Concerning the evidence of Speaking in tongues

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

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

Concerning the evidence of Speaking in tongues: The scripture tread the mouth and the lip as the index of the heart, and the tongue is one of the most unruly, and speaks out of the fullness of heart. If the heart is full of sin, it will speak sin, and if the heart is filled with the Holy Spirit, it will speak Holy Spirit. As the Spirit fills the heart, the tongue speaks what is in the heart.

Concerning eternal security: This is a bad terms, because it implies that we say today that God forgave our past, present and future sin. This is true, but we must be careful not to say on this bases “Once saved, always saved”. God is always relational.

Alexander:

We have lost Wesley’s concept of assurance. Assurance was the foremost concern of Wesley. He had no assurance of his own faith, because it was no concept in the Anglican tradition. That was a crises in Wesley.

Wesley: Assurance is the perception of the Spirit’s work (a Spirit’s work), and every person should be able to know assurance.

The 19^th century holiness movement Phoebe Palmer, she was the leader in the holiness, and of the Wesleyan tradition. She changed the idea of assurance, and through that Wesleyan Theology becomes more Calvinistic.

Phoebe introduced a shorter way: (also called altar theology, because it all happens at the altar)

1. entire consecration
2. faith
3. testimony

At the altar you receive entire consecration, receive faith and get up and testify, and act on your faith. That short-circuits sanctification as a processed. That was a shortcut and a roadblock in Pentecostal theology.

Finished Work: Durham (1910) preaches finished work. Durham collapses everything – except the baptism of the Holy Spirit – is the finished work, it is positional theology.

That is a detour because it keeps people from understanding that God is interested with more than just forgiving of sin.

Healing: We have two sides, the Wesleyan theology and the finished work side.

They have a lot in common, healing as a sign, healing in atonement.

They differ how healing is appropriated.

• The finished work: healing is always a looking back to Calvary.
• Wesleyan: healing is always a looking forwards as a sign of the kingdom to come.

Flowrence: (1917) think health, act health, and be healthy.(This was positional theology)

Over-realized eschatology is also a roadblock, because it looks to much to the future and brings it the presence.

Gause:

There can not be entire sanctification, except by death. Our death becomes a necessity for our sanctification. We must be careful not to have a dualism, and embrace a positional point in which we believe to entire sanctification as received at one point.

The Wesleyan forward look: Healing is participation in resurrection.

Healing is not a guarantee, that we don’t die, but healing is a participation in resurrection.

We have to hold in tension, which is healing and dying.

Eternal security. (Once saved, always saved)

Hebr.6.1-6: They argue with this scripture, that it is not possible to backslide, because once saved, and backslide, it is not possible to be saved again. They argued if somebody “backslide”, that they actually had not tasted salvation. But: Christ tasted death: Greek – taste is much stronger.

Conversion is tasting in Jesus, and there is nothing that someone seems only to be saved, in order to justify a scripture for eternal security.

It is possible to fall from grace. But why is this passage of Hebr.6.1-6 so severe. The background is that it talks about Jewish believers, who return to Judaism, and had to denounce Christ as from the devil, that also applies to the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

We are far more secure in the love of God, that we ever imagined.