Are Tongues Necessary? Debate (David Bernard vs James White) 2/5

[TheLayman316]

David Bernard clearly does not follow grammar or context, and has little understanding of the purpose of the Book of Acts. I wonder if he know that there was about 11 years between the tongues in Acts 2 and Acts 10?

[manualboyca]

If speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation, I guess mute people can not be saved. That's sad, because I thought God wished that all would be saved.

[MrHellowwww1]

See Jews for Jesus and the day of Shavuot or Pentecost. Tongues as defined by the Bible and Jewish history seem to be a forgein language. Not some spirital language of non sense. God is not the author of the crazy or confusion.

[1love1Lord]

It's all a process We can't just assume We are saved by repenting the scriptures fully explain when they ask peter what they need to do to be saved We can't just neglect the full description ,other wise people could proceed on thinking they got saved as an infant. I thank God for Dr Bernard who stay focus on the truth!

[morrisondan]

I absolutely agree 100% with Dr. James White!. There is just no reason whatever to believe we have to speak in tongues, as a demonstration that the Holy Spirit has taken up residence in our heart & our life!. That is just plain, SILLY!.

[MikielaMannie]

The word comes by revelation!they don't have it I wouldn't waste time!

[mikgorblack]

Thanks for the input friend

[mikgorblack]

Dr white explains that the repentant heart is the initial evidence of the in filling of the Holy Spirit because it cannot be faked. Are you kidding me? Have you never met a person that said sorry, or looked the part but didnt have an ounce of Jesus? A good heart can surely be faked.

Thats probably why it states in the book of acts, that repentance and being filled with the holy ghost as two seperate things. Because they are. Just like Saul of Tarsus.

[JD2010CWS]

@mikgorblack are you kidding ME? Sure there are deceitful people out there within all walks of Christianity but let me ask you my condescending friend is have you ever met a person that has faked tongues? Even though you don't want to admit it I am sure you have. My question is what is the sign of tongues for? Is it for the people around the person at the time to know that they are saved or is it for the person who is being saved? God does not need a sign, he is the savior.

[mikgorblack]

dr bernard has a true anointing to his speach. Just the way that White addresses Bernard would lead me to believe that Bernard is really filled with God's spirit. Dr white doesent really portray God's love in his tone.

[JD2010CWS]

@mikgorblack dr. bernard has a true annointing to his speech b/c you are a pentecostal and want to be reassured that what you believe is correct. Its called a debate my friend which sometime become argumentative, I find it humorous that you assume based on they way you perceive Dr. White that Dr. Bernard is filled with the Spirit and perhaps that Dr. White is not

[morrisondan]

@mikgorblack Unfortunately, the "tone" of someones voice is absolutely NOT important when dealing with a subject such as this!. If we base what we accept as God's word, on the tone of voice of the one speaking on it, well, that's just NOT a wise thing to do!. I have met some soft spoken "satanist"!.

[christian771984]

The book of James & 3 John don't have amen at the end of the last chapter. That's the trouble with pentecostals, they don't know their bibles properly. That's why they believe in the heresy of denying the trinity, speak fake tongues, perform false miracles, love worldly ungodly music in their churches, venerate false apostles, admire heretics like 'mad' hagin & other loonies etc. Tongues are a sign to unbelieving jews. I really worry. Are these the people Jesus was on about in Matthew ch7 21-23?

[PJGraham3]

People always abuse things and exploit them, if they find a contradiction they take them to levels they were never intended. God warns us to avoid extremes, however, the events in the Holy Bible  evolved as time went by. Yes, Peter did not mention tongues, because water baptism was at issue. The faith was developing and the issue of tongues and baptism were important aspects of the early churches organization. Sola Scriptura and Glossolalia were important elements of its development.

[PJGraham3]

People always abuse things and exploit them, if they find a contridiction and take them to levels they were never intended. God warns us to avoid extremes, however, the events in the Holy Bible evolved as time went by. Yes, Peter did not mentioned tongues, because water baptism was at issue. The faith was developing and the issue of tongues and baptism were important aspects of the early churches organization. Sola Scriptura and Glossolalia were important elements of its development.

[PJGraham3]

What other religion requires the evidence of tongues? The standards that Apostolic faith is being compared to are mid eastern in origin, and even includes Islam (the belief in one God). Do you think that this right? Do you think that non Christian religions are correct? Christianity is Christianity and other, other. So what are the Utilitarians and Unitarians really fighting about?. I do agree with the comments of the gentlemen who stated, tongues has been unnecessarily made a normative issue.

[MANUAIM]

I always or as often as being led by the SPIRIT OF GOD, like to ask people who believe like or similar to Dr. White, so when do believers receive the Holy Spirit,and is it absolute for all who believe or conditional what? Because soon as they say all who believe receive it immediately, I first mention the Apostles who were not initially born of the Holy Spirit until Acts 2:4 though they believed, then Acts 8:12-16, and Acts 19:2-4 they were all baptized believers without the Holy Spirit Baptism.

[MANUAIM]

Pt.5

Ask J.White is everyone forgiven for sins. He will say, no and give some great speach as to why that is only to the believer. So there you have it. He will admit that in the scriptures there are benefit verses dealing with people who are already in the faith via repentance, confession and belief (EXPERIENCES), but deny by overlooking the precision that 1Cor.12 is to ppl who already received The Holy Ghost, or preparation doctrine for believers in Jesus Christ.

[JD2010CWS]

@MANUAIM but according to your logic then you believe Dr. White is correct. Plus your logic is cleary false, either way if Paul was speaking to believers and/or unbelievers in Corinthians he clearly poses a rhetoric question states "Do all speak in tongues" and of course we all know the anwer to that but yet you refuse to believe it.

[MANUAIM]

@JD2010CWS -I think you overlooked the validity of my logic...My point was Dr. White understands that there are passages in the scriptures both in the NT and OT that is solely to the believer. Thus I pointed out that 1Cor.12 was was contextually dealing with believers who ALREADY received The Baptism of The Holy Spirit when it says do all speak with tongues.

The Baptism of The Holy Spirit with the evidence of tongues is available to those who are hungry to receive it and ask. Luke 11:1-13

[JD2010CWS]

@MANUAIM again, I continually hear the "evidence" of receiving the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues. provide me with the Biblical passage that states this. Also, for sake of argument let's assume you are right, who is this sign of tongues for? Obviously it is not for God as he is the one who grants us the Holy Spirit and does need a sign to prove that he has done so, therefore the sign could only be for the person speaking in tongues and/or for those around him. where is this Biblical?

[MANUAIM]

@JD2010CWS-I shouldn't have to keep on repeating myself. Maybe it was on the other page.....Again I will make it simple...So now I'll ask you a question while answering your request for a biblical passage.

In Acts 1:5 and Matthew 3:11 and even Isa.28:11-12 are prophecies about the Holy Spirit Baptism AND Joel 2 endorses it.

Now....when this happened i.e. Baptism of The Holy Spirit ....Acts 2:4; Acts 10:44-47, Acts 19:6...

Now did they speak in tongues when it happened.

[JD2010CWS]

@MANUAIM indeed they did. Is it also true that Paul asked a rhetorical question in Corinthians saying "do all speak in tongues"? Of course he was stating that no they don't. Now if not all people speak in tongues, then how can one teach it is the initial evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit? Again, we can agree to disagree.

[MANUAIM]

@JD2010CWS-You are missing the context of 1Cor.12. Sir please re-read the context. 1Cornithians is about gifts of the Holy Spirit, so right away Paul is dealing with those who are either already operating in the gifts of The Spirit or they desire to.

Even if you desire to accept this truth in the comfort of your own mind, be filled with integrity and understand the context of 1Cor.12

Paul was teaching not all will have the gifts of tongues i.e. interpretations and diversities of tongues.

[higherground2050]

@MANUAIM well said.

[MANUAIM]

@JD2010CWS-I believe you have a genuine faith and I totally believe you are a truth seeker. I believe that ALL believers should experience a sense of urgency where they are selfish enough to cry out to THE FATHER and enquire of HIM concerning this issue.

Proverbs 21:30 teaches there is no wisdom, nor counsel, nor understanding against THE LORD (YHVH)......Luke 11:1-13 is clear focus on Luke 11:13.....

Bless you sir....stay in the word stay strong bro. Peace be upon you....

[higherground2050]

@JD2010CWS The church is made up of believers. Some have the gift of the Holy Ghost as mentioned in the book of Acts and some do not. But all of the believers living holy and and obeying Jesus' commandment of love one another are all God's children.

[JD2010CWS]

@higherground2050 Very well stated and I agree 100%

[MANUAIM]

@JD2010CWS -Also it is not that I refuse to believe that all believers do not speak with tongues. I just have been given the grace to understand that this passage is dealing with gifts of the Holy Spirit not receiving the Holy Spirit Baptism, but rather receiving gifts as a result of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

All we have to do is take out time to go to "Church History {i.e. book of Acts}" and see what happened when believers initially were born of the Holy Spirit.

[JD2010CWS]

@MANUAIM are you stating that the apostles were not saved prior to the day of pentecost and only at that point where they spoke in tongues could we be assured that they were in fact saved? If so, where does the repentence and baptism mentioned by Peter in acts 2:38 occur on the day of pentecost?

[MANUAIM]

Pt.4

So we just need to humble up and wise up about the strawman of this argument. This message can easily be lost if one allows the focus to be on the gifts of the Spirit. No...we are talking about being born of the Spirit and what accompanied the experience---> Tongues *AND prophecies either before or after the experience confirming it was them being baptized by the Holy Spirit. Saints don't let the strawman tactics of unbelievers (of the experience) trick you into 1Cor.12 about gifts.

[MANUAIM]

Pt.3

This is why many bring up the question of where do we see Jesus speaking in tongues. Well, Jesus wasn't a born sinner and He never needed to be born of the Holy Ghost! He was Born of the Spirit of GOD via incarnation conception in Mary's womb. Remember this topic is about when receiving the Holy Spirit Baptism do you have to speak with tongues. This topic is NOT about believers having the same gifts but about believers having the same Holy Spirit baptism experience as they did in Acts!

[MANUAIM]

Pt.2

In 1Cor.12 obviously it is speaking to people who have either already received the baptism of the Holy Spirit or people who are new converts. My point is that contextually this is NOT addressing the tongues that come during the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, because this is NOT the topic of the text. The topic in 1Cor.12 are Gifts of the Spirit i.e. The Holy Spirit that they have RECEIVED already thus they are being discipled about use of the Gifts, NOT RECEIVING THE HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISM.

[MANUAIM]

Pt.1

What truly amazes me is that in every place where the Baptism of The Holy Spirit was given with the evidence of speaking in tongues i.e. Acts 2:4, Act 10:44-46, and Acts 19:6 that either before or after this happened either Acts 1:5 is referenced or Mt.3:11 is referenced to precisely clarify that this was a PROPHECY coming to pass about the Holy Spirit Baptism. For Acts 2:4 read Acts 1:5, and for Acts 10:44-46 read Acts 11:15-16, and for Acts 19:6 read Acts 19:4 referencing Mt.3:11!

[Jaysen1976]

Bernard does a fine job on these debates.

[uberfatmoocow]

The first caller makes a good point - The prophet Joel did not prophesy about tongues, but about the infilling of the Holy Spirit (Joel 2:28). When Peter answers the questions of the witnesses in Acts 2:16 about what they have just seen and heard he explains that this prophecy has been fulfilled before them. I don't see how Dr. White can then separate the Holy Spirit baptism as prophesied, and the evidence of that baptism which prompted Peter to explain the fulfilment of Joel's prophecy

[bessieeliza]

The Book of Acts is the only Book in the Bible that does not have AMEN at the end of the last chapter. Therefore it should be obvious to all that this Book is continuing to this day in which we live, and that the examples of conversion and salvation that are depicted therein are valid to this day including Tongues as the initial evidence of the infilling of the Holy Ghost..... Mark 16 : 17 "They SHALL speak with New Tongues"

[FalseTrinityDoctrine]

@bessieeliza

Amen

[October31st1517]

@bessieeliza That is an assumption on your part that the fact the Book of Acts is the only Book in the Bible that does not have AMEN at the end that the gifts are continuing today. It has no biblical defense for it. If that is the case then are you giving everything you own to the church and dispersing it to everyone in need? If you believe that God is still speaking today then your authority is wider than the bible alone. Pentecostalism violates Sola Scriptura.

[FalseTrinityDoctrine]

@October31st1517

For one thing, it is a deed to disperse to those who are in need and churches still do this till this day.

[October31st1517]

@FalseTrinityDoctrine Oh...I agree entirely. Let's feed the poor, take care of the widows, etc. But my question is do you give ALL that you possess and give it to the church? This is what the early Christians were doing. Once the bible was completed, there was no need for the gifts because everything God wants us to know has been revealed to us in the bible.

[metanoeo1]

@FalseTrinityDoctrine That wasn't the question, though. October31st1517 said "are you giving everything you own to the church and dispersing it to everyone in need?" That's what Acts says the church was doing then, i.e. if bessieeliza believes that because the book of Acts doesn't end with the word Amen, it isn't closed. That's some of the worst exegesis I've ever heard of. If the canon of Scripture isn't closed, then who gets to choose what is added to it? How do we determine what's right?

[ETHANGELIST]

@bessieeliza

"The Book of Acts is the only Book in the Bible that does not have AMEN at the end of the last chapter."

LOL. This statement is a amazingly false. You must be referring to only the KJV and only the New Testament right?

[jessypooh24]

@bessieeliza AAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEN­NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!! THAT IS THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE THE SPIRIT OF GOD!!!!!!!!! THANK GOD FOR YOU SAYING THIS!!

[jessypooh24]

@bessieeliza AAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMEEEEN­NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!! THAT IS THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE THE SPIRIT OF GOD!!!!!!!!! THANK GOD FOR YOU SAYING THIS!!

[TheDogfight55]

@bessieeliza James and III John doesn't end in Amen either so are they a continuing gospel....just saying

[JD2010CWS]

@bessieeliza and where in the Bible do you base any of your statements on?  Utter nonsense.

[swenmanwwjd12]

@bessieeliza Thank you. Good reference! Is everybody forgetting about MARK 16:17? How much more scripture do we need? If it says it once in God's book it is as good as gold.

[Gwarrior0690]

@bessieeliza The verse you talking about was not in the original manuscripts of The Bible, it was added in later copys of the New testament manuscripts.

[uberfatmoocow]

Ah, just found it -sorry, it wasn't coming up when I searched

[FalseTrinityDoctrine]

@uberfatmoocow

Trying to get # 5 up but it keeps telling me there was an error. I will try to have it up by today or tomorrow

[lkevins1]

If people only allowed the scriptures to speak for themselves in the light and Spirit of his truth, and humble themselves, not leaning on their own understanding, then it will become apparent that all scripture is the direct revelation of God and can only be understood in the proper context that God originally intended.

[FalseTrinityDoctrine]

@lkevins1

Amen i agree, i just posted the the 4th and 5th vid so be sure to check em out. God Bless