Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

How do you answer them that say tongues is not required for conversion, them pointing out scriptures in acts that seems to imply faith alone saves?

Such as:

Acts 18:8 KJV

And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.


Nothing mentions them speaking in tongues or Paul instructing further about conversion.

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

Really quite simple to me.....every mention of new believers/converts does not have to mention R/B/HG because from those recorded with it we see it was the established/accepted teaching/experience. (Acts 2, 10, 19)

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

Cant make doctrine out of "does not have to" that is assuming, if you read the whole bible and not just Acts more people were saved by faith then just the Book of Acts and tongues..Acts is just one book, take the bible as a whole not a part..

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

Unless you are saying that it is not necessary for one to receive the Holy Ghost to be saved.....it is very clear that the Apostles used speaking with tongues as THE identifier that people had received the spirit the same as they did.

What is universal manifestation of one receiving the Holy Ghost?

If you do not believe that one must receive the Holy Ghost to be saved, then you are in error.

You cannot show me one person after Calvary that was "saved" by faith alone....you can assume so.... based on lack of info.....but then, you stated that is dangerous.

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

The real issue is not tongues, but how can one be 'saved by faith" without having received the Holy Ghost. Normally, the Spirit was not received automatically upon belief in Acts. How do Evangelicals explain this?

Therefore, to be "saved by faith" is to"receive the promise of the Spirit through faith" (Galatians 3:14)

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

Yes and no.......Your question is one which I have asked many times.....mostly without it being answered. However, according to the Apostle Paul there is a universal manifestation that every person who receives the spirit has.....what is that one universal manifestation?

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

Some distinguish between receiving the Spirit by faith and being and baptized with it with tongues.

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

I believe IE is at the very least "normative" for our day, though I have my own ideas as to why we did not see much of it from the time of Luther until the Pentecostal revivals of the early 19th century. However, how do Evangelicals explain the fact that in Acts the Spirit was not automatically received upon belief?

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

(fatty......I resemble that statement....lol)

Paul tells us that there is ONE spirit and many gifts of that one spirit. He also says that there is ONE manifestation of that spirit that is given to ALL. If the THE spirit is the spirit of Christ/God then the believers in Acts 8 did not receive HIM until the Apostles laid hands on them. vs16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Faith simply acts as a conduit through which the spirit can flow.

Re: Tongues at conversion vs faith???
 

Yes, Evangelical Pentecostals explain it that way. But their argument is not strong at all. What of non-Pentecostal Evangelicals?