Dr. Brown responds to an article by Dr. James White on the anointing of the Spirit, asking what we can expect (according to the Scriptures) when the Holy Spirit moves. Dr. Brown will also catch up with the latest news and take your calls. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.
Hour 1:
Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Let us welcome the Holy Spirit when He comes, when He moves; even if it shakes our lives!
Hour 2:
Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Do we want more of the Spirit or less of the Spirit in our lives? Why not ask God for everything He has.
SPECIAL OFFER! THIS WEEK ONLY!
This week when you order a copy of Authentic Fire: A Response to John MacArthur’s Strange Fire, we’ll send you a free e-book that was specially put together by Dr. Brown. For more details on how to buy Authentic Fire in print or e-book, and on how to get your free e-book, click HERE!
Call 1-800-278-9978 or Order Online!
Other Resources:
It might be out of order to not leap and shout for joy at times. I think it depends on what the Lord does.
(healing someone who has been praying for healing for quite some time, and then receives a word from someone under the anointing about how they’ve been seeking the Lord for healing and their faith was tested for a time, and now it’s time to reap the reward for enduring, and suddenly they are fine, being able to walk again or something like that)
What we should expect under the anointing of the Lord, is that we should sense his presense in a stronger and clearer way than before, have a stronger sense of what’s going on spiritually, have a stonger sense of conscience, sometimes manifesting in a stronger sense of guilt if we are guilty and haven’t come to repent when we should have repented, or maybe it’s a stronger sense of what we should say, if we happen to be teaching at the time, or it might be a clearer sense of what should be done about something, clearer than we have ever known it before.
These are the kind of things I expect to see when his anointing comes.
When I think of anointing, I think of the pouring on of oil or expensive ointment, or the application of it.
I believe the reason they spoke in tongues in Act 2 wasn’t because there were so many people in the area at the time who were of differing languages, rather, they spoke in tongues because the holy Spirit was poured out upon them and as it was, the Spirit gave them what to say as they said it.
That’s why they spoke in tongues.
The result was such that each of them spoke in a different language, (unless of course, and it could be so, that some of them spoke in the same tongue, but this I find to be unlikely since I’ve heard perhaps hundreds of tongues and have never heard two of the same tongue that I could recognize.)and those languages (by the gifting of God) happened (according to his will and wisdom) to be of the sort that people who were present could and did understand, which of course proved they were not drunk (for is a drunk very often well understood?) as some supposed, and I suppose some mockingly suggested, but they had in fact been filled with the Holy Spirit of God, the evidence being the speaking in tongues, which was speaking of his wonderful works, which was worship of God and also was a good encouragement for the people present.
There’s so much teaching that someone could do just on what happened on that day.
Once the holy Spirit had been given on that day (Acts 2) do you think they had to wait for the Spirit to be poured out again (every day since then) in order for them to speak in tongues again, or do you think that once they received the gift of the holy Spirit, evidenced by the manifestion of speaking in tongues, that they could speak in tongues anytime they wanted to, similar to praying?
After that day of Pentecost, could they speak in tongues anytime they wanted to, or did they always have to wait for the Spirit to be poured out again?
I myself speak in tongues and I believe I know the answer to this.
Another question:
Do you think you have to wait?
Ray,
Your speculation in your third post illustrates my question about the whole debate around tongues.
“Tongues” which just means “language” in Greek or even more vaguely “tongue” is never clearly described, except in Acts 2.
If you are honestly “sola scriptura” about tongues then you can’t have a strong opinion on it. The biblical record simply is too sketchy for that.
For sure, the early church practices something related to a “foreign” language but beyond that, what do we know about it? Hardly anything!
I seriously doubt that what was revived in Los Angeles 100 years ago resembles what was practiced back then. The coincidence of that seems incredibly improbable.
But, that’s doesn’t make it invalid, in my opinion. Just not necessarily biblical. But TONS of stuff in our modern churches is not biblical.
Here’s some possible answers to the question above:
A. I think I have to wait for the anointing of the Spirit.
B. I don’t want to wait. I want to speak in tonges now.
C. I would like to speak in tongues and I know I will need the help of the Spirit of God. I will need a supernatural ability to be given me, and the Spirit of God will have to lead me into this.
D. I’m going to pray earnestly about this.
E. I’m going to think about it.
F. I’m going to wait ’till God makes (as in forces) me do it.
Personally, I don’t think God ever goes along with F.
G. I’m interested in this and I am going to pray that God give me a true Berean spirit about this.
There’s only one gift or manifestion of tongues. It is real. It is a gift of God’s grace.
The only counterfeit to it is something out of the flesh, some effort to counterfeit it using the natural ability to forulate sounds, randomly putting vowels and consonants together in haphazard fashion, as we wear out our minds trying to do so, stumbling all over ourselves, having the evidence that what we are doing is not tongues as being led by the Spirit of God, or we might memorize a few lines of something that might sound like tongues, like, (O she bought a Honda!)and wave our arms in the air saying that real fast. But how much can a man really memorize? Enough to fool anybody?
There’s more on tongues in the Bible than just what’s in Acts 2. When what you read in Acts 2 aligns with everything else you read about tongues and can logicly gather from a thorough investigation of everything, much like a detective might investigate a crime scene, milling over every minute detail, trying to put it all together, (and we have the help of the Spirit of God if we believe in Jesus) then we will be on the right track.
I believe there’s enough revealed in the Bible to answer any question anyone might have about tongues, but please don’t take this as an invitation to frustrate the matter, or cause confussion, or to shoot everything down from unbelief.
1-John 2-27
I remember when I did not speak in tongues, though I was around so many who did. I remember driving in my car, looking at signs, bill boards, taking at random letters and trying to speak whatever, just playing around and yet wanting to speak in tongues.
“There’s just some things I can’t do by myself.”
Once we’ve been baptized with the Holy Spirit, I believe we have an anointing that stays with us, and yet I believe (and have experienced this) that there are times when the anointing of God can be more tangible or evident.
When I was a young Christian there was much I had not experienced. Later on I began to experience more.
If I had never heard a shiny shoed TV preacher talk about the day of Pentecost, and all I had was my KJV, Would I ever have come to the conclusion that this outpouring of the holy Spirit happened in either an upper room or a temple?
It seems to me, likely not.
About all my Bible says about it is that it was in a house, (Acts 2:2) and as I consider that the apostles did as Jesus commanded, I would conclude that this house where they were sitting was in Jerusalem. (Acts 1:4)
And I suppose I would conclude that this speaking in tongues was “noised abroad” where there were many Jews, devout men, out of every nation, (Acts 1:5)and that there was a multitude that came together.
I suppose that if one or two, or a few more even, started talking about how there’s a group of people over there, with the apostles of Jesus, and they, (being Galilaeans) are speaking in languages they are not accustomed to speak in, and it’s really something!…
I wonder if ever 12 or more showed up at the temple drunk.
…”full of new wine”…? (Acts 2:13)
Maybe sometimes we should listen to what we say, even if we happen to be mocking at the time. (Luke 5:39)
Ray, may we kindly request that you try to consolidate your posts? We’re glad to have your comments, but these constant short posts (especially without interacting with anyone) completely overwhelm the site. Thanks!
I am not sympathetic to ur views but as an ex-pentecostal and ex-arminian I have been following the strange fire conference controversy (which I fully endorse) and hence your views in opposition to it whilst noticing the total lack of direct and specific rebuke of any single charismaniac. seems like even the most ardent exponents of the movement are bona fide to you as we have now seen. I noticed on this show that you quoted jonathan edwards as many charismatics do but i doubt if you have actually read edwards on these issues because if you had you would have noticed that he does not support your continuationist view and in fact once rebuked a man for claiming that God gave him a verse to help someone out of depression! Refer to “FAITHFUL NARRATIVE
OF THE SURPRISING WORK OF GOD IN THE CONVERSION OF MANY HUNDRED SOULS,IN NORTHAMPTON AND THE
NEIGHBOURING TOWNS AND VILLAGES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, IN NEW ENGLAND; IN A LETTER TO THE REV. COLMAN OF BOSTON
Please also refer to this treatise “THE DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF A WORK OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD,APPLIED TO THAT UNCOMMON OPERATION THAT HAS LATELY APPEARED ON THE MINDS OF THE PEOPLE OF NEW ENGLAND:WITH APARTICULAR CONSIDERATION OF THE EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES WITH WHICH THIS WORK IS ATTENDED.” Here are just two quotes “Therefore I do not expect a restoration of these miraculous gifts in the approaching glorious times of the church, nor do I desire it. It appears to me, that it would add nothing to the glory of those times, but rather diminish from it. and another “They who leave the sure word of prophecy which God has given us as a light shining in a dark place—to follow such impressions and impulses, leave the guidance of the polar star, to follow a Jack with a lantern. No wonder therefore that sometimes they are led into woeful extravagancies.” There is much more here. At least if you want to be seen as serious scholar please do your homework and be honest with your references in quoting men who truly stand out as having turned the world upside down and not the church.