Why the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is not for Today

We still know in part, don't we?

You cant compare the OT believers with the believers after pentecost. The OT believers had not the Holy Spirit given as it is to us.

Faith is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. Abel, Abraham, Job all had the Holy Spirit seen in their faith.

Tongues and prophecy were in part. Now we have the full revelation through scripture. Do we understand all of it? More now than ever before.

If you read 1. Cor. then you will find that speaking in tongues was a spirituell gift as any other gift. And it was not combined with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The events in acts ( 2, 8, 10, 19, ) Where only to show the people that the gospel not only for the jews, but for all. The same reason we find in john 20 why Jesus did all the signs and miracles.

Tongues IS the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Nothing like what people claim today.

You should be able to explain it anyway. I am not the only one here reading these posts. There can be upwards of 2000 people at any one time reading. It's not about trying to convince me. Or me you. It's about laying out the truth. I have challenged your assertions on Rev11, and you have an opportunity to address this line by line. You are running from this. Unnecesaary if you have this knowledge all sorted out.

But I think you know why you are not addressing it. Because if you look closely at the passage you will stumble across scripture which cannot be explained by the heresy you are promoting. And you know this to be the case. And that why we have had this song and dance dodging for the last half a dozen posts. Be honest with yourself and others here. This is why ,^^^ what I have said above.

Let's do this. You explain your view in a post. And I'll explain mine as a follow up. And let the reader decide? Why argue proving only ignorance in the matter?

You are in the danger to mix it and comes to a false conclusion. The Holy Spirit permanent given to an believer we cant find in the OT. Also, it makes no sense then that Jesus said he has to go to the father,otherwise he cant send the Holy Spirit. What he finally did at pentecost. And not before!

They called it Circumcision of the Heart in the OT.

From where you have this idea?

Where and in what situation this is quotet?

@Dave-L you haven't answered post 169
https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...t-is-not-for-today.189832/page-9#post-4144844

When did Paul get it?

Come on. Surely every Eastern Orthodox priest you speak to is going to say that I Corinthians 14 is a part of the canon. Paul addressed speaking in tongues and interpretation and how these were to edify the church. What saints said it was _exclusively_ for evangelization? By just quoting the verses in his homily, John Chrysostom contradicted your statement.

There was also the one St. Gregory who thought Acts 2 was along the lines of a 'miracle in the ear' and the other who believed it was actually speaking in foreign languages.

This feels like a bit of a strawman to me. I see critics of speaking in tongues who assume that it is supposed to be 'tongues of angels.' Historically, the emphasis on speaking in tongues is on speaking languages, with more emphasis on human language than tongues of angels. I suppose people would allow for 'tongues of angels' since it is in scripture. It is possible to give ones body to be burned or to give all to the poor, so why wouldn't tongues of angels be possible? There were a number of accounts from the Azusa Street Revival of those present understanding speaking in tongues in their own languages, and even one from the Azusa meeting (and others elsewhere) of them also confirming the interpretation as genuine. Some Pentecostal missionaries have testified to speaking in tongues in the language there on the mission field or else hearing the missions-field language back one. There was a book of similar accounts published in the 1970's. The 'tongues of angels' idea gets discussed by certain theologians, I guess, and probably some groups of charismatics think that way.


I thumbed through 'The Spirit and the Church: Antiquity' which deals with a number of references to spiritual gifts in the writings of the so-called 'church father's' writings as a part of the discussion. He referred to Athanasias prophesying, along with quotes, which would have been just outside of the time period you reference. There are likely some references to tongues as well. What is the doctrinal basis for saying these gifts have ceased? Have you discussed with your priest the idea of whether the Eastern Orthodox church teaches that God will give no man this or certain other gifts? Isn't that up to the Holy Spirit?

I did not say I prophesied. But how big should the canon be? The Bible refers to numerous prophecies not recorded in scripture. What did the elders prophesy when Moses laid hands on them? What did Micaiah prophesy about Ahab that he did not like before that one prophecy recorded in scripture? What did the prophets who met Saul on their way back from Shiloh say? What did Saul prophesy? What about all the prophecies of the sons of the prophets? What did the prophets, besides Agabus, who went from Jerusalem to Antioch prophesy? What did Judas and Silas prophesy? What did the prophets in Corinth prophesy? There were other revelations not included in scripture, like what the 'man caught up into the third heaven' saw. Paul said it was unlawful to speak.

Do you consider all these prophecies to be the same as scripture? Should they be included in the Bible?

I would much rather accept what the Bible teaches about the role of spiritual gifts, than reject Biblical teaching on this because of some man-made philosophy about the role of scripture.

Yes, I remember. It was a miracle. Its what he does all day everyday.

What do you think the Hezekiah sign (15 years) represented as the unseen spiritual understanding?

I think it speaks to redemption the ultimate healing .Turning back the hands of time or degrees of shadows . Like that of Lazarus... rise. . . time has not ended. He will rise again on the last day. Again fifteen like five would seem to represent redemption.This is in respect to verse 5 (2 Kings 20) the promise. . "behold, I will heal thee: on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the Lord"

The gospel hidden in that parable .

The apostles who asked Jesus for the sign of His coming and of the end of the age were not given direct sign as a "wonder" ( source of faith). Not all signs are given as wonders. Two different words, The father of lies would try and make all one in the say .

Signs of the times was given by Christ but no day, hour, month or year . The Holy Spirit uses the phrase last day as a unknown . Not needed if a person walks by faith.

Christ gave it as sign that things will continue as they are until the last day. People being deceived, as the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven. Some led by the Spirit of truth . Like in the days of Noah. We walk by faith the unseen eternal not after signs that cause wonderment . Like Noah we watch for it knowing he will come like a thief in the night the last day. But the day and the hour he would never reveal, as. . . . if we did wrestles against flesh and blood. The temporal things seen

The law below is clear. Signs are for those who rebel and refuse to believe sola scriptura . .prophecy as it is written alone. No side shows...called; "fill me up with the Spirit"

Those who follow after the oral traditions of men. Again the law clearly informs us signs are not for those who believe prophecy called the tongue of God .But for those who refuse to believe. They fall backward with great pride to confirm their unbelief.

In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 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. 1 Corinthians 14: 21-22

The last sign as a wonder or source of faith "the unseen future" was the sign of Jonas it was fulfilled with Jesus. Jesus says as a warning it is a evil generation of unconverted mankind that does seek after signs as lying wonders .None was given. Not one.

Those who say men heal by laying on of hands. . is a sign of something? They call it the gift of healing or sign. The sign they seek after by laying on of hands. It is simply a request or desire like folding hands or praying out loud, or bowing ones head. Without the true fast the gospel, prayer would have no effect being by itself . It would be like when the disciples could not cast out the messengers of infirmary as lying spirits called demons. God who is not served nor does he heal by hands . He must cause the growth by creating life.

The gospel does the healing.

If God does heal it has nothing to do with the literal hands .God is not served by the corruptible things seen as if he was worshipped by them. rather than the Spirit of Christ which abides in mankind's corrupted bodies of death

Go raise some dead folks and prove you have the same gifts as the apostles and those they laid hands on.

Ananias ministered to Paul, but the baptism was in being an apostle.

“And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.” Deuteronomy 30:6 (KJV 1900)

These one liners simply won't do. There is not enough meat on them. Are you saying that Paul had the baptism in the Holy Spirit or not?
If he did, where was it TRANSFERRED to him?