So this little mini-sermon about the Holy Spirit will either prove extremely boring and irrelevant for some, interesting or amusing for others, and quite off base for a third group who is the intended target.
In the Christian world there is often a debate about the role of the Holy Spirit, and whether things like tongues and healing are "for today." Most of this debate will tend to be among conservative Christians who take the Bible literally as God's word. One segment, like Baptists, might shy away from the supernatural and things like tongues, but a great handful of your born again evangelical types hue closely to the idea that everything you read in the book of Acts should be happening today.
The outcome of this usually results in a kind of Christian schism, centered around the role of the Holy Spirit. It manifests itself under the general question of "Are you saved and filled (or baptized) with the Holy Spirit?" That question is usually quickly followed by "And do you speak in tongues?" The assumption is that when you truly accept Jesus as your lord and savior, you become baptized or super stuffed with God's spirit, and the evidence of this (your changed nature not being instant proof) is the speaking out in tongues.
In certain circles and churches, those members or pastors who speak in tongues are considered somehow closer to God, on fire, full of the spirit. Those without tongues to prove the indwelling of the spirit are always considered wanting and not fully formed as a useful tool for God. If you are debating some issue, invariably your view will be dismissed because you are not filled with the spirit and seeing everything with God's eyes. It's Christian dyslexia that you will maintain until tongues appear.
We know from the book of Acts and elsewhere that the Holy Spirit as an entity is important. During one of the few "vengeful God" episodes that can be found in the New Testament, Ananias and Sapphira died on the spot for being deceptive about what they were offering to the church by lying to the Holy Spirit. (Incidentally, these two can be placed at the center of a whole sermon regarding tithing that I won't get into here).
Understanding how the Holy Spirit works at the time of conversion, as evidenced in the Bible, should really serve to bring Christians into a less questioning stance regarding each other, but it involves jettisoning preconceived notions passed down from preacher to congregation to child and back again. Often enough the ones trying to divorce tongues from the authentic Christian equation are merely seeking to practice a Christianity somewhat removed from Biblical practice. At the other end of the perspective, those who speak in tongues often worry that removing tongues as an automatic part of the true conversion experience somehow makes their own activity suspect.
Let's look at some parts of Acts.
In Acts 1:5 we have Jesus telling us that John baptized with water, but that his followers will be baptized with the Holy Spirit in a few days. We can notice two things here. First, that the face of God in front of the world is changing. In the Old Testament it was a fiery God interfacing with man directly and instantly. The New Testament brings God among men in a body in the form of Jesus, where he is seen interacting with those around him. After his death and going forward today, it's God in the form of his Holy Spirit. Unseen, but living within us. The second thing we can note is that water baptism is not enough: God's spirit is necessary.
We travel forward to Pentecost in Acts 2:4 when the Apostles were "filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues." This attracted a crowd of observers who were amazed to hear Galileans speaking in other languages, and some concluded the Apostles were drunk. We won't get into the debate here about whether there are multiple types of tongues (known languages versus God's tongue), but simply note that the Apostles all did speak in tongues as the Spirit guided them. In Acts 2:14 Peter goes on to explain what is happening as something new between God and man.
In Acts 2:37 we see the response to Peter's words. Those listening asked, "Brethren, what shall we do?" after being pierced to the heart. Peter said, "Repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." This is a pretty clear statement about how to be "saved." Note that tongues are not mentioned in the process, and yet the gift of the Spirit is affirmed strongly.
Three thousand souls came to God and were baptized and began living the Christian life, sharing things in common, breaking bread together. Many wonders and signs took place, "through the Apostles".
Thus far we have seen tongues evident among the Apostles, but not native to every experience. In Acts 4:8 we get an interesting contra-point regarding the function of the Holy Spirit. Those who tend to get hung up over people getting baptized or filled with the Spirit on conversion (and with tongues), often fail to note the many places in the Bible where believers are situationally "filled with the spirit". In this verse Peter becomes filled with the spirit before speaking to officials. This is one of the many clear examples that indicate that God's spirit can come more strongly when necessary to help the believer. Conversely, it indicates that the concept of "filled" or "baptized" to completion is a misnomer when it relates to conversion. In essence during conversion you simply get God's spirit, giving him access to your life. How much the Holy Spirit is actually in you is variable, situational, dependent on you and God.
This is an important point, because often the tongues enthusiasts carry a related yet convoluted idea that while everyone surely gets the Holy Spirit, that to be a truly powerful Christian, you must be FILLED. And you will know you are filled when tongues are evident. Actual Biblical evidence indicates otherwise. Christians are not a gas tank that is either filled or empty, filled or faulty, filled or weak, nor did the Apostles walk around "filled" every moment, as we see them getting "refilled".
A good example of "refilling" can be seen in Acts 4:31 after Peter and John get released. It says, "And when they had prayed, the place where they had gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak the word with boldness." We don't see this as a new manifestation of Christians as this group is referred to as "companions" of the two. What we do see here are two things: people being refilled and, no tongues. In Acts 7:55 we see Stephen filled with the Spirit and gazing into heaven.
Chapter Eight introduces us to Saul, a hunter of Christians, and an anonymous Ethiopian official. But first we see Peter and John popping into Samaria. They, Samarians, had received the word of God, but not the Holy Spirit. The believers there were baptized in water. Clearly, they had not received the full message about the necessity of the Holy Spirit. Peter and John prayed for them, they received the Spirit (no mention of tongues) and all was good. We also note the general flaw in Philip's ministry, who basically let Simon the magician be his sidekick. That the believers did not receive the Holy Spirit could be reflective of the influence of Simon, who ultimately gets rebuked by Peter.
Let's pause a moment. We see tongues pared with salvation only among the Apostles thus far. Everyone else just receives the Holy Spirit in some quantity. The Holy Spirit is the necessity and the gift to every believer.
We next see Philip being used to bring God's message to an Ethiopian, so apparently his hanging around with Simon didn't do permanent damage to his usefulness for God. (And of course the Bible is full of great men of God making mistakes and doing stupid things, while still being useful to God). Philip preaches Jesus to the Ethiopian Eunuch, baptizes him, and the eunuch goes on his way rejoicing. We might question whether his salvation is complete, for while we see the Holy Spirit snatching Philip away, we don't see explicit reference to the Holy Spirit falling on the Ethiopian. We can cautiously assume the spirit fell (since an angel sent Philip in the first place), while noting, again, no tongues. The greater purpose of this conversion example is to prepare the way for God's message to be opened to the Gentiles. Biblical foreshadowing.
Saul, murderer of disciples, enters the scene in Acts 9, and by Acts 9:17 Saul is a new man. Ananias lays hands on brother Saul, he regains sight, is filled with the Spirit, and gets water baptized. He then has a snack, but no tongues. Interesting that.
We get to the pivotal Chapter 10, which begins the opening of God's message to everyone, gentile and Jew alike. Up until now, and before the Ethiopian conversion, the message was centered among the traditional Jewish population that had the history and relationship with God.
In Acts 10:45:
And all the circumcised belivers who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God."The new believers are then baptized in water. This first outpouring en masse to Gentiles mirrors the events with the Apostles, the first Jews to receive the Holy Spirit. Peter gets some flak (11:2) from his fellow Jews about cavorting with and converting Gentiles, and he explains the new paradigm.
"And as I began to speak the Holy Spirit fell upon them, just as He did upon as at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, and how He used to say, "John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit". If God therefore gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?"(Acts 11:15-17)
This is the second place we will see tongues paired with conversion and it's momentous. In the first instance it was God coming to his chosen people, and signaling this new vision with tongues. In the second it's God coming to the rest of the world, and signaling this new vision with tongues. But in between and individually, and from person to person, each salvation moment is highlighted not by tongues, but by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Both Lydia and the jailer of Paul and Silas in Chapter 16 come to God: no mention of tongues.
Tongues finally returns in Acts 19 when Paul goes to Ephesus. But this event is much like what happened with Philip, where believers had not received the Holy Spirit. The message in Ephesus was the message of John the Baptist and the believers were not aware that something beyon water baptism was needed now. Paul asks them if they received the Holy Spirit and they respond, "Uhm, what Holy Spirit?" (Acts 19:2).
Here we have a major body of believers who never received the full message that went to everyone else. So Paul lays hands on these 12 men, they speak in tongues, and thus the word of God expanded into Asia. (As earlier some Apostles had been told by the Holy Spirit not to head that way).
That pretty much sums it up. Nowhere do you get the impression that tongues is an automatic indicator of authentic Christian conversion. You can wander around other books of the Bible to get greater clarification on the gifts of the spirit and come to the general conclusion that different people get different gifts and can request gifts. But you can't rightly read Acts and then leap to an assumption that every Christian should be speaking in tongues, or that without tongues there is no Holy Spirit inside a person, or filling a person.
And yet Christians will continually dance around the idea that an ongoing manifestation of tongues is indicative of a greater understanding of God's ways, or a closer walk with God. This allows certain Christians to be overwhelmingly and undeservedly confident in their walk with God, and leads others to be highly insecure in the truth of their own conversion. Others of us don't care too much, knowing better, but sit silent when the tongues brigade preaches or pushes assumptive theology not based in scriptural reality. Usually those who use tongues as a barometer of spirituality are far too sure of their rightness to question or do a verse by verse analysis of what they believe.
In the end it's important for Christians to recognize each other, love one another, and work together for God's good. We each are imparted with the Holy Spirit to guide us in this task. We won't always agree to the task at hand either. The Apostles and disciples often disagreed, and chose opposing options, but remained unified in love. And that's the true symbol of real Christianity. They will know us by our love for the world, and for each other, and for Jesus.
No comments:
Post a Comment