Pentecostal vs. Charismatic

[jeolmstead]

Pentecostal vs. Charismatic

I was saved as a young child in a Pentecostal denominational church (Church of God)

While I’ll always love the Church of God I came to a point where I did not agree with their teaching concerning eternal security and what I took at the time to be their works based mentality concerning holiness. (i.e. what you wear or don’t wear ect..)

Now, I was filled with the spirit in a non-denom charismatic church in 1982.

At the time I could see a glaring difference between the two. Now however it seems to me that the two things have blended into one.

Can someone define for me the difference between the two now?

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Pentecostal vs. Charismatic

I was saved as a young child in a Pentecostal denominational church (Church of God)

While I’ll always love the Church of God I came to a point where I did not agree with their teaching concerning eternal security and what I took at the time to be their works based mentality concerning holiness. (i.e. what you wear or don’t wear ect..)

Now, I was filled with the spirit in a non-denom charismatic church in 1982.

At the time I could see a glaring difference between the two. Now however it seems to me that the two things have blended into one.

Can someone define for me the difference between the two now?

My wife was born an rasied COG and in fact went to Midwest Bible College in ND back in the 70s when we started dating. We were married on the campus quad!

I taugh in a traditional Pentecostal church for a number of years and became somewhat aware of problems in the teaching. These revolve around "justification" "sancitification"(as a second act of grace) as well as the idea of getting "good and saved" before one can receive the Holy Spirit. The divisions between all these are well defined in the COG and they use these terms to identify levels of your Christian walk.
Charismatics tend to see all these things happening at the same time. You are redeemed, justified, sanctified, and therefore made "good enough" for the Holy Spirit the moment you are saved. No need for tarrying or getting "good and saved." When you get saved you are as good as you are ever going to be in the eyes of God and therefore worthy to receive the Holy Spirit immediately when you are saved.

I recall many good hearted people who spent their whole lives (some decades) waiting, tarrying, and striving to be "good enough" to receive the Holy Spirit... and never did realize that we recieve the Spirit by faith.

 

[JEBrady]

Pentecostal vs. Charismatic

I was saved as a young child in a Pentecostal denominational church (Church of God)

While I’ll always love the Church of God I came to a point where I did not agree with their teaching concerning eternal security and what I took at the time to be their works based mentality concerning holiness. (i.e. what you wear or don’t wear ect..)

Now, I was filled with the spirit in a non-denom charismatic church in 1982.

At the time I could see a glaring difference between the two. Now however it seems to me that the two things have blended into one.

Can someone define for me the difference between the two now?

I wish that I could. False doctrine comes in two flavors, Biblically speaking- legalism and license. I've heard COG was in the ditch on the legalism side. God is merciful and still moves mightily in that church by His spirit. If everything had to be perfect we could all hang it up with no hope. Many non-denom full-gospel and charismatic churches are untaught regarding sound doctrine, and have a tendency to lean toward license as a result. These broad generalizations are just that, so they don't necessarily appy in any given church. I found the most balanced doctrine and move of God in an independent church. The thing is, each church has a tendency to specialize in one thing and neglect something else.

Some things are flat out wrong in the word of God (e.g. fornication) and must come under discipline. Other things are disputable (e.g. what you wear). While coming to church half-naked is not Biblical for obvious reasons, we can't be the Holy Spirit for people. God has to deal with our hearts to change us. But if blatant violations of the Word go unanswered or uncorrected by leadership, the church will lose the anointing. Balance is the key, and it is found through properly dividing God's Word. Any church direction has to be based soundly upon scripture. And this is what God wants, so it's not as though it should be so hard. The trouble is, in order to really come into true discernment, we must live up to what we already know, and not everyone is willing to do that.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

I don't know what faith Charles Swindoll belongs to but he has a very good book that explains the stages a Christian progresses thru to get to maturity.
Birth=jn 1:11-13, 3:3 Heb 10:10-18 Matt 18:3-4 Acts 2:42 1 Pet 2:1-3 1 Cor 3:1-3 Heb 5:13-14
Childhood=Eph 5:1-21 Rom 6:6-13 Gal 5:16 Col 1:9-10 1 Thes 2:10-12
Adolecence=Heb 5:12-6:2 1 Cor133:11 PeterPan Syndrom= 1 Cor 1:10-11 5:11 8:12
Maturity=Ecc 4:9-13 Mrk 6:7 Phil 2:2-3 Jn 17: 19-23 Mtt 10:7-8 Act 4:32-37
Barriers to maturity=willfull disobedience, Isa 30:1-2a Jer 4:22 5:21-22a 5:23-24a CURE yeilding of the WILL
superficial commitment, Ezek 33:30-32 CURE faith in action
overly impressed with servants, 1 Cor 1:11-13 3:3-7 CURE grateful not grovel
easily swayed by intentional fraud, Eph 4:14 CURE commitment to continual Growth in Christ
Prophesy against the Shepards=Ezek 34
It's very worth doing a study on to see that altho we're equipted we need to learn to use the tools and continully grow in Christ

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

My wife was born an rasied COG and in fact went to Midwest Bible College in ND back in the 70s when we started dating. We were married on the campus quad!

I taugh in a traditional Pentecostal church for a number of years and became somewhat aware of problems in the teaching. These revolve around "justification" "sancitification"(as a second act of grace) as well as the idea of getting "good and saved" before one can receive the Holy Spirit. The divisions between all these are well defined in the COG and they use these terms to identify levels of your Christian walk.
Charismatics tend to see all these things happening at the same time. You are redeemed, justified, sanctified, and therefore made "good enough" for the Holy Spirit the moment you are saved. No need for tarrying or getting "good and saved." When you get saved you are as good as you are ever going to be in the eyes of God and therefore worthy to receive the Holy Spirit immediately when you are saved.

I recall many good hearted people who spent their whole lives (some decades) waiting, tarrying, and striving to be "good enough" to receive the Holy Spirit... and never did realize that we recieve the Spirit by faith.

I pretty sure justification is getting right with God because of what Jesus did for us and sactification is our position in Him as He sees us cloaked in Jesus' righteousness. How do you define it?

 

[BarbB]

I thought that pentecostals and charismatics both believed the same things - that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are in evidence today, primarily tongues, interpretation, healing and prophecy. Pentecostals are those within pentecostal denominations and charismatics are within non-pentecostal denominations, like the RCC and Anglican and Episcopalian, and whose individual churches may or may not operate in the gifts.

 

[Tenebrae]

I thought that pentecostals and charismatics both believed the same things - that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are in evidence today, primarily tongues, interpretation, healing and prophecy. Pentecostals are those within pentecostal denominations and charismatics are within non-pentecostal denominations, like the RCC and Anglican and Episcopalian, and whose individual churches may or may not operate in the gifts.

That says it pretty well I think

 

[dentonz]

Pentecostal vs. Charismatic

I was saved as a young child in a Pentecostal denominational church (Church of God)

While I’ll always love the Church of God I came to a point where I did not agree with their teaching concerning eternal security and what I took at the time to be their works based mentality concerning holiness. (i.e. what you wear or don’t wear ect..)

Now, I was filled with the spirit in a non-denom charismatic church in 1982.

At the time I could see a glaring difference between the two. Now however it seems to me that the two things have blended into one.

Can someone define for me the difference between the two now?

How I wish we could all blend into one. There is no denominational boundaries in the love of God.

 

[dignitized]

I thought that pentecostals and charismatics both believed the same things - that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are in evidence today, primarily tongues, interpretation, healing and prophecy. Pentecostals are those within pentecostal denominations and charismatics are within non-pentecostal denominations, like the RCC and Anglican and Episcopalian, and whose individual churches may or may not operate in the gifts.

not always. I and the guy who painted your avatar both belong to a non-denominational Charismatic church. There are some differences between chrasmatic and pentecostals - but they are not always obvious.

 

[dignitized]

http://www.answers.com/topic/pentecostalism

http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?dsid=2222&dekey=Charismatic+Movement&linktext=Charismatic%20Movement

Often confused with Pentecostalism (which it was inspired by), Charismatic Christianity tends to differ in key aspects: most Charismatics reject the preeminence given by Pentecostalism to glossolalia, reject what they consider to be legalism sometimes associated with Pentecostalism, and often stay in their existing denominations such as Roman Catholic Charismatics.
Because of the continual cross-over between Pentecostalism and the modern Charismatic movement, it is increasingly difficult to speak of Charismatics and Pentecostals as being part of separate movements. Yet because neither movement is monolithic, it is also unfair to speak of them as being one movement either. The difference is primarily one of origins. Beliefs of the two groups are very similar; each movement, however, is unique in its historical beginnings. Having been conceived in unique contexts, the difference may secondarily be described in terms of contrasting church cultures evidenced through each movement's manners and customs (i.e., worship styles, preaching styles, altar ministry methods). Until a more acceptable broad nomenclature is used, it needs to be understood that both movements share a great deal in common, and yet can sometimes be clearly differentiated.

 

[KingZzub]

Derek Prince preached a sermon not that long before he died making the point that he was a Pentecostal, not a Charismatic because he felt the charismatic move had lost the fear of the Lord and a sense of Biblical holiness.

Cheers,
|ZZ|

 

[victoryword]

Derek Prince preached a sermon not that long before he died making the point that he was a Pentecostal, not a Charismatic because he felt the charismatic move had lost the fear of the Lord and a sense of Biblical holiness.

Cheers,
|ZZ|

And they have discarded a lot of other doctrines that were once unique to being Charismatic. I am almost ready to join Prince in this.

 

[JimB]

Derek Prince preached a sermon not that long before he died making the point that he was a Pentecostal, not a Charismatic because he felt the charismatic move had lost the fear of the Lord and a sense of Biblical holiness.

Cheers,
|ZZ|

You mean the same Derek Prince who led hundreds/thousands into the “shepherding movement” during the 1970s until the doctrine was exposed as excessive and hererodoxical and he was forced to recant it in 1983?

Prince, as a teacher and wise masterbuilder we should follow, lost credibility c.1973. It took him more than a decade and a lot of bad press (and followers) before he finally saw the errors of the now-defunct shepherding movement.

Sincerely,
~Payne N. DeButtz

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Church of God, Doctrinal Commitments

1. Repentance. Mark 1:15; Luke 13:3; Acts 3:19.
2. Justification. Romans 5:1; Titus 3:7.

3. Regeneration. Titus 3:5.

4. New birth. John 3:3; 1 Peter 1:23; 1 John 3:9.

5. Sanctification subsequent to justification. Romans 5:2; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 1 Thessalonians 4:3; Hebrews 13:12.

6. Holiness. Luke 1:75; 1 Thessalonians 4:7; Hebrews 12:14.

7. Water baptism. Matthew 28:19; Mark 1:9, 10; John 3:22, 23; Acts 8:36, 38.

8. Baptism with the Holy Ghost subsequent to cleansing; the endowment of power for service. Matthew 3:11; Luke 24:49, 53; Acts 1:4-8.

9. The speaking in tongues as the Spirit gives utterance as the initial evidence of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. John 15:26; Acts 2:4; 10:44-46; 19:1-7.

10. Spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:1, 7, 10, 28, 31; 1 Corinthians 14:1.

11. Signs following believers. Mark 16:17-20; Romans 15:18,19; Hebrews 2:4.

12. Fruit of the Spirit. Romans 6:22; Galatians 5:22, 23; Ephesians 5:9; Philippians 1:11.

13. Divine healing provided for all in the atonement. Psalm 103:3; Isaiah 53:4, 5; Matthew 8:17; James 5:14-16; 1 Peter 2:24.

14. The Lord's Supper. Luke 22:17-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.

15. Washing the saints' feet. John 13:4-17; 1 Timothy 5:9, 10.

16. Tithing and giving. Genesis 14:18-20; 28:20-22; Malachi 3:10; Luke 11:42; 1 Corinthians 9:6-9; 16:2; Hebrews 7:1-21.

17. Restitution where possible. Matthew 3:8; Luke 19:8, 9.

18. Premillennial second coming of Jesus. First, to resurrect the dead saints and to catch away the living saints to Him in the air. 1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; 2 Thessalonians 2:L Second, to reign on the earth a thousand years. Zechariah 14:4; 1 Thessalonians 4:14; 2 Thessalonians 1:710; Jude 14, 15; Revelation 5:10; 19:11-21; 20:4-6.

19. Resurrection. John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15; Revelation 20:5, 6.

20. Eternal life for the righteous. Matthew 25:46; Luke 18:30; John 10:28; Romans 6:22; 1 John 5:11-13.

21. Eternal punishment for the wicked. No liberation nor annihilation. Matthew 25:41-46; Mark 3:29; 2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; Revelation 20:10-15; 21:8.

 

[victoryword]

You mean the same Derek Prince who led hundreds/thousands into the “shepherding movement” during the 1970s until the doctrine was exposed as excessive and hererodoxical and he was forced to recant it in 1983?

Prince, as a teacher and wise masterbuilder we should follow, lost credibility c.1973. It took him more than a decade and a lot of bad press (and followers) before he finally saw the errors of the now-defunct shepherding movement.

Sincerely,
~Payne N. DeButtz

The fact that Prince denounced and recanted the shepherding excesses should be sufficient to NOT bring up the past. If God forgave him then no one else has a right to bring this up.

So Jim, what was the purpose of this? Does it take away from anything that Prince said in Zzub's quote of him?

 

[dignitized]

It's times like these that I'm glad I do not move in certain circles . . . .

 

[merryheart]

The fact that Prince denounced and recanted the shepherding excesses should be sufficient to NOT bring up the past. If God forgave him then no one else has a right to bring this up.

So Jim, what was the purpose of this? Does it take away from anything that Prince said in Zzub's quote of him?

As one who was hurt in the shepharding movement, the point would be that you would want to be careful with what he wrote considering even *he* repented of what he wrote

 

[victoryword]

As one who was hurt in the shepharding movement, the point would be that you would want to be careful with what he wrote considering even *he* repented of what he wrote

I have three words for that:

GET OVER IT!

 

[dignitized]

I have three words for that:

GET OVER IT!

there is no call for being rude.

 

[merryheart]

I have three words for that:

GET OVER IT!

I am over it -

Praise God for His mercy - it was a difficult road

however, I wouldn't go to the teacher of that mess to learn again...


(and ya, that was rather rude. Why did you do that? Have I trampled your feelings somewhere unknowingly?)