[noeticknight]

We can certainly get microscopic with the scriptures, but before we get too deep into that, what about the age of the "Initial Evidence" doctrine? The original formulators had no such ideas about "speaking in tongues" being linked to salvation, so why adopt a reformulated theory less than a century old? And btw, where does this theory put the rest of Christendom?

This doctrine was handed down to me from my former church leader. The history was never explained, and its evolution into a requirement for salvation was always kept conveniently hidden. Instead, I grew up witnessing pressure-cook church services that must have been like hitting the jackpot on a slot machine in Vegas, "We've got one over here that won it!!!" "Not tonight, but don't worry, next week is your lucky week!!" In the end, it made me no more of a Christian than his other teachings such as "outward holiness standards" or paying a penalty of 5% on your gross if you missed paying the mandated 10%.