I'm just wondering...
Because the first time these folks were FILLED, the result was they "began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."
Acts 2:4
Yet in
Acts 4:29-31 when they were FILLED, the result was boldness to witness and healing hands.
It seems to me that both incidents resulted in different by-products of the Holy Ghost to be manifested.
So... I'm wondering,
Would we accuse someone of not being saved if they didn't have the gift of healing?
Yet we accuse them of not being saved if they don't speak in tongues. I don't get it.
I am really only trying to understand.
Threaded Mode
