Tongues: Sign of Covenantal Curse and Blessing

By O. Palmer Robertson

Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia

God does not generally startle his people with the novel and the unexpected. The whole purpose of the long preparatory history of the Old Testament was to cushion the potential shock of an incarnated Son of God. Hardly a doctrine or an experience of the New Covenant people of God has failed to have its Old Testament counterpart. The softening shape of the shadow has preceded the luminous entry of the reality. In order to assure proper contextual comprehension, God carefully guarded the entry of his truth into the world.

This “preparation principle” certainly played a prominent role in the charismatic gift of tongues. On the day of Pentecost, Peter could point readily to Joel the prophet as one Old Testament figure who had anticipated quite specifically the outpouring of God’s Spirit on all flesh. The connection established by Peter between Pentecost and the Old Testament is well known.

Not so readily recognized is the connection made by Paul. Interestingly, Paul connects the Old Testament specifically with the phenomenon of tongues itself. While Peter applies a general Old Testament prophecy concerning the Spirit to the tongues of Pentecost, Paul penetrates even more deeply and points to a portion of the Old Testament which concerns itself explicitly with tongues.

Paul’s passage, often overlooked, is embedded in the very heart of his treatment of the tongues of Corinth. In typical fashion, Paul locates the problem-solving fulcrum for the New Testament people of God in the inspired Scriptures of the Old Testament. If a definitive answer is to be found for trouble among God’s New Covenant people, it must be sought in the authoritative documents of God’s Old Covenant people. Paul’s pertinent comments are found in 1 Cor 14:20–22, which read as follows:

20 Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be babes; but in your thinking be mature. 

21 In the Law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, and even so they will not listen to Me, says the Lord. 

22 So then tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe, but to unbelievers; but prophecy is not to unbelievers, but to those who believe.[1]

First, note that Paul identifies tongues as a sign of covenant fulfillment.[2] The quotation which the Apostle applies to the current tongues phenomenon originates in Is 28:11. However, the trail of Old Testament anticipation of tongues cannot stop with Isaiah. When the prophet announces that a foreign nation is to overrun Israel’s borders, babbling in a strange tongue, he is simply applying to his day the covenantal curse of Deut 28:49:

The Lord will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as the eagle swoops down, a nation whose language you shall not understand.

The judgment of God on a disobedient people will come by means of a foreign nation. The sign of God’s covenantal judgment on Israel will be the sound of babbling in a foreign tongue.

The context of Isaiah’s allusion to the covenantal curse of Deuteronomy makes it quite plain that the prophet understood himself to be announcing the fulfillment of God’s covenantal judgment on his people. Look again at Is 28:9ff. The prophet asks, Who is the one to whom God is attempting to teach knowledge? What kind of hearer has Israel been (vs. 9a)?

Isaiah answers his own question out of the frustrating failure he has experienced in attempting to communicate God’s message to a rebellious people. Their infantile response insults the God who has made them. They act as though they were babies—just weaned from milk, just taken from the breast (vs. 9b). Because they “would not listen” (vs. 12), God must speak to them as though they still were learning through juvenile jingles:

“Order on order	“sav lasav
order on order	sav lasav
line on line	kav lakav
line on line”	kav lakav” (vss. 10, 13)

What will be the final result of this willful reversion to infancy on Israel’s part? What will be the outcome of their childishness?

Isaiah stuns his hearers. If they persist in acting like children, pretending not to hear or to understand, then God will speak to them judgmentally in their childishness. His voice will speak to them as the words of an adult must sound to the infant. Instead of communicating to them clearly in their own native tongue, God “will speak to this people through stammering lips and a foreign tongue” (vs. 11). He shall bring to pass the curse of the covenant spoken by Moses. A nation whose language is not their own shall swoop down upon them to execute God’s wrath and curse. His favorable relation to them shall be terminated by a people whose language they cannot understand. God will speak in unfamiliar accents, “that they may go and stumble backward, be broken, snared, and taken captive” (vs. 13).[3]

Isaiah’s threat that God soon will heap the covenantal curses of Deuteronomy on Israel by speaking to them in “stammering lips and a foreign tongue” (vs. 11) finds further development in the immediately following verses of the chapter. Is 28:16 declares:

Therefore thus says the Lord God,
Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone,
a costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed.
He who believes in it will not be disturbed.

The verse will be recognized immediately as a passage of particuiar importance for the writers of the New Testament. Paul in Romans 9:31–33 explains Israel’s stumbling in the light of this verse from Isaiah. The parable of Christ himself which dramatizes the snatching of the kingdom from Israel grounds itself in the Old Testament context of the cornerstone which also operates as a stumbling-stone for Israel (Matt 21:42–46).[4]

This broader employment of the message of Is 28 by the New Testament in application to the termination of God’s distinctive relation to Israel enforces the significance of Paul’s citation of the curses of the covenant as they relate to the phenomenon of tongues. Tongues occur as no surprise to the people of God. They have an appointed role as covenantal sign. When tongues occur, God’s judgment on Israel has become a realized part of redemptive history. Tongues serve as a sign of covenantal curse.

Since this perspective on the role of tongues is rather new, the starting-point of this discussion must be underlined again. It is Paul the Apostle, dealing with the problematic of tongues in Corinth, who quotes the judgmental words of Isaiah to explain the significance of tongues.

A closer scrutiny of the context of Paul’s quotation may serve to enforce the connection of Paul’s argument with that of Isaiah’s. Paul begins in 1 Cor 14:20 by breaking into his discussion of tongues to admonish his hearers not to be “children” in their thinking. The Corinthians are being childish in their display of the gift of tongues. They are exercising immaturely the gift without restraint and without considering adequately its proper role in the purpose of God.

It is quite striking to note the similarity of contexts in Isaiah and in Paul. Isaiah’s problem was the childish nation of Israel; Paul’s problem is the childish church of Corinth. By setting his remarks in a context comparable to that of Isaiah, Paul reinforces the weight of his words. The Corinthians indirectly are admonished not to stumble into the same error as Israel of old.

At the same time, the similarity of context between Is 28 and 1 Cor 14 strongly suggests that Paul knew what he was doing when he quoted Isaiah 28:11 about God’s speaking judgmentally to Israel “through stammering lips and a foreign tongue.” It is not that Paul simply snatches up an isolated aphorism to apply to his circumstance. He knew full well that tongues in Isaiah appeared as a sign of covenantal curse. He understood that judgment on Israel was the subject at hand. In short, Paul quoted Is 28:11 precisely because he understood the New Testament phenomenon of tongues to be the climactic fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy.

Israel did receive in the days of the Old Testament the judgment to which Moses and Isaiah alluded. Both had prophesied that as a result of covenantal disobedience, the sign of babbling languages would be heard in the land. Their prophecies were joined by a further word of confirmation by a third prophet standing as contemporary to the accomplished fact. Moses spoke in the fifteenth century B.C. about people of a foreign tongue coming to judge Israel (Deut 28:49). Isaiah spoke in the eighth century B.C. with the same perspective. In the century of Israel’s captivity, Jeremiah reiterated the same message:

Behold, I am bringing a nation against you from afar,
O house of Israel, declares the Lord.
It is an enduring nation,
It is an ancient nation,
A nation whose language you do not know,
Nor can you understand what they say (Jer 5:15).

This triple prophecy of the fifteenth, eighth, and sixth centuries B.C. found its initial fulfillment at the time that the “babbling Babylonians” overran Israel. But Paul says this sign of covenantal curse on Israel found its climactic fulfillment by the manifestation of the gift of tongues in the New Testament era. The judgment of God on Israel in 586 B.C. was only a foretaste of that severest of judgments pronounced by Christ himself: “Your house is left to you desolate” (Luke 13:35).

How did tongues serve as a sign of covenantal judgment for Israel? In a very literal sense, the “tongues” of Pentecost represented the taking of the kingdom away from Israel and the giving of the kingdom to men of all nations. Indeed, all those who witnessed the phenomenon at Pentecost originally were Israelite in origin. The superabounding character of God’s grace is nowhere more apparent than in the salvation of Israelites. Yet the significance of tongues is quite apparent. No longer will God confine himself to one people, speaking a single language. No longer will God funnel his gracious work of salvation through a single nation. Instead, God now shall speak all languages to all the peoples of the earth. To all the nations of the world he shall address himself directly. Tongues thus serve as a covenantal sign. Tongues indicate the realization of God’s curse on Israel for their covenantal unfaithfulness.

Indeed, the magnitude of God’s grace is seen clearly in the broadened accomplishments of salvation represented by the gift of tongues. No doubt tongues serve simultaneously as a sign of covenantal blessing as well as covenantal curse. As God turns from Israel, he turns toward all nations. Peter’s sermon at Pentecost emphasizes that by the gift of tongues it has become evident that God has poured out his spirit on all flesh. But the full significance of tongues must be kept in view. As Paul has indicated by his Old Testament quotation, tongues are a sign of covenantal curse as well as covenantal blessing. It is this balanced perspective that must be remembered.

If it is appropriate to note the covenantal role of tongues, it is equally significant to note the sign-character of tongues. After quoting Is 28:11, Paul offers his own interpretive remarks. “Tongues,” says Paul, “are for a sign.” Both the essential nature of tongues and the context of Paul’s Old Testament quotation as earlier discussed help to define the precise “sign-character” of tongues. Tongues serve as a sign to indicate that God’s redemptive program has shifted from a Jewish-centered activity to an activity involving all the nations of the world.

God’s New Testament prophets suddenly burst out spontaneously in declaring the wonderful works of God in all the languages of mankind. The sign is unmistakable. The transition has occurred. God no longer speaks singularly to a single people. He speaks in the many tongues of the many peoples of the earth.[5] The sign of tongues is a sign of transition. A new day has dawned for the people of God.

It has been indicated already that the context of Paul’s quotation from Is 28 has to do with God’s judgment on Israel for their hardness of heart. The reference to the “costly cornerstone” of Is 28:16 as it is employed in the New Testament supports the suggestion that the context of Paul’s quotation has to do with the removal of the kingdom from Israel. “Tongues” function in this context as a “sign.” It is a sign that this judgment on Israel has been accomplished. It is a sign of the covenantal curse on Israel, a sign that God addresses himself no longer in a special way to a special nation in their special language. Instead, the sign of tongues indicates that he addresses himself manifestly to men of all nations.

Perhaps this perspective may aid in the understanding of the subsequent comments of the Apostle. Paul says tongues are for a sign, “not to those who believe, but to unbelievers” (1 Cor 14:22). What do these words mean? Notice that Paul connects this remark immediately with his quotation from Isaiah. “So, then,” because of the judgmental character of tongues as manifested in Old Testament covenantal contexts, “tongues are for a sign…to unbelievers.” Because of their particular role as sealing God’s judgment on unbelieving Israel, tongues communicate a special message to current unbelievers. Whether Jews or Gentiles, unbelievers ought to take special note of tongues. They testify to God’s fidelity to the word of his covenantal curses. Israel persisted in unbelief, and God brought the threatened judgment. Tongues give witness to God’s judgment on Israel. Clearly God no longer deals particularly with a single people. By tongues he testifies to his turning to men of all nations. At the same time, tongues testify to the unbeliever of the worldwide dimensions of the grace of God. A transition has been accomplished. The gracious intention of God has been manifested. God has displayed his determination to speak the language of men of all nations.

So, tongues are for unbelievers. They serve primarily as an evangelical tool. When understood properly with the background of the Old Testament in view, tongues offer their sign-testimony to the unbeliever. However, this sign of transition has a role of minor significance to someone who has entered the fellowship of believers. “Tongues are for a sign…to unbelievers; but prophecy is to those who believe” (1 Cor 14:22). God has not assigned the gift of tongues for the consistent upbuilding of the believer. By their very nature, tongues have a concrete role in redemptive history to play. Like most “signs,” tongues give direction along the way. But once the sign-post has been passed, it has no further active function.

At this point, it is necessary to make some further comparison of the gifts of prophecy and of tongues as they functioned in the New Testament era. The gifts had significant points of similarity, while at the same time manifesting unique distinctives. Both prophecy and tongues represented gifts of a verbal nature. Gifts such as “giving” and “showing mercy” (Rom 12:8) were not gifts by which words were communicated. But prophecy and tongues had in common this verbal quality.

Furthermore, both prophecy and tongues appear to represent gifts of inspired utterance. In the case of tongues, the correctness of this evaluation seems apparent. Since God was making the mouth move, the utterance in a tongue had to be a directly God-inspired statement conveying infallible and inerrant material. The interpretable quality of tongues-utterances (1 Cor 14:5) would appear to rule out the possibility that tongues were nonsense syllables. They did communicate divinely inspired truth.

The gift of prophecy also appears to have been an utterance derived directly from God’s inspiration. The gift is discussed in terms of its “revelational” quality in 1 Cor 14:29–31. Although the case is not as clear as tongues, prophecy does appear to manifest the character of revelation.

But the two gifts also manifest marked distinctives. While they both fit into the same basic category, they display significant differences. Most important for the present discussion is the distinctive characterization which Paul assigns to each of the gifts in the life of the church. “Prophecy” is for the edification, exhortation and consolation of men. “Tongues” have the effect of edifying only the speaker, unless they are interpreted (1 Cor 14:3–5). This relative value of the two gifts finds permanent confirmation in the fact that chosen words of “prophecy” have been preserved in the Scriptures for the continual edification of the church. We still possess a “more sure word of prophecy” (2 Pet 1:19) which is adequate to make the man of God “perfect, thoroughly furnished unto every good work” (2 Tim 3:16). Because of their continual value in edifying the church, inspired words of prophecy have been preserved in Scripture. The gift of tongues, however, did not possess inherently this value for the edification of God’s people. Therefore tongues-utterances would have had no such lasting value in preservation. “Tongues” served as a “sign” which communicated to unbelievers (1 Cor 14:22). Prophecy ministered instead for the edification of the believer.

A “difference of species” therefore separated the gifts of “tongues” and of “prophecy” despite their similarities. One partook of drastic limitations in form and function. The other did not possess these limitations. It is this radical “difference of species” that serves to resolve the interpretive problem associated with Paul’s next remark (vss. 23–25).

Paul had just assigned tongues for unbelievers, and prophecy for believers. Then in verses 23–25, he seems to reverse himself entirely, so much so that the following comment is found in a footnote of J. B. Phillips’ translation of the New Testament:

This is the sole instance of the translator’s departing from the accepted text. He felt bound to conclude, from the sense of the next three verses, that we have here either a slip of the pen on the part of Paul, or, more probably, a copyist’s errors.[6]

In verse 23, Paul says that the effect of tongues on the unbeliever will be to lead him to conclude that those in the Christian assembly are “mad.”[7] He will not be able to comprehend the significance of the phenomenon. But, continues the Apostle in verses 24 and 25, if all are engaged in prophesying in the assembly when an unbeliever visits, he will be convicted and converted. While tongues lead the unbeliever to the conclusion that Christians are mad, prophecy leads him to salvation.

How is this apparent contradiction in the Apostle to be resolved? In verse 22, he commends tongues for the unbeliever; in verses 24 and 25 it is prophecy that he commends. The answer to this question lies in the distinction made earlier between the basic nature of tongues and of prophecy. Tongues are a “sign”; prophecy is not. “Tongues” possess a character which inherently limits their function to a narrower scope than the ministry enjoyed by “prophecy.” “Tongues” serve as an indicator; “prophecy” serves as a communicator. “Tongues” call attention to the mighty acts of God; “prophecy” calls to repentance and faith in response to the mighty acts of God.

If Paul’s line of thinking in 1 Cor 14:20–25 is considered in the light of Acts 2, it will become apparent that Paul is recommending for the unbelievers of Corinth nothing more than the procedure followed at Pentecost. First, tongues serve as a sign to the unbeliever. Then prophecy elicits repentance and faith from the unbeliever. First, the apostles manifested the gift of tongues, which converted no one. As a matter of fact, it only led the crowd to attribute drunkenness to the Apostles (Acts 2:13). Paul says in like manner the Corinthians may expect unbelievers to conclude madness from the gift of tongues (1 Cor 14:23). But by the gift of prophecy, the phenomenon of tongues may be explained, the declaration of the word may proceed, and the lost may be won.

The history of redemption makes plain the truth. Tongues, while significant as a sign, have a most limited usefulness for deepening the understanding of the church. According to Paul, tongues marked unmistakeably the point of judgment on Israel, and the point of transition to the nations. As such, they served as a sign of covenantal curse and blessing. It is in this context that the temporally circumscribed character of the gift of tongues becomes most apparent. Tongues are a sign which are attached vitally—but irretrievably—to a particular juncture in the history of redemption. As such, the gift of tongues cannot be expected to fulfill actively its assigned role indefinitely. By the very nature of the case, the gift of tongues could fulfill its God-appointed function only in the historical context divinely designed for such a sign.

At a crucial point in history, necessity required that God’s judgment on Israel be sealed by a sign. God’s intention to minister his gospel equally to men of all nations needed to be made manifest by a sign. Tongues were that sign.

Tongues served well to show that Christianity, though begun in the cradle of Judaism, was not to be distinctively Jewish. Tongues aided significantly the transition from a Jewish to a world-wide gospel. Tongues provided signal support to the foundational structure of Christianity. Now that the foundation has been laid, the continuation of the sign of tongues would serve no significant function. Now that the transition has been made, the sign of transition has no abiding value in the life of the church.

Today there is no need for a sign to show that God is moving from the single nation of Israel to all the nations. That movement has become an accomplished fact. As in the case of the founding office of apostle, so the particularly transitional gift of tongues has fulfilled its function as covenantal sign for the Old and New Covenant people of God. Once having fulfilled that role, it has no further function among the people of God.

Notes

1. The text is taken from the New American Standard Version, except for the omission of the words “for a sign” with respect to prophecy, which were inserted by the translators and are not part of the original text.
2. I wish to give full credit to the Rev John Garrisi, who first suggested to me this particular line of interpretation of Paul’s words. Mr. Garrisi has a special zeal for encouraging pastors to “do theology” amidst all the many duties of that office which is “first in usefulness” to the church of Christ
3. A slightly different interpretation of Is 28:9, 10 is held by several significant O.T. scholars, including E. J. Young. However, this alternative interpretation of vss. 9, 10 does not affect the fact that Is 28:11 is applying the covenantal curse of Deut 28:49 to Israel.
4. The contextual unity of the word specifically quoted by Paul (Is 28:11) with the reference to the stone laid in Zion (Is 28:16) finds strengthening support in the allusion to the establishment of justice as the measuring-line (vs. 17). God will make mishpat lakav. The Hebrew word for “measuring-line” is the same rare word found in vs. 11 (kav lakav). The effect of this contextual unity in Is 28 is to strengthen the case for seeing tongues as a sign related specifically to God’s judgment on hardened Israel.
5. The fact that Paul applies the prophecies concerning foreign languages to the problem at Corinth argues very strongly (to the present writer, conclusively) in favor of the view that would see the tongues of Corinth as being of the same nature as the tongues of Pentecost. Unquestionably the “tongues” to which the O.T. prophets referred were foreign languages. Since Paul applies the prophecy to the situation at Corinth, it may be assumed they also were foreign languages. While there are problems admittedly, there is no conclusive argument against the suggestion that the “tongues” of Corinth were the same as the “tongues” of Acts.
6. The New Testament in Modern English, A Translation, by J. B. Phillips. London: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd., 1958, p. 346, note.
7. This remark, when compared with Acts 2:13, adds further confirmation to the theory that the tongues of 1 Corinthians were no different than the tongues of Acts. The initial effect of the phenomenon is the same in both cases.