tongues argument is unscriptural and even absurd: 

• Speaking in tongues was not given for the purpose of preaching the Gospel in foreign languages. 
• Tongues can be spoken in known human languages, or even in heavenly angelic languages.  
• Paul did not require that speaking in tongues be allowed only when unbelieving Jews are present.
• God can choose to use or not to use speaking in tongues as a convicting sign to unbelieving Jews or Gentiles.  That decision is entirely up to Him.

     Can you begin to see now how the present-day Church has been robbed of a great blessing?  Can you see how the erroneous teachings of men have grieved and quenched the Holy Spirit as He has attempted to move thorugh this beautiful gift only to be met with unscriptural restrictions and man-made obstructions?

     If you have followed this hideous anti-tongues argument, you now see it has no foundation in Scriptures or in common sense.  And you need to humble yourself under the correction of God's written Word, and repent of the way hou have hindered the Holy Spirit in your church and life.

     If you are a pastor, a teacher, or a Seminary professor, and you have taught the anti-tongues nonsense, you need to ask God's forgiveness for leading your people astray.

     God is quick to forgive, and the Holy Spirit will gladly put it all behind you and Him, and will fill you with Himself and flow in greater power in your life and church.

     If you have are already in the pro-tongues camp, I would urge you to think on the issues and explanations I have offered here.

     Don't just say, "Yeah...I know all this."

     No you don't or you would have it in greater manifestation in your life and church.

     The Bible says that "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God."  If you will think deeply on the solid teachings from God's Word, embrace them in faith, and give the Holy Spirit the liberty to flow in your lives and services, then you will find Him manifesting Himself through tongues and through interpretations in stronger ways than you ever imagined.

     There is much, much, much more power and anointing in speaking in tongues than we have ever realized or tapped into.  And 100 years after the outpouring at Topeka Kansas and the later one at Azusa Street, it is high time we understand these gifts and flow in them in the strength and anointing God intended.

     God bless you!

      Copyright 2006  Mel C. Montgomery.  All rights reserved.  Material may be copied and shared with others as long as it is done so free of charge, in entirety, and attribution is given.