The Holy Spirit and the Southern Baptist Convention (XXXVI): “Prophecy and Tongues (Continued; 1 Cor. 14:1-25)

With apologies to Sam Creed (and his typically insightful comment), I apparently overstated my case in my last post on the flow of the section comprised of 1 Corinthians 12-14.  In retrospect, Sam is surely onto something in gently chiding me for presenting ch. 13 as an aside (i.e., a sort of parenthesis) in Paul’s argument, instead of a crucial addition to what had already been laid out in ch. 12.  If nothing else, this corrective becomes important as we get to the discussion in ch. 14 because it requires that the question having to do with whether one is exercising his/her gifts to edify others in love is a key aspect of the discussion.  So, I want to thank Sam for his graciously explained comment and getting me to (re)think this through!

For the remainder of this post, I would like to discuss the significance of the passage before us for the subject of what is often referred to as “private prayer language.”  And, let me begin by saying that I have never spoken in tongues, whether publicly or privately.  Thus, I have no personal “dog in this hunt” at all.  Instead, I am seeking to look at the biblical text and try to understand what it is saying and implying, not to defend a particular theological position.

Now, I do freely admit that I have several friends who have told me of their individual experiences with speaking in tongues (both publicly and privately–and, actually, more privately!).  According to each, they did not seek to speak in tongues.  It just happened to each one, in somewhat different ways.  In one case, it occurred right at the point when he became a Christian.  With the others, it varied in specific circumstances except one: they were all fervantly seeking the Lord (i.e., but not to speak in tongues).  That is, the experience of speaking in tongues came upon each of them unexpectedly.  And, in more than one case, they did not even share that it had happened with anyone else for some time afterwards.

While the remarks I just made may initially seem like an odd way to approach this subject, given my stated desire to be as biblical as possible, I think I can make the case this is a necessary related subject to bring up for preliminary discussion here.  You see, many people apparently stumble upon the realization that they have the gift of tongues privately.  And, although tongues is apparently largely intended by the Lord as a gift for public communication, if there is someone with the gift of interpretation present (1 Cor. 14:5), what does the person with the gift of tongues do with the gift the rest of the time?

The answer seems pretty clear in the public setting: those who speak in tongues are not edifying their fellow believers unless the tongues are interpreted.  Thus, they should be silent, unless there is someone who can interpret on the scene (or unless those gifted in tongues are given the ability to interpret their own glossalalia; 1 Cor. 14:13).

That question and answer might be taken by some to be enough to silence those who speak in tongues in any situation in which there is not an interpreter, except for one other point Paul makes in ch. 14.  What is that?  Well, it’s this amazing claim and explanation the Apostle gives in 14:18-19: “I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you; yet in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding, in order to teach others also, than 10,000 words in a tongue.”

Wow!  How in the world do those who are in opposition to the concept of a “private prayer language” get around those two assertions: 1) that Paul speaks in tongues more than any of those in the Corinthian church; and 2) that he rarely speaks in tongues publicly, given that it usually does not edify the hearers (i.e., because there is no interpreter present)?

Think about that.  The incredibly rational Apostle Paul, who is a great hero of the cessationist movement because of his taking to task of the supposed “charismania” of the Corinthians, spoke in tongues more than any of the readers he was correcting.  However, he apparently seldom did so in a congregational setting, leaving only–you guessed it–the private realm in which Paul could do all that tongues speaking.

OK.  So, there is clearly a place for speaking in tongues in private.  But, that still leaves us with the question of whether it can be legitimately called “a prayer language.”

The easy part of that issue has to do with the term “language.”  As far as I know, the vast majority of both continuationists and cessationists do think tongues is indeed some sort of language or languages–whether heavenly/angelic or earthly.  But, is it really legitimate to refer to it as “prayer?”

Yes, it is… and Paul says quite clearly that is the case.  1 Corinthians 14:2 states, “For the person who speaks in tongues is not speaking to men but to God… .”  And, what is speaking to God but prayer?  In addition, 14:13 says, “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays… .”  What else can that mean but that speaking in tongues is a form of prayer?

Bottom line: Cessationists can huff and puff in arguing against the validity of tongues speaking for today all they want.  However, for them to attempt to say that Paul did not describe what is usually referred to in SBC circles as a “private prayer language” is ludicrous.  To attempt to do so, they must, in effect, call the Apostle a liar in the way he developed his argument in 1 Corinthians 14:1-25.

More on the flow of this passage next Tuesday…

Coming Saturday: “Saturdays are for Newspaper Articles”