-
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 Work of the Holy Spirit
- Thread starter Tom Butler
- Start date
- Status
If they are for us today to have in the body...
WHY?
they fulfilled their purposes originally, as a sign to isreal/jews that God had raised jesus as messiah, sign to testify that the HS would also come into non jews, Gentiles/Samiritans...
Also, they were used to give revelations from the HS to speak to the local churches before the scriptures came in full...
they were ALWAYs a language someone could hear and know, not si me si da
they were NOT given as personal prayer tongues
they were NOT the sign of being baptized int he HS...
WHAT role would they have today?
NONE, ceased to exist after Apostolic Age, as rest of the son called sign gifts did also!
trust me, i know what its like to realise that what my church taught me ended up being wrong, as was an AoG elder/teacher for yeras, but the lord finally enabled me to see my errors, and became baptist, and sticking to the Bible now!
Then apologize to John for lying to him:
As you can see, I went back to thread, as you suggested. Your first post introduced "the gifts of the Holy Spirit." Your second post introduced "praying in the spirit" with a direct correlation to tongues and from there you took off with your tongues agenda. You brought tongues into this thread just as John alleged. You denied it. You need to apologize to him and admit that you were wrong.
I have discussed Scripture over and over again.
You don't want to discuss Scripture; you want to dismiss Scripture.
Something so basic as the gospel, John 3:14-16, you can't give a proper interpretation. You simply dismiss it, allegorize it, make the simple gospel of salvation mean something other than what it truly means. If you don't know what the gospel is; if you can't understand the milk of the Word, is it any wonder that you can't understand meat?
This is really very basic. If these gifts were for today there would be evidence. Your claims would be demonstrable. But you can't speak in a real language can you (other than English)? What languages has the Holy Spirit gifted you with? Just gibberish, correct? And that is not Biblical at all.
Yes it is personal and always will be. It is a matter of where we stand, personally on the Word of God. Right now we have a poster that has to personally defend why his church has an official belief of "all who worship on a Sunday have the mark of the beast." If it is their official position it becomes his personal belief as well. And he must defend it.
You must defend your personal beliefs, but you won't. That makes you a hypocrite.
I don't have time to answer this whole post, but I do want to comment on this first point.
I am going to post my grandfather's experience in the matter.
Notice that as a Baptist way back in the 1930's, it probably was, he diligently researched, studied the Bible, and prayed for the answer. Notice also that he was determined to leave the SBC, where he was a preacher at the time, if it turned out that he began speaking in tongues. He had the character to know it would be wrong to stay a Baptist if he spoke in tongues, because it is not a Baptist doctrine. The so-called Baptist Charismatics of this day do not have the same character. They would rather spread their tongues among Baptist churches who do not believe in them and never have.
Here then is his testimony:
"If the reader will kindly forgive the personal pronoun for a bit, I will use it to give a personal testimony. In my early ministry I saw the absolute necessity for the power of the Holy Spirit upon my life and ministry, if I were to be and do what God wanted me to be and do. I determined, at any cost under Heaven, to have the fullness of God's power. I longed to win souls. I longed to be used of God in bringing revivals. And so I promised God that I would go anywhere the quest led me, take gladly anything He gave me, pay any cost He required, if only He would fill me with His Spirit. I went into this tongues question then quite thoroughly. I attended the services of tongues preachers. I read every book on this subject that I could find, written by godly leaders of the Pentecostal movement. I was willing to talk in tongues if that was necessary to having the fullness of God. I knew there would be reproach on me if I should speak with tongues. I knew it would be a heartbreaking thing for me to leave my denomination, as, of course, I should do, if I personally experienced and then began to preach speaking in tongues as the duty of Christians and as the necessary evidence to the fullness of the Holy Spirit. As God is my witness, I faced that matter honestly, prayerfully, with many tears, with long, long hours of prayer. I studied my Bible with holy eagerness io learn what God's Word taught on this subject. But God first showed me in the Word that speaking in tongues was not the Bible evidence of fullness of the Spirit and that it was not expected of Christians generally, and gave me perfect peace of mind on this question. I knew I had found His will. And then, praise His name, He also, in His infinite mercy, breathed upon me power from Heaven, for which my heart had cried so long, with the result that multiplied thousands of souls have been saved under my ministry" (The Power of Pentecost or the Fullness of the Spirit, by John R. Rice, pp. 204-205).
John R. Rice went on to see about 200,000 souls saved and great influence among Baptists of all stripes, all without tongues.
I am going to post my grandfather's experience in the matter.
Notice that as a Baptist way back in the 1930's, it probably was, he diligently researched, studied the Bible, and prayed for the answer. Notice also that he was determined to leave the SBC, where he was a preacher at the time, if it turned out that he began speaking in tongues. He had the character to know it would be wrong to stay a Baptist if he spoke in tongues, because it is not a Baptist doctrine. The so-called Baptist Charismatics of this day do not have the same character. They would rather spread their tongues among Baptist churches who do not believe in them and never have.
Here then is his testimony:
"If the reader will kindly forgive the personal pronoun for a bit, I will use it to give a personal testimony. In my early ministry I saw the absolute necessity for the power of the Holy Spirit upon my life and ministry, if I were to be and do what God wanted me to be and do. I determined, at any cost under Heaven, to have the fullness of God's power. I longed to win souls. I longed to be used of God in bringing revivals. And so I promised God that I would go anywhere the quest led me, take gladly anything He gave me, pay any cost He required, if only He would fill me with His Spirit. I went into this tongues question then quite thoroughly. I attended the services of tongues preachers. I read every book on this subject that I could find, written by godly leaders of the Pentecostal movement. I was willing to talk in tongues if that was necessary to having the fullness of God. I knew there would be reproach on me if I should speak with tongues. I knew it would be a heartbreaking thing for me to leave my denomination, as, of course, I should do, if I personally experienced and then began to preach speaking in tongues as the duty of Christians and as the necessary evidence to the fullness of the Holy Spirit. As God is my witness, I faced that matter honestly, prayerfully, with many tears, with long, long hours of prayer. I studied my Bible with holy eagerness io learn what God's Word taught on this subject. But God first showed me in the Word that speaking in tongues was not the Bible evidence of fullness of the Spirit and that it was not expected of Christians generally, and gave me perfect peace of mind on this question. I knew I had found His will. And then, praise His name, He also, in His infinite mercy, breathed upon me power from Heaven, for which my heart had cried so long, with the result that multiplied thousands of souls have been saved under my ministry" (The Power of Pentecost or the Fullness of the Spirit, by John R. Rice, pp. 204-205).
John R. Rice went on to see about 200,000 souls saved and great influence among Baptists of all stripes, all without tongues.
You have shared this before! It is a great testimony!
Many were saved before the day of Pentecost! Many more saved after Pentecost! As I have said before...you do not have to speak in tongues in order to be saved and tongues are not for spreading the gospel! Salvation comes by faith in Jesus Christ!
saturneptune
New Member
This is just a curiosity question, and not part of the debate. Since I have never heard a message in tongues, or believe in them for that matter, what do they sound like? Could someone give a syllable example to the sounding? Then, after the message it vocally given, does someone else immediately give the interpretation? Could you give an example of what a message has been from the Lord? Then the third requirement, that it be edifying to the local church, could someone give an example of how that is determined?
You interprete it that way because of your understanding of the ONLY purpose for the manifestation of the Holy Spirit through tongues!
The syllables/language is different with each person because there are so many different languages out there.
In our church we rarely give a message in tongues and interpretation, but when they do it is a short message and a general interpretation. When this is done it NEVER contradicts the written Word. One time I remember someone speaking and someone else interpreted and the message was so convicting to a certain person that he came forward, repented and gave his life to Jesus.
Edification comes from just hearing a praise to God or a confirming Word as that young man recieved.
You are right in that there are many languages out there.
Thus if someone spoke in tongues and someone interpreted, the language must have been known to the interpreter, at least. And in my view it would be known to the speaker as well simply because it is the gift of languages.
So what was the language spoken, and what was the language interpreted into. Or possibly in your view, at least give the language that the interpreter interpreted from if he interpreted into English. God is not the author of confusion.
1 Corinthians 14:29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
In this case the prophets were sitting near by. It says "let the others (prophets) judge. Judge what? Judge to see if what was being said was of God. There must be someone there who knows what is being spoken and interpreted to judge if both is of God. How do you know if the interpretation is accurate? How can you judge? What if the person is praising Satan and the interpretation praises God, and he doesn't know it? Who is there to judge an accurate translation if no one knows what is being said?
In the NT they were actual languages, common languages that others could recognize.
there are 3 given for them in the NT scriptures!
As a witness to the jews at pentacost, in fulfillment of isaiah and Joel prophecies
As a witness that non jews were also saved, as those were same gift jewish believers had experienced at pentacost
To be used to forthtell revelations from God to local churches
What other ones are there?
And all those needs ceased to be required!
"For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries"
Also in Acts 10 they used tongues to magnify God!
Really! So we do not need to speak to God of magnyfy him?
As usual you have turned this verse upside down and inside out.
It is a total rebuke to the Corinthian. He is basically telling them to shut up!!
There is nothing in this verse to advocate any kind of speaking or praying in tongues--nothing at all.
First, all speaking in tongues is done in a church setting. He was speaking to the local church. He was not speaking to individuals. Thus the rebuke: "not unto men." It was wrong. It was not to the edification of the people of the church.
But "unto God." Sure God could understand the language you spoke in. So God can understand German or Spanish; but the Corinthians couldn't. It was just a mystery language to them. "Howbeit in the spirit he speaks mysteries."
Therefore sit down and shut up. What you say is totally useless.
They were speaking languages that they and God could understand, but no one else could. The "men" or mankind (people of the church) could not understand, and were complete mysteries to them, and therefore were useless. This verse is a total rebuke, and nothing else but a rebuke.
Tongues in Corinthians refer to those given by God to speak/give revelations from God to local church!
Why so much time and effort to promote Tongues, for they are the least of the gifts even listed?
Do you hold that One MUST speak in a tongue to show either been saved, or else "baptized' in the HG?
Gone over this with you in another thread! Lets not rehash it here!
Please explain what you mean by tongues are given to give revelation from God to the local church...WITH SCRIPTURES!
- Status