What Was Tongues? (Part 3) By Nathan Busenitz

Thus far, we have attempted to make the case that (1) there is only one kind of ”gift of tongues” talked about in the New Testament; and (2) that gift consisted of the supernatural ability to speak in authentic foreign languages for the purpose of evangelism or (when translated) edification within the local church. This understanding of tongues, obviously, runs contrary to the contemporary charismatic understanding.
Today, we will look at some of the church fathers (orthodox Christian leaders in the first few centuries of church history) to see what they understood the gift of tongues to be. Did they see it as consisting of authentic foreign languages? Or did they believe it was characterized by ecstatic utterances?
(Though we’ve only listed a few of the church fathers today, we have studied this topic at length. These quotes are consistent with all of the other patristic evidence we have been able to find. To read our journal article on this topic in The Master’s Seminary Journal click here.)

THE CHURCH FATHERS (REGARDING THE NATURE OF TONGUES)
A. Regarding the cessation of the gifts in general
John Chrysostom (c. 344–407): This whole place [speaking about 1 Corinthians 12] is very obscure: but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place.
Augustine (354–430): In the earliest times, “the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spoke with tongues,” which they had not learned, “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to show that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening, and it passed away.
Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393–c. 466): In former times those who accepted the divine preaching and who were baptized for their salvation were given visible signs of the grace of the Holy Spirit at work in them. Some spoke in tongues which they did not know and which nobody had taught them, while others performed miracles or prophesied. The Corinthians also did these things, but they did not use the gifts as they should have done. They were more interested in showing off than in using them for the edification of the church. . . . Even in our time grace is given to those who are deemed worthy of holy baptism, but it may not take the same form as it did in those days.
B. The gift of tongues was closely associated with evangelism. It authenticates the message of the evangelist (cf. Heb. 2:2–3)
Hippolytus (c. 170–c. 236): It is not therefore necessary that every one of the faithful should cast out demons, or raise the dead, or speak with tongues; but such a one only who is vouchsafed this gift, for some cause which may be advantage to the salvation of the unbelievers, who are often put to shame, not with the demonstration of the world, but by the power of the signs; that is, such as are worthy of salvation: for all the ungodly are not affected by wonders; and hereof God Himself is a witness, as when He says in the law: “With other tongues will I speak to this people, and with other lips, and yet will they by no means believe.”
John Chrysostom (c. 344–407): The Corinthians thought that speaking in tongues was a great gift because it was the one which the apostles received first, and with a great display. But this was no reason to think it was the greatest gift of all. The reason the apostles got it first was because it was a sign that they were to go everywhere, preaching the gospel.
Augustine (354–430): In the earliest times, “the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spoke with tongues,” which they had not learned, “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to show that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth.
Others agree including Ambrosiaster (mid-fourth century), Hegemonius (before 350), Gregory of Nazianzen (c. 329–390), and Leo the Great (d. 461).
C. The gift of tongues consisted of authentic foreign languages which the speaker had not previously learned. (Again the gift is closely associated with evangelism.) The content of tongues-speech was “the mighty deeds of God,” specifically with regard to the Gospel.
Gregory of Nazianzen (c. 329–390): They spoke with strange tongues, and not those of their native land; and the wonder was great, a language spoken by those who had not learnt it. And the sign is to them that believe not, and not to them that believe, that it may be an accusation of the unbelievers, as it is written, With other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people, and not even so will they listen to Me saith the Lord.
John Chrysostom (c. 344–407), commenting on 1 Cor. 14:1–2: And as in the time of building the tower [of Babel] the one tongue was divided into many; so then the many tongues frequently met in one man, and the same person used to discourse both in the Persian, and the Roman, and the Indian, and many other tongues, the Spirit sounding within him: and the gift was called the gift of tongues because he could all at once speak divers languages.
Chrysostom [again]: “The Corinthians thought that speaking in tongues was a great gift because it was the one which the apostles received first, and with a great display. But this was no reason to think it was the greatest gift of all. The reason the apostles got it first was because it was a sign that they were to go everywhere, preaching the gospel.” (John Chrysostom, Homilies on 1 Corithians, 35.1. Cited from 1–2 Corinthians, ACCS, 138 in reference to 1 Cor 14:2.)
Chrysostom (again): “For as the Apostles themselves had received this sign first, so also the faithful went on receiving it, I mean, the gift of tongues; yet not this only but also many others: inasmuch as many used even to raise the dead and to cast out devils and to perform many other such wonders: and they had gifts too, some less, and some more. But more abundant than all was the gift of tongues among them: and this became to them a cause of division; not from its own nature but from the perverseness of them that had received it.” (Ibid., 29.1. Cited from Schaff, NPNF, First Series, 12:168 in reference to 1 Cor 12:1–2.)
This is agreed on by Irenaeus (c. 140–c. 202), Hippolytus (c. 170–c. 236), Hegemonius (before 350), Ambrosiaster (mid-fourth century), Augustine (354–430), Leo the Great (d. 461), and implied by others (such as Tertullian [c. 160–c. 220] and Origen [c. 185–c. 254]).
[Additional note:] The fathers equated the gift in Mark and Acts with the gift in 1 Corinthians 12–14. They did not see two types of the gift—one public and one private. They saw only one type of tongues—that as described in Acts 2.
D. The gift of tongues is given to select individuals by the Holy Spirit. Not everyone is expected to speak in tongues.
Hippolytus (c. 170–c. 236): It is not necessary that every one of the faithful should cast out demons, raise the dead, or speak with tongues. But only such a one who has been graciously given this gift—for the purpose that it may be advantageous to the salvation of unbelievers.
Ambrose (c. 340–c. 397): Not all, says he, have the gift of healings, nor do all, says he, speak with tongues. For the whole of the divine gifts cannot exist in each several man.
Others agree including Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–c. 215), John Chrysostom (c. 344–407), Jerome (c. 345–420), Augustine (354–430), and Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393–c. 466).
E. The gift of tongues was never intended to be the hallmark of the church or its most prestigious spiritual gift. Rather, the gift of prophecy is preferable because it does not require interpretation or translation in order to edify the church.
Ambrosiaster (mid-fourth century): The pursuit of prophecy is more acceptable [than the pursuit of tongues] because it is more useful.
John Chrysostom (c. 344–407): The Corinthians thought that speaking in tongues was a great gift because it was the one which the apostles received first, and with a great display. But this was no reason to think it was the greatest gift of all. The reason the apostles got it first was because it was a sign that they were to go everywhere, preaching the gospel. [Chrysostom taught that tongues is only equal to prophecy if it can be interpreted.]
John Chrysostom (c. 344–407): Paul does not forbid speaking in tongues, however much he may belittle the gift, but he insists that it be kept under control and used for the edification of the whole church.
F. The purpose of the gifts (within the church) is to edify the body (cf. 1 Pet. 4:10–11 ). The ideal use of tongues, therefore, is when the gift is interpreted (translated) so that fellow believers are edified.
First Epistle of Clement Regarding Virginity (from third or fourth century): With the gift, therefore, which thou hast received from our Lord, serve thy spiritual brethren…and declare the gift which thou hast received in the Church for the edification of the brethren in Christ (for good and excellent are those things which help the men of God), if so be that they are truly with thee.
Basil (c. 239–379): Since no one has the capacity to receive all spiritual gifts, but the grace of the Spirit is given proportionately to the faith of each, when one is living in community with others, the grace privately bestowed on each individual becomes the common possession of the others…. One who receives any of these gifts does not possess it for his own sake but rather for the sake of others.
Others agree including Irenaeus (c. 140–c. 202), Tertullian (c. 160–c. 220), Origen (c. 185–c. 254), Novatian (d. c. 258), Hilary (c. 291–371), Ambrosiaster (mid-fourth century), John Chrysostom (c. 344–407), Theordoret of Cyrus (c. 393–c. 466), and John Cassian (360–435).
G. The gift of tongues, if used in church, was to be used in an orderly manner.
Severian of Gabala (d. c. 408): The person who speaks in the Holy Spirit speaks when he chooses to do so and then can be silent, like the prophets. But those who are possessed by an unclean spirit speak even when they do not want to. They say things that they do not understand.
John Chrysostom (c. 344–407), commenting on 1 Cor. 14:40: Again giving a blow to them who chose to behave themselves unseemly without cause, and to incur the imputation of madness; and who keep not their proper rank. For nothing doth so build up as good order, as peace, as love; even as their contraries tend to pull down.
A BIBLICAL / HISTORICAL UNDERSTANDING OF TONGUES
Summary: The gift of tongues was a supernaturally endowed ability, given by the Holy Spirit to select Christians, enabling those believers to speak in previously unlearned human languages. The ideal use of the gift involved the translation of the message for the general edification of fellow believers or evangelism of unbelievers. This ability was not given to all Christians nor were they commanded to seek it. It was not considered the hallmark of the early church, nor is it ever highlighted as a normal part of the Christian experience.
Hasel, The Gift of Tongues: “The contemporary phenomenon of ‘speaking in tongues,’ which is practiced by millions of Christians around the world at present, is of recent origin in Christianity. Even though there have been attempts by the score to demonstrate that the phenomenon of glossolalia in modern times has roots going back for centuries in Christian practice, it remains certain that it is of recent origin.”
Geisler, Signs and Wonders: “Even those who believe in tongues acknowledge that unsaved people have tongues experiences. There is nothing supernatural about them. But there is something unique about speaking complete and meaningful sentences and discourses in a knowable language to which one has never been exposed. This is what the real New Testament gift of tongues entailed. Anything short of this, as ‘private tongues’ are, should not be considered the biblical gift of tongues.”