What was the true manifestation of speaking in tongues?

Introduction

This will be a look at the distinction Paul makes in 1 Corinthians 12-14 between the true manifestation of speaking in tongues and the false pagan practice. These chapters are the only ones in the Bible that describe an ecstatic form of tongues so they are the ones we must examine. Nowhere in this writing will the true manifestation of tongues be forbidden or even discouraged. It is strictly going to be information about what Paul was writing to deal with in the Corinthian Church. Whether or not true tongues are for believers today will not be addressed.

First let’s lay some groundwork for our understanding. Paul describes the Corinthian believers as having come out of paganism and severe immorality (1 Cor. 6:10-11), and that before they came to Christ they would practice the pagan worship and ecstatic rituals that were seen in Hellenistic culture (12:2). This can be seen throughout the book in many of the perversions that the Corinthians had brought into their worship of Christ: (e.g. gluttony in the love feast, sexual activity with other worshipers, women in authority over men, etc.). So Paul writes to the Corinthians to answer some of their questions and to correct their perversions of true worship.

When we take into consideration the cultural background from which the Corinthians came, we will see that Paul is not talking about one practice of speaking in tongues but of two different types: the real spiritual manifestation and the false pagan practice.

Historical data

The false pagan practice

I've included links to the information in this section so that you don't have to take my word for it but can check the facts yourself.

 Historically, when someone who lived in ancient Greece would visit the pagan temples (Most notably the temple of Aphrodite in Corinth), they would often worship one of the pagan gods by entering into various ecstatic rituals. To be ecstatic literally means to be "out of mind" or out of your normal senses; i.e. a trance, astonishment. A pagan ecstatic state is when a person goes into an intensely emotional trance and they enter a state of deep connection with the spiritual realm. They are then united with and/or led by and/or possessed by a spirit or a god. These ecstasies were found in several of the pagan religions during New Testament times and they were induced by means such as drugs, music, sexual stimulation, meditation, etc. The city of Corinth was world-famous for its ecstatic sexual rituals and ceremonies, and the term "Corinthian" was used to describe someone who was overtly sexually licentious to the point of being nearly ecstatic (i.e. out of their mind).

The ancient Greek philosopher Plato (Ca. 427-347 B.C.), in his Dialogues (Phaedrus, Ion, and Timaeus) and in his Apology of Socrates, described the pagan practice of ecstatic speech hundreds of years before Christ. For example, here is an excerpt from the Dialogue Timaeus:

“No man, when in his wits, attains prophetic truth and inspiration; but when he receives the inspired word, either his intelligence is enthralled in sleep, or he is demented by some distemper or possession. And he who would understand what he remembers to have been said, whether in a dream or when he was awake, by the prophetic and inspired nature, or would determine by reason the meaning of the apparitions which he has seen, and what indications they afford to this man or that, of past, present or future good and evil, must first recover his wits. But, while he continues demented, he cannot judge of the visions which he sees or the words which he utters; the ancient saying is very true, that 'only a man who has his wits can act or judge about himself and his own affairs.' And for this reason it is customary to appoint interpreters to be judges of the true inspiration. Some persons call them prophets; they are quite unaware that they are only the expositors of dark sayings and visions, and are not to be called prophets at all, but only interpreters of prophecy.” [emphases added] (trans. by B. Jowett. 1871)

Here in Timaeus, what the philosopher is describing is speech uttered while in theia mania (Gr. θεία μανία “madness of the gods”) – speech they could not understand while in an ecstasy and under the inspiration of a god. The “dark sayings” here are used to speak not of evil but of indiscernible speech; i.e., incomprehensible mysteries. Moreover, the sayings also needed to be interpreted and the interpretations, according to Timaeus, were basically up to the interpreter to fabricate, further corroborating the fact that it was unintelligible both to the one speaking and to those hearing the speech. In Plato's other writings, Socrates often refers to the Pythia of Delphi (Delphi was located near Corinth), who was known for speaking in unintelligible ecstatic words. Moreover, according to Virgil's (70 - 19 B.C.) Aenid, the Sibyl of Delphi was known for speaking prophecies in a frenzied ecstasy. Furthermore, adherents to several of the pagan mystery religions of Hellenism (e.g. Eleusinian mysteries [Eleusis was located near Corinth], Dionysian mysteries, etc.) would go through cult ceremonies called "mysteries," and at the end of the ceremonies they would have an ecstatic ritual. In these ecstasies they would speak mysteries (dark sayings) in the spirit while encountering the god or spirit messenger (a "dæmon") of the cult; hence the designation of mystery cult.

Admittedly, there were other cults and religious groups at the time that were opposed to ecstatic worship and rituals, but nonetheless it was still common knowledge that ecstatic experiences existed in the pagan culture, especially near Corinth. Furthermore, much of the historical data of ecstatic speech shows that it was in the form of prophecy, not tongues, and it was usually spoken only by those who were "gifted" or "inspired." Thus, Paul directly denounces ecstatic prophetic speech by saying "the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets" (1 Cor. 14:32). Paul affirms that true prophetic messages only come through a prophet in his right mind and in total control of his senses; not in an ecstasy.

The pagan practice of tongues can thus be described by saying that one would get into the spiritual realm by turning control of their mind over to a pagan god or spirit messenger. This involved getting into an intensely emotional, trance-like state; an ecstasy. Then one began to utter sounds without meaning, and the spirit of the god would then control the sounds so that they became either an outpouring of unintelligible words from the spirit messenger or god, or an intelligible prophecy of the spirit messenger or god. This is what the pagan practice consisted of, and this is what Jesus Himself actually said to avoid in our prayers in Matthew 6:7. Moreover, although the Old Testament prophets and New Testament Apostles occasionally had ecstasy-like experiences (yet all the while in their right minds, e.g. Ezekiel, Peter, John), participation in any kind of ecstatic experience among regular believers wherein one tries to encounter the spiritual realm was explicitly prohibited by the Bible (Lev. 19:31; 20:6, 27; Deut. 18: 10-12; Matt. 6:7; 1 Cor. 12:2; 14:32; Col. 2:18-19; Heb. 1:1-2).

The true spiritual manifestation

The first time that we see the true manifestation of speaking in tongues in the Bible is in Acts 2. This is the only place in the entire Bible that actually describes what the believers were speaking ("the mighty deeds of God," Acts 2:11). In no other passage that mentions people speaking in tongues does it say what was being spoken. It only describes that people began to speak in other tongues.

In the Acts 2 passage it says that foreign people heard the Jews glorifying God in their foreign language on the Day of Pentecost (2:6, 8, 11). This means that what was being spoken was understandable to others. Moreover, on Day of Pentecost, although all believers were filled with the Holy Spirit, not all spoke in tongues; only those that "the Spirit gave utterance" (2:4).

Furthermore, every mention in Acts of a group of people speaking in tongues shows that those who spoke in tongues did not do it purposefully (Acts 2:3-4; 10:44-46; 19:6). The Holy Spirit “fell upon” those who had received salvation as they glorified God and their speech turned into other languages. They were not seeking to speak in tongues, rather it happened to them spontaneously; it was a surprise. So, when we come to other descriptions of speaking in tongues in the New Testament, we have no warrant to think or say that anything other than understandable foreign languages were being used. The only warrant we do have for defining what true tongues was is gained from Acts 2 alone.

In other passages in the New Testament tongues is never included as a spiritual “gift,” (this will be explained a little later) but only as a “manifestation” of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7-11). So whatever tongues is, it is only a way that the Holy Spirit chose to manifest Christ to others. Also, Paul says that the Spirit decides who gets which manifestation (12:11, 27-30); therefore not every believer could have had the same manifestation. This agrees with what we see in Acts 2. Furthermore, Paul also says that all manifestations of the Spirit are only for the edification of others, never for oneself alone (12:7). Therefore, if a so-called "gift" was meant to be used for oneself then it is not truly from the Holy Spirit.

What we see from the biblical data is that the true manifestation of tongues can only be rightly called a human foreign language which was previously unknown to the one speaking it.

It must be carefully noted that the pagan practice was extant during at least the 6^th century B.C. in the region of Corinth and continued into the first few centuries A.D. as attested by some early Church fathers in their dealings with Gnosticism. This means that the argument that the pagan practice was Satan's counterfeit is false since the counterfeit by logical necessity cannot precede the original. The pagan practice existed for centuries in the region of Corinth, long before Pentecost, and could not have been a counterfeit of a true form of ecstatic tongues. To put it simply, God did not give an ecstatic form of tongues to the Church only to have Satan counterfeit it; Satan already had the pagan practice in existence. If anything, a gift of this sort from God would be a counterfeit of the pagan practice. Moreover, the true manifestation of tongues was intended to be a sign to unbelievers (14:22), yet the ecstatic pagan practice was already a common feature of Greek religion, therefore the true manifestation would not have been a distinct sign but would have been indistinguishable from the pagan's own practice. To summarize the difference; the false practice was always uttering unintelligible speech under “divine madness” to a god or daimon (spirit messenger) while in an out of control ecstasy, but the true manifestation was speaking comprehensible known human languages under truly divine influence to another human, and always while the speaker was completely alert and in total control of their speech.

Paul’s distinction in 1 Corinthians 12-14

We have now seen the difference between the true spiritual manifestation of tongues, and the false pagan practice. The true manifestation was only ever described as understandable foreign languages heard by others. The false practice was sought after, unintelligible gibberish that was done in a state of ecstasy in which one would speak mysteries in their spirit.

Now the Greek word for tongue (glóssa, γλῶσσα) has two primary meanings; (1) the physical body part - the tongue, and (2) a language for communication. Throughout 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14 Paul uses the singular “a tongue” and the plural “tongues.” Is there a reason for him doing so? I believe it is because Paul is making the distinction between the false pagan practice and the real spiritual manifestation. There is only one type of gibberish, not many, but there are many types of languages, not just one. Moreover, Paul, using the singular "a tongue" could even be referring to the physical tongue metaphorically as being a non-audible and non-comprehensible muscle in the mouth; unable in-and-of itself to make audibly distinct words. Therefore, throughout these chapters whenever Paul uses the singular “a tongue” without any qualifying factors (there are a couple times when Paul uses “a tongue” but is not referring to the pagan practice) he must be describing the false pagan practice. Likewise, whenever he uses the plural “tongues” he must be talking about the true manifestation of the Spirit. And this agrees with the historical data we looked at earlier. So Paul would be writing in these chapters to deal with the pagan practice that the Corinthians had brought into their worship of the true God (just as he wrote of some other practices they had also brought in), and to correct their perversions of true tongues.

The false pagan practice

Paul, using the singular “a tongue,” describes the false pagan practice by saying that one who speaks in “a tongue” (the pagan practice) is not speaking to men but to a god (1 Cor. 14:2, "a god" is a valid translation of "theos" θεός = a divine being. This will be explained later); no one understands him (1 Cor. 14:2); he speaks mysteries in his spirit (1 Cor. 14:2); edifies no one but himself (1 Cor. 14:4); and he prays in his spirit without understanding what he is saying (1 Cor. 14:14).

Paul further and indirectly says that the one who speaks in a pagan ecstasy may unknowingly curse Jesus if an evil spirit takes control (1 Cor. 12:3), they may not have love (1 Cor. 13:1), they sound like a clanging cymbal or sounding brass (1 Cor. 13:1), they don’t make any sense and are speaking into the air (1 Cor. 14:7-9), they are a barbarian to others (1 Cor. 14:11 “barbarian” βάρβαρος means someone who speaks in unintelligible words), they can’t be understood by others (1 Cor. 14:16), and they do not edify others (1 Cor. 14:17).

Finally, Paul says that the one who speaks in “a tongue” must pray that he may interpret (1 Cor. 14:13), so that others can understand what is being said and be edified.

The above description fits perfectly with what the historical sources describe as pagan ecstatic mystery gibberish, and it also fits perfectly with what Jesus said to avoid. Finally, this also fits perfectly with the emphasis of love and unity that Paul is making in the section. Paul is saying that the pagan practice creates disunity because it does not edify others, and that it is also completely void of love because the one praying is seeking to edify only themselves, not others.

The true spiritual manifestation

 I will not try to answer the question of whether or not the true manifestation of speaking in tongues is for believers today. I will only attempt to describe what Paul said the real manifestation was and what it entailed.

Paul directly says that the true manifestation (not “gift”) of tongues (languages) is given to some and not all believers (1 Cor. 12:10, 30), has many different kinds (12:10, 28, hence the use of the plural “tongues”), is worthless without love (13:1), was destined to cease (13:8), is not as great as the manifestation of prophecy unless there is an interpreter (14:5), is for a sign to unbelievers (14:22), is not to be spoken by women while in the assembly (14:34) (sorry ladies), and is not to be forbidden (14:39).

Paul also indirectly says that tongues are always to be understood otherwise it is profitless (14:6-11), must be interpreted in the Church for edification (14:5, 14-19, 28), must only be spoken by two or three at the most and in order (14:27), and must be used only for the edification of others (14:12, 14-19).

Summing up, we can see that the true manifestation of tongues was always intended to be understood by others. It was intended to be used as a sign to unbelievers, but if it was used in the Church assembly there had to be an interpreter for the purpose of edification.

This fits perfectly with the descriptions of the true manifestation of tongues in the book of Acts.

TRUE vs. FALSE TONGUES
The true spiritual manifestation ("tongues")	The false pagan practice ("a tongue")
Given to some and not all (1 Cor. 12:10, 30) Has many different kinds (12:10, 28) Is worthless without love (13:1) Destined to cease (13:8) Is not as great as prophecy, unless there is an interpreter (14:5) Is for a sign to unbelievers (14:22) Is not to be forbidden (14:39) Must be understood, otherwise it is profitless (14:6-11) Must be interpreted in the church for edification (14:5, 14-19, 28) Must only be spoken by two or three, and in order (14:27) Must not be spoken by women while in the assembly (14:34) Must be used only for the edification of others (14:12, 14-19)	Not spoken to people but to a god (1 Cor. 14:2) No one can understand (14:2) Are spoken as mysteries in one’s spirit (14:2) Edifies no one but the speaker (14:4) The speaker can’t understand (14:14) May contain curses at Jesus (12:3) Is unloving (13:1) Is like toneless musical instruments (13:1) Is spoken only into the air (14:7-9) Sounds like barbarian gibberish (14:11) Can’t be understood by others (14:16) Does not edify others (14:17) Is forbidden by Jesus (Matt. 6:7)

Connecting the dots

 Now let’s tie the chapters together. Remember that the main thrust of these chapters is for love and unity in the Church, and tongues (among other spiritual manifestations) must fit into the flow.

Manifestations of the Spirit (12:1-11)

First, Paul begins the section talking about general spiritual things in 1 Corinthians 12:1. The word “gifts”used in verse 1 is not there in the original Greek manuscripts. It was supplied by the translators to help the flow of the reading. Therefore, Paul is not necessarily always talking about spiritual “gifts” throughout the section. Rather, he is talking about generic spiritual things (e.g. "gifts" in 1 Cor. 12:4, "ministries" in 12:5, and "activities" in 12:6), all of which are different manifestations of the Spirit (12:7).

He begins dealing with the unity of the Church in 12:7 by saying that the various manifestations of the Spirit are all given for the profit of the whole Church. And tongues is only one manifestation in the list (12:10)

The Church is like a body (12:12-31)

Paul then goes on to talk about how the Church is like a human body with different parts (1 Cor. 12:12-27). Each different body part is equally necessary and important for the whole body to function properly. Paul then lists some of the manifestations that are given for the functioning of the body, and then he asks some rhetorical questions to show the Corinthians that not everyone can have the same manifestation of the Spirit (12:28-30) because the Church would not be a body if everyone did (12:19).

First Corinthians 12:31 should actually be part of chapter 13. A brief note on this verse: The sentence structure of the original Greek for 12:31 does not necessitate an imperative command to desire and seek after the showy gifts, as it is usually translated: “but [you must] earnestly desire the greater gifts” (NLT). A translation in the imperative mood unfortunately contradicts Paul's main point that each member's part in the body is equally necessary and equally important. It is also contrary to the objective fact that the Holy Spirit (not the believer) decides who gets what part in the body.

Thus the verse should be translated in the indicative mood as a description of what was happening in the Corinthian Church. Paul is actually rebuking the Corinthians because they were jealously coveting the showy gifts and because they were not content with the ones they had been given. This is why Paul finishes verse 31 by saying “But I will show you a more excellent way.” The verse should be translated like this: “But you are earnestly desiring the greater gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.”

This fits perfectly with chapter 13 because Paul begins to talk about the superiority of love. In other words, the flow of the end of chapter 12 goes like this: Paul tells the Corinthians that God gives different manifestations of the Spirit to different believers, but they (in loveless vanity) were seeking after manifestations that they were not given, so Paul begins to tell them the proper way to exercise their spirituality: use the gift you've been given in selfless love.

Love for others must be the ruling factor (chapter 13)

Paul begins chapter 13 by saying that even if (“Though” is not a proper contextual translation. In the original Greek, it is a third-class conditional statement; meaning that it may and/or may not be possible/probable. The use of the third class conditional means Paul is saying that it is possible for him to speak in the languages of men but simultaneously probable that he cannot speak in the languages of angels. This makes sense since Paul is using hyperbole throughout vv. 1-3 [See Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics. Zondervan. Grand Rapids. 1996. pp. 471, 696-698]) he spoke in all the different known languages of men and even hypothetical languages of angels (Although unlikely, this may possibly be an allusion to the languages of pagan spirit messengers– daimons), but did not have love then his speaking in tongues would be worthless (1 Cor. 13:1). Here Paul is obviously using hyperbole to make his point. This can be seen in the next two verses (1 Cor. 13:2-3) where Paul exaggerates other manifestations to the extreme (e.g. all knowledge, all faith, total generosity, total sacrifice).

Paul goes on to describe how love relates to the spiritual manifestations. All of the manifestations of the Spirit are totally worthless if they are not done in love. Watch how this passage opens up our understanding of the spiritual manifestations when kept in its proper context. The character of love means that a believer is patient in using their spiritual gift, they use it in kindness not in jealousy, and they are not arrogant and do not brag about their God-given manifestation (1 Cor. 13:4). The loving believer does not use their manifestation in an unbecoming way (e.g. putting on a spiritual show), they do not seek their own edification through their manifestation, and they are not provoked to use their spiritual gifts in a wrong attitude (1 Cor. 13:5). At this point Paul switches to describing the attitudes and feelings of a believer who uses their manifestation in the proper, loving and selfless, way.

Regulations for the edification of the church (chapter 14)

 Paul seems to be dealing with the false pagan practice of tongues in 14:1-19, and then switches to start dealing with the real spiritual manifestation in 14:20-28. Paul begins speaking about desiring to prophesy rather than to speak in "a tongue" because it is the best way to edify others in love and keep the unity of the Church (1 Cor. 14:1). But wait, doesn't that run contrary to the Holy Spirit's sovereign distributing of the manifestations in chapter 12? Well, the Greek word for “prophecy” (prophēteia, προφητεία) just means “to speak forth” and Paul uses it in the sense of divine communication via human agency. So prophecy is merely speaking God’s truth to others in one's normal language. But, notice that Paul does not say to desire the manifestation of prophecy in a nounal sense (once again note that the word "gift" is not in the original manuscripts), rather he says to desire the opportunity to prophesy in an active verb sense (i.e. to communicate God's truth).

Now, please note carefully that the literal Greek of 1 Corinthians 14:2 is present tense and it literally reads, "the one who is speaking in a tongue is not speaking to men but to a god... he is speaking mysteries in spirit." We do not see it in our English versions but in Koine Greek they would use the definite article ("the") when referring to a specific person. For example, in the original Greek Luke 3:38 says, “of the Enoch, of the Seth, of the Adam, of the God” (emphases added). And the definite article is in fact used here in 1 Corinthians 14:2 to refer to the one speaking in a tongue, denoting specificity. However, there is no definite article used in this verse to refer to any specific god. Thus, "a god" is the most fitting translation of this verse. These combined grammatical observations could have only have one possible meaning: There was a specific person in the Corinthian Church who was speaking in an ecstatic utterance to a god. Moreover, the one who was doing it was probably not intentionally speaking to a pagan god. They were probably trying to speak to the true God using their old pagan practice. This would make further sense of the lack of the definite article because the one who was attempting to speak to God would actually only be speaking to their idea of god; which is why Paul would leave the definite article absent. In essence, Paul is saying that the one speaking in an ecstatic tongue is not really speaking to the true God, even if they think they are. The question then becomes, was this a true manifestation of the Holy Spirit? Remember that all of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit are given and used only to edify others, never oneself (1 Cor. 12:7, 25). The ecstatic form of "a tongue" that Paul describes here is not even able to communicate comprehensible language to others, therefore it cannot edify others. Since it cannot edify others it is not a true manifestation of the Holy Spirit, but must necessarily be the false pagan practice.

Moving along, Paul does make it clear that it is okay to desire spiritual things, but that the spiritual things must be regulated by love (14:1). Paul goes on to describe more of what the Corinthians were doing wrong, and then lay down some rules to correct their behavior. Using inductive methodology, we may conclude that the Corinthians who did have the true spiritual manifestation of tongues were abusing it for their own vanity, and this was causing those believers who did not have the manifestation to jealously covet tongues (12:31). This then caused the jealous believers to bring their former pagan ecstatic practices into the worship services so they too could satisfy their vanity. Moreover, this brought unbelievers into the Church who were being possessed by evil spirits while in ecstasy, and they would actually curse Jesus in known languages (12:3). The Corinthian Church was a huge mess! No wonder Paul says that everything should be done decently and in order since God is a God of order (14:40, 33).

Now at the end of chapter 14 Paul says, “do not forbid to speak with tongues” (14:39). So Paul was not writing to forbid the Corinthians from speaking with true tongues, but he does put down several rules and regulations for the use of the true manifestation. These regulations are given to make sure the Church is lovingly edified (14:2-3,12, 26), because the true manifestation of tongues is supposed to be a sign to unbelievers (14:20-22), but the Corinthians who did have the manifestation were not using it that way (12:26). We won’t take the time to look at all the regulations but we will look at the main one.

Interpretation

The main regulation that Paul lays down is that tongues must always be interpreted and must never be practiced in the Church unless there is an interpreter (1 Cor. 14:27-28). "Interpret" is the Greek word that means “to translate” (herméneuó, ἑρμηνεύω). Remember that Paul’s main point is that all things must be done in loving edification to keep the unity of the Church. Because of this, the spiritual manifestation of interpretation was given so that those in the assembly who could not understand the ones speaking in foreign languages could understand and be edified (12:10). Paul says it is ridiculous to use the spiritual manifestation of tongues if no one in the Church can understand (14:6-11). So he regulates tongues by demanding that interpretation be used so that the other believers can understand and be edified (14:27-28).

Tongues and interpretation in the Church worked like this: A foreign unbeliever would visit the Corinthian Church service and they either could not understand what was being spoken or they were not convinced of Christianity's truth. God wanted them to receive a message from Him so He manifested His message to one with tongues and they would speak God's message to the unbeliever in their own heart language. But this then presented a problem: Now the Church could not understand God's message to the unbeliever. This is where interpretation/translation comes in: God would also give a manifestation of interpretation so that the Church could understand and be edified.

Now Paul does say that the Corinthians who spoke in "a tongue" (pagan gibberish) were to ask to interpret (14:13). This seemingly does undermine the Holy Spirit's sovereignty in the distributing of manifestations. This can be explained by observing the purposes of tongues and interpretation. Tongues were not meant for the Church but for unbelievers (14:22). So the normal, intended use of tongues was for outside the Church assembly to evangelize the lost (e.g., Acts 2:11). Interpretation was intended for those rare occasions when God wanted to reveal a message to an unbeliever who was present in the Church assembly so that the message in tongues could be translated and understood by the Church (1 Cor. 14:5). It was only at those times that interpretation was given. So it was never manifested outside the Church assembly and it was not a manifestation given for regular, normal use. Therefore, the one who was speaking in false pagan tongues ("a tongue") was instead to pray to be the one used for interpretation in those rare times when true tongues were used in the Church. To paraphrase the basic thought, Paul would be telling the Corinthians, "Don't try to edify yourself with fake pagan tongues but instead seek to edify others by interpreting/translating real tongues."

Before coming to the conclusion, we have to deal with 14:28 where Paul says, “but if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in the church and let him speak to himself and to God.” Is Paul saying that the true gift of tongues can be used to speak to God? Or that there is a form of true tongues that is meant to be spoken to God? Absolutely not. Here Paul is implying that if there is no interpreter then the true gift is not being used. Therefore, the tongue that was spoken was the false practice. If a true manifestation of tongues was given in the assembly, then God would also give a manifestation of interpretation, without exception, so that the church could be edified. So, when there was no interpretation there was no true tongues. Now, Paul does use the definite article here to refer to the god (Gr. τῷ Θεῷ). But in the context of this verse, the god would be a pagan god, not the true God. This is because what is being described is not a general pattern (as in 14:2), but a specific occurrence in which a specific pagan god was being spoken to by a specific church member.

Conclusion

There is no ecstatic form of tongues found in the church in Acts at all, only real human languages. Ecstatic speech was found in the pagan religions in the region of Corinth and in the church in Corinth. Because the Corinthians had brought other pagan practices into their assembly, it is easy to conclude that pagan ecstatic speech was also brought into it. It is also obvious that the Corinthians had brought the pagan ecstatic practice of speaking in tongues into their worship because Paul writes to forbid them from practicing it since it cannot edify the church. Moreover, they had also perverted the true manifestation and Paul wrote to correct their error.

Both Jesus and Paul forbid the false pagan practice of speaking in unintelligible meaningless gibberish. Jesus forbids it because believers are supposed to pray to God in simple prayers that they themselves can understand (Matt. 6:7-13). Paul forbids it because it is void of love and selfishly seeks its own edification (1 Cor. 13:5, cf. 14:4), and because it does not edify the church (1 Cor. 14:4, 17).

The true manifestation of speaking to people in foreign languages was given regulations so that the church could be edified and remain united in love (1 Cor. 13:1). The main regulation was that in the church assembly another person must interpret the one speaking in a foreign language so that the church could understand and be edified (1 Cor. 14:26). Above all, love for other believers must take priority over all of the spiritual manifestations. If there is no love then the use of any of the true spiritual manifestations must be restricted.

The Lord's prohibition

As we conclude we must recognize that Jesus Himself commanded His followers, “And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words” (Matt. 6:7 NIV). In the original Greek Jesus, uses the word battalogeo (βαττολογέω) to describe words without meaning and coherence; i.e. gibberish, babbling. The Greek term is what's called an onomatopoetic word, which is merely a designation for a sound. A modern English version would be something like "goo goo gah gah" or "blah blah blah." In the case of βαττολογέω the sound literally is "batta batta batta..." and its literal translation is "batta words/speech." It eventually came to mean "nonsense" or "words without meaning" and was commonly used to describe either gibberish or pointless drivel. So the best explanation of what Jesus is actually saying is to not use meaningless, unintelligible words (gibberish) in prayer. He says that's how the pagans prayed and that God does not listen to that kind of prayer. And, as we have seen, divine communication in ecstatic meaningless communication was indeed present in the region of Corinth and in its church. Thus, it would make sense that Paul would condemn it since Jesus also did.

For sake of argument, instead of blatant gibberish, let's take βαττολογέω to mean "vain repetition" as it is often translated (even though Jesus does not use γλῶσσαλγος nor γλῶσσαλγία, the Greek words for endless talking/vain repetition). This would carry the idea of communication that is empty of meaning, import, and sense due to how the words are used, not necessarily due to their comprehensibility; i.e. pointless drivel, endless jabber, babbling on and on, empty prating, etc. If this is what Jesus is saying then unintelligible gibberish still fits the description of pointless drivel, meaningless jabber, etc. To boil it down, the emphasis of Christ's statement is not on longwindedness, as it is usually interpreted (although it is certainly included). Rather, the emphasis is on comprehensibility and sincerity. Thus, the principle of the verse is that no amount of babbling in meaningless communication will make God hear our prayers.

Lastly, please carefully observe that Jesus does not directly say that we are not to pray in pagan prayer; rather He is saying that we are not to do anything that is similar to what they do in prayer. The phrase "like pagans" carries the idea of comparison, not equality. In other words, the Lord doesn't refer to praying actual pagan prayer (although the prohibition also applies to it), rather He refers to the way they prayed. Also, in the context Jesus is speaking of private prayer. So He is saying that not even in our private prayers are we to utter words/sounds that we cannot understand because God does not listen to it. Therefore, praying repeatedly with words/sounds that we cannot understand is direct disobedience to the Lord.

Finally, just to drive this point all the way home; if one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is in any way similar to non-understandable human language, then the Holy Spirit Himself is in direct opposition to this commandment of the Lord.

“And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans” (Matt. 6:7)

Nehemiah Ryan © 2010