pgfinest2002
New Member
- Sep 23, 2010
- 24
- 0
- 0
Perhaps I may challenge you on this.
In the original post, I showed that ...
-- salvation is always about the Holy Spirit coming INTO the person.
-- Holy Spirit baptism is always about the Holy Spirit coming UPON the person,
and is accompanied by speaking in tongues, etc.
Where is the confusion?
You can't be a member of Christ's body unless one is baptized by the Spirit, yet we tell brothers and sisters they need the Holy Spirit baptism?:
John 14:16 - And I will pray the Father and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever - the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him, but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.
Acts 2:38 - Repent...and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you (the Jews) and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.
Romans 8:9 - But you are not in the flesh, but in the spirit if the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.
I Corinthians 12:13 - "For by one Spirit we were all BAPTIZED (emphasis mine) into one body - whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free - and have all be made to drink one Spirit."
Ephesians 4:4 - There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, ONE baptism...
So Jesus said the Spirit would dwell in the apostles. Peter tells the Jews the promise of the Spirit (based on the OT) is for they and their children and ALL who are far off (later they see the Spirit is given to the Gentiles as well).
Paul says if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he his not a part of Christ.
Paul tells the Corinthians that we were all BAPTIZED into the body of Christ by the Spirit.
Paul later tells the Ephesians that there is ONE Baptism (yet we say there are two).
So which is the baptism of the Spirit, the first one or the second one you said is the spirit coming "upon" a person. Paul made no distinction.
And what tongues did the apostles speak? Luke is clear in Acts they were speaking in other KNOWN tongues/languages, langauges the Jews from the Diaspora would have recognized because it was their native languages (although all possibly knew Greek/Hebrew)
Acts 2:5 - And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from EVERY NATION under heaven.
Acts 9:8-11 - And how is that we hear each in our language (dialect) in which WE WERE BORN? Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs - we hear them SPEAKING in our own tongues (languages/dialects) the wonderful works of God?
Since we point to this incident as the baptism speaking with the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues, should we not be speaking in tongues as the apostles spoke?