The doctrine of tongues according to second century Church Father Irenaeus.
Irenaeus, according to Wikipedia โwas a Christian Bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, then a part of the Roman Empire (now Lyons, France). He was an early church father and apologist, and his writings were formative in the early development of Christian theology. He was a disciple of Polycarp, who was said to be a disciple of John the Evangelist.โ
The following English translations are found at the New Advent website which has a digital reproduction of the Ante-Nicene Fathers by the Christian Literature Publishing Company in 1885.1
The English translation has not been proofed against the Greek or Latin.
Against Heresies (Book 3, Chapter 12:1)
When the Holy Ghost had descended upon the disciples, that they all might prophesy and speak with tongues, and some mocked them, as if drunken with new wine, Peter said that they were not drunken, for it was the third hour of the day; but that this was what had been spoken by the prophet: “It shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, and they shall prophesy.”(3) The God, therefore, who did promise by the prophet, that He would send His Spirit upon the whole human race, was He who did send; and God Himself is announced by Peter as having fulfilled His own promise.2
Against Heresies (Book 3, Chapter 17:2)
This Spirit did David ask for the human race, saying, โAnd stablish me with Thine all- governing Spirit;โ(12) who also, as Luke says, descended at the day of Pentecost upon the disciples after the Lord’s ascension, having power to admit all nations to the entrance of life, and to the opening of the new covenant; from whence also, with one accord in all languages, they uttered praise to God, the Spirit bringing distant tribes to unity, and offering to the Father the first-fruits of all nations. Wherefore also the Lord promised to send the Comforter,(13) who should join us to God.3
Against Heresies (Book V, Chapter 6:1)
For this reason does the apostle declare, โWe speak wisdom among them that are perfect,โ [1 Corinthians 2:6] terming those persons โperfectโ who have received the Spirit of God, and who through the Spirit of God do speak in all languages, as he used Himself also to speak. In like manner we do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God, whom also the apostle terms โspiritual,โ they being spiritual because they partake of the Spirit, and not because their flesh has been stripped off and taken away, and because they have become purely spiritual.4
It is clear from his writings here that the gift of tongues was the ability to speak in a foreign tongue. The purpose of the gift was to bring all peoples and nations into one accord.
- Ante-Nicene Fathers: Vol. 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1885.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight. Irenaeus is translated by Alexander Roberts and William Rambaut.
- http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103312.htm. The original source is MPG Vol. 7a. S. Irenaei. Contra Haereses. Lib III:12:1. Col. 892.
- http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103317.htm. The original source is MPG Vol. 7a. S. Irenaei. Contra Haereses. Lib III:17:2. Col. 929
- http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103506.htm. The original source is MPG Vol. 7b. S. Irenaei. Contra Haereses. Lib V:6:1. Col. 1137
Great website! But I think your personal bias is revealed in your comment.
The comment is simply restating in short form the author’s definition of the gift of tongues.
Not really. You yourself are interpreting Irenaeous as able to represent all glossolalic activity in the Early Church. Paul says in First Corinthians that he who speaks in a tongue speaks not to man but to God, for no understands him. He also suggests that tongues are the “language of angels”. It is by far unclear that the tongues of the Early Church is not synonymous with what we see in Pentacostal circles, today. Why even do this if you’re going to be so biased and badly researched? This could have taken you 5 minutes to research.
There is much more content in the Gift of Tongues Project that substantiates my statement. I encourage you to the look throughout the site as it has many answers to your assertions.
Cheers, Charles
Thank you! I agree with you. This doctrine has been so butchered up by man. My opinion is as Paul stated in scripture. There should be an interpreter there if someone speaks in tongues. In todayโs society I have yet to see one interpreter when Iโve heard someone speak in tongues. So either way, scripture isnโt being followed when this is done. If we want to claim something is real, we must follow it fully.
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. – 1 Corinthians 13:1
The tongues of angels refer to the different languages spoken on earth since the destruction of the tower of Babel. As Moses says in Deuteronomy [:]: โGod has set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of angels.โ It is therefore the task of each angel to defend the distinction of nations. The tongues of men on the other hand are languages which we learn; they do not come to us naturally. .
– Severian of Gabala
Can you show me one place in the Bible where an angel needed a translator? Can you show me one place in the Bible where the “language” of angels is mentioned besides 1 Corinthians 13? The Testament of Job mentions a gift that Job’s daughter received from God, and that is the only place someone could ever point to. We have to go back to the book of Acts where it is first mentioned as see what it really was. Also, the whole idea of the gifts is mentioned 1 Corinthians 12:7 “For the profit of all…” If it is not building up the body it cannot be a gift. There are no gifts that are not for building up others.
the language of angel was hyperbole on pauls part . when angels appeared to humans what language did they speak ?
https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ref-rev/13-4/13-4_gumerlock.pdf
In this short work by Francis Gumerlock, read the 3rd-6th centuries a.d. church fathers testify that their knowledge of the gift of tongues, as given in the New Testament, was real human language of the nations around the Apostles/Early Church.
To be an authority of any form of practice, be it a skill, a sport or a technique, one must not only experience but practice it as time is a good test of many things.
I have been faithfully walking alongside my Lord Jesus, the Son of God, reading the Word of God diligently for 38 years, leading personally hundreds to Christ.
I have also been speaking in tongues for 34 years since and it is a part of my prayer life. I have written dozens of book on the Christian faith.
Unless one speaks in ‘Tongues’, the views expressed are from the outside, similar to a fan of golf who does not play golf at all.
One has no authority to speak about tongues unless one speaks too.
Speaking in tongues creates a conflict of interest when writing on the subject. One must validate his experience or else admit to having erred and to having sinned against the Spirit by having attributed a false, psychologically induced experience to Him.
In contrast, one who has not spoken in tongues can be impartial. He remains more qualified to objectively interpret what we KNOW to be the words of God. One need not be a Mormon to criticize fatal Mormon doctrines; one need not be a woman to criticize abortion; and one need not have spoken in tongues to interpret relevant scriptures objectively.
Whether one interprets scriptures in light of traditions as Catholics do, in light of experience as the Pentecostal does, or in shadow of lack of experience as atheists do, one elevates subjective opinion above scriptures. That is a workman who needs to be ashamed, wrongly dividing the Word.
If what you are saying is true, then one with the gift of teaching and /or preaching cannot teach on tongues if they do not have that gift also…
This argument is weak to say the least. Does one have to be a murderer to speak against murder? Does one have to be homosexual to speak against homosexuality?
Matthew 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. The Greek word for โvain repetitions is battologรฉล a proverbial stammerer) and G3056; to stutter, to blubber nonsensical repetitions, to chatter.
This describes the modern day pentecostal – A proverbial stammerer. Same spirit as the heathen.
Does a Physician have to have cancer to treat a cancer patient? Does a police officer have to be a criminal himself to understand one? Can a follower of Christ not warn a Satanist of his ways, unless they themselves were former Satanists at one point?
I don’t agree with you, Timothy. When I was an elder at the Hiding Place in Westwood, CA, we had several people speak in (real or imaginary) tongues. When finished, they would wait until someone interpreted. The senior pastor (an elder), a second elder and I had our regular meeting in private. I suggested since many of the people in our congregation believed they spoke in tongues and a few believed they had the gift, they accepted a proposal that I presented to them.
If someone wanted to speak and or interpret tongues in a church service or Bible study, they would need to come before the three elders and exercise their gift. But first we would have to identify at least two people that had the gift to interpret. So the idea was that we would have two interpreters sit in on the elder meeting with pen and pad to write their interpretation of whomever was going to speak in tongues. After they finished, the two interpreters would turn in their interpretations separately. If the interpretations matched, we would then allow the person with the gift to speak in tongues before the church.
Well, nobody came forward claiming either gift. Instead, I got a lot of pushback, one claiming that I was “putting God in a box,” and that was their reason why the Holy Spirit wasn’t manifesting tongues in the church any longer. Well, that theological hogwash didn’t wash with me or the other elders who had both previously been part of the Kenneth Hagin Word of Faith movement, which our church embraced before I began attending.
In addition, over the years when someone would approach me about joining the in speaking with tongues, I would tell them that I hadn’t experienced the gift, had prayed for the gift more than once, but it never manifested for me. Nevertheless, I was sincerely open to it. I’ve offered a few times to record a person speaking in tongues, offering to take it to a linguist to get it interpreted. I’ve never had a taker.
Also, I visited a church with a Pentecostal friend of mine. As the pastor was prophesying in the first person, as though it was the Father or His Holy Spirit speaking, he spoke in a modified King James version language, adding a “thus saith the Lord,” and a few other KJV words mixed with modern English. The pastor looked at me from the pulpit, prophesying to me saying something like, “My son, I know you are struggling with believing that spiritual gifts are manifesting, etc., etc. Since I was a visitor, it would have been nice if God said, “Lance Hunter Voorhees… Well, being that God knows my name and the pastor didn’t, he went with “My son.”
Another time on a homeless mission, three of us engaged in a conversation with a Vietnamese woman (with very broken English), who was not yet a believer but was open to praying for God to help her believe. When our first lady started praying in English for the Vietnamese woman, the other woman started praying in tongues, which caught me off guard and I opened my eyes. I saw the Vietnamese lady open her eyes and look towards the tongues lady. The lady being prayed for had a confused look on her face because she couldn’t make heads or tails out of what the tongues lady was saying. What a perfect time for the true gift of tongues to have been manifested…but, I can only find people who exercise tongues only in their “personal prayer language.” How convenient.
The Misunderstood Doctrine of Speaking in Tongues: A Historical Perspective
Throughout church history, few doctrines have been as misunderstood and misrepresented as the doctrine of speaking in tongues. This confusion traces back to the early church, notably to the writings of Irenaeus in the 2nd century. Today, modern interpretations of tongues generally fall into two categories:
1. Supernatural Ability to Speak Foreign Languages: Some believe that speaking in tongues refers to a miraculous ability to speak in foreign languages that the speaker has never learned.
2. Incomprehensible Babbling: Others perceive it as producing sounds or utterances that are unintelligible and have no discernible meaning.
Both interpretations deviate significantly from what the Bible and early church fathers described.
Irenaeus on Tongues
Irenaeus, a prominent early church father, provided critical insight into the practice of speaking in tongues in his work Against Heresies. He mentioned that people within the church, empowered by the Holy Spirit, spoke in various languages, bringing forth hidden things and mysteries of God. He wrote:
“We do also hear many brethren in the Church, who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of God” (Against Heresies 5.6.1)
True Nature of Biblical Tongues
The true nature of biblical tongues, as evidenced from early church history and scripture, aligns more closely with known languages used to communicate God’s revealed truths rather than mystical or unknown sounds. Tongues were actual languages that could be understood by those with the Holy Spirit’s guidance, yet remained incomprehensible to those without it. This is evident in the early church’s practice where tongues served the purpose of edifying the church by unveiling divine mysteries.
The Modern Misinterpretation
Today’s interpretation of tongues, especially in charismatic and Pentecostal circles, often diverges from this historical and biblical understanding. The modern view tends to emphasize either a miraculous linguistic ability or ecstatic, unintelligible speech. However, such practices were neither described nor endorsed by early church fathers like Irenaeus.
The Importance of Wisdom and Edification
The Apostle Paul emphasized that tongues should be used with wisdom for the edification of the church. He instructed that speaking in tongues must be accompanied by interpretation to be beneficial to the congregation:
>But in the church, I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue” (1 Corinthians 14:19).
This underscores the principle that the purpose of tongues is to convey God’s wisdom and revelation clearly and intelligibly.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the doctrine of speaking in tongues has strayed far from its biblical and historical roots. Irenaeus’s testimony from the 2nd century supports the view that tongues were real, comprehensible languages used to communicate divine truths. Modern practices often miss this essential aspect, leading to widespread misunderstanding and misapplication of this spiritual gift. It is crucial to return to a biblically grounded and historically informed understanding of tongues to preserve the integrity of this gift as intended for the edification of the church.
Yes, your conclusions do parallel Christian history. Thanks for sharing.
None of these comments seem to answer the question. What was Paul describing in
1 Corrinthians 14:2?
For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit, he speaks mysteries.
This is obviously Prayer speaking unto God and not man. It is also clear that this is not meant for man to understand. Paul states you speak not to men.
I see three distinct types of tongues in scripture.
#1 on the day of Pentecost. This gift crosses language barriers for the furtherance of the Gospel.
#2 Heavenly revelation from God. This you should pray for the interpretation to be given to you. This is the tongue that requires interpretation. #1 requires no interpretation. This is also a tongue that can be spoken to men and revelation can be interpreted by man.
#3 This is what is described in 1 Corrinthians 14:2
not to man, but to God.
It is distinctly different in that way. It is not understood by the speaker or any other man. It is also not intended to be.
As the bible said… All types of different tongues.
There seem to be three distinct tongues described in scripture. I do not see any way around that truth. Praise God. So it is with truth. Not understanding it fully makes it not less true.
Type one from man to man in a known language. No interpreter needed.
Type two God to man. Divine revelation. Interpretation needed from God to speaker or to another man.
Type three is a prayer language. It speaks to God and not to man and no man understands.
Thanks for the feedback. I am working on a commentary on I Corinthians 14 that is part of Volume three of the book series which should be out early in the New Year. I hope the commentary will satisfy what you are looking for.