Speaking in Tongues
By Philip Mauro
The gift of tongues, which was bestowed upon men for the first time on the day of Pentecost, was a miraculous endowment which enabled those who received it to speak in languages unfamiliar to themselves, languages they had never learned. Thereby they were empowered to declare the glad tidings to those with whom they would not have been able otherwise to communicate.
The record found in Acts 2 gives a clear description of the nature of this gift. We read that there were at Jerusalem at that season devout men "out of
every nation under heaven," and that when the multitude came together, they were confounded, "because that every man heard them speak
in his own language" (Acts 2:5, 6). Thus the prominent and essential characteristic of the pentecostal gift of tongues was that it enabled the disciples to address those foreigners, "every man in his own language."
Further, it is recorded for our enlightenment that "They were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these that speak Galilaeans? And how hear we every man
in our own tongue wherein we were born; Parthians and Medes and Elamites"—sixteen countries being named—"we do hear them speak
in our tongues the wonderful works of God" (vv. 7-11).
Thus, in this short description, it is stated three times that the pentecostal gift of tongues was a miraculous endowment whereby those who received it were able to speak to foreigners
in their own language. When, therefore, we encounter now-a-days that which purports to be the apostolical and pentecostal gift of tongues, the first thing to be ascertained is whether its reputed possessor has the supernatural ability to speak to strangers
in their own language. If the supposed gift does not pass that test, it may safely, and without further inquiry, be regarded as spurious.
The coming of the Holy Ghost was the beginning of that new and wonderful era which John the Baptist had announced (Matt. 3:11). The Lord had previously instructed His disciples that their special mission would be to preach repentance and remission of sins in His Name
among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem; but they were to wait in that city until they should be endued with power from on high (Luke 24:47-49); for the Gospel was to be preached, not with mere human power, but "with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven" (I Pet. 1:12). It is, therefore, a very impressive fact that the manner in which the Holy Spirit manifested His presence was by the appearance of tongues as of fire, resting upon each of the disciples, and by the bestowal upon them of the power to preach to all men who were gathered in Jerusalem to observe the feast of Pentecost,
each in his own language. This was a most significant miracle. It proclaimed in a striking way,
first that the great work of this era for which the Holy Ghost had come, is
the preaching of the risen Jesus of Nazareth as both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:32- 36); and
second, that this glorious gospel was to be proclaimed to "every nation under heaven," so that all men should hear it
in their native tongue.
It should be noted that in Acts 2, and wherever the word "tongue" is used in this connection in the Scriptures, it means simply
a language, just as we commonly say "the English tongue," "the French tongue," etc. In I Corin-thians 14, where the expression
"unknown tongue" occurs, it will be seen that the word "unknown" is printed in italics, showing that it does not occur in the original text. This supplied word has misled some. The expression means simply
a foreign language.
This supernatural ability to address a foreigner in his own language served also the purpose (along with other miracles which abounded at that time) of
attesting this new era and this new message (the Gospel), as being from God.
Without such manifestations of the presence and power of God working in and with those obscure Galilaeans, it could not have been made evident to Jews and Gentiles that God was really introducing a new order of things. That the main purpose of miracles was to authenticate the preaching of the "great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord," is declared in many Scriptures, as in Hebrews 2:3, 4, where we read that God also
bore witness (with His preachers) by means of "signs and wonders, and with divers miracles and
gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to His own will."
That such extraordinary miracles were needed at the beginning of the new era is obvious. In this respect we have a parallel in the beginning of the era of the law, when God wrought wonderful signs and miracles in Egypt and in the wilderness. Those manifestations ceased when they had accomplished their purpose.
Tongues After Pentecost
The second time the miraculous speaking in tongues is mentioned is in connection with Peter’s preaching of the Gospel to a company of Gentiles in the home of Cornelius, the Roman Centurion, at Caesarea, which city was really a Roman city, though within the borders of Judea. Here again "was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost,
for they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God" (Acts 10:45, 46). This was a convincing sign to Peter and the six Jewish converts who accompanied him, that God had indeed saved those Gentiles. Therefore, they (the Jews) did not dare "forbid water, that these should not be baptized," or refuse to receive them as brethren in Christ.
Moreover, when they of the circumcision, who were at Jerusalem, contended with Peter because of this, the apostle vindicated himself by appealing to the fact that (to quote his own words) "The Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us
at the beginning" (Acts 11:15). Thus we have given us in the Bible a very clear and strong reason for the manifestation of the gift of tongues on this occasion; for otherwise converted Gentiles would not have been received.
It should be particularly noted that, for another occurrence of that sort, Peter had to go back
to the day of Pentecost. The inference is plain that, in all the years between, there had been
no similar manifestation to which Peter could appeal. It is, therefore, very far from the truth to say, or to suppose, that all who were saved in apostolic times received the power to speak in tongues. It clearly appears, on the contrary, that the bestowal of the gift of tongues was reserved for occasions of unusual importance.
At Ephesus—The third and last time the manifestation of the gift of tongues is mentioned in Acts is in chapter 19. This was outside of Palestine altogether. Paul, on coming to Ephesus, met with certain disciples who had received only so much of the truth as was connected with John’s baptism. They had not received the Holy Spirit because they
had not believed on the risen Jesus Christ. When, however, they were baptized
in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and Paul had laid his hands upon them, then "the Holy Ghost came on them; and they
spake with tongues and prophesied" (Acts 19:1-6). In this case, as in the two preceding, there was an evident need that the truth proclaimed by Paul should be specially authenticated by signs and miracles. Ephesus, moreover, was the place where the great temple of Diana was located, and where "curious arts" (e.g., necromancy, black art, etc.) were practiced (v. 19). Therefore, "God wrought special (i.e., unusual) miracles by the hands of Paul" in that place (vv. 11, 12).
In none of these cases was the gift of tongues sought, nor was the Holy Spirit sought after the manner of some in the present day. The Holy Spirit simply bestowed the gift when and as He deemed it needful so to do.
The Gift of Tongues in the Church
In I Corinthians, chapters 12 and 14, we read of the gift of tongues "in the church." It is mentioned among the things wrought by the Spirit, "dividing to every man severally
as He will" (12:7-11). Thus the giving or not giving this (or other) gift is
entirely a matter of the Divine will, which is exercised according to the Divine wisdom.
This gift is mentioned last in the list of gifts which "God hath set in the church" (12:28-29). And the apostle’s questions "Have all the gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues?" make it clear beyond all doubt that
some only of the saints possessed those gifts. Indeed the questions are asked for the very purpose of enforcing the argument that, as in the human body there are many members, each with
its own special function, to be exercised for the benefit of all, so in the church there are
different gifts and duties as-signed to the several members; yet, inasmuch as all belong to one and the same body, the gifts ail pertain to that one body, regardless of what members have them. According to the inspired argument of that chapter it would be as absurd to expect every member of the church to have the gift of tongues as to expect that every member of the human body should be a tongue endowed with power to speak (v.17).
In chapter 14 Paul shows that the gift of prophecy is far more to be desired than that of tongues, because prophesying—i.e., ministering the Word of
God—edifies the church; and this is the work of Love, because "Love edifieth" (8:1), whereas speaking in tongues may be but the vain display of a gift. Paul makes the contrast very strong, saying, "I speak with tongues more than ye all; yet in the church I had rather speak
five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than
ten thousand words in an (unknown) tongue" (14:18, 19). So the relative value is as five to ten thousand.
He then bids those Corinthians to "be not children in understanding," and explains to them that the gift of tongues was a fulfillment of Isaiah 28:11, 12, where God, in foretelling judgments upon Israel in connection with their rejection of His Word (which had always been spoken to them
in Hebrew) said, "For with stammering lips and another tongue
will I speak unto this people" (the Jews) . Therefore, at Pentecost God began to speak to
the Jews in "another tongue." This was a "sign" to that
unbelieving people. And this is precisely what Paul declares in the next verse, where he says: "Wherefore, tongues are for
a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not;
but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe"
(I Cor. 14:21). Thus the gift of prophecy is incomparably greater than that of speaking in tongues. It follows that to say the gift of tongues is a sign to believers that the one so gifted who has received the Holy Spirit, is simply to turn the Scripture upside down.
The Spirit Given to Them That Believe
The Lord Jesus declared that
"they which believe on Him should receive" the Holy Spirit (John 7:39). Peter, on the day of Pentecost, said that all who would
repent and be baptized should "receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). Again he said, speaking of the Holy Ghost, "Whom God hath given to
them that obey Him" (Acts 5:32), that is, who obey the gospel by believing in Jesus Christ. In Galatians 3:1-3 Paul bases his entire argument on the fact that the Galatians had "received the Spirit
by the hearing of faith."
Never is there such a thing as a believer in Christ who had not received the Holy Spirit, or one who had received Him otherwise than through
believing the Gospel.
As regards the strange modern idea that speaking in tongues is to be sought as the "Bible-sign" of having received the Holy Spirit we would point out that
faith does not seek after a sign, but rests upon the simple Word of God. Paul says, "For
the Jews require a sign"; and it was natural for them to do so; but not for those who are "justified by faith."
The Lord Jesus said: "This is an evil generation, they
seek a sign"; and again, "Except ye see signs and wonders
ye will not believe" (John 4:48). The spirit of the Jews was manifested in the question,
"What sign showest thou, that we may see and believe thee?" (John 6:30). These Scriptures surely do not encourage God’s saints to seek after a sign. Moreover, the Lord did not say concerning His people that "by their
signs ye shall know them," but expressly "by their fruits
ye shall know them" (Matt. 7:20). And again, "By this shall all men know that ye are
my disciples, if ye have love one to another" (John 13:35). If those who have received the Holy Spirit are seen walking after the Spirit, manifesting the love of the Spirit, and bringing forth the fruit of the Spirit, there will be no need of any "signs" whereby they may be distinguished.
Appeal is frequently made to the words of Mark 16:17,18, as if they contained the promise that
all that believe should be endowed with the gift of tongues. But the words will bear no such interpretation. They declare that certain signs, of which speaking with new tongues was one, should follow
them that believe. The Lord no more promised that all believers should speak with tongues than He promised that all should cast out devils, take up serpents, and drink poison without receiving hurt. Speaking with tongues, therefore, is no more the "Bible sign" of having received the Holy Spirit than is the casting out of devils, or the taking up of serpents.
Moreover, we have only to read the 20th verse of the chapter to find the
complete fulfillment of the promise of verses 17 and 18: "And they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and
confirming the word with signs following."
This Scripture refutes "pentecostal" doctrine, for it speaks of "them that
believe"; whereas, according to that doctrine, speaking in tongues is not a sign of
believing, but of receiving the Spirit, which the "pentecostals" hold
is a distinct thing.
A Dangerous Delusion
We believe that the modern error regarding tongues, as made prominent by those who call themselves "pentecostals," is one of the most dangerous of these last days. Many true, earnest, and zealous children of God have been deluded by it. The appeal it makes is very attractive to saints who groan and sigh for something different from the shams and dead formalities of religious Christendom. We have had it under observation from the start. Its phenomena—ecstasies, transports, prostrations, yielding to "the power," displaced personality, etc.—are the very same as we had already become
familiar with in our previous investigations of hypnotism, spiritism, and other psychic and occult phenomena. We know by personal observation some of the terrible havoc—moral and spiritual—it has wrought. Most earnestly, therefore, do we warn the beloved people of God against it.
What do YOU think ?
Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Comment Box Disabled For Security
Date: 17 Nov 2005
Paul said I speak in tongues more than you all, he didn't speak to people in
tongues but prayed and sang in tongues for the edification of himself. I to
speak and sing in tongues for the edification of my self that I might edify
others. I cannot edify if I am not edified. Paul says that tongues are for
personal edification and that prophecy is for the edification of others.
There is a distinction between the tongues that occured at pentecost and the
tongues that were used to speak and sing to God wherein the spirit was
edified but the understanding was unfruitful.
Paul also says I wish all spoke in tongues but even more that they would
prophesy that the church may be edified.
Date: 26 Dec 2005
Since I find more error than truth in the above article, this rebuttal will
take a while.
Mr. Mauro refers to Pentecost in Acts 2, and draws this conclusion. "Thus,
in this short description, it is stated three times that the pentecostal
gift of tongues was a miraculous endowment whereby those who received it
where able to speak to foreigners in their own language.If the supposed gift
does not pass that test, it may safely and without further inquiry, be
regarded as spurious."
Well, I'm going to have to disagree with that,and most everthing else in
this article, point by point, line upon line, and precept upon precept. I
do, however, see why Mr. Mauro might discourage "further inquiry" in a
critical examination of his doctrinal claims.
This miracle at pentecost seems to be just as much a miracle of hearing as
of speaking. There are sixteen nations mentioned specifically and probably
many more since they came from "every nation under heaven". Do we really
believe that Peter repeated his sermon (that saved over 3000 converts)
sixteen plus times in each foreign language? Perhaps. I'll give you that
one, but the rest we must prove by the scriptures.
In paragraph six, Mr Mauro asserts; "It should be noted that in Acts 2 and
wherever the word 'tongue' is used in this connection in the scriptures, it
means simply a language, just as we commonly say 'the English tongue', 'the
French tongue', etc. In 1 Cor 14, where the expression 'unknown tongue'
occurrs, it will be seen that the word unknown is printed in italics,
showing that it does not occur in the original text. This supplied word has
misled some. The expression means simply a foreign language."
Let's take out the italicised word 'unknown' and see if Mr. Mauro is telling
the truth. 1Cor 14:2 "For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto
men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he
speaketh mysteries." So you see, the very verse that Mr. Mauro uses to
"prove" that the gift of tongues is always a foreign language known to men,
says just the opposite. That ought to raise a red flag of concern. But wait,
In paragraph 8, Mr. Mauro says that miraculous signs and wonders were used
to authenticate the old covenant as being from God just as they were used in
the first century to confirm the new covenant. He then goes on to claim that
those manifestations (miracles) ceased after they had accomplished their
purpose. Is he implying that the new testament gifts of the Holy Spirit have
This makes me wonder if Mr. Mauro ever even read the old testament. If he
had, he would know that miracles never ceased. What about Jerico's walls,
Josua's long day, Gideon's fleece, Elija's fire, Elisha's parting the river,
raising the dead, filling the jars with oil, Daniel's lions, Meshech's firey
furnace? Come on! There's more.
Moving on to section 2, "Tongues after Pentecost", Mr. Mauro makes a number
of conclusions unsupported by the text.
--He refers to tongues again as foreign languages, which makes no sense in
this case because they already understood and believed Peter's sermon at
Corneleus' house. Why change languages?
--He concludes that Peter had to refer back to pentecost at the council at
Jerusalem infering that no one had received the gift of tongues since then
until Corneleus. The evidence, one could argue, suggests that this was so
common that as soon as Peter referenced it, the discussion was over.
--Then Mr. Mauro refers to Acts 19 where Paul goes to Ephesus. He first
concludes that special miracles means "unusual" miracles. I guess as opposed
to the your every day, run of the mill miracle. Of even more concern, Mr.
Mauro implies that receiving the gospel and being baptized into the name of
the Lord Jesus through water baptism is what caused the receiving of the
baptism of the Holy Spirit. He also claims that in none of these cases was
the baptism of the Holy Spirit sought. Well, you'll notice that the
immediate text there in chapter 19 links the receiving of the Baptism of the
Holy Spirit not to water baptism, but to the laying on hands.
The biblical truth that water baptism and baptism in the Holy Spirit are two
distinctly different things is illustrated clearly in Acts 8:12-18. The
people of Samaria, at the preaching of Philip, believed "in the good news of
the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ" (vs 12). They had not yet
received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, but had only been water baptized,
or, "baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus." (vs 16) So Peter and John
laid hands on them and baptized them in the Holy Spirit.
So here it clearly illustrated that water baptism into the name of Jesus,
and baptism in the Holy Spirit are two distinctly different things.
It is interesting to note that speaking in tongues is not mentioned in this
passage of scripture. It is in my view implied in that there is obviously
some uniformly observable manifestation of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Even the new converts, Simon the sorcerer being one of them, "saw through
the laying on of the apostle's hands the Holy Spirit was given.."
Just as at Cornelius' house, you can see it, and it is unmistakable. In my
experience, its tongues. Let's move on. There's more.
In section 3,"The Gift of Tongues in the Church" Mr. Mauro is dead in the
water from the beginning. He is expounding on his erroneous conclusion that
"tongues" (1Cor 14) and "other tongues" (Acts 2) is the same thing, and
always refers to a foreign language spoken to foreigners. Contrasting Acts 2
with 1Cor 14:2 we have seen that one gift edifies the listener, the other
gift edifies the speaker, the listener being God. Edification is always a
good thing, for God gives good gifts to His children.
Mr. Mauro points out that Paul says in 1Cor 24:21 that tongues are a sign to
unbelievers and prophesy serves believers. Mr. Mauro, therefore concludes
that "the gift of prophesy is incomparably greater than that of speaking in
tongues." In saying that, Mr. Mauro is putting an incomparably higher value
on believers edifying each other, as opposed to edifying unbelievers by
fullfilling the great commission. There's more.
Let's look at Mr. Mauro's 4th section, "The Spirit Given to Them That
Believe". In this section, Mr. Mauro makes a common mistake of not knowing
the distinction between the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the Baptism of
the Holy Spirit. He is correct(finally) in saying that if you believe in
Jesus, you have the Holy Spirit. No one says, "Jesus is Lord.", except by
the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit who seals us for our salvation. So
Paul says, "Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and the Spirit
of God lives in you?" Amen! Does that mean you are baptized in the Holy
Spirit? No. We just saw that in Acts 8.
We also see in John 20:21-22 that when the disciples saw Jesus in the upper
room, He breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit." Yet after He
breathed the Holy Spirit into them, (indwelt) He told them not to go out and
teach yet , but to "wait for the gift My Father promised" "you will be
baptized with the Holy Spirit....you will receive power from on high."(Acts
Finally, in Mr. Mauro's final section, "A Dangerous Delusion", he equates
speaking in tongues and exercising the other gifts of the Holy Spirit with
"spiritism, hypnotism, and other psychic and occult phenomena", and warns
against it. The word of God commands us to eagerly desire spiritual
gifts.(1Cor 14:1) Mr. Mauro himself acknowledges that the Holy Spirit
divides them severally among the body of Christ so that we can function
better together as a unit in ministering both to believers and unbelievers.
Why would he then try and link these spiritual gifts with satanic spiritism.
I feel that I have conclusively rebutted most of Mr. Mauro's erroneous
conclusions that he has put forth in this paper. And not with my opinion,
but with chapter and verse from the word. I've shown you that there is very
little in Mr Mauro's paper that doesn't directly contradict the word of God.
Date: 10 Feb 2006
The whole thesis of Paul in 1 Corinthians 14 is that no one should be
speaking in the presence of other fellow human beings without being
understood. This is an expression of common courtesy. It is not a matter of
whether the tongue is a foreign dialect or an ecstatic utterance, that is
important, but whether or not one is understood!
No, the gifts haven't ceased, but do all have the same gift? Do all speak in
tongues? Dr. Mauro is correct on this point. The answer is a resounding NO!
Not all are apostles or prophets and neither are all to speak in tongues. In
Paul's list, speaking in tongues was at the bottom, totally different that
what we're hearing from some circles today. Those who do not speak in
tongues are considered "suspect" in this matter of being baptized by the
Spirit. That is not only offensive but wrong. What is offensive is to go to
a pentecostal meeting and hear emotional utterances spoken all at the same
time and almost never interpreted. But now no interpretation is needed
because it's a prayer language that no one can understand except God. Oh
Delphi was the center of pagan oracles and just across the bay from Corinth.
The Dephi priestesses always spoke in ecstatic utterances and often left the
seeker in confusion. Notice how 1 Corinthians 14 not only deals with
'tongues' but also with women speaking out of turn in church resulting in
disturbances and confusion, no doubt in imitation of the Delphi oracles. No
where else is there a problem with ecstatic utterances than in the church in
Corinth! This is why Dr. Mauro is correct to mention a connection of
ecstatic utterances to spiritualism since that seems to be its source in the
In this regard I would highly recommend Dr. John Stott's little book,
"Baptism and Fullness" for an excellent Scriptural examination of this
topic. I have found no where else his excellent study on how the baptism of
the Spirit is received the same time as the forgiveness of sins. The new
covenant in both Jeremiah and Ezekiel promises BOTH forgiveness of sins AND
the gift of the Spirit. The moment Christ is received there is a removal of
sins and then a bestowal of the Spirit. These cannot be disconnected. Dr.
Stott shows how the exceptions to this covenant promise in the Book of Acts
were instances when God wanted to establish the authority of the Apostles in
the eyes of the Gentiles. To teach today that those who do not speak in a
tongue are not baptized in the Spirit is Scripturally and theologically in
Date: 15 Feb 2006
I disagree with the interpretation that the gift of tongues in the church of
Corinth was an imitation of pagan Delphi priestesses. Paul certainly doesn't
characterize it that way. In verse 17 he tells them that when they speak in
tongues they "give thanks well". Are we to believe that Paul would
characterize the mimicking of pagan Delphi priestesses in God's temple as
'giving thanks well'?
I tend to think that Paul would forbid it, or , at least not speak well of
it. But Paul does allow it in Vs. 27, limiting it to 2 or 3 with an
interpretation. In verse 39 Paul instructs them, "do not forbid to speak in
He is thankful that he speaks in tongues more than all of them,(vs 18) even
though it is, as he says, for his own edification.(vs.4) And yes it is
generally a mystery that only God understands. (vs.2,15)
I don't deny that tongues is over-emphasized in some churches, but the
articles I've read on this site concerning tongues, spiritual gifts, and the
baptism of the Holy Spirit seem to be attacking all three. These are
scriptural. They are something God's word commands us to eagerly desire.
So what if the gift of tongues is at the bottom of the list? God gives good
gifts to His children. I'll not turn down any gift from God, be it from the
top of the list, the bottom, or anywhere in between.
I pray in tongues often, and I'm not mimicking any Delphi priestess. I
didn't get baptized in the Spirit at my salvation. I got it later at the
laying on of hands in prayer.
I am not familiar with Dr. John Stott's little book, but a claim that the
separation of salvation and the baptism of the Holy Spirit (as depicted in
Acts) as a sign of Apostolic power seems weak to me. These new converts had
already witnessed miracles by Spirit-filled believers such as Phillip, who
wasn't an apostle. That's part of why they converted. Jesus had said the
kingdom of heaven does not consist of words, but of power. Apostle's and
others were healing the sick, casting out demons and raising the dead. They
were healed when Peter's shadow touched them, or they touched a prayer
cloth. If that didn't establish the authority of the Apostles, I doubt if
the Baptism of the Holy Spirit would make much difference.
Date: 27 May 2006
For everyone who defends speaking in tongues so zealously (and I am not
speaking for or against it) I have always wondered why we only find Paul
discussing it at length in his first epistle to Corinth and in no other
epistle. Is is because it was such a problem in a church where fleshly
activities were so evident?
And to ask whether Philip Mauro ever read the Old Testament (?!) is somewhat
supercilious (Barry Wuthrich). If there is something Philip Mauro did it was
reading and studying the whole Bible, the Old and the New. It is indeed
pitiful to attack the person of any believer just because his interpretation
of certain sections of the Bible differs from your own pet subject
Date: 07 Jun 2006
If all of the apostolic gifts are still in effect why isn't anyone raising
people from the dead lke Peter and Paul both did in Acts?
Date: 08 Aug 2006
Pentecostalism had a very shaky beginning and although there are some good
Pentecostal Christians, there seems to be a lot of heresies also. When a
Pentecostal goes astray it seem they really go astray. But the biggest
failure I think concerning Pentecostalism is that it has spawned the likes
of, Copeland, DuPlantis, Roberts(2),and Price just to name a bery few.
Date: 08 Aug 2006
I've heard a lots of tongue talking through the years. Not once did I think
it was a gift that I heard. A UPC preacher and I agreed that if it had to be
learned it was a phony and yet when they speak (the UPC) it is the same
jabber that you hear in the Assemblies and also on TV. And of course the
intrepretations are always the same thing and most of the time in King James
Date: 19 Dec 2006
My statement about Mr Mauro is not a personal attack on his character. It's
tongue in cheek. The fact that Mr Mauro seems to suggest that miracles in
the Old Testament ceased after the covenant with Abraham was established, I
find incredible. That's all I'm saying.
I wonder if you were equally as upset with Mr. Mauro for characterizing my
beliefs as a dangerous delusion akin to spiritism, hypnotism, and other
psychic and occult phenomena.
I didn't mean it personally and I don't believe Mr. Mauro did either. He was
merely speaking his mind as am I.
I want my beliefs based on truth, and many statements in the article above
seem to directly contradict scripture. I have attempted to point those out
by citing scripture.
Date: 16 May 2007
this is a great article and i agree 100%.
Date: 22 Jul 2007
I appreciate all the comments and opinions shared here. Some have posted
some very interesting comments indeed. There are some deep thinkers here. I
believe God is just as able today as he ever was to fulfill all the works of
the Spirit in the Christian who has yielded to God and has been converted in
the inner man. However, I also believe that many false workers of signs and
gifts have discouraged other Christians and unbelievers from desiring those
gifts that God has reserved for the believer. Just as there are True and
false prophets and Apostles there are those who upon examination of their
Gift of tongues it may be found that it is more a learned action then one
delivered by God. Be not disheartened nor waiver in the faith of Jesus
Christ because of the error of pretenders. We are admonished throughout
scripture that if it were possible the very elect might be deceived by a
false Gospel or even a false Christ. We must compare everything brought into
question to the Word of God and the Spirit of Jesus Christ and his
Righteousness. Many have done a great harm to the Kingdom of God because
they error in Word and deed. When many people being unrestrained by the
Spirit of Jesus Christ continue trying to wield his Word by faith rather
then by Spiritual understanding and application it is like sending many
untrained civilians into the battle field in place of trained soldiers with
unproved weapons they have neither checked, maintained nor mastered the use
of. It may be quite possible that their good intentions may endanger even
those who they have come along side to defend. We must all pray that we
ourselves do not become the one who endangers our brother or the one Jesus
Christ may be calling. J.W. Mills JWMills@Onlybyfaith.org
Date: 26 Oct 2007
Thus the prominent and essential characteristic of the pentecostal gift of
tongues was that it enabled the disciples to address those foreigners,
"every man in his own language."
This is simply not accurate. Tongues were not used to address the
foreigners. Tongues were used to magnify and declare the wonderful works of
God. Tongues are not used to address men, but to magnify and praise God. The
direction of tongues is upward not man-ward. It was Peter's preaching in his
own language that brought people to faith in Christ. Prophecy is not as Mr
Mauro suggests - preaching the word. If that wass so Paul wouldn't have told
the Thessalonians to not despise prophesying. There is a clear distinction
between preaching and prophesying. According to 1 Cor 1V7, all the gifts of
the Spirit including tongues are to continue until the coming of the Lord.
Date: 16 Feb 2008
It is very often for people that never speak in tongues to know all about
Just because one reads a book about Jet Aircraft does not qualify them to
Respectfully, Norman Fikes
Date: 15 Mar 2009
Bottom line on this conflict of speaking in tounges is that it turns people
off! It scares children and it makes Christians look life fools. How happy
the Devil is that we continue in the Pagan practice. Every time night line
or date line or one of those shows does a piece on Christians, they ALWAYS
go to the churches where people are speaking in tounges, rolling around on
the ground, making complete fools of themselves. That is what the world
feels about this so-called "Gift". Were not here to convert the converted.
We are here to preach to the non-converted. Let's be dignified about it!
There ARE other forces at work here! It is another form of brainwashing. If
you get enough people together doing it, they too will believe and get
caught up in it. Beware of what your putting out to the world. Nobody is
impressed yet. Do you really believe that our God wants us to look like
fools? Our God is a God of Order. Good Orderly Direction. Kimberly Johnson
Date: 26 May 2009
Just a few observations:
Although I have come to agree with Mauro’s assessment of the present day
tongues movement, I feel it is not as complete as it could be. The story of
Acts, in capsule, is the spread of the Gospel and the Church from Jerusalem,
Judea/Samaria, and the uttermost parts of the earth. In other words to Jew
(Acts 2), Samaritan (Acts 8) and finally to the Gentiles (Acts 10). Each of
these events is markedly accented by the giving/outpouring/receiving of the
Holy Spirit at the hands of apostles and primarily not as simply the giving
of a gift but as a sign to the observing Jews in that age that the work of
God was no longer limited to Jews only (who “require a sign) but to all
mankind as promised since the time of Abraham. As with most commentators,
however, Mauro leaves out the account and significance of Philip’s ministry
to the Samaritans (a Jewish mixture and representative of the second phase
of the Great Commission) in Chp. 8 and the subsequent receiving of the Holy
Spirit through the laying on of hands by Peter and John. Although the word
“tongues” is not specifically used there, it must be asked “what did Simon
see when it says in vs. 18 “And when Simon saw that through laying on of the
apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19 Saying,
Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the
Holy Ghost.” Simon had already seen miracles, signs and wonders through
Philip so what more could there be that had not already been performed and
witnessed? I believe it was the gift of tongues (something that was entirely
new to this magician’s bag of tricks) which validated the apostles’ ministry
and gave “sign” to the on-looking Jews that these Samaritans (of “Judea and
Samaria”) of the second phase of the great commission were truly saved. In
other words, the importance of the giving of the gift of tongues was not so
much that some men received a gift to be exercised in the Church (or, as
modern-day Pentecostals claim, in their private prayer life) but that Je!
ws would be thoroughly convinced that all the nations would now be blessed.
As to Mauro’s assertion in regards to Peter’s testimony to the Jerusalem
Jews convincing them of the authenticity to the outpouring of Acts 10, he
says “…Peter had to go back to the day of Pentecost. The inference is plain
that, in all the years between, there had been no similar manifestation to
which Peter could appeal.” I disagree. It was not that there was no similar
manifestation in the intervening years but his appeal was to the gold
standard of Pentecost. A standard which in these days is not held by the
very people who name themselves after it.
Finally, as to John’s disciples of Acts 19 it was not so much that tongues
were needed to authenticate Paul’s ministry as that “special” miracles
(other than tongues) were needed to combat the idolatrous darkness of
Ephesus The gift of tongues here falls outside of the three previous
instances of the giving of the gift to those representative groups, Jew
(Jerusalem), Samaritans (Judea and Samaria) and Gentiles (uttermost parts of
the earth). John’s disciples were representative of another group of
believers that formed a special case; those who had repented and believed in
the coming One but did not know that the Holy Spirit of John’s message had
actually arrived. It was a group, I believe, that would always be left in
question in that day until even today had not this coming upon not been
granted. It was granted and this category of believers, of which there must
have been many others like them within hundreds of miles from Jerusalem,
were not excluded from the possession of the Spirit.
Date: 12 Aug 2009
All I can say is that you may not have researched enough, but tongues are
real and have not ceased to this day. I know from personal experience. I
know and love God, and the things I've seen and done are real.
Date: 23 Nov 2009
Philip Mauro is the man. Is he still alive?
Date: 25 Dec 2009
I agree with Mauro. The logical outcome of what he said about Isaiah
28:11-12 is that God was warning the Israelites of judgment, which fell in
70 AD when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans under Titus. So tongues
were never needed after that. They ceased in and of themselves, which is
what the Greek word in 1 Corinthians 13:8 means.
Date: 17 Mar 2010
We are all commanded to worship in Spirit and Truth. The evidence of
speaking in Tonges as God has given giuves evidence of his Holy Spirit. I
ask the Lord that he edify and approve me so i can pray in spirit. Bam! I
was laughing i fthough a JOt came over me that I could not stop with
stammering lips . For the glory of Jesus and the Living God!
Date: 02 Jul 2010
There is no doubt something in the name of "tongues" is real and active
today. Nonetheless, I agree with Philip Mauro is many of his observations
including the ceasation of tongues as they are mentioned in Scripture. As
for what is the "tongues" of today, I would ask myself the question Do they
provide understanding of God's revelation, in particularly the gospel? The
gospel is the most important thing after all
1 Cor. 15:3-4. Perhaps, I don't understand "tongues" enough but they seem to
be something in place of authenic God and truth seeking of the gospel and
Scripture. They seem to be based primarily on the experience of the person,
instead of the person being primarily focused on the knowledge of God.
Perhaps, "tongues" of today are great signs and wonders performed by the
false Messiah's and prophets of our day (Matt. 24:23 also see 1 John when he
speaks of the antichrist). Whether or not this is true, it does seem that
Isa. 28:11, which is the background to 1 Cor. 14, does apply in that
professing Christians in North America of today are just like the
unbelieving Israelites, that is we treat Scripture as a book of precept upon
precept (legalism). Accordingly, we turn from understanding what God is
saying in order to turn to our legalism and/or some fantasitical experience
such as "tongues". Seek the Truth!
Something outside of this document burdens my heart, that is many professing
Chrisitans can not answer the simple question "what is the gospel?". They
put their doing right or abstaining from doing wrong, or their reponse to
the gospel, or even equate their experience of the gospel in their life as
the gospel. My dear brethren this is not the case. The gospel is a fact of
the acts and life and sacrifice and resurrection of Christ, which were once
for all, decisive, and accepted as satisfaction of God's wrath. We stand in
Christ's righteousness, we are justified solely because of what Christ did
for us. Moreover, any good work we do is generated by the gospel in our
lives. Our works are nothing when it comes to us being accepted or justified
before God the Father. Christ alone is our all in all.
Date: 02 Aug 2010
1.It was the day of pentecost for crying out loud.
2.It was the fulfillment of joel 2
3.Read for yourselfs and see what joel 2 was to be.
4.Acts 4:31 said it much clearer ( and they spoke the WORD OF GOD WITH
BOLNESS) produceing fruit with power from on high.
5.Acts 2:5 and there were dwelling at jerusalem (JEWS) devout men ie
religious leaders out of every nation under heaven.
6.matt21:43 well! was there being a change of fruit producers? can one see
that the word ie language of God being taken from one and given to another?
7.Was there such a language speaking problem with the jews scatered thru out
the land ie under heaven?
8.Could not these devout jews easly been matt3:7f
"O generation of vipers" or matt23" hypocrites "?
9.Acts 4:36 Barnabas was a leviet from Cyprus not jerusalem.one might ask
the question;On the cross of Christ if Barnabas or someone from Cyprus walk
by could they have read what was written on it?
Did the cross have Cyprus language written for those people to understand?
10.I come to believe pentecost was the fulfillment of what joel wrote about
and These people were going to need all the help they could get.an they did.
11.Even in Acts2:7,12 they were saying ie speaking one to another. and in
Acts2:11 was the wounderful works of God.
12.Dont for get Acts2:14,22 called them men of judaea and men of israel.
Date: 06 Aug 2010
I wonder how many people who have commented on this subject have ever read
all the counsel of God (Acts 20:27), that is the Bible from cover to cover,
more than once (Deuteronomy 17:19), and continue to do so for the purpose of
knowing and doing God’s will (James 1:22) and not their own.
Many people call Jesus Lord, Lord, but do not the things which He says (Luke
6:46 ...), but do what they feel is right in their own eyes (Proverbs 21:2
...) and not based upon what the Word of God says; they have a zeal but not
according to knowledge (Romans 10:2). It seems everyone has their own
private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20) which always fits their own lifestyle
and desires, of which their own mouths testify.
The making of gods to go before ones self is no new thing (Exodus 32:1), God
has not changed (Malachi 3:6), and neither has man. Man is still in the
business of idolatry; always peddling in what he can see with his eyes, or
hear, or feel, or touch. Man still molds in his own imagination a god that
serves himself, rather than allowing (God) the Word of God to mold himself
by the renewing of his mind (Romans 12:2) to serve God.
The linage of man’s sin can always be traced back to Satan’s first deception
(Genesis 3:1) as one is always smarter in knowledge, science, etc, and above
the other, his eyes opened and as a god knowing good and evil. But will a
man search the Scriptures to see whether these things be true, and when he
finds the answer, will he then change his ways?
Life is not about self-realization, as it is with many who seek only to find
themselves, but about the honor and glory of the only begotten of the Father
(Ephesians 1:12) full of grace and truth (John 1:14), the same was in the
beginning with God (John 1:2), and is God, as He said, “I and my Father are
one” (John 10:30).
Proverbs 10:17 - He is in the way of life that keepeth instruction: but he
that refuseth reproof erreth.
Isaiah 19:14 - The LORD hath mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof:
and they have caused Egypt to err in every work thereof, as a drunken man
staggereth in his vomit.
Isaiah 28:7 - But they also have erred through wine, and through strong
drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through
strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through
strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.
Isaiah 29:24 - They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding,
and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.
Isaiah 32:6 - For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will
work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the LORD,
to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the
thirsty to fail.
Jeremiah 23:32 - Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith
the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by
their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they
shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.
Galatians 4:16 - Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the
Date: 17 Aug 2010
This book proves that no matter how intelligent of God-fearing the person,
if we let even one ounce of our own personal opinion light the Scriptures
for us: it can ruin much for God.
Date: 18 Feb 2011
None of the spiritual gifts have ceased. The Apostle Paul says in 1
Corinthians 13:10 - "But when that which is perfect has come, then that
which is in part will be done away." However the "perfect" has not come.
Paul also tells us in Ephesians 4:13-15 exactly what the "perfect" is: Till
we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of
God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ: (14) That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and
carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and
cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; (15) But speaking
the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head,
even Christ:" God's people have not arrived at the perfect man. Tongues is a
spiritual gift and no not every Christian has to speak in tongues. I have
prayed in tongues and I have interpreted other peoples message in tongues. I
do believe that the gift is greatly misused and abused. I can no more
"learn" to speak in tongues anymore that I can "learn" to receive words of
knowledge, learn to have spiritual discernment, give words of prophecy or
use any other gift. All a spiritual gift is is the Holy Spirit working in
and through a person. I have seen the dead raised once. I have seen many,
many people healed. I have seen many, many people set free from demonic
spirits. At the same time I have heard and seen Christians pray and declare
a person healed, when no healing took place. I have
heard and seen Christians pray and declare a person delivered from demonic
spirits, when there was no change. I have heard and seen Christians pray in
tongues that were real and effective in edifying someone. But I have also
heard and seen people praying in tongues that I knew and they knew were not
from God. In modern society, the world wants to see and outward sign as
proof of God. We do not walk by sight, but walk by faith. The Body of Christ
is not "ONE" as long as we fight and bicker over things like mere men. Paul
said we are "carnal" Christians. And that is not a compliment.
Date: 05 Oct 2011
First if 'tongues' is simply the ability to speak to a foreigner in his own
language then I fail to see why anyone would speak to HIMSELF in a foregin
Second if the current use of tongues really is of the Holy Spirit, then in
calling it occult the author of this article has just committed the
unpardonable sin (blasphemy against the Holy Spirit) by attributing His work
to the devil.
Third - why is everbody using this ridiculous, anachronistic, Elizabethan
English - and please note, even John Stott believed the K. J. to be one of
the least accurate translations, based as it was on documents no earlier
than the 8th century - if you're going to do a Bible study at least use the
RSV or it's American equivalent, or maybe the Amplified - KJ is just
evidence of a spirit of religion - please stop it!
Date: 08 Sep 2012
the gift of speaking in tongues is for the church today im sorry that
believers wont take the time to experience this gift for themselves.
Date: 23 Nov 2011
Tongues ceased with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, when no longer
was there needed this sign to unbelieving Jews. Judgment had fallen upon the