Featured Private prayer language

Ever wonder why he does? The real has to be out there for him to distort! He never has an original idea...he always will take what God says or does and twist it as you are trying to do by ignoring what the scriptures are saying about tongues being ...speaking to God/praying in the spirit/ blessing with the spirit/ giving thanks...PRAYER!

 

That verse does not say that Paul did not speak in tongues in church. That verse is part of the greater rebuke against the Corinthians about how they were speaking in tongues.

Paul did NOT say "don't speak in tongues in church"; if that is what he was saying in verse 19, then why would he turn around and tell them how to properly do it in verse 27?

Where did Paul speak in tongues outside of the church? Look at every other example of speaking in tongues in the book of Acts. It was always in public, but not necessarily in church.

But you will NOT find a single scriptural example of anyone speaking a "private prayer language."

So if all that is YOU, how can you say that you privately pray in your spirit without knowing what it is that you pray? Tongues are a sign for unbelievers; why do YOU need the sign?

We are not saved by or because of our repentence. We are saved by Faith; and Faith comes by hearing.

See my notes above.

Two things: 1) on the day of Pentecost, thousands of unbelievers heard the sign; heard the preaching, and were saved. So not "just like."
2) Re-look at the story of Cornelius, and pay attention to verse 45.

 

Yes it was correction by his own example! He spoke in tongues more than any of them, YET in the church he would rather speak five words with his understanding! So where did he speak tongue if not in the church? It does not say whether he did or not just what he would RATHER do!

Again, He was using his own example! I have never said that he does not want tongues in church. Go back and read my other post! I have always said tongues in church with interpretation is in order! But I do not deny anyone outside the church walls to not speak/pray in tongues! All of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit can be done outside the church assembly, including praying in the spirit!

It does not give any example of any of the apostles speaking in tongues except Acts 2. But we know they did!

FIrst, do you see that speaking in tongues is praying? If so then why can't we pray outside the church in our prayer closet between me and God! Just like vs. 28 says!

I do not need a sign to believe! I do not limit tongues JUST as a sign to the unbeliever! As I have shown before there were not any unbelievers around when they spoke in tongues in Acts 10 or 19.

I agree! I did not say repentance saved! RE READ my post! I said Faith saved us..it was by hearing the Word that brings us to repentance (change of mind and action).

See my response above!

Verse 45 says that they of the circumcision which believed were astonished! They were already believers!

Yes! vs. They received the Holy Ghost just as they did at Pentecost! They spoke in tongues just as they did at Pentecost! What were they doing in vs. 46? Magnifying God! No interpretation given! Tongues were not used as a sign to unbelievers here! Tongues were used to spread the gospel!
If there was any sign given here it was a sign to the BELIEVING Jews that Gentiles received the Holy Spirit!

Bottom line is that they were not witnessing to anyone. Unbelievers were not present. They were magnifying God!
In the passages which we have been examining (especially the account of Pentecost and the story of Cornelius), people were speaking to God in tongues. This is what the apostle Paul meant when he said:

"For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God." (1 Corinthians 14:2)

So when people spoke in tongues in the above passages, they were praying directly to God in the Holy Spirit. In other words, the communication was going from earth up to heaven.

Now take a look at another statement that the apostle Paul made

"He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified." (1 Corinthians 14:5)

Here Paul said that when a person speaks a message in tongues to a church congregation, the message must be interpreted so that the congregation can be edified (so that the message will benefit them, instruct them, build them up in their faith, etc.). This describes another form of tongues in which a message is delivered from heaven down to earth, which must be interpreted into the local language.

So there are actually two purposes for tongues in the New Testament, which is something that many Christians don't realize. There's a "public" form of tongues for delivering a message from God to a group of people (which must be interpreted into the local language), and there's a "private" form of tongues for speaking to God (praying to Him in the Spirit). Each form of tongues has a different purpose.
Until you realize this...tongues will contradict in scriptures! If you see this, there is no contradiction!

 

You make assumptions based on what? Not studying the Scriptures.
Look at the context:

Acts 10:22 And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.
--This Gentile had a good report among all the Jews, a good reputation. Undoubtedly many of those Jews, both believing and unbelieving, were there to witness what was happening. It is wrong to assume that all were believing. It is a sign to the unbelieving Jew. The text does not indicate that all the Jews got saved.

Who says unbelieving Jews were not present. How do you know that? He was a very popular man among all the Jews.

That is not prayer and a deliberate misinterpretation of Scripture. Look what it says in another translation:

1Co 14:2 If you speak languages that others don't know, God will understand what you are saying, though no one else will know what you mean. You will be talking about mysteries that only the Spirit understands.
--The phrase "to God" simply means "God understands what you are saying." He is omniscient. You are not praying to him. You are simply speaking in another language that others cannot understand and causing confusion and chaos in the church, and for should be ashamed of yourself. It was a rebuke. God doesn't bless it; rather it is more like a curse.

There was no prayer to God. Don't be deceived. It simply means that God understood what they meant. They spoke in actual languages, which you cannot do. And God understood that. The church didn't because it was a language unknown to them (like Hindi) when none of them were of Asian descent.

1Co 14:5 I am glad for you to speak unknown languages, although I had rather for you to prophesy. In fact, prophesying does much more good than speaking unknown languages, unless someone can help the church by explaining what you mean.
--Here Paul plainly puts the emphasis on prophecy. Paul says: "I would rather that you prophesy." How can you miss that? He then says again: "Prophesying does much more good than speaking in unknown languages." This is plain and clear.
If another language is spoken at all then someone must help the church understand the meaning by explaining what you are saying. There is the meaning. It is totally opposite of what you are saying. Sometimes it is better to look at a different translation. There is no other "form of tongues."
Tongues are languages that needed interpretation because there was a second language group. They needed to be interpreted back into the common language of Greek, "so that everyone could understand," not just the foreigners that were present.

No there isn't. Not once in the Bible does God condone a private form of tongues or languages. No gift was personal or private. They were not selfish. You don't have one verse to back this up; not one. Your misinterpretation is shameful. It is a distortion of God's Word. The gift of languages was always for the benefit of all in the local church, and after the transitional period of Acts was used only in the local church. It was one of the gifts of the church to be used in the local church, as is indicated by chapter 12.

You have contradicted Scripture throughout this post, as has been quite evident.

 

I will let the scriptures speak louder than your misinterpretation!

"And they of the circimcision 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."

Again I will take scripture truth.
" While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word." THe Holy Spirit came on everyone who heard the message. So no unbelievers present! Seems simple common sense to me!

Bottom line is we are still speaking to God=prayer!

Again, bottom line speaking to God is prayer! It does not matter if they understood or not! God understands and therefore it is still speaking to God/prayer. The others are no edified so we should not do it in church without the interpretaion! But it is still speaking to God any way you want to twist it!

You continue to leave out scriptures that contradict what you are trying to imply! "EXCEPT you interpret, that the church may be edified!"

I have never denied that they are real languages and that they need to be interpreted! So what is your point? THey are still speaking to God/praying in the spirit/ blessing/ giving thanks!

Scriptures are plain! It is speaking to God/ praying in the spirit/ blessing/ giving thanks! Pauls correction was that they were praying in the spirit in church without the interpretation!

I believe it is the other way around!

 

You do err not knowing the Scripture neither the power of God.
Again look at the context here. "They of the circumcision" refers back to verse 23:
Acts 10:23 Then called he them in, and lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.
--It refers to those 6 men that Peter brought with him. They did not believe that salvation had come to the Jews, not that they were unbelievers in Christ. That is what the "belief" was referring to. In this respect Peter was an unbeliever also. He was an unbeliever in the sense that he had to be convinced that salvation had come to the Gentiles. Now he had become a believer; he had seen it with his own eyes. This is what "believer" means in this sense. "Because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost." That is what they believed.
--It has no reference to unbelieving Jews--in reference to salvation.

Obviously there were unbelieving Jews present. This does not include Peter and the six that were with him. This includes unbelieving Jews.

How do you outright deny what the Bible says?
Look at the verse again:

CEV 1Co 14:2 If you speak languages that others don't know, God will understand what you are saying, though no one else will know what you mean. You will be talking about mysteries that only the Spirit understands.
--It is not praying to God. It simply says "God understanding what you are saying." That is not prayer.

I will quote it again:
CEV 1Co 14:2 If you speak languages that others don't know, God will understand what you are saying, though no one else will know what you mean. You will be talking about mysteries that only the Spirit understands.
--There is no prayer here. Why do you insist there is?
The person is simply speaking in another language. That is not praying it is speaking; speaking in another language is not prayer. Paul is rebuking that person for causing confusion.

I didn't leave out Scripture. I simply quoted the same Scripture that you quoted but in another translation. Your accusation is false.

Is this the verse you are referring to? You didn't say.
CEV 1Co 14:15 Then what should I do? There are times when I should pray with my spirit, and times when I should pray with my mind. Sometimes I should sing with my spirit, and at other times I should sing with my mind.
There is nothing here about a private prayer language.
Praying in the spirit (small s), is not praying in tongues. It is the emotions of the person. Paul says if you do that and not use your mind it is useless, if you do it in another language. In other Scriptures he tells us that our minds are always to be engaged.

Praying in the emotional being of the person is not in another language.
Praying without interpretation is wrong.
The passage about prayer in chapter 14 is an illustration. It starts with "for example." He never condones prayer at all. He uses it as an example; he does not condone it. You use it out of context.

 

you are the one that keeps saying that your experiences confirm the truth of the doctrines that you hold to!

lets check out that 'evidence', eh?

You cannot support/prove in the bible that god ever gave tongues for a personal prayer language
You admit that there are no togues/interpreting/miracles/healings being done by anyone in your charasmatic baptist church

You do not know what language of man that you tongue

you claim to JUSt follow the truths of scriptures, yet aligned with traditions/doctrines of stuff that just came in apst 100 years to the church
you calim that God stayed the same, we hindered Him thru unbelief, yet calvin/luthor/Whitefield?moody/Spurgeon etc NEVER saw that doctrine you espouse

Am I correct in this?

 

lets check that!

Do you hold to a second act of the Holy spirit available to us, the "baptism in the HG?"
that one will speak in tongues to shw that happened
That God still has Apostles/prophets in the church
that gifts of healings/miracles still around
that therevelation of God still ongoing
that God wanted to operate just as in Acts, but no one knew that for 1900 years, and that 1905 was of God?

is that about it?

 

The so called prayer language has been thoroughly debunked. At this point everyone is just repeating themselves.

 

how do YOU know if the tongues are of the HS or satan?

We know that the heretics like hagin/hinn/Copeland?paulk/Price etc ALL spoke in tongues, cliamed to be of god, NONE of them were...

How do you check for if god or satan? As the so called teachers of the movement have not!

 

Kundalini (Hindu Yoga) speaks in tongues as well. Nobody knows or understands their tongues either.

 

So now you are saying that the sign of tongues is for the unbeliever (concerning the baptism) not in general? So what you are saying is that tongues is a sign that someone received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Isn't that in line with what the pentecostals believe? Tongues is a sign that someone receives the baptism? By what you posted above..you just proved there theory!

Only your assumption! No scriptural proof! It said all that heard the words of Peter the Holy Spirit fell upon them! Everyone in the room at that time was believers!

How do you outright deny the part where they are speaking to God! PRAYER!!!

AGAIN...you keep leaving out the phrase "speaking to God"....that is prayer!

Then quit denying "speaking to God"...that is prayer!

No it was the same verse you quoted but you left out the last part...EXCEPT HE INTERPRET, THAT THE CHURCH MAY RECEIVE EDIFYING.

Here again you deny that Paul refers to praying in the spirit as tongues vs.14 confirms that praying in the the spirit is tongues.."For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful"

Vs. 14 says praying with my spirit is tongues!

YOu added emotions to what Paul said! He said we pray with our spirit! Our mind/soul is our emotions. Our spirit is the part of us that is reborn by the Holy Spirit! It is from our spirit that the Holy Spirit gives the utterance!

NO, you are leaving out or adding to the scrptures to fit your theology! I have not ignored one scripture!
It is plain if anyone would read it that the correction Paul is given is tongue in the assembly without interpretaion! NOWHERE does it say what you are insinuating!
Tongues is praying in the spirit/speaking to God/ blessing with the spirit/giving thanks!....ALL ARE PRAYER! WHETHER PRIVATE OR PUBLIC!

 

You have to deny speaking to God is prayer! IF you continue to deny that you will never see the truth of what tongues is!

I have never said that there are not tongues/interpretation healings done at our church! But this is not about my or my church...this is about scripture proving that tongues is prayer!You do not know what language of man that you tongue

My doctrine align with scriptures! Until you can prove that speaking to God/praying in the spirit/ blessing with the spirit/giving thanks is not prayer you have nothing to stand on in this debate!
PRAYER IS SPEAKING TO GOD!

 

NNE HAS YET PROVED THAT SPEAKING TO GOD IS NOT PRAYER!
PRAYING IN THE SPIRIT IS NOT TONGUES!
BLESSING IN THE SPIRIT IS NOT PRAYER!
GIVING THANKS IS NOT PRAYER!

Prove that and I will consider it debunked! Otherwise...you have nothing to stand on but your assumptions and theories!

 

this is called the strawman fallacy.

 

Again! over and over I have showed that false ( I am not saying the ones you called out are false, because I do not know)....but you can not disprove what scriptures say by pointing out the false!

There are false pastors/teachers/christians too! So are you saying there are no real pastors/teachers/chritians too????

 

These are the facts! YOU can not prove them! Period!

 

Apparently you do not know what a stawman fallacy is. Google is your friend.

 

It stands alone! You can not prove that tongues is not prayer unless you deny....
speaking to God is prayer vs.2,28
my spirit prayeth...is tongues vs. 14.
Blessing with the spirit is prayer vs. 16
Giving thanks is prayer vs. 17

All are prayer according to Paul!

 

i am saying that there is ONE GIFT that modern Charasma seems to be lacking, of discernment!

most of ewhat goes on as either wrong/bad/heretical theology, and causes people to get really hurt!

again, if the prominent teachers of the movement are NOT from god, if you cannot claim any modern Apsotles/prophets, no healings miracles WHAT is there to hold to in your experiences?

just the tongue talking?

And have you noticed that none of us calim our experiences in refuting your beliefs, JUST the bible?

Could learn from AoG, as they would at least say that we hold to these doctrines because the bible teaches it, NOT because of our experiences, or that the HS told us!

Google the AoG as they actually say latter day rain/sons of god, and word of faith are unscriptual!

ifyou must stay charasmatic, go into that church!