AZUZA STREET. REVIVAL OR NOT ?

The Righterzpen · May 4, 2026

BPPLEE said:
Yes it speaks of interpretation
1Co 14:13 - Therefore let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret.
1Co 14:14 - For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful.

Which means it’s not meant to be uninterpreted. Which conveys that it’s not uninterpretable either.

NBB · May 4, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
Experience is subjective. Truth is not.

I've had experiences myself. My experiences though don't run my logic. You've probably heard "Facts don't care about your feelings." (Popular phrase coined by Ben Shapiro.) It's applicable across many domains. I grew up in a very dysfunctional household where I endured years of sexual abuse as well as neglect. My "feelings default" was "You're worthless." But just because I feel that way; doesn't make it so.

So why should I assume a positive feeling I may have would be telling me the truth either?

I've had "dreams" and I've had "visions" too; but when dreams about Jesus Christ tend to be sexual in nature; ya tend not to take much stock in your dreams!

Still! His grace is sufficient for me.

I'm also a veteran and I'm diagnosed with depression and dissociative PTSD. I've been in psych hospitals for suicide attempts. Closest thing I ever heard to the audible voice of God was: GET OFF THE BRIDGE!

OK... (I didn't question it; I obeyed.)

And I remember looking at the ground underneath me (I was up under the girding of a bridge that spanned a large bay) and I knew that if I fell; I wasn't going to survive. The fisherman standing on the pylon below me looked to be about the side of a plastic toy soldier. And I remember saying to God. "What if I fall?"

And the answer was: "My grace is sufficient for you."

(Of which this bridge event (experience) was rooted in Scriptural truth.) Is Christ's sacrifice sufficient to cover my sin?

Yes! It is.

So... given what I've written as responses; do you want to discuss with me; what my experience is with sanctification? Do you want to discuss these things with someone who knows they're a sinner?

How about we stick with Scripture.

Sorry but you are so wrong, you know why the bible was written? because the disciples etc had God and the Holy spirit in them,
and had experience, you could go through thousands and millions of theology books, and interpret the bible millions ways,
only the Holy Spirit can make you see the truth.

BPPLEE · May 4, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
Which means it’s not meant to be uninterpreted. Which conveys that it’s not uninterpretable either.

That’s why the speaker should pray that he can interpret the unknown language

Aussie52 · May 4, 2026

Jeff Carr said:
Let us get back to the subject of this thread, having wandered along bypass meadow.
I happened to be browsing in Amazon looking at books and came upon an interesting book. The title is ' The Azuza Revival was not what you think it was'. A coincidence: there are no coincidences with God!
Having a quick look at the promo, the book takes an unsanitised look at what happened at Azuza, how it affected the future Pentecostal Movement and lessons that we can learn from it today.
It arrives tomorrow and after I read it, I shall report in greater detail my findings and other things of interest to this thread.

I received the book, 'The Azuza Revival was not what you think it was' and have made a start in reading it. Firstly, it is not easy read, it is rather heavy going. So far in my reading, the author (who strangely is not named) is laying out the spiritual, social & historical background to Azuza St. He raises a number of issues and makes criticism of them. Some criticisms are to my mind, unjust. For example, he criticizes the Holiness Movement & entire sanctification in particular. Unfortunately, his description of entire sanctification is incorrect, and thus, his criticism not valid. One should get the facts right about a thing, before throwing stones.
Reading the book, I get a sense of 'superiority' with his criticisms of others, which is worrying. There is one other thing that I find annoying, that is the use of the Hebrew names for God & Jesus. It seems to be a 'trendy' thing at the moment, especially in Christian Forums.
Will post more as I progress through the book.

The Righterzpen · May 4, 2026

NBB said:
Sorry but you are so wrong, you know why the bible was written? because the disciples etc had God and the Holy spirit in them,
and had experience, you could go through thousands and millions of theology books, and interpret the bible millions ways,
only the Holy Spirit can make you see the truth.

OK, let's go with what you're saying.

You say the Bible can be interpreted a million different ways. The disciples had experiences, I've had experiences, you've had experiences. You are telling me I'm so wrong. So.... how do you know who's right. If there's no objective truth? How do you know who has the Holy Spirit and who doesn't?

How do you know I'm not the one who's right and you're not the one who's wrong?

The Righterzpen · May 4, 2026

BPPLEE said:
That’s why the speaker should pray that he can interpret the unknown language

Which proves that it ultimately not an unknown language. You might not know it. I might not know it; but that doesn't mean it's unknowable. Do you see the issue here?

BPPLEE · May 4, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
Which proves that it ultimately not an unknown language. You might not know it. I might not know it; but that doesn't mean it's unknowable. Do you see the issue here?

I don’t think you do, but it’s okay. Nothing to argue about

The Righterzpen · May 4, 2026

BPPLEE said:
I don’t think you do, but it’s okay. Nothing to argue about

Well, OK. Would you like to explain to me what you think I'm not getting and what doctrine does the idea of this being an "unknown" tongue substantiate?

BPPLEE · May 4, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
Well, OK. Would you like to explain to me what you think I'm not getting and what doctrine does the idea of this being an "unknown" tongue substantiate?

I think we have beat this horse enough, it’s not a salvation issue so it’s pointless to go on just to try to win an argument.
I understand your position, have a good evening

The Righterzpen · May 4, 2026

BPPLEE said:
I think we have beat this horse enough, it’s not a salvation issue so it’s pointless to go on just to try to win an argument.
I understand your position, have a good evening

OK… I didn’t ask whether or not you understood my position; I’m asking you to defend yours.

But if you don’t want / can’t to do that; OK.

Have a good night.

NBB · May 4, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
OK, let's go with what you're saying.

You say the Bible can be interpreted a million different ways. The disciples had experiences, I've had experiences, you've had experiences. You are telling me I'm so wrong. So.... how do you know who's right. If there's no objective truth? How do you know who has the Holy Spirit and who doesn't?

How do you know I'm not the one who's right and you're not the one who's wrong?

Is the same as the example, you been to disney world for a year, or 10, know it like the palm of your hand,
and some guy comes and says "you don't even know what you are talking about, my opinion is disney world doesn't exists", and you have been having fun there for years.

The Righterzpen · May 4, 2026

NBB said:
Is the same as the example, you been to disney world for a year, or 10, know it like the palm of your hand,
and some guy comes and says "you don't even know what you are talking about, my opinion is disney world doesn't exists", and you have been having fun there for years.

The question isn't whether or not a phenomena ("Disney World") exists; the question is who's running it? Does your "Disney World" line up with the original Walt Disney's vision or is it a "strong delusion"; corrupted by greed and graft?

What does Scripture say about what really happened in the 1st century; and now compare today's phenomena to 2000 years ago. Does it line up? (The answer to that is "no; it doesn't.")

Aussie52 · May 4, 2026

Jeff Carr said:
I received the book, 'The Azuza Revival was not what you think it was' and have made a start in reading it. Firstly, it is not easy read, it is rather heavy going. So far in my reading, the author (who strangely is not named) is laying out the spiritual, social & historical background to Azuza St. He raises a number of issues and makes criticism of them. Some criticisms are to my mind, unjust. For example, he criticizes the Holiness Movement & entire sanctification in particular. Unfortunately, his description of entire sanctification is incorrect, and thus, his criticism not valid. One should get the facts right about a thing, before throwing stones.
Reading the book, I get a sense of 'superiority' with his criticisms of others, which is worrying. There is one other thing that I find annoying, that is the use of the Hebrew names for God & Jesus. It seems to be a 'trendy' thing at the moment, especially in Christian Forums.
Will post more as I progress through the book.

I have continued my reading of,' The Azuza Revival was not what you think it was'. I found many good thoughts, especially the failure of the leadership to actually lead. There were other things that troubled me. I believe discernment is needed in reading this volume.
I have decided to put it aside and read something more edifying. I have two biographies waiting to be read. One of Peter Cartwright and the other, Francis Asbury, both Methodist preachers during the second great awakening.

NBB · May 6, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
The question isn't whether or not a phenomena ("Disney World") exists; the question is who's running it? Does your "Disney World" line up with the original Walt Disney's vision or is it a "strong delusion"; corrupted by greed and graft?

What does Scripture say about what really happened in the 1st century; and now compare today's phenomena to 2000 years ago. Does it line up? (The answer to that is "no; it doesn't.")

Well that is worse, because you put God in the bag of some looneys, and without really knowing, just 'your opinion' on what you saw on some wacko church, like i said in the first post, people better be careful.

The Righterzpen · May 6, 2026

NBB said:
Well that is worse, because you put God in the bag of some looneys, and without really knowing, just 'your opinion' on what you saw on some wacko church, like i said in the first post, people better be careful.

What does Scripture say and do your practices align with Scripture? (That's the real question!)

I know modern pentecostalism tells people they are "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" if they critique the phenomena that takes place in these churches; but that attempted self defense isn't the Biblical definition of "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" either!

Please explain how this phenomenon takes place in other religions if it's "of the Holy Ghost"? The "ecstatic religious experience" and its exhibited behavioral presentations isn't confined to pentecostal Christianity. Muslims, Jews, Hindus and people of tribal religions also "speak in tongues" and are "slain in the spirit" and run up and down screaming and yelling and rolling on the floor type of behavior. (Don't believe me; look it up on YouTube.)

So yeah, you're right in saying "people need to be careful". (That's true!)

Scripture says Christ was the fulfillment of prophecy "according to the Scriptures". There has to be an objective measure of doctrine and practice. (And I'm not saying there's "one church" who's got it 100% right either.) But Scripture is to be our guide.

DamianWarS · May 6, 2026

Jeff Carr said:
Pick up any book on modern day revivals and included will be an account of the 'Azuza Street Revival' at the beginning of the 20th century in Los Angeles.
This occurrence in church history is usually painted in bright colours and spoken of as a genuine move of God.
The account of the happenings at the old, rundown African Episcopal Methodist Church building in Azuza Street, was reported by Frank Bartleman, a Chrisian newspaper reporter. His account of those happenings became a book called, ' Another Wave Rolls In. Frank's account was very 'sugar coated' and he tendered to view what was happening through 'rose tinted glasses'. This unfortunate view of Azuza St. has been repeated in books & sermons done through the years.
The main figure in these events was a black, one eyed, holiness preacher named William J Seymour, who had come to Los Angeles from a Bible School in the South, where the students had experienced, the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues.' This college was headed up by a Baptist minister, who had received the baptism, by the name of Charles Parham. He will pop up in this story a little later.
William Seymour started meetings at Azuza St, where crowds of spiritually hungry Christians gathered to seek the baptism with the evidence of tongues. Frank Bartleman's description of the meetings were anything but the truth. Many newspaper reporters were present along with many of the City's evangelical ministers, who were horrified by what they saw.
The meetings were carried on without any guiding hand; in fact, they were described by objective onlookers as 'bedlam'. Seymour spent his time in the meetings with his head in a fruit crate that doubled as the pulpit, leaving the proceedings to do what they wished. It was reported that people ran around the building shouting at the top of their voices. Others, rolling around the floor with bodily jerking movements. Many of the visiting ministers reported demonic manifestations happening, which were allowed to go on without any intervention by Seymour or anyone else. Many times, Police were called to come and stop the loud noise and 'madness' that was going on.

Enter Charles Parham. When Charles arrived at the Azuza St meetings, he could not believe what he saw. He immediately took control and brought sanity and order into the situation. Over a period of time, things began to fizzle out and the meetings were closed.

The Azuza Street meetings became the 'birthplace' of the modern Pentecostal Movement with this new doctrine of the 'Baptism in the Holy Spirit with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues'.

What can be learnt from this 'so called revival' that is so often held up as a significant move of God?

Looking at what really went on, it was not a real revival in any sense of the word. It was a series of meetings that were overly emotional, demonstrations of the 'flesh' and worst of all, demonic in nature. Azuza St cannot be compared with the Welsh Revival or the Hebrides Awakening under the ministry of Duncan Campbell. In these revivals, people were convicted of sin, lives changed for the good and most of all, God was glorified.

The new and novel doctrine of 'initial evidence of tongues' in relation to the baptism in the Holy Spirit, raises questions as to its validity and scripturalness.
.
Those involved in the Azuza St meetings assumed that the supernatural occurrences which took place were from God. This is most dangerous. There are other 'sources' of the miraculous & supernatural besides God. John said to 'test the spirits as to whether they be of God'.

It is my personal opinion that the Pentecostal Movement was built on a fraudulent foundation and continues to move in a mixture of truth & fraud, even to today.
I invite questions & discussion on this subject.

Final note. The writer of this post spent 20 years in the Pentecostal Movement. Seven years as a pastor. I saw the good and the bad of it.

Someone who spent 20 years within Pentecostal movements, 7 of which as a pastor, but no longer is, can expose a strong bias against. I constantly read of similar accounts of pastors who have left the ministry for Islam. Their grievances against the church or denomination, etc.., after spending a considerable amount of time as a stakeholder inside, doesn't help their case, it only makes it emotional for them.

The article seems to be overgeneralizing, suggesting other rivals "people were convicted of sin, lives changed for the good and most of all, God was glorified." then is implying that in Azuza none of these things happen, which is a bold claim to make. Supporters of Azusa would argue that there was repentance, evangelism, holiness emphasis, prayer, and missionary fervour there too, it can depend on which evidence you want to emphasize.

Frank Bartleman was also certainly sympathetic, but historians still treat him as an important primary source. Like many eyewitnesses, he had a theological bias, but dismissing him as essentially dishonest is an overstatement.

The “head in the box/crate” story is real. Seymour sometimes prayed with his head inside the makeshift pulpit but the context is important. His purpose is actually not to be theatrical but to pray in private. You can easily frame this to show the oddity of it over showing the humility, and prayer focus. It was a humble play with not a lot of extras and was often crowded. The seats and pulpits were simply wooden boxes so the box over the head is a way he could isolate into a private prayer time within a crowd. I can understand how someone described as Seymour could come to those conclusions (even today) even if you think it's odd.

Charles Parham also did not “take control” and restored order. Parham did have sharp criticism of Azusa, which was largely rejected by Seymour, and the movement continued without him. I'm not saying it can't be criticized, but I don't think the article best represents what it really was and it sound more like someone turned anti-pentecostal. I think the "no true Scotsman" fallacy is also valid to point out if it was an authentic movement/rival or not.

NBB · May 6, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
What does Scripture say and do your practices align with Scripture? (That's the real question!)

I know modern pentecostalism tells people they are "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" if they critique the phenomena that takes place in these churches; but that attempted self defense isn't the Biblical definition of "blaspheming the Holy Spirit" either!

Please explain how this phenomenon takes place in other religions if it's "of the Holy Ghost"? The "ecstatic religious experience" and its exhibited behavioral presentations isn't confined to pentecostal Christianity. Muslims, Jews, Hindus and people of tribal religions also "speak in tongues" and are "slain in the spirit" and run up and down screaming and yelling and rolling on the floor type of behavior. (Don't believe me; look it up on YouTube.)

So yeah, you're right in saying "people need to be careful". (That's true!)

Scripture says Christ was the fulfillment of prophecy "according to the Scriptures". There has to be an objective measure of doctrine and practice. (And I'm not saying there's "one church" who's got it 100% right either.) But Scripture is to be our guide.

Well, you can have all opinions you want, is dangerous to form opinions just by superficial stuff,
As someone who is telling you, few times in my life i have lied, very few times, i lost my last driver test because i didn't want to lie
in what medication i was taking, i met the precious Holy Spirit in pentecostal churches, more than being sincere i can't do. Be careful.

The Righterzpen · May 8, 2026

NBB said:
Well, you can have all opinions you want, is dangerous to form opinions just by superficial stuff,
As someone who is telling you, few times in my life i have lied, very few times, i lost my last driver test because i didn't want to lie
in what medication i was taking, i met the precious Holy Spirit in pentecostal churches, more than being sincere i can't do. Be careful.

"Be careful" about what? I'm basing my understanding about all of this from what I find in Scripture. If you can prove me wrong by using Scripture; then I'm wiling to listen. Yet just because you have an experience; doesn't make your position Scripturally sound.

NBB · May 9, 2026

The Righterzpen said:
"Be careful" about what? I'm basing my understanding about all of this from what I find in Scripture. If you can prove me wrong by using Scripture; then I'm wiling to listen. Yet just because you have an experience; doesn't make your position Scripturally sound.

Sir, without the Holy Spirit there would be no scriptures, and christians can't understand them correctly without Him,
You know when the apostles were around, there were mixed among them false people, even John says 'they were with us but not were us'
So this attitude people have about pentecostalism, is more about unbelief about gifts and healing etc, than other thing,
there are bad baptists, bad whatever i don't see people sinking all churches into saying their are bad because of them.

Is plain unbelief, and this is what the bible teaches like it or not, there are gifts, seek prophecy, heal the sick, cast out demons etc.

tdidymas · May 14, 2026

BPPLEE said:
There is a type of tongues that is not a known language
1Co 14:2 - For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.
But I never believed that it was necessary to speak in tongues to be filled with the Spirit. I did have the experience but I always wondered if I was really speaking in tongues or if it was just something I was doing
I know that I received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. That was real

That verse (1 Cor. 14:2) is in the context of the Corinthian church, where what was spoken in an "unknown" language was unknown to the church at that time. This is why Paul was rebuking them for speaking in a language no one in the church understood, nor was getting any supernatural interpretation (translation, that is). It does not mean it was unknown to anyone anywhere.

AZUZA STREET. REVIVAL OR NOT ?

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Well-Known Member

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Well-Known Member

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Well-Known Member

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Well-Known Member

Jesus is my Shield in any Desert or Storm

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Similar threads