Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

Are Christ's words limited to the Gospel?
or
Are His words, as it is written, from Genesis to Revelation?

Does not the scripture say this of Christ:
Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:
“Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.
In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
You had no pleasure.
Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come—
In the volume of the book it is written of Me—
To do Your will, O God.’ ”

Did not the LORD say this to the Apostles:
I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth;
for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come.
He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.

HalleluYah - Open your heart so that the LORD can open your eyes to understanding and you also will laugh in great Joy.

TB went through most of the Pentecostal and quite a number of non-Pentecostal churches in Australia. It was officially endorsed by what was then known as the AOG and Australia's home grown CRC. I and others spent a year checking this abomination. We started neutral as we had been praying for revival and we hoped that was what we were seeing. Tragically, not. The opposite.

I agree with much of what you said here. But the point of disagreement is what I said was the one thing that distinguishes the P/Cs from other denominations, which is tongues. And I'm not the only one who has a problem with it, there are many. I'm simply one who has studied the subject for many years because I had a vested interest in knowing the truth about it.

I do also get that you're not going to be persuaded to re-examine your experience, as it appears to me that you firmly believe in your experiences. And as I said before, you tend to judge people of other denominations according to your experience and your familiarity with your fellowship group. You have certain sentiments in your encounters with people, and it is natural to judge people based on those sentiments.

But I have exited the P/C movement and embraced the Reformed movement, because that's where my sentiments are, in love of the word of God. It's the reason I go to a Bible church where the Bible is taught "16 ounces to the pound." In later years I find more inspiration in the scriptures than I do in the theatrics of the P/Cs.

Parham wasn't looking for truth, he was looking for an angle. Like all good con artists do.

Parham wasn't looking for truth, he was looking for an angle. Like all good con artists do.

I'm a bit puzzled about "TB". What is that? I've never heard of it.

The rest of what Christ has to say to the church is found in Paul's letters.

Because you cannot answer the real issue, you resort to personal affronts. But to be sure, P/Cs impose their agenda onto scripture, and that's what the error is about. But because you think it's about condemnation, you'll never get it, but will keep arguing and being offended.

"Scripture is profitable for correction." If you can't be corrected, then you're unteachable. But of course, you think you're above me, because you think you have the Spirit and I don't. Am I getting to the root problem?

Yet, you are trying to correct me, so don't you think your statement is hypocritical?

And here's the rub: your prejudice. Why bring up cessationism,

The issue is about modern tongues in general, which I believe is not the same as Biblical tongues.

And just because someone is impressed with it enough to become a Christian, doesn't make it true or authentic.

Who will be more harshly judged: Those who don't believe because of con-artists or those who continue to support con-artists after they've been exposed?

I'm a bit puzzled about "TB". What is that? I've never heard of it.

"Toronto Blessing". It was prevalent in the 1990's. It is a counterfeit of the Holy Spirit. There have been frequent false manifestations since the Welsh and Azusa St revivals. The difference is that the TB was all fake, not a mixture as in the past. I'm happy to back up my assertions.

Yep. Totally agree on TB, but I think we discussed that before in another thread.

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?

PC, I believe Gideon is referring to me.

Many of us, after having been extricated by God from a particular denominational church scene, have gone searching for a church group where we felt the Lord would truly be regarded as its Head. All I found in my personal wanderings were other man-derived religious institutions and groups that had some theoligical bias that, by implication, caused them to be unbalanced in their thoughts and expectations.

When I got close to the elders and other individuals and saw their worldly behaviour outside of the Sunday theatrics, it became obvious to me that the Holy Spirit would have nothing to do with them. Therefore the conclusion was that, as far as the pentecostal and charasmatic assemblies that I visited were concerned, the spiritual manifestations on display were not sourced from the Holy Spirit, but from their own vain imaginings.

You and others may or may not agree with my conclusions, and that's fine, and I don't intend to get in a barney with anyone over it. I've put my personal point of view out there, and if there is truth in that, then it will not return to the Lord empty, it will have achieved its goal in some instances to save, and in others to convict.

We did, I was replying to a question about my post.

I agree with much of what you said here. But the point of disagreement is what I said was the one thing that distinguishes the P/Cs from other denominations, which is tongues. And I'm not the only one who has a problem with it, there are many. I'm simply one who has studied the subject for many years because I had a vested interest in knowing the truth about it.

I do also get that you're not going to be persuaded to re-examine your experience, as it appears to me that you firmly believe in your experiences. And as I said before, you tend to judge people of other denominations according to your experience and your familiarity with your fellowship group. You have certain sentiments in your encounters with people, and it is natural to judge people based on those sentiments.

But I have exited the P/C movement and embraced the Reformed movement, because that's where my sentiments are, in love of the word of God. It's the reason I go to a Bible church where the Bible is taught "16 ounces to the pound." In later years I find more inspiration in the scriptures than I do in the theatrics of the P/Cs.

PC, I believe Gideon is referring to me.

Many of us, after having been extricated by God from a particular denominational church scene, have gone searching for a church group where we felt the Lord would truly be regarded as its Head. All I found in my personal wanderings were other man-derived religious institutions and groups that had some theoligical bias that, by implication, caused them to be unbalanced in their thoughts and expectations.

When I got close to the elders and other individuals and saw their worldly behaviour outside of the Sunday theatrics, it became obvious to me that the Holy Spirit would have nothing to do with them. Therefore the conclusion was that, as far as the pentecostal and charasmatic assemblies that I visited were concerned, the spiritual manifestations on display were not sourced from the Holy Spirit, but from their own vain imaginings.

You and others may or may not agree with my conclusions, and that's fine, and I don't intend to get in a barney with anyone over it. I've put my personal point of view out there, and if there is truth in that, then it will not return to the Lord empty, it will have achieved its goal in some instances to save, and in others to convict.

"Toronto Blessing". It was prevalent in the 1990's. It is a counterfeit of the Holy Spirit. There have been frequent false manifestations since the Welsh and Azusa St revivals. The difference is that the TB was all fake, not a mixture as in the past. I'm happy to back up my assertions.

Asking so you can clarify, are you saying anyone who doesn't believe in cessationism is a con- artist, or supports them?

Paul did not complete all the words of the LORD for His Church - Please read again very carefully Post #601