I'm going to go out a limb here a bit. I received an email with a question from this past Sunday's service. I will post the original email and then my response unedited except for greetings and names. Feel free to weigh in with comments
Original Email
I just wanted to send you a note to let you know how encouraged I am that you are sharing on the topic of the Holy Spirit.
In my personal search for "that single point of truth" there is one scripture concerning the forementioned topic that I would like your input on
1 Corinthians 12:27-30 Says:
27Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. 29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[a]? Do all interpret?
My questions is: Is the gift of tongues the only evidence that one has recieved the baptism of the Holy Spirit? Can someone have the baptism without speaking in tongues?
I look at the impact that many ministries (across denominations) have had on reaching the lost and can't help but to believe that although not all of the practice the gift of tongues, many have experienced fruitful ministries like that mentioned in the book of Acts (i.e. Billy Graham Ministries)
Many of the old Penticostals refuse to believe that you can have the baptism of the Holy Spirit without the evidence of speaking in tongues.
Can you share your viewpoint on this?
My response:
Great question and one that has been asked many times.
I may or may not get to it directly in the next two weeks, so I 'll answer it some right now.
The passage in 1 Cor. 12 is speaking to special gifts of the Spirit. Most scholars and theologians agree this is not a statement regarding all tongues, just the gift of tongues used in public settings or where one speaks fluently a human language they have not learned for the benefit of another. The gift of tongues and the personal edification tongues spoken of in 1 Cor. 14:4 and much of Acts.
In the AG our doctrines state that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence and much of the accounts of Acts seems to support this. However, tongues is not the baptism and should not be the focus. I do believe the AG (in practice more than doctrine) is a bit (or a lot) out of balance in this area as too much emphasis is on tongues. I think it can in some circumstances border on the case of Simon the Magician liking the show of it and seeking the power to make it happen. Too me the real evidence is in the things you mentioned of people reaching the lost, loving, caring, leading, etc according to the fruits of the Spirit in Galatians 5 as well as the gifts in 1 Cor. If there is no t love and a desire or striving for unity, then I have a hard time believing the Spirit is actively working in someone's life no matter how much they speak in tongues, dance, shout, or what have you. 1 Cor. 13:1
I was a little on the fence about my Wednesday night topic coming up this summer, but the response to this past Sunday may have just solidified it as a teaching on the spiritual gifts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
This was a great question, and one I'm glad you answered, Shane. Well said.
ReplyDeleteI also like in the sermon the credence to Romans 8 and the Baptists; at the moment of salvation we're filled with the Spirit. Hopefully this will clear up a lot of misunderstanding.
The buzzwords in this conversation are "baptism of the Holy Spirit." At salvation we receive the Holy Spirit. When pentecostals say "baptism of the Holy Spirit" really what they mean is the "empowering" of the Spirit, which happens only after salvation (it can be within minutes but always after). This "empowering" is noticeable initially by the gift of tongues, according to the AG. Salvation is not dependent on whether or not someone is "baptized" in the Holy Spirit; the baptism is for empowerment, not salvation, again according to the AG.
So, to be very specific here, in the case of Billy Graham, traditional AG beliefs would say that He did have the Holy Spirit (because he has been saved), but has not been empowered (because he has not spoken in tongues) or "baptized". Take that for what it's worth.
http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/baptmhs_faq.cfm
And Shane if you'd like to forward that response or that website to the questioner feel free, it may help.
ReplyDeleteI was raised Southern Baptist and to be honest made fun of Pentecostals and speaking in tongues. I was raised to believe that when your 'saved' you get the Holy Spirit and Christ both, there is no separate baptism of the Holy Ghost. I have seen in a lot of pentecostal gatherings (informal, church, internet, or just friends at McDonalds) people are always quick to bring up tongues and never say anything about the rest of the gifts. One of which is teaching if we AGers are guilty of over emphasis on tongues I would say thats the gift of choice for Southern Baptist (used those two groups because thats the 2 I am/have been affiliated with)
ReplyDeleteI think your wednesday night series will help a lot. There is not a lot of teaching on the gifts, even in Pentecostal Charismatic groups. And a lot of what is seen, I really have to wonder if its biblical