Receiving The Holy Spirit & Speaking In Tongues

[KeptByTheWord]

Note this scripture:

Acts 2: 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

It says they were filled with the HG.

So let me ask you this, were the ones in the upper room not saved before the HG filled them?

Was there no spirit in their hearts while they tarried for 120 days, praying? Why would they even be there if the spirit of the Lord was not there convicting them, and causing them to seek Him? Why would you spend 4 months in one room praying if there was no spirit at work?

Here's another illustration. I can have a cup that is halfway full, I can still drink from it and enjoy it, but it's not enough, and its not satisfying because I don't have all the fullness available yet to me, because the cup is half empty. When the cup is filled, I can drink from the fullness of the cup, and enjoy all of it, more of it, and be satisfied. The ingredients in the cup didn't change, but the amount did, and the fullness satisfied me, where as the half empty glass was not enough to satisfy me.

In the same way, the spirit of the Lord in a measure comes to us, drawing us to Him, and we cry out to Him in repentance and complete our obedience in baptism and then the Lord is there to fill our cup to overflowing with the fullness of the spirit available to us, with giftings, signs and wonders, as He chooses to give.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

? About what?

About my ability to communicate. I'm afraid I have utterly failed to make myself clear. Undoubtedly my lack of communication skills at work.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Note this scripture:

Acts 2: 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

It says they were filled with the HG.

So let me ask you this, were the ones in the upper room not saved before the HG filled them?

Was there no spirit in their hearts while they tarried for 120 days, praying? Why would they even be there if the spirit of the Lord was not there convicting them, and causing them to seek Him? Why would you spend 4 months in one room praying if there was no spirit at work?

Here's another illustration. I can have a cup that is halfway full, I can still drink from it and enjoy it, but it's not enough, and its not satisfying because I don't have all the fullness available yet to me, because the cup is half empty. When the cup is filled, I can drink from the fullness of the cup, and enjoy all of it, more of it, and be satisfied. The ingredients in the cup didn't change, but the amount did, and the fullness satisfied me, where as the half empty glass was not enough to satisfy me.

In the same way, the spirit of the Lord in a measure comes to us, drawing us to Him, and we cry out to Him in repentance and complete our obedience in baptism and then the Lord is there to fill our cup to overflowing with the fullness of the spirit available to us, with gifting, signs and wonders, as He chooses to give.

KBTW, The Holy Ghost is a promise to those who will obey the gospel. Tongues is only the sign of its occurrence. We don't seek tongues, but instead we recognize Spirit baptism by tongues. It is the only way that the scripture demonstrates. Truly it does take the Spirit to draw a person to repentance and baptism, but that doesn't mean that a person has been baptized or filled with the Spirit at that point.

[n david]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

To say the gift of tongues is necessary to know if one is saved or not is not taught anywhere in the NT.

I stand on what the scriptures say, and do not add or take away from the simple written truths.

You're confused. The gift of tongues is not the same as the initial evidence of the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor 12 doesn't apply to the initial new birth experience.

Originally Posted by Jito463

It's not a contradiction, because you're equivocating the gift of tongues with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. They are not the same thing. One might never have the gift of tongues, but still be saved.

Bingo. 1 Cor 12 is not dealing with salvation, it's dealing with what is given after a person has been filled with the spirit. The argument KBTW is using I hear from charismatics all the time. They, too, are confused between the initial evidence and the gifts given to people after being filled with the spirit.

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

The spirit of the Lord is present in a measure, or in part at repentance/baptism, but the fullness or complete infilling of the spirit takes place when the Lord decides the time is right, and the giftings of the spirit are varied and diverse, as Paul said in 1 Cor. 12.

Salvation in installments? "When the Lord decides the time is right?" No offense, but that's as absurd as people praying "the will of God" for sick people. Your post reads to me as though God is up in Heaven teasing people with the free gift promised in Acts 2.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

This whole tongues issue, is just a back and forth rehash of the same arguments. But tongues people keep saying tongues is the initial evidence, where does it say that explicitly. It does not. It has been said that they say that because tongues is the only evidence given when someone received the spirit, but that is not true. Not everyone spoke in tongues.

Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

How does one magnify God and speak with tongues at the same time?

Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

How does one speak in tongues and prophesy at the same time?

Where in the scriptures posted does it say these were done at the same time? "speak with tongues , and magnify God" ; "they spake with tongues , and prophesied." How is this not easily understood?

I'm a big college football fan, so I'll write the same sentence structure using a football example: "Tommy handed the ball to the fullback, and blocked the defensive end." Same type of structure, but we know there's no way Tommy hands the ball off and gives a block at the same time, right? It was during the same play, but not the same, exact moment.

So why is it difficult for people to speak with tongues AND magnify God or prophesy? It doesn't mean it was done at the same moment.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by n david

Where in the scriptures posted does it say these were done at the same time? "speak with tongues , and magnify God" ; "they spake with tongues , and prophesied." How is this not easily understood?

I'm a big college football fan, so I'll write the same sentence structure using a football example: "Tommy handed the ball to the fullback, and blocked the defensive end." Same type of structure, but we know there's no way Tommy hands the ball off and gives a block at the same time, right?

So why is it difficult for people to speak with tongues AND magnify God or prophesy? It doesn't mean it was done at the same time.

OR even, tongues was a form of prophecy.

1 Cor. 14:21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people;

When God speaks through men could that not be prophecy as well?

When we speak in tongues we pray to God without understanding. Our spirit is edified but our understanding is not. Could not the mangnifying of God be the tongues that is given.

1 Cor. 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed:

If we are speaking by the Spirit we certainly are not going to curse God. It would be logical to think that we are magnifying God with tongues.

The Bible does not say these things, but it does make sense. It certainly does not give any other sign as an example of the Holy Ghost baptism.

[KeptByTheWord]

GS... I had to copy and paste again. Do you know how to use the quotes properly in a discussion? If not, just ask, and I'll try my best to explain to you. It is much easier to respond to you if you quote correctly. I've had to cut and paste your responses again.

Originally Posted by good samaritan

This thread is about speaking in tongues. I am not even speaking concerning salvation. My whole case is that the only biblical evidence that anyone has for the baptism of the Holy Ghost is tongues. This argument about salvation is not even the subject.

Speaking in tongues and salvation is the very reason this thread is continuing on in this way, because that is really the main issue and reason tongues are such a hot subject. Are they, or are they not necessary for salvation? Can you answer that question?

Your case that "the only biblical evidence that anyone has for the baptism of the Holy Ghost is tongues" does not hold up. See these scriptures:

Acts 13:52 And the disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost.

Acts 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.

Luke 1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.

Luke 1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:


Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

Acts 12:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

Please show where in any of these above passages that tongues were mentioned when people were filled with the Holy Ghost?

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Again this is evading the subject at hand. When we are baptized with the Holy Ghost do we speak in tongues? We can't come unless the Spirit of God draws us, but that is not the same experience as the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

IOW, we receive a little of the Holy Ghost up front and then for those who are smart and want more they can receive it with diverse gifting. It seems you are implying anything more than just initial repentance and Jesus name baptism is optional (satisfactory amounts of the Holy Ghost is present at these) KBTW, The Holy Ghost is a promise to those who will obey the gospel. Tongues is only the sign of its occurrence. We don't seek tongues, but instead we recognize Spirit baptism by tongues. It is the only way that the scripture demonstrates. Truly it does take the Spirit to draw a person to repentance and baptism, but that doesn't mean that a person has been baptized or filled with the Spirit at that point.

But you are essentially agreeing with my position, don't you see that? You said "it does take the spirit to draw a person to repentance/baptism but that doesn't mean that a person has been baptized or filled with the spirit" And I agree with that. A measure of the spirit is present, of which you agree, and then the fullness is poured out at such a time as the Lord designs, and is filled.

Where we differ is that you believe tongues MUST be present in order to know that the spirit is received, but I've just listed events above where tongues was not specifically mentioned at all. And then of course, there are events where tongues are mentioned. So we cannot make assumptions based on what we think should have happened when it is not written there.

The best we can do is stand on the clearest scripture we have about how to be saved, out of the mouth of Jesus himself, that repentance/baptism are two main components of the salvational experience and that signs follow.

Mark 16:16-17 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;

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by n david

You're confused. The gift of tongues is not the same as the initial evidence of the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor 12 doesn't apply to the initial new birth experience.

Where in 1 Cor. 12 does it say that that the signs/gifts come at a certain time period? How much longer after the HG filing must you wait to have the giftings of the spirit?

Originally Posted by n david

Bingo. 1 Cor 12 is not dealing with salvation, it's dealing with what is given after a person has been filled with the spirit. The argument KBTW is using I hear from charismatics all the time. They, too, are confused between the initial evidence and the gifts given to people after being filled with the spirit.

Not confused. Just following the clearest scripture we have from Jesus himself.

Mark 16:16 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;


Signs follow salvation. Jesus said so. Are you arguing against the words of Jesus?

Originally Posted by n david

Salvation in installments? "When the Lord decides the time is right?" No offense, but that's as absurd as people praying "the will of God" for sick people. Your post reads to me as though God is up in Heaven teasing people with the free gift promised in Acts 2.

The Lord is not teasing. I've never implied that. He determines when the heart is right and ready to receive. Quite simple really.

So then answer me this... when does the spirit come into a heart? At repentance? At baptism? Or only at tongues? Please support with scripture.

[Amanah]

I thought this was interesting:

http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/topics/gen..._baptismhs.cfm

Speaking in tongues is the only phenomenon mentioned every time Scripture supplies details concerning the Baptism experience. Of the five instances in Acts which recount the experience of believers being baptized in the Spirit, three supply details. Speaking in tongues is the only one that occurs each time (Acts 2, 10, 19). In the Acts 10 account, tongues is specifically mentioned as proof that "the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues" (Acts 10:45, 46). The relationship between the phenomenon and the experience cannot be ignored.

[n david]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Where in 1 Cor. 12 does it say that that the signs/gifts come at a certain time period? How much longer after the HG filing must you wait to have the giftings of the spirit?

I never said anything about a certain time. All I posted is that the initial experience of tongues is not the same as the gift of tongues, and that Paul is not speaking about the initial evidence in 1 Cor 12. You're confusing the two.

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Not confused. Just following the clearest scripture we have from Jesus himself.

Mark 16:16 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;

Signs follow salvation. Jesus said so. Are you arguing against the words of Jesus?

This verse is used by those who try to claim people are saved by praying the sinner's prayer and "accepting Jesus." I'm not arguing Jesus' words, I understand the context.

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

The Lord is not teasing. I've never implied that. He determines when the heart is right and ready to receive. Quite simple really.

But you are by claiming God gives a "measure" or "part" at the beginning and more later on, whenever He decides. Perhaps it was different with you, but when I repented and was baptized, I received the full spirit of God as I spoke with tongues as He gave the utterance. He didn't just fill a small part of me, He filled me completely.

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

So then answer me this... when does the spirit come into a heart? At repentance? At baptism? Or only at tongues? Please support with scripture.

You've got it backwards. The spirit doesn't come at tongues, tongues is the initial evidence of the spirit infilling.