Pentecostal and Charismatic Theology — Unit 5: Spirit Baptism II: Initial Evidence and Its Critics

Key Verse

"And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts 2:4, NKJV)

Learning Objectives

When you finish this unit, you should be able to:

1. State the classical Pentecostal teaching that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit, and say what the teaching does not claim.

2. Give the biblical case from Acts 2, 10 and 19, and explain how Pentecostals read Acts 8 and 9.

3. Distinguish tongues as the sign of Spirit baptism from the gift of tongues in the assembly (1 Corinthians 12-14).

4. State at least four objections to initial evidence fairly and give a Pentecostal answer to each.

5. Describe how a pastor can teach this doctrine with firmness, honesty and care for people.

The Voice of This Unit

This unit is written from inside the classical Pentecostal tradition, for students who belong to it. It is conservative and Trinitarian. In Unit 4 we studied what Spirit baptism is, why it is for power, and why we call it subsequent. Now we study the sign that we teach goes with it. We affirm this teaching as a conviction of our tradition. Many evangelicals, and some Pentecostal scholars, question it, so we state their reasons fairly before we answer.

What We Teach

Many classical Pentecostal denominations teach that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Assemblies of God, for example, adopted a Statement of Fundamental Truths in 1916 that included this teaching. Each word in the phrase matters.

Initial means first. Tongues are the first sign, not the last. The baptism is the beginning of a Spirit-filled life, and the evidence of that life must continue in fruit, love and service.

Physical means that the sign can be heard. It is not only an inner feeling. In Acts, other people could tell that something had happened.

Evidence means a sign that points to something real. Tongues do not create the baptism and they are not the baptism itself. They show that the Spirit has come.

We must also say what the teaching does not claim.

• It does not say that tongues prove a person is saved. Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ (Ephesians 2:8).

• It does not say that a believer without tongues is lost, or lacks the Spirit. Every believer has the Spirit (Romans 8:9).

• It does not say that speaking in tongues proves a person is holy or mature. Corinth had many gifts and many faults.

• It does not say that tongues are the only gift or the greatest. Paul says the opposite: "I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied" (1 Corinthians 14:5).

What it claims is narrower. When Jesus baptizes a believer in the Holy Spirit, the pattern in Acts is that the person speaks in tongues, and we expect that pattern to continue.

The Biblical Case

Our teaching rests on Luke's accounts in Acts. We start with the three passages where tongues are plainly named.

Acts 2: Jerusalem

"And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:4). At Pentecost the sign was heard in languages that visitors from many nations understood. The crowd was amazed, and Peter said that this was what Joel had promised: "your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (Acts 2:17). Here the first Spirit baptism of the church was shown by inspired speech.

Acts 10: Caesarea

Peter preached to Cornelius's household, and "the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word." The Jewish believers with Peter were astonished that the Spirit had been poured out on Gentiles, "For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God" (Acts 10:44-46). Their reason is the key. How did they know the Gentiles had received the Spirit? Luke says: they heard tongues. Later, when Peter explained this to the church in Jerusalem, he said the Holy Spirit fell on them "as upon us at the beginning" (Acts 11:15). He compared it to Pentecost, where the sign had been tongues. We reason that tongues were the evidence that persuaded the apostles that the Gentiles had received the same gift.

Acts 19: Ephesus

After Paul laid hands on the twelve disciples, "the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied" (Acts 19:6). Again the Spirit's coming is joined with tongues.

So in all three accounts where Luke describes the outward result in detail, tongues are present. Pentecostals say this repeated agreement is not an accident. It is Luke's pattern, and he intends the church to notice it.

Acts 8 and Acts 9: the harder cases

Two accounts do not name tongues. In Acts 8, the Samaritans received the Spirit through the laying on of hands, and Luke does not say how it showed. But Luke does say something happened that Simon "saw" (Acts 8:18). Something visible and impressive made him offer money for the power. Pentecostals have long reasoned that this was most likely tongues, since Luke uses the same pattern elsewhere, though we admit the text does not say so. We hold this as a reasonable inference, not a proven statement.

In Acts 9, Saul was told he would "be filled with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 9:17), and Luke does not describe the result. But Paul himself tells us years later, "I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all" (1 Corinthians 14:18). We believe it is likely that his tongues began when he was filled.

Our case, then, does not claim that every account names tongues. It claims that where Luke tells us what happened, tongues are there, and where he is silent we have good reason to think the pattern held.

Why Tongues?

Why would God choose this sign? The Bible suggests two reasons.

First, tongues are Spirit-inspired speech. Peter links them to the promise that the Spirit would cause His people to prophesy (Acts 2:17-18). Speech is how witness is given, and Spirit baptism is for witness. The sign matches the purpose.

Second, tongues in Acts are a form of praise. At Caesarea the Gentiles spoke with tongues "and magnify God." The first act of the Spirit-filled person is worship.

These are reasons we find helpful. We do not claim the Bible states them. Our main argument remains the pattern in Acts.

The Sign and the Gift

Critics often point to 1 Corinthians 12:30, where Paul asks, "Do all speak with tongues?" The expected answer is no. How can we then say every Spirit-baptized believer speaks in tongues?

Pentecostals have long distinguished two uses of tongues.

Tongues as the initial sign. In Acts, tongues appear when a person is first baptized in the Spirit. This is open to all who are baptized in the Spirit.

The gift of tongues in the assembly. In 1 Corinthians 12-14, Paul writes about a gift given by the Spirit "to each one individually as He wills" (1 Corinthians 12:11) for the church's building up. Not all have this ministry. When it is used in public, it needs interpretation (1 Corinthians 14:27-28), so that the church may be edified.

Paul also speaks of tongues in private prayer. "For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries" (1 Corinthians 14:2). He says the one who speaks in a tongue "edifies himself" (1 Corinthians 14:4) and writes, "I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding" (1 Corinthians 14:15). Paul says the Spirit helps us in prayer (Romans 8:26), and Jude 20 speaks of "praying in the Holy Spirit." Many Pentecostals understand these verses to include the prayer language that tongues give.

Thus the answer to 1 Corinthians 12:30 is that Paul asks a question about the public gift and ministry, not about the sign at the first baptism. The same word "tongues" is used for related but different purposes. Paul wishes that all would speak with tongues (1 Corinthians 14:5), yet he also says that not all have the public gift. Both can be true.

The Main Objections and Our Answers

Pentecostal students must be ready to hear the following objections. They come from sincere people, and some from within our own movement.

Objection 1: Not every account in Acts mentions tongues.

The objection. Acts 8 and 9 are silent. Acts 4:31 says believers were filled again, with no mention of tongues. So Luke does not teach a fixed sign.

Our answer. Silence is not denial. Luke often summarizes. Where he gives details (Acts 2, 10, 19), tongues are there, and in Acts 10 they are the very evidence the apostles trusted. In Acts 8 the observable sign is implied. As for repeated fillings, we agree that believers are filled again many times. The initial evidence belongs to the first baptism and not to every later filling.

Objection 2: First Corinthians 12:30 says not all speak with tongues.

Our answer. This is answered above. Paul is talking about the gift exercised in the assembly. We do not say every believer has that ministry. We say that the sign at the beginning of Spirit baptism is different in function.

Objection 3: Narrative does not set doctrine.

The objection. This is the most serious scholarly objection, and it comes from within our own tradition. Gordon Fee, an Assemblies of God minister and scholar, has argued in his writing on hermeneutics that an example in a narrative does not by itself become a rule for all believers. Acts tells us what happened. It does not necessarily say what must always happen.

Our answer. We take Fee's caution seriously. A single event should not be made into a command. But our case is not built on one event. It rests on a pattern that Luke repeats, on Peter's argument in Acts 10-11, and on the promise that Jesus gives the Spirit to all who ask (Luke 11:13). Pentecostal scholars such as Roger Stronstad have argued that Luke wrote his narrative with a purpose to teach. Scripture says, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine" (2 Timothy 3:16), and Luke's history is part of it. We also add that some Pentecostals, including some scholars, hold tongues to be the usual and normal sign without making it a required test. We respect those brothers. But the classical bodies that adopted the doctrine did so after reading these passages together, and we believe they read them rightly.

Objection 4: Many believers have great power and holy lives without tongues, and some who speak in tongues live badly.

Our answer. This is true, and it is why we say that tongues are not proof of holiness. We never judge another's spiritual standing by this sign. The Lord has used many people who do not speak in tongues, and we thank God for them. But the fact that God works through others does not cancel what He has promised. And the abuse of a gift does not take the gift away. Corinth shows that.

Objection 5: Tongues are only a human psychological phenomenon.

The objection. Some psychologists and linguists have studied modern tongues and said they do not look like human languages, and that they resemble speech patterns learned or produced in religious excitement.

Our answer. Science can describe how people speak, but it cannot weigh the work of the Spirit. The Bible does not say that tongues are always known human languages. At Pentecost they were understood by hearers (Acts 2:6), and Paul speaks of "the tongues of men and of angels" (1 Corinthians 13:1) and of speech that "no one understands" (1 Corinthians 14:2). Our test is not a laboratory but Scripture and fruit: does the experience lead to praise of Christ, love and bold witness? "Test all things" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). We also warn against imitation and pressure, because a coached sound is not the Spirit's gift.

Objection 6: The gifts, including tongues, have ceased.

Cessationists say that tongues belonged only to the apostolic age. We answered this briefly in Course 1, Unit 1. The reply is that 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 places the end of the gifts at the coming of "that which is perfect," which we take to mean the return of the Lord. Unit 10 of this course will take up cessationism in full.

Pastoral Care in Teaching Initial Evidence

Because this doctrine can be misused, pastors should observe five rules.

1. Teach it from Scripture, not from pressure. Show people Acts 2, 10 and 19. Let the Word persuade.

2. Do not make it a test of salvation or fellowship. We welcome all who confess Christ.

3. Do not coach or imitate. Never teach people to make sounds to "get" the gift. Teach them to ask, trust and yield to the Lord.

4. Keep order in the assembly. Paul says, "Let all things be done decently and in order" (1 Corinthians 14:40). Public tongues need interpretation, and teaching should be clear for visitors (1 Corinthians 14:23).

5. Watch the fruit. Tongues should lead to love, holiness and witness.

Pastoral Application

Pastor Miguel serves a small church. A family of faithful believers from a Baptist background has begun to attend. The father, Daniel, loves Scripture and says, "I believe the Holy Spirit gives power to witness. But I don't see why I need to speak in tongues to prove it. My wife has served God for thirty years without it."

First, Miguel thanks Daniel for his honesty and for his wife's service. He says plainly that no one in his church considers her less saved or less spiritual.

Second, he opens Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44-46 and Acts 19:6 with Daniel, and explains that this is what our tradition has seen in Luke's pattern. He admits that Acts 8 and 9 do not name tongues, and that some good scholars disagree with us.

Third, he explains that tongues are called evidence, not a proof of salvation or holiness.

Fourth, he does not press. He invites Daniel to keep reading Acts with an open heart and to ask the Father, as Luke 11:13 says. He offers to pray with him whenever he wishes, and he leaves the matter with the Lord. The family stays in the church.

Summary

Many classical Pentecostal bodies teach that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Assemblies of God included this in its 1916 Statement of Fundamental Truths. The teaching does not say that tongues prove salvation, holiness or maturity, and it does not unchurch believers who lack the sign. The biblical case rests on Acts 2:4, 10:44-46 and 19:6, on Peter's argument in Acts 10-11, and on a reasonable inference for Acts 8 and 9. Pentecostals distinguish the sign at the beginning of Spirit baptism from the gift of tongues in the assembly, which needs interpretation and is not given to all. Critics note that not every account names tongues, that 1 Corinthians 12:30 says not all speak with tongues, that narrative may not set doctrine (a point Gordon Fee has raised), that holy lives exist without tongues, and that tongues may be explained as a human phenomenon. We answer each from Scripture, with humility and without pressure.

Further Reading

• Roger Stronstad, The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke (1984).

• Gordon D. Fee, God's Empowering Presence (1994).

• James D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (1970), an evangelical critique.

• Frank Macchia, Baptized in the Spirit (2006).

• Max Turner, The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts (1996).

• Amos Yong, The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh (2005).

Submit Exam & Check Pass Reset