As a generally cessationist individual, I've been quite surprised by the great number of Pentecostals and Charismatics ("P/C" from here-on-out) on this forum. It isn't that I'm angry about it, just that I find it interesting that so many people of the same theological outlook find their way to the same page. Maybe there are others who do not fall under those categories and leave, but anecdotally I still see an overwhelming body of people on these forums with those outlooks.
I'm really interested to know how everyone came to this specific faith--or, if you left it, why you did so. Were you in another church but decided that P/C was the correct view? Were you raised in the tradition? Did you join a P/C church first on your own volition? Or did others invite you?
I would really enjoy hearing any stories or Biblical arguments anyone might have which led them to the P/C faith. I don't mean to trivialize your faith as data, but P/C churches are likely the most-quickly growing religious group in the world, and I'm very interested to hear how that has played out in the personal lives of our brothers and sisters in Christ. Plus, a nice conversation between Christ's children seems like an appropriate way to further bring us together.
But maybe I should explain first what I'm thinking of when I say P/C. While it is obviously not the ONLY statement of their faith or even necessarily the most important, I have perceived many individuals discussing demons/possession, the devil, specific and concrete inspiration by the Holy Spirit, and some sort of dramatic and spiritual conversion experience. I understand this is not a definitive picture of the P/C churches, but I feel that they serve as reasonable indicators for them. I hope I haven't implied anything cross or offended anyone; I just thought I should explain my thinking.
Thanks.
I grew up Pentecostal. My dad was in construction and followed the work around the country, so I went to a few churches. They were both from Baptist backgrounds. Two of my dad's brothers were baptist preachers and so was his grandfathers. My parents told about getting baptized with the Holy Spirit at some kind of revival meetings at a Firehall. They started going to an Assemblies of God. I think I was about two at this time. My dad used his GI bill money to spend a year in Bible College.
As we moved, we went to different churches. We kept moving back to near where my mom is from in NC for much of elementary school. We had a house there, but it was so rural, my dad would take us elsewhere where he found work. We went to a 'Full Gospel' church in NC, non-denominational but Pentecostal in style and belief. We went to a Charismatic church in a small town in KY where we lived because my parents couldn't find a Pentecostal church, then A/G for most of my middle and high school years with some time in the Church of God (Cleveland). Like I said, we moved a lot. There were three A/Gs we sent to in my middle and high school years in two different states.
I have also spent time in the Indonesian affiliate of the COG, Gereja Bethel Indonesia. Style-wise some of their congregations are more Charismatic.
But an adult, I have also been involved with house churches. My own beliefs are not 'classical Pentecostal' anymore. I do not see a clear case from scripture that anyone who is baptized with the Holy Spirit may speak in tongues. Pentecostals think in terms of discreet 'steps': saved, then baptized with the Holy Ghost. The Holiness wing of the movement thinks in terms of discreet steps of 'saved', 'sanctified' and 'filled with the Holy Ghost.' The Oneness-- maybe 5% of Pentecostals-- some of them at least--tend to think a little different, thinking that you get saved by being baptized 'in Jesus' name' (those words or a similar phrase spoken at the baptism instead of the Matthew 28 trinitarian formula) and that if you are saved you will speak in tongues. I've never been to a Oneness meeting.
I do think it is important that believers be filled with the Holy Spirit, but I do not emphasize the idea that everyone has to have some point in time were they spoke in tongues, since I do not see a good Biblical case for the 'initial evidence doctrine.' Though, a lot of people do have that experience--speaking in tongues when they are filled with the Holy Spirit-- and I did too. I do not see a clear case that every individual in Acts 19, for example, spoke in tongues. Some may have prophesied and not spoken in tongues.
Anyway, I do believe in the operation of spiritual gifts. There are a lot of things I appreciate about the Pentecostal movement. It does, to some extent, allow for the expression of gifts of the Spirit. But in my experience, the way the movement allows it is much more limited than what I see in scripture. In your traditional American Pentecostal church, between songs, someone might give a prophecy, or someone might speak in tongues, followed by interpretation. But the Bible allows a lot more than that. I Corinthians 14:26 says that 'every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. Paul went on to put some parameters on this, but he calls his instructions 'commandments of the Lord.' I do not think I have seen the flow of prophecy in a Pentecostal church to the extent Paul is dealing with in this chapter, where one prophet is speaking and another comes to one who sits by and the first holds his peace, for ye may all prophesy one by one. Some Pentecostals (A/G especially) interpret the passage to mean a maximum of two prophecies, something I do not believe fits with the context.
Azusa Street revival meetings would have multiple people speaking, tongues and interpretation, prophesying, etc. But it seems like people who went to the revival mainly reverted back to evangelical tradition when they returned home. I don't see the one-man-pastorate in scripture. Most Pentecostals seem to follow that or the senior pastor model. IMO, too much emphasis is placed on a 'call to preach' in relation to overseeing a local church as opposed to the Biblical qualifications in the Pentecostal movement. I think it's Methodist influence, but I think some of the baptist churches have the same philosophy. Being called to preach and being qualified to be an overseer are not the same thing.
One tongues, some Pentecostals believe and practice tongues followed by interpretation. I heard this idea and saw it expressed in the A/G growing up. But there also Pentecostla groups from the Appalachian mountains that practice everyone praying at the same time-- sometimes in English, but also in tongues-- that tend to think the restrictions on tongues are only about messages addressed to the congregation and not their practice of all speaking in tongues at the same time. Apparently, some of the A/Gs practice this, though others are stricter on the idea of tongues needing to be interpreted.
The practice of telling everyone to speak in tongues at the same time is, to my mind, a practice of the Charismatic movement, but it has influenced the Pentecostal movement. Originally, Charismatics were mainline denominational groups that accepted aspects of Pentecostal belief about baptism with the Spirit and spiritual gifts, but many of those people went independent and doctrine and practice have influenced each other. Pentecostals for the most part in the US stopped being so strict on hair, makeup and jewelry. That started to be the case when I was a child, though. I did not experience a lot of 'clothes line' emphasis. Maybe the pendulum swung too far the wrong way on that.
Barna Surveys actually have shown evidence that Charismatics tend to know the Bible better than other evangelicals. Pentecostal groups ranked the highest on people taking surveys actually believing standard evangelical doctrines. There is a stereotype about Pentecostals being high on emotion and experience and light on scripture, but surveys about beliefs and scripture knowledge seem to overturn those findings.
2
