"in the Spirit"

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I don't see that in scripture. We are simply trying to establishment that travailing doesn't have to include tongues, and I don't see any strong evidence to agree with that view.

You and brother Blume have asserted that praying in the spirit is ONLY and ALWAYS praying in tongues. There is no scripture that says that. There is no scripture that NECESSITATES that conclusion. Therefore there is no scriptural basis for dogmatically asserting that if a person is not praying in tongues, they are not praying in the spirit.

Furthermore, as I pointed out, the ONLY scripture speaking about the subject of praying and tongues does NOT say "praying with the spirit is always in tongues". It doesn't even say "praying with the spirit is praying in tongues" without the "always". What it does say is very specific - if I pray in tongues my spirit prays but my understanding is unfruitful. That's all it says. Guess what? If I speak in tongues my spirit speaketh but my understanding is unfruitful. Should I therefore conclude that if a person is NOT speaking in tongues they are not speaking in, by, or with the spirit? Of course not.

If people wish to build their doctrine on their personal experience and subjective opinions without regard to the ACTUAL TEXT then I guess have at it. It's what the entire denominational world does, so why not, right?

As for me, I will stick with the Bible.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You and brother Blume have asserted that praying in the spirit is ONLY and ALWAYS praying in tongues. There is no scripture that says that. There is no scripture that NECESSITATES that conclusion. Therefore there is no scriptural basis for dogmatically asserting that if a person is not praying in tongues, they are not praying in the spirit.

Furthermore, as I pointed out, the ONLY scripture speaking about the subject of praying and tongues does NOT say "praying with the spirit is always in tongues". It doesn't even say "praying with the spirit is praying in tongues" without the "always". What it does say is very specific - if I pray in tongues my spirit prays but my understanding is unfruitful. That's all it says. Guess what? If I speak in tongues my spirit speaketh but my understanding is unfruitful. Should I therefore conclude that if a person is NOT speaking in tongues they are not speaking in, by, or with the spirit? Of course not.

If people wish to build their doctrine on their personal experience and subjective opinions without regard to the ACTUAL TEXT then I guess have at it. It's what the entire denominational world does, so why not, right?

As for me, I will stick with the Bible.

The initial evidence of the Holy Ghost is tongues. Anytime the Holy Ghost/Spirit is mentioned it must point back to that initial sign. So, for me, it's a no brainer that Holy Ghost = tongues. I mean, Paul talks about it quite a bit in Corinthians.

[mfblume]

Praying with our spirits is contrasted with praying with our understanding. Paul is not speaking about any contrasts that deal with God's Spirit. God's Spirit is just as involved in understanding through native tongue as it is in spirit in tongues. The difference is our spirits versus our understanding. If we're talking about prayer in the spirit, 1 Cor 14 is the only chapter that deals with that issue, and it is tongues, and context shows it is a contrast of two parts of us, not how much of God's Spirit we tap into or not.

[votivesoul]

Has no one else been praying "in the Spirit" and vacillated, as God moves, between tongues and native language, i.e. between spirit and understanding?

Does that mean, then, at every instance of change between speaking in tongues and speaking in the native language, that one goes in and out of the Spirit?

That doesn't make sense to me.

It's all "in the Spirit" if all inspired by the Spirit. Jesus prayed many times before Pentecost with the understanding in His own native tongue. Was that not "in the Spirit"?

If we ask anything according to the will of God, He hears us, correct?

And the Spirit itself makes intercession for us according to the will of God, does it not?

So, if the Spirit is making intercession for us and leading us to pray according to the will of God, and if by praying according to the will of God we can know that God hears us and that we will have the petitions we ask of Him, then by default all such praying, whether in tongues or not in tongues, is "in the Spirit".

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Has no one else been praying "in the Spirit" and vacillated, as God moves, between tongues and native language, i.e. between spirit and understanding?

Does that mean, then, at every instance of change between speaking in tongues and speaking in the native language, that one goes in and out of the Spirit?

That doesn't make sense to me.

It's all "in the Spirit" if all inspired by the Spirit. Jesus prayed many times before Pentecost with the understanding in His own native tongue. Was that not "in the Spirit"?

If we ask anything according to the will of God, He hears us, correct?

And the Spirit itself makes intercession for us according to the will of God, does it not?

So, if the Spirit is making intercession for us and leading us to pray according to the will of God, and if by praying according to the will of God we can know that God hears us and that we will have the petitions we ask of Him, then by default all such praying, whether in tongues or not in tongues, is "in the Spirit".

I agree with you here. However, unless I am misunderstanding Mizpeh and Esaias, they are saying it is not ever necessary to speak in tongues again after initial infilling. I don't agree with that. I don't see the scriptures supporting that view.

[Pressing-On]

One thing I would like to say is that the Apostles taught more on "worship" than they did on Acts 2:38. Everything comes into play when we worship.

Notice these scriptures - Acts 1:4; Ephesians 6:18; Philippians 4:6 - "in prayer/worship and supplication/petition", "with all prayer/worship and supplication/petition"; "by prayer/worship and supplication/petition".

Worship should always precede petition.

Notice when studying the word "prayer" that the definition "worship" G4335 is used more often.

We would see more things happen if we focused on "worship" rather than whether or not it is allowable to speak in tongues in church, at home or ever again after the initial infilling. JMO.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

One thing I would like to say is that the Apostles taught more on "worship" than they did on Acts 2:38. Everything comes into play when we worship.

Notice these scriptures - Acts 1:4; Ephesians 6:18; Philippians 4:6 - "in prayer/worship and supplication/petition", "with all prayer/worship and supplication/petition"; "by prayer/worship and supplication/petition".

Worship should always precede petition.

Notice when studying the word "prayer" that the definition "worship" G4335 is used more often.

We would see more things happen if we focused on "worship" rather than whether or not it is allowable to speak in tongues in church, at home or ever again after the initial infilling. JMO.

Amen! And note that one must put the Book down to worship, which btw cannot--or anyway does not--happen in a church building. "Worship" means "follow."

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by shazeep

Amen! And note that one must put the Book down to worship, which btw cannot--or anyway does not--happen in a church building. "Worship" means "follow."

The definition for "worship" that is used most in the NT is proskuneō. Notice that it is very close to proseuchomai, which is the most used definition for "pray".

In the Greek, "worship" means to "kiss the hand" or "meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master’s hand".

It means, metaphorically, that we trust God "entirely" with our care and that is, or should be, our heart and focus when we commune with God.