A) BIBLICALLY DEFINING THE WORD TONGUE.

B) ACTS, CHAPTER TWO.

C) KNOWN LANGUAGES.

D) FIRST CORINTHIANS, CHAPTER TWELVE

E) FIRST CORINTHIANS, CHAPTER FOURTEEN BREAKDOWN

F) FIRST CORINTHIANS 14:22 (KEY POINT).

G TO YOUR OBJECTIONS.

H) FINALLY.

 

 

A) BIBLICALLY DEFINING THE WORD TONGUE

 

 

First, let me point out for those who believe they are in a form of praying to God when speaking in “tongues,” Romans 8:26 makes it quite clear (its in plain English) that:  “for we know not what we should pray for as we ought:  but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.”  Who is “uttering” your prayer?  Who is “groaning” words we “cannot” understand?  Thus, speaking in “tongues” is not speaking in an “unknown” language to God or a prayer that you or an interpreter cannot understand.

 

The Greek noun “glossa,” which means “tongue,” or “language,” and the Greek verb “laleo,” which means “to speak,” when combined together, i.e., “glossolalia,” is a literal translation of the two Greek terms, thus meaning, “speaking in tongues.”  This subject can be clearly understood beyond all doubt.  All we need to do is go to the original Greek when trying to understand what this language of Heaven or earth really was/is.

 

There are only two words used in the Greek dialect when referring to any form of language.  One is “glossa,” meaning: “The language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations.”  In other words, one’s own “native tongue.”  The English-speaking world get their word “glossary” from this Greek word.  The other is “dialektos,” meaning: “The tongue or language peculiar to any people.”  In other words, a “foreign language.”  The English-speaking world receive their English word “dialect” from this word.

 

 

B) ACTS, CHAPTER TWO

 

 

With this Biblical truth in mind, let’s look at Acts, Chapter Two, starting with verses 3 & 4.  “(3) And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. (4) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.”

 

Both “tongues” in this case are from the Greek word “glossa,” which is native or specific to a certain Nation.  Thus, through the power of the Holy Spirit, the “gift of tongues,” or better, the “gift of another native language,” had now become inherited and understood by the disciples, and it also became a useable part of the disciple’s vocabulary.  This is the true meaning, because it is certain that the “tongues” were a gift from the Holy Spirit, seeing how the disciples were not native to any of the Nationalities present; neither were they fluent with the languages with which they were now speaking.  We know this because when we continue on to verse six, we find:  “Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.”  How much clearer must God’s Word be?

 

 

C) KNOWN LANGUAGES

 

 

Thus, the “language” spoken of in Acts Chapter Two, is “dialektos.”  In other words, the multitude were clearly confessing that they were hearing what would be a “foreign language” to these “Galilaeans” and not their own native language.  Which is confirmed and clarified again in verse 8: “And how hear we every man in our own tongue [dialektos], wherein we were born?”  Again, how much clearer must God’s Word be, particularly when It explains Itself?  And once again, this fact of “dialect,” and not some rambling of tongues, is confirmed again by verse 11, where we are told that the Jews who had come to Jerusalem from a dozen or so of different countries were surprised to “hear them [the apostles] telling in our own tongue [dialektos] the mighty works of God,” Acts 2:11.

 

This outpouring “gift” of the Holy Spirit was prophesied by our Lord Himself as a forecasted event in Mark 16:17:  “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In My Name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues.”  The Greek word for “tongues” used here by our Lord is “glossa.”  Therefore, our Lord Himself told us beforehand that His followers would be speaking with the use of “foreign languages.”

 

 

D) FIRST CORINTHIANS, CHAPTER TWELVE

 

 

Everyone should see that in Acts, Chapter 2, real languages were used.  The greatest misunderstanding of “The Gift Of Tongues” comes from Paul’s discourse in First Corinthians, Chapter 14.  Had we learned our lesson from our Lord in Mark 16:17 and Acts, Chapter 2, we would have had no problems with the Book of First Corinthians.

 

As an example, in First Corinthians, Chapter 12, verse 10, we are instructed that there are many gifts, with one of them being the “gift of tongues [“glossa”].”  Notice our Greek word is “glossa,” meaning, a “specific language.”  This is given to an individual who never new that “language” before.  Notice also that God places this gift as last in line -- in terms of importance -- for His work (verse 28).  Consider as an example, our Lord Jesus did not even have this gift, nor does it seem that He needed to use it, which would be why God would give this gift or any other gift in the first place.  However, the Apostles did need it (see Acts, Chapter Two, again if you disagree).  These people heard the Gospel and took it back to their respective countries and lands.

 

If we use the principle of interpretation, in which difficult passages are interpreted on the basis of simpler ones, then some of the more difficult texts that deal with tongues (such as First Corinthians, Chapter 14) need to be examined in light of what is clear.  And what is clear is that in Acts, Chapter Two, the “gift of tongues” was actually the ability to speak in “foreign languages.”

 

 

E) FIRST CORINTHIANS, CHAPTER FOURTEEN BREAKDOWN

 

 

Therefore, when we come to First Corinthians, Chapter 14, we can better understand why the apostle is pleading with them.  He says in verse 1: “Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.”  The “gift of tongues” was not as important to Paul either, above that of the other gifts of the Holy Spirit (see verse 5).  It is also very important here to notice that the word “unknown” is a supplied word, not in the original manuscripts, and has probably caused most of the confusion on this subject.  It is also “very important” to notice that for “every” use of the word “tongue” or “tongues” in Chapter 14, the Greek word used is “glossa,” meaning, a specific “language.”

 

Consequently, it is absolutely clear that Paul was talking about a “known language” on this earth.   We can know this by reading verse 10: “There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.”  He is speaking about “real dialects.”  Therefore, whenever you come across the word “tongues” in Chapter 14, replace it with the word “language,” for the Greek word is “glossa,” and you will no longer be confused upon this subject.

 

Also, it would appear that Paul spoke in more “tongues” than any of them (whether learned or spiritually given, he does not say), but he still confirms that he is speaking about known languages.  For he states in First Corinthians 14, verses 18 and 19: “(18) I thank my God, I speak with tongues [“glossa;” “language” remember?] more than ye all: (19) 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 [glossa; “unknown” being supplied; remember?].”

 

Now that we have established the Greek word for “tongue[s]” is “glossa,” meaning “language or dialect,” we can see that this same Greek word is used in Mark 16:17; Acts 2:4, 11; 10:46; 19:6; Romans 14:11; First Corinthians 12:10 & 28, and unmistakably refers to human language.  The purpose for speaking in an “unknown tongue” is for the edification of the Church (verses 4 & 5 & 12 & 26) or to “magnify God,” Acts 10:46.

 

According to Acts 2:4, it is because of the “Holy Ghost” that one can even speak in different tongues than what one already knows or is raised with.  The reason Paul says that we only speak “unto God” (verse 2) in an unknown tongue, is because only God understands that tongue, since no one else there is of that nationality (or tongue).  An interpreter (verses 5 & 13 & 27 & 28) is needed if no one of that nationality is present because an interpreter is not someone who had a vision or dreamed a dream, but knows the worldly language.  Paul clarifies what “tongues” are when he says:  “so many kinds of voices in the world” (verse 10). And verse 11:  “Therefore if I know not the meaning of the [world’s] voice.”

 

Considering verse 21:  “In the Law it is written” – Paul is referring to Deuteronomy 28:49, which clearly is understood as being a different “language,” and not some kind of “unknown tongue.”

 

Consider verse 22:  “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe but to them that believe not:” and therefore these tongues would have to be understood by non-believers who, of course, would never understand some Heavenly language.  You will also find that whenever the “gift of tongues” is associated with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, it is when people from more than one language group were gathered together.  This applies to Chapter 2, of the Book of Acts.  However, in Chapter 4, we have the exact same outpouring of the Holy Spirit, but no gift of tongues, because no foreigners were present.

 

Should First Corinthians 14:14 be a stumbling block:  “For if I pray in an unknown tongue [“unknown” being supplied to the translators mis-understanding; and with Paul not understanding himself], my spirit prayeth, but my understanding [thoughts] is unfruitful [to those listening].  Please excuse my liberty, but I believe this to be the correct interpretation.  Otherwise, how would Paul ever know if his prayer was answered?  This is clear when we consider verses 15 & 16:  “I will pray with the understanding. . . Else. . . how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen.”  It now becomes obvious from the context of the First Corinthians, Chapter 14 explanation, that the purpose of speaking in tongues, rather, foreign languages, is to communicate the Gospel to those present who would not understand Paul native Hebrew language, and thereby edify the Church.  Finally, if the gift of tongues is a necessity, then Jesus Himself and John the Baptist should have had this gift.

 

“Some of these persons have exercises which they call gifts and say that the Lord has placed them in the church.  They have an unmeaning gibberish which they call the unknown tongue, which is unknown not only by man but by the Lord and all Heaven.  Such gifts are manufactured by men and women, aided by the great deceiver.  Fanaticism, false excitement, false talking in tongues, and noisy exercises have been considered gifts which God has placed in the church.  Some have been deceived here.”  1T:412.

 

 

F) FIRST CORINTHIANS 14:22 (KEY POINT)

 

 

Now notice First Corinthians 14:22:  “Wherefore tongues [“glossa”] 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.”  HEREIN LIES THE KEY POINT.  The “gift of tongues” was NOT given for the believer, but for the unbeliever.  As an example, “prophecy” is for the believer, but not the unbeliever.  To ignore this point is to ignore a Biblical truth.  And that truth is that these “tongues” were “languages” put to use by God’s people in order to reason with persons of another “dialect.”  And therefore, those who teach that you do not have the “gift” of the Holy Spirit without the manifestation of the “Gift of Tongues” do not understand what they are talking about.  And now, hopefully, YOU WILL!

 

First Corinthians 14:20-25 could and should help us understand that in all of Paul’s discourses to the Corinthian brethren, Paul is speaking of an intelligible language, known to some language group of mankind.  Paul explains how undue exaltation of the “Gift of Tongues” is a sign of childish and immature thinking, i.e., “Brethren, be not children in understanding:  howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men,” verse 20.  To illustrate the immature thinking, Paul refers to an incident in Isaiah’s time when God warned He would speak to Israel by people of “strange tongues.”  “For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.”  Isaiah 28:11.  God will do anything to reason with an individual (Isa. 1:18).

 

This event was intended to lead the people to repentance, but instead they stubbornly refused to listen:  “yet they would not hear,” Isaiah 28:12.  The fulfillment came a short time later when the Assyrian king, Sennacherib, sent his military officer, the Rabshaketh, to threaten king Hezekiah with invasion and defeat and urge him to surrender.

 

My point is, that this other “tongue” was none other than a different language that the Israelites were unlearned of.  And in regards to Paul’s discourses with the Corinthian brethren, he is also referring to intelligible languages, but not understood by all (or anyone).

 

It is noteworthy that the unbelievers in Isaiah 18:11 are not foreigners, but the Israelites themselves, who had rejected the clear Word of God spoken through the prophets; and consequently, they had fallen in such unbelief that God would let the foreign tongues of Assyria to do His speaking to Israel for Him.  In fact, to be addressed in “other tongues” was a common theme of judgment in the Old Testament (see Deu. 28:49).  For example, like Isaiah, Jeremiah predicts God’s judgment upon Judah’s apostasy, saying: “Behold, I Am bringing upon you a nation from afar.  O house of Israel, says the Lord. . . a nation whose language you do not know, nor can you understand what they say.”  Jeremiah 5:15.

 

To conclude then, Paul uses in the same way the passage of Isaiah 28:11, to show that as the Assyrian tongues served to the Israelites as a sign of their unbelief, so the inordinate proliferation of the “Gift of Tongues” by some Corinthian members was as a sign of their unbelief.  Also, it must also be pointed out that:  “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.”  First Corinthians 14:22.  Therefore, for a church to use this gift merely for their own benefit is to misuse the Gift.

 

 

G) TO YOUR OBJECTIONS

 

 

The first person to speak about the gift of tongues was Jesus Christ Himself.  He mentions it only once, according to the Gospel records.  The passage is found in Mark 16:17:  “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In My Name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues.”

 

The Meaning of the Words “New Tongues,” is what is arguable, so let’s take a serious Biblical look at what Jesus is saying.

 

The Greek words for “new tongues” are “glossais kainais.”  The noun “glossa” is used with two major meanings.  First, it is employed to describe the “tongue” as an organ of speech.  For example, in the healing of a deaf man, Jesus “touched his [physical] tongue [glossa],” Mark 7:33 (see also Luke 1:64; Rom. 3:13; 14:11; 1Jo. 3:18; 1Pe. 3:10).  Second, the word “tongue [glossa],” is commonly used with the meaning of “language” (see Acts, Chapter 2; Php. 2:11; Rev. 5:9; 7:9; 10:11).  The meaning of “languages” is employed in Mark 16:17 by the “New American Standard Bible,” which translates this verse as “new languages.”  This translation reflects the intended use of the original Greek word “glossa.”  Also, according to “The Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark,” it explains that “tongues,” as used in Mark 16:17, literally means “languages,” because “the meaning here is the same as that [as] in Acts 2:4-11.”

 

The Greek adjective “kainais,” is usually translated as “new,” thus the phrase is translated as, “speak in new tongues.”  Thus, it is that in Mark 16:17, the Greek term “kainais” takes upon its form and seems to indicate “new,” except only in the sense of a “new” language which the speaker had not known before.  Therefore, to speak with “new tongues,” literally means to speak in a “new language” which would be “new,” or better, “unknown” before to the speaker at this point.  Sounds more and more like the power of the Holy Spirit here and His ability to give us gifts.  Any other concepts or ideas about this takes away the gift of God and gives power to the speaker; ground I do not want to be on.

 

We have already discussed the purpose for speaking in other languages.  The purpose of speaking in “new tongues” is clarified by the immediate context of Mark 16:17, where Jesus promises to His disciples the enabling power of the Holy Spirit to empower them to “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to the whole creation,” Mark 16:15.  Thus Christ promised them the power to speak other languages.  To thus equip the unlettered disciples to preach among other nations beyond the borders of Palestine in languages, which were not understandable to any of them before, fits the context or intent of the discourse, and gives glory to the promise of our Lord and not man.

 

In conclusion, there is an unmistakable linguistic connection between the phrase “new tongues,” of Mark 16:17, and “other tongues,” of Acts 2:4.  Only in these two passages can we find adjectives joined to the phrase “speaking in tongues.”  The two adjectives “new,” and “other,” link the two passages together by clarifying that the promise to “speak in new tongues,” of Mark 16:17, was fulfilled a few weeks later in Acts 2:4, when the disciples spoke “in other tongues.”

 

 

First Corinthians 13:1, is used to try and convince Bible students that Paul spoke with “tongues of. . . angels.”  In other words, since it was “Angelic Speech,” it was unintelligible and non-understandable unless one had an interpreter.  However, the context supports a different view and understanding of Paul’s dialog.

 

Verse two helps us to understand the context: “And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries.”  What Paul is pointing out is that even if he could speak the language of Heaven (“angels”), and even if he understood “all [the] mysteries” ever occurring, and certainly we cannot place Paul into the category of God’s position of understanding everything that ever was (or will be), is that without love, he is worthless, i.e., “and have not charity, I am nothing,” verse 2.

 

Therefore, what we have here is Paul was just exaggerating in order to bring home his real point about “love.”  He is not giving a lecture about the proper use of tongues nor its function, but the proper use and understanding of how Christians should function.  In fact, one cannot be considered to be a Christian and cannot function as such without the life blood of “love” in their every-day lives (see verses 3-13, i.e., the rest of the Chapter).  Neither “tongues” nor “mysteries” was his main point, nor the subject in this discourse.  They were only used to point out his real principle about “charity,” i.e., “love.”

 

 

In regards to First Corinthians 14:2, the reason that Paul or anyone would be only speaking “unto God,” and that “no man understandeth him,” is simply because, as clearly stated by Paul, “for no man understandeth him.”  In other words, no one present understands this particular language or dialect being spoken at the time (no one to interpret).  To make anything more of this text is to push it out of context.

 

First Corinthians 14:8-9 makes this perfectly clear, in that if no one understand the signal of the trumpet the soldiers do not know what to do.  And if no one understands the particular language being spoken, what good is it?

 

 

In looking at First Corinthians 14:23, one should not come to the conclusion in regards to the context, that because “the whole Church” could “speak with tongues,” that it was a Heavenly language and not human.  What Paul is saying is that if they could, he is just exaggerating in order to make his real point about outsiders then coming to the false conclusion that they would then think they are crazy, i.e., “mad,” because of all of the different “tongues” being spoken at the same time.

 

The real conclusion and point of Paul here in this discourse is that if all are speaking at once in different languages, then they would appear stupid, i.e., “mad” to an observer.  Thus, they should keep their prized “tongues” speaking to a reasonable level, and as pointed out earlier by Paul, only spoken when an interpreter is present (1Co. 14:5).  If one really pays attention to detail, a good Bible student would come to the conclusion and understand that Paul is really trying to point out to the Corinthian Church the “downplays” of the gift of tongues.

 

The Corinthian Church gave Paul more headaches and heartaches than any other Church that he served.  In fact, some of the problems he had to deal with there were:  the problem of factionalism and contentiousness, the toleration of gross immorality, the conducting of lawsuits against each other, the temptation to fall back into idolatry through the eating of meats offered to idols, abuses in connection with the Lord’s Supper, and the denial of the resurrection of the body.

 

With this background we can better understand why the Corinthians also had problems with spiritual gifts and why Paul even goes into a deep discussion over them; in particular, the “Gift of Tongues.”  Their problem was not the lacking in or of spiritual gifts, i.e., “you are not lacking in any spiritual gift,” First Corinthians 1:7, but the abuse of them.  This becomes evident from a careful reading of Chapters 12-14, which suggests that many Corinthian believers were placing the “Gift of Tongues” above every other gift and at the top of the list of spiritual endowments.  Even more striking is the fact that in the two other Pauline lists of spiritual gifts as found in Ephesians 4:11-12 and Romans 12:6-8, tongues-speaking is not even mentioned at all!  In reality, the absence of tongues speaking in the Ephesian and Roman Churches should convince contemporary tongue-speakers that their attempt to make the “Gift of Tongues” a requirement, or the supreme spiritual gift, lacks Biblical support.

 

 

First Corinthians 14:14, is used to justify speaking in tongues, at least for your prayer life.  And to be truthful, the supplied word “unknown,” although a supplied word, is added with the understanding of the false context, in that even Paul did not understand the language he would be praying in.  Let’s be honest, and I don’t mean to be derogatory, but if you do not know what you are praying for, how do you know if your prays are answered or not?  Verse fifteen clear states the Paul “pray[ed] with the understanding.”

 

Another way to look at what Paul was refering to is “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities:  for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.”  Romans 8:26.  And our underlining point remains, in that if you or anyone present does not understand what is being said, what is the Spiritual (or personal) benefit for the Church?

 

 

In verses 11-27 of First Corinthians, Chapter 12, Paul illustrates how the Spirit “apportions to each one individually,” verse 11, spiritual gifts.  He does this by comparing the Church to a body with many members.  His point is that since the Spirit gives different gifts to various members, we cannot expect everyone to have the same gift, i.e., “If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing?”  First Corinthians 12:17.  Thus, Paul’s argument is a veiled rebuke to those who promoted, and promote tongue-speaking as the spiritual gift that all should possess.  And this point is made even clearer in verse 30: “Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?”  In other words, not all have nor are required to have the use of, or command of the “Gift of Tongues.”

 

Thus, Paul addresses the problem by showing that the “Gift of Tongues” was not nearly as important as many of the Corinthians thought it was.  To accomplish this objective, he uses two strategies.  First, he places the “Gift of Tongues” and the interpretation of tongues last in the two listing of spiritual gifts as given in Chapter 12 (vs. 8-10 and 28).  Second, he lays down strict rules for the exercise of tongues-speaking.  If correctly observed, the Pauline rules, such as the translation requirement (1Co. 14:5), all would be orderly and understandable and more conversions would take place and less people would consider them to be “mad.”

 

 

In regards to Acts 10:45-46, Peter and his Jewish brethren “were amazed, because, the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles.  For they heard them speaking in tongues [“glossa”] and extolling God.”  That the speaking in “tongues” by Cornelius and his household was similar to that experienced by believers on the Day of Pentecost, Peter makes perfectly clear by making the connection between the two events, when he reports to the Jerusalem brethren:  “(15) The Holy Spirit fell on them [in Caesarea] just as on us in the beginning. . . (17) God gave the same gift to them as He gave to us [at Pentecost] when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ,” Acts 11:15 & 17.  Thus, Peter was convinced that the gift of speaking in “tongues” by the believers in Caesarea was “the same gift” of miraculously speaking foreign languages given to Christ’s followers on the Day of Pentecost.  And so should we.

 

The purpose of the manifestation of the gift of speaking in “tongues” in the Book of Acts, Chapter 10, differs slightly from that of the Day of Pentecost, in that the latter was to equip believers with the ability to speak “foreign languages” in order to fulfill Christ’s commission to proclaim the Gospel to every nation and tongue.  By contrast, the former was to break down the existing racial barriers between Jews and Gentiles, created by Jewish traditions.  A careful reading of the account helps us appreciate this purpose (see Acts 10:35).  The need for Cornelius and his family to speak in foreign languages was minimal, but the need for Peter and his party to break down racial barriers was great!

 

 

What about Acts 19:6?  The new aspect of the outward sign of receiving the Holy Spirit was the ability to “prophesy.”  “The Holy Spirit came on them; they spoke with tongues [“glossa”] and prophesied,” Acts 19:6.  This is the “first”New Testament passage which mentions together the two spiritual gifts of “speaking in tongues” and “prophesying.”  Paul discusses at great length the distinction between the two in First Corinthians, Chapter 14.  By contrast, no distinction is made in Acts, Chapter 19.

 

In Acts 19:6 the two spiritual gifts of “speaking in tongues” and “prophesying” are mentioned together, apparently because they served a common function.  The believers who received the gift of speaking a “foreign language,” also received a message for building up, encouragement, and consolation of the newly formed Church.  The gift of speaking a “foreign language” would hardly be of little value if the speaker did not receive from the Holy Spirit also a message of encouragement and edification for the congregation.

 

It must be emphasized that people are edified and converted, not by the sound of a “foreign language,” or an un-understandable language, but by the message itself being proclaimed.  Just as we see in Corinth, where Paul distinguishes between the two gifts, apparently because tongues-speakers were misusing the gift to edify themselves rather than the congregation (see 1Co. 14:4).  It is for this reason that Paul places the gift of prophetic speech above the gift of tongues (see 1Co. 14:5).

 

 

H) FINALLY

 

 

Finally, the Book of Acts reports that numerous people in various settings were baptized without ever “speaking in tongues.”  Consider the 3,000 at Pentecost (Acts 2:41); the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:38-39); Paul himself in Damascus (Acts 9:18); Lydia and her household (Acts 16:15); and the jailor and his household (Acts 16:33).  The Book of Actsalso mentions people like Peter (Acts 4:8), Stephen (Acts 7:55), and Paul (Acts 13:8), who were filled with the Holy Spirit, without the experience or manifestation of them speaking in tongues when filled (Paul apparently having this gift later on).

 

Only in Acts 2:4 is the expression “filled with the Holy Spirit” applied to people who received the gift of tongues on the Day of Pentecost.  This experience is negated as a requirement for acceptance into the Church by the numerous examples in the Book of Acts, where people are described as being filled with the Spirit, or full of the Holy Spirit, without “speaking in tongues” (see Acts 4:8; 4:31; 6:3 & 5; 7:55; 9:17; 11:24; 13:9 & 52).  Support for this conclusion is again provided in the Book of Acts by the numerous conversion stories of large crowds as well as of single individuals, none of whom are said to have spoken in tongues (see Acts 2:41; 3:7-9; 4:4; 5:14; 6:7; 8:36; 9:42; 11:21; 13:12 & 43 & 48; 14:1 & 21; 16:14 & 34; 17:4 & 11-12 & 34; 18:4 & 8; 28:24).