I think she may be referring to the baptism where ppl begin speaking in tongues. I could be wrong here, however. But I have noticed that ppl on here(some, not all) will make up things on others(IOW lie) to try to assasinate their character. Trust me...I know about that first handed.
That's probable.
Another troubling scenario is this false compromise that "we all believe we are saying the truth." That's a broad brush cop out that focuses on nothing specific, and to the myopic sounds plausible.
It addresses exactly nothing specifically while applauding and maligning both parties at the same time.
Compromise does this, and people think it's called peace and unity.
We're not arguing about hypotheses, but actual cases and things said which deny the gospel, deny imputed righteousness, deny the completed work of Christ, deny security in Christ, all witnessed on here. An opposite view of these things does not become one persons "truth," while the Biblical side becomes yet another persons "truth."
That's just a bunch of compromising baloney and namby-pamby behavior.
To broad brush it as such is foolish, as if truth were merely subjective to the person. It is basing the statement on something intangible while pretending it hit some actual mark somewhere.
Be specific then you might have a case, and quite generalizing and compromising truth as being only relative.
To use that cop out is to say none have a true Gospel, we only think we do, and anyone's truth is the same as another. It is also saying that we cannot arrive at truth through 2 Timothy 2:15 and contextual exegesis. The Gospel is up for grabs for some, so lend everyone an ear. Seems completely contrary to 2 Timothy 3 and 4 because it is.
"Differing opinions" is the popular catch phrase of today used to support any form of doctrine as relevant, but is really designed to mitigate the Gospel by making any other opinion on par with the one true. That is what it really accomplishes.