Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

[ResidentAlien]

Some teachers claim that those gifts are no longer available to the Church. That is not true.

They're available but no one in existence today has any of the miraculous powers; those who say they do are really clever sleight-of-hand artists. And by "sleight-of-hand" I include things like hypnotism. You have to hypnotize someone if you want them to accept something that clear and convincing evidence shows isn't true. And there's no greater delusion than self-imposed delusion.

 

[ResidentAlien]

It's not. That's a common misunderstanding. The things that led up to Azusa started long before that. The Assemblies of God considers 1901 the inauguration date. I can't attach an image for some reason so I'll have to post a link.

https://www.themessedupchurch.com/b...e-prophets-con-artists-criminals-and-heretics

Scroll a little less than halfway down and you'll see an image that says "Setting the Stage: The Years Before the Assemblies of God." It's a picture of a plaque that hangs in the Assemblies of God museum in Springfield, Missouri. The first paragraph reads:

"At the turn of the 20th century, a spirit of revival sprang up in many parts of this country. Although there were isolated reports earlier of people experiencing Spirit baptism, the Topeka, Kansas, revival of 1901, (Charles Fox Parham) is considered the start of the Pentecostal movement. This revival spirit moved through Kansas, into Missouri and Texas and finally into Los Angeles (Azusa)." (underline added)​

By their own standard, the AoG considers 1901 their official start date. The earlier "isolated reports" refer to Frank Sandford's Shiloh community in Main and John A. Dowie's Zion, Illinois community. Both these guys were as shady as they come and Parham was affiliated with them. There were other groups that claimed to have the Spirit baptism going back even further—very well-known groups.

Here we go.

 

[shittim]

Ask your Savior

They're available but no one in existence today has any of the miraculous powers; those who say they do are really clever sleight-of-hand artists. And by "sleight-of-hand" I include things like hypnotism. You have to hypnotize someone if you want them to accept something that clear and convincing evidence shows isn't true. And there's no greater delusion than self-imposed delusion.

Baloney, complete baloney.
A reprobate belief.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

I'm a Charismatic from a Catholic background. I support Charismatic Movement in its renewed emphasis both on the Person of the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, and on Continued Miracles. Miracles did not die with Christ and His Apostles, as some claimed, after just 30 or 40 years of Christianity, but continue even today. Let me just mention 2 Missionaries from Church History, whose Christian lives were blameless and beyond reproach, who worked miracles. European Missionary to India, St. Francis Xavier, and Pentecostal Evangelist to Africa, Reinhard Bonnke. Millions of people came to Christ and Baptism through their ministries.

These are well known facts and anyone can look up their Wiki profiles if you doubt me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Xavier
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinhard_Bonnke

On the "speaking on tongues" things, I'm not convinced either, though. I believe Apostolic Tongues were actually other languages.

But prophecy, healings, miracles, exorcisms certainly. Our Lord Himself said: "Unless you people see signs and wonders,” Jesus told him, “you will never believe.” (Jn 4:48) and many people are still like that. They need signs and wonders in order to believe the Gospel.

Even Nicodemus believed in Jesus because of the signs that Jesus did: "2He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs You are doing if God were not with him.”

God who supplies all our needs from time to time raises up holy men who by His Grace and Power work miracles just like He Himself and His Apostles did. As Our Lord Himself showed, if you want to start a Ministry of Miracles, you will usually need long periods of fasting. Extra-ordinary graces do happen, but not easily and without any effort. They are usually given by God's Mercy when His Church goes out in search of Non-Christians, the Lost Sheep, to seek and save the lost. If we don't have much heart for Evangelism, then we may not see many miracles. And of course you will find a few charlatans here and there, who usually expose themselves with financial or sex scandals or something. But that doesn't take away from the real thing, which does exist, and holiness and miracles go together imo, as with Christ and His Apostles.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

I posted this on the "Cessationist" thread as well. Amazing imho! Until recently, I had only read of miracles like this. Now, we have it on Video! This comes from Pentecostal Ministry Christ for All Nations - a completely scandal free Ministry - started by Reinhard Bonnke.

The Muslim friend in Africa not only got healed but also, because he was healed by Lord Jesus, got saved from sin and confessed Jesus Christ as the Son of God. That is the Power of Miracles! They are a sign to unbelievers and greatly help them to come to the Faith.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I posted this on the "Cessationist" thread as well. Amazing imho! Until recently, I had only read of miracles like this. Now, we have it on Video! This comes from Pentecostal Ministry Christ for All Nations - a completely scandal free Ministry - started by Reinhard Bonnke.

The Muslim friend in Africa not only got healed but also, because he was healed by Lord Jesus, got saved from sin and confessed Jesus Christ as the Son of God. That is the Power of Miracles! They are a sign to unbelievers and greatly help them to come to the Faith.

I don't trust Daniel Kolenda. He endorses people like Benny Hinn, Beth Moore, Bill Johnson & Bethel Church, Brian Houston, Creflo Dollar, Steven Furtick & Elevation Church; the list goes on and on.

https://narconnections.com/daniel-kolenda-endorsements/

He's a big Assemblies of God guy. My personal opinion—the guy in that video is probably a plant, paid for his testimony or compensated in some other way.

 

[XavierJesusLovesIndia]

Kolenda's ministry says CFAN has reached over 80 MN people for Christ in Africa over the last 40 years. They have documented records of people who gave their lives to Christ. I don't believe everyone, but I see good fruits from this particular ministry. No one is infallible in his endorsements, and maybe he is mistaken in 1 or 2 of them, I don't know. But Christianity has grown in Africa a lot over the last few decades, and Reinhard Bonnke was definitely a large part of that. What are your thoughts on Reinhard Bonnke, Resident Alien?

"According to a 2018 study by the Gordon–Conwell Theological Seminary, more Christians live in Africa than any other continent, with 631 million Christians.[7] The study also states that Latin America has the second-highest number of Christians at 601 million Christians, while Europe has the third-highest with 571 million Christians.[8]

According to updated data for 2021, there are now nearly 685 million Christians in Africa, with 760 million expected by 2025.[9] This surpasses earlier estimates of 630 million to 700 million for 2025: "By 2025, that number is expected to nearly double, to somewhere between 630 and 700 million believers."[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Africa

In 1900, there were less than 10 Million Christians in Africa. So Missionary Efforts in Africa over the last 100 or so years have definitely been successful to a large degree, and Christ for All Nations Ministry was definitely a large part of that.

Reinhard Bonnke was called "the Billy Graham of Africa" and "A Giant and a General in the Army of God"

"ORLANDO, Fla. (RNS) — Reinhard Bonnke, the German evangelist known as “The Billy Graham of Africa,” was lauded at a Saturday (Jan. 4) memorial service as “a giant and a general in the army of God.”

The Pentecostal pastor died Dec. 7 at the age of 79 in Orlando, where he moved his international ministry, Christ for All Nations, in the early 2000s. He retired as head of Christ for All Nations in 2017, citing declining health.

During more than four decades of mass crusades in Africa, Bonnke preached in 51 of the continent’s countries and claimed to have converted 79 million people to Christianity." https://religionnews.com/2020/01/04...s-the-billy-graham-of-africa-draws-thousands/

 

[Amanuensis]

I wasn't born yesterday, so please don't assume that I don't know what I'm talking about. I didn't say it was ONLY the 12 apostles, you assumed that.
Acts 2:4 "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. "
Notice it says "they were all... and began..."
One might safely surmise that there were many more than 15 languages spoken that day. But Luke wrote that years after it happened. He was acting as an investigative journalist. He talked to many people about what happened, and the 15 prominent languages that he listed were ones he heard about. Don't assume exact numbers, or that it's an exhaustive list. It's not exact, and it's not exhaustive. I said "the apostles" because I'm assuming that all 120 people became such, since they all were with Jesus at His ascension. I do understand that "the 12" are prominent because they were His closest disciples. Yet, James was not and still considered an apostle. Mark was not and is still considered an apostle since he wrote his gospel. Perhaps not an apostle of the caliber of Peter, Paul, or James, but his writing was accepted as canon in the churches.


No, I disagree. In the first place, he said "he who speaks in tongues [that is, in the church] is speaking to God, not to men" - and that is prayer. The context of Paul's whole argument is tongues in the church, not out of it. "Church" means assembly, so the Acts 2 event was in church, since it was the assembly of the 120 disciples. It can be safely surmised that during the miraculous event, many of them immediately went out of doors, being driven by the Holy Spirit, to speak (to God) among the crowds, speaking about God's mighty works. This was their prayers, and people heard what they spoke and understood it.

Now in the case of Paul speaking in tongues in the churches, he never spoke anything that wasn't either translated or interpreted. The point is that his tongues was a real language that was miraculously given to him. And in the context of 1 Cor, "interpretation" means that someone (either him or someone else) also miraculously got the translation of the message. Such things came from God, not from the imaginations of people as it is done today. And we should not assume that Paul spoke one and only one tongue for 20 years. Since the Holy Spirit gifted various languages (and Paul was an authority to teach that), we can safely surmise that he spoke various tongues, meaning many different languages, according to how the Holy Spirit moved in whatever assembly he was in.

So, regardless of whether he spoke in tongues inside or outside the church, he spoke real languages which were miraculously given to him by God. It was not the kind of pseudo-language that people commonly speak today. Modern tongues do not fit in the framework of NT tongues. And besides all that, "tongues" is a religious term taken from the KJV and other early English translations. They used that term to distinguish it from the common term "languages." It was to indicate that those languages were actual languages not understood by the speaker, but given to people by God, for the hearing of unbelievers who understood them. But the misuse of it by the Corinthians made it a caricature, and so Paul had to rebuke them about it in his epistle.


I disagree with you. Although Paul admitted that speaking in tongues edified himself, he was rebuking the Corinthians for failing to obtain interpretation. That means Paul never spoke it with other people around without knowing it was going to be interpreted (or translated). It means that in addition to the particular tongue he was given by the Holy Spirit, he was also given the direction to interpret it himself, or the knowledge that someone else was going to interpret it. All of that came from God, not from peoples' imaginations.


Your speculation is not convincing. I don't believe any Christian ever accused him of that. Perhaps unbelievers did who might have said "he's crazy" if there was no interpreter. But that would have been highly unlikely, given that he never spoke it in public without an interpreter.

I would say that my speculation that Paul was talking about praying to himself and to God made up the majority of his "speaking in tongues more than them all," is based on the syntax of his sentence;

18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

I think my speculation is stronger than yours that he always had an interpreter and never spoke in tongues between himself and God. Why would he give instructions for them to do something he did not do?

28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

When people interpret tongues today in the churches I attend the Holy Spirit does gives it to them.

Your opinion that it is only imagined, is an opinion.

As I mentioned a another post, many times I have received the interpretation because I was the leader and responsible to give it if no one else did, for mutual edification and then someone gave it and it was exactly what I was going to give. This builds great faith and demonstrates that we are not just making it up out of our imagination. The specifics of the interpretation made it impossible to be coincidence and this has happened many times.

I do hear in your explanation of what might have happened in the first century that you have a belief in the supernatural element of the gifts and I can imagine you would think that it was all a positive thing at that time. There is a certain building up of our faith and expectation when we read about it that God wants to use us today empowered by the Holy Spirit to reach a lost world. And I think when we agree on that we are all on the same page. Even if you don't agree with what you have witnessed through your past experience with Charismatic churches you seem to still be open to the idea of God using you in a supernatural way if He wanted to.

Many of us charismatics and non charismatics do agree on the concept of the "empowering of the Holy Spirit" to carry out the great commission. I even hear non charismatics talk like charismatics when they start preaching on the empowering of the Holy Spirit and you can tell that they are really open to God using them any way He so chooses. When we believe that God can use us today anyway He so chooses then we are less likely to judge others whom He is using in ways that we are not familiar with.

One of the reasons that I fellowship with Charismatic believers is because that is where I meet the most godly people. That is where I find the majority of sincere, Spirit Filled, holiness living, soul winners, who are living the best examples of what a Christian should be like. That has been my experience these 40 years and I can tell a HUGE difference when I get around non Charismatic believers. They are often indifferent and seem to be faking Christianity.

So we all have our testimonies about being around Pentecostals and Charismatics, some people have a negative report, but everyone I know has a positive report about them. Your testimony does not reveal "a problem" among them. It only reveals that you have a perception that there is a problem among them.

 

[ResidentAlien]

What are your thoughts on Reinhard Bonnke, Resident Alien?

I don't really know anything about him except that Kolenda is his successor.

I do know that large meetings and large numbers don't mean anything. A lot of people are impressed by these; they think it indicates they're really doing something for God. But a lot of religions can boast large numbers, some which I'm sure Pentecostals would label as false religions or cults.

Sometimes ministries inflate numbers too. People want to give to a ministry they think is really doing something.

 

[kaylagrl]

I posted this on the "Cessationist" thread as well. Amazing imho! Until recently, I had only read of miracles like this. Now, we have it on Video! This comes from Pentecostal Ministry Christ for All Nations - a completely scandal free Ministry - started by Reinhard Bonnke.

The Muslim friend in Africa not only got healed but also, because he was healed by Lord Jesus, got saved from sin and confessed Jesus Christ as the Son of God. That is the Power of Miracles! They are a sign to unbelievers and greatly help them to come to the Faith.

Saved and healed !! And yet people will say it's done by demon power. smh Remember they said the same to Jesus and what was His answer?

 

[Amanuensis]

Here we go.

As I have mentioned before. Parham asked the bible students to search the scriptures and decide on their own what was the scriptural evidence that one had been baptized in the Holy Spirit. He went away and when he came back they all had come to the same conclusion that Speaking in tongues was the common sign.

Now Parham having had scandals and been confronted and lost credibility later in his life, did not change the answer to the question.

So the AG does not endorse anything that Parham did that you want to point at. You are using this reference that the beginning of the movement started with the answer to this question as a smoking gun that any erroneous teachings of Parham are the root of the movement and that is not the case.
This sign is referencing the fact that it was when Parham asked his students to answer the question.

It is the answer to the question "what is the scriptural evidence that someone was baptized in the Holy Spirit in the Book of Acts?" That was the root of the movement that eventually birthed the AG when they formed later.

The answer to that question can be asked today and you can go through the book of Acts and come up with your own answer. Speaking in Tongues is the common sign that occurred in each of the cases in Acts and therefore it is scriptural to expect it.

 

[ResidentAlien]

As I have mentioned before. Parham asked the bible students to search the scriptures and decide on their own what was the scriptural evidence that one had been baptized in the Holy Spirit. He went away and when he came back they all had come to the same conclusion that Speaking in tongues was the common sign.

Now Parham having had scandals and been confronted and lost credibility later in his life, did not change the answer to the question.

So the AG does not endorse anything that Parham did that you want to point at. You are using this reference that the beginning of the movement started with the answer to this question as a smoking gun that any erroneous teachings of Parham are the root of the movement and that is not the case.
This sign is referencing the fact that it was when Parham asked his students to answer the question.

It is the answer to the question "what is the scriptural evidence that someone was baptized in the Holy Spirit in the Book of Acts?" That was the root of the movement that eventually birthed the AG when they formed later.

The answer to that question can be asked today and you can go through the book of Acts and come up with your own answer. Speaking in Tongues is the common sign that occurred in each of the cases in Acts and therefore it is scriptural to expect it.

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

 

[Edify]

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

Were you there?
I feel so sorry for you. You judged the righteous of the past that you do not know, then judge these here you also do not know.
"with the measure you judge it will be measured to you again."

 

[ResidentAlien]

Were you there?
I feel so sorry for you. You judged the righteous of the past that you do not know, then judge these here you also do not know.
"with the measure you judge it will be measured to you again."

I wasn't there but I've done my homework.

I have the truth. I'm at peace. I'm more at peace now than I've ever been. So go on, give it your best shot; it rolls off me like water off a duck's back.

 

[kaylagrl]

You have said much which I disagree with much I will highlight the areas.


First off to not believe the tongues spoken today is Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is not what Jesus said Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is.
As a pentecostal minister, there are many saved brothers & sisters who do not or have spoken in Tongues. They are just as saved as I.

Tongues do not save. Those who are Pentecostals that say that is wrong. Also, your conclusion comes from much human reasoning and opinion as you said, however, your acceptance or disbelief doesn't make the word of God to no effect. The term "Modern Tongues"
Is a created term that is unbiblical. Language has always been modern.

Holiness Pentecostals believe tongues are salvic. Vast majority of Pentecostals don't believe that, AofG doesn't.

 

[kaylagrl]

Were you there?
I feel so sorry for you. You judged the righteous of the past that you do not know, then judge these here you also do not know.
"with the measure you judge it will be measured to you again."

It's ok, RA believes he's the only one going to heaven. He might let one squeak by that believes exactly like him. rofl Boy, isn't he gonna be surprised.

 

[TDidymas]

And you've deemed only your experience is right. And only your POV is correct.

The fact that you interpret it this way shows that your thinking is self-righteous. What I actually meant is that there are a variety of experiences, and we cannot judge what is right or wrong based on those experiences. We have to judge experiences based on scripture. But if you had carefully and open-mindedly read the full context, you would have seen that.

 

[TDidymas]

Sure it is. Pentecostals don't know the Bible like you do. smh

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.

How about you leave that up to God, it's a little bit above your pay grade.

"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?

Oh, I'm sorry, you don't understand sarcasm. I thought you knew so much more than the rest of us.

Of course you were sarcastic, but from where I'm looking it's the truth. But look in the mirror; why did you not see my statement as sarcasm?

When you turn on the tv each day and watch the news, would you say the perfect has come? When you see that women have been raped and murdered in the streets, has the perfect come? When you see drugs are killing people daily, when you see abortion has taken the lives of 60 million children, does it seem like the perfect has come to you?!

"For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes the partial will pass away."

We know how cessationists came to their "conclusion". You use one single verse of the Bible and determine for yourself that the perfect has come. And you'd swallow your tongue before you'd admit that looking around the world, the perfect hasn't come and maybe, just maybe you're wrong. Maybe there is another way to look at that verse. At the very least you all could admit that there could be another view, since it's only one verse in the entire Bible you've latched on to.

The fact is I don't believe the perfect has come. The fact is I don't believe it's Biblically sound to base a believe or doctrine on one verse in the entire Bible. You have no "proof" that the perfect has come. You're speculating as much as anyone taking the opposite view. If you were the least bit mature you'd admit that.

And here's the rub: your prejudice. Why bring up cessationism, since I've said several times that debate goes nowhere. But you want to talk about it, as if I believe those useless interpretations like the one you're talking about right now. I do not agree with it, nor did I ever agree with it. But your prejudice makes you jump to a false judgment about what you think I believe.

I've told a story before about a pastor I know who came to the Lord through tongues and interpretation. He has a church, which I have attended, with over a thousand people. Is he demon possessed, as some claim? Did satan do that? Is your experience right and mine is wrong?? I don't have the proof you need? If someone says they are healed is that the devil? Or it's just some mental delusion? God can't perform miracles today. Tongues can't possibly be true. smh A thousand people are just deluded by satan to serve the Lord. Yep, no proof there. Only your experience is right. Seems like some spiritual pride there, if you ask me.

Your prejudice and false judgments are revealed loud and clear in this response. But it appears to me that your strategy is to shotgun the main issue with many false ideas, to distract me from the issue. But I'll stay on point. 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. God can use anything to draw people, including wrong things and cultic ideas and practices. When I was young and naive, I was very much impressed with the theatrics of tongues and interpretation. Whatever appeared passionate, loud, sensational, extraordinary, and mysterious was automatically associated with God. But now that I'm grown up, I can see it's just fleshly activity. Not that I discount theatrics completely, because it makes for an exciting show.

 

[Aaron56]

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?

 

[TDidymas]

I would say that my speculation that Paul was talking about praying to himself and to God made up the majority of his "speaking in tongues more than them all," is based on the syntax of his sentence;

18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue.

I think my speculation is stronger than yours that he always had an interpreter and never spoke in tongues between himself and God. Why would he give instructions for them to do something he did not do?

28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God.

When people interpret tongues today in the churches I attend the Holy Spirit does gives it to them.

Your opinion that it is only imagined, is an opinion.

As I mentioned a another post, many times I have received the interpretation because I was the leader and responsible to give it if no one else did, for mutual edification and then someone gave it and it was exactly what I was going to give. This builds great faith and demonstrates that we are not just making it up out of our imagination. The specifics of the interpretation made it impossible to be coincidence and this has happened many times.

I do hear in your explanation of what might have happened in the first century that you have a belief in the supernatural element of the gifts and I can imagine you would think that it was all a positive thing at that time. There is a certain building up of our faith and expectation when we read about it that God wants to use us today empowered by the Holy Spirit to reach a lost world. And I think when we agree on that we are all on the same page. Even if you don't agree with what you have witnessed through your past experience with Charismatic churches you seem to still be open to the idea of God using you in a supernatural way if He wanted to.

Many of us charismatics and non charismatics do agree on the concept of the "empowering of the Holy Spirit" to carry out the great commission. I even hear non charismatics talk like charismatics when they start preaching on the empowering of the Holy Spirit and you can tell that they are really open to God using them any way He so chooses. When we believe that God can use us today anyway He so chooses then we are less likely to judge others whom He is using in ways that we are not familiar with.

One of the reasons that I fellowship with Charismatic believers is because that is where I meet the most godly people. That is where I find the majority of sincere, Spirit Filled, holiness living, soul winners, who are living the best examples of what a Christian should be like. That has been my experience these 40 years and I can tell a HUGE difference when I get around non Charismatic believers. They are often indifferent and seem to be faking Christianity.

So we all have our testimonies about being around Pentecostals and Charismatics, some people have a negative report, but everyone I know has a positive report about them. Your testimony does not reveal "a problem" among them. It only reveals that you have a perception that there is a problem among them.

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.