The Gift of Tongues in the New Testament: One Gift or Two?

The Gift of Tongues in the New Testament: One Gift or Two?

To understand what the writers of Scripture were truly trying to convey so that we might fulfill the Great Commission in the spirit of the Great Commandments and live in right relationship with God and others is the highest goal of all believers. And yet there are certain parts of scripture or topics that cause us to lose sight of these goals.  Instead of allowing scripture to clearly instruct and teach us, we resort to personal opinion or personal experience. One such topic is the gift of tongues in the New Testament. Not only is there a great deal of confusion but there also seems to be a great deal of personal opinion thrown into the mix.

I remember as a young Christian the progression of my exposure to what was simply called “speaking in tongues.” It began as a new Christian in 1980 when I was given a Living Bible and read of people speaking “another language.” At a Mike Warnke concert in 1981 several people went forward and began to make loud moans and verbally praise God in English. Joining in loud prayer in English with them I later shared with my friends that I thought I had spoken in tongues. A few years later a girl from my home church came back from summer camp and upset the youth pastor by saying she had learned to speak in tongues. Then in 1983 a girl I had dated in college told me that people in her home church felt she was “missing God’s fullness” and had been taking her to the front of the church after every Sunday night service and praying over her that she would receive the gift. In 1984, the Bible College I attended taught that the gift of tongues was an apostolic gift of authentication that had ceased with the completion of the New Testament. Then in 1990 missionaries with the cessasionist missions group ABWE in South America and then in 1997 a close friend who was an evangelist said that people had heard them speaking in their own language even though they did not know that language. Several close friends have confided in me that they have a personal prayer language. A large mega church in San Jose, California openly states that the biblical proof of salvation for all believers is the ability to speak in tongues.[1] Confusion, personal opinion, misunderstanding, more confusion.

But what does scripture say? While it is not within the scope of this discussion to cover all aspects of the baptism and filling of the Holy Spirit, the gifts of the Spirit, or the relevance of speaking in tongues for the church today, I would like to examine the term “various kinds of tongues” in 1 Corinthians 12:10 and suggest that the tongues of Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 are two different and distinct instances of the gift of tongues.  From this I hope that the reader will be able to have a clearer understanding of this gift and use this information to more clearly navigate through these passages of scripture.

I would like to begin by looking at the phrase “various kinds of tongues” from 1 Corinthians 12:10. In 1 Corinthians 12:10 Paul makes the statement “γένη γλωσσῶν”, “kinds of tongues.” The noun “kinds” is supplemented with the adjective “various” or “different” in our English translations.[2] In other words, there is something more diverse being spoken of here. It is not just “tongues” as if there is only one kind, but “various kinds” which points to the gift of tongues having more than one common manifestation. This however, means different things to different commentators.

The key in this discussion is to understand what “various kinds of tongues” means. Is it referring to different kinds of languages; as English, French and Spanish are different kinds of languages? Or is it referring to various kinds of tongues as in known earthly languages versus an unknown language? And do we see this difference in scripture?

Most writers, especially those who believe the gift of tongues has ceased, see the genuine gift of tongues only as the ability by a believer to speak a known earthly language. Gromacki[3] holds to a known languages only position. Wiersbe[4] says that, “we must assume that when ‘speaking in tongues’ is mentioned elsewhere in Acts, or in 1 Corinthians, it refers to an identical experience, believers praising God in the Spirit in languages that are known.” MacArthur says that the tongues of Acts 2 were known languages[5] but the tongues in Corinth were counterfeit and mimicked pagan ecstatic speech.[6] Blaiklock[7] rejects “the view that foreign languages were spoken by those who had no knowledge of them” and simply diminishes the miraculous.

Mare[8] writes:

The ability to speak in different kinds of tongues has been taken to mean speaking ecstatic, humanly unintelligible utterances... In the light of Acts 2:4ff where it is said that the Holy Spirit gave them the ability to speak with different kinds of language, i.e., known foreign languages (Acts 2:7-11), we are safe to say that the ability mentioned here in 1 Cor 12:10 is the ability to speak unlearned languages. LSJ (Liddell, Scott, Jones: A Greek-English Lexicon) does not list under glossa any meaning under the category of ecstatic speech. Rather, the emphasis of the word is “language,” “dialect,” “foreign” language...The only concrete evidence we have as to the nature of the tongues speaking in the early church is to be found in the only clear example we have—that given in Acts 2 where the speaking is a speaking in foreign languages that were to be understood, and were understood.

However, in the same commentary series, Longenecker[9] tells us, concerning Acts 2,

The “tongues” here are often identified with ecstatic utterances of the sort Paul discusses in 1 Corinthians 12-14... But the words spoken at Pentecost under the Spirit’s direction were immediately recognized by those who heard them as being languages then current, while at Corinth no one could understand what was said till someone present received the gift of interpretation.

Kistemaker[10] also believes that while Acts 2 may refer to known, earthly languages, 1 Corinthians 14 is talking of something else. He writes that,

The word tongue can mean either a known language (Acts 2:6,8,11) or tongue-speech (1 Corinthians 14:2,4,28); in the present epistle, the word can signify either—the meaning depends on the context... Tongue-speech alludes to an act of worship directed to God... Notice that Paul writes the expression kinds of tongues. This points to both varieties of known languages (14:9-10) and tongue-speech. He attributes all these tongues and their interpretations to the work of the Holy Spirit (vv.7,11).

Pratt[11] also picks up on the two kinds of tongues described in Scripture:

Tongues. This gift is at least as controversial today as it was in Paul’s day. Much of the controversy centers on whether tongues were known human languages spoken by someone who did not know the language, or ecstatic utterances not known to humans, perhaps even “the tongues of angels” (1 Cor 13:1). A few interpreters have even argued that tongues included language that could be understood by listeners as if it were their own native language, though it was not (Acts 2:11). A crucial consideration lies in the fact that Paul did not say tongues, but different kinds of tongues (12:10). Paul appears to have been intentionally ambiguous, allowing for a broad range of phenomena under the rubric of tongues.

And Gangel[12] simply states, “Most evangelical scholars believe the tongues of Pentecost were genuine languages, not the ecstatic sounds Paul dealt with in Corinth (1 Cor 14:1-12).”

DA Carson[13] gives a more technical answer:

Were the tongues at Corinth “real languages” or something else? To put the matter in technical terms, is the phenomenon of 1 Corinthians an instance of xenoglossia (that is, speaking in unlearned human languages) or glossolalia (that is, speaking in verbal patterns that cannot be identified with any human)?... they may be an expression of deep feelings and inarticulate thoughts issuing out of the speaker’s deep experiences of the Spirit, but not demonstrably conveyed in propositional terms in the sounds themselves... MacGorman insists that glossolalia in 1 Corinthians is “Holy Spirit inspired utterance that is unintelligible apart from interpretation, itself an attendant gift... Dunn supports the view that the tongues in Corinth were not real human languages... Of course, this will not do for the tongues of Acts 2, where the gift consisted of known human languages; but elsewhere, the alternative is not as simple as “human languages” or “gibberish,” as many noncharismatic writers affirm. Indeed, the fact that Paul can speak of different kinds of tongues (12:10,28) may suggest that on some occasions human languages were spoken (as in Acts 2), and in other cases not—even though in the latter eventuality the tongues were viewed as bearing cognitive content.

What then can we conclude? I would like to suggest, based on the above discussion, that when Paul refers to “various kinds of tongues” in 1 Corinthians 12:10 that he is not simply saying that there are different earthly languages. Instead, he is saying that the gift of tongues consists of the ability to speak a previously unknown earthly language and the ability to speak an unknown language that is of another scope or purpose. But can this be seen in Scripture?

What I would now like to focus on are the differences in the tongues speaking of Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14. Let’s read both of these passages:

Acts 2:4-11

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5 Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6 And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. 7 And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? 8 And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? 9 Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, 11 both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God.” (ESV)

1 Corinthians 14:1-5

1 Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. 2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. 4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. 5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up. (ESV)

First of all, in both passages it is believers who are speaking in tongues. Paul goes so far as to remind us in 1 Corinthians 1:2 that those he wrote to were “the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Notice also that he does not condemn the tongues speaking of Corinth. He simply states that prophecy is the greater gift.

Second, let’s examine the setting of Acts 2. The place where the believers gathered in Acts 1 was referred to as an “upper room” (Acts1:13). Sielaff[14] writes:

The Greek word translated “upper room” is from the root noun huperoon. The term means the “upper chamber” of a structure with 2 or more stories. This term occurs later in Acts 7:37, 39 and 20:8. The fact that Luke used two different Greek terms in Luke 22:12 and Acts 1:13 may show that dissimilar types of “upper room” were intended. That would mean the upper room (or social room of an inn) of Mark 14:15 and Luke 22:12 was different than the upper room (or upper chamber) of Acts 1:13. On the other hand, Luke may simply have used a different term to describe the same room both where the Passover Supper was held and where Pentecost room occurred. It cannot be determined clearly from the text... Further, although the disciples and women were not wealthy, we know that the room they were in at Pentecost could hold about 120 people (Acts 1:16).

Reynolds[15] further clarifies their location on the day of Pentecost when he states that the 120 were most likely at the Temple:

“…in one place…” – Luke does not tell us the place. Since we last saw them in the upper room somewhere in Jerusalem, it is easy to assume that is where they were. However, since we see the disciples coming into immediate contact with a large crowd of people (Acts 2:6), it is possible they had gathered somewhere in the area of the Temple. This event occurred around 9:00 a.m. (Acts 2:15) which was one of the prescribed times of prayer.

And so, the 120 were gathered at the Temple Mount on the day of Pentecost at 9am for prayer. In addition, Hamp[16], who contends that Jesus taught in Hebrew and not Aramaic, mentions that even those who believe Jesus taught in Aramaic believe that the Temple language was Hebrew. It is also interesting to note that Paul switches from Greek to speak to the crowd in Acts 22:2 in Hebrew (ESV and others; however, the NIV wrongly chooses Aramaic for åβραΐδι διαλέκτῳ).

Commenting on the speaking of Hebrew rather than Aramaic, Knowles writes:

In some circles, it is still commonly believed that Jesus’ everyday language was Aramaic, the language the Jews had learned and brought back from Babylon during their sojourn there. For example, the Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible tells us, "The dialect daily spoken by Jesus and the disciples was Galilean Aramaic, which, as is noted in Matt. 26:73, was recognizably different from the S [southern] dialect spoken in and around Jerusalem. It was in this same Galilean dialect that the Aramaic of the Palestinian Talmud and the older Midrashim was written" (article "Aramaic", Vol. 1, p. 186). The edition quoted above is copyrighted 1962. In more recent times, an expanding circle of scholars has rejected this commonly believed notion as erroneous. They are now convinced that the language Jesus used to teach his talmidim – disciples – was Hebrew, not Aramaic. There is as well a growing conviction that Hebrew was also the language in which the original "Life of Jesus" was first conveyed. Christian scholars working in cooperation with Jewish scholars in Jerusalem have been among the first to develop the evidences for this relatively new theory. In this article, we consider their arguments in favor of Hebrew as Jesus’ teaching language, and as the language of an original "Gospel" account from which all others are ultimately derived.[17]

Notice what is happening in Acts 2. The 120 are gathered at 9am for prayer on the Day of Pentecost. Everyone is speaking the Temple language of Hebrew. Suddenly, they were speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. They were speaking to devout men. They were heard by these men speaking their native language, a known earthly language. There was no interpreter. They were declaring the mighty works of God. The unbelievers were filled with awe. This miracle made it possible for Peter to preach the gospel to them. Furthermore, while γλώσσαις is used in Acts 2:4, in 2:6,8 the word translated language is διαλέκτῳ which “refers to the language or dialect of some country or district.”[18]

Let’s now examine the setting of 1 Corinthians. The church in Corinth was heavily influenced by the mystery religions of that time. House[19] mentions the mystery religion of Apollo:

several temples in Corinth were for the worship of Apollo, and the famous shrine at Delphi was primarily that of Apollo... The ecstatic tongues-speaking of the oracle and the subsequent interpretation by the priest at Delphi are widely known... This religion easily could have provided the kind of impetus for spiritual experience found in the Corinthian church... it is not surprising that some of the Corinthians carried these pagan ideas in the church at Corinth

In addition, Forbes[20] writes:

Paul’s understanding of the close relationship between interpreted tongues and prophecies mirrors the understanding of the parallel phenomena found in the case of the Delphic oracle. Here, it is widely believed, the Pythian priestess (mantis) ascended Apollo’s tripod, and either went into a trance or pretended to do so. In this state she spoke her oracles, in a mixture of broken, incoherent Greek and unintelligible free vocalisation. Her utterances were “interpreted” by the prophetes, who declared them to the inquirer, usually in oracular, ambiguous hexameters, and, if requested, provided a written copy to be taken home.

Robeck, Jr[21] gives a similar perspective on the relationship between the abuse of tongues in Corinth and Greek religion:

The Delphic and Pythian religion of Greece understood ecstatic behavior and speech to be evidence of divine inspiration by Apollos. Described in Greek literature by the terms ekstasis and mantis (cf. Eng. “mantic”), this behavior may provide background to the Corinthian misunderstanding of tongues-speaking. Plutarch (Moralia 432,438,758) described the Delphic oracle as a mantic who sought divine inspiration that enabled her to speak in an ecstatic manner. A second person, an interpreter (prophetes, “prophet”) stood by to make intelligible to paying customers what the mantic had received under inspiration (cf. Plato, Timaeus 71f.). Uninterpreted tongues in Corinth were apparently understood by some as sufficient indication of Spirit possession, and hence, of spirituality (1 Cor. 14:4-6, 37f.).

Paul is writing to a group of believers who have come out of a background of cultic glossolalia, a religious practice which involved a manic state of speaking by the mantis and an interpretation by the prophetess. While Paul does not forbid or condemn the gift of tongues in Corinth, he does deal with the abuses of this gift, i.e., the public use of it in a manner similar to the mystery religions, the inappropriate overemphasis upon it, and the disorderly use of it (1 Corinthians 14:5,27,40). This may also explain his need to reaffirm his command that “the women should keep silent” (1 Corinthians 14:34) and explain the term in 14:23 “out of your minds,” μαίνεσθε, or, “be beside oneself.”

Concerning 1 Corinthians 14:23, Murphy-O’Connor[22] writes:

The gift of tongues proliferated at Corinth because the mysterious sound of tongues meant enhanced social prestige... However, were an unbelieving outsider to walk into an assembly where all were speaking in tongues, his inevitable reaction would be ‘You are raving!’ (v.23), a judgment that would put the Christian assembly on the same level as the pagan mystery religions.

With respect to the meaning and usage of μαίνεσθε, BAGD[23] states that this word, used by Paul, was also used to describe those who gave ecstatic utterance in the pagan temples:

μαίνομαι...be mad, be out of one’s mind... have no control over oneself... Of the impression made by speakers in ‘tongues’ on strangers 1 Cor. 14:23 (Herm. Wr. 9, 4 those who were filled w. divine Gnosis made the same impression on the outsiders)

In other words, Paul, in order to confront the abuses in the Corinthian church, intentionally uses a word that seems to indicate that much of the disorderly tongues speaking in the church was an imitation of the female-led raving and disorderly conduct of the pagan temples.

Now notice the distinct differences in the tongues of Corinth compared to Acts. In 1 Corinthians 14 Paul immediately states that the one who speaks in a tongue is not speaking to men but to God. The human listeners cannot understand since he utters mysteries in his spirit. The one who speaks in a tongue is building up himself. It was being done in the church amongst believers but when an unbeliever was present their response to tongues was that they are out of their minds (14:23).

When we look at both passages we see significant differences. The miraculous tongues of Acts 2 were known earthly languages that did not require an interpreter and were directed to men. We could call these “evangelistic tongues.” The tongues of 1 Corinthians 14 were a mystery language spoken to God for the purpose of personal edification and required the gift of interpretation to be understood by others. Thus we could call this type of tongues “edifying tongues.” It is “private worship directed to God. Speaking to God in a tongue is comparable to personal prayer: The one who prays speaks to himself and to God (v.28) and does so within the context of love.”[24]

J. Oswald Sanders[25] also detected these differences. He made the following points:

1. At Pentecost the disciples spoke to men (Acts 2:6) but at Corinth the speaking was to God (1 Cor 14:2,9).

2. At Pentecost tongues were a sign or credential to believers but at Corinth to unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22).

3. At Pentecost the unbelievers were filled with awe and marveled (Acts 2:7,8), but at Corinth the unbelievers thought the Christians were mad (1 Cor 14:23).

4. At Pentecost there was harmony (Acts 2:1), at Corinth confusion (1 Cor 14:23).

So what can we conclude from this discussion? Let me first begin with the evangelistic tongues of Acts 2. That the disciples spoke the known earthly languages of those who had gathered for Pentecost is beyond doubt. Filled with the Holy Spirit they boldly proclaimed the praises of God to both Jew and Gentile. They were not speaking to God but to men and no interpreter was needed since they were speaking the native language of those around them. The end result of this miraculous event was the acceptance of the message of Peter that Jesus is the Messiah.

In the same way today I believe that the evangelistic gift of tongues, the ability to speak, or possibly to be heard, in the native language of the listener is to be seen as a miraculous gift and not the norm. Only twice have I heard of this gift occurring. One such time was in 1997. Pierre Chiasson, a Baptist pastor who held evangelistic Bible studies in English among the French and English residents of the Highlands of Cape Breton Island, Canada was speaking at the docks beside the ocean in Cheticamp. After presenting the gospel, the mother of a man who had recently come to Christ came to him and began speaking in French. Finding the son to act as an interpreter, Pierre learned that the woman was asking him when he had learned to speak such perfect French. Explaining that he had been preaching in English the woman declared that she had heard him presenting the gospel in French and wanted to receive Christ as her Savior. Not only did Pierre not know that he was being heard in French, this event has never happened again to him.

With respect to the edifying tongues of 1 Corinthians 14 I believe that Paul is dealing with a language that is not a known language but ecstatic utterances. While it would take much more time to discuss in greater depth the Corinthian abuses of this gift and Paul’s edicts for the practice of this gift in worship services (although many churches would benefit from a reminder of Paul’s teachings), I believe that we can safely say the following. First, while Paul does not say that we should seek this gift, Paul does not condemn its use. Rather, he condemns its abuses. He does not say that it is wrong to possess a gift that edifies the one who has it. He simply states that those who possess this gift speak to God and not to men for the purpose of self edification.

From the above discussion I would like to conclude that the evangelistic gift of tongues as seen in Acts 2 is the miraculous and uncommon ability to speak a known earthly language. The gift of tongues in 1 Corinthians 14 is the ability to utter mysteries in our spirit, a form of prayer language or personal worship. These two distinct methods of speaking in tongues are different in their language, their use and their audience. Thus Paul is able to say in 1 Corinthians 12:10 that there are definitely “various kinds of tongues.”

Works Cited

Barnes, Albert. Barnes' Notes: Acts. 1847. Ed. Robert Frew. 14 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Books, 2005. Vol. 10.

Barnes, Albert. Barnes’ Notes: 1 Corinthians. 1847. Ed. Robert Frew. 14 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Books, 2005. Vol. 11.

Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Trans. William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker. Second. ed. Chicago, USA: The University of Chicago Press, 1979. "μαίνομαι". Rpt. of Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schriften Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur. 1957. Print.

Blaiklock, E. M. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: the Acts of the Apostles. 1959. 20 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Eerdmans, 1971. Vol. 5.

Carson, D. A. Showing the Spirit: a Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14. 1987. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Book House, 1992.

Dennis, Lane T., and Wayne Grudem, eds. ESV Study Bible. Wheaton, USA: Crossway Bibles, 2008.

Forbes, Christopher. Jstor. Early Christian Inspired Speech and Hellenistic Popular Religion. Spec. issue of Novum Testamentum XXVIII.3, 1986. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.jstor.org/​pss/​1560737>.

Gangel, Kenneth O. Holman New Testament Commentary: Acts. Ed. Max Anders. 12 vols. Nashville, USA: Broadman & Holman, 1998. Vol. 5.

Gromacki, Robert G. Called to Be Saints: an Exposition of 1 Corinthians. 1977. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Book House, 1986.

Hamp, Douglas. "Discovering the Language of Jesus - Hebrew of Aramaic?" 2005. Discovering the Language of Jesus - Hebrew of Aramaic?. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.thefirstsixdays.com/​LanguageofJesus/​index.htm>.

House, H Wayne. "Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth." Atlaonline. Bibliotheca Sacra 140.558, p 134-150, 1983. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​search.atlaonline.com/​pls/​eli/​ec.pdfapp.showpdf?myaid=ATLA0000929671>.

Kent Jr, Homer A. Jerusalem to Rome: Studies in Acts. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Book House, 1972.

Kistemaker, Simon J. New Testament Commentary: Acts. 1990. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Academic, 2007. Vol. 5.

Kistemaker, Simon J. New Testament Commentary: 1 Corinthians. 1993. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Academic, 2007. Vol. 7.

Knowles, Brian. "Which Language Did Jesus Speak – Aramaic or Hebrew?" N.d. Godward.org. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.godward.org/​Hebrew Roots/​did Jesus speak hebrew.htm>.

Longenecker, Richard N. The Expositors Bible Commentary: Acts. Ed. Frank E. Gaebelein. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Zondervan, 1981. Vol. 9.

Lowery, David K. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament. 1983. Ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton, USA: Victor Books, 1984.

MacArthur, John. Spiritual Gifts: 1 Corinthians 12. Chicago, USA: Moody Press, 1985. Rpt. of The Power of Jesus. 1983.

MacArthur, John. Acts 1-12. 22 vols. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago, USA: Moody Press, 1994. Vol. 5.

MacArthur, John. 1 Corinthians. 22 vols. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago, USA: Moody Press, 1984. Vol. 9.

Mare, W Harold. The Expositor's Bible Commentary: 1 Corinthians. Ed. Rank E. Gaebelein. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Zondervan, 1976. Vol. 10.

McGee, J Vernon. Thru the Bible with J Vernon McGee: 1 Corinthians Through Revelation. Nashville, USA: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. New Testament Message : 1 Corinthians. 1979. Ed. Wilfrid Harrington and Donald Senior. 22 vols. Wilmington, USA: Michael Glazier Inc, 1982. Vol. 10.

Pratt Jr, Richard L. Holman New Testament Commentary 1 & 2 Corinthians. Ed. Max Anders. Nashville, USA: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

Reynolds, Larry. "Acts - Session 3." 30 Jan. 2009. Larry Reynolds, Denton, TX Biblical Exposition. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​larry.instantspot.com/​blog/​2009/​01/​30/​Acts--Session-3>.

Rombeck Jr., CM. "Tongues, Gift of." The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Rev. ed. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988. Vol. 4. Print.

Sielaff, David. "The Upper Room." 12 Oct. 2005. Associates for Scriptural Knowledge. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.askelm.com/​news/​n051012.htm>.

Toussaint, Stanley D. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament. 1983. Ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton, USA: Victor Books, 1984.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "Acts." The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament. 1984.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Wiersbe Bible Commentary: New Testament. Italy: David C Cook, 2007.

"What We Believe." Jubilee Christian Center. Jubilee Christian Center. 5 Nov. 2009 ​/​jubilee.org/​welcome.html>.

---

[1] "What We Believe." Jubilee Christian Center. Jubilee Christian Center. 5 Nov. 2009 ​/​jubilee.org/​welcome.html>.

[2] Kistemaker, Simon J. New Testament Commentary: 1 Corinthians. 1993. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Academic, 2007. Vol. 7, pg 428.

[3] Gromacki, Robert G. Called to Be Saints: an Exposition of 1 Corinthians. 1977. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Book House, 1986, pg 153.

[4] Wiersbe, Warren W. The Wiersbe Bible Commentary: New Testament. Italy: David C Cook, 2007, pg 327.

[5] MacArthur, John. Acts 1-12. 22 vols. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago, USA: Moody Press, 1994. Vol. 5, 42.

[6] MacArthur, John. 1 Corinthians. 22 vols. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago, USA: Moody Press, 1984. Vol. 9, pgs 370-371.

[7] Blaiklock, E. M. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: the Acts of the Apostles. 1959. 20 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Eerdmans, 1971. Vol. 5, pg 57.

[8] Mare, W Harold. The Expositor's Bible Commentary: 1 Corinthians. Ed. Rank E. Gaebelein. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Zondervan, 1976. Vol. 10, pg 262-263. (LSJ – Liddell, Scott, Jones: Greek-English Lexicon)

[9] Longenecker, Richard N. The Expositors Bible Commentary: Acts. Ed. Frank E. Gaebelein. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Zondervan, 1981. Vol. 9, pg 271.

[10] Kistemaker, Simon J. New Testament Commentary: 1 Corinthians. 1993. 12 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Academic, 2007. Vol. 7, pg 426.

[11] Pratt Jr, Richard L. Holman New Testament Commentary 1 & 2 Corinthians. Ed. Max Anders. Nashville, USA: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000, pg 216.

[12] Gangel, Kenneth O. Holman New Testament Commentary: Acts. Ed. Max Anders. 12 vols. Nashville, USA: Broadman & Holman, 1998. Vol. 5, pg 26.

[13] Carson, D. A. Showing the Spirit: a Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14. 1987. Grand Rapids, USA: Baker Book House, 1992, pgs 79-87.

[14] Sielaff, David. "The Upper Room." 12 Oct. 2005. Associates for Scriptural Knowledge. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.askelm.com/​news/​n051012.htm>.

[15] Reynolds, Larry. "Acts - Session 3." 30 Jan. 2009. Larry Reynolds, Denton, TX Biblical Exposition. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​larry.instantspot.com/​blog/​2009/​01/​30/​Acts-- Session-3>.

[16] Hamp, Douglas. "Discovering the Language of Jesus - Hebrew of Aramaic?" 2005. Discovering the Language of Jesus - Hebrew of Aramaic?. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.thefirstsixdays.com/​LanguageofJesus/​index.htm>.

[17] Knowles, Brian. "Which Language Did Jesus Speak – Aramaic or Hebrew?" N.d. Godward.org. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.godward.org/​Hebrew Roots/​did Jesus speak hebrew.htm>.

[18] Wiersbe, pg 327.

[19] House, H Wayne. "Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth." Atlaonline. Bibliotheca Sacra 140.558, p 134-150, 1983. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​search.atlaonline.com/​pls/​eli/​ec.pdfapp.showpdf?myaid=ATLA0000929671>.

[20] Forbes, Christopher. Jstor. Early Christian Inspired Speech and Hellenistic Popular Religion. Spec. issue of Novum Testamentum XXVIII.3, 1986. Web. 11 Nov. 2009. ​/​www.jstor.org/​pss/​1560737>.

[21] Rombeck Jr., CM. "Tongues, Gift of." The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Rev. ed. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, USA: Wm B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988. Vol. 4. Print.

[22] Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. New Testament Message : 1 Corinthians. 1979. Ed. Wilfrid Harrington and Donald Senior. 22 vols. Wilmington, USA: Michael Glazier Inc, 1982. Vol. 10 pgs 128, 130.

[23] Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Trans. William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker. Second. ed. Chicago, USA: The University of Chicago Press, 1979. "μαίνομαι". Rpt. of Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schriften Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur. 1957. Print.

[24] Kistemaker, 1 Corinthians, pg 477.

[25] Mare, pg 263.

Book Reviews: Logic, or the Right Use of Reason; Rhetoric and Hermeneutics; Foundations of Christian Thought: Faith, Learning and the Christian Worldv

Foundations of Christian Thought: Faith, Learning, and the Christian Worldview (Paperback), by Mark P. Cosgrove

Rhetoric and Hermeneutics, by James Hester and David Hester

Logic, or the Right Use of Reason, by Isaac Watts

I have been in pastoral ministry since the summer of 1986. At that time I had been a believer for six years, was newly married and had just finished my second year of Bible college. Growing up, I had always had a fear of public speaking. We moved frequently. I attended five different elementary schools. And being very tall, thin and awkward I tended to lack confidence when it came to people. In addition, my father had worked as a police officer, a bouncer in a bar, and then a car salesman until his death in 1980. He was a very smooth, imposing and incredibly gifted person, especially when it came to communicating. He was a voracious reader, a skilled solver of crossword puzzles and simply put; he could sell refrigerators to Eskimos.

I, on the other hand, was not so confident. So when I began to teach I began to slowly formulate the decision that instead of being a smooth talking salesman of the Bible and Christianity I would allow the power of God’s word to do the work. My role was to exegete the text and then explain what it meant and seek to apply it without attempting to emotionally embellish the text. Even my homiletics professor in college appeared to place more emphasis on the technical construction of the text and very little emphasis on its delivery and the use of words in crafting the message.

Rhetoric, however, is defined by WordNet (http://wordnetweb.princeton.ed) as “study of the technique and rules for using language effectively, especially in public speaking.” The Course Requirements state that rhetoric is “the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a: the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b: the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion.” So as I began to read through the required texts for this course my heart began to resonate with the message that was being conveyed by the authors. Yes, we must be biblical but we must also understand that preachers and teachers are in essence “public orators” and there is power in the spoken word, especially since we are seeking to persuade people to make eternal decisions.

The first book that I read was Isaac Watts’ “Logic or The Right Use of Reason in the Inquiry After Truth.” I was immediately intrigued to read on when I read Watts’ words in the preface, “the great design of this noble science is to rescue our reasoning powers from their unhappy slavery and darkness; and thus, with all due submission and deference, it offers an humble assistance to divine revelation” (Watts, p 3).

What I appreciated most about Watts’ approach to logic was the way in which he began building a simple foundation of examining that which is around us, how these things are perceived and then how we communicate our concepts of these things. I greatly enjoyed his use of scriptural examples to explain his points. General statements of wisdom such as when he refers to making notes as read and saying, “It is but a very weak objection against this practice to say, I shall spoil my book; for I persuade myself, that you did not buy it as a bookseller, to sell it again for gain, but as a scholar, to improve your mind by it...though your book yields less money for your executors” (Watts, p 64). Not only is there wisdom but there is a dry humor in his writing.

In addition Watts’ was very helpful in how we should approach a subject, divide it and adequately explain it. I often see young men who take a subject and essentially preach three separate sermons or they send the majority of their on one point (with several sub points) and very little time on the other two or three main points. In addition, his work on propositions was very helpful for making clear and precise statements that logically communicate the truth of Scripture.

The next book which I read was “Rhetorics and Hermeneutics” by Hester and Hester. I did not know what to expect when I began to read this book. As the title teasingly states, is it simply Rhetorics and Hermeneutics or is Rhetoric a part of Hermeneutics, is it Rhetorics or Hermeneutics or is it Rhetorics instead of Hermeneutics?

What I appreciated most from this book was the understanding that the Bible was not simply written as words on a page that are to only be examined one word at a time. “Rhetorics distinguishes itself from hermeneutics precisely by concentrating on the text’s effects at each and every moment of performance and at every integral context: the context of the rhetor, both real and implied, the context of the text’s materiality, and the context of the audience, empirical, intended, and constructed, both universal and particular” (Hester, p 10). In addition, Wuellner adds, “More importantly, however, is the awareness brought to rhetoric that the essence of all rhetoric is not mere communication, but the creation of states of communion… the aim of identification through transformation” (Hester, p 11).

In my opinion, the essays in this book create an opportunity for the preacher to understand that the rhetoric of the Bible must not be ignored or abandoned but must be the very essence of string Biblical communication today. Do we preach in such a way that our hearers break out with applause? Do we agree with Demosthenes that “the three most important parts of rhetoric are delivery, delivery, delivery” (Hester, p 129)?

This book caused me to evaluate my speaking beyond technical exegetical skills and to ask myself if I am truly seeking to communicate in a way that creates emotion, identification and ultimately transformation through persuasion.

The third book was “Foundations of Christian Thought” by Mark Cosgrove. Perhaps the key quote in this book was his statement, “I suspect that Satan dos not work through chants, ceremonies, Halloween costumes, and body postures as much as through ordinary American TV commercials and self –righteousness in our churches” (Cosgrove, p 118). As I read this book I found myself asking if my preaching has helped people to develop a truly Christian world view. Is this world view of Christian Theism clearly taught and applied or are we for the most part creating people who in practice have a New Age Movement view of spirituality where “I see Americans driving their fast cars, eating rich foods, and then heading off to their twenty minute, Eastern meditation sessions” (Hester, pg 127). This eerily sounds like the behavior of many evangelical Christians today.

In conclusion, the reading of these books has helped me to better evaluate my preaching style, the way that I craft sermons and the purpose of my preaching. The words of Paul ring true, “we try to persuade men” (2 Corinthians 5:11). Most importantly, are we leading people into a true spiritual experience, built upon Christian Theism or are we simply creating individuals who have a form of spirituality apart from regeneration that simply seeks to “unleash” each persons inner potential.