Foundations of the Christian Life.
Chapter 28. The Holy Spirit #9 – Benefits of Speaking in Tongues.
Note:
In this chapter “spirit” with a small “s” refers to the human spirit. The Holy Spirit will be referred to as “the Holy Spirit”.
REVIEW:
We have been looking at the subject of the Pentecostal experience of the Holy Spirit. We have seen it consists of three aspects:
1. An experience of being baptised in the Holy Spirit, the Spirit “upon” us.
2. An experience of being filled with the Holy Spirit, the Spirit “in” us.
3. An experience of the release of the human spirit from soulish bondage evidenced by and effected by speaking in tongues.
An Important Aside:
As we mentioned in the last chapter, speaking in tongues was not a new thing at Pentecost. It was, in fact, common in the religions of the ancient world, particularly in the Middle East. Tongues were common in the so-called “mystery” religions, the "mother and son" cults.
The thing we need to realise about these mystery religions is that they were all “prophetic” in nature, i.e. they believed that the “gods” would communicate with men through individuals who were suitably gifted as “Oracles”. In fact what was considered to be the highest spiritual experience was this experience of prophecy which typically meant that the Oracle went into a trance of some form and spoke under the influence of the “gods”. Therefore the “gift of prophecy” was very highly prized in the culture of the ancient world. The highest form of prophecy, in their understanding, was when the “gods” so took control of the Oracle that the oracle began to speak in another language which he had not learned, i.e. spoke in tongues. The rituals and festivals of the mystery religions, besides being orgies, were all designed to bring the worshipper into a trance where they would prophecy – hopefully in tongues – and drugs, music, alcohol and sexual stimulation were all part of the process. The common view was this: you were really spiritual if you spoke in tongues, a little less so if you prophecied in a known language.
With this cultural understanding we can see why Paul devotes so much time in 1 Corinthians 14 to tongues and prophecy and the relative value of prophecying in a known language or in an unknown language, i.e. tongues. He seeks to show that prophecying in a known language is better than in tongues because the hearer can understand it. The aim is not to show off how spiritual you are but to bring the message from God.
So there was a relative commonness of tongues in the culture of the times and an extremely high value was put on it as a religious experience. This cultural background makes sense of Paul’s statements in 1 Corinthians chapters 12-14.
The novel things Paul adds to the discussion are:
1. The distinction between a generalised “speaking in tongues” and the phenomena of “Prophecying in tongues” which Paul demanded had to be interpreted. This was not the case in the surrounding culture. It was enough just to speak in tongues ands so show off your spirituality. Interpretation was unnecessary. Paul argues that there is thus two forms of tongues – a public use requiring interpretation and a private use. Both uses have validity.
2. Paul realigns the value of the two forms of prophecying – in tongues (the gift of tongues) and in a known language (prophecy). He gives prophecying in a known language a higher value when done in public. This is a reversal of the commonly held view of the times.
In this chapter I am interested in the “language of the spirit” not in the “gift of tongues”.
1 Corinthians 14: 5
"I want you all to speak in tongues"
* Paul here is presumably speaking of the so-called prayer language not of the gift of tongues as he goes on to say that not all will bring messages in tongues.
* Is this Paul writing as Paul, or as the apostle under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Elsewhere, where he gives his own opinions he is careful to say that they are his, here there is not such a caution. We must conclude that he felt this was the Holy Spirit speaking through him. Hence this desire is more than just Paul's desire; it is a command of the Holy Spirit to us.
* For Paul to want this (and there are not many things Paul says we should all do) there must be some real benefits to doing so. After all, he spoke in tongues "more than all of them" (1 Corinthians 14:18). Obviously Paul perceived benefits were to be gained by doing this – and so one should do it a lot.
So let’s go on to look at the benefits of speaking in tongues.
The first few benefits I want to list arise out of the nature of what tongues is, a function of the human spirit, and the psychology of the human being.
1. DIVISION OF SOUL FROM SPIRIT.
In the last chapter I talked about how the spirit of man has been placed into bondage as a result of the fall. Speaking in tongues is a means and a result of the human spirit being released.
How does the spirit get released?
In pagan religion they do it through dance, music, drugs, alcohol, sex and so on.
Naturally creative people already have a spirit that is relatively free compared with the bulk of the population so they find speaking in tongues to be relatively easy.
But what is happening at a psychological level with the Pentecostal experience to enable the human spirit to be released?
Normally the spirit cannot break out of its bondage to the flesh unaided. This is where the Holy Spirit comes to our aid. In the Pentecostal Experience two things happen:
1. The Holy Spirit FILLS our human spirit, giving us spiritual strength and also inspiration to praise God in tongues (Acts 2:4 - "gave them utterance" does not mean He took their mouths and made them speak, rather it means "gave them inspiration").
2. The Holy Spirit also CLOTHES our body and energizes it with the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:10).
However because the Spirit is one person he can make a direct connection between our spirit and our body, thus bypassing the soul (mind) which normally makes that connection. Spiritual release is given through the power and person of the Holy Spirit.
If we have faith for spiritual release, then we should complete that faith by the appropriate works, otherwise that faith is dead (James 2:26).
When we speak in tongues the first benefit is that we release the spirit from its bondage to the soul. This is because the spirit is now able to do something through the body (speak in tongues) without being controlled by the mind (the soul).
Hebrews 4:12
“For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.”
* There is a dividing of soul and spirit that needs to happens in the process of sanctification.
* This is an automatic consequence of speaking in tongues. The power of the soul over the spirit is broken.
Such a division of soul and spirit is actually desired by God for us because he knows that the merger is part of our problem as fallen human beings. This division is not a bad thing because it allows the human spirit to operate in a spiritual way instead of being dominated by soulish and bodily drives. This division clearly happens because what we experience happening is the spirit speaking directly through the body while the mind is shunted off to one side.
2. DIVISION OF THE SOUL FROM THE BODY – BREAKS THE POWER OF THE FLESH.
Speaking in tongues breaks the power of the flesh in our lives.
This flows out of what we have just been talking about – the psychology of what is happening when we speak in tongues.
When we speak in tongues we, by an act of will, allow our spirit to take control of our body directly at the point of our mouth. This bypasses the mind, i.e. the soul, which normally makes this connection for us. Once the Holy Spirit has established this connection once for us we can thereafter make the connection at will.
The second thing that happens, then, is that there is a division created in us between our soul and our body. As we saw before the soul came under the domination of the body because of sin. This union of the soul and the body is what the Bible calls “the flesh”. The “flesh” means the whole man under the control of the bodily desires and passions.
This domination of the body over the soul finds its highest power point in the tongue – where the soul and the body come together over words.
God takes the seat of the flesh’s power and demonstrates the power of the spirit over it.
James 3:2-8.
“We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check. When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal. Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go. Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell. All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man, but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.”
See what power James attributes to the tongue:
* If one can keep his tongue in check he can control his whole body.
* The tongue corrupts the whole person
* The tongue sets the whole course of a man’s life.
* The tongue is set on fire by Hell.
* No man can tame the tongue.
* It is a restless evil, full of poison.
James is clearly talking here of the tongue in the unregenerate man. But the point is clear. The tongue controls the whole body. It is the seat of the power of the flesh.
For us to become holy in our inner being there needs to be a division between the body and soul so that the soul becomes free of the power of the body. In this way the flesh is destroyed.
When we speak in tongues that division of body and soul is immediately effected as the spirit takes control over the body, bypassing the soul.
To demonstrate its authority the spirit must take control over the tongue and use it to speak in a language which the mind does not know. The soul and the body are thereby immediately divided and the flesh is destroyed.
So the second benefit of speaking in tongues is that it is a powerful tool for us in our path of sanctification in overcoming the flesh.
3. RESTORATION OF THE DIVINE ORDER OF THE HUMAN PERSONALITY.
The human personality is thus automatically brought back into the order of divine design as seen in creation when we speak in tongues.
* The false union between spirit and soul is broken and
* The spirit takes lordship over the body at the point of its greatest rebellion – the tongue.
* By default the soul is subjected to the spirit – but in a voluntary subjection because the soul, i.e. the will, has chosen to allow the spirit to speak through the body without using the channel of the mind (“The mind is unfruitful” 1 Corinthians 14:14). Thus the will has placed the soul, including the mind, under the “lordship” of the spirit, and hence of the Holy Spirit who dwells in our spirit.
As a result the whole personality is forced into Divine order, Spirit - soul – body, every time one speaks in tongues.
4. STRENGTHENING OUR HUMAN SPIRIT.
The fourth benefit is related to our psychology as human beings also.
As we speak in tongues not only is the power of the flesh broken, but also the human spirit is exercised and built up.
1 Corinthians 14:4.
“He who speaks in tongues edifies himself", or builds himself up.
How does this occur?
This cannot mean:
* Physically built up (jaw exercise?).
* Soulishly - as tongues is not a function of the soul. “The mind (soul) is unfruitful" (1 Corinthians 14:14).
It can only mean "edifies himself spiritually".
The human spirit is strengthened, built up. Speaking in tongues is THE one thing the Bible says God has given us to do that can build up ("edify") our spirit, and thus our walk with God in the spirit.
Tongues is a God-given way of building up our spirits. Thus as we speak in tongues there are several flow on benefits in our spirit:
* As a result the functions of our spirit, conscience, intuition and communion, are also strengthened. We become more spiritually sensitive.
* Other spiritual functions – such as creativity – are also greatly increased by speaking in tongues and are released in our lives in greater measure.
* Other dormant functions of our spirit start to become “alive” again as the Holy Spirit in us is released through our spirit. Things we don’t even know about as carnal people.
* As our spirit is strengthened its capacity is increased. The result of this is that we are able to receive in our experience a greater relationship with the Holy Spirit. He is able to presence himself with us more. Now I know that the Holy Spirit is a person and we can’t have “more or less” of a person. Either he is there or he is not. But our capacity to relate to him is increased by speaking in tongues and hence we experience more of him.
* With increased relationship and increased sensitivity we find that there is a greater ability to move in the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The gifts of the Holy Spirit all depend to some degree on the ability to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. Speaking in tongues deepens our relationship and sensitivity to the Holy Spirit so we can hear his voice more clearly and as such we are more able to move in the gifts more accurately. The whole experience of revelation, hearing God's voice, is greatly enhanced.
Question: How long should we speak in tongues?
Answer: Until we are built up.
Only you know when your spirit is built up.
5. THE GENERATION AND RELEASE OF SPIRITUAL POWER THROUGH OUR WHOLE BEING.
Speaking in the language of the spirit generates spiritual power in that it makes the “connection” between the Holy Spirit in us and the Holy Spirit on us.
In one sense we are a bit like a battery cell. As we live we "use up" spiritual life and vitality. Speaking in tongues "recharges" us. Speaking in tongues is an important way of tapping into the re-filling of the Holy Spirit.
As a result the power of God is able to flow in and through us unimpeded. This power then flows out of our spirit into our soul and then to our body.
Romans 8:11.
“And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.”
This works as a purging flood in our lives. It forces out of our spirit, then out of our soul, then out of our body, all the garbage that is there.
Tongues thus aligns our whole being with the Spirit of God in a unique way. As a result "wholeness" is able to flow from God through our spirit to the rest of our being.
Some consequences of this:
* The human spirit is the healing centre of the human being. It sustains the body (See John & Paula Sandford, The Healing of the Wounded Spirit). Speaking in tongues thus releases healing power out from our spirit, through our soul and body and eventually to others. Many of us a sick simply because we have not availed ourselves of speaking in tongues and the power of healing it releases in us. Speaking in tongues is thus a healing force given to us by God. Many do not receive healing because the key to their healing is in their mouth - speaking in tongues.
* Another consequence – power for ministry.
Ephesians 1:19
“the power in us – resurrection power”
But it is “in us” – tongues releases it through us, out of our mouths to others.
By the connection of body and spirit made through tongues we are able to manifest this flow of the spirit through the body – both to our own needs and to others.
6. SPEAKING IN TONGUES BRINGS US INTO A NEW REALM OF WORSHIP.
As it is also worship, in a pure sense, it allies our spirit with God in a unique way, the channels between us and God are opened.
Acts 2:11
"declaring the wonders of God".
"Declaring the mighty acts of God" is a typically Hebrew way of saying they were having a worship session. This was not preaching; it was the overflow of their spirits in praise. The fact that some in the crowd heard it and understood was incidental, they were doing this before the crowd gathered.
Acts 2:4
"they spoke - as the Spirit gave them utterance"
Utterance here means two things:
(1) Spiritual release to do it.
(2) Some form of inspiration in the content of what is said.
It does not mean "the Holy Spirit originated it and did it through them". In fact to take this sort of meaning would be to suggest the Holy Spirit "took them over", i.e. controlled them, in some way, and this is a very unscriptural position. The work of the Holy Spirit is NEVER to TAKE control of us, but is to RETURN the control to us that has been robbed by sin and Satan. The Holy Spirit NEVER dominates, but he advises, leads and empowers us to do the will of God. But the responsibility and decision is still ours at every step.
As a result of this inspiration tongues becomes praise to God.
An Important Aside:
Note the wording here, “They spoke in tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.”
They did the speaking! The Spirit only gave inspiration and release.
The point is this – if anyone is going to speak in tongues they have to start speaking. The Holy Spirit does not take control of your body and manipulate your mouth and vocal organs to make you speak. You speak – the Spirit just gives ability to do so.
No one ever spoke in tongues who didn’t start speaking.
1 Corinthians 14:15.
“So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind.”
This verse is not fully clear. Paul could be interpreted to mean, “I’m not going to do anything unless someone else can understand it” – but this is not the likely meaning as he immediately goes on to say he speaks in tongues more than anyone else. The likely meaning is thus as follows:
“I will pray in tongues and I will pray in a known language. I will sing in tongues and I will sing in a known language.” I.e. he will do both. But then he goes on to say that in church it is generally better to use a known language.
The implication then is that one can sing in tongues – a form of worship.
In this light we see that there are other references to tongues in the scriptures:
Ephesians 5:19
“Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord,”
Colossians 3:16.
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God.”
* “Spiritual songs” – or “songs of the spirit”. While not exclusively a reference to singing in tongues we have to allow a reference to that here.
* Presumably messages in tongues, with interpretation, were sung in the Early Church.
* The practice of corporate singing in tongues, or "singing in the spirit", which is often seen in Charismatic/Pentecostal churches today falls into this category. It is not the gift of tongues, but rather is the combined use of the individual spiritual language in a corporate and public setting. Hence it does not need interpretation, it is simply a sung prayer, or worship.
7. SPEAKING IN TONGUES CAN BRING US INTO A NEW REALM OF PRAYER.
1 Corinthians 14:14.
“My spirit prays”.
Jude 20.
"Pray in the Holy Spirit".
How does this work?
With new birth a change takes place. We are born again. We become "one Spirit with the Holy Spirit".
Romans 8:9-11.
"You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you."
Hence the Christian who speaks in tongues speaks praise to God, and cannot speak otherwise.
Romans 8:26-27.
“In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.”
This must be allowed to have a reference to tongues.
Speaking in tongues, then, is a function of the human spirit, but because of the unity we have with the Holy Spirit he gives inspiration to what our spirit utters
Tongues is prayer. As such it can fulfil all of the functions of prayer: Worship, intercession, petition, praise, command, etc.
In using tongues as a vehicle for intercessory prayer we allow the Holy Spirit in our spirit to create a burden, often for things we do not know about, nor do we understand. Then our spirit carries this burden to God in prayer, even though we are unaware at times even of whom we are praying for. In this way the Holy Spirit can effectively use us in prayer for things we have no knowledge of.
As it is the deepest language of our human person, it is the deepest cries of our heart to God. It is thus prayer of the deepest and most effective kind - even if our minds do not understand it.
(8) TONGUES CAN BRING TO US A REVELATION .
1 Corinthians 14:6.
“Now, brothers, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction?”
How this happens is not defined, but the truth is stated here. The allying of our whole being to the Spirit of God means he is able to speak to us in our minds, as we purify our minds through tongues.
(9) TONGUES ARE A SIGN TO UNBELIEVERS - (V 22) - WHY?
1 Corinthians 14:22
“Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers.”
Again how it is a sign to unbelievers is unsaid. But the following suggestion is one way.
The world should be able to see that we are different. But the difference should be one of WHOLENESS". They should be able to look at us and say, "Why is it that you Christians have it together, that your personalities and whole being, lifestyle, etc are WHOLE?" Our answer thus would be "The power of God released in our lives through speaking in tongues."
In this way tongues is a sign to them. There may be other ways.
We need to remember that the FACT of tongues could not have been considered a sign, or proof, of the presence of God to the Corinthians - nor to most of the Ancient near East - for the simple reason that tongues AS A PHENOMENON was a feature of every ancient religion. Tongues is thus not a sign of the presence of God per se! Tongues can only be a sign to unbelievers IF AND WHEN Christians use it enough for it to make a difference in their lives in a positive sense.
(10) SPEAKING IN TONGUES IS UTTERING MYSTERIES IN THE SPIRIT.
The Bible tells us there are several mysteries:
(i) Sin and iniquity.
Revelation 17:5
“This title was written on her forehead: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.”
(ii) Christ and his work; the eternal plan of God.
Ephesians 1:9,10
“And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfilment- to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.”
There are other mysteries.
Hence the content of the prayer of tongues is to do with the working of these mysteries in us and in the world. Speaking in tongues brings these two mysteries out into the open. You don't know what you are saying, but God does.
By speaking in tongues we pray concerning the mysteries of the spiritual realm, and help to bring the mysteries of God into being, and to unravel the mysteries of Satan. We engage in spiritual warfare.
Ephesians 3:9-11.
“… and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things. His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.”
* Through speaking in tongues somehow we help in the administration of the mystery of God, the rulership of the principlalities and powers.
Speaking in Tongues is Under Your Control.
Acts 2:4. "They spoke" - it was still their responsibility.
Once initially released, the ability to use the prayer language depends on the WILL of the Person concerned.
This follows on from the fact that it is a natural function of his spirit. Once his spirit has been released, and the ability to speak in tongues has been discovered / learned, then it is simply a matter of exercising that ability.
HOMEWORK.
1. Go through a concordance looking up the word “mystery”. See some of the ways we can engage in the plan of God as we “utter mysteries in the Spirit.”
2. Write down 2 or 3 things that you would like God to give you revelation on. Begin to spend a few minutes every day holding these up to the Lord while speaking in tongues. Allow God to bring revelation to you on them.
TRANSFORMER VERSE:
Speaking in Tongues.
1 Corinthians 14:2
“For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.”
1 Corinthians 14:4
“He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.”
1 Corinthians 14:14
“For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.”
PRAYER:
Spend time speaking in tongues. Just do it.
Try to begin with, say, 5 minutes each morning and evening.
Build up that time so that you are spending 15 minutes morning and evening speaking in tongues. Remember, in faith you are speaking mysteries in the Holy Spirit.
Speak in tongues while you are driving, walking, cleaning the house, cooking - any time you are doing something else and you are not going to interfere with whatever else you are doing.
Spend some time singing in tongues every day – an act of worship.
Monday, 29 January 2007
Tuesday, 23 January 2007
Foundations of the Christian Life. Chapter 27. The Holy Spirit #8 - Speaking in Tongues.
Foundations of the Christian Life.
Chapter 27. The Holy Spirit #8 - Speaking in Tongues.
Probably the area of greatest controversy in the work of the Holy Spirit has been the Pentecostal insistence that speaking in tongues is the “Sign” of having received the experience of the Baptism in the Spirit. This has been the greatest stumbling block to acceptance of the whole experience. Even Charismatics choke on this one a little. Usually a Charismatic (rather than a Pentecostal) presentation of the Baptism in the Spirit will not press the point on tongues. Rather Charismatics tend to say that the evidence of the gift of the Spirit is moving into any of the gifts of the Spirit.
I have real problems with the Charismatic position here because I know various people who have moved in the other gifts of the Spirit and have not had this Pentecostal experience. So “moving in the gifts of the Spirit” seems to me to be no sort of proof of having had this experience at all. It is simply a way of trying to avoid the embarrassing question of tongues.
And embarrassing it is! How can you explain to people that you expect them to speak in a language they don’t know; that they don’t understand and that no one else will understand – except God. It is more than a little offensive to the sensibilities of nice middle class people. In fact, it could be construed to be a sure sign that you have gone a bit crazy in the head.
So the point of question in this chapter, then, is the Pentecostal claim: Is tongues the sign of having received the Pentecostal experience?
I have to admit here again that I take quite a different position to just about anyone I have ever heard or read on the subject. The “answers” given me by both “pro-tongues” and “anti- tongues” people really didn’t satisfy as they left too many unanswered questions. So here is my contribution to the debate.
To understand what we are going to look at in this chapter I am going to put a few ideas up that seem at first to be quite unrelated, but before we finish I will draw the threads together.
BACKGROUND IDEAS:
1. A Biblical Psychology.
I covered some of this in Chapter 21 so I do not want to go over that in detail again but we need to summarise to set the scene again.
(a) Man as Created.
Genesis 2:7.
"The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being/soul."
This verse describes to us the construction or make up, or “psychology”, of the human personality as God intended in creation. In God’s creation of man we were made one being with three distinct parts: A spirit, a soul and a body.
In God’s plan this is how man was meant to operate:
The Holy Spirit was to dwell in our spirit. I used the illustration of a hand in a glove to try to explain this.
We were made to be Spirit-filled.
The Holy Spirit was to speak to us in our intuition.
Our spirit would then inform our soul through our mind.
The mind would then direct the will.
Resulting in bodily action.
(b) Man as Fallen.
When Adam rebelled against God, in what we know as the Fall, there was a major disruption in the human personality.
The first thing that happened was that man died spiritually. By this we do not mean that mankind now has no spirit at all. His spirit still exists but his spirit has lost contact with the spiritual realm, in particular the Spirit of God who he was created to relate to in a unique way. The Holy Spirit withdrew from the human spirit. The result is that even though there still is a human spirit, it is flat, weak, performing below God’s original intention, just like a glove without a hand in it.
The link between the Holy Spirit and the human spirit was broken. Man no longer could receive knowledge from the Holy Spirit. But man’s soul still needed knowledge to survive so he turned to the body to gain knowledge through his senses – that is what “eating of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” means.
But in turning to the body for knowledge the soul became dependent on the body so a reversal took place in the human personality.
The Body
Now rules the Soul
Which is in turn merged with the human Spirit.
This is what we call the “fleshly, or carnal, man” because the fleshly appetites of the body are now the dominant drives in human beings.
The human spirit is thus “trapped” inside the carnal soul and body and cannot break free to rule.
(c) Man as Redeemed in Christ.
The Holy Spirit enters into our human spirit again and we are “born again”. But the bondage of the “flesh” is not removed immediately. We need to be sanctified in spirit, soul and body (1 Thessalonians 5:23).
So the fact is, though we are “born again” our spirit is still in fleshly bondage.
2. The Power of Words.
Man was made in God’s image – and the only thing we know about God at the point man was made is that God is a speaking, creative God – he created by speaking.
So we must assume man was also made a speaking, creative being.
Our words have spiritual power to create things, they have power to build up or to destroy, to bless or to curse. And this power is not just spiritual or soulish – there is power in the physical realm as well.
How does this work?
Some Questions:
(a) God speaks into our spirit – so what does the spirit run on?
Answer: Words.
(b) Our spirit informs our soul in our minds – what does the mind run on?
Answer: Words.
(c) Where does the spirit and mind find their most natural outlet in the body?
Answer: In the tongue.
(d) What does the tongue run on?
Answer: Words.
So at the point of our tongue – our speaking – spiritual power, mental power and physical power come together in a unique way in God's plan.
It all runs on words. Speaking. The tongue.
This does not change because of the Fall – “the gifts and the call of God are without change of mind” on his part (Romans 11:29). Having given man this ability he is not going to take it away. The real power of the fleshly man is still just where God created it to be – in the tongue. This is taught in the Bible in many ways.
That’s two sets of ideas I want you to be aware of.
1. We were created in God’s image, a three part being of Spirit, soul and body that was designed to work in a particular way. As a result of the Fall there has been a complete corruption of the human personality.
2. The human personality finds its greatest power of release in words, in the tongue. This was true before the fall where Man worked in the image of God – creating by commanding. It remains true today. The point where the physical word, the spiritual world and the soul come together most powerfully is at the tongue, in our words. Through our words we affect the physical, soulish and spiritual worlds.
Let’s put these two ideas up on the shelf for a few minutes while we look at another set of ideas.
(3) Functions of the Human Spirit.
The human spirit has many functions – normally we would identify three in teaching on this:
* conscience – the ability to discern moral right from wrong,
* intuition – the ability to perceive knowledge spiritually and not in the mind, and thirdly
* communion – the deep desire to know God that every human being has. There is a “God-shaped vacuum” in each one of us that can only be satisfied by a relationship with the Spirit of God dwelling in our hearts, just as God originally intended.
But there are other functions of the human spirit. To illustrate this I will mention two:
* Creativity. I have already touched on this in saying we were created in the image of God – a creative being. This is a spiritual function. God is Creative and God is Spirit. Creativity belongs to Spirit. Despite what many modern philosophers say, creativity is not a function of the mind, it is a spiritual function. It arises out of the depths of the human personality and is completely irrational in its function. Much has been said about this – even by secular philosophers – and it is now pretty well accepted that creativity is not a rational function of the mind. It too often runs counter to the mind’s operation. Creativity is not planned in the mind, rather it is birthed in the inner being, in the spirit, and only later does the mind become aware of it. Often the mind cannot cope with the shear irrationality of the creative force. The mind likes to order things into nice neat compartments – creativity likes to break the bounds of the boxes the mind creates.
* The other area is health. John and Paula Sandford talk in their book, “Healing of the Wounded Spirit”, about this function of the human spirit. The spirit’s job, if you like, is to sustain life in the body, and as such releases spiritual powers of health and healing throughout the body so that we can live in the body. They give several quotes from scripture to illustrate this function but we wont go into that now.
But besides these functions of the human spirit there are others – some of which we are almost completely unaware of. Reading George Otis’ book, “The Twilight Labyrinth” gives a few clues as to what the human spirit is, or was, capable of. I recommend it. Also, Watchman Nee, “The Latent Power of the Soul”.
So let’s just put that idea up on the shelf for a few minutes: The human spirit has functions we are unaware of - and look at another idea.
4. Spiritual Gifts.
There are many ways of looking at the whole question of spiritual gifts. Just for a few moments let’s look at a way you may not have thought of before.
There are two kinds of spiritual gifts:
1. There are those gifts that are totally supernatural – they are a gift from God and there is no measure of human ability that we can put into the equation. For instance, healing or working of miracles would seem to me to be something that is totally supernatural. We don’t have the ability to do these things in the natural and can only do them if God gives us a new supernatural spiritual ability.
2. But on the other hand there are some spiritual gifts that are not so totally supernatural. Rather they are – or can be - natural abilities we have which are lifted to a higher level by God anointing it with a spiritual gift or power. Some gifts that can be like this are teaching, preaching, evangelism. We could see, in some cases, how a person had a natural bent towards that ability even before they became a Christian and God then took it and used it in a Christian context. However even these gifts may be in some people totally supernatural.
I, myself, was not aware of any natural ability to teach before God gifted me with the gift of teaching. Then I had to learn to use the gift – and I’m still learning.
So that’s another set of ideas – keep them in mind – some "spiritual gifts" are not totally supernatural but are natural abilities lifted to a higher level by the gift or anointing of God.
Now let’s look at another set of ideas.
5. There are two types of “Speaking in Tongues”.
One of the helpful distinctions that Pentecostals have made in the whole discussion about tongues is the distinction between the “gift of tongues” and the “prayer tongue”.
This distinction is based on the following scriptures:
a. 1 Corinthians 14:18 Paul himself spoke in tongues - but not in public. Therefore there is a private use of tongues.
b. 1 Corinthians 14:14 – speaking in tongues can be prayer.
c. In this context Paul says that the public use of tongues is a message from God and so should be accompanied with interpretation. The implication is that interpretation is not necessary if tongues is used in private as it is prayer and God understands even if we don't.
Paul seems to be making a distinction here between a private use of tongues as prayer and a public use of tongues in church where it is usually a message and would require interpretation. This is particularly helpful, as we shall see shortly.
The difficulty is Paul talks about both uses of tongues in this passage (1 Corinthian 14) but a little thought can sort it out. Pentecostals are certainly right in making the distinction between the “prayer tongue” and the “gift of tongues”. This distinction holds together pretty well even if there are a few Bible teachers who object to it. The objectors mainly seem to be members of the group of Christians who don’t believe in tongues anyway. Those who speak in tongues are more likely to understand the fine distinctions between various forms of the phenomena than those who do not or who are opposed to the phenomena. If I wanted to know about flying a plane I would ask a pilot, not a farmer. In the same way if I want to know about the finer details of speaking in tongues I am better off talking to someone who has spoken in tongues than in someone who doesn’t believe in tongues.
It is the so-called “prayer tongue” that we find in the Acts instances exclusively. Nowhere in Acts do we see the gift of tongues for messages or for preaching. Rather what we see is people overwhelmed by the Spirit using a private manifestation of tongues in a place where others happen to see them doing it. But the fact that others saw them doing it is incidental. They were not speaking in tongues so others could see them. Nowhere is the demand made that the tongues be interpreted.
Question: What about Acts 2 – people understood the languages?
Answer: That was incidental. The speakers were not bringing messages neither was interpretation used. They were praising, not preaching (“glorifying God” = a Hebraism for “praising God”) and some of the bystanders happened to recognise some of the languages being spoken, but this was purely incidental. God did this as a sign (1 Cor 14:22) at that time and may do it again but that is not the gift of tongues. It is a by-product of the fact that tongues can be, as Paul says, “of men or of angels” (1 Corinthians 13:1).
It is the “prayer tongue” I am talking about here, not the gift of tongues.
That’s the last idea – there is a difference between the prayer tongue and the gift of tongues.
Summary of background ideas:
1. We are beings made up of three parts: Spirit, soul and body.
2. As a result of the Fall our human spirits have been placed in bondage to our body and soul and many of the functions of our spirit work at a lesser ability, or not at all. Some of them we are unaware of.
3. We are spiritual beings and the power of our spirit is released through words, through the tongue, for good or evil. The tongue is the place where our spirit, soul and body comes together in a unique way so power is concentrated there in a unique way.
4. There are two types of spiritual gifts – some are totally supernatural, but others are natural abilities that God takes and anoints to a higher level.
5. There are two manifestations of tongues – the so-called prayer language and the gift of tongues.
Now let’s tie it all together:
SPEAKING IN TONGUES:
I struggled with all this Pentecostal stuff. I was raised in a church that did not believe in it – in fact they were convinced that speaking in tongues was of the devil and anyone who did it was clearly demon possessed. Not only that, they believed that no Christian could be demon possessed. So, by implication, all Pentecostals were not Christian.
My problem was that, at university, I encountered hundreds of young Christians who spoke in tongues and gave no appearance of being demon possessed – in fact they had bright Christian lives and witnesses.
So I researched the matter. I read books for tongues by Pentecostals, and against tongues by others – until I got sick of them all. Then one day my father, who was similarly struggling with the issues, bought an interesting book on the subject by an American writer. The book was called, “Tongues of Men and of Angels” by William J. Samarin. This was the book that made the most sense of the whole question because it didn’t come from a preconceived opinion but rather was trying to understand the whole question of tongues from a purely evidential viewpoint.
As far as I know Samarin is/was not a Christian. He is/was a psychologist and linguist. His purpose in writing the book was that it was his thesis for his doctorate. The phenomena of tongues in churches had hit the media in the States big time and he thought it would be a good topic that brought together his two areas of study – psychology and linguistics – for his Doctoral Thesis.
As books go it made more sense than anything else I have read on the subject.
Samarin examined tongues speaking throughout history and around the world at that time – the early 1970s. He found out some interesting things.
1. Tongues speaking is not something peculiar to Christianity. It occurs in every religion in the world and the history of religion shows that it seems to have so since time began.
2. Speaking in tongues in the religious context seems to occur at times of spiritual revival or renewal – no matter what the religion is. It has frequently appeared in Church history at various revivals. It is not new with Pentecostalism. When spiritual passion is high tongues often accompanies such passion.
3. Many non-religious people find it easy to speak in tongues and do so regularly. In particular Samarin found creative people – musicians, artists, poets, writers and the like – find speaking in tongues very easy.
After all his research Samarin came to the following conclusions:
* Speaking in tongues is a normal and natural phenomena of the human psyche, or subconscious.
* It requires some trigger, or mechanism, for it to be released in most cases (creative people being the exception).
This is interesting in what it says but to understand what he is saying we have to translate it into “Christianese”.
Remember we looked at the structure of the human personality as God created it and then as a result of the Fall.
I pointed out that the human spirit in fallen man is “dead”, in that it is not functioning properly, but it is still there. But the spirit has been merged, or may I say now, submerged, under the conscious activities of the soul.
So the normal functions of the spirit are now “sub-conscious”. And this is what we find in psychological literature. Areas that we Christians understand to be functions of our spirit are deemed to be part of our “subconscious” by psychologists. Psychologists, in general, deny that the concept of a human spirit, in the Christian sense, exists at all. Then, having denied its existence, they then ascribe its functions to this elusive “subconscious”.
Things that get dealt with this way include conscience, intuition, religious affection and creativity. Samarin lumps tongue speaking in here too.
But note what he said – creative people find it easy to speak in tongues. We Christians understand that the whole area of creativity is intuitive and is a part of our human spirituality. Samarin's research suggests there is a link between creativity and tongues speaking in thast they arise out of the same part of the human psyche. That "part" we Christians would recognise as being the human spirit.
So, in our language, Christianese, what Samarin is saying is this:
“Speaking in tongues is a natural function of our human spirit.”
This is a profound conclusion and has tremendous implications for us as Christians.
Now let’s see what Paul says about this.
1 Corinthians 14:14.
“For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays”
We probably need to give this verse it’s fullest meaning – when we speak in tongues it is our human spirit speaking. Not “the Holy Spirit praying through us”, not some sort of divine gift but our own human spirit praying in a language our minds do not know.
Now let’s go back to what I said about the two types of spiritual gifts – gifts that are totally supernatural and gifts that are natural abilities that God takes to a higher level. I want to suggest that speaking in tongues – or what Pentecostals call “the prayer tongue” – is actually a natural function of the human spirit. But at times and with some people God takes this natural ability and raises it to another level and it becomes “the gift of tongues” wherein God speaks a message to a group. Then it requires interpretation.
The normal assumption, by those who know nothing about the historical background of tongues, is that tongues is a gift that is totally supernatural, i.e. it is a gift from God that we didn’t have before we became Christians. But Paul’s words here suggest otherwise.
Hence Paul can make two statements that sound almost contradictory:
1 Corinthians 14:5
“I want you all to speak in tongues”
Presumably meaning the ability to pray in tongues, speak in the language of our human spirit. But then he can say in:
1 Corinthians 12:30
“Do all speak in tongues”
This, in the Greek, demands the answer, “No!” But here it is in a list of gifts of the Spirit, so it means, “Not all of us have the gift of tongues to bring messages from God, just as not all of us have the gift of apostleship, teaching, etc.”
They are not really contradictory but are talking about two quite different things.
Tongues is thus a natural function of the human spirit which all human beings have by virtue of creation. God thought of it. He created it.
In some cases, with some people, God takes that natural ability and raises it to a higher level with an anointing so they move in the gift of tongues. But not everyone who speaks in tongues has the gift of tongues.
Now this is actually the position most Pentecostals have come to but they describe it differently. What they do is make a distinction between the “prayer tongue” and the “gift of tongues”. They are aware that there is a difference, but most of them haven’t a clue why there is a difference or what the difference entails. I have just explained the difference.
So speaking in tongues is a natural function of the human spirit when the human spirit is released from soulish bondage
Because it is a natural function of the human spirit anybody and everybody can do it. Non Christians included.
This means when the non-Christian speaks in tongues it is not demonic (though the means of release may be). But equally when the Christian speaks in tongues it is not the Holy Spirit (though the means of release may be).
The tongues we are talking about here, the prayer language, is therefore not a gift of the Holy Spirit, nor is it Demonic, it is a purely human phenomenon, as such it is part of how God created us.
Hence Paul's statement: "My spirit prays" can be allowed its full weight. We do not have to try to find a way around it.
This idea that speaking in tongues is a natural function of the human spirit is confirmed in a strange way by an interesting fact of the way Luke has written Acts ch 2.
Throughout the chapter Luke makes many allusions to the tower of Babel story (Genesis 10 & 11). You only have to go onto the internet and Google “Babel” and “Pentecost” and you will find hundreds of pages of sermons and Bible studies that bring out the parallels.
So Luke is clearly associating Pentecost and the Tower of Babel together in some spiritual way.
At Babel tongues were divided to divide men so that men could not continue their rebellion against God.
At Pentecost tongues were “given” in a sense, or better “released”, in the Church by the action of the Holy Spirit to bring men together in a new spiritual unity so that they could better serve God.
Pentecost, in that sense, is the reversal of Babel.
It is my personal view that before the Tower of Babel men communicated by speaking in tongues and their spirits still were able to function in the gift of interpretation. My feeling is that, at Babel, God “shut down” the ability of the human spirit to interpret the tongues men were speaking and so immediate confusion resulted. As a result they had to learn to understand each other in their minds and so the control of the soul over the spirit was strengthened – a judgement of God bringing men into bondage. The need to learn languages slows down the progress of acquiring knowledge so the slide into sin would be slower.
In other words, the languages we normally speak in, which we learn from our parents, were not the languages men used before Babel. Language before Babel was intuitive, not learned. Have you ever heard a young child, who cannot speak properly in the language of their parents yet, speaking in their “own language”. We (clever?) adults call it “babbling” (after the Tower of Babel). But are you sure? Are they speaking in the language of their spirit, an intuitive language, unlearned because it is spiritual? It may be that the languages we adults communicate in are the “babble”.
Let’s come back to the Pentecostal experience.
Derek Prince says it is an experience of three parts:
1. A Baptism in the Spirit.
2. A Filling of the Spirit, and
3. An overflow, seen in speaking in tongues.
Let’s redefine that third aspect in the light of what we have seen here.
The third aspect of the Pentecostal experience is a release of the human spirit seen in speaking in tongues, which is a natural, God-given-in-creation function of the human spirit.
But the human spirit, and tongues, has been bound up. The spirit of man as a result of the Fall has been bound to the soul and it needs releasing for us to be able to speak in tongues.
As Samarin says, there needs to be some sort of trigger to enable us to release it.
A RELEASE.
What Samarin says is that tongues are a natural function of the human spirit but they need to have some form of release for people to experience them.
Once people have done it the first time it seems to be easy to do it again at will. But the first time there usually needs to be a release trigger.
In pagan religions this release is usually a combination of music, dance, alcohol, drugs and sex.
For this reason when the crowd saw the disciples speaking in tongues in Acts 2 they said, “They are drunk.” This was their experience of speaking in tongues up to that point – it happened as a result of some sort of religious festival or orgy.
But in fact it was the Holy Spirit of God who had given them the release.
An Important Aside:
Speaking in tongues was not a new thing at Pentecost. It was, in fact, common in the religions of the ancient world, particularly in the Middle East. There are several instances in the OT where tongues are probably the best explanation of what happened – e.g. when the Spirit fell on King Saul and he “prophesied”.
In the ancient world the greatest spiritual experience one could have was to be “possessed” by the god and prophesy. “Oracles” or “prophets” were highly regarded in all countries of the ancient world. But the epitome of this experience of “possession” was speaking in tongues. It was considered to be a form of prophecy, but was the highest form of prophecy because the person speaking had (apparently) lost total control to the gods. Hence tongues was a highly sought after experience in the ancient world. In Corinth there were many religious groups who practised speaking in tongues, usually induced by music, drugs, alcohol and sex.
Hence the statement made by the onlookers in Acts 2 “they are drunk”. In their experience that was how you got to the point of speaking in tongues.
In the light of this historical background Paul’s cryptic comment in 1 Corinthians 12:2 makes a lot of sense”
“You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols.”
He is referring to their past spiritual experiences, and tongues in particular.
Some people are afraid of tongues because of the demonic aspect in some cases. But note that Paul, knowing all about demonic religions and their use of tongues, does not shy away from tongues. We should show the same fearlessness. Again, as I have said before, Satan is not creative. He has no ideas of his own. He only takes and corrupts things God created. As Christians we are to take what has been corrupted and restore it to the rightful use and place in our lives.
Tongues needs some form of release.
How does the Holy Spirit give this release?
1. The Holy Spirit “clothes” us with himself in the Baptism of the Spirit. Our physical bodies are clothed with power from on high. This is the “upon” relationship of the Spirit to us.
2. The Holy Spirit “fills” our human spirit, inspiring and energising it with his presence. This is the “in” relationship of the Spirit to us.
This is the God side of the miracle of spiritual release from soulish bondage: God, in the person of the Holy Spirit, clothes us and fills us.
The stage is set then for a miracle of spiritual release. Our spirits are filled with the Holy Spirit and our bodies are empowered by the same Holy Spirit. Spiritual release - release of our human spirit from the bondage of the soul - is now possible through the person of the Holy Spirit.
If we, in our spirit, then take control of our bodies, by-passing our soul then:
1. The false merging of soul and spirit is immediately broken.
2. The spirit takes rulership over the body and the inverted human psychology (Body ruling soul/spirit merged) is put back in Divine order (spirit controlling soul controlling body).
We are then on the path to spiritual maturity.
But to any miracle there is a human side also. The two gifts of the Holy Spirit are on us – the “in” and the “upon” – but it is like they are “short circuited”. The power resident in them is not released. It is like having two phases of a three-phase electrical circuit. If all three phases are not connected the whole circuit malfunctions and the power is not fully released.
The missing phase is something we have to do. We have to “flick the switch” as it were.
How do we, by our spirit, rule our body?
Answer: Our whole being was designed to run on words. Somehow we have to allow our spirit to express words through our body, by-passsing the mind, which is the normal way this happens. This is speaking in tongues.
The power of God in us is released through words.
The power of our spirit, soul and body as created by God is released through words. To make the connection so that the three phases: The Spirit on us, the Spirit in us and our own spirit released all come together we must do something – we must speak.
But not in the language of our minds – because that is soulish and will only increase the bondage we are under to the flesh. We must speak in the language of our spirit. We must speak in tongues. When we do that the connection between the Spirit on us and the Spirit in us in made and supernatural power is released in and through us to the glory of God.
Release is given through the person of the Holy Spirit who bypasses for us the mind – that thing which normally controls our tongue and enables us to take ownership of our tongue by our spirit.
It’s our choice.
Back to the question: Is tongues the sign of the Pentecostal experience?
The answer has to be, “Yes”. But not in the way Pentecostals usually teach. Rather the work of the Holy Spirit in bringing us to spiritual release in our human spirit is not completed until we “flick the switch” and speak in tongues. When we do this the power of the Holy Spirit is released in us to bring us freedom. If we don’t “flick the switch” there are ways we remain in bondage to the flesh – forever. Speaking in tongues is “flicking the switch” and the fact that we can do it without sex, drugs, alcohol, heavy music and dancing proves that the Holy Spirit is at work in us. It is the proof of having received the Holy Spirit.
One thing is for sure – the full power of the Holy Spirit, as given to us in the baptism and Filling of the Spirit, is not released through us if we don’t speak in tongues. It is short-circuited by our failure to “connect”.
Chapter 27. The Holy Spirit #8 - Speaking in Tongues.
Probably the area of greatest controversy in the work of the Holy Spirit has been the Pentecostal insistence that speaking in tongues is the “Sign” of having received the experience of the Baptism in the Spirit. This has been the greatest stumbling block to acceptance of the whole experience. Even Charismatics choke on this one a little. Usually a Charismatic (rather than a Pentecostal) presentation of the Baptism in the Spirit will not press the point on tongues. Rather Charismatics tend to say that the evidence of the gift of the Spirit is moving into any of the gifts of the Spirit.
I have real problems with the Charismatic position here because I know various people who have moved in the other gifts of the Spirit and have not had this Pentecostal experience. So “moving in the gifts of the Spirit” seems to me to be no sort of proof of having had this experience at all. It is simply a way of trying to avoid the embarrassing question of tongues.
And embarrassing it is! How can you explain to people that you expect them to speak in a language they don’t know; that they don’t understand and that no one else will understand – except God. It is more than a little offensive to the sensibilities of nice middle class people. In fact, it could be construed to be a sure sign that you have gone a bit crazy in the head.
So the point of question in this chapter, then, is the Pentecostal claim: Is tongues the sign of having received the Pentecostal experience?
I have to admit here again that I take quite a different position to just about anyone I have ever heard or read on the subject. The “answers” given me by both “pro-tongues” and “anti- tongues” people really didn’t satisfy as they left too many unanswered questions. So here is my contribution to the debate.
To understand what we are going to look at in this chapter I am going to put a few ideas up that seem at first to be quite unrelated, but before we finish I will draw the threads together.
BACKGROUND IDEAS:
1. A Biblical Psychology.
I covered some of this in Chapter 21 so I do not want to go over that in detail again but we need to summarise to set the scene again.
(a) Man as Created.
Genesis 2:7.
"The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being/soul."
This verse describes to us the construction or make up, or “psychology”, of the human personality as God intended in creation. In God’s creation of man we were made one being with three distinct parts: A spirit, a soul and a body.
In God’s plan this is how man was meant to operate:
The Holy Spirit was to dwell in our spirit. I used the illustration of a hand in a glove to try to explain this.
We were made to be Spirit-filled.
The Holy Spirit was to speak to us in our intuition.
Our spirit would then inform our soul through our mind.
The mind would then direct the will.
Resulting in bodily action.
(b) Man as Fallen.
When Adam rebelled against God, in what we know as the Fall, there was a major disruption in the human personality.
The first thing that happened was that man died spiritually. By this we do not mean that mankind now has no spirit at all. His spirit still exists but his spirit has lost contact with the spiritual realm, in particular the Spirit of God who he was created to relate to in a unique way. The Holy Spirit withdrew from the human spirit. The result is that even though there still is a human spirit, it is flat, weak, performing below God’s original intention, just like a glove without a hand in it.
The link between the Holy Spirit and the human spirit was broken. Man no longer could receive knowledge from the Holy Spirit. But man’s soul still needed knowledge to survive so he turned to the body to gain knowledge through his senses – that is what “eating of the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” means.
But in turning to the body for knowledge the soul became dependent on the body so a reversal took place in the human personality.
The Body
Now rules the Soul
Which is in turn merged with the human Spirit.
This is what we call the “fleshly, or carnal, man” because the fleshly appetites of the body are now the dominant drives in human beings.
The human spirit is thus “trapped” inside the carnal soul and body and cannot break free to rule.
(c) Man as Redeemed in Christ.
The Holy Spirit enters into our human spirit again and we are “born again”. But the bondage of the “flesh” is not removed immediately. We need to be sanctified in spirit, soul and body (1 Thessalonians 5:23).
So the fact is, though we are “born again” our spirit is still in fleshly bondage.
2. The Power of Words.
Man was made in God’s image – and the only thing we know about God at the point man was made is that God is a speaking, creative God – he created by speaking.
So we must assume man was also made a speaking, creative being.
Our words have spiritual power to create things, they have power to build up or to destroy, to bless or to curse. And this power is not just spiritual or soulish – there is power in the physical realm as well.
How does this work?
Some Questions:
(a) God speaks into our spirit – so what does the spirit run on?
Answer: Words.
(b) Our spirit informs our soul in our minds – what does the mind run on?
Answer: Words.
(c) Where does the spirit and mind find their most natural outlet in the body?
Answer: In the tongue.
(d) What does the tongue run on?
Answer: Words.
So at the point of our tongue – our speaking – spiritual power, mental power and physical power come together in a unique way in God's plan.
It all runs on words. Speaking. The tongue.
This does not change because of the Fall – “the gifts and the call of God are without change of mind” on his part (Romans 11:29). Having given man this ability he is not going to take it away. The real power of the fleshly man is still just where God created it to be – in the tongue. This is taught in the Bible in many ways.
That’s two sets of ideas I want you to be aware of.
1. We were created in God’s image, a three part being of Spirit, soul and body that was designed to work in a particular way. As a result of the Fall there has been a complete corruption of the human personality.
2. The human personality finds its greatest power of release in words, in the tongue. This was true before the fall where Man worked in the image of God – creating by commanding. It remains true today. The point where the physical word, the spiritual world and the soul come together most powerfully is at the tongue, in our words. Through our words we affect the physical, soulish and spiritual worlds.
Let’s put these two ideas up on the shelf for a few minutes while we look at another set of ideas.
(3) Functions of the Human Spirit.
The human spirit has many functions – normally we would identify three in teaching on this:
* conscience – the ability to discern moral right from wrong,
* intuition – the ability to perceive knowledge spiritually and not in the mind, and thirdly
* communion – the deep desire to know God that every human being has. There is a “God-shaped vacuum” in each one of us that can only be satisfied by a relationship with the Spirit of God dwelling in our hearts, just as God originally intended.
But there are other functions of the human spirit. To illustrate this I will mention two:
* Creativity. I have already touched on this in saying we were created in the image of God – a creative being. This is a spiritual function. God is Creative and God is Spirit. Creativity belongs to Spirit. Despite what many modern philosophers say, creativity is not a function of the mind, it is a spiritual function. It arises out of the depths of the human personality and is completely irrational in its function. Much has been said about this – even by secular philosophers – and it is now pretty well accepted that creativity is not a rational function of the mind. It too often runs counter to the mind’s operation. Creativity is not planned in the mind, rather it is birthed in the inner being, in the spirit, and only later does the mind become aware of it. Often the mind cannot cope with the shear irrationality of the creative force. The mind likes to order things into nice neat compartments – creativity likes to break the bounds of the boxes the mind creates.
* The other area is health. John and Paula Sandford talk in their book, “Healing of the Wounded Spirit”, about this function of the human spirit. The spirit’s job, if you like, is to sustain life in the body, and as such releases spiritual powers of health and healing throughout the body so that we can live in the body. They give several quotes from scripture to illustrate this function but we wont go into that now.
But besides these functions of the human spirit there are others – some of which we are almost completely unaware of. Reading George Otis’ book, “The Twilight Labyrinth” gives a few clues as to what the human spirit is, or was, capable of. I recommend it. Also, Watchman Nee, “The Latent Power of the Soul”.
So let’s just put that idea up on the shelf for a few minutes: The human spirit has functions we are unaware of - and look at another idea.
4. Spiritual Gifts.
There are many ways of looking at the whole question of spiritual gifts. Just for a few moments let’s look at a way you may not have thought of before.
There are two kinds of spiritual gifts:
1. There are those gifts that are totally supernatural – they are a gift from God and there is no measure of human ability that we can put into the equation. For instance, healing or working of miracles would seem to me to be something that is totally supernatural. We don’t have the ability to do these things in the natural and can only do them if God gives us a new supernatural spiritual ability.
2. But on the other hand there are some spiritual gifts that are not so totally supernatural. Rather they are – or can be - natural abilities we have which are lifted to a higher level by God anointing it with a spiritual gift or power. Some gifts that can be like this are teaching, preaching, evangelism. We could see, in some cases, how a person had a natural bent towards that ability even before they became a Christian and God then took it and used it in a Christian context. However even these gifts may be in some people totally supernatural.
I, myself, was not aware of any natural ability to teach before God gifted me with the gift of teaching. Then I had to learn to use the gift – and I’m still learning.
So that’s another set of ideas – keep them in mind – some "spiritual gifts" are not totally supernatural but are natural abilities lifted to a higher level by the gift or anointing of God.
Now let’s look at another set of ideas.
5. There are two types of “Speaking in Tongues”.
One of the helpful distinctions that Pentecostals have made in the whole discussion about tongues is the distinction between the “gift of tongues” and the “prayer tongue”.
This distinction is based on the following scriptures:
a. 1 Corinthians 14:18 Paul himself spoke in tongues - but not in public. Therefore there is a private use of tongues.
b. 1 Corinthians 14:14 – speaking in tongues can be prayer.
c. In this context Paul says that the public use of tongues is a message from God and so should be accompanied with interpretation. The implication is that interpretation is not necessary if tongues is used in private as it is prayer and God understands even if we don't.
Paul seems to be making a distinction here between a private use of tongues as prayer and a public use of tongues in church where it is usually a message and would require interpretation. This is particularly helpful, as we shall see shortly.
The difficulty is Paul talks about both uses of tongues in this passage (1 Corinthian 14) but a little thought can sort it out. Pentecostals are certainly right in making the distinction between the “prayer tongue” and the “gift of tongues”. This distinction holds together pretty well even if there are a few Bible teachers who object to it. The objectors mainly seem to be members of the group of Christians who don’t believe in tongues anyway. Those who speak in tongues are more likely to understand the fine distinctions between various forms of the phenomena than those who do not or who are opposed to the phenomena. If I wanted to know about flying a plane I would ask a pilot, not a farmer. In the same way if I want to know about the finer details of speaking in tongues I am better off talking to someone who has spoken in tongues than in someone who doesn’t believe in tongues.
It is the so-called “prayer tongue” that we find in the Acts instances exclusively. Nowhere in Acts do we see the gift of tongues for messages or for preaching. Rather what we see is people overwhelmed by the Spirit using a private manifestation of tongues in a place where others happen to see them doing it. But the fact that others saw them doing it is incidental. They were not speaking in tongues so others could see them. Nowhere is the demand made that the tongues be interpreted.
Question: What about Acts 2 – people understood the languages?
Answer: That was incidental. The speakers were not bringing messages neither was interpretation used. They were praising, not preaching (“glorifying God” = a Hebraism for “praising God”) and some of the bystanders happened to recognise some of the languages being spoken, but this was purely incidental. God did this as a sign (1 Cor 14:22) at that time and may do it again but that is not the gift of tongues. It is a by-product of the fact that tongues can be, as Paul says, “of men or of angels” (1 Corinthians 13:1).
It is the “prayer tongue” I am talking about here, not the gift of tongues.
That’s the last idea – there is a difference between the prayer tongue and the gift of tongues.
Summary of background ideas:
1. We are beings made up of three parts: Spirit, soul and body.
2. As a result of the Fall our human spirits have been placed in bondage to our body and soul and many of the functions of our spirit work at a lesser ability, or not at all. Some of them we are unaware of.
3. We are spiritual beings and the power of our spirit is released through words, through the tongue, for good or evil. The tongue is the place where our spirit, soul and body comes together in a unique way so power is concentrated there in a unique way.
4. There are two types of spiritual gifts – some are totally supernatural, but others are natural abilities that God takes and anoints to a higher level.
5. There are two manifestations of tongues – the so-called prayer language and the gift of tongues.
Now let’s tie it all together:
SPEAKING IN TONGUES:
I struggled with all this Pentecostal stuff. I was raised in a church that did not believe in it – in fact they were convinced that speaking in tongues was of the devil and anyone who did it was clearly demon possessed. Not only that, they believed that no Christian could be demon possessed. So, by implication, all Pentecostals were not Christian.
My problem was that, at university, I encountered hundreds of young Christians who spoke in tongues and gave no appearance of being demon possessed – in fact they had bright Christian lives and witnesses.
So I researched the matter. I read books for tongues by Pentecostals, and against tongues by others – until I got sick of them all. Then one day my father, who was similarly struggling with the issues, bought an interesting book on the subject by an American writer. The book was called, “Tongues of Men and of Angels” by William J. Samarin. This was the book that made the most sense of the whole question because it didn’t come from a preconceived opinion but rather was trying to understand the whole question of tongues from a purely evidential viewpoint.
As far as I know Samarin is/was not a Christian. He is/was a psychologist and linguist. His purpose in writing the book was that it was his thesis for his doctorate. The phenomena of tongues in churches had hit the media in the States big time and he thought it would be a good topic that brought together his two areas of study – psychology and linguistics – for his Doctoral Thesis.
As books go it made more sense than anything else I have read on the subject.
Samarin examined tongues speaking throughout history and around the world at that time – the early 1970s. He found out some interesting things.
1. Tongues speaking is not something peculiar to Christianity. It occurs in every religion in the world and the history of religion shows that it seems to have so since time began.
2. Speaking in tongues in the religious context seems to occur at times of spiritual revival or renewal – no matter what the religion is. It has frequently appeared in Church history at various revivals. It is not new with Pentecostalism. When spiritual passion is high tongues often accompanies such passion.
3. Many non-religious people find it easy to speak in tongues and do so regularly. In particular Samarin found creative people – musicians, artists, poets, writers and the like – find speaking in tongues very easy.
After all his research Samarin came to the following conclusions:
* Speaking in tongues is a normal and natural phenomena of the human psyche, or subconscious.
* It requires some trigger, or mechanism, for it to be released in most cases (creative people being the exception).
This is interesting in what it says but to understand what he is saying we have to translate it into “Christianese”.
Remember we looked at the structure of the human personality as God created it and then as a result of the Fall.
I pointed out that the human spirit in fallen man is “dead”, in that it is not functioning properly, but it is still there. But the spirit has been merged, or may I say now, submerged, under the conscious activities of the soul.
So the normal functions of the spirit are now “sub-conscious”. And this is what we find in psychological literature. Areas that we Christians understand to be functions of our spirit are deemed to be part of our “subconscious” by psychologists. Psychologists, in general, deny that the concept of a human spirit, in the Christian sense, exists at all. Then, having denied its existence, they then ascribe its functions to this elusive “subconscious”.
Things that get dealt with this way include conscience, intuition, religious affection and creativity. Samarin lumps tongue speaking in here too.
But note what he said – creative people find it easy to speak in tongues. We Christians understand that the whole area of creativity is intuitive and is a part of our human spirituality. Samarin's research suggests there is a link between creativity and tongues speaking in thast they arise out of the same part of the human psyche. That "part" we Christians would recognise as being the human spirit.
So, in our language, Christianese, what Samarin is saying is this:
“Speaking in tongues is a natural function of our human spirit.”
This is a profound conclusion and has tremendous implications for us as Christians.
Now let’s see what Paul says about this.
1 Corinthians 14:14.
“For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays”
We probably need to give this verse it’s fullest meaning – when we speak in tongues it is our human spirit speaking. Not “the Holy Spirit praying through us”, not some sort of divine gift but our own human spirit praying in a language our minds do not know.
Now let’s go back to what I said about the two types of spiritual gifts – gifts that are totally supernatural and gifts that are natural abilities that God takes to a higher level. I want to suggest that speaking in tongues – or what Pentecostals call “the prayer tongue” – is actually a natural function of the human spirit. But at times and with some people God takes this natural ability and raises it to another level and it becomes “the gift of tongues” wherein God speaks a message to a group. Then it requires interpretation.
The normal assumption, by those who know nothing about the historical background of tongues, is that tongues is a gift that is totally supernatural, i.e. it is a gift from God that we didn’t have before we became Christians. But Paul’s words here suggest otherwise.
Hence Paul can make two statements that sound almost contradictory:
1 Corinthians 14:5
“I want you all to speak in tongues”
Presumably meaning the ability to pray in tongues, speak in the language of our human spirit. But then he can say in:
1 Corinthians 12:30
“Do all speak in tongues”
This, in the Greek, demands the answer, “No!” But here it is in a list of gifts of the Spirit, so it means, “Not all of us have the gift of tongues to bring messages from God, just as not all of us have the gift of apostleship, teaching, etc.”
They are not really contradictory but are talking about two quite different things.
Tongues is thus a natural function of the human spirit which all human beings have by virtue of creation. God thought of it. He created it.
In some cases, with some people, God takes that natural ability and raises it to a higher level with an anointing so they move in the gift of tongues. But not everyone who speaks in tongues has the gift of tongues.
Now this is actually the position most Pentecostals have come to but they describe it differently. What they do is make a distinction between the “prayer tongue” and the “gift of tongues”. They are aware that there is a difference, but most of them haven’t a clue why there is a difference or what the difference entails. I have just explained the difference.
So speaking in tongues is a natural function of the human spirit when the human spirit is released from soulish bondage
Because it is a natural function of the human spirit anybody and everybody can do it. Non Christians included.
This means when the non-Christian speaks in tongues it is not demonic (though the means of release may be). But equally when the Christian speaks in tongues it is not the Holy Spirit (though the means of release may be).
The tongues we are talking about here, the prayer language, is therefore not a gift of the Holy Spirit, nor is it Demonic, it is a purely human phenomenon, as such it is part of how God created us.
Hence Paul's statement: "My spirit prays" can be allowed its full weight. We do not have to try to find a way around it.
This idea that speaking in tongues is a natural function of the human spirit is confirmed in a strange way by an interesting fact of the way Luke has written Acts ch 2.
Throughout the chapter Luke makes many allusions to the tower of Babel story (Genesis 10 & 11). You only have to go onto the internet and Google “Babel” and “Pentecost” and you will find hundreds of pages of sermons and Bible studies that bring out the parallels.
So Luke is clearly associating Pentecost and the Tower of Babel together in some spiritual way.
At Babel tongues were divided to divide men so that men could not continue their rebellion against God.
At Pentecost tongues were “given” in a sense, or better “released”, in the Church by the action of the Holy Spirit to bring men together in a new spiritual unity so that they could better serve God.
Pentecost, in that sense, is the reversal of Babel.
It is my personal view that before the Tower of Babel men communicated by speaking in tongues and their spirits still were able to function in the gift of interpretation. My feeling is that, at Babel, God “shut down” the ability of the human spirit to interpret the tongues men were speaking and so immediate confusion resulted. As a result they had to learn to understand each other in their minds and so the control of the soul over the spirit was strengthened – a judgement of God bringing men into bondage. The need to learn languages slows down the progress of acquiring knowledge so the slide into sin would be slower.
In other words, the languages we normally speak in, which we learn from our parents, were not the languages men used before Babel. Language before Babel was intuitive, not learned. Have you ever heard a young child, who cannot speak properly in the language of their parents yet, speaking in their “own language”. We (clever?) adults call it “babbling” (after the Tower of Babel). But are you sure? Are they speaking in the language of their spirit, an intuitive language, unlearned because it is spiritual? It may be that the languages we adults communicate in are the “babble”.
Let’s come back to the Pentecostal experience.
Derek Prince says it is an experience of three parts:
1. A Baptism in the Spirit.
2. A Filling of the Spirit, and
3. An overflow, seen in speaking in tongues.
Let’s redefine that third aspect in the light of what we have seen here.
The third aspect of the Pentecostal experience is a release of the human spirit seen in speaking in tongues, which is a natural, God-given-in-creation function of the human spirit.
But the human spirit, and tongues, has been bound up. The spirit of man as a result of the Fall has been bound to the soul and it needs releasing for us to be able to speak in tongues.
As Samarin says, there needs to be some sort of trigger to enable us to release it.
A RELEASE.
What Samarin says is that tongues are a natural function of the human spirit but they need to have some form of release for people to experience them.
Once people have done it the first time it seems to be easy to do it again at will. But the first time there usually needs to be a release trigger.
In pagan religions this release is usually a combination of music, dance, alcohol, drugs and sex.
For this reason when the crowd saw the disciples speaking in tongues in Acts 2 they said, “They are drunk.” This was their experience of speaking in tongues up to that point – it happened as a result of some sort of religious festival or orgy.
But in fact it was the Holy Spirit of God who had given them the release.
An Important Aside:
Speaking in tongues was not a new thing at Pentecost. It was, in fact, common in the religions of the ancient world, particularly in the Middle East. There are several instances in the OT where tongues are probably the best explanation of what happened – e.g. when the Spirit fell on King Saul and he “prophesied”.
In the ancient world the greatest spiritual experience one could have was to be “possessed” by the god and prophesy. “Oracles” or “prophets” were highly regarded in all countries of the ancient world. But the epitome of this experience of “possession” was speaking in tongues. It was considered to be a form of prophecy, but was the highest form of prophecy because the person speaking had (apparently) lost total control to the gods. Hence tongues was a highly sought after experience in the ancient world. In Corinth there were many religious groups who practised speaking in tongues, usually induced by music, drugs, alcohol and sex.
Hence the statement made by the onlookers in Acts 2 “they are drunk”. In their experience that was how you got to the point of speaking in tongues.
In the light of this historical background Paul’s cryptic comment in 1 Corinthians 12:2 makes a lot of sense”
“You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols.”
He is referring to their past spiritual experiences, and tongues in particular.
Some people are afraid of tongues because of the demonic aspect in some cases. But note that Paul, knowing all about demonic religions and their use of tongues, does not shy away from tongues. We should show the same fearlessness. Again, as I have said before, Satan is not creative. He has no ideas of his own. He only takes and corrupts things God created. As Christians we are to take what has been corrupted and restore it to the rightful use and place in our lives.
Tongues needs some form of release.
How does the Holy Spirit give this release?
1. The Holy Spirit “clothes” us with himself in the Baptism of the Spirit. Our physical bodies are clothed with power from on high. This is the “upon” relationship of the Spirit to us.
2. The Holy Spirit “fills” our human spirit, inspiring and energising it with his presence. This is the “in” relationship of the Spirit to us.
This is the God side of the miracle of spiritual release from soulish bondage: God, in the person of the Holy Spirit, clothes us and fills us.
The stage is set then for a miracle of spiritual release. Our spirits are filled with the Holy Spirit and our bodies are empowered by the same Holy Spirit. Spiritual release - release of our human spirit from the bondage of the soul - is now possible through the person of the Holy Spirit.
If we, in our spirit, then take control of our bodies, by-passing our soul then:
1. The false merging of soul and spirit is immediately broken.
2. The spirit takes rulership over the body and the inverted human psychology (Body ruling soul/spirit merged) is put back in Divine order (spirit controlling soul controlling body).
We are then on the path to spiritual maturity.
But to any miracle there is a human side also. The two gifts of the Holy Spirit are on us – the “in” and the “upon” – but it is like they are “short circuited”. The power resident in them is not released. It is like having two phases of a three-phase electrical circuit. If all three phases are not connected the whole circuit malfunctions and the power is not fully released.
The missing phase is something we have to do. We have to “flick the switch” as it were.
How do we, by our spirit, rule our body?
Answer: Our whole being was designed to run on words. Somehow we have to allow our spirit to express words through our body, by-passsing the mind, which is the normal way this happens. This is speaking in tongues.
The power of God in us is released through words.
The power of our spirit, soul and body as created by God is released through words. To make the connection so that the three phases: The Spirit on us, the Spirit in us and our own spirit released all come together we must do something – we must speak.
But not in the language of our minds – because that is soulish and will only increase the bondage we are under to the flesh. We must speak in the language of our spirit. We must speak in tongues. When we do that the connection between the Spirit on us and the Spirit in us in made and supernatural power is released in and through us to the glory of God.
Release is given through the person of the Holy Spirit who bypasses for us the mind – that thing which normally controls our tongue and enables us to take ownership of our tongue by our spirit.
It’s our choice.
Back to the question: Is tongues the sign of the Pentecostal experience?
The answer has to be, “Yes”. But not in the way Pentecostals usually teach. Rather the work of the Holy Spirit in bringing us to spiritual release in our human spirit is not completed until we “flick the switch” and speak in tongues. When we do this the power of the Holy Spirit is released in us to bring us freedom. If we don’t “flick the switch” there are ways we remain in bondage to the flesh – forever. Speaking in tongues is “flicking the switch” and the fact that we can do it without sex, drugs, alcohol, heavy music and dancing proves that the Holy Spirit is at work in us. It is the proof of having received the Holy Spirit.
One thing is for sure – the full power of the Holy Spirit, as given to us in the baptism and Filling of the Spirit, is not released through us if we don’t speak in tongues. It is short-circuited by our failure to “connect”.
Foundations of the Christian Life. Chapter 26. The Holy Spirit #7. The Pentecostal Experience.
Foundations of the Christian Life
Chapter 26. The Holy Spirit #7. The Pentecostal Experience.
At this point I feel I have established that:
1. The covenant gift of the Spirit, received at conversion, includes two relationships of the Holy Spirit to the believer, both and “in” relationship (the indwelling Spirit) and an “on” relationship (the Baptism in the Spirit). These are given to us because they belong to Christ and we are “in Christ”.
2. However there is an experiential element to both of these: The Indwelling Spirit should lead to being Spirit-filled and manifesting the nature of Christ through us, the Baptism in the Spirit should lead to power in Christian service. We acknowledge that we don’t fully enter into the experience of the gift of the Spirit at conversion, rather we grow into it.
3. The experience of receiving the gift of the Spirit is described in Acts, particularly in Acts 2:1-4.
There are three questions that need to be addressed here:
1. What does the gift of the Spirit look like in Acts 2:1-4?
2. Was it a pattern in Acts? Is this the same right through Acts?
3. Should it be taken as a norm, or pattern, for us?
WHAT DOES THE GIFT OF THE SPIRIT LOOK LIKE?
It is at this point that the Pentecostal teacher has something to contribute to the discussion. Their contention seems to me to be sound at this point. There are four main points they make:
* The Promise of the Spirit, both indwelling and baptism, was fulfilled at the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4), and this is the description of what the gift of the Spirit looks like in experience.
* Speaking in tongues is the visible sign of having received this experience.
* Other people were accepted into the Church later in Acts because their experience matched the experience of those who were present at Pentecost.
* The experience at Pentecost is thus the pattern and norm for receiving the full experience of the Spirit for every Christian.
We will leave detailed discussion of speaking in tongues until later as it tends to divert the discussion from the other points, which are of primary interest and importance for the discussion at this point. Besides which, I’m not sure I agree with the way the claim about tongues is made by Pentecostals.
Acts 2:1-4.
“When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.”
There are certain things in this passage which are unique to the historical situation and therefore should not be taken as a guide for us, but other aspects are common to all, or most, of the Acts experiences so we can take them as a guide for us.
(1) Elements Unique to Acts 2.
(a) The wind and tongues of fire.
(b) The Apparent two-stage reception of the Spirit by the 120.
C/f John 20:19-23.
I covered this in Chapter 23 so we wont go into it again.
These two things appear to be unique to the experience of the original 120 disciples present on the day of Pentecost.
The sound of wind and the visible tongues of fire signify the giving of the gift of the Holy Spirit by the Father at the beginning of a new age – the Church Age.
In later Acts experiences where the gift of the Spirit is given to people he is mediated through those in the Church who already have the Spirit. This is God’s normal way of spreading the Spirit in this age – through other people. There is, therefore. no need for the sound of wind or the visible tongues of fire to be repeated in the other Acts instances.
(2) Elements Common to the Other Acts Episodes.
There are three elements to the Pentecostal Experience that seem to be common to the Acts episodes.
(a) The BAPTISM in the Holy Spirit - the words "clothed", "upon".
This is an experience of being IMMERSED in the Spirit.
Acts 2:3 (above).
From the understanding that Baptism means initiation we are to conclude that the initial reception of the Spirit was a Baptism in the Spirit. But it is clear in Acts that there was a dramatic experience for the convert, which was observable by others. This experience could only be described in terms of being immersed, or overwhelmed, by the Spirit. In other words, the experience matched the words used to describe and name it. The Spirit “clothed” them or “came on them”. This is implied by the very meaning of the word "Baptise", "An Immersion", derived from the Greek "Baptiso", meaning to cause a thing to be dipped, or plunged, or submerged, or immersed in fluid.
We have to allow this meaning of the word with the Baptism of the Spirit. Clearly the idea John the Baptist hints at when he prophecies that the Messiah would "baptise in the Holy Spirit and in Fire", is that this spiritual baptism would be at least every bit as real as the water baptism he was offering. Clearly this is true in Acts.
Hence we have three lines of thought coming from the idea of Baptism:
(1) It indicates a relationship with the Spirit that every believer has, at least in theory/doctrine.
(2) It indicates something that can be seen by others and be verified as being the same as other similar experiences.
(3) It is an experience for the individual that is as real as being immersed in water.
(b) Being FILLED with the HOLY Spirit.
Acts 2:3 (above).
There is a clear difference between Baptism and Filling. Where Baptism is an OUTER clothing, the Filling is an INNER experience.
(c) Speaking in Tongues.
See later discussion.
Clearly at Pentecost:
* The experience of receiving the Spirit was dynamic, powerful.
* Those that received the Spirit knew they had received him.
* Others, who were bystanders, could see something had happened.
Question: Are these factors true in the other Acts accounts of receiving the Spirit?
Though all three elements do not appear in every case, they appear, or are implied in most. We do not have to insist that they are always recorded in every case as the Bible is not a science textbook. God is under no obligation to repeat himself every time for our benefit when the pattern is clear. All I have to show here is a significant number of these aspects in each case for the argument to be valid.
We need to understand the structure of the book of Acts if we are to understand what it is trying to teach us. The structure of the book is outlined for us in
Acts 1:8
“You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth”.
The book is structured around how the gospel spread in these steps:
Acts 1-7 In Jerusalem and Judea.
Acts 8-9 To Samaria.
Acts 10ff To the Gentiles – the ends of the earth.
So as the gospel spreads to each new area we see a spreading of the gift of the Spirit to each new group. This experience of the Spirit is seen in Acts to be the proof that they have become Christians.
Let’s look at the episodes:
1. The Samaritan Revival.
Acts 8:15-18.
“When they (Peter and John) arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money …”
* “The Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them” – the wording refers to the Baptism in the Spirit. See ch 18 for a full discussion on why this was their real salvation experience. It was their initiation into the Spirit.
* “They received the Spirit” – Presumably for this to be stated so definitely there was some way that the Samaritans knew they had received the Spirit and the Apostles could verify this. There must have been some criteria by which the Apostles judged that was sufficiently common to what was happening in Jerusalem and elsewhere for this to be so.
* “When Simon saw…” – whatever happened Simon could see it happening. Most interpreters nowadays assume it was speaking in tongues. But the real point here is that receiving the Spirit was observable, experiential and verifiable by those who knew about such things.
* There is no mention of being “filled with the Spirit”.
2. The Conversion of Saul/Paul.
Acts 9:17,18.
“Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord- Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here- has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit." Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized, …”
* We discussed in Chapter 15 why this event and not the experience on the road to Damascus three days earlier was Paul’s conversion. So this was his initial experience of the Spirit.
* He was presumably “filled with the Spirit” in accordance with Ananias’ words.
* The Baptism in the Spirit is not mentioned.
* Tongues is not mentioned here, but Paul testifies that he “spoke in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:18)” and it is not unreasonable to assume that he began to do so at this point of his life.
* Whatever happened to Paul at this point was clearly observable and similar to what happened to others who received the Spirit. I say this because Paul immediately began witnessing to Christ and this brought some criticism from older believers. However Barnabas was sufficiently convinced (Acts 8:26ff) and was able to convince others that Saul had been saved. What criteria was he judging with? What proofs did he offer to the Church in Jerusalem that calmed their fears? Clearly Ananias and later Barnabus were totally convinced that Paul was truly converted. There must have been some evidence for their conviction considering Paul's prior reputation.
3 The Conversion of Cornelius.
Acts 10:44-47.
“While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, "Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."
* “the Holy Spirit came on all…had been poured out even on the Gentiles” – “on” is Baptism in the Spirit language. This was clearly their initiation into the Spirit.
* “For they heard them speaking in tongues” – In the minds of Luke (writing this) and those who were present there is obviously a strong identification of the reception of the Spirit with speaking in tongues. The Word "for" is causative.
* The “Filling of the Spirit” is not mentioned.
* “they have received the Holy Spirit just as we have” – Peter is recognising that there is an identity of experience between what was happening elsewhere and what had just happened with the Gentiles. It was observable, verifiable, experiential.
4. The Ephesian “disciples”.
Acts 19:1-6.
“While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit." So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?" "John's baptism," they replied. Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.”
* “Did you receive the Holy Spirit…” – Paul is assuming that if they had done so they would know for sure. There is no room for “maybes” here.
* “the Holy Spirit came on them.” – Baptism in the Spirit language.
* “They spoke in tongues and prophecied.”
* No mention of the “Filling of the Spirit.”
* The reception of the Spirit was experiential, observable, able to be verified by others as being the reception of the Spirit.
* This is clearly their first reception of the Spirit, their initiation. This is their salvation experience, as discussed in Chapter 15.
Our survey of Acts, then, produces these results. Where the reception of the Spirit is described:
1. It was clearly experiential.
2. It could be seen by other people who were watching.
3. It was basically the same in every instance so that those observing were able to verify that this was the real thing and not some other experience. There was “criteria.”
4. We get the impression that this experience was so common and so distinct that it could be used as a “proof” of salvation if there was a dispute, e.g. in the cases of the Samaritans, Paul and the Gentiles.
5. There was a pattern:
* The Spirit came "on" them.
* They were "filled with the Spirit".
* They "spoke in tongues and prophecied" (see later discussion on the cultural identity of tongues and prophecy).
WAS THIS UNDERSTOOD TO BE A NORM?
This experience seems to have been taken as the norm and standard. Others were included in the Church because their experience conformed to this pattern. It seems to have been the common experience of salvation in the early Church. Some references indicate this to us:
Acts 10:47.
“They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."
This phrase is interesting because of the word “we”. Who are the “we” Peter is talking about?
Luke has already told us that the people accompanying Peter were not from Jerusalem. They were not present at Pentecost. Rather they were converts from Joppa (v23). This indicates that the subjective experience of the Disciples at Joppa when they became Christians had also been to have a dynamic experience of the Spirit and to speak in tongues. “Just as we have” indicates an identity of experience. This was exactly the same as they had experienced.
It would seem that the church in Joppa had a similar experience of receiving the Spirit. Presumably this was the case in Peter’s ministry throughout Judea.
Peter is assuming a commonality of experience of the Spirit that he can appeal to. He can only do this if he has a pretty strong knowledge that there was a common experience.
Acts 15:8.
"... gave them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us".
When Peter returned to Jerusalem he was called to task for accepting the Gentiles into the Church. His defense was that God accepted the Gentiles so how could he refuse them entry. His proof of God’s acceptance is that God "Gave them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us".
The interesting thing about this defense is the word “us”. Who is the “us” Peter is referring to?
This comment of Peter's to the assembled Church in Jerusalem is calling on their collective experience of receiving the Holy Spirit as being the test for the reality of the Gentiles' experience. For this to be a meaningful test there must be some common elements:
(i) Their experience at Jerusalem must have been all very similar.
(ii) Their experience must have been tangible, in that others could attest to it being true and real. This means there must have been external evidence in the experience of those being saved that was immediately visible to those looking on. The conclusion we are drawn to is that nearly every convert in Jerusalem had a similar experience of speaking in tongues. After all, the Spirit is invisible we can’t see him (John 3) so the Baptism in the Spirit and the Filling of the Spirit are not observable to the human eye. The only thing in the Acts stories that is observable is the “speaking in tongues” so this must have been the external visible criteria they made the judgment on: “These people are saved/have received the Spirit because they are speaking in tongues.” It is hard to come to any other conclusion.
In his speech Peter appeals to the common experience of receiving the Spirit in the Jerusalem church. In other words, the Acts 2 experience was the common experience of all of the members of the Jerusalem church – which numbered tens of thousands by this stage. Again, Peter could not confidently appeal to such a common experience unless he knew it was common – i.e. they all had the same experience.
There appears to be three elements to the experience of receiving the Spirit which were common to all the Early Church, and which were taken as a norm, or standard of proof, that people were Christians. These are:
1. An experience of being baptised in the Spirit.
2. An experience of being filled with the Spirit.
3. Speaking in tongues, which in some way was understood to be the result of the first two things.
The reception of the Spirit was clearly a visible dramatic experience. This experience had two things about it which were clear:
(i) The recipient knew they had had an encounter with the Living God.
(ii) Onlookers knew that the person had received the Spirit.
IS IT VALID TO MAKE THIS PATTERN A NORM FOR US?
Of course!
I believe the Acts experiences are a guide - a model if you like – for us today of what receiving the fullness of the Spirit should look like on an experiential level. The experience of Acts 2:1-4 is a pattern, as criteria by which we can judge whether or not someone has fully experienced what God wants for them with the gift of the Spirit.
Peter and the other apostles used the Acts 2 experience as a sort of measuring stick to tell if someone was really a Christian or not. Had they really received the Spirit? If the apostles could do it then we can too. In other words if we enter into the fullness of the Spirit this is what it should look like in our experience.
Again I point out, if we are not prepared to accept the Acts episodes as a guide for us today then we have no guide in scripture and we are left to make up our own minds as to what the gift of the Spirit looks like. But the evidence of Scripture suggests it is defined a bit more clearly for us than that.
I know we can prove doctrinally that every Christian is born again and has received the Baptism in the Spirit. But when we ask the question, “What does this mean in our experience?” we have to answer that question also from the Bible. If we ask, “What does the Pentecostal experience, the Fullness of the Spirit, look like?” then Acts provides the answer. It looks like this:
An experience that has three dynamic elements:
1. A baptism in the Spirit which is a gift of power, a clothing a coming upon us by the Holy Spirit. An immersion in the Spirit.
2. An infilling with the Holy Spirit.
3. Speaking in tongues.
RECEIVING THE SPIRIT IN THE EPISTLES:
There is clear evidence in the epistles that receiving the Spirit at conversion was such a dynamic experience that the person could not doubt their reception of the Spirit. It formed the basis of their assurance of salvation.
(1) Romans 5:5.
“And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.”
Romans 5 is dealing with the issue of assurance of salvation. Paul is moving in his discussion beyond the legal aspects of justification into the experiential reality of that salvation for us as Believers.
Paul's language here would seem to indicate that the readers have had an experience of the Spirit - there is a knowing of the love of God in their hearts through the pouring of the Holy Spirit into them.
This is Baptism in the Spirit language. The word "poured" is associated in particular with the Baptism of the Spirit. But the whole emphasis in this passage is that these things are real experiences in our lives that we can trace back to a time when we KNOW we received the Spirit. It is this gift of the Spirit that gives us absolute confidence of Salvation. Assurance of salvation is not obtained by memorising proof texts, but by experiencing the Holy Spirit.
(2) Galatians 3:2.
“I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?”
Paul's question here can only mean that they KNEW that they had received the Spirit. It was an event dynamic enough in their lives for him to be able to use it as a reference point in his argument.
Other references could be examined but the point is clear - when they got the Spirit they knew it, there was no doubt, their experience was dynamic and beyond question.
Summary:
(1) The Evangelical doctrine, as far as it goes, appears to be correct. But it needs to be fair when talking about the relationship of doctrine to experience. Because there is a tendency to ignore this relationship of doctrine to experience in the debate over the Baptism in the Spirit the Evangelical position is incomplete and so is a distortion of the teaching of scripture. In other words, though it starts out being right it ends up wrong because it does not go far enough.
(2) The Pentecostal experience has an adequate scriptural basis and, as it appears to be the normal pattern in scripture of receiving the fullness of the Spirit. We can thus make the claim that it should still be the normal pattern today, the criteria for deciding if one has really received the Spirit or not. In the early Church there is evidence that this was the criteria.
HOMEWORK:
TRANSFORMER VERSES:
Receiving the Spirit:
Romans 5:5.
“And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.”
Galatians 3:2.
“I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?”
PRAYER:
Father God, I pray that you would give me an experience of the Spirit that will give me assurance of your love and the fact of my salvation. In Jesus name I pray, Amen.
Chapter 26. The Holy Spirit #7. The Pentecostal Experience.
At this point I feel I have established that:
1. The covenant gift of the Spirit, received at conversion, includes two relationships of the Holy Spirit to the believer, both and “in” relationship (the indwelling Spirit) and an “on” relationship (the Baptism in the Spirit). These are given to us because they belong to Christ and we are “in Christ”.
2. However there is an experiential element to both of these: The Indwelling Spirit should lead to being Spirit-filled and manifesting the nature of Christ through us, the Baptism in the Spirit should lead to power in Christian service. We acknowledge that we don’t fully enter into the experience of the gift of the Spirit at conversion, rather we grow into it.
3. The experience of receiving the gift of the Spirit is described in Acts, particularly in Acts 2:1-4.
There are three questions that need to be addressed here:
1. What does the gift of the Spirit look like in Acts 2:1-4?
2. Was it a pattern in Acts? Is this the same right through Acts?
3. Should it be taken as a norm, or pattern, for us?
WHAT DOES THE GIFT OF THE SPIRIT LOOK LIKE?
It is at this point that the Pentecostal teacher has something to contribute to the discussion. Their contention seems to me to be sound at this point. There are four main points they make:
* The Promise of the Spirit, both indwelling and baptism, was fulfilled at the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4), and this is the description of what the gift of the Spirit looks like in experience.
* Speaking in tongues is the visible sign of having received this experience.
* Other people were accepted into the Church later in Acts because their experience matched the experience of those who were present at Pentecost.
* The experience at Pentecost is thus the pattern and norm for receiving the full experience of the Spirit for every Christian.
We will leave detailed discussion of speaking in tongues until later as it tends to divert the discussion from the other points, which are of primary interest and importance for the discussion at this point. Besides which, I’m not sure I agree with the way the claim about tongues is made by Pentecostals.
Acts 2:1-4.
“When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.”
There are certain things in this passage which are unique to the historical situation and therefore should not be taken as a guide for us, but other aspects are common to all, or most, of the Acts experiences so we can take them as a guide for us.
(1) Elements Unique to Acts 2.
(a) The wind and tongues of fire.
(b) The Apparent two-stage reception of the Spirit by the 120.
C/f John 20:19-23.
I covered this in Chapter 23 so we wont go into it again.
These two things appear to be unique to the experience of the original 120 disciples present on the day of Pentecost.
The sound of wind and the visible tongues of fire signify the giving of the gift of the Holy Spirit by the Father at the beginning of a new age – the Church Age.
In later Acts experiences where the gift of the Spirit is given to people he is mediated through those in the Church who already have the Spirit. This is God’s normal way of spreading the Spirit in this age – through other people. There is, therefore. no need for the sound of wind or the visible tongues of fire to be repeated in the other Acts instances.
(2) Elements Common to the Other Acts Episodes.
There are three elements to the Pentecostal Experience that seem to be common to the Acts episodes.
(a) The BAPTISM in the Holy Spirit - the words "clothed", "upon".
This is an experience of being IMMERSED in the Spirit.
Acts 2:3 (above).
From the understanding that Baptism means initiation we are to conclude that the initial reception of the Spirit was a Baptism in the Spirit. But it is clear in Acts that there was a dramatic experience for the convert, which was observable by others. This experience could only be described in terms of being immersed, or overwhelmed, by the Spirit. In other words, the experience matched the words used to describe and name it. The Spirit “clothed” them or “came on them”. This is implied by the very meaning of the word "Baptise", "An Immersion", derived from the Greek "Baptiso", meaning to cause a thing to be dipped, or plunged, or submerged, or immersed in fluid.
We have to allow this meaning of the word with the Baptism of the Spirit. Clearly the idea John the Baptist hints at when he prophecies that the Messiah would "baptise in the Holy Spirit and in Fire", is that this spiritual baptism would be at least every bit as real as the water baptism he was offering. Clearly this is true in Acts.
Hence we have three lines of thought coming from the idea of Baptism:
(1) It indicates a relationship with the Spirit that every believer has, at least in theory/doctrine.
(2) It indicates something that can be seen by others and be verified as being the same as other similar experiences.
(3) It is an experience for the individual that is as real as being immersed in water.
(b) Being FILLED with the HOLY Spirit.
Acts 2:3 (above).
There is a clear difference between Baptism and Filling. Where Baptism is an OUTER clothing, the Filling is an INNER experience.
(c) Speaking in Tongues.
See later discussion.
Clearly at Pentecost:
* The experience of receiving the Spirit was dynamic, powerful.
* Those that received the Spirit knew they had received him.
* Others, who were bystanders, could see something had happened.
Question: Are these factors true in the other Acts accounts of receiving the Spirit?
Though all three elements do not appear in every case, they appear, or are implied in most. We do not have to insist that they are always recorded in every case as the Bible is not a science textbook. God is under no obligation to repeat himself every time for our benefit when the pattern is clear. All I have to show here is a significant number of these aspects in each case for the argument to be valid.
We need to understand the structure of the book of Acts if we are to understand what it is trying to teach us. The structure of the book is outlined for us in
Acts 1:8
“You shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth”.
The book is structured around how the gospel spread in these steps:
Acts 1-7 In Jerusalem and Judea.
Acts 8-9 To Samaria.
Acts 10ff To the Gentiles – the ends of the earth.
So as the gospel spreads to each new area we see a spreading of the gift of the Spirit to each new group. This experience of the Spirit is seen in Acts to be the proof that they have become Christians.
Let’s look at the episodes:
1. The Samaritan Revival.
Acts 8:15-18.
“When they (Peter and John) arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money …”
* “The Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them” – the wording refers to the Baptism in the Spirit. See ch 18 for a full discussion on why this was their real salvation experience. It was their initiation into the Spirit.
* “They received the Spirit” – Presumably for this to be stated so definitely there was some way that the Samaritans knew they had received the Spirit and the Apostles could verify this. There must have been some criteria by which the Apostles judged that was sufficiently common to what was happening in Jerusalem and elsewhere for this to be so.
* “When Simon saw…” – whatever happened Simon could see it happening. Most interpreters nowadays assume it was speaking in tongues. But the real point here is that receiving the Spirit was observable, experiential and verifiable by those who knew about such things.
* There is no mention of being “filled with the Spirit”.
2. The Conversion of Saul/Paul.
Acts 9:17,18.
“Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord- Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here- has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit." Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized, …”
* We discussed in Chapter 15 why this event and not the experience on the road to Damascus three days earlier was Paul’s conversion. So this was his initial experience of the Spirit.
* He was presumably “filled with the Spirit” in accordance with Ananias’ words.
* The Baptism in the Spirit is not mentioned.
* Tongues is not mentioned here, but Paul testifies that he “spoke in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:18)” and it is not unreasonable to assume that he began to do so at this point of his life.
* Whatever happened to Paul at this point was clearly observable and similar to what happened to others who received the Spirit. I say this because Paul immediately began witnessing to Christ and this brought some criticism from older believers. However Barnabas was sufficiently convinced (Acts 8:26ff) and was able to convince others that Saul had been saved. What criteria was he judging with? What proofs did he offer to the Church in Jerusalem that calmed their fears? Clearly Ananias and later Barnabus were totally convinced that Paul was truly converted. There must have been some evidence for their conviction considering Paul's prior reputation.
3 The Conversion of Cornelius.
Acts 10:44-47.
“While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, "Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."
* “the Holy Spirit came on all…had been poured out even on the Gentiles” – “on” is Baptism in the Spirit language. This was clearly their initiation into the Spirit.
* “For they heard them speaking in tongues” – In the minds of Luke (writing this) and those who were present there is obviously a strong identification of the reception of the Spirit with speaking in tongues. The Word "for" is causative.
* The “Filling of the Spirit” is not mentioned.
* “they have received the Holy Spirit just as we have” – Peter is recognising that there is an identity of experience between what was happening elsewhere and what had just happened with the Gentiles. It was observable, verifiable, experiential.
4. The Ephesian “disciples”.
Acts 19:1-6.
“While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit." So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?" "John's baptism," they replied. Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.”
* “Did you receive the Holy Spirit…” – Paul is assuming that if they had done so they would know for sure. There is no room for “maybes” here.
* “the Holy Spirit came on them.” – Baptism in the Spirit language.
* “They spoke in tongues and prophecied.”
* No mention of the “Filling of the Spirit.”
* The reception of the Spirit was experiential, observable, able to be verified by others as being the reception of the Spirit.
* This is clearly their first reception of the Spirit, their initiation. This is their salvation experience, as discussed in Chapter 15.
Our survey of Acts, then, produces these results. Where the reception of the Spirit is described:
1. It was clearly experiential.
2. It could be seen by other people who were watching.
3. It was basically the same in every instance so that those observing were able to verify that this was the real thing and not some other experience. There was “criteria.”
4. We get the impression that this experience was so common and so distinct that it could be used as a “proof” of salvation if there was a dispute, e.g. in the cases of the Samaritans, Paul and the Gentiles.
5. There was a pattern:
* The Spirit came "on" them.
* They were "filled with the Spirit".
* They "spoke in tongues and prophecied" (see later discussion on the cultural identity of tongues and prophecy).
WAS THIS UNDERSTOOD TO BE A NORM?
This experience seems to have been taken as the norm and standard. Others were included in the Church because their experience conformed to this pattern. It seems to have been the common experience of salvation in the early Church. Some references indicate this to us:
Acts 10:47.
“They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have."
This phrase is interesting because of the word “we”. Who are the “we” Peter is talking about?
Luke has already told us that the people accompanying Peter were not from Jerusalem. They were not present at Pentecost. Rather they were converts from Joppa (v23). This indicates that the subjective experience of the Disciples at Joppa when they became Christians had also been to have a dynamic experience of the Spirit and to speak in tongues. “Just as we have” indicates an identity of experience. This was exactly the same as they had experienced.
It would seem that the church in Joppa had a similar experience of receiving the Spirit. Presumably this was the case in Peter’s ministry throughout Judea.
Peter is assuming a commonality of experience of the Spirit that he can appeal to. He can only do this if he has a pretty strong knowledge that there was a common experience.
Acts 15:8.
"... gave them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us".
When Peter returned to Jerusalem he was called to task for accepting the Gentiles into the Church. His defense was that God accepted the Gentiles so how could he refuse them entry. His proof of God’s acceptance is that God "Gave them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us".
The interesting thing about this defense is the word “us”. Who is the “us” Peter is referring to?
This comment of Peter's to the assembled Church in Jerusalem is calling on their collective experience of receiving the Holy Spirit as being the test for the reality of the Gentiles' experience. For this to be a meaningful test there must be some common elements:
(i) Their experience at Jerusalem must have been all very similar.
(ii) Their experience must have been tangible, in that others could attest to it being true and real. This means there must have been external evidence in the experience of those being saved that was immediately visible to those looking on. The conclusion we are drawn to is that nearly every convert in Jerusalem had a similar experience of speaking in tongues. After all, the Spirit is invisible we can’t see him (John 3) so the Baptism in the Spirit and the Filling of the Spirit are not observable to the human eye. The only thing in the Acts stories that is observable is the “speaking in tongues” so this must have been the external visible criteria they made the judgment on: “These people are saved/have received the Spirit because they are speaking in tongues.” It is hard to come to any other conclusion.
In his speech Peter appeals to the common experience of receiving the Spirit in the Jerusalem church. In other words, the Acts 2 experience was the common experience of all of the members of the Jerusalem church – which numbered tens of thousands by this stage. Again, Peter could not confidently appeal to such a common experience unless he knew it was common – i.e. they all had the same experience.
There appears to be three elements to the experience of receiving the Spirit which were common to all the Early Church, and which were taken as a norm, or standard of proof, that people were Christians. These are:
1. An experience of being baptised in the Spirit.
2. An experience of being filled with the Spirit.
3. Speaking in tongues, which in some way was understood to be the result of the first two things.
The reception of the Spirit was clearly a visible dramatic experience. This experience had two things about it which were clear:
(i) The recipient knew they had had an encounter with the Living God.
(ii) Onlookers knew that the person had received the Spirit.
IS IT VALID TO MAKE THIS PATTERN A NORM FOR US?
Of course!
I believe the Acts experiences are a guide - a model if you like – for us today of what receiving the fullness of the Spirit should look like on an experiential level. The experience of Acts 2:1-4 is a pattern, as criteria by which we can judge whether or not someone has fully experienced what God wants for them with the gift of the Spirit.
Peter and the other apostles used the Acts 2 experience as a sort of measuring stick to tell if someone was really a Christian or not. Had they really received the Spirit? If the apostles could do it then we can too. In other words if we enter into the fullness of the Spirit this is what it should look like in our experience.
Again I point out, if we are not prepared to accept the Acts episodes as a guide for us today then we have no guide in scripture and we are left to make up our own minds as to what the gift of the Spirit looks like. But the evidence of Scripture suggests it is defined a bit more clearly for us than that.
I know we can prove doctrinally that every Christian is born again and has received the Baptism in the Spirit. But when we ask the question, “What does this mean in our experience?” we have to answer that question also from the Bible. If we ask, “What does the Pentecostal experience, the Fullness of the Spirit, look like?” then Acts provides the answer. It looks like this:
An experience that has three dynamic elements:
1. A baptism in the Spirit which is a gift of power, a clothing a coming upon us by the Holy Spirit. An immersion in the Spirit.
2. An infilling with the Holy Spirit.
3. Speaking in tongues.
RECEIVING THE SPIRIT IN THE EPISTLES:
There is clear evidence in the epistles that receiving the Spirit at conversion was such a dynamic experience that the person could not doubt their reception of the Spirit. It formed the basis of their assurance of salvation.
(1) Romans 5:5.
“And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.”
Romans 5 is dealing with the issue of assurance of salvation. Paul is moving in his discussion beyond the legal aspects of justification into the experiential reality of that salvation for us as Believers.
Paul's language here would seem to indicate that the readers have had an experience of the Spirit - there is a knowing of the love of God in their hearts through the pouring of the Holy Spirit into them.
This is Baptism in the Spirit language. The word "poured" is associated in particular with the Baptism of the Spirit. But the whole emphasis in this passage is that these things are real experiences in our lives that we can trace back to a time when we KNOW we received the Spirit. It is this gift of the Spirit that gives us absolute confidence of Salvation. Assurance of salvation is not obtained by memorising proof texts, but by experiencing the Holy Spirit.
(2) Galatians 3:2.
“I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?”
Paul's question here can only mean that they KNEW that they had received the Spirit. It was an event dynamic enough in their lives for him to be able to use it as a reference point in his argument.
Other references could be examined but the point is clear - when they got the Spirit they knew it, there was no doubt, their experience was dynamic and beyond question.
Summary:
(1) The Evangelical doctrine, as far as it goes, appears to be correct. But it needs to be fair when talking about the relationship of doctrine to experience. Because there is a tendency to ignore this relationship of doctrine to experience in the debate over the Baptism in the Spirit the Evangelical position is incomplete and so is a distortion of the teaching of scripture. In other words, though it starts out being right it ends up wrong because it does not go far enough.
(2) The Pentecostal experience has an adequate scriptural basis and, as it appears to be the normal pattern in scripture of receiving the fullness of the Spirit. We can thus make the claim that it should still be the normal pattern today, the criteria for deciding if one has really received the Spirit or not. In the early Church there is evidence that this was the criteria.
HOMEWORK:
TRANSFORMER VERSES:
Receiving the Spirit:
Romans 5:5.
“And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.”
Galatians 3:2.
“I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?”
PRAYER:
Father God, I pray that you would give me an experience of the Spirit that will give me assurance of your love and the fact of my salvation. In Jesus name I pray, Amen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
