Quote:
Originally Posted by TRFrance
Mike, I luv you bro, but you're killing me here. 
Careful now... If you want to use that line of argument, it simply doesn't hold up.
For example... there are certainly instances in the Book of Acts where it talks about people being saved, but the Bible never stated that they repented. Should we just assume that repentance isnt necessary for salvation since it's not recorded in each instance?
If so, wouldnt there be a serious flaw with that assumption?
Thanks for playing 
|
TR, I love you too, in spite of your condescending attitude sometimes!
You do make a good point.
However, repentance has ALWAYS been a part of salvation, even before the Holy Ghost was poured out. It started at an altar of sacrifice. It's a given that one cannot be saved without repentance, and that concept is clearly spelled out time and time again in scripture, i.e. when JEsus said "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish".
Jesus never mentioned tongues in connection with salvation.
So, does speaking in tongues really hold as much of a "given" status when it comes to salvation as repentance does?
And, if - in your mind - it does, then why is it that we don't hold folks to the Book of Acts benchmark of speaking in "other" tongues as the Spirit gives utterance, rather than them speaking in an "unknown" tongue?
Threaded Mode
