Assembly of God and Tongues

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

They are wrong on both counts IMO.

Firstly all believers are baptised in the Spirit from the moment they beleive. It is not some secondary blessing or experience. It is the beleiver's initiation into the body of Christ, the universal church....

1 Cor 12:13 "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit."​

Secondly the phenomenon they experience is not the tongues of the New Testament. There is only one description of the gift in scripture - Acts 2:4-11, and it is clearly the miraculous ability to speak a foreign human language that you have not previously learned. Nowhere is the gift redefined as an extra-terrestrial language or anything else.

They point to 1 Cor 14:2 to say otherwise but all that verse says is no one in the Corinthian church understood the language spoken. If someone was speaking say Swahili in a predominantly Greek church then undoubtedly no one would understand. Only God, who knows all languages, would understand what was spoken.

I respectfully disagre .
But that's ok . I accepted Christ as a Nazarene. SO I fully understand where you are on the issue .
I once believed the gifts were not for today also.
In the book of Acts we find four occasions, for sure, and possibly five where the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred. No one occasion is identical to the other, although there were some commonalities.

(1) In Acts 2:1-4 the 120 believers experienced the Baptism and filling of the Holy Spirit simultaneously accompanied with tongues speaking at Pentecost. Also at Pentecost there were three thousand who received the gift of the Holy Spirit and salvation under the preaching of Peter, no mention is made of them speaking in tongues. The 120 were saved and received the baptism and filling of the Holy Spirit subsequent to salvation. Which is interesting

So I experienced God through the gifts of the spirit in a different way from how I understood & was brought up ( like I Met God in what seems like the first time through the baptism of the Holy Spirit)
and I understand what it's like to not have that experience yet .
Although I am strict to the foundations of church function moving in the gifts . I could no longer deny it .

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

I would also say with certainty they are wrong on the count that it is THE evidence. All the support I need for that statement is the way the Holy Spirit has worked in me, guiding me, in the years since I accepted Christ. He has directed me through situations where I have been thoroughly unequipped. I have felt clearly the Holy Spirit in times of worship, struggle, praise, need.

I have seen people accept Christ and the fruits of the spirit become evident quickly and perpetually. I myself am a different person and have seen both the fruits and gifts of the spirit. But no speaking in tongues by me or most of those I know who show signs of being truly indwelled by the Holy Spirit.

To believe that tongues is a requirement would run contrary to the reality I have seen. In fact, while I see much that I admire about Pentacostals, particularly as I think many churches underplay the importance of the Holy Spirit, I find the AoG position to be hard to understand.

Amen well I definitely don't think it should be something fake or forced , but I'm all for the Gifts !
Why fake it ... don't make something Holy a common thing .
I know some have done this and it hurts .
However that doesn't mean All are .
I AGREE

 

[swordsman1]

The 120 were saved and received the baptism and filling of the Holy Spirit subsequent to salvation. Which is interesting

The reason the 120 were baptized in the Spirit subsequent to believing was because up until that point the Spirit hadn't been given. However nowadays we are baptised in the Spirit at conversion as 1 Cor 12:13 says all believers are baptized in the Spirit so as to form one body. It is a baptism that unites believers into the body of Christ, not one that divides believers into the "haves" and the "have nots".

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

The reason the 120 were baptized in the Spirit subsequent to believing was because up until that point the Spirit hadn't been given. However nowadays we are baptised in the Spirit at conversion as 1 Cor 12:13 says all believers are baptized in the Spirit so as to form one body. It is a baptism that unites believers into the body of Christ, not one that divides believers into the "haves" and the "have nots".

So when Peter explains what is happening in the baptism with the Holy Spirit, he says in verses 16–17:
Let's look at more got a bit from an article I found that relates closest to my view .

This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: “And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.”

I think that being baptized with the Holy Spirit (the way Luke means it) is not the same as being born again or being united to Christ by the work of the Holy Spirit. In other words, I don’t think that what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 12:13 is the same as what is happening here in Acts.

Paul says, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free.” The context shows that he is referring to a work of the sovereign Spirit who unites all believers to Christ. This is virtually the same as the work of conversion. When you are born again and put your faith in Christ, the Spirit of God unites you to Christ so that you are part of his body and a fellow-heir with him of eternal life.

I used to just assume that Paul and Luke were talking about the same thing when they used the word “baptism” and connected it to the Holy Spirit — in other words, that the baptism by the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:13 and the baptism with the Holy Spirit in Acts 2were the same. Many very able scholars and teachers still make that connection. The view I am about to give you is not the only orthodox one, But it is one that I am increasingly persuaded is correct .

Receiving Extraordinary Power for Ministry
We are trying to answer the question: What is the heart or essence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit? I have said that I do NOT think the essence is new birth or conversion or being united to the body of Christ. What then is it? And why do I not think it is the same as what Paul speaks of in1 Corinthians 12:13?

I think the essence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit is when a person, who is already a believer, receives extraordinary spiritual power for Christ-exalting ministry. So let me try to show you the reasons why I think this is the heart of the matter.

Jesus’s Focus on Being Clothed with Power

First, let’s start back at Luke 24:49. Keep in mind as we turn there that inActs 1:4 Jesus said, “He charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father” — the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Now in Luke 24:49 Jesus says virtually the same thing. “And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high.” What is important here is to see that what Jesus focuses on, of all the things he might focus on in the baptism with the Spirit, is being clothed with power.

So that is the first pointer that the heart of this matter of baptism with the Holy Spirit is a matter of empowerment. He told them inLuke 24:47 that they are to preach to all the nations.

And the point of verse 49 is we cannot do that with greatest success unless we are clothed with power from God — that is, unless we are baptized with the Holy Spirit.


The second pointer that this is the essence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit is found in Acts 1:6–8.

Right after Jesus says that they would be baptized with the Spirit (v. 5), the disciples say, “‘Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’ He said to them, ‘It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you shall be my witnesses.’”

So here the baptism with the Spirit is seen as a “coming upon” that gives power for witness. So that is the second pointer to empowering as the heart of being baptized with the Spirit.

Notice that neither of these texts suggests that what is happening in the baptism of the Spirit is rebirth or conversion or union with Christ.

There are good reasons for believing that these disciples were already born again and converted and had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them (John 13:10; 15:3;Romans 8:9; John 3:5). But even more important than that is the fact that the issue of the new birth and conversion of the disciples are simply not in view at all in Acts 1 and 2.

Jesus doesn’t say, “Wait in Jerusalem until you are born again or converted or put into the body of Christ.”

He says, “Wait until you are clothed with power.” He doesn’t say, “You shall receive membership in the body of Christ when the Holy Spirit has come upon you.” He says, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you.”

And notice, in the third place, that when Peter explains what promise of the Father is being fulfilled in the baptism of the Spirit, he focuses on the promise in Joel 2.
There are promises that might have stressed the promise of the Spirit to bring new birth (like Ezekiel 11:19;36:26–27). But that is not what Peter or Luke focuses on. Peter says that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is a fulfillment of Joel 2; and what Joel 2promises explicitly is not new birth or conversion or membership in the body of Christ, but a new power to prophesy. “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams” (2:17).

 

[swordsman1]

So when Peter explains what is happening in the baptism with the Holy Spirit, he says in verses 16–17:
Let's look at more got a bit from an article I found that relates closest to my view .

This is what was spoken by the prophet Joel: “And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.”

I think that being baptized with the Holy Spirit (the way Luke means it) is not the same as being born again or being united to Christ by the work of the Holy Spirit. In other words, I don’t think that what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 12:13 is the same as what is happening here in Acts.

Paul says, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free.” The context shows that he is referring to a work of the sovereign Spirit who unites all believers to Christ. This is virtually the same as the work of conversion. When you are born again and put your faith in Christ, the Spirit of God unites you to Christ so that you are part of his body and a fellow-heir with him of eternal life.

I used to just assume that Paul and Luke were talking about the same thing when they used the word “baptism” and connected it to the Holy Spirit — in other words, that the baptism by the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:13 and the baptism with the Holy Spirit in Acts 2were the same. Many very able scholars and teachers still make that connection. The view I am about to give you is not the only orthodox one, But it is one that I am increasingly persuaded is correct .

Receiving Extraordinary Power for Ministry
We are trying to answer the question: What is the heart or essence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit? I have said that I do NOT think the essence is new birth or conversion or being united to the body of Christ. What then is it? And why do I not think it is the same as what Paul speaks of in1 Corinthians 12:13?

I think the essence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit is when a person, who is already a believer, receives extraordinary spiritual power for Christ-exalting ministry. So let me try to show you the reasons why I think this is the heart of the matter.

Jesus’s Focus on Being Clothed with Power

First, let’s start back at Luke 24:49. Keep in mind as we turn there that inActs 1:4 Jesus said, “He charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father” — the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Now in Luke 24:49 Jesus says virtually the same thing. “And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high.” What is important here is to see that what Jesus focuses on, of all the things he might focus on in the baptism with the Spirit, is being clothed with power.

So that is the first pointer that the heart of this matter of baptism with the Holy Spirit is a matter of empowerment. He told them inLuke 24:47 that they are to preach to all the nations.

And the point of verse 49 is we cannot do that with greatest success unless we are clothed with power from God — that is, unless we are baptized with the Holy Spirit.


The second pointer that this is the essence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit is found in Acts 1:6–8.

Right after Jesus says that they would be baptized with the Spirit (v. 5), the disciples say, “‘Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’ He said to them, ‘It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you shall be my witnesses.’”

So here the baptism with the Spirit is seen as a “coming upon” that gives power for witness. So that is the second pointer to empowering as the heart of being baptized with the Spirit.

Notice that neither of these texts suggests that what is happening in the baptism of the Spirit is rebirth or conversion or union with Christ.

There are good reasons for believing that these disciples were already born again and converted and had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them (John 13:10; 15:3;Romans 8:9; John 3:5). But even more important than that is the fact that the issue of the new birth and conversion of the disciples are simply not in view at all in Acts 1 and 2.

Jesus doesn’t say, “Wait in Jerusalem until you are born again or converted or put into the body of Christ.”

He says, “Wait until you are clothed with power.” He doesn’t say, “You shall receive membership in the body of Christ when the Holy Spirit has come upon you.” He says, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you.”

And notice, in the third place, that when Peter explains what promise of the Father is being fulfilled in the baptism of the Spirit, he focuses on the promise in Joel 2.
There are promises that might have stressed the promise of the Spirit to bring new birth (like Ezekiel 11:19;36:26–27). But that is not what Peter or Luke focuses on. Peter says that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is a fulfillment of Joel 2; and what Joel 2promises explicitly is not new birth or conversion or membership in the body of Christ, but a new power to prophesy. “I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams” (2:17).

There are a number of flaws in the article you quote. The author seems to think there are 2 baptisms of the Spirit, the one described in 1 Cor 12:13 that unites a believer into the body of Christ and a separate subsequent type, as at Pentecost, that produces empowerment and boldness. He is mistaken:

First, let’s start back at Luke 24:49. Keep in mind as we turn there that inActs 1:4 Jesus said, “He charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father” — the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Now in Luke 24:49 Jesus says virtually the same thing. “And behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you; but stay in the city, until you are clothed with power from on high.” What is important here is to see that what Jesus focuses on, of all the things he might focus on in the baptism with the Spirit, is being clothed with power.

So that is the first pointer that the heart of this matter of baptism with the Holy Spirit is a matter of empowerment. He told them inLuke 24:47 that they are to preach to all the nations.

It was not the baptism of the Spirit that empowered the disciples, it was the "filling" of the Spirit. Not only were they baptised with the Spirit at Pentecost, they were also filled with the Spirit (Acts 2:4 "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit"). It is this filling of the Spirit, not baptism, that produces boldness. Look at the following examples:

Acts 4:7-8 "And when they had set them in the midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?” 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders...."

Acts 4:31 "and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness."

Acts 7:54-55 "Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. "

Acts 13:9-10 "But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him 10 and said, “You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy...."

Acts 13:52-14:1 "And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit. Now at Iconium they entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed."​

There are good reasons for believing that these disciples were already born again and converted and had the Holy Spirit dwelling in them (John 13:10; 15:3;Romans 8:9; John 3:5).

No, the disciples had not received the Holy Spirit prior to Pentecost:

John 7:39 "Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

John 16:7 "Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you."​

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

There are a number of flaws in the article you quote. The author seems to think there are 2 baptisms of the Spirit, the one described in 1 Cor 12:13 that unites a believer into the body of Christ and a separate subsequent type, as at Pentecost, that produces empowerment and boldness. He is mistaken:



It was not the baptism of the Spirit that empowered the disciples, it was the "filling" of the Spirit. Not only were they baptised with the Spirit at Pentecost, they were also filled with the Spirit (Acts 2:4 "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit"). It is this filling of the Spirit, not baptism, that produces boldness. Look at the following examples:

Acts 4:7-8 "And when they had set them in the midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?” 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders...."

Acts 4:31 "and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness."

Acts 7:54-55 "Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. "

Acts 13:9-10 "But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him 10 and said, “You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy...."

Acts 13:52-14:1 "And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit. Now at Iconium they entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed."​

No, the disciples had not received the Holy Spirit prior to Pentecost:

John 7:39 "Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

John 16:7 "Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you."​

A few verses to consider .
I'm not saying that I fully agree with every view from the article . But I do believe in the filling of the Holy Spirit as a baptism,
The scriptures show that the Holy Spirit was given to people from the beginning of time and before the day of Pentecost. Here are few references:

1-The Spirit of God worked on the hearts of people at Noah’s time (Genesis 6:3)

2-Joseph had the “Spirit of God“ in him (Genesis 41:38).

3-The seventy elders received the Holy Spirit and “when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied” (Numbers 11:25).

4- King Saul had “the Spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied” (1 Samuel 10:10)

5-The Holy Spirit came upon Mary the mother of Jesus (Matthew 1:18).

6- John the Baptist was “filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his others’ womb” (Luke 1:15).

7-Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit “And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary…Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost” (Luke 1:41).

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

There are a number of flaws in the article you quote. The author seems to think there are 2 baptisms of the Spirit, the one described in 1 Cor 12:13 that unites a believer into the body of Christ and a separate subsequent type, as at Pentecost, that produces empowerment and boldness. He is mistaken:



It was not the baptism of the Spirit that empowered the disciples, it was the "filling" of the Spirit. Not only were they baptised with the Spirit at Pentecost, they were also filled with the Spirit (Acts 2:4 "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit"). It is this filling of the Spirit, not baptism, that produces boldness. Look at the following examples:

Acts 4:7-8 "And when they had set them in the midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?” 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders...."

Acts 4:31 "and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness."

Acts 7:54-55 "Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55 But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. "

Acts 13:9-10 "But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him 10 and said, “You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy...."

Acts 13:52-14:1 "And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit. Now at Iconium they entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed."​

No, the disciples had not received the Holy Spirit prior to Pentecost:

John 7:39 "Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified."

John 16:7 "Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you."​

A few more to ponder
God Bless

John 7:39

Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

John 16:7

Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.

John 20:22

And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit."
BEFORE Pentecost ***
Acts 1:5

"...for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."

The Holy Spirit worked through some believers prior to Jesus' life on Earth, as some leaders and prophets were filled with the Holy Spirit (e.g. Jdg 3:10, 1 Sam 16:13, Mk 12:36, 1 Pet 1:10-11, 2 Pet 1:21). In Jesus' time, John the Baptist was "filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb" (Lk 1:15), and both his parents prophesied through the Spirit (Lk 1:41, 1:67). However, these were specific individuals; the Spirit had not yet been given to all believers.

There are some distinct differences between the disciples receiving the Spirit in John 20:22 and their receiving the Spirit at Pentecost:

• In John 20, the Spirit was given only to the disciples, versus being available to all believers as a fulfillment of the prophecy inJoel 2:28-29 (see Acts 2:1-21, 38-39).
• The giving of the Spirit at Pentecost is referred to as a baptism of the Holy Spirit (Mk 1:8, Acts 1:5) and was distinctly different than Jesus' breathing on the disciples in John 20. "And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:2-4).
• It's possible the disciples received the Spirit temporarily in John 20, versus permanently at Pentecost (Jn 14:16)

As for Jesus' declaration that the Spirit would not come to the disciples if Jesus didn't leave, this may have referred to Jesus' death and resurrection being a prerequisite for the prophecy of Joel 2 to be fulfilled (as mentioned in John 7:39, "...as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified"). (Incidentally, the giving of the Spirit in John 20:22 takes place after Jesus' resurrection.) Clearly Jesus didn't mean that his presence on Earth was incompatible with the Holy Spirit indwelling others, as John the Baptist was also filled with the Spirit as mentioned above.

 

[swordsman1]

I'm not saying that I fully agree with every view from the article . But I do believe in the filling of the Holy Spirit as a baptism,

Being baptised in the Spirit is not the same as being filled with the Spirit. We are only Spirit baptized once into the body of Christ, upon conversion. We are commanded to be filled with the Spirit repeatedly (Eph 5:18), otherwise we lapse into being controlled by the old nature and sin.

Baptism of the Spirit is only mentioned 7 times in the bible. Four of those are quoting John the Baptist when he said "He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit" (Matt 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16, John 1:33). Two of those quote Jesus when he was pointing to Pentecost and the birth of the church "But you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” (Acts 1:5, Acts 11:16). The final one is 1 Cor 12:13 which says all believers are baptized in the Spirit so as to become part of the body of Christ.

John 20:22
And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit."
BEFORE Pentecost ***

There are some distinct differences between the disciples receiving the Spirit in John 20:22 and their receiving the Spirit at Pentecost:

• In John 20, the Spirit was given only to the disciples, versus being available to all believers as a fulfillment of the prophecy inJoel 2:28-29 (see Acts 2:1-21, 38-39).
• The giving of the Spirit at Pentecost is referred to as a baptism of the Holy Spirit (Mk 1:8, Acts 1:5) and was distinctly different than Jesus' breathing on the disciples in John 20. "And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Acts 2:2-4).
• It's possible the disciples received the Spirit temporarily in John 20, versus permanently at Pentecost (Jn 14:16)

As for Jesus' declaration that the Spirit would not come to the disciples if Jesus didn't leave, this may have referred to Jesus' death and resurrection being a prerequisite for the prophecy of Joel 2 to be fulfilled (as mentioned in John 7:39, "...as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified"). (Incidentally, the giving of the Spirit in John 20:22 takes place after Jesus' resurrection.) Clearly Jesus didn't mean that his presence on Earth was incompatible with the Holy Spirit indwelling others, as John the Baptist was also filled with the Spirit as mentioned above.

Although Jesus blew on the disciples, it doesn't say they actually received the Holy Spirit at that point. In John 7:39 and John 16:7 Jesus specifically says the disciples would not receive the Holy Spirit while He was with them, but that He would send the Spirit only after he had departed. If they received the Spirit when Jesus blew on them, then Jesus was lying. No, in John 20 Jesus was simply giving them a visual illustration and a future command in preparation for Pentecost.

So Pentecost was not the disciples receiving a second measure of the Holy Spirit. It was the birth of the church, the body of Christ. Once the Spirit was given and the church was formed the disciples were baptised in the Spirit so as to form one body, and now all believers receive the same baptism at conversion. "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body" 1 Cor 12:13.

 

[Biblicist]

In my opinion, no, they are not right.

Conveniently, this video was just uploaded by a great Seminary on the subject and it addresses it adequately.

P.S. It's a short video, don't worry

As much as I highly value Biblical scholastic input on any subject, having gone through this video, about the only thing that this chappie managed to get correct was with how the 120 (but not just the Twelve) spoke in known human languages. As for his thoughts, if they were put on paper and submitted for a grade then it should probably get an 'F'.

Edit: typo

 

[Biblicist]

1 Corinthians 12:27-30

Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?​

With this passage Paul is merely pointing out that within the Congregational meeting that not all will function within prophecy, powers, healings or tongues; afterall, Paul has stipulated (through the Holy Spirit), that only three messages of praise to the Father in tongues are permitted and that only three messages or words of prophecy to the congregation are permitted per meeting. We can add to this that not everyone will choose to speak words of praise to the Father in tongues where they may choose to prophesy instead.

As we are all told to pray in the Spirit then it is logical to realise that we should all be able to pray in the Spirit where we can communicate through the Holy Spirit (or Him through us) to the Father, either in words of praise or supplication.​

Ephesians 4:11-13

And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ​

It is pretty clear that everyone did not receive the same gifts, and to claim that every believer must speak in tongues does violence to the meaning of the above passages.

This passage is speaking only about those who have been set in place within the church to help train others, where they can be within homegroups, children, youth or adult ministries; Paul is not saying that because someon has a pastoral ministry or who may be a teacher that they cannot prophesy or speak in tongues.

 

[Biblicist]

Up until maybe five years back I used to believe that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit was separate to our initial conversion, where the BHS was to be evidenced with someone speaking in tongues.

This is the position of the AoG and for those of us who came into Pentecost sometime after we were Born Again and where we spoke in tongues for the first time, this can make it very easy to view the Baptism in the Holy Spirit as being an experience that is intended to be subsequent to our salvation. For many of us, that moment of time when we were first empowered to praise God in the Spirit is usually a very impactful moment and for me it was even more substantial than my initial salvific experience.

The experience that I and many millions of others have experienced particularly over the past 50 years with the onset of the Charismatic Renewal in the 60’s and 70’s, is not intended to be the norm, but where we should still all be taught that we can begin to pray in the Spirit (tongues) at the very moment of our salvation, where tongues should not be deemed to be just an evidence of our being Baptised in the Holy Spirit, but that this Baptism signifies that we have received the Holy Spirit upon our salvific experience.

There are two positions regarding the BHS, where the first is the Classic Pentecostal view that the BHS is one of subsequence (where the Holy Spirit is received hours, days or years later after our Salvation). The second is the non-classic understanding where the BHS is intended to be Salvific in nature. Where many Pentecostals such as myself changed our minds has been with the realisation that Paul does not even provide a hint that the BHS is intended to be subsequent to our initial salvation, where the only connection that the supporters of subsequence (i.e., the AoG) can make is with Luke’s writings, and even here they are misreading Luke’s historical account. This is why the AoG position, which is known as the Classic Pentecostal position is recognised by its supporters as being based on Lukan and not Pauline theology. Unfortunately, the Classic Pentecostal is misreading Luke’s historical record where they regularly add too much into what Luke is saying.

As for this Pentecostal, I am of the strong opinion that any Pentecostal meeting that holds an “Altar Call” without informing the new initiate that they can immediately expect to speak in tongues is nothing less than shameful. This does not mean that everyone needs to speak in tongues before they can say that they are Saved, but we must still inform the new initiate that the ability to pray in the Spirit is something that they should all be expecting.

 

[All4Christ]

Up until maybe five years back I used to believe that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit was separate to our initial conversion, where the BHS was to be evidenced with someone speaking in tongues.

This is the position of the AoG and for those of us who came into Pentecost sometime after we were Born Again and where we spoke in tongues for the first time, this can make it very easy to view the Baptism in the Holy Spirit as being an experience that is intended to be subsequent to our salvation. For many of us, that moment of time when we were first empowered to praise God in the Spirit is usually a very impactful moment and for me it was even more substantial than my initial salvific experience.

The experience that I and many millions of others have experienced particularly over the past 50 years with the onset of the Charismatic Renewal in the 60’s and 70’s, is not intended to be the norm, but where we should still all be taught that we can begin to pray in the Spirit (tongues) at the very moment of our salvation, where tongues should not be deemed to be just an evidence of our being Baptised in the Holy Spirit, but that this Baptism signifies that we have received the Holy Spirit upon our salvific experience.

There are two positions regarding the BHS, where the first is the Classic Pentecostal view that the BHS is one of subsequence (where the Holy Spirit is received hours, days or years later after our Salvation). The second is the non-classic understanding where the BHS is intended to be Salvific in nature. Where many Pentecostals such as myself changed our minds has been with the realisation that Paul does not even provide a hint that the BHS is intended to be subsequent to our initial salvation, where the only connection that the supporters of subsequence (i.e., the AoG) can make is with Luke’s writings, and even here they are misreading Luke’s historical account. This is why the AoG position, which is known as the Classic Pentecostal position is recognised by its supporters as being based on Lukan and not Pauline theology. Unfortunately, the Classic Pentecostal is misreading Luke’s historical record where they regularly add too much into what Luke is saying.

As for this Pentecostal, I am of the strong opinion that any Pentecostal meeting that holds an “Altar Call” without informing the new initiate that they can immediately expect to speak in tongues is nothing less than shameful. This does not mean that everyone needs to speak in tongues before they can say that they are Saved, but we must still inform the new initiate that the ability to pray in the Spirit is something that they should all be expecting.

Not all are given the gift of tongues. There is a diversity of gifts. It is very clear in scripture:

1 Corinthians 12

Spiritual Gifts: Unity in Diversity

12 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant: 2 You know that[a] you were Gentiles, carried away to these dumb idols, however you were led. 3 Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.

Unity and Diversity in One Body

12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into[c] one Spirit. 14 For in fact the body is not one member but many.

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best[d] gifts [Love is the best gift as shown in 1 Corinthians 13]. And yet I show you a more excellent way. - Text inside brackets is mine

I'll highlight a key part of the passage:

"4 There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 There are differences of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are diversities of activities, but it is the same God who works all in all. 7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healings by the same Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills."

 

[FaithfulPilgrim]

I just had a debate with my dad on this subject last week.

He told me about his experience at a Pentecostal church he was invited to and said one man who was speaking in tongues sounded like a "turkey choking on peanutbutter." He couldn't take the Pentecostal movement seriously.

I think these "ecstatic utterances" can and do occur, but only when God wills it, Just like all spiritual gifts. However, there has to be an interpreter or else you should not be speaking in an unknown tongue.

I don't reject tongues, I just think Pentecostals take it too far.

 

[shioks]

I believe 1 John 4:1 says it all. Not all so called "tongues" are from God.

 

[swordsman1]

With this passage Paul is merely pointing out that within the Congregational meeting that not all will function within prophecy, powers, healings or tongues; afterall, Paul has stipulated (through the Holy Spirit), that only three messages of praise to the Father in tongues are permitted and that only three messages or words of prophecy to the congregation are permitted per meeting. We can add to this that not everyone will choose to speak words of praise to the Father in tongues where they may choose to prophesy instead.

As we are all told to pray in the Spirit then it is logical to realise that we should all be able to pray in the Spirit where we can communicate through the Holy Spirit (or Him through us) to the Father, either in words of praise or supplication.

Paul is not talking about congregations in 1 Cor 12:27-30, he is talking about roles given to believers within the body of Christ (the universal church). The passage begins "Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it...". (Congregations are not referred to until chapter 14). Paul then asks a series of individual rhetorical questions, the answer to each of which is NO.

"Are all apostles?" No.
"Are all prophets?" No.
"Are all teachers?" No.
"Do all work miracles?" No.
"Do all possess gifts of healing?" No.
"Do all speak with tongues?" No.
"Do all interpret?" No.

Not all believers have the ability to speak in tongues (not that today's tongues is the same as the tongues of the NT), in the same way not all believers have the ability to perform miracles or are apostles or are prophets. Paul continually reinforces the point that we each have different gifts, particularly with his comparisons of the body of Christ to a human body where we are not all "eyes".

Rom 12:4-6 "For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith;"

1 Corinthians 12:17-20 "If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body."​

1 Cor 12:8-10 "For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues."​

 

[PeterDona]

 

[huk945]

Assembly of God believes that speaking in tongues is the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Are they right?

NO

 

[Razare]

Assembly of God believes that speaking in tongues is the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Are they right?

Yes, No, and Maybe.

To understand baptisms is like one of the deepest topics in the Bible.

I believe the apostles and early church understood it to the point that they kind of took it for granted that people understand everything in the church. Then because the knowledge was not recorded for us plainly like a basic user manual in how Western minds think, we lost the knowledge.

The knowledge is all in scripture, but piecing it together is one of the most advanced studies in the Bible. According to Hebrews 6:1 knowledge of the multiple baptisms is supposed to be common knowledge for all believers, in order to be mature Christians. It is not common knowledge today. I am still learning about it and I know more than anyone I have ever heard speak on the subject.

This means the church failed. It failed to maintain a sound teaching the early church knew and practiced concerning baptisms, and it has failed to arrive at the "basic knowledge" God has given me on baptisms. And even this basic knowledge I have which everyone should know, I am still learning and trying to get more from God on it.

-------------------------------------- To answer the question:

Point A - Most people who teach about the Holy Spirit fail to comprehend multiple instances of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament church. The first instance of the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples was NOT at Pentecost.

John 20:22 is when the disciples received the Holy Spirit. This was before the day of Pentecost written about in Acts.

But John 20:22 was not the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It was when the disciples received new covenant salvation, and DID NOT speak in tongues.

This means you can be a born-again believer in Christ with the Holy Ghost in you, and not speak in tongues. But this person is not baptized in the Holy Ghost.

Point B - Even after you get baptized in the Holy Ghost, there are other instances afterward, where you receive fillings of the Holy Spirit again. Acts 13:52 It's an important side-note, but not all that pertinent to this question. It is important however, in revealing that this issue of the Holy Ghost is more complex than any teaching is going to cover. It's about relationship with God, not a teaching.

Point C - Will the Holy Spirit force a person to speak? No. Anyone who has been baptized in the Holy Ghost realizes that tongues is something we permit and have to permit the spirit to speak through our body.

In this way, a person can receive tongues without ever speaking them. I met a person who had received tongues but not spoke them. He was afraid. He was asking me, "Why is it whenever I think about Jesus strange words come to my mouth?" He had been baptized in the Holy Ghost, with speaking in tongues as a sign, but because he was scared he would not speak them. Just because he did not speak them, does not mean he did not receive the Holy Spirit.

We can't make a simple doctrine that "If you can't speak, you can't have tongues." No. Even people with injuries in their mouth, if their mouth were removed for example, could receive tongues. How you ask? Spiritually. The spirit of man has tongues, not our mouths. It is a gift of the spirit, not a gift of our mouth, so anyone can receive tongues and fail to speak them for whatever reason, whether fear or bodily injury.

Now, if we don't or can't speak tongues from our spirit, we might question whether they are effective. Maybe they are not effective if they are not spoken, but the evidence of the gift is still there should the mouth fail to speak.

Point D - When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. - Acts 19:6

You can also prophesy instead of speaking in tongues. That said, if you are prophesying, you will also receive the gift of tongues, and maybe later you will speak in tongues.

Prayer tongues is available to all believers. The special gift of tongues, as a native man language used for signs and wonders, or the special gift of tongues for believers to supernaturally interpret are not available cart blanch, but only available as the spirit wills. This brings us to the next point.

Point E - Tongues has 3 modes of operation.

Type 1 - As a sign and wonder to unbelievers, where you speak natural human languages, where a native speaker of that language understands his own language not by divine revelation, but by his natural understanding of his own language. See Acts 2.

Type 2 - As prophesy to the church by an interpreter (usually supernatural interpretation), here a spirit-filled believer speaks in tongues, not to unbelievers as a sign, but to other Christians, and a Christian among them holds the interpretation given not by natural understanding but by divine understanding in their own spirit. 1 Corinthians 14:27

Prophecy is greater than tongues, unless someone interpret, then tongues becomes prophecy. 1 Corinthians 14:5

Type 3 - As prayer language to God, where no man knows what is said.

For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit. - 1 Corinthians 14:2

When someone gets baptized in the Holy Ghost, and they speak in tongues, it is usually 3, but if the spirit wills they manifest the gift of tongues for signs or edification, then type 1 or type 2 may happen. Type 3 is available to all believers, type 1 and type 2 are not available "at will" but can be sought after with God.

-------------------------------

So no, they are wrong that you "have to speak in tongues to be baptized in the Holy Ghost". If you are baptized in the Holy Ghost, you have tongues, but you certainly are not mandated to move your lips against your will. Rarely, very rarely, the spirit in us will be so strong if we get over into the spirit, that we will speak in tongues by the spirit. But you have to decide to get over into the spirit, it's not automatic that we become spiritual Christians, it's a choice.

And then I am also not sure if Assemblies of God know or understand that people without the baptism of the Holy Ghost have the Holy Ghost in John 20:22. Apostolic types for example are generally ignorant of this from what I have heard. They just understand the Holy Ghost baptism with tongues, and if you're missing it, they think the person doesn't have the Holy Ghost.

PS - And no, I didn't even cover the basics of what God has shown me on baptism. This is like pre-basic knowledge that I shared concerning Holy Ghost baptism only.

 

[Deadworm]

I grew up in the Canadian equivalent of the AoG, but left that denomination in my youth. Let me play Devil's Advocate and offer their standard rationale for tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit baptism. In Mark 16:17 (the KJV ending only) speaking in tongues is a sign of the true believer. The Book of Acts establishes the pattern of tongues as the unique initial initial evidence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit.

In 3 of the 5 descriptions in Acts of Spirit baptism, the initial evidence includes speaking in tongues: the Day of Pentecost (2:1-8), Cornelius's household (10:44-46), and the church at Ephesus (19:1-6). In the 4th case, Samaria 8:17-18), we are not told how the reception of the Spirit manifested itself, but Simon the magician is so impressed by this demonstration of the Spirit's bestowal that he offers Peter money for the power to impart the Spirit. It is logical to conclude that he too witnesses speaking in tongues.

In the fifth case, Ananias lays hands on the blinded Paul to bestow the Holy Spirit (9:17). Luke doesn't describe the experience. Was it accompanied by speaking in tongues? Paul's question "Do all speak in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:30)?" expects a negative reply because in fact some Corinthians have not yet received or sought this gift. But Paul's question does not imply that God never intended that everyone speak in tongues. On the contrary, in 1 Corinthians Paul says, "I want you all to speak in tongues" (14:5) and "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all (14:18)." He considers ecstatic prophecy the best spiritual gift, but concedes that speaking in tongues equals prophecy as the greatest gift, if the tongues are interpreted (14:5). Who are we to trivialize by our apathy spiritual gifts that the Holy Spirit has given to build us up in the faith?

Contrary to the video posted early on this thread, the tongues don't need to express unknown human languages. That was the case on the Day of Pentecost, but not in the other cases in Acts. Peter equates the tongues in Cornelius's household with the tongues spoken at Pentecost: "The Holy Spirit fell upon them, just as it had upon us in the beginning (11:15)." Indeed, the tongues don't need to be human at all: "Though I speak in tongues of people and of angels (1 Corinthians 13:1)"

 

[All4Christ]

I grew up in the Canadian equivalent of the AoG, but left that denomination in my youth. Let me play Devil's Advocate and offer their standard rationale for tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit baptism. In Mark 16:17 (the KJV ending only) speaking in tongues is a sign of the true believer. The Book of Acts establishes the pattern of tongues as the unique initial initial evidence of being baptized with the Holy Spirit.

In 3 of the 5 descriptions in Acts of Spirit baptism, the initial evidence includes speaking in tongues: the Day of Pentecost (2:1-8), Cornelius's household (10:44-46), and the church at Ephesus (19:1-6). In the 4th case, Samaria 8:17-18), we are not told how the reception of the Spirit manifested itself, but Simon the magician is so impressed by this demonstration of the Spirit's bestowal that he offers Peter money for the power to impart the Spirit. It is logical to conclude that he too witnesses speaking in tongues.

In the fifth case, Ananias lays hands on the blinded Paul to bestow the Holy Spirit (9:17). Luke doesn't describe the experience. Was it accompanied by speaking in tongues? Paul's question "Do all speak in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:30)?" expects a negative reply because in fact some Corinthians have not yet received or sought this gift. But Paul's question does not imply that God never intended that everyone speak in tongues. On the contrary, in 1 Corinthians Paul says, "I want you all to speak in tongues" (14:5) and "I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all (14:18)." He considers ecstatic prophecy the best spiritual gift, but concedes that speaking in tongues equals prophecy as the greatest gift, if the tongues are interpreted (14:5). Who are we to trivialize by our apathy spiritual gifts that the Holy Spirit has given to build us up in the faith?

Contrary to the video posted early on this thread, the tongues don't need to express unknown human languages. That was the case on the Day of Pentecost, but not in the other cases in Acts. Peter equates the tongues in Cornelius's household with the tongues spoken at Pentecost: "The Holy Spirit fell upon them, just as it had upon us in the beginning (11:15)." Indeed, the tongues don't need to be human at all: "Though I speak in tongues of people and of angels (1 Corinthians 13:1)"

1 Corinthians 12 and 13 are one thought. What is the base gift and most important gift? Love. Nothing else matters without that.