Thank you. I will check it out. We live in a very small community and I have probably visited every church this site would recommend. There are only a couple of Pentecostal churches in the area, a Foursquare Church and an Assembly of God church. And though I don’t have a problem with Pentecostal churches, I do share some theological differences. I tend to be much more Calvinistic and less emotional than most Pentecostal denominations. And I have seen such abuse in these churches. For example, when I was checking out churches when I first started to teach at the Christian school, I decided to attend the Assembly of God church affiliated with the school. It was during COVID and the church would not let us through unless we wore a mask. The only thought that was going through my mind was, “ You believe in divine healing except for a virus with a 99.97% survival rate?” I never went back to that church. For me to enjoy the preaching, the preaching needs to be intellectually and biblically stimulating. Currently we do attend a church that I think is okay but my wife loves. I just wish my desire to attend a church was strong like it once was. For right now we will probably stay with that church. Thank you.
Do you believe in the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of Speaking in Tongues?
I believe in speaking in tongues but I have issues with the idea of baptism of Holy Spirit as evidence of speaking in tongues. I do not find it biblical nor do I see evidence that someone who is Pentecostal as evidence of someone who has a more spiritual life than a Baptists. In fact often I see just the opposite. John MacArthur, who wrote, “Strange Fire” opened up his church during COVID right away whereas Pentecostals coward in fear. Who has more faith? And then I would attend the chapel services led by an Assembly of God pastor at the school, and I felt his preaching was so unbiblical that I stopped attending chapel services. So where I see no biblical reason to reject these miraculous gifts, I have seen massive abuse and absolutely no change difference between someone claiming the filling of the Holy Spirit and a Baptist.
The difficulty with that position is that Scripture does not leave the matter ambiguous in its first and clearest outpouring of the Holy Ghost. In Acts 2, the Holy Spirit deliberately chose to give us a controlled, undeniable pattern at the very birth of the Church. About one hundred and twenty disciples were gathered together in one place, men and women who already believed, prayed, and followed Jesus faithfully. When the Spirit was poured out, the text does not say some spoke, or many spoke, or the most zealous spoke. It says plainly and without qualification, “they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4). Every one of the one hundred and twenty received the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and every one of them spoke with tongues. No exceptions are recorded, no alternate manifestations are mentioned, and no distinction is made between spiritual maturity, personality, or prior devotion. Tongues did not make them superior believers; it was simply the uniform, God-chosen sign that the Spirit had come to dwell within them. If the Spirit intended tongues to be optional, symbolic, or merely cultural, this would have been the perfect place to demonstrate diversity of evidence. Instead, Scripture gives us total consistency. The issue, then, is not whether Pentecostals are more spiritual than Baptists, but whether we will allow the Bible to define what the baptism of the Holy Ghost looks like at its first occurrence. Acts 2 leaves no room for denial: one hundred and twenty received, and all one hundred and twenty spoke with tongues as the Spirit Himself gave utterance.
If the Spirit of Christ Does Not Dwell in You
Romans 8:9 (KJV)
“Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.”
Scripture does not leave room for a Christianity that exists without the indwelling Spirit. Paul does not present this as a growth issue, a maturity issue, or a denominational distinction. He presents it as an ownership issue. Without the Spirit of Christ dwelling within, a person does not belong to Christ, regardless of how long they have attended church or how familiar they are with religious language.
The modern church has produced a version of Christianity that allows people to sit in a chair, hear sermons, participate in rituals, and still remain unchanged inwardly. This is not the Christianity revealed in the New Testament. Sitting in a church building does not place Christ in you. Repentance spoken without surrender does not place Christ in you. Water baptism, though commanded and necessary, places you into Christ in identification, but it does not cause Christ to dwell in you. Burial is not resurrection.
Jesus Himself stated that except a person is born of water and of the Spirit, they cannot enter the kingdom of God. That statement does not describe spiritual excellence; it defines spiritual entry. Acts 2 confirms this pattern. When conviction fell, Peter did not offer reassurance. He commanded repentance, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and promised the gift of the Holy Ghost. The Spirit was not presented as optional, delayed, or symbolic. He was presented as essential.
The most dangerous deception in the church is the belief that external obedience without internal transformation is sufficient. Scripture never affirms this. A person may be baptized and still not belong to Christ. A person may believe and still lack the indwelling Spirit. Paul is clear: if the Spirit of Christ does not dwell in you, you are not His.
This is not an attack on sincere seekers. It is a warning to those who are comfortable without transformation. The Spirit of Christ convicts, governs, and leads. Where that work is absent, assurance is false. Christianity without the indwelling Spirit is not incomplete Christianity; it is not Christianity at all.
This is the dividing line. Either Christ lives in you by His Spirit, or He does not. There is no middle ground supported by Scripture. This truth will either produce repentance and faith, or it will be rejected by those who never truly wanted God to rule them in the first place.
I did not say that I don’t believe in tongues. I don’t believe that biblically speaking you can convince me that it has anything to do with baptism of Holy Spirit! I agree with everything you said. I thanked you for speaking about my situation and you are trying to convince me of your theological persuasion as if I had not studied it. I have spoken in tongues, attended an Assembly of God church, a Foursquare church and have studied it in depth. I needed comfort from what I went through, not a debate about tongues. Let me ask you a question, did your church shut down during the fakedemic? If you answer yes then our debate is over.
We didn’t and still don’t fear man, viruses or man-made viruses. We then and still do put our FULL trust and God’s providence.
I understand what you’re saying, and I’m not questioning whether you believe in tongues. What I want to do is stay strictly with the language of Scripture itself, not Pentecostal tradition or later theological framing.
The phrase “baptism of the Holy Spirit” does not originate with Pentecostals. It originates with John the Baptist and is repeated by Jesus Himself.
John the Baptist makes a direct distinction between water baptism and another baptism that he himself could not administer:
Matthew 3:11 (KJV)
“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I… he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.”
The same statement is repeated independently in the other Gospels:
Mark 1:8
“I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.”
Luke 3:16
“I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh… he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.”
John is not describing regeneration in general terms. He is identifying a distinct baptism that Jesus Himself would perform, contrasted directly with water baptism.
Jesus later affirms this exact language after the resurrection:
Acts 1:5
“For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”
This is Jesus speaking to people who already believed in Him, already followed Him, and had already received His teaching. Yet He still speaks of a coming baptism that had not yet occurred.
When Acts 2 happens, Luke does not say they were “saved again” or “symbolically filled.” He records a fulfillment of what Jesus had already named:
Acts 11:15–16
“And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.”
Peter explicitly identifies the Acts 2 and Acts 10 events as the baptism Jesus promised, using John’s language verbatim.
So biblically, the term “baptized with the Holy Ghost” is not an interpretive leap tied to tongues theology. It is a phrase directly used by John the Baptist, repeated by Jesus, and later referenced by Peter as a fulfilled promise.
And in every instance Tongues were the evidence of that Baptism. The concept of Holy Ghost baptism itself is not a later invention. It is explicitly named, promised, and referenced across the Gospels and Acts using the same language.
That’s all I’m pointing out — not tradition, not experience, not argument — simply the words the Bible itself uses.
There it is laid out perfectly in Biblical Truth. Truth is absolute regardless of whether we believe it or not.
If I had the energy or desire then I would debate you. I am hurting and have no interest in this debate.
Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Rom 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
1Co 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
…explicitly states that believers are baptized by one Spirit into one body, grounding Spirit baptism in ecclesial unity rather than individual spectacle.
Gal 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
…links reception of the Spirit with faith, not law observance.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
…affirms one Spirit alongside one Lord and one faith, situating Spirit baptism within the unified work of salvation.
Tit 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
Tit 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Tit 3:6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Tit 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
…describes renewal by the Holy Spirit poured out through Jesus Christ, explicitly Trinitarian and resurrection-shaped.
Why people are hurt by the “church” putting a “guilt-trip” on them, not rightly dividing the Scriptures.
J.
Im sorry about what happen in your experience and if its ok id like to add a perspective from both sides for ive actually been in both & maybe i could encourage you and your son! See im 46now but i was raised in a pentocostal church where too often they showed condemnation rather than compassion ( its gotten better) andthings happen when i was young that caused me to get angry and i left it assoon as i was old enough .i held resentment , etc. For a long time and it obviously eat away at methen i decided in my mid 20s to try again because i still knew i was miserable srperated from God & his purpose for me so i went & for a while i Was enjoying it and was mending my walk with God & asked to just helpwith youth class so i did & out of nowhere im called to pastors officeand asked to step down because rumors that i was doing things that were not true( and later i was cleared ) but the damage was done and all it was is someone felt something wasnt right because i was in my mid 20s and single so they accused me according to their own idea to what age a christian man should be married! & since i wasnt then something was not right!! Well needless to say i was disheartened and being that the leaders didnt even check the truth to accusations ( probably b/c that person gave money to church) i used it as a excuse to go back to my old ways which was bad decision it took me down a dark road and i left and for years would get angry anytime someone would mention God or church , long story short i was in a dangerous place and growing more cold heartedtill one day a situation arose that only God could fixand when he didnt i began to ask why God ? Why wont u answer me why did u not take up for me when accused? & i promise i heard him more clear than anyone ive ʼever spoken to& what he said changed it all! He said i didnt take up for you because u never called on me , u tried to do it on your own , and i will not force myself in your life And i have been answering you everyday but u allowed your “ FEELINGS” to dictate your decisions rather than the guidance of my word and finally he said i know it hurts to be falsely accused i was crucified for false accusations by the churchwhich is why i teach to have a relationship with me not a religion! Then he ended by saying the enemyis gonna accuse because i called you and he knows your weakness es which is why he came at you! This was a revelation and the scales fell off my eyes and allowed so many other issues to be seen for what they were and it allowed me to forgive the peoplebecause at end of the day it wasnt the people but rather satan the accuser they were just allowing themselves to be used by him ! Sorry for long message but i pray it helps, brcause just remembertwo things to align ourself with christ is to bring hardships on this side of heaven but it means heavenly rewards waiting if we dont allow it to corrupt our hearts and go by our feelings! And secondly people need to understand satan is in the church too because h gets in the hearts of men and until we step into eternity we all are subject to his ways which is why we must study Gods word to show ourselves approved & able react correctly when situations arise! So remember when we hilf a grudge we only hurt ourselves abd deny christ that relationship whilr those who hurt us go on about their lives so please harken to these wirds we are too close to his return to let others accusations dictate our eternity!
I’m sorry. I hear you.
I’ve read your plight in detail, and I understand, at least I understand your POV in the situation. What you have gone through sounds horrible, and un-testimonial of The True Body of Christ. We cast all our care on The Righteous Judge whose eyes have missed nothing in your life. I know you depend on this too.
When you expose a personal problem, and also your personal pain in a public forum, the very nature of the platform makes it an unlikely place for you to find the comfort you say you are seeking. I do not fault you for trying, because sometimes trauma makes you grasp any likely lifeline you can reach. Unfortunately, a public forum can never substitute for the intimate fellowship and mutual care of The Body of Christ; the Spiritual organism, designed and provided by your Savior, in which He has purposed you to thrive. Some on the forum have no comfort to offer, some sympathize but do not know how to help, and some others try to help by offering from the resources they have at their disposal. I encourage you to view those who feel unhelpful in this third category. Their offering may not ease your burden, but the fact that they are offering something may suggest that they are giving what they have, and possibly what has helped them in previous personal situations. It may be that the counsel offered actually does comes from evil sources, but we don’t have to be quick to make that determination. (I’m not suggesting you have, I’m just putting it out on the table) Given the nature of a public Christian forum, and all the communication qualities that it lacks, it seems better for us to imagine good motives behind every effort, and to be grateful (as I know you are). There is just no substitute for a close friend, or a small group of like-minded believers, who can sit with you, listen to your plight, look into your eyes, hold your hand, and share your burden. I sincerely hope you can find that kind of help, and find it soon.
Yours in Jesus
KP
Thank you. I do have a small group of Christian friends that have been very helpful. Unfortunately some of my closest friends have some serious health problems while others (including members of my immediate family) are going through a deconstruction process with their faith. I do not find deep fellowship at any church I have been to. Most of the time before or after a church service, the conversations are shallow and brief. The few small groups I have been a part of have not lasted very long. People are extremely busy with their own families and community life in the US is no longer a part of our culture. I will keep praying. I am thankful that both of my sons work for solid Christian Organizations and my wife has a heart for the Lord.
The_Omega, I’m going to be blunt because souls are at stake. Sending a wounded man to the UPC is not compassion. It is misdirection. A warm welcome does not make a church biblical. Jesus warned, “Beware of false prophets… ye shall know them by their fruits” ~Matthew 7:15–20. The first fruit to test is doctrine.
The UPC denies God as He has revealed Himself. At Jesus’ baptism the Son is in the water, the Father speaks from heaven, and the Spirit descends ~Matthew 3:16–17. That is not one person wearing three masks. That is God speaking plainly. Scripture is equally plain that denying the Son as He is revealed is fatal. “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father” ~1 John 2:23.
They also add conditions to the gospel that God never added. The Word of God says, “To him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” ~Romans 4:5. Salvation is “by grace… through faith… not of works” ~Ephesians 2:8–9. When a church teaches baptism and tongues as required for salvation or assurance, it is no longer preaching the gospel Christ preached. It is moving people from Christ to their performance. Paul did not stutter, “If any man preach any other gospel… let him be accursed” ~Galatians 1:8.
And the tongues requirement collapses under Scripture’s own question. “Do all speak with tongues?” ~1 Corinthians 12:30. The answer is no. Yet every believer has the Spirit, “after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise” ~Ephesians 1:13. So the UPC’s rule is not biblical. It is man-made.
Paul has already been crushed by fear-driven leadership and unbiblical process. The answer is not to send him into another system that distorts who God is and muddies how a sinner is saved. He needs the plain Christ of Scripture, the plain gospel, and the plain Word, handled honestly ~2 Corinthians 4:2.
So here is the conscience question for anyone recommending that path. Are you trying to help a man heal, or are you sending him to a place that will put extra chains on his conscience? Christ said, “Come unto me… and I will give you rest” ~Matthew 11:28. Rest is found in Christ, not in a church that adds requirements He never gave.
Speaking in tongues has absolutely nothing to do with salvation. Period. It should never be preached as proof someone is saved. The gospel is not an experience. The gospel is a Person. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” ~Acts 16:31 Jesus didn’t say believe and speak. He said believe.
Scripture clearly teaches every believer receives the Holy Spirit at the moment of faith. “After that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.” ~Ephesians 1: 13 If speaking in tongues was required then Paul lied and the Spirit refused to seal the believer. However, the Word of God does not lie. Men do.
Paul totally guts the tongues-evidence doctrine with one question. “Do all speak with tongues?” ~1 Corinthians 12:30 The answer is no. But Scripture also says if a man does not have the Spirit, he does not belong to Christ ~Romans 8: 9 Both of these cannot be true if tongues is required. Therefore, the doctrine falls to the dissecting table of Scripture itself.
Tongues is a gift. Granted. But like every other spiritual gift, it is given to some for specific purposes. But tongues will never be preached as proof of salvation. Paul did not go around the world preaching tongues. He said, “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel” ~1 Corinthians 1:17 The gospel he preached was Christ crucified and risen, received by faith.
When tongues are used as a test for salvation you take Christ and replace Him with an experience. That is not spiritual maturity. Spiritual pride. Scripture has a stern warning about this. “If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed” ~Galatians 1:8.
Here’s the gut check question. Are you trusting Christ or are you trusting an experience? One of those will save you. The other will deceive you.
Tongues are not needed to validate the gospel. The blood of Christ is enough.
Acts 2 records what God did, not what sinners must do to be saved. Narrative is not command. If tongues were the defining evidence of receiving the Spirit, the apostles would have preached it. They never did. They preached Christ. “Repent ye, and believe the gospel” ~Mark 1:15. When the jailer asked how to be saved, Paul did not point him to Pentecost. He said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” ~Acts 16:31.
Scripture is crystal clear about when the Spirit is received. “After that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise” ~Ephesians 1:13. Sealed means completed, not waiting on a sign. If the Spirit comes later with proof required, Paul misled the church. He did not.
Tongues never function as assurance in the New Testament. They function as a sign in moments of redemptive transition. Signs point. They do not save. When a sign is turned into a requirement, faith is replaced with performance. That is exactly what Paul warns against. “Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” ~Galatians 3:3.
Here is the unavoidable question Scripture forces on every man. What is your confidence resting on? The finished work of Christ, or a manifestation you can point to? One gives life. The other breeds pride or despair.
God never told sinners to seek tongues. He told them to trust His Son. “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life” ~John 3:36. That is not foggy. That is final.
I appreciate your concern for souls, and I don’t doubt your sincerity. That truly matters, and I want to say that up front. Where we differ is not in our desire to protect people—it’s in how we understand what Scripture actually teaches and how carefully we allow it to speak for itself.
On sending someone to the UPC and the charge of misdirection
No one is suggesting that a “warm welcome” replaces truth, nor is anyone claiming a denomination saves anyone. The point was never “UPC good, therefore safe.” The point was that healing does not begin with isolating someone from the body of Christ or assuming bad fruit before any fruit is examined firsthand. Doctrine matters—but so does not bearing false witness against brothers and sisters before actually hearing what they teach in their own words.
On Matthew 3:16–17 and the accusation of “one person wearing three masks”
This is a common framing, but it’s not an accurate representation of what Oneness believers actually believe. No one denies the Father speaking, the Son being baptized, or the Spirit descending. The disagreement is not over whether these realities exist—it is over how Scripture defines God’s being versus His manifestations. Oneness theology does not deny the Son; it affirms fully that Jesus is the Son. The question is whether Scripture teaches God as three co-equal, co-eternal persons, or one God who has revealed Himself fully in Christ. That is a theological disagreement—not a denial of the Son.
According to the explicit declarations in Book of Isaiah, God repeatedly states—without qualification—that He is God alone, by Himself, and that beside Him there is no Savior (Isaiah 43:10–11; 44:6, 8; 45:5–6, 21–22; 46:9). These passages do not merely deny other gods in a pagan sense; they deny the existence of any other divine person alongside Him. God even says, “I know not any.”
So the question that naturally follows—and must be answered from Scripture, not later theology—is this:
If God declares that before Him no God was formed, after Him no God would exist, and that besides Him there is no Savior, how can Jesus be understood as a distinct, pre-incarnate Son existing alongside the Father in eternity past without introducing another divine person beside the LORD Isaiah describes?
Put another way:
-
When Isaiah says God was alone, who was with Him?
-
When God says He knows of no other, who is the eternal Son supposed to be beside?
-
When God says “beside Me there is no Savior,” how can salvation later be attributed to a second eternal divine person without contradicting Isaiah’s claim?
This is not a denial of Jesus. It is a demand for consistency.
Either:
-
Isaiah’s statements are absolute and define God’s eternal being, or
-
They must be reinterpreted to allow another divine person to exist beside Him—something Isaiah never hints at and explicitly denies.
So the burden of explanation is not on Isaiah.
It is on any theology that places another divine person alongside the LORD while still claiming to affirm these texts.
That is the question Isaiah himself forces us to ask.
On 1 John 2:23 and “denying the Son”
Oneness believers do not deny Jesus’ sonship, humanity, obedience, death, or resurrection. They deny a particular philosophical framework about divine personhood that developed later in church history. Equating theological disagreement with denying Christ Himself is a serious charge that I don’t take lightly.
When the crowd cries out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37), they are not asking a generic question about moral improvement, nor are they merely asking how to cope emotionally with guilt. The context makes that impossible.
Peter has just declared three devastating truths:
-
Jesus is Lord and Christ (v. 36)
-
They crucified Him
-
God has raised Him up and exalted Him
Luke says they were “pricked in their heart.” That phrase is judicial and covenantal, not casual. It is the language of being pierced with guilt under divine conviction. They now realize they stand accountable before God for rejecting and crucifying His Messiah. This is not curiosity—it is crisis.
So when they ask, “What shall we do?” they are not asking how to undo history or how to atone for murder. They are asking the only question left once guilt is exposed and judgment is looming:
What response does God now require of us?
In other words, it is a salvation question. They spoke in covenant terms. Their question means:
-
How do we escape the judgment we now see coming?
-
How do we come back into right standing with God?
-
What must we do now that we know the truth?
Peter treats it as exactly that kind of question. He does not say, “You already are forgiven,” nor does he say, “Just feel sorry.” He gives a clear, authoritative response of entry into salvation:
“Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
If their question were not about salvation, then Peter’s answer makes no sense. He explicitly addresses:
-
Remission of sins
-
Receiving the Holy Spirit
Both are salvation realities in the New Testament.
They are not being told how to pay for crucifying Christ—because they can’t. They are being told how to receive mercy for it. Grace does not deny guilt; it answers it. And Acts 2 shows us that the way guilt is answered under the New Covenant is not by merit, but by obedient faith responding to God’s command.
So the statement “that is not asking how to be saved” only works if we impose modern categories on an ancient text. Luke doesn’t do that. Peter doesn’t do that. Scripture presents this as the first gospel response ever given, and it is framed exactly the way convicted sinners speak when they finally see the truth:
“What shall we do?”
And God, through Peter, answers.
On Galatians 1:8 and “another gospel”
Paul’s warning was against replacing Christ with law, circumcision, and human righteousness. He was not condemning obedience to Christ’s own commands. Peter did not preach “another gospel” in Acts 2 when he told believers to repent, be baptized, and receive the Holy Spirit. That was the gospel preached under inspiration.
On 1 Corinthians 12:30 and tongues
This verse is addressing gifts within the body, not the initial reception of the Spirit. Paul is talking about ministry functions, not conversion experience. The same Paul who asked “Do all speak with tongues?” also encountered believers in Acts 19 who had not yet received the Holy Spirit at all. And later said “I speak in tongues more than you ALL.” Scripture itself distinguishes between the gift of tongues used corporately and tongues as an initial sign of Spirit reception. Collapsing those categories creates confusion the text itself avoids.
On Ephesians 1:13 and being “sealed after belief”
Yes—sealed after belief. The verse does not say belief is the seal; it says the Spirit is. The entire debate hinges on what it means to actually receive the Spirit, not whether belief matters. Everyone agrees belief matters. The question is whether Scripture ever treats Spirit reception as automatic or invisible. Acts repeatedly says it is received, recognized, and known.
On concern for the wounded man
This is where I want to be very clear and very pastoral. The goal is not to put chains on anyone’s conscience. The goal is not to move people from Christ to performance. The goal is to let Scripture speak without fear, without slogans, and without assuming the worst about fellow believers. Rest is found in Christ—but Christ also calls people to follow Him, obey Him, and receive what He promised.
I respect your desire to protect. I simply believe protection is best accomplished by careful, honest engagement with Scripture—not by dismissing an entire stream of believers as dangerous before hearing them accurately.
That’s where I’m coming from.
Thank you so much for your response bdavidc. In the midst of my pain I was not interested at all concerning Omega’s Charismatic persuasion and so I didn’t pay attention to all of his arguments. I believed they were futile, and now that I know he belongs to the United Pentecostal Church, even more so. 40 years ago, a housemate of mine was of the UPC persuasion and I even spent a few Sundays attending his church. According to this cult, the vast majority of church history, no one was saved. So we spent a great deal of time trying to talk my friend out of this denomination.
And now I move to a small town, and we attend a church that used to be affiliated with The Church of Christ denomination and they take some of the same verses that UPC uses ( I.e. Mark 16:16. He who believes and is baptized shall be saved…) and interprets that verse that you must be baptized in water by immersion to be saved. Again, the vast majority of church history, no one was saved. Both are wrong but I am not interested in getting into why the Bible does not teach this.
I have been severely wounded by the church and I have no interest in getting into a theological debate right now. Omega lacks compassion and even his profile picture is not pleasant to look at.
And now my youngest son struggles with depression and has ongoing health problems that no one seems to be able to help him with. And my wife just lost her mother a couple of weeks ago and this Saturday would have been her 90th birthday. And my oldest son has the pain of being falsely accused and reputation destroyed. And so I come on here to seek compassion and prayer and encouragement and most have given me that. But Omega wants to engage in a theological debate. Omega, please stop! If you want to engage in theological debates then there are other platforms or forums to use. Perhaps even Crosswalk, but this title is not called, “Let’s debate if tongues is needed for salvation”. It is titled, “Severely hurt by the church!”
I get you ~~ totally.
The frustration, confusion and almost betrayal from a church/ parachurch organization has been my issue for years.
I won’t go into my story but I’ll let you know what I’ve done because of it. When I finally took my anger to Jesus and knew I was forgiven for my bitterness, I didn’t look for another church. I looked to several ministers on line, generally YouTube, and that’s how I found Voddie Baucham. I never ceased my own study into Gods Word altho it was difficult early on. Study vs devotion is different for me.
Recently (decades later) I have sought which church I might want to attend. I am in a very small town and for the size of my town I’m amazed at the number of “good churches” there are. But I will try the Bible church after finally finding their YouTube channel.
I found a Voddie quote:: “True preachers would rather offend sinners into heaven than entertain their itching ears into hell.“.
My suggestion is to find this type of preacher on YouTube and worship via YouTube for a while. There is no shame in not attending a church in person. God will never shame you.