Speaking in Tongues (Privately, Outside of Church)

[DJ2]

I have seen what is right in front of my eyes, and that is why I believe in the existence of miracles today, and why I accept the testimony of others as plausible.

Whether from you or someone else, it is simply a claim. The reality of the here and now is before us and not based on claims to the contrary. Even you must admit this. Society would break down if we just accepted people's understanding of reality instead of the obvious.

If the New Testament age of the miraculous never ended there would be no debate. In other words, you are fighting the obvious.

 

[breno785au]

I was praying in an unknown tongue before I even read about it in the Word.

I've also heard people praying in tongues, then praying in a Ghanaian language that they didn't know. A Ghanaian man approached her after and said, when you prayed, you prayed in my language saying, The Lord is coming quickly!

 

[UnderGrace]

Hmm..I did not use the word encouraging once.

When a report is received about a particular sin in the church Paul can clearly drawn the line,

You tell me how he was supposed to precisely identify from a distance who had the genuine gift, who was speaking in a foreign language and who was using ecstatic utterance.

Reading the scripture with our cultural lens does not work

Why did Paul use the plural and singular...he was a smart man I am sure he had his reasons

Examine all things...

I know its hard, I had incorporated Calvinism and Lordship Salvation nonsense in my understanding of scripture, twenty lost years of a carefully constructed understanding of scripture and the complexities of salvation which only bound me.

Thankfully I went back to the drawing board and reexamined my own indoctrination and broke free, I relearned that the gospel is pretty simple and God's grace and love are at the center and when I pray, it is in my simple English language which is more than sufficient and sometimes I do not even need words God already knows.

Paul is not endorsing a private prayer language, it is not needed we are already in a position of fellowship with God.

1 Corinthians 14:

27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, [Greek glōssē, noun, singular] 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.


In 1 Corinthians 14:27, the word glōssē is singular.

So now you're saying that Paul encouraged the use of the counterfeit in the church congregation when he told them to speak in tongues two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret?

And then Paul urged the believer to use the counterfeit to speak to his/her pagan god?

 

[Enow]

I was praying in an unknown tongue before I even read about it in the Word.

Nonchristians have used that kind of tongue too, but it is just vain & profane babbling nonsense, whereas the real God gift of tongues is of other men's lips to speak unto the people. 1 Corinthians 14:21

So if you have been around believes that speak in tongues, chances are you may have that experience as well. It doesn't mean it is from God though which is why the apostle John warned believers not to believe every spirit but test them, even the tongues they bring to see if they speak the way the world speaks which is the spirit of error; 1 John 4:1-6.

I've also heard people praying in tongues, then praying in a Ghanaian language that they didn't know. A Ghanaian man approached her after and said, when you prayed, you prayed in my language saying, The Lord is coming quickly!

Kind of confusing but you said a woman was praying in tongue which means the Holy Spirit is praying that to the Lord?

How do you not know if that woman knew Ghanaian to speak in Ghanaian to draw attention to herself?

I mean, why pray that to God if that was a message to that Ghanaian? Can hardly call it a prayer meant for God, right?

There is a gift called discerner of spirits. Not once have I ever heard any tongue speaker claim that was being used to discern from that supernatural tongue found in the world in testing the spirits.

Thank you for sharing, brother. It does raise a lot of concern for you that I can only hope the Lord will wake you up to.

Especially when 1 Corinthians 14th chapter has Paul citing the Lord's commandment not to speak in church; that they were to be silent. So is the Holy Spirit making that woman break the Lord's commandment? No. Then He is not manifesting tongues in her either. Something is not right here, Biblically, but most tongue speakers just want to continue and have fun.

 

[Dino246]

Especially when 1 Corinthians 14th chapter has Paul citing the Lord's commandment not to speak in church; that they were to be silent. So is the Holy Spirit making that woman break the Lord's commandment? No. Then He is not manifesting tongues in her either. Something is not right here, Biblically, but most tongue speakers just want to continue and have fun.

Since you are so confident that Paul was "citing the Lord's commandment", please quote the commandment. It's in the law, isn't it? Go find it, and post it for all to see. Good luck.

Breno did not say that what happened took place in the context of a church service. Your assumption of that puts you in error.

 

[DJ2]

I was praying in an unknown tongue before I even read about it in the Word.

I've also heard people praying in tongues, then praying in a Ghanaian language that they didn't know. A Ghanaian man approached her after and said, when you prayed, you prayed in my language saying, The Lord is coming quickly!

It is not uncommon for foreigners to purposely seek out pentecostal churches and claim that the tongues the members are speaking is their native tongue. It's always good for at least a free lunch. Your claim is neither remarkable or new.

 

[UnderGrace]

Very interesting, I guess some things never change... hmm... reminds of the first century church at Corinth

It is not uncommon for foreigners to purposely seek out pentecostal churches and claim that the tongues the members are speaking is their native tongue. It's always good for at least a free lunch. Your claim is neither remarkable or new.

 

[Joidevivre]

It is real to me - and I guess you have to have a personal experience to really understand. It is very freeing when I pray in tongues in private - I do not always know how to pray, but the Holy Spirit does. I release His prayer through my voice. And I know that the prayer will be answered.

For those who disagree with the reality of this, I leave them alone and do not try to convince. That is the Holy Spirit's job. Yet, I see so many who do not believe in a private spiritual language trying so hard to convince those who do that it is wrong. For what purpose?

 

[breno785au]

Nonchristians have used that kind of tongue too, but it is just vain & profane babbling nonsense, whereas the real God gift of tongues is of other men's lips to speak unto the people. 1 Corinthians 14:21

So if you have been around believes that speak in tongues, chances are you may have that experience as well. It doesn't mean it is from God though which is why the apostle John warned believers not to believe every spirit but test them, even the tongues they bring to see if they speak the way the world speaks which is the spirit of error; 1 John 4:1-6.



Kind of confusing but you said a woman was praying in tongue which means the Holy Spirit is praying that to the Lord?

How do you not know if that woman knew Ghanaian to speak in Ghanaian to draw attention to herself?

I mean, why pray that to God if that was a message to that Ghanaian? Can hardly call it a prayer meant for God, right?

There is a gift called discerner of spirits. Not once have I ever heard any tongue speaker claim that was being used to discern from that supernatural tongue found in the world in testing the spirits.

Thank you for sharing, brother. It does raise a lot of concern for you that I can only hope the Lord will wake you up to.

Especially when 1 Corinthians 14th chapter has Paul citing the Lord's commandment not to speak in church; that they were to be silent. So is the Holy Spirit making that woman break the Lord's commandment? No. Then He is not manifesting tongues in her either. Something is not right here, Biblically, but most tongue speakers just want to continue and have fun.

Thing is though, I am a believer. And I asked for the Holy Spirit and God has given it to me because I asked for it, and He gave it as He promised He would. It really is that simple, no carnal minded rationale. I see the fruits of it, and I will continue to do so

Oh and the testimony of the woman and Ghanaian man, it was during a prayer time of about 5-10 people, not a church service, though I might clear that up for people whoay jump to conclusion.

Oh, and if you want to talk about the gift of discerning of spirits, I have that gift.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I know its hard, I had incorporated Calvinism and Lordship Salvation nonsense in my understanding of scripture, twenty lost years of a carefully constructed understanding of scripture and the complexities of salvation which only bound me.

Thankfully I went back to the drawing board and reexamined my own indoctrination and broke free, I relearned that the gospel is pretty simple and God's grace and love are at the center and when I pray, it is in my simple English language which is more than sufficient and sometimes I do not even need words God already knows.

This is a pretty amazing testimony, and we can thank the Lord for opening your eyes to the truth. The Gospel is indeed very simply, yet very profound and powerful. We must always let the Word of God interpret the Word of God.

As to private prayer language, as long it remains private it should not be an issue for anyone. Yet it really has no basis in Scripture. If anyone should have had a private and supernatural prayer language, it should have been the Lord Himself. But He prayed with brevity and simplicity in ordinary human language.

 

[shrume]

...As to private prayer language, as long it remains private it should not be an issue for anyone.

And when it's spoken out loud, it must be interpreted (1 Cor 14:5, 13)

Yet it really has no basis in Scripture.

Of course it does. Read 1 Cor 12-14.

If anyone should have had a private and supernatural prayer language, it should have been the Lord Himself. But He prayed with brevity and simplicity in ordinary human language.

It was not possible to speak in tongues before the day of Pentecost.

 

[Nehemiah6]

And when it's spoken out loud, it must be interpreted (1 Cor 14:5, 13)

For whom? This is about PRIVATE prayer language, not in a public meeting. No interpreter needed.

Of course it does. Read 1 Cor 12-14.

Yes I have not only read but STUDIED this portion of Scripture. There is absolutely nothing there about PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE. What Paul stated was that if a person in a public meeting speaks in tongues without an interpreter, only God understands what is being said, and that was unacceptable. He also said that prayer must involve both the mind and the spirit.

It was not possible to speak in tongues before the day of Pentecost.

Since Christ is God, and there is nothing impossible with God, it would have been extremely easy for Christ to speak in any human language fluently. He understands and knows all languages, but while He was on earth He prayed briefly and simply in Aramaic (when in public), but also spent long hours simply communing with the Father (but not in any special language).

 

[shrume]

For whom? This is about PRIVATE prayer language, not in a public meeting. No interpreter needed.

Noted. You're right. If a person speaks in tongues to himself, there is no need to interpret.

Yes I have not only read but STUDIED this portion of Scripture. There is absolutely nothing there about PRIVATE PRAYER LANGUAGE. What Paul stated was that if a person in a public meeting speaks in tongues without an interpreter, only God understands what is being said, and that was unacceptable. He also said that prayer must involve both the mind and the spirit.

Not quite. Paul said that when he spoke in tongues, his understanding was unfruitful (1 Cor 14:14). That means his mind is not involved. He also states that when a person speaks in tongues, he does not understand what he is saying (1 Cor 14:2). And that is perfectly acceptable in a person private prayer life. And if a person does not want to interpret, he is to pray in tongues silently, to himself and to God (1 Cor 14:28). Also, speaking in tongues is called praying in the spirit (1 Cor 14:15), and there are a few places where Christians are encouraged to pray in the spirit (Eph 6:18; Jude 20).

Since Christ is God, and there is nothing impossible with God, it would have been extremely easy for Christ to speak in any human language fluently. He understands and knows all languages, but while He was on earth He prayed briefly and simply in Aramaic (when in public), but also spent long hours simply communing with the Father (but not in any special language).

Nobody spoke in tongues before the day of Pentecost. The gift of the Holy Spirit that we have today was not available yet (John 7:39).

Bed for me.

 

[DJ2]

And when it's spoken out loud, it must be interpreted (1 Cor 14:5, 13)


Of course it does. Read 1 Cor 12-14.


It was not possible to speak in tongues before the day of Pentecost.

It was not possible to speak in tongues before the day of Pentecost

Even for Jesus?

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Hmm..I did not use the word encouraging once.

Apologies if the use of "encouraging" is too strong a word for your sensibilities. However, you're skirting the issue.

You know 1 Cor 14:28 states that if a person speaks in tongues in the church, he/she is to speak silently to God if there is no interpretation.

According to you, 1 Cor 14:27-28 refers to "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)" due to the use of the singular "tongue" (Greek glōssē, noun, singular).

So when Paul wrote 1 Cor 14:28 (if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God), Paul is "allowing" the use of the counterfeit (according to you) to be spoken to God.

We know Paul is not shy. He had no problem telling the Corinthian believers to knock off certain behaviors, but when it comes to (according to you) "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)", this is something Paul allows to be spoken to God? Seriously?

When a report is received about a particular sin in the church Paul can clearly drawn the line,

Yes. Paul was able to make perfectly clear that certain behavior was to stop. So why do you think Paul is not so clear when it comes to (according to you) the "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)" you claim was going on in the church at Corinth?

Could it be that Paul does not discuss "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)" at all? And that Paul's focus in 1 Cor 12 - 14 is on the genuine manifestation of the Spirit?

You tell me how he was supposed to precisely identify from a distance who had the genuine gift, who was speaking in a foreign language and who was using ecstatic utterance.

Why did Paul use the plural and singular...he was a smart man I am sure he had his reasons

Examine all things...

I believe Paul wrote concerning the genuine manifestation when he wrote 1 Cor 12 - 14.

You have yet to establish that Paul spoke of "foreign language" or "ecstatic utterance".

Paul is not endorsing a private prayer language, it is not needed we are already in a position of fellowship with God.

In 1 Cor 14, Paul wrote concerning the use of the manifestation within the church. Paul is not addressing "fellowship with God" in his writing of 1 Cor 14 (or 1 Cor 12 - 13 for that matter).

Believers come face to face with situations in which the manifestation (as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10) is beneficial at various times ... not just when we are in church.

The manifestation (as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10) benefits the believer in every instance in life.

According to 1 Cor 14:39, Paul states we are not to forbid speaking in tongues.

 

[Kavik]

Yes, 1 Cor 12:11 indicates the one and the selfsame Spirit works the manifestation within the born again believer.

The manifestation is not energized within those who are not born again (natural man).

1 Cor. 12:11 it is simply stating that all these gifts/manifestations are given by one in the same Spirit as opposed to a specific Spirit for each manifestation. The Spirit gives these abilities to whomever it wishes and to the degree that it wishes. One does not need to be born again to be given a manifestation/gift from the Holy Spirit; it does not discriminate.

While the concern of Paul is the edification of the church congregation, there is also reference to the personal edification of the believer who speaks in tongues. That you fail to recognize this fact does not negate that Paul does, in fact, claim there is a benefit to the individual. The benefit is spiritual as opposed to mental or physical.

I don’t think I ever said there wasn’t a benefit to the speaker; on the contrary, why shouldn’t there be? He understands what he’s saying (while others do not) thus; in fact, the benefit would only be to the one speaking – I think that’s Paul’s whole point here: clarity and understanding in a public setting such that all may benefit. If what is being said at a public worship is only understood by the speaker, it benefits only him and no one else. Paul, in a sense, admonishes the speaker to either get an interpreter (i.e. translator) so everyone can benefit, or pray silently so as not to cause a disturbance/distraction.

So now you're saying that there are many and various Scriptural interpretations and all are okay?

Yes, of course there is more than one understanding/interpretation of the Bible – yours is no more correct/better than any other, nor is mine for that matter. What I’m pointing out is that sometimes you have to look at a given passage in another light than what you may be used to. The interpretation I used is completely viable and, given the historical real-life situation with respect to everyday communication in a multi-port and multi-cultural city like Corinth, seems to make considerable more sense than postulating something supernatural that’s occurring. Sometimes what’s reported in the Bible is just plain factual data regarding a given situation; it’s nothing more earthshattering than that. At times, it helps to put things into a historical perspective; but because it’s reported in the Bible, people look for something more that just isn’t really there.

Again, your opinion that the manifestation is "just a tool, created by man, to establish a closer relationship with the divine" is complete contradiction to what Scripture indicates in 1 Cor 12.

In light of Biblical ‘tongues’ (read ‘real language(s)’ here) there is no contradiction as real languages, not non-cognitive non-language utterance (modern ‘tongues’), are what’s being referenced in the Bible with respect to ‘tongues’. One of the pitfalls of using 17[SUP]th[/SUP] century English in the 21[SUP]st[/SUP] century.

Nice try. No one can fault you in your endeavor to render that which is spiritual as merely a mundane attempt to "establish a closer relationship with the divine" is complete contradiction to what Scripture indicates in 1 Cor 12.

See above. The experience can certainly be very spiritual (I don’t think I ever indicated it wasn’t), but modern tongues are a tool; nothing more. No difference in what you’re doing as opposed to a shaman somewhere in Siberia.

 

[UnderGrace]

Not about my sensibilities it is about you stating that I wrote things when I did not.

Je suis fini

Translation

Done

Apologies if the use of "encouraging" is too strong a word for your sensibilities. However, you're skirting the issue.

You know 1 Cor 14:28 states that if a person speaks in tongues in the church, he/she is to speak silently to God if there is no interpretation.

According to you, 1 Cor 14:27-28 refers to "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)" due to the use of the singular "tongue" (Greek glōssē, noun, singular).

So when Paul wrote 1 Cor 14:28 (if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God), Paul is "allowing" the use of the counterfeit (according to you) to be spoken to God.

We know Paul is not shy. He had no problem telling the Corinthian believers to knock off certain behaviors, but when it comes to (according to you) "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)", this is something Paul allows to be spoken to God? Seriously?





Yes. Paul was able to make perfectly clear that certain behavior was to stop. So why do you think Paul is not so clear when it comes to (according to you) the "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)" you claim was going on in the church at Corinth?

Could it be that Paul does not discuss "counterfeit (ecstatic speech)" at all? And that Paul's focus in 1 Cor 12 - 14 is on the genuine manifestation of the Spirit?





I believe Paul wrote concerning the genuine manifestation when he wrote 1 Cor 12 - 14.

You have yet to establish that Paul spoke of "foreign language" or "ecstatic utterance".





In 1 Cor 14, Paul wrote concerning the use of the manifestation within the church. Paul is not addressing "fellowship with God" in his writing of 1 Cor 14 (or 1 Cor 12 - 13 for that matter).

Believers come face to face with situations in which the manifestation (as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10) is beneficial at various times ... not just when we are in church.

The manifestation (as shown in 1 Cor 12:8-10) benefits the believer in every instance in life.

According to 1 Cor 14:39, Paul states we are not to forbid speaking in tongues.

 

[MarcR]

Even as a person very skeptical about the validity of unknown tongues; I see no harm in their private use.

I am quite open to the idea that all of the gifts including tongues for purpose of evangelism are still operative.

It is only unknown tongues that I struggle with.

However if you believe that God is using unknown tongues in your life in some useful way, I'm not about to challenge your right to believe that even if I don't.

 

[Enow]

Even as a person very skeptical about the validity of unknown tongues; I see no harm in their private use.

I am quite open to the idea that all of the gifts including tongues for purpose of evangelism are still operative.

It is only unknown tongues that I struggle with.

However if you believe that God is using unknown tongues in your life in some useful way, I'm not about to challenge your right to believe that even if I don't.

But why talk about it when it does not even benefit talking to other tongue speakers about it? If it is really a private thing between the tongue speaker and the Lord, there is no point talking about it to even other tongue speakers other than to brag about doing something that not all believers are doing. How can they NOT come across showing off in that way?

 

[shrume]

Even as a person very skeptical about the validity of unknown tongues; I see no harm in their private use.

I am quite open to the idea that all of the gifts including tongues for purpose of evangelism are still operative.

There is no such thing as "tongues for purpose of evangelism". Tongues is not for missionary work, or outreach. Its primary use is for the individual believer, for his edification. Whenever tongues is spoken in public, it must be interpreted so the church can be edified.

It is only unknown tongues that I struggle with.

Every time anyone speaks in tongues the language is unknown to them (1 Cor 14:2, 14).

However if you believe that God is using unknown tongues in your life in some useful way, I'm not about to challenge your right to believe that even if I don't.

It is appreciated.