Some Thoughts on Moses’ Flight from Egypt

Last Sunday night I was considering some aspects of the life of Moses and especially concerning his flight from Egypt. Since we had one of our frequent power outages then, I had some time to consider it. What I find interesting is that in this story is a key to seeing how God judges our own actions at times. There are three basic accounts of this period of Moses' life found in Exodus 2, Hebrews 11, and in Acts 7. I would like to compare them now and see what we can learn from them.

 

One day, when Moses had grown up, he went out to his people and looked on their burdens, and he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his people. He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. When he went out the next day, behold, two Hebrews were struggling together. And he said to the man in the wrong, "Why do you strike your companion?" He answered, "Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?" Then Moses was afraid, and thought, "Surely the thing is known." When Pharaoh heard of it, he sought to kill Moses. But Moses fled from Pharaoh and stayed in the land of Midian. And he sat down by a well (Exo. 2:11-15).

 

By faith Moses, when he was grown up, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter, choosing rather to be mistreated with the people of God than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. He considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward. By faith he left Egypt, not being afraid of the anger of the king, for he endured as seeing him who is invisible (Heb. 11:24-27).

 

At this time Moses was born; and he was beautiful in God's sight. And he was brought up for three months in his father's house, and when he was exposed, Pharaoh's daughter adopted him and brought him up as her own son. And Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds. "When he was forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brothers, the children of Israel. And seeing one of them being wronged, he defended the oppressed man and avenged him by striking down the Egyptian. He supposed that his brothers would understand that God was giving them salvation by his hand, but they did not understand. And on the following day he appeared to them as they were quarreling and tried to reconcile them, saying, 'Men, you are brothers. Why do you wrong each other?' But the man who was wronging his neighbor thrust him aside, saying, 'Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? Do you want to kill me as you killed the Egyptian yesterday?' At this retort Moses fled and became an exile in the land of Midian, where he became the father of two sons (Acts 7:20-29).

 

Looking at these two passages together we see some apparent differences. At first glance it appears that Moses fled Egypt out of fear and yet Hebrews says he did it out of faith not fearing. How could it be said to be by faith? I think the key lies in the fact that the path was begun in faith. Clearly it was only faith that would enable Moses to abandon all his privileges and go down to his own people, and identify with them even in slavery. This is more than mere patriotism, because his people were not just any nation, but were heirs of Abraham's promise. It took something extraordinary for him to be willing to do this. We call that something faith.

It was faith that caused him to go down to his brethren. However, it was a mistaken belief that caused him to kill the Egyptian. He was zealous for his people and angry at the wrong he saw done. In the back of his mind was the knowledge that he would deliver Israel and he thought this was the best mode of bringing it about. In this he was bitterly disappointed. He did not receive a medal of commendation from his people, perhaps not even a thank you from the one he rescued, but what he did receive was rejection, "Who made you a ruler…" At this rejection he was afraid and he fled. In a certain sense he was afraid of Pharaoh, and certainly that was his initial reaction, but Hebrews tells us that he left by faith, not fearing the king's wrath. The way I see it is that God is showing the deepest motive in Moses in Hebrews. He had abandoned a life of ease and comfort and came to the aid of his brethren because of faith. There was a mistaken zeal and misunderstanding of God's way mixed in with it, but it was still faith. Thus his flight was brought about by faith even though the immediate cause might have seemed to have been fear. God looks at things differently than we do. Later it became apparent that forty more years were required to complete the time God had promised to Abraham that the children of Israel would be in Egypt (Gen. 15:13; Exo. 12:41).

This has bearing on our lives today. There are times when we must make a major decision, sometimes a decision which will affect the rest of our lives. We pray about it, and we act according to what we believe God is requiring of us. The consequences can be hard sometimes. I am certain Moses was very discouraged when he sat down at the well. His bid to become deliverer of his people had been cast down, trampled on, and torn to shreds. Yet God saw faith. The very fact that he had tried to deliver Israel showed a hold on the promises of God, even if it was premature.

Another example of this sort of faith is seen in the life of the Apostle Paul. There is much debate as to whether Paul actually should have gone to Jerusalem. He felt bound in heart to go, his friends opposed it, and a prophet told him what would happen if he did. True prophecy will at times say what will happen in a given course, but that does not mean of itself that the course is wrong. Paul was determined to go. Scripture seems somewhat ambiguous as to whether he actually should have. This is actually comforting in a way, because there are times when we may make a choice to do what we believe is pleasing to God. Unfortunately, we may miss it. Sometimes we can look it over and wonder if we made the right choice, and others may wonder the same as they did with Paul. Paul's choice was not made for wrong motives though, he sincerely was going to Jerusalem to proclaim Christ. It was not out of selfish-ambition or other wrong motive that he went. So when he was in prison Christ appeared to him and encouraged him (Acts 23:11). In the end whether it was best for him to go to Jerusalem or not is a moot point since God used this imprisonment to fulfill the purpose He had for Paul when He called him, and Paul could write at the end of his life that he had finished his course. May God grant that the same may be said of us! Amen.

 

Make me Yours, O Christ

Make me Yours, O Christ! Wholly completely
O draw me, Christ! Tenderly sweetly

Lead through dark valley of shadowy night
Yet lead forth from darkness and into the light

Break, Christ, break for I broken must be
Then make O remake what I should be

O to hear Your voice if only in rebuke
Blessed be whatever whip that drives me on toward you

My sweet Sin Offering to you I’m betrothed
To bear your name and character my Beloved

O in that day in You let me be found
Not with my own, but your righteousness girt round

Then may the capstone of this work be laid down
As cries of , “grace, grace” forever resound

How Christ and the Apostles Used Scripture

Almost as important as our love for Scripture as Christians is the way we use it. It is my belief that every problem we face and many struggles we have in our own lives are because we do not let the Word of God go down deep enough, either because we do not know what it says with reference to our situation, or because we know it, but do not actually apply it in a practical way. Most of us will confess, myself included, that we wish we had a more thorough knowledge of Scripture, but if we are really honest we will also admit that there is a great disconnect between what we know and what we actually apply to our lives. The more clearly we see what is required of us, the better we will be able to enter into it, and where it is difficult as often it is, seeing it clearly spelled out in Scripture drives us to prayer so that we can be enabled to do what is beyond us.

In order to clearly see our duties we must first rightly divide the Word of truth. This is only possible as God gives us light on the Word, so it is imperative for us to pray for understanding in His Word. Also required is a correct application of God's Word. Sometimes people do not apply God's Word because it is viewed as something God spoke to a specific person at a specific time. While it is true that some scriptures are specifically for a specific situation (for example both Hos. 1:2 and Jer. 16:2 were clearly for those individuals in particular, and are not applicable to all believers), yet there are many that are applicable to everyday situations. I am writing this post not to give an exhaustive study of them, but simply to promote thought and I would appreciate other examples if anyone has them. I intend to give a few examples of how Christ and His apostles used Scripture and drew applications from it so that we can emulate them through God's grace and be ourselves strengthened by His Word.

Some might object that Christ as the Son of God, and the apostles as inspired men who wrote Scripture, could use Scripture in a way that would be wrong for us. I would answer that if they are not out pattern who is? If our pattern is not found in the Scriptures themselves than where are they found? Also if you look closely you will notice that even Christ Himself gave very little that was not previously in the Old Testament, far more of His ministry was involved in opening concealed truths from the Old Testament than in adding new doctrine. The few exceptions had to do with His distinct avowal of His Divinity (such as John 3:13) and even these He elsewhere proved from the Psalms, especially ones that were acknowledged as Messianic even by His opponents. Now I would like to take a look at the way Christ used Scripture.

1. In the Temptation
   

One interesting to note about the temptation of Christ is that He not only met each snare of the devil with Scripture, but that strictly speaking they were not Scriptures used in context. They were however well applied. Thus while the context of Scripture is very important in its correct use for understanding doctrine, yet in application context is not entirely necessary. This fact has application to the objection of cessationists that when Pentecostals give prophecies which are quotations of scripture passages that they are not good, because they are not given in context. Let's take a closer look at the temptation in Matthew 4:1-10.

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. And the tempter came and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread." But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'" Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, "'He will command his angels concerning you,' and "'On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'" Jesus said to him, "Again it is written, 'You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.'" Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, "All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me." Then Jesus said to him, "Be gone, Satan! For it is written, "'You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.'"

 

The first temptation is answered by a partial quote of Deut. 8:2-3, "And you shall remember the whole way that the LORD your God has led you these forty years in the wilderness, that he might humble you, testing you to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments or not. And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD." In quoting it the way that He does Christ takes the following into consideration: 1. This was to be remembered by the children of Israel 2. This remembrance was not for Moses' generation only 3. The wilderness experience was not only to teach and humble them but to teach the same lessons to those who follow 4. The lesson taught was that man needed more reliance on the Word of God than on daily bread 5. I do not need bread as much as I need God's Word, and I will not put the temporal above the spiritual.

 

The second temptation actually began by the devil quoting a messianic Psalm himself. Christ replied by quoting Deut. 6:16, ""You shall not put the LORD your God to the test, as you tested him at Massah." He thus compared the demanding and complaining for water by Israel to force God to move on their behalf with any attempted coercion of God, even to do something He has specifically promised. The Apostle Paul also later condemned the attitude of let us do evil that good may come (Rom. 3:8).

 

The third temptation is more straightforward then the others, being directly against a clear precept of God, so I won't cover it here.

 

1. Christ's appeal to the Historical Books
   

 

When those in His hometown were expecting Him to work great works there He went to the historical books of the Bible and said, "Truly, I say to you, no prophet is acceptable in his hometown. But in truth, I tell you, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, when the heavens were shut up three years and six months, and a great famine came over all the land, and Elijah was sent to none of them but only to Zarephath, in the land of Sidon, to a woman who was a widow. And there were many lepers in Israel in the time of the prophet Elisha, and none of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian" (Luke 4:24-27). This was a masterful use of Scripture. He showed that in the Old Testament the prophets did not have inherent power to do as they wanted but were reliant on the will of God. Not only did God not heal all those in Israel, but to add insult to injury, instead He sent His prophets to heathens! The logic was inescapable and made the Jews who prided themselves more on natural descent than spiritual relationship hopping mad.

 

Another example of Christ's use of the historical books is seen when He was challenged because of His disciples plucking and eating grain on the Sabbath (Matt. 12:1-8).

 

At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry, and they began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said to him, "Look, your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath." He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath and are guiltless? I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. And if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath."

 

Jesus shows them a precedent in what David did, and how his was even far greater a breach. Yet he was not called a sinner for doing so, because it was done in a time of need and God desired mercy more than a ritualistic observance of the Law. He then further points out that if anyone works on the Sabbath, the priests do, because the Law required double sacrifices on that day. From these examples I think we can see that there are many practical things we can learn concerning the ways of God from the historical books.

 

1. Jesus' Proof of Life After Death and a Resurrection
   

After the Sadducees had tried to test Jesus with a sophistical question concerning the resurrection, which they rejected, Jesus used a few short words from the Pentateuch (the Sadducees doubted the prophets) to show that there is a hereafter (Mark 12:24-27).

Jesus said to them, "Is this not the reason you are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God? For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not God of the dead, but of the living. You are quite wrong."

 

When God said, "I am" rather than "I was" He showed a continued relationship with the patriarchs who had passed on. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were still alive to God though their bodies were buried. He is their God today as they even now adore Him in heaven awaiting their return with Christ. Christ shows us the importance of event the smallest phrases in Scripture by this example.

 

1. Paul's use of the Scripture
   

Paul's use of Scripture is a study in itself (Christ's even more so), but I would like to look at a few examples. He uses the law of firstfruits to show that if the elect of the remnant of Israel are saved though Christ, then the believers in the Gentile nations will also be so (Rom. 11:16). He also uses the same law to show how Christ's resurrection implies our resurrection (1 Cor. 15:20). This also proves our acceptance by God, since the firstfruits was accepted God has accepted the entire harvest to follow. This is the basis for Paul's often repeated phrase of "in Him" comes from. If Christ is the firstfruits than what happens to Him is credited to us.

 

Another interesting example, the way he uses a law concerning animal husbandry, to show that ministers can justly expect pecuniary benefits (1 Cor. 9:7-11).

 

Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard without eating any of its fruit? Or who tends a flock without getting some of the milk? Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same? For it is written in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain." Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you?

 

He points out that if God was concerned that oxen were rewarded for their work, how much more should ministers of the Gospel be rewarded for theirs.

 

On a side note I might mention that I have used this verse often when reprimanded for sampling cookie dough I have been stirring. However, once when I quoted it in defense of someone else, it got ugly. I was the only male present and the female consensus was that I had insulted the person. There was wailing and gnashing of teeth and I had to beat a hasty retreat. I was only a little more fortunate then the sons of Sceva.

 

In all seriousness though, as we see how Christ and the apostles used Scripture we can see a glimpse of how rich a treasure Scripture is and how little we actually know even of what we are familiar with. With that I commend my readers to God and to the Word of His grace which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among those that are sanctified. Amen.

 

A Few Thoughts on Original Sin

We live in an age that prides itself on being “tolerant.” It is an age that will abide almost anything, except a man of convictions. It is an age that promotes license in the name of liberty. In this age Christians are often unwilling to state even plain gospel truths. I can think of a few evangelical preachers who when interviewed by unbelievers and asked if a non-Christian can go to heaven replied with words to the effect, that they didn’t think so, or that the person had no guarantee. I should also state that of those ministers at least one apologized to his evangelical brothers afterwards, but we can only hope that he sought forgiveness from the One whose doctrine he was ashamed of.
In bygone eras it was spoken against the doctrine of justification by faith that it pardons wicked people. In this age, we would rather God not be allowed to damn the wicked, but should pardon everyone freely and at no cost. This in spite of the contrast of their own behavior who are only too willing to at least professedly curse their fellow men for the most paltry of reasons, such as minor traffic violations, and any little thing that causes them inconvenience. Any inconvenience or even unintentional thwarting of our desires earns our avowed anger, but we will not allow the One who sits in heaven and who by right of creation has right of ownership any anger at our repeated and willful attempts to thwart Him. The funny thing about the world is that while in every age its objection might be different, its opposition will remain the same. The truth of God’s Word will prevail eventually. In eternity we will learn exactly how God’s ways were higher than our ways and His thoughts than ours. Until then we can always rest in knowing He will do right.
One of the reasons for the difficulty we can have in understanding why God would condemn an unbeliever, especially one who has not heard the gospel is because we lack an understanding of original sin. This results in our looking only at sinful actions and not dealing with the source of all those actions. Even as Christians we become angry with people because of their sins, but don’t realize that they sin because they are sinners and can do no better without a Saviour.
Unless we understand the depth of our sinfulness, we can never understand the depth of our salvation. Jesus said that unless a man is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God, and then shows Himself to be referring to a spiritual birth (John 3:3-6). Paul wrote that if any man is in Christ he is a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17). Why is it necessary for us to be born again and by that birth to become a new creation? It is necessary because we are born with Adam’s sinful nature.
About a year ago I was doing some studying in Romans 5 and was wondering how God could in justice condemn men before the men had actually sinned. Yet we know that they were under the penalty because they all died, even those who did not sin against a specific divine precept as Adam did. I was somewhat unsettled by this thought, because I know God is just and yet I failed to see how one who has not actually committed a sin could be judged guilty, and yet clearly since death had power over them they were. How could God in justice hold us guilty for Adam’s fall? Then after some prayer it dawned on me, it had to do with natures.
Take a male Siamese fighting fish for example, let’s say that this particular one was a young one that had never shown any previous aggressive behavior, now let’s take another innocent male Siamese fighting fish and put him in the tank so they can become friends. What will happen, they will kill each other. Why? That is their nature. The fact that neither one has killed in the past does not change the fact that as Siamese fighting fish they will fight given the opportunity to do so. So in fact, many people who own Siamese fighting fish and own more than one keep them in separate tanks, even if the fish have never been in a fish fight before, because they know that if they were placed in the same tank they would fight. It would not be wrong to say that the behavior of the original Siamese fighting fish is imputed to his descendants. It is justly imputed, because as anyone who has one knows, the innocence would end the moment opportunity came. Likewise people do not place a young kitten in a canary cage with a canary inside, because even if the kitten has never before killed a canary it still has the canary-killing nature.
In the same way God justly imputes Adam’s sin to us, not because we have actually eaten forbidden fruit, but because being given that command we would also act the same way. Thus because Adam was worthy of death and we would do the same given the opportunity we are treated as worthy of death even before we have actually added our own transgression to the original one. It is this sin nature that keeps us out of heaven, because were we to go there as we are born, we would import discord, disunity and war there. God’s will would be done no better in heaven by unconverted men than it is done on earth by them. Some people think they can attain heaven by doing various good works and outward ceremonies, but that never deals with the root issue which is the sin nature. That is why Paul wrote, “For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation” (Gal. 6:15). Only a new man can go to heaven, one with the nature of the second Adam. However when we are born we are born with the old Adam’s nature so how can we go to heaven?

The good news is that when we believe on Christ and in his death and resurrection the righteousness of Christ is imputed unto us, even as Adam’s sin was. Since Christ is a new creature we are viewed as having potential for the boundless goodness found in the Original. Adam’s sin ruined himself and resulted in countless sins of others following him, Christ’s righteousness not only overcame the guilt of Adam’s and all following multitudinous transgressions, but also opened up a way for multitudes of other righteous acts. Since we all have born the image of the earthly man, we also in Christ will bear the image of the heavenly. This is also why Peter tells us that we can be partakers of the divine nature in 2 Peter 1:4, because we are joined to Christ and from Him flows His good nature into us causing us to do through Him what we could never do in ourselves. Truly the free gift is far greater than the offense! Amen.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 7 – A Few Personal Experiences As Well As Some of Others

In this post I will relate some experiences that I have personally had as well as a few others related to me by those who witnesses of them.

Before writing this post I should mention that I by no means speak for all or even a few Pentecostals in this writing. A man's perspective and view of the world and his experiences are all personal. They may be generally shared with others, but yet are also as individual as a snowflake. I write this as a person who is inclined when his contemplation of a wrong action or unkind thought towards brothers or sisters in Christ is interrupted by stubbing his toe to thank God for the interruption. I view it as a mercy, if it happened more often I would have sorer feet but a better walk. Thus compared to many brethren I know I am a little peculiar. I think some of my somewhat peculiar world view may have to do with my ancestry, particularly the Kentucky Irish/Native American received from my mother. All I know for certain is that I firmly believe that the spiritual world is not only real, but more real than the tangible.

One example of what I mean comes from two visits I made to Rwanda. The first visit was last year and though I had heard of the genocide there I did not really know much about it. This journey was taken with my cousin who is also a missionary though in another country. The pastor we were visiting had wanted to take us to the genocide memorial, but the day we scheduled to do it was a public holiday and it was closed. The one night though I had a vivid dream in my hotel room there. In my dream I was a black man and I was running and trying to hide from men in the genocide. Waking up from this I panicked at seeing the mosquito net lying over me and gave it as stout a kick as possible, waking up, and probably scaring my cousin who was sharing the hotel room. He knew I had had a nightmare, but I wasn't able to talk much about it. The dream came before I had heard much about the genocide, but because of the dream I had more of an understanding of the trauma it inflicted in the country. This year I went on a second visit to Rwanda and went to the genocide memorial. Frankly I was a little scared because having a good memory, there are some things I'd rather not plant in my head. Still I felt I should go, if for no other reason than to know some of the burden carried by the church in that nation and the obstacles they face. The odd thing was, that though the photos and things shown were all disturbing, it didn't really drive home the awfulness of what had happened there. For me that happened when we went to the mass graves just outside the memorial. When I was there, I could sense death and the whole indescribable sadness of what had happened. For me while a picture may be worth a thousand words, an impression upon the soul is even more talkative. Of course with so many people buried there, many unsaved with their iniquity lying on their bones (Ezek. 32:27), I would be more surprised if I felt nothing at all.

If anything I write seems a little odd, eccentric or even foolish I only beg the prayer of the reader that I might by God's grace be found in the end to be a harmless eccentric fool. There are few experiences I have had which encourage me not to totally shrug off my feelings.

1. Some Examples of Spiritual Sense
   

   In one case when I was in Singapore for a 6 month stay, I had one night where my sleep was really badly disturbed my nightmares and I had a real sense that something bad was going on in the spirit. That morning I awoke to see that the night had inaugurated Hungry Ghost Festival, something I had never heard of, but consisting of basically a one month long Halloween where joss sticks are burned under most trees, paper effigies of gifts being burned and offerings of fruit all for people's departed relatives. Since I had no idea of any of this yet felt something was going on it confirmed me in trusting my spiritual sense.
   

   The second case I will mention was a prayer meeting I was invited to attend at a certain place. It was a spur of the moment thing on my part, and I had no idea of anything except that it was an interdenominational prayer meeting. When the praying began, two ministers began by opening in prayer. The first man brought an immediate sense of the presence of God to my spirit and I knew he was a man of God and was heard of God. The second man also prayed and I felt a sense that it was all show for him. Without saying anything to anyone, one of my friends who was there told me who men were a little later. The first man was a man whom I had never met but was well respected among the churches of that area, confirming what I had felt. The second man was a pastor that had taken to performing card tricks (literally) and other antics in the pulpit to bring people into his church so he could preach to them. I do not usually consider, or even want to consider someone's spiritual state when they pray, but in this case without my having any possible prejudice one way or another, not knowing who these men were, my spirit bore witness with what the known facts of their lives also spoke.
   

2. One Example of Someone Speaking a Known Human Language While Speaking in Tongues
   

   I currently assist my parents in a work which they pioneered in Malawi, one of the main parts of which is a Bible School. For a few years I was absent from the work here, serving on other fields. During this time there was a student who when he received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and began to speak in tongues spoke the praises of God in Shona. Shona is a language spoken in Zimbabwe, but not in Malawi. Of the class at that time of 20-30 students only one actually knew Shona and he informed the leadership that the man was praising God in Shona. There is no reason to believe that we are aware of that the man speaking in tongues had ever heard or learned Shona. I was informed of this incident by my parents and their testimony was corroborated by Rev. Mario Manyozo who acts as interpreter in the Bible School.
   

   
    

3. An Example of a Word of Knowledge
   

   In one case while we were praying for a certain pastor in the Bible school, my mother received a vision of a women hiding something. She asked him if that meant anything to him, and he said that it did not. Mom still felt it strongly and asked him if he was sure. He denied it again, but then as we were about to begin to pray for someone else he came forward and confessed that his wife was practicing witchcraft, she had been doing it openly, and then had stopped for a while before starting again but secretly. This is one incident I witnessed, but I know of another similar one. In our early days at the Bible school we had many pastors and elders from rural areas who were involved in witchcraft come to the Bible School. Some were delivered, some decided to remain in it. The Bible school has been going for 8 years now, and we see less of these sort of problems now.
   

   
    

4. The Reality of the Enemy
   

   There are many times I have experienced spiritual attacks during my life. Two are worth noting here.
   

   
    

   When I was 16 years old and living in South Africa, I began to pray for the neighborhood I lived in and took regular walks while quietly praying. After I had been doing this for a short time, one night I was awoken by a very heavy knee pressing down right on my solar plexus. It was heavy enough I could not breathe. I could not see anyone, but I felt the evil presence. I managed to gasp out, "Jesus, help." Immediately, the weight removed, but the evil presence was still in the room. I continued to pray and after a while it left.
   

   
    

   Another time on a trip out to a village in Malawi for ministry, me, my brother Justin, and my then-friend-now-brother-in-law were sharing a sleeping quarters. They were both soundly sawing logs, but every time I would shut my eyes, I would see a picture in my mind of a face leering at me or later a cobra rearing up. Feeling my fair share of self-pity since the others were apparently undisturbed I prayed through. It was more than an hour before I could sleep though I don't know how much longer. There was still some opposition in the service the next morning but we felt something got through. Later I found out part of the problem, this church was the one where the pastor's wife was practicing witchcraft. After this time she stopped, until later when she went back to it secretly as previously mentioned.
   

   
    

5. Experience Involving a Young Man with a Tatoo
   

   When I was in South Africa there was a young man I knew who had known the Lord but then had walked away. During this time he had gotten a few tattoos. When he got them they told him that they were African tribal symbols. After a time he came back to the Lord, and a few weeks after that he told us that the one night he woke up and he felt a burning where the tattoos were, and when he looked they had faded, not completely gone, but they were much less visible than before. We encouraged him to keep on praying that they would be totally removed, but unfortunately he later went back into the world. I firmly believe that had he continued following God the tattoos would have totally disappeared.
   

   
    

   While on this subject I should just mention not only are tattoos forbidden by Lev. 19:28, but if you study the origins of it is often linked with spiritism, the designs being put on in accordance with a vision given to a shaman, or to the one receiving the mark. Also included in this would be ritual scarring like the Sioux did in their sundance and is done in a multitude of different ways in other religions as well. A mark is a symbol of ownership. Having a mark on your person that is a symbol of another spirit gives that spirit the right to you. That is the main reason pagan societies used tattoos, warpaint, etc… Indeed, among some tribes such as the Sioux warriors specifically saught a spirit guide in a trance prior to putting on warpaint. The paint dictated by the spirit enabled that spirit to enter and energize them. Similar practices were found among the Picts and among Viking berserkers. With berserkers they were known to become so enraged they bit shields and other hard objects, and after snapping out of it had long fits of depression, a clear sign of the demonic possession and bondage involved in the whole thing.
   

   
    

6. An Experience Showing that God's Word Speaks to Every Situation
   

   Once when I was in Bible School I was reading a book on Bible Archaeology, this particular one was by a skeptical man who tried to cast a lot of doubt on what the Bible said concerning certain events. As I was reading this it was as if a mental band came over my mind making it hard to reason against. I was very disturbed, put the book down, but still felt this band pressing in on my mind. Later that day as I was praying and reading Scripture, I came across Psalm 101:3, "I will not set before my eyes anything that is worthless. I hate the work of those who fall away; it shall not cling to me." Realizing that this was precisely applicable to my case, I repeated it several times out loud, especially the last part. The band broke. I have had similar experiences since. It is very important what we read and watch, especially if it is something made by one who has backslidden and forsaken God it can cleave to us and produce unbelief in us.
   

   
    

Those are some experiences I have had and seen. They will prove nothing to anyone who does not desire to see, but with a clean conscience I cannot pretend I don't feel things I feel or see things I see. Also if I am making a decision and weighing evidence and looking at Scripture to determine a course of action, I must consider all evidence I have before me, unless wish to make an ill-informed decision.

I should add in closing that sometimes we can be confused by things that happen to us, but if we cast ourselves on Christ He will show us the way out. Often we will realize that there are Scriptures applicable to our situation even if the situation is odd in itself. This is as it should be, if spiritual things are real , and the Bible is a spiritual book, we should expect it to have answers in any spiritual experience we encounter. Some must be rejected, as the Bible has a long list of abominable spiritual practices – necromancy, etc... Christ will give us victory over the enemy and can also impart understanding of our situations as we trust in Him. Praise God!

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 6 – Revelation and in What Sense

In this post I would like to show why some degree of revelation must continue, even if the canon of Scripture is closed and we know it is. Previously I already gave my reasons why I believe the "perfect" of 1 Cor. 13 refers to the second coming as the general agreement of the Christian Church has always been, not the canon of Scripture. Suffice it to say now, that unless I now know as I am known, perfection has not yet come. We still see through a glass dimly, and that no cessationist can argue. Some cessationists allow for some measure of God speaking even today, but my post will be directed towards those who deny any direct revelation of any sort, a semi-deism if you will.

Let me first state that it is impossible to deny all direct revelation consistently and be a born again Christian. Thus we know that many of these cessationists do not actually believe what they say they do. Why do I say this? Because the new birth experience is not only a creation of a new man within us made in the image of God, but is also accompanied by a revelation that we have been born of God, and a realization that Jesus is exactly as He claimed in Scripture – the Son Of God who died and has risen and who will return. What is The Spirit Bearing witness to our spirit, but a revelation that we have experienced the new birth as the Bible tells of it?

Further Christ specifically told his disciples that He would not leave them as orphans (John 14:18). If we are left with the law, but yet without presence of the Spirit within to instruct and remind us in the situations we face and instead must rely totally on our own understanding of it as imparted by elder brothers in the Lord, are we not much like a child-headed orphan family? A father not only chastens and corrects, and lays down a law, but he also listens and talks to His children, shows them how to do what He commands and when they are unable, assists them. Is our Heavenly Father less likely to do this than a sinful by nature earthly father?

Also Christ made a promise to manifest Himself to those who love Him and keep His commandments (John 14:21). By definition any manifestation is revelatory, and any revelation is a manifestation of what was previously obscure.

Now this is the point that should be made clear when I mention revelation. Notice that these examples are not revelations of new doctrines to be propounded but rather are an enlightening of the understanding of an already given Scriptural doctrine. Christ is Saviour already, but He is revealed to us as Saviour when we are born again. Thus these revelations are confirmations of Scripture by experience, and they cannot cease or Scripture would be of no effect.

It has been argued that the main purpose of the gift of prophecy was that what was prophesied could be added to Scripture and once Scripture was written there was no further need. Anyone who thinks thus has no idea of Biblical prophecy at all. There were many non-writing prophets in the Old Testament, compare the use of the term sons of the prophets, and also note how though Jonah's prediction of prosperity for Jereboam II was fulfilled the actual words are not given (2 Kings 14:25). These prophecies were important for those hearing them, but they were not included for the instruction of all times to come as the Scripture was. Also consider Corinth, Phillip's daughters and the other New Testament prophets, if the purpose of their ministry was to add to the canon and yet there is little evidence of any of the perhaps thousands of prophecies given being added to the canon were the gifts not complete, consummate and catastrophic failures? Thankfully, that is not what the New Testament says of prophecy. Prophecy is for edification, exhortation, and comfort (1 Cor. 14:3). It establishes a person in the path that God has ordained for his life. Timothy had received a prophecy and also a gift when the elders had laid hands on him (1 Tim. 4:14). We do not know what the gift was, but we do not need to know, Timothy knew and was the one that needed to use what was imparted and required a reminder to do so from Paul. Thus some prophecies are for specific situations either personal, congregational, or even national. They were intended to guide the receivers in their actions, and were never intended to be received into the canon of Scripture. Thus the whole argument for cessation of gifts due to the closure of the canon is, frankly, irrelevant.

In closing this post I would also add that I fail to see how it would be possible to believe in no direct revelation at all and yet to sing some of the hymns in any non-sophistical sense. Hymns such as "He lives" and "This is my Father's World" are examples.

In my next an final post, I intend to mention a few personal experiences I have had and also discuss a little on miracles and experiences in general.

 

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 5 – Evidence for Continuance

In this post I would like to look at some evidence for the continuance of the gifts of the Spirit. I would like to look at Scriptural evidence first and then proceed to historical.

The first passage I would like to quote in defense of the continuance of the gifts is a much contested one. That is Mark 16:17-18. This whole portion of Mark from verses 9-20 is questioned, because not only does it not occur in some manuscripts, but some have a shorter ending in its place and some have both endings showing that the copyist knew of both and unable to decide put both in. Clearly there was a papyrus roll of Mark floating around with no ending at all at some point which lead to problems for scribes. One Armenian manuscript ascribes these verses to Ariston, possibly Aristion the disciple of John. There is no way at this point in time to conclusively prove or disprove Mark's authorship. However, I submit this:

1. They are dated by almost all to at latest 100 AD and so fall within Apostolic times
   
2. We accept John 21:24-25, Numbers 12:3, and a few other verses believed to have been added shortly after the writer wrote the book to also be inspired. If this passage was not written by Mark, but was penned by someone like Aristion, or another one who had heard this portion of Christ's words from an apostle than there is no reason to reject it.
   
3. If it is the Word of God it will stand whether we reject it or not. The children of Israel's unbelief did not make God's promise of no avail but it did keep them out of the land. The disbelief of any portion of God's Word will not damage it, but it will shut us out from the promises and comfort contained in it.
   

With that in mind here is Mark 9:17-18:

And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.

 

May I suggest that if it were not for what this portion of Scripture teaches it would have been much more readily accepted. Now I inquire do these signs really follow those that believe? For those that believe it, they do. In the instance of laying hands on the sick and their recovery there are scores of men throughout church history who saw this. I will mention a few examples of this and other miraculous manifestations later.

 

Looking at a few more passages, we come to Peter on the day of Pentecost.

 

And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself." (Acts 2:38-39). The promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit is for all who are called of God. This is the promise of the Father Christ told the apostles to wait for that was manifested by their speaking in tongues.

 

As we already saw in our post on 1 Cor. 14, Paul desired all the believers to speak in tongues, but even more he desired them to also enter into prophecy (1 Cor. 14:5). He also wrote to the Thessalonians to not despise prophecies, but to test all things and hold fast to the good (1 Thess. 5:20-21).

 

Reading these verses alone you would find no hint that the gifts of the Spirit were ever to cease. The only passage of Scripture which alludes at all to the cessation of prophecy and other gifts is 1 Cor. 13:8-13.

 

Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

 

The bone of contention in this passage lies with what the perfect is in this passage – the canon of Scripture or Christ's return in glory. Applying this portion Scripture to the canon of Scripture is probably one of the sorriest pieces of eisegesis done in modern times. It is equivalent to doing to this text what God threatened to do to Jerusalem in 2 Kings 21:13 – wiping it clean and turning it upside down! Why do I say this?

 

1. Do we now see Him face to face? If we do not then we are still in partial knowledge not full.
   
2. Do we know as we are known now? Then we are not yet in the time of cessation.
   

 

That these verses were understood of the second coming of Christ and not the canon of Scripture until comparatively recently is clear from even a cursory glance at the writings of those who have gone before from a wide spectrum of believers. Gill, Wesley, Clarke and Barnes all refer this to the saints in heaven and second coming not the canon. Going back to the earliest possible commentary on this passage we come to a lost work by an anti-montanistic write quoted by Eusebius, the Church historian:

 

And again after a little he says: "For if after Quadratus and Ammia in Philadelphia, as they assert, the women with Montanus received the prophetic gift, let them show who among them received it from Montanus and the women. For the apostle thought it necessary that the prophetic gift should continue in all the Church until the final coming. But they cannot show it, though this is the fourteenth year since the death of Maximilla."

 

The editor of the translation of the fathers I took this from (Philip Schaff) confesses ignorance as to what passage this writer refers to, but notes that the term "the apostle" without a name following referred to Paul in the early church. Clearly though this writer interpreted the perfect of 1 Corinthians 13 as referring to the second coming and argued in essence that since the Montanists had lost the gift they were not the true Church. It should be noted while we are on the subject of the Montanists, who are often claimed as the forerunners of Pentecostals by our opponents, that the Montanists were not condemned for prophesying, but for their manner of doing it. They gave their prophecies often in ecstacy, involuntarily, under compulsion. The Church condemned this because as Paul had written, "the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets" (1 Cor. 14:32). The Church at this time had some prophets of its own and clearly believed that there would be some in it until Christ returned.

 

Having thus shown I from Scripture why I believe the gifts should continue, I would like to look at a few examples of some of the gifts in history. Before I do this I should mention a little concerning how I evaluate miracles that I read of in history. There are many tales of miracles in some of these early works, some of which are, frankly, incredible and absurd. Miracles if done by the Spirit of God must be governed by Scripture. This is as true for ones done a thousand years ago as for ones done today. So here are my criteria for evaluating miracles.

 

1. Since the Comforter does not bear witness to Himself or to the one working the miracle, but rather to Christ any genuine miracle should do so. Peter and Paul both refused any honor for the miracles they worked and pointed to Christ (Acts 4:10; Acts 14:8-18). Any miracle done in the name of a saint or another god, is a lying wonder. Also if the result of the person's miracles tend to produce a cultish following of him rather than of Christ which he does nothing to correct then the source should be questioned.
   

   
    

2. The manifestation of the Spirit is given to everyman for his profit. The miracles recorded should be done for a specific good reason. Healings may glorify Christ and vindicate the Gospel, but that is not the primary purpose. The purpose of a healing is seeing one afflicted by disease recover. This is why the gifts flow from love. Many of Christ's miracles were wrought specifically out of compassion. On the other hand He steadfastly refused to work miracles as a proof of His ministry. His miracles validated His ministry, but that was not the primary purpose. True miracles should always be worked for the good of the recipient. Flashy, showy manifestations that do little good to anyone, but draw attention to the one doing them are not of God.
   

   
    

3. Does it seem plausible or is it a fabulous and absurd miracle which is likely legendary? This one is subjective and thus the least reliable of my criteria. I do try as reading various accounts of men to discern if the said miracle is plausible on many I doubt it and on many others I merely cannot state with any confidence one way or the other.
   

   
    

I will try in this following section to state a few that I believe meet both my criteria and which I also consider plausible. Of course if someone is convinced that miracles have ceased, they will not find them very plausible, but I leave it up to the reader to weigh each case I give himself.

 

Examples of Prophecy

 

I quote my first from the Life of St. Columban written by the monk Jonas in the 7^th Century.

 

In the meantime the compact of peace which Theuderich and Theudebert had made was broken, and each one, priding himself on the strength of his followers, endeavored to kill the other. Then Columban went to king Theudebert and demanded that he should resign his kingdom and enter a monastery, in order not to lose both earthly crown and everlasting life. The king and his companions laughed; they had never heard of a Merovingian on the throne, who had voluntarily given up everything and become a monk. But Columban said, if the king was not willing voluntarily to undertake the honor of the priestly office, he would soon be compelled to do it against his will. After these words the holy man returned to his cell ; but his prophecy was soon verified by events. Theuderich immediately advanced against Theudebert, defeated him near Zülpich, and pursued him with a great army. Theudebert gathered new forces and a second battle was fought near Zülpich. Many fell on both sides, but Theudebert was finally defeated and fled.

At that time the man of God was staying in the wilderness, having only one attendant, Chagnoald. At the hour when the battle near Zülpich began, Columban was sitting on the trunk of a rotten oak, reading a book. Suddenly he was overcome by sleep and saw what was taking place between the two kings. Soon after be aroused, and calling his attendant, told him of the bloody battle, grieving at the loss of so much human blood. His attendant said with rash presumption: "My father, aid Theudebert with your prayers, so that he may defeat the common enemy, Theuderich." Columban answered: "Your advice is foolish and irreligious, for God, who commanded us to pray for our enemies has not so willed.. The just Judge has already determined what He wills concerning them." The attendant afterwards enquired and found that the battle had, taken place on that day and at that hour, just as the man of God had revealed to him.

Theuderich pursued Theudebert, and the latter was captured by the treachery of his followers-and sent to his grandmother, Brunhilda. She, in her fury, because she was on Theuderich's side, shut him up in a monastery, but after a few days she mercilessly had him murdered.

I leave the plausibility of this to the reader, but just to help those who are unfamiliar with the events I will state that politically and personally Columban was far more disposed to the king killed than the victor. There is more in the life relating to Columban's prophetic ministry but I leave only this sample. Notice that he is not presented in this tale as one who can change what God has ordained should he wish it, but only as a messenger of what God has already decreed, that is a large part of the prophetic ministry. Sometimes they can intercede, but at other times the decree has already been set.

Next I would like to consider the case of Savonarola. He is a fairly controversial figure who clearly had his faults. He prophesied repeatedly that he had seen judgment coming upon Italy and Rome. After Florence tired of him they had him executed in 1498. In the next 30 or so years following took place the Italian wars, including the sacking of Rome in 1527. This particular sacking is viewed by historians as a far worse one then Rome had seen even by the Vandals and Goths. The whole of Italy was thrown into turmoil during this period. Micah's prophecy that Jerusalem would be like a plowed field, was not fulfilled far later than 30 years after it was given, so the time frame can hardly be used to discredit Savonarola.

Last in my sample, which is by no means exhaustive, is mentioned in George Fox's auto biography concerning the fire of London:

The people of London were forewarned of this fire; yet few laid to heart, or believed it; but rather grew more wicked, and higher in pride. For a Friend was moved to come out of Huntingdonshire a little before the fire, to scatter his money, and turn his horse loose on the streets, to untie the knees of his trousers, let his stockings fall down, and to unbutton his doublet, and tell the people that so should they run up and down, scattering their money and their goods, half undressed, like mad people, as he was sign to them; and so they did, when the city was burning.

 

Examples of Healings

 

Without going into too many details as my post is getting fairly long now a few men who were noted for laying hands on the sick and seeing them recover were. St. Anskar (also spelled Ansgar), and St. Bernard (very interesting in that he mentions his own miracles as apparently provoking amazement in himself as well as on lookers) are two candidates for the continuance of healing.

 

Examples of Speaking in Tongues

 

There are several possible references to speaking in tongues in the lives of various men of God, but usually they are vague enough that it is hard to state with certainty. John Calvin wrote to Beza concerning his having awoken and found himself speaking in a barbarous language. Charles Finney had an experience in which he felt infilled the Holy Spirit and bellowed unutterable gushings from his soul. Both of these could easily refer to tongues though proof is another matter.

 

Time and space constraints limit me somewhat in this work on miracles in history. Let me merely add for those willing to do more searching, Charles Spurgeon several times manifested what Pentecostals would call words of knowledge in his pulpit ministry. Speaking in tongues and prophecy were sometimes reported among early Methodists, Quakers, Anabaptists and others.

 

I intend to write another post soon on why every Christian must logically believe in some measure of divine revelation to an individual, but I'll close this post with a quote from my namesake who was executed as an Anabaptist heretic at Graz in 1534, as his confession of faith he gave the Apostle's Creed with this addition, "We believe also, that there is a Christian church, in which the Holy Spirit has His work." To which I say, "Amen."

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 4 – A look at 1 Corinthians 14

One passage that is of importance in understanding the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the use of tongues is 1 Corinthians 14. I would like to devote this post to a study of this chapter and explain, at least I hope so, the difference between speaking in tongues in delivering a message to the Church which requires interpretation, and praying in tongues which does not.

Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up (v. 1-5).

Paul starts out first continuing from the previous chapter which emphasized love without which everything we do or say is worthless. He never gives an either or proposition for character and gifts, but instead affirms both. Pursue love and also desire the gifts. He then goes to show why prophecy is superior to tongues. Tongues are spoken to God who understands them, and edify the speaker, but not the hearers. Prophecy edifies, encourages and consoles the church. The gift of prophecy is not really involved in foretelling future events, that belongs to the Ministerial office of prophet that Christ sets in His Church. Paul never wrote that all should desire to be prophets but that all should desire to prophesy. In practice in the Pentecostal churches I have been in, prophecies are usually quoted scripture, sometimes with an application, not given with anyone in mind but addressed to the congregation in general. As such it fulfills the conditions edification, encouragement, and consolation. Often it has often spoken to me personally concerning things I was considering and had mentioned to no one. In order for a message in tongues to have a similar effect it must be interpreted.

Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church (v. 6-13).

Paul continues to explain why interpretation is necessary, and again encourages that gifts be used to edify the Church, not show off or used in a way to the detriment thereof.

Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also. Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say "Amen" to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue (v. 14-19).

One accusation often brought against Pentecostals is that our tongues are not Biblical because we do not pray to interpret them. Our distinction between the prayer tongue which is received initially as a evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and the gift of tongues is then held to be a fiction to justify our error. Let’s look at this section closely then shall we? We are enjoined to pray for interpretation if we speak in a tongue with the thought again of considering others as the reason. Then Paul says that he excels them all in speaking in tongues, but would rather speak in the vernacular in Church. Consider this closely:

1. The apostle Paul spoke much in tongues
2. Assuming he followed his own counsel here, he didn’t do most of that in church
3. that leads me to believe that he did it in prayer to God privately
4. Since he previously stated that the one praying in tongues edifies himself and speaks mysteries to God, is he required by this passage to interpret what he prays to God? No, because the interpretation was for the sake of the others.

This is what we refer to as our prayer language, and it doesn’t usually require interpretation. Occasionally we may pray for interpretation that we might understand what we are praying, but whatever we pray we know it is the mind of the Spirit, who can readily say that when they pray in the vernacular? There is a difference between the gift of tongues, which is like a prophecy in a foreign language and requires interpretation, and the speaking in tongues Paul was doing before God. I would also say to our critics, what is your response when you here tongues, since you require all tongues to receive interpretation? Do you pray that you might interpret? Would to God you did, more likely you would silence them, but where is that found in Scripture?

Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. In the Law it is written, "By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord." Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds? But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you. What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. (v. 20-28).

Paul writes more concerning the rationale in preferring prophecy to tongues. In the last verse in allowing the people to speak to themselves and to God I see an allowance for softly speak prayers in vernacular and tongues while waiting on God for a word or interpretation.

Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,(v.29-33).

This passage does not limit the number of prophecies in a meeting because he specifically writes all may prophesy one by one. He is basically telling them not to cut each other off by trying to all prophesy at the same time, and reminds them that the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. Meaning that it is possible to restrain and channel the unction given. Personally, I have at times felt a word quickened, but had to hold back until the service was quieter and it could be heard. Gifts must be exercised in such a way as to best edify the Church.

the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized. (v. 34-38)

The context of this command to women is referring to asking questions of their husbands, and as will be remembered in eastern churches they likely sat separately which would create much confusion. It does not refer to being silent from prayer or prophecy, because Paul gives instructions concerning how women should pray and prophesy in Chapter 11:5. We also see from Acts that Philip’s daughters prophesied (Acts 21:9). I leave it to the judgment of the reader where they did this and which was more befitting of modesty to operate their gifts in the gatherings of the faithful, or in markets and byways of the world.

So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But all things should be done decently and in order. (v.39-40).

Again he exhorts them to desire prophecy. Cessationists violate both parts of this verse, because the both do not desire to prophesy and forbid to speak in tongues. He concludes by telling them in surmise that all things should be done decently and in order. Note there are two parts to this, all things should be DONE, these gifts should be used. How? They should be used decently and in order. May it be so. I intend to continue this series by next looking at why I believe the gifts have not ceased both doctrinally and historically.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 3 – Some Misconceptions of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit

In this post I would like to look at some misconceptions of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

1. Unless someone speaks in tongues they are not saved
   

This is a very fringe position of a few Pentecostals. I would say roughly percentage wise it is equivalent to the percentage of hyper-Calvinists that believe that God is the author of sin. It is clear from Scripture that the disciples had already received the Holy Spirit (John 20:22) before the day of Pentecost. On the day of Pentecost Peter told those who asked what they were to do that after repenting and being baptized they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Since Jesus speaking in John 14 specifically stated that the world cannot receive the Comforter, thus this baptism can only come on those already converted. It can come on those newly converted as it did upon Cornelius and those with him, and in that case it was done specifically to show that he had been converted as Peter knew the Comforter cannot be received by the world, thus he had no grounds for refusing baptism. At Ephesus, it appears that the former disciples of John received salvation, baptism in water and the baptism of the Holy Spirit on the same day in quick succession, but Paul had started by asking them if they had received the Holy Spirit since they believed clearly referring to the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. In Samaria under Philip's ministry many believed and were baptized, but only after Peter and John came and laid hands on them did they receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, so clearly someone can be saved without speaking in tongues. However it is also clear from Paul's first question to those at Ephesus, the response in Jerusalem to the revival in Samaria, and Christ's command to tarry in Jerusalem until they received the promise the need of the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the life of believers.

1. Speaking in tongues is a sign of holiness
   

It is a common misconception that the gifts of God are a sign of holiness. This is not the case. In the Galatian church they had serious errors and were in danger of slipping into damnable heresy, yet Paul pointed to examples of miracles being worked among them and showed that the miracles flowed from faith, not the works of the law (Gal. 3:5). The Corinthians excelled in gifts and used them to show off but were hardly holy. Peter was reproved by Paul for his conduct long after he had begun to flow in the gifts of the Spirit. Working miracles in the Name of Jesus is not even proof of our ultimate salvation, let alone a superior holiness (Mat. 7:21-23). In the Old Testament the offering on the day of Pentecost that was offered to the Lord was singular in that it was the only offering which contained leaven (Lev. 23:16-17). In type then there can be a lot of sin still in someone who is flowing in the gifts. The children of Israel had miraculous provision for their needs not only at the beginning of their journey, but even for the extra 38 they gained through rebellion. The miracles were signs of God's provision, but not a sign of their holiness. The Lord both receives and gives gifts even to the rebellious that He might dwell among them (Psa. 68:18; Eph. 4:8-10).

Looking at Ezekiel's vision of the river we can see a certain comparison (Ezek. 47). At each point in the vision the waters are measured and then we are told the depth as he wades further into the river. The measure is always a thousand which could point to a certain fixed stage of Christian walk. The first one is ankle deep, which speaks of salvation, prior to that we never knew there was a river, but now we feel it's refreshing on our feet and enjoy it. The next could be compared to water baptism, we follow Christ in obedience into the waters of Baptism and it begins to affect our way of walking – knee deep. Then we come to waist deep, which I would compare to the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, because once you are waist deep in water you feel the current far more than before. However, and this is the problem, you can still resist it. Many, many Pentecostals feel the moving of the Holy Spirit, but they often would rather do their own thing. The final depth is swimming depth, and when you swim in a river it carries you along the current even as you move. This is a sign of true Christian maturity and one which Christ specifically spoke to Peter, "Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go" (John 21:18).

It should also be noted that nowhere are the gifts spoken of as bad or a sign of immaturity. The abuse of them was corrected. Every good and perfect gift comes from above, though men can taint them. We do not condemn the gift of marriage because people abuse it, and we should not condemn the gifts of the Spirit either. Paul believed that spiritual gifts established believers (Rom. 1:1). He also encouraged the Corinthians to covet the best ones – the ones that most edified the Church (1 Cor. 12:31; 14:39).

1. I am Spirit-filled but I have never spoken in tongues
   

Sometimes people believe that they are Spirit-filled because they have been used in healing, casting out demons, have an anointing to preach, or some other experience with God. Remember that the Apostles when sent out by Christ preached, cast out devils and performed healings, but they still were told by Christ to wait for the promise of the Father. The immediate effect of the reception of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost was speaking in tongues, though there were many side effects (Acts 2:4). Also this was seen as evidence of reception of the Spirit by Peter in the case of Cornelius (Acts 10:46-47). The men in Ephesus also spoke in tongues and also prophesied, which shows that prophecy can and should flow from us as we flow in the Spirit (Acts 19:6). The key to knowing if we have received the promise is whether or not we have spoken in other tongues.

These are probably the three most common misconceptions of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I intend to carry on in the series with more posts on this topic, looking at some side issues and also if I am able at some doctrinal and historical evidence for the continuation of the gifts.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 2 – the Effects of it

As we look at the effects of the baptism in the Spirit it is perhaps first helpful to understand what the Word "baptize" means. I once read a Baptist archaeologist, whose name I would cite if I could remember it, state that while the Greek "baptizo" means "immerse", it means more than that. The ordinary Greek word for immerse is "bapto," and "baptizo" is a more emphatic form. Having written this he publishes an ancient Greek pickle recipe to demonstrate his point. In the recipe cucumbers were first dipped "bapto" in boiling water, then dipped "baptizo" in vinegar. The difference between mere dipping and baptism was baptism produced a marked change in the thing dipped just as the vinegar changed a cucumber into a pickle. The word was also used to describe the dying of a cloth, or sinking of a ship, or being overwhelmed in general. As this relates to water baptism I think this is apparent. As we choose to follow Christ in the waters of baptism we are buried with Him and begin a new life, we proclaim publicly our following of Him and it has an indelible effect upon us, whether we are true to the profession made there or not. Now in looking at the baptism in the Holy Spirit, we are referring to an immersion into the Spirit of God, like a cup thrown into a lake, where the water is in the cup and the cup is in the water, so we become vessels in the Spirit filled with the Spirit. Baptism in the Spirit must produce a marked change in our lives or it is not a true baptism. What are the effects then?

1. Speaking in other (foreign) tongues
   

Acts 2:1-4, "When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance." Notice here that while the entrance of the Spirit into the room was announced by the wind and fire, but the filling of the individuals was shown by their speaking in other languages as the Spirit enabled them to enunciate clearly (the meaning of utterance). Peter speaking later to the crown who wondered what was going on told them that this was the promise given by Joel. He also added that it was the promise of the Father that Christ had received on His ascension that they were seeing and hearing (v. 33). Further he promised them that they and all who were called of God could enter into this promise if they repented and were baptized (Acts 2:38-39). The tongues that they were hearing were an intimate part of the promise of the Father so much so that they are the initial evidence of this promise.

 

Looking now at Acts 8, we see that Phillip the deacon ministered in Samaria and many responded and were baptized (Acts 8:12). Yet later we see that the apostles in Jerusalem specifically sent Peter and John to Samaria to pray for these converts to receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:14-17). Clearly this does not refer reception of the Spirit at salvation, it must refer to something else, the most obvious conclusion would be that it refers to receiving subsequently the promise of the Father with its intendant sign and this is allowed by many non-pentecostal commentators such as Gill, Barnes, and Clarke. If the early church felt it important enough to send a special mission out to ensure that the new converts were filled with the Spirit, do you not think that it is perhaps important for us as Christians to enter in to this same blessing?

 

In Acts 10, Peter was preaching to the Gentiles, much to his own initial horror, and the Spirit fell on them. They manifested this by speaking in tongues (Acts 10:44-48). This opened the door to the Gentile believers. Peter knowing that the Spirit had fallen on them because of their speaking with tongues could not forbid their baptism. This portion of Scripture shows us that Peter interpreted the speaking in tongues as evidence of being filled with the Spirit. It also presents a large obstacle to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, but that is another issue.

 

Peter then defends his conduct to his Jewish brethren in the next chapter saying, "As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" This again shows that he equated the speaking with tongues with the reception of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

 

In Ephesus Paul met disciples of John the Baptist who he first baptized into Christ and then laid hands on them the received the Holy Spirit and spoke with other tongues and prophesied (Acts 19:1-7). Again we see speaking with other tongues linked with receiving the Holy Spirit.

 

I think it is clear from these Scriptures that we have looked at that this experience is subsequent to salvation. It is also clear from these passages that this experience is separate from water baptism. I also trust that it is clear that the one manifestation that is the distinguishing evidence of this experience is speaking in other tongues, though other effects also follow.

 

1. Boldness
   

Boldness is an effect of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The marked contrast in the Apostles conduct at the time of Christ's crucifixion and the day of Pentecost says volumes about the power of the emboldening Spirit. The religious leaders saw it and realized it came from Christ (Acts 4:13). Furthermore they prayed for more boldness in the face of persecution and were heard.

 

1. Guidance
   

It is interesting to note that after the Spirit fell we never see the use of lots for guidance any more in Scripture, but instead the believers were lead by the Holy Spirit. The Baptism in the Holy Spirit opens us up to receive His voice and prodding in a greater way than we have before.

 

1. Other miraculous gifts
   

The baptism of the Holy Spirit also resulted in a flow of spiritual gifts, such as prophecy, miracles, and healing. Jesus had promised rivers of living water flowing out of believers and the rivers can be various in manifestation, but flow from one source. It should be noted though that it is at least somewhat possible to move in healing and casting out devils without the baptism in the Holy Spirit because all the Apostles and the seventy did (Matt. 10:1;Luke 10:17).

 

These are not the only effects of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, but I think they are a sufficient look at some of the main ones. In my next post I would like to look at some misconceptions of the baptism of the Holy Spirit and with God's help do what I can to clear them up.

 

 

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit – Part 1 – the Promise of it

In this series of posts I would like to look at the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. I want to look at this doctrine fairly comprehensively, starting with this post by looking at the promise of it, when the promise was first given and how God later enlarged on it. Whenever we study a doctrine in the Word of God, we will see that it is first hinted at, then enlarged on, and lastly fulfilled and made openly available. This is true of redemption seen first vaguely in Gen. 3:15 before being enunciated more and more clearly until being seen and fulfilled in Christ. In the same way the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was first promised in the Old Testament, being gradually amplified and enlarged until poured out on the day of Pentecost.

The first seed of the promise is found, at least as far as I see, in Numbers 11. In this passage of Scripture Moses was weary because the people were constantly complaining and asked God for help. God took a measure of the Spirit that was upon Moses and placed it on the elders of Israel, including Eldad and Medad who had neglected to come when summoned. This angered Joshua who wanted to silence them. Moses replied in Verse 29, ""Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the LORD's people were prophets, that the LORD would put his Spirit on them!" Moses shows the heart of God in desiring to place His Spirit upon all of His children, this is the promise in a seed form.

It is also worth noting here that while the Feast of Pentecost was not kept in the wilderness journey, because it was a harvest feast, the law was apparently given on the day of Pentecost as seen from Exodus 19. It was on that day that the mountain shook and the Law was given externally and the people were commanded not to draw near lest they die. On that same day many years later, there was a mighty wind and tongues of fire and many were called to draw near, that the law might be written internally.

Later in time we come to Joel, who having prophesied the removal of the current difficulties Israel was then facing upon the repentance and turning unto God, further promised, "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Even on the male and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit" (Joel 2:28-32). The "afterwards" is one of those little jumps in the prophetical timeline skipping several hundred years, as Peter pointed out at Pentecost. Again the promise was to all from the oldest to the youngest, regardless of sex or rank.

 

The prophet Isaiah begins chapter 28 by pronouncing woes upon Ephraim, specifically their rulers, and continues with a promise of His being in place of the rulers the crown of glory, the spirit of judgment, and the strength of those in battle. Then Isaiah carries on and referring firstly to the Babylonians yet looking beyond them as Paul shows us in 1 Cor. 14:21 says, "For by people of strange lips and with a foreign tongue the LORD will speak to this people, to whom he has said, "This is rest; give rest to the weary; and this is repose"; yet they would not hear" (Isaiah 28:11-12). In this chapter also this speaking in a foreign language is shown in contrast with the exterior law which was precept upon precept and was not heeded.

 

This promise is also alluded to in Jeremiah's promise of the New Covenant where the law be written on the heart and not on stones. A few years later, God speaking through Ezekiel reiterates the same promise, "And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules." The putting of His Spirit within us is the hall mark of the New Covenant. It is true that we all receive the Holy Spirit at salvation, but there is a greater depth of the Spirit than mere salvation spoken of here. We will look at this more in depth in the future.

 

Progressing to the beginning of the New Testament John the Baptist proclaimed Christ as the One who would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Luke 3:16).

 

Jesus in John chapter 7 gave the promise of rivers of living water flowing out from believers speaking specifically of the Spirit who was not yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified (v.37-39). Jesus also encouraged men to ask seek and knock for the Spirit that the Father would give to those who ask (Luke 11:9-13).

 

In the last discourse He had with His disciples before going to the cross, He spoke concerning the coming Comforter. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you" (John 14:12-18). Then a little later He continues, "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." Notice that this portion of Scripture is an expansion of the promise of the New Covenant, with believers receiving the Spirit as indwelling, and teaching us the right way, and reminding us of what Christ has taught.

 

Looking now at the same discourse, but chapter 15, Jesus says, "But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me. And you also will bear witness, because you have been with me from the beginning" (v.26-27). He repeats some of the previous thoughts in John 16, and adds that the Spirit will convict of sin, righteousness, and judgment.

 

Some reading these chapters would refer them to receiving the Holy Spirit at salvation, however, I refer this portion to the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and not to salvation for several reasons. Firstly, Christ says that this will happen after He went to the Father, and the disciples received the Spirit prior to their baptism in the Spirit in John 20:22. Secondly, this reception of the Holy Spirit is specifically tied to the ability to witness which is related to the infilling in Acts 2 (compare Acts 1:8 with John 15:26-27). Also Christ specifically told them to await the promise of the Father after this which implies a previous promise that if not found here and in the continuing discourse is found nowhere at all in Christ's teaching.

 

The coming of this Comforter is important, so important that Jesus commanded the disciples to wait for it in Jerusalem. This is the promise spoken of first by Moses that all God's people would have His Spirit upon them, reiterated and enlarged on by Joel, and foretold as one of Christ's ministries by John. Christ is the Baptizer in the Holy Spirit. It is the Father that sends the Spirit through Christ, who is the Baptizer. So what are the effects of this promise? We will look at that in the next post.