Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
2,896
1,594
113
London
I'll answer your question if you first answer mine? Where exactly in the New Testament does it predict an end-time worldwide revival. :)
I don't say it does but that it must be so is obvious because the gospel must be preached to all nations before the end of the age.

Until the Pentecostal movement swept the world India was practically closed to the gospel Africa was still regarded as the dark continent, the Latinos were locked in Catholicism and China remained impenetrable.

Suddenly we have this reverse situation where the western churches have become cold but MILLIONS are being swept into the church on these continents.

Did you know that Kenyans, Ghanaans, Ugandans etc are sending missionaries to Britain ... that is not a kid, that is happening. And what God is doing in China is entirely along Pentecostal lines.
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
2,896
1,594
113
London
Then you should look into the beginning of this teaching in Topeka and Azusa. Indeed today you can find many different directions and meanings of this teachings through the splittings and the charismatic movements of the last century. Even on CC.
I dont know any charismatic ore pentecostal who is teaching this not. The different is, that same claim it is for salvation, others say for empowerment/ filled with the Spirit.
The second dont say you need it as Christian, but... let you know that you in the case you font search for, you ignore/ deney a profit which the Holy Spirit is ready to give.
I cant find this teaching in the bible! You make out of the events in Acts 2,8, 10 and 19 an doctrine, but cant show that this ever was taught.
You made of one of the smallest gifts, the most important gift. Even Paul says it is better to prophecie then to speak 8n tongues.
And even if you lack on love this speaking on tongues is worthless.
The important thing is that people do receive the Holy Spirit ... they can learn all the teachings later.

You did not know your butt from your elbow when you got saved, but praise the Lord you did get saved. And what about all the diversity of teaching among the other denominations? they quarrel over everything, you got Methodists side by side with Baptists and neither will speak to the Presbyterians down the road.

I don't say you must speak in tongues ... if you had your way you would say you must not speak in tongues.

Paul said I wish that ye did ALL speak in tongues ... Jesus said these signs will follow them that believe they shall speak in new tongues

What is the problem? why is it a problem for you?
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
2,896
1,594
113
London
Then you should look into the beginning of this teaching in Topeka and Azusa. Indeed today you can find many different directions and meanings of this teachings through the splittings and the charismatic movements of the last century. Even on CC.
I dont know any charismatic ore pentecostal who is teaching this not. The different is, that same claim it is for salvation, others say for empowerment/ filled with the Spirit.
The second dont say you need it as Christian, but... let you know that you in the case you font search for, you ignore/ deney a profit which the Holy Spirit is ready to give.
I cant find this teaching in the bible! You make out of the events in Acts 2,8, 10 and 19 an doctrine, but cant show that this ever was taught.
You made of one of the smallest gifts, the most important gift. Even Paul says it is better to prophecie then to speak 8n tongues.
And even if you lack on love this speaking on tongues is worthless.
Ya know I got a big beef about Evangelicals, do you know what it is?

My beef is that the Pentecostal movement needed your doctrines ... oh yes

One result of being filled with the Holy Spirit for me was I developed a great love for C. H. Spurgeon and that has lasted for more than 40 years. You would be AMAZED at how many spirit filled folks get attracted to Spurgeon.

At a certain church where people started getting saved where the leaders had never witnessed people actually getting saved one of the pastors pressed a copy of Spurgeon's "All round ministry" into my hands and made me promise to read at least 15 pages before putting it down ... I have not put Spurgeon down since.

Folks coming into the kingdom for the first time through Pentecostal or Charismatic movements are HUNGRY, what an opportunity it is for the evangelical church to teach those sound doctrines of Luther, Whitefield, Bunyan and Spurgeon.

But instead of that they simply throw dirt at them.
 
Jun 9, 2021
1,893
424
83
Are all teachings and promisses Jesus gave for us today?
They are when the Teachings are specifically defining how to recognize one of His Followers.
Mark 16 is specifically how to recognize a Follower of Jesus.
Why would that change in 2,000 years?
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,558
2,722
113
From Jesus' own MOUTH, He said:

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
What Did Yeshua say?

1) Go and Preach to the World
2) He that BELIEVES and IS BAPTIZED is saved and not be damned

How will you know Who is SAVED?
From Verse 17:
1) they will have SIGNS that follow them

What are these SIGNS that follow those who are SAVED and BELIEVE?
1) They will Cast of Devils
2) They will Speak with new TONGUES
3) like Paul did when picking up drift wood a Venomous snake bit him and nothing happened
4) If they drink something deadly it will not hurt them
5) They shall lay hands on the sick and the sick will be HEALED


You claim to be saved.
Which of the 5 SIGNS of being SAVED have you been able to do?

Have you ever cast out devils?
Have you ever Spoke in Tongues?
Have you ever been bitten by a poisonous snake and the Faith God gave you was better than modern medicine?
Have you ever been poisoned by no fault of your own and survived?
Have you ever put your hands on someone and prayed for healing and they were healed?

If you've never done any of these things, do you believe you are saved?

And REMEMBER, this is Christ saying this. And His Words are the SAME yesterday-today-forever. So they NEVER change.

What have you done that the SIGNS that follow you tell me you're SAVED?
Complain about Pentecostals and Speaking in Tongues?
Yeah, that is DEFINITELY YOUR SIGNS!
A Complainer of God's Holy Word!
The second ending of Mark is completely spurious. It was written sometimes in the second century, and attached early. The vocabulary is completely different from the rest of Mark, it uses high Christology, rather than as Mark addresses him with Jesus first name, in the rest of Mark. Plus, give me some examples of people praying and getting over bites from venomous snakes in the 21st century.

Mark 16:9-20 is simply not the words of Jesus! It was an attempt to finish the sentence, because the last word of verse 8, γαρ or for, which cannot end a sentence in Koine Greek. There is also a shorter ending, which is not correct, either. There is no doubt something is missing at the end of Mark. But it is not the verses in Mark 16 from 9-20. So, this post proves nothing, it is not inspired and not the words of Christ, through Mark!
 

jb

Senior Member
Feb 27, 2010
4,592
443
83
The second ending of Mark is completely spurious. It was written sometimes in the second century, and attached early. The vocabulary is completely different from the rest of Mark, it uses high Christology, rather than as Mark addresses him with Jesus first name, in the rest of Mark. Plus, give me some examples of people praying and getting over bites from venomous snakes in the 21st century.

Mark 16:9-20 is simply not the words of Jesus! It was an attempt to finish the sentence, because the last word of verse 8, γαρ or for, which cannot end a sentence in Koine Greek. There is also a shorter ending, which is not correct, either. There is no doubt something is missing at the end of Mark. But it is not the verses in Mark 16 from 9-20. So, this post proves nothing, it is not inspired and not the words of Christ, through Mark!
I did a blog on this (the ending of the Gospel of Mark 16v9-20), you can find it Here and Here...
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,558
2,722
113
I did a blog on this (the ending of the Gospel of Mark 16v9-20), you can find it Here and Here...
As I said, it was added very early, in the 2nd century, so the Church Fathers would know about the longer ending. I can write more about the structure and language, which prove it is not part of the original Mark, if you want!
 

Aidan1

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2021
1,747
743
113
If i may ask, what Denomination are you?
And since the mainstream Denominations like Baptist, Wesleyan, Methodist, Presbyterian, Catholic, United Church of Christ all now accept and allow same sex Preachers/Pastors/Bible teachers, have you ever been in a church service when a HOMOSEXUAL man was preaching?
No, i would leave this Kind of church and denomination.
When I became Christian I found a menonite brethren church with Sound doctrine. Since I became believer ( i come from nominell protestant church, where I never heared the gospel) i see myself as Christian and not as menonite ore Baptist ore ore. In heaven you will not find denominations.
Because of Gods leading i changed place to another menonite bretheren Church with believers from different Background. But this menonite brethrern become also open for charismatic/pentecostal teachings, Remarriying after devorce, so I left.
No I am in a russian german Baptist church. But in the last years there leaders are open to for charismatic teachings. But they dont teach it openly.
 

Aidan1

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2021
1,747
743
113
The important thing is that people do receive the Holy Spirit ... they can learn all the teachings later.

You did not know your butt from your elbow when you got saved, but praise the Lord you did get saved. And what about all the diversity of teaching among the other denominations? they quarrel over everything, you got Methodists side by side with Baptists and neither will speak to the Presbyterians down the road.

I don't say you must speak in tongues ... if you had your way you would say you must not speak in tongues.

Paul said I wish that ye did ALL speak in tongues ... Jesus said these signs will follow them that believe they shall speak in new tongues

What is the problem? why is it a problem for you?
The problem I have is simple. It is not taught in the bible to other believers.
 

randyk

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2021
902
266
63
Pacific NW USA
:) One of the things that God does is to break up the hard "soil" of those He seeks to save. I "made a decision" at a Billy Graham outreach in 1967. It did not stick. It was not Dr Graham's fault. One of my acquaintances got truly born again. I could see the difference in his countenance immediately. It was scary. Several years later, after much turmoil, alcohol abuse and disenchantment with life, my boss witnessed to me after work one evening. I was saved properly that time.

My experience is one reason why I don't accept that we need to be baptised in water to be saved. I was in the Navy, at sea somewhere, surrounded by water. I had no knowledge of baptism. The man who led me to the Lord believed in baby sprinkling so the subject never came up. And I doubt the captain would have stopped the ship to allow me to be dunked.

I knew I was different. That's about all I knew. The Bible that once I could not read became a treasure chest to me. The Lord led me to many different denominations. I knew very little and we went to many different countries. So I went to church wherever I could, whenever I could. No denomination has all the truth and the vast majority of Christians do not care about denominational distinctions. God commands the blessing when brethren dwell in unity. (Psalm 133.) I look forward to the day when we see that in reality. Then maybe we will be as blessed as the church in China.
Interesting! Yes, I was also in the military, and just went to church on any base I happened to be at. In my long experience, I now know that you avoid Mormon churches and dead churches that are liberal or are more ritual than substance. Like you, the important thing is spiritual experience, or spiritual change. It's getting truly converted or spiritually regenerated.

I think you're spot on about the lack of necessity of Water Baptism. My conscience got hung up it when I recommitted to Christian living--I've always been a Christian, but lacked knowledge about living a disciplined Christian life. I lacked understanding about the difference between the carnal life and the spiritual life, although I'm sure I recognized that my life went south with the self-indulgence I got into.

It's really about becoming spiritually regenerated, and not what boxes you check off on the way there. It's not about what rituals you have or haven't performed. I got baptized twice, once dunked as a child and again in a lake by friends as a teen. I don't really believe any of them were necessary because I was dedicated as a child and grew up in Christianity, even if it was somewhat weak.

I think the whole object of Water Baptism is to symbolize spiritual purification. If you've already been spiritually converted, you don't need to become spiritually converted again through some ceremonial rite. You may, however, want to make a public show that your purification has already taken place using Water Baptism as a symbolic representation of spiritual Salvation. It helps both you and others create a line of demarcation between what you once were and what you now are.
 
Jun 9, 2021
1,893
424
83
The second ending of Mark is completely spurious. It was written sometimes in the second century, and attached early. The vocabulary is completely different from the rest of Mark, it uses high Christology, rather than as Mark addresses him with Jesus first name, in the rest of Mark. Plus, give me some examples of people praying and getting over bites from venomous snakes in the 21st century.

Mark 16:9-20 is simply not the words of Jesus! It was an attempt to finish the sentence, because the last word of verse 8, γαρ or for, which cannot end a sentence in Koine Greek. There is also a shorter ending, which is not correct, either. There is no doubt something is missing at the end of Mark. But it is not the verses in Mark 16 from 9-20. So, this post proves nothing, it is not inspired and not the words of Christ, through Mark!
And yet, the Council that you swear by deemed it to be Inspired as if Christ did say it.

So, tell me this, when is it ok to say what the Council of Nicene deemed as Inspired vs not?

Should we toss the entire Word of God away because the Council deemed it Inspired but you do't like Mark 16, like some don't like 1 John 5:6-8, that both [GREEK] the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus don't include the Father-Son-Holy Spirit Version and yet we find it still in our Bible as Gospel?

It seems that people have the opinion if they don't like something it cannot be inspired vs what they like has to be inspired.
 
Jun 9, 2021
1,893
424
83
From the OLDEST known Bibles period written in Greek the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus


6 This is he that came through water and blood, Jesus Christ: not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood; and it is the Spirit that testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

7 For they that testify are three,

8 the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are one.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
3,177
1,159
113
But Acts 2:17 and Joel 2:28 both states: In the last days it will be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh.
This view has been stated by a few others in this thread. But frankly, it puzzles me. I'm not sure if we're even on the same page.

To me it seems elementary. Peter very clearly says: "But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel." In other words, the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost was that which Joel referred to as occurring in the last days—the entire New Testament period considered as the "last days."

The latter rain doctrine is something else entirely. It refers to a second outpouring which started in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The day of Pentecost being the the "early rain" and that which began with Pentecostalism the "latter rain."

Sure, everyone wants revival. But where is the "latter rain" told of in scripture? Is Pentecostalism a fulfillment of scripture or is just another Christian sect that claims to have something it doesn't?
 
Jun 9, 2021
1,893
424
83
This view has been stated by a few others in this thread. But frankly, it puzzles me. I'm not sure if we're even on the same page.

To me it seems elementary. Peter very clearly says: "But this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel." In other words, the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost was that which Joel referred to as occurring in the last days—the entire New Testament period considered as the "last days."

The latter rain doctrine is something else entirely. It refers to a second outpouring which started in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The day of Pentecost being the the "early rain" and that which began with Pentecostalism the "latter rain."

Sure, everyone wants revival. But where is the "latter rain" told of in scripture? Is Pentecostalism a fulfillment of scripture or is just another Christian sect that claims to have something it doesn't?
Agreed!
But if we take into Peter's account, we're looking at 2,000 years ago, and here we still continue waiting for the Second Coming of Christ. And if we apply the [Last Days] concept, we have to be closer to that then when the Holy Spirit fell upon the Upper Room. So, assuming only here, this verse can mean several periods of [Last Days], because no doubt we are in them now.

And if God's Spirit did fall onto all flesh (humanity) today, 8 billion, there would no doubt be the biggest Revival ever known.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
3,177
1,159
113
I don't say it does but that it must be so is obvious because the gospel must be preached to all nations before the end of the age.
Fair enough. But what it you're interpretation of Matthew 24:14 is completely wrong. What if so many people have misunderstood.

Christ's prophecy is given in the Olivet discourse on the end times. He's describing the events leading up to His return. Now, what if, rather than the Gospel being preached to all the world by humans, he's talking about Revelation 14:6:

"Then I saw another angel flying directly overhead, with an eternal gospel to proclaim to those who dwell on earth, to every nation and tribe and language and people."

What if Pentecostalism is exporting false doctrine to all those countries and is contributing to the great deception which is prophesied?

Yes, the Lord commanded us to go into all the world and preach the Gospel, but I'm not sure he ever intended us to reach the whole world before He could return.
 

Aidan1

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2021
1,747
743
113
They are when the Teachings are specifically defining how to recognize one of His Followers.
Mark 16 is specifically how to recognize a Follower of Jesus.
Why would that change in 2,000 years?
Because it is obvious, that this cant meant in the way you use it. Even in the time of the churchfathers it was not reality.
When you look to the text and when Jesus told this, you can see the fullfillment in the doings of the apostles.
Anyhow this has endet in the 1st century. Till today the sign of beeing a child of God is love to each other and obiedience to God the father.
 

Aidan1

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2021
1,747
743
113
Not sure why that is a Doctrine or perceived as a Doctrine. What that teaching is that [we NEED an end time Revival], not that there will be one. But Acts 2:17 and Joel 2:28 both states: In the last days it will be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh.

Now, if we are in the Last Days before the beginning of Tribulation, this Verse should fit right in that time frame. If God does pour out His Spirit onto all flesh, 8 billion plus, that has the spark to creating an End Time Revival!
Maby you should read the context from Joel 2:28, too. Who is the Adressat? Jews ore all mankind. When it will be? What is the situation of Israel in this time?
 
Jun 9, 2021
1,893
424
83
No, i would leave this Kind of church and denomination.
When I became Christian I found a menonite brethren church with Sound doctrine. Since I became believer ( i come from nominell protestant church, where I never heared the gospel) i see myself as Christian and not as menonite ore Baptist ore ore. In heaven you will not find denominations.
Because of Gods leading i changed place to another menonite bretheren Church with believers from different Background. But this menonite brethrern become also open for charismatic/pentecostal teachings, Remarriying after devorce, so I left.
No I am in a russian german Baptist church. But in the last years there leaders are open to for charismatic teachings. But they dont teach it openly.

We both know from the day we accepted Christ and Believed in him we were SAVED. At that moment we did not know much about God and the Word of God. But after years have passed and reading the Bible, we now know much much more than we did in the beginning. The same goes for your old Church Pastors. After years of Believing and Teaching a certain way, God finally opened their eyes to the Truth. That's why they're slowly converging over to similar Views as Pentecostals. They are Shepherds of God and charged with Teaching their flock the Truth. Thank God they have seen the Light!
 
Jun 9, 2021
1,893
424
83
Because it is obvious, that this cant meant in the way you use it. Even in the time of the churchfathers it was not reality.
When you look to the text and when Jesus told this, you can see the fullfillment in the doings of the apostles.
Anyhow this has endet in the 1st century. Till today the sign of beeing a child of God is love to each other and obiedience to God the father.

Interesting!

So what Jesus taught is just temporary.
I guess NONE of us are saved then.
Didn't we base our Salvation on what Jesus said?
According to you, it's only a temporary time frame.
None of us are saved then :(
God's Word is not forever from your post you wrote :cry: