Being filled with the Holy Spirit vs tongues

Revelation 22:10-12 said:

And how do you propose believers go about to accomplish that when they already believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and that God raised Him from the dead?

Strange how the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father was to be given by coming to & believing in Jesus Christ for why no believer will hunger nor thirst any more for a filling. John 6:35

So if coming to and believing in Him is not how one is born again, what are you proposing for how one can work at in order to receive what was promised to us by faith in Jesus Christ? Galatians 3:14 & Galatians 3:26

What steps did it say in Acts for us to get that promise that has been consistent thru out the Book of Acts if it is not by believing in Him is how we receive the remission of sins and the promise of the Spirit?

Click to expand...

sincere or not this is the probably the best question on this thread.
There is much to be said about what leads up to Peter preaching on the day of Pentecost and that information is vital to understand why Peter instructed the crowd the way he did.
But to stay in the book of Acts only. I will show what happened.
I will paraphrase but you can look it up verse by verse if you would like.
Acts 2 1-4 you find the Promise of the father the "holy ghost" filled all that were in the upper room, this was men, women. They all spake in tongues as this took place.
Acts 2:14 Peter stands up and begins to preach to the crowd.
vs 16 17 18 19 Peter says this that you hear and see is the fulfillment of the prophesy spoken of be Joel as if they knew what Joel said.
Peter continues to preach the gospel to the crowd and in vs 37 they were convicted of their sins and asked "men and brethren what shall we do"
I think it would be safe to say they wanted to know how to respond to what they just heard because the believed what Peter was preaching.
Acts 2:38 This is what Peter says the proper response is this is also the fulfillment of what we call the great commission. He says to repent everyone be baptized in Jesus' name and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.vs 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.
So we see the ones that gladly received his word were baptized. Now it does not say they repented or received the holy ghost but it is understood they did both.
Again in Acts 8 we see the conversion of those from Samaria Philip preached the gospel and in vs 12 when they believed Philip they were baptized yet in vs 16 it says they did not have the Holy Ghost yet. So they believed were baptized but something was missing, the Spirit birth.
vs 17 the Apostles laid hands on them and the received the Holy Ghost.
later in the same chapter Philip preaches to the Eunuch and the Eunuch said after hearing Philip "here is water what doth hinder me to be baptized"? And Philip replied If you believe with all your heart you may. And Philip Baptized him, it is not noted whether he received the Holy ghost at that point.
Acts 10 the household of Cornelius.
Peter preaches to his household and while Peter was preaching the Holy Ghost fell on them, the Apostle knew they received the Spirit because he heard them speak with tongues. afterward they were commanded to be baptized in the name of the Lord.
Acts 19 other disciples
Paul met other disciples that had not yet received the Holy Ghost and Paul asked how then were you baptized and the said unto john's baptism. Paul begin to explain the gospel to them and they chose to get baptized and then they also received the Holy Ghost and spake in tongues.

In no wise is believing in Christ and believing done away with but it these examples is was the very first response to hearing the gospel. But in these examples there was also further response and that was getting baptized and receiving the Holy Ghost.

What the Apostles did in some of these cases was to be able to look at their experience in Acts 2 and compare to the experience the new believer had and identify that they in fact did receive the Holy Ghost.

What is consistent through the book of Acts is
1. Preaching of the Gospel
2. believing what was preached
3. Obeying what was preached/asking what shall we do
4. baptism
5. receiving the Holy Ghost/ the common thread seen in those receiving the Holy Ghost is that they spake in tongues.
concerning being born again, in every case of new believers in the Book of Acts you find faith, obedience, and outcome.
turn form sin and believe, baptism, and receive the Spirit the outcome was they were born again of water and the Spirit.

New Birth said:

Who told you this?

Click to expand...

Biblically speaking we only read two cases which are identified with "baptism with the Holy Spirit", the first is at Pentecost as recorded in the 2nd chapter of the Acts, and the second is at the household of Cornelius as recorded in the 10th and 11th chapters of the Acts.

These are the only two occasions where "baptism with the Holy Spirit" is applied to anything. As such you will need a pretty impressive argument that it should be extended to beyond these two rather remarkable events. In the 19th chapter of the Acts we read about the conversion of several disciples of St. John the Baptist, where St. Paul has them baptized and then lays hands on them and they speak in tongues--but no where does the text call this "baptism with the Holy Spirit", likewise the same with incidents such as with the Samaritans; though I would permit that the occasion with the Samaritans is an important one.

I used to be Pentecostal, so I assure you I am familiar with most of the arguments. Granted you seem to belong to a form of Pentecostal tradition that is far more extreme than the one I was raised in. Nobody in my old church would have suggested that someone who doesn't speak in tongues isn't saved.

-CryptoLutheran

Saint Steven said:

Wow. "just"???
The question isn't divisive, but your answer sure is. (do you even know what divisive means?)

You are claiming that "everyone must have the Holy Ghost just like they had in the book of Acts to be saved." Meaning, if they don't speak in tongues they aren't saved. ????? And you don't see that as divisive? Wow. Seriously?

Click to expand...

you disagree that every one needs the Spirit of Christ in them?

New Birth said:

1 Corinthians 12:29 is addressing the "Gift of tongues" that is used in a church setting to edify the church. it is not speaking on the topic you and I are addressing. there is a difference.

Its not nice to claim what I believe is heresy. I have not stated your belief or lack of understanding and knowledge to be inferior to mine or claimed you are in heresy.

Click to expand...

Scripture makes no distinction between the glossolalia as it occurred at Pentecost or other moments and the charism the Apostle mentions in 1 Corinthians 12-14. Making that distinction is an artificial one imposed on Scripture.

-CryptoLutheran

New Birth said:

not so. All that receive the Holy Spirit speak in tongues like in the bible.

Click to expand...

You really need to stop hammering this.
1Cor12v29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

Why would Paul ask if all spoke in tongues, if as you keep claiming, it was automatic.

As I said before, back in the 70s when I was baptised in the Holy Spirit, it was several weeks before I spontaneously started speaking in tongues. And that has been the case with many I know.

ViaCrucis said:

Biblically speaking we only read two cases which are identified with "baptism with the Holy Spirit", the first is at Pentecost as recorded in the 2nd chapter of the Acts, and the second is at the household of Cornelius as recorded in the 10th and 11th chapters of the Acts.

These are the only two occasions where "baptism with the Holy Spirit" is applied to anything. As such you will need a pretty impressive argument that it should be extended to beyond these two rather remarkable events. In the 19th chapter of the Acts we read about the conversion of several disciples of St. John the Baptist, where St. Paul has them baptized and then lays hands on them and they speak in tongues--but no where does the text call this "baptism with the Holy Spirit", likewise the same with incidents such as with the Samaritans; though I would permit that the occasion with the Samaritans is an important one.

I used to be Pentecostal, so I assure you I am familiar with most of the arguments. Granted you seem to belong to a form of Pentecostal tradition that is far more extreme than the one I was raised in. Nobody in my old church would have suggested that someone who doesn't speak in tongues isn't saved.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Acts 19 says the Holy Ghost came on them and they spake with tongues.
There is only one Holy Ghost.

New Birth said:

Acts 19 says the Holy Ghost came on them and they spake with tongues.

Click to expand...

It does not, however, refer to as baptism with the Holy Spirit. That is your imposition upon the text.

-CryptoLutheran

Francis Drake said:

You really need to stop hammering this.

You are basing a theology entirely on your personal experience, when its not even scriptural.​

1Cor12v29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

Why would Paul ask if all spoke in tongues, if as you keep claiming, it was automatic.

As I said before, back in the 70s when I was baptised in the Holy Spirit, it was several weeks before I spontaneously started speaking in tongues. And that has been the case with many I know.

Click to expand...

you dont have to reply but my position will not change. BTW 1 Cor is speaking of the gift of tongues. Not the same as in the book of Acts.

New Birth said:

you dont have to reply but my position will not change. BTW 1 Cor is speaking of the gift of tongues. Not the same as in the book of Acts.

Click to expand...

Where does Scripture make any distinction?

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

It does not, however, refer to as baptism with the Holy Spirit. That is your imposition upon the text.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

that was the baptism of the Holy Spirit its the same thing that happened to Cornelius and all in the upper room.

New Birth said:

you disagree that every one needs the Spirit of Christ in them?

Click to expand...

No, I disagree that everyone needs to speak in tongues to saved. (or even filled with the Spirit)

Saint Steven said:

No, I disagree that everyone needs to speak in tongues to saved. (or even filled with the Spirit)

Click to expand...

"If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his" Explain how one will be saved without the spirit of Christ in them.

New Birth said:

you dont have to reply but my position will not change. BTW 1 Cor is speaking of the gift of tongues. Not the same as in the book of Acts.

Click to expand...

If the tongues of 1 Corinthians (written by Paul) and Acts (written by Luke) were different then Luke, who was a close companion of Paul and writing under his authority, would not have used the exact same terminology. Glossa, lalio, etc. Paul would have briefed Luke, especially regarding Paul's involvement in Acts 19, and told him to use different terminology if they were different. Identical expressions = identical meaning.

New Birth said:

"If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his" Explain how one will be saved without the spirit of Christ in them.

Click to expand...

Now you are putting words in my mouth. I said NO SUCH THING!!!!!!!

New Birth said:

that was the baptism of the Holy Spirit its the same thing that happened to Cornelius and all in the upper room.

Click to expand...

It's not though. The texts describe what happened at Pentecost and at Cornelius' house as remarkable, special events. The Spirit came suddenly, without warning, upon whole groups at once. This does not happen any where else.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

It's not though. The texts describe what happened at Pentecost and at Cornelius' house as remarkable, special events. The Spirit came suddenly, without warning, upon whole groups at once. This does not happen any where else.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

There are many testimonies of revivals where the Holy Spirit showed up unexpectedly. The Holy Spirit is unpredictable. We cannot guess what he might do. I have personally experienced incredible things.

I was just remembering a meeting where my wife and I went up to the front for prayer. When the preacher stretched out his hand to pray for us there was a spark where he touched us that blew us backwards off of our feet. No warning.

New Birth said:

sincere or not this is the probably the best question on this thread...……..

What is consistent through the book of Acts is
1. Preaching of the Gospel
2. believing what was preached
3. Obeying what was preached/asking what shall we do
4. baptism
5. receiving the Holy Ghost/ the common thread seen in those receiving the Holy Ghost is that they spake in tongues.
concerning being born again, in every case of new believers in the Book of Acts you find faith, obedience, and outcome.
turn form sin and believe, baptism, and receive the Spirit the outcome was they were born again of water and the Spirit.

Click to expand...

So when a believer says he has turned from sin and believe the gospel, had water baptism but did not get the outcome you claim as receiving the Holy Spirit by that sign of tongues, what then?

Saint Steven said:

No, I disagree that everyone needs to speak in tongues to saved. (or even filled with the Spirit)

Click to expand...

No words in your mouth, tbis is what you said. Do you think the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Christ are different spirits?

Revelation 22:10-12 said:

So when a believer says he has turned from sin and believe the gospel, had water baptism but did not get the outcome you claim as receiving the Holy Spirit by that sign of tongues, what then?

Click to expand...

They should pray and believe God to fill them with his Spirit. When it happens they will begin to speak in other tongue. This will happen even if they have never heard of tongues before.

ViaCrucis said:

Nobody in my old church would have suggested that someone who doesn't speak in tongues isn't saved.

Click to expand...

Exactly!