Tongues as Private Prayer Language

Gregory Thompson · May 28, 2020

I find that since Paul had to instruct the Corinthians to "forbid not the speaking in tongues" - this sentiment of skepticism is probably as old as the church. If you don't have the gift, it will seem as non-sense.

Chris35 · May 28, 2020

I received tounges, outside of a church, we had a preacher door knocking who had led me to Jesus.

From my own testimony, i knew very little about tounges, however after baptism, the preacher prayed over me for the holy spirit. As he was praying he told me to start talking.

I was confused as to what to say in that situation after all he was praying so i asked him what should i talk about, he said anything, so i started talking about my day.

I started talking normally, and soon after i felt the holy spirit fill me, i remember it clearly, my mind would come up with a normal sentance to say, and i opened up my mouth to say it, but as i tried to say the sentance, the words that come out of my mouth were gibberish, not the words I was trying to say at all.

I wasnt trying to talk in tounges, i wasnt trying to force the words out as tounges, just the words that were coming out of my mouth, were not the ones i was trying to say, i couldnt talk normal words. It lasted about 1 minute.

Scripture can be interrupted both ways, those who have expereinced can see what Paul was talking about, and those who havent can see that it might not be true, and that people only spoke in other languages.

I am a Christian, i am a brother in christ, and shall not bear false witness, what i said is true, that is what happened, the problem is that, there is a mountain of testimony from people that have experienced tounges, who will always defend it because it is truth.

Your going to have to search deep inside yourself, and figure out why you have to prove or disprove it in the first place, because all it will do is cause division.

Gregory Thompson · May 28, 2020

Chris35 said:
I received tounges, outside of a church, we had a preacher door knocking who had led me to Jesus.

From my own testimony, i knew very little about tounges, however after baptism, the preacher prayed over me for the holy spirit. As he was praying he told me to start talking.

I was confused as to what to say in that situation after all he was praying so i asked him what should i talk about, he said anything, so i started talking about my day.

I started talking normally, and soon after i felt the holy spirit fill me, i remember it clearly, my mind would come up with a normal sentance to say, and i opened up my mouth to say it, but as i tried to say the sentance, the words that come out of my mouth were gibberish, not the words I was trying to say at all.

I wasnt trying to talk in tounges, i wasnt trying to force the words out as tounges, just the words that were coming out of my mouth, were not the ones i was trying to say, i couldnt talk normal words. It lasted about 1 minute.

Scripture can be interrupted both ways, those who have expereinced can see what Paul was talking about, and those who havent can see that it might not be true, and that people only spoke in other languages.

I am a Christian, i am a brother in christ, and shall not bear false witness, what i said is true, that is what happened, the problem is that, there is a mountain of testimony from people that have experienced tounges, who will always defend it because it is truth.

Your going to have to search deep inside yourself, and figure out why you have to prove or disprove it in the first place, because all it will do is cause division.

That reminds me of when I started believing, I didn't really have a church - a school yard friend told me about Jesus. I didn't know about tongues or have anything to copy cat, but a couple years later I started talking to God in a language within me, and I remember having this confidence of being protected during those times.

Later on I read about things like that in the bible after being exposed to the "just tongue, don't translate" application. And decided to follow the teaching highlighted by remembrance from the Holy Spirit which was to pray to translate.

It definitely has built me up over the years.

Phil W · May 28, 2020

SPF said:
Thanks Phil, though it's not very useful, beneficial, or helpful to just quote a passage and not provide any commentary. Those passages have already been discussed, and there is no reason to think that Paul was not referring to a real foreign language.

There is no reason to think he was referring to a foreign language either.

In fact, as Paul was specifically the missionary to the gentiles, we would expect that he would speak in tongues more than anyone as he was reaching more than anyone!

I just don't see anything in Scripture that makes the jump from foreign languages as outlined in Acts to a private prayer language that you don't understand and don't have interpreted.

It is written..."Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God." (Rom 8:26-27)
If the Spirit is making intercession for the saints in a language which can't be understood, doesn't that eliminate the possibility that it is in a language of the modern time and era?

I don't doubt for a moment that you feel like it's meaningful, but I also suspect it was a learned behavior that you got better at over time, and I bet that if you've done it long enough, you could probably start "speaking in tongues" on the spot if you wanted to.

I didn't learn "it" from men, but instead, was given the gift by God.

If the gift of tongues doesn't exist, why is it a sign for unbelievers?

Chris35 · May 29, 2020

Michael Collum said:
And decided to follow the teaching highlighted by remembrance from the Holy Spirit which was to pray to translate.

Thats exactly right.

anyone who speaks in a tongue a does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit.

7Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the pipe or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes?8Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?

9So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air.

10Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. 11If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me.

12So it is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the church.

13For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say.

Richard T · May 29, 2020

SPF said:
Richard, thank you for your response. I can often come across combative, but at least in this discussion, I'm not trying to be. I want nothing less than to hold to proper theology, and the last thing I would want to do is discount or deny the work of the Holy Spirit. Especially since I go to an AOG Church at the moment, I'm trying to do my due diligence on this. You mention 3 different instances of speaking in tongues here. I think the first two are mentioned in Scripture, and I think they both would be understood as foreign languages. As for conversing in an unknown tongue with another person, are you suggesting that both speakers are speaking in tongues and that neither of them know what they are saying to each other? If so, that sounds like one of the things Paul would be speaking against, as there would be no interpreter.

Yea, if I was robbing a Taco Bell and someone did that, I would probably be like "what the crap" and get out of there too. Most people who rob places are actually cowards who have no intention of utilizing any weapon they may have in hand.

Anyway, again, thanks for the conversation. But I'm still fairly convinced that one of the main parts of the new covenant is that all Believers are immediately indwelled and filled with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit then gives gifts as He chooses, for the edification of the Church.

I see the 4 Pentecost events of Acts to be a unique, perhaps not wise to use as a standard example, event that displayed in candid fashion how the Holy Spirit had come as Jesus said - to all people. First to the Jews, then we saw it go to the Samaritans, God Fearers, and Gentiles. The gift of the Spirit was poured out on all who came to Believe.

Speaking and praying in tongues was an amazing work of the Spirit, which was a sign to unbelievers, in which Christians spoke a foreign language, that was then to be interpreted by someone.

I never took you as being combative. You sound quite earnest and respectful. Speaking in tongues back and forth is like a conversation between two people. Only those two would be involved so I do not rule out this possibility. Some might consider this flaky, but I wanted to share my thoughts openly, to perhaps inspire you to think outside of the box. I might not seem disciplined, but there are lines to be drawn between what is flesh and what is by the spirit or Spirit. I have been in all kinds of charismatic meetings, from Hagin and Oral Roberts to the Vineyard church in Toronto. You are doing well to stick with what you know and believe, and put anything else on a shelf until you can work through any new conclusions. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts.

Dave L · May 29, 2020

Minister Monardo said:
1 Corinthians 14:15. What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding.

This verse has always been the basis for me to spend time praying and even singing in the Spirit.

The tongue speakers in the bible knew what they were saying. Paul said they were edified in doing it. And he said understanding is the basis for edification.

SPF · May 29, 2020

Hi John, thanks for the response. I appreciate it.

Saint JOHN said:
1Co 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
Corinthians mentioned ,is how to operate "IN THE CHURCH" (the people not a building)
Jesus already told you to pray in private !
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that [by my voice] I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an [unknown] tongue.

The problem here is that you added the word "unknown", kind of like how the JWs add words into Scripture that aren't there to make it say what they want to. We could easily replace the word "unknown" with "foreign" and the passage would read just as smoothly and properly.

It's simply not enough to add the word "unknown" and assume it's true. The only example we have to work from are the Pentecost events of Acts, and in those instances, it's actually clear that the speaking in tongues was foreign languages. So how do you make the jump from that to a non-sensical, syllable driven, unintelligible language?

Saint JOHN said:
1Co 14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

This is actually the one verse that originally gave me pause. But...

For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue - This verse is designed to show that the faculty of speaking intelligibly, and to the edification of the church, is of more value than the power of speaking a foreign language. The reason is, that however valuable may be the endowment in itself, and however important the truth which he may utter, yet it is as if he spoke to God only. No one could understand him.

Speaketh not unto men - Does not speak so that people can understand him. His address is really not made to people, that is, to the church. He might have this faculty without being able to speak to the edification of the church. It is possible that the power of speaking foreign languages and of prophesying were sometimes united in the same person; but it is evident that the apostle speaks of them as different endowments, and they probably were found usually in different individuals.

But unto God - It is as if he spoke to God. No one could understand him but God. This must evidently refer to the addresses “in the church,” when Christians only were present, or when those only were present who spoke the same language, and who were unacquainted with foreign tongues. Paul says that “there” that faculty would be valueless compared with the power of speaking in a manner that should edify the church. He did not undervalue the power of speaking foreign languages when foreigners were present, or when they went to preach to foreigners; see 14:22. It was only when it was needless, when all present spoke one language, that he speaks of it as of comparatively little value.

For no man understandeth him - That is, no man in the church, since they all spoke the same language, and that language was different from what was spoken by him who was endowed with the gift of tongues. As God only could know the import of what he said, it would be lost upon the church, and would be useless.

Howbeit in the Spirit - Although, by the aid of the Spirit, he should, in fact, deliver the most important and sublime truths. This would doubtless be the case, that those who were thus endowed would deliver most important truths, but they would be “lost” upon those who heard them, because they could not understand them. The phrase “in the Spirit,” evidently means “by the Holy Spirit,” that is, by his aid and influence. Though he should be “really” under the influence of the Holy Spirit, and though the important truth which he delivers should be imparted by his aid, yet all would be valueless unless it were understood by the church.

He speaketh mysteries - The word here seems to be synonymous with sublime and elevated truth; truth that was not before known, and that might be of the utmost importance.

Saint JOHN said:
mark 16v17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Again, this lines up with what did happen at Pentecost and following, where speaking with new tongues was foreign languages.

You haven't established a jump from foreign languages to what we see practiced today.

SPF · May 29, 2020

Michael Collum said:
In applying the highlighted verses, I find a quality similar to the original auto-translate wonder post-pentecost where the Holy Spirit would auto-translate what was uttered into a language everyone could understand in their own language or tongue.

The problem I have with this is that Acts is clear that there wasn't any sort of "auto-translate" going on.

Acts 2:7 tells us that all the men present heard Apostles speaking in their native languages. Verses 9,10,11 give us some of the different languages that were being spoken by the Apostles. Verse 13 shows that some people were totally confused by the Apostles speaking different languages and thought they were drunk.

There was no auto-translate. The miracle was a miracle of speaking, not a miracle of hearing. Meaning, the Spirit gave to some Apostles the ability to speak Arabic, others spoke Persian, others spoke Latin, etc... Yet, each person present was able to hear at least one Apostle speaking their native language.

I'm not for a moment doubting the gift of speaking and praying in tongues. What I'm searching for is a way to establish, Biblically, that speaking/praying in tongues is ever shown to be something other than a foreign language - and I have yet to make that connection.

SPF · May 29, 2020

Richard T said:
I never took you as being combative. You sound quite earnest and respectful. Speaking in tongues back and forth is like a conversation between two people. Only those two would be involved so I do not rule out this possibility. Some might consider this flaky, but I wanted to share my thoughts openly, to perhaps inspire you to think outside of the box. I might not seem disciplined, but there are lines to be drawn between what is flesh and what is by the spirit or Spirit. I have been in all kinds of charismatic meetings, from Hagin and Oral Roberts to the Vineyard church in Toronto. You are doing well to stick with what you know and believe, and put anything else on a shelf until you can work through any new conclusions. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts.

I guess I'm trying to be careful to be both honest and loyal to what Scripture teaches, while at the same time not wanting to rule out the honest working of the Holy Spirit. The last thing I want to do is make some sort of declarative statement that tongues as a private prayer language is false and be wrong. That wouldn't look good for me when I stand before God and find out I was wrong and actually hindered the faith of others as a result.

The bottom line is that God can do what He wants, and reach people the way He wants. I do believe though that part of being immutable in character is that He doesn't change. Or put in this specific context, He won't contradict Scripture. But if Scripture is mum on something, or vague on something, who am I to say it's not from God?

It's interesting because the AOG members I go to church with obviously see tongues as a private prayer language all over the writings of Paul. I honestly feel like they're biased and letting their experience drive their interpretation. I want an honest interpretation, more exegetical as opposed to isegetical. And with that point of view, I'm struggling to see a clear jump from foreign languages to private, non-sensical (to others) languages.

SPF · May 29, 2020

Phil W said:
There is no reason to think he was referring to a foreign language either.

Except there is reason to think that because the foundational example we have from the Pentecost experiences of Acts is foreign languages. So what I'm looking for is where this jump from known, foreign languages to private, non-sensical*, non-existent languages takes place.

*I'm not using "non-sensical" flippantly or condescendingly (can be tough to discern tone online), but literally.

Phil W said:
It is written..."Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God." (Rom 8:26-27)
If the Spirit is making intercession for the saints in a language which can't be understood, doesn't that eliminate the possibility that it is in a language of the modern time and era?

Problem of course is that "cannot be uttered" would rule out speaking in tongues as those are uttered...

Phil W said:
If the gift of tongues doesn't exist, why is it a sign for unbelievers?

I never said the gift of tongues doesn't exist. I've said all along that it does exist and is a real gift. It's a sign for unbelievers because hearing someone speak in your native tongue who doesn't is well, quite a sign.

Gregory Thompson · May 29, 2020

SPF said:
The problem I have with this is that Acts is clear that there wasn't any sort of "auto-translate" going on.

Acts 2:7 tells us that all the men present heard Apostles speaking in their native languages. Verses 9,10,11 give us some of the different languages that were being spoken by the Apostles. Verse 13 shows that some people were totally confused by the Apostles speaking different languages and thought they were drunk.

There was no auto-translate. The miracle was a miracle of speaking, not a miracle of hearing. Meaning, the Spirit gave to some Apostles the ability to speak Arabic, others spoke Persian, others spoke Latin, etc... Yet, each person present was able to hear at least one Apostle speaking their native language.

I'm not for a moment doubting the gift of speaking and praying in tongues. What I'm searching for is a way to establish, Biblically, that speaking/praying in tongues is ever shown to be something other than a foreign language - and I have yet to make that connection.

I suppose the event can be interpreted a number of different ways, but if people of one culture are speaking a message, and each person in a crowd of 3000 heard it in their own native language - this would lend to the Holy Spirit translating and thus reversing the curse of babel. . . at least for a moment.

The pentecost event was a one-off wonder to speak the good news to other cultures who had not yet received it.

The gift of tongues referred to in 1st Corinthians is different.

SPF · May 29, 2020

Michael Collum said:
I suppose the event can be interpreted a number of different ways, but if people of one culture are speaking a message, and each person in a crowd of 3000 heard it in their own native language - this would lend to the Holy Spirit translating and thus reversing the curse of babel. . . at least for a moment.

Sure, but there's only one correct one, and the idea that the miracle was a gift of hearing and not of speaking seems to contradict what is recorded.

v.4 - And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.

It literally says that the began to speak with other tongues (foreign languages), as the Spirit gave them. This alone essentially rules out the idea of the miracle being a miracle of hearing. This is further supported by the very fact that in verse 13 men accuse them of being drunk.

If the miracle was a miracle of hearing, then there would be no explanation for people being confused in verse 12, and then others saying they were drunk in verse 13. It was only because of the fact that they were speaking so many different known languages.

Michael Collum said:
The gift of tongues referred to in 1st Corinthians is different.

It's easy to make statements like this. It's another thing altogether to actually support statements like this.

johnlxyz · May 29, 2020

Richard T said:
You have some good info on tongues though I do respectfully disagree with some of the conclusions and potential omissions. it is often thought that the translators have trouble distinguishing between human spirit and the Holy Spirit as both use the Greek word pnuema. Romans 8 is a potential example of this and makes more sense if you examine the words in ( ). that I have added.
Romans 8:26-28 (KJV)
26 Likewise the (Holy) Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the (human) Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.
Think about it, if the Holy Spirit were making intercession for us, then am I wrong to suggest the results are not that stellar? No, it seems more likely that it is our human spirit, empowered by the Holy Spirit, through tongues that not only makes the intercession, but causes all things to work together for our good. If the results are not stellar, it is because we are not exercising our human spirit to make the intercession. Otherwise, why would we need to pray at all the holy Spirit is making intercession for us, wouldn't that be enough?

27 And he (God) that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the (human) Spirit, because he (human) maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
Verse 27 makes little sense that God searches his own spirit, and then makes intercession according to His will.
28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. Romans 8:26 (YLT)

Romans 8 is just the icing on the cake for this issue. I admit it just one interpretation, but it makes far more sense than how the translators use the same word pnuema for the human spirit versus the Holy Spirit.

The best evidence goes back to Jesus in the book of John. John 4:13-14 (KJV)
13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: 14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
Ok, so here we have the born again experience, notice the well of water. Now compare the well with the experience of the Holy Spirit.
John 7:37-39 (KJV)
37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
Here we have the Holy Spirit being given to the born again believer. it is no longer just a well, it is now "rivers of living water." Where are they coming from? A believer's belly. This is the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

Ok, now how about Acts? You suggest there are 3 scriptures that speak of tongues. Yes, there are 3 direct references but two other references that have outward signs of the Holy Ghost.
Acts 2

Acts 8:14-18 (KJV)
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. 18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
Here we likely have tongues. It is some outward sign or Simon would not have seen it. Evidence too that one can be a believer (well spring up to eternal life) and not the baptism of the Holy Spirit (rivers overflowing).

Acts 10:44-46 (KJV)
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.

Acts 11:14-16 (KJV)
14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. 16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
It does not directly say tongues here but why would one think otherwise? The Holy Ghost fell just as the beginning (Acts 2).

Acts 19:6-7 (KJV)
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. 7 And all the men were about twelve. If you notice earlier these were men who believed on Jesus, but had not heard of the Holy Ghost. It was preached and they received it.

We all should agree that spiritual gifts should be desired, though obviously not as much as love.

1 Corinthians 14:1-2 (KJV)
1 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

1 Corinthians 12:31 (KJV)
31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

Jude 1:20 (KJV)
20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
Since tongues are said to be for edification, Jude most likely is including tongues.

I could go on about the differences of the gift called "various kinds of tongues" and the personal prayer language speaking in tongues." While either could be gibberish, a Christian praying in faith, in tongues will make a difference. It will not give them fruit of the spirit, but the whole purpose of the Holy Spirit to be given in addition to the born again experience is to receive power to witness.

Acts 1:8 (KJV)
8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Lets be honest, where does one see the most healings, deliverances and salvations in the church today? Mostly in those (including catholics) who speak in tongues and exercise the gifts. Just as you would expect from scriptures. I am not boasting about this, nor am I suggesting that all groups who do this are great followers of Christ. It is where the power is though.

I liked the last part of Richard T’s post:

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

Lets be honest, where does one see the most healings, deliverances and salvations in the church today? Mostly in those (including catholics) who speak in tongues and exercise the gifts. Just as you would expect from scriptures. I am not boasting about this, nor am I suggesting that all groups who do this are great followers of Christ. It is where the power is though.
(end of excerpt)

When Jesus gave the commandment to his disciples to be “witnesses unto [Him] both in Jerusalem…and unto the uttermost part of the earth,” – Jesus also told them (paraphrased) that they would receive power from on high as they prayed and tarried in Jerusalem. Luke 24:46-49

46) And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
47) And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
48) And ye are witnesses of these things.
49) And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

That’s why I agree with Richard T when he said:

where does one see the most healings, deliverances and salvations in the church today? Mostly in those (including catholics) who speak in tongues and exercise the gifts. Just as you would expect from scriptures.

The power of the Holy Spirit of God is what made those humble disciples able to proclaim the christian gospel, which eventually spread to the whole world. I personally do not speak in tongues, but I believe it’s one of the gifts of the HS. What christians need to careful of – is that the gifts can be counterfeited by darkside forces, which is why the gift of discernment is very important.

Maria Billingsley · May 29, 2020

SPF said:
I'm having trouble seeing how Scripture teaches the idea that there is such a thing as praying in tongues as some sort of private prayer language where Christians speak non-sensical syllables that is the result of the Holy Spirit.

Before I get into why, let me make a quick disclaimer. I've spent a good bit of time, on and off over the past few months reading and studying on this issue. I've done this at work, where I don't have dedicated time, nor was I meaning to share my thoughts with others. Therefore, the notes I took, I took on a Word document, and a lot of times I copy/pasted from websites. Therefore, there is a good chance that things I copy/paste from my notes are not my words. So i'm sure i'll be plagiarizing thoughts in this post.

I think the best thing to do is look at Acts as a starting place for this issue. In the book of Acts, we have the primary Pentecost event, which takes place in Acts 2. This particular section actually makes it really clear that the speaking in tongues is, without a doubt, speaking other known languages.

What I do find interesting is that some people attempt to claim that the miracle wasn't actually a miracle of speaking, but a miracle of hearing. I disagree with this interpretation, as I don't think it accurately accounts for verse 2:13 where some people accused them of being drunk. I like to play things out. So let's play it out.

If this were a miracle of hearing, and everyone present (people who spoke different dialects of Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Arabic, potentially Asian languages), all heard anything any of the apostles spoke in their own language - that would sound normal. By normal, I mean it wouldn't be confusing. There would be no reason to accuse them of being drunk.

However, if it was a miracle of speaking, then verse 13 makes sense. If the Spirit gave to some the gift of speaking Arab, and some the gift of speaking Latin, and some the gift of speaking an Asian language, then while it may have been the case that everyone present was able to hear speaking in their native language, it would still seem potentially confusing because they also heard someone like Peter speaking Arabic, which would be odd. That would make sense then why some people would accuse them of speaking non-sense and being drunk.

So what I think we have in Acts 2 is the Holy Spirit making Himself known, indwelling the Believers, and giving them the gift of speaking tongues. All present heard about the "mighty deeds of God" in their own language, by the people that were gifted to speak their own language.

Thus, we have the first instance of speaking in tongues, which is done primarily as a sign to unbelievers.

Moving on from there, we essentially have 3 other Pentecostal events that take place in Acts. What stands out to me about these is how they line up with what Jesus said in Acts 1:8 about being His disciples in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest parts of the earth.

So what we have at the first Pentecost is that it takes place among the Jews. Then if you look at the other 3 Pentecostal events, you'll see that one takes place with the Samaritans, one takes place with the God Fearers (converted Gentiles), and finally one takes place in Ephesus with Gentiles.

Thus, what we have in Acts in relation to the gift of speaking in tongues is that God is demonstrating that the new Covenant has expanded to include all people. Furthermore, when the Holy Spirit came and people spoke in tongues, it was always in another known language of the people.

For me, that's the foundation of speaking in tongues. The question I then have is how do we make the leap from what we see in Acts to the notion that tongues becomes some sort of private prayer language for the edification of the person praying, when that isn't what we actually see take place.

Romans 8:26 - Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered..

Romans 8:26 is interpreted by many to support the belief that “praying in tongues” is an experience where a person prays in an otherwise unknown language that the speaker does not understand. This passage is used to support this belief by arguing that this passage describes what happens when we pray in tongues. This interpretation is problematic for two reasons:

1) It is the Spirit that groans, not Believers.

2) The groans of the Spirit cannot be uttered. Speaking in tongues is uttering words. Words are expressed and uttered.

A better interpretation would be that the reason we do not know what to pray and require the Spirit to intercede can be because:

1) We do not know what would be really best for us.

2) We do not know what God might be willing to grant us.

3) We are to a great extent ignorant of the character of God, the reason of his dealings, and our own real needs.

4) We are often in real, deep perplexity. We are encompassed with trials, exposed to temptations, feeble by disease, and subject to calamities. In these circumstances, if left alone, we would neither be able to bear our trials, nor know what to ask at the hand of God.

The word used for intercession here is found nowhere else in the NT. However, a similar word is used several times, and it means to be present with anyone for the purpose of aiding, as an advocate does in a court of justice. This is what the Spirit does for us. It means that the Spirit greatly assists or aids us, not by praying for us, but in our prayers.

With regards to cannot be uttered, perhaps, which is not uttered; those emotions which are too deep for utterance, or for expression in articulate language. This does not mean that the Spirit produces these groanings; but that in these deep-felt emotions, when the soul is oppressed and overwhelmed, he lends us his assistance and sustains us. The phrase may be thus translated: “The Spirit greatly aids or supports us in those deep emotions, those intense feelings, those inward sighs which cannot be expressed in language, but which he enables us to bear, and which are understood by Him that searcheth the hearts.”

I think that is enough to start a conversation. Thoughts are more than welcome on this.

Thanks for all your research. Tongues are entrenched in several denominations and every argument has been used to promote as well as discourage its use. Ultimately, it is God who hears the cries of His people. Some cry with their understanding and some cry with no understanding. The question is, what does God understand? The heart. No language involved in that. Be blessed and stay healthy!

Junia · May 29, 2020

SPF said:
I'm having trouble seeing how Scripture teaches the idea that there is such a thing as praying in tongues as some sort of private prayer language where Christians speak non-sensical syllables that is the result of the Holy Spirit.

Before I get into why, let me make a quick disclaimer. I've spent a good bit of time, on and off over the past few months reading and studying on this issue. I've done this at work, where I don't have dedicated time, nor was I meaning to share my thoughts with others. Therefore, the notes I took, I took on a Word document, and a lot of times I copy/pasted from websites. Therefore, there is a good chance that things I copy/paste from my notes are not my words. So i'm sure i'll be plagiarizing thoughts in this post.

I think the best thing to do is look at Acts as a starting place for this issue. In the book of Acts, we have the primary Pentecost event, which takes place in Acts 2. This particular section actually makes it really clear that the speaking in tongues is, without a doubt, speaking other known languages.

What I do find interesting is that some people attempt to claim that the miracle wasn't actually a miracle of speaking, but a miracle of hearing. I disagree with this interpretation, as I don't think it accurately accounts for verse 2:13 where some people accused them of being drunk. I like to play things out. So let's play it out.

If this were a miracle of hearing, and everyone present (people who spoke different dialects of Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Arabic, potentially Asian languages), all heard anything any of the apostles spoke in their own language - that would sound normal. By normal, I mean it wouldn't be confusing. There would be no reason to accuse them of being drunk.

However, if it was a miracle of speaking, then verse 13 makes sense. If the Spirit gave to some the gift of speaking Arab, and some the gift of speaking Latin, and some the gift of speaking an Asian language, then while it may have been the case that everyone present was able to hear speaking in their native language, it would still seem potentially confusing because they also heard someone like Peter speaking Arabic, which would be odd. That would make sense then why some people would accuse them of speaking non-sense and being drunk.

So what I think we have in Acts 2 is the Holy Spirit making Himself known, indwelling the Believers, and giving them the gift of speaking tongues. All present heard about the "mighty deeds of God" in their own language, by the people that were gifted to speak their own language.

Thus, we have the first instance of speaking in tongues, which is done primarily as a sign to unbelievers.

Moving on from there, we essentially have 3 other Pentecostal events that take place in Acts. What stands out to me about these is how they line up with what Jesus said in Acts 1:8 about being His disciples in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest parts of the earth.

So what we have at the first Pentecost is that it takes place among the Jews. Then if you look at the other 3 Pentecostal events, you'll see that one takes place with the Samaritans, one takes place with the God Fearers (converted Gentiles), and finally one takes place in Ephesus with Gentiles.

Thus, what we have in Acts in relation to the gift of speaking in tongues is that God is demonstrating that the new Covenant has expanded to include all people. Furthermore, when the Holy Spirit came and people spoke in tongues, it was always in another known language of the people.

For me, that's the foundation of speaking in tongues. The question I then have is how do we make the leap from what we see in Acts to the notion that tongues becomes some sort of private prayer language for the edification of the person praying, when that isn't what we actually see take place.

Romans 8:26 - Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered..

Romans 8:26 is interpreted by many to support the belief that “praying in tongues” is an experience where a person prays in an otherwise unknown language that the speaker does not understand. This passage is used to support this belief by arguing that this passage describes what happens when we pray in tongues. This interpretation is problematic for two reasons:

1) It is the Spirit that groans, not Believers.

2) The groans of the Spirit cannot be uttered. Speaking in tongues is uttering words. Words are expressed and uttered.

A better interpretation would be that the reason we do not know what to pray and require the Spirit to intercede can be because:

1) We do not know what would be really best for us.

2) We do not know what God might be willing to grant us.

3) We are to a great extent ignorant of the character of God, the reason of his dealings, and our own real needs.

4) We are often in real, deep perplexity. We are encompassed with trials, exposed to temptations, feeble by disease, and subject to calamities. In these circumstances, if left alone, we would neither be able to bear our trials, nor know what to ask at the hand of God.

The word used for intercession here is found nowhere else in the NT. However, a similar word is used several times, and it means to be present with anyone for the purpose of aiding, as an advocate does in a court of justice. This is what the Spirit does for us. It means that the Spirit greatly assists or aids us, not by praying for us, but in our prayers.

With regards to cannot be uttered, perhaps, which is not uttered; those emotions which are too deep for utterance, or for expression in articulate language. This does not mean that the Spirit produces these groanings; but that in these deep-felt emotions, when the soul is oppressed and overwhelmed, he lends us his assistance and sustains us. The phrase may be thus translated: “The Spirit greatly aids or supports us in those deep emotions, those intense feelings, those inward sighs which cannot be expressed in language, but which he enables us to bear, and which are understood by Him that searcheth the hearts.”

I think that is enough to start a conversation. Thoughts are more than welcome on this.

I t isn't Biblical. i don't think there is anything wrong with it though. i feel it edifies me when i pray in tongues. Because actually i very often cannot find any words when i need to pray. i rstruggle with finding the words. so tonues helps me say what my heart wants to say

Junia · May 29, 2020

if our hearts are right with God He always likes to hear us pray. so idont think He minds either way. being slain in spirit is not biblical either but sometimes God has used it to minister to those slain. so it fine.

Junia · May 29, 2020

Maria Billingsley said:
Thanks for all your research. Tongues are entrenched in several denominations and every argument has been used to promote as well as discourage its use. Ultimately, it is God who hears the cries of His people. Some cry with their understanding and some cry with no understanding. The question is, what does God understand? The heart. No language involved in that. Be blessed and stay healthy!

exactly! when i pray it is like my heart is groaning but i am not good enough with words to pray it properly

SPF · May 29, 2020

WrappedUpinHisLove3 said:
so tonues helps me say what my heart wants to say

Except you don't actually know that since you don't understand what you're even saying.

Junia · May 29, 2020

SPF said:
Except you don't actually know that since you don't understand what you're even saying.

well, no, but if it is nothing at all, God knows the intent of my heart and i feel like i have prayed. it prob is just gibberish but am sure God would rather i pray than not.

Tongues as Private Prayer Language

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Active Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Change is inevitable, feel free to spare some.

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads