Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
But that does not equate tongues with salvation. Other than what 3-steppers claim about tongues, how else can they claim tongues is only initial evidence of a part of the process that actually saves, and that tongues do not actually saves in and of itself?? Would you say they should make a disclaimer to indicate tongues do not save, but are evidence of salvation so long as repentance and baptism were already accomplished?
|
I'm speaking from a 3-stepper perspective as I understand it. There cannot and would never be a disclaimer concerning tongues and salvation with the 3-stepper. For example, if a person repented, was baptized and they said "I'm redeemed for I have been born of the Spirit", the reaction to that by a 3-stepper would include the question of 'evidence' of tongues in some way. If the person indicated they had not spoken in tongues, the 3-stepper would be quick to point out that the person isn't born again....not redeemed. Tongues are an integral indivisible part of the 3-stepper program.
And I ask again, who taught such a doctrine IMMEDIATELY before the 1913 introduction of such theology? Where was the church in the 1800's teaching such things?
Threaded Mode
