Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
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.
But if it is nothing at all, then even though you may "feel" like you have prayed, you in fact, have not prayed, but just fabricated an emotional experience that was ultimately of no kingdom value.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.
Except you don't actually know that since you don't understand what you're even saying.
I've never suggested otherwise. Speaking in tongues is not a Salvation issue.but our salvation would not be affected by how well we prayed. salvation is a gift. dependent on receiving it. if you been born again, you going to Heaven, do not fear
But if it is nothing at all, then even though you may "feel" like you have prayed, you in fact, have not prayed, but just fabricated an emotional experience that was ultimately of no kingdom value.
Better to pray with understanding.
I've never suggested otherwise. Speaking in tongues is not a Salvation issue.
1 Corinthians 12 thru 14 gives instruction as to the gift of tonguesI'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 get the sense regardless of reasoning your mind is already made up. So the way you read the scriptures will always come to the same conclusion.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.
It's easy to make statements like this. It's another thing altogether to actually support statements like this.
Yes. My husband was saved the first time he went to church. He had never heard of or seen tongues. When he listened the tape of his salvation a few days later, he asked who the guy speaking the foreign language was, and was astonished to learn it was him. He tried to find an excuse to not stay a Christian, but that was a supernatural thing that he couldn't logic away. He says the 'unbeliever' who needed convincing was himself.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.
Yeah, as long as the gift builds up the faith of others or ourselves, you can tell it is from God.Yes. My husband was saved the first time he went to church. He had never heard of or seen tongues. When he listened the tape of his salvation a few days later, he asked who the guy speaking the foreign language was, and was astonished to learn it was him. He tried to find an excuse to not stay a Christian, but that was a supernatural thing that he couldn't logic away. He says the 'unbeliever' who needed convincing was himself.
Thanks for your "addendum".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.
As speaking in tongues necessitates "uttering", it is apparent that the interpretation of the word "utter" must mean something else besides "speak".Problem of course is that "cannot be uttered" would rule out speaking in tongues as those are uttered...
I agree with you, but I think the gift of tongues can also be used in other capacities than stunning the unbelieving bystanders.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.
It isn't biblical...but you do it?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
It isn't biblical...but you do it?
Hmmmm...
Speaking in tongues is biblical and mentioned many times in the bible.
We even have this exhortation/admonition..."Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues." (1 Cor 14:39)
I've never suggested otherwise. Speaking in tongues is not a Salvation issue.
You are correct, but as speaking in tongues IS mentioned in the bible, it is apparently biblical.it isnt wrong to do things not mentioned in the bible though.
today did you: clean your teeth
read a bike
use a toaster
drive a car
watch tv?
all the above are unBiblical
You are correct, but as speaking in tongues IS mentioned in the bible, it is apparently biblical.
I think you may have missed my "question mark".
I think praying in tongues is biblical, as Rom 8:26 seems to point it out..."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."ah, ok... i ddi not explain it well (no surprsie there)
tongues are Biblical in a church setting with interpretation. but not as a private prayer language. but i , like many, find using tongues as private prayer language very edifying. so it is not biblical per se, but it is good to do. God doesnt mind if we babble away in private prayer times
I like to think of the babble as like baby talk. (a parable from the creation as it were) There's something we're trying to say, but it comes out incomprehensible. God understands it all the same, and is with us there in it. Which is why praying to interpret what is being said, is genius.strangely enough, mine does. even if it is just babble
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?