The Full Gospel Paradox
Eston College (formerly Full Gospel Bible Institute) founder/teacher Dr. Glen S. McLean in The Baptism In The Holy Spirit, page 20, wrote, “The Scripture also speaks of the baptism in the Holy Spirit as us being filled with the Spirit…” The word filled or full precipitated the term “Full Gospel” to represent the Apostolic Church of Pentecost (ACOP-Trinitarian) doctrine: “In the Baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to salvation, with the Scriptural evidence: namely, speaking in tongues.” This experience is also called the second blessing with speaking in tongues as “the evidence”.
David K. Bernard (general superintendent of the United Pentecostal Church International, Oneness), in Pentecostal Theology, Volume 2, The New Birth, page 188, writes:
The Book of Acts describes the baptism of the Spirit in many ways: “filled with the Holy Ghost” (2:4); “the promise of the Holy Ghost” (2:33); “the gift of the Holy Ghost” (2:38); “the Holy Ghost fell on them” (10:44); “poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost” (10:45); “received the Holy Ghost”(10:47); and “the Holy Ghost came on them” (19:6). …All these phrases simply identify the same New Testament experience in different ways. When empty human vessels are baptized in the Spirit, they are filled with the Spirit…The following chart demonstrates the equivalence of all these phrases…
page 235…The Book of Acts teaches that a person will speak in tongues when he receives the Holy Ghost. Therefore, speaking in tongues is the initial sign (evidence) that one has received the gift (baptism)of the Holy Spirit.
Page 238…If one has been baptized in the name of Jesus, has received the Holy Ghost with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues, and continues to obey God’s Word, he can know he is saved. Many churches deny this evidentiary role, and as a result their members struggle with uncertainty about salvation.
Page 239…when one repents from sin and believes on Jesus according to the Scriptures, he will receive the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues.
Oneness Pentecostals deny the Trinity and believe that speaking in a tongue is the proof of salvation! Furthermore, unless you are baptized by immersion “in Jesus’ name” and speak in tongues, you are not saved. Unlike other Pentecostals, they do not believe in the second blessing experience subsequent to salvation, but correctly believe the baptism of the Holy Spirit happens at the moment of salvation. Erroneously however, since they believe Spirit baptism is Spirit filling, “the evidence” of tongues must occur to prove true salvation. In effect, people can accept Christ as their Lord and Savior but still go to hell if they do not speak in tongues!
Definition: “A paradox is a statement or proposition that, despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a contradictory outcome.”
Ironically, Trinitarian and Oneness Pentecostals divide over the other’s faults but neither can see their common fault. The unwritten premise is that Pentecostals have experienced the complete or full gospel, therefore intimating that the non-experienced believe a lesser gospel. The written premise is that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is or “as” being filled with the Holy Spirit, however, the paradox is that the distinctiveness of two separate and opposite ministries of the Holy Spirit has been eliminated. Then, the baptism of the Holy Spirit that is mentioned only seven times in all the Bible, without “the evidence” of tongues (Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16, John 1:33, Acts 1:5, Acts 11:16, and 1Corinthians 12:13), by the merger with filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:4, has now allegedly taken on “Scriptural evidence: namely, speaking in tongues”. This is NOT scriptural! This is a grievous error because two separate ministries of the Holy Spirit have been substituted by one non-biblical man-made experience. This “experience subsequent to salvation” or tongues experience salvation, rather than sealed with the Holy Spirit having believed (Ephesians 1:13) at the moment of salvation, is a different baptism of a different gospel. If we accept a different gospel, can we be truly saved, or in the very least, not grieve the Holy Spirit? Twisting the scriptures to name an ecstatic mystical experience of unknown tongues, the baptism with the Holy Spirit, appears to be full and more, but is actually empty and lacking.
1Corinthians 12:13, “For by one Spirit we were ALL baptized into one body…”
2Corinthians 11:4, “For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it!”
Galatians 1:6-8, “I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.”
Ephesians 1:13, “In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.”
2Peter 3:15-16, “…Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.”
Teaching that takes away the completeness we received at the moment of salvation is “a different gospel”. Having a mystical experience of unknown tongues, “the evidence”, before establishing what is biblical truth, is a different gospel stronghold of self-deception that is formidable. Many untaught believers value the experience far above a doctrine,but entering into the non-biblical demonstrates to God that we are not discerning or obedient.If we seek after a mystical experience that God does not require, and reject the “as it is written” by one Spirit we were ALL baptized into one body, we entertain evidence that God has not given!
Acts 20:28-31, “…take heed to yourselves and to all the flock…after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. Also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves. Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.”
1Timothy 4:13, 16, “Till I come, give attention to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine…Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.”
1Thessalonians 5:21, “Test all things; hold fast what is good.”
It may be of interest to students of Scripture, since defectors from error are downplayed, rejected, and forgotten, to find and read of Apostolic Church of Pentecost (ACOP) teachers and founders who found their way out of experienced-based theology using Scripture alone and intelligent reasoning; and arrived at precisely the same simple conclusion—“the baptism and the filling of the Holy Spirit are two different and separate ministries of the Holy Spirit, and tongues are not “the evidence” of Spirit Baptism but was ‘an’ evidence of Spirit Filling.” Shortly after publishing The Promise of the Father, a reader sent me a book 17 Reasons Why I Left The Tongues Movement, by the late ACOP pastor Alfred Pohl who writes in his personal history:
Page 12 (pdf page 11), “I belonged to the Apostolic Church of Pentecost…raised in it from childhood, was saved and baptized in it, ordained in it, preached in it, taught in our Bible school for five years, and was our denomination’s missionary-secretary for five years—during which time I visited and spoke in most of our churches across Canada…But why then did I leave?…”
Page 26 (pdf page 24),“Another teaching in which most Tongues people err is that the baptism and the filling or fullness of the Holy Spirit are one and the same. But these are two different and separate ministries of the Holy Spirit.
www.wayoflife.org/free_ebooks/downloads/17_Reasons_p.php
Also of interest is Rev. Joe Erickson, another ACOP pastor who left the tongues movement. From the 100th anniversary history of the Veteran Local Church in Veteran, Alberta:
“Many during the 1940’s distanced themselves from the Pentecostal teaching and experience because of error by some. The assembly was shocked when Joe Erickson, one whom they respected so much, became one of these. This led to a division regarding the foundational experience from the revival that led to the formation of the assembly in the beginning. Howard Knapp relates in the “Prairie Fire” that things came to a head in 1948 when the elders took a stand and invited Glen McLean from Eston to come and teach on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.”
From another source: “In February and March 1936 he led a six-week ”Fundamental Bible School” in a vacant three story commercial building in Coronation…In 1937 he opened a “Fundamental Bible School” in Grenfell, Saskatchewan until the spring of 1939. That summer he came to the West Coast…Mr. Erickson changed his doctrinal teaching about the Holy Spirit and in 1944-45 taught that the Holy Spirit indwelled every believer who trusted in Jesus Christ and that all believers did not need to speak in tongues. In the process he had lost his Pentecostal support base. In 1945…Northwest Baptist Bible College opened there that fall with Mr. Erickson…and then became a Seminary that today is part of the ACTS seminary consortium at Trinity Western University in Langley.
Dr. Glen S. McLean (1917-2000) in his book The Baptism in the Holy Spirit, page 7:
“As a young Christian I had been greatly helped by the ministry of individual Christians and certain ministers who had received the Baptism and taught this experience. But later on they claimed they saw they were in error, and renouncing their previous experience, they very zealously preached against it…it left me very bewildered and terribly confused…To add further to my confusion, some of the teaching which I had received concerning the Baptism did not agree with the Word of God or intelligent reasoning… (page 9) There was one thing which was a help to me in the perplexing situation I faced. As a boy of eleven years God had wonderfully baptized me with he Holy Spirit and I spoke in tongues…”
Some personal notes I received from Rev. Lorne O. Pritchard during the course of writing The Promise of the Father:
September 25, 1997 “Dear brother Dean: I received your letter and papers the day before yesterday. I did not want to reply until I had read your paper on “The Promise of the Father”. First of all I am amazed at the amount of homework you have done! Few preachers bother to do so and is one reason we have so much confusion today. I have never looked into the history of Azusa, but I have looked into the history of the so-called 1947-48 revival…as you know I am away until November 16th. Perhaps after that date we could work in a visit…We must keep in touch…Sincerely, in Christ, a brother, L.O.P.”
Undated note, 1997: For a young generation who know not the history of Latter Rain let me tell you: It divided preachers within denominations from each other. It divided denominations. It divided individual churches. It divided husbands from their wives and brothers from their brothers. Homes were broken. Many claimed gifts they did not possess and as a result became so discouraged they stopped going to any church…These are dangerous days…The Bible is enough, I need no additions to it…I have concluded that anyone who thinks 1948 was a year of revival after all the evidence against it, is deceived. Or if that one is not deceived, then I am deceived…Sincerely, a brother, L.O. Pritchard
November 20, 1997 hand written note: “When time permits we must sit down and talk over your paper. There are few today who take time to study the Scriptures for themselves. Every blessing…L.O.P.”
July 6, 1999 “Dear Dean: …Thank you for being a student. Thanks for being able to see through things that are not Scriptural. I am in agreement with each answer to the stated problems. Our churches need men like you who dare to speak out. I fear, in coming days, it will be more difficult for us…May God give you the strength to keep on keeping on. A brother L.O.P.”
April 10, 2007 “Dear Dean: I just received your letter and book…I do not know if you know, I may have told you, 1n 1995 when the Toronto thing was in force, I wrote A.C.O.P. office and asked them to take a stand against or for Toronto. They would not, so I did not renew my papers. I am not registered with any denomination now…Let me know if you receive this message.
Sincerely, L.O.P.”
Lorne Pritchard held in his hands the substantial teaching of my book The Promise of the Father in 1997 and I speculate that between 1997 and 2000, Lorne discussed with his long time co-founder and close friend Glen McLean, some of the doctrinal contradictions I listed from Glen McLean’s book, The Baptism in the Holy Spirit. The reason I say that is because in 2010, I was informed, “GS McLean realized his error and in the last months of his life (2000), tried to correct those errors you mentioned.” To verify that statement, at a the Learn To Discern conference on Saturday, June 14, 2014 at Olivet Church in Abbotsford, I met teacher Roger Oakland of understandthetimes.org , another of Glen’s close friends and long time ministry associate. I asked Roger to be specific on, “What doctrine did GS McLean realize he taught in error and tried to correct in his final months of life?” Without any reflection of his own theological position, Roger simply answered the fact that, “GS McLean realized that speaking in tongues was not ‘the evidence’ of Spirit Baptism.” I mean no harm to GS, who in speaking to him personally, found him to be a fine humble well meaning man; a small man with a large voice. The fact is that his writings are the basis of the full gospel doctrine, the Bible school, and the denomination. Only his writings are what are under scrutiny. If he tried to correct the decades of error since 1944, then this writing is in his support.
The challenge
My challenge then is, to every student of Scripture, to find out why ACOP teachers Alfred Pohl and Joe Erickson gave up ministry positions for the truth—“…the baptism and the filling or fullness of the Holy Spirit…these are two different and separate ministries of the Holy Spirit.” Ask yourself why founder, Lorne O Pritchard, taught against Latter Rain, and just after the Toronto Blessing pulled his papers to separate himself from the ACOP. Why did a second FGBI founder, Glen McLean recant the flagship doctrine of the Apostolic Church of Pentecost statement of faith:
“In the Baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience subsequent to salvation, with the Scriptural evidence: namely, speaking in tongues.”
In the ACOP Membership Policy, Section III—Licensed Membership, A:
“That a candidate for license…be baptized with the Holy Spirit with the Scriptural evidence, namely speaking in tongues.”
Section IV—Ordination Policy, A. Qualifications, 1:
“That a candidate for ordination…be baptized with the Holy Spirit with the Scriptural evidence, namely speaking in tongues.”
This is the same conclusion of William Seymour, the initiator of the so-called 1906 Azusa Street revival, the birthplace of the whole Pentecostal movement:
“In the early days, Seymour preached that the gift of tongues was “the” evidence for baptism with the Holy Spirit. After Azusa was all over, Seymour himself changed his theology to believe that tongues was not “the evidence” of Spirit baptism. Seeing that the whites could speak in tongues and still detest their black brothers, he now believed that overcoming racial prejudice and the fruits of the Spirit were the evidence of the Holy Spirit, and that tongues speaking was one gift of the Spirit and sometimes it was not a gift at all…Seymour still did not understand the distinction of Spirit baptism and Spirit filling but he believed closer to what all the mainline churches believed all along, with which he caused so much division.” (The Promise of the Father, page 120)
This monumental fracture in the experience based theology, collapses the whole premise of the Pentecostal faith like a house of cards. If tongues is not “the evidence”, how can a second blessing experience subsequent to, and apart from salvation exist?Some contradictions to ask yourself:
- The book The Baptism In The Holy Spirit explains on page 16 that “receive ye the Holy Ghost” means the “indwelling relationship”, but on page 47 “Received ye the Spirit”, means “baptism in the Holy Spirit”. However, Pentecostal doctrine dogmatically states that Spirit baptism is not the event of indwelling of the Spirit, but a subsequent event.
- On page 20, we are told “The Scripture also speaks of the baptism in the Holy Spirit as us being filled with the Holy Spirit…” while confusingly on page 84, we are told that “many who have initially received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit are not in-filled with the Holy Spirit in their daily walk with the Lord.” Spirit baptism is taught to be one and the same as Spirit filling at the beginning of the book, however, by the end of the book the two can be separated from each other.
- If Spirit baptism is Spirit filling, but later a Spirit baptized person is no longer filled, either (a) the events must be separate events, or (b) a person must also loose the baptism in the Holy Spirit when he looses Spirit filling. Against all logic, Pentecostals believe that the baptism in the Holy Spirit happens once, but Spirit filling can come and go at the same time, as being the same event.
To one Pentecostal pastor, of more than twenty years in the pulpit, I asked this question, “Is Spirit baptism the same thing as Spirit filling?” He agreed with his church’s statement of faith, that they are the same event. Then I asked him “since baptism with the Holy Spirit did not happen until the day of Pentecost, was anyone Spirit filled before that day?” He replied “No.” Thirdly, I asked him to read Exodus 31:2-3,6, concerning Bezalel, “And I have filled him with the Spirit of God…” Then I asked him to remember how John the Baptist was filled with the Spirit in his mother’s womb, and to remember some 120 others like Elizabeth and Zacharias, who were Spirit filled without tongues evidence and before the day of Pentecost. Clearly, the blank look of concern on this pastor’s face demonstrated that the Pentecostal doctrine was lacking.
Baptism: Water and Spirit parallel
The belief that Spirit baptism equals Spirit filling is the very cornerstone of the Pentecostal statement of faith, but to the contrary, Bezalel in Exodus 31:2-3 and a host of Old Testament saints were “filled with the Holy Spirit” including John the Baptist. He taught that Spirit baptism was yet to come, but he never spoke in tongues. A separation of 1800 years between the first occurrences of filling and baptism proves that Spirit baptism is not Spirit filling.
Spirit filled John the Baptist said, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me…will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire…Jesus came up immediately from the water…He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him.” (Matthew 3:11,16) “…’Upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining on Him, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” (John 1:33)
Out of the context of water baptism is the first mention in the Bible of Spirit baptism! Jesus promised to every believer, one event incorporating two different parts, an action and a position, each without any required outward evidence: (1) The action: The baptism with the Holy Spirit, which is the promise of the Father, Matthew 3:11, Acts 1:4-5, 2:38-39, and (2) The position: The indwelling of the Holy Spirit, John 14:16-31.
Jesus promised, “He will be in you” (John 14:16-31),which is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, to every single believer, without tongues evidence. He also promised the baptism with the Holy Spirit to every single believer without tongues evidence. Acts 11:15-17, “as upon us at the beginning…baptized with the Holy Spirit…when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ”. Romans 8:9, “…if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.” The 120 believers, in Acts 2:4, received the promise of the Father,Spirit baptism and indwelling, and were ALSO subsequently Spirit filled and spoke in tongues, as a sign to the unbelievers. It could be said that the baptism with the Holy Spirit is the “descending” action of the Holy Spirit that brings the residency, “remaining”, or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit; the baptism action and the indwelling position cannot be separated.
Water baptism by immersion symbolizes the believer’s identification with Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection, to walk in newness of life.
1Peter 3:18, “…baptism…through the resurrection of Jesus Christ…” If Spirit baptism and water baptism are parallel, why would we reverse the order and go from new birth, newness of life, back into death, burial, and sin? Pentecostal doctrine does precisely that—disconnects Spirit baptism from Spirit indwelling, puts the action subsequent to the position, and then attaches “the evidence” of tongues as a condition of baptism. Since the Spirit comes to dwell in us at the moment of salvation, the coming in or the baptism must immediately precede. To send a person, who has just repented to salvation, to yet seek “their baptism” or “the evidence” is to deny them the promise of the Father, a grievous error. 1Corinthians 12:13, “For by one Spirit we were ALL baptized into one body…” when we believed.