Wesleyan Pentecostal Church
of Washington
1.    The Scripture admits to public praise, worship and prayer with many speaking at one time. (2 Chron. 5:13; 2 Chron. 15:14; Psa. 100, 147-150; Acts 4:24; Rev. 4:8-11; 5:9-14.)

2.    The Scripture allows for tongues to be spoken by more than one at a time in a public setting. Though the occasion may be the event where people are initially filled with the Spirit, the result is the same—more than one person speaking in tongues at a time, in a public setting, speaking praises or petitions to God. The reasoning would flow that if believers being filled for the first time with the Spirit may speak in tongues in a public forum, then may not other Spirit-filled believers join with them in adoring the Father for His wondrous gifts? (Acts 2:4-11; 8:17, 18; 10:46; 19:6 with 1 Cor. 14:2-4)

3.    The tenor of 1 Cor. 14 is regulation for speaking in tongues when those tongues are directed or displayed toward the church. (v. 6, 9, 11, 16, 19) 1 Cor. 14 is not in a context of worship and praise, but leading a congregation in prayer or thanksgiving over a meal, instruction and teaching. v. 13, 16, 17, 19, 24, 26, 31, 35.  When tongues become a forum for individual, spiritual display without regards to the context and spirit of the assembly, the result is tumult and disorder. It should be stated here that the meaning of the word “confusion” in verse 33 is tumult, commotion, state of disorder, disturbance. It is translated “commotions” in Luke 21:9 and “tumults” in 1 Cor. 6:5 and 2 Cor. 12:20. It does not mean a simple lack of understanding or befuddlement as we sometimes define and use it. The onlookers on Pentecost day were confounded because of the tongues, but there was no tumult or disorder among the saints. This is why Paul gave the regulation—that he may bring order out of the commotion, because God does not author tumult in the midst of His people. The work of the Spirit is to bring unity not disorder. By way of application and example: One can have a service when all or at least the majority are praying and worshipping God (some in English, some in tongues produced by the Spirit, some in another language known to them—such as foreign nationals in the church); they are focused on and speaking to God above, not the neighbor sitting or standing beside you. Consequently, it is neither disorderly, nor indecorous when we hear different languages being spoken at the same time in a praise and worship setting. On the other hand, if one or two elders stand and address the congregation in tongues, silence follows, another stands and offers a prayer in tongues; then several more speak in tongues at once outside of the context of general church worship and prayer while others sit, watch and listen without interpretation; others are then encouraged to stand and put in their two cents in a known or unknown tongue. Would this produce tumult and commotion? Yes. This was the problem at Corinth.

4.    Paul admits to tongues that can be spoken to God and not men and thus require no interpretation (v. 2 with v. 28). He then admits to tongues spoken to the congregation that require interpretation (v. 5 and 13 with 27-28). The indication is that when the tongues are directed toward God (the only context being praise and prayer) they need no interpretation as they are for individual edification and God obviously needs no interpreter. When the tongues are directed toward the church in prayer, teaching, or any other form of public address, they require an interpretation as they are for the edifying of the body.

5.    To apply Paul’s regulation to all tongues in every context of the assembly would be to eliminate the tongues in Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19. We may not interpret Scripture in a manner that does injustice to other parts of Scripture.

Defense for Public Speaking in Tongues