Speaking In Tongues Does Not Equal Salvation.

[deadeye]

Originally Posted by Mr. Steinway

1Cr 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Which carries more weight? Charity or speaking in tongues?

Can one be saved without charity, or speaking in tongues or either?

Speaking in tongues is not the ultimate test of salvation!

Actually the New Birth is the ultimate test of salvation...tongues however happens to be a very important part of the New Birth.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by deadeye

Actually the New Birth is the ultimate test of salvation...tongues however happens to be a very important part of the New Birth.

so then all who have never spoken in tongues in the history of the church are lost?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

so then all who have never spoken in tongues in the history of the church are lost?

yes,

if

speaking with tongues is the initial physical evidence of the HGB (Holy Ghost Baptism) and nobody has ever received the HGB unless they have spoken with tongues

and

the Holy Ghost Baptism is the birth of the Spirit.

It seems to me that would have to be a fair assessment of that doctrine.

Some of us, however, believe that there is a birth of the Spirit at repentance and the HGB is a separate experience and those who have been born of the Spirit may or may not later receive the HGB.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

so then all who have never spoken in tongues in the history of the church are lost?

This would be not just silly, but sad - knowing only a small minority of Christian heroes I honor and respect has practiced the speaking in tongues phenomenon.

[geekette]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

This would be not just silly, but sad - knowing only a small minority of Christian heroes I honor and respect has practiced the speaking in tongues phenomenon.

But there were and are people who believe it, and then would go through contortions trying to prove that their devout grandmother had spoken in tongues even though she was a staunch Methodist until the day she died (and, truth be told, would never have done anything so undignified).

Of course, that was nothing compared to the hoops people would jump through to prove that their Methodist granny was saved even though she hadn't been baptized in Jesus' Name.

[BroGary]

Originally Posted by geekette

But there were and are people who believe it, and then would go through contortions trying to prove that their devout grandmother had spoken in tongues even though she was a staunch Methodist until the day she died (and, truth be told, would never have done anything so undignified).

Of course, that was nothing compared to the hoops people would jump through to prove that their Methodist granny was saved even though she hadn't been baptized in Jesus' Name.

I understand what you are saying, and while we of course want as many people to be saved as possible, we can't just ignore doctrine as unimportant and simply say that just being sincere is enough reguardless of how you believe.

That is why it is so important to stand firm for what the Bible says is a must to be born again and share that truth with others.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Amen and amen. This is the very accusation people have against whom they call "three steppers" and it is a strawman. No matter how anyone slices it, you cannot accuse something that is claimed to be initial evidence of what is required for salvation to be thing required for salvation based upon that claim. --no matter who among the three step crowd mistakenly treats it as though it were.

[KWSS1976]

I am just still tring to figure out why he said this was a "gift" and 12 peps pray over someone and they still do not get the "gift"...Thats not how it happened in the bible..everytime someone had there hands laid on them in Acts it happened..So what has changed between then and now...?????

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by pelathais

LOL! Maybe he will come back and elaborate a little on that last comment.

[Digging4Truth]

No mention of tongues here...

Act 9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, [even] Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Act 9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

No mention of tongues here...

Act 8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
Act 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
Act 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Act 8:17 Then laid they [their] hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

No mention of tongues here...

Act 8:14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
Act 8:15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
Act 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Act 8:17 Then laid they [their] hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

I think we would be more Biblically sound to recognize that tongues can be a sign. But to require as part of our doctrine that tongues IS, absolutely, THE initial evidence cannot be unequivocally backed up with scripture.