Sanctification in the Assemblies of God

Posted by Brody Pope in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

So I have a question. I know that the Church of God, IPHC, and the Free Will Baptist of Pentecostal Faith believe that sanctification is a second work of grace. However, I never hear anything about sanctification from the Assembly of God, most notably, Jimmy Swaggart. How do they view sanctification?

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:29 AM]
We believe in it is part of salvation 🙂

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 8:30 AM]
Ok. So, when someone is saved they are sanctified at the same time?

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:31 AM]
You are saved, sanctified, justified and glorified 🙂 This was what broke Azusa Street up.

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 8:31 AM]
Ok thank you for explaining.

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 8:33 AM]
Sanctification is an act of separation from that which is evil, and of dedication unto God. Sanctification is realized in the believer by recognizing his identification with Christ in His death and resurrection, and by the faith reckoning daily upon the fact of that union, and by offering every faculty continually to the dominion of the Holy Spirit. http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/statement_of_fundamental_truths/sft_full.cfm#9

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:35 AM]
Basically, AG believe in two baptisms, COG believes in three, Latter Rain people believing in an ongoing baptism.

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 8:37 AM]
Well, I mean, I believe that we are saved, then sanctified, and then after sanctification we are filled with the Holy Ghost with the evidence in speaking in tongues.

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 8:38 AM]
Peter A Vandever baptism(s) is probably not the best term here

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:38 AM]
That is not biblical. Most my COG pastor friends dont even believe it lol I can not find a place in the NT that someone was baptized with sanctification.

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:40 AM]
What is the Baptism of Fire to you?

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 8:42 AM]
Never heard of the baptism of fire. And we baptized with sanctification.

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 8:43 AM]
Far as I know, we are baptized with Christ, baptized with water, and baptized in the Holy Ghost.

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:45 AM]
Can you give me a biblical defense? the Baptism of Fire happened in Acts 2:1-4 and its burns the chaff away. You can say it happens at salvation or you can say it is part of the baptism of the Holy Spirit but I can find a third infilling in the New Testament

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 8:48 AM]
No, Acts 2:1-4 was when they were filled with the Holy Ghost and with fire. I’ve never heard it as the Baptism of Fire.

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 8:49 AM]
There are 7 baptisms for believers listed in the New Testament. Baptism of Fire could be Holy Spirit or persecution as early Pentecostals saw their power in being persecuted for the Gospel. We had a good discussion not long ago on the whole baptism in fire, dynamit etc. But matters little what we think about it and it’s more important what John the Baptis meant when he said: He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. (Matthew 3:11 )

McMinnville, Tennessee Church of God

Peter A Vandever [08/15/2015 8:51 AM]
I baptize you with[a] water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with[b] the Holy Spirit and fire.

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 8:56 AM]
The term FIRE-BAPTIZED was introduced to the Holiness movement BEFORE they were baptized with the HG.. Irwin taught of a third blessing that came after salvation and entire sanctification called the “baptism of fire.” While speaking in tongues was not unheard of among the Fire-Baptized Holiness, it was not (or perhaps not yet) understood as the initial evidence of fire baptism. This idea was formulated by Charles Parham and only began to influence the Fire-Baptized Church (est. 1895 Lincoln, Nebraska) as news of the Azusa Street Revival spread after 1906. By 1900 (i.e. before Azusa), Irwin also taught there were additional “baptisms of fire” he called baptisms of “dynamite”, “lyddite”, and “oxidite”. This “chemical jargon” never took root within the church and was abandoned by Irwin’s successors. It was also discarded by the few Pentecostal circles that adopted it once the doctrine of HS baptism was finalized at Azusa and denominations like AoG and CoG introduced their doctrinal statements. We had a great discussion about those early roots not long ago, but I cannot find the article. Perhaps Charles Page remembers it and can point you to it

Jerome Foster Jr. [08/15/2015 9:13 AM]
So just accepting Jesus is not enough, I thought when you accept him. You are immediately filled with the Holy Ghost.

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 9:14 AM]
oh brother Jerome Foster Jr. where art thou? Rick Wadholm Jr

Jerome Foster Jr. [08/15/2015 9:15 AM]
I’m home, where are you?

Brody Pope [08/15/2015 9:16 AM]
Lol

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 9:16 AM]
Jerome Foster Jr. How do you interpret the words of Paul: have you received the holy ghost SINCE you believed (Acts 19:2)

Jerome Foster Jr. [08/15/2015 9:22 AM]
How do you explain Acts 2:38? I learned one thing after I got all these degrees, we need to preach Jesus and him crucified and the Holy Ghost will convict hearts.

Jerome Foster Jr. [08/15/2015 9:23 AM]
And still my previous question was not answered.

John Kissinger [08/15/2015 9:24 AM]
Peter A Vandever furthermore, Irwin became convinced that there was an experience beyond sanctification called the “baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire” or simply “the fire”. After receiving this experience in October 1895, he began to preach this “third blessing” among holiness adherents in the Midwest, particularly among Wesleyan Methodists and Brethren in Christ. His services were highly emotional with participants often getting the “jerks”, shouting, speaking in tongues, and holy dancing and laughing.

Jerome Foster Jr. [08/15/2015 9:29 AM]
Brody Pope good thought for discussion, thanks, have a great Saturday

3 Comments

  • Reply July 10, 2016

    Joseph D. Absher

    If you have to resort to name calling to promote yourself you don’t know what sanctification even means. Go baaaaaack.

  • Reply July 12, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    HEre we go Charles Page First time we discussed it was under our AG sanctification doctrine

    The term FIRE-BAPTIZED was introduced to the Holiness movement BEFORE they were baptized with the HG.. Irwin taught of a third blessing that came after salvation and entire sanctification called the “baptism of fire.” While speaking in tongues was not unheard of among the Fire-Baptized Holiness, it was not (or perhaps not yet) understood as the initial evidence of fire baptism. This idea was formulated by Charles Parham and only began to influence the Fire-Baptized Church (est. 1895 Lincoln, Nebraska) as news of the Azusa Street Revival spread after 1906. By 1900 (i.e. before Azusa), Irwin also taught there were additional “baptisms of fire” he called baptisms of “dynamite”, “lyddite”, and “oxidite”. This “chemical jargon” never took root within the church and was abandoned by Irwin’s successors. It was also discarded by the few Pentecostal circles that adopted it once the doctrine of HS baptism was finalized at Azusa and denominations like AoG and CoG introduced their doctrinal statements. We had a great discussion about those early roots not long ago, but I cannot find the article. Perhaps Charles Page remembers it and can point you to it

    http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/early-church-of-god-of-prophecy/

  • Reply July 12, 2019

    Thangsan Hisfootstep

    If to believe in the finished work of Christ on the cross, sanctification is already in there and is a part of the composite. Just to believe it and live it daily (by faith in it) is what supposed to do from our part.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.