The "Pentecostal, but Not Charismatic" Thread

[Bro Flame]

I've often wondered just how different self-proclaimed Pentecostals and Apostolics are from self-identifying Charismatics out there.

I found this photo attached by this link:

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Holy Roller

Forgive me, I couldn't figure out how to post the picture itself.

Like this



This is an awesome motorcycle.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Oh, difference between Apostolic and Charismatics?

Apostolics are cool, Charismatics are soy.

[Apostolic1ness]

Real fire vs strange fire?

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Like this



This is an awesome motorcycle.

Copy and paste? It didn't work when I tried last night.

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

Real fire vs strange fire?

Interesting. Is this to say that counterfeit is more common among those outside of Apostolic fellowships? Do those that have "gone Charismatic" still have what's legit?

[Bro Flame]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Oh, difference between Apostolic and Charismatics?

Apostolics are cool, Charismatics are soy.

[Originalist]

I have observed that Oneness Pentecostals have a habit of labelling all Pentecostals outside of our movement as "Charismatic". This general characterization simply is not accurate and shows great ignorance concerning the history of the Charismatic movement as a separate event. I was licensed with the Assemblies of God during much of the 80's and 90's. At that time we strongly rejected being labelled Charismatic. Resolutions were passed in several districts denouncing "Charismatic fads" which were finding inroads into traditional classical Pentecostal churches. Among those fads were dance teams and the use of banners during worship services, all of which are common in the UPCI now. Thus, when someone now introduces me as a "former Charismatic brother", I kindly correct them. I have NEVER been a Charismatic.

[Bro Flame]

Charismatic, as coined in the early sixties, was defined as a Christian who belonged to a mainline denomination (i.e. Roman Catholic, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, etc.) whose ideology of the Scriptures and spiritual gifts were opened. They may or may not have experienced Pentecost themselves, and they still may be cautious towards tongues and their usage. Primarily, the term "charismatic" was coined to define a renewal movement in the historically mainline churches that had traditionally kept salvation and the gifts of the Spirit separate in their doctrines.

The sole doctrinal stance that separated Pentecostals and Charismatics is Spirit baptism. Pentecostals traditionally believed that one had not been filled with the Spirit if the individual hadn't spoken in other tongues. Charismatics, meanwhile, generally accept a variety of spiritual experiences as evidence of Spirit baptism.

Today, people use to the term Charismatic, in most cases, to describe a movement or ministry that is nondenominational in affiliation, but who believe that the spiritual gifts are still in operation.

[Michael The Disciple]

The sole doctrinal stance that separated Pentecostals and Charismatics is Spirit baptism. Pentecostals traditionally believed that one had not been filled with the Spirit if the individual hadn't spoken in other tongues. Charismatics, meanwhile, generally accept a variety of spiritual experiences as evidence of Spirit baptism.

To general of a definition. Probably most Charismatic groups believe tongues is the initial evidence. They just dont believe its essential same as the Pentecostals. Charismatic and Pentecostal beliefs are generally the same as to foundation doctrine. Pentecostals may be a BIT more modest in dress than most Charismatics.