|
| |
What Other Tongues?
by Phil Maxwell August 1999
And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord
in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled
all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of
them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as
the Spirit gave them utterance.
And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded,
because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these
which speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and
Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers
of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
- Acts 2:1-18
The spectacular event described here
was a one time, unprecedented, profound manifestation of Yahweh’s power in the sight
of men. Taken in perspective as to the occasion it marked, the birth of Yahshua’s
Church in the world, it was arguably an even more notable event than the series of
miracles by which Yahweh delivered the Israelites out of Pharaoh’s Egypt or the flood
of Noah’s day.
I’d like to narrow the focus down to a
simple issue, and I think most would find what I’m about to propose credible, even
though it is not at all consistent with common teachings. The question is, what language(s) did these initial recipients of the Holy Spirit begin speaking? I count 15
distinct ethnic groups listed in verses 9 through 11. I can’t explicitly say that
each of these represents a unique language or not, though that does seem to be the
author’s intent. In any event, there was clearly quite an array of different native
languages represented by the group of witnesses to this event. Nevertheless, I’d like
to propose that it is likely that the group of disciples who, with cloven tongues of fire
appearing on them, were not moved by the Spirit to speak in 15 different languages, nor
12, 6, or even 2. Rather, it seems to me that they spoke in one language only, and that
language was what Paul later called the tongues of angels.
You may be thinking, ‘But, but...there
were 15 different ethnic groups there who all heard them in their own language!’
coupled, perhaps, with, ‘What kind of nut are you, anyway!’ But let’s
examine the text closely, for in it we find nothing that says they SPOKE in the languages
of all these different people, but rather that those people HEARD in their own language.
Is that splitting hairs? You may (in fact, you must) judge for yourself, but please hear
me out.
First of all, I’m not about to
tell you that God is not able to supernaturally give someone the ability to speak in
another language which they have not learned. I don’t believe that myself, but I I
know of no Biblical record of any such thing, either, the possibility of that being the
case in Acts 2 notwithstanding. There are, however, many cases recorded in the Scriptures
of people speaking in an unknown tongue upon receiving the Holy Spirit, but these all
point to a language that is otherwise unknown in the world, the tongues of angels. In
fact, from this point on, the book of Acts consistently depicts this as a normal
manifestation by those who receive the Spirit, as well as evidence of the same to others.
The point is that the Biblical record shows substantial precedent of the Spirit giving
people utterance in the same angelic language, but there is no specific record of the
Spirit giving people utterance in diverse human languages. (I trust that someone will
advise me if I’m overlooking something on the latter point.)
Now let me turn your attention to the other
side of this equation. On one hand we have the 120 or so disciples who were speaking as
the newly poured out Holy Spirit gave them utterance, and on the other we have thousands
of ethnically diverse Jews nearby who all heard them speak in their own language of the
wonderful works of God. It is this fact that has caused most people to believe that the
Spirit given utterances of that occasion were a supernaturally given ability to speak in
unlearned human languages. It doesn’t say that, though. A lot of people would agree
that such would at least be an exception to the normal manifestation of speaking in
tongues. Others maintain that speaking in tongues as described in the Bible IS speaking in
an otherwise unknown human language, and, even though it doesn’t really say that,
base their arguments on this passage.
Again, it says they HEARD what was being spoken
in their own language, but all it says of those speaking is that they spoke in other
tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Turning again to Scriptural precedent, Paul
lists and discusses a common ministry gift of the Spirit known as interpretation of
tongues in chapters 12 and 14 of his first epistle to the Corinthians. The net result of
the operation of this gift is the same as prophesying, the difference being that (properly
conducted) one person speaks a message in tongues while another translates it for the rest
of the congregation. The person who interprets hears the message in the tongues of angels,
but by the working of the same Spirit, is given understanding of it as though spoken in
their own native tongue.
While it would be a mistake to portray this
event as ordinary, it did mark the beginning of new things that shortly thereafter became
common amongst the believers. Two of those things were speaking and interpreting the
tongues of angels. It seems far more plausible that these 120 or so disciples experienced
the same thing that others who followed them did upon receiving the Spirit -- speaking in
the tongues of angels -- than that they manifested a one time miracle of speaking in a
dozen or more languages simultaneously. Likewise, it seems more likely that the chosen
audience for the ministry that was going forth at that moment were given ears to hear, so
to speak, by the same operation of the Spirit Paul discussed in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14
than the alternative.
Judging by various other translations, the KJV
rendition of Acts 2:6 is a bit misleading. It reads, “Now when this was noised
abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard
them speak in his own language.” I verified this through several others, but I'll use
the NAS version is sufficient to illustrate this point:
And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled
the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested
on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as
the Spirit was giving them utterance.
Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were bewildered, because
they were each one hearing them speak in his own language. And they were amazed and marveled, saying, "Why, are not all these who are speaking
Galileans? "And how is it that we each hear {them} in our own language to which we were born?"
- Acts 2:1-8 (NAS)
What I'd like to call your attention to
is where it says “this sound” in verse 6. What sound? There are two options
given: In verse 2 there was the noise coming from heaven like a violent, rushing wind, and
there was the voices of those speaking with other tongues as the Spirit gave them
utterance. The most natural reading of the passage indicates that the noise in verse 2
gives way to the sound of their voices in verse 4, which is also the latter of the two.
Also, the word translated as ‘sound’ in verse 4 is most commonly rendered as
‘voice’ in the New Testament, and the remainder of verse 6 strongly indicates
that the ‘sound’ that caught their attention was the sound of the
disciples’ voices speaking in strange tongues.
Try to picture this scenario: The voices of the
disciples speaking as the Spirit gave them utterance was significant enough to catch the
attention of a very large and diverse crowd. If they were nothing else in this, they were
loud, very loud. On top of that, the gathering crowd was bewildered, amazed, and marveling
at what they were witnessing, and, naturally, they were all conversing with one another
while this is going on. Others mocked them, speculating that they were drunk. Can you
picture this? What do you see? I see a riotous gathering of several thousand people.
Let's consider these crowd reactions. If
someone spoke perfect, coherent English to you, would you think they were drunk? Everyone
knows that one of the most prominent indications of being drunk is that it impedes your
speech. If someone started talking in a language that didn’t sound like any language
I’d ever heard, I might think they were drunk, but not if they were speaking clearly
in my own language. I might be amazed and bewildered if I knew for a fact that they
didn’t naturally speak my language, but I wouldn’t think them drunk.
This crowd demonstrated two very contrary
reactions. While some marvelled in amazement at the prophesying they heard, others thought
they were drunk and mocked them. We know that by the time that day finished, about three
thousand souls of the devout Jews in Jerusalem at that time were added to Yahshua’s
Church out of that crowd, but we also know that there were plenty of scoffers there, too.
Each may draw their own conclusions, but I just don’t find it reasonable to conclude
that those who thought they were drunk and mocked them heard them speaking of the
wonderful works of God in their own language like the others did. I propose that some had
ears to hear and heard, which in this case would have been the first example of
interpretation of tongues recorded, and would be on par with the profound degree that
speaking in the tongues of angels was manifested at the same time.
One more thing that I’d like to ask before
I conclude is this: Have you ever been involved in a small group where several different
conversations are going simultaneously? Even in a small gathering, it can get pretty hard
to distinguish one voice from another. With that in mind, go back to the scenario
described in Acts 2. I've tried to feature the small group of disciples gathered together
and loudly speaking in numerous different languages to this crowd, and I just don’t
see how those assembled could have discerned one language from another in such a setting.
That picture actually reminds me of the confounding of languages Yahweh did to obstruct
the construction of the city and tower of Babel. Not that it wouldn’t be possible, it
just seems that being able to hear their own language in the midst of all this would
require a more significant miracle than being enabled by the Spirit to interpret a single
language being spoken by the small group of disciples.
In conclusion, I recognize that what I've said
here is arguable. I always search for relevance when I consider things like this, and the
relevance here doesn’t directly apply to everyone. For those who argue that the gift
of speaking in tongues is nothing more than a supernatural ability to speak in a foreign
human language, it is pertinent. If what I have presented here is arguable, doctrines such
as this that are built on the same passage of Scripture are without foundation. That
speaking in the tongues of angels (not foreign languages) is a common, ordinary
manifestation of being filled with the Holy Spirit is well documented elsewhere in the
Scriptures. Acts 2 only represents the beginning of this new thing that was given to
God’s people nearly 2,000 years ago, which is why it is important to dispense with
false or unfounded conclusions being drawn from it. At the very least, one should at least
recognize that the fact that this passage only says that they spoke as the Spirit gave
them utterance and that the audience heard in their own language. It does not explicitly
resolve how this was accomplished, and it most certainly does not form a foundation for a
doctrine that portrays speaking in tongues as spoken of often in the Scriptures as
speaking in a foreign human language and nothing more.
|
