Have You Received the Holy Ghost Since You Believed?
- Thread starter Wansvic
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I have already explained the reason in acts 2 why the nation Israel heard all the believers speaking in tongues.
Paul wrote 1 cor to the body of Christ, during the acts transitional period where the nation of Israel has already lost their status as God favored nation. The gift of tongues was being phase out.
That is how I reconcile
Paul wrote 1 cor to the body of Christ, during the acts transitional period where the nation of Israel has already lost their status as God favored nation. The gift of tongues was being phase out.
That is how I reconcile
Fortunately, I've never felt inclined to answer for the entirety of humanity on an individual basis. But no matter what is available and they've not received yet, they including yourself still have the right to Philippians 2:12
Philippians 2:12 KJV
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Philippians 2:12 KJV
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
You should have to answer, because you claim, if I dont missunderstood you, that all who receive the Holy Spirit, also receive the gift of speaking in tongues. So the conclusion is that either your claim is wrong, ore all believers who are not getting the gift of speaking in tongues while receiving the Holy Spirit are wrong.
Guojing,
I've been praying about this and other things this morning and I think I will discontinue trying to convince you to see things the way I see them in Acts.
That's not to suggest a lack of stability in my own doctrine, nor is it to suggest that you will not someday agree. (I think it unwise to withdraw hope from any breathing individual). And I'm not saying you can't teach a doctrine that disagrees with my own.
But I do recognize an inability to see eye to eye on this matter at this time, and see value in breaking off the discourse.
I'll share this with you even though I'd not particularly gotten it for you, and even though some would be offended simply to hear it. But like I said, I've decided to retain hope in your case. You're welcome to take it to prayer.
A few days ago God showed me that some people read passages referencing the Holy Ghost similar to the way a stubborn blind person (as portrayed by some bad old movies) might enter a room they aren't familiar with when they don't want to admit their frailty. Leaving the doorway they enter the room with hands outstretched and groping for a familiar item such as a chair until they find it. When they do they congratulate themselves on their ability to "See", even though (of course) they didn't see anything between Point A and Point B.
To me, "How God used the Holy Ghost to speak to unbelieving Israel" is Point B. All the justification in the world for Point B does nothing to explain Point A... from which the journey began.
I wish you well in your journey.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I've been praying about this and other things this morning and I think I will discontinue trying to convince you to see things the way I see them in Acts.
That's not to suggest a lack of stability in my own doctrine, nor is it to suggest that you will not someday agree. (I think it unwise to withdraw hope from any breathing individual). And I'm not saying you can't teach a doctrine that disagrees with my own.
But I do recognize an inability to see eye to eye on this matter at this time, and see value in breaking off the discourse.
I'll share this with you even though I'd not particularly gotten it for you, and even though some would be offended simply to hear it. But like I said, I've decided to retain hope in your case. You're welcome to take it to prayer.
A few days ago God showed me that some people read passages referencing the Holy Ghost similar to the way a stubborn blind person (as portrayed by some bad old movies) might enter a room they aren't familiar with when they don't want to admit their frailty. Leaving the doorway they enter the room with hands outstretched and groping for a familiar item such as a chair until they find it. When they do they congratulate themselves on their ability to "See", even though (of course) they didn't see anything between Point A and Point B.
To me, "How God used the Holy Ghost to speak to unbelieving Israel" is Point B. All the justification in the world for Point B does nothing to explain Point A... from which the journey began.
I wish you well in your journey.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
When I engage in discussion, I don't aim to convince anyone to change their minds because that is beyond my control, its more to understand how others form the doctrine they have, that is within my control.
So from this discussion from you, this is what I understood about your doctrine as:
So from this discussion from you, this is what I understood about your doctrine as:
- You believe there is a switch in tongues from heavenly languages to actual foreign languages, from Acts 2:4 to Acts 2:6, because you believe the time it takes for the other Jews to gather in vs 5, facilitated this switch.
- You believe that, even though Paul stated in 1 Cor 12:29-30 that not all will speak in tongues, you believed the Acts 2 situation, where all believers filled with the Holy Spirit were given the gift of tongues, takes precedence over that teaching by Paul.
-
1
- Show all
Nope.
There are two distinct types of tongues. Different in purpose. Different in whom they are speaking to.
It's not a matter of time that causes a switch.
There is no degradation over time.
When there is a change in situation there is a change in need/purpose. With the change in need/purpose comes the appropriate change in manifestation to meet that new need/purpose.
From the moment of outpouring until the day the gifts are no longer needed in the church, these things remain the same. (For each to be used in the appropriate situations).
You don't recognize the first manifestation or its purpose. So you keep reading until you stumble into something you do recognize (various earthly languages). Then you make the wrong assumption that what you can comprehend of the second situation somehow must be what is going on in the first situation. (It's not)
The problem is that you can't see. And that isn't fixed by better explanations.
There was a time when I met someone who tried to explain a thing to me that I thought I already understood. I would explain what I saw and he'd say "Nope, you're not seeing it yet" and would repeat what he'd said before. This went on for quite some time. If it wasnt for the fact that he was doing it in patient lovingkindness, I would have written him off. Finally I said "Either you're not listening that I already understand and have done this thing, or you're trying to share a deeper meaning that I just am not seeing." He said "Let's pray." So we did asking God to open my eyes. As soon as we got done praying and he went through it one more time I said "I see it!" And explained back to him what he had been trying to teach me the whole time. He said "Wow, that was fast!" To which I replied "What did you expect? I was praying SINCERELY".
Point being that it doesn't matter how SINCERELY you want to know something. If for some reason there is a blindness covering the eyes of understanding, there is no amount of fleshly explanation that will remove the barrier. ONLY going sincerely and humbly to God will bring it to pass because God has to do the work.
Also, in agreement with Philippians 2:12, someone unwilling to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling before God alone will likely find it an impassable way to him who DWELLS in the midst of clouds and thick darkness. That is part of the reason he dwells there.
I wish you well on your journey. Don't take that lightly.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
There are two distinct types of tongues. Different in purpose. Different in whom they are speaking to.
It's not a matter of time that causes a switch.
There is no degradation over time.
When there is a change in situation there is a change in need/purpose. With the change in need/purpose comes the appropriate change in manifestation to meet that new need/purpose.
From the moment of outpouring until the day the gifts are no longer needed in the church, these things remain the same. (For each to be used in the appropriate situations).
You don't recognize the first manifestation or its purpose. So you keep reading until you stumble into something you do recognize (various earthly languages). Then you make the wrong assumption that what you can comprehend of the second situation somehow must be what is going on in the first situation. (It's not)
The problem is that you can't see. And that isn't fixed by better explanations.
There was a time when I met someone who tried to explain a thing to me that I thought I already understood. I would explain what I saw and he'd say "Nope, you're not seeing it yet" and would repeat what he'd said before. This went on for quite some time. If it wasnt for the fact that he was doing it in patient lovingkindness, I would have written him off. Finally I said "Either you're not listening that I already understand and have done this thing, or you're trying to share a deeper meaning that I just am not seeing." He said "Let's pray." So we did asking God to open my eyes. As soon as we got done praying and he went through it one more time I said "I see it!" And explained back to him what he had been trying to teach me the whole time. He said "Wow, that was fast!" To which I replied "What did you expect? I was praying SINCERELY".
Point being that it doesn't matter how SINCERELY you want to know something. If for some reason there is a blindness covering the eyes of understanding, there is no amount of fleshly explanation that will remove the barrier. ONLY going sincerely and humbly to God will bring it to pass because God has to do the work.
Also, in agreement with Philippians 2:12, someone unwilling to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling before God alone will likely find it an impassable way to him who DWELLS in the midst of clouds and thick darkness. That is part of the reason he dwells there.
I wish you well on your journey. Don't take that lightly.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
-
1
- Show all
Hadn't heard that particular saying.
I'm more a believer of the principle "If you don't understand something in the scriptures, you can't trust your own incomplete understanding to fill in the gaps...and you shouldn't put your trust in man either...You'd better PRAY until God opens the understanding TO YOU. And don't be pretending he's done it before he does."
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I'm more a believer of the principle "If you don't understand something in the scriptures, you can't trust your own incomplete understanding to fill in the gaps...and you shouldn't put your trust in man either...You'd better PRAY until God opens the understanding TO YOU. And don't be pretending he's done it before he does."
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
From my perspective, the first few mention of tongues in Isaiah 28:11, Acts 2:6, Acts 10, are clear that they refer to actual foreign languages.
I do understand that when Paul gave instructions for tongue speaking in 1 Cor 14, it may be unclear in the sense that Paul could be referring to a heavenly language, especially in verses like
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
These could be taken to imply Paul was actually referring to tongues as a heavenly language.
So the principle is "Use clear scripture of tongues to understand those unclear passages regarding tongues".
The Law of first mention tells us that the first time tongues were mention, whether in the OT, or in Acts 2 and Acts 10, were actual foreign languages.
So if that is the clear scripture on tongues, when we come to the unclear teachings, say in 1 Cor 14, unless there is clear scripture that tells us that Paul is referring to heavenly languages, we use that principle to guide us in our understanding there.
For your case, I can see that because you already began with the axiom that there are 2 types of tongues, hence, that is the principle you use to come up with your doctrine such as "Acts 2:4 tongues is different from Acts 2:6 tongues".
I do understand that when Paul gave instructions for tongue speaking in 1 Cor 14, it may be unclear in the sense that Paul could be referring to a heavenly language, especially in verses like
2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
These could be taken to imply Paul was actually referring to tongues as a heavenly language.
So the principle is "Use clear scripture of tongues to understand those unclear passages regarding tongues".
The Law of first mention tells us that the first time tongues were mention, whether in the OT, or in Acts 2 and Acts 10, were actual foreign languages.
So if that is the clear scripture on tongues, when we come to the unclear teachings, say in 1 Cor 14, unless there is clear scripture that tells us that Paul is referring to heavenly languages, we use that principle to guide us in our understanding there.
For your case, I can see that because you already began with the axiom that there are 2 types of tongues, hence, that is the principle you use to come up with your doctrine such as "Acts 2:4 tongues is different from Acts 2:6 tongues".
So to correct my understanding 1, I should have phrased it as
- You believe there is a switch in tongues from heavenly languages to actual foreign languages, from Acts 2:4 to Acts 2:6, because you believe the switch in audience from believers in vs 4 to unbelievers in vs6, caused that switch.
If you believe that, then what do you think Paul meant in 1 Cor 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
The context of that verse, as I already stated, was based on the time Israel spent in exile in Assyria during the OT, described in Isaiah 28:11.
If you believe that God was the audience and all of them are believers, why would tongues be needed there?
The context of that verse, as I already stated, was based on the time Israel spent in exile in Assyria during the OT, described in Isaiah 28:11.
If you believe that God was the audience and all of them are believers, why would tongues be needed there?