Speaking in Tongues: Still for Today, or Was It Just for Them?
One Greek word splits the whole debate down the middle. Let's read the passages, look under the English, and hand you the pen.
6 min read · LovingBible
A whole debate hanging on one word
Walk into one church and people are praying out loud in a language nobody learned. Walk into another and you'll be told that gift packed up and left around the end of the first century.
Same Bible. Same Holy Spirit. Wildly different Sunday.
So before we pick teams — let's not pick teams. Let's read.
The very first time it happens: the disciples are filled with the Spirit and begin to speak in "other tongues." This is ground zero for the whole conversation.
The word itself is a fork in the road
Here's the thing that makes this so debated. The Greek word translated "tongues" is doing double duty.
English locks in on "tongues," but glōssa can mean a literal human language OR the physical tongue — so "speaking in tongues" can point in two directions at once
Read that again. The word can mean "speaking real human languages" OR "an ecstatic prayer language." The vocabulary doesn't settle it for you. Which is exactly why context has to do the heavy lifting.
One word, two doors. Scripture doesn't lock either one — it makes you walk through and look.
At Pentecost, it sounds like real languages
Back to Acts 2. Watch what the crowd actually experiences. Foreigners from all over hear the disciples — and each one hears their own native tongue.
this is a normal, learnable language — the kind you'd grow up speaking; the crowd isn't hearing gibberish, they're hearing home
The crowd is "bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own language." This reads like real, understood, human languages — a miracle of communication.
So in Acts, the gift looks like supernatural translation. People hear the gospel in the language they were born into. Concrete. Understood. No interpreter needed.
Notice the purpose there, too. It's not a private experience — it's a megaphone. Galileans who never studied a day of Persian or Egyptian are suddenly preaching Jesus to the whole known world at once. The gift serves the message. Keep that in your back pocket, because it's part of why the two camps later split.
In Corinth, it sounds like something else
Now flip a few hundred pages. Paul writes to a messy, gifted, chaotic church — and the same gift behaves differently.
The one who speaks in a tongue "speaks not to men but to God ... he utters mysteries in the Spirit." Here it's directed upward, to God — and nobody around understands it.
"The one who speaks in a tongue edifies himself." This is personal, private upbuilding — not crowd communication.
That's a different texture than Acts. And Paul knows it can get out of hand, so he sets guardrails.
Only two or three, in turn, and someone must interpret — "if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent." Orderly, limited, and dependent on interpretation.
So one Bible gives us tongues that everyone understands (Acts) and tongues that no one understands without interpretation (Corinth). Same word, glōssa — different shape. Hold both; don't flatten either.
The verse the whole argument leans on
Here's the passage you'll hear quoted most when people ask "did it stop?"
"As for tongues, they will cease ... For we know in part ... but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away." Tongues have an expiry — the question is when.
Everything hinges on two words: "the perfect."
not "flawless" so much as "the full, finished, grown-up version" — and Scripture doesn't spell out here exactly what that thing is
What is "the perfect"? Christians genuinely read it three different ways: the completed Scripture? The return of Christ? Full spiritual maturity? The text says when the perfect comes — and then leaves you holding the question of what arrives.
The two camps, side by side
Faithful, Bible-loving Christians land in different places. Here's what each camp actually sees in the texts:
Cessationist reading
The miraculous, revelatory "sign" gifts — including tongues — were given to authenticate the apostles and lay the church's foundation. Once that foundation was laid and Scripture was complete, "the perfect" had come in the sense they need, and the sign gifts ceased their original function.
Continuationist reading
Nothing in Scripture clearly flips the gifts off, and "when the perfect comes" most naturally points to Christ's return — which hasn't happened yet. So the gifts continue today, meant to be used in the orderly, interpreted way Paul lays out in 1 Corinthians 14.
Notice the real disagreement. It isn't "is the Bible true?" Both camps cherish every verse above. The split is over what "the perfect" is and whether Acts and Corinth describe a gift that was sealed off or one still on the table.
It's worth saying plainly: godly, prayerful, Bible-soaked believers have stood on both sides of this for centuries. Some of the people you most admire in the faith would shake their heads at each other here — kindly, and over open Bibles. That should make you slow, not smug. Whatever you conclude, hold it the way you'd want someone to hold a view you disagreed with: gently, and with the text in hand.
So — where does that leave you?
Lay it out on the table. Acts 2: understood human languages, a miracle of communication. 1 Corinthians 14: a prayer language needing interpretation, kept orderly. 1 Corinthians 13: tongues will cease "when the perfect comes" — and a Greek phrase, to teleion, that Scripture doesn't define for us in the moment.
The honest tension is right there in the text, and it's why sincere believers come out in different places. That's not LovingBible ducking the question — that's what's actually on the page when you slow down and read all of it.
You've now seen the passages in both directions, the Greek under "tongues" and "the perfect," and what each camp sees. The pen is yours.
Examine it for yourself
Read 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14 in one sitting — the whole flow, not a snippet. Read Acts 2 in full. Pray over what you find, and bring it to your local church, where you can ask questions and be shepherded. The Bereans checked even the Apostle Paul against the Scriptures daily (Acts 17:11) — you're invited to do exactly that.
Examine it yourself
Type this question — or your own — into LovingBible and see the passages, in English, Greek, and Hebrew. No verdict. You decide.
Open LovingBible →Quick questions
Does the Bible say speaking in tongues has stopped?
1 Corinthians 13:8-10 says tongues 'will cease ... when the perfect comes' — but it doesn't spell out what 'the perfect' (Greek to teleion) is. Some read it as the completed Scripture, others as Christ's return. Read the passage in full and weigh it for yourself.
What does the Greek word for 'tongues' actually mean?
The word is glōssa, which can mean both the physical tongue and a language. So 'speaking in tongues' can point to real human languages (as in Acts 2) or a prayer language needing interpretation (as in 1 Corinthians 14). The word itself allows both, which is why context matters so much. Look at each passage and see.
Why does tongues look different in Acts than in 1 Corinthians?
In Acts 2 foreigners each heard their own dialektos (known language), so it reads like understood human languages. In 1 Corinthians 14 the speaker 'speaks not to men but to God' and needs an interpreter, so it reads more like a prayer language. Same word, two textures — read both before drawing a conclusion.
Which view is right — cessationism or continuationism?
LovingBible won't tell you. Cessationists see tongues as a sign gift tied to the apostolic foundation; continuationists see nothing in Scripture switching the gifts off before Christ's return. Both love the whole Bible. Read 1 Corinthians 12-14 and Acts 2, pray, talk to your church, and see what you find.
Keep examining
LovingBible never hands down a verdict. Read every passage in its full context, pray, and confirm with your local church and pastor. Scripture references open in the World English Bible (public domain).