I don’t want to discount personal prayer in tongues outright, but something bothers me about it. Now, I’m no expert and I’m not trying to start a fight here, and I’m not trying to disprove it, so maybe someone could address some of my concerns. First, I like to say that I see the reference to communicating with God using tongues in (1 Cor 14:2 and 14:28) Just so you know I’m not denying it to be real.
In 1 Cor 14:1 it appears St. Paul is returning to his statement in 12:31 and frowning on tongues with no interpretation. I can’t help but look at verse 4 “Whoever speakes in a tongue builds himself up, but whoever prophesies builds up the church”, and hear him refering back to being inflated, seeking one’s own good, and pleasing ones self. (8:1) and (10:23-24) compaired to the related concept of “the beneficial” in (6:12) and (12:7)
In (14:6-9) he seems to be saying sound, in order to be useful, must be intelligible. And the anologies are to music (7-8) regular speech (10-11) and tongues (9 and 12) It seem to me that he’s frowning on tongues as a personal prayer language. (in and of itself)
When the charism of interpretation comes in it seems less like personal prayer, because it becomes intelligible, and has the same effect as prophecy. Why does he stress his mind and the role of reason? Why point out how confusing everything seems to be with no interpretation?
It just seems to me like much of what he is saying speaks against tongues as personal prayer. He equates tongues with foreign laguages in (14:10-12) and specifically challenges the Corinthians about seeing tongues as a sign of God favor, by being able to have direct communication in 14:20-22
He challenges them to a more mature appraisal by giving them a less flattering explanation of what speaking in tongues may signify. In verse21 Isaiah threatened the people that if they failed to listen to their prophets, the Lord would speak to them (in punishment) through the lips of Assyrian conquerors (Is 28:11-12)
Then Paul concludes from Isaiah that tongues are a sign not for those who believe, (it sure seems like it’s not a mark of Gods pleasure for those who listen to Him, but a mark of His displeasure with those in the community who are faithless, who have not heeded the message that He has sent through the prophets)
Then he concludes with specific directives regarding the exercise of the gifts in the assembly. Basically, it must contribute to the “building up” of the church. If any one speaks in a tongue, let it be two or at most three, and each in turn, and one should interpret. But if there is no interpreter, the person should keep silent in the church and speak to himself and to God. (14:27-28)
Let me close by saying, my only experience seeing tongues was at a Pentacostal church and it was chaos. I thought it was absolutely wrong, but like I said I’m no expert on these things. I would like to hear some response to these thoughts, because I don’t want to have a grudge against tongues as personal prayer to God. I’m just stuck with this idea in my head. Maybe because I perceived the abuse of tongues at the services I went to, and partially because I was afraid some might no be speaking in the Holy Spirit but some foul spirit.
Peace be with you,
Ryan
