What does having the Holy Spirit mean?

[Barb]

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.

I believe this, but have a question and I don't mean it to sound elementary...IYO, is there a difference between having the Holy Ghost working in you/drawing you and being Spirit filled?!

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Barb

I believe this, but have a question and I don't mean it to sound elementary...IYO, is there a difference between having the Holy Ghost working in you/drawing you and being Spirit filled?!

I've made the point so many times that there are different operations/works of the Holy Ghost in our lives.

I was regenerated by the Spirit of God i.e. born again before I ever spoke in tongues. That experience came much later as it does with many people who serve God for many years before they're Baptized with the Spirit.

The disciples walked with Jesus, had His anointing on their lives, exercised spiritual authority and power a good while before they spoke in tongues.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Felicity

I've made the point so many times that there are different operations/works of the Holy Ghost in our lives.

I was regenerated by the Spirit of God i.e. born again before I ever spoke in tongues. That experience came much later as it does with many people who serve God for many years before they're Baptized with the Spirit.

The disciples walked with Jesus, had His anointing on their lives, exercised spiritual authority and power a good while before they spoke in tongues.

And I believe this...

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Barb

And I believe this...

LOL! Well God bless your l'il heart for believing at least one line of what I wrote.

[mizpeh]

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.

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?

[OGIA]

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?

[Felicity]

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?

I think it's a matter of semantics -- this "in/on' business.

As for the Samaritans there was already change that had taken place in their lives. It was evidenced by the JOY they possessed and that was shining out of their lives.

There's no JOY if there's been no change that's already taken place.

Even so ..... the Samaritans had not yet been endued with the power of the Holy Ghost evidenced by speaking in tongues.

[freeatlast]

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?

An interestring study on the word "recieved". Our one english word recieved is the word the translators use for 18 different woords in the original text's.

The Samaritans "recieved(lambano) the holy Spirit.

This word lambano gives the menaing of manifesting objectvively what one allready possesses.

Because the UNBELIEVNG Jews could not Believe that a Samaritan dog could be saved God "fell upon or came upon" the Samaritans and manifested a gift of the spirit thru them. The gift of tongues to convince the unbeleivers that Samaritans could be saved and have Chris within their lives.

Remeber Paul said tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe but to them that believe not.

Tongues were a sign that someone had become a believer a " few" times in Acts. This in no way establishes that tongues will always accompany conversion.

There are many other places in Acts where we read of people coming to faith with no mention of tongues.

[mizpeh]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by freeatlast

An interestring study on the word "recieved". Our one english word recieved is the word the translators use for 18 different woords in the original text's.

The Samaritans "recieved(lambano) the holy Spirit.

This word lambano gives the menaing of manifesting objectvively what one allready possesses.

I looked up the word "receive" and "received" in the book of Acts in the verses in which it is associated with the gift of the Holy Spirit. Strong's references lambano each time and different tenses of the verb. Your definition of lambano is different from Strong's. Where did you get your definition? Where do you find 18 different words for "receive"? are they all these different words for receive in the original texts used in reference to "receiving the Holy Spirit"?

Because the UNBELIEVNG Jews could not Believe that a Samaritan dog could be saved God "fell upon or came upon" the Samaritans and manifested a gift of the spirit thru them. The gift of tongues to convince the unbeleivers that Samaritans could be saved and have Chris within their lives.

Why was tongues a sign to Peter and the believing Jews that the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost?

Remeber Paul said tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe but to them that believe not.

Is there a difference between the initial evidence of tongues and the gift of tongues? What do you think of Isaiah 28:11-12? What do you think of Jesus' mention of a "sound" in John 3:8? Is it tongues?

Tongues were a sign that someone had become a believer a " few" times in Acts. This in no way establishes that tongues will always accompany conversion.

To be converted is to repent or turn away from sin and to turn to God. Acts 3:19 Tongues doesn't always accompany repentance but it does accompany receiving the Spirit of God.

There are many other places in Acts where we read of people coming to faith with no mention of tongues.

The Bible never says the Philipian jailor and his family repented or received the Spirit. Yet we know both are necessary for salvation and commanded of God. Same with the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8. Does the Bible have to spell it out to us, as in Acts 2, every time someone is saved?

In Acts 2 when the hearers were pricked in their hearts by believing those things Peter preached, were they saved then and there. Was Acts 2:38 just an afterthought?

[Felicity]

*written to nobody specifically*


I've heard people say so many times ..........


"They may not be apostolic and they may not have ever spoken in tongues but they've got something. There's no doubt about that. The anointing is all over them and the glow of the Holy Ghost is on their face. They certainly ministered to me. The presence of the Lord was so rich!"


Well.........just what is it that they have? What is that something?