Featured Blog – Selwin Christian
This was a huge concern in my heart as I went through difficult times where I had to suffer a big threat over my faith in Christ, due to Doctrinal deviations that are so rapidly increasing in mainstream Churches in present day. Charismatic movement before 90’s were considered fringe of mainstream evangelicalism, which has gained considerable invasion now into mainstream pulpit. That has continued for long time without any scrutiny and Biblical voice from mainline Churches except few faithful pastors and theologians who regularly speak against these issues. Bizarre experiences, convoluted exhibit of spirit-fullness literally attracts huge people with passion without truth in it and leaves others simply to ask, ‘what is all these? Is it really Biblical? How to draw the line?’
It was astounding discovery for me to know that Doctrine of Tongue speaking has been actually re-interpreted at the inception of Pentecostal movement in India. It is actually found in so many resources that 1906 Azusa street revival is considered the inception point where Pentecostalism was born. That revival was characterized by fanatic extravaganza. Until that time Church always believed Gift of Tongues to be ‘real language gift’. I.e Speaking in French, Hindi, Nepali etc.
Pentecostalism has started in 19th Century as a movement, which early sound Evangelical Churches did not accept. Today, there are lot of new stuff coming in apart from tongues, prophecy, miracles and healings, we have new Prosperity Gospel & Word of Faith Gospel which is capturing many minds. It basically says, come to Jesus and you will have prosperous life or ‘best life now’, you will become what you think and want. Jesus never said following him will result in monetary welfare or always positive happenings in our life.
Going back to the history of Charismatic or Pentecostal doctrine of particularly Tongue Speaking, as classical Pentecostals, the Holiness Church [1] believes all are entitled to and should seek the baptism in the Holy Spirit that must accompany speaking in tongues. International Pentecostal Holiness Church is also called Wesleyan Pentecostal who is controversial about perfect sanctification before Baptism in Holy Spirit. Church of God (one of the largest)[2] and the Assembly of God Church teaches that this experience is distinct from and subsequent to the experience of salvation[3]. They believe, the baptism in the Holy Spirit empowers the believer for Christian life and service.” The initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues “as the Spirit gives utterance.” So, movements like Holiness movement & Apostolic Church, Foursquare Church, Third wave movement and Oneness Pentecostal all that resulted from these phenomena.
Now, I am talking about roots where it all started to take turn as part of Charismatic History. I am talking about classic Pentecostal movement. This both movements have roots that were started during early 1900 by a person named, Charles Parham. He had revival meetings in Azusa street, Los Angeles, California. History identifies its beginnings at a gathering on April 9, 1906. The revival was characterized by ecstatic spiritual experiences accompanied by speaking in tongues and dramatic worship services. There were missionaries who thought by speaking in tongues they would travel to different countries with this gift. But without spiritual understanding they found out that, their Speaking in Tongues were not working in the field. Because different dialect people of many places were not able to understand what they were speaking.
It was recorded that Agnes Ozman[4] first spoke in tongues of Chinese, which resulted in fake claim afterwards, even the photograph containing her writings didn’t even match anyhow with Chinese language. When tongue speaking of entire movement did not appear to be human languages, they met with huge dilemma. So, they changed the interpretation of Gift of tongues calling it unintelligible utterance, though Biblical exegesis position never changed for tongues to be the human language. Later, one of them Mr. A.G Garr came to Calcutta, India. A.G Garr spoke tongues of spirit, but people could not understand those tongues, when he could not speak Bengali in tongues. So he with his family went to China. It was said, “Speaking in tongues in India did not enable them to speak the native language, Bengali.”[5] Later, that man changed the doctrine that speaking in tongues is for personal spiritual edification also.
It is also recorded that, One of them Mr. Alfred G. Garr came to Calcutta India. A. G Garr came to Calcutta pretending to speak in Bengali” [6] A. G. Garr significantly contributed changing the doctrine from a belief that speaking in tongues was not explicitly for evangelism but to a belief that speaking in tongues was also a gift for “spiritual empowerment”.[7] It became very well documented that, “they could not speak in Bengali”. [8] Mr. A. G. Garr specifically mentioned in his written letter to one pastor in England of his confusion and personal struggle with this complication saying, “I know of no one having received a language so as to be able to converse intelligently, or to preach in the same with the understanding, in the Pentecostal movement. I supposed [God] would let us talk to the natives of India in their own tongue, but He did not” [9] He appealed to the languages of angels referred to in 1 Corinthians 13:1.[10] He also said in his different magazine writings, “Thus, tongues-speech might be in known languages, as well as the unknown languages of the heavenly sphere. Garr undoubtedly hoped this would counter the criticisms of those who described tongues as “barnyard cackle” and “unintelligible gibberish’. [11].
In a lengthy article, “Tongues”. The Biblical Evidence to the Baptism with the Holy Ghost he explained his new understanding of tongues-speech, answered his critics in Calcutta, and those of the doctrine in America.[12 ]
So, here we see how whole movement came into Doctrinal conflict, when they seemed to have conflict in their experience and Biblical Doctrine. In order to save the image of whole movement these men had no other option but to reinterpret Doctrine of tongues from Biblical real languages Gift of evangelism to “unintelligible utterance of personal enjoyment’.
So that’s how starting was later on Charismatic movement also started with the same flow of people coming out of this massive influence. Charismatic movement started to take its ground around 1960, later on it also covered Roman Catholics in this movement around 1967. Catholic Charismatic began in 1967 at Duquesne University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Before 1955 the religious mainstream did not embrace Pentecostal doctrines. If a church member or clergyman openly expressed such views, they would (either voluntarily or involuntarily) separate from their existing denomination. The charismatic movement represented a reversal of this previous pattern whereas those influenced by Pentecostal spirituality chose to remain in their original denominations. Person named Harald Bredesen a lutheran minister who is called often father of Charismatic movement, who coined the word Charismatic’ and claimed in 1946 that he received Baptism in spirit and speaking in tongues as initial evidence. [13]
What is real gift of Tongues?
The question than remains is what is Real Gift of tongues ? Well that question is answered by the fact that what was considered ‘historical position’ is the true meaning , until Pentecostal position came along and try to reshape that understanding. What is this Historical position.
The Greek Word Tongue:
The word “Tongue Is translated from the original Greek word “Glossa” which is “language”. In Acts 2 particular words for language used are Dialect and Glossa. And it is of course human language, or any of the earthly languages. Scripture never meant at first point itself to utter “Gibberish” which we hear people say, “Ba.sara…ba.sara…Bla..Bla..” Means tongue always had its meaning in the terms of earthly legitimate language, writer never meant it to support the idea of meaningless words. It is only talking about meaningful language. Paul is clearly no proponent of any kind of speech that is not intelligible” (1 Corinthians 14:9). Sounds and syllables without meaning are of no use whatsoever. “There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning” (1 Corinthians 14:10). Throughout the chapter, he is talking about real languages with real meaning. The ecstatic gibberish of the modern charismatic movement does not even fit the apostles definition of a language. [14]
When gentiles spoke in Acts 2:11 they say, “we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues (Glossa-language)” they literally meant our own language not some unintelligible words. During the day of Pentecost there were Jews from many places came to Jerusalem for the celebration. (Acts 2:5) They all understood apostles speaking their own dialects. While other native Jews did not understand what Apostles were speaking, because they did not know foreign dialects. Apostles were speaking almost 16 foreign dialects like Parthian, Medes etc. These unbelieving native Jews at Pentecost accused the apostles of being drunk because they did not understand. But foreigners exactly understood them in their own (native) language or dialect Acts 2:8. Same word Glossa’ is used elsewhere in Bible like 1 Corinthians 12-14. So, Tongues’ in the Bible can mean only languages or single language, never gibberish.
Is intelligence required when we speak in tongue?
In our contemporary Christian circle people come with different ideas relating to tongues like; ‘stop thinking and let the Holy Spirit give you utterance which will later be converted to tongue speaking’. In fact originally tongue’ means language, which supposed to make sense to the one who is speaking and all the people who listen through translation. So nowhere bible teaches us to close our minds and let spirit work. Instead it says. “I will pray with my mind and I will also pray with my spirit.’ 1 Cor. 14:15.
In next few lines I will attempt to give some hint regarding most difficult chapter to decide certain theological discussion on 1 Corinthians 14, where Paul enlarges Gift of Tongues in more detail. Once Dr. John MacArthur said,
“Now, the Internet—and social media in particular—offers a global and perpetual platform to expose false teachers and warn against their teaching. Today, the long-term survival of false teachers hinges on their ability to cloak their error in enough truth to avoid zealous bloggers and to clear customs at the church gate.”
This is so true in the case of Charismatic and Pentecostal doctrines, they have changed their rank heretic appearance and have started to cite scriptures to validate their scrutiny. Mostly debated chapter is 1 Corinthians 14:1-4. According to 1 Cor. 14:2-4-Some say, tongues are unintelligible language (completely contrary to what we Just discussed), even if we do not understand tongues, we should still speak; it exhilarates and brings joy in us. They believe that way we can self. You may well quote edify our 1 Cor. 14:2-4 saying; we can edify our self. Theological view of scholars on this is, what I call ‘comparison view’. Comparison doesn’t necessarily mean suggestion but showing importance of one gift over another. i.e. Tongues vs Prophecy (Preaching).
Let us look both the verses with comparison view,
“For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit” 1 Cor. 14:2.
Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church’. 1 Cor. 14:4
Interpretation:
No one understands: According to first view in both the verses, tongue speakers were speaking legitimate language which was foreign to the congregation. For example if they were speaking Parthian language (Acts 2:9) no one could understand since there were no Parthian present there understood it.
But God understood it since he knows all languages. So Paul says in that sense, tongue speaker doesn’t speak to men but to God. Paul is addressing the genuine gift of languages being used. But, they were speaking without translation and interpretation and no one could understand or edify. They uttered mysteries (14:2) in their heart, in a sense that only the person who speaks and God who is omniscient understood the foreign language they spoke. Mystery is not mystical utterance at the first place but, when people didn’t understand at Corinth it became mystery for them. Now, please note here idea is nowhere unintelligible utterance but earthly language. Paul was saying they may well edify themselves since only the person understood what he was speaking in legitimate language but it did not benefit any other because that language group was absent. Still that gift of tongue was so much abused that everyone tried to boast with speaking languages.
Focusing something better that is Love’ in comparison to gifts. The small word but in all the verses about tongue motivation is very important. Read again, 1 Cor. 14:2 & 4 notice the word ‘but’. In both the verses comparison does not necessarily mean Paul is suggesting private use of tongues which would edify, but he compares to public use of preaching (prophecy) that would build up the Church. That word tells us that second part of the statement is important not the first part. So, 1 Cor. 14:2 and v3 are connected, anyone speaks in tongues doesn’t speak to men but to God.…, v3 but everyone who prophesies speaks to men’. Notice the word ‘but’ which is connection. So Hyperbole is inserted to show us comparison of private selfish use against public edifying use. (Paul himself suggests later that everyone must understand 14:9, in contrast to v2.)
(14:4) Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies himself. Same view applied in verse 4, He who speaks in tongues edifies himself but he who prophesies edifies the Church’. The word ‘but’ suggests comparison. So, in Verse 4 Paul is not promoting private use but correcting selfish use. (Paul suggests that Church must be edified 1 Cor. 14:26, in contrast to v4) So, these both verses do not suggest that private use is Biblical but makes the point for Church use. We come to that conclusion through the contrast. You may ask, how come person who speaks edifies himself? Simply by speaking Tongues in understanding of his mind edified him, same way the person who reads Bible is edified by the understanding. This is the only historical understanding of this text. Mindlessness never edify, it’s only hysteria. So person who spoke genuine language edified himself since he understood what he was saying, but people couldn’t.
By way of illustration, consider the following hypothetical example. If someone stood up in a typical Gujarati church service and said, “Parmeshwar Ke Tapailai Prem Gumuhunch,” it is likely that no one present would understand him, except that person and God who knows all languages. In order for the congregation to be edified, the phrase would require an interpreter to translate it. Gift of interpretation would translate foreign language into native language and more over explain the meaning also. In this case, the phrase (transliterated from Nepali) means, “Jesus loves you.”Only after the foreign language has been translated it is edifying to those who hear it. Left un-translated, no one understands it and so it becomes mystery for Gujaratis.
Even though 1 Cor. 14:1-4 apparently seems that it may edify us, this may have encouraged many tongue speakers with edifying based on feelings not with spiritual understanding from the Lord. So, Paul adds next part of the verse, But he who prophesies edifies the Church. –(Verse 4) Even though we may suggest edification by speaking in tongues in ecstatic form of exhilaration and spiritual euphoria which may not be wrong for innocent, but that is not gifts are for. Personal edification and exhilaration expression of joy were often natural products of legitimate use of it.
Historical position that tongues is ‘real gift of languages and not unintelligible utterance’ is held by scholars such as Justin Martyr, St Augustine, John Chrysostom, Matthew Henry, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Watson, John Owen, Charles Spurgeon, westminister confession of faith, Jonathan Edwards, B B Warfield. All these important figures/confessions of church history not only believed tongues were real languages but also believed ‘with the completion of Apostolic age and completion of Revelation writings the Bible’, after 1st century this gift is no longer operative and it was never seen afterwards, it was used for specific time period for specific purpose.
May God help us to understand real gift of tongues and save others from following man-made mystical ideas that certainly jeopardize believers growth and leads into mysticism and unbiblical idea about Genuine Spirit led Christian life.
Yours in his ministry,
Selwin.
Bibliography
[1] International Pentecostal Holiness Church. Article of faith, sub point 11.
[2] Church of God, Declaration of Faith.
[3] World Assembly of God, statement of faith.
[4] When The Latter Rain First Fell: The First One to Speak in Tongues, January 1909. p.2.
[5] Espinosa, Garson William J. Seymour and the Origins of Global Pentecostalism., University Press, 2014.pg.89.
[6] (Espinosa, Gaston. William J. Seymour and the Origins of Global Pentecostalism. Duke University Press, 2014. p.89)
[7] Hayford, Jack W; Moore, S. David (2006). The Charismatic Century: The Enduring Impact of the Azusa Street Revival (August 2006 ed.). Warner Faith.
[8]Burgess, Stanley M. (2001). “Pentecostalism in India: an overview”. Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies.
[9] AG Garr letter from Hongkong to Rev. A. A. Boddy. All Saints Vicarage, Sunderland, 1908.A. G Garr. “A letter from Bro. Garr,” Confidence, Special Supplement to Confidence, May 1908, p. 2. Boddy published letters in the supplement to specifically address the failure of Pentecostal missionaries to preach in the languages of their hearers.
[10] Garr, “Tongues,” p: 3.
[11] H. Gulliford,”speaking with tongues” Harvest Field, April 1907, Pg. 133
[12] The article gained a far wider audience when Moorhead reprinted it with some changes and editorial improvements as “Tongues, The Bible Evidence, ” Cloud of Witnesses to Pentecost in India, September 1907, pp. 40-7.
[13] Menzies & Menzies 2000.pp. 38-41.
[14] Strong’s NT Greek, 1100. ‘Tongue’. pg. 60, Greek Dictionary of New Testament.
