You'd Be Proud

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

LOL!

The scriptures don't have to say you must speak in tongues to be saved. All of these scriptures speak about receiving it, dwelling in us, leading and guiding us into all truth, and taking us to glory.

The Apostles identified how they knew someone had received the Holy Ghost Acts 10:46 . It's not complicated, and I don't know how many times that needs to be written in the Bible to get it. Further, those that believed and obeyed the Gospel received the Holy Ghost, so there was no question the Holy Ghost is part of the process of salvation. We can't stay saved unless we have some internal mechanism to help us out - that being the Spirit of God.

I've always thought it was funny that every person on this forum and the two before argued against speaking in tongues - YET - they all have and do speak in tongues. Doesn't that seem funny to you or at least interesting to notice?

There are so many scriptures regarding the Spirit of God, that I can't see how anyone thinks the NT church can operate or be saved without it.

I think we currently have about 4 or 5 threads going right now all on the same subject, lol... and it gets a bit tedious keeping up with it all, lol!

To reiterate: I am not against speaking in tongues, I am as for it as you are, and my life has never been the same without the gift of tongues. I do believe the spirit of God is developed more fully within me with the gifting of tongues.

I just posted the below on another thread...

While the spirit of God most certainly can gift one with the gift of tongues... there is not ONE clear scripture that specifically says, unless you speak with tongues, you have NOT received the spirit of the Lord. Hence the discussion.

Even in Mark 16:15-17... it says that the signs shall FOLLOW them that believe. It does NOT say that the signs would come with salvation but that they would FOLLOW salvation. Note that it says he that believeth, and is baptized SHALL BE SAVED. And then it says... these signs shall FOLLOW them that believe.


Mark 16:16-7
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

The tongues are a gift of God, a sign that follows them that believe, and the tongues are NOT ever equated in scripture specifically as a sign of salvation, rather tongues are part of the signs that will FOLLOW them that believe.


With this understanding... tongues are one of the signs that FOLLOW the believer, and this is key here. There are other signs and gifts too, but tongues seems to be the easiest one to recognize.

After one believes and is baptized = salvation happens Mark 16:16
After one believes, signs shall follow them, tongues being one of the signs.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I think we currently have about 4 or 5 threads going right now all on the same subject, lol... and it gets a bit tedious keeping up with it all, lol!

To reiterate: I am not against speaking in tongues, I am as for it as you are, and my life has never been the same without the gift of tongues. I do believe the spirit of God is developed more fully within me with the gifting of tongues.

I just posted the below on another thread...

While the spirit of God most certainly can gift one with the gift of tongues... there is not ONE clear scripture that specifically says, unless you speak with tongues, you have NOT received the spirit of the Lord. Hence the discussion.

Even in Mark 16:15-17... it says that the signs shall FOLLOW them that believe. It does NOT say that the signs would come with salvation but that they would FOLLOW salvation. Note that it says he that believeth, and is baptized SHALL BE SAVED. And then it says... these signs shall FOLLOW them that believe.


Mark 16:16-7
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

The tongues are a gift of God, a sign that follows them that believe, and the tongues are NOT ever equated in scripture specifically as a sign of salvation, rather tongues are part of the signs that will FOLLOW them that believe.


With this understanding... tongues are one of the signs that FOLLOW the believer, and this is key here. There are other signs and gifts too, but tongues seems to be the easiest one to recognize.

After one believes and is baptized = salvation happens Mark 16:16
After one believes, signs shall follow them, tongues being one of the signs.

I'll have to get back with you. And, yes, it is tedious keeping up with the various threads. I am painting some furniture and need to get back to it. Have to try and finish by this evening. TTYL!

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'll have to get back with you. And, yes, it is tedious keeping up with the various threads. I am painting some furniture and need to get back to it. Have to try and finish by this evening. TTYL!

Yes, this is keeping me from work that I need to be doing too, lol! Have fun painting furniture, sounds more fun that what I have to do... we ordered 80 pounds of chicken from Zaycon, and need to package it up for the freezer... brr. lol!

[Sherri]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Sorry, but this is seriously flawed doctrine, it doesn't even make sense within it's own paradigm.

First, if what you say is true, that 'born of water' = natural birth, then you have just consigned every miscarriage and every aborted baby to oblivion or worse. You have made actual natural birth a requirement for entering the kingdom of God. C-sections need not apply, I guess?

Second, you have conflated 'life at conception' with 'salvation' and 'birth' into a horrible mish-mash of nonsense.

Let's assume that 'life begins at conception' = salvation = faith and repentance. The problem is, conception is not birth. And Jesus did not say you must be conceived, but born. Conception comes before birth, and therefore conception is not birth. So whatever conception represents, it does not represent whatever birth represents. And it is birth that Jesus identified as the requirement for entering the kingdom of God.

Third, when a baby is born, they die if they do not BREATHE. So, if you have Holy Ghost baptism and tongues as being represented by the breathing (and crying?) of a newborn, then the analogy follows that a 'believer' who does not receive the Holy Ghost and speak in tongues is suffocating and will certainly and most assuredly without any doubt whatsoever BE DEAD. Call the undertaker.

So in effect, you teach that any believer who leaves this world without speaking in tongues will not enter the kingdom of God, and yet you seem to object to those who teach that receiving the Holy Ghost is a requirement of entering the kingdom of God. Trying to play both sides of the aisle?

Jesus was telling Nicodemus that he had to be born born ways - natural and spiritual. He goes on to talk about natural birth and spiritual birth. He said Flesh gives birth to flesh and spirit gives birth to spirit. He was definitely referring to natural birth.

Also, in a C-section, there is still water.

Even if a baby never takes a breath, at conception, he was alive. We are alive in Christ at the point of conception.

[good samaritan]

Being born again of the spirit doesn't seem to be a good parrallel to conceiving. The Scripture doesn't say that a man must be conceived again to enter the kingdom of heaven. It says that he must be born again. I agree with the analogy faith/conception, but I don't think you can make the case that salvation occurs at conception when the scripture says it takes birth. Of course for there to be a birth there must be a conception.

"Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith." It was the word of God where are faith began (conception) and it will be Jesus who will see it through to the end. Salvation doesn't occur at conception, but the process certainly begins at conception.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Sherri

. We are alive in Christ at the point of conception.

But you can't get into the kingdom without being born.

[Sherri]

I just had a very conservative UPC pastor tell me that he listened to the sermon online and how GOOD it was.
So it must not be too controversial!

[good samaritan]

I was not trying to disagree with your husbands sermon b/c I never heard it. I only disagreed that we must be born again. I agree with conception, but it cannot stop there or we will die. No offense meant.

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by shazeep

hmm well, lest you get the wrong impression of me, i'll say that i would appreciate a reply to the 12 pack pastor, if you are led, or even @ the fang lady.

What do you want to know about a 12 pack pastor and the fang lady?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by shazeep

nice. obviously she is currently in a cult of the self, EB, and i think you are asking fair questions. I would not let her babysit my kids, at least until i saw some evidence of her heart changing, a reduction in the affectations.

But i would examine this "accept as saved" perspective, and i'm interested in what exactly that means? Iow what differences in my treatment of her do you think should manifest if i did not accept her as saved v accepting her as saved?

^