There is more than meets the eye on this subject. Before rendering any view on this subject, I am going to leave some things for people to look at first.


1.) When was I Corinthians written?
2.) When was Acts wirtten?
3.) Of the 28 chapters of Acts, how many instances do we see of speaking in tongues?
4.) View tongues as actual known languages, but unknown to the hearers.
5.) Why does Paul quote Isaiah in I Corinthians 14. THIS IS SERIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!
6.) What is the purpose of foreign tongues?
7.) Is their a history of God's people and foreign languages.
8.) Look at the New Testament as a snapshot to present day. What is the difference between what we see as tongues today, as opposed to what they were in the early church?
9.) Why did the tongues era disappear for almost 1600 years? We do not see the Early Church Father's stressing this subject in their writings. When it re-emerged, DID IT IN THE SAME WAY IT BEGAN IN ACTS 2:4? Hint: Read the historical accounts of the Azusa Street Movement and the one involving Charles Parham.
Email: glos_havebeenexposed@yahoo.com

Holy Spirit Baptism #1

Min H:
AE- These are my thoughts on Holy Spirit baptism, as a response to your post. I have been questioning this for 5 years because of what I wasn’t taught, then was taught, and ultimately confused by. Your thoughts please.

1. 1 Corinthians was written before Acts, approximately 5-6 years prior. (1 Corinthians 55 AD, and Acts 61-64 A.D.) It is placed, however after Acts in the NT. Is it possible that Acts did happen first, even though it was recorded later?

MH- Some of Acts did occur first, remember Paul’s Missionary journey’s are in their. So the events of Acts and I Corinthians did occur years before they were put in writing. This means that the problems with tongues were occurring before either book was written.

AE- If you go by the dates, the gifts of the Holy Spirit were outlined before the Day of Pentecost and the gift of tongues specifically was intended to be a sign for those who did not believe.

MH- The key is, who are those unbelievers? I Corinthians 14:21 In the LAW……….Now what would Paul be discussing about the law with Gentiles. Then Go to Isaiah 28 (read whole chapter), from which Paul is referring. Notice what Isaiah says about Israel’s judgment. Now Peter also quotes Joel 2:28-29 concerning tongues, while Paul quotes Isaiah 28. What the “unbelievers” (Jews) should have known was that judgment was coming. Remember that tongues were for a sign. What happened in Acts 2:4? Look who is being addressed with tongues; JEWS!!! Look at those Jews reaction. Peter then preaches a sermon, but not all get saved. Acts 2:41 (They that gladly received, not all)

AE- So before the Day of Pentecost, the gift of tongues was being employed. How did the Corinthian Church even know how to use the gift? What was their blueprint?

MH- Some of Acts did occur first, remember Paul’s Missionary journey’s are in their. So the events of Acts and I Corinthians did occur years before they were put in writing. This means that the problems with tongues were occurring before either book was written. We do not know what Paul knew about Pentecost, but we know his experience in Acts 9. I am conjecturing that tongues had probably spread throughout the Jewish community, until Acts 10 with Cornelius. Remember that these things occurred before they were written.





AE- The first recorded baptism of the Holy Spirit is in Acts, wherein the gifts of tongues were evidenced as a foreign language spoken to draw in those who could not understand the communication of The Gospel. But, if the gifts of the Holy Spirit were spoken of before the Day of Pentecost, then doesn’t that mean that there would have had to have been Holy Spirit baptism before Acts was written? I am cloudy on this point.

MH- DO my comments above help? Tongues are not primarily used for the purpose underlined. Remember 5 words understood > 10,000 words in foreign languages. In most recorded accounts, they were signs to the Jews. Tongues with interpretation edified and gave the church understanding. This is where specific knowledge may have been involved.

AE- QUESTION: Is tongues exclusively used to be a gift for the unbeliever to hear the gospel, and know God is real through the power of the Holy Spirit?

MH- No! The born again experience suffices for all of those things. Salvation is actually a Baptism of the Holy Spirit. By one Spirit are we all “baptized” into one body……The Greatest Gift!!!!!!!!!!!

AE- or is it also a gift to be used among believers, who already believe?

MH- What for? The New Testament is done. We do not need anymore “NEW” teachings. We do not see speaking in tongues anywhere after Acts and I Corinthians in the Bible.

AE- If it is a gift to be used among believers, who already believe, what is the functionality of it (this implies modern day usage)?

MH- Look at tongues today! It is not the tongues of the early church. Gibberish, ecstatic, and unintelligible speech is not what we see back then.

AE- Corinth in and of itself was a very pagan society to begin with, complete with idolatry, sexual immorality and an open-air market of capitalistic materialism and carnality (strippers, gamblers, slaves, prostitutes, etc.----NIV Student Bible 1992). It was a big city, second probably to Rome.
1 Corinthians was written by Paul as a response to various issues that were corrupting true worship of the church that he had founded there some years prior. The tone of this letter was as an admonition to correct was had gone grossly awry. Pagan practices had crept into the body, and distorted genuine worship to Jesus Christ. The immoral culture of the city had infiltrated the church. There was a lot of Roman influence in the Corinthian culture

MH- We see Paul and others dealing with all of these sins in Corinth, but why is the issue of tongues addressed anywhere else in the Bible among other Pagan cultures. It could have been that other churches were doing just fine, or no tongues at all.
AE- 2. Acts 2:1-4, Acts 2:6-12, Acts 10:44-48, Acts 19:1-7 are the 4 places where tongues are mentioned in the book of Acts.

MH- True

AE- 3. Paul quotes Isaiah in 1 Cor 14:20-21 because, I would dare to say he (Isaiah) is prophesying about the Gospel being preached to those other than the Jews, as the Jews rejected the Gospel of Jesus Christ and because of their rejection, Gentiles were able to receive this good news as adopted sons (see Romans 9-10).

MH- We see the evidence of this in Acts 10. The Gentiles receive the Baptism. For what? It was a SIGN to the Jews that they were approved of God to receive salvation by faith. "They received, just as we"......The question arose....."Can we forbid them water"?.....

AE- Now, Gentiles encompassed those who spoke of a non-Hebrew language and converts to Judaism (Acts 2 ?), and therefore communication of the Gospel of Jesus Christ had to come to them in their own language. Hence, foreign tongues were those languages of the Gentiles.

MH- These people were Jews in foreign lands, not Gentiles.
Acts 2:5- And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
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.

AE- 3. The purpose of foreign tongues is to communicate the Gospel of Jesus Christ to those who do not speak in your language. This ability alone is evidence of spiritual power given by the Holy Spirit. It is extra-ordinary for an average person who has never studied a language to be able to speak in that language all of a sudden; this is a demonstration of the surreal nature of the Holy Spirit.

MH- What amazes me is that there is no evidence that missionaries (those who need it most) have been given this gift, but have had to learn the languages of the Natives they sought to give the Gospel.

4. Is there a history of God’s people and languages? Yes, the story of the tower of Babel back in Gen 11. God confused the languages of mankind because they conspired to make a name for themselves by building a tower to reach the heavens. They did not want to be scattered and separated, so they attempted to build this city and this tower as a way to fortify their existence. God put a stop to this saying that if they accomplished this task then nothing they planned thereafter would be impossible. So he scrambled their language, creating multiple languages so that they could not understand one another. They were then scattered across the earth, sticking with those who spoke the same language (or tongue).

MH- Where ever we see tongues/languages, we see signs and judgment, not preaching. Peter even preaches in a known language after tongues were given to the Jews in their own languages.

AE- 5. The difference between the tongues today versus the tongues of the early church:
a) They are spoken in the Body where there are people present who all speak the same language, and who are all presumably, saved already. In Acts the tongues were employed to reach the unbeliever, to bring them to Christ. Today, tongues are spoken among believers, who should have already received the Good News, who is Christ.

MH- Are they a sign to all unbelievers, or unbelieving Jews? What do we see today if an English-Speaking preacher preaches at a Spanish Church? An interpreter for both believers and unbelievers, not for a sign, but for understanding what is being spoken.

AE- b) There is no interpretation offered. What are these people saying? What language are they speaking? Who are they talking to, if everyone can already understand each other? A common defense given is that they are talking to God in an angelic language. I do not understand this concept, personally. This is not a mutually edifying practice because I cannot understand a word that is being uttered. I thought we were supposed to do what was mutually edifying in corporate worship (1 Cor 13-14). Secondly, if an unbeliever walked into a revival where everyone was speaking and tongues, having no foreknowledge of what tongues was, biblically, the response would be a confused one, in my opinion, because they are not hearing the gospel of Jesus Christ, they are hearing emotional babble. I have, however, been told to assume that this is the Holy Spirit at work. However, I have been told in 1 John to test every spirit with the Word. My biggest question is: why should I assume this is the Holy Spirit at work when I cannot comprehend what is being said?

MH- ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Emotional babble is what's being spoken and heard, so who is it helping anyway? No one! Self-Edification is actually a rebuke or ridicule, not a statement of fact. Self-Edification was the whole problem at Corinth. It was such a large problem that they did not judge a sinner in their midst. (I Corinthians 5)

AE- c) prayer language defense: people (particularly Pentecostal denominations) say that when they are in deep worship they are communing with the Holy Spirit, and Romans 8:26-27 is their defense. However, this scripture states that the Holy Spirit intercedes with groans that words cannot express. Now, if words cannot express these groans, that seems to rule out any possibility that the words (known or unknown) being spoken during what is called “prayer language” are born of the Holy Spirit, because it says that they cannot be expressed at all. Key Words: cannot be expressed.

MH- Agreed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i) In Matt 6, Christ tells us not to babble as the pagans. Babbling, in my estimation, does not only encompass the Pharisaical manner of piety, speaking excessively in empty words, but babbling also means babbling: speaking in a manner that is unintelligible and without sound meaning. Furthermore, Christ is interceding for us at the right hand of God (Hebrews). As such, we do not know exactly what is being said, but we should rest assured that Christ is talking to the Father on our behalf. There is a lot of spiritual communication going on beyond what we know of. It is intangible to us. Look at Job and the communication between God, angels and Satan in Job chapter 1 and look at Daniel chapter 10:12-20. When the angel finally appeared to Daniel he says that he couldn’t get to him any sooner because the Prince of Persia detained him. Upon deeper study of this book, there were spiritual forces at work, unbeknownst to Daniel, in regards to his prayer.
Point: there is an unseen, spiritual world constantly moving that we cannot see, and when Romans 8 talks of the Holy Spirit interceding for us, that does not mean that this intercession manifests itself through our speech in an unintelligible language. How can you benefit from what you cannot understand? And furthermore, does God really need us to have a secret language that the devil cannot intercept? Isn’t He Sovereign, Omnipotent and Omniscient?

MH- All of this is conjecture, and contains no scriptural method.

AE- d) When Paul says “if I speak in tongues of angels or of men” many commentaries state that he is being sarcastic in this remark, to discredit the Corinthians practice and to expose it as absurdly fraudulent.

MH- I agree due to the nature of how it is written in greek, and the consistency of his Body Edification versus Self-Edicfication.

AE- e) Azusa Street and Charles Parham: “The baptism in the Holy Spirit is a gift of power upon the sanctified life. So, when we receive the gift, we have the same evidence the disciples received on the day of Pentecost in speaking in new tongues. In 1901, one of Parham’s students received the baptism in the Holy Spirit. She began to speak in tongues as the spirit gave utterance. Parham studied the scripture and constructed his thesis that glossolalia was the biblical evidence of being baptized in the Holy Spirit.”

MH- He was wrong. He constructed "his" thesis. Heteroglossolalia is not glossolalia.
Asuza Street revival versus Toronto Blessing: is there a difference in the two? Furthermore, what does it mean to worship in Spirit and in Truth? Has emotion and fervor replaced biblical worship? Is true worship about ecstatic and sensational displays of emotion? I am personally frustrated with this ideology (particularly in the Black Church) that if you do not exhibit these qualities than you are not filled with the Holy Spirit. They have adapted true worship into a stage show. And tradition has replaced sound doctrine, once again, as it has in the Catholic Church. Fervor comes before conviction and this equals counterfeit, in my opinion.

MH- I agree!

The following is where I get stuck: Holy Spirit Baptism
AE- 1. Holy Spirit Baptism in Acts 19:6: These disciples already believed and had received John’s baptism. Is it safe to assume that they were saved, even though they had not received the Holy Spirit baptism until Paul laid hands on them? Is, then getting back to a question raided above, this a gift to be used among believers to show proof of the Holy Spirit, or was this exclusive situation for these individuals in Acts 19. Were the circumstances different for this group of disciples then the circumstances of the present day?

MH- Read the account and you will see that they did accept Christ first.
AE- 2. Wasn’t the first church different in nature being that it was the first to introduce Christ to the world, versus present day where the foundation is already established and we have completed cannon of the Holy Scriptures to use as a blueprint? My point: the Holy Spirit worked in and through the apostles of that day in a different manner than today because of the time, circumstances and setting of the early church. Can we honestly compare today’s methods at large with those of the Way? As such, is the Holy Spirit baptism going to be identical to what it was in Acts?

MH- It should be identical, and it is obvious that the Apostles were "special" messengers. Yes, the foundation of the Church was Christ, the Apostles, and the Prophets.

AE- 3. Furthermore, how can every single believer be required to speak in tongues to evidence the Holy Spirit when Ephesians 1:13-14 says that we are sealed with the Holy Spirit when we believe?

MH- It's not a requirement. Case: Look at the whole New Testament. How many people do we see speaking in tongues? We do not see Timothy, Silas, Barnabas, Philip, Apollos, Stephen, etc. speaking in tongues, but we do see Stephen and Philip performing miracles.

AE- 4. I was taught at a COGIC church that I did not have the Holy Spirit unless I evidenced speaking in tongues. This contradicted my understanding. None-the-less, I had the “tarrying at the altar until the gift of tongues fell upon me” experience. A church mother laid hands on me and instructed me on what to say. I was to repeat hallelujah over and over again. In hindsight, I feel like that was a manipulated experience. After I had the experience I was told to pray in tongues whenever I got the chance, or would lose the gift. So for about a year I did this, starting off with hallelujah as I had at the altar and eventually the hallelujahs became jumbled into gibberish; all the while thinking that I had a special connection to God. One day, I felt like I was engaging in nothing more than a mantra-like practice. I studied some more, and I believe that God convicted me to stop this prayer language practice. I felt silly more than anything, and I did not feel as if any spiritual power was coming out of me. I didn’t even know what I was saying. I only did this prayer language thing in private, never in corporate worship.
Prior to going up to the altar, I was asked if I wanted to receive the Holy Spirit. Thinking to myself, “why would I say no to this question?” I said yes, and that is where it began. Looking back, I was coming out of a Church of Christ background, and thought that there were some things that were left out of what I was taught. Church of Christ shunned tongue speaking altogether, and I had never heard that I did not have the Holy Spirit if I had not spoken in tongues. I was taught, pre-COGIC that by believing in my heart, I had the Holy Spirit. When I went into this COGIC church, I went in respectfully challenging this theology about tongues with the Bishop and with the mother who tarried with me at the altar.

MH- Brave one.............

Conclusion:
AE- 1. If tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit gives gifts according to His Will (1 Cor 12:11), how is it that every person who receives the Holy Spirit must speak in tongues? What if the Holy Spirit does not issue a person that specific gift?

MH- It is His will, not our will.

AE- 2. There are plenty of other spiritual gifts so why it is that prophecy or healing or any of the other gifts are not promoted as evidence of having received the Holy Spirit?
MH- Because speaking in tongues is the easiest to counterfeit.

AE- 3. According to Ephesians 1: 13-14, we are sealed with the Holy Spirit when we believe. How does this parallel with the baptism that many say does happen as you evidence speaking in tongues?

MH- Ephesians 4:4-5- There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
You are baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ's Body.
I Corinthians 12:13- For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

April’s conclusion: The baptism of the Holy Spirit is not exclusive to the events in Acts, and its manifestation should not be confined just to what occurred in Acts. More exegesis of scripture is needed to define what the Holy Spirit baptism means in modern time. The events in Acts were exclusive to those who experienced it, not a general guideline for everyone thereafter.

MH's conclusion- It is rather a complete misunderstanding of scripture by novices claiming an anointing that never produced results. Holy Spirit baptism means then what it does now; inclusion into the Body of Christ, and having one's name written in the Lamb's Book of Life.
Remember that miracles, signs, and wonders all had/have their respective purposes. When we look at the Old and New Testament, we see a common pattern. Only certain people worked miracles. We do not see all Jews, nor do we see all Christians. We only see those with special assignments doing these things. What is also a most interesting parallel is what Jesus said about the Jews and our discussion here. The Gentiles’ strong need to see Acts in present day has caused the church to lose its way. The cross and the resurrection are absent from "mainstream" preaching. This generation wants a sign and it will get it; a sudden disappearance of all those seeking after one thing; His glorious return to meet us in the clouds. This is the only thing that believer's are to hope for. This sign is also one of judgment.

Matthew 12:38-42
38Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
39But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
40For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
41The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
42The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

The resurrection was the only sign given to the Jews to look for, and they rejected it and rejected Him. What Happened? 70 A.D.- the complete destruction of the Jewish Temple and slaughter of the Jews. The next judgment on unbelieving Israel- The Antichrist!
Ephesians 1:13-14
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory.
Your thoughts please.
April E.

Holy Spirit Baptism #2
Min H:

AE- Thanks for the response. I understand more because of the scripture about one baptism, into one body. Is that what you are saying is true Holy Spirit baptism? So then, what some people have made to be a separate experience is really what happens the moment one is saved?

Min. H- I would say that for the present day. Back then, one had to be saved to receive the separate experience.

AE- What is your take on some folks' emphasis on Holy Ghost power?

Min. H- They need to understand that the power is the passing from death to life.

AE- This I hear alot...dependence on a sign? What is your take on "Holy Ghost Power" (Asuza Steet experience claims this was the Power of the Holy Ghost)....

Min. H- The history states that people heard them speaking gibberish, just as we see today. Holy Spirit Baptism did not divide the early church, but look at what it does now.

AE- I am clearer on the Jews who were being addressed on the day of Pentecost. So then tongues on the day of Pentecost was for Jews who had to still be pursuaded, correct, because the resurrection was not proof enough--- is that what you are saying?

Min. H- Some were persuaded and others were not. This sign was actually a warning to them. Read I Corinthians 14:21, then the cross reference to Isaiah 28. The Jews should have known that to deny Christ meant judgment. Their denial ended up bringing on their destruction in 70 A.D.

AE- So then, in summary, the desire to see a sign (tongues) is clouding the bottom line message of Christ, the Cross and the Death/Burial and Resurrection.

Min. H- Yes! Look at what Peter said after Acts 2:4

AE- The desire to see a sign will in essence be a curse of judgement to those who desire it?

Min. H- All the signs we need are already written. The next sign for the world will be the Rapture. Believers look for the hope of His coming, It is not a sign for us, we'll be ooouuuuuuut!

AE- So my next question is: how does this issue get resolved in the church today, when sooooo many people are convinced in the power of the Holy Spirit being evidenced by tongues?

Min. H- One soul at a time. Placing conversations like ours on websites, if you permit.

When it is brought up, it causes division. When it is ignored is causes confusion. Right now there is a musician in the chapel we attend who just feels like praying in tongues is a genuine move of the Holy Spirit, and boasts about it...I had a friend tell me that she fell out and started singing in tongues when a minister blew on her...is this Satan at work or sheer ignorance...because the question in the back of my mind is always, what spirit is this stuff generating from-- Toronto Blessing---when not checked at the door more sensational foolishness is the result...so how do you teach one baptism in circumsatnces like this, without causing controversy?

People focus on validating you by this outward evidence...like being "checked" in the Body of Christ...

I think there is a lot of Corinthian behavior in the church today....and the spirit of self edification is perverting the church...not only with tongues but in many other symptoms of the mega church era, false prophets, etc...self-edification is indeed a spirit at work in more ways than one....

Lastly, being that the Holy Spirit wills who gets the gift of tongues, is it safe to say that He would not will it in a fashion that contradicts scripture...furthermore, you cannot be taught, or coached how to do this, as is the case (as was my case) in modern day scenarios...man trying to do the job of God....

Holy Spirit Baptism #3

AE- Thanks again for further insight. I am going to share your insight with my 2 friends, we can never come to solid conclusion about this issue...I do not mind you posting our dialogue.

To clarify what you have stated, I have more questions, sorry if redundant; I want to make sure that I understand fully because I was just explaining it to a friend:

AE- 1. Tongues on the day of Pentecost were for the Jews who still weren't convinced of Christ, right? Based on Isaiah and Acts 2:4...up until our discussion, I thought tongues were to communicate with those who couldn't understand the native language of the one preaching the gospel, but this is incorrect right?

MH- Paul could speak in several tongues (languages), which helped him during his missionary journeys. When Peter preached after the Acts 2:4, all was made clear. Some believed and some did not. But all heard the gospel, probably in whatever language Peter spoke, most likely Hebrew or Greek. They heard Peter's one voice. I doubt he spoke in 18 different languages. Although Jews lived in other countries, this did not mean that their language was forgotten.

AE- 2. So then, how do you explain what the Corinthians were doing? Were they mimicking the events of Pentecost, as some do today, in an incorrect fashion? Were they, in essence, doing the same thing that folks do today--talking in ecstatic jibberish.

MH- What the Corinthians was doing was legitimate. The problem was the abuse of the gift (i.e. for their own personal use and self-edification). In Corinthians we had confusion, in Acts there was not. In Acts, there was some form of disbelief, (i.e. they must be drunk). Paul was simply trying to bring order and benefit to all in the church.


AE- 3. Ultimately, tongues today serve no true purpose as compared to the purpose it had on Pentecost?

MH- Not to my knowledge! If so, it would only be to serve a specific purpose.

AE- 4. The woman who tarried with me said that the power of the Holy Ghost came upon her when she was overseas and she began to speak in the language of a woman from Africa whom she had never met, and the woman recognized her language being spoken and they made a connection to the Gospel that way, she was singing a song and tongues poured out of her, she says....what do you make if that?

MH- This is possible, but that does not explain the ecstatic gibberish. Personal experiences do not justify an unbiblical practice.

AE- 5.) Diabolical is a good word, because a young lady who had been exhorted to be an Intercessor by the same group of "Prayer Clinicians" my other friend had her expereince with, started doing just that, these open spectacles of speaking in tongues during prayer, and it got to the point where her eyes were rolling around in her head and all that...two of my friends who observed this in corporate prayer described this scene as eerie, one even called it seance-like...this is why I asked what spirit is operating because in what many call a move of the spirit this is happening, yet how can there be a move of the Holy Spirit if there is this other, carnal spirit is also working in a church service? Is it a move of the Holy Spirit...what is going on in these cases? Light and dark cannot co-exist. Is this holy or demonic? In this case is demonic and ignorance synonymous?

MH- This is why knowing those who labor among you is important. Unsaved wolves can easily bear "sheeps" clothing in the church today. This means that demonic possession could be occurring before one's very eyes. Light and dark do co-exist and co-mingle with one another. They're not supposed to, but the tares do grow among the wheat. This is why sin must be constantly purged. The actions themselves are not an authorized move of the Holy Spirit, BUT could be a wake up call to the church to stop fooling around with certain things.

Example: Creflo Dollar's church should have been EMPTY after he denied the deity of Christ. He knew the statement was controversial, and had obviously studied on this before he preached the sermon.


Holy Spirit Baptism #4
Min H:

AE- Thanks for the response. I understand more because of the scripture about one baptism, into one body. Is that what you are saying is true Holy Spirit baptism? So then, what some people have made to be a separate experience is really what happens the moment one is saved?

Min. H- I would say that for the present day. Back then, one had to be saved to receive the separate experience.

AE- What is your take on some folks' emphasis on Holy Ghost power?

Min. H- They need to understand that the power is the passing from death to life.

AE- This I hear alot...dependence on a sign? What is your take on "Holy Ghost Power" (Asuza Steet experience claims this was the Power of the Holy Ghost)....

Min. H- The history states that people heard them speaking gibberish, just as we see today. Holy Spirit Baptism did not divide the early church, but look at what it does now.

AE- I am clearer on the Jews who were being addressed on the day of Pentecost. So then tongues on the day of Pentecost was for Jews who had to still be pursuaded, correct, because the resurrection was not proof enough--- is that what you are saying?

Min. H- Some were persuaded and others were not. This sign was actually a warning to them. Read I Corinthians 14:21, then the cross reference to Isaiah 28. The Jews should have known that to deny Christ meant judgment. Their denial ended up bringing on their destruction in 70 A.D.

AE- So then, in summary, the desire to see a sign (tongues) is clouding the bottom line message of Christ, the Cross and the Death/Burial and Resurrection.

Min. H- Yes! Look at what Peter said after Acts 2:4

AE- The desire to see a sign will in essence be a curse of judgement to those who desire it?

Min. H- All the signs we need are already written. The next sign for the world will be the Rapture. Believers look for the hope of His coming, It is not a sign for us, we'll be ooouuuuuuut!

AE- So my next question is: how does this issue get resolved in the church today, when sooooo many people are convinced in the power of the Holy Spirit being evidenced by tongues?

Min. H- One soul at a time. Placing conversations like ours on websites, if you permit.

AE- When it is brought up, it causes division. When it is ignored is causes confusion. Right now there is a musician in the chapel we attend who just feels like praying in tongues is a genuine move of the Holy Spirit, and boasts about it...I had a friend tell me that she fell out and started singing in tongues when a minister blew on her...is this Satan at work or sheer ignorance...

Min. H- Ignorance, emotion, and sometimes rebellion!!!!!!!!!!

AE- because the question in the back of my mind is always, what spirit is this stuff generating from-- Toronto Blessing---when not checked at the door more sensational foolishness is the result...so how do you teach one baptism in circumsatnces like this, without causing controversy?

Min. H- Carnal Spirit, definitely a spirit of error.

AE- People focus on validating you by this outward evidence...like being "checked" in the Body of Christ...

Min. H- This is why people in the Body of Christ are tiring of this foolishness. This is why I am ever watchful.

AE- I think there is a lot of Corinthian behavior in the church today....and the spirit of self edification is perverting the church...not only with tongues but in many other symptoms of the mega church era, false prophets, etc...self-edification is indeed a spirit at work in more ways than one....

Min. H- I Agree! The mind games are diabolical.

AE- Lastly, being that the Holy Spirit wills who gets the gift of tongues, is it safe to say that He would not will it in a fashion that contradicts scripture...

Min. H- I would agree based on the evidence.

AE- furthermore, you cannot be taught, or coached how to do this, as is the case (as was my case) in modern day scenarios...man trying to do the job of God....

Min. H- This is total craziness........