The following was sent to me via the form on this web site. The individual was either too ashamed or too discourteous to include a name or e-mail address. I therefore answer it in this manner, hoping he/she will read my response. I place it hear exactly as the person wrote it, shouting capitals and misspellings included, so that others can judge whether my response is as discourteous as this person’s attacks.
MY FRIEND, I WAS BORN AND RAISED PENTECOSTAL AND YOUR WRITINGS WERE NEW TO ME. EVERYONE I'VE EVER ASSOCIATED WITH EXEPT THE JESUS ONLY GROUP, BELIEVES IN A TRINITY. WHERE DID YOU GET THIS INFO. ITS CERTAINLY NOT BIBLICAL, AND BESIDES THE APOLISTIC OR JESUS ONLY, PENTECOSTALS BELIEVE DIFFERENT THAN YOUR INVALID RESEARCH SHOWS. IF YOU WANT TO DEBATE TONGUES MAYBE YOU NEED TO READ THE BIBLE A LITTLE MORE. THE DAY OF PENTECOST WHEN MANY DIFFERENT GROUPS HEARD THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE ISN'T THE ONLY SCRIPTURES YOU NEED TO READ. DID YOU EVER READ WERE PAUL WAS TEACHING THE CHURCH ABOUT THE GIFT OF TONGUES AND HOW WHEN ONE SPEAKS HE SPEAKS MYSTERIES AND NO MAN KNOWS BUT GOD. I HATE TO SOUND HARSH BUT IT BOTHERS ME WHEN FELLOW CHRISTIANS MAKE FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT MY DEMINATION. FUTHER MORE I HAVE NEVER HEARD ONE SAY YOU HAD TO RECIEVE THE BABTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST TO BE SAVED
I can understand how you feel when people make false statements about your beliefs. After all, that is how I felt when I first read what you wrote. I will also agree that some of the things that I said were believed by some Pentecostals are not biblical. That is not my fault, but the fault of those Pentecostals who profess to hold those doctrines. In my answers about Pentecostals on my site I have generally pointed out that I am not an expert on Pentecostal doctrine. I try to use words such as “some” or “many” when talking about the people who hold certain beliefs. That is because there are many variations of Pentecostal doctrine. One Pentecostal (you) may not necessarily believe what another does (the Pentecostal whose web site said that one could not be saved without the gifts of the Holy Spirit).
When I said “most” Pentecostals reject the doctrine of the Trinity, perhaps I should have said “many.” Of course, it is also true that some in almost every Christian group reject the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. In another of my answers I specified that some Pentecostals believe the doctrine while the “Oneness Pentecostals” reject it. I believe I have been honest in stating that some Pentecostals accept the doctrine and some don’t.
If you have never heard that one had to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost to be saved, then obviously you are not as aware of all Pentecostal doctrine as you profess. I received that bit of information directly from someone who claimed to be Pentecostal, although I don’t believe even he used the phrase “baptism of the Holy Ghost.”
To quote you, “if you want to debate tongues maybe you need to read the Bible a little more.” You make a claim that the Bible says something that it just does not say. Your words are, “when one speaks he speaks mysteries and no man knows but God.” What Paul said was, “For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. He that speaketh in a tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.” (1 Corinthians 14:2-4) Nowhere in this passage does he say what you claim he said, that is that no man knows but God. Certainly when I speak German or Spanish in an audience that speaks only English I am speaking “mysteries.” God does know what I am saying, and I know what I am saying. Even Paul says that the one speaking knows what he is saying. Anyone who knew that language would know what he was saying. It is just that if he speaks it without an interpreter, which Paul also requires, what he is saying is a mystery to his audience. The context shows that Paul is speaking in terms of what the audience understands, not whether the language is in itself incomprehensible.
I find it interesting that the one argument I make about tongues that you attack is that in the Bible it is always a human language. That is the easiest of my arguments to demonstrate. The things you don’t question are the more important issues, that Paul tells people to desire other gifts more than speaking in tongues and that according to the Bible the only way for someone to receive the gift of tongues today would be for there to be a 2,000-year-old apostle traveling the world to lay his hands on people without their knowing it.