The Manifestation of the Spirit for the Common Good 1 Corinthians 12

[Truth Seeker]

I was going by this definition: Cessationism is the belief that certain spiritual gifts, such as prophecy, healing, and speaking in tongues, stopped being given by God to the church sometime in the first century AD or gradually over the next few centuries.

Hmm. I don't know very many people who would agree with that theory, regardless of denomination.

This was directly taken from internet definition and what many other have told me. If it's not the true definition then I don't know.

And why wouldn't we find members of the Pentecostal churches doing what their ministers tell them to do?? Especially after not "speaking in tongues" is presented as proof that any such person isn't a complete Christian.

It’s important to address this concern with sensitivity and clarity. The experience of speaking in tongues, or glossolalia, is indeed a distinctive feature of Pentecostal theology and practice, but it is crucial to understand the broader context and teaching around this spiritual gift. Pentecostal ministers, including those in the United Pentecostal Church, encourage believers to seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is often evidenced by speaking in tongues, based on scriptural examples such as Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44-46, and Acts 19:6. However, there are several reasons why not all members might immediately or uniformly experience this. Every believer's walk with God is unique. While some might receive the gift of tongues soon after seeking it, others may take longer. The timing and manner of receiving spiritual gifts can vary greatly.

The reception of spiritual gifts often depends on an individual's readiness and openness to the Holy Spirit. Factors like personal faith, understanding, and spiritual maturity can influence this process. Some individuals might feel undue pressure to speak in tongues and could be focusing too much on the act itself rather than fostering a deep relationship with God. Pentecostal ministers typically emphasize that the gift of tongues is not about performance but about a genuine encounter with the Holy Spirit. There might be differences in how the teaching and encouragement around speaking in tongues are communicated and understood within different congregations. Effective discipleship and clear teaching are crucial for helping believers understand and seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit in a healthy way. Ultimately, the giving of spiritual gifts is under God's control. While believers are encouraged to seek these gifts earnestly, it is God who determines the timing and manner in which they are bestowed.

Addressing the concern that "not speaking in tongues" might be seen as a sign of an incomplete Christian experience, it’s important to clarify that while the Pentecostal tradition highly values this experience, it does not mean that those who have not yet spoken in tongues are lesser Christians. The emphasis should be on seeking a deeper relationship with God and being open to all that He has for us, rather than feeling incomplete or inadequate. Pentecostal ministers typically encourage believers to continue seeking, praying, and growing in their faith, with the assurance that God knows their hearts and will provide according to His perfect will and timing. The key message is one of encouragement, faith, and persistence in pursuing a full and vibrant relationship with God through the Holy Spirit.

 

[Truth Seeker]

So not all speak in tongues, but we should all speak in tongues. What's wrong with this picture?

First, there is speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, which is a private and personal experience for every believer baptized in the Holy Ghost. This experience is a sign of the New Birth and is distinct from the spiritual gifts described in 1 Corinthians 12.

Second, the passage in 1 Corinthians 12 refers to the specific gift of tongues used in a public worship setting. This gift, meant for the edification of the church, typically occurs during quiet spiritual moments and requires interpretation. Not all believers will possess this particular gift, (The Entire 5-Fold ministry ins still in operation Today), just not all are apostles, prophets, or teachers.

 

[Albion]

This was directly taken from internet definition and what many other have told me. If it's not the true definition then I don't know.

That would be the definition of the term cessationism. However, that doesn't make the term be accurate.

Most non-Pentecostals are aware that the gifts didn't stop 100% for a millennium or so until the Holiness movement and its offshoots in more recent times made an issue of receiving the gifts and, consequently, began to use the word "Cessationist" for the members of all the historic churches.

It’s important to address this concern with sensitivity and clarity. The experience of speaking in tongues, or glossolalia, is indeed a distinctive feature of Pentecostal theology and practice, but it is crucial to understand the broader context and teaching around this spiritual gift. Pentecostal ministers, including those in the United Pentecostal Church, encourage believers to seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is often evidenced by speaking in tongues, based on scriptural examples such as Acts 2:4, Acts 10:44-46, and Acts 19:6. However, there are several reasons why not all members might immediately or uniformly experience this. Every believer's walk with God is unique. While some might receive the gift of tongues soon after seeking it, others may take longer. The timing and manner of receiving spiritual gifts can vary greatly.

The reception of spiritual gifts often depends on an individual's readiness and openness to the Holy Spirit. Factors like personal faith, understanding, and spiritual maturity can influence this process. Some individuals might feel undue pressure to speak in tongues and could be focusing too much on the act itself rather than fostering a deep relationship with God. Pentecostal ministers typically emphasize that the gift of tongues is not about performance but about a genuine encounter with the Holy Spirit. There might be differences in how the teaching and encouragement around speaking in tongues are communicated and understood within different congregations. Effective discipleship and clear teaching are crucial for helping believers understand and seek the baptism of the Holy Spirit in a healthy way. Ultimately, the giving of spiritual gifts is under God's control. While believers are encouraged to seek these gifts earnestly, it is God who determines the timing and manner in which they are bestowed.

Addressing the concern that "not speaking in tongues" might be seen as a sign of an incomplete Christian experience, it’s important to clarify that while the Pentecostal tradition highly values this experience, it does not mean that those who have not yet spoken in tongues are lesser Christians. The emphasis should be on seeking a deeper relationship with God and being open to all that He has for us, rather than feeling incomplete or inadequate. Pentecostal ministers typically encourage believers to continue seeking, praying, and growing in their faith, with the assurance that God knows their hearts and will provide according to His perfect will and timing.

Sounds like the Pentecostal minister doesn't demand that all members immediately demonstrate that they have received one or more of the gifts BUT that, as you have explained it, they will receive such if and when they pray harder or etc. There's not really much of a difference there.

The key message is one of encouragement, faith, and persistence in pursuing a full and vibrant relationship with God through the Holy Spirit.

 

[Truth Seeker]

Sounds like the Pentecostal minister doesn't demand that all members immediately demonstrate that they have received one or more of the gifts BUT that, as you have explained it, they will receive such if and when they pray harder or etc. There's not really much of a difference there.

The emphasis is on a genuine, heartfelt pursuit of God's presence and will (Not harder praying, raising hands in the air or jumping up and down, which are right and proper in specific context but not the means by which they come), which leads to the natural outworking of spiritual gifts rather than a checklist approach or immediate demonstration. This perspective underscores a relational and dynamic interaction with God rather than a rigid or performance-based expectation.

That would be the definition of the term cessationism. However, that doesn't make the term be accurate.

Most non-Pentecostals are aware that the gifts didn't stop 100% for a millennium or so until the Holiness movement and its offshoots in more recent times made an issue of receiving the gifts and, consequently, began to use the word "Cessationist" for the members of all the historic churches.

The passage from Amos 8:11, which speaks of a famine of hearing the words of the LORD, can be interpreted in light of the historical trajectory of the Church’s relationship with spiritual gifts. For many centuries, there was a significant shift in the broader Christian Church away from actively practicing or teaching about the spiritual gifts described in the New Testament.

This historical shift is seen as a manifestation of the very famine described by Amos—a period where the Church, for various reasons, became less focused on the experiential and supernatural aspects of faith. During this time, the gifts of the Spirit, such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, and healing, were often neglected or minimized in teaching and practice. This period of neglect is viewed as a form of spiritual famine, where the fullness of God’s promises and the active presence of His Spirit were not being fully experienced or sought after.

The resurgence of interest in spiritual gifts in the 20th century is seen as a response to this famine. This resurgence sought to restore the Church’s connection to the gifts of the Spirit and to re-emphasize the importance of direct, personal experiences with God. From this perspective, the renewed emphasis on spiritual gifts is viewed as a fulfillment of the prophetic promise to once again hear the words of the LORD and experience His active presence.

In summary, Amos 8:11 serves as a poignant reminder of the spiritual void that can occur when the Church loses sight of the dynamic and active work of the Holy Spirit. The 20th-century revival of the gifts of the Spirit is seen as a corrective to this historical famine, restoring the practice and teaching of spiritual gifts to their rightful place in the life of the Church.

 

[Albion]

In summary, Amos 8:11 serves as a poignant reminder of the spiritual void that can occur when the Church loses sight of the dynamic and active work of the Holy Spirit.

None of us would deny that, but it doesn't necessitate or make right what the Pentecostal churches have done with regard to the Gifts.

The 20th-century revival of the gifts of the Spirit is seen as a corrective to this historical famine, restoring the practice and teaching of spiritual gifts to their rightful place in the life of the Church.

Keep in mind that we're talking about GIFTS of the Holy Spirit. Gifts. That's not what's being described here.

 

[Truth Seeker]

None of us would deny that, but it doesn't necessitate or make right what the Pentecostal churches have done with regard to the Gifts.

And what exactly are they doing wrong?

 

[tango]

First, there is speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, which is a private and personal experience for every believer baptized in the Holy Ghost. This experience is a sign of the New Birth and is distinct from the spiritual gifts described in 1 Corinthians 12.

Second, the passage in 1 Corinthians 12 refers to the specific gift of tongues used in a public worship setting. This gift, meant for the edification of the church, typically occurs during quiet spiritual moments and requires interpretation. Not all believers will possess this particular gift, (The Entire 5-Fold ministry ins still in operation Today), just not all are apostles, prophets, or teachers.

So we're back to the assumption that what happened in Acts 2 is prescriptive and must therefore happen every single other time the Holy Spirit is received? Someone speaks in tongues for a time, regardless of whether it serves any purpose or not, and then stops speaking in tongues at some unspecified point in time later unless they are given the gift of speaking in tongues, in which case they don't. Makes perfect sense.

 

[Truth Seeker]

Some people contest this point and say it is not necessary to speak with other tongues. They further affirm, and with this part we must agree, that there is no specific passage of Scripture stating that all must speak in tongues when filled with the Holy Spirit. It is very significant, however, that when the Spirit was poured out on the Day of Pentecost, everyone in the Upper Room spoke with other tongues; not some of them, not half of them while the other half had other gifts instead; but they were all filled and they all began to speak with other tongues. It does not seem satisfactory, therefore, for one today to have an experience that does not precisely correspond with what they had in the Upper Room.

Some folks argue that speaking in tongues isn’t necessary when you receive the Holy Spirit. They point out, and we can agree with this, that there’s no specific Bible verse saying everyone must speak in tongues when filled with the Spirit. However, it's pretty striking that on the Day of Pentecost, everyone in the Upper Room spoke in tongues. Not just some, or half, but all of them. So, it seems a bit lacking for someone today to have an experience that doesn’t quite match what happened there.

Let us for a little while consider the speaking with tongues. People have said, “Oh, the speaking in tongues is the least of the nine gifts.” Let us for a moment subscribe to that; let us accept the statement that the speaking with other tongues is the least of all the gifts. Now we will give due consideration to this least gift, since it is amazingly supernatural. A person by the power of the Spirit of God speaks in a language he has never learned; he uses a vocabulary that he has not committed to memory; he speaks clearly, not hesitantly, but fluently and positively. He speaks grammatically. It is a very remarkable thing that he should utter, by the power of the Spirit of God, a language strictly according to its grammatical construction, without knowing anything whatever about the grammar of the language.

Think of that! He speaks clearly; he speaks fluently; he speaks grammatically correct in a language he has not learned; and if that isn’t enough, we may go still further and mention that he speaks idiomatically, and I suppose that is the last thing we ever do in learning a language. In learning a language we labor to commit a vocabulary to memory, or at least a sufficient number of words to hold a simple conversation, and then we struggle with the grammar to get our tenses, etc., right; and the last thing that troubles us is the idiom; yet by the Spirit of God, without the least effort upon his part, the individual can speak clearly, fluently, grammatically, and idiomatically in a language he has never learned. I affirm that it is astonishing to say the least. This is what God does with everyone who speaks in other tongues.

Then one may ask, “Why is it that the entire Church of Jesus Christ has not been amazed at this stupendous miracle? Why has not the whole Church become Pentecostal?” The answer is in the Bible, Isaiah 28:11, 12, and these are the words: “With stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people ... yet they would not hear.” There is the indictment of of Scripture against the Church that accepts the Lord Jesus as her Saviour, but does not accept the Holy Spirit’s manifestation of speaking with other tongues. Mark the words, “Yet they would not hear.”

So, it is God who is speaking through the Spirit-filled person in other tongues. It is the Almighty, by the Holy Ghost, who is giving him the amazing power to articulate in a language he has never learned. Yet there are some people who love the Lord Jesus Christ but have no time for this manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Albion]

Some people contest this point and say it is not necessary to speak with other tongues. They further affirm, and with this part we must agree, that there is no specific passage of Scripture stating that all must speak in tongues when filled with the Holy Spirit. It is very significant, however, that when the Spirit was poured out on the Day of Pentecost, everyone in the Upper Room spoke with other tongues; not some of them, not half of them while the other half had other gifts instead; but they were all filled and they all began to speak with other tongues. It does not seem satisfactory, therefore, for one today to have an experience that does not precisely correspond with what they had in the Upper Room.

How does that follow? The Apostles and disciples had many other experiences that we do not think must apply to all believers today. There was the feeding of thousands with a miraculous supply of loaves and fishes, for instance, but we do not commemorate this event by having everyone repeat it. They also had tongues of fire appear over their heads when the Holy Spirit came to them, but we don't expect or require that to be repeated in our lives or, if it's not, make the claim that the believer isn't a full Christian.

Some folks argue that speaking in tongues isn’t necessary when you receive the Holy Spirit.
They point out, and we can agree with this, that there’s no specific Bible verse saying everyone must speak in tongues when filled with the Spirit. However, it's pretty striking that on the Day of Pentecost, everyone in the Upper Room spoke in tongues.

See the above.

Not just some, or half, but all of them. So, it seems a bit lacking for someone today to have an experience that doesn’t quite match what happened there.

See the above.

Let us for a little while consider the speaking with tongues. People have said, “Oh, the speaking in tongues is the least of the nine gifts.” Let us for a moment subscribe to that; let us accept the statement that the speaking with other tongues is the least of all the gifts. Now we will give due consideration to this least gift, since it is amazingly supernatural. A person by the power of the Spirit of God speaks in a language he has never learned; he uses a vocabulary that he has not committed to memory; he speaks clearly, not hesitantly, but fluently and positively. He speaks grammatically. It is a very remarkable thing that he should utter, by the power of the Spirit of God, a language strictly according to its grammatical construction, without knowing anything whatever about the grammar of the language.

There apparently have been some people gifted with the ability to speak in other languages--real languages, that is, but Pentecostalism rests upon followers rattling out a string of meaningless sounds or syllables, sometimes complete with barking and other such utterances, and still spoken with the normal regional accent (Southern, New England, etc.) of that person. And this is accepted, not rejected by these churches.

Then one may ask, “Why is it that the entire Church of Jesus Christ has not been amazed at this stupendous miracle? Why has not the whole Church become Pentecostal?” The answer is in the Bible,

No, the answer is that you are not describing Pentecostal Christianity as it really is. You are referring to otherwise unexplained happenings in the lives of some very few churchmen and women, little different from other seemingly miraculous experiences of people who are members of non-Pentecostal churches.

 

[tango]

Some people contest this point and say it is not necessary to speak with other tongues. They further affirm, and with this part we must agree, that there is no specific passage of Scripture stating that all must speak in tongues when filled with the Holy Spirit. It is very significant, however, that when the Spirit was poured out on the Day of Pentecost, everyone in the Upper Room spoke with other tongues; not some of them, not half of them while the other half had other gifts instead; but they were all filled and they all began to speak with other tongues. It does not seem satisfactory, therefore, for one today to have an experience that does not precisely correspond with what they had in the Upper Room.

The people speaking in other tongues were heard by those around them who spoke the tongues naturally. People heard the simple disciples speaking in their tongues and marveled. It served a purpose. If I receive the Holy Spirit in the privacy of my own living room, or in a church surrounded by people whose native tongue matches my own, what purpose does it serve if I speak in some other language? Nobody around me will know whether I'm speaking another language or just muttering gibberish.

As you say there is no passage in Scripture that says this must happen, so to insist that it does is to create a rule where Scripture offers no such rule. The crucial part of the Upper Room experience was the infilling of the Holy Spirit, not the specific manifestation of the Spirit at that time.

 

[Truth Seeker]

How does that follow? They also had tongues of fire appear over their heads when the Holy Spirit came to them, but we don't expect or require that to be repeated in our lives or, if it's not, make the claim that the believer isn't a full Christian.

I want to emphasize that my approach to this discussion is based solely on Scripture, without any denominational or man-made doctrines influencing my perspective. While Pentecostals and Charismatics often come up in conversations about spiritual gifts due to their emphasis on the continuation of these gifts, my focus remains on what the Bible teaches. In Acts 2, the early believers experienced tongues of fire as a dramatic sign of the Holy Spirit’s arrival, but we do not expect or require this specific manifestation to be repeated in every believer's life today. That event was a unique and foundational moment in the Church’s history.

What truly defines a full Christian experience is the internal work of the Holy Spirit, including the fruits of the Spirit and Gifts of empowerment for ministry. It’s important to recognize that not receiving the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues might mean missing out on the full range of spiritual gifts and empowerment for service that the Holy Spirit offers. Speaking in tongues, as described in the New Testament, is not only an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit but also a gateway to a broader experience of spiritual gifts that enable effective service and ministry. Therefore, while dramatic signs like tongues of fire are not necessary for salvation or Christian identity, embracing the fullness of the Holy Spirit can greatly enrich and empower believers in their service and witness for Christ.

The Apostles had many other experiences that we do not think must apply to all believers today. They were fed with a miraculous supply of loaves and fishes, for instance

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father" (John 14:12)

This is a profound promise of empowerment and an essential aspect of the believer's relationship with Christ. Jesus' words underscore the expectation that those who have faith in Him will not only continue His earthly ministry but will also surpass it in scope and impact. This promise is deeply connected to the advent of the Holy Spirit, which Jesus mentions as a crucial factor for these greater works.

Jesus' ascension to the Father and the subsequent sending of the Holy Spirit are seen as pivotal events that enable believers to perform these greater works. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit, experienced on the Day of Pentecost, empowers believers to operate in the same miraculous works that Jesus performed, such as healing, prophecy, and miracles, and to extend these works to a broader extent. The "greater works" are understood not necessarily as greater in kind, but in terms of their reach and impact, facilitated by the global spread of the gospel and the collective ministry of the Church empowered by the Holy Spirit. This passage affirms the active and ongoing role of the Holy Spirit in equipping and commissioning believers to continue and expand upon the mission of Jesus, embodying the dynamic and transformative power of God in their lives and ministry.

There probably are some people who are given to speaking on other languages--real languages, that is, but Pentecostalism rests upon followers spewing out a string of meaningless sounds or syllables, sometimes with barking and other such utterances and still spoken with the normal regional accent of that person. And this is accepted, not rejected by these churches.

It’s true that speaking in tongues might be perceived by some as the “least” of the gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12, it is essential to recognize that every gift of the Spirit holds significant value and purpose in the life of the believer and the functioning of the Church. Even if speaking in tongues is considered the least of the gifts, it is still a profound and supernatural experience. When one speaks in a language they have never learned, fluently and grammatically, it is a remarkable demonstration of the Spirit’s power. This experience, often described in Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14, reflects the miraculous nature of God’s work through His Spirit.

Regarding the concerns you’ve raised about the nature of tongues within Pentecostal practice, it is important to differentiate between the genuine biblical experience of speaking in tongues and various practices that may deviate from scriptural teachings. Genuine speaking in tongues, as outlined in the New Testament, involves a supernatural utterance that may be a known language or an unknown language used in personal or public prayer. It is not merely about producing random sounds or syllables but is deeply rooted in the biblical understanding of spiritual gifts. In our tradition, the focus is on ensuring that these manifestations align with the biblical examples and teachings, which emphasize edification, prayer, and worship in the Spirit. It’s essential to approach these experiences with discernment and a commitment to the authenticity and integrity of the gifts as they are described in Scripture.

Difference between real biblical tongues and Interpretation and (counterfeiting) faking it:

Real Tongues

skip to 12:19

Fake Tongues

 

[Truth Seeker]

The people speaking in other tongues were heard by those around them who spoke the tongues naturally. People heard the simple disciples speaking in their tongues and marveled. It served a purpose. If I receive the Holy Spirit in the privacy of my own living room, or in a church surrounded by people whose native tongue matches my own, what purpose does it serve if I speak in some other language? Nobody around me will know whether I'm speaking another language or just muttering gibberish.

The distinction between public (Spoken aloud purposely for everyone to hear) and private speaking in tongues is important to understand in light of its purpose and function in each context. In public settings, such as on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, speaking in tongues served as a dramatic and visible sign to those around that the Holy Spirit had been poured out. The multilingual utterances were understood by those present who spoke those languages, thus serving as a powerful witness and confirmation of God's work. This public manifestation was intended to draw attention to the miraculous nature of the Holy Spirit’s arrival and to serve as a testament to the truth of the Gospel.

When speaking in tongues occurs in private settings or within a congregation (privately to yourself) its primary purpose is for the edification and spiritual enrichment of the individual. Here, speaking in tongues functions as a form of prayer and worship, allowing believers to communicate with God in a way that transcends their own understanding. This private use of tongues is about building up one’s spirit and deepening one’s connection with God serving a tremendous purpose for the experience. It may not always be understood by those around, but it remains a meaningful expression of faith and a channel for personal spiritual growth. While the public manifestation of tongues has a specific and observable purpose, the private experience emphasizes the internal, transformative work of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life.

s you say there is no passage in Scripture that says this must happen, so to insist that it does is to create a rule where Scripture offers no such rule. The crucial part of the Upper Room experience was the infilling of the Holy Spirit, not the specific manifestation of the Spirit at that time.

How did the onlookers know the were filled with the Holy Ghost. the answer is here:

Acts 2:33, "Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear."

 

[Albion]

I want to emphasize that my approach to this discussion is based solely on Scripture, without any denominational or man-made doctrines influencing my perspective.

You quote Scripture, that's so. But that doesn't mean that Scripture is being correctly understood.

I tried to point that out in the post immediately preceding this one. I also have seen that you deflect and make excuses in response to something that is the standard perspective on the Pentecostal movement that most Christians of other denominations hold. Of course, that is not uncommon for any denomination or movement that has been subject to a lot of criticism, whether it's Pentecostals or Catholics or Mormons, etc. I don't want to be mean-spirited, but here we're struggling to get to the heart of the matter with this topic.

While Pentecostals and Charismatics often come up in conversations about spiritual gifts due to their emphasis on the continuation of these gifts, my focus remains on what the Bible teaches. In Acts 2, the early believers experienced tongues of fire as a dramatic sign of the Holy Spirit’s arrival, but we do not expect or require this specific manifestation to be repeated in every believer's life today. That event was a unique and foundational moment in the Church’s history.

and it was just one example that could have been used. But more to the point, if it's convenient to say that one event in Scripture is eternal and even obligatory for us all, but another that's similar of course shouldn't be repeated or copied, even for the reasons you used in defense of tongues-speaking, then that's the stuff of cults. Many of them follow some leader who has a unique idea he's gotten from his reading the Bible and then he teaches that all the rest of Christianity has been quite wrong for the past 2000 or so years. And if that is so...then it defies the promise that we also find in Scripture that the Holy Ghost will be with and stay with his church and keep it from departing from the truth.

What truly defines a full Christian experience is the internal work of the Holy Spirit, including the fruits of the Spirit and Gifts of empowerment for ministry. It’s important to recognize that not receiving the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues might mean missing out on the full range of spiritual gifts and empowerment for service that the Holy Spirit offers.

If we don't speak in tongues, then we miss out on speaking in tongues. Got it.

Speaking in tongues, as described in the New Testament, is not only an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit but also a gateway to a broader experience of spiritual gifts that enable effective service and ministry. Therefore, while dramatic signs like tongues of fire are not necessary for salvation or Christian identity, embracing the fullness of the Holy Spirit can greatly enrich and empower believers in their service and witness for Christ.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father" (John 14:12)

This is a profound promise of empowerment and an essential aspect of the believer's relationship with Christ.

I cannot agree that taking a verse like John 14:12 and pretending that it refers to speaking in tongues correct interprets God's word, quite apart from all the other aspects of the issue we've been dealing with.

 

[Truth Seeker]

You quote Scripture, that's so. But that doesn't mean that Scripture is being correctly understood.

I tried to point that out in the post immediately preceding this one. I also have seen that you deflect and make excuses in response to something that is the standard perspective on the Pentecostal movement that most Christians of other denominations hold. Of course, that is not uncommon for any denomination or movement that has been subject to a lot of criticism, whether it's Pentecostals or Catholics or Mormons, etc. I don't want to be mean-spirited, but here we're struggling to get to the heart of the matter with this topic.

If there are particular points where you feel my understanding or interpretation of Scripture might be off, let's discuss those directly. Your insights and experiences are valuable, and I'm here to listen and share from my perspective as well. Together, we can seek a deeper understanding of the heart of the matter.

I appreciate your observation, and I want to clarify that my intention is not to deflect or make excuses based on any religious ideology. What I'm striving to emphasize is the importance of aligning our beliefs and practices with what the Bible teaches and what Christ Himself taught. The core of our faith should always be rooted in Scripture, and it's essential to carefully examine and understand its teachings. While I recognize that there are standard perspectives held by many denominations, my focus is on ensuring that our faith and practice are biblically sound. It's not about adhering to a particular movement or tradition, but about faithfully following the teachings of Jesus and the apostles as recorded in the Bible. Let’s continue to explore these topics together, always with a commitment to seeking truth through Scripture.

and it was just one example that could have been used. But more to the point, if it's convenient to say that one event in Scripture is eternal and even obligatory for us all, but another that's similar of course shouldn't be repeated or copied, even for the reasons you used in defense of tongues-speaking, then that's the stuff of cults. Many of them follow some leader who has a unique idea he's gotten from his reading the Bible and then he teaches that all the rest of Christianity has been quite wrong for the past 2000 or so years. And if that is so...then it defies the promise that we also find in Scripture that the Holy Ghost will be with and stay with his church and keep it from departing from the truth.

Speaking in tongues, as an evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, is consistently witnessed throughout the New Testament and continues to be relevant for believers today. It’s not about picking and choosing what to follow, but about understanding the purpose and pattern that God has laid out in His Word. Speaking in tongues is more than just an isolated event; it’s a recurring theme in the New Testament that signifies the infilling of the Holy Spirit and empowers believers for service and edification.

Regarding your concern about cults and unique interpretations, it’s important to differentiate between adhering to Scripture and following a leader's novel ideas. I adhere and follow as best I can and to align with the teachings of the apostles as recorded in the Bible. The promise of the Holy Spirit’s guidance is indeed for all believers, and I believe that this guidance includes a call to embrace the full experience of the Holy Spirit, including speaking in tongues. This practice is not about departing from truth but about embracing the fullness of what Scripture reveals. The Holy Spirit's presence ensures that we stay anchored in the truth, continually drawing us closer to God and empowering us for His work.

If we don't speak in tongues, then we miss out on speaking in tongues. Got it.

I understand your sentiment, and it’s important to approach this topic with both grace and truth. Speaking in tongues, as described in the New Testament, is more than just a unique experience; it’s a significant aspect of the believer's walk with God. In Acts 2, we see that speaking in tongues was a powerful sign of the Holy Spirit’s arrival and an essential part of the early church's experience.

Speaking in tongues is not just about the act itself, but about the deeper connection and empowerment it signifies. It’s a gateway to experiencing the fullness of the Holy Spirit, which includes a greater sensitivity to God's presence, enhanced prayer life, and access to spiritual gifts of empowerment that equips us for effective service and ministry.

If someone doesn't speak in tongues, it doesn't mean they aren't a genuine Christian or that they don't have a relationship with God. However, they may be missing out on a profound and enriching aspect of that relationship. Our goal is to encourage believers to seek everything God has for them, not out of obligation, but out of a desire to draw closer to Him and to be fully empowered for His work.

I cannot agree that taking a verse like John 14:12 and pretending that it refers to speaking in tongues correct interprets God's word, quite apart from all the other aspects of the issue we've been dealing with.

The quote you are referring to was meant to go with your quote here:

How does that follow? The Apostles and disciples had many other experiences that we do not think must apply to all believers today. There was the feeding of thousands with a miraculous supply of loaves and fishes, for instance, but we do not commemorate this event by having everyone repeat it

Here it is in full:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father" (John 14:12)

This is a profound promise of empowerment and an essential aspect of the believer's relationship with Christ. Jesus' words underscore the expectation that those who have faith in Him will not only continue His earthly ministry but will also surpass it in scope and impact. This promise is deeply connected to the advent of the Holy Spirit, which Jesus mentions as a crucial factor for these greater works.

Jesus' ascension to the Father and the subsequent sending of the Holy Spirit are seen as pivotal events that enable believers to perform these greater works. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit, experienced on the Day of Pentecost, empowers believers to operate in the same miraculous works that Jesus performed, such as healing, prophecy, and miracles, and to extend these works to a broader extent. The "greater works" are understood not necessarily as greater in kind, but in terms of their reach and impact, facilitated by the global spread of the gospel and the collective ministry of the Church empowered by the Holy Spirit. This passage affirms the active and ongoing role of the Holy Spirit in equipping and commissioning believers to continue and expand upon the mission of Jesus, embodying the dynamic and transformative power of God in their lives and ministry.

 

[Albion]

Regarding your concern about cults and unique interpretations, it’s important to differentiate between adhering to Scripture and following a leader's novel ideas.

Of course that's true, which is why the revisionist sects of recent times about which I made that quick reference talk confidently about adhering to Scripture while actually advocating for a novel approach to some well-established aspect of Scripture. That's what makes such a movement stand apart from the rest of Christianity.

Speaking in tongues, as described in the New Testament, is more than just a unique experience; it’s a significant aspect of the believer's walk with God. In Acts 2, we see that speaking in tongues was a powerful sign of the Holy Spirit’s arrival and an essential part of the early church's experience.

But we are dealing with today's church. The time period in which we live now is not part of the "Early Church."

I pointed to the historical fact that the gifts were prominent during the age we call the "Early Church," but that when the Church came to be well established after a few centuries of struggling against a hostile world, the gifts were no longer needed as a witness nearly as much as before. The great outpouring of the gifts had accomplished God's purpose. Consequently, there then began a gradual but significant decline in the number of occurrences.

This is the historical record; and you seemed to agree with it. Meanwhile, I have not argued that the gifts aren't received by anybody at all in today's world.

If someone doesn't speak in tongues, it doesn't mean they aren't a genuine Christian or that they don't have a relationship with God. However, they may be missing out on a profound and enriching aspect of that relationship.

That makes the Charismatic or Pentecostal movement of recent history sound thoroughly neutral concerning reception of the gifts, while still valuing them like every other church also does. Such a view does not at all describe the experience of the Pentecostal denominations.

Our goal is to encourage believers to seek everything God has for them, not out of obligation, but out of a desire to draw closer to Him and to be fully empowered for His work.

Which raises a question. Which Christian denominations take the other POV and so are opposed to their members seeking all that God has intended for them including a desire for a closer relationship with the Almighty? Offhand, I can't think of any.

The quote you are referring to was meant to go with your quote here:

Here it is in full:

I apologize if I messed up some of that post of mine. I did move around some sections of the text after reviewing my first draft, so I can well imagine that a mistake was made.

 

[Truth Seeker]

That makes the Charismatic or Pentecostal movement of recent history sound thoroughly neutral concerning reception of the gifts, while still valuing them like every other church also does. Such a view does not at all describe the experience of the Pentecostal denominations.

I believe in Acts 2:37-38 as Salvation asked for and answer given. But at the same time I see the beauty in a soul saved by grace that shared this testimony:

"I have done just that many, many times in the last 45 years.
God has done many miracles in my life in that time, as well. He instantaneously delivered me from a 5 pack a day smoking habit, shortly after salvation. I stood up in the congregation one day and thanked Him and praised His Holy name for that. As I struggled to get free of alcohol, running in fear to AA meetings every day, He took that fear of not going to meetings away and set me free, shortly after salvation. I had gone through rehab 4 times and spent several months in a halfway house. When He freed me of that fear, I had not taken a drink in a year and a half, yet I was not free until He took the fear away.
I praised and thanked Him for all that He has done for me over the last 45 years.
With this, I have been anointed with oil and prayed over many times at a number of congregations. I have prayed perhaps hundreds of times that He would baptize me in The Holy Ghost and that I may receive the gift of a prayer language, believing that I would be built up in faith by this and that it was my desire to be closer to Him as a result."

Which raises a question. Which Christian denominations take the other POV and so are opposed to their members seeking all that God has intended for them including a desire for a closer relationship with the Almighty? Offhand, I can't think of any.

Cessationist Denominations: Some denominations, like certain Reformed and Baptist traditions, hold to a cessationist view, which teaches that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit (such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, and healing) ceased with the apostolic age. While they certainly encourage believers to seek a close relationship with God, they do not emphasize seeking these particular gifts as part of that pursuit.

Liturgical Denominations: Denominations such as Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and some mainline Protestant churches (like Anglican, Lutheran, and Methodist) may place a stronger emphasis on sacraments, liturgy, and traditional forms of worship as means of drawing closer to God. They may not focus as much on the charismatic gifts, though they certainly value spiritual growth and a deep relationship with God.

Non-Charismatic Evangelicals: Many evangelical churches emphasize personal Bible study, prayer, and evangelism as primary means of growing closer to God. They may not actively teach against charismatic gifts, but they also do not place a strong emphasis on seeking these gifts.

I apologize if I messed up some of that post of mine. I did move around some sections of the text after reviewing my first draft, so I can well imagine that a mistake was made.

I understand what you mean; it can be challenging to keep track sometimes. I appreciate meaningful discussions, unlike those who post one-liners such as "God is Good" or "Praise God." While these are positive expressions, they don't foster substantial dialogue. Similarly, when someone says "I don't agree" without providing any context, scripture, or explanation, it doesn't contribute to a productive conversation. (Feel free to use this in response to anyone who does such things.)

 

[Albion]

I believe in Acts 2:37-38 as Salvation asked for and answer given. But at the same time I see the beauty in a soul saved by grace that shared this testimony:

"I have done just that many, many times in the last 45 years.
God has done many miracles in my life in that time, as well. He instantaneously delivered me from a 5 pack a day smoking habit, shortly after salvation. I stood up in the congregation one day and thanked Him and praised His Holy name for that. As I struggled to get free of alcohol, running in fear to AA meetings every day, He took that fear of not going to meetings away and set me free, shortly after salvation. I had gone through rehab 4 times and spent several months in a halfway house. When He freed me of that fear, I had not taken a drink in a year and a half, yet I was not free until He took the fear away.
I praised and thanked Him for all that He has done for me over the last 45 years.
With this, I have been anointed with oil and prayed over many times at a number of congregations. I have prayed perhaps hundreds of times that He would baptize me in The Holy Ghost and that I may receive the gift of a prayer language, believing that I would be built up in faith by this and that it was my desire to be closer to Him as a result."

Cessationist Denominations: Some denominations, like certain Reformed and Baptist traditions, hold to a cessationist view, which teaches that the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit (such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, and healing) ceased with the apostolic age. While they certainly encourage believers to seek a close relationship with God, they do not emphasize seeking these particular gifts as part of that pursuit.

Liturgical Denominations: Denominations such as Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and some mainline Protestant churches (like Anglican, Lutheran, and Methodist) may place a stronger emphasis on sacraments, liturgy, and traditional forms of worship as means of drawing closer to God. They may not focus as much on the charismatic gifts, though they certainly value spiritual growth and a deep relationship with God.

Non-Charismatic Evangelicals: Many evangelical churches emphasize personal Bible study, prayer, and evangelism as primary means of growing closer to God. They may not actively teach against charismatic gifts, but they also do not place a strong emphasis on seeking these gifts.

I understand what you mean; it can be challenging to keep track sometimes. I appreciate meaningful discussions, unlike those who post one-liners such as "God is Good" or "Praise God." While these are positive expressions, they don't foster substantial dialogue. Similarly, when someone says "I don't agree" without providing any context, scripture, or explanation, it doesn't contribute to a productive conversation. (Feel free to use this in response to anyone who does such things.)

In short, some church bodies don't emphasize the gifts, while the Pentecostal denominations make them almost obligatory; and many of these, sorry to say, encourage people to pretend to have received one or more of the gifts.

Meanwhile, the liturgical churches think that the non-liturgical churches, such as the Pentecostal ones, are wrong for doing without the historic and Scriptural forms of worship, much as the churches that take Christ's words literally when he instituted the Lord's Supper believe that those other churches which think the sacrament is just symbolic are in error.

Maybe we should just end it there.

 

[Truth Seeker]

One final thought if Christ said "Acts 1:8, "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." Obviously referring to the Baptism of the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues on the Day of Pentecost. And if it gives me access to what is stated below. And if they are still available today I or any true christian would desire them and seek for it. At least that is what I believe. Thanks for a wonderful discussion it has truly been great. I have been in discussion back and forth in different threads and here I don't want to forget to finish out 1 Corinthians 12. Still have a way to go.

Acts 1:8 reveals a profound promise and mandate from Jesus to His disciples. This passage outlines both the source and the scope of the mission given to the early Church.

The "power" referred to is the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit, which is essential for effective Christian witness and ministry. This power encompasses not only divine enablement for bold proclamation but also includes the gifts of the Spirit, such as speaking in tongues, prophecy, healing, and miracles. These gifts are instrumental in demonstrating the reality of God's Kingdom and in equipping believers for service. They represent a profound inner change and spiritual strength that comes from being filled with the Holy Spirit, allowing believers to operate in the fullness of God’s authority and grace.

The scope of the mission described in this verse is both immediate and expansive. Jerusalem represents our immediate community or starting point of ministry. Judea symbolizes the broader societal context, including our cultural and national spheres. Samaria, often associated with historical animosity and cultural barriers, signifies the need to reach out across divides and prejudices. The uttermost parts of the earth symbolize the universal mission of the Church to bring the Gospel to all nations, transcending every boundary.

 

[Albion]

One final thought if Christ said "Acts 1:8, "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." Obviously referring to the Baptism of the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues on the Day of Pentecost.

"Obviously?" Certainly not.

The historic churches of Christianity certainly do believe and teach what is given to us in that verse--The Holy Ghost will come upon you and you will be witnesses, etc. But there is no mention in this verse of what you've added to it.

There is no mention there of speaking in tongues, receiving a "word of knowledge," being "slain in the spirit," or anything else that distinguishes Pentecostal churches from the rest of Christianity.

At the same time, the mainline denominations DO believe that the Holy Ghost will come upon believers and that witnessing is important and will follow. And they've explained for two thousand years how that takes place. They just don't read into this verse something that isn't there.

At least that is what I believe. Thanks for a wonderful discussion it has truly been great. I have been in discussion back and forth in different threads and here I don't want to forget to finish out 1 Corinthians 12. Still have a way to go.

I understand, and I hope that you will continue to be active here on CH. I'd love to read your thinking on other topics.

 

[tango]

I want to emphasize that my approach to this discussion is based solely on Scripture, without any denominational or man-made doctrines influencing my perspective.

... and yet you insist on demanding certain signs that Scripture does not demand, based on a very denominational interpretation of one very specific passage.

While Pentecostals and Charismatics often come up in conversations about spiritual gifts due to their emphasis on the continuation of these gifts, my focus remains on what the Bible teaches. In Acts 2, the early believers experienced tongues of fire as a dramatic sign of the Holy Spirit’s arrival, but we do not expect or require this specific manifestation to be repeated in every believer's life today. That event was a unique and foundational moment in the Church’s history.

... and yet you do expect speaking in tongues to be a sign of the Holy Spirit. Why one and not the other? Scripture is equally silent on both, yet you insert a very denominational interpretation while insisting you are not.

What truly defines a full Christian experience is the internal work of the Holy Spirit, including the fruits of the Spirit and Gifts of empowerment for ministry.

The fruit is never described as optional. Paul is clear that not all people receive any specific gift. His passage about the body of Christ affirms this - someone who is an eye might have a strong prophetic gift. Someone who is a thumb might appear to have no specific gifts and indeed might not have specifically supernatural gifts but might bring a sense of balance to a situation.

It’s important to recognize that not receiving the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues might mean missing out on the full range of spiritual gifts and empowerment for service that the Holy Spirit offers. Speaking in tongues, as described in the New Testament, is not only an initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit but also a gateway to a broader experience of spiritual gifts that enable effective service and ministry.

Quite aside from your casual insertion of a requirement to speak in tongues that isn't present in Scripture, now you're implying that without speaking in tongues effective service and ministry aren't enabled? There are lots of people out there with effective ministries who don't speak in tongues.

Therefore, while dramatic signs like tongues of fire are not necessary for salvation or Christian identity, embracing the fullness of the Holy Spirit can greatly enrich and empower believers in their service and witness for Christ.

I don't think anyone is disputing the necessity of the Holy Spirit. The issue is whether the presence of the Holy Spirit must be evidenced by speaking in tongues. You insist that it must despite no Scriptural evidence.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father" (John 14:12)

This is a profound promise of empowerment and an essential aspect of the believer's relationship with Christ. Jesus' words underscore the expectation that those who have faith in Him will not only continue His earthly ministry but will also surpass it in scope and impact. This promise is deeply connected to the advent of the Holy Spirit, which Jesus mentions as a crucial factor for these greater works.

This isn't relevant to the issue of speaking in tongues at all. There is also much question over exactly what "greater works" means. It's hard to imagine doing "bigger and better" works than the man who was God, who healed the sick and raised the dead. Greater in quantity is certainly plausible, given we're talking millions of people over thousands of years.

It’s true that speaking in tongues might be perceived by some as the “least” of the gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12, it is essential to recognize that every gift of the Spirit holds significant value and purpose in the life of the believer and the functioning of the Church. Even if speaking in tongues is considered the least of the gifts, it is still a profound and supernatural experience. When one speaks in a language they have never learned, fluently and grammatically, it is a remarkable demonstration of the Spirit’s power. This experience, often described in Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14, reflects the miraculous nature of God’s work through His Spirit.

I'm not sure anyone is disputing this. The question is more about validation that a person is actually speaking fluently and correctly, especially in a situation where nobody else in the vicinity knows other languages. I may speak in "tongues of men and angels" in prayer but if I'm sitting in a room full of people who only speak my language and suddenly start speaking something else, nobody will know whether it's a tongue or gibberish. Conversely if someone I don't know speaks a language I don't understand it may be they are praying in their own native tongue, which is nothing supernatural at all.

Regarding the concerns you’ve raised about the nature of tongues within Pentecostal practice, it is important to differentiate between the genuine biblical experience of speaking in tongues and various practices that may deviate from scriptural teachings. Genuine speaking in tongues, as outlined in the New Testament, involves a supernatural utterance that may be a known language or an unknown language used in personal or public prayer. It is not merely about producing random sounds or syllables but is deeply rooted in the biblical understanding of spiritual gifts. In our tradition, the focus is on ensuring that these manifestations align with the biblical examples and teachings, which emphasize edification, prayer, and worship in the Spirit. It’s essential to approach these experiences with discernment and a commitment to the authenticity and integrity of the gifts as they are described in Scripture.

If a denomination demands that tongues are the only valid evidence of the Holy Spirit it's hardly surprising that it creates pressure on people to fake it, especially when nobody present would ever know the difference. A teaching that creates pressure to fake things seems like the kind of teaching it's worth looking at to make sure it isn't pushing something false.