Private prayer language

[Don]

Good question! I love a challenge! But really do not have an answer for this! Let me pray about it study it out and get back to you!

From what I gather from your question... you are putting those that believe in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the same catagory as those he says works iniquity, is that correct?

Not exactly. Consider: Christ said there were going to be those that say "we cast out devils in your name"; obviously, they thought that doing so meant they were Christians. But He's going to tell them, "I never knew you."

How many of us -- you and I both included -- are going to look at speaking in tongues as evidence that we're a Christian, only to find out we placed our trust in the wrong thing? How many are going to look at paying their tithe, or "wearing the proper clothes," or any of a number of things, as evidence that we're Christians, only to find out that we weren't?

And if something as serious as casting out devils is one of those things that doesn't necessarily mean we're a Christian, then we have to accept the premise that speaking in tongues is also something that doesn't necessarily mean we're a Christian.

Understand?

So are you saying that on Acts 2 they were not showing love? I am not following where you are going with this! Who are you saying does not understand, the unbelievers? So how are you saying it is a sign to unbelievers?

No, I'm saying that emphasizing a "private prayer language" is not showing love. The parable of the talents emphasized that the man who buried his talent found no favor with the master. Jesus told Peter, "If you love me, feed my sheep." Paul said in 1 Cor 14:26, "Let all things be done unto edifying."

We shouldn't desire things for ourselves. Our task is to tell all the Gospel. Encouraging others to engage in a "private prayer language" isn't edifying to the body, and isn't love for the unbelievers.

My spirit prays...the Holy Spirit gives the utterance.

Because it eliminates the possibility of selfishness entering our prayer life. If I pray with my own mind/understanding I could be praying against God's will or selfishly. THe HOly Spirit gives us the language/utterance of His perfect will.
In Rom. 8:26 it says we know not what we SHOULD pray. He does not say we do not know HOW to pray. Didn't Jesus pray to the Father? Isn't Jesus God?

Can you provide scripture for any apostle who prayed the way you describe?

My born again spirit? Do you really know or understand all about your spirit? I am still learning through the guidiance of the Holy Spirit.

Is it your flesh that was saved, or your spirit? If it was your flesh, then we should have an entirely new conversation. If it was your spirit, then tell me: Isn't your spirit YOU?

Do you believe tongue is praying in the spirit as Paul says in chapter 14?

I believe that speaking in tongues is exactly as described in Acts 2. People began to magnify God; unbelievers heard them in their own languages, and were saved.

I am going to ask you as I have asked others...where does the Word of God limit ANY kind of prayer? If we can pray with our understanding/mind in private, why would you limit this?

Because you yourself limit scripture. Whenever you look at 1 Cor 14 and respond with "that was for the assembly," you place a limit. When I then use the same limit and point out that Paul says to pray to yourself while in the assembly, now you don't want to use that limit?

I was referring to 1 Cor. 14:21. Are you saying that this is not using tongues as an example?
You stated that Is. was not a reference to tongues...but He uses Is. in 1 Cor. 14.


Are you saying now that the unbelievers did not hear them in Acts 2? You are not making sense with where you are going with this!


I am saying that 1 Cor. 14 used Isaiah to get a point across concerning a sign to the unbelievers.

Sorry; you were the one that confused that issue because you asked about "refresh." 1 Cor 14:21 absolutely quotes Isaiah 28:12 -- including the statement, "for all that, they will not hear me."

 

[DHK]

THe only thing different is that we do not deny the power of the Holy Spirit! We believe the Holy Spirit still manifest Himself as he did since Jesus sent Him on the Day of Pentecost! We stop denying what the Word says!

I have never denied the power of the Holy Spirit. I have no doubt seen it more times than you. But I do deny that what is fraudulent and done in the name of the Spirit under the guise of what is called tongues today is even of God. It is gibberish, and not of God at all. It has another source. It is practiced in Voodooism, Hinduism, Mormonism, and in paganism in general. Jump right in why don't you?

First off there can be no valid Christian doctrine without experience.

Harmartiology:
All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
Man has sinned.
What experience do I need to know that?

Soteriology:
Christ came into this world, lived, died and rose again. That is the gospel.
By believing in him and his atoning work one can have salvation.

Anthropology:
Man is a creation of God. God created him in his own image and likeness. But man sinned and fell. He now lives with an "Adamic nature" or sin nature, the result of Adam's sin. The only remedy for his sin is found at the cross.

Angelology: God created angels--messengers that serve him, and also them that believe on his name and are heirs of his salvation. (Heb.1:14).
Fallen angels are called demons.

I could go on. But I don't need to. Doctrine is taught without experience. And it is all valid. You inadvertently said that your experience is more important than your doctrine. What a sorry state you live in.

Jesus spoke of a balanced life, a need to operate in Spirit and truth!

Give Scripture, otherwise you are just speaking in the air and making things up as you go.

Your tradition and theories are often lifted higher than Scripture. Cessationism being one of them!

I don't have tradition; I have the Word of God. It is my final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. Your authority is your experience as is evidenced both in this post and in your statement: "I won't give up my experiences." You will give up proper exposition of God's Word; but you won't give up your experiences. You will rationalize the Scripture away before you will give up an ungodly experience.

I had an acquaintance many years ago who did what you are doing, but in a slightly different manner. He "was led of God" to take a job as a bartender. God gave him the Scripture: "The doors that God opens no man shuts and the doors that God shuts no man opens." God opened the door for him and no man would shut it. Therefore serving liquor and helping others to get drunk was God's will for his life. He also was Charismatic. He used "the leading of the Holy Spirit" and "the Scripture" to justify his bartender job with the ungodly. He was like you in many ways. "Don't take away my experience."

But back to the OP....praying in the spirit/ speaking to God/ giving thanks is prayer!

Not in a language you cannot understand. Then it is all foolishness.

 

[awaken]

Not exactly. Consider: Christ said there were going to be those that say "we cast out devils in your name"; obviously, they thought that doing so meant they were Christians. But He's going to tell them, "I never knew you."

How many of us -- you and I both included -- are going to look at speaking in tongues as evidence that we're a Christian, only to find out we placed our trust in the wrong thing? How many are going to look at paying their tithe, or "wearing the proper clothes," or any of a number of things, as evidence that we're Christians, only to find out that we weren't?

And if something as serious as casting out devils is one of those things that doesn't necessarily mean we're a Christian, then we have to accept the premise that speaking in tongues is also something that doesn't necessarily mean we're a Christian.

Understand?

I am following you now! But I have never believed that speaking in tongues was a sign of salvation!
Something puzzled me about those scriptures so I am still going to study them out!

No, I'm saying that emphasizing a "private prayer language" is not showing love. The parable of the talents emphasized that the man who buried his talent found no favor with the master. Jesus told Peter, "If you love me, feed my sheep." Paul said in 1 Cor 14:26, "Let all things be done unto edifying."

We shouldn't desire things for ourselves. Our task is to tell all the Gospel. Encouraging others to engage in a "private prayer language" isn't edifying to the body, and isn't love for the unbelievers.

I understand that! But we can not sit by and allow someone to misrepresent His Word. I am not pushing tongues on anyone! I am discussing/debating scriptures!

Can you provide scripture for any apostle who prayed the way you describe?

Can you show scripture of any of the apostles speaking in tongues other than Acts 2?

Is it your flesh that was saved, or your spirit? If it was your flesh, then we should have an entirely new conversation. If it was your spirit, then tell me: Isn't your spirit YOU?

My spirit is the only part of me that is born again. I am in the process of renewing my mind...my body will be made new at his coming! But I still do not understand ALL spiritual things yet. Just because my spirit is born again does not mean I understand and walk in all that he said I could. It is a process to walk out our salvation.

I believe that speaking in tongues is exactly as described in Acts 2. People began to magnify God; unbelievers heard them in their own languages, and were saved.

But were they saved because of tongues or because of Peter preaching?

Because you yourself limit scripture. Whenever you look at 1 Cor 14 and respond with "that was for the assembly," you place a limit. When I then use the same limit and point out that Paul says to pray to yourself while in the assembly, now you don't want to use that limit?

NO, his correction is using praying in the spirit/tongues in the assembly. It is not to be done without interpretation. But he does not limit praying in the spirit to JUST the assembly. Paul said he spoke in tongues more than any of them, but not in church! He does not limit tongues to church!

Sorry; you were the one that confused that issue because you asked about "refresh." 1 Cor 14:21 absolutely quotes Isaiah 28:12 -- including the statement, "for all that, they will not hear me."

You have already admitted that the unbelievers heard them in Acts 2. So we will leave it at that. That would be another thread!

 

[awaken]

You inadvertently said that your experience is more important than your doctrine. What a sorry state you live in.

FAlSE! I said I read the Word, I believed the Word, I received the Word and I experienced the Word. My experience came last!

Give Scripture, otherwise you are just speaking in the air and making things up as you go.

So are you saying God is not looking for someone to worship him in Spirit and Truth?

I don't have tradition; I have the Word of God. It is my final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. Your authority is your experience as is evidenced both in this post and in your statement: "I won't give up my experiences." You will give up proper exposition of God's Word; but you won't give up your experiences. You will rationalize the Scripture away before you will give up an ungodly experience.

False! My experience confirms the Word that he gave me! The word came first!

I had an acquaintance many years ago who did what you are doing, but in a slightly different manner. He "was led of God" to take a job as a bartender. God gave him the Scripture: "The doors that God opens no man shuts and the doors that God shuts no man opens." God opened the door for him and no man would shut it. Therefore serving liquor and helping others to get drunk was God's will for his life. He also was Charismatic. He used "the leading of the Holy Spirit" and "the Scripture" to justify his bartender job with the ungodly. He was like you in many ways. "Don't take away my experience."

Not in a language you cannot understand. Then it is all foolishness.

YOu can not disprove my experience by an example of someones bad choice and understanding of scriptures.

 

[Revmitchell]

False! My experience confirms the Word that he gave me! The word came first!


YOu can not disprove my experience by an example of someones bad choice and understanding of scriptures.

And here you have it. "Experience" is equal to the word of God.

 

[DHK]

FAlSE! I said I read the Word, I believed the Word, I received the Word and I experienced the Word. My experience came last!

That is what you said previously. But that is now what you just demonstrated in your latest post.
What do you think this statement of your means:

"First off there can be no valid Christian doctrine without experience."

Your experience is just as important as doctrine, as the Bible. In fact you build your doctrine on your experience. You must have experience as you just said. But I demonstrated to you that doctrine is quite effectively taught without experience.

What do you think the 3,000 were doing:
Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
So are you saying God is not looking for someone to worship him in Spirit and Truth?
--Speaking gibberish? Rolling down the aisles? Hissing like snakes? Drinking poison? Barking like dogs? Picking up serpents? Looking for new and exciting experiences?? NO!!! It doesn't say that at all.
--They continued steadfastly or continuously learning doctrine, and that without experience. They sat at their feet day after day learning doctrine. It wasn't "the Holy Spirit teaching them;" it was the Apostles. They had teachers, the best; the Apostles themselves. They were taught of men. The only experience they had were to be taught of men, day after day going through the Scriptures.

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
--What was their experience? Studying the Scriptures: day after day after day; hour after hour after hour. They searched the Scriptures; not speaking in tongues.
[quoteFalse! My experience confirms the Word that he gave me! The word came first! [/quote]
No it doesn't. I just demonstrated that. It confirms the Word in as much as that fellow's experience confirmed the Word for him to be a bartender. There is no difference. God doesn't confirm error or heresy.

YOu can not disprove my experience by an example of someones bad choice and understanding of scriptures.

Your choices were wrong, bad, and your understanding of Scriptures are about the same as his was if not worse. God does not condone those things that go against His Word.

If you had any of the Biblical gifts of the Spirit you would be able to demonstrate them. But you cannot. Therefore what you do is fraudulent. You should accept that.

 

[awaken]

Back to the prayer language...
Speaking to God is prayer!
praying in tongue is prayer!
Blessing with the spirit is prayer!
Giving thanks is prayer!

 

[SovereignMercy]

Tongues are known languages. In Acts foreigners hear the works of God in their language, there is no need of interpretation. It was never the nutty stuff you hear today or in the pagan temples in Corinth. The corinthians were imitating the cults not the gift that is evident in the book of Acts. When did an angel ever speak and need to be interpreted? Never.

 

[SovereignMercy]

Back to the prayer language...
Speaking to God is prayer!
praying in tongue is prayer!
Blessing with the spirit is prayer!
Giving thanks is prayer!

For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding.

The two cannot be separated which is Paul's point here. Name one instance in the Bible where someone prays in mumbo jumbo.

 

[Don]

I am following you now! But I have never believed that speaking in tongues was a sign of salvation!
Something puzzled me about those scriptures so I am still going to study them out!

Good!

I understand that! But we can not sit by and allow someone to misrepresent His Word. I am not pushing tongues on anyone! I am discussing/debating scriptures!

As am I.

Can you show scripture of any of the apostles speaking in tongues other than Acts 2?

The opening post, and the point of this thread, is praying in a private prayer language. So the question still stands: can you provide scripture that indicates an apostle, or anyone else for that matter, praying in a private prayer language?

My spirit is the only part of me that is born again. I am in the process of renewing my mind...my body will be made new at his coming! But I still do not understand ALL spiritual things yet. Just because my spirit is born again does not mean I understand and walk in all that he said I could. It is a process to walk out our salvation.

But is your spirit YOU?

But were they saved because of tongues or because of Peter preaching?

Neither. They were saved by their belief.

NO, his correction is using praying in the spirit/tongues in the assembly. It is not to be done without interpretation. But he does not limit praying in the spirit to JUST the assembly. Paul said he spoke in tongues more than any of them, but not in church! He does not limit tongues to church!

Where did Paul say "not in church"?

You have already admitted that the unbelievers heard them in Acts 2. So we will leave it at that. That would be another thread!

"Admitted"? Not hardly. Agreed that whenever tongues are spoken, they are a sign for unbelievers; and that unbelievers were present whenever tongues were used. Scripture is clear on that.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

YOu said...."Originally Posted by Thomas Helwys
Praying in tongues in private which is what those who have the gift of tongues can do when they are not giving a message for interpretation is not the same as everyone being able to speak in a private prayer language. This is where charismatics go completely astray because they cannot understand scripture. And the result? Everybody's vain babblings.

So what I comprehended is that you admitted that praying in tongues is what they that have the gift can do. You just added that not everyone can do it! Therefore you admitted that speaking in tongues is prayer.

So instead of trying to say I am misrepresented you correct me if I am wrong! But that is what you said in the above post! In Bold!

Let me simplify this so PERHAPS even you can understand it since you quote my post but cannot comprehend what I am saying, or pretend not to:

The only ones who can speak in tongues in private are those who have the GIFT of tongues, and that is not everyone but just a few. That is what Paul is saying. Therefore, the Charismatic claim that says the gift of tongues is different and distinct from a private prayer language and that the latter can and should be had by everyone, is total bull and not scriptural, as has been proven here time and again. So, what Charismatics claim is a private prayer language is nothing but gibberish and vain babblings. Furthermore, it is questionable if anyone nowadays actually has the GIFT of tongues, as the experience of Charismatic missionaries has shown. The conclusion: 1. There is no such thing as a private prayer language that everyone can have 2. The GIFT of tongues is exceedingly rare, if in operation at all today.

Therefore, ANY utterances which are not a result of the GIFT of tongues are not coming from God. That is the inevitable conclusion.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Most people that speak in tongue are usually having to defend them more than any other manifestation! Maybe that is why they are talked about more!

In church, we very rarely here a message in tongues with interpretation. It is usually the other manifestation! So tongues in our service is not the most important one!

So you speak in general...but not for all!

What I said is 100% the truth. Charismatics/Pentecostals have built entire denominations on their errant doctrines. Their CENTRAL doctrine which is the foundation of their entire system is that tongues is the initial evidence of the HS baptism; thus, everybody is supposed to experience this. And everybody should and can have a private prayer language. All of this is unscriptural, but by holding to this, Charismatics put tongues at the pinnacle of all the gifts, turning Paul's teaching on its head.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

This is the problem with Charismatics. They hold experience as equal to scripture.

No, they don't. They put experience above scripture. Because when it can be clearly shown that scripture contradicts their errors, as in this thread, they will cling to the error with tenacity and deny scripture.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Was it God or satan? Satan hates the manifestation of the Holy Spirit, especially tongues!
Well, my experience was just the opposite! I have been in a Baptist church all my life, still in one! God open my eyes to the truth you are denying!
Maybe yours was not real? I can not say!

One thing about being in the Baptist church when I embraced this truth is that they will not let things get unbiblical or out of line! But they also do not ignore what scripture is plain about!

Satan does not hate tongues. He uses them quite often, as the cults demonstrate.

 

[awaken]

For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is the conclusion then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding.

The two cannot be separated which is Paul's point here. Name one instance in the Bible where someone prays in mumbo jumbo.

THey are still two separate ways to pray! Whether you do them one right after the other! It does not take away from the fact that praying with your spirit is prayer!

 

[awaken]

Tongues are known languages. In Acts foreigners hear the works of God in their language, there is no need of interpretation. It was never the nutty stuff you hear today or in the pagan temples in Corinth. The corinthians were imitating the cults not the gift that is evident in the book of Acts. When did an angel ever speak and need to be interpreted? Never.

People sometimes use the account of Pentecost to prove that the main purpose of tongues in the first century was for witnessing to foreigners in their native languages. That was not the purpose for tongues at Pentecost. In fact, there's not a single example in the entire New Testament of anyone speaking in tongues in order to communicate with foreigners. I have heard first-hand reports of people who communicated with foreigners by speaking in tongues, so perhaps God sometimes uses tongues for this purpose. But my point is that there's not even a hint of such a thing in the entire New Testament. That is not one of the main purposes for tongues

 

[awaken]

The opening post, and the point of this thread, is praying in a private prayer language. So the question still stands: can you provide scripture that indicates an apostle, or anyone else for that matter, praying in a private prayer language?

If Paul did not speak tongues in church, yet he spoke more than all of them, where did he speak in tongues?

"I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue." (1 Corinthians 14:18-19)

But is your spirit YOU?

I am spirit, body and soul! I am in the process of allowing my spirit control my mind and body that is not re born yet!

Neither. They were saved by their belief.

True! It was their faith that saved them... but it is the preaching/teaching of the word that brings men to repentance!

Where did Paul say "not in church"?

vs. 19 above...

"Admitted"? Not hardly. Agreed that whenever tongues are spoken, they are a sign for unbelievers; and that unbelievers were present whenever tongues were used. Scripture is clear on that.

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.

 

[awaken]

Let me simplify this so PERHAPS even you can understand it since you quote my post but cannot comprehend what I am saying, or pretend not to:

The only ones who can speak in tongues in private are those who have the GIFT of tongues, and that is not everyone but just a few. That is what Paul is saying. Therefore, the Charismatic claim that says the gift of tongues is different and distinct from a private prayer language and that the latter can and should be had by everyone, is total bull and not scriptural, as has been proven here time and again. So, what Charismatics claim is a private prayer language is nothing but gibberish and vain babblings. Furthermore, it is questionable if anyone nowadays actually has the GIFT of tongues, as the experience of Charismatic missionaries has shown. The conclusion: 1. There is no such thing as a private prayer language that everyone can have 2. The GIFT of tongues is exceedingly rare, if in operation at all today.

Therefore, ANY utterances which are not a result of the GIFT of tongues are not coming from God. That is the inevitable conclusion.

1 Cor. describes tongues as speaking to God/ praying in the spirit/ blessing with the spirit. All the examples in Acts show that everyone spoke in tongues that were baptized in the Holy Spirit.
Acts they were praising God in tongues!

 

[awaken]

What I said is 100% the truth. Charismatics/Pentecostals have built entire denominations on their errant doctrines. Their CENTRAL doctrine which is the foundation of their entire system is that tongues is the initial evidence of the HS baptism; thus, everybody is supposed to experience this. And everybody should and can have a private prayer language. All of this is unscriptural, but by holding to this, Charismatics put tongues at the pinnacle of all the gifts, turning Paul's teaching on its head.

And I repeat..not all charismatics believe the same way! Just like not all Baptist believe the same!

 

[awaken]

No, they don't. They put experience above scripture. Because when it can be clearly shown that scripture contradicts their errors, as in this thread, they will cling to the error with tenacity and deny scripture.

You have shown your interpretation of the scriptures...big difference! ANd you have yet to prove error!