Need the HG speaking in tongues to be saved - Page 2

kclee4jc · #11 10-05-2011, 04:44 AM

stay steadfast amanah :-)

deltaguitar · #12 10-05-2011, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amanah

without the HG seal of approval (tongues as evidence) the deal is off.
the HG seals the deal.

There is no mention of tongues as an evidence of spirit baptism in scripture. I see nothing mentioned by any apostle, teacher, or Jesus that mentions this. There are three or four instances where people receive the Holy Ghost and that happened over a very long period of years and years. Each time tongues was mentioned is was because this was a new people group who were receiving the spirit and each time there was an apostle present. Other than those instances, there is no other mention in scripture of tongues ever accompanying the Holy Spirit and many thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people were saved. If fact, the whole world changed and the gospel spread like wildfire and there is no mention of people seeking this evidence.

Amanah, the AOG, COG, and most other pentecostal groups teach that the spirit baptism is subsequent and a "second blessing" after being indwelt by the Holy Spirit at conversion. The idea that the "initial evidence" was required for receiving the holy spirit has not been a widespread teaching of pentecostalism.

This all started with the holiness methodist who taught of a second blessing that happened after conversion called "entire sanctification" Many of these folks carried that idea over to the new movement that was the beginning of pentecostalism. They taught of a second blessing called the "baptism of the holy spirit with the evidence of speaking in other tongues" that was for empowerment or for the gifts. There was later a split between the holiness methodist and the "baptism of the holy ghost" folks and that split resulted in the beginning of the pentecostal movement. The pentecostals didn't want there to be a "third" blessing because that was just getting way to far from scripture. I think this was around the time that the AOG was formed.

This is all documented and once you trace the roots and the thinking of the people during that time period it is very easy to see how folks were looking for a power that would prove that they were the "real" christians.

We cannot just accept that the baptism of the holy ghost IS the same as the indwelling of the holy spirit at conversion. Even among pentecostals it never was meant to be believed that way.

Pressing-On · #13 10-05-2011, 07:39 AM

Galatians 1:12 "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."

Luke 24:49 "And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high."

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."

scotty · #14 10-05-2011, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrsMcD

I do not believe you have to speak in tongues to be saved.

Nobody believes that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orthodoxy

I do not believe that tongues are a requirement for salvation.

And again, nobody has made this statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kclee4jc

stay steadfast amanah :-)

Agreed Hold true to your convictions.

Amanah, here is the twist your going to run into here on the forum. People like me and you and kclee and others believe that speaking in tongues is "evidence" of one being baptized in the Spirit. As you see from the statements quoted above, some will twist that around to make it look like you believe that the "speaking in tongues" is "salvational", when its not, its the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

While some here, such as Delta, will legitimatly debate whether tongues is evidence or not, others will try to box you in and brand you with "tongues = salvation". Don't fall for it.

Pressing-On · #15 10-05-2011, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotty

[B]
Agreed Hold true to your convictions.

Amanah, here is the twist your going to run into here on the forum. People like me and you and kclee and others believe that speaking in tongues is "evidence" of one being baptized in the Spirit. As you see from the statements quoted above, some will twist that around to make it look like you believe that the "speaking in tongues" is "salvational", when its not, its the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

While some here, such as Delta, will legitimatly debate whether tongues is evidence or not, others will try to box you in and brand you with "tongues = salvation". Don't fall for it.

That's a fine line, IMO, Scotty.

If you have NOT the spirit of Christ, you are none of His. (Romans 8:9)

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: (John 16:13)

It looks like a salvational issue to me. Perhaps I don't understand what you are saying. Tongues is the initial evidence of being filled with the Holy Ghost. I don't see how we are able to separate the two. Actually, I've never understood that.

I believe that you cannot be saved without the Word and without His Spirit. The Spirit leads and guides, the Word sets you free.

On another note, the "second blessing" view is totally bogus and has no scripture to support it.

deltaguitar · #16 10-05-2011, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotty

Nobody believes that.

And again, nobody has made this statement.

Agreed Hold true to your convictions.

Amanah, here is the twist your going to run into here on the forum. People like me and you and kclee and others believe that speaking in tongues is "evidence" of one being baptized in the Spirit. As you see from the statements quoted above, some will twist that around to make it look like you believe that the "speaking in tongues" is "salvational", when its not, its the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

While some here, such as Delta, will legitimatly debate whether tongues is evidence or not, others will try to box you in and brand you with "tongues = salvation". Don't fall for it.

Scotty, it looks to me like Amanah is calling the holy spirit AND baptism of the holy spirit the same thing. While I could agree, I am on a totally opposite side of the argument.

I just wanted to bring up the point that very few pentecostals believe that holy ghost indwelling and holy ghost baptism are the same thing.

Holy Ghost baptism has always been seen as a second blessing among most in the pentecostal world. However, among pentecostal three-steppers they do not make a distinction between the two and require "tongues" as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit and therefore a REQUIREMENT for new birth.

Here is a great debate by David Bernard and one of my favorite calvinist debators, James White. DB lays out his position that is very similar to Amanah's. There are five videos total.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kx-bD...eature=related

I am very familiar with Amanah's position because I believed the same thing for 27 years.

scotty · #17 10-05-2011, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

That's a fine line, IMO, Scotty.

If you have NOT the spirit of Christ, you are none of His. (Romans 8:9)

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: (John 16:13)

It looks like a salvational issue to me. Perhaps I don't understand what you are saying. Tongues is the initial evidence of being filled with the Holy Ghost. I don't see how we are able to separate the two. Actually, I've never understood that.

On another note, the "second blessing" view is totally bogus and has no scripture to support it.

I'm sure you don't understand what I am saying as we have usually agreed on this topic in the past.

My belief is that one must recieve the Holy Ghost to be saved. A sign or "evidence" of one recieving the Holy Ghost is speaking in other tongues.

My point was that what some here attempt to do is turn it around to say that "speaking in tongues" is the catalyst for salvation. They like to say that we encourage others to pray or seek "tongues" for salvation when in fact we encourage others to pray or seek the "Holy Ghost". Tongues will come as a "result" of being filled.

Pressing-On · #18 10-05-2011, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

Scotty, it looks to me like Amanah is calling the holy spirit AND baptism of the holy spirit the same thing. While I could agree, I am on a totally opposite side of the argument.

Yes, that is how I view it as well.

Quote:

I just wanted to bring up the point that very few pentecostals believe that holy ghost indwelling and holy ghost baptism are the same thing.

But, Delta, what difference does that really make? It really is and should be - what does the Word of God say about it?

My husband was raised with the "second blessing" teaching (COG) and today he believes that teaching is erroneous.

Pressing-On · #19 10-05-2011, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotty

I'm sure you don't understand what I am saying as we have usually agreed on this topic in the past.

My belief is that one must recieve the Holy Ghost to be saved. A sign or "evidence" of one recieving the Holy Ghost is speaking in other tongues.

My point was that what some here attempt to do is turn it around to say that "speaking in tongues" is the catalyst for salvation. They like to say that we encourage others to pray or seek "tongues" for salvation when in fact we encourage others to pray or seek the "Holy Ghost". Tongues will come as a "result" of being filled.

Okay,, yes, I understand you now. This is how I explain that - We don't teach to seek the gift, but seek the Giver. Seeking the Giver will result in receiving the gift. That's how I explain it. Are we on the same page?

deltaguitar · #20 10-05-2011, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

That's a fine line, IMO, Scotty.

If you have NOT the spirit of Christ, you are none of His. (Romans 8:9)

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: (John 16:13)

It looks like a salvational issue to me. Perhaps I don't understand what you are saying. Tongues is the initial evidence of being filled with the Holy Ghost. I don't see how we are able to separate the two. Actually, I've never understood that.

I believe that you cannot be saved without the Word and without His Spirit. The Spirit leads and guides, the Word sets you free.

On another note, the "second blessing" view is totally bogus and has no scripture to support it.

I would agree that it is totally bogus but not nearly as bogus as the "initial evidence" doctrine.

To me, the best way to characterize it is to say that we receive the Holy Spirit at conversion or new birth (yes some folks connect this to speaking in tongues but if you come to my church you will meet many people who have the holy spirit who have never spoke in tongues) and that the gifts of the spirit are available today in a believers life. That may include tongues, teaching, word of knowledge, gift of healing, ministry, etc.

There is no normative experience in teh new testament that points to tongues as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit. This is why the pentecostals of old always tied speaking in tongues in with "the baptism" because in their mind that is separate from the infilling of the holy spirit.