Speaking in Tongues Is Alive and Well -- In Some Surprising Places
Monday, June 4, 2007 at 11:46AM 
This news would come as no surprise if this post was speaking about Pentecostal churches. But tongue-speaking is alive and well in some very surprising places.
How about among Southern Baptists?
"A new study from LifeWay Research shows that two-thirds of Protestant pastors -- and half of Southern Baptist pastors -- believe the Holy Spirit gives some people a special prayer language from the Lord. The phone study surveyed 1,004 Protestant laity, 405 pastors in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), and 600 non-SBC senior pastors. Pastors were asked if they believed the Holy Spirit gave some people the gift of a special language to pray privately to God. Fifty percent of SBC pastors said the Holy Spirit still gave some people the gift of tongues, 43 percent said no, and seven percent didn't know." Click here: Survey says ... half of So. Baptist pastors believe private prayer language is valid (OneNewsNow.com)
Or how about in the Christian Reformed Church?
"Third Wave Pentecostalism
It might seem odd for a synod of a Reformed church to be discussing a Pentecostal movement, but as Rev. Peter Hoytema pointed out in his article `Riding The Third Wave' (May 2007 Banner), this movement has had a greater influence within the CRC than many people realize. Synod 2004 appointed a committee to study it. That committee is reporting to Synod 2007 with two reports, one from the majority of the committee and one from the minority. The two groups could not agree on the biblical basis or the place in the CRC of practices such as prophesying, healing ministries, spiritual warfare and deliverance ministries. The majority of the committee, while cautioning against spiritual elitism, found that the Third Wave movement has much to offer the CRC. However, the minority group said that some of the dangers cautioned against by the majority are so serious that they could not agree with the positive assessment. Synod 2007 will have to make its own judgment." (Click here: wfn.org | CRC NEWS: What to Watch for at Synod 2007).
I have only one thing to say, but unless you have the gift of interpretation, you wouldn't understand it.
Reader Comments (40)
yes, the baby dedication thing is what gnashes my teeth most. sounds like the classis that will make that overture to synod this year has effectively decided they are baptists. i don't understand why they want approval and don't just leave altogether? why not be baptists and be done with it instead of asking paedo-baptists to allow a baptist rite?
zrim
It's alright, Dr. Riddlebarger, just nearing the end of the a-millennium.
Hopefully you are merely ignorant.
May God forgive you.
As for tounge speaking, I was involved in carasmatic church and I was prayed for to speak in tounges. It sounded like some soft of baby language. When nothing happaned they dismissed it and said I was not ready.
As for the Bible Acts and I Corinthians, tounges & spiritual gifts were used for edifing the church or preaching the gospel. Bringing glory to Christ not oneself. Most churches I see which are charasmatic look like they are bringing attention onto themselves?
Thank God I am no longer blinded by TBN or the Foursquare teachings. I go to CRC and thank God that I am learning correct doctrine from God's word.
Thank you Pastor Kim, Rev. Souza & Professor Samples.
r.
could you briefly explain what you mean when you say you "need to speak in tongues"?
zrim
Every gift God gives to the body of Christ in His sovereignty is exactly what is needed. The same way scripture says every member is necessary. ( I've known some members that seemed very unnecessary but I have to trust the word).
Why me, why tongues? I don't know but scripture says it ediffies oneself and I sure have needed edifying. Perhaps there is an element of humilty and lack of self reliance for one who can rely on what they think and say?
I have to feel some pity and concern for those here who are mocking and contemptuous. I understand the reaction to most of modern charismania. But if tongues during Acts and Corinthians days did not undermine the doctrine of the sufficiency and inerrency of scripture, they do not undermine those doctrines today either. You can't pick and choose which gifts ceased. A good pastor and a good teacher is as much a miracle in my opinion as a tongues!!!
while i am about as far away from affirming these doctrines of tongues, etc., i hope i am equally as far from those who feel the need to simply mock and ridicule.
that said, i asked because i can't help but hear what i would consider very therapeutic lingo used by folks who call tongues "personally edifying." it is my belief that any gift must pass the serving test, which is to say, it cannot be primarily for personal, private use, etc. so tongues was a gift given to further the gospel (and as evidence of apostolic authority) and not so much to therapeut the agent. it was given to transcend language barriers.
i don't mean for this to necessarily engage the topic or debate you or anything. i was just curious what you meant. i used to teach at a full gospel/charistmatic church school. ever since i have been curious if those who embrace tongues ever do it for those sorts of pragmatic reasons (i.e. to translate another legit language for the sake of the gospel) or if it is for what i call more therapeutic reasons. the folks at the school always seemed to do so for the latter reasons. sounds like it is probably the same for you...unless...you do translate for legit languages...?
anyway,
zrim
interesting post.
Paul prayed privately in tongues for what appears to be personal edification. That is bible lingo, not therapeutic psychobabble lingo. So I guess the real question is if such things stopped with Paul. Obviously non dispy Calvinists disagree on this.
It is true that when I got saved in 72, amid terrible persecution from peers at a very liberal college, after two years smoking dope almost evey weekend,I prayed in tongues more frequently, especially when I did not even know where to start in English. I would say that the great truths about the sovereignty of God are so helpful when I pray now that I do pray in tongues less often. Whether that is good or bad I do not know, Paul did not seem to slow down any at it. Like I said, maybe I needed it more than others.
I spent five years in what was PDI (now Sovereign Grace ministries) a while back and they were trying hard to figure out being Reformed and being non cessationist. Back then they believed in a "second blessing" but have rejected that doctrine, so I am told, while still affirming all the gifts today. At this point I tell people who ask that I believe in a second, third, fourth, 10th, 100th, and 1000th blessing, etc. I pray all the time for God to pour out his Holy Spirit in power. I know sick folks no doctor can help. I wish we all had miraculous gifts operating. And I always say that when the Holy Spirit fell and the place was shaken in the book of Acts, twice, they started to share and give everything. Show me a greedy or stingy Pentecostal, and I'll show you somebody who hasn't got a clue about what the holy spirit's power is supposed to do.
At any rate, your lack of mockery towards guys like Grudem and Piper speaks well of you even if you are cessationist. I shudder to think of how God feels about people mocking non cessationists like John Piper.
This is an interesting read: ( Vern is a prof at Westminster TS)
Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts:
Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist Theology
Vern Sheridan Poythress
[Published in The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39/1 (1996): 71-101. Used with permission.]
http://www.frame-poythress.org/poythress_articles/1996Modern.htm
One thing I don't understand is if what passes for the gift of tongues is legitimately from the Spirit, why is it indistinguishable from the utterances of heretics such as Oneness Pentecostals (or outright false religions for that matter)?
I do not know for sure.
We do know that on the judgement day, people who think they belong to the Lord,and call Him Lord, and in His name prophesied and did many miracles, will be sent away and Jesus will say he never knew them. There is no indication that the miracles did not really happen and they did not really cast out demons and prophesy, but they are still called evildoers. Balaam prophesied beautiful true things from God, and he was evil. I don't fully understand that except as a warning that evildoers can do true miracles and yet lead the flock into sin.
I knew a darling girl who got saved into oneness Pentecostalism....it took years to get her to finally accept a father and son relationship. She and her hub ended up in a Reformed Baptist church after many years and he became an avid five point Calvinist,and she maybe a 3.5-4 pointer non-oneness. You just never know with people. Maybe her tongues were real to start, maybe counterfeit. I don't know. She believed at first that anybody who did not speak in tongues was definitely not saved, but not anymore.
I have been around tongues a few times that gave me the creeps. Really hard to explain. You just felt like it was from the evil one. The people were forceful and pushy so maybe it wasn't the tongue, maybe it was the people. Maybe it was just the fact that it loud, public, and uninterpreted.
This is more by Vern Poythress on tongues, I only skimmed it very superficially...FWIW...
http://www.frame-poythress.org/poythress_articles_topic.htm#cessationism
We've had some good talks about all this with our PCA pastor who loved Vern at Seminary. Our Pastor claims we fit just fine in our beloved PCA church, but needless to say we tend keep our mouths clamped shut on this entire subject except with the pastor.
He also says there are very few strict cessationists at Westminster TS left, because there are such undeniable miracles happening in the third world where the gospel is going forth for the first time. He said they tend to expect God to work through means here though. (Sounds fine until you start to deal with all the people that ordinary means don't help, ie modern medicine. Then we start asking God for some healing miracles. At least I do!)
http://www.bible.ca/tongues.htm
I would say your link's assumption that crazy Pentecostalism equals all usage of the gift of tongues today, is right up there with saying that all Christians believe in a pre trib rapture.
Amils are in the minority, and Reformed tongues prayers may be in an even smaller minority. But such blanket characterization is unhelpful.
Could you please capitalize your sentencing. It makes reading a whole lot easier and follows English convention.
Thank you sir or madam.
Also, thank you for some of your thoughts which have been helpful.
I totally agree with you on that one! :)
Like it or not, there IS a lot of similarities in the pagan/occult religions and emotive expressions like tongues in Christianity.
Discernment is not accomplished via experience evaluations but by the Word of God.
r.
Paul seems to be contrasting tongues as needing an interpretation and prophecy which does not. The usual argument is that Corinth must have been multi-lingual so that when a tongue came it needed to be interpreted. However if someone prophesied it also would need interpreted but Paul does not attach interpretation to Prophecy as he does with tongues (1 Cor 14:5). The argument is nonsensical...imagine the senario for a moment:
A Church has a mixture of French, Spanish and English speaking people. If the French speaking person "propecies" the people who speak othe r languages need an interpretation for that as well; a command that is lacking throughout 1 Cor 14. Paul assumes that Prophecy is understood without an interpretation.
Paul's argument only works if Corinth was predominantly monolinguistic and the tongues being spoken of are ineed an "unkown" language used in prayer for the edification of the individual (1 Cor 14:1-3). In the context of 1 Cor 13:1 it is not an exaggeration to say it is a "heavenly" prayer language. This makes Paul's argument more logical as everyone in the church speaks the same language meaning prophecy does not need an interpretation but tongues (which is from man to God i.e. prayer) need an interpretation. This means that the tongues in Acts 2 were different to the tongues in 1 Corinthians 14. The word used maybe the same but context should determine meaning. On Pentecost the people heard "the works of God" (i.e. God's message to them) whereas in Corinth as I have already said, the tongues where form man to God