In 1 John 4:2b, what does John mean by ἐν σαρκὶ ἐληλυθότα? “In flesh [and blood]” or “among humans/men”? And why is this such an important issue?
Please provide primary source(s) for any historical references.
By the way, my own view is that “John” wrote his letter to correct various misrepresentations of Jesus, such as saying that he was divine or an angel (the message of the antichrists) which he considered idolatry.
σάρξ, σαρκός, ἡ (Hom.+; ‘flesh’). ① the material that covers the bones
of a human or animal body, flesh lit. 1 Cor 15:39abcd; Hv 3, 10, 4; 3,
12, 1. The pl. (which denotes flesh in the mass [Lucian, Dial. Mort.
10, 5], whereas the sing. rather denotes the substance.—Herodas 4, 61;
Gen 40:19; 1 Km 17:44; 4 Km 9:36; PsSol 4:19; TestJob 13:5; Philo;
Jos., Ant. 12, 211; Just., A I, 26, 7; Mel., P. 52, 383; Ath. 34, 2)
Lk 24:39 v.l.; Rv 19:18, 21 (4 [6] Esdr [POxy 1010, 16] cannibalism
out of hunger, sim. Mel., P. 52, 383; Quint. Smyrn. 11, 245: the
σάρκες of the slain are food for the birds) B 10:4; metaph. Rv 17:16.
It decays 1 Cl 25:3; cp. Ac 2:31 (cp. 2a below). Normally gives forth
an evil odor when burned MPol 15:2. W. bones (s. ὀστέον) 1 Cl 6:3 (Gen
2:23); Lk 24:39; Eph 5:30 v.l. (metaph.). Paul speaks of his illness
as a σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί (s. σκόλοψ) 2 Cor 12:7. ἡ ἐν σαρκὶ περιτομή the
physical circumcision (cp. Just., D. 10, 1 al.) Ro 2:28; cp. Eph
2:11b; Col 2:13 (ἀκροβυστία 2); Gal 6:13 (ἡ σάρξ=the flesh that is
circumcised); B 9:4. Metaph.: the corrosion on the precious metals of
the rich φάγεται τὰς σάρκας ὑμῶν ὡς πῦρ Js 5:3.—Ign. describes the
elements of the Eucharist as σὰρξ (or αἷμα) Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ IRo 7:3;
IPhld 4; ISm 7:1. Also J 6:51–56 urges that one must eat the flesh
(and drink the blood) of the Human One or Son of Man (Just., A I, 66,
2; s. TPhilips, Die Verheissung der hl. Eucharistie nach Joh. 1922;
Bultmann ad loc.; AWikenhauser ’48, 105f).—His anti-Docetic position
also leads Ign. to use the concept ‘flesh (and blood) of p 915
Christ’ in other contexts as well ITr 8:1; IPhld 5:1.—For Mt 16:17;
Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12; and 1 Cor 15:50 s. 3a. ② the physical body as
functioning entity, body, physical body ⓐ as substance and living
entity (Aeschyl., Sept. 622: opp. νοῦς; Ex 30:32; 4 Km 6:30; TestAbr A
20 p. 103, 6 [Stone p. 54] πάντα τὰ μέλη τῆς σαρκός μου; w. καρδία or
ψυχή Alex. Aphr., An. p. 98, 7–10 Br.; Ps 37:8; 62:2; Eccl 2:3; Ezk
11:19; 44:7 a1.; Jos., Bell. 6, 47, Ant. 19, 325; Ar.15, 7) οὔτε ἡ
σὰρξ αὐτοῦ εἶδεν διαφθοράν Ac 2:31 (but s. 1). W. ψυχή 1 Cl 49:6 (Tat.
13:2 al.). W. καρδία Ac 2:26 (Ps 15:9).—Eph 5:29. ἑόρακαν τὸ πρόσωπόν
μου ἐν σαρκί they have seen me face to face Col 2:1. ἕως ἂν τὸν
χριστὸν ἐν σαρκὶ ἴδῃ before he had seen the Messiah in person GJs 24:4
(cp. Lk 2:26). Opp. πνεῦμα (Ath. 31:3; PGM 5, 460 ἐπικαλοῦμαί σε τὸν
κτίσαντα πᾶσαν σάρκα κ. πᾶν πνεῦμα) 1 Cor 5:5; 2 Cor 7:1; Col 2:5; 1
Pt 4:6; Hm 3:1; 10, 2, 6; cp. AcPl Ant 13:17 (=Aa, I 237, 2; s. οἶδα);
also in relation to Christ (though this is disputed) J 6:63; Hs 5, 6,
5–7; cp. 1 Ti 3:16.—ἀσθένεια τῆς σαρκός bodily ailment Gal 4:13; s.
vs. 14. ἀσθενὴς τῇ σαρκί weak in the body Hs 9, 1, 2. ὁ ἀλγῶν σάρκα
the one who is ill in body B 8:6. πάσχειν σαρκί 1 Pt 4:1b. Cp. 2 Cor
7:5. ἡ τῆς σαρκὸς καθαρότης the purity of the body Hb 9:13 (opp.
καθαρίζειν τὴν συνείδησιν vs. 14). σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπου 1 Pt 3:21 (s.
ῥύπος 1). The σάρξ is raised fr. the dead (s. ParJer 6:9; Theoph. Ant.
1, 7 [74, 2]) 1 Cl 26:3; 2 Cl 9:1. ἀνάστασις σαρκός AcPlCor 1:12; 2:24
(σαρκὸς ἀνάστασιν Just., D. 80, 5); cp. ἀναστήσεσθε ἔχοντες ὑγιῆ τὴν
σάρκα AcPlCor 2:32. Of the body of Christ during his earthly ministry
Eph 2:14 (JHart, The Enmity in His Flesh: Exp. 6th ser., 3, 1901,
135–41); Hb 10:20; 1 Pt 3:18; 4:1a; 1J 4:2; 2J 7; B 5:1, 10f; 6:7, 9;
7:5; 12:10; IEph 7:2; Pol 7:1; AcPlCor 2:6b. Married couples form μία
σάρξ (Gen 2:24; s. Ath. 33, 2 τὴν σάρκα πρὸς σάρκα …
κοινωνίαν.—GAicher, Mann u. Weib ein Fleisch: BZ 5, 1907, 159–65) Mt
19:5f; Mk 10:8ab; 1 Cor 6:16; Eph 5:31 (on these passages, TBurkill,
ZNW 62, ’71, 115–20). δικαιώματα σαρκός behind ‘all sorts of
ceremonial washings’ there are regulations that concern the physical
body Hb 9:10.—On ὑποτάγητε τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ὡς ὁ Χριστὸς τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ
σάρκα IMg 13:2 s. Hdb. ad loc. and MRackl, Die Christologie des hl.
Ignatius v. Ant. 1914, 228.—πνεῦμα δυνάμεως … ὁ θεὸς … κατέπεμψεν εἰς
σάρκα τουτέστιν εἰς τὴν Μαρίαν God sent a powerful spirit (prob. a
ref. to the kind of divine breath that brought the first human being
to life [Gen 2:7]) into flesh, that is, into Mary AcPl Ha 8, 26=BMM
recto 34; s. AcPlCor 1:14. ⓑ as someth. with physical limitations,
life here on earth (ApcEsdr 4:4 p. 28, 3 Tdf. σάρκα ἀνθρωπίνην φορῶ)
θλῖψιν τῇ σαρκὶ ἕξουσιν 1 Cor 7:28. Cp. 2 Cor 4:11; Col 1:24. Of
Christ τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ his body with its physical limitations
Col 1:22; cp. 2:11 and s. cα below (cp. En 102:5 τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκὸς
ὑμῶν; 1QpHab 9:2; Orig., C. Cels. 6, 29, 25).—Of human life: ἀποδημεῖν
τῆς σαρκός MPol 2:2 (s. ἀποδημέω). ἐπιμένειν ἐν τῇ σαρκί Phil 1:24.
ζῆν ἐν σαρκί vs. 22; Gal 2:20. ἐν σ. περιπατεῖν 2 Cor 10:3a. ἐν σ.
τυγχάνειν Dg 5:8a. ὄντος ἔτι ἐν σ. σου AcPlCor 1:6. τὸν ἐπίλοιπον ἐν
σ. χρόνον 1 Pt 4:2. ἡ ἐπιδημία τῆς σαρκὸς ταύτης our sojourn in life
2 Cl 5:5. ἐν τῇ σαρκί in our earthly life 8:2. ⓒ as instrument of
various actions or expressions. α. In Paul’s thought esp., all parts
of the body constitute a totality known as σ. or flesh, which is
dominated by sin to such a degree that wherever flesh is, all forms of
sin are likew. present, and no good thing can live in the σάρξ Ro 7:18
(cp. Philo, Gig. 29 αἴτιον δὲ τῆς ἀνεπιστημοσύνης μέγιστον ἡ σὰρξ καὶ
ἡ πρὸς σάρκα οἰκείωσις; Sextus 317 ἀγαθὸν ἐν σαρκὶ μὴ ἐπιζήτει. The OT
lays no stress on a necessary relationship betw. flesh as a substance,
and sin. But for Epicurus the σάρξ is the bearer of sinful feelings
and desires as well as the means of sensual enjoyment: Ep. in Plut.,
Mor. 135c; 1087bf; 1089e; 1096c αἱ τῆς σαρκὸς ἐπιθυμίαι. Also Diog. L.
10, 145. Likew. Plut. himself: Mor. 101b ταῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἡδοναῖς;
672e; 688d; 734a; Ps.-Plut., Mor. 107f σαρκὶ καὶ τοῖς πάθεσι ταύτης;
Maximus Tyr. 33, 7a. Cp. 4 Macc 7:18 τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς πάθη; Philo, Deus
Imm. 143 σαρκὸς ἡδονή, Gig. 29; TestJud 19:4; TestZeb 9:7; ApcMos 25
[p. 14, 2 Tdf.] εἰς τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τῆς σαρκός); Ro 6:19; 7:25 (opp.
νοῦς); 8:3a, 4–9 (cp. Persius 2, 63 scelerata pulpa, which
contaminates devotion to deity), 12f; Gal 5:13, 24; Col 2:23; Jd 23;
AcPlCor 2:11, 15; Dg 6:5 (opp. ψυχή, as Plut., Mor. 101b). Opp. τὸ
πνεῦμα Ro 8:4, 5, 6, 9, 13; Gal 3:3; 5:16, 17ab; 6:8ab; J 3:6; B 10:9.
τὸ μὲν πνεῦμα πρόθυμον, ἡ δὲ σὰρξ ἀσθενής (cp. Orig., C. Cels. 2, 25,
8) Mt 26:41; Mk 14:38; Pol 7:2. σὰρξ ἁμαρτίας sinful flesh Ro 8:3b.
ἐπιθυμία (τῆς) σαρκός (cp. Maximus Tyr. 20, 9f σαρκῶν … ἐπιθυμίας) Gal
5:16; 1J 2:16; B 10:9. Pl. Eph 2:3a, cp. b; 2 Pt 2:18; cp. Ro 13:14.
τὰ ἔργα τῆς σαρκός Gal 5:19 (s. Vögtle at πλεονεξία). τὰ θελήματα τῆς
σαρκός Eph 2:3b. ὁ νοῦς τῆς σαρκός Col 2:18. τὸ σῶμα τῆς σαρκός the
body of (sinful) flesh 2:11; cp. 1:22 and s. b above (cp. Sir 23:17
σῶμα σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ; En 102:5 τῷ σώματι τῆς σαρκὸς ὑμῶν). τὰ τῆς σαρκός
what pertains to (sinful) flesh Ro 8:5b. ἐν (τῇ) σαρκὶ εἶναι be in an
unregenerate (and sinful) state Ro 7:5; 8:8f. τὰ ἔθνη ἐν σαρκί Eph
2:11a. κατὰ σάρκα εἶναι Ro 8:5a; ζῆν vs. 12b; 13; Dg 5:8b; περιπατεῖν
Ro 8:4; 2 Cor 10:2; βουλεύεσθαι 1:17; στρατεύεσθαι 10:3b; cp. IRo 8:3
(opp. κατὰ γνώμην θεοῦ). β. source of the sexual urge. The σάρξ is the
source of the sexual urge, without any suggestion of sinfulness
connected w. it ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς ἐγεννήθησαν J 1:13. ⓓ as someth.
attractive 2 Pt 2:10 (a Hebraism, cp. Judg 2:12; 3 Km 11:10; Sir
46:10). S. also 3b. ③ one who is or becomes a physical being, living
being with flesh ⓐ of humans person, human being: πᾶσα σάρξ every
person, everyone (LXX; TestAbr B 7 p. 112, 3 [Stone p. 72]; GrBar
4:10; ApcEsdr 7:7; ApcMos 13 [p. 7, 1 Tdf.]; Mel., P. 55, 400: for
כָּל-בָּשָׂר; s. πᾶς 1aα) Lk 3:6 (Is 40:5); J 17:2; Ac 2:17 (Jo 3:1);
1 Pt 1:24 (Is 40:6); 1 Cl 59:3; 64; 2 Cl 7:6; 17:5 (the last two Is
66:24); AcPlCor 2:6a. οὐ πᾶσα σάρξ no person, nobody (En 14:21
end.—W-S. §26, 10a; B-D-F §275, 4; 302, 1; Rob. 752) Mt 24:22; Mk
13:20; Ro 3:20 (cp. Ps 142:2 πᾶς ζῶν); 1 Cor 1:29 (μή); Gal
2:16.—Though σ. in the foll. passages refers to body in its physical
aspect, it cannot be divorced from its conjunction with αἷμα, and the
unit σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα (cp. Sir 17:31; TestAbr B 13 p. 117, 26 [Stone p.
82]; Philo, Quis Div. Rer. Her. 57; Just., D. 135, 6) refers to a
human being in contrast to God and other transcendent beings Mt 16:17;
Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12 (here vice versa, αἷ. καὶ σ.). τὰ παιδία
κεκοινώνηκεν αἵματος καὶ σαρκός the children share mortal nature Hb
2:14, but with suggestion of its frailty, as indicated by the context
with its ref. to death. Because they are the opposites of the divine
nature σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομῆσαι οὐ δύναται 1 Cor
15:50 (JJeremias, NTS 2, ’56, 151–59). For Jd 7 s. b next. Cp. AcPl
Ant 13, 17 (=Aa I 237, 2) σαρκί personally (s. οἶδα 2). ⓑ of
transcendent entities ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο J 1:14 (RSeeberg, Festgabe
AvHarnack dargebracht 1921, 263–81.—Artem. 2, 35 p. 132, 27 ἐὰν
σάρκινοι οἱ θεοὶ φαίνωνται; Synes., Dio 6 p. 45b).—Of flesh other than
human: ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας after another kind of flesh (cp. Judg 2:12
ὀπίσω θεῶν ἑτέρων) i.e. of divine messengers who take on σ. when they
appear to humans (so Windisch et al.; difft. Frame et al. of same-sex
activity) Jd 7. p 916
…④ human/ancestral connection, human/mortal nature, earthly
descent (Did., Gen. 144, 25) Ἀβραὰμ τὸν προπάτορα ἡμῶν κατὰ σάρκα Ro
4:1 (Just., D. 43, 7 al.). οἱ συγγενεῖς μου κατὰ σάρκα 9:3. τοὺς τῆς
σαρκὸς ἡμῶν πατέρας Hb 12:9. τὸν Ἰσραὴλ κατὰ σάρκα the earthly Israel
1 Cor 10:18 (opp. τὸν Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ θεοῦ Gal 6:16). Of natural descent
τὰ τέκνα τῆς σαρκός children by natural descent Ro 9:8 (opp. τὰ τέκνα
τῆς ἐπαγγελίας). ὁ μὲν ἐκ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ σάρκα γεγέννηται Gal
4:23; cp. vs. 29. μου τὴν σάρκα my compatriots Ro 11:14 (s. Gen
37:27).—Of Christ’s physical nature Ro 8:3c; Hb 5:7. Christ is
descended fr. the patriarchs and fr. David (τὸ) κατὰ σάρκα according
to the human side of his nature, as far as his physical descent is
concerned Ro 1:3 (JDunn, Jesus: Flesh and Spirit [Ro 1:3f], JTS 24,
’73, 40–68); 9:5; 1 Cl 32:2; IEph 20:2. The context of 2 Cor 11:18
includes ancestry as a reason for boasting, but σ. in this pass.
applies as well to other aspects of Paul’s career and therefore
belongs more properly in 5…
⑤ the outward side of life as determined by normal perspectives or
standards, a transf. sense of 1 and 2. Usually w. κατά indicating norm
or standard σοφοὶ κατὰ σάρκα wise (people) according to human
standards 1 Cor 1:26. καυχᾶσθαι κατὰ (τὴν) σάρκα boast of one’s
outward circumstances, i.e. descent, manner of life, etc. (cp. 11:22)
2 Cor 11:18. κατὰ σάρκα Χριστόν Christ (the Messiah) from a human
point of view or as far as externals are concerned 5:16b, cp. a (κατά
B5bβ and 7a; also VWeber, BZ 2, 1904, 178–88; HWindisch, exc. ad loc.;
Rtzst., Mysterienrel.3, 374–76; FPorter, Does Paul Claim to Have Known
the Historical Jesus [2 Cor 5:16]?: JBL 47, 1928, 257–75; RMoxon, CQR
108, 1929, 320–28). οἱ κατὰ σάρκα κύριοι those who, according to human
standards, are masters Eph 6:5; Col 3:22. ὑμεῖς κατὰ τὴν σ. κρίνετε
you judge by outward things, by externals J 8:15. Of the route taken
in one’s earthly life ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ κατὰ σάρκα IRo 9:3.—ἐν σαρκὶ πεποιθέναι
place one’s trust in earthly things or physical advantages Phil 3:3f.
εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί Gal 6:12. Onesimus is a beloved brother to
Philemon καὶ ἐν σαρκὶ καὶ ἐν κυρίῳ both as a human being (=personally,
in the external relationship betw. master and slave) and as a
Christian Phlm 16. ὑμῶν δὲ ἐν σαρκὶ ἐπισκόπῳ IEph 1:3 (cp. IMg
3:2).—HWindisch, Taufe u. Sünde 1908; EBurton, ICC Gal. 1920, 492–95;
WSchauf, Sarx 1924; WBieder, Auferstehung des Fleisches od. des
Leibes?: TZ 1, ’45, 105–20. W. special ref. to Paul: Ltzm., Hdb. exc.
on Ro 7:14 and 8:11; Lohmeyer (ἁμαρτία 3a); EKäsemann, Leib u. Leib
Christi ’33; RGrant, ATR 22, ’40, 199–203; RBultmann, Theologie des
NTs ’48, 228–49 (Engl. tr. by KGrobel, ’51 I, 227–59); LMarshall,
Challenge of NT Ethics ’47, 267–70; E Schweizer, Die hellenist.
Komponente im NT sarx-Begriff: ZNW 48, ’57, 237–53; two in KStendahl,
The Scrolls and the NT, ’57: KKuhn, 94–113 and WDavies, 157–82;
JPryke, ‘Spirit’ and ‘Flesh’ in Qumran and NT: RevQ 5, ’65, 346–60;
DLys, La chair dans l’AT ’67; ASand, D. Begriff ‘Fleisch’ ’67 (Paul);
RJewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms ’71, 49–166. On Ign.:
CRichardson, The Christianity of Ign. of Ant. ’35, esp. 49 and 61. S.
also the lit. s.v. πνεῦμα, end.—B. 202. DELG. M-M. EDNT. TW. Spicq.
Sv.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon
of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p.
916). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
The Baptism of the Holy Spirit: We believe that the baptism with the Holy Spirit is an experience that follows salvation. All believers have God’s Spirit within them. Holy Spirit baptism empowers believers to exalt Jesus, to live lives of holiness, and to be witnesses of God’s saving grace. We believe that those who experience Holy Spirit baptism today will experience it in the same manner that believers experienced it in the early church; in other words, we believe that they will speak in tongues—languages that are not known to them (Acts 1: 5, 8; 2:4).
John Ruffle
Need to re-phrase this. If its a statement then remove the question mark. If it’s meant to be a question, then re-phrase the sentence. As it is it is neither one thing or the other? (There it is – I just wrote a non-question and ended it with? ??? )
Varnel Watson
If I remember correctly the discussions started with a question if and which denominations practice speaking in tongues any longer to which Terry Wiles was kind to provide this very informative response. BTW it is Pentecost sunday in Israel today Tom Steele Do you speak in tongues John Ruffle
Tom Steele
Yes
John Ruffle
You’ll need to judge for yourself on that – asking about private devotions is a very intimate question, like “did you have sex last week?”
Tom Steele
Oh… Troy Day, use punctuation next time, I thought that question was directed at me. My answer still stands though, and I also believe tongues is very important as it is the only of the gifts that was not recorded in the Old Testament. Well, also interpretation, but that goes kinda hand in hand with tongues.
John Ruffle
I like you for that!
Varnel Watson
You show me one OT verse from the Bible with punctuation in it and I will start using it on my here telephone device. If it was good for Paul…
Varnel Watson
Andrew Gabriel Would pls take a look at this list created by senior pastor Terry Wiles How do you feel your claims go along WHAT VIRTUALLY ALL PENTECOSTAL DENOMINATIONS BELIEVE CONCERNING SPEAKING IN OTHER TONGUES AS THE INITIAL EVIDENCE OF THE BAPTISM WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT? http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/what-virtually-all-pentecostal-denominations-believe-concerning-speaking-in-other-tongues-as-the-initial-evidence-of-the-baptism-with-the-holy-spirit/
Scotty Searan
If the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is so needful, then why aren’t more members baptized in it. We know by per capita in the churches the % has fallen way off in the 50 years. Can a church be Pentecostal and most of there members not have the Baptism with speaking in other tongues?
Varnel Watson
More members are baptized with a greater majority. Overall Pentecostalism worldwide is the fastest growing movement now surprising even Catholicism by speed of growth
Scotty Searan
It might be so in foreign lands, because they have not got caught up in the trappings that are in our churches hear in America. But hear in America and you know it is a fact more than half of the COG, AOG and PH do not have the baptism of the Holy Ghost. It wasn’t that way 50 years ago. And we are sending out the missionaries to these other countries. Won’t it not get into there congregations eventually. The Non-Spiritual dry milk of not speaking in tongues.
Varnel Watson
Last I check AOG and COG are growing tremendously. Where do you get your stat facts? Please check latest from PEW
Scotty Searan
I didn’t say the AOG and COG wasn’t growing. I said that more than half the members do have the Batism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues. There is a difference. They are growing, but they have taken away the requirement to be earnest seeking the Baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence fo speaking in other tongues.
Joseph Kidwell
Scotty Searan is right. When I was a CoG minister from 1978-2002, the CoG’s own statistics showed that 47% of members had not received the Holy Ghost. I was a full time evangelist from 1979-1991 and then from 1993-1996 and focused on an emphasis on the Holy Ghost. During that time, we had over 1500 people who received the Holy Ghost.
Varnel Watson
Please Scotty Searan where do you get your statistics? http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/09/encounters-with-the-holy-ghost-in-american-churches/380118/
Scotty Searan
Troy Day This article is mostly about mainline, but it has not proven that the majority of COG and other Pentecostal church members have the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues. The churches I have attended over the last 40 years, the baptized have been in the minority. I challenge you to do a survey of your local membership
Varnel Watson
Joseph Kidwell With great respect for the years you’ve served but lots has happened in the world since 2002 http://www.christianpost.com/news/assemblies-of-god-leader-denies-that-speaking-in-tongues-is-in-decline-in-pentecostal-churches-103613/
Joseph Kidwell
Troy Day, if you have recent statistics, I would like to hear them. The statistics that I referred to came from Dr. Ray H. Hughes.
Varnel Watson
Joseph Kidwell This was really long time ago then. This was the reason I asked you and Scotty Searan for the sources so we can compare what these sources say today. It will be interesting to see the growth – I cited our own Dr. Wood and the Pew Forum in the last mutual survey
Terry Wiles
Respectively. Growing up in the AoG they fully emphasized the Baptism in the Holy Spirit for the endowment of power for life and service.
Today it seems as if all they speak about is speaking in tongues.
I understand and believe it is the initial Biblical evidence but thing the 40% number is close to correct and it may be even lower.
Perhaps a survey of pastors would reveal an eye opening number. Maybe you can set up one on your system.
Varnel Watson
Pastor Terry when are we going to see your comparison on sanctification?
Terry Wiles
Waiting on someone to give me a clear official statement from the COG. Someone posted a picture of an older book recently. If I could get a copy I would flesh it out.
Varnel Watson
http://www.churchofgod.org/beliefs/declaration-of-faith
Joseph Kidwell
My friends who are still in the CoG tell me that if anything, there has been a steady erosion of spirituality over the last 15 years. That is consistent with what I witnessed from 1984 on.
Joshua Sakal
Why do you say the baptism of the Holy Spirit. There’s only baptism to receive the Holy Spirit.
Terry Wiles
Baptism “of” is in 1 Corinthians 12. The Holy Spirit Baptizes one into the Bod of Christ. Baptism “in” is the work of Christ. Reference John the Baptist’s comment about how he baptizes in water to repentance but the one John speaks of will baptize one in the Holy Spirit.
Scotty Searan
If you just say baptism, some just think about water baptism, which is natural, but then there is a spiritual baptism, which is the baptism of the Holy Ghost, which does effect the spiritual and the physical being.
Joshua Sakal
Baptism means to submerge in water.
Terry Wiles
There is water baptisms and spirit baptism
Joshua Sakal
i think you missed what the definition of baptism is. It means to be submerged in water. And there is only one baptism in the new testament
Terry Wiles
Baptism means to immerse in. In some cases it is water and in other it is the Body of Christ and in other cases it is in the Holy Spirit.
Perhaps you missed these verses in the New Testament. Matthew 3:11 and 1 Corinthians 12:13.
Joshua Sakal
Well Terry Wiles what spirit do you think that those two verses are talking about? It says in Ephesians 4:4,5,6 that there is only one baptism and one spirit. What is the only verse in the Bible that shows how you receive the Holy Spirit?
Varnel Watson
Here we go Wayne Scott about your UPC tongue speaking question
Isara Mo
Bible without the Holy Spirit is equal to religion..(not my quote)
Varnel Watson
the Holy Spirit is not equal to religion
Isara Mo
Troy Day
I said the Bible WITHOUT the Holy Spirit..is equal to religion.
Religions don’t have tongues, salvation does..that is my point.
In other words I might have all the Bible in my head but if I don’t have the Holy Spirit to make it living and powerful I will have a good religion…
A cessionist is someone who has chosen to unsubscribe from God and yet continues to use the Bible..without the Holy Spirit.
You love the Word and you don’t want the Teacher….
Surely tongues were not fabricated(but I didn’t say that) and even today true tongues for a new believer is very important…very or else they might end up in some dead end religious system..(my view not Biblical..though).
Nikki Sheppick
Bearing in mind that this topic is regarding what some have varied beliefs about, be prepared to DEFEND your position within the rules found above to the left, and with common courtesy throughout. Thank you. Also, confer with the announcement above – Regarding other purely doctrinal/theogical issues, there is another group recommended to go to:
Announcement from Mong re: Christ. Apologetics
https://m.facebook.com/groups/1493330220801352?view=permalink&id=1871227573011613
Varnel Watson
my position defended by presenting virtually every Pentecostal denomination view I am anticipating questions on those and not baptist calvinist or other variations that will be OFF topic
Jonathan Shrader
I’m Pentecostal and believe you can still have and be filled with the Holy Spirit if you don’t speak in tongues. There’s a lot of gifts that people operate in not just tongues..one person may have been given the gift of healing while another words of wisdom. I don’t necessarily believe that if you don’t do these things you’re not filled as everything is God’s will.
Joshua Steindl
“It is scriptural to expect all who receive the gift, filling, or baptism of the Holy Spirit to receive the same physical, initial sign of speaking with other tongues.” Except it’s not as there’s no bible verse that says that. Even in this article, the author doesn’t have a verse next to this statement. Tongues is a gift of the Spirit, but it is not given to everyone (1 Corinthians 12:7-11).
Varnel Watson
the article is pulled starlight from various declarations of faith and I see MORE than enough verses in it Are we looking @ the same thing here? What are you talking about
Joshua Steindl
None of those verses back up the claim that speak in tongues MUST be the initial sign of the Holy Spirit and in fact the verse that I referenced says the opposite (“Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.”
1 Corinthians 12:7-11 NIV
https://www.bible.com/111/1co.12.7-11.niv)
Cody Ashton Hitchen
There is no 2nd baptism
Varnel Watson
so there is no 2nd Resurrection either?
Cody Ashton Hitchen
Troy Day we die once and are resurrected once at the coming of our Lord
Varnel Watson
Cody Ashton Hitchen so are you saying there is no 2nd resurrection in the BIBLE ? What youma talking about?
Cody Ashton Hitchen
Troy Day one for believers and one for unbelievers. What does this have to do with a 2nd baptism?
Bob Jones
There are no unknown tongues the Bible speaks of other languages
Shane Mccall
Bob Jones
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
1 Corinthians 14:2 KJV
Maybe you overlooked that verse
Shaun Earle
Bob Jones okay, so then why is there always a translation or someone else that can “hear” it? Every Pentecostal service I’ve attended there would be tongues and it was never “valid” unless someone translated it.
Shane Mccall
Shaun Earle
Because, just as speaking in a unknown tongue is a gift, So is the interpretation of tongues a gift.
Shane Mccall
Shaun Earle
1 Corinthians 14 has all your answers to this topic brother
Varnel Watson
Bob Jones what you said is NOT in the Bible but what are you saying by denying Acts 2, 8, 10, 19 1 Cor 12, 14 etc?
Nathaniel Taylor
I always found it odd having grown up in and later leaving the Pentecostal church was that they deny the Acts 2 description of tongues being a language that was intelligible to other people in their native language (AKA, tongues is not holy gibberish) and 1 Cor 14 where it talks about orderly worship with an interpreter so that tongues would edify the body, not merely be a display of the presence. I’ve been in no less than 100 of these churches going to camps, fellowshipping with other churches in my region growing up. Never seen an interpreter. Never heard the gift of a new language bestowed on anyone that would match anyone’s native language.
Jonathan Shrader
Nathaniel Taylor I personally believe someone who speaks in tongues also has the gift of interpretation at the same time.
Nathaniel Taylor
Jonathan Shrader That is unfortunately not pulled from exegesis. Paul clearly states in 1 Cor 14:13 that if one speaks in tongues, they should pray so that they may have the ability to interpret those tongues. So, I would say that they “may” have the gift of interpretation. Regardless, of who can interpret, Paul later in the chapter goes on to say that no more than 2 or 3 should be speaking in tongues and that if that be the case, “someone should interpret” meaning a singular person could do the interpreting for all 3. This for me almost seems non-existent because I have never even heard someone explain the meaning of a specific episode of tongues. I was in the Pentecostal churches for over a decade. Maybe things have changed but I am not so sure.
Varnel Watson
Nathaniel Taylor who are THEY who deny the Acts 2 description of tongues being a language that was intelligible to other people ?
Nathaniel Taylor
Troy Day Last night I sat down with someone who told me that tongues was always an unintelligible language and that it was the only way to know if someone had received the Spirit. I’m working to veer away from continually saying someone’s denomination because there are so many variances within denominations that it always lends itself to 15 different sub-descriptors to try to affirm what someone affirms. The church I grew up in nor that person I spoke with last night would see tongues as a language that would be in a native tongue to the people hearing it as outlined in Acts 2.
Paul L. King
Not all Pentecostal denominations believe tongues is the initial evidence of the baptism in the Spirit. Most notably Jack Hayford and the Foursquare Church have backed away from that position, as has the Open Bible Standard Church. The founders and ongoing leaders of the European Pentecostals, by and large, have not insisted on tongues as the evidence–Alexander Boddy and George Jeffreys in the UK, Jonathan Paul in German and mainland Europe, as well as Willis Hoover, founder of Pentecostalism in Chile. The AG has been wrestling with it, some holding to a “delayed evidence,” since that is the experience of some if its founders.
Varnel Watson
same as PA of Canada that has recently rejected it as initial evidence AS well as some British and EU Pentecostals Hence virtually ALL views presented in this post
Antonio Di Monaco
I was in a pray meeting last night and the elder from the pulpit encouraged over and over to pray in tongues, I don’t speak in tongues, so I felt a little out of place not understanding or being able to just say amen to the prayers, so I left the prayer meeting as I couldn’t hardly hear myself think, I read in 1 Corinthians that tongues are to be no more than 2-3 persons and 1 at a time and always with an interpreter this within the congregation….but the thing is I feel bad for leaving the prayer meeting…
Nathaniel Taylor
When I was younger and in that church, I was told that I didn’t speak in tongues because I had not been sanctified enough to allow the Holy Ghost to move in me in such a way…
Antonio Di Monaco
Nathaniel Taylor wow not nice… I know they say it’s the evidence of being baptized in the Holy Spirit here and my wife says she speaks and has been baptized in the Holy Spirit.. so I’m about the only one left of the long serving in the fellowship who has not this gift and so not been baptized in the Holy Spirit, so guess how I might feel??? 16 years a Christian
Nathaniel Taylor
Antonio Di Monaco The Pentecostal exegesis of this is truly a late comer to the stage. The early church fathers were unanimous that baptism was with water and that paired with the preceding belief would ensure the gift of the Spirit affirming this as their exegesis of Acts 2:38. Layering in an additional baptism is also problematic. Paul says in Ephesians 4 that for those of us who are in Christ, there is but one baptism. The problem with setting a standard that the Bible didn’t set, is it can put you in a vicious cycle of attempting to earn the presence of the Spirit by works. The Word promises us freedom, rest, and peace in Christ. It does not tell us that we would be put in pursuit of earning the presence of the gifts of the Spirit. The Bible clearly states that God doesn’t give the gift of speaking in tongues to everyone (correction added). 1 Corinthians 12 says, “7 The Holy Spirit is given to each of us in a special way. That is for the good of all. 8 To some people the Spirit gives a message of wisdom. To others the same Spirit gives a message of knowledge. 9 To others the same Spirit gives faith. To others that one Spirit gives gifts of healing. 10 To others he gives the power to do miracles. To others he gives the ability to prophesy. To others he gives the ability to tell the spirits apart. To others he gives the ability to speak in different kinds of languages they had not known before. And to still others he gives the ability to explain what was said in those languages. 11 All the gifts are produced by one and the same Spirit. He gives gifts to each person, just as he decides” I pray you find freedom in this brother. I applaud your honesty. Not everyone in that church has the gift of tongues yet all are participating. You worship in the Spirit of truth and God will bless you for your honest offering.
Nathaniel Taylor
I made a small correction there for that to reflect my opinions. Not all are given the gift of tongues was my comment. God bless you brother.
Antonio Di Monaco
Nathaniel Taylor thank you so much for your support it’s not easy to find on certain teachings as such. God bless you also dear brother for spending time and thought for me.
Nathaniel Taylor
Antonio Di Monaco As brothers, we are to bear one another’s burdens. I am happy to have been a part of your journey. God bless. I pray you find that rest in the King brother. Be well.
Antonio Di Monaco
Nathaniel Taylor amen and thanks again
Carol Myers
Gift of tongues??….I pray for the gift of humility and ability to help my fellow man who is in distress…..tongues? Pfffft
Carol Myers
I dont mean to be rude….but that is simply the way I roll…
Michael Dennis
Antonio Di Monaco hi, “The Holy Spirit” has revealed the truth to you. Tongues are a language from man (or woman) straight to God. Unless there is an interpreter (as you mentioned) it spreads confusion and should be done singularly. Thank “The Holy Spirit”. Be blessed.
Antonio Di Monaco
Michael Dennis thanks dear brother
Karl Ernst Von Buddenbrock
We are baptised with the Holy Spirit when we become Christians. Sop creating extra requirements.
Antonio Di Monaco
Karl Ernst Von Buddenbrock I’m not creating extra requirements. I’m just saying of my experience
Karl Ernst Von Buddenbrock
But the bible is clear. We get the Holy Spirit at regeneration. I respect your experience, but it can’t invalidate the Scriptural record.
Varnel Watson
yap Philip Williams Neil Steven Lawrence good luck with what Karl Ernst Von Buddenbrock is saying about Spirit baptism
Varnel Watson
Aaron Noble ANY question you have on these views presented in OP since obviously your view on the subject is unBiblical
Karl Ernst Von Buddenbrock
Sure. People like BB Warfield, John Calvin, Charles Hodge, Augustine, and other great theologians just wilt in the light of your amazing knowledge. Who are they anyway?
Varnel Watson
Karl Ernst Von Buddenbrock BIBLE pls Augustine believed in Spirit baptism Calvin who said to has followed Augustine in the same Luther did not agree with Augustine on this or post-mil vs a-mil
Aaron Noble
No, my view is biblical. Jesus never said yabba bogo hidirosho like Joyce Meyers and the rest of the charismatics. Nor did any other prominent Christian over the last 2000 years. In fact most claimed not to speak in tongues at all. Paul knee upwards of 4 different languages. Just like you were wrong about me being a Mason. You are wrong again. Christians weren’t saying yogi baga woohoo until 100 years ago at Azusa st. God is not a Godof confusionmy friend. And confusion is not a fruit of the spirit.
Joshua Steindl
Troy Day 1 Corinthians 12:7-11
Eddie Krause
Sad the reformed people attack the principle as defined in the Bible They sadly forget their own terrible erring ways !!!!
Varnel Watson
some reformed ppl need to read their Bible and get saved
Eddie Krause
Troy Day agree thx
Varnel Watson
Aaron Noble as an apologetic theologian you should be able to make difference between Penetecostal and Charismatic which are NOT the same. Seems though you’ve been watching too much TV and not doing much theology Now then when you start making that difference you will have to answer HOW you so called Biblical view can deny the occurrences in Acts 2, 8, 10, 19 etc. as we as the apostolic writ in 1 Cor ch 12 ch 14 etc I would venture that your so called biblical view cuts all these OFF your Bible and disregards them completely Hence the lack of understanding you’ve shown on this thread about simple Biblical principles and praxis
Aaron Noble
Meh… 2000 years of historical Christian figures and nobody was saying yogo yoga baga looloo until 100 years ago…. Be deceived if you wish. Thats on you bro. God bless
Joshua Steindl
Troy Day you need to read these chapters you keep quoting. None of them say the things that you are saying.
Ronald Burns
Aaron Noble I found something we agree on. Lol
Susan Moore
Yes, the Apostles spoke in tongues. However it was different languages so everyone could understand the Gospel. Not the gibberish the Charismatics and Pentecostals speak!!!’
Varnel Watson
Aaron Noble at least I am quoting the BIBLE and not just giving humanistic logiX like you? I’ve read these chapters long before you were born AND can exegite them anytime with you if you dont understand them and need clarification BUT I am getting the feeling you aint got it in you Larry Dale Steele Neil Steven Lawrence
Varnel Watson
Aaron Noble @Nathaniel Merritt Can answer such doctrine with a smiley face You have to speak in tongues to know what you are talking about which apparently you DO NOT
Varnel Watson
Daniel J Hesse Neil Steven Lawrence I cant find your answer in this big mess of comments here Could you repost so I can read it Can you also bring @Francisco Arriola in here to give some more detail cogger theological expo on the initial evidence. Philip Williams which of the views listed was supported by your grandmas Pentecostal community ?
Neil Steven Lawrence
Troy Day It’s very simple the overwhelming evidence available in the book of Acts and the writings of Paul are that tongue speech and prophecy are listed as the initial evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit.
This is the scriptural programmatic norm established.
It doesn’t matter which unbelieving non-Pentecostal wants to say tongue speech is relegated to the past – tongue speech as the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the scriptural programmatic norm.
In these last days we have seen the fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements; leading to the largest influx of believers into the body of Christ; first in the developed world and then in the undeveloped world. Currently the Pentecostal branch of Christianity is the largest part of the body of Christ in history by numbers and the fastest growing by far in the history of the Church!
Just because“Headstrong people“ want to deny it, does not make it irrelevant! The numbers disprove them!
If they want to operate their vehicles without a “turbo charger“ then it is their loss. They are a dying breed…
Varnel Watson
Neil Steven Lawrence I agree The BIBLE is explicit about tongues The larger majority of Christians in the world speak in tongues Pope including So what are all these calvinators trying to tell us by them gifts being stopped or what
Philip Williams
Don’t see anything here concerning the free Pentecostals who would not use any statement of faith other than the Bible. The original Pentecostals, even those who first met in Arkansas did however view such organizations as heresy.
Varnel Watson
that was early FREE Pentecostals pre-Cashwell finished work and RichardAnna Boyce free grace calvinism Once they stepped in the grass-root folk like Saymure and Bartleman stepped away from Pentecostal denominationism and got lost in history ALL and WHILE they were the tongue speaking heroes we should remember today #JustSayin
Daniel J Hesse
You know I am curious regarding this initial evidence. Growing I believe only about 10% of our AG church was filled. Very few interpreted other tongues, prophetic utterance seemed to have ceased, other gives seemed dormant.
Daniel J Hesse
We need more than initial evidence.
Daniel J Hesse
Do all speak with tongues? Paul’s question…not mine.