Showing posts with label Holy Spirit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Holy Spirit. Show all posts

Thursday, 4 June 2026

Is the Gift of Distinguishing between Spirits Still Useful Today?

In 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 the apostle Paul gives a list of gifts that are given and empowered by the Holy Spirit. One of these is the gift of distinguishing between spirits (v. 10).

This gift is first and foremost about the ability to distinguish between whether something has been caused by an evil spirit or by the Holy Spirit. Often this will apply to messages that people claim to be from God. The gift is relevant for determining whether the message really is from God or whether it has a demonic origin.

However, the ability to distinguish between whether something is from an evil spirit or from the Holy Spirit is very similar to the ability to distinguish between whether something is caused by an evil spirit or has a purely natural cause. So I think we can reasonably say that this gift would at times involve the ability simply to tell if an evil spirit is the causer of something, whether a message or an illness or a situation or whatever.

Cessationism

There are some Christians today, who claim that the Spirit no longer gives the gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 because they are not needed now that we have the completed New Testament. These Christians are known as ‘cessationists’, because they think that the Spirit ceased giving these gifts long ago.

I am convinced that cessationism is a big mistake and that God continues to give all the gifts mentioned on this list, including the gift of distinguishing between spirits. It was never God’s plan for the Bible to provide us with all useful pieces of information for us to live our lives, and the gift of distinguishing between spirits is one way in which He sometimes imparts useful pieces of information to His children.

Luke 13:10-16

One passage that it will be helpful for us to consider for this topic is Luke 13:10-16, which reads as follows:

‘10 Now he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbath. 11 And behold, there was a woman who had had a disabling spirit for eighteen years. She was bent over and could not fully straighten herself. 12 When Jesus saw her, he called her over and said to her, “Woman, you are freed from your disability.” 13 And he laid his hands on her, and immediately she was made straight, and she glorified God.

14 But the ruler of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, said to the people, “There are six days in which work ought to be done. Come on those days and be healed, and not on the Sabbath day.”

15 Then the Lord answered him, “You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the manger and lead it away to water it? 16 And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?”’ (ESV)

This passage tells us about a woman who had a severe spinal problem. She was bent over and couldn’t stand up straight, and she had had this problem for 18 years.

In v. 11 Luke says that her condition was caused by a ‘spirit’, which has to mean an evil spirit. This is confirmed by Jesus’s words in v. 16, where He says that this woman was bound by Satan.

Luke says that Jesus laid His hands on her and she was immediately healed. There is no mention in the passage of the evil spirit speaking through her, as sometimes happens in other biblical examples of people being freed from evil spirits. Nor is there any suggestion that this evil spirit was able to do anything else to the woman other than give her this physical disability.

So it doesn’t seem that Jesus simply deduced from certain visible signs that it was an evil spirit that was causing the woman’s disability. Instead, it seems that He was able to supernaturally discern that the woman’s condition was caused by an evil spirit. In other words, Jesus apparently did the same sort of thing that is found in the gift of distinguishing between spirits.

Imagining a similar situation today

This is the only biblical example of someone who has the medical condition of being bent over. And the passage is clear that it was caused by an evil spirit. So it makes sense to think that some examples today of people suffering from this condition will also be caused by evil spirits.

I am not saying that everyone suffering in this way today has an evil spirit causing it. But it surely means that some do. To think that the only biblical example of someone bent over was caused by an evil spirit, but that no one who is bent over today is being affected by an evil spirit, makes absolutely no sense. Such a conclusion would not be faithful to learning from what Scripture has to say.

So imagine for a moment that you are a Christian doctor, and someone comes to see you who is bent over.

The first thing you would want to know is whether an evil spirit is causing their disability, isn’t it? The way that you would go about helping this person would depend in very large part on whether or not an evil spirit is causing the problem. So you would want to start by learning, if possible, whether or not an evil spirit is responsible.

It may be that if you became aware that an evil spirit was causing the disability you would want to refer the patient to someone else. I am not saying that every Christian doctor should be skilled in freeing people from evil spirits.

But I am saying that it makes absolutely zero sense to approach helping this patient in any other way. The first thing to do, if possible, would obviously be to try to determine if this patient’s disability is caused by an evil spirit or not.

And how would a Christian do this? Well, one way would surely be by using the gift of distinguishing between spirits.

It is unwarranted to think that there would have to be obvious visible signs if an evil spirit was involved. No such signs are mentioned in Luke 13. Instead, as I have noted, Jesus seems to have supernaturally discerned that an evil spirit was causing the disability. So it makes sense to think that the same kind of method would sometimes be used today, i.e., through the gift of distinguishing between spirits.

I have given this example, mirroring what we find in Scripture, as what I think is a very good example of the usefulness of the gift of distinguishing between spirits today. The idea of cessationists that this gift is no longer useful now that we have the New Testament is completely wrong.

A biblical command to desire spiritual gifts

In 1 Corinthians 14:1 Paul instructs his readers to desire spiritual gifts from God, and these gifts certainly include those mentioned in the list of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10.

Importantly, there is no good reason for thinking that Christians today are not under obligation to obey Paul’s command. Let all of us, then, who want to live out a biblical Christian faith, do what we are told to do in this verse.

 

See also:

The Bible, God’s Voice, and Useful Information

The Importance of Ministering to People Afflicted by Demons

Every Christian Should Desire the Gift of Prophecy

God Wants to Use Christians in Miracle Work Today

Tuesday, 20 January 2026

Getting the Balance between Expecting Too Little and Too Much Moral Progress

When we become Christians, we receive the Holy Spirit, who then sets about transforming us into the moral likeness of Jesus. The Bible is very clear on this.

But this raises an important question. How quickly should we expect this change to happen?

I would suggest that on this issue, as on so many other issues to do with the Christian life, it is possible to go too far one way or the other. There are many Christians who are expecting too little from God in this area, and there are many others who are expecting too much.

Expecting too little transformation

Firstly, there are those who don’t expect enough from God in terms of moral transformation.

This attitude often ties in with a lack of expectation generally in spiritual matters. Importantly, however, the Bible encourages us to think big as regards what God is going to do, in various ways.

As far as moral transformation is concerned, we should be expecting God to act in a significant way.

In 2 Corinthians 3:18 Paul states:

‘And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.’ (ESV)

This is clear that the Spirit is making Christians ever more glorious, where our glory refers to our moral purity.

Similarly, in Galatians 5:22-23 Paul says:

‘But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.’ (ESV)

There is no doubt that as we live our Christian lives we should expect to increase in these virtues.

Again, in Romans 8:13 we read:

‘For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.’ (ESV)

This verse implies that if we put in the required effort, we can expect to grow in moral purity.

The verses I have quoted, along with many others, show that we should expect to change as times passes. We should be becoming morally better people.

It seems to me, based on conversations I have had with other believers, that there are many Christians who are expecting very little in terms of moral transformation, and this is a big mistake. The Holy Spirit is ready and willing to change us if we let Him, which we are under obligation to do.

Expecting too much transformation

Secondly, there are Christians who expect too much moral transformation.

This is a problem, because if we have unrealistically high expectations of things, it can be extremely discouraging when these expectations are not met. If, by contrast, we have more realistic expectations, we won’t be so disheartened by failures and will be quicker to dust ourselves down and get ready for the next fight.

One key Bible verse on this subject is James 3:2, where James says:

‘For we all stumble in many ways.’ (ESV)

Stumbling in this verse refers to committing unpremeditated sins of short duration, and James is clear that every Christian commits these. Importantly too, James himself had very probably been a Christian for many years when he wrote these words.

This short sentence makes it clear that there is a limit to how much moral transformation we can realistically expect.

Another passage that points in the same direction is 1 Corinthians 7, where Paul discusses marriage and singleness.

Generally speaking, in this chapter Paul clearly rates the unmarried life more highly for a Christian than the married life.

In v. 7 he says:

‘I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.’ (ESV)

When Paul says ‘as I myself am’ in this verse, he means unmarried as he is. And the fact that he implies here that being married and unmarried are both gifts from God doesn’t negate what he says about a preference for Christians being unmarried.

Similarly, in verses 32-34 he says:

‘The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband.’ (ESV)

There is no doubt that Paul has a preference for Christians being concerned with ‘things of the Lord’ rather than ‘worldly things’. So, all other things being equal, Paul clearly has a preference for unmarried Christians remaining unmarried.

However, other verses in the chapter show that all other things are not in fact equal. In v. 2 he says:

‘But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.’ (ESV)

Note the phrases ‘each man’ and ‘each woman’ in this verse. Even allowing for some hyperbole in the word ‘each’, it seems clear that Paul is thinking that because of sexual temptations it would be best for most unmarried Christians to get married. If possible, he would like most unmarried Christians to remain unmarried, but he realises that sexual temptations make this unrealistic.

My point is that Paul is making a remarkably big concession to human weakness here. We might have expected him to say something like this:

It is better for unmarried Christians to remain unmarried. And if you are struggling with celibacy, look to the Holy Spirit’s empowering and transformation. Expect God to cause you to rise above your struggles and temptations.

But Paul doesn’t say this. Instead, he implies that if Christians are struggling with celibacy, it would be good for them to get married, even though this means that they won’t be able to have such wholehearted devotion to God. And he thinks that most Christians will actually be in this group!

So Paul clearly has very limited expectations of how quickly Christians are going to be transformed by the Spirit to gain sexual self-control.

This is another passage, then, which clearly implies that there is a limit to how much moral transformation we can realistically expect.

Summing up

There are many other biblical passages that could be used to make the points I have made in this article. Basically, the Bible is clear that as we live our Christian lives, we should be expecting God to transform us morally for the better, but this is typically a slow process.

On the one hand, where we have moral weaknesses, we mustn’t resign ourselves to thinking that these will continue for the rest of our lives.

But on the other hand, if we don’t see dramatic progress, we shouldn’t be discouraged. Instead we should persevere, fighting forward.

 

See also:

Getting the Balance between Expecting Too Little and Too Much from Prayer

The Importance of Taking Steps to Avoid Temptation

The Importance of Learning All We Can from Sins and Mistakes

What Does 1 John Mean When It Says That Christians Do Not and Cannot Sin?

Monday, 9 December 2019

Christian Healing Ministry Should Be Free for Those in Need

We know from the Gospels that when the Lord Jesus was on earth, supernaturally healing people formed a big part of His ministry. The apostles and non-apostles also joined Him in healing work (e.g., Luke 9:1-6; 10:1-12). Then, later, after the Lord had ascended to heaven, apostles and non-apostles continued with this work (e.g., Acts 3:1-10; James 5:14-15). 

Nor should we expect anything different today. The idea, accepted by some Christians, that God ceased working healing miracles sometime in the first century is a big mistake and fits very poorly with the Bible. 

For a defence of the position that healing ministry should take place throughout the Christian era, see my article: God Wants to Use Christians in Miracle Work Today. 

Jesus and the early Christians 

Something that we need to understand clearly about the healing ministries of Jesus and the early church is that there is no evidence that they ever charged people for this. Healing ministry was free for those in need. 

In fact, we are told in Matthew 10:8 that when the Lord sent out the twelve to heal, He said to them: 

‘Heal those who are ill, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, expel demons. Freely you received. Freely give.’ 

Nothing in the New Testament leads us to think that any early Christian ever acted outside this principle of giving freely to people who needed healing. 

It is true that some who were helped then chose to give financial or practical support to those who had helped them (e.g., Luke 10:8). But there is no evidence that Jesus or early Christians ever charged people for ministry or that they put any pressure on people to give them money or anything else. Instead, they gave freely out of love, without asking for anything in return. 

Those today who charge for healing ministry 

Something that really gets under my skin is Christian healing ministries today that charge people for healing sessions. 

There are several things wrong with this: 

(1) Those who do this are failing to follow biblical practice. 

As I have noted, in Matthew 10:8 Jesus commands the twelve to give healing ministry freely, and there is no good reason for thinking that Christians today shouldn’t also follow this command. 

Importantly too, the Bible teaches us how to act not only by giving us commands but also by giving us the example of the early church to follow. And nowhere in Scripture is there any suggestion that any early Christian ever charged anyone for healing ministry. 

(2) Love is right at the heart of the Christian faith, and love involves giving freely to people without expecting anything in return. 

I suspect that many of those who charge for healing ministry have a poor understanding of the love of God or the love that is required of believers. 

(3) No healing ministry today is going to result in everyone who is ministered to being healed. And when people are not healed but charged a fee anyway, it often greatly damages the reputation of Christians and the Christian faith in the eyes of non-believers. 

(4) Many of those who seek healing ministry are unable to work due to illness or disability. This means that those who receive this ministry are often among the poorest in society. 

There is something especially nasty about people claiming to be Christian healers who charge money from suffering people who are poorer than themselves. 

(5) Healing ministry requires faith (e.g., Matt 17:19-20; James 5:14-15), and it is ironic that those who charge people money to do this ministry seem to have such little faith that God will meet their financial needs. 

Those today who put pressure on people to give money 

There are many in Christian healing ministry today who don’t go as far as charging for healing sessions, but who nevertheless put pressure on people to give money. 

All too often, the websites of healing ministries try to persuade readers who are seeking healing to donate money. Sometimes this is even done on the home page. And frequently suggestions are made about how much people should give if they are able. 

This sort of practice is not as bad as actually charging people for healing ministry, but it still leaves a very bad taste in the mouth. It also goes wrong in all five of the ways that I listed above. 

Workers deserve wages 

It is true that workers deserve wages (e.g., Luke 10:7; 1 Tim 5:18), and this is a principle that applies to healing ministers as much as to any other Christians. 

I don’t intend in this article to discuss how healing ministries are funded. However, I will say that if people who have received healing ministry really do want to give to those who have helped them without being charged or pressured, there is nothing wrong with that. This is what we find in Luke 10:8 and by implication in Matthew 10:10. 

What healing ministers should never do, however, is charge people who are seeking healing or pressure them to give money, whether before or after they have received ministry. 

Some suggestions 

Here are a few suggestions for how healing ministries can operate in the area of finance: 

(1) As I have said, a healing ministry should never charge or pressure people for money. 

If this means that the ministry can no longer function, then stop the ministry. Take it as a sign from God either that He doesn’t want this ministry to exist, or that He wants to pause it until it can operate without charging or pressuring people for money. 

(2) If possible, on the website of the healing ministry don’t even have a link that people can click on to donate. 

I understand that this will not always be possible, and I don’t want to condemn those who do have a link for donation. But if the ministry can get by without asking for donations, that is a great thing to do. 

(3) Where a website does have a link for donation, make it as discreet as possible. 

(4) When people click on a link for donation, have a few paragraphs that say something along the following lines: 

(a) Explain that you would love not to ask for donations, but you really do feel that you need to do this. 

(b) Stress very strongly that healing ministry is free and that no one is under any pressure whatsoever to give money, whether before or after receiving ministry. 

(c) Give no suggested figure for a donation. 

(d) Say that you would rather a person doesn’t give than gives reluctantly. 

(e) Suggest that people who receive ministry and who would like to donate wait a few months until after the ministry, to make sure that they still feel the same way. 

(5) Take a decision that everyone in your healing ministry who is paid for this work will have a personal income that is lower than the average income for people living in that area. Say on your website that this is your policy. 

Drawing people to Christ 

As God’s people, one of our big purposes is to draw people to Jesus Christ and the salvation that is in Him. 

When Christians give freely out of love to people in need, including to those who are ill or disabled, this is bound to draw some to Him. 

By contrast, charging people for healing sessions or pressuring them to give money is bound to put some off coming to Him. Everyone involved in healing ministry needs to make sure that they don’t fall into this trap. 

 

See also: 

The Importance of a Good Reputation in the Eyes of Non-Christians 

God Wants to Use Christians in Miracle Work Today 

The Importance of Ministering to People Afflicted by Demons 

Is It Always God’s Will to Heal Christians?

Wednesday, 16 October 2019

Does God Still Give the Gift of Speaking in Tongues? Part 2

Part 1 of this article can be found here. 

 

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED 

In part 1 of this article I argued that the Bible fits better with the position that God continues to give the gift of speaking in tongues than with the view that He ceased doing this long ago. 

I will now move on to look at objections that are made by those who say that God no longer gives this gift. I am confident that each objection can be answered adequately. 

I mentioned at the beginning of the article that 1 Corinthians 14 refers to two different kinds of speaking in tongues. First, there is speaking in tongues for strengthening the individual Christian. And second, there is the tongue plus interpretation method of strengthening the local church.

As I also noted, the second kind of tongues is really just equivalent to a prophecy. So the objections that are levelled against the existence today of this kind of tongues are almost exactly the same as the objections that are levelled against the existence today of the gift of prophecy. 

In another article, ‘Every Christian Should Desire the Gift of Prophecy’, I have given answers to objections to the existence of the gift of prophecy today, and I don’t want to repeat all that here. Readers who are interested can find part 2 (the relevant part) of that article here. 

In what follows I will concentrate only on objections that are made to the existence of tongues for strengthening the individual Christian. So in the following discussion, when I refer to the gift of tongues, I will be thinking specifically of this kind of speaking in tongues. 

Some of the objections will overlap each other to a certain extent, and so will some of the answers. 

Objection 1: 

The gifts of the Spirit listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, including speaking in tongues, are what are known as ‘sign gifts’. These gifts were given by God in the first decades of the church to act as signs pointing to the truth of the gospel message while the church was getting established. However, once the church was established, sign gifts no longer had any place in God’s purposes. 

Answer: 

There are several big problems with this argument: 

(1) ‘Sign gifts’ is not a biblical term, and even the concept is not a helpful one. 

To begin with, some of the gifts listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, such as distinguishing between spirits (v. 10), don’t really seem to have all that much to do with pointing to the truth of the gospel message. 

Furthermore, even gifts that do often point to this have other purposes too. 

For example, let’s think for a moment about the healing miracles that we read about in the book of Acts. This book refers to some supernatural healings that served to confirm the gospel message (e.g., in Acts 3:1-10; 8:5-7; 9:36-42). However, this was not all that these miracles did. They also helped to build up those who were already saved in the faith. And there is no doubt that part of God’s reason for working these miracles was simply because He loved people and wanted to free them from suffering. To say that the Christians who worked the miracles in Acts had ‘sign gifts’ is an unhelpful description. These miracles were much more than just signs. 

(2) To the extent that some gifts of the Spirit did function in the first century as signs pointing to the truth of the gospel, there is no reason whatsoever to think that these gifts would function any differently today. The fact that the church is now well established is beside the point. 

(3) There seems to be an unspoken assumption in this argument that God wants to do the minimum amount of giving gifts that is possible. The argument seems to suppose that after the first few decades of the church, God said to Himself: 

‘Phew! Finally! The church is now established enough that I don’t have to give gifts like tongues any more. What a relief!’ 

But why would we assume that God wants to give these gifts as little as He has to? There is no good reason. 

(4) It is a least questionable whether the gift of tongues for strengthening the individual Christian should be understood as a sign at all. It is true that in 1 Corinthians 14:22 Paul describes tongues as a sign for unbelievers. But the focus in this verse is on tongues that are spoken out loud in Christian gatherings. Tongues for strengthening the individual are normally a private thing. 

Objection 2: 

The gift of tongues was useful for a time when there was no New Testament. However, once the NT was completed, tongues no longer had any place in God’s purposes. 

Answer: 

Again, there are big problems with this argument: 

(1) Those who argue in this way seem to be assuming that there is much more of a difference between the first century and today than there really is. 

In the first century, Christians had the Old Testament and the apostles’ teaching ministries. Today we have the OT and the NT. The difference between then and now is not that great, because the NT is full of the apostles’ teaching. So if the gift of tongues was useful in the first century to complement the OT and the apostles’ teaching, it makes sense to think that it would be useful today to complement the OT and the NT. 

(2) The gift of tongues for strengthening the individual Christian is a mysterious thing that involves a deep work of the Spirit to build up that Christian in the faith. The fact that the NT exists is really beside the point as far as the usefulness of this gift is concerned.

Objection 3: 

Christians who say that God still gives the gifts of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, including tongues, also accept Pentecostal theology on baptism in the Holy Spirit. This theology claims that God usually baptizes Christians in the Spirit at some point after their conversion. However, the Bible teaches that Christians are baptized in the Spirit at conversion. Therefore, we should reject the idea that gifts are for today. 

Answer: 

It is true that Scripture teaches that Christians are baptized in the Spirit at conversion (1 Cor 12:13). Nevertheless, there are some serious mistakes in this argument. 

(1) It is simply not the case that all Christians who say that God still gives the gifts of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 also accept Pentecostal theology on baptism in the Spirit. Many who say He still gives the gifts reject this theology. 

Some major figures in present-day evangelicalism who say that gifts are for today but reject Pentecostal theology on Spirit baptism are D. A. Carson, Wayne Grudem and Sam Storms. 

Should we accept that the gifts are for today? Absolutely! 

Should we side with Pentecostal theology on baptism in the Spirit? Absolutely not! 

Whether gifts are for today and whether Pentecostal theology on Spirit baptism is correct are two separate issues that mustn’t be confused. 

(2) This argument makes no sense anyway. Basically, the argument says that because a group of people believe something false, then another belief they have must also be false. But this is illogical. Just because Pentecostals make a mistake about baptism in the Spirit, it doesn’t follow that they must be wrong to say that God still gives the gifts of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10. 

Objection 4: 

Between the end of the 1st century and the beginning of the 20th, orthodox (i.e., non-heretical) Christians never claimed to be able to speak in tongues. This shows that it was always a temporary gift. It seems very strange to think that God allowed this gift to die out and then chose to revive it in our time. Therefore, it makes sense to think that all claims to be able to speak in tongues today are false. 

Answer: 

I can only assume that those who use this argument haven’t taken time to research the matter. In fact, there have been more than a few claims of speaking in tongues by orthodox believers between the 2nd and 19th centuries. 

For example, Irenaeus, who lived c. 130 – c. 202, wrote: 

‘. . . we hear many of the brothers in the church, who have prophetic gifts, and who speak all sorts of tongues by the Spirit, and who also bring to light the secret things of people . . .’ (Against Heresies, book 5, ch. 6) 

Similarly, Tertullian, who lived c. 155 – c. 240, in a challenge to the heretic Marcion, wrote: 

‘. . . let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer – only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has come to him . . . Now all these signs can be provided by my side without any difficulty . . .’ (Against Marcion, book 5, ch. 8) 

It is true that Tertullian speaks here about interpretation of tongues, which has to do with tongues used to strengthen the local church. And, as I have said, in this part of the article I am defending the existence today of tongues used to strengthen the individual Christian. Nevertheless, if one sort of tongues existed in Tertullian’s day, it seems highly likely that the other sort existed as well. 

It is not just in the first centuries of the church that there were claims by orthodox believers to have spoken in tongues. For example, there is good evidence that some Huguenots, i.e., French evangelicals, claimed to be able to speak in tongues in the 18th century. 

The idea, then, that between the 2nd and 19th centuries no orthodox Christians claimed to be able to speak in tongues is simply not true. 

Objection 5: 

If God continued giving the gift of tongues throughout the Christian era, we would expect Him to have done this as often as He did in the 1st century. However, it can’t be denied that there have been relatively few claims of tongues in the following centuries as compared to the 1st century. Therefore, this suggests that the claims there have been after the 1st century were all fakes or wishful thinking. 

Answer: 

It is surely true that for at least most of the Christian era there have been relatively few claims of tongues as compared to the first century. However, there are two important things to consider here. 

(1) The Bible often makes receiving things from God conditional upon believing. The believing is very important. So when a Christian doesn’t believe that God wants to give a gift of some sort, it seems that He would very probably not give that gift, even if He wanted to. 

I would suggest that part of the reason why there has been a lack of tongues throughout church history is because most Christians wrongly believed that God had no desire to give this gift. 

(2) We need to recognise that the Holy Spirit is thoroughly mysterious, and it is a mistake to think that He must have chosen to do things in roughly the same amounts in each century of the church. 

In 1 Samuel 3:1 we are told that when Samuel was a boy, ‘the word of the LORD was rare in those days’. Similarly, I think that even under post-Pentecost, New Covenant conditions, it is not all that surprising if there is considerable variation in how much the Spirit operates supernaturally from time to time. 

That is not to say that over the centuries God has been inconsistent in His requirements or promises. In all centuries of the church He has wanted Christians to seek the ability to speak in tongues. But it is much too simplistic to say that we should expect Him to give gifts in uniform amounts in each century of the church. 

Objection 6: 

The principal Reformers in the 16th century, most notably Martin Luther, John Calvin and Huldrych Zwingli, believed that God stopped giving the gift of tongues in the first century. Because these men were giants of the faith, it makes sense to think that their views on this point were correct. 

Answer: 

It is true that the Reformation was extremely helpful in some very significant ways. But to assume that the Reformers were correct on everything of importance can’t be right for the simple reason that they differed among themselves on a number of key issues. 

There are unfortunately many Christians today who follow certain people in church history without questioning their beliefs nearly enough. This is really a form of idolatry and it should be carefully avoided. What matters is what the Bible teaches, not what certain Christian leaders have believed in the past. 

Objection 7: 

In churches that claim to use the gift of tongues, there is often a frenzy of emotion in worship services. These churches also frequently support false teaching, such as the so-called ‘Prosperity Gospel’. 

Answer: 

It is true that many churches which use the gift of tongues make some big mistakes, as do all sorts of churches. 

However, to say that abuses and mistakes show that this gift is not given today makes no sense. By the same logic, we should avoid anything that is abused or about which mistakes are sometimes made. 

For example, teaching from the Bible is something that is often abused in our day. Every Sunday there are thousands of so-called Christian leaders worldwide who say they are teaching from the Bible, but who are actually promoting heresy in one way or another.   

But this doesn’t mean that all teaching from the Bible is false! It doesn’t mean that leaders on a Sunday should abandon giving biblical instruction to their flocks. And the same applies to tongues. To say that abuses and mistakes mean that there is no place for tongues today is illogical. 

Wherever there is something that is from God, Satan will almost always try to counterfeit it. He will also tempt Christians into using gifts, including tongues, in ways that are less than edifying. And part of what it means to be a sinful human being is to make mistakes. So even Christians with good intentions and motivations can get things wrong at times.   

Therefore, bad reports surrounding tongues in no way mean that God doesn’t give this gift today.   

Summing up 

Despite the fact that the objections I have listed are commonly used, none of them manages to convince that God no longer gives the gift of speaking in tongues in our day. 

THE BIBLE COMMANDS US TO SEEK SPIRITUAL GIFTS INCLUDING TONGUES 

In part 1 of this article we saw that the Bible most naturally suggests that the gift of tongues will continue until Jesus returns. And in part 2 we have looked at a series of unconvincing arguments against this position.

All things considered, it makes sense for us to accept that God still gives the gift of tongues. 

But we should do more than just accept this. We are actually under obligation to seek gifts of the Spirit, including tongues, from God: 

In part 1 I commented on 1 Corinthians 14:1, where Paul tells the Corinthian Christians: 

‘Pursue love, and eagerly desire spiritual gifts . . .’ 

As I noted in my comments, the spiritual gifts Paul refers to in this verse certainly include the gift of tongues. And I noted too that this command to desire gifts including tongues would have applied to all Christians at the time 1 Corinthians was written. 

Whenever there is a biblical command that applied to all Christians at the time of writing, by far the most natural way of understanding it is as a command that applies to all Christians in all centuries of the church. Therefore, anyone who claims that today we shouldn’t follow a biblical command that applied to every Christian when it was written needs to have a very strong argument indeed to support their view. 

In part 1 we saw that the Bible doesn’t lead us to believe that God has ceased giving the gift of tongues. On the contrary, we found that the evidence actually points in the other direction. 

This means that we have no excuse for not obeying the command in 1 Corinthians 14:1 to eagerly desire spiritual gifts. And for those who don’t currently speak in tongues, this will include desiring this gift. 

Let all of us, then, who are following Jesus as Lord, be faithful in heeding what the Spirit says in this verse of Scripture. We dare not disobey it. 


See also:

A Time to Avoid Speaking in Tongues 

Every Christian Should Desire the Gift of Prophecy 

God Wants to Use Christians in Miracle Work Today 

Baptism in the Holy Spirit Takes Place at Conversion


Does God Still Give the Gift of Speaking in Tongues? Part 1

In 1 Corinthians 14 the apostle Paul spends some time teaching the church in Corinth about the spiritual gift that is commonly known as speaking in tongues. 

TERMINOLOGY 

In the phrase ‘speaking in tongues’, ‘tongues’ just means ‘languages’. So in modern English, ‘speaking in languages’ is actually a much better way of referring to this gift. And in modern English versions of the Bible too ‘speaking in languages’ is a better translation of the Greek. 

Nevertheless, because the phrase ‘speaking in tongues’ is so widely used, I will stick with this term in this article. And when referring to an individual example of using this gift, I will use the term ‘speaking in a tongue’. 

WHAT THIS GIFT IS 

When someone speaks in a tongue, they speak in a language that they don’t understand with their mind. The person’s spirit connects with their mouth to form words that have meaning, but their mind is not involved. 

Paul describes this situation in the context of prayer in 1 Corinthians 14:14: 

‘For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unproductive.’ 

THE PURPOSES OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES 

In 1 Corinthians 14 Paul refers to two purposes of speaking in tongues. 

Tongues for strengthening the individual Christian 

First, he says that this gift is used for personal spiritual strengthening.

In verses 4-5 he states: 

‘4 The person who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the person who prophesies builds up the church. 5 Now I wish that you could all speak in tongues . . .’ 

Paul is explicit here that speaking in a tongue serves to build up a Christian who uses it. And he is clear that he would like all believers to be able use this gift for this purpose. 

Similarly, in v. 18 he says: 

‘I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.’ 

Again, Paul stresses the usefulness of speaking in tongues for the purpose of personal spiritual strengthening. 

Tongues for strengthening the local church 

The second purpose that Paul gives for speaking in tongues is to strengthen the local church.

In v. 5 he tells his readers: 

‘The person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets so that the church might be built up.’ 

Here Paul is thinking of a situation where someone speaks a message from God in a tongue and then interprets the incomprehensible language into language that those listening can understand. The result will be that the listeners are built up in the faith. 

Similarly, in v. 13 he tells his readers: 

‘Therefore, the person who speaks in a tongue should pray that he can interpret.’ 

And then in v. 27 he says: 

‘If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be two or three at most, in turn, and someone should interpret.’ 

This use of speaking in tongues referred to in verses 5, 13 and 27 is really the equivalent of a prophecy. In a prophecy, a prophet speaks a message from God to the listeners in language that they can understand. In a tongue plus interpretation, the same result is achieved in two stages. A Christian speaks a message from God out loud in an unknown language, and then either the same believer or another interprets this into understandable language. 

This is all extremely mysterious. Personally, I have no idea why God would ever want to use this method of tongue plus interpretation, when it might seem that a simple prophecy would suffice. 

INCREASE IN ACCEPTANCE OF THIS GIFT 

I think in most of church history, the majority view among Christians has been that God ceased giving the gift of tongues at some point in the first century. 

A big change came at the beginning of the twentieth century, however, with the origin of the Pentecostal movement. Since then, an increasing number of believers have accepted that God still gives this gift today. In fact, I think it would be right to say that at the present time a sizable majority of evangelicals worldwide accept that God still gives this gift. 

Nevertheless, there remain more than a few Christians who deny that He does this, and they use various arguments to try to make their case. 

I believe that God does give the gift of tongues today, and in what follows I will argue for this position. 

BIBLICAL TEACHING 

When thinking about any topic, the most important thing to do is see what the Bible has to say about it. Scripture is our God-given ‘Manual for the Human Life’, and what it teaches is key. So we will begin with this. 

1 Corinthians 13:8-10 

A good place for us to start is 1 Corinthians 13:8-10. 

Here the apostle Paul states: 

‘8 . . . if there are prophecies, they will be done away with. If there are tongues, they will cease. If there is knowledge, it will be done away with. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when what is complete comes, what is partial will be done away with.’ 

In this passage Paul is referring back to the gifts of the Spirit he has been talking about in chapter 12. He clearly believes that a time will come when speaking in tongues, prophesying and other gifts will no longer be used. And he seems to imply that this will happen ‘when what is complete comes’. 

Those who claim that God no longer gives the gift of tongues (and some other gifts of the Spirit) today often argue that the time Paul is referring to when he says ‘when what is complete comes’ is the point at which the New Testament was completed. 

This, however, is simply not a credible interpretation of the passage. ‘When what is complete comes’ is certainly not referring to any experience that can be found in this world of ours. Rather, it has in view a time after Jesus has returned to earth. 

The context of verses 8-13 confirms this. In these verses, Paul contrasts a present state and a future state. The present state involves knowing in part and seeing indistinctly. The future state, which begins when what is complete comes, involves knowing fully and seeing face to face. Paul is clearly contrasting the present experience of Christians with our future state of existence. So ‘when what is complete comes’ is definitely referring to a time after Jesus has returned to the earth. 

Therefore, when Paul says that partial things like speaking in tongues will be done away with ‘when what is complete comes’, the most natural way of taking his words is that this gift will continue until Jesus returns. 

It is true that Paul is speaking very concisely here. And it is true too that his main focus in this passage is not on precisely when the gifts of the Spirit will cease being used. I am not saying that this passage proves outright that God still gives the gift of tongues today. But Paul’s words certainly fit better with this gift continuing until Jesus returns than ceasing centuries ago. 

1 Corinthians 14:1 

Another verse that points in the same direction is 1 Corinthians 14:1. Here Paul instructs the Christians in Corinth: 

‘Pursue love, and eagerly desire spiritual gifts . . .’ 

The ‘spiritual gifts’ Paul refers to here certainly include the gifts he has listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10, one of which is speaking in tongues. 

The first thing to note about the command to desire spiritual gifts in 14:1 is that it must have applied to all Christians in around 55 AD, when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. Clearly, this command was given to all the Christians in Corinth. And there is no reason whatsoever for thinking that Paul or God would have wanted anything different in other churches at that time. We should therefore have no doubt that when Paul wrote this letter God wanted all Christians to eagerly desire spiritual gifts, including the ability to speak in tongues. 

Next, we need to give due weight to an argument from probability: 

If we consider the rest of the New Testament, it contains hundreds of commands that would have applied to all Christians at the time they were written. I am not aware of a single one of these that no longer applies to Christians today. 

If it is correct that every other NT command that applied to all Christians at the time of writing still applies today, then, all other things being equal, it is highly probable that the command in 1 Corinthians 14:1 also still applies. And if it applies today, then we can infer that God is still giving spiritual gifts like speaking in tongues. 

Even if I am mistaken and there are a few NT commands that applied to all Christians when they were written that no longer apply today, the number of these is surely very few. So the argument from probability would still carry some weight, although admittedly not nearly so much.

Acts 2:16-18 

Another relevant passage is Acts 2:16-18. Here Peter, referring to the speaking in tongues that occurred on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was given, quotes the prophet Joel: 

‘16 But this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel: 

17 “And it will be in the last days”, says God, “that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and daughters will prophesy, and your young men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my slaves, both men and women, in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they will prophesy.”’ 

Peter is saying that the events of the day of Pentecost are the beginning of the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy in Joel 2:28-32. Joel prophesied that God would pour out His Spirit, says Peter, and this has now come into effect. 

This passage refers explicitly to prophesying, visions and dreams. I will say something about what the passage suggests about these things before moving on to talk specifically about speaking in tongues. 

First, we need to note the time reference in this passage. It says that God will pour out His Spirit, and prophecies, visions and dreams will take place, ‘in the last days’. The last days here is the period of time that began with the giving of the Spirit and will end with the return of Christ. 

When this passage says that God will pour out His Spirit ‘in the last days’, and that this will involve prophesying, visions and dreams, the most natural way of taking the words is that these activities will take place throughout the last days. If they occurred only in the first century, then the pouring out of the Spirit in the way that the passage describes would only have happened in the very first part of the last days. And that does seem a rather awkward interpretation of the text. 

Furthermore, to think that prophesying, visions and dreams no longer occur today also fits poorly with what we know as ‘salvation history’. 

This is a term that refers to how God’s overall plan for human beings has unfolded in various ways in different periods of history. 

For example, the calling of Abraham and the giving of the Law at Sinai involved radical new departures from what had come before. 

Later, the ministry of John the Baptist brought something radically new, as did the earthly ministry of Jesus. 

The day of Pentecost was also a huge change from what had come before. On this day the Spirit was given, in fulfillment of Old Testament promises of the New Covenant. 

Crucially, however, since Pentecost there has been no critical point in salvation history. We are still in the same New Covenant era that began on that day. 

In view of this, it would be unexpected, to say the least, if God no longer spoke through prophecies, visions and dreams. After the Spirit had descended on the day of Pentecost, this would be like Him deciding to partially reascend to heaven part-way through the New Covenant era. 

There are two good reasons, then, for thinking that prophesying, visions and dreams continue today. First, ‘in the last days’ most naturally suggests this. And second, today we are still in the same period of salvation history that began on the day of Pentecost. 

Of course, the revelation that God gives in prophecies, dreams and visions today is not remotely on a par with biblical revelation. Nor does it have universal application. Instead, it just concerns specific situations that individual Christians or individual churches are facing at the time. 

Although v. 17 makes no explicit mention of speaking in tongues, it makes sense to think that what this verse implies about prophesying, visions and dreams it also implies about the gift of tongues as it is described in 1 Corinthians. There are two reasons for this: 

First, speaking in tongues is precisely the thing that leads Peter to quote Joel’s prophecy. It is true that the kind of speaking in tongues in Acts 2 is not exactly the same as either of the kinds of tongues mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14. And it is true too that the day of Pentecost was a unique event. Nevertheless, it is a fact that it is tongues that leads Peter to refer to God’s pouring out of His Spirit. 

Second, the pouring out of the Spirit that Joel prophesied surely involves all the gifts of the Spirit listed in 1 Corinthians 12:8-10. And speaking in tongues is on that list. 

It is reasonable, then, to think that what the verse implies about prophesying, visions and dreams it also implies about the gift of tongues as it is described in 1 Corinthians. So, because the verse most naturally implies that prophesying, visions and dreams continue throughout the Christian era, the same is true of speaking in tongues. 

Acts 2:16-18, then, counts as biblical evidence that God still gives the gift of tongues today. 

The Longer Ending of Mark’s Gospel 

Another relevant text for our purposes can be found in the so-called ‘Longer Ending’ of Mark’s Gospel. 

We know that in the first centuries of the church, this Gospel circulated with a number of different endings. The earliest surviving copies of Mark end at Mark 16:8. However, most old copies of Mark contain the Longer Ending that a majority of English-speaking readers of the Bible will be most familiar with, ending at what is known as Mark 16:20. There are also old copies that have a variety of other different endings. 

In the Longer Ending there is a passage that refers to speaking in tongues. The text that is commonly referred to as Mark 16:15-18 reads as follows: 

‘15 And He [Jesus] said to them [the eleven], “Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to all creation. 16 The person who has believed and has been baptized will be saved. But the person who has not believed will be condemned. 17 These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will expel demons, they will speak with new tongues, 18 with their hands they will pick up snakes, if they drink anything poisonous it will in no way harm them, and they will place their hands on those who are ill and they will get well.”’ 

Discussion of which ending or endings of Mark should be considered Scripture is complex. Personally, I prefer the view that this passage shouldn’t be regarded as Scripture. But I don’t want to get into a long analysis of the issue here. 

Instead, let’s look at this passage under two scenarios, firstly assuming that it is Scripture and secondly assuming that it isn’t. 

So, first, let’s suppose that the passage I have quoted should be regarded as Scripture. 

If we do this, it should be clear that the passage strongly implies that speaking in tongues is something that continues throughout the Christian era: 

In v. 15 Jesus refers to evangelism in ‘all the world’ and ‘to all creation’. So from His point in time He is clearly thinking about evangelism that will continue on long into the future around the world. 

Therefore, when in verses 16 and 17 He refers to ‘the person who has believed’ and ‘those who have believed’, by far the most natural way of taking His words is as a reference to Christians of all times and places. Those who say that in these verses Jesus is speaking only of Christians living in the first century or thereabouts are taking an extremely unnatural interpretation of the text. 

Verse 17 says that speaking in tongues is a feature of those who believe. (This doesn’t mean that it is a feature of all who believe, simply something that many Christians do.) So, because those who believe are Christians of all times and places, speaking in tongues is something that we can expect to be a continuing activity of the church. 

If these words are Scripture, then, this passage strongly implies that speaking in tongues is something that we should expect in every century of the church. 

Second, let’s suppose that this passage is not Scripture. 

If we do this, it still seems reasonable to regard the passage as quite strong evidence that speaking in tongues continues throughout the Christian era: 

Importantly, there is no doubt that in the last 2000 years large numbers of Christians have understood the passage we know as Mark 16:9-20 to be part of Scripture. In fact, it seems highly likely that most believers have regarded this passage as Scripture. 

The vast majority of these Christians have known nothing about early copies of Mark or even that this Gospel once circulated with a variety of endings. Most, or at least very many, Christians in the last 2000 years have been led to believe that Mark 16:9-20 is Scripture, and they have accepted this in good faith. 

It is surely very unlikely that God would have allowed so many Christians to have an ending of Mark’s Gospel that misled them. If He had, then through no fault of their own they would have been reading as Scripture something that was actually misdirecting them. But we would expect God, in His love, not to have allowed this to happen. 

So even if Mark 16:9-20 is not Scripture, it makes sense to think that it contains good Christian teaching. 

We saw above that if we take this passage as Scripture, it strongly implies that speaking in tongues is something that continues throughout the Christian era. Therefore, even if we don’t take the passage as Scripture, because it apparently contains good teaching it still supplies us with quite a strong piece of evidence that we should expect speaking in tongues today. 

Hebrews 2:3-4 

One passage that is often said to show that God no longer gives the gift of tongues is Hebrews 2:3-4, where the author writes: 

‘3 . . . how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? This salvation was first announced by the Lord, and then it was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 while God added His testimony by signs and wonders, various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to His will.’ 

Those who say that the gift of tongues has ceased often argue in this way: 

In this passage the author wants his readers to understand what an enormously important thing the Christian message of salvation is. To help him make his point, he says that in the time of the first generation of Christians God testified to the truth of this message by signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Spirit. However, if the author believed that these things still occurred at the time of writing, we would expect him to have concentrated on God testifying to the message by them in the present rather than in the past. Therefore, this passage strongly implies that gifts like tongues no longer existed at the time of writing. 

It is certainly true that the author’s intention in this passage is to stress how important the message of salvation is. And I do admit that this argument isn’t one that should be quickly dismissed. Nevertheless, there are a few points to make here. 

(1) The passage is too indirect and brief for us to reach clear conclusions on what the author believed about the existence of tongues and other gifts at the time of writing. 

(2) It is possible that the author felt that after mentioning Jesus and the first generation of Christians, he had done enough to make his point. 

He begins by telling them that no less a person than Jesus began announcing the message. And then he goes on to say that people who heard Jesus themselves were the ones who passed on the message to the author and the readers. He also notes that God accompanied this passing on of the message with miracles and gifts of the Spirit to help validate it. 

Maybe, having said all this, he thought that he had said enough to make his point that the message of salvation is extremely important. If so, then potentially he could have chosen not to move on to speak about the time of writing, even if he was aware that God was still giving gifts of the Spirit like tongues in his day. 

(3) I think it is quite possible that at the time this letter was written, miracles and gifts of the Spirit may have been a lot less common than they were earlier in the first century. And this could have motivated the author in Hebrews 2:3-4 to focus on miracles and gifts among the first generation of Christians. 

I will say something about the frequency of tongues throughout church history in part 2 of this article. 

(4) In Hebrews 6:5 the author refers to Christians generally as people who have ‘tasted . . . the powers of the age to come’. 

This could well suggest that gifts of the Spirit like tongues were ongoing at the time of writing. 

(5) Even if this passage does more naturally seem to suggest that the gift of tongues had ceased at the time of writing, it is still the case that several other passages most naturally suggest that this gift has not ceased, as we have seen. 

Summing up 

There are other Bible passages that have some relevance for the topic we are considering, but I have given the most important of them. The above discussion has shown that on balance the Bible fits better with the position that God continues to give the gift of speaking in tongues than with the view that He ceased doing this long ago.

 

The second and final part of this article can be found here. 

 

See also: 

A Time to Avoid Speaking in Tongues 

Every Christian Should Desire the Gift of Prophecy 

God Wants to Use Christians in Miracle Work Today 

Baptism in the Holy Spirit Takes Place at Conversion