Tongues are the initial sign of the new birth

TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
SimpleMan77 said:
It was absolutely a sign that the Bible specifically says accompanied the infilling of the Holy Ghost in 3 out of the 4 accounts in the book of Acts (4 times it specifically says people or groups were filled with the Holy Ghost).

On the other account (where it isn't specifically mentioned), Phillip knew they hadn't received the Holy Ghost, even though they had received the word, had great joy, and had been baptized.

When they finally did receive the Holy Ghost, probably days after believing, there was visible evidence, the Bible just doesn't say what that visible evidence was.

Those are the facts. Feel free to show me scripture disproving any point (in other words find one place in the book of Acts where it tells the account of someone receiving the Holy Ghost, where it doesn't mention visible evidence)
Click to expand...

John 20 for starters.
 
TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
Nabbu said:
The bible also talks about miracles by the Holy Spirit too
so any miracle by any spirit other than the Holy spirit is not a miracle?

A. True

B. False
Click to expand...

The NT also says that signs and wonders and miracles will be done by deceptive spirits.
 
TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
SimpleMan77 said:
The Holy Spirit is God's gift of Himself to us. The same in every generation.

The promise of Joel, which was fulfilled at the Day of Pentecost" was that your son's and daughters, servants and handmaidens would have God's Spirit poured on them, which had never happened on a broad scale.
Click to expand...

That is not what Joel stated. You are missing an important fact.

Peter said that "the promise is unto you, and unto your children, and into them that are afar off (usually a term used to describe Gentiles), even as many as the Lord our God shall call (includes us today)".

The only promise he mentioned before making that statement was "you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost".
Click to expand...

When one believes they receive the Holy Spirit - the context of His words was belief in Christ, not some experience that included tongues.
 
TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
SimpleMan77 said:
So you can prove that no Christians during that time spoke with tongues???

If some tribe in the Amazon gets a Bible tomorrow, reads that they can receive the Holy Ghost, and start speaking in tongues, are you saying that just because they hadn't heard about it before that it means that it didn't happen anywhere before that?

History tells about high profile religions. Roman Catholicism, Orthodox Churches, the reformation, all of which made big ripples.

It would not have recorded the small groups here and there, regardless of whether they spoke in tongues or not.
Click to expand...

Just because one speaks in tongues does not validate their religion. They are false religions.

There were no tongues in the Reformation. Who told you that?
 
TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
Nabbu said:
By the power of God.

A. True

B. False
Click to expand...

What do you think?

2 Thess 2
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
 
J

Jdorman

New member
TweetyBird said:
There are no extra experiences of salvation. That is so not Biblical. When you are saved, that is the most miraculous thing that happens to a person on earth. Don't belittle the sacrifice of Christ by making His gift a process that requires extra steps.
Click to expand...
The steps are Acts 2:38. Tongues are not a step. Just part of the experience.

Sent from my Z812 using TheologyOnline mobile app
 
S

SimpleMan77

New member
TweetyBird said:
Just because one speaks in tongues does not validate their religion. They are false religions.

There were no tongues in the Reformation. Who told you that?
Click to expand...

There are a lot of counterfeits. However, the fact that there is a counterfeit means there is also something real.

I didn't say that there were tongues in the reformation. I said there were huge events that historians captured, but there were thousands of groups that the historians never wrote about.

There is no way anyone can say that those off-radar groups didn't speak with tongues. In fact, history does record the Waldenses in the 1100's speaking with tongues, along with the Quakers well before the 20th century.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 
L

Lilstu

New member
I find it interesting that people believe that Jesus is his own father. [As God he is his own father]
They also believe Jesus is fully God and fully human.

But the Holy Spirit caused Mary to be pregnant with Jesus so the Father is not Jesus' father but the Holy Spirit is Jesus' father.

IMO when you engage the Trinity...you have some strange consequences.
 
J

Jdorman

New member
S

SimpleMan77

New member
Lilstu said:
I find it interesting that people believe that Jesus is his own father. [As God he is his own father]
They also believe Jesus is fully God and fully human.

But the Holy Spirit caused Mary to be pregnant with Jesus so the Father is not Jesus' father but the Holy Spirit is Jesus' father.

IMO when you engage the Trinity...you have some strange consequences.
Click to expand...

Actually Trinitarians believe that the Trinity was the Father of Jesus, making Him 1/3 his own son.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 
L

Lilstu

New member
SimpleMan77 said:
Actually Trinitarians believe that the Trinity was the Father of Jesus, making Him 1/3 his own son.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Click to expand...

Moses made a future prophecy.

Deuteronomy 18:15
The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him.

Peter said that Jesus was that prophet that Moses spoke about.

Acts 3:22
Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brethren; to Him you shall give heed to everything He says to you.

Now here is the wrinkle….Is Jesus like Moses?
If Jesus is just a man like Moses then we can say “Yes…Jesus is like Moses”

But if Jesus is the Trinitarian God/Man then we have to say ….“No…Jesus is not like Moses.” Then Jesus didn’t fulfill this prophecy
 
Crucible

Crucible

BANNED
Banned
Nabbu said:
Temporary? How come you believe
the gifts of God are temporary?
Click to expand...

The angels trumpeted and the devils lamented, which caused a spiritual flux among the living. It has since settled.

A lot of people tend to labor under 'magical thinking', not accepting the fact that tongues universally went out- that this gift was simply abandoned and picked up again much time later. It ceased as the Spirit moved on to the Christian Church. If you want the Spirit, listen to your preacher or speak the words of Scripture- that's where the edification is and also the Spirit.
 
TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
Jdorman said:
Tongues is the initial sign however it is not a sign of continuous obedience
Click to expand...

Are you saying if you sin tongues is taken away? Do you then assume that one is living in unrepentant sin if they stop speaking in tongues? I am wondering where all of this is in Scripture.
 
TweetyBird

TweetyBird

New member
Jdorman said:
The steps are Acts 2:38. Tongues are not a step. Just part of the experience.
Click to expand...

Tongues is not part of salvation. It was sign that the apostles were preaching the Gospel of Christ. That sign is unnecessary as the complete Gospel is written down in the NT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top