A Hebrew or Greek NT?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

A reflection of tongues that seems to oppose Sam's,
a discussion of Tongues of Angels.

http://www.christiancourier.com/arti...rinthians-13-1

A...doctoral? rebuttal would be nice, Sam, ty.

no, I wouldn't try to rebut him or anyone else. I realize there are good Christian brothers and sisters who have not spoken with tongues and some do not even believe that "speaking with tongues" is valid since the early church and the first century.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Sam

no, I wouldn't try to rebut him or anyone else. I realize there are good Christian brothers and sisters who have not spoken with tongues and some do not even believe that "speaking with tongues" is valid since the early church and the first century.

then they are those who say speaking in tongues is of the devil unfortunatly...

[Sam]

Usually Pentecostal organizations/denominations state that speaking with tongues is "the initial physical evidence" of the (HGB) Holy Ghost Baptism.

Among Pentecostals/Apostolics/Charismatics who believe in the "initial physical evidence" some believe that the HGB is an experience subsequent to salvation/regeneration and a small minority believe that the HGB is the same as being born of the Spirit.

There are 20 some references in the Book of Acts of how people responded to the Gospel and became part of the NT Church. In some cases it is mentioned that they were also baptized in water (Acts 2:41; 8:12, 16, 36-39; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5). In some cases it is mentioned that they received an experience called by various terms like filled with the Spirit; receiving the Spirit; the Spirit falling upon; the Spirit coming upon. Based on this, it is my belief that a person is justified/saved/regenerated at the moment they accept or believe in or trust in Jesus Christ and that water baptism and Spirit baptism are experiences which are separate from and subsequent to the salvation experience.

In some cases when the person receives this filling or baptism of the Spirit it is recorded that the experience was accompanied by or followed with "speaking with tongues." These would be Acts 2:1-4; 10:44-46 and 19:6. In Acts chapter 8 in Samaria when Peter and John came from Jerusalem they ministered the HGB by the laying on of hands. Something happened when those folks received that experience but we are not told directly what it was. Simon saw something other than miracles, healings, exorcisms, and conversion life changes that made him want to buy the gift of laying on of hands to minister the HGB. I believe what impressed Simon was the Samaritans speaking with tongues when the Spirit came upon them. A verse that may corroborate this is verse 22 of that chapter. In verse 21 Peter says, "to hell with you and your money" (paraphrase) because you thought that you could buy the gift of God with money. Our word "simony" comes from this. Then in verse 22 he continues with "thou hast neither part nor lot in this MATTER..." The word translated "matter" there is "logos" which is translated "utterance" in 1 Corinthians 1:5, so Peter's rebuke could be translated, "thou has neither part nor lot in this utterance."

So, based on the 3 or 4 times that speaking with tongues accompanies the HGB in the Book of Acts, some have come to the conclusion that speaking with tongues always accompanies the HGB and that is the basis for the "initial physical evidence" doctrine. Are these 3-4 instances enough to establish that doctrine? Each of us must decide for himself/herself.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by acerrak

...Matthew we know had a hebrew copy written, we also know some of the epistles was initialy written in hebrew by paul and then written in greek by luke

Do we really know they were initially written in Hebrew and then translated or is that a theory?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by acerrak

then they are those who say speaking in tongues is of the devil unfortunatly...

yes, and some Christians believe that also.

I remember someone telling me about a camp meeting and someone spoke in tongues and some of the preachers quickly gathered around the tongue speaker to cast out the devil. This was the Church of God (Andersen, Indiana) organization. This happened quite a few years ago. I hear about it in the nineteen fifties and it was an old story then.

We have a large church which belongs to this same Church of God denomination about a mile or so from our house. One night the pastor got up and said some thing like, "i believe God has something to tell us" or "I believe God has something to say to us." A person spoke with tongues and it was interpreted publicly. The aunt and uncle of one of our friends whom we've known for 40 years or so were there. They had been taught that stuff like speaking with tongues was not available from God in this day and age. They had been missionaries earlier but were now retired. They left that church because they did not want to be part of a church that had stuff like that going on. These were good Christians. They just did not believe in speaking with tongues.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Sam

Do we really know they were initially written in Hebrew and then translated or is that a theory?

early church quote in history comming from clement of alexandria and Eusebius they do not say all his epistles written in hebew but they do allude to Paul having written some and luke also translating it into greek

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Sam

Usually Pentecostal organizations/denominations state that speaking with tongues is "the initial physical evidence" of the (HGB) Holy Ghost Baptism.

Among Pentecostals/Apostolics/Charismatics who believe in the "initial physical evidence" some believe that the HGB is an experience subsequent to salvation/regeneration and a small minority believe that the HGB is the same as being born of the Spirit.

There are 20 some references in the Book of Acts of how people responded to the Gospel and became part of the NT Church. In some cases it is mentioned that they were also baptized in water (Acts 2:41; 8:12, 16, 36-39; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5). In some cases it is mentioned that they received an experience called by various terms like filled with the Spirit; receiving the Spirit; the Spirit falling upon; the Spirit coming upon. Based on this, it is my belief that a person is justified/saved/regenerated at the moment they accept or believe in or trust in Jesus Christ and that water baptism and Spirit baptism are experiences which are separate from and subsequent to the salvation experience.

In some cases when the person receives this filling or baptism of the Spirit it is recorded that the experience was accompanied by or followed with "speaking with tongues." These would be Acts 2:1-4; 10:44-46 and 19:6. In Acts chapter 8 in Samaria when Peter and John came from Jerusalem they ministered the HGB by the laying on of hands. Something happened when those folks received that experience but we are not told directly what it was. Simon saw something other than miracles, healings, exorcisms, and conversion life changes that made him want to buy the gift of laying on of hands to minister the HGB. I believe what impressed Simon was the Samaritans speaking with tongues when the Spirit came upon them. A verse that may corroborate this is verse 22 of that chapter. In verse 21 Peter says, "to hell with you and your money" (paraphrase) because you thought that you could buy the gift of God with money. Our word "simony" comes from this. Then in verse 22 he continues with "thou hast neither part nor lot in this MATTER..." The word translated "matter" there is "logos" which is translated "utterance" in 1 Corinthians 1:5, so Peter's rebuke could be translated, "thou has neither part nor lot in this utterance."

So, based on the 3 or 4 times that speaking with tongues accompanies the HGB in the Book of Acts, some have come to the conclusion that speaking with tongues always accompanies the HGB and that is the basis for the "initial physical evidence" doctrine. Are these 3-4 instances enough to establish that doctrine? Each of us must decide for himself/herself.

i dont agree with the majority view of initial evidence by pentacostal churches, it is in error regardless of how many believe it.

The fact is people have demonstated the fruit ot the Spirit with out the initial evidence. since this is the case one is lead to believe that The infilling of the spirit is not all ways something visible as us pentacostals view.

Also according to the initial evidence doctrine these churches such as the assembly of God or church of God(which i grew up in) would contridict themselves.

cause they say at repentance your saved. God Gives you his Spirit, then they turn around and say Then there is Spirit baptism with evidence of tongues. called the baptism of the Holy ghost.

if this is true then what Spirit did the believer get to begin with. Then we go to the flip side, if you havent spoke in tounges you dont have the Spirit your not saved.

Both doctrines error. even william seymour believed tongues was a gift as he said all the gifts are here.. He actually made a comment about people pushing it, stating speak in tongues all you want but if you aint got Love you aint his.

If we keep tongues as the gift in which Paul describes as a Gift of the Spirit. This is the correct biblical view. If something was so essential Then the bible would have preached it as much as the cross, but it isnt and it is mostly localized to one book of the bible with small references in corinthians and the book of mark

what we have today is based on bad hermenuetics in My opinion.
I have seen people recieved the outpour of the Spirit, Dance, shout, pass out, speak with tongues, run. Shout praises to God, cry.

[bbyrd009]

Amen.
I was initially saved and Baptized in a tongues-believing
church, and became disillusioned with what came across
as..."acting in tongues," maybe--teaching 3 year olds to
"practice tongues," etc. that sent me running.

I've had pointed out to me that the 3 obv
instances of tongues in Acts were
1) upper room; connecting HS with Christ.
2) tongues presented to Gentiles
3) tongues presented to Jews

tho I might have the order of the last two reversed;
and I found this compelling; introducing the HS to
the relevant gathered believers, if you will.

While I no longer believe tongues (of the unearthly language kind)
are necessary for salvation, and tend to lean toward "satanic,"
I find stories like Sam's on the other thread compelling...

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

Amen.
I was initially saved and Baptized in a tongues-believing
church, and became disillusioned with what came across
as..."acting in tongues," maybe--teaching 3 year olds to
"practice tongues," etc. that sent me running.

I've had pointed out to me that the 3 obv
instances of tongues in Acts were
1) upper room; connecting HS with Christ.
2) tongues presented to Gentiles
3) tongues presented to Jews

tho I might have the order of the last two reversed;
and I found this compelling; introducing the HS to
the relevant gathered believers, if you will.

While I no longer believe tongues (of the unearthly language kind)
are necessary for salvation, and tend to lean toward "satanic,"
I find stories like Sam's on the other thread compelling...

while i understand where your comming from, i would suggest that you would not lean tword satanic. cause if its not then you would be basically calling the gift of the Spirit satanic, and as Jesus casted out a demon, people said he was doing it by the power of satan. Somethings we just need to let God handle.

Just my 2cents

[Michael The Disciple]

So, based on the 3 or 4 times that speaking with tongues accompanies the HGB in the Book of Acts, some have come to the conclusion that speaking with tongues always accompanies the HGB and that is the basis for the "initial physical evidence" doctrine. Are these 3-4 instances enough to establish that doctrine? Each of us must decide for himself/herself.

However look at it this way. There are exactly ZERO places in Acts where someone received the Holy Ghost and did not speak in tongues. Or where it is stated they received and manifested some other gift. So if we want to learn anything about the Holy Spirit baptism that seems to be it.