Montanism and the Second Blessing

Status
Not open for further replies.
Qoheleth

Qoheleth

Puritan Board Freshman
This article claims that Montanus (and Tertullian) taught that there was a dichotomy between normal ("catholic") Christians and those who have received a special indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and draws this parallel with Pentecostalism. Numerous citations are provided, but not for this particular assertion. Does anyone know whether this is true, and if so, could you provide a source?

http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/montanism.htm#.WbWSr0FuiaN
 
Qoheleth said:
This article claims that Montanus (and Tertullian) taught that there was a dichotomy between normal ("catholic") Christians and those who have received a special indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and draws this parallel with Pentecostalism. Numerous citations are provided, but not for this particular assertion. Does anyone know whether this is true, and if so, could you provide a source?

http://www.cprf.co.uk/articles/montanism.htm#.WbWSr0FuiaN
Click to expand...

Seems true, though there is some debate on how fully Tertullian became a Montanist.
 
Here is a more practical approach to your question "from the horses mouth" i.e,. their teachers.

When I was in Bible College (Southeastern Bible College), there were 3 of us on campus who were, at the time reforming. It was a highly commotted Pentecostal School. Rodney Howard Brown and other arch-heretics of the day came there with open arms and such.

In any case, one of our required classes was "Doctrine of the Holy Spirit" which was taught by the president of the School. In our book for the class, (The Holy Spirit: A Pentecostal Interpretation by Thomas L. Holdcroft) the very first paragraph stated, something to this effect, "We gain our doctrine of the Holy Spirit from the Montanists." My buddy Larry and I were perplexed. We hoped we would gain our doctrine as Pentecostals at the time from the Bible. We raised our hand(s) in class, Larry was picked, and he asked, the book says we get our doctrine from the Montanists...weren't they heretics?" The President replied, "That's where we get our doctrine from." And he moved on completely ignoring the problem.
 
C. Matthew McMahon said:
In any case, one of our required classes was "Doctrine of the Holy Spirit" which was taught by the president of the School. In our book for the class, (The Holy Spirit: A Pentecostal Interpretation by Thomas L. Holdcroft) the very first paragraph stated, something to this effect, "We gain our doctrine of the Holy Spirit from the Montanists." My buddy Larry and I were perplexed. We hoped we would gain our doctrine as Pentecostals at the time from the Bible. We raised our hand(s) in class, Larry was picked, and he asked, the book says we get our doctrine from the Montanists...weren't they heretics?" The President replied, "That's where we get our doctrine from." And he moved on completely ignoring the problem.
Click to expand...

That's incredible. I'm interested in the Montanists because I came from a church that was technically non-denominational, but quite Pentecostal in almost every aspect (and I suspect it was one deeply influenced by the Holiness Movement) and have a couple of friends that went there when I did with whom I discuss theology fairly often. One got me the book "Authentic Fire" by Michael Brown. They both rest their continuationism on Sola Scriptura, but seeing the still miraculously gifted early Church repudiating Montanism is fascinating and eye-opening to me.
All this is towards the goal of being able to support my position with robust exegesis and historical witness rather than merely assert what Presbyterians believe next time I talk to them, as I should be doing with each of these beliefs.
By the way, I appreciate the work you do on A Puritan's Mind. I hope to get your book on Peter Ramus some time soon (I'm quite interested in the study of logic in particular.)
 
Qoheleth said:
That's incredible. I'm interested in the Montanists because I came from a church that was technically non-denominational, but quite Pentecostal in almost every aspect (and I suspect it was one deeply influenced by the Holiness Movement) and have a couple of friends that went there when I did with whom I discuss theology fairly often. One got me the book "Authentic Fire" by Michael Brown. They both rest their continuationism on Sola Scriptura, but seeing the still miraculously gifted early Church repudiating Montanism is fascinating and eye-opening to me.
All this is towards the goal of being able to support my position with robust exegesis and historical witness rather than merely assert what Presbyterians believe next time I talk to them, as I should be doing with each of these beliefs.
By the way, I appreciate the work you do on A Puritan's Mind. I hope to get your book on Peter Ramus some time soon (I'm quite interested in the study of logic in particular.)
Click to expand...

To be fair, continuationism is not in the same category as Montanism. There might be similarities, but Montanism has an ascetical rigor along a schismatic impulse. Montanism isn't just receiving words of wisdom, otherwise the Covenanter Richard Cameron would be a Montanist! It was a complex of issues including schism, prophecy, forbidding remarriage, etc. Plus, they celebrated Easter on a different date. That might not seem like a big deal to us, but it was a life and death issue for every Christian back then.
 
C. Matthew McMahon said:
Keep in mind, this was (is?) the official position of the Assemblies of God Church in that day. I understand your distinction. Keep in mind their non-distinction.
Click to expand...

I get that, and the AoG certainly isn't a Patristic powerhouse. And Montanism was a wide source. Some Montanists thought the Trinity was Father, Son, and Montanus. On the other hand were Montanists like Tertullian, who may not have bought into the heresy but were attracted to the movement.

But yeah, I'll look into what the AoG said on it.
 
C. Matthew McMahon said:
Keep in mind, this was (is?) the official position of the Assemblies of God Church in that day. I understand your distinction. Keep in mind their non-distinction.
Click to expand...
I was an Assemblies of God teaching Elder at one time, and would say that we never claimed to get our theology in that church from them, but from mainly the book of Acts itself.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
To be fair, continuationism is not in the same category as Montanism. There might be similarities, but Montanism has an ascetical rigor along a schismatic impulse. Montanism isn't just receiving words of wisdom, otherwise the Covenanter Richard Cameron would be a Montanist! It was a complex of issues including schism, prophecy, forbidding remarriage, etc. Plus, they celebrated Easter on a different date. That might not seem like a big deal to us, but it was a life and death issue for every Christian back then.
Click to expand...
There are varying groups within those seeing the ongoing sign gifts though, as the Classic ones would see them still in operation, but also hold to the primacy of the scriptures, while others see it as ongoing revelation knowledge from God, and others seeing us as being little gods, and ready to take over the world system for Christ.
 
Montanus was ideologically influenced by pagan worship in Phrygia, which is nothing new when you consider the Pauline epistles each caution against syncretism of one sort or another. I was raised in the epicenter of Charismania - we got our theology from CS Lewis and Tolkien.
 
Held Fast said:
Montanus was ideologically influenced by pagan worship in Phrygia, which is nothing new when you consider the Pauline epistles each caution against syncretism of one sort or another. I was raised in the epicenter of Charismania - we got our theology from CS Lewis and Tolkien.
Click to expand...
What church?
 
Dachaser said:
What church?
Click to expand...
Which church was I raised in? My folks were saved in the Jesus Movement in the southwest. They were musicians so we moved around as the spirit lead - same building would change names every time they changed the leader, usually whomever had the freshest word, or the newest gift. Or the group would move around from place to place - houses, schools, storefronts, church for a while, split, new speaker/gift. Rinse, repeat. We did not go so far as to live in a van like Dead Heads, but we put a lot of miles in traveling around to hear a fresh word. Church names are a blur, but we knew the Crouches, Copelands, Hayford, Hinn when they were starting out, along with a raft of others who burned out. Very heavy into spiritual warfare, demonology, and yes as a kid I was discipled through the allegory of Tolkien in one sunday school group, and CS Lewis in another, and Chick tracts in another. I could not articulate the Gospel until I was in my 20s when Christ called me to himself in salvation.
 
Held Fast said:
Which church was I raised in? My folks were saved in the Jesus Movement in the southwest. They were musicians so we moved around as the spirit lead - same building would change names every time they changed the leader, usually whomever had the freshest word, or the newest gift. Or the group would move around from place to place - houses, schools, storefronts, church for a while, split, new speaker/gift. Rinse, repeat. We did not go so far as to live in a van like Dead Heads, but we put a lot of miles in traveling around to hear a fresh word. Church names are a blur, but we knew the Crouches, Copelands, Hayford, Hinn when they were starting out, along with a raft of others who burned out. Very heavy into spiritual warfare, demonology, and yes as a kid I was discipled through the allegory of Tolkien in one sunday school group, and CS Lewis in another, and Chick tracts in another. I could not articulate the Gospel until I was in my 20s when Christ called me to himself in salvation.
Click to expand...
You were really a part of the really bad charismatic theology of the word of faith gurus, and thank God he took you out from them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top