HS Baptism by Jesus (Matt 3:11) and HS Baptism by the HS (1 Cor12:13)

[Boo]

Is there a difference between the "gift of prophecy" and the "gift of teaching?" Is any of this the same as the gift of preaching? I know many who think that the "gift of prophecy" IS the gift of preaching. Today, preaching includes teaching for many people. It really gets confusing, doesn't it?

If there is a statement of the "gift of prophecy" ceasing, why do we think that it means that we will lose our ability to preach? Somehow, that doesn't make sense, does it? Our ability to preach - to edify the body of the church using scriptures will not cease. However, the gift to tell the future can be removed. Does anyone think that there is anyone out there being told by God what the future holds?

I've read peoples explanations about what "prophecy" CAN mean. It is how it was used in this sense that gets confusing.

As to tongues, it really gets interesting. If someone gets up and spits out a bunch of funny sounding words and then someone else gets up to tell us what they mean; how would anyone know if he was right? The speaker doesn't know and neither does anyone else. Kind of a guaranteed acceptance, isn't it?

I would think that the need for an interpreter was so that when one actually spoke in a foreign language, the one or two people present who spoke that language understand, but nobody else does. Since those who speak that language cannot speak the language of the others present, an interpreter was needed in order to share the message.

That is why we were to have interpreters - and that makes sense to me. This tongues of angels stuff - that is just as interpretation of Pauls message that may not be the actual case.

[Slug1]

I pray for the sick and encourage others to do the same. Sometimes the sick get better. I thank God for the healing. How He chooses to do the healing is not for me to say. I know Satan has nothing to do with it.

Hooah! Let's focus on the signs/wonders in contention. What I mean is this... if a person has come to believe in the cessation of tongues/knowledge/prophecy... with both speaking in tongues and also the possibility of speaking prophecy are manifestations of evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit... then such a person who does believe as they do, HOW are they to accept God's will when He allows many in the Body of Christ to receive the blessing OF the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Acts 2:6-8

Understanding needs to be balanced then with context of scriptures other then the Acts 2:6-8.

We understand that there are multiple "kinds" of tongues.

1 Cor 12:10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

Does the usage of "kindS" mean the many languages of the world? Does it mean that this gift comes in different "kinds"?

So we have to go to scripture and balance how, when, where, why tongues has been used in scripture and discern the meaning.

The situation you posted through the Acts 2:6-8 scriptures is a "kind" of example of tongues where there is NO need for the accompanying gift of Interpretation of tongues. This is how this can be discerned... the gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to ONLY those who are a part of the Body of Christ (All of 1 Cor 12 teaches this but v12-14 specifically helps this understanding). So, this tells us that the UNbelievers in Acts 2:6-8 were NOT operating with the gift of Interpretation of Tongues.

Yet... they STILL were able to understand Peter's native language as he spoke, even though all the listeners had many different native languages... they understood his speech (him speaking his native language) in their native language ALL at the same time

So this is a "kind" of the gift of "different kindS of tongues" (1 Cor 12:10).

Then we have the "kind" that DOES require the additional gift of Interpretation of Tongues when God is to use servants to EDIFY others who are IN the Body of Christ. This is the "kind" of tongues that the Corinthians were ABUSING and using improperly (out of order) and Paul has to FIX this problem. This is ALSO the same ABUSE and improper usage of this gift that CONTINUES today.

This kind has a specific purpose... to EDIFIY! Whether this is for ONLY the one who is speaking, or for others... it is made clear BY Paul what this "kind" is for. This can all be understood through Paul's instructions to the Corinthians are studied in 1 Cor 12-14.

The unbelievers were those of the circumcision. They believed in Christ Acts 10:45 but they did not believe the Gospel was for the Gentiles until after they witnessed what happened to Cornelius. Acts 11:18

So would you agree that the term "unbeliever" is not limited to ONLY those who are NOT in Christ but can also involved an UNbelief that a person IN Christ may be having and is an UNbeliever?

[Boo]

Being an "unbeliever" is not necessarily a bad thing if you are referring to a belief that is incorrect. The word is ususally used as a perjorative and is frequently used for just that purpose. I would hope that it is not your intent.

I fail to note any attempts made by Jesus to teach us that we are to edify ourselves. All that I have seen teaches us that we are to edify others, to help others, and to love and comfort others. If we do something to edify ourselves, I believe it falls outside the teachings we are given.

[Slug1]

Being an "unbeliever" is not necessarily a bad thing if you are referring to a belief that is incorrect. The word is ususally used as a perjorative and is frequently used for just that purpose. I would hope that it is not your intent.

As you can see, we used the word to describe Peter due to his UNbelief in accepting that the Gentiles could accept and Christ and will be saved.

I guess it's a matter of "acceptance"... not belief then?

I fail to note any attempts made by Jesus to teach us that we are to edify ourselves. All that I have seen teaches us that we are to edify others, to help others, and to love and comfort others. If we do something to edify ourselves, I believe it falls outside the teachings we are given.

Jesus is the entire Word. Just because something isn't in red lettering doesn't mean that Jesus didn't say it. This is what the Word of God says... so is it then a matter of acceptance?

1 Cor 14:4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.

The meaning is this... tongues is a gift to GIVE edification to the Body of Christ on both a personal (edification given by God to the speaker) and on a corporate level (edification given by God to all listeners).

You don't think that satan does all he can to STOP this by clouding our understanding so many in the Body of Christ are not able to be blessed by God when He offers edification through the speaking in tongues either privately to a Christian when they speak in tongues to themselves or to a whole church when a 1-3 speak in tongues and there is Interpretation of tongues, SO ALL are edified?

[WITDNM]

Why is that? I think you may have missed the point. If there are no true prophets anymore than anyone claiming to be a prophet would be a false prophet, right?

Yes, that would be true.

How hard would it be to discern that a prophet is false if all prophets today are false? Not hard at all. So, why even be concerned about false prophets if all prophets today are false prophets?

Why, because people believe there are living, true prophets and are being deceived by the false ones. Mormons, etc. As long as people believe there are living, true prophets the warning is needed, and as long as there are false prophets claiming to be true prophets, the warning is needed.

The only case where a warning about false prophets should be taken seriously is if there were also true prophets out there. In that case you'd have to be careful to discern whether a prophet was true or false. But if they were all false today then there would be no such concern. I believe the warnings about false prophets still stand today and if that's the case then there must be true prophets as well. That's what the warning is all about, to be careful to test and see which ones are true and which are false.

At the time Jesus gave the warning there were true prophets, Jesus was one of them. There were also false prophets, claiming to be true prophets, just like today.

[John146]

Why, because people believe there are living, true prophets and are being deceived by the false ones. Mormons, etc. As long as people believe there are living, true prophets the warning is needed, and as long as there are false prophets claiming to be true prophets, the warning is needed.

Do you think that is the context of the warnings given in scripture about false prophets? I don't. I believe the warning in scripture regarding false prophets is to watch out for them and to test anyone claiming to be a prophet to see whether they are a true or false prophet. The warning in scripture is based on the assumption that there are both true and false prophets and the importance of being able to discern one from another. So, do you think those warnings regarding false prophets in scripture still apply today in that context or not?

At the time Jesus gave the warning there were true prophets, Jesus was one of them. There were also false prophets, claiming to be true prophets, just like today.

What basis is there for thinking there are no true prophets today? Someone might say that there can't be any true prophets today because there will be no more prophecies since the prophecies given in the book of Revelation were the last ones. I agree that there are no new prophecies today but there is more to being a prophet than just foretelling the future so just because there won't be any new prophecies is not a basis for thinking that there can't be any true prophets today. Look at this scripture:

1 Cor 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. 29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? 30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? 31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

Notice how prophets are listed along with apostles, teachers, people who perform miracles and healings and so on. Now, would you try to say that there are no longer apostles or teachers in the church? If not then what basis is there for thinking there are no longer prophets in the church?

[Slug1]

Notice how prophets are listed along with apostles, teachers, people who perform miracles and healings and so on. Now, would you try to say that there are no longer apostles or teaches in the church? If not then what basis is there for thinking there are no longer prophets in the church?

I always imagine some in the Body of Christ using a black Sharpie pen to line out "prophets" from that scripture... sad actually.

[WITDNM]

Hooah! Let's focus on the signs/wonders in contention. What I mean is this... if a person has come to believe in the cessation of tongues/knowledge/prophecy... with both speaking in tongues and also the possibility of speaking prophecy are manifestations of evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit... then such a person who does believe as they do, HOW are they to accept God's will when He allows many in the Body of Christ to receive the blessing OF the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Understanding needs to be balanced then with context of scriptures other then the Acts 2:6-8.

We understand that there are multiple "kinds" of tongues.

1 Cor 12:10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues.

Does the usage of "kindS" mean the many languages of the world?

I believe so. One with the gift of tongues could have went to China and spoke Chinese to the unbelieving Chinaman. He could have went to England and spoke English to the unbelieving Englishman. Just curious Slug, do you see any of this "kind" going on today?

Does it mean that this gift comes in different "kinds"?

So we have to go to scripture and balance how, when, where, why tongues has been used in scripture and discern the meaning.

The situation you posted through the Acts 2:6-8 scriptures is a "kind" of example of tongues where there is NO need for the accompanying gift of Interpretation of tongues. This is how this can be discerned... the gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to ONLY those who are a part of the Body of Christ (All of 1 Cor 12 teaches this but v12-14 specifically helps this understanding). So, this tells us that the UNbelievers in Acts 2:6-8 were NOT operating with the gift of Interpretation of Tongues.

Yet... they STILL were able to understand Peter's native language as he spoke, even though all the listeners had many different native languages... they understood his speech (him speaking his native language) in their native language ALL at the same time

Whoa here. The tongue speaking happened before Peter spoke in verse 14. When Peter addressed the crowd he could have spoke Greek or maybe Hebrew which most, if not all, would have understood.

So this is a "kind" of the gift of "different kindS of tongues" (1 Cor 12:10).

Then we have the "kind" that DOES require the additional gift of Interpretation of Tongues when God is to use servants to EDIFY others who are IN the Body of Christ. This is the "kind" of tongues that the Corinthians were ABUSING and using improperly (out of order) and Paul has to FIX this problem. This is ALSO the same ABUSE and improper usage of this gift that CONTINUES today.

This kind has a specific purpose... to EDIFIY! Whether this is for ONLY the one who is speaking, or for others... it is made clear BY Paul what this "kind" is for. This can all be understood through Paul's instructions to the Corinthians are studied in 1 Cor 12-14.

Notice, it was not the gift of tongues in and of itself that edified the church. It was the WORDS. An interpreter allowed them understand the WORDS and be edified. That's the main point of chapter 14. It is better to speak so you can be understood. Is it possible the carnal minded, tongue speaking, Christians in Corinth thought they were better than those who didn't? (I'm not implying that is the situation with you today. You have made it clear it's not)

So would you agree that the term "unbeliever" is not limited to ONLY those who are NOT in Christ but can also involved an UNbelief that a person IN Christ may be having and is an UNbeliever?

All I can say is that those of the circumcision were convinced the Gentiles were accepted because Cornelius and his household were Baptized in the Holy Spirit Acts 11:18, and that Paul said tongues were a sign to unbelievers. I Cor 14:22

[Slug1]

I believe so. One with the gift of tongues could have went to China and spoke Chinese to the unbelieving Chinaman. He could have went to England and spoke English to the unbelieving Englishman. Just curious Slug, do you see any of this "kind" going on today?

Yes I do. However, your understanding of this "kind" of tongues is in a misunderstanding. The person going to China isn't speaking Chinese. They are speaking their native language but the Chinese listener is HEARING them in Chinese which is "their" native language.

When we read about this specific "kind" of tongues in the Acts 2 chapter, you will find that there is a Greek, an Arab, and many other nationalities all together. While Peter speaks only in HIS native language, EACH of the listeners were HEARING Peter's speech in their own, personal native language. This is WHY all who were listening were so confused.

In other words... if there are Chinese, Russian, Spanish, and Korean people in a crowd listening to me speak a message and God empowers this "kind" of tongues... even though I'm speaking in English, they hear me in their PERSONAL native language. So while the Chinese hear me speaking in Chinese, as the SAME TIME, the others are hearing me speaking in their language.

Whoa here. The tongue speaking happened before Peter spoke in verse 14. When Peter addressed the crowd he could have spoke Greek or maybe Hebrew which most, if not all, would have understood.

Sure, it began before the speech but you still have to discern all the meaning...

v6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language.

"his own language"... then discern this with this additional scripture: v8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?

Notice, it was not the gift of tongues in and of itself that edified the church. It was the WORDS. An interpreter allowed them understand the WORDS and be edified. That's the main point of chapter 14. It is better to speak so you can be understood. Is it possible the carnal minded, tongue speaking, Christians in Corinth thought they were better than those who didn't? (I'm not implying that is the situation with you today. You have made it clear it's not)

It is the "purpose" of the gift of tongues for edification to be received from God. It's not the ONLY way... but it IS a way God has chosen.

All I can say is that those of the circumcision were convinced the Gentiles were accepted because Cornelius and his household were Baptized in the Holy Spirit Acts 11:18, and that Paul said tongues were a sign to unbelievers. I Cor 14:22

Ok... so if I was to discern the fruit of these words you just spoke and I discerned that unbelievers is NOT limited to mean ONLY people of NO faith in Jesus... would my discernment be correct?

I'm gonna be straight up in this next statement... are you resisting submitting to what the scriptures are saying and the truth of all these scriptures are going against what you have believed for so many years?

I've been transparent to you all through this thread... submitting to these scriptures KILLED ME as the Holy Spirit began to walk me through all this and submitting was hard. Once I humbled myself and submitted... it went much easier and quicker to understand parts of the Word of God I literally denied.

[John146]

I always imagine some in the Body of Christ using a black Sharpie pen to line out "prophets" from that scripture... sad actually.

And the speaking in tongues part as well. They can't have that there. No, sir. The rest of it is okay with them and can stay, though.

[WITDNM]

Do you think that is the context of the warnings given in scripture about false prophets? I don't. I believe the warning in scripture regarding false prophets is to watch out for them and to test anyone claiming to be a prophet to see whether they are a true or false prophet. The warning in scripture is based on the assumption that there are both true and false prophets and the importance of being able to discern one from another. So, do you think those warnings regarding false prophets in scripture still apply today in that context or not?

What basis is there for thinking there are no true prophets today? Someone might say that there can't be any true prophets today because there will be no more prophecies since the prophecies given in the book of Revelation were the last ones. I agree that there are no new prophecies today but there is more to being a prophet than just foretelling the future so just because there won't be any new prophecies is not a basis for thinking that there can't be any true prophets today. Look at this scripture:

1 Cor 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. 29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? 30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? 31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

Notice how prophets are listed along with apostles, teachers, people who perform miracles and healings and so on. Now, would you try to say that there are no longer apostles or teachers in the church? If not then what basis is there for thinking there are no longer prophets in the church?

I'll make a fuller response later but I want you to think about this.

Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. Genesis 2:22

I believe God made a woman from the rib of a man. Do you?
I Believe God still has the power to make a woman from the rib of a man. Do you?
If a lonely young man read Genesis 2 and believed with all his heart that God could make him a wife from his rib, and prayed to God that He do exactly that, would God make him a woman? I don't believe He would. Do you believe He would?

[Slug1]

I'll make a fuller response later but I want you to think about this.

Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. Genesis 2:22

I believe God made a woman from the rib of a man. Do you?
I Believe God still has the power to make a woman from the rib of a man. Do you?
If a lonely young man read Genesis 2 and believed with all his heart that God could make him a wife from his rib, and prayed to God that He do exactly that, would God make him a woman? I don't believe He would. Do you believe He would?

A man who reads Genesis 2:22 WOULD believe that they can pray for a women and God WOULD make them one from one of their ribs.

This is the problem with doctrines that don't include ALL scriptures of the Bible and only put in select ones to fit the doctrine, thus creating context that also fits the doctrine.

This man would believe this UNTIL they come out from under the bondage of such a belief. This is accomplished by accepting ALL the context of scriptures. Until such a man submitted to all the context of the Bible and not just the context CREATED by a doctrine that limits the scriptures... until then, they will continue to believe the doctrine OVER the Bible and also NOT understand the Bible in it's full truth, due to the bondage of the doctrine.

You raise a PERFECT example and I will use this to help others!!

Thank you!

This thread is turning out more edifying than I thought!

[John146]

I'll make a fuller response later but I want you to think about this.

Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. Genesis 2:22

I believe God made a woman from the rib of a man. Do you?

Of course.

I Believe God still has the power to make a woman from the rib of a man. Do you?

Sure. I can see where you're going with this (some things in the Bible don't necessarily apply to all times - yeah, I get that) but it really doesn't address the point I was making.

If a lonely young man read Genesis 2 and believed with all his heart that God could make him a wife from his rib, and prayed to God that He do exactly that, would God make him a woman? I don't believe He would. Do you believe He would?

That would be up to Him. It doesn't matter whether I think He would or not since that has no bearing on whether or not He would do it. I don't know if He would or not. The fact that He could do it would make me hesitant to say whether or not He would one way or another. Why would we ever want to put a limitation on what God can or can't do regarding things besides those that He said He won't do (He won't ever send a global flood again, for example). But this is all really beside the point I was making, though.

None of this really addresses what I said about 1 Cor 12:28-30. Why would some of the positions in the church listed there have ceased (prophets, speaking in tongues) while others remained (apostles, teachers, helpers)? I don't believe that makes any sense. Please address that question specifically.

[WITDNM]

Yes I do. However, your understanding of this "kind" of tongues is in a misunderstanding. The person going to China isn't speaking Chinese. They are speaking their native language but the Chinese listener is HEARING them in Chinese which is "their" native language.

When we read about this specific "kind" of tongues in the Acts 2 chapter, you will find that there is a Greek, an Arab, and many other nationalities all together. While Peter speaks only in HIS native language, EACH of the listeners were HEARING Peter's speech in their own, personal native language. This is WHY all who were listening were so confused.

In other words... if there are Chinese, Russian, Spanish, and Korean people in a crowd listening to me speak a message and God empowers this "kind" of tongues... even though I'm speaking in English, they hear me in their PERSONAL native language. So while the Chinese hear me speaking in Chinese, as the SAME TIME, the others are hearing me speaking in their language.



Sure, it began before the speech but you still have to discern all the meaning...

v6 And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone heard them speak in his own language.

"his own language"... then discern this with this additional scripture: v8 And how is it that we hear, each in our own language in which we were born?

So, you believe the scene in Acts 2 would have looked something like a Japanese monster movie where the speech does not match the lips. I don't believe that. I believe they heard them SPEAK in their own language. You believe the Chinaman would have seen the lips move in Greek or whatever but heard the sound in Chinese...I don't believe that.

It is the "purpose" of the gift of tongues for edification to be received from God. It's not the ONLY way... but it IS a way God has chosen.

It was the words spoken by the tongue speaker that edified the church. Tongues spoken, but not understood did not edify the church.

Ok... so if I was to discern the fruit of these words you just spoke and I discerned that unbelievers is NOT limited to mean ONLY people of NO faith in Jesus... would my discernment be correct?

In a sense they were unbelievers because they did not believe the gospel was for the Gentiles but they did believe Jesus was the son of God.

I'm gonna be straight up in this next statement... are you resisting submitting to what the scriptures are saying and the truth of all these scriptures are going against what you have believed for so many years?

I've been transparent to you all through this thread... submitting to these scriptures KILLED ME as the Holy Spirit began to walk me through all this and submitting was hard. Once I humbled myself and submitted... it went much easier and quicker to understand parts of the Word of God I literally denied.

What I am resisting is your misunderstanding of these scriptures. I don't believe you have the truth of all these scriptures. Yes, your misunderstanding is against what I have believed for so many years. That is why we are involved in this discussion.

[Slug1]

So, you believe the scene in Acts 2 would have looked something like a Japanese monster movie where the speech does not match the lips. I don't believe that. I believe they heard them SPEAK in their own language. You believe the Chinaman would have seen the lips move in Greek or whatever but heard the sound in Chinese...I don't believe that.

If this is how you want to analyze what the scriptures mean... that is your prerogative. Just don't mock what the Holy Spirit is doing when Peter is speaking in Greek or Hebrew and the Arab heard Arabic. Who cares what it looked like when the Holy Spirit is manifesting... the focus is what the Holy Spirit is accomplishing. He's not gonna care what our opinion is about how it appears to us.

Those watching the 120 called them drunk (assuming this is how it appeared to look to them)... you call it as you just did... to me, both of these type of reactions are due to a lack of understanding.

Let's not return to the kneejerk level of discussion like earlier... ok? Calling them all drunk was kneejerking enough. No need to reinvent that wheel with calling them something else as was just done

It was the words spoken by the tongue speaker that edified the church. Tongues spoken, but not understood did not edify the church.

Hooah... that is what Paul taught us all about tongues. Without interpretation, ONLY the speaker is edified by God. With the gift of Interpretation also manifesting, ALL listeners are edified.

In a sense they were unbelievers because they did not believe the gospel was for the Gentiles but they did believe Jesus was the son of God.

Amen... thus my question... does the term "unbeliever" ONLY mean those who are not believers "IN" Christ?

What I am resisting is your misunderstanding of these scriptures. I don't believe you have the truth of all these scriptures. Yes, your misunderstanding is against what I have believed for so many years. That is why we are involved in this discussion.

Fair enough. Your understanding you have now is the same as what I understood several years ago until I came out from under the cessationist doctrine and held my hand up to God for help and for HIS understanding.