Private Prayer language

[Salty]

Most Baptists believe that speaking in tongues ended with the Apostles.
But there are some who believe in "Private Prayer Language"

Open for discussion

FROM BAPTIST PRESS:

 

[Mike B]

Straight up 100% English here.

In truth, if I started uncontrollably speaking in some unknown gibberish language it would scare the
daylights out of me, and I'd probably go to the ER for a brain scan to make sure I didn't
have a stroke.

Some consider it a gift of the Holy Spirit, and yes it is biblical, but I would very much
prefer never to experience it.

 

[Salty]

...Some consider it a gift of the Holy Spirit, and yes it is biblical, but I would very much
prefer never to experience it.

Is Biblical or WAS Biblical

And if we are to still have a private prayer lanuage:
A) What is the purpose
B) IF it is of the Lord - would we not want to experience it?

Could we say the same of immersion? Someone states they were sprinkled as a baby,
so why would they want to be dunked???.......

 

[Salty]

NOTE: I just added a link in the OP.

 

[Mike B]

Not quite sure I see the need for a "private prayer language". Of what benefit
would it be when God speaks perfectly good English, Dutch, Mandarin and any
other language His children speak.

Are the "babbling type" of tongues considered as some type of angelic language
that brings a deeper connection with God?

The Lord knows our thoughts, and the intent of our hearts, so I have to wonder
how speaking in some babbling tongue edifies the Lord?

 

[Ben1445]

Do you edify yourself if you speak a language you don’t know, or do you edify yourself if the language you use is known to you but unknown to others?

Kgxicoyckck xltskx xlsitxzzixxdhvuvvdrzotdjddhdxhp

Okay, I know that means nothing to you but it means nothing to me to. Mashing the keyboard might feel good, but in perspective, it is the feeling of accomplishment and seeing something done or hearing something uttered that has the ability to accomplish nothing.
Whited sepulchers?? Empty?? I think so.
Looks good (to some) in the outside but has done nothing to the inside. If you can’t interpret your unknown language into a language you know with accuracy and precision, you are a pretender, or, you may have had a stroke.

 

[John of Japan]

The very thought of a "private prayer language" is abhorrent. Why in the world would God want me to pray in a language I don't understand for something which I don't know? Our God loves intelligent, sincere and personal communication with His children.

In my experience, the "private prayer language" becomes needful when the Charismatic finds that his or her public "prayer language" is not allowed in the church he attends, so he goes private.

 

[Salty]

The very thought of a "private prayer language" is abhorrent. Why in the world would God want me to pray in a language I don't understand for something which I don't know? Our God loves intelligent, sincere and personal communication with His children.

My questions exactly !!

In my experience, the "private prayer language" becomes needful when the Charismatic finds that his or her public "prayer language" is not allowed in the church he attends, so he goes private.

Hmmmmm

 

[Ascetic X]

There was, maybe still is, a type of speaking in tongues that could be called a “private prayer language.”

We should not let the spectacle of contemporary charismatics cause us to delete chapter 14 of First Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 14:2,14,15

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.

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.


My issue is that, while I believe all the gifts of the Spirit are still available today, the speaking in tongues that I hear by Pentecostal believers typically all sounds the same, like they are imitating each other. It generally tends to sound like a variation of Aramaic.

So I refrain from mocking or condemning anything that could be a genuine manifestation of the Holy Spirit, if it has a biblical basis.

However, slaying in the spirit and the Toronto Blessing activities of shaking the head, acting drunk, barking like a dog, rolling on the floor, “holy laughter”, etc. are things that I reject as unbiblical.

In 1 Corinthians 14, speaking in tongues is never called ecstatic, babbling, or uncontrollable.

I accepted Christ at a Mennonite church camp as a teenager. As I read my Bible, I saw mentions of speaking in tongues. When I asked the pastor who led me to Christ about tongues, he said it was a valid thing, but he did not talk about speaking in tongues because it was divisive in the church.

 

[Ben1445]

There was, maybe still is, a type of speaking in tongues that could be called a “private prayer language.”

We should not let the spectacle of contemporary charismatics cause us to delete chapter 14 of First Corinthians.

1 Corinthians 14:2,14,15

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.

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.


My issue is that, while I believe all the gifts of the Spirit are still available today, the speaking in tongues that I hear by Pentecostal believers typically all sounds the same, like they are imitating each other. It generally tends to sound like a variation of Aramaic.

So I refrain from mocking or condemning anything that could be a genuine manifestation of the Holy Spirit, if it has a biblical basis.

However, slaying in the spirit and the Toronto Blessing activities of shaking the head, acting drunk, barking like a dog, rolling on the floor, “holy laughter”, etc. are things that I reject as unbiblical.

In 1 Corinthians 14, speaking in tongues is never called ecstatic, babbling, or uncontrollable.

I accepted Christ at a Mennonite church camp as a teenager. As I read my Bible, I saw mentions of speaking in tongues. When I asked the pastor who led me to Christ about tongues, he said it was a valid thing, but he did not talk about speaking in tongues because it was divisive in the church.

I think in context, praying in an unknown tongue is not something that you do by yourself or even could do by yourself. Praying in an unknown tongue would be praying with somebody else who is not speaking your language. The entire idea is that you’re in the assembly not alone.

 

[Ascetic X]

I think in context, praying in an unknown tongue is not something that you do by yourself or even could do by yourself. Praying in an unknown tongue would be praying with somebody else who is not speaking your language. The entire idea is that you’re in the assembly not alone.

I gently disagree, brother. Praying in an unknown tongue would be praying to God, speaking mysteries — without any human audience. I think it is different from the speaking in tongues of Acts 2, where it was a supernatural form of evangelism.


I Corinthians 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.

But there is a sense in which speaking in tongues can be done in the church. It will edify others when it is interpreted.


1 Corinthians 14:27,28

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.



I do not care to get too deeply into this topic, for I am not certain of how genuine has been the speaking in tongues that I have heard in
Pentecostal churches.

If speaking in tongues passed away with the original apostles, there is no need to discuss it.

If it is still available today, I have not yet heard it.

 

[Ben1445]

I gently disagree, brother. Praying in an unknown tongue would be praying to God, without any human audience. I think it is different from the speaking in tongues of Acts 2, where it was a supernatural form of evangelism.

I do not care to get too deeply into this topic, for I am not certain of how genuine has been the speaking in tongues that I have heard in
Pentecostal churches.

If speaking in tongues passed away with the original apostles, there is no need to discuss it.

If it is still available today, I have not yet heard it.

Was Paul speaking to individuals about their behavior at home or the behavior of an assembly assembled?

Tongues instruction in Scripture is about how to use languages. We use language to communicate.

 

[Ascetic X]

Was Paul speaking to individuals about their behavior at home or the behavior of an assembly assembled?

Tongues instruction in Scripture is about how to use languages. We use language to communicate.

If the tongues are interpreted, there is communication to the church assembly.

If it is not going to be interpreted, the tongues must be done silently and is communication to God.

I Corinthians 14:27,28

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

 

[Ben1445]

If the tongues are interpreted, there is communication to the church assembly.

If it is not going to be interpreted, the tongues must be done silently and is communication to God.

I Corinthians 14:27,28

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

If you’re praying at home, do you check to see if you have an interpreter if you’re by yourself? Why is this even a consideration?

 

[Ben1445]

If you’re speaking in an unknown tongue, how would you know where to find an interpreter if you wanted to know what you were saying? At what point does this become a ridiculous question?
Speaking in tongues has to do with not knowing what language is being spoken by another person, not gibberish that you speak or somebody else speaks that actually means nothing.
We have a Bible versions section of the BB; that is what speaking and interpreting tongues is about.

 

[Ascetic X]

If you’re praying at home, do you check to see if you have an interpreter if you’re by yourself? Why is this even a consideration?

It is not a consideration.

This section of 1 Corinthians 14 is about speaking in tongues in the church, not at home by yourself.

Speaking in tongues in church requires an interpreter so all may understand.

At home, it is a private prayer language and it is the spirit praying to God, who understands it. The human speaker does not need to understand it.

I Corinthians 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.

 

[Ascetic X]

If you’re speaking in an unknown tongue, how would you know where to find an interpreter if you wanted to know what you were saying? At what point does this become a ridiculous question?
Speaking in tongues has to do with not knowing what language is being spoken by another person, not gibberish that you speak or somebody else speaks that actually means nothing.
We have a Bible versions section of the BB; that is what speaking and interpreting tongues is about.

No, speaking in tongues in the church is not about Bible versions. It is or was about bringing a message from God to the church.

How was an interpreter found? “Let one interpret” is what the scriptures say.

I would not call this ridiculous, just because your church does not operate these gifts.


1 Corinthians 14:27,28

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.


But I have no reason to dive deeply into this topic. Speaking in tongues may have been a “sign gift” that passed away with the original apostles — or it is still available today, but I myself have never heard tongues that seemed genuine. It always sounds to me like a variation of Aramaic and everyone sounds the same.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

There are a good number of Baptists who are "Continuationist" including a few who happen to be in our congregation. I know this personally because I got an earful from them when I was teaching through 1 Cor 14!

I believe that the "Prayer Language" thing is concessionary to those who believe in "Tongues" but the leadership insists that such not be practiced during a regular church service. This is the predominant position of Calvary Chapel where people may have their hands raised and speaking in tongues under their breath to themselves during worship but they will not belt out some sort of "message" which would demand an interpretation which I have seen in churches that are more "Pentecostal" oriented.

Fact of the matter is that 1 Cor 14 does not speak at all of tongues being a so-called "prayer language." Those who stand out in a service and belt out a bunch of gibberish that is followed by an "interpretation" is more biblical than the "prayer language" crowd.

 

[Ascetic X]

There are a good number of Baptists who are "Continuationist" including a few who happen to be in our congregation. I know this personally because I got an earful from them when I was teaching through 1 Cor 14!

I believe that the "Prayer Language" thing is concessionary to those who believe in "Tongues" but the leadership insists that such not be practiced during a regular church service. This is the predominant position of Calvary Chapel where people may have their hands raised and speaking in tongues under their breath to themselves during worship but they will not belt out some sort of "message" which would demand an interpretation which I have seen in churches that are more "Pentecostal" oriented.

Fact of the matter is that 1 Cor 14 does not speak at all of tongues being a so-called "prayer language." Those who stand out in a service and belt out a bunch of gibberish that is followed by an "interpretation" is more biblical than the "prayer language" crowd.

Wrong. 1 Corinthians 14 does mention speaking in tongues privately or silently. It is giving thanks well.


15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?

17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.

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.



1 Corinthians 14:27,28

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.


I Corinthians 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.

 

[JonC]

Not quite sure I see the need for a "private prayer language".

Paul said it was to benefit the spirit (rather than for edification) and should be done in private (as opposed to tongues spoken in the congregation which is for edification and a sign [the mode] for the unbeliever).

That's about all I know about it. I can only trust in God's Word here because speaking in tongues (in a congregation or private) is foreign to my experience.