The “initial” in “initial evidence” does not mean “only.” I don’t think you will find the word “initial” defined as “one and only” in any English dictionary. This distinction between “initial” and “only” is also present in both historic and contemporary Pentecostal literature.

“ The “initial” in “initial evidence” does not mean “only.”

“Only Sign?”

To be fair, the only sign of Spirit baptism that just about every classical Pentecostal denomination mentions explicitly in their statements of faith is speaking in tongues.

And historically, tongues were just about the only sign that Pentecostals were concerned with when it came to Spirit baptism. Indeed, Pentecostals went to great lengths to defend their belief that tongues signifies that believers have been baptized in the Holy Spirit.

As a result of this emphasis, some Pentecostals in history have gone to the extent of saying (perhaps with over emphasis), “speaking in tongues is the only sign (or evidence) of the baptism of the Holy Ghost” (W. Akers, 1922).[1] As a result, some incorrectly think that official Pentecostal doctrine is that tongues is the “only” sign or evidence of Spirit baptism. But it is not.

Instead, what you will find often in Pentecostal history are statements like these: “Let us not make the mistake that some have made, that the only sign to be expected of the abiding baptism with the Holy Spirit is that of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit gives utterance. That is only the initial sign” (G. Montgomery, 1948).[2]

All in all, I actually think that these two perspectives aren’t contradictions, because I think that the first one really intends to mean that tongues are the “only initial sign” of Spirit baptism. But I could be wrong.

To further my point that tongues is not the only sign of Spirit baptism, let me point to the contemporary publications of two Pentecostal denominations.

Assemblies of God (AG, USA)

Not surprisingly, the AG position paper on Baptism in the Holy Spirit affirms that the “initial physical evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit” is speaking in tongues (p. 9, 13).

At the same time, this AG position paper includes a section that affirms a number of “continuing evidences of Spirit Baptism.” This section includes discussion of “openness to spiritual manifestations,” “righteous living,” and “power for witnessing” (p. 10-11).

Recognizing “continuing evidences” implies there is not only one evidence or sign of Spirit baptism.

Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC)

The PAOC does not have a position paper on the doctrine of Spirit baptism, but the PAOC’s Statement of Fundamental and Essential Truths states, “The initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is speaking in other tongues” (p. 3).

At the same time, in 2010 the PAOC’s Enrich magazine included a sidebar which asked the question, “Is speaking in tongues the only evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit and a spirit-filled life?” The answer is explicit:

Tongues are not the only evidence of a Spirit-filled life.” It continues, “enthusiasm and boldness in witnessing, divine guidance and enabling in the presentation of the gospel, and miraculous manifestations of God’s power before unbelievers may all serve as additional evidences of baptism in the Holy Spirit.”[3]

The above sources from the AG and PAOC don’t represent everyone in those denominations, and neither sources were voted on by the whole council or conference of either denomination, but they at least represent the views of key leaders in each denomination.

Why Raise the Issue?

As I explained in the original blog post, my concern is that too many Pentecostals have made Spirit baptism only about speaking in tongues.

“ Too many Pentecostals have made Spirit baptism only about speaking in tongues.

Sharing my concern, in an article from 1929 in The Pentecostal Testimony, evangelist Harvey McAlister wrote,

If you believe … tongues is the only evidence, as soon as the Holy Spirit comes within and takes control of your vocal organs and gives utterance, you will feel that you have reached a climax. But, if you believe that speaking in supernatural tongues is simply the initial or first physical evidence or result, you will not feel, upon bursting forth and speaking in tongues supernaturally, that you have reached a climax but that you have just been ushered into the supernatural realm and will continue to yield and expect additional manifestations graces and gifts.”[4]

In addition, I raise the issue because on more than one occasion I have stood at the front of my class and looked out at a student from a Pentecostal church who claims that they don’t affirm the doctrine of initial evidence. They look at me and say, “I don’t believe that tongues is the only evidence of Spirit baptism.” And they reject the doctrine because they don’t understand it.

There are multiple ways that people misunderstand the initial evidence doctrine. But if we can get those misunderstandings out of the way, then maybe they will be surprised by what Pentecostals actually believe about Spirit baptism, and initial evidence in particular (more on this in a future post).

And maybe they will find that we disagree on less than they thought we did. Or maybe not. But at least then they will be rejecting or accepting something that they understand.

“PART 1” of this article can be found here.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• PAOC Clergy on Tongues and Spirit Baptism: Changing Views
• Myth #3: “Spiritual Gifts are Dramatic and Miraculous”
• Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 1 – Frank Macchia

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

Endnotes

[1] W. O. Akers, “Tongues,” The Pentecostal Holiness Advocate (Jan 12, 1922), 2.

[2] G. H. Montgomery, “The Sunday School Teacher,” The Pentecostal Holiness Advocate vol. 31 (April 1, 1948), 12.

[3] “Q & A on the Holy Spirit,” Enrich: The Leadership Magazine of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (Spring, 2011), 30.

[4] Harvey McAlister, “Two Sides of Truth,” The Pentecostal Testimony vol. 10, no. 5 (May 1929), 10.

The post Tongues is NOT the Only Sign of Spirit Baptism, PART 2 appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.