Assembly of God churches

[Helen]

I have some questions here and would appreciate some feedback.

First, I understand that this is where the 'health and wealth' heresies originated. Is this true?

Second, something I have read recently has led me to think that it is taught there that if you sort of generally confess that you are a sinner, that your sins are then totally declared forgiven. Is the doctrine here that no forgiveness need to asked of the offended party (if possible) or real repentance be experienced? (I hope I am stating this clearly, as I know we cannot ever know all the sins we have commited and often simply have to count on God's grace to cover the unknown sins. I am refering to known sins and actions which have hurt others...)

Third, is there a universalist area of doctine in some of these churches where it is said that somehow everyone ends up in heaven?

Not trying to pick fights, please. Trying to know more from those who might know. Thanks.

 

[Dustin]

The Pentecostal movement is a hotbed of heresy. This movement came out of the Wesleyan/holiness movement, tying Wesleyan doctrines of "deeper life" and the doctrine of Christian perfection, which John Wesley, an Anglican, borrowed from Eastern Orthodox practices, with an abundance of eastern spiritualism and other theological muck. The movement split in the early 20th century, because apostates in the group denied the Trinity, and baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in preference of "in Jesus name" only. The Trinitarians largley became the Assemblies of God, though there were countless other sects. The "Jesus only" Pentecostals largely became the United Pentecostal Church in the mid 20th century, though there are different sects and slinter groups. This group is a practical cult. Many of both of these groups are on TBN, propagating faith healing, health and wealth, name it claim it garbage. T.D. Jakes is a Oneness Pentecostal, on the TRINITY broadcating network. Oh, the irony. The AoG are probably the most orthodox group, but that's not saying much as they spew much the same sewage as the UPC. Ultimately, all these roads lead back to Rome, with a hodge podge of different heresies peppered throughout. Universalism isn't a doctrine they have that I know of, but it wouldn't surpise me at all if so. It's not really one doctrine in particular, just error stacked on error stacked on error from it's start.

 

[Jack Matthews]

I have several close friends who go to an Assembly of God church, and we have a lot of discussions about differences and similarities of doctrine. I can't recall that they've ever advocated a "health and wealth" approach to the gospel, I'm sure that would have come up in conversation long before now if their church believed and taught that. It may well have originated with some people in the Assembly of God at one time, just like the Landmark heresy and sinless perfectionism did with Baptists, but it doesn't appear to be part of their theology at present.

Again, speaking from what I've heard from those I know, I don't think that the A of G teaches what you are stating. They do not believe in eternal security, and I tend to think that they go a bit overboard in seeking after spiritual "experiences" in both private and corporate worship as a result of not having this security. Confession and repentance are visible and open in A of G altar calls and I've seen many people get up from one and go ask forgiveness of someone they've offended.

I think their lack of belief in eternal security precludes universalism. In fact, one of the frequent themes of my discussion with my A of G friends is their apparent lack of ability to understand the concept of grace. If you can lose it, can it be true grace? If you can go somewhere that it cannot follow you, is it truly grace?

One of my own personal observations about the A of G church my friends attend is the diversity of background from which the membership seems to be drawn. The majority of the people who attend there are not from an Assembly of God or Pentecostal/Charismatic background. They are attracted to this particular church because it has a reputation for relevant, spiritual worship and for ministry development and lay mobilization in ministry as the goal of spiritual maturity and discipleship. They emphasize evangelism, discipleship and support individual ministry calling and service. That may be an exception rather than the rule for Assemblies of God, I don't know.

 

[Pete]

1: It was popularized by a number of preachers during the 1950s, especially by Oral Roberts.... SOURCE

2: No idea

3: Universalism is one error I haven't seen in them....give them time I guess, I think they are working on collecting the set

 

[Pete]

*sigh* and surfing around the web after health and wealth question I came across this:

...We, as Indigenous and Black Pentecostal communities around the world, must gain confidence in our own cultural, philosophical and ideological heritage. We have leaned too heavily on Western Christianity for forms, models and frames of references. The adoption of the prosperity gospel is a case in point. It maybe fashionable, but it is theologically questionable, economically unsound, psychologically oppressive, morally deficient and selfish, and ideologically foreign to our communal way of live and Pentecostal roots.....

SOURCE

It worries me when I have to agree with some of them on something.... :tonofbricks: :BangHead:

 

[Jerome]

Prominent minister Carlton Pearson's credentials with the Church of God in Christ were revoked recently for his espousal of universalism.
The Assemblies of God had its early origins in the COGIC, before splitting off due to racial issues.

 

[Lagardo]

Much like baptists, A of G are wide and varied. As a whole, I'm not sure any of these apply, but I am sure you could find each in some area of A of G. You can among Baptists too.

I happen to have a book in my office about Primitive Baptist Universalists. It is very odd, but these (hyper) calvinist Baptists are, in fact, universalists.

 

[Marcia]

I don't think the health and wealth movement originated in the AOG churches, but it has been spreading to a lot of them, unfortunately. Many do reject it.

Here are some links to the Word of Faith movement (of which the health and wealth teachings are a part). Many of the WoF doctrines are based on Dake's Bible which has some erroneous comments in it.

General article on WF. This might be good to read first as it gives an overall view of WF.
http://www.watchman.org/profile/wordpro.htm


A page with links to various articles. This is on the site of someone who was in WF
http://www.banner.org.uk/sum_wof.html


Quotes from WF teachers
http://craom.net/Hereticalsayings.htm


Testimony of Tricia Tillin, who was in WF
http://www.banner.org.uk/wof/mytest.html


Ten Reasons to Reject WF, by Tricia Tillin
http://www.banner.org.uk/wof/tract3.html


Another general article on WF
http://www.biblebb.com/files/WRDFAITH.HTM


Article on Kenneth Copeland, one of the biggies of the WF
http://www.letusreason.org/Wf22.htm

A list of articles on WF
http://www.letusreason.org/WFDir.htm

The Prosperity Gospel (both articles)
http://craom.net/ProsperityGospel.htm

http://marcelkoster0.tripod.com/id23.html

Dake's Bible
http://www.equip.org/free/JAD100.htm
http://www.ovrlnd.com/FalseDoctrine/drakesbible.html
http://sites.onlinemac.com/trwmainst/dake.html

 

[drfuss]

My wife's father was an AOG minister; and I have a very close friend who is a district official and minister of the AOG. I also have had many discussions concerning AOG and Baptist similiarites and differences. I attended AOG churches years ago. Jack's impressions and mine are very similiar. I have added some comments below.

I have several close friends who go to an Assembly of God church, and we have a lot of discussions about differences and similarities of doctrine. I can't recall that they've ever advocated a "health and wealth" approach to the gospel, I'm sure that would have come up in conversation long before now if their church believed and taught that. It may well have originated with some people in the Assembly of God at one time, just like the Landmark heresy and sinless perfectionism did with Baptists, but it doesn't appear to be part of their theology at present. Some AOG advocate health, but not wealth doctrine. They tend to be "name it, claim it" concerning healing, see their statement of faith. However, their leading officers are trying to soften that. IMHO, the general Baptist belief in seeking God's will and glory in praying for healing has it all over the AOG belief on claiming healing.

Again, speaking from what I've heard from those I know, I don't think that the A of G teaches what you are stating. They do not believe in eternal security, and I tend to think that they go a bit overboard in seeking after spiritual "experiences" in both private and corporate worship as a result of not having this security. Confession and repentance are visible and open in A of G altar calls and I've seen many people get up from one and go ask forgiveness of someone they've offended. IMHO, seeking after spititual experiences has nothing to do with not believing in Eternal Security. Their belief in speaking in tongues encourages their seeking spiritual experiences.

I think their lack of belief in eternal security precludes universalism. In fact, one of the frequent themes of my discussion with my A of G friends is their apparent lack of ability to understand the concept of grace. If you can lose it, can it be true grace? If you can go somewhere that it cannot follow you, is it truly grace? AOG doctrines of grace are not as universally defined as among Baptists. Various ministers may preach a different slant on grace. However in general, AOG believes in conditional security, i.e. you cannot lose your salvation, but you can forfeit it by deciding to stop trusting in Christ. They believe they are eternally secure as long as they continue to trust in Christ. Whereas many eternal security Christians believe if a person stops trusting in Christ, he was not a Christian in the first place, but only thought he was.

One of my own personal observations about the A of G church my friends attend is the diversity of background from which the membership seems to be drawn. The majority of the people who attend there are not from an Assembly of God or Pentecostal/Charismatic background. They are attracted to this particular church because it has a reputation for relevant, spiritual worship and for ministry development and lay mobilization in ministry as the goal of spiritual maturity and discipleship. They emphasize evangelism, discipleship and support individual ministry calling and service. That may be an exception rather than the rule for Assemblies of God, I don't know. I completely agree.[/quote]

 

[drfuss]

Jerome wirtes:
"The Assemblies of God had its early origins in the COGIC, before splitting off due to racial issues."

This is the first that I have heard anything about racial issues or that they had orgins in the COGIC. Do you have a source for this?

My information is that the AOG had its orgins with the Christian Missionary Alliance Church before the CMA split off.

 

[Jerome]

From the Encyclopedia of Christianity (Eerdmans, 2005), s.v. Pentecostal Churches:
"The foremost of the affiliations along racial lines was the formation of the General Council of the Assemblies of God (AG) in April 1914. Early in the movement many white Pentecostal ministers were ordained by Charles H. Mason (1866-1961) of the COGIC. . . . Organization of the AG may be attributed in part to theological differences with Mason, but it must also be recognized as racially motivated. The "open" invitation to attend the organizational meeting was conspicuously not circulated among African American congregations."

 

[LadyEagle]

I have many friends (and relatives) who are AoG and AoG churches are as varied as Baptist Churches and they are not WOF. To equate or intermingle the two is not fair or accurate.

Here is the website for the AoG so you can see what they believe for yourself:

http://ag.org/top/

 

[drfuss]

From the Encyclopedia of Christianity (Eerdmans, 2005), s.v. Pentecostal Churches:
"The foremost of the affiliations along racial lines was the formation of the General Council of the Assemblies of God (AG) in April 1914. Early in the movement many white Pentecostal ministers were ordained by Charles H. Mason (1866-1961) of the COGIC. . . . Organization of the AG may be attributed in part to theological differences with Mason, but it must also be recognized as racially motivated. The "open" invitation to attend the organizational meeting was conspicuously not circulated among African American congregations."

Thank you. My AOG sources apparently ommitted that. I believe the organization meeting was in Arkansas, so it makes sense.

 

[Jim1999]

I don't think thje AoG had a monopoly on segregation if you go back that far...even into the 50's. Not a few Baptist Churches were segregational. If I remember correctly, it was Billy Graham who refused to hold a meeting in a Southern Baptist Church because the "Negroes" (a relevant name then) were relegated to the balcony.

The theology of segregation, following the Ham lines, was stopped in the late 50's.

Having said that, I always understood the AoG simply as a Pentecostal Church akin to the Canadian Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[rbell]

Having an AoG minister in the family (Grandfather) and several family members, let me echo the consensus in response to helen...

1. some WoF, but not systemic; varies widely and depends on church
2. unknown.
3. I've not seen any universalist tendencies in the AoG. Many in the South follow some of the old holiness traditions down here, which are more of a call of separation and difference from the world--pretty antithetical to universalist leanings.