Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #191  
Old 08-08-2019, 09:50 PM
JamesGlen JamesGlen is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 303
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Peter said God accepted Cornelius because he feared God and did what’s right. God then poured out His Spirit on him (and his house), and they spoke in tongues.

W that in mind...

I have many friends, one specifically is southern baptist, his whole family are all about serving God w all their heart.I have a few others the same.

My question is, if God accepted Cornelius, and the Spirit fell on him(as Peter explains the cross) w tongues present, why does God not accept these others like my friends family that loves Jesus w all their heart as well? And then they speak in tongues like Cornelius. There’s without question thousands of these people that love God w all their heart, similar to Cornelius. Why are they not accepted? Or are they?
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 08-09-2019, 08:45 AM
Apostolic1ness Apostolic1ness is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,263
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGlen View Post
Peter said God accepted Cornelius because he feared God and did what’s right. God then poured out His Spirit on him (and his house), and they spoke in tongues.

W that in mind...

I have many friends, one specifically is southern baptist, his whole family are all about serving God w all their heart.I have a few others the same.

My question is, if God accepted Cornelius, and the Spirit fell on him(as Peter explains the cross) w tongues present, why does God not accept these others like my friends family that loves Jesus w all their heart as well? And then they speak in tongues like Cornelius. There’s without question thousands of these people that love God w all their heart, similar to Cornelius. Why are they not accepted? Or are they?
They may be really great sincere people. No doubt, but what is their response to the gospel? The gospel being preached to Cornelius resulted in him being filled with the Spirit the first time he heard it.
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:16 AM
JamesGlen JamesGlen is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 303
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness View Post
They may be really great sincere people. No doubt, but what is their response to the gospel? The gospel being preached to Cornelius resulted in him being filled with the Spirit the first time he heard it.

How many ways can a sincere believer respond to the gospel as best they know how, (like Cornelius, accepted & spirit filled BEFORE water baptism)?

You receive it, believe it, get baptized, commit your trust and your life to him, everything in your life revolves around him. Tons of folks like that, including my friends. So what is the difference between them and Cornelius, at the point of God accepting them for THAT, and them then speaking in tongues(as an evidence)?

IOW, Why would God accept Cornelius and not them?
Again, God accepted him(obviously by knowing his heart) while Peter was explaining “the cross was for him too”. So why not others that have a heart all in for Jesus their Lord?

Last edited by JamesGlen; 08-09-2019 at 09:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 08-09-2019, 07:00 PM
Esaias's Avatar
Esaias Esaias is offline
Master ThreadKiller


 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 20,773
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGlen View Post
How many ways can a sincere believer respond to the gospel as best they know how, (like Cornelius, accepted & spirit filled BEFORE water baptism)?

You receive it, believe it, get baptized, commit your trust and your life to him, everything in your life revolves around him. Tons of folks like that, including my friends. So what is the difference between them and Cornelius, at the point of God accepting them for THAT, and them then speaking in tongues(as an evidence)?

IOW, Why would God accept Cornelius and not them?
Again, God accepted him(obviously by knowing his heart) while Peter was explaining “the cross was for him too”. So why not others that have a heart all in for Jesus their Lord?
God did not accept Cornelius in the sense of Cornelius was considered saved. Rather, God accepted Cornelius in the sense of "he is not excluded from the offer of salvation."

I also suspect that the influence or effect of the Spirit depends to an extent on the preacher's anointing. In other words, how much Holy Ghost did the preacher bring with him to the meeting has a lot to do with what effect(s) the preaching has on the hearers.
__________________
Visit the Apostolic House Church YouTube Channel!

Instead of google, use www.yandex.com


Biblical Worship - free pdf http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/21/biblicalworship4/

Conditional immortality proven - http://www.robertwr.com/

Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 08-09-2019, 08:36 PM
JamesGlen JamesGlen is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 303
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
God did not accept Cornelius in the sense of Cornelius was considered saved. Rather, God accepted Cornelius in the sense of "he is not excluded from the offer of salvation."

I also suspect that the influence or effect of the Spirit depends to an extent on the preacher's anointing. In other words, how much Holy Ghost did the preacher bring with him to the meeting has a lot to do with what effect(s) the preaching has on the hearers.
I would like more of you thoughts on this:
In light of Cornelius’ story...

People hungry for God, love and live for our Saviour, he is not just their Saviour but also their Lord. JUST LIKE CORNELIUS feared God and did what’s right. Yet based on the position of tongues always being THE evidence of Spirit infilling, people don’t receive the Spirit.
Why is that?
Without question there is and has been thousands.
Why would God Spirit fill Cornelius even preceding baptism, but yet not fill them neither before or after?
Because of their preacher?

Remember, Peter was simply telling Cornelius about “the cross being for everyone that feared God and did what’s right, not just Jews, and then all of a sudden pow, the Holy Ghost was poured out on him.

This kind of troubles me, as is obvious, but I believe it is a legitimate concern, so looking for answers.

Thank you for any and all thoughts as to why him, and not them.

Last edited by JamesGlen; 08-09-2019 at 09:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:10 PM
votivesoul's Avatar
votivesoul votivesoul is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 4,479
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGlen View Post
So out of Joels entire spill on “this is that”, you don’t believe any of that happened because the scripture didn’t mention it? Joel says this is that, young men seeing visions, old men dreaming dreaming, sons and daughters prophesying HAD to be in an unknown language? Am I following you? Phillip was there, and his 4 daughters were prophetesses, so obviously they prophesied, yet their prophesying, whether in an unknown tongue or not, wouldve been part of THE evidence of Spirit baptism, correct? If not, why not? Surely you aren’t thinking Peter quotes Joel, but what ALL Joel said would happen did NOT happen as part of THE evidence of God pouring out of His Spirit?


Are you assuming “this is that” there were no visions,or dreams, or prophesying in a known language, as outpouring evidence because it was not mentioned, even though Joel said “these things” are that?


Just trying to follow your thinking.
Joel was not lying, nor was he mistaken.

When Simon Peter said "This is that", take a moment and think about the demonstrative pronoun "this". What is this "this" to which Simon referred?

The "this" to which Simon referred was the fact the crowd heard these Galilean disciples of Jesus speaking in their native tongues declaring the wonderful works of God.

This "this" is all that Simon referred to. And for an explanation, he claimed this "this" is actually "that", another demonstrative pronoun. What is the "that" to which Simon referred? It is nothing else but Joel 2:28.

Therefore, the Galilean disciples of Jesus speaking with other tongues declaring the wonderful works of God = Joel 2:28. And vice versa. And while Joel mentioned visions and dreams, neither of those are said to have occurred on Pentecost. Only prophesying and speaking in tongues.

Therefore, on Pentecost, the only evidence that anyone had received the Holy Spirit is prophesying as one speaks in tongues. On that day, speaking with other tongues was THE only sign or evidence. None else existed. There were no visions or dreams. The wind and cloven tongues like as of fire were external manifestations of the Holy Spirit being poured out; they did not occur within the Galilean disciples of Jesus.

This being the case, subsequent to that Pentecost, if people received and still receive the Holy Spirit with any number of accompanying signs, there is no real end to the signs that might be summoned as proof that one has received the Holy Spirit. Additionally, it also means there is no uniform experience.

Without something resembling a uniform experience, all experiences are fair game. Just have a sense or feeling? A burning in the bosom? Experience a sublimity of mind or spirit? A sudden sense of peace or security? No feeling at all, you just know?

What are the Biblical limitations? If we cannot testify to a uniform experience, then everyone can claim to have received the Holy Spirit, and we have no means whereby we can ever reject anyone's claim.

And that is exactly what we have today, isn't it? All making claims, trying their best to point at the Bible to prove they have the goods, when the only uniform, uniformly consistent sign or evidence in the Scriptures is speaking with other tongues.

Here's a thought experiment: Read all accounts of people speaking with other tongues from the Bible, then strike them from the record. Pretend they aren't there. What then is left to convince us any of these people received the Holy Spirit? The Bible goes completely silent if no mention of speaking with other tongues is present.

Here's another thought experiment:

Imagine if God took away from you the ability to speak with other tongues, permanently, for the rest of your life. How long, if you are honest, do you suppose it will be before you begin to think God took away His Holy Spirit from you?
__________________
For anyone devoted to His fear:

http://votivesoul.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:22 PM
Esaias's Avatar
Esaias Esaias is offline
Master ThreadKiller


 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 20,773
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGlen View Post
I would like more of you thoughts on this:
In light of Cornelius’ story...

People hungry for God, love and live for our Saviour, he is not just their Saviour but also their Lord. JUST LIKE CORNELIUS feared God and did what’s right. Yet based on the position of tongues always being THE evidence of Spirit infilling, people don’t receive the Spirit.
Why is that?
Without question there is and has been thousands.
Why would God Spirit fill Cornelius even preceding baptism, but yet not fill them neither before or after?
Because of their preacher?

Remember, Peter was simply telling Cornelius about “the cross being for everyone that feared God and did what’s right, not just Jews, and then all of a sudden pow, the Holy Ghost was poured out on him.

This kind of troubles me, as is obvious, but I believe it is a legitimate concern, so looking for answers.

Thank you for any and all thoughts as to why him, and not them.
Not saying it's all on the preacher, but I think that plays an important part.

Cornelius was an exceptional case, happening the way it did because of the reticence on the part of the church to preach to and accept gentiles. It is not really normative, in my opinion. So I don't expect the pattern to be repeated. Although, it has happened. I just don't see it as normative.
__________________
Visit the Apostolic House Church YouTube Channel!

Instead of google, use www.yandex.com


Biblical Worship - free pdf http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/21/biblicalworship4/

Conditional immortality proven - http://www.robertwr.com/

Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:23 PM
votivesoul's Avatar
votivesoul votivesoul is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 4,479
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGlen View Post
Votive, in light of John 7:39 & “pre acts 2 outpouring”, I am curious as to your thoughts of WHY didn’t Zacharias speak in an unknown tongue when he was filled with the Holyghost, or even Elizabeth for that matter?


I’ve heard the notion of the untamed unruly member the tongue as being the example of reasoning for acts 2 and following....whether accurate or not, but would like to know your thoughts as to why no tongues w John’s dad and mom.
The few occasions prior to Pentecost in Acts 2 where-in we read someone was filled with the Spirit, the context indicates a few things that are of note:

1.) These in-fillings appear to be a temporary manifestation of God's Spirit to bring about a specific situation or experience. Once the situation played out or the experience was had, the in-filling ended.

Two exceptions to this are John and Jesus. John was filled with the Spirit since the womb. How was he going to speaking in utero? Same with Jesus. So the point is moot for these two. For everyone else, however, point 1 stands.

2.) These in-fillings were not salvific or redemptive in nature, unlike Pentecost. It was not as though Zechariah was unredeemed and lost, then suddenly born again after John was born.

3.) These in-fillings did not also fill someone with the spirit of the Lord Jesus. With Zechariah, Elizabeth, John or etc, we cannot say that they were filled with Jesus' Spirit, at least not in the sense we can say regarding Pentecost.

4.) These in-fillings did not represent the typological prophecies of the OT. Pentecost reflects Sinai and the dedication of the Temple in Solomon's day.

These selective in-fillings are one and done deals for specific purposes. The outpouring on Pentecost forward is the very coming of the Kingdom of God.

Two majorly different things.
__________________
For anyone devoted to His fear:

http://votivesoul.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:28 PM
votivesoul's Avatar
votivesoul votivesoul is offline
Administrator


 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: WI
Posts: 4,479
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesGlen View Post
Just curious, Votive (or EB) what was the purpose in EB calling Ike, Chris(then later said Ike was not Chris)?



I didn’t get that...


Did he not ever really think he was Chris?

Did he at first think he was Chris, then suddenly changed his mind?

What was the deal there?
EB will have to answer that of his own accord. I imagine however, that since Chris was known to use several different screen-names, and he made it clear he was willing to return and deceive users into thinking he was someone else, and he even advocated such behavior openly, if a new member appears and begins to post ideas and concepts that parallel things Chris often said and believed, it would not be without reason to wonder whether or not Christ had returned, albeit under a different guise.
__________________
For anyone devoted to His fear:

http://votivesoul.wordpress.com/
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:30 PM
Esaias's Avatar
Esaias Esaias is offline
Master ThreadKiller


 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Zion aka TEXAS
Posts: 20,773
Re: Tongues- A sign or THE sign Of Spirit Infillin

Quote:
Originally Posted by votivesoul View Post
The few occasions prior to Pentecost in Acts 2 where-in we read someone was filled with the Spirit, the context indicates a few things that are of note:

1.) These in-fillings appear to be a temporary manifestation of God's Spirit to bring about a specific situation or experience. Once the situation played out or the experience was had, the in-filling ended.

Two exceptions to this are John and Jesus. John was filled with the Spirit since the womb. How was he going to speaking in utero? Same with Jesus. So the point is moot for these two. For everyone else, however, point 1 stands.

2.) These in-fillings were not salvific or redemptive in nature, unlike Pentecost. It was not as though Zechariah was unredeemed and lost, then suddenly born again after John was born.

3.) These in-fillings did not also fill someone with the spirit of the Lord Jesus. With Zechariah, Elizabeth, John or etc, we cannot say that they were filled with Jesus' Spirit, at least not in the sense we can say regarding Pentecost.

4.) These in-fillings did not represent the typological prophecies of the OT. Pentecost reflects Sinai and the dedication of the Temple in Solomon's day.

These selective in-fillings are one and done deals for specific purposes. The outpouring on Pentecost forward is the very coming of the Kingdom of God.

Two majorly different things.
I'm not completely sold on the idea that pre-Pentecost Spirit operations were substantially different than post-Pentecost, although it is widely held among Pentecostals (and even some non Pentecostals). I tend to see pre Pentecost outpourings as isolated instances of a universally available post Pentecost outpouring. In other words, the difference is one of scope more than effect or result or purpose.
__________________
Visit the Apostolic House Church YouTube Channel!

Instead of google, use www.yandex.com


Biblical Worship - free pdf http://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/02/21/biblicalworship4/

Conditional immortality proven - http://www.robertwr.com/

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is It A Good Sign, Bad Sign, Not A Sign? Jermyn Davidson Fellowship Hall 16 06-19-2017 03:27 PM
Evidence of Spirit Infilling? Hoovie Fellowship Hall 52 06-04-2009 06:43 AM
Infilling of Holy Spirit in OT? StillStanding Fellowship Hall 40 04-28-2009 01:36 PM
From the Infilling to the Power of the Spirit Sam Fellowship Hall 6 03-24-2009 03:29 PM
What Did You Sign Up For? Rico Fellowship Hall 15 06-26-2007 06:08 AM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by Salome
- by Amanah

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.