The Azusa Street Revival . . .

[Trekker06]

Did you know that it was only a hundred years ago that 'tongues' (ala Pentecostal Church) was 're-invented' at a meeting that became known as the Azusa Street Revival? Prior to 1906 we hear nary a word about 'tongues'. In fact, we have to go WAY BACK to the book of Corinthians before we see the usage of that word again.

So, what happened? Wikipedia tells us that the Azusa Street Revival was a Pentecostal revival meeting that took place in Los Angeles, California and was led by William J. Seymour, an African American preacher. It began with a meeting on April 14, 1906 at the African Methodist Episcopal Church and continued until roughly 1915. The revival was characterized by speaking in tongues, dramatic worship services, and inter-racial mingling. The participants received criticism from secular media and Christian theologians for behaviors considered to be outrageous and unorthodox, especially at the time. Today, the revival is considered by historians to be the primary catalyst for the spread of Pentecostalism in the 20th century.

Was the Holy Spirit asleep for a couple of thousand years prior to this event? Why is this event considered to have been authentic?

[Trekker06]

Well, maybe we could discuss that on a different thread. But then, it would just become another 'Sabbath' thread, wouldn't it?

There's a BIG difference, Vh, in bringing back the 'forgotten' commandment - the one we were asked to REMEMBER but which was discarded by MAN, not God - and 'tongues' not being given BY the Holy Spirit until 1906. Why did it take a group of 'radicals' (according to the reports of the day) to suddenly find favor with the Holy Spirit? Were the Christians and the martyrs of the previous 2000 years unworthy of this alleged 'gift'? Doesn't this at least make every thinking person a little suspicious?

I would appreciate your views on this, Vh.

[Humble Pie]

As usual, I would LOVE to have this discussion with you, but I have to attack your VERY INCORRECT presuppositions first, then we can move on to scripture...

Twentieth-century Pentecostalism was NOT the earliest instance of "speaking in tongues" in church history; rather, there were antecedents in several centuries of the Christian era, e.g.

150 AD - Justin Martyr wrote “For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to this present time.” and “Now, it is possible to see amongst us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God;”
156-172: Montanus and the women that followed him - Maximilla and Priscilla - were speaking in tongues and were trying to prove that they were true prophets. For this purpose they used a list with prophets from the times of the New Testament. But anti-montanists declared that no prophet ever had such attitude and that Montanists were moved by the spirit of deception.(Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. V,17, 3).
175 AD - Irenaeus in his treatise Against Heresies speaks (positively) of those in the Church "who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages."
circa 230 AD - Novatian said, “This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, often discrimination of spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels, and orders and arranges whatever other gifts there are of charismata; and thus make the Lord’s Church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed.”
After the 1st, or 2nd century there is no record of "speaking in tongues" in any Eastern Orthodox source.
circa 340 AD - Hilary of Poitiers wrote, “For God hath set same in the Church, first apostles…secondly prophets…thirdly teachers…next mighty works, among which are the healing of diseases… and gifts of either speaking or interpreting divers kinds of tongues. Clearly these are the Church’s agents of ministry and work of whom the body of Christ consists; and God has ordained them.”
circa 390 AD - Augustine of Hippo, in an exposition on Psalm 32, discusses a phenomenon contemporary to his time of those who "sing in jubilation", singing the praises of God not in their own language, but in a manner that "may not be confined by the limits of syllables".
475 - 1000 AD - Dark ages. Little history recorded.
1100s - Franciscan order of monks.
1100s - Hildegard of Bingen is reputed to have spoken and sung in tongues. Her spiritual songs were referred to by contemporaries as "concerts in the Spirit." (Note: It is also claimed that this may have been a combination between her native German and Latin.)
1300s - The Moravians are referred to by detractors as having spoken in tongues. John Roche, a contemporary critic, claimed that the Moravians "commonly broke into some disconnected Jargon, which they often passed upon the vulgar, 'as the exuberant and resistless Evacuations of the Spirit'".
1600s - The French Prophets: The Camisards also spoke sometimes in languages that were unknown: "Several persons of both Sexes," James Du Bois of Montpellier recalled, "I have heard in their Extasies pronounce certain words, which seem'd to the Standers-by, to be some Foreign Language." These utterances were sometimes accompanied by the gift of interpretation exercised, in Du Bois' experience, by the same person who had spoken in tongues.
1600s - Early Quakers, such as Edward Burrough, make mention of tongues speaking in their meetings: "We spoke with new tongues, as the Lord gave us utterance, and His Spirit led us".
1700s - John Wesley and Methodism. Wesley sprouts revivalism across Europe and North America, including many miraculous events such as speaking in tongues.
1800s - Edward Irving and the Catholic Apostolic Church. Edward Irving, a minister in the Church of Scotland, writes of a woman who would "speak at great length, and with superhuman strength, in an unknown tongue, to the great astonishment of all who heard, and to her own great edification and enjoyment in God". Irving further stated that "tongues are a great instrument for personal edification, however mysterious it may seem to us."


Now that we can start off with a decent foundation based on truth, let's do this. What makes you think the gifts have ceased?

[Trekker06]

Humble Pie. I don't have the time to respond to your rather detailed post right now but I want to ask you a question based on the contents of your post.

This is today ...Monday 6 August 2007. Do you truly believe that the members of a current Pentecostal Church who claim to speak in 'unknown tongues' (whatever they might be) are indeed gifted by the Holy Spirit? Some? All? None? Perhaps? I don't know? What?

[Humble Pie]

Some. I know that if it does not adhere to 1 Corinthians 14 it is NOT of God. Sadly in many churches it does not, but that does not invalidate the gifts being availiable today.

just because it hasn´t been recorded in historic documents until the Azusa Street revival doesn´t mean that individuals haven´t been speaking in tongues ever since the original day of Pentecost, the one recorded in the Bible.

throughout history God led ppl to the re-discovery of being born-again, of water baptism, of the baptism in the Holy Spirit and of the gifts of the Holy Spirit being for today - all of which makes sense for if God is the same yesterday, today and forever, then the Holy Spirit is the same yesterday, today and forever.

[Trekker06]

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

Some. I know that if it does not adhere to 1 Corinthians 14 it is NOT of God. Sadly in many churches it does not, but that does not invalidate the gifts being availiable today.

Thanks for the response.

How do YOU determine what is 'genuine' and what is not? I personally believe that NONE of them are genuine.

Originally Posted by Trekker06

Thanks for the response.

How do YOU determine what is 'genuine' and what is not? I personally believe that NONE of them are genuine.

my answer would be: by the Spirit.
spiritual things are spiritually discerned i.e. by the Spirit. the spirit of man knows what is in man and of man; the Spirit of God searches the deep things of God and knows all things of God.

but you may have asked Humble Pie. so, let´s see what he will answer.

[Trekker06]

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

As usual, I would LOVE to have this discussion with you, but I have to attack your VERY INCORRECT presuppositions first, then we can move on to scripture...

Twentieth-century Pentecostalism was NOT the earliest instance of "speaking in tongues" in church history; rather, there were antecedents in several centuries of the Christian era, e.g.

150 AD - Justin Martyr wrote “For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to this present time.” and “Now, it is possible to see amongst us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God;”

Everyone who steps up to a pulpit and preaches the Word of God is using a gift of the Holy Spirit. I DO emphasize 'preaches the Word of God', incidentally. That may NOT be the message of EVERYONE who steps up to a pulpit to preach.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

156-172: Montanus and the women that followed him - Maximilla and Priscilla - were speaking in tongues and were trying to prove that they were true prophets. For this purpose they used a list with prophets from the times of the New Testament. But anti-montanists declared that no prophet ever had such attitude and that Montanists were moved by the spirit of deception.(Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. V,17, 3).

I have no clue what the above means. Is it supposed to contribute something useful to this debate?

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

175 AD - Irenaeus in his treatise Against Heresies speaks (positively) of those in the Church "who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages."

I'm sure that the above has nothing to do with 'Pentecostalism'. I doubt that there has ever been an independently documented case where anyone in the Pentecostal Church started speaking a previously unlearned but KNOWN language fluently. The reason is that the sounds they make are no more no less than unrecognizable 'babble'. Now, if someone can point me to an independently documented case where one broke out into Swahili never having previously been able to speak the language then you've won me over ...toward that particular individual, that is. I will still remain skeptical toward the rest of the 'tongue-speakers', however.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

circa 230 AD - Novatian said, “This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs teachers, directs tongues, gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, often discrimination of spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels, and orders and arranges whatever other gifts there are of charismata; and thus make the Lord’s Church everywhere, and in all, perfected and completed.”

I can't begin to speak for or against someone I haven't previously heard of ...let alone some quote from 1800 years ago. It would be no more different than someone taking my posts 1800 years from now and making them out to be divine. You (the future 'whoever') have my permission to do so if you wish, however.

Anyway, within the Christian Church of COURSE there are all kinds of talents and skills that can be put to extremely good use. Some are naturally acquired while others have to train in order to hone what may be latent abilities that are waiting to be tapped. The Holy Spirit does not just 'zap' someone with knowledge, healing, teaching, the speaking of other languages, etc. And this misconception of being zapped with an ability - immediate GRATIFICATION for the individual - is where the Pentecostals come unstuck.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

After the 1st, or 2nd century there is no record of "speaking in tongues" in any Eastern Orthodox source.
circa 340 AD - Hilary of Poitiers wrote, “For God hath set same in the Church, first apostles…secondly prophets…thirdly teachers…next mighty works, among which are the healing of diseases… and gifts of either speaking or interpreting divers kinds of tongues. Clearly these are the Church’s agents of ministry and work of whom the body of Christ consists; and God has ordained them.”

And, you won't get any argument from me. It's true. But ...prophets don't 'just happen', nor do teachers. nor do mighty works, nor does the healing of diseases, nor does speaking other languages, nor does interpreting other languages, etc. Don't you see that these abilities are gifts of the Holy Spirit when used for the PURPOSE of the Holy Spirit?

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

circa 390 AD - Augustine of Hippo, in an exposition on Psalm 32, discusses a phenomenon contemporary to his time of those who "sing in jubilation", singing the praises of God not in their own language, but in a manner that "may not be confined by the limits of syllables".

Nothing at all here to support any of the Pentecostal practices. Other than that I can't comment.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

475 - 1000 AD - Dark ages. Little history recorded.
1100s - Franciscan order of monks.
1100s - Hildegard of Bingen is reputed to have spoken and sung in tongues. Her spiritual songs were referred to by contemporaries as "concerts in the Spirit." (Note: It is also claimed that this may have been a combination between her native German and Latin.)

No 'angelic language' used here by the sounds. Other than that it's just hearsay. I wouldn't trust my life in a court of law to this testimony.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

1300s - The Moravians are referred to by detractors as having spoken in tongues. John Roche, a contemporary critic, claimed that the Moravians "commonly broke into some disconnected Jargon, which they often passed upon the vulgar, 'as the exuberant and resistless Evacuations of the Spirit'".

Oh my. You can probably hear this kind of thing today in Haiti. They just LOVE their voodoo.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

1600s - The French Prophets: The Camisards also spoke sometimes in languages that were unknown: "Several persons of both Sexes," James Du Bois of Montpellier recalled, "I have heard in their Extasies pronounce certain words, which seem'd to the Standers-by, to be some Foreign Language." These utterances were sometimes accompanied by the gift of interpretation exercised, in Du Bois' experience, by the same person who had spoken in tongues.

Yeah, I don't know, Humble pie. I don't think I'll be endorsing Pentecostal 'tongues' from the above.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

1600s - Early Quakers, such as Edward Burrough, make mention of tongues speaking in their meetings: "We spoke with new tongues, as the Lord gave us utterance, and His Spirit led us".

Again ...what do we do with this? Please never forget that 'tongue' is simply another word for 'language'. There is absolutely no reason to give the word 'tongues' a life of its own. It just means language.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

1700s - John Wesley and Methodism. Wesley sprouts revivalism across Europe and North America, including many miraculous events such as speaking in tongues.

There is absolutely NOTHING miraculous about a person from Japan speaking Japanese, a person from Germany speaking German, a person from ...you get the point. Sure, it sounds impressive to we who don't speak any other language but our own. And, NO ONE - whether it be John Wesley or Walt Disney - can say with any authority that someone's speaking in another language is 'miraculous'. You know ...when I hear someone from Spain or Latin America speak Spanish I instinctively believe that they are clever! Such is the experience or 'miracle' of hearing one's speaking another language.

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

1800s - Edward Irving and the Catholic Apostolic Church. Edward Irving, a minister in the Church of Scotland, writes of a woman who would "speak at great length, and with superhuman strength, in an unknown tongue, to the great astonishment of all who heard, and to her own great edification and enjoyment in God". Irving further stated that "tongues are a great instrument for personal edification, however mysterious it may seem to us."

My first instinct is to say 'baloney', but my second more reasonable instinct is to say ...so, what has this got to do with Pentecostal 'tongues'?

Originally Posted by Humble Pie

Now that we can start off with a decent foundation based on truth, let's do this. What makes you think the gifts have ceased?

Okay, Mr. Mensa ...can you HONESTLY say that you presented anything resembling a compelling argument for today's Pentecostal 'tongue-speaking'?

And, you're talking to the wrong guy. I DO believe in the 'gifts' that, when used appropriately, ARE of the Holy Spirit. But ...that one is simply ZAPPED with an 'instant gift' by the Holy Spirit ...NO WAY!

[Trekker06]

Is there ANY ONE who can point me to a scripture that states that, one moment an individual has no particular ability (gift), the next moment that individual has a SPECIFIC ability (gift) ...?

The Azusa Street experience and the Movement of Pentecostalism that followed rises or falls on such a scripture or the lack of.

ANYONE?