This teaching is long and intentionally in-depth because speaking in tongues is one of those subjects that is often misunderstood. Some sections will naturally overlap because the same passages answer more than one question, but my goal is to let Scripture build the picture piece by piece. So, this is a longer read, but if you have ever had questions about speaking in tongues, I encourage you to take your time and walk through it with me.

What Is Speaking in Tongues?

Before we get into all the questions surrounding speaking in tongues, we first need to understand what we are actually talking about. Depending on your church background, you may have been taught completely different things about this subject. Maybe you grew up in a church where speaking in tongues happened regularly. Maybe you were taught that tongues stopped after the apostles died. Maybe you have heard people speaking in tongues but had absolutely no idea what was happening. Or maybe the whole thing has always seemed strange to you. So before deciding what we believe about it, let’s go to Scripture and see what the Bible actually says.

Speaking in tongues is not something that modern Pentecostal or charismatic churches invented. It is found directly in the New Testament. We see it happen in the book of Acts, and Paul gives extensive teaching about it in 1 Corinthians 12–14. Whatever conclusions you eventually reach about how tongues operate, you first have to acknowledge that speaking in tongues is a real biblical phenomenon.

The main Greek word translated “tongue” is glōssa. At its most basic level, the word can literally mean the physical tongue in your mouth, but it can also mean a language. We actually use the English word “tongue” similarly when we say something is someone’s “native tongue.” So, when the New Testament talks about speaking in “other tongues” or “different kinds of tongues,” it is talking about speech or language.

What makes biblical tongues unusual is that the speaker is not just speaking a language he or she naturally learned. The ability is connected to the work of the Holy Spirit. One of the clearest examples happens in Acts 2. When the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, the believers began speaking in other tongues “as the Spirit gave them utterance.” The people listening were shocked because they heard the believers speaking in their own native languages. These were real languages recognized by the people standing there, yet the speakers had not naturally learned them.

That immediately gives us one expression of biblical tongues: God can supernaturally enable someone to speak a language they did not learn naturally.

But when we get to Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians, he describes someone speaking in a tongue that the people around them do not understand. He talks about someone speaking mysteries in the Spirit. He talks about praying in a tongue and says that when he does this, his spirit prays while his understanding is “unfruitful.” He talks about singing with the spirit. He talks about interpreting tongues. He even tells the Corinthians that if there is no interpreter during a public gathering, the person should remain quiet in the church and “speak to himself and to God.”

That is why we need to be careful about reducing every passage about tongues to Acts 2. Acts 2 absolutely involved recognizable human languages. We should not deny that. But we also need to allow 1 Corinthians 12–14 to speak for itself and ask what Paul is describing there.

Paul also uses an interesting phrase in 1 Corinthians 12:10: “various kinds of tongues.” That tells us immediately that we should not assume every manifestation of tongues necessarily looks exactly the same. Later in this study, we are going to look closely at whether Scripture is describing completely different types of tongues or whether it is showing us different uses and settings of the same spiritual ability.

Another important thing to understand from the beginning is that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit. First Corinthians 12 places tongues among the manifestations of the Spirit. In the same passage we find gifts such as prophecy, healing, miracles, discernment of spirits, various kinds of tongues, and interpretation of tongues. Paul then makes something extremely important clear: the Holy Spirit distributes these gifts according to His own will.  In other words, tongues are not something we manufacture.

A person does not need to make up sounds because someone told them they were supposed to speak in tongues. Nobody should feel pressured to copy another person’s sounds, repeat syllables until something happens, or prove that they have the Holy Spirit by producing a tongue. If tongues are genuinely a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, then the Holy Spirit is the source.

At the same time, that does not mean the person speaking has no participation in what is happening. Scripture says that they spoke as the Spirit gave them utterance in Acts 2:4. Paul also gives people instructions about when to speak, when to remain silent, when interpretation is necessary, and how spiritual gifts should function when believers gather together. That means the biblical picture is not necessarily that the Holy Spirit takes control of someone’s mouth while that person becomes completely powerless over what they are doing. There is cooperation between the believer and the Holy Spirit.

This becomes especially important because sometimes people think anything supernatural must mean completely losing control of yourself. But when Paul teaches about spiritual gifts, he repeatedly gives instructions concerning how believers should use them. First Corinthians 14 is filled with order: speak one at a time, let someone interpret, remain silent under certain circumstances, allow others to speak, and make sure everything builds up the church. Paul even says that “the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets” in 1 Corinthians 14:32. Spiritual activity and self-control are not enemies.

We also need to distinguish speaking in tongues from interpretation of tongues. They are connected, but Paul lists them separately. One person may speak in a tongue, while another may receive the ability to interpret what was spoken. Paul also tells the person who speaks in a tongue to pray that they may interpret.

This becomes especially important when tongues happen publicly. If I am praying to God in a language that I do not understand, nobody else needs to understand what I am saying in order for me to be praying. But if I stand before an entire congregation and begin speaking in a tongue as a public ministry to everyone, Paul becomes concerned about whether the people around me are being edified. If nobody understands what I am saying, they cannot receive what is being communicated. That is why interpretation becomes so important in Paul’s instructions about the gathered church.

This is also where we begin to see that purpose and setting matter. A person praying to God in a tongue is not necessarily doing the same thing as someone giving a public tongue in a church gathering. Someone miraculously speaking a recognizable foreign language in Acts 2 is not necessarily functioning in exactly the same setting as someone in 1 Corinthians 14 whose speech is understood by nobody present unless interpretation is given.

There are also phrases Christians commonly use that are helpful but are not themselves phrases found in Scripture. “Prayer language” is one example. The Bible does not actually use the phrase “prayer language.” But, that does not automatically mean the concept is wrong. Paul clearly talks about praying in a tongue in 1 Corinthians 14:14. The phrase “prayer language” is simply a later way Christians have described that experience. We need to make that distinction because our doctrine should come from what Scripture describes, not merely from terminology we have inherited from a particular church tradition.

We are not going to begin with, “This is what Pentecostals say,” or “this is what cessationists say.” We are not going to begin with someone’s personal experience and then try to make Scripture fit it. And we are not going to reject someone’s experience simply because it is unfamiliar to us. We are going to begin with what Scripture actually says.

As we move through Acts and 1 Corinthians, we are going to see that there is much more to this subject than simply asking, “Are tongues real?” The deeper questions are: Who gives tongues? Why are they given? Does everyone receive them? Are all tongues recognizable human languages? Can someone pray in tongues? What does Paul mean when he says his spirit prays while his understanding is unfruitful? What is interpretation? What happens when tongues are used publicly? Can God communicate something through an interpreted tongue? What are “tongues of angels”? And why does Paul correct the Corinthians’ use of tongues while still ending his instructions by saying, “Do not forbid speaking in tongues”?

And we can start with this foundation: Speaking in tongues is biblical. The Holy Spirit is the giver. The believer participates, but the gift originates with Him. Scripture shows tongues operating in different settings and for different purposes. Therefore, we need to understand the biblical gift, recognize its proper use, and allow Scripture to establish the boundaries.

Let’s dive in.

Who Gives the Gift?

One of the most important things to understand about speaking in tongues is where the gift comes from. Speaking in tongues is not something we create ourselves. It is a spiritual gift that comes from the Holy Spirit. First Corinthians 12 explains that there are different spiritual gifts, but they all come from the same Spirit. Paul lists several of them, including wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing, miracles, prophecy, discernment of spirits, various kinds of tongues, and interpretation of tongues.

Spiritual gifts are not abilities we can simply decide to have. Someone can teach you how to preach more clearly or can help you learn how to pray. You can study Scripture and grow in your understanding. But nobody can teach you how to manufacture a genuine gift of the Holy Spirit. If speaking in tongues is coming from the Holy Spirit, then He has to be the source of it.

Paul also lists interpretation of tongues as a spiritual gift. This is important because speaking in a tongue and understanding what is being spoken are not necessarily the same thing. A person may speak something by the Spirit without naturally understanding the meaning of what they are saying. God can then give an interpretation so that what was spoken can be understood by others. Later, when Paul talks about tongues being used publicly in the church, interpretation becomes especially important because the purpose of the gathering is not simply for one person to have a spiritual experience. The people around them need to be edified as well.

First Corinthians 12:11 gives us one of the most important truths for understanding all spiritual gifts. Paul says that the Spirit distributes them to each person individually as He wills. In simple terms, the Holy Spirit decides how He distributes His gifts. We do not get to hand them out. A pastor does not get to decide who receives them. A ministry cannot guarantee that everyone who comes forward will receive a particular gift. The Holy Spirit is the giver.

That also means we should be very careful about telling Christians that they must possess a particular spiritual gift in order to prove something about their relationship with God. If Scripture says the Spirit distributes gifts according to His will, then we should allow Him to do exactly that. Someone should not be made to feel like they are less spiritual, less saved, or somehow missing God simply because their spiritual gifts do not look exactly like someone else’s.

At the same time, Scripture does tell us to desire spiritual gifts. Paul tells believers to earnestly desire them. So, there is nothing wrong with wanting to speak in tongues. There is nothing wrong with praying and asking God for spiritual gifts. There is nothing wrong with saying, “Lord, if this is something You want to give me, I want to receive it.” Desire and surrender can exist together. We can desire something without demanding.

This is where we need to distinguish between receiving and manufacturing. If someone desires the gift of tongues, they do not need to create sounds themselves to try to make something happen. They do not need to copy the person beside them. They do not need someone whispering syllables into their ear and telling them to repeat them faster until it turns into a “tongue.” They do not need to feel pressured because everyone else around them is speaking in tongues. If it is a gift of the Holy Spirit, we should be able to trust the Holy Spirit to give it.

That does not mean the person receiving a gift has no participation. When people spoke in tongues in Acts 2, Scripture says they began to speak as the Spirit gave them utterance. They were speaking, but the Spirit was enabling what was happening. There was human participation and divine empowerment working together. The Spirit gave; they spoke.

This also helps us understand why two believers may not experience spiritual gifts in exactly the same way. God may use one person strongly in prophecy, another in discernment, another in teaching, another in healing, and another in tongues or interpretation. The Body of Christ was never designed so that every person would function exactly the same way. First Corinthians 12 actually emphasizes the opposite. There are different gifts and different functions, but the same Spirit is working through them.

So, when it comes specifically to speaking in tongues, our starting point should not be, “How can I make this happen?” It should be, “Holy Spirit, I am open to whatever You want to give me.”  The Holy Spirit is the giver. He determines how His gifts are distributed, and we can trust His timing and His wisdom.

Does Every Christian Speak in Tongues?

One of the biggest questions surrounding speaking in tongues is whether every Christian is supposed to do it. In some churches, you may hear that every believer should speak in tongues. In others, you may even hear that speaking in tongues is the proof that someone has received the Holy Spirit. But if we are going to understand this biblically, we have to look at everything Paul says about spiritual gifts instead of building our belief around one experience or one verse.

First Corinthians 12 gives us one of the clearest places to start. Paul has just explained that the Church is one body made up of many different members. Every member belongs to the same body, but every member does not have the same function. He then begins asking a series of questions: Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? The expected answer to those questions is no.

Paul’s entire point is that every believer does not have the same function or the same spiritual gifts. If everyone were an apostle, where would the prophets be? If everyone were a teacher, where would the other functions be? In the same way, when Paul asks, “Do all speak with tongues?” there is no reason to suddenly change the expected answer for that one question. He is showing the diversity within the Body of Christ.

Tongues should never become a test we use to determine whether someone is truly saved. Our salvation is based on Jesus Christ, not on whether we possess one particular spiritual gift. Paul is talking to believers who belong to the Body of Christ, yet he clearly recognizes that they do not all have the same gifts.

The same is true when it comes to receiving the Holy Spirit. Every Christian belongs to Christ through the work of the Holy Spirit, but that does not mean every Christian will possess every manifestation or gift of the Spirit. Earlier in 1 Corinthians 12, Paul explains that the Spirit gives different gifts to different people according to His will. If the Spirit Himself distributes the gifts differently, then we cannot turn one particular gift into a requirement that God never made it.

Tongues also should not become a measurement of spiritual maturity. Someone can speak in tongues and still be spiritually immature. The Corinthians themselves are a strong example of this. They were experiencing spiritual gifts, including tongues, yet Paul had to correct them about division, jealousy, pride, sexual sin, lawsuits, disorder in worship, and the way they treated one another. Having a spiritual gift did not automatically mean they were spiritually mature.

That is an important lesson for us today. A spiritual gift tells us something about the grace and work of the Holy Spirit; it is not automatically a statement about the character of the person operating in it. Someone may genuinely have a gift and still need tremendous growth in humility, love, wisdom, self-control, and holiness. This is one reason 1 Corinthians 13, Paul’s teaching about love, sits right in the middle of his discussion of spiritual gifts. Gifts are valuable, but gifts without love are not the goal.

This also protects Christians who do not speak in tongues from feeling as though something is wrong with them. If you have prayed for tongues and have not received that gift, you do not need to manufacture it to prove that you love God. You do not need to question your salvation because someone else told you that every Spirit-filled Christian must speak in tongues. If the Holy Spirit distributes gifts according to His will, then your responsibility is to remain open to Him, desire what He wants to give, and trust Him with the outcome.

However, there is another verse that we need to address because at first it can sound like Paul is saying the opposite. In 1 Corinthians 14:5, Paul says, “I want you all to speak in tongues.” So how can Paul ask, “Do all speak in tongues?” in chapter 12 and then say, “I want you all to speak in tongues” in chapter 14?

The simplest way to understand this is to recognize the difference between Paul’s desire and his teaching about how the Spirit actually distributes gifts. Paul can desire for all of them to experience tongues without saying that every Christian must possess the same gift. In the very same sentence, Paul goes on to say that he would even more desire for them to prophesy, because prophecy can immediately edify the congregation in a way an uninterpreted tongue cannot.

We see similar language elsewhere in Paul’s writing. Paul can express something he desires for believers without turning that desire into a statement that every believer will have the exact same experience. First Corinthians 14:5 does not erase what Paul has already established in chapter 12: the Spirit distributes gifts according to His will, and the members of the Body do not all possess the same functions. There is freedom in that.

The Body of Christ is supposed to have diversity. The Spirit gives gifts according to His will, and those gifts work together for the good of the whole Body. Tongues are one beautiful part of that, but they were never meant to become a dividing line between the Christians who supposedly “have the Holy Spirit” and the Christians who supposedly do not.

Tongues in the Book of Acts

If we want to understand speaking in tongues, the book of Acts is one of the most important places to look because Acts actually shows us people experiencing it. Paul later gives detailed instructions about tongues in 1 Corinthians, but Acts allows us to see what happened when the Holy Spirit moved among the early believers. There are three especially important places where tongues are specifically mentioned: Pentecost in Acts 2, the household of Cornelius in Acts 10, and the believers at Ephesus in Acts 19. Each event gives us another piece of the picture.

A. Pentecost — Acts 2:1–13

The first major appearance of speaking in tongues happens on the day of Pentecost. Before Jesus returned to the Father, He told His disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the promised Holy Spirit. In Acts 2, that promise is fulfilled. The believers are gathered together when suddenly there is a sound like a rushing mighty wind. Something resembling tongues of fire appears and rests upon them, they are filled with the Holy Spirit, and they begin speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives them utterance.

Right away, we see something important. The believers are the ones speaking, but the Holy Spirit is giving them the ability to speak. Something supernatural was happening through them as the Spirit enabled them.

Acts 2 also gives us information about these particular tongues that we do not receive in every other passage. Jerusalem was filled with Jewish people from many different regions because they had come for Pentecost. When they heard what was happening, they were amazed because they recognized their own native languages being spoken. They were essentially asking, “How are these Galileans speaking the languages we grew up speaking?”

That means the tongues at Pentecost were recognizable human languages. The people listening could identify what they were hearing. They heard the believers declaring the mighty works of God in their own languages. This is important because Acts 2 establishes beyond question that one biblical expression of tongues can be a supernatural ability to speak an earthly language that the speaker did not naturally learn. Someone may not know a language with their natural mind and yet, through the power of the Holy Spirit, speak it.

Pentecost was also a very important moment in the history of the Church. This was not a random prayer meeting where something unusual happened. Jesus had promised the coming of the Holy Spirit, and Acts 2 records that promise being dramatically fulfilled. The gospel was about to spread outward from Jerusalem, and people from many different places were present to witness what God was doing.

The tongues functioned as a supernatural sign. Something had happened that the people could not easily explain naturally. The crowd knew these speakers were Galileans, yet they were hearing their own languages. That caused people to stop, pay attention, and ask what was happening. Peter then stood up and preached Jesus to them.

Pentecost was a major moment in God’s unfolding plan. We should not assume that every future occurrence of tongues has to reproduce every detail of Acts 2. There does not have to be a rushing wind, visible fire, a crowd of international visitors, and recognizable foreign languages every time someone speaks in tongues. Acts itself does not repeat all of those details every time tongues appear.

B. Cornelius’s Household — Acts 10:44–48

The next major occurrence happens in a very different setting. Peter is preaching in the house of a Gentile named Cornelius when the Holy Spirit falls upon the people who are listening.

To understand why this moment matters so much, we have to remember that the earliest followers of Jesus were Jewish. God was now making it unmistakably clear that the gospel and the gift of the Holy Spirit were also for the Gentiles. This was a huge development for these Jewish believers.

While Peter is still speaking, the Holy Spirit falls upon the Gentiles who are hearing the message. The Jewish believers who came with Peter are astonished because the gift of the Holy Spirit has been poured out upon Gentiles too. How did they know something had happened? Acts specifically tells us that they heard them speaking in tongues and magnifying God.

In this situation, tongues served as visible and audible evidence that God had genuinely received these Gentiles. The Jewish believers could not simply dismiss what was happening because they were witnessing the Holy Spirit working among the Gentiles in a way they recognized.

This becomes even clearer in Acts 11 when Peter later explains what happened. He connects the experience at Cornelius’s house with what the Jewish believers themselves had experienced “at the beginning.” Peter understood that the same Holy Spirit who had moved among them was now moving among the Gentiles.

However, notice something Acts 10 does not tell us. Unlike Acts 2, Luke does not say that people standing around recognized different earthly languages. He simply tells us that they heard the Gentiles speaking in tongues and magnifying God. That does not prove these could not have been earthly languages, but the text does not give us enough information to identify them in exactly the same way we can at Pentecost.

C. Ephesus — Acts 19:1–7

The third major example happens when Paul comes to Ephesus and meets a group of disciples who have received John’s baptism but have an incomplete understanding of what has happened through Jesus. Paul explains things more fully to them, they are baptized in the name of Jesus, and Paul lays his hands on them. The Holy Spirit comes upon them, and they begin speaking in tongues and prophesying.

This time we see tongues and prophecy happening together. These are two different manifestations of the Spirit, and both appear as the Holy Spirit comes upon these believers. This is especially interesting because Paul will later spend a great deal of time discussing both tongues and prophecy in 1 Corinthians 12–14.

Again, though, Luke does not tell us exactly what these tongues sounded like. He does not tell us whether someone standing nearby recognized them as foreign languages. He simply tells us that they spoke in tongues and prophesied.

What we can confidently say is that tongues were once again connected with a powerful work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit came upon them, and supernatural manifestations followed.

The presence of prophecy alongside tongues also begins showing us something that becomes much clearer in Paul’s teaching: tongues are part of a larger picture of spiritual gifts. Tongues are important, but they are not the only supernatural manifestation of the Holy Spirit. God may speak, reveal, empower, and work through His people in different ways.

D. What Acts Does—and Does Not—Establish

When we put these passages together, there is no question that speaking in tongues had a real place in the life of the early Church. Acts does not treat tongues as fake, meaningless, or something the disciples were imagining. Tongues repeatedly appear in connection with the activity of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2 shows believers speaking languages they had not naturally learned. Acts 10 shows Gentiles speaking in tongues when the Holy Spirit is poured out upon them, giving the Jewish believers unmistakable evidence that God had also given the Spirit to the Gentiles. Acts 19 shows believers speaking in tongues and prophesying when the Holy Spirit comes upon them.

Acts does not tell us that every single person who believed in Jesus spoke in tongues. There are many conversion accounts throughout the book where tongues are not mentioned. Sometimes people believe. Sometimes they are baptized. Sometimes the Holy Spirit fills people. Sometimes signs and wonders occur. Tongues appear in several important places, but Luke does not record tongues every single time someone comes to Christ or experiences the work of the Holy Spirit.

That matters because we should not turn a repeated biblical experience into a universal requirement unless Scripture actually makes it one. At the same time, we should not make the opposite mistake and downplay tongues because they are not mentioned in every conversion story. Luke clearly considered these experiences important enough to record them. Tongues accompanied significant movements of the Holy Spirit and helped demonstrate that the same Spirit was being poured out across boundaries that had previously divided people.

Acts shows us what happened, but it does not always stop to explain how everything works. Luke tells us that people spoke in tongues, but he does not give us a detailed teaching about when tongues should be interpreted, whether someone can pray privately in tongues, what happens when the speaker does not understand what they are saying, or how tongues should function when the whole church gathers. For those questions, we need Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians.

That is why Acts and 1 Corinthians need to be read together. Acts gives us actual examples of tongues happening. First Corinthians gives us detailed instruction about how tongues function and how they should be handled.

So, Acts establishes several important things for us. Speaking in tongues is biblical. It is connected with the work of the Holy Spirit. At Pentecost, tongues included recognizable languages that the speakers had never naturally learned. Tongues also appeared when the Holy Spirit was poured out upon Gentiles and when He came upon the believers at Ephesus. And Acts does not give us permission to say that every Christian must speak in tongues, and it does not give us enough information to say that every occurrence of tongues must look exactly like Acts 2. We have to let the whole of Scripture give us the picture.

Are There Different Kinds of Tongues?

Now that we have seen tongues operating in the book of Acts, we can ask a question that causes a lot of confusion: Are there actually different kinds of tongues?

First Corinthians 12:10 is an important place to begin because Paul uses the phrase “various kinds of tongues.” That wording at least tells us that we should not automatically assume every manifestation of tongues looks exactly the same. The Bible does not give us a neat chart saying, “Here are five different types of tongues.” Instead, it shows tongues operating in different situations and for different purposes.

Because of that, it may be better to think in terms of both kinds and functions. Scripture clearly shows that tongues can function differently depending on the setting. Sometimes other people understand the language. Sometimes nobody present understands it without interpretation. Sometimes the tongue is being spoken to God. Sometimes Paul specifically describes praying in a tongue. Sometimes he talks about singing with the spirit. And sometimes tongues are being expressed publicly in a church gathering where interpretation is required. We do not have to force all of those situations into one exact experience. We can simply allow Scripture to show us the different ways tongues operate.

A. Recognizable Human Languages

Acts 2 gives us the clearest example of tongues being recognizable human languages. When the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, the believers began speaking in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. People from different regions heard these believers speaking and recognized their own native languages. The supernatural part was not that these languages had never existed before. The supernatural part was that the people speaking them had never naturally learned them.

Imagine someone who only speaks English suddenly beginning to speak fluent Arabic, Greek, Mandarin, or another language they have never studied. Someone standing nearby who actually speaks that language understands exactly what is being said. That gives us a simple picture of what happened in Acts 2.

When researching we notice modern 20^th– century Scientific scholars called this xenoglossia or xenolalia. They created these terms by pulling individual words out of the original Greek text of the Bibleand gluing them together with anew prefix, but we do not need those technical terms to understand the main idea. GOD SUPERNATURALLY ENABLED PEOPLE TO SPEAK LANGUAGES THEY HAD NOT LEARNED.

This means we cannot say biblical tongues are never human languages. Acts 2 clearly shows that they can be. The question is whether every other passage about tongues must also be describing exactly the same thing. That becomes harder to establish when we reach 1 Corinthians because Paul describes situations that sound different from Pentecost.

B. Tongues Not Naturally Understood

First Corinthians 14:2 is one of the most important verses in the entire discussion. Paul explains that someone speaking in a tongue is not speaking to people but to God because no one understands them, and that they are speaking mysteries in the Spirit.

That is noticeably different from what happened in Acts 2. In the situation Paul describes nobody present understands what the person is saying. Whatever the language is, its meaning is hidden from the people who are hearing it.

Paul says the person is speaking “mysteries in the Spirit.” The word “mysteries” means what is being spoken is not naturally understood by the people listening. Something is being expressed spiritually, but its meaning is not accessible to them without interpretation.

This is also where the phrase “unknown tongue” sometimes causes confusion. If someone grew up reading the King James Version, they may remember seeing the phrase “unknown tongue.” The word “unknown” was supplied by the translators to make the English sentence clearer; it is not a separate Greek word describing a special category called an “unknown tongue.” However, that does not mean the concept of an unrecognized or unintelligible tongue was invented. Paul plainly says that no one understands the speaker in the situation he is describing.

Simply put, there are tongues that are not naturally understood by the people hearing them.

C. Prayer in Tongues

Paul becomes even more specific later in 1 Corinthians 14 when he talks about praying in a tongue. He says that if he prays in a tongue, his spirit prays, but his mind or understanding is unfruitful.

He is not describing someone preaching a full sermon to another person. He is talking about prayer directed toward God. This fits naturally with what he said earlier in the chapter about the person speaking in a tongue speaking to God.

Paul also says something very interesting about his understanding. He says his spirit is praying, but his mind is unfruitful. In other words, prayer is genuinely taking place even though his natural understanding is not producing the meaning of the words being spoken.

This is one of the main biblical passages behind what many Christians call a “prayer language.” Again, the Bible itself does not use the phrase “prayer language,” but the Bible absolutely does describe praying in a tongue.

Paul’s response is not to reject this kind of prayer because his mind does not understand it. Instead, he says he will do both. He will pray with the spirit, and he will also pray with the understanding. He does not teach that spiritual prayer should replace understandable prayer. He does not tell Christians to stop praying with their minds. But neither does he say that prayer is invalid if the person praying does not naturally understand the tongue they are speaking.

There is room for both. A believer can pray to God with words they understand, bringing specific requests, thanksgiving, worship, repentance, and needs before Him. And someone who has been given tongues can also pray in a tongue even when their natural understanding does not know the meaning of what is being spoken.

D. Singing in Tongues

Paul takes the same idea one step further by talking about singing. After saying that he will pray with the spirit and pray with the understanding, he says that he will also sing with the spirit and sing with the understanding. That tells us that spiritual utterance was not limited only to spoken prayer. There could also be a musical or worshipful expression of it.

Just as Paul distinguishes between praying with the spirit and praying with understanding, he distinguishes between singing with the spirit and singing with understanding. A believer may worship God by singing words they naturally understand, but Paul also leaves room for a form of spiritual singing in which the natural mind is not producing the words.

This is something that may sound very unfamiliar to someone who has never been around charismatic or Pentecostal worship. But the basic idea is not difficult. Instead of speaking the tongue, the person is singing it.

Just to clarify again, we should not turn this into something people feel pressured to perform. The fact that Scripture allows for singing with the spirit does not mean everyone in a church needs to begin making sounds. Our foundation remains the same: spiritual gifts originate with the Holy Spirit. But if the Holy Spirit gives someone tongues, Scripture gives us reason to believe those tongues may be expressed not only through spoken prayer but also through worship and singing.

E. Public Tongues With Interpretation

Then we come to another setting: tongues being expressed while the church is gathered together. This is where understanding the context becomes extremely important. Not everything spoken in tongues while someone is physically inside a church building is automatically a public message that requires interpretation. The important question is what the person is doing with the tongue and who is being addressed.

Paul clearly describes praying in a tongue. He says, “If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays,” and earlier he describes the person speaking in a tongue as speaking to God. Scripture does not specifically call this “private prayer,” as though it can only happen when someone is alone. A better description is prayer in tongues directed to God.

That distinction matters in a corporate prayer setting. For example, a group of believers may all be praying to God at the same time. One person may be praying in English while another person who has the gift of tongues may be praying in a tongue. Even though other people are physically present, that does not necessarily mean the person praying in tongues is giving a public tongue for everyone else to listen to and receive. They may simply be praying to God while surrounded by other believers who are also praying.

That is different from someone speaking out in a tongue in a way that takes the attention of the gathering and is intended to function publicly among the congregation. In that situation, Paul gives clear instructions. There should be a limited number of speakers, they should speak one at a time, and someone should interpret. The reason is simple: if the congregation is expected to listen to something being spoken publicly, they need to understand what is being said in order to be edified by it.

Paul’s instruction about what to do when there is no interpreter actually helps us see this distinction. He tells the person to remain silent in the church and “speak to himself and to God.” Notice that the person is still in the gathering. Paul does not say that tongues can only be used at home or when nobody else is around. He restricts the person’s public use of the tongue while still allowing speech directed personally toward God. So the biblical distinction is better understood as God-directed prayer versus a tongue functioning publicly for the congregation.

This means that if an entire church is praying and individual believers are personally praying to God in tongues, we should not automatically treat every individual prayer as a public tongue requiring interpretation. Paul explicitly recognizes prayer in tongues and speech directed toward God. Interpretation becomes necessary when tongues are functioning publicly in the gathering in a way that requires the congregation to receive and understand what is being spoken.

To help understand, ask: “Were they praying to God, or were they speaking out for the congregation? Was everyone supposed to stop and listen? Was the utterance functioning as part of the public ministry of the gathering?”

If a tongue is being given publicly for the gathered church to receive, God requires interpretation. If a believer is praying to God in tongues while other believers are also individually praying to God, Scripture does not specifically say that every such prayer must be interpreted.

Why Did Paul Say, “I Speak in Tongues More Than All of You”?

One of the most interesting things Paul says about tongues is found in 1 Corinthians 14:18–19. After spending much of the chapter correcting the Corinthians about how tongues were being used when they gathered together, Paul says that he thanks God that he speaks in tongues more than all of them. Then immediately afterward, he says that in the church he would rather speak five understandable words that can teach others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

At first, those statements can sound like they contradict each other. If Paul spoke in tongues so much, why was he telling the Corinthians to limit tongues in their gatherings? The answer becomes clearer when we remember what Paul is actually correcting. Paul is not correcting the existence of tongues. He is correcting the use of tongues when nobody else can understand what is being said.

Paul was clearly not against speaking in tongues. In fact, he was thankful for it. Saying that he spoke in tongues more than all of them is a very strong statement, especially considering how much the Corinthian church apparently valued tongues. Whatever role tongues played in Paul’s own spiritual life, it was significant enough that he thanked God for it.

But then Paul says, “in the church” he would rather speak five understandable words than ten thousand words in a tongue. Those three words, “in the church,” are important. Paul has moved the conversation to what benefits other people when believers are gathered together.

What he is saying is, if he is teaching the congregation, they need to understand him. Ten thousand words that nobody understands cannot teach them anything. Five words they understand can. His point is not that understandable speech is spiritually superior to tongues in every situation. His point is that when you are trying to instruct other people, they need to understand what you are saying. Simply that.

Imagine someone standing before a church and speaking in tongues for twenty minutes while everyone else sits there unable to understand a single word. That person may be genuinely speaking in tongues, but the congregation has received no instruction from what was spoken unless interpretation is given. Now imagine someone saying one simple sentence everyone understands about Jesus. That sentence can actually teach, encourage, correct, or strengthen the people listening. That is the contrast Paul is making.

This also raises an interesting question. If Paul spoke in tongues more than the Corinthians but severely limited uninterpreted tongues when addressing the gathered church, when was Paul doing all of this speaking in tongues? The Bible does not specifically tell us.

It strongly suggests that Paul’s use of tongues was not limited to standing before a congregation and speaking publicly. Earlier in the same chapter, Paul has already talked about speaking to God in a tongue and praying in a tongue. So, there was clearly a God-directed use of tongues that was different from using understandable words to instruct other people.

This also helps us understand why it can be misleading to reduce the entire discussion to “private tongues versus public tongues.” Paul’s main concern is not where someone is physically located. The deeper issue is who is being addressed and what purpose the speech is serving.

If I am speaking to God, I am praying. If I am addressing the congregation, I am ministering to other people. Those situations have different requirements because they have different purposes. When I am teaching you, you need to understand me. When I am encouraging you, you need to understand me. When I am giving instruction to the church, you need to understand me. That is why Paul places such a high value on understandable speech in the gathering.

But when someone is praying to God in a tongue, the purpose is different. This is where personal edification and congregational edification begin to matter. Paul says that the person speaking in a tongue edifies himself, while prophecy edifies the church. His concern throughout the chapter is that when believers gather together, they should care about building up everyone else rather than focusing only on their own spiritual experience.

That does not make personal edification bad. Paul never says that being personally strengthened is sinful or useless. The problem comes when something that benefits me personally takes over a setting where I am supposed to be concerned about strengthening everyone around me. For example, prayer can personally strengthen me. Reading Scripture can personally strengthen me. Worship can personally strengthen me. There is nothing wrong with being spiritually strengthened. But if I have been given the responsibility to teach a room full of people, I cannot spend the entire teaching doing something only I understand and then claim that I have served them well.

Paul is teaching the Corinthians to think beyond themselves. That is really the heart of much of 1 Corinthians 14. This is why Paul’s statement about speaking in tongues more than all of them is so important. It prevents us from reading his corrections as an attack on tongues. Paul is not standing outside the experience criticizing something he does not understand. He is correcting misuse of a gift that he himself practiced extensively.

Paul’s own example gives us a healthy balance. He could genuinely thank God for speaking in tongues extensively while also valuing understandable speech when ministering to others. We do not have to choose between loving the gift of tongues and caring about biblical order. Paul did both.

What Does “He Who Speaks in a Tongue Edifies Himself” Mean?

In the previous section, we mentioned that Paul distinguishes between personal edification and the edification of the whole church. But that raises another important question: what does Paul actually mean when he says that the person speaking in a tongue “edifies himself”?

In 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul says that the person who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, while the person who prophesies edifies the church. Sometimes this verse is read as though Paul is criticizing the person speaking in tongues for being selfish. In other words, the idea would be, “Look at you building yourself up while you should be building up everybody else.” But we need to look more carefully at what Paul means by edification and at the larger point he is making.

The Greek word translated “edifies” is oikodomeō. The basic picture behind the word is building something up. It can literally refer to building or constructing something, but in the New Testament it is also used in a spiritual sense for strengthening, encouraging, developing, or building someone up.

So, when Paul says that someone speaking in a tongue “edifies himself,” the basic idea is that the person is personally being built up or strengthened through what is happening. That becomes especially interesting when we connect it with what Paul says about praying in tongues. He explains that when he prays in a tongue, his spirit prays while his natural understanding is unfruitful. So, the fact that his mind does not understand the words does not mean nothing spiritually meaningful is taking place. Paul recognizes that his spirit can be engaged in prayer even when his natural understanding is not producing or comprehending the words.

So is Paul presenting self-edification negatively? No, because the larger context suggests that the problem is not personal edification itself. The issue is what should happen when the entire church is gathered to learn as we mentioned earlier.  Paul’s main concern throughout 1 Corinthians 14 is that believers think about one another.

That is why Paul contrasts tongues with prophecy. If someone speaks in a tongue and nobody understands what is being said, the speaker may be personally edified, but everyone else is standing there unable to understand. Prophecy, on the other hand, is understandable to the people listening, so the entire church can receive from it.

The difference is not necessarily that one is spiritual and the other is not. The difference is who is being built up. This also explains why interpretation changes the situation. Earlier we saw that Paul says the person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues “unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified.” Once the tongue is interpreted, the congregation can understand what is being communicated, and now the benefit is no longer limited to the person speaking.

His problem is not tongues themselves. His concern is understandable edification when something is functioning publicly among the church. Personal edification has a place in the Christian life. There are many things we do that personally build us up spiritually. There is nothing inherently selfish about being strengthened by God. The problem would be taking something that is personally edifying and making it the focus of a setting where everyone else is supposed to be receiving ministry.

Imagine that I am supposed to teach a group of believers, but instead I spend the entire time doing something that only strengthens me while everyone else sits there confused. I may personally be receiving something, but I am not fulfilling my responsibility toward the people I am supposed to be serving. That is the kind of distinction Paul is making. This is why context matters so much when reading 1 Corinthians 14.

His concern is love and order. First Corinthians 13, the famous chapter about love, sits directly in the middle of Paul’s larger teaching about spiritual gifts. That is not an accident. Spiritual gifts are not supposed to become opportunities for us to draw attention to ourselves or prove how spiritual we are. They are given within a Body, and love causes us to care about how our actions affect the people around us.

Tongues and Interpretation

We have already touched on some points in this section several times throughout this teaching, but now we need to dive a little deeper into what interpretation actually is and how it is supposed to work. First Corinthians 12 lists “various kinds of tongues” and “interpretation of tongues” alongside the other manifestations of the Holy Spirit. This tells us from the beginning that speaking in tongues and interpreting tongues are connected, but they are not exactly the same gift.

Interpretation of tongues is the Spirit-given ability to make the meaning of a tongue understandable to people who otherwise would not understand what was spoken. Someone speaks in a tongue, the people listening do not naturally understand the language, and through interpretation the meaning becomes understandable to the congregation.

One important distinction is that interpretation does not necessarily mean the same thing as a word-for-word translation. The Greek word Paul uses is the idea of explaining, interpreting, or expressing the meaning. Scripture does not tell us that an interpretation must contain exactly the same number of words or follow the exact grammatical structure of the tongue that was spoken.

That matters because people sometimes become suspicious if someone speaks in tongues for thirty seconds and the interpretation takes a minute, or the opposite happens. They assume that if the lengths do not match exactly, the interpretation cannot be genuine. But that assumes interpretation works exactly like a human translator converting one sentence from Spanish into English word for word. Paul calls this interpretation, and Scripture does not give us a rule saying the length of the interpretation must match the length of the tongue.

That does not mean anything can be called an interpretation. Spiritual gifts should still be tested and weighed. An interpretation should never be treated as unquestionable simply because someone says, “The Lord gave me the interpretation.” Like other spiritual manifestations, it remains subject to biblical discernment. But we also should not create requirements for interpretation that Scripture itself never gives us.

Another interesting part of Paul’s teaching is that the person who speaks in tongues may also be the person who interprets. First Corinthians 14:13 says that the person who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret.

That means we should not imagine that one person must always have the gift of tongues while a completely different person must always have the gift of interpretation. That can happen, but Paul clearly allows for the speaker to receive the interpretation as well.

This also tells us something about the nature of the gift. The person speaking in tongues does not necessarily understand the tongue naturally. If they already understood everything they were saying simply because they were the speaker, there would be little reason for Paul to tell them to pray that they may interpret. The tongue can be genuinely coming through the speaker while its meaning is not naturally known to their mind.

That fits with Paul’s statement that when he prays in a tongue, his spirit prays while his understanding is unfruitful. The spiritual utterance can be genuine without the speaker naturally knowing the meaning of every word being spoken.

Interpretation becomes especially important when tongues function publicly in the gathered church. Paul explains that if someone speaks out in a tongue in a way that the congregation is expected to receive, there should be interpretation. His concern throughout the chapter is that the church be built up.

Without interpretation, everyone hears something they cannot understand. With interpretation, the congregation can receive the meaning and therefore be edified. This is why Paul can say that the person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues unless the tongue is interpreted so that the church may be edified. He is not saying that prophecy comes from a greater Holy Spirit or that the person prophesying is spiritually superior. He is talking about usefulness to the gathered congregation. If everyone understands what is being spoken, everyone can receive from it.

Paul also puts boundaries around how this should happen. When tongues are being spoken out publicly, he does not allow an unlimited number of people to give tongues one after another. One person may speak, but if multiple people have a tongue to give, Paul limits it to two or at most three. They are to speak one at a time, and someone should interpret. His point is not that at least two people must speak. He is setting a limit and establishing order when tongues are functioning publicly in the gathering.

Paul’s instructions show us that genuine spiritual gifts can operate with order. The presence of structure does not quench the Holy Spirit.

But then Paul addresses an important situation: what happens if there is no interpreter? He does not tell the person to give the public tongue anyway and hope someone eventually figures it out. He says the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God.

Paul does not say, “If there is no interpreter, stop speaking to God in tongues altogether.” He restricts the public expression that would require the congregation to listen without understanding it. Yet he still leaves room for the person to speak to himself and to God.

Once again, this is one of the passages that helps us understand why saying tongues must either be completely “private” or completely “public” can be misleading. The person Paul is describing is still in the church gathering. What changes is how the tongue is being used.

This also raises another question that we will deal with separately: what exactly is being communicated through an interpreted tongue? Is it always prayer, praise, or thanksgiving directed toward God? Can God use interpreted tongues to communicate something that functions like a word for the congregation? And how is an interpreted tongue different from prophecy? Those questions deserve their own careful examination because Christians sometimes use the phrase “message in tongues” without stopping to ask exactly what Scripture says about the direction and content of tongues.

For now, the important point is that interpretation takes something the congregation cannot understand and makes its meaning understandable so that others can be edified. The speaker may receive the interpretation. Someone else may receive it. If a tongue is functioning publicly for the gathered church, interpretation is required. If no interpretation is available, Paul tells the person not to continue addressing the congregation in an unintelligible tongue, but he still allows them to speak to themselves and to God.

Can God Give a Word Through Tongues?

We have established that tongues can be interpreted and that, once interpreted, the church can be edified by what was spoken. So, this naturally raises another question: can God give a word to His church through tongues and interpretation?

Yes. God can use tongues and interpretation to communicate something that ministers to and edifies His people. In fact, the very existence of the gift of interpretation tells us that there is meaningful content being spoken that can be made understandable to others. If nothing in the tongue were ever meant to benefit the church, there would be no reason for Paul to place such importance on interpretation when tongues are spoken publicly.

In many charismatic and Pentecostal churches, you may hear someone speak out in tongues during a service. The room becomes quiet, and either that person or someone else gives the interpretation. What is interpreted may bring encouragement, comfort, correction, warning, worship, thanksgiving, or something else that strengthens the Body. This is commonly called a “message in tongues” or a “word in tongues.”

Paul tells us that the person speaking in a tongue speaks to God and speaks mysteries in the Spirit. Scripture gives us examples of this. At Cornelius’s house, the believers were heard speaking in tongues and magnifying God. At Pentecost, people heard the believers declaring the mighty works of God. Paul also talks about praying and giving thanks in connection with tongues. So prayer, praise, thanksgiving, and declaring God’s greatness can clearly be expressed through tongues.

But that does not mean God cannot use tongues to give something to His church. Paul specifically teaches that when a tongue is interpreted, the church can be edified. In 1 Corinthians 14:5, he explains that prophecy benefits the church because people understand it, but then he makes an important exception concerning tongues: unless the tongue is interpreted, so that the church may receive edification. That tells us something important. There is meaningful content in the tongue that can benefit other believers once God makes its meaning understandable.

Interpretation is not there to prove that someone really spoke in tongues. It takes something the congregation could not understand and makes its meaning understandable so that the Body can receive from it. Without interpretation, the congregation hears the tongue but does not know what is being communicated. With interpretation, what was hidden from their natural understanding becomes understandable and can build them up.

First Corinthians 14:26 strengthens this picture. Paul describes believers gathering together and says that one may have a psalm, another a teaching, another a revelation, another a tongue, and another an interpretation. He places tongues and interpretation right among the spiritual contributions being brought into the gathering and then gives the governing principle: everything should be done for edification.

So, tongues with interpretation are not presented as meaningless spiritual sounds happening in the background. They can contribute something spiritually meaningful to the gathering. Interpretation removes that barrier. Once the meaning is understood, something originally expressed through tongues can now minister to everyone listening.

We do not need to put God in a box and say that an interpreted tongue can only contain prayer or praise and could never bring encouragement, warning, exhortation, or something else God wants His people to receive. Paul tells us that tongues with interpretation can edify the church. If the Holy Spirit gives the tongue and the Holy Spirit gives the interpretation, He can use that manifestation to minister whatever He want to wants to His people.

This is why tongues and interpretation work together so beautifully in the gathered church. The tongue is given by the Spirit. The interpretation makes its meaning understandable. And the Body can then receive what is being communicated.

Tongues vs. Prophecy

Now that we have established that God can use tongues and interpretation to edify His church, we need to look more closely at something Paul repeatedly does in 1 Corinthians 14: he compares tongues with prophecy. At first, it can sound like Paul is putting prophecy in one category as the “better” spiritual gift and tongues in another category as something less important. But when we slow down and follow his reasoning, we see that his main concern is not which gift is more impressive. His concern is whether the people gathered together can understand what is being communicated and therefore be built up by it.

First, we need to understand what prophecy is. In simple terms, New Testament prophecy is Spirit-given communication that brings something from God to people. In 1 Corinthians 14:3, Paul says that the person who prophesies speaks to people for their edification, encouragement, and comfort. The people listening can understand what is being said, so they are able to receive from it immediately.

Imagine someone stands up in a church gathering and gives a prophetic word in a language everyone understands. The congregation immediately understands what was spoken. They can weigh it, receive what is from the Lord, and be encouraged, corrected, comforted, or strengthened by it. Now imagine someone stands up and speaks in tongues. The tongue may genuinely be from the Holy Spirit, but nobody in the congregation understands what was said. Until interpretation is given, the people listening cannot receive the meaning. That is why Paul prefers prophecy in that situation.

This helps us understand Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 14:5 that the person who prophesies is “greater” than the person who speaks in tongues unless the tongue is interpreted so that the church may be edified. I stated in a previous section, the word “greater” can easily be misunderstood. Paul is not ranking Christians according to their spiritual importance. He is talking about which manifestation is more useful to the congregation in that particular situation. And notice the word “unless.” That word is extremely important. Paul does not simply say, “Prophecy is greater than tongues.” He says prophecy is greater in this situation unless the tongue is interpreted so that the church may be edified. Interpretation changes the situation because understanding has now entered the picture.

Prophecy comes in understandable speech and therefore does not require the separate gift of interpretation. Tongues are not naturally understood by the congregation, so interpretation is necessary when the tongue is functioning publicly for the Body. Both can edify the church, but they operate differently.

However, the fact that tongues and prophecy are different manifestations does not mean an interpreted tongue could never contain something prophetic. Scripture does not place that restriction on the Holy Spirit. If God gives a tongue and then gives an interpretation containing encouragement, warning, correction, revelation, or something else He wants His people to hear, that interpretation can carry prophetic content.

The distinction is not necessarily that prophecy can contain a word from God while tongues cannot. With prophecy, the Spirit-given message comes in understandable speech from the beginning. With tongues, the utterance is not naturally understood by the congregation, so its meaning must be made understandable through interpretation.

That does not make tongues and prophecy the same gift. Paul still lists prophecy, various kinds of tongues, and interpretation of tongues separately in 1 Corinthians 12. Acts 19 also tells us that when the Holy Spirit came upon the believers in Ephesus, they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Scripture places these manifestations right beside one another while still distinguishing between them. Different does not have to mean completely unrelated.

Both come from the same Holy Spirit. Both can operate supernaturally. Both can contribute something when believers gather. And when a tongue is interpreted, what is revealed may contain something prophetic that God intends to use to encourage, strengthen, correct, warn, comfort, or otherwise minister to His people.

So we should not put a restriction on tongues that Scripture itself does not put there. We do not need to say that every interpreted tongue is prophecy, but neither do we need to say that an interpreted tongue can never release something prophetic. We allow the Holy Spirit to determine what He is communicating, and then we weigh what has been given.

The Corinthians were apparently misusing tongues. Paul could simply have said, “This is creating too much confusion, so stop doing it.” But he doesn’t. Instead, he teaches them how to use the gift correctly. That tells us a lot about Paul’s approach to spiritual gifts. Misuse does not require removal. It requires correction. The answer to disorder is not to shut down everything supernatural. The answer is to bring spiritual gifts into biblical order.

The same principle of discernment applies to both prophecy and interpreted tongues. Just because someone says, “God told me,” does not automatically mean God did. Prophecy is supposed to be weighed, and something presented as an interpretation should not become untouchable simply because it followed a tongue. If something contradicts Scripture, teaches false doctrine, manipulates people, glorifies the speaker, or leads people away from Christ, we should not accept it simply because someone says it came from the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not contradict the Word He inspired.

So, Paul is not teaching us to choose between tongues and prophecy. He is teaching us to understand their purposes and use them in a way that builds up the Body. Prophecy is understandable immediately. Tongues require interpretation before the congregation can understand what is being communicated. And once a tongue is interpreted, it can edify the church and may even carry prophetic content. The gifts are different, but the Holy Spirit is the source of them both.

“Tongues of Men and Angels”

Another phrase we need to look at when studying tongues comes from 1 Corinthians 13:1, where Paul talks about speaking in the “tongues of men and of angels.” This has led many Christians to believe that tongues can include not only earthly human languages, but also heavenly or angelic languages.

And we should not immediately dismiss that possibility. Paul does specifically mention the tongues of angels. The question is how much Paul intends for us to understand from that statement.

We already know from Acts 2 that tongues can be human languages. The believers spoke languages they had never learned, yet people standing nearby recognized what they were saying. Those would clearly fit what we could call “tongues of men.”

But could there also be tongues that are angel language? First Corinthians 13:1 certainly leaves that possibility open. Paul refers to the speech of both men and angels, and Scripture clearly shows that angels are capable of speaking and communicating. Throughout the Bible, angels deliver messages, worship God, make announcements, and communicate with people.

What Scripture does not tell us is what angelic communication normally sounds like in the heavenly realm. When angels speak to humans in Scripture, the humans understand them. But that does not necessarily mean angels naturally communicate only in earthly human languages. It simply means that when God sends an angel to communicate with a person, that communication is understandable to the person receiving it.

So when someone asks, “Can tongues be a heavenly or angelic language?” I do not think we need to say that is impossible. Paul himself uses the phrase “tongues of angels.”

At the same time, we should recognize the kind of argument Paul is making in 1 Corinthians 13. His main subject is not angelic languages. His subject is love. Paul is making extremely strong statements to show that spiritual gifts mean very little when they operate without love. He talks about speaking in the tongues of men and angels, understanding all mysteries and all knowledge, having faith capable of moving mountains, giving away everything he owns, and even giving up his own body.

His point is essentially this: even if I possessed the most extraordinary spiritual abilities imaginable, without love I have missed the point. Because Paul is speaking this way, some Christians understand “tongues of angels” as rhetorical language. They believe Paul is essentially saying, “Even if I could speak every human language and even the language of heaven itself, without love it would mean nothing.” That is a reasonable interpretation.

Others understand Paul’s words more literally and believe he is acknowledging that angelic languages actually exist and may be spoken through the spiritual gift of tongues. That is also why we should be careful about being overly dogmatic in either direction. Paul does mention tongues of angels, but he does not stop and explain them.

It could be a human language the people present do not know. It could be a spiritual language given by the Holy Spirit that is not naturally understood. And some Christians believe it could be heavenly or angelic speech based partly on Paul’s language here. Scripture does not give us a way to listen to a tongue and identify which category it belongs to.

We can say what Scripture says: Paul refers to “tongues of men and of angels.” We know human languages can be supernaturally spoken through tongues because Acts 2 demonstrates it. We know Scripture describes tongues that are not naturally understood by the people present. And Paul at least acknowledges the idea of angelic speech. Beyond that, we should be careful not to fill in the blanks ourselves. But we also cannot miss Paul’s larger point. First Corinthians 13 was never written primarily to teach us what language angels speak. Paul is teaching believers how spiritual gifts are supposed to operate.

“Groanings Too Deep for Words”

Another verse that is often brought into conversations about praying in tongues is Romans 8:26. Paul explains that the Spirit helps us in our weakness because we do not always know what we should pray for, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. Many Christians connect this passage directly to praying in tongues. The thought is that when we do not know what to pray, the Holy Spirit can help us pray beyond our natural understanding.

The first thing Paul tells us is that there are times when we simply do not know how or what to pray. We may understand that something is wrong without knowing what needs to happen. We may be overwhelmed, grieving, confused, burdened for someone, or completely unsure of God’s will in a particular situation. We want to pray, but we do not even know what to ask for. Paul says that the Holy Spirit helps us in that weakness. Our inability to find the right words does not prevent the Spirit from being involved in our prayer.

Paul then says that the Spirit Himself intercedes for us. To intercede simply means to come on behalf of another. The next verse explains that God, who searches hearts, knows the mind of the Spirit because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. This means that even when we do not know God’s will for a situation clearly enough to put it into words, the Holy Spirit does. We may not know what needs to happen, but He does.

Then Paul uses the phrase “groanings too deep for words.” The word translated “groanings” is the idea of groaning or sighing, and that language actually appears throughout the surrounding passage. Paul says creation is groaning as it waits for restoration. He then says believers themselves groan inwardly as we wait for the redemption of our bodies. After describing the groaning of creation and believers, Paul speaks about the Spirit’s intercession with groanings. The entire passage is dealing with weakness, suffering, longing, and waiting for the completion of what God has promised.

This is important because Romans 8:26 does not describe someone beginning to speak another language. Paul does not use the language for tongues that he uses in 1 Corinthians. He simply says that the Spirit intercedes with groanings that cannot be expressed in ordinary words.

However, that does not mean there cannot be a connection between this kind of Spirit-assisted prayer and someone’s experience of praying in tongues. A believer who has been given tongues may absolutely find themselves praying in tongues during moments when they do not naturally know what to pray. This fits naturally beside what Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 14, where he says that when he prays in a tongue, his spirit prays while his natural understanding is unfruitful. There can be moments when our natural mind does not know what to say, yet prayer is still taking place.

There is also an important difference between the wording of these two passages. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul says that when he prays in a tongue, “my spirit prays.” In Romans 8, Paul specifically says that the Holy Spirit intercedes for us. Both passages involve prayer and the work of the Spirit, and they may certainly connect in someone’s experience, but Paul does not describe them in exactly the same way.

This is also why we do not need Romans 8:26 to prove that prayer in tongues is biblical. First Corinthians 14 already explicitly talks about praying in a tongue. We do not strengthen the biblical case for tongues by forcing every passage about Spirit-led prayer to refer to tongues. We actually strengthen our understanding by being willing to say exactly what Scripture says and stop where Scripture stops.

Romans 8 gives us something beautiful on its own. Sometimes we know exactly what to pray and can bring those requests before God with our understanding. Sometimes a believer who has been given tongues may pray in a tongue while their natural understanding is unfruitful. And sometimes we may be so overwhelmed, burdened, or unsure of what to pray that we simply do not have the words. In all of those situations, we are not abandoned in prayer. The Holy Spirit is present and helping us.

So, can Romans 8:26 be connected with the larger subject of prayer in tongues? Yes. Both involve prayer that goes beyond the limits of what our natural understanding can accomplish, and a believer may certainly experience praying in tongues during the kinds of moments Romans 8 describes.

The main point of Romans 8:26 is even broader and incredibly comforting: we do not have to know exactly what to say for the Holy Spirit to help us pray. When our understanding is limited, when our words fail, and when we do not even know what we should be asking God for, the Spirit knows the will of God and intercedes for us according to that will.

Tongues as a Sign to Unbelievers?

One of the harder passages in Paul’s teaching about tongues is 1 Corinthians 14:20–25. Paul says that “tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers,” but then says that if unbelievers enter a gathering where everyone is speaking in tongues, they may think everyone is out of their minds. At first, that can sound contradictory. If tongues are a sign for unbelievers, why would Paul immediately warn that unbelievers might respond negatively to them? To understand what Paul means, we need to look at Isaiah 28, because that is the passage Paul himself quotes.

In Isaiah 28, God is dealing with people who have repeatedly refused to listen to Him. They had received understandable instruction from God but rejected it. Because they would not listen, God warned that they would eventually hear “strange lips” and “another tongue.” In the historical setting, this foreign speech was connected with invading nations and judgment. The people who refused to listen when God spoke clearly would eventually find themselves surrounded by the unfamiliar language of foreigners. So the strange language was a sign, but it was not primarily a pleasant evangelistic sign meant to help unbelievers understand God. It was a sign connected with judgment and their refusal to listen. Paul even includes the statement, “Even then they will not listen to me.”

That background helps us understand Paul’s statement that tongues are a sign for unbelievers. In Isaiah, unfamiliar speech was a sign precisely because the people had rejected God’s understandable words. The sign revealed something about their spiritual condition, but it did not guarantee repentance or faith.

Paul then applies this principle to what was happening in Corinth. He imagines the whole church coming together and everyone speaking in tongues when unbelievers or outsiders enter. His concern here should not be confused with individual believers personally praying to God in tongues while other believers are present. Earlier in the same chapter, Paul specifically allows someone who is not giving a public interpreted tongue to “speak to himself and to God.” So simply being inside a church building does not suddenly mean every use of tongues requires interpretation.

The problem Paul describes here is a gathering being dominated by speech that nobody entering can understand. Imagine an unbeliever walking into a church and hearing person after person speaking out in tongues, or the entire gathering filled with uninterpreted tongues, with no understandable teaching, no prophecy, no explanation, or interpretation. The visitor has no way of knowing what is even happening. Paul says that person may conclude that everyone is out of their minds.

That is different from corporate prayer in which believers are personally addressing God. A room may be praying together while individual people are directing their own prayers toward God. Someone may pray with their understanding, while someone who has been given tongues may pray to God in a tongue. Other believers being physically present does not automatically transform that person’s God-directed prayer into a public message requiring interpretation.

The distinction throughout 1 Corinthians 14 is not simply “tongues at home are acceptable, but tongues inside church require interpretation.” Paul’s concern is how tongues are functioning. When a tongue is given publicly for the congregation to receive, interpretation is necessary because everyone needs to understand it. When a believer is personally speaking to God, Paul recognizes a different use of tongues.

This also helps us understand Paul’s concern for unbelievers. He is not teaching churches to hide every supernatural manifestation whenever an unbeliever walks through the door. Acts 2 would make that conclusion impossible. His concern is that an outsider should not enter a gathering so dominated by unintelligible speech that there is nothing understandable for them to receive.

So there is no contradiction between Paul’s warning about unbelievers and prayer in tongues occurring among gathered believers. Tongues can be present in the gathering. God-directed prayer in tongues can occur in the presence of other believers. Public tongues can occur when interpretation follows. What Paul corrects is disorder and the uncontrolled use of unintelligible speech in a way that prevents the gathered Body—and outsiders among them—from understanding what is taking place.

Acts 2 helps us see another side of this. At Pentecost, tongues had a powerful effect on the people listening because they recognized their own languages being spoken by people who had never learned them. That supernatural sign got their attention. Even then, however, not everyone responded with faith. Some were amazed and wanted to understand what was happening, while others mocked the believers and accused them of being drunk. Peter still had to stand up and explain what was happening and preach Jesus in words the crowd could understand. The supernatural sign got their attention, but understandable preaching explained the meaning of what they were witnessing.

So Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 are not contradicting each other. At Pentecost, people recognized the languages being spoken. In the situation Paul describes in Corinth, outsiders would be hearing speech they did not understand. That difference matters. Tongues can absolutely function as a supernatural sign, but a sign does not automatically create understanding, and it does not automatically produce faith.

This is why Paul’s quotation of Isaiah is so important. When he says tongues are a sign to unbelievers, he is not simply giving churches an evangelism strategy of speaking in tongues in front of unbelievers. He is drawing from a passage where unfamiliar speech was connected with unbelief, judgment, and people who refused to listen. His immediate warning that outsiders may think the church is out of its mind confirms that simply hearing uninterpreted tongues does not necessarily lead someone toward faith.

Paul’s answer is not to remove tongues from the church. Throughout the chapter, he teaches believers how to use tongues properly. Public tongues should be interpreted. Prophecy should be weighed. People should speak in turn rather than over one another. Everything should be done for the building up of the Body. His concern is not making church less supernatural. His concern is making sure genuine manifestations of the Spirit operate with meaning and order.

So when Paul says tongues are a sign to unbelievers, we need to keep the whole passage together. Tongues can function as a supernatural sign, but Scripture never promises that unbelievers will automatically understand or respond positively to that sign. Isaiah actually shows the opposite possibility: unfamiliar speech can confront people who refuse to hear God while still leaving them in unbelief. That is why Paul values interpretation and understandable speech so strongly when the church gathers. The problem was never that tongues were too supernatural. The problem was using a genuine spiritual gift in a way that left everyone else without understanding what God was doing.

Can Tongues Be Manufactured or Imitated?

If we believe speaking in tongues is a genuine gift of the Holy Spirit, then we also need to believe in testing spiritual manifestations. Not everything that sounds supernatural automatically comes from God, but something should not automatically be rejected simply because it sounds strange or unfamiliar either. Scripture gives us a balance. We are told not to quench the Spirit, but we are also told to test spiritual things. Being open to the Holy Spirit and using discernment are not opposites. We are supposed to do both.

One concern surrounding tongues is that people can sometimes be pressured into producing something themselves. This can happen when someone desperately wants the gift, especially if they have been taught that they are supposed to speak in tongues. They may be surrounded by people praying loudly over them and telling them to “just start speaking.” Eventually the person may begin producing sounds because they feel like something is expected to happen. That does not necessarily mean they are deliberately pretending. They may sincerely love God and genuinely want whatever He has for them, but emotional pressure can still cause someone to imitate an experience rather than actually receive a gift from the Holy Spirit.

This becomes even more concerning when people are actually coached in what sounds to make. Sometimes someone will give another person syllables and tell them to repeat those sounds over and over until a tongue begins to “flow.” Other times people are encouraged to copy the person praying beside them. I do not believe we need to do that. If tongues are given by the Holy Spirit, then we do not need to manufacture the utterance for Him. At Pentecost, the believers were the ones who opened their mouths and spoke, but Acts specifically says that the Spirit gave them the utterance. There was human participation, but the supernatural ability came from the Holy Spirit. Nobody had to teach them which syllables to say first.

At the same time, this does not mean genuine tongues must be uncontrollable. Sometimes people describe the Holy Spirit as though He completely takes over a person’s mouth and the person has absolutely no choice about whether they speak. Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 14 do not give us that picture. He tells people when to speak, when to wait, and when to remain silent if there is no interpreter. That means the person operating in the gift still has control over whether they release what they have been given. The Holy Spirit giving an utterance is different from the Holy Spirit physically forcing someone’s mouth to move.

We should also recognize that human beings can learn and imitate behavior without intentionally trying to deceive anyone. If someone spends years in an environment where they repeatedly hear a particular style of tongues, it is possible for them to pick up similar sounds, patterns, rhythms, and behaviors. That is simply something human beings do. We naturally imitate what we repeatedly hear around us. This does not mean every person whose tongue sounds similar to someone else’s is fake, but it does mean similarity alone cannot prove that something is supernatural.

We also have to be equally careful in the opposite direction. We cannot listen to someone’s tongue and declare that it is fake simply because it sounds repetitive, unusual, simple, emotional, or unlike any language we recognize. Scripture never gives us a linguistic test for tongues. Most of us have heard only a tiny fraction of the thousands of languages and dialects spoken throughout the world, and we certainly do not know everything about how supernatural tongues may sound. Something sounding strange to us does not prove anything about its source.

This is why discernment is so important. We should not automatically accept something because it looks supernatural, and we should not automatically reject something because it looks unusual. Scripture teaches believers to test spiritual manifestations. First John tells us not to believe every spirit but to test the spirits. First Thessalonians tells believers not to quench the Spirit or despise prophetic utterances, but then immediately tells them to test everything and hold on to what is good. That gives us a very healthy biblical pattern. We can remain open to what the Holy Spirit is doing while still examining what we are seeing and hearing.

This brings us to another question that sometimes comes up when discussing tongues: can there be demonic tongues? Scripture clearly teaches that demons exist and that spiritual deception is real. The Bible warns about deceiving spirits, false prophets, false signs, and supernatural manifestations that are not from God. So we should never assume that something must be the Holy Spirit simply because it appears supernatural. There are also spiritual practices outside Christianity where people chant, vocalize unusual sounds, enter altered states, or claim supernatural speech. The existence of counterfeit or non-Christian spiritual experiences does not disprove biblical tongues, but it does remind us that supernatural claims still need discernment.

What is the source being called upon? What is being taught? Is Jesus Christ being honored? Does what is happening agree with Scripture? What kind of fruit surrounds the manifestation? Is there manipulation, occult involvement, false doctrine, or another spiritual source being invoked? Those questions give us much more to work with than simply deciding whether the sounds themselves seem unusual.

It is also important to understand that misuse does not automatically mean something is demonic. The Corinthian church had serious disorder surrounding spiritual gifts, yet Paul did not tell them that their gifts were therefore coming from demons. He corrected them. A genuine gift can be handled immaturely, selfishly, or disorderly by an imperfect person. That is very different from saying the spiritual source of the gift is demonic. We need enough discernment to recognize that distinction too.

If something genuinely comes from an evil spiritual source, Christians should reject it. If someone is manufacturing sounds because they have been pressured or coached, we should not pretend that learned behavior is automatically a gift of the Spirit. But if we simply do not know what is happening, we do not have to rush into labeling it. We can test it, watch the fruit, compare everything with Scripture, and allow the Holy Spirit to bring clarity.

The existence of counterfeits should never make us afraid of the genuine. We do not stop believing in prophecy because false prophets exist, and we do not have to reject tongues because people can imitate or misuse them. Instead, we learn to recognize what Scripture actually teaches, refuse manipulation and manufactured experiences, test spiritual manifestations, and remain open to the genuine work of the Holy Spirit.

Biblical discernment does not require us to shut down everything supernatural, and openness to the supernatural does not require us to accept everything without question. We can desire the gifts of the Spirit while testing what claims to come from the Spirit. That is not quenching the Holy Spirit. That is obeying Scripture.

Tongues vs. the Baptism of the Holy Spirit

One of the biggest disagreements surrounding speaking in tongues is its relationship to the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Some Christians believe that every person who is baptized in the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues and that tongues are the initial physical evidence that this baptism has occurred. Others believe tongues may accompany the baptism of the Holy Spirit but should not be required as proof that someone has received Him. Because the book of Acts contains several powerful examples of people speaking in tongues when the Holy Spirit comes upon them, we need to take those passages seriously while also looking at everything the New Testament tells us.

The traditional Pentecostal position is commonly called the doctrine of “initial evidence.” In simple terms, this teaching says that speaking in tongues is the first outward or physical evidence that someone has been baptized in the Holy Spirit. This does not necessarily mean Pentecostals believe tongues are required for salvation. Classical Pentecostal theology normally distinguishes salvation from baptism in the Holy Spirit. The claim is specifically that tongues provide the initial evidence of Spirit baptism.

There is an understandable reason this doctrine developed because there is a real pattern in Acts. At Pentecost in Acts 2, the Holy Spirit fills the believers and they begin speaking in other tongues as the Spirit gives them utterance. In Acts 10, while Peter is preaching at the house of Cornelius, the Holy Spirit falls upon the Gentiles and the Jewish believers recognize that they have received the Holy Spirit because they hear them speaking in tongues and magnifying God. Then in Acts 19, Paul lays hands on believers in Ephesus, the Holy Spirit comes upon them, and they speak in tongues and prophesy.

We should not minimize that pattern. Tongues clearly accompany powerful encounters with the Holy Spirit in the book of Acts. They are not a strange practice that appeared centuries later in church history. Tongues were present when the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, when the gospel crossed an enormous boundary into the Gentile world at Cornelius’s house, and when the Holy Spirit came upon the believers Paul encountered in Ephesus. Anyone studying tongues seriously has to account for that.

However, the next question is whether Acts teaches that tongues must occur every single time someone receives the Holy Spirit or is baptized in the Spirit. This is where I do not believe Scripture gives us enough reason to turn the pattern into an absolute requirement.

There are other places in Acts where people believe, receive the Spirit, are filled with the Spirit, or experience the Spirit’s work and tongues are not mentioned. Acts 8 is especially interesting. The Samaritans believe the gospel and are baptized, and later Peter and John lay hands on them and they receive the Holy Spirit. Something visible apparently happens because Simon sees that the Spirit is given through the laying on of hands, but Luke never tells us what he saw. Some Christians believe it was tongues, and that is certainly possible, but the text itself does not say so.

We see the same need for caution elsewhere. When Paul is filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts 9, the passage does not say that he spoke in tongues at that moment. We know from 1 Corinthians 14 that Paul definitely did speak in tongues; he later says that he spoke in tongues more than all of the Corinthians. But Acts does not tell us that tongues were the immediate evidence when Ananias laid hands on him.

This becomes even more important when we bring in Paul’s teaching about spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12. Paul explains that the Holy Spirit distributes gifts according to His own will. He then asks a series of questions: Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? The expected answer throughout the series is no. That creates an important distinction. Having the Holy Spirit is not the same thing as possessing every manifestation or gift the Holy Spirit gives.

Every Christian belongs to Christ through the Spirit, but the Spirit distributes gifts according to His will. One believer may prophesy. Another may have gifts of healing. Another may speak in tongues. Another may have a different manifestation. The diversity of gifts does not mean some Christians have the Holy Spirit while others do not.

I believe the Holy Spirit still fills and empowers believers. I believe the gifts of the Spirit are still active. I believe speaking in tongues is supernatural and biblical. I believe tongues can accompany powerful encounters with the Holy Spirit because Acts plainly shows that happening. I believe Christians can desire spiritual gifts and ask God for everything He wants to give them.

But I do not believe we should tell someone, “If you have never spoken in tongues, you have not received the Holy Spirit,” or, “If you were really had the Holy Spirit, you would definitely speak in tongues.” I feel that can go further than I believe Scripture allows us to go.

The main thing I know, the Holy Spirit does not need us to manufacture evidence for Him. If He gives someone tongues, receive the gift with thanksgiving. If He has not given that gift, we should not teach the person how to fake it. We can desire spiritual gifts, remain open, pray, ask, and trust the Holy Spirit to distribute His gifts according to His will and timing.

“Do Not Forbid Speaking in Tongues”

After everything Paul says about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14, his conclusion is incredibly important. He has corrected disorder. He has explained the importance of interpretation. He has compared tongues with prophecy. He has emphasized understanding and edification. He has placed boundaries around how tongues should operate publicly. Yet after correcting all of that, Paul does not tell the Corinthians to stop speaking in tongues. He tells them not to forbid it.

In 1 Corinthians 14:39–40, Paul brings the discussion together by telling believers to desire prophecy, not to forbid speaking in tongues, and to let everything be done decently and in order. Those instructions belong together.

The Corinthian church had problems with how spiritual gifts were operating. People were apparently speaking in ways others could not understand. Multiple people could be trying to contribute. The gathering could become confusing. Paul spends a large portion of the chapter correcting these problems. If there were ever a situation where someone might have been tempted to say, “This tongues thing has gotten completely out of hand, so let’s just get rid of it,” Corinth would have been that situation. But Paul does not abolish the gift. He corrects the abuse while preserving the gift.

That gives us an important principle for how we approach spiritual gifts today. Misuse does not prove that a gift is false. Counterfeits do not eliminate the genuine. Immaturity does not mean the Holy Spirit has stopped giving gifts. When something biblical is being handled incorrectly, the answer is not automatically to remove it. The answer is to bring it back into biblical order. There are churches today that want nothing to do with tongues because they have seen excess, manipulation, confusion, or people claiming things were the Holy Spirit when they clearly were not. Some Christians have personally experienced environments where tongues were pressured, manufactured, or treated as proof of spiritual superiority. Those concerns should not simply be dismissed. Abuse should be confronted. But Paul’s response to abuse gives us our model. Correct what is wrong without forbidding what God has given.

On the other side, believing in tongues does not give us permission to ignore everything else Paul taught. “Do not forbid tongues” does not mean “anything goes.” Public tongues should operate according to biblical order. Interpretation matters. Edification matters. Discernment matters. Love matters. Other people matter. The Holy Spirit does not need disorder in order to demonstrate His power.

Biblical order also does not mean everything must be quiet, predictable, emotionless, or controlled according to human preference. Pentecost probably did not look neat according to everyone’s expectations. People thought the believers were drunk. The supernatural work of God can surprise people and challenge what they are accustomed to. Biblical order means that spiritual gifts operate according to God’s instructions, not that everything must fit our personal comfort level. That is where I believe we should land after studying speaking in tongues.

We should not manufacture it. We should not pressure people into it. We should not use it as a badge of spiritual superiority. We should not make it a requirement for salvation or proof that someone has the Holy Spirit. We should test spiritual manifestations, require interpretation when a tongue is functioning publicly for the congregation, and care about whether the Body is being edified.

Additional Questions About Tongues

Before closing this teaching, there are a few additional questions that are worth addressing. We have already touched on some of these ideas throughout this study, so I do not want to repeat everything we have already covered. I simply want to answer a few questions that commonly come up when discussing speaking in tongues.

Are Tongues Still for Today?

Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:8 that tongues will eventually cease, so the question is not whether tongues will cease, but when. Some Christians believe “when the perfect comes” refers to the completion of Scripture or the end of the apostolic age. Others believe Paul is looking forward to the return of Christ and the fullness of what is still to come.

The surrounding language is important. Paul says that right now we know in part and prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, what is partial will pass away. He also says that right now we see dimly, but then we will see “face to face,” and that now he knows in part, but then he will know more fully. That sounds much bigger to me than simply receiving the completed Bible.

Scripture also never says that tongues would cease when the apostles died or when the biblical canon was completed. In fact, after spending an entire chapter correcting the misuse of tongues, Paul ends by saying, “Do not forbid speaking in tongues.” I believe there will come a time when spiritual gifts like tongues are no longer necessary because we will be in the fullness of what they currently point toward. But I do not see biblical grounds for saying that time has already come.

So, if someone were to plainly ask me, “Are tongues still for today?” I would answer with assuredly, yes.

Does “Praying in the Spirit” Always Mean Praying in Tongues?

Ephesians 6:18 tells believers to pray “in the Spirit,” and Jude 20 speaks about “praying in the Holy Spirit.” These verses are sometimes automatically interpreted as commands to pray in tongues, but neither passage actually mentions tongues.

Praying in tongues can absolutely be Spirit enabled prayer. Paul specifically talks about his spirit praying when he speaks in a tongue in 1 Corinthians 14. But I don’t know if that means every time Scripture says someone is praying in the Spirit, it must mean tongues. A believer can pray under the direction, help, and influence of the Holy Spirit while praying in a language they understand. A believer who has been given tongues can also pray to God in tongues. From my understanding, both can involve the Holy Spirit.

So, I personally, would not say “praying in the Spirit” is exactly another name for “praying in tongues.” Tongues can be one expression of Spirit-enabled prayer, but Spirit-led prayer is bigger than tongues, if all are indwelled with the spirit upon salvation.

Indwelling, Filling, and Manifestation

Another thing that can become confusing is how believers can already have the Holy Spirit living in them while Scripture still describes them as being filled with the Holy Spirit again. Peter gives us a great example. Jesus tells the disciples, “Receive the Holy Spirit” in John 20:22. Peter is then shows us when they are filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost in Acts 2. In Acts 4:8, Peter is again described as being filled with the Holy Spirit, and in Acts 4:31, the gathered believers are filled again.

This does not mean the Holy Spirit kept leaving Peter and then coming back. It also does not mean Peter kept running out of the Holy Spirit and needed to be topped back up. The Holy Spirit is a Person, not a substance that gets used up.

The easiest way I have found to understand the distinction is this: indwelling describes the Holy Spirit’s abiding presence in the believer. Filling describes the abiding Spirit actively influencing and empowering the believer. Manifestation describes how the activity of the Spirit becomes evident through what He is doing.

That manifestation does not always look the same. At Pentecost, they were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues. In Acts 4, Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit and boldly spoke what needed to be said. In other places we see prophecy, wisdom, joy, supernatural gifts, and other expressions of the Spirit’s activity.

So, every genuine believer has the Holy Spirit, but that does not mean every believer will experience every manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Tongues are one manifestation He can give. Prophecy is another. Other spiritual gifts are manifestations as well. The same Holy Spirit distributes and works through His people according to His will.

Do We Participate in Speaking in Tongues?

I know I have touched on this earlier in the teaching, but personally, this was something I struggled to understand before receiving the gift of tongues. I had questions about what my part was supposed to be. Does the Holy Spirit completely take over and make me speak? Do I open my mouth and begin speaking? If I am the one choosing to speak, does that mean it is coming from me instead of Him? Because I wrestled with those questions myself, I wanted to address this separately and give it a little room to breathe.

Speaking in tongues does not mean the Holy Spirit possesses someone’s mouth and completely removes their ability to control themselves. Acts 2:4 gives us a helpful picture because the believers spoke while the Spirit gave them utterance. The Holy Spirit supplied the supernatural ability, but the people actually opened their mouths and spoke.

Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 14 also show us that believers do retain self-control while operating in spiritual gifts. He can tell someone when to speak, when to remain silent, when to pray for interpretation, and how to participate in an orderly gathering. Paul even says, “I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding.” There is human participation in the exercise of something that ultimately comes from the Holy Spirit.

I can also explain this from my own experience. There have been times when I have felt the Holy Spirit moving very strongly before giving a word to a congregation or when I have felt an intense filling and burden to intercede in prayer. For me, there can be very strong emotion connected with it. I become deeply aware of the presence of God moving upon me, and sometimes I know before I ever open my mouth that something is about to happen because I have learned to recognize the way the Holy Spirit moves upon me.

In those moments, I am not unconscious, out of control, or unaware of what I am doing. I am yielding myself to Him. I am still the person who opens my mouth and speaks, but there can be such a strong sense of His presence and prompting that it almost feels difficult to contain what is stirring inside of me. I could resist it or refuse to speak, but there is an intense awareness that the Holy Spirit is prompting me to yield and release what He is giving.

That distinction is important because yielding is not the same thing as losing control. The Holy Spirit can move upon someone very powerfully. His presence can affect us deeply and emotionally. There can be an overwhelming burden to pray, speak, intercede, prophesy, or release something the Lord is placing upon our heart. None of that requires us to say that the Holy Spirit takes possession of our body and forces us to do something against our will.

This also helps us understand the difference between manufacturing something and cooperating with the Holy Spirit. When I yield and begin speaking, I am participating, but that does not mean I created the prompting that came before it. There is a difference between deciding on my own to manufacture an experience and recognizing the Spirit’s prompting and willingly responding to Him.

That is why I do not think we have to choose between saying, “The Holy Spirit did it,” and “I spoke.” Both can be true. It is the Spirit speaking through YOU. At Pentecost, the Spirit gave the utterance, and they spoke. God was the supernatural source, while the believers willingly participated in what He was doing.

And this can look different at different times and for different people. My personal experience should never become the measuring stick that determines what everyone else’s experience must feel like. Someone else may not experience the same intensity of emotion or the same physical awareness that I do. The biblical foundation is more important than any individual’s experience. But personal experience can help us understand how powerful yielding to the Holy Spirit can feel while still recognizing that the believer remains a willing participant.

Spiritual gifts do not require a loss of self-control. In the same chapter where Paul teaches about tongues and prophecy, he says that the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. Genuine manifestations of the Holy Spirit can be incredibly powerful, even overwhelming to our emotions, while still involving our willing participation and yielded obedience.

Gifts Are Not the Same as Spiritual Maturity

Finally, we should never confuse having a spiritual gift with being spiritually mature. Someone speaking in tongues does not automatically mean they are closer to God, more holy, more surrendered, or more mature than someone who does not speak in tongues.

The Corinthians themselves are one of the clearest examples of this. They were experiencing supernatural spiritual gifts, yet Paul still had to correct them for division, pride, selfishness, disorder, sexual immorality, and other serious problems. They were gifted, but in many areas they were still immature.

Spiritual gifts demonstrate what the Holy Spirit has graciously given someone. Spiritual fruit shows what should increasingly develop in a life that is walking with and submitting to the Holy Spirit. We should desire spiritual gifts without turning those gifts into badges of spiritual superiority.

Someone can speak in tongues and still need tremendous growth in love, patience, humility, self-control, and holiness. Someone else may not have been given tongues and yet display beautiful fruit of the Holy Spirit in their life.

We do not have to choose between gifts and fruit. We should desire everything God has for us while remembering that supernatural gifting never replaces Christlike character.