This doesn’t surprise me much. I have seen a shift in the SBC pastors that I know from a cessationist position to an “open but cautious” position. I speak in tongues in terms of the private prayer language and I have found that a number of my SBC friends are comfortable with saying “tongues is a present-day gift for some, but not all--if you speak in tongues that is ok with me!” This shift falls in line with Doug Banister’s declaration in Word and Power Church that the war between charismatics and cessationists is over.

With 500 - 600 million Pentecostal/charismatics (P/C) around the world, it is not suprising that they are having an effect on the larger Evangelical body of believers. Where I have neen P/Cs get into trouble is when then push the issue of tongues too much. Where they hold it out as the ultimate litmus test of spirituality. I don’t think speaking in tongues makes me better than anyone else in the Body of Christ. I pray in tongues because I need help!

What I do find interesting is that there are so few books written about tongues as the prayer language. Jack Hayford’s The Beauty of Spiritual Language is one. They Speak with Tongues is another. Outside of that there is nothing really out there. I think that a level headed book by a P/C with a solid biblical theology would be helpful. Larry Hart has pretty good systamatic theology called Truth Aflame: A Balanced Theology for Evangelical and Charismatics, which deals with the issue of tongues, but I think we need more good writing from the P/Cs on the subject.

Derek

Derek

I find this VERY interesting. My wife and I resigned from the SB int’l missions board in part due to their adopting a policy against tongues. My alma mater (Southwestern Baptist Seminary) last year decided not to employ faculty who believe tongues is a valid gift for today. I don’t doubt the other six SB seminaries follow suit. The article points out that it is the older pastors who are more open to tongues, while current SB seminary students and recent grads are least likely to support it. It appears as if the leadership of my denomination is bent on stamping out this phenomenon.

I use my prayer language daily, and find it extremely beneficial personally.  I do agree that there are few balanced books on the subject, and Jack Hayford’s “the Beauty of Spiritual Language” is the best I’ve read.

I just did a teaching on the subject a few weeks ago (leading up to Pentecost Sunday) and you can download the message at our site: http://www.clctoday.org/tinleypark/sermons.html

Another great book on the subject is “Spirit and Power” by William Menzies.  It is published by Zondervan and is a resource for anyone looking to understand the theology behind speaking in tongues and “Spirit baptism” from a more scholarly perspective.

The next thing will be the private/special revelation that homosexual practices are acceptable. According to recent polls that is the new trend in thinking among Ammericans. Apparently the subject of tongues follows the trend toward an emotional/personal understanding of scripture rather than a historical consensus arrived at by exegetical means. The tongues thing is IMHO a reaction of a society which values personal opinion above all else. Isn’t this just an expected post-modern response, i.e. personal truth/revelation? I mean no offense to those who see this differently.

This is a definitely a dividing issue in the modern church (in America, at least). I come from a mildly Pentacostal background, and am currently in a charasmatic denomination, albeit a more balanced church (by “balanced” I simply mean in terms of time spent on different teachings, not correctness of teachings). I’ve never had a “spiritual language.” Not for any lack of prayer, faith, or effort. It just hasn’t happened, hasn’t been given, or however you want to phrase the lack. This doesn’t mean I disbelieve in the theology that this gift exists, and that it still exists today, but it necessarily forces a different perspective on the theology. Especially in the area of the “second baptism” theology. Also, I would absolutely agree that this one spiritual gift is on a pedstal in my denomination (at least in my region of SoCal). In my denomination at least, the real contention is not that this gift exists, but that it is supposed to be for all, that it is the evidence of this second baptism. I’ve heard all the explanations and seen all the Scriptures, and I continue to study. Teachings on this gift, especially in the youth camps, border on indoctrination; understanding, from my view, isn’t really valued. Of course, the hurtful part is the spiritual inferiority projected onto those who don’t have the gift. Whether this is intentional (e.g. “You just aren’t able to be an effective Christian") or unintentional (e.g. “Tongues are like ‘power tools’; they really help you be more effective for the Kingdom!"), it’s just inevitable that some kind of inferiority will be projected onto those who “don’t have it.” Whether that is right or wrong is a different issue. Anyway, I guess the emotionalism seems to be the practical foundation of this practice, instead of a Scriptural understanding--that’s what bugs me. If a new part of the body of Christ is accepting spritual languages, awesome. But I’d just like to hear their reasoning for it.

In the denomination I’m in, not only is it a requirement that you believe in a particular tongues theology, but that you operate in this gift. I’m sure other denominations require that you don’t believe in it and that you don’t operate in it! Hmm… perhaps the eye has gotten off the ball…

Keith wrote:
PUH-leeese. Give it some thought first, will you? Was it “post-modern” for Moses to have chat with a flaming bush, for Ezekiel to see a wheel within a wheel, or Stephen to see Jesus standing in heaven? Personal truth / revelation is at the core of Christianity, since we boast of a God who would be otherwise unknowable but that he chooses to reveal himself to us. And did that very God not give what is described in the bible tongues as a ‘gift?’

Whether one concludes tongues are a human language or ecstatic utterance ("of angels,” 1Cor 13.1), whether one believes tongues have ceased from use or are still in use, to equate the recognition of a gift of God with acceptance of blatant sin (homosexuality) is really, really bad, dude. Enough.
Thanks Keith for the insightful comments. Obviously “PUH-leeese” is one of those ecstatic utterances, which only you and God understand.
I was just trying to point out the argument over tongues seems to fit the “true for you but not for me” of the post -modern world where everyone just decides for themselves what truth is and it will all be OK. But surely there is a definitive interpretation to these scriptures that can be understood by anyone. It seems to that if we cannot decide what is the correct interpretation then who can? The denominations that embrace homosexuality or any other sin do so using the same bible we all use and just interpret it to their own purpose. I am not trying equating tongues with sin only using it as an example of the self serving interpretations of scripture.
As for the inspired writers of scripture you mentioned, well I believe their interpretation has been divinely ratified where as yours and mine have not.
When a denomination (SBC) decides to follow an interpretation and one disagrees then one should do as you did get out.

Robby wrote: <br>
“I was just trying to point out the argument over tongues seems to fit the “true for you but not for me” of the post -modern world where everyone just decides for themselves what truth is and it will all be OK. But surely there is a definitive interpretation to these scriptures that can be understood by anyone.”<br><br>
This may be true sometimes, but I think this theological issue is kind of a different animal. Other theological issues, like salvation, the Trinity, etc, are somewhat theoretical in nature, abstract. Tongues is very experiential, it’s something you do. While the others are handled solely by study of Scripture and other intellectual means, a large component of understanding or believing in tongues is experience, because tongues is something you do, something you experience. So it seems to me that if you haven’t experienced tongues, well, it’s going to be a factor in your thinking. It’s something we ought to be understanding about; we shouldn’t adopt the “something is wrong with you, then” attitude toward our fellow Christians.

<br><br>
Also, I’d agree with Nora that this issue is a “non-essential”, as defined by Augustine. So, it shouldn’t be a point of division and contention among believers. But, at the same time, to momentarily step back on my worn-out soapbox, I think this division is inevitable as long as Christians don’t value, and aren’t taught to value, understanding of Scripture and God. Not that we can attain that completely, but it, I think, would be seeking Him with your mind. But, of course understanding is not everything and can be it’s own downfall, so let’s ultimately stand with love.

And also say lots of bad words to show everyone we’re “with it.”

I have been personally studying the matter of tongues, having attended many different denominations for years before regualrly attending a Souhren Baptist church now.  I read recently that the modern tongues has only been in operation for about a hundred years or so, since the first “Great Awakening,” as well as literature on the pretribulation rapture.  I tend to trust the centuries of our forefathers in the faith, though the Bible should always be our first route of study about anything.  I was encouraged to speak in tongues, so I question if it really is considered a gift, but more like Romans 8:26 - “groanings” coming from the spirit.  After all, when crying out to the Lord. one can only think of so many words (even for a woman!) for someone, something, the nation, etc.  I liken it to comtemplative prayer (prayer without words) and so I have often prayed this way privately or if in the company of others who do so.  The real proof of the pudding (faith) I’ve seen is not who can hold their arms up higher, speak in tongues or fall and stay on the floor long enough.  It’s in their actions - the fruits of the Spirit - the lack of complaining in a church or gossipping - and instead their purity and generally doing the Word of God.