quote:

---

By your reasoning, we all also have these gifts: Wisdom, knowledge, gifts of healing, miraculous powers, prophecy, distinguishing between spirits, interpretation of tongues. Why single out speaking in tongues?

I'm not, especially, except that unlike the other gifts, tongues is the manifestation of the Spirit. Would you like to see each of the 9 gifts promised to all Christians explicitly in other verses ?

---

First, do you mean "tongues" as in "languages" or more specifically "special language for speaking to God" (1 Cor 14)?

If we mean "languages" in the broadest sense of the term, then we all speak at least one tongue - in my case, English. You would be correct.

They're all works of the Spirit, as indicated by 1 Cor 12:11. I'm not sure how you equate only tongues with "manifestation."

I'm not sure what you're trying to ask in your question - clarify?

It might be interesting to note that in the interlinear bible I've recently found, the word "tongues" in 1 Cor 12:10 is slightly different from that used in 14:2. I'm not sure if that's just some grammer thing (I know nothing about the original biblical languages) or if there's really a difference. Anybody know?

quote:

---

First, do you mean "tongues" as in "languages" or more specifically "special language for speaking to God" (1 Cor 14)?

---

I mean speaking in tongues, which is ALWAYS a language that only God understands. It's never used for preaching the Gospel, it is a sign to unbelievers, and is also a prayer language to God.

quote:

---

They're all works of the Spirit, as indicated by 1 Cor 12:11. I'm not sure how you equate only tongues with "manifestation."
[/quote

1 Cor 12 says

1Cr 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
1Cr 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
1Cr 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
1Cr 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

The word 'but' is explicit in the Greek. In other words, there are lots of ways the Spirit moves, but there is one manifestation of the Spirit. The book of Acts bears this out, the manifestation, when nominated, was always tongues, and in Acts 8, people with faith and healing are still not filled with the Spirit.

[quote]
It might be interesting to note that in the interlinear bible I've recently found, the word "tongues" in 1 Cor 12:10 is slightly different from that used in 14:2. I'm not sure if that's just some grammer thing (I know nothing about the original biblical languages) or if there's really a difference. Anybody know?

---

According to www.blueletterbible.org, 1 Cor 12 is glossa, which means your tongue. The word in 1 Cor 14 is the same, according to Strongs as presented at that site.

Tongues...again, oh dear, oh dear, I shall try to be original

I worry that with all this arguing about whether we need to speak in tongues, people will discouraged from seeking gifts like tongues. So I want to assure anyone reading this who has had no experience of tongues that the vast majority of christians who pray in tongues do not believe it is a sign of salvation, but rather one of many gifts for building up the church.

Lets start with some scripture...

Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy. For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit. But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies is greater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified. Now, brothers, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the flute or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes? Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle? So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air. Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and he is a foreigner to me. So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret what he says. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind. If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue. Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults. In the Law it is written: "Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me," says the Lord. Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers. So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in while everybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner and will be judged by all, and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So he will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

The main point that is very clear from this scripture is that the gift of tongues is of very little benefit to the church, unless there is interpretation. Is there interpretation in your church?

The second point is that prophecy is a greater gift. Paul says he would rather we prophesized. It is a greater gift.

Paul says to this church of believers "I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy". This statement doesn't make sense if everyone was speaking in tongues already.

We need to think about why God gave the gift of tongues. Some churches call it the "biblical test", and use it to check if someone is a christian.

Is this why God gave us this gift?

Why is no precedent in the bible for using the gift this way?

Grace and Peace

Rowan

If tongues is how we live holy, then don't you think scripture would make ample mention of it?
Only in 1 Cor 14 are the tongues in question ever mentioned. 1 Cor is very very vague and to be honest, it can mean a quite a number of things.

But scriptures make ample mention that we live by faith and not by sight. We are told to dwell on Godly things and that is how we combat the evil within us.

"tongues", whatever they are, scripture never said that we combat sin with it.

I'll just address the bits you highlighted, they are the ones I would have highlighted also...

quote:

---

I would like every one of you to speakin tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. He who prophesies isgreater than one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that thechurch may be edified.

---

It's speaking in context of a meeting, quite plainly, it's not saying that only some COULD speak in tongues, or prophecy. Indeed 1 Cor 14:31 plainly says that all CAN prophecy.

When Paul says 'greater' do you take it to mean that some Christians are better than others, having better gifts ? I take it to mean the person who prophecies at one meeting makes a greater contribution to that meeting, but we are all equal in Christ.

quote:

---

For this reason anyone who speaks in a tongue should pray that he mayinterpret what he says.

---

Amen. So we agree that anyone who has tongues can also use the gift of interpretation then ?

quote:

---

For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but mymind is unfruitful.

---

Well, I would also highlight that tongues is how we pray in the Spirit, which many verses tell us is vital.

quote:

---

I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in thechurch I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others thanten thousand words in a tongue.

---

Yes, Paul is very thankful of the gift of tongues ( this means more thankful, not that he does it more ), but in the church there is order, which is really what all this is about.

quote:

---

So if the whole church comestogether and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand orsome unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?But if an unbeliever or someone who does not understand comes in whileeverybody is prophesying, he will be convinced by all that he is a sinner andwill be judged by all, and the secrets of his heart will be laid bare. So hewill fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

---

True, and yet tongues is a sign to unbelievers, prophecy to believers. How do you reconcile these two things ? I note it's possible for all in the church to speak in tongues at once ( and that this is wrong ).

quote:

---

Is there interpretation in your church?

---

Yes, of course. Of all the churches I have gone to where SOME speak in tongues, mine is the only one I have found that follows the instruction of 1 Cor 14.

quote:

---

It is a greater gift.

---

Yes, in the contest of use in a meeting. So do you think different people have different gifts, some greater than others ? Havcing tongues really sucks because prophecy would have been better ? Surely faith would be better again, or healing ? Are all Christians not equal before God ?

quote:

---

"I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy". This statement doesn't make sense if everyone was speaking in tongues already.

---

He also says 'forbid not tongues, desire prophecy'. The diffence is he's saying 'don't stop speaking in tongues, but DO go on to use prophecy, and do things in an orderly manner ( not all speaking in tongues at once anymore ).

quote:

---

Is this why God gave us this gift?

---

Romans says it's a prayer language, because we know not what to pray for. Paul says it's how we pray in the Spirit, and also a sign to unbelievers. Acts makes clear that a specific manifestation of the Spirit was expected when people were saved, but God did not intend for us to go through churches demanding tongues of people. He expected us not to misunderstand and misappropriate His Word to the point that 'churches' have people who are not Christians in the first place.

quote:

---

Why is no precedent in the bible for using the gift this way?

---

Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19.

How do you think someone becomes a Christian ? If your answer involves 'giving your heart to Jesus', saying a 'sinners prayer', or making a 'decision for Christ', I'd ask why those phrases, let alone those concepts/processes, never occur in the Bible.

InsanePoet

quote:

---

If tongues is how we live holy, then don't you think scripture would make ample mention of it?

---

I'm not sure what you mean. 1 Cor 14 says tongues is how we pray in the Spirit, look up prayer in the Spirit in your concordance.

quote:

---

But scriptures make ample mention that we live by faith and not by sight. We are told to dwell on Godly things and that is how we combat the evil within us.

---

Of course. I never said speak in tongues and live however you like. The whole Bible is important, every last word.

quote:

---

"tongues", whatever they are, scripture never said that we combat sin with it.

---

I was thinking of Jude 20-21, prayer in the Spirit ( tongues ) is how we build ourselves up in the faith.

I don't think I should try to respond (at this point) to all of what you have said. I think it would be better to concentrate on one point at a time, otherwise I fear we will just go round in circles.

I would happily have this conversation over email with you if you prefer. It does get a bit confusing having a discussion such as this with so many different opinions on tongues (including their existence).

The first point we have to deal with is the context of 1 Cor 12-14. Is it talking about a single meeting or the church as a whole (the body of Christ). Obviously we're are going to have completely different interpretations if we are reading it in two very different contexts.

So I'll let you go first (cuz I'm tired), and you can lay out your argument for why the passage is given in the conext of a single meeting.

Grace and peace brother

Rowan

quote:

---

The book of Acts bears this out, the manifestation, when nominated, was always tongues,

---

Nominated? Always? Err, clarification and verses?

BTW, in 1 Cor 12:10, it's "speaking in different kinds of tongues" - indicating the ability to use more than one "tongue" - possibly indicating languages? Then again, "tongues" is always plural . . .

Reading a little later in your posts - are you trying to say "speaking in tongues" == "prophesying"??

From some reading of your posts, it almost sounds like you're trying to mix word definitions toghether.

I'm still thinking about the word "faith" in the context of 1 Cor 12:9 - whether it's a more general definition faith, or specifically faith in Christ.

Heh, I've given myself more questions than answers. Guess I should do more research.

Here's another verse to consider:

1Co 12:7 But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withal.
1Co 12:8 For to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit:
1Co 12:9 to another faith, in the same Spirit; and to another gifts of healings, in the one Spirit;
1Co 12:10 and to another workings of miracles; and to another prophecy; and to another discernings of spirits; to another diverse kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues:
1Co 12:11 but all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as he will.

Atleast three versions (KJV, ASB, and NIV) are parallel here, saying "to another". The greek for "another" is "heteros," meaning something close to "a different one."

This seems to say that different people are given different gifts, that not all are given the gift of tongues. That's my view of things, at least.

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

[This message has been edited by ArchAngel (edited March 27, 2003).]

quote:

---

I would happily have this conversation over email with you if you prefer.

---

If you'd like. How do I do that ?

quote:

---

Nominated? Always? Err, clarification and verses?

---

Read the chapters, and you'll find they knew when people had the Spirit ,because they spoke in tongues. Acts 8 is an exception, it simply shows that visible evidence was expected, and that there's such a thing as an unsaved believer.

quote:

---

Reading a little later in your posts - are you trying to say "speaking in tongues" == "prophesying"??

---

Um... no. Of course not.

quote:

---

This seems to say that different people are given different gifts, that not all are given the gift of tongues. That's my view of things, at least.

---

The Greek when it asks 'do all speak in tongues' DEMANDS the answer 'no', But it's asking about what people DO, not what they CAN do. In the context of the body coming together ( a meeting ), not all will prophecy, not all will be healed, not all will speak in tongues. 1 Cor 14:26 and 31 tell us that all CAN prophecy, interpret, speak in tongues. The answer is what you think, but you're asking the wrong question. :-)

At least you are all more civil than MeanManInOz in your discussion, though I must admit, I do miss his passion (heh heh heh).

Have fun in your debates.

Must go.

Oh well... It'll take some prayer to find the truth.
I, however, still believe that different people are given different gifts. Atleast from my knowledge of the Bible and stuff.
But, Look at the bright side, we'll all find out one day!

Ah, yes. I remember MeanManInOz. He was... passionate. No Hard feelings, of course.

T'sall good, Peace out, homies!

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

quote:

---

I, however, still believe that different people are given different gifts. Atleast from my knowledge of the Bible and stuff.

---

Sure. Lots of people do. But I've started to show from the Bible why it is that you're mistaken. Are you willing to take that chance ?

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

A good starting point is to ask why 1 Cor 12 lists 9 gifts that are promised to all Christians elsewhere in the Bible. Do all Christians have faith ? Can all Christians ask God for wisdom ? Can all Christians be healed ?

Another good start is to ask why Christians speak in tongues at all. Then we can ask if it's something only some Christians need.

What they said was that those gifts are open to all. Any christian can get it, it's just that not everyone does get it(or maybe should get it), as of the other gifts. Tongues may not be for everyone, but it is open to all christians.
With prayer and stuff, It makes alot of sense. and I think I now believe it. it makes everything fit together.
This also seems pretty much on what you are saying.

I'm pretty much against tongues being a "proof of salvation" or all good christians speak in tongues.

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

The key points remain the ones I asked you in my last post. Do all Christians have faith ? Why do we speak in tongues ? What is the manifestation of the Spirit, and how does it fit into Acts 8 ?

It's easy to find people who agree with you, no matter what your view. What matters is what God's view is on the subject.

[This message has been edited by christian (edited March 28, 2003).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by christian:

Do all Christians have faith ?

---

Yes, All Christians have faith; we are saved by grace, through faith.

quote:

---

Why do we speak in tongues ?

---

Tongues is speaking to God, not man. It edifies the self.

quote:

---

What is the manifestation of the Spirit, and how does it fit into Acts 8 ?

---

1 cor 12 seems to say it is spiritual gifts.

There are the answers to your questions.

P.S. Not be a nitpicker, but God hardly holds views of subjects... He owns them!

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

Christian: I really didn't want to encourage another tongues thread like this, but I have to respond to what you're claiming about tongues. We can't ignore the magnitude of our difference of opinion. If what you say is true, them most people on this site are going to hell, and I am helping them there by not supporting you. If what I say is true, then you are preaching a different gospel to the one most of us believe in. I would much rather discuss this with you in private.

I asked previously if you might present your argument one point at a time, and to start by addressing the context of 1 Cor 12-14, and proving to us that it is speaking about a specific meeting.

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines. 1 Cor 12:7-11

You keep asking do all christians have faith as if this proves it can't be in the context of the church as a whole. But if we take this in the context of a single meeting, then only some christians have faith during a single meeting, which makes just as little sense.

I believe most have us have experienced exactly what Paul is talking about. The Holy Spirit's ability to work in us and increase our faith when we need it most. Faith is something measurable, and the more we have of it, the more God can work through us.

I give you some money, does that imply that you don't have any? Of course not. So why do you think the Holy Spirit giving faith implies that there is none to begin with?

I shall leave it that, so you have no excuses for not responding to my point. I apologize for occasions in the past when my motivation in these discussions has been pride and point scoring, and I assure you, that my motivation now is just to see this matter settled, so that, to quote Paul, "we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves".

Grace and Peace

quote:

---

And I am holding our opinions against the Bible. atleast trying to.

---

I have no doubt that is your intention. Which is why we have a basis to explore this from the Bible.

quote:

---

Yes, All Christians have faith; we are saved by grace, through faith.

---

I agree, obviously. So in what context is faith listed in the gifts of 1 Cor 12 ? I don't find any verses that indicate there are different kinds of faith, faith is faith. My point is that if 1 Cor 12 says only some have tongues, it also says only some have faith. My answer is that it's about use of gifts in a meeting context. Some use thier faith in a meeting, others do not ( most obviously some take their needs to a prayer line and some will have no needs to take ).

quote:

---

Tongues is speaking to God, not man. It edifies the self.

---

Amen. So if it's a gift that builds us up, why would any Christian not want/need it ?

quote:

---

1 cor 12 seems to say it is spiritual gifts.

---

But Acts 8 records people who have some of these gifts mentioned, but do not have the Holy Spirit. They exhibited faith and recieved healing. My answer: faith is shown in the step towards God, but not all recieve the Spirit right away, and healing is a gift not promised to Christians alone. It's obvious that in Acts 8 a visible sign was sought and eventually present.

quote:

---

There are the answers to your questions.

---

I appreciate them immensely. I find a majority of people I discuss these things with do not attempt to answer my questions at all. I've explained where I agree with you and where I think your replies do not explain the situation fully, and why, from the Bible. I look forward to your response.

quote:

---

P.S. Not be a nitpicker, but God hardly holds views of subjects... He owns them!

---

*grin* I guess it's a little semantic. My point is that if two disagree on something so fundamental, God cannot possibly agree with both.

quote:

---

Christian: I really didn't want to encourage another tongues thread like this, but I have to respond to what you're claiming about tongues.

---

And so you should.

quote:

---

We can't ignore the magnitude of our difference of opinion. If what you say is true, them most people on this site are going to hell, and I am helping them there by not supporting you. If what I say is true, then you are preaching a different gospel to the one most of us believe in. I would much rather discuss this with you in private.

---

Others seem keen to discuss it here, if you want to discuss it in private, I had asked how to contact you privately, did you not see that question ?

And I agree, there is a fundamental gap between us in terms of salvation doctrine, which should be addressed, because it is so vitally important.

quote:

---

I asked previously if you might present your argument one point at a time, and to start by addressing the context of 1 Cor 12-14, and proving to us that it is speaking about a specific meeting.

---

You asked me to do that in private and I asked how to contact you. Would you like me to address it here instead ?

quote:

---

Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to anotherthe message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith bythe same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to anothermiraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing betweenspirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to stillanother the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one andthe same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.1 Cor 12:7-11

---

Correct. This follows the body analogy, which speaks of the body working together. When does this happen, if not in a meeting. 1 Cor 13 explains that our attitude to the gifts is more important than our using them at all, and 14 goes on to explain how the gifts should be used in a meeting. So that is the obvious context all along, Paul is correcting misuse of the gifts within the Corinthian meetings.

quote:

---

You keep asking do all christians have faith as if this proves it can't be in the context of the church as a whole. But if we take this in the context of a single meeting, then only some christians have faith during a single meeting, which makes just as little sense.

---

No, some Christians exercise faith within a meeting, faith without works being dead. Faith is exercised by stepping out in using the voice gifts, in taking needs to the prayer line so the elders of the church can pray for them, etc. In the same way that all CAN speak in tongues, but not all DO, all HAVE faith, but not all USE it.

quote:

---

I believe most have us have experienced exactly what Paul is talking about. The Holy Spirit's ability to work in us and increase our faith when we need it most. Faith is something measurable, and the more we have of it, the more God can work through us.

---

Our faith does not grow, we grow in the faith. Jude 20-21 says this. It also says the way to do this is to pray in the Spirit, so we're full circle again to the main point of this thread....

quote:

---

I give you some money, does that imply that you don't have any? Of course not. So why do you think the Holy Spirit giving faith implies that there is none to begin with?

---

That's not the point at all. The point is to turn your logic on to the tongues example, you're saying that all Christians have tongues, but do not use them, or get more at some point.

quote:

---

I shall leave it that, so you have no excuses for not responding to my point.

---

I would hope never to have or need an excuse. If you think I've not answered you on a point, by all means call me on it, it is never intentional.

quote:

---

I apologize for occasions in the past when my motivation in these discussions has been pride and point scoring, and I assure you, that my motivation now is just to see this matter settled, so that, to quote Paul, "we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves".

---

I appreciate that, and intend for my motivation to be the same. Have I answered the question ? 1 Cor 12 lists 9 gifts. To say that only some have tongues because it's in that list, you must claim that the same is true of the other 8. Would you like perhaps for me to show explicit promises in the rest of the Bible, where God promises each of the 9 gifts in 1 Cor 12 to all Christians ?

quote:

---

ArchAngel: Tongues is speaking to God, not man. It edifies the self.
Christian: Amen. So if it's a gift that builds us up, why would any Christian not want/need it ?

---

Isn't part of being Christ-like lifting others up instead of ourself? I agree there is occasion for self-edification; there must be else the gift wouldn't be given. The truth is that if each one of us who calls ourself Christian were to do what we should, there wouldn't be so much a need for self-edification

quote:

---

Christian: My point is that if two disagree on something so fundamental, God cannot possibly agree with both.

---

Who says God has to agree with either of you? We are to agree with God. It is entirely possible you both are wrong on this issue. For that matter, we all could be

I would offer another interpretation of the gifts given to those who are believers (and filled with the Spirit by having the gifts), and that is this: That everyone who believes and asks to be filled of the Spirit receives all the gifts of the Spirit. *But* the Spirit causes the manifestation of those gifts in due time according to the needs of the moment. Remember there is no confusion in any of this; that is not to say that it is all logical to our human intellect.
I agree that the believer plays a role in the working of the gifts, as the believer has to maintain a steady relationship with God in order to prevent the greiving of the Spirit and subsequently the ineffective workings of the gifts of the Spirit. Ultimately though, God is in control of all of this.
Remember that the gifts also have a temporary nature (1 Cor 13:8). It is not for us to argue when and why the gifts vanish, but to trust God that what does or does not happen is according to His perfect plan.

In any case I fear that the issue over spiritual gifts has moved from the original intent - to work toward the building up of others in salvation and the way - to something very dangerous and I dare say egocentric. I think the body of Christ needs to do some house cleaning and make things more inviting to those who need to hear the truth. I also think those who have heard the truth need to put it into practice and stop wearing nasks.

My apologies for going somewhat off topic; I had to post some things that have been on my heart recently.

God bless,
Matt

quote:

---

Originally posted by nfektious:
Isn't part of being Christ-like lifting others up instead of ourself?

---

That's why Corinthians puts prophecy over tongues. Because prophecy edifies the church.

And Christian, I'll get back to your post/thing. I'm really tired now... head drooping on keyboard... this would be illegal if I was driving... drooling... can't keep eyes open... need sleep... sleeeeeeeepppppp...

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

quote:

---

Isn't part of being Christ-like lifting others up instead of ourself? I agree there is occasion for self-edification; there must be else the gift wouldn't be given. The truth is that if each one of us who calls ourself Christian were to do what we should, there wouldn't be so much a need for self-edification

---

Yes, that is the point of 1 Cor 13. The gifts were being misused, and while the people all speaking in tongues were edified, they were not showing the love of God in how they ran their meetings.

quote:

---

Who says God has to agree with either of you? We are to agree with God. It is entirely possible you both are wrong on this issue. For that matter, we all could be

---

Clearly, God will not change His mind, if He agrees with one of us, it's because we agree with Him. The point is that a maximum of one can be right.

quote:

---

That everyone who believes and asks to be filled of the Spirit receives all the gifts of the Spirit. *But* the Spirit causes the manifestation of those gifts in due time according to the needs of the moment. Remember there is no confusion in any of this; that is not to say that it is all logical to our human intellect.

---

I agree entirely, with the exception that tongues is the 'manifestation of the Spirit'.

quote:

---

And Christian, I'll get back to your post/thing. I'm really tired now... head drooping on keyboard... this would be illegal if I was driving... drooling... can't keep eyes open... need sleep... sleeeeeeeepppppp...

---

*sigh* thank goodness. I am exausted, and more than glad to see a reply later rather than right now. It's 12:30 here, and I am NOT a night owl.

quote:

---

Originally posted by christian:
[B]I agree entirely, with the exception that tongues is the 'manifestation of the Spirit'.[B]

---

??? (that's my only comment on that)

About having faith, and having tongues; I think it's a stretch... I read 1 cor 12, and it doesn't add up.

[Quote] [b]
[u]ArchAngel(mwah)[/u]: Tongues is speaking to God, not man. It edifies the self.
[u]Christian[/u]: Amen. So if it's a gift that builds us up, why would any Christian not want/need it ?[b] [quote]

I'm not saying tongues is bad or anything... of course it's good. I think we all agree on that.

P.S. I was writing my last post around, er, 1:30 A.M. I'm could possibly be characterized as a night hawk. I also woke up at 11:45, today. Not that you needed to know that or anything... Hey! I had nothing going on! It's saturday!

------------------
Fight(as in overkill) the Good Fight of Faith...

quote:

---

About having faith, and having tongues; I think it's a stretch... I read 1 cor 12, and it doesn't add up.

---

Doesn't add up how ? Does James promise wisdom to all who ask ? Doesn't James say we can ALL be healed ? Doesn't 1 Cor 14:31 say 'you can ALL prophecy' ?

quote:

---

I'm not saying tongues is bad or anything... of course it's good. I think we all agree on that.

---

So why is it only good for some ? Why are any of the 1 Cor 12 gifts only good for some ?

I read through most of the discussion but I have to go so I wanted to add one fact and I hope it is in context at this point - In the verse above it must be pointed out that "except he interpret" and then the entire church can receive. Obviously there is the need for tongues and the need for interpretation when it comes to the body which is a seperate item from personal prayer in our time with God in the closet. This "except he interpret" of course will make prophesy and tongues of equal value especially in word of knowledge etc.
All gifts are needed in the body just as all people should be active in the body. The gifts are free and all of them are real and all of them are available to any believer. Our search should be in fulfilling the great commission and utilizing all the gifts as we do so. After all they are His to give and I for one want all the Lord has to offer as He wills in my life and the lives of my friends.

------------------
Luke 12:15 Then he said to them, "Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions."

quote:

---

All gifts are needed in the body just as all people should be active in the body. The gifts are free and all of them are real and all of them are available to any believer. Our search should be in fulfilling the great commission and utilizing all the gifts as we do so. After all they are His to give and I for one want all the Lord has to offer as He wills in my life and the lives of my friends.

---

This is really the point. Even if one can be saved WITHOUT tongues, why would you want to be ? Why would anyone love God and NOT want everything He has to offer ? Ditto the other gifts, all the fruits, and everything else.

quote:

---

(v7: But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.)
The Spirit was manifested by the exercise of these gifts; his influence and interest appeared in them. But they were not distributed for the mere honour and advantage of those who had them, but for the benefit of the church, to edify the body, and spread and advance the gospel. Note, Whatever gifts God confers on any man, he confers them that he may do good with them, whether they be common or spiritual. The outward gifts of his bounty are to be improved for his glory, and employed in doing good to others. No man has them merely for himself. They are a trust put into his hands, to profit withal; and the more he profits others with them, the more abundantly will they turn to his account in the end, Phil. 4:17. Spiritual gifts are bestowed, that men may with them profit the church and promote Christianity. They are not given for show, but for service; not for pomp and ostentation, but for edification; not to magnify those that have them, but to edify others.
(v11: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.)
It is according to the sovereign pleasure of the donor. What more free than a gift? And shall not the Spirit of God do what he will with his own? May he not give to what persons he pleases, and in what proportion he pleases; one gift to one man, and another to another; to one more, and another fewer, as he thinks fit? Is he not the best judge how his own purpose shall be served, and his own donatives bestowed? It is not as men will, nor as they may think fit, but as the Spirit pleases. Note, The Holy Ghost is a divine person. He works divine effects and divides divine gifts a he will, by his own power, and according to his own pleasure, without dependence or control. But though he distributes these gifts freely and uncontrollably, they are intended by him, not for private honour and advantage, but for public benefit, for the edification of the body, the church.

---

Paul uses the analogy of the human body to explain that every believer serves a specific purpose in the body of Christ. He clarifies that not every believer is called to serve in a specific role in the body of Christ; this is distinct from the role we each serve outside the body of Christ. We are all called to advance the gospel of salvation outside the body of Christ and we do so by utilizing the gifts. We similarly build up the body of Christ by utilizing the gifts that are needed in our local fellowship, but for everyone to do so by all using one gift or all the gifts at once would result in total confusion. I believe this is what is meant by 1 Corinthians 14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

1 Corinthians 12 leads into 1 Corinthians 13: "But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way." (1 Corinthians 12:31) Here Paul introduces that excellent way to seek after the best gifts and to be a true follower of Christ:

(1 Corinthians 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.
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.
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.

4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul instructs these believers that charity (love) is the attitude with which we are to use the gifts. He further explains the uselessness of speaking in tongues in and of itself - that is, without interpretation at the least. It is clear from 1 Corinthians 14 that the gift of tongues alone has no value except to God, and that tongues should not be used unless there is interpretation also.

My whole reason for posting this exegesis on these chapters and the issue of tongues is because of the assertion that the gift of tongues is the sole manifestation of the Spirit as proof of salvation. Clearly scripture refutes that premise, because the gift of tongues in and of itself is only something that is of understanding to the person using the gift and to God.
Christian, unless your argument is for self-evidence that a person can know they have been saved and filled with the Spirit by having the gift of tongues, your argument has no merit that the gift of tongues is evidence of salvation and the filling of the Spirit to other believers. The gift of tongues can only prove the filling of the Spirit in a believer if it is accompanied by interpretation also. Even in the case of self-evidence of salvation, the believer should still be certain that the spirit is verified with scripture. Testing of the spirits is instructed in any event, especially when proof of source is in question.
I have not noticed any comments that any believer would not want to have the full filling of the Spirit in their life. The argument has never been about full dispensation; it has been about proof of salvation and the filling of the Spirit by speaking in tongues.

I have not posted this out of malice. I have been searching for proof in scripture to support your premise and I just could not find any. Please prove me wrong if I am in error with scripture.

God bless,
Matt

quote:

---

Note, Whatever gifts God confers on any man, he confers them that he may do good with them, whether they be common or spiritual.

---

Agreed.

quote:

---

It is according to the sovereign pleasure of the donor. What more free than a gift? And shall not the Spirit of God do what he will with his own?

---

Agreed.

quote:

---

May he not give to what persons he pleases, and in what proportion he pleases; one gift to one man, and another to another; to one more, and another fewer, as he thinks fit?

---

Yes, He may, but He says He does not.

quote:

---

Paul uses the analogy of the human body to explain that every believer serves a specific purpose in the body of Christ. He clarifies that not every believer is called to serve in a specific role in the body of Christ; this is distinct from the role we each serve outside the body of Christ. We are all called to advance the gospel of salvation outside the body of Christ and we do so by utilizing the gifts. We similarly build up the body of Christ by utilizing the gifts that are needed in our local fellowship, but for everyone to do so by all using one gift or all the gifts at once would result in total confusion. I believe this is what is meant by 1 Corinthians 14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

---

1 Cor 14:33 is specifically about the Corinthians stopping from all speaking in tongues in their meetings.

quote:

---

1 Corinthians 12 leads into 1 Corinthians 13: "But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way." (1 Corinthians 12:31) Here Paul introduces that excellent way to seek after the best gifts and to be a true follower of Christ:

---

Yes, Paul goes on to talk about our attitude being more important than any gift, and the use of the gifts to be in subservience to the needs of the church. Which is a great way to lead into telling them to stop using tongues all at once, and to use the other gifts. One question. Doesn't 'covet earnestly the best gifts' indicate that some gifts are of more use than others, and if only some Christians can have those gifts, doesn't it set the rest up to feel second class, or disappointed ?

quote:

---

(1 Corinthians 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.
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.
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.

---

Let me just point out that many look to these verses as a dichotomy. Paul is not saying love OVER tongues/faith/etc, he's saying love AND tongues/faith/etc.

quote:

---

It is clear from 1 Corinthians 14 that the gift of tongues alone has no value except to God, and that tongues should not be used unless there is interpretation also.

---

Yes, in the church, tongues should always be interpreted.

quote:

---

My whole reason for posting this exegesis on these chapters and the issue of tongues is because of the assertion that the gift of tongues is the sole manifestation of the Spirit as proof of salvation.

---

In light of my past posts, you can't really address that question without explaining why/how people in Acts 8 who had some of these gifts manifested in their lives did not have the Spirit, and how they knew. Or why Acts 2/10/19 don't report knowing that people had the Spirit because the range of gifts from 1 Cor 12 was present, different gifts in different people.

quote:

---

Clearly scripture refutes that premise, because the gift of tongues in and of itself is only something that is of understanding to the person using the gift and to God.

---

No, only God, not the person speaking. And I don't see how that is relevant, or proves anything ?

quote:

---

Christian, unless your argument is for self-evidence that a person can know they have been saved and filled with the Spirit by having the gift of tongues,

---

Yes, partially. The Bible says we know He is in us, and we in Him, because He has given us of His Spirit. But Acts 8 indicates visible evidence by which others know also.

quote:

---

your argument has no merit that the gift of tongues is evidence of salvation and the filling of the Spirit to other believers.

---

OK, then what do you propose in the place of tongues in Acts 8, and where is whatever you elect in Acts 2/10/19 ?

quote:

---

The gift of tongues can only prove the filling of the Spirit in a believer if it is accompanied by interpretation also.

---

There was no interpretation in Acts 2, 10 or 19, and to be honest, I have no idea what chain of logic is leading you to this conclusion. I am baffled.

quote:

---

Even in the case of self-evidence of salvation, the believer should still be certain that the spirit is verified with scripture. Testing of the spirits is instructed in any event, especially when proof of source is in question.

---

You're suggesting when someone asks God for salvation, and the manifestation that God has nominated is present, some further test is warranted ?

quote:

---

I have not noticed any comments that any believer would not want to have the full filling of the Spirit in their life. The argument has never been about full dispensation; it has been about proof of salvation and the filling of the Spirit by speaking in tongues.

---

Another point I keep making is that 1 Cor 12 uses the word 'but' to differentiate between there being many gifts, and there being a manifestation of the Spirit. You need to tell me what that manifestation is, if it is not tongues, and tell me how your view fits into Acts 2/8/10/19.

quote:

---

I have not posted this out of malice. I have been searching for proof in scripture to support your premise and I just could not find any. Please prove me wrong if I am in error with scripture.

---

I hope I have taken a step towards doing that. Your post seems to me to be chasing trails of circular logic that I can't claim to follow. Do you believe that 1 Cor 14 means no tongue should ever go without interpretation ? I'm not sure, perhaps you'd like to elucidate on your point as well as answering those I have raised....

------------------
Luke 12:15 Then he said to them, "Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soul Joy:
I have a question - What church teaches that speaking in tongues is proof of salvation? I have never ran across or met any church body that taught this.

---

I have.

Actually, the church I'm thinking of actually says that if you don't speak in tongues then you arn't saved. They also say that water baptism is required for salvation.

[This message has been edited by InsanePoet (edited March 30, 2003).]

And it's also irrelevant IMO. All that matters is what the Bible says. Water baptism is non-negotiable, but it's just a step towards God, many people are water baptised and not saved, just like the people in Acts 8.

Can you be saved without being water baptised?

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

1 Cor 14:33 is specifically about the Corinthians stopping from all speaking in tongues in their meetings.

---

quote:

---

One question. Doesn't 'covet earnestly the best gifts' indicate that some gifts are of more use than others, and if only some Christians can have those gifts, doesn't it set the rest up to feel second class, or disappointed ?

---

quote:

---

Let me just point out that many look to these verses as a dichotomy. Paul is not saying love OVER tongues/faith/etc, he's saying love AND tongues/faith/etc.

---

quote:

---

In light of my past posts, you can't really address that question {the assertion that the gift of tongues is the sole manifestation of the Spirit as proof of salvation}without explaining why/how people in Acts 8 who had some of these gifts manifested in their lives did not have the Spirit, and how they knew. Or why Acts 2/10/19 don't report knowing that people had the Spirit because the range of gifts from 1 Cor 12 was present, different gifts in different people.

---

Aside: It is interesting to note that the Feast of Pentecost is also known as the Feast of Harvest or the Feast of Weeks, the first day being known as the Day of First Fruits. This was also a male only celebration. (Exodus 23:16,17; Deuteronomy 16:16)

quote:

---

Me: ...the gift of tongues in and of itself is only something that is of understanding to the person using the gift and to God.
Christian: No, only God, not the person speaking. And I don't see how that is relevant, or proves anything ?

---

I was assuming the rule that the gift of tongues is to be used with interpretation, as is instructed in 1 Corinthians 14:13,14. With the context of 1 Corinthians being set around the rules of conduct for gifts in a fellowship of believers, then intertpretation is to follow. You agreed to this earlier in your post ("Yes, in the church, tongues should always be interpreted.") and then you disagree on the same point?? What exactly is relevant and what proof are you looking for then??

On the issue of proof of salvation: God promised salvation to us through Jesus Christ. By believing so, I am accepting by faith that what God said He will do. If I have reason to doubt my salvation, or rather that God is true to His promise, then I am missing the essence of faith itself and subsequently my salvation should be questioned. That applies to inward proof.
For outward signs of proof of salvation we have the gifts of the Spirit and the fruit of the Spirit. These are signs to believers and unbelievers alike that an inward change has manifested itself in my life.
The Spirit cannot live in someone who does not believe, just as Christ cannot save someone who does not believe. How can the gifts of the Spirit or the fruit of the Spirit be evident in someone who does not believe? They cannot because God is not in them.
You asked: "You're suggesting when someone asks God for salvation, and the manifestation that God has nominated is present, some further test is warranted ?"
I answer: Yes; when doubt is present - enough to cause one to doubt salvation - further testing of the source is warranted.
I cannot help but think about the lesson in Thomas when he doubted the resurrected Christ. Thomas walked and talked with Christ in person; how much more doubt is expected from those who did not.

It is already 2:30 in the morning and I have to get some sleep for work. I hope I have answered your post clearly; I certainly gave it my best attempt in spite of the time.

God bless,
Matt

I have another question about tounges, actually two

Do you believe in counterfiet tounges?

and if so, what is your definition of idolotory?

If a person seeks a gift of God, and seeks it much more than they seek
God Himself. Would that be idolotory?

And if one seeks tounges in such an idolotorous way - do you suppose the possibility of them not recieving the gift of tounges from God, but indeed a counterfiet?

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

Karl:

1. I don't believe one can recieve the ability to speak in tongues from anyone but God. Anyone can speak gibberish though.

2. My definition of idolatry is obviously to place anything before God. Anyone who seeks tongues and not God is clearly confused, and will recieve nothing. God will not give anything in that situation, and no other being has power to.

3. Yes, that would be similar to Simon the Sorcerors attitude in Acts 8.

quote:

---

do you suppose the possibility of them not recieving the gift of tounges from God, but indeed a counterfiet?

---

No, they will recieve nothing, there is no being with the power to give any such ability, and certainly not with the power to usurp God, whom the person is asking, albiet asking amiss.

but regarding spiritual power not of God - real tangible power

2 Thessalonians 2
9This evil man will come to do the work of Satan with counterfeit power and signs and miracles. 10He will use every kind of wicked deception to fool those who are on their way to destruction because they refuse to believe the truth that would save them.

but tounges might be such counterfiet..

God gives the gift of healing..
However i know of a case where a witch doctor did indeed heal a shrivilled up leg... however upon recieving this 'healing' so many areas of this persons life crumbled.. However when he came to Christ, God healed those areas of his life - more important areas than a physical leg , but when he recieved Christ, the leg shrivilled up again..

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

(this is an excerp
the recorded cases of glossolalia go back as far as 1100 B.C. At that time a young Amen worshiper made ancient headlines and attracted historical notoriety when he suddenly became possessed by a god and began to emit sounds in a strange ecstatic "tongue." In the "Report of Wenamon," a text giving the oldest account of glossolalia known to man (originating in Byblos, a temple city in historical Lebanon), we find the scanty details:

"Now, when he sacrificed to his gods, the gods seized one of his noble youths, making him frenzied, so that he said, 'Bring the god hither! Bring the messenger of Amen who hath him. Send him and let him go.'"—George A. Barton, Archaeology and the Bible (Philadelphia: American Sunday School Union, 1916), page 353.

Seven hundred years later, the Greek philosopher Plato also made mention of the "gift" in his time. In his Phaedrus, he demonstrated that he was well acquainted with the phenomenon, for he referred to several families who, according to him, practiced ecstatic speech, praying, and utterings while possessed. Continuing further, he pointed out that these practices even brought physical healing to those who engaged in them. Plato, together with most of his contemporaries, asserted that these occurrences were caused by divine inspiration. To support this view, he suggested (in Timaeus) that God takes possession of the mind while man sleeps or is possessed, and that during this state, God inspires him with utterances and/or visions which he can neither understand nor interpret.

Virgil, too, during the last century before Christ, described in Aeneid the activities of the Sybilline priestess on the Island of Delos. He attributed her ecstatic tongues to the result of her being unified with the god Apollo, a state that enveloped her while she meditated in a haunted cave amidst the eerie sounds of the wind playing strange music through the narrow crevices in the rocks.

In speaking of the Pythoness of Delphi, Chrysostom, a church father, wrote: "This same Pythoness then is said, being a female, to sit at times upon the tripod of Appolo astride, and thus the evil spirit ascending from beneath and entering the lower part of her body, fills the woman with madness, and she with disheveled hair begins to play the bacchanal and to foam at the mouth, and thus being in a frenzy to utter the words of her madness."—Chrysostom, "Homilies on First Corinthians." (Italics supplied.)

Many of the mystery religions of the Graeco-Roman world undoubtedly included the same phenomenon. Among those most often listed are the Osiris cult originating in the land of the Pharaohs; the Mithra cult of the Persians, and the lesser known Eulusinian, Dionysian, and Orphic cults cradled in Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece. The basis for this opinion is that their entire system of belief and rituals centered around spirit possessions. Another indication comes from Lucian of Samosata (A.D. 120-198) who in De Dea Syria describes an example of glossolalia as exhibited by an itinerant believer of June, the Syrian goddess, stationed at Hierapolis in Syria.* (Interestingly, the term glossolalia, so widely used today, comes from the Greek vernacular which was in existence long before the day of Pentecost.)

Moffatt's New Testament Commentary says of these manifestations: "Oracles of the great 'lord' at the Shrine of Delphi, as Heraclitus put it, were revelations of the god's will through ecstasy, not through sensible words. So were the Sybil's unintelligible cries. A priest or priestess, seized by sudden trances of the spirit, uttered mystic sayings, which were held to be all the more divine as they were least rational or articulate. [Italics supplied.] Philo in Alexandria had taken over the Greek notion, arguing that such ecstasy, when the mind or unconscious reason was superseded, was the highest reach of the human soul in its quest for God."—Commentary on 1 Cor. 14, p. 214.

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

How do you interpret that? The passage instructs them in the proper use of tongues in their meetings (1 Corinthians 14:27 and following). Furthermore, Paul commands them that they do not forbid the speaking of tongues, provided that which is done (whether tongues, prophecy, etc) is done decently and in order as he has instructed them (verses 39 and 40).

---

Earlier, Paul tells them that if they all speak in tongues, people will think they are mad. He goes on to explain how tongues should be used. Of what use is this instruction, if they were not all speaking in tongues at once ? Also, he said to seek prophecy and forbid not tongues. The emphasis on each gift should make clear which was being ignored, and which was being overused/abused.

quote:

---

Obviously the gifts in use depend on the needs of the body of believers at the time. I believe Paul is instructing the Corinthians to seek the gifts that will best benefit their fellowship.

---

So not all churches need tongues as 'a sign to unbelievers', or prophecy to 'edify the church' ? Are you sure that is what you mean ?

quote:

---

In the case of these Corinthian believers it is clear that they were abusing the gift of tongues over and above any other gifts. I believe that is evident in Paul's stress on prophecy - not to point out prophecy specifically, but to guide them to pursue something more than tongues.

---

He specifically states that prophecy in a meeting is a better gift, explains why, and says to seek the 'best gifts'. My question on people having better gifts and others being left out stands if it is better in the context of their location, or globally.

quote:

---

I'm not sure what you are referring to in Acts 8; I read it and there is no mention of any body of Christ having any gifts manifest without the Spirit.

---

Faith and healing were present in the least. If 1 Cor 12 lists different gifts any of which could be the manifestation of the Spirit, there are several there which simply could not be detected in the manner that Acts 8 suggests.

quote:

---

The only mention is of believers in Samaria who had only been saved and baptized.

---

No, it does not say they were saved. How can anyone be saved if they do not have the Holy Spirit ?

quote:

---

I assume your point with Acts 8 is in reference to the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost in Acts 2 and why those in Acts 8 didn't receive the same.

---

My point is that whatever they recieved, it was considered inadequate, and it was a sufficient matter of urgency for the apostles to be called to pray with them further. Do you believe people can be saved apart from the Holy Spirit ?

quote:

---

My only answer is simply that the believers at Pentecost were at Jerusalem, and the gifts manifest there were for those believers present - the 11 apostles at minimum, as far as Scripture indicates (Acts 2:7 - the speakers who were filled with the Spirit were Galileans). The multitude who heard Peter's message were not believers but were present for the Pentecost festivities. They were Jews from different nations. The believers also in Acts 10 and Acts 19 were Gentiles.

---

Yes, and tongues is consistently how they knew they had the Spirit.

quote:

---

I'm afraid I don't quite know what you're getting at here. Can you be explicit about what you are after?

---

Simply, Acts 8 records unsaved believers and the fact that a specific manifestation was sought, and when it occured it must have been visible for someone to offer money for it.

quote:

---

Aside: It is interesting to note that the Feast of Pentecost is also known as the Feast of Harvest or the Feast of Weeks, the first day being known as the Day of First Fruits. This was also a male only celebration. (Exodus 23:16,17; Deuteronomy 16:16)

---

Yes, there are specific, prophetic reasons that the church began on the day of Pentecost.

quote:

---

I was assuming the rule that the gift of tongues is to be used with interpretation, as is instructed in 1 Corinthians 14:13,14. With the context of 1 Corinthians being set around the rules of conduct for gifts in a fellowship of believers, then intertpretation is to follow. You agreed to this earlier in your post ("Yes, in the church, tongues should always be interpreted.") and then you disagree on the same point??

---

No, people asking God for salvation is totally different to people using tongues as a sign to unbelievers in the church. Tongues were not interpreted in Acts 2, 10, 19, it's never out of order for a soul to be saved. Tongues is also a prayer language, in fact it's how we pray in the Spirit, according to Paul. We do not need to understand, or interpret, in that context. Paul says as much in 1 Cor 'you give thanks well, but the others are not edified'.

quote:

---

What exactly is relevant and what proof are you looking for then??

---

I didn't want to snip this question, but I'm not sure what you're asking. 1 Cor 12 says there is a common manifestation of the Spirit, Acts 2, 10 and 19 indicate tongues, and Acts 8 records unsaved believers seeking a visable sign of the Spirit, and recieving it.

quote:

---

On the issue of proof of salvation: God promised salvation to us through Jesus Christ. By believing so, I am accepting by faith that what God said He will do. If I have reason to doubt my salvation, or rather that God is true to His promise, then I am missing the essence of faith itself and subsequently my salvation should be questioned. That applies to inward proof.

---

The Bible says our inward proof is that God gives us the Spirit.

1Jo 4:13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.

So, turning back to Acts 8, how do we know we have the Spirit ?

The trouble with your statement is that it is too vague. The Grand Wizard of the KKK knows that he is in Christ, and Christ in him. Believing it does not make it so.

quote:

---

For outward signs of proof of salvation we have the gifts of the Spirit and the fruit of the Spirit. These are signs to believers and unbelievers alike that an inward change has manifested itself in my life.

---

The Bible says that the main sign to unbelievers is the love we have for one another, but obviously healing and so on is also powerful proof.

quote:

---

The Spirit cannot live in someone who does not believe, just as Christ cannot save someone who does not believe. How can the gifts of the Spirit or the fruit of the Spirit be evident in someone who does not believe?

---

That's true. So when the Bible speaks of a believer, it means more than someone who believes in Christ, it means someone who believes what He says and does it.

quote:

---

They cannot because God is not in them.
You asked: "You're suggesting when someone asks God for salvation, and the manifestation that God has nominated is present, some further test is warranted ?"
I answer: Yes; when doubt is present - enough to cause one to doubt salvation - further testing of the source is warranted.

---

So what sort of tests do you propose ?

quote:

---

I cannot help but think about the lesson in Thomas when he doubted the resurrected Christ. Thomas walked and talked with Christ in person; how much more doubt is expected from those who did not.

---

Jesus said 'blessed are those who see not, and believe'. :-)

quote:

---

It is already 2:30 in the morning and I have to get some sleep for work. I hope I have answered your post clearly; I certainly gave it my best attempt in spite of the time.

---

You've done good, mate. I doubt I could hold it together to even type at that time !!!

quote:

---

i have witnessed satanists using and proclaiming a satanic tounge, whether supernaturally empowered by something demonic, or some made up self delusional gibberish, only God knows... however i believe it to be real..
(though i am not scared - greater is He who is in me that he who is in the world)..
but regarding spiritual power not of God - real tangible power

---

As you say. Satanists must be the stupidest people alive, they have no power, and nothing to fear. It's a counterfiet that exists simply to muddy the waters and attack the Gospel.

quote:

---

2 Thessalonians 2
9This evil man will come to do the work of Satan with counterfeit power and signs and miracles. 10He will use every kind of wicked deception to fool those who are on their way to destruction because they refuse to believe the truth that would save them.

but tounges might be such counterfiet..

---

Yes, they might be, if the Bible did not describe them as being the sign of the Spirit, and a gift that should operate in the church. Worrying about fake tongues in my opinion simply means not having faith in God that He alone answers people who call on Him. Obviously, any Christian must show the fruits, and if someone came to me as a Christian and said they knew because they could speak in tongues, I believe their works would reveal themselves before too long. I can't imagine why anyone would do that though.

quote:

---

God gives the gift of healing..
However i know of a case where a witch doctor did indeed heal a shrivilled up leg... however upon recieving this 'healing' so many areas of this persons life crumbled.. However when he came to Christ, God healed those areas of his life - more important areas than a physical leg , but when he recieved Christ, the leg shrivilled up again..

---

I can't comment on that story, I have nothing to measure it against ( not that I doubt you, I simply can't comment ). But I will say that Jesus often said 'your faith has healed you.' I believe that faith healing is to some degree an ability God has built into us that relies on faith alone, a fact that is borne out by how much people get better beyond medical expections by 'being positive'. I don't believe a witch doctor has any power, or any evil spirits on his side. He's just a funny little man with a bone through his nose.

Perhaps I am overly cavalier, but my resting place is Christ and His power, if any other power exists, it cannot touch me, or anyone else who trusts in God and walks with Jesus.

quote:

---

1 Cor 12 says there is a common manifestation of the Spirit, Acts 2, 10 and 19 indicate tongues, and Acts 8 records unsaved believers seeking a visable sign of the Spirit, and recieving it.

---

It seems like the crux of your argument, Christian, rests on your belief that there is a (as in single) common manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Can you point out the exact verse in 1 Corinthians 12 or the thought path (if it's more conceptual throughout the chapter) that led you to this?

P.S. Thanks for sticking with us so long on this

quote:

---

It seems like the crux of your argument, Christian, rests on your belief that there is a (as in single) common manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Can you point out the exact verse in 1 Corinthians 12 or the thought path (if it's more conceptual throughout the chapter) that led you to this?

---

Sure. To reiterate, 1 Cor 12 says

1Cr 12:4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
1Cr 12:5 And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
1Cr 12:6 And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
1Cr 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

The Greek is explicit, it says 'but'. In other words, there are many ways the Spirit works, BUT ( i.e. in contrast to this diversity ) THE manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man. If it was saying we each get something different, it would say 'AND A manifestation....'. Also, Acts 2, 10 and 19 would record different manifestations for different people, and Acts 8 would make no sense, as these people had faith and healing, but did not have the Spirit, and certainly it is hard to measure the arrival of discernment or wisdom. A visible sign was expected, it was absent in baptised believers, and when it was present it was visible and Simon offered money for it.

I hope that clarifies my point.

quote:

---

Regarding your second post on fake tongues, I said people can speak gibberish. Speaking in tongues can only mean praising God in a language He gives. I maintain that no-one else can give a person anything else while they are seeking God. I have too much faith in God for that.

---

I do believe that those who do seek God sicerely will be found of God, howso i don't know.. i'm just a little man, with limited understanding.. I know God can keep on top of his own business and with His love and mercy and grace He will meet those who seek him. I also have faith in God for that. But if somebody is not really seeking God, just a supernatural or emotional experience - the question is still open..

quote:

---

As you say. Satanists must be the stupidest people alive, they have no power, and nothing to fear. It's a counterfiet that exists simply to muddy the waters and attack the Gospel.

---

But even as christians, under God's protection, we can let sin, and certian sins in specific give authority to satan, especially if we are unrepentant in these sins.. a good example of this is say sexual sin.. we are letting things into our lives, that aren't of God.. and we reap those consequences.. and its not just a physical battle of self control.. it is spiritual.. ask anybody who has ever been enslaved (thus under the power , real power) to sexual sin, who has been freed by Jesus.. in their remembrance there was definately a spiritual element to their bondage, and spiritual effects on their walk..

quote:

---

Yes, they might be, if the Bible did not describe them as being the sign of the Spirit,

---

quote:

---

Worrying about fake tongues in my opinion simply means not having faith in God that He alone answers people who call on Him.

---

[/quote]

quote:

---

I can't comment on that story, I have nothing to measure it against ( not that I doubt you, I simply can't comment ). But I will say that Jesus often said 'your faith has healed you.' I believe that faith healing is to some degree an ability God has built into us that relies on faith alone, a fact that is borne out by how much people get better beyond medical expections by 'being positive'.

---

quote:

---

I don't believe a witch doctor has any power, or any evil spirits on his side. He's just a funny little man with a bone through his nose.

---

quote:

---

Perhaps I am overly cavalier, but my resting place is Christ and His power, if any other power exists, it cannot touch me, or anyone else who trusts in God and walks with Jesus.

---

another question..

Is Abraham saved?
if so - did he speak in tounges?
the bible said that God reveled the gospel to abraham in advance..
the bible aslo says God was pleased of Abraham because of his Faith

and we are also saved by Faith

Thus the 'believing' is where our salvation lies (well it lies with Jesus's sacrifice on the Christ) but i mean the believing is how we accept it.. its a matter of Faith..

and faith is being in things unseen..

the issue i have about salvation being tied to tounges is this..

with having tounges as a sign - the faith element goes out the door..
it becomes tangible again.. salvation is something to be measured.. in the physical, though we can't see it, it is something to be heard..

But God is pleased with faith..

to me the doctrine of tounges/salvation was created by people who either wanted to be exclusively special - real christians so to speak.. or people lacking in faith, that needed something in the real world to prove that they were saved.. that otherwise they would be full of doubt, wavering about.. not sure of their salvation, unless they see a miracles of sorts - the manifestation of this gift tounges... and then they can relax "oh yes, i speak in tounges, what a relief, i am actually saved"..

thats just my opinion

Though i speak in tounges (and often - currently while writing this post)
I accept my salvation by Faith , and by Faith alone..

Karl

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

the bible doesn't say that tounges is the manifestation of the spirit of the sign of a believer (or rather a saved person anywhere).. that is conjecture from a selective interpration of scripture.. which honest exegesis does not back up.

---

I've not yet begun to quote all the scriptures on this topic. I prefer to focus on one thing at a time. If you're right, then Acts 8 clearly either indicates that people without the Holy Spirit are saved, or that some other external evidence exists. Which is it ?

Regarding Abraham I can only give a weasel answer. I know for sure that God has something great in store for Abraham, but whatever it is, it relates to a dispensation prior to the church age, which means that

a. He did not have God in him as we do, and
b. Whatever it is that is in store for him, it's part of something which is now no longer available, even as the Spirit was not given when he lived.

quote:

---

with having tounges as a sign - the faith element goes out the door..
it becomes tangible again.. salvation is something to be measured.. in the physical, though we can't see it, it is something to be heard..

---

I understand how mainstream theology causes you to think this. Your core problem remains Acts 8, but either way, people do not recieve the Spirit and speak in tongues until they place their faith in the promises of God and ask Him. Faith is not bankrupt or negated in this. It's simply a matter of what promises of God we place our faith in. Salvation the Bible pattern, the Gospel being in a God who answers in the manner He has defined, or an airy fairy God who sits back and does nothing much, or certainly nothing definite, and our faith being intangible, based on our emotional convictions alone. Either God is fine by me, I'd just rather the one the Bible presents.

quote:

---

to me the doctrine of tounges/salvation was created by people who either wanted to be exclusively special - real christians so to speak.. or people lacking in faith, that needed something in the real world to prove that they were saved.. that otherwise they would be full of doubt, wavering about.. not sure of their salvation, unless they see a miracles of sorts - the manifestation of this gift tounges... and then they can relax "oh yes, i speak in tounges, what a relief, i am actually saved"..

---

You're welcome to make that natural judgement. However, the core issue is not what God would we like, but what God do we serve ? The core issue is 'what does the Bible say', and your first port of call in telling me that what I say is not 'honest exegisis' is to provide your exegisis of the verses I keep pointing to, explain what they DO mean, instead of just telling me what they DON'T mean. I presume your 1 Cor 12 post above attempts to do that, and I will answer it when I have time ( I've spent my lunchtime on this post and need to do some work )

See you then :-)

quote:

---

Originally posted by christian:
1Cr 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.

The Greek is explicit, it says 'but'. In other words, there are many ways the Spirit works, BUT ( i.e. in contrast to this diversity ) THE manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man. If it was saying we each get something different, it would say 'AND A manifestation....'.

---

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_dir/words/1049163595-5039.html

Actually, the greek word 'de' that is translated here is also translated several times in the Bible as 'and' (about 3/4 as much as it is translated 'but'). I'm just wondering how you can determine that the usage for this passage is is that of a stark contrast to the verses before it. Obviously the translators translated it as 'but', but (no pun intended ) there are at least a few other places in the Bible where there is a 'but' that doesn't make sense when read as 'however'.

One other thing: after the verse we're looking at (1 Cor. 12:7), Paul continues on to list the gifts of the Spirit:

quote:

---

1Cr 12:8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

1Cr 12:9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

1Cr 12:10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

---

It seems to me that this list comes in addition to his mentioning the manifestation of the Spirit; that is, that each of these things constitutes that manifestation. Why do you read it as '*the* manifestation' as in singular manifestation, as opposed to 'the manifestation' (where manifestation is general, and the list that follows specifies the different ways the Spirit can manifest itself)? Just trying to get inside your head

I don't want to bite off more than we can chew focus-wise (I've seen that happen way too much, and then the thread just spirals down and down), so if you don't mind, I hope we can just focus on this one passage for now. Thanks

quote:

---

It seems to me that this list comes in addition to his mentioning the manifestation of the Spirit; that is, that each of these things constitutes that manifestation. Why do you read it as '*the* manifestation' as in singular manifestation, as opposed to 'the manifestation' (where manifestation is general, and the list that follows specifies the different ways the Spirit can manifest itself)? Just trying to get inside your head

---

3 problems with this assumption.

1. Acts 8 records people who have some of these things and do not have the Spirit
2. Some of these things cannot be the visible manifestation that was obviously EXPECTED in Acts 8
3. Each of these nine gifts is promised to all Christians elsewhere in the Bible, you can't possibly claim only some Christians have access to *any* of them. In reality this only needs to be proven for one to make the point, but it's true of all of them.

As for 'but', I didn't look at the BLB link (yet), but it was BLB I checked for the word 'but'. I'll have to look at it some more and get back to you. I've not said any more in order to maintain focus on these passages as you requested, but it's fundamental to recognise that this was written to people who understood what Paul was speaking of, it was not written to tell us what the manifestation of the Spirit is. It's therefore not unreasonable for us to use other scripture to help us establish what it was that those in Corinth would have known, as people who followed the doctrine that Paul established amongst them.

I mentioned Pentecost because that is where most sects of christianity who believe in tongues as proof of salvation support their theory. Regardless of the argument over "But" in 1 Corinthians 12, the issue originates in Acts 2.
I grew up a Baptist, but I don't subscribe to any sect of christianity anymore. For me the issue of tongues was somewhat a taboo subject, but I challenged my faith by studying the scriptures and seeking to learn the truth of God's word rather than man's opinionated interpretation of that truth. I was taught that all those present at Pentecost received tongues, but in my studies the last few days I realized for the first time that that notion is wrong.
The reason why so many people were present from different places at Pentecost is because Pentecost is a Jewish festival and it is required for all Jewish men to attend. Please note that these Jewish men were not believers in Christ - this is an important point.
This multitude of Jews were in a state of chaos over the festivities because they could not communicate with or understand one another.
If you notice verse 7 of Acts 2 the multitude was amazed that they could suddenly understand what was being said by the apostles - the Galileans in reference. The apostles were the ones filled with the Spirit and speaking in tongues. But there is a unique twist here that is also very important to understand - note how it is described.
Acts 2, verse 8: And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
The unbelieving multitude heard the apostles as they spake in tongues and understood. There was interpretation of tongues and it was done by the Holy Spirit! They heard the words in their own tongue - from the mouth of the apostles who spake as they were led by the Spirit to speak. The apostles didn't speak in 15 different languages at once - that would be no better than what caused the confusion in the first place.
Christian, you said yourself that there was no interpretation in Acts 2. How can you explain how the multitude of unbelievers heard the words and understood them? If you say the apostles spoke in the language of the foreigners, then the apostles didn't speak in the heavenly tongue and that begs to ask, what is the gift of tongues given by the Spirit? If you say the Spirit interpreted, then the gift of interpretation was given to unbelievers and that begs to ask, how can the manifestation of the Spirit (whether one gift or all) be proof of salvation?
Clearly, the Holy Spirit can can do what he wants with the gifts - whether to saved or unsaved - if the profit of doing so is salvation.

On some other issues you raised:
The Samaritans in Acts 8 had believed the preching of Christ by Philip and were baptized. Philip had the filling of the Spirit as he healed and cast out demons. But he did not impart the Spirit upon those he preached to and who believed in Christ. (Healing and casting out demons does not require one to lay hands on a person; many times Jesus did so by not touching the afflicted. That is why Peter and John prayed and laid hands on the believers to impart the Spirit on them. Peter and John being filled also with the Spirit would have discerned the spiritual oppression in Samaria and realized the Spirit was not among the believers there.)
The Gentiles in Acts 10 received the Holy Ghost just as the Jews who believed at Pentecost did (Acts 2:38). This occasion was done so that the Jewish believers would realize the extent of salvation to the unclean people of the world (Gentiles) and to further educate them in the power of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit came upon them after they had already believed, and yet before they had heard the gospel of Christ. Cornelius feared (respected with awe) God and was very religious, but it is clear in his own words and actions that he believed in God. Peter presented the gospel of Christ and while he was doing so the Spirit was poured out (verses 34 and following).
Paul encountered some disciples in Ephesus in Acts 19. These disciples were converts under John's preaching, yet they never heard of the Holy Spirit. They believed on Christ, repented of their sins and were baptized unto that - according to the ministry of John the Baptist.
In these three chapters the new converts did speak in tongues (some did more than that also). I can see where you might conclude that tongues is proof of salvation through these passages. However, this common event following the filling of the Spirit (note, not salvation) does not qualify your premise that tongues is proof of salvation.
I would offer that these new converts were praising and glorifying God for their new spiritual state. That is also indicated as often as what you propose.

God bless,
Matt

quote:

---

I mentioned Pentecost because that is where most sects of christianity who believe in tongues as proof of salvation support their theory. Regardless of the argument over "But" in 1 Corinthians 12, the issue originates in Acts 2.

---

You're right - Acts 2 is where the church started. Peter said so in Acts 11.

quote:

---

I grew up a Baptist, but I don't subscribe to any sect of christianity anymore. For me the issue of tongues was somewhat a taboo subject, but I challenged my faith by studying the scriptures and seeking to learn the truth of God's word rather than man's opinionated interpretation of that truth.

---

Taboo in what way ?

quote:

---

I was taught that all those present at Pentecost received tongues, but in my studies the last few days I realized for the first time that that notion is wrong.

---

I'm fascinated to hear why you think this....

quote:

---

The reason why so many people were present from different places at Pentecost is because Pentecost is a Jewish festival and it is required for all Jewish men to attend. Please note that these Jewish men were not believers in Christ - this is an important point.

---

OK - not sure how this matters, but noted.

quote:

---

This multitude of Jews were in a state of chaos over the festivities because they could not communicate with or understand one another.

---

Wrong. They actually went on to listen to Peter preach in their common language after they had seen and heard the Holy Spirit being poured out. How could the apostles have known that what they said was understood unless it could be conveyed to them in a common language that this had occured ?

quote:

---

If you notice verse 7 of Acts 2 the multitude was amazed that they could suddenly understand what was being said by the apostles - the Galileans in reference.

---

So how did they tell them that they had understood ?

quote:

---

The apostles were the ones filled with the Spirit and speaking in tongues.

---

Actually I made the same mistake. It was the 120.

quote:

---

But there is a unique twist here that is also very important to understand - note how it is described.
Acts 2, verse 8: And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?
The unbelieving multitude heard the apostles as they spake in tongues and understood. There was interpretation of tongues and it was done by the Holy Spirit! They heard the words in their own tongue - from the mouth of the apostles who spake as they were led by the Spirit to speak. The apostles didn't speak in 15 different languages at once - that would be no better than what caused the confusion in the first place.

---

Yes, in this one case tongues were understood. No argument from me there. I'm not sure of the point you want to make from this ?

quote:

---

Christian, you said yourself that there was no interpretation in Acts 2. How can you explain how the multitude of unbelievers heard the words and understood them?

---

The gift of interpretation is to interpret an unknown tongue. The tongues in this case where KNOWN of the men who heard, no-one interpreted them.

quote:

---

If you say the apostles spoke in the language of the foreigners, then the apostles didn't speak in the heavenly tongue and that begs to ask, what is the gift of tongues given by the Spirit?

---

I'll admit the Bible is not clear as to why the tongues were understood this time, but no reading of 1 Cor 14 on interpretation suggests that interpretation is automatic, and not an actual interpretation delivered by a human being in a common language.

quote:

---

If you say the Spirit interpreted, then the gift of interpretation was given to unbelievers and that begs to ask, how can the manifestation of the Spirit (whether one gift or all) be proof of salvation?

---

You're tying yourself up in convoluted logic. Yes, tongues were in this case understood by unsaved people. They were plainly not interpreted, they were understood. Why this is I can only offer conjecture, because the Bible does not say.

quote:

---

Clearly, the Holy Spirit can can do what he wants with the gifts - whether to saved or unsaved - if the profit of doing so is salvation.

---

Of course. Unsaved people can recieve healing, for example, as happened in Acts 8.

quote:

---

On some other issues you raised:
The Samaritans in Acts 8 had believed the preching of Christ by Philip and were baptized. Philip had the filling of the Spirit as he healed and cast out demons. But he did not impart the Spirit upon those he preached to and who believed in Christ. (Healing and casting out demons does not require one to lay hands on a person; many times Jesus did so by not touching the afflicted. That is why Peter and John prayed and laid hands on the believers to impart the Spirit on them. Peter and John being filled also with the Spirit would have discerned the spiritual oppression in Samaria and realized the Spirit was not among the believers there.)

---

The key issue is not being addressed here. Where they saved without the Spirit ? How did they know they had the Spirit ? What did Simon offer money for ?

quote:

---

The Gentiles in Acts 10 received the Holy Ghost just as the Jews who believed at Pentecost did (Acts 2:38). This occasion was done so that the Jewish believers would realize the extent of salvation to the unclean people of the world (Gentiles) and to further educate them in the power of the Spirit. The Holy Spirit came upon them after they had already believed, and yet before they had heard the gospel of Christ. Cornelius feared (respected with awe) God and was very religious, but it is clear in his own words and actions that he believed in God. Peter presented the gospel of Christ and while he was doing so the Spirit was poured out (verses 34 and following).

---

Yes, that is right. So they also knew they had the Spirit because they spoke in tongues. You're offering an accurate summary of events but not really addressing the questions I've raised from these verses.

quote:

---

Paul encountered some disciples in Ephesus in Acts 19. These disciples were converts under John's preaching, yet they never heard of the Holy Spirit.

---

What's important is that before Paul knew they were converts to John, he asked 'have you recieved the Holy Spirit since you believed'. Again, it's possible to be a believer and not have the Spirit. Does this mean one can be an unsaved believer, or saved and not have the Holy Spirit in your life ?

quote:

---

They believed on Christ, repented of their sins and were baptized unto that - according to the ministry of John the Baptist.
In these three chapters the new converts did speak in tongues (some did more than that also). I can see where you might conclude that tongues is proof of salvation through these passages. However, this common event following the filling of the Spirit (note, not salvation) does not qualify your premise that tongues is proof of salvation.

---

It is meant simply to follow that the manifestation of the Spirit, whenever nominated, is speaking in tongues.

quote:

---

I would offer that these new converts were praising and glorifying God for their new spiritual state. That is also indicated as often as what you propose.

---

Yes, of course they were. I'm lost as to what it is you wanted to tell me with all of this though. Perhaps if you could clarify, by addressing if people can be saved without the Spirit, and if 1 Cor 12 indicates different gifts as the manifestation of the Spirit, why the people in Acts 8 did not have the Spirit, but had some of the gifts, and why Acts 2, 10, 19 don't record some having tongues, others having wisdom, and so on.

quote:

---

and why Acts 2, 10, 19 don't record some having tongues, others having wisdom, and so on.

---

in the same logic,i could ask, why do many other chapters in acts, and in the epistles that are in the context of people getting saved , and/or baptised don't talk about some having spoke in tounges? when it is very clear from the context that paul is talking to or about the Chruch, about saved people, and times when people were saved.. Why is 'believing' and believer so stressed by paul, rather than saved toungespeaker?

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

(from your own words)...it's fundamental to recognise that this was written to people who understood what Paul was speaking of, it was not written to tell us what the manifestation of the Spirit is.

---

quote:

---

Me: I grew up a Baptist, but I don't subscribe to any sect of christianity anymore. For me the issue of tongues was somewhat a taboo subject, but I challenged my faith by studying the scriptures and seeking to learn the truth of God's word rather than man's opinionated interpretation of that truth.
Christian: Taboo in what way ?

---

Yes I was mistaken in my comments of Acts 2 when I said "This multitude of Jews were in a state of chaos over the festivities because they could not communicate with or understand one another." Thanks.

But to answer your question:

quote:

---

So how did they tell them that they had understood ?

---

I have to ask you to point me to where the number of apostles (you say 120, others say 70) is clearly called out at Pentecost. I couldn't find it at 2:30 in the morning. Thanks.

quote:

---

The gift of interpretation is to interpret an unknown tongue. The tongues in this case where KNOWN of the men who heard, no-one interpreted them.

---

quote:

---

The key issue is not being addressed here. Where they saved without the Spirit ? How did they know they had the Spirit ? What did Simon offer money for ?
...
Does this mean one can be an unsaved believer, or saved and not have the Holy Spirit in your life ?

---

I have to ask you this first in order to avoid using terms that vary in meaning between us. What do you mean by "saved"? What do you mean by "saved without the Spirit"?

quote:

---

Perhaps if you could clarify, by addressing if people can be saved without the Spirit, and if 1 Cor 12 indicates different gifts as the manifestation of the Spirit, why the people in Acts 8 did not have the Spirit, but had some of the gifts, and why Acts 2, 10, 19 don't record some having tongues, others having wisdom, and so on.

---

God bless,
Matt

quote:

---

in the same logic,i could ask, why do many other chapters in acts, and in the epistles that are in the context of people getting saved , and/or baptised don't talk about some having spoke in tounges? when it is very clear from the context that paul is talking to or about the Chruch, about saved people, and times when people were saved.. Why is 'believing' and believer so stressed by paul, rather than saved toungespeaker?

---

Because believer means someone who believes in the Jesus of the Bible. That is synonymous with someone who speaks in tongues, even as it's synonymous with someone who believes in the resurrection. Very few accounts of people being saved mention the blood of Jesus, does that mean His blood plays no part in those events ? Not one mentions a manifestation apart from tongues, and the worst possible interpretation of 1 Cor 12 is that we all get a different manifestation, so if none is mentioned, it may as well be tongues ( as it is whereever it is mentioned ) as some other manifestation that we choose to invent in the absence of any mention in the Bible.

I'm beginning to think you just want to argue with me. Please don't. Either make some intelligent case for your belief, or ignore my posts. I don't like being drawn into contentious arguments with people if I can avoid it.

quote:

---

Yet you assert you know what it is though scripture doesn't tell us? How then can we even attempt to find out and answer your lingering questions? Nevertheless I will continue.

---

No, I am saying we need to look to more than one scripture to establish what would have been clear to those whom Paul had preached to. To be honest, that's true of any doctrine, whatever is right. There are so many beliefs about Jesus that would not have existed while Paul was there to correct them, and so many things that Paul assumed people knew would probably be held in contention today.

quote:

---

First of all Peter had to raise his voice over the crowd. Second, they asked Peter and the other apostles directly what to do (verse 37). Communication: it can't be any simpler than that.

---

I don't get the point. The point is that they were able to speak to Peter, and having understood the tongues, still needed to ask him to tell them what they had to do to be saved.

quote:

---

I have to ask you to point me to where the number of apostles (you say 120, others say 70) is clearly called out at Pentecost. I couldn't find it at 2:30 in the morning. Thanks.

---

I was running on memory, I could be wrong :-)

Act 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)

I think this may be where I got the figure from.

quote:

---

And yet Peter was able to respond to the question asked by the multitude in verse 37. See verse 38. So, were the tongues unknown to the apostles then? They had to be or else the fact that the multitude was amazed makes no sense. So then was there interpretation or wasn't there?

---

I'm sorry, your question makes no sense to me. Tongues were understood, Peter stood and preached ( obviously expecting people to understand him ), and people asked 'what must we do' ( in light of the things he had said about Christ's life and death ). The tongues were unknown to the apostles, and to many of the people who heard them ( who said they were drunk ). There is no mention of any interpretation taking place, at all. Some people simply understood the tongues that were spoken, but they still needed to be told what they needed to do to be saved. Peter spoke to a group and they asked him a question. If they could not ask in a language Peter understood, why was he speaking to them in that language ? How did they understand his reply ?

quote:

---

I have to ask you this first in order to avoid using terms that vary in meaning between us. What do you mean by "saved"? What do you mean by "saved without the Spirit"?

---

Can a person be a Christian, a follow of Jesus, washed in the blood of the Lamb, a child of God and headed for eternal life, without the Holy Spirit being inside them ?

quote:

---

Perhaps what is important is not what gift, but at least a gift. Paul implied tongues was not the best gift; perhaps that also indicates tongues is the weakest of the gifts - or better to say, the simplest gift to employ (sorta like crawling before walking before running, as a child grows to be an adult).

---

In the context of a church meeting, this is certainly the case, yes.

(Okay, so there's some exaggeration ) On to the stuff...

quote:

---

Originally posted by christian:
1. Acts 8 records people who have some of these things and do not have the Spirit
2. Some of these things cannot be the visible manifestation that was obviously EXPECTED in Acts 8

---

I know you've referenced people doing some of the things without having the Spirit, but I guess I'm wondering exactly where that is. Maybe I've overlooked it or something; could you give me exact verses? That would help me out a ton.

quote:

---

3. Each of these nine gifts is promised to all Christians elsewhere in the Bible, you can't possibly claim only some Christians have access to *any* of them. In reality this only needs to be proven for one to make the point, but it's true of all of them.

---

Could you clarify a bit on this point? Sorry, I don't want to interpret it the wrong way (the wording's a little tough for me).

quote:

---

I've not said any more in order to maintain focus on these passages as you requested, but it's fundamental to recognise that this was written to people who understood what Paul was speaking of, it was not written to tell us what the manifestation of the Spirit is. It's therefore not unreasonable for us to use other scripture to help us establish what it was that those in Corinth would have known, as people who followed the doctrine that Paul established amongst them.

---

Okay, I agree with you here, but let's not jump the gun and take stuff too fast Just 1 Cor. 12 and Acts 8 now if that's okay.

[EDIT] Oops, I'm not so good at the UBB codes [/EDIT]

[This message has been edited by BKewl (edited April 01, 2003).]

quote:

---

Hehe this is probably something like what the CCN archives look like:
Non-tongues thread 1kb
Non-tongues thread 2kb
Tongues thread 19MB
etc.
(Okay, so there's some exaggeration ) On to the stuff...

---

LOL - yeah but the same scriptures get quoted so often on both sides, it should be pretty easy to compress !!!

quote:

---

I know you've referenced people doing some of the things without having the Spirit, but I guess I'm wondering exactly where that is. Maybe I've overlooked it or something; could you give me exact verses? That would help me out a ton.

---

I am thinking principally of healing. I suspect that you believe that the gift of healing is to heal people, but I believe only God heals people, that He does not need any person present in order to do so, and that the gift of healing is to be healed.

quote:

---

Could you clarify a bit on this point? Sorry, I don't want to interpret it the wrong way (the wording's a little tough for me).

---

I'm saying that the 1 Cor 12 gifts are all promised to all Christians elsewhere, so to say that 1 Cor 12 says that they are not for everyone contradicts a pile of other verses.

Jam 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

1Cr 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

1Cr 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

Jam 5:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

Hbr 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, [even] those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

1Cr 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

And so on. The number of verses about Christians all having/needing faith is too great to count, and I am sure you know them.

quote:

---

Okay, I agree with you here, but let's not jump the gun and take stuff too fast Just 1 Cor. 12 and Acts 8 now if that's okay.

---

Fine by me. :-)

quote:

---

The point is that they were able to speak to Peter, and having understood the tongues, still needed to ask him to tell them what they had to do to be saved.
...
I'm sorry, your question makes no sense to me. Tongues were understood, Peter stood and preached ( obviously expecting people to understand him ), and people asked 'what must we do' ( in light of the things he had said about Christ's life and death ). The tongues were unknown to the apostles, and to many of the people who heard them ( who said they were drunk ). There is no mention of any interpretation taking place, at all. Some people simply understood the tongues that were spoken, but they still needed to be told what they needed to do to be saved. Peter spoke to a group and they asked him a question. If they could not ask in a language Peter understood, why was he speaking to them in that language ? How did they understand his reply ?

---

quote:

---

Me: I have to ask you this first in order to avoid using terms that vary in meaning between us. What do you mean by "saved"? What do you mean by "saved without the Spirit"?
Christian: Can a person be a Christian, a follow of Jesus, washed in the blood of the Lamb, a child of God and headed for eternal life, without the Holy Spirit being inside them ?

---

quote:

---

...in the context of a church meeting...

---

If you do not see my point then the principle escapes you. I only extend the argument to these degrees of conversation to show the effects of the basic issue we are discussing. This is a very critical issue as it involves Salvation - the foundation of Christianity. I cannot treat it lightly or else any error in part will affect the whole. I'm sure you also realize this.

I have to ask you another question - and I think this one will shed some new light on this issue altogether. What is your interpretation of this passage:

quote:

---

Mark 16:14-20 KJV

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen

---

(I beg you to reconsider your view on healing as it is clearly in conflict with the very words of Christ.)

Also, these signs that follow those who believe are close to the gifts of the Spirit, but there are also some signs here that are not listed among the gifts of the Spirit. Is it possible that the gifts of the Spirit are only signs of being filled by the Spirit, and these signs spoken of by Christ are separate and different as proof of faith in God? Is it possible that these new tongues in Mark 16 are different than the tongues in 1 Corinthians 12, but perhaps the same as the tongues in 1 Corinthians 14? I am asking this for discussion as I've not researched this and have not interpreted the truth to me, so to speak, on this issue (ie, I have not formed an educated opinion).

God bless.

quote:

---

If the multitude was able to hear and understand in their own language as Peter and the apostles spoke through the guiding of the Spirit, and then after hearing the gospel message ask the apostles what to do, and Peter and the apostles were able to answer them back what to do - how can you not see that there was interpretation of the tongues?

---

I can't believe we're still stuck on this.

1. The gift of interpretation is to interpret. To deliver a version of the tongue in a common language. That plainly did not happen in Acts 2.
2. You're assuming that the people there could not speak a common language, the Bible does not say that. The miracle you're describing would be described in the Bible if it had occured.

quote:

---

Peter and the apostles did not know their language as the Spirit had to give them that ability to speak it. Moreover, the Spirit had to give the apostles the ability to understand what the foreigners would say back to them after hearing the gospel for the apostles to tell them what to do. It is perfectly clear to me, but do you understand?

---

Yes, I understand what you believe, and I have for a while. As I keep saying, you're not in step with what the Bible says here. You're adding your own assumptions and in the process making things that are simple, complex.

quote:

---

I still would like to know what your definition is. Your question in response to me implies your view, but I'd rather you state it outright so we are all clear on the beliefs - whether common or not.

---

What does saved mean ? I think that my last answer was plain enough, I'm not keen to keep going in circles. A person who is saved has accepted Jesus sacrifice for their sins and thus has the promise of immortality and freedom from sin. Is that plain enough for you ?

quote:

---

My answer to your question is a technical Yes. Even if the believer never asks to receive the Holy Spirit they are still a believer even though they are weak spiritually by not having the Holy Spirit in them.

---

The demons are also believers. Romans says that anyone who does not have the Spirit is not Christ's. Why complicate what the Bible makes simple ?

quote:

---

however, I also believe that a believer can receive the Holy Spirit by the same faith they receive the truth of the gospel. Eternal life was promised to those who believe (John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life") and the Holy Spirit was also promised the same way.

---

Yes, but believed what of Christ ? If I believe Christ is the statue outside Rio ( is that right, it's somewhere there ), am I saved ? Or do I need to believe in the Jesus of the Bible, and what He said ?

quote:

---

I have noticed that you continue to fall back to what is proper in the context of a church meeting. What to you is a church meeting? I apologize for getting technical and perhaps elementary, but I must. The church is the body of believers. so where there is a body of believers in fellowship together, would you say that there is a church meeting in progress?

---

My answer here is a fuzzy 'yes'. If people are in fellowship, then they can use gifts of wisdom, knowledge and discernment. They can pray for each other and be healed.

quote:

---

Morever, with the body as the temple of God and the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit, cannot one person in worship be considered a church meeting?

---

Of course. But that does not mean this is the context Paul speaks of.

quote:

---

Surely if God can spare a city for one righteous person living there, the fellowship of even one believer with God can be considered a sacred service.

---

None of this addresses the context in which Paul speaks.

quote:

---

If you do not see my point then the principle escapes you. I only extend the argument to these degrees of conversation to show the effects of the basic issue we are discussing. This is a very critical issue as it involves Salvation - the foundation of Christianity. I cannot treat it lightly or else any error in part will affect the whole. I'm sure you also realize this.

---

I agree in part, but it's a tangent which does not aid the discussion.

quote:

---

I have to ask you another question - and I think this one will shed some new light on this issue altogether. What is your interpretation of this passage:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark 16:14-20 KJV
14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(I beg you to reconsider your view on healing as it is clearly in conflict with the very words of Christ.)

---

No, it is not. The fact that we can lay hands on the sick does not mean we are able to heal people, or that God is constrained from healing anyone unless someone with the 'healing gift' is present. It's obvious, Jesus is telling them what signs will follow believers, and telling them to preach the Gospel.

quote:

---

Also, these signs that follow those who believe are close to the gifts of the Spirit, but there are also some signs here that are not listed among the gifts of the Spirit. Is it possible that the gifts of the Spirit are only signs of being filled by the Spirit, and these signs spoken of by Christ are separate and different as proof of faith in God?

---

No. Romans says that anyone who does not have the SPirit is not Christ's. Jesus spoke often of the need for the Spirit also. There is no seperation between the two.

quote:

---

Is it possible that these new tongues in Mark 16 are different than the tongues in 1 Corinthians 12, but perhaps the same as the tongues in 1 Corinthians 14? I am asking this for discussion as I've not researched this and have not interpreted the truth to me, so to speak, on this issue (ie, I have not formed an educated opinion).

---

1 Cor 12 does speak of diverse tongues, this may be a point of differentiation, it's not something I've considered much to be honest, because either way, tongues is the manifestation of the Spirit. If some have more different tongues after the fact is not all that important, as only God understands them all anyhow.

A response to some questions I have not answered:
I appreciate your questions about what it is we are to believe about Christ, but I don't feel I need to answer that as that is clear and I am sure we are all on common ground in that respect (Thank God).

An explanation of my approach to you in this discussion:
I do apologize for my tangential remarks, but I do like to take the path less chosen in regard to certain issues - especially important ones. I do not mean to irritate you with what you call circular logic; every minute element of this conversation has bearing on many facets of Christianity, elements that I hold dear. My points may not make sense to you when you confine the issue to just tongues/salvation. I understand the desire to do so, but this simply cannot be done. The foundation supports the structure. I am considering the proverbial big picture in my discussion with you.
I would also like to point out that although many people do post here I try not to allow those discussions to affect the discussion between you and I. There may be points that I refer to, or that you refer to, in those other discussion, but I am sincerely trying to eliminate confusion of the other conversations taking place here. If you would like me to change my approach in this regard I will - if it will make it easier for you and I to continue this discussion.

God bless.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:

LOL - yeah but the same scriptures get quoted so often on both sides, it should be pretty easy to compress !!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Christian:

I suspect that you believe that the gift of healing is to heal people, but I believe only God heals people, that He does not need any person present in order to do so, and that the gift of healing is to be healed.

---

Could you provide Biblical basis that "the gift of healing is to be healed" ? I agree that God doesn't need anyone present to heal someone, but I does seem logical from many parts in the Bible that the gift of healing is healing others with the power of God. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are given for the common good, right? How does receiving healing fit into all of this?

quote:

---

A person who is saved has accepted Jesus sacrifice for their sins and thus has the promise of immortality and freedom from sin.

---

Also, I hate getting sidetracked but this just popped into my mind. I suppose this would fall under clarification: do you believe that all people who proclaim Christ (i.e. meet the above definition of being saved) are in fact liars or at the least misguided unsaved people? I'm a little confused with how all that works.

quote:

---

First, my question in regard to the point of this topic:
If "only God understands them all anyhow", how do you know that the tongues someone speaks are of the Holy Spirit? how can you know the tongues in which you speak are of the Holy Spirit?

---

That is a question of faith. 1 Cor 12:2 addresses this to some point.

quote:

---

An explanation of my approach to you in this discussion:
I do apologize for my tangential remarks, but I do like to take the path less chosen in regard to certain issues - especially important ones. I do not mean to irritate you with what you call circular logic; every minute element of this conversation has bearing on many facets of Christianity, elements that I hold dear. My points may not make sense to you when you confine the issue to just tongues/salvation. I understand the desire to do so, but this simply cannot be done. The foundation supports the structure. I am considering the proverbial big picture in my discussion with you.
I would also like to point out that although many people do post here I try not to allow those discussions to affect the discussion between you and I. There may be points that I refer to, or that you refer to, in those other discussion, but I am sincerely trying to eliminate confusion of the other conversations taking place here. If you would like me to change my approach in this regard I will - if it will make it easier for you and I to continue this discussion.

---

Fair enough. Having a discussion on a public forum can be a struggle, and I see where you're coming from here.

quote:

---

Could you provide Biblical basis that "the gift of healing is to be healed" ? I agree that God doesn't need anyone present to heal someone, but I does seem logical from many parts in the Bible that the gift of healing is healing others with the power of God. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are given for the common good, right? How does receiving healing fit into all of this?

---

Healing is at least partially a shadow of salvation and really is a temporal thing ( we get sick again, we eventually die ). It is however, a major reason people come to know God, the first evidence of Him they experience. The Bible does not directly answer your question, it's really just self obvious. If we agree that God can heal anyone, ( and when the Bible says to pray for the sick, it does not indicate that those with the healing gift will have to pray, it indicates that faith is the key thing ), then why would God need any person ? If He doesn't, then no person has a special healing gift, except I am sure we agree, the person who recieves the gift of being healed.

The whole 'healing ministry' idea is a cash cow for people who have a travelling 'healing ministry'. It is superfluous, and shameful.

quote:

---

Also, I hate getting sidetracked but this just popped into my mind. I suppose this would fall under clarification: do you believe that all people who proclaim Christ (i.e. meet the above definition of being saved) are in fact liars or at the least misguided unsaved people? I'm a little confused with how all that works.

---

Fair enough. I do not for a minute believe that the churches are full of liars, or evil people. Instead, the great satanic victory for this age is this: that unsaved people will never seek Christ, because they think they know Him. I have experience of being in this category, but even if I did not, I would never doubt the sincerity of any person who believes themselves saved, by any doctrine. Sincerely wrong is still wrong, and it's a real shame. That's probably the main reason I persist in seeking to discuss these things, I hope to help those who are as I was. And I certainly learn a few things on the way as well.

quote:

---

Did I understand correctly that you think those people are sincere, though still unsaved, as indicated by their lack of tongues?

---

Yes, absolutely. Once someone has spoken in tongues, they have the Holy Spirit, and from that point it's no longer anyone's right to say if someone is saved or not, although not all who speak in tongues will have walked in the Spirit, so the line is NOT drawn by tongues/no tongues alone when Jesus returns.

Rowan

A lot of people believe what they are told without question. So the belief that the people who don't speak in tongues also have the Holy Spirit is accepted as it is told to people, and no-one really looks into it, they just have a few verses that they were told say that belief=salvation, and everything else is read in that light. I know you can make that same accusation of me, but the difference is really that I've held to that point of view, and examined it, and found it to be wrong. History shows that I don't just believe what I am told without investigation.

I also have family who recieved the Spirit elsewhere, were convinced that all Christians speak in tongues ( this is prior to my conversion, so I didn't say it ) and then over time had it 'beaten out of them' by the doctrines of the churches they went to. You know from my private email what my experience was, most of the churches I went to, most people spoke in tongues, but because they had no idea what it meant, I doubt they prayed in the Spirit terribly often, because they were taught it was a good thing, but not that important, really.

Just because someone believes it does not make it so, any more than might makes right in the Bible, indeed the opposite is mostly true. Either way, I don't think this is an avenue that will lead to anything conclusive, but if you feel it proves something, feel free to explore it, I will gladly follow. :-)

I think therefore I am? Is that statement not employing the same logic as what you said above?

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

christian told me:

quote:

---

The Greek when it asks 'do all speak in tongues' DEMANDS the answer 'no', But it's asking about what people DO, not what they CAN do. In the context of the body coming together ( a meeting ), not all will prophecy, not all will be healed, not all will speak in tongues. 1 Cor 14:26 and 31 tell us that all CAN prophecy, interpret, speak in tongues. The answer is what you think, but you're asking the wrong question. :-)

---

. . . and I just realized I completely agree

How quickly I forget stuff when I'm half-asleep . . .

The Spirit performs works through us . . . we, being physical beings can't do much by ourselves - it's the Spirit that works through us. Being that the Spirit CAN do anything, I have to agree . I think I'm on christian's frequency now. Things are getting less muddy . . .

------------------
There are only 10 types of people - those who understand binary, and those who don't.

First I believe the tongues was the tongues we were talking about today. The tounges that is talked about in Paul¡¯s epistles, the one mentioned in other places in Acts, the gift of tongues that both Christian and I are talking about - even if we disagree on the issue of its relationship to salvation.

I do believe though that there were added aspects to this initial filling of the Spirit at Pentecost in acts 2- i.e. the tongues/flames of fire above the heads of the people etc. Though that doesn't separate it from the above, making it a one of a kind occasion as some people like to think..

4All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.

Tongues definitely followed the filling.. However it doesn't indicate that it is a sign, proof of salvation..

I may have been misunderstood that I thought that peter preached in tongues rather than the lanuage he was likely to have preached in - Aramaic or Greek. That is not the case... However before Peter preached to everybody (in greek or aramaic), The apostles and company were speaking in tongues.. I believe they were at this time doing it to God, rather than trying to bring a message through tongues. However onlookers could hear.. non-christian onlookers, Jews and converts to Judaism from throughout the empire. They could hear, and understand the words these people were saying.. Hearing these people praise God in these tongues.. I don't believe these onlookers where exercising (or had) the gift of interpretation.. But in this case. The tongues that God had given were actually different earthly languages (1st cor 13 talks of tongues of men and angels).. The tongues these apostles spoke were unknown to the speaker, but known to the various listeners.
Thus my ASSUMPTION is that one apostle may have been speaking(supernatural tongues) that happened to be some Egyptian dialect, and those from Egypt could understand, while another was speaking say an Ethiopian dialect, and those from Ethiopia could understand it...

5Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. 6When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7Utterly amazed, they asked: "Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? 8Then how is it that each of us hears them in his own native language? 9Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10Phrygia 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!" 12Amazed and perplexed, they asked one another, "What does this mean?"

from that scripture there is the possibility, that each person understood all the tongues.. i.e. say the apostle JOHN spoke, and a Partian heard that particular sentence in Parthian, while a Mede heard it in median etc... That is a possibility, and God can work amazing, and this was unique.. You can only infer so much from scripture.. it could be this way, or the way I mentioned above.. I personally think the way I mentioned first, from other examples of tongues, and my own experiences.. However neither understanding contradicts scripture, and whether you think one way or another of this, it doesn't affect either my doctrine, or christians significantly.

From the above scripture though you can find out quite a few things. These were Jews, and converts(to Judiasm) from everywhere.. All gathered in Jerusalem, for the feasts week including Pentecost (as history backs up)... They obviously could understand each other from them talking to each other "what does this mean"... probably having Aramaic and/or Greek as common languages.. History backs this up as well... So basically they heard these back country hick Galileans (for that is the attitude towards Galileans) Galileans who to these people probably spoke a vulgar form of Aramaic, and street Greek, definitely not educated people.. But these backcountry Galileans speaking in the languages and dialects of the lands all these onlookers come from... that in itself was a sign, a miracle to those who didn't discount them as drunks... it got the peoples attention and I believe in this case tongues served the purpose mentioned in 1 cor 14
22Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers

You see the tongues was a sign, not to the believers who had received the spirit and were speaking in tongues, but to the unbelievers.. It was a sign of the supernatural that got their attention, got their ear turned, and listening in, for when Peter preached the gospel to them..

Thus these tongues were for a purpose (though of course I also believe they were edifying the speakers at the same time).. Pause and think about this for a moment..

Tongues is a sign, not for believers, but FOR unbelievers...
If tongues is a sign of salvation , it would be a sign FOR believers... "like, oh yes, i got tongues, i am saved¡±.. But tongues is a gift to those who have it, not a sign. It is a gift of the Spirit and thus follows those who believe, those who are filled with the spirit.. So in one sense, given its not false tongues - which generally is the case because if you ask the real true God for it, He gives good gifts to his children, not stones nor snakes, so you can say that well if somebody speaks in tongues they are saved.. however its not a sign for that purpose, and you can't say 'well if you don't speak in tongues, you are not saved'

The other instances of tongues in Acts can be seen in the same light, it was a result of receiving the Holy Spirit.. But in acts 19.. Prophesy is also another such result, thus if we use historical narrative to dictate doctrine, prophesy also would be an option for proof of salvation, or the "nominated manifestation of the spirit"

So moving onto other parts of Acts... Acts primarily is a historical narrative , a history of the early church, with a few tidbits of doctrine smattered around, and of course through the historical narrative, there are certain doctrinal assumptions that can be solidly made, but others that really would just be conjectural to make..
This is very important.. because say in acts 8 - which seems to be pivotal to the tounges/salvation doctrine if I am not mistaken. It says about believers, and then receiving the Holy Spirit and then speaking in tongues.. Its a historical narrative.. To assume that the believers weren't saved before is assumption (though I can see how certain other doctrinal scriptures, when taken in isolation can bring about this conclusion but I¡¯d rather use the whole bible to interpret certain scriptures),and also to assume that tongues was thus the sign of salvation (maybe it was just a sign to Peter, that yes.. even Samaritans can receive the spirit- maybe it wasn't even meant as a sign at all..
and even if it was a consistent sign of receiving the Holy Spirit or such, that still doesn't mean its a sign of salvation. It was a gift of God, given for a purpose, to be used rather than just as a sign..MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE.. either way all is assumption.. It is also an assumption to link this with, and solely as the manifestation of the spirit according to 1 cor 12..(will get back to that later)

So as far as doctrine is concerned. it is far more wise, not to take doctrine from assumptions in historical narrative, but rather take it from the words of Jesus, and clear doctrinal statements made in the epistles, which there are many which back up 'believing, and faith' (so many to list - I am not even going to start unless this thread changes course to salvation in general) and in the bible there are no doctrinal statements support tongues is anyway tied to salvation.. If there is, please show them to me. I am sincere in this asking.

This brings me back to the statement "nominated manifestation of the spirit". I really urge Christian to give me doctrinal scriptures that support that
1) The manifestation of the spirit is tongues,
2) that this manifestation, or any manifestation is nominated, as a sign for anything..
3) and specifically that this manifestation - tongues specifically, is specifically nominated as a sign for SALVATION

I believe that in my other thread, that it is was made clear that from 1 cor 12 a case cannot be made that tongues = the manifestation of the spirit.. But rather
the manifestation of spirit was the following gifts - including tongues.. Christian pointed out that 1 cor 12 purpose wasn't to say what the manifestation of tongues was, and thus pointed us to acts 8.. which I have covered above.. But lets talk about manifestation in the bible, and just the word manifestation . This 'manifestation of the spirit' is ONLY mentioned by that word in 1 cor 12 , and actually the word manifestation (phanerosis) only twice in the bible.
The word manifestation "phanerosis" is only written once in the context of the spirit and only once in the bible - in 2 cor 4:2

2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

In a different context altogether.. Lets see how this word phanerosis - translated manifesation in KJV.. is transalted in other translations

AMP
but we state the truth openly (clearly and candidly). And so we commend ourselves in the sight and presence of God to every man's conscience
here as a verb STATE..
NIV
Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
here translated 'SETTING FORTH'

NLT
We reject all shameful and underhanded methods. We do not try to trick anyone, and we do not distort the word of God. We tell the truth before God, and all who are honest know that.

and here plainly 'TELLING' (which makes sense in context of truth)..
the other occurrence of ¡°manifestation¡± in the king James in is romans 8:19 , which is a different Greek word (apokalupsis) which is in many scriptures
(while phanerosis is only in 2), but ussually this word is translated by the KJV into different english words/prhases as
1) laying bear, making naked
2) a disclosure of truth, instruction
a) concerning things before unknown
b) used of events by which things or states or persons hitherto withdrawn from view are made visible to all
3) manifestation, appearance

with revelation being the most commonly used English word to translate this greek word in the KJV.
Even in English manifestation isn't some mystical word..
here is the dictionary definition
Manifestation \Man`i*fes*ta"tion\, n. [L. manifestatio: cf. F. manifestation.] The act of manifesting or disclosing, or the state of being manifested; discovery to the eye or to the understanding; also, that which manifests; exhibition; display; revelation; as, the manifestation of God's power in creation.
manifestation
n 1: a clear appearance; "a manifestation of great emotion"
2: a manifest indication
3: expression without words; "tears are an expression of
grief"; "the pulse is a reflection of the heart's
condition" [syn: expression, reflection, reflexion]

Its something revealing, showing... to me.. and definitely in the context of 1 cor 12
The manifestation of the spirit, is anything that the Holy Spirit does.. directly to the world and humanity, but in this scripture, specially through the vessels, members of the Body of Christ, whom he has filled and given spiritual gifts, specially manifesting through these spiritual gifts - including tongues..
It would be folly to say when the Holy Spirit is healing somebody to say, that oh no he isn't manifesting because its not tongues, manifesting is a word, and if the Holy Spirit shows himself that way or this way.. He is manifesting.. just as i can manifest (though i choose not to use that word) with all the things i do in life.. its just a word.. Though I say the Holy spirit can manifest this way or that. I am not using it as an excuse for humans to say he is doing it according to our own fancy.. (oh that burp was a manifestation of the Holy Spirit).. I am just saying that anything that the HOLY SPIRIT ACTUALLY does, in of course manifestation of the spirit.. And as Christians, He often manifests through us.
Anyhow, from acts and 1 cor 12, the evidence is very loose, and conjectural to tie tongues in as ' The nominated manifestation of the spirit' and also to tie it in as a sign/proof of salvation and without it a proof of lack of salvation..

and to end, i'll repeat something from my previous post..
Adept , spirit-filled, christians who are experts in greek, in its vocabulary, grammer
and literary style have translated the scripture 1 cor 12:7 and 'manifestation of the spirit' into English that doesn't really support tounges=this manifestation very well.. Here are some examples

NIV
There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.
NLT
6There are different ways God works in our lives, but it is the same God who does the work through all of us. 7A SPIRITUAL gift is given to each of us as a means of helping the entire church.

I know the hang-up we've had really is some interpret the "THE" of "the manifesation of the Spirit" as a capital The. meaning a singlefold aspect.. While the Greek article is better translated as A, or The in the sense of the apple (not one specific apple) but say mashed apple.. if there was some mashed apple in the fridge, somebody could say to his family - did you eat the apple? and each could have eaten it, manifesting it unto their intestines J each eating a different part of it. According to what was given by the mum J
I can see how the English can really make it contentious.. However many Greek scholars have chose best to interpret it into modern day English as A, knowing how The can be misinterpreted.

I know i covered many things in this post, maybe it will be best to start a thread on each of the areas..

God Bless all

Karl

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

what about say the mormons, who call on Jesus Christ and God also?...
Hadn't you also said in an earlier post, about the word God, or Jesus being null.. its the Jesus of hte Bible that matters , who you call on.. not some statue in rio or something?

---

Yes, obviously. And as the God of the Bible promises tongues to those who call on Him, those who call on Him with that expectation call on the God of the Bible, not a God of their invention. And in so doing, they will not get an answer from anyone else. I don't believe anyone who asks amiss ( this is, has wrong ideas about who God is and what He said ), will get anything from anyone else either, because if they did, they would believe those things came from God.

You're building straw men at an astonishing rate here. Your core question is 'if someone calls on Jesus, can someone else answer', and I say 'no'. That does not mean that they are saved, or have an understanding of anything apart from the fact that they are calling on Jesus. It simply means that God will not allow anyone to answer on His behalf.

†Caleb†

------------------
"True friendship is not characterized by the absence of conflict, but by the ability to resolve conflict."

quote:

---

I do believe though that there were added aspects to this initial filling of the Spirit at Pentecost in acts 2- i.e. the tongues/flames of fire above the heads of the people etc. Though that doesn't separate it from the above, making it a one of a kind occasion as some people like to think..

---

I don't believe there was fire above their heads, I believe it *spread* like fire. But I don't care if there *was* fire, it's not important to me.

quote:

---

Tongues definitely followed the filling.. However it doesn't indicate that it is a sign, proof of salvation..

---

No, we seem to be pursuing a divide and conquer approach. I keep pointing out several scriptures about the same thing and insisting they must all be talking about the same thing, and that the Bible does not contradict itself.

quote:

---

The tongues these apostles spoke were unknown to the speaker, but known to the various listeners.

---

Yes.

quote:

---

Thus my ASSUMPTION is that one apostle may have been speaking(supernatural tongues) that happened to be some Egyptian dialect, and those from Egypt could understand, while another was speaking say an Ethiopian dialect, and those from Ethiopia could understand it...

---

That seems to me to have been the case also.

quote:

---

You see the tongues was a sign, not to the believers who had received the spirit and were speaking in tongues, but to the unbelievers.. It was a sign of the supernatural that got their attention, got their ear turned, and listening in, for when Peter preached the gospel to them..

---

Yes, tongues is a sign to unbelievers. That verse is in the context of use in a meeting, and it does not signify anything to me when a believer speaks in tongues in a meeting. I can't understand it and I already knew they could speak in tongues - all Christians can.

quote:

---

Tongues is a sign, not for believers, but FOR unbelievers...
If tongues is a sign of salvation , it would be a sign FOR believers... "

---

We're in convoluted logic land again....

The verse you quote is in the context of a meeting, not in the context of a person being converted. Why do you think tongues is a sign to unbelievers ? Paul is talking about tongues, not interpretation, he's not talking about their being understood.

quote:

---

like, oh yes, i got tongues, i am saved¡±.. But tongues is a gift to those who have it, not a sign. It is a gift of the Spirit and thus follows those who believe, those who are filled with the spirit.. So in one sense, given its not false tongues - which generally is the case because if you ask the real true God for it, He gives good gifts to his children, not stones nor snakes, so you can say that well if somebody speaks in tongues they are saved.. however its not a sign for that purpose, and you can't say 'well if you don't speak in tongues, you are not saved'

---

None of this is based on the Bible, except that you paraphrase Luke 11. Which is interesting, because Jesus was speaking about God giving the Spirit, in the context of the question 'how should we pray'.

Seeing as Acts 8 obviously shows that a visible sign was looked for, you need to explain from the Bible what that was, and why it was not tongues.

quote:

---

The other instances of tongues in Acts can be seen in the same light, it was a result of receiving the Holy Spirit.. But in acts 19.. Prophesy is also another such result, thus if we use historical narrative to dictate doctrine, prophesy also would be an option for proof of salvation, or the "nominated manifestation of the spirit"

---

You COULD read it that way, if you wanted to. I believe that all who were saved did both.

quote:

---

So moving onto other parts of Acts... Acts primarily is a historical narrative , a history of the early church, with a few tidbits of doctrine smattered around, and of course through the historical narrative, there are certain doctrinal assumptions that can be solidly made, but others that really would just be conjectural to make..

---

I'm using Acts to see what happened in the early church in seeing to establish what Paul meant in Corinthians. Is it not fair to say that what he said should happen would also have happened in the early church ?

quote:

---

This is very important.. because say in acts 8 - which seems to be pivotal to the tounges/salvation doctrine if I am not mistaken. It says about believers, and then receiving the Holy Spirit and then speaking in tongues.. Its a historical narrative.. To assume that the believers weren't saved before is assumption (though I can see how certain other doctrinal scriptures, when taken in isolation can bring about this conclusion but I¡¯d rather use the whole bible to interpret certain scriptures),

---

Fine, interpret Acts 8 in the light of Romans 8. Any man who has not the Spirit is not Christs. Or any of the other verses where Jesus spoke of the need to recieve the Holy Spirit. How can someone who does not have the Holy Spirit inside them possibly be a Christian ?

quote:

---

and also to assume that tongues was thus the sign of salvation (maybe it was just a sign to Peter, that yes.. even Samaritans can receive the spirit- maybe it wasn't even meant as a sign at all..
and even if it was a consistent sign of receiving the Holy Spirit or such, that still doesn't mean its a sign of salvation.

---

In other words, you believe there are saved people who do not have the Holy Spirit. Why ?

quote:

---

So as far as doctrine is concerned. it is far more wise, not to take doctrine from assumptions in historical narrative, but rather take it from the words of Jesus, and clear doctrinal statements made in the epistles, which there are many which back up 'believing, and faith' (so many to list - I am not even going to start unless this thread changes course to salvation in general) and in the bible there are no doctrinal statements support tongues is anyway tied to salvation.. If there is, please show them to me. I am sincere in this asking.

---

How about we start with John 3, Luke 11 or Mark 16 ? How about Zeph 3:9 ? How about we talk about how someone who does not speak in tongues prays in the Spirit, seeing as 1 Cor 14 says it's different to prayer we understand ? How about we address a core issue. You've as much as claimed three times now that people can not have the Holy Spirit and yet be saved. There is one Spirit, and anyone who does not have the Spirit is none of His. So please reconcile these things.

The 'believe and be saved' verses are true, but vague. They do not tell you who Jesus is, or what we must believe. They don't tell us what 'saved' means, either. I believe they are true, but they do not negate more specific verses that tell me what Jesus promised, or who He was. I can't believe in ANY Jesus and be saved.

quote:

---

This brings me back to the statement "nominated manifestation of the spirit". I really urge Christian to give me doctrinal scriptures that support that
1) The manifestation of the spirit is tongues,

---

Acts 2, 10 and 19, it always was tongues. Zeph 3:9, we need a pure language. John 3:8 actually says the voice of the Spirit is heard whenever someone is born of the Spirit. Luke 11 has Jesus telling us about recieving the Spirit in answer to the question 'how should we pray'. The answer ? Pray in the Spirit, which 1 Cor 14 says is tongues, and Jude says builds us in the faith and keeps us in God's love. Not surprising, as Romans 8 says we don't know what to pray for, but the Spirit intercedes with 'groanings that cannot be uttered', i.e. things we don't know how to say ourselves. Of course, 1 Cor 12:2 also is speaking about tongues when it says that we cannot curse Jesus by the Spirit, and equally, we cannot call Jesus Lord if we cannot do so by the Spirit. 'By the Spirit' is synonymous with Paul's explanation of how we pray in the Spirit ( tongues ) and no other interpretation of this verse I have ever heard is less than a nonsense.

quote:

---

2) that this manifestation, or any manifestation is nominated, as a sign for anything..

---

C'mon now. Acts 8 - believers who do not have the Spirit ( I won't say unsaved, because you're going to prove salvation apart from the Spirit for us ), and it's important enough for the Apostles to be called, and a visible sign was obviously sought and seen. The Bible also says we know we are in Him because He has given us His Spirit. So how do we know we have the Spirit ?

quote:

---

) and specifically that this manifestation - tongues specifically, is specifically nominated as a sign for SALVATION

---

Having the Holy Spirit and salvation cannot be seperated from each other. All the verses that talk of prayer in the Spirit, or tongues in any other way ( such as Rom 8 ) do not suggest in any way that only some Christians have these things, any more than you can use 1 Cor 12 to suggest that only some have faith.

quote:

---

I believe that in my other thread, that it is was made clear that from 1 cor 12 a case cannot be made that tongues = the manifestation of the spirit.. But rather
the manifestation of spirit was the following gifts - including tongues..

---

That would be possible if you ignored the record of Acts, and Acts 8 in particular.

.snip a lot of talk about the word manifestation.

quote:

---

It would be folly to say when the Holy Spirit is healing somebody to say, that oh no he isn't manifesting because its not tongues, manifesting is a word, and if the Holy Spirit shows himself that way or this way.. He is manifesting..

---

OK, BUT in Acts 8 they were healed. Why was that not the manifestation of the Spirit then ? The Spirit can work without infilling someone.

quote:

---

Anyhow, from acts and 1 cor 12, the evidence is very loose, and conjectural to tie tongues in as ' The nominated manifestation of the spirit' and also to tie it in as a sign/proof of salvation and without it a proof of lack of salvation..

---

What's even looser is that you have no explanation for these verses except to reject mine. Why did they not have the Spirit in Acts 8 ? What sign were they looking for ?

quote:

---

and to end, i'll repeat something from my previous post..
Adept , spirit-filled, christians who are experts in greek, in its vocabulary, grammer
and literary style have translated the scripture 1 cor 12:7 and 'manifestation of the spirit' into English that doesn't really support tounges=this manifestation very well.. Here are some examples

NIV
There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good.
NLT
6There are different ways God works in our lives, but it is the same God who does the work through all of us. 7A SPIRITUAL gift is given to each of us as a means of helping the entire church.

---

The NLT sucks. You've already established that the word is 'manifestation', and does not in any way shape or form mean 'A spiritual gift'. Every translator brings their doctrinal ideas to the table as well.

quote:

---

I know the hang-up we've had really is some interpret the "THE" of "the manifesation of the Spirit" as a capital The. meaning a singlefold aspect.. While the Greek article is better translated as A, or The in the sense of the apple (not one specific apple) but say mashed apple.. if there was some mashed apple in the fridge, somebody could say to his family - did you eat the apple? and each could have eaten it, manifesting it unto their intestines J each eating a different part of it. According to what was given by the mum J
I can see how the English can really make it contentious.. However many Greek scholars have chose best to interpret it into modern day English as A, knowing how The can be misinterpreted.

---

Which leaves us with a Bible that contradicts itself, unless you can explain Acts 8 in this light.

In an effort to circumvent "convoluted logic land" I am going to refrain from debate and just ask specific questions.
1. Did the Holy Spirit work in the lives of people - whether filling them for a work, or just guiding them without filling - before the time of Jesus Christ?
2. Was the Holy Spirit decidedly given to certain persons during the ministry of Jesus Christ, by Jesus Christ or by God?
3. Did the Holy Spirit fill certain persons during the time of Jesus Christ when invited in by them?
4. Was the Holy Spirit free to fill, with or without invitation, after Jesus Christ was glorified (that is, after the resurrection and ascension)?
5. What does it mean to have eternal, or everlasting, life?
6. If someone is called a son of God, or a child of God, does that imply that they are of Jesus Christ and therefore filled with the Holy Spirit?

That is all for now. God bless.

quote:

---

1. Did the Holy Spirit work in the lives of people - whether filling them for a work, or just guiding them without filling - before the time of Jesus Christ?

---

Yes, of course.

quote:

---

2. Was the Holy Spirit decidedly given to certain persons during the ministry of Jesus Christ, by Jesus Christ or by God?

---

Yes, of course. But in a temporary sense, not in the sense of NT salvation.

quote:

---

3. Did the Holy Spirit fill certain persons during the time of Jesus Christ when invited in by them?

---

Not that I can think of, but I presume you've found a verse. But again, in the OT sense of empowering to specific works, the Spirit to indwell was not given until Jesus was glorified.

quote:

---

4. Was the Holy Spirit free to fill, with or without invitation, after Jesus Christ was glorified (that is, after the resurrection and ascension)?

---

No, I don't believe that people can recieve the Spirit without asking, they cannot be saved against their will. Again, I presume you've found a verse though.... :-)

quote:

---

5. What does it mean to have eternal, or everlasting, life?

---

Um... to never die ? Do you want to discuss the nature of the afterlife ?

quote:

---

6. If someone is called a son of God, or a child of God, does that imply that they are of Jesus Christ and therefore filled with the Holy Spirit?

---

In this dispensation, yes.

Here are some verses for everyone to consider, and comment on if deemed necessary. I have specifically avoided 1 Corinthians and Acts to allow scripture to prove scripture.

quote:

---

1 John 4, various verses (KJV)
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
...
13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14 And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

---

quote:

---

Galatians 4:4-7(KJV)
4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

---

quote:

---

Galatians 3, various verses (KJV)
6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
...
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
...
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

---

quote:

---

Romans 8, various verses (KJV)
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
...
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

---

quote:

---

John 4:24 (KJV)
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

---

Here are some more questions for you.
1. Can you explain John 20:22 with what happened in Acts 2?
2. Do you believe in the Trinity - the God-head - that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all one God, yet three parts?
3. Do you believe that someone who believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God is saved (note the verses above) and are "in Christ" and therefore also "of God" and also "of the Spirit", seeing as how Christ if of God and also of the Spirit and the Spirit is of Christ and also of God?

God bless.

[edit]fixed error in quote.

[This message has been edited by nfektious (edited April 03, 2003).]

quote:

---

Here are some more questions for you.

---

OK. I have some questions also.

1. Can a person be saved but not have the Spirit ?
2. Does it matter what we believe of Jesus, or are we saved so long as we have a belief that centres on that name ?
3. Is it enough to believe that Jesus is the Son of God, i.e. to accept that this is true, or do we need to do some thing about it ?

quote:

---

1. Can you explain John 20:22 with what happened in Acts 2?

---

Jhn 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on [them], and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

I've already said that in the OT the Spirit empowered people to do God's work and that this is different to the infilling of the NT, which saves the soul. Jesus told them that He needed to go and die, otherwise the Spirit could not be sent. Peter in Acts 11 refers to Acts 2, not John 20, or any other event while Jesus was alive, as 'the beginning'.

quote:

---

2. Do you believe in the Trinity - the God-head - that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all one God, yet three parts?

---

I believe that this is a source of false mysticism, an intellectual miracle that has been emphasised by the traditional churches in place of salvation, and far more than the Bible speaks of it. But it is fundamentally true, yes.

quote:

---

3. Do you believe that someone who believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God is saved (note the verses above) and are "in Christ" and therefore also "of God" and also "of the Spirit", seeing as how Christ if of God and also of the Spirit and the Spirit is of Christ and also of God?

---

I do not believe that anyone who believes Jesus is the Son of God is saved. The demons believe also. I believe that you need to look into the Greek word translated 'believe', and consider that if you believe in the Jesus of the Bible, you believe what He said, which is shown by doing something about it. It also includes believing His promises, and that is shown by putting faith in them and seeing the results He spoke of. In short, when the Bible says we must believe in Jesus, it is implied we must believe in the Jesus who lived and died, and not in some other Jesus that has since been invented. The word 'Jesus' is not a magic word, saying it does not invoke some magic spell. If you don't believe in the Jesus that the Bible presents, you don't believe in Jesus. That is true regardless of if He said what I claim, or what you claim.

It may be worth reading James in this light - faith without works is dead. Jesus also said 'why say you love me and do not the things I say'.

In Luke 11, Jesus spoke of asking, seeking and knocking. Anyone who seriously believes in Him will ask, seek and knock, and they WILL be saved. I don't believe anyone can be saved without the Holy Spirit, and Acts 8 records believers who did not have the Spirit. Reference Acts 19:2. Was Paul asking if these believers were saved, or saying we can be saved without the Spirit that Jesus died to send us ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by christian:
1. Can a person be saved but not have the Spirit ?
2. Does it matter what we believe of Jesus, or are we saved so long as we have a belief that centres on that name ?
3. Is it enough to believe that Jesus is the Son of God, i.e. to accept that this is true, or do we need to do some thing about it ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by christian:
I do not believe that anyone who believes Jesus is the Son of God is saved. The demons believe also. I believe that you need to look into the Greek word translated 'believe', and consider that if you believe in the Jesus of the Bible, you believe what He said, which is shown by doing something about it. It also includes believing His promises, and that is shown by putting faith in them and seeing the results He spoke of. In short, when the Bible says we must believe in Jesus, it is implied we must believe in the Jesus who lived and died, and not in some other Jesus that has since been invented. The word 'Jesus' is not a magic word, saying it does not invoke some magic spell. If you don't believe in the Jesus that the Bible presents, you don't believe in Jesus. That is true regardless of if He said what I claim, or what you claim.

It may be worth reading James in this light - faith without works is dead. Jesus also said 'why say you love me and do not the things I say'.

In Luke 11, Jesus spoke of asking, seeking and knocking. Anyone who seriously believes in Him will ask, seek and knock, and they WILL be saved. I don't believe anyone can be saved without the Holy Spirit, and Acts 8 records believers who did not have the Spirit. Reference Acts 19:2. Was Paul asking if these believers were saved, or saying we can be saved without the Spirit that Jesus died to send us ?

---

You assume I use the term "believe" as a general acknowledgement of the person of Jesus Christ. In fact, you assume many things from my posts of late. I'm not sure what you are getting at here. The Jesus I speak of is the Jesus of the Bible; I would think that is clear by the things I have said, and the scripture I have used.
I said earlier I would touch on the issue of believing who Jesus Christ is. You tossed out the argument (as overused and misunderstood as it is) that the demons also believe. You do realize that the demons should know who Jesus Christ is as the demons were created of God originally as angels. Recall Lucifer took a third of the heavenly host with him when he was cast down from heaven. Also, the fact that the demons believe who Christ says he is does not mean they are able to receive salvation. Obviously, the demons being cast out angels who rejected the power of God cannot receive salvation for that reason, and also for the very fact that salvation was for mankind. There is a very profound difference in the belief of demons and the belief of mankind; that difference is salvation - the gift of eternal life from eternal damnation.
Another point here is that Jesus Christ was sent to save us, not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was sent as a Comforter and to teach us in the ways of the truth, which happened after Jesus Christ brought salvation.

That is all I will post for now as I have to return to work. God bless.

OK, assuming for a moment that the thief was saved under the Old Testament ( which is where he lived and died ), how does that relate to us ? As you believe we can have eternal life and not have the Spirit, why did Jesus talk about the Spirit so much ? How about this: Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. ???

2. Of course it matters what we believe of Jesus Christ. Many believe that Jesus Christ existed but not that he existed as the Messiah, the Son of God, or that he arose from the grave to conquer sin and death thereby saving us from eternal damnation. I'll respond more on this later in this post.

OK.

3. Certainly we are to put our faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior into practice. "Faith without works is dead" means that someone who has faith should engage in acts of faith (that is believing God at His word on all things), and more specifically to follow the teaching of Christ (including engaging in testifying of His gospel, treating others in love, being merciful, revealing false teachers and doctrines, casting out spirits contrary to truth, and so much more). That phrase does not mean that faith is lost, just that it is not alive. Faith in action results in stronger and deeper faith. Scripture is clear on the fact that anyone who believes in Jesus Christ is charged to share the gospel with others; that in the very least indicates a true believer from someone who just acknowledges Jesus Christ is who He says He is but does not allow Jesus Christ to become Lord in their life.

So we agree that scriptures which simply say to 'believe' are true, but vague, and other scriptures provide the detail ?

You assume I use the term "believe" as a general acknowledgement of the person of Jesus Christ.

No, I don't.

In fact, you assume many things from my posts of late. I'm not sure what you are getting at here. The Jesus I speak of is the Jesus of the Bible; I would think that is clear by the things I have said, and the scripture I have used.

It's close to the Jesus of the Bible, except the bits where He said that believers will speak in new tongues :-)

I said earlier I would touch on the issue of believing who Jesus Christ is. You tossed out the argument (as overused and misunderstood as it is) that the demons also believe. You do realize that the demons should know who Jesus Christ is as the demons were created of God originally as angels. Recall Lucifer took a third of the heavenly host with him when he was cast down from heaven. Also, the fact that the demons believe who Christ says he is does not mean they are able to receive salvation. Obviously, the demons being cast out angels who rejected the power of God cannot receive salvation for that reason, and also for the very fact that salvation was for mankind. There is a very profound difference in the belief of demons and the belief of mankind; that difference is salvation - the gift of eternal life from eternal damnation.

I'll admit it's a little of a throwaway line :-)

Another point here is that Jesus Christ was sent to save us, not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was sent as a Comforter and to teach us in the ways of the truth, which happened after Jesus Christ brought salvation.

So they are totally seperate - you can be saved, but not comforted, comforted but not saved ? Jesus came to save us, yes. He also said often that He came to send the Spirit. And anyone without the Spirit is not His. So how do you seperate the Spirit and salvation ?

quote:

---

So they are totally seperate - you can be saved, but not comforted, comforted but not saved ? Jesus came to save us, yes. He also said often that He came to send the Spirit. And anyone without the Spirit is not His. So how do you seperate the Spirit and salvation ?

---

I have to go now. I would like to say more, but time does not allow. God bless.

quote:

---

You can be saved and comforted; comforted and saved. Is not the fact of salvation comforting?

---

I would have thought so, but you seem to be saying otherwise.

quote:

---

I would ask you to consider this view, which I believe is supported through all of scripture, that you can have salvation and the Spirit at the same instance.

---

Um... isn't that what *I* am saying ?

quote:

---

I do not separate the Spirit and salvation. If you ask for Jesus to be Lord of your life, are you not also asking for God to be Lord of your life and the Spirit to be Lord of your life also?

---

Yes, of course. But you seem to be advocating the non-Biblical 'prayer of salvation' with your terminology. Do you propose that they did not have the Spirit in Acts 8 because he forgot to tell them the sinners prayer ? He could be forgiven, it's not like it appears anywhere in the Bible....

Sorry, that was a little facaecious, which is wrong of me, especially when I cannot even spell it. Seriously, there is no process of 'asking JEsus into your heart/life', there is only Acts 2:38. That in essence is asking Jesus to give you a NEW life, not enter the old one, and again, it involves recieving the Spirit, and according to Peter earlier in Acts 2, speaking in tongues.

quote:

---

Scripture is clear that the Spirit is not for salvation. Obviously you cannot have the Spirit and not be saved, but also if you have salvation you have the Spirit.

---

Great. SO why did they not have the Spirit in Acts 8, and how could they tell ? Where does this leave your earlier statements, now that we (correctly) do not differentiate between salvation and recieving the Spirit ? [Edit to insert quote] You said: Do you believe that someone who believes in Jesus Christ as the Son of God is saved (note the verses above) and are "in Christ" and therefore also "of God" and also "of the Spirit", seeing as how Christ if of God and also of the Spirit and the Spirit is of Christ and also of God? So as they believe Jesus was the Son of God in Acts 8, and were baptised, how could they NOT have the Spirit ? [edit]

quote:

---

Bear in mind that the Spirit was not promised to the generation of the time Jesus was on the earth; it was for the next and following generations.

---

Of course, prior to the resurrection it was not possible for God to give the Spirit as He does today.

quote:

---

Proper understanding of scripture shows that if you are of God, then you are of the Spirit, as the Spirit is sent from God; likewise if you are of Christ, you are of the Spirit, as Christ is sent from God and the Spirit is sent from Christ.

---

No argument from me, because you're stating the case I have been making. So where does that leave us in terms of Acts 8 ? Why were baptised believers not saved ?

[This message has been edited by christian (edited April 04, 2003).]

quote:

---

SO why did they not have the Spirit in Acts 8, and how could they tell ?
...
So as they believe Jesus was the Son of God in Acts 8, and were baptised, how could they NOT have the Spirit ?

---

quote:

---

So where does that leave us in terms of Acts 8 ? Why were baptised believers not saved ?

---

What does Romans 6:3-10 mean then?

quote:

---

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.

---

Can you explain this passage as well in Mark 16, verses 15 and 16:

quote:

---

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

---

You still have not proved your premise that tongues is sole proof of salvation and that the filling of the Holy Spirit is salvation. There is no doubt that tongues followed those who received the Holy Spirit - and even in Mark 16:17-18,

quote:

---

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

---

Christian - I do not mean to attack you or your faith and I know that is hard to separate from my approach here. The issue is, and always has been, that there has to be something along side salvation to prove someone is saved. The fact is that none of us has to prove anything to any other, as God is the sole judge of our heart. However, it is encouraged in scripture to not be afraid to be bold and publicly testify of one's salvation - through baptism and many other actions. This is faith with works - at least in part - as James teaches. The other part is to practice faith, love, mercy and all the other facets of true Christ-likeness as described in scripture.
I want you to know that I love you in Christ and do not want you to feel despised or rejected. I know there are others here who feel the same way as I do about you. You are loved and prayed for, that you will see the false doctrine of man you have placed so much effort into, to prove a faith that is much easier to prove in the true doctrine of scripture.
May God bless you and keep you, may you grow in the ways of the Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ, and walk in His truth.

quote:

---

I thought we already covered this. The Holy Spirit filled those at Jerusalem. These believers were converted in Samaria. It's all right there in black and white.

---

Imagine my confusion. Didn't we just agree that

a. You can't be saved without the Holy Spirit, and
b. Acts 8 plainly says these baptised believers did not have the Spirit ?

quote:

---

I must say I don't think you know what you are talking about anymore.

---

We're clearly not on the same page. You argue my case one post, then ridicule my case the next. I'm totally lost.

quote:

---

What does Romans 6:3-10 mean then?

---

Before I even look it up, it does NOT mean that Acts 8 is a lie. Baptised believers who do not have the Spirit. Please address this, and make a reply which ties your currently self contradicting posts together so I have *some* idea of what you believe. Either people can be saved without the Spirit, or the believers in Acts 8 were not saved. End of story. Either way, you've not begun to address how they knew they did not have the Spirit.

The passage in question explains why we are baptised, to symbolise the burial of the old life. In Acts 10, they were saved without water baptism, it needs to occur, but it is not the moment of salvation.

quote:

---

Can you explain this passage as well in Mark 16, verses 15 and 16:

---

Mark 16:15-16 is easy, you need to be baptised and to believe. And if you believe in the Jesus of the Bible, you'll show the signs that Jesus goes on to speak of, speaking in tongues, protection from God, and able to pray and see people recover.

quote:

---

You still have not proved your premise that tongues is sole proof of salvation and that the filling of the Holy Spirit is salvation.

---

A post ago you agreed with me that when someone is saved they are filled with the Spirit, and when someone is filled with the Spirit, they are saved. I quoted Romans 8 in this light 'if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, they are none of His'. The YLT reads 'if any man have not the Holy Spirit, he is not a Christian at all'.

I remain confused how you can flip flop on this point from post to post, without ever explaining what you think Rom 8 means. I feel that credibility drops markedly as soon as someone ignores a verse which is shown to contradict them, instead of explaining how it fits into their views. You'll note I am careful to try and cover every verse that is raised to me, and explain how I see it, and how it does not stop me from holding a viewpoint based on the entire Bible.

quote:

---

tongues alone is not proof of salvation. If anything it is only one of many proofs of salvation

---

Not even remotely. There are many gifts, but one manifestation of the Spirit. I have shown this from 1 Cor 12, some time ago. Acts 2, 10 and 19 also affirm this.

quote:

---

The fact is that none of us has to prove anything to any other, as God is the sole judge of our heart.

---

I agree. The manifestation of the Spirit exists partially to tell us that God has judged, as was the case in Acts 8.

quote:

---

The other part is to practice faith, love, mercy and all the other facets of true Christ-likeness as described in scripture.

---

Assuming the Spirit is present, this is walking in the Spirit. No argument from me, this is vital and non-negotiable.

quote:

---

You are loved and prayed for, that you will see the false doctrine of man you have placed so much effort into, to prove a faith that is much easier to prove in the true doctrine of scripture.

---

I don't doubt the sincerity with which you write this, but given the contradictions in your last two posts, I have trouble taking it seriously. I praise God daily that I was not left in the mire of a gospel that relies on a Bible which contradicts itself, not least in the issue of Acts 8, which I am still waiting for you to address. Were they saved without the Spirit ( in direct contradiciton of Romans 8 ), or where they unsaved believers ( in direct contradiction, not of the Bible, but of your interpretation of it ) ?

I hate to refer to my own experience as if it has veracity at a level remotely close to that of the Bible, but why is it that after 2 years of sincere belief and application to your gospel I remained a hopeless, depressed alcoholic ? Why did a false gospel deliver me from that in an instant ?

quote:

---

May God bless you and keep you, may you grow in the ways of the Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ, and walk in His truth.

---

Thank you, that is exactly what I pray for also, for me and for others.

exceeding pain. It is clear to me that the issue is that you've had an experience that somehow helped you overcome alcoholism and exhibit

happiness like never before, and that you are afraid to deny your experience as anything other than of God.
I am not judging you, and only basing these following comments on your own admission. Perhaps the two years you remained a slave to

alcohol reflects a lack of true lordship of Christ in your life. Being an alcoholic by definition means that alcohol is your motivation in life. I do

not mean to criticize the condition you were in.
Sincere belief in something false can result in feeling better. This is evident in many areas: science (Evolution to rationalize anything but a belief

that God created the world), medicine (pills and drugs can heal or fix something better than God), religion (Buddhism and Zen mysticism along

with other philosophies of true peace and happiness that deny absolute eternal peace in God). This is the deception of false prophets and false

doctrine - to replace eternal spiritual wholeness with temporal emotional euphoria.

I really do not have the words to express the truth of scripture more than I already have. Nor do I have the time to continue a debate that you

are adamantly refusing to accept scriptural proof of error in your ways. Yes, I can see how you are confused over what I have said - based

completely on the fact that your understanding of scripture is incorrect. I think it is interesting that "my" view of living as Christ and being of

Christ is in contradiction of itself, and that if "my" view is correct, then the scripture also is contradicting of itself - as you claim.
Why should I use scripture to support "my" view - again and again - when you repeatedly refuse to accept it? What benefit is it to argue with

that which is true when you refuse to accept it as truth?
I can't change you by "my" words so why should I bother? My only reason for getting into this was so that your false doctrine does not

contaminate the minds of those seeking the truth of scripture rather than the interpretation of man. Only the Spirit can convict and reveal, like

He has done since the beginning of time.
I have addressed your points time and time again yet you continue to fail to see the truth. Are you blind to the truth?

You have misunderstood what I believe from the beginning; not because I fail to argue correctly and show scripture to prove it, but because

you fail to take scripture as proof. If you follow the context of my argument you will see that I do believe when someone is saved that they are

filled with the Spirit; but this is what is now (and what was not long after the Spirit had reached those on the earth through the missionaries of

the time), not what was when the very first converts were saved. The Spirit had to be given first for us today to be able to receive Him when

we are saved. Salvation has not changed because the Spirit is involved in the process. Salvation still is by believing that Jesus Christ is the Son

of God, sent by God to redeem mankind from sin and eternal death, and to give mankind eternal life to live with God in heaven forever. This is

clear, all throughout scripture - Old Testament and New Testament.
Because the Spirit was given after Christ ascended to glory, we now - in this generation - can be saved by believing in Christ as God and also

receiving the Spirit together, because the Bible shows us the completeness of why God sent Christ and Christ sent the Spirit.
At the time of the early church, the Spirit had to be sent out with those who ministered the gospel of Christ as they went into the uttermost

parts of the earth. This explains why Peter and John prayed for those in Acts 8: they had received the gospel brought them by Philip but Philip

had neglected to pass the Spirit onto them. Again, it is all written before you in Acts 8 why they were saved but didn't have the Spirit, and

how it was known that they didn't have the Spirit, and how they received the Spirit.
Romans 8 does indeed say that those who have not the Spirit of Christ are not of Him. Again, Matthew Henry's Commentary has a good explanation:

quote:

---

To be Christ’s (that is, to be a Christian indeed, one of his children, his servants, his friends, in union with him) is a privilege and honour which many pretend to that have no part nor lot in the matter. None are his but those that have his Spirit; that is, [1.] That are spirited as he was spirited-are meek, and lowly, and humble, and peaceable, and patient, and charitable, as he was. We cannot tread in his steps unless we have his spirit; the frame and disposition of our souls must be conformable to Christ’s pattern. [2.] That are actuated and guided by the Holy Spirit of God, as a sanctifier, teacher, and comforter. Having the Spirit of Christ is the same with having the Spirit of God to dwell in us. But those two come much to one; for all that are actuated by the Spirit of God as their rule are conformable to the spirit of Christ as their pattern. Now this description of the character of those to whom belongs this first privilege of freedom from condemnation is to be applied to all the other privileges that follow.

---

quote:

---

It is clear to me that the issue is that you've had an experience that somehow helped you overcome alcoholism and exhibit happiness like never before, and that you are afraid to deny your experience as anything other than of God.

---

And THIS is the sort of waffle that makes me afraid to relate my experiences. I'm not scared of *anything*. I AM curious why your Gospel was powerless to help me for more than brief periods of emotional high ( as you said, anything can do that ).

quote:

---

I am not judging you, and only basing these following comments on your own admission. Perhaps the two years you remained a slave to alcohol reflects a lack of true lordship of Christ in your life

---

LOL - I'm not juding you, but I am ? Give it a rest. I told you I was totally sincere, and I was. All I lived for was to know Christ, on any terms He wanted. So I guess the Acts 8 test was one of sincerity as well, was it ?

I'm sorry that you've contradicted yourself constantly, and I've now given you an avenue from which to judge me, reject everything I've said, and ignore the fact that your self contradictory position exists as an attempt to struggle to fit Acts 8 into your theology. Which you consistently failed to do.

I am ending my involvement in this discussion. [edit]Three reasons to do so - none of which has anything to do with the need to defend my view:[/edit]
1. It is not right to argue over matters that divide and cause doubt in the body of believers as to the truth. I would be neglectful in my duties as a Christian to carry on in this manner. The truth is, perhaps I should have stopped long ago when "convoluted logic" was the popular phrase.
2. I have much better things to do with my faith and my time in the faith than this.
3. If I had been a weaker brother, this most certainly would have caused me to doubt my salvation. But worse, this would have caused me to see no point in it at all. I don't want to be judged that way before God when all is said and done.

I pray that those in search of truth will rely on scripture solely and as God gives them wisdom to understand it. I pray that anyone caused harm or to stumble as a result of this conversation will forgive me of my involvement in that. As pure and honest as my intentions were, they have seemingly wrought nothing of gain. I pray that everyone injured spiritually by this discussion is healed and comforted, in the name of Jesus. Amen.

Goodbye.

[This message has been edited by nfektious (edited April 05, 2003).]

I agree with some of the reasons that have perpetuated your gospel...as in modern times (and throughout history, even in the days of acts) many have watered down the gospel, clichéd it, and misunderstood or abused it. However the gospel stands strong. Many have tried to come to Christ just as something to try, "maybe it will make my life better, a different trip than my last - LSD", or to use as a selfish self-improvement scheme. 'Asking Jesus into your heart' and saying the ‘sinners prayer’ has often been done without true repentance, not understanding the gospel or the words of the prayer they are saying. I believe that when the gospel is presented, and the Holy Spirit convicts of sin, the repentance sentences in the 'sinners prayer' are not needed. Because the person actually knows their sins, and knows specifically what to repent of. I know many who have said the sinners prayer, heard part of the gospel, and like seed in the bad places have weeds choke out the gospel, and fall away, many people who say the prayer, but aren't repentant of their sins.
However the Gospel stands strong, and it lands on good soil and produces bountiful fruit - God's word never returns void.
But just because some water down the gospel doesn't mean anything is needed to be added to it.

You discount the 'traditional' gospel by your own experience. And I don't doubt your sincerity at all - though I might doubt your complete submission to the Lordship of Jesus Christ - as I understand mankind, and my own heart and the sinful nature.
However to discount the traditional gospel by your experience of it (or a watered down form of the ‘traditional’ gospel) isn't wise. We could also discount your RCI doctrine by the disillusioned many who feel let down by RCI doctrine, who feel abused, mistreated, and misled by Revival centers.

And also by your own experience (though not in your understanding), being saved and walking in victory are two different things. Salvation is by grace through faith, but victory requires making sure we stay in the place where God wants us, in following him, in laying down our lives before him on the alter, in obeying him…in total surrender, not just occasionally. And maybe when coming to RCI, you discovered a truth - and yes there are some truths in RCI, though sadly the deceptions in the long run make the truths almost benign, and the deceptions bind and enslave. But anyway you discovered some truths, truths that God used by his great love and mercy of you, Christian, to set you free,to give you victory…and thank you Lord for that testimony. However, God was your deliverer, and your savior - not your church nor its doctrine.

I have found that the greatest source of lack of victory and failure in my own Christian walk comes from my lack of obedience to God in certain things, and trying to sit on the throne with him or push him off it, not submitting myself to His Lordship. Laying my burdens at the foot of the cross, then after emotional release, picking them up again and carrying them again. Often I have prayed for victory in one area, striving so much, understanding God's delivering capacity and will. However, often my motives are I want to change, so I can feel better about myself, because I don't like myself in that area, and if God changes me then I can feel better about myself and not reject or hate myself. In doing so I call God a liar, for he has accepted me, and loves me, even when I am still a sinner. However God often says to me "I want you to be obedient in this area, or do this or that" but I say "No lord, look at this, this issue is much bigger, I need to be successful in this, then maybe I’ll be obedient in that area". However I find, when I submit my pride and my "I know better" to God, and obey him, often in seemingly little things, He miraculously changes other areas of my life, the ones I had struggled with, and tried so hard to change. It’s all by His grace and wisdom. He disciplines us, and grows us - calling us towards submission, and relying on Him, trusting Him and doing things his way, the biblical way - I see your enslavement to alcohol in a similar light - however I am a man - I don't claim to have heard discernment from God specifically regarding you and this issue, and God alone knows the heart of man - yours and mine - which we can't trust our own, as the human heart is deceitful above all things.

I don't at all doubt your salvation. I believe you are saved, by grace, through faith, and also you are filled with the real spirit of God, not a counterfeit, and your tongues are real. However I do believe that some of your doctrines have blinded you (I believe all of us have some blind spots, some mostly benign, but others that practically cripple us spiritually), and thus it restricts the Holy Spirit moving in you in many areas, and restricts your growth to Christian maturity and its fruits. This may sound harsh, but I am not attacking you, for this is something common to many Christians, dare I say all of us. To you the restriction may be some false doctrines and their enslavement, their boxing God into a religion with every question answered thus limiting the infinite mind of Christ to what can be perceived and reasoned by the finite mind of man - but to many other Christians it is other things, our selfishness, our western independence and thus unwillingness to submit to God, a variety of idols in our life, many good things, like we can idolize our wife above God, for others it can be money or possessions etc., for others its choosing not to trust God, and making our fears more important that God in our lives. I believe that these doctrines also restrict your ability to have an intimate relationship with your creator, and your saviour - Jesus - who loves your greatly and wants to be intimate with you…for you to hear His voice, and His plans for your life - without thinking that God doesn't tell people specific things to do…to be able to show you the wonderful plans and purposes that are good and not to harm you (Jer 29:11) he has for you and your life.

For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.

That He has known you since He knit you together, lovingly, in your mother’s womb. That there are so many things He wants to restore in your life, including family relationships and it’s all good, though being under the surgeons knife is not always comfortable but can be quite painful. To accept that any one of your doctrines is false is a big step, and scary, because it would throw apart a big part of your worldview. But you ARE SAFE in GOD. That to accept some of these false doctrines as actually false, doesn't mean you aren't secure in God, that your salvation would thus be vulnerable or that God doesn't care for you extremely, it wouldn't mean that the things God has done in your life are null and void, for you still have a testimony of God in your life, and nobody, no blind spot, nothing can take that away from you. You are saved my friend, and God has plans and purposes in your life. The place where you are now is not a place to stay for the rest of your life - neither is mine. God is taking us both on journeys, journeys towards righteousness, being used of God, as vessels doing His will, sharing His Gospel, loving our neighbors, and knowing Him. I pray that you can throw yourself into Christ, with total abandonment enough to take the next few steps, and to trust God enough that you are safe in Him to do so.

The discussions of tongues has mostly gotten us nowhere, What I am willing to do, is for you to select a book, or some sermons, and me also. And for each of us to prayerfully, and diligently listen, read and offer us to God "Lord teach us the truth in this, and separate the truth from the untruth" with an attitude of "I surrender my opinions and thoughts Lord, knowing I am safe in your hands, Lord I want to know you more, to understand you more, to follow you more, Lord lead me, and give me discernment, and take away from my heart issues like pride that muddy the situation". Would you be willing to do this? You know throughout our discussions there have been truths I have discovered through you, despite my belief about much of your doctrines, I hope the same can be said by you about me.

I am unsure of whether to send this to you via private email, or to post to the board. But in light on the recent threads, and the direction they have gone.. It might be best for me to post this in the forum, However you can contact me back privately if you would rather – karl@godcentric.com
And contact me there also regarding my offer above.

I pray my friend, that both of us, you and I - as I know I need it also - learn to submit to God more and more, abide in him daily, growing to maturity in Christ.

Love,

Karl

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

If you are going to let your attitude and emotions cloud the issue and give you an excuse not to answer the issue then fine. That reveals more about yourself than the thousands of words you have offered.

---

This self righteous outburst leaves me wondering if I want to bother posting here anymore. Have you explained how Acts 8 fits in with your theology ? No. Have you come close ? No. Have you even proven that what you believe is consistent ? No, it changes from one post to the next. So I'm afraid your words carry no power. I've tried desperately to focus on one issue, from the Bible, and you have failed utterly to even try to answer a simple question.

Here is the question you cannot answer:

If you're right, and believing in Jesus, that is, trusting in Him and His message of salvation, means that you have the Holy Spirit, how are the events of Acts 8 even remotely possible ?

Seeing as you can't answer, it's best you don't respond, you'll only insult me some more. I don't mind, really. I just find it funny that you feel able to judge my sincerity in Christ and change your position to whatever suits you. But it does not leave you in a particularly stable position, as far as I can see.

quote:

---

However to discount the traditional gospel by your experience of it (or a watered down form of the ‘traditional’ gospel) isn't wise. We could also discount your RCI doctrine by the disillusioned many who feel let down by RCI doctrine, who feel abused, mistreated, and misled by Revival centers.

---

When I bring up the Bible, people won't answer my questions. As soon as I refer to my experience, I become someone led by experience and not the Bible. My 'experience' prior to being saved included at least 3 AOG's, 2 Christian City churches, 2 Lutheran churches, and a number of smaller denominations. Are you saying they were all wrong, but when people here say the same as they did, they are right ? Just wondering.

And yes, experience is less important than scripture, I know that. I also know that there are people who justify their leaving of RCI churches by finding other people who leave and convincing them that they were abused in RCI, a position very few remotely hold at the point they leave, but one which they later 'recall' after talking to people who would have them think that way. Such people usually have a book or tapes to sell, but not always. Either way, it's the Bible that matters, I brought up my experience in multiple churches of the 'gospel' being presented here simply as an adjunct, because I could not get a straight answer to my simple question.

Yes, I'm happy to take you up on your offer. You can email me via the email address stored in the CCN database.

[edit]
I have one qustion though:

quote:

---

I pray that you can throw yourself into Christ, with total abandonment enough to take the next few steps, and to trust God enough that you are safe in Him to do so.

---

I'm at a loss to understand why you want to reassure me of things I already know, presume I am somehow insecure, and encourage me to take the *next* step, back into a doctrine that I followed sincerely for two years, found to have no power in it, and which no-one here can answer me when I refute it from the Bible ? I'd accept SOME answer as to what happened in Acts 8, and accept that people at least hold an opinion, even if I think it's a wrong one. But the main reason this thread has gone awry is that I am going *insane* trying to get *anyone* who is posting on it to ANSWER THE QUESTION.

If you can prove that the 'optional tongues/saved by belief except in Acts 8' doctrine is Biblical, then my experiences count for nothing in the face of the Bible. But while I remain open to be corrected by scripture, my experiences here so far do not leave me holding my breath. The simple fact appears to be that when I am not swayed by arguments that rely on ignoring passages that don't suit, people assume I am unwilling to be corrected by the Bible. And because everyone here holds to the same belief, they can't see that my question is not being answered, only that people are reiterating what they already believe. Everything you've said about not being willing to be corrected, and being fearful, can equally be pointed at every person here. In every case, it is an assumption that is based simply on people not willing to see our point of view, it's not one anyone can be excused for jumping to.
[/edit]

[This message has been edited by christian (edited April 06, 2003).]

quote:

---

I'd accept SOME answer as to what happened in Acts 8, and accept that people at least hold an opinion, even if I think it's a wrong one. But the main reason this thread has gone awry is that I am going *insane* trying to get *anyone* who is posting on it to ANSWER THE QUESTION.

---

quote:

---

If you can prove that the 'optional tongues/saved by belief except in Acts 8' doctrine is Biblical, then my experiences count for nothing in the face of the Bible.

---

quote:

---

Everything you've said about not being willing to be corrected, and being fearful, can equally be pointed at every person here. In every case, it is an assumption that is based simply on people not willing to see our point of view, it's not one anyone can be excused for jumping to.

---

Karl..
anymore questions or requests?
prehaps a pixie caramel?

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

quote:

---

anymore questions or requests?
prehaps a pixie caramel?

---

Sounds nice. :0)

You're right, there's no point in discussing this anymore, no real discussion is taking place, or has taken place for some time.

b.t.w
do you have electricity and cars in tasmania?

just kidding..

When i was in perth, my cousins flatmate was from tasmania, and also at that time another friend of hers visited from tasmania - felt a little sad for them, for the amount of hassles they got from continental aussies from being from Tasmania. It seems continental aussies think tasmanians are a bunch of backward incestously inbreed hicks but i doubt its the truth.. North Islanders often have certian opinions of south islanders in N.Z such is the nature of mankind huh.

Karl

------------------
Karl /GODCENTRIC
Visionary Media
the creative submitted to the divine.
Husband of my amazing wife Aleshia
Klumsy@xtra.co.nz

I'm actually an ex-mainlander myself. Tassie rocks. It's just not as crowded or polluted as the mainland.