Is This True?

[obriencp]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

The most important conclusion that can be drawn from Acts 19:1-2 regarding our doctrine is that repentance and believing are not synonymous with being filled with the Holy Ghost. 1. They hadn't even heard that there was a Holy Ghost--even though they had repented and were believers, and 2. In spite of the fact that they had repented and believed, Paul prayed for them and the Holy Ghost they hadn't yet heard of or experienced "came on them" and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. It was definitely a separate experience from repentance and believing.

This is why some believe that there is a separation/difference between salvation at repentance and believing and a later empowering of the the Holy Ghost, IE tongues as an external manifistation.

One could also read this as they hadn't heard of the empowerment of being filled with the Holy Ghost. Paul never stated they weren't saved. He did however pray for them that they too could receive a greater blessing that had been experienced by others.

Most OPs cannot separate tongues from salvation, or water from salvation. If you separate tongues from salvation, it's not so hard to see how one could be saved long before they ever speak in tongues. Acts traces the spread of the church and outpouring of the Holy Ghost. The experience of tongues was to prove to the apostles that God was not a respector of persons and that all could be saved under this new covenant.

On a separate note... we love to throw out verses that connect baptism to salvation. How many more verses connect believing/faith to salvation or having life? Now i expect people to counter this with James ch 2 to bolster the claim that faith and repentance alone cannot bring salvation.