I honestly don't know.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Private Prayer language
- Thread starter Salty
- Start date
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
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.
The Spirit in question is the Holy Spirit. And the “groanings” are the intercessions of the Holy Spirit on our behalf. The are described as unable to be uttered.
Unable to be uttered is the opposite of language. So babbling and gibberish without understanding may not be classified with (and IMO, described in the same way as) the words that cannot escape the lips of the human tongue.
Uttered means spoken, noises made.
Cannot be uttered means silence.
This is how I view “private prayer language.”
@ ben1445
You have some good points there.
I can only add one thing -
Some folks (if not many) just do what they are told what to do - often without realizing WHY they are doing it.
Two examples;
1) was talking to a pentecostal about tongues - I asked him if he followed the rules in I Cor. His answer: "What Rules"?
2) A lady was saved in our church - she lived 100 miles away - was here visiting her sister. The pastor asked the lady if she wanted to be baptized. She had no ideal what was going on (I could tell by the expression on her face) So she somewhat reluctantly replied "yes"
BTW, our church did not have a baptistry - so its not like we would be baptising her on the spot
You have some good points there.
I can only add one thing -
Some folks (if not many) just do what they are told what to do - often without realizing WHY they are doing it.
Two examples;
1) was talking to a pentecostal about tongues - I asked him if he followed the rules in I Cor. His answer: "What Rules"?
2) A lady was saved in our church - she lived 100 miles away - was here visiting her sister. The pastor asked the lady if she wanted to be baptized. She had no ideal what was going on (I could tell by the expression on her face) So she somewhat reluctantly replied "yes"
BTW, our church did not have a baptistry - so its not like we would be baptising her on the spot
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
I don’t understand how mumbling edifies the spirit.
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
I agree with you.
It is unfortunate.
Hosea 4:6
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.
God’s children will also be driven about with every wind of doctrine and destroyed for lack of knowledge.
Excellent verse! I think I need to highligt this in my Bible!
Also, "babblings" are the opposite of language.
I understand that you equate "groanings too deep for words" with "silence", but I disagree as "groanings" by definition is not silence.
I do not view Rom 8:26 as indicating silence but instead the lack of words. This is literally what the passage states.
ἀλαλήτοις, which the KJV translates as "unable to be uttered" also means "unable to express in words".
The problem with the KJV wording is there is no such thing as groaning without utterance (groaning is an utterance).
It is not the mumbling itself that edifies the spirit.
I do not believe that any Christian who has prayed to God in a way that cannot be expressed in words will be able to explain how their spirit is edified to one who has never spent such time in prayer.
But I will try.
I have been praying for an individual, initially going down a mental list. But as I continued to pray, mentally I was putting them before God rather than cognitively going down a list. I realized I was making a sound, but not spoken words. The sound did not matter. I think this is simply a human response.
When praying for myself, my walk with God, the same occurs. I bring my petitions to God but at some point words cannot express my prayer. From this I am spiritually edified.
I do not consider this "speaking in tongues". Just trying to answer your question.
If it helps, "edifying to the spirit" (strengthening the spirit) is not cognitive learning.
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
You are conflating the persons who are doing the uttering. This is a grave error considering the one is ourselves who cannot utter the groanings of the Holy Spirit’s intercession.
I don’t dispute that sometimes we are at a loss for words. I don’t find that to be speaking in tongues. I would say that to be at a loss for words is the opposite of speaking any language.
There is benefit to realizing that we don’t know how to pray as we ought. But that is not a gift of the Spirit. And that is not tongues.
Time to put some Proverbs into practice.
Proverbs 29:11
A fool uttereth all his mind:
but a wise man keepeth it in till afterwards.
If you have nothing on your mind, are at a loss for words, nothing is what comes out of your mouth. So if you have nothing to say, keep it to yourself. Don’t open your mouth and babble.
Ascetic X
Well-Known Member
Would you call what Paul did “babbling”?
If there is legitimate, biblical speaking in tongues by Christians happening today, your calling it derogatory words may be grieving and offending the Holy Spirit. We must be careful.
1 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. [PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE]
5 I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. [PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE]
18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
No. Paul said he prayed with understanding.
Babbling is not legitimate language that edifies. It doesn’t follow Paul’s instructions. So it is the babbling folks who need to be careful to not offend the Holy Spirit.
Nobody gets to claim God is telling them to do what contradicts Scripture and not be under scrutiny.
This is not private prayer language. It is speaking in a language that men don’t understand. God who created languages doesn’t need an interpreter. So if a believer from Egypt traveling, arrived in Corinth, if he didn’t know the language would pray by himself to God. He didn’t start mumbling.
The gift of tongues is a gift of understanding, not a gift of confusion.
Acts 2:8
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
It doesn’t matter how many languages you could speak if you have no interpreter.
NOT PRIVATE BABBLING PRAYER LANGUAGE.
If the Corinthian pastor or a member is praying when the traveler from Egypt attends he may pray with them but have an understanding that is unfruitful. He may support them in spirit and gain spiritual blessing from fellowship limited by language.
Paul knew more languages than the rest of them. He didn’t need interpreters as much.
Don’t tell your brother in Christ to shut up because he doesn’t speak your language.
Find an interpreter.
1 Corinthians 14:4
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
(8-9)For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.
(Why the pastor should make the sermon easy to understand and not a level 4 college course)
(10-11) There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.
(There is a limited number of languages. All of the languages in question carry meaning. They are not babbling. Paul doesn’t talk about being a barbarian to himself. This is because language is for communication between people. People who don’t even know what they are saying should be quiet. )
(16-17)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? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
(Clearly not a matter of private prayer language.
But still we are talking about a language unknown by others and not unknown to ourselves.)
(22) Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
(The actual gift of tongues is a sign for the unbelieving. It is not a gift for the church)
(23) If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
(Yes, it would be confusing to walk into a church that has services in multiple languages. And those are the legitimate languages. Absolutely people will think they are crazy if only half of what is said is unintelligible. So it is also crazy for people to say they want to pray without understanding what they themselves are saying. Yes, that is crazy.)
(26) How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
(NOT PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE
The governing rule is that everything we do should be edifying and not just babbling.)
(27-28) 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. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
(There is a reasonable limit to how many real languages can be interpreted in a church service. We are not the UN with translators in our ears. I have seen earpiece translating in church and it does work well. It just doesn’t give opportunities for timely “Amens.”
But if his language is unknown, he can speak to himself, not because he doesn’t know it; but because he is the only person present who does understand it.)
(33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
(
about what you’re saying in your private prayer language? (unknown to the person voicing, aka babbling)You may be sure that God is not the author of it. It is not of God.)
Edit: can’t get the AI to let me say confused. So the interpretation of the blue face emoji is “confused.”
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
1 Corinthians 14:4
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
1 Corinthians 14:14
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
How can I speak an unknown tongue and edify myself if I have no understanding. That is not edifying. If it is not edifying for anyone else, how does babbling edify me?
Someone will have to reconcile these two verses before I can accept “private prayer language” that is unknown to the speaker of it.
And babbling is a good biblical word for it. At Babel, the languages were confused and the people were forced by their own lack of understanding to spread out.
Babel did not make it so that they could not understand themselves. So “private prayer language” doesn’t even measure up to the “confusion of languages” at Babel.
There was more understanding at the tower of Babel than in “private prayer language.”
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
1 Corinthians 14:14
For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
How can I speak an unknown tongue and edify myself if I have no understanding. That is not edifying. If it is not edifying for anyone else, how does babbling edify me?
Someone will have to reconcile these two verses before I can accept “private prayer language” that is unknown to the speaker of it.
And babbling is a good biblical word for it. At Babel, the languages were confused and the people were forced by their own lack of understanding to spread out.
Babel did not make it so that they could not understand themselves. So “private prayer language” doesn’t even measure up to the “confusion of languages” at Babel.
There was more understanding at the tower of Babel than in “private prayer language.”
You need to be very careful here.
You post verses from passages where God tells us that praying in tongues edifies the spirit, that it is desirable to speak in tongues, that when we pray in tongues it should be done in private unless there is an interpreter so that the congregation is edified, etc. But then you seem to mock the passage you referenced. That is very dangerous ground.
God telling us that one who speaks in tongues edifies himself, that it is desirable to speak in tongues, that praying in tongues efifies the spirit (etc) is no less God's words than "He bore our sins".
It is fair to ask "how" but it is not right to mock God's words.
As far as the "how" goes, I have already told you and also indicated that it is not something that can be explained in words (it is spiritual).
Paul gives instruction on the "when" (one prays and sings in tongues in private rather than in the congregation because this edifies the spirit of the one praying and singing but not the mind and not the congregation).
But Paul assumes his audience is spiritually aware, understands how the spirit is strengthened. He offers no explanation of "how" as this is beyond words. He merely explains the "when".
The problem with using "babbling" is God has given other words for it (edification of the spirit, tongues). "Babbling" is mocking God's words.
One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church. Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is one who prophesies than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may receive edifying. But now, brethren, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I profit you unless I speak to you either by way of revelation or of knowledge or of prophecy or of teaching?
Yet even lifeless things, either flute or harp, in producing a sound, if they do not produce a distinction in the tones, how will it be known what is played on the flute or on the harp? For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?
So also you, unless you utter by the tongue speech that is clear, how will it be known what is spoken? For you will be speaking into the air. There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning. If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me. So also you, since you are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek to abound for the edification of the church. Therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. What is the outcome then? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also. Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the “Amen” at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying? For you are giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not edified. I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind so that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
I am not mocking God’s words.
I do find man’s definitions to be crazy or mad, as Paul himself also said.
1 Corinthians 14:23
If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
Paul’s definition of tongues and the modern definition of tongues are not the same.
All this Scripture proves nothing for babbling if a proper understanding of languages is used instead of babbling confusion.
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
You (the reader) must pardon me if you are offended by my choice of words.
They are selected to make a clear understanding of what I intend to say. I am not mincing words here. Nobody has any doubt about what I believe because I have been clear in conveying the meaning of my statements with the words I use.
It may potentially step on toes. I particularly expect to at some point if that pie chart is accurate. But if that many people are mistaken, I should be quiet because it might be taken like hate speech??
Can we be serious about doctrine without trying to silence the opposing views?
They are selected to make a clear understanding of what I intend to say. I am not mincing words here. Nobody has any doubt about what I believe because I have been clear in conveying the meaning of my statements with the words I use.
It may potentially step on toes. I particularly expect to at some point if that pie chart is accurate. But if that many people are mistaken, I should be quiet because it might be taken like hate speech??
Can we be serious about doctrine without trying to silence the opposing views?
I doubt anybody views your words as "hate speech".You (the reader) must pardon me if you are offended by my choice of words.
They are selected to make a clear understanding of what I intend to say. I am not mincing words here. Nobody has any doubt about what I believe because I have been clear in conveying the meaning of my statements with the words I use.
It may potentially step on toes. I particularly expect to at some point if that pie chart is accurate. But if that many people are mistaken, I should be quiet because it might be taken like hate speech??
Can we be serious about doctrine without trying to silence the opposing views?
You simply stumbled on an "uncomfortable truth".
God has said something (the passage is in my last post) so we know it is true but at the same time it is something foreign to our experience.
We have two choices - believe it or reject it. You have chosen the latter.
I do not sing and pray in tongues. God said that it is desirable. God said this strengthens the spirit. But God also indicated not all will pray and sing in tongues. So I am good with that. This means I do not fully understand the gift because it is foreign to my experience. I am good with that as well.
I can accept God's words as true because they are God's words. My lack of understanding and experience with tongues in private prayer is not the criteria for truth.
You also have no experience with praying in tongues privately. But your standard for truth is your own experience rather than God's words.
We are not talking about the gift of tongues for the unbeliever (tongues spoken in the congregation with one translating as a sign for the unbeliever).
We are talking about God's words regarding private prayer and the spirit being strengthened, uttering sounds that cannot be expressed in words.
The idea sign gifts ceased does not apply as we are not talking about sign gifts. We are talking about God's words.
Either God has told us the truth - even if it is foreign to our experience - or God has lied. I believe 1 Corinthians 14 is truth. Period. I do not have to understand it.
I agree.
Today tongues in the congregation are often nothing but babbling. No interpreter. Not a sign for the unbeliever. This is not biblical.
I also agree that Scripture does not support babbling.
BUT that is not what I was talking about.
I was talking about God's words (what Scripture DOES state).
God tells us a few things about praying in tongues:
1. The spirit is strengthened.
2. This is desirable.
3. What is prayed cannot expressed with words.
4. This is to be done in private.
5. This is the intercession of the Spirit
6. This accompanies rather than replaces cognitive edification.
There are two non-Christian poles within Christianity regarding this topic. One rejects cognitive believes only the spiritual. The other rejects the spiritual and believes only the cognitive. Neither are Christian (both ultimately reject the gospel of Jesus Christ as it is spiritual and cognitive).