-
3.1 Schisms in the Pentecostal Movement
Answer ONE of the following prompts in a paragraph.
- Consider the idea of Progressive Illumination. Howard Goss, one of the founders of ACOP, wrote “A Pentecostal preacher who did not dig up a new slant on some scripture, or get some new revelation to his heart every so often; one who did not propagate it, defend it, and let it be known that if necessary, he was prepared to lay down his life for it, was considered slow, dull and unspiritual." Is there some merit to the idea of Progressive Illumination? Do you discern any problems or challenges with it?
- Of the three issues in this video (Only Evidence, Finished Work, New Issue), which side of the theological divides do you find yourself on? Are there any of these issues that you think are of lesser importance than the others?
-
24 Replies
-
Of the three schisms listed in this session, I think the most important one (at least in my estimation) is the question of finished work vs second work. Certainly in our own experiences as Christians we can identify an ongoing sanctification as we mature in our faith. As we grow in our surrender and obedience to Christ, we begin to look more like Him. This would lead me to accept that sanctification is a second work of grace, were it not for passages like Gal 2:20 and Rom 6, which describes our life as being lived in and through Christ. This coincides with the passages in the prophets which refer to God giving us a new heart and putting a new spirit within us. The life we now live as Christians, at its core, is the life of our resurrected Saviour lived through us. Our experience of this transformed life is still an ongoing process, which makes it difficult to fully digest or conceptualize how our sanctification is complete in Jesus. I tend to land more on the side of Gal 2:20, but whether we see sanctification as a second work of grace or as part of Jesus’s sacrifice, the important thing to recognize is that it is a work of GRACE, and is something only God can produce in our lives.
-
With the issue of the initial evidence of speaking in tongues, I find I am more in the camp of the gift of tongues being a gift of the Holy Spirit, but not necessarily something a believer has to have in order to show themselves to be filled with the Holy Spirit. I worry that if someone does not have the gift of tongues that they will feel there is something wrong with them, and it puts a lot of pressure on a gift of the Holy Spirit then the Spirit Himself. There has also not been a strong enough Biblical argument presented to me that the initial evidence has to be the speaking of tongues, and so I would err on the side of unity and not question someone’s faith journey on the basis of tongues.
That being said I did find it very helpful to understand why that emphasis came about!
-
The concept of Progressive Illumination, as described by Howard Goss, suggests that spiritual growth and understanding involve continually uncovering new insights and revelations from Scripture. There’s merit in this idea, as it acknowledges the dynamic nature of spiritual growth and the importance of ongoing study and reflection. However, potential challenges include:
1. *Interpretation subjectivity*: New insights may be influenced by personal biases or cultural context.
2. *Doctrinal drift*: Emphasis on new revelations might lead to deviations from core biblical teachings.
To balance Progressive Illumination, it’s essential to ground new insights in Scripture, ensure they align with core doctrine, and engage in respectful dialogue with others.
Theological Perspectives
Regarding the three schisms:
1. *Only Evidence*: I believe speaking in tongues is evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, but not the only evidence.
2. *Finished Work*: I lean towards the view that salvation and sanctification are a process, with sanctification being a lifelong journey.
3. *New Issue*: I believe in the Trinity, and water baptism in Jesus’ name is a matter of interpretation within Christianity.
Each issue’s importance may vary depending on individual perspectives and denominational stances.
-
I think that progressive illumination is a great concept and hopefully a lived reality in the lives of believers and churches. The Bible says in 2 Peter, we are to grow in the knowledge and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. There should be an even deepening understanding and revelation of Jesus in our lives and churches or we have become stagnant and something is wrong. That being said, progressive revelation is an unpacking of the treasures of wisdom and understanding that are in Christ, whom the Holy Spirit reveals, and will never take us outside the realm of Biblical revelation, even if it at first causes a new look at the Bible. I think that this is a major issue for preachers today just as it was said in the quote, however maybe not with such a theological thrust. I think many preachers feel the need to be novel, entertaining, creative yes, but sometimes niche, and so in the name of progressive illumination stretch the boundaries of revealed truth, but with ambitious motives. All truth is found in Him who is Truth and none of us should be naive enough to believe we know it all right now, but whatever we learn will be rooted and grounded in Him.
Log in to reply.