|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
In contemporary Christian circles looms a debate unlike any other, A debate that changes EVERYTHING! The debate is about whether speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation. Don don don. Alright alright, dramatic music out of the way, lets get serious. This debate is a ridiculous one. One that I have luckily been saved from having to engage in. However, I have received some communications that seems to indicate some semblance of importance, a reason to respond. Thus, in this article I will be responding to the claim that “speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation.”
Historical Context of Speaking in Tongues
The practice of speaking in tongues, or the phenomenon where individuals speak in languages unknown to them, has a storied history within Christianity, yet it has never been recognized as a prerequisite for salvation. Until the early 20th century from certain branches of the modern Pentecostal movement. To come right out of the gate this idea does not have roots in early Christianity or among the Church Fathers, it emerged with the revival of charismatic practices in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. That said, we’re still going to look at how the gift of tongues has been interrupted across various historical periods AND movements within Christianity.
Let’s start with the early Christian Church, as described in the Book of Acts, speaking in tongues was one of the signs accompanying the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. On the day of Pentecost, described in Acts 2, the apostles began to speak in tongues, enabling them to communicate the Gospel to a diverse crowd in their own languages. This event was seen as miraculous and a confirmation of the Gospel’s universal reach. However, this was not uniformly replicated in every conversion narrative or gathering of believers thereafter, while yes tongues were significant, they were not the sole or necessary sign of the Spirit’s presence or of one’s salvation.
As Christianity spread and diversified, the interpretation and importance of tongues varied. In the Patristic era, from the 2nd to the 8th century, church fathers did not place an emphasis on speaking in tongues at all let alone as a criterion for salvation. Instead, figures like Augustine of Hippo discussed spiritual gifts within broader theological and moral teachings, emphasizing virtues like faith, hope, and charity over any singular manifestation of the Spirit.
Moving into the Middle Ages, the focus of Christian life shifted towards monasticism, theological scholarship, and the establishment of doctrinal orthodoxy. During this time, the gift of tongues was less emphasized or even recorded. Figures like John Wycliffe, who was pivotal in the pre-Reformation period, focused on making the Scriptures accessible to the common people by translating the Bible into English. His efforts were more about empowering the laity with direct access to God’s word rather than promoting any particular spiritual gift as mandatory for salvation.
The Reformation era saw a further shift in theological emphasis, with reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin advocating for salvation by faith alone (sola fide). Luther, in particular, was critical of any practices that could be seen as works-righteousness, which would include the overemphasis on any charismatic gift like speaking in tongues. Calvin, in his “Institutes of the Christian Religion,” discusses spiritual gifts but frames them within the context of edifying the church, not as a test of one’s salvation.
The 19th and early 20th centuries witnessed a revival of interest in charismatic gifts, culminating in the Pentecostal movement, which began around 1906 with the Azusa Street Revival in Los Angeles. Here, speaking in tongues was seen by some as the initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. However, even within these circles, the necessity of tongues for salvation was not universally accepted. Many Pentecostal leaders and theologians argued that while tongues could be a sign of spiritual empowerment, they were not required for one’s eternal salvation.
Throughout these centuries, the historical narrative shows a pattern where speaking in tongues, while significant in certain contexts, has never been a requirement for salvation. Instead, it has often been viewed as one among many gifts of the Spirit, meant for specific purposes like evangelism, personal prayer, or edification of the church body, but not as a litmus test for one’s faith or salvation status. Across Christian history the focus on salvation remains rooted in the grace of God received through faith in Christ.
Theological Arguments Against the Necessity of Tongues for Salvation
History is great in all, but let’s face the facts. Those who are positing the claim that speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation, don’t care if they go against all of historical Christianity. So lets take a more theological approach shall we. This is the simplest way I can put it, theologically the assertion that speaking in tongues is essential for one’s salvation stands in direct opposition to Christian soteriology. (Doctrines of salvation)
At the heart of Christian theology is the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith, as articulated by the Apostle Paul in his epistles. Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.” This passage underscores that salvation is a gift from God, received through faith, not through any meritorious acts or demonstrations of spiritual gifts like speaking in tongues. To claim that tongues are necessary for salvation is to add a condition to what scripture declares as freely given.
Paul further elaborates on this in Romans 3:28, where he asserts, “For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.” Here, “works” can be understood broadly to include any human action or performance, including spiritual gifts. The emphasis is on faith in Jesus Christ as the sole means of justification before God, not on any external sign or gift.
In 1 Corinthians 12-14, where Paul discusses spiritual gifts at length, he places speaking in tongues within a broader framework where love is the greatest virtue (1 Corinthians 13). He argues that not all will possess the same gifts (1 Corinthians 12:29-30), directly stating, “Do all speak in tongues?” with the expected answer being “No.” This rhetorical question by Paul clearly indicates that not having this gift does not exclude one from the body of Christ.
Moreover, the Reformation’s theological stance, particularly the principle of “sola fide” (faith alone), explicitly rejects any requirement for salvation beyond faith in Christ. Martin Luther’s opposition to the sale of indulgences and the idea of works-based salvation, would have seen the demand for tongues as another form of legalism. John Calvin, too, in his theological works, while acknowledging the gifts of the Spirit, did not list tongues or any other gift as a requirement for salvation but emphasized the sovereignty of God in distributing gifts according to His will for the benefit of the church.
The Westminster Confession of Faith, a pivotal document in Presbyterian and Reformed theology, also supports this view. It declares that “the grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts” (The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 14). Here, faith is highlighted as the instrument by which salvation is received, not any visible manifestation like speaking in tongues.
Theologically, then, to impose speaking in tongues as a criterion for salvation is to misalign with the core Christian message of grace, faith, and the sufficiency of Christ’s work on the cross. It introduces a form of works-righteousness, which contradicts the clear biblical and historical teaching that salvation is a gift, undeserved and freely given to all who believe. This perspective not only diminishes the universality and simplicity of the Gospel, it creates barriers to God’s salvific plan.
Modern Misinterpretations and Movements
All that said, this view is almost solely held by certain charismatic and Pentecostal circles. These circles often hold to misinterpretations that suggest speaking in tongues is not only a sign of spiritual maturity or the baptism of the Holy Spirit but also, by extension, a requirement for salvation.
Since I mentioned the Pentecostal movement lets take another look at it’s history. The Pentecostal movement gained significant momentum in the early 20th century, notably with the Azusa Street Revival in 1906. This already is showing us the disconnect, which is why I felt it necessary to cover history earlier in the article. At these “Revivals” they placed a strong emphasis on the gift of tongues as evidence of the Holy Spirit’s baptism. While this was initially seen as a sign of spiritual empowerment, some branches of this movement began to imply or even explicitly teach that speaking in tongues was a necessary part of the Christian experience, linking it directly to one’s assurance of salvation.
This perspective became particularly influential in the heretical sect known as “Oneness Pentecostalism,” where not only is speaking in tongues seen as evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, but it is also sometimes required for baptism to be considered valid. That said it’s only fair to point out that this view, is not universally held even within all Pentecostal communities.
In the broader charismatic movement, which encompasses a wide variety of denominations, speaking in tongues has been celebrated for its personal and communal spiritual benefits, such as in private prayer or in worship settings. However, the leap from celebration to requirement for salvation is a misinterpretation that has sparked considerable controversy in said movements. Again it’s only fair to point out that many charismatic leaders have clarified that while they encourage the pursuit of spiritual gifts, including tongues, they do not see them as prerequisites for salvation or even for the fullness of Christian life.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, the claim that speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation finds no robust support in either scripture or history. Salvation, as consistently taught by the New Testament, is by faith in Jesus Christ, not by the manifestation of any particular spiritual gift. To insist that speaking in tongues is a criterion for salvation is to add to the Gospel, which is already complete and sufficient through Christ’s work on the cross.
