Branham.. prophet. I have a question.

[iamlamad]

On 5/23/2020 at 2:03 PM, dhchristian said:

Those who led the revival At asuza were nobodies, rejects of Methodism and fundamentalism which had lost their way in textualism. The holiness movement being cast out of Methodism at the time.

Growing up as a Wesleyan,  I really would not have worded it the way you did. From encyclopedia Britannica: 

"From the outset, the motto of colonial American Methodism was “to spread Christian holiness over these lands.” But, in practice, the doctrines of holiness and perfectionism were largely ignored by American Methodists during the early decades of the 19th century. In 1843 about two dozen ministers withdrew from the Methodist Episcopal Church to found the Wesleyan Methodist Church of America, establishing a pattern of defections or looser ties. Sizable numbers of Protestants from the rural areas of the Midwest and South were joining the Holiness movement. These people had a penchant for strict codes of dress and behavior. Most of them had little sympathy for the “superficial, false, and fashionable” Christians allegedly preoccupied with wealth, social prestige, and religious formalism."

John Wesley was one of the leaders of the "holiness movement." 

William Seymour - who led the Azusa street revival - was a holiness preacher before Azuza. 

What do you mean, "they lost their way?" Is Holiness "losing one's way?" Is holiness in any way textualism? Or are you referring to the Azusa revival as "textualism?"

I will agree, those at Azusa were nobodies. But because of Azusa, they became somebody. 

If any readers want to hear a first hand account of Azusa, from 2 people that were there: One was a lady who did not go to school because she was totally deaf as a young girl - but was healed. The other, a man, had TB as a child and was healed. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6AoOZFej7k

 

[dhchristian]

1 hour ago, iamlamad said:

Growing up as a Wesleyan,  I really would not have worded it the way you did. From encyclopedia Britannica: 

DR. VINSON SYNAN: The background of it was the Holiness Movement that had been around for the whole 19th century -- mainly from Methodist roots. The Methodists had sort of read these people out of the church by 1894 and there were a lot of people, maybe 100,000 in America, who were seeking a deeper walk with God in what they called the second blessing of sanctification, which they also called the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/the-revival-that-changed-a-century

[iamlamad]

19 hours ago, dhchristian said:

DR. VINSON SYNAN: The background of it was the Holiness Movement that had been around for the whole 19th century -- mainly from Methodist roots. The Methodists had sort of read these people out of the church by 1894 and there were a lot of people, maybe 100,000 in America, who were seeking a deeper walk with God in what they called the second blessing of sanctification, which they also called the Baptism in the Holy Spirit.

https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/the-revival-that-changed-a-century

It was a good read. Perhaps by 1894 The Methodist church had dried up enough that the leadership was not interested in "holy rollers" any longer!  ;-)

Thank God for the Holy Spirit. And those students were right: speaking in tongues IS the bible evidence for receiving the baptism in the Spirit.  We can look back and perhaps make fun of John Wesley and perhaps his contemporaries: how did they come up their their theory of "entire Sanctification" as the second definite work of the Holy Spirit -when Acts 1 makes it so clear it was the baptism in the Holy Spirit. However, knowledge of the scriptures in general has grown exponentially it seem since John Wesley. I sure wish there were men like him today: I read where he said, "I'd ride a horse for 12 hours if I could get to preach!"