Thread: Tongues as a private prayer language

I have a dear friend in the Lord who attends a local community bible church. Loves Rob Bell, Rick Warren, that sort of thing.

We were discussing the Charisma the other day, and he told me he spoke in tongues often as part of his private devotions. He doesn't understand what he says, but is confident the words/sounds express the deepest groaning of his spirit to God in prayer. He said speaking in tongues was instrumental in him coming to Christ.

I used to think that people speaking in tongues was either the result of emotions getting over-hyped in an excitable setting, or possibly even demonic influence.

But this doesn't seem to be the case here. He is speaking in tongues in his study, alone, before or after reading the bible. As far as any human could tell, he is a sincere and conscientious Christian (even if he is wrong on some important doctrinal issues). He has a solid, conservative personality, not the sort given to hype or letting emotions get the best of him.

So what am I to think about this?

With all due respect you're to think it is wrong. "If I speak with the tongues of men and angels..." If I had wings I could fly.There is no private prayer language. To pray with one's lips and not the mind is ridiculous with a capital "R."

Originally Posted by Herald

With all due respect you're to think it is wrong. "If I speak with the tongues of men and angels..." There is no private prayer language. To pray with one's lips and not the mind is ridiculous with a capital "R."

Oh, I think it's wrong. My question is where does it come from? He says it is the Holy Spirit speaking through him. I cannot agree. So if not the Holy Spirit, then what?

I read a book by John MacArthur on speaking in tongues, arguing for its having stopped after 70 A.D. After reading it, I do not believe that it still happens, though my parents attest to having spoken in tongues, numerous members of my church attest to speaking in tongues, and friends of mine who actively defend charismatic theology, and who even claimed that making a joke against modern speaking in tongues would be blasphemy, possibly blasphemy against the holy spirit. I have been told in bible study groups that believing that the holy spirit doesn't actively work anymore or that the gifts have ceased, etc., is close to committing the unpardonable sin, or possibly is the unpardonable sin. So I am not in particularly friendly waters in my local church with regards to this issue.

To tell you the truth, I don't know what to call the tongues that still happens. John MacArthur in the book suggests it might be emotional frenzy, learned behavior, or possibly even demonic activity. I don't know.

The best book I have read on prophecy and tongues is O. Palmer Robertson's "The Final Word". His chapter on tongues is IIRC in the downloads section here.

Originally Posted by Exagorazo

The best book I have read on prophecy and tongues is O. Palmer Robertson's "The Final Word". His chapter on tongues is IIRC in the downloads section here.

My google-fu must be weak, because I can't find it...

The picture you paint of your friend--godly, sane and the like--is something that I've seen multiple times. Some of the finest believers I've known routinely pray in tongues and claim that it is helpful. I don't know what to make of it--can't find any rational explanation--but it happens. Why should we seek any explanation? For me the phenomenon is sits securely and safely in my mental filing cabinet--drawer labeled "Things I'll probably never understand." IMO it's not our place to pass judgment on them.

Originally Posted by Jan Ziska

Originally Posted by Herald

With all due respect you're to think it is wrong. "If I speak with the tongues of men and angels..." There is no private prayer language. To pray with one's lips and not the mind is ridiculous with a capital "R."

Oh, I think it's wrong. My question is where does it come from? He says it is the Holy Spirit speaking through him. I cannot agree. So if not the Holy Spirit, then what?

Gibberish. A mish-mosh of vowels and consonants arranged to resemble speech.

Understand there are a lot of assumptions and implications in what your friend is saying.

In many cases, people like this have absorbed an Arminian influenced doctrine of God, dispensationalism, and a notion that having a confession is unspiritual because individuals can't "judge spiritual things for themselves." They do not even realize it and have never heard the alternative ("Calvinism," covenant theology, a confession) credibly explained to them. They may have heard a few reflexive objections, but not the substance.

In addition, many pick up a "low view" of the Church and even of the sacraments because they have not had good systematic theology from all of Scripture.

So, there are many larger overarching differences before one looks narrowly at whether two or three of the spiritual gifts (e.g. speaking in other tongues) continues, and if so in what form. If all their theology is focused on this narrow point, then they are off balance in the whole of the Christian life. It doesn't mean necessarily they are not Christians. They may be ignorant, even willfully ignorant, walking disobediently, but it does not in itself mean they are not Christians.

A good doctrinal statement, carefully done is one by the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) on the narrower topic, but with implications for the larger topics:

PCA Historical Center: PCA Pastoral Letter on the Expeience of the Holy Spirit in the Church Today


The problem is that many charismatics/pentecostals do not recognize that their focus on two or three spiritual gifts alone is undue biblically (cf I Corinthians 14). The priority on this replaces the resurrection of Christ, the Gospel, and living out the Christian life of love and obedience.

Another problem is that the superficial level of theology they have absorbed does in fact, assume that revelation continues on an equal level with that of Scripture.

Many will say something like, "Well, no it doesn't add to Scripture, and it can't contradict it," but, in effect they are accepting new revelation equal with that of Scripture. While denying that it is new revelation equal with Scripture, the next church service will hover in quiet waiting for "a Word from the Lord," which is accepted to be authoritative, sometimes even more so than Scripture. On top of this, most of these churches have no discipline even in the sense of I Corinthians 14 requirement of interpretation and being judged by others, either.

So what you are left with is an entire focus on whether "tongues" exists today, which is not the really important issue, doctrinally here with your friend.

Reformed theology has a very high regard for Scripture. We worship God by it and through it and we are not to add to it.

Having said all that, going past all the real mileposts here, I am not persuaded that these gifts do not exist or cannot exist in some form, perhaps for exhortation or personal edification, or maybe as an evangelism tool. God is not limited.

But God has completed the authoritative revelation of His Word, and it is forever settled in heaven, and we are not to imagine alternatives. This is what you need to discuss with your friend.

Tas,

After I left Romanism, the first church I attended was an Assembly of God fellowship. I was baptized in the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues. I wanted to be an enlightened pentecostal so bad. I went with the crowd and just opened my mouth and said whatever came out. It basically sounded like, "A Honda is a Hyundai" over and over again. I KNEW I was talking gibberish. I knew it made no sense. Eventually my disillusionment with the charismatic movement became too much to ignore and I left it. That's partly why I have zero tolerance for it.

Someday we'll have to have a long 70AD thread, because I can't see how a Pagan army destroying a Pagan city can change things like the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

In PNG we were going from village to village, holding services and then teaching literacy. We came to one village, everyone was there, and when the missionary opened in prayer, everyone started babbling, because a Pentecostal group had just been through. The missionary stopped the praying, and instructed the people to stop speaking and pay attention to the words of his prayer. We all bowed our heads again, and one little kid didn't get the word and started babbling again. I peeked, and saw his big sister punch him. He looked around, smiled sheepishly, and stopped babbling.

IF tongues DID exist, it would sure help Bible translation - but Pentecostals are very under-represented among all Bible translators.

Originally Posted by Jan Ziska

Originally Posted by Exagorazo

The best book I have read on prophecy and tongues is O. Palmer Robertson's "The Final Word". His chapter on tongues is IIRC in the downloads section here.

My google-fu must be weak, because I can't find it...

It is available here.

Years ago I heard some very credible stories of foreign people hearing tongues in churches here and it was their (very obscure) language that the typical American did not know anything of. I had a good friend back in college who kept getting one single strange word when she prayed and she went to a linguist to ask if it was a real word in any language. The linguist (a brilliant Jew) looked in some books and told her it appeared to be an ancient word for "praise".

Nobody can prove that a Pentecostal or charismatic person is really speaking in a true language of men or angels unless it is recognized as such. But there are so many documented stories of exactly that- a foreign tongue being recognized and understood- that either the Holy Spirit or an evil spirit is speaking, the person didn't make it up. And I would be very very hesitant to say it is a demon when the speaker is a born again Christian.

Originally Posted by Pergamum

IF tongues DID exist, it would sure help Bible translation - but Pentecostals are very under-represented among all Bible translators.

Thanks for putting this whole topic in perspective Perg. You hit it outta the park with that line, IMO.

No one speaks, or prays in "biblical tongues today. Nobody.
Biblical tongues were primarily for a sign to unbelieving Jews,

21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

22Wherefore 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.

it had been written in Isa.28

7But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.

8For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean.

9Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

11For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

12To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.

13But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

14Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.

15Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:

16Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

17Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.

18And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.

The "real" covenant children

18Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.

19And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?

20To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

No one speaks, or prays in "biblical tongues today. Nobody.
Biblical tongues were primarily for a sign to unbelieving Jews,

21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

22Wherefore 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.

it had been written in Isa.28

7But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.

8For all tables are full of vomit and filthiness, so that there is no place clean.

9Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.

10For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

11For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

I am something of an agnostic on this question, primarily because matters are not quite so simple as the usual Reformed arguments con or the tongues promoting arguments pro, allow for. Although tongues were a sign for unbelieving Jews, speaking in tongues did attract attention among unbelievers at Pentecost, some of whom later believed.

In his book Charisma vs. Charismania, Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel records an interesting incident. He had a lady in his congregation who spoke in tongues, but her tongue was a known language, French. He had another lady who, not knowing a word of French by natural means was able to "interpret" the other lady's prayers in tongues and to do so accurately. One day Smith felt prompted to ask the former lady to pray in tongues (not his normal practice) and the second lady duly interpreted. At the end of the service a Jewish girl came to him and asked why did the one lady pray in French and the other lady translate? Turned out the girl was a French major at university. That opening led to a discussion which led to the girl's conversion.
If this incident took place as described it is a contemporary recurrence of the biblical tongues and none can gainsay it.

My two cents commenting on several posts in this thread are:

To claim that there is no private prayer language is unscriptural. Paul spoke in tongues privately more than any of the Corinthians, so private use of tongues was valid. The questions are: what are biblical tongues? and Do tongues occur today?

It is clear from Scripture that the biblical tongues were human languages supernatural given to the speakers (there is no conclusive biblical evidence that non-human languages were ever spoken by Christians.) And I deny that the glossolalia -the mishmash of vowels and consonants arranged to resemble speech- which is often claimed to be the biblical tongues is the biblical tongues.

Yet I remain unconvinced by every cessationist argument I have seen as they have been either logically inconclusive or based on poor exegesis. Yet I recognize that if tongues do continue they will be a sovereign gifting of the Holy Spirit giving them when and to whom he wills. So I deny universality of tongues. Where spoken publically, they must be followed by interpretation or not used.

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

To claim that there is no private prayer language is unscriptural. Paul spoke in tongues privately more than any of the Corinthians, so private use of tongues was valid.

What are your scripture references for these positions? Not doubting you etc etc, I'd just like to look it up for myself.

Originally Posted by TimV

Someday we'll have to have a long 70AD thread, because I can't see how a Pagan army destroying a Pagan city can change things like the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

That would be interesting. I would add that not only do we have a Pagan army destroying a Pagan city, but all we know about the event is from Pagan historians.

Originally Posted by lynnie

Years ago I heard some very credible stories of foreign people hearing tongues in churches here and it was their (very obscure) language that the typical American did not know anything of. I had a good friend back in college who kept getting one single strange word when she prayed and she went to a linguist to ask if it was a real word in any language. The linguist (a brilliant Jew) looked in some books and told her it appeared to be an ancient word for "praise".

Nobody can prove that a Pentecostal or charismatic person is really speaking in a true language of men or angels unless it is recognized as such. But there are so many documented stories of exactly that- a foreign tongue being recognized and understood- that either the Holy Spirit or an evil spirit is speaking, the person didn't make it up. And I would be very very hesitant to say it is a demon when the speaker is a born again Christian.

Send me the proof of these "documented" stories.

Originally Posted by Jan Ziska

Oh, I think it's wrong. My question is where does it come from? He says it is the Holy Spirit speaking through him. I cannot agree. So if not the Holy Spirit, then what?

There are multiple ways to approach this this topic, but each way will boil down to this:

The Holy Spirit will not lead a man to disobey His commandments. If your friend holds the gift of tongues in high regard and is certain that it is a gift of the Holy Spirit, he will be practicing and using the gifts in line with Scripture and the will of God (for, what other reason does God give men such gifts, other than to do His will?).

Ask him these simple questions based on 1 Corinthians 14, out of all love and patience:

1. Does the gift benefit yourself more than those at your church? (v. 12)
2. Do you have as earnest a desire to interpret as you do to speak in tongues? (v. 13)
3. Have you, empowered by the gift, brought unbelievers into your church? (v. 22)

The next questions are about his church:
4. Do more than three people speak in tongues outloud during your worship service? (v. 27)
5. Is it common sense in the church to not speak in tongues if there is no interpreter? (v. 28)
6. Do women ever speak in tongues during the service? (v. 34)

If the Holy Spirit is leading this man into tongues (or anything), He will do it by the Book. If the practice or use of the gift is outside of its regulations, it cannot be of the Spirit, for God is not the author of confusion but of peace.

If he is ignorant of the will of God in using tongues and you rebuke his actions, it should lead him to repentence if it is indeed God's Spirit.

If its not the Holy Spirit, its the same spirits the Catholics and Muslims and tribal shamans use to speak in tongues and heal and cast out demons.

I stated in another thread:

In v. 37 Paul states these are commands from the Lord, which is a powerful argument against the tongues movement today, for those pentecostal churches that hold the gift of tongues in such high regard, they do not follow the commands of the Lord in practicing them. If the rules were enforced today that women could not speak in tongues in the church, and only three or four men could (in order), I'm pretty sure the movement would fall apart.

I don't quite understand the logic that mandates rejecting an entire practice because of instances (albeit widespread) of abuse and/or disobedience. Radical cessationists reject all tongues phenomena because of illegitimate practices connected therewith. Radical continuationists accept the majority if not all such phenomena indiscriminately. Is there not a middle ground? If there is not, then perhaps cultural anti-supernaturalism is a factor in the controversy.

Perhaps there is cultural supernaturalism at work too, missionaries in animistic cultures, instead of changing the culture, being changed by the culture and adopting animistic and sub-biblical practices through frequent interaction with these cultures.

Again, if God gifts the church with tongues, and wants charity and the edification to reign supreme, why is this gift not being used in Bible translation?

During my Bible translation courses, I did not meet a single Continuist nor have I ever heard of the charismatic gifts ever being used to actually give any peoples at any time (post-NT) the Word of God.

Pergamum, I'm a cessationist, although occasionally there are things I can't explain, but I will repeat the following story because I heard it first hand from a godly man who was my Anglican minister at the time, and who was not otherwise at all charismatic:

Before he was in Australia he had been an Anglican minister in South Africa. At one event he was called on to preach at a mixed race, mixed tribe gathering. He spoke in English, the only relevant language he knew. Afterwards people came up to him and variously told him that they had heard him speak in English, Afrikaans, and native African languages.

I can't verify the story, nor am I claiming to know what it meant or to rule out other explanations, but I do know that the man in question was known to be honest and didn't have an incentive to lie about what had happened.

Originally Posted by Jan Ziska

Originally Posted by timmopussycat

To claim that there is no private prayer language is unscriptural. Paul spoke in tongues privately more than any of the Corinthians, so private use of tongues was valid.

What are your scripture references for these positions? Not doubting you etc etc, I'd just like to look it up for myself.

1 Cor 14:18,19 is Paul speaking in tongues more than all the Corinthians and his normal preference for speaking in Greek when teaching publically. It is a fair conclusion that he largely restricted his tongue speaking to his prayers.

-----Added 12/28/2008 at 10:24:27 EST-----

Originally Posted by Pergamum

Originally Posted by lynnie

Years ago I heard some very credible stories of foreign people hearing tongues in churches here and it was their (very obscure) language that the typical American did not know anything of. I had a good friend back in college who kept getting one single strange word when she prayed and she went to a linguist to ask if it was a real word in any language. The linguist (a brilliant Jew) looked in some books and told her it appeared to be an ancient word for "praise".

Nobody can prove that a Pentecostal or charismatic person is really speaking in a true language of men or angels unless it is recognized as such. But there are so many documented stories of exactly that- a foreign tongue being recognized and understood- that either the Holy Spirit or an evil spirit is speaking, the person didn't make it up. And I would be very very hesitant to say it is a demon when the speaker is a born again Christian.

Send me the proof of these "documented" stories.

See post #17 pp. 2.

I think there are two instances of speaking in tongues... in private Just between the Holy Spirit and God and in the Church where and interpreter is needed.
The reason I said that is because that is what it is like for me when I pray.

The question IMNSHO boils down to this: what is the purpose of the "gift of tongues" and more importantly who gets the glory? I have been told by non reformed folks that "so and so has a prayer language" and I can't figure out what this "prayer language" is and if it is biblical.

Originally Posted by calgal

The question IMNSHO boils down to this: what is the purpose of the "gift of tongues" and more importantly who gets the glory? I have been told by non reformed folks that "so and so has a prayer language" and I can't figure out what this "prayer language" is and if it is biblical.

If "so and so has a prayer language" how is it edifying in their prayer life? That question fits squarely in your purpose inquiry. I don't see how (provided such a thing exists) it helps ones prayer life. I know in the charismatic community I've run in a prayer language is generally considered confirmation God has spoken to you. My question to them was always "why then do we need faith, if we have the proof of tongues to verify our prayers reach heaven?"

I just don't see the precedent. I've been accused of putting God in a box for that opinion. It must have been a biblical box?!

Originally Posted by GMcClain20

Originally Posted by calgal

The question IMNSHO boils down to this: what is the purpose of the "gift of tongues" and more importantly who gets the glory? I have been told by non reformed folks that "so and so has a prayer language" and I can't figure out what this "prayer language" is and if it is biblical.

If "so and so has a prayer language" how is it edifying in their prayer life? That question fits squarely in your purpose inquiry. I don't see how (provided such a thing exists) it helps ones prayer life. I know in the charismatic community I've run in a prayer language is generally considered confirmation God has spoken to you. My question to them was always "why then do we need faith, if we have the proof of tongues to verify our prayers reach heaven?"

I just don't see the precedent. I've been accused of putting God in a box for that opinion. It must have been a biblical box?!

Thank you! I was accused of being all "head and no heart. Of course the person who had the "secret language" was also a big Dave Hunt fan so.....

Originally Posted by calgal

Originally Posted by GMcClain20

Originally Posted by calgal

The question IMNSHO boils down to this: what is the purpose of the "gift of tongues" and more importantly who gets the glory? I have been told by non reformed folks that "so and so has a prayer language" and I can't figure out what this "prayer language" is and if it is biblical.

If "so and so has a prayer language" how is it edifying in their prayer life? That question fits squarely in your purpose inquiry. I don't see how (provided such a thing exists) it helps ones prayer life. I know in the charismatic community I've run in a prayer language is generally considered confirmation God has spoken to you. My question to them was always "why then do we need faith, if we have the proof of tongues to verify our prayers reach heaven?"

I just don't see the precedent. I've been accused of putting God in a box for that opinion. It must have been a biblical box?!

Thank you! I was accused of being all "head and no heart. Of course the person who had the "secret language" was also a big Dave Hunt fan so.....

These are common arguments for the broader charismatic movement which go beyond the tongues/prayer language issue. Their refusal to argue on biblical grounds betrays their fundamental ignorance of the issue.

I think what they often mean by "heart" is "what I feel" opposed to "head" being defined as "what my uneducated brain can't rationalize."

The reason I don't have a "private prayer language?" Because I think God understands English.
Besides, the gift of tongues really needs to be defined. What do you mean when you say the gift of tongues? Ecstatic utterances like Pentecostals, Mormons, Muslims, and many cults? Or speaking in other known languages in order to spread the gospel and edify the body, which cannot be "initiated" by man?

To follow Christ was the best decision God made for me!

Off Topic but I love your signature AThornquist!

Originally Posted by GMcClain20

To follow Christ was the best decision God made for me!

Off Topic but I love your signature AThornquist!

It is a good one.

I think that the gift of tongues has been widely abused on both sides... it's been thrown around and thrown out by just about everyone... but when you are alone and you are communing with God just you and Him and you are speaking your heart sometimes the Holy Spirit yearns within you and it longs to burst free and when it does it's beautiful and indescribable. And very very private.
Why should that be pounced on and torn to shreds like it's a piece of garbage? did you read the OP? this man was not flashing it about like some Benny Hinn, he was sharing with her. Just because he does things you don't do or wouldn't even consider ya'll pounce.

Originally Posted by GMcClain20

To follow Christ was the best decision God made for me!

Off Topic but I love your signature AThornquist!

Hey, thanks That line came to me as I was preparing my testimony before my baptism, which was in September.

Originally Posted by Honor

I think that the gift of tongues has been widely abused on both sides... it's been thrown around and thrown out by just about everyone... but when you are alone and you are communing with God just you and Him and you are speaking your heart sometimes the Holy Spirit yearns within you and it longs to burst free and when it does it's beautiful and indescribable. And very very private.
Why should that be pounced on and torn to shreds like it's a piece of garbage? did you read the OP? this man was not flashing it about like some Benny Hinn, he was sharing with her. Just because he does things you don't do or wouldn't even consider ya'll pounce.

Honor, you will find this to be a strongly cessationist board. And when I say cessationist, this includes a full rejection of any sort of tongues extant within the post-apostolic church - public or private.

This complete rejection causes a presupposition of deep skepticism concerning the verity of any contemporary tongues experience, public or private - from any source, no matter how reliable.

In short, the reasoning goes, the praxis of modern tongues, public or private are at least self-deception, if not something more sinister.

I am not convinced of this viewpoint but I am not a hyper-cessationist, either.

Originally Posted by Honor

I think that the gift of tongues has been widely abused on both sides... it's been thrown around and thrown out by just about everyone... but when you are alone and you are communing with God just you and Him and you are speaking your heart sometimes the Holy Spirit yearns within you and it longs to burst free and when it does it's beautiful and indescribable. And very very private.
Why should that be pounced on and torn to shreds like it's a piece of garbage? did you read the OP? this man was not flashing it about like some Benny Hinn, he was sharing with her. Just because he does things you don't do or wouldn't even consider ya'll pounce.

If you have been told that the Holy Spirit does this , and the person explained to you that Romans 8 teaches this, you have been mislead.
Cessationism Resources

26Likewise 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.

27And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

This passage has nothing to do with any biblical tongue, whatsoever.

groanings which cannot be uttered.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Originally Posted by Honor

I think that the gift of tongues has been widely abused on both sides... it's been thrown around and thrown out by just about everyone... but when you are alone and you are communing with God just you and Him and you are speaking your heart sometimes the Holy Spirit yearns within you and it longs to burst free and when it does it's beautiful and indescribable. And very very private.
Why should that be pounced on and torn to shreds like it's a piece of garbage? did you read the OP? this man was not flashing it about like some Benny Hinn, he was sharing with her. Just because he does things you don't do or wouldn't even consider ya'll pounce.

If you have been told that the Holy Spirit does this , and the person explained to you that Romans 8 teaches this, you have been mislead.
Cessationism Resources

26Likewise 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.

27And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.

This passage has nothing to do with any biblical tongue, whatsoever.

groanings which cannot be uttered.

Actually I wasn't told anything. I had only read about tongues in the Bible.

-----Added 12/29/2008 at 08:45:20 EST-----

Originally Posted by panta dokimazete

Originally Posted by Honor

I think that the gift of tongues has been widely abused on both sides... it's been thrown around and thrown out by just about everyone... but when you are alone and you are communing with God just you and Him and you are speaking your heart sometimes the Holy Spirit yearns within you and it longs to burst free and when it does it's beautiful and indescribable. And very very private.
Why should that be pounced on and torn to shreds like it's a piece of garbage? did you read the OP? this man was not flashing it about like some Benny Hinn, he was sharing with her. Just because he does things you don't do or wouldn't even consider ya'll pounce.

Honor, you will find this to be a strongly cessationist board. And when I say cessationist, this includes a full rejection of any sort of tongues extant within the post-apostolic church - public or private.

This complete rejection causes a presupposition of deep skepticism concerning the verity of any contemporary tongues experience, public or private - from any source, no matter how reliable.

In short, the reasoning goes, the praxis of modern tongues, public or private are at least self-deception, if not something more sinister.

I am not convinced of this viewpoint but I am not a hyper-cessationist, either.

ok... thanks for the heads up... when you say cessationist you mean cessation of all the gifts of the Spirit?

Cessationism, in Christian theology, is the view that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, such as healing, tongues, and prophetic revelation, pertained to the apostolic era only, served a purpose that was unique to establishing the early church, and passed away before the canon of Scripture was closed. It is contrasted with continuationism, which is the view that the miraculous gifts are normative, have not ceased, and are available for the believer today.

from here

Take a look at the link articles, pretty good - pro and con.

Originally Posted by panta dokimazete

Originally Posted by Honor

I think that the gift of tongues has been widely abused on both sides... it's been thrown around and thrown out by just about everyone... but when you are alone and you are communing with God just you and Him and you are speaking your heart sometimes the Holy Spirit yearns within you and it longs to burst free and when it does it's beautiful and indescribable. And very very private.
Why should that be pounced on and torn to shreds like it's a piece of garbage? did you read the OP? this man was not flashing it about like some Benny Hinn, he was sharing with her. Just because he does things you don't do or wouldn't even consider ya'll pounce.

Honor, you will find this to be a strongly cessationist board. And when I say cessationist, this includes a full rejection of any sort of tongues extant within the post-apostolic church - public or private.

This complete rejection causes a presupposition of deep skepticism concerning the verity of any contemporary tongues experience, public or private - from any source, no matter how reliable.

In short, the reasoning goes, the praxis of modern tongues, public or private are at least self-deception, if not something more sinister.

I am not convinced of this viewpoint but I am not a hyper-cessationist, either.

Hyper-cessationist.

This reminds me of a speech I once heard from Antoni Scalia where he was decrying the modern desire for "moderate" judges. He asked a telling question: What is a "moderate" interpretation of a law? That is to say that, if it is the job of a judge to merely interpret the law, then how can a judge be "moderate" in its intrepretation?

If particular offices are no longer needed by the Church and the charismatic gifts that accomponied those offices then there is nothing "hyper" about noting this. I don't hedge my bets with truth.

And this board is clear about not advocating for views that are contra- the confessions. I'm unapologetic in shutting down discussion on this. Let the ignorant and those who might be led astray by heterodoxy be led astray elsewhere. The modern charismatic movement is a return to pagan forms of religion. The pagans need to do all the babbling and talking for their gods because their gods are dumb and mute.

Our God speaks and His Word is living and active. It is a complete misapplication of the text in the OP to assume this is private prayer language. Romans 8 fleshes out what the groaning is about.