Charles Parham "sick to his stomach" Over Azusa?

[Nahum]

When Parham visited the meetings in October 1906, even he was shocked by the confusion of the services. He was dismayed by the "awful fits and spasms" of the "holy rollers and hypnotists." He described the Azusa "tongues" as "chattering, jabbering and sputtering, speaking no language at all" (Synan, p. 102). The Azusa Street meetings were so wild that Parham condemned them with the term "sensational Holy Rollers." He testified that the Azusa Street meetings were largely characterized by manifestations of the flesh, spiritualistic controls, and the practice of hypnotism (Sarah Parham, The Life of Charles F. Parham, Joplin, MO: Tri-state Printing, 1930, p. 163). According to Parham, two-thirds of the people professing Pentecostalism in his day "are either hypnotized or spook driven" (Parham, Life of Charles Parham, p. 164). In his writings about Azusa Street, Parham described men and women falling on one another in a morally compromising manner. I have seen this same thing in video recordings of Laughing Revival services.

When Parham arrived in Azusa Street in 1906, he began his first sermon by telling the people that "God is sick at his stomach" because of the things which were occurring at Azusa (Charles Shumway, A Study of the "Gift of Tongues," A.B. thesis, University of California, 1914, pp. 178,179; cited by Goff, Fields White Unto Harvest, p. 131). He never changed his opinion. To the end of his life, Parham, often called "the father of Pentecostalism," denounced Azusa Street as a case of "spiritual power prostituted." Thus the "father of Pentecostalism" roundly rejected the Azusa Street meetings as phony, manipulated, and demonic, even though practically all Pentecostal denominations trace their heritage directly from those meetings!

www.tribwatch.com/azusa.htm - 10k

[RevDWW]

I wasn't there so I couldn't tell you what happened or in what spirit it happened in, but I can tell you that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is real and that I have spoken in tongues as the Spirit gave the utterance.

So what's your point PP?

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

When Parham visited the meetings in October 1906, even he was shocked by the confusion of the services. He was dismayed by the "awful fits and spasms" of the "holy rollers and hypnotists." He described the Azusa "tongues" as "chattering, jabbering and sputtering, speaking no language at all" (Synan, p. 102). The Azusa Street meetings were so wild that Parham condemned them with the term "sensational Holy Rollers." He testified that the Azusa Street meetings were largely characterized by manifestations of the flesh, spiritualistic controls, and the practice of hypnotism (Sarah Parham, The Life of Charles F. Parham, Joplin, MO: Tri-state Printing, 1930, p. 163). According to Parham, two-thirds of the people professing Pentecostalism in his day "are either hypnotized or spook driven" (Parham, Life of Charles Parham, p. 164). In his writings about Azusa Street, Parham described men and women falling on one another in a morally compromising manner. I have seen this same thing in video recordings of Laughing Revival services.

When Parham arrived in Azusa Street in 1906, he began his first sermon by telling the people that "God is sick at his stomach" because of the things which were occurring at Azusa (Charles Shumway, A Study of the "Gift of Tongues," A.B. thesis, University of California, 1914, pp. 178,179; cited by Goff, Fields White Unto Harvest, p. 131). He never changed his opinion. To the end of his life, Parham, often called "the father of Pentecostalism," denounced Azusa Street as a case of "spiritual power prostituted." Thus the "father of Pentecostalism" roundly rejected the Azusa Street meetings as phony, manipulated, and demonic, even though practically all Pentecostal denominations trace their heritage directly from those meetings!

www.tribwatch.com/azusa.htm - 10k

Confusion breads confusion. God is not the author of confusion, but of peace. Too much insanity mixed with spiritism. It's no wonder the denominal churches from LA dismissed it as a work of the devil. It's interesting to read what the surrounding established churches had to say about what was happening.

The Azusa mission went to nothing. They lost the church, infighting, confusion and every evil work ruled the day. It makes you wonder how much of it was actually from God.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

I wasn't there so I couldn't tell you what happened or in what spirit it happened in, but I can tell you that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost is real and that I have spoken in tongues as the Spirit gave the utterance.

So what's your point PP?

I don't have one. Kinda like my sermons.


How could Parham be "the founder of modern Pentecostalism" and depise the very meeting we credit as the birthplace of that same movement?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

I don't have one. Kinda like my sermons.


How could Parham be "the founder of modern Pentecostalism" and depise the very meeting we credit as the birthplace of that same movement?

Because of his students who came to the conclusion the gift of the Holy Ghost in accompanied by the evidence of speaking in other tongues. They then prayed for and recieved that experience in Topeka Kansas before Azuza street.

[Steve Epley]

Reading Parham I came away with the opinion he didn't think it was smoke unless it was coming out of his chimney. Just my opinion.

[Nahum]

Did you guys know he was accused of being gay?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Did you guys know he was accused of being gay?

He was arrested in Houston. Don't know if he was guilty or not but that arrest isolated him mostly from the rest of those folks in that day.

[Pastor Keith]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

When Parham visited the meetings in October 1906, even he was shocked by the confusion of the services. He was dismayed by the "awful fits and spasms" of the "holy rollers and hypnotists." He described the Azusa "tongues" as "chattering, jabbering and sputtering, speaking no language at all" (Synan, p. 102). The Azusa Street meetings were so wild that Parham condemned them with the term "sensational Holy Rollers." He testified that the Azusa Street meetings were largely characterized by manifestations of the flesh, spiritualistic controls, and the practice of hypnotism (Sarah Parham, The Life of Charles F. Parham, Joplin, MO: Tri-state Printing, 1930, p. 163). According to Parham, two-thirds of the people professing Pentecostalism in his day "are either hypnotized or spook driven" (Parham, Life of Charles Parham, p. 164). In his writings about Azusa Street, Parham described men and women falling on one another in a morally compromising manner. I have seen this same thing in video recordings of Laughing Revival services.

When Parham arrived in Azusa Street in 1906, he began his first sermon by telling the people that "God is sick at his stomach" because of the things which were occurring at Azusa (Charles Shumway, A Study of the "Gift of Tongues," A.B. thesis, University of California, 1914, pp. 178,179; cited by Goff, Fields White Unto Harvest, p. 131). He never changed his opinion. To the end of his life, Parham, often called "the father of Pentecostalism," denounced Azusa Street as a case of "spiritual power prostituted." Thus the "father of Pentecostalism" roundly rejected the Azusa Street meetings as phony, manipulated, and demonic, even though practically all Pentecostal denominations trace their heritage directly from those meetings!

www.tribwatch.com/azusa.htm - 10k

Parham was a racist, his big issue at Azusa was the fact that whites and black were worshipping together and were in close proximity, black men praying with white women. This has been documented, I think you have to read his comment with that in mind.

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by keith4him

Parham was a racist, his big issue at Azusa was the fact that whites and black were worshipping together and were in close proximity, black men praying with white women. This has been documented, I think you have to read his comment with that in mind.

This is true, but more to it than that. The charges of the day included sexual overtones. Black men hugging white women, etc. It was considered taboo for their day. The headlines were scandalous.