Is baptism necessary for salvation?

[His_disciple3]

You characterized the baptism in this passage as a spiritual baptism. I disagree. I see nothing in these verses that indicates this is not a literal baptism in water.

What's telling in this passage though, is that these disciples believed but did not yet have the Holy Spirit. In fact, they had never even heard that there was a Holy Spirit. This fact immediately brought to Paul's mind their baptism. They knew he was talking about baptism in water because they said they were baptized unto John's baptism which everyone agrees is a baptism in water.

Why did baptism come to Paul's mind when he discovered that these disciples believed but didn't know anything about the Holy Spirit? Because Paul knew that believers receive the Holy Spirit when they are baptized in water (Acts 2:38; 1 Cor. 12:13). Certainly there's a spiritual aspect to baptism, but we dare not deny the physical aspect of baptism -- immersion in water. There are just too many verses that, unless they are misinterpreted, clearly state that God saves people when they are baptized in water.

then I think John the Baptist should have said I baptize with water and after this Jesus will Baptize with the Holy Ghost joining the water baptism with the spiritual baptism. Not But after this Jesus will baptize with the Spirit and fire. and Jesus would have said that I no longer need to baptize you with spirit and Fire for you received that when John baptized you, but that is not what either one of them said there was not a joining conjunction But rather a separating conjunction.

KJV
Luke 3:16
16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
KJV
Acts 1:5
5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
KJV
"But" does not join the two baptism, sorry I don't even think that would wash on "are you smarter than a fifth grader" the Believers didn't receive the Holy Spirit with the water baptism, Jesus said after they had been dunked, not many days hence ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit. I fail to see how anyone could even state that these two baptism were one in the same !! for one the Holy Ghost had not been sent yet, Jesus said it is expedient/ better for you if I go away for If I don't go away then the Father can't send the Comforter.

 

[His_disciple3]

God promised the Messiah, and when He sent Him many could not accept that He had come and they lived in the old times, still doing things as they had always had, even though the Messiah said this is the way to go now. Jesus/God promised that the Comforter would be sent. many can not accept that He has come, and they are still living in the pass, even though the Comforter who is to guide us in all things, has said that this is the way things will be done now, does history repeat itself or not??? and we sit today and marvel how the old testament saints could not see the One that God had sent, and how they rejected Him as being of God, some even accused Him of being a devil, Go Figure!! today when the Holy Ghost shows up, some will even say that that is the work of the devil!! simply Amazing!!!


2 Corinthians 13:14
14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.
KJV

Good morning Holy Spirit, thank you for teaching me of the things of God and guiding me through this day. thank you for abiding with me and for your daily fellowship as The Father walked with Adam and Eve in the cool of the evening, and the Son walked daily with the Disciples and followers, even so you, the Holy Spirit walks daily with the believers today!

 

[greatdivide46]

then I think John the Baptist should have said I baptize with water and after this Jesus will Baptize with the Holy Ghost joining the water baptism with the spiritual baptism. Not But after this Jesus will baptize with the Spirit and fire. and Jesus would have said that I no longer need to baptize you with spirit and Fire for you received that when John baptized you, but that is not what either one of them said there was not a joining conjunction But rather a separating conjunction.

I disagree. Peter clearly says in Acts 2:38 that when people repent and are baptized they will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Paul says in Ephesians 4:5 that there is only one baptism. There is not a baptism in water and a baptism in the Holy Spirit. According to Paul there is only one baptism -- a baptism of water and the Spirit, just as Jesus says in John 3:5 when referring to baptism as the new birth.

 

[greatdivide46]

Amen!

You are saved how?

By faith through grace, it is the gift of God. (cf. Eph. 2:8-9)

God Bless

Till all are one.

Actually if you check your Scripture I think you'll find that Eph. 2:8-9 says we are saved by grace through faith -- not by faith through grace. No wonder people get the idea that we are saved by faith alone if Scripture is misquoted like this.

 

[a pilgrim]

To understand baptism with the Holy ghost and baptism with fire you have to look at the passage in context. Let's examine:

Matt. 3
[5] Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
[6] And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

Those who accepted the message John was preaching, confessed their sins, and were baptized. However, not everyone there came for that purpose.

[7] But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

The Pharisees and Sadducees came as skeptics and were religious hypocrites and John warned them of the wrath to come.

[8] Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
[9] And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
[10] And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

Now, we should understand and agree that those who repented, confessed their sin, and were baptized were, what we could call, saved. But, the Pharisees and Sadducees did not do that and he likened them unto a tree that does not bring forth good fruit and is cast into the fire.

[11] I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

As John goes on to explain the dynamics of what was going on that day he told them he, personally, could baptize them with water unto repentance, (or because of repentance,) but Jesus, on the other hand, would baptize some with the Holy Ghost, (the repenters,) and some, with fire. (the hypocrites.)

[12] Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

When the Lord returns, and purges his floor, (the Tribulation,) he is going to gather his children, (the wheat,) into his barn, (heaven,) but those who reject him and his message are going to be gathered, in the wrath to come, and be burned.

That's the way I see the baptism with the Holy Ghost as opposed to the baptism with fire.

Now, is baptism essential in order to be saved? Let's look at the Gospel of Mark:

Mark 1
[4] John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

John baptized in the wilderness, and preached the baptism of what?

Repentance for the remission of sins.

What must one do for, or in order to obtain remission of sins?

Repent.

Matt. 3
[8] Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

What does baptism do, it is the first fruit that is meet for repentance, or to show that repentance has occured. Man cannot see the heart, but he can see the outward act of obedience to the command of Christ and be baptized after repentance.

Ben

​

 

[phoenixdem]

Actually if you check your Scripture I think you'll find that Eph. 2:8-9 says we are saved by grace through faith -- not by faith through grace. No wonder people get the idea that we are saved by faith alone if Scripture is misquoted like this.

What is it besides faith that gives salvation in accordance with the plan of God?

Romans

3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes,
of the Gentiles also:

3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith,
and uncircumcision through faith.

3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we​

establish the law.

 

[greatdivide46]

What is it besides faith that gives salvation in accordance with the plan of God?

Romans

3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes,
of the Gentiles also:​

3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith,
and uncircumcision through faith.​

3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we​

establish the law.

Faith doesn't give salvation any more than baptism does. Salvation is given only by the grace of God. We are saved by grace through faith for good works at baptism.

 

[phoenixdem]

Faith doesn't give salvation any more than baptism does. Salvation is given only by the grace of God. We are saved by grace through faith for good works at baptism.

If faith doesn't give salvation, both God and Paul and the other Apostles would be spinning in their graves.

 

[a pilgrim]

Faith doesn't give salvation any more than baptism does. Salvation is given only by the grace of God. We are saved by grace through faith for good works at baptism.

I jumped in late, but I was with you up until that last phrase, ". . . at baptism."

Salvation does not happen AT baptism as we can see in the following passage;

Acts 10
[44] While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
[45] And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
[46] For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
[48] And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

The hearts of the Gentiles were ready as we know Cornelius sent for Peter to hear the Gospel. However, they had already received the Holy Ghost prior to their baptism. The Holy Ghost DOES NOT DWELL in vessels that have not yet been cleansed by the blood of Jesus.

So, we must logically conclude that when they heard the Gospel, their hearts already being affected by the Lord, believed unto salvation, were cleansed of their sins, and baptized spiritually into the body of Christ.

1 Cor. 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.

The Spirit of God baptizes people into Christ, the body, when they repent/believe.

John 3
[17] For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
[18] He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
[36] He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

John 5
[24] Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Water baptism is for believers, not IN ORDER to become a believer. That is why Peter commanded them to be baptized, they ALREADY had the holy Ghost.

Notice Paul's comments on the place or priority of baptism:

1 Cor. 1
[14] I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
[15] Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
[16] And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
[17] For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

If baptism was part of the Gospel, Paul would have preached the necessity of baptism in order to be saved. But, the thing that saves us is belief/faith in the message of the gospel which is given to us by grace, the unmerited favor of God. Again, notice:

Mark 1
[15] And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Acts 15
[7] And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

2 Cor. 4
[4] In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

The object of the Good News is that IT, (the Gospel,) being mixed with faith/belief, (not just intellectual assent,) will give the hearer thereof, eternal life. John said that above, rememeber?

John 5
[24] Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

No baptism there. Also, notice, he that believeth HATH, present tense, everlasting life.

Yes, they preached, ". . . repent AND be baptized." It was the clarion call to those who were being awakened that the Kingdom of God (spiritually,) was at hand. But BELIEF of the message is what saved. Consider the Great Commission as given in Mark:

Mark 15
[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.

Indeed, they needed to repent, (in order to be saved,) and be baptized, to make public that they identified with he who died, was buried, and rose again the third day, (the very picture baptism depicts,) BUT Mark made it clear what would "damn" a man, '. . . he that believeth not." NOT he that is not baptized.

Just some observations.

Ben

 

[a pilgrim]

Just an aside. The Roman Catholic Church was the group that pushed baptismal regeneration, which ultimately lead them to infant baptism, (the younger you do it, the more you save, right? Wrong.)

The necessity of baptism IN ORDER TO OBTAIN salvation also comes from Catholicism. If I have to be baptized in order to be saved, I have to have a human element, (a priest,) in order to be baptized, ( I cannot baptize myself.) But, Paul made it clear:

1 Timothy 2
[5] For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

This is a true statement if salvation comes by grace through faith alone. However, if I have to be baptized, I need a SECOND mediator. . . THE BAPTIZER. . . THE PRIEST, to baptize me into Christ.

 

[His_disciple3]

well if it is faith plus water baptism which is a work then some of you scholars need to tell Jesus the next time you guys talk with Him That He should have mentioned water baptism for salvation in John 3.

John 3:17-18
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
KJV

nope I don't see anything about water baptism in these scriptures and red letters in my KJB means that Jesus spake these words!! so whom do you all suppose that we listen to God Himself or man??

 

[greatdivide46]

well if it is faith plus water baptism which is a work then some of you scholars need to tell Jesus the next time you guys talk with Him That He should have mentioned water baptism for salvation in John 3.

John 3:17-18
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
KJV

nope I don't see anything about water baptism in these scriptures and red letters in my KJB means that Jesus spake these words!! so whom do you all suppose that we listen to God Himself or man??

I don't see anything in these verses about repentance either. Was Jesus wrong when he said, "Except ye repent ye shall perish"? I don't see anyting about confessing in these verses either. Was Paul wrong when he said, "If you confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord . . . you will be saved."?

Just because baptism is not mentioned by Jesus here doesn't mean that Jesus was saying the baptism is unnecessary. After all Jesus is the one who commanded his disciples to make other disciples by baptizing them. Was Jesus wrong when he uttered that command?

 

[greatdivide46]

Originally posted by a_pilgrim

The hearts of the Gentiles were ready as we know Cornelius sent for Peter to hear the Gospel. However, they had already received the Holy Ghost prior to their baptism. The Holy Ghost DOES NOT DWELL in vessels that have not yet been cleansed by the blood of Jesus.

How do you know they had already received the Holy Ghost prior to their baptism? I think what Peter is referring to here is receiving the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit because he says "as well as we" referring back to the Day of Pentecost recorded in Acts 2. That also was receiving the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit. It was NOT receiving the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit because Peter told the people in Acts 2 that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit after they repented and were baptized.

 

[His_disciple3]

I don't see anything in these verses about repentance either. Was Jesus wrong when he said, "Except ye repent ye shall perish"? I don't see anyting about confessing in these verses either. Was Paul wrong when he said, "If you confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord . . . you will be saved."?

Just because baptism is not mentioned by Jesus here doesn't mean that Jesus was saying the baptism is unnecessary. After all Jesus is the one who commanded his disciples to make other disciples by baptizing them. Was Jesus wrong when he uttered that command?

repent means to change ones mind so no Jesus wasn't wrong the bulls and goats were no longer needed so they were to change their mind/ repent

if you would just look at romans 10 you would see that the confess, paul was talking about is nothing about confessing our sins. it says if we confess the Lord, Jesus you are my Lord , there I just confessed The Lord, so Paul was right on track we must believe that He is Lord if we believe that then we will confess that with our mouth and again nothing about water baptism in your own scripture reference, here Thanks!! read what the scriptures says dude. not what you have been preached. it will help others that you try to teach.

Jesus said nothing about salvation when he told His disciple about baptism , Jesus let John the Baptist baptize Him , surely you aren't saying that that is when Jesus got saved!! hope this is has been a help.

 

[a pilgrim]

How do you know they had already received the Holy Ghost prior to their baptism?

[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

". . . have received. . . " past tense. They already had him. Simple English grammar.

I think what Peter is referring to here is receiving the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit because he says "as well as we" referring back to the Day of Pentecost recorded in Acts 2. That also was receiving the gift of tongues from the Holy Spirit.

What you think is not as important as what God said.

Acts 2
[38] Then Peter said unto them, 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.

As stated above in the Gospel of Mark, John the Baptist preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Repentance is what remits sins. Baptism is the outward act to show what one has done. It is a public profession.

In this passage in Acts 2, Peter was echoing the same message:

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus, thus separating this from the baptism John preached.
2. Repentance brings the remission of sins, AND. . .
3. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Answer these, please:

Do unsaved people receive the Holy Ghost? Give scriptural proof.

Do unsaved people exercise a spiritual gift, like speaking in tongues? Give scripture reference.

It was NOT receiving the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit because Peter told the people in Acts 2 that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit after they repented and were baptized.

So now you are breaking the coming of the Holy Ghost up into two separate events. This is flat out, unbiblical. There is not a verse to confirm this type of thinking.

AND. . .Peter went on to preach, explaining what was happening to the Jews:

Acts 3
[17] And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.
[18] But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
[19] Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Again, notice the threefold affect of repenting:

1. One will be converted, (from the unsaved state to the saved or born again state.)
2. One will have their sins blotted out.
3. The times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

And still. . . NO MENTION OF BAPTISM.

 

[greatdivide46]

repent means to change ones mind so no Jesus wasn't wrong the bulls and goats were no longer needed so they were to change their mind/ repent

Yes. They were also to change their minds about their past sinful lifestyle, too. That's more along the lines of what repentance means today.

if you would just look at romans 10 you would see that the confess, paul was talking about is nothing about confessing our sins. it says if we confess the Lord, Jesus you are my Lord , there I just confessed The Lord, so Paul was right on track we must believe that He is Lord if we believe that then we will confess that with our mouth and again nothing about water baptism in your own scripture reference, here Thanks!! read what the scriptures says dude. not what you have been preached. it will help others that you try to teach.

I agree that Romans 10 is not talking about confessing our sins. It's talking about confessing Jesus as Lord. That doesn't change anything. Confession is still required for salvation according to these verses

Jesus said nothing about salvation when he told His disciple about baptism , Jesus let John the Baptist baptize Him , surely you aren't saying that that is when Jesus got saved!! hope this is has been a help.

Of course he was talking about salvation when he told His disciples to make other disciples by baptizing and then teaching them. Is it possible to do that without at least mentioning salvation? And BTW, John's baptism is not the same as the baptism experienced by Christians today. Jesus was not baptized by John for salvation. He was baptized by John to fulfill all righteousness.

 

[greatdivide46]

[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

". . . have received. . . " past tense. They already had him. Simple English grammar.

The key to this verse is not what you have highlighted but the final four words "as well as we," or as the ESV says, "just as we have." This means just like we did, referring to the fact that the apostles spoke in tongues on the Day of Pentecost just like Cornelius and his household did. It is not a reference to the reception of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2

[38] Then Peter said unto them, 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.

As stated above in the Gospel of Mark, John the Baptist preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Repentance is what remits sins. Baptism is the outward act to show what one has done. It is a public profession.

Interesting that you think repentance is what remits sins. See Matthew 26:28 for another idea on what actually remits sin.

In this passage in Acts 2, Peter was echoing the same message:

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus, thus separating this from the baptism John preached.
2. Repentance brings the remission of sins, AND. . .
3. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Answer these, please:

Do unsaved people receive the Holy Ghost? Give scriptural proof.

No, not the indwelling presence of the Holy Ghost.

Do unsaved people exercise a spiritual gift, like speaking in tongues? Give scripture reference.

Apparently so. Witness Cornelius and his household. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit cannot witness through unsaved people?

So now you are breaking the coming of the Holy Ghost up into two separate events. This is flat out, unbiblical. There is not a verse to confirm this type of thinking.

I have no idea what your referring to here. The Holy Spirit comes into a person's life the first time only once. Before and after than the Holy Spirit may work in a person's life innumerable times.

AND. . .Peter went on to preach, explaining what was happening to the Jews:

Acts 3
[17] And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.
[18] But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
[19] Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Again, notice the threefold affect of repenting:

1. One will be converted, (from the unsaved state to the saved or born again state.)
2. One will have their sins blotted out.
3. The times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

And still. . . NO MENTION OF BAPTISM.

Of course there's no mention of baptism. Everyone he was talking to understood where baptism fit in their salvation. Baptism wasn't the main thing, obviously, but that doesn't mean that it was unnecessary.

 

[DeaconDean]

[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

". . . have received. . . " past tense. They already had him. Simple English grammar.

"ἔλαβον" -3rd person plural, 2nd aorist active indictive

Peter recognized that right then, they had already received the Holy Spirit. (before they were baptized)

Simple Greek.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[greatdivide46]

"ἔλαβον" -3rd person plural, 2nd aorist active indictive

Peter recognized that right then, they had already received the Holy Spirit. (before they were baptized)

Simple Greek.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Obviously they had already received the Holy Spirit. However, since Peter as "as well as we," I'm inclined to think he's speaking of the fact that they spoke in tongues. After all that was recognized as "receiving" the Holy Spirit by the early Christians and certainly that happened in Acts 2 as well. I do not believe that Peter is talking about receiving the indwelling, regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit. Personally, I don't believe there's a necessary connection between receiving the indwelling, regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit and receiving the miraculous ability to speak in tongues.

Peter is the one who said that people receive the gift of the Holy Spirit when they repent and are baptized (see Acts 2:38). If he really believed that, then why would he want Cornelius and his family to baptized if they already had the gift of the Holy Spirit?

 

[DeaconDean]

Obviously they had already received the Holy Spirit. However, since Peter as "as well as we," I'm inclined to think he's speaking of the fact that they spoke in tongues. After all that was recognized as "receiving" the Holy Spirit by the early Christians and certainly that happened in Acts 2 as well. I do not believe that Peter is talking about receiving the indwelling, regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit. Personally, I don't believe there's a necessary connection between receiving the indwelling, regenerating presence of the Holy Spirit and receiving the miraculous ability to speak in tongues.

Peter is the one who said that people receive the gift of the Holy Spirit when they repent and are baptized (see Acts 2:38). If he really believed that, then why would he want Cornelius and his family to baptized if they already had the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Jesus also appeared to the 10 disciples, minus Thomas and gave them an infilling of the Holy Spirit then, where was the speaking in tongues? (cf. John 20:21-22)

So it is possible for a person to have the Holy Spirit and not speak in tongues.

As a matter of fact, the recording of actual speaking in tongues is only mentioned three times in Acts. (Acts 2, 10, 19)

And the Apostle Paul is plain to point out that not everybody will be given this.

It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is synonymous with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is unscriptural teaching which says that all who are baptized by the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues. The Scriptures state emphatically that all saved persons have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body . . . ” (1 Corinthians 12:13). All the believers at Corinth received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, however all did not speak in tongues. The question asked in verse 30, “Do all speak with tongues?” is so phrased so as to convey the expected answer, “No.”

The baptizing work of the Spirit is not an experience in the believer subsequent to salvation. Rather it is that act of the Holy Spirit which joins the believing sinner to the Body of Christ. More emphatically, there is no other means whereby one can become a member of the Church which is Christ’s Body. All saved persons have been baptized by the Holy Spirit, but not all saved persons speak in tongues. The baptizing work of the Spirit places the believer in the Body positionally.

Be careful that you do not confuse the baptism of the Spirit with the command to be “filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18). All believers share equally in this position in Christ and thus share equally in union with Him. There is only one experience of baptism by the Holy Spirit but there can be many experiences of being filled with Spirit. Paul said that not all of the Corinthian Christians spoke in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:5), and yet he stated clearly that all had been baptized with the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13).

It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of being filled with the Spirit. All believers are commanded to “be filled with (controlled by) the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18), but nowhere in Scripture are believers commanded to speak in tongues. A Christian can be under the influence and control of the Holy Spirit and not speak in tongues. There are numerous instances when the disciples were filled with the Spirit but did not speak in tongues. See Acts 4:31 and 13:9-11. To be Spirit-filled is to be Spirit-controlled. Are we to believe that the thousands of mightily used men and women of God who were among the world’s best missionaries of Christ’s Gospel and Bible teachers were never filled with the Holy Spirit because they never spoke in tongues? Perish the thought!

Can one know if he is filled with the Spirit? Look at one verse in the Bible where the command to be filled with the Spirit is recorded. “And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God” (Ephesians 5:18-21). Three things are mentioned as evidence of being Spirit-filled; a joyful heart, a thankful heart and a submissive heart. Nothing is said about speaking in tongues. To sum it up in one word, Christlikeness is the manifestation of being filled with the Spirit, and the Scriptures do not tell us that our Lord ever spoke in tongues.

Speaking in Tongues | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site

The fact is, the Greek text proves you wrong.

The fact is, Peter and the others had already received an infilling proior to Pentecost.

Fact is, nowhere can one show from scriptures that any of the disciples prior to Pentecost were baptized.

You could argue that some were baptized while serving under John the Baptists ministry as Andrew was a disciple of John the Baptist, however, Paul ran across disciples of John's baptism and re-baptized them.

But nowhere in scripture does t record that the disciples were baptized.

So your argument does not hold water.

So show me in scriptures where all the "Christians" in the primative churches at Corinth, Colossae, Phillpi, Galatia, Ephesus, Thessolinica, etc., spoke in tongues as evidence of being infilled with the Holy Spirit.

Till then, ...

God Bless

Till all are one.