Speaking In Tongues Does Not Equal Salvation. - Page 18

DAII · #**171** 08-14-2010, 01:41 PM

These hokey analogies of babies crying in the natural ... and necessarily equating it to the spiritual is sheer lunacy and wishful thinking ...

In the 3 step paradigm ... I've heard these self-birthing sycophants compare each step to the gestation period and delivery ... yet in the case of Cornelius we have the "final step", new life/resurrection, or delivery and "crying" in tongues ... before there is a proper burial and "going through the birth canal" ... pick your analogy ...

Can one obey the Gospel and have new life without following the steps Christ took? It's convenient word blathering. That which is still dead cannot be quickened to life unless the Author of Life ... does the quickening ...

The proposal made here is that ... that which is reckoned dead can live before being quickened.

The same folks who politically consider a fetus alive and a baby in the mother's womb... would somehow fallaciously use an analogy that falls short in logical sequence and doctrinally .... while continually putting the glory and effort for the birth and new creation on the baby.

Compare to a physical baby crying all you want ... it ain't bible or logic

If we are going to use the natural and logic to explain the instantaneous work of the Holy Spirit we're doomed to the laws of physics and our limited earth-bound definitions.

We must be born FROM ABOVE (gennao anothen)

BroGary · #**172** 08-14-2010, 01:46 PM

Here is a reply from someone else who was in a simular discussion elsewhere:

I believe they did speak the name of Jesus at some point during the baptism, not the English version of course, but whichever language was contemporary (Jesus is smart enough to know we are speaking to Him whether we are using Greek, Russian, Spanish, etc.) It may not have been exactly like we do it today when we dunk them in the water and say "[name of person], I baptize you in the Name of Jesus Christ...", but at some point they needed to tell the person that they are getting baptized in the name of Jesus. Below this paragraph are three verses where the name of Jesus was invoked by spoken words. The verses are not related to baptisms, but they show that yes, indeed, speaking His name was practiced.

"Then Peter said, 'Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.'" Acts 3:16

"...But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, 'I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.' And he came out the same hour."

"Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the LORD Jesus, saying, 'We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.." Acts 19:13

If one were not baptized with some kind of spoken reference, how would one know who he or she was baptized "in"? The baptizer could be doing it "in the name" of The Great Pumpkin for all we know. There was a similar situation in the Bible where people were apparently prone to identify baptism "into" someone other than Jesus, which Paul condemed: "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name." (1 Corinthians 1:13-15). So, it's extremely important that the one being baptized is made aware of exactly who they are being baptised into, and who they are NOT being baptised into, and the only way to do that is to speak it plainly and clearly.
Paul asked a group in Acts 19 about their own baptism methods, and then re-baptized them, so again we know it was important to the original church to know precisely who we were baptized into.
What we actually speak aloud is powerful; for example, "blasphemy" is defined as the audible spoken word against God. Jesus said blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only unforgivable sin. Apparently just "thinking it" wasn't unforgivable, but speaking that "thinking" aloud is.

DAII · #**173** 08-14-2010, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroGary

Here is a reply from someone else who was in a simular discussion elsewhere:

I believe they did speak the name of Jesus at some point during the baptism, not the English version of course, but whichever language was contemporary (Jesus is smart enough to know we are speaking to Him whether we are using Greek, Russian, Spanish, etc.) It may not have been exactly like we do it today when we dunk them in the water and say "[name of person], I baptize you in the Name of Jesus Christ...", but at some point they needed to tell the person that they are getting baptized in the name of Jesus. Below this paragraph are three verses where the name of Jesus was invoked by spoken words. The verses are not related to baptisms, but they show that yes, indeed, speaking His name was practiced.

"Then Peter said, 'Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.'" Acts 3:16

"...But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, 'I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.' And he came out the same hour."

"Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the LORD Jesus, saying, 'We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.." Acts 19:13

If one were not baptized with some kind of spoken reference, how would one know who he or she was baptized "in"? The baptizer could be doing it "in the name" of The Great Pumpkin for all we know. There was a similar situation in the Bible where people were apparently prone to identify baptism "into" someone other than Jesus, which Paul condemed: "Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name." (1 Corinthians 1:13-15). So, it's extremely important that the one being baptized is made aware of exactly who they are being baptised into, and who they are NOT being baptised into, and the only way to do that is to speak it plainly and clearly.
Paul asked a group in Acts 19 about their own baptism methods, and then re-baptized them, so again we know it was important to the original church to know precisely who we were baptized into.
What we actually speak aloud is powerful; for example, "blasphemy" is defined as the audible spoken word against God. Jesus said blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the only unforgivable sin. Apparently just "thinking it" wasn't unforgivable, but speaking that "thinking" aloud is.

No doctrine of necessary invocation of the proper name Jesus in the Bible to obtain salvation ... is what you are saying and that your brand of salvation hangs on your assumptions.

Sound doctrine and hermeneutics don't work that way.

You have no bible for your doctrine. In your paradigm a deaf mute cannot baptize another deaf mute because "speaking the proper name" remits sin.

The Gospel applies in all instances.

Falla39 · #**174** 08-14-2010, 01:51 PM

Col. 3:17
17And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

DAII · #**175** 08-14-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falla39

Col. 3:17
17And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

When you typed that verse, Falla, did you invoke the name "Jesus" at every keystroke ... if you did not .. then using your prooftexting and hermeneutic you've disobeyed this command ... You can't have it both ways.

Doing things in His name has a long tradition in Scripture ... in the OT as well and it was never in the Hebraic mind ... about getting syllables of a proper name ... correctly ...

The power is not in adjuring the proper name ... if so then the sons of Sceva would have been successful ... it's about the power and the authority given by the person of Jesus Christ.

Pull up all the verses that deal with in the name of the Lord, from the OT onward, and you will see a consistent thread and pattern as to its meaning ...

Again, no bible for this doctrine.

BroGary · #**176** 08-14-2010, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lacey

I witnessed several new people receive the Holy Ghost the other night at church. They ALL spoke with tongues as the Spirit of God gave the utterance....

just like the Bible says happens.

NEW people. New to the Experience. New people that most definitely would not know how to "fake" tongues.

It is always, ALWAYS a miraculous thing to witness!

I thank God that He chose the tongue (that unruly member) for EVIDENCE!!

Amen, excellent example and points !

I remember from years ago someone who did NOT believe speaking in tongues was still for today, but he was very hungry for God and was praying earnestly at the altar reaching out to God in hunger and when God filled him with His Spirit he started speaking in tongues and afterwards had to acknowledge people do speak in tongues as the Spirit gives uttterence :-)

He definitely was NOT trying to speak in tongues because he did NOT believe he was supposed to speak in tongues, but it happened anyhow when he received the Holy Ghost :-)

Falla39 · #**177** 08-14-2010, 01:57 PM

I believe there are some on this forum that in their professing to be wise, they are/have
become/becoming foolish!
Falla39

DAII · #**178** 08-14-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falla39

I believe there are some on this forum that in their professing to be wise, they are/have
become/becoming foolish!
Falla39

A fool for the Cross, Falla ... but you cannot make a doctrine from isolating scripture and forcing your meaning into it ... and that's what you have done.

It's unsound and it's why most consider this paradigm heterodoxy or heretical.

No explicit apostolic doctrine of necessary invocation to obtain salvation and sin remission/washing ...

It does not exist.

Pressing-On · #**179** 08-14-2010, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII

When you typed that verse, Falla, did you invoke the name "Jesus" at every keystroke ... if you did not .. then using your prooftexting and hermeneutic you've disobeyed this command ... You can't have it both ways.
.

Smart aleck comment, Danny.

I think that if I don't care much for a dress code, i.e. someone telling me what to do or how to dress OR that someone in leadership was a rank sinner, I don't believe I would jump ship toward false doctrine. It's a deception. In patience, possess ye your soul.

DAII · #**180** 08-14-2010, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Smart aleck comment, Danny.

I think that if I don't care much for a dress code, i.e. someone telling me what to do or how to dress OR that someone in leadership was a rank sinner, I don't believe I would jump ship toward false doctrine. It's a deception. In patience, possess ye your soul.

Did you say "Jesus" after or during ... posting this?

If not then you are in disobedience, as well

Unless Paul meant what most of Christianity understands .... and YOU DON'T.