|
Re: George Glass Sr/Response- "Mystery Solved" Thr
Allow me to add a few thoughts on this subject. I have direct relations that received the Holy Ghost in Chicago in 1903, on Bonnie Brae Street in LA, and many afterward. Arthur Osterberg, the first trustee of the Azusa mission is also related to me. I also understand that pedigree does not mean ownership of facts; I was reminding my oldest living ancestor of a commonly known fact about her own history, and she (now) denies that it ever occurred. Time will do that to the best of us. The record then becomes difficult for any of us to ascertain, when memory fails to remember all, or tends to favor a few (desired) points.
Consider this point from history: The Upper Room Mission (URM) was a 300 member break-off of the Azusa mission (fall 1906), led by Elmer K. Fisher, who taught that tongues was the initial evidence of the spirit birth instead of a sign/blessing that “may” follow. It was this mission that brought Ewart and Cook to the west coast. The URM became a strong voice for the necessity of speaking in tongues as the reception of the Holy Ghost. I think that all groups consider being “born again” essential, it is in the definition of that phrase that there is disagreement. The URM was not afraid to declare speaking in tongues as the Spirit gives utterance essential.
Rather than submit my own stories or documents, look at what the Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, printed by Regency/Zondervan (1988) has to say:
“The issue of tongues as the “Bible evidence” of baptism in the Spirit was very important to this mission [URM]. Azusa appears to have been more fluid on the subject and in 1915 rejected the idea completely, coming to view tongues as a sign or gift that might follow the baptism. [Elmer]Fisher, however, repeatedly kept the issue before his readers”. (page 865).
“The significance of the revival is equally related to its teaching about baptism in the Spirit and in the gift of tongues. Unlike later Pentecostals, and clearly in opposition to the Pentecostal message of the Upper Room Mission a few blocks away, Seymour moved away from a theology of tongues as the initial physical evidence of baptism in the Spirit. In point of fact, Seymour ultimately repudiated the “initial evidence” teaching as providing “an open door for witches and spiritualists and free lovism”. (page 36).
Please also note that The URM split off in fall of 1906, and in October of that same year Ch. Parham visited the Azusa mission and found it in theological disarray.
All points to ponder
When keeping the timeline in a
Straightline
|
Threaded Mode
