Is Speaking In Tongues Biblical?

In this video I discuss the subject of speaking in tongues. I examine passages from Isaiah 28, Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 13 & 14. Biblical tongues is the ability to preach the word of God in an unlearned foreign language.

[ahskincare]

Yes.Speaking In tongues is a gift from God.

[armyantlocsta]

"If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues." Corinthians 14:37-39...unlearned or unbelieving people call tongue talkers mad (crazy)...thanks for fulfilling scripture. If you were spiritual you would discern these simple basic spiritual gifts...you would acknowledge these things.

[rochelleb]

Wow, old video that just came on my feed but so useful 2/6/24

[robertnieten]

In scriptual Interpretation there is what is known as The Law Of Repetition. According to this Law the Word will repeat something said, and/ or an event three times in order to:
1) Direct our attention to an important spiritual truth.
2) To set a precedent so that the same circumstance need not be repeated in as much detail elsewhere in scripture when it occurs.
In Acts ch.2 when the believers recieved the Holy Spirit and began to speak in " tongues", three times the men in the crowd question how they are hearing the believers speaking in their native languages.
The spiritual truth is that the miracle for the men in the crowd was not that the believers were speaking in the individual languages of the men in the crowd, but that the men were Hearing what the believers were speaking in a spiritual language in their individual languages.
The precedent set is:
1) The first evidence of a believer recieving the Holy Spirit, when they recieve, is speaking in this spiritual language
2) A sign for unbelievers, the men in the crowd.
Lastly, the only reason that the word " tongues" is plural is because more than one believer is speaking the spiritual language. The translators translated this word according to their understanding of what was happening.

[hashimayele]

Great biblical insight brother Caleb! God bless you!

[kavikv.d.hexenholtz]

The “tongues” Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians are producing today is an entirely self-created phenomenon. It is non-cognitive non-language utterance; random free vocalization based upon a subset of the existing sounds of the speaker’s native language, and any other language(s) the speaker may be familiar with or have had contact with. It is typically characterized by repetitive syllables, plays on sound patterns, and over-simplification of syllable structure. “Tongues” may be either spoken or sung. Due to the nature of how it is produced, no two people will ever have the same “tongue”.

People believe something to be supernatural because they can't explain it otherwise.

There is _nothing_ however that these ‘speakers’ are producing that cannot be explained in natural linguistic terms.

Conversely, there are no Biblical references to ‘tongues” that cannot be explained with respect to real rational language. Indeed, the patristic view supports “tongues” as rational (foreign) languages.

Early Pentecostal/Charismatic ‘tongues-speakers’ looked for Scriptural references for what they were doing, since their original supposition (xenoglossy) definitely wasn’t it; however, Scriptural references were simply not there. The resulting implicit theology was not a synthesis of revelation and philosophy, but rather a synthesis of trying to make sense of the “tongues experience” in light of the narrative of Scripture.

In other words, a way to legitimize the modern phenomenon by ‘proofing‘ it in the Bible, despite the obvious overwhelming absence therein of anything resembling modern tongues – call it what you will, but the result was a virtual re-definition of Scripture with respect to the understanding/justification of modern “tongues” for this group of Christians.

Two of the best examples of this classic re-definition are the phrase “praying in the Spirit”, and the word “tongue(s)” itself.

Praying in the Spirit does _not_ refer to the words we are saying. Rather, it refers to _how_ we are praying.

In the three places the phrase is used (Corinthians, Ephesians, and Jude), there is absolutely no reference to 'languages' in connection with the phrase. Therefore, “praying in the Spirit” should be understood as praying in the power of the Spirit, by the leading of the Spirit, and according to His will. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with 'tongues'. A reading into Scripture of something that was just never there.

The word “tongue(s)” itself is simply a more archaic word for (real) “language(s)”, nothing more. Replace “tongue(s)” with “language(s)” in these passages and the whole modern Pentecostal/Charismatic concept of “tongues” begins to become difficult to posit – “language(s)” sounds a lot less mysterious. In Pentecostal/Charismatic parlance however, the phase has come to be equated with the modern concept of “tongues-speech”. Again, a reading into Scripture of something that was never there.

“Tongues” is simply not what its ‘speakers’ want/need it to be.

Modern tongues is just another tool, like chanting or meditation, etc.; a way by which one may establish a closer relationship with the divine and strengthen one’s spiritual path. In this respect (i.e. as the _tool_ it is), it can be quite powerful to accomplish this goal, as attested by many of those who use it.


Most people who use it are very keen on describing the ‘experience’; however, when examining the “mechanics” behind it, not so much. Indeed, when a person has experienced tongues, s/he is absolutely convinced as to the ‘scripturalness’ of his/her experience and the correctness of his/her doctrinal beliefs, despite the overwhelming scriptural absence of anything remotely akin to it.

Contrary to Pentecostal/Charismatic belief, there is no ‘continual chain’ of tongues in the church; just sporadic reports of individuals producing what, in a few examples, appear to be similar (if not identical) phenomena to modern tongues. Unfortunately, most of these writings describe the experience, not the mechanics behind it. As a result, they are more often vague at best at describing what is actually happening with respect to language/tongues.

What Pentecostal/Charismatic Christians are doing today, 150 years ago, did not exist in the Christian tradition.

“Tongues” is to some Christian believers a very real and spiritually meaningful experience, but consisting of emotional release via non-linguistic ‘free vocalizations’ at best – the subconscious playing with sounds to create what is perceived and interpreted as actual, meaningful speech. In some cases, I would argue that it is clearly a self/mass delusion prompted by such a strong desire to “experience God” that one creates that experience.

It is interesting to note that certain types of schizophrenia will present with glossolalia. Why is it that what they are producing is immediately recognized and labeled as “nonsense” virtually without question, but when Pentecostal/Charismatic Christians engage in glossolalia it is deemed ‘sacred’ and is called “speaking in tongues”? Both are producing is the exact same thing, done in the exact same way. The catchphrase “we don’t know what we’re saying…but it’s profound” just doesn’t stand up.

Known by many different names, “tongues”, or more accurately “glossolalia”, is practiced by many cultures and religious beliefs from all over the world; it is relatively new to Christianity and certainly not unique to it.

[allonekingdom]

If. Paul said he "spoke in tongues more than all of you" - why is there no record of another Pentecost type event. He (Paul) said "they are speaking to God" when referring to people who speak not to others. Why is it that people's dogma silences "speaking in the tongues of angels", in communion with our Holy God. I'm not saying the Kenneth Copeland type babble isn't ridiculous, but one can't broadbrush the whole gift for the ones who abuse it.
"Teachers, be not many of you as you will suffer the harsher judgement".

[Blackrims]

No. Paul was talking about speaking in earthly language that they don’t understand

[kvelez]

5:43
Are there prophets today?
I think that there aren't but how can I avoid people who use this passage to validate false prophets or prophets that according to the Bible shouldn't exist because Christ fulfilled them all?

[bosabarbosa]

ABSOLUTELY. Petencostal and Carismatics insist on saying they are speaking to GOD in angelic languages, and it is FOOLISH! They say that because it makes them feel "special, better", kinda like "I speak to GOD, GOD loves ME; I am BETTER, I am SPECIAL, YOU ARE NOT!" ABSOLUTELY FOOLISH.

[glennrobinson]

How can one claiming to be a Christian reject this gift? It's a beautiful gift from God. To go as far as saying it's of the devil sounds akin to blaspheming the Holy Ghost.
Caleb. At 5:18 to 5:23mins you said "we have no account in scripture of anyone PRAYING in tongues, only speaking in tongues." You purport to taking all in "context". The following verse refutes what you are saying: "For if I PRAY in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." 1Cor14:14. So this is in essence an account of PRAYING in tongues. Your statement, to the unlearned listener could be interpreted as meaning I am not to pray to God in an UNKNOWN tongue. Therefore I am saying that you are incorrrect. We can both speak in tongues and pray in tongues. But what is prayer anyway but speaking unto God??
Also, that's a lot of belony that Paul is "chastising" the people, he is lovingly correcting them not "chastising". And he's not saying they're doing the "wrong" thing. Yes, agreed, in the church where there's other believers I am not there to be just edifying myself. (1Cor14:16, 19, 23). However, to say that tongues is not for prayer is errant as 1Cor14:14 clearly lays out. My understanding being unfruitful is not a problem. I pray with the spirit AND with the understanding.

[johanandgaildros]

Dear Caleb, Your personal interpretation of speaking in tongues does not mention the gift of the interpretation of Tongues. For a clear understanding of these passages please listen to Pastor Bayless Conley’s exposition. His understanding and personal experience will enlighten your understanding on this subject. Please take the time to further investigate this Gift of the Holy Spirit ! God bless.

[toddnetland]

Wrong Bible translation! Only the KJV is the PURE word of God.

[videospro]

This question if you give it time will help you see the light. Joseph prince does not teach people that sin is correct but that it receives its power from the law (Take time to think about what this implements).... This means that without the law sin has no power (WOW i was also amazed) Now without the law there is no righteousness (That's why jesus had to fulfill it not destroy or remove it) If your following me like a child you should be at the point where you understand that jesus did not destroy the Law because without it there is no righteousness and also that if had destroyed the law sin would have lost all power...(Now what did jesus do or the better question how did jesus overcome all this) Jesus knew that no one was able to fulfill the law so he did it for us. ( This is the point where you ask.... what does this mean?) Okay its simple to a child (as i am) okay this means that righteousness is accomplished by the law (dont run relax) yes because jesus was justified by the law and was found blameless...Okay now we can also benefit this even tho we do not deserve it or a better way of saying it, Have not achieved it (Grace). How do we benefit it by believing (Faith nothing More) and just like that we are rescued from Judgement( By the Law). We become Lawless being because if you observe the law you will be judged by it. WE HAVE NO JUDGEMENT IN CHRIST___i know i concluded without verses or proof but i assure you i have. Please talk back to me or email me for i was just like you once but i understood something the power of sin is the law...yet the law works guilt if you think really hard you will know that even you pray for forgiveness to God everyday because you feel that you have failed him (Guilt) Guilt means that you yourself convict yourself of that which you feel guilty about....So i will ASK WHERE IS YOUR FAITH....I have much to tell you and anyone who wants to know more feel free to ask me anything or any verse that you do not understand.

[Streetpreaching]

My point is you just Repent and Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and Be Born Again.

Genuine saving Faith is incumbent of a repentant heart. Faith without works is dead is very much Biblical Truth and is in line doctrinally with rest of scripture.

2Co 7:10  For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

Rom 2:4  Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

[denis-kononov]

Funny, your name is iThink biblically, but in this case your view is clearly unbiblical and your biased is very easily seen. Many times you ignore the plain reading of the text and change it into something that its not saying.

Paul was not writing to the corinthian believers to stop speaking in tongues, he was instructing them how to behave in the house of God, and that if someone stood up and spoke in an unknown language which is seems like they were used to doing, then it doesn't help the church and therefore they shouldnt do it.

No where was Paul condemning speaking in unknown languages to God, as a matter of fact he encouraged it (vs 5) and he spoke in unknown languages himself(vs 18). You cannot say that Paul is referring to himself speaking in different know languages when the whole chapter is about unknown tongues.

I do appreciate your other videos but I think you need to remove all biases when reading the bible and stick to the plain reading of the text. (i thought it was funny how you said when Paul said he prays with his spirit, he actually meant praying with his mind lol)

[servantofmessiah]

"The purpose of the gift is to speak to man and not God."

Wrong.

That's one purpose.

"He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church." (1 Cor 14:4)

Here Paul clearly differentiates speaking in tongues without an interpreter present, with speaking in tongues with an interpreter present, which is equal to prophesying.

"I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying." (1 Cor 14:5)

Again, it is clear that Paul in the first part of this verse is referring to speaking in tongues without an interpreter, which is valid. Why then do you not teach the truth on this passage? Shameful!

"If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?" (1 Cor 14:23)

Again, it is obvious from this verse that Paul is referring to speaking in tongues without an interpreter present.

"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. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God." (1 Cor 14:27-28)

In this final passage, it is clear that it is possible to speak in tongues without an interpreter. In the church, we are commanded not to do that. But it is clearly permissible, under that case, where there is no interpreter, to "let him speak to himself, and to God".

Why you gloss over al this, miss it, and say, incorrectly, "The purpose of the gift is to speak to man and not God, " is beyond me. You are jaded. Sadly.

Repent, brother.