INTRODUCTION
Subjectivism, acceptance of the emotions prompted by human experiences as the proper testimony in matters of religion, has undermined the Christian system more than many realize. Turning from divine revelation as the single evidence of faith, to the multiplied and diverse feelings housed up in the flesh, has warped the thinking and direction of many -- to such extent that we now witness errors on the Holy Spirit's role never imagined as possible issues within the churches of Christ. Advocacy of tongues speaking, demon possession, Spirit leadings separate from the written word, and the offering of an inner consciousness as evidence for faith and practice have become too common in some quarters. We propose that all present day tongues movements are unscriptural and devotees thereto constitute a cult in opposition to pure religion.
THE PURPOSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Communication is at the center of attention when studying the office of the Holy Spirit. "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come" (John 16:13). This text, addressed to the apostles only, presents the argument that the work of the Spirit was to reveal the mind of God to the apostles and cause them to remember that which had been taught of the Lord. Inspiration and revelation made the communication to the Spirit-filled apostles who in turn, John-like, obeyed the order "What thou seest, write in a book" (Rev. 1:11). Any theory shoving the Spirit into a movement wherein he operates above and beyond the written word constitutes a not-so-covert denial of the inspiration of the scriptures as the all-sufficient guide.
Diversities of revelations, continual communication, separate and apart from the written word, presents diversities of doctrines which are divisive in nature, not unifying. Men begging for recognition within the fellowship of the New Testament church while proposing the continuation of tongues speaking are in actuality advocating the inadequacy of the scriptures and the necessity of hearing their new word -- they are no more correct in their assertion nor right in their stance than the Roman Pope, the false prophet Joe Smith, or the false prophetess Ellen G. White. We have lifted the banner of truth against these false teachers outside the church and we shall not close our eyes to the same errors preached within the body. We further propose that any notion of an immediate indwelling of the Holy Spirit in individual Christians exists for immediate influence. The contention that no immediate influence is exerted by an immediate indwelling reduces the argument to nonsense. God does not perform in superfluous manners -- a direct indwelling demands a direct influence.
What influences the Christian other than the written word? If you feel an influence separate and apart from the word, above and beyond the written word, if you are led by the Holy Spirit without the word, what sign do you exhibit confirming the influence as being from God? Tongues? "And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following" (Mark 16:20). Is this unscriptural quest for and insistence upon speaking in tongues an outgrowth of certain individuals desiring to make new revelations, communications, and confirm the divine origin of those new doctrines? If not, the tongues are unessential. If so, the Bible is incomplete. Either way tongues cares go in the argument they are wrong.
MODERN CLAIMS DISCUSSED
Claimants to the gift of tongues in modern times consistently define tongues as unintelligible utterances, an admitted jargon -- "ecstatic utterances," "prayer language," "holy laughter," -- contradicting the axiom that the Holy Spirit communicates. The Holy Spirit addresses man's consciousness through communication -- words, the vehicles of communication. Man is an intelligent creature. God addresses him as such for he is not a puppet necessarily manipulated by outside forces over which he has not jurisdiction. Choice has been given man. Upon weighing the evidence of God's Word men either obey or disobey -- choice is a rational, mental, intelligent function.
Ecstatic, emotional, unreasonable, unconscious, disconnected and non-edifying outbursts are not characteristic of Divinity! The garbled jargon of a dis-oriented person, apparently psychologically over-wrought, having been duped into believing a whipping-up of emotions, the fleshly senses, is spirituality, makes God appear dis-oriented. Contortions and convulsions do not answer to conversion. The bewildered response that a so-called speaker of tongues edifies himself although others do not understand misses the point, for all public conduct is to be to the edification of the assembly. Paul's entire argument demands an intelligent tongue, a known tongue, language, be used that instruction results. In the event no interpreter is available, let the tongue-speaker remain silent in the assembly (1 Cor. 14:11-24,27-28).
Assertion that "the gift of the Holy Spirit" in Acts 2:38 is in fact the gift of tongues amounts to a gross misconstruction and misapplication of the text. Bloomfield's Greek Testament has the following: "... [@ten] [@dorean] [@tou] [@hagiou] [@pneumatos]. By this seems to be here chiefly meant, not the miraculous gifts before adverted to, but, as appears from what follows, the ordinary aids and influences of the Spirit given to every man to profit withal." Charismatics are standing outside evidence on Acts 2:38. The gift of the Spirit in no wise relates to supernatural performance, miraculous gifts, but the ordinary influences of the Spirit -- that is, through the word, for the supernatural gifts were for the confirmation of the word. Since no supernatural element is found in the phrase of Acts 2:38, no further revelations were to be made and no further confirmations would be essential; hence, miracles ceased. The tongues advocates are out of order time-wise -- they are applying texts to modern conditions that were given to the apostles and the first century church alone.
EXEGESIS OF THE "TONGUES" PASSAGES
An exegesis of the tongues passages is both concise and enlightening.
Acts 2:4,6,11. The Pentecost Day beginning of the church is the beginning of the use of tongues -- known languages. Effort to denominate the current tongues movement as a Pentecostal experience is anachronistic -- out of its time period. The attempt is due to the exercise of tongues and to that fact alone. Follow the Biblical sequence: "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). The apostles, filled with the Spirit, spoke in tongues -- tongues that were heard, that is, understood: "and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language" (Acts 2:6). That truth is emphasized and amplified when Luke records; "And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?" (Acts 2:8). Furthermore, the text lists the various dialects required to reach such a diverse audience. Why, if the languages were not intelligible (Acts 2:8-11)?
Peter's inspired comment on the matter settles the time element of the text when he said, "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh ... and they shall prophesy" (Acts 2:16-18). Since inspiration so restricted the interpretation of the Joel 2:28 prophecy to the Pentecost Day fulfillment, a general, or repeated fulfillment cannot be anticipated. To so argue the passage is a mishandling of both the prophecy and its fulfillment.
Mark 16:17 -- Tongues are herein mentioned as one of several signs promised to the apostles and to them alone. Who was privy to this conversation other than the twelve? Due to the fact that the text refers as well to the casting out of devils, taking up serpents, and drinking deadly poison, along with the healing of the sick, we question the 20th-century practice of tongues, glossolalia, to the exclusion of the other promised gifts. Why tongues to the neglect of the others? All such signs were given in the beginning as means of confirming the word -- Mark 16:17-20 constitute one section. The references are to the witness of the Holy Spirit to the preaching of the apostles. Paul stated of the matter:
"How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation: which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord. and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him: God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?" (Heb. 2:3-4)
Present preaching on demon possession and the existence of devils indwelling men today by some of our brethren is only evidence of the ignorance that is mounting pulpits! Some, unable to cope with the direct-indwelling-of-the-Holy-Spirit-in-Christians issue have adopted the indwelling of the Devil in sinners! How can Bible-preaching, Bible-believing, and Bible-studying people condone such balderdash? Since they have gone from the direct indwelling of the Spirit to demon possession, possibly some will begin handling rattlesnakes! If we are going to be Pentecostals, call us Pentecostals. If we are going to be Christians, leave Pentecostalism alone.
Acts 10:46. Third, in the sequence of the tongues passages is the matter of the inauguration of the gospel to Gentiles. The household of Cornelius was given the gift of tongues in an outpouring from heaven for the purpose, stated within the passages, of convincing the Jewish eyewitnesses that God, not man, had opened repentance unto life to the heathen nations (Acts 15:7-9). Applying the text in a fashion other than that by the apostle results in error. Press the passage no further than Peter's inspired application. "For they (Jewish witnesses) heard them (household of Cornelius) speak with tongues" (Acts 10:46).
The case of Cornelius is unique -- the first Gentile converts, received the gift of tongues from heaven rather than by laying on of hands. Cornelius is used as an indisputable argument for direct Spiritual regeneration on the basis of the foregoing; yet, those so stating are ignoring the truth that there can be no degrees in Holy Spirit baptism. Had Cornelius been baptized with the Spirit he would have been equal to the apostles -- one is either baptized with the Spirit or not, and two so baptized received the same thing, an equal measure. If Cornelius had been so baptized with the Spirit, he would have enjoyed the very powers entailed in such a baptism. He would have known, even as Peter knew, the words of salvation and it would not have been necessary for the apostle to preach in that house.
It must be remembered by our preachers that the fact that Cornelius was able to speak in tongues was not a demonstration of Spirit baptism, but of a gift, a single gift, as demonstrated by various members of the churches during the period of time in which spiritual gifts existed. Had Cornelius been challenged to demonstrate the powers inherent in Holy Spirit baptism he would have failed as certainly as those fail today who claim Holy Spirit baptism. The apostles were baptized with the Spirit -- they wrote the Bible. Spirit-baptized men of the twentieth century could do the same thing, and Cornelius could have written it had he received that baptism. We have long held to an inconsistency on this subject and some of our debating brethren will find themeIves eventually nailed to the wall by some sectarian preacher wise enough to seize upon the situation.
Proof of Holy Spirit baptism does not consist in speaking in tongues -- tongues were never given for that purpose. Proof of Holy Spirit baptism lies in the possession of the Comforter ([@Parakletos]) as promised to the apostles, and that spells Advocate, the plenary and verbal inspiration of the word given the apostles alone.
"It came to pass, that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus; and finding certain disciples, he said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him. We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied" (Acts 19:1-6).
Paul baptized twelve Ephesians who knew only the baptism of John and had never heard of the Holy Spirit. They received the gift of tongues as another instance of proof -- proof that John's baptism was invalid and that all spiritual blessings are in Christ, not Moses. Tongues were given as a gift when Paul "laid his hands upon them." The gift was given in that manner -- a manner constant with the manner of all other gifted Christians outside the band of the twelve apostles who received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Since the gift was received in the laying on of hands, it was not the gift of Acts 2:38 which is given all baptized believers. Furthermore, since it was by the laying on of hands it ceased with the termination of all other spiritual gifts according to 1 Cor. 13.
