1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The diffrence of Tongues in Acts and at Corinth

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by ONENESS, Jul 19, 2002.

Top Posters
Page 6 of 14
  1. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
     
    #101 DHK, Jul 31, 2002
  2. ONENESS

    ONENESS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry about hat Don. I thought I did.

    They were baptized a second time b/c they had to be born of the Water and the Spirit.

    John 3:5
     
    #102 ONENESS, Jul 31, 2002
  3. ONENESS

    ONENESS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0


    Yes, they knew who Jesus was, but is that enough? Did they know he had died, did they know he was ressurected, did they know he was sitting in heaven at the right hand of the Father? Knowing who he is, isn't enough to receive the Holy Spirit because knowing who he isisn't enough for salvation.

    You seem to ignore the difference between the OT and the NT. No one in the OT had the Holy Spirit baptism, do you agree?

    Since only those who were alive at the time of Christ were the only ones who lived under both the Old and New testament, they are the only ones that had to be baptized twice. They were the only ones given the Spirit after "believing".

    We have discussed how God gave His Spirit to first the Jews in Acts 2, then the Samaritans in Acts 8, then the Gentiles in 10. As word spread those alive at the time got to become a part of this glorious new covenant with God.

    To show you the difference, please tell me how many times you were baptized with water? As someone above pointed out, they were baptized with water twice. What is your explanation for that?

    Do you notice any difference at all between those who lived under both covenants and us today?

    ~Lorelei    </font>[/QUOTE]
    Lorelie, that is the Point I have been trying to make the Whole time. Just knowing who he is has never been enough and never will. But that is what several people on this Board believe. (Chemitz,DHK right off the top of my head.)

    We dont know if Those deciples knew he had died risen or not. The only thing we know is
    • </font>
    • They had not received the HOly Ghost since they believed + </font>
    • And they were baptized unto Johns Baptisim

      The qustion was not "Have your heard that our Savoir has died, or has risen?" The question was "How were you baptized"?

      Yes I agree with that however there were people that were chosen by God that He gave his Spirit out to in the OT. But has far has a baptisim of the Spirit, I would agree with you.

      But if you are speaking of Johns Deciples It is far into the New Testement by the time Paul had approached them.

      I dont think that has a whole lot to do with it but I will agree to a certain extent. They need to be baptized again in the Name of Jesus.

      But for us today (I know you dont agree that John 3:5 speaks of Baptisim) we are to be born of the Water and the Spirit to enter into the Kingdom of God. Peter told all the sinners on the Day of Pentecost to Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost.

      And I strongly believe that if someone today has not been baptized in the only name given among men under heaven where by we must be saved, needs to do so.

      are you just speaking of Johns Deciples or everyone that lived under both testements? If you are just speaking of Johns Deciples, The Samartains received the HOly Ghost After the fact that they believed on a seperate ocassion.

      I was baptized at the age of 10 or 11 at the baptist church I was attending. I really did not understand why, but for the most part i did it to join the Church. And I was also baptized with the titles F,S,HG.

      When I was 18 I sat in a bible study where I was shown about the New Birth Exp. And I was shown that I needed to be baptized in the Name of Jesus. No long after I was baptized again in the Only saveing Name.

      As far as my explanation, I have no idea. Could you point me towards the post so I can acheive a greater understanding of what the poster was trying to say and the point they were trying to make.

      Yes a whole lot of diffrence as a matter of fact. The people that lived in the OT times were under the law and when grace popped in there face it was hard for them to accept the redemptive plan that God promised them near creation. It was very hard for them to accept that they did not have to live bound by the law any longer and trust in a Man.

      Where as today, we are not accustomed to the Law and the sacrifices etc. And all we are told from Birth is that Jesus is God. We grow up believing that with no problem. Have no problem accepting him and no problem obeying his commands.

      But to say that the New aged Church could be saved a diffrent way than us is unheard of. We are commaned the exact commands as them. After all we are still apart of that new aged church. If they had to repent why not us? If they were baptized in the Name of Jesus, why not us? If they recieved the Holy Ghost, why not us?

      God is no respector of Persons. What went for them goes for us today.

      Godbless
     
    #103 ONENESS, Jul 31, 2002
  4. Don

    Don Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    11,048
    Likes Received:
    321
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ah. I think I see.

    Since you said that the second baptism (in Acts 19) was also of water, then what you're saying is that even though they knew of Jesus, they weren't saved yet.

    Ya know, and this part is addressed to everyone, I don't recall receiving an answer to a question I had on a couple of other threads: Why did the Samarians have to wait on the apostles to receive the Holy Spirit? Why wasn't Phillip enough?

    I'll be gone for the next three days. I'll look for an answer when I get back.
     
    #104 Don, Jul 31, 2002
  5. ONENESS

    ONENESS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can't believe after all this time you still go in the same circles. By now you have to know we don't believe that!

    We are not saying we don't need the Holy Ghost to be saved, we are saying we have the Holy Ghost.

    You just don't believe us because we haven't spoke
    n in tongues.
    You said at the beginning of this thread you had a great thesis written by your pastor.

    *shakes head in disbelief* I cant believe that ONENESS is still looking for answers outside of the Word of God. :confused:

    ~Lorelei    </font>[/QUOTE]Lorelei, lets get something straight. Just b/c you have not spoken in tongues does not casue me to be your judge. What you belive and what I believe are b/t us and God. Not me and you. So for you to say I judge you is not fair.

    So what if my pastor wrote a thesis about speaking in tongues. Would you shake your head in unbelief b/c someone came here asking you questions about it? I dare to say No you would not. But would not hesitate to share with them what you believe. And they would gladly listen to what you have to say. Would you shake your head at them for looking out side the scripture.
     
    #105 ONENESS, Jul 31, 2002
  6. ONENESS

    ONENESS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don i really dont know why they had to wait on phillip.
     
    #106 ONENESS, Jul 31, 2002
  7. ONENESS

    ONENESS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    You can't believe ?
    Perhaps you need more Faith
    LOL! Just Kidding!
    Naomi    </font>[/QUOTE]Naomi, remember the email with the question you asked me. When ever you are ready [​IMG]
     
    #107 ONENESS, Jul 31, 2002
  8. Briguy

    Briguy <img src =/briguy.gif>

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    1,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Naomi writes:
    """So, putting these scriptures all together in context, it would all make sense that:
    #1. Tongues were used as a sign to the unbelieving Jew.
    #2. Tongues were used as a prayer language unto God.
    #3. Tongues were used to edify the body of believer's when there was an interpretation.
    #4. Tongues were given to christians after they received the Holy Spirit (as in Acts)."""

    Naomi, Don't you see what you are doing? You are really making the gift of tongues into something it is not. Your #1 is what tongues were for. No matter how used in the early church tongues were given to fulfill a Bible prophecy. You cannot work your way around that by quoting a single verse or two out of context. We have a general principle, that is your #1 and the scripture as a whole proves that principle. Think of a "sign" as used by Paul this way: If you are driving toward Kenosha you will see signs that say Kenosha 50 miles then Kenosha 20 miles. The signs will continue until you get to the city. Once in Kenosha there will be no need for a "sign" anymore. Once the land of Isreal was destroyed and the Jews scattered, the need for the "sign" which pointed to that event went away. That is why Paul says that tongues will fade away on their own, once no new people got the gift, the gift just faded away.

    Naomi, Now you are saying WE can decide our own gifts. If tongues are open to everyone then wouldn't every gift be open to everyone?

    Paul says that the Spirit gives the gifts as HE wills. Our gifts will always be God's choice. Naomi, your theology is on a slippery slope and you have to keep creating things to explain away direct scripture. Oh how I wish you would step back and see that you can put away the "tongues" and draw close to Jesus without them.

    Brian(oneness). The "water" in John 3 that you speak of is not the water of baptism, it is the water of birth. One natural birth plus one spiritual re-birth = entrance into the Kingdom of God. The next verse says flesh is born of flesh and spirit is born of spirit. This is a simple point Jesus was making though many want to make a whole theology out of it. Jesus would have said Baptism if he meant Baptism. If it was meant to be some big deep thing he would have went into more detail. HE didn't so WE shouldn't!!!!!!

    In Love and Truth,
    Brian

    P.S. Naomi, thanks for answering the one question. Now tell me what Ron believes

    [ July 31, 2002, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: The Briguy ]
     
    #108 Briguy, Jul 31, 2002
  9. Don

    Don Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    11,048
    Likes Received:
    321
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thanks, Oneness.

    I'd appreciate hearing from Naomi, or MEE, or any other tongues-speaker as to why the Samarians that Phillip baptized had to wait on Peter and John before they received the Holy Spirit.
     
    #109 Don, Jul 31, 2002
  10. MEE

    MEE <img src=/me3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,271
    Likes Received:
    0
    DHK, you are starting to understand! [​IMG] No one has said that everyone has to have the "gift of tongues."

    MEE
     
    #110 MEE, Jul 31, 2002
  11. MEE

    MEE <img src=/me3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,271
    Likes Received:
    0
    MEE writes:
    "You show doubt in your postings by saying things like, "could very well be demonic or just emotionally deluded."
    ---The doubt comes in that I don't know for sure which source: the flesh or the devil. There is no doubt in my mind that it is one or the other. There is no doubt in my mind that it is not of God. This is serious. Not only could your source of tongues be just from the flesh or have started out that way, it could now be demonic. That is a distinct possibility.

    DHK, your doubt is still showing!

    Believe what you want, but the Jews got where they are today because of "unbelief."

    ---Yes they did. You are the same way. You would rather put your trust in an experience than in the Word of God. The Jews refused the Words of the prophets. They killed them. They rejected the message of God's Word. You have done the same. You have sacrificed the Word of God for an experience. That is a shame.
    DHK[/QB][/QUOTE]

    My "experience" is of the Word of God whether you believe it or not DHK. Believe what you want, but for myself I'll take the Word and what it has to offer. You are right, most of the Jews did reject the NT plan of salvation, but I didn't. Isn't that wonderful? :D

    This may be a little off the subject, but DHK I have often wondered what you look like. I don't know if you have seen the movie "Hannibal" staring Anthony Hopkins, but when I saw the movie, Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins) is the face and personality that seem to fit your postings. Don't know why, just does. [​IMG]

    As far as that goes, I have wondered what most of you look like. Anyone care to send me a picture by e-mail? [​IMG]
    MEE
     
    #111 MEE, Jul 31, 2002
  12. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
     
    #112 DHK, Jul 31, 2002
  13. ONENESS

    ONENESS New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2001
    Messages:
    1,197
    Likes Received:
    0
    My "experience" is of the Word of God whether you believe it or not DHK. Believe what you want, but for myself I'll take the Word and what it has to offer. You are right, most of the Jews did reject the NT plan of salvation, but I didn't. Isn't that wonderful? :D

    This may be a little off the subject, but DHK I have often wondered what you look like. I don't know if you have seen the movie "Hannibal" staring Anthony Hopkins, but when I saw the movie, Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins) is the face and personality that seem to fit your postings. Don't know why, just does. [​IMG]

    As far as that goes, I have wondered what most of you look like. Anyone care to send me a picture by e-mail? [​IMG]
    MEE[/QB][/QUOTE]

    Speaking of looks, I want to know what Chemits and Don look like. Don I know you said you were older, but I just dont see you as being old. Dont know why.

    Chemtiz I cant even put a face on you. I know that you are older than my self, but sometimes I just see you as a peer or someting. Dont know why either, I just do.

    Godbless
     
    #113 ONENESS, Jul 31, 2002
  14. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    137
    I will put no doubt in your mind MEE. Whatever is not of God is of the devil. Modern day tongues is not of God. It goes directly contrary to Scripture. It is of the devil. Is that clear enough.

    You put your experience above the Word of God. That is unbelief. You have demonstrated on this board a refusal to look at Scripture objectively, to answer many of Don's questions, let alone mine. The reason is that you cannot. Your theology is so weak that you cannot even give the plan of salvation outside of the Book of Acts. When you have to confine your theology to just one book of the Bible, and it does not harmonize with the rest of Scripture, then you know it is wrong. But experience is more important to you than doctrine. Experiences are found in the Book of Acts, a book of history. You want to go back into history and try to duplicate historical events that have already passed. Will you also part the Red Sea? Tongues are not for today. But experiences to you are more important than doctrine, so you will remain in your unbelief.
    DHK
     
    #114 DHK, Jul 31, 2002
  15. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have wondered what most of you look like[MEE]

    I like seeing those who have their pictures up. Some of them really make my day! I have you(MEE), pictured as dark-haired, & Naomi as fair-haired. I imagine you, her, & Lorelei as being tall-maybe Naomi a little shorter than the two of you.

    I think of DHK & Don as looking the same, with Don being a tad older. I think they both have a lot of thick black hair. I've seen a pic of ol'Oneness on his profile once & I thought Chem, too, but maybe that's someone else I'm thinking.

    Now this don't have nothing to do with nothing, other than it gives me a chance to say for the most part y'all have been very respectful & decent in all your postings. I just pray that each of you who are in error will study the WHOLE Bible & let it guide you in all aspects of your lives. [​IMG]

    That's all for now~~~carry on...
     
    #115 GrannyGumbo, Jul 31, 2002
  16. boris99

    boris99 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2002
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have a question... if the gift of tongues has not ceased, why were tongues not present in the Christian church from 70 AD until about 1900? I'm not attacking anyone or questioning anyone's experience, I'm just curious as to how charismatics answer this.
     
    #116 boris99, Jul 31, 2002
  17. MEE

    MEE <img src=/me3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,271
    Likes Received:
    0
     
    #117 MEE, Jul 31, 2002
  18. MEE

    MEE <img src=/me3.jpg>

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2001
    Messages:
    1,271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, looks as though I can't send a picture. Sorry, I tried. :(

    For those who can, post us a picture!

    MEE
     
    #118 MEE, Jul 31, 2002
  19. Naomi

    Naomi New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    0
    Originally posted by The Briguy:
    Naomi writes:
    """So, putting these scriptures all together in context, it would all make sense that:
    #1. Tongues were used as a sign to the unbelieving Jew.
    #2. Tongues were used as a prayer language unto God.
    #3. Tongues were used to edify the body of believer's when there was an interpretation.
    #4. Tongues were given to christians after they received the Holy Spirit (as in Acts)."""

    Naomi, Don't you see what you are doing? You are really making the gift of tongues into something it is not. Your #1 is what tongues were for. No matter how used in the early church tongues were given to fulfill a Bible prophecy. You cannot work your way around that by quoting a single verse or two out of context. We have a general principle, that is your #1 and the scripture as a whole proves that principle.

    I also shared from the book of Corinthians how Paul stated tongues were for a sign for the unbleiever, then stated that tongues were for the church service.

    Think of a "sign" as used by Paul this way: If you are driving toward Kenosha you will see signs that say Kenosha 50 miles then Kenosha 20 miles. The signs will continue until you get to the city. Once in Kenosha there will be no need for a "sign" anymore. Once the land of Isreal was destroyed and the Jews scattered, the need for the "sign" which pointed to that event went away. That is why Paul says that tongues will fade away on their own, once no new people got the gift, the gift just faded away.

    Paul said tongues will fade away when Jesus comes back, and we see Him face to face.
    The gifts were in operation all throughout the New Testament.

    Naomi, Now you are saying WE can decide our own gifts. If tongues are open to everyone then wouldn't every gift be open to everyone?

    Yes!

    Paul says that the Spirit gives the gifts as HE wills. Our gifts will always be God's choice. Naomi, your theology is on a slippery slope and you have to keep creating things to explain away direct scripture. Oh how I wish you would step back and see that you can put away the "tongues" and draw close to Jesus without them.

    I have not created anything on my own. I have only used the scriptures to back my beliefs. Not only the scripture, but also I witness people receive the gift of tongues all the time. I speak in tongues in my prayer closet. My mind is unfruitful but my Spirit is not.

    P.S. Naomi, thanks for answering the one question. Now tell me what Ron believes

    He believes in the gifts of the Spirit. I am not sure about his position about women Elders. It actually does not matter to me if he believes in Women Pastors, as it is not a essential in our fellowship. I, personnally do not think women should be in those offices, but that is my own opinion. not an issue for fellowship.

    If you do not believe the gift is for today....and you really and truly think it is just a bunch of gibberish....How about some proof? I mean, if it is for today, and Jesus wants to give you a gift....why refuse it?
    What do you think? :D

    Naomi
     
    #119 Naomi, Jul 31, 2002
  20. Naomi

    Naomi New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    0
    LOL! Granny, you must have the gift of The Word of Knowledge! I am fair-skinned (right now,pink-skinned as I look like a lobster!)
    I am tall 5'10, blond hair, and green eyes. Not skinny, not fat, in-between i guess!
    Our scanner does not work at this time :(

    Now my turn! :D
    I picture Granny as a cute, older woman, the kind that would probably drive a motorcycle if she had half a chance! LOL! Perhaps a leather jacket to boot ;) !! And can whip up a good, hearty meal in no time! ( I think she should invite us all over for dinner, and homemade pie).

    Mee, I have to agree with Granny's description!

    DHK: Clean-cut, clean shaven, perhaps even a three-piece suit! LOL!
    Don and chem, perhaps the same, with chem being a little bit younger!

    Thank you Granny, for not guessing our age ;) !
    I will tell...I am 41 years young!
    Naomi
     
    #120 Naomi, Jul 31, 2002
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 6 of 14
Loading...