Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

I have often heard it said that there are 3 types of tongues, those being:

1. Tongues as initial evidence.
2. Tongues as a gift of the Spirit.
3. Tongues as a prayer language.

I maintain that tongues as a prayer language is not a biblically distinct type of tongues. I am not saying that praying in tongues is extra-biblical, only that it is not a biblically verifiable type of tongues. Clearly tongues were never spoken of as a prayer language in Acts. That leaves 1st Corinthians 12-14 which I shall address in the remainder of this post.

1 Corinthians 12 is clearly a chapter about the spiritual gifts. The references to tongues in this chapter are clearly in relation to the gift of tongues.

1 Corinthians 13 has only one mention of tongues. The verse is 1 Corinthians 13:1 and is mentioned right after this. From context, there are two interprations of what tongues could be in this verse.

1) They are referring to a spiritual gift because the topic had been spiritual gifts immediately before.
2) They are referring to the natural act of speaking in another language because verse 13:3 refers to the natural act of giving your goods to feed the poor.

Neither of these views lends support to a prayer language. It seems the gift of tongues is the more probable explanation. Since the gifts of the Spirit were just being spoken about at the end of chapter 12, and most all of the gifts are referenced in 13:1-2. Tongues, prophecy, word of wisdom, word of knowledge, faith are all mentioned.

In chapter 14 there are 14 verses referencing tongues. (Verses 2, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 39)

Verses 1-6 are clearly comparing and contrasting tongues with prophesy. Verse 1 even speaks about desiring spiritual gifts. Clearly the context of these verses dictates that they are about the gift of tongues.

Verses 7-12 give an analogy of why the gift of tongues is not useful without interpretation, because it doesn't edify the church.

Verses 13-17 are the most interesting verses on this topic and they determine the context of verses 18 and on. There are three possibilities here.

1) It is continuing speaking about the gift of tongues. No real evidence is needed for this one, it is the most obvious way to take the context. In this case it would be speaking of making a prayer through the gift of tongues.

2) In verse 13 it mentions praying that you may interpret your unknown tongue. It could be that these verses are about supernatural interpretation of your natural foreign tongue that those around you haven't learned.

3) It is very unlikely that these verses are references to people praying in tongues as pentecostals today do. Contrary to most pentecostal interpretations, verse 15 has to mean praying with the spirit and with the understanding simultaneously. Verse 14 says "...my spirit prayeth but my understanding is unfruitful" Verse 15 paraphrased asks What should be done about this praying with the spirit but without the understanding? It recommends praying with the spirit and with the understanding also. Further verse 16 gives the reason why both is needed. Verse 16 explains that we need both because those hearing our prayer can't agree with it if they don't understand them. Verse 16 also makes it clear that you are already blessing with the spirit but makes the point that the understanding is need in addition to this.

Of all these possibilities I'm beginning to think option 2 is the best contextual reading of verses 13-17. What do you all think?

To be continued (after some responses of course ;) ) ...

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

I'm not so sure there is any distinction between tongues at all Biblically. That seems to be what we have inserted in there but I don't see it.

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

I'm not sure either, but I am pretty sure that the bible doesn't differentiate tongues with a prayer language of tongues

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

Where do we get that anyway? Seems like another invented theory to me.

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

I agree. That's why I'm trying to combat it. So if you join the cause NOW you don't have to be a kamikazee for it or even a suicide bomber!!! ;)

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

I agree that praying in tongues is not distinguished as something other than either the initial evidence or the gift of tongues. However, I would think it is involved in the initial evidence, since it is a prayer. All who receive the Spirit baptism should be able to pray in tongues. Why would prayer be something only those with the gift can do?

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

But isn't that more from reading into the text than it is from what is actually in the text?

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

I got this idea FROM the text. :)

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

Really? You sure? Maybe there is some baggage you are bringing to you to the party. Perhaps?

Re: Only 2 types of tongues not 3
 

That is always a possibility in anything anyone says. But when reading 1 Cor 14 and studying the idea of prayer in the Spirit and with the understanding, one cannot find any instance anywhere where a certain kind of prayer is limited to only a select few. Since each gift is only given to a select people, and not the whole church possessing all the gifts, then the entire concept of prayer in tongue-praying seems to demand that it is available to everyone! And since the Spirit baptism is for everyone, but the gifts are not, seems to be a no-brainer to me.