I discuss a lot of things here and many of you probably think you know what I believe but I'd have to tell you that nobody does... because I don't even knwo for sure some times. I don't present thoughts like the one to follow because this is my belief or my stance. I present these thoughts because this is a good place to put forth such concepts where I will be introduced to thoughts pro & con that I might not have considered on my own. I think that is probably the way a lot of people are but once you post something people tag it to you... and that's the way it is. But... no biggie... and enough of that.
Now to the reason for the thread.
On the issues of that invisible scripture everyone loves to quote that says "received the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues" I would like to present the following thoughts.
I can't find the webpage right now but one time someone (Seems like it was DA) presented a page that showed that there are 36 instances in the NT where people recieved the Holy Ghost. Of those 36 times there were 3 times recorded where the recipient spoke in tongues.
Let's list those instances...
The initial outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the Jews.
The initial outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the Gentiles.
The outpouring of the Holy Ghost on John's disciples at Ephesus.
Paul had the following to say...
1 Corinthians 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.
Everybody likes to say that this scripture refers only to the gift of tongues and never in reference to tongues as a sign of the Holy Ghost but Paul did say that he was glad that he spoke in tongues more than all of them. Was he saying that he was glad that he was used in the gift of tongues more than all of them? That would not seem to be the case.
But... to continue.
Taking into consideration the scripture above and the 3 lone examples of tongues in the NT beginning at the Day of Pentecost.
1. The initial outpouring of the Holy Ghost. This is clearly a sign for the unbelievers. It is by seeing them speak in tongues (in their own languages I might add) that they knew something was happening. Tongues on that day was a sure sign for the unbeliever.
2. The initial outpouring on the Gentiles. When Cornelius and his household began to speak in tongues it was a sign for the jews who did not yet believe and when they saw that they spoke with tongues they then knew that they had received the Holy Ghost and belived that the Holy Ghost was now poured out on the Gentiles.
3. Johns disciples at Ephesus. At this point there is a group of about a dozen men who had become converts of John and were subsequently baptized by him. They were then approached by Paul asking them if they had received the Holy Ghost since they had believed and they had not even heard whether there was such a thing as the Holy Ghost. They heard Paul and were baptized in Jesus name and then he laid hands on them and the spoke with tongues and prophesied. So people who had not even known whether there was such a thing as the Holy Ghost had now received it with this sign and they then knew there was a Holy Ghost to receive and that they had, indeed, received it.
So. I do find it interesting that the only three post Day of Pentecost examples given where someone spoke with tongues are all in keeping with Pauls words that tongues are for the unbeliever.
Now... I speak with tongues... regularly. I'm not against tongues. As a matter of fact, due to my upbringing, I am a bit of an unbeliever until i see those tongues. I've been taught this and I still struggle with unbelief until I hear those tongues. Maybe some people speak with tongues when I'm there as a sign to me... the unbeliever... because I struggle with my faith unless I hear those tongues because this is how I've been raised.
But, to me, the working assumption that three examples out of 36 demonstrating people speaking with tongues (and sometimes prophesying) when they received the Holy Ghost is not hard and fast proof that ALL who received the Holy Ghost spoke in tongues especially in the light of these examples all falling in line with the words of Paul that tongues are a sign for the unbeliever.
I do believe with absolute confidence that tongues is A SIGN of recieving the Holy Ghost. I also see that prophesy appears to be a sign in the word as well. But I find it hard agreeing with a hard lined stance that tongues is THE SIGN for the receiving of the Holy Ghost without which no one is saved.
I just don't see where the word of God bears this out.
Thoughts?
(Sorry this post was so long)
Linear Mode
