differences between Baptist and Pentecostal

[Iollain]

If it is biblical, there is an interpreter...those that are doing without one are not doing so correctly.

People that speak in tongues can do so, but in church they shouldn't without an interpreter because it does nothing for the congregation but hearing someone saying something they all can't understand (not edifying), plus if there are unbelievers there they will think we are crazy and not come back.

 

[novcncy]

You calling the outpouring of the Holy Spirit a 'circus' and 'gibberish' seems to me to be bordering on blasphemy. 'Creative theologians' instead of the word of God? You try to nullify the word of God with the traditions of man!

I never attributed the circus or the gibberish to the Holy Spirt. I wouldn't think of assigning anything to the Holy Spirit which the end results are confusion, mass hysteria, and dissension within the church. That's what some Pentecostals have done, however. The "creative theologians" are they that attempt to nullify the word of God by coming up with preposterous interpretation rather than give up some emotional experience that they can't describe.

This whole thing reminds me of the story of the Emperor's new clothes. Everything is plainly obvious, yet no one will acknowledge the simple truth.
Otherwise, I have committed the unpardonable sin, I have attributed to Satan the works of the Holy Spirit. I assure you, I'm not the slightest bit concerned about that possibility, but let's not mince words, using such niceties as "bordering on". There is no bordering, I either am, or I'm not.

Tongues are a sign for the unbelievers, useful for edification and translatable for a prophetic message.

I couldn't agree with this statement more. Had you taken the time to read the thread, you would know that. Observe how frequently the "tongues" manifested today fit ANY of these purposes, much less, ALL of them.

If you do not have the empowering of the holy Spirit this is available to you, if you swallow your false phariseeical pride and turn to the Lord. Let go of whatever is holding you back- cleave yourself fully to God.

Hmmmmm.....that's true. It is available to me, and if it weren't then I wouldn't be a Christian. That's some good advice, assuming it is I who have "false phariseeical pride" and haven't turned to the Lord. I sure hope that's not the case. I'll check with Him. Thanks for pointing it out.

Is the main difference between pentecostals and baptists that there is more of the Bible we baptists cannot except because of pre- conceived notions?

:o

There!!! You have done it. You have identified the very difference between us, although I fear you did it accidentally. You are so right when you say that we Baptists cannot "except" any of the Bible because of preconcieved notions. Should we except what it plainly says in order to accept the modern tongues movement, then we would be holding preconcieved notions ahead of the word of God.

 

[perpendicular_bisector]

There!!! You have done it. You have identified the very difference between us, although I fear you did it accidentally. You are so right when you say that we Baptists cannot "except" any of the Bible because of preconcieved notions. Should we except what it plainly says in order to accept the modern tongues movement, then we would be holding preconcieved notions ahead of the word of God.

Hi Friend

1 Corinthians 14:39 NIV
Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

The problem is your position is not scriptural

God Bless

 

[CHARLES H]

Hi Friend

1 Corinthians 14:39 NIV
Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

The problem is your position is not scriptural

God Bless

i agree paul talks about tongues like it's a minor gift. if fact he says that he would rather speak 5 words normally to someone who understands than10,000 to someone who doesn't understand. i cor.14 is a great chapter on this subject it kinda sets the rules.

 

[Iollain]

The Bible clearly states that we are not to use tongues 'in church' without an interpereter. It will scare unbelievers away.

 

[novcncy]

Hi Friend

1 Corinthians 14:39 NIV
Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

The problem is your position is not scriptural

God Bless

Who is forbidding? I think it would be great if every one could use Arabic and Korean and Chinese and any other language they don't know to spread the gospel. (Wait a minute......they can!) I'm simply pointing out that the modern tongues movement DOES NOT line up with scripture. If it follows the conditions layed out in 1 Corinthians 14, then I am all for it. I find ironic, to say the least, the reference to the specific chapter that most directly contradicts the doctrine of modern tongues.

What is not scriptural is to twist and insert definitions. Tongues meant and means an actual, spoken language. That is inherently clear from the context surrounding tongues in the NT. (Read Acts. It's never a "heavenly" language, it's an earthly one.) It is unfortunate that entire doctrines have been built around the word "unknown". It is unfortunate because it is an added word, and it was simply added for clarification. (i.e. if I've been taught Arabic for twenty years, it's not a miracle of the Holy Spirit when I witness to someone using Arabic. Now, if I don't speak a word of Arabic, hence it is unknown to me, but am miraculously and suddenly able to witness to an Egyptian in his own language....THAT is the miracle of tongues! But since I know what's going on, it's more miraculous to the Egyptian (the unbeliever...), because he KNOWS I don't speak his language, and that gives credibility to what I am saying, because I am miraculously empowered by God, there is no other explanation.) Yet a doctrine of inferences is founded upon this one word. It's unfortunate, to say the least, yet God knows what's going on.

Best wishes to you.

 

[lismore]

. Now, if I don't speak a word of Arabic, hence it is unknown to me, but am miraculously and suddenly able to witness to an Egyptian in his own language....THAT is the miracle of tongues!
Best wishes to you.

Hi there

I think thats what we are all talking about.

Dont know about the other movement you were talking about.

Glad we agree

Best wishes to you too

Lismore

 

[novcncy]

Hi there

I think thats what we are all talking about.

Dont know about the other movement you were talking about.

Glad we agree

Best wishes to you too

Lismore

Hi Mr. Lismore,

FYI, There are those that believe that gift of tongues is a "heavenly" language, unintelligible to any human unless divinely empowered by the Holy Spirit. This is the circus and the gibberish I referred to. There is no scripture that supports this, and this is the doctrine which hinges on the word "unknown".

The other issues that have been raised, are all coming from disagreements between philosophy and scripture. For example, there are those churches that believe that you are not baptized with the Spirit if you don't speak in tongues. They forget, or ignore, that tongues are not for a sign to believers, but for a sign to unbelievers. In those churches, it becomes a show of false piety, and conincidentally, exposes the true nature of the congregation. Either they are doing it for each other (and therefore, not of the Holy Spirit), or someone involved, who speaks that language, isn't a believer.

I know that all churches are not like this.

I believe that the Holy Spirit is the one who chooses when to bestow the gift of tongues, and that the believer is not the decision making agent. I also believe that due to the multiculturism and worldwide nature of communications media, that the gospel is capable of reaching nearly any ear in a language understandable to that person. As a result, we will not see the manifestation of tongues that was necessary for validation of the early church and for the spread of the gospel beyond Judea and Samaria. That isn't to say it will never happen, just that it will happen a lot less than in the New Testament, and not in a room where everyone speaks the same language.

 

[lismore]

Hi novcncy

How are you.

No need for Mr lismore, just plain Lismore will do

You raised many interesting points, to take one or two.

I believe that the Holy Spirit is the one who chooses when to bestow the gift of tongues, and that the believer is not the decision making agent.
.

I agree, a person can ask but God gives the gifts.

They forget, or ignore, that tongues are not for a sign to believers, but for a sign to unbelievers

.

Yes this is often true. But Paul also talks about translating tongues in the meeting for the edificiation of the body. He also talks about tongues for self edification, but in the context of the meeting for translation only. You are right though that it is never jibberish. God sends this for a reason. Have you encountered someone or a group that you thought were talking jibberish?

FYI, There are those that believe that gift of tongues is a "heavenly" language, unintelligible to any human unless divinely empowered by the Holy Spirit

.

This is probably what Paul means when he says tongues of angels. But then do all believers not have the Holy Spirit, so would it not be available to be understood?

If you could perhaps share a little of your experiences with this I could understand a little better where you're coming from.

God Bless

Lismore

 

[ChurchBoy]

I find this thread very interesting. My wife and I are members of a non-denominational Pentacostal church. I was saved in this church in 1998. We have been visiting a Korean Baptist church (my wife is Korean) for the past few weeks led by her former youth pastor who now pastors the english speaking part of this church. We are seriously considering changing churches for various reasons. My wife is much more "charismatic" than I am. When I was first saved I was very much into WoF, speaking in tongues, properity preaching, etc. because this is what I was taught. As I grew in my faith and read the Word of God, I began to see unbiblical principles in what I was being taught. I am much more "conservative" in my theology today. My wife grew up in a Baptist church and embraced a more "charismatic" theology later in life. She is into woF, speaking in tongues, etc. So it will be interesting to see what happens if we do join the Baptist church.

ChurchBoy

 

[CHARLES H]

I find this thread very interesting. My wife and I are members of a non-denominational Pentacostal church. I was saved in this church in 1998. We have been visiting a Korean Baptist church (my wife is Korean) for the past few weeks led by her former youth pastor who now pastors the english speaking part of this church. We are seriously considering changing churches for various reasons. My wife is much more "charismatic" than I am. When I was first saved I was very much into WoF, speaking in tongues, properity preaching, etc. because this is what I was taught. As I grew in my faith and read the Word of God, I began to see unbiblical principles in what I was being taught. I am much more "conservative" in my theology today. My wife grew up in a Baptist church and embraced a more "charismatic" theology later in life. She is into woF, speaking in tongues, etc. So it will be interesting to see what happens if we do join the Baptist church.

ChurchBoy

i think if your looking for a more conservative view you will like the church,although i'm not saying your other church is bad as long as they preach the gospel.

 

[novcncy]

Hi Lismore,

This is probably what Paul means when he says tongues of angels. But then do all believers not have the Holy Spirit, so would it not be available to be understood?

Yep, that's exactly so. Hence, my difficulties. I will digress

If you could perhaps share a little of your experiences with this I could understand a little better where you're coming from.

I have had limited experience with Pentecostals and charismatics(AOG).

I have been told that the baptism of the Spirit will manifest itself in tongues. I believe, that quite differently from that assertion, that the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs at the moment of salvation, and in fact, performs the regeneration of the previously dead spirit, endowing it with eternal life.

This belief regarding tongues as THE manifestation of the baptism of the Holy Spirit implies that anyone who has not spoken in tongues has not been baptised by the Spirit, and the end result of the inferences is that unless you have "recieved the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues" then you are not a genuine Christian. That's not even close to what the Bible teaches, yet many folks believe that in practice, if not in word.

There is, paranthetically, a difference between living by the Spirit, and walking by the Spirit.

The interaction with one of my high school friends, who was AOG and his father was the pastor, led me to understand his belief. Perhaps it is not indicative of all AOG, I don't really know. At any rate, as I previously posted, this church believes that tongues are a heavenly language unintelligable to anyone without the Holy Spirit empowering them. They teach that even as the individual is speaking in tongues, he has no idea what he is saying. (That's not quite decently and in order, IMHO) The entire doctrine seems to be hinged on the verse you quoted, with the reference to "the tongues of angels." No other case, or basis for this belief, is offered.

My significant problem with both of these patterns of belief is that they tend to focus on the emotionalism of being filled with the Spirit. We are emotional creatures, and I know that when God has worked powerfully in one's life, it is an emotional event, but I have seen people crave the emotion without the greater substance and fruit that the Bible teaches is the fruit of the Spirit.

So that's a quick summary. I tried to be brief, and I appreciate your patience and gentleness, just so you know.

 

[lismore]

I have been told that the baptism of the Spirit will manifest itself in tongues. I believe, that quite differently from that assertion, that the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs at the moment of salvation, and in fact, performs the regeneration of the previously dead spirit, endowing it with eternal life.

Hi there

I hope you are well.

I think we are both getting confused with terminology here. I'll try to do my best.

John 20:22 NIV
And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

Jesus gave the believers the Holy Spirit here, after their salvation, but then he went on to promise a further empowerment via the Holy Spirit: in Acts 1v8-' You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you'- this was fulfilled at pentecost.

Now its the second one that I would call the baptism in the Holy Spirit, I dont know what the first would be, maybe being filled with the spirit or some such thing. Perhaps you use different terminology, but the meaning would be the same. Someone can have the Holy Spirit but not have the Acts 2 experience (for want of a word).

This belief regarding tongues as THE manifestation of the baptism of the Holy Spirit implies that anyone who has not spoken in tongues has not been baptised by the Spirit, and the end result of the inferences is that unless you have "recieved the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues" then you are not a genuine Christian.

I would disagree with anyone who suggested this.

Theres no such thing as a genuine or un-genuine Christian, theres only Christians.

The interaction with one of my high school friends, who was AOG and his father was the pastor, led me to understand his belief. Perhaps it is not indicative of all AOG, I don't really know. At any rate, as I previously posted, this church believes that tongues are a heavenly language unintelligable to anyone without the Holy Spirit empowering them. They teach that even as the individual is speaking in tongues, he has no idea what he is saying. (That's not quite decently and in order, IMHO) The entire doctrine seems to be hinged on the verse you quoted, with the reference to "the tongues of angels." No other case, or basis for this belief, is offered.

Ya, I agree with you that speaking in tongues is not gobbledygook for showing off, I guess I have been lucky in not meeting such a person.

God always works for a reason.

Even if the person doesnt know what they're saying it should be either A) Understood by a foreign person in the meeting B) or be translatable by several people

My significant problem with both of these patterns of belief is that they tend to focus on the emotionalism of being filled with the Spirit. We are emotional creatures, and I know that when God has worked powerfully in one's life, it is an emotional event, but I have seen people crave the emotion without the greater substance and fruit that the Bible teaches is the fruit of the Spirit.

.

Yes you would be right that this would be far from ideal. I dont believe God operates just to give people 'fun experiences' so to speak. There is always a purpose.

So that's a quick summary. I tried to be brief, and I appreciate your patience and gentleness, just so you know.
.

Thanks for your posting its been really interesting #

God Bless

Lismore

 

[novcncy]

Jesus gave the believers the Holy Spirit here, after their salvation, but then he went on to promise a further empowerment via the Holy Spirit: in Acts 1v8-' You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you'- this was fulfilled at pentecost.

Now its the second one that I would call the baptism in the Holy Spirit, I dont know what the first would be, maybe being filled with the spirit or some such thing. Perhaps you use different terminology, but the meaning would be the same. Someone can have the Holy Spirit but not have the Acts 2 experience (for want of a word).

Hi Lismore,

I don't disagree that the promise of Acts 1:8 was fulfilled starting at Pentecost. But Acts 1:8 is much more than that. It's a command, and the promise associated with it is what empowers us to follow the command. The Holy Spirit still empowers us to be witnesses for Christ, but there are so many ways He can do this. The filling of the Holy Spirit is not limited to tongues. Look at Peter, even when He's not using tongues. The Bible says that Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost... btw, that's my comment regarding the differences between living by the Spirit, and walking by the Spirit. (Galatians 5:25) Being filled with the spirit (Ephesians 5:18) means relinquishing total control of our lives to the Holy Spirit and doing His bidding constantly. It's compared to being drunk, that's the degree of control the Spirit SHOULD have over our actions and thoughts. Just as a drunk person is controlled by alchohol, really in every aspect of their life until the sober up, that's the degree the Spirit should control our lives. Unfortunately, we can take the wheel back at any time, and then we are no longer walking in the Spirit. Being filled with the Spirit isn't the mystical experience of Acts 2, (although it COULD be ) Instead, it is a moment by moment submission to the Spirit of God. It's available to every Christian, and isn't an experience. It's a choice, it's obedience to God and submission to Him. Do you know that the tense of the Greek word translated "filled" in Ephesians 5:18 means continual action? It means, "be being filled".

Also, do you believe it possible for a believer to not know what they are saying should the Holy Spirit manifest Himself by the gift of tongues? (1 Corinthians 14:33)

There are many other issues with tongues, (God's word is complete, the church is already validated, etc.) but I don't think this is the appropriate forum for such a specific discussion. I think the OP has something to do with differences between Baptist and Pentecostals ???

 

[lismore]

Hi there

We agree on many issues, this is the only thing I can think of where baptists disagree with pentecostals............not that I'm a member of a pentecostal church but I have had a pentecostal experience.

Also, do you believe it possible for a believer to not know what they are saying should the Holy Spirit manifest Himself by the gift of tongues? (1 Corinthians 14:33)

I believe that what is sent for God via tongues etc is always a real message/ utterance that does say something real. The only time I have ever spoken in tongues in public it was translated (by everyone there who all seemed to understand the message) and then when it was translated it fitted with my spirit like a glove if you know what I mean in that It was something that had been told me before by the Lord but these other folks didnt know that. It was a warning to me for me which I heeded .

Thats why im sorry I went off on the deep end with my first post but when a person has experienced something like this, such as me, and then other believers say its not from the Lord then this hurts very deeply

I have also heard it said that some people intercede by praying in tongues when they dont know what to pray.

But I dont believe in it for showing off......

The filling of the Holy Spirit is not limited to tongues.

Thats true.

Every believer has the Holy Spirit.

But there seems to be a deeper level that I would refer to as the 'baptism in the Holy Spirit' . Its like the verses I posted last time: Jesus said 'be filled with the Holy Spirit'- theyb received the Holy Spirit and then later they received something deeper at pentecost. Elijah also had the Spirit of God come upon him and he ran faster than a chariot! But he must have had the Holy Spirit before this to prophecy?

You are right that you can witness without tongues: boldness to witness and wisdom are signs of the Holy Spirit. Someone can be an effective witness through the Holy SPirit without the Baptism in the Holy SPirit. Look at the men
in Acts 19, or Appollos, They were bold, they had received an impartation of God's Spirit but they had not yet received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

Someone can also have the fruits of the Spirit without the Baptism in the Holy SPirit. But if someone says they have the Baptism in the Holy SPirit and are not an effective witness or do not show the fruits of the SPirit then they are deluding themselves or others.

Anyway this is just my twopence worth. Thanks for discussing this with me its been very interesting

p.S sorry for any inexactitudes in terminology.

 

[novcncy]

p.S sorry for any inexactitudes in terminology.

LOL....absolutely the least of my concerns.

But I think our terminology is confused. From my experience:

All christians have the baptism of the spirit. This baptism is recieved when we are saved, and it is THIS baptism, not the water baptism, that actually makes us a Christian. 1 Corinthians 12:13 "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether [we be] Jews or Gentiles, whether [we be] bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." At this point, the Spirit indwells us, and we become literally the Temple of God, as He is residing in us.

Being FILLED with the Spirit is what we ought to strive for, and this is when the Spirit works miracles through us, whether it be the prophesying of the OT Prophets or even Anna, or even when he came upon Samson. If you do a word search on Blueletterbible.org for "came upon" it is impressive all the miracles the Holy Spirit performed in the OT. Acts puts it a little more clearly. Whenever the miracles at and surronding Pentecost are performed, the Bible says that disiples, or Peter, were "filled" with the Holy Ghost.

So I think we both agree there are two different, "levels" if you will, of relationships that the Christian can have with God through the Holy Spirit. The entry level is that of being regenerated and indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God. I call this being baptized by the Spirit, and I hope I showed you why I call it that. The second, and more mature level, is that of being completely controlled by the Holy Spirit, to do even things that are impossible, miraculous, only doable by the power of Almighty God. This is being "filled" with the Holy Spirit. This is the difference between living in the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit. Galatians 2:25

 

[lismore]

LOL....absolutely the least of my concerns.

But I think our terminology is confused. From my experience:


Being FILLED with the Spirit is what we ought to strive for, and this is when the Spirit works miracles through us, whether it be the prophesying of the OT Prophets or even Anna, or even when he came upon Samson. If you do a word search on Blueletterbible.org for "came upon" it is impressive all the miracles the Holy Spirit performed in the OT. Acts puts it a little more clearly. Whenever the miracles at and surronding Pentecost are performed, the Bible says that disiples, or Peter, were "filled" with the Holy Ghost.

So I think we both agree there are two different, "levels" if you will, of relationships that the Christian can have with God through the Holy Spirit. The entry level is that of being regenerated and indwelt by the Holy Spirit of God. I call this being baptized by the Spirit, and I hope I showed you why I call it that. The second, and more mature level, is that of being completely controlled by the Holy Spirit, to do even things that are impossible, miraculous, only doable by the power of Almighty God. This is being "filled" with the Holy Spirit. This is the difference between living in the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit. Galatians 2:25

Hi there

We are using differences in terminology, but I think we are saying the same thing yes. We have slightly different backgrounds and experiences, but I wouldnt disagree with most of what you have said

 

[lismore]

The Bible clearly states that we are not to use tongues 'in church' without an interpereter. It will scare unbelievers away.

Well

You are correct

if they dont speak the language of the tongues and it isnt interpreted, then they will probably just think everyone is gaga.

Tongues would be useful, as far as I understand,

for private prayer/ edification

for receiveing a message in the meeting- this must be translated

or communicating with someone who you wouldnt otherwise be able to reach under normal means.

God Bless

Lismore