Fellowship Without tongues there cannot be a shared equality

[Biblicist]

While reading through a book by the Pentecostal theologian Amos Yong, I came across a section where he discussed the inroads of the Pentecostal denominations within India. He made a very interesting remark;

“Certainly in the beginning (the 1920s through the 1940s) there were mutual cooperation and shared table fellowship between Dalit and Syrian Christians in the pentecostal churches. Because the reception of Spirit baptism as evidenced by tongues affirmed that God is no respecter of castes, Dalits were "brothers and sisters” instead of being addressed by their caste names (as they were in mainline congregations)”.

The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh (2005) Amos Yong p.56​

In todays church, no matter if it is in a Majority world or First world country, the ability of the Believer to be able to pray in the Spirit (tongues) makes us all equal - where we each share of the one Holy Spirit.

 

[Alithis]

Interesting...

as youve seen me ask often ..the question- (of anyone)have you been baptised in the Holy Ghost and if so..how do you know?..ie.testify .

im almost no longer amazed at the answers..or lack
of them.they are such vague answers which are basicly saying.." i think so because ..this or that". Which is no answer at all except NO.

as the holy Spirit is given as the surety of our faith .the down payment guarantee of the promise to come , there is no way we can give a vague reply to that question.

sent frm phone

 

[Biblicist]

Interesting...

as youve seen me ask often ..the question- (of anyone)have you been baptised in the Holy Ghost and if so..how do you know?..ie.testify .

im almost no longer amazed at the answers..or lack
of them.they are such vague answers which are basicly saying.." i think so because ..this or that". Which is no answer at all except NO.

as the holy Spirit is given as the surety of our faith .the down payment guarantee of the promise to come , there is no way we can give a vague reply to that question.

sent frm phone

Okay, that wasn't quite the response that I was expecting; maybe I should have made it clearer that this is a fellowship thread where I would hope to see some positive contributions regarding the Spirit driven ability where we can pray to the Father.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

A fellowship thread .. good times. Remember to pray so you can translate your tongue.

 

[hislegacy]

You are straight on accurate!

In prayer, in that place only accessed by the Holy Spirit we are one.

I love the times when praying in the Spirit it is as if I get lost in the things of God.

 

[Alithis]

I am being positive lol ...im positive that tongues is a wonderful gift and wholly agree with the op.

 

[Gideons300]

While reading through a book by the Pentecostal theologian Amos Yong, I came across a section where he discussed the inroads of the Pentecostal denominations within India. He made a very interesting remark;

“Certainly in the beginning (the 1920s through the 1940s) there were mutual cooperation and shared table fellowship between Dalit and Syrian Christians in the pentecostal churches. Because the reception of Spirit baptism as evidenced by tongues affirmed that God is no respecter of castes, Dalits were "brothers and sisters” instead of being addressed by their caste names (as they were in mainline congregations)”.

The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh (2005) Amos Yong p.56​

In todays church, no matter if it is in a Majority world or First world country, the ability of the Believer to be able to pray in the Spirit (tongues) makes us all equal - where we each share of the one Holy Spirit.

Bib, I must take exception to your post title. So you are saying that there cannot be shared equality unless a Christian speaks in tongues? What? You are saying that a person who is washed in the blood, made new by the Father of us all, can still not be equal to any other Christian, because he or she does not speak in tongues?

You know, I have been a charismatic for over forty years, yet if I am honest, I am more than disappointed with what we have accomplished as charismatics. When I was first filled with the Spirit and spoke in tongues in 1972, I was so sure this would change the entire church. I was wrong. We have become spiritual elitists, and the truth is our actions, our lives, our attitudes have not exactly turned the world upside down. We have birthed some of the strangest, most unbiblical doctrines ever, and rather than being more humble, more servant like, we rather like the attention, as if speaking in tongues makes us "special". Jesus said the greatest would take the low place, not look for the place at the head of the table, yet among well known charismatic ministers, pride and self honor are rampant. And we, the audience, love it so and build them up even more.

Leonard Ravenhill said this about us:

"Can you explain to me how 120 men filled with the Holy Spirit turned the entire known world upside down in one generation, and yet today, there can be 120 churches in one city claiming to have the same infilling as the early disciples did, and the town not even know or care that they are there?"

I think it is time we as charismatics did a lot of soul searching. We lift up tongues as if we are worshipping the experience, the evidence. Should we not be lifting up Jesus? Should our lives not resemble in some small ways the lives of the first 120? If a man filled with an evil spirit does evil things because that is his nature, should not a man truly filled with the Holy Spirit actually become holy? Should he not grow to hate the sin that dishonors God, and cry out to Him if he is still bound by satan in certain areas? What advantage is tongues if our lives are still unholy and our hearts have not one desire to truly BE holy and pure?

Praying in tongues is no measure of spirituality. Walking in the Spirit is. Now, what is the litmus test for if we are walking in the Spirit? We may not like the answer.

"Walk in the Spirit, and you will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh."

How are we doing? Not so good, methinks. Perhaps it is time to mix some tears with our tongues?

Blessings,

Gids

 

[Biblicist]

Bib, I must take exception to your post title. So you are saying that there cannot be shared equality unless a Christian speaks in tongues? What? You are saying that a person who is washed in the blood, made new by the Father of us all, can still not be equal to any other Christian, because he or she does not speak in tongues?

Gideon, that was a well thought out response and I agreed with the points that you raised even before I penned my thread; in fact I was waiting to see who would be prepared to point out the things that you've raised as the thrust of my thread can easily be mistaken for something else.

One thing that I will need to point out is that I am not speaking of empowerment for mission in that our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) is supposedly some form of panacea for Church growth, but merely that through the Holy Spirit we share a common heritage as One people in and before God where we are each not only joined to the Godhead but to one another through the Holy Spirit.

Now an objection could be raised that there are still millions of born again Christians who are Baptised in the Spirit but for whatever reason have not chosen or do not know that they can all pray in the Spirit just as we do. These Believers are certainly a part of the Body of Christ just as we are along with the Indian Dalits (slave caste) who only felt that they were equal with other Christians when they were able to speak in tongues. This enabled them to pray in the Spirit during times of corporate worship, within smaller Believers prayer meetings and during their own times of personal prayer; so when they were standing alongside the more influential and powerful members of their congregation, they were on equal footing where caste, wealth and status meant for very little.

I would imagine that for these Dalits and with other people groups who suffer from various forms of persecution that Peter Althouse’s following definition of tongues would ring true within their hearts:

“The Pentecost narrative of Acts 2 is an eschatological event, in which the coming of the resurrection Spirit renews the covenantal community in anticipation of the parousia, and tongues is a theophanic sign of divine self-disclosure like that of the burning bush in the calling of Moses and the giving of the Law. As an eschatological foretaste, speaking in tongues is a cry for liberation, a ‘cry of abandonment; which symbolizes the liberating force of the Spirit in breaking down racial, gender and class barriers. Glossolalia embodies an equalizing impulse in leveling all languages and human strivings, pointing to the inauguration of divine justice and mercy in its ''groaning" for the suffering of creation yearning for liberation”.​

During the congregational meeting it mattered little if an influential member of a church provided a message of praise in a tongue as even the poorest and most wretched church member could provide an interpretation and of course the reverse occurs as well.

In 1 Cor 12:18-27 Paul speaks of the Body of Christ where it is built up of individual members, where its unity comes not only through the Spirit but by its diversity in and through the Holy Spirit. From what I've observed over the years, when the various church leadership groups do not stand in the way, it seems to me that the Spirit of God is inclined to work more powerfully through the 'least of the members'. Of all the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) it seems that our ability to corporately pray in the Spirit is the one equaliser that breaks down all social barriers.

(1Co 12 NASB)17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be?
18 But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired.
19 If they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now there are many members, but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you"; or again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."
22 On the contrary, it is much truer that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary;
23 and those members of the body which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable,
24 whereas our more presentable members have no need of it. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked,
25 so that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it.​

 

[ToBeLoved]

Gideon, that was a well thought out response and I agreed with the points that you raised even before I penned my thread; in fact I was waiting to see who would be prepared to point out the things that you've raised as the thrust of my thread can easily be mistaken for something else.

One thing that I will need to point out is that I am not speaking of empowerment for mission in that our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) is supposedly some form of panacea for Church growth, but merely that through the Holy Spirit we share a common heritage as One people in and before God where we are each not only joined to the Godhead but to one another through the Holy Spirit.

Now an objection could be raised that there are still millions of born again Christians who are Baptised in the Spirit but for whatever reason have not chosen or do not know that they can all pray in the Spirit just as we do. These Believers are certainly a part of the Body of Christ just as we are along with the Indian Dalits (slave caste) who only felt that they were equal with other Christians when they were able to speak in tongues. This enabled them to pray in the Spirit during times of corporate worship, within smaller Believers prayer meetings and during their own times of personal prayer; so when they were standing alongside the more influential and powerful members of their congregation, they were on equal footing where caste, wealth and status meant for very little.

I would imagine that for these Dalits and with other people groups who suffer from various forms of persecution that Peter Althouse’s following definition of tongues would ring true within their hearts:

“The Pentecost narrative of Acts 2 is an eschatological event, in which the coming of the resurrection Spirit renews the covenantal community in anticipation of the parousia, and tongues is a theophanic sign of divine self-disclosure like that of the burning bush in the calling of Moses and the giving of the Law. As an eschatological foretaste, speaking in tongues is a cry for liberation, a ‘cry of abandonment; which symbolizes the liberating force of the Spirit in breaking down racial, gender and class barriers. Glossolalia embodies an equalizing impulse in leveling all languages and human strivings, pointing to the inauguration of divine justice and mercy in its ''groaning" for the suffering of creation yearning for liberation”.​

During the congregational meeting it mattered little if an influential member of a church provided a message of praise in a tongue as even the poorest and most wretched church member could provide an interpretation and of course the reverse occurs as well.

In 1 Cor 12:18-27 Paul speaks of the Body of Christ where it is built up of individual members, where its unity comes not only through the Spirit but by its diversity in and through the Holy Spirit. From what I've observed over the years, when the various church leadership groups do not stand in the way, it seems to me that the Spirit of God is inclined to work more powerfully through the 'least of the members'. Of all the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) it seems that our ability to corporately pray in the Spirit is the one equaliser that breaks down all social barriers.

(1Co 12 NASB)17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be?
18 But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired.
19 If they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now there are many members, but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you"; or again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."
22 On the contrary, it is much truer that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary;
23 and those members of the body which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable,
24 whereas our more presentable members have no need of it. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked,
25 so that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it.​

This is meant as no disrespect, Biblicist but I find this whole idea kind of crazy. It's like one group thinking the other group has the Holy Spirit because of tongues, but then isn't that a lack of faith on both parts? What about the ones who do not speak in tongues? They obviously have nothing to 'prove' in this cast system that they are anything.

Why would a person of faith, indwelt with the things of God and the Spirit care so much who thinks they are Christian vs. who doesn't. If speaking in tongues were the end all to be all, then why would not every Christian say they have this gift and attempt to work with it?

I do not see the Holy Spirit as an equalizer breaking down social barriers, either with or without tongues. We all know that people can pretend to speak in tongues and some just don't have that gift.

To call the Holy Spirit a equalizer in breaking down social barriers in society, is counter intuitive to the entire Bible. They (others) are to know we are His when they see a light in us, a love in us, that resembles that of our Savior. Others are suppose to be in 'awe' of us. What does that person have? I want it!

Tongues was never meant to be a testimony to another Christian.

I'm not really getting this book and don't see it as a very good testimony of Jesus Christ at all.

 

[Gideons300]

Gideon, that was a well thought out response and I agreed with the points that you raised even before I penned my thread; in fact I was waiting to see who would be prepared to point out the things that you've raised as the thrust of my thread can easily be mistaken for something else.

One thing that I will need to point out is that I am not speaking of empowerment for mission in that our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) is supposedly some form of panacea for Church growth, but merely that through the Holy Spirit we share a common heritage as One people in and before God where we are each not only joined to the Godhead but to one another through the Holy Spirit.

Now an objection could be raised that there are still millions of born again Christians who are Baptised in the Spirit but for whatever reason have not chosen or do not know that they can all pray in the Spirit just as we do. These Believers are certainly a part of the Body of Christ just as we are along with the Indian Dalits (slave caste) who only felt that they were equal with other Christians when they were able to speak in tongues. This enabled them to pray in the Spirit during times of corporate worship, within smaller Believers prayer meetings and during their own times of personal prayer; so when they were standing alongside the more influential and powerful members of their congregation, they were on equal footing where caste, wealth and status meant for very little.

I would imagine that for these Dalits and with other people groups who suffer from various forms of persecution that Peter Althouse’s following definition of tongues would ring true within their hearts:

“The Pentecost narrative of Acts 2 is an eschatological event, in which the coming of the resurrection Spirit renews the covenantal community in anticipation of the parousia, and tongues is a theophanic sign of divine self-disclosure like that of the burning bush in the calling of Moses and the giving of the Law. As an eschatological foretaste, speaking in tongues is a cry for liberation, a ‘cry of abandonment; which symbolizes the liberating force of the Spirit in breaking down racial, gender and class barriers. Glossolalia embodies an equalizing impulse in leveling all languages and human strivings, pointing to the inauguration of divine justice and mercy in its ''groaning" for the suffering of creation yearning for liberation”.​

During the congregational meeting it mattered little if an influential member of a church provided a message of praise in a tongue as even the poorest and most wretched church member could provide an interpretation and of course the reverse occurs as well.

In 1 Cor 12:18-27 Paul speaks of the Body of Christ where it is built up of individual members, where its unity comes not only through the Spirit but by its diversity in and through the Holy Spirit. From what I've observed over the years, when the various church leadership groups do not stand in the way, it seems to me that the Spirit of God is inclined to work more powerfully through the 'least of the members'. Of all the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) it seems that our ability to corporately pray in the Spirit is the one equaliser that breaks down all social barriers.

(1Co 12 NASB)17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be?
18 But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired.
19 If they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now there are many members, but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, "I have no need of you"; or again the head to the feet, "I have no need of you."
22 On the contrary, it is much truer that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary;
23 and those members of the body which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable,
24 whereas our more presentable members have no need of it. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked,
25 so that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it.​

Brother, your answer was full of grace.... as usual. I do need to apologize to you, however. I just saw your post was a fellowship post, and my answer was not in full agreement with your OP. I hope you will forgive me.

One thing I have noticed of many Charismatics of late is that there is an underlying prevalent attitude, certainly unspoken and I believe for the large part even unidentified, that because we are filled with the Spirit, our time of seeking the Lord is done. We have got IT. We have the best God has for us. To some, seeking is almost an admission of doubt, or of lack. It has caused us to become trapped by the very thing we were so glad to escape when we first discovered the blessing of the infilling- a religious spirit, content with the status quo. What we do not understand is being once filled and staying full are two totally different animals.

Satan has used this tactic to almost paralyze the charismatic church, and instead of our initial infilling being a springboard to levels of grace and holiness we have up till now not even known, we have rested content with having "it", and not pressed deeper into "it" having us. But thank God, He has assured me that this will pass, and those who truly are hungering and thirsting for righteousness WILL be filled with it, resulting in lives being lived as overcomers, not just as the forgiven overcome. Big changes are coming. GOOD changes.

Blessings to you, dear Bib. You are truly an asset here.

Gideon

 

[ToBeLoved]

Thanks Gids, I need to apologize too. Sorry I infringed on your Fellowship post.

 

[Biblicist]

This is meant as no disrespect, Biblicist but I find this whole idea kind of crazy. It's like one group thinking the other group has the Holy Spirit because of tongues, but then isn't that a lack of faith on both parts? What about the ones who do not speak in tongues? They obviously have nothing to 'prove' in this cast system that they are anything.

It seems that you’re introducing an objection that neither I or any other mainstream Pentecostal or charismatic is suggesting. No Pentecostal (other than a oneness Pentecostal) would dare suggest that anyone has to speak in tongues before they can prove that the Spirit of God resides within them which is what I pointed out in post #8, as per;

“Now an objection could be raised that there are still millions of born again Christians who are Baptised in the Spirit but for whatever reason have not chosen or do not know that they can all pray in the Spirit just as we do. These Believers are certainly a part of the Body of Christ just as we are along with the Indian Dalits (slave caste) who only felt that they were equal with other Christians when they were able to speak in tongues”.​

Why would a person of faith, indwelt with the things of God and the Spirit care so much who thinks they are Christian vs. who doesn't. If speaking in tongues were the end all to be all, then why would not every Christian say they have this gift and attempt to work with it?

Again, you are introducing a couple of objections that neither I nor the mainstream Pentecostal and charismatic movements are proposing. Have I ever suggested even beyond this thread that our ability to pray in the Spirit has anything to do with us being “Christians vs. those who are not”, of course not.

For that matter, who is suggesting that tongues is “the end all to be all”, I know that I certainly haven’t where I even mentioned this to Gideon;

“One thing that I will need to point out is that I am not speaking of empowerment for mission in that our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) is supposedly some form of panacea for Church growth, but merely that through the Holy Spirit we share a common heritage as One people in and before God where we are each not only joined to the Godhead but to one another through the Holy Spirit”.​

To explain this point further, as a marker of ones conversion, Craig C. Keener who I'm not all that sure would be deemed to be a charismatic in its full sense, stated the following in his book Acts: An Exegetical Commentary p.830;

“Thus I would argue that Luke does in fact use tongues as evidence of baptism in the Spirit and in one sense would argue this more strongly than most traditional Pentecostals: tongues is not an arbitrary evidence but is highlighted because it is intrinsically related to the point of what Luke means by baptism in the Spirit. In this case, reception history draws our attention to an important feature of Luke’s narrative pattern that we might easily have missed. At the same time, we need not go as far as traditional Pentecostals in believing that Luke expected tongues on every occasion when a person was initially filled with the Spirit, even given Luke’s emphasis. Tongues is a sign that attests the nature of the experience, not necessarily an exclusive, mandatory sign of every individual's reception of that experience”.​

I do not see the Holy Spirit as an equalizer breaking down social barriers, either with or without tongues. We all know that people can pretend to speak in tongues and some just don't have that gift.

As many people pretend to be Christians when they are obviously not, does this mean that we should ignore even the legitimate claim by someone that they are saved? If we look to the possible counterfeit in life then we would hardly dare leave our homes.

To call the Holy Spirit a equalizer in breaking down social barriers in society, is counter intuitive to the entire Bible. They (others) are to know we are His when they see a light in us, a love in us, that resembles that of our Savior. Others are suppose to be in 'awe' of us. What does that person have? I want it!

You’re brave, I would think that even the hard-core cessationist John MacArthur would have some strong words to say to you about this. Let me asure you, there would hardly be a single scholar, be they Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Reformed, Evangelical or Pentecostal who would not accept that our equaliser is indeed the Holy Spirit; this is one of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian message, if we loose this then all is lost.

Tongues was never meant to be a testimony to another Christian.

Apparently the Council of Jerusalem thought otherwise when they grilled Peter about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Romans. Once Peter replied with "they spoke in tongues" then the Council gave their full agreement that the Holy Spirit had been given to the Gentiles. And then there are other times where similar has occured but this should suffice for now.


. . . . . .
PS. I noticed that you did not realise that this was a fellowship post but as I had almost finished my reply before I left home earlier today I decided to post it - but all is well!

 

[Biblicist]

Brother, your answer was full of grace.... as usual. I do need to apologize to you, however. I just saw your post was a fellowship post, and my answer was not in full agreement with your OP. I hope you will forgive me.

That's certainly okay. Considering the topic, the fellowship tag was probably unexpected but I was expecting that someone might provide some comments similar to your own; as with ToBeLoved's post, you both gave me a superb opportunity to clear a few things up - where I at least hope that I have!

One thing I have noticed of many Charismatics of late is that there is an underlying prevalent attitude, certainly unspoken and I believe for the large part even unidentified, that because we are filled with the Spirit, our time of seeking the Lord is done. We have got IT. We have the best God has for us. To some, seeking is almost an admission of doubt, or of lack. It has caused us to become trapped by the very thing we were so glad to escape when we first discovered the blessing of the infilling- a religious spirit, content with the status quo. What we do not understand is being once filled and staying full are two totally different animals.

Satan has used this tactic to almost paralyze the charismatic church, and instead of our initial infilling being a springboard to levels of grace and holiness we have up till now not even known, we have rested content with having "it", and not pressed deeper into "it" having us. But thank God, He has assured me that this will pass, and those who truly are hungering and thirsting for righteousness WILL be filled with it, resulting in lives being lived as overcomers, not just as the forgiven overcome. Big changes are coming. GOOD changes.

Even though I want to avoid appearing to oversimplify the current state of the Pentecostal and charismatic movements here in the Minority world (i.e., Western countries), I do believe that a major reason for our often laclustre appearence where we seem to be "content with having it" or where we may even now be a bit unsure as to what "it" is, this could be due to the ever prevailing uncertainty where many have very shaky Theological foundations.

This does not mean that a good theological understanding necessarily means that someone is more spiritual than another, but this uncertainty can still unsettle the faith of some where they (we) tend to miss out on resting on the power of the Holy Spirit.

In more recent times, I've been spending a lot of time looking into the person and ministry of the Holy Spirit where I've moved way outside of my comfort zone by looking into the better material regarding the Holy Spirit.
Besides reading the standard contemporary commentaries that address the various passages regarding the person and ministry of the Holy Spirit, I have also invested into some superb specialist books that numerous Pentecostal and charismatic commentators have produced, such as with:

• Baptized in the Spirit: A Global Pentecostal Theology (2006) Frank D. Macchia
• Justified in the Spirit: Creation, Redemption, and the Triune God (2010) Frank D. Macchia
• Pneumatology (2002) Veli-Matti Karkkainen
• Beyond Pentecostalism (2010) Wolfgang Vondey
• God’s Empowering Presence (1996) Gordon D. Fee
• Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God (1994) Gordon D. Fee
  
• The Spirit Poured Out on All Flesh: Pentecostalism and the Possibility of Global Theology (2005) Amos Yong
• Holy Spirit and Salvation (2010) Veli-Matti Karkkainen
• The Holy Spirit in Biblical Teaching (2013) Anthony C. Thiselton

Leaving aside any talk of spirituality, what I have come to realise is that I have probably taken for granted the person of the Holy Spirit and with the vital role he performs in the life of the Christian. As I no longer use the term 'spiritual-gift' which even Paul does not utilise, I've realised for a long time that it is not the Spirit who gives us anything but it is He who outworks himself in and through us to others.

When it comes to the purpose of this thread, my more recent readings have reminded me that not only is the Holy Spirit the common denominator and equaliser for the Body of Christ, but as with the Dalit's in India and even with the black minority in the USA who were persecuted up until the 1960's, those black and Hispanic Christians who were able to pray in the Spirit (tongues), that this allowed them to recognise that they were equals with everyone else.

Now we certainly need to add in the other 8 Operations of the Spirit (1Cor 12:7-11) but our ability to allow the Holy Spirit to pray through us where the Eschatological Spirit is able to intercede with groanings to deep for words is certainly one aspect of his ministry that certainly break down barriers, where the professor of theology or medicine can provide a word in the Spirit where someone who is both emotionally and financially downtrodden can provide an interpretation.

 

[Alithis]

ok biblicist ole buddy .. obviously when you began this thread you had deeper thoughts to discuss (not debate ) then i realized .

i Just agreed with the basic premise that the gift of tongues is ..in a manner of speaking , an equalizer . for the lord baptized in his spirit any who believe and showed (specifically in the gift of tongues due to the more plainly obvious nature of the gifts manifestation ) that he is no respecter of persons . thus removing all division of carnal or spiritual based merit .. and its a great thing he has done, making of the many ... one .
..
- enjoying the read

add.. : and yes i use the term "gift" but only for want of a better term . the person of the holy Spirit outworking through us ... is a great start

 

[ToBeLoved]

It seems that you’re introducing an objection that neither I or any other mainstream Pentecostal or charismatic is suggesting. No Pentecostal (other than a oneness Pentecostal) would dare suggest that anyone has to speak in tongues before they can prove that the Spirit of God resides within them which is what I pointed out in post #8, as per;

“Now an objection could be raised that there are still millions of born again Christians who are Baptised in the Spirit but for whatever reason have not chosen or do not know that they can all pray in the Spirit just as we do. These Believers are certainly a part of the Body of Christ just as we are along with the Indian Dalits (slave caste) who only felt that they were equal with other Christians when they were able to speak in tongues”.​

Again, you are introducing a couple of objections that neither I nor the mainstream Pentecostal and charismatic movements are proposing. Have I ever suggested even beyond this thread that our ability to pray in the Spirit has anything to do with us being “Christians vs. those who are not”, of course not.

For that matter, who is suggesting that tongues is “the end all to be all”, I know that I certainly haven’t where I even mentioned this to Gideon;

“One thing that I will need to point out is that I am not speaking of empowerment for mission in that our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) is supposedly some form of panacea for Church growth, but merely that through the Holy Spirit we share a common heritage as One people in and before God where we are each not only joined to the Godhead but to one another through the Holy Spirit”.​

To explain this point further, as a marker of ones conversion, Craig C. Keener who I'm not all that sure would be deemed to be a charismatic in its full sense, stated the following in his book Acts: An Exegetical Commentary p.830;

“Thus I would argue that Luke does in fact use tongues as evidence of baptism in the Spirit and in one sense would argue this more strongly than most traditional Pentecostals: tongues is not an arbitrary evidence but is highlighted because it is intrinsically related to the point of what Luke means by baptism in the Spirit. In this case, reception history draws our attention to an important feature of Luke’s narrative pattern that we might easily have missed. At the same time, we need not go as far as traditional Pentecostals in believing that Luke expected tongues on every occasion when a person was initially filled with the Spirit, even given Luke’s emphasis. Tongues is a sign that attests the nature of the experience, not necessarily an exclusive, mandatory sign of every individual's reception of that experience”.​

As many people pretend to be Christians when they are obviously not, does this mean that we should ignore even the legitimate claim by someone that they are saved? If we look to the possible counterfeit in life then we would hardly dare leave our homes.


You’re brave, I would think that even the hard-core cessationist John MacArthur would have some strong words to say to you about this. Let me asure you, there would hardly be a single scholar, be they Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Reformed, Evangelical or Pentecostal who would not accept that our equaliser is indeed the Holy Spirit; this is one of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian message, if we loose this then all is lost.


Apparently the Council of Jerusalem thought otherwise when they grilled Peter about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Romans. Once Peter replied with "they spoke in tongues" then the Council gave their full agreement that the Holy Spirit had been given to the Gentiles. And then there are other times where similar has occured but this should suffice for now.


. . . . . .
PS. I noticed that you did not realise that this was a fellowship post but as I had almost finished my reply before I left home earlier today I decided to post it - but all is well!

All my comments were geared specifically at the quotes from the book in your OP and the reasons that I disagreed with it. Sorry that led to confusion.

 

[Biblicist]

ok biblicist ole buddy .. obviously when you began this thread you had deeper thoughts to discuss (not debate ) then i realized .

i Just agreed with the basic premise that the gift of tongues is ..in a manner of speaking , an equalizer . for the lord baptized in his spirit any who believe and showed (specifically in the gift of tongues due to the more plainly obvious nature of the gifts manifestation ) that he is no respecter of persons . thus removing all division of carnal or spiritual based merit .. and its a great thing he has done, making of the many ... one .

I wonder if I should have included a sub-title in the opening post along the lines of (Day 1 of the Christian walk) which would have allowed the thread to be seen more about our relationship with the Father (and each other) through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

Even though I chose the Fellowship tag, I had certainly hoped to see a bit of feedback and it would be unreasonable to expect that everyone would agree with all of the points that I have provided; so I am more than happy to see those who pray in the Spirit to add in a bit of comment if they disagree with any of my posts otherwise the Fellowship tag might be a bit unfair considering that it is an aspect of the Christian walk that many hold to rather passionately.

It would certainly be helpful if we can move away from the misnomer that those who speak in tongues are supposedly more spiritual than those who do not, though our ability to allow the Holy Spirit to pray directly to the Father on our behalf should essentially make us more effective in our walk, but even this still does not necessarily mean that we will each grow spiritually in some continuing exponential manner, though being more effective should I suppose be synonymous with spiritual maturity.

You may recall a few weeks back where Oscarr made an interesting remark whereby our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) should also be reason where our faith is increased through our knowledge that the Holy Spirit is praying on our behalf to the Father in accordance with the Father’s heart. This faith could possibly also be transferred to our initiation/conversion experience where our ability to pray in the Spirit on Day 1 of our new Walk should be more reason to value our reception of the Holy Spirit, which would be unlike my own quasi-cessationist conversion where the most popular question for myself and my peers was “how do I know that the Holy Spirit is within me”?

..
- enjoying the read

add.. : and yes i use the term "gift" but only for want of a better term . the person of the holy Spirit outworking through us ... is a great start

Having only recently stopped using the term “spiritual gifts”, as a Pentecostal of four decades where the term has been essentially burnt into my very being, I can well understand both how hard it is to avoid and that it is simply a very convenient term that most people seem to understand – or where they think that they understand what it means! Even many of our Bible translations will frequently place gift/s in italics to indicate that is not strictly in the Greek or that the various nine Greek words behind our English gifts may be a bit obscure, such as with:

Doron, doma, dorea, dorema, charisma, pneumatikos, hadrotes (2Cor 8:20), eulogia (2Cor 9:5), merismos (Heb 2:4).​

Then there’s Luke 21:5 which has ‘votive gifts’ where the Greek is ἀνάθημα anathema. The English word gift is also inserted into our English texts by the various translation committees for purely stylistic reasons where none of the previous eight words are in the Greek.

To be fair, virtually all commentators use the term but when you go to the passage of 1 Cor 12:1 with “Now about spiritual …” here’s where we find that these same commentators (top end theologians and exegetical scholars) all of sudden seem to struggle with Paul’s use of πνευματικῶν (pneumatikon) where there is definately a consensus that gifts is maybe not the best choice. Some go for ‘spiritual people where others might choose things of the Spirit or spiritual matters or even spirituals; even though spirituals is probably the more literal translation, as this has the connotation that the next three chapters are about the Operations of the Holy Spirit, which is incorrect, my preference would be with spiritual matters as this has a far broader application which includes the Father and the Son along with the Holy Spirit.

When it comes to 1Cor 12:7-11 with the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit which is translated from verse 7 φανέρωσις τοῦ πνεύματος which is “manifestations of the Spirit”, the socially awkward word ‘manifestations’ could be changed for the more positive ‘operations’. So we can replace ‘spiritual gifts’ for either manifestations of the Spirit or operations of the Spirit. Once we get away from the problematic term "spiritual-gifts", where it implies that the Holy Spirit is standing on the outside handing out various abilities; we can then recognise that they are not something 'given to us' but where the Holy Spirit is the one who is working through us to others.

Where the problem seems to come from is with how we view the two lists of 1Cor 12:7-11 and 28 where these two lists are further compared to Rom 12 and Eph 4. If we see them all as being so called “spiritual gifts” then things are probably not all that complicated; but a good scholar and a prudent commentator will recognize that some of things found in these lists are in fact fruits of the Spirit or that the role of the apostle, teacher, shepherd, evangelist are not strictly things that are given by the Spirit but where Christ gives (or leaves behind) these ‘people who are given to the Body’.

For those who are interested, the following spoiler contains the definitions of pneumatikos from within five lexicons.

Spoiler: 1Cor 12:1

All Lexical entries taken from the software program BibleWorks 9.

Friberg Lexicon:

22291 πνευματικός, ή, όν spiritual, pertaining to the spirit, opposite σαρκικός (fleshly, carnal) and σάρκινος (worldly, earthly); (1) as distinguishing the nonmaterial from the material part of man; (2) predominately as distinguishing what belongs to the supernatural world from what belongs to the natural world (1C 15.44, 46); substantivally ὁ π. the spiritual person, the Spirit-filled person, i.e. a person possessing and governed by the Spirit of God (1C 2.15); neuter plural τὰ πνευματικά spiritual things or matters (1C 9.11); spiritual gifts or enablements (1C 14.1); (3) as an adjective expressing the qualifying characteristic of impersonal things under the divine order spiritual (RO 7.14); (4) as an adjective denoting relationship to satanic forces; neuter plural τὰ πνευματικὰ τῆς πονηρίας as a substantive spiritual forces of evil, supernatural evil powers (EP 6.12)​

Louw-Nida Lexicon:

12.21 πνευματικός, ή, όν ; πνευματικῶς: (derivatives of πνεῦμα 'Spirit,' 12.18) pertaining to being derived from or being about the Spirit - 'spiritual, from the Spirit' (in reference to such matters as gifts, benefits, teachings, blessings, and religious songs). πνευματικός: περὶ δὲ τῶν πνευματικῶν, ἀδελφοί, οὐ θέλω ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν 'brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant about spiritual gifts' or '... gifts which come from the Spirit' 1 Cor 12.1; πνευματικοῖς πνευματικὰ συγκρίνοντες 'explaining spiritual truths to spiritual persons' 1 Cor 2.13. In 1 Cor 2.13 πνευματικά may perhaps be best rendered in some languages as 'truths revealed by the Spirit' or possibly 'truths about the Spirit.' Some persons would insist, however, that in 1 Cor 2.13 πνευματικά refers to teachings which are of particular benefit or relevance to people's spirits.

ὁ εὐλογήσας ἡμᾶς ἐν πάσῃ εὐλογίᾳ πνευματικῇ 'who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing' or '... with every blessing which comes from the Spirit' Eph 1.3; ἵνα τι μεταδῶ χάρισμα ὑμῖν πνευματικὸν εἰς τὸ στηριχθῆναι ὑμᾶς 'in order to share a spiritual blessing with you to make you strong' Ro 1.11. The occurrence of πνευματικός in Eph 1.3 and Ro 1.11 could be understood as referring to the human spirit, but the contexts would seem to to point more clearly to the involvement of the Spirit of God. See 26.10.

λαλοῦντες ἑαυτοῖς ἐν ψαλμοῖς καὶ ὕμνοις καὶ ᾠδαῖς πνευματικαῖς 'speak to one another in the words of psalms, hymns, and songs inspired by the Spirit' Eph 5.19 . It is also possible that in Eph 5.19 πνευματικαῖς means merely 'spiritual,' and as such pertains to what is 'sacred' or 'religious.' One can, therefore, translate ᾠδαῖς πνευματικαῖς as 'songs used in worship' or 'songs used in worship of God.' For a discussion of certain related problems involving the rendering of πνευματικός, see 26.10. πνευματικῶς: ὅτι πνευματικῶς ἀνακρίνεται 'because it is judged in terms of the Spirit' 1 Cor 2.14. The reference in 1 Cor 2.14 may be interpreted to mean that the unspiritual person cannot receive the gifts of the Spirit; neither can such a person understand them because they can only be judged or evaluated on the basis of their being derived from the Spirit of God. For another interpretation of πνευματικῶς in 1 Cor 2.14, see 26.10.​

LSJ Lexicon (Abridged):

34949 πνευματικός
πνευμα±τικός, ή, όν, of spirit, spiritual, N.T.​

VGNT Dictionary:

3451 πνευματικός [pg 522]

πνευματικός.
P Lond 4625 (iv/A.D.) (= I. p. 66) ἐν συστροφῇ πρὸς πνευματικ(ὴν) ἀπειλή@ν, “shortly, for spiritual threatening” (Ed.). See also Vett. Val. pp. 111 πνευματικῆς ἤτοι αἰσθητικῆς κινήσεως, 23120 περὶ καταδίκης καὶ πνευματικοῦ κινδύνου, and for πνευματώδης ib. 139 ψυχεινοί, πνευματώδεις.​

Gingrich Lexicon:

5219 πνευματικός

πνευματικός, ή, όν pertaining to the spirit, spiritual—1. caused by or filled with the (divine) Spirit, pertaining or corresponding to the (divine) Spirit—a. as adj. Ro 1:11; 7:14; 1 Cor 10:3f; 15:44; Eph 1:3; 5:19; Col 1:9; 3:16; 1 Pt 2:5. ὁ πνευματικὸς (ἄνθρωπος) in 1 Cor 2:15 means the spiritual person, whose powers of judgment are directed by the divine πνεῦμα. Cf. also 1 Cor 15:47 v.l.—b. subst. τὰ πνευματικά spiritual things or matters Ro 15:27; 1 Cor 2:13; 9:11; 15:46. Spiritual gifts 1 Cor 12:1; 14:1. ὁ πνευματικός the one who possesses the Spirit 1 Cor 3:1; 14:37; Gal 6:1.—2. pertaining to (evil) spirits subst. spirit-forces Eph 6:12.* [pneumatic] [pg 162]​

Edit: Grammar has been improved.

 

[ToBeLoved]

I wonder if I should have included a sub-title in the opening post along the lines of (Day 1 of the Christian walk) which would have allowed the thread to be seen more about our relationship with the Father (and each other) through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

Even though I chose the Fellowship tag, I had certainly hoped to see a bit of feedback and it would be unreasonable to expect that everyone would agree with all of the points that I have provided; so I am more than happy to see those who pray in the Spirit to add in a bit of comment if they disagree with any of my posts otherwise the Fellowship tag might be a bit unfair considering that it is an aspect of the Christian walk that many hold to rather passionately.

It would certainly be helpful if we can move away from the misnomer that those who speak in tongues are supposedly more spiritual than those who do not, though our ability to allow the Holy Spirit to pray directly to the Father on our behalf should essentially make us more effective in our walk, but even this still does not necessarily mean that we will each grow spiritually in some continuing exponential manner, though being more effective should I suppose be synonymous with spiritual maturity.

You may recall a few weeks back where Oscarr made an interesting remark whereby our ability to pray in the Spirit (tongues) should also be reason where our faith is increased through our knowledge that the Holy Spirit is praying on our behalf to the Father in accordance with the Father’s heart. This faith could possibly also be transferred to our initiation/conversion experience where our ability to pray in the Spirit on Day 1 of our new Walk should be more reason to value our reception of the Holy Spirit, which would be unlike my own quasi-cessationist conversion where the most popular question for myself and my peers was “how do I know that the Holy Spirit is within me”?



Having only recently stopped using the term “spiritual gifts”, as a Pentecostal of four decades where the term has been essentially burnt into my very being, I can well understand both how hard it is to avoid and that it is simply a very convenient term that most people seem to understand – or where they think that they understand what it means! Even many of our Bible translations will frequently place gift/s in italics to indicate that is not strictly in the Greek or that the various nine Greek words behind our English gifts may be a bit obscure, such as with:

Doron, doma, dorea, dorema, charisma, pneumatikos, hadrotes (2Cor 8:20), eulogia (2Cor 9:5), merismos (Heb 2:4).​

Then there’s Luke 21:5 which has ‘votive gifts’ where the Greek is ἀνάθημα anathema. The English word gift is also inserted into our English texts by the various translation committees for purely stylistic reasons where none of the previous eight words are in the Greek.

To be fair, virtually all commentators use the term but when you go to the passage of 1 Cor 12:1 with “Now about spiritual …” here’s where we find that these same commentators (top end theologians and exegetical scholars) all of sudden seem to struggle with Paul’s use of πνευματικῶν (pneumatikon) where there is definately a consensus that gifts is maybe not the best choice. Some go for ‘spiritual people where others might choose things of the Spirit or spiritual matters or even spirituals; even though spirituals is probably the more literal translation, as this has the connotation that the next three chapters are about the Operations of the Holy Spirit, which is incorrect, my preference would be with spiritual matters as this has a far broader application which includes the Father and the Son along with the Holy Spirit.

When it comes to 1Cor 12:7-11 with the 9 Manifestations of the Spirit which is translated from verse 7 φανέρωσις τοῦ πνεύματος which is “manifestations of the Spirit”, the socially awkward word ‘manifestations’ could be changed for the more positive ‘operations’. So we can replace ‘spiritual gifts’ for either manifestations of the Spirit or operations of the Spirit. Once we get away from the problematic term "spiritual-gifts", where it implies that the Holy Spirit is standing on the outside handing out various abilities; we can then recognise that they are not something 'given to us' but where the Holy Spirit is the one who is working through us to others.

Where the problem seems to come from is with how we view the two lists of 1Cor 12:7-11 and 28 where these two lists are further compared to Rom 12 and Eph 4. If we see them all as being so called “spiritual gifts” then things are probably not all that complicated; but a good scholar and a prudent commentator will recognize that some of things found in these lists are in fact fruits of the Spirit or that the role of the apostle, teacher, shepherd, evangelist are not strictly things that are given by the Spirit but where Christ gives (or leaves behind) these ‘people who are given to the Body’.

For those who are interested, the following spoiler contains the definitions of pneumatikos from within five lexicons.

Edit: Grammar has been improved.

I really like what you said. Very interesting.