Tag: languages

Speaking In Tongues

Carl Pollard

Recently, Wesley Huff (christian apologist) made comments about speaking in tongues that sparked a lot of discussion online. And honestly, this is a subject Christians need to handle carefully because emotions, experiences, and traditions often shape people’s views more than Scripture does. The real question is simple: what does the Bible actually teach about tongues?

The clearest place to begin is Acts 2. On the Day of Pentecost, the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit and began speaking in tongues (Acts 2:4). Then the crowd responded, “How is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language?” (Acts 2:8). Luke even lists different nations and languages present that day. Thats important because it defines biblical tongues for us.

 In Scripture, tongues were real human languages miraculously spoken by people who had never learned them. The purpose was communication. The people heard “the mighty works of God” in their own languages (Acts 2:11).

Tongues also served as a sign confirming God’s revelation. Hebrews 2:3–4 says God bore witness to the gospel through signs, wonders, miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit. Before the New Testament was fully revealed and circulated, miraculous gifts confirmed the message and the messengers.

Paul also explains in 1 Corinthians 14 that tongues served as a sign to unbelievers, especially unbelieving Israel, connecting it to Isaiah 28 where foreign languages symbolized judgment.

And then there’s Corinth. There we find a church abusing spiritual gifts. Their worship assemblies had become disorderly and self-centered. Paul spends much of 1 Corinthians 12–14 correcting that behavior.

One verse often brought into this discussion is 1 Corinthians 14:4. “The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.” Some use this verse to argue for a kind of private prayer language. And yet the context shows Paul correcting selfish use of gifts in the assembly. His whole emphasis in the chapter is church edification. He tells them to, “strive to excel in building up the church” (14:12), and “let all things be done for building up” (14:26). 

Paul is pointing out the problem, uninterpreted tongues only benefited the speaker while prophecy benefited everyone. That’s why he says if there’s no interpreter, the speaker should remain silent in the church (14:28). Biblical tongues involved understandable communication that could be interpreted.

Another common argument comes from 1 Corinthians 13:1, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels…” Some will claim this proves ecstatic heavenly speech. And yet the context shows Paul using exaggeration throughout the chapter. He also says, “if I have all knowledge” and “if I have all faith so as to remove mountains.” Paul’s point is that even the greatest imaginable abilities mean nothing without love. He emphasizes love rather than defining a heavenly prayer language. And throughout Scripture, angels always spoke understandable language when communicating with people.

So, do tongues still exist today?  Paul said, “As for tongues, they will cease” (1 Corinthians 13:8). The New Testament shows miraculous gifts connected to the apostolic age and the revealing of God’s Word. Hebrews 2:3–4 connects miracles to the confirmation of the gospel message. Acts 8:18 also shows miraculous gifts being passed on through the apostles hands. As the apostolic age came to an end and God’s revelation was completed in Scripture, those miraculous sign gifts faded. Even early Christian writers acknowledged that miraculous gifts had largely stopped. 

Today, modern charismatic practices often look very different from the biblical pattern. Scripture describes tongues as understandable languages spoken orderly and interpreted in the assembly. Modern practices often involve repetitive sounds, simultaneous speaking, and speech that doesn’t correspond to identifiable human language.

But keep in mind, this discussion isn’t about attacking sincere people. Many are genuine and passionate in their faith. And yet Christians must always let Scripture define spiritual truth. The New Testament consistently points Christians toward holiness, truth, love, faithfulness, and spiritual maturity (Gal. 5). Those things remain the clearest evidence of God working in someone’s life.

Books by the Pollards

A Tiny Spark Snail Mail Club (Kathy Pollard)

The Mighty Hunter: How Nimrod Became the World’s First Archetype

Brent Pollard

When Cartoons Eclipsed Scripture

There is a particular kind of cultural tragedy that unfolds not with a bang but with a punchline. The name Nimrod—once thunderous with the weight of an ancient empire—has been reduced, in the mouths of millions, to a schoolyard insult. Daffy Duck first deployed the name against Elmer Fudd in 1948, and Bugs Bunny later wielded it against Yosemite Sam in 1951, dripping with the kind of sarcasm only a cartoon rabbit can muster. The joke, of course, depended on the audience knowing that Nimrod was a legendary hunter. But as biblical literacy faded, so did the reference. Today, Merriam-Webster’s primary definition of the word is “idiot” or “jerk.” The irony is almost too painful to bear: a figure God saw fit to name in Holy Scripture has been redefined by a cartoon duck.

This should unsettle us. It is not merely a curiosity of language; it is a symptom of a culture that has lost its moorings in the Word of God. When a generation can no longer recognize the names written by the finger of divine inspiration, something far deeper than vocabulary has been forgotten.

A Mighty Man in the Sight of God

Scripture is sparing but deliberate in what it tells us about Nimrod. He was the grandson of Ham through Cush (Genesis 10.8; 1 Chronicles 1.10), and Genesis 10:9 declares that he was “a mighty hunter before the LORD” (NASB95). That single phrase, “before the LORD,” carries an ambiguity that has occupied commentators for millennia. The Hebrew liphnê YHWH can suggest either divine approval—a man operating in full view of God’s favor—or divine confrontation —a man who sets himself up against the Lord. Augustine of Hippo noted that the Septuagint rendering left room for the darker reading. The Aramaic Targum Jonathan went further, rendering Nimrod as “a mighty rebel before the Lord.”

The first-century historian Flavius Josephus connected Nimrod directly to the Tower of Babel, portraying him as the instigator of that colossal act of defiance against God (Antiquities of the Jews 1.4.2). Whether one accepts every detail of Josephus’s account, the trajectory is clear: Nimrod was no mere huntsman tramping through the brush. He was a founder of cities—Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar, and later Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah, and Resen in Assyria (Genesis 10.10–12). He was a man of civilizational consequence, a builder and ruler whose shadow fell across the ancient world.

We must pause here and feel the weight of what is being said. The cities Nimrod built—Babylon and Nineveh—would become the very instruments of God’s judgment against His people centuries later. Babylon carried Judah into exile (2 Kings 25.1–11; 2 Chronicles 36.15–20). Nineveh was the seat of the Assyrian empire that devoured the northern kingdom of Israel (2 Kings 17.5–6). The seeds of captivity were sown in the brickwork of Nimrod’s ambition. God, in His providence, told us exactly who laid those foundations. Nothing in Scripture is accidental.

The First Archetype

Nimrod stands at the headwaters of something enormous. He is, perhaps, the first man in postdiluvian history whose life became a template—an archetype—that later cultures would reshape in their own image. The mighty hunter, the tyrant-king, the rebel who dared to defy heaven: these are not merely Nimrod’s characteristics. They are the raw materials from which countless myths were fashioned.

Consider what happened at Babel. Genesis 11.1–9 records that God confused the languages of mankind and scattered them across the face of the earth. If Josephus was correct that Nimrod instigated Babel’s construction, then the peoples who dispersed from that plain carried with them the memory of the man whose ambition had precipitated their scattering. As they settled in new lands and developed new tongues, that memory would not have vanished. It would have been retold, reshaped, and recast according to the genius of each emerging culture. The hunter became a demigod; the rebel became a tragic hero; the king became a figure among the stars.

We must be careful here, for we walk a line that requires both intellectual honesty and theological conviction. Moses wrote the Pentateuch later than the earliest Mesopotamian scribes committed their traditions to clay tablets. The pagans had the first opportunity to record stories of figures like Nimrod, and they did so with considerable embellishment—most notably in the epic of Gilgamesh, a legendary king of Uruk whose adventures bear unmistakable echoes of biblical narrative, including a great flood (cf. Genesis 6–9). But we must never confuse chronological priority with theological authority. The Hebrew Scriptures are not derivative of Babylonian mythology. They are the divinely inspired, theologically accurate account. What we can acknowledge, without any compromise of faith, is that the nations surrounding Israel were working from the same raw historical events—events they distorted, while Moses, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, recorded faithfully.

Written in the Stars

Perhaps the most striking echo of Nimrod is found not in a library but in the night sky. The constellation Orion has been recognized across cultures as the image of a mighty hunter. In Greek mythology, Orion was a son of Poseidon, a man of extraordinary prowess who boasted he would slay every animal on earth. The earth goddess Gaia responded by sending the giant scorpion Scorpius to kill him. After his death, Zeus placed Orion among the stars at the request of Artemis, the huntress. But Zeus also immortalized Scorpius on the opposite side of the sky, so that Orion is forever fleeing from the creature that destroyed him. His constellation depicts a hunter brandishing a club and shield against Taurus the Bull, accompanied by his hunting dogs, Canis Major and Canis Minor, who pursue the hare Lepus.

The parallels with Nimrod are striking, even if they resist dogmatic conclusions. Both were mighty hunters. Orion was the son of a sea god; Nimrod was the descendant of a man who survived the great Flood (Genesis 6.9–10; 9.18–19). Orion was destroyed by his hubris—the Greek concept of overweening pride that invites divine retribution. Nimrod, according to later tradition, was a man swollen with pride who was humbled by God through the dispersion at Babel (Genesis 11.8–9). The pattern is the same: a mighty man rises, defies the order of heaven, and is brought low.

And the Sumerians saw Orion as Gilgamesh. The Inuit call the constellation Ullaktut—three hunters chasing a bear. In Malay tradition, the constellation is Buruj Belantik, “The Hunter Constellation.” The Navajo saw a young warrior-hunter who provided for his people. The Chinese named the constellation Shen and associated it with a great hunter. Across oceans and millennia, separated by the very confusion of tongues that God imposed at Babel, cultures looked at the same stars and saw the same figure: a mighty hunter. That is, at the very least, a remarkable coincidence.

Providence in Every Syllable

Why does any of this matter? Because the Holy Spirit does not waste words. Every name, every genealogy, every city listed in the sacred text is there for a reason, even when that reason does not announce itself on the first reading. Paul reminded Timothy that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3.16, NASB95). The brief account of Nimrod in Genesis 10 is no exception.

At minimum, God was drawing a direct line from the ambitions of one man to the empires that would later discipline His people. Babylon did not spring from nowhere. Nineveh did not appear by accident. Their foundations were laid by a grandson of Ham, a mighty hunter whose name became a proverb and whose legacy became a myth repeated in a hundred tongues. The prophets who later thundered against Babylon (Isaiah 13–14; Jeremiah 50–51) and Nineveh (Nahum 1–3) were, in a sense, addressing the spiritual descendants of Nimrod’s rebellion.

But there is a deeper lesson still. Nimrod’s story is the story of every man who builds without God. His cities were impressive; his hunting prowess was legendary; his name echoed through the centuries in ways that few names ever have. Yet what did it profit him? The tower he built—or inspired—was abandoned. The languages he united were shattered. The people he led were scattered to the four winds. Jesus asked the question that Nimrod’s life answers before it was ever spoken: “For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?” (Matthew 16.26, NASB95; cf. Mark 8.36; Luke 9.25).

The world remembers Nimrod in fragments—a constellation here, a myth there, a cartoon insult in between. But God remembered him whole. He placed Nimrod’s name in the only book that will never pass away (Matthew 24.35; 1 Peter 1.24–25). And He did so not to celebrate Nimrod’s achievements but to remind us that every empire built on human pride will crumble, while the kingdom of God endures forever (Daniel 2.44; 7.14). The mighty hunter has been hunted down by time. But the Word of the Lord stands eternal.