Where is the biblical proof for a private prayer language in tongues?

[Bible Highlighter]

I think you are drawing long bow there... Tongues was common in Pauls non-jewish congregations.

Yes, at one time tongues took place and it was a necessary part of confirming the Word. All things took place for a reason in the Bible. At one time, Paul escaped by a basket, that does not mean we have to do the same thing. Noah built an ark. The Israelites sacrificed animals. That does not mean we have to do the same thing. Some things in the Bible are not meant for us to copy literally. Yes, there are many instructions that we do have to apply to our lives. But looking at the context helps us to determine this. Being a good Berean and and asking God for the truth on this matter will help to shed light on this topic. Again, I am not saying I could not be wrong by a 1% chance, but from my perspective and understanding on this topic, there are lots of Scriptures that lean heavily towards Partial Cessationism.

From my many years of studying the Bible: I am led to the conclusion that I want to face the Lord Jesus Christ one day and say that I was faithful to what His Word said alone and not some experience, vision, church tradition, etc.; I want to be faithful to His Word by faith and not by some experience which is based on sight.

 

[Carl Emerson]

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine so that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17).​

In other words, if Scripture is sufficient for doctrine, and instruction in righteousness to make the man of God (or woman of God) perfect unto ALL good works, what do I need anything else for?

What good are church traditions, added holy books, special visions, or anything else for that matter?
The thing is that I have evidences backing up the Bible as being divine in origin. I have no such proof for your experiences. For me: I would rather play it safe, then be sorry. I would rather be in line with what the Word says by faith then to go outside what it says. For the moment we go outside what the Bible says, it opens pandora's box to a whole mess of problems and errors.

Yes this is the nub of the issue. Timothy is not stating that the scripture is exhaustive. No where does the scripture say that the Word of God is confined to scripture. It says that we must not add to scripture. It does not say that we can't be spoken to by His word in other ways. It does not insist that we ignore His voice within, guiding us is His peace. It is our last reference to Truth.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Yes this is the nub of the issue. Timothy is not stating that the scripture is exhaustive. No where does the scripture say that the Word of God is confined to scripture. It says that we must not add to scripture. It does not say that we can't be spoken to by His word in other ways. It does not insist that we ignore His voice within, guiding us is His peace. It is our last reference to Truth.

But adding a spiritual experience that is clearly the working of a spiritual practice of some kind should be clearly defined in the Bible in some way. If not, then we can do all sorts of things we think or desire by what we think God desires us to do outside of the Bible. We may think God wants us to handle snakes, or to make animal noises, to push people back with the sway of our hand, etc. But such a thing is not something God specifically told us to do. All through the Bible when men failed to do exactly what God specifically told them to do and they chose to do what they wanted to do, things didn't go well for them.

 

[The Righterzpen]

OT prophecy can have more than one fulfillment.

The conditions that gave rise to the believers needing this outpouring of the Spirit are re-emerging. The hour is late.

Old Testament prophecy was about the first coming of Christ though. He was the fulfillment of that covenant.

Although I don't believe prophecy really has more than one fulfillment; I do see a lot of parallels between stuff that happened in the 1st century and stuff that's happening now; but none of those parallels are good. Are we within a decade or so of the second coming? I don't know; we'll see in another 15 or so years.

Just as Judaism was incredibly apostate by the time Jesus came the first time; a lot of what I see in the church I see as signs of judgement.

1 Peter 4:
17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

Luke 18:
7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?

8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

 

[Carl Emerson]

But adding a spiritual experience that is clearly the working of a spiritual practice of some kind should be clearly defined in the Bible in some way. If not, then we can do all sorts of things we think or desire by what we think God desires us to do outside of the Bible. We may think God wants us to handle snakes, or to make animal noises, to push people back with the sway of our hand, etc. But such a thing is not something God specifically told us to do. All through the Bible when men failed to do exactly what God specifically told them to do and they chose to do what they wanted to do, things didn't go well for them.

 

[Der Alte]

But adding a spiritual experience that is clearly the working of a spiritual practice of some kind should be clearly defined in the Bible in some way. If not, then we can do all sorts of things we think or desire by what we think God desires us to do outside of the Bible. We may think God wants us to handle snakes, or to make animal noises, to push people back with the sway of our hand, etc. But such a thing is not something God specifically told us to do. All through the Bible when men failed to do exactly what God specifically told them to do and they chose to do what they wanted to do, things didn't go well for them.

Unlike the other phenomenon you mention Paul writing in Corinthians wants everyone to speak in tongues. For example, no NT writer suggests that everyone handle snakes.

1 Corinthians 14:5
(5)I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.​

 

[Carl Emerson]

Is this not the very reason that God gave us the Holy Spirit inside with the New Covenant. To free us from an external Law that was not a living word for each circumstance. Instead He placed in our hearts His living Word to reveal His perspective on matters we were to encounter - not in contradiction to His written word but specific to our life circumstances. We are invited to walk in 'the way' with him as a friend in His appointed works.
We know that it is right to pray for the sick - that is clear from Scripture.
We can't read in scripture where someone lives right now that needs Jesus to heal.
That is why we have His spirit within to lead us to His appointed works.
This was common in the NT - think Simon the Tanner's house and Cornelius.
Without this I would have missed out on several amazing appointments with Him and the needy.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Unlike the other phenomenon you mention Paul writing in Corinthians wants everyone to speak in tongues. For example, no NT writer suggests that everyone handle snakes.

1 Corinthians 14:5
(5)I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.​

But again, no one church is able to speak in a foreign tongue that we know of today anymore than any one person is given the gift of healing. Tongues were for the purpose of spreading the gospel in another language and they were a sign of judgment to the unbeliever. Tongues were not even for the believer, but to the unbeliever.

Also, some believers add things to what speaking in tongues means to them. Some believers think there is a private prayer language that is behind closed doors, and other believers think there are different classifications of tongues (When such a thing is not clearly defined).

 

[Carl Emerson]

Old Testament prophecy was about the first coming of Christ though. He was the fulfillment of that covenant.

Are you saying that all the end times prophesies in Daniel for exampe are already fulfilled?

 

[Hillsage]

Second, I believe that the one baptism mentioned in Ephesians 4:5 is spirit baptism. It is the only baptism that matters. I believe this baptism is the receiving of the Spirit, which is generally done when a person first accepts Jesus Christ as their Savior and they seek forgiveness with Him, and they believe that His death, and resurrection on their behalf.

You are very close to the truth that no one here sees.

It isn't water baptism and it isn't accepting Christ either. There is nothing in that verses list pertaining to us 'in context'.

EPH 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

Does this verse refer to our "body" or His? Your Spirit" or His?

What is the "hope of your calling" you or Him?

4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Are you Lord" or Him? Is "faith" in you or Him? Now we have this "one baptism" which nobody understands because they all apply it to US. So let's skip it for a minute and continue.

6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Are you God and Father or is He?

So, keeping with every 'in context' point I made above, just exactly what "ONE BAPTISM" could there be that also is not of us but Him? A baptism which has provided the opportunity for Spirit which is in ALL of us who are Christians?

And the SCRIPTURAL answer is NOT the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Not water baptism. Not even baptism for the dead. So what's even left? It's the ONE BAPTISM which Jesus still had not undergone AFTER He was 'water baptized and "Holy Spirit baptized by John. There is only one left, and that is the baptism of Jesus death on the cross.

LUK 12:50 "But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished!

His death is the only "ONE BAPTISM" which has appropriated the availability of Spirit of Christ to even be 'in every born again Christian' there is.

 

[Carl Emerson]

But again, no one church is able to speak in a foreign tongue that we know of today anymore than any one person is given the gift of healing. Tongues were for the purpose of spreading the gospel in another language and they were a sign of judgment to the unbeliever. Tongues were not even for the believer, but to the unbeliever.

Also, some believers add things to what speaking in tongues means to them. Some believers think there is a private prayer language that is behind closed doors, and other believers think there are different classifications of tongues (When such a thing is not clearly defined).

There again is the cruncher you expect all matters to be clearly defined. We had exactly the same issue when Jesus came. The scholars of the day insisted on acting on biblical principles and would have had the adulteress stoned.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Are you saying that all the end times prophesies in Daniel for exampe are already fulfilled?

With exception of Christ's second coming to recreate the universe incorruptible; yes, I believe everything else has been fulfilled.

 

[Carl Emerson]

With exception of Christ's second coming to recreate the universe incorruptible; yes, I believe everything else has been fulfilled.

Including the last judgement in Daniel 7?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

There again is the cruncher you expect all matters to be clearly defined. We had exactly the same issue when Jesus came. The scholars of the day insisted on acting on biblical principles and would have had the adulteress stoned.

But we are not talking about a time when the Bible was complete yet (Whereby we are not to add any new words to what is now known as the Holy Bible).

 

[Ricky M]

Why would not want to help me to see the truth of God's Word?
I have changed my beliefs before (on certain topics and certain portions of Scripture) based on what Scripture says by other believers online. I also stated that I could be wrong by a chance of 1%. I say this because I don't want to speak against God if I am wrong. So if you have biblical proof, I really would like to see it. In fact, it is why I created this thread.

I'm sorry, no offense, but I and several others here see nothing more than an agenda. None of your responses to any of the scriptures presented here show thought and consideration thereof, on the contrary they show a pre-planned response and effort to prove others wrong. And I don't think this is one of the 'certain' portions of scripture you're willing to reconsider. And leaving 1% doubt just in case? That's just cya.

I suspect you already saw my thread on the subject of 1 Cor 14, your copy cat colorizing of one cherry picked scripture here again says you are looking to make a point, not to learn. If I thot you were truly open to questioning and learning I would make the effort to share it with you. But so far, that's not what I see here. Not at all.

Again, no offense intended, but I've been thru this rodeo many many times before. You're not looking to learn anything. If you were, my 1 Cor 14 thread would CLEARLY show you the difference between prophecy and tongues.

 

[Ricky M]

Just on the chance I may be wrong, Here's the link to the thread 1 Corinthians 14 decoded

I would have copied/pasted it here, but color coding doesn't carry over and I don't have the time at the moment to re-edit it all again.

 

[Carl Emerson]

But we are not talking about a time when the Bible was complete yet (Whereby we are not to add any new words to what is now known as the Holy Bible).

I have never argued that we should do this, but I do state quite clearly that the complete bible does not render the Holy Spirit silent within. Also as an aside, what was the scripture that Timothy was referring to as some of the letters was not written when He stated that. I suspect he was referring to the OT because the idea if a NT was not conceived at that time. This adds weight to my claim that scripture is not exhaustive and was never meant to replace His voice within in the new Covenant. We have let the fear of deception to legislate a bible only position, when the truth is that when we function as a body in unity the checks and balances are there along with the bible and discernment to keep us on track - and this is how the very elect will not be deceived - not because we refer to bible scholars but because we collectively refer to Him in mutual submission.

 

[His student]

We are believers in Jesus Christ, and not just any ordinary "you guys." Again, you are referring to a professing believer in Jesus, and not just some guy.

I thought that was understood since this is a Christian forum and all of the guys I have referred to have so identified themselves.

If it will sooth your sensibilities I'll endeavor to call you all "brothers" from now on out.

I can say for myself that what I have seen and read about so far (in regards to tongues) is not evidence of any real language. In fact, they have had people who are linguists who studied to see if what these other believers in Christ were speaking a real language or not. Their conclusion is that it was not a real language.

Let's get this straight since you seem to be a bit mixed up about it.

You are the one who says that biblical tongues were all real languages. I have not said that nor have those who practice tongues either in the bringing of messages from God or in their prayer closet claimed that they have been real languages.

In fact I don't believe that the tongues spoken in Acts 2 were known languages - only that many people heard those tongues in their own language. We've been over this before. I have been very clear about what I believe about the nature of tongues. Please don''t say things about what I believe that are not so.

I don't think this is always the case. If somebody has an experience outside of God's Word, they sometimes seek to insert their experience or justify it by the Bible in some way (When it really doesn't).

Or "lack of experience" for that matter.

They let experience take control of their interpretation of Scripture, when they should walk by faith in God's Word in what it says first and they should not walk by sight in an experience.

Often IMO because certain people have not experienced tongues - their jealousy or their pride in their ability to form correct doctrine causes them to attack the views and practices of others - rather than leave them alone as they should.

Think... the Tower of Babel.

I do. Pentecost may well have been like the tower of Babel only in reverse.

 

[His student]

the purpose of having a spiritual gift is to benefit others

You're assuming that praying in the Holy Spirit (the subject of the O.P.) is a spiritual gift. It is not - it is an order.

"but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God." 1 Corinthians 14:29

"These are the ones who cause divisions, worldly-minded, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life." Jude 19-21

Look - I wish all "you guys" the best in your prayer life and that you will be mightily built up by praying in the Holy Spirit (what ever you construe that to be).

I also pray that you will not suffer loss at the Judgment Seat of Christ because of your undermining of the faith of many of your brothers and sisters.

See you guys on the other side.

 

[DamianWarS]

I prefer the term "Partial Cessationism."

what does this mean? and do you use 1 Cor 13:10 as your support?