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. While there, he learned of the Holiness doctrine of an approaching "latter rain," that is, an outpouring of the Holy Spirit which would fall on people as it had in the church's early day. This would be a sign of Christ's imminent return. What scriptural basis is there for the latter rain doctrine? James says: "Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains."—James 5:7 This is the only verse from which a case might be made for a latter rain. So we must understand clearly what this verse actually says. Is James instructing his readers to be patient for the latter rain or for Christ's return. He's clearly encouraging them be patient for the Lord's return using an agricultural metaphor to make his point. There are no other New Testament scriptures from which we can put together a "latter rain" doctrine; it simply isn't taught. In fact, rather than worldwide revival, the scriptures clearly reveal the world will descend into darkness before the Lord's return.
While at Shiloh, Sanford filled Parham's head with tales of foreign missionaries who had spontaneously begun speaking the language of their foreign hosts without ever learning the language. In other words, they could preach to them in their own languages using the gift of tongues. But what evidence is there of this ever really happening? None that I'm aware of. But Parham was fascinated; he was convinced that this was a sure sign of the end-time and Christ's imminent return.
Returning to Topeka, Kansas, Parham established a missionary training center. In December of 1900, he challenged his students to find evidence of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit like what happened in Acts 2. He also suggested that the surest evidence of this would be speaking in tongues. At their New Year's eve service, 1901, right on schedule, Agnes Ozman asked Parham to lay hands on her head and pray she would receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Ozman began singing in an unknown language, which someone identified as Chinese.
What's strange about this picture? First of all, there's no evidence from the New Testament that missionaries ever used the gift of tongues to preach the good news. When missionaries did eventually go to foreign countries after the "latter rains" started falling, they failed miserably. Secondly, notice that Parham gave his students a suggestion which they pondered for a month. This wasn't a spontaneous outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Parham orchestrated the whole thing.
So, the question I leave you with is this: If the tree is bad, how can the fruit possibly be good?
Y|ou have read into the story several things that are not there so here goes.
First I know of denominations started by godly men and when I look at them today, they are a shadow of what they were originally. So, just because the founder was good or bad does not write it off at a later date. Are you going to write off Willow Creek because of Bill Hybels indiscretions?
Then there is the Brethren who were adamant that the supernatural is not of God. Having spent about 15 years in the Brethren, I know that the men who ran the local fellowship were men of God and exemplary in their walk with the Lord. Plus, in the UK one of the major players in the Restoration Movement in the 70s, and 80s, were Elders who had come out of the Brethren because they had been baptised in the Holy Spirit and God used them mightily to revive the priesthood of ALL believers and the supernatural experience of God.
Even if the start was good and the men behind it were good, we only have to look at today's lot and see that they have fallen by the wayside, embracing the devil's programme and ignoring the word of God. So the character of the founder is no guarantee of its progress or standing.
Then there is the fact that what you call something is not important. It is what you do that counts. I have just finished reading up again on the "Third Wave" of John Wimber. I don't care what John called it, it is what happened that is important. In John's Third Wave things DID HAPPEN and you could only describe them as a supernatural act of God.
Now, regarding people talking in a language they didn't learn. I have heard that happen so the fact that you haven't means nothing.
And like so many people who write here, it is a case of your God is too small. You want him to fit into a box of your making so that you can control him, instead of him controlling you. I have been used by God to do things I would never have thought possible, but when you have an open mind not cluttered up with ifs, buts, maybe, possibly, don't think so, doesn't fit my theology, not my way of thinking, doesn't use the right words, can't see it in scripture God can use you in any way he wants to, for HIS glory, not yours.
Let me ask you. Do you own and drive a car? If so, where is that in scripture? If you follow scripture you must travel on foot, on a donkey or a horse and may be a horse and cart if you have money.