Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

A structure is only as solid as its foundation. In this short study into Pentecostalism's origins we'll discover whether it's built on solid rock or sinking sand.

Charles Fox Parham, Pentecostalism's acknowledged founder, spent the summer of 1900 at Frank W. Sanford's Holiness commune in Shiloh, Maine. While there, he learned of the Holiness doctrine of an approaching "latter rain," that is, an outpouring of the Holy Spirit which would fall on people as it had in the church's early day. This would be a sign of Christ's imminent return. What scriptural basis is there for the latter rain doctrine? James says: "Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains."—James 5:7 This is the only verse from which a case might be made for a latter rain. So we must understand clearly what this verse actually says. Is James instructing his readers to be patient for the latter rain or for Christ's return. He's clearly encouraging them be patient for the Lord's return using an agricultural metaphor to make his point. There are no other New Testament scriptures from which we can put together a "latter rain" doctrine; it simply isn't taught. In fact, rather than worldwide revival, the scriptures clearly reveal the world will descend into darkness before the Lord's return.

While at Shiloh, Sanford filled Parham's head with tales of foreign missionaries who had spontaneously begun speaking the language of their foreign hosts without ever learning the language. In other words, they could preach to them in their own languages using the gift of tongues. But what evidence is there of this ever really happening? None that I'm aware of. But Parham was fascinated; he was convinced that this was a sure sign of the end-time and Christ's imminent return.

Returning to Topeka, Kansas, Parham established a missionary training center. In December of 1900, he challenged his students to find evidence of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit like what happened in Acts 2. He also suggested that the surest evidence of this would be speaking in tongues. At their New Year's eve service, 1901, right on schedule, Agnes Ozman asked Parham to lay hands on her head and pray she would receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Ozman began singing in an unknown language, which someone identified as Chinese.

What's strange about this picture? First of all, there's no evidence from the New Testament that missionaries ever used the gift of tongues to preach the good news. When missionaries did eventually go to foreign countries after the "latter rains" started falling, they failed miserably. Secondly, notice that Parham gave his students a suggestion which they pondered for a month. This wasn't a spontaneous outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Parham orchestrated the whole thing.

So, the question I leave you with is this: If the tree is bad, how can the fruit possibly be good?

IF there were to be a denominational identity approved by God it would be 'Pentecostal'.

Why do you say this? On what do you base it?

Did you not read the entire post?

By the way, I am no fan of Copeland or any other TV money preacher.

It's a matter of public record. You can't argue with the facts.

It's a matter of public record. You can't argue with the facts.

I'm sorry, Gideon, but you are 100% wrong about the Toronto Blessing. I was there and it was God. You don't know what you're talking about. It started through the Vineyard movement, of which I was part.
There were some people in Toronto making animal noises. An Associate pastor at Toronto, Mark Dupont, was about to release a book on animal noises. John Wimber told him not to.
Together with Toronto's senior pastor, John Arnott, Dupont went ahead and released the book. John Wimber disassociated the Toronto Airport Vineyard Christian Fellowship over it. But what started in Toronto was a genuine move of the Holy Spirit.
What it turned into, I don't know as it's been over 20 years since I was involved in these groups. You really shouldn't talk so confidently about something I know you are so ignorant about...brother.

There are no eyewitnesses alive any longer to refute the many criticisms of the foundations of the Pentecostal movement. The movement has been changed so much, and corrupted in so many ways with "new revelation", prosperity and guaranteed healing doctrines, and man-made theology, that what it was really like in 1902 has now vanished into the mists of past history.

I understood it well enough. The gist of it being:

"Pentecostalism is a form of Christianity that emphasises the work of the Holy Spirit
and the direct experience of the presence of God by the believer. Pentecostals believe
that faith must be powerfully experiential, and not something found merely through
ritual or thinking. Pentecostalism is energetic and dynamic"

I know exactly what I'm talking about. I was there too. It is satanic to the core and I can show you in God's word exactly why. A group of us investigated for a year. We did not come to the conclusion lightly.

What did or did not start in Vineyard is irrelevant. What swept the churches, called the Toronto Blessing, was entirely fake.


Tell me what is of God in that abomination? And there is plenty more. I know about the occult. RHB engaged in hypnosis, pure and simple.

A structure is only as solid as its foundation. In this short study into Pentecostalism's origins we'll discover whether it's built on solid rock or sinking sand.

Charles Fox Parham, Pentecostalism's acknowledged founder, spent the summer of 1900 at Frank W. Sanford's Holiness commune in Shiloh, Maine. While there, he learned of the Holiness doctrine of an approaching "latter rain," that is, an outpouring of the Holy Spirit which would fall on people as it had in the church's early day. This would be a sign of Christ's imminent return. What scriptural basis is there for the latter rain doctrine? James says: "Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains."—James 5:7 This is the only verse from which a case might be made for a latter rain. So we must understand clearly what this verse actually says. Is James instructing his readers to be patient for the latter rain or for Christ's return. He's clearly encouraging them be patient for the Lord's return using an agricultural metaphor to make his point. There are no other New Testament scriptures from which we can put together a "latter rain" doctrine; it simply isn't taught. In fact, rather than worldwide revival, the scriptures clearly reveal the world will descend into darkness before the Lord's return.

While at Shiloh, Sanford filled Parham's head with tales of foreign missionaries who had spontaneously begun speaking the language of their foreign hosts without ever learning the language. In other words, they could preach to them in their own languages using the gift of tongues. But what evidence is there of this ever really happening? None that I'm aware of. But Parham was fascinated; he was convinced that this was a sure sign of the end-time and Christ's imminent return.

Returning to Topeka, Kansas, Parham established a missionary training center. In December of 1900, he challenged his students to find evidence of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit like what happened in Acts 2. He also suggested that the surest evidence of this would be speaking in tongues. At their New Year's eve service, 1901, right on schedule, Agnes Ozman asked Parham to lay hands on her head and pray she would receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Ozman began singing in an unknown language, which someone identified as Chinese.

So, the question I leave you with is this: If the tree is bad, how can the fruit possibly be good?

Whatever. As usual, when valid arguments end personal attacks begin.

Thank you for the clarification. Pentecostalism by that definition fails the test. It's supposed strength is in fact its weakness. The Holy Spirit is never to be emphasised.

Many Pentecostals, especially those poisoned by the Toronto Blessing, speak as if Jesus has been replaced by the Holy Spirit. That is false and heretical. The main Pentecostal denomination in Australia taught that heresy for a time. I've long since stayed away from those assemblies. I don't know what they teach now.

There are no eyewitnesses alive any longer to refute the many criticisms of the foundations of the Pentecostal movement.

I'd like to see all the parts come together into one functioning body. Where the lost looked at us and said, "Look at the love and care they have for each other."

You talk about fear, I would fear to do what you do.

Living eyewitnesses are irrelevant.

Yes I did actually but I can't glean the answer from your post. Can you simplify it so even a dummy like me can understand it?