Speaking In Tongues Does Not Equal Salvation. - Page 3

Digging4Truth · #21 08-09-2010, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lacey

Every person I've ever known to receive the Holy Ghost, always, without fail, spoke in another tongue. Seems that was also evident in the folks mentioned in the Bible who received it.

Of course... because when we view tongues as the initial evidence then no one is considered to have received the Holy Ghost unless they have spoken in tongues. So everyone who received the Holy Ghost did speak in tongues because those who have not spoken in tongues are deemed to have not yet received the Holy Ghost.

The paradigm creates it's own success rate due to the ever successful method of circular reasoning.

Pressing-On · #22 08-09-2010, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

Of course... because when we view tongues as the initial evidence then no one is considered to have received the Holy Ghost unless they have spoken in tongues. So everyone who received the Holy Ghost did speak in tongues because those who have not spoken in tongues are deemed to have not yet received the Holy Ghost.

The paradigm creates it's own success rate due to the ever successful method of circular reasoning.

Gosh, Digging,
There is more evidence that tongues was the initial evidence in the Book of Acts than not being the evidence. You know the verses.

DAII · #23 08-09-2010, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

No mention of tongues here...

No mention of tongues here...

No mention of tongues here...

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.

Yep.

The principle of first mention as some would like to point out to prove this century old man made doctrine .... is not in Acts 2 .... but rather referenced by the preacher at Pentecost when he points to Joel's prophecy.

The prophecy states that they will prophesy (NOT SPEAK IN TONGUES)... and that the Lord would show his wonders on the heavens and earth ....

Keeping in mind that biblically prophesying is not just foretelling future events but also declaring, teaching, et al.

Those who were there marveled .... marveled mostly because they heard those engaged in xenolalia were sharing/prophesying/declaring or "speaking in our own tongues the wonderful works of God" (Acts 2:11)

Had it been unintelligible ... or "lalalalalalala" ... they would not have been able to make the connection Peter made early in his message on the day of Pentecost in which he reminds them of the promise ....

Quote:

And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved;
for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem
there will be deliverance,
as the Lord has said,
among the survivors
whom the Lord calls. Joel 2:20-21, Acts 2: 19,20

The vehicle ... tongues has been confused with what the message OR CONTENT is ...

THE WORKS OF THE LORD ... who is mighty to save FOR THOSE WHO CALL UPON HIS NAME!

That tongues is a prophetic manifestation of Spirit infilling cannot be denied ....

that it is the necessary and universal initial evidentiary sign of the New Birth ... or being born from above ... is not supported didactically or explicitly in Scripture ... at all.

I believe that Acts 10 and 19 support this view ... as we find PURPOSEFUL tongues accompanied with "magnifying the Lord and prophesying" in both instances.

Acts 10: 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.

Acts 19: 6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.

Digging4Truth · #24 08-09-2010, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Gosh, Digging,
There is more evidence that tongues was the initial evidence in the Book of Acts than not being the evidence. You know the verses.

There are verses where tongues was evidence that people had received the Holy Ghost. 3 of them. Each of them appear to be in keeping with the scripture that says...

Quote:

1Cr 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

1. On the day of Pentecost when the initial outpouring happened.
2. When Cornelius (the first Gentile) received the Holy Ghost.
3. When the 12 at Ephesus received the Holy Ghost. They had already heard and believed John's gospel they had heard but had, apparently, not been told about the Holy Ghost or about being baptized in Jesus name. Although there is no evidence that they all spoke with tongues. There were 12 there and the Word says they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Did all 12 speak with tongues and then all 12 prophesy? We can't know. But it would seem most likely that some spoke with tongues and some prophesied.

And there are an equal number of biblical references that speak of the Holy Ghost being received with no mention of tongues.

So we have at least a 50/50 split on mentions of tongues and no mention of tongues and yet so many hold hard and fast that tongues is THE evidence that someone has received the Holy Ghost.

Digging4Truth · #25 08-09-2010, 09:23 AM

Also... one other thing..

Quote:

1Cr 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying [serveth] not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

Tongues is viewed today as a sign for the believer. Your average pentecostal believer will not accept that you have received the Holy Ghost until they see the sign.

DAII · #26 08-09-2010, 09:24 AM

2 conversions out of 20 or 21 in Acts in which the link between tongues and prophesying are implied or explicitly stated .... does not a template make for all time to obtain salvation or to prove regeneration...

We must search the Scriptures to flesh out such a view ... and there is nothing to support it .... NOTHING .... simply ASSUMPTION AND FEELINGS.

This is not an apostolic doctrine, nor sound hermeneutic.

Pressing-On · #27 08-09-2010, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

And there are an equal number of biblical references that speak of the Holy Ghost being received with no mention of tongues.

Could you list them for me?

It seems that Jesus instructed the Disciples to tarry in Jerusalem "until ye be endued with power from on high". (Luke 24:49)

And suddenly, there came a sound from heaven.....

Acts 2:6 ..."and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language."

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.

What you see and hear, it is the promise of the Father - the Holy Ghost.

Digging4Truth · #28 08-09-2010, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Could you list them for me?

It seems that Jesus instructed the Disciples to tarry in Jerusalem "until ye be endued with power from on high". (Luke 24:49)

And suddenly, there came a sound from heaven.....

Acts 2:6 ..."and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language."

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.

What you see and hear, it is the promise of the Father - the Holy Ghost.

On your post above... absolutely. They were to wait for the outpouring of the Holy Ghost and it came and the Jews from all over the world saw it and knew something different was happening because of the sign of tongues. This was a sign to those who did not believe.

And on the instances where there was no mention of tongues... I've already provided those in another post but I will copy/paste the post here for you.

Quote:

No mention of tongues here...

Quote:

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...

Quote:

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...

Quote:

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.

Pressing-On · #29 08-09-2010, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

On your post above... absolutely. They were to wait for the outpouring of the Holy Ghost and it came and the Jews from all over the world saw it and knew something different was happening because of the sign of tongues. This was a sign to those who did not believe.

And on the instances where there was no mention of tongues... I've already provided those in another post but I will copy/paste the post here for you.

I believe the precedent was set (Acts 2:47) and was not necessary to keep mentioning such a tremendous and promised phenomenon. Why would it be necessary after the upper room experience? It was happening. Today, there is so much doubt, it is easy to overlook something hiding in plain sight.

I also find it remarkable that those making the comments that the sign is not necessarily speaking in tongues - all DO speak in tongues. Don't you find that rather strange?

Digging4Truth · #30 08-09-2010, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DAII

2 conversions out of 20 or 21 in Acts in which the link between tongues and prophesying are implied or explicitly stated .... does not a template make for all time to obtain salvation or to prove regeneration...

We must search the Scriptures to flesh out such a view ... and there is nothing to support it .... NOTHING .... simply ASSUMPTION AND FEELINGS.

This is not an apostolic doctrine, nor sound hermeneutic.

DA... I know this is asking a lot... and... "no... I don't have time" is a perfectly good answer.

But would you be able to provide the scriptures for the 21 conversions in Acts? I don't have a list of that many conversions and it would help to have all of those instances.