Have you ever....?

Discuss current news and trends taking place in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Moderator: William Thornton

Have you ever experienced the "private prayer language", or spoken in tongues during prayer, as described in the scripture?

Yes
1
8%
No
9
69%
Not certain
3
23%
 
Total votes : 13

Have you ever....?

Postby Sandy » Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:10 am

Just curious.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8862
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Have you ever....?

Postby William Thornton » Thu Jun 08, 2006 11:01 am

Sandy wrote:Just curious.


I don't quite get it on the PPL. Does the speaker understand what he/she is saying?
User avatar
William Thornton
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12075
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Atlanta

Postby Hal Eaton » Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:52 pm

Musings on speaking in tongues:

(1) It never happens when you are alone.

(2) It happens only when you are with a group who believe the act is God-inspired, and to be admired.

(3) The quality of the pronouncements improves greatly with practice. First attempts are more "oola, oola, galla, bamba." Then sophistication sets in, and you hear, "Bashaga, cobalindo, perterino, vestiblularoni."

(4) Private prayer language may result when a pious follower of the procedure hears about objection No. (1) above, and seeks to reject the validity of the criticism.

Any psychological analysis of the practice indicates understandable and cogent explanations of the event.

As always, belief in inerrancy, and selective belief in individual verses, enhances acceptance of the manifestation as proof of spirituality. In turn, speaking in tongues provides another attainable goal in the quest for certainty and assurance.
User avatar
Hal Eaton
 
Posts: 1609
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:01 pm
Location: Mouth of Wilson, VA

Postby pjerwin » Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:22 pm

Hal Eaton wrote:As always, belief in inerrancy, and selective belief in individual verses, enhances acceptance of the manifestation as proof of spirituality. In turn, speaking in tongues provides another attainable goal in the quest for certainty and assurance.

To quote your responses on another thread: "Such elitism produces a rather limited version of God -- who, at least in theory, cannot, or ought not, be limited... Each step of the way, we are further detaching ourselves from all others who disagree in form, labels, polity, and adherence to stated principles... The 'sin' of pride requires us to proclaim that... that all else in this world is vanity except our chosen God, gods, or preferences... In our own society, we have groups continually drawing smaller and smaller circles designed, not to include their fellows, but to exclude all who dare to disagree on any point... I'm still looking for that cartoon, somewhere in my files, that depicts a fellow shouting, 'I'm right! I'm right! I'm right!' as he disappears down the terlet."

You seem to have real antipathy toward those who profess to speak in tongues. That's not very tolerant, not very inclusive. You're drawing them outside of your circle. What gives?
Scott Erwin,
Small Soul
pjerwin
 
Posts: 650
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 5:21 pm

private prayer language as spoken of in scripture

Postby Howard » Fri Jun 09, 2006 5:57 am

Interesting topic. Have had more than one person spend inordinate amounts of time trying to persuade me that I "needed" to have this experience - of speaking in some sort of "tongue" or "language." The implication was always that it was either necessary for salvation or necessary to really live the Christian life. The fact I never saw their point [as needed or required by scripture] always produced some sort of pity on their part that I was only half or partly saved. Or if I were saved I was some how gravely deficient in my Christianity.

The occasion early on in Acts argues strongly that whatever happened was either a speaking in a KNOWN language or atleast HEARING in a known language which was understood. The supplying of the word "unknown" in the KJV as a supplement to the translation has caused untold problems.

Can't see any scriptual need to speak in some unknown tongue or language. Even if Hebrew was the original language [TIC] I'm sure God understands all languages. On top of that I have enough problems speaking and understanding American English.
Howard
Howard
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL 35811-1916

Postby pjerwin » Fri Jun 09, 2006 5:05 pm

JaneFordA wrote:It's all a lot of :censored: and those who claim to get into this lunacy need to be locked in little rooms with comfy upholstered walls.

And yet IMB and SBC leaders will be excoriated for requiring that SB missionaries not practice or promote it? There appears to be some inconsistency here.
Last edited by pjerwin on Sat Jun 10, 2006 1:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Scott Erwin,
Small Soul
pjerwin
 
Posts: 650
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 5:21 pm

Postby jerryl » Fri Jun 09, 2006 6:26 pm

Hal Eaton wrote:Musings on speaking in tongues:

(1) It never happens when you are alone.



Gotta disagree with you on this one. Twice in my life, I've had PPL, or something much like it, happen when I was alone. And this is one of the few times I've ever discussed it.

I don't care to go into detail mainly because I don't want to sound like I had some special, "I'm more spiritual than you" experience. I seriously doubt that I'm anywhere close to being as spiritual as 95% of you here (and that's not being modest, just the truth.)

The experiences scared me as much as providing me an ecstatic experience. And in no way did it turn me into a charismatic or make me think that those experiences were 'more spiritual' than others. (There might be some physical/mental non-spiritual explanation for these occurrences, I'm not completely sure.)

But it did cause me to not completely write off all such utterances, just most. It's nothing I've ever tried to experience again. And I'm pretty sure that TD Jakes blubbering onstage is just blubbering, but I have a hard time completely write off all such experiences.

jerryl
jerryl
 
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:34 am
Location: Dallas, TX

Postby Haruo » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:30 am

I agree with Jerry. I voted not sure, and I am fairly sure that if I have had such experiences, it's been when alone, not in a group supportive or otherwise.

Haruo
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12252
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Postby Hal Eaton » Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:38 pm

pjerwin wrote:
Hal Eaton wrote:As always, belief in inerrancy, and selective belief in individual verses, enhances acceptance of the manifestation as proof of spirituality. In turn, speaking in tongues provides another attainable goal in the quest for certainty and assurance.

To quote your responses on another thread: "Such elitism produces a rather limited version of God -- who, at least in theory, cannot, or ought not, be limited... Each step of the way, we are further detaching ourselves from all others who disagree in form, labels, polity, and adherence to stated principles... The 'sin' of pride requires us to proclaim that... that all else in this world is vanity except our chosen God, gods, or preferences... In our own society, we have groups continually drawing smaller and smaller circles designed, not to include their fellows, but to exclude all who dare to disagree on any point... I'm still looking for that cartoon, somewhere in my files, that depicts a fellow shouting, 'I'm right! I'm right! I'm right!' as he disappears down the terlet."

You seem to have real antipathy toward those who profess to speak in tongues. That's not very tolerant, not very inclusive. You're drawing them outside of your circle. What gives?


Oldad: pj herein uses the famous "NIGYYSOB" line from Eric Berne's "Games People Play." That translates to "Now I've Got You, You SOB!"*

My circle includes believers, but that does not preclude my trying to help them understand a better way to interpret, serve and act. A psychological analysis of tongues-speaking, snake-handling, poison-drinking, faith-healing, salvation-by-baptism, Biblical literalism, etc., are all part and parcel of inclusion. Criticism, analysis, questioning, do not mean exclusion--unless you choose to take it that way . . .

My comment regarding tongues-speaking not occurring in solitary--perhaps I should have said "almost never . . ."

And, finally, as the famous "old Frenchman" once said, "Nobody ever falls in love until he hears about it."

*SOuthern Baptist, of course.
User avatar
Hal Eaton
 
Posts: 1609
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:01 pm
Location: Mouth of Wilson, VA

Postby pjerwin » Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:49 pm

Riiiiiiiiiight... Nice rationalization. And I believe you believe it. :) But let's see what you actually did in your "musing." (BTW: these are just my musings on your musings.)

What does it mean to say, "It [almost] never happens when you are alone." It appears to mean that it's usually done for some public display. So, what does that say about the perception of the tongues-speaker's character except he is pretentious.

What does it mean to say, "It happens [almost] only when you are with a group who believe the act is God-inspired, and to be admired." (I added your caveat here as well.) It appears to mean that it's usually done only in the company of those from whom one might because of it receive some measure of esteem. In other words, it's a means of either self-aggrandizement or ingratiation or both. What does that say about the perception of the tongues-speaker's character except that he is egocentric.

What does it mean to say, "The quality of the pronouncements improves greatly with practice. First attempts are more "oola, oola, galla, bamba." Then sophistication sets in, and you hear, "Bashaga, cobalindo, perterino, vestiblularoni." It appears to mean that the person is either self-deceived or a deceiver. What does that say about the perception of the tongues-speaker's character except that he is a liar.

What does it mean to say, "Private prayer language may result when a pious follower of the procedure hears about objection No. (1) above, and seeks to reject the validity of the criticism." ...sorry, but I don't know WHAT this means.

What does it mean to say, "Any psychological analysis of the practice indicates understandable and cogent explanations of the event." And what would those be? This is similar to the tactic Bultmann and others used -- and many still use -- to try and discredit the accounts of "supernatural" events in Scripture along with the possibility of the supernatural in the real world.

What does it mean to say, "As always, belief in inerrancy, and selective belief in individual verses, enhances acceptance of the manifestation as proof of spirituality. In turn, speaking in tongues provides another attainable goal in the quest for certainty and assurance?" It is quite interesting that you consistently lump together fundamentalists, inerrantists and charismatics. The truth is, most fundamentalist groups are also cessationists, which oddly enough forces them to take liberties with Scripture they otherwise would eschew. On the other hand, charismatics are rarely fundamentalists except with regard to legalistic application of dress codes and such, but most charismatics are not really inerrantists, either, in that they believe through tongues-speaking, prophecy, words of knowledge, words of wisdom, etc., more revelatory light beyond, but not in contradiction of, the Bible will be given. Among non-fundamentalist, evangelical inerrantists, however, there is often some openness to, if not acceptance of (i.e., W. Grudem), tongues-speaking and other manifestations of the Spirit.

But it must be noted that if, as you posit, "speaking in tongues provides another attainable goal in the quest for certainty and assurance," yet those who practice it are so deceptive or easily deceived, there can be little if any certainty -- and this is especially true given that most charismatic groups do not hold to a doctrine of the perseverance of the saints that includes eternal security of the believer (in other words, they believe one can lose his or her salvation).

Thus, your musings do give one a sense of antipathy toward tongues-speakers. Nevertheless, perhaps in your magnanimity you include them in your circle, but it seems to betray a sense of elitism, which behooves you to try to "help them understand a better way to interpret, serve and act."

Just a few thoughts for Oldad from a YoungPup. :lol:
Scott Erwin,
Small Soul
pjerwin
 
Posts: 650
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 5:21 pm


Return to SBC News and Trends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest