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]
John Kissinger 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.