When reading Through the latter portion of I Corinthians, it is hard not to come away with questions about Paul’s discussion of tongues.
A major issue in Corinth
Why did he spend so much time on this issue? Not only is the whole of chapter 14 devoted to the topic, but it is referred to in chapters 12 and 13, as well. Compare this to the amount of time he spent on the many other serious issues plaguing this group — in chapter 15, some of them were even questioning the doctrine of resurrection!
Why was this scene he describes happening at all? As Paul says in 14:33 (NKJV as all quotes): “God is not the author of confusion” (NIV: “disorder”). Why would God give the gift of speaking in those particular tongues to the members of the ecclesia at Corinth anyway? The purpose of the spirit gifts in general was for preaching and for building up the early church.
The only other descriptive mention of the gift of tongues is in Acts 2 the day of Pentecost. On this occasion, the picture is very different from what appears to have been happening in Corinth. “Every man heard in his own tongue.” Compare this to I Cor. 14:14, where not even the speaker appears to understand what he is saying! Paul even points out (v. 22) that the original purpose of the tongues gift was so unbelievers might learn.
Why was this the only spirit gift to be “abused?” With the litany of gifts described earlier in the chapter and in the gospels, it seems more probable that we’d have a record of an indiscriminate healer or prophet than a disruptive tongue-speaker. Also, aside from a few examples (e.g. Baalam) there isn’t much recorded about people who had spirit gifts and misused them. This seems to be an exceptional case on many counts.
Possible explanations
So what are the options? One view we can take is that God had bestowed the actual Holy Spirit gift of tongues on all the Corinthians who claimed the gift, and some of those people had just perverted it. This is possible, but difficult to accept given the points already noted.
Another option is that the people were just pretending to have the gift. This also seems improbable. Apparently, they did have the motivation to “pretend” – “you are eager to have the spiritual gifts” (14:12). It’s not hard to imagine that receiving a Holy Spirit gift (in a time in which they were still active and being ‘given’) would be like God’s stamp of approval. “God gave me the gift of tongues, therefore I am holy, end of argument.” However, if this whole scenario is based on people “pretending” to have the gifts, that implies willful self-delusion on a fairly massive scale. We all have experienced our mortal flesh’s propensity to defraud itself, but for an ecclesia to do so in bulk would be extreme. Also, if people were willfully “pretending,” why wouldn’t Paul have spoken out against it directly? Both of these options have problems.
The likely answer
The solution to these issues is found when we consider a third option. When Paul argued against the Corinthian’s practice of speaking in tongues, he was not arguing against abuses of the genuine gift of tongues or against any willful self-deception – he was arguing against the practice commonly known as “glossolalia.” This phenomenon is most frequently seen in our modern world in the Pentecostal churches, though evidence from historians and cultural anthropologists tells us that it has been a common religious practice through the centuries.
Many of the characteristics of this behavior fit into the picture painted by Paul. First, it is a learned behavior — it has never yet been known to occur in a social vacuum. Second, the participants believe they are actually having a mystical experience, there is not the aspect of “willful self-deception” discussed earlier. Third, the behavior almost always happens (and is facilitated by) a group environment, and often spontaneously. Fourth, though the speaker is saying things he cannot understand, he is not in a full “trance state” – he is still aware of what is going on around him and tends to be in control of himself. Finally, there is a body of historical evidence indicating glossolalia existed in the religious world around Corinth at the time — and clearly one of the things Paul is combating earlier in the book is contamination of the ecclesia by ideas coming from external religious practice.
There are three main possibilities as to the source of this behavior: the mystery cults of Cybele-Attis and Dionysus and the religion of Apollo. (The Oracle at Delphi, famous for her ecstatic proclamations, was part of the Apollan group, as was the slave girl Paul encountered in Philippi on the way to Corinth.) Aside from the historical evidence, it is clear that fundamentally, it would be possible to confuse glossolalia with a genuine gift of tongues – just walk into a Pentecostal meeting, and you will meet many people who believe just that.
Mixture of glossolalia and foreign languages
If we then re-read the section of I Corinthians in question (especially chapter 14) while keeping this idea in mind, many of the things Paul says suddenly make much more sense. The relevant phrases and sections of each verse are discussed below.
v. 2: “He that speaketh in a [unknown] tongue speaketh not to men, but to God: for no man understandeth him.” The unintelligible speech of glossolalia contrasts with the description we have in Acts 2 (“every man heard in his own tongue”).
v. 4: “He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself.” If this was a ‘true’ tongue, there really wouldn’t be that aspect of self-edification as one would be speaking in a foreign language for the benefit of someone else. This again implies that the motives behind people “desiring the gifts” might have been incorrect.
v. 7: “Unless they give distinction in the sound…” This phrase probably refers to the ‘babbling’ which is characteristic of glossolalia. Even though we might not understand a foreign language, it still “has distinction” to our ears – we can make out words and sentences.
v. 14: “My spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.” Again in this verse, we are told that what was happening was meaningless to the speaker.
Vs. 21-23: Paul quotes Isaiah 28:11, and makes the inspired interpretation that the gift of tongues is for preaching to (and causing belief in) unbelievers.
However, he turns around to say that if an outsider DID see what the Corinthians were doing, they would think them mad! What kind of a sign would that be? This is further evidence that what was being practiced here was not the gift of God prophesied by Isaiah.
Vs. 27-30: “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.” These verses set up a very careful “filter” on the kind of tongue that was acceptable. Evidently, many people were manifesting glossolalia. If they were speaking simultaneously in unintelligible tongues, it is a very similar picture to a modern Pentecostal revival, or many of the other religious gatherings exhibiting this behavior which have been studied. But if it was a true foreign language and someone could interpret the message, then it would be beneficial to others.
v. 32: “The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets.” This is interesting in the context of glossolalia, because there is a tendency for it to get out of control, especially with the group dynamic. Another filter would be that the tongue must be under control.
Questions considered
Understandably, there are a number of questions that spring to mind if we consider this idea that glossolalia was being mixed with foreign languages.
Why wouldn’t Paul just frankly tell these people they are delusional? Well, there are probably several reasons. At this time, the Acts 2-style gift of tongues was still very much active. Since the people he was speaking to would consider that both the real and counterfeit gifts were the same, he couldn’t very well totally forbid the activity — v.39, “do not forbid it.” Also, if you’ve ever spoken to someone who has experienced this phenomenon, they deeply believe that they have had a spiritual experience. There is really no way to argue that they haven’t; and in Paul’s case, it probably would have served to alienate people. (It is not difficult to imagine the defensive reactions. “Just because you don’t understand it doesn’t make it not a tongue!” “What do you know about the tongues of angels, Paul?”) It seems clear that Paul’s approach is to control the behavior while simultaneously keeping everyone on board.
Paul says that there should be translators for these languages. Doesn’t that mean that they were actually translatable, and hence, language?
Actually, it seems that this is one of the more ingenious parts of his “filtration system.” Even though a person might be convinced that he is speaking in a truly God-inspired tongue, for someone to truly believe that he was translating it back into a “known” tongue would be far more difficult. This should have served to squelch the random babble that is most commonly heard with glossolalia.
Conclusion
In conclusion then, it’s important to realize that this is only an idea, and is really a peripheral issue to our walk in the faith. Thankfully, we don’t have people speaking in tongues in our meetings so it’s not something we are confronted with regularly! However, it’s nice to be able to think about a possible explanation for what is otherwise a very baffling portion of scripture.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One