Initial Evidence?

[mhazell]

OK, here's the scoop.... I have just finished my first year at Mattersey Hall Bible College, which is run by the AoG (Assemblies of God), a Pentecostal denomination. I'm sure most of you have heard of it at some point....

Anyway, I am not a member of the AoG; I would class myself as a non-denominational Charismatic Christian. I believe in the gifts of the Spirit, and operate in them. The one problem I seem to have with the AoG is their insistance on initial evidence, which is the doctrine that when you are baptised in the Holy Spirit, you will speak in tongues. In other words, the gift of tongues is the evidence that you are filled with the Holy Spirit.

Most of my ideas are always in flux, and this is no exception. (I say most - obviously central ideas I am 100% sure of, i.e. Jesus being God, the Trinity, etc.) So, to try and gather a greater understanding of the positions on initial evidence, these are the (grouped) questions:

1) Do you believe in initial evidence, and if so, what is your Biblical basis for it?
2) What is your view on "baptism in the Holy Spirit"? Is it a Biblical idea? Why? When does this "baptism" happen (assuming you believe in it)?

Personally, I don't believe in initial evidence. I can't see why the "evidence" can't be any of the other (1 Cor 12) gifts of the Spirit. If someone performs a healing, but does not speak in tongues, then what? Is it a counterfeit healing? Did they have the Holy Spirit for a split second? Also, see 1 Cor 12:29-30 in context. The implied answer to all of these questions is "no". I'm not sure how/if that can be reconciled with the initial evidence thing.

Because I hold this view, I am tempted to argue that the "baptism" in the Spirit is not a distinct event, but happens on conversion. However, I am not sure how I would go about putting a successful case forward for that idea, so I won't (yet).

So... am I in the minority? :)

[wildernesse]

I have thought about this on occasion, also--even though I didn't know the name "initial evidence" for it.

I was raised in the Church of God, which is a Pentecostal denom similar to the AOG, and baptism of the Holy Spirit is evidenced by speaking in tongues. I have been wondering why--since tongues is not the only gift, and the Bible talks about parts of the body of Christ having different spiritual gifts. I am leaning in the same direction that you are; namely that speaking in tongues is not the only evidence of baptism in the Spirit. I believe that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to live Christian lives, and I'm not sure why there would be a period of time between when a believer becomes a Christian and when they are empowered to live that life.

I will be interested in seeing what other people have to say about this!

--tibac

[superdave]

I think that when you are baptized in the Holy Spirit that's what you are getting. As in Acts, when the Holy Spirit came upon them- they first spoke with tongues of fire. So it's the same today. I also believe however, that this shouldn't be the only gift of the Holy Spirit- that we shall desire all gifts that he gives us.

[SUNSTONE]

Do you speak in tongues?

Andrew Wormack said, "Fighting the devil without tongues, is like shooting at him with a water pistol"

I don't have a conviction wether a person "has" to speak in tongues in order to have the Holy Spirit. But I think that it may be the most important thing to have, which is praying in the spirit.

[mhazell]

Personally, I'm not entirely sure the effect that tongues has on the devil. For one thing, you don't know what you are saying! See 1 Cor 14:14-15:

(14) For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. (15) What is the outcome then? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also. (NASB)

I do speak in tongues, but it's not something that I'm reliant on to any great degree. Paul writes in that same chapter of 1 Corinthians (v.4) that you edify yourself when you speak in tongues. It says nothing directly about Satan fleeing from you, or whatever. I would much rather have the Word in a battle with the devil. What did Jesus use to fight Satan - tongues or the Word of God? Anyway, this is a side point really. An interesting side point though. :)

I think that when you are baptized in the Holy Spirit that's what you are getting. As in Acts, when the Holy Spirit came upon them- they first spoke with tongues of fire. So it's the same today.

There are a couple of problems I see with this. One is that the passages generally referred to in Acts (chs. 2, 8, 10, 19) cannot, I think, be considered as "normal" occasions (whatever normal means - something for the philosophy board methinks!). Acts 2 is Pentecost - a one-off event in the history of the Church. Pentecost cannot be repeated; its effects are felt, because the Holy Spirit is still with us (hooray!), but the event itself was unique.

Also, if we are to follow the "pattern" of Acts, then an apostle must be present every time someone is "baptised". Clearly impossible nowadays.

There is one other main problem I see with initial evidence, and that is it appears to create a two-tier Christianity. Christians become split into two groups, those who have the Spirit and those who don't.

I'm just bashing ideas around really. My salvation experience does correspond with initial evidence, and also corresponds with my theory of "baptism" happening on conversion. But I don't think for one minute you can argue from experience - doctrine has to come from the Word. Praise God for His Word!

[SpiritPsalmist]

OK, here's the scoop.... I have just finished my first year at Mattersey Hall Bible College, which is run by the AoG (Assemblies of God), a Pentecostal denomination. I'm sure most of you have heard of it at some point....

Anyway, I am not a member of the AoG; I would class myself as a non-denominational Charismatic Christian. I believe in the gifts of the Spirit, and operate in them. The one problem I seem to have with the AoG is their insistance on initial evidence, which is the doctrine that when you are baptised in the Holy Spirit, you will speak in tongues. In other words, the gift of tongues is the evidence that you are filled with the Holy Spirit.

Most of my ideas are always in flux, and this is no exception. (I say most - obviously central ideas I am 100% sure of, i.e. Jesus being God, the Trinity, etc.) So, to try and gather a greater understanding of the positions on initial evidence, these are the (grouped) questions:

1) Do you believe in initial evidence, and if so, what is your Biblical basis for it?

Yes. I do believe that the evidence of one being baptized in the Holy Ghost is tongues. And my reasoning is; that was the evidense that showed up every time that anyone was told about receiving the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:3, Acts 19:6) While what happend on the day of Penticost was unique it in no way says it was the only time it would happen.
2) What is your view on "baptism in the Holy Spirit"? Is it a Biblical idea? Why? When does this "baptism" happen (assuming you believe in it)?
My view on baptism: I'm not sure what you're asking but I'll try to answer. I believe that one is filled with the Holy Spirit upon salvation. However, there is what is commonly referred to as the baptism. Matthew 3:11 says, "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. But He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worth to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:"

I believe it can happen at the same time as salvation but often does not due to those (humans) leading not thinking it important enough to do. The difference in the newly born again person might be phenominal if done at the point of salvation. There would be less struggle with the Old man, since the new babe would also have a new language of which to "build themselves up", in the most Holy faith.

Read Romans 8:26-28 for a description of what is going on the spirit world when we pray in the Spirit. Scripture also says, that when we draw near to God, and resist the devil, that he (the devil) flees. Praying in tongues is definately a "drawing near" to God. It takes the most untamed part of the body and puts in under the control of the Spirit.

Personally, I don't believe in initial evidence. I can't see why the "evidence" can't be any of the other (1 Cor 12) gifts of the Spirit. If someone performs a healing, but does not speak in tongues, then what? Is it a counterfeit healing? Did they have the Holy Spirit for a split second? Also, see 1 Cor 12:29-30 in context. The implied answer to all of these questions is "no". I'm not sure how/if that can be reconciled with the initial evidence thing.

All Christians have been commissiond to lay hands on the sick and pray the prayer of faith so the sick will be healed. This has nothing to do with being filled with the Spirit. All the disciples could do this before the day of Penticost. However, the power and authority increased with the baptism.

Because I hold this view, I am tempted to argue that the "baptism" in the Spirit is not a distinct event, but happens on conversion. However, I am not sure how I would go about putting a successful case forward for that idea, so I won't (yet).

So... am I in the minority? :)

I believe they are two different events. Not only due to what I've read in scripture but also due to the VERY distinct differences I've seen in those who did not then they do and they have the proper training to go along with it.

The training is extremely important. Without it, people don't know what it's for and tend to write it off as insignificant.

Bad. . .very bad. :( So much power and authority over the enemy cast to the wayside.

[superdave]

Ditto.

[Hollypop]

I wrote a paper for school on this subject... based on acts chapter 8. I got a 98 on it too.

[SpiritPsalmist]

I wrote a paper for school on this subject... based on acts chapter 8. I got a 98 on it too.

Share it with us Hollypop http://www.anchoredbygrace.com/smileys/mgcheerful.gif please. . .pretty please.

[EJO]

OK, here's the scoop.... I have just finished my first year at Mattersey Hall Bible College, which is run by the AoG (Assemblies of God), a Pentecostal denomination. I'm sure most of you have heard of it at some point....

Anyway, I am not a member of the AoG; I would class myself as a non-denominational Charismatic Christian. I believe in the gifts of the Spirit, and operate in them. The one problem I seem to have with the AoG is their insistance on initial evidence, which is the doctrine that when you are baptised in the Holy Spirit, you will speak in tongues. In other words, the gift of tongues is the evidence that you are filled with the Holy Spirit.

Most of my ideas are always in flux, and this is no exception. (I say most - obviously central ideas I am 100% sure of, i.e. Jesus being God, the Trinity, etc.) So, to try and gather a greater understanding of the positions on initial evidence, these are the (grouped) questions:

1) Do you believe in initial evidence, and if so, what is your Biblical basis for it?
2) What is your view on "baptism in the Holy Spirit"? Is it a Biblical idea? Why? When does this "baptism" happen (assuming you believe in it)?

Personally, I don't believe in initial evidence. I can't see why the "evidence" can't be any of the other (1 Cor 12) gifts of the Spirit. If someone performs a healing, but does not speak in tongues, then what? Is it a counterfeit healing? Did they have the Holy Spirit for a split second? Also, see 1 Cor 12:29-30 in context. The implied answer to all of these questions is "no". I'm not sure how/if that can be reconciled with the initial evidence thing.

Because I hold this view, I am tempted to argue that the "baptism" in the Spirit is not a distinct event, but happens on conversion. However, I am not sure how I would go about putting a successful case forward for that idea, so I won't (yet).

So... am I in the minority? :)

I agree with you completely.
I also am not a AoG person either, but my first church I attended was a very charismatic.

When you become a believer in Christ. Follow Him, and Live your life according to the Bible, the HS is living in you. He is your helper. He clenses us, empowers us, He shows us truth.

If I do not speak in tongues then who are you to tell me that I do not have the Holy Spirit?

[Hollypop]

quaffer its really long. like 4 or five pages... if you want to see it i will pm it to you.

[SpiritPsalmist]

quaffer its really long. like 4 or five pages... if you want to see it i will pm it to you.


OK. . .go ahead and PM it.

http://www.anchoredbygrace.com/smileys/yl2jump.gif I'm looking forward to reading it.

[Grace_Alone4gives]

The minute you are a believer and submit totally unto God, the Holy Spirit dwells in you. You do NOT have to have the gift of tongues. If that were the case, only 45% of Christians out there would be saved as the rest would not have the Holy Spirit. Tongues is an awesome gift...but ANY gift is a sign that you have the Holy SPirit.

My thoughts.

Andrew Wormack said, "Fighting the devil without tongues, is like shooting at him with a water pistol"


I will probably get slack for this....but that is a silly notion to carry! I have fought many times in english...and won. Why? Because I have Christ and the devil does not. It does not take tongues to defeat Satan...it takes God.

[SpiritPsalmist]

The minute you are a believer and submit totally unto God, the Holy Spirit dwells in you. You do NOT have to have the gift of tongues. If that were the case, only 45% of Christians out there would be saved as the rest would not have the Holy Spirit. Tongues is an awesome gift...but ANY gift is a sign that you have the Holy SPirit.

My thoughts.



I will probably get slack for this....but that is a silly notion to carry! I have fought many times in english...and won. Why? Because I have Christ and the devil does not. It does not take tongues to defeat Satan...it takes God.

There are tongues as a gift. . .given to the body for uplifting. Then there are tongues as a prayer language. . . given for the individuals uplifting.

No one has to speak in tongues to be saved. I believe I have stated that severel times now. And No, not any gift is a sign. Paul listed the gifts of the HS and they are not just ANY gift.

We can do all things through Christ Who strengthen us. Any fight is better than no fight. So I commend you on this. But according to Rom 8:26 when we don't allow the Spirit to speak through us then we are not praying as we ought. We will only pray according to our own understanding, our own knowledge. We need to rely on Him to pray through us for the things we REALLY need. Not just what we understand we need.

Yes, the HS dwells in you the minute you accept Jesus, however, that does not mean you have all the gifts you need. Why else would Paul tell us to "pursue" them, if as you say, we already have them?

[Grace_Alone4gives]

There are tongues as a gift. . .given to the body for uplifting. Then there are tongues as a prayer language. . . given for the individuals uplifting.

No one has to speak in tongues to be saved. I believe I have stated that severel times now. And No, not any gift is a sign. Paul listed the gifts of the HS and they are not just ANY gift.

We can do all things through Christ Who strengthen us. Any fight is better than no fight. So I commend you on this. But according to Rom 8:26 when we don't allow the Spirit to speak through us then we are not praying as we ought. We will only pray according to our own understanding, our own knowledge. We need to rely on Him to pray through us for the things we REALLY need. Not just what we understand we need.

Yes, the HS dwells in you the minute you accept Jesus, however, that does not mean you have all the gifts you need. Why else would Paul tell us to "pursue" them, if as you say, we already have them?
I agree :)
It just seemed that the topic of discussion was leading to the direction of 'yu are not a warrior if you do not have tongues' and 'if you have never spoken in tongues you may not have ever been baptised in the HS' - which I feel is untrue.

Thank for clarifying your view.

[SUNSTONE]

I agree :)
It just seemed that the topic of discussion was leading to the direction of 'yu are not a warrior if you do not have tongues' and 'if you have never spoken in tongues you may not have ever been baptised in the HS' - which I feel is untrue.

Thank for clarifying your view.

I was drenched with the spirit so many times before I started to pray in the spirit.

But the difference between praying in the spirit, and not, is like night and day.
From my personal experiences,I don't think you are much of a "warrior" without praying the proper way.

Quaffer pointed out that one verse, where it says we don't know how to pray as we ought. That is HUGE.

Andrew Wormack said not using tongues(praying in the spirit)is like fighting the devil with a water pistol. This guy says he hasn't had to take an aspirin in 30 years, had fought a minor cold for less than 2 days, in 30 years. And God showed me, just how important it is, to spiritual warfare.

[Andrew]

The basis for saying that tongues is the sign of the Spirit Baptism is simply the pattern found in Acts. To me, if that's the way it happened, then I'll just stick to the way it happened, as recorded in the Bible.

I mean, if there is nothing to stop me from receiving the way it was received in Acts, then why wld I want to settle for anything less. Furthermore, I'd prefer to just stick to the Bible 'benchmark' to 'play safe'.

That said, I struggled at the question for some time too until God showed me that that was the pattern. I'm not saying I'm right and know better, but just saying that it was a personal revelation to me.

It's a long story but I'll try to keep it short.

My burning question to God was "Yes, I believe in the Spirit baptism BUT IS TONGUES THE SIGN!?? Everyone's arguing abt this!"

The revelation came in Acts 10 & 11, where Peter explained to his critics what happened in the house of Cornelius.

Notice in 10:47 and 11:15 that Peter stressed that the Spirit had come upon the household of Cornelius "JUST AS IT HAD come on us AT THE BEGINNING". IOW the gentiles received the Holy Spirit the WAY the disciples had on Pentecost.

Peter himself, and the Jews who criticised him for entering the home of Cornelius, a gentile, had trouble believing that God wld save gentiles let alone baptise them with His Spirit.

So what proof did Peter have in his defence to offer his critics, to show that indeed Cornelius and his household were saved and baptised in the Spirit?

The only visible evidence was tongues! That's why Peter stressed to his critics that they received "JUST AS WE HAVE" ie in the same way with the same sign of tongues.

The clincher then, for me, was the following verse: "18 When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God."

So in the same way, I had no further objections but believed that tongues is the sign of the Spirit Baptism. "JUST AS WE HAVE IN THE BEGINNING" is the benchmark that should cause us all to have no further objections as to how and when one is Spirit baptised.

I hope you get the jist of what I'm trying to put across. It was not so much just the scriptures presented but how these verses jumped out at me and 'spoke' to me in answer to my question.

God bless.

[The Midge]

IMO Intitial evidence is a false dichotomy.

Being saved, baptised and baptised by the Holy Spirit are different things, independent of eachother.

Most importantly, we should not be listening for tounges but looking for the fruit of the Spirit. The last time I looked at my apple tree fruit did not appear instantly. We are too caught up looking for instant results. Let us patiently wait for the real work of the Holy Sprirt to manifest it's self in changed lives.

[HomeBound]

Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mark 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acts 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with TONGUES, and prophesied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Corin 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
1 Corin 12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
1 Corin 12:29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1 Corin 12:30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
1 Corin 12:31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet show I unto you a more excellent way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Corin 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
1 Corin 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
1 Corin 13:3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

of course, replace the word charity with love.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Corin 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Corin 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
1 Corin 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think a lot of church members believe that tongues is the evidence of baptism because it is very common amongst them. However the other gifts are a little more rare.

[SpiritPsalmist]

In my church, tongues is probably the most common, however, we also operate in all the others too.

[afnospam]

1 Corinthians 12:1-11, and verse 28
1Now about spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant. 2You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. 3Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.
4There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. 6There are different kinds of working, but the same God works all of them in all men.
7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,[1] and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines. 28 And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues.

Rather than tounges being universal, it would seem to me that Paul describes specifc gifts being given to each person, and that some may have the gift of tounges while others a different gift. Confirming that Jesus is Lord is the manifastation evidence of the Holy Spirt.

[afnospam]

The basis for saying that tongues is the sign of the Spirit Baptism is simply the pattern found in Acts. To me, if that's the way it happened, then I'll just stick to the way it happened, as recorded in the Bible.

I mean, if there is nothing to stop me from receiving the way it was received in Acts, then why wld I want to settle for anything less. Furthermore, I'd prefer to just stick to the Bible 'benchmark' to 'play safe'.

That said, I struggled at the question for some time too until God showed me that that was the pattern. I'm not saying I'm right and know better, but just saying that it was a personal revelation to me.

It's a long story but I'll try to keep it short.

My burning question to God was "Yes, I believe in the Spirit baptism BUT IS TONGUES THE SIGN!?? Everyone's arguing abt this!"

The revelation came in Acts 10 & 11, where Peter explained to his critics what happened in the house of Cornelius.

Notice in 10:47 and 11:15 that Peter stressed that the Spirit had come upon the household of Cornelius "JUST AS IT HAD come on us AT THE BEGINNING". IOW the gentiles received the Holy Spirit the WAY the disciples had on Pentecost.

Peter himself, and the Jews who criticised him for entering the home of Cornelius, a gentile, had trouble believing that God wld save gentiles let alone baptise them with His Spirit.

So what proof did Peter have in his defence to offer his critics, to show that indeed Cornelius and his household were saved and baptised in the Spirit?

The only visible evidence was tongues! That's why Peter stressed to his critics that they received "JUST AS WE HAVE" ie in the same way with the same sign of tongues.

The clincher then, for me, was the following verse: "18 When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God."

So in the same way, I had no further objections but believed that tongues is the sign of the Spirit Baptism. "JUST AS WE HAVE IN THE BEGINNING" is the benchmark that should cause us all to have no further objections as to how and when one is Spirit baptised.

I hope you get the jist of what I'm trying to put across. It was not so much just the scriptures presented but how these verses jumped out at me and 'spoke' to me in answer to my question.

God bless.

Good post and thanks for sharing.

+

[hal weeks]

Quote (Personally, I don't believe in initial evidence. I can't see why the "evidence" can't be any of the other (1 Cor 12) gifts of the Spirit.)

Tongues seems to be the big "holdout."
I recommend telling God you want ALL He has for you and do not exclude tongues. I suspect it is such a powerful gift, especially in spiritual warfare, that Satan has caused this to be so contrversial.
I have seen both healing and deliverance when all I did was pray in tongue.
Post your questions with God also.

[hal weeks]

Speaking in tongues comes after you have already been born again and filled with the Holy Spirit.

It is part of what happens when the being filled becomes rivers of living water.

John 7:37-39

[Templedweller]

I have enjoyed reading the posts here.....And being as it is an older thread I really enjoy seeing what has been said in ones in the past.

I agree that it is a gift

That it has its place

That we ought to be looking for fruit in the life of a believer and not just for evidence that they speak in tounges

That it is a glorious spiritual gift and there are different purposes for it backed by Scripture and that one need not be Baptized in The Spirit to make it through the gates of Heaven...They need Jesus, acknowledgement of His blessed shed blood and his death and ressurection for salvation sake.

Though I don't think it wrong nor bad neither ungodly. How can a gift from GOD be bad for us???

Sincerely,
Templedweller:)

[foadle]

As best I can I will try to explain what I believe.

The baptism in the spirit is definately biblical. John the baptist talks about baptising with water but that the one who coems after him will baptise with fire. Christ himself said that if he did not leave them he could not send them the spirit that would be their guide.
Yes baptism in the spirit is biblical however I do disagree with the initial evidence of tongues. Not once does the bible ever mention Jesus speaking in tongues yet I am sure no one would argue he had the spirit. If speaking in tongues is so important then why is it never recorded that Jesus did? I am not saying he didn't but the bible actually doesn't say one way or the other.
Only once does the bible show people speaking in tongues after receiving the spirit and that was on pentecost. If it is so important why is this the only time it is mentioned as occuring straight after baptism in the spirit.
While the bible talks of Paul speaking in tongues it does not say that this occured directly after he was baptised in the spirit. Yet we know that this happened after his walk to Damascus was interupted.
No - I believe that if tongues was meant to be a sign of this there would be a lot more specific documentation of its occurance.
More importantly that are documented is loving God, loving people, baptism (both physical and in the spirit) and living a righteous life. On these there is much detail though little on signs.

[Mark2010]

In my church, tongues is probably the most common, however, we also operate in all the others too.

I definitely need to come visit your church. It's obvious that God has given you a great deal of wisdom on many things.

[Maharg]

I believe that the believer is filled with the Holy Spirit at the moment of conversion. I base this belief on reading John's gospel, chapter 3.

I believe that when we believe in Jesus we are born again, and have a new life within us.

I believe that sometimes the Holy Spirit will come upon us in an especially powerful way, edifying us, healing us and giving us the power to live for God's glory. I don't understand how this relates to us already having the Holy Spirit within us - this belief for me has come from my experiences with God, when He has suddenly overwhelmed me with love.

Maharg

[Hisgirl]

I moved in prophecy, words of knowledge and healing before I spoke a word in tongues...and even then, it's only a word or two.

I only know four or five folks who spoke in tongues at the moment they were empowered with the Holy Spirit...filled, baptized, however you say it. Most others were given a prayer language sometime over the next days, weeks or years.

I believe the evidence is displaying God's power in some way.

Maharg, I was taught the difference is between being indwelt and being empowered. Yes, I felt God's love and had an intense desire to worship Him, but was also empowered to minister using His gifts, as was evidenced by their coming forth. :)

[christianmomof3]

This is an interesting thread. I have been a Christian for 15 years and I have never heard anyone speak in tongues. I don't know anyone who has done that even. I do have a friend who met with a church that did tongue speaking in the past, but she felt that it was forced and fake for them. (I am not implying it is forced and fake for everyone - but it seems that it does happen - I have heard that from some other people too.)
Yes, the Bible does speak of tongue speaking, but Paul says in 1 Cor. 14:19 But in the church I would rather speak five words with my mind, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
23 If therefore the whole church comes together in one place and all speak in tongues, and some unlearned in tongues or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are insane?
24 But if all prophesy and some unbeliever or unlearnde person enters, he is convicted by all, he is examined by all;
25 The secrets of his heart become manifest; and so falling on his face, he will worship God, declaring that indeed God is among you.
14:4 He who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but he who prophesies builds up the church.

Paul does go on to say not to forbid speaking in tongues, but it seems that he is saying that prophesying is a better way to build up the church.
Prophesying, as Paul speaks of it is not fortelling the future, but speaking for Christ and speaking forth Christ.

I have never spoken in tongues, but I am born again, I have Christ dwelling in my spirit and I experience His life in my spirit.

I am sure some people do speak in tongues even today, and I think it would be interesting to experience, but I think that saying it is necessary for salvation is not correct according to the Bible and it is legalistic.

[Hisgirl]

Hi Christianmomof3 :wave:

Welcome! I was wondering if you realized you were smack dab in the middle of a forum where we believe speaking in tongues is indeed for today? (charismatic)

I would even bet that most folks posting here have indeed been baptized in the Holy Spirit and given the gift of tongues.

It's a beautiful experience and one not spoken about in many denominational churches...however, as God pours His Spriit out in abundance, I am hearing more and more Methodist, Baptist etc churches begin to teach about this 'empowering' as spoken about in the book of Acts.

I'm sure you'll read some good responses here...bless you!

[christianmomof3]

Hi Christianmomof3 :wave:

Welcome! I was wondering if you realized you were smack dab in the middle of a forum where we believe speaking in tongues is indeed for today? (charismatic)

I would even bet that most folks posting here have indeed been baptized in the Holy Spirit and given the gift of tongues.

It's a beautiful experience and one not spoken about in many denominational churches...however, as God pours His Spriit out in abundance, I am hearing more and more Methodist, Baptist etc churches begin to teach about this 'empowering' as spoken about in the book of Acts.

I'm sure you'll read some good responses here...bless you!
I do not know much about Pentacostal or Charismatic - I am here to learn. Several years ago there was a little Pentacostal church at the end of my street where I used to live and they had a children's outreach type ministry and I would take my oldest dd, who was 5 then (she is 13 now) and she had fun and the people there were very nice. :)

[Hisgirl]

I do not know much about Pentacostal or Charismatic - I am here to learn. Several years ago there was a little Pentacostal church at the end of my street where I used to live and they had a children's outreach type ministry and I would take my oldest dd, who was 5 then (she is 13 now) and she had fun and the people there were very nice. :)

That's great! I would suggest reading through the book of Acts too. Please don't base too much on our behavior as of late...sometimes we tend to act like squabbling five-year-olds...there's a lot of different beliefs here in regards to healing and we like to hash it out about every eight weeks.

There's a cool web site called www.layhands.com (http://www.layhands.com) where you can read some wonderfully insightful articles pertaining to charismatic issues. It helped me a lot when I was first learning.

Bless you!

[BenAdam]

In regards to the OP, no offense for I know you are honestly seeking, but these kind of questions and arguments are ridiculous.

People get hellbent on what "evidence" someone has for being baptized in the Holy Spirit. Carnal people can speak in tongues, and extremely Godly people sometimes don't. Tongues is NOTHING if you don't allow yourself to be changed and led by God Himself.

The true evidence is a changed life...

[BarbB]

.... Tongues is NOTHING if you don't allow yourself to be changed and led by God Himself.

The true evidence is a changed life...

Awesome post - especially for a pirate! :thumbsup:

HisGirl's right. We do this every so often. Her posts are always edifying!

(I love that word - edify! We need to edify more and squabble less! :clap:)

[BenAdam]

Awesome post - especially for a pirate! :thumbsup:

HisGirl's right. We do this every so often. Her posts are always edifying!

(I love that word - edify! We need to edify more and squabble less! :clap:)
Thanks BarbB!!!!

[JEBrady]

1) Do you believe in initial evidence, and if so, what is your Biblical basis for it?
2) What is your view on "baptism in the Holy Spirit"? Is it a Biblical idea? Why? When does this "baptism" happen (assuming you believe in it)?

Since you’re in an AOG school already, I suggest you pick up a copy of What Meaneth This at the bookstore. It’s put out by Gospel Publishing House, so I imagine it’s in stock, and if not, they should be able to get it for you. Buy it or borrow it, and it will give you the biblical basis behind this doctrine. I highly recommend this if you’re really questioning whether this is supported in scripture.

Personally, I don't believe in initial evidence. I can't see why the "evidence" can't be any of the other (1 Cor 12) gifts of the Spirit. If someone performs a healing, but does not speak in tongues, then what? Is it a counterfeit healing? Did they have the Holy Spirit for a split second? Also, see 1 Cor 12:29-30 in context. The implied answer to all of these questions is "no". I'm not sure how/if that can be reconciled with the initial evidence thing.
You really have to pay close attention to understand 1 Co 12-14.
The list in 1 Co 12:29 is ministry gifts. The list in v. 4-8 is manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Here’s the short question: if you can all prophesy, why are all not prophets?

I'm new to this board, but there's been a rash of questions on this subject. I posted something more in depth recently. Maybe I can find that post.

Because I hold this view, I am tempted to argue that the "baptism" in the Spirit is not a distinct event, but happens on conversion. However, I am not sure how I would go about putting a successful case forward for that idea, so I won't (yet).

See Acts 8 and read about the Samarian revival. These believers got saved under Philip’s ministry, but Peter and John had to be called in to get them filled with the Spirit.

So... am I in the minority?

What really matters is what the Bible says about it.

Here's a cut and paste from my previous post:
Regarding the baptism in the Holy Spirit, scriptural precedent is shown in Acts 2, and they spoke with other tongues. At Cornelius’ house, the sign that the Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit was that they spoke with tongues and glorified God. The scriptural evidence that a person has received the baptism in the Holy Spirit is to speak with tongues. You can be saved by faith in the Lord Jesus, receiving the fullness of the Spirit is a further work of grace. See Acts 19 for an instance of believers who hadn’t received the baptism.

As others have said, you don’t have to speak in tongues to be saved. You already have the Holy Spirit by faith, who witnesses with your spirit that you are saved. That’s not the same thing as the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Before the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2, Jesus had breathed on the believers and said, Receive the Holy Spirit (Jn 20:22). Later they were baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Also, the first passage you quote in 1 Co 12 is a list of ministry gifts. The earlier list of 9 manifestations of the Holy Spirit in v.8-10 are not ministry gifts, they are manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Anyone can speak in tongues if you receive the Holy Spirit baptism, but not everyone is used in that ministry. There are folks that get used in that regularly, and if you haven’t seen it, you won’t know what that means. In the assembly, there are some restrictions on the way these manifestations are used. It’s really important to study this out to understand it properly. The list in 1 Co12:27 et al is those ministries God has placed in the church. The obvious answer to each question is “no”. Not everybody is a prophet, for instance. But on occasion anyone may have a word of wisdom, word of knowledge or discerning of spirits manifest in their Christian walk. But for a prophet, those manifestations are common, whereas if a person is not called to be a prophet it will be uncommon. For a regular Christian, one may speak in tongues at any time if baptized in the Holy Spirit, but not in the church, out loud, to the assembly. While on occasion that may happen, only someone called to that ministry is going to be manifesting that regularly, and it has to be accompanied by interpretation of tongues.

How do you harmonize where Paul says “you may all prophesy” and yet not all are prophets? One’s a manifestation, one’s a ministry.

The second I Co 14:22 reference shouldn’t be considered out of context. The whole chapter is to try and establish the principles of use for spiritual gifts in the church. This is why you have interpretation of tongues in conjunction with speaking in tongues. If a person is speaking in tongues during the praise service, for instance, he is to do it under his breath, not to speak it out to the assembly, unless the Lord is directing it as a word to the assembly.

A book that examines some of these issues is “What Meaneth This”, published by Gospel Publishing House (associated with AG). As far as my experience, I’ve been Pentecostal for 20 years and have had all those gifts manifest in my life at some time. I speak in tongues in my prayer life practically every time I pray, at least for part of the prayer. But I have never been used in the ministry of tongues in the assembly (though I have been used in gifts of healings, prophecy, and some others). No one works these things themselves. God is the one who works them. They are manifestations of the Holy Spirit, not manifestations of man or man’s spirit.

If you have a specific question about anything in this post, please ask it. I’ll try to give a specific answer if I have any light on it. Speaking in tongues is speaking in tongues, whether it’s in your private prayer life or in the assembly, but the usage is different, not the actual manifestation itself or its origin.

In spite of God’s grace in my life, I’m really spiritually pretty obtuse. It took all my desire and 3 months of hitting the altar 3 times a week for the baptism before I was able to receive it, and I just barely did when I did. It’s a faith thing. But regarding fruit, you are dead on right it’s more important than what manifestations God uses you in- and the Bible makes that really clear. Remember a scripture anywhere about a clanging cymbal??? There’s a reason why the love chapter is wedged between the two chapters on spiritual gifts. It’s so we know what the purpose of those things is- they’re to work by LOVE.

[dentonz]

OK, here's the scoop.... I have just finished my first year at Mattersey Hall Bible College, which is run by the AoG (Assemblies of God), a Pentecostal denomination. I'm sure most of you have heard of it at some point....

Anyway, I am not a member of the AoG; I would class myself as a non-denominational Charismatic Christian. I believe in the gifts of the Spirit, and operate in them. The one problem I seem to have with the AoG is their insistance on initial evidence, which is the doctrine that when you are baptised in the Holy Spirit, you will speak in tongues. In other words, the gift of tongues is the evidence that you are filled with the Holy Spirit.

Most of my ideas are always in flux, and this is no exception. (I say most - obviously central ideas I am 100% sure of, i.e. Jesus being God, the Trinity, etc.) So, to try and gather a greater understanding of the positions on initial evidence, these are the (grouped) questions:

1) Do you believe in initial evidence, and if so, what is your Biblical basis for it?
2) What is your view on "baptism in the Holy Spirit"? Is it a Biblical idea? Why? When does this "baptism" happen (assuming you believe in it)?

Personally, I don't believe in initial evidence. I can't see why the "evidence" can't be any of the other (1 Cor 12) gifts of the Spirit. If someone performs a healing, but does not speak in tongues, then what? Is it a counterfeit healing? Did they have the Holy Spirit for a split second? Also, see 1 Cor 12:29-30 in context. The implied answer to all of these questions is "no". I'm not sure how/if that can be reconciled with the initial evidence thing.

Because I hold this view, I am tempted to argue that the "baptism" in the Spirit is not a distinct event, but happens on conversion. However, I am not sure how I would go about putting a successful case forward for that idea, so I won't (yet).

So... am I in the minority? :)

Read the thread on Acts 19: 1-7 in this same forum and it might give you some more insight. Separate instances for conversion and baptism of the Spirit are recorded several time in Acts, but most definately in Acts 8 concerning the Samarians.

However, I can't say absolutely, at this moment that the evidence is always speaking in tounges. All the 120 in Acts 2 spoke in tounges. All the believers in Ephesus began to speak in tounges and prophesy when they received the baptism in Acts 19.

[Jimbeaux]

Since I believe the “baptism by the Spirit” occurs at the time you are saved 1 Cor. 12.13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2012.13&version=31) tongues is not an evidence. Anyhow, you have to ask, an “evidence” to whom? God knows you are saved and you know it by the witness of the Holy Spirit. Who else needs evidence?

[AllTalkNoAction]

Since I believe the “baptism by the Spirit” occurs at the time you are saved 1 Cor. 12.13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2012.13&version=31) tongues is not an evidence.
Please explain that logic ?
The baptism in the Spirit is clearly defined in Acts, all knew precisely when they received it, they immediately spoke in tongues !

If it is possible to receive the Spirit and NOT speak in tongues, the apostles were *wrong* to judge that the Spirit had just fallen upon people when they spoke in tongues, logically they could only say that people had *at some unknown time previously* received the Spirit . . . but they didn't.

1 Cor. 12v13 also alludes to this:-
1Co: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.

All are "made to drink" as they speak in tongues ("the refreshing" - Isaiah 28v11-12, 1 Cor. 14v21-22).

We need evidence because our hearts are "deceitful above all things" (Jer. 17v9), so God must bare independant witness (Acts 18v8, Romans 8v15-16, Gal. 4v6)
The new tongue signifies the new heart.

[New_Wineskin]

Since I believe the “baptism by the Spirit” occurs at the time you are saved 1 Cor. 12.13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2012.13&version=31) tongues is not an evidence. Anyhow, you have to ask, an “evidence” to whom? God knows you are saved and you know it by the witness of the Holy Spirit. Who else needs evidence?



I completely agree with you on this ( especially the questions ) . :)

[AllTalkNoAction]

I completely agree with you on this ( especially the questions ) . :) But you havn't answered the question and points I made (see the previous post)

[New_Wineskin]

But you havn't answered the question and points I made (see the previous post)

What questions did you ask me and in what post ? I was talking to Jim about his post . I wasn't answering your question because I wasn't responding to a post of yours . However ....

7Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom, to another the message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, [b]to another[b] gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues,[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012;&version=31;#fen-NIV-28629a)] and to still another the interpretation of tongues.[b (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012;&version=31;#fen-NIV-28629b)] 11All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he gives them to each one, just as he determines.

12The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. 13For we were all baptized by[c (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2012;&version=31;#fen-NIV-28632c)] one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14Now the body is not made up of one part but of many. (NIV)


This is a good passage to indicate that the Spirit baptizes us all into one body and He gives to each as He desires .

[Jimbeaux]

Please explain that logic ?
The baptism in the Spirit is clearly defined in Acts, all knew precisely when they received it, they immediately spoke in tongues !

*****
It’s not logic; it’s scripture. If you’re talking about Acts 2.4 (for example), it does not say they were baptized in the Spirit, it says they were “filled” with the Spirit. And so do all the other Pentecostal proof-texts in Acts.

BTW, I am a former Assemblies of God pastor, four churches over thirty years, who had this hammered into me (and I hammered it into others) until I stepped back to see what the scriptures really said without the denomination interpreting them for me.

Someone has said that the Bible is so easy you have to have help to misunderstand it.

Try it. You might begin to see things differently but it will take some deprogramming.

[JEBrady]

It’s not logic; it’s scripture. If you’re talking about Acts 2.4 (for example), it does not say they were baptized in the Spirit, it says they were “filled” with the Spirit. And so do all the other Pentecostal proof-texts in Acts.

And what of these scriptures? How do you read them?
(my bold)

Matthew 3:11 (NKJV)
11 o (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn1)I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. p (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn2)He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit 1 (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn3)and fire. [1] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn4)
Luke 24:49 (NKJV)
49 s (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn5)Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city 4 (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn6)of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”
[2] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn7)
Acts 1:4-5 (NKJV)
4 e (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn8)And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have f (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn9)heard from Me; 5 g (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn10)for John truly baptized with water, h (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn11)but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” [3] (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn12)

Acts 2:33 (NKJV)
33 Therefore c (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn13)being exalted 1 (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn14)to d (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn15)the right hand of God, and e (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn16)having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He f (http://www.christianforums.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=23541595#_ftn17)poured out this which you now see and hear.

[AllTalkNoAction]

An often quoted, but rarely understood passage is 1 Corinthians 12, which talks about "the gifts".
The context is that since chapter 11 it has been talking about what should / shouldn't happen in meetings, the passage is NOT about what different people get when they *become* Christians.
This is seen from the fact that it says:-
1Cor.12v8-9: For TO ONE is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; TO ANOTHER the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith . . . healings . . . tongues . . interpretation

The beginning of this letter affirms that they ALL have all these attributes - because ALL have Jesus Christ inside, and you cannot have Jesus *without* faith, knowledge, power etc !

1Cor.1v5-6: That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge; Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you
(see also 2 Cor. 5v17, 1 John 4v2, 17 etc)

It is *precisely because* all christians have all these attributes for private use that there needs to be limitation and order when all meet. If more than one person speaks at once, there is confusion. The Corinthians were getting this wrong, which is why Paul had to write to them on the subject.

Paul affirms the main use of tongues is private prayer, and meetings are for *giving* and receiving God's inspiration in ways that help everyone there. The "gift of tongues", two or three only, each with interpretation, is for a sign to visitors who have not yet received the Holy Spirit through faith.
1Cor.14v18: I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than you all:
(a rather crass and boastful thing to say if some couldn’t !)
v19: Yet *in the church* I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also.
v22-23: Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that you are mad?
v27-28: If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church

If only some could speak in tongues, the problem would never have arisen !

[JEBrady]

Since I believe the “baptism by the Spirit” occurs at the time you are saved 1 Cor. 12.13 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2012.13&version=31) tongues is not an evidence.

Absolutely true. The baptism by the Spirit into the Body of Christ has nothing to do with tongues. We receive the earnest of our salvation, we receive the Holy Spirit and are placed by way of a complete change of nature, into the body of Christ. What you failed to distinguish, Jim, is that the baptism by the Spirit into the Body is not the baptism by Jesus in the Holy Spirit. You have confused the two actions. They are not the same thing.

[AllTalkNoAction]

1Co: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.

All are "made to drink" as they speak in tongues ("the refreshing" - Isaiah 28v11-12, 1 Cor. 14v21-22).

The scriptures detailing the baptism in the Spirit make this so clear one has to shut one's eyes not to see it:-

Ac:1:5: For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence . . . . . 2v4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.


Ac:10:44: While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
. . .46: For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, . . .11:15: And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
:16: Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.