What do you think about tongues in the Bible?

Barnardot

@Voice ;to another divers kinds of tongues

That's a total load of scary crap really and I have actually seen this happen. You go to a church, and someone sticks their hand up and says that they have a personal problem. And by the way, it's my observation that all die-hard Cristians who go to church have heaps of weird problems to put it mildly.

Then what happens is that a group of elders surround that person and hold hands and wail out at the tops of their voices, "Whaaalah ooomdy diggin duthe diggedydo boom bang" And when they run out of weird words to say they repeat it over and over again. And you think, what the? 

And where in the Bible does it say to do that? Like nowhere that's where. All these people want to do is interpret something in the Bible as something completely different and weird so that they can justify being totally weird themselves. 

Who are they kidding?

polytheistwitch

Where? Acts mostly. The thing about talking in tongues, in my understanding, is that there has to be somebody there that can understand or translate it. If not it's probably just gibberish.

Fredsnephew

Argument Topic: Barney DOT.

@Barnardot

For sure, all that French kissing cannot be healthy.

Barnardot

@polytheistwitch ;that there has to be somebody there that can understand or translate it.

Yes, that would be totally right. And what I found in my case when I went was this. After all the embarrassing wailing stopped, the Pastor steps in and says words to the effect of "I have heard your words of wisdom and concern and so did God. Now let us pray." Like what the?

He fully understood and translated all right. Just like pigs fly.

polytheistwitch

@Barnardot Yeah if he didn't actually share what was said with the congregation I would think it's pretty iffy too. I certainly believe that chanting and sound can affect healing as well as uniting a group in focus. And talking in tongues may very well fall under that but it tends to be less useful or uniting as the other two things I mentioned. 

Joeseph

Whats uttered is absolute nonsense , people like Just Lying on this site claim to be Charismatic Penticostals who speak in tounges and claim they can do miracles, make prophecies and speak in tounges these individuals are clearly mentally disturbed.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Voice ; @Factfinder ; @21CenturyIconoclast ; @Joeseph ; @Barnardot ; @Polytheistwitch ; @Fredsnephew ; 

The Spiritual gift of speaking and understanding languages that one has not studied was a gift given at Pentecost for two-primary purposes,

1) As a sign of the presence of the Holy Spirit for the unbelieving Jews, a divine sign that the New Covenant as promised in Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 36 had indeed arrived and had been ushered in by the blood sacrifice of Messiah at Golgotha (Matthew 26:28).

2) The Gift of Tongues greatly assisted in the early Church' obedience to the "Great Commission" (Matthew 28) as understanding and speaking the dialects and languages of the known World in that day became an oral tradition until the advent of the first Canon of Scripture, the Muratorian Canon (Circa 180AD).

Tongues today are a pagan manifestation, a mimicking, of the pagan priestess at the Temple of Delphi adjacent Corinth in the First-Century where the priestess sitting atop a throne in the Temple over a burning intoxicating substance would provide oracles and often times gibberish prophecy to awaiting patrons who often left more confused than when they entered seeking enlightenment. Obviously, this pagan tongue slithered its way into the Corinthian Church creating much consternation for Paul who ultimately mandated that women be quiet in Church services; evidently, some women in the Corinthian congregation were mimicking the absurdity of the pagan priestess and interrupting Church with gibberish, oracles of prophecy, that was mislabeled as a heavenly language, unknown tongue, prophecy.

Today’s Pentecostalism and other “Churches” of Charismata teach and perform this pagan ritual under the auspices of Biblical Tongues as demonstrated in Acts; some actually teach this pagan tongue to children and as a sign of one’s “Baptism in the Holy Spirit.” Some even go as far as teaching tongues as essential for one’s salvation. This pagan nonsense glorified in certain Churches creates an atmosphere of apostasy, works salvation, doubt, fear, confusion. These “Churches” are an embarrassment to the Holy Spirit and the Kingdom of God.

Anyone who advocates for “tongues” today should be required to answer this simple question: “If tongues are extant today, why must we methodically train our missionaries in the language of the culture they will proselytize with the Gospel?”

jack

Voice said: 

What do you think about tongues in the Bible?

Hello Voice:

Tongues, hell??  Have you seen the Holy Rollers or the Whirling Dervish???  They do exactly what you'd expect them to do. 

excon

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Lol

Sticking your tongue in a bible will just give you a paper cut. 

maxx

Anyone knows that what speaking in tongue s is simply having the ability to converse in other languages.  Were the Tongues in Scripture Known Languages? by Don Stewart (blueletterbible.org)
 @Voice

Barnardot

@maxx ;Anyone knows that what speaking in tongue s is simply having the ability to converse in other languages.

Well Jesus do me sideways and upside down. They may be other languages but those languages ain't anywhere near any languages that we have on earth. I have been there and heard them shout that crap and it is all a load of gobble dee gook made up on the spot.

maxx

that is just people misinterpreting what talking in tongues really means. read the link. no where in the bible does it say that talking in tongues means speaking gibberish that only the holy spirit can understand. @Barnardot

Barnardot

@maxx ;that is just people misinterpreting what talking in tongues really means. read the link.   no where in the bible does it say that talking in tongues means speaking gibberish that only the holy spirit can understand.

I have no doubt about that but I think its a matter of if you give Christians an inch and they will take a bleeding light year. The Bible is just a means to and end for them. They justify all their whacko behaviors by saying "Hay it says to do this in the Bible and here's the passage". So I reckon that it went something like this: One day a guy catches another guy shouting out, "oh waaaalh ooohla wham doodle dicky di do dilly willy dum de doo" So as not to lose face and pretend that he is normal, the nit pulls out the Bible and says: "Hay its okay, I'm normal because I'm talking in tongues because it says to do it right here in the Bible".

So, what I am saying is that Christians have a habit of justifying their looniness by interpreting the Bible to suit the occasion.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Barnardot ; Are you the arbiter of Truth? What do you actually "KNOW" about the Bible? Can you explain "justification" as it relates to Jesus as Messiah?

Factfinder

RickeyHoltsclaw said:

@Barnardot ; Are you the arbiter of Truth? What do you actually "KNOW" about the Bible? Can you explain "justification" as it relates to Jesus as Messiah?

The bible contains errors and deceit and has nothing at all to do with truth or morals or justice. The objective truth stands as an antagonistic adversary to the indoctrinated views espoused from bronze age myth books designed to ready the weak minded for voluntary enslavement. Making them think the threat of a gun or hell means 'freewill' instead of what it actually is, sadistic totalitarian maniacal like god complexes of stoopid people seducing even more stoopid people into ignorant enslavement. Deniers of truth and reality with imaginary friends.

 

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Factfinder ; There are no errors nor is there deceit in the Scriptures...only Truth and you have rejected same to your own destruction.

21CenturyIconoclast

@RickeyHoltsclaw


.

MEMBERSHIP:

I am truly sorry that another update relative to RICKEYHOLTSCLAW in using lame little-boy excuses to run away from ATHEISTS posts to him because he cannot address them and remain intelligent looking in the aftermath, is to be shown once again at Rickey's expense!  

Current UPDATE; September 20, 2024, where showing additional excuses by Rickey shown at number 62 through number 77!    

1. “Do you have a theological question or premise for me to respond too?”

”https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188639/#Comment_188639

2. “I have told you repeatedly that I don't do links...I'm not your slave...you are satan's slave...if you can state a legitimate theological premise...I will debate you; otherwise, Gish Gallop you coward.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188598/#Comment_188598 ;

3. “If you possessed the cognitive ability to actually provide a theological premise for debate...there would be no problem but you're lacking and needy and absent.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188371/#Comment_188371

4. “Still hiding behind links seeing that you're absent sufficient knowledge to formulate a premise...you're pathetic, atheist.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187992/#Comment_187992

5. You are cowards...you can't present a theological argument...you're spiritually ignorant and afraid…

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188199/#Comment_188199

6. “Is there a premise in that ignorant tirade?” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188200/#Comment_188200

7. “You're not sufficiently intelligent to discern the World around you...you're a pathetic, spiritually ignorant, atheist. You're a demonic cult member.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188258/#Comment_188258

8. “Your daddy not providing rhetorical substance for you today?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188265/#Comment_188265

9. “Without Jesus, you will perish in Hell.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188275/#Comment_188275    

10.  “Can you articulate your concerns in a valid, succinct, premise? I don't chase links and I'm not your slave. You are the one that is headed to death in Hell, not me. If you have a sincere question, ask it.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187343/#Comment_187343

11. “Is there a debatable premise amongst that tyraid of demonic filth? Why be such a vulgar loser just because you're a mindless atheist?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187586/#Comment_187586 ;

12. “I don't do links...it you can manage sufficient brain cells to provide a premise, I'll debate you.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187623/#Comment_187623

13. “Is there a premise there> if so, what is it?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187729/#Comment_187729 ;

14. “Once again atheist, I am NOT your slave and I do not respond to links or your cowardly gish galloping; therefore, if you desire Biblical Truth in response to your atheistic ignorance, state a succinct and pointed theological premise and I will respond to your demonic intent; otherwise, I'm not chasing your arrogance and atheistic stup-idity”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/186924/#Comment_186924

15. “Can you articulate your concerns in a valid, succinct, premise? I don't chase links and I'm not your slave. You are the one that is headed to death in Hell, not me. If you have a sincere question, ask it.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/9983/does-the-noahic-flood-negate-the-reality-of-free-will-the-atheist-says-yes-what-is-the-truth/p3

16. “You are insane...get help!”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187730/#Comment_187730

17. “My "authority" flows from the Holy Spirit who indwells me. Your authority flows from the demon who indwells you. The Holy Spirit is Deity; your spirit is a fallen angel...you lose eternally.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188669/#Comment_188669

18. “No, you see nothing...you're absent wisdom and discernment. You are your father's fool (John 8:44).”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188257/#Comment_188257

19. “You must be on bottle 2? “

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188382/#Comment_188382

20. “That's because you're dead spiritually and irrelevant eternally.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188418/#Comment_188418  

21. “If you reject Jesus, you have chosen eternal death...if you're good with that, enjoy.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187537/#Comment_187537

22. “I don't do links...why not end the silly obfuscation and stu-pid rhetoric and produce a premise for debate? Coward.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187537/#Comment_187537

23. “I don't do links...post a logical, debatable, premise, if that's possible for you, coward.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187599/#Comment_187599

24. “I don't do links...if you have a question, ask it, coward.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187614/#Comment_187614

25. “Is there a debateable premise in your demonic trash talk? If so, I don't see it...please try harder atheist”.

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187628/#Comment_187628

26. “You're just a stup-id, lying, deceiving, atheist...what do know about a brain?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187733/#Comment_187733

27. “You are to be pitied...you are Devil's fool.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187738/#Comment_187738

28. “I never have envied the mentally and spiritually ill...pitied yes, envied, no.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187782/#Comment_187782

29. “You mock and ridicule what you don't know but you will pay an eternal price for your arrogance”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187841/#Comment_187841

30. “There is One-Elohim and unless Jesus is your Messiah by faith, you will perish in Hell.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/185848/#Comment_185848

31. “Do you have one-point of theological contention you would like to discuss...I'm not your slave nor do I attempt to respond to cowardly gish-galloping.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/186056/#Comment_186056

32. “If you believe there is a "contradiction" in my Lord's words...state is openly and clearly...let's discuss it, atheist.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/186925/#Comment_186925

33. “You are free to reject your Creator's pardon from sin and die in Hell...that is your volitional option.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187029/#Comment_187029

34. “Atheism is a religion of fools, secular humanists, Darwninists, the demonic in origin.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187468/#Comment_187468

35. “You will both pay a horrible price at Judgment.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187605/#Comment_187605

36. “Do you have a debatable premise or is Gish Galloping your tactic to justify your path to Hell in atheism? Are you fearful of a legitimate premise that can be responded too?” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/184389/#Comment_184389 ;

37. “Is there a singular debatable premise in there somewhere; if so, bring it forth.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/184395/#Comment_184395

38. “Those words that comprise the Scriptures will never fade away...they are eternal in their import and relevance and you will internalize them and live or deny them, mock them, and die in Hell.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/184592/#Comment_184592

39. “What you want atheist is irrelevant but what is Truth is relevant. You are but a vapor that is fading away by the second yet you "think" your opinions are paramount.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187077/#Comment_187077

40. “All atheists are cowards, fools, children in maturity and demons in reality...you have no option but to either avoid them or confront them with Truth.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187287/#Comment_187287

41. “I answered your question, you're too spiritually ignorant to respond with a theologically based argument therefore you repeat your error and your blasphemy...you are a horrible person.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/186057/#Comment_186057

42. “Religions, like atheism, secular humanism, are frauds....you should know this”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/184717/#Comment_184717

43. “Is there a debatable, succinct, premise in there somewhere that we can discuss?” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/185344/#Comment_185344

44. “I don't receive your quotes as notifications....you're not worthy a debate...you're a drunk and a godless atheist who serves satan.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/185357/#Comment_185357

45. “Still waiting for a cognizant theological premise from you...your gish galloping is indicative of an atheistic coward.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/185572/#Comment_185572

46. “Simply waiting for you theologically ignorant atheists to present a debatable premise.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/186391/#Comment_186391

47. Is there a debateable premise in your demonic trash talk? If so, I don't see it...please try harder atheist. 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187628/#Comment_187628

48. “Again, ad nauseam...I am not your slave...you are the one headed to death in Hell, not me. When you present a logical and understandable premise..ONE at a time...I'll respond with my Lord's Truth but your Gish Galloping is a ruse for cowards...you are an atheistic coward and the devil's fool.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/187501/#Comment_187501

49. “Is there a debatable, succinct, premise in there somewhere that we can discuss?” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/185344/#Comment_185344

50. “Ad nauseam. I don't do links nor do I honor Gish Galloping. If you desire a spiritually based, theologically relevant, response to a legitimate concern you have relevant to the Bible, just ask…"

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188951/#Comment_188951

51. “I don't do links and I've responded to your repeated, paste and copy questions...anything else?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189398/#Comment_189398

52.  “No, the education you received was indoctrination...you are the devil's fool.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189319/#Comment_189319

53. “When you both stand in the Judgement of the Condemned (Revelation 20:11-15) tell Jesus that you trust in a child's cereal cartoon as your god...I'm sure all will be well.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/188967/#Comment_188967

54. “copy and paste? I don't do "links" and I don't respond to "gish galloping" by atheists headed to death in Hell in unbelief. If you can muster "a" debatable theological premise (one at a time), I'll be pleased to debate you; after all, it is YOU that is dying in spiritual ignorance…”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189479/#Comment_189479

55. “I don't do links nor do I respect "gish galloping" and other atheistic obfuscation. If you have the intelligence and understanding to draft a debatable theological premise, I will provide you with Biblical Truth; otherwise, enjoy your atheistic path to Hell.” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189493/#Comment_189493

56. "You are unable cognitively to provide a debateable theological premise because you're mentally ill, demonically inclined and theologically ignorant. Please try harder...I don't do links. True and valid faith in Jesus forgives sin when accompanied by honest repentance with a sincere heart...Jesus knows the heart.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189396/#Comment_189396

57. “You have denied your only Hope for life...Jesus. You can't provide a sound and logical theological premise due your spiritual ignorance...I've attempted repeatedly to engage you but you continue to obfuscate in stup-idity and arrogance....you'll reap what you're sowing.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189397/#Comment_189397

58. “Still nothing but empty and irrelevant accusations...have you nothing of substance?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189638/#Comment_189638

59.  “Is there a debatable premise in that demonic laden diatribe? Your demon must be especially aroused today, atheist?” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189814/#Comment_189814

60.  “Is there a debatable premise in that demonic diatribe?” 

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189820/#Comment_189820

61. “Only the coward Gish Gallops debate sites...when and if you're ever sufficiently mature to forward a debatable theological premise...we can debate...but your atheistic arrogance and obfuscation make you laughable.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/190688/#Comment_190688

62 “Do you have a legitimate theological question?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/190758/#Comment_190758 ;

63.  Can you possibly provide a premise void initiating your rebuttals with defamatory insults and hate?

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/190980/#Comment_190980

64. “You are mentally and spiritually ill…”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/190901/#Comment_190901

65. “If you possessed faith the size of a mustered seed, you would not be perishing in Hell but find life in Jesus, everlasting.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/180588/#Comment_180588

66. “Jesus is from the Tribe of Judah in the flesh. If you desire abundant life now and eternal life subsequent death of your body, you'll trust in the Lion from the Tribe of Judah and live!”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/180589/#Comment_180589

67. “Unless Jesus is your God...you will perish in Hell without hope or excuse.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/180663/#Comment_180663

68. “You are fascist liberal atheist. You have nothing of value to offer America or its sustainability. “

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/180906/#Comment_180906

69. “You expose nothing but your spiritual ignorance, arrogance, and hopelessness that is ATHEISM.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/180910/#Comment_180910

70. “Still waiting for an intelligent, comprehensible, rebuttable, premise from you as Satan's fool.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181230/#Comment_181230

71, “Still waiting for a sensible, comprehensible, premise from Satan's atheistic servant.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181427/#Comment_181427

73.  “Still waiting for a succinct, comprehend-able, premise for debate...can you do that?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181719/#Comment_181719

73. “Do you have a sincere question concerning Christianity, theology?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181744/#Comment_181744

74. “I believe everything Authored by the Holy Spirit...there is no need for deciphering your individual pieces of obfuscation.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181781/#Comment_181781

75. “You’re dead spiritually, you're willfully ignorant Scripturally...you have not a clue because you've rejected Jesus and the anointing of the Holy Spirit as your teacher; therefore, you're likened to a spoiled child in crib of nihilism, shouting at the Moon in your self-righteous arrogance as you decay in a body of wastefulness via your ridiculous atheism.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181814/#Comment_181814

 76. “We sound like that to the atheist because you don't understand true faith...you simply are unable to understand.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181789/#Comment_181789

77. “What is your question...can you state it intelligently?”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/181824/#Comment_181824

.

21CenturyIconoclast

@RickeyHoltsclaw

.

ONE OF RICKEYHOLTSCLAW’S MOST DUMBFOUNDED QUOTES THAT HE HAS EVER MADE SHOWN BELOW!!!

“Jesus is Elohim..."not a Jew" or Gentile...but our Creator, eternally.”   https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/189400/#Comment_189400

YES! Rickey actually said that Jesus is not a JEW in his quote above?! OMG! He’s not kidding, Rickey is that historically STU-PID! LOL!

FIRST AND FOREMOST, JESUS WAS A JEW!

Jesus was a Jew. He was born of a Jewish mother that was a Levite in Galilee, a Jewish part of the world. All of his friends, associates, colleagues, disciples, all of them were Jews. He regularly worshipped in Jewish communal worship, what we call synagogues. He preached from Jewish text from the Bible. He celebrated the Jewish festivals. He went on pilgrimage to the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem where he was under the authority of priests. He lived, was born, died, taught as a Jew. This is obvious to any casual reader except our number one BIBLE FOOL RickeyHoltsClaw! 

What's striking is not so much that Jesus was a JEW,  but that the gospels make no pretense that he wasn't!  The gospels have no sense yet that Jesus was anything other than a Jew. The gospels don't even have a sense that he came to found a new religion, an idea completely foreign to all the gospel text, and completely foreign to Paul.  So, to say that he was a Jew is saying a truism, is simply stating an idea that is so obvious on the face of it, one wonders it even needs to be said.  Duh!

Therefore, as usual, our number one BIBLE FOOL RickeyHoltsClaw once again has shown his outright Bible STOOPIDITY to all of the membership at his laughable expense!  But, what did we expecit from Rickey in the first place?!   Rickey's priceless stoopidity is shown again, how sad!  

PSEUDO-CHRISTIANS, DO THE SIMPLE MATH TO THIS IMAGE, DUH!

.

Barnardot

@RickeyHoltsclaw ;Can you explain "justification" as it relates to Jesus as Messiah?

Probably not and I wouldn't want to either. I can explain justification how it relates to people in the normal world, and I'll tell you this for nothing: The only justification that those talking tongue nits know is all the loony stuff in the Bible. If that is not enough, they will stretch that loony stuff as far as it is necessary to make it justify their loony talking tongues crap. 

They may call it talking tongues but here in the real world we call it insanity and these nits should really be having therapy.

just_sayin

RickeyHoltsclaw ,I think it is important to distinguish the differences in what Luke addresses and what Paul is addressing (Primarily in 1 Corinthians 12, 14)
Luke, using the exact Greek terms  (Septuagint) version for instances of the Holy Spirit coming on people in the Old Testament, uses this language to speak of people being baptized in the Holy Spirit.  It is never for their salvation/initiation but power for service to God.  Whereas Paul speaks primarily about 2 other types of tongues - 1 a gift given that is used in connection with interpretation, and 2) tongues as a private prayer language.

The Christian church unanimously viewed the baptism of the Holy Spirit as something distinct from salvation/initiation, as power to better serve God until 1851, when G. W. H. Lampe wrote the Seal of the Spirit which tried to link the baptism of the Holy Spirit to salvation.  He did this, not in response to Pentecostals (Azusa Street Revival is not until the early 1900's), but in response to Baptists losing so many people to the Methodist revivals of the day.  Prior to this every theologian interpreted the baptism of the Holy Spirit as something that was distinct and apart from salvation.

From the grand daddy of all Baptists, John Calvin (Acts of the Apostles - his commentary on the Book of Acts)

These gifts, mentioned by Luke, differ indeed from the grace of regeneration (commentary on Acts 10:44)

Whether they had received the Holy Ghost. The end of the history doth show that Paul doth not speak in this place of the Spirit of regeneration, but of the special gifts which God gave to divers at the beginning of the gospel, for the common edifying of the Church. - Acts 19:2 commentary

Even Baptists in the early 1800's taught what Pentecostals and Charismatics do today: From the Philadelphia Baptist Association - The Baptism of the Holy Spirit" - 1802 - this was the largest and most influential Baptist group in America at the time

That haply we may be of use to some of our respected friends, by showing them, that, though they may be regenerated, and enjoy the highest consolation in the sweet incomes of the Holy Comforter, and the most sensible communion with Christ;... The nature of this baptism, most clearly evinces it to be distinct, and materially different from that of regeneration. The one a still small voice, saying, "This is the way;" the other, that of "a rushing mighty wind." One invisible, "A white stone, and a new name given, which no man knew save he that had received it;" the other, to be seen, "Cloven tongues of fire sat on them." One internal, filling the heart with secret consolation, joy and pleasure; the other external, "The whole house where they were sitting."
     This renders the term baptism proper, because they were immersed in the fountain of the Spirit, and thereby made partakers of such extraordinary and miraculous influence, as in regeneration and conversion were never promised.
     The design of this baptism, is another important argument in favor of this idea. To qualify otherwise ignorant and unlearned men, to cope with all the greatness of this world, and to meet the wisdom of men, in all their formidable attacks, putting them to silence. To establish the greatest doctrines in the councils of heaven, or among men, God and man dwelling in one Christ; and that Jesus of Nazareth, crucified by the envious and treacherous Jews, was he; and, though the master was exalted, the disciple could effect, in his name, visible evidence of his Godhead, and by signs and miracles, as well as Scripture prophecy, prove him to be the Messiah promised to the fathers.
     To establish the gospel dispensation, by the instrumentality of a few illiterate persons, raised up in the land of Judea, (who declared that the whole economy made known to the ancient fathers, the costly grandeur of the temple and the expence of its worship, was fulfilled, and all its glory exceeded, in him who expired on the accursed tree,) needed the power of omnipotence, to make its way against the formidable force raised in opposition. Another reason was to assure the apostles, primitive Christians, and all subsequent believers, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and only Saviour of Jews and Gentiles. For which reason, the Holy Ghost, in his miraculous gifts of speaking with divers tongues, fell on the Gentiles in a visible form, as upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost, Acts xi:15, 16, "The Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning;" which extraordinary gifts served to confirm Peter that he was doing right, in hearkening to the vision he had seen; and to satisfy the church of the divine right of all nations in common to partake of salvation by the cross of Jesus Christ.
     The subjects of this baptism differ essentially from those of regeneration. The work of grace is upon the hearts of the unregenerated, bringing them from a state of moral death to life, from darkness to light, and from the power of sin, and service of Satan, to the liberty of the gospel, and the enjoyment of fellowship with God. Whereas, the baptism of the Holy Ghost was upon the apostles; who, having experienced the work of grace upon their souls, and being thereby made partakers of all that is peculiar to regeneration, could not be regenerated by the descent of the sacred Spirit, which being a work only once in the divine life, could not be effected again. As an assurance of this fact, they are declared to have "their names written in heaven," and Jesus Christ had manifested the Father to them, (John xvii:6,) and "that they had known surely Christ came from God, and had believed on the Son of God," (verse 8.) "Flesh and blood had not revealed it unto them, but the Father in heaven." They are called by every near and dear appellation, that could expressthe love of God to them. And as for Cornelius, he had intercourse with God, and was acquainted with the power of renewing grace, as the cause of sending for Peter. As for the twelve on whom Paul laid his hands, none can doubt of their previous interest in Christ; for they are said to have believed. To render this point more clear, not only regeneration is not the baptism of the Holy Ghost, nor yet the receiving of the sacred Spirit; this is most clearly manifested in the case of the disciples, who, after the resurrection of Christ, were visited by him, and he breathed on them and they received the Holy Ghost, (John xx:22,) no doubt as much, if not, more, than believers in common; and yet, notwithstanding, they are ordered to tarry at Jerusalem until baptised of the sacred Spirit. All which join to show, that whatever any Christian may have gained in the experience of grace, he has no right to the term, baptised by the Spirit, unless such a person professing this miraculous attainment, for no other is called the baptism of the Holy Ghost, prove it by signs and wonders, as did the primitive Christians.
     The effects which followed this baptism: Casting out devils; Paul dispossessed the damsel that had a spirit of divination, commanding the spirit, in the name of Jesus Christ, to come out of her, and it did; and also of others, by the power and in the name of Christ; speaking with new tongues - not such as all others were ignorant of, but such as they had never learned or understood before; taking up serpents without injury - so Paul had a viper fastened on his hand, which he shook off, and to the amazement of the beholders, received no harm, but their united testimony that lie was more than mortal drinking deadly poison, without hurt; laying hands on the sick, and they recover; the father of Plubius was healed of a fever and the bloody flux; the lame man from his mother's womb made whole, and the shadow of Peter effected the cure of many; (Acts v:15, 16;) others were healed by handkerchiefs and aprons taken from the body of Paul: (Acts xix:12:) all of which were then necessary for the confirmation of the gospel, and the establishment of Christianity in the world.

Now John Calvin nor the Philadelphia Baptist Association claimed to speak in tongues.  They thought it had stopped.  Not because of definitive Bible verses, as John Calvin points out, but because it wasn't seen happening anymore.  That's basing your theology on your personal experiences rather than the Bible. 

So Pentecostals and Charismatics agree with what Catholics and Baptists of the past believe regarding the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.  Its just that for Pentecostals/Charismatics its not something that just happened in the past, it is something that is part of their personal experience today.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast ; 

Jesus was born in a body of flesh through the Tribe of Judah making Him an "Earthly" Jew by blood but Jesus is Elohim, the flesh was temporary as a blood sacrifice for your sin in accordance with Leviticus 17:11 but Jesus is truly Spirit (John 4:24) and His resurrected body is Glorious, not identified as Jewish or Gentile or Israelite but as God in Flesh - Immanuel - "God with us" (Matthew 1:23)...I don't serve a Jew...I serve Jesus who is Elohim (Genesis 1:1; John 1; Hebrews 1; Colossians 1) and when one belongs to Jesus by faith they are not known or recognized as a Jew or Gentile or Israelite or Slave or Free or Woman or Man...they are ONE with Jesus in Spirit, forever.

It is NOT Messiah's "Jewish" flesh that makes Him relevant as the Jewishness of Jesus is relevant only for eschatological purposes as verification of the Messiah - it is the Truth that Jesus is Elohim - our Creator - in Flesh (John 1; Hebrews 1; Colossians 1) who gave Himself for you to provide you blood atonement for your sin (Matthew 26:28; 1 Peter 1:18-19) so that by faith you can live forever with Him in Glory as His redeemed vessel of honor (John 3:16; John 10:28-20) but you have chosen to live as atheistic trash in a dung heap of a fallen World; therefore, these words of life are offensive to the demon that is guiding your body, mind, soul, into the depths of Hell in spiritual arrogance and ignorance exactly like every other atheist in demonically corrupted forum. 

 

Factfinder @Joeseph ; @21CenturyIconoclast ; @Polytheistwitch ; @Fredsnephew ; @MayCaesar

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast @21CenturyIconoclast ; As a mentally challenged atheist, perhaps you will notice that when you provide me even the most shallow of premise fodder I respond with Truth and seek to inform you of why you are dying in your sin and headed to death in Hell but I'm not going to chase your fabricated links that mean nothing...you are simply obfuscating your atheistic insanity via gish galloping and I'm not your slave or your fool. You can't debate me on truly authentic theological grounds because you're dead spiritually and willfully ignorant of Truth...you must try harder and stop running from your inability to debate but only falsely accuse and denigrate to appease your seared and defiled conscience.

21CenturyIconoclast

@RickeyHoltsclaw

RICKEYHOLTSCLAW ONCE AGAIN SHOWS THE ATHEIST THAT THE BIBLE CONTRADICTS ITSELF, ........ PRAISE RICKEY’S TRUTHFULNESS! 

RICKEY’S QUOTE WHERE HE WRONGFULLY SAYS ONLY FAITH IS NEEDED FOR SAVLATION: 'Anyone who calls upon Jesus as Messiah and seeks Him as Savior by faith will be saved (John 3:16). Matthew 7:21, Jesus teaches that those who seek the Kingdom by works, human effort, apart from establishing New Covenant relationship with the Father by faith in the Son as Messiah will not enter the Kingdom...as they're absent relationship and their works are interpreted as a "filthy garment" (Isaiah 64:6) and we know that sinful humanity cannot "earn" their own salvation as only the Spotless Lamb of God is sufficient to make atonement for sin as per the mandates of Leviticus 17:11; therefore, what Jesus is teaching in Matthew 7:21-23 is that no everyone who calls Him "Lord-Lord" will enter the Kingdom lest they have established New Covenant relationship with the Father by faith...this is a relationship established by faith with a sincere heart, not works.”

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/191459/#Comment_191459

There is a reason that RickeyHoltsClaw is this Religion Forums Number one Bible FOOL, and that is because Jesus’ inspired words say that you need “WORKS” along with faith for Salvation as blatantly shown below at Rickey’s total embarrassment AGAIN!

JESUS’ INSPIRED WORDS SAY THAT "RICKEYHOLTSCLAW" IS WRONG AGAIN,  WHERE JESUS SAYS ONE NEEDS “WORKS” ALONG WITH “FAITH” FOR SALVATION!

1. JESUS SAID:  “You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and AND NOT BY FAITH ALONE." (James 2:14-24)

2. JESUS SAID: ”He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury." (Romans 2:6-8)

3. JESUS SAID: “Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done.” (Revelation 22:12)”

4. JESUS SAID: “For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then  He will reward each according to his works.”   (Matthew 16.27)

5. JESUS SAID: “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.” Revelation 22:12)

HEADS UP RICKEY! Do you want to call Jesus A LIE*R in his inspired passages above in showing that Jesus said you have to have “WORKS” for your Salvation, where your Bible Stoopidity says you only need "Faith?"  Huh? Well, do you or not?!  LOL!

Rickey has RAN AWAY from this truthful adage before regarding his Bible Ignorance shown above, where if there are "contradictions" in the Bible, then there are "LIES," because both "contradicting falsehoods" cannot be true at the same time, therefore, for bible inept pseudo-christians like "RickeyHoltsClaw," build their faith upon "LIES," WHICH IS INSANITY!!!

AS I HAVE SHOWN ONCE AGAIN, ….”RICKEYHOLTSCLAW”…. IS ONE OF THE MOST “BIBLE STOOPID FOOLS” THAT ANY ATHEIST HAS PROBABLY EVER SEEN, BAR NONE!

.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast

1) Quote one from "James" an Apostle teaches that authentic "faith" naturally results in a desire to honor the indwelling Holy Spirit's work of sanctification in the "new creation" in Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17)...it is not what a man or woman does that saves them but in Whom they believe that results in New Covenant relationship with the Father and the receiving of the indwelling Holy Spirit (John 3:16; Ephesians 1:13-14)) as we're not saved by works (Ephesians 2:8-9) but we are saved from death in Hell through Whom we place our faith, Jesus our Messiah (Galatians 2:16). Jesus tells us that the Christian is to produce much "fruit" (Galatians 5:16-23) and thereby glorify the Father (John 15:8)...fruits of the Spirit produced by the Christian during daily sanctification as the Christian is to walk by the Spirit (Galatians 5:16).

If we could work our self to our Holy God through our own efforts, Jesus died needlessly (Galatians 2:21).

2) Jesus will definitely render to each in accordance to what he or she has done in body and Jesus will judge the atheist in accordance with their sin in body as they have rejected the pardon from death in Hell freely offered by Jesus through faith in Him as one's Messiah (John 3; John 8:24) and Jesus will also judge the works of the Christian but this Judgment called "The BEMA Judgment" is not a judgment of salvation but a judgment of quality of work done "subsequent salvation by faith;" that is, Jesus' BEMA Judgment of the "believer" will judge the work of the Christian as to whether their works were the product of obedience to the indwelling Holy Spirit or works done for narcissistic, self-aggrandizement. Those works performed through the Holy Spirit will receive a reward (crown), those works done for selfish reasons will suffer loss but the Christian will be saved and NOT suffer the "second death" in Hell as the are secure in Jesus, forever (John 10:28-30).

3) Yes, Jesus will pay each his due wages...those who have trusted in Him as Messiah will reap life eternal (John 3:16) and those who have rejected Him as Messiah will reap death, eternally, in Hell (Revelation 20:11-15).

4) & 5) These essentially say the very same thing...Those who have obeyed the Father by trusting in Jesus as Messiah will reap eternal life (John 6:29; John 3) and those who have dishonored the Father by rejection of the Son will reap death in Hell (John 3; 1 John 2:23; Revelation 20:11-15).

maxx

Read the link rick.. @RickeyHoltsclaw

just_sayin

Reading through the posts there is a lack of understanding of what the Bible says about tongues and what Pentecostals/Charismatics belief.  There are 4 types of tongues spoken of in the Bible:

1.  Xenoglossy - receiving the ability to speak fluently a foreign language without learning it.

Example - Acts 2

2. Sign of Receiving Power for Service Through Holy Spirit

Examples: Acts 2, Acts 8, Acts 10, Acts 19

3.  Gift used in public worship settings in connection with the gift of interpretation

Examples - 1 Corinthians 12 & 14

4. As a personal prayer language

• 1 Corinthians 14:2

  "For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries". 
• 1 Corinthians 14:18-19

  Paul mentions speaking in tongues in private, contrasting it with speaking in public service. 
• 1 Corinthians 14:14

  "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful". 
• Jude 1:20-21

  Encourages praying in tongues to build faith and stay in God's love. 

They are not all the same type of 'tongues' experience.  For example 1 Corinthians 14 says that the gift of tongues needs an interpreter and that at most only 2 or three should speak, whereas the tongues experienced in acts happened to multitudes at a time and there was no interpreter.  1 Corinthians 14 delineates the gift of tongues used in a public worship settings with tongues as a prayer language in a private setting - one is to build the church up and another is a prayer to God.  

maxx

regardless of the verses, which are taking out of context, speaking in tongues means speaking in a language, not simply some sort of gibberish. most highly educated Christians and biblical scholars agree with this. did you, by perchance read the link i posted? @just_sayin

just_sayin

maxx said:

regardless of the verses, which are taking out of context, speaking in tongues means speaking in a language, not simply some sort of gibberish. most highly educated Christians and biblical scholars agree with this. did you, by perchance read the link i posted? @just_sayin

1 Corinthians 13:1 suggests that tongues may be human languages or languages of angels (or some would say the language of heaven):

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal - 1 Corinthians 13:1

The only occasion in the Bible where tongues is a known human language is in Acts 2.  All other occasions it is unknown and needs to be 'interpreted'.  So, I think you need to get better Bible scholars.  I would recommend:
F.F. Bruce - The Book of Acts  - Catholic, Baptist, and Pentecostal alike recognize his work on Acts as the most influential research on the early church history and beliefs
Gordon Fee - 1 Corinthians 
J Rodman Williams - Renewal Theology: Systematic Theology

Joeseph

@just_sayin

Hilarious stuff    .....Angel speak .....says it all ......translation  ....gibberish

maxx

i think that people made a huge error about tongues. the actual definition and the origins is speaking in various languages. regardless if the holy spirit allowed them to do so, it is still just other languages; not some magical speak that transcends humans. no where in the bible does it imply otherwise. if you read corinthians 14 in its context, you will understand that paul is speaking about other languages. The whole chapter, not just one verse should be taken in context. read both verses 10 and 11.  What does the Bible say about speaking in tongues? (activechristianity.org)   @just_sayin

RickeyHoltsclaw

@maxx ; What about the "link" and what in the "link" do you find relevant...do you have a question?

just_sayin

maxx said:

i think that people made a huge error about tongues. the actual definition and the origins is speaking in various languages. regardless if the holy spirit allowed them to do so, it is still just other languages; not some magical speak that transcends humans. no where in the bible does it imply otherwise. if you read corinthians 14 in its context, you will understand that paul is speaking about other languages. The whole chapter, not just one verse should be taken in context. read both verses 10 and 11.  What does the Bible say about speaking in tongues? (activechristianity.org)   @just_sayin

Maxx, first, thanks for the interesting topic.  Most of the regular posters are atheists so most religion topics are not about niche topics within Christianity.  I'm probably the only person with a Pentecostal/Charismatic background.

Honestly, your argument sounds more like special pleading to me.  Paul specifically mentions speaking in 'tongues of men and of the angels' in 1 Corinthians 13, which is right in the middle of his discussion on Spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12-14).  Since he delineates men and angels, unless you have evidence that all angelic languages are synonymous with human languages it seems like it is possible that there is a difference.  Verses 10-11 of chapter 14 does not exclude the possibility of angelic languages.   Do you have evidence that all angelic languages correspond with human languages?  

Maxx, what is your underlying premise?  What is your position on speaking in tongues?

maxx

I can get more to you when i gave the time, however,  speaking in tongue,  from glossila, or glossa, the root of the word,  means nothing more than to speak,  prattle, say, and so on. So basically,  that is the definition of speaking in tongues, to speak in languages . So what i am saying,  is regardless if they are speaking in a language previously unknown to them , gifted to them by god, or speaking in languages of other people simply because they learned it, it is still a language that is not understood by god only but It is known languages.  You go to Spain and begin talking  in Spanish,  you are speaking in their tongue,  regardless if god gifted the power to do so, or if you already knew their language.  @just_sayin

just_sayin

@Maxx
You go to Spain and begin talking  in Spanish,  you are speaking in their tongue,  regardless if god gifted the power to do so, or if you already knew their language.

If you start speaking a language that you did not learn and do so fluently and ongoingly it is called xenoglossy or xenoglossia.  There are some examples of this in history.  However, the gift of tongues in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 requires an interpreter - this is also a spiritual gift and not a learned skill according to 1 Corinthians 12.  

So what i am saying,  is regardless if they are speaking in a language previously unknown to them , gifted to them by god, or speaking in languages of other people simply because they learned it, it is still a language that is not understood by god only but It is known languages. 

I think your claim is too broad, considering 1 Corinthians 13:1 right in the middle of Paul's discussion of tongues.  Tell me Maxx, what language is the language of angels?  Unless you definitively know this, it seems to me your conclusion is just your opinion and not what the Biblical text expressly states.  

RickeyHoltsclaw

@just_sayin ; There is one Baptism in the Spirit...at salvation...when one believes that Jesus is Messiah, they receive the indwelling Holy Spirit as Guarantor of New Covenant with the Father, there is NO subsequent giving of the Spirit...you receive every ounce of the Holy Spirit the moment you "believe" that you will ever receive...the only addendum to that truism is the fact that the power and work of the Spirit in one's life is wholly contingent upon how much of one's self and one's own will they are willing to surrender to the Spirit's anointing and will for their life. The more one seeks to abide in the Spirit through obedience to the Spirit's leadership the more the Spirit works in that life and the more potent and relevant the anointing and power to work and do and succeed in the Name of Jesus for the Kingdom. It sounds as though you were indoctrinated in a Full-Gospel, perhaps Pentecostal dogma?  Tongues are no longer extant in the Church; this, with the advent of the first Canon around 180AD...tongues have ceased, today's "Charismatic Tongues" are pagan gibberish that dishonor the Spirit and the true Church but glorify man and narcissism. Charismata in some "Church of God" "Full-Gospel" "Pentecostalism" has become a works cult that is not of the Spirit but of the demonic.

Factfinder

RickeyHoltsclaw said:

@just_sayin ; There is one Baptism in the Spirit...at salvation...when one believes that Jesus is Messiah, they receive the indwelling Holy Spirit as Guarantor of New Covenant with the Father, there is NO subsequent giving of the Spirit...you receive every ounce of the Holy Spirit the moment you "believe" that you will ever receive...the only addendum to that truism is the fact that the power and work of the Spirit in one's life is wholly contingent upon how much of one's self and one's own will they are willing to surrender to the Spirit's anointing and will for their life. The more one seeks to abide in the Spirit through obedience to the Spirit's leadership the more the Spirit works in that life and the more potent and relevant the anointing and power to work and do and succeed in the Name of Jesus for the Kingdom. It sounds as though you were indoctrinated in a Full-Gospel, perhaps Pentecostal dogma?  Tongues are no longer extant in the Church; this, with the advent of the first Canon around 180AD...tongues have ceased, today's "Charismatic Tongues" are pagan gibberish that dishonor the Spirit and the true Church but glorify man and narcissism. Charismata in some "Church of God" "Full-Gospel" "Pentecostalism" has become a works cult that is not of the Spirit but of the demonic.

So how come you have no anointing or power? God made you give up your brains for nothing? Just asking based on observational facts. Not being insulting.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Factfinder ; The Holy Spirit teaches me, loves me, strengthens me, works through me...I have told you the Truth via the Holy Spirit but you're possessed by a demon and you've relented and surrendered your life in Time and your soul to Satan...I can't help you...you've chosen the broad road...you proselytize for Satan. 

 

Factfinder

Lucky said "they're magically delicious" in all tongues....

Joeseph

@RickeyHoltsclaw


Rickets brands fellow bum buddy @just_sayin a Satanist ........you really have to laugh at these clowns who cannot decide which one is a true Christian........

One thing is for sure it really gets to both of them that the largest church in the world is still by a country mile Catholicism who claim to be the oldest and one true church , that really hurts right?


Dear oh Dear you have turned on your best buddy just Lying,  it seems everyone iyou disagre with is a Satanist .......tongues are no longer extant in the Church; this, with the advent of the first Canon around 180AD...tongues have ceased, today's "Charismatic Tongues" are pagan gibberish that dishonor the Spirit and the true Church but glorify man and narcissism. Charismata in some "Church of God" "Full-Gospel" "Pentecostalism" has become a works cult that is not of the Spirit but of the demonic.

maxx

let me put it this way. The first mention of speaking in tongues came in the Tyndale bible. When he translated from the original hebrew and greek, he simply used tongues instead of language; however the tow are interchangeable and mean the same thing. So i suggest you read Corinthians again and substitute language when you encounter the word tongue. For some reason, modern people began thinking that tongues was a separate phenomenon; some sort of magical aspect of religion that other religions do not have.  speaking in tongues and speaking in languages are the same thing. It is not just my opinion. I believe i have aske you before to read the tyndale bible, for it is much closer to the original meaning of the hebrew version. another thing here is, you and others, seem to interchange the two words, to suit your interpretation of the bible. If tongues means one thing, then it should remain that meaning, regardless if it is in acts or Corinthians.  The same if it means language. You are putting two distinct meanings to the word tongues. This is like if i took a passage' in the beginning god created..now i can make use of various meanings to the word created; each which would change the substance of the passage. Have you ever actually seen anyone jump up and begin speaking in the language of angels; where no one else understood? did the individual know what he said? Does speaking in tongues even make sense, when it is just as easy to talk to god in a normal fashion? What exactly is the language of angels? how many references of it are there in the bible? @just_sayin

just_sayin

@RickeyHoltsclaw
when one believes that Jesus is Messiah, they receive the indwelling Holy Spirit as Guarantor of New Covenant with the Father,

I agree with you on this.

There is one Baptism in the Spirit...at salvation

I disagree with you on this, as does all of Church History. Catholics and Protestants alike have historical claimed that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was distinct from salvation/initiation.  It wasn't until about 1851 when G. W. H. Lampe wrote the Seal of the Spirit that any theologian EVER claimed the Baptism in the Spirit was synonymous with salvation.  I mentioned some Baptist theologians as evidence:

From the grand daddy of all Baptists, John Calvin (Acts of the Apostles - his commentary on the Book of Acts)

These gifts, mentioned by Luke, differ indeed from the grace of regeneration (commentary on Acts 10:44)

Luke describeth, in this place, the proceedings of the grace of God in the Samaritans, as he useth to enrich the faithful continually with greater gifts of his Spirit, for we must not think that the apostles took that counsel whereof Luke speaketh, without the instinct of the same God who had already begun his work in Samaria by the hand of Philip; and he useth his instruments diversely unto divers parts of his work, according to his good pleasure. He used Philip as an instrument to bring them unto the faith; now he ordaineth Peter and John to be ministers to give the Spirit  - (commentary on Acts 8:14)

Whether they had received the Holy Ghost. The end of the history doth show that Paul doth not speak in this place of the Spirit of regeneration, but of the special gifts which God gave to divers at the beginning of the gospel, for the common edifying of the Church. - Acts 19:2 commentary

Even Baptists in the early 1800's taught what Pentecostals and Charismatics do today: From the Philadelphia Baptist Association - The Baptism of the Holy Spirit" - 1802 - this was the largest and most influential Baptist group in America at the time

That haply we may be of use to some of our respected friends, by showing them, that, though they may be regenerated, and enjoy the highest consolation in the sweet incomes of the Holy Comforter, and the most sensible communion with Christ;... The nature of this baptism, most clearly evinces it to be distinct, and materially different from that of regeneration. The one a still small voice, saying, "This is the way;" the other, that of "a rushing mighty wind." One invisible, "A white stone, and a new name given, which no man knew save he that had received it;" the other, to be seen, "Cloven tongues of fire sat on them." One internal, filling the heart with secret consolation, joy and pleasure; the other external, "The whole house where they were sitting."
     This renders the term baptism proper, because they were immersed in the fountain of the Spirit, and thereby made partakers of such extraordinary and miraculous influence, as in regeneration and conversion were never promised.
     The design of this baptism, is another important argument in favor of this idea. To qualify otherwise ignorant and unlearned men, to cope with all the greatness of this world, and to meet the wisdom of men, in all their formidable attacks, putting them to silence. To establish the greatest doctrines in the councils of heaven, or among men, God and man dwelling in one Christ; and that Jesus of Nazareth, crucified by the envious and treacherous Jews, was he; and, though the master was exalted, the disciple could effect, in his name, visible evidence of his Godhead, and by signs and miracles, as well as Scripture prophecy, prove him to be the Messiah promised to the fathers.
     To establish the gospel dispensation, by the instrumentality of a few illiterate persons, raised up in the land of Judea, (who declared that the whole economy made known to the ancient fathers, the costly grandeur of the temple and the expence of its worship, was fulfilled, and all its glory exceeded, in him who expired on the accursed tree,) needed the power of omnipotence, to make its way against the formidable force raised in opposition. Another reason was to assure the apostles, primitive Christians, and all subsequent believers, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and only Saviour of Jews and Gentiles. For which reason, the Holy Ghost, in his miraculous gifts of speaking with divers tongues, fell on the Gentiles in a visible form, as upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost, Acts xi:15, 16, "The Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning;" which extraordinary gifts served to confirm Peter that he was doing right, in hearkening to the vision he had seen; and to satisfy the church of the divine right of all nations in common to partake of salvation by the cross of Jesus Christ.
     The subjects of this baptism differ essentially from those of regeneration. 

So we see that Baptists, from the original Baptist, John Calvin, till 1851 believed that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was separate from salvation.  Because of the Methodists revivals, the Baptists created a new doctrine where they claimed baptism in the Spirit was salvation. Methodists were emphasizes a second work of the Spirit in their revivals. The new doctrine that linked the Baptism of the Holy Spirit to salvation didn't exist before that.  If you think I'm wrong, find me one theologian who when commenting on the passages in Acts, of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, ever said different.

Does the Bible show that salvation and baptism of the Holy Spirit can happen at different times?  Yep.

The disciples receive the seal of the Holy Spirit after the resurrection and before Jesus' ascension:

And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.  - John 20:22

On day of Pentecost the disciples received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit:

When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested[a] on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. - Acts 2:1-4

The Samaritans were saved and received the word of God and then later they received the baptism of the Holy Spirit:

 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. 18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money,... - Acts 8:14 - 18

The Ephesians were believers and then received the baptism of the Holy Spirit:

And it happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the inland[a] country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John's baptism.” 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in[b] the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying. 7 There were about twelve men in all. - Acts 19:1-7

 It sounds as though you were indoctrinated in a Full-Gospel, perhaps Pentecostal dogma?  Tongues are no longer extant in the Church; this, with the advent of the first Canon around 180AD...tongues have ceased, today's "Charismatic Tongues" are pagan gibberish that dishonor the Spirit and the true Church but glorify man and narcissism.

Is that right?  Let's ask Jule's AI and see:

Based on the search results, here are some specific examples of people reportedly speaking in tongues throughout Christian history after 100 AD:
1. Montanus and his followers in the 2nd century AD. Eusebius wrote that they would speak "strange things" in an ecstatic state.
2. Irenaeus, writing around 150 AD, mentioned Christians speaking in tongues, though the exact nature is not specified.
3. Saint Hildegard of Bingen in the 12th century was said to be able to speak and write in Latin without having learned it.
4. In the late 17th/early 18th century, a group of French Protestants called Huguenots reportedly spoke in tongues.
5. In the early 18th century, a group of Catholic priests called Jansenists engaged in tongues speaking.
6. Saint Vincent Ferrer in the late 14th/early 15th century was said to be understood by people of different languages as he preached throughout Europe.
7. In the 16th century, Catholic saints Francis Xavier and Louis Bertrand were reported to have spoken foreign languages they didn't know during missionary work.
8. Martin Luther was described as a "speaker in tongues" in some historical accounts.
9. John Wesley in the 18th century defended the ongoing existence of tongues speaking against critics.
10. The Moravians in the 15th century were accused by critics of speaking in tongues.
11. A group called the French Prophets in the 17th century reportedly spoke in tongues.
It's worth noting that the exact nature of the "tongues" is not always clear in these historical accounts - some may have been understood as miraculous speaking of foreign languages, while others were more like ecstatic speech. The frequency and widespread nature of the practice also varied over time.
Citations:
[1] https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/speaking-in-tongues-in-the-bible/
[2] http://theologicalperspectives.com/tongues-1
[3] https://davidbcapes.com/articles/brief-articles/tongues-speaking-in-the-early-church/
[4] https://www.apostolic.edu/speaking-in-tongues-throughout-history/
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_in_tongues
[6] https://charlesasullivan.com/7231/summary-gift-tongues-project-catholic/
[7] https://study.com/academy/lesson/speaking-tongues-overview-history-facts-glossolalia.html
[8] https://genesischristianchurch.org/academy_old/spa/ws_speak_in.htm

Now if you had said that speaking in tongues became less prevalent in the church over time until the Azuza street revival in the early 1900's, I could agree with you.  But as Jule's AI points out there are several recorded historical examples throughout Christian history.

Sometimes people will cite this passage to claim that tongues ceased:

 Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. - 1 Corinthians 13:8-10

They will say the 'perfect' thing is the Bible, so when the canon was completed tongues stopped.  But did knowledge end then too?  Did prophesy/preaching end then?  Nope, they did not.  The 'perfect' referenced in the passage is Jesus' second coming and establishment of a new heaven and new earth.

I get that it is not part of your personal experience.  But it is fallacy to claim that Pentecostals made up the experience or the theology of it.  It was Baptist theology centuries before Pentecostals even existed.  So Pentecostals and Charismatics agree with what Catholics and Baptists of the past believe regarding the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.  Its just that for Pentecostals/Charismatics its not something that just happened in the past, it is something that is part of their personal experience today.

By the way, in May 2024, the Southern Baptist Convention changed its rules to allow its Missionaries to speak in tongues.  In fact, most SBC missionaries in Africa speak in tongues and are preferred missionary candidates there, because the experience is so wide spread among the churches, even historically non-spirit filled ones.  Are most Southern Baptist Missionaries in Africa going to hell, Rickey?  

RickeyHoltsclaw

@just_sayin ; THERE IS NO "BAPTISM IN THE HOLY SPIRIT" SUBSEQUENT SALVATION BY FAITH. When one humbles them self before the Father and repents of their sin; that is, they apologize to the Father for their life of sin against Him and His Moral Law, and this individual, with a sincere heart, acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah who died for them they receive the indwelling Holy Spirit as per New Covenant promise (Ezekiel 36:27; Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 10:16; John 14:16; Ephesians 1:13-14) and the Holy Spirit is the Guarantor of New Covenant relationship with the Father, forever. The indwelling Holy Spirit is NOT parceled-out in pieces or a process of man but the Holy Spirit is a Person of the Triune Godhead who is given, in WHOLE, by faith.

The Holy Spirit's anointing and power and strength in the redeemed is wholly contingent upon the obedience and willingness of the redeemed to submit to the Holy Spirit's work in their life. The more one commits to the Spirit's will, the more the Spirit's anointing is poured-out upon their life in order that their service to the Father, their spiritual gifts, be successful for ONE END...the glorification of Elohim and the proliferation of the Gospel throughout the World in preparation for the Tribulation Era and the Millennial Kingdom...as the Holy Spirit is the LOGISTICAL aspect of the Trinity...the Spirit is the Divine Mover of all things and this responsibility is first noted in Genesis 1:2 as Overseer of the Creation Narrative and the Spirit's unfailing work in the birth, life, death, resurrection, of Messiah.

Pentecostalism, Charismata, certain estranged factions, have morphed into a religious cult...they are no longer Christian as far too many require participation in tongues as evidence of salvation and go as far as to deny that one is saved lest one speak in an unknown tongue........while working in one such ministry many years ago, I was instructed to teach others how to speak in a tongue...this was John Osteen's Church before his son Joel took over "Lakewood Church" on US 59 in Southwest Houston. I left that corrupted ministry or "cult" as they no longer preached the true Gospel but advocated a foul cult works doctrine of tongues and charismatic insanity.

How many sincere men and women have been insulted and offed by the Pentecostal - Full Gospel movement that centers on "Spiritual Gifts" of "tongues" and aberrations of the spiritual that are NOT of God but of Satan? How many men and women this very hour live in confusion and doubt as their vile ministers in charismata tell them that unless they speak in a tongue, they are absent the Holy Spirit and are therefore damned to Hell?

Keep your modern day charismata...it's demonic in origin... I will except nothing less than the purity of the Gospel of Jesus as the standard concerning my faith.

@Factfinder @Joeseph ; @21CenturyIconoclast ; @Polytheistwitch ; @Fredsnephew ; @MayCaesar

just_sayin

@RickeyHoltsclaw
When one humbles them self before the Father and repents of their sin; that is, they apologize to the Father for their life of sin against Him and His Moral Law, and this individual, with a sincere heart, acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah who died for them they receive the indwelling Holy Spirit as per New Covenant promise (Ezekiel 36:27; Jeremiah 31:33; Hebrews 10:16; John 14:16; Ephesians 1:13-14) and the Holy Spirit is the Guarantor of New Covenant relationship with the Father

On this much we agree.

The indwelling Holy Spirit is NOT parceled-out in pieces or a process of man but the Holy Spirit is a Person of the Triune Godhead who is given, in WHOLE, by faith.

SMH.  First, is God omnipresent or not?  

I am a God who is everywhere and not in one place only - Jeremiah 23:23-24

Where shall I go from your Spirit?
    Or where shall I flee from your presence?
8 If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
    If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! - Psalms 1397-8

God's word says there is no place where God's Spirit is not.  Yes, Rickey, God's Spirit is even in @FactFinder 's physical heart.  God's Spirit will be with @FactFinder in hell, if he goes there, though Fact will not sense His presence. 

When the Bible speaks of being sealed with the Spirit - it does not mean a physical location - it is indicating a work of the Spirit.  God's Spirit was not absent from your body before you became a Christian.  This is not an issue of physical location.  The Holy Spirit has a role in your salvation - on that we agree.  That does not mean, that the Holy Spirit does not do other things also.  Luke intentionally uses the phrases 'come upon', 'enter into', 'fall on' because they are the very terms used in the Greek translation of the Old Testament where the Spirit came upon God's people for power for service.  

Pentecostalism, Charismata, certain estranged factions, have morphed into a religious cult...they are no longer Christian as far too many require participation in tongues as evidence of salvation and go as far as to deny that one is saved lest one speak in an unknown tongue

If you were told you had to speak in tongues to be saved, I agree with you that is wrong.  If you were taught words to say and it was called speaking in tongues, I would agree with you that was false teaching.

However, as I pointed out to you - the church has historically always believed that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is distinct from salvation.  I asked you to show me just 1 theologian before 1851 who disagreed with what I said.  That holds true for Catholic and Protestant tradition.  It was Baptists who made up their own theology over the issue, because of their lack of experience of God's power moving in their lives.  I showed you how the founder of Baptists believed as I do, that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is different than salvation, centuries before the first Pentecostal denomination.  I showed you how Baptist conventions agreed with me.  I showed you multiple Bible verses that clearly show a distinction in when someone was saved and then later received the baptism in the Holy Spirit.  You claimed nobody after 130 AD spoke in tongues, and yet I showed you several historical examples before Azusa Street.  You ignored all the evidence that proves your opinion to be false.  I might as well call you @FactFinder. 

How many men and women this very hour live in confusion and doubt as their vile ministers in charismata tell them that unless they speak in a tongue, they are absent the Holy Spirit and are therefore damned to Hell?

To my knowledge there is only one Pentecostal denomination that teaches what you mentioned here.  It not only teaches that you must speak in tongues but that you must do so when baptized or you are not saved.  It is an aberration, not mainstream Pentecostal and Charismatic thought.  Do you know which denomination in the world you will find the most people who speak in tongues?  Catholicism.  You will find lots of Episcopalians, Baptists, and Methodists too who speak in tongues, especially outside the US. 

Now I do not personally believe that the Bible teaches you must speak in tongues to receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.  The most I think one could say is that speaking in tongues was normative for those who received the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament.

So what are you going to do with all the Baptist missionaries who speak in tongues?  Are they too going to go to hell?  Or maybe, you are the one whose theology is wrong, and who is missing something God wants to do in your life.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@just_sayin ; No one speaks in the tongues practiced in the Corinthian Church...these "unknown" tongues were a manifestation of the pagan practices evolving in the pagan Temple at Delphi; this, having been carried over into the Christian Church at Corinth by women seeking to mimic the popularity and aura of the revered pagan priestess and prophet..."the Delphic Oracles." This is but one reason Paul commanded that women remain silent during Church services (1 Corinthians 14:34).

Today's "tongues" are rooted in the pagan "Delphic Oracles"...this practice is an embarrassment to the Body of Messiah, His Church and the Holy Spirit....a madness that Paul dealt with in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:23)...a prophetic utterance that was not interpreted...a prophet utterance that Paul dealt with in an understanding way. Yes Paul did speak langues, possibly more so than those who filled the Corinthian Church...but we're not talking about intelligible languages one has not studied but is gifted to speak and understand, we're talking about the pure gibberish that pollutes "Churches of Charismata." 

It is true that tongues were prophesied as part of the New Covenant's genesis (Mark 16:17) but even Mark's 16th-Chapter (vvs. 9-20) are not found in early manuscripts but is an addition most likely by a scribe seeking to provide an understandable ending to Mark's abrupt conclusion...never intending this paragraph to be part of the inspired text but same found its way into the text over time by mistake. 

Today's tongues are not those of Acts but are pagan in origin...this is why every missionary sent abroad must be methodically trained in the language of those to be proselytized with the Gospel...today's Churches of charismata seek to pacify the flesh with sensuality and works and noise and gratification of the emotions as opposed to teaching the Truth of the Gospel and sincere faith in Jesus and the empowerment of the Holy Spirit through sanctification and humble obedience. 

   

 

Factfinder

RickeyHoltsclaw said:

@just_sayin ; 

It is true that tongues were prophesied as part of the New Covenant's genesis (Mark 16:17) but even Mark's 16th-Chapter (vvs. 9-20) are not found in early manuscripts but is an addition most likely by a scribe seeking to provide an understandable ending to Mark's abrupt conclusion...never intending this paragraph to be part of the inspired text but same found its way into the text over time by mistake. 

   

 

What's this, errors in the "infallible word of god"? Evidence the bible is the work of man, not god. Thanks Ricky. Two so called "Christians" arguing diametrically opposed interpretations of the same verses, classic. Even more evidence of the mythical status of elf gods. Thanks guys, you're okay...

just_sayin

@Factfinder
What's this, errors in the "infallible word of god"? Evidence the bible is the work of man, not god. Thanks Ricky. Two so called "Christians" arguing diametrically opposed interpretations of the same verses, classic. Even more evidence of the mythical status of elf gods. Thanks guys, you're okay...

I'm Ok with what Rickey is saying here.  He is the one who brought up the Mark passage, and that section is dated later.  In @RickeyHoltsclaw 's defense, the doctrine of inerrancy only applies to the original autographs, not the copies.  People have indeed made copying mistakes over the years.  

People disagree with interpretations of the Bible, not because the Bible is flawed or inconsistent, but because people are human and not omniscient.  Good people can disagree on things.  If you noticed I haven't accused Rickey of blaspheming the Holy Ghost and dooming his soul to eternal hell because we disagree.  I don't think this issue is an essential belief of the Christian faith.  My motto:

In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity, 

I think I have the better argument - as it involves explicit biblical examples, and the weight of historical witness.  

just_sayin

RickeyHoltsclaw said:

@just_sayin ; No one speaks in the tongues practiced in the Corinthian Church...these "unknown" tongues were a manifestation of the pagan practices evolving in the pagan Temple at Delphi; this, having been carried over into the Christian Church at Corinth by women seeking to mimic the popularity and aura of the revered pagan priestess and prophet..."the Delphic Oracles." This is but one reason Paul commanded that women remain silent during Church services (1 Corinthians 14:34).

Today's "tongues" are rooted in the pagan "Delphic Oracles"...this practice is an embarrassment to the Body of Messiah, His Church and the Holy Spirit....a madness that Paul dealt with in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:23)...a prophetic utterance that was not interpreted...a prophet utterance that Paul dealt with in an understanding way. Yes Paul did speak langues, possibly more so than those who filled the Corinthian Church...but we're not talking about intelligible languages one has not studied but is gifted to speak and understand, we're talking about the pure gibberish that pollutes "Churches of Charismata." 

It is true that tongues were prophesied as part of the New Covenant's genesis (Mark 16:17) but even Mark's 16th-Chapter (vvs. 9-20) are not found in early manuscripts but is an addition most likely by a scribe seeking to provide an understandable ending to Mark's abrupt conclusion...never intending this paragraph to be part of the inspired text but same found its way into the text over time by mistake. 

Today's tongues are not those of Acts but are pagan in origin...this is why every missionary sent abroad must be methodically trained in the language of those to be proselytized with the Gospel...today's Churches of charismata seek to pacify the flesh with sensuality and works and noise and gratification of the emotions as opposed to teaching the Truth of the Gospel and sincere faith in Jesus and the empowerment of the Holy Spirit through sanctification and humble obedience. 

   

 

First just an observation that Rickey has failed to explain:
1) If the baptism in the Holy Spirit is synonymous with salvation how come there are multiple examples in the New Testament where that did not happen:

The disciples receive the seal of the Holy Spirit after the resurrection and before Jesus' ascension:

And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.  - John 20:22

On day of Pentecost the disciples received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit:

When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested[a] on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. - Acts 2:1-4

The Samaritans were saved and received the word of God and then later they received the baptism of the Holy Spirit:

 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit. 18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money,... - Acts 8:14 - 18

The Ephesians were believers and then received the baptism of the Holy Spirit:

And it happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the inland[a] country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John's baptism.” 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in[b] the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying. 7 There were about twelve men in all. - Acts 19:1-7

You ran from the word of God, rather than to it Rickey.  

2) If the baptism in the Holy Spirit is salvation, how come ever baptist theologian prior to 1851 said that the Baptism in the Holy Spirit was not salvation?

From the grand daddy of all Baptists, John Calvin (Acts of the Apostles - his commentary on the Book of Acts)

These gifts, mentioned by Luke, differ indeed from the grace of regeneration (commentary on Acts 10:44)

Luke describeth, in this place, the proceedings of the grace of God in the Samaritans, as he useth to enrich the faithful continually with greater gifts of his Spirit, for we must not think that the apostles took that counsel whereof Luke speaketh, without the instinct of the same God who had already begun his work in Samaria by the hand of Philip; and he useth his instruments diversely unto divers parts of his work, according to his good pleasure. He used Philip as an instrument to bring them unto the faith; now he ordaineth Peter and John to be ministers to give the Spirit  - (commentary on Acts 8:14)

Whether they had received the Holy Ghost. The end of the history doth show that Paul doth not speak in this place of the Spirit of regeneration, but of the special gifts which God gave to divers at the beginning of the gospel, for the common edifying of the Church. - Acts 19:2 commentary

Even Baptists in the early 1800's taught what Pentecostals and Charismatics do today: From the Philadelphia Baptist Association - The Baptism of the Holy Spirit" - 1802 - this was the largest and most influential Baptist group in America at the time

That haply we may be of use to some of our respected friends, by showing them, that, though they may be regenerated, and enjoy the highest consolation in the sweet incomes of the Holy Comforter, and the most sensible communion with Christ;... The nature of this baptism, most clearly evinces it to be distinct, and materially different from that of regeneration. The one a still small voice, saying, "This is the way;" the other, that of "a rushing mighty wind." One invisible, "A white stone, and a new name given, which no man knew save he that had received it;" the other, to be seen, "Cloven tongues of fire sat on them." One internal, filling the heart with secret consolation, joy and pleasure; the other external, "The whole house where they were sitting."
     This renders the term baptism proper, because they were immersed in the fountain of the Spirit, and thereby made partakers of such extraordinary and miraculous influence, as in regeneration and conversion were never promised.
     The design of this baptism, is another important argument in favor of this idea. To qualify otherwise ignorant and unlearned men, to cope with all the greatness of this world, and to meet the wisdom of men, in all their formidable attacks, putting them to silence. To establish the greatest doctrines in the councils of heaven, or among men, God and man dwelling in one Christ; and that Jesus of Nazareth, crucified by the envious and treacherous Jews, was he; and, though the master was exalted, the disciple could effect, in his name, visible evidence of his Godhead, and by signs and miracles, as well as Scripture prophecy, prove him to be the Messiah promised to the fathers.
     To establish the gospel dispensation, by the instrumentality of a few illiterate persons, raised up in the land of Judea, (who declared that the whole economy made known to the ancient fathers, the costly grandeur of the temple and the expence of its worship, was fulfilled, and all its glory exceeded, in him who expired on the accursed tree,) needed the power of omnipotence, to make its way against the formidable force raised in opposition. Another reason was to assure the apostles, primitive Christians, and all subsequent believers, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and only Saviour of Jews and Gentiles. For which reason, the Holy Ghost, in his miraculous gifts of speaking with divers tongues, fell on the Gentiles in a visible form, as upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost, Acts xi:15, 16, "The Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning;" which extraordinary gifts served to confirm Peter that he was doing right, in hearkening to the vision he had seen; and to satisfy the church of the divine right of all nations in common to partake of salvation by the cross of Jesus Christ.
     The subjects of this baptism differ essentially from those of regeneration. 

3) if Tongues ceased after AD 130, why are there so many examples of Christians speaking in tongues after that?

Based on the search results, here are some specific examples of people reportedly speaking in tongues throughout Christian history after 100 AD:
1. Montanus and his followers in the 2nd century AD. Eusebius wrote that they would speak "strange things" in an ecstatic state.
2. Irenaeus, writing around 150 AD, mentioned Christians speaking in tongues, though the exact nature is not specified.
3. Saint Hildegard of Bingen in the 12th century was said to be able to speak and write in Latin without having learned it.
4. In the late 17th/early 18th century, a group of French Protestants called Huguenots reportedly spoke in tongues.
5. In the early 18th century, a group of Catholic priests called Jansenists engaged in tongues speaking.
6. Saint Vincent Ferrer in the late 14th/early 15th century was said to be understood by people of different languages as he preached throughout Europe.
7. In the 16th century, Catholic saints Francis Xavier and Louis Bertrand were reported to have spoken foreign languages they didn't know during missionary work.
8. Martin Luther was described as a "speaker in tongues" in some historical accounts.
9. John Wesley in the 18th century defended the ongoing existence of tongues speaking against critics.
10. The Moravians in the 15th century were accused by critics of speaking in tongues.
11. A group called the French Prophets in the 17th century reportedly spoke in tongues.
It's worth noting that the exact nature of the "tongues" is not always clear in these historical accounts - some may have been understood as miraculous speaking of foreign languages, while others were more like ecstatic speech. The frequency and widespread nature of the practice also varied over time.
Citations:
[1] https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/speaking-in-tongues-in-the-bible/
[2] http://theologicalperspectives.com/tongues-1
[3] https://davidbcapes.com/articles/brief-articles/tongues-speaking-in-the-early-church/
[4] https://www.apostolic.edu/speaking-in-tongues-throughout-history/
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaking_in_tongues
[6] https://charlesasullivan.com/7231/summary-gift-tongues-project-catholic/
[7] https://study.com/academy/lesson/speaking-tongues-overview-history-facts-glossolalia.html
[8] https://genesischristianchurch.org/academy_old/spa/ws_speak_in.htm

Rickey mentioned the Oracles of Delphi, as if 1 Corinthians 14 is about that.  Where in 1 Corinthians 14 does it mentions them?  What we see about women being silent in churches is:

If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. - 1 Corinthians 14:35

That is much more consistent with women sitting apart from their husbands, as the custom was for the men to sit with the men and the women with the women, and that cross talk was disrupting the service as most theologians say is the circumstance in 1 Corinthians 14.

Rickey, you have a perfect @FactFinder record going in this debate.  You have presented no evidence that holds up, and you have refused to address evidence that destroys your argument.  

The Bible says:
do not forbid speaking in tongues. - 1 Corinthians 14:39

Rickey, are you saying it is wrong for Baptist missionaries to speak in tongues?  Are you forbidding Pentecostals and Charismatics to speak in tongues?

just_sayin

maxx said:

let me put it this way. The first mention of speaking in tongues came in the Tyndale bible. When he translated from the original hebrew and greek, he simply used tongues instead of language; however the tow are interchangeable and mean the same thing. So i suggest you read Corinthians again and substitute language when you encounter the word tongue. For some reason, modern people began thinking that tongues was a separate phenomenon; some sort of magical aspect of religion that other religions do not have.  speaking in tongues and speaking in languages are the same thing. It is not just my opinion. I believe i have aske you before to read the tyndale bible, for it is much closer to the original meaning of the hebrew version. another thing here is, you and others, seem to interchange the two words, to suit your interpretation of the bible. If tongues means one thing, then it should remain that meaning, regardless if it is in acts or Corinthians.  The same if it means language. You are putting two distinct meanings to the word tongues. This is like if i took a passage' in the beginning god created..now i can make use of various meanings to the word created; each which would change the substance of the passage. Have you ever actually seen anyone jump up and begin speaking in the language of angels; where no one else understood? did the individual know what he said? Does speaking in tongues even make sense, when it is just as easy to talk to god in a normal fashion? What exactly is the language of angels? how many references of it are there in the bible? @just_sayin

I am failing to see your point.  Are you saying that the language of men and of angels is exactly the same?

As I mentioned before there are 4 types of tongues mentioned in the Bible:
1) xenoglossy
2) A sign of receiving the baptism in the Holy Spirit (power for service)
3) The gift of tongues - where a person with the spiritual gift of interpretation is needed
4) As a private prayer language

Google AI said this:

In the Bible, the distinction between the tongues of men and of angels may refer to the following: 

• Intelligibility

  1 Corinthians 14:10 may imply that "tongues of men" were intelligible, while 1 Corinthians 14:2 may refer to angelic tongues, which are not understood by others. 
• Language of angels

  The language of angels may refer to the actual language spoken by heavenly beings, or it may be a figure of speech used to make a point about love. 
• Supernatural utterance

  Speaking in tongues is a supernatural utterance by the Holy Spirit in languages the speaker has never learned. It is not understood by the speaker's mind, and it may not always be understood by the listener. 
• Three expressions

  There are three expressions of the gift of tongues: personal, prophetic, and proof. The personal tongue is only understood by God, the prophetic tongue is understood by the church with an interpreter, and the proof tongue is understood by unbelievers. 

RickeyHoltsclaw

@just_sayin ;   The reason individuals in the New Testament are supposedly shown to have received the Holy Spirit, His fullness, subsequent salvation is the fact that they were not truly redeemed but possessed a head knowledge of Messiah and it was not until their faith was complete with a thorough understanding of the Gospel Truth that these were truly redeemed....there is also the possibility that for the sake of those in observance, the Holy Spirit was given in a visible and tangible way as a witness for the Great Commission similar to the Day of Pentecost for those who were saved by faith under the Old Covenant but had not yet received the Spirit in the New Covenant's promise; either way, when one is truly redeemed by faith, they receive all of the Holy Spirit they will ever receive...again...the Holy Spirit is NOT parceled out in portions or degrees but the Holy Spirit's anointing is wholly dependent upon man's obedience to and actuation of the spiritual gifts granted he or she at the moment of salvation.

The evidence you seek is in your heart and in your mind when the Spirit is your teacher...you have fallen prey to a religion of the flesh, not the Spirit...be forewarned.

 

A BIBLICAL LOOK AT THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
AND THE FILLING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT  https://bible-truth.org/bapt-hs.htm

It is important to understand that nowhere in Scripture is the believer told to be baptized with the Holy Spirit. I Cor 12:13, says "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body". One who is saved, at salvation, is regenerated by the Holy Spirit, and indwelled and put into the body of Christ. Ephesians 4:4-5, "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling, One Lord, one faith, one baptism." There is only one Baptism of the Holy Spirit, and it is automatically received by all who by faith trust in the Lord Jesus and are saved. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit, is the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit which is given to all Christians. Ephesians 1:13 says that a person, after hearing the Gospel, and having believed they were saved, were "sealed" with the Holy Spirit which had been promised. Verse 18 says that those who had been saved, had their understanding enlightened, and that they "know what is the hope of his calling". Verse 19 says that the believer has great power.           The major doctrine that the Pentecostals and Charismatics do not understand is the dispensational truth that: we are not in Old Testament times, but rather, we live in a different dispensation of God's dealing with men. The period of the Gospels and the early church was a transitional time of the Jews rejecting the Savior, and the Gospel going to the Gentiles. There was no New Testament, which addresses God's instructions for this age. Further the Jews were looking for signs to authenticate God's presence and work (1 Cor. 1:22).            Even after God graciously gave them signs which accompanied the preaching of the Word, and fulfilled Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of the Messiah, they still rejected Jesus. Because the Jews rejected their Messiah, God temporarily withdrew the offer of the Kingdom, meaning the Millennium, when Israel will be restored and Christ will reign for a 1000 years from Jerusalem. With the Jews off the scene and the Gospel going to the Gentiles there was no need of the sign gifts any more. Gentiles seek after wisdom (not signs) meaning the study of the Bible and the Word of God (1 Cor. 1:22).            God gave the sign gifts to the early church because they were Jews. In fact the early church was 100% Jewish, except for Cornelius, until Acts 11 with the establishment of the Jewish-Gentile church at Antioch. All this time from 33 AD until 70 AD, when Jerusalem was destroyed, the sign gifts were valid to authenticate that the Apostles were speaking for God and had his Spirit directing them. But the Jews rejected Christ and the Gospel went to the Gentiles through the ministry of the Apostle Paul. After 70 AD the Jews had no nation, God had destroyed Jerusalem and scattered the Jewish people to the four winds. The sign gifts then ceased as 1 Corinthians 13:8f said they would because the Jews were no longer in view in this dispensation and most of the New Testament was written, that is, “that which is perfect is come" meaning the written word of God. (1 Cor. 13:10).

WHAT DID JESUS SAY ABOUT SALVATION, AND RECEIVING THE HOLY SPIRIT?

           Jesus told the Pharisee Nicodemus, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." (John 3:3) In Verse 5, Jesus further explained that, ". . . Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." There can be no mistake that Jesus was saying a person, in order to be saved, must be born again of the Holy Spirit. These verses do not say that being born of the Spirit and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit are the same. However, in verse 6, Jesus said that, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." He is saying what the Holy Spirit produces is Spirit.            John explained that the Jesus spoke of the coming indwelling of the Holy Spirit in John 7:33-38; John says, "But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." (John 7:39)

WHAT THEN IS THE FILLING OF HOLY SPIRIT?

           The Bible teaches that the Filling of the Spirit is not the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Whereas the believer is not told to be Baptized with the Spirit, he is told that he is to Filled with the Spirit. “And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;” (Ephesians 5:18)            This verse instructs us not to be drunk with wine, which is excess; but be filled with the Spirit. The verse is using the example of one being drunk or under the control of alcohol to similarly illustrate that a Christian should let himself be controlled by the Holy Spirit.            Paul's use of the example of "be not drunk with wine" is a reference to the first century idea that alcohol was the "drink of the gods" and its effect on man was the power of God, which enabled the drinker to receive greater spiritual awareness or inspiration. Paul dismisses this idea as debauchery which is what the phrase "wherein is excess" means. Paul illustrates by using the example of one who is letting alcohol control him, in contrast to the Christian who is to let the indwelling Holy Spirit control him.            The phrase "filled with the Spirit", means "to be under the influence of". Examples in the New testament of being filled with the Spirit are as follows:
1. Jesus, in Luke 4:1, said he was "full of the Holy Spirit."2. Stephen, was "full of faith and the Holy Spirit" Acts 6:5, 7:55.3. Barnabas, also was full of the Spirit. Acts 11:24.4. Peter, preached in Acts 4:8 "filled with the Holy Ghost."5. The first deacons, in Acts 6:3, to be qualified must be men "full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom."
           Nowhere in scripture does God command a person to be baptized with the Holy Spirit, however, God does command that we be filled with the Holy Spirit. Letting oneself be filled with the Spirit is reference to the fact that the Christian has two natures (Rom.6 and 7). One is the old or carnal nature and the other is the new nature or spiritual one. The Christian can let himself be controlled by the old nature and sin (1 John 1:8-10), or can allow the Holy Spirit who indwells him, control him. (Eph. 5:18) Who is controlling us is determined by our submission to the Holy Spirit or to the lust of our carnal flesh. In Acts 13:8-10, Elymas the sorcerer who was a false prophet, and is said by Paul to have been ". . . Full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil". Paul, in Romans 1:28-29, says that man, ". . . Being filled will all unrighteousness, fornication, . . .” willingly gave up his knowledge of God. These verses show that man in different degrees can let himself be controlled by his carnal nature.

CONCLUSION

           The Bible teaches that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the Filling of the Holy Spirit are separate functions or ministries of the Holy Spirit.            The examples in the Book of Acts of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, after salvation, as happened at Pentecost, Acts 2, and subsequently in Acts 8, 10 and 19, are accounts of believers receiving the "indwelling" of the Holy Spirit. In each case mentioned in Acts those who received the Baptism, were believers who were saved under the Old Testament dispensation of the Law.            When they heard the Gospel, which was the "Good News” that Jesus was the Messiah and had risen from the grave, they gladly accepted this and received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which had been promised by Jesus. They received Christ and became a part of the Church Age or the dispensation of Grace, and became part of the Body of Christ. It is important to note that in no case in the New Testament was the Baptism of the Holy Spirit sought. It was understood that all who were saved would receive the indwelling as promised.            At the time of the beginning of the church things were different. One thing different was that all those who became a part of the church, in its beginning, were Jewish believers! They were saved saints of God. However, they were not, at first, in the church. Why? Because Christ had not begun the church until the Day of Pentecost! Today, this is not the case. The church now carries the Gospel to the lost. However the Jews, as a people, are still rejecting their Messiah. Those who are saved today were once lost in their sins, both Jew and Gentile. The lost, when they receive Christ as Savior receive the Holy Spirit, and being indwelt by the Spirit of God become a part of the church, the bride of Christ.            Historically, as the Gentiles heard the Gospel and were saved, the early churches became part Jew and part Gentile. This was the case at Antioch. After Paul's missionary journeys to Asia some Jews were saved, but there were more Gentiles in the churches than Jews. After a time most of the saved Old Testament Jews of the first Century, who were waiting for the coming Messiah, heard the Gospel and accepted Christ and became members of local churches in their areas. After 70 AD, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the scattering of the Jews, the nation of Israel and biblical Judaism ceased to exist. The churches, within a century, had become mostly Gentile which is our situation today. We rejoice to hear today of Jews who are saved and receive Christ as their Savior. There are a good number of Messianic Jewish congregations today. However, the Jews that were saved after Pentecost are not Old Testament saints, but when saved, become a part of the body of Christ.            The point is that few Jewish people believed in Jesus as their Messiah, and certainly not the nation of Israel. God's offer of the Kingdom to the Jews was valid until they, as a nation, rejected Him. Thus, from Pentecost, until the destruction of Jerusalem and the nation of Israel, God was offering the Promised Kingdom to the Jews; however the Kingdom could only have come at that time if the Jews, as a people, had received their Messiah. Therefore, there was a transitional period of time from Pentecost to 70 AD when the Jews could have believed and received their Messiah. After 70 AD and the destruction of Jerusalem, the offer of the Kingdom was postponed until after the Rapture, the Seven Year Tribulation and the Second Coming of Christ. During the Tribulation, Israel will be purged, and after the Lord's Second Coming He will set up the Promised Kingdom. Everyone in this Dispensation, who believes in Jesus Christ and is saved, is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, which is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, the Lord promised in Acts 1:5 and which began in Acts 2.            Nowhere in the Bible does it say or infer that it is a "second blessing" or that the proof one has experienced the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, is that they speak in "tongues" (known languages). However, Galatians 5:22-23, says “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.”           Note that "tongues" is not mentioned as a fruit of the Spirit. Further you must have the Spirit in order to have the fruit of the Spirit. These "fruits" do not come from our carnal nature, but from one's submissiveness to the spiritual nature only which the believer receives when he is saved and receives the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. If God says these are the fruits of the Holy Spirit in a believer's life, then the believer must have the indwelling and the presence of the Holy Spirit in order to have such fruit. Never in the New Testament is there even a hint of a class of believers, who have not had the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, but yet can still serve God and have the fruits of the Spirit in their lives. All believers are exhorted to have the fruits of the Spirit in their lives. Galatians 5:16 says Christians are to “. . . Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.” Would God tell us that the way to overcome our sinful flesh was to "walk in the Spirit" when we are not able to? The answer is “of course not”. The command of God is based on the fact that we have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and can absolutely "walk in the Spirit."            Further, one cannot partially receive the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is a person. You can not partially receive a person. The Holy Spirit can only be fully and permanently received. Once He is received in salvation, we can obey and let Him lead our lives, or we can walk in the flesh. That is why Paul said, in Ephesians 5:18, "And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit." In other words, let the Holy Spirit control us. Again, He cannot control us if He does not indwell us.

maxx

ive asked you how many references  in the bible speak of angels having a language of their own. you also failed to ,mention not only why, but the reason for those who have received the holy spirit to utter in tongues. is it actual communication with god? why is that necessary; for we do not need such utterances to commune with him Just what do you mean by being filled with the holy spirit? just to allow it to completely empower your life? are you as a christain been ever filled witjh the holy spirit and if so, have you suddenly began speaking in strange utterances? Do other Christians understand you when you do? No, i think that over time since the bible was written and translated; speaking in tongues developed a new meaning that is devoid of its original content; and people use it today to justify therir belief in the bible.The brain can do many odd things to a person, including hypnotizing itself especially in times of highly euphoric conditions such as a church revival. They believe that speaking in tongues is a special event so they begin uttering what they know not what, and when pressed as to the meaning of such so called speech, they fail to make an actual coherent answer. If angels exist, i alos fail to believe they have a spoken language, for it would not be needed. tongues and languages ae the same thing.Somewhere from today to the past; people began to confuse the two. @just_sayin