Demystifying Tongues | What Does the Bible Say?

A New Age “light worker” starts speaking “light language,” and it sounds uncomfortably familiar. If you’ve ever heard modern tongues and wondered, Is that the Holy Spirit, human emotion, or something darker, we go straight to the Bible and refuse to dodge the hard parts.

We unpack speaking in tongues through 1 Corinthians 12–14 and Acts 2, including why Paul’s first test for spiritual manifestations is content about Jesus, not external behavior. Terrence brings a careful, historically cessationist frame, and we pressure test it against the text: Are tongues always known human languages, or is Paul describing ecstatic speech that requires interpretation? We also dig into devotional tongues vs public tongues, why “no one understands” matters, and how love and edification are meant to govern every gift.

Then we slow down in Acts 2 and look at what’s spoken versus what’s heard, the singular “sound,” and the details in the Greek that suggest the miracle may be happening in the listeners as much as in the speakers. From there, we talk purpose: why pray in the Spirit, how faith can be built beyond the mind, and why spiritual power without discernment can turn dangerous fast.

If you’re Pentecostal, charismatic, cautious, or just curious about spiritual gifts, this will give you language, categories, and guardrails for discernment in a time of rising supernatural claims. Subscribe, share this with a friend who’s wrestling with tongues, and leave a review with your biggest question or pushback so we can keep the conversation going.

Transcript

Cold Open On Counterfeits

SPEAKER_03 0:07

So there there is a demonic tongues, and how do you reconcile what what's happening biblically with what's happening in the occult? And I think that the answer is this is that the the awakening of the gift of tongues is essentially a spirit, whether it's the Holy Spirit or another spirit, awakening something inside of us to commune with them.

SPEAKER_02 0:30

Yeah, well done.

SPEAKER_03 0:31

And out of that comes this expression of intimacy that we call tongues. So there is a real thing and there is a fake thing. And being able to determine which is which can sometimes be crucial.

SPEAKER_01 0:49

In a

Season Three Kickoff And Why Now

SPEAKER_01 0:50

time when fate can feel flat, distracted, and disengaged, the Blood and Oil podcast cuts through the noise to reveal the raw, unfiltered work of the Holy Spirit. Welcome to the Blood and Oil Podcast.

SPEAKER_03 1:11

What's up, everybody? Welcome to Blood and Oil. It's been a couple weeks. We've had uh a little bit of uh time off as we just wrapped up season two. Um, thank you to everyone for hanging out with us. Uh, we was looking at Metrics the other day, and we're we're being played in over 50 countries, and um just uh blessed to see what it is that that God is doing, thankful to everybody um who's who's hanging out with us. Uh had a a desire, was was praying and thinking about how to start this season off, and was watching a uh clip on Instagram, uh or maybe it was maybe it was Facebook. Anyway, it was a reel where this woman who's a new age practitioner and uh what they call in in this zone light workers, which Zane, if is there can you can

New Age Light Language Explained

SPEAKER_03 2:05

you give us a little bit of context for this light worker thing?

SPEAKER_00 2:08

Yeah, just you know, everything is love and light in the new age. Um and so the idea being that, you know, the goal of of the new age practitioner is to ascend toward the light, towards source, back to what we would call God, um, you know, by way of Jesus and the Holy Spirit. But they call, you know, the universe, source, whatever it might be, but it's love and light is essentially the the the descriptors of it. So a light worker is someone who is on that path of ascension, who is doing their best to align their chakras and raise their vibration and get back to the place where it's a self-deification. So a light worker is someone who's on the path of of light, basically.

SPEAKER_03 2:48

So I'm I'm listening to this um clip from YouTube or or Instagram, one of the social media feeds, and this woman is what's called a light worker, and she begins to speak in what she calls light language. And uh I'm Pentecostal, charismatic, was baptized on the Holy Spirit when I was 10 years old, um, speaking tongues, all that stuff, prayer language, etc. And the the crazy part is that what she was doing is very similar to what the Pentecostals' charismatics practice in what we call ecstatic speech. And it occurred to me that um that this is exactly why some of our cessationist brothers see these things and they're like, that's not Jesus. And so what I wanted to do today is break open the Bible, look at the passages, let the Bible inform us. Um, Terrence is gonna take one side, I'm gonna take the other side. Um, and so he's, you know, him and I, we agree it in, you know, the gifts of the Holy Spirit exist um and and they're to be practiced today. And uh so he he's gonna kind of push back from the opposite side because he's familiar with that zone. I I am too, but uh, but he

Why Tongues Stirs So Much Doubt

SPEAKER_03 4:05

he he's got his toes in there regularly. And uh just wanted to take a look at at what the Bible says about the gift of tongues, kind of dispel some of the the misconceptions and uh hopefully get some some grounding, especially with the increase of the supernatural and the the increase of the deceptions that are coming. We know that lying sons and wonders are coming. And so what is what is tongues? What is fake tongues? What is demonic tongues, what is real tongues, these these questions that I think are very apropos, especially as we we see the supernatural continue to rise. Um so that that's kind of where uh where where my my head and my heart is at today. Um Terrence, any opening thoughts?

SPEAKER_02 4:47

Yeah, just a clarification. So I'm neither a cessationist or a somebody who um I'm I'm very careful. I'm what you might call, and then this is my coin here, a careful cessationist. So I'm definitely on the one side, whereas you're on the opposite side on this matter. Um, I'm not against these things being uh true and um applicable today. I'm just very careful because of the uh history for sure.

SPEAKER_03 5:10

Yeah. So what he means is that there's a lot of errors out there and there's a lot of excesses and and totally warranted to want to be careful, totally warranted to to want to make sure that we guard the expression. Um, you know, the same thing happened with Jonathan Edwards, the revivals broke out, and he's seeing all these manifestations and he's trying to figure out okay, what's God, what's the flesh, what's demonic, what's not. I I need to know what is genuine and what isn't, what what is of the right kingdom, what is of the wrong kingdom. And so the these questions are they're not new. They're it's nothing new. Um it they've been around since the birth of the church. So I I I think probably the the best place to start is uh what what has historically um been viewed as as the gift of tongues. And the gift of tongues, uh or at least the expression of what's called tongues existed before the New Testament existed before the church. And it's essentially what what what has been known in history is what's called ecstatic speech. And it it sounds like gobbly gook to listeners, to people who hear it. This is something that was known in the cults, it was known in in the um the mystery religions before Pentecost, all this other kind of stuff. And so what part of the problem has been that this thing that seems to be practiced in um in the right, in in the cults and and in occultism, etc. Um, now makes its way into the church. And so there's been a very long and protracted desire to try to separate what's what happens in the church from what happens in the cults, and and that's a good thing, that's not a bad thing. Um, the question is though, what what does the Bible

Paul’s First Test For Manifestations

SPEAKER_03 7:04

say about it? And I think probably the the best place to start is first Corinthians chapter 12 uh and verse one. And anyone's got any questions, please go ahead and and feel free to ask in the chat. Um, so Paul says this he says, Concerning spirituals, brothers, I do not want you to be unaware. So his desire is he doesn't want us to be ignorant. Praise God. He wants us to be informed, he wants us to know what it is that he's talking about. And apparently they had asked him because he's now addressing what seems to be concerning these things, I don't want you to be ignorant. You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols, however it was that you were led. So he starts with this is how you used to do it, when you were in the the ashrams and the cults and and worshiping false idols, verse three. Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says Jesus is accursed, and no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit. Now notice, he does not tell them when it looks like this, when it sounds like this, when the act is like this. His first standard of judgment is content. What is the content of the revelation? So if someone's prophesying and they say Jesus isn't God, that's not the Lord. He doesn't say if they shake or if they if they twitch or if they fall down. He he doesn't use any external manifestations at all in any of his of his standards of judgment. He will go on to say first and foremost, it is spiritual, not natural, doctrine, the gift of discerning spirits, the judgment of the brethren, edification of the body. These are these are the standards by which we are to judge a manifestation of the spirit. Okay, uh Terrence, why don't you go ahead and share what has been the typical cessationist understanding of what tongues has been or is presently?

Cessationist Case For Known Languages

SPEAKER_02 9:03

Yeah, sure, of course. So typically, and just to keep it short, um the understanding is this that the gifts, whether it be tongues, prophecy, etc., etc., was uh for a specific dispensation of time, namely the church age, it was to vindicate or rather validate the apostles' um calling. In other words, these people were called by God, Jesus Himself, and therefore to validate their calling, they were given or endowed with certain powers as to prove their uh authority. And one of those things were tongues. Um of course, with regards to tongue, a slight uh, I suppose, um parenthetical thought should be added here. Uh the group from which I come, right, the background in my theology would say tongues was definitely part of those gifts, but those those those tongues specifically were languages that we saw arcing back to um Genesis, where God dispersed different languages in the whole uh b Tower of Babel scene. And so again, my background would say tongues were languages, not just like you said earlier, gobbliguk or like um freestyle sort of talk, but rather again real languages, perhaps unknown languages known at the time of the uh uh apostles, perhaps like Scandinavian, African, etc., etc., etc., but nonetheless real languages. And and that in a nutshell is what uh cessationists would teach.

SPEAKER_03 10:23

Yeah, so the the those who are kind of middle of the road who are um uh continuationists but are not charismatic or Pentecostals, so they believe that the gifts have continued, they would call that missional tongues. And what they mean by that is that these are known human languages and they point to the day of Pentecost as correlating to what what Terrence had said, Genesis chapter 11 with the Tower of Babel event, in that the the scattered or dispersed uh people groups who were represented on the day of Pentecost heard the gospel in their own language. And so that this is what we would call xenolia, um theologically meaning a a speaking in a another known or or unknown to the speaker, but known human language. Right. So the the question becomes okay, if if that's true, then 1 Corinthians 14 depicts an entirely different gift.

1 Corinthians 14 And “No One Understands”

SPEAKER_03 11:26

So if you go to 1 Corinthians 14, he says, pursue love, verse 1, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy. 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. So it seems from the text that either A First Corinthians 14 is speaking about an entirely different gift than Acts chapter 2, and there are those that that believe that, or B, there's a different understanding of Acts chapter 2 because when he says no one understands, the term is Udes and it means no one. If this is a known human language, somebody would understand. In particular, Acts chapter two, if this passage, 1 Corinthians 14 and verse 2, correlates to Acts chapter 2, none of those men should have understood. So how do we reconcile that? How how how do we understand tongues then in 1 Corinthians 14 and Acts chapter 2? Terrence, did you have a uh a way in which your or the those that you've historically been with have typically tried to answer this?

SPEAKER_02 12:42

Yeah, yeah. That's I think this is really good because I I I look forward to being uh taught myself. But nonetheless, the way in which I understood this based upon my presupposition uh my own presupposition was that um he's not saying that um nobody altogether is can't understand it, but rather nobody's there to understand it. Rather, so so in other words, if nobody's hearing it, kind of like the whole philosophical question, if a tree falls into a forest and no one's here to hear it, does it make a sound? Well, yes, it makes a sound, but nobody hears it, so it doesn't make a sound in one sense. And therefore, what Paul is trying to convey in this particular text, based upon my background again, is that there's no one there to understand and or interpret, and therefore he's you know, he's speaking to himself. And rather than because again it goes into the context of the the chapter before, which is love, right? Um, the whole the whole thing that Paul's talking about in Corinthians, and again, this is specifically how I understand it based upon my theological background. We have to understand the context, namely love. And if nobody's being edified, it's not loving, therefore you're speaking to yourself. And I think that's how they would interpret it.

SPEAKER_03 13:39

Okay, so they're they're uh according to that position, then n no one understands means that it it's uh let me see if I can it's it this seems like hermeneutic hermeneutical gymnastics to me.

SPEAKER_02 13:54

Fair enough. But I'll try to make yeah, yeah. And I'm not I'm not saying I'm I'm concrete there right now. Yeah, I'm just saying, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 14:00

Yeah, because the entire context of 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14 is corporate. Paul, Paul would be then shifting to a a non-corporate use, which I do believe he does later because he says later in 1 Corinthians 14, um, he says, however, in the church. So he does have this idea of this non-church use of the gift of tongues. But if that's true, then that means that that tongues is not for another person, but for the person themselves. Right. So go ahead. I feel like you wanted to say something. So to me, that that would kind of preclude the missional idea of another language. Flesh that out for me. I want to make sure I get you. So I i if it's for me, why would it be in the language of another person for them? Right.

SPEAKER_02 14:53

And I think that's what I was trying to convey there. Okay, so let me go back and excuse me, let me go back and try to clean up what I was saying. So again, Corinthian, 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14, they're all in context. And the context there is, I think you would agree, love. And so when you said uh you talked about uh community or communical, um, there's this aspect that Paul's trying to convey that if you're not doing something, if your gifts, in other words, is not used in order to build somebody else up, your good your your gifts is not uh, you know, it's in that in that regard, it's not anything, right? Because the aim is to love, right? And so when he gets to verse 14, again, he says, pursue love, because that's what that was the whole chapter before, right? So he starts off where he left off, namely love, and he says, Pursue love and earnestly desire the spiritual gift, especially that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in tongues speaks not to men, but to God, for no one no one understands him. And he's so so the one when he says no one understands him, he's not saying that there's not somebody on the earth that who can't understand him, but rather in this particular context, he's saying there's no one there to understand him because the aim is love. And if therefore no one is there to understand him and also be built up because of the the tongues that he's speaking or prophesying to be specific, then it's of no use. Therefore, speak to yourself and edify yourself is how they would interpret it.

SPEAKER_03 16:08

Gotcha. Okay, so the I I think that the reason why that's problematic is because he later on clearly says, I think in if I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all, so that there is this individual use that he he commends. And so the only time that he denounces the use of tongues is if it's in a ministerial context and it's meant for other people. But if that's the case, then the no one has to mean somebody else, because that's that's the grounds for it needing to be interpreted. The grounds for it needing to be interpreted is that nobody understands. If it's a human language, somebody understands. That's my point. So if you're yeah, so so if it's a human language, you can't say no one understands.

SPEAKER_02 16:58

You can, again, and this is not something I'm not saying this because I necessarily agree, but just to be fair with the language, you can, in the same way, I can say all of us do the show together, and I'm I'm implying just you and I, not Zayn, because Zayn is not here, but all has a certain meaning in a certain context, just like no one. Every word we use, whether in no matter what language you use it in, has a context in which it's apropos to use it and wrong to you. You know what I mean? And so when he says no one, he doesn't mean no one altogether, that is to say, somebody on the island of Jamaica. Perhaps they could understand it, but he meant no one in the context in which he spoke. Therefore, keeping and keeping everything in context with regards to loving in the church to which to whom he's writing.

SPEAKER_03 17:35

Correct. So if tongues is a natural human language, then it is given it whether whether it's it's no one globally or no one locally, it doesn't matter because it takes a supernat an equally supernatural gift to interpret. Indeed. So if if tongues is Spanish and I'm speaking in Spanish and there's nobody around who speaks Spanish, then there obviously there needs to be an interpretation. But that presumes there's nobody there who can understand it. But the idea of missional tongues presumes that there's somebody there to understand it. Missional tongues, those who view missional tongues in Acts chapter two, is built upon the predication that it's a natural human language and that those there who heard it were there because they understood it. Do you see what I'm saying?

SPEAKER_02 18:28

I do see what you're saying, and that's a wonderful point. But to call it missional tongues, I think is a little bit of a misnomer because once you put a title on it like that, then you have to see it in context in that situation every time. Whereas I don't think the people on that side would say it's called missional tongues, specifically given as a missionary tool to make them hear their language. That was the case in Acts 2 for sure, but it's not missional in the sense that it's always missional. It's it's the the point isn't that it's uh some sort of evangelistic tool at that point. The point is they're hearing their language, which is a real language, is the greater point that they would make and not call it missional. Because once you put it in in the context of the the title to which you just called it missional, then you have to see it in that, and every time you see the word tongues, you have to think missional if you're trying to be consistent with what they believe. But they themselves wouldn't put themselves in that box. Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_03 19:12

So they they wouldn't say that the point of of speaking in tongues in Acts chapter two was the presentation of the gospel?

SPEAKER_02 19:18

They no, not actually no. The the primary point was to uh validate Joel's prophecy and to again vindicate the the uh apostles who they were. So of course there's secondary meaning uh happenings and all these things, but that wasn't the primary purpose, in other words.

SPEAKER_03 19:32

So in so then uh in that understanding, was what I've always heard from that camp was that um the point of tongues in Acts chapter two was to present the gospel in another person's language in in by people who did not speak that language, and that was the miracle that grabbed their attention.

SPEAKER_02 19:51

Is that not no uh so I would push back on that because not anybody from what I you know who I study would say that because primarily what happened in Acts 2 wasn't even the gospel being preached. Now, of course, it's correct. Right. So that's why I wouldn't say that anybody on my my side would say that. Now, of course, Peter preaches in order to get to the gospel eventually, right? Because he presents Christ at the end of this sort of judgmental talk, you crucified him and all this type of thing, right? And God vindicated him. So he gets to the gospel ultimately, but again, the people on this the side to which I'm familiar would not say that was the primary purpose. Again, it was to fulfill Joel's prophecy, which is why Paul Peter says, this is to um validate. Um I'm paraphrasing here, of course, what the prophet Joel spoke about when he said thus and so. Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_03 20:35

Yeah, yeah, no, and that that's interesting. That is a position I've never heard because is the all of the cessationists that I have engaged with or that I've read concerning tongues have all have all couched Acts chapter two as far as the presentation of the gospel in their native language. And one of the apologetics that I've always had is exactly your point. When you read the passage, it doesn't say that they heard the gospel in their language, it says that they heard the mighty deeds of God, and then Peter preached the gospel, which which either means cessationists since you know, in the last 25 years, since you know I've become a Christian and and done this, have have now begun to engage with the opposing sides critiques of their positions, which is probably what it sounds like they've done, which is good because that that means that that's a whole lot more accurate to the text than a lot of the the positions that I've heard um that have come out uh since the the early 2000s.

SPEAKER_02 21:35

To be fair though, to what you're saying, uh I've heard that too, but again, we're talking about primary and secondary and all all these points did in fact occur and is in fact of an apologetics they used to kind of validate their claims as to why they hold my position or whatever the case may be, but it's not the primary purpose of the um uh occurrence of uh Acts 2 or tongues and all of that. Again, the thing that they would Says the primary thing was the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, which the text says uh without any kind of equivocation. It's very clear in that regard. When you have a text that says this is too dot dot dot, then to say something other than that would be erroneous.

SPEAKER_03 22:13

Yeah, it would it would require hermeneutical gymnastics. Gymnastics, correct. Right, yeah. For sure. Okay, so 1 Corinthians 14, he says that in his spirit he speaks mysteries. So to my understanding, the nature of tongues itself is a is a it is done by the spirit, is not done by the mind, which I think you would agree. If if it is a a gift that is empowered by the spirit of God, then it is not of the natural man, requires it to be supernatural. And because it requires an equally supernatural gift of interpretation, then the understanding of no one understands means nobody present corporately. Correct. I would hold to that. I would agree with that, yeah. Yeah, so you you and I are on the same page as far as that goes. Um, thank you for representing the other position fairly. Uh, and being clear that again, you you don't necessarily hold to that position.

SPEAKER_02 23:07

Right, I'm vacillating between the two realities for for now.

SPEAKER_03 23:10

I know. That's that's because he loved me. Yeah, I do. Don't let everybody know your primary Bible guys of Pentecostal, bro.

SPEAKER_02 23:16

No, I have no listen, I I can say this before the whole world. I my my brothers in Christ is not boiled down to a specific doctrine. It's the the main thing. I keep the main thing, the main thing. The gospel. You hold to that, man. I love you for Jesus' sake. Amen. Amen. Just don't tell him you you come to me when you want to know what something says in the scripture. Well, you kind of let it out the bag now, bro.

SPEAKER_03 23:35

Chill. Okay, so here's what he says. He says, um, verse 13, for when I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful, which is the the point that we just had. And what does he mean by uh my mind is unfruitful or my my mind is unfruitful? He he goes to verse six through verse um verse 12, he tells us that speaking in tongues without interpretation is like an indistinct sound on a flute or a harp. So the the it seems that based on the context of 1 Corinthians 14, the core of what tongues is is something that's done by the spirit, it is not understood with the mind, and without interpretation, nobody understands, and it is an indistinct sound. Would that be that be fair?

SPEAKER_02 24:27

That would be my position. Well, that that's both position because that doesn't um you know hurt anyone, whether your side or my side. Here's why. Because suppose you were all of a sudden endowed with an ability to speak Mandarin or Cantonese, right? The Asian uh Chinese language, and you were doing this real time as we're talking now, you just broke into Cantonese. Well, you wouldn't understand the thing, and it would be indistinct to you, it would be strange to you. All these uh um uh how do you say um descriptive words would would would be apropos because you're it's weird. It's happening all of a sudden and you don't know what's going on. Um, so it's the same thing that Paul is trying, excuse me. Yeah, Paul is trying to convey here. It no matter what side you're on, we would all have the same sort of end conclusion. If you were suddenly endowed with an ability to speak something altogether different and you didn't know the interpretation of what she was saying, surely then the up the end conclusion would be the same. Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_03 25:19

Yeah, I I think I would add to though that his presumption is anyone hearing also presumes the same, because he he he goes on to say at at the you know at the playing of the horn, how does somebody respond and prepare themselves for battle? So the idea is very clearly not just the speaker, but also the hearer. And that's that would be the reason why at its core, I would I would argue, based on Acts chapter two, which we'll get to, that the the core expression of tongues is ecstatic.

SPEAKER_02 25:50

And when you say ecstatic, and break that down for me, do you mean like just repetitive speech or how how do you interpret it?

Ecstatic Speech And Tongues Of Angels

SPEAKER_03 25:57

I I mean a a a language of the spirit, is what I mean. Um and the so if you look at the T D, the theological dictionary in the New Testament, Kittle's TDT, and you you look at the words mind, you look at the words spirit, and you look at the word tongue, and you go and you you study those as far as the TDT goes, and the TDT is the the gold seal for lexical aids for the New Testament. Its contention is that even secular scholars, when looking at the Greek and understanding the history of of the terms, etc., the contrast of spirit and mind with the use of the tongue means ecstatic speech, meaning a speech that is unlike anything natural. And those on my side would say that's the tongue of angels that Paul's is talking about. Now, to be fair, when he says if I speak with the tongue of men or of angels, it is hyperbole.

SPEAKER_02 26:56

Yes.

SPEAKER_03 26:57

100%.

SPEAKER_02 26:57

Yes.

SPEAKER_03 26:58

He is intentionally overstating something in order to make a point. Whether I run five million miles or whether I run five miles, whether I eat a horse or whether I eat a hot dog, whether this this is clear. Yeah. Correct. This hyperbolic usage. However, the Jews of the first century and the Christians both believed that angels of different orders had different tongues. And they they contended for that. So when Paul says the tongue of angels, it is hyperbole, but it's hyperbole based on what they believed, not based on a hypothetical usage. Does that make sense? So there's uh a um what's up, guys? There is a uh a pseudopigrapha, is what we would call it, or a apocryphal work called the Testament of Job. Now it's not scripture, so we're not arguing that you use it as scripture, we're not arguing that you that you you go and try to find revelation from it. All we're saying is this, this is what they believed. So when you're asking about statements that are made in the New Testament, like the Genesis chapter six, that is quoted by both Peter and Jude, as the first century Jew and the second second temple Jew understood it with the the uh fallen angels, the sons of God, right? In that same stuff, there is what's called the Testament of Job, where Job gets three magic girdles that he gives to each of his daughters, and it enables them to understand the different dialects of the angels. So not saying that they have that, not saying that it it's a thing, saying that when he says that, that's what they understand. They they believe that that's a a real thing, that there is a real thing called the tons of angels. Now, I believe that there is. Um but what that means is that yes, it's hyperbolic, but it's hyperbolic real, not hyperbolic hypothetical. Make sense? Yes, based upon some cultural historical evidences and things like this. Exactly. And again, not arguing that we use it as scripture, that's you know, not what we're saying.

SPEAKER_02 29:08

That's one thing I would say that I like about the other side. Um their staunch stance on if it's in scripture only, then I will kind of, you know, fall on this side. I could never fault a person for saying I want to um not rely on my own understanding, or rather collectively vis-a-vis like um culturally, historically, etc., but I want to rely wholly on the word of God. I could never fault somebody for saying that because I think that's true wisdom. Amen.

SPEAKER_03 29:35

100%.

SPEAKER_02 29:36

100%.

SPEAKER_03 29:37

Okay. So what is the the direction of tongues, which I'm I'm really glad that you you kind of broke down that that other way of viewing Acts chapter two, because I I I'm glad that that that position exists.

Tongues As Worship Directed To God

SPEAKER_03 29:50

I think it's a whole lot more biblical than someone saying that they heard the gospel in their own language. And the direction of tongues as well in 1 Corinthians 14 is verse 4 first uh 16, he says, otherwise, if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say, Amen? At what you're giving of thanks, since he does not know what you're saying, you're giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified. And he he describes it as praise, as a hymn, as a song, as worship. And so the direction of tongues seems to be from me to the Lord, which would groove with Acts chapter two, where it says that they heard the magnificent deeds of God in their own language. Okay.

SPEAKER_02 30:34

Um just one slight pushback though, and I think you would actually agree with me. So again, whether you end up on your side or mine, the issue is this all things ultimately is supposed to do to the glory of God. The same Paul said in the same book, 1 Corinthians, I think it's 10. 10 31. Whatever you do, whether you, whether you eat or drink, do it all to the glory of God. So it again, tongues, everything ultimately exists for the glorification of God. It has a secondary purpose, of course, and I think it's important to say that, which is why I'm leaning on this side. The secondary purpose is to glorify God specifically by edifying the church or the brothers within the body. And so when we speak in tongues and there's nobody there to interpret, it's better than to speak to God yourself. In that way, you're not harming anybody and you're getting the blessings of speaking in tongues, whether again heavenly language or unknown language at the time, isn't really the issue. But the issue, again, is to glorify God specifically by edifying the body. And I think that's Paul's greater point.

SPEAKER_03 31:27

Yeah, I would agree. And there's one qualification that I would make for that, um, and and it's this that there's a difference between ministerial tongues and devotional tongues. And Paul's statement, however, in the church, I would speak more words with my mind than a thousand words in tongues, means that he he conceives of a use that's meant for other people and a use that's meant for the person privately. That's that is my understanding, the entire context of 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14 is gifts that are used for the benefit of other people. The question is, does he leave room open for the expression of the gift where it's just for the individual? And it seems that he does. The ones that are meant for the body need to be interpreted. And the ones that are not meant for the body, I don't believe need to be interpreted at all. So for instance, if you were in church with me and we were standing together and I was over there speaking in tongues, and it obviously wasn't for everyone else, then you know obviously that's not for everyone. That's between me and the Lord. The one caveat that I would give is that there is the potential for people to stumble in churches who walk in who are who do fill the role of the ungifted, which is what Paul says, the one who is ignorant or ungifted who walks in, isn't he going to say you're all crazy? You know, you don't say you're all crazy because someone's speaking in Spanish. You all say you say they're all crazy because they're babbling.

SPEAKER_02 33:02

Well, if you never heard Spanish before ever and you walked in and somebody spoke in Spanish, you would assume they were babbling still.

SPEAKER_03 33:09

So see, I would push back on that and I would say no, because when I go, when I go to a church and I hear somebody speaking in a different language, I don't think that they're crazy.

SPEAKER_02 33:17

That's because you're coming with a presupposition, though. You're coming from the position you're look, if you take if you strip away all of your idiosyncrasies and everything that makes you believe what you believe, you would certainly have the same sort of um uh I don't I don't think so.

SPEAKER_03 33:30

Because I I like at Home Depot, if I walk around the corner and I hear somebody speaking in Portuguese, I don't presume they're nuts. Right.

SPEAKER_02 33:37

So that's my point though. I think you missed it. So my point isn't that you would think that they're nuts, or even I, I wouldn't think that they're nuts because we're coming from a 2,000 years of church history where debate on this topic has uh existed, right? And so we are not we're we're not so easily swayed by the those sort of happenings. We're testing the spirit type of people. That's who we are. So we expect extraordinary type of things anyhow. We it's we expect spiritual things anywhere. We're spiritual people who believe in a supernatural message. So we wouldn't, had we not had these sort of presuppositions about us, though. And were we here, were we able to hear a language, even a real language that nobody ever spoke before, but only in a certain sort of remote place in Africa, we would, if we didn't have the presupposition we did and the sort of makeup we we have because of our biblical beliefs, we would have that same sort of um end result as Paul is describing, because that's just a human nature. If you never experience something, it's going to seem strange.

SPEAKER_03 34:32

So again, I would say I disagree. And here's the reason why. I come from a multicultural area. Corinth is a multicultural church. So you the Corinth is a trade hub that is uh on an Ithsmith between Macedonia and the southern areas on the east coast of the Aegean Sea, they've got the the Acropolis and or the Agri Corinth that's a thousand feet up with a thousand prostitutes. They've got all of the the peoples of the known area coming through. Somebody speaking a foreign language is not an uncommon thing. So in the same way, it if perhaps I was from the bush in Africa and never heard anyone ever speak another language, to your point, sure. That's the point. But in the world, because of your background, yes, yeah. Right. In this context where they are in a cultural melting pot, no one's gonna freak out if they hear somebody speaking a different language. They're gonna presume that this is just somebody speaking in a different language. However, if you look at Acts chapter two, what was the accusation? They're drunk.

SPEAKER_02 35:38

They're crazy, yeah. Drunk, yes.

SPEAKER_03 35:39

Have you ever heard somebody babbling when they're drunk? You can tell when somebody's under the influence and they're speaking. And you can tell that ain't normal.

SPEAKER_02 35:48

That's not what we push back a little bit because again, all of these things we're saying, we all have presuppositions, right? And because of a presupposition, we lean, our interpretation leans either this way or that way. And so let's go back to the drunk assumption that people have when you speak, when you're babbling. There's a godly woman in the Old Testament named Hannah. She's preaching in the church at her time in the temple, and the God of the man of God, Eli, assumes that she's drunk.

SPEAKER_03 36:17

Right, but he doesn't hear what she says. He sees her moving her mouth. Good point. I concede. Yep. So all he sees is her moving her mouth. Good point. And so he does not understand what she's saying, and that you know, that because he doesn't hear her. So uh let's look at Acts chapter two, and this is probably the the one that secures it the most for me. And and my position is that tongues, no matter where you find it in the New Testament, is all essentially the same. All of it is is ecstatic speech, and it is it is up to the spirit of God and what he wants to do with it. I'll I'll give you a couple of examples, um modern-day anecdotes of Christians who are are praying in tongues, and uh uh probably the most readily one is one of my Bible college professors was um at a church in in Monterey or some middle mid-coast California-ish area. And it's a big church, you know, a couple hundred, two, three hundred people, and somebody in the um choir starts going off in tongues. And I don't mean they're just quietly praying in tongues between them and God. That's not what I'm talking about. I mean they start going, the whole church goes quiet. Because if you've ever been in that context, you can tell when someone is praying just privately between them and God, and when someone begins to express outwardly in a way that, okay, this is supposed to be meant for the people, or at least they think it is, they feel it is. So the whole church shuts down, this person's going off in tongues, and what everybody hears is the same. What's presented by the opposite side is gobbledygook gibberish. That's what they hear. That's what everybody hears. The pastor shuts down the service and he goes, All right, we're gonna wait for an interpretation. Bible says there's supposed to be an interpretation. Five minutes goes by, no interpretation. He says, All right, we're gonna continue to wait. He says, All right, just want to, you know, everyone to know there's supposed to be an interpretation. Bible says there's supposed to be sorry, somebody obviously got it, they're not responding to God, or you know, well, we're gonna move on with service. And to his credit, like completely, completely governed it biblically. Praise God. Afterward, he preaches the gospel. One guy responds and gets saved. And he comes up and he says to him, if it hadn't been for that person speaking the most beautiful temple Hebrew I've ever heard in my life, I wouldn't have gotten saved. Now, here's the crazy part nobody else heard Hebrew. Wow. Nobody. So what do we have? We have this ecstatic speech that this person is praying, and the Spirit of God gave him the gift of interpretation. That guy who heard it in Hebrew got the interpretation right. But he he didn't know any better. He he he wasn't even a believer. And in the same way in Acts chapter two, the question is okay, what was spoken and what was heard?

Acts 2 Pronouns And What Was Heard

SPEAKER_03 39:02

All right, Acts chapter two, verse one. When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place, and there came suddenly from heaven a noise that is singular, like a violent rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. So one noise. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Spirit and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit was giving them utterance. Verse 5. Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every nation under heaven, and when this sound occurred, singular sound, the crowd came together and they were bewildered because each one of them, the individuals, was hearing them, group, that's plural pronoun, speak in his singular own language. And they were astonished, saying, Why are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we each hear them in our own language to which we were born? Parthians, Medes, Elamites, residents of Mesopotamia, Judea, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontius, Asia, Fergia, Pamphylia, Egypt, and districts of Libya around Cyrene, visitors from both Rome, both Jew and proselyte, Crete and Arab, we hear them in our own tongue speaking the content, mighty deeds of God. And they were they continued in amazement and great perplexity, saying to one another, What does this mean? But others were mocking and saying, They're full of wine, sweet wine. So in other words, they're drunk. Okay. So when you look at the the Greek text that's underneath, and you're looking at the singular and uh plural pronouns, starting in Acts chapter two, verse five. Let me get down to the passage. It switches from singular to plural pronouns. Okay. Meaning each individual, Parthian, Mead, Judean, Cappadocian, whatever heard them as a group, correct. Speaking in Judean, Parthian, Mead, etc. Okay. What does that mean? It means they were not speaking in Parthian, Meade, or Judean. The people hearing it heard it. This guy hears it in Judean, one group. This guy hears the same group in Median. This guy over here hears the same group in Cappadocian. That's what the plural and singular pronoun usage reveals. What then is the math? My understanding. There is a gift of interpretation given to those who would believe. And to the ones who don't believe, they continue to hear the one singular noise that to them sounds like people being drunk. Okay, go ahead. Push back.

SPEAKER_02 41:39

No, there's nothing for me to push back because I wholeheartedly agree on that. That's how I would understand it too.

SPEAKER_03 41:43

Amen.

SPEAKER_02 41:43

Well, I thought that would be a whole lot more interesting. Well, no, I do have a question for you. You asked me ahead of time to get some questions. From your perspective, what would be the purpose of not what you would call missional tongues? I think that's the phrase you used. Devotional? Yeah. What would be the point of devotional tongues? Or even the tongues in which you just described what you saw in church, by the way, which I agree, this is why I'm not a hard cessationist.

SPEAKER_03 42:06

Yeah.

Why Devotional Tongues Builds Faith

SPEAKER_03 42:07

So the phraseology to pray in the spirit. So when you go to the TDNT and the the that is a a uh forensic term, praying in the spirit. Paul specifically links praying in the spirit as not praying with the mind. So praying in a in a language that is not with the prefrontal cortex or the brain. Okay. Jude uses the same phraseology, praying in the spirit, building yourselves up on your most holy faith. So Jude uses the same forensic term, so fair to interpret. Jude is talking about praying in tongues. What does he say? It builds you up on your most holy faith. I asked God recently, I said, God, why tongues? Like this is it's such a problem, child. Like it's it it is a dividing line for so many people. It offends these ones. And it it it's it's gotta be for these ones say, Oh, if you don't do it, you're not saved. And by the way, that's not biblical. You you have the Holy Spirit, whether you speak in tongues or not, if you have a relationship with Jesus, stop. So I asked the Lord, I was like, why? And in my experience with praying for people to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, in which we, you know, we we expect that folks who are seeking to be baptized in the Holy Spirit will will speak in tongues. The experience that I've had with them is it is terrifying to try to do something without your mind. It is absolutely terrifying. And here's the math Jesus doesn't speak in tongues, didn't need to. Perfect communion with the Father. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13 that these gifts are partial and they will be done away with when the complete comes. They are meant to point to a day when that intimacy that they facilitate is eclipsed, yeah, right, with the person of Jesus, where I see face to face and I know even as I'm completely. No. So Jesus doesn't speak in tongues, didn't need to speak in tongues. Why do we need to speak in tongues? What what what's the math on that? And it's a lot like a trust fall. And and I don't believe with telling people to practice, and I don't believe in telling people make sounds after me, and all those weird things are out there. Yes, I've seen it. It's it is indeed weird. 100%. That is not biblical.

SPEAKER_02 44:26

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 44:26

The the text says Acts 2 4, they spoke as the Spirit gave utterance. That's correct. Yep. That's right. So who is speaking in tongues based on that passage? The Holy Spirit through the person. Nope. The person. They spoke as the Spirit gave the utterance. So the Holy Spirit's not speaking. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 44:43

I'm sorry, I've said that wrong, but that's what I mean. Yeah. The Holy Spirit gave them the utterance and they therefore spoke. Correct. Yeah, I gotcha.

SPEAKER_03 44:49

So the Holy Spirit doesn't need to speak in tongues. He has complete communion with the Father and with the Son. There's nothing partial about his relationship with God. With us, we're limited and finite and compartmentalized and submitted sometimes and not all the time. And so I've I've got this need for um relationship with God. And yet, because of my my body and my the the state of sin and corruption that exists.

SPEAKER_02 45:20

100%.

SPEAKER_03 45:21

I've got blinders, I've got limitations, I am I know in part and I see in part, etc., is is what Paul says. Why then tongues?

SPEAKER_02 45:29

Yes, that's the question.

SPEAKER_03 45:31

It requires like a trust fall, and people are terrified of trust falls. Is it is it the Lord? Is it me? I don't want it to be me. It's got to be Jesus. Like all of these things, which, by the way, not a wrong value, right? You don't want it to be fake. No, you don't, you don't want it to be you. But the text says it is you.

SPEAKER_02 45:57

But I'm not sure if I understand the the question though. I'm not sure if I get the answer. I understand what you're saying with regards to it's a trustful, it's a faith enacting, or you're strengthening your faith muscle, so to speak. But what then is the point and or purpose of tongues from your perspective?

SPEAKER_03 46:11

The devotional use is the building up of a relationship of faith between me and God where I do not rely on my mind. Okay, so my God.

SPEAKER_02 46:21

Okay, so this is the pushback then. Because, and to be fair with you and even with the text, I think this is the contention the Corinthians had, right? So some people had a supernatural gift, whatever it is, whether it's my side or yours, whether it's an angelic tongue or an unknown human tongue, there's hey, I'm better. God likes me more because I have this gift. And so there's this contention. What does the person speaking in tongue have that the person not speaking in tongue have?

SPEAKER_03 46:46

So, in my understanding, Acts chapter 19, Paul sees the evision disciples and he says, Have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed? Now, we know according to Pauline theology, they do have the Holy Spirit. So he's obviously talking about something else other than belief, because it would be impossible for him to mean, have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed in the same way as salvation? That's impossible because he would then be completely contradicting himself in what he's written and how Luke records him. So what is he saying? He's saying the same thing that Luke has been saying the entire time throughout the book of Luke and the book of Acts, that there is a subsequent empowerment by the Holy Spirit that exists for the believer. And by the way, anyone listening, this is not a a new or a Johnny Come Lately thing. The the church has been believing this subsequent experience with the with the Lord for generations. And John Piper believes it. Um certain groups of people for sure, yes. Yeah, that's right. Others don't. So, you know, to be fair, there are those who do not believe that there's a secondary experience with the Holy Spirit, but there are many who do, and it is so it is completely acceptable within the realm of orthodoxy. There's nothing heretical about it, nothing like that. Um so what does Paul say? He he sees that there is something in their life that is missing. Otherwise, he doesn't ask the question. He then prays for them, they get baptized in the Holy Spirit, and they speak in tongues. Now, here's the danger. The danger is it seems like it's going to present an elitism, fair, fair concern, yeah, fair assessment. And by the way, many Pentecostals absolutely fall into that error, this elitism. If you don't speak in tongues, you're not a whole Christian if you don't all this nonsense, which isn't true. However, if we're going to be biblical and put the emphasis where the Bible puts the emphasis, there is a fullness of expression and moving in the gospel, and in Jesus tells them to wait until they're baptized with the Holy Spirit. And they were they were regenerated 40 days before in John chapter 20 when he breathes on them to receive the Holy Spirit. So what then is the solution? Okay, we do not want to develop a uh have and have nots elitism. However, we do want to keep in front of people, if you're hungry for Jesus, you should want everything that he has for you. And something that you didn't have tomorrow, that you can have today, would you want it? And I think every true believer would say, absolutely.

SPEAKER_02 49:26

So what then though would be the difference between the people who speaks in tongues and the people who doesn't? Christians, I mean, specifically Christians. Uh clarify your question. What do you mean what do you mean? So I mean, in other words, if there's no if there's nothing that the person who speaks in tongues has that the other person who doesn't speak in tongues lacks, what would be the benefit of speaking in tongues from your perspective?

SPEAKER_03 49:47

It it's the building up of the faith. So when I ask the Lord and I say, God, why tongues? What I realized is that there for me, when I'm in my brain, I will shortchange things all the time. I I will say, I mean, Terrence, you know, look, she's been gone 15 years, she's not coming back. That's that's my brain. That's my natural man. That's that's my street dude who knows knows the block, who knows, you know what I'm saying? Dude, she's gone, bro. Like, that's it. Yeah. But in faith, I know what he said. And I know what he wants. And so this this place of faith is established and built up inside of me that that comes specifically from the exercise of speaking in tongues.

SPEAKER_02 50:31

But that's what I mean, though. So this is why I love us, amongst other reasons, of course. I'm not there yet with you. Thank you. But I do the same thing too with my mind. Uh, love the Lord God with all your mind. I think the mind is given by God by God to us specifically so that we might know him. And therefore, when I read the Bible and faith comes by hearing the word of God, I am strengthening my inner man to believe things. I think you know enough about me to uh to say I have what people might call an audacious sort of faith, because I believe like a child. By I I think it's a grace to me, but I don't speak in tongues. And so my question still stands in my in my opinion. If the crush the Christian who doesn't speak in tongues is or can be like and and and and and experience the same sort of building up as the one who does, what would be the point to even fight about these things? If you have it by well and good. And if you don't have it, you get the same sort of gifts anyhow. So what would be the the point is my question. I sat and thought about this for a while.

SPEAKER_03 51:24

I I think uh I think Jude is clear that there is a building yourself up in faith that happens in praying tongues that that is different than normal prayer.

Brain Studies And Praying Beyond Words

SPEAKER_03 51:33

And what I when they've done studies of of folks who are speaking in tongues, put the neurodes on the head, all that other kind of stuff. And what they found when you're speaking in a normal language that that your brain is computing, like you and I are communicating. I have something on the inside, I want to talk to you. And so what do I do? I I conceive of of thought structures and the idea that I have and then translates to my tongue, and then I'm able to talk to you. And so my prefrontal cortex or the frontal lobe is the the language center, is the the logic center, is the place that's active when I'm talking to you now. But when people speak tongues, the the place that's active is the emotive region of the brain. It's the same place that's active when we sing, because when we sing, it's not the prefrontal cortex that's active. There is a place inside of us that is more, I don't want to say base because bass insinuates um bad, but there is a place inside of us that is more uh raw, more um organic, raw, all of these things sound good. Yeah, less refined, uh more just yeah, raw, I think is is probably more core blank colour canvas type of thing. Yeah, like the um I I don't think that Paul is talking about tongues in Romans 8 when he says he intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. I I don't think yeah, I don't think he's talking about tongues in that that uh that passage, but I do think that the idea of groanings that that are expressed that are so deep that the mind can't word them is the thing. And that place of raw communion with God is what's cultivated. And in that place of cultivation, there is a a witness that is established and that that moves forward. So for instance, if if if I hear the Lord tell me I want to raise that dead person from the dead, I'm gonna go and pray for them. Well, how how do I cultivate that relationship that I have with them? Dude, I pray in tongues every day for long periods of time every day.

SPEAKER_02 53:44

I don't doubt any of that, but I'm just saying, what do you do with the people with likewise faith who do the exact same things? So you have people in history who did great feats of miraculous sort of things, sometimes miraculous in the sense that, you know, it's natural and sometimes supernatural. And they didn't speak in tongues. So again, what's the difference?

SPEAKER_03 54:01

Yeah, no, I and I I get it. And I'm I'm saying that there's a greater level that's available.

SPEAKER_02 54:07

And how can we quantify that? What can we see in history to vindicate that sort of claim?

SPEAKER_03 54:11

Pentecostal church is the fastest growing church in Christian history.

SPEAKER_02 54:15

Other religions like Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world and they're supernatural in sense too. So you see, the claims you're making could be I'm not saying I'm not doing this, by the way, just to prove you're wrong. I'm just saying, I'm thinking, I'm thinking like a person who wants to push back. And so they again, the claim with Islam, they're the fastest growing religion in the world. They have supernatural things too. We would say the demonic supernatural type of things. And they're the so the claim, therefore, to say they're the fastest growing um sort of religion as so as to vindicate your claim as an end in itself is superseded by the Islamic claim, who's the fastest growing religion?

SPEAKER_03 54:48

Sort of, but not really, because you know that they're heresy, heretics and we're not. So I agree, but that's biased, though. That's biased in circular. I would I I I I agree, it absolutely is circular, but for somebody who's in the faith, circular reasoning isn't a problem.

SPEAKER_02 55:04

Sure. But again, that's biased. So, you know, I'm just thinking, like as a thinking person who wants to be fair, the question still stands if the one Christian who's speaking in tongues is doing great and miraculous feats, because we cannot lie, there are people historically who did wonderful things, supernatural things, and they spoke in tongues. And then, equally speaking, there are people who did not believe in tongues the way you do, who did great exploits supernaturally and naturally as well. And they're vindicated by their faith, that George Mueller, for example.

SPEAKER_03 55:30

Yeah, agreed. And he's he's a fantastic man of God.

SPEAKER_02 55:33

What a great example for uh he's known as a man of faith modern, and modernly speaking, because even Spurgeon, the great Spurgeon in his time, said, I would rather pray like Mueller than preach, you know, just preach because he had a supernatural sort of thing with God. His disciples went on to do great things too, and they believed what he taught. Uh Corey, not Cory Tinboom, that's later on in history, but uh Hudson Taylor, um, all these missionaries that went to China, all the way down to Amy Carmichael later on, who believed that you can you can literally pray and don't talk to anybody, and God would do that through your prayers. And they didn't speak in tongues. No, but that was very supernatural.

SPEAKER_03 56:07

And I agree, it it was very supernatural. The dynamic that's happening is your request on earth and then God answering versus building up the person on earth to to more and more faith and greater exploits. So I I would say that there's more available. And the the evidence is that when you've got folks who are presently doing missionary work across seas, they come back and they say, if you don't have the gifts of the spirit and the manifestation of the power of the spirit, you can't do work over here. You're done. Yeah, if yeah, if if you're not operating in these things, you can't do work over here, to the point where the Southern Baptist Convention had to reconfigure what they allowed from their missionaries. Um, okay, we're gonna let people who speak in tongues be missionaries with us.

SPEAKER_02 56:55

And by the way, just to flug this in from your side, and this is why I'm again not staunch on the other side. What do you do with all the people who, you know, come back from missionary uh exploits and they said, uh, you know, we had these people had dreams of Jesus coming and telling us to leave Islam. Many of them went to their death believing Christ. Do you dismiss that because your theology wouldn't allow for it? I think that's stupid and bunk. And so obviously there are supernatural occurrences happening in the world to validate your your side, but I'm just thinking, you know, this is why the questions arise. I'm thinking on the basis of, okay, this side has certain points and this side has certain points, and I want to be f middle.

SPEAKER_03 57:29

So yeah, absolutely. And for those listening, I asked Terrence to do this when we had a conversation offline. And I said, I want you to take the other side, I want you to push back. Uh so I I think that the danger is the elitism, but I think that the answer is the the Bible shows that there is a greater that is available. And I think that anyone who who looks at first Corinthians 14 and Paul says, I thank God I speak in tongues more than you all. Why would you not want that? If if it's available for you, and you know, uh perhaps there's things in our lives that are available to us that we never attain to. There's a real thing like missing God. You can you can legitimately miss God. You you can miss out on what God wants to do through your life. You can forfeit things in your life, you can miss moments that God has for you in your life. And, you know, we were talking about this in in Bible school um last week, where somebody had a word from the Lord, they didn't give the word from the Lord, somebody else stood up and said, I got a word from the Lord, and they gave the exact thing that God had just told the other person. And then the other person was like, Oh my god, and I know this person personally, this other person was like, Oh my gosh, God, you just gave that to me. And you know what he said to her? She, the other one that did it, wasn't the first one I asked. She was, and she missed it. So she had an opportunity. What God gave her, she denied being used in the moment. God gave it to somebody else, and she missed out on that moment. So there is such a thing as missing out on what could be. That is where I think the the where it lands, that there is more that's available. And not everybody will speak in tongues, but I believe everybody can speak in tongues.

SPEAKER_02 59:27

I, you know, this may sound funny, and I do too. I will push back one last time, and this is where I would make my, I would plant my flag gladly.

The More Excellent Way Is Love

SPEAKER_02 59:34

I do think there's greater things to for the Christian to experience. And Paul argues for that too. In the context and having supernatural gifts and so forth, he says, I will show you a more excellent way. And the way in which he spoke, the more excellent way that he taught was this love. And he defined love as not self-absorption that people get either when they have a great intellect on my side or they have supernatural occurrences on the other side. It's a side, it's it's it's a predisposition whereby you allow for variables and you're so outside of yourself that you're willing to be humble, you're willing to stand for truth because he said love doesn't, you know, uh seek to do the wrong thing and or validate the wrong, um, but but stands and validates the truth. But you're but you're not thinking of yourself, which is what both sides do anyway. And so he's calling for a side in the middle to say, okay, perhaps there and perhaps there, but it's not about me. It's about God's glory and building up the body. That's the more excellent way, and I think people fall by the wayside on the other two ditches. Yeah. And so I'm arguing for the middle.

SPEAKER_03 1:00:33

Yeah. And I think that those who use tongues in a devotional way get into the corporate context and they're so used to using tongues in a devotional way that they continue, and it actually makes themselves absorbed in the moment rather than. Absolutely. Look at me secretly, though. Uh not not even look at me, just I'm so used to this groove privately, that now that I'm in the corporate context, I'm reaching for God the same way that I do privately, and and now I'm myopic and I miss it.

SPEAKER_04 1:01:02

Greater broadly. Right.

SPEAKER_03 1:01:04

I I miss the greater context and the the broader understanding of okay, you know, what is God doing instead of instead of not about me being so um tunnel-visioned.

SPEAKER_02 1:01:16

You know what I mean? Yeah. Um likewise the other side too. I mean, I don't want to sound like I'm just poo-pooing your side. The other side is big brains, and they think that because they understand exegesis and hermeneutics, that this is the way in which God prescribes everybody to get, as if God depends upon human wisdom anyhow. Not saying the exegesis and things like this is wrong, but they they they they they harp on and um maximize that side only, notwithstanding that the reality of the other side exists too. So I'm not arguing again for either side, but for balance and specifically to love, to look past yourself and say, all right, perhaps this brother is on to something here. Let me let me serve him, because the wisdom is being a servant of all. That's the greatest. In Jesus' economy, the greatest man is the one who's a servant, not looking to see to to to to use himself as a means to glorify himself or using God's work as a means to glorify himself, but but minimizing himself so as to glorify God specifically by helping the brethren. That that's that's wisdom, I feel. Amen.

SPEAKER_03 1:02:13

I agree.

Demonic Tongues And Testing Spirits

SPEAKER_03 1:02:14

Um, so to to kind of touch on where we started with the the light language, um, there is such a thing as demonic tongues. Uh, we were dealing with a a woman who had a demon a couple months ago and and she was speaking in tongues, and I asked her afterward, and I said, Do you do she was like, No, I don't, I don't know anything about that. Um, so there there is a demonic tongue, and how do you reconcile what what's happening biblically with what's happening in the occult? And I think that the answer is this is that the the awakening of the gift of tongues is essentially a spirit, whether it's the Holy Spirit or another spirit, awakening something inside of us to commune with them. Yeah, well said. And out of that comes this expression of intimacy that we call tongues. And there is a real thing because otherwise that there's a counterfeit thing, and you don't have counterfeit things unless there's a real thing.

SPEAKER_02 1:03:11

Yes.

SPEAKER_03 1:03:11

Right. So there is a real thing and there is a fake thing. And being able to determine which is which can sometimes be crucial. I'll also tell you, there have been times where I've walked into homes that have had demonic spirits inside, and immediately I shift into speaking in tongues. And and and it's not not the Holy Spirit puppeteering me. That's not how tongues works. Okay, tongues is you, you speak as the spirit gives utterance. But this this I guess you could say spiritual awareness and sensitivity that's been cultivated inside of me that's beyond my brain. And so when I walk into a room that I may not see anything with my natural eyes, may not perceive anything with my mind, but suddenly my spirit goes, You're not alone here, and it clicks and it shifts, that's something that that happens uh regularly as well. They need to be tested. So one of the one of the the things that biblical gifts are supposed to submit to is the testing by the local church in the congregation, these kinds of things. So just because someone speaks in tongues doesn't mean it's Jesus. Um the false is done with the fallen spirit, and the real is done with the Holy Spirit must be tested. And uh I I think a a couple of points about Acts chapter two for those who may be looking to study a little bit more. One of the interesting things about the passage is that what is spoken is the term glosa, which is tongue, but what is heard is not tongues, it's dialectos, which means dialect. So there's a uh in in the Greek text, there's a very clear indication that what is heard is not the same thing as what is spoken. Um content was not the gospel, we we said that already. Uh the sound is singular. Application is more. Yes. So they they heard one sound, which means that if if it was several different people speaking several different languages, it wouldn't be just one sound. It it would be more than that. Um it would it would be a cacophony sounds. Uh, but that's that's not what they heard. They heard they heard one singular commotion and then they came and they observed. Um, probably the strangest one for anyone who's who's into um looking at exegeting the text is that in verse in verse 10, so it says from the Firgins, Pamphylians, Egyptians, Libya, Cyrene, Rome, Jews, and proselytes. Okay, so the word there, Jews, is Iudei. And essentially, it what that means is that you have Judean. Are surprised to hear Judeans speaking in Judean, which is impossible. And so for those who exegete the text and look at the the Greek that's underneath our English translations, if you're doing a study, that's one of the creators, that's one of the hardest things that you're gonna have to deal with is the fact that you have Judeans surprised to hear Judeans speaking in Judean, which only works if what they're speaking is ecstatic and not languages. Otherwise, you would not have Judeans surprised to hear Judeans speaking in Judean. It would be like, duh, these are we know these people. But rather, what it looks like is everyone heard this ecstatic speech. Suddenly, each of these guys here's the entire group in their own native tongues at the same time, they realize holy smokes, something just happened that's not normal. How is it that we are hearing this group? I'm hearing them in English, and you're hearing them in Cantonese, and you're hearing them in Russian. How is it that this has happened? And that's what gets their attention. But the ones who would not believe, they still hear gobbly cook. Yeah, and they're like, they're drunk. Why are you tripping? This isn't abnormal. These are just drunk people. To which Peter says, actually, it's too early in the morning.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:21

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03 1:07:22

It's too early for us to be drunk.

SPEAKER_02 1:07:24

That's a different culture. Now you could be drunk at whatever time now.

SPEAKER_03 1:07:27

Yeah, that's right. That's right. Uh Zane wanted to mention the the spontaneity of speaking in tongues. And uh I think yeah. Um sorry about the the issues with the live stream and the connections. Um, but the point is, is that that when there's uh I've been in moments where I'm at the altar praying and my brain's got nothing. And I'm just like, you know, I'm the preacher and somebody comes up for for ministry, and you know, I'm praying with them, and and I'm just given kind of the the general prayer. But then something begins to spontaneously arise in me, and it's almost like a a uh a word of knowledge or a word of wisdom that comes in spontaneity, and it's that same kind of spontaneity that is established in a regular habit of praying in tongues, where it makes it easier for me to shift from the brain zone into the the moving by the spirit zone. It also makes it more dangerous because if you're not being discerning, you can be led astray. And that's where a lot of our charismatic Pentecostal brothers are, is they they are so given to this free flow of the spirit that they drop their discernment. And the next thing you know, they are being bewitched by false spirits or, you know, these other kinds of things. So, so there is a danger that's present

Guardrails For Safe Spiritual Power

SPEAKER_03 1:08:58

there. But I think that as long as you keep the scripture regularly moving through you, you keep fellowship with a good local church, you remain connected with good brethren who know the scripture, and they can be like, hey, look, you know, this is not the Lord, this is, etc. As long as you keep those counterbalances in place, that that you can you can keep those uh guardrails on to keep you in a safe spot. Yeah, I like that.

SPEAKER_02 1:09:25

Seek the gifts, uh the higher gifts, but I'll show you a more excellent way. And so I would say this to the people listening. Um, by all means, if there's anything more to get in Christ, please seek the gifts. But also consider this too: the Holy Spirit gives gifts to whom he desires and when he desires. This is not something that we can make him do. In the same way, God knows us best and he won't give everybody money so as to destroy themselves. Perhaps he won't give you certain gifts so as to make you proud and arrogant. So seek whatever gifts, three things. Seek all the gifts. Do that. Uh keep in mind that God is uh sovereign in his this what's the word distribution of said gifts. And then finally, remember this there is a more excellent way, namely to love. So whether God gives you the gift or not, your aim is not to take the gift and make it about yourself, but rather to love the brethren and to humble yourself. Those are my three takeaways.

SPEAKER_03 1:10:13

Amen. And I I would add that for those who are are seeking the gift, stop. One. Number two, when and if it happens, understand that the baptism in the Holy Spirit moment, it's not an arrival. This doesn't mean that suddenly you've arrived and now you're super spiritual or you're a super Christian. Doesn't want, does that's not what it means at all. It is a springboard. So remember that we are ever growing, we are ever reaching. And I and I think that Paul's exhortation in Ephesians is probably the best one. He says, be filled with the spirit. And that's a present active participle, and it means be filled now and be filled tomorrow and be filled the day after. And while it is appropriate to ask, as Paul did in Acts 19, have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed? I think the additional question is: not only have you received the spirit since you believed, are you presently pursuing the work of the Holy Spirit? Are you presently pursuing being intimate with God and growing? And is your experience of the gospel and the Holy Spirit more today than it was yesterday? Is your intimacy with God larger today than it was yesterday? Have you allowed him to take up your tent posts and extend your capacity so that you can love him more? And when you love him more, to Terence's point, then you will love others more, because loving others only comes because you first love him. And in that context, we become a larger and larger conduit for his grace and for his mercy. And remember, Peter's very clear, all the gifts are gifts of grace. These are not something that we demand, it's not something that we can we can um pay God for. It's it's it is because he is the God of mercy and he is the God of grace, and everything that he does is because he is merciful and he is gracious. And this is what he says a good father gives good gifts.

SPEAKER_02 1:12:17

And and remember the words of the prophet Ben Parker with great power comes great responsibility. That's the biblical counterpart.

SPEAKER_03 1:12:27

Followed up by the by his junior prophet Peter Parker, Marvel Comics. That's awesome.

Closing Thoughts And Listener Requests

SPEAKER_03 1:12:35

All right, guys, if nobody has anything else, we're uh gonna wrap this about 15 minutes early. And by the way, if anybody's got some stuff you want to hear about um or some some uh guests that you would like to see, let us know. We can reach out and say, hey, you know, some of our people were requesting and asking. We're we're presently in the process of having conversations, get a couple more interviews this season. Welcome to season three. Um, we love you guys. God bless you, and we're we're grateful for you. Blood and oil out.

SPEAKER_01 1:13:11

Blood and Oil Podcast is filmed and recorded by Pastor Jesse and Zane in California with Terrence on Video Call from the East Coast. We thank our supporters, and please be reminded to use your own discernment as the views and opinions expressed by the hosts and guests may not reflect those of other people, institutions, or organizations. A variety of guests will join us as we discuss modern events through a biblical lens. So buckle up and enjoy the ride. Thanks to all of our supporters and praise God for the opportunity to serve Him in this way. We hope you have enjoyed this episode and pray for blessings upon your day.