Revising Pentecostal history: 1908-1912

[Michael The Disciple]

Jason

But amongst all those groups who claimed speaking in tongues, NO ONE ever taught the initial evidence doctrine. It is in very point of fact a completely new doctrine.

It certainly was not new in the early New Testament Church tho! Here is the shocking and undeniable truth. It is never shown in the New Testament Church a case of anyone receiving the Holy Ghost evidenced by another evidence. If one counts "prophesying" in Acts 19:6 they must admit that tongues preceded prophecy!

So I ask you or anyone to show one instance where it can be seen that someone received the Holy Ghost with ANOTHER MANIFESTATION.

To me THAT is huge.

[good samaritan]

This idea that OP's belief in Jesus name baptism and Spirit baptism with the initial evidence of tongues is a new phenomena is crazy when it is in the Bible which is the most solid church history we have. Of coarse catholics aren't going to include any good history about us in their history. Isn't most of all the church history outside of the Bible written by caltholics and early protestants still who mantain much of catholic teaching. Even now people pervert the truth of what many OP actually believe. Even now what is written about this movement is characterized as charismatics and we are lumped together as a bunch of crazies. What do you think history is saying even now about Pentecostals.

Without any ground it is dismissed because either people haven't faith to believe for it, reject it, or never open the word to discover what is in it. I don't say that the many posts that have to do with the faith doesn't matter. I agree faith is the most important element in our walk with God, but to make the case that you can have faith and disregard scripture is ludicrous. I really don't have a lot study in church history and wish I knew more, but I don't we should look to secular history for salvational issues. The last two thousand years has been full of church movements and theologies, but the Word of God remains the same. I will just trust my good ole KJV.

[Michael The Disciple]

Jason

But amongst all those groups who claimed speaking in tongues, NO ONE ever taught the initial evidence doctrine. It is in very point of fact a completely new doctrine.

Consider this then. I cannot argue to whether and groups from ancient times till the 20th century taught the evidence doctrine. I dont have access to the beliefs of the multitude of groups that have existed since then.

But if it never was taught and then it was brought to light in the 20th century we can thank the Trinitarians for it.

Far as I know the Trinitarian Charles Parham began to teach that one had not received the Spirit if they had not spoken in other tongues.

So lets get that fact clear Jason. We would have to say that even now more Trinity Pentecostals and Charismatics teach it than Oneness Pentecostals by sheer strength of numbers.

The difference is that OP's are more consistent to what we are taught by the Apostles. "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his" Rom. 8:9

Trinitarian Charismatics and Pentecostals teach you can be saved or born again WITHOUT having the Holy Spirit.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

A lack of LOVE and HUMILITY. AGAPE love. FERVENT LOVE not just "emotionless love evidenced by works." A love with warmth and compassion for everyone. And a lack of humility. Just because we are live in the Spirit doesn't mean we are led by the Spirit

Would not this fit the Trins at least equally as us?"

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

It certainly was not new in the early New Testament Church tho! Here is the shocking and undeniable truth. It is never shown in the New Testament Church a case of anyone receiving the Holy Ghost evidenced by another evidence. If one counts "prophesying" in Acts 19:6 they must admit that tongues preceded prophecy!

So I ask you or anyone to show one instance where it can be seen that someone received the Holy Ghost with ANOTHER MANIFESTATION.

To me THAT is huge.

21 epistles. Tongues only appears in 1. And it certainly doesn't seem like Paul believed that every Christian would speak in tongues.

1 Corinthians 12:28-30 NLT
Here are some of the parts God has appointed for the church: first are apostles, second are prophets, third are teachers, then those who do miracles, those who have the gift of healing, those who can help others, those who have the gift of leadership, those who speak in unknown languages. Are we all apostles? Are we all prophets? Are we all teachers? Do we all have the power to do miracles? Do we all have the gift of healing? Do we all have the ability to speak in unknown languages? Do we all have the ability to interpret unknown languages? Of course not!

1 Corinthians 14:1-5 NLT
Let love be your highest goal! But you should also desire the special abilities the Spirit gives--especially the ability to prophesy. For if you have the ability to speak in tongues, you will be talking only to God, since people won't be able to understand you. You will be speaking by the power of the Spirit, but it will all be mysterious. But one who prophesies strengthens others, encourages them, and comforts them. A person who speaks in tongues is strengthened personally, but one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church. I wish you could all speak in tongues, but even more I wish you could all prophesy. For prophecy is greater than speaking in tongues, unless someone interprets what you are saying so that the whole church will be strengthened.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Consider this then. I cannot argue to whether and groups from ancient times till the 20th century taught the evidence doctrine. I dont have access to the beliefs of the multitude of groups that have existed since then.

But if it never was taught and then it was brought to light in the 20th century we can thank the Trinitarians for it.

I'm not following the argument? Is it "good" since it came from trinitarians? Are you pointing out the fact that the Pentecostal movement started among trinitarians, and thus I'm in the wrong to rail against oneness Pentecostals?
Regardless I don't see the point. Trinitarians are QUITE capable of inventing and spreading had doctrine. 7th Day Adventist, Jonestown, David Koresh, Benny Hinn, the entire prosperity movement, the extreme wing if Charismata, etc.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Far as I know the Trinitarian Charles Parham began to teach that one had not received the Spirit if they had not spoken in other tongues.

And? Beyond what I wrote above Parham doesn't exactly have credibility, and the first girl who spoke in tongues later denied the authenticity of her experience.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

So lets get that fact clear Jason. We would have to say that even now more Trinity Pentecostals and Charismatics teach it than Oneness Pentecostals by sheer strength of numbers.

Probably so, but the overwhelming majority of Pentecostals affirm justification by faith.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

The difference is that OP's are more consistent to what we are taught by the Apostles. "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his" Rom. 8:9

Trinitarian Charismatics and Pentecostals teach you can be saved or born again WITHOUT having the Holy Spirit.

Yep. And while trinitarian Pentecostals do teach this, mostly because the error of the initial evidence doctrine and the truth of justification by faith, the come up with the second blessing doctrine.

Note however I (and many conservative evangelicals) strongly affirm Romans 8:9-11.

Without the Spirit there is no salvation. I just deny that tongues is the "evidence".

[Esaias]

Agnes Ozman did not deny the authenticity of her experience, as far as I know. Instead, she joined the AoG and denied that tongues is always the evidence of receiving the Spirit.

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Agnes Ozman did not deny the authenticity of her experience, as far as I know. Instead, she joined the AoG and denied that tongues is always the evidence of receiving the Spirit.

True, see page 1, second column here.

http://pentecostalarchives.org/digit...HC/1909_01.pdf

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

It certainly was not new in the early New Testament Church tho! Here is the shocking and undeniable truth. It is never shown in the New Testament Church a case of anyone receiving the Holy Ghost evidenced by another evidence. If one counts "prophesying" in Acts 19:6 they must admit that tongues preceded prophecy!

So I ask you or anyone to show one instance where it can be seen that someone received the Holy Ghost with ANOTHER MANIFESTATION.

To me THAT is huge.

I think you may have missed this Jason. Isnt this huge? IN THE BIBLE in the New Testament there are zero snapshots of anyone who received the Holy Ghost and then did something first besides speaking in tongues.

If there were do you think there would be such a thing as the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement? Of course not it would easily be refuted!

So we can go to the historical narrative in Acts and make a very strong case for our doctrine while all of Christendom cannot present such a case that shows someone was filled with the Spirit......and something ELSE occured.

[Michael The Disciple]

Reconciling Justification And Pentecostal Doctrine Of Salvation

Peter preached at Pentecost:

But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
Acts 2:16-18

Peter equates Joels prophecy about the outpouring of the Spirit to what just happened. They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues.

Later on Peter sums up on the topic like this.

Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath SHED FORTH this, which ye now see and hear.
Verse 33

So the outpouring of the Spirit here in Acts followed by speaking in tongues was the PROMISE OF THE FATHER Paul mentioned in Ephesians 1:13 and Jesus mentioned in Acts 1:4

Notice the words SHED FORTH THIS. In the NKJV it has the words "poured out this".

Keep in mind its talking about the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

Lets go to Romans 5:5

And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

When Paul spoke to Romans about the love of God he said it was SHED ABROAD in our hearts by the HOLY SPIRIT which was given to us.

Interestingly in the NKJV again the term SHED ABROAD is translated as "poured out".

Obviously Paul is speaking to them about the OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
Now hold onto your seats for this next one!

Titus 3:4-7

But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

Paul is writing about salvation. Being born again. He says God SAVED US (HOW) by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit which he SHED ON US through Jesus.

So hes talking about HOW WE ARE SAVED.
Well very consistently we have the same connection. When Paul speaks of renewing of the Holy Spirit which he SHED ON US..... the NKJV renders this whom he POURED OUT ON US abundantly.

Are you seeing what Im seeing? Paul is saying its the OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT which is being saved by grace!

Verse 7 after saying he saved us by washing of regeneration and renewing of the Spirit which he POURED OUT ON US his next thought is that is being JUSTIFIED BY HIS GRACE!
If we can connect Acts 2, Romans 5 and Titus 3:5-7 with the OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT we have proved not only that its a PART OF SALVATION but its also being JUSTIFIED BY HIS GRACE!
Since Jesus said we must be born of WATER AND THE SPIRIT it is then easily understood that Pauls phrase "WASHING OF REGENERATION" refers to WATER BAPTISM!
Paul is referring to Jesus teaching that one must be BORN OF WATER AND SPIRIT and the spirit he means is the OUTPOURING prophesied by Joel the Prophet!

Oh Hallelujah!

But we should not be so surprised. In Peters original sermon about the OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT in Acts 2 we notice that its context is CONCERNING SALVATION!
Acts 2:16-21

But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:
And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:
The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come:
And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Note verse 21. In the CONTEXT of the OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT Peter says whoever calls on the name of the Lord SHALL BE SAVED!

Connect this to Titus 3:5 and we have ourselves a revelation.

So its true whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved but its in the context of the OUTPOURING OF THE SPIRIT!
No wonder Peter said:

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38

The Holy Spirit baptism was/is the "high point" of our salvation.

Jesus came not just as the lamb that takes away our sins but as "he which baptizes with the Holy Spirit and fire".

These characteristics of Jesus made real to us produces "full salvation".

One other place we are allowed to see what it means to call on the name of the Lord to be saved.

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

Paul is instructed to call on Jesus in the waters of baptism.

So when Paul says "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved he is referring to the time he arose and was baptized calling on the name of the Lord.

So if we are born of water and the Spirit in water and Spirit baptism.....

Let us NOT think of this as something APART FROM faith in Jesus.

Why?

Because BOTH EXPERIENCES are tied and linked to WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED!
Hope this helps!