Holy Spirit Baptism and Tongues

Discussions on ecclesiology such as the nature, constitution and functions of the church.

I have spoken in tongues

Yes
21
37%
No
36
63%
 
Total votes: 57

User avatar
puritan lad
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1491
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:44 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: Stuarts Draft, VA
Contact:

Postby puritan lad » Tue Nov 08, 2005 6:45 am

ryo dokomi wrote:okay first of all i would like to point out that Jesus Himself stated that He and the Father are one. (dont know scripture sorry) and if that is ture and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God the Father then that proves the trinity. and if the trinity is true then look at Hebrews 13:8 says "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever" (NKJV) this means that the Holy Spirit is the same yesterday, today and forever. this meaning that the gifts that are given by the Holy Spirit have always been the same. Tongues have been the same, prophesy is the same.

True. Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. However, His ways of dealing with man do change (and I think you know this).

Does God speak to us today? Absolutely. He speaks through His Word, through nature, and other means. However, does God still give Special Revelation outside of His Holy writ through "visions", "tongues", and "prophecy"? No. This ceased with the close of the Canon and the end of the Old Covenant (the Prophet was an Old Covenant office).

The cessation of prophecy is not something unique to modern times. After the temple was rebuilt, prophecy was "sealed up" for 400 years between Malachi and John the Baptist. The gifts promised by the Prophet Joel were reserved for "the last days" of the Old Covenant ([bible]Joel 2:28-32[/bible]). Those "last days" began on the Day of Pentecost ([bible]Acts 2:16-20[/bible]) and ended in 70 AD ([bible]Daniel 9:24[/bible]). They are history, as the writer of Hebrews explains.

[bible]Hebrews 1:1-2[/bible]
"God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;"

Daniel made it clear that within 490 years of the restoration of the temple, "vision and prophecy" would be sealed up ([bible]Daniel 9:24[/bible]).

As I pointed out in the previous post, one who has the gift of prophecy would be speaking inerrant, infallible, authoritative words directly from the mouth of the living God. We would be expected to obey that prophet just as if God Himself were speaking to us. ([bible]Deut. 18:18-19[/bible]). The same is true in the New Testament ([bible]Acts 13:1-3[/bible]). However, the "prophets" of today speak errant, fallible, feeble words that they claim are from God, but obedience is optional (as Dale said, "it should never be used for guidance and should only be a confirmation of what has already been settled in the heart by the Holy Spirit".) Therefore, though Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever, the gifts were unique for that time period, as "prophecy" today is a totally different animal then the biblical version (as you admit, "but Prophecy now-a-days does not support scripture"). The same is true of tongues: earthly languages in the Bible - ([bible]Acts 2:5-6[/bible]), but unintelligible gibberish today.

Therefore, I will have to deny that there are true "prophets" today. Church History unanimously taught that these gifts ceased in the Apostolic age.

By the way Dale, my name isn't Tom. I just have a quote from Thomas Watson in my signature. Sorry for the confusion. I'll fix this shortly.

God Bless,

PL
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN

http://covenant-theology.blogspot.com
http://christianskepticism.blogspot.com/

Dale Tooley
Familiar Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:57 am
Christian: No
Location: New Zealand

Holy Spirit Baptism and tongues

Postby Dale Tooley » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:02 am

Thomas Watson asks: I am just not clear on the role of the "prophet" in charismatic churches. If prophecy today "should never be used for guidance and should only be a confirmation of what has already been settled in the heart by the Holy Spirit", then why prophesy to begin with?

Well Thomas , One must never confuse the role of a prophet, one of the 5 fold ministry gifts , with the gift of prophecy which is akin to interpretation of tongues without the message in tongues first been uttered. In a wide sense all preaching is prophecy and to be a false prophet all one has to do is preach a false message. But lets be charitable about that, we can all be wrong on minor points. I am talking about preaching a gospel that does not bring people to Christ as Lord & Savior. It is sad to see Christian brother turn on Christian brother just because he is not "on the line" 100% all the time. Even the first century Christian apostles had disagreements but did not accuse eachother of being false prophets. It is said that Christians are the only army that shoots its own wounded. Satan wants us divided, God wants us united in love. Paul says we can all prophecy one by one but of course many do not as it is to be done "according to the measure of faith". It takes faith to operate all 9 of the supernatural gifts any if any are wondering why, even in our Pentecostal and charismatic Western churches signs , wonders and miracles are often lacking it is because we are not the faith people God wants us to be. And what causes that? Few of us are close to God in His presense as we should be. Why have a prophetic word in confirmation? The best of us will have doubts about God's call to us ( especially during times of testing) and a prophetic word of confirmation can settle the heart for the long haul. It has encouraged me many times.

Dale Tooley
Familiar Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:57 am
Christian: No
Location: New Zealand

Holy Spirit Baptism and tongues

Postby Dale Tooley » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:19 am

Sorry Puritan lad, I have only just noticed that Thomas Watson is not your name.

I certainly cannot agree with the Preterist view that the last days
ended in AD 70. But neither can I agree with the generally held futurist view that somehow the 20th century- but now, surprisingly- the 21st century are the last days either. It is clear from a whole range of scriptures in both Testaments that the "last days" are the gospel age, the whole day of grace. I have an article on my website that includes Daniel 9:24 http://www.hastenthelight.org.nz/articles/11.htm and amazingly it appears on a major Preterist website also, and that without my express permission, though frankly I do not mind!

User avatar
puritan lad
Esteemed Senior Member
Posts: 1491
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:44 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Undecided
Location: Stuarts Draft, VA
Contact:

Re: Holy Spirit Baptism and tongues

Postby puritan lad » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:37 am

Dale Tooley wrote:Sorry Puritan lad, I have only just noticed that Thomas Watson is not your name.

I certainly cannot agree with the Preterist view that the last days
ended in AD 70. But neither can I agree with the generally held futurist view that somehow the 20th century- but now, surprisingly- the 21st century are the last days either. It is clear from a whole range of scriptures in both Testaments that the "last days" are the gospel age, the whole day of grace. I have an article on my website that includes Daniel 9:24 http://www.hastenthelight.org.nz/articles/11.htm and amazingly it appears on a major Preterist website also, and that without my express permission, though frankly I do not mind!


Excellent Article. I certainly disagree with you on the end times (You see that a majority of my posts so far deal with that issue). As you can tell from my username and several of my posts, I am a Preterist (Postmillennial), Cessationist, Calvinistic, Covenantal, Westminster Confessing, Infant-Baptizing, Puritan,...well, you get the picture. Glad to have you aboard. and looking forward to more of your posts.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN



http://covenant-theology.blogspot.com

http://christianskepticism.blogspot.com/

Cliffwood PCA
Newbie Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 7:29 pm
Christian: No
Location: Augusta, GA

Re: Holy Spirit Baptism and tongues

Postby Cliffwood PCA » Thu Jan 19, 2006 7:39 pm

Dale Tooley wrote:Sorry Puritan lad, I have only just noticed that Thomas Watson is not your name.

I certainly cannot agree with the Preterist view that the last days
ended in AD 70. But neither can I agree with the generally held futurist view that somehow the 20th century- but now, surprisingly- the 21st century are the last days either. It is clear from a whole range of scriptures in both Testaments that the "last days" are the gospel age, the whole day of grace. I have an article on my website that includes Daniel 9:24 http://www.hastenthelight.org.nz/articles/11.htm and amazingly it appears on a major Preterist website also, and that without my express permission, though frankly I do not mind!


Sounds as if semi-preterist might be a good fit for you. It is an emphasis on the already but not yet aspect of the Kingdom. It is a good fit for an Amillinialist.
Blessings,

Tugger
Newbie Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:51 am

Speaking in Tongues

Postby Tugger » Fri Mar 17, 2006 6:19 pm

Tongues - every tongue (language) in the world all at one time from one mouth. It is not man that does the speaking, it will be the Holy Spirit speaking to fit the ear of the hearer. An interpreter is not needed, for each individual will hear their own langage right down to the dialect.

Speaking in Tongues of the end times is when the Holy Spirit will speak through the elect right before Christ's return at the 7th trump. This is the same thing that happened to the Apostles in Acts 2. The Holy Spirit spoke through them.

Acts 2:4 "And they were filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2:6 "Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were comfounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language."

Every person standing among Apostles as they spoke in tongues understood what they were saying according to their language, right down to their dialect. When the Holy Spirit speaks through the elect, every person on this earth will understand them. They will hear them in their own language, in their own dialect. There will be no need for an interpreter. What the elect will be saying is "truth". They will be witnessing and bringing forth truth so that everyone who is listening will be hearing the truth.

Mark 13:9 "But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them."

Beaten here is not a physical beaten, but a brow beating. The testimony is God's Word, truth.

Mark 13:11 " But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premediate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Spirit."

The elect will be delivered up to Satan (anti-Christ) at the 6th trump. This is when the Holy Spirit will speak through them. The "hour" is the hour of temptation, the time allotment for Satan to be here for testing given to him at the 6th trump, 6th seal, 6th vial.....his mark is 666.

Kerux
Established Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:57 pm

Postby Kerux » Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:00 pm

Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of having tongues anyway?


Exactly.

The 'tongues' found in Acts were known languages, not some 'angelic tongues.' or unknown languages.
******************************

Of course, I believe my views to be true.
If I didn't, I would change my views.

User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5308
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby Canuckster1127 » Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:51 am

Kerux wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What would be the point of having tongues anyway?


Exactly.

The 'tongues' found in Acts were known languages, not some 'angelic tongues.' or unknown languages.


Well, possibly, maybe even probably, but exactly?

Here's the passages in Acts where Toungues are manifested. You should probably look at each passage on its own to see if that opinion holds up.

[bible]Acts 2:1-12[/bible]

Acts 2

1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 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.
5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7 Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 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—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!" 12 Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"


The question here would be, is the miracle in the speaker's voices or in the listener's ears? There appears to be a reasonable textual basis for concluding the later. Regardless of mode, it is clear these are known languages in the midst of an audience of cosmopolitan Jews from all over the known world at the time.

The next passage is [bible]Acts 10:44-46[/bible]

Acts 10

44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.


It is not as clear here as in [bible]Acts 2[/bible] as to what is happening. It's reasonable to perhaps assume it was the same as [bible]Acts 2[/bible] and in particular God gave this sign in order to make it very clear that as Gentile believers God was demonstrating his acceptance of them just as the Jewish group earlier. That certainly comes out later in [bible]Acts 15[/bible]. It doesn't appear clear here that the tongues gave any understanding or benefit beyond the sign being the same as in Acts 2. It's reasonable, I think to presume it was like it in that manner, but it is nor clear directly from the text itself. There's some inference taking place here.

The next passage is [bible]Acts 19:1-6[/bible]

Acts 19

1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2 and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?"
They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
3 So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"
"John's baptism," they replied.

4 Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.


This passage is even less clear in some ways than the first two, at least in terms of why tongues were manifested. The passages in Acts 2 and 10 indicate Spiritual confirmation of the receiving of the Holy Spirit with tongues as a sign and it appears tied in some way to a "miracle" in order to put an exclamation point to it by God.

Here in Acts 19, there appears to be a differentiation in terms of the Baptism experiences. John's baptism was refering to John the Baptist who baptized in terms of repentence and looking forward to the Messiah. It could be that this event was to make clear the need to move from that general repentence to actually taking the name of Christ in direct acceptance and thus once again tongues came as a heavenly sign.

It's even less clear in this situation however, as to whether the language was understandible or for the benefit of the hearers of any particular message. Again, probably reasonable to infer especially is you see this as an sign manifestation marking a new era in terms of God's covenant, relationship or practices with those saved by Christ.

Of course this isn't all there is about tongues in Scripture. There is the passage in Mark 16 and also the Corinthian passages. It's not clear that the gift of tongues there completely lines up with these experiences.

There's a lot of different opinions and practices in that arena.

Bart
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender

http://bartsbarometer.com/

Kerux
Established Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:57 pm

Postby Kerux » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:50 pm

"There appears..."

'It is not as clear here....'

It's reasonable to perhaps assume.....'

'It's reasonable, I think to presume......

'This passage is even less clear in some ways than the first two....'

'Here in Acts 19, there appears to be ....'

'It's even less clear in this situation however,'

'Again, probably reasonable to infer ....'

'It's not clear that the gift of tongues ......'

'There's a lot of different opinions and practices in that arena. '


Good to see less dogmatism. I haven't been over the tongues issue for some years, but if there is an interest, I could explain my understanding and perhaps clear up some of your 'cloudiness' surrounding this topic.
******************************



Of course, I believe my views to be true.

If I didn't, I would change my views.

User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5308
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby Canuckster1127 » Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:12 pm

Kerux wrote:"There appears..."

'It is not as clear here....'

It's reasonable to perhaps assume.....'

'It's reasonable, I think to presume......

'This passage is even less clear in some ways than the first two....'

'Here in Acts 19, there appears to be ....'

'It's even less clear in this situation however,'

'Again, probably reasonable to infer ....'

'It's not clear that the gift of tongues ......'

'There's a lot of different opinions and practices in that arena. '


Good to see less dogmatism. I haven't been over the tongues issue for some years, but if there is an interest, I could explain my understanding and perhaps clear up some of your 'cloudiness' surrounding this topic.


Thanks for your offer Kerux.

You wish to offer me your dogmatism perhaps? ;)

I've got plenty of opinions and exegisis to offer in this area if you wish.

I sent a great deal of time within the charasmatic movement and was educated in part at a major charismatic university. No that doesn't impress God nor do I seek to impress anyone else. It's called introduction, and allowing people to get to know you and understand where you are coming from. Something that might help people to understand you too as more than phosphorous symbols on a screen.

Feel free to educate me as you will.

Your understanding thus far appears to me to consist of terse generalizations designed to throw people off guard followed by evasive answers and not a lot of engagement.

I'd be glad to be proven wrong however and can have a conversation in this area if you wish. Conversation requires two, however.
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender

http://bartsbarometer.com/

Kerux
Established Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:57 pm

Postby Kerux » Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:53 pm

The Scripture verses I post and let speak for themselves are

"terse generalizations designed to throw people off guard followed by evasive answers and not a lot of engagement?"

I engage and get criticized. I don't engage and get criticized.

I guess you wouldn't have liked to have Jesus teach using parables either then, eh? :D
Last edited by Kerux on Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
******************************



Of course, I believe my views to be true.

If I didn't, I would change my views.

User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5308
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby Canuckster1127 » Wed Aug 09, 2006 11:44 pm

Kerux wrote:The Scripture verses I post and let speak for themselves are

"terse generalizations designed to throw people off guard followed by evasive answers and not a lot of engagement?"

I engage and get criticized. I don't engage and get criticized.

I guess you wouldn't have like to have Jesus teach using parables either then, eh? :D


Jesus I know. You I don't.

Jesus has revealed Himself to me through His Word.

You have yet to reveal yourself in any very meaningful way on this board as of yet.

You may very well be a mature believer with much to offer. Until you open up a little and help us to know you, I suspect you'll continue to be frustrated.

Up to you however.
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender

http://bartsbarometer.com/

Kerux
Established Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:57 pm

Postby Kerux » Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:21 am

I'm not frustrated.
******************************



Of course, I believe my views to be true.

If I didn't, I would change my views.

User avatar
Canuckster1127
Old School
Posts: 5308
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Location: Tulsa, OK

Postby Canuckster1127 » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:01 am

Kerux wrote:I'm not frustrated.


Fair enough. You're not communicating very effectively though.

That's up to you however. ;)
Dogmatism is the comfortable intellectual framework of self-righteousness. Self-righteousness is more decadent than the worst sexual sin. ~ Dan Allender

http://bartsbarometer.com/

Kerux
Established Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:57 pm

Postby Kerux » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:37 am

That, of course, is your opinion. And you, of course, are entitled to your opinion.

We are, I assume, mostly born again Christians here and love the Lord Jesus and are endeavoring to serve Him to the best of our ability. We are all different and have different purposes within the body of Christ. No one of us is better or more important than any one else.

I repeat, we are all different. Unique. Trying to get everyone to do things the same way, when there is no compelling reason to do so, is stifling the Holy Spirit.

I kind of like Thomas Edison's saying, "There are no rules here, we're trying to get something accomplished."

"Once, when a new employee checked in at Menlo Park, he asked Edison for a copy of the lab rules. "There ain't no rules around here," said Edison. "We're trying to accomplish something." Accomplish he did. He worked 24 hours a day, taking fifteen-minute cat naps when he was tired, and eating on the run, when he was hungry."
******************************



Of course, I believe my views to be true.

If I didn't, I would change my views.


Return to “The Church”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests