Since the Bible says that "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. Rom 8:9 Does it not say that we MUST have the Holy Ghost in order to be saved and therefore If we do not speak in tongues we cannot know that we are filled with the Holy Ghost and therefore are not yet saved?
Personally I believe that the initial outward evidence of being filled with the Holy Ghost. I recently did a study on Mark chapter 16 and found that the sign following believers included "Speaking in Tongues". A new Global Forum on Speaking in Tongues
It has just begun in Australia. It is to be found here: http://speakingintonguesforum.aimoo.com/General-Discussion/What-is-Speaking-in-Tongues-1-59261.html
One example of the types of posts is as follows:
MARK CHAPTER 16
On the surface Mark chapter 16 appears to clearly say that believers will speak in tongues. Upon further investigation however the following question arises.
If Speaking in Tongues accompanies ALL believers, then the same must be said of the other four signs listed herein. How can this be rationalised in the scriptures?
The answer becomes apparent upon close examination of the way in which these signs were apparent in the early church. Consider the following:
The 5 Signs that follow Believers are:
1) Casting out Devils
2) Speaking in Tongues
3) Taking up Serpents
4) Drinking Poison &
5) Laying hands on the sick
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mar 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they 1) cast out devils; they shall 2) speak with new tongues; Mar 16:18 They shall 3) take up serpents; and 4) if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall 5) lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Mar 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
Looking in the word of God, especially New testament lets see the signs following doctrine in action.
1) Casting out devils
Act 16:17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation.
Act 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour. (Clearly the Apostle Paul exercised this sign) This is not questioned. The fact is that those who are filled with his (God's) Holy Spirit are filled with light. We read in 1 John...1Jo 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
2) Speaking in new tongues
There are several accounts of this sign following believers: Acts 2:4, Acts10:44 and Acts 19:1-5 are obvious examples.
3) They shall take up serpents
Only one Biblical case of a serpent or viper confronting one of the Apostles in the NT Acts 28:3-7 Certainly there were no acts of "Taking up" serpents. Some translations translate Mark 16:18 {they will pick up snakes in their hands} ISV This flies in the face of verses like; Matt 4:7 (see below) Perhaps a better application can be found by exploring the Acts of the Apostles through whom these signs would be evident.
Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Mat 4:7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.
Further we read in Luke... Luke 10:17 And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name. Luk 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. Luk 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.
In this passage Jesus give a clear picture that a) "Power to tread on Serpents" is the defined as having "Power over the enemy" We all know who the enemy is don't we! ...Further we read in the Psalms...Psa 140:3 They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent; adders' poison is under their lips. Selah. Psa 140:4 Keep me, O LORD, from the hands of the wicked; preserve me from the violent man; who have purposed to overthrow my goings.
Here again the Psalmist defines the "Violent Man" as having Tongues like Serpents. If this seems unclear breaking the term up in the Greek can be helpfull.
A) The Act { taking up}
I have highlighted the translation I believe is supported by evidentury substance in the Bible
αἴρω airo ah'ee-ro
A primary verb; to lift; by implication to take up or away; figuratively to raise (the voice), keep in suspense (the mind); specifically to sail away (that is, weigh anchor); by Hebraism (compare [H5375]) to expiate sin: - away with, bear (up), carry, lift up, loose, make to doubt, put away, remove, expose, take (away, up).
Above I have underscored the meaning "Make to doubt". This is the way that the same word αἴρω was translated in John 10:24 as follows:
John 10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? ( αἴρω airo ) If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
Further in Matthew we read:
Mat 21:21 Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed,( αἴρω airo ) and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.
Thirdly in Luke we read:
Luke 17:12 And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off: Luke 17:13 And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.
Act 4:24 And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice ,( αἴρω airo )to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is:
Act 21:36 For the multitude of the people followed after, crying, Away with him. And the very next chapter...Act 22:22 And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live.
I believe it is plain to see that the term "Take up" realy speaks to confronting and defeating the power of the enemy. This can ofen mean religious leaders.
Next we will look at the Object being "Taken up".
B) The object { Serpents}
When it comes to the term "Serpents I do not need to elaborate at all. A simple cursary glance at a handfull of scriptures clearly defines what Jesus was really talking about.
Mat 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Luk 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.
1Co 10:9 Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.
Rev 9:19 For their power is in their mouth, and in their tails: for their tails were like unto serpents, and had heads, and with them they do hurt.
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Psa 58:4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
Psa 140:3 They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent; adders' poison is under their lips. Selah. I really do not need to say any more. Serpents are those who speak not according to God's word. The things that they say is poison because it leads to death.
4) Drinking any Deadly thing:
The word used here for "Drink" is (πίνω, πίω, πόω pino pio poo) pee'-no, pee'-o, po'-o)
The first is a prolonged form of the second, which (together with the third form) occurs only as an alternate in certain tenses; to imbibe (literally or figuratively): - drink. To: imbibe; absorb; Take in & Keep Mentally; {The deadly poison of the World!}
Similar to "Serpents" the term "Poison" or "Drinking" are figurative terms representing the potentially deadly words of false teachers. Consider the following:
Jam 3:5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! Jam 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity; so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. Jam 3:7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: Jam 3:8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Rom 3:13 Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Rom 3:14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Psa 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Psa 58:4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
Lastly I will repeat Psalm 140 in full:
Psa 140:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. Deliver me, O LORD, from the evil man: preserve me from the violent man; Psa 140:2 Which imagine mischiefs in their heart; continually are they gathered together for war. Psa 140:3 They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent; adders' poison is under their lips. Selah.
5) They shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover:
Act 5:15 Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them. Act 5:16 There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one. Act 5:17 Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees,) and were filled with indignation,
Notice that the religious leaders who did not possess the signs following "rose up" in "Indignation"
Jam 5:14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: Jam 5:15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Jam 5:16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
Jesus went on to say... Mar 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. There are many doctrines being presented today and often they lack the signs that Jesus pronounced would "Confirm" the words being spoken as being from God. Jesus had similarly said in... Luke 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.
Jesus did this by giving us "Power" he repeated this promise in Acts Chapter one...
Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? Act 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
This occurred on the Day of Pentecost when as we read in Acts Chapter two... Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. This event marked the beginning of the Church. Just as Jesus had promised this event was confirmed as being from God by the "Sign" of Speaking in Tongues. A few verses later Peter standing up to explain what this meant says the following:
Act 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
This question could just as well be asked today and the answer would not be any different today as it was on that day. Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. Act 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Act 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. Act 2:42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. Act 2:43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. Act 2:44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; Act 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. Act 2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Act 2:47 Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Those that were added to the Church in verses 41 & 47 could only have been added to the Church by the Spirit. As we read in 1Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
In the end it is up to the individual as to whether or not they wish to believe that Jesus confirms his word with EACH AND EVERY Christian with SIGNS FOLLOWING. The concept of God confirming his word by signs following is not a new one. This is exactly the way that God confirmed his word with Elijah in the Old Testament. In that case we read. 1Ki 18:21 And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. 1Ki 18:22 Then said Elijah unto the people, I, even I only, remain a prophet of the LORD; but Baal's prophets are four hundred and fifty men. 1Ki 18:23 Let them therefore give us two bullocks; and let them choose one bullock for themselves, and cut it in pieces, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: and I will dress the other bullock, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: 1Ki 18:24 And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the LORD: and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken. The New Testament equivalent of the confirmation by God with "Fire from Heaven" is the Baptism of the Holy Ghost. This is why when Jesus spoke of the Apostles receiving "Power" he referred to what John had said ...Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: So it comes as no surprise that shortly after Jesus recounted this for the Apostles in Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. That Fire from Heaven did indeed fall (figuratively speaking) "there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them" The question then must be Has God answered you "By Fire" has Jesus confirmed his word in you "By signs following" If the answer is NO. Then is just possible that you have fallen victim to what Jesus warned us in Matthew chapter 24 verse 11 would come in these last days..."And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many". Remember that Paul warned us as well in 2nd Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 2Ti 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Don't accept anything less than the Full, 100% sure Gospel that was preached and confirmed on the Day of Pentecost and is currently being experienced by millions worldwide today.
God Bless
Luke 7:35
You need to break up long posts into smaller posts to make them easier to read.
:copcar:
Yes one sure must speak in tongues!
Its NOT the baptist way, accept Jesus Christ as personal saviour and walaaaaaaaaaaa!
What I dont get are those that argue this.There is such fear I think.There afraid of how they might act.
Quote from: gospelgirl on July 07, 2009, 03:12:18 PM
Yes one sure must speak in tongues!
Its NOT the baptist way, accept Jesus Christ as personal saviour and walaaaaaaaaaaa!
What I dont get are those that argue this.There is such fear I think.There afraid of how they might act.
i agree with the speaking in tongues and since we are talking language (so to speak) since you brought it up:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life.
if you notice the baptist wear this verse except they take the word should and exchange it for the word shall. i was raised baptist and have some insight to what they believe. they think the era of the apostles is over and such miracles are too. of course there are no direct scriptures for this, unless taken out of context. some are even reworded like the one above. the biggest reason baptists and all others argue this is cause they dont read their Bibles. they take another mans word for truth.
My mom, who i have tried to teach has recently asked me if i believe i/we should be baptized. i told her yes and showed her the scripture. with tears streaming down her face she rejected the teaching of direct scripture cause it went against her baptist doctrine and all she has heard from the baptist pullpit. hmmm! what happened to trust no man lest he deceive you.
on the matter of John 3:16
beleiveth is an actionary word. it is meant for more than a face value word. who do you believe? what did they stand for? what morals or rules did they hold? if you truly believe then you will follow all comands of said belief.
the just believe as in just a mental capacity thing dont work. satan believes in Jesus. are we gonna see him in Heaven?
should is a word that means chance. its like it almost implies a but. you should not perish but....
shall takes away the chance. you shall not perish.
the almost funny but terribly sad part is that a couple of great movies that were made by some baptists also quoted this scripture wrongly and it was on their screen for all to read and has led many others to misquote the verse also.
I would say the question is more fundamental than this.
It's not "Is speaking in tongues necessary for Bible salvation?". To me, that's the wrong question.
Rather, I would ask, Is being baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit necessary for salvation?
One can then augment the original question to look something like this: Is speaking in tongues necessary for proving the Bible evidence of Holy Spirit baptism?
With these two questions, you have two "yes's", which make for a stronger case.
Otherwise, if it's only relegated to "tongues", then speaking in tongues becomes the evidence of salvation, as opposed to the atonement of Jesus Christ received by grace through faith. There are a whole mess of "tongue-talkers" in the world, but not all of them are saved. But there is the few in number who have found the narrow, strait way to eternal life, and they all have spoken, and/or do speak in tongues.
See the difference?
No, absolutely not. If it were, Jesus would have said so.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 03, 2010, 01:57:14 AM
No, absolutely not. If it were, Jesus would have said so.
you may be in the wrong place for that comment. then again, maybe not. depends on what the admin let you get away with on your stand on tongues. this is (mostly) an apostolic discussion board. we believe in tongues as an evidence of the infilling of the Holy Ghost (or at least me and mine do).
not gonna do it!! somebody else can chime in here.
:ignore:
Quote from: yosemite on June 03, 2010, 05:20:10 AM
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 03, 2010, 01:57:14 AM
No, absolutely not. If it were, Jesus would have said so.
you may be in the wrong place for that comment. then again, maybe not. depends on what the admin let you get away with on your stand on tongues. this is (mostly) an apostolic discussion board. we believe in tongues as an evidence of the infilling of the Holy Ghost (or at least me and mine do).
not gonna do it!! somebody else can chime in here.
:ignore:
Sooooo
Rather than searchingly discuss what the context of the Bible tells us.....
we censor anyone who doesn't agree with the apostolic denomination?
:question: :question: :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :question: :question:
Yes, this board is operated by a Spirit-filled portion of the Body of Christ.
Yes, the conclusions do tend to be "across-the-board" members wise.
No, it shouldn't be censored just to pander to infantile sensibilities of some who cannot handle biblical truth that undercuts their accepted doctrine.
Yes, that includes all doctrines of all denominations, and all members of the Body of Christ; "apostolic" or not.
When you're open to the Body - you deal with the Body.
Otherwise, do a more stringent background search, police every poster, cancel memberships, censor like crazy, and become a Secret Society Cult.
That's my 2 cents. :cool:
The question, as I read it, was "is it NECESSARY (required) to speak in tongues for salvation"? Absolutely, 100 percent no!! I have many friends who are devote Christians who have never spoken in tongues. does that negate their faith in Christ?
All throughout the New Testament, it is clear that faith in Christ is what is required for salvation. Not anything else.
Look, I think tongues and spiritual gifts are wonderful. They are tools to help Christians in their walk while on this earth. But to put them in the place of faith for salvation is incorrect.
As adults, we should all be able to agree to disagree and remain friends. I would not want to be part of a community where freedom of thought and freedom of speech are not encouraged. You will never find me attacking or ridiculing another person's belief and I expect my views to be respected as well.
Hey Mark2010... welcome to GP... :great:
In reference to your comment...
Acts 19:1-3 KJV
(1) And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
(2) He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
(3) And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Question... How were you baptized?
Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 03, 2010, 12:22:32 PM
Quote from: yosemite on June 03, 2010, 05:20:10 AM
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 03, 2010, 01:57:14 AM
No, absolutely not. If it were, Jesus would have said so.
you may be in the wrong place for that comment. then again, maybe not. depends on what the admin let you get away with on your stand on tongues. this is (mostly) an apostolic discussion board. we believe in tongues as an evidence of the infilling of the Holy Ghost (or at least me and mine do).
not gonna do it!! somebody else can chime in here.
:ignore:
Sooooo
Rather than searchingly discuss what the context of the Bible tells us.....
we censor anyone who doesn't agree with the apostolic denomination?
:question: :question: :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :question: :question:
Yes, this board is operated by a Spirit-filled portion of the Body of Christ.
Yes, the conclusions do tend to be "across-the-board" members wise.
No, it shouldn't be censored just to pander to infantile sensibilities of some who cannot handle biblical truth that undercuts their accepted doctrine.
Yes, that includes all doctrines of all denominations, and all members of the Body of Christ; "apostolic" or not.
When you're open to the Body - you deal with the Body.
Otherwise, do a more stringent background search, police every poster, cancel memberships, censor like crazy, and become a Secret Society Cult.
That's my 2 cents. :cool:
i am a bit brash and blunt and a bit arguminitive about what i believe. i was only trying to let others chime in cause they may be more sensitive to the question and handle it a little better than I. thats all OOJ. no big spill or indepth thought required from or on your behalf was nessesary. thanks, Allen
Quote from: YooperYankDude on June 03, 2010, 03:32:55 PM
Hey Mark2010... welcome to GP... :great:
In reference to your comment...
Acts 19:1-3 KJV
(1) And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
(2) He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
(3) And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Question... How were you baptized?
My understanding of the verses quoted on Acts 19 is that they are referring to Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Paul met these believers (who were already converted to Christianity) and asked if they had received the Holy Ghost since they believed. This tells me that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was and often can be a separate and distinct event aside from and after salvation.
I could ask the same question to many Christians today: "Have you received the Holy Ghose since you believed?" Many would say no. Fine, it doesn't negate the fact that they did believe. Heck, there are a lot of Christians who have never been baptized in water, either. Yet they are still true Christians.
Quote from: gospelgirl on July 07, 2009, 03:12:18 PM
Yes one sure must speak in tongues!
Its NOT the baptist way, accept Jesus Christ as personal saviour and walaaaaaaaaaaa!
What I dont get are those that argue this.There is such fear I think.There afraid of how they might act.
Many people that are against the doctrine of initial evidence tongues are those that either have spoken in tongues before or still speak in tongues.
Quote
No, it shouldn't be censored just to pander to infantile sensibilities of some who cannot handle biblical truth that undercuts their accepted doctrine.
I believe receiving the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is necessary for the salvation of every believer. I don't believe in censoring people from discussing openly and honestly, but the way you've worded this makes it appear that everyone who believes as I do possesses "infantile sensibilities." I accept that you may not see things the way I do, but I find it irritating that the implication seems to be those who don't agree with you are slobbering juveniles who aren't as spiritually mature as you. I'm sure this isn't what you meant, but nevertheless, it certainly comes across that way. You might want to consider for future postings how the use of words such as "infantile" can be perceived.
Mark:
You make the statement:
"The question, as I read it, was "is it NECESSARY (required) to speak in tongues for salvation"? Absolutely, 100 percent no!! I have many friends who are devote Christians who have never spoken in tongues. does that negate their faith in Christ?"I think Raven summed it up a few posts prior to yours.
QuoteIt's not "Is speaking in tongues necessary for Bible salvation?". To me, that's the wrong question.
Rather, I would ask, Is being baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit necessary for salvation?
Perhaps you believe there is a distinction between baptism of the Holy Spirit and being "filled" with the Spirit. Paul asked the question, "have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?" Since the answer was clearly no, it lets us know that just believing does not = reception of the Spirit. Romans 8:9 tells us that if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. Receiving the Spirit is ESSENTIAL for every person who believes on Christ. It's a non-negotiable. If you don't have the Spirit, you are none of His.
So that leaves us with the second part of Raven's question.
Quote"Is speaking in tongues necessary for proving the Bible evidence of Holy Spirit baptism?"
This has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere, although I certainly would not censor anyone from discussing it again. I think contextual evidence of scripture shows that tongues is a part of receiving the Spirit, in the same way that getting wet is part of being baptized.
Being baptized and receiving the Spirit are essential elements of a person's faith in Christ. We can argue ins and outs regarding salvation all day, but I contend that even if you feel a person is saved merely by confessing faith in Christ, there is an overwhelming amount of scriptural evidence commanding us to be baptized and receive the Spirit. Perhaps there are many who have a misplaced emphasis on seeking tongues, but that in no way negates the experience.
Quote from: bishopnl on June 04, 2010, 01:10:12 PM
Quote
No, it shouldn't be censored just to pander to infantile sensibilities of some who cannot handle biblical truth that undercuts their accepted doctrine.
I believe receiving the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is necessary for the salvation of every believer. I don't believe in censoring people from discussing openly and honestly, but the way you've worded this makes it appear that everyone who believes as I do possesses "infantile sensibilities." I accept that you may not see things the way I do, but I find it irritating that the implication seems to be those who don't agree with you are slobbering juveniles who aren't as spiritually mature as you. I'm sure this isn't what you meant, but nevertheless, it certainly comes across that way. You might want to consider for future postings how the use of words such as "infantile" can be perceived.
If the word "infantile" offends you... accept my apologies.
And no... I do not believe anyone who doesn't agree with me are "slobbering juveniles who aren't as spiritually mature as you".
I do believe that the Church is full of
"infants" "outer court functionaries."
Again... my apologies. I hope the desire of being a Christian is stronger than being an apostolic.
They definitely are not the same thing. :grin:
It's not the use of the word "infantile" that bothers me.
Your statement as it is written seems to suggest that those who don't agree with you just can't handle "biblical" truth and possess "infantile sensibilities." Disagreement doesn't relegate your opponent to being "infantile." Again, I doubt this is what you meant, but it's the way it comes across.
And I believe discussion forums are full of confused people who believe they have a handle on Truth, but in reality have little understanding of it. It's up to the discerning believer to imitate the Bereans and immerse themselves in the Word of God.
((((I hope the desire of being a Christian is stronger than being an apostolic.))))
this is what stumps me. they were first called Christians!! what were they called before? I believe that apostolic is as much a title for the true born as Christian is a title. I hold to the foundational roots that the apostles taught, therefore a apostolic.
so many false doctrines have taken on the title Christian and wanting nothing to do with his name, i dont know if i want to associate to that term. Apostolics taught Jesus and lived Jesus. I feel honored to be of those who worship Jesus in truth and in spirit. of course it is a title of men, but who were the men? they were the foundation upon the rock. they had no power of there own save that of Jesus through them. what better a title that could be as level as Christian!!
Lu 6:48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
call me Christian or apostolic or call me for dinner, just as long as you call me gone when Jesus returns!! maybe even quickend or follower or Jesus freak, Holy roller, bible thumper, dont matter to me. PRAISE THE LORD!!! I'm bout ta get happy here thank ya Jesus!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: bishopnl on June 04, 2010, 01:10:12 PM
Quote
No, it shouldn't be censored just to pander to infantile sensibilities of some who cannot handle biblical truth that undercuts their accepted doctrine.
I believe receiving the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is necessary for the salvation of every believer. I don't believe in censoring people from discussing openly and honestly, but the way you've worded this makes it appear that everyone who believes as I do possesses "infantile sensibilities." I accept that you may not see things the way I do, but I find it irritating that the implication seems to be those who don't agree with you are slobbering juveniles who aren't as spiritually mature as you. I'm sure this isn't what you meant, but nevertheless, it certainly comes across that way. You might want to consider for future postings how the use of words such as "infantile" can be perceived.
Mark:
You make the statement: "The question, as I read it, was "is it NECESSARY (required) to speak in tongues for salvation"? Absolutely, 100 percent no!! I have many friends who are devote Christians who have never spoken in tongues. does that negate their faith in Christ?"
I think Raven summed it up a few posts prior to yours.
QuoteIt's not "Is speaking in tongues necessary for Bible salvation?". To me, that's the wrong question.
Rather, I would ask, Is being baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit necessary for salvation?
Perhaps you believe there is a distinction between baptism of the Holy Spirit and being "filled" with the Spirit. Paul asked the question, "have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?" Since the answer was clearly no, it lets us know that just believing does not = reception of the Spirit. Romans 8:9 tells us that if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. Receiving the Spirit is ESSENTIAL for every person who believes on Christ. It's a non-negotiable. If you don't have the Spirit, you are none of His.
So that leaves us with the second part of Raven's question. Quote"Is speaking in tongues necessary for proving the Bible evidence of Holy Spirit baptism?"
This has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere, although I certainly would not censor anyone from discussing it again. I think contextual evidence of scripture shows that tongues is a part of receiving the Spirit, in the same way that getting wet is part of being baptized.
Being baptized and receiving the Spirit are essential elements of a person's faith in Christ. We can argue ins and outs regarding salvation all day, but I contend that even if you feel a person is saved merely by confessing faith in Christ, there is an overwhelming amount of scriptural evidence commanding us to be baptized and receive the Spirit. Perhaps there are many who have a misplaced emphasis on seeking tongues, but that in no way negates the experience.
If you believe A is necessary for B. And if you believe that C is necessary for A then the syllogism A -> B and C -> A then C -> B is applicable. So, if you believe that the Holy Ghost baptism is necessary for salvation and if you believe that the evidence of tongues is necessary in order for someone to have the Holy Ghost, then it is logical to conclude that you believe that the evidence of tongues is necessary for salvation. Personally I don't know why people try to deny that these premises lead to that conclusion?
I personally do not believe that being baptized in water or of the Holy Spirit is a prerequisite for salvation. My belief is that both can come afterward.
As I posted earlier, I know MANY Christians who do not speak in tongues. I'm certainly not negating their faith and salvation experience.
I tend to be a broad thinker. If, as some has suggested, that only those who speak in tongues are saved, that limits the list considerably. Not wanting to go down that road.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AM
I personally do not believe that being baptized in water or of the Holy Spirit is a prerequisite for salvation. My belief is that both can come afterward.
As I posted earlier, I know MANY Christians who do not speak in tongues. I'm certainly not negating their faith and salvation experience.
I tend to be a broad thinker. If, as some has suggested, that only those who speak in tongues are saved, that limits the list considerably. Not wanting to go down that road.
neither do i negate it, but it dont line up with the word. i tend not to be so broad in my own thinking, nor do i tend to enlarge myself in false doctrine. here are a few stater verses.
Joh 15:7 If ye abide in me, and my
words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
mat 15:8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and
broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Isa 5:14 Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
john 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
isa 28:9 ¶ Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.
heb 5:11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
I didn't really have much more to add to this post from what I originally wrote, but, since I was quoted a few times, I figured I should chime in.
The if A = B, and B = C, then A = C syllogism is correct. I don't think anyone, at least those that believe that speaking in tongues is the only Bible evidence of Holy Spirit baptism, disagree or avoid it. I only point to how we have probably focused too much on tongues and not enough on Spirit baptism. It would be better to preach and seek being filled with the Holy Spirit then it is to simply "speak in tongues". It's only a question of emphasis. I've met people that call the Holy Spirit "tongues". Kids who seek the Holy Spirit sometimes are so confused and cannot receive It because of the misinformation and poor choice of emphasis.
Secondly, I like that Romans 8:9 was brought up. It's not the only proof text, but it might be the best one. Everyone wanting to be a Christian must line up with "...if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you". Why? Because if the Spirit of God does not dwell in someone, then they are in the flesh, and those in the flesh cannot please God (Romans 8:8 ) which means that they don't have faith, because without faith it is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6), hence they are not saved by grace according to Ephesians 2:8.
And in order to line up with Romans 8:9, one needs to go all the way back to Joel 2:28. Yes we can look in Mark 16, or in Acts, or wherever, but God promised that when He poured out His Spirit upon all flesh they would, I repeat, they WOULD prophesy. If God poured His Spirit out on you, me, or any other person, and we did not prophesy, the prophet is a liar, and God's Word is not true. Peter makes it pretty clear in Acts 2:16-17 that speaking in tongues is how one "prophesies" so as to fulfill Joel 2:28. Since, just ten days before this event, Jesus had just ascended to heaven promising the gift of the Holy Ghost (Luke 24:49) and for forty days prior to that, He taught the Apostles things pertaining to the Kingdom of God (which is the Holy Spirit - Romans 14:17) according to Acts 1:3, I think it's pretty safe to assume that Jesus taught them how to correctly interpret Joel 2:28 so that, when it came to pass, Peter would be able to explain what was happening to those people who witnessed it. And, then, as an added reminder, just before He ascended, He told them that those who believe in His name would, quite literally "in tongues speak new things" (Mark 16:16).
So, just for a moment, everyone needs to ask themselves, did I personally experience Joel 2:28? Did I prophesy at any time when I received the Holy Spirit? And if so, does my prophetic utterance match what Peter said, and most likely also what Jesus taught His Apostles, that that prophetic utterance would be?
If we answer "no" to any of these questions, then we must be honest enough and love truth enough to realize that the Spirit of God does not dwell in us and we are still in the flesh, and do not have the kind of God-pleasing faith He requires in order to save us by His grace.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AM
I personally do not believe that being baptized in water or of the Holy Spirit is a prerequisite for salvation. My belief is that both can come afterward.
Jesus would disagree with you.
"5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." From the Jewish stand point, as Jesus was talking to a learned Jew and a teacher of the Law, this is undeniably referencing baptism and receiving the spirit of God.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AMAs I posted earlier, I know MANY Christians who do not speak in tongues. I'm certainly not negating their faith and salvation experience.
Faith alone does not save, if it did the devils would be saved as they believe there iis one God, they believe Jesus is the savior....but they cannot nor would they ACT on that belief... James talked about faith without works being dead.....there are works that we must do, and baptism is one of them. Some people can be very sincere, but they can also be sincerely lost.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AMI tend to be a broad thinker. If, as some has suggested, that only those who speak in tongues are saved, that limits the list considerably. Not wanting to go down that road.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."There is no salvation outside of the way Jesus and his disciples taught in the scripture. EVERY time someone was saved under the time of grace, they have repented, been water baptized in Jesus name, and received the Holy Ghost.
way to go Bro Trey!! most eloquent and compasionatly spoken!! :thumbsup2:
AMEN Bro Trey
I am grateful for the Holy Ghost, and according to the Bible, in the word of God it is required that we are baptized by water and fire (Holy Ghost).
There are things in the word that at times I don't understand or something that God asks of us doesn't make sense to me, even Jesus when he knew he was going to be crusified he prayed "let this cup pass, but not my will, but let your will be done". He didn't want to be crucified but it was the instruction of God. Abraham did not want to do the burnt offering of his son, I couldn't imagine but he was willing to obey God, even though God stopped him.
In the natural I cannot see what occurs when we are baptized, and I don't understand exactly what God is doing. But God gives us directions and commandments and I believe and trust him even when I don't understand why he is telling me do something. Who am I to tresspass God, I will not do that, he is God, it is his will not mine.
There are some things that I really did not want to comply with as I was coming to God, rebelious I can say. When I learned that having faith is beleiving all the word of God is important and in believing I will obey him and surrender my will to him. I am a living sacrifice, he is my teacher, father, saviour, creator, and Most of all he is God. I believe God is looking for someone to be willing to obey his every word.
Quote from: Raven180 on June 05, 2010, 10:49:55 AM
I didn't really have much more to add to this post from what I originally wrote, but, since I was quoted a few times, I figured I should chime in.
The if A = B, and B = C, then A = C syllogism is correct. I don't think anyone, at least those that believe that speaking in tongues is the only Bible evidence of Holy Spirit baptism, disagree or avoid it. I only point to how we have probably focused too much on tongues and not enough on Spirit baptism. It would be better to preach and seek being filled with the Holy Spirit then it is to simply "speak in tongues". It's only a question of emphasis. I've met people that call the Holy Spirit "tongues". Kids who seek the Holy Spirit sometimes are so confused and cannot receive It because of the misinformation and poor choice of emphasis.
Secondly, I like that Romans 8:9 was brought up. It's not the only proof text, but it might be the best one. Everyone wanting to be a Christian must line up with "...if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you". Why? Because if the Spirit of God does not dwell in someone, then they are in the flesh, and those in the flesh cannot please God (Romans 8:8 ) which means that they don't have faith, because without faith it is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6), hence they are not saved by grace according to Ephesians 2:8.
And in order to line up with Romans 8:9, one needs to go all the way back to Joel 2:28. Yes we can look in Mark 16, or in Acts, or wherever, but God promised that when He poured out His Spirit upon all flesh they would, I repeat, they WOULD prophesy. If God poured His Spirit out on you, me, or any other person, and we did not prophesy, the prophet is a liar, and God's Word is not true. Peter makes it pretty clear in Acts 2:16-17 that speaking in tongues is how one "prophesies" so as to fulfill Joel 2:28. Since, just ten days before this event, Jesus had just ascended to heaven promising the gift of the Holy Ghost (Luke 24:49) and for forty days prior to that, He taught the Apostles things pertaining to the Kingdom of God (which is the Holy Spirit - Romans 14:17) according to Acts 1:3, I think it's pretty safe to assume that Jesus taught them how to correctly interpret Joel 2:28 so that, when it came to pass, Peter would be able to explain what was happening to those people who witnessed it. And, then, as an added reminder, just before He ascended, He told them that those who believe in His name would, quite literally "in tongues speak new things" (Mark 16:16).
So, just for a moment, everyone needs to ask themselves, did I personally experience Joel 2:28? Did I prophesy at any time when I received the Holy Spirit? And if so, does my prophetic utterance match what Peter said, and most likely also what Jesus taught His Apostles, that that prophetic utterance would be?
If we answer "no" to any of these questions, then we must be honest enough and love truth enough to realize that the Spirit of God does not dwell in us and we are still in the flesh, and do not have the kind of God-pleasing faith He requires in order to save us by His grace.
Maybe a few erroneously call the Holy Ghost tongues. However, its far more amazing to me at how many apostolics I've spoken to that erroneously tell me that they believe the Holy Ghost is required for salvation and believe tongues are required for the Holy Ghost but then try to deny believing tongues are required for salvation. I applaud you for not doing this!
Any time a person strings together one verse here and one verse there in order to make a doctrine it raises a red flag for me. In fact, I can prove to you rather easily that people have faith and don't have the Holy Ghost. Did you have the Holy Ghost when you were baptized? Probably not. Did you have faith when you were baptized? If you didn't then you might should think about being rebaptized because baptism must be done with faith, otherwise you just got wet.
I am very glad you brought up the joel prophecy because, if his prophecy indicates anything is to accompany the Holy Ghost it indicates that prophecy instead of tongues are to accompany the reception Holy Ghost. We also know that tongues and prophecy oftentimes are not the same thing. 1 Corinthians 14 shows this well. So does Acts 19 where it says they spoke with tongues and prophesied. In fact, 1 Corinthians 14 even tells us the difference between prophecy and tongues. Prophecy is to men and tongues are to God unless there is an interpretor. If there is an interpretor then tongues can be to men and can essentially serve the same purpose as prophecy. If there is not an interpretor then tongues cannot be to men because such tongues are said to be to God and if what is being spoken is not to men then it is not prophecy. The point is that the presence of tongues themselves doesn't imply prophecy but instead what is said in tongues may or may not be prophecy. So in Acts 2 what do we find them saying in tongues? Well, in Acts 2:11 we find they are speaking to men and that they are speaking of the wonderful works of God. So it seems logical to conclude that speaking of the wonderful works of God is what fulfilled Joel's prophecy. In Acts 10 we don't know if anyone understood the tongues they spoke so we don't know if they were speaking of the wonderful works of God in tongues to men or not. We do know that they magnified God. Magnifying God and speaking of the wonderful works of God could be the same thing even though one was done in tongues and one was not. In Acts 19 we know they spoke in tongues and prophesied. We don't know if anyone understood their tongues here either so we don't know if they were speaking of the wonderful works of God/Magnifying God in tongues to men or not. We do know that they prophesied which we already concluded must have meant to be speaking of the wonderful work of God/Magnifying God to men. Also, there is no context here to suggest that there prophesizing was in tongues.
Oh, I forgot one other thing. There is not one bible translation that supports Mark 16:17 being "in tongues speak new things". Here is a list of how a number of bibles render that verse http://bible.cc/mark/16-17.htm (http://bible.cc/mark/16-17.htm)
Quote from: BroTrey on June 05, 2010, 03:47:07 PM
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AM
I personally do not believe that being baptized in water or of the Holy Spirit is a prerequisite for salvation. My belief is that both can come afterward.
Jesus would disagree with you. "5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." From the Jewish stand point, as Jesus was talking to a learned Jew and a teacher of the Law, this is undeniably referencing baptism and receiving the spirit of God.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AMAs I posted earlier, I know MANY Christians who do not speak in tongues. I'm certainly not negating their faith and salvation experience.
Faith alone does not save, if it did the devils would be saved as they believe there iis one God, they believe Jesus is the savior....but they cannot nor would they ACT on that belief... James talked about faith without works being dead.....there are works that we must do, and baptism is one of them. Some people can be very sincere, but they can also be sincerely lost.
Quote from: Mark2010 on June 05, 2010, 01:05:27 AMI tend to be a broad thinker. If, as some has suggested, that only those who speak in tongues are saved, that limits the list considerably. Not wanting to go down that road.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
There is no salvation outside of the way Jesus and his disciples taught in the scripture. EVERY time someone was saved under the time of grace, they have repented, been water baptized in Jesus name, and received the Holy Ghost.
Peter was filled with the Holy Ghost once in Acts 2 and once in Acts 4:31. John 3:5 speaks of birth. Birth seems like it should be a one time event. So, if John 3:5 is speaking about being filled with the Holy Ghost then we have to conclude that Peter was born of the Spirit two times. This doesn't make much sense to me? Does it you?
Quote from: jfrog on June 06, 2010, 03:54:19 PM
Peter was filled with the Holy Ghost once in Acts 2 and once in Acts 4:31. John 3:5 speaks of birth. Birth seems like it should be a one time event. So, if John 3:5 is speaking about being filled with the Holy Ghost then we have to conclude that Peter was born of the Spirit two times. This doesn't make much sense to me? Does it you?
makes perfect sence to me!! you dont get born of the spirit twice but refreshed. like a good nights rest.
Ac 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the
times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
it didnt say one
time but
times of refreshing. more than one.
11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.
romans 15:32 That I may come unto you with joy by the will of God, and may
with you be refreshed.
some say he was to be rested from the journey, but i feel since he added "with you" it had a deeper meaning.
1Co 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.
the initial evidence,(sign) is for the unbeliever. prophesying is not for the unbeliever. this to me says the sign is a proof for ourselves. we had an experience that we can testify to. Acts 19 it says they first spoke in tongues(had an evedence and believed they received) then prophesied for now they are beleivers. i do not beleive the incident in acts 19 was simotaneously done. i beleive they were having an ole timey so nuff church service where the spirit was moving on them and may have been hours and hours of service before any prophesying was done. just like the two fishes and five loaves, the bible is silent on what they done with the fragments. I beleive the young lad went home with his parents and had a feast. but can not prove it cause the bible is silent on it. we must be led of the spirit. what a love letter the Bible is to those who see it, hear it, read it, know it, and hide it in their heart.
QuoteMaybe a few erroneously call the Holy Ghost tongues.
Even if it's only a few, that's a few too many, and indicates a sore lack of proper teaching.
QuoteHowever, its far more amazing to me at how many apostolics I've spoken to that erroneously tell me that they believe the Holy Ghost is required for salvation and believe tongues are required for the Holy Ghost but then try to deny believing tongues are required for salvation. I applaud you for not doing this!
That's pretty backward, if anyone does or says that. I've not met one who would say that.
QuoteAny time a person strings together one verse here and one verse there in order to make a doctrine it raises a red flag for me.
Like the majority of Apostles in their various epistles? :P
QuoteDid you have faith when you were baptized? If you didn't then you might should think about being rebaptized because baptism must be done with faith, otherwise you just got wet.
Who gets baptized without having faith? A person must needs repent prior, which, along with faith, are the two first principles of the doctrine of Christ (Hebrews 6:1-3).
QuoteI am very glad you brought up the joel prophecy because, if his prophecy indicates anything is to accompany the Holy Ghost it indicates that prophecy instead of tongues are to accompany the reception Holy Ghost.
I would almost make the same case, except I think it can be show rather well that speaking in tongues as one first receives the Holy Spirit is to prophesy, as opposed to just being a manifestation of the Spirit during charismata, which you described. "This is that..." is pretty straight forward.
As far as "...and magnified God" or "...and prophesied" from Acts 10:46 and 19:6, respectively, one might consider that
kai can be understood to mean "even", thereby indicating that the magnification of God in Acts 10 and the prophetic utterance in Acts 19 were in fact, in tongues.
QuoteOh, I forgot one other thing. There is not one bible translation that supports Mark 16:17 being "in tongues speak new things".
Word Study Greek-English New Testament by Paul R. McReynolds, which uses the USB 3rd Edition of the Greek New Testament. A literal word for word translation of the Greek, using Greek syntax, as opposed to English, indicates that what I wrote is accurate.
:lurk:
Quote from: Raven180 on June 07, 2010, 10:26:00 AM
QuoteMaybe a few erroneously call the Holy Ghost tongues.
Even if it's only a few, that's a few too many, and indicates a sore lack of proper teaching.
QuoteHowever, its far more amazing to me at how many apostolics I've spoken to that erroneously tell me that they believe the Holy Ghost is required for salvation and believe tongues are required for the Holy Ghost but then try to deny believing tongues are required for salvation. I applaud you for not doing this!
That's pretty backward, if anyone does or says that. I've not met one who would say that.
Well, I've never seen anyone call the Holy Ghost tongues. I don't doubt that you have though...
QuoteQuoteAny time a person strings together one verse here and one verse there in order to make a doctrine it raises a red flag for me.
Like the majority of Apostles in their various epistles? :P
Then you should have no problem when I do the same thing :)
QuoteQuoteDid you have faith when you were baptized? If you didn't then you might should think about being rebaptized because baptism must be done with faith, otherwise you just got wet.
Who gets baptized without having faith? A person must needs repent prior, which, along with faith, are the two first principles of the doctrine of Christ (Hebrews 6:1-3).
You originally said this: "Secondly, I like that Romans 8:9 was brought up. It's not the only proof text, but it might be the best one. Everyone wanting to be a Christian must line up with "...if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you". Why? Because if the Spirit of God does not dwell in someone, then they are in the flesh, and those in the flesh cannot please God (Romans 8:8 ) which means that they don't have faith, because without faith it is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6), hence they are not saved by grace according to Ephesians 2:8."
But now you have told me that those who were baptized had faith at the moment of their baptism. I thought it would be obvious why this would be a problem in relation to what you originally said. I guess its not as obvious as I thought, so I will explain: If those who are baptized have faith then it is possible for them to please God. So because it is possible for them to please God that means they are not in the flesh. Because they are not in the flesh that means the Spirit of God must dwell in them. (But not everyone that was baptized had been filled with the Holy Ghost by the time of their baptism and yet from above we know that those people must have had the Spirit of God dwelling in them by the time of their baptism!)
So are you sure you still don't have a problem with jumping from verse to verse to verse? Or is my explanation true?
QuoteQuoteI am very glad you brought up the joel prophecy because, if his prophecy indicates anything is to accompany the Holy Ghost it indicates that prophecy instead of tongues are to accompany the reception Holy Ghost.
I would almost make the same case, except I think it can be show rather well that speaking in tongues as one first receives the Holy Spirit is to prophesy, as opposed to just being a manifestation of the Spirit during charismata, which you described. "This is that..." is pretty straight forward.
As far as "...and magnified God" or "...and prophesied" from Acts 10:46 and 19:6, respectively, one might consider that kai can be understood to mean "even", thereby indicating that the magnification of God in Acts 10 and the prophetic utterance in Acts 19 were in fact, in tongues.
How can it be shown that speaking in tongues as one first receives the Holy Spirit is to prophesy? You see, I have no doubt that you can show the possibility that speaking in tongues is to prophesy. However, to show it is to prophesy would mean that no other alternate explanation could exist. I already gave one alternate explanation.
QuoteQuoteOh, I forgot one other thing. There is not one bible translation that supports Mark 16:17 being "in tongues speak new things".
Word Study Greek-English New Testament by Paul R. McReynolds, which uses the USB 3rd Edition of the Greek New Testament. A literal word for word translation of the Greek, using Greek syntax, as opposed to English, indicates that what I wrote is accurate.
I found the source and looked it up. You are correct. That is interesting. However, since the other things listed in Mark 16:17-18 are not things done by every believer then Mark 16:17 cannot be used as proof that prophetic tongues or even tongues will be spoken by every believer.
Lu 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
And how does luke 8:10 reflect on the discussion? I see no application for it here.
QuoteWell, I've never seen anyone call the Holy Ghost tongues. I don't doubt that you have though...
Yeah, I have, unfortunately.
QuoteThen you should have no problem when I do the same thing :)
I don't necessarily mind. But there are limitations...
QuoteBut now you have told me that those who were baptized had faith at the moment of their baptism. I thought it would be obvious why this would be a problem in relation to what you originally said. I guess its not as obvious as I thought, so I will explain: If those who are baptized have faith then it is possible for them to please God. So because it is possible for them to please God that means they are not in the flesh. Because they are not in the flesh that means the Spirit of God must dwell in them. (But not everyone that was baptized had been filled with the Holy Ghost by the time of their baptism and yet from above we know that those people must have had the Spirit of God dwelling in them by the time of their baptism!)
So are you sure you still don't have a problem with jumping from verse to verse to verse? Or is my explanation true?
I'm sure I don't have a problem. And no, I don't think your explanation is true. Romans 1:17 comes into play here. People move from faith to faith. There are levels involved.
QuoteHow can it be shown that speaking in tongues as one first receives the Holy Spirit is to prophesy? You see, I have no doubt that you can show the possibility that speaking in tongues is to prophesy. However, to show it is to prophesy would mean that no other alternate explanation could exist. I already gave one alternate explanation.
What does it mean to prophesy, but to speak as the Spirit of God comes upon, moves, or in some other way, gives someone the ability to speak words from God? What does it matter what language it is in? Does it even matter if the language one is speaking as God speaks through them is new to the speaker? It's still prophesying.
QuoteHowever, since the other things listed in Mark 16:17-18 are not things done by every believer then Mark 16:17 cannot be used as proof that prophetic tongues or even tongues will be spoken by every believer.
I wouldn't say that Mark 16:17 is a proof-text if taken in isolation. However, when combined with other more obvious verses that actually can stand alone, Mark 16:17 lends great support for the belief that speaking in tongues is the only Bible evidence that one has received the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
QuoteLu 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
Quote from: nwlife on June 09, 2010, 08:35:11 AM
And how does luke 8:10 reflect on the discussion? I see no application for it here.
For what it's worth, I see the application.
Quote from: Raven180 on June 11, 2010, 09:51:35 AM
What does it mean to prophesy, but to speak as the Spirit of God comes upon, moves, or in some other way, gives someone the ability to speak words from God? What does it matter what language it is in? Does it even matter if the language one is speaking as God speaks through them is new to the speaker? It's still prophesying.
There is at least this difference, if not more: with speaking in tongues the Spirit controls one's tongue, hence the words spoken also. With prophecy the Spirit gives one the message to speak, but one is still in control of one's own tongue, and must still choose how to phrase the message given.
Quote from: Raven180 on June 11, 2010, 09:58:39 AM
QuoteLu 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
Quote from: nwlife on June 09, 2010, 08:35:11 AM
And how does luke 8:10 reflect on the discussion? I see no application for it here.
For what it's worth, I see the application.
The only thing I see this reflecting in use of this scripture without any explanation is in most conversations I have ever had was that the person usually using it means that since you don't believe my view of things, God has blinded your eyes and ears so you won't see or hear or accept the "truth".
I wasn't sure if that was what yosemite meant or not, that was why I was asking him what he was intending to say. For there was no logical application for that scripture in the current conversation flow.
Quote from: titushome on June 11, 2010, 04:11:57 PM
Quote from: Raven180 on June 11, 2010, 09:51:35 AM
What does it mean to prophesy, but to speak as the Spirit of God comes upon, moves, or in some other way, gives someone the ability to speak words from God? What does it matter what language it is in? Does it even matter if the language one is speaking as God speaks through them is new to the speaker? It's still prophesying.
There is at least this difference, if not more: with speaking in tongues the Spirit controls one's tongue, hence the words spoken also. With prophecy the Spirit gives one the message to speak, but one is still in control of one's own tongue, and must still choose how to phrase the message given.
I don't entirely agree. Yes, the words spoken are of the Spirit when speaking in tongues, but the tongue is not completely overwhelmed by the Spirit, else someone who is speaking in tongues would not be able to start/stop themselves from doing so. Granted, there must be volition of the human will, but it's not like God wrests all control away from the speaker and makes them speak.
Secondly, in terms of prophesying, we shouldn't assume that God is not also choosing the words, else we come too close to someone prophesying out of their own spirit, which is sincerely frowned upon by God. Further, while the "spirit of the prophet is subject to the prophet", the speaker must also yield his/her will just the same as when speaking in tongues, meaning they can also start/stop, and if the person is truly submitted to God, then God will give the words as He so decides, even as the speaker articulates the message in his or her own way, i.e. volume, inflection, tone, etc.
Make sense?
QuoteThe only thing I see this reflecting in use of this scripture without any explanation is in most conversations I have ever had was that the person usually using it means that since you don't believe my view of things, God has blinded your eyes and ears so you won't see or hear or accept the "truth".
Isn't that how Jesus meant it?
QuoteI wasn't sure if that was what yosemite meant or not, that was why I was asking him what he was intending to say. For there was no logical application for that scripture in the current conversation flow.
Well, we are talking the Holy Spirit generally, and speaking in tongues, specifically, and since the Kingdom of God is righteousness, joy, and peace, in the Holy Spirit, we can safely assume that any mystery involved is pertinent to the discussion. But I digress. I'll let Yosemite answer for himself...
Luke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
Quote from: Raven180 on June 11, 2010, 09:51:35 AM
QuoteWell, I've never seen anyone call the Holy Ghost tongues. I don't doubt that you have though...
Yeah, I have, unfortunately.
QuoteThen you should have no problem when I do the same thing :)
I don't necessarily mind. But there are limitations...
QuoteBut now you have told me that those who were baptized had faith at the moment of their baptism. I thought it would be obvious why this would be a problem in relation to what you originally said. I guess its not as obvious as I thought, so I will explain: If those who are baptized have faith then it is possible for them to please God. So because it is possible for them to please God that means they are not in the flesh. Because they are not in the flesh that means the Spirit of God must dwell in them. (But not everyone that was baptized had been filled with the Holy Ghost by the time of their baptism and yet from above we know that those people must have had the Spirit of God dwelling in them by the time of their baptism!)
So are you sure you still don't have a problem with jumping from verse to verse to verse? Or is my explanation true?
I'm sure I don't have a problem. And no, I don't think your explanation is true. Romans 1:17 comes into play here. People move from faith to faith. There are levels involved.
First, Romans 1:17 doesn't speak at all of different levels of faith. Romans 1:17 speaks of the same type of faith that is held by two different types of people, the Jews and the Gentiles. That being said, the bible in other places does seem to make it apparent that different levels of faith exist. However, you are not just saying that different levels of faith exist but that the fact that different levels of faith exist implies that my explanation must be wrong. The only way that different levels of faith existing could make my explanation wrong is IF there is a lesser level of faith required to be baptized than the level of faith that Hebrews 11:6 is speaking about. So the question I want to ask is this: "Is there any reason from the context of Hebrews 11 to assume that Hebrews 11:6 is speaking of a higher level of faith than is required for a person to be baptized?"
QuoteQuoteHow can it be shown that speaking in tongues as one first receives the Holy Spirit is to prophesy? You see, I have no doubt that you can show the possibility that speaking in tongues is to prophesy. However, to show it is to prophesy would mean that no other alternate explanation could exist. I already gave one alternate explanation.
What does it mean to prophesy, but to speak as the Spirit of God comes upon, moves, or in some other way, gives someone the ability to speak words from God? What does it matter what language it is in? Does it even matter if the language one is speaking as God speaks through them is new to the speaker? It's still prophesying.
Words coming from God does not make those words prophecy no matter how much you want them to. You see, the bible differentiates between tongues and prophecy. The bible defines the difference between these two things in such a way that tongues cannot be prophecy (unless they are understood).
1 Corinthians 14:2 For
he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
1 Corinthians 14:3 But
he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
So, prophecy is to to men; to be understood by men.
For further proof, consider this verse.
1 Corinthians 14:5
I would that ye all spake with tongues but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
If speaking with tongues is prophesy then how can Paul write that he would rather us prophesy than speak in tongues?
QuoteQuoteHowever, since the other things listed in Mark 16:17-18 are not things done by every believer then Mark 16:17 cannot be used as proof that prophetic tongues or even tongues will be spoken by every believer.
I wouldn't say that Mark 16:17 is a proof-text if taken in isolation. However, when combined with other more obvious verses that actually can stand alone, Mark 16:17 lends great support for the belief that speaking in tongues is the only Bible evidence that one has received the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Mark 16:17 can only show the possibility that prophesy can be done through tongues. I've not disputed this. Prophesy can be done through tongues when those tongues are understood. However, besides relating tongues and prophecy this verse provides absolutely no other support for the initial evidence of tongues doctrine. I'm a little confused on how you can define that as great support for the initial evidence of tongues doctrine.
So then... it must be assumed, if God chooses the words... that either...
A. God speaks 17th century English... (hence all the thee's, thou's, ye... and cometh... in many prophesies... especially considering "His returning soon...")
B. They are choosing to change it...
C. They are false prophets?
Just an an observation...
Quote from: YooperYankDude on June 12, 2010, 05:05:53 PM
So then... it must be assumed, if God chooses the words... that either...
A. God speaks 17th century English... (hence all the thee's, thou's, ye... and cometh... in many prophesies... especially considering "His returning soon...")
B. They are choosing to change it...
C. They are false prophets?
Just an an observation...
A very good observation :thumbsup2:
Quote from: nwlife on June 12, 2010, 06:09:54 AM
Luke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
Sure it does. It's just that the people who quoted it didn't understand that they were supposed to apply it to themselves and not to others ;) jkjk
On a serious note, that verse should really never be used in a discussion because the only purpose someone can have for quoting it is to incite the other side to anger. When a person quotes that verse it is a claim by that person that says I'm right and your wrong. It's a claim that I'm more spiritual than you...
QuoteFirst, Romans 1:17 doesn't speak at all of different levels of faith...
I agree that it's referring to Jews and Gentiles, as v. 16 makes the context very clear. I would say, however, that if, as you say it's the same type of faith, then it's very confusing, because it's talking about the righteousness of God being revealed from the one to the other. A transition is strongly implied, especially when considering the Greek prepositions
ek (from) and
eis (to).
Looking at their respective definitions, they, when their meanings are combined in such a way as Romans 1:17 does, connote a movement or exit away from one into or toward another. It can also speak of an emission from one to another. So, the faith talked about here of the Jew, moves or exits (perhaps emanates is a good word) from one location to another, namely, into or toward the faith of the Gentile. It's a transmission of faith. But, in the transmission, there is also a transformation, because the Jew, who formerly believed in God only, now must also believe in Jesus, that He is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. That's leveling up, so to speak. The Gentile also changes faith, from whatever pagan or heathen belief once held, to belief in the One True God. So, as the faith of the Old Testament Jew transforms, or perhaps grows is a better way to put, to include the Gospel of the Son of God, it then can be transmitted to the formerly pagan Gentile, so long as that Gentile likewise believes in the Gospel.
If the faith of a Jew does not grow to include Jesus as his Lord and Christ, it does not negate their faith in the One True God, such as we have now amongst those Jewish people that still worship the same God that we do, just without understanding/believing the manifestation of this God into flesh.
They have faith. But it's a different level. Even a Gentile may believe in this One True God, as in His existence, but still not believe
in Him (if you know what I mean) or His Son, such as to be saved. And this goes right into Hebrews 11:6.
Quote...there is a lesser level of faith required to be baptized than the level of faith that Hebrews 11:6 is speaking about.
Hebrews 11:6 has two levels of faith already inside of it. Level 1 is the belief/acknowledgement of the existence of God. Millions of people, from the theist who believes in an impersonal god, to any number of other ideas or people who will admit that God exists, but don't actively attempt to reach for Level 2, which is that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him. So, someone can believe God exists, but not seek Him, say, for repentance and remission of sins, and they still have faith, but at a lesser level. Then there are those who believe God exists but also seek Him for the reward(s) He promises them. This is a higher level of faith. Both have faith, but at different levels.
So when it comes to pre-baptism faith and Hebrews 11:6, obviously, anyone who is going to be baptized must needs have repented from their dead works and have faith toward God, implicitly announcing that they have faith in God's existence. But they are also leveling up to a higher faith by repenting to this God they believe exists, and by desiring to be baptized so that they may be rewarded with all the rights and privileges granted to those immersed in the name of the Lord. That is a higher level of faith. Subsequent (and sometimes before, too) to water immersion a person can seek or believe God for the gift of the Holy Spirit, which is the seal unto our redemption. And, in going back to Romans 8:9, if someone does not have the Holy Spirit, they do not belong to God/Christ, and/because, God/Christ knows them that are His.
In the event that someone has been immersed in the name of Jesus subsequent to God granting them repentance, then, yes, they are, in a sense, exhibiting Hebrews 11:6 faith. But what happens when they don't seek the Holy Spirit, as does happen? If they even, how shall I say it, stop seeking God for more, i.e. for the complete born again experience, for whatever reason. Then what? They obtained a certain level of faith, but did not or cannot, for whatever reason, proceed to the next level of faith, which is living in the Spirit, being led by the Spirit, having the Spirit of God truly dwell in them, etc. If and when this occurs, as much as they might believe and have faith otherwise, they are still carnally minded and are no longer pleasing God because their lack of faith and their lack of continuing to seek God indicates a rejection of God's Spirit.
Yes, they had Hebrews 11:6 faith in order to repent and be baptized, and their obedience to the command pleased God and God rewarded them with remission of sins. But, if they stopped there, while not nullifying their faith entirely, they are stagnating it to the point of not truly belonging to Christ/God.
Quote from: Raven180 on June 13, 2010, 10:55:05 AM
QuoteFirst, Romans 1:17 doesn't speak at all of different levels of faith...
I agree that it's referring to Jews and Gentiles, as v. 16 makes the context very clear. I would say, however, that if, as you say it's the same type of faith, then it's very confusing, because it's talking about the righteousness of God being revealed from the one to the other. A transition is strongly implied, especially when considering the Greek prepositions ek (from) and eis (to).
Looking at their respective definitions, they, when their meanings are combined in such a way as Romans 1:17 does, connote a movement or exit away from one into or toward another. It can also speak of an emission from one to another. So, the faith talked about here of the Jew, moves or exits (perhaps emanates is a good word) from one location to another, namely, into or toward the faith of the Gentile. It's a transmission of faith. But, in the transmission, there is also a transformation, because the Jew, who formerly believed in God only, now must also believe in Jesus, that He is the Christ, the Son of the Living God. That's leveling up, so to speak. The Gentile also changes faith, from whatever pagan or heathen belief once held, to belief in the One True God. So, as the faith of the Old Testament Jew transforms, or perhaps grows is a better way to put, to include the Gospel of the Son of God, it then can be transmitted to the formerly pagan Gentile, so long as that Gentile likewise believes in the Gospel.
If the faith of a Jew does not grow to include Jesus as his Lord and Christ, it does not negate their faith in the One True God, such as we have now amongst those Jewish people that still worship the same God that we do, just without understanding/believing the manifestation of this God into flesh.
They have faith. But it's a different level. Even a Gentile may believe in this One True God, as in His existence, but still not believe in Him (if you know what I mean) or His Son, such as to be saved. And this goes right into Hebrews 11:6.
There are a variety of opinions by commentators on that clause in Romans 1:17: from faith to faith. So I think that we can agree to disagree on Romans 1:17. Though this disagreement shouldn't really affect the rest of our discussion, because I already agreed with the principle that you were trying to bring forth with this verse, the principle that there are different levels of faith.
I have only quoted the relevant parts from the following commentaries.
http://bible.cc/romans/1-17.htm (http://bible.cc/romans/1-17.htm)
QuoteGeneva Study Bible
{6} For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from {z} faith to faith: {7} as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
(z) From faith, which increases daily.
QuotePeople's New Testament
From faith to faith. This clause has caused much discussion. The generally received view is thus stated by Dr. Schaff:
The righteousness is revealed from faith, or through means of faith, in order to produce faith in others.''
It is revealed to us by believing (faith), and the duty of the believer is to extend the gospel, or to extend the faith. Says Dr. Schaff,
Believing includes knowledge and belief, assent and surrender, appropriation and application.''
QuoteWesley's Notes
From faith to faith - By a gradual series of still clearer and clearer promises. As it is written - St. Paul had just laid down three propositions: Righteousness is by faith, Rom 1:17: Salvation is by righteousness, Rom 1:16: Both to the Jews and to the gentiles, Rom 1:16. Now all these are confirmed by that single sentence, The just shall live by faith...
QuoteJamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
from faith to faith-a difficult clause. Most interpreters (judging from the sense of such phrases elsewhere) take it to mean, "from one degree of faith to another." But this agrees ill with the apostle's design, which has nothing to do with the progressive stages of faith, but solely with faith itself as the appointed way of receiving God's "righteousness." We prefer, therefore, to understand it thus: "The righteousness of God is in the gospel message, revealed (to be) from (or 'by') faith to (or 'for') faith," that is, "in order to be by faith received." (So substantially, Melville, Meyer, Stuart, Bloomfield, &c.).
QuoteMatthew Henry's Concise Commentary
Faith is all in all, both in the beginning and progress of Christian life. It is not from faith to works, as if faith put us into a justified state, and then works kept us in it; but it is all along from faith to faith; it is faith pressing forward, and gaining the victory over unbelief.
Quote from: Raven180 on June 13, 2010, 11:26:54 AM
Quote...there is a lesser level of faith required to be baptized than the level of faith that Hebrews 11:6 is speaking about.
Hebrews 11:6 has two levels of faith already inside of it. Level 1 is the belief/acknowledgement of the existence of God. Millions of people, from the theist who believes in an impersonal god, to any number of other ideas or people who will admit that God exists, but don't actively attempt to reach for Level 2, which is that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him. So, someone can believe God exists, but not seek Him, say, for repentance and remission of sins, and they still have faith, but at a lesser level. Then there are those who believe God exists but also seek Him for the reward(s) He promises them. This is a higher level of faith. Both have faith, but at different levels.
I more or less agree with what you are getting at here. I probably would have worded it much differently, but I think you are meaning about the same as I would.
QuoteSo when it comes to pre-baptism faith and Hebrews 11:6, obviously, anyone who is going to be baptized must needs have repented from their dead works and have faith toward God, implicitly announcing that they have faith in God's existence. But they are also leveling up to a higher faith by repenting to this God they believe exists, and by desiring to be baptized so that they may be rewarded with all the rights and privileges granted to those immersed in the name of the Lord. That is a higher level of faith. Subsequent (and sometimes before, too) to water immersion a person can seek or believe God for the gift of the Holy Spirit, which is the seal unto our redemption. And, in going back to Romans 8:9, if someone does not have the Holy Spirit, they do not belong to God/Christ, and/because, God/Christ knows them that are His.
In the event that someone has been immersed in the name of Jesus subsequent to God granting them repentance, then, yes, they are, in a sense, exhibiting Hebrews 11:6 faith. But what happens when they don't seek the Holy Spirit, as does happen? If they even, how shall I say it, stop seeking God for more, i.e. for the complete born again experience, for whatever reason. Then what? They obtained a certain level of faith, but did not or cannot, for whatever reason, proceed to the next level of faith, which is living in the Spirit, being led by the Spirit, having the Spirit of God truly dwell in them, etc. If and when this occurs, as much as they might believe and have faith otherwise, they are still carnally minded and are no longer pleasing God because their lack of faith and their lack of continuing to seek God indicates a rejection of God's Spirit.
Yes, they had Hebrews 11:6 faith in order to repent and be baptized, and their obedience to the command pleased God and God rewarded them with remission of sins. But, if they stopped there, while not nullifying their faith entirely, they are stagnating it to the point of not truly belonging to Christ/God.
"You originally said this: "Secondly, I like that Romans 8:9 was brought up. It's not the only proof text, but it might be the best one. Everyone wanting to be a Christian must line up with "...if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you". Why? Because if the Spirit of God does not dwell in someone, then they are in the flesh, and those in the flesh cannot please God (Romans 8:8 ) which means that they don't have faith, because without faith it is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6), hence they are not saved by grace according to Ephesians 2:8.""
What you originally said is directly in contradiction with what I bolded above. In one place you say that those without the Holy Ghost don't have Hebrews 11:6 faith and in the other place you say they do.
There is another contradiction too. In one place you said that those without the Holy Ghost cannot please God but just now you said they could.
It is because of contradictions like these that I believe your original statement is wrong and that my statement is true. My statement was: "But now you have told me that those who were baptized had faith at the moment of their baptism. I thought it would be obvious why this would be a problem in relation to what you originally said. I guess its not as obvious as I thought, so I will explain: If those who are baptized have faith then it is possible for them to please God. So because it is possible for them to please God that means they are not in the flesh. Because they are not in the flesh that means the Spirit of God must dwell in them. (But not everyone that was baptized had been filled with the Holy Ghost by the time of their baptism and yet from above we know that those people must have had the Spirit of God dwelling in them by the time of their baptism!)"
Quote from: nwlife on June 12, 2010, 06:09:54 AM
Luke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
have you had the Holy Ghost with speaking in tongues as an evidence? If not then you do not see what i see. you dont have the assurance that i have. that is how it is relative.
Quote from: yosemite on June 14, 2010, 02:25:25 AM
Quote from: nwlife on June 12, 2010, 06:09:54 AM
Luke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
have you had the Holy Ghost with speaking in tongues as an evidence? If not then you do not see what i see. you dont have the assurance that i have. that is how it is relative.
I have...
Quote from: jfrog on June 12, 2010, 05:12:45 PM
Quote from: nwlife on June 12, 2010, 06:09:54 AM
Luke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
Sure it does. It's just that the people who quoted it didn't understand that they were supposed to apply it to themselves and not to others ;) jkjk
On a serious note, that verse should really never be used in a discussion because the only purpose someone can have for quoting it is to incite the other side to anger. When a person quotes that verse it is a claim by that person that says I'm right and your wrong. It's a claim that I'm more spiritual than you...
i cant help how others take the scripture. I take it for truth. if scripture gets you riled up it is not my fault. I am no more spiritual than you could be, but lets call a spade a spade and quit playing patty cake with our own feelings and get to the truth. the bible says it would not be explainable to some. some will not see for their understanding is not opened to them. if you go to church it does not mean you are automatically a christian. Just because you stand in a garage does not make you a car.
Joh 15:7 If ye abide in me,
and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto
you.
God is an Austere God in the old testiment. God is the same Austere God in the new testiment.He wants obedience.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Mr 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.
Lu 3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
what is fire?
Jas 3:4 Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
6
And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
8
But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
Ac 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
God can tame the tongue!!!!! as a helm will be guided by a man so shall his ship be guided. As God guides a helm so shall the ship be guided. want proof?? receive ye the Holy Ghost!!!
Quote from: yosemite on June 14, 2010, 03:14:11 AM
Quote from: jfrog on June 12, 2010, 05:12:45 PM
Quote from: nwlife on June 12, 2010, 06:09:54 AM
Luke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
Sure it does. It's just that the people who quoted it didn't understand that they were supposed to apply it to themselves and not to others ;) jkjk
On a serious note, that verse should really never be used in a discussion because the only purpose someone can have for quoting it is to incite the other side to anger. When a person quotes that verse it is a claim by that person that says I'm right and your wrong. It's a claim that I'm more spiritual than you...
i cant help how others take the scripture. I take it for truth. if scripture gets you riled up it is not my fault. I am no more spiritual than you could be, but lets call a spade a spade and quit playing patty cake with our own feelings and get to the truth. the bible says it would not be explainable to some. some will not see for their understanding is not opened to them. if you go to church it does not mean you are automatically a christian. Just because you stand in a garage does not make you a car.
Joh 15:7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto
you.
God is an Austere God in the old testiment. God is the same Austere God in the new testiment.He wants obedience.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Mr 7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
Lu 3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
what is fire?
Jas 3:4 Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind:
8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
Ac 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.
God can tame the tongue!!!!! as a helm will be guided by a man so shall his ship be guided. As God guides a helm so shall the ship be guided. want proof?? receive ye the Holy Ghost!!!
if scripture gets me riled up? lol
I would explain to you what got me riled up, but you could not understand. I mean some won't see for their understanding is not opened up to them right?
jfrog you said you had the Holy Ghost, we should be on the same page here.
Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
Pr 18:6 A fool's lips enter into contention, and his mouth calleth for strokes.
Quote from: jfrog on June 14, 2010, 03:54:38 AM
if scripture gets me riled up? lol
I would explain to you what got me riled up, but you could not understand. I mean some won't see for their understanding is not opened up to them right?
acts 19:9 But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.
I'll not comment further for not wanting contention.
Okay, I finally get what your going after, jfrog. And I see where I misled. My apologies. Please excuse my hyperbole. :)
Going back to the idea of "levels of faith", when I said that a person who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not have Hebrews 11:6 faith (but then said that they did have it if they had repented and been baptized) I was referring to not having the Hebrews 11:6 level of faith in regards to Spirit baptism. I used a hyperbole and misled and obviously implied that any person who does not have the Holy Ghost has absolutely no faith whatsoever. I don't believe that, as I think I pointed out in my last posts. They do have faith, whether in just the existence of God, or for repentance, etc. But, if they don't have faith to receive the Holy Spirit and therefore do not believe God for being able to live in the Spirit, then it can reasonably be said that they have "no faith" and cannot please God, in terms of what it takes to believe, receive, and walk in the Spirit and not in the flesh.
Hope this all makes sense and that I have made proper restitution to any offense given to the Word or to others who are reading/participating.
Peace and God bless,
Aaron
QuoteWords coming from God does not make those words prophecy no matter how much you want them to.
Then what does it make them, especially considering Amos 3:8b?
Quote...the Lord GOD hath spoken, who can but prophesy?
Seems to me that there is safety in realizing the connection between God speaking (words, of course!) and prophesying. Granted God can speak without using people. In that case, "the voice of the LORD thundereth...". But, if and when God chooses to speak to, and especially through, a person, how can it not, generally speaking, be prophesying? What else is it?
Quote...the bible differentiates between tongues and prophecy.
It only does so in terms of charismata, i.e. diverse kinds of tongues and the gift of prophecy (and the interpretation of tongues). Elsewise, when a person speaks in tongues as they receive the Holy Spirit, which is what we are talking about, it is prophesying. Peter said as much when he indicated that the speaking in tongues which happened on the day of Pentecost was the complete fulfillment of Joel 2:28, that God's sons and daughters would prophesy. While speaking languages capable of being understood, they were xenoglossalia to the speakers. And they prophesied of the wonderful works of God.
QuoteIf speaking with tongues is prophesy then how can Paul write that he would rather us prophesy than speak in tongues?
He can write that, if the tongues he is talking about are the private, speaking mysteries to God which is for personal edification tongues, because those only edify the speaker, as opposed to the gift of prophecy, which edifies the entire church. But, as I reiterate, Paul is not talking about the baptism of the Holy Spirit here (
but we are!) which is uniformally accompanied by speaking in tongues--not the charismata of diverse kinds of tongues--but tongues as the Spirit gives utterance in light of Joel 2:28, Acts 2:4, 17, and elsewhere.
QuoteLuke chapter 8 still has no relevance to the conversation about speaking in tongues though.
Well, in terms of the Spirit being the Kingdom of God, and that life in this Spirit/Kingdom contains mysteries that God does not allow the uninitiated to know or comprehend, and that speaking in an unknown tongue, according to 1 Corithians 14:2 is to speak mysteries, i.e. secrets, to God, then, how does it not apply, generally speaking? Anything Spirit/Kingdom related relates to the discussion at hand.
QuoteOn a serious note, that verse should really never be used in a discussion because the only purpose someone can have for quoting it is to incite the other side to anger...
Again, is that how Jesus meant it? Surely we can quote Jesus with the same mind and understanding with which He spoke His own Words?
There are people who are right and those who are wrong, and who are more spiritual than others. As much as it might anger someone to hear that, or to be told that they are barred from understanding the mysteries of the Kingdom on a God said so basis, it doesn't make the fact that these things are so any less valid.
Quote from: yosemite on June 14, 2010, 02:25:25 AM
have you had the Holy Ghost with speaking in tongues as an evidence? If not then you do not see what i see. you don't have the assurance that i have. that is how it is relative.
I have the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and yes I have spoken in tongues. But actually I have to say that to depend on tongues for assurance that I am saved is ludicrous. My assurance comes from faith in Christ (Romans 4:16, acts 10:43 Eph. 2:8 ), NOT on what I may speak in a service.
Too many pentecostals base their assurance of being saved, forgiven, and redeemed on if they "feel" the holy ghost, had a decent shout, and spoke in something that might be tongues or might be jibberish. I believe that most of what passes for tongues now days is truely nothing but jibberish. For what few years I was in the pentecostal ministry, I had way too many pentecostal believers come to me and ask if they were still saved. When questioned why they asked, Almost 100% of the time, it is because they hadn't spoke in tongues for a while and hadn't "Felt" the holy ghost for a while.
This is why I have left the pentecostal movement as a whole.
Though a quick question, Looking at 1 Corinthians 14:22
Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers.
And thus Acts 2:1-4 where other languages were spoken in as unbelievers were present. Then should not tongues be only used in public when a unbeliever that doesn't speak your language is present?
I Cor. 14:19-23
19Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
20Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. 21 In the Law it is written, "By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord." 22Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. 23If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?
Quote from: nwlife on June 14, 2010, 10:33:21 AM
Though a quick question, Looking at 1 Corinthians 14:22
Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers.
And thus Acts 2:1-4 where other languages were spoken in as unbelievers were present. Then should not tongues be only used in public when a unbeliever that doesn't speak your language is present?
12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
I hold that the unbeliever,(one who is not presently of the beleif but has a will and heart to beleive) is the one who is receiving the tongues,because he now has a justifiable evidence of which when is received, he is then and only then a believer.(technically)
I Cor. 14:19-23
19Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.
here you speak of two different gifts, gift of the Holy Ghost with evedince in tongues, and the gift of tongues.
20Brothers, do not be children in your thinking. Be infants in evil, but in your thinking be mature. 21 In the Law it is written, "By people of strange tongues and by the lips of foreigners will I speak to this people, and even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord." 22Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. 23If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?
By people of strange tongues(language they dont know) and by the lips of foreigners(people that were not of Israel) will I speak to this people. this is a prophesy verse, and should be understood as such. this verse deals not with the initial tongues of evidence. all though it done pretty well with the Apostles when they saw that the gentiles had received the Holy Ghost same as they. But of course the Apostles had understanding of the field of tongues.
Jas 3:4 Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds,
yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.
5
Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!
6
And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.
7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of
mankind:
8
But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
who is the governor of your helm? what better evidence of the infilling than tongues. God is showing that he created the tongue and He can tame the tongue. He now controls the ship. we have to stay humbly submissive. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: nwlife on June 14, 2010, 10:16:12 AM
I have the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and yes I have spoken in tongues. But actually I have to say that to depend on tongues for assurance that I am saved is ludicrous.(tongues aint a god, it is from God. depend on Jesus. tongues is a gift, a reward.) My assurance comes from faith in Christ (Romans 4:16, acts 10:43 Eph. 2:8 ), NOT on what I may speak in a service.
Too many Pentecostals base their assurance of being saved, forgiven, and redeemed on if they "feel" the holy ghost, had a decent shout, and spoke in something that might be tongues or might be jibberish. I believe that most of what passes for tongues now days is truly nothing but jibberish. For what few years I was in the pentecostal ministry, I had way too many pentecostal believers come to me and ask if they were still saved. When questioned why they asked, Almost 100% of the time, it is because they hadn't spoke in tongues for a while and hadn't "Felt" the holy ghost for a while. did you ask them if they had ernestly saught for the face of God as they had saught for the Holy Ghost? feeling good is an afterward experience. you have to make the connection first. besides, God is the same yesterday today and forever. what he done yesterday he can do today. if a refreshing is what you need and desire and you abide in the word, you have but to ask. To seek!!
This is why I have left the pentecostal movement as a whole. SAD
Ac 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the
times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
faith comes by hearing, but that don't mean you get it!!
Heb 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
by all means if there is no worship or praise or repentance going on then there will be no reward. when a church stops doing it starts dying. that don't mean Pentecostals as a whole, is wrong. salvation is an individual walk. why judge salvation of another or even whether it be jiberish. that aint my burden nor is it the cross i bare. i have to bare my own faults, not everybody Else's.
you have a grain of faith, then there is word of faith. you have to mix them in order to profit. you cant sit on yo duff and get points. those who set on their duff, the pigions are looking for you. you don't get nowhere by being a statue. you have let the sense realm deceive you like Issac did. feels like Esau, smells like Esau, must be Esau!! NOT!!
I will come back to address some other things, but this had to come first.
1. It is not sad that I left the pentecostal movement. For since I have left, I have had more joy in my life, more peace, a true assurance and confidence of my salvation. I have had more spring in my step, more freedom in lifting my hands in praise as I sing the psalms and great hymns, and more freedom when worshipping in decency and order then ever before because I no longer have to worry about the emotional aspects of pentecostal worship to be my judge/guideline to see if I am touching the foot of the throne of God, that I am in his presence, or that I am approved by him.
2. I never was judging the salvation of others, but it is the normal pentecostal position to judge the salvation of people as "have you spoke in tongues", and if they haven't ever or haven't in a while, they automatically assume that person is not saved, when the scriptures point to it being clearly totally by faith and trust in the grace of God through Christ Jesus. Not by works or speaking in tongues.
Quote from: nwlife on June 14, 2010, 09:17:52 PM
I will come back to address some other things, but this had to come first.
1. It is not sad that I left the pentecostal movement. For since I have left, I have had more joy in my life, more peace, a true assurance and confidence of my salvation. I have had more spring in my step, more freedom in lifting my hands in praise as I sing the psalms and great hymns, and more freedom when worshipping in decency and order then ever before because I no longer have to worry about the emotional aspects(didnt God create us as emotional being?) of pentecostal worship to be my judge/guideline to see if I am touching the foot of the throne of God, that I am in his presence, or that I am approved by him. Even david had to seek God's face.
2. I never was judging the salvation of others, but it is the normal pentecostal position to judge the salvation of people as "have you spoke in tongues", and if they haven't ever or haven't in a while, they automatically assume that person is not saved, when the scriptures point to it being clearly totally by faith and trust in the grace of God through Christ Jesus. Not by works or speaking in tongues. to me it is abnormal to judge others salvation for the bible says to keep the plank out of your own eye.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Pr 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
James 2:18 doesn't prove we are saved by works. only that works are what should result from our faith.
Galations 5:6 (ESV) 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.
(KJV) 6For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Eph. 2:7-10 (ESV) 7He did this through Christ Jesus out of his generosity to us in order to show his extremely rich kindness in the world to come. 8God saved you through faith as an act of kindness. You had nothing to do with it. Being saved is a gift from God. 9It's not the result of anything you've done, so no one can brag about it. 10God has made us what we are. He has created us in Christ Jesus to live lives filled with good works that he has prepared for us to do.
(KJV) 7That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. 8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast. 10For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
That word translated as unto, also means toward....not by or because of. It does not show we are saved by our works rather that good works is a natural progression of our life after we are saved!
Quote from: nwlife on June 14, 2010, 10:37:33 PM
James 2:18 doesn't prove we are saved by works. only that works are what should result from our faith.
agreed, but if ya take your faith and it mixes with the word of faith, you will proceed in doing what the word says to do.
Ro 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
Ro 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Galations 5:6 (ESV) 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.
(KJV) 6For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
he talks of the ones who are circumcised in the flesh and not seeing the cicumcision of the heart leaning toward tradition of the old covenant.
a few verses after.
7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph. 2:7-10 (ESV) 7He did this through Christ Jesus out of his generosity to us in order to show his extremely rich kindness in the world to come. 8God saved you through faith as an act of kindness. You had nothing to do with it. Being saved is a gift from God. 9It's not the result of anything you've done, so no one can brag about it. 10God has made us what we are. He has created us in Christ Jesus to live lives filled with good works that he has prepared for us to do.
remember the epistles were writen to the churches of whom already had the Holy Ghost.
Ro 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
this brings us back to, "how do ya get the spirit of Christ in ya?"
Joh 15:7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
(KJV) 7That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. 8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast. 10For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
That word translated as unto, also means toward....not by or because of. It does not show we are saved by our works rather that good works is a natural progression of our life after we are saved!
did you kneel down at an alter to ask forgiveness? that took an effort. did ya voice a prayer to ask for it? that took an effort. did ya drive to church that day? that took an effort. you did a lot of work to get to salvation just in that day. it is by grace we have an oppertunity for salvation. faith is what we stepped out on toward salvation and saught for the gift and the promise. No man is saved untill he hears "well done my faithful servant" and the gate clicks shut behind him. we are on a constant rout toward salvation.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
there is no once saved always saved or we would not have verses like:
heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
7 For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:
8 But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.
9 ¶ But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.
10 For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister.
11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end:
12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.
So, maybe this topic should have been broken up into many different threads. This was painful to read even the first page, which is why I stopped when I saw 3 pages...
I believe when you come into the full knowledge of Christ and the Bible, you cannot dispute that tongues is the initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit. With that being said, I do believe that there are some out there who may never receive the full plan as we have and then the Judge of their Hearts would be the ONE in Heaven. Some will hear it an reject it, those are not the ones I speak of. The Bible teaches us to submit our whole selves to Christ, later it also says that the tongue is the most unruly member of the body. Before you can be fully submissive to Christ, you must submit your tongue to Him. Then again, One can speak in all the tongues they want and still not be saved in their hearts. I know plenty who are self proclaimed saints, speak in tongues and then go do whatever in the world that they want. Salvation is the beginning but you are truely saved through your lifestyle change FOLLOWING the EXPERIENCE.
"Out of your bellys, shall flow river of living water; this spake He of the spirit...." Someone mentioned that Jesus did not teach this, but in Luke it says that He spake of the spirit but they could not recieve because He had not been crucified (glorified). The church that Peter addressed in Acts were established followers of Christ's teachings before His death, burial and ressurection. Once crucified, they were shown the completed messege of when Christ opened the understanding of His disciples.
If we want to believe it or not, there will be more people in heaven than Pentecostals. I am glad that I have this wonderful truth and will spread it to all I can with love and compassion, but the only one who can determine when and where Grace is used... is not me.... is Jesus Christ.
Anyways, I find it amusing when we as Pentecostals debate eachother cause that really makes our mission a complete one. If you feel that I am out of line, so be it. I have an open mind and once I was the same as you until I found the Love in and of Christ. If we follow after the Gospel of Christ, then we will demonstrate love rather than condemnation.
EDIT: LoL, I also just realized that this is a dead topic from June 2010... Haha, no wonder.