Is tongues the sign?
Is tongues the evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit? Some years ago, I asked the Lord this question not long after I spoke in tongues. The problem here is that there isn't a verse in the Bible that says explicitly that tongues is the initial evidence of the Spirit baptism. One can only infer from the various "tongues accounts" in Acts. The Apostles and disciples knew that new converts had received the Spirit when they heard them speak in tongues and prophesy, the former being the common denominator. Interestingly, the Bible never mentions them asking today’s often asked questions: “Is this tongues that I’m hearing real or is it fake? Is this from God or is this from the devil?" The Apostles and disciples simply took it as the real thing when they heard it. So, my rationale is simply this: If that's how the Apostles, disciples and early converts received the Spirit baptism, then that's how I want to receive it, too. Who am I to stand out and be different? And if that's what convinced the Apostles and disciples that someone had indeed received the Spirit baptism, then that's how I want to be convinced, too. Who am I to use another yardstick? In short, I simply want to stick to the Bible norm, standard or benchmark.
Acts 11 The Lord did actually answer my question in a strange way. I had asked Him: “Lord, is tongues the evidence? This is what everyone is debating and arguing about!” Not too long after, I read Acts 11, and a few phrases in a certain portion of the chapter just “jumped” at me and burned in my heart.
Acts 11 records Peter's defence to those of the circumcision who were contending with him for having gone to a Gentile's (Cornelius) home and eating with them (Acts 11:2,3). He had to explain to them why he went to Cornelius' house and, more significantly, how the Spirit fell on the Gentiles there while he was preaching to them. The phrases that spoke to me are in red. I saw that in verses 15 and 17, the Holy Spirit was given to the Gentiles in the same way it was first given to the 120 disciples, that is, with the manifestation of tongues. That was how Peter knew that God had indeed poured out His Spirit on the Gentiles. The circumcised believers who were with Peter when it happened were just as surprised when they heard the Gentiles speak in tongues.
God was simply telling me that how the baptism in the Holy Spirit is to be received today should be the same as how it was received by the Apostles, disciples as well as the early Gentile converts.
No more debating, case closed I also saw that in verse 18, those who were contending with Peter "had no further objections and praised God". Why? Because Peter had presented them the main evidence -- tongues. Imagine, without the proof of tongues, how would Peter convince them? How would Peter himself, and the circumcised believers who were with him, be convinced that the Spirit had been poured out on Cornelius' household? In all this, God was telling me that all debates, arguments and doubts (my own really) should cease when you have the outward evidence of tongues. Indeed, it is when you do not have the evidence of tongues that you will always wonder: "Have I really received the baptism in the Holy Spirit?" Not only are you not convinced, but others -- those who believe in the baptism in the Holy Spirit with tongues as the sign -- will not be convinced either. So the "contending" persists. And because there are still Christians who, unlike Peter and the circumcised believers, dismiss the tongues evidence, the "contending" persists. Perhaps they can learn something from Peter's statement of repentance: "So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us,... who was I to think that I could oppose God?"
|