Jesus did not baptize anybody with the Holy Spirit while He was on earth. HE BAPTIZES NOW in the Spirit.
HOW TO RECEIVE & ACTIVATE THE GIFT OF SPEAKING IN TONGUES.
Thread: 1/15
Jesus did not baptize anybody with the Holy Spirit while He was on earth. HE BAPTIZES NOW in the Spirit.
See Matth 3v11, Mark 1v7-8, Luke 3v16, John 1v33
"He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit". But nobody was baptized with the Spirit while He was on earth, until after He ascended-Acts 1v5-8
Why is this truth important? Because for the most part Christians have developed this habit of separating salvation from every other experience in Christ.
Just as Jesus is the Savior; Jesus is the Healer; Jesus is the baptizer in the Spirit!
What about the baptism of the Spirit? Is He now holding it back from us?
Jesus is God's best. The best gift God could have given anyone is JESUS. So if God didn't hold back Jesus from us, He's not holding back anything else!
Luke 11:11, 13 CEV
God is not holding back. "He that asks, receives". It means when we ask of Him, He gives us without hesitation.
So what happens when you ask? You received. But why don't you speak in tongues?
1. Their assumptions. They suppose that they have to FEEL something, like shouting & rolling on the floor. But Bible didn't tell us that.
2. Sin consciousness. They feel they're too filthy & unworthy to receive the HOLY Spirit.
4. Some feel that when the Spirit comes, He takes hold of our mouth & does the speaking. No! You do the speaking!
He is our teacher. We speak, He gives the utterance - the ability to speak well.
Let's see something in 1 Cor 14v14-15: the word "I WILL" is used 4 times!
"They were filled with the Spirit & BEGAN TO SPEAK in tongues.." Acts 2v4
Even though we've received the gift of the Spirit, we can neglect it. 1 Tim 4v14
It's up to us to stir up the gift of God which we have received! Stir it up! Don't be afraid! 2 Tim 1v6
Just like the house of Cornelius, He's willing to fall on you now if you'll yield in faith (Acts 10v44-46) "While Peter yet spoke the Holy Spirit fell!"
I.e "God's Word says it, & I do it, not because I feel so but because the Word says so" that's faith!
If you need someone to pray with you, my DM Is open. I'm not the Baptizer in the Spirit, no man is, Jesus is!
Shalom 💕
More from Religion
A TINY THREAD ON NON-ACCEPTANCE OF ATHEISTS IN SOME HINDU HOLY BOOKS.
Many RW Hindus with confused identity think that Hinduism accepts Atheists.
What do some of the Hindu sacred texts say on this topic? Let's see.
Shri Krishna was 100% clear on importance of Shaastras as we already know.
Shri Rama was also clear on what should be done to atheists.
Ayodhya Kanda of Valmiki Ramayana.
https://t.co/lbCkEkPobA
Maharaaj Manu on Atheists.
Bhagvan Ved Vyas Ji in Shanti Parva of Mahabharata said this to his son Shukadeva regarding Atheists.
Many RW Hindus with confused identity think that Hinduism accepts Atheists.
What do some of the Hindu sacred texts say on this topic? Let's see.
Shri Krishna was 100% clear on importance of Shaastras as we already know.
Shri Rama was also clear on what should be done to atheists.
Ayodhya Kanda of Valmiki Ramayana.
https://t.co/lbCkEkPobA
Maharaaj Manu on Atheists.
Bhagvan Ved Vyas Ji in Shanti Parva of Mahabharata said this to his son Shukadeva regarding Atheists.
#BookExcerpts #Venkateshwara #Balaji
I will write a 3 part thread series with some interesting points from this book.
Part-1 : History of Tirumala & Venkateshwara Swamy
Part-2: Rituals & Prasada Procedure
Part-3: Historical records
Part-1 thread below
1/
Venkatachala Hill
Maha Vishnu wished for the mountain Krida / Krida Parvatham / Kridhachalam from Vaikunta to be brought to the earth for his avataram.
This was brought to earth by Garuda and Ananta & placed it on banks of river Swarna Mukhi
2/
This is where current Tirumala temple is located. The fact that this was transported from Vaikunta is apparently a scientifically proven fact.
The scientific dating of the sedimentary rocks have confirmed the date to be around 120 million years ago..
3/
This timeline coincides with Swayambhu Manu manvanthara of the Sweta Varaha Kalpa which is the time when Swamy descended on earth in the form of Venkateshwara Swamy.
From a survey of flora and fauna, they have found rare species of plants & animals like golden gecko..
4/
that are exclusive to this hill range only and not found anywhere else in the world.
Tirumala hills are a range of 7 hills
1. Seshachala
2. Vedachala
3. Garudachala
4. Anjanachala
5. Vrishabhachala
6. Narayanachala
7. Venkatachala --> Where temple is present
5/
I will write a 3 part thread series with some interesting points from this book.
Part-1 : History of Tirumala & Venkateshwara Swamy
Part-2: Rituals & Prasada Procedure
Part-3: Historical records
Part-1 thread below
1/
#Books
— GunduHuduga| \u0c97\u0cc1\u0c82\u0ca1\u0cc1 \u0cb9\u0cc1\u0ca1\u0cc1\u0c97|\U0001f549 (@GunduHuDuGa) January 14, 2021
Thanks to Niranjan Raman again for this wonderful recommendation
Tirumala - Sacred Foods of God pic.twitter.com/dwiZDPI7W0
Venkatachala Hill
Maha Vishnu wished for the mountain Krida / Krida Parvatham / Kridhachalam from Vaikunta to be brought to the earth for his avataram.
This was brought to earth by Garuda and Ananta & placed it on banks of river Swarna Mukhi
2/
This is where current Tirumala temple is located. The fact that this was transported from Vaikunta is apparently a scientifically proven fact.
The scientific dating of the sedimentary rocks have confirmed the date to be around 120 million years ago..
3/
This timeline coincides with Swayambhu Manu manvanthara of the Sweta Varaha Kalpa which is the time when Swamy descended on earth in the form of Venkateshwara Swamy.
From a survey of flora and fauna, they have found rare species of plants & animals like golden gecko..
4/
that are exclusive to this hill range only and not found anywhere else in the world.
Tirumala hills are a range of 7 hills
1. Seshachala
2. Vedachala
3. Garudachala
4. Anjanachala
5. Vrishabhachala
6. Narayanachala
7. Venkatachala --> Where temple is present
5/
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
