| Author | Message | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 226 Registered: 9-2006 |
River, your labors are not in vain. I've learned it's always good to admit ignorance, and this discussion has spurred me to study and pray. River, you have helped me understand a number of things, and so have you, Colleen. It's so easy and natural to misunderstand the Holy Spirit. Like you say, there's no comfortable spot where things are all nice and neatly tied up. It was time to be taught, so I read through I Cor. 12-14, Romans 8, and read some commentary by Grudem and other sources. That Awakening movement I grew up in had a strong disdain for anything charismatic, or even any talk of spiritual gifts. We used to make sport of people speaking in tongues, or anybody who claimed to speak in prophecy or perform miracles. Funny thing was, even though we felt so superior, we still accepted an Ellen White with all her drama and manifestations. We were kind of like the cessationists, though we made a single exception for Ellen. We were afraid of being carried away by a "compulsive possession negating the will," and we valued our wills more than anything. We followed this path of unbelief and hardness and many of us also gave up on God's word. These days I am not afraid of being deceived by spiritual gifts. The test of authenticity is not complicated, and I am confident that God will reveal Himself in many surprising ways. Perhaps some charismatics mislabel what God is doing in their lives, while many other Christians run terrified from God's power. Even so, He is working until now, and we don't always have to have a detailed answer. I'm tired of running away. Heavenly father, have mercy on this FAF group, and those you have drawn to lurk here on this forum. Open our eyes and ears and soften our hard hearts; we so badly need to receive what you will feely give us. Martin C | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7118 Registered: 9-2006  |
Prayer language is praying in an unknown tongue,sometimes put as 'Praying in the Holy Spirit.(1Cor. 14:15-17. What you witnessed was not praying, it was a person speaking under the anointing of God in an unknown tongue, then someone translates under the same anointing. It is not some type of made up language. Prayer in the 'tongues' is the same as prayer with the mind, it is prayer. What you found spooky was the supernatural gifts in action. The translation is to be judged by those present as to whether it is of God or not. (1 Cor. 14:29) People confuse prayer in an unknown tongue with prophesying,(speaking out to others under the anointing of the Holy Spirit) Prayer is prayer period. Prayer aloud in an unknown tongue should not be done in a public church service, however it is sometimes done out of ignorance of order in which it should be done. Sometimes the unknown tongue is also used in offering praise to God. I hope I didn't confuse you more than you were.  | ||
| Alison1 Registered user Username: Alison1 Post Number: 36 Registered: 10-2010 |
No, I'm not confused but have you ever thought that the term tongues maybe referring to the different languages at that time period. Food for thought. | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 1109 Registered: 7-2005  |
Alison1, the tongues phenomenon in Acts 2 does indicate the languages were known to the people of that time period. “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” Acts 2:4. Just exactly what did happen to the first Christians at Pentecost? We know from the written record that there were about 120 people, who were followers of Jesus, gathered in prayer in Jerusalem. They were in an “upper room”, which would indicate they were indoors, having a meeting of believers for the purpose of prayer. This miracle did not happen while they were witnessing, as some assume. It happened while they were having a congregational meeting. We can assume they were all Jews, because Jesus did not take the gospel to the Gentiles during His earthly life. He left that work for His disciples. When the Spirit first filled them, their speech (utterance) was miraculously transformed. They no longer used their native, learned language, which was Aramaic or Hebrew, for prayer, but rather used their “new languages”. The first fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy that signs would follow His believers was a miraculous prayer language, a language given by the Spirit. This must have been a very unusual occurrence, because news of it was “noised abroad” to other Jews who were dwelling at Jerusalem, who then came to see this strange event for themselves. Notice that the unbelievers were drawn to the believers. It wasn’t the disciples going out by twos to witness. The miraculous new languages were not being used for spreading the gospel, although the empowered disciples, starting this same day, did spread the gospel. The prayer came first, and then the gospel was spread. Now we know from the record that the multitude that gathered contained at least 16 different language groups, listed in Acts 2:9-11. There were 16 language groups, each hearing its own native, learned language. These people were bilingual, speaking the Greek variant, KOINE, plus their own native languages as well. The KOINE was common to them all, but each of them came from different local geographic areas and each group had its own native language. It would he like a Frenchman, a Spaniard, an Italian, a German and a Norwegian, all being at the Olympic games, but all being able to speak English. If an American, who had learned only English all his life, suddenly spoke German also, the German would be amazed. So we have at least 16 languages being spoken by approximately one hundred twenty disciples. And we have a “multitude” of listeners. We don’t know how many people were in this multitude, but we do know there were at least 16 people representing 16 languages and able also to exclaim to each other in Koine Greek, “And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:8) Now here are some questions to ponder: 1. Did each of the one hundred twenty speakers in tongues understand all of the 16 languages being spoken, not only by himself and but also by the other tongue speakers? 2. Did every speaker speak only one language or did he speak more than one? 3. Did every hearer understand every language being spoken? 4. Is it possible that people were hearing multiple languages, some of which they didn’t understand, in addition to their own native language, which they did understand? 5. Is it possible the speakers did not understand the language they themselves were speaking? 6. Is it possible that some of the hearers did not understand any of the “new” tongues? The one hundred twenty disciples in their private meeting place first spoke the tongues. Then someone from that group went out among the people of the city and announced to them in Koine Greek what was happening, and they all came to see for themselves and heard their own native languages being spoken. We can’t know by what is recorded in Acts 2, whether the speakers understood their own utterances in other tongues. Many, many people hold the assumption that they did understand their own new tongues. But we cannot find army concrete evidence that they did. It must be recognized for what it is, which is merely an assumption. Let us be careful not to base a doctrine on an assumption, especially one that cannot be supported by the words given us in Scripture. However, if the gift of tongues in Acts 2 is the same gift as the phenomenon portrayed in I Cor. 14, then we can use the personal testimony of the only one who gives a description of what it is like in to speak in tongues, the apostle Paul. If Paul’s tongues are the same as Peter’s tongues and John’s tongues and Matthew’s tongues, then none of them understood the “new tongues” which they had been given. Their understanding was unfruitful. We can assume, but remember it is only an assumption, that the speakers in tongues did not understand the other languages being spoken by the other disciples. The only ones who did understand the “new tongues” were, at the least, 16 people or perhaps more than 16. However, there definitely were some people present, and it could have been a majority, who did not understand the new languages. We have no way of knowing how many people did not understand the new tongues, only that some of the people thought the disciples were drunk. We are assuming again that they thought they were drunk because they could not tell they were praising God. It must have sounded to them that they were only babbling nonsense, as when a drunken person slurs his speech. Of those who did understand the new tongues, the Parthians, the Medes, etc., can we assume that they all understood all of the 16 languages? Did the Parthians suddenly understand the language of the Medes, as well? The only way they could have done that was to have received the supernatural gift of interpretation, spoken of in I Cor 12. This prompts another question. Were all nine gifts of the Holy Spirit, mentioned in I Cor. 12, in operation on the day of Pentecost, or was it only the gift of tongues? Well, we do know that the gift of prophecy was also in operation. In Peter’s subsequent sermon, he explains to the multitude that this phenomenon is the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy that the Spirit would be poured out on all flesh. This prophecy does not mention tongues at all, but rather predicts that people would operate in the gift of prophecy. Jesus predicted “new” tongues. Joel predicted prophecy. Peter told the Jews that Joel’ s prophecy was being fulfilled that day. The day of Pentecost was the day of the Holy Spirit, much more than it was the day of new tongues. It is exciting to consider that all nine gifts of the Spirit were just beginning to operate in this brand new church at its birth that day. Let us turn now to the phenomenon of utterance in Corinth. In 1 Cor. 14, the speakers must have been speaking a language other than Corinthian, since no one understood them; causing Paul to tell them to keep quiet or else pray for the gift of interpretation. Acts 2 does not explicitly state that anyone was given the miraculous gift of interpretation of tongues. It only states that they were given the miraculous ability to UTTER other languages. On the other hand, Paul instructs the Corinthian believers to ask in prayer for the power to interpret tongues, not just any foreign language, but specifically utterances in tongues. If I speak in another tongue, and someone says they understand what I am saying, which would glorify God, the God of miracles, more: my saying, “What did I say? I didn’t understand it,” or my saying, “Oh yes, I knew what I was saying.” If the hearer knows that I understand the language I am speaking, he will think I learned it, not that God miraculously uttered it through me. If I understand what I am uttering, then the gift of tongues is not a supernatural gift. If I understand what I am uttering, then the gift in operation is prophecy or interpretation of tongues. I have written much more about this topic in a document called, "Speaking in Tongues: Grounds for Faith or Reason to Fear." You can find the entire document here: http://honestwitness.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/speaking_in_tongues_grounds_for_faith_or_reason_to_fear_by_hw1.pdf | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7121 Registered: 9-2006 |
Speaking of assumptions, I think that my stance on the ability for every believer who has received the baptism in the Holy Spirit at least has the ability to pray in tongues, whether they use that ability or not sounds crazy to others is based on the assumption that I am just stubborn and unwilling to change. Not so. I probably have a more scientific mind than most on this forum as I have studied science and engineering my entire life. I am willing to change my mind when I see proof that I am wrong. As Honestwitness addressed, and I thought quite well, there are practical aspects that need to be examined, and questions that need to be asked. I spent the whole summer three summers ago and several hundred dollar trying to prove or disprove whether or not we can produce enough hydrogen in a small unit attached to a gasoline engine to improve fuel mileage on vehicles. I also worked with introducing pre-evaporated gasoline into an engine ahead of the fuel injection to increase the combustion factor. If I see a flock of geese flying in the same direction, I am going to assume they are flying in the same direction, and further more that it is a flock of geese. So I hold on to the stance that everyone is able to speak in tongues that has received the baptism in the Holy spirit simply because everyone that I have ever heard of receiving this says by their own witness that they did speak in tongues. Every single one of them. That includes people who are your own former Adventists, now I could discount Honestwitness here who has to admit she spoke in tongues, because she wasn't raised adventist, but there is the witness of others who are second, third and fourth generation Adventist who testified they spoke in tongues when they received the baptism in the Holy spirit also. As Honestwitness has pretty much said, we don't know the whole story from reading the book of Acts, we have to go on the witness of others. What I cannot accept is the old line you always hear, "Do all speak with tongues?" that is taken out of context because Paul is speaking to the Corinthians about church practice and not how they pray privately, because the very next words are "Do all interpret?" He stays in the context of church practice clear through chapter twelve. Other indications in the bible override the idea of not being able to pray in tongues when the promised baptism by Jesus himself and fore told by John are received by the people, and in fact is, it is the only apparent indication of the Baptism ever being received. The theory that we receive the baptism when we receive salvation just does not hold water. Not due to my own experience, but the experience of so many others. the Baptism that John predicted began to take place at Pentecost and continued, and it is present today, not by my witness but by the witness from people who are formers just like yourselves. Now there is a lot of practices out there that aren't kosher and anybody with half a brain can see its not kosher, but I have to ask you? Does that prove the word of God to non-effect? Does Adventism or Mormonism or barking and crawling around on the floor make Gods word null and void? Just because it sounds strange to you, does that make this impossibility? More especially since about six months or a year ago you would have refuted everyone on this forum as nuts. So until somebody can come up with somebody that has received the promised baptism as predicted by John and has never spoken in tongues, and besides a one line of text from scripture taken out of context, I’m going to stick with eye witnesses because the eye witnesses confirm the word I have studied. God will confirm his word, not because you blew through the bible a couple times, but because he spoke it, whether you understand it or not. I don’t believe the Bible just because it words in a book, I believe the Bible because God has confirmed his word over and over and over to me. I have been a pretty hard nut to crack and I wanted proof right off the bat and he has furnished plenty. There is a lot more depth to that word than just coming out of Adventism and proclaiming, “We have arrived.” River | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7122 Registered: 9-2006 |
Now the in the original post I put fourth the possibility that the prayer language of tongues is Gods blessing to us so we can talk to him in the Spirit directly, bypassing our flesh in addition to the tongues being a sign to the unbeliever. Right away someone hauls out the scripture that tongues are for a sign to the unbeliever and can't possibly serve another purpose at the same time. Well..if that's the case and tongues are for a sign to the unbeliever and nothing else and since it says that tongues are a sign for the unbeliever, then where is your sign to the unbeliever? I guess the unbeliever is just out of luck as far as you are concerned. Right? So all your preaching to him ain't gonna do no good because you don't have a sign. In that case I guess you think all your Adventist friends, relatives and acquaintances are saved, so why do you want them to get saved again for? What is it that you are trying to reach them with? If tongues are for a sign to the un-believer and nothing else as you so readily claim, yet tongues are never, and I mean never used in your church for ANY reason, then I guess an unbeliever walking into your church is just flat out of luck ain't he? There ain't a sign any of you are Christians I guess if that's the unbelievers sign. Now hold up your tongues if you got a sign. Honestwitness and me got our sign, so where is yours? Hold it up high now. Thought so. Here's yer sign. P. S. I'm just being a little sarcastic, but don't it ever make you wonder just a little? | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1597 Registered: 3-2009 |
River says: and If you say that the only apparent indication of the Baptism is speaking in tongues, then how can anyone come up with somebody that has received the promised baptism as predicted by John and has never spoken in tongues? Isn't that kind of circular? Hec | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7124 Registered: 9-2006 |
No it isn't circular bro, even though it might sound so. I guess I better get away from being sarcastic and teach. Tongues are not a requirement for receiving the promised baptism in the Holy Spirit. Thats where so many people get all fowled up. They think they have to speak in tongues. That member is yielded to God like any other member. I'll try to give an example: Lets say you go down to the DMV and ask for a drivers license. You have met the requirements and the state gives you one. Are you forced to drive because you have a license? Or to put it another way, the license gives you the privilege to make a left turn,but you don't know that, so you make all right turns the whole time you have your license. I know that example sounds kind if silly but I think you can get what I wanted to say out of it. So yes, I do believe there are people who have received the baptism by faith, yet due to ignorance on the matter, have not spoken to God in tongues, they just have not been taught. But until they do, I have no way of knowing, nor neither does he or anybody else. Listen Hec, I don't go on blind faith, my faith is not 'A leap of faith' kind of thing, I want evidence. One thing I require first is Bible evidence, and I don't believe there is a one on here can give me bible evidence of anyone in there who has received the baptism in the Holy Spirit without the ability to speak to God in tongues. People try to claim that there is no bible evidence of Paul receiving the baptism. Oh no? Paul said, "I thank my God that I speak with tongues more than you all." Ergo, the evidence. River | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7125 Registered: 9-2006 |
Further more, I believe that there are those in the Adventist church who have received salvation by faith, and yet do not know they are saved. They simply have not been taught properly, good solid bible foundational teaching is so important. Teachers are so needed, they are the ones who are there when the Evangelist has moved on, but there are so many more teachers who think they are teachers, but who cannot teach on the subject of the baptism in the Holy Spirit because they have not received the baptism in the Holy Spirit themselves. River | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12220 Registered: 12-2003  |
River, I respect your spiritual insight immensely, and your understanding of the gospel and Scripture...but your saying above that Paul's statement that He speaks with tongues more than all of them is the evidence that He has been baptized by the Spirit is not a logical or biblical conclusion. If tongues is an "evidence" that is certain and fool-proof that a person has received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, then we would have to admit many people who are not Christians into the "baptized" category. The syncretistic Catholic/voodoo-believers in Haiti also speak in tongues and manifest the same behaviors (such as barking, rolling, etc.) that are often used as evidence of the Holy Spirit's power. (It must be noted that such manifestations were NEVER mentioned in Scripture, by the way.) Moreover, there is no scriptural evidence that people are to expect a "second baptism" or "second blessing" after accepting the Lord Jesus and receiving the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. God gives us a Person, not a power, when we place our faith in the Lord Jesus. We must think of Him as a Person. He is not a power which we can access "more of" by seeking. We receive more of His empowering as we surrender the parts of our lives and understandings to Him that He reveals to us. As we give up our control and our fear, He draws us into Himself more deeply. Moreover, gifts God gives us are not things we must be "taught" to do by another human. To be sure, God uses members of the body of Christ to teach other members of the body, but when He gives a gift, He gives it. Those people at Pentecost were not taught to speak in tongues. River, I have experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit—but by the definition you give, I would be discredited. Yet I know what I have experienced and continue to experience, and I know many others whose lives are powerful, people who operate in Holy Spirit giftedness that would be IMPOSSIBLE to duplicate in the flesh, yet these people have not spoken in tongues. Something besides tongues must be the mark of the Spirit's baptism, because He is powerfully at work in a great many people without their speaking in tongues. I do not see a pattern in Scripture for how we are to expect to see the Spirit touching lives. The only "formula" Scripture articulates is that we must believe in the Lord Jesus and His completed work, and then we are filled with the Spirit. That filling and empowering is different in every person, and people differ in their willingness to submit and trust the Lord Jesus to manifest Himself through them as well. The mark of the Holy Spirit's work is not physical manifestations or power; it is the promotion of the Lord Jesus. Jesus Himself explained to his disciples before His death what the Holy Spirit's "mark" would be:
The Holy Spirit is here in believers to continue the work of Jesus on the earth; the point is not our own ability and power and giftedness. Rather, the Holy Spirit uses us and equips us with His gifts so the Lord Jesus will be lifted up, so the truth will be clear, so Jesus will be glorified on the earth. We absolutely must not limit the work of the Holy Spirit by assuming that certain physical behaviors will always be available for all believers. What is available for all believers is the absolute PROMISE that the Holy Spirit will indwell us when we have believed. He will equip us for the unique work He prepared in advance for us to do (Eph 2:10). If we have been born again, we have a Person indwelling us who will give us ALL we need to live for Him, to surrender to Him, to speak for Him, to worship Him, to KNOW Him more deeply. Colleen | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7128 Registered: 9-2006 |
Colleen I respect your spiritual insight immensely also and to pull voodoo such as practiced in Haiti and other areas of the world is rather getting below the belt here isn't it? Is that what you think I am talking about? I am talking about what happened in scripture, not voodoo. Ringing voodoo in on this conversation doesn't sound to me much like respect. River | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 227 Registered: 9-2006 |
Here is why I have difficulty with the doctrine of a baptism of the Holy Spirit that is separate from regeneration. 1. We separate the Spirit's power from the hearing of the Gospel, Christ's death for the forgiveness of sins. We reduce the supremacy of the Gospel in bringing us all the blessings of promise. Miracles and power came to the Galatians through the hearing of faith (Gal. 3:2-5), yet they were not satisfied with the blessings they had. Paul told them, as he did the Colossians (2:10), that they had full access to the blessings of God by receiving Christ. 2. We separate the Spirit from His role as glorifying and bearing witness of Christ (Jn. 16). We will tend to seek that second blessing as a separate goal. Jesus' role isn't to lead us to the Holy Spirit, but the reverse. 3. We will tend to minimize the importance of the New Birth, looking for a greater infilling and experience to feel genuinely Christian. 4. It emphasizes outward, more exciting manifestations and not the quiet, inward work that characterizes NT faith. 5. We will tend to divide Christians into two tiers, those that have and those who don't. The have-nots will be just ordinary believers, who's prayers and faith could be seen as less effective or real. The NT does not divide the body this way, for we are united by the Spirit (Eph. 4:4). Martin C | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3567 Registered: 10-2004  |
Martin, How then would you explain Luke 11:13? Jeremy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12222 Registered: 12-2003 |
I'm also eager to read Martin's answer to your question, Jeremy...but this is my take on it. Luke 11:9-13 says:
Once we are born of the Spirit, we are God's adopted children, and we are His heirs. The context of Luke 11 (and also the corresponding account in Matthew 7:11) seems to be the gifts of the Spirit. When we are born of God, we have the privilege of asking our Father for His power and gifts as we need them in the work He gives us to do. In 1 Cor. 14:1-3 Paul says,
So the Bible is clear that we may ask God for spiritual gifts, but it's also clear that He gives them "just as He wills" (1 Cor 12:11). But as God's children, it's always OK to ask! Asking God for the Spirit's power and wisdom and ability to speak and for whatever we need for our lives is not "more of the Spirit", as I see it. It's being vulnerable enough to know that we don't have in ourselves what we need to do God's work. So we ask. We don't ask because we don't have the full baptism of the Spirit; we ask because life brings surprises and challenges, and we ALWAYS have to be vulnerable and submitted and receptive of God's gifts. We don't get more of God after we receive Him when we believe. We grow in Him and learn to operate more and more in His power as described in Romans 8. The "second blessing" is not a biblical teaching; our ongoing submission, requesting, and vulnerability to our Father as He gifts us through the Spirit for our witness of the Lord Jesus—this is biblical. I wouldn't quibble about this if it weren't such a dividing line within Christianity. When people seek a "second blessing", the focus goes off of the Lord Jesus onto the person of the Holy Spirit. Yet His job is to reveal the Lord Jesus. Every person's experiences are different; even Jesus' own miracles differed. His healings did not follow a pattern; some people had to go and wash; some people He touched; others He healed at a distance when a third party requested it. One He healed in two stages. One was healed by touching his robe. There was no pattern, no "formula" people could expect or seek to copy. Each healing was individualized. God's "outworking" in our lives as Christ-followers is different. No two are alike. There is no formula for how we are to expect the Holy Spirit to work in us. The one thing we are told is that we are indwelt by the third Person of the Trinity when we believe in the Lord Jesus. How that looks and works is different from one person to the next. There is no "expected" second blessing. There is, however, a continually deepening, ongoing realization of God's equipping and power as we submit to Him and to the Holy Spirit's own work: Scripture. Colleen (Message edited by Colleentinker on January 31, 2011) | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7129 Registered: 9-2006 |
Where is the dividing line Colleen? The only ones I ever see complaining about the have and have nots are the ones who reject the idea that there is a baptism in the Holy Spirit that can come in conjunction with receiving salvation or that God can give it later. They object vehemently and strongly. We really shouldn't refer to it as a second blessing, but refer to it as scripture lays it out, because everybody receives many blessings from God. Look at Mark 3:11, mark 1:8, luke 3:16,John 1:33, Act 1:5, Acts 8:15-17, and so on. we are not talking about something that is not in scripture here. Now nobody is contesting that we are all (Those who are saved) born of the Spirit of God. It seems to me that where we differ in view is very simple. One is talking about a baptism (me) and the other is talking about Salvation. Now if we get to holloring about haves and have nots, voodoo and such truck, nobody learns. I mean everybody and his dog knows there are mimics to Christianity, Adventism mimicks Christianity. You mimicked Christianity for years on end and didn't even know it, now isn't there a possibility that there is something you still don't know? What we are talking about here is the Baptism promised by Jesus, Jesus does this himself, that means that nomatter what or how you mimic, nobody but Jesus can Baptize in the Holy Ghost just as John said. Now let me ask you please, and I'm not trying to argue or steer you into my way of thinking here, What is the requirement for Salvation? Now answer careful here. "What is the simple requirement for salvation?" On the one hand the Bible talks about a baptism Acts 11:16 that Jesus himself does, and on another hand we address the requirements as laid down in the word for salvation. If you say there is only one Baptism, you are wrong either way you view baptism, there is a baptism to be done in water, and there is a baptism to be done by Jesus himself. So..what are the simple requirements for salvation? What I would still like to have an answer too is this. If tongues are never, ever, heard in your church, then where is the sign for the sinner? Is he just out of luck for a sign in your church? Lets keep this simple and organized if we can, we all know about Christian growth and submitting, simple and to the point, no voodoo, formulas or haves and have nots. Is there a possibility that there is a baptism that Jesus himself does, and in addition, and on top of granting us salvation? River | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 7131 Registered: 9-2006 |
In any number of these conversations someone will be sure to quote Paul in Corinthians I 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet show I unto you a more excellent way. But is the purpose for quoting this scripture for the sake of promoting love, or to make up for their own lack of the gifts in operation in their own life? As for love I confess I forget to take it out the door with me and Paul says Corinthians I 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. Corinthians I 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. Corinthians I 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. I manage a park with 189 families, I don't want to give the impression that I value myself above others, but what I say and how I act can set the tone for the whole park. What Paul was taking about is more easily said than done. I have to make a conscious effort to be sure to take love along when I walk out that door every day, because there is not a day passes when I do not meet some kind of circumstance in dealing with people, some situation in which people are down right displeased with me and the horse I rode in on. It never fails that if I treat them with love in my heart that it changes other hearts toward me and my company who employs me. But I am only dust and sometimes I forget Pauls more excellent way. Some days the adversarial circumstances start in the morning and just keep coming, one after the other, until I forget Pauls more excellent way. I'm just saying that if you quote it, you had better be prepared to use it. There is a very big difference in glibly quoting scripture and living the practical aspects of scripture. River | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 612 Registered: 11-2005 |
I've finally had some time to read through this entire thread... I have a sincere and honest question. Why is there a "need" to have a belief in a "second blessing"? I don't understand. If I understand correctly, "second blessing theology" demands the idea that there is a second event or "infilling" of the Spirit AFTER salvation. Yet, within Scripture, there are cases where this seemed to happen, and definitely cases where it didn't happen. So wouldn't it be more logical (and fit better with Scripture) to believe that you get the whole "Spirit" package at salvation, and therefore, throughout your life, you may unleash more and more of it as you grow in Christ? So it's not just a "second blessing", but third, fourth, fifth, etc, into sanctification? For some people, it seems as if it comes all at once, and for others it seems like it comes in stages, but really we get all of God when we ask Him to be Lord of our life, and depending on how submitted we are to Him, and what His will is for us, we "unleash" His potential in us. For some, this may look like we're receiving something extra, whereas in reality it's not the case. It was always there, we just didn't "access" it. No? Grace | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12226 Registered: 12-2003 |
That's exactly how I see it, Grace. Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3568 Registered: 10-2004 |
These Scriptures are crystal clear. Before the New Covenant, before Jesus rose from the dead glorified, the disciples did not have the Holy Spirit indwelling them--He was "with" them but He was not "in" them. Then, after the Resurrection, they received the Holy Spirit and He was now "in" them, but He was still not "upon" them (Acts 1:8) and they had not yet been "baptized with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 1:5). Therefore, the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" came later, after they were born again and received the Holy Spirit under the New Covenant. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was clearly something distinct from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This does not mean, of course, and River even acknowledged this above, that the two distinct events cannot occur at the same time--that is sometimes the case, as recorded in the book of Acts, also. But we cannot dogmatically say that it is always the case, and it certainly was not for the disciples, as shown above. What we must say, from the testimony of the Scriptures quoted above, is that--whether or not they occur at the same moment in time--the indwelling of the Spirit and the baptism of the Spirit are two distinct events/happenings/things. There are three distinct works of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers, "with" (leading us to Christ), "in" (indwelling us when we are born again), and "upon" (the baptism of the Holy Spirit). I definitely recommend listening to the following sermons from Pastor Mark Martin on this subject (I believe at least the first three sermons in the series teach on this): http://www.calvaryphx.com/media-library/series/acts/ And yes there can be multiple "infillings" of the Spirit (Acts 4:31 seems to suggest this, for example). As Pastor Mark likes to say, we are "leaky vessels" and may need to be filled again and again. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on February 01, 2011) | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 613 Registered: 11-2005 |
Thanks for the video clips, Jeremy. I'm very interested in hearing them. Funny, it was Pastor Mark Martin's sermons on the gifts that helped me understand there wasn't a second blessing (it was his sermon series from a year ago, or something?)... I must have interpreted it wrong, because I definitely thought he was in the camp where there weren't two separate events. I'm going to have to relisten to his sermon. It was the one on "tongues". Now, could it be that the two events were the case for the disciples, because it was pre-pentecost? But after pentecost, then it was an all-one event? Because isn't the significance of pentecost that we were given the Holy Spirit? And the disciples, in the John reference, just got a "preview" of that? Just asking... I sincerely am questioning, and admit I don't know all the answers. I'm just going by what makes sense when I look at Scripture. Grace |
