Poll Says Many Pentecostals Don’t Speak in Tongues – Christianity Today Magazine

As Evangelicals grow older, Pentecostals seem to be growing quieter – at least in their use of the supposed gift of tongues. That is, the old style Pentecostals who jumped pews, while leaping to the altar, in a desperate attempt to exercise their so-called private, and well-rehearsed signature move: speaking in tongues, are not jumping or jargoning as much any longer. According to a recent poll, Pentecostals and charismatics are less likely to shout their “shanda-la-ha’s” as they are to lay hands on a headache or free someone from the demon of halatosis.

Why? Why are tongues ‘a-waning today? I know, I have some good friends whose blood is boiling already. C’mon, you’ve said worse about my lack of tongin’ than I have about your private, yet not-so private prayer shouting. So, since I’ve already crossed the line, let me offer a few sterotypical, off-the-cuff suggestions as to why I think grumbling in gibberish is not quite as popular today as when it began just over a century ago.

Reason # 1: Very little long-term life change or spiritually substantive depth has been produced by talking-n-tongues. For all of the appeals to 1 Corinthians 14 and Paul doing it more than the Corinthians, and the supposed “edification” it brings to the speaker (while the listener remains with his head in the “cow-new-gate” position), little real, long-lasting life-change is wrought because one speaks in tongues. One does not learn more of God’s Word while speaking in an unknown tongue; obviously – it’s unknown. Sin is not overcome by what I repeatedly say yet cannot rationally comprehend. Simply, neither spiritual depth nor transformation of life takes place because one speaks in tongues. Certainly some who speak in tongues could tell me of long lasting change and we can absolutely name a number of spiritually deep people who speak in tongues, but my guess is they are as they are for reasons far beyond and in spite of their tongue talking.

Reason # 2: The Purpose Driven Church. Yes, I think the PDC movement has tamed the tonguers. I have found it sterotypically facinating to see how many of the hard-core charismatic churches in my city and the cities I have served in as a pastor have abandoned the typcial tongue-driven services for the more socially palatable and numerically successful PDC approach. Talking in tongues is not helpful when you are trying to be sensitive to seekers who think such gabbing is simply strange blathering. I think many charismatics tamed their tongues because they jumped on to the seeker band wagon and speaking in tongues had to be kept in the prayer closet in order for the church service to draw the anticipated crowd. I know, this is stereotyping and straw-manish. But I do think it is a valid factor.

My last suggestion is that speaking in tongues has not historically been biblically practiced or produced. In my estimation, what we have typically heard from those who speak in tongues is a learned behavior that sounds strangely similar to that of most of the TBN personalities who have made it so popular. I still say there is nothing in 1 Corinthains 14 that suggests that the gift was ever intended to be private. I am also convinced that few tongue talkers in the past 100 years have wanted the gift to remain in the prayer closet. So, when it inevitably does make its way to the public assembly, it has been produced in such a way to violate virtually every exhortation explicitly given for its public use in 1 Corinthians 14. Those charismatics who tend to emphasize the Bible more than their experience have more and more wanted to speak in tongues in public – all at once – less and less. Many have stopped trying to attach the baptism of the Holy Spirit to speaking in tongues, mainly because the Bible simply doesn’t support the connection.

Obviously, I’ve poked fun at some who are no doubt very sincere in their speaking in tongues. I apologize. I am speaking about the extremes – and there are PLENTY of extremists on this issue (click HERE for a typical example). We can all name them and so my playfulness is meant just as that. However, the extremists tend to draw thousands more than the more level-headed and biblically based tongue-talkers (yes, I believe they exist). So, if you are one of those who thinks Benny Hinn is hogwash, don’t be too offended. If you think Paul, Jan, Rod, and Benny, are God’s aointed blessings to the church and find my stereotypes offensive, please know, I’ve done far less to your cause than you have to Christ’s.
Now, my suggestions do not explain why charismatics have not let go of healing as much as speaking in tongues, but that’s another post for another century.