Some truth about speaking in tongues, the Holy Ghost, spiritual gifts and 1 Corinthians 14

I agree on the idea that Jesus lived perfectly, died, rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven so that (in addition to having paid the debt for our sins) the Holy Ghost now comes into the believer to remain and abide... not simply to visit.

However, there does appear to be a difference in our beliefs (currently) regarding the timing. I believe that even though the Holy Ghost is promised to the believer, which means we have a right to receive it, it is not guaranteed to happen at the moment of belief.

It sounds like you believe the Holy Ghost comes instantly at time of belief. Am I expressing your belief correctly?

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Is Birth a process or an event?

Interesting question. I'd probably say it's a process culminating in an event. I'm interested to find out why you ask.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

You should maby read the post.
You maby should read the post. I did not say you have something to do with JW. It was only an example.

Well first off I believe there is a process that leads to the birth. Labor pains would be one such example. The pains aren't the actual birth.

BUT the moment of Birth is a singular event.

So it is with our Spiritual Birth. The process would be a drawing by the Lord to Jesus by a recognition that we are sinners in need of a Savior. (Repentance) A confession that He is indeed God in the flesh, the ONLY Savior, and a belief that He was raised from the grave.

Once that occurs, the moment of our Spiritual Birth happens. We ARE indwelt, sealed, and kept by the Holy Spirit until we receive our Glorified bodies. I believe THAT is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. SEPARATE from times when the Holy Spirit can come upon us in power. But those times are not always permanent.

Now a WHOLE bunch of other stuff can happen in that interim between NEW Birth and Glorified bodies, but our Birth into God's Kingdom as His Children is complete.

That's fairly clearly stated. I 'll probably ask a few clarifications later, but I have 2 questions for now...

1. When do you believe the apostles received the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

2. Which step of that process do you think happened to those in the upper room on the day of Pentecost?

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

I would like to answer this too,

The Apostles received the Holy Spirit for what seems to be for salvation recorded in the Gospel of John chapter 20:22
this was when I think the indwelling of the Holy Spirit His Spirit bared witness with our Spirit. Then in the Book of Acts chapter 2. This was the empowering to be a witness which Jesus said would happen after the Holy Spirit came upon them or baptized with the Holy Spirit or Enclothed with the Holy Spirit. That is what Baptized in the Holy Spirit means to be enclothed with.

If i am not wrong we had till post 111 a good conversation. And I had in my first post no 15 a serious question.
Maby i was to optimistic.
What I meanwhile find out is, that there is nobody who can answer my question. But i am treat as unbeliever because of my questions.
For me a sign that this teaching is wrong.
You are talking about truth, but regarding this particular teaching i asked for an answer this is no truth.
True as it is written in acts, but not as teaching for today.
Thank you for your kind manner to answer.

LOL you don't want to hear an answer, you want to believe your question can't be answered yet it does not change the context of Book Acts, what Jesus said in John chapter 14, 15 and what is seen in 1cor 12 to 14 chapters.

The Apostles had a separate type of relationship with Jesus as it pertains to receiving the Holy Spirit, and being Baptized by Him.

Jesus tells them they will be "Baptized" with the Holy Spirit, and He will come "UPON" them with power in Acts 1.
Remember though, Jesus said the Holy Spirit could NOT come until He went to His Father. So because Jesus was still WITH them, He PERSONALLY gave THEM the Holy Spirit Himself, AFTER RESURRECTION, while He was still on Earth. BECAUSE Jesus had not yet ascended, having the Holy Spirit come upon them WAS a different event.
John 20:22 New King James Version (NKJV)
22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.

Where was the Holy Spirit up until this time? Well, He came upon some and left them sometimes because He had not indwelt and the sealed them. We see this with King Saul, and Samson. In Samson's case, He was upon him for most of his life, left him after the Delilah haircut, and came back to him to empower him to tear down the pagan temple.

So Jesus breathing Him on them is DIFFERENT than how He operates today in coming upon someone in power.

I believe that since Jesus HAS already ascended to His Father, and He HAS sent the "Comforter" receiving the Holy Spirit for US IS being Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

This is NOT to say that He cannot also come upon us with power. I think He can and sometimes does, but for HIS purposes.
So I don't think we should be telling unbelievers or baby Christians that Salvation is a process in the sense that Baptism of the Holy Spirit is separate from receiving the Holy Spirit.

The thing that bothers me about speaking in tongues is how misused they are. Speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, not something you can learn. Like any other spiritual gift, tongues is not given to all believers. There MUST be someone there who can interpret the tongues for the congregation so it does not become nothing more than emotional babbling. I Cor. 14:27 If anyone speaks in a tongue, two--or at the most three--should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. " I have too often seen "speaking in tongues" without the interpreter, whip people up into a frenzy. This is not Godly, and should be discouraged.

WRONG incorrect unscriptural and not born out through any real experience.

Hey thanks for clearing that up for everybody! Have a nice day!

that is biblically correct and the very context of Rom 10:9-13

I beg to disagree.
One verse does not a gospel make.

lol Ok, it's not one verse it is five. And supported by other books and the gospels.

You don't know how happy it makes me that you answered this post. Not because it provokes a battle, but because I know what you have And I know that I can simply tell you something and you'll know how to go pray about it and actually let God answer you. (whenever he sees fit, rather than rushing it).

So, I'll share this with you, knowing that I'll still carry respect for you whether you are able to receive it now, or if instead it takes a while and you receive it later. And of course, I intend to 'challenge' your ability to believe. Not towards overthrowing it, but rather like you are weightlifting to see if you can handle an extra plate on each side. The thing is this:

The apostles didn't receive the Holy Ghost twice. It was impossible for them to receive the NT Holy Ghost until Jesus was glorified (John 7:39 (as you know)... but this does not mean when he died on the cross....it means when he ascended... because He said also "if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." John 16:7 KJV therefore it was impossible for them to have received the Promise/Comforter/HolyGhost until he departed (at his ascension Acts 1). Shortly afterwards they received the Holy Ghost.(Acts 2).

Here's the hard part.... Have you ever considered the reason people why want so badly to declare themselves or anyone else as "saved"?? <--really think about that.

SPOILER ALERT: ............. It's because of fear, not faith.

Men love that word (and have nearly deified it and built a shrine to it, lol) because it gives the illusion that everything difficult is in the past. I call it an illusion because of the very first stipulation Jesus mentioned regarding how to be "saved". He said "he that endureth to the end shall be saved." <---doesn't sound much like the way men use it today, does it?

The word saved simply means "delivered" and/or "protected".

Do a bible search and check it out. See if those words (the definition of saved) give clarity pretty much everywhere the word "saved" is used.

And consider this.... if you "save" money, that means you "protect" and "deliver" it from things that would devour it. And if you "save" yourself until marriage, that means you "protect" and "deliver" yourself intact and undefiled all the way to the wedding.

God was "saving"....(protecting and delivering) the apostles since the day each was conceived. It doesn't make it anything more or less if we try to declare them "ultimately saved" at some point, just so we can feel good about it.

There's so much more to say on this topic but I think I'll wait to see what questions/comments you might have so far.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Brother it is better I leave this thread.
Nobody could show me from the scripture that this teaching is right.
And the respones i got shows me that i cant
Where Jesus said, that speaking in tongues is the proof that you are baptised/ filled with the Holy Spirit?
Where this is taught in any scripture to believers?
This was first taught in 1900. So what with the believers before 1900?
Ore which not follow this pentecostal/ charismatic doctrine?

Please note the parts that I made bold.

The second highlighted portion is why there is a problem. One of us says the record in the book of Acts is more relevant than the records of man. The other says no, the records of man are more applicable than the record in the book of Acts.

However, the topic is Holy Ghost... not belief. The bible shows a separation in the two.... meaning it is possible that a person can believe but not yet have the Holy Ghost.

Lastly, the bulk of your question(s) have been answered. However, I feel no obligation to tell you why the sources you choose to trust did not record some certain thing from 300AD-1900AD any more than I feel obligated to tell you why they didn't use electricity during nearly the same time period...even though that, too, was available.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Was it not to the apostles that Jesus said "if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." ? (John 16:7, at the last supper) If so, it doesn't sound like he was making an exception for them.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby