"To Speak in a Tongue"

The Old Testament and Early Rabbinic Background of a Pauline Expression by Edward A. Engelbrecht

Nils Engelsen, in his 1970 doctoral dissertation, “Glossolalia and Other Forms of Inspired Speech according to 1 Corinthians 12-14”,[1] pulled together the research current in his day on the topic of "tongues." He supported the general conclusion that the expression "to speak in a tongue" was being used by Paul in a technical way to describe ecstatic activity in the Corinthian congregation. This is also the conclusion of Roy Harrisville in his article interacting with Engelsen's dissertation, "Speaking in Tongues: A Lexicographical Study.”[2] Both of these studies point away from Paul as the first to use the expression in this technical way. It is argued that the expression instead has its derivation in pre-Christian Judaism. The difficulty with this thesis is that there are no specific sources which use the expression to describe unintelligible, ecstatic speech prior to Paul, making the conclusions of Engelsen and Harrisville rather tenuous. Since "to speak in a tongue" occurs a number of times in the Old Testament, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Rabbinic literature, it is necessary to consider these writings to determine the origin and meaning of Paul's expression. This article proposes that "to speak in a tongue" was a common Semitic idiom adapted by Paul. It was suggested to him by the prophecy of Isaiah 28:11, which he used to address the difficulties at Corinth. The expression's application in Semitic literature is not to ecstatic speech but to speaking in a foreign language.

After surveying New Testament usage, Harrisville begins his search for the origin of Paul's expression in the most obvious place— the Old Testament. In the Septuagint he discovers that “tongue” is used with “speak” 7 times.[3] Other appearances, where the words stand independently of one another, result in a list of twenty passages suggestive of New Testament use. However, after considering the relationship of these passages to Paul's application of the expression, Harrisville surmises,

We cannot conclude without further ado that the Septuagint usage has in any way influenced that of the New Testament. The similarities between the Septuagint and New Testament references are, in the last analysis, few and far between. Indeed, the Septuagint translator appears to have known nothing of a technical term for speaking in tongues.[4]

Engelsen begins his dissertation with a different methodology. Rather than examining the occurrences and uses of glossa and lalein, he seeks out examples of ecstatic speech. After a complete survey of ecstatic utterance in pre-Christian Greek literature, Engelsen affirms, The term glossais (glosoon) lalein, or any similar expression particularly referring to inarticulate speech, does not occur in any of the texts. So far it has not been evidenced in Greek literature outside the New Testament."[5] Harrisville agrees after noting one possible exception, two reconstructed lines of a hymn to Imanthes-Asclepius in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri.[6] While examples of ecstatic speech are common, the expression "to speak in a tongue" is essentially unknown in pre-Christian Greek apart from the passages in the Septuagint mentioned above.[7]

Harrisville rounds out his survey with a look at Qumran literature. There he finds two explicit references to Isaiah's prophecies. In the Masoretic text it is God who will speak to His stubborn people through the strange tongues of their Assyrian captors. But in the examples from Qumran the passage is reapplied to the "lying prophets" or "seekers after smooth things." They have exchanged teaching and understanding for "lips of uncircumcision, and for the foreign tongue of a people without understanding, that they might come to ruin in their straying" (Thanksgiving Hymn 2:18). Again in hymn 4:16, "They come to inquire of Thee from the mouth of lying prophets deceived by error who speak [with strange] lips to Thy people, and an alien tongue, that they may cunningly turn all their works to folly."[8] Harrisville concedes that these examples do not apply directly to ecstatic speech, but he suggests that the apotalyptic and prophetic environment of the community that produced the Qumran literature provided fertile ground for the development of “tongue speak” as technical terminology for ecstatic speech. Thus, despite differences in methodology, Harrisville and Engelsen come to essentially the same conclusion: The expression "to speak in a tongue" as used by Paul to mean ecstatic utterance has its origin in pre-Christian Judaism.[9]

There is, however, a common problem in the methodology of both these studies. They begin with the assumption that Paul understood "speaking in tongues" to mean "ecstatic speech" and do not fully consider other possible meanings. Because of this decision, Harrisville and Engelsen end up searching for examples of ecstatic speech rather than considering how the actual examples of the expression relate to Paul's use. In other words, they find no examples of this expression used for ecstatic speech prior to Paul. Still they fail to question the meaning that they have attributed to the expression in Paul's usage. They conclude that because of the frequency and consistency with which Paul uses the expression, it must have meant ecstatic speech sometime prior to him even though there is not a single text testifying to this use. What other possible meaning could the expression "to speak in a tongue" have? Harrisville concluded that the Old Testament passages using this expression had precious little to do with Paul's usage. These passages need to be reexamined leaving aside the concern to find some connection with ecstatic speech.

Old Testament Examples

Isaiah 28:11 says, "Very well then, with foreign lips and strange tongues God will speak to this people." Paul quotes this very passage to direct the worship practices of the Corinthian congregation. Here the meaning of the expression in Isaiah is easily discerned; it describes the language of the Assyrians who have captured the Israelites and are leading them away into captivity. "To speak in tongues" in Isaiah 28:11 means "to speak foreign languages."

A similar expression occurs in Esther 1:22. The King's decree is given "to each people in its own language, proclaiming in each people's tongue that every man should be ruler over his own household." The verb and the noun are the same in Isaiah 28. The only differences are the use of the Hebrew preposition rather than the use of the Hebrew modifier. Despite these variations the basic expression and its meaning are like that of Isaiah, "to speak a foreign language."

A third example is Nehemiah 13.24, which says, "Half of their children spoke the language of Ashdod or the language of one of the other peoples, and did not know how to speak the language of Judah." Same Hebrew verb and noun. The preposition as in Esther (qoph) rather than (beth). Yet the meaning once again is “to speak a foreign language.”

A final example is found in Jeremiah 5:15 that says, "I am bringing a distant nation against you—an ancient and enduring nation, a people whose language you do not know, whose speech you do not understand." The last colon of this poetic parallelism literally reads, "And you will not understand what it [i.e., this nation] says." The verb of speaking and noun for language in the previous, parallel line is the same. The passage as a whole is dramatically similar to Isaiah 28:11—God will bring a nation that speaks a foreign language to judge His people.

Depending on how one dates passages of Scripture, the prophecies of Isaiah 28 and Jeremiah 5 may stem from one of the curses for disobedience recorded in Deuteronomy. Deuteronomy 28:49 says, "The LORD will bring a nation against you from far away, from the end of the earth, like an eagle swooping down, a nation whose language you will not understand, a fierce-looking nation without respect for the old or pity for the young." The expression here is very similar in context to those given above. At the very least this passage testifies to the same tradition of foreign language as a sign of God's punishment upon His rebellious people.

It is this tradition of foreign language as a sign of God's punishment that lies behind Paul's quotation and application of Isaiah 28:11. This passage also appears to be the impetus behind his choice of "to speak in a tongue" as a description of the phenomenon at Corinth.[10] Isaiah's prophecy becomes a proof passage for Paul's halakic counsel that tongues are not beneficial unless translated, while prophecy is always beneficial.[11]

Previous studies into the origin and meaning of Paul's expression have not taken note of the consistent use of this theme and idiom in the Old Testament because they have concentrated upon the Septuagint text rather than the Hebrew. This turns out to be a real problem because as one begins to search the Hebrew and Aramaic texts beyond the Old Testament one finds this expression again and again.

Examples in the Dead Sea Scrolls

The two passages in the Thanksgiving Hymns in the Dead Sea Scrolls have already been mentioned since they were treated by Harrisville and Engelsen.[12] They are allusions to Isaiah 28:11 or 33:19 describing the language of the invading Assyrians. It is not clear what "language" is being attacked by the writer of the Thanksgiving Hymns. The application of the expression is different from Isaiah 28:11 in that language becomes a sign of the sinfulness of the user rather than of the people against whom the language is used. In Isaiah 28:11 it is the Assyrians speaking against sinful Judah. In Qumran it is the sinful false prophets speaking against the Qumran community. This is more the sense in Isaiah 33:19, "You will see those arrogant people no more, those people of an obscure speech with their strange, incomprehensible tongue." Otto Betz has argued compellingly that these allusions to the prophecies of Isaiah have become another way of calling the opponents of Qumran false prophets.[13] If he is correct, then this would be the first time that "to speak in a tongue" meant something other than "to speak a foreign language."

Examples in the Mishnah

The same expression as found in the Hebrew of the Old Testament and the Thanksgiving Hymn of Qumran appears in the Mishnah, which along with other Rabbinic literature was not considered by Harrisville and Engelsen. In fact it appears that no modern study has consulted these texts regarding the meaning of "to speak in a tongue."[14] Sotah 7:1 says, "These are said in any language: (1) the pericope of the accused wife [Num. 5:19-22], and (2) the confession of the tithe [Deut. 26:13-15], and (3) the recital of the Shema [Deut. 6:4-9], and (4) the Prayer, (5) the oath of testimony, and (6) the oath concerning a bailment."[15] This is a list of liturgical passages that could be recited in any language, that is, spoken in any tongue. Unlike the Old Testament, the verb of speaking is different, though this does not affect the meaning. A further example occurs at Shabbat 16:1 concerning Holy Scriptures "written in any language." In contrast Sotah 7:2 says,

And these are said in the Holy Language (1) the verses of the first fruits [Deut. 26:3-10], (2) the rite of Halisah [Deut. 25:7, 9], (3) blessings and curses, (4) the blessings of the priests [Num. 6.24-26], (5) the blessing of a high priest [on the Day of Atonement], (6) the pericope of the king [Deut. 17:14-20], (7) the pericope of the heifer whose neck is to be broken [Deut. 21:7f.], and (8) [the message of] the anointed for battle when he speaks to the people [Deut. 20:2-7].

See also Sotah 7:3; 7:4; and 8:1. These passages are specifically designated for the holy language, that is Hebrew. The expression is the same as above.

Another example from the Mishna is Megillah 2:1, concerning the public reading of Scripture:

He who reads the Scroll backwards has not fulfilled his obligation. [If] he reads it by heart, [if] he read it in Aramaic translation or in any [other] language, he has not fulfilled his obligation. But they do read it to those, who speak a foreign language in a foreign language. Still, one who speaks a foreign language who heard it in Assyrian [Hebrew], has fulfilled his obligation.

The prepositional phrase is the same as in the passages mentioned above but with a different verb to designate reading as opposed to recitation. The expression at the end of the passage regarding speaking a foreign language employs the word used for the "foreign lips" of Isaiah 28:11. This creates an interesting parallel since both expressions used for the foreign language of the Assyrians appear here together again in the Mishnah.

Examples in the Targums

The same type of expression found in the Hebrew of Tannaitic literature occurs in the Aramaic of the Targums. Here the verbs "to speak" or "to call" used in a particular language. Hebrew is distinguished from other languages as “the holy language" or the "language of the sanctuary." Targum Onkelos (first or second century A.D.) simply translates the Hebrew of Isaiah 28:11 and 33:19. Targum Neophyti 1 (pre-third or fourth century A.D.) adds several other passages Genesis 2:19; 11:1; 31:47; and 45:12; Esther 1.22 and 2.21. Targum Ps-Jonathan (redacted after seventh or eighth century A.D.) also uses this expression—Genesis 11:1; 31:47; 321; 42:23; 45:12; Deuteronomy 25:7 and 8. This is probably not an exhaustive list of the use of this expression in the Targums. To this list of Aramaic examples could be added the many uses of this expression in the Syriac of the Peshitta.

Conclusions

It needs to be stated once again that the expression "to speak in a tongue" is unknown in pre-Christian Greek literature apart from a few examples in the translation of the Old Testament. In contrast, the Hebrew Bible, the Thanksgiving Hymns of Qumran, the Mishnah, and the Aramaic of the Targums provide numerous examples of the expression.[16] In light of this evidence it is not difficult to conclude that "to speak in a tongue" is a semitic idiom and that earlier studies which concentrated on finding its origin and meaning in Greek literature were misguided. It should also be noted that "to speak in a tongue" is never used in the sense of "ecstatic utterance" and (apart from two polemical passages in the Thanksgiving Hymns) consistently refers to the speaking of a foreign language or the holy language, Hebrew.

The expression used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 14 as well as other passages of the New Testament initially meant "to speak a foreign language." Whether Paul understood the expression in this sense cuts to the very heart of the interpretation of the passage. It could easily be argued that Paul has reworked this expression to mean "ecstatic utterance." The fact that it meant "to speak a foreign language" almost everywhere else does not necessarily establish that meaning for Paul in 1 Corinthians. However, there may be a simpler way of looking at the passage. It is possible that Paul saw speaking in tongues, whatever it actually was, as genuine language (like those described in Acts 2) rather than mantic, ecstatic babbling. Then his halakic interpretation of Isaiah 28 would have suggested both the use of the expression and its basis for warning against abuses of God's gifts.

---

[1] Ph.D dissertation, Yale University, 1970.

[2] Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 38 (January 1976): 35-48. Much of the research on the subject of glossolalia was conducted during the 1970s when the charismatic movement was making its initial impact upon mainline denominations. Since that time tongues have ceased to be a major topic of scholarly inquiry.

[3] lbid., pp. 38-39. The passages are Job 33:2; Pss. 36(37):30; 38(39):4(3); 108(109):2; Is. 19:18; 28:11.

[4] lbid., p. 39.

[5] Engelsen, p. 20.

[6] See Harrisville, p. 39.

[7] A key set of passages in the study of the origin of speaking in tongues has been chapters 49-52 in the pseudepigraphic Testament of Job. Here we are told that Job's daughters speak and sing in the "languages" of the angels. The expression "to speak in a tongue" is never used. The Greek word for language is instead dialektos, the term used by Luke in Acts. There are several difficulties with applying this passage directly to 1 Corinthians. The first is the history of the text itself R. P. Spittler suggests that the originally Jewish work about Job was edited by the Montanists in the second century, adding the references to angelic languages, See The Old Testament Pseudepigraha, vol. 1, edited by James H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983), p. 834. Also the term 61,04E1c-roc can refer to a manner of speaking and not specifically to language (although that interpretation seems unlikely here). Lastly, what Paul means when he says "the languages of men and angels" in 1 Corinthians 13 causes difficulty. He may just be offering up polar extremes to illustrate the absurdity of a Christian without love (as he does throughout the rest of the chapter in a most hyperbolic manner). In this case "languages of men and angels" may be another way of saying "any language." There is also the problem that already in the Mishnah (second cent. A.D.) and Targum Neophiti 1 (pre-third or fourth cent. A D.) Hebrew was considered the holy or heavenly language. In the Babylonian Talmud Hebrew is specifically called the language of the angels. While these sources are later than Paul, they may reflect early tradition. Thus Paul's comment could be a reference to both sacred and profane language, again meaning "any language" and not that "speaking in tongues" was specifically angelic in character.

[8] The translations are from G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 3rd ed. (Sheffield, England: J.S.O.T. Press, 1987), pp. 169 and 175. In his article "The Historical Background of Qumran HebreW," Scripta Hierosolymiyana 4 (1958), C. Rabin concludes that these are references to Mishnaic Hebrew, p. 146.

[9] Harrisville suggests what he thinks are the only other alternatives to this hypothesis, ". . . to fix the origins of the technical term with Jewish Christianity or with Paul" (p. 46).

[10] Herodotus uses a form of phaw with glossa to express speaking a language. See History 1.58; 4.108 and 155; 8.135. This is also used by Polybius in his Histories 2.17. A variety of verbs occur with glossa in Dionysius of Halicarnassus' Roman Antiquities: [2.50], [5.28], and [8.56]. Such expression would have been available to Paul, but he elected not to use them. Instead he used an expression from the Old Testament.

[11] For a discussion of Paul's use of halakic interpretation in 1 Corinthians 14 see Peter J. Tomson's Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakha in the Letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), pp. 131-144. It is also suggested by E Earle Ellis in Paul's Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1957), p. 108 that Isaiah 28:11-12 had a pre-history in anti-Jewish polemics. See also Gerhard Dautzenberg Urchristliche Prophetie: Ihre Erforschung. ihre Voraussetzungen im Judentum und ihre Struktur im ersten Korintherbrief (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1975), p. 244.

[12] IQH 2 (p 169)—"They have exchanged them for lips of uncircumcision and for the foreign tongue of a people without understanding, that they might come to ruin in their straying." I QH 7 (p. 175)—"...from the mouth of lying prophets deceived by error who speak [with strange] lips to Thy people, and an alien tongue. Despite the release of many new Qumran texts, further uses of "to speak in a tongue" have not come to light.

[13] Betz does not deal with the question of whether there was another language involved. "Zungenreden und sii.f3er Wein: Zur eschatologischen Exegese von Jesaja 28 im Qumran und im Neuen Testament." in Bibel und Qumran (Berlin: Evangelische Haupt-Bibelgesellschaft, 1968), p. 22.

[14] H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck's Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrash, 6 vols. (Munich: Beck, 1922-1961) essentially skips over the question of the origin of "to speak in tongues" in 1 Corinthians 14.

[15] Jacob Neusner, Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988).

[16] Examples could be multiplied from later Midrash literature and the Babylonian Talmud.