So you mean the Charismatics don't have a doctrine and belief? I'm sure they have some thoughts and beliefs because a Charismatic chruch is very different despite most of everything being the same.

Maybe check out what charismatics beleive more its hard to consolidate the two.

Hmm... I think being a Charismatic is more than just the style of conducting a service. The very name (in the Greek) shows that they hold on to a particular doctrine. I believe that being a Pentecostal and being a Charismatic differs simply by holding on to different doctrines, no matter how minute they may be. Putting them together would probably be like saying you can be the Pope as well as Martin Luther.. They differ, definitely and cannot be placed together due to the difference in believes (Sorry for the bad analogy! Haha!). That, of course, is just my humble opinion.

Hi Angeline,
I agree with both Lionel and Bryan that though there are some similarity in Pentecostal and Charismatic like the giftings and working of the Spirit but there are still some distinctive differences between them. Example speaking in tongues (glossalia) as evidence to Baptism in the Holy Spirit for the Pentecostals. Maybe can you elaborate some othere differences?

Montanism, a heretic movement also believes in the Holy Spirit and its manifestation strongly. How would you explain this if your church member says that the Assemblies of God Movement has similarities in its doctrine as Montanism and therefore its somewhat heretic

Hmm, it is true that there are much overlapping between pentecostalism and charismaticism. And i think what Angeline might be trying to say is that on the practical aspect, why make such a big fuss of the differences of the two, after all both are effective in reaching out to the younger generation in their own and often similar ways. Although i am aware that on paper and from a doctrinal aspect there are considerable diferences, but my question is if this issue(especially doctrinal) cannot be reconciled, is it worth figthing for ones own distinctiveness? if so at what cost?

You are a pentecostal and charismatic. That's interesting...if you had to choose between being a pentecostal and a charismatic, which would you choose?

Dear ALL
My apologies. i wrote this post with my idea of being a Pentecostal and Charismatic. I suppose we have differed from the original meanings so much that many would be confused by its terms.

Freddie
i think Bryan did a pretty good elaboration on the differences between being a Pentecostal and a Charismatic - Hop over! i only have one thing to add from there and it is that Charismatics accept that the fruit of the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit is equally validating an evidence for the HS Baptism. [taken from Lasting Legacies of the Azusa Street Revival doc.]

Jason
Thanks. Um.. At this point of time, as we all are aware - a large percentage of Christians don't even know which umbrella they belong to. And certainly it does not bother them whether or not they are Pentecostal or not. So, it's probably not worth fighting for. But, having said that, i'm not saying that we don't teach them. Because like Ps. Lim says, we need to know our heritage in order to know what we believe in. So, the approach we take shouldn't be one of an argumentative one, but impartation of knowledge and awareness and in time herd the sheep back into its pen.

Kee Ming
i think the question was if we could be both? I still dont have a concrete answer for you on this. I certainly hold the view that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of the HS Baptism. But, it doesnt necessarily automatically makes me a pentecostal and not charismatic.

=)

Hi Angeline...

Joining in the discussion,
I too would like to suggest that we can be both a Pentecostal and a Charismatic. In other words there is a way to harmonize these "supposedly oxymoron" doctrines. And I quite I agree with you when you says that it is possible to be a Pentecostal and a Charismatic to a certain extend.
Those who disagree should probably do a bit of research on the Pentecostal-Charismatic movement that they may understand what I mean.

Thank You...

Yup,
I agree with Samuel too, coz as a Pentecostal. I believe I can also be charismatic at the same time but don't get me wrong. I agree with Angeline on adopting the Charismatic styles which I believe many Pentecostal themselves do. But we don't follow the theological part of Charismatic view where one may or may not receive the baptism of the H.S. by evidence of tongues which we deferred ourselves from Charismatic movers, right Angeline?

Samuel & Kenrick

haha. yes, you are both right in interpreting what i'm trying to say =) Thanks!

Can we be a Baptist and Pentecostal at the same time?

Can we hold on to the doctrine of Baptist yet having a Pentecostal style of worship (but not believing in pentecostal doctrines) thus become a Baptist Pentecostal?

Now can we be a pentecostal and charismatic at the same time?
(Pentecostal believes that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of baptism of the Holy Spirit while Charismatic don't)

Can we hold on to the doctrine of Pentecostal (speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of baptism of the Holy Spirit) yet having a "Charismatic worship" style (but don't believe in the Pentecostal doctrines) thus become a Pentecostal Charismatic?

Our answers must not contradict our belief or claims of our belief.

If one claims to be a true Pentecostal (such as Samuel and Kenrick in this case-you mentioned it in your own blogs) yet endorsed that one can be a Pentecostal Charismatic at the same time...you need to check yourself again.

I understand that Angeline is reducing "charismatic" as a style of worship or even a contemporary culture rather than a movement (thus one can be a Pentecostal Charismatic to mean that one is a Pentecostal who is contemporary in lifestyle) yet we know the fact that Charismatic is a movement on its own with its own set of beliefs.

Can we just say modern Pentecostal or contemporary Pentecostal to mean Pentecostal with contemporary style of worship or church environment? Are we saying then that a "true" Pentecostal aren't contemporary in their lifestyle?

To make it more obvious : If I were to hold on to the doctrines of Mormons yet speak in tongues, can I be a Mormon Pentecostal?

Surely you would answer no to this besides the fact that Mormon is a cult, but also to the fact that one can't be a Pentecostal without holding Pentecostal's doctrines. It will do great injustice and grave error to reduce Pentecostal to just a style.

Therefore, can we be Pentecostal Charismatic? Or even dare to admit that one is a true Pentecostal yet agree to the idea of being a Pentecostal Charismatic is possible.

Thank you.

Minor correction to my comment :

* Can we hold on to the doctrine of Pentecostal (speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of baptism of the Holy Spirit) yet having a "Charismatic worship" style (Charismatic movement does not believe in the Pentecostal doctrine of the above mentioned) thus become a Pentecostal Charismatic?

Hi Angeline,
I think the learner posted a good and interesting question. Hope it is not too confucing for you. I too would like to know your view whether a true Pentecostal based on his sets of belief, could practice indifferently in our contemporary settings of the church today?

Lionel & Bryan
yes yes, i suppose i have gone wrong there in assuming that Charismatics do not have their own set of beliefs. hehe. I wrote the above before doing most of the readings and it was 'my idea' of Pentecostalism and Charismatic-ism. Will work on reconciling the two from here ya :) thnks!

Charity
To answer your question, I think we would have to trace how montanism came about and what are its practices other than believing in the works and manifestations of the HS.
Based on the little that i've read, the heretical part of montanism isn't because of their belief in the HS and manifestations but due to the founder (Montanus's) claims of having direct revelation from the HS and the misinterpretation of Montanus as God or the HS. The AG's belief in the manifestations of the HS is biblical and therefore should not be compared to together and generalized as heresy

Learner
It seems as though you are 'cornering' me to choose a yes or no of having a joint in doctrinal beliefs to the two movements! After reading the materials I’ve read, receiving comments and then having to analyze my stand…

If being Charismatic isn’t just a style (as I have stated in my post) but having a whole set of its own separate beliefs (as it is) and there is no way to reconcile the beliefs… then I would suppose that we cannot be Pentecostal Charismatic and have misused the term ‘Charismatic’…

[[I need to find out what else differs a Charismatic and Pentecostal besides having speaking in tongues as the initial evidence of the Baptism of the HS]

With this as the case, I would for now reside/resolve to being a contemporary Pentecostal contemporary replacing charismatic. But then the other issue that would arise would be can a “true” pentecostalist be a contemporary Pentecostal? Haha.

I regret to have to say that I still don't have a conclusion for these questions as yet (but i do hope to be able to by the end of my course) hehe.

hmm.. I hope to have seen where you are coming from and have given you a slightly corrected view of my stand. I’m sorry to not be able to provide you an answer as yet but I appreciate your thought provoking statements that has caused me to evaluate further what I claim to believe.

On a side note, would it be possible for you to also share your stand and also input further on the possibility or non-possibility to be a pentecostal charismatic? And perhaps on being a true and contemporary Pentecostalist :)

Thanks!!

Hi Angeline...

Wow!!! You really had me impressed with the way you wormed your way out of that YES/NO situation. Nevertheless, I have a little question for you.

I do not quite understand what you mean when you say you resolved to be a contemporary Pentecostal. Do you mean a Pentecostal who has been contemporarized by his surrounding environment/culture or do you mean that there's a view called "Contemporary Pentecostalism" like Classical Pentecostalism and Neo Pentecostalism etc.?

I'd sincerely appreciate it if you could briefly explain this for me.

Thank You.

Thanks for your feedback to my comment, appreciate your understanding on my viewpoint. And please know that I am sincere in my comment with no intention to corner anyone but to correct any claims or belief that aren't sharpen or haven't gone through deep thinking.

You are right to agree that we need to think harder and dig deeper with provoking thoughts to test our understanding of what we believe is true.

Ok, coming to the important point of whether one can or cannot be a "Pentecostal Charismatic", I believe I have made my point very clear on my previous comment.

Based on my definition, it is not possible if you define it as a movement with its set of specific beliefs as they are clearly two different separate movement but it is possible if you mean to define it as "modern Pentecostal". To mean charismatic as being modern in its worship or culture.

But personally I don't like the idea of this as it makes as though "Classical Pentecostal" is old-fashioned or traditional in its culture. It is even worse if by such definition, makes one think that "Classical Pentecostal" is not expressive in its worship.

I would not like to comment much on your second question as it involves much history and the need to venture into other area which will stray away from the original question of this blog.

Besides, it is for me to know and really literally for you as a student to find out. This is not my blog ;p

The true is it is late and mind my needs its sleep. Good job and I will be expecting more on your second question...

Hi Angeline,
Thanks for reply. I am just curious; as being a youth yourself, maybe you may share through your experiences why young people find it difficult to flow in the certain gifts of the Spirit like speaking in tongues or interpretation of prophecy? is it because it sounds 'fake'; too emotional etc?