Speaking in tongues and the Holy Spirit

[Runningman]

I completely Agree. Just keep this in mind:

It's true that as believers, we both experience the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit, manifesting through speaking in tongues and other gifts, as described in Acts 2:4 and 1 Corinthians 12. These experiences are vital and life-giving, and they demonstrate the active work of God in each of us. So while the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives is indeed a point of shared experience, the underlying theology is significant because it influences our understanding of who God is. while the Holy Spirit works powerfully in all who believe, the understanding of God's nature—whether as Oneness or Trinity—shapes how we interpret these experiences and how we relate to God. Our desire is not just to experience God but to know Him as He has revealed Himself in Scripture. I see the Holy Spirit as the very presence of Jesus as the same God (I AM of the OT) who indwells us and empowers us. That said, the common ground we share in the Spirit’s work is indeed a beautiful thing, and I value our fellowship in that.

While it's true that speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, it is not necessarily vital and life-giving because God doesn't decide to use it in everyone. For example, there is no record of Jesus having the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues and Jesus already confirmed that he got his life from the Father (John 5:26) so Jesus didn't have life until it was given to him by the Father, not life from speaking in tongues. Not all speak in tongues, contrary to Paul's wishes, though tongues is not even the greatest of the gifts: "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..."

Paul taught the people of Corinthia to earnestly seek the spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 14) which would involve seeking something one does not inherently have. In the seeking, God may be pleased by this show of faith and potential rewarder of those who diligently seek Him (Hebrews 11:6), yet they are gifts and not entitlements. I also might add, the seeking can last a long time. If one has the patience and drive to keep knocking, God may very well answer directly sooner or later.

The misunderstanding that the spiritual gifts are to be eagerly sought out, rather than an entitlement, seems to account for their apparent absence in most churches and, as a result, have led many to become spiritual cessationists. While God is not pleased with spiritual laziness, He will not compromise His standards and if it requires the bulk majority of Christians be powerless, impotent, and barren then it's evident He will let it be so.

 

[My Rock]

While it's true that speaking in tongues is a spiritual gift, it is not necessarily vital and life-giving because God doesn't decide to use it in everyone.

Not all speak in tongues

1 Corinthians 12:29-30, "Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?"

Addresses the diversity of spiritual gifts within the body of Christ, emphasizing that not every believer will have the same role or gift. The church is likened to a body, with each member having a distinct function, and all are necessary for the health and growth of the church. This diversity ensures that the church operates effectively, with apostles, prophets, teachers, miracle workers, those with gifts of healing, and others each contributing uniquely to the mission of the church.

It is important to distinguish between the different types of speaking in tongues mentioned in the New Testament. The Bible teaches that speaking in tongues serves different purposes and contexts. First, there is speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, which is a private and personal experience for every believer baptized in the Holy Ghost. This experience is a sign of the New Birth and is distinct from the spiritual gifts described in 1 Corinthians 12.

Second, the passage in 1 Corinthians 12 refers to the specific gift of tongues used in a public worship setting. This gift, meant for the edification of the church, typically occurs during quiet spiritual moments and requires interpretation. Not all believers will possess this particular gift, just as not all are apostles, prophets, or teachers. This public exercise of the gift of tongues, accompanied by interpretation, is different from the personal prayer language experienced by individuals when they receive the Holy Spirit.

While every believer is encouraged to seek and receive the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues as a personal experience, the specific gift of tongues used in church settings for communal edification and requiring interpretation is given according to God’s sovereign will and purpose. This distinction clarifies the different roles of speaking in tongues within the body of Christ, both for individual spiritual growth and for the edification of the church.

there is no record of Jesus having the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues

Your answer to this is right here:
John 16:7, "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

Holy Ghost speaking in Tongues wasn't available until Chris ascended to Heaven first.

though tongues is not even the greatest of the gifts: "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..."

There can be no Interpretation (which is what prophecy means in context) without a message in Tongues first.

 

[Runningman]

1 Corinthians 12:29-30, "Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?"

Addresses the diversity of spiritual gifts within the body of Christ, emphasizing that not every believer will have the same role or gift. The church is likened to a body, with each member having a distinct function, and all are necessary for the health and growth of the church. This diversity ensures that the church operates effectively, with apostles, prophets, teachers, miracle workers, those with gifts of healing, and others each contributing uniquely to the mission of the church.

It is important to distinguish between the different types of speaking in tongues mentioned in the New Testament. The Bible teaches that speaking in tongues serves different purposes and contexts. First, there is speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, which is a private and personal experience for every believer baptized in the Holy Ghost. This experience is a sign of the New Birth and is distinct from the spiritual gifts described in 1 Corinthians 12.

While 1 Corinthians 12 doesn't say speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth, why do you believe that is the case and why would tongues, being of the lesser gifts, be initial evidence of this when, by example, that is not what happened in Scripture and not even something Paul said to desire in the first place? By inference, Paul minimized what you're saying is a sign of the New Birth and directly said to seek something else instead. That would be equal to Paul saying "Don't seek evidence of your salvation."

The best and greatest spiritual gift is prophecy.

1 Cor. 12
31But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

1 Cor. 14
1Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
5I 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.
39Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

Second, the passage in 1 Corinthians 12 refers to the specific gift of tongues used in a public worship setting. This gift, meant for the edification of the church, typically occurs during quiet spiritual moments and requires interpretation. Not all believers will possess this particular gift, just as not all are apostles, prophets, or teachers. This public exercise of the gift of tongues, accompanied by interpretation, is different from the personal prayer language experienced by individuals when they receive the Holy Spirit.

While every believer is encouraged to seek and receive the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues as a personal experience, the specific gift of tongues used in church settings for communal edification and requiring interpretation is given according to God’s sovereign will and purpose. This distinction clarifies the different roles of speaking in tongues within the body of Christ, both for individual spiritual growth and for the edification of the church.

Some of this is Scriptural, but I believe some of it is likely to be Oneness Pentacostalism and it does indeed set a dangerous precedent since what you're describing is not the established norm in Scripture. I believe it could make someone doubt their salvation if they believed you and if they didn't speak in tongues, too.

I believe Paul spoke to the error of the doctrine you have presented when he said in 1Cor. 14:18, "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all..." which, if what you are saying were true, Paul would have virtually been thanking God that he has more signage of salvation than the others. It doesn't follow the spirit of holiness and righteousness for Paul to thank God for such a thing.

Your answer to this is right here:
John 16:7, "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."

The context is not about spiritual gifts or the promise of tongue-speaking later on.

Holy Ghost speaking in Tongues wasn't available until Chris ascended to Heaven first.

I don't believe God was restricted on the gifts He could provision at any point and evidently decided not to give tongue-speaking to Jesus.

There can be no Interpretation (which is what prophecy means in context) without a message in Tongues first.

I believe prophecy is an entirely different gift than speaking in tongues and it serves a different role than prophecy in the Body. Their work doesn't produce the same result either (1 Corinthians 14:4.)

 

[tigger II]

While 1 Corinthians 12 doesn't say speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth, why do you believe that is the case and why would tongues, being of the lesser gifts, be initial evidence of this when, by example, that is not what happened in Scripture and not even something Paul said to desire in the first place? By inference, Paul minimized what you're saying is a sign of the New Birth and directly said to seek something else instead. That would be equal to Paul saying "Don't seek evidence of your salvation."

The best and greatest spiritual gift is prophecy.

1 Cor. 12
31But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

1 Cor. 14
1Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
5I 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.
39Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

Some of this is Scriptural, but I believe some of it is likely to be Oneness Pentacostalism and it does indeed set a dangerous precedent since what you're describing is not the established norm in Scripture. I believe it could make someone doubt their salvation if they believed you and if they didn't speak in tongues, too.

I believe Paul spoke to the error of the doctrine you have presented when he said in 1Cor. 14:18, "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all..." which, if what you are saying were true, Paul would have virtually been thanking God that he has more signage of salvation than the others. It doesn't follow the spirit of holiness and righteousness for Paul to thank God for such a thing.


The context is not about spiritual gifts or the promise of tongue-speaking later on.


I don't believe God was restricted on the gifts He could provision at any point and evidently decided not to give tongue-speaking to Jesus.


I believe prophecy is an entirely different gift than speaking in tongues and it serves a different role than prophecy in the Body. Their work doesn't produce the same result either (1 Corinthians 14:4.)

...................................................

The Greek word translated “prophesying” or “prophecy” in both passages properly means to “speak forth” or declare the divine will, to interpret the purposes of God, or to make known in any way the truth of God which is designed to influence people. Many people misunderstand the gift of prophecy to be the ability to predict the future. While knowing something about the future may sometimes have been an aspect of the gift of prophecy, it was primarily a gift of proclamation (“forth-telling”), not prediction (“fore-telling”). - https://www.gotquestions.org/gift-of-prophecy.html

 

[My Rock]

While 1 Corinthians 12 doesn't say speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth, why do you believe that is the case

The belief that speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth, particularly the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, is rooted in the accounts found in the Book of Acts, rather than 1 Corinthians 12. Acts 2:4, 10:46, and 19:6 all depict speaking in tongues as an immediate, observable sign when individuals first receive the Holy Spirit. These instances establish a pattern that connects the experience of speaking in tongues with the New Birth. While 1 Corinthians 12 discusses the gifts of the Spirit in the context of their operation within the church, it does not focus on the initial evidence of receiving the Spirit. Therefore, the belief is based on the narrative examples in Acts rather than a doctrinal statement in 1 Corinthians.

why would tongues, being of the lesser gifts, be initial evidence of this when, by example, that is not what happened in Scripture and not even something Paul said to desire in the first place?

While speaking in tongues may be considered a lesser gift in terms of its role within the body of Christ, its significance as initial evidence of the Holy Spirit's indwelling is not based on its ranking among the gifts. Instead, it serves as a clear, external sign that is uniformly evidenced in the New Testament accounts when believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit. The Book of Acts shows that speaking in tongues occurred at pivotal moments of initial Spirit infilling, providing a tangible and unmistakable indication of the Holy Spirit's presence and to mark the Beginning of the Church. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 12, addresses the diversity of spiritual gifts and their function within the church, but the focus on tongues as initial evidence is drawn from the specific contexts where the Holy Spirit was first received.

By inference, Paul minimized what you're saying is a sign of the New Birth and directly said to seek something else instead.

Paul does emphasize the pursuit of the higher gifts, such as prophecy, which edify the church, as seen in 1 Corinthians 14:1. His instruction to desire the higher gifts is rooted in the practical need for edification within the corporate body of believers. However, this emphasis does not negate the role of tongues as initial evidence of the Spirit’s infilling. Paul's guidance is for the functioning of the gifts within the church after one has already been filled with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the role of tongues as initial evidence and its function within the church context are two distinct aspects of the Spirit’s work, both serving different purposes. There can be no Interpretation (which is what prophecy means in context) without a message in Tongues first.

That would be equal to Paul saying "Don't seek evidence of your salvation."

This statement reflects a misunderstanding of the distinction between seeking spiritual gifts and recognizing the evidence of the Holy Spirit's initial indwelling. Paul’s encouragement to seek spiritual gifts is aimed at believers who have already experienced the New Birth. The evidence of salvation, including speaking in tongues, is a separate matter that occurs when the Holy Spirit initially fills a person. Paul’s exhortations in 1 Corinthians are about the operation of the gifts within the church, not about the initial evidence of salvation. Speaking in tongues as evidence of the New Birth is based on the scriptural pattern seen in Acts, and it is not in conflict with Paul’s teaching on the pursuit of spiritual gifts for the edification of the body.

 

[Runningman]

...................................................

The Greek word translated “prophesying” or “prophecy” in both passages properly means to “speak forth” or declare the divine will, to interpret the purposes of God, or to make known in any way the truth of God which is designed to influence people. Many people misunderstand the gift of prophecy to be the ability to predict the future. While knowing something about the future may sometimes have been an aspect of the gift of prophecy, it was primarily a gift of proclamation (“forth-telling”), not prediction (“fore-telling”). - https://www.gotquestions.org/gift-of-prophecy.html

I agree with that for sure. Prophecy isn’t like predicting the future most of the time, but it can be. I believe the revelation is already complete. Right now there is nothing to add. We are in the New Covenant and the door is still open until God says it isn’t.

 

[Runningman]

The belief that speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth, particularly the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, is rooted in the accounts found in the Book of Acts, rather than 1 Corinthians 12. Acts 2:4, 10:46, and 19:6 all depict speaking in tongues as an immediate, observable sign when individuals first receive the Holy Spirit. These instances establish a pattern that connects the experience of speaking in tongues with the New Birth. While 1 Corinthians 12 discusses the gifts of the Spirit in the context of their operation within the church, it does not focus on the initial evidence of receiving the Spirit. Therefore, the belief is based on the narrative examples in Acts rather than a doctrinal statement in 1 Corinthians.

While speaking in tongues may be considered a lesser gift in terms of its role within the body of Christ, its significance as initial evidence of the Holy Spirit's indwelling is not based on its ranking among the gifts. Instead, it serves as a clear, external sign that is uniformly evidenced in the New Testament accounts when believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit. The Book of Acts shows that speaking in tongues occurred at pivotal moments of initial Spirit infilling, providing a tangible and unmistakable indication of the Holy Spirit's presence and to mark the Beginning of the Church. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 12, addresses the diversity of spiritual gifts and their function within the church, but the focus on tongues as initial evidence is drawn from the specific contexts where the Holy Spirit was first received.

Paul does emphasize the pursuit of the higher gifts, such as prophecy, which edify the church, as seen in 1 Corinthians 14:1. His instruction to desire the higher gifts is rooted in the practical need for edification within the corporate body of believers. However, this emphasis does not negate the role of tongues as initial evidence of the Spirit’s infilling. Paul's guidance is for the functioning of the gifts within the church after one has already been filled with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the role of tongues as initial evidence and its function within the church context are two distinct aspects of the Spirit’s work, both serving different purposes. There can be no Interpretation (which is what prophecy means in context) without a message in Tongues first.

This statement reflects a misunderstanding of the distinction between seeking spiritual gifts and recognizing the evidence of the Holy Spirit's initial indwelling. Paul’s encouragement to seek spiritual gifts is aimed at believers who have already experienced the New Birth. The evidence of salvation, including speaking in tongues, is a separate matter that occurs when the Holy Spirit initially fills a person. Paul’s exhortations in 1 Corinthians are about the operation of the gifts within the church, not about the initial evidence of salvation. Speaking in tongues as evidence of the New Birth is based on the scriptural pattern seen in Acts, and it is not in conflict with Paul’s teaching on the pursuit of spiritual gifts for the edification of the body.

Your premise seems to be that speaking in tongues is "a sign of the New Birth, particularly the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit..." but the Bible doesn't say this nor does do all those who been anointed and empowered by the Holy Spirit speak in tongues, i.e., Jesus and others.

So I am going to have to disagree with the theological framework you have surrounding this. For full disclosure, this is a denominational teaching, not a Biblical one.

Plainly, is it your belief that if someone isn't speaking in tongues that they aren't saved?

 

[My Rock]

Plainly, is it your belief that if someone isn't speaking in tongues that they aren't saved?

receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Speaking in tongues serves as a confirmation of this indwelling, but the broader evidence of a Spirit-filled life includes the fruit of the Spirit and a life aligned with God’s Word. Therefore, the emphasis should be on the complete experience of salvation and living out one’s faith, recognizing that speaking in tongues is an important sign, but not the sole measure of one’s relationship with God.

Living a holy and overcoming life without the baptism of the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking in tongues, would be exceedingly difficult because the Holy Spirit is the source of spiritual power and guidance for the believer. The New Testament teaches that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to overcome sin, resist the flesh, and live a life that is pleasing to God (Romans 8:13; Galatians 5:16). Without this indwelling presence, the believer is left to rely on their own strength and willpower, which is insufficient to fully overcome the sinful nature and the challenges of this world. The baptism of the Holy Ghost not only seals the believer into the New Covenant but also enables them to access divine strength, wisdom, and discernment, which are crucial for living a life of holiness and victory. Speaking in tongues serves as an initial evidence of this infilling, affirming that the believer has received the Spirit's power. Without this transformative experience, maintaining a consistent, overcoming Christian walk becomes a struggle, as it is the Holy Spirit who leads and empowers believers to live out the righteousness of God in a fallen world.

 

[My Rock]

Your premise seems to be that speaking in tongues is "a sign of the New Birth, particularly the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit..." but the Bible doesn't say this nor does do all those who been anointed and empowered by the Holy Spirit speak in tongues, i.e., Jesus and others.

So I am going to have to disagree with the theological framework you have surrounding this. For full disclosure, this is a denominational teaching, not a Biblical one.

Plainly, is it your belief that if someone isn't speaking in tongues that they aren't saved?

Point specifics of my interpretation you think is incorrect and we will address it. It is not about personal beliefs or denomination it's completely Scripture and that will always be TRUTH.

 

[Runningman]

receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Speaking in tongues serves as a confirmation of this indwelling, but the broader evidence of a Spirit-filled life includes the fruit of the Spirit and a life aligned with God’s Word. Therefore, the emphasis should be on the complete experience of salvation and living out one’s faith, recognizing that speaking in tongues is an important sign, but not the sole measure of one’s relationship with God.

While speaking in tongues did occur in close proximity to the Upper Room event, it isn't to suggest that this is the standard model for what those who are Spirit-filled can or will experience.

The usage of tongues in the context of Acts 2:38 was for the purpose of effectively speaking to the people of diverse languages that were present. According to Acts 2:5-11, there were Jews and proselytes who were the Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Cretes and Arabians, who were hearing wonderful works of God being spoke of in their own language due to the apostle's gift of tongues.

While the people who were utilizing the gifts of tongue were Spirit filled, they were not Spirit filled because they were speaking tongues. God used a miracle for this situation because He wanted to get a message to people who would have otherwise not been able to communicate with one another.

Living a holy and overcoming life without the baptism of the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking in tongues, would be exceedingly difficult because the Holy Spirit is the source of spiritual power and guidance for the believer. The New Testament teaches that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to overcome sin, resist the flesh, and live a life that is pleasing to God (Romans 8:13; Galatians 5:16). Without this indwelling presence, the believer is left to rely on their own strength and willpower, which is insufficient to fully overcome the sinful nature and the challenges of this world. The baptism of the Holy Ghost not only seals the believer into the New Covenant but also enables them to access divine strength, wisdom, and discernment, which are crucial for living a life of holiness and victory. Speaking in tongues serves as an initial evidence of this infilling, affirming that the believer has received the Spirit's power. Without this transformative experience, maintaining a consistent, overcoming Christian walk becomes a struggle, as it is the Holy Spirit who leads and empowers believers to live out the righteousness of God in a fallen world.

Living a holy and overcoming life without the baptism of the Holy Ghost, evidenced by speaking in tongues, would be exceedingly difficult because the Holy Spirit is the source of spiritual power and guidance for the believer. The New Testament teaches that the Holy Spirit empowers believers to overcome sin, resist the flesh, and live a life that is pleasing to God (Romans 8:13; Galatians 5:16). Without this indwelling presence, the believer is left to rely on their own strength and willpower, which is insufficient to fully overcome the sinful nature and the challenges of this world. The baptism of the Holy Ghost not only seals the believer into the New Covenant but also enables them to access divine strength, wisdom, and discernment, which are crucial for living a life of holiness and victory. Speaking in tongues serves as an initial evidence of this infilling, affirming that the believer has received the Spirit's power. Without this transformative experience, maintaining a consistent, overcoming Christian walk becomes a struggle, as it is the Holy Spirit who leads and empowers believers to live out the righteousness of God in a fallen world.

Jesus himself didn’t have the Holy Spirit anointing until his water baptism (Matthew 3:16,17, Acts 10:37,38) which was the time in which he was empowered for God to do miraculous works through him, not before. It may seem like being anointed by the Holy Spirit and led by the Holy Spirit are the same things, they are not.

Those who are anointed by the Holy Spirit are empowered by the Holy Spirit to do miraculous works, but they are not necessarily born again or have what you refer to as the New Birth. These can be people who receive the gift, but didn't receive the New Birth and may actually still be habitual, unrepentant, sinners according to Matthew 7:21-23 and these very people could include tongue-speakers.

While on the other hand, those who are led by the Holy Spirit are walking according to the Spirit as opposed to walking in the flesh. This sounds religious and it's what I like to call "Bible-speak," but in plain English it means someone is pursuing goodness, righteousness, and being holy as opposed to sinning.

So while having the gift of tongues may mean that someone has received a spiritual gift, it does not presuppose that they are under the guidance of the Holy Spirit or that they feel much, if any, conviction to obey God and produce the fruits of the Holy Spirit.

The fruits of the Holy Spirit are what are the sign(s) of the New Birth. One who has been born again may have one or more of these type of spiritual fruits (Galatians 5:22-23) and could hypothetically have them all at one point or another. The fruit is the evidence of the New Birth and Jesus was very direct about this in Matthew 7:15-20, saying "Ye shall know them by their fruits."

This is why not all people speak in tongues in Scripture or by what is observable in the present day. It isn't directly related to salvation, the new birth, being born again, etc; it's for ministerial purposes or whatever other purpose God wants to use it for. (1 Corinthians 12, 14)

receiving the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Speaking in tongues serves as a confirmation of this indwelling, but the broader evidence of a Spirit-filled life includes the fruit of the Spirit and a life aligned with God’s Word. Therefore, the emphasis should be on the complete experience of salvation and living out one’s faith, recognizing that speaking in tongues is an important sign, but not the sole measure of one’s relationship with God.

I believe that the tongue-speaking in Acts 2:38 was so that Peter could persuade the Jews to convert and he was successful: "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." However, it is not related to one's relationship with God. God is concerned about your obedience and submission to His will rather than you speaking in tongues.

This is evident by our final judgement being based on our unrighteous and righteous works while our spiritual gifts, or absence thereof, will not even be taken into account.

Matthew 7
21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[Runningman]

Point specifics of my interpretation you think is incorrect and we will address it. It is not about personal beliefs or denomination it's completely Scripture and that will always be TRUTH.

Please concisely point me to the verse that says speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth.

 

[My Rock]

Please concisely point me to the verse that says speaking in tongues is a sign of the New Birth.

In response to the claim that speaking in tongues is not necessary for salvation, Acts 2:37-38 provides critical insight into the early Church’s understanding of salvation and the role of the Holy Spirit. When the crowd, convicted by Peter’s sermon, asked what they must do to be saved, Peter’s response was clear: "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." While Peter does not explicitly mention speaking in tongues in these verses, the broader context of Acts demonstrates that speaking in tongues was the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:4; 10:44-46; 19:6). Therefore, speaking in tongues serves as a confirming sign that one has received the Spirit, aligning with the New Testament pattern of Spirit baptism. However, it is crucial to understand that the act of speaking in tongues itself is not the source of salvation but is evidence of the indwelling Holy Spirit, which is essential for a complete new birth experience. The emphasis in Acts 2:37-38 is on repentance, baptism in Jesus' name, and receiving the Holy Spirit, which together constitute the New Testament plan of salvation. Speaking in tongues as evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit ensures that the believer has fully experienced the baptism of the Spirit, fulfilling what Jesus spoke of in John 3:5 about being born of water and Spirit.

 

[Runningman]

In response to the claim that speaking in tongues is not necessary for salvation, Acts 2:37-38 provides critical insight into the early Church’s understanding of salvation and the role of the Holy Spirit. When the crowd, convicted by Peter’s sermon, asked what they must do to be saved, Peter’s response was clear: "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." While Peter does not explicitly mention speaking in tongues in these verses, the broader context of Acts demonstrates that speaking in tongues was the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:4; 10:44-46; 19:6). Therefore, speaking in tongues serves as a confirming sign that one has received the Spirit, aligning with the New Testament pattern of Spirit baptism. However, it is crucial to understand that the act of speaking in tongues itself is not the source of salvation but is evidence of the indwelling Holy Spirit, which is essential for a complete new birth experience. The emphasis in Acts 2:37-38 is on repentance, baptism in Jesus' name, and receiving the Holy Spirit, which together constitute the New Testament plan of salvation. Speaking in tongues as evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit ensures that the believer has fully experienced the baptism of the Spirit, fulfilling what Jesus spoke of in John 3:5 about being born of water and Spirit.

The "gift of the Holy Spirit" can be any of the spiritual gifts for ministerial purposes. It doesn't have to be tongues, though it can be, or it can be something else less overt (1 Cor. 12:4-11.) The claim that tongue is the objective, definitive, evidence of the New Birth is not supported by Scripture. People can get one or more the the gifts because a "body has many members" that serve different functions and capacities yet ultimately contribute to the whole regardless of if they seem minimal or insignificant.

So the claim that the gift of tongues is essential for a complete New Birth experience sets a false and dangerous precedent that is not compatible with the gospel of salvation despite the circumstantial evidence that seems to only exist in Acts 2.

 

[Hopeful 2]

The "gift of the Holy Spirit" can be any of the spiritual gifts for ministerial purposes. It doesn't have to be tongues, though it can be, or it can be something else less overt (1 Cor. 12:4-11.) The claim that tongue is the objective, definitive, evidence of the New Birth is not supported by Scripture. People can get one or more the the gifts because a "body has many members" that serve different functions and capacities yet ultimately contribute to the whole regardless of if they seem minimal or insignificant.

So the claim that the gift of tongues is essential for a complete New Birth experience sets a false and dangerous precedent that is not compatible with the gospel of salvation despite the circumstantial evidence that seems to only exist in Acts 2.

Acts 19 too.
The twelve at Ephesus also spoke in tongues, after receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Cornelius' group, in Acts 10, also spoke in tongues after having received the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Can you cite another manifestation of the gift of the Holy Ghost, besides tongues, in Acts ?

 

[Runningman]

Acts 19 too.
The twelve at Ephesus also spoke in tongues, after receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Cornelius' group, in Acts 10, also spoke in tongues after having received the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Can you cite another manifestation of the gift of the Holy Ghost, besides tongues, in Acts ?

There are many different manifestations of the Spirit or gifts of the Spirit. Tongues isn't the only one and it isn't even the most important. Yes there are examples of people speaking in tongues as their gift and that's great, I love that, but needing to speak in tongues isn't a point in the gospel of salvation.

1 Corinthians 12
7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 8For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

 

[Hopeful 2]

There are many different manifestations of the Spirit or gifts of the Spirit. Tongues isn't the only one and it isn't even the most important. Yes there are examples of people speaking in tongues as their gift and that's great, I love that, but needing to speak in tongues isn't a point in the gospel of salvation.

1 Corinthians 12
7But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 8For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

So you couldn't think of one other manifestation of the gift of the Holy Ghost except tongues in Acts, but continue to down-play it ?
I consider the gift of tongues essential for proof of the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

[My Rock]

The claim that tongue is the objective, definitive, evidence of the New Birth is not supported by Scripture.

What I am saying is throughout Acts, speaking in tongues served as a visible and audible sign that the individuals had received the Holy Spirit. These examples establish a pattern where speaking in tongues is connected with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is a critical component of the New Birth experience.

 

[Runningman]

So you couldn't think of one other manifestation of the gift of the Holy Ghost except tongues in Acts, but continue to down-play it ?

Not sure what you’re talking about since it’s downplaying itself just fine and scarcely mentioned.

There is healing in Acts3:7 as one example.

All of them are shown in example in Acts 2-8.

I consider the gift of tongues essential for proof of the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Verse?

 

[My Rock]

Verse?

Acts 2:1-4 spells it out very nicely.

 

[Runningman]

Acts 2:1-4 spells it out very nicely.

The premise was tongues is essential for proof for the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:1-4 doesn’t mention this nor suggest it.