Brother Les,…good question and I try to answer your question in more detail in the third installment of this post… but I will give a quick answer here. Let me state right up front…that I am not a cessationist, because I believe that scripture demands that the gift of tongues is not required to cease. There is no scriptural evidence to demand that the gift of tongues has ceased even though the use of tongues has never been normative in all the churches.

A tongue is a language (known and unknown …by testimony of the hearer) that is spoken by men and women “speaking the might deeds of God”. Biblical tongues are spoken, understood, and discerned as some language. As Paul was instructing the church at Corinth, he made the point that he spoke more than all….meaning that he certainly new what tongues were and what they were meant for…. in other words, speaking in a tongue (gifted by the Spirit) was nothing new to him.

I believe in verse four of the 14th Chapter we see a teaching device that is used often by Paul… not only here but throughout his letters to all the churches. When he says that someone that is gifted to speak tongues certainly edifies, confirms or builds himself.….the next contrast is given to bolster a later claim. He is simply using these first few verses to build his argument which he reveals later in this section,.. but not to introduce new facts concerning tongues….the fact about what tongues “consist of” has already been established….. (Acts 2)

Gibberish is certainly not tongues, never has been. It seems we have made tongues something of a mystery on our own. All gifts edify the body of Christ when understood, taught, and presented properly in love.

Blessings,
Chris

I’m going to need some help to grasp your point. I’m not quite following you…

In your first paragraph you describe this passage as a, “correction of bizarre activity”. By what biblical standard would you judge their worship as bizarre activity? Is it the list of “abusive behaviors” that you outline in the following paragraph?

I’m a little confused as to what you believe a “tongue” actually is. Are you saying that it is a human language or is it an attitude that one has when speaking? I’m not wanting to be argumentative. I really don’t get it…I’m sometimes slow that way…lol.

–Dave

You said, “The mention of a tongue in verse four (vs. 4) is to emphasize that “only” the speaker of a tongue is enlightened, or educated, or satisfied”.

Do you believe those who speak in a “unknown” tongue understand what they are saying? Personally, I don’t think the people whom I’ve heard babbling and claimed they were “speaking in tongues” had any idea what they were saying. If not, how can that be enlightening to the tongue speaker?

Just so you know my position, I do not believe that tongues as referenced in the NT were unknown but known languages. Also, I believe that today’s gift of “tongues” are manifested by those who speak more than one known langugage, not the gibberish I’ve witnessed from Pentacostals.

Thanks.

Les