Dr Paul Allen

The most obvious answer to this question is that the Scriptures encourage it. Jesus said it was one of the signs that was to follow the ministry of Christians: “And these signs will accompany those who believe…they will speak in new tongues” (Mark 16:17).  And Paul, while recognising the need for propriety in the public manifestation of tongues, nevertheless urged Christians to receive and make use of this significant gift. “Earnestly desire the spiritual gifts….Now I want you all to speak in tongues….I thank God that I speak in tongues more than you all” (1 Corinthians 14:1, 5, 18). As the late Reverend Samuel Shoemaker observed, “The Christian needs every gift God offers.” The willingness to yield our tongues to God may also indicate a more profound surrender than almost any other act. The tongue is the primary instrument of expression of the human personality, and until God has dominion over the tongue, His control over us is relatively slight. So the tongue is a little member ...

Question:   “Do all speak with tongues?” (1 Corinthians 12:30) and “If any speak in tongues, let there be only two or at most three” (1 Corinthians 14:27) indicate that not all Christians are meant to speak in tongues? THERE IS A DIFFERENCE - ARE YOU LISTENING? Certainly, this has been used as an extensive argument by those who oppose speaking in tongues. In fact, many use Paul’s statement, “let there be only two or at most three,” not to limit tongues but to prohibit them entirely.  Both these Scriptures must be considered in any discussion of tongues, but only in connection with Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 14:5: “Now I want you all to speak in tongues.” How do we reconcile “let there be only two or at most three” and “I want you all to speak”? Is Paul contradicting himself? No. The confusion is cleared away when we consider the two sets of circumstances in which speaking in tongues appears in the New Testament.  They appear both as a sign and as a gift.  They...

With God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26), therefore, the answer to this question is yes. However, it is a highly qualified yes! I personally know of two people who received the baptism in the Holy Spirit and spoke in English rather than in unknown tongues. Both were exceptionally sensitive, prophetic men, true spiritual giants of our time. One is Dr Frank Laubach, through whom the Holy Spirit manifested Himself supernaturally in English.  The other was Rufus Moseley, who, some months after his baptism in the Holy Spirit, began to speak in tongues and continued to witness faithfully to their value until his death. In a booklet entitled “How to Enter, Abide, and Increase in Union with Jesus Christ,” he makes this excellent statement: My feeling is that we must not be dogmatic and say that no one can have the baptism of the Holy Spirit unless he speaks in tongues. God, of course, can speak in English and in every tongue of men and angels. But He now seems a little more real ...

The only clear scriptural evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues. The first Christians to be baptised in the Holy Spirit were the 120 gathered in the upper room at Pentecost. The unique evidence that the 120 received the Holy Spirit was that “they began to speak in other tongues” (Acts 2:4).  All the other spiritual gifts, such as healing and prophecy, appear in the Old Testament and in the gospels. But with the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, which signified God’s presence in the disciples’ lives in a new dimension, God gave a new gift: the gift of tongues. The book of Acts records five separate occasions when the Holy Spirit was received. On three of these occasions, speaking in tongues is specifically mentioned as the visible sign accompanying the experience: at Pentecost (see Acts 2:4), at the house of Cornelius (see Acts 10:44–46), and at Ephesus (see Acts 19:6).  Paul received the Holy Spirit when Ananias laid hands on him and prayed (...

First of all, how much importance should we place on whether or not a religious practice is currently “normative”? Christianity is not the normative religion of the world today, but this does not keep Christians from proclaiming Jesus Christ as the Light of the world and believing that it is God’s will for all men to come to a saving knowledge of Him.  While the baptism in the Holy Spirit may not yet be normative in the church of our day, nevertheless, it is growing by leaps and bounds. It was much more normative in the early church than is generally understood. A study of Scripture shows that Christians in Caesarea, Samaria, Ephesus, Rome, Corinth, and Jerusalem received the Holy Spirit with speaking in tongues, since either direct or indirect references point to the fact. We know that the 120 in the upper room at Pentecost spoke in tongues, as did the apostle Paul. From this group emerged almost the entire leadership of the early church.  O bviously, as they ministered in th...

SUMMARY: 1.  The  imperfect tense  in  ἐδίδου  ("was giving") shows that the Holy Spirit’s influence was  continuous , not delayed,  fulfilling Jesus' promise  of lasting spiritual  power  in Acts 1:8. Therefore,  Acts 2:4 reads  "As the Spirit was continuously giving, kept giving again and again for them to speak out."  (or as the NIV " as the Spirit gave them utterance.") 2.  Acts 2:4   illustrates the "ablative of source" concept: "they were filled from the Spirit as the source." From out of the source of the Holy Spirit came ongoing, continuous languages, again and again, with no hesitation. Fifteen untaught but known languages simultaneously declaring Christ at the same time by people who were overwhelmed, overflowing, submerged, and totally dominated by the Holy Spirit, who was continually giving. First Explanation of Edidou. "The continuing influence of the Holy Spirit is seen in the imperfect tense in 'ed...

Acts 2:4 ends with the phrase, "as the Spirit gave them utterance, or as the Spirit enabled them."  Meaning, in all of Christian life, nothing is accomplished apart from God.  The followers of Christ on the day of Pentecost spoke in the languages of at least fifteen different countries or ethnic groups. The description in the text states that people from various regions, like Parthia, Media, Elam, Mesopotamia, Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, Libya, Rome, Crete, and Arabia, were able to understand the disciples speaking in their own languages. The context of the phrase "the Spirit gave them utterance" clearly acknowledges that the Holy Spirit immediately gave each disciple the ability to speak in a language they had not previously learned, enabling them to declare Christ. Yes, it was evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit and also a very unique experience for the disciples. The word utterance is not found with the same event in Acts 11...

Does the Holy Spirit Choose Not to Baptize People, or Are People the Problem? From a Pentecostal perspective, including that of Donald Gee and other scholars, the issue is not that the Holy Spirit chooses not to baptize certain people but that individuals may encounter personal barriers to receiving. Baptism in the Holy Spirit is a promise available to all believers, not a selective gift withheld by God. God’s Desire to Baptize All Believers Pentecostals believe Baptism in the Holy Spirit is a gift available to all who believe in Christ. Acts 2:39 states: "The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call." (NIV) This verse supports the view that Baptism in the Holy Spirit is not limited to a select few but is meant for all believers. Scholars such as Donald Gee emphasize that God does not withhold the Holy Spirit arbitrarily; rather, the responsibility often lies with the individual (Gee, Pentecost , 1932). Human B...

The baptism in the Holy Spirit is after conversion. Why must this be? The baptism in the Holy Spirit is evidenced by speaking in tongues. How can this occur?  The doctrine of the conditions for the baptism in the Holy Spirit is the sustained Pentecostal effort to answer both these questions: to explain why spiritual baptism cannot usually accompany initial faith,  detailing the conditions that believers usually fail to meet at that time, and to announce how spiritual baptism can be brought to the crisis event where tongues will occur, detailing the conditions that, when fulfilled, will lead to the experience.  The doctrine of conditions, then, is actually a corollary of the doctrine of subsequence and a premise for the doctrine of evidence, and as such, occupies a cornerstone position in the edifice of the distinctive Pentecostal doctrine. Under the doctrine of conditions, it is regularly suggested that certain fundamental steps must be taken for the believer to be a suit...