For those that left the UPC...

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

yeah, kinda like when he said drink this my blood shed for you and eat this is my body broken for you which was said before his blood was shed and body broken.

This makes it clear for me:

John 7:38-39

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
KJV

[Godsdrummer]

It has become my personal experiance in the last several years that speaking in tongues is not the initial evidince of the Holy Ghost that some seem to imply. When one truely hears the Gospel and calls on Christ in a true spirit of repentance the Holy ghost comes into our live at that time. To go on and say one must speak in tongues negates the promise that it is a gift.

Peter did not say you had to speak in tongues in Acts 2, he said repent and be baptized and you will recive "the gift of the holy ghost".

We are to try the spirits to see if they are of God.

1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

John did not say check if they speak in tongues! To see if the have the spirit.

I used to ask if some one spoke in tongues when they said they had the spirit of God. If they did not then I passed judgement that they did not have the spirit of God and that they had to get saved as I had. When I left UPC and attended demominal churches I saw and tried the spirits for myself and found the Holy Ghost dwelt in those that had not spoke in tongues. I found more of the spirit of God in those that did not profess to have spoken in tongues than those that did speak in tongues every Sunday.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Point well taken. If that were the only evidence it would be thrown out of court for lack of evidence. However, we also know that we can't say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit. I'm saying that receiving Christ is a work of the Holy Spirit, just as those in Acts 19 were already believers who had net yet received the Holy Spirit. It's a different work of the Holy Spirit and one that every believer should have. I think we probably agree on that.

Some of us on here see a difference between being born of the Spirit and a subsequent work known as an empowering of the Spirit, or a filling with the Spirit, or the Spirit coming upon, or receiving/making room for the Spirit, or the Spirit falling upon, or a baptism in the Spirit.

[mfblume]

Tongues as initial evidence of the Holy ghost baptism is not to be confused with fruit as ongoing evidence.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

yeah, kinda like when he said drink this my blood shed for you and eat this is my body broken for you which was said before his blood was shed and body broken.

This makes it clear for me:

John 7:38-39

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
KJV

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Tongues as initial evidence of the Holy ghost baptism is not to be confused with fruit as ongoing evidence.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

It has become my personal experiance in the last several years that speaking in tongues is not the initial evidince of the Holy Ghost that some seem to imply. When one truely hears the Gospel and calls on Christ in a true spirit of repentance the Holy ghost comes into our live at that time. To go on and say one must speak in tongues negates the promise that it is a gift.

Peter did not say you had to speak in tongues in Acts 2, he said repent and be baptized and you will recive "the gift of the holy ghost".

We are to try the spirits to see if they are of God.

1Jn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

John did not say check if they speak in tongues! To see if the have the spirit.

I used to ask if some one spoke in tongues when they said they had the spirit of God. If they did not then I passed judgement that they did not have the spirit of God and that they had to get saved as I had. When I left UPC and attended demominal churches I saw and tried the spirits for myself and found the Holy Ghost dwelt in those that had not spoke in tongues. I found more of the spirit of God in those that did not profess to have spoken in tongues than those that did speak in tongues every Sunday.

I think you are confusing the change of lifestyle that comes with repentance with fruit of the Spirit. God is with those who believe in Christ and turn from sin but He is not in them until they have received the Spirit " as on us at the beginning" Acts 11:15, that is with the evidence of speaking with other tongues.

I changed immensely after I believed and repented but I was not filled with the Holy Spirit. I didn't have the same experience the early disciples did to confirm and know without a doubt that Christ had come to take up residence within me. Receiving the Spirit at faith is not taught in the book of Acts. Receiving the Spirit by faith is taught but not at faith.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I think you are confusing the change of lifestyle that comes with repentance with fruit of the Spirit. God is with those who believe in Christ and turn from sin but He is not in them until they have received the Spirit " as on us at the beginning" Acts 11:15, that is with the evidence of speaking with other tongues.

I changed immensely after I believed and repented but I was not filled with the Holy Spirit. I didn't have the same experience the early disciples did to confirm and know without a doubt that Christ had come to take up residence within me. Receiving the Spirit at faith is not taught in the book of Acts. Receiving the Spirit by faith is taught but not at faith.

Neither is speaking in tongues taught as a sign of receiving the spirit of God. Just because many of the cases they spoke in tongues does not make it a teaching of the diciples.

The point is where does the works of repentance change to the fruit of the spirit. I am just saying the fruit of the spirit is more evidince to me of one having Gods spirit than speaking in tongues. I have known too many that speak in tongues and profess to having Gods spirit based on this that have not the fruit of the spirit in thier lives. Yet others that have not spoke in tongues that have more of Gods spirit manifest in thier lives every day.

Again we are not to try the spirits based on speaking in tongues. Like many other things we have made a doctrine out of scripture that don't say what we say they say.

[Truthseeker]

In acts they spoke in tongues when the holy ghost fell, simple enough for me.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Tongues as initial evidence of the Holy ghost baptism is not to be confused with fruit as ongoing evidence.

Then where does one stop and the other began, too many that profess to having the holy ghost based on speaking in tongues don't have the fruits to show for it.

This is what I think James was talking about then he said you say you have faith I will show you my faith by my works. I don't think the works he is speaking of are the works that so many three steppers call the steps of salvation. But the manifesting of the works or fruit of the spirit. The works he then list confirm this in my mind.