your most welcomed it been a wile since I posted

you sound very moved in you heart regarding the coming revival ,,and the passed ones ,,it is very very refreshing to see that

you humble attitude is apresiated


blessings

The pleasure remains mine Sir!

_________________
Emeka Joe Uzosike

Brother Emeka

The answer to your question is very simple but you will not like it.

At that time of history and for the earlier stage of the growth of Pentecostalism, there was a great divide between those preaching holiness doctrine and Pentecostalism. We dont see it today because second blessing holiness teaching has just about disappeared and the Pentecostal version has overtaken it.

It is said that Pentecostalism has its roots in the holiness movement but that is only true to a certain extent. This is because tongue speaking was not a part of holiness teaching.

If you read the book jointly authored by Roberts and Penn-Lewis, you will see no teaching on tongues and a section denouncing such things.

Roberts would have been willing to give counsel and pray for those involved with Azusa, but would not associate with it otherwise because he will not have classed it as true revival though he may have thought revival could grow within it. He would not denounce it but would keep his distance.

The same applied to Wesley who nowhere taught tongues.

http://truthinheart.com/EarlyOberlinCD/CD/Hills/Tongues.htm

///VI.—It was never promised that this gift would continue. One passage, Mark xvi. 17, seems to promise it. But every scholar knows that the Gospel of Mark closes with the 8th verse of the last chapter.

All that follows is a spurious addition by a later hand. Different manuscripts have different endings. It is no part of the Bible, and its teachings are questionable. Christians are not taught that they can play with rattle- snakes and cobras and vipers with impunity, nor that they can drink prussic acid and suffer no harm. The spurious "tongues passage" goes with the rest.

Moreover, St. Paul did teach, "Whether there be tongues they shall cease" (1. Cor. xiii. 8). And they did cease. So far as we know, and the Bible record goes, for the last nineteen years of the apostle's life neither he nor any other apostle wrote a word on the subject. The mess which the Corinthian Church made of it, and Paul's rebuke, may have cured the other Churches. After the year A.D. 58, when Paul wrote his sharp letter to the Corinthians, all the Bible-writers drop the subject as completely as if there had never been such a thing as the gift of tongues.

It is reported that three or four passages in the writings of the Fathers through the early centuries mention speaking with tongues. But these only make it perfectly manifest that this gift had its chief service at Pentecost; that it was, save on three occasions, of little value to saint or sinner, so far as we can learn from the Word; that it was peculiarly liable to perversion and abuse; that it was rated the lowest of all the gifts; and that it altogether ceased, just as St. Paul said it would.///

http://www.the-highway.com/tongues_Dollar.html

Krautfrau said, "Roberts would have been willing to give counsel and pray for those involved with Azusa, but would not associate with it otherwise because he will not have classed it as true revival though he may have thought revival could grow within it. He would not denounce it but would keep his distance."

You are saying this, sister, because you knew Roberts personally, of course.

As to what you have said about tongues, the experience of thousands of Christians proves you wrong on this.

Allan

_________________
Allan Halton

QUOTE:
"The answer to your question is very simple but you will not like it."
Those words hit me hard and made me prepare for a shocker.

QUOTE: "He would not denounce it but would keep his distance." This was intended to serve as a key but -for me- its turning into a lock. My mind has gotten busy thinking of how Evan Roberts could've done that. I don't DOUBT it for a moment but I just can't help imagining how he'd have stood aside.

Remember am only speculating what history wouldve been had Brother Roberts crossed d Atlantic.

QUOTE: "You are saying this, sister, because you knew Roberts personally, offcourse." Did you have d privilege of knowing Evan Roberts personally Ma'am? May wish to ask you what it was like to meet him in d flesh.

Really appreciate your post Dear Sister! God's richest blessings!

_________________
Emeka Joe Uzosike

So brothers, what other reason can you think of to explain why Evan Roberts did not cross the Atlantic, nor any others it seems that were part of the Welsh Revivals? If you can come up with another reason apart from the one I have given I will be interested to hear it as it defies logic otherwise.

It is a fact of history that the new Pentecostalism, was in the process of alienating Holiness folk due to the doctrine of tongues.

Here is a report of what happened in Great Britain due to the split. It describes how the League of Prayer and the International Holiness Mission, opposed the new Pentecostals.

///The International Holiness Mission continued to take this approach, dismissing the Pentecostal movement as “fanaticism.”[21] There was a particular problem for the League because of its own use of the term Pentecostal, usage which came from its equation of the baptism of the Spirit and entire sanctification. The League repeated on many occasions that it had absolutely no connection with “the Tongues movement.”[22] This stance united it with most British conservative evangelical thinking of the period. In 1930, Spiritual Life, which replaced Tongues of Fire after the First World War, insisted that the League was in line with evangelical churches, having nothing to do with modern Pentecostalism.[23

21] The Holiness Mission Journal, June 1919, 48.



[22] Spiritual Life, February 1923, 2.



[23] Spiritual Life, March 1930, 2.

http://www.lcoggt.org/Articles/pentecostal_league_of_prayer.htm///

Oswald Chambers was part of the League of Prayer and did not accept tongues even though he is often quoted by Pentecostals.

Despite this, it is clear that Roberts did have sone contact with Azusa, and could you give some referrences please. The only reason possibly being that there was some sign that there was an opening to him having an influence in correcting them but it is significant that he did not visit them so obviously that hope did not become fulfilled.

Of course I did not know him but I know his doctrine and have read a lot of his co-worker Penn-Lewis` books. I have studied revivals, both the true and the false.

If you read War on the Saints which Roberts co-wrote, there is a chapter in the Appendix which includes an article from a German pastor which explains exactly what is entailed in this false baptism of the Spirit which produces as its fruit, not the perfection of traditional holiness teaching, but a state in which these pseudo spiritual experiences including tongues occur.

*I see that this portion has been removed from the sites I found which print the book. This editing is common in historical holiness writing. Do you wonder why?

Those who are so deceived by Satan, are to be treated with patience to bring them to the truth humbly conscious of the ability of us all to deception, but the ones in this deception are always of a different spirit and will cause division, obviously as the enemy seeks to divide to conquer.

We can see this attitude in Wesley towards Whitfield who opposed the teaching. Wesley kept the lines open between them but I am sure he did notshare a platform with him.

Though Roberts would have had this attitude, as it is in line with scripture, he would not associate with the proponents publically. It is not difficult to understand the actions and even make good guesses in speculating when one is `in the same spirit` or at one with their doctrines.

I am not debating tongues nor wish to, I am merely reporting history and have given the only possible explanations for the man`s actions.

I don`t see any value in `what ifs` in this case. The Pentecostals would be perfectly aware of the teaching they opposed.

I have found it.

From WAR ON THE SAINTS by Jessie Penn-Lewis and Even Roberts

Light on "Abnormal" Experiencesnote 15.
Extract from a book published in Germany by Pastor
Translated from the German.

Just as in a caricature the outstanding features of the true picture are to be found, so that a likeness is unmistakable, so phenomena which we find in heathen systems, in theosophy so-called, or new Buddhism, in spiritism, etc., resemble to some extent the Divine manifestations called forth by the working of the Holy Spirit upon the spirit of man. They also produce revelations and prophecies, speaking and singing with tongues, healing and miracles. It is of importance that we should study this subject to find an answer to the question as to how these phenomena are brought about. It is self-evident that they are not manifestations of the Holy Spirit. The numerous and exact investigations which are being made in our day into the subject are giving us increasing insight into this dark realm. Powers and possibilities have been discovered in man, which until now have been totally unsuspected. They are designated "subliminal powers," and we speak of "subconciousness."note 16 What physical occurrences accompany these phenomena? The lower nerve-centres (the ganglionic system, or the "vegetative" nerves, as they are called), which have their chief seat in the region round the pit of the stomach, are excited to increased activity. At the same time the central region of the higher nervous system (the cerebral system), which in a normal state of affairs is the medium of conscious perception and action, becomes paralyzed. There is a reversal of the order of nature. The lower nerves take over the duty of the higher ones (a sort of compensation). This state of things comes to pass negatively by the higher organ losing its natural supremacy under pressure of illness, or artificially by hypnotism, auto-suggestion, etc.; and positively by the lower nerves being in some way excited artificially to increased activity, whereby they get the upper hand. These nerves then display abilities which our ordinary organs of sense do not possess, they receive impressions from a realm usually closed to us, such as clairvoyance, presentiments, prophecy, speaking with tongues, etc.

The Mohammedan sooth-sayer, Dschalal-Ed-Dinrumi, describes the trance-state, as follows: "My eyes are closed, and my heart is at the open gate." Anna Katharina Emmerich (1774-1824): "I see the light, not with my eyes, but it is as though I saw it with my heart, (with the nerves which have their seat in the pit of the stomach) . . . that which is actually around me I see dimly with my eyes like one dosing and beginning to dream; my second sight is drawing me forcibly, and is clearer than my natural sight, but it does not take place through my eyes . . ." When in a state of somnambulism, the inner sense, heightened in its activity, perceives outward things as clearly and more so than when awake, when it recognizes tangible objects with eyes tightly closed and absolutely unable to see, just as well as by sight; this takes place, according to the unanimous declaration of all somnambulists, through the pit of the stomach, i.e., through the nerves, which have their seat in this region . . . . And it is from this part that the nerves are set in action which move the organs of speech (in speaking with tongues, etc.) . . . .

Numberless cases of false mysticisms through all the centuries of Church History display the same characteristics, the sub-consciousness being always the medium of such perception and functions. They are morbid, coming under the garb of Divine manifestations to lead souls astray. Now, it is very significant that according to the assertions of the leaders, it is an activity of the sub-consciousness that we meet with in the "Pentecostal Movement" (so called). We read in a report of an "International Pentecostal Conference."

"On Tuesday, a Pastor introduced the discussion. The main topic was the working of the sub-conscious mind in messages and prophecy. Much confusion prevailed concerning the relation of our consciousness to our sub-consciousness. The Scriptural discrimination was preferable (1 Cor. 14: 14, 15), where they were spoken of as 'understanding' and 'spirit.'"

"When Christ lives in us He lies in our hearts and in the heart are two chambers. In one room lives the conscience and through the conscience I can know that Christ lives in me. In the other room of my heart there is the sub-consciousness, and there also Christ lives. We look at 1 Cor. 14: 14, 'For if I pray in a tongue my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.'"

Notice the expression "my spirit," (my sub-conscious mind), and also the expression "my understanding," i.e.--"When my spirit prays in tongues, my sub-conscious mind prays!"

In the Declaration of the Second Mulheim "Pentecostal Conference," September 15th, 1909, we read:--

"In 1 Cor 14: 14 Luther's translation Paul makes a distinction between the understanding and the spirit of man. By the word understanding he means the conscious, and by the word spirit the unconscious, spiritual life, life of man. In this unconscious spiritual life--in modern language also termed 'sub-consciousness'--God has placed the gift of speaking with tongues and prophecy . . . . ."

According to this, the spiritual life of the believer is synonymous with the sub-consciousness of the somnambulist. And the more highly developed this sub-consciousness is in any individual, the more highly developed would be their spiritual life. Just try substituting the word sub-consciousness in those passages where the Scripture speaks of the spirit of man; for example Ps. 51: 17, Ps. 77: 6, Isa. 66: 2, Acts 7: 59, Acts 18: 5, Acts 20: 22, Romans 1: 9, Romans 2: 29, Romans 8: 16, 1 Cor. 2: 11, 1 Cor. 4: 21, 1 Cor. 5: 5, Gal. 6: 1, Gal. 6: 18, Eph. 4: 23, 1 Thess. 5: 23.

Those in whom the sub-consciousness becomes active in the manner described above, feel as it were an electric stream passing through the body, which is an exciting of the nerves, which have their central seat in the pit of the stomach. It is from thence that the jaws are moved in speaking with tongues.

One of the leaders of the "Pentecostal Movement," in describing the process of this so-called Baptism of the Spirit in his body, made use of the singular comparison that it seemed to him as though there were in his body an inverted bottle. The simile was incomprehensible to me, but this way of expressing it was most strikingly illuminated when I find an almost identical expression used by a Mohammedan sooth-sayer. Tewekkul Beg, a pupil of Mollah Schah, was receiving instruction from his master as to how he could get into the ecstatic state. He says: "After he had bound my eyes . . . I saw something in my inner being resembling a fallen tumbler . . . When this object was placed upright a feeling of unlimitless bliss filled my being."

This feeling of bliss is another characteristic feature of this class of occurrences. By exciting the lower nervous system a feeling of intense rapture is regularly produced . . . . At first we find connected with it usually, involuntary contraction of the muscles and movement of the limbs, in consequence of the unnatural inversion of the nervous system.

Pastor Paul again says:--

"If anyone is to prophesy in the way I have now learnt, God must be able to move the mouth of the one prophesying, as He formerly moved the mouth of Balaam's ass. The ass understood nothing of the words which she spoke, she only said what she was to say. There is a danger in uttering things we understand. It is so easy to mix in one's own thoughts, and then to utter what one thinks. This occurs without our intending it in the least. That is the reason why God trains His prophets in so preparing them that they utter exactly what the Spirit gives them. Speaking in strange tongues is a good preliminary school. There one learns to speak as the mouth is moved. One speaks without knowing what one is saying by simply following the position of the mouth. Just so in prophecy; there, too, one speaks as led by the position of the mouth. Speaking with tongues and prophesying are both on the same principle."

It is evident that in these phenomena we have the exact opposite of what the Scriptures understand by the communication of the Spirit. When the Spirit of God takes possession of the spirit of man, HE IS BROUGHT BACK TO A NORMAL CONDITION; the SPIRIT acquires the full authority given it by the Creator over the powers of the soul, and through the soul over the body. The conscious personal life is once more completely under the authority of the spirit. The dependency upon God, which man sought to break off, in his mania for exalting himself by setting his reason, his emotions, or the flesh upon the throne, is restored again. The Spirit of God can exercise once more His controlling and quickening power. The deeds of the flesh are put to death by the Spirit, the powers and the gifts of the Spirit developed, the man becomes spiritual, full of the Holy Spirit."

The following was written after the quote given. Jessie Penn-Lewis stood in exactly the same position as Roberts regarding the speaking of tongues. Those who opposed tongues as from Satan would by no means attend any meeting where these manifestations were taking place.

Note by Mrs. Penn-Lewis (Editor of The Overcomer).

The light given by Herr Lohmann will open the eyes of many perplexed believers, and give them intelligent understanding of much that has distressed them, and caused painful division among the most devoted children of God. It will also confirm the statements we have made concerning the working of evil spirits in the circumference of a believer, at the very same time that, up to the extent of his consciousness, he may know nothing against himself before the Lord; for Satan and his emissaries are well aware of the laws of the human frame, and work along their line, arousing and exciting the natural life, under the guise of its being spiritual.

The false conception of "surrender" as yielding the body to supernatural power, with the mind ceasing to act, is the highest subtlety of the enemy, and is exposed as such in this paper, for it brings about--as Herr Lohmann explains--the paralysis of the "cerebral" system, i.e., the action of the mind, and allows the "vegetative nerves" full control and activity, excited by evil spirits, for the Holy Spirit dwells in, and acts through the spirit of man, and not through either nerve centre, which have both to be under the control of the spirit.

We have also pointed out again and again that "claiming the Blood" cannot protect us from the enemy if in any way he is given ground, e.g., if the cerebral nerves cease to act by "letting the mind go blank" (!) and the vegetative nerves are awakened to act in their place, so that the latter are excited to give "thrills" and "streams of life" through the body, no claiming of the precious Blood of Christ will prevent these physical laws acting when the conditions for action are fulfilled. Hence, the strange fact which has perplexed many, that abnormal experiences manifestly contrary to the Spirit of God, have taken place whilst the person was earnestly repeating words about the "Blood."

Moreover, the arousing of the "vegetative nerves" to such abnormal activity that "floods of life" have appeared to pour through the whole body--the enemy whispering at the same moment, "this is Divine"--(1) dulls the mind and makes it inert in action, (2) causes a craving in the recipient for more of this "Divine" life, (3) leads to the danger of ministration of it to others, and all that follows as this path is pursued in honest faith and confidence of being "specially advanced" in the life of God.

Should any reading this discover their own case depicted let them thank God for knowledge of the truth, and (1) simply reject by an attitude of will, all that is not of God; (2) consent to trust God in His word without any "experiences"; (3) stand on Rom. 6: 11, with James 4: 7, in respect to the Adversary. John 16: 13, "Through the Eternal Spirit."

amrkelly

I believe that Mrs Penn-Lewis was refering to the pseudo baptism of the Spirit which allows Satan entrance because the person is not discerning the spirits. She did not write the piece about the vegative state she was commenting on it.

I did not read any teaching on tongues in Nee`s books, can you give me a reference please? His position on this did not differ from the others involved with Keswick and therefore non Pentecostal.

But yes she was saying that the experiences in other religions is the same one.