And because those who say WB is salvific also say speaking in tongues (SIT) indicates SB or filling,
perhaps it behooves us to see how NT statements regarding that work may be harmonized with Scripture
teaching that the sign of SB is love.
The original occurrence of SIT at Pentecost (in Acts 2:4-11) and for awhile longer was earthly languages given as a sign that fulfilled Joel 2:28-32 (cf. Isa. 28:11-12 cited in 1Cor.14:21), which reversed Babel and evangelized 3,000 people, thereby ensuring the planting of the first Christian church.
However, by the time of its occurrence in the church at Corinth apparently it had morphed into mere pagan-like babbling (cf. Matt. 6:9), which Paul neither quashed completely nor commanded, writing that the gift would cease (1Cor. 13:8-13) as love continued forever but also that he exercised it more than anyone (1Cor. 14:18), thereby causing confusion. [Thanks Paul! :^]
This confusion and apparent contradiction can be resolved by noting that if SIT were important it would be mentioned and even commanded in other epistles, so the absence of affirming SIT in other Pauline epistles speaks volumes. Thus, whenever SIT is claimed,
it is right to test whether it is genuine or pagan (1Thes. 5:21).
Certainly, if someone suddenly is enabled to speak an unlearned earthly language, that can be verified and considered miraculous,
but interpretation of babbling is impossible to verify. Thus, disagreement can continue regarding the occurrence of SIT in private prayer [for Edify], although there is no Scriptural warrant for viewing it as signifying Spirit filling rather than love (John 13:35, 1John 4:7-21).
I see that this information is still relevant:
Some people (“Actsists”) focus on events in Acts such as WB and glossolalia rather than on teachings in the epistles about faith/SB being what is essential (“Faithists”). The book of Acts does not teach foundational Christian doctrine but merely records what occurred during the early days of the church era as the revelation of GRFS transitioned from OT beliefs to the NT doctrine that is taught in the epistles, which never command WB or tongues as signs of SB or as essential for salvation.
The transition can be seen as occurring in Acts 16:31-34, where Paul told the jailer to believe in the Lord Jesus in order to be saved, NOT to believe and be WB in order to be saved. However, the jailer and others in his family who believed in God were WB. Then in Acts 17:30-34 Paul told the Athenians to repent, which some did, but whether they were WB is not mentioned. Then in Acts 19:1-6 Paul encountered some disciples of John who had been WB but had not been taught about SB, so they received SB when Paul placed his hands on them. Then in Acts 26:16-18, when Paul recounted his calling to King Agrippa, he quoted Jesus as saying, “I am sending you to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.” WB was not mentioned, which continued to be the case in Paul’s epistles.
The foundation cited in 1Corinthisans 3:11 is Christ, referring to faith in Christ’s atonement (Rom. 3:12-5:1). Instructions about baptisms are mentioned in Hebrews 6:2, which logically, semantically, and mathematically had to be that WB is a sign or rite portraying a soul has been SB (Col. 2:12), since there is only one baptism (Eph. 4:5) into one body (Eph. 4:4, 1Cor. 12:13). This understanding was held by Christians generally until RC perverted it by practicing infant sprinkling, which was corrected by the Anabaptists during the Protestant Reformation.
By the last of Paul’s epistles, WB came to be understood as a good but non-essential work or rite, like physical circumcision, and the basis for believing folks are filled with the HS is reflecting God’s love for everyone (Matt. 22:37-40, 1John 4:7-21, John 13:35, Rom. 5:5, Gal. 5:6 & 22, etc.). Then, like now, the rite is performed as an apt way of portraying saving faith in the atonement of Christ, even though the work is not required, just as physical circumcision was not required for salvation either per Paul in Romans 3:21-5:1.
Regarding speaking in tongues (SIT), the original occurrence of SIT at Pentecost (in Acts 2:4-11) and for awhile longer was earthly languages given as a sign that fulfilled Joel 2:28-32 (cf. Isa. 28:11-12 cited in 1Cor.14:21), which reversed Babel and evangelized 3,000 people, thereby ensuring the planting of the first Christian church. However, by the time of its occurrence in the church at Corinth apparently it had morphed into mere pagan-like babbling (cf. Matt. 6:9), which Paul neither quashed completely nor commanded, writing that the gift would cease (1Cor. 13:8-13) as love continued forever but also that he exercised it more than anyone (1Cor. 14:18), thereby causing confusion.
This confusion and apparent contradiction can be resolved by noting that if SIT were important it would be mentioned and even commanded in other epistles, so the absence of affirming SIT in other Pauline epistles speaks volumes. Thus, whenever SIT is claimed, it is right to test whether it is genuine or pagan (1Thes. 5:21).
Certainly, if someone suddenly is enabled to speak an unlearned earthly language, that can be verified and considered miraculous, but interpretation of babbling is impossible to verify. Thus, disagreement can continue regarding the occurrence of SIT in private prayer, although there is no Scriptural warrant for viewing it as signifying Spirit filling rather than love (John 13:35, 1John 4:7-21).
.