Tongues

[JunChosen]

I don't think I said there were more "books/letters/writings" that had been left out concerning tongues.
I merely said there are more records of writings done during Paul's days, as well as in the O.T. that were "cut out" from the canon.
Often referred to as "Apocryphal Books."

No that's NOT what you said in Post #368.

This is what you wrote:

There were even more writings then just Paul's, before during and after Paul, there were "writings!"

FYI, the "Apocryphal Books" are NOT inspired writings!

To God Be The Glory

 

[Paul Christensen]

I listen to him on the John Ankerberg Show. He held the degree in languages. So not a fraud. He spoken a language he was fluent in. So not a liar.

He went to that church because it was known to be pulling stunts like this.

In the capacity I was serving in that the time I was invited to a Pentecostal church as a special guest.

They prayed in tongues over me, laid on hands and even had a woman who was known for slain in the spirit, a totally non-biblical performance.

1. Did the linguist make his intentions clear to the people in that church that what he was about to speak was a language he had learned and knew the meaning, and that it was going to be a test for them? If not, he behaved as a liar and deceiver.

2. Did you voluntarily submit yourself to prayer in that church? If so, going to a strange church and letting those people pray over you, you have noone to blame but yourself. If not, then I would have had the assertiveness to say "no thanks" to their offer of prayer.

To be honest, my last visit to an AOG church in Auckland was spooky for me. It was in the worship time that the pastor went around whispering in people's ears, "Jesus is here." People would then shake and fall over. He tried it on me, but I wasn't going to shake or fall over for anyone! After the service was over, I got out of there, resolving to never go back.

Your description is the use of prayer and tongues as some kind of sorcery, that praying in tongues is a kind of force in itself to achieve a result, whatever that result might be. It is not the tongues itself that is the issue, but the way it was being used on you. Even if they didn't pray in tongues over you, but prayed in English, it still would have been sorcery, because the prayer would be used with the same intention - to achieve what they intended.

True prayer in tongues or English is making requests to God and leaving the result to Him according to his will. I totally believe in praying with tongues, but I would never pray with tongues while laying hands on a person. And laying hands on people can also be a form of sorcery when used to try to transfer some kind of "force" to the person. I wouldn't allow anyone I don't know or trust to lay hands on me because you never know what they might be imparting to you.

Biblical ways of laying hands:
1: receiving the Holy Spirit
2: conferring a leadership role
3; conferring an Abrahamic blessing

If I pray for a person who needs healing, I take them lightly by the wrist and say, "Jesus heals you." I don't go into any extended dramatic prayer to try and heal the person myself through prayer. That could be a form of sorcery in trying to transfer some healing "force" from me to that person. Jesus is the healer, and the prayer of faith for healing is very short and can be made in just three words as I demonstrated. Taking the person by the wrist is agreeing together to look to Jesus for the healing.

If I am asked to pray for someone that God's will be done concerning an issue or request for prayer, I stand behind the person and put my hand on their shoulder. This is the act of both of us in agreement standing before God's throne of grace. If I stood in front of the person then I would feel that I am trying to be a mediator between him and Christ, and blocking that person's access to God's throne of grace.

Also, in some cultures, it is a total insult to put one's hands on another's head.

As far as the falling down stuff. Falling backwards is mentioned only when the crowd came to arrest Jesus. He showed that no one could arrest Him by force, and that He went with the crowd voluntarily. When a persons falls down under the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, they fall on their faces before God. John fell at the feet of the glorified Christ when He appeared to John in the book of Revelation. He fell straight down, not backward.

I have seen preachers lay their hands on people's heads while the person is looking up with their eyes closed. What happens that if the preacher slightly rocks the person back, the person overbalances and falls backward. So, it is not falling in the Spirit at all, but the natural overbalancing of a person being rocked off their equilibrium.

I have seen when people truly fall when affected by the absolute sense of peace from the Spirit. Their knees buckle and they sink directly down like a person fainting. Not with straight legs falling backward. When the peace of God overwhelms a person, their whole body goes limp and crumples. Also, the experience is usually rare event for the person, and it is a lifechanging event. Not a regularly Sunday evening performance.

Anyway, those are my views on these things.

 

[Paul Christensen]

If indeed there are more writings about tongues before Paul's writings, please furnish us with Scripture references.

I beg to differ. God is the Author of the Bible and it is He who put it all together, not man!
2 Peter 1:21.

And here lies the error of your ways:

The Bible is complete according to Revelation 22:18-19. And, the "book" mentioned is not the book of Revelation rather it is the Bible, BECAUSE the book of Revelation cannot stand alone apart from the Bible.

To God Be The Glory

We have to be careful about interpreting apocalyptic literature. The genre is highly symbolic and the readers of the 1st Century knew the keys to the symbols. We are at a disadvantage because 2000 years later, we no longer have those keys in the same way that the 1st Century believers had. The book was written for Christians undergoing severe persecution, and was for their encouragement that Christ will be the final victor and their persecution won't go on forever. Also, the pagan Romans didn't have the keys to interpret the writing, so they didn't understand what was being written. It is the same with John Skelton's (a Tudor poet under Henry VIII) who wrote a poem rubbishing Cardinal Wolseley. The poem was titled "Speake Parrote" in which he put all in the insults in the mouth of a parrot. Wolseley couldn't do anything because if he tried, Skelton would say, "It's only a parrot talking". which would have made Wolseley look like a fool if he brought a charge against the poet over things a parrot was saying! John Bunyan put his Pilgrims Progress forward as a dream for the same reasons. He wrote the book during very dangerous political times in which dissenters from the established English church were being imprisoned and executed.

And so the book of Revelation was written also during dangerous political times, and for the same reason. So any attempt at interpretation for modern times has to be doubtful and speculative.

 

[Paul Christensen]

The passage you posted, and indeed the whole chapter, most certainly applies to the current situation whereby false teachers wherever they are, can spread their pernicious ideology across the world via the internet, without leaving their armchair. Facebook being a case in point.

In the post you mention I was trying to make two points. The first point is that freewill is proven when we see how easily people are manipulated by advertising, the media and the internet etc. Matthew 24 warns us about this. In a nutshell, the message is to keep our eyes firmly fixed on Jesus. Those who deny freewill like the OSAS people are on to a looser when they try to deny it, so why allow it to be taught on the CHRISTIAN forums?

This brings me to my second point, whereby the Christian forums are an obvious target for false teachers, who come, so they may deceive. They are obviously well versed in Christianity as they have all their counter arguments in neat array. Debating with them is like casting pearls before swine, so why give them the opportunity to sully the Gospel of Jesus Christ? My aim is to glorify God and bring honour and glory to His name, instead of which, I find myself defending Him against those who oppose the Saviour of the World as only the One God in heaven and earth can do.

Overall, I ask myself, why give the adversary a ready-made platform? Should we not be saying, "get thee behind me Satan?" I certainly do not want the presence of the devil in my home and that is a fact.
.

The internet is like our roads and motor vehicles. It is how it is used. A motor vehicle can be of great use if used rightfully, but it can kill in irresponsible hands. Who was it who said that guns don't kill people, people do. A person commenting on that said, "My pencil failed my final exams!"

Facebook has been a blessing to multitudes of people. Facebook is not the problem, it is the way it is being used by some people. It is the same with churches and their teaching. It is not the church or the Bible that deceives people. It is the way some use the church and the Bible as a weapon to deceive folk. For the majority, church is a place of fellowship and Biblical instruction. Others use a church as a place where they can build their religious empire and have power and control over people. Therefore it is not the church itself, but the people using it to achieve their own ends.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Micah 3:11
The heads thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord, and say, Is not the Lord among us? none evil can come upon us.
And, then when evil, sickness, or calamity, does come upon them? They just don't, can't understand why. And are so resistant to any teaching that would cause them in making spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
Keeping one's eye firmly affixed to Christ only goes so far! Because sooner, or later, Our Heavenly Father gets tired of Jesus confessing them to Him, and nothing happens! They won't go unto the Him who sent Christ to this earth to show us the way back to God!
It would seem they will only go as far as they can rationalize.
And God said "lean not on your own understanding"...."Cuz you ain't gonna understands it!"
Although Nimrod died a long time ago?
The reason/s for his building never did!
1 Corinthians 10:22
Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
This "perpetrator's" name has changed over the millennia! But, his title hasn't! He who deceived the WHOLE world!

This looks like a lot of generalized gobbledegook to me. I can't see the point of it.

 

[CoreIssue]

1. Did the linguist make his intentions clear to the people in that church that what he was about to speak was a langua he had learned and knew the meaning, and that it was going to be a test for them? If not, he behaved as a liar and deceiver.

2. Did you voluntarily submit yourself to prayer in that church? If so, going to a strange church and letting those people pray over you, you have noone to blame but yourself. If not, then I would have had the assertiveness to say "no thanks" to their offer of prayer.

Anyway, those are my views on these things.

When you're investigating something like that you do not announce who you are. If they are legit. They know exactly exactly what you say and what you are doing. Having worked in intelligence, you simply do not reveal yourself.

I was just saying how they operated in their church. with my background, I can tell you it was all staged.

 

[Waiting on him]

Matthew 6:7 KJV
[7] But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do : for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
Greek: βαττολογέω
Transliteration: battologeō
Pronunciation: bat-tol-og-eh'-o
Definition: From Βάττος Battos (a proverbial stammerer) and G3056; to stutter that is (by implication) to prate tediously: - use vain repetitions.
KJV Usage: use vain repetitions (1x).
Occurs: 2
In verses: 1

 

[Paul Christensen]

When you're investigating something like that you do not announce who you are. If they are legit. They know exactly exactly what you say and what you are doing. Having worked in intelligence, you simply do not reveal yourself.

I was just saying how they operated in their church. with my background, I can tell you it was all staged.

There is a big difference between a researcher visiting a church as an observer, taking no part in the proceedings, and someone who comes in and performs something false and deceptive in order to trap people into making the mistake that the person is doing something genuine.

Actually, if the leadership of that church allowed the visitor to give a "tongues"message, then they have no one to blame than themselves for allowing a stranger to come in and minister in that way. In the Pentecostal churches I have associated with, if a stranger came in and tried to give a tongues message, the leader would stop him and say that the tongue is not for interpretation. Then the leader would take the visitor aside and tell him that "we don't allow first time visitors to exercise spiritual gifts. We want to get to know you first."

I believe it would be irresponsible for a leadership to allow total strangers to come into a meeting and give tongues messages and prophecies. That sort of thing is not the practice of normal Pentecostal churches in New Zealand. In fact, one prominent Pentecostal denomination actually specifies who are authorised to give tongues messages and prophecies in their church meetings and everyone who attends that church knows it.

In one church I attended for around seven years, we had our share of lunatic fringe people who would get up and do crazy things. But they were clearly identified and no one took them seriously. On one occasion when a large fellow with a built in amplifier gave a long, loud prophecy, the leader got up and said, "Well, we can safely ignore that one!" On another occasion, the leader heard a prophecy that was totally off beam and he cried out, "That's not of God!!"

So, if the Pentecostal church you referred to allow the total stranger to get up and give a tongues message, and someone gave an interpretation, then it shows that the leadership of that church were not very responsible concerning the spiritual safety of the members, in allowing them to be exposed to such deception from a "researcher" intent on catching them out and making fools of innocent people who thought they were doing the right thing according to their faith. In fact, that researcher was lying to the Holy Spirit by pretending to use a Holy Spirit ministry gift with the intention of deceiving the people, thereby proving that tongues and interpretation is false. If he did that where the Apostle Peter was leading the church in the 1st Century, he might have suffered the same fate as Ananias and Sapphira!

 

[Waiting on him]

There is a big difference between a researcher visiting a church as an observer, taking no part in the proceedings, and someone who comes in and performs something false and deceptive in order to trap people into making the mistake that the person is doing something genuine.

Actually, if the leadership of that church allowed the visitor to give a "tongues"message, then they have no one to blame than themselves for allowing a stranger to come in and minister in that way. In the Pentecostal churches I have associated with, if a stranger came in and tried to give a tongues message, the leader would stop him and say that the tongue is not for interpretation. Then the leader would take the visitor aside and tell him that "we don't allow first time visitors to exercise spiritual gifts. We want to get to know you first."

I believe it would be irresponsible for a leadership to allow total strangers to come into a meeting and give tongues messages and prophecies. That sort of thing is not the practice of normal Pentecostal churches in New Zealand. In fact, one prominent Pentecostal denomination actually specifies who are authorised to give tongues messages and prophecies in their church meetings and everyone who attends that church knows it.

In one church I attended for around seven years, we had our share of lunatic fringe people who would get up and do crazy things. But they were clearly identified and no one took them seriously. On one occasion when a large fellow with a built in amplifier gave a long, loud prophecy, the leader got up and said, "Well, we can safely ignore that one!" On another occasion, the leader heard a prophecy that was totally off beam and he cried out, "That's not of God!!"

So, if the Pentecostal church you referred to allow the total stranger to get up and give a tongues message, and someone gave an interpretation, then it shows that the leadership of that church were not very responsible concerning the spiritual safety of the members, in allowing them to be exposed to such deception from a "researcher" intent on catching them out and making fools of innocent people who thought they were doing the right thing according to their faith. In fact, that researcher was lying to the Holy Spirit by pretending to use a Holy Spirit ministry gift with the intention of deceiving the people, thereby proving that tongues and interpretation is false. If he did that where the Apostle Peter was leading the church in the 1st Century, he might have suffered the same fate as Ananias and Sapphira!

There is a big difference between a researcher visiting a church as an observer, taking no part in the proceedings, and someone who comes in and performs something false and deceptive in order to trap people into making the mistake that the person is doing something genuine.

Actually, if the leadership of that church allowed the visitor to give a "tongues"message, then they have no one to blame than themselves for allowing a stranger to come in and minister in that way. In the Pentecostal churches I have associated with, if a stranger came in and tried to give a tongues message, the leader would stop him and say that the tongue is not for interpretation. Then the leader would take the visitor aside and tell him that "we don't allow first time visitors to exercise spiritual gifts. We want to get to know you first."

I believe it would be irresponsible for a leadership to allow total strangers to come into a meeting and give tongues messages and prophecies. That sort of thing is not the practice of normal Pentecostal churches in New Zealand. In fact, one prominent Pentecostal denomination actually specifies who are authorised to give tongues messages and prophecies in their church meetings and everyone who attends that church knows it.

In one church I attended for around seven years, we had our share of lunatic fringe people who would get up and do crazy things. But they were clearly identified and no one took them seriously. On one occasion when a large fellow with a built in amplifier gave a long, loud prophecy, the leader got up and said, "Well, we can safely ignore that one!" On another occasion, the leader heard a prophecy that was totally off beam and he cried out, "That's not of God!!"

So, if the Pentecostal church you referred to allow the total stranger to get up and give a tongues message, and someone gave an interpretation, then it shows that the leadership of that church were not very responsible concerning the spiritual safety of the members, in allowing them to be exposed to such deception from a "researcher" intent on catching them out and making fools of innocent people who thought they were doing the right thing according to their faith. In fact, that researcher was lying to the Holy Spirit by pretending to use a Holy Spirit ministry gift with the intention of deceiving the people, thereby proving that tongues and interpretation is false. If he did that where the Apostle Peter was leading the church in the 1st Century, he might have suffered the same fate as Ananias and Sapphira!

Doesn’t to be humbled mean to be humiliated?

 

[Waiting on him]

There is a big difference between a researcher visiting a church as an observer, taking no part in the proceedings, and someone who comes in and performs something false and deceptive in order to trap people into making the mistake that the person is doing something genuine.

Actually, if the leadership of that church allowed the visitor to give a "tongues"message, then they have no one to blame than themselves for allowing a stranger to come in and minister in that way. In the Pentecostal churches I have associated with, if a stranger came in and tried to give a tongues message, the leader would stop him and say that the tongue is not for interpretation. Then the leader would take the visitor aside and tell him that "we don't allow first time visitors to exercise spiritual gifts. We want to get to know you first."

I believe it would be irresponsible for a leadership to allow total strangers to come into a meeting and give tongues messages and prophecies. That sort of thing is not the practice of normal Pentecostal churches in New Zealand. In fact, one prominent Pentecostal denomination actually specifies who are authorised to give tongues messages and prophecies in their church meetings and everyone who attends that church knows it.

In one church I attended for around seven years, we had our share of lunatic fringe people who would get up and do crazy things. But they were clearly identified and no one took them seriously. On one occasion when a large fellow with a built in amplifier gave a long, loud prophecy, the leader got up and said, "Well, we can safely ignore that one!" On another occasion, the leader heard a prophecy that was totally off beam and he cried out, "That's not of God!!"

So, if the Pentecostal church you referred to allow the total stranger to get up and give a tongues message, and someone gave an interpretation, then it shows that the leadership of that church were not very responsible concerning the spiritual safety of the members, in allowing them to be exposed to such deception from a "researcher" intent on catching them out and making fools of innocent people who thought they were doing the right thing according to their faith. In fact, that researcher was lying to the Holy Spirit by pretending to use a Holy Spirit ministry gift with the intention of deceiving the people, thereby proving that tongues and interpretation is false. If he did that where the Apostle Peter was leading the church in the 1st Century, he might have suffered the same fate as Ananias and Sapphira!

There is a big difference between a researcher visiting a church as an observer, taking no part in the proceedings, and someone who comes in and performs something false and deceptive in order to trap people into making the mistake that the person is doing something genuine.

Actually, if the leadership of that church allowed the visitor to give a "tongues"message, then they have no one to blame than themselves for allowing a stranger to come in and minister in that way. In the Pentecostal churches I have associated with, if a stranger came in and tried to give a tongues message, the leader would stop him and say that the tongue is not for interpretation. Then the leader would take the visitor aside and tell him that "we don't allow first time visitors to exercise spiritual gifts. We want to get to know you first."

I believe it would be irresponsible for a leadership to allow total strangers to come into a meeting and give tongues messages and prophecies. That sort of thing is not the practice of normal Pentecostal churches in New Zealand. In fact, one prominent Pentecostal denomination actually specifies who are authorised to give tongues messages and prophecies in their church meetings and everyone who attends that church knows it.

In one church I attended for around seven years, we had our share of lunatic fringe people who would get up and do crazy things. But they were clearly identified and no one took them seriously. On one occasion when a large fellow with a built in amplifier gave a long, loud prophecy, the leader got up and said, "Well, we can safely ignore that one!" On another occasion, the leader heard a prophecy that was totally off beam and he cried out, "That's not of God!!"

So, if the Pentecostal church you referred to allow the total stranger to get up and give a tongues message, and someone gave an interpretation, then it shows that the leadership of that church were not very responsible concerning the spiritual safety of the members, in allowing them to be exposed to such deception from a "researcher" intent on catching them out and making fools of innocent people who thought they were doing the right thing according to their faith. In fact, that researcher was lying to the Holy Spirit by pretending to use a Holy Spirit ministry gift with the intention of deceiving the people, thereby proving that tongues and interpretation is false. If he did that where the Apostle Peter was leading the church in the 1st Century, he might have suffered the same fate as Ananias and Sapphira!

Doesn’t to be humbled mean to be humiliated?

 

[Waiting on him]

Greek: ταπεινόω
Transliteration: tapeinoō
Pronunciation: tap-i-no'-o
Definition: From G5011; to depress; figuratively to humiliate (in condition or heart): - abase bring low humble (self).
KJV Usage: humble (6x), abase (5x), humble (one's) self (2x), bring low (1x).
Occurs: 14
In verses: 11
here it is humbled in Philippians.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Matthew 6:7 KJV
[7] But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do : for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
Greek: βαττολογέω
Transliteration: battologeō
Pronunciation: bat-tol-og-eh'-o
Definition: From Βάττος Battos (a proverbial stammerer) and G3056; to stutter that is (by implication) to prate tediously: - use vain repetitions.
KJV Usage: use vain repetitions (1x).
Occurs: 2
In verses: 1

Jesus wasn't referring to praying in tongues here. You are twisting the Scripture to mean something that Jesus never meant. Heathen prayers are repetitious incantations, saying the same words over and over again. Some church people do the same when chanting the liturgy in church. They mouth the words but their hearts are not in it. When pagans and Mormons speak in tongues, it is ceremonial and said as part of their incantations, not as prayers to God. They would never use tongues in private prayer. It is just part of their ceremonial chanting.

I have to admit that some Pentecostals use public tongues in the same way - to create an atmosphere of worship, as if collective speaking in tongues brings a more intense sensual presence of the Holy Spirit in the meetings. I believe that this is a type of collective sorcery and a misuse of the gift of tongues.

The fact is that when Spirit-filled people enter a church, they bring the atmosphere in with them. The people are the atmosphere because of the indwelling Holy Spirit in each person. The evidence of the presence of the Spirit is the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit in the meetings. Without the manifestation of the gifts, there is no evidence that the Spirit is actually active in the meeting.

Jesus said that when we pray, go into our own private place where God is the only listener, so that when we pray in secret, the Lord will reward us openly. That's the place to pray in tongues. The only place to use tongues in church is to give a definite message in tongues followed up by an interpretation so that all may be benefitted by it. All other public speaking in tongues is pointless, as Paul quite clearly points out.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Doesn’t to be humbled mean to be humiliated?

It's not the people who should have been humiliated by the deception. It is the worship leader who allowed a stranger to give the utterance who should be disciplined for allowing it to happen. I have been a member of a Pentecostal church with a very godly pastor who if a stranger got up and did the same he would interrupt that person and tell him to sit down. He did that to an acquaintance of mne who during a free sharing time got up and started talking inappropriately, and the pastor told him in no uncertain terms to sit down! Under a strict leadership like that one is very careful about what he shares in a meeting with that pastor in charge!

 

[Paul Christensen]

Doesn’t to be humbled mean to be humiliated?

Duplicate post, and quoting me twice in both posts. Vain repetition???

 

[Waiting on him]

Jesus wasn't referring to praying in tongues here. You are twisting the Scripture to mean something that Jesus never meant. Heathen prayers are repetitious incantations, saying the same words over and over again. Some church people do the same when chanting the liturgy in church. They mouth the words but their hearts are not in it. When pagans and Mormons speak in tongues, it is ceremonial and said as part of their incantations, not as prayers to God. They would never use tongues in private prayer. It is just part of their ceremonial chanting.

I have to admit that some Pentecostals use public tongues in the same way - to create an atmosphere of worship, as if collective speaking in tongues brings a more intense sensual presence of the Holy Spirit in the meetings. I believe that this is a type of collective sorcery and a misuse of the gift of tongues.

The fact is that when Spirit-filled people enter a church, they bring the atmosphere in with them. The people are the atmosphere because of the indwelling Holy Spirit in each person. The evidence of the presence of the Spirit is the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit in the meetings. Without the manifestation of the gifts, there is no evidence that the Spirit is actually active in the meeting.

Jesus said that when we pray, go into our own private place where God is the only listener, so that when we pray in secret, the Lord will reward us openly. That's the place to pray in tongues. The only place to use tongues in church is to give a definite message in tongues followed up by an interpretation so that all may be benefitted by it. All other public speaking in tongues is pointless, as Paul quite clearly points out.

You continually use the phrase praying in tongues, but I can’t find any reference in scripture.
1 Corinthians 14:14 KJV
[14] For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
here Paul says it’s unfruitful, the only reference I find. He further says it’s his spirit, not the Holy Spirit. And we both know how unruly the spirit of man can be, don’t we?

 

[Waiting on him]

Duplicate post, and quoting me twice in both posts. Vain repetition???

Lol.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

When pagans and Mormons speak in tongues, it is ceremonial and said as part of their incantations, not as prayers to God. They would never use tongues in private prayer. It is just part of their ceremonial chanting.

Actually "Mormons" believe that the gift of tongues is being able to miraculously speak in a language unknown to them, but known to another person, for the purpose of preaching the Gospel. An example of this would be a British missionary being able to suddenly teach a lesson in Mandarin to a Chinese person.

 

[Waiting on him]

Actually "Mormons" believe that the gift of tongues is being able to miraculously speak in a language unknown to them, but known to another person, for the purpose of preaching the Gospel. An example of this would be a British missionary being able to suddenly teach a lesson in Mandarin to a Chinese person.

I have a missionary friend told me he once had this local that followed him around for weeks, would even pop up in his window some mornings insisting I want a manual. He said he kept telling him I don’t have a manual. I laughed my head off when I realized what the local was asking for.

 

[Waiting on him]

I want a manual.

 

[Paul Christensen]

You continually use the phrase praying in tongues, but I can’t find any reference in scripture.
1 Corinthians 14:14 KJV
[14] For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
here Paul says it’s unfruitful, the only reference I find. He further says it’s his spirit, not the Holy Spirit. And we both know how unruly the spirit of man can be, don’t we?

1 Corinthians 14:2 says that a person speaking in tongues is speaking to God. Isn't that praying? What would you call it?