Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
Библията Тв | PentecostalTheology.com
PREACHING in TONGUES among early PENTECOSTALS
Nov. 26, 1908 Cleveland. During my sermon I broke down and went to crying, and the Holy Ghost caught up Homer, my own son, and he went to preaching in tongues until he and I and others fell under deep groans and weeping and praying. This continued for some length of time, which was really demonstrating the last part of my text, but after while I was able to finish my sermon and close the meeting.
Feb. 16, 1909 Last night after supper, we, with Bro. Bryant who had just come home, were singing. We heard Homer, my sixteen year old son, upstairs in agonizing prayer. We soon left off the singing and went upstairs. Homer was caught away under the power and control of the Spirit. He had been agonizing in prayer, when suddenly he arose on his knees and quoted the text: “If ye love me, keep my commandments, and I will pray the Father and he will give you another Comforter,” etc., _in a tongue,_ which was interpreted by Bro. Bryant. From the text he preached a sermon in a _foreign language,_ then he made his altar call, and it appeared that numbers came forward, and began to get saved. Then he went through great ecstasies of joy over the salvation of souls. Pen cannot describe the scene. The _language_ was clear and distinct. Others in the town are _frequently caught away in the Spirit in a similar way._ While the devil is raging God is blessedly working. Sick are being healed, devils cast out, etc., etc.
Feb. 20, 1909 Meeting at night. _Several messages_ given in tongues and the Holy Spirit gave the interpretations through me. Luther Richard, Homer Tomlinson, Jesse Trim _preached in tongues as the Spirit gave utterance_
Link Hudson [11/03/2015 2:23 PM]
Where does my theory go? That confirms my ‘theory’ that early Pentecostals believed tongues were foreign languages. It wasn’t just the movement in LA. That was the case at least among this movement in the Southeast.
I also don’t know that proper Biblical order was ever an emphasis when it came to tongues among most of the COG (Cleveland) folk, and this quote doesn’t do anything to override that hypothesis. My experience in the COG in the US has been limited. I’ve spent more time in Indonesia, but that denomination is really a split off of a denomination started through the missionary efforts of a church in Seattle. And some of them have adopted a more Charismatic flavor, but unique to Indonesia in some ways in terms of culture and style.
If what was going on was that Homer’s sermon was in tongues and then it was interpreted, that may have been all well and good. But I know from reading the Bible that preaching in tongues doesn’t benefit those who do not understand. It would be curious to know if any present understood the language like we read about at Azusa Street. It seems unlikely that there were a lot of people in that part of the country who spoke two languages among those he was ministeng to unless some of them spoke Cherokee.
John Kissinger [11/03/2015 2:41 PM]
your theory goes down the drain – early Pentecostals spoke in tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance and not in a man-made order
Link Hudson [11/03/2015 4:21 PM]
Some early Pentecostals were godly people who preached the word faithfully. Some early Pentecostals were into emotionalism. According to F.F. Bosworth, there were some of the more unscrupulous Pentecostal preachers who’d tell people to say ‘glory glory’ really fast until they got tongue-tied and then tell them, “you got it.” So being ‘early’ doesn’t make a Pentecostal 100% right. If you mean apostles by ‘early Pentecostals’, sure they spoke in tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance as many Pentecostals have in the late 1800’s, late 1900’s up to this day.
Speaking in tongues contrary to the order laid out in I Corinthians 14 is ‘man made order.’ The Lord’s order is written there in the Bible. The debate we’ve been having is whether the verses on order in speaking in tongues really applies to us (or to the COG or whatever group.)
Didn’t God know that there would be Baptists and Presbyterians who would reject tongues when I Corinthians 14 was written? Didn’t he know there would be Pentecostals and Charismatics in the later days who’d all speak in tongues at the same time when those commandments of the Lord were given to Paul that were included in I Corinthians 14?
The practice of some Pentecostals to disassociate their experiences from the teaching of scripture is a stumbling block for cessationists. We should embrace what I Corinthians 14 says about tongues just like we embrace Acts 2.
Link Hudson [11/03/2015 4:24 PM]
John Kissinger Does the man in this scenario speak in tongues as the Spirit gives him utterance?
16 Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?
17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.
What about in this scenario?
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
He has the ability to speak in tongues. But he is not to when he knows there is no interpreter. Paul isn’t talking about fake tongues. He introduces tongues that are among the manifestation of the Spirit in chapter 12 when he opens this section on gifts.
He starts off the topic saying “I would not have you be ignorant” and closes with “if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” and a few closing comments.
John Kissinger [11/03/2015 4:30 PM]
Link it says: ” Luther Richard, Homer Tomlinson, Jesse Trim _preached in tongues as the Spirit gave utterance_” How do you understand it?
Timothy D McCune [11/03/2015 4:32 PM]
Link Hudson you said something about a person speaking cherokee in the context of tongues , i think that was your point. Anyway unless a person grows up in the tribe speaking Cherokee is very difficult it is a beautiful language but it is very hard to learn, Our Lord can bless anyone tongue to speak this language in order for ministry ,but i dont image just anyone can pull it off as a trick.
Link Hudson [11/03/2015 4:33 PM]
John Kissinger If they went on and on without interpreting, knowing it wasn’t going to be interpreted, I’d say they were stewarding their gifts in a way that edified themselves that didn’t edify the congregation. Speaking in tongues was still relatively new to them. Preaching in tongues didn’t become a regular part of COG experience did it? You haven’t gone to church and the preacher opened his Bible and preached the whole thing in tongues have you?
The next time I speak in church, I suppose I could just stand up and speak in tongues the whole time, even if there were no interpreter. That would be a childish misuse of the gift, though. I plan to teach others out of the Bible.
Link Hudson [11/03/2015 4:35 PM]
Timothy D McCune, I was thinking L.A. in 1906 was a multi-ethnic city with lots of different languages like Japanese, Chinese, Russian, and Armenian. There were even tongues-speaking Russian and/or Armenian Molokans who fled to LA before the slaughter and persecution in their countries in response a boy’s prophecy.
But I don’t know that there were a lot of foreign language speakers in the mountains where the COG denomination started, except the Cherokee, and maybe some Gaelic-speaking Irish immigrants.
John Kissinger [11/03/2015 4:38 PM]
Link it is my sincere prayer that the Spirit does give you utterance…
Link Hudson [11/03/2015 4:41 PM]
John Kissinger I was praying in tongues earlier today. I could stand up and do that in church. I wouldn’t do that unless I expected it to be interpreted. It doesn’t edify other people to hear me speak in tongues. It does edify if a genuine interpretation follows. It also edifies if I teach the word of God.
Timothy D McCune [11/03/2015 4:48 PM]
Tongues is a gift from God, it is not to be used lightly. I believe that we can pray in our spirit by ourselves to God this a deep prayer. I believe any tongues in a church settings should have an interpretation. If none follows I dont think the person is wrong only that they have been caught up in prayer,if it becames a distraction, in other words if there is no Godly thing coming from it then the church eleder or pastor does need to gently stop it.
Varnel Watson
Street Preacherz Another good topic for bro. Andrew to write in his next blog post
Street Preacherz
Haven’t a chance to read it. The blood of Jesus is our stay.
Street Preacherz
A testimony. We need more not less. You can trust a pastor that gets on his face before God to pray…
Street Preacherz
Correction: it’s a sign you can trust the pastor when…
Terry Wiles
I experienced being prayed over like in the picture when I was young.
I have to say the genuine Baptism in the Holy Spirit was much better than that.
Varnel Watson
you always find ways to make good things better
Link Hudson
I would imagine back when speaking in tongues was new to the people in the early COG (Cleveland) movement, they may have done some things without thinking them through, whether they were Biblical or not. And they may have used some genuine gifts in a way that wasn’t completely Biblical.
If we read I Corinthians 14, preaching a sermon ‘in tongues’ without an interpretation does not fit with what Paul says there. What is the purpose of it? It just edifies the speaker, and we are to edify one another when we come together as a church. Maybe the one who preaches in tongues preaches well, ‘but the other is not edified.” Just as the case is when someone prays a blessing in tongues. Except if we are talking about a 45 uninterpreted message in tongues, the speaker is depriving the audience of 45 minutes where they could be edified instead of just 30 seconds or so.
This is the same movement that had people leap-frogging in church meetings, and that embraced snake handling for a while. It’s a good thing the COG (Cleveland) let go of some of these early practices.
Varnel Watson
this is your people Link right? how about that now
Link Hudson
Troy Day isn’t your family from a COG background. I have many brothers and sisters in Christ in those congrefations and many other congregations. I spent about a year attending COG denomination congegations (plural because I moved mid school year). Obe seemed almost likeba Baptist church for style. My dad’s choice at the time. I have been to GBIs in Indonesia. That denomination existed before affiliating woth Cleveland.
Varnel Watson
4th gen AG – may have some far cogop relatives if I dig into it but that would be by marriage and not by birth
Anonymous
its a THING Link Hudson Feb. 20, 1909 Meeting at night. _Several messages_ given in tongues and the Holy Spirit gave the interpretations through me. Luther Richard, Homer Tomlinson, Jesse Trim _preached in tongues as the Spirit gave utterance_
it was a thing in early Pentecostalism that Philip Williams grandma saw too It was a kind of now you see it now you dont thing Jeffrey Snyder much like Oscar Valdez and Dan Anthony for 399 days
Anonymous
Troy Day Very interesting. And 1909? I didn’t know you were that old.
I have a question for you.–as an A/G guy (now, right?) how does that square with the standard A/G interpretation of scripture that there should be a maximum of three tongues and interpretations in a given service?
Anonymous
Link Hudson well I ant much young as you well know If you google this OP I have said plenty about when it was posted by some cog guy by the name of Charlie Page. It came from his family archive or such You can google it for several detail discussions – my interest was connected to the Dolly Pond snake handling church which Jeffrey Snyder knows well ; the reason I was interested in it some Chattanooga reporter reached out to me asking about it as Pentecostal praxis – we did not have snakes in our AG – Link you may have participated if you attended any cogS There is NO standard A/G interpretation of scripture that there should be a maximum – there has never been one such standard anywhere within Pentecostals; I have never heard cog ppl sayi what you are saying as well – you may do well to study some 1 Cor 14 to make up for your lack in Pentecostalism – for example entire sanctification as adhered by your cog and then tongue infilling – sign VS gift These are differences within your denomination and you should know them well if you are not a bapticostal as Ive long suspected BTW you seem to align more with one of our new AG neo-charismatic churches than actual cog IMHO As far as I am concern you can hold a snake and speak in tongues if you want – 2 3 4 times as long as you can hold it Dan Anthony] may do that on the holy Sabbath as well – who can tell you not to? I know I cant or John
Anonymous
Troy Day On one occasion I was in a ministerial service in the church and only my wife and I were Hispanic all the others were American brothers and sisters and there were not many of us there that day, and in the ministerial part some sisters from the south of the United States who have their southern accent, began to pray for my wife, I was praying with my eyes closed in the pew and they were with my wife near the Altar, and suddenly I heard someone praising God in Spanish a heavenly and perfect Spanish that I had to open my eyes because I was surprised and when I looked towards the Altar I saw that the sister praising God in perfect Spanish was American, I just had to praise God, at the end of the service I asked her if she knew Spanish, and she told me that she did not know anything of Spanish and it was true.
The question is why we Pentecostals do not see this more commonly in our churches and prefer the prosperity gospel, NAR, scribblings?
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez I was in a conference in Europe many moons ago I think may have mentioned this to Peter Vandever We were praying in tongues – nothing really too exciting or glorious you know just a normal prayer. Two sisters turned from the row in front of us and the first one said: where did you learn Italian so well. This is like my native … and she named the area where she was from which I to this day do not know. I answered that I was just praying and didnt know a word of Italian [period] The other one looked at me shocked and said with a very heavy Italian accent (not NY Brooklyn much different): But brother, she just asked you this in ITALIAN Just before Link Hudson jumps on it – my latin she aint so good. Philip Williams has heard these stories from his grandma but never experienced them on Noah’s boat – – – to this day I still remember the words the Spirit was speaking through me. I was so shocked that never asked them what was being said in their native tongue. It took me many years after that experience to find someone who can translate them as human words (not interpret them in the Spirit)
Anonymous
BTW Neil Steven Lawrence just FYI gracia gloria de dios does NOT count as speaking in tongues 🙂 We hear this all over the place in the South by non-spanish speakers and NO these exact words do not confirm a call to missions 🙂 Link Hudson Angel Bonilla Αγγελος Ρουίζ
Anonymous
Troy Day ¡Praise God! 🔥🔥🔥
Anonymous
gracia gloria de dios (with a Southern accent) would be Xenolailia. 🧐
Anonymous
Oscar Valdez you can say that again
Anonymous
Troy Day
2 points:
1. Preaching more than a phrase or a praise in tongues is unproductive for the congregation.
2. While it is interesting and informative that this kind of manifestation occurred in history it may not require a normative behavior for today.
The Holy Spirit may modify his inspiration upon the body in different ways at different times. (this observation in no way denigrates the operation of the Holy Spirit through tongues in our midst)
Anonymous
Troy Day Is this date correct “Feb. 20, 1909”?
Anonymous
I am not sure what the point is but those who claim scriptural experience should understand that there is a difference in speaking in other tongues (evidence of the Holy Spirit indwelling a believer) and the gift of tongues and interpretation. I am generally appalled by how many people do not understand the difference.
Anonymous
Bishop Bernie L Wade I agree that I also cling to the initial evidence TO explain with Neil Steven Lawrence John Mushenhouse what the Gift of Tongues-plural in 1Cor14 actually is – do not think Link Hudson Philip Williams make such difference THEN there was this point I completely disagree with just the other day THAT Holy Spirit is indwelling believerS as in a disp view Oscar
Anonymous
Bishop Bernie L Wade there is not enough scripture on the topic to make the distinction. Paul does not address the idea of initial evidence. He treats tongues for prayer as the same sort of thng that is interpreted in chapter 14.
Anonymous
Link Hudson Wow. There actually only manifestation. Your discounting it as initial evidence implies that when the Holy Spirit comes into someone that that person controls the transaction. It is an arrogance that is perpetuated by many religions and their adherents but not what Scripture teaches. I am capable of expounding much more on the topic, but this is not the format.
Anonymous
Bishop Bernie L Wade Those who claim scriptural experience should understand that there is a difference in speaking in other tongues (evidence of the Holy Spirit indwelling a believer) and the gift of tongues and interpretation. I am generally appalled by how many people do not understand the difference. That is the view from my porch…
Anonymous
Bishop Bernie L Wade I have not ‘discounted initial evidence’. I wrote that Paul doesn’t comment on the idea of initial evidence. He doesn’t comment on whether what he describes in chapter 14 is initial evidence.
Chapter 14 implies that one can choose not to speak in tongues and in a certain context should indeed chhose not to (v. 28.)
Anonymous
Once again THAT that Paul doesn’t comment on the idea of initial evidence is a pure argument from silence – very dangerous. The fact that Paul addresses a different manifestation of tongues shows Acts 2 was a given for him THEN PAUL does address the idea of initial evidence by using a completely different terminology in his 1Cor14 expose – most certainly the difference is easily observed not only by his wording used with a purpose through the passage but the general flow of the text as well i.e. ch11-12-13-14-15
Anonymous
Troy Day My posts do not speak of the supposed initial evidence because it is a strawman used by those who think their will directs the Holy Spirit. Scriptures informs us that our contribution is submission and obedience to the Holy Spirit. To those who were already submitted and obedient Apostle Paul gives further understanding in Corinthians.
Anonymous
Bishop Bernie L Wade there you go – we see LOTS of strawman used by those who think their will directs the Holy Spirit. Link Hudson
Anonymous
Link Hudson how does what you said here related to preaching in tonguies as historically present evidence within your denomination ?
Anonymous
Troy Day He doesn’t say there whether anyone interpreted Jesse Trim’s sermon in tongues.
Any preacher who stands up and preaches a whole message in tongues and no one understands and there is no interpreter needs to read I Corinthians 14. That doesn’t edify the congregation, just the speaker. It would be better for the congregation to let someone else teach the word or for those so gifted to prophecy as the Spirit moved them, or to sing songs, or to read the Bible.
But this doesn’t say whether there was an interpretation.
I don’t endorse everything that has ever happened in a COG meeting. I don’t care for playing leap frog or snake handling.
Anonymous
Link Hudson Jesse Trim? A.J. son peached in tongues and he interpreted it for himself AJ even says which tongue it was There are multiple accounts in your own denomination about these occurrences