I was an AOG teaching elder, and look upon them as holding to errors regarding the secondary working of the holy Spirit,as in no Baptism in Holy Spirit as they define it, nor tongues for today, but do see them as being loosely in same camp as free will Baptists for salvation!
-
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!
Defining Pentecostal Doctrine
- Thread starter rockytopva
- Start date
I saw and heard first hand prophesy and tongues and interpreting for over a decade, and woul dsay that vast majority of it was due to people having preconceived notions to expect it to happen, as much of it just simple"Lord has promises for you, have courage, he is coming soon" etc!
I see that as not being needed today, as we have the full revealed word of God in Bible!
I do see a real difference bertween those in AIG and say word of faith, as most of what goes on in AOG is due to precondition responses, they believe it will happen, so cause it to happen , but WoF teaches heresies and have a real demonic aspect involved!
Why would the Holy Spirit be having her give forth a tongue, know that it violates His own revelation on needing an Interpreter present?
1689Dave
Well-Known Member
This was not an outpouring. It began at Azusa st. when Wm. Seymour thought his native african voodoo tongues were the same as bible tongues. He tried to mix them into his Wesley Methodism in Anderson Indiana through the Church of God who excommunicated him for it. He tried again in Los Angeles and the Assemblies of God came about because of it. They attracted many at an emotional level as they continue doing today. But it certainly has more to do with voodoo and Wesley Methodism than anything else. Loosley quoted from;I believe hearing from God and experiencing the actual Holy Spirit is a seven step process... And from the Azusa Street revival....
1. The Outer Court - Justification - Faith to enter in.
2. The Altar - Salvation by acknowledging and believing on Jesus
3. The Laver - The clean effects of sanctification.
4. Table of Showbread – Partaking of the Word of God.
5. Light at the Lightstand - Faith, hope, charity, joy, grace, spiritual fruit, etc.
6. The Golden Incense Altar - Prayer and Praise meetings.
7. The Holy of Holies - The Shekinah Glory and Baptism of the Holy Ghost.
And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubims: and he spake unto him. - Numbers 7:89
It was in the Holy of Holies that God spoke to Moses. It is also the place where you can hear from him too. This is Pentecostal doctrine whose architect, William Seymour, issued this disclaimer...
William Seymour warned that, “Whenever the doctrine of the baptism in the Holy Ghost will only be known as the evidence of speaking in tongues, that work will be an open door for witches and spiritualist and free loveism. That work will suffer because all kinds of spirits can come in.”
From the William Seymour archives....
Pagan Pentecostalism: Its Roots: Sex, Sin & Slavery First Edition
by Curtis Edwards https://www.amazon.com/Pagan-Pentecostalism-Its-Roots-Slavery/dp/1500858080
Also see;
https://www.dana.org/article/speaking-in-tongues-glossolalia-and-stress-reduction/
And; Religious affiliation and psychiatric disorder among Protestant baby boomers. - PubMed - NCBI
Yes, I agree, we must never forbid speaking in foreign languages. That's what the word glossa means in Greek and what the word "tongue" meant in 1611 to the KJV translators.
In fact, that's what the original Azusa St. Pentecostals believed also. Parham sent missionaries to the field with the instructions that they would not need to study the language of their field, but that God would give them the tongue/language (L. Grant McClung, Jr., ed., Azusa Street and Beyond, 13).
Last edited:
Not insurance, meant to post AOG!
Why would that be a real movement of the Holy Spirit, when it produced as "spiritual fruit" doctrines such as WoF, name it claim it, manifest sons of god, latter day rain, Kingdom now etc?
I believe hearing from God and experiencing the actual Holy Spirit is a seven step process... And from the Azusa Street revival....
1. The Outer Court - Justification - Faith to enter in.
2. The Altar - Salvation by acknowledging and believing on Jesus
3. The Laver - The clean effects of sanctification.
4. Table of Showbread – Partaking of the Word of God.
5. Light at the Lightstand - Faith, hope, charity, joy, grace, spiritual fruit, etc.
6. The Golden Incense Altar - Prayer and Praise meetings.
7. The Holy of Holies - The Shekinah Glory and Baptism of the Holy Ghost.
And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubims: and he spake unto him. - Numbers 7:89
It was in the Holy of Holies that God spoke to Moses. It is also the place where you can hear from him too. This is Pentecostal doctrine whose architect, William Seymour, issued this disclaimer...
William Seymour warned that, “Whenever the doctrine of the baptism in the Holy Ghost will only be known as the evidence of speaking in tongues, that work will be an open door for witches and spiritualist and free loveism. That work will suffer because all kinds of spirits can come in.”
From the William Seymour archives....
I believe this works in all Christian denominations. I was brought up Baptist. Our pastor used to take us out of public school for youth conference. While we were travelling you could see the concern on him on whether or not we would get anything spiritual out of the conference . As we would spend time in the Word in a sanctified Christian environment I would leave such a place with a clean sense of the Holy Spirit. I am a big believer in Christian gatherings with time in prayer, worship, and in the Word. If done effectually one would leave such a place blessed.
My denomination of choice, Pentecostal Holiness, was founded as a result of the evangelistic ministry of Abner Blackmon Crumpler, a Methodist evangelist. We originally focused on John Wesley's teachings on sanctification. If the Spirit of Christ was not in the experience we would tell you to come back tomorrow night, and smile a little as we said it. It was probably 25 years after its founding that tongues came into the doctrine. A good Pentecostal Holiness preacher will have plenty going on, including scheduled revivals with good evangelists, in which is getting harder to come by these days.
Do you believe in the second act of grace then, Baptism in Holy Ghost?
I believe the Holy Spirit needs renewed in a believers life and quality church service provides such the environment...
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; - Titus 3:4-5
I see the scriptures that command us to be infilled by/with the Spirit, where is the command to seek the Baptism evidenced by speaking in other tongues though?
I believe everyone uniquely gets the Holy Spirit, his effect is different in each life, and making tongues a requirement was a mistake. The Apostle Paul asks, Do all speak in tongues? However forbidding it all together is also something Paul said not to do.
So you do not believe in the Pentecostal doctrine that one gets the Baptism in Holy Ghost when evidenced by speaking in tongues?
Yes, with reservations . For some reason this took better with the old WW2 generation. I met many fine people who acquired this gift in a good way. Another thing is sanctification was taught as a prerequisite. You could peer into such souls and find good things.
The doctrine of the Holy Spirit... I believe Billy Graham was an Evangelist filled with the Holy Spirit. Would it be possible to design a doctrine and have everyone turn out like Billy Graham? This is also the problem with Pentecostal doctrine. It is my experience that the Holy Spirit effects people differently. I believe it would be better to describe a Holy Spirit filled life with fire rather than with tongues. The Holy Spirit will produce a fire down in the spiritual man.
Another problem with tongues is now we have the folks who instruct people, repeat after me, "ma, ma, ma, ba, ba, ba" You got it mate! And the person really did not receive anything different deep within. A person can now fit the description of "Holy Spirit filled" and be just as cold as the next guy down the street.
Believe that the concept of yielding to the Holy spirit and giving to Him yourself is the infilling continually, and that would evidence in spiritual fruit, but the Pentecostal problem is they define it as a second act of grace shown by only tongues!
This problem was talked about early on.... As far as tongues William Seymour said that if people weren’t expressing the I Corinthians 13 kind of love, then, “I care not how many tongues you may have, you have not the baptism with the Holy Spirit.” William Seymour also warned that, “Whenever the doctrine of the baptism in the Holy Ghost will only be known as the evidence of speaking in tongues, that work will be an open door for witches and spiritualist and free loveism. That work will suffer because all kinds of spirits can come in.” And "Sanctification makes us clean on the inside." - William Seymour
One can have sanctifying power and have holy lives without tongues or second act of grace, as those are wrongs ways to express a valid experience.