Ask a Pentecostal

[ltwin]

At last you agreed if church is to function correctly their needs to be organization and leadership.

At last? You are making it sound like I was arguing that the church did not need to have organization or leadership.

 

[JustaServant]

Three watermelons and two cantaloupes weigh 32 pounds. Four watermelons and three cantaloupes weigh 44 pounds. All watermelons weigh the same and all cantaloupes weigh the same. What is the weight of two watermelons and one cantaloupe?

 

[siamus2k13]

Why are you Pentecostal? What makes you believe in your faith and that it is the correct one? How is that for starters? lol

I personally can’t see too many people being anything other than Pentecostal if they are truly bible believers.

 

[ltwin]

I personally can’t see too many people being anything other than Pentecostal if they are truly bible believers.

Well, I don’t think that’s biblical at all. It’s not even mainstream Pentecostal thinking today. John Wesley wasn’t Pentecostal, and we built our theology on his. There were not Pentecostals before 1900, so for you to say something like this is really irresponsible and indefensible. How can you argue that everyone who came before Parham and Seymour were not “truly bible believers”?

Charles Harrison Mason, of the COGIC, was a Baptist and then Holiness before he got his Pentecost. Was he not a true Bible believer for the simple fact that he never had an enduement with power? Just because Pentecostals believe we have more light than others does not mean that others are less than true believers.

I think the following paragraph, written by a Church of God minister, sums up an authentic Pentecostal understanding that can be defended because it makes historical sense:

The Pentecostal Movement was not birthed in a vacuum. Pentecostalism is one of the latest in a series of movements by which the Holy Spirit works to renew the church. The Pentecostal church is the beneficiary of the “cloud of witnesses” throughout the history of the Christian church. Pentecostal spirituality is informed by Martin Luther, John Calvin, James Arminius, John Wesley, Phoebe Palmer, A.B. Simpson, and many other Protestant Christians. To the surprise of some Pentecostals, our spirituality has also benefited from the Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditions. This book seeks to give voice to this “cloud of witnesses.” Throughout the book, I have sought to allow the voices to speak for themselves. You will find quotations from the early fathers, Protestant reformers, pioneer Pentecostals, and Catholic and Orthodox theologians. Each voice speaks from the conviction that Jesus is Lord.​

(Daniel Tomberlin. Pentecostal Sacraments: Encountering God at the Altar . Kindle Edition.)

If you look into Pentecostal history, the first Pentecostals saw their movement as a divine move of God that built on earlier moves of God. It was “the latter rain” that would be greater than the “former rain.”

 

[RaiseMeUp]

I personally can’t see too many people being anything other than Pentecostal if they are truly bible believers.

Pentecostalism teaches the Unbiblical doctrine of Sola Scriptura - True Bible believers they may be, but they tend to believe their own interpretation of the bible. I live in a Pentecostal community. I have heard them say absurd things that it is not required to be baptized, and use of the penitent thief as an example of that theory - And most recently, faith healing. The pastor says that when someone asks to be prayed for - for some kind of ailment or sickness - that instead the Bible tells us to use our authority to make the ailment or sickness flee. Then they have altar calls of the sick or people in pain and after demanding of the pain or sickness to flee he will ask on scales of 1 - 10 what the level of pain is. He says that we shouldn’t pray for the sick - that we have all been given the authority to heal. But to teach not praying for the sick goes against James 5:14 - where it is pretty explicit when it describes the power of prayer and encourages praying for the sick.

Also, why SO much emphasis on tongues? I see them speaking tongues - almost priding themselves on tongues. From what I have learned, tongues weren’t looked at in the greatest of light in the Bible. It just seems that many Pentecostals are so focused on and emphasize so much on the Supernatural.

 

[ltwin]

I live in a Pentecostal community.

May I ask what you mean by this? Do you mean that you live in a predominantly Pentecostal neighborhood? Just curious.

I have heard them say absurd things that it is not required to be baptized, and use of the penitent thief as an example of that theory

Well, belief in non-regenerative baptism is fairly common among American Protestants.

And most recently, faith healing. The pastor says that when someone asks to be prayed for - for some kind of ailment or sickness - that instead the Bible tells us to use our authority to make the ailment or sickness flee. Then they have altar calls of the sick or people in pain and after demanding of the pain or sickness to flee he will ask on scales of 1 - 10 what the level of pain is. He says that we shouldn’t pray for the sick - that we have all been given the authority to heal. But to teach not praying for the sick goes against James 5:14 - where it is pretty explicit when it describes the power of prayer and encourages praying for the sick.

There is a lot in this paragraph to respond to, so bear with me.

First, Pentecostals do believe in divine healing. For Pentecostals, the basic theological principle concerning healing is that “healing is in the atonement.” This means that Christ’s sacrifice is not only efficacious for our spiritual restoration but also for our physical healing.

Second, the pastor you have seen or heard is typical of a certain type of preacher but is not typical of all Pentecostals. Whoever you have been exposed to is obviously an advocate of strong positive confession theology. Positive confession is the belief that if you claim a thing then God will respond to your confession of faith and bring what you claim into reality. This has become popular since the 1950s when it largely dealt with healing but since the 1960s until now it has expanded into every facet of life. If you want a better job, for example, you can “name it and claim it.” The more extreme teachers of this theology do at times advise Christians to confess or claim something rather than pray about it.

Third, positive confession has often intersected with a heightened focus on demonology. The result is that often sickness is attributed to specific demonic forces. The prayer of healing takes on the form of an exorcism. You do not pray that demons go away. You command them to go away in Jesus name. Therefore, this is what such ministers do. They command the “spirit of cancer” or whatever the disease may be to leave the believer’s body.

To sum up, what you are seeing is not simply Pentecostal healing prayer. It is a combination and mishmash of popular theologies and ideas that have become bound together. While such a blend is common, it is far from universal among Pentecostals, and if you visit enough Pentecostal churches, you will get a good idea about the varieties of ways Pentecostals will handle healing prayer.

There is nothing in Pentecostal theology that precludes praying for the sick. Such a prayer need not include such a line as “if it be your will Lord.” Pentecostals see no need to place such a provision in a prayer. James 5:14 is used by Pentecostals as the guideline by which healing in church is done. A sick person or anyone who needs prayer calls for the ministers of the church. The ministers anoint the person’s head and pray the prayer of faith. Note that James says, “the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up.” We have authority to pray in faith for healing and so we choose to pray bold prayers.

Such prayer may take the following form, “In the name of Jesus, I command sickness to leave this body.” Or it may take the following form, “Lord, we ask that you heal this body and that the next doctor’s visit brings a good report. In the name of Jesus we pray. Amen.” It depends on many factors how a Pentecostal will pray.

Also, why SO much emphasis on tongues? I see them speaking tongues - almost priding themselves on tongues. From what I have learned, tongues weren’t looked at in the greatest of light in the Bible. It just seems that many Pentecostals are so focused on and emphasize so much on the Supernatural.

For Pentecostals, unknown languages are believed to be spoken “as the Spirit gives utterance” (Acts 2:4). In the book of Acts, most instances of the infilling with the Holy Spirit were accompanied with speaking in unknown languages. Many Pentecostals believe that those who are baptized in the Holy Spirit will also speak in unknown languages.

Speaking in tongues is also listed as one of the gifts of the Spirit by Paul in two of his lists: 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 and 1 Corinthians 12:28. As a spiritual gift, Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 14:2 that “one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God.” For Pentecostals, this is clear evidence that there is a personal dimension to speaking in tongues that includes: personal prayer, praise, singing, and thanksgiving (1 Cor. 14:14-16).

Paul also wrote that there was a corporate dimension to speaking in tongues. This was for the following purposes: “revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching” (1 Cor. 14:6). This corporate dimension of tongues requires interpretation, which is also listed as a spiritual gift, so that everyone present may understand and benefit (1 Cor. 14:13). Many Pentecostal churches will exhibit a form of prophetic speech during services that begins with a “message in tongues” followed by the interpretation of the message in the common language of the congregation.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul has many good things to say about speaking in tongues. It is the abuse of tongues that angers Paul, not the use of tongues. This is the Pentecostal perspective at least.

 

[RaiseMeUp]

May I ask what you mean by this? Do you mean that you live in a predominantly Pentecostal neighborhood? Just curious.

Yes. I have explained in other forums that I am currently in a Pentecostal Program. I am obligated legally and circumstantially to complete it. I’m near completion and while it was a great stepping stone that brought me back to God, I cannot deny the fact that I have seen and heard some perplexing teachings and practices.

This has become popular since the 1950s when it largely dealt with healing but since the 1960s until now it has expanded into every facet of life. If you want a better job, for example, you can “name it and claim it.”

I want to say first off I respect any Christian brother - even if I do not necessarily agree with them. But this comment above just puts it into perspective. Why conform to a relatively new trend or practice, yet disregard the historical rooted teachings of the Catholic Church?

In 1 Corinthians, Paul has many good things to say about speaking in tongues. It is the abuse of tongues that angers Paul, not the use of tongues. This is the Pentecostal perspective at least.

As for tongues, I am very cautious when I hear them. Which is way too often. Like I said in my earlier post, I see a lot of priding one’s self on the ability to speak in tongues, and it happens way too often. The spiritual gifts of prophecy, the word of knowledge, and tongues brought only a partial revelation of God’s will to any man or church (I Cor 13:9). Tongues were to convince unbelievers that the speaker was sent by God with a divine message, as at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-11). The use of tongues among believers misses God’s purpose for them. Paul valued 5 words of preaching over 10,000 words of tongues. Preaching is far superior in God’s purpose and for the churches’ profit.

“Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.”
(I Corinthians 13:8)

It is emphasized way too much, and in reality it was the** least** of all the spiritual gifts.

 

[Zachary]

“Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.”
(I Corinthians 13:8)

How do you reconcil this to Pentacostalism?

And, if you dont understand what someone who is alledgedly speaking is toungues is saying, how do you know they are not a fraud or that they are not simply praising Satan?

 

[RaiseMeUp]

How do you reconcil this to Pentacostalism?

Im not sure I understand your question. As I stated, Im in a pentecostal program and this is emphasized on often and encouraged. In terms of the scripture verse, this is kind of what I was gearing towards.

 

[Reuben_J]

As for tongues, I am very cautious when I hear them. Which is way too often.

I would be concerned too if speaking in tongue (not praying in tongue) is way too often. Speaking in tongue is a gift that is quite rare. It may happen in a community where at least two persons compliment each other on the execrcise of this gift - one speak in tongue and the other interpret it. If you have them, you can expect it to happen regularly there as the people who have this gift will exercise it in a given situation.

But not all churches and communities have peopel with the gift of speaking in tongue and interpreting it. Therefore in such places, speaking in tongue would not happen at all. What is common is praying/singing in tongue and there is nothing to be proud of. If a person take personal pride in that, then he/she certainly has the wrong focus and attitude. Perhaps due to wrong teaching given by their leaders.

 

[Brandall]

How do you reconcil this to Pentacostalism?

And, if you dont understand what someone who is alledgedly speaking is toungues is saying, how do you know they are not a fraud or that they are not simply praising Satan?

I’m pretty sure that’s what the French couple next to me at mass was doing or at least I think so. I couldn’t understand a word they said.

 

[grannymh]

For Pentecostals, this is clear evidence that there is a personal dimension to speaking in tongues that includes: personal prayer, praise, singing, and thanksgiving (1 Cor. 14:14-16).

A special thank you for this interpretation. While there is the contrast between the two kinds of tongues, now I can better grasp the fullness of praying in tongues.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul has many good things to say about speaking in tongues. It is the abuse of tongues that angers Paul, not the use of tongues. This is the Pentecostal perspective at least.

Ditto for the Catholic perspective.

 

[Reuben_J]

Speaking in tongue is a gift that is quite rare.

Speaking in different tongue (ala during the Pentecost) is rarer still. I have not witnessed this though I know one priest who saw it happened once. A person spoke in tongue, did not know what she was talking about but a hearer could understand her perfectly. She, a non-Spanish speaking person, was heard speaking perfect Spanish by the Spanish speaking hearer. This kind of manifestation is one in a million or it could not happen at all.

 

[ltwin]

I want to say first off I respect any Christian brother - even if I do not necessarily agree with them. But this comment above just puts it into perspective. Why conform to a relatively new trend or practice, yet disregard the historical rooted teachings of the Catholic Church?

Healing prayer is not new. Not sure you can even say that belief in the demonic origin of sickness is new or recent. It’s more of having balance in teaching. Some people are not balanced in their teaching on this and this leads them to give too much attention to the demonic.

As for tongues, I am very cautious when I hear them. Which is way too often.

How often is too often?

Like I said in my earlier post, I see a lot of priding one’s self on the ability to speak in tongues, and it happens way too often.

I will not defend anyone for having pride in speaking in tongues. Growing in up in a church where nearly everyone spoke in tongues, it was never something to be proud of because it was so ordinary!

The spiritual gifts of prophecy, the word of knowledge, and tongues brought only a partial revelation of God’s will to any man or church (I Cor 13:9).

Yes, but so does preaching. 1 Corinthians 13 is not just about those gifts. It is about all our means of “knowing.” One of the problems with the Corinthians were that they prized knowledge. Paul is saying that all our means of knowing in this life are imperfect and when the perfect comes, they will no longer be needed. Notice that in chapter 14, Paul prioritizes prophecy over tongues, but even in chapter 13 he says, “prophecies they will pass away.” Why? Because “we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.” So, yes, our means of knowledge is now imperfect, but when Christ returns we shall “know fully.” While knowledge is partial. faith, hope, and love are complete. For, “faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” and God is love.

So you are correct, but not only about spiritual gifts but all means of knowing.

Tongues were to convince unbelievers that the speaker was sent by God with a divine message, as at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-11). The use of tongues among believers misses God’s purpose for them.

How do you arrive at that conclusion? Paul says, “For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.” This is what a tongue is for: communication with God. There is a personal dimension tongues (praying in the Spirit) and a corporate dimension (bringing some revelation, prophecy or teaching). So, explain to me how can tongues among believers be “miss[ing] God’s purpose for them”?

Paul valued 5 words of preaching over 10,000 words of tongues. Preaching is far superior in God’s purpose and for the churches’ profit.

You are actually overlooking an important part of Paul’s argument in this chapter. We have to grasp what issues Paul was dealing with and what issues he was not. What he was not concerned with was all instances of speaking in tongues. What he was concerned with was uninterpreted tongues in a corporate setting. Paul makes this quite clear from the outset: “The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up” (1 Cor. 14:5). If tongues are interpreted, there is no problem. Tongues that are interpreted are just as “superior in God’s purposes and for the churches’ profit” as preaching is. Paul is not concerned with the mode of transmission of knowledge. He is concerned with the intelligibility of the one who is transmitting knowledge.

“Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.”
(I Corinthians 13:8)

Yes, when the perfect comes and we “fully know.”

It is emphasized way too much, and in reality it was the** least** of all the spiritual gifts.

I’m sure there are people who emphasize it too much. But there are a lot of churches who emphasize a lot of things too much.

 

[ltwin]

How do you reconcil this to Pentacostalism?

The rest of this passage goes like this:

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.​

Has the perfect come? Has the partial passed away?
Do we now see face to face?
Do we now know fully?

If you answer “yes” to all these questions, please let me know how it is that you think you know more than the writers of Scripture. If you answer no to all these questions, then I rest my case.

And, if you dont understand what someone who is alledgedly speaking is toungues is saying, how do you know they are not a fraud or that they are not simply praising Satan?

They could be a fraud. If so, they bring condemnation on themselves for mocking the Holy Spirit. If someone is praising Satan, then they are demon possessed. We would see other signs of demonic possession, such as a loss of control. Paul wrote that “the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets” (1 Cor. 14:32). God leads us as the man leads a woman in a dance. He does not compel or force us to do anything.

 

[RaiseMeUp]

Paul says, “For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.”

Okay, but if there is no one to interpret this, then shouldn’t it be between man and God and not in public all the time since no body understands it?

 

[ltwin]

Okay, but if there is no one to interpret this, then shouldn’t it be between man and God and not in public all the time since no body understands it?

I guess it depends on what you mean by “public.” Is it public tongues when you are praising God in tongues while surrounded by people who are singing and praising God in English and who can barely hear you anyway?

 

[grannymh]

Okay, but if there is no one to interpret this, then shouldn’t it be between man and God and not in public all the time since no body understands it?

There are actually two separate, distinct Holy Spirit gifts which use the gift of Tongues. Once people understand that simple fact, interpreting St. Paul’s message in Chapters 12 and14 in 1 Corinthians is a breeze.

 

[RaiseMeUp]

I guess it depends on what you mean by “public.” Is it public tongues when you are praising God in tongues while surrounded by people who are singing and praising God in English and who can barely hear you anyway?

I mean when someone spontaneously starts speaking tongues (and not trying to be stereotypical -but trying to understand) usually from my experience its not an intimate personal matter but a spectacle and is blatantly obvious and loud enough for people to recognize that this person is speaking in tongues. I guess edifying one’s self, not the Church with an interpretation.

 

[ltwin]

I mean when someone spontaneously starts speaking tongues (and not trying to be stereotypical -but trying to understand) usually from my experience its not an intimate personal matter but a spectacle and is blatantly obvious and loud enough for people to recognize that this person is speaking in tongues.

Ok. There tends to be an etiquette for these things. It’s usually quite clear to the congregation when God desires to speak to them through tongues and interpretation. There will be a sense among the people that they are not at liberty to proceed in the service but should pause and “wait on God.” In such a case, the person giving the message needs to make sure that either they or someone else in the congregation can interpret. (Once you’ve been in a congregation long enough, you get a good idea who has the gift of interpretation). Anytime someone stops the service speaking in tongues, an interpretation will be expected. If none is given, the pastor will most likely have some words with the person afterwards to make sure he/she never does that again.

Most of the time people who speak in tongues are not stopping the service and demanding attention. They are usually just praying or praising as they would do in English. So, for Pentecostals it is just not an issue.

I guess edifying one’s self, not the Church with an interpretation.

Not really sure what this means. People who speak in tongues do not know what they are saying. When I speak or pray in tongues, I never understand it. Only those with the gift of interpretation can understand tongues, and this really only applies to “messages in tongues” not to simple prayer or praise.