Why Did I Pray in Tongues Once and Never Again
10 Things to Know about Speaking in Tongues
- Pastor, Author
- 2019 29 Jan
The spiritual gift of speaking in tongues remains controversial in our twenty-four hours and is a bailiwick deserving of our shut attention. This curt article is not designed to fence that tongues are still valid only only attempts to describe the nature and function of tongues oral communication.
Photo courtesy: Wikimedia Eatables
#1: The "tongues" spoken on the Day of Pentecost were real man languages.
The variety of nations represented (vv. eight-11) would certainly confirm this. The discussion "language" (vv. half dozen, 8) =dialekto = dialect (cf. Acts 1:xix; 21:forty; 22:2; 26:14). Tin this phenomenon still occur today? Absolutely, yes. Simply in my stance it happens quite rarely.
Some insist that the tongues in Acts 2 were non human languages. Acts two describes not the hearingof one's own language simply the hearingin one's own language. At the aforementioned moment that "other tongues" were spoken through the Holy Spirit, they were immediately translated by the same Holy Spirit into the many languages of the multitude (J. Rodman Williams,Renewal Theology, 2:215). Thus, at that place is both a miracle of "speech communication"—other, different, spiritual tongues—and a miracle of "understanding," each facilitated by the Holy Spirit.
Photo courtesy: ©Wikimedia Eatables
If this view is correct…
a miraculous charisma of the Holy Spirit (namely, the gift of estimation) was given to every unbeliever present on the day of Pentecost. But information technology is Luke's purpose "to associate the descent of the Spirit with the Spirit'due south activeness among the believers, not to postulate a miracle of the Spirit among those who were withal unbelievers" (Carson,Showing the Spirit, 138). Or, as Max Turner puts it, surely Luke "would not wish to suggest that the apostolic band simply prattled incomprehensibly, while God worked the yet greater miracle of interpretation of tongues in the unbelievers" (The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts, 223).
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
#2: The souvenir of speaking in tongues can include "heavenly" dialects.
The gift of speaking in tongues that continues throughout church building history and is and so widespread today is the Spirit-prompted ability to pray and praise God in a heavenly dialect, perhaps even an angelic language that is not related to anything spoken on world such as German or Swahili or Standard mandarin or English language. The Holy Spirit personally crafts or creates a special and unique language that enables a Christian to speak to God in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving. This souvenir is non a human language that one might come across in some strange country, but a Spirit-empowered capacity to speak meaningful words that are merely understood by our Triune God: Begetter, Son, and Holy Spirit (unless, of course, God provides the interpretation through the one speaking or through another believer.
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
#3: At that place is no evidence that tongues-speech in Acts 2 (or elsewhere) served an evangelistic purpose.
The content of tongues-speech was "the mighty deeds of God" (Acts 2:11; ten:46; 19:17). People don't hear an evangelistic message but doxology or worship. So, again, how can tongues be evangelistic when the but ii occurrences of tongues outside of Acts ii (Acts 10 and nineteen) took identify when but believers were present? Neither is tongues the invariable sign of Spirit-baptism or Spirit-filling. There are numerous instances in Acts of true conversion and Spirit-baptism where no tongues are mentioned (2:37-42; 8:26-xl; nine:i-nineteen; 13:44-52; sixteen:11-15; 16:25-34; 17:1-10a; 17:10b-15; 17:16-33; 18:i-11; eighteen:24-28).
Photograph courtesy: ©Unsplash
#4: Speaking in tongues is prayer, praise, and cocky-edification.
Paul says that the ane who speaks in a natural language "speaks not to men just to God" (1 Cor. 14:ii). This means that tongues is a course ofprayer. See particularly one Cor. 14:14. Tongues is as well a form ofpraise (1 Cor. 14:15) and a mode in which we givethanks to God (1 Cor. 14:16-17).
Tongues is besides a style in which weedify or strengthen ourselves. Paul writes, "The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds upwardly the church" (1 Cor. 14:iv). Self-edification is a skilful thing , every bit we are commanded edify ourselves in Jude 20: "But you, dearest, edifice yourselves up in your almost holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the honey of God." Cocky-edification is only bad if it is done as an finish in itself. It is good to take whatever steps you tin to edify yourself, to build upwards and strengthen your soul, so that you might be better able and equipped to build up others (see 1 Cor. 12:7).
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
#five: Interpreted tongues edify others in the aforementioned way prophecy does:
"Now I want yous all to speak in tongues, but fifty-fifty more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church building may exist built up" (1 Cor. 14:5). Prophecy is to be preferred over uninterpreted tongues in the corporate gathering of the church because it is intelligible and thus can serve meliorate than unintelligible tongues speech to build up, edify, and encourage the people of God. But this obtains only in the absence of an interpretation for tongues. If "someone interprets" (1 Cor. 14:5b), and so tongues can too serve to strengthen and instruct God's people.
Photograph courtesy: ©Unsplash
#6: Tongues are a "sign for unbelievers".
What does Paul mean in 1 Cor. 14:21-25 that tongues are a "sign for unbelievers"? In 1 Cor. 14:21, Paul quotes Isaiah 28:eleven, the meaning of which is found in a prior warning of God to State of israel in Deuteronomy 28:49. If Israel violates the covenant, God volition chastise them by sending a strange enemy, speaking a foreign tongue. Thus, confusing and confounding speech was a sign of God'southward judgment confronting a rebellious people. This is the judgment that Isaiah says has come up upon Israel in the 8th century BC when the Assyrians invaded and conquered the Jews (cf. also what happened in the sixth c. BC, Jer. v:xv).
Photo courtesy: ©Unsplash
The principle is this:
When God speaks to people in a language they cannot empathize, it is a form of penalisation for unbelief. It signifies his anger. Incomprehensible speech will not guide or instruct or pb to faith and repentance, only but confuse and destroy. Thus, if outsiders or unbelievers come in and you speak in a language they cannot understand, you will merely drive them away. You volition be giving a "sign" to unbelievers that is entirely wrong, because their hardness of middle has not reached the point where they deserve that severe sign of judgment. So when you come together (ane Cor. 14:26), if anyone speaks in a tongue, be certain at that place is an interpretation (five. 27). Otherwise the tongue-speaker should be quiet in the church (v. 29). Prophecy, on the other hand, is a sign of God'due south presence with believers (5. 22b), then Paul encourages its employ when unbelievers are nowadays in order that they may come across this sign and thereby come up to Christian faith (vv. 24-25).
Therefore, Paul isnon talking almost the part of the gift of tongues in full general, but merely about thenegative outcome of one itemcorruption of tongues-oral communication (namely, its use without estimation in the public assembly). So, do not permit uninterpreted tongues-spoken language in church, for in doing so, you run the hazard of communicating a negative sign to people that will merely bulldoze them away.
Photo courtesy: ©Unsplash
#vii: There are objections that demand to be addressed:
Ane objection to the gift of tongues…is that nothing is of spiritual value unless it passes through the cerebral cortex of the brain and tin can be cognitively understood. Whatsoever notion that the Holy Spirit might appoint with the man spirit straight, by-passing our cognitive thought processes, is anathema to most evangelicals. If it is to be spiritually profitable it must be intelligible.
But there is a vast deviation between the necessity of intelligibility for the sake of the entire body of Christ, on the one paw, and whether or not a Christian tin can be edified and blessed and built up spiritually while speaking in uninterpreted tongues privately, on the other. Tongues in the corporate assembly must be intelligible or interpreted for the sake of others who are listening.
Photograph courtesy: ©Unsplash
Profound spiritual fruit is possible in the life of the individual believer when he/she prays in tongues privately.
When yous pray in tongues in private, you are most certainly praising. The person who speaks in tongues is truly praying to God (14:14), praising or worshiping God (fourteen:15b), and thanking God (14:16), all the while his/her "mind" is "unfruitful" (i Cor. 14:xiv). By "unfruitful" he ways either, "I don't understand what I am proverb," or "other people don't understand what I'1000 saying," or perhaps both. Paul doesn't sympathize what he is praying or how he is giving cheers or in what manner he is worshiping. But praying, praising, and giving thanks is almost certainly taking place! And all this at the same time he lacks cognitive awareness of what is happening.
Many say: "Paul'south response to his heed being 'unfruitful' should be to stop speaking in tongues altogether. Shut it downwards. Forbid information technology." Only that isn't Paul'southward determination. No sooner does he say that his "mind is unfruitful" than he makes known his adamant resolve: "Ivolition pray with my spirit, only Iwill pray with my heed also; Iwill sing praise with my spirit, but Iwill sing with my mind likewise" (1 Cor. 14:15). We know that Paul is referring to praying and singing in tongues considering in the next verse he describes giving thanks with i'south spirit as unintelligible to those who may visit the church meeting.
Photograph courtesy: ©Thinkstock
Paul was not afraid of a trans-rational feel.
If Paul had been fearful of trans-rational experience (which, by the mode, is far and abroad dissimilar from existence irrational), would not his next step be to repudiate the employ of tongues birthday, or at minimum to warn u.s. of its dangers? At the very least nosotros should expect Paul to say something to minimize its importance and so as to render it trite, at to the lowest degree in comparison with other gifts. But he does no such thing.
Paul asks the question, in view of what has just been said in five. 14, "What is the event then?" (NASB; v. 15a), or "What am I to do?" (ESV). I know what many of you recollect he should do: "Put a stop to this ridiculous and useless practice of speaking in tongues. There is merely one viable response; only one reasonable conclusion: I'll never speak in tongues again since my understanding is unfruitful." But that isn't what he says. His response is plant in 5. 15. In that location we read that he is determined to do both! "IWill pray with my spirit," i.e., I volition pray in tongues, and "IWILL pray with the mind also," i.e., I will pray in Greek or the language of the people so that others who speak and understand the linguistic communication can profit from what I say." Clearly, Paul believed that a spiritual feel across the grasp of his heed, which is what I hateful by "trans-rational", was yet profoundly profitable. He believed that it wasn't absolutely necessary for an experience to be rationally cognitive for it to exist spiritually beneficial and glorifying to God.
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
#viii: Paul preferred to exercise the gift of speaking in tongues in individual.
If Paul speaks in tongues more ofttimes and fervently than anyone else, notwithstanding in church building almost never does (preferring in that location to speak in a way all can sympathize), where does he speak in tongues? In what context would the affirmation of v. 18 ("I thank God I speak in tongues more than all of you") have shape? Conspicuously, Paul exercised his remarkable gift in private, in the context of his personal, devotional intimacy with God . Again, the only grounds I can see for objecting to this scenario is the reluctance that many cessationists have for spiritual experiences that bypass or transcend the mind.
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
Logical, reasonable, highly-educated Paul prayed in tongues more than anyone else!
Allow'south remember, this is the homo who wrote Romans. This is the homo whose unequalled heed and power of logical argumentation rendered helpless his theological opponents. This is the man who is known to history equally the greatest theologian outside of Jesus himself. This is the man who took on and took out the philosophers in Athens (Acts 17)! Yes, logical, reasonable, highly-educated Paul prayed in tongues more than anyone! Paul non only believed in the spiritual value of praying in private in uninterpreted tongues, he also himself skilful it. In fact, he happily declares that he prays in private in uninterpreted and therefore unintelligible tongues more than than all the natural language-happy Corinthians combined!
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
#ix: Is information technology God's will that every Christian speak in tongues?
Paul writes: "Now I want yous all to speak in tongues" (1 Cor. 14:5a).
Those who say "No" appeal to 1 Cor. seven:seven where Paul uses identical language to what is found in xiv:five. With regard to his ain land of celibacy, Paul writes: "I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his ain gift from God, one of one kind and i of another." No one volition argue that Paul intends for all Christians to remain single every bit he is. His "wish", therefore, should not exist taken as the expression of an unqualified and universal desire. Surely, then, we should not expect all to speak in tongues either.
Secondly, co-ordinate to one Cor. 12:seven-eleven, tongues, like the other gifts mentioned, is bestowed to individuals as the Holy Spirit wills. If Paul meant that "all" were to experience this gift, why did he utilize the terminology of "to one is given . . . and to another . . . to another," etc.? In other words, Paul seems to propose that the Spirit sovereignly differentiates among Christians and distributes 1 or more gifts to this person and yet another, a different souvenir to this person and nonetheless another gift to that 1, and so on.
Photo courtesy: ©Thinkstock
Paul implies that non all accept the souvenir, merely doesn't imply that all cannot.
Then there is 1 Cor. 12:28-30 where Paul quite explicitly states that "all practice not speak with tongues" whatever more than all are apostles or all are teachers or all accept gifts of healings then on. In Greek at that place is a grammatical construction that is designed to arm-twist a negative response to the question being asked. Paul employs it in i Cor. 12:29-xxx,
"All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? All practise not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?" (NASB)
Paul asks his question in such a way that he wants you to respond past saying, "No, of class not." But what about other texts where Paul uses the "I want" or "I wish" terminology (1 Cor. 10:1a; 11:3; 12:1)? The aforementioned Greek verb is used in these texts that we observe in 1 Cor. 14:5 ("I want" or "I wish"), and in all of them what the apostle wants applies equally and universally to every laic. Furthermore, in 1 Cor. 7 Paul tells usa explicitly why his "wish" for universal celibacy cannot and should not be fulfilled. It is because "each has his ain gift from God" (ane Cor. 7:7b). But in 1 Cor. xiv no such contextual clues are plant that propose Paul's "wish" or "desire" for all to speak in tongues cannot be fulfilled.
Photo courtesy: ©Unsplash
The potential for every believer to pray in tongues in individual devotion exists.
Some (only non I) insist that one Cor. 12:7-11 and 12:28-thirty refer to the gift of tongues in public ministry building , whereas 1 Cor. 14:five is describing the gift in private devotion . In 12:28 Paul specifically says he is describing what happens "in the church building" or "in the assembly" (cf. 11:18; 14:19, 23, 28, 33, 35). Not everyone is gifted past the Spirit to speak in tongues during the corporate gathering of the church. But the potential does exist for every believer to pray in tongues in private.
Photo courtesy: ©Unsplash
Souvenir of Tongues five. Grace of Tongues
Jack Hayford argues that the souvenir of tongues is limited in distribution (1 Cor. 12:11,30), and its public exercise is to be closely governed (1 Cor. fourteen:27-28); while the grace of tongues is so broadly bachelor that Paul wishes that all enjoyed its blessing (one Cor. 14:5a), which includes distinctive advice with God (ane Cor. fourteen:two); edifying of the believer'southward private life (1 Cor. 14:4); and worship and thanksgiving with dazzler and propriety (ane Cor. xiv:fifteen-17) (The Beauty of Spiritual Language, 102-06). The difference between these operations of the Holy Spirit is that not every Christian has reason to await he or she will necessarily exercise the public gift; while any Christian may await and welcome the private grace of spiritual language in his or her personal time of prayer fellowship with God (one Cor. 14:two), praiseful worship before God (1 Cor. 14:15-17), and intercessory prayer to God (Rom. 8:26-27).
Photograph courtesy: ©Unsplash
Non every believer contributes to the trunk in the same way.
Thus, according to Hayford, Paul'southward betoken at the finish of 1 Corinthians 12 is that non every laic will contribute to the body in precisely the same mode. Not everyone will minister a prophetic word, not anybody will teach, and then on. Just whether or not everyone might pray privately in tongues is another matter, non in Paul's purview until chapter 14.
"All are not prophets, are they?" (1 Cor. 12:29). No. But Paul is quick to say that the potential exists for "all" to prophesy (14:1, 31). Why could not the same be truthful for tongues? Couldn't Paul be saying that whereas all do not speak in tongues as an expression of corporate, public ministry, it is possible that all may speak in tongues every bit an expression of private praise and prayer? Just equally Paul's rhetorical question in 12:29 is not designed to dominion out the possibility that all may utter a prophetic give-and-take, then also his rhetorical question in 12:30 is non designed to exclude anyone from exercising tongues in their private devotional experience.
Photo courtesy: ©Unsplash
#10: Is tongues-voice communication an ecstatic experience?
The NT never uses this term to describe speaking in tongues. Many define "ecstatic" as a mental or emotional state in which the person is more or less oblivious to the external world. The individual is perceived equally losing cocky-control, perhaps lapsing into a frenzied condition in which self-consciousness and the power for rational thinking are eclipsed. There is no indication anywhere in the Bible that people who speak in tongues lose self-command or become unaware of their surroundings. Paul insists that the 1 speaking in tongues can first and end at volition (1 Cor. 14:15-19; xiv:27-28; 14:forty; cf. 14:32). There is a vast divergence between an experience existence "ecstatic" and it being "emotional". Tongues is often highly emotional and exhilarating, bringing peace, joy, etc., but that does not mean it is "ecstatic".
Article originally published on SamStorms.com. Used with permission.
Sam Storms is an Amillennial, Calvinistic, charismatic, ideology-baptistic, complementarian, Christian Hedonist who loves his wife of 44 years, his two daughters, his four grandchildren, books, baseball, movies, and all things Oklahoma University. In 2008 Sam became Lead Pastor for Preaching and Vision at Bridgeway Church in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Sam is on the Board of Directors of both Desiring God and Bethlehem College & Seminary, and also serves as a member of the Council of The Gospel Coalition. Sam is President-Elect of the Evangelical Theological Society.
Photograph courtesy: ©Unsplash
This article is part of our larger resource library of terms of import to the Christian organized religion. From heaven and hell, to communion and baptism, we want to provide easy to read and understand articles that answer your questions well-nigh theological terms and their meaning.
What is Irreverence and Why is it So Deadly?
What is Heresy?
The Fruit of the Spirit - What Are They?
10 Things to Know About Speaking in Tongues
What is the Tithe?
What is the Sabbath and is information technology Still Important?
Heaven - What is it Similar, Where is information technology?
Hell - 10 Things You Should Know
Baptism - What Does information technology Hateful and Why is it Important?
Communion - ten Of import Things to Remember
The Trinity - Father, Son, Holy Spirit Explained
Armor of God - What is information technology and How to Use information technology
Source: https://www.crosswalk.com/faith/spiritual-life/10-things-to-know-about-speaking-in-tongues.html
0 Response to "Why Did I Pray in Tongues Once and Never Again"
Post a Comment