Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

[soberxp]

Time Problem, and I am not shure I should do it to someone who calls me a hatefull person. Only because I dont believe in man made doctrine.

No hatefull, Amen.

Maybe we disagree with eachother, but never hate and anger till the sun down.

 

[ResidentAlien]

If it is built on sinking sand, why is it still going a hundred years later?

Yes, Pentecostalism may still be around but sinking sand refers to those who buy into it. They don't have a firm foundation, in my view.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Your initial premise is false. The restoration of the truth regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit goes back at least as far as John and Charles Wesley. It was a key manifestation in the Welsh revival of the early 1900's.

There have been many false manifestations purporting to be the Holy Spirit. There is a great deal of ignorance, which leads to the acceptance of things such as the "Toronto Blessing". The TB was a world wide phenomenon. However, there were more localised versions in places around the world before the 1990's. That includes Wales during the Welsh revival.

There are two dangers. One is to reject the true baptism of the Holy Spirit and so miss out on the blessings that accompany it. The other is to obsess over the Gift and neglect the Giver.

Receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is very simple. There is no need to wait, no need to fast, spend hours in prayer or any other religious gymnastics. The Holy Spirit was poured out by the Lord Jesus, as the result of His exaltation. The Holy Spirit is here, now and available to all who are born again.

Be warned. There are dangers attached to receiving the Holy Spirit. Satan fears those with power and authority. One of his first tricks is to flood the receiver with spiritual pride. And that is one reason that Pentecostals are so easily deceived. It's not the only potential problem, but I think I've said enough for now. I welcome any comments, whether you agree or disagree.

Hello Gideon. This kind of argument is really no argument at all. But it's impossible to refute because it's not based upon scripture or anything substantive; it's just you saying my baptism is true and others' isn't.

 

[soberxp]

Hello Gideon. This kind of argument is really no argument at all. But it's impossible to refute because it's not based upon scripture or anything substantive; it's just you saying my baptism is true and others' isn't.

They just get what they want when they ask for God.It's as simple as he said, but it doesn't mean other people's failure.

 

[ResidentAlien]

So all of pentecostalism in all its forms and expressions is a delusion and false? Is that what you are claiming?

I can't say because I'm not familiar with every form and expression of Pentecostalism.

What I am saying is the doctrine of latter rain is false and the doctrine of speaking in tongues as the outward sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is false. Every Pentecostal group I've ever encountered hold to these two doctrines in one form or another. These are the two doctrines Parham believed and were instrumental in what eventually was the "outpouring of the Holy Spirit" on New Year's eve. If there are Pentecostals who don't buy into these sketchy doctrines then I say kudos and blessings to them.

 

[soberxp]

wrong..do not create doctrine out of one verse. cessationists seem to have created their 'tongues' doctrine on this verse in particular..HOWEVER, scripture, begs to differ

Acts 19:6
And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying.

1 Corinthians 12:10-11
To another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. Acts 19:6
All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

1 Corinthians 14:2
For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:28
And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues.

1 Corinthians 14:13
Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray for the power to interpret.

1 Corinthians 14:14
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful.

1 Corinthians 14:18
I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you.

1 Corinthians 14:27
If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret.

1 Corinthians 14:39
So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues.

1 Corinthians 14:4
The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church.

All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

Amen

 

[soberxp]

If you think that man's doctrine is wrong, don't spread his name or discuss his doctrine. Instead, discuss what Jesus taught

 

[PaulChristensen]

I am not now a Pentecostal or charismatic. However, I was the first 15 years I was saved. To me it is a shallow doctrine, and mostly experiential. I prefer to rely on the Bible for my doctrine, and let the Holy Spirit, who is NOT an extrovert, lead and guide me!

In fact, a cult, the Oneness Pentecostals are the ones who perpetuate this non-biblical idea that you aren't saved if you don't speak in tongues as well as a bunch of other heresies, like not believing in the Trinity. I have no problem fellowshipping with Pentecostals, even if they tend to sometimes look down on people who haven't had this so-called second blessing.

I'm not worried about denominational issues that are not central to salvation. But, as I said, Oneness Pentecostals have added to the gospel. That does affect salvation.

And I did once believe I was baptized in the Holy Spirit. But it became apparent I was lying to myself and God. Just because something was written in the Bible, doesn't mean it applies to us, today.

As for why Pentecostalism has lasted for 115 years, I believe that emotionalism sucks people in, plus charismatic leaders suck people into their sect. But no, most Pentecostals are not bad people or even deluded. And God is dealing with us all, and he knows where each believer stands, and where they need to change to be transformed.

I happen to be a Puritan Reformed Presbyterian, not part of a Charismatic "sect", and who holds to Sola Scriptura, opposed to emotionalism, a firm believer in the trinity, a continuist in terms of the spiritual gifts, and pray in tongues all the time.

So, are you going to say that I am taking a position not central to salvation, shallow, depending solely on the experiential, just because I happen to pray in tongues?

 

[PaulChristensen]

How can you say that the gift of tongues is meant for “an audience of unbelievers”, when in the very next verse (1 Corinthians 14:23) it says that if an unbeliever walks in on everyone speaking in tongues they will think you are mad? It actually is endorsing prophesying in the case of unbelievers because they will be convinced (it says) and it says also “falling down on his face he will worship God and report God is in you of a truth.” So prophecy in this case is beneficial for the unbeliever as opposed to tongues.

Our friend quoted the verse out of context and didn't include Paul's reference to Isaiah in connection with it. Isaiah said that the presence of foreigners on Israeli soil, speaking foreign language was a sign of impending judgment for them, and yet still they wouldn't listen. Paul compares Isaiah with the contemporary gift of tongues where the presence of believers speaking "barbarian" languages is a sign of the judgment to come, yet the reprobate unbelievers still won't listen, and it is the reprobate hearing tongues spoken and declares that these Christians are all mad. But the honest, sincere seekers after Christ won't think they are mad, but will see the sign of judgment to come, and will turn to Christ for salvation as they hear the tongues and the prophetic interpretation showing that God is really in their midst.

 

[PaulChristensen]

She speaks in tongues now, but not publicly. We do not encourage that in our meetings.

So, when Paul says, "Do not forbid speaking in tongues", your church decides to contradict him.

 

[PaulChristensen]

Ok, no problem yet if you are speaking of all as you have and not fully knowing all who are Pentecostals as you have said about those who are, being ungodly and unbiblical makes you hateful. it is what you said that is hateful not what you don't believe.

many people here have said " I don't believe the Gift of Tongues is for today" Ok so be it no problem. I have not said they are unbiblical I disagree yet they are just as saved as I from what I see in the confession of Christ. I have heard those say the "tongues I see today is not the one in the Bible "

I agree to appoint with that because many have abused the gifts of the Holy Spirit. There are two examples where I agree with those who do not see The gift of tongues for today. I did not say they were of the devil as you have, I have not saved them practicing pagan beliefs as you have. I have yet to even mention their denomination if they even have one. You have not provided anything edifying or testimony of how God is using you today.

Do you pray today for sick people are they healed? You said you leave it in the hands of God. But attack those who believe God heals today.

I believe that the tongues I speak are the ones spoken about in 1 Corinthians 14. Why? For the simple reason that I asked the Lord for the gift, received it, and pray in faith when I pray in tongues. How come I know that my prayer language is genuine? Because the Lord promised me in Luke's gospel that if I ask for bread, He won't give me a stone, and if I ask for fish, He won't give me a snake, but if unbelievers know how to give good gifts to their children, God knows much better to give the Holy Spirit (and the gift of tongues) to those who ask Him. Therefore when I pray in tongues, my faith is securely founded in the direct words of Jesus Himself.

 

[PaulChristensen]

Yes, Pentecostalism may still be around but sinking sand refers to those who buy into it. They don't have a firm foundation, in my view.

Is that right? I have been praying with tongues since 1966, and my faith is securely founded on Puritan Reformed Sola Scriptura doctrine that accentuates Christ and Him crucified. I guess that is about a firm a foundation as one could have, in MY view!

 

[BenFTW]

Our friend quoted the verse out of context and didn't include Paul's reference to Isaiah in connection with it. Isaiah said that the presence of foreigners on Israeli soil, speaking foreign language was a sign of impending judgment for them, and yet still they wouldn't listen. Paul compares Isaiah with the contemporary gift of tongues where the presence of believers speaking "barbarian" languages is a sign of the judgment to come, yet the reprobate unbelievers still won't listen, and it is the reprobate hearing tongues spoken and declares that these Christians are all mad. But the honest, sincere seekers after Christ won't think they are mad, but will see the sign of judgment to come, and will turn to Christ for salvation as they hear the tongues and the prophetic interpretation showing that God is really in their midst.

No matter what point he is trying to make, we have to conclude from scripture that the gift of tongues is multifaceted. It does not serve only one use. It is for personal prayer, intercession of another, praise and worship, and for ministering to others with interpretation (and yet still without interpretation if you are speaking in their language having not learned it).

A person cannot argue that tongues is strictly meant for unbelievers or for believers. It serves both under different circumstances.

 

[PaulChristensen]

I can't say because I'm not familiar with every form and expression of Pentecostalism.

What I am saying is the doctrine of latter rain is false and the doctrine of speaking in tongues as the outward sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is false. Every Pentecostal group I've ever encountered hold to these two doctrines in one form or another. These are the two doctrines Parham believed and were instrumental in what eventually was the "outpouring of the Holy Spirit" on New Year's eve. If there are Pentecostals who don't buy into these sketchy doctrines then I say kudos and blessings to them.

I believe that the evidence of the baptism with the Spirit is genuine conversion - a totally transformed heart that hates sin and loves righteousness. That's what John Wesley believed, and called it "entire sanctification". Joseph Alleine, a well-known 17th Century Puritan preacher, says that one must seek for genuine conversion with all their heart and the sign of it is a total transformation away from the works of the flesh. He may not have called it the baptism with the Spirit, but would be in total harmony with Wesley in what he saw as genuine conversion to Christ.

 

[PaulChristensen]

No matter what point he is trying to make, we have to conclude from scripture that the gift of tongues is multifaceted. It does not serve only one use. It is for personal prayer, intercession of another, praise and worship, and for ministering to others with interpretation (and yet still without interpretation if you are speaking in their language having not learned it).

A person cannot argue that tongues is strictly meant for unbelievers or for believers. It serves both under different circumstances.

It is a tool of the Spirit for the Christian church, in the same way that a socket set is part of the took kit for a mechanic. In terms of a "sign", one could say that the socket set in the tool box could be a "sign" that the owner of the toolbox is a mechanic, and that a mechanic appearing on your doorstep might be a sign that you need your car fixed. I know it is a pretty "down to earth" comparison, and given to show that we should not be so heavenly-minded that we are no earthly use.

Those who play the "sign for unbelievers" card, miss out why Paul actually made that comment. All they have to do is read his Isaiah quote and work out why Isaiah said it in terms of Israelites hearing foreign languages in their country.

 

[SophieT]

the gift of tongues is multifaceted

exactly

and that is a fact most cessationists ignore or skirt around

 

[Blade]

I can't say because I'm not familiar with every form and expression of Pentecostalism.

What I am saying is the doctrine of latter rain is false and the doctrine of speaking in tongues as the outward sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is false. Every Pentecostal group I've ever encountered hold to these two doctrines in one form or another. These are the two doctrines Parham believed and were instrumental in what eventually was the "outpouring of the Holy Spirit" on New Year's eve. If there are Pentecostals who don't buy into these sketchy doctrines then I say kudos and blessings to them.

I keep typing so much but I can't stop thinking about "kudos and blessings to them.". For me praise God you love Jesus. Your personal belief does not out weight the word of God nor does mine. Thats all this is.. you made a post about something YOU personally do not agree with and said that. So bless those that believe like you? What about me? No kudos or blessing.. just because I disagree.

Parham.. seems you didn't search fully on the man. No I don't agree with ever thing but he was a great man of God. Many signs and wonders happened in his life. Yet you came away with "false doctrine" according to how you personally believe. Yes I went back and searched again on him and what some others said and things he wrote and said. Looked for things written by those I don't know.

What God said through Joel quoted by Luke in Acts will happen. For me says "last days". Thats it.. I believe. Now luke 11 13 ask the Father.. have you done this since you believed? Ask from heart see what happens. Oh Praham I think it was newyears haha there were many there and he prayed for a woman according to Luke 11 13 and for the first time she could speak in Chinese and write it. No one knew Parham to lie but.. thats a path anyone can take.

Thank you for sharing.. I mean that. I disagree. False doctrine gets used so much today.. doesnt mean what it use to

 

[AandW]

Paul literally bragged about Speaking in Tongues the most and desired everyone would do it. So at least according to Paul, anyone saved is capable of Speaking in Tongues. However though, knowing that Paul claims to Speak as much in Tongues as he did, it is also clear the majority of times are happening in his private prayer life. And we know about daily prayer, most of them are not in the Spirit but just communication unto God.

Concerning the Pentecostal viewpoint and origins, I guess it's as equal to using a Doctrine from someone allegedly accredited with killing 78 people in the name of Heresy, or modern Protestants now allowing same sex Ministers and Leaders within the Church Body. If we boil it all down, every Denomination's beginnings are sketch because none of them were started by Christ Himself.

 

[Angela53510]

I happen to be a Puritan Reformed Presbyterian, not part of a Charismatic "sect", and who holds to Sola Scriptura, opposed to emotionalism, a firm believer in the trinity, a continuist in terms of the spiritual gifts, and pray in tongues all the time.

So, are you going to say that I am taking a position not central to salvation, shallow, depending solely on the experiential, just because I happen to pray in tongues?

Like me, I believe you are deluded, as I was for 15 years when I sincerely thought I was speaking in tongues. But when I saw the fruit in the lives of members of my Pentecostal congregation, and realized it was not there, I began to examine my own heart and practices.

I pray God will realign you on this matter, and you will recover the sound doctrinal background you obviously have. I think you are probably sincere in your beliefs. I just think you are sincerely wrong.

 

[BenFTW]

Like me, I believe you are deluded, as I was for 15 years when I sincerely thought I was speaking in tongues. But when I saw the fruit in the lives of members of my Pentecostal congregation, and realized it was not there, I began to examine my own heart and practices.

I pray God will realign you on this matter, and you will recover the sound doctrinal background you obviously have. I think you are probably sincere in your beliefs. I just think you are sincerely wrong.

I can tell you this Angela, it’s hard to think you’re deluded when you speak in tongues, someone interprets, and what you share with the person you’re ministering to is information you couldn’t have known about the person.

As for the fruit Angela, look at Carnal Corinth. The Corinthians had the gifts but oh boy did they need some help in how to operate and walking in righteousness. Why do you think that a lack of fruit dismisses the gift?

What’s scarier in this situation is realizing that the gift does not necessarily represent proximity to God, just anointing. Someone can minister to people and yet not have a great intimacy with God. I could, for example, pray for the sick in faith but be lacking in my prayer life. The sick are healed! Great, but God wants to work in areas of my heart I need to surrender to Him in fellowship.

Anointing doesn’t automatically mean a person knows God intimately, it just means that the Holy Spirit has instilled in them gifts like all of God’s children. Please don’t make the mistake that because they lacked fruit the gift is invalid. It’s on the individual in how they conduct their self.

PS: Hope you’re doing well.