Why don't some speak in tongues?

[deltaguitar]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Well, that's just swell for you, MOW, but I don't believe it is scriptural. And by teaching genuine repentance makes one "rapture ready", some folks will not see the need to seek to be filled with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. And if a believer does not have the Spirit of Christ in them, they are not part of the body of Christ...none of His nor are they born again.

The problem here is the question of when someone recieves the Spirit of Christ. You say at repentance, but you have no Biblical proof. I say someone can receive the Spirit anytime AFTER repentance with the sign of speaking in other tongues (this is not the gift of tongues). If you want to start a thread on "When does someone recieve the Spirit of Christ?", I'd be happy to take part in it.

I've stated what I believe many times and I don't cloak my beliefs either. I take it from your response that if I say what I believe you will not ........ me for playing the role of a judge, is that correct? I'm usually very straightforward in saying what I beleive. I don't try to circumvent stating my beliefs to with sugar coating or gobblygook as you call it.

There is also this other accusation against 3 steppers going around that states we say that if don't speak in tongues you aren't saved. It implies that speaking in tongues saves us which is not what I believe at all. The emphasis is then on speaking in tongues and not on receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. Another damned if you do and damned if you don't arguement that goes around in circles.

I think we all agree with you that we must have the Holy Spirit. Ephesisans 1:13-15 speaks of being sealed with the Holy Spirit when we believed. It doesn't mention tongues and neither does Acts 2:38 say that tongues are essential for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Ephesians 1:13-15 (New Living Translation)

13 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. 14 The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

[SDG]

So the new fangled doctrine term is what you are holding against me Mizzy ... interesting ....

and what compounded this was ...

You sought to show that the blood was applied at baptism and I didn't answer your post ...

C'mon Mizzy .... no one said you were spreading it ... and I think in that the thread I did include Oneness theologian, David Bernard, as holding this belief ...

Did you want to have a discussion as to when the blood was applied as that thread sought to lay out the divergent thoughts throughout Apostolica (trademarked) on when we are forgiven ... and when we are washed ...

I am yet to read the verse that says this happens at baptism ...

I read a lot of prooftexts tied together ... but didn't see an Apostle or Christ say such a thing.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

Mizpeh, you can pray for me anytime you want and I will accept it as I know your motives are pure and you have a sincere heart after God. Dan knows I need the prayer too.

Thanks, DG. I'll probably do more than just pray for you and I'm not going to pray that you speak in tongues!

I do want everyone to speak in tongues and feel the awesome power of God

I feel the awesome power of God without speaking in tongues.

but I am very concerned with the damage that can be done in a person's walk with God when they are taught that they have to achieve this elite moment in time when God decides they are repentant enough to receive his spirit. I have said before that it is like slot machine church. We go to the altar over and over and all of a sudden we get a blessing and we have our fix until the next random time God decides that we are worthy of his power. We then become addicts just hoping and praying that it will happen again and many go years before they get their fix. Never missing a church service because this might be the blow out service and they could have missed their time.

If that's what is taught then I agree with you, it's a sad, frustrating way to live for God. We should be having an altar in our home where we offer up sacrifices of praise and love to God daily. I have felt the presence of God in my home or where I work or when I go for a walk. I don't look to be in God's presence only when I'm in church and standing at the altar. My walk with God is very personal. I'm blessed when I worship Him coporately with other members of His body, but if that is the only time I could touch God, I would be most miserable.

This goes against the very message that the Gospel is a gift from God and that our sins have been paid for by what Christ did for us. It also goes against much of orthodox Christianity that seems to state that we are born again by God and not because of our own ability. I am convinced that these improper teachings on the Gospel lead to much nervousness about the rapture and security of our salvation.

I'm not sure what you mean. You'll have to explain what you mean sentence by sentence and be specific.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by deltaguitar

I think we all agree with you that we must have the Holy Spirit. Ephesisans 1:13-15 speaks of being sealed with the Holy Spirit when we believed. It doesn't mention tongues and neither does Acts 2:38 say that tongues are essential for the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Ephesians 1:13-15 (New Living Translation)

13 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. 14 The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

The folks in Ephesians got their roots in Acts 19 and yes they did speak in tongues. I am constantly making statements about the Holy Ghost and do not qualify with tongues. It is understood. Just like baptism when I say baptism I do not have to qualify it all hearing know baptism is only valid in Jesus Name.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

So the new fangled doctrine term is what you are holding against me Mizzy ... interesting ....

and what compounded this was ...

You sought to show that the blood was applied at baptism and I didn't answer your post ...

C'mon Mizzy .... no one said you were spreading it ... and I think in that the thread I did include Oneness theologian, David Bernard, as holding this belief ...

Did you want to have a discussion as to when the blood was applied as that thread sought to lay out the divergent thoughts throughout Apostolica (trademarked) on when we are forgiven ... and when we are washed ...

I am yet to read the verse that says this happens at baptism ...

I read a lot of prooftexts tied together ... but didn't see an Apostle or Christ say such a thing.

Dan, go back and read my posts which were direct responses to your accusations. Proof texts tied together is how Trinitarians come up with the doctrine of the Trinity. It is simply logical deduction to conclude that if sins are remitted at baptism and only the blood of Jesus Christ can take away sin, then the blood of Christ must be applied at baptism. I laid it out in a syllogism for you to make it easy.


That thread may have been a vehicle for you to lay out the divergent thoughts throughout Apostolica on when we are forgiven, but your original post was a direct condemnation of me being a heretic and according to the title of that thread, New Doctrine Emerges: NOT Forgiven at Repentance, the thread was indeed about "when the blood was applied". So, no, I dont' want to start a NEW DISCUSSION about when the blood is applied but I want to finish the OLD DISCUSSION that you started.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Well, that's just swell for you, MOW, but I don't believe it is scriptural. And by teaching genuine repentance makes one "rapture ready", some folks will not see the need to seek to be filled with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. And if a believer does not have the Spirit of Christ in them, they are not part of the body of Christ...none of His nor are they born again.

The problem here is the question of when someone recieves the Spirit of Christ. You say at repentance, but you have no Biblical proof. I say someone can receive the Spirit anytime AFTER repentance with the sign of speaking in other tongues (this is not the gift of tongues). If you want to start a thread on "When does someone recieve the Spirit of Christ?", I'd be happy to take part in it.

I've stated what I believe many times and I don't cloak my beliefs either. I take it from your response that if I say what I believe you will not accuse me of playing the role of a judge, is that correct? I'm usually very straightforward in saying what I beleive. I don't try to circumvent stating my beliefs with sugar coating or gobblygook as you call it.

There is also this other accusation against 3 steppers going around that states we say that if don't speak in tongues you aren't saved. It implies that speaking in tongues saves us which is not what I believe at all. The emphasis is then on speaking in tongues and not on receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. Another damned if you do and damned if you don't arguement that goes around in circles.

I understand what you believe and could take your side, from what I was taught for decades, and promote it quite well. I do understand that 3 steppers don't normally come out and literally state that unless someone speaks in tongues, they are going to hell.

However, the logical conclusion of that soteriology, is that a person is NOT saved unless they have spoken in tongues and therefore will not go to heaven because they are none of His and therefore will logically go to hell. That is the logical progression of that particular belief paradigm.

What bothers me about all of this is that a person can truly repent, get baptized, live a sanctified life and not have spoken in tongues and they're not rapture ready.

Conversely, a person can truly repent, receive the HG speaking in tongues, life a sanctified life, and not have been baptized in Jesus; name and they're still not rapture ready.

So, it appears to me, that the most important thing is NOT that their lives have changed due to a sincere surrender to the Lord, it is the completion of a 3 step paradigm. Their relationship with the Lord is of lesser importance than their completion of the 3 step plan. So the REAL deal is that these people are "damned" if they do and "damned" if they don't. Who is really getting the short shrift here?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Mow ... some have gone as far as saying that one is justified before God ... made righteous .... after repentance (Segravian view) or after baptism (Epleyian view) but still not rapture ready because they have not experienced glossolalia ...

I can't wrap my mind around the fact that the righteous will burn in hell or that the bible lied about the righteous being saved.

Can you quote Segraves saying we are not justified until after repentance? Or did you mean AT repentance?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

I believe that kind of thinking/theology can ONLY take place when one is given a paradigm first! After that paradigm is accepted and becomes ingrained, then facts or logic matter not a whit! it doesn't make sense from the viewpoint of God's nature or scripture itself! But it DOES fit with the paradigm and the bottom line given by those who subscribe to it is, "Well, we can't really say if someone is going to hell or not (wink, wink) because God is really the judge. We just let the scripture be the judge."

And their paradigm of the scripture is that they WILL go to hell...they are just too gutless to state what they really believe!



How many times have we been around the bush with 3 steppers trying to get them to simply state what their viewpoint states and that is that a person is NOT rapture ready until they have spoken with tongues? Many times they wiggle, squirm, side-step and juke and jive until they are cornered and then they really get upset when they have to come clean.'

I have been taken to task numerous times when I have called for intellectual honesty in stating what one believes.

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Ultimately you and I know that none of us can send anyone to hell. We will not be the One sitting on the judgement seat.

You put those who believe the new birth is the baptism of water and the baptism of the Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues between a rock and a hard place. If we say a believer will not see or enter the kingdom of God without being born again, then you will say we are acting as judges.

If we say we are not judges but simply declare what we believe to be the truth of the word of God ie, tongues is the visible and auditory sign that a believer has been filled with the Holy Spirit, but will not say if a believer does not speak in tongues they are going to hell, then you say we wriggle and squirm and are scared to come clean.


Seriously MOW, what do you expect? Either way you will find fault. So why bother.

I have to agree with Mizpeh. Once again we've made this a discussion about THEM in a pejorative way and not rather about what is the truth doctrinally

Why should I run around and tell people "You are going to hell"? The bible says

Luk 6:37 Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you shall be forgiven.

Yet over and over I see other Christians trying to force other Christians into breaking this.

The word is the revelation of God. That is what we are called to teach and preach. I could be wrong about somethings. I know I am right that God is very merciful. It's HIS kingdom not anyone elses.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I am not MOW but I speak from a 1 stepper point of view. I think that 3 steppers can be too tough on people and be too judgmental and also can not stand for what you believe. When most 1 steppers speak we are sure of a persons salvation but usually we say that God is the final judge often times when some 3 steppers talk about it they can become damning to those that don't follow. I am not speaking of all 3 steppers and all 1 steppers, but a good amount of each of the parties do this. There is nothing wrong with standing for what one believes in but approaching it from the "I believe this is the biblical way of doing it" is different than "this is the what the bible says to do and all others are hell bound" see the difference in the terms? One is optimistic and the other is judgmental. That is how I see it.

Wait a second...one steppers from all "ilks" are just as damning to anyone that has not followed that ONE STEP too! I find Trinitarians doing this often

One "reason" they label others a cult is that they have doctrines that ........ others to hell...well gee wiz...are Muslims and Atheists saved too or are they going to hell? With the exception of the URs, we all believe that. So we all have doctrines that essentially ........ someone to hell.

But the ironic thing is the folks that judge those that have doctrines that might judge them.

And let's face it...there are also a LOT of talk about "legalists" and "works" and if you follow that to it's conclusion a lot of One steppers believe three steppers are going to hell because they rely on works supposedly. Personally I find the works argument for a three stepper is a false one

OPs are accused of being elitests...but those accusors are just as elitest by declaring only THEY are saved and the JWs and Oneness and SDAs etc etc are not saved

[Praxeas]

You know...Mizpeh...nobody really WANTS others to go to hell...maybe a few. But the reality is this is what many of us believe...faith, repentance, baptism in Jesus name and receiving the Holy Spirit of a full salvation experience....

Im not offended by the Trinitarian that says I have to believe in the Trinity to be saved. However I find it hypocritical on his part for saying something about me because in my view maybe he is not saved.

Ok, but 1 Steppers, 2 Steppers and 3 Steppers and even the 3 Steppers plus standards believe what they believe and they believe they have bible. Why get offended at someone elses belief? Why lash out at them personally because they believe something that might make others lost?

I'd rather address that belief directly with bible than get emotional over it and start slinging mud