Speak in Tongues - essential :

Biblicist

Full Gospel believer
Mar 27, 2011
7,023
992
Melbourne, Australia
✟51,094.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Because he used the word "If". They are supposed examples.
Hey, I'm still waiting to hear your explanation as to why you believe that Paul never prophesied:link Mind you, I think that I have been waiting many months for such a reply where you regularly seem to forget to explain why in your opinion you apparently believe that Paul fibbed about being able to prophesy.
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟251,947.00
Faith
Christian
I'm the one who used the quotation marks around the word "told". There was a reason for that which anyone not looking to belittle the idea of people hearing from the Lord in various ways can readily understand.

Not looking to belittle you. As you said they were your own words.

The word gift was used in a general manner because, as I clearly told you before, every good thing we have from the Lord is a gift of some kind.

Doesn't sound like that to me. You said your ability to speak in tongues "was the gift itself being manifested". But you are free to change your mind.

I have received an alert from the forum that you have been following me since last Tuesday. Your attitude is heading toward belligerence. I doesn't take a spiritual gift for me to see the connection.

I am not 'following' you on the forum. There is nobody in my 'follow' list, and never has been.

Neither the method of receiving nor the use of the tongues in the Book of Acts matches that of the Corinthians either.

The method of attainment of tongues in both books is exactly the same. It is a sovereign unconditional enablement by the Holy Spirit:

Acts 2:4 "they began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them."

1 Cor 12:11: "All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.


Granted they were used for different purposes. But both were 'signs' and both 'for the common good'. I take it your 'ability' is only used in public places outside church as a confirming sign?


Nor does the idea of asking by faith for the Holy Spirit as instructed by the Lord match the methods of attainment in the Book of Acts.

Faith is not a condition of obtaining tongues in either book.

Getting snarky as expected.

Not snarky. A touch of sarcasm perhaps as I find your ideas are not scripturally warranted. Please forgive me if you found it offensive.

Why would I want to do such a thing when Paul's instruction do apply and I have never said otherwise.

Because the tongues in 1 Corinthians is the 'gift of tongues' which you no longer claim to have, and so you are not obliged to follow Paul's instructions regarding the gift.

I didn't say that I had the same ability as the disciples in Acts.

You have claimed that the tongues in Acts was the 'ability' not the 'gift' of tongues, even challenging me to prove that it was the 'gift'. And you have the 'ability' not the 'gift', right?

Yes - since you asked - praying in the Spirit apparently sounds different from what was the sound made in the Book of Acts - at least at Pentecost.

Where in 1 Corinthians does it say what tongues sounded like? In the absence of any redefinition we must presume it sounded the same as Acts.

It could have been a one time ability and it could have been a gift of God which was irrevocable. It seems to be the former since it is not mentioned again in the same vein.

Yes it is. In Acts 10 & 11 the Gentiles had exactly the same tongues experience as the disciples at Pentecost. That was the only criteria the disciples gave for accepting them into the church as equals. Luke doesn't say the tongues was any different from his previous description in Acts 2, which he would have done if they were.

The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable and yet I see temporary abilities in Acts and elsewhere.

Where does it say someones ability to speak in tongues was withdrawn?


Peter and Paul didn't have the "gift" of escaping from prison and yet they had the ability. Paul had the ability to live through a stoning. I wouldn't call it a gift though.

You are comparing apples with oranges. You are claiming there are 2 types of tongues - one a 'gift' that is governed by the theology of 1 Corinthians, the other an 'ability' which is not.

We are told to pray in the Spirit. It is done by faith and there is nowhere that that ability is called one of the gifts.

That's right we are all commanded to "pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests" (in our native language, not tongues).
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟251,947.00
Faith
Christian
Aren't we all silly bunnies, here we were for many hundreds of years presuming that Paul actually prophesied, so tell us, was Paul maybe fibbing when he tells us that he prophesies or was he maybe employing a bit of hyperbole.

Ok let's look again at that particular 'if' statement:

"If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge....but do not have love, I am nothing"

Did Paul really prophecy to the degree of fathoming ALL mysteries. ie was he omniscient? I don't think so.


I staggers me that you still try and pull this tired old humanist line, which I grant probably works on the less astute and with those who are essentially theologically illiterate, but I suppose that we can put it all down to CNN theology - fake news.

Seeing as the vast majority of commentators (who are not "theologically illiterate") agree with me that neither Paul nor anyone else spoke in the tongues of angels, then I don't think it is me who is being a "silly bunny". But then such silly ideas are not uncommon among some misguided charismatic/pentecostal types where God's Word must be twisted to accommodate their unscriptural subjective experiences.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Waggles

Acts 2:38
Site Supporter
Feb 7, 2017
768
476
69
South Oz
Visit site
✟112,244.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Widowed
Receive the Holy Ghost and the immediate outward evidence speaking in tongues as the spirit gives direct undefileable contact with GOD !
Getting back to basics.
Speaking in tongues as a personal prayer language is the Bible evidence of being baptized in the
Holy Spirit; that is receiving the indwelling Holy Spirit as a convert to the gospel.

Diversities of tongues and interpretation and prophesy are gifts to be used within the Spirit-filled
Church at formal worship meetings. The other six gifts are dispersed individually as needed by
saints in their day-to-day walk and are for the collective benefit and growth of the body of Christ.

Again if you are not Pentecostal and cannot pray in tongues you should cease pretending that you
have anything worthwhile to say on the OP.
No experience = no knowledge
 
Upvote 0

Righttruth

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2015
4,484
341
✟176,910.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Getting back to basics.
Speaking in tongues as a personal prayer language is the Bible evidence of being baptized in the
Holy Spirit; that is receiving the indwelling Holy Spirit as a convert to the gospel.

That is your presumption. All don't utter gibberish in their personal prayers.

Diversities of tongues and interpretation and prophesy are gifts to be used within the Spirit-filled
Church at formal worship meetings.

Right. That is translating a existing foreign language spoken not understood by the congregation.

The other six gifts are dispersed individually as needed by
saints in their day-to-day walk and are for the collective benefit and growth of the body of Christ.

Speaking gibberish is not a spiritual gift listed by Paul.

Again if you are not Pentecostal and cannot pray in tongues you should cease pretending that you
have anything worthwhile to say on the OP.
No experience = no knowledge

Fancy experience is not truth!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Phil 1:21
Upvote 0

pescador

Wise old man
Site Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
That is your presumption. All don't utter gibberish in their personal prayers.



Right. That is translating a existing foreign language spoken not understood by the congregation.



Speaking gibberish is not a spiritual gift listed by Paul.



Fancy experience is not truth!

If you haven't yet spoken in tongues there is no need to belittle those of us who do. Why do you think that Paul wrote "For the one speaking in a tongue does not speak to people but to God, for no one understands; he is speaking mysteries by the Spirit."?

Speaking in tongues, "speaking mysteries by the Spirit", is a gift from God. I have received that gift and use it all the time. If you can't accept that, that is not my problem.

In Paul's letter to the church in Corinth he said, ""Love is patient, love is kind, it is not envious." I recommend that you read his writings more carefully.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Waggles
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Site Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Hopefully the following excerpt on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit from another continuist, Wayne Grudem, will help you as it covers much more detail, including the events of Acts.

Wayne Grudem - Systematic Theology

Baptism in and Filling with the Holy Spirit

Should we seek a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” after conversion? What does it mean to be filled with the Holy Spirit?

Systematic theology books have not traditionally included a chapter on baptism in the Holy Spirit or filling with the Holy Spirit as part of the study of the “order of salvation,” the study of the various steps in which the benefits of salvation are applied to our lives.1 But with the spread of Pentecostalism that began in 1901, the widespread influence of the charismatic movement in the 1960’s and 1970’s, and the remarkable growth of Pentecostal and charismatic2 churches worldwide from 1970 to the present, the question of a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” distinct p 764 from regeneration has come into increasing prominence. I have put this chapter at this point in our study of the application of redemption for two reasons: (1) A proper understanding of this question must assume an understanding of regeneration, adoption, and sanctification, all of which have been discussed in previous chapters. (2) All the previous chapters on the application of redemption have discussed events that occur (or in the case of sanctification, that begin) at the point at which a person becomes a Christian. But this question concerns an event that occurs either at the point of conversion (according to one view) or sometime after conversion (according to another view). Moreover, people on both sides of the question agree that some kind of second experience has happened to many people after their conversion, and therefore one very important question is how to understand this experience in the light of Scripture and what scriptural categories properly apply to it.

EXPLANATION AND SCRIPTURAL BASIS

A. The Traditional Pentecostal Understanding

The topic of this chapter has become important today because many Christians say that they have experienced a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” that came after they became Christians and that brought great blessing in their lives. They claim that prayer and Bible study have become much more meaningful and effective, that they have discovered new joy in worship, and they often say that they have received new spiritual gifts (especially, and most frequently, the gift of speaking in tongues).
This traditional Pentecostal or charismatic position is supported from Scripture in the following way:

(1) Jesus’ disciples were born-again believers long before the day of Pentecost, perhaps during Jesus’ life and ministry, but certainly by the time that Jesus, after his resurrection, “breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit” ’ (John 20:22).

(2) Jesus nevertheless commanded his disciples “not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father” (Acts 1:4), telling them, “Before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5). He told them, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you” (Acts 1:8). The disciples then obeyed Jesus’ command and waited in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit to come upon them so that they would receive new empowering for witness and ministry.

(3) When the disciples had waited for ten days, the day of Pentecost came, tongues of fire rested above their heads, “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4). This clearly shows that they received a baptism in (or with)3 the Holy Spirit. Although the disciples were born again long before Pentecost, at Pentecost they received a “baptism with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 1:5 and 11:16 refer to it this way) that was subsequent to conversion and resulted in great empowering for ministry as well as speaking in tongues.4

(4) Christians today, like the apostles, should ask Jesus for a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” and thus follow the pattern of the disciples’ lives.5 If we receive this baptism in the Holy Spirit, it will result in much more power for ministry for our own lives, just as it did in the lives of the disciples, and will often (or always, according to some teachers) result in speaking in tongues as well.

(5) Support for this pattern—in which people are first born again and then later are baptized in the Holy Spirit—is seen in several other instances in the book of Acts. It is seen, for example, in Acts 8, where the people of Samaria first became Christians when they “believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 8:12), but only later received the Holy Spirit when the apostles Peter and John came from Jerusalem and prayed for them (Acts 8:14–17).6
Another example is found in Acts 19, where Paul came and found “some disciples” at Ephesus (Acts 19:1). But, “when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied” (Acts 19:6).

All of these examples (Acts 2, 8, sometimes 10, and 19) are cited by Pentecostals in order to show that a “baptism in the Holy Spirit” subsequent to conversion was a very common occurrence for New Testament Christians. Therefore, they reason, if it was common for Christians in Acts to have this second experience sometime after conversion, should it not be common for us today as well?
We can analyze this issue of the baptism in the Holy Spirit by asking three questions: (1) What does the phrase “baptism in the Holy Spirit” mean in the New Testament? (2) How should we understand the “second experiences” that came to born-again believers in the book of Acts? (3) Are there other biblical expressions, such as “filling with the Holy Spirit,” that are better suited to describe an empowering with the Holy Spirit that comes after conversion?

B. What Does “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” Mean in the New Testament?

There are only seven passages in the New Testament where we read of someone being baptized in the Holy Spirit. (The English translations quoted here use the word with rather than in.)8 The seven passages follow:

In the first four verses, John the Baptist is speaking of Jesus and predicting that he will baptize people in (or with) the Holy Spirit:

Matthew 3:11: “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”

Mark 1:8: “I have baptized you with water; but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

Luke 3:16: “I baptize you with water; but he who is mightier than I is coming, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.”

John 1:33: “He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” ’

It is hard to draw any conclusions from these four passages with respect to what baptism with the Holy Spirit really is. We discover that Jesus is the one who will carry out this baptism and he will baptize his followers. But no further specification of this baptism is given.

The next two passages refer directly to Pentecost:

Acts 1:5: [Here Jesus says,] “John baptized with water, but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

Acts 11:16: [Here Peter refers back to the same words of Jesus that were quoted in the previous verse. He says,] “I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’”

These two passages show us that whatever we may understand baptism in the Holy Spirit to be, it certainly happened at the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit fell in great power on the disciples and those with them, and they spoke in other tongues, and about three thousand people were converted (Acts 2:14).

It is important to realize that all six of these verses use almost exactly the same expression in Greek, with the only differences being some variation in word order or verb tense to fit the sentence, and with one example having the preposition understood rather than expressed explicitly.9

The only remaining reference in the New Testament is in the Pauline epistles:

1 Corinthians 12:13 (NIV mg): “For we were all baptized in one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.”

Now the question is whether 1 Corinthians 12:13 refers to the same activity as these other six verses. In many English translations it appears to be different, for many translations are similar to the RSV, which says, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” Those who support the Pentecostal view of baptism in the Holy Spirit after conversion are quite eager to see this verse as referring to something other than baptism in the Holy Spirit, and they frequently emphasize the difference that comes out in the English translations. In all the other six verses, Jesus is the one who baptizes people and the Holy Spirit is the “element” (parallel to water in physical baptism) in which or with which Jesus baptizes people. But here in 1 Corinthians 12:13 (so the Pentecostal explanation goes) we have something quite different—here the person doing the baptizing is not Jesus but the Holy Spirit. Therefore, they say, 1 Corinthians 12:13 should not be taken into account when we ask what the New Testament means by “baptism in the Holy Spirit.”

This point is very important to the Pentecostal position, because, if we admit that 1 Corinthians 12:13 refers to baptism in the Holy Spirit, then it is very hard to maintain that it is an experience that comes after conversion. In this verse Paul says that this baptism in/with/by the Holy Spirit made us members of the body of—“We were all baptized in one Spirit into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13 NIV mg). But if this really is a “baptism in the Holy Spirit,” the same as the event that was referred to in the previous six verses, then Paul is saying that it happened to all the Corinthians when they became members of the body of Christ; that is, when they became Christians. For it was that baptism that resulted in their being members of the body of Christ, the church. Such a conclusion would be very difficult for the Pentecostal position that holds that baptism in the Holy Spirit is something that occurs after conversion, not at the same time.

Is it possible to sustain the Pentecostal view that the other six verses refer to a baptism by Jesus in which he baptizes us in (or with) the Holy Spirit, but that 1 Corinthians 12:13 refers to something different, to a baptism by the Holy Spirit? Although the distinction seems to make sense from some English translations, it really cannot be supported by an examination of the Greek text, for there the expression is almost identical to the expressions we have seen in the other six verses. Paul says ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύματι ... ἐβαπτίσθημεν (“in one Spirit ... we were baptized”). Apart from one small difference (he refers to “one Spirit” rather than “the Holy Spirit”),10 all the other elements are the same: the verb is βαπτίζω (G966) and the prepositional phrase contains the same words (ἐν, G1877, plus the dative noun πνεύματι from πνεῦμα, G4460). If we translate this same Greek expression “baptize in the Holy Spirit” (or “baptize with the Holy Spirit”) in the other six New Testament occurrences where we find it, then it seems only proper that we translate it in the same way in this seventh occurrence. And no matter how we translate, it seems hard to deny that the original readers would have seen this phrase as referring to the same thing as the other six verses, because for them the words were the same.

But why have modern English translations translated this verse to say, “By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body,” thus giving apparent support to the Pentecostal interpretation? We should first note that the NASB gives “in” as a marginal translation, and the NIV margin gives both “with” and “in” as alternatives. The reason these translations have chosen the word “by” has apparently been a desire to avoid an appearance of two locations for the baptism in the same sentence. The sentence already says that this baptism was “into one body,” and perhaps the translators thought it seemed awkward to say, “in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” But this should not be seen as a great difficulty, for Paul says, referring to the Israelites, “all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (1 Cor. 10:2)—a very closely parallel expression where the cloud and the sea are the “elements” that surrounded or overwhelmed the people of Israel and Moses means the new life of participation in the Mosaic covenant and the fellowship of God’s people (led by Moses) that the Israelites found themselves in after they had passed through the cloud and the sea. It is not that there were two locations for the same baptism, but one was the element in which they were baptized and the other was the location in which they found themselves after the baptism. This is very similar to 1 Corinthians 12:13: the Holy Spirit was the element in which they were baptized, and the body of Christ, the church, was the location in which they found themselves after that baptism.11 It thus seems appropriate to conclude that 1 Corinthians 12:13 also refers to baptism “in” or “with” the Holy Spirit, and is referring to the same thing as the other six verses mentioned.

But this has a significant implication for us: it means that, as far as the apostle Paul was concerned, baptism in the Holy Spirit occurred at conversion. He says that all the Corinthians were baptized in the Holy Spirit and the result was that they became members of the body of Christ: “For we were all baptized in one Spirit into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13 NIV mg). “Baptism in the Holy Spirit,” therefore, must refer to the activity of the Holy Spirit at the beginning of the Christian life when he gives us new spiritual life (in regeneration) and cleanses us and gives a clear break with the power and love of sin (the initial stage of sanctification). In this way “baptism in the Holy Spirit” refers to all that the Holy Spirit does at the beginning of our Christian lives. But this means that it cannot refer to an experience after conversion, as the Pentecostal interpretation would have it.12

But how, then, do we understand the references to baptism in the Holy Spirit in Acts 1:5 and 11:6, both of which refer to the day of Pentecost? Were these not instances where the disciples, having previously been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, now experienced a new empowering from the Holy Spirit that enabled them to minister effectively?

It is true that the disciples were “born again” long before Pentecost, and in fact probably long before Jesus breathed on them and told them to receive the Holy Spirit in John 20:22. 13 Jesus had said, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44), but the disciples certainly had come to Jesus and had followed him (even though their understanding of who he was increased gradually over time). Certainly when Peter said to Jesus, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16), it was evidence of some kind of regenerating work of the Holy Spirit in his heart. Jesus told him, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 16:17). And Jesus had said to the Father regarding his disciples, “I have given them the words which you gave me, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me ... I have guarded them and none of them is lost but the son of perdition, that the scripture might be fulfilled” (John 17:8, 12). The disciples had “little faith” (Matt. 8:26) at times, but they did have faith! Certainly they were regenerated long before the day of Pentecost.14

But we must realize that the day of Pentecost is much more than an individual event in the lives of Jesus’ disciples and those with them. The day of Pentecost was the point of transition between the old covenant work and ministry of the Holy Spirit and the new covenant work and ministry of the Holy Spirit. Of course the Holy Spirit was at work throughout the Old Testament, hovering over the waters of the first day of creation (Gen. 1:2), empowering people for service to God and leadership and prophecy (Ex. 31:3; 35:31; Deut. 34:9; Judg. 14:6; 1 Sam. 16:13; Ps. 51:11, et al.). But during that time the work of the Holy Spirit in individual lives was, in general, a work of lesser power.

There are several indications of a less powerful and less extensive work of the Holy Spirit in the old covenant: the Holy Spirit only came to a few people with significant power for ministry (Num. 11:16–17, for example), but Moses longed for the day when the Holy Spirit would be poured out on all of God’s people: “Would that all the LORD’s people were prophets, that the LORD would put his spirit upon them!” (Num. 11:29). The equipping of the Holy Spirit for special ministries could be lost, as it was in the life of Saul (1 Sam. 16:14), and as David feared that it might be in his own life (Ps. 51:11). In terms of spiritual power in the lives of the people of God, there was little power over the dominion of Satan, resulting in very little effective evangelism of the nations around Israel, and no examples of ability to cast out demons.15 The old covenant work of the Holy Spirit was almost completely confined to the nation of Israel, but in the new covenant there is created a new “dwelling place of God” (Eph. 2:22), the church, which unites both Gentiles and Jews in the body of Christ.

Moreover, the Old Testament people of God looked forward to a “new covenant” age when the work of the Holy Spirit would be much more powerful and much more widespread (Num. 11:29; Jer. 31:31–33; Ezek. 36:26–27; Joel 2:28–29).16

When the New Testament opens, we see John the Baptist as the last of the Old Testament prophets. Jesus said, “Among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he ... all the prophets and the law prophesied until John; and if you are willing to accept it, he is Elijah who is to come” (Matt. 11:11–14). John knew that he baptized with water, but Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit (John 3:16). John the Baptist, then, still was living in an “old covenant” experience of the working of the Holy Spirit.

In the life of Jesus, we first see the new covenant power of the Holy Spirit at work. The Holy Spirit descends on him at his baptism (Luke 3:21–22), and after p 771 his temptation Jesus “returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee” (Luke 4:14). Then we begin to see what this new covenant power of the Holy Spirit will look like, because Jesus casts out demons with a word, heals all who are brought to him, and teaches with authority that people had not heard before (see Luke 4:16–44, et al.).

The disciples, however, do not receive this full new covenant empowering for ministry until the Day of Pentecost, for Jesus tells them to wait in Jerusalem, and promises, “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you” (Acts 1:8). This was a transition in the lives of the disciples as well (see John 7:39; 14:17; 16:7; Acts 2:16). The promise of Joel that the Holy Spirit would come in new covenant fullness was fulfilled (Acts 2:16) as Jesus returned to heaven and then was given authority to pour out the Holy Spirit in new fullness and power (Acts 2:33).

What was the result in the lives of the disciples? These believers, who had had an old-covenant less-powerful experience of the Holy Spirit in their lives, received on the Day of Pentecost a more-powerful new-covenant experience of the Holy Spirit working in their lives.17 They received much greater “power” (Acts 1:8), power for living the Christian life and for carrying out Christian ministry.
This new covenant power gave the disciples more effectiveness in their witness and their ministry (Acts 1:8; Eph. 4:8, 11–13), much greater power for victory over the influence of sin in the lives of all believers (note the emphasis on the power of Christ’s resurrection at work within us in Rom. 6:11–14; 8:13–14; Gal. 2:20; Phil. 3:10), and power for victory over Satan and demonic forces that would attack believers (2 Cor. 10:3–4; Eph. 1:19–21; 6:10–18; 1 John 4:4). p 772 This new covenant power of the Holy Spirit also resulted in a wide and hitherto unknown distribution of gifts for ministry to all believers (Acts 2:16–18; 1 Cor. 12:7, 11; 1 Peter 4:10; cf. Num. 11:17, 24–29). These gifts also had corporate implications because they were intended not to be used individualistically but for the corporate building up of the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:7; 14:12). It also meant that the gospel was no longer effectively limited to the Jews only, but that all races and all nations would hear the gospel in power and would be united into the church, to the glory of God (Eph. 2:11–3:10).20 The Day of Pentecost was certainly a remarkable time of transition in the whole history of redemption as recorded in Scripture. It was a remarkable day in the history of the world, because on that day the Holy Spirit began to function among God’s people with new covenant power.

But this fact helps us understand what happened to the disciples at Pentecost. They received this remarkable new empowering from the Holy Spirit because they were living at the time of the transition between the old covenant work of the Holy Spirit and the new covenant work of the Holy Spirit. Though it was a “second experience” of the Holy Spirit, coming as it did long after their conversion, it is not to be taken as a pattern for us, for we are not living at a time of transition in the work of the Holy Spirit. In their case, believers with an old covenant empowering from the Holy Spirit became believers with a new covenant empowering from the Holy Spirit. But we today do not first become believers with a weaker, old covenant work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts and wait until some later time to receive a new covenant work of the Holy Spirit. Rather, we are in the same position as those who became Christians in the church at Corinth: when we become p 773 Christians we are all “baptized in one Spirit into one body” (1 Cor. 12:13)—just as the Corinthians were, and just as were the new believers in many churches who were converted when Paul traveled on his missionary journeys.

In conclusion, the disciples certainly did experience “a baptism in the Holy Spirit” after conversion on the Day of Pentecost, but this happened because they were living at a unique point in history, and this event in their lives is therefore not a pattern that we are to seek to imitate.

What shall we say about the phrase “baptism in the Holy Spirit”? It is a phrase that the New Testament authors use to speak of coming into the new covenant power of the Holy Spirit. It happened at Pentecost for the disciples, but it happened at conversion for the Corinthians and for us.21
It is not a phrase the New Testament authors would use to speak of any post-conversion experience of empowering by the Holy Spirit.

C. How Should We Understand the “Second Experiences” in Acts?

But even if we have correctly understood the experience of the disciples at Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2, are there not other examples of people who had a “second experience” of empowering of the Holy Spirit after conversion, such as those in Acts 8 (at Samaria), Acts 10 (Cornelius’ household), and Acts 19 (the Ephesian disciples)?

These are not really convincing examples to prove the Pentecostal doctrine of baptism in the Holy Spirit either. First, the expression “baptism in the Holy Spirit” is not ordinarily used to refer to any of these events,22 and this should give us some hesitation in applying this phrase to them. But more importantly, a closer look at each case shows more clearly what was happening in these events.
In Acts 8:4–25 the Samaritan people “believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” and “they were baptized, both men and women” (Acts 8:12). Some have argued that this was not genuine saving faith on the part of the Samaritans.23 However, there is no indication in the text that Philip had a deficient understanding of the gospel (he had been prominent in the Jerusalem church) or that Philip himself thought that their faith in Christ was inadequate, for he allowed them to be baptized (Acts 8:12).

A better understanding of this event would be that God, in his providence, sovereignly waited to give the new covenant empowering of the Holy Spirit to the Samaritans directly through the hands of the apostles (Acts 8:14–17) 24 so that it might be evident to the highest leadership in the Jerusalem church that the Samaritans were not second-class citizens but full members of the church. This was important because of the historical animosity between Jews and Samaritans (“Jews have no dealings with Samaritans,” John 4:9), and because Jesus had specified that the spread of the gospel to Samaria would be the next major step after it had been preached in Jerusalem and the region of Judea that surrounded Jerusalem: “You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Thus, the event in Acts 8 was a kind of “Samaritan Pentecost,” a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the people of Samaria, who were a mixed race of Jewish and Gentile ancestry, so that it might be evident to all that the full new covenant blessings and power of the Holy Spirit had come to this group of people as well, and were not confined to Jews only. Because this is a special event in the history of redemption, as the pattern of Acts 1:8 is worked out in the book of Acts, it is not a pattern for us to repeat today. It is simply part of the transition between the old covenant experience of the Holy Spirit and the new covenant experience of the Holy Spirit.

The situation in Acts 10 is less complicated, because it is not even clear that Cornelius was a genuine believer before Peter came and preached the gospel to him. Certainly he had not trusted in Christ for salvation. He is rather a Gentile who was one of the first examples of the way in which the gospel would go “to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8).25 Certainly Cornelius had not first believed in Christ’s death and resurrection to save him and then later come into a second experience after his conversion.

In Acts 19, once again we encounter a situation of some people who had not really heard the gospel of salvation through Christ. They had been baptized into the baptism of John the Baptist (Acts 19:3), so they were probably people who had heard John the Baptist preach, or had talked to others who had heard John the Baptist preach, and had been baptized “into John’s baptism” (Acts 19:3) as a sign that they were repenting of their sins and preparing for the Messiah who was to come. They certainly had not heard of Christ’s death and resurrection, for they had not even heard that there was a Holy Spirit (Acts 19:2)!—a fact that no one who was present at Pentecost or who had heard the gospel after Pentecost could have failed to know. It is likely that they had not even heard that Jesus had come and lived and died, because Paul had to explain to them, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus” (Acts 19:4). Therefore these “disciples” in Ephesus did not have new covenant understanding or new covenant faith, and they certainly did not have a new covenant empowering of the Holy Spirit—they were “disciples” only in the sense of followers of John the Baptist who were still waiting for the p 775 Messiah. When they heard of him they believed in him, and then received the power of the Holy Spirit that was appropriate to the gospel of the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

Because of this, these disciples at Ephesus are certainly not a pattern for us today either, for we do not first have faith in a Messiah that we are waiting for, and then later learn that Jesus has come and lived and died and risen again. We come into an understanding of the gospel of Christ immediately, and we, like the Corinthians, enter immediately into the new covenant experience of the power of the Holy Spirit.26

It seems therefore that there are no New Testament texts that encourage us to seek for a second experience of “baptism in the Holy Spirit” that comes after conversion.

this all hinges on an interpretation that Acts was an a transitional period to which scripture doesn't comment on. Grudem doesn't address the words charisma/doera, nor does he do an adequate job at the terminology for the the baptism of the HS within Acts like being "filled with the HS" (Acts 2:4, 4:8, 4:31, 9:17, 13:9) or the HS "falling down" (8:16, 10:44, 11:15) and then comparing them with the same terminology used elsewhere in the NT as he did "baptism".

Grudem sweeps Acts under the 1st rug by calling it a transitional period but doesn't do due diligence for calling it such. Obviously if Acts is a transitional period than all unique elements that happens in Acts stays in Acts he however fails to value the importance of this question and presents it as common knowledge with no support.

If Acts is not a transitional period then it changes everything and we spend less time trying to superimpose 1 Cor 12 over Acts and more time reading Acts. If it is a transitional period trying to enforce Corinthians is pointless as it would be an exception to the rule and would not apply.

People spend too much time on the wrong details. Is Acts a transition period or not? answer that question and the rest is easy. Grudem does not answer the question.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Is Acts a transition period or not? answer that question and the rest is easy. Grudem does not answer the question.
Transition from what to what?

Jesus' work at Calvary was done and after the brief description in the first paragraph of His past instructions to His disciples and His returning to the Father, we are in the N.T. era in the Book of Acts.

If that be so - and it is - any other view of the receiving of the Holy Spirit than the Pentecostal/charismatic one - is teaching a works salvation in that people get saved by tarrying in certain places expecting special signs, having the hands of some special group of people laid on you, being baptized etc.

This is preaching a false gospel IMO.

Of course one could say that these were but special N.T. cases. But that is hardly comforting to those of us who assume, base on the scriptures, that we have the Holy Spirit in us from the instant we believed (or even slightly before if you are a Calvinist).
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I’m trying to picture how a message in tongues in a congregation of believers would look if tongues and interpretation is only of a known language as asserted here. That – as opposed to the common Pentecostal view that the tongue is an unknown utterance given by God and in need of interpretation so that the congregation can hear it in a language they understand.

I did something like this before when I tackled this issue when the subject was new to me. I’m doing it again now because I have always believed in revisiting various doctrines occasionally from scratch to be sure I believe correctly.

The same thing can be done in the mind of course – but sometimes it helps to picture things with the use of props.

I’ve got a dozen white chips here before me on the desk to represent a congregation of one language group – English in my experiment.

I’ve got a few more odd colored chips interspersed with the white. They are black red, and green in my case and they represent what I’m saying are a visiting Frenchman and a visiting Spanish man and a visiting German. None of the four groups speak the language of the other (although I’ve also pictured it in other ways).

Why the three foreigners are sitting in a congregation enjoying a service where they don’t know the language of anyone around them – I don’t know. But then --- this experiment isn’t about picturing my position but the position of those who deny that the message and interpretation is in a special “Pentecostal” kind of language.

I’m really trying to understand the thinking of the non-unknown language folks and how things would work in real life.

Various scenarios could be pictured here including a message from the Holy Spirit coming to any person in the group for any person in the group in something like say Romanian where no one knows the language and it must be kept internal for the person hearing it from the Lord.

Why would the Holy Spirit be praying or bringing a message in Romanian knowing full well that no one but Himself could possibly understand it? Why would we be instructed to then pray to ourselves the message in Romanian which had not been for us? More to the point - why would God want us to pray to Him a message in Romanian which He had just sent intended for someone else? He thought up the message. Surely He knew what it sounded like. Throw those ideas into the mix while thinking through this situation in light of the instruction we have in Corinthians.

Who’s the message from the Holy Spirit intended for and therefore are in need of interpretation? Who receives the message? What language is it in? Who would bring the interpretation?

If a person had the gift of interpretation – why didn’t God give them the message in order that they could tell the person intended to receive the message directly without disturbing the congregtion?

Why would the Holy Spirit give a message in French that was intended for the Frenchman to an Englishman when the Englishman didn't know French and there was no interpreter available to help out? Sure - the Frenchman might not have been a believer and an intermediary was needed because he couldn't receive from the Holy Spirit directly. But did not the Holy Spirit know that the Englishman didn't speak French and there was no interpreter around?

As long as you’re going through these ideas – how about thinking through the prayer language situation a bit? In view of the biblical statements about praying to God - do I, an English speaker, pray in, say, French (a language I don’t speak) and am to keep it between myself and God if there are no Frenchmen around?

Try to picture the original Pentecost situation while thinking about who in that group is speaking what language, who understands them and who thinks them drunk etc.

Think about the other instances in Acts and how they would look (and why) if the tongues these folks suddenly spoke were known languages.

Anyway! I really would like to feature how these things would work if tongues are always known languages.

I know how it works worldwide in congregations and privately with what is likely millions of charismatic/Pentecostals. If I need examples of that - all I have to do is look at life around me on this continent and on other continents even more so to understand how the Holy Spirit apparently is fulfilling the instructions in the scriptures.

I’m not trying to be a smart a** here. I just want to picture how this would possibly look under the way that non-Pentecostals believe it did and then lay that way along side of the traditional Pentecostal vision of these things to see which makes the most sense in the various ways tongues are used.

You don’t have to lay it out all at once. Just, please, do me a favor and give me an example or two here so I can reconsider my position.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

pescador

Wise old man
Site Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Since Paul wrote "If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but I do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal" he is clearly saying that there are two kinds of "tongues", those spoken by men, which I believe are to be understood by other men, and those of angels, which I believe are entirely different.

He also wrote, "The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets so that the church may be strengthened." Why would there be a need to interpret if the language could be understood like a prophecy?

He also wrote, "So if the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and unbelievers or uninformed people enter, will they not say that you have lost your minds?" If they were speaking in a normal language others would not judge them as having lost their minds. (Some of those in this discussion judge others in this manner.)

The biblical evidence seems to me to be clear and straight-forward. Some people have been given the gift of speaking in unknown tongues. In fact it's a spritual language that the speaker, including myself, can't understand with the mind. Paul wrote, "If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unproductive." It is clearly my spirit speaking; you can definitely feel that when you pray in tongues.

I realize that this may be difficult to accept if one hasn't been given that particular gift, but to say that it's unscriptural babbling is simply untrue.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin Knox
Upvote 0

pescador

Wise old man
Site Supporter
Nov 29, 2011
8,530
4,776
✟498,844.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Nearly 2,000 years ago Paul wrote an inspired letter to the church in Corinth, in part, to set them straight regarding their arrogant belief pertaining to speaking in tongues. Apparently not everyone got the memo.

There is no arrogance in many of us who speak in tongues. We are not Corinthians living in a Roman culture that existed 2000 years ago, who were arrogant about many things. This post is unnecessary, wrong, and arrogant.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin Knox
Upvote 0

Phil 1:21

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2017
5,869
4,399
United States
✟144,842.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There is no arrogance in many of us who speak in tongues. We are not Corinthians living in a Roman culture that existed 2000 years ago, who were arrogant about many things. This post is unnecessary, wrong, and arrogant.

If the shoe doesn't fit, feel free not to wear it. :oldthumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Nearly 2,000 years ago Paul wrote an inspired letter to the church in Corinth, in part, to set them straight regarding their arrogant belief pertaining to speaking in tongues. Apparently not everyone got the memo.
Who didn't get the memo? I.E. who has an arrogant belief pertaining to speaking in tongues?
Actually, it's God shoe (scripture). You may want to read it sometime. Good stuff.
The scripture gives no clue as to who here you meant with your quip.

It isn't God who is slandering some of the brethren by calling them arrogant. It's you and you alone.

Although one guy here did say that the beliefs and practices of most charismatics is of the devil.

I have to say that his slander is a lot worse than yours. But why slander at all?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pescador
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Some here have ridiculed the way that charismatics and Pentecostals believe in and practice tongues.

Assuming you aren't a cessationist - this question is for you. If you are a cessationist then all I can say is that IMO the idea of the Holy Spirit giving detailed instruction about how to practice something that would be obsolete about the time the ink dried on the paper seems a bit far fetched to me.

What other instructions given by the Holy Spirit no longer apply? Is salvation still by grace through faith? We can only hope that hasn't changed since the ink was dry on the pages of scripture.

The question is this. (Piggy back it in with my post number 410 above if you want.)

There were only an estimated 200,000,000 people alive on the earth when Jesus died. There are now at least 7.5 billion alive. In fact 20% of all the people who have ever lived are alive at this moment.

A large percentage of those people are Christians and close to 1/3 of those are charismatic/Pentecostals.

Virtually all of them believe and practice tongues in the way which I and others have laid out here - namely that tongues is an unknown language as practiced in the church if not in all of the Book of Acts as well.

It has been suggested (even insisted upon) that tongues are a known language. I and others have even been ridiculed for believing as most charismatics on earth do.

My question is this. Where, in the history of the church, since the scriptural directions concerning the practice of tongues were given to us, have we ever seen it practiced either corporately or privately with known languages?

I could get almost every charismatics on earth (again - soon if not currently about 1/3 of the church) to tell me what they believe about tongues and how they practice tongues and how their churches practice tongues. I believe that in almost every single case it would be as I believe it to be.

Give me an example of it being practiced with known languages (or preferably 100's of thousands of examples) in light of the Holy Spirit being the same yesterday, today and forever.

Just a few examples from history or current practices will do (and IMO are really necessary in light of the derisive attitude of some of those who believe that tongues were and must always be known languages).

Again - if you believe that tongues (be they gift or otherwise) passed away about the time we received the instructions concerning how to use them:scratch: - then this question is not for you.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Site Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Hey, I'm still waiting to hear your explanation as to why you believe that Paul never prophesied:link Mind you, I think that I have been waiting many months for such a reply where you regularly seem to forget to explain why in your opinion you apparently believe that Paul fibbed about being able to prophesy.

The Thessalonian letters speak about end times. That is prophetic
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Waggles

Acts 2:38
Site Supporter
Feb 7, 2017
768
476
69
South Oz
Visit site
✟112,244.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Widowed
You don’t have to lay it out all at once. Just, please, do me a favor and give me an example or two here so I can reconsider my position.
You'll never work it out intellectually - the carnal mind is opposed to the mind of Christ.
It is a spiritual baptism where one is immersed in the Holy Spirit and one receives understanding.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searches all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knows the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the
things of God knows no man, but the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might
know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the
Holy Ghost teaches; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness
unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Corinthians 2:10-14

If you want to experience the truth of Pentecost then you need to put aside your own ways and seek
the Lord through the commandments given in the scriptures.
You can read for yourself what is required to enter in to the Kingdom of God:

Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
Luke 17:21
7 Wonder not that I said to thee: You must be born again.
8 The Spirit breaths where he will and thou hear his voice: but thou know not whence he comes
and whither he goes. So is every one that is born of the Spirit.
John 3:7-8
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest
of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many
as the Lord our God shall call.
Acts 2:37-39
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Acts 10:44-48

The Revival Fellowship, Fresno – A Church that knows the truth and has the proof
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0