Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

[Edify]

I work much by myself for the state where I live & there's been times I would play some old praise & worship on my computer speakers & have a hand-raising, crying, worshipful time. It actually has been better than worship at our church. It doesn't happen all the time, but when it does, it feels like a time of refreshing for me, like a renewal.

Has anyone else have that happen?

 

[shittim]

I attempt to practice praying without ceasing in the Divine prayer language and experience His pleasure showering down all the time, He really is everpresent.

 

[Oblio]

"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him." - Hebrews 11:6

 

[Absolutely]

Hey.
I thought of a new toy to introduce into your trash the brethren playpen!!!!
TARGET BLACK CHURCHES!!!!!!

I attend a local black church and my pastor is a black man.

If you like to see animated behavior and use it to trash the brethren.....

Oh man...BLACK CHURCHES are a GOLD MINE!!!!!

You would go into convulsions of joy as you trash them!!###

 

[ResidentAlien]

Hey.
I thought of a new toy to introduce into your trash the brethren playpen!!!!
TARGET BLACK CHURCHES!!!!!!

I attend a local black church and my pastor is a black man.

If you like to see animated behavior and use it to trash the brethren.....

Oh man...BLACK CHURCHES are a GOLD MINE!!!!!

You would go into convulsions of joy as you trash them!!###

What you've said here is nonsense and hardly worth addressing. However, I wouldn't hesitate to challenge a black church or pastor on their false teaching: Creflo Dollar is one example but I could name two or three others off the top of my head.

 

[mustaphadrink]

This an interesting thread because anything that is not "balanced" is deemed heretical. I am very fortunate that I have been exposed to Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical, Anglican, Brethren, Charismatic Brethren and Pentecostal. So you might say I indulged in liquorice allsorts.

There are some that are really good. Some that are good . Some that are mediocre. And some that are downright awful. The place any church holds is in most cases purely subjective and usually judged by what another church does or does not do or what I like or do not like. I rarely hear when discussing this subject, what does the scriptures teach?

For me the biggest killer about church is that one size fits all. If you don't want to meet on a Sunday morning at 10am forget it. If you don't want to go through the hymn prayer sandwich, forget it. If you don't speak in tongues, forget it. I am sure you can come up with your version of one size fits all.

A friend of mine decided God was calling him to minister to the homeless in town. When he embarked on the ministry, Sunday morning at 10am was irrelevant. Most ministry happened during the night. it took about two years but he ended up with a vibrant church of homeless people and speaking in tongues didn't become a requirement for membership.

I have a book that details the testimonies of ministers that visited Toronto, went back to their own churches renewed and revived which caused their churches to grow. Are you telling me that is wrong?

Jesus said he would build HIS church, not ours. If we let him do that and most don't, anything can and does happen. Be careful that you are not calling the work of the Holy Spirit the work of Satan because that is the unforgivable sin.

 

[Oblio]

Having ears, they don't hear.
Having eyes, they don't see.
That's the Lord's concern.
What's it to me?

 

[Magenta]

Having ears, they don't hear.
Having eyes, they don't see.
That's the Lord's concern.
What's it to me?

 

[Amanuensis]

The roots of the modern Pentecostal movement were very similar to the roots of the Protestant Movement. And just as there were people involved in the roots of the Protestant movement who were wrong about some of the things they wrote or taught there was plenty that was Right about the Protestant Movement as well.

As you read the history of the modern Pentecostal Movement around the late 1800s and early 1900s you will discover that one of the most significant events that apply to "the root" of the modern Pentecostal Movement was seeking out the answer from the scriptures "what is the evidence that someone was baptized in the Holy Spirit?"

Now asking that question was not wrong. It was similar to Luther and others asking the question "what does the scripture say about what it means to be saved?"

Where the Protestant movement did a good job of finding the answer to that question in the scriptures the Pentecostal Movement did a good job of finding the answer to their question about the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

They discovered that the scriptures clearly revealed a pattern that most of the accounts recorded the gift of speaking in tongues occurred when believers experienced this event. And just as the early protestants having learned that one could be saved by receiving Christ by faith, they sat about to confess their sins, and believe and by faith they reported that they had been born again much to the chagrin of the Roman Catholic Church who set about to malign them and call them ignorant heretics.

So it is in the same way, those who by taking God at his word asked for and received the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in Tongues and ushered in the RESTORATION of the gifts of the Spirit and the modern Pentecostal movement were and are maligned by those who do always resist the Holy Spirit and refuse to go forward in the Restoration, Reformation and continuation of the Reformed movement. The Reformed are now occupying the seat of the Pharisees, and the Roman Catholics and the Pentecostals are following the cloud as Jesus leads us toward the eternal city who's builder and maker is God.

Pull up some of the scandals surrounding Calvin. He justified killing heretics using bad interpretations from the Old Testament, as did Augustine. But there are much more scandalous things than that. You can find it in their own writings so it is not just false accusations from their opponents that we are talking about. Luther was not without fault in some of his strange ideas. As a matter of fact they and many others that were involved in the Reformation said and did things that could be used to present a stronger case for discounting the Reformation movement as corrupt roots than what you have attempted to do with finding cases of error or flaky characters in the Pentecostal movement.

However the theological question "What does the bible say about salvation" was at the root of the Protestant / Reformed movement and the answers that were discovered in scripture were what we point to and say was very much the will of God and the truth that we should embrace. And the question "what does the bible say is the evidence that someone has been baptized in the Holy Spirit, .. or "What was similar to all of these accounts where groups of believers in the book of Acts who were filled with the Holy Spirit which we call "baptized in the Holy Spirit" and the answer we discover is that they spoke in tongues, this is a valid contribution to the reformation of the church since the dark ages and that period of time when the scriptures were closed to the common people and they were told a bunch of lies about what real Christianity looked like in the first century before the corrupt leaders took over and taught their nonsense for over a thousand years of ignorance.

Therefore no amount of examples of people teaching falsehood, or weird people acting weird will discount or remove the truth of the scriptures that are being rediscovered by those Pentecostals who base their interpretations not on celebrity preachers or hyped up fads going on among the Pentecostals or Charismatics, but who base their interpretations solely on the scriptures and use proper hermeneutics to defend their scholarly positions.

Celebrity preachers, and large churches that get a lot of attention, that may get into false teaching or extremism should not be used to say "That is what all Pentecostals believe" Most Pentecostals are just as disgusted by the whack a doodles as anyone else and this is why many Pentecostals are not even using that word to describe themselves today. It used to mean that you believed that what happened on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 and all of the other accounts in the Book of Acts was still available for believers today including the gift of tongues, but now the word is associated with particular denominations that believe in dressing like the Amish and that one MUST speak in tongues to be saved, or those that handle snakes. To avoid being included with those heretics many are describing themselves as "continuationists" or "Spirit Filled" or other phrases that better communicate what they want to express.

So... when people spend time praying, asking to be filled with the Holy Spirit for service, and they report and experience of being filled with the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues, we must go to the scriptures and ask ourselves is this a biblical thing? And we discover that it is. If one says that it is not, they must present their scriptural hermeneutic to discount this claim, but they can't.

The Root is clearly scriptural and the fruit of the majority of Pentecostals world wide is that of the most biblical example of godly living among all denominations and christian churches and therefore both the Root and the Fruit passes the biblical test.

Bringing up the latest error discovered in a Joel Osteen Sermon will not change this fact.

 

[ResidentAlien]

The roots of the modern Pentecostal movement were very similar to the roots of the Protestant Movement.

In what sense?

 

[Amanuensis]

In what sense?

The Protestant Movement started by asking the question "what did the scriptures say was the way to be saved"

The Pentecostal Movement continued on to the next question "what did the scriptures say was evidence of that experience called the baptism of the Holy Spirit as recorded in the book of Acts"

The Protestant Movement discovered the answer was Faith in Jesus Christ which resulted in an experience called "born again" or regeneration.

The Pentecostal Movement at it's roots discovered that "speaking in tongues was the outward sign that these groups of people who were filled with the Holy Spirit, or experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit for power to witness" Like when Peter said that he knew that they had received the same gift because they spoke in tongues.

Now one may argue that it is not true that the scriptures teach that the sign that these believers had been baptized in the Holy Spirit was speaking in tongues, but the position of the Pentecostals is that it does, and that is the ROOT of the modern Pentecostal Movement.

Your efforts to disprove this position would require a heremeneutical presentation using the scriptures that the Pentecostals used to prove their position much like what the Roman Catholics and Protestants engaged in concerning scriptures that prove their position about what the scriptures say about being born again.

 

[DavidTree]

The Protestant Movement started by asking the question "what did the scriptures say was the way to be saved"

The Pentecostal Movement continued on to the next question "what did the scriptures say was evidence of that experience called the baptism of the Holy Spirit as recorded in the book of Acts"

The Protestant Movement discovered the answer was Faith in Jesus Christ which resulted in an experience called "born again" or regeneration.

The Pentecostal Movement at it's roots discovered that "speaking in tongues was the outward sign that these groups of people who were filled with the Holy Spirit, or experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit for power to witness" Like when Peter said that he knew that they had received the same gift because they spoke in tongues.

Now one may argue that it is not true that the scriptures teach that the sign that these believers had been baptized in the Holy Spirit was speaking in tongues, but the position of the Pentecostals is that it does, and that is the ROOT of the modern Pentecostal Movement.

Your efforts to disprove this position would require a heremeneutical presentation using the scriptures that the Pentecostals used to prove their position much like what the Roman Catholics and Protestants engaged in concerning scriptures that prove their position about what the scriptures say about being born again.

And we know that ALL things pertaining to God and the Promises require Faith in Him and His Word.

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

 

[ResidentAlien]

The Protestant Movement started by asking the question "what did the scriptures say was the way to be saved"

The Pentecostal Movement continued on to the next question "what did the scriptures say was evidence of that experience called the baptism of the Holy Spirit as recorded in the book of Acts"

The Protestant Movement discovered the answer was Faith in Jesus Christ which resulted in an experience called "born again" or regeneration.

The Pentecostal Movement at it's roots discovered that "speaking in tongues was the outward sign that these groups of people who were filled with the Holy Spirit, or experienced the baptism of the Holy Spirit for power to witness" Like when Peter said that he knew that they had received the same gift because they spoke in tongues.

Now one may argue that it is not true that the scriptures teach that the sign that these believers had been baptized in the Holy Spirit was speaking in tongues, but the position of the Pentecostals is that it does, and that is the ROOT of the modern Pentecostal Movement.

Your efforts to disprove this position would require a heremeneutical presentation using the scriptures that the Pentecostals used to prove their position much like what the Roman Catholics and Protestants engaged in concerning scriptures that prove their position about what the scriptures say about being born again.

What you're saying makes sense. However, to know if the founders of Pentecostalism had the right interpretation of scripture one has to look at the fruit of their lives and examine their other teachings and practices. If someone is a known con artist and manipulator, why should we think their interpretation of scripture is correct?

Do you know of any of the Reformers who bilked people out of their money? Any who lied to gain a following? Any who forbade the use of doctors for all their followers except for them? Any who engaged in power struggles to be top dog? Any who made one false prophecy after another? These things aren't occasional moral failures; it's a consistent pattern to all the founders of Pentecostalism.

This is what's so frustrating to me. Most Pentecostals don't even know the origins of their own beliefs and when you try to inform them they immediately go into attack mode. One doesn't need a hermeutical presentation of scripture; all that's needed is some knowledge and a little common sense.

 

[ResidentAlien]

And we know that ALL things pertaining to God and the Promises require Faith in Him and His Word.

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

Whose interpretation of His word are you relying on? Your own or that of known con artists?

 

[DavidTree]

Whose interpretation of His word are you relying on? Your own or that of known con artists?

Your response to Post #692 is clear evidence that you have yet to be Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Here is God's Wisdom from the Holy Spirit for you today:

Brother RA, you started a Thread - Do we stress baptism enough? March 12, 2022
In your OP you point to water baptism as "an integral and important part of the message"
and you state: "Whether or not you believe baptism is critical for the forgiveness of sins or rebirth, it can't be denied that it should be preached and practiced."

How is it that you find water baptism, which is an outward - one and done - symbolic act that cannot save us nor cleanse the inner heart of man, be so important to you (and it is important to us who belong to Christ) but yet the TRUE Baptism of the Holy Spirit
which our LORD stresses in His Word, you find it something to mock.......

THINK THINK THINK

John the Baptist - John the BAPTIST who went about baptizing with water, even our LORD who said - "so be it for now",
John the Baptist says this: I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

THINK THINK THINK

By you rejecting, and worse, mocking the Baptism in the Holy Spirit you displease the LORD greatly and harm your own spirit.

Our LORD says: And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Our Lord said it TWICE: And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Our LORD stresses the Baptism of the Holy Spirit throughout Acts and you find fault???

You asked me this question: "Whose interpretation of His word are you relying on? Your own or that of known con artists?"

Should you not ask yourself this as well, before the LORD.

Never condone con artists and NEVER call the Baptism of the Holy Spirit an unholy thing.

Go to this Thread - 'After water Baptism' and pray.

 

[Edify]

3 John 1:
5Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are, 6who testified to your love before the church. You will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God. 7For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. 8Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth.
9I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority. 10So if I come, I will bring up what he is doing, talking wicked nonsense against us. And not content with that, he refuses to welcome the brothers, and also stops those who want to and puts them out of the church.

How many here think the early church was wrong & bad because of Diotrephes? He obviously was a sham, he threw out others that believed the truth, & was proven to be totally selfish.
Yet the church there was a real church.
Every denomination, even independents, have or had their own Diotrephes from time to time. Yet their churches are true & real.
Yet despite all this, some believe their churches are a sham because there are heretics in it.
My question is, which one doesn't have them?
You can't judge a whole basket of apples as bad because it has a few bad ones in it. Yey that's exactly what I see with this Op.
Judging, condemning, mocking. These things come from those who have not the Spirit of God. For if they did, they would at least be showing love , mercy, and compassion to make a positive difference.
Luke 6:43“For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit, 44for each tree is known by its own fruit. For figs are not gathered from thornbushes, nor are grapes picked from a bramble bush. 45The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.

Anybody can be religious. Anybody can have a "form" of godliness. But the real ones manifest the fruit.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Your response to Post #692 is clear evidence that you have yet to be Baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Here is God's Wisdom from the Holy Spirit for you today:

Brother RA, you started a Thread - Do we stress baptism enough? March 12, 2022
In your OP you point to water baptism as "an integral and important part of the message"
and you state: "Whether or not you believe baptism is critical for the forgiveness of sins or rebirth, it can't be denied that it should be preached and practiced."

How is it that you find water baptism, which is an outward - one and done - symbolic act that cannot save us nor cleanse the inner heart of man, be so important to you (and it is important to us who belong to Christ) but yet the TRUE Baptism of the Holy Spirit
which our LORD stresses in His Word, you find it something to mock.......

THINK THINK THINK

John the Baptist - John the BAPTIST who went about baptizing with water, even our LORD who said - "so be it for now",
John the Baptist says this: I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

THINK THINK THINK

By you rejecting, and worse, mocking the Baptism in the Holy Spirit you displease the LORD greatly and harm your own spirit.

Our LORD says: And being assembled together with them, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the Promise of the Father, “which,” He said, “you have heard from Me; for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Our Lord said it TWICE: And He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has put in His own authority. 8But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Our LORD stresses the Baptism of the Holy Spirit throughout Acts and you find fault???

You asked me this question: "Whose interpretation of His word are you relying on? Your own or that of known con artists?"

Should you not ask yourself this as well, before the LORD.

Never condone con artists and NEVER call the Baptism of the Holy Spirit an unholy thing.

Go to this Thread - 'After water Baptism' and pray.

Why should I believe a word you say when apparently you follow false teachers and known liars. Your credibility with me is a big 0.

I don't know you personally. I'm sure you're a wonderful person but as far as your discernment goes I don't trust you.

 

[DavidTree]

Why should I believe a word you say when apparently you follow false teachers and known liars. Your credibility with me is a big 0.

I don't know you personally. I'm sure you're a wonderful person but as far as your discernment goes I don't trust you.

When did i ever show approval of 'false teachers'? No, i rather expose them.

You are not bound to believe what i say - but we are bound to believe "every word that proceeds from the Mouth of God."

If you feel that you have wisdom to expose falsehood, then you should be able to examine the many uplifting posts on 'After water Baptism'.

Are the words of John the Baptist to be trusted? I baptize you with water for repentance, but after me will come One more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

Are the words of CHRIST to be trusted?Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift the Father promised, which you have heard Me discuss. 5For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

Do you not know that the Scripture says: 'In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established'

 

[ResidentAlien]

You are not bound to believe what i say

Well, we agree on one thing at least.

 

[DavidTree]

Well, we agree on one thing at least.

Are we bound to believe every word that proceeds from the Mouth of God?
or
Is it a personal choice option?