If you are referring to Ephesians 4:5, the context makes it clear he is referring to Spirit baptism, not water baptism.
I also, was referring to Spirit baptism, not water baptism. The baptism of the Holy Ghost, the born again of the spirit, and the sanctification of the Spirit only happens at our salvation at the calling of the gospel; not by saved believers looking to receive the Holy Spirit apart from salvation.
Again, I don't believe I nor anyone else who has been truly baptized in the Spirit wants anyone else to be treated differently, and I know for certain that God doesn't. But if they reject the experience as unscriptural, it is they who limit their own experience of spiritual things rather than God electing to treat them differently.
If we are all to speak the same thing and hold to the same judgment and thereby give testimony that we all share in how we were all baptized into one body whereby we all say we were all made to drink of the One Spirit as per 1 Corinthians 12:13, then there can be no deviation from that testimony of some believers having another drink of the One Spirit. That is how it becomes unscriptural.
The Holy Spirit still intercedes to the Father on behalf of those who haven't received the baptism, LoL. He just isn't able to communicate through them directly as He would if they had.
You think about what you just said. If the indwelling Holy Spirit is interceding for all believers anyway, then what is the point for the Spirit to pray in tongues? None. So when I say you do not need tongues for the Holy Spirit to pray in, I am pointing to Romans 8:26-27 in the KJV as a testimony that all believers can share in in speaking the same thing. But tongues for the Holy Spirit to pray in? That is exclusivity and a mark of the elite.
Listen, for starters this subject isn't something I go around talking a lot about to begin with. It's generally only when it is getting assailed that I feel the need to defend it. But I have now determined that the next time I do hear someone even remotely suggesting there is no salvation without the baptism I intend on coming down hard on them. I can see how it causes concerns in some. But take a lesson from the way I always approached it. When I was asked if I wanted to experience the baptism in the Holy Spirit, I simply shrugged my shoulders and said, "If it's something the Lord wants me to have then I'm all for it." I honestly wasn't concerned one way or the other, because I was too consumed with growing in the Lord one way or the other. I was never nervous about anything, and the issue didn't really concern me. As a result, I was at peace when it came time, and received very powerfully, because I could have taken it or left it. I suggest you take the same attitude. It's not healthy being that concerned about it one way or another.
You guys do not pay attention to how Frank Lee is defending tongues. He points to Acts 19 to use that reference that not every believer gets the Holy Ghost. Then when a believer knows about Romans 8:9, then hears that, then they begin to doubt their salvation just because they don't speak in tongues and so they look for that baptism of the Holy Ghost by the sign of tongues. And that is why some of them are saying if you do not speak in tongues, you do not have the Holy Ghost, and therefore you are not saved.
You guys ignore the groundwork laid by tongue speakers for the defense of gaining tongues by receiving the Holy Spirit spectacularly later in life as a saved believer.
My former neighbor across the street was telling me that one day she was reading her Bible at the kitchen table when the Holy Spirit came over her and she began speaking in tongues. Then she went on to say that was when she was saved because she got it all at once. Then I had asked her what she was reading that led her to believe in Jesus Christ. She did not know what I had meant. Then she went on to tell me how she went to Lakeside and had asked her pastor what had happened because she had been a believer for most of her life. Then the pastor pointed to something in Acts, or so she said. She still clings to that changed testimony as to that was when she was saved and not by believing in Him at the calling of the gospel. That in turn sets the hearers to doubt their own salvation and to seek after the Holy Spirit by that sign of tongues.
She went on to tell me how others in that church had similar experiences but she rolled her eyes about it and did not care to share it with me.
I was once in that Lakeside church and the pastor had to make sure everybody in that assembly knew about Jesus Christ and the Good News to man before he put the focus on the Holy Spirit. There was such an urgency about it but it don on me that it was possible that some had the experience of feeling a spirit coming over them as they were speaking in tongues only to find out later that they had never believed in Jesus Christ as their Savior.
I cannot confirm this at all, but that was the way I had perceived that pastor, by making sure he did not make that mistake again. It was notable.
I also noted that Joyce Meyers described the same experience but took that to mean God was calling her into the ministry.
Others have different ideas about what that phenomenon was about and all the ones after it.
And I am saying you guys don't really know what that was otherwise the Spirit of Truth would not be all over the place about what that moment was.
This passage was never intended by Paul to be read outside the common Christian experience at the time, which was that all had received the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Does this mean those who have not received the baptism do not have the Spirit dwelling within them? No, not if you take 1 Corinthians 12:3 literally. As I teach it, the baptism is a matter of extent; of being taken under and submerged in the water, and of rivers of water flowing out from the belly, rather than it simply abiding within in a sort of contained way, as in a cup, to use an analogy.
Matthew 9:17 would disagree with you since being always spirit-filled is part and proof of the testimony that we have been saved by faith in Jesus Christ. Galatians 3:14 cites it as a promise and Galatians 3:26 identifies that faith in Jesus Christ is how we are all defined as children of God by.
Colossians 2:5-10 wasn't written over any debate concerning the baptism in the Holy Spirit. It was written in refutation against the threat of Essenism, which was encroaching on the churches at Colosse and Galatia.
Nevertheless, it also refutes the idea that you are not complete in Christ as if you are not full for why believers err by thinking they need a filling apart from salvation after having received Jesus Christ.
γὰρ ἐν ἑνὶ Πνεύματι ἡμεῖς πάντες εἰς ἓν σῶμα ἐβαπτίσθημεν = "for by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body." It was not a doctrinal statement about what all Christians today are all baptized into. It was a statement about what they all had been baptized into back then, before Satan convinced large segments of Christianity that they had no need of the baptism since they had supposedly received everything they needed when they received Christ as Savior.
This has nothing to do with water baptism when it involves the one drink of the One Spirit thus the baptism with the Holy Ghost at our salvation.