What does having the Holy Spirit mean?

[Sherri]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I can give a simple clear answer to your question. If a person hasn't received the Holy Spirit like the disciples in Acts 2 with the evidence of speaking in other tongues, then no, they do not have the Spirit of Christ and they are none of His.

Then WHAT IN THE WORLD do they have after repentance? NOTHING?????? I know people who have totally walked away from sins and addictions after they repent. They could not do that without the power of God's Spirit in their lives.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Sherri

Then WHAT IN THE WORLD do they have after repentance? NOTHING?????? I know people who have totally walked away from sins and addictions after they repent. They could not do that without the power of God's Spirit in their lives.

Here's some posts by Mizpeh that explains her position .....

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Repentance made a HUGE change in my life. My mind was completely changed. I didn't want to do the sinful things I had been doing. I stopped taking the Lord's name in vain. I stopped going to bars, etc. I started reading the Bible. I told everyone I knew about Jesus. I prayed. I was a different person just because of repentance. My mind was turned around and I wasn't the same. Praise the Lord!

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I don't think I said I came to Christ on my own. God was dealing with my heart months before I repented. I didn't tell the WHOLE story.

I know from the Bible that it is the goodness of God that leads us to repentance. Repentance IS a change of mind. I would have to disagree with your first paragraph. Repentance through the leading of the Spirit turned me around completely. All of the changes wrought in my life when I first came to God, I believe resulted from repentance. A repentance that God's grace granted me. I didn't receive the Spirit until I spoke in tongues a couple of months later. The work of salvation is of the Spirit, all of it. From faith to confession to repentance to the new birth. We are saved by the grace of God through faith. True repentance totally turned my life around.

I agree completely with your last two paragraphs. A person who was later to be a good friend witnessed to me and I started reading the Bible at the gospels. I repented while reading the gospel of Matthew. I know it was the Spirit of God dealing with my heart through his word. God gets all the glory from me for what He has done in my life. I'm sorry if that didn't come across in my post.

Originally Posted by Felicity

Repentance didn't turn your life around.

The Spirit of God changing you did that. You repented because of the Holy Ghost working in you.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I agree with you, the Holy Ghost was working in my life but not IN me. Not until I was baptized in the Spirit. The Spirit led me to a place of repentance without being indwelt by the Spirit. The Spirit was WITH me but not IN me. This is where we don't agree.

What do you think about Acts 8 and the conversion of the Samaritans? Why did they send for the apostles to pray for the new believers to receive the Holy Spirit if they received the Spirit upon faith? Why did Paul say ask the disciples at Ephesus in Acts 19 "Have ye received the Holy Ghost SINCE ye believed?" if they received the Spirit upon faith?

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Barb

TB, it was always explained to me that Luke had already written that they received the Holy Ghost and spoke, so in those places where he was silent about tongues, as it would have been inconsistent for some to speak when the Spirit came and others not, he felt no need to repeat it everytime. In other words, it could be considered as fact that if they spoke at Pentecost in an upper room, they spoke everytime someone was filled.

This is not a strong argument. The 120 who were filled with the Spirit in the upper room spoke known languages. This caused those who heard them to believe they must be drunk and to marvel. So it only stands to reason that if 3000 people suddenly began speaking in unknown languages it would be an even greater and more profound phenomena. Yet, there is no mention of what would have been an even more perplexing event than the Day of Pentecost outpouring, don't you think?

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

You misunderstand, it's not that we shouldn't be ready to give an answer to reason. The Bible instructs us to do so. Much more could have been written in greater detail of what took place as even the Word gives witness to.

John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Even Jesus in his teaching often held back greater detail. Should it surprise us that His Word is no different? He has given what he has given, and what has been given on this topic is plenty, unless you have the attitude that you haven't been told enough times. Perhaps by the very divine inspiration given Luke, the Lord feels that enough is given for those that receive the Word gladly with eyes to see and ears to hear. It's not for the scoffer, the unbeliever, and the faithless. We see that over and over again in Scripture.

Also, a bad spirit or attitude is not in the asking of a question, it's in how it is asked.

If someone is sincerely seeking truth and you exhaustively share the Word on a matter, they look it over and prayerfully receive it.

That's a sharp contrast to the individual that has been shown the Word and still demands evidence with the 'show me' attitude. It is to these that the truth is hidden and this is by divine design.

Let me say this about your post...

Asking for evidence of an opinion or theology does not a bad attitude make.

Case in point...I am a 'PAJCer' by reason of birth, indoctrination and ultimate belief, YET I have heard and read opinions/theology that I never knew EXISTED in the Apsotolic Church. That these things have given me pause and that I am asking some hard questions does not mean I am wishy washy in my faith or that I am seeking another way.

I don't have a bad attitude or spirit and those who would be called 'PCI' in belief surely understand this.

By the same token, if TB or anyone else asks us to give proof for why we believe as we do, I do NOT believe it is with an attitude of "show me", rather he earnestly is asking.

IMHO, sir, you are way off base in your assumption of the elder's intent...

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

"Prove it to me!"

This post is a great example of the attitude one has to have to disbelieve. It is likened unto doubting Thomas, or those that sought a sign of Jesus in the midst of his fulfilling the very letters of their Holy Books.

There they were, all the proof in the world written out for them, and they missed him standing right in front of them.

Thomas wouldn't even believe his contemporaries when they all told them that the Lord had risen.

John 20

24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

What an attitude to take. Look at how Jesus handled it. Interesting to me that Thomas had to disbelieve in their company for eight days. I imagine he went for some long walks.

26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

You see TB, not all was written in the New Testament, however what is written is given that we might believe. There are no guarantees. The Word falls on all kinds of ground.

Jesus had an interesting way of revealing himself and teaching.

Let's take a look at John 10.

22 And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. 24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make F22 us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. 25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and my Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

39 Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand, 40 And went away again beyond Jordan into the place where John at first baptized; and there he abode. 41 And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true. 42 And many believed on him there.
Jesus teaches some here and not only do they not believe, they want to kill him. He teaches others and they both see and follow.

Why did he teach in proverbs and parables? Matthew 13.

10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. 12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. 14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Even Paul, being full and inspired by the Holy Ghost, was a difficult one to understand.

2 Peter 3

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

So, getting back to the material of your post.

The evidence of tongues as an elemental aspect of Spiritual Baptism is sound, yet not mentioned in redundancy. It's not needful.

Do I need to refer to all the gifts of the Spirit, or the fruits thereof every time I refer to the terms? Not if you've already been taught what they are.

You suggest that because there is not pure and complete redundancy that it is not provable.

You demand that since these large outpourings aren't laid out to your satisfaction, then they didn't speak in tongues. Well now, where is the proof that they repented? It's not mentioned, yet their experience is seen and manifest in their subsequent ACTS.



Matthew 7

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Christendom is full of those that do wonderful things and follow some scripture, yet the Lord has not known them. I find this amazing.

What I am saying is that while you contend that everyone who was filled with the Holy Ghost spoke with other tongues, the record doesn't support that position. It's been 100 years since the outpouring in Topeka, Kansas, yet Pentecostals still think it necessary to emphasize that someone spoke with tongues, so it just seems logical to me that an historian who felt it newsworthy that 120 spoke with known tongues, would consider 3000 people speaking in unknown tongues even more news worthy, and of historical significance.

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

You misunderstand, it's not that we shouldn't be ready to give an answer to reason. The Bible instructs us to do so. Much more could have been written in greater detail of what took place as even the Word gives witness to.

John 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Even Jesus in his teaching often held back greater detail. Should it surprise us that His Word is no different? He has given what he has given, and what has been given on this topic is plenty, unless you have the attitude that you haven't been told enough times. Perhaps by the very divine inspiration given Luke, the Lord feels that enough is given for those that receive the Word gladly with eyes to see and ears to hear. It's not for the scoffer, the unbeliever, and the faithless. We see that over and over again in Scripture.

Also, a bad spirit or attitude is not in the asking of a question, it's in how it is asked.

If someone is sincerely seeking truth and you exhaustively share the Word on a matter, they look it over and prayerfully receive it.

That's a sharp contrast to the individual that has been shown the Word and still demands evidence with the 'show me' attitude. It is to these that the truth is hidden and this is by divine design.

This is exactly how I feel about those who in spite of what the Scripture actually says about what it means to be born again insist on their own interpretation rather than simply accepting what the Bible says.

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Theophilus

True, everybody believes that their experience lines up with the Word. Some, and maybe even most folks are right in so far as their experience goes.

The question we all need to ask is:

Does my experience line up with the Word of God completely?

One thing is certain. The three step plan does not line up with either the Word or the experience of most people who come to Christ for salvation and experience spiritual transformation.

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Sherri

Then WHAT IN THE WORLD do they have after repentance? NOTHING?????? I know people who have totally walked away from sins and addictions after they repent. They could not do that without the power of God's Spirit in their lives.

AMEN!!!

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Barb

Let me say this about your post...

Asking for evidence of an opinion or theology does not a bad attitude make.

Case in point...I am a 'PAJCer' by reason of birth, indoctrination and ultimate belief, YET I have heard and read opinions/theology that I never knew EXISTED in the Apsotolic Church. That these things have given me pause and that I am asking some hard questions does not mean I am wishy washy in my faith or that I am seeking another way.

I don't have a bad attitude or spirit and those who would be called 'PCI' in belief surely understand this.

By the same token, if TB or anyone else asks us to give proof for why we believe as we do, I do NOT believe it is with an attitude of "show me", rather he earnestly is asking.

IMHO, sir, you are way off base in your assumption of the elder's intent...

Thank you Barb! The Bereans were actually considered more noble because they searched the Scriptures daily to see if what was being presented was so or not. They weren't considered to have a bad attitude or spiritually blind for questioning what was being taught.

Originally Posted by Barb

Let me say this about your post...

Asking for evidence of an opinion or theology does not a bad attitude make.

Case in point...I am a 'PAJCer' by reason of birth, indoctrination and ultimate belief, YET I have heard and read opinions/theology that I never knew EXISTED in the Apsotolic Church. That these things have given me pause and that I am asking some hard questions does not mean I am wishy washy in my faith or that I am seeking another way.

I don't have a bad attitude or spirit and those who would be called 'PCI' in belief surely understand this.

By the same token, if TB or anyone else asks us to give proof for why we believe as we do, I do NOT believe it is with an attitude of "show me", rather he earnestly is asking.

IMHO, sir, you are way off base in your assumption of the elder's intent...

That's your opinion and you're are welcome to it, maam, but you're making a mountain out of a mole hill.

For the record, I can't believe for a moment that an 'elder' would be so novice in requiring such redundancy. Do we see repentence with redundancy? No! Are we to assume that it was not there? If anybody's assumtions are without merit and off base, it is that of anyone that requires redundancy to their personal satisfaction in order to prove to them, what the Word has already proven with plenty of instances.

Therefore, if not novice, then the prevential demand for more proof, where plenty is given, is of poor attitude, IMHO.

An 'elder' ought to have a better approach to the Word than that, unless there be an agenda, not of truth seeking, but rather status quo keeping of, if nothing else, one's personal theology.