Christian Dopers: Question about praying in tongues

Great Debates
21

I’m a member of the Assemblies of God, and yes, as a Pentecostal denomination there are a number (perhaps even a majority of adult members) of the A/G who do speak in tongues at one point or another.

The thing that’s interesting about it is that there isn’t a lot of teaching on the topic, at least not Sunday morning pulpit types of teachings. But the general consensus, as far as I’ve ever seen (I’ve been a regular congregant at no fewer than two dozen different Assembly churches over the years, thanks to moves.) is that there are two different flavors of speaking in tongues.

The first is the combination of tongues and interpretations as a tool of prophecy. This is not, I’d hazard, what the OP heard the TV evangelist speaking about. It’s a fairly rare occurence and everyone is well aware of the risk of a.) kooks who rattle off something that isn’t tongues and/or isn’t meant to be interpreted, which leaves the rest of the congregation stymied and embarrassed and leaves the kook angry that no one was “receptive to the spirit” enough to help bring forth their word from the Lord and b.) false “interpretations” where someone gives a statement that has nothing to do with the real prophetic message that was to be disseminated. (Yes, it’s a big leap to say that there is a prophetic message involved in this kind of incident, but it’s a flat out matter of faith.)

The other type of tongues, and the one that the OP had to be hearing about, is something that has been referred to as a personal “prayer language,” an evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, by which an individual’s spirit can directly communicate with God without language (vocabulary) barriers and self-editing. Use of personal tongues in this manner can happen during any prayer (personal or group) or during any time of worship, and is referred to as “praying in the spirit” or “singing in the spirit.” (The latter phenomenon can be quite amazing when it happens in congregational services, as everyone begins to sing a song with as many different words and different tunes as there are people singing, but in perfect blend of harmony and rhythm.) For those who believe that they have received this particular manifestation of the Holy Spirit, it’s something that they can turn on and off at will, much as they might switch to speaking another known, earthly language, they can simply begin to pray or address God using their prayer language.

In the pentecostal tradition, prayer is a means of communication which is not merely one-way. As such, it is a crucial part of one’s spiritual development and should be undertaken at every available opportunity. Given that, it would of course follow that if praying in tongues provides a more open or honest means of revealing ourselves to God in ways that we could not otherwise approach, then the evangelist was correct that praying in tongues provides spiritual benefits which are important enough – to those who believe in this mold – to seek daily.

I have to say that this is not something I ever expected to get into on the SDMB. Whew. I think I need to go pray.

22

TeaElle, thanks for a slightly different POV on the matter.
I love that this place is dedicated to fighting ignorance, because I’ve got a walloping dose of ignorance myself, and can always use help fighting it!

23

There are but a handful of Dopers to whom I might say this, but anything for you, norinew!

24

Thanks. . .I guess.:slight_smile:

25

(It was meant as a compliment.) :slight_smile:

26

Assembly of God member here, tho a rather liberal one by AoG standards (which still makes me a rabid conservative here G)-

while AoG (and classical Pentecostal) doctrine maintains that genuine modern speaking in tongues is the God-given ability to pray in actual languages, I don’t buy it. I do believe the bulk of it is a spiritually-genuine psychological release- kinda praying out of pent-up inexpressable emotionalism. There are anecdotes of actual foreign languages being heard at times, but they are rare. The Pentecostal gift of tongues in Acts 2 is recorded as genuine languages. The praying in tongues used in the Corinthian Church, of which Paul cautions against excessive public use, seems to be of the more cathartic kind. In my own 26 years of glossalatin’, I think all of mine has been the cathartic (I was going to say
“ecstatic” but that gives the impression of an altered state of consciousness, which I have not had often in my praying in tongues).

27

Friar Ted, so you would admit that it is of conscious accord? Although you are motivated spiritually, it is not a true supernatural state, but willed?

28

Okay, just makin’ sure. In that case, definitely thanks!

29

I’m surprised by the few numbers of people on this board that have been exposed to speaking in tongues. In my experience, it is a very widespread phenomemon in the evangelical and charsimatic protestant communities. As someone who also grew up in such a church, I think my experience might help clarify some of what has been said.

My church taught that speaking in tongues is a gift from God, first given on Pentecost by the Holy Spirit. While it may rarely be a true foreign language, most often it is a “heavenly” unkown and non-existant language. “Interpretation” of the tongues is very rare, and I’ve never seen it. It is meant as a way for your spirit to communicate directly with God, speaking in utterances that the flesh cannot understand. While a person’s initial speaking in tongues might be seen as an “involuntary” utterance, in practice, tongues speaking is just a conscious effort. As a child, I was encouraged basically to just “start” speaking in tongues, by repeating the words of my Pastor, and then coming up with my own. It is always a controlled, and conscious process and I think anyone could do it. In a way, speaking in this “language” does make you feel powerful and connected with God.

That being said, I do not like to hear tongues being spoken (it makes me slightly uneasy), and I no longer attend this church now that I am an adult. In the Bible, Paul says that speaking in tongues should be a private practice. My parents are still heavily involved in their church, however. I feel that this brand of Christianity is extreme, and that it (not really the tongue speaking, but all the spiritual beliefs that go along with it) can certainly damage a child’s concept of himself and the world. Although I never bought everything I was told, it is very difficult to navigate and find out one’s own beliefs of what is true in this atmosphere.

30

Bear in mind that the Biblical accounts of speaking in toungues is an apostolic gift that was for a limited time only and has passed away.

The use of “tongues” is only mentioned in 3 books of the Bible. Acts, Mark 16:17 and 1 Coronthians chapters 12 and 13. RThe first 2 instances were refering only to the Apostles. Corinthians is actually a rebuke for misusing the gift. Out of all the epistles that Paul wrote this is the only one that even mentions this gift. Nowhere are we commanded to seek out or use or desire the gift of tongues. In fact, Paul was pointing out that ifanything that caused confusion in the church (which speaking in tongues was) it was not from God.
Most people who are pro-speaking in tongues do not realize or discount that there is no Biblical basis for the modern interpretation of their practice.

31

Oddly enough, glossolalia has been studied by linguists.

linky

Furthermore from a review of linguistic studies on this topic:

The Gospel Herald

Both sites are interesting reads.

32

The glossaholia you hear is a thorougly modern invention, just as rapture theology is. The modern tongues movement is only about 100 years old, starting in California in the 1900’s. The Pentecostal/Charismatic movement is just as new. If you look at the historical church, in response to the Montanist movement the early church agreed that gifts of the spirit ended with the death of the apostles. So between 200 A.D. and 1900 A.D. there was an almost complete lack of speaking in tongues in Christianity. I say this because the speaking in tongues is not unique to Christianity.

When people become highly emotional, they become highly suggestible as well. IMHO, this is what you see in these modern day churches. If you look at some of the larger “revival” movements where tongues play a big part (such as Brownsville, FL and the Toronto Revival), they follow similar patterns of church services. Word of mouth have people expecting to be touched, music and lighting is used to get people in the “spirit” and the next thing you know people are falling down getting carpet time and babbling in tongues all over the place.

33

devilsknew- of course. Most charismatics I know can pray in tongues at will. It’s often an ability which, once given or attained (however one views it), is ever-present. Speaking out as in giving a message in tongues in church should be done only when one feels a sureness of God’s prompting to do so.

Btw, I’ve also known Christians who are ex-charismatics and even some ex-Christians who can STILL speak in tongues- and are either amused or bothered by that.

34

Well, I can speak in tongues too…
Essentially, it would seem that there is no difference in me (a nonbeliever) or a believer breaking out into tongues. Or am I wrong here. Would my tongues be suspect and demonbabble, maybe?

35

You’re missing an 'according to…" in here somewhere.

There’s no Biblical basis for lots of things that modern churches do. But if the Bible doesn’t address something at all, who’s to say what’s right?

Like you say, the Biblical references to speaking in tongues aren’t extensive: Jesus refers to the practice in Mark 16:17, there are three instances of it in Acts (the day of Pentecost and two other times), and there’s Paul’s extended discussion of tongues and other spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians, chapters 12-14. Still, that ain’t bad; the New Testament says far more about speaking in tongues than the entire Bible says about homosexuality, yet inerrantists find the readings on the latter subject more than sufficient.

What I don’t find in those references is a verse that says the gift of tongues is only given to that one generation. Can you enlighten me? I’m a born-again Christian, and while I’m less than convinced that modern-day glossolalia is ever real, and I’m all but certain that it’s rarely real, I don’t see a Bible verse saying it can’t be real.
I commend More Cowbell for providing the short history of speaking in tongues within Christianity.

36

A verse in the Bible that has not yet been mentioned is Romans 8:26 which gets used as the scriptural backing for the type “praying in tongues” that the OP mentions. The idea is that this is a “private prayer language” unique to you and God, used to pray when words just aren’t appropriate/available.

This “gift of the Holy Spirit” is often pushed by the more charismatic branches of the Church, as it is an easy starting point/lead in to the other gifts which they believe are available to Christians today. Some churches take this to the point where if you are not able/willing to pray in this manner, then you are at the very least suspect in your faith. Others suggest that it is a helpful tool to those who choose to use it and a good starting point, but stress that the greater gifts (prophecy, healing, etc) are to be striven for rather than tongues.

To me, it is a tool that I have used and do use on occasion, as it feels right, but ranks along with meditation, fasting, prayer walking, reading of scripture, etc as tools that develop my relationship with God - it is not a better or more spiritual way of relating, and is in danger of being presented as such, as many of those who use it find do it helpful, and want to encourage others, but end up making an imperative of it… as with so much…

Grim

37

I had a friend way back in the day who was an Apostolic Pentecostal. Interesting people. The women weren’t allowed to wear trousers, cosmetics, jewelry, or cut their hair. They singed their hair instead, to get rid of split ends. But that’s beside the point.

They were serious babblers. I grew up in a very strict baptist household. General Association of Regular Baptist Churches DO NOT speak in tongues:)

They were singing a hymn, and then this guy jumps up, rips off his shoes and starts running up and down the aisle screeching incoherently. Then someone else stood up and started interpreting. “God loves you, blah de blah blah”. Then this huge knot of people…about 40 or 50 gets up and kind of rushes the pulpit and people start moaning and crying and babbling. It was very strange to me, and frankly, I’m skeptical. I believe these people were overcome by some kind of mass emotional mobbish moment.

However, I knew a Christian woman who did pray in tongues, in the privacy of her home. I’ve fallen from my faith in that I no longer believe (I’m not sure I ever did believe) in the “power of prayer” and whatnot, but I had, and still do have, the utmost respect for the intellectual and emotional stability of this woman. So I don’t know. Whatever gets you through the day, I guess.

38

You’re right. Sorry, that should read “according to my Pastors, teachers, my research and the scholars I’ve come to respect and trust as they/we interpret scripture.”

The word of God says what right by whether something is in violation of a commandment or a principle. Are there grey areas? some. But for most problems or questions it’s pretty straightforward. Drugs, internet porn, too much televison and not doing your homework are not specificaly mentioned in the Bible but there are principles laid down that cover those situations.

I’m sorry I don’t quite follow you here. What was your point? (no disrespect intended)

Read 1 Corinthians 13:8 “Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.”

The greek word for “cease” means to cease permanently (forgive the hasty answer, my greek new testament is at home)

Did they “cease” ?

If you believe that the Signs and wonders of the Apolstolic age were unique for that time only (as I do) then the answer is yes. The mention of tongues in Corinthians was a rebuke for a misused gift, and Corinthians was an early epistle. The later epistles do not mention tongues, although later books mention other gifts. By the time of the book of Hebrews, the fantastic gifts of the Apostles were already looked upon as something in the past.

I find it interesting that charismatics really get into tongue-speaking but never seem to push for the “voilent rushing wind” or the “tongues of fire settling on their heads” also mentioned in the book of Acts at the same time.

The Bible doesn’t have to say it can’t be real. Find where in the Bible that we are to seek out and strive for the gift of tongues. Try to find it’s mention in the later books of the Bible, you won’t. You won’t even find it’s occurance in early church history for the first 5 or 6 centuries.

In regards Romans 8:26 “The Holy Spirit makes intercessions for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.”

The key word is cannot. If it cannot, why do some people think you can? Plus, it’s the Holy Spirit doing the uttering, not us.

I would reccomend John MacArthur’s Charismatic Chaos , for a real good overview on the subject.

39

Mark 16:9-20 were an addition by later Christian writers. It was not found in any of the earliest copies of Mark, is not mentioned in other early Christian writings and does not fit into Mark’s literary style. To say Jesus referred to the practice is a bit of a stretch as this was certainly added after the writing of Acts.

The tongues at Pentecost are quite different than those mentioned by Paul in his letters to the Corinthian churches. One must take into account the area and people to which Paul is writing. The mystery religions were quite prevalent in Corinth. They were already used to speaking in tongues, dancing around naked and having quite the ruckus in their worship activities. Rather than chastise these new Christians and possible alienate them, he set down rules into which they should be used. Hence the covering of heads, the requirement of orderly church services, the silence of women (they were quite often leaders in these other religions) and the need for interpeters. While Pentecost did not need translators, Paul required this when speaking in tongues. Paul also mentions that the most important thing is not the acquiring of spiritual gifts, but of the expression of love. Without love, their gifts are useless. In this, he shifted the emphasis from the Corinthians old religious goals to new ones, more in line with Christ’s teaching.

Would you agree with me that how something feels is not always the best gauge when it comes to matters of faith and practices? I have heard this from many charismatics when presented with historical and biblical evidence on the cessation of the charims and specifically speaking in tongues. I find the “if it feels right” reasoning a bit disconcerting.

40

Perhaps I should have said “feels appropriate” rather than “right”…

I take (and agree with) your point that a “if it feels good, do it” attitude is not helpful, but in the matter of the practice of my faith, I feel that whatever deepens your relationship with God is helpful, and whatever separates you from Him is not helpful, within the fundamental principles of scripture. The “cessation of the charisms” is not a fundamental doctrine, any more than infant/adult baptism, transubstantiation, veneration of saints or use of drums/guitars in worship are. It is clear that we disagree on this issue (and no doubt on many others) - I am sure that there is a “correct” position on each of these issues, but I do not claim to know what it/they are - at least not yet.

Grim