What is the initial evidence of the Baptism with the Holy Spirit?

[Wick Stick]

Outstanding. I think that is topic-worthy. If you would?

[

New topic:

How many baptisms are there? Just one

In Ephesians, Paul identifies just one baptism: 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. However, it was recently pointed out in...

www.christianityboard.com

 

[quietthinker]

I have heard of that theory.
It begs a question about what the gift of the interpretation of tongues is for?

[

It does. Would a similar question be 'what is the appropriate and correct interpretation of scripture? Are the two questions connected at the hip?
....and secondly, God asked Moses after he kicked up a fuss about not being able to speak well, 'who do you think made man's mouth?', in other words, I can enable you to speak any which way I desire. So, in spite of what I stated earlier about the miracle of hearing, the ability to be able to speak in an unknown tongue is not out of the question.

In this light the account of events and experiences at Pentecost require reconsidering, particularly if there is a tendency to make it (speaking in tongues ie) a hill to die on.

 

[St. SteVen]

St. SteVen said:
I have heard of that theory.
It begs a question about what the gift of the interpretation of tongues is for?

It does. Would a similar question be 'what is the appropriate and correct interpretation of scripture? Are the two questions connected at the hip?

That's a curious question. What do you think the relationship would be?
The other thing would be what God is communicating to an individual.
Two different people may get a completely different message/emphasis from a scripture.

I had a PM discussion with someone that operated in the gift of the interpretation of tongues.
He said that it worked the same as prophecy. You opened your mouth and a message flowed out in English.

In this light the account of events and experiences at Pentecost require reconsidering, particularly if there is a tendency to make it (speaking in tongues ie) a hill to die on.

Indeed.
The miracle could have been in the hearing. At least at some level. Were there more hearers than speakers?
9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,[b]
10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome
11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs... (I count at least 15)

Either way, the narrative tells us that they spoke in tongues, not that they simply declared the wonders of God.

Acts 2:3-4 NIV
They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them.
4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

[

 

[quietthinker]

St. SteVen said:
I have heard of that theory.
It begs a question about what the gift of the interpretation of tongues is for?

That's a curious question. What do you think the relationship would be?
The other thing would be what God is communicating to an individual.
Two different people may get a completely different message/emphasis from a scripture.

I had a PM discussion with someone that operated in the gift of the interpretation of tongues.
He said that it worked the same as prophecy. You opened your mouth and a message flowed out in English.


Indeed.
The miracle could have been in the hearing. At least at some level. Were there more hearers than speakers?
9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,[b]
10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome
11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs... (I count at least 15)

Either way, the narrative tells us that they spoke in tongues, not that they simply declared the wonders of God.

Acts 2:3-4 NIV
They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them.
4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

[

I would say 'other tongues' is primarily the message of the Gospel. It is a different message to anything heard by the people of that day.
In the same vane, we today can also speak in 'other tongues' to the general narrative of the times.
....and what is the general narrative of the times? Is it not sport, money, sex, violence, hate, gossip and all the other yada yada which is ultimately futile and useless.

 

[quietthinker]

That's a curious question. What do you think the relationship would be?
The other thing would be what God is communicating to an individual.
Two different people may get a completely different message/emphasis from a scripture.

Here is the relationship....
God's energies are bent in communicating his character, precisely because men have a faulty understanding of it....and what's more, they insist on maintaining a faulty understanding.

The Gospel communicates good news and the purpose of tongues is to do exactly the same thing....that's the 'hip joining'. Either method highlights and validates the other.

If what we are sharing is not good news, we are not speaking in tongues; in fact we have locked onto a counterfeit....thats how subtle deception is.

 

[Simonides]

.

 

[quietthinker]

I went a little ways into this thread, seemed like you guys were mostly focusing on speaking in tongues and a little about cessation. I wasn't about to read the whole thirty pages, so if this isn't pertinent, I apologize in advance.

A brief anecdote.
16 years old, lost, maybe ready to meet the Lord, don't know. Went for a walk with a buddy, passed a church with a lot of commotion going on, we turned around to check it out.

Walked in the door and oh my goodness, people hopping pews, rolling around, shouting (I really don't mind the shouting), and speaking in tongues. We got out of there as fast as we could and laughed all the way down the block.

7 horrible years later, Christ saved my life and my soul.

Not long after that, I found this passage of scripture, all His words are true.

"If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?"
1 Corinthians

Any scene in a church that you describe above is no doubt madness. It's an embarrassment to the witness of the Gospel.

 

[St. SteVen]

I would say 'other tongues' is primarily the message of the Gospel. It is a different message to anything heard by the people of that day.
In the same vane, we today can also speak in 'other tongues' to the general narrative of the times.
....and what is the general narrative of the times? Is it not sport, money, sex, violence, hate, gossip and all the other yada yada which is ultimately futile and useless.

That's a curious view, and worth discussing.
The question that comes immediately to me is whether redefining 'other tongues' has an impact on the list of gifts in 1 Cor. 12
or even on the other evidence of tongues in the book of Acts. Or whether it primarily applies to the outpouring at Pentecost. ???

And how it may, or may nor effect my observations about five uses of tongues.

Five Uses of Tongues
1) Personal prayer language (speaking to God) See Acts 1:5, 1 Corinthians 14:2 and Acts 19:6
2) Intercessory prayer language (prayer in the Spirit) See Romans 8:26
3) Congregational message (preferably with interpretation) 1 Corinthians 14
4) Worship language (singing in tongues) See 1 Corinthians 14:15
5) Evangelistic language (language of the hearers) Like the outpouring at Pentecost. See Acts 2

[

 

[St. SteVen]

Here is the relationship....
God's energies are bent in communicating his character, precisely because men have a faulty understanding of it....and what's more, they insist on maintaining a faulty understanding.

The Gospel communicates good news and the purpose of tongues is to do exactly the same thing....that's the 'hip joining'. Either method highlights and validates the other.

If what we are sharing is not good news, we are not speaking in tongues; in fact we have locked onto a counterfeit....thats how subtle deception is.

That would explain why the gospel is foolishness (gibberish) to those who are perishing.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

I went a little ways into this thread, seemed like you guys were mostly focusing on speaking in tongues and a little about cessation. I wasn't about to read the whole thirty pages, so if this isn't pertinent, I apologize in advance.

A brief anecdote.
16 years old, lost, maybe ready to meet the Lord, don't know. Went for a walk with a buddy, passed a church with a lot of commotion going on, we turned around to check it out.

Walked in the door and oh my goodness, people hopping pews, rolling around, shouting (I really don't mind the shouting), and speaking in tongues. We got out of there as fast as we could and laughed all the way down the block.

7 horrible years later, Christ saved my life and my soul.

Not long after that, I found this passage of scripture, all His words are true.

"If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?"
1 Corinthians

Thanks for weighing in on this.
What you experienced in the church was an extreme. And you had culture shock.
How do you view these things now?

[

 

[MatthewG]

I dont speak in tongues...

Never cared to do so. I don't think people really do today, compared to back then. There was a transformation from the holy spirit 1.0, to 2.0. Perhaps...

 

[MatthewG]

when you think about it, the Apostles back in their day could raise the dead, and cast out demons.

Frauds say they can cure your aids, or your sons autism, or herpes... or speak in some incoinherit languages that is just babbles and not another language as the first people experienced.

I never rose the dead or cast out demons, or heal anyone ever. Jesus the only one I know to heal the heart. And the fruits of the spirit is, love, joy, peace, mercy, faithfulness, longsuffering, founded in Galatians 5.

 

[MatthewG]

But if you never spoke tongues, or you never got what you asked for when asking God.

People boil it down, "well hunny you just ain't got enough faith!" What a twisted logic...

Many people like to be healed from their inflictions, and maybe sometimes God can help you have a turn around, but sometimes you need to go to the doctor.

A lady told me her side seized up one day when she got out of the shower, and she told she said "Get behind me satan." And about an hour later she was okay....

The body isn't gonna stay healthy forever... slight movements and what not cause it to hurt etc... etc... We are gonna die, and while some symptoms clear up, it's wild to think for someone to say "You ain't got enough faith brother, sister, momma, daddy." Is just... placing hope in things to me are in the wrong areas to focus on. It's the heart Yahavah is aiming for, to look towards him no matter your situation good or bad.... our desires and wants are to live as long as possible, and be as healthy as possible for some, but you are still going to die.

 

[DJT_47]

I have had the same question. My best attempt at reconciling it follows... (I'm allowed to quote myself, right?)

I wrote that about 9 years ago. Today I might quibble with a few word choices... mostly how I've written it so certainly. Its more of a theory... I'm not 100% certain.

I DO think the church often rushes ahead to baptize people prematurely, though... which complicates things.

If you delay baptism when one says he believes, then you may in fact committing the person to eternal death rather than eternal life. If the person would die while they are waiting for YOU to decide if they are ready to be baptized, that person is LOST, not saved. There is no record of anyone delaying or being denied baptism upon their belief in and confession of Christ. On the contrary, all were immediately baptized.

 

[St. SteVen]

Wick Stick said:
I have had the same question. My best attempt at reconciling it follows... (I'm allowed to quote myself, right?)
I wrote that about 9 years ago. Today I might quibble with a few word choices... mostly how I've written it so certainly. Its more of a theory... I'm not 100% certain.
I DO think the church often rushes ahead to baptize people prematurely, though... which complicates things.

If you delay baptism when one says he believes, then you may in fact committing the person to eternal death rather than eternal life. If the person would die while they are waiting for YOU to decide if they are ready to be baptized, that person is LOST, not saved. There is no record of anyone delaying or being denied baptism upon their belief in and confession of Christ. On the contrary, all were immediately baptized.

I disagree with the idea that salvation comes via water baptism.

Baptism is a religious ceremony. A ceremony is an outward sign of an inward reality.
Salvation comes via the inward reality, not the outward sign.

[

 

[Wick Stick]

There is no record of anyone delaying or being denied baptism upon their belief in and confession of Christ. On the contrary, all were immediately baptized.

Many early churches practiced a period of instruction and teaching for proselytes before they were baptized, at which point they were admitted fully to the church.

You may also remember that there was a theological dispute between those who practiced infant baptism and those who taught that the converts should be of adult age before being baptized.

There are many records of this. Several of the church fathers even delayed their own baptism on purpose - St. Ambrose and St. Jerome, notably.

 

[Wick Stick]

I disagree with the idea that salvation comes via water baptism.

In a strict cause-and-effect sense I agree, but...

Baptism is a religious ceremony. A ceremony is an outward sign of an inward reality.
Salvation comes via the inward reality, not the outward sign.

Baptism is a ceremony of ADOPTION. The submersion and resurfacing are meant to picture death and re-birth. The idea of being "born again" is that one is adopted to a new Father.

So, while the water doesn't directly do anything to save, I do think that ADOPTION is necessary for salvation.

 

[Wick Stick]

I dont speak in tongues...

Never cared to do so. I don't think people really do today, compared to back then. There was a transformation from the holy spirit 1.0, to 2.0. Perhaps...

You speak at least one - English.

 

[Wick Stick]

Many people like to be healed from their inflictions, and maybe sometimes God can help you have a turn around, but sometimes you need to go to the doctor.

There are 3 words in the New Testament that are all translated into English as "heal." They're not all the same things:

The first one describes healing generically (iaomai)
The second one describes a miraculous "faith healing" (sozo)
The third one describes treatment for a sickness as a course of therapy (therapeuo)

And now... the story of Jesus healing the centurion's servant makes more sense:

Matthew 8:5: When Jesus had entered into Capernaum, a centurion came to him, beseeching him, 6 and saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.

7 And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and therapeuo-heal him.

8 The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be iaomai-healed.

10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. 13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was iaomai-healed in the selfsame hour.

Jesus offered to therapeuo-heal him - that is, to come to his house and oversee a course of treatment nursing him slowly back to health. The centurion says that Jesus should simply command it, and he will be well. And with that kind of faith, that's what happened.

Also, what was Jesus profession? I don't think He was a carpenter... the people didn't come out in droves to get wagon-tongues from Him. They went to Him for healing... He was a doctor.

 

[DJT_47]

Wick Stick said:
I have had the same question. My best attempt at reconciling it follows... (I'm allowed to quote myself, right?)
I wrote that about 9 years ago. Today I might quibble with a few word choices... mostly how I've written it so certainly. Its more of a theory... I'm not 100% certain.
I DO think the church often rushes ahead to baptize people prematurely, though... which complicates things.

I disagree with the idea that salvation comes via water baptism.

Baptism is a religious ceremony. A ceremony is an outward sign of an inward reality.
Salvation comes via the inward reality, not the outward sign.

[

You can disagree all you want but it won't change what the scriptures clearly say

Mk16:15-16

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

1Peter 3:21

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: