All Trinitarians are Lost!!!!!!!!!!!

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Then how could Cornelius's household receive the Holy Ghost while still in their sins?

Yep, does the Holy Ghost leave you every time you sin, or does the Holy Ghost deal with it accordingly....?


These folks were just repentant, but needed their sins remitted.

God even filled John the baptist with the Holy Ghost BEFORE he repented....

[houston]

Originally Posted by Sean

Yep, does the Holy Ghost leave you every time you sin, or does the Holy Ghost deal with it accordingly....?


These folks were just repentant, but needed their sins remitted.

God even filled John the baptist with the Holy Ghost BEFORE he repented....

So the Holy Spirit is given to people that are dead in their trespasses? Well, I wasn't aware that God has bastard children. Ya learn something new everyday on AFF.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Sean I like you but this answer is so lame. I can't tell you how many times oneness people use it. The fact is that just because Paul was writing to saints doesn't mean they fully understood salvation and under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost he wrote Romans which turns out to be the closest thing to a systematic theology we have in the Bible. And as Paul explained salvation (beginning in chapter 1 through 11). Note there is no mention of tongues in Paul's soteriology.

Also note Romans was written long before Acts. That Paul and Luke were fellow labourers and that Luke very likely had the same soteriology as Paul hearing Paul preach many times (probably being converted by Paul at Antioch) and unlimited private discussion. Luke never hints that he ever spoke in tongues, makes no mention of tongues in His gospel, and while recording the history if the church does note the supernatural phenomena of tongues in Acts 2,8*,10, and 19). (*I'm granting Acts 8 implies tongues). Acts 2 isn't a conversion experience but is the coming if the Spirit on the Jews, 8 the Samaritans, 10 the Gentiles, 19 the followers of John the Baptist (distinct from Christ's disciples, see Mark 2:18). Out of 21 conversions in Acts however tongues are only mention 2 or 3* timed. In the rest of the conversions tongues are not even hinted at or suggested including Acts 2:41 which tells us 3,000 people were added to the church that day- how? Being baptized. There no suggestion at all the spoke in tongues, neither any suggestion that the 5,000 of Acts 4:4 spoke in tongues. And certainly if you study all of the sermons in Acts and all of the conversions you will note tongues are not emphasized, mentioned, or expected with the possible exceptions of Acts 8 & 19.

Furthermore 1 Corinthians was written long before Acts and its quite likely Luke believed tongues to be a spiritual gift as described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12, but not the universal initial evidence as no one believed this until the 20th century.

Even church history tells us this is not the normative conversion experience though the early church did have the gift if tongues and prophecy in operations. (I know people say we do too and maybe so but all I've ever seen is tongues with a very generic interpretation, or tongues then interpreted by the one who gave the message-which isn't biblical, but I suppose the sign gifts are yet another topic).

Its simply not an accurate conclusion to suggest people who use Romans to understand/explain soteriology skipped Acts. Not at all.

What your concept is doing is hoping these letters(epistles to the saints) have "slipped" in a few sinners into the conversation. In your desperation to find a way to skip Acts, you are quoting the Book of Romans illegitimately to sinners......If you cannot see this error, you will be in BIG TROUBLE with the Lord. This is EXACTLY how you and the others have ended up with a differing plan of salvation that the book of Acts shows us.

Below is a previous post of mine......see if you can find sinners being addressed in the "Letters to the Saints"......


Originally Posted by Sean View Post
Well, lets try this... each of the epistles address certain individuals. Lets see who they may be.
Romans 1:7 (the saints of Rome)
1 Cor. (the CHURCH of God in Corinth) vs 2
2 Cor. (the Church of God at Corinth and Achaia) vs 1
Galatians (the churches of Galatia)vs 2
Ephesians ( the saints at Ephesus) vs 1
Philippians (the saints at Phillipi with the bishops and deacons) vs 1
Colossians (the saints and faithful brethren at Colosse) vs 2
1 Thessalonians (The church) vs 1
2 Thessalonians (the church) vs 1
1 Tim. (to Timothy only) vs 2
2 Tim. (to timothy only) vs 2
Titus (to Titus only) vs 4
Philemon (to Philemon, Apphia, Archippus and his house CHURCH) vs 1 and 2
Hebrews ( The whole thing addressing christians) 2:1, 3:1 (holy brethren) etc.
James ( his saved Jewish BRETHREN scattered abroad) vs 1 and 2
1 Peter (the scattered saints (elect) of God) vs 1 through 4
2 Peter (all saints) vs 1 through 4
1 John (all saints or brethren) chapter 2:7
2 John (the elect lady and her children) vs 1
3 John ( to Gaius only) vs 1
Jude (to them that are sanctified by God...and called)
Revelation (the 7 churches of Asia Minor) chapters 1-3


It dont look like the epistles are written to SINNERS to me...Looks like saved people!!! If you cant see this,, I dont know what else to tell you.


Remember...you are suggesting to sinners an alternative plan of salvation than Acts to sinners....this is exactly how you are able to come to this very conclusion....By NOT rightly dividing the word of truth.... what a shame.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by houston

So the Holy Spirit is given to people that are dead in their trespasses? Well, I wasn't aware that God has bastard children. Ya learn something new everyday on AFF.

The Holy Ghost falls on people to lead them to water baptism and get their sins remitted. Then to lead and guide them to all truth, then to quicken their mortal bodies in the "catching away"...Glad I could be of some help...

Those that were baptized in the N.T. were declared "dead" to sin. Some were baptized 1st and some baptized after they received the Spirit...

Romans 6
6 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.



For many of them, they were declared DEAD by baptism after receiving the Spirit... They were not dead to sin UNTIL they were baptized

[Originalist]

[QUOTE=Sean;1324622][COLOR="Red"]The Holy Ghost falls on people to lead them to water baptism and get their sins remitted. QUOTE]

Love ya man, but that is simply downplaying the significance of Spirit baptism.

God gives people his spirit for the following reasons........


New birth (John 3:5)

The rest I'll just repeat my previous comments....

Furthermore, God credits those who have the Spirit as having met all the righteous requirements of the Law through Christ's death. ...

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Those Trinitarians who have the Holy Ghost are not in the flesh, and belong to Christ in spite of their imperfect doctrine of God and in spite of the fact that the man who baptized them messed it up......

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Again, in romans 8 Paul is not contrasting "weak Christians" who are "in the flesh" with those stronger Christians who are "walking in the Spirit". He is contrasting to dominions, the flesh and the Spirit. he makes it clear that one who has the Spirit dwelling in them is NOT IN THE FLESH. Sean, you contradict Paul by saying that those Christians with the Holy Ghost who had an imperfect baptism are still in their sins. Here Paul clearly contradicts any such notion.

Furthermore, those same Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians have life because of the imputed righteousness of Christ that is in them.....

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

Is Christ in them or not, Sean?

Continuing, those Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians will one day have their mortal bodies quickened just like those Holy Ghost filled Oneness folk...

11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. (except those of you who had an imperfect baptism. You're still in your sins and going to Hell)

Finally, those very imperfect Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians who though they have imperfect doctrine, are spirit led and Spirit adopted children of God, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ......

4 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together

The Apostle Peter declared in Acts 5 this concerning Holy Ghost baptism....

32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

When God gives someone the Holy Ghost, he is declaring that that person has "obeyed" the gospel according to Peter. What gospel? The gospel Peter mentioned in verses 29-31....

29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.

31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

Acts 5:32 blows any idea out of the water that the Holy Ghost falls on people just to lead them to be rebaptized so they won't still be in their sins.

Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians believe that God raised Jesus, exalted him, and he alone can forgive sins. When they submit to that message, God fills them with his Spirit just like us.

Is there doctrine perfect? No. Should the preacher have invoked the name of Jesus when he baptized them? Yes. Should we try to lead them into more truth? Yes. But we should admonish them as BROTHERS, for all the reasons I mentioned in this post.

These points are irrefutable despite the efforts of some to twist the clear wording and context of Romans 7 and 8. It would be better to claim these people really don't have the Holy Ghost than to come up with a ridiculous soteriology that makes Oneness Pentecostals look like a bunch of buffoons.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Sean

The Holy Ghost falls on people to lead them to water baptism and get their sins remitted. Then to lead and guide them to all truth, then to quicken their mortal bodies in the "catching away"...Glad I could be of some help...

Those that were baptized in the N.T. were declared "dead" to sin. Some were baptized 1st and some baptized after they received the Spirit...

Romans 6
6 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.



For many of them, they were declared DEAD by baptism after receiving the Spirit... They were not dead to sin UNTIL they were baptized

They should never have been prayed for to receive the Holy Ghost before they were baptized to begin with. God will do this, but he does so for the same reason he gave Cornelius the Holy Ghost before he was baptized, the ignorance of the ones ministering. He gives them the Holy Ghost on credit, so to speak, knowing their intention to get baptized. But in all reality 99% of people who do receive the Spirit do so after baptism and that is God's plan.

I have no argument saying those who receive the Spirit before baptism still need to be baptized. My beef is with our insistence that God rejects outright imperfect baptisms and that guys like Wilkerson and others are in hell. Totally stupid. Gee, what else might God be demanding perfection in that we are missing the boat on? We all might end up in hell if that is the case.

[Originalist]

I know a preacher who says NOTHING when he baptizes. He has the candidate repent as confess Jesus as Lord then he dunks them.

Another preacher does not use a formula, but quotes Romans 6:4 when he baptizes somebody saying....

I therefore bury you with him by baptism into death: that like as Jesus Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so you also should walk in newness of life.

Are these two examples going to hell because the pastor did not use the word "name" or the word "baptize"?

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Sean

What your concept is doing is hoping these letters(epistles to the saints) have "slipped" in a few sinners into the conversation. In your desperation to find a way to skip Acts, you are quoting the Book of Romans illegitimately to sinners......If you cannot see this error, you will be in BIG TROUBLE with the Lord. This is EXACTLY how you and the others have ended up with a differing plan of salvation that the book of Acts shows us.

Hardly. The only reason that you can come to such a conclusion is because you do not want to truthfully weigh what I have to say. Since you are assuming that I "skip Acts" let me ask you, why do you skip the gospels and go straight to Acts? Did nothing Jesus say matter? Or do you only pick and choose what you want, like for example you'll take John 3:3-8 but reject what follows later in the chapter, not even finishing the dialogue, glossing over 3:15-16, and 36, or the tons of scriptures in the gospel of John, the words of Jesus himself, which explicitly teach that genuine faith in Him is sufficient to save:

John begins by noting that "as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." (John 1:12) and ends his book by stating that his intent was to write so that the reader "might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." (John 20:31)

(* for scriptures that reflect a direct link between belief and salvation/eternal life)

*1:12-13

John 1:49-50

John 2:11

John 2:23-25

*3:15-18

*3:36

John 4:39-42

*5:24

John 6:29

John 6:35

*6:40

*6:47

John 6:68-69

John 7:37-39

John 8:30-32

John 9:35-38

John 10:26-28

*11:25-27 (cf. John 4:41-42 & John 6:68-69)

John 11:42,45

John 12:11

John 12:42-46

John 13:19

John 14:10-12

John 14:29

John 17:3

John 17:21

John 19:35

John 20:29

*20:31

Originally Posted by Sean

Below is a previous post of mine......see if you can find sinners being addressed in the "Letters to the Saints"......

What's your point? Was ACTS written to lost people? Scripture interprets scripture, we should see what scripture says as a whole on any given subject. All scripture is profitable for doctrine. The oneness pentecostal way of overemphasizing one book is the sure way to come to a faulty conclusion, and what do you know, they arrived at a conclusion that no one in Christianity has arrived at prior to the early 1900's. That should be a red flag right there.

Originally Posted by Sean

Remember...you are suggesting to sinners an alternative plan of salvation than Acts to sinners....this is exactly how you are able to come to this very conclusion....By NOT rightly dividing the word of truth.... what a shame.

I challenge your assertion that conversion in Acts was not faith and repentance. Oneness Pentecostals who hold to the 3 step salvation error typically pick and choose what they want out of Acts. It is a very inconsistent hermenutic and does not all reflect the truth of the matter:

Conversions in the Book of Acts

There are roughly 21 accounts of conversions to the Christian faith in the book of Acts. Some of these are direct reactions to a message preached, others are statements made in passing by the writer of Acts. Here is a list of the conversions in Acts, if they were in response to a preached message the text of that message will appear in parenthesis.

Conversions

Acts 2:41 (Acts 2:14-40)

Acts 4:4 (Acts 3:12-26)

Acts 8:12

Acts 8:36-38 (Acts 8:35)

Acts 9:6,17-18

Acts 10:44-48 (Acts 10:34-43)

Acts 11:20-21

Acts 13:12

Acts 13:48

Acts 14:1

Acts 16:14-15

Acts 16:30-34

Acts 17:4 (Acts 17:3)

Acts 17:12

Acts 17:34 (Acts 17:22-31)

Acts 18:8

Acts 18:24-28

Acts 19:18-19

Acts 19:1-7

Acts 28:24


Conviction as a result of Apostolic Preaching in the Book of Acts

Acts 2:37

Acts 5:33

Acts 7:54

Acts 24:24-25

What Must We (I) Do?

Acts 2:37

Acts 9:6

Acts 10:6

Acts 16:30


Sermons in the Book of Acts

Acts 2:12-40 (Peter) Resurrection- Acts 2:24,32 Repentance- Acts 2:38

Acts 3:12-26 (Peter) Resurrection- Acts 3:14-15 Repentance-Acts 3:19

Acts 4:8-12 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 4:10 Repentance (by implication) Acts 4:12

Acts 5:29-32 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 5:30 Repentance-Acts 5:31

Acts 7:2-53 (Stephen) Resurrection (by implication) Acts 7:52,55 Repentance (by implication) Acts 7:51

Acts 8:5,12 (Phillip)

Acts 10:34-43 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 10:39-41 Repentance (by implication) Acts 10:43 cross reference w/Acts 11:18

Acts 13:16-41 (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 13:30,37 Repentance (by implication) Acts 10:38-39

Acts 14:15* (Paul) Repentance-Acts 14:15

Acts 14:22 (Paul)

Acts 17:3 (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 17:3

Acts 17:22-31* (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 17:31 Repentance-Acts 17:30

Acts 20:18-35 (Paul) Repentance-Acts 20:21

Acts 24 (Paul before Felix)

Acts 26 (Paul before Agrippa) Resurrection-Acts 26:23, Repentance-Acts 26:20

*When preaching to pagans the common method was to preach about God as Creator and Judge. When preaching to Jews the common method was to prove from the scriptures that Jesus was the promised Messiah.

Scriptures in Acts that Support Salvation by Faith:

Acts 2:21

Acts 10:43

Acts 11:17-18

Acts 15:11

Acts 16:31

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Hardly. The only reason that you can come to such a conclusion is because you do not want to truthfully weigh what I have to say. Since you are assuming that I "skip Acts" let me ask you, why do you skip the gospels and go straight to Acts? Did nothing Jesus say matter? Or do you only pick and choose what you want, like for example you'll take John 3:3-8 but reject what follows later in the chapter, not even finishing the dialogue, glossing over 3:15-16, and 36, or the tons of scriptures in the gospel of John, the words of Jesus himself, which explicitly teach that genuine faith in Him is sufficient to save:

John begins by noting that "as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." (John 1:12) and ends his book by stating that his intent was to write so that the reader "might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." (John 20:31)

(* for scriptures that reflect a direct link between belief and salvation/eternal life)

*1:12-13

John 1:49-50

John 2:11

John 2:23-25

*3:15-18

*3:36

John 4:39-42

*5:24

John 6:29

John 6:35

*6:40

*6:47

John 6:68-69

John 7:37-39

John 8:30-32

John 9:35-38

John 10:26-28

*11:25-27 (cf. John 4:41-42 & John 6:68-69)

John 11:42,45

John 12:11

John 12:42-46

John 13:19

John 14:10-12

John 14:29

John 17:3

John 17:21

John 19:35

John 20:29

*20:31



What's your point? Was ACTS written to lost people? Scripture interprets scripture, we should see what scripture says as a whole on any given subject. All scripture is profitable for doctrine. The oneness pentecostal way of overemphasizing one book is the sure way to come to a faulty conclusion, and what do you know, they arrived at a conclusion that no one in Christianity has arrived at prior to the early 1900's. That should be a red flag right there.


I challenge your assertion that conversion in Acts was not faith and repentance. Oneness Pentecostals who hold to the 3 step salvation error typically pick and choose what they want out of Acts. It is a very inconsistent hermenutic and does not all reflect the truth of the matter:

Conversions in the Book of Acts

There are roughly 21 accounts of conversions to the Christian faith in the book of Acts. Some of these are direct reactions to a message preached, others are statements made in passing by the writer of Acts. Here is a list of the conversions in Acts, if they were in response to a preached message the text of that message will appear in parenthesis.

Conversions

Acts 2:41 (Acts 2:14-40)

Acts 4:4 (Acts 3:12-26)

Acts 8:12

Acts 8:36-38 (Acts 8:35)

Acts 9:6,17-18

Acts 10:44-48 (Acts 10:34-43)

Acts 11:20-21

Acts 13:12

Acts 13:48

Acts 14:1

Acts 16:14-15

Acts 16:30-34

Acts 17:4 (Acts 17:3)

Acts 17:12

Acts 17:34 (Acts 17:22-31)

Acts 18:8

Acts 18:24-28

Acts 19:18-19

Acts 19:1-7

Acts 28:24


Conviction as a result of Apostolic Preaching in the Book of Acts

Acts 2:37

Acts 5:33

Acts 7:54

Acts 24:24-25

What Must We (I) Do?

Acts 2:37

Acts 9:6

Acts 10:6

Acts 16:30


Sermons in the Book of Acts

Acts 2:12-40 (Peter) Resurrection- Acts 2:24,32 Repentance- Acts 2:38

Acts 3:12-26 (Peter) Resurrection- Acts 3:14-15 Repentance-Acts 3:19

Acts 4:8-12 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 4:10 Repentance (by implication) Acts 4:12

Acts 5:29-32 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 5:30 Repentance-Acts 5:31

Acts 7:2-53 (Stephen) Resurrection (by implication) Acts 7:52,55 Repentance (by implication) Acts 7:51

Acts 8:5,12 (Phillip)

Acts 10:34-43 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 10:39-41 Repentance (by implication) Acts 10:43 cross reference w/Acts 11:18

Acts 13:16-41 (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 13:30,37 Repentance (by implication) Acts 10:38-39

Acts 14:15* (Paul) Repentance-Acts 14:15

Acts 14:22 (Paul)

Acts 17:3 (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 17:3

Acts 17:22-31* (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 17:31 Repentance-Acts 17:30

Acts 20:18-35 (Paul) Repentance-Acts 20:21

Acts 24 (Paul before Felix)

Acts 26 (Paul before Agrippa) Resurrection-Acts 26:23, Repentance-Acts 26:20

*When preaching to pagans the common method was to preach about God as Creator and Judge. When preaching to Jews the common method was to prove from the scriptures that Jesus was the promised Messiah.

Scriptures in Acts that Support Salvation by Faith:

Acts 2:21

Acts 10:43

Acts 11:17-18

Acts 15:11

Acts 16:31

Jason, I am what you refer to as a "three stepper". Do you see any difference in my approach versus other three steppers on AFF? How is repeating Peter's command in Acts 2:38 to those seeking salvation an error in your opinion?

[Jason B]

It is common for oneness Pentecostals to argue in favor of the initial evidence doctrine, which simply states that anyone who truly receives the Holy Ghost will speak in tongues at the time of the baptism. It is common to link Romans 8:9 to this doctrine "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Thus the conclusion is that if someone does not speak in tongues they have not received the Holy Spirit, they don't belong to Christ, and as such they are lost and facing an eternity in hell if they don't repent, get baptized in the name of Jesus, and receive the Holy Ghost with this initial evidence of speaking in tongues. We're pretty much all familiar with this doctrine, I'm just restating the obvious for point of reference for this thread.

But the problem of course is that there just isn't any solid scriptural foundation for this doctrine because the Bible never says that someone has to speak in tongues to be saved, nor does it ever say that speaking in tongues is the one universal initial evidence that someone has received the Holy Ghost.

See if there were just one scripture that said "except you speak in tongues you cannot be saved" or "we know the people who are saved because they have spoken in tongues" then the argument would be considerably stronger if not altogether settled. But of course there is NO scripture that teaches such, at best the doctrine is built on stringing some scriptures together, making assumptions, and arriving at a soteriological theory at best.

None of this so far is particularly new here on AFF, but what has me pondering tonight is why do oneness Pentecostals go into full denial mode when the shoe is on the other foot? For example, if there were scriptures that plainly said that if someone does X, Y, and/or Z they are saved or can know they are saved, why are those scriptures ignored? Why is the plain language of the inspired, infallible, inerrant, authoritative, living, Word of God not good enough for some oneness Pentecostals? How can someone really defend a teaching which insists that unless someone has spoken in tongues they cannot be saved, in the face of plain and basic scriptures?

Here's where I'm going: 1 John contains some things out I'd like to share with regard to this topic. I admit freely this is not all that scholarly, and I'm not trying to impress, so if you want to knock my study feel free to do so, but my question to oneness Pentecostals who affirm speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation is: "How can the initial evidence doctrine stand in light of these scriptures?"

First, the book of 1 John was written for 5 reasons"
1)For Christian fellowship (1:3)
2)that the believers joy may be full (1:4)
3)they the believers sin not (2:1)
4)that they might believe on the name of the Son of God (5:13)
5)that they might know they have eternal life (5:13)


In first John there are a variety of "tests' given so that we can know who the true believers are and who the false teachers/false believers are. These tests are along 3 lines
Social=have to do with our relationships with others
Theological=have to do with what we believe
Moral=have to do with how we live.

In the order they appear in the book, here are scriptures which tell us HOW WE CAN KNOW WE ARE SAVED:

Assurance of Salvation:
1 John 1:71 John 1:7,9
1 John 2:31 John 2:3,5-6
1 John 2:10
1 John 2:17
1 John 2:23b
1 John 2:29
1 John 3:6,7
1 John 3:9
1 John 3:14
1 John 3:17-23
1 John 3:24
1 John 4:2
1 John 4:41 John 4:4,6-7
1 John 4:11-161 John 4:11-16,21
1 John 5:1-5
1 John 5:10
1 John 5:11-13
1 John 5:18-19

Evidence we are not saved:
1 John 1:6
1 John 1:81 John 1:8,10
1 John 2:4
1 John 2:91 John 2:9,11
1 John 2:15-17a
1 John 2:22-23a
1 John 3:61 John 3:6,8
1 John 3:10
1 John 3:14b-15
1 John 4:3
1 John 4:5,61 John 4:5,6,8
1 John 4:20
1 John 5:10
1 John 5:12b

1)We can know that we are saved if we believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah/Christ, that He came in the flesh, made atonement for our sins, and is God. These are the theological tests.
2)We can know that we are saved if we have love for fellow Christians (in the modern sense this would mean not only those of our own organization, that is in fact the opposite, a party spirit), love for all people, and genuine concern and compassion for those who are in need. In a word-if our lives are defined by love for others, it is a strong evidence that we belong to God. These are the social tests.
3)We can know that we are saved if we are trying to live Christ like lives, defined by holiness, godliness, righteousness, and a keeping of God's commandments. If our lives reflect Christ we can know that we are saved. These are the moral tests.

No where in 1 John does he specify (or even mention) speaking in tongues. It is not even a factor. But we are told very specifically:

1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.