How do you almost receive a gift?

[n david]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

When Jesus came to the churches in the book of Revelations, nothing is ever mentioned about them not speaking in tongues. Nope. Not there.

Instead, what we find is Jesus speaking to them of overcoming. How do you overcome, except by the spirit of the Lord producing fruit in your life, that in turn weeds out and destroys the work of the flesh? These are the things Paul, and the other NT writers spent time teaching. We must be overcomers.

Rev. 2:19 "I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works, and the last to be more than the first."

What is Jesus referencing here? Tongues? Nope. Fruit of the spirit... charity (love), faith, patience!

Gal. 5:22 "But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance, against such there is no law."

Again, it's to the churches -- the one's who have already received the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.

In your argument about Paul's letters to Thessalonica, you mentioned well Paul had mentioned baptism a lot in other letters....to use that argument, Jesus already said you must be born of water and spirit

Oh, Jesus didn't mention baptism in Rev either...

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by n david

You asked where in Hebrews 6:1-2 is tongues mentioned as salvational, doctrinal and foundational. It is certainly doctrinal and foundational, as pointed out already.

Is tongues salvific? IMO it is. You seem to try to take both sides by saying "sure, it's the initial evidence," but then stating it shouldn't be considered if you don't speak in tongues, you're going to hell.

Do you believe receiving the Holy Ghost is part of salvation, or subsequent to salvation? If you believe it's part of salvation, then a person must receive the Holy Ghost with the initial evidence being they speak in other tongues.

If you believe the Holy Ghost to be subsequent to salvation, then it's not important to have the initial evidence of tongues.

I would be classified a three-stepper. I believe repentance, and baptism of both water and the Holy Ghost, with the initial evidence of speaking in other tongues.

I do wholeheartedly agree with you that once the initial evidence has been exhibited, people should mature and demonstrate the fruit of the spirit in their lives. I would also agree that there is an overabundance of emphasis placed solely on tongues as a sign of salvation, rather than the gifts of the spirit. There's also the error of clothes and appearance being an indicator of salvation as well, but that's another discussion.

Originally Posted by n david

Again, it's to the churches -- the one's who have already received the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.

In your argument about Paul's letters to Thessalonica, you mentioned well Paul had mentioned baptism a lot in other letters....to use that argument, Jesus already said you must be born of water and spirit

Oh, Jesus didn't mention baptism in Rev either...

The emphasis on tongues is wrong. Paul never once emphasized that, of which you have basically had to admit. The emphasis should rather be on fruits of the spirit. No Jesus didn't mention baptism in Rev, neither did he mention tongues, nor uncut hair, or beards, or any of the lovely issues that are dead horses around here.

Why not focus on what Paul taught constantly, and what Jesus saw as important .... fruit of the spirit needed to overcome?

Why indeed?

Because tongues are something that "man" can use to pinpoint, and wield authority with.... but the fruit of the spirit being something that the Lord can only really see into our hearts, and judge, thus the power to control and exert power and authority over people... that is WHY tongues are used to condemn people to hell... because it is something man can judge... but the LORD is the righteous judge, not man, and he is looking at our hearts, and if we are producing fruit of the spirit in our lives to overcome.

I see it this way... the OP uses the evidence of tongues to control and manipulate people in the way of man... the Lord's way is to judge the heart and the fruit, something man cannot do, unless he is operating through the gifts of the spirit.

[n david]

Do you believe the Holy Ghost is part of, or subsequent to salvation?

[n david]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

The emphasis on tongues is wrong. Paul never once emphasized that, of which you have basically had to admit. The emphasis should rather be on fruits of the spirit. No Jesus didn't mention baptism in Rev, neither did he mention tongues, nor uncut hair, or beards, or any of the lovely issues that are dead horses around here.

Why would Paul need to emphasis something they already had received or experienced? Paul didn't emphasize baptism in his comments about it. In fact, 1 Corinthians 1:17 says, "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." So did Paul not believe he should baptize people?

Again, the point of the Epistles was Paul addressing a specific issue in each body of believers. There was no need for Paul to write the entire doctrine of salvation or his beliefs, because they were known and experienced already.

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Why not focus on what Paul taught constantly, and what Jesus saw as important .... fruit of the spirit needed to overcome?

I can agree with this. We should focus more on the fruits and gifts of the spirit for believers who have already experienced the initial evidence. We should also preach the Gospel, which is the death, burial and resurrection; or repentance, baptism and the infilling of the Holy Ghost.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by n david

I can agree with this. We should focus more on the fruits and gifts of the spirit for believers who have already experienced the initial evidence.

Amen!

[Real Realism]

If one is not saved until they receive the Spirit, evidenced by speaking in tongues (and not saying I don't disagree with this) - in the case of the woman who's only ever spoken "lalalalalala" stammering lips...for years...is she not saved? Does she need to "press harder"? How would you counsel her?

[obriencp]

if tongues are a sign to the unbeliever, then a believer that feels they are saved doesn't need that sign. It's the bystanders that don't believe the individual is saved because they haven't seen the sign THEY need to accept them into the body. Wasn't water baptism also done as a sign to others of ones conversion into the body? ...sorry, different topic.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by TGBTG

Well, I see what you're saying, but if we interpret scriptures based on context only, then how do you justify Paul and Peter's use of Isaiah 28:16 to bolster the claim that Jesus is the stone being referred to in verse 16? wouldn't that be a misapplication of scripture?

*bump* for David...

[TGBTG]

And someone said AFF was going down??

just have to bring on standards or tongues or Godhead to light the fire!!!

[n david]

Originally Posted by TGBTG

Well, I see what you're saying, but if we interpret scriptures based on context only, then how do you justify Paul and Peter's use of Isaiah 28:16 to bolster the claim that Jesus is the stone being referred to in verse 16? wouldn't that be a misapplication of scripture?

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

*bump* for David...

Isaiah 28:16, "Therefore thus says the Lord GOD, "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a tested stone, A costly cornerstone for the foundation, firmly placed. He who believes in it will not be disturbed."

Romans 9:33, "As it is written, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

1 Peter 2:6, "For it stands in Scripture: “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

If you read the context of these verses, it's not misapplied.

The context and meaning of Isa 28:16 is Jesus is the cornerstone and only sure foundation for those who believe. Paul and Peter both applied it correctly.

This is not at all similar to Isa 28:11. That scripture is speaking about foreign invaders bringing judgement against Israel.