What I've Learned

The big issue with spiritual gifts, like with baptism, is determining their purposes. If the purpose of baptism is to indicate personal faith, then infant baptism is irrelevant and a misapplication of the sacrament.

If the purpose of "sign" gifts was simply to establish the church, not to continue building it up, then contemporary speaking in tongues is irrelevant at best, and misleading at worst.

However, I still struggle with this issue. My church has taken a clear stand on this issue, but it appears to me that Paul specifically forbids forbidding tongues (cf. 1 Corinthians 14:39-40).

As long as I keep in mind that this policy is in place to encourage non-Christians to attend services and learn more about Jesus, and to avoid Paul's concern in verses 22-25.

What these verses say to me is that the purpose of speaking in tongues is outreach to people who speak different languages. The way I've experienced tongues in charismatic services is very disorderly, the way Paul criticizes in these verses.

As so often happens in life, it appears that both extremes miss the point as a result of fear. Charismatic congregations ignore Paul's guidelines to keep things orderly, and conservative congregations adopt a cessationist perspective which denies the reality of tongues in today's world.

In my mind, the gift of tongues is a miraculous outreach gift that can expand God's kingdom today, but that is used unbiblically in many worship services.

Like many other things I belive on faith, not sight, I believe in the contemporary biblical application of tongues, and am not a cessationist. However, I can balance this perspective with the church's teaching and my tactful facilitation.