TRUE or FALSE: All Pentecostal trace roots to Azusa? by Dr. Vinson Synan

TRUE or FALSE: All Pentecostal trace  roots to Azusa? by Dr. Vinson Synan

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

| PentecostalTheology.com

               

Pentecostalism: William Seymour

What scoffers viewed as a weird babble of tongues became a world phenomenon after his Los Angeles revival.

Pentecostalism: William Seymour

202 Comments

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stephen Williams Is this what we were discussing with you awhile back?

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Jim Daniel

    False. There were two outpourings before Azuza Street. The first was during the 1880s or 1890s in the mountains around Murphy, N.C. that led to the formation of the Church of God denomination from Cleveland, TN. After that, there was an outpouring in the Kansas City area at a Bible college.
    The roots may go back further than that, however. The Cane Creek revival in Kentucky that led to the present day Independent Christian Churches (Stone-Campbell or Restoration Movement) involved some behaviors that seem to possibly ve connected to manifestations of the Holy Spirit along with some practices that were clearly very much flesh and emotion. They play down the possibilty of it being connected with any sort of spiritual ecstatcies because their official position now is that of cessationism. That was as far back as the first decade of the 1800s.

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Jim Daniel Are you saying Vinson Synan should have include Murphy, N.C? I think it was Link Hudson who also mentioned the Russian molokans who spoke in tongues long before getting to the Azusa revival

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Jim Daniel

      Those are just the tip of the iceberg. There is a trail leading all the way back to the apostles and early church of believers who operated in the gifts of the spirit including the gift of tongues.
      There was a group of believers during the 2nd century AD in the region of France and Spain called the Montanists, (I think that is the correct spelling) who were strong proponents of the use of the gifts of prophecy and tongues, especially through their leadership. They were all but eradicated by the Roman Catholics as heretics. The Catholics then seem to have destroyed anything that they may have written and quite possibly slandered them to justify the actions of the church.

      • Reply March 10, 2018

        Fr. Timothy Cremeens, PhD

        The Montanists were not “eradicated” by the Roman Catholics, neither were they considered heretics BECAUSE they spoke in tongues or prophesied. Rather they were considered heretical because 1) they believed their prophetic utterances were superior to the writings of the NT, 2) they believed that Jesus would return again to Pompusa in Phrygia NOT to Jerusalem 3) that Montanus was an incarnation of the Holy Spirit and 4) when they spoke in tongues and prophesied they did so in a frenzied manner like the pagans and not like the Orthodox Catholic Church Christians who did so in a decent and orderly manner.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      We’ve discussed before Speaking in Tongues in America Prior to the Azusa Street http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/speaking-in-tongues-in-america-prior-to-the-azusa-street-ourcog/

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Jim Daniel

      That was the Montanists of the 2nd century.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Jim Daniel

      Also, there was indications that the early Quakers spoke in tongues.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Jim Daniel

      Also, it was Cane Ridge, not Cane Creek. I apologize, Cane Creek is a falls in north Georgia and I keep mixing the two.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Gottfried Sommer believes several movements merged. There was speaking in tongues among Methodist-type movements in South America and India that started about the same time as the Azusa Street revival.

      There were also some Presbyterians in England in the 1800’s. That turned into something highly liturgical, and kind of like the NAR in some ways, but with 12 Gentile so-called ‘apostles’.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Larry Ray Talley

      You gentlemen show a genius for Pentecostal history!! I wish I were younger, I would love to study your findings and maybe work on a comprehensive manual tying them all together. The research would be a challenging and thouroughally enjoyable exercise!!!!!

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Varnel Watson

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Stephen Williams

    Revival under Count Zinzendorf in 1727. Speaking in tongues occurred there. And tongues in Edward Irving’s church 1830.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      But the unique mixture that emerged as Pentecostalism has Wesleyan roots (see Dayton), emphasized the “full gospel”, experiential spirituality and a strong premillennial eschatological thrust.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Zinzendorf 1727 was never proven was it?

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Let me check my references.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      See William DeArteaga, Quenching the Spirit p. 383; Van Johnson, Master’s Pentecostal Seminary, Matrix of Pentecostalism, Lecture Notes, 2014, p. 3.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Also see Richard Hogue, Tongues: A Theological History of Glossolalia, p. 193.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Dr. William DeArteaga us a frequent poster in this group and perhaps can shed some light personally on the Moravians – namely did they conenct speaking in tongues to the Holy Spirit Baptism in 1727?

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Aren’t we talking about roots? They wouldn’t have been connecting tongues to HSB. Not on the radar.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      William DeArteaga

      Troy Day I read a litle on the Moravians in regard to their influence on the Wesleys, but never ran into thier speaking in tongues. That is possible, but I did not go into their literature deeply.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      I agree. There you have it Stephen Williams Possible but never stated explicitly. Much like Irving and then the Great Cane Ridge Revival of Logan County, Kentucky – tongues were there but were they connected to HSB ??? Link Hudson http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/1796-the-foundation-of-the-great-cane-ridge-revival-of-logan-county-kentucky/

      • Reply March 14, 2024

        Joe Thomas

        Read Joseph L. Thomas, “Perfect Harmony: Interracialism in Early Holiness-Pentecostalism, 1880-1907” to read the interracial story of this movement.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      No, not HSB, but according to McGee, Zinzendorf believed tongues to be connected to the missionary effort.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Further, McGee, on page 99, citing A.J. Lewis, writes, “On one occasion, participants were ‘baptized by the Holy Spirit to one love”…and on page 32, states that famous Moravian preacher John Cennick spoke of the Spirit’s baptism “without which all other baptisms are but faint shadows” from a sermon in 1740.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      The New Charismatics II mentions speaking in tongues at a Methodist revival near the University of Georgia in 1901..

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Vernon Soles

    No.

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Stephen Williams

    “In 1722, the Moravian refugees established a new village called Herrnhut, about 2 miles from Berthelsdorf. The town initially grew steadily, but major religious disagreements emerged and by 1727 the community was divided into warring factions. Zinzendorf used a combination of feudal authority and his charismatic personality to restore a semblance of unity, then on August 13th, 1727 the community underwent a dramatic transformation when the inhabitants of Herrnhut “Learned to love one another.” following an experience which they attributed to a visitation of the Holy Spirit, similar to that recorded in the Bible on the day of Pentecost. It is said that the great revival at Herrnhut was accompanied by prophecies, visions, glossolalia (Speaking in tongues), and healings.” – Moravian Moment #129–The Moravian Pentecost http://moravians.net/joomla/about-us/34-moravian-moments/231-moravian-moment-129

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Moravians were evangelical, missional and revivalists but speaking in tongues was never established. It is said that Herrnhut was accompanied glossolalia but I very strongly doubt they even connected speaking in tongues to the HSB in 1727. There is just not enough theological support for such doctrine out there for the period. If you know any others 1720s sources I wold love to examine them

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Aren’t we talking about roots or antecedents?

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      OP is about the last sentence in the article: All Pentecostal trace roots to Azusa… What Pentecostal movement came out of the Moravians?

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Moravians influenced Wesley- Wesley the Pent movement

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Jim Daniel Did they connect tongues to HSB at Murphy?

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Link Hudson

      The first I’ve read of the ‘initial evidence doctrine’ in history was probably with Irving in the 1800’s

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Tongues were the ‘standing sign’- Irving. Synan, Century of the Holy Spirit, pp. 22-25.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Varnel Watson

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Jim Daniel

      It is my understanding that the outpouring at Murphy began with a group of believers seeking to be filled with the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. The Church of God (Cleveland, Tn.) has held the position that tongues is the initial evidence from their very beginning as a denomination and they came directly from that revival.
      Interesting sidebar: While most of the church goes out of its way to deny that speaking in tongues is necessary to identify the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, I know of two published New Testament scholars with Ph. D.s that have said that the sign that they were looking for in Acts 8 in Samaria was speaking in tongues. That would make it unanimous that every time there was an outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Acts, someone spoke in tongues. And these were not Pentecostal or Charismatics, so their opinions would not be seen by the world as biased. Unfortunately, neither one was willing to make that final step in receiving the fullness of God’s blessing.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      It’s just that the Azusa narrative became the dominant one.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Jim Daniel

      Azuza got all the press.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Exactly!

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Link We’ve discussed before Speaking in Tongues in America Prior to the Azusa Street. Irvin did not quite make the list – scholarly source for your claim pls! Also if Jim Daniel has a source for connecting they tongues to HSB at Murphy will be helpful http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/speaking-in-tongues-in-america-prior-to-the-azusa-street-ourcog/

    January 1, 1901– The initial phenomenon of speaking in tongues occurred at Parham’s school in Topeka, Kansas
    January 6, 1900 – Frank Sanford’s Shiloh school reported that “The gift of tongues has descended”
    1896 – Over 100 people baptized in the Shaerer schoolhouse revival conducted by the Christian Union in the North Carolina mountains
    1887 – People falling in trances and speaking in tongues were reported at Maria Etter’s revival meetings in Indiana
    1874 – Speaking in tongues occurred during healing meetings reported in New York
    1873 – William H. Doughty and the Gift People of Rhode Island spoke in tongues
    1854 – V. P. Simmons and Robert Boyd reported tongue speaking during Moody’s meetings

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Try Edward Irving on Wikipedia first. (UK) I’m sure you could find a scholarly source over there since you probably have more access to those kinds of books where you are than where I am. I could use Google scholar, but you could do that as well.

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Link Hudson

    Troy Day, Edward Irving from the 1800’s was in England. Have you read about that? The movement was called the Catholic Apostolic Church after he died? THey appointed 12 so-called ‘apostles’ who they did not replace, and the movement died out. There is a splinter group in Germany.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Irving’s Christology was Lucan as well. Very Pentecostal-like.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Stephen Williams What are the characteristics of Lucan Christology. Irving believed Christ did His miracles through the power of the Spirit rather than through His deity. He was accused of saying ‘Christ’s sinful flesh’ and he lost his ordination for the Presbyterian church over this. I think it was Drummond who asked him where his authority came to baptize after he lost his ordination (weird thinking IMO.) They ended up reorganizing under Drummond and others who they considered apostles.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Link Hudson

      After he died, the movement went really liturgical. Their aristocratic ‘apostles’ went around Europe and brought back aspects of liturgy. They divided up Europe by characteristics they thought matched tribes of Israel– strange from my perspective. They believed in apostles laying hands on people to ‘seal’ them. They’d lay hands on Anglican ministers and Roman Catholic priests to put their blessing on them. Drummond promoted the idea that apostles– himself and other– were necessary for the unity of the church. That kind of reminds me of NAR, but it was different in a lot of other ways.

      When it started off, though, it seemed a bit more like a kind of Pentecostal or Charismatic movement. More Charismatic I guess since it happened in a Presbyterian church that believed in infant baptism.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Through the power of the Spirit…

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Stephen Williams I agree the Gospels show that He did miracles through the power of the Spirit. I think Pentecostals have a valid point on this. I don’t know if Irving tooks his teaching a bit too far or not.

    • Reply February 18, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Yeah, likely did. But definitely possessed a Spirit Christology.

  • Reply February 18, 2017

    Link Hudson

    The splinter group isn’t Pentecostal or Charismatic the way we’d think of it. They just call their leaders apostles. They don’t do sermon prep. They use the apocrypha. That’s the splinter group.

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Link What’s your point on Irving – source for their speaking in tongues connected to HSB?

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Link Hudson

    From Irvings ‘The Day of Pentecost, or the Baptism of the Holy Ghost’

    “I have had fully in my mind-namely, for preventing the church from falling into despair upon the discovery that she possesseth not the baptism with the Holy Ghost, whose standing sign, if we err not, is the speaking with tongues (Irving 28).”

    as quoted in,
    https://oldlandmark.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/49/

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Link Hudson

    Irving may have been the first person in history to believe in the classical Pentecostal initial evidence doctrine.

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Link Hudson This is old school interpretation. Have you read the many more who say old landmarkists were and are still are clueless about the Biblical HS baptism. Are you taking “standing sign” as initial evidence or you disregard the whole initial evidence doctrine? Also do you make difference between initial evidence and the gift of speaking in tongues?

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Troy, initial evidence was Parham’s way of articulating it. Irving’s was standing sign, both are not biblical, but ways to articulate a biblical idea. How we articulate is not infallible.

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Link Hudson

    What is old school interpretation? I don’t know what you mean by ‘standing sign’ Landmark Baptists? What do they have to do with Irving? He was a Prebyterian in England.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      You cited ‘standing sign’ above so I am asking you if you understand “standing sign” as initial evidence of HSB? You should also read pg 64ff about sign and gift (since you brought is as a source in the discussion) https://archive.org/stream/daypentecostorb00irvigoog#page/n117/mode/2up/search/tongues

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Troy Day So you mean did Irving mean the same thing by ‘standing sign’ as the Pentecostal movement would mean with the term ‘initial evidence.’ That’s how I took it.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      I mean have you actually read the whole book like p64ff? Does this even sound like BHS and initial evidence to you?

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Troy Day, I have not read that whole book. I was going to tell you that I read in a biography about him many years ago that he believed that tongues was the sign of being baptized with the Holy Ghost. But I decided to do a web search to see if I could find a quote instead, and I posted that. I haven’t read Irving’s book.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      I think you may have a point there. With old school interpretation above I was referring to old landmarkists aka bapticostal

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Who are you calling Bapticostals?

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      For the 3rd time “old landmarkists aka bapticostal”

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      I dont’ get it

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      whre does the ‘costal part come in?

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      How are Landmark Baptist Pentecostal?

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    James Guthrie

    Don’t forget the Sunderland conference under AA Bossy and the Keswick Movement both in England

    • Reply March 10, 2018

      Fr. Timothy Cremeens, PhD

      A.A. Boddy, not Bossy, who was an Anglican priest to his dying day!

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Stephen Williams

    PAOC- “Azusa is not the birthplace of the PAOC! Stop perpetuating the myth. Ottawa Valley – McAlister via Horner. Montreal – Baker who came from Ottawa. Toronto – Hebden Mission and Keswick. Winnipeg – Argue, Methodists and Durham in Chicago. And the Canadian who went to Azusa was McAlister and that was after he already knew about speaking in tongues from Horner in the Ottawa Valley.” -Dr. Michael Wilkinson

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Gottfried Sommer

    Von Below (noble family in Pomerania) revival started 1820, known for singing in tongues, Lars Levi Laestadius (1830) Finnland, the Laestadius still do speak in tongues. Even in the revival lead by Paavo Ruotsasleinen, speak Ing in tongues was known.
    Mukti revival in India was before Azusa Street, influenced the Chilenian revival under Hoover.

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      That the birthplace of the PAOC was Azusa.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      The article states “Today, practically all Pentecostal and charismatic movements can trace their roots directly or indirectly to the humble mission on Azusa Street and its pastor.” PAOC did not start until 1919 so in most probability is directly or indirectly connected right?

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Not according to Canadian scholars, eg. Wilkinson.

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stephen Williams The origin of Pentecostalism is widely considered the 1906 Azusa Street Revival in Los Angeles, California. Within months of the outbreak of revival at Azusa Street, Pentecostalism had reached Canada, and by 1910, there were Canadian Pentecostals on both the Pacific and Atlantic coasts, with sizable congregations in Toronto, Ontario, and Winnipeg, Manitoba. A majority of Pentecostals were found in the prairie provinces due in part to the large numbers of United States immigrants who brought their faith with them. Because of these influences, Canadian Pentecostals maintained close ties to their American counterparts Source: The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada”. The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Rev. ed. Edited by Stanley M. Burgess and Eduard M. van der Mass. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2003

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Have you read the Cambridge Companion to Pentecostalism? Have you read Anderson? The Azusa narrative became dominant not because it was THE origin of the movement but because it became the most publicized and popular centre.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Yes I have read them. Pls cite a source for your PAOC claim

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      I did. Michael Wilkinson is a PAOC scholar. I quoted him directly.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Canadian Pentecostalism and Winds from the North- both by Wilkinson.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Have you read the Wilkinson books? Or William Sloos’ article in Pneuma tracing the origins of the Hebden Mission back to Keswick Holiness in England. The facts are here in the North is that Pentecostalism emerged separately from Azusa. Ellen Hebden’s experience of Spirit Baptism cannot be traced to Azusa Street anymore than can Agnes Ozman’s.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Yes – as answered before. Keswick Holiness is one very limited stream and some do not recognize it as true Pentecostal because of the Calvinist element in it. I also mentioned the Molokans and other international groups. But none of this really proves the Canadian theory does it? Pls see my last comment here https://www.facebook.com/groups/pentecostaltheologygroup/permalink/1264883633566649/?comment_id=1266671826721163&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      If you would like more light shed on the subject, you could always chat with Wilkinson. Send him a private message.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      So, would you say that Durham, the AG, PAOC, or any other ” Pentecostal” group that are not Wesleyan-Holiness are not to be recognized as true Pentecostal?

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stephen Williams Guess we need to examine them when there is more time. So far the Irving, Zinzendorf and the Moravian could not be proven. I suspect the Murphy case cited by Jim Daniel is a bit shaky as well…

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Did you see my post about Zinzendorf? McGee states there was tongues there

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Yes you also cited William DeArteaga who stated clearly his position

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Right here

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Further, McGee, on page 99, citing A.J. Lewis, writes, “On one occasion, participants were ‘baptized by the Holy Spirit to one love”…and on page 32, states that famous Moravian preacher John Cennick spoke of the Spirit’s baptism “without which all other baptisms are but faint shadows” from a sermon in 1740.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Zinzendorf not out yet

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Troy Day, what do you make of McGee stating that tongues occurred spontaneously during Moravian meetings!

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Link Hudson

      What about Irving cannot be proven? I provided a quote about his beliefs. But I can’t find a historical link between his group and the Pentecostal movement.

    • Reply February 19, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Yeah, I don’t know what Troy is talking about.

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Jim Price

    I have been under the impression that the Monroe County holiness group had the experience of speaking in tongues ( from which sprang the Church of God ) around 1890.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      As asked Jim Daniel about Murphy / Monroe – no doubt they may have spoken in tongues but did they connect speaking in tongues to the baptism with the Holy Spirit. In other words did they explicitly understood and stated – we speak in tongues as initial evidence our receiving of the Holy Spirit. And even more importantly – is there an explicit documented source (not later on historical here-say) that proves both their claim and experience ????

  • Reply February 19, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    My grandfather was exposed to Pentecostals being sent out of Houston into East Texas, as early as 1910, no doubt associated with the Charles Parham group (which had sent out Seymour to Los Angeles earlier).

  • Reply February 20, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stephen Williams The main thing is still the main thing – they may have spoken in tongues but did they connect speaking in tongues to the baptism with the Holy Spirit. In other words did they explicitly understood and stated – we speak in tongues as initial evidence our receiving of the Holy Spirit. And even more importantly – is there an explicit documented source (not later on historical here-say) that proves both their claim and experience ????

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Likely not, due to the fact that they were not looking for “initial evidence” for the Baptism in the Holy Spirit was were the likes of Parham. I am sure you are well aware that Palmer equated HSB with santification where as Oberlin and Keswick groups associated it with power for service. So, who was right, and how do you know you got it?
      Charles Parham formulated initial evidence in the context of a “fundamentalist-like religious culture searching for rational responses” (Robeck)

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      There you go – and my point exactly. BTW you posted a partial page above, I was interested to read the whole page and 2-3 after if possible to post. Seemed like good history

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      I bought the book for a seminary course. Good resource.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Troy Day, McGee traces many precursors to Pentecostalism, but I think that initial evidence is a debated topic at the moment. For clarification, that’s how I knew I received it, so I am good with it!

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      One of my professors, thinks that Pentecostalism is more than a list of “ingredients” ( eg. HSB, spiritual gifts, Jesus is our Saviour, Healer etc etc) but it is how those ingredients are mixed and “baked”! In other words, when listing characteristics in front of a CMA student, the student didn’t see much difference. So, not just ingredients, but how they are baked!

  • Reply February 20, 2017

    John Duncan

    Even Cashwell visited Azusa then went to Dunn, NC to bring Pentecost to the Southeast. I have never heard the “initial evidence” doctrine came from anywhere else – directly or indirectly.

  • Reply February 20, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Stephen Williams The only one with doctrinal affirmation baptism with Holy Spirit with evidence of tongues before Azusa (that I have found clearly documented) Frank Sanford and his Shiloh school which was visited by both Parham and AJ Tomlinson before they experienced speaking in tongues

    January 6, 1900 – Frank Sanford’s Shiloh school reported that “The gift of tongues has descended”

    January 1, 1901– The initial phenomenon of speaking in tongues occurred at Parham’s school in Topeka, Kansas – year later and very much copying the same style after Parham’s visit in Shiloh.

    What is NOT certain IF Parham taught initial evidence ie. speaking in tongues as part of the baptism PRIOR to Shiloh Dr. Harold D. Hunter tells the story better than me in his article on the FORGOTTEN ROOTS OF THE AZUSA STREET REVIVAL http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/pentecostal-roots-of-the-azusa-street-revival/

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Yes, Parham was certainly influenced by Sanford’s school and teaching.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      To me Sanford is the first one who connected speaking in tongues with HSB in modern day America

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Irving in England. 1830’s.

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      That to me is not explicitly clear and documented As pointed to Link Hudson before. Irving’s book on pg 64ff becomes very unclear what’s standing sign, initial evidence and gift of tongues

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Link Hudson

      From ‘The Collected Writings of Edward Irving’
      “Beyond all question …
      speaking in tongues was the sign of the Holy Ghost in the person who so spake … as the tongue or word of man is the
      sign of the mind within him; so, when another Spirit, the Spirit of God, enters into him, He signifieth His presence by
      another tongue from that which the person himself useth.”

      according to this site:http://agchurches.org/Sitefiles/Default/RSS/IValue/Resources/Holy%20Spirit/Articles/SpeakinginTongues.pdf

    • Reply February 20, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Once again standing sign or initial evidence? Irving makes a great deal of difference in the other book you cited. And also presence in the person or Holy Spirit baptism?

    • Reply February 21, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Troy Day This doesn’t touch on the ‘initial evidence doctrine’, but I thought you might find it interesting. The first article touches a bit on Plymouth Brethren attitudes toward ‘Pentecostalism’ and eschatology. The second article is from a critic of Irving who had been in the movement. Irving had some beliefs similar to Pentecostals, including some Holiness beliefs, but other leaders in his movement did not all agree https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/cbrfj/10_40.pdf

      http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/kelly/8_Bt/Irving.html

  • Reply February 20, 2017

    Louise Cummings

    False. Most Pentecostals will preach the beginning there. But the Church Of God was before that. It wasn’t named Church Of God at that time. But after a while the same people and same movement came up with Church Of God. And this Name has stayed. But the Church Of God was before Azusa street revival.

  • Reply February 20, 2017

    Jimmie Wheeler

    The Pentecostal movement came about in the upper room when peter and the people were given the gift of the Holy Spirit and spake in another language that was not their own.

  • Reply February 22, 2017

    Varnel Watson

    Thanks for the Link Link Still seems Shiloh and Parham were the first ones to really connect it. But Irving was very very close to that too

    • Reply February 22, 2017

      Link Hudson

      That’s the problem. If Shiloh and Parham were first, why believe it?

      I don’t know why Pentecostals would want to have connections with Sandford, either, considering the accounts of starvation, etc. which were said to have been attributed to the Lord’s leading.

    • Reply February 22, 2017

      Link Hudson

      Btw, a quote from Irving,
      “In The Collected Writings of Edward Irving, he had written: “Beyond all question …
      speaking in tongues was the sign of the Holy Ghost in the person who so spake … as the tongue or word of man is the
      sign of the mind within him; so, when another Spirit, the Spirit of God, enters into him, He signifieth His presence by
      another tongue from that which the person himself useth.””

      from http://agchurches.org/Sitefiles/Default/RSS/IValue/Resources/Holy%20Spirit/Articles/SpeakinginTongues.pdf

  • Reply October 8, 2017

    Michael Hazlewood

    false

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Rickey Matthews

    false

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Tim Anderson

    False

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Coe Campbell

    False, Sadly The Revivals in Kansas and N.C. Mountains are often overlooked.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      How do you mean? Did they connect the speaking of tongues with the Baptism with the Holy Spirit?

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Bill Coble

      Yes, 1896 Murphy NC revival did. Over 100 baptized w Holy Ghost w Speaking in Tongues.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Though they may have been speaking in tongues no one there connected it as initial evidence. This was done only at Azusa

    • Reply October 10, 2017

      Stephen Williams

      Nope. Connected at Topeka. Seymour got his IE doctrine from Parham. Canadians trace beginnings to the Hebdens in Toronto. Hebden was influenced by Keswick Holiness- independent of Azusa. Hebden connected SB with tongues as IE.

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Paul Hughes

    A lot of the roots went through Charles Parham’s work in Houston, including William J. Seymour. My grandfather was Spirit-baptized near Livingston in 1915 when some young evangelists were sent out from Houston. He went on to plant several assemblies in Baytown and northeast of Houston. Raymond T. Richey set up his Bible school in Baytown.

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Hannah Marie Smith

    I was taught that the AG had no solid ties to Azusa… maybe a few ingignificant figures attended Azusa, but Parham did not

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Phillip Aaron Powers

    False. Church of God Revival in Murphy predates Azusa Street by 10 years

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Bill Coble

    False. 1896 in Mountains of NC before Azusa.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Phillip Aaron Powers

      10 years before California

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Did anyone there connect speaking in tongues as initial evidence of the baptism of the Spirit? There has been no evidence presented to that extent because no one there connected it

  • Reply October 9, 2017

    Curt Stewart

    Pentecost started on the day of Pentecost. I suggest Marvin Arnold’s book “Apostolic Church history outline”.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Phillip Aaron Powers

      Yes, we know. We are talking about American Pentecostalism

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Curt Stewart

      Apostolic Church history outline gives detailed info. On church history both here in the U.S. and other nations. References are given to.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Phillip Aaron Powers

      Again, I realize that. HOWEVER… We are discussing American Pentecostalism. The article title is a little misleading.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Curt Stewart

      It gives detailed information on American Pentecostals.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Phillip Aaron Powers

      Thanks.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Curt Stewart

      You’re welcome. Love you.

    • Reply October 9, 2017

      Varnel Watson

      Phillip Aaron Powers How so? The title comes from this statement in the article: Today, practically all Pentecostal and charismatic movements can trace their roots directly or indirectly to the humble mission on Azusa Street and its pastor.

  • Reply August 24, 2018

    Louise Cummings

    People does Reece it Azusa St first. But it’s wrong because the Church Of God was before them. It didn’t start out with the Church Of God. But Quickly changed to the Church Of God, before Azusa St. started. Even tho it changed names at first. It still was the same Church.

  • Reply August 24, 2018

    Ron Culbreth

    False. It is traced to the day of Pentecost.

    • Reply August 24, 2018

      Louise Cummings

      I thought everyone knew that. I thought you meant in our time. We wouldn’t have it , it not for when the Holy Ghost coming on the day of Pentecost.

  • Reply August 24, 2018

    Varnel Watson

    What happened at Azusa Street during the next three years was to change the course of church history. Although the little frame building measured only 40 by 60 feet, as many as 600 persons jammed inside while hundreds more looked in through the windows. The central attraction was tongues, with the addition of traditional black worship styles that included shouting, trances, and the holy dance. There was no order of service, since “the Holy Ghost was in control.” No offerings were taken, although a box hung on the wall proclaimed, “Settle with the Lord.” Altar workers enthusiastically prayed seekers through to the coveted tongues experience. It was a noisy place, and services lasted into the night.

  • Reply August 24, 2018

    John Crilly

    False…..

    • Reply August 24, 2018

      Varnel Watson

      Why do you feel that way? The exact statement made by the article was

      Today, practically all Pentecostal and charismatic movements can trace their roots directly or indirectly to the humble mission on Azusa Street and its pastor.

    • Reply August 24, 2018

      Louise Cummings

      Troy Day I thank God for Azusa St. Outpouring.

  • Reply August 24, 2018

    Jeremiah Burton

    Modern day Pentecostal Theology does, but even Parham & Seymour needed the teaching of Acts 2 to inspire their teachings.

  • Reply August 24, 2018

    Jeremiah Burton

    This was a great article…..thanks for sharing.

  • Reply October 9, 2018

    Varnel Watson

    Do you agree or disagree with this statement? WHY?

  • Reply October 9, 2018

    Carl Dawson

    I disagree. There were early groups that had stammering lips in Michigan and Ohio and Tennessee and North Carolina who joined with other groups after Azusa .

  • Reply October 9, 2018

    Varnel Watson

  • Reply October 9, 2018

    Jared Cheshire

    I disagree. All Pentecostals trace their roots back to the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2.

    • Reply October 9, 2018

      Varnel Watson

      what about all American Pentecostals ?

  • Reply October 9, 2018

    Jared Cheshire

    There is neither Jew nor Greek, nor American for that matter.

    There are stories I have heard of people with pentecostal experience further back than our founding of this country.

  • Reply June 1, 2020

    Joshua Tesillo

    Yup that when the denomination started

    • Reply June 1, 2020

      Varnel Watson

      this is correct – THE very reason the historian of Azusa and one of the most dedicated evangelist of Pentecost BARTLEMAN left was when denominations started splitting the young movement

  • Reply June 1, 2020

    Varnel Watson

    Chris Westerman you seem to suggest that engaging in a bitter ‘culture war’ in order to preserve America’s formerly dominant Christian culture has been largely a failed strategy but I will submit that you may be too late for any of that

  • Reply April 24, 2023

    Anonymous

    When I was on staff at a COG, Cleaveland, TN. The pastor was adamant that the COG had experienced and embraced the Baptism in the Holy Spirit with evidence of speaking in other tongues before the Azusa outpouring.

  • Reply April 25, 2023

    Anonymous

    not pentecostal enough? John Digsby Link Hudson

  • Reply April 26, 2023

    Anonymous

    Who knows that it may be for propaganda to get the awareness of others.

  • Reply May 8, 2023

    Anonymous

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    HISTORICALLY and THEOLOGICALLY, who was the first person in America to come up with the idea of Speaking in Tongues as part of the Holy Ghost baptism?

    We know that Parham visited with Dowie where he borrowed the idea from Zion’s healing houses and established healing school in Topeka. But there was no speaking in tongues at Zion – so where did he take the idea of speaking in tongues come up? Philip Williams Jerome Herrick Weymouth J.D. King Dale M. Coulter Tony Richie though cog preached in tongues just around 1909 and not earlier https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/preaching-in-tongues-among-early-pentecostals/

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy, Parham got the idea at Frank Sandford’s Shiloh In Massachusetts. He supposedly heard one of the students speaking in tongues at the prayer tower.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      J.D. King identifying tongues as the initial evidence began at Topeka and Parham taught it at his School of the Prophets in Houston. He and Pennock laid hands on Seymour when they sent him to preach the message in Los Angeles. Parham headed to Zion Illinois to preach the message there. After this, Pentecost mostly spread from Los Angeles.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Philip, I know that Shiloh didn’t teach tongues as the initial physical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. However, it is true that Parham heard some tongues speech there.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      J.D. King oh please Philip Williams is just singing his song with NO proof
      YOU can NOT – I repeat can NOT prove Sanford connection 1 little bit

      REFERENCE => https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/frank-sanford-and-his-history/

      it is just like we can say Parham got it from ZION or Bartleman and Azusa got it from Irwing

      REFERENCE =>https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/irwin-taught-baptisms-of-fire-dynamite-lyddite-and-oxidite/

      Larry Martin and Bishop Bernie L Wade got into this when they were writing their books on PARHAM and there could NOT settle where he got it from

      January 1, 1901– The initial phenomenon of speaking in tongues occurred at Parham’s school in Topeka, Kansas

      January 6, 1900 – Frank Sanford’s Shiloh school reported that “The gift of tongues has descended”

      1896 – Over 100 people baptized in the Shaerer schoolhouse revival conducted by the Christian Union in the North Carolina mountains

      1887 – People falling in trances and speaking in tongues were reported at Maria Etter’s revival meetings in Indiana

      1874 – Speaking in tongues occurred during healing meetings reported in New York

      1873 – William H. Doughty and the Gift People of Rhode Island spoke in tongues

      1854 – V. P. Simmons and Robert Boyd reported tongue speaking during Moody’s meetings

      REFERENCE => https://cupandcross.com/speaking-in-tongues-in-america-prior-to-the-azusa-street-revival-of-1906-diamonds-in-the-rough-n-ready-pentecostal-series/

      Parham could have gotten it from anyone AT THE SAME TIME Mel Robeck has explained many times and ways how the FIRST to speak in tongues @ Azusa were the Molokans – it is recorded in Apostolic Faith issue #1 and many other after it.

      The Molokans claim to have spoken in tongues and recognized it as sign for the baptism of the Holy Spirit. In the early 1900s some 2,000 Molokans (mostly of the Jumpers/Leapers) immigrated to California (via Elis Island) after receiving a young boy’s prophecy to do so in their homeland. Among them was the family of Full Gospel Business Men’s Fellowship International’s founder Demos Shakarian who tells the story in his autobiography (Demos Shakarian, The Happiest People on Earth: The Long-Awaited Personal Story of Demos Shakarian (Old Tappan, NJ: Chosen Books, 1975).

      The Russian settlers formed a community in Los Angeles near Boyle Heights and Oake’s lot (later Pecan Playground at 1st and Pecan Str.) around the Flats area slums were tent revival meetings took place during the Azusa Street Revival (1906-09) (Samarin, William. Tongues of Men and Angels. The Religious Language of Pentecostalism. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1972). See also Pauline C. Young The Russian Molokan Community in Los Angeles in American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 35, No. 3, Nov. 1929 (University of Chicago Press, 1929).

      REFERENCE => https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/the-molokans-claim-to-have-spoken-in-tongues-2/

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day there are numerous instances of speaking in tongues reported over the centuries. What created the Pentecostal movement was the initial evidence doctrine which everyone should agree began with Parham, whatever his moral failures. That should keep us Pentecostals humble, probably as God intended.

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    just recently Philip Williams addressed J.D. King on this article by saying

    I believe that Vinson Synan neglected the importance of the Latter Rain motif In Pentecostal history. Latter Rain thought predates Parham who prayed that the Lord would send the Latter Rain. Writing in the forties, decades before Synan, Methodist historian of America’s small sects Elmer T. Clark classifies all the Pentecostal churches as Latter Rain sects.
    It seems that recent histories have limited Latter Rain teachings to the mid-century New Order of Latter Rain movement. Was a reason this was called New Order! Before the Dispensationalist rapture took over the Pentecostal seminaries, Pentecostals believed the opposite, that is, in the Latter Rain!

    now Peter Vandever has already stated J.D. King is no historical theologian and I myself has suspected Philip Williams Pentecost stopped with his grandma SO from where any of them can claim DR Synan was wrong is a mystery for the ages to resolve

    We may look some into the church of God claims 1986 Dale M. Coulter Tony Richie whereas Todd Shaw stated

    The Church of God began as the Christian Union. They changed their name at the request of their leader as he believed that they had aligned themselves with the Church of God of the Bible.
    HOWEVER I just recently researched some Baptist archives in Tellico Plaines / Reliance and there is absolutely NO proof for any of this as a historical NON-example and after speaking with Wade H. Phillips it is clear that the Church of God (Cleveland, TN) did NOT exist before 20th century.
    https://www.amazon.com/Quest-Restore-Gods-House-Formation-Transformation-Reformation/dp/193593144X

    AND Link Hudson may or may not be cog enough to know this though weVE discussed the earliest tongue speakers on Azusa being the #MOLOKANS https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/the-molokans-claim-to-have-spoken-in-tongues/

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day This is literally in the book description that YOU provided. “Quest to Restore God’s House – A Theological History of the Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee): Volume I, 1886-1923, R.G. Spurling to A.J. Tomlinson, Formation-Transformation-Reformation.”

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Todd Shaw if you actually took time to read Wade he proves HOW
      1. first off they did not consider tongues as evidence back then
      2. they were not cog just yet AND if they were to be considered cog it would be cogOP not cog-cleveland as you attempted to state
      3. very few spoke in tongues – like 2-3 not 100 at the shareware school house revival and NONE of them were among the Christian Union members – and NONE of them were ever part of cog – the Kilpatrick family is still out of cog to this day just 1 example 🙂

      if you just took the time away from the historical clichés and read the book beyond its title – – – there is whole another world out there

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day 1. It still happened. They didn’t know what this experience was, or how it fit into scripture, but it happened & has been happening throughout history. God would not limit Himself to one man, or one movement. “For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:39)

      2. Either you are unaware, or unwilling to acknowledge that the COG and the COGOP have a shared history until the movement split in the 1920’s. So they were one, and the same, until the split.

      3. Few, or many, doesn’t matter. You made the assertion that all Pentecostal denominations & movements can be traced back to Azusa Street. That isn’t true. Why look through history with a closed mind? That’s like going shopping without taking money with you.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Todd you are reaching but have no case Apparently you are unware of your own history and trying to turn my proven points against the claim – it is not working you see 🙂 Dr SYNAN made the claim – not me, and he offered plenty of proof. You however cannot show a SINGLE prove that tongues were spoken as HS baptism in 1896 Appalachia – there is no such proof. If there was you would have presented it instead of the usual cliché mantras. Just read the book already and get yourself educated on the subject pls

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    no then Jerome Herrick Weymouth also said he don’t believe that. + THey preached upon the latter rain. It’s supposed to be the next great Holy Spirit outpouring and after that would come the rapture. Well when I was in the Assembly of God church. I used to hear a lot of sermons on the latter rain. Because there was the outpouring on the day of Pentecost And the Azusa Street revival and then in the last days there would be the Latter Rain outpouring.

    to which Philip Williams began singing his regular song that
    the rapture teaching taught a latter day apostasy, not a latter day revival. Why would God remove a church that is winning the world for Christ!

    which is malarkey AS I’ve proven to him no less than dozen times early pentecostals were as pre-trib as they get as was his late grate Pentecostal grandmother #over4now https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/vinson-synan-charles-r-fox-jr-william-j-seymour-pioneer-of-the-azusa-street-revival/

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    Esther Yateesa if you just read what Peter Vandever has been saying you would have not answer with :

    False.
    However, I believe the formulation of the two distinctive Pentecostal doctrine are traced back to Charles Parham. Their catalyst was at Azusa led by Joseph Seymour.

    ALSO Karsten Wille stated
    This is a much debated topic. If it is true, does this mean the root of pentecostal faith is based on oneness pentecostals, therefore not trinitarian? Educate me guys, as I prefer trinitarian. to which Ivan Karel could not really answer with much evidence …

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    Thanks for the conversation. It is the case that spontaneous eruptions of Pentecostal-like phenomena occurred before the 20th century, and before Azusa Street, not only in the USA (CCOG) but also globally (e.g., Chile, India). I find it helpful to bear in mind that church leaders (e.g., Tomlinson, Phillips) or historians (whether Conn or Phillips, etc.) do not write without agendas of their own (having read both C and P). And, of course, the same can be said of theologians LOL.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Tony Richie Tomlinson did NOT speak in tongues until after Cashwell came to Cleveland – I believe the revival was next to the old YMCA or around there where they also handled the serpent when the Spirit fell upon them with power – the difference is Peter Vandever and J.D. King have never handled the serpent under the Spirit Philip Williams you see now Todd Shaw I may be getting old now having forgotten more than you know about cog 🙂 but as Jim Price once told me: Rev. James Slay of the Narragansett Church of God in Chicago was commissioned to write the book entitled, THIS WE BELIEVE in connection to the 1948 Church of God Declaration of Faith. During the forties, you could see him driving around Cleveland in a white and green Packard. His hair was much longer then and somewhat wavy. Later, he was heard preaching a sermon at the Narragansett Church of God in Chicago a sermon titled: “God setteth the door ajar and flings it wide open when necessary.” https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/narragansett-church-of-god-in-chicago-celebrates-70-years/

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Tony Richie youVE actually now read Vol2 of Wade’s series /?

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    All Pentecostals trace roots to Mary’s House 😉

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Mary did you know ?

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    is THIS the article you wrote about? Judith Smith where does it say anything close to what you are saying? A strawman is someone answering a question no one asked

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day I answered a question to an article you posted. Why are you uptight about it?

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Judith Smith article was posted by Dr SYNAN in our group while he was still alive Vinson Synan
      Of all the outstanding black American religious leaders in the twentieth century, one of the least recognized is William Seymour, the unsung pastor of the Azusa Street Mission in Los Angeles and catalyst of the worldwide Pentecostal movement. Only in the last few decades have scholars become aware of his importance, beginning perhaps with Yale University historian Sidney Ahlstrom, who said Seymour personified a black piety “which exerted its greatest direct influence on American religious history”—placing Seymour’s impact ahead of figures like W. E. B. Dubois and Martin Luther King, Jr.

  • Reply July 6, 2023

    Anonymous

    No, Parham. Seymour was a catalyst.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Danny Payton No, Parham what? Parham plainly denied AND rejected Seymour saying nothing @ Azusa had anything to do with the Pentecost Parham was teaching

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day we’ll, seeing Pentecostalism as tongues being the initial evidence of the BHS that was duration proclaimed I 1901 at Parhams Bible s hool on Topeka. Seymour recieved instruction in this under Parham in Texas before going onto California. So that’s my understanding.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Danny Payton partially right as Philip Williams attested earlier

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day didn’t read the thread. Just answered a question.

    • Reply July 6, 2023

      Anonymous

      Danny Payton of course 🙂

    • Reply July 9, 2023

      Anonymous

      Danny Payton this is pretty racist as a claim you see – what you just stated

  • Reply July 9, 2023

    Anonymous

    you never gave your 2 cents there Peter Vandever Terry Wiles Paul L. King

    • Reply July 9, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day I grew up Pentecostal. But we never traced our roots to Azusa. Of course we recognized it happened there. But our churches were so Bible based we looked to the book of Acts and believed it was for all including men, women, sons and daughters.

    • Reply July 9, 2023

      Anonymous

      Terry Wiles AG never traced our roots to Azusa? you recon how racist this could be interpreted any given Sunday – perhaps the reason for the article WHO know Vinson never talked much about it afterwards Peter

    • Reply July 9, 2023

      Anonymous

      Troy Day lol. That’s the problem. Too much focus on man and not enough holding to the truth. Gods word is truth.

  • Reply March 15, 2024

    Troy Day

    Neil Steven Lawrence YES the Latter Rain started before Azusa Street. BUT the letter rain did not experience MASS glossolalia like @ AZUSA There were here and there some but isolated baptisms with tongues even in Kansas as Peter Vandever has recognized AND for the most these early cases DID NOT recognize the sign as initial evidence too

  • Reply March 15, 2024

    Troy Day

    Oscar Valdez I think William DeArteaga masterfully showed that disp. theology robbed Pentecostals from the very essence of the Holy Spirit restorationism we followed so eagerly Also Daniel Isgrigg did a masterful presentation @ SPS on the uneasy relationship with disp. which all @followers should review when he puts his PPW online

  • Reply March 15, 2024

    Troy Day

    Robert Cox when you said
    you mean bc the wyt guys came and took over and drove the Holyghost out?

    not sure how you referred it to this so John Mushenhouse could respond BUT I was remembering a comment you did back in the day outing many as racists. Not sure if it was this one or another though

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Advice for Preparing a PhD Research Proposal

Advice for Preparing a PhD Research Proposal

In a previous blog, I shared some practical advice before starting a PhD program in Theology from my experience teaching research methods for the ORU PhD Program. Preparing to enter a PhD program is a daunting task. But if your goal is to become an exp…