Pentecostalism's sketchy origins

[Amanuensis]

Like Joel Osteen, Joyce Meyer, Benny Hinn, Paula White and Kenneth Copeland?
I think not. I think they are some of the most unholy people you can imagine. 100% carnal 100% of the time. Tares among the wheat. Clouds without water. The epitome of Jude 1:12......

They don't represent the average Charismatic. As a matter of fact the average Charismatic has the same issue with these TV preachers as you do. But we already discussed this didn't we? Did you know that many who go to Joel Osteen's church say that they are Baptist? They don't know what they are.

But since we are talking about TV. It is my hypothesis that if you were to do a study on how many Christians have decided to not have a TV in their home at all in order to keep the filth of the gay commercials and other constant ungodliness from being displayed and piped into their home, that you will find that there would be more Charismatic, Pentecostal types on that list than any other segment of Christians. There would be more Charismatic/Pentecostals who wont even have a TV in their home than other protestants.

Your opinions about whether getting rid of the TV has any moral value is a separate debate, but the fact that more Charismatics and Pentecostals would be on that list I wager would be the outcome. Of course someone has to do the study to prove it.

My point is that these are the kinds of things I have observed over 40 years. Many Pentecostals have a sensitivity to the filth on TV and won't tolerate it. I think that is just Christianity 101 but I find that there are many non Pentecostals who accuse us of legalism.

We think they are compromising and they think we are legalistic. It really comes down to what the bible teaches and what the Holy Spirit is saying to the believer about purity and holiness and protecting your eyes and mind as much as possible.

Holiness. Some talk it, others walk it. But without holiness no man shall see the Lord.

I think anyone who gets around to meet Charismatic and Pentecostals in real life will soon find that my assessment is correct, they will discover that MOST of them are much more serious about "the little things" than the other protestant Christians are. They are more likely to call things sin that others tolerate as no a big deal. Some may say they are being legalistic but if you get into a discussion with them about it they will probably convince you that they are definitely on the Holy Spirit's side of the debate.

 

[Amanuensis]

You make some valid points, but I think you have overlooked the purpose of chapter 12... it is Paul explaining how the gifts of the Spirit are to work in the assembly of believers.
He went into great detail describing how the believers that have been bestowed with different gifts work together, like the different parts of a body. He specifically pointed out that a foot is not a hand, etc... in other words, a foot cannot do what a hand does, and a nose cannot speak. Different parts (gifts) make up the body. He even said that the different parts should not WISH to be something they are not
"16 And if the ear says, “Because I am not an eye, I am not a part of the body,” it is not for this reason [o]any less a part of the body. "

Paul explicitly tells us that most of us will NOT have all the manifestations of the Spirit, and we shouldn't expect to. In fact, if everyone has "tongues" as a gift, then the "body" would only be a big eye, or foot.

We receive the Spirit when we are baptized, thus ALL believers are baptized with the Spirt of God... otherwise, Paul would not have said..

"12 For just as the body is one and yet has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For [m]by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

We are both seeing the same message in Chapter 12. Yes he is "explaining how the gifts of the Spirit are to work in the assembly of believers"
And because of that I understand the question "do all speak in tongues" as applying to in the assembly. No all will give a tongue in the assembly. Not all will interpret.
Does that mean that Paul said that not everyone CAN receive the gift of tongues such as praying to himself and to God where his understanding is unfruitful but his spirit prays? I don't think we can say that is what Paul was talking about.

I think it is unfair to say that Paul said that when that was not the context in which he was making his point. His point was about that public manifestation in the assembly. That is all that one should apply it to.

If we do that then we see perfect harmony between repeated accounts of a group in Acts where all spoke but yet instructions by Paul saying that all should not speak. We know that there were occasions when all did speak and it was not a bad thing. And yet here Paul is saying everyone speaking at once is not good.

So we see the need to reconcile this which is not difficult because we understand that they are two different contexts and that the one that Paul is addressing in 1 Cor 14 is the assembly on a regular basis and not the initial reception of the gift as those other accounts were. In this context he asks "do all speak in tongues" and we know that based on his contextual dialog about how to use the gifts of the Spirit in the assembly of believers that the answer is no.

Can all speak in tongues to themselves and to God? (a different context than in the assembly) The answer is yes, that is what happened in Acts.

 

[Amanuensis]

In the end, Pentecostals are here to stay and are planting more churches and seeing more people born again and bearing the fruit of the Spirit than any other protestant group. This trend will continue because their message is empowered by the Holy Spirit and the illumination in the heart of the souls being saved is by the Holy Spirit.

If you want to be on the cutting edge of what God is doing in the world today you want to be part of a Charismatic, Pentecostal type of local assembly.

If you are looking for a good church to attend Google "Assemblies of God" near me and go visit this Sunday. Give it a few months and meet people and go to dinner with them, and volunteer for church ministry or outreaches etc.

Then let us know what you discover in 5 or 6 months. If it's bad, go to the next one and check it out. They all have their own unique culture based on the pastor and the people. AG is the largest missionary movement in the world planting more churches in other countries than any other group.

I think you will find that there is something there that gives you that feeling "This is it! This is where God wants me to go to Church"

 

[Evmur]

Absolutely these things grieve me. Immensely in fact. Truth be told they grieve me as much as the fake babbling bogus tongues.

I have to tell you that I attended one so-called Pentecostal Church service.....where the pastor/family only spoke Spanish exclusively. And never once spoke one word of Scripture. Never quoted the Bible. Absolutely zero teaching ministry. No Bible studies. All of it was a crazy crashing family bandstand, endless screaming/crying/shouting, slayinging in the Spirit and fake tongues.

The "attendees" were apx 50-50 split English Spanish. The English speakers had no idea of what he was saying to begin with. They were there strictly to see the carnival sideshow spectacle and that's it. And evidently they thought it was real and legitimate. As far as I could tell anyways.

I even participated in the slaying in the Spirit scam. And believe it or not I actually fell over just keep up appearances and ensure the "Pastor" didn't embarrass himself.

Yes it was awful. Very very awful. And no I never went back.

BTW.......by and large the worst "Churches" are loosly charismatic Pentecostal ripoff Churches.
$$$$$$$Blab it and grab it. Word faith heretics. Prosperity gospel apostates. Christian psychobabble$$$$$$

Bearing your Cross, persecution, privation and suffering for the word of God and for Christs' sake? You'll never ever hear that in one of those "Churches". Such talk is anathema to them. Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen, T.D. Jakes.......the list is endless.

You FAKED being slain in the Spirit? why shame on you .... and now you think everybody else is a fake [shakes his head]

You know I take umbrage at your labelling all utterances as babbling, not because I don't recognise that much of that goes on but because that babbling is unto God and I think God is kind, I think He looks upon it as Father, I think He looks into the heart of the babbler and will grant their desires if they line up with His word.

Them Hispanics are sure excitable ... I remember walking through North London and from an old Anglican church came the most angelic, heavenly singing I ever heard in my life so I thought I would creep into what I supposed would be the foyer and listen.

It happened that the church had been re-furbished and and the seating turned around so instead of being in the foyer I was slap bang in the middle of the congregation and I looked upon a perfect sea of black faces .... you talk about culture shock.

A little sister jumped up with her hymn book and order program and found me a seat and gave me a little hug .... I was so BLEST.

... I thought I would just share that.

 

[Evmur]

This is the attitude that turns so many people off toward pentecostals.... "we are special, and we will tell you so..."

Are you saying that pentecostals are NOT decent, respectable, and evangelical? I think that ALL believers are supposed to be those things.
When Paul preached to the believers in the upper room, until midnight, was there any mention of "demonstrations of the Holy Ghost" during the preaching? The only demonstration was after the preaching when Paul brought Eutychus back to life.
Why do you feel the need for there to be these kinds of demonstrations? Is it not enough to KNOW that the Spirit is there, in you and among you? Why do you feel the need for some kind of "demonstration" ?

No apologies from me I am special and I will tell you so.

I didn't say I was more special than you, what I have received is the birthright of every child of God and it is just for the asking, granted upon the selfsame basis that ALL God's promises are received.

Are you a lover of Spurgeon? I have loved Spurgeon since I was saved and have gotten through a great many of his volumes. His writings have had a revival in these last 50 years AMONG PENTECOSTALISTS ... oh yes

Spurgeon would have been at the forefront of the Pentecostalist movement WHY? because the gifts were manifest in his ministry. He would would have decried much of what goes on today, what passes for the Holy Spirit. He would scorned the froth. BUT HE WOULD NEVER DENY THE TRUTH.

Spurgeons day is gone, his kind of evangelical are a rarity [he was pretty rare in his own day]

Do you want to know the REAL reason there is so much quackery and fakery in the Charismatic/Pentecostalist world today? do you. really?

Because the evangelicals have fled the field.

They are like the Benjaminites of old, they have stood on the sidelines and folded their arms and criticised and sniped. We needed their good doctrines, their sound theology. We needed Spurgeon's doctrines.

Never mind, we will prevail, we will win the battles of the Lord, we'll get folks saved, we'll get them fixed up and out of the holes and prison cells they have got themselves into. We'll do all the hard work, we'll take the stick for His name sake. We' ll be laughingstocks.

You sit back and criticise.

 

[TheLearner]

A structure is only as solid as its foundation. In this short study into Pentecostalism's origins we'll discover whether it's built on solid rock or sinking sand.

Charles Fox Parham, Pentecostalism's acknowledged founder, spent the summer of 1900 at Frank W. Sanford's Holiness commune in Shiloh, Maine. ?

"The court case that followed the catastrophe at sea in 1911 was not Shiloh’s first brush with the law. The “hundred-fold” life also rejected modern medical attention and looked to God for health and healing. In 1903, the death of a 14-year-old boy from diphtheria aroused public anger and brought Frank Sandford to trial for manslaughter in a case that dragged on for years. When he was finally acquitted of responsibility for the boy’s death, he and a portion of his Shiloh company set sail for Jerusalem to await God’s next orders. " http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/trustandtrouble.html

"
Frank Sanford
Research|People|Record|Image|Newspaper


On a cold October night off the coast of Portland, Maine, a crippled yacht made its way into port. As it docked, men quickly scrambled to aid the vessel. To their surprise, they found fifty men, women, and children in critical condition, suffering from sickness and starvation. Death had already entered the vessel; scurvy was starting to claim the lives of the malnourished. Deck hands once strong and capable were reduced to skin-and-bone. The crew and passengers were so exhausted and weak that had they could barely stand. Had the ship not made port that night, it was doubtful they could have kept the craft afloat for even a day longer. Rescuers were shocked when they found mere skeletons working the pumps, alternating between three shifts.
They were even more astonished when one single passenger emerged, well nourished and well cared for. While the passengers and crew had struggled to survive, this particular passenger, viewed by the rest as their leader, had lived sumptuously in his luxuriously furnished cabin.


...


Sandford focused heavily on the Book of Revelation and its descriptions of the events leading to Armageddon. According to Sandford, the 11th chapter of the Book of Revelation was literal rather than symbolic, and the “two witnesses” mentioned in Revelation 11 would soon appear to prophesy. Sandford affirmed that his “school” would “stand by them and if need be die.”

...

and Sandford claimed to have had “spiritual revelation” that he must establish an outpost in Palestine. Heavily influenced by British Israelism, he taught that his followers were blood descendants of the ancient Hebrews, and must be reconnected with the Tribe of Israel.

...

After the crippled Coronation, crew, and passengers were examined, the government intervened in the situation. “Elijah” Reverend Frank Sandford, was found guilty of manslaughter. Unable to be convicted under civilian law, he was tried under marine law. Shortly after, he was convicted for cruising with a defectively equipped vessel. Sadly, this conviction came only after five members of the crew of the Kingdom died of starvation in December of 1911. Under land-based law, Sandford was able to escape penalty for the inhumane conditions leading to prior deaths at his land-based commune. He was sentenced to 10 years of hard labor in an Atlanta, Georgia federal prison, but was released after only six years when his sentence was reduced for good behavior. Upon his release, Sandford publicly stated his intentions of re-establishing his cult.

Shortly after his conviction, one newspaper article summed up Sandford’s “ministry” as a “religious grafter.” The article claimed that of all the grafters, the “religious grafter” – the self-appointed Messiah, Elijah, Daniel, Israel, or Adam, was the “meanest.” It was one of the most profitable grafts, and could be considered a “safe con game” to play for the cult leader. The article pointed out that in Sandford’s case, however, it proved deadly for the cult victims.

Newspapers described his cult following as a “peculiar sect,” but failed to make the connection to a quickly growing movement in the United States. Reverend Frank Sandford’s divine healing “Elijah cult” was one of at least two such religious groups whose worship centered on the belief that a charismatic American evangelist was the reincarnation of the Old Testament Jewish “Elijah the prophet.”
"
https://william-branham.org/site/research/people/frank_sanford

 

[TheLearner]

"In a world with few material possessions, the most minor flaws became the source of guilt and self-loathing. A young girl confessed to the sin of vanity because she looked in a mirror. Then she was told to fast for three days to atone for her sin. It became a community obsession to root out the most minute bit of evil in their lives with a ruthlessness usually reserved for members of restrictive monastic orders. “It mattered how you acted, how you talked, even how you thought and looked.
Frank Sandford even made an example of his own son, John. When John was seven years old, he disobeyed his father. John learned the penalty for disobedience, as did the entire community through his example. Sandford declared that John should be isolated in a room, denied food and water, and then he would be whipped. There was a twist to the whipping- John had to earnestly desire to be beaten. For three days John was in a room, a glass of water torturously placed out of reach on the nightstand, learning to be happy about suffering. Each day he would climb the staircase to his father’s prayer room and ask for his whipping, but Frank did not find him happy enough until the third day.” Churches That Abuse by Ronald M. Enroth, Professor of Sociology, Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California (ret).

"
https://www.cabinet.com/opinion/cab...he-infamous-sadistic-religious-sect-in-maine/

 

[TheLearner]

"
Charles Fox Parham (1873-1929)
Parham is the father of Pentecostalism. His actual life story, however, is filled with scandals, false prophecies, and even overt racism. "
https://www.themessedupchurch.com/b...e-prophets-con-artists-criminals-and-heretics

"
In 1902, Parham’s British(or Anglo-)Israelism, which proclaimed the spiritual and racial superi-ority of the white Anglo-Saxon race, is full blown, complete with an iden-tification of the throne of David with the British royal family courtesy of the prophet Jeremiah (who is supposed to have taken King Zedekiah’sdaughter to Ireland), and an identification of Britain with “Ephraim” andthe United States with “Manasseh” among the ten “lost tribes.” Manycommentators, including Parham’s biographer Goff, have failed to see theintrinsically racist character of British Israelism. Parham got these ideasearly on in his ministry in the 1890s.
4
In 1900 he spent six weeks at Frank Sandford’s Shiloh community in Maine, where he imbibed most of Sandford’s doctrines, including Anglo-Israelism and “missionary tongues,”doctrines that Parham maintained for the rest of his life.
5
Parham alsoentertained notions about the “Antichrist” as “the reincarnation of JudasIscariot,” did not believe in the immortality of the soul, and held to thedoctrine of the annihilation of the wicked. He had strange ideas aboutwhat constituted the “Body” and “Bride” of Christ and the meaning of “redemption.” In fact, Parham had an all-round “unorthodox” theology,certainly by evangelical standards! He also advocated Zionism, the cre-ation of the state of Israel, and Jerusalem as the commercial center of theworld. But there are even more sinister statements in his books.
"
https://www.academia.edu/10825872/The_Dubious_Legacy_of_Charles_Parham

Teaching Anglo-Israelism puts them out of even being Christians. This would include their followers too.

1 John 2:9
He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.

1 John 2:11
But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.

1 John 3:15
Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

1 John 4:20
If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

 

[TheLearner]

"This article uses archival sources and secondary sources to argue that narratives from various pentecostal church presses reflected shifts in the broader understanding of homosexuality when discussing the 1907 arrest of pentecostal founder Charles Fox Parham for “unnatural offenses.” In the early 1900s, gay men were free to pursue other men in separate spaces of towns and were generally left alone as long as they did not attract attention. " Johnson, A. S. (2019). All Manner of Evil Spoken Falsely, Pneuma, 41(1), 31-49. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/15700747-04101033
https://brill.com/view/journals/pneu/41/1/article-p31_4.xml

 

[TheLearner]

"
Second, Parham was firmly against integrated services, believing that the Anglo-Saxons were the descendants of the ten “lost” tribes of Israel and that blacks and whites should be segregated (Seymour had not been allowed to sit with the rest of Parham’s students in class). In 1906, Parham publicly denounced Seymour and the Azusa Street “revival.”

Besides his teaching of Anglo-Israelism, Parham also began to advocate for annihilationist theology—the teaching that people who go to hell will eventually be annihilated rather than endure eternal punishment. These doctrines and an arrest in Texas caused Parham to be viewed more and more critically by those within the movement and by those reporting on it from the outside. "
https://www.gotquestions.org/Charles-Parham.html

 

[TheLearner]

Treat my last posts as close to rumor until someone more knowledgable posts the false prophecies. The arrest for sodom behavior was well documented in google searches. Also, the hateful racism of both men is well known even by pentecostal sources., Book: God's Generals and an academic pentecostal journal.

 

[cv5]

They don't represent the average Charismatic. As a matter of fact the average Charismatic has the same issue with these TV preachers as you do. But we already discussed this didn't we? Did you know that many who go to Joel Osteen's church say that they are Baptist? They don't know what they are.

But since we are talking about TV. It is my hypothesis that if you were to do a study on how many Christians have decided to not have a TV in their home at all in order to keep the filth of the gay commercials and other constant ungodliness from being displayed and piped into their home, that you will find that there would be more Charismatic, Pentecostal types on that list than any other segment of Christians. There would be more Charismatic/Pentecostals who wont even have a TV in their home than other protestants.

Your opinions about whether getting rid of the TV has any moral value is a separate debate, but the fact that more Charismatics and Pentecostals would be on that list I wager would be the outcome. Of course someone has to do the study to prove it.

My point is that these are the kinds of things I have observed over 40 years. Many Pentecostals have a sensitivity to the filth on TV and won't tolerate it. I think that is just Christianity 101 but I find that there are many non Pentecostals who accuse us of legalism.

We think they are compromising and they think we are legalistic. It really comes down to what the bible teaches and what the Holy Spirit is saying to the believer about purity and holiness and protecting your eyes and mind as much as possible.

Holiness. Some talk it, others walk it. But without holiness no man shall see the Lord.

I think anyone who gets around to meet Charismatic and Pentecostals in real life will soon find that my assessment is correct, they will discover that MOST of them are much more serious about "the little things" than the other protestant Christians are. They are more likely to call things sin that others tolerate as no a big deal. Some may say they are being legalistic but if you get into a discussion with them about it they will probably convince you that they are definitely on the Holy Spirit's side of the debate.

I have met charismatics in real life and also on Christian Chat. IMO far too many have "a zeal for God but not according to knowledge". Also by and large their eschatology and doctrine is a mess. Massive cutting and pasting Scriptures yet no idea of their import or meaning. Probably because there are hyper focused on signs and wonders and miracles which evidently (ahem) "rarely" happen.

I remember watching a so-called "prayer meeting" by a bunch of younger women Pentecostals in a home basement. I couldn't tell the difference between them and a bunch of mediums doing channeling (they were sitting in a circle chanting some kind of crazy mantras). And they were mostly asking for "power" so they could get stuff and/or make stuff happen etc. (including healing a husband who had cancer who subsequently died a few weeks later.......I built this man a bunch of pens for their goats). Their success rate was zero as far as I could observe. It was endless outrageous "seeking after a sign" and a departure from John 6:29......rather clinging to 6:28.

BTW......these were relatively immature baby Christians and I honestly think they had no idea what they were doing or what they were talking about. With heavy doses of worldliness, self-centered narcissism and carnality.

So.........I basically bailed out on charismatic Pentecostalism (after being thoroughly exposed to it) And never looked back. I'm done.

Display these crushing disappointments, I nevertheless doggedly continued on with grounded hardcore high level Bible studies. And I thank God that the Lord had mercy on me to have me abide all these years. To the result where I am not carried away with every $$$stunt, fraud, scam$$$, and every wind of doctrine set forth by nutter apostates and heretics.....such as the TeeVee kooky charismatics.

 

[soberxp]

"
Second, Parham was firmly against integrated services, believing that the Anglo-Saxons were the descendants of the ten “lost” tribes of Israel and that blacks and whites should be segregated (Seymour had not been allowed to sit with the rest of Parham’s students in class). In 1906, Parham publicly denounced Seymour and the Azusa Street “revival.”

Besides his teaching of Anglo-Israelism, Parham also began to advocate for annihilationist theology—the teaching that people who go to hell will eventually be annihilated rather than endure eternal punishment. These doctrines and an arrest in Texas caused Parham to be viewed more and more critically by those within the movement and by those reporting on it from the outside. "
https://www.gotquestions.org/Charles-Parham.html

This idea is paranoid,I can feel inferior about it.

 

[cv5]

We are both seeing the same message in Chapter 12. Yes he is "explaining how the gifts of the Spirit are to work in the assembly of believers"
And because of that I understand the question "do all speak in tongues" as applying to in the assembly. No all will give a tongue in the assembly. Not all will interpret.
Does that mean that Paul said that not everyone CAN receive the gift of tongues such as praying to himself and to God where his understanding is unfruitful but his spirit prays? I don't think we can say that is what Paul was talking about.

I think it is unfair to say that Paul said that when that was not the context in which he was making his point. His point was about that public manifestation in the assembly. That is all that one should apply it to.

If we do that then we see perfect harmony between repeated accounts of a group in Acts where all spoke but yet instructions by Paul saying that all should not speak. We know that there were occasions when all did speak and it was not a bad thing. And yet here Paul is saying everyone speaking at once is not good.

So we see the need to reconcile this which is not difficult because we understand that they are two different contexts and that the one that Paul is addressing in 1 Cor 14 is the assembly on a regular basis and not the initial reception of the gift as those other accounts were. In this context he asks "do all speak in tongues" and we know that based on his contextual dialog about how to use the gifts of the Spirit in the assembly of believers that the answer is no.

Can all speak in tongues to themselves and to God? (a different context than in the assembly) The answer is yes, that is what happened in Acts.

Acts ch 2 (master template, first mention):

Disciples speaking in tongues they did NOT know (confirmed in Corinthians).
Visitors hearing the word of God in languages that they DID know and understand.

Conclusion: The Acts 2 tongues were real existing languages. Which according to Corinthians require an interpreter when there is no valid target audience per se.

So I have one question to ask you. I would like a Yes or No answer:
Is today's charismatic incoherent babbling gibberish "tongues" a real actual authentic New Testament tongue? Yes or No.

I ask because the heretical Kenneth Copeland "tongues" are indistinguishable from the supposed authentic charismatic tongues. This according to my firsthand observation of both. They are both one and the same and in fact use the same typical identifiable gibberish words!

 

[cv5]

"
Second, Parham was firmly against integrated services, believing that the Anglo-Saxons were the descendants of the ten “lost” tribes of Israel and that blacks and whites should be segregated (Seymour had not been allowed to sit with the rest of Parham’s students in class). In 1906, Parham publicly denounced Seymour and the Azusa Street “revival.”

Besides his teaching of Anglo-Israelism, Parham also began to advocate for annihilationist theology—the teaching that people who go to hell will eventually be annihilated rather than endure eternal punishment. These doctrines and an arrest in Texas caused Parham to be viewed more and more critically by those within the movement and by those reporting on it from the outside. "
https://www.gotquestions.org/Charles-Parham.html

And there we have it. Fringe Charismatic Pentecostalism walking hand-in-hand with heretical unbiblical nutter doctrines of demons. Which are exemplified today in people like Kenneth Copeland and his ilk. Bogus Churches and faux pastors dragging people to hell is the name of the game.

For my part I never ever follow a movement, fringe uprising, or charismatic leader. It's Acts 17:11 for me. And anything that departs from biblically founded confirmed doctrine......generally gets thrown the trash can. Generally after some measure of scrutiny.

 

[cv5]

a sign of the Lord's imminent return, what's taking so long? I wouldn't call 120 years very imminent.

The sign of the Lord's imminent return today is the restoration of the nation Israel. Biblically there's no doubt that Israel itself is denoted as a sign. Always has been always will be.

 

[cv5]

Brother, I think there's something that you missed out earlier from jb. In the last days, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit will be a sign of Christ' second coming. If your 'latter rain' doctrine is referring to God's outpouring of the Holy Spirit, then I would point you to truth in Acts 2:16-17.

“‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy." - ESV

Christ will return soon and we are nearing the last days. I would like to caveat that this is not an argument for Pentecostalism. There are individuals (like in the example you mentioned) where they take it too far and try to dramatize this outpouring when it's not evident at all.

"last days" (4X mentioned) = entire Church age. Equivalent to the term "last time" (1Jn 2) and "last times" (1 Pet 1:20). There maybe a little wiggle room but not much.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Beyond all this there is absolutely no doubt the the best/greatest gifts of the Spirit are NOT tongues....which are literally last on the list of precedence. And which Paul clearly indicates not all possess.

Good points. However, I'm not sure Pentecostals would say tongues is the greatest gift but that tongues are evidence of the "baptism of the Holy Spirit." This "baptism" is what sets them apart from others in their minds. IMHO

 

[ResidentAlien]

The sign of the Lord's imminent return today is the restoration of the nation Israel. Biblically there's no doubt that Israel itself is denoted as a sign. Always has been always will be.

True

 

[cv5]

If you want to be on the cutting edge of what God is doing in the world today you want to be part of a Charismatic, Pentecostal type of local assembly.

I am on the cutting edge and it has nothing whatsoever to do with charismatic Pentecostal assemblies.

When I say cutting edge I mean preaching the gospel to every creature. Which I do (mostly one on one) everywhere all the time. Continuously nonstop whenever the opportunity arises.

I never waste my time at Charismatic assemblies looking for signs and the miracles. I have work to do.