Your Tongues Are Not Biblical

In the realm of theological discussions, few topics spark as much debate and controversy as the gifts of the Holy Spirit, particularly the gift of tongues. Todd Friel with Wretched Radio has presented commentary on the gift tongues, advocating for a cessationist perspective. In this episode of Remnant Radio, we examine Friel's arguments and provide a comprehensive analysis of his viewpoints.

Exploring Todd Friel's Arguments on Tongues and Cessationism:

Friel's Points and Counterpoints:

Speaking in tongues requires an interpreter:
Friel asserts that if speaking in tongues occurs without an interpreter present, it may not align with biblical principles. While we agree that interpretation is crucial for edification in a public setting, we challenge Friel's assumption that interpreters must always accompany speaking in tongues in all circumstances. For example, in using the gift in a small group in prayer an interpreter may not always be available, or the gift of interpretation may not manifest on demand. The focus should be on the potential edification of the individual and the community, while also maintaining order.

Tongues must edify the believer:
Friel questions how speaking in tongues edifies a believer. He suggests that it should provide cognitive understanding or impart knowledge about God and His Word. However, the speaker argues that edification extends beyond cognitive growth. Speaking in tongues can foster a deep sense of communion with God, nurture faith, and inspire fervent prayer. The emotional and spiritual impact of tongues should not be overlooked as forms of edification.

Similarities with other religions:
Friel highlights the existence of tongues-like practices in other religions. He suggests that this similarity raises questions about the authenticity of tongues within Christianity. However, the response asserts that similarities in manifestation do not necessarily indicate a shared spiritual source. It is crucial to differentiate between the genuine gift of tongues in Christianity and the counterfeit practices of other religions. The presence of counterfeit experiences does not invalidate the authentic gifts within the Christian faith.

Tongues as a gift versus learned ability:
Friel argues that tongues cannot be learned and must be a genuine gift of the Spirit. We agree with this point, as the Bible confirms that spiritual gifts are freely given by God. However, we note that Friel's point is not presented as a separate argument but rather included in a larger point, which may lead to confusion. Both sides align on the understanding that tongues cannot be acquired through human effort.

Tongues and church history:
Friel suggests that church history portrays those speaking in tongues as outside the bounds of Orthodoxy. We challenge this assertion, noting that Friel's perspective might reflect the stance of his specific church community rather than historical consensus. Classical Pentecostals, for instance, hold orthodox beliefs while embracing the gift of tongues. Labeling all those with the gift of tongues as heretical based on fringe groups is an unfair generalization that contradicts historical evidence.

The absence and prevalence of the gift of tongues:
Friel questions why the gift of tongues appeared to be absent for over 2,000 years before resurfacing. We dismisses this assumption, highlighting that historical accounts and church history contradict Friel's claim. Instances of tongues and other spiritual gifts have been documented throughout history, even during the Protestant Reformation. We suggest that the perception of a diminishing of gifts may be attributed to changes in church structure rather than the cessation of the gifts themselves.

To watch our full response to Todd Friel's arguments, please watch the video above.