Speaking in tongues and the Holy Spirit

[My Rock]

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.

Acts 2:1-4 indeed provides a foundational scriptural basis for understanding tongues as the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The passage describes the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was first poured out upon the disciples: “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” The Greek term for "filled" (plēthō - πλήθω) emphasizes a complete and overwhelming experience of the Holy Spirit, leading to an outward manifestation. The phrase "began to speak" (laleō - λαλέω) coupled with "tongues" (glōssa - γλῶσσα) indicates that the immediate, observable consequence of being filled with the Spirit was the spontaneous utterance in languages unknown to the speakers, signifying a supernatural occurrence directly initiated by the Holy Spirit. This event set a precedent that speaking in tongues was the normative evidence of the Spirit’s infilling.

This understanding is reinforced by later accounts in Acts. In Acts 10:44-46, when the Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles in Cornelius’s house, they also “spoke with tongues and magnified God,” confirming to Peter and the Jewish believers that they had received the same gift of the Holy Spirit as the apostles did at Pentecost. Acts 19:6 recounts a similar occurrence when Paul laid hands on the Ephesian disciples, and they “spoke with tongues and prophesied” after receiving the Holy Spirit. The repetition of this pattern across different contexts and groups emphasizes that speaking in tongues served as the tangible, objective evidence that the believers had experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

This consistent manifestation underscores that tongues were not merely an isolated phenomenon but a definitive sign accompanying the initial outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The connection between tongues and the infilling of the Spirit in these accounts suggests that tongues were viewed by the early Church as the expected evidence of this transformative experience. Therefore, Acts 2:1-4, along with corroborative passages, clearly supports the understanding that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, providing a clear, scripturally grounded basis for this belief.

Outside Biblical sources with citation:

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD):
In Against Heresies, Irenaeus mentions the continuation of miraculous gifts, including speaking in tongues, as signs accompanying believers filled with the Holy Spirit. He writes, "We hear many brethren in the Church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages" (Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 6, Section 1). This passage indicates that speaking in tongues was a recognized sign of the Spirit's presence in the early Church.

Tertullian (c. 160-220 AD):
Tertullian, in his work Against Marcion, makes a reference to the gifts of the Spirit, including speaking in tongues. He writes, “Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have predicted things to come, and have made manifest the secrets of the heart; let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer, only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him” (Against Marcion, Book 5, Chapter 8). Tertullian’s challenge to Marcionites to demonstrate the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues, as validation of divine inspiration, underscores the importance of tongues as a sign of the Spirit in the early Church.

Origen (c. 184-253 AD):
Origen, though more cautious about the miraculous gifts in his time, acknowledges their presence in the early Church. In Against Celsus, he writes, "The Holy Spirit gave signs and wonders in the early days of the Church; many people spoke with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Contra Celsum, Book 7, Chapter 8). This acknowledgment, though brief, ties the practice of speaking in tongues to the early Church’s experience of the Holy Spirit.

Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD):
Augustine, though later in the timeline, references the early Church's experience with tongues. In Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Augustine reflects on the Pentecost event and notes, "For who can fail to be astonished at this sign, when in one Spirit all men were made to speak in all kinds of tongues?…That sign passed away." Although Augustine believed the miraculous gifts had ceased, he clearly recognized that speaking in tongues was a significant sign in the early Church.

 

[Runningman]

Acts 2:1-4 indeed provides a foundational scriptural basis for understanding tongues as the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The passage describes the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was first poured out upon the disciples: “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” The Greek term for "filled" (plēthō - πλήθω) emphasizes a complete and overwhelming experience of the Holy Spirit, leading to an outward manifestation. The phrase "began to speak" (laleō - λαλέω) coupled with "tongues" (glōssa - γλῶσσα) indicates that the immediate, observable consequence of being filled with the Spirit was the spontaneous utterance in languages unknown to the speakers, signifying a supernatural occurrence directly initiated by the Holy Spirit. This event set a precedent that speaking in tongues was the normative evidence of the Spirit’s infilling.

This understanding is reinforced by later accounts in Acts. In Acts 10:44-46, when the Holy Spirit fell on the Gentiles in Cornelius’s house, they also “spoke with tongues and magnified God,” confirming to Peter and the Jewish believers that they had received the same gift of the Holy Spirit as the apostles did at Pentecost. Acts 19:6 recounts a similar occurrence when Paul laid hands on the Ephesian disciples, and they “spoke with tongues and prophesied” after receiving the Holy Spirit. The repetition of this pattern across different contexts and groups emphasizes that speaking in tongues served as the tangible, objective evidence that the believers had experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

This consistent manifestation underscores that tongues were not merely an isolated phenomenon but a definitive sign accompanying the initial outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The connection between tongues and the infilling of the Spirit in these accounts suggests that tongues were viewed by the early Church as the expected evidence of this transformative experience. Therefore, Acts 2:1-4, along with corroborative passages, clearly supports the understanding that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit, providing a clear, scripturally grounded basis for this belief.

Outside Biblical sources with citation:

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130-202 AD):
In Against Heresies, Irenaeus mentions the continuation of miraculous gifts, including speaking in tongues, as signs accompanying believers filled with the Holy Spirit. He writes, "We hear many brethren in the Church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages" (Against Heresies, Book 5, Chapter 6, Section 1). This passage indicates that speaking in tongues was a recognized sign of the Spirit's presence in the early Church.

Tertullian (c. 160-220 AD):
Tertullian, in his work Against Marcion, makes a reference to the gifts of the Spirit, including speaking in tongues. He writes, “Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have predicted things to come, and have made manifest the secrets of the heart; let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer, only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him” (Against Marcion, Book 5, Chapter 8). Tertullian’s challenge to Marcionites to demonstrate the gifts of the Spirit, including tongues, as validation of divine inspiration, underscores the importance of tongues as a sign of the Spirit in the early Church.

Origen (c. 184-253 AD):
Origen, though more cautious about the miraculous gifts in his time, acknowledges their presence in the early Church. In Against Celsus, he writes, "The Holy Spirit gave signs and wonders in the early days of the Church; many people spoke with tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance" (Contra Celsum, Book 7, Chapter 8). This acknowledgment, though brief, ties the practice of speaking in tongues to the early Church’s experience of the Holy Spirit.

Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD):
Augustine, though later in the timeline, references the early Church's experience with tongues. In Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Augustine reflects on the Pentecost event and notes, "For who can fail to be astonished at this sign, when in one Spirit all men were made to speak in all kinds of tongues?…That sign passed away." Although Augustine believed the miraculous gifts had ceased, he clearly recognized that speaking in tongues was a significant sign in the early Church.

Tongues was their gift of the Holy Spirit. It wasn’t the same gift others got because it isn’t suggesting nor stating that’s the established norm.

The gift the Father promised was for them, but not necessarily for all, though others can have it too as evidenced by other passages that prove such.

In Acts 1, Jesus said the following:

4And, 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. 5For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

Jesus was speaking directly to those who were present. They gathered in the upper room and received the gift from the Father.

There is no such general message to all Christians about their guaranteed gift of tongues. I understand that is your belief and I am fine with that, but you actually cross a line by suggesting it’s related to salvation. I understand how you have come to that conclusion by reading Acts 2, but in the broader, global, context of Scripture the evidence of salvation has nothing to do with spiritual gifts. I believe you’re misunderstanding this.

 

[My Rock]

There is no such general message to all Christians about their guaranteed gift of tongues. I understand that is your belief and I am fine with that, but you actually cross a line by suggesting it’s related to salvation. I understand how you have come to that conclusion by reading Acts 2, but in the broader, global, context of Scripture the evidence of salvation has nothing to do with spiritual gifts. I believe you’re misunderstanding this.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is considered the foundational experience necessary for the effective operation of all spiritual gifts. Acts 2:4 sets a precedent that is consistently observed in subsequent New Testament accounts. This experience of speaking in tongues is seen not merely as a sign but as an essential confirmation of receiving the Holy Spirit's indwelling presence.

1 Corinthians 12:7-11 enumerates various spiritual gifts, including wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing, miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. These gifts are manifestations of the Holy Spirit’s work and are distributed according to His will. The essential role of the Holy Spirit in this distribution underscores that these gifts operate through the presence and empowerment of the Spirit. Consequently, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, with its initial evidence of speaking in tongues, is viewed as crucial for accessing and effectively utilizing these diverse gifts.

Theological consistency within this perspective asserts that the baptism of the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is not just an initiation but a necessary empowerment for the full spectrum of spiritual gifts. This foundational experience is believed to open believers to a deeper relationship with God and to enable them to operate in the various gifts of the Spirit. Thus, in this framework, while the Holy Spirit is indeed the source of all spiritual gifts, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is considered an indispensable prerequisite for their manifestation and effective use in the believer’s life.

 

[Runningman]

The baptism of the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is considered the foundational experience necessary for the effective operation of all spiritual gifts. Acts 2:4 sets a precedent that is consistently observed in subsequent New Testament accounts. This experience of speaking in tongues is seen not merely as a sign but as an essential confirmation of receiving the Holy Spirit's indwelling presence.

1 Corinthians 12:7-11 enumerates various spiritual gifts, including wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing, miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. These gifts are manifestations of the Holy Spirit’s work and are distributed according to His will. The essential role of the Holy Spirit in this distribution underscores that these gifts operate through the presence and empowerment of the Spirit. Consequently, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, with its initial evidence of speaking in tongues, is viewed as crucial for accessing and effectively utilizing these diverse gifts.

Theological consistency within this perspective asserts that the baptism of the Holy Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues, is not just an initiation but a necessary empowerment for the full spectrum of spiritual gifts. This foundational experience is believed to open believers to a deeper relationship with God and to enable them to operate in the various gifts of the Spirit. Thus, in this framework, while the Holy Spirit is indeed the source of all spiritual gifts, the baptism of the Holy Spirit is considered an indispensable prerequisite for their manifestation and effective use in the believer’s life.

There are gifts other than tongues that those who were baptized in the Holy Spirit received. While tongues is one of the gifts that was given to the disciples, it was not given to others with consistency in Scripture.

For example, in Acts 11:15-18, when the Holy Spirit fell upon those present, there is no record of them having received the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues. The gift, in the context, is a spirit of holiness, or the Holy Spirit. This should be noted with distinction from the Father, who is both holy and Spirit (also known as the Holy Spirit), and the gift of what should be understood as a holy spirit or spirit of holiness.

I believe what you are trying to do is set a standard based on isolated examples of people receiving the gift of tongues upon their baptism of the Holy Spirit, but as already demonstrated above in Acts 11, that receiving the gift of tongues isn't the established norm in Acts.

After Acts, there are many other examples of Holy Spirit baptism where there is no mention of speaking in tongues. In Paul's teachings, 1 Corinthians 12 & 14, he taught that not all people receive the gift of tongues, but rather the gifts are diverse. No one ever taught anything about the gift of tongues being being pre-requisite or concrete evidence of their New Birth. No one ever taught the gift of tongues is necessary for salvation.

So while you have quoted Scripture, you have actually presented a theological argument that does not lead to a sound conclusion because no one will be judged based on what spiritual gifts they had (Matthew 7:15-23.) Rather, people will be judged based on their deeds and receive eternal life or not accordingly (Romans 2:5-8.) So if tongues were a sign of the New Birth and salvation then it should follow that eternal life is guaranteed, however, what we find in Scripture is that one's spiritual gifts will not save them nor are they an indicator one is saved.

 

[My Rock]

No one ever taught anything about the gift of tongues being being pre-requisite or concrete evidence of their New Birth. No one ever taught the gift of tongues is necessary for salvation.

What I am trying to convey is that receiving the Spirit, as described in John 3 when Jesus speaks of being "born of the Spirit," is an essential part of the new birth experience and, therefore, a vital component of the overall salvation experience. However, it's important to clarify that speaking in tongues, while it is the audible and visual evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, is not itself equivalent to salvation. Salvation encompasses a broader transformation that includes repentance, faith in Jesus Christ, and a life aligned with God's Word. Speaking in tongues is a sign that the Holy Spirit has filled a believer, but it should be understood as one aspect of the fuller experience of being born again, rather than the entirety of what it means to be saved.

 

[Hopeful 2]

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

I think that three examples of the gift of tongues at the reception of the gift of the Holy Ghost is sufficient.

There is healing in Acts3:7 as one example.

The crippled man didn't receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
We don't even know if he was aware of who Jesus was.

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

There are lots of examples of folks being healed in Acts, but which were as a result of receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost ?

Verse?

Acts 2, Acts 10, and Acts 19.

 

[Runningman]

What I am trying to convey is that receiving the Spirit, as described in John 3 when Jesus speaks of being "born of the Spirit," is an essential part of the new birth experience and, therefore, a vital component of the overall salvation experience. However, it's important to clarify that speaking in tongues, while it is the audible and visual evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, is not itself equivalent to salvation. Salvation encompasses a broader transformation that includes repentance, faith in Jesus Christ, and a life aligned with God's Word. Speaking in tongues is a sign that the Holy Spirit has filled a believer, but it should be understood as one aspect of the fuller experience of being born again, rather than the entirety of what it means to be saved.

Speaking in tongues and other spiritual gifts have nothing to do with salvation in Scripture. Your position seems to be that spiritual gifts have something to do with salvation.

So if that were the case, then why is it those people with spiritual gifts did not get salvation for being wicked in Matthew 7:15-23?

 

[Runningman]

I think that three examples of the gift of tongues at the reception of the gift of the Holy Ghost is sufficient.

Sufficient to suggest what?

The crippled man didn't receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
We don't even know if he was aware of who Jesus was.

The man who healed him had the gift of the Spirit called healing.

There are lots of examples of folks being healed in Acts, but which were as a result of receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost ?

Which verses say that?

Acts 2, Acts 10, and Acts 19.

What about them? They say nothing about your belief that the "the gift of tongues essential for proof of the gift of the Holy Ghost."

 

[Hopeful 2]

Sufficient to suggest what?

Sufficient to see a pattern of the gift of tongues being part and parcel of t=receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The man who healed him had the gift of the Spirit called healing.

The man who, through God, healed him, already showed he had received the gift of tongues.

Which verses say that?

Do you use "biblegateway.com" in the course of your studies ?
If you type in "healed" on their search bar, you will get 7 mentions of healing in the book of Acts.
None of those healings were an initial manifestation of someone receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

What about them? They say nothing about your belief that the "the gift of tongues essential for proof of the gift of the Holy Ghost."

Men received the gift of the Holy Ghost.
They spoke with tongues.
That pattern continues today.
Of course, all gifts from God depend on a true repentance from sin first.

 

[Runningman]

Sufficient to see a pattern of the gift of tongues being part and parcel of t=receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The man who, through God, healed him, already showed he had received the gift of tongues.

Do you use "biblegateway.com" in the course of your studies ?
If you type in "healed" on their search bar, you will get 7 mentions of healing in the book of Acts.
None of those healings were an initial manifestation of someone receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Men received the gift of the Holy Ghost.
They spoke with tongues.
That pattern continues today.
Of course, all gifts from God depend on a true repentance from sin first.

The apostles had already received their spiritual gifts before Jesus was crucified. So my point is that they were utilizing spiritual gifts and it had nothing to do with their Salvation. Even Judas Iscariot was given the same type of power according to Matthew 10:1-8.

So the gift of the Holy Spirit was actually just an additional spiritual power, not their initial reception of the Holy Spirit. So tongues in regards to the salvation of the apostles in irrelevant. Jesus had already promised them they were getting eternal life in Matthew 19:28-30.

And I have already mentioned it many times to My Rock and it has gone unaddressed. I guess because it's a difficult one to incorporate into Oneness Pentecostalism. So I will also ask you the same question:

Why is it those people with spiritual gifts did not get salvation for being wicked in Matthew 7:15-23?

 

[My Rock]

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

2 Corinthians 13:1, "This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."
Matthew 18:16,"But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established."
The principle referenced here comes from both Deuteronomy 19:15 and is echoed in the New Testament, in passages like Matthew 18:16 and 2 Corinthians 13:1, which emphasize the importance of confirming a matter through the testimony of two or three witnesses. This concept underscores the value of corroboration and truthfulness in establishing facts or judgments.

 

[My Rock]

Speaking in tongues and other spiritual gifts have nothing to do with salvation in Scripture. Your position seems to be that spiritual gifts have something to do with salvation.

To say that spiritual gifts, particularly tongues, have nothing to do with salvation is to overlook the clear scriptural pattern that associates the outpouring of the Holy Spirit with the New Birth and the broader experience of salvation. Acts 2:37-38 encapsulates the message of the early church: repentance, baptism in Jesus’ name, and receiving the Holy Spirit are all interconnected elements of the salvation process. The spiritual gifts that follow, such as tongues, are not mere addons but are deeply connected to the transformative work of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer. Denying this connection undermines the cohesive biblical teaching on the role of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament church.

So if that were the case, then why is it those people with spiritual gifts did not get salvation for being wicked in Matthew 7:15-23?

Matthew 7:15-23 serves as a warning that spiritual gifts should not be viewed as an end in themselves or as a substitute for a true relationship with God. Salvation involves repentance, faith, and living a life aligned with God’s will. While the Holy Spirit’s indwelling presence, often evidenced by speaking in tongues, is an essential part of the salvation experience, it must be accompanied by a life that bears the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23). This passage reminds us that what ultimately matters is not just the external manifestations of spiritual gifts, but whether we truly know Christ and live according to His commands.

 

[My Rock]

The apostles had already received their spiritual gifts before Jesus was crucified.

In John 20:22, when Jesus breathes on His disciples and says, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," this moment is rich with theological meaning within the broader context of the biblical narrative. This act of Jesus can be seen as a prophetic gesture, foreshadowing the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit that would occur on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. It is important to understand this event not as the final and complete indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but rather as an act that points to the greater reality that was yet to come.

In the context of the entire biblical narrative, this moment connects back to the creation account in Genesis 2:7, where God breathes life into Adam, making him a living soul. Similarly, in John 20:22, Jesus breathes on His disciples, symbolizing the new spiritual life that would be fully realized through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This act signifies the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, where the Spirit of God would no longer dwell in temples made with hands but would reside within the hearts of believers.

This event is not the full reception of the Holy Spirit, as evidenced by the fact that the disciples still awaited the promise of the Father (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4-5). The fulfillment of this promise occurred on the Day of Pentecost when they were baptized with the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of this new birth experience (Acts 2:1-4). Therefore, John 20:22 should be understood as an anticipatory moment, where Jesus symbolically imparts the Spirit, pointing forward to the complete outpouring that would empower the disciples to be His witnesses and establish the Church. This is God's unfolding plan of redemption, where the fullness of the Spirit's indwelling presence is realized in the life of every believer through the New Birth experience.

 

[Runningman]

2 Corinthians 13:1, "This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."
Matthew 18:16,"But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established."
The principle referenced here comes from both Deuteronomy 19:15 and is echoed in the New Testament, in passages like Matthew 18:16 and 2 Corinthians 13:1, which emphasize the importance of confirming a matter through the testimony of two or three witnesses. This concept underscores the value of corroboration and truthfulness in establishing facts or judgments.

Even though more than one person can help establish words, it is not the quantity of the people but rather the quality. If it is your word and someone else's word against the Bible then that is not sufficient to establish a truth claim. Rather, it is sufficient to establish that and others have beliefs that are contrary to Scripture.

For example, your claim that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is evidenced by speaking in tongues is not able to be reproduced with consistency in Scripture. For example, the disciples of Jesus had already gotten then baptism in the gospels and none of them were speaking in tongues until Pentecost. On Pentecost, they didn't receive the Holy Spirit again, but rather another gift. (Acts 1-2)

 

[Runningman]

To say that spiritual gifts, particularly tongues, have nothing to do with salvation is to overlook the clear scriptural pattern that associates the outpouring of the Holy Spirit with the New Birth and the broader experience of salvation. Acts 2:37-38 encapsulates the message of the early church: repentance, baptism in Jesus’ name, and receiving the Holy Spirit are all interconnected elements of the salvation process. The spiritual gifts that follow, such as tongues, are not mere addons but are deeply connected to the transformative work of the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer. Denying this connection undermines the cohesive biblical teaching on the role of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament church.

Acts 2:37-38 is not a standalone verse that represents the church. Christians still exist today and they aren't all speaking in tongues. Are all of them not saved despite having repented of their sin and obeyed the gospel?

Matthew 7:15-23 serves as a warning that spiritual gifts should not be viewed as an end in themselves or as a substitute for a true relationship with God. Salvation involves repentance, faith, and living a life aligned with God’s will. While the Holy Spirit’s indwelling presence, often evidenced by speaking in tongues, is an essential part of the salvation experience, it must be accompanied by a life that bears the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23). This passage reminds us that what ultimately matters is not just the external manifestations of spiritual gifts, but whether we truly know Christ and live according to His commands.

Matthew 7:15-23 means that regardless of your idea of tongue-speaking being evidence of a perceived salvation event, that isn't the metric by which you will be judged. You will be judged on whether you are a practitioner of righteous or lawlessness. In other words it will be about how much you've obeyed God, not about the gifts you may or may not have.

 

[Runningman]

In John 20:22, when Jesus breathes on His disciples and says, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost," this moment is rich with theological meaning within the broader context of the biblical narrative. This act of Jesus can be seen as a prophetic gesture, foreshadowing the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit that would occur on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2. It is important to understand this event not as the final and complete indwelling of the Holy Spirit, but rather as an act that points to the greater reality that was yet to come.

So despite Jesus telling them to receive the Holy Spirit, you believe they didn't receive the Holy Spirit? It's an easier argument to take what Jesus said literally rather than conceptualize it and turn into foreshadowing.

John 20:21 was their reception of the Holy Spirit since he told them they will receive it then.

In the context of the entire biblical narrative, this moment connects back to the creation account in Genesis 2:7, where God breathes life into Adam, making him a living soul. Similarly, in John 20:22, Jesus breathes on His disciples, symbolizing the new spiritual life that would be fully realized through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. This act signifies the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, where the Spirit of God would no longer dwell in temples made with hands but would reside within the hearts of believers.

Or it could actually be them receiving the Holy Spirit as Jesus already said. Isn't that a possibility?

This event is not the full reception of the Holy Spirit, as evidenced by the fact that the disciples still awaited the promise of the Father (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4-5). The fulfillment of this promise occurred on the Day of Pentecost when they were baptized with the Holy Ghost, speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of this new birth experience (Acts 2:1-4). Therefore, John 20:22 should be understood as an anticipatory moment, where Jesus symbolically imparts the Spirit, pointing forward to the complete outpouring that would empower the disciples to be His witnesses and establish the Church. This is God's unfolding plan of redemption, where the fullness of the Spirit's indwelling presence is realized in the life of every believer through the New Birth experience.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit is therefore for the impartation of spiritual gifts since the upper room event isn't even the way it always happened in Scripture. The baptism of the Holy Spirit could occur through water baptism, the laying on of hands, (Acts 19:5,6) or God seeming to just enable it without much of a show (Acts 11:15-17) where there was no mention of tongue-speaking.

Therefore, since the disciples had already received the Holy Spirit before the day of Pentecost (John 20:22) and they were already practicing spiritual gifts before this reception, then the receiving of spiritual gifts in the baptism of the Holy Spirit wasn't to be confused with their New Birth, but rather as by what is apparent, their reception of a gift from the Father (Acts 1:4-5) therefore the salvation event of the disciples occurred in John 20:22 when they received the Holy Spirit and not on Pentecost when they received a spiritual gift of tongues.

 

[Runningman]

2 Corinthians 13:1, "This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."
Matthew 18:16,"But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established."
The principle referenced here comes from both Deuteronomy 19:15 and is echoed in the New Testament, in passages like Matthew 18:16 and 2 Corinthians 13:1, which emphasize the importance of confirming a matter through the testimony of two or three witnesses. This concept underscores the value of corroboration and truthfulness in establishing facts or judgments.

Even though more than one person can help establish words, it is not the quantity of the people but rather the quality. If it is your word and someone else's word against the Bible then that is not sufficient to establish a truth claim. Rather, it is sufficient to establish that and others have beliefs that are contrary to Scripture.

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)

 

[My Rock]

Even though more than one person can help establish words, it is not the quantity of the people but rather the quality. If it is your word and someone else's word against the Bible then that is not sufficient to establish a truth claim. Rather, it is sufficient to establish that and others have beliefs that are contrary to Scripture.

The main point being made is not myopinion and someone else's. On day of Pentecost there was way more than two witnesses so it is an established fact and that is strictly biblical and no way around it.

 

[My Rock]

For example, the disciples of Jesus had already gotten then baptism in the gospels and none of them were speaking in tongues until Pentecost. On Pentecost, they didn't receive the Holy Spirit again, but rather another gift. (Acts 1-2)

none of them were speaking in tongues until Pentecost.

The argument that the disciples received the baptism of the Holy Spirit in John 20:22 and merely received “another gift” at Pentecost misunderstands the progressive unfolding of God’s plan. The events in Acts 1-2 reveal the fulfillment of Jesus’ promise that the Holy Spirit would come with power (Acts 1:8), marking the birth of the Church and the full indwelling of the Spirit within believers. The speaking in tongues in Acts 2 was not just an additional gift but the evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, which is the deeper experience Jesus pointed to in John 20:22.

It is also important to recognize that the Holy Ghost was not poured out until Christ ascended into heaven. (so of course they didn't speak in tongues yet) Jesus Himself said in John 16:7 that it was necessary for Him to go away so that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, could come. This shows that the full outpouring of the Spirit was contingent upon Jesus' departure. The progression from the symbolic act in John 20:22 to the full manifestation in Acts 2 underscores the transition from the Old Covenant, where God’s presence was external and temporary, to the New Covenant, where His Spirit permanently indwells believers. The tongues of fire and the speaking in tongues at Pentecost were clear signs that the disciples had received this promised Spirit in its fullness, transforming them into the living temples of God’s presence, as foretold by the prophets and by Jesus Himself. Thus, the events of Pentecost complete and fulfill what Jesus began in John 20:22, marking the true beginning of the New Covenant community.

 

[My Rock]

Therefore, since the disciples had already received the Holy Spirit before the day of Pentecost (John 20:22)

In John 20:22, after His resurrection but before His ascension, Jesus breathed on His disciples and said, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost." This act was significant, but it should be understood as a symbolic and preparatory moment rather than the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit that was to come. This breathing on them can be seen as a foreshadowing or an anticipation of the greater event that would take place at Pentecost.

John the Baptist had prophesied that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire (Matthew 3:11). This baptism with fire and the Holy Spirit was fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost, as recorded in Acts 2:1-4, when the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, and tongues of fire rested upon them. This event marked the full and powerful coming of the Holy Spirit, accompanied by the outward sign of speaking in tongues, which was a clear and undeniable manifestation of the Spirit's indwelling presence. It’s important to note that the vocal gifts of the Spirit, such as prophecy and the interpretation of tongues, cannot operate without first receiving the gift of speaking in tongues, which is the initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit.

The reason why John 20:22 was not the baptism of the Holy Ghost that John spoke of is that, at that time, Jesus had not yet ascended to the Father. In John 16:7, Jesus told His disciples that it was necessary for Him to go away so that the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, could come to them. The full outpouring of the Holy Spirit, as experienced at Pentecost, could only occur after Jesus had ascended and was glorified.

Thus, the experience in John 20:22 was a preliminary, symbolic act, pointing forward to the greater reality that would be realized after Jesus’ ascension. The disciples were not yet fully baptized with the Holy Ghost and fire in John 20:22 because the conditions for that baptism—Christ’s ascension and glorification—had not yet been fulfilled. This fuller experience was realized in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit was poured out in power, fulfilling the promises and prophecies made by Jesus and John the Baptist. Moreover, it established speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of this baptism, a necessary precursor for the operation of any vocal gifts of the Spirit.