Is speaking in tongues for today?

The Bible uses the word "tongue" in several ways. This question is about speech given by the Holy Spirit. The clearest account is the day of Pentecost:

The Spirit gave the speech. The hearers heard it in their own native languages, and what they heard was the wonderful works of God. In Paul's list of the Spirit's gifts, tongues and their interpretation stand side by side:

The original Greek word behind "tongue" in these verses has the index number G1100. The reading checked all 47 places it appears. It is used for the body's organ of speech, for speech used wrongly, for peoples and language groups, and for this gift. For example, here is a healing:

In Acts 2, the same word is even used for what the disciples saw before anyone spoke:

So sharing a word does not make these things the same. Each use is read from its own setting.

Meaningful speech, and the need for interpretation

In Corinth, the problem Paul addresses is that the hearers do not understand without interpretation:

Paul compares this to instruments, to distinct sounds, and to a foreigner who cannot be understood. The issue is whether the hearers can understand, and interpretation changes that (1 Corinthians 14:5, quoted below). So the fact that hearers cannot understand does not prove the speech has no meaning.

In the English phrase "unknown tongue", the word "unknown" was supplied by the English translation. The original has only the word for tongue, which is the same word used in Acts 2. That index note only shows where to look. The real support is the passage's own repeated stress on meaning and interpretation.

It works the other way too. The shared word does not prove that every utterance in Corinth was a particular earthly language that could be named. Acts shows such languages. First Corinthians does not name every possible language or identify every utterance.

Paul's mention of the tongues of angels comes in an "if" sentence (1 Corinthians 13:1, quoted below). It does not establish that actual speakers speak an angelic language.

For all these reasons, not every modern sound called tongues should simply be identified with the gift Scripture describes.

Peter did not explain Pentecost by the crowd's excitement. He explained it by the prophet Joel:

Joel's own chapter was read whole. Its setting includes judgment, a call to return to God, restoration, and the coming day of the LORD:

Peter's explanation shows that what happened came from God, and that the outpouring is broad. It does not say that everyone who receives the Spirit receives tongues.

Peter then gave a promise that reaches beyond his first hearers:

This is a promise of the Holy Ghost. Turning it into a promise that everyone receives this particular gift would contradict 1 Corinthians 12:11 and 12:30. Jesus' words about the Father's giving should not be turned that way either:

Jesus' earlier promise to the apostles had a short, stated time attached:

That timed promise is not turned into a promise that repeats every few days.

At Cornelius' house, Gentiles received the Spirit while Peter was still speaking:

Later, Peter explained it to the believers who objected:

Here Scripture itself links this event to the beginning at Pentecost, and calls it the like gift. The event shows that Gentiles are included. It does not say that tongues have no other purpose, or that they must end once Gentile inclusion is accepted.

At Ephesus, Paul met about twelve disciples who knew only John's baptism. He taught them about Christ, and they were baptized in the Lord Jesus' name. Then:

These are records of what God did. A record of what happened is not a command for every later believer to repeat every detail.

In Samaria, the Spirit was given through the apostles' hands:

That verse records how it happened there. It does not say God can give the Spirit only that way.

At Cornelius' house, Acts 10:44 places the Spirit's coming while Peter spoke, and 10:47 says the hearers had received the Spirit before their water baptism. So the claim that receiving the Spirit must always follow water baptism is false by Acts 10:47. This is not what Scripture teaches.

No laying on of hands is mentioned at Cornelius' house. But a story's silence about an act does not prove the act never happened. The reading first stated this more strongly and then corrected it. What can be said is this: Acts 8 records a means, not a universal rule. The presence of apostles fits these accounts, but no verse turns their presence into a rule for when the gift ends.

Paul also connects the Spirit's work with faith rather than law:

This ties the supply of the Spirit, and miracles among the Galatians, to the hearing of faith. It does not say every believer must work a miracle. It does not say only an apostle can be present, and it gives no end date. It is a further reason not to make the laying on of apostles' hands a universal method. It does not prove that any gift is present today.

Paul's letter is addressed beyond the church at Corinth:

In the tongues chapter itself, he rejects the idea that these instructions are Corinth's private affair, and calls them the Lord's commands:

Elsewhere in the letter, Paul also gives instruction for all the churches:

That verse is about walking in one's calling, not about tongues. It shows that Paul speaks across churches. The direct link for tongues comes from chapter 14 itself.

Scripture also commands that teaching be handed on to later learners:

Together, these show that the Lord's instructions about tongues are passed on beyond their first hearers. They hand on commands. They do not promise every later believer every gift. Neither passage mentions tongues or says how often the Spirit will give them.

A command's reach does not remove its conditions. Instructions about using a gift apply where the gift is present.

In one argument, Paul says all believers share the one Spirit (12:13), and that not all speak with tongues (12:30). Gifts differ, and they are given for the good of all. Paul says the same elsewhere:

So the claim that every believer must speak in tongues conflicts with 1 Corinthians 12:11 and 12:30. This is not what Scripture teaches. The positive ground is that the Spirit gives each gift as he wills.

The same verses rule out the opposite error: using the absence of tongues to judge anyone. Having tongues, or not having them, is no verdict on any person's standing before God. Tongues should never be imposed as the required evidence for every believer.

Jesus' promise in Mark speaks of believers as a group:

This includes tongues in Jesus' promise, so tongues are not a forbidden kind of speech. But reading it as "every believer will show every sign" would clash with 1 Corinthians 12:28-30. Mark 16:20 reports that the promise was fulfilled. It gives no end date, and it does not promise the same signs in every later place without a break. In the same way, when Acts 2:4 says all were filled, that describes the company present that day.

The Scripture tool notes that Mark 16:9-20 is absent from some early copies. That note is not a verse and was not investigated. No conclusion here rests on it.

Faith is also not measured by demanding a sign:

The nobleman believed Jesus' word before he learned that his son had been healed. That passage records a real healing and real belief. It sets no rule that every believer must show or witness a sign.

Paul moves from the gifts in chapter 12, through love in chapter 13, and back to the gifts in chapter 14:

Gifts without love are worth nothing. But right after chapter 13, Paul says to follow love and desire spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 14:1). Love governs how the gift is used. It does not cancel the gift, and it does not permit disorder.

Tongues are also no proof of spiritual maturity. The Corinthians had these gifts, yet Paul wrote:

Paul prefers prophecy in the church because it builds up the church with speech people can understand. Interpretation changes that comparison:

Prayer to God in a tongue is clearly in view, but so is prayer with the understanding:

Then come the rules for the assembly:

Put plainly:

• Everything must build the church up.
• At most two or three may speak, one at a time.
• Someone must interpret.
• With no interpreter, the speaker keeps silent in church and speaks to himself and to God.
• Everything is done decently and in order (1 Corinthians 14:40).

The claim that anyone with the gift may ignore interpretation, turn-taking or order would make 1 Corinthians 14:27-28, 37 and 40 false. This is not what Scripture teaches. Claiming that something is spiritual does not exempt it from these commands.

Prayer and private speech to God are both affirmed:

• It cannot be denied. Denying all speech to God in a tongue would make 1 Corinthians 14:14 and 14:28 false.
• Personal benefit is no excuse in church. That a speaker is built up does not justify uninterpreted speech in the assembly.
• It is not given to everyone. Chapter 14 never says that every believer has a private prayer language. The "if" in 14:14 stays an "if".
• It is not demanded of anyone. Making it required for every believer would clash with 12:30.

The positive instruction is to pray with the spirit and with the understanding, and to keep silence in the assembly when there is no interpreter. It is not a demand that everyone produce sounds.

The instructions near the end of chapter 14 about prophets and about women were read, but nothing in this question needed them applied. The law mentioned in 14:34 was not used for any finding about how long tongues last.

Paul quotes Isaiah. Isaiah's chapter was read whole. In it, the people refuse the rest God offers, and foreign speech comes in a setting of refusal and judgment:

Paul applies it like this:

Another Isaiah passage also describes the burden of a people whose speech cannot be understood:

That supports Paul's point about being understood. It gives no date for the gift.

Two readings fail here:

• "A sign must convert those who hear it." This would erase the refusal to hear in 14:21 and the unbelievers' reaction in 14:23.
• "Because tongues are a sign for unbelievers, they have no place among believers." This would make 14:5 and 14:26-28 false, because those verses expressly provide for interpreted tongues that build up the church.

The sign and its use, with or without understanding, have to be read together. Neither Isaiah nor Paul says the gift ends once one generation has been judged.

Jesus also warned that striking signs do not prove where they come from:

So Scripture calls for neither blanket suppression nor untested acceptance. The claim that anything called tongues is acceptable would make 1 Corinthians 14:27-28, 37 and 40 false. This is not what Scripture teaches.

The passages on testing deal with spiritual claims and prophecy in general. They are not a mechanical test for every sound. No present speaker was described, so nothing here judges any speaker.

This is the strongest passage on the other side, and it must be heard in full:

Tongues will cease. That is certain, so the claim that tongues will last for ever is false by 1 Corinthians 13:8. This is not what Scripture teaches.

One verse is sometimes offered against this:

Its setting is Israel, election, the fathers and mercy. It is not a promise that every gift continues unchanged for ever. Stretching it that way would contradict 1 Corinthians 13:8.

What "perfect" means in 1 Corinthians 13:10

Paul explains his own words. Verses 9 to 12 describe present, partial knowing giving way to completeness. The child grows into a man. Seeing dimly gives way to seeing face to face. Knowing in part gives way to knowing as fully as one is known.

So the best-supported meaning of "perfect" here is the end of the present, partial way of knowing. This rests on verse 12's own explanation, not on a dictionary.

Two other passages fit this:

These share the same movement from the present condition to a fuller meeting with Christ, and that supports the reading. But neither passage says it is explaining 1 Corinthians 13:10. They do not fix an exact date for tongues, and they do not say every gift stops at one instant.

Love's arrival has not already ended the gift. Reading 13:8 that way would make the commands that follow, in 14:1 and 14:39, false. This is not what Scripture teaches.

Readings that put the end of tongues in the past

Several arguments say tongues have already ended. Each was weighed.

1. The "perfect" of 13:10 is the completed Bible. The reading affirms what Scripture says about itself:

Scripture comes from God and fully equips a person for every good work. But that is not the same claim as knowing even as one is known (13:12). It also gives no date when a collection of writings is closed. Scripture calls a law perfect even in times when people still know in part:

So a perfect word can already be present while knowing is still partial.

Two forms of this argument need to be kept apart:

• "13:10 expressly names a completed Bible." This fails. The object and the date come from outside the passage.
• "13:10 implies a completed Bible." This lacks positive support. It does not explain verse 12, which goes far beyond what the word "perfect" alone could carry.

This does not mean the word "perfect" can never describe a law. It plainly can. The point is that calling a word or law perfect does not identify the event in 1 Corinthians 13.

The Greek word for "perfect" in 2 Timothy 3:17 (G739) differs from the one in 13:10. That difference alone proves nothing either way, since different words can speak of the same thing. The missing link is in what the verses actually say. Another verse that uses the 13:10 word was also checked:

It concerns Christ's greater tabernacle, not the closing of a collection of writings.

2. The "perfect" of 13:10 is maturity. The child-to-man sentence in 13:11 is a real comparison. The Greek word for "perfect" in 13:10 (G5046) does describe maturity elsewhere. All 17 places it appears were read, including these:

The same word describes maturity, love, discipleship, a law and completeness. So the word alone cannot decide whether 13:10 means a finished collection of books or only the future state. The context decides, and in 13:10-12 the context is the end of partial knowing.

Ordinary maturity cannot be what ends tongues. Paul speaks wisdom among the mature (2:6), yet still knows in part (13:12). He thanks God for his tongues (14:18). He tells the Corinthians to be mature (14:20), and he does not then withdraw the command in 14:39. So maturity is a comparison that helps explain the passage. It is not the historical event that ends the gift.

The same applies to the maturity of the whole church. Paul names a shared goal:

A future completeness of the whole body fits that goal. But the claim that the finished writings have already brought it about would have to show two things: the unity and fullness named in Ephesians 4:13, and the direct knowing named in 1 Corinthians 13:12. Pointing to the sufficiency of the writings shows neither. That is a missing link, not a direct contradiction. It does not disprove every possible use of the picture of the church growing up. It means the claim cannot ground a ban on tongues today.

3. Tongues were only signs to confirm the first preaching. That confirming purpose is real, and the reading affirms it:

Mark 16:20, quoted above, says the same.

None of these verses says that confirming the word is the only purpose of tongues. None gives a point after which God cannot give them. Treating confirmation as their only purpose would make 1 Corinthians 14:4-5, 14, 17 and 28 false, because those verses speak of building up, prayer, thanksgiving and speech to God. This is not what Scripture teaches.

The softer claim, that the confirming purpose could have been fulfilled, is not false. But no verse says that fulfilling it ends every other use.

4. Only apostles had these gifts. Apostles did have a distinctive role, and the signs of 2 Corinthians 12:12 bore witness to Paul's apostleship. But others worked miracles too:

Acts distinguishes Stephen and Philip from the twelve, and 1 Corinthians 12:28 lists apostles and tongues as different things. The narrower claim stands: apostles had a foundational role. The broader claim fails: it is not true that only apostles ever used gifts.

5. The foundation was laid, so tongues ended.

The foundation picture describes the household of God and what it is built on, including the revelation that Gentiles share in the promise. It is not a dated decree about tongues.

The strongest answer comes from Paul's own letter to Corinth:

In the same letter, Paul says the foundation is already laid, and then gives directions for tongues and forbids forbidding them. So a laid foundation is not, by itself, enough to end tongues. This does not deny the apostles' foundational role. It also does not promise every later builder every earlier gift.

The list of Christ's gifts in Ephesians 4 was read too:

Its source in the Psalms praises God's victorious ascent:

Neither passage gives an end date for tongues. Tongues are not named in Ephesians 4's list. So the word "till" in Ephesians 4:13 does not guarantee that tongues will appear in every period. The foundation picture does not end them automatically either.

Checking the words "cease" and "face to face"

Different Greek words stand behind the three verbs in 13:8. The one for tongues ceasing (G3973) was checked in all 15 places it appears. It means stopping, and each setting gives its own cause and length:

Peter is quoting the Psalms, and that source was read too:

That is about holding back evil speech. It says nothing about when spiritual gifts end.

The word used for prophecy failing and knowledge vanishing (G2673) is also translated "ceased" elsewhere. In 13:11 it is the word for putting away childish things:

So the different words do not mean that tongues stop on their own, or stop before the other gifts. They create no timeline. That tongues will cease is firm. That they have already ceased is not something these words supply.

The phrase "face to face" was checked in other places:

These passages contrast indirect communication with direct communication. The phrase is not a technical date. In 1 Corinthians 13:12 it comes with knowing even as one is known, and any explanation must fit that whole clause. A change from spoken gifts to written letters does not explain it.

The exact time when tongues cease is not dated in these passages. The reason is in the text itself.

Verse 8 names tongues alongside prophecy and knowledge. Verses 9 and 10 then name knowing and prophecy again, but not tongues. That leaves two readings:

• The connected reading. Verses 8 to 12 are one description of the gifts giving way to completeness, at the end of partial knowing. This has positive support: the unified contrast with love that never fails, and the word "for" in verse 9, which links the verses as one explanation.
• The earlier-cessation reading. Tongues stop at some earlier point. No verse read makes this bare possibility false. But nothing in the text shows it either. The different words for stopping, the confirming purpose of signs, and the foundation picture do not pick out an earlier date. They do not say that such a date has arrived, and they do not withdraw 1 Corinthians 14:39.

On when tongues cease, and so on whether they have already ceased: Scripture speaks to this, but doesn't settle it, in the passages this reading gathered. This applies to those passages. It is not a claim that no other verse anywhere in Scripture bears on it.

The open point does not leave everything open. These things hold under either reading:

• Certain: tongues will cease.
• Not established: that they have already ceased. None of the arguments offered shows it.
• Not stated: that genuine speakers will exist in every generation. The commands make no such promise.
• Unchanged: the church's rule. Genuine tongues are not to be forbidden, and their use must follow the commands. The arguments for an end date are unproved, so they are no ground for a ban.

Here is what each reading means for the question "for today":

• Under the connected reading, these passages support receiving the gift within the present time of partial knowing.
• Under the earlier-cessation reading, whether genuine tongues are given today depends on whether that earlier end has already come, and no verse read says it has.

How the Spirit gives tongues across time is left with the Spirit, who gives as he wills (1 Corinthians 12:11).

No present-day speaker, church or experience was described. So nothing here declares any present case genuine or false. That would need knowledge of a particular case. These verses lay out the commands and the limits, but they do not certify any instance.

• It did not open the whole Bible. Some search results were shown but not read. They are listed in the record and were not used, so this answer makes no claim that no other verse bears on the question.
• It did not look at any history, any account of present-day speakers, any manuscript evidence, any study of modern languages, or anyone's experience. None of these was within the sources allowed. The commands above do not depend on them. A claim that genuine tongues occur in a particular present case would.
• Every Scripture quotation in the record was checked again against the text and matched exactly.