Why Such A Fuss Over Standards!!

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I will say this and I know that won't be very popular here, but I believe it is false doctrine and, therefore also a lie, to say that speaking in tongues is not evidence of the Holy Ghost/Sprit and that we do not need it to be saved.

Why do I believe that?

Galatians 3:14 "That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."

Acts 2:33 "Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear."

Another strong point begins at the Galatians 3:1 "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

What did Jesus say about one of the reason's he would have to be die? Not only to save us from our sins, but in order for the Comforter to come and dwell in us.

John 15:26 "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:"

John 16:7 "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

Romans 8:9 "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

Romans 8:11-12 "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you."

He testifies in Acts 2:33 that what they see and what they hear is the Holy Ghost that was promised.

Galatians 3:15 "Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto."

I see many leave, and not necessarily always because of the standards, but they also leave the truth - that the Holy Ghost is evidenced by speaking in tongues or that it is salvific. That is not negotiable for me. That may be another reason that people who stay in, regardless of the standards, don't want to follow. Just my observation.

The issue of shaking people and forcing them to an altar, etc. is a whole separate matter.

I know that when I received the Holy Ghost I spoke in tongues... but none of the above scriptures specifically say that tongues is the evidence.

I think this verse comes closer:


Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I know that when I received the Holy Ghost I spoke in tongues... but none of the above scriptures specifically say that tongues is the evidence.

I think this verse comes closer:


Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

You must have missed Acts 2:33.

[OnTheFritz]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

You must have missed Acts 2:33.

I don't nessarily disagree with your premise, but nothing about Acts 2:33 implies EVIDENCE by speaking in tongues. I think that's a stretch.

Hate that I was too busy today to participate in this thread. It's been a good one.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by OnTheFritz

I don't nessarily disagree with your premise, but nothing about Acts 2:33 implies EVIDENCE by speaking in tongues. I think that's a stretch.

Hate that I was too busy today to participate in this thread. It's been a good one.

I don't believe that can be a stretch - at all. When you read Acts 2:4 it bears out that they were speaking in tongues.

The context of Acts is based on Psalms 16 and Psalm 110. If the writer was only referring to his words to them concerning those OT scriptures, he would have said "hear" only, but he also said, "see". Therefore, they were hearing and seeing something and verse 4 bears out what that would be - tongues, i.e., the Holy Spirit.

It was the "seal" set upon them - Ephesians 1:13 "And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,"

That's why Galatians 3:15 can say - "Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. Galatians 3 is all about the Holy Ghost.

It only makes sense, IMO.