1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Azusa St. Revival- 105th anniversary

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 4
  1. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    Today marks the 105th anniversary of the Azusa Street Revival.

    This took place under the leadership of an uneducated preacher named William Seymour. It gave birth to a new movement and new beliefs that only a handful of heretical movements ever adhered to and those movements only popped up in brief spouts in church history.

    Ridiculous tongues and new revelations and the Charasmatic movement and the health-wealth TBN type religion and Oneness Pentecostal heresy has plagued us ever since this wild ecstatic movement sprang up.


    The greatest problem with this movement is the deadly combination of ignorance and arrogance that gave rise to it.

    They did not care that the church has NEVER believed these crazy things. They did not care that they knew BEANS about Church History and Christian Theology. Yet they had the audacity to stand up in their ignorance and unabashedly preach these new doctrines.

    These people are dangerous.

    But they are not alone.

    This is the story of the birth of ALL cults: Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, Church of Christ...

    and I fear...

    this new nameless theology that Independent Baptists have given us and has taken over the Southern Baptist movement (keep in mind that the vast majority of Baptists have historically been Calvinists with small minorities like the General Baptists straying from Calvinism; but the Southern Baptist movement was OVERTLY Calvinist in it's origin).

    There is a TERRIBLE danger of people who have no REAL theological education and no REAL Church History education standing up and preaching doctrines the Church has NEVER believed.

    It is the most dangerous thing the Church has EVER dealt with.

    It is why Jude said at the swiftly closing era of the Apostolic Period that we need to "EARNESTLY CONTEND FOR THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED UNTO THE SAINTS..."

    May God open our eyes and help us.
     
    #1 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
  2. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    Don't fail to remember what this day is!

    The greatest gift of history is the ability to be reminded not to make the same mistakes!


    That's what I am afraid these nameless theologies are- repeated mistakes of people who do not know and therefore do not learn from history.
     
    #2 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
  3. Jerome

    Jerome Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    9,838
    Likes Received:
    702
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A 105th anniversary is a very very significant anniversary. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
     
    #3 Jerome, Apr 14, 2011
  4. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    Yes, well I expect that people who are concerned for the spiritual condition of our culture will recognize the significance of it.

    It is significant because it reminds us that Pentecostalism is a new thing.

    It is significant because it reminds us of the importance of theological training.

    It is significant because an even newer doctrine is prevalent on this board and growing in this culture. It exists for the exact same reason that Pentecostalism exists- ignorance and arrogance: this new nameless stuff that is destined to do at least as much damage as Pentecostalism has done.
     
    #4 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
  5. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    Clue me in - what is "nameless" doctrine?
     
    #5 J.D., Apr 14, 2011
  6. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,521
    Likes Received:
    43
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Anyone not a Calvinist... by lumping them in with what is obviously in error, he gets to make people who disagree with his soteriology all guilty of heresy by association.
     
    #6 Tom Bryant, Apr 14, 2011
  7. JesusFan

    JesusFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    8,916
    Likes Received:
    241
    Think that you have to step back though, and get the overall "big picture"...
    There WERE "experiences" recorded during the Great Crusades held by fols like Whitefield and Wesley....

    Even the Puritans, as stauch a group of "strict" Calvists you would hope to find... Had the ministry of the Holy Spirit sometimes do "unusual" things among them...

    Speaking from one who is a "baptacostalist",,,

    CAN appreciate your desire to keep the Cardinal truths of the Christian Faith untainted...

    DO think that much of the "fringe" elements ARE cultic/heretical... Such as Word of faith, modern day Prophets/Apostles/faith healers/ Miracle workers etc BUT

    Also think that the Bible still allows for the operation of Spiritual Gifts IF done in order, biblical fashion, and they NEVER add to or contridict the establish canon, Holy Bible...

    We CAN and MUST bring to light the hesaseys and excesses within that Movement, but don't think Biblically speaking, can auto judge ALL in that as being "wrong/heretics " etc....

    And I Don't think that was the MOST dangerous thing facing the Church...

    Think those who deny the Diety of Jesus, sufficiency/need of the Cross, and who hold to an error filled Bible were/are far more dangerous than this Movement!
     
    #7 JesusFan, Apr 14, 2011
  8. JesusFan

    JesusFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    8,916
    Likes Received:
    241
    Think that you have to step back though, and get the overall "big picture"...
    There WERE "experiences" recorded during the Great Crusades held by Calvinist and Aremians like Whitefield and Wesley....

    Even the Puritans, as stauch a group of "strict" Calvists you would hope to find... Had the ministry of the Holy Spirit sometimes do "unusual" things among them...

    Speaking from one who is a "baptacostalist",,,

    CAN appreciate your desire to keep the Cardinal truths of the Christian Faith untainted...

    DO think that much of the "fringe" elements ARE cultic/heretical... Such as Word of faith, modern day Prophets/Apostles/faith healers/ Miracle workers etc BUT

    Also think that the Bible still allows for the operation of Spiritual Gifts IF done in order, biblical fashion, and they NEVER add to or contridict the establish canon, Holy Bible...

    We CAN and MUST bring to light the hesaseys and excesses within that Movement, but don't think Biblically speaking, can auto judge ALL in that as being "wrong/heretics " etc....

    And I Don't think that was the MOST dangerous thing facing the Church...

    Think those who deny the Deity of Jesus, sufficiency/need of the Cross, and who hold to an error filled Bible were/are far more dangerous than this Movement!
     
    #8 JesusFan, Apr 14, 2011
  9. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    101
    This is a bit of an overstatement. There have been many fine churches that were sourced out of the Azusa Street Revival. There have been many people brought into the Kingdom of God because of ministries created by its participants. While some excess has occurred the revival has created more good than bad.

    For what its worth charismatic movements have existed in the history of Christianity prior to Azusa.

    What nameless theology is this?

    Uh, nope, this is a dramatic overstatement of fact. This is way out of bounds historically and just terribly uninformed. As one who has done plenty of primary research into the history of Baptists while doing my PhD, this is simply wrong.

    If you're going to accused others being not knowing "beans" about history you might want to brush up on it yourself. The "vast majority" of Baptists haven't been Reformed. A high percentage, I'd agree to that, but not such a brazen misidentifying of reality.

    And we should all mind our plank as we speak of our brothers' specks.

    Really? Not the issues going on that led to the Reformation? Not the violent persecution under Rome? Not the false teaching that led to the travesty of the crusades?

    I think you're riding a hobby horse to try to make an exacerbated point. There are elements of Pentecostalism that teach falsely, there are elements of the charismatic influence that have gone to excess. But you're overstating, and rather unnecessarily at that, the truth of the matter.
     
    #9 preachinjesus, Apr 14, 2011
  10. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    20,493
    Likes Received:
    3,043
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Really? I thought the 'no name theology' was in reference to the free willers who refuse to be labeled as Arminian or synergists or anything else. Thus 'no name'.
     
    #10 kyredneck, Apr 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 14, 2011
  11. freeatlast

    freeatlast New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    While your zeal in this is certainly admirable your application is not. Jude was not speaking about Calvinism or even its teachings. Jude states what he was speaking about and it is has nothing to with what your speaking about.
    For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

    He was speaking about those who turn grace into a license to sin and with all honesty my friend the Baptist church is and has done that in the last 50 years and I speak as a Baptist.
    Sin is no longer our own responsibility nor is it the main focus of the church to rid itself of it. Excuses like we all sin daily, no one is perfect, we all have a sin nature, and on and on. Today what is being called confession is nothing but speaking an admission to an act. If that was not serious enough today godliness is a bad word and the church much less a practice of the church.

    I see and hear things in the Baptist church that must make heaven cringe. So your attempt to use Jude to justify and push your Calvinistic beliefs is not only unjustified but sin in the highest by changing the intent of the letter. It is one thing to hold to your beliefs, but to condemn those who differ by twisting scripture is an abomination.

    As for the Azusa street experience I too agree that the teachings are not correct, at least some of them, but what went on there has no bearing or comparison on the differences of belief for or against Calvinism.

    Both sides can make legitimate arguments at least to a point. The problem arises when either side pushes their beliefs to absolutes without regards to scripture that clearly teaches other wise while giving wild explanations as to why the opposing passage does not mean what it says.

    So I would suggest that any fear that you have about Calvinism verses an opposing view that you put it aside as that is not the issue that is destroying the church. Sin is however and the liberal lasciviousness of these who hold to its teachings which many on this board openly and without shame make clear.
     
    #11 freeatlast, Apr 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 14, 2011
  12. Tom Bryant

    Tom Bryant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    4,521
    Likes Received:
    43
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Thus it was anyone not a Calvinist...
     
    #12 Tom Bryant, Apr 14, 2011
  13. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    You could not be more wrong.

    I do not deny that many have been saved because some of these do preach some Gospel and therein is the power of God revealed unto salvation.

    But the wacko emotionalism and barking like dogs and seizing and convulsing on the floor and the jibber jabber has done MUCH to discredit Christianity among thinking, rational people.

    This is just in the ORTHODOX movements like the Assemblies.

    Not to mention the heresy of Charismatics and Oneness Pentecostalism.

    Not on this wise. Not even close.

    People that have a theology that has no name and no historical roots. It is a convenient hodge-podge to suit them which has not been systematized nor named.



    Nope. Other than the General Baptists, for the first 100 years of Baptist history the VAST majority of Baptists in this world were Reformed.



    Yes, ALL of US.


    Absolutely.

    New doctrine has ALWAYS been the root cause of these things and other TRAVESTIES in church history. ABSOLUTELY.

    I recommend "Charismatic Chaos" as just one of MANY good reads on this matter.
     
    #13 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
  14. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    Nope. Arminians have systematized their theology. They have supported it with Bible and made it to make sense and be cohesive.

    This Independent Baptist stuff that has infected the ranks of Southern Baptists is nameless, not cohesive, illogical, unsystematized and, imo, dangerous.
     
    #14 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
  15. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    I am not against occasional powerful experiences. I am well aware that many in the Great Awakening were obliterated emotionally under the weight of the guilt of their sin. That is a wonderful thing.

    But to PRACTICE it regularly discredits Christianity among thinking people.

    And as for the Deity of Christ being questioned, etc... I agree.

    But what I am saying is that THIS is how it always STARTS.

    When people have no knowledge of historic Christianity and come up with their own ideas and beliefs and philosophies totally independent of the way the Church (Arminian, Calvinist, etc...) has believed- SHORTLY thereafter the fundamental doctrines of the faith will fall.
     
    #15 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
  16. Amy.G

    Amy.G New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    5
    If it is supported by the bible, how can it be wrong? :confused:
     
    #16 Amy.G, Apr 14, 2011
  17. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    3
    I would think that some of our over-educated Calvinist would fill this bill nicely!

    I would suspect that Calvinism can be as dangerous as anything you have mentioned.

    You mean like Peter, James or John.
     
    #17 Robert Snow, Apr 14, 2011
  18. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    101
    I'm happy to reply at length to your comments on my post above, but I must ask how deep do you want to get into this?

    I mean really? I am prepared to really get into history and theology but won't if you're going to just pass things off and not engage in a helpful, complete, edifying discussion of your points. Just let me know.

    And if anyone else has insight that might help me on whether or not engagement is worth it let me hear it. :)
     
    #18 preachinjesus, Apr 14, 2011
  19. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    Unless you are going to accept Carroll's "Trail of Blood" as an actual historical work you are going to come up far short trying to prove that Baptists other than a small percentage known as General Baptists were not predominantly Calvinistic for the first one hundred years of their existence.
     
    #19 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 14, 2011
  20. Luke2427

    Luke2427 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    23
    The reason no one has ever believed this new, weird, eclectic hodge-podge of doctrine is because it is NOT biblical.

    Church History is not the ENEMY of Scripture. They are close companions.

    Church History shows how the true church has stood and defended for hundreds of years the doctrines of Scripture.

    When Mormons or JW' or these new nameless theologies pop up without ANY historical Christian roots- you can mark it down- it is headed for heresy.

    The Southern Baptists were OVERTLY Calvinistic until Finney gave rise to this new weird mess that spawned these backwater Independent Baptist ideals and theologies. Then, because SBC began to go liberal, the conservatives in SBC retreated to this weird, new, nameless IFB mess.

    That is what many adhere to on BB.
     
    #20 Luke2427, Apr 14, 2011
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 4
Loading...