differences between Baptist and Pentecostal

[lismore]

Possibly also the belief about whether one can lose one's salvation. Most of the Baptists that I know (most of whom are SB) believe in once saved always saved. I'm thinking that that's not a Pentecostal belief, but maybe someone could enlighten me there.

Eternal security is believed by most pentecostals in my experience

 

[novcncy]

Pentecostals believe more of the bible is applicable for today

What a crock!!!

All the Baptists I know believe the Bible is the only physical thing on earth that is completely applicable. I can't believe you would make such an inflammatory and salacious statement, and then pretend it's light hearted by posting a little winking smiley! How audacious to put that comment on the Baptist/Anabaptist forum! Your comment is clearly based in ignorance and is utter nonsense. A strong point for both denominations is total RELIANCE on scripture. While we may disagree with one another on it's meaning, we couldn't agree more on it's relevance.

 

[Lil Miss]

WOW! This thread helped me a lot personally!

I ususlaly attend a "alliance, on the edge of pentactostal" type church, but they are relocating even FARTHER away, so lately I have been looking for a new church. Just down the street from me is a HUGE and very gorgeous Baptist church that has always caught my eye. However, I have always been afraid to go and check it out simply becuase I didnt know exactly how different it would be. But after reading all your comments and finding out it wont be that different after all, I think I will go check it out

 

[Iollain]

Well, yes and no.

Baptists generally believe that tongues are different human languages, which someone on the earth should be able to translate. The Bible general supports this view, although there is one part in Acts (Cornelius household) that is a little hard to understand. I know I sure don't understand it. At any rate, we do not deny that the Spirit can be manifested through tongues, but there are several criteria...first, an earthly language, secondly, as a sign to unbelievers, ie folks who know that you don't speak their language, and are thereby aware that a miracle of God is taking place. Generally, we believe that God has given us his entire word, and a knowledge of earthly language, and so since His entire word is revealed to all humanity, the gift of tongues is rarely, if ever, needed. This whole business of the nature of signs is essential. The Bible teaches in 1 Corinthians 14 that the gift of toungues is a sign not to believers, but to unbelievers. So what then is the point of manifestation of the Spirit in a room full of believers? Either someone is an unbeliever, or it's not really the Spirit of God, but it can't be both!

(Some) Pentecostals believe that tongues is a heavenly language, which only God knows, but is unknown to humanity and Satan and his demons. This position seems to require a creative interpretation of scripture, and an absurd stretch of logic. The stretch is that Satan and his demons used to live in Heaven, and Satan still goes to Heaven where he talks face to face with God....so how come he wouldn't know the "heavenly" language?

So obviously, I know more about the Baptist position on tongues than the Pentecostal one. In my opinion, this issue is one on which we can happily agree to disagree. While I disagree with my Pentecostal brethren, I do not feel that they are adding to or taking away from the gospel, so I take the position that "he who is not against us, is for us."

The gift of tongues is not always a human language:



1Cr 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.





1Cr 14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.


1Cr 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men [to] edification, and exhortation, and comfort.


1Cr 14:4 He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.


1Cr 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.


1Cr 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?


1Cr 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?


1Cr 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?


1Cr 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.


1Cr 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them [is] without signification.


1Cr 14:11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh [shall be] a barbarian unto me.


1Cr 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual [gifts], seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.


1Cr 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.


1Cr 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.


1Cr 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.


1Cr 14:16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?


1Cr 14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.


1Cr 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:


1Cr 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that [by my voice] I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an [unknown] tongue.


1Cr 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.


1Cr 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.


1Cr 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.


1Cr 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in [those that are] unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?


1Cr 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or [one] unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:


1Cr 14:25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on [his] face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.


1Cr 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.


1Cr 14:27 If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret.


1Cr 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.


1Cr 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.


1Cr 14:30 If [any thing] be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.


1Cr 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.


1Cr 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.


1Cr 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

 

[novcncy]

The gift of tongues is not always a human language:



1Cr 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.





1Cr 14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.


1Cr 14:3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men [to] edification, and exhortation, and comfort.


1Cr 14:4 He that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.


1Cr 14:5 I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater [is] he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.


1Cr 14:6 Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?


1Cr 14:7 And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?


1Cr 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?


1Cr 14:9 So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air.


1Cr 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them [is] without signification.


1Cr 14:11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh [shall be] a barbarian unto me.


1Cr 14:12 Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual [gifts], seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.


1Cr 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue pray that he may interpret.


1Cr 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.


1Cr 14:15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.


1Cr 14:16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?


1Cr 14:17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.


1Cr 14:18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:


1Cr 14:19 Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that [by my voice] I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an [unknown] tongue.


1Cr 14:20 Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.


1Cr 14:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.


1Cr 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.


1Cr 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in [those that are] unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?


1Cr 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or [one] unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:


1Cr 14:25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on [his] face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.


1Cr 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.


1Cr 14:27 If any man speak in an [unknown] tongue, [let it be] by two, or at the most [by] three, and [that] by course; and let one interpret.


1Cr 14:28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.


1Cr 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.


1Cr 14:30 If [any thing] be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.


1Cr 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.


1Cr 14:32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.


1Cr 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

I'm assuming that you interpret the word "unknown", which was added by the King James translators, means "unknown to anyone". Others would say it's simply a language that person previously had no knowledge of. Perhaps the word "tongue" is important, and not the word "unkown". At any rate, it's highly debatable, hence the disagreement. I find it interesting that the scripture goes to great lengths to detail how uncertain language is not profitable, by comparing it to discordant musical instruments, barbarians and to uncertain signals in the midst of battle. The curious part is this scripture which is clearly teaching that tongues are to be concise and intelligible, is twisted to support the absurdity that babbling and gibberish are a "language." Quite the paradox, but I'm certain it can be explained away....

 

[Iollain]

1Cr 14:2 For he that speaketh in an [unknown] tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth [him]; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

1Cr 14:14 For if I pray in an [unknown] tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

.........looks like it is unknown as in man cannot understand unless someone has the gift to do so

 

[White Horse]

Pentecostals believe more of the bible is applicable for today

You mean like raising people from the dead?

 

[lismore]

You mean like raising people from the dead?

Hi there

No, I meant it as a comment, not as a criticism. Im sorry If I offended anyone.

Having attended both baptist and pentecostal meetings I can testify that pentecostals follow more areas e.g healings by the laying on of hands and Holy Spirit empowerment, particularly speaking in tongues. There is nothing wrong with what baptists do at their services! Just pentecostals have more at theirs.

P.S The difference between a Baptist and a pentecostal you can see in the Bible: the difference between Apollos and Paul. Acts 18+19

24Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor[b] and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.

Paul in Ephesus



1While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[a] you believed?"
They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."

3So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"
"John's baptism," they replied. 4Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5On hearing this, they were baptized into[b] the name of the Lord Jesus. 6When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues[c] and prophesied. 7There were about twelve men in all.

 

[lismore]

You mean like raising people from the dead?

No. In my experience Baptists believe in the ressurection of the dead also. I even met one black baptist lady in a fellowship of Chinese believers who had been raised from the dead after being a day in the morgue . Didnt seem to have a huge effect on anyone when hearing her testimony but then I realised that this sort of thing happens more often in African/ asian countries.

 

[novcncy]

.........looks like it is unknown as in man cannot understand unless someone has the gift to do so

Do you mean man, as in the corporate "man", the species?

If so, that is quite the creative stretch to make a word added by translators change the whole meaning of the passage. If you take the passage as a whole, you will see that the gift of toungues was given as a sign to unbelievers. However, many Pentecostals and charismatics change the meaning behind the gift, and say that manifestation of the gift of tongues is evidence of salvation and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Those ideas are diametrically opposed, and you are free to believe whatever you choose.

At any rate, I'm not really interested in arguing this out, I was simply acknowledging that there are two different schools of thought on the issue. I'm sure the topic has been beat to death on numerous threads here in CF.

 

[novcncy]

Hi there

No, I meant it as a comment, not as a criticism. Im sorry If I offended anyone.

Having attended both baptist and pentecostal meetings I can testify that pentecostals follow more areas e.g healings by the laying on of hands and Holy Spirit empowerment, particularly speaking in tongues. There is nothing wrong with what baptists do at their services! Just pentecostals have more at theirs.

P.S The difference between a Baptist and a pentecostal you can see in the Bible: the difference between Apollos and Paul. Acts 18+19

24Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor[b] and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.

Paul in Ephesus



1While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[a] you believed?"
They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."

3So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"
"John's baptism," they replied. 4Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5On hearing this, they were baptized into[b] the name of the Lord Jesus. 6When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues[c] and prophesied. 7There were about twelve men in all.

Okay Mr Lismore, you're starting to get me fired up.

Either you are intentionally twisting the Scriptures, of you are simply ignorant of them, but in either case, this is quickly turning into a case of the blind leading the blind.

Perhaps you should study the Baptism of John. I am quite certain you will immediately think some nonsense like "It's water baptism." But it's much more than that. It was a baptism of repentance, not a baptism of obedience and a symbol of belief. It was similar to the OT sacrifices, a picture of the coming Messiah. NT, or believer's baptism, is in obedience to Christ, and is a symbol of being dead with Christ, and the New Man raised to walk in His image. The Holy Spirit is given to every believer at the moment of belief (Ephesians 1:13, Titus 3:5). There's a difference between living in the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit. There's a difference between being indwelt by the Spirit, and being filled, or controlled by Him. Although walking in the Spirit, being totally controlled by Him is ideal, a Christian will ALWAYS be in at least the lower condition. Maybe you should read the very scripture you posted, Acts 19, so that the context will illuminate the few verses you pulled out. It's amazing that Paul, your amusingly described Pentecostal, goes on to teach them the the exact thing I have so crudely paraphrased.

Apollos had a correct, but incomplete knowledge of God, to be sure. He was a devout Jew, and once Aquilla and Priscilla showed him that Jesus was God's Messiah, he accepted that truth. But he wasn't a Christian until he realized that Jesus was the Messiah. That's why he practiced the Baptism of John. He knew he was sinner, and needed the Messiah, and so he practiced the baptism of repentance. He didn't know the Messiah had already come, and once he accepted Jesus, he recieved the baptism of the Spirit.

These manifestations of the Holy Spirit you mention, my personal feeling is that they are hogwash. Satan himself can appear as an angel of light. The function of the Spirit is to glorify the Son, and not the other way around. When people are focusing on the Spirit, instead of the Son, they are wrong. Of all of these so called "miracles" I've ever heard of, none of them bring glory to the Son, they all either glorify the Spirit, or they glorify a person. In either case, they can seem right, but careful examination will reveal that they are not.

Now, one last thing. Check out the rules of the B/AB forum. Make sure you're in accord with them. If you would like to make assertions that Baptists don't have the Holy Spirit or believe the Bible is "appropriate" for today, you can do it elsewhere.

 

[Heero Yuy]

lismore, what book and chapter did those verses come from?

 

[lismore]

lismore, what book and chapter did those verses come from?

Hi there

Acts 18:24

Acts 19:1

 

[lismore]

Okay Mr Lismore, you're starting to get me fired up.

Either you are intentionally twisting the Scriptures, of you are simply ignorant of them, but in either case, this is quickly turning into a case of the blind leading the blind.

Perhaps you should study the Baptism of John. I am quite certain you will immediately think some nonsense like "It's water baptism." But it's much more than that. It was a baptism of repentance, not a baptism of obedience and a symbol of belief. It was similar to the OT sacrifices, a picture of the coming Messiah. NT, or believer's baptism, is in obedience to Christ, and is a symbol of being dead with Christ, and the New Man raised to walk in His image. The Holy Spirit is given to every believer at the moment of belief (Ephesians 1:13, Titus 3:5). There's a difference between living in the Spirit, and walking in the Spirit. There's a difference between being indwelt by the Spirit, and being filled, or controlled by Him. Although walking in the Spirit, being totally controlled by Him is ideal, a Christian will ALWAYS be in at least the lower condition. Maybe you should read the very scripture you posted, Acts 19, so that the context will illuminate the few verses you pulled out. It's amazing that Paul, your amusingly described Pentecostal, goes on to teach them the the exact thing I have so crudely paraphrased.

Apollos had a correct, but incomplete knowledge of God, to be sure. He was a devout Jew, and once Aquilla and Priscilla showed him that Jesus was God's Messiah, he accepted that truth. But he wasn't a Christian until he realized that Jesus was the Messiah. That's why he practiced the Baptism of John. He knew he was sinner, and needed the Messiah, and so he practiced the baptism of repentance. He didn't know the Messiah had already come, and once he accepted Jesus, he recieved the baptism of the Spirit.

These manifestations of the Holy Spirit you mention, my personal feeling is that they are hogwash. Satan himself can appear as an angel of light. The function of the Spirit is to glorify the Son, and not the other way around. When people are focusing on the Spirit, instead of the Son, they are wrong. Of all of these so called "miracles" I've ever heard of, none of them bring glory to the Son, they all either glorify the Spirit, or they glorify a person. In either case, they can seem right, but careful examination will reveal that they are not.

Now, one last thing. Check out the rules of the B/AB forum. Make sure you're in accord with them. If you would like to make assertions that Baptists don't have the Holy Spirit or believe the Bible is "appropriate" for today, you can do it elsewhere.

Hi there

The Holy Spirit points the way to Jesus- they never work in competition and the Holy Spirit never works for the Devil -im not sure where you're coming from!

As I said the baptists dont do anything wrong in their service- far from it, everyone can come closer to God, no matter where you are. I have attended services at both baptists and pentecostal churches and know that neither have 'arrived' completely at perfection. Please, if the scriptures I quoted are wrong: please quote another which shows how they are wrong.

Acts 4: Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: "Rulers and elders of the people! 9If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, 10then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11He is
" 'the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the capstone.[a]'[b] 12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."


Acts 1:8 Jesus said: 8But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

Acts 2

The Holy Spirit Comes at Pentecost

1When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

32God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact. 33Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear.

43Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles.

The believers prayed for the sings and wonders: Acts 4: 29Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your word with great boldness. 30Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus."

Matthew 3:11
"I baptize you with [ Or in] water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

 

[novcncy]

Hi there

The Holy Spirit points the way to Jesus- they never work in competition and the Holy Spirit never works for the Devil -im not sure where you're coming from!

It's a three part process, and here's how it works: First, by causing believers to focus on gibberish, the focus is taken off of God. Second, by focusing on gibberish, believers are caused to judge each other's spirituality by manifestation/lack of this interesting phenomena. Thirdly, although Paul clearly taught that it was a sign to unbelievers (as in, "Whoah! This person can all of the sudden speak my tongue [LANGUAGE]!!! This must be a miracle of God!!!!"), it is turned into a circus within the church, which USUALLY is populated mostly with believers. None of these are in line with scripture. In fact, the debacle of the modern "tongues" movement is exactly contrary to 1 Corinthians 14:40, "Let all things be done decently and in order."

Please, if the scriptures I quoted are wrong: please quote another which shows how they are wrong.

I shall proceed...

The first error is insistence that "other tongues" means something other than other tongues. Baptists do not deny that the Holy Spirit enabled the believers at Pentecost to speak in tongues. What we do refute is the association of the word tongues, which clearly means "languages", with the unbiblical notion of a "Heavenly language", which is unintelligable to anyone on the planet. The fact that the tongues of Acts 2 are human languages, is clearly illustrated in the text. Language groups from all over the world heard these uneducated, Gallillean fishermen preaching the gospel, and were amazed, and wondered how every man heard in his own tongue, the message of the gospel. That's the miracle of tongues.

The second error is the adherance to the concept that tongues are sign for other Christians to recognize the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is amazing to me that proponents of tongues do not see the purpose of tongues, that being a sign of the anointing of God to UNBELIEVERS. What more clear illustration can there be than Acts 2? Yet it is continually taken out of context to support the doctrine.

Related to the second error, is the third, and that is regarding the baptism of the Spirit. The baptism of the Spirit is not a mystical, unintelligible language. It's what happens at the moment of salvation, when the Holy Spirit regenerates the dead soul, and seals it until the day of redemption. Everyone who asks Jesus to save them is baptized by the Spirit. There is no such thing as a believer who is not baptized in the Spirit.

Matthew 3:11
"I baptize you with [ Or in] water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

No one denies what John the Baptist taught....to the first disciples, and that, even before they were disciples! And God fulfilled His promise. His Holy Spirit baptized them at the moment they were saved, and they even had tongues of fire over their heads at Pentecost. The statement John made applied to them, but not to every Christian. It's quite the stretch to maintain that every Christian needs to have a cloven tongue of fire over their head, or they don't have the Holy Spirit. Rather, we have a small list of items, perhaps you're familiar with, called the fruits of the Spirit. Since Paul talked about the very topic of "How do you know you're controlled by the Spirit?" not just once, but twice (Ephesians 5 and Galatians 5), one would think that if tongues or flames had anything to do with it, he would have remembered to mention those facts. I guess Paul forgot, but fortunately, we have creative theologians to help him fill in the cracks, and help us understand what it REALLY means to have the Holy Spirit. (That's sarcasm, in case it's not as obvious as it seems)




Back to the OP....I suppose that you're starting to see some of the differences (or the main one) between Baptists and Pentecostals.

 

[HumbleMan]

If you don't mind me jumping in........

There are as many flavors of pentecostals as there are baptists. The main theological difference is the issue of cessation of gifts, and even that line is blurred sometimes. Pentecostals believe the gifts given to the apostles are still in use today, although every time there's a discussion about the gifts, it gets bogged down on tongues.

Most pentecostals assign no salvific value to speaking in tongues, just as most baptists don't believe water baptism saves you. There are actually very few doctrinal differences between the majority of baptist and pents.

The biggest difference you're probably going to see is in worship style. While most baptist services (that I've been to) proceed in an orderly and planned manner, pentecostals prefer a more emotional and unplanned approach to worship. As my pastor is wont to say, "I may be driving, but the Holy Spirit is giving the directions!". Music style used to be an issue, too, but that's changing.

 

[novcncy]

If you don't mind me jumping in........

There are as many flavors of pentecostals as there are baptists. The main theological difference is the issue of cessation of gifts, and even that line is blurred sometimes. Pentecostals believe the gifts given to the apostles are still in use today, although every time there's a discussion about the gifts, it gets bogged down on tongues.

Most pentecostals assign no salvific value to speaking in tongues, just as most baptists don't believe water baptism saves you. There are actually very few doctrinal differences between the majority of baptist and pents.

The biggest difference you're probably going to see is in worship style. While most baptist services (that I've been to) proceed in an orderly and planned manner, pentecostals prefer a more emotional and unplanned approach to worship. As my pastor is wont to say, "I may be driving, but the Holy Spirit is giving the directions!". Music style used to be an issue, too, but that's changing.

Hmmmm...that's about it. Thanks, HumbleMan, for your post.

 

[~Blackangel~513~]

If you don't mind me jumping in........

There are as many flavors of pentecostals as there are baptists. The main theological difference is the issue of cessation of gifts, and even that line is blurred sometimes. Pentecostals believe the gifts given to the apostles are still in use today, although every time there's a discussion about the gifts, it gets bogged down on tongues.

Most pentecostals assign no salvific value to speaking in tongues, just as most baptists don't believe water baptism saves you. There are actually very few doctrinal differences between the majority of baptist and pents.

The biggest difference you're probably going to see is in worship style. While most baptist services (that I've been to) proceed in an orderly and planned manner, pentecostals prefer a more emotional and unplanned approach to worship. As my pastor is wont to say, "I may be driving, but the Holy Spirit is giving the directions!". Music style used to be an issue, too, but that's changing.

I could not have said it better myself. I attend a baptist church but I have been to every kind of church. My mom sings with a nondenominational choir and we have had to priveledge to worship with every color, shape and denomination.


Growing up in a baptist church I have seen my church change from the traditional baptist to as one poster called it "baptistocal." we praise, worship, dance, shout, lift holy hands, lay hands, anoint with oil, etc. We also do not have a set schedule for our service, our programs read that we will let the HOLY SPIRIT lead. My pastor is vibrant, he jumps, he hoot and will holla. We also believe in women preachers and giving of tithes.

Only differences I have really noticed is that at most baptist churches it is come as you are. Although we believe in the spiritual gift of tongues, we also believe that you should have an interpreter.

 

[Ginny]

Although we believe in the spiritual gift of tongues, we also believe that you should have an interpreter.

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

 

[perpendicular_bisector]

It's a three part process, and here's how it works: First, by causing believers to focus on gibberish, the focus is taken off of God. Second, by focusing on gibberish, believers are caused to judge each other's spirituality by manifestation/lack of this interesting phenomena. Thirdly, although Paul clearly taught that it was a sign to unbelievers (as in, "Whoah! This person can all of the sudden speak my tongue [LANGUAGE]!!! This must be a miracle of God!!!!"), it is turned into a circus within the church, which USUALLY is populated mostly with believers. None of these are in line with scripture. In fact, the debacle of the modern "tongues" movement is exactly contrary to 1 Corinthians 14:40, "Let all things be done decently and in order."





Back to the OP....I suppose that you're starting to see some of the differences (or the main one) between Baptists and Pentecostals.

Hello

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

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

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

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

:o