Speaking in tongues

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:
Did Peter tell us how to be born agian? Yes Acts 2:38

Did they repent, Yes,
Were they baptized? Yes
Did they speak in tongues when they received the Holy Ghost? Yes<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

NO, they did NOT speak in tongues. Where does it say they spoke in tongues?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Acts 2:38
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.
40
And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
41
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
42
And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
43
And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.
44
And all that believed were together, and had all things common;
45
And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.
46
And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
47
Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No where does it say that those who were saved spoke in tongues, it DOES say that wonders and signs were done by the Apostles, not by everyone!


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

(that is being born of the water and the spirit)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's keep this in the water and spirit thread. I posted my thoughts there.


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

Check out Acts 8: Seems that more had to happen than just believe and baptizeing for the Holy Ghost to fall.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And in Acts 10 they received the Holy Spirit without having received water baptism. You still have not told me HOW this can happen if the blood was not applied. The Holy Spirit can NOT indwell a house that has is full of sin and not been covered by the blood!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Acts 10:43
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
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?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

See the "we part"? Can we forbid water to these? Of course not, but the water was something performed by "them" not by God. The Holy Spirit indwelled and saved these people regardless of water baptism!


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

What about the Ethiopien, it was just him and Phillip, did he get baptized to show the world? NOOOOOOOOOOOO it was just him and phillip. He did it b/c he wanted to be born again. Not to show the world. if that was the case he would have gathered the world together. (Use a little common since here people)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What about the Ethiopian? Do tell us why God would take Phillip away and leave this man unsaved? He never did recieve a "baptism of the Holy Spirit or spoke in tongues". God took Phillip away as soon as he was baptized in water!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

Acts 19: Hmmmm man John the Baptist baptized these guys, why get wet a second time? To show the world again that you were going to follow Christ. Thats the whole reason why John the Baptist baptized. He baptized them b/c that baptisism that John Baptized was an "OUTWARD STATEMENT TO SHOW THE WORLD THAT YOU WERE GOING TO FOLLOW CHRIST" What happened when they found that out? Ummm were the rebaptized in the NAME OF JESUS? Well thats what the Bible says but maybe you should read it for your self. And what happened after that? FUNNNY! they spoke in tongues and where were the interpretors?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As with the people in Acts 8, this is the transitional time from life under the law to life under grace. The Apostles were going around giving the Holy Spirit to those who had not heard about what happened in the upper room. God decided to use the Apostles for this task. This only applied to those who were alive in both eras, the time of the law AND the time of grace. We have never lived under the law since Jesus has made his sacrifice once for all, we live under grace and all we need to do is believe in Him and we receive His Spirit, just as He promised that He would give it to us.

The Bible will not contradict itself. There are explanations for things if you look at them in context. I still have yet to get an answer for Acts 10 and the thief on the cross. How can you be saved without the blood being applied?

~Lorelei

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:


and for acts 10 I dont know why God did it that way, but notice after they are filled with the holy Ghost they are commanded to be baptized in the name of Jesus.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes they are commanded to be baptized but they are already saved! The Baptism was not necessary for salvation, for the blood to applied, or for the Holy Spirit to be received.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

Why does it have to state everywhere that someone spoke in tongues. If you would read acts 10 and 11 you would find out that it says "they received the HOLY GHOST just LIKE WE DID" That means they spoke in tongues and yadda yadda yadda.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And why do I have to take YOUR word for it that they do? It HAS to say it IF it must be true. The Bible doesn't HAVE to say it every time because it DOESN'T happen every time. The Bible NEVER says that tongues is the evidence of the Holy Spirit AND it is not demonstrated EVERY time as the evidence, therefore tongues IS NOT the evidence. Again..if you received the Holy Spirit JUST LIKE THEM, then tell me about the cloven tongue of fire and what language you are speaking. Who heard you speak in thier own tongue?? READ WHAT YOU ARE QUOTING! You are proving yourself wrong!


You admit yourself you don't know the answers.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:
and for acts 10 I dont know why God did it that way<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And for defense you say why does it have to be that way?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:
Why does it have to state everywhere that someone spoke in tongues. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't show me God's Word to prove your point, just what you think it should mean.

That is NOT good enough! God will reveal His Truth through His Word not yours!

~Lorelei

[ January 02, 2002: Message edited by: Lorelei ]

 

"Keep thinking" Brian, God only knows you need it.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

I already answered the question about the theif on the cross. The theif on the cross was still under the old testament law. No one could exp the new birth exp until Jesus died. The New testament salvation could not fully come until the death of Jesus.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What makes your off-hand declaration of the thief on the cross being in the Old Testament correct? Why should anyone believe that? Just because you say it? The thief on the cross received salvation directly from Christ, and is as much in the New Testament dispensation as any other believer living today. Quit trying to justify your warped theology by giving another senseless meaning to Scripture.
DHK

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ONENESS:

Why does it have to state everywhere that someone spoke in tongues. If you would read acts 10 and 11 you would find out that it says "they received the HOLY GHOST just LIKE WE DID" That means they spoke in tongues and yadda yadda yadda.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It doesn't state everywhere that people spoke in tongues and it doesn't have to. Of all the dozens of times that the Book of Acts mentions people getting saved, there are only three; get that, just 3, that people spoke in tongues: the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2), Acts 10, and Acts 19. Of all the many times individuals came to Christ these are the only instances that are mentioned where individuals spoke in tongues.
The reasons are given for us in 1Cor.14. Tongues are for a sign for the unbelieving Jew. In all three places you have Jews present. They were given because the revelation of God had not yet been completed (perfected) 1Cor.13:8-11. Tongues is the last gift of importance listed in 1Cor.12:28-31, but you make it the most important, contrary to Scripture. It was sign only given to the church, for public use, and only given to men, never to women. It always needed an interpreter. Tongues is not gibberish. It is a real known language. There are some 13 languages listed in Acts 2 which were spoken by the Apostles on the Day of Pentecost. Which language do you speak in? Paul in as much denounces tongues in that he says, if one comes into your assembly and you are all speaking in tongues, will he not think that you are mad (insane, crazy)? The world thinks you are! Paul was right. He also said that he would rather speak five words with understanding than 10,000 words in an unknown languange. That puts the relative value of tongues on a scale of 1 to 10,000 at 10,000, with 10,000 being the bottom number. Not much value in that gift is there? How could such a valueless gift be so necessary to salvation? Please answer.
DHK

 

Just something for EVERYONE to consider, prayerfully: There is "evidence" of the Holy Spirit indwelling us. It's found in Galatians 5:22-23. For the entire context, see verses 18-24.

 

Hello everyone!

I am new here (this is my first post!) Having just finished reading all the posts, I must emphatically say - whew!

I thank you all for your wonderful insight, and colorful conviction.

Before I add to this thread allow me to introduce myself.

I was brought up in serious doctrinal error. My mother was a catholic, and my father an atheist. My mother taught me how to pray to the cross, to pray to Mary, to say the rosary, and that I needed to believe that Jesus was the son of God, and do good deeds so that I could go to heaven.

I was saved much later in life. A young lady that I had been sleeping with broke up with me, and wanting to rid herself of me suggested that I go become a missionary or something. At the time I thought going over seas would be fun, so I looked for missionaries in our local phonebook, and the next day I found myself in the pastor's office at a local evangelical church.

The pastor asked a few questions and very quickly determined that I was not, nor had I ever really been saved. He put all the pieces together for me, and through the grace of God, I understood Christ's promises and I understood what I needed to do to be saved. I then had this incredible and live-changing feeling of peace and contentment that washed over me, overwhelming me, and saturating my whole being for about an hour and a half. I tried to explain it to the pastor as soon as I felt it and told me that it was the Holy Spirit!

But the next day, the feeling was gone, and I began to doubt that the experience I had was what salvation. The seed had fallen where there was no root - I returned to my sinful life with a vengeance.

I knew what salvation was, any new message of salvation was useless on me since I was already aware of the truth. I knew it but I did nothing with it. Hebrews 6:4-6 described me perfectly. I was a partaker of the Holy Spirit in that I was witness to it, and I tasted the good word of God, but I chose to disregard that knowledge.

If you had asked me at that time whether I was saved, I would likely say "yes", or possibly, "I think so." I even had the joy of explaining salvation to others, even though I did not accept it for myself. I believed it was true, (just like the demons), but I never opened the door when Christ was knocking.

Anyway I met a Christian when I was 31 years old. If you would have asked me to describe him, I would have said, "He's a Christian," before anything else, because this guy just loved Jesus. It defined who he was. I would like to say that it was an attractive trait, but it had the opposite effect on me. I found him most annoying. I had learned to hate God, and I had always been a terrible blasphemer. You could say that he and I rubbed each other the wrong way.

I especially hated his Christian naivety, and his thorough and uncompromising knowledge of scripture. We had arguments about homosexuality, evolution, the inerrancy of scripture, but no matter what, he used the bible as his argument. Scripture, scripture, scripture.

I knew enough of the bible from my past to show how little I knew about the bible. One day he looked at me and said, "Look, if you want to discuss the bible with me, read it!"

I didn't read it. But from that day on, I stopped harassing him. He was a great guy, in spite of his Christianity, and I decided to respect his folly as best I could.

The trouble was that God was plainly working in his life. Coincidence after coincidence after coincidence. It was this more than anything else that broke me.

I went home one day after seeing one of his impossible prayers answered. It was not so much that his prayer was answered, but his non-chalance about it. He should have been jumping up and down, but he was very tame about it, even matter-of-fact about it.

Man I went home and I cried like a little baby. This fellow was showing me the legitimacy of his salvation in everything he said and did. God did exist, just not in my life. I begged God to be real to me. Give me enough faith to believe him for myself.

Somewhere in the middle of that prayer I was saved. I didn't pray the clichéd sinner's prayer with words I prayed it with my heart. I could see God and I wanted him in my life, truly in my life. I recognized that I needed Christ as my LORD as well as my savior, and I determined in my heart to believe him, and to follow him no matter what.

From that day on I started reading the bible everyday - determined to believe and obey what I find there. When I finish reading the bible, I just start over again. I try to change versions each time, to get a nice feel for it. I am studying Koine Greek so that I can read it in the language it was written. I find there are lots of puns and plays on words etc in the original language that do not translate into English.

Anyway. I was baptized a Baptist, not that I particularly care what name is attached to the church I attend, as long as they preach the bible as the perfect and inerrant word of God.

I too have studied the tongues thing, both in English and Greek. My mother was saved about seven years ago, and started attending a church where they preach the gift of tongues as a sign of salvation.

She was concerned when I explained that I did not have the gift of tongues, and even more concerned when I did not want it either. I showed that my feelings were biblical, that Paul instructs us not to desire speaking in another language, but to desire gifts that edify the church, the very thing I desired. Further I pointed out from scripture that at Pentecost Peter was understood by everyone who heard him. It was not described as unintelligible mutterings, but as perfectly understood gospel. So perfectly understood that 3000 Jews were converted by hearing and understanding it. I have even showed her the scripture that plainly states that women do not receive spiritual gifts.

I do believe in the gift of tongues, as it was at Pentecost - real language, perfectly understood, edifying the church. I believe that Paul did speak in tongues - that is, that he spoke in a language that was perfectly understood by any who heard it, not because anyone convinced me of it - but rather because that is how the bible reads, and I am convinced by the word of God.

Corinth was a cosmopolitan city, with every language known to man passing through it. Koine Greek would have been the trade language, and everyone would likely speak it, but everyone could also speak their native language, Hebrew, Phoenician, etc. What good would it do if these new Christians were preaching in their native languages? Not much, unless someone was there to interpret what they were saying.

The Corinthians did not need a gift of God to be unintelligible to one another - Certainly Not! And Paul’s correcting them for real but unknown languages was just.

My mother explained how she speaks in tongues. She had some people pray for her, and she read a prayer, the pastor and some elders laid hands on her, and -bang- she had the gift. They encouraged her to start praying in tongues immediately. Of course by this time she had heard others boldly praying in tongues on many occasions, so she opened her mouth, and started speaking. She was careful not to say anything intelligible (English is never a tongue language). And though she felt silly at first, with much encouragement she began to talk, sing, and pray in 'tongues'.

Maybe other people have more mystical experiences than my mother, but she is confident that her gift is real. Certainly as confident as some of you are.

I love the truth, and when I find doctrine more biblically sound than what I believe, I adopt it as quick as the Holy Spirit can teach it to me! In the beginning this happened all the time, as I heard this from here and that from there, and something else in scripture. I began to make a point of seeking God as He is. My early study habit was to go to scripture to reinforce things I already believed. I would believe something, then use scripture to prove it to myself.

There was a problem with this. I was not finding God in scripture, but using scripture to support my preconceived conceptions of God. It is a pretty common thing, but then I was a spiritual child, and was ignorant of Satan’s devices. God was good to me, in that I read a wonderful book by A. W. Tozer, called the Holiness of God, or something like that. In that book Tozer explained that we must go to scripture seeking God, and not seeking ourselves. It changed he way I looked at my bible study. Now I make a point of going to scripture with no preconceptions. I want to know God as he is, and not as I make Him.

Anyway, I have heard both sides of this debate, and I suppose my post reveals my thoughts on this issue. Whether or not tongues is a still a valid gift is not really the issue. The issue is whether speaking in a spontaneously made-up ‘personal prayer language’ is actually the gift of tongues, or a grave doctrinal error.

What most ‘charismatics’ think of as the gift of tongues is historically very new. It started a little over a hundred years ago, just before planes were invented (to put it in perspective). Before that this ‘gift’ was silent for 1800 years. I have heard people explain this quoting Joel 2, as Peter did in the book of Acts. That it will come about after this that I will pour my spirit out on all mankind, etc. The problem with that is that Peter said himself that this prophesy was now fulfilled! So there is no reason for the spirit to disappear for 1800 years and reappear, as the charismatic doctrine would argue.

I respect everyone’s conviction, but Christians are called to correct one another; I therefore cannot sit by then and see this doctrine promoted without strongly urging everyone involved to go back to scripture and read it for the first time. Even those who agree with me.

And to you who find what I say offensive, as the truth is always offensive to those who believe the lie, please TEACH me. My heart yearns all day long for his truth. You will find no better student than myself, because I hunger for righteousness as a starving man hungers for bread. I will listen to everything you say and I will weigh it, because I know you will say these things, not to defend your beliefs, but to instruct me. So please, teach me to believe this tongues doctrine. All I ask is that you teach me from scripture. Show me explicitly. Do not make theological leaps that cannot be perfectly supported by God’s word, and do not persuade me with colorful speech, or the doctrine of men. Let God work in you. Do not respond to me without prayerfully asking God to direct you, and do not respond if he hasn’t.

I don’t ask you to prove that tongues exist – No. Please don’t bother.

I ask you to convince me [using only scripture] that this current church trend (which began with the charismatic movement start around 1900 - commonly referred to as the gift of tongues) is the same gift that Peter used to speak at Pentecost. Explain why his gift was understood by all, and yours is not.

Searcher.

 

Excellent post Searcher. I appreciate your testimony. Welcome to the forray, er forum. And welcome to Baptist Board.
DHK

 

Searcher:
You had alot to say in your post...and I to would like to hear there response...welcome to the forum...May the Lord Jesus Christ teach you the things that you desire in your walk with him...For He is teaching me the the desires each day as I walk with Him...and What an Awesome God we have.. Praise the Lord Jesus Christ...


Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come. Revelation 4:8b
Revelation