Has the Gift of Tongues Ceased? A Defense of Practical Cessationism

I submitted this paper for Holy Spirit (TH 753) at Bob Jones University on November 26, 2003, and revised it in 2006.

Introduction

Throughout the history of the church, different doctrines have been at the center of theological controversy. In the early church, theologians battled over the Trinity and Christology. During the middle ages, little theological development of any significance took place. It was during the Reformation that a number of important issues developed. Soteriology and ecclesiology saw much advancement through the conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. In the years following the Reformation many other doctrines were developed. Although there are many points of theological discussion today, few rival the doctrine of the work of the Holy Spirit—and not so much His salvific work, but rather His miraculous work. Are the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, such as healing, casting out demons, prophecy, and tongues, still viable gifts for the church today? That is the chief point of pneumatological controversy—and the subject of this paper.

Survey of the Main Positions

There are essentially three main positions to this question, and most deal with all the miraculous gifts together. The discussion to follow will focus primarily on the gift of tongues. It will serve as a test case for the larger issue. The first group, normally called cessationists, argues that all miraculous gifts ended with or shortly after the time of the apostles. The second comes short of saying that the Scripture teaches a cessation of all miraculous gifts and is open to these gifts still occurring today. The third group argues that all the miraculous gifts are just as much for the church today as they were for the apostolic church.

Cessationist View

Arguably, the most common view in the history of the Christian church has been cessationism. According to this view, tongues and the other miraculous gifts served a specific purpose unique to the first-century church. Consequently, tongues are no longer needed. Most agree that all subsequent occurrences of speaking in tongues are not of God, and some would even say they are demonic.¹ The majority of those of both the Reformed and dispensational persuasions are cessationists.²

Open but Cautious View

A second group, disagreeing with the cessationists that the Scripture exegetically or theologically rules out the present existence of miraculous gifts, is open to the use of these miraculous gifts today. Some in the church may truly have the gift of tongues. This group, however, is opposed to the modern abuses represented in the non-cessationist camp. According to Wayne Grudem, this position represents the majority of evangelicals.³

Non-Cessationist Views

This viewpoint was essentially absent from the church for its first 1900 years. It was not until the last century that some in the church started to argue for the perpetuation of tongues and the other miraculous gifts until the return of Christ.⁴ Since the initial reviving of interest in the supernatural gifts of the Spirit, three groups have emerged.

Pentecostal View

Pentecostalism began in the early 1900s, starting their own distinct denominations. The Pentecostals argued for the continuation of all the spiritual gifts. In addition, baptism in the Holy Spirit is distinct from conversion and will be accompanied by speaking in tongues.

Charismatic View

The Charismatic movement began in the 1960s and agreed with Pentecostalism on the perpetuation of all the spiritual gifts. One distinct thing about the Charismatics is that they did not form their own denominations. Rather, they infiltrated all the major denominations. Charismatics gave a prominent place to speaking in tongues; it became a necessary sign of spirituality.

Third Wave View

A third revival in the miraculous gifts of the Spirit began in the 1980s. This movement has been designated by most as “The Third Wave.” Its distinct emphasis is that the spiritual gifts are the power of God manifested in the proclamation of the gospel. These sign gifts function to confirm the message in order to bring people to conversion. Speaking in tongues is important, but it does not receive the same emphasis that the previous two groups give it.⁵

Exegetical Considerations

Having established something of a survey of the various positions, analysis of the relevant Scripture is the next step. Experience cannot be the guide in these matters. The Scriptural teaching must be the sole foundation for a proper understanding of the gift of tongues.

Analysis of Glossolalia

The Greek word for tongues is γλῶσσα. It occurs 50 times in the NT, 21 of those coming from 1 Corinthians and 14 from chapter 14. Two of the meanings of this word are clear and undebated: (1) the organ used for speech and (2) a language. A third disputed meaning is ecstatic speech.⁶

Relevant Scriptural Data

The Scripture speaks of tongues quite infrequently. It occurs in three chapters in Acts and three in 1 Corinthians. There is a disputed reference to tongues in Mark as well. Other than this, the NT is silent on this spiritual gift. There are, however, other passages that refer to the broader category of the sign gifts and a few passages that may deal with tongues implicitly.

Explicit Scriptural Data

Mark 16:15–18. This passage contains the first reference in the NT to the gift of tongues. This is Mark’s account of the Great Commission. Mark records Jesus’ words: “These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues” (v. 16).⁷

Acts 2. This is the most significant passage in Acts and the first recorded account of speaking in tongues. The ability to speak in unknown languages was temporarily given to the one hundred and twenty disciples of the Lord who were gathered together waiting for the presence of the Spirit.

Acts 10:44–48. This passage recounts the first major conversion of the Gentiles. While Peter was preaching, the Holy Spirit came upon those listening, and they began to speak in tongues. Peter parallels this to his own experience at Pentecost (v. 47).

Acts 19:1–7. In Paul’s visit to Ephesus, he came across twelve disciples of John who had not yet received the Holy Spirit. Paul updated them on the fulfillment of the gospel and the gift of the Holy Spirit. He baptized them, and they received the Spirit and began to speak in tongues. In all of these passages in Acts, speaking in tongues takes place after receiving the Spirit. It is not sought. There is no mention that this was repeated.

1 Corinthians 12. Paul lists out the spiritual gifts and includes “different kinds of tongues” (γένη γλωσσῶν) in verses 10 and 28 and “speaking in tongues” in verse 30. What is interesting here is that both times tongues is listed last in the list, and Paul makes it clear that not all have this gift.

1 Corinthians 13:8–12. This passage has often been used by both cessationists and non-cessationists in order to argue their point. This fact should caution both positions from finding the basis of their view in these verses.⁸ While careful exegesis of this passage is essential to any position, the issue will not be solved here. Many different views of this passage exist. The main point of debate is when the gifts will cease. This point is based on one’s interpretation of “the perfect” (τὸ τέλειον) in verse 10. Many cessationists have argued that the perfect is (1) the completed canon or (2) the mature church. All non-cessationists (and some cessationists) argue for (3) the glorification of the believer (a) at death, (b) at the rapture, or (c) at the second coming, or (4) the eternal state.

In chapter 13, Paul is contrasting love with spiritual gifts, showing the superiority of the former to the latter. His point is to demonstrate the eternality of love as opposed to the temporal nature of gifts. In verse 8, he mentions three gifts: prophecy, tongues, and knowledge. It is likely that these three are not an exhaustive list of gifts that will pass away. Most, if not all, of the spiritual gifts will no longer be necessary in the eternal state. It does seem, however, that Paul does not lump these three together in the same category without making any distinctions between them.

The first distinction is the verb used in verse 8. Prophecies will be set aside (καταργηθήσονται) and knowledge will be set aside (καταργηθήσεται), but tongues will cease for itself (παύσονται). Some have suggested that this is merely a stylistic change and has no significance, but the second distinction in verse 9 argues against this conclusion. Paul continues the distinction by saying, “We know [γινώσκομεν] in part [ἐκ μέρους] and we prophecy [προφητεύομεν] in part [ἐκ μέρους].” These two verbs correspond with the nouns in verse 8: προφητεῖαι and γνῶσις. Had Paul wanted to, he could have said, “We know, speak in tongues, and prophecy in part.” However, he connected ἐκ μέρους only with knowledge and prophecy. The combination of this argument together with the use of the middle voice lends support to the view that the cessation of tongues is not contemporaneous with the cessation of knowledge and prophecy.

	Prophecy	Tongues	Knowledge
Verb Form	καταργηθήσονται	παύσονται	καταργηθήσεται
Verb Parsing	FPI3P	FMI3P	FPI3S
Partial	ἐκ μέρους		ἐκ μέρους

So if Paul is making a distinction, what is it? It would seem that what Paul says about the cessation of the partial in verse 10 does not include tongues. By implication then, tongues is not going to cease at the coming of the perfect. Rather, it seems that tongues will just die out when it has served its purpose. Paul does not give a definitive ending point for tongues.

Consequently, then, the issue of “the perfect” does not have any bearing on the passing of tongues. Rather, it addresses the passing of the gifts of prophecy and knowledge. The context seems to point inescapably to the glorification of the believer—the future state of perfection. This is when believers will see “face to face” and will know just as [they] have been known” (13:12).⁹ These cannot take place at any other time than the believer’s glorification.

1 Corinthians 14. This passage is the most thorough analysis of tongues in the Scripture. A paper-length discussion would be necessary to fully treat this material. Nevertheless, the main points of the passage are clear. Love is greater than the gifts, but among the gifts, prophecy is superior to tongues. What is clear from this passage is that tongues, if they are to be practiced, must follow the specific guidelines. The goal of gifts in the church is edification (vv. 3–5, 12, 17, 26). In order for this goal to be accomplished, the speaking in tongues must be interpreted (vv. 5, 13, 27, 28). All of this must be decent and orderly (v. 40). Yet, the modern practice of tongues ignores these requirements.

Implicit Scriptural Data

In addition to the passages that directly mention tongues, a couple other passages are often included in the discussion. The first is Acts 8:12–17, where the Samaritans are converted. There are some significant parallels with Acts 2 and Acts 10. Simon saw them receive the Spirit (v. 18). He probably saw the effects of it, namely speaking in tongues. Some see tongues in Romans 8:26–27 as well. It is unlikely, however, that tongues are in view.

Theological Considerations

Apart from the Scripture that explicitly addresses the gift of tongues and those passages that deal with it implicitly, there are several arguments of a broader theological nature that add to the cessationist position.

The Purpose of Tongues

Scripture is clear on the role of the miraculous in God’s purposes. In Mark 16:20, the role of the miraculous is to confirm the preaching of the Word. In Acts 14:3, signs and miracles are God’s way of testifying to the Word of His grace. Hebrews 2:3–4 is another key text for dealing with the miraculous activity during the time of the apostles. God was testifying “both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit” to the authenticity of the gospel. The miracles in Jesus’ ministry served the same purpose as well (cf. Mat. 11:2–5).

It seems that tongues played a similar confirmatory role, especially in Acts. A somewhat more challenging passage is 1 Corinthians 14:22, where Paul explicitly states the purpose of tongues: “So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers.” There is considerable debate concerning the meaning of this passage. Likely, in addition to being a positive confirmation of God’s work, tongues also had a negative role of judgment upon unbelievers.¹⁰

The Temporary Nature of Miraculous Ability

It seems that the apostles themselves did not even retain their supernatural gifts until the end of their lives. Early in his ministry, Paul had the ability to heal people (e.g., Acts 28:8). However, it seems that later on in his ministry, this power to work miracles was no longer at his disposal. Timothy apparently had an ongoing sickness for which Paul advised him to take some wine (1 Tim. 5:23). Though it is not explicitly stated, it seems likely that Paul would have healed Timothy of this illness to enable him to be more effective in the ministry. That he did not may imply that he no longer had the ability to perform miraculous gifts of healing.

The Absence of Tongues in the Epistles

One argument of considerable weight concerns the absence of tongues from any of the other Epistles. The Epistles are the primary literature that God has given to the church for their instruction in doctrine and practice. It is quite strange that there is no mention of tongues outside of 1 Corinthians. If the gift of tongues was common in the NT church, why does Paul not deal with it more often? The silence of the NT seems to argue for its inferiority and cessation.

Historical Considerations

While history is of less value than the statements of Scripture (due to the fact that it requires interpretation), it is still of value in the discussion on the cessation of tongues. Both biblical history and church history seem to point in the direction of cessationism.

Biblical History

Many of the times that God used miracles, He did so apart from human mediation. When He has given men the ability to do the miraculous, it has happened only during three different stages in history. It is not God’s customary means of accomplishing His purposes. The three periods in history that God gave miraculous power were during the lives of (1) Moses, (2) Elijah and Elisha, and (3) Jesus and the Apostles. These were all epochal events that required a special verification of authenticity.

Church History

Most historians argue that history demonstrates the absence of speaking in tongues in the church between the end of the first century and the beginning of the third.¹¹ Much of the speaking in tongues that has gone on has been outside the church among Spiritists and Muslims, in paganism, in non-Christian religions, in connection with mental illness, and in the demon possessed.¹²

A Tentative Position

Though the evidence essentially points to a cessationist position, this is a conclusion based primarily on theological and historical grounds. The exegesis of the explicit texts does not provide a solid enough foundation for strict cessationism. However, the arguments against the continuation of tongues to the present are most convincing. Some cautions are necessary. Nowhere in Scripture has God restricted Himself from ever using tongues again. He is free to grant the ability to speak in other languages to whom He wills.¹³ If those who come to a position different from this one are following the biblical guidelines set forth in 1 Corinthians 14 (if such a thing is even possible), then believers should deal charitably with them and not “forbid to speak in tongues” (14:39). Finally, while every Christian should carefully evaluate everything in light of Scripture, he should be very careful in ascribing speaking in tongues to Satan. This is dangerous, since, if it is ever a genuine work of God, to ascribe it to Satan is to defame the Spirit.

Bibliography

Cairns, Alan. “Cessationism.” Dictionary of Theological Terms. Belfast: Ambassador Productions, Ltd.; Greenville, SC: Emerald House Group, Inc., 1998.

Grudem, Wayne A., ed. Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996.

________. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.

Hankins, Steven J. “The Greatest of All: Love (1 Corinthians 13).” Biblical Viewpoint (April 1998): 52–61.

Hodge, Charles. 1 & 2 Corinthians. Geneva Series of Commentaries. Carlisle, PN: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1994.

Kuyper, Abraham. The Work of the Holy Spirit, translated by Henri De Vries. Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2001.

Lenski, R. C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Lenski’s Commentary on the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.

Martin, Alfred. First Corinthians. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1989.

Morris, Leon. 1 Corinthians. Rev. ed. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, edited by Leon Morris. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997.

Osborne, G. R. “Tongues, Speaking in.” Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Pettegrew, Larry D. The New Covenant Ministry of the Holy Spirit. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2001.

Prior, David. The Message of 1 Corinthians: Life in the Local Church. The Bible Speaks Today, edited by John R. W. Stott. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1985.

Thiselton, Anthony C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary, edited by I. Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000.

Notes

1. G. R. Osborne “Tongues, Speaking in (‘Glossolalia’),” Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 1103. ↩

2. Well-known representatives of the Reformed cessationist position include men such as B. B. Warfield, Richard Gaffin, and Robert Reymond. Men from the dispensational segment of cessationism include John MacArthur, Jr., Robert L. Thomas, and the majority of professors from Dallas Theological Seminary. ↩

3. Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Four Views (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 13. Grudem himself is a defender of this position. See Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), 1031–38. Another individual who holds to this view is John Piper. ↩

4. Grudem has challenged this (Systematic Theology, 1043–44). ↩

5. C. Peter Wagner coined the name “Third Wave,” and John Wimber is the well-known leader of the Vineyard churches. ↩

6. Lexical sources differ. Some recognize this meaning of ecstatic speech (e.g., BDAG, Louw-Nida), others suggest it as an option (Friberg), while others do not list it at all (Thayer, Liddell Scott). It seems that theological presuppositions are influencing the linguistic conclusions. Taken at face value though, the usage seems to be in favor of only two definitions: the tongue and a language. Acts 2 provides the basis for interpreting tongues elsewhere. ↩

7. For a detailed discussion of the textual support for Mark 16:9–20 see Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (New York: American Bible Societies, 1994), 102–07. ↩

8. Anthony Thiselton’s comments are appropriate: “[This passage] hardly addresses the debate between Reformed and neo-Pentecostalist writers about ‘tongues will cease’ after the close of the canon or at a given stage of individual or historical maturity…. This issue must be determined on other grounds than exegetical discussions of this verse.” Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary, edited by I. Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 1062. ↩

9. The contrast between the present and the future is unavoidable. Twice in verse 12, Paul distinguishes between the present (ἄρτι) and the future (τότε). Some (e.g., Robert L. Thomas) have tried to argue that the “perfect” of verse 9 is different from the time period of the statements of verse 12, but the “now”/“then” clearly corresponds with the “in part”/“perfect” of verses 9–10. ↩

10. See Thiselton, 1122–26. ↩

11. See Alan Cairns, “Cessationism.” Dictionary of Theological Terms (Belfast: Ambassador Productions, Ltd.; Greenville, SC: Emerald House Group, Inc., 1998), 77–79. “There is a distinct lack of evidence of miraculous powers in the church in the first hundred years after the apostles. Only in the third century did miraculous claims became [sic] more abundant and they continued to increase in succeeding centuries” (78). According to Osborne, “The supernatural gifts like glossolalia gradually declined during the patristic period…. By the middle of the fourth century the practice [of speaking in tongues] seems to be a thing of the past” (1102). ↩

12. Cairns, 162–64. ↩

13. For example, Bruce Olson recounts his missionary experience in Venezuela. Olson had ministered in a tribe and finally saw God bring widespread conversion. This tribe later proclaimed the gospel to a neighboring tribe who did not speak their language. Olson’s claim was that God granted either the ability to speak an unknown language or the ability to hear in one’s own language. Whether or not this account is true, the point is that this would seem to be within the bounds of God’s freedom to do. See Bruce Olson, Bruchko (Charisma House, 1989). ↩