Comments on: Pentecostal According to Who? http://www.revivalblog.com/pentecostal-according-to-who/ Didn't our hearts burn within us? Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:17:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Regarding a Second work of Grace « The Sign Of Jonah http://www.revivalblog.com/pentecostal-according-to-who/#comment-8013 Regarding a Second work of Grace « The Sign Of Jonah Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:44:32 +0000 http://revivalblog.com/2006/10/05/pentecostal-according-to-who/#comment-8013 [...] I have to say that before carl gets too offended.  carl seems like a great guy and even though he called me a “bonehead,” I can take it on the chin, realize we are both brothers and return the compliment.  But I’ll let him use his own words for that.  There are elements what I’ll discuss that permeate the movement but this is my experience and I am relating it as such.  If you want a really succinct and more objective  history of the Pentecostal movement, I’d recommend Gary Gilley’s article on the topic here. I don’t really have time to explore all of the ins and outs and frankly, I’d just be doing the most boring part of research by regurgitating facts, names and dates. Not really what I like to do on a Wednesday evening. But as for me, I’m still buzzing from the high of seeing my meager hit counter surge a couple of days ago after being Blogspotted by the prince of Reformed blogging, Grace to You’s Phil Johnson. So I’m not planning on bringing myself down with boring names and dates.  Thanks Phil. Fine I’m saved, now what? First off, these guys are Christians and I love them as such.  (Even as I say “these guys,” I realize that not all Pentecostals will fit into this category.)  I just have some disagreements.  I think that’s safe ground for discussion.  For me, I have to say that I was always bothered by the idea of the so-called “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” as espoused by my Pente-smatic pastor growing up. For those unfamiliar, Pentecostals were known as the “tongues speakers” for the longest time believing that the only evidence that one “had the Holy Spirit” was that they babbled about in “other tongues.” Although the more traditional Pentecostal would disagree, I think that some would say that displaying any of the various spiritual gifts would qualify someone as having received the Holy Spirit even if tongues in particular was not present. The bottom line is that as a distinctive they still believe that one has to “receive the Holy Spirit” as a Secondary Work of Grace, that is, as something that is subsequent to Salvation. [...] [...] I have to say that before carl gets too offended.  carl seems like a great guy and even though he called me a “bonehead,” I can take it on the chin, realize we are both brothers and return the compliment.  But I’ll let him use his own words for that.  There are elements what I’ll discuss that permeate the movement but this is my experience and I am relating it as such.  If you want a really succinct and more objective  history of the Pentecostal movement, I’d recommend Gary Gilley’s article on the topic here. I don’t really have time to explore all of the ins and outs and frankly, I’d just be doing the most boring part of research by regurgitating facts, names and dates. Not really what I like to do on a Wednesday evening. But as for me, I’m still buzzing from the high of seeing my meager hit counter surge a couple of days ago after being Blogspotted by the prince of Reformed blogging, Grace to You’s Phil Johnson. So I’m not planning on bringing myself down with boring names and dates.  Thanks Phil. Fine I’m saved, now what? First off, these guys are Christians and I love them as such.  (Even as I say “these guys,” I realize that not all Pentecostals will fit into this category.)  I just have some disagreements.  I think that’s safe ground for discussion.  For me, I have to say that I was always bothered by the idea of the so-called “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” as espoused by my Pente-smatic pastor growing up. For those unfamiliar, Pentecostals were known as the “tongues speakers” for the longest time believing that the only evidence that one “had the Holy Spirit” was that they babbled about in “other tongues.” Although the more traditional Pentecostal would disagree, I think that some would say that displaying any of the various spiritual gifts would qualify someone as having received the Holy Spirit even if tongues in particular was not present. The bottom line is that as a distinctive they still believe that one has to “receive the Holy Spirit” as a Secondary Work of Grace, that is, as something that is subsequent to Salvation. [...]

]]> By: David Copeland http://www.revivalblog.com/pentecostal-according-to-who/#comment-7775 David Copeland Sat, 07 Oct 2006 02:20:24 +0000 http://revivalblog.com/2006/10/05/pentecostal-according-to-who/#comment-7775 as long as preachers continue to be afraid of pressing the issue of tongues as the initial physical evidence (or tongues at all) because they are afraid of nutting people out, the real power of "Pentecost" will continue to be a fad instead of the confirmation power to prove the validity of the Word! Signs and Wonders should follow the Word if the Holy Spirit of the Book of Acts is still real And He is!!!!!! as long as preachers continue to be afraid of pressing the issue of tongues as the initial physical evidence (or tongues at all) because they are afraid of nutting people out, the real power of “Pentecost” will continue to be a fad instead of the confirmation power to prove the validity of the Word!

Signs and Wonders should follow the Word if the Holy Spirit of the Book of Acts is still real And He is!!!!!!

]]>