Private prayer language

[DHK]

What were the Gentiles doing when they spoke in tongues in Acts 10? Magnifing God!...just like the disciples did on the day of Pentecost.

That has nothing to do with prayer. Get back to the OP.
They spoke in tongues as a sign to the Jews.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

I missed the example given in scriptures where they are to evangalize.

You miss a lot of things because you are evidently lacking in comprehension. You should study Luke and Paul again and use your mind or whatever deductive powers you might have left that you did not surrender when you became charismatic, as charismatics say that one should not let the mind get in the way when dealing with the things of God, which is a tenet that cults have, btw.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

If you are not a cessationist...why the IF the gift of tongues is still in operations?

Because I have studied and experienced this a lot, and I am not aware of even one verified instance of the gift of tongues. As I said, I heard a couple of times what might have been a real language, but I could not be sure. I have studied linguistics, but I am not a specialist in it.

On the other hand, the mission field has disproven the gift of tongues in use there by charismatics.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Charismatics maintain the following three errors based on misinterpretation or ignoring scripture: 1. A HS baptism separate from and subsequent to conversion that every believer should and must seek, 2. Tongues as the initial evidence of this supposed HS baptism, 3. A private prayer language distinct from the initial evidence of tongues and the gift of tongues that every believer is entitled to, can have, and should seek.

The scriptures clearly teach that every believer is baptized by the HS at conversion and indwelt and filled with the HS at that time, and that infilling happens again and again in the life of the believer. So, what are we to make of these experiences that charismatics claim? Since they are not based on or supported by scripture, what is their source? Delusion? Satan? A need to be accepted by the "tribe? I would say it could be all three. Also, I think what some say is the HS baptism may indeed be that because they had never been converted, and this experience signals their true conversion. Also, the experience might simply be a new infilling, as the Bible speaks of.

So, I don't want to say that this experience is never of God. What I will say is that these three errors that I mentioned at the beginning of this post are just that: errors. And two things are very evident: 1. If the gift of tongues is in operation today, it is very rare indeed. 2. This "private prayer language" that charismatics say all believers can and should have is not supported anywhere in scripture, and any such language is not language at all but merely gibberish and a product of the imagination.

 

[awaken]

That has nothing to do with prayer. Get back to the OP.
They spoke in tongues as a sign to the Jews.

The Op is a prayer language!

 

[awaken]

You miss a lot of things because you are evidently lacking in comprehension. You should study Luke and Paul again and use your mind or whatever deductive powers you might have left that you did not surrender when you became charismatic, as charismatics say that one should not let the mind get in the way when dealing with the things of God, which is a tenet that cults have, btw.

In other words...you could not find the scriptures so you lower to degrading the person!

 

[awaken]

Because I have studied and experienced this a lot, and I am not aware of even one verified instance of the gift of tongues. As I said, I heard a couple of times what might have been a real language, but I could not be sure. I have studied linguistics, but I am not a specialist in it.

On the other hand, the mission field has disproven the gift of tongues in use there by charismatics.

Those reports go against what God says about tongues in the Bible! Your experience with the false does not disprove tongues!

 

[Revmitchell]

In other words...you could not find the scriptures so you lower to degrading the person!

I am sorry but this statement is just not honest. You have been shown scripture time and again. Just because you struggle in understanding how to apply scripture correctly does not mean others do not have scripture. And just because a comment is made in reference to a Peripheral issue without scripture does not mean one does not have scripture to back up their position.

Now I suggest you heed the scripture you have been shown and work to understand proper biblical application.

 

[awaken]

Charismatics maintain the following three errors based on misinterpretation or ignoring scripture: 1. A HS baptism separate from and subsequent to conversion that every believer should and must seek,

When we hunger for more of God...He will lead you to understand more! Understanding the power upon /power within helps!


[/quote]2. Tongues as the initial evidence of this supposed HS baptism, [/quote] I do not believe tongues is the only manifestation of the Holy Spirit! Some do, but I do not! I will say that the examples of the baptism in the Holy Spirit in scriptures does show everyone speaking in tongues!

[/quote]3. A private prayer language distinct from the initial evidence of tongues and the gift of tongues that every believer is entitled to, can have, and should seek.[/quote] Until you can prove that speaking to God (1 Cor. 14:2), Praying in tongue...your spirit prays vs. 14, Praying with the spirit AND praying with the understanding vs. 15, Blessing with the spirit/giving thanks well is not prayer....you do not have a leg to stand on in this debate!

The scriptures clearly teach that every believer is baptized by the HS at conversion and indwelt and filled with the HS at that time, and that infilling happens again and again in the life of the believer.

And you are going to share those scriptures with us???

So, what are we to make of these experiences that charismatics claim? Since they are not based on or supported by scripture, what is their source? Delusion? Satan? A need to be accepted by the "tribe? I would say it could be all three. Also, I think what some say is the HS baptism may indeed be that because they had never been converted, and this experience signals their true conversion. Also, the experience might simply be a new infilling, as the Bible speaks of.

I have heard that some believe it is a one time experience and the Bible supports this on one occasion with Cornelius! But what most ignore or explain away is Chapter 8 and 19 where it is clear that those disciples believed and were baptized but did not receive the Holy Spirit.

So, I don't want to say that this experience is never of God. What I will say is that these three errors that I mentioned at the beginning of this post are just that: errors. And two things are very evident: 1. If the gift of tongues is in operation today, it is very rare indeed. 2. This "private prayer language" that charismatics say all believers can and should have is not supported anywhere in scripture, and any such language is not language at all but merely gibberish and a product of the imagination.

Well then you like others ignore speaking to God/ praying in tongues, my spirit prays/blessing with the spirit/praying with the spirit (Which Paul explains in vs. 14 is praying with the spirit).
I encourage everyone to read 1 Cor. 12-14 with an open mind to what He is REALLY teaching. Chapter 14 is correcting the use of praying in the spirit in church. He said it should not be done without interpretation. He alsoe says forbid not to speak in tongues!

 

[awaken]

I am sorry but this statement is just not honest. You have been shown scripture time and again. Just because you struggle in understanding how to apply scripture correctly does not mean others do not have scripture. And just because a comment is made in reference to a Peripheral issue without scripture does not mean one does not have scripture to back up their position.

Now I suggest you heed the scripture you have been shown and work to understand proper biblical application.

You mean heed YOUR interpretation of that scripture! NO thanks! I will stick to letting scripture interpret scripture! Your theology contradicts too many other scriptures that you want to ignore!

 

[Revmitchell]

You mean heed YOUR interpretation of that scripture! NO thanks! I will stick to letting scripture interpret scripture! Your theology contradicts too many other scriptures that you want to ignore!

Really, show me what I have ignored.

 

[awaken]

Really, show me what I have ignored.

Staying on Op..
As I have said in several post on this thread.
#1 Paul says that tongue are a sign to unbelievers.
I have ask what was the sign for? NO one has answered with scriputures!

#2 Acts 2 shows them speaking in tongues, but does not say they preached to the crowd. Peter preached. They were speaking the wonderful works of God.

#3 Acts 10 they spoke in tongues, just like Acts 2. THere were no unbelievers there! There were no interpretation! THey were magnifying God/praising!

#4 Acts 19 they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Tongues again was not used to preach.

When we get to 1 Cor. 12-14 Paul is correcting the use of tongues in an assembly. They were praying in the spirit without interpretation.
Chapter 14:2 says speaking in tongue is speaking to God.
Vs. 14 says tongues is praying in the spirit
Vs. 1516 says praying with the spirit (Paul already said praying in the spirit is tongues in vs. 14)

 

[Revmitchell]

Staying on Op..
As I have said in several post on this thread.
#1 Paul says that tongue are a sign to unbelievers.
I have ask what was the sign for? NO one has answered with scriputures!

This has all been addressed by others but let me help you out here:

Let's take a look at the verse you speak of in its context:

1Co 14:21 In the Law it is written, "By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord."
1Co 14:22 Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers.

You must look at the word "thus" in v. 22 here for it is important to understand the context and proper application. "Thus" here is in effect a conjunction between two thoughts. It is tying the main idea in verse 21 to the main idea in verse 22. If you separate these two ideas then you have ripped them both out of context and have done great violence to the passage and doctrine.

Now when we look at verse 21 we see that in Isaiah 28:11,12 "For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.to whom he has said, "This is rest; give rest to the weary; and this is repose"; yet they would not hear. " , God foretold the people of Israel that He would use people of other languages as a judgment on Israel. Notice here he did not suggest that there would be any use of some language not known in this world. And Paul is saying that the same thing has happened here. When tongues (a known language to others) are used it is a judgment on the Jews because they would not hear God.

So what was going on in the church at Corinth? Well, they were looking for signs because they confused signs with power. They were doing then as so many churches do today and trying to repeat what was done at Pentecost. The problem is that we cannot choose to willy nilly do what God did that day. There is no scripture that says we can call on the supernatural work of God at our will and time of choosing. In fact the disciples were told to go and wait on God not to make it happen on their own. Any time God moves among His people it is at His choosing and not ours. We cannot wield the HG like a sword.

The implication here is clear and the reason why is because he does not say that tongues are for this and that. There is no conjunction to include any other reason for the use of tongues. The use of tongues is made singular here.

#2 Acts 2 shows them speaking in tongues, but does not say they preached to the crowd. Peter preached. They were speaking the wonderful works of God.

This is just flat out false. Speaking the wonderful works of God is preaching. But what happened here. The use of tongues made the message of these wonderful works of God understandable to those people in their own language. Not some cheap imitation that we see in churches today which is nothing more than gibberish.

What did the sue of tongues accomplish. It got everyone's attention to show them that this preaching was of God. It was a sign as spoken of in Isaiah as judgment on the Jews and brought the gentiles to listen to the message of repentance preached by Peter.

#3 Acts 10 they spoke in tongues, just like Acts 2. THere were no unbelievers there! There were no interpretation! THey were magnifying God/praising!

Ok let's look at this:

Act 10:45,46 "And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God."

So who was hearing them speak in tongues? The Gentiles. Because this language (glossa) which was spoken was in their own native language. And again it was as Paul said, an example of what was spoken of in Isaiah.

#4 Acts 19 they spoke in tongues and prophesied. Tongues again was not used to preach.

You are trying to make a distinction here that scripture does not make. "Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying."

The action taken here is two things that happen at the very same time. Tongues and prophesying happen in conjunction with each other. Not separate. Scripture in no way shows them to be separate here.

When we get to 1 Cor. 12-14 Paul is correcting the use of tongues in an assembly. They were praying in the spirit without interpretation.
Chapter 14:2 says speaking in tongue is speaking to God.
Vs. 14 says tongues is praying in the spirit
Vs. 1516 says praying with the spirit (Paul already said praying in the spirit is tongues in vs. 14)

V. 14 does not say tongues is praying in the Spirit. It says nothing of the sort. Paul is speaking of praying in his spirit not God's. It is incorrect to say "in the Spirit" which indicates the Spirit of God.

What Paul is saying in vs. 14 and 15 is that he prays with both his spirit, and his mind. In other words he prays with all the faculties God gave Him. he does not pray in a language nobody knows.

Now what was the primary role of the coming of the Holy Ghost? Let's look at scripture to see what it says: Act_1:8 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. To be witnesses. The power and the Holy Ghost is for the purpose of being witnesses.


Now I have addressed your concerns with clarity and in rightly dividing the word. You are now accountable to the truth of the matter. What you do with it is now on you.

 

[DHK]

The Op is a prayer language!

But Acts 10 has nothing to do with a prayer language. You cannot stick with the OP, because nothing in Scripture speaks of private prayer language in tongues. Acts 10 certainly doesn't.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

In other words...you could not find the scriptures so you lower to degrading the person!

I have cited the scriptures several times. And you are being your usual disingenuous self.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

When we hunger for more of God...He will lead you to understand more! Understanding the power upon /power within helps!

I do not believe tongues is the only manifestation of the Holy Spirit! Some do, but I do not! I will say that the examples of the baptism in the Holy Spirit in scriptures does show everyone speaking in tongues!

Until you can prove that speaking to God (1 Cor. 14:2), Praying in tongue...your spirit prays vs. 14, Praying with the spirit AND praying with the understanding vs. 15, Blessing with the spirit/giving thanks well is not prayer....you do not have a leg to stand on in this debate!

And you are going to share those scriptures with us???

I have heard that some believe it is a one time experience and the Bible supports this on one occasion with Cornelius! But what most ignore or explain away is Chapter 8 and 19 where it is clear that those disciples believed and were baptized but did not receive the Holy Spirit.


Well then you like others ignore speaking to God/ praying in tongues, my spirit prays/blessing with the spirit/praying with the spirit (Which Paul explains in vs. 14 is praying with the spirit).
I encourage everyone to read 1 Cor. 12-14 with an open mind to what He is REALLY teaching. Chapter 14 is correcting the use of praying in the spirit in church. He said it should not be done without interpretation. He alsoe says forbid not to speak in tongues!

The instances in Chapters 8 and 19 have been explained to you exhaustively, and you ignore that or cannot comprehend it.

The only one who has a "private prayer language" is the one who has the gift of tongues and uses tongues in private, as Paul teaches. Otherwise, the scriptures show that there is no such thing.

And considering that the gift of tongues is extremely rare, if in operation today at all, this so-called "private prayer language" that charismatics claim everyone can have is nothing more than vain babblings and gibberish, the production of a fanciful and deluded mind. Not only is it non-scriptural, it is anti-scriptural.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

This has all been addressed by others but let me help you out here:

Let's take a look at the verse you speak of in its context:



You must look at the word "thus" in v. 22 here for it is important to understand the context and proper application. "Thus" here is in effect a conjunction between two thoughts. It is tying the main idea in verse 21 to the main idea in verse 22. If you separate these two ideas then you have ripped them both out of context and have done great violence to the passage and doctrine.

Now when we look at verse 21 we see that in Isaiah 28:11,12 "For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.to whom he has said, "This is rest; give rest to the weary; and this is repose"; yet they would not hear. " , God foretold the people of Israel that He would use people of other languages as a judgment on Israel. Notice here he did not suggest that there would be any use of some language not known in this world. And Paul is saying that the same thing has happened here. When tongues (a known language to others) are used it is a judgment on the Jews because they would not hear God.

So what was going on in the church at Corinth? Well, they were looking for signs because they confused signs with power. They were doing then as so many churches do today and trying to repeat what was done at Pentecost. The problem is that we cannot choose to willy nilly do what God did that day. There is no scripture that says we can call on the supernatural work of God at our will and time of choosing. In fact the disciples were told to go and wait on God not to make it happen on their own. Any time God moves among His people it is at His choosing and not ours. We cannot wield the HG like a sword.

The implication here is clear and the reason why is because he does not say that tongues are for this and that. There is no conjunction to include any other reason for the use of tongues. The use of tongues is made singular here.





This is just flat out false. Speaking the wonderful works of God is preaching. But what happened here. The use of tongues made the message of these wonderful works of God understandable to those people in their own language. Not some cheap imitation that we see in churches today which is nothing more than gibberish.

What did the sue of tongues accomplish. It got everyone's attention to show them that this preaching was of God. It was a sign as spoken of in Isaiah as judgment on the Jews and brought the gentiles to listen to the message of repentance preached by Peter.





Ok let's look at this:

Act 10:45,46 "And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God."

So who was hearing them speak in tongues? The Gentiles. Because this language (glossa) which was spoken was in their own native language. And again it was as Paul said, an example of what was spoken of in Isaiah.





You are trying to make a distinction here that scripture does not make. "Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying."

The action taken here is two things that happen at the very same time. Tongues and prophesying happen in conjunction with each other. Not separate. Scripture in no way shows them to be separate here.




V. 14 does not say tongues is praying in the Spirit. It says nothing of the sort. Paul is speaking of praying in his spirit not God's. It is incorrect to say "in the Spirit" which indicates the Spirit of God.

What Paul is saying in vs. 14 and 15 is that he prays with both his spirit, and his mind. In other words he prays with all the faculties God gave Him. he does not pray in a language nobody knows.

Now what was the primary role of the coming of the Holy Ghost? Let's look at scripture to see what it says: Act_1:8 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. To be witnesses. The power and the Holy Ghost is for the purpose of being witnesses.


Now I have addressed your concerns with clarity and in rightly dividing the word. You are now accountable to the truth of the matter. What you do with it is now on you.

A valiant effort, to be sure, but she will respond in one of three ways, and maybe all three: She will twist and misrepresent what you say, she will ignore it, or she will not comprehend it.

 

[Revmitchell]

A valiant effort, to be sure, but she will respond in one of three ways, and maybe all three: She will twist and misrepresent what you say, she will ignore it, or she will not comprehend it.

Well she has the truth now. She is responsible for it. I will leave it in her hands.

 

[awaken]

This has all been addressed by others but let me help you out here:

Let's take a look at the verse you speak of in its context:



You must look at the word "thus" in v. 22 here for it is important to understand the context and proper application. "Thus" here is in effect a conjunction between two thoughts. It is tying the main idea in verse 21 to the main idea in verse 22. If you separate these two ideas then you have ripped them both out of context and have done great violence to the passage and doctrine.

Now when we look at verse 21 we see that in Isaiah 28:11,12 "For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.to whom he has said, "This is rest; give rest to the weary; and this is repose"; yet they would not hear. " , God foretold the people of Israel that He would use people of other languages as a judgment on Israel. Notice here he did not suggest that there would be any use of some language not known in this world. And Paul is saying that the same thing has happened here. When tongues (a known language to others) are used it is a judgment on the Jews because they would not hear God.

So what was going on in the church at Corinth? Well, they were looking for signs because they confused signs with power. They were doing then as so many churches do today and trying to repeat what was done at Pentecost. The problem is that we cannot choose to willy nilly do what God did that day. There is no scripture that says we can call on the supernatural work of God at our will and time of choosing. In fact the disciples were told to go and wait on God not to make it happen on their own. Any time God moves among His people it is at His choosing and not ours. We cannot wield the HG like a sword.

The implication here is clear and the reason why is because he does not say that tongues are for this and that. There is no conjunction to include any other reason for the use of tongues. The use of tongues is made singular here.

Paul seems to contradict himself in this passage. First he says that tongues are a "sign" for unbelievers, but then he says that if unbelievers see people speaking in tongues, the unbelievers will think that the believers are out of their minds.

True... "uninterpreted tongues" have been used in Israel's history as a sign to the unbelieving Israelites that God's judgment had come upon them.
This prophecy was fulfilled when the Assyrian army swooped down upon Israel speaking a foreign language (an uninterpreted tongue), carrying Israel off into captivity. Paul used an example from Israel's history to show that uninterpreted tongues are sometimes used as a "sign" for unbelievers that judgment has come upon them.

Then Paul pointed out that if an unbeliever enters a church where Christians seem to have lost their minds, the unbeliever wouldn't see this as a sign of impending judgment. This is why Paul said that prophecy is much more beneficial during a church service.

This is just flat out false. Speaking the wonderful works of God is preaching. But what happened here. The use of tongues made the message of these wonderful works of God understandable to those people in their own language. Not some cheap imitation that we see in churches today which is nothing more than gibberish.

I do not know what cheap imitation you are referring to. But tongues is more than gibberish! It is a language that the speaker himself does not know or understand without an interpretation from the Holy Spirit.

The people in the crowd said, "we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" In other words, the disciples were praising God, telling Him of His wonders, as in Psalms 40:5 and 66:3

"Many, O LORD my God, are the wonders you have done. The things you planned for us no one can recount to you; were I to speak and tell of them, they would be too many to declare." (Psalms 40:5)

"Say to God, "How awesome are your deeds! So great is your power that your enemies cringe before you."" (Psalms 66:3)

Why were the disciples praising God in tongues? Because this is one of the primary purposes for tongues:

"If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying?" (1 Corinthians 14:16)

On the day of Pentecost the disciples were talking to God in the Holy Spirit (they were praying in the Spirit), they were not sharing the Gospel in tongues.
Even non-charismatic commentaries agree that the disciples were praising God in tongues and not sharing the Gospel. For example, The Bible Knowledge Commentary (Walvoord and Zuck, Dallas Theological Seminary, p.358) says this:

"The topic the people discussed in all these languages was the wonders of God. It seems they were praising God. Their message was not one of repentance; it was not the gospel." (emphasis added)

The disciples were praising God in the Holy Spirit. Bible teachers talk about different types of prayer, such as the prayer of repentance, the prayer of consecration, the prayer of thanksgiving, the prayer of praise, and so on. The disciples were giving God the prayer of praise in the Holy Spirit. They were praying in the Spirit.

The purpose for tongues at Pentecost was not for sharing the Gospel with foreigners in their native languages. In fact, nowhere does the New Testament say that speaking in tongues is for witnessing to foreigners.

Just curious what tongue(language) did Peter preach in?

 

[awaken]

What did the sue of tongues accomplish. It got everyone's attention to show them that this preaching was of God. It was a sign as spoken of in Isaiah as judgment on the Jews and brought the gentiles to listen to the message of repentance preached by Peter.

I will agree it got everyones attention!

Ok let's look at this:

Act 10:45,46 "And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God."

So who was hearing them speak in tongues? The Gentiles. Because this language (glossa) which was spoken was in their own native language. And again it was as Paul said, an example of what was spoken of in Isaiah.

No it was not the Gentiles that heard..they were the ones speaking!
While the apostle Peter was teaching Cornelius and his household about Christ, the Holy Spirit came on everyone who heard the message. They all began speaking in tongues, but they were not witnessing to anyone because every non-Christian in the house had just gotten saved ( there was no-one else present who needed to hear the Gospel). Instead, they were praising God in tongues by the Holy Spirit, just like the disciples did on the day of Pentecost.

trying to make a distinction here that scripture does not make. "Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying."

The action taken here is two things that happen at the very same time. Tongues and prophesying happen in conjunction with each other. Not separate. Scripture in no way shows them to be separate here.

When the apostle Paul laid hands on these twelve men, they all began speaking in tongues. There is no mention of anyone else being present, so there's no evidence to suggest that these twelve men were witnessing to foreigners in tongues. Prophesying is not preaching!

. 14 does not say tongues is praying in the Spirit. It says nothing of the sort. Paul is speaking of praying in his spirit not God's. It is incorrect to say "in the Spirit" which indicates the Spirit of God.

It is in our spirit that we do pray to God in tongues!

What Paul is saying in vs. 14 and 15 is that he prays with both his spirit, and his mind. In other words he prays with all the faculties God gave Him. he does not pray in a language nobody knows.

Paul said that when we pray in tongues, it's our spirits which are praying (through the Holy Spirit), not our minds (because our minds are unfruitful while we pray with our spirits, Paul said). "Praying in tongues" and "praying with my spirit" and "praying in the Spirit" all mean the same thing.

The Amplified Version of the Bible is often a useful study tool because it brings out various shades of meaning that might otherwise be lost in the translation from Greek to English. Here is this same verse in the Amplified Version:

"For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit [by the Holy Spirit within me] prays, but my mind is unproductive - bears no fruit and helps nobody." (1 Corinthians 14:14, AMP)

In other words, when we pray in tongues, the Holy Spirit is providing the words to our spirits which we then speak out of our mouths. This bypasses our minds, which is why Paul said that his mind was unproductive when he prayed with his spirit.

So one type of praying is done with the mind, and another type of praying is done with the spirit. In this verse, Paul specifically said that the way he prayed with his spirit was by praying in tongues in the Holy Spirit.

Notice that when we talk about prayer, we're talking about speaking to God. Therefore, in this verse Paul was referring to the private form of tongues ( praying to God in the Holy Spirit, or "praying in the Spirit").

Now what was the primary role of the coming of the Holy Ghost? Let's look at scripture to see what it says: Act_1:8 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. To be witnesses. The power and the Holy Ghost is for the purpose of being witnesses.


Now I have addressed your concerns with clarity and in rightly dividing the word. You are now accountable to the truth of the matter. What you do with it is now on you.

I agree that the power of the Holy Spirit was given to witness!

But you ignore too many scriptures that show speaking in tongues/speaking to God/ Blessing God....is praying!

One last note....the HOly Spirit prays through our spirit! He gives the utterance! We surrender our mouth!
We can pray with understanding AND with the spirit!