I have been having a discussion with a friend about spiritual gifts. First of all, he believes that a person is baptized by the Holy Spirit separately from when they receive salvation.

Some people will get this impression from Acts 2. The disciples (already saved) have a separate experience with the Holy Ghost. Notice, however, that the passage never uses the term “baptized with the Holy Ghost,” only that they were “filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:4) and thus did the miraculous. Splitting hairs, maybe, but the terms used are significant. Another instance that may be separating salvation from the “baptism” is in Acts 19, but that’s kind of iffy. These were men who had accepted John’s message of a coming messiah (saved?) but had not yet heard of Jesus (unsaved?). As soon as they were told about Jesus, they believed and were baptized with water, and then the Holy Ghost “came upon them” (v. 6) and miraculous things happened. So were salvation and receiving the Holy Spirit separate events, or simultaneous? My guess is that they were saved by their faith under John, and that (in their minds) the Messiah just got a name when they were told of Jesus. This would separate the two events. The only other example of miracles associated with the coming of the Holy Spirit in Acts is Acts 10, when Cornelius, a gentile, and his family were saved. They all spoke in tongues at this event. In all three examples (Acts 2, 10 and 19) we have very unique groups (Jesus’ disciples, the first Gentile converts, and John’s disciples) that were saved, and had miraculous events to demonstrate the validity of that salvation. But in comparison with the salvation of literally THOUSANDS of people in Acts, we’d have to agree that these experiences were the exceptions, rather than the rules. Nowhere in that book are these called “gifts,” nor are they called “baptism.” Each time you have people saved under unique circumstances that are non-reproducible, and no indication that this was normal or expected of all believers.

In fact, the rest of Scripture emphasizes the connection between salvation and the Spirit’s indwelling, not the separation or distinction. Consider these verses…Romans 8:9 – “But if any man have not the spirit of God, he is none of His.” Romans 8:14 – “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” Romans 8:16 – “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God.” These all link having the Spirit and being saved. How can they then be successive or progressive events? A person is either saved or he is lost. He either has the Holy Spirit or he does not. The Holy Spirit is not a blessing to be sought, but a reality to be enjoyed in the life of a believer.

He also maintained that the spiritual gifts of prophecy, tongues, healing, etc are still given today because the Bible does not clearly state otherwise (1Cor 13 is considered vague). He points to 1 Cor 12 and 14 as proof of the existence of gifts. He believes that churches today are lukewarm because they don't believe in the power of the Holy Spirit and the use of spiritual gifts for the kingdom of God.

Nice of him to consider the best verse on the subject vague. It’s like saying “Prove to me that Jesus died for my sins, but don’t use John 3:16. I don’t like that verse.” Oh brother! Well, I’m going to start with I Corinthians anyway (just to be ornery) and then move on.

I Corinthians is definitely correcting that church for their misuse of spiritual gifts. Rather than using the blessings of God to build the church and reach the world, they had turned their gifts into a contest of spirituality, with those evidencing “showy,” visible manifestations of God’s power lording it over those who “only” served others, taught, showed mercy, etc. To that end, Paul emphasizes the relationship between members of the Body (Ch. 12) and specifically says that “showy” external things are proportionally less important than internal things (12:23-24). It’s like saying that my hair is more important than my heart, because my hair is visible, while no one sees my heart. It would be silly to think this way, and Paul reminds the church that “miraculous gifts” are technically less important than “ministry gifts,” and he explains why in Ch. 13. Consider the “vague” passage dealing with tongues in 13:8-10. I’ve annotated it below:

1 Corinthians 13:8-10 8 Charity never faileth (HE EXTOLS THE VIRTUE OF CHARITY, OR LOVE): but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail (PROPHECIES HERE REFERS TO THE ABILITY TO PREDICT THE FUTURE, A GIFT WHICH WILL EVENTUALLY “FAIL,” OR BE RENDERED INEFFECTIVE); whether there be tongues, they shall cease (TONGUES, MIRACULOUS LANGUAGES, ARE SAID TO BE FADING AWAY); whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away (“KNOWLEDGE” HERE REFERS TO DIRECT REVELATION FROM GOD, WHICH WOULD ALSO STOP IN THE FUTURE). 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away (SOMETHING PERFECT, OR COMPLETE WAS COMING, WHICH WOULD RENDER MIRACULOUS KNOWLEDGE AND PROPHECIES UNNECESSARY).

So why would these miraculous gifts fail, vanish away, and cease? What was the perfect thing which was coming. Jump over to Hebrews 2:3-4. It says…

Hebrews 2:3-4 3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; 4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

Those who heard Christ and the salvation He taught were responsible for taking that message to others. God put His stamp of approval on that message by enabling them to work miracles. This was to demonstrate that their message was correct and from Him. Thus the disciples at Pentecost demonstrated that their message was correct by speaking in tongues. Cornelius spoke in tongues to prove that the Gentiles were just as saved as the Jewish believers. John’s disciples showed they had accepted Christ by demonstrating the same miracles. The early apostles validated their authority in the spoken word of God by the miracles He enabled them to perform. Remember, however, that the apostles in the process of physically recording Jesus’ message and teachings. Eventually, the spoken messages would no longer be the ultimate authority, as they were replaced by the written messages. As more of the Bible was written, we would see fewer evidences of the miraculous. That which was “in part” was being done away, and replaced by that which was “perfect.” Today, I validate the authority of a preacher, not by how many miracles he works, but rather by how closely he agrees with the Bible.

So why don’t I believe that miracles are to be normal for today? Because they are unnecessary (we have the Bible) and we are told in that Bible that they would eventually end. Incidentally, that’s exactly what happened historically. I Corinthians was one of the first epistles to be written, and miracles were evidently still happening in that church. But as you go later chronologically through the epistles, miracles associated with the Holy Ghost are never again mentioned. Not in Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, the Thessalonians, the Timothy’s, etc. If tongues and other gifts were a crucial to salvation as modern charismatics claim, then Paul left out a major chunck of the gospel in all those other epistles! Your friend may feel like he and his church obey the “rules” laid down in Scripture regarding the use of the miraculous, but I’m afraid they are being rather selective about which rules they choose to follow.

The biggest defense he has is his own testimony.

And so we come to the heart of the matter. Which is more authoritative? My experience, or the Bible? I don’t mean to be harsh, but at the end of the day, I am fallible, prone to error, capable of misunderstanding, and easily mislead. My Bible is infallible, contains no errors, speaks quite clearly, and will never lead me astray. I can’t explain what has happened to your friend in his experience with charismatic gifts, but if his experience is contradictory to the Word of God, I’m going to come down on the side of the Bible every single time.

I started to pray that God would show me truth and discernment in regard to spiritual gifts. I don't doubt that God can use people in a miraculous way; however, something about stories of people going to Africa and curing 400 people from AIDS and raising 200+ people from the dead just doesn't add up.

It is interesting, is it not, that the vast majority of these “miracles” occur in underdeveloped, under-reported, and previously/currently idolatrous countries? I’d be nervous about those evidences also. If someone has the gift of healing, why not empty the local hospital on CNN? Admittedly Jesus was never flashy in His miracle working, and never did it just to draw attention to Himself, but neither did He EVER turn down a request for help. Today’s televangelist charismatics claim that if a healing doesn’t occur, it’s a problem with the sick person’s faith. Sounds awful convenient to me.

If you want to read more on the subject, check out John Macarthur’s book, “Charismatic Chaos.” He’ll give you the full run-down on the Bible teaching, the problems with the charismatic arguments, and more examples than you can shake a stick at.