If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but I do not
have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. – 1 Corinthians 13:1
(NET)
Whenever the topic of “speaking
in tongues” is considered, a common misconception, together with a failure in
basic knowledge of the subject, is advanced. That common misconception is
that “speaking in tongues” or “glossolalia” somehow began with Christians at
Pentecost. Whether one is “for” or “against” the idea of speaking in
tongues, which is generally considered to be an ecstatic form of speech that is
unintelligible to both the speaker and any hearers as it does not bear
resemblance to any known languages, it is impossible to engage in a discussion
without first considering the fact that records of the practice of speaking in
tongues predates Christianity by several hundred years. Yes, records of
its historical practice in a way that is akin to the way in which it is
practiced by millions of Christians around the world today, can be found
centuries prior to the advent of the church and in complete isolation from the
influence of the Creator God’s covenant people.
The Apostle Paul, in his first
letter to the congregation of Corinth, deals extensively with the issue of
spiritual gifts, with that of speaking in tongues receiving what appears to be
an inordinate amount of focus and attention. This particular spiritual
gifting appears to be of grave concern to the Apostle, and one can only have
any hopes for understanding the reasons for Paul’s dealing with the subject in
the context of the body of people that stood in representation of the kingdom
of God, if one also understand a bit of the history of the action itself, its
place in the culture, what it signified to the performer and to an audience,
how it was received, how it functioned in a community, and in what the action
of speaking in tongues would result.
So yes, as one gazes through the
pages of recorded history, one finds that there have been many occasions where
people have spoken in what has been referred to as ecstatic language. The
records indicate that this is no different, in practice and in appearance, than
what is to be seen in the contemporary (and historical) Christian practice of
speaking in tongues (ecstatic language). Shortly, this study shall also make
clear that the given reasons for the speech have remained unchanged, and that
the practice has merely been adapted to the new situation.
Most of the accounts of ecstatic speech predate Pentecost
(though it will be necessary to provide a helpful delineation between what is
recounted in the second chapter of Acts and the activity that is being
addressed in Paul’s letter to the Corinthian church) and were of decidedly
non-Christian origin. This fact should
give pause to Christians that decry, and perhaps quite rightly, the fusion of
pagan holidays into Christianity, rejecting the celebration of Easter and its
associated traditions or Christmas and its associated traditions because of
their questionable origins, while uncritically embracing pre-Christian (pagan)
acts such as speaking in tongues that have also been carried over into the
church.
As the simple facts of the matter will eventually serve to
demonstrate, Christians cannot say with any degree of confidence, that every
occurrence of glossolalia (again, this is not necessarily what is seen in the
second chapter of Acts) must be an expression of the will of the Creator God.
Many, of course, subscribe to this view, though it is historically untenable
and does not withstand an even moderate degree of scrutiny.
No comments:
Post a Comment