The word ' tongue ' occurs in a figurative sense in Ac 2* (tongues of fire ; cf. Is 5-^) and Rev 5", etc. ( = language). On the phenomena of glossolalia, which St. Paul regards chiefly as a sign to un- believers (1 Co 14="), see artt. TONGUES, GIFT OF, and Holy Spirit.
Literature. — The Commentaries ; see also artt. Man and Mouth. H. WheELEK RobINSON.
TONGUES, GIFT OF.— The chief authority in apostolic literature for the gift of speaking with tongues {y\iji(r<ro\a\la.) is 1 Co 14. What happened on the day of Pentecost is described (Ac 2*) as speaking 'with other tongues' (XaXeiv iripms yXiixraais). The emphasis lies on the distinguishing iripaii. The speakers spoke in.languages other than their own : under the stress of spiritual emotion they lapsed into a foreign tongue ; it was a special phenomenon peculiar to a special occasion. In Ac 10'* 19" the same phenomenon according to some authorities re-appears ; but, as the distin- guishing eripais is absent, it is open to us to regard these passages as parallel to 1 Co 14 and as indicating a phenomenon other than the Pente- costal.
What are the chief features of glossolalia in the Corinthian church? (1) Like ' prophecy,' ' speak- ing with tongues' was one of the gifts of the irvev- /xaTLKol : it was reckoned among the charisms as an inspiration or endowment originating with the Holy Spirit. (2) It was unintelligible to others (1 Co 14°, 'no man understandeth '). (3) It was personal to the speaker, who edified himself and not the church (v.^). (4) It is described in the case of an individual as y'XilKTcrais XaXeiv (v.') and again in the singular 7Xui<r(77; (vv."'-^') or it> yXuaiyi) (v.'") [Sia.TT)iy\u(i(!rf%, v.', refers to the instrument of speech). It is evident that ' tongue' in this con- nexion is used of a specific utterance. It is an
TONGUES, GIFT OF
TORMENT
599
open question whether it was deliberate, on the groinul that ordinary lanfrnage was unsiiilalile for prayer or fellowship or testimony ref,'arding the sjiiritnal life, or was ])nHUu'od apart from the voli- tion of the speaker nnder tlie inllnenfe of spirit\ial excitement or emotion. Tlio evidence is in favour of the latter view : in other words, that the si)eaker was the subject of a Spirit-possession which moved him to speak ' with the tongues of men and of angels' (1 Co 13'). The distinction in the latter passage points to an ecstasy which on occasions appeared to be more than human, as if the Spirit used a human medium for angelic s])eech (cf. 2 Co 12*). It was used only in prayer (1 Co 14-- "). It was speech ' not unto men, but unto God.' To the outsider it appeared a species of .soliloquy. Intellect or voCs was passive or Sko/jttos (14"). There were many types of tongues {yivri •/Kuaawv
JOIO- 28\
Undoubtedly St. Paul recognized it as a spiritual gift, but inferior, as, e.(j., compared with prophecy. It was of no value to an unbeliever, because it could not lead to faith : cf. St. Paul's application of Is 28>"- in 1 Co 14='. Indeed, to both the out- sider and the unbelievei: (v.=") it would appear a kind of madness. Nor to the believer was it of real benefit unless there was an interpretation (v."); and the speaker-with-tongues was coun- selled to pray for such an interjiretation, as if his utterance per se were of little value. St. Paul was no believer in unintelligibility (v.") : hence his emphasis on a e(crriij.os ('capable of being ex- pounded ') \6yos (v."). He claimed the gift as one of his o^vn (v."), but preferred five instructive words spoken with the understanding to ten thousand in a tongue (v."). If his words were not understood, it was like pouring words into the empty air (v.'). Hence an interpretation was essential, though this was a gift by itself and was not necessarily exercised by the speaker-with- tongues himself.
It is obvious that the Corinthians were specially susceptible to such abnormal powers ; with a con- siderable section of the church y\u(T(To\a\la. was more popular than teaching and prophecy, in spite of the fact that as a purely subjective phenomenon it was of no value to the outsider (i'Sicirj/s), who could not even say ' Amen ' to the formula of thanks- giving (v.'*). The common sense of St. Paul was undoubtedly tried by its inefl'ectuality ('your thanksgiving may be all right, but then — the other man is not edified !' [v." in J. Moffatt, The New Testament: A New Translation', London, 1914]).
There is no need to look for the origin of this experience among contemporary ethnic cults. That the atmosphere of the Hellenistic world of St. Paul was full of the phenomena of mysticism and ecstasy is clear to all students of the mystery- religions. But the ecstatic manifestations of the Corybantic or Dionysiac devotee or the worshipper of Isis and Osiris are simply parallels with the Corinthian Christian phenomena ; they are not sources of it. Kopv/SavTiaf (to use Philo's word, Quis Rer. Div. Jleres, 69, quoted by Kennedy, St. Paul and the Mystery-Reliciions, p. 66) is a con- venient generic term for Divine possession as found in the revivals of ancient and modern religions. To Huxley the Salvation Army appeared to he a kind of ' Corybantic Christianity, judged by its external phenomena of religious excitement and enthusiasm. At the same time, the phenomena that have accomp.anied revivals such as early Methodism, the Salvation Army, and the recent Welsh revival have rarely been of the type of y\ua(To\a\ia : there have been sobs and ejacula- tions, but not unintelligible continuous speech. In a valuable appendix to his Earlier Enistlex of St. Paul- (London, 1914) K. Lake (' Glos.solalia