Jeff Clarke’s 10 QUESTIONS for PENTECOSTALS

Jeff Clarke’s 10 QUESTIONS for PENTECOSTALS

I got lost on Q1 if someone could help me understand Daniel Rushing
but I can most certainly and unquestionably answer Q9 on the list

Steve Webb [11/02/2015 8:39 AM]
Dependent upon where you go to church these are all valid questions. Within the Church of God I see a glimpse of perhaps each listed.
And as for number 1…we promise encounter and fail to deliver on discipleship. At least in some churches I am familiar with, and I think that is the point? But maybe I’m missing something in the question…

John Kissinger [11/02/2015 9:35 AM]
There’s a major difference b/w Pentecostal and Charismatics, which this article does not really indicate in any way. Is this some AG view? Rick

Rick Wadholm Jr [11/02/2015 11:08 AM]
Its a broad sweeping Pentecostal/Charismatic scholarly view.

Charles Page [11/02/2015 11:27 AM]
#10 is a doozie!!! “entire sanctification failure” if you are Wesleyan Teólogo Pentecostal

Link Hudson [11/02/2015 4:57 PM]
John Kissinger What would you say the difference is between Pentecostals and Charismatics in relation to the article?

John Kissinger [11/02/2015 5:29 PM]
I’d probably start with some of what we’ve discussed: sanctification, initial evidence and gifts of the Spirit; but the guy is wrong on #9

Link Hudson [11/02/2015 5:50 PM]
I see Pentecostalism as having a tendency toward being more Fundamentalist than some of the Charismatics, at least in the US. Sanctification as a one-time thing is a difference between the Holiness/Methodist roots side of the Pentecostal movement, not the A/G or Foursquare side and Charismatics. I was thinking about Pentecostal leaders who had a teaching or leadership role in the Charismatic movement as it emerged or a role in getting it started with certain groups. Derrick Prince was a Pentecostal. Hagin used to be A/G for a while. DuPlessis was from an ‘Apostolic’ church in South Africa, which doesn’t usually mean Oneness down there. I don’t know of any Pentecostal leaders among the Charismatics who were from the Holiness type movements from the southeast. Du Plessis apparently taught at Lee for a while, and then got a A/G ordination for a while and was presurred to give it up because of his ecumenicalism.

Link Hudson [11/02/2015 5:51 PM]
John Kissinger How are Charismatic views on initial evidence or gifts of the Spirit different from Pentecostals (particularly the A/G side of the movement?

John Kissinger [11/02/2015 5:52 PM]
time for another one of your topics Link ? 🙂

Link Hudson [11/02/2015 5:56 PM]
I think he may have a valid point with point 9. I don’t see where the Bible tells us that when we go to church we are to have an individual encounter with God. I’m not against individual encounters with God, but I think it can be unhealthy to have too much of a fixation on having some kind of emotional experience.

There are people who think if they don’t feel a certain way during praise and worship, that something is wrong with their relationship with God. I was thinking about the philosophy of what church is about as I was listening to some songs, “Show us your glory.” Nice words, from the Bible, too. I’m not agin it. But songs like that show the emphasis on wanting a meeting where we experience shekinah glory. Should that be our primary emphasis though?

Paul says ‘let all things be done unto edifying.’ If we go to church thinking it is a time where God ‘can use me in my gift to edify someone else and use someone else to edify us as well’, we might act differently than if we go to church thinking our main goal is to have an individual supernatural experience. If we think the aim of church is to see a glory cloud, we might just sing praise songs asking for glory clouds to come and pray for that. If we think we are to edify one another with our spiritual gifts, we may be praying to prophesy and interpret tongues. Before the meeting, we may be studying to have a teaching or word of exhortation to share.

John Kissinger [11/02/2015 5:59 PM]
I understood Jeff’s questions more on a daily basis than just in church. More of being the church every day than going to church one day a week. And since the The Orthodox theosis through out Christian history there has been a move to seek God deeply every day. This is not and should not strictly Pentecostal in any way [not that there’s anything wrong with that Rick]

Charles Page [11/02/2015 6:46 PM]
all scriptural writing is strictly Pentecost – forbid not to speak in tongues. Pentecostalism = Christianity

John Kissinger [11/03/2015 6:30 AM]
Link my observations are purely Pentecostal Peter always has a better [from the kitchen] look on modern Charismatic Christianity

Peter A Vandever [11/03/2015 6:32 AM]
I consider myself Classic Pentecostal in doctrine but Charismatic in application.

Peter A Vandever [11/03/2015 6:33 AM]
Most WOF hold to tongues being the evidence, other hold it to be “most times” and some hold any spiritual gift is evidence.

John Kissinger [11/03/2015 6:33 AM]
you cant be Classic Pentecostal in doctrine if you dont believe and practice the doctrine of sanctification #HELLO Alan Rick there’s you one major, major difference Link

Peter A Vandever [11/03/2015 6:43 AM]
give me a break…. Pentecost is a freaking feast, not anything to do with a silly questionable doctrine!

John Kissinger [11/03/2015 6:48 AM]
yeah, keep on trying 🙂 even in the Old Testament in Exodus 19, God told Moses to ask the people to sanctify themselves for three days before entering the DAY. OF. PENTECOST 🙂

Alan N Carla Smith [11/03/2015 11:45 AM]
i AGREE WITH Steve/

Alan N Carla Smith [11/03/2015 11:51 AM]
On Q1, “simply giving people what they want when our slogans promise them a powerful encounter with God?”
Would this also include the churches claiming to teach ‘their people’ how to witness, minister, or go out into the world but yet fail them by not teaching accountability nor making sure they are rooted and grounded in the faith (or basics of faith) before launch?
Is this a failure to correctly launch?

John Kissinger [11/03/2015 12:43 PM]
but then in Q9 he questions the daily seeking of “powerful encounter with God?” #STRANGE

John Kissinger [11/03/2015 2:39 PM]
Link I mean Wesleyan Renewal theology as part of the Classical Pentecostal tradition

Link Hudson [11/03/2015 4:30 PM]
I’ve never directly read Irwin’s sermons. He was another preacher with Pentecostal type preaching and experience before Azusa, preaching a baptism of fire. There were tongues and people falling down. But then he started preaching a baptism of dynamite and a bunch of other similar sounding something or other ‘ite’ baptisms that people could have, according to Synan.

Holiness folks were already preaching ‘experience oriented’ type stuff. The Bible doesn’t teach that all believers have to have a one-time sanctification experience subsequent to salvation. Someone could pray and experience something like that. I’m not against that, of course. But it isn’t a doctrine of the Bible. And people shouldn’t be taught they can’t be filled with the Spirit until they have an experience like that. You can hinder people that way.

Supernatural experiences with God are a good thing, but I do think Pentecostals can be way too ‘experience’ focused in this regard. I don’t think our focus in church should generally be having some kind of emotional, ecstatic experience with God. It should be mutual edification -and that’s what gifts of the Spirit are for.- and fellowship/Communion with the Lord’s body. If some people have supernatural experience and have visions during church meetings, that’s fine.

Charles Page [11/03/2015 5:06 PM]
Link, where did these experience oriented manifestations originate? Surely the early church did not worship in this manner.

John Kissinger [11/03/2015 5:08 PM]
Surely Peter did not preach in tongues on the Day of Pentecost and surely Jesus’ 4th sentence from the cross was in a known language that instead of translated to a known tongue had to be “interpreted” Rick 🙂