Speaking in tongues and the Holy Spirit

[My Rock]

This is doubly the case since tongues-speaking did not accompany every recorded instance of conversion to the faith in Acts.

True, the observation that tongues-speaking did not accompany every recorded instance of conversion in Acts is very true and highlights the nuanced nature of spiritual experiences in the early church. Picture this: On a profound day of spiritual awakening, an individual in the crowd feels a powerful conviction, their heart pierced by the unmistakable touch of divine truth. They turn to Peter, their soul aching with the desire for redemption and a deeper connection with God. Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost and acting under the Spirit’s guidance, commands them to repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and promises the gift of the Holy Ghost. This powerful directive underscores the essentials of the apostolic experience.

Yet, it’s intriguing to consider that, even though the New Testament does not explicitly state that everyone who felt such conviction sought the entire apostolic experience, the expectation remains that those genuinely yearning for everything God offers would indeed pursue it with all their heart. If one feels deeply convicted, stirred by the Holy Ghost, and fully desires the entirety of what God has made available to His people, it seems only natural to seek out the full measure of the Spirit's blessings, including the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. Such a heartfelt pursuit reflects a true longing for a complete spiritual experience, one that embraces every aspect of God's promise.

And triply so, in light of the fact that nowhere in the NT is tongues-speaking ever taught as a necessary, to-be-expected sign of spiritual regeneration.

These instances suggest that, in the early church, speaking in tongues was a notable and observable sign associated with the initial infilling of the Holy Ghost. However, it is important to note that while speaking in tongues was a significant initial indicator, the broader New Testament teaching emphasizes that spiritual maturity and regeneration are evidenced by a transformed life, fruit of the Spirit, and alignment with God's will, beyond the initial sign of tongues.
Across historical and modern scholarship, the prevailing interpretation of John 3:5 consistently identifies "born of water and the Spirit" as a reference to baptism and the transformative work of the Holy Spirit. Early church fathers and medieval scholars laid the groundwork by associating baptism with regeneration, a view upheld by Reformation theologians who emphasized the necessity of baptism for salvation. Contemporary scholars continue to support this interpretation, viewing baptism as a visible sign of the inner spiritual renewal accomplished by the Holy Spirit. This consensus reflects a robust tradition that links baptism and spiritual rebirth as integral to entering the kingdom of God. Anyone who doesn't hold this view is in the minority.

This is sheer quess-work. It is far more likely, it seems to me, in the near-complete absence of any discussion about tongues-speaking in the various letters of the NT (when many other issues were repeatedy addressed), that tongues-speaking just wasn't central to the life and work of the Early Church. This evident even in Acts, as I pointed out, the three thousand saved at the end of Acts 2 having no tongue-speaking accompanying their conversion.

The argument that speaking in tongues is not mentioned after the Corinthian epistles to suggest it is not for every believer overlooks the broader context of spiritual gifts as described in the New Testament. In the letters to the Corinthians, Paul provides extensive teaching on the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues, prophecy, and healing, establishing a framework for their practice and purpose within the church. However, the absence of detailed discussion on specific gifts in later epistles does not imply their cessation or irrelevance. The New Testament writings often address diverse issues relevant to the churches they were written to, focusing on particular doctrinal or practical concerns as needed. The lack of mention of tongues or other gifts in certain letters should be understood in light of the fact that the foundational teaching on spiritual gifts had already been established and integrated into the church's life. The gifts, including tongues, were part of the early church’s experience and were expected to continue as part of the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, their absence in some texts does not negate their role or suggest they are not intended for all believers, but rather reflects the broader scope of New Testament teaching, which aimed to address various aspects of Christian faith and practice beyond the specific manifestation of spiritual gifts.

 

[My Rock]

Reposting this video because I gave no commentary on it before. This is Lee Stoneking of the UPCI addressing U.N. about His resurrection from the dead. After the heart stops beating, blood typically begins to coagulate (clot) within 20 minutes. Blood coagulation is part of the body's natural process of blood clotting, which continues even after death until the blood fully solidifies. He was dead for 45 min. Pay special attention to 4:15 Praise God Almighty.

 

[My Rock]

None of this has any relevance to what the Bible says. I don't take my cue concerning spiritual living from any other source but divinely-inspired Scripture. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

Historical references to the continuation of this practice serve not as a replacement for Scripture but as a witness to the ongoing work of the Holy Spirit in the church. They demonstrate that the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues, were not isolated to the apostolic era but continued to be experienced by believers throughout church history, in fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Therefore, while Scripture remains the ultimate guide, the experiences and teachings of early and modern church figures can affirm and illuminate the enduring presence of spiritual gifts in the life of the church, as promised by Jesus and recorded in the New Testament.

Jesus's conception being way of the Spirit does not mean he was therefore necessarily indwelt constantly by the Holy Spirit all of his life.

It’s important to recognize that the conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit is not merely a one-time event but a foundational aspect of His entire being. The fact that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit means that His very nature was intertwined with the Spirit from the moment of conception. Unlike any other human, Jesus was fully God and fully man, with the divine nature fully present in Him. This divine nature includes the constant indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as seen throughout His life and ministry. Scriptures like John 3:34 affirm that God gave the Spirit to Jesus “without measure,” indicating a continuous and full presence of the Holy Spirit in His life, not just at His baptism but throughout His entire earthly existence. Therefore, the claim that Jesus was not necessarily indwelt by the Holy Spirit all His life fails to acknowledge the unique and continuous relationship between Jesus and the Spirit, as evidenced by His divine nature.

While Jesus was already fully indwelt by the Holy Spirit from conception, His baptism by John the Baptist was a pivotal moment where the Spirit's descent in the form of a dove served as a public affirmation of His identity as the Messiah. This event did not indicate that Jesus was receiving the Holy Spirit for the first time, but rather, it was a manifestation of the Spirit’s empowerment for His ministry, signaling the start of His role as the anointed one who would fulfill God’s redemptive plan.

This is a glaring non sequitur. All that Christ's divine conception permits us to say is that he was so-conceived.

This statement oversimplifies the profound theological implications of Christ’s divine conception. The conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit is not just an isolated event but a revelation of His identity as God manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16). The divine conception is indicative of the union between God and man in the person of Jesus Christ, who was conceived by the Spirit, born of a virgin, and lived a life fully empowered by the Holy Spirit. This event signifies the beginning of the Incarnation, where God took on human form, fully indwelt by the Holy Spirit from conception to resurrection. Limiting the significance of Jesus’s conception to just the act of being "so-conceived" neglects the ongoing work of the Spirit in His life, which was evident from the moment of conception through His ministry, miracles, and even His resurrection. The fullness of the Holy Spirit was evident in every aspect of Christ’s life, making it clear that His divine conception was not just a starting point but the foundation of His Spirit-filled existence.

 

[My Rock]

The point wasn't about whether or not Jesus is the Ultimate Source of spiritual gifts but what it means that he never did any tongues-speaking though he was filled with the Holy Spirit. If tongues-speaking was a vital feature of Christian living, it stands to reason this would be exemplified in the life of our Great Example, Jesus Christ.

The argument that if tongues-speaking were vital, Jesus would have exemplified it, reveals a misunderstanding of the purpose of Jesus' ministry and the role of spiritual gifts in the New Covenant. Tongues, along with other spiritual gifts, were given to the church after Jesus' ascension as a sign of the Holy Spirit's indwelling and empowerment for believers (Acts 2:4). Jesus, being the source of all spiritual power, did not need to exhibit tongues-speaking because His life and ministry were the ultimate demonstration of God's power and authority. To suggest that Jesus needed to perform every spiritual act that would later be available to believers undermines the unique and progressive revelation of God's plan. The Holy Spirit's outpouring at Pentecost marked a new era for the church, where the gifts, including tongues, were given to equip believers for ministry and to confirm the Word of God. To demand that Jesus model every aspect of post-Pentecost Christian living is to impose a requirement on Him that contradicts the very nature of His mission.

This is all a rather convenient ad hoc extrapolation, not the plain statement - or description - of the NT.

The statement that "the gift of tongues, along with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, was a promise to be fulfilled after His earthly ministry" is not an ad hoc extrapolation but is rooted in a careful reading of Scripture through a Oneness Practical Symbolic Exegesis Perspective. John 7:39 explicitly states, "the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified." This passage reveals a clear chronological order in God's redemptive plan. Jesus's earthly ministry was focused on fulfilling the law, teaching the kingdom of God, and ultimately sacrificing Himself for the sins of humanity. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit, as promised in Joel 2:28-29 and fulfilled in Acts 2, was divinely reserved for the time after Jesus's ascension, marking the beginning of the New Covenant era. This outpouring included the manifestation of spiritual gifts, such as speaking in tongues, which were signs of the Spirit's work in the believers' lives. To dismiss this as an extrapolation overlooks the significance of the timing and purpose of these events as outlined in Scripture. The New Testament's narrative is consistent with the idea that the full expression of the Holy Spirit's power, including tongues, was intended for the church after Christ’s glorification, serving as a distinct marker of the new era of grace initiated at Pentecost.

 

[hawkman]

Before I tell you where I got them, can you provide an answer?

I can provide answers when I know for sure we have the right numbers in the first question you ask . Not until then .

 

[Rookie]

I can provide answers when I know for sure we have the right numbers in the first question you ask . Not until then .

Pew says 1/3 weekly, but more than 50 garunteed. And personal experience meeting hundred of churchgoers from Compton to Sac and interstate ministries, I seen it for myself.

But really since I'm the one asking the questions why is my answer to an irrelevant indicative for a response.
You could just say you don't want to.

 

[Rookie]

That's odd to say, NO!

I know its a play on words but that is how I approach the Bible is from all angles. Practically, Symbolically, and Exegesis of topics in question and even word study when necessary.

There is a difference between Exegesis and eisegesis.

 

[My Rock]

There is a difference between Exegesis and eisegesis.

I know. But that is not what I am doing.

 

[hawkman]

Pew says 1/3 weekly, but more than 50 garunteed. And personal experience meeting hundred of churchgoers from Compton to Sac and interstate ministries, I seen it for myself.

Great ! Thank you for the help . Now since you know where the info came from , give me the Pew link . Should be easy for you .

One, why is it that 70% of Christians can supposedly speak in tongues, but less than 2% of Christians use all the other gifts combined?

 

[Runningman]

I have a question and I hope and pray somebody can answer it.

One, why is it that 70% of Christians can supposedly speak in tongues, but less than 2% of Christians use all the other gifts combined? It's like everyone uses the gift that can't be verified if it's real or not, but since all the other gifts like healings or prophecy can be verified, no one does those. And the very few that do take on the endeavor of other gifts almost always have some fraud related to them with healings, or the prophets are always vague.

While tongues can be "faked" and anyone can sorta mutter a bunch of sounds that seem to be the words of an unknown language, real tongues are very powerful and isn't meant to be something for the benefit of the unlearned and unbelievers anyway. I have a friend who spontaneously began speaking in tongues while praying. It's true, she could be lying, but knowing her character and personality and lifestyle, I sincerely and highly doubt it. I believe it's real.

Paul actually warned against it showing it off in front of those who who couldn't understand it, for fear they would say they were crazy.

1 Corinthians 14
23If 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?

It's also true that those with real spiritual gifts don't have a verification process, at least not one that they can easily share with you because it's God doing the verifying and He doesn't give people a certificate they can just share with others. It isn't like that. Those with the real gifts don't often make it into a public spotlight, but they probably do sometimes. I would guess they will most likely get slandered, demonized, accused, called a heretic, etc. Anything to cast doubt on them and lump them in with the fakers. There are a lot of fakers who are successful and do lead their group astray for profit, too.

Secondly, assuming that everyone who seems to speak in tongues can actually speak in tongues, why do they never, I MEAN NEVER, have an interpreter. Which Paul commands without exception. I even asked certain tongue speakers about this and they'll admit that they have to have an interpreter, but then they just waltz about their day and continue to speak without an interpreter.

I'm not even going to mention those who I know who can supposedly speak in tongues, but as soon as church is over they speak in a whole different set of unholy tongues (foul language), or are in unrepentant lifestyles of sin.

So how does that reconcile?

While that is unfortunate, I believe this is a misconception about spiritual gifts. Actually, those with spiritual gifts might be sinners still and still retain their spiritual gift. There may have been a point where they were worthy of the gift and got it, but hit a rough patch or fell off the wagon. In any case, God's gifts are irrevocable (Romans 11:29) and they aren't the metric of what it really means to be a Christian. Those with the gifts may very well, in the end at their judgment, be told to depart from God because they didn't do the will of the Father and were workers of sin. See Matthew 7:15-23.

 

[RandyK]

I have a question and I hope and pray somebody can answer it.

One, why is it that 70% of Christians can supposedly speak in tongues, but less than 2% of Christians use all the other gifts combined? It's like everyone uses the gift that can't be verified if it's real or not, but since all the other gifts like healings or prophecy can be verified, no one does those. And the very few that do take on the endeavor of other gifts almost always have some fraud related to them with healings, or the prophets are always vague.

Secondly, assuming that everyone who seems to speak in tongues can actually speak in tongues, why do they never, I MEAN NEVER, have an interpreter. Which Paul commands without exception. I even asked certain tongue speakers about this and they'll admit that they have to have an interpreter, but then they just waltz about their day and continue to speak without an interpreter.

I'm not even going to mention those who I know who can supposedly speak in tongues, but as soon as church is over they speak in a whole different set of unholy tongues (foul language), or are in unrepentant lifestyles of sin.

So how does that reconcile?

Well, you have more than one issue. The hypocrisy has nothing to do with it. God pours out rain on undeserving land that may or may not respond with thankfulness.

But I'm already on record as saying Tongues has been changed from a Group Phenomena on the Day of Pentecost, and immediately thereafter, to a more or less individual prayer language, to a required gift in order to prove one has the Baptism of the Spirit.

Obviously, something is wrong with this picture. You simply need to read the appropriate Scriptures, and not develop your own theology or doctrine--just take it as it is.

My own opinion is that the Group Tongues thing was for the initial coming of the Spirit, which had been promised by John the Baptist. Jesus told a *group,* ie the Apostles, to wait for it together in Jerusalem. And so it was a "group thing."

After that, Paul indicated that Tongues continue, both individually and for church services, though only when accompanied by an interpretation. Individual giftings has a long history and precedent in the OT Scriptures. There were Prophets, priests, and judges, etc.

There is no theology or doctrine in the Bible that states we need to speak in Tongues to confirm we've been baptized in the Holy Spirit. But we are not to quench the Spirit or forbid any of the spiritual gifts, including Tongues and Prophecy. David's wife opposed him dancing before the Lord and became childless.

We simply have to discern what is real. Obviously, if it has become a Doctrine, then a lot of people are going to fake it in order to be part of the group.

To be honest, I tried to do it for awhile. I just couldn't continue doing something that seemed so "forced." I suppose anybody can speak gibberish to the Lord--I'm sure the Lord isn't offended. ;)

 

[Consecrated Life]

I have a question and I hope and pray somebody can answer it.

One, why is it that 70% of Christians can supposedly speak in tongues, but less than 2% of Christians use all the other gifts combined? It's like everyone uses the gift that can't be verified if it's real or not, but since all the other gifts like healings or prophecy can be verified, no one does those. And the very few that do take on the endeavor of other gifts almost always have some fraud related to them with healings, or the prophets are always vague.

Nobody today is raising the dead, nobody is prophesizing, nobody is giving a mere shrug of the shoulders being bitten by a pit viper, nobody is commanding the paralyzed to walk, etc,etc,etc,etc, & etc.
It is no coincidence that that only visible "gift" being claimed today is the one that can be faked .

 

[Rookie]

Obviously, something is wrong with this picture. You simply need to read the appropriate Scriptures, and not develop your own theology or doctrine--just take it as it is.

And where did I do that? And it seems counterintuitive that you give your own opinion in the paragraph below.

Still doesn't answer my question

It is no coincidence that that only visible "gift" being claimed today is the one that can be faked .

True, although I have to give prophecy a credit. I had 2 experiences I can't deny with that gift. One where we were visiting a friend's Church who we barely just met, and the pastor was leading a worship session who we never met before, and he was calling people up and prophesying over them and some people were falling out.

Well I thought a fake would have his predetermined people, but what do you know he actually called on me. When I was before him for some odd reason my leg wouldn't stop shaking, and he accurately put on the spotlight that I was going through a season of repeated attacks from the enemy, which I was, and for me to "start that YouTube channel", which how would anyone but myself know I wanted to start a YouTube channel??

Secondly there's this woman on YouTube who also claims to be a prophet, but unlike any other prophet I've ever seen, she prophesies almost exactly like Jeremiah, isaiah, ezekiel, or Daniel does, and she always backs up her prophecies with scripture. She is pretty terrifying though because she's almost always prophesying judgment against the evil in the world especially America. And I still have yet to find any other prophecies that have failed, in fact a couple of them have already came true (for example TD Jakes scandal she prophesied a year earlier, the "coup" on Biden she prophesied 3 years ago and that Kamala was going to be the next president which was also 3 years ago.)

 

[My Rock]

Nobody today is raising the dead, nobody is prophesizing, nobody is giving a mere shrug of the shoulders being bitten by a pit viper, nobody is commanding the paralyzed to walk, etc,etc,etc,etc, & etc.

But they most certainly could.

 

[Consecrated Life]

And where did I do that? And it seems counterintuitive that you give your own opinion in the paragraph below.

Still doesn't answer my question


True, although I have to give prophecy a credit. I had 2 experiences I can't deny with that gift. One where we were visiting a friend's Church who we barely just met, and the pastor was leading a worship session who we never met before, and he was calling people up and prophesying over them and some people were falling out.

Well I thought a fake would have his predetermined people, but what do you know he actually called on me. When I was before him for some odd reason my leg wouldn't stop shaking, and he accurately put on the spotlight that I was going through a season of repeated attacks from the enemy, which I was, and for me to "start that YouTube channel", which how would anyone but myself know I wanted to start a YouTube channel??

Secondly there's this woman on YouTube who also claims to be a prophet, but unlike any other prophet I've ever seen, she prophesies almost exactly like Jeremiah, isaiah, ezekiel, or Daniel does, and she always backs up her prophecies with scripture. She is pretty terrifying though because she's almost always prophesying judgment against the evil in the world especially America. And I still have yet to find any other prophecies that have failed, in fact a couple of them have already came true (for example TD Jakes scandal she prophesied a year earlier, the "coup" on Biden she prophesied 3 years ago and that Kamala was going to be the next president which was also 3 years ago..

All God's prophets have long since departed in Peace.
The common tendency is to forget that the Word of God is sufficient in Prophecy .

 

[RandyK]

And where did I do that? And it seems counterintuitive that you give your own opinion in the paragraph below.

Still doesn't answer my question

Oh no, I did indeed answer your question---just not to your satisfaction. This is what you asked....

One, why is it that 70% of Christians can supposedly speak in tongues, but less than 2% of Christians use all the other gifts combined? It's like everyone uses the gift that can't be verified if it's real or not, but since all the other gifts like healings or prophecy can be verified, no one does those. And the very few that do take on the endeavor of other gifts almost always have some fraud related to them with healings, or the prophets are always vague.

So this is what I answered in so many words...
I personally don't believe that Tongues were meant to be a universal prayer language for the Church. And yet Pentecostals teach this, though I do count myself a Pentecostal. So I know.

This is why a large % of Pentecostal Christians--not just "Christians," speak in tongues, instead of the other gifts. These "other girs" are not required as evidence of the Baptism of the Spirit, which is what Pentecostals teach. So Christians find less need to demonstrate those gifts.

Christians want to belong to the group that believes in the power of the Holy Spirit, with signs and wonders. They want to be part of God doing things today, and not just in ancient times. They don't want a dry, dead church, where only old people go and children can scarcely be found anymore. They want to go where prophecy is alive, and God is manifesting Himself in their midst!

Again, I don't believe the Tongues part is for everybody or required to be Spirit Baptized. But that is where Pentecostals have placed the emphasis on demonstrating spiritual gifts. And that's actually how the Day of Pentecost started the history of the Church, with group Tongues.

So you're right--Tongues can't be verified if nobody knows what is being said. It can be fraudulent and nobody can disprove it. Easy to do to become part of the group!

And it's much harder to produce miracles of healing on demand, though some have tried these more difficult signs of God's power. Again, I don't agree with all of the theology Pentecostals sometimes teach. I don't agree with the Faith Teachers who teach that "whatsoever you ask for, you'll receive," that "if you ask in faith, consider it done."

These kinds of statements were made by Jesus but in the context of the Abrahamic Promise. And so the things "asked for" would have to be aligned with God's plan for Abraham's faith descendants--not just applying to anything we want to have.

That's why those who believe they just need to have faith end up looking like fakes, because they try to will things into existence that don't exist. And when things don't materialize as ordered they become experts at either rationalizing it away or disappearing like a vapor.

Or, the whole thing is covered up in shouting, emotions, and hysteria. A very real sense of worship seems to cover over a lot of the obvious failure. And despite the failures I do think actual miracles do take place, along with a genuine sense of worship and God's presence. So there's that.

So I have answered your questions, though apparently not to your satisfaction. But when you ask questions expect to get the views of those you ask--not just what you think adequately answers it for you. Thank you.

 

[RandyK]

That was a nice way to cover up the fact that you originally didn't answer my question, but now I guess you finally realize you didn't and you answered the first question only.

No, I actually thought I had answered the question. It's apparent to me that you're not interested in a real conversation. I think you've completely misread much of what I was saying. But oh well, if you prefer to tell me what I mean instead of hear me explain what I meant, we won't get anywhere, will we?

 

[RandyK]

Soldier asked:
One, why is it that 70% of Christians can supposedly speak in tongues, but less than 2% of Christians use all the other gifts combined?

In my opinion, 70% of Christians do not speak in Tongues. Perhaps 70% of *Pentecostal Christians* may speak in Tongues.

The reason so many Pentecostal Christians speak in Tongues is because doctrinally they often believe that it is the major sign that someone has received the Baptism of the Spirit. If someone wants to be a Pentecostal, he would want to indicate that he or she is baptized in the Spirit. Therefore, many Pentecostals believe that Tongues is a common Prayer Language that all Pentecostal Christians should enjoy. Real or not, that is what they produce.

It's like everyone uses the gift that can't be verified if it's real or not, but since all the other gifts like healings or prophecy can be verified, no one does those. And the very few that do take on the endeavor of other gifts almost always have some fraud related to them with healings, or the prophets are always vague.

In my opinion, Tongues continue to be practiced among Pentecostals in high numbers even though some of that practice is likely faked precisely because they cannot be verified. It is indeed more difficult to fake a healing.

And because it is much harder to fake a healing or a prophecy, it would not likely be something everybody can do without being held accountable. Hence, this is done in much smaller numbers. Though Pentecostals often claim that they have all of the gifts of the Spirit available to them, they simply can't practice them when they can't be faked!

That being said, I believe in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit through the gifts of the Spirit given to individuals as the Spirit wishes to give them. I believe in Tongues, Healing, and Prophecy, among others. True demonstrations of these gifts should yield verifiable results. I don't expect all the gifts to be demonstrated by every Pentecostal on demand. I don't interpret the Scriptures to be teaching these things, although I understand that good Christians think otherwise.

 

[electedbyHim]

Reposting this video because I gave no commentary on it before. This is Lee Stoneking of the UPCI addressing U.N. about His resurrection from the dead. After the heart stops beating, blood typically begins to coagulate (clot) within 20 minutes. Blood coagulation is part of the body's natural process of blood clotting, which continues even after death until the blood fully solidifies. He was dead for 45 min. Pay special attention to 4:15 Praise God Almighty.

addressing U.N. about His resurrection from the dead.

I see you capitalized the H in his.

One can google his name and see websites about all the contradictions in his supposed resurrection.

 

[electedbyHim]

Outside Biblical sources with citation:

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD):
In Against Heresies, Irenaeus mentions the continuation of miraculous gifts, including speaking in tongues, as signs accompanying believers filled with the Holy Spirit. He writes, "We hear many brethren in the Church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages" (Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 6, Section 1). This passage indicates that speaking in tongues was a recognized sign of the Spirit's presence in the early Church.

The Testimony of Irenaeus​

The witness of Irenaeus is very important for his statement regarding tongues has been pointed to as evidence of the existence of the gift in the centuries after the Apostles.21 Irenaeus says “we hear many brethren in the Church…who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages.”22

Before considering this statement more closely, the background of Irenaeus should be examined. Though very little is known of Irenaeus’ early life, the few scraps of information that are available are very vital. As a boy growing up in Smyrna he heard Polycarp and was greatly influenced by him.23 Some time around A.D. 177 Irenaeus traveled from Asia Minor to Lyons in Gaul where he became a presbyter under Pothinus who was also trained by Polycarp. During this time he witnessed the severe persecution at Lyons and saw his faithful friend, Pothinus, brutally murdered.24 While still a presbyter, he was sent to Rome with a letter for the bishop, Eleutherus. This was a letter written by a group of Montanists to try to persuade Eleutherus to have a kind attitude toward them.25 It was after the death of Pothinus that Irenaeus became bishop of Lyons where he served until he, too, died a martyr’s death.

In connection with the present study, two things in the background of Irenaeus should be observed. First, he came from Asia Minor and then ministered in Lyons. It is important to realize that it was in Asia Minor and Syria that there were many unhealthy influences upon Christianity,26 and particularly the influence of Montanus and his perverted pneumatology.27 This association with the Montanist element did not cease when Irenaeus arrived in Lyons, for there was a close connection between the churches of Lyons and those of Asia Minor.28 In addition to Pothinus and Irenaeus from Asia Minor, also Alexander from Phrygia and Attalus from Pergamon were among those residing in Lyons.29 With this close relation it is only natural that there were spiritual and doctrinal connections, good as well as bad, and Montanism was one of the bad elements in Lyons.30 It is in this light that Irenaeus’ statement regarding tongues should be viewed. From his background he had evidently heard the spiritual excesses of those who were influenced by Montanus.

The second thing to observe about the background of Irenaeus is that he was influenced by Polycarp. Because of this close association, it would be normal to him to have derived much of his knowledge of Christian doctrine from the aged bishop of Smyrna.31 It is obvious that tongues did not play a part in Polycarp’s writings, and even more significant that they did not occupy a large part of Irenaeus’ theology. The point is, if the gift were of great importance, both the teacher and his pupil should have stressed it. They did not.

With these things in mind it is now possible to examine Irenaeus’ statement regarding tongues. First, observe that Irenaeus does not say he spoke in tongues. Second, he evidently does not classify those close to him as having the gift, for he uses the plural “we hear.” Coxe points out that the old Latin uses the perfect audivimus, “we have heard.”32 Third, because of Irenaeus’ association with the Montanists,33 Robertson is right in saying, “His rather vague statement may rest on some report as to the Montanists of Asia Minor….”34 Fromthese things it must be concluded that Irenaeus meant that he and those around him had at some past time heard of things like those heard in Montanists circles. Regarding the whole of Irenaeus’ works it could be said that certainly the main thrust and emphasis of his theology was not on the gift of tongues.35

---

22 22. Irenaes, op. cit., V, 6. 1.
23 Irenaeus, op. cit., III, 4; Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, II, 749.
25 25. Ibid., V, 4.
26 26. Cf. A. F. J. Klijn, “A Survey of the Research into the Western Text of the Gospels and Acts,” Novum Testamentum, 3:173, October, 1959.
32 32. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (eds.), “The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus,” The Ante Nicene Fathers, I, 531.
33 33. It should be noted that he was the one who carried their letters to Eleutherus. Cf. Eusebius, op. cit., V, 4.
34 34. A. T. Robertson, “Tongues, Gift of,” Hastings Bible Dictionary, IV, 796.
35 35. See Irenaeus, op. cit., III, 12. Here he discusses the events of Pentecost, but gives no hint that the gift was operative during his day.