Is there A Baptism In the holy Spirit For today?

[DHK]

Pentecost was a one time event! Once the Holy Spirit was poured out it was available to all that believed. Acts 10 and 19 did not experience the cloven tongues and a mighty rushing wind...Yet, they still were baptized in the Holy Spirit just like the Jews.

Acts 2, 10, 19: All three chapters involved the Jews.
Acts 2, at the Feast of Pentecost, about 100,000 Jews were present out of whom 3,000 were saved. Please note, only some of the 120 out of all those 100,000 spoke in tongues.
Acts 10: The gospel went to the Gentiles. The Gentiles were saved and spoke in tongues. Note that Peter, when he went to the house of Cornelius took Jews with him. He did this for a reason. The tongues were a sign for the Jews to witness that the gospel was going to the Gentiles. Otherwise these Jews would not believe. They have "no dealings with the Gentiles." Peter needed witnesses. Tongues are a sign for the Jews.
Acts 19. The very ones that were saved were Jews. They spoke in tongues.
Are you a Jew? What tribe are from? If not, do you speak in tongues in the presence of Jews for their benefit?

My experience confirms my faith in what the Word says! Nowhere in scriptures does it say if I do not understand the language what I am speaking..I am on dangerous grounds! That is your added twist! Acts 14 says different!

Acts 14 speaks of Paul on a missionary journey starting churches and "ordaining elders in all the churches" in which he had been.
The book of Jude commands us to "contend for the faith."
You contend for your experience. Your experience determines your faith.
My faith comes first. Whatever experiences I may or may not have are a result of the doctrine I believe.
Whatever doctrine you believe is a result of the experiences you have. Your foundation is experience. That is why you could say: "My experience confirms my faith."
The Bible confirms my faith. I stand on the promises of the Word of God, not on experience.

Acts 1:8 says different..it has been poured out! Just like Acts 2:38 says ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The Bible does not contradict itself, and you completely avoid what is posted???????
Here is what is posted (now for the third time!!)

God's Spirit has not been poured out on all flesh. That is a prophesy that has not yet been fulfilled, just like the signs and wonders in the heavens have not yet been seen. Thus, no, it does not include you. Plus the fact it was a promise written to the Jews. If the Spirit had been poured out on all flesh then 100% of the world's population would be saved. Is it?

This has nothing to do with Acts 1:8 or 2:38. Perhaps Hezekiah 3:4 will help you. You must deal with the Scripture posted. You cannot pit Scripture against Scripture. Don't go jumping off the boat with other scripture until you can deal with this one.

Please do not give credit to the Holy Spirit for what the Muslim did! All will not receive...Not that it was not poured out! Christ died for all...but all will not believe. Just because the Muslims do not believe in Christ does not mean He did not die for all.

You are the one giving credit as long as you maintain that God's Spirit has been poured out on all flesh. All flesh includes: Stalin, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Osama Ben Ladin, etc. All flesh includes all the Muslims, all the Hindus, All the Buddhists, etc. It means ALL FLESH.
It is speaking of the Millennial Kingdom, not now.

If it is speaking of now, then answer:
Acts 2:19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
--Have you seen blood and fire, and vapor of smoke in the heavens or atmosphere.
Did you see the sun turn into darkness, and the moon turn into blood.
Has "that great and notable day of the Lord come?"
If it has come, where is HE?

Nowhere in scriptures does it say that it would die out in the first century!!!!!! NOWHERE!! Can you tell me what day and year it ceased? I believe that would be in Christians history books! "ON such and such day at such and such hour the Holy Spirit left us and we can not manifest Holy Spirit anymore"...a little ridiculeous! Because it did not happen!!

Not only is it in Scripture, which you reject. It is in history.
The phenomena which you believe in, is not old. It is new. It started in 1905, and was unknown before then. Even if it were Biblical (but it isn't), the gift of tongues ceased at the end of the first century and there is no trace of them historically for 19 centuries. History is quiet. You can find them among cults and pagan religions. That is all. Voodooism practices tongues. And so do you. That says a lot doesn't it?

 

[awaken]

Without telling the pastor?

Would you allow someone to come into your church and start meeting privately with the other members, trying to convince them that tongues are wrong?

I do believe in the authority of a pastor, so do not get me wrong on what I am fixing to say.

I do not believe in division of any sort! If these people were going JUST to cause division there motives are wrong and not of God.

But... if the truth is not taught in a church and someone wants to share the gospel (truth), who am I to stop them? If God has called them to share the gospel (truth of the good news). Who are they to obey? Man or God?

I would first go to the pastor explain how I believe. This is what I did when I joined the Baptist church that I am now a member of. I told the pastor before joining what I believed. At this time he shared the same belief. I also told him if the subject ever come up I would stand on what the Bible said and proclaim it. He agreed!

Not all in my church believe the same and my pastor does not feed his flock what they are not ready for. But I am witnessing God preparing the people to receive...It is going to be an exciting time!

We have already witnessed a healing in our church...word of knowledge..prophecy. We are learning what worship is really all about and the presence of the Holy Spirit welcome!

I will also add...that it is my experience that the Holy Spirit will let you know who to share with and who not to. He would give me boldness when he wanted me to share. When a person was not ready to hear...He would also witness that to my spirit!

 

[awaken]

Acts 2, 10, 19: All three chapters involved the Jews.
Acts 2, at the Feast of Pentecost, about 100,000 Jews were present out of whom 3,000 were saved. Please note, only some of the 120 out of all those 100,000 spoke in tongues.

Where do you get some of this stuff? Where does it say that only a few spoke in tongues? vs. 4 Says.. "they were ALL were filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues"

Acts 10: The gospel went to the Gentiles. The Gentiles were saved and spoke in tongues. Note that Peter, when he went to the house of Cornelius took Jews with him. He did this for a reason. The tongues were a sign for the Jews to witness that the gospel was going to the Gentiles. Otherwise these Jews would not believe. They have "no dealings with the Gentiles." Peter needed witnesses. Tongues are a sign for the Jews.

But what you will not grasp is that others than the Jews spoke in tongues. Others than the apostles spoke in tongues!

Acts 19. The very ones that were saved were Jews. They spoke in tongues.
Are you a Jew? What tribe are from? If not, do you speak in tongues in the presence of Jews for their benefit?

Were the Corinthians Jews? Was Paul sent to the Jews or the Gentiles? Was the Holy Spirit poured out Just for the Jews are for all?

[/quote]Acts 14 speaks of Paul on a missionary journey starting churches and "ordaining elders in all the churches" in which he had been.
The book of Jude commands us to "contend for the faith."
You contend for your experience. Your experience determines your faith.
My faith comes first. Whatever experiences I may or may not have are a result of the doctrine I believe.
Whatever doctrine you believe is a result of the experiences you have. Your foundation is experience. That is why you could say: "My experience confirms my faith."
The Bible confirms my faith. I stand on the promises of the Word of God, not on experience. [/quote] I would appreciate it if you will refer back to my testimony before you try to elaborate on it! No where do I lean on JUST my experience! I told you numerous times that...
I went out first to disprove what I am sharing. When I saw in scriptures (WORD) the truth concerning this, because I was in unbelief...I repented and confessed it before God. I did not experience this first! I fought it because of the way I was taught by man. My experience backed up what I believed by faith in the Word. I put it in bold so you will not twist it again! If you are going to elaborate on my testimony at least copy and paste my own words first!

The Bible does not contradict itself, and you completely avoid what is posted???????
Here is what is posted (now for the third time!!)

God's Spirit has not been poured out on all flesh. That is a prophesy that has not yet been fulfilled, just like the signs and wonders in the heavens have not yet been seen. Thus, no, it does not include you. Plus the fact it was a promise written to the Jews. If the Spirit had been poured out on all flesh then 100% of the world's population would be saved. Is it?

And for more than the third time....The Holy Spirit is available to more than the Jews...and by your own statement above the Jews was shown a sign that it is available to the Gentiles. That does include me!!

You are blinded to what I am saying....
Did Jesus die on the cross for all?
Can you just answer that with a yes or a no?
IF you say yes! Which he did! Then are you saying the WHole world is saved? No, they are not all saved! Yes! He paid the penalty on the cross, but not all believe!
This is the same with the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out for ALL to receive. Did all receive? No! because not all believe! Does that prove that it was not poured out! NO! Just like the unbelief of others concerning the cross does nulify that Jesus died for all!

Now you deal with that!

You are the one giving credit as long as you maintain that God's Spirit has been poured out on all flesh. All flesh includes: Stalin, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Osama Ben Ladin, etc. All flesh includes all the Muslims, all the Hindus, All the Buddhists, etc. It means ALL FLESH.
It is speaking of the Millennial Kingdom, not now.

I answered this above! God died for all those SINNERS mentioned above! THe Holy Spirit was poured out for all to receive! Unbelievers will not experience salvation!

If it is speaking of now, then answer:
Acts 2:19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
--Have you seen blood and fire, and vapor of smoke in the heavens or atmosphere.
Did you see the sun turn into darkness, and the moon turn into blood.
Has "that great and notable day of the Lord come?"
If it has come, where is HE?

The Ultimate fulfillment of Joel's prophecy will occur during the tribulation, right before the return of Christ. This is when the signs will show in the heavens. (Act 2:19;20; Isa. 13:10; Ezek. 32:7; Mt. 24:29; Rev. 6:12)

You can not deny that Peter referenced Joel concerning that what had just happened was the pouring out of the Holy Spirit just as Jesus promised in 1:8!
Why else would he reference it here?

"But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But THIS(what they just saw..those speaking in tongues) is that (what Joel prophesied) which was spoken by the prophet Joel."

Not only is it in Scripture, which you reject.

No! I just reject your interpretation of scriptures. I let scripture interpret scipture.

It is in history.
The phenomena which you believe in, is not old. It is new. It started in 1905, and was unknown before then. Even if it were Biblical (but it isn't), the gift of tongues ceased at the end of the first century and there is no trace of them historically for 19 centuries. History is quiet. You can find them among cults and pagan religions. That is all. Voodooism practices tongues. And so do you. That says a lot doesn't it?[/QUOTE]
Wow! I was warned that if they can not defend what they believe in scriptures that the next step would be to attack the person themselves. You have proven this over and over!

The dark ages were quiet on a lot of doctrine! There was a lot of corruption during that time. It has taken years for God to correct it! The different religions prove this! God can not work without faith! Can He find faith when He returns?

No religion has complete truth!

 

[DHK]

Where do you get some of this stuff? Where does it say that only a few spoke in tongues? vs. 4 Says.. "they were ALL were filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues"

Who is they all? It refers to those in the upper room. And then the question is does they "all" refer to they all (the apostles), or they all (the 120)? Commentators are divided on that question as the context is not quite clear. But of the thousands below the upper room, it is certain that none of them spoke in tongues.

As many as 120 could have been speaking in tongues, and then the multitude gathered together. Why? They heard the strange noise (other languages). And they were confused as to what was going on. They listened more carefully. They realized that every one of them could hear the message in their own mother tongue--their own language wherein they were born. They all knew Greek, but to listen to the message in the language in the nation in which they were born was something else!

Acts 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.

But what you will not grasp is that others than the Jews spoke in tongues. Others than the apostles spoke in tongues!

You misunderstood what I said. The Gentiles that were saved spoke in tongues. This was a sign to Peter and the Jews that he took with him that salvation was for the Jews. It goes along with the vision that Peter had. Remember what God had told him: "Do not call uncommon (or unclean), that which I have called clean). Peter had to change his attitude toward the Gentiles. He would never have stepped foot into the house of a Gentile before this time; would have done everything possible to avoid them. Now the message of salvation has gone out to the Jews, and they see them speaking in tongues. This speaking in tongues is a sign to Peter and the other Jews that salvation has come to the Gentiles also--those that they had previously considered unclean.

Were the Corinthians Jews? Was Paul sent to the Jews or the Gentiles? Was the Holy Spirit poured out Just for the Jews are for all?

The make-up of the Corinthian church has nothing to do with the incident in Acts 19. Acts 19 is a historical event that will never be repeated. These were Jews that were following the teaching of John the Baptist.

The Corinthian church was started by Paul. Paul had led them to the Lord, spent a 18 months living among them, discipling them. They should have known better than this.

I would appreciate it if you will refer back to my testimony before you try to elaborate on it! No where do I lean on JUST my experience! I told you numerous times that...
I went out first to disprove what I am sharing. When I saw in scriptures (WORD) the truth concerning this, because I was in unbelief...I repented and confessed it before God. I did not experience this first! I fought it because of the way I was taught by man. My experience backed up what I believed by faith in the Word. I put it in bold so you will not twist it again! If you are going to elaborate on my testimony at least copy and paste my own words first!

And Josh McDowell went out to prove that the resurrection never happened and that Jesus Christ was a fraud. He came back a saved man.
The difference is that Josh McDowell listened to the evidence. You didn't.
Instead you listened to your experiences, experiences which can be easily disproved by the Word of God. We have disillusioned people (who are very much confused) come to our church from a Charismatic church up the road often. And quite often they are able to speak in tongues but are not saved. They are hanging their hat on an experience hoping that that experience will get them to heaven. They are deluded. Your experience is not of God no matter what you think. The Bible teaches otherwise.

And for more than the third time....The Holy Spirit is available to more than the Jews...and by your own statement above the Jews was shown a sign that it is available to the Gentiles. That does include me!!

The Holy Spirit and tongues are two different things. The Holy Spirit is available to you. If you are saved you received the Holy Spirit at salvation like everyone else. Why are you seeking something else? The gift of tongues was a sign to unbelieving Jews; not a sign to you! Are you an unbelieving Jew? Differentiate between tongues and the Holy Spirit. They are not the same.

You are blinded to what I am saying....
Did Jesus die on the cross for all?
Can you just answer that with a yes or a no?

Yes of course he did.

IF you say yes! Which he did! Then are you saying the WHole world is saved? No, they are not all saved! Yes! He paid the penalty on the cross, but not all believe!

Only those who believe are saved (Acts 10:43; Romans 10:9,10).

This is the same with the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out for ALL to receive.

The Holy Spirit was not poured on all flesh at that time. The prophecy of Joel was a partial fulfillment. You need to rightly divide the word of truth. You are not doing that.

Did all receive? No! because not all believe! Does that prove that it was not poured out! NO! Just like the unbelief of others concerning the cross does nulify that Jesus died for all!

Again the Holy Spirit came, but he was not poured out on all flesh. If that were true then all the Muslims would be saved today. Yes or no: Are all Muslims saved today? Is "all flesh" saved today? Were all 100,000 present there at Pentecost saved because the Spirit was on all flesh? The Spirit was not on all flesh!

Now you deal with that!

I just did.

I answered this above! God died for all those SINNERS mentioned above! THe Holy Spirit was poured out for all to receive! Unbelievers will not experience salvation!

As long as you butcher the Word of God and maintain that the Spirit came on ALL FLESH at that time then ALL FLESH should be saved, including Muslims, and in the past people like Hitler and Stalin. But we know that is not true. Therefore your interpretation of Scripture is wrong.

The Ultimate fulfillment of Joel's prophecy will occur during the tribulation, right before the return of Christ. This is when the signs will show in the heavens. (Act 2:19;20; Isa. 13:10; Ezek. 32:7; Mt. 24:29; Rev. 6:12)

You can not deny that Peter referenced Joel concerning that what had just happened was the pouring out of the Holy Spirit just as Jesus promised in 1:8!

Why else would he reference it here?

"But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, ....spoken by the prophet Joel."

In many places in the Bible there are Scripture that has a partial fulfillment, and some that have a double fulfillment. Some of those are in Matthew 24 and 25, and in Daniel 9:24-27. Matthew speaks of the rapture and of the Second Coming and of the Tribulation all in the same passage.
In Daniel he refers to the destruction of The Temple, the first coming of Christ, and the coming of the Antichrist all in the same passage.
Joel speaks of more than one thing also. He speaks of the event taking place at Pentecost, but also a further event which will take place in the Millennial Kingdom, and the events just preceding it.

No! I just reject your interpretation of scriptures. I let scripture interpret scipture.

It is in history.

You take Scripture out of context.
You ignore scripture given to you.
You string scripture together which are not related to each other.
You do anything but let scripture interpret scripture.
In fact you allow your experience to interpret scripture.

As for history, if it was historically accurate you would be able to demonstrate it, but you can't. No Charismatic has ever been able to give any history of their movement. It is impossible, since we know the starting date is 1905. When did it exist before that date except in paganism. What you believe is not of God but has its origins in paganism.

Wow! I was warned that if they can not defend what they believe in scriptures that the next step would be to attack the person themselves. You have proven this over and over!

I have just given you the facts and where "tongues", the Charismatic brand, has originated from. If you have a problem with it, then do some research. Better yet, leave it. If you can prove the history of it, then do it.

The dark ages were quiet on a lot of doctrine! There was a lot of corruption during that time. It has taken years for God to correct it! The different religions prove this! God can not work without faith! Can He find faith when He returns?

No religion has complete truth!

The RCC can prove its existence but you can't yours. That says something doesn't it. The Lutherans can prove their lineage. The Methodists, theirs. But the Charismatic movement can only be traced back to 1905 and that is a known fact. All such similarities to the Charismatic movement are found in paganism and cults. That also is a fact.
Here is what the Bible says about that:

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

 

[awaken]

Who is they all? It refers to those in the upper room. And then the question is does they "all" refer to they all (the apostles), or they all (the 120)? Commentators are divided on that question as the context is not quite clear. But of the thousands below the upper room, it is certain that none of them spoke in tongues.

As many as 120 could have been speaking in tongues, and then the multitude gathered together. Why? They heard the strange noise (other languages). And they were confused as to what was going on. They listened more carefully. They realized that every one of them could hear the message in their own mother tongue--their own language wherein they were born. They all knew Greek, but to listen to the message in the language in the nation in which they were born was something else!

the 120 spoke in tongues!

Acts 2:6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
You misunderstood what I said. The Gentiles that were saved spoke in tongues. This was a sign to Peter and the Jews that he took with him that salvation was for the Jews. It goes along with the vision that Peter had. Remember what God had told him: "Do not call uncommon (or unclean), that which I have called clean). Peter had to change his attitude toward the Gentiles. He would never have stepped foot into the house of a Gentile before this time; would have done everything possible to avoid them. Now the message of salvation has gone out to the Jews, and they see them speaking in tongues. This speaking in tongues is a sign to Peter and the other Jews that salvation has come to the Gentiles also--those that they had previously considered unclean.
The make-up of the Corinthian church has nothing to do with the incident in Acts 19. Acts 19 is a historical event that will never be repeated. These were Jews that were following the teaching of John the Baptist.

What did the Jews receive in Acts 2? It was the Baptism of the Holy Spirit...the same thing the Gentiles received! The same thing we receive today!
What scripture do you use to prove your theory that it was a one time event in chapter 19? What part of it was only a one time event?

The Corinthian church was started by Paul. Paul had led them to the Lord, spent a 18 months living among them, discipling them. They should have known better than this.
And Josh McDowell went out to prove that the resurrection never happened and that Jesus Christ was a fraud. He came back a saved man.
The difference is that Josh McDowell listened to the evidence. You didn't.
Instead you listened to your experiences, experiences which can be easily disproved by the Word of God. We have disillusioned people (who are very much confused) come to our church from a Charismatic church up the road often. And quite often they are able to speak in tongues but are not saved. They are hanging their hat on an experience hoping that that experience will get them to heaven. They are deluded. Your experience is not of God no matter what you think. The Bible teaches otherwise.

You have no idea what you are speaking of concerning my experience! My doctrine is not based on my experience! I back up my doctrine with Scriptures!

The Holy Spirit and tongues are two different things. The Holy Spirit is available to you. If you are saved you received the Holy Spirit at salvation like everyone else. Why are you seeking something else? The gift of tongues was a sign to unbelieving Jews; not a sign to you! Are you an unbelieving Jew? Differentiate between tongues and the Holy Spirit. They are not the same.

Again! you do not read my post or you twist it..not sure which! I never went looking for tongues! I went out to prove what man had taught me, I was against it! Sciptures proved me wrong!

Yes of course he did.
Only those who believe are saved (Acts 10:43; Romans 10:9,10).
The Holy Spirit was not poured on all flesh at that time. The prophecy of Joel was a partial fulfillment. You need to rightly divide the word of truth. You are not doing that.
Again the Holy Spirit came, but he was not poured out on all flesh. If that were true then all the Muslims would be saved today. Yes or no: Are all Muslims saved today? Is "all flesh" saved today? Were all 100,000 present there at Pentecost saved because the Spirit was on all flesh? The Spirit was not on all flesh!

I said it was partial? So which part of Acts was fulfilled from Joel?

I just did.
As long as you butcher the Word of God and maintain that the Spirit came on ALL FLESH at that time then ALL FLESH should be saved, including Muslims, and in the past people like Hitler and Stalin. But we know that is not true. Therefore your interpretation of Scripture is wrong.

Jesus blood was poured out for all to be saved! But not all received! The Holy Spirit was poured out for all to receive...but not all will believe!

In many places in the Bible there are Scripture that has a partial fulfillment, and some that have a double fulfillment. Some of those are in Matthew 24 and 25, and in Daniel 9:24-27. Matthew speaks of the rapture and of the Second Coming and of the Tribulation all in the same passage.
In Daniel he refers to the destruction of The Temple, the first coming of Christ, and the coming of the Antichrist all in the same passage.
Joel speaks of more than one thing also. He speaks of the event taking place at Pentecost, but also a further event which will take place in the Millennial Kingdom, and the events just preceding it.
You take Scripture out of context.
You ignore scripture given to you.
You string scripture together which are not related to each other.
You do anything but let scripture interpret scripture.
In fact you allow your experience to interpret scripture.

Wrong on all accounts! At least you admitted Joel was a partial fulfilment! Which part was fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost? What part were they seeing an hearing that day?

As for history, if it was historically accurate you would be able to demonstrate it, but you can't. No Charismatic has ever been able to give any history of their movement. It is impossible, since we know the starting date is 1905. When did it exist before that date except in paganism. What you believe is not of God but has its origins in paganism.
I have just given you the facts and where "tongues", the Charismatic brand, has originated from. If you have a problem with it, then do some research. Better yet, leave it. If you can prove the history of it, then do it.
The RCC can prove its existence but you can't yours. That says something doesn't it. The Lutherans can prove their lineage. The Methodists, theirs. But the Charismatic movement can only be traced back to 1905 and that is a known fact. All such similarities to the Charismatic movement are found in paganism and cults. That also is a fact.

History of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit/Baptism in the Holy Spirit was dated back Acts 2! I believe the Word!

Here is what the Bible says about that:

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

Your point?

 

[awaken]

Wow, that was like pulling my own teeth just to get you to answer a simple question. Are you always so suspicious of people?

Now I'll make my point, which I believe is a very important one. As Tom and I have both told you, tongues often cause divisions in churches (and you have not denied this, meaning you tacitly agree). The Greek word airesiV (hairesis) occurs a number of times in the NT as "sect," as in the Pharisees. Paul specifically said to the Corinthians, "There will be haireseis (plural) among you, that they which are approved may be known" (1 Cor. 11:19). It is listed as a work of the flesh in Gal. 5:20. In 2 Peter 2:1 such things are called "damnable." It is the Greek word for "heresy," and it literally means a division or a faction.

Someone who causes such a division is a heretic, the Greek word being hairetikos. Paul tells Titus in 3:10-11, "10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself."

In our scenario, Joe is a heretic, because is causing a division in the local church, which Jesus Christ shed his blood for. If he teaches tongues in a tongues speaking church, fine. I believe in the Baptist distinctive of the autonomy of the local church. But by saying it is okay for Joe to teach tongues to members of a non tongues-speaking church, you are advocating heresy.

I sincerely hope you'll rethink this. The manifestations of the Spirit that you are advocating are a very minor doctrine, even if you have it right (which I don't believe you do). To say that they are important to the extent of splitting a local church is very dangerous spiritually. Jesus Christ will defend His church, and woe be to the person who splits it. I know of a case where five people banded together to kick out a pastor, thus eventually destroying that church, and God took each one of them in the months to follow: cancer, a car accident, etc.

Must have missed this post!
Now you are telling me I am in heresy!
When I believe in the whole Bible!
When I have confessed Jesus as my Lord and Savior!
What I believe...I have backed up with scripture!

What I shared, God knows my heart! It was not to divide! I wish you all could speak in tongues, just as Paul proclaimed! I wish you all could walk in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit! It is for the church!

 

[John of Japan]

Must have missed this post!
Now you are telling me I am in heresy!
When I believe in the whole Bible!
When I have confessed Jesus as my Lord and Savior!
What I believe...I have backed up with scripture!

What I shared, God knows my heart! It was not to divide! I wish you all could speak in tongues, just as Paul proclaimed! I wish you all could walk in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit! It is for the church!

Please go back and carefully read what I wrote. It was written with the best of intentions, not that you stop your tongues speaking (that's not my purpose), but that you see that tongues speaking is divisive. (Remember your own words, saying "Tongues divide.") Yet you have taken the position that tongues can be taught willy nilly in another church without the pastor knowing by a non-member to members. That is simply wrong, brother.

Believing the whole Bible as you say, you must admit that my explanation of heresy is right on target, right there in the Bible. And you must admit that division causing (whether on tongues or some other doctrine) is the same meaning as heresy. Furthermore, the Bible clearly states that heresy is of the flesh, not the Holy Spirit. So anyone causing division in the church of Jesus Christ is not manifesting the Spirit but the flesh.

"19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, (division causing) 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (Gal. 5:19-21).

So, do you honestly and truly believe the whole Bible, or are those just words? Answer carefully. From your words I see that until now you have not understood heresy. You can be saved and be a heretic. You can believe the whole Bible and be a heretic. The only thing needed to be a heretic is to be a church splitter.

 

[awaken]

Please go back and carefully read what I wrote. It was written with the best of intentions, not that you stop your tongues speaking (that's not my purpose), but that you see that tongues speaking is divisive. (Remember your own words, saying "Tongues divide.") Yet you have taken the position that tongues can be taught willy nilly in another church without the pastor knowing by a non-member to members. That is simply wrong, brother.

Believing the whole Bible as you say, you must admit that my explanation of heresy is right on target, right there in the Bible. And you must admit that division causing (whether on tongues or some other doctrine) is the same meaning as heresy. Furthermore, the Bible clearly states that heresy is of the flesh, not the Holy Spirit. So anyone causing division in the church of Jesus Christ is not manifesting the Spirit but the flesh.

"19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, (division causing) 21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (Gal. 5:19-21).

So, do you honestly and truly believe the whole Bible, or are those just words? Answer carefully. From your words I see that until now you have not understood heresy. You can be saved and be a heretic. You can believe the whole Bible and be a heretic. The only thing needed to be a heretic is to be a church splitter.

You have not read my post very well! Or I have not expressed myself well!

I posted this to Don...

I do not believe in division of any sort! If these people were going JUST to cause division there motives are wrong and not of God.

 

[awaken]

I am going to address this thread one more time and if anyone wants to question this you can pm me!

What I am posting here if from scriptures it is not to divide but to share the truth of the Word of God.

Jesus is the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit. This truth originated with the Father and all four Gospels writers believed they needed to mention this truth. (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:15,16; John 1:33)

In Acts 2:33 Confirms this " Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear"

Peter told them all in Acts 2:38 what they should do to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

In verse 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."

Note the pupose of the promise in Acts 1:8..
"But ye shall receive power after tht the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth."

They went to all those places, but did they go to the uttermost parts of the earth? OR are we as the church the ones that are going to the uttermost parts of the earth? Are we still reaching people in these parts?

Also note that it was not just the apostles that received this.... others manifested the Holy Spirit throughout scriptures.

Jesus still baptizes in the Holy Spirit because the offer was never rescinded. "For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance" (Rom. 11:29)

Tongues and other manifestations disappeared from the church because people stopped taking advantage of the offer! They were taught not to believe!

In Cor. 12 it tells us that God does not want us to be ignorant concerning spiritual gifts. That .."the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal" It does not say just to the apostles!

These gifts are given to the body of Christ to edify, exhort and comfort the body of Christ! We as the body are still here! And we still need this...especially as we see the day approaching!

In Cor. 13. it tells us that none of the gifts will cease until we see face to face (1 John 3:2). and we will know even as also we are known.

In Cor. 14 Paul is correcting the use of this in the church, He is not forbidding any of it!

My motive is not to divide but to share the truth of God's word! Please pray and study this out for yourselves.

 

[John of Japan]

You have not read my post very well! Or I have not expressed myself well!

You expressed yourself very directly and clearly. In one post you clearly said, "Tongues divide." Do you deny that? Then in answer to my hypothetical situation you clearly endorsed people teaching tongues to members in a church that did not believe in tongues. Do you deny that?

The only way I'll accept that you are not endorsing heresy is if you clearly disavow your statement in answer to my hypothetical situation. And by the way, I did not accuse you of heresy as you said. I accused you of endorsing heresy, which is different.

You seem to have a hard time with words. You are careless with them. You have a number of times completely misunderstood what I was saying, usually because you thought you could read my mind. Please pay attention to my actual words (usually chosen carefully as a missionary linguist and translator) and not my presumed thoughts.

I posted this to Don...

"I do not believe in division of any sort! If these people were going JUST to cause division there motives are wrong and not of God."

But heresy (division causing) is not proven by motive. The motive of the heretic may be the best. The heretic may think he is following God. What proves heresy is action: has the heretic split the church or not?

The heretics in Matt. 7 thought they were doing right: "22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

As for the rest of your post to Don, he is perfectly capable of answering you himself, so I'll wait for him to do so. But I will say that your concept of the precious Gospel of Jesus Christ in that post is the most abysmal and un-Biblical I've ever seen on the BB in my years of participation.

 

[John of Japan]

You expressed yourself very directly and clearly. In one post you clearly said, "Tongues divide." Do you deny that? Then in answer to my hypothetical situation you clearly endorsed people teaching tongues to members in a church that did not believe in tongues. Do you deny that?

The only way I'll accept that you are not endorsing heresy is if you clearly disavow your statement in answer to my hypothetical situation. And by the way, I did not accuse you of heresy as you said. I accused you of endorsing heresy, which is different.

You seem to have a hard time with words. You are careless with them. You have a number of times completely misunderstood what I was saying, usually because you thought you could read my mind. Please pay attention to my actual words (usually chosen carefully as a missionary linguist and translator) and not my presumed thoughts.
But heresy (division causing) is not proven by motive. The motive of the heretic may be the best. The heretic may think he is following God. What proves heresy is action: has the heretic split the church or not?

The heretics in Matt. 7 thought they were doing right: "22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

As for the rest of your post to Don, he is perfectly capable of answering you himself, so I'll wait for him to do so. But I will say that your concept of the precious Gospel of Jesus Christ in that post is the most abysmal and un-Biblical I've ever seen on the BB in my years of participation.

awaken has sent me a PM to the effect that he will not answer this post of mine. This says to me that he refuses to take responsibility for his words and that he refuses to recognize clear Biblical teaching about heresy. So be it. His words show his heart.

 

[awaken]

awaken has sent me a PM to the effect that he will not answer this post of mine. This says to me that he refuses to take responsibility for his words and that he refuses to recognize clear Biblical teaching about heresy. So be it. His words show his heart.

Who is causing division here? So if you are going to make public what we discussed in a PRIVATE conversation why don't you post the whole discussion! Otherwise, you are only trying to cause strife!

It is not heresy if you are spreading the truth of God's word. I am not in heresy and I do not condone anyone spreading falsehood! Whether it is biblical or personal!

 

[John of Japan]

Who is causing division here? So if you are going to make public what we discussed in a PRIVATE conversation why don't you post the whole discussion! Otherwise, you are only trying to cause strife!

It is not heresy if you are spreading the truth of God's word. I am not in heresy and I do not condone anyone spreading falsehood! Whether it is biblical or personal!

Private? Maybe to you. I never consented to a private conversation about my public post. There is no BB rule or ethical principle to the effect that I have to keep my mouth shut about your PM.

Is it heresy? Let's find out what the other BBers think. I'm starting a thread to that effect with a poll. See you there if you have the courage of your conviction that tongues is worth splitting a church over.

 

[awaken]

Private? Maybe to you. I never consented to a private conversation about my public post. There is no BB rule or ethical principle to the effect that I have to keep my mouth shut about your PM.

Is it heresy? Let's find out what the other BBers think. I'm starting a thread to that effect with a poll. See you there if you have the courage of your conviction that tongues is worth splitting a church over.

Not playing your game! Grow up!

 

[John of Japan]

Not playing your game! Grow up!

You think I'm playing a game? At 60 years old after preaching the Gospel for 42 of those, spending 31 of those years as a missionary to Japan, I'm playing no game. No, I am outraged that someone calling themself a Christian and a Baptist would think it was okay to split the precious church of our Lord Jesus Christ, especially on such a minor but extremely contentious doctrine as modern tongues.

 

[Oldtimer]

Not playing your game! Grow up!

This morning I've read this thread from the beginning, noting both the words and demeanor of the various participants. Some have shown great patience. My hat's off to them, as my impatience would have probably been sorely visible, had I entered this discussion previously.

One of the signs of maturity is a show of respect to those to whom we disagree. Not resorting to child-like behavior, as exhibited in this post. It's quite sad to witness the loss of credibility in this fashion.

 

[awaken]

This morning I've read this thread from the beginning, noting both the words and demeanor of the various participants. Some have shown great patience. My hat's off to them, as my impatience would have probably been sorely visible, had I entered this discussion previously.

One of the signs of maturity is a show of respect to those to whom we disagree. Not resorting to child-like behavior, as exhibited in this post. It's quite sad to witness the loss of credibility in this fashion.

Interesting! So you do not think it is childish to put a private message to the public and only post one part of it? Misleading people with half the truth!

 

[MB]

There is baptism in the Holy Spirit nearly every Sunday. At least in Baptist churches we are baptised in the name of the Father, Son and, Holy Spirit. Any other baptism is worthless.
MB

 

[Don]

Interesting! So you do not think it is childish to put a private message to the public and only post one part of it? Misleading people with half the truth!

Then post a copy of the PM you sent to John, and put it to rest. He's already implied consent for you to do so.

 

[John of Japan]

Interesting! So you do not think it is childish to put a private message to the public and only post one part of it? Misleading people with half the truth!

I didn't quote any of it, I referred to it. You have a hard time getting words straight. But post the whole thing. I urge you to. In fact, I will if you don't.

You were antagonistic. So you think I'll treat you with kid gloves?