What is the baptism of the holy spirit all about?

[A New Day]

for jesusfreak34988

1 Corinthians 12:10- To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kings of tongues; To another the interpretation of tongues.
1 Corinthians 14:2- For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not untio men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; home beit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
...
If you don't understand something please don't count it as weird, strange or wrong. See what God has to say about it first

thank you that you mentioned those verses, they also remind me of the seven gifts of the holy spirit and the 12 fruits of the holy spirit and the seven virtues of the holy spirit.

 

[Nanopants]

To Nanopants
​

in the beginning you said that it is not a persistent feeling
And after that you said that it is a persistent effect.

I do not want to understand what you said wrong, did you mean that when someone receive/received the holy spirit, if they were not in a stand with God then the holy spirit would be in vain for them that it will not manifest itself in and through the person? is that what you mean?

The statement was derived from the text which I quoted. I was disassociating the impermanent experiences such as feelings with the unchanging effect of the anointing which is derived from the essence of God, the effect being blessings and curses measured out on those in contact with such an individual.

 

[A New Day]

Nanopants I am sorry that your last sentence is not clear to me, if you care to express it differently that would be nice.

 

[A New Day]

to MoreCoffee

It seems to me that these things have their root in history and their branches in our time; we do not repeat Pentecost either communally or individually nor do we receive the anointing again communally or individually but we possess both as the body of Christ in succession from those who first received these blessings. And it is this succession which brings us to the laying on of hands as the means of transmitting this gift from one to another through all the centuries from the beginning on Pentecost day to our own day.

Thank you for that thought, but I think that there are two problems with that.

First it is as if you say that the direct pouring from God to us, of the holy spirit, was limited to a number of people only.
Second how can a person today know if he is a successor/descendant of those that received the holy spirit two thousand years ago? What if those and all their generations are no more?

 

[A New Day]

For JAL

First

Here again the Spirit fell upon a group of individuals within a geographic region. Pentecost was not therefore a historic once-and-for-all, it is to be repeated in the lives of individuals.

Do you believe in the baptism of individuals today the same as the apostles baptized individuals two thousand years ago?

Second

You said:

Consider the unbeliever. Does he have the Spirit? Yes, if we maintain that God is EVERYWHERE. But the Spirit within him is merely an inactive potential, activated only by repentance, obedience and faith.

Then you said:

So when God gives the Spirit to the Christian,...

you first said that unbeliever/everyone has already the holy spirit, then you said that God gives it to the christian.

I do not understand. Can you explain that again please?
Also When does an unbeliever have the holy spirit in him?

 

[Nanopants]

Nanopants I am sorry that your last sentence is not clear to me, if you care to express it differently that would be nice.

I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." -Gen 12:3

This has nothing to do with feelings, and we know from experience that they come and go, hence they are impermanent.

 

[A New Day]

To ViaCrucis

you said:

The Spirit has already, once and for all, been poured out for all; upon the whole Church. Our reception of the Spirit comes by our Baptism into Christ, by which our sins are forgiven and we receive the gift of the Spirit.

I have two questions for you please:
1 - What do you mean by: the whole church? If you mean the first church two thousands years ago then I ask you the following question number 2:
2 - it is the same question that I asked to MoreCoffee:
How can a person today know if he is a successor/descendant of those that received the holy spirit two thousand years ago? What if they and all their generations are no more?

thank you

 

[zeke37]

I said...one of the largest farces in all Christendom is calling the gift of tongues,

that which we see today in Pentecostal and charismatic circles.

WOW!, it's actually the opposite

ANYONE can mumble and call it what ever they want...
some even believe it's Godly, or God speaking for you, etc.....
some just go along with it....keeping up with the Jones'.

I would suggest that you dismiss it completely and move on.
I checked it out, and it did not take long to realize it was all a sham.

speaking in mumbled-jumbled ecstatic syllables, which no one can understand, is not a gift.

and anyone claiming to understand this goobily gock,
is outright lying or being deceived by dark forces

First off, Speaking in tongues is a prayer language between Man and God.

lol...have at it...but no, it is not.
if you are not willing to listen to reason
then you will be trapped in your Babylon, babbling, and calling it Godly...lol.

Satan taking away prayer from certain Christians....ouch.


biblically, speaking in tongues is speaking the languages of men.
if it comes out as barbarian speech, then it is not a gift of God.

if you were supposed to evangelize a large group,
but you spoke a different "tongue=language" than them listening,
it would be a very bad thing.
you'd be preaching to God only
you'd be speaking to the air
no one could get a thing from it.
it would be in vain.

the funniest thing is how charismatics take Paul's admonitions, as praise.
he's telling you that it's bad if you ONLY speak to God
when you were supposed to speak to men and bring them to God

so speak their language=tongue,
or get someone to help you translate you message into their tongue
so they can learn and come to Him.

1. Corinthians 12:10- To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kings of tongues; To another the interpretation of tongues.
1. Corinthians 14:2- For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not untio men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; home beit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

DIVERSE KINDS/DIVERSITIES of tongues...ie, the tongues of men.

the ACTS events were not the norm.
they were a special KICKSTART for the Great Commission
getting the Gospel into the minds of all, regardless of what language they spoke.

1Cor14 is much the same, but not by the Cloven tongues of fire method,
but rather by spreading the word of Christ into all languages of men,
through natural means.
with the help of God gifted individuals to help spread it.

preachers/translaters/interpreters....

it simply has nothing to do with the charismatic circles today.
sorry Charlie.


Paul was a great linguist too,
and he did not need the help of translators/interpreters.
he spoke more tongues of men, than anyone,
and that is one reason why God chose Him to be the gentile ambassador

he could speak Hebrew, and Greek dialects....many....

5. I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied" fr greater is he that prophesieth that he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret that the church may receive edifying.

it's like this...example...
you speak a certain dialect of Hebrew,
but you are at a multi-lingual assembly.
in the church there are many languages/dialects being represented.
Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic dialects...

how do we, no matter what tongue/language we ourselves speak,
get the message that we have, across to them so they can ALL understand it?

maybe we have an "interpretation" of the OT that points to Christ
maybe we have a psalm to share that points to Christ
maybe we have learned something about the scriptures, that we are commissioned to share.

but (in Corinth) lots of folks assembled, each speak different languages...
so how do we accomplish this?
how do we get our specific Hebrew dialect, understood by all these in attendance?

1Cor14 tells us how.

use gifted individuals to help you .
linguists and preachers on the same stage.
one speaking the message, and another translating.

infact, i'm very glad that folks through the centuries have understood this properly,
because it is by this very means that YOU and I have the Word of Christ today

we became Christians because of this technique

the Word of God was NOT kept in Hebrew or Greek or even Latin, forever.
we are to allow the Word into ALL tongues of men, so forbid tongue not.

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.

that means both at the same time.
you can't mumble ecstatic utterances and have it mean anything intelligent.
why can't you guys read the entire chapter...you choose a line here or there that SEEMS to support your THEORY,
until, of course, the rest of the chapter is read with it,
making your understanding null and void.

18. I thank my God that I speak with tongues more than ye all:
22. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not; but prophesying serveth not for them not believe not, but for them which believe.

did you even bother to read that?
tongues is NOT a sign for those that believe.
so what ever you are calling tongues, is not it.

tongues, means, the Word being shared in folks natural tongues.
that's it.
from one kind of tongue to another....one language to another

Hebrew to Greek
Greek to Latin
Latin to English
English to French
etc
etc
etc.

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.

yep.
example...you speak Hebrew, and it is your turn to preach to the assembly and share your Psalms and interpretations of the Word

say there was an English man in the audience,
but he did not understand Hebrew.

He understands English and French.

so, you preach in Hebrew,
and a translator translates your words to Greek
at the same time, another translator also translates your Hebrew message into French

now, if this is done too much, the message gets lost
and we don't want that...
too much would bring confusion,
so paul limits translators to being 2 or three at most, at one time.

and if someone in the audience still can't understand,
then they are to remain silent and wait, asking someone later for the meaning.
do not disrupt the service.

39. (and most important) Wherefore, brethern covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

yep. it is very important to get the message of Christ out to the entire world and all their "tongues"

so don't forbid that Word of God going in tongues.
it does not have to be spread in Hebrew or Greek....

(RCC kept it in Latin for centuries and centuries...shame
you would have had to understand Latin to get any message from the Bible
thank God that was stopped and we have His Word today)

it simply does not mean what many base their "faith" on.
sad.

when God speaks, everyone understands,
regardless of what "tongue" they themselves speak and understand

if any message comes out of a preachers mouth, that is not understood by his audience, ie the mumbo-jumbo that is in charismatic circles...
then it is not of God
it's nothing but confusion, and God does not author confusion.

the word of God is NOT for YOU alone.
it is for ALL men in ALL tongues.

there is no speaking gobbly [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]

i call the charismatic movements version of tongues lots of things,
but never "from God"

as you called it, we are commanded to speak in tongues,

then do so, in Latin Greek Chinese Mandarin, Swaheli...
spread the Word into ALL tongues of men.
what do you think Missionaries have been doing all these years?
speaking goobly gock?

and things of that nature, certain things are for us to use as a witness within the Christian world and others are for those not yet saved.

but that is NOT wha the chapter teaches.
it says tongues are NOT a sign for those that believe.

what has you believing that any of the the gifts of the Spirit are used for building "us" up.
they are to get other IN. not for US to think were special.

If you don't understand something please don't count it as weird, strange or wrong. See what God has to say about it first. ...

lol.
been doing so for many years.
the problem is, that you seem to have related your faith, to speaking in what you call tongues.
shame again.

you follow a sham, charlatans or worse.

now you have compelled me to post the entire chapter with a line by line explanation.

if YOU don't agree, so be it...

but plenty of others have over the years,
and it has becomes apparent to them, that your circle has completely made void the word of God
with regards to this chapter about spreading the word of God to everyone, regardless of what tongue they speak and understand.

you make it about a special prayer language......lol....shame.

hey, I could care less how you wanna pray.
but when you rip this chapter up, and make it about your prayer language,
you make void the Word of God, about the Great Commission
and I cannot stand for that without saying something to the contrary

 

[JAL]

Being how they were Jewish converts from other foreign lands, it would stand to reason that they would also know Hebrews since they were dwelling in Jerusalem.

Acts 2:5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

So yes, when Peter had spoken finally, it was in Hebrews as they all did understood Hebrews, and thus Peter spoke as the Spirit led him to speak as it would be the gift of prophesy.

But what had happened before Peter's speech to them all was God manifesting the gift of tongues to speak unto the people in their native tongue as a sign to them and to draw them out to hear Peter's speech in Hebrews.

Again, you're not addressing the argument. (Sigh). Here it is again. The Greek word "tongues" simply means "languages" as in "every nation and every tongue". It doesn't ALWAYS refer to the "gift of tongues". So what is the gift of tongues? Check out 1Cor 14. A revelation spoken can be
(1) in a language no one understands. Paul calls this the gift of tongues. It REQUIRES a second gift (if spoken publicly) called the gift of interpretation. The message is always stated twice, first in the tongue, and THEN via the gift of interpretation. On Pentecost the message was only stated ONCE. Which brings us to #2
(2) In a language the audience DOES understand. Paul calls it the gift of PROPHECY. Here the message only needs to be stated ONCE. THAT'S what happened on Pentecost. There was NO INTERPRETER anywhere in the book of Acts. Moreover, Peter TELLS us it was the gift of prophecy because he says it fulfilled Joel's promise, "They SHALL prophesy". Notice it doesn't say, "They might just POSSIBLY prophesy" No. SHALL prophesy. Anyone who isn't prophesying lacks the Lukan anointing/baptism for witnessing/evangelism.

I gave three additional arguments - you didn't address either of those as well. I'm not going to repeat them here.

 

[JAL]

To JAL

Unfortunately I hear more than one thought about the speaking in tongues, others say that it is a language of angels to speak with God and others say that it is about speaking in different human tongues/languages and others say something else.
Thank you anyway for your story with speaking in tongues.

you saidDo you care to explain that please? the apostles literally were speaking in multiple languages, do you think that they did not understand what they were speaking? What do you think?

Acts 2:4 They were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak in foreign languages according as the Spirit gave them words to utter.

Yes Peter knew exactly what he was saying. But he articulated it in languages unfamiliar to him, by the power of the Spirit.

 

[A New Day]

I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." -Gen 12:3

This has nothing to do with feelings, and we know from experience that they come and go, hence they are impermanent.

Thank you Nanopants, let me quote the previous post please

Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord... -Acts 3:19

But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him. -1 Jhn 2:27

I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." -Gen 12:3

The anointing isn't something that provides a persistent "feeling", but through the gift of the Holy Spirit God Himself teaches us to walk in His ways, and if we do, then there is a persistent outward effect on the world.

So as I understand, you say that the anointing itself does not provide persistent/permanent feelings, but there are effects that are the cause of the anointing and they are blessings and curses for those in contact with the anointed person, and those effects come and go.

Did i say it right finally?

 

[A New Day]

Yes Peter knew exactly what he was saying. But he articulated it in languages unfamiliar to him, by the power of the Spirit.

Thank you, so since Peter knew what he was saying
and since he articulated it in different languages unfamiliar to him
Do you think that the languages were all spoken by him at the very same time simultaneously? or was each language spoken one after another?

 

[A New Day]

to ViaCrucis

you said:

Just as the Apostle said on Pentecost in his sermon, "Repent and be baptized every one of your in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Do you believe that the apostle meant that to be for the first church two thousand years ago only?

You said:

This is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call."

That was acts 2:39, does it mean that the children of a person that is baptized do not need to be baptized since their parents were baptized? For how many generations is that possible? How do you understand that verse please?

 

[A New Day]

To Tellastory

About your post http://www.christianforums.com/t7735257/
i have a question, who are baptized with the holy spirit, are they all considered believers?

About your post http://www.christianforums.com/t7735253/

The same holds true for believers looking for a sign that they are born again when signs follow the believers in serving as a sign to the unbelievers. The signs are not for serving the believers to prove that they are saved.

I would like to hear your thought about this verse please:
2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you--unless, of course, you fail the test?

About your post http://www.christianforums.com/t7735256/

For a saved believer to be asking for the Holy Spirit to receive again is like denying His words above because that would be a work of denying you had received Him in the first place as if the Father gave you a stone instead of bread or He gave you a serpent instead of a fish that you would need to ask for the Holy Spirit again.

But what about David:
Psalm 51:10 Create in me a pure heart, O God,
and renew a steadfast spirit within me.
11 Do not cast me from your presence
or take your Holy Spirit from me.
12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation
and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

In the example of David, do you think that what he did is that he denied that he received the holy spirit when he was anointed? Or was that psalm about something else? what do you believe?

You said:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7735257/
Jesus had given the Holy Spirit in Matthew 10th chapter and agin in John 20th chapter, but they were only temporary infilling as those in the OT saints were.

That is the first time that hear about temporary infilling? I know the word manifestation, did you mean by temporary infilling the word manifestation? What I think is that the holy spirit can manifest itself in different ways and in different times in the life of a person who had already received the holy spirit, is that what you mean?

thank you

 

[JAL]

Thank you, so since Peter knew what he was saying
and since he articulated it in different languages unfamiliar to him
Do you think that the languages were all spoken by him at the very same time simultaneously? or was each language spoken one after another?

I sometimes speculate that the Spirit actually took control of the sound waves causing it to be proclaimed in several languages at once as Peter spoke. I dunno.

 

[JAL]

Zeke37,

All your ranting about how silly it is to evangelize in tongues is already well known by Pentecostals. The gift is understood to be for personal edification (and corporate edification if there is an interpreter). It's not for evangelism, so you don't have to insult them on that point.


A couple of weak points in your analysis. First, Paul calls it "The gift of interpretation." Let's consider how gifts work, shall we? Suppose I have the gift of healing given to me by the Spirit. If I travel to a different country where people speak a language unknown to me, can the gift still operate? Yes, because it is a supernatural gift. It doesn't REQUIRE a particular language or geograpical locale. (I'll get to my point in a moment). What now of the gift of interepretation? If it is just a natural talent of learning languages, as you suggest, why call it a gift of the Spirit? So suppose you now visit a country speaking a language unfamiliar to you. Here you would be unable to interpret. That's odd, isn't it? The Spirit supposedly gave you the gift of intepretation, but it only works in your own country? That's a pretty low view of the Spirit's capabilties and His gifts. When Peter prophesied on Pentecost in multiple languages, here too we see a gift that could succeed in any nation.


Second problem is 14:13, "Therefore let him that speaks in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret." If I'm just speaking out a natural language that I learned the hard way, I wouldn't need an intepretation for myself (I already know what I said). Would I perhaps need God to give me a translatoin/interpretation for the audience? Yes, perhaps, but if God gives it to me all of a sudden, then it's not a natural talent of learning languages. Or if I don't need to get it from God (suppose I already know how to interpret/translate it by natural learning), then why should I pray for an interpretation? Why not just start translating?

Third problem is that Paul says that "no man understandeth him" who speaks in tongues (verse 2). This means it is NOT a language that someone in the audience learned. Since no one understood what was said, the only way to get a translation is to get it directly from God. This is NOT a matter of learning languages, therefore.

Your position on this issue is understandable, but I'm inclined to think it's a little weaker, exegetically, than the Pentecostal reading of 1Cor 14.

 

[A New Day]

To Jpark

It can happen many times.
It can be invoked but can also come and go like in the days of old (John 3:8).​

Thank you for
John 3:8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

And a question about that, do you think that the spirit dwells in a person in order that it shows itself in his life many times later? Or that it does not dwell and it comes and goes through the person whenever that it likes?

Another thing about what you said

Now I'll ask a question. What is the nature of Spirit baptism?

1 Peter 1:2 who have been chosen and destined by God the Father and sanctified by the Spirit to be obedient to Jesus Christ and to be sprinkled with his blood

But what if someone is baptized and he was not chosen and destined by God?
In other words, how do you know that you are chosen by God and that your name is written in the book of life in order for you to be baptized?
In other words, can a baptism be in vain?

What do you think?

 

[Tellastory]

Again, you're not addressing the argument. (Sigh).

Almost like two ships passing in the night.

Here it is again. The Greek word "tongues" simply means "languages" as in "every nation and every tongue". It doesn't ALWAYS refer to the "gift of tongues".

But that is what gift of tongues are: of other men's lips. It is the same thing to mean languages as in every nation and every tongue.

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

In that whole chapter, Paul was talking about the gift of tongues and so that is why what I say is backed by scripture that what had happened at Pentecost as far as tongues goes is what had happened in the churches where it needs interpretation to edify the church, but it did not at Pentecost because they understood that tongue being in their native tongue that they did not need an interpretation.

So what is the gift of tongues? Check out 1Cor 14. A revelation spoken can be
(1) in a language no one understands. Paul calls this the gift of tongues. It REQUIRES a second gift (if spoken publicly) called the gift of interpretation. The message is always stated twice, first in the tongue, and THEN via the gift of interpretation. On Pentecost the message was only stated ONCE. Which brings us to #2

Understood as necessary for decency and order in the church.

(2) In a language the audience DOES understand. Paul calls it the gift of PROPHECY. Here the message only needs to be stated ONCE. THAT'S what happened on Pentecost. There was NO INTERPRETER anywhere in the book of Acts. Moreover, Peter TELLS us it was the gift of prophecy because he says it fulfilled Joel's promise, "They SHALL prophesy". Notice it doesn't say, "They might just POSSIBLY prophesy" No. SHALL prophesy. Anyone who isn't prophesying lacks the Lukan anointing/baptism for witnessing/evangelism.

But it was not in the sense the gift of prophesy because the speaker did not know what they were saying to the audience that were hearing it in their native tongue, thus in that respect, that was the gift of tongues.

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. 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.

The gift of tongues serves as a sign towards unbelievers and so as a minsteriel outreach, the gift of interpretation is not needed as they were hearing it in their native tongue.

Most take the word prophecy to mean predicting or foretelling future events or future judgments when in fact, it is referring to edify as in preaching the word. So when I say it was God's gift of tongues as of other men's lips to speak unto the people, then that is what it was as needing no interpretation and thus in that sense straightforward prophesying to them.

I gave three additional arguments - you didn't address either of those as well. I'm not going to repeat them here.

Sorry, but addressing certain key points was all I had thought was necessary. I meant no offense, but that was the gift of tongues at Pentecost before Peter had stood up and spoke plainly in Hebrew as led by the Spirit to say with the gift of prophesy.

 

[JAL]

Almost like two ships passing in the night.



But that is what gift of tongues are: of other men's lips. It is the same thing to mean languages as in every nation and every tongue.

Um..no. To know a language you learned is distinct from supernaturally articulating a language you never learned. One is "the gift of tongues", the other is a natural talent.

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

In that whole chapter, Paul was talking about the gift of tongues and so that is why what I say is backed by scripture that what had happened at Pentecost as far as tongues goes is what had happened in the churches where it needs interpretation to edify the church, but it did not at Pentecost because they understood that tongue being in their native tongue that they did not need an interpretation.

Paul says the gift of tongues ALWAYS requires an interpreter. Therefore what happened at Pentecost was not the gift of tongues - it was simply prophetically gifted men doing a miracle (as prophets often did), in this case the miracle of articulating the prophetic utterance in unlearned languages.

But it was not in the sense the gift of prophesy because the speaker did not know what they were saying to the audience that were hearing it in their native tongue, thus in that respect, that was the gift of tongues.

. Nope. No interpreter needed, ergo it wasn't the gift of tongues. According to Paul the gift of tongues REQUIRES an interpreter because it is in a language which NO ONE UNDERSTANDs (14:2). Your contradicting Paul's definition of "the gift of tongues" by trying to substitute your own - and trying to shove it down Pentecost's throat.

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. 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.

The gift of tongues serves as a sign towards unbelievers and so as a minsteriel outreach, the gift of interpretation is not needed as they were hearing it in their native tongue.

No interpreter, then it's not what Paul called "the gift of tongues" - it was rather what PETER called it, the gift of prophecy.

Most take the word prophecy to mean predicting or foretelling future events or future judgments when in fact, it is referring to edify as in preaching the word. So when I say it was God's gift of tongues as of other men's lips to speak unto the people, then that is what it was as needing no interpretation and thus in that sense straightforward prophesying to them.

Yes. It was prophesy in multiple languages. It wasn't the official "gift of tongues" that Paul refers to in 1cor 14. That's an important distinction, and unfortunately you keep trying to blur it.

Sorry, but addressing certain key points was all I had thought was necessary. I meant no offense, but that was the gift of tongues at Pentecost before Peter had stood up and spoke plainly in Hebrew as led by the Spirit to say with the gift of prophesy.

Wrong. Peter said the OTHER disciples (before he gave his own speech) had already fulfilled Joel's promise, "They shall prophesy." So it wasn't the gift of tongues.

 

[Tellastory]

To Tellastory

About your post http://www.christianforums.com/t7735257/
i have a question, who are baptized with the holy spirit, are they all considered believers?

Only believers in Jesus Christ has the promise of the permanent indwelling Holy Spirit now that Christ has ascended to the right hand of God the Father..

About your post http://www.christianforums.com/t7735253/


I would like to hear your thought about this verse please:
2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you--unless, of course, you fail the test?

This was in reference to those preaching another Jesus or another spirit to receive in 2 Corinthians 11:1-4. The idea that they believe they have to receive the Holy Spirit again, means they need to re-examine themselves in the faith to remind themselves that He is in them as promised for all those that come to & believed in Jesus Christ.

About your post http://www.christianforums.com/t7735256/

But what about David:
Psalm 51:10 Create in me a pure heart, O God,
and renew a steadfast spirit within me.
11 Do not cast me from your presence
or take your Holy Spirit from me.
12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation
and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

In the example of David, do you think that what he did is that he denied that he received the holy spirit when he was anointed? Or was that psalm about something else? what do you believe?

That wasn't the promise of the permanent indwelling Holy Ghost. Jesus had given the Holy Ghost in Matthew 10th chapter and again in John 20th chapter after His resurrection, but that was not the promise of the permanent indwelling Holy Ghost because He was not glorified yet to give that promise, as the condition of that promise was when He was no longer present with them but at that right hand of God the Father.

John 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Here is the condition of that promise:

John 14:1Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. .....16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.....25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. 27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. 28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. 29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.

He did not say that you will know Him when you speak in tongues. He said you will know Him as dwelling within you and that promise is as abiding forever.... even when a believer depart from faith and live in sin.

Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

2 Timothy 2:11 It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him: 12 If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: 13 If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.........18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. 21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

You said:
Originally Posted by Tellastory

http://www.christianforums.com/t7735257/
Jesus had given the Holy Spirit in Matthew 10th chapter and agin in John 20th chapter, but they were only temporary infilling as those in the OT saints were.
​

That is the first time that hear about temporary infilling? I know the word manifestation, did you mean by temporary infilling the word manifestation?

What I mean is.. per Old Covenant, those led by the Spirit of God did not have Him permanently as those in the New Covenant have Him now.

What I think is that the holy spirit can manifest itself in different ways and in different times in the life of a person who had already received the holy spirit, is that what you mean?

Since you are expounding on the part about temporary infilling, I'm going to have to assume you are referring to another incident where a believer will feel the Holy Spirit coming over him in a supernatural manner that it would take their eyes off of the Son and move away from resting in Him to receiving the "Spirit" again and after a sensational sign in the flesh... to which if that is what you are referring to, then no.. that is not the Holy Spirit but the work of the spirit of the antichrist.

The real indwelling Holy Spirit need to do no such manifestation in the life of a believer when He seeks to point them to continually seek the face of the Son in prayer, fellowship, and worship as we are to be the bride to the Bridegroom.

Seducing spirits will lure believers away from relating to God the Father through the Son and thus proving to be the spirits of the antichrist which is in the world to do the work as described as antichrist meaning "instead of Christ" as Jesus is the Christ for us to be relating to God through.

thank you

Be sure to go before that throne of grace asking Jesus Christ for help for wisdom and discernment in His words in understanding this issue and God be willing, I shall be thanking the Lord when He causes the increase.