What is glossolalia?

The expression 'unknown tongue' is unhappy, because it has led some to think that the gift of tongues consisted of a sort of unintelligible gibberish. The word 'unknown' has been added in the A.V., where it should read simply 'tongue.' At Pentecost it was shown that the gift of 'tongues' was in a person speaking a language which he had never learnt, but which was at once understood by those who knew it.

In the same epistle to the Corinthians we have used the expression, "speaking with tongues," and our excuse is that the thing designated by this term is as unusual as the term itself. To speak languages, or in different languages, is not at all the apostle's meaning. The divine gift, by which they spoke divers languages without having learnt them, required a name of its own.

There seems no need of dwelling on "gifts of healings in virtue of (ἐν) the same Spirit," further than to say that it is not more comprehensive, but less, than "faith." There was faith in him who exercised spiritual powers in healing the sick, but gifts of healings were restricted of course to their own peculiar domain. "Faith," as such, might be exercised in a great variety of ways besides that which strengthened some to be martyrs or confessors. Again, another might have "operations of powers" (erroneously rendered in the Rhemish and the Authorized Versions, "the working of miracles"), which were not "healings," but such superiority to things material, or beings spiritual, as we see promised in Mark 16:17-18, and illustrated in the Acts of the Apostles. "Prophecy" another might have given him, which was an energy of the Holy Ghost in the purely spiritual domain, enabling him to give out the mind of God as to the present or future. This definition embraces the twofold application of the term in scripture, whether to the narrow field of prediction, or to the larger one of declaring God's mind and will, so as to act on conscience with unfailing, divine conviction. (See for the latter 1 Cor. 14; for the former Acts 11) "Discerning of spirits" is another gift, which means the faculty of deciding, not between true and spurious professors of the Lord Jesus, but between the Spirit's teaching and that which simulated it by evil spirits. The general responsibility to try or prove the spirits if they are of God we see in 1 John 4, because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Here it is a special gift. The danger, or rather the fact, of misleading some is also foreshown in 1 Timothy 4. The designed distribution of these gifts is strikingly shown in the last two, where "kinds of tongues," or a variety of languages naturally unknown to the speaker we find distinguished from "interpretation of tongues" given to another, though 1 Corinthians 14:13 intimates the desirableness of their combination.

Verses 2-4. "For he that speaks in an (unknown) tongue speaks not to men," etc. To justify the prominence assigned to prophecy, it is here compared with what seems at that time to have been one of the commonest as well as the most conspicuous form of spiritual manifestation. That "tongues" had been unduly valued by these Corinthian saints, and the gift unseasonably used, may be inferred from the general tenor of this chapter, the chief aim of which is the correction of disorders arising from a free exercise of spiritual powers, without the qualifying accompaniments of soundmindedness and love. He begins, therefore, his task by a comparative definition of these very dissimilar gifts, one of which is in its exercise distinctively for God, and the other for men. He who had a "tongue" spake not to men, but to God. It is this non-communicative character that separates it so strikingly from all other spiritual manifestations. The very member which forms the active link of human intercourse and sympathy was in this case miraculously diverted from its natural use. Men spoke, but with an utterance not cognizable even by their own understanding. Their speech was addressed immediately to God, yet not in the ordinary communion of the Spirit. For neither praise, nor prayer, nor intercession could proceed intelligently while the understanding was in suspense. In his spirit the speaker was engaged with "mysteries," while his mind was inactive and out of communication with the minds of others. No one could understand him.2 He knew that he was speaking, and that he spoke to God, but he looked for no effect on others. Without a divinely gifted interpreter, the only result of such utterances was that God was really operating, but men knew not either how or why.

It is evident from the contents of this chapter that the Corinthians had unduly magnified the gift of speaking in a strange tongue. It had a spectacular aspect which they enjoyed. He therefore shows them that the gift of prophecy is more to be coveted than speaking in an unknown tongue. The speaking in an unknown tongue is intelligible to God, but he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, exhortation and comfort. While the Apostle does not deny the value of speaking with tongues, he would rather that they prophesied "for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues." Speaking with tongues edifies the speaker alone but prophecy edifies the church. What is the profit in speaking with an unknown tongue to believers unless the tongue has a real meaning. Musical instruments, which give forth sound, like a pipe or an harp, have no meaning whatever unless there be distinction in the tunes. Thus he shows the uselessness of the gift of tongues for edification unless the tongue is intelligible to all. "Even so ye, for as much as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret."

What the speaking in tongues really was we do not know positively. It was probably an ecstatic form of speech, or some foreign language. As a distinctive gift it has passed away, notwithstanding the fact that from time to time the restoration of this sign-gift has been claimed. (During the middle ages; at the time of the Wesley's; during the days of Edward Irving, when it was proven to emanate from evil spirits; and in our own days, thousands claim to possess it.) But what is prophesying? , In the Old Testament prophecy, it was foretelling coming events. In the New Testament, it has a different meaning. It is not foretelling, but forthtelling. it is one who is speaking as from God and for God; the one who possesses this gift must therefore be in communication with God through the Spirit so as to be able to communicate to others His mind and His will. The exercise of this gift necessitates a close walk with God. This gift the Apostle desired the Corinthians to have. Instead the Corinthians had the inferior gift, which they valued on account of the display and perhaps the mysteriousness of it.

Yet there were cases where the human element was wholly inoperative. A man spoke with a tongue and spoke mysteries (which others could enjoy if they knew the tongue), and did not know what he said himself, though he knew the Spirit was working in him, connecting his soul with divine things in God; but his understanding was unfruitful, and if he spoke with his understanding, it was also a revelation to himself; and then, if an inspired instrument of communication to others, he spoke in words which the Holy Ghost taught, communicating things given by the Spirit, by words given by the Spirit too (πνευματιχοῖς πνευματιχά).

"My persuasion concerning the unknown tongue as it is called (in which I myself was very little experienced) is, that it is no language whatever, but a mere collection of words and sentences; and in the lengthened discourses is, much of it, a jargon of sounds" (p. 134). To this we may all agree, save in the unfounded distinction as to Corinth, which was clearly similar to Pentecost. How could a sober christian think the Holy Spirit conferred there or anywhere "a jargon of sound"? Neander, in his History of the Planting of Christianity, reasons on the "tongues" in 1 Cor. 12, 14 as ecstatic to set aside the force of Acts 2:6-8; but such efforts to explain away scripture are as lamentable as vain. The Lord had promised this sign in Mark 16:17.

In the case of communities 1, 3 and 4 baptism with the Spirit was accompanied by the miraculous gift of speaking with "tongues." This, as we learn from Acts 2, was speaking in foreign languages. (The word "other" in verse 4 has the force of "foreign," and is so rendered by some translators.) This is clearly to be distinguished from the speaking with tongues in 1 Corinthians 12:30; 13:8 and 14:2-28, 39. We do not read of any speaking with other (i.e., foreign) tongues except as a manifestation attending the baptism with the Spirit of the original representatives of three of the above-mentioned communities. It is, therefore, not to be expected today.

Verse 2 is by no means a doctrinal statement of what is properly true in God's giving the gift of tongues; but speaks of the case of one speaking in the assembly, where the Corinthians were all of one language (Greek). If one should use the gift of tongues there, no one would understand him. He would be speaking to God, no doubt, and to himself, for only God and himself would understand. Compare verse 28. In the Spirit he would be speaking mysteries - not mysteries to himself or to God, but to the assembly. And I must seriously remember that gift is not given merely for my own blessing, but for the help of others. We shall understand much better the force of this chapter if we keep in mind that we are here considering the gathering of the assembly, and that which is becoming as regards ministry for the sake of all.

How much more valuable then was prophecy, which brings edification (building up), exhortation (stirring up), and comfort (binding up), all of which are so necessary for the assembly. For one who spoke in a tongue edified himself because he understood, but did not edify the assembly, because the assembly did not understand. The tongue here is a genuine language, just as is seen in Acts 2:6, but one which the speaker did not normally understand. The wonder of the gift was that God gave him ability to speak his own thoughts, by the power of the Spirit, in this foreign language, he himself being in thorough control of his words. The value of this in speaking to a foreigner whose language this was, is evident, as Acts 2 shows; and in this respect Paul spoke with tongues more than others; but in the assembly, where aIl understood Greek, other tongues were unnecessary (vv. 18,19).

Tongues were as plainly language as possible - not always consequently understood by the speaker, though he felt the influence and presence of God, and perhaps certain apprehensions; hence his understanding (nous) was unfruitful. If he could interpret (or another) well - but even the prophets, where there was no question of language, had to search out their own prophecies to have their minds fully fruitful through them.