1

Introduction

Most Pentecostal denominations in the United States subscribe to the doctrine that the initial physical evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit is the ability to ‘speak in tongues,’ i.e. to be able to speak in a language they neither know nor understand as the Spirit of God enables them. This ability, as witnessed by the person actually , is the first physical evidence of the person having been baptized in the Holy Spirit, as described in ch. 2 of the book of Acts. In December, 1900, a small group of students at the Bethel Col- lege in Topeka, , received an assignment from their teacher, Charles Parham, to begin a study of the subject of the ‘Baptism in the Holy Spirit.’1 Specifically, they were charged with the responsibility of discovering the ‘real Bible evidence’ of this baptism.2 Parham reported that when he returned to the school a few weeks later, the unanimous conclusion of the students was that the only scriptural evidence consist- ently reported in the Bible for the Baptism in the Holy Spirit was ‘speak- ing in tongues.’3 Subsequently, on January 1, 1901, Agnes Ozman became the first person in the modern era to expect to, and then to speak in tongues as evidence of having received the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Within days, at least a dozen other students had also begun to speak in tongues as evidence of their having been baptized in the Holy Spirit.4

1 The phrase ‘Baptism in the Holy Spirit,’ is the most commonly used way to describe the experience covered in this book. It has become the most common way of referring to it in our day. But in the early days of the Pentecostal movement one was just as likely to hear or see it referred to as the ‘Baptism with the Holy Spirit,’ or the ‘Baptism of the Holy Spirit.’ For consistency’s sake I will use the phrase ‘Baptism in the Holy Spirit,’ but will leave all quotations as they were in the original. 2 Charles F. Parham, The Higher Christian Life, ed. Donald Dayton, A Voice Crying in the Wilderness (New York: Garland, 1944; repr. 1985), pp. 33-34. 3 Sarah Parham, The Life of Charles F. Parham, Founder of the Apostolic Faith Movement by His Wife (Joplin, MO: Hunter, 1930), p. 52. 4 Agnes N.O. LaBerge, The Higher Christian Life, ed. Donald Dayton, What God Hath Wrought (New York: Garland, 1985), p. 29. 2 Why Tongues?

By 1930 the doctrine that everyone who was baptized in the Holy Spirit would speak in tongues as the initial physical evidence of that bap- tism was accepted by virtually every Pentecostal denomination in the United States. At least one denomination, the Assemblies of God, called the doctrine of initial evidence their ‘distinctive testimony.’5 The doc- trine of initial physical evidence became the reason for being for Pente- costal churches. Fellowship was broken over it. This study will explore the historical and philosophical backgrounds of the initial evidence doctrine in North American Classical Pentecos- talism. It will show that Pentecostals reveal in their writings a mindset that reflects the assumptions of the philosophical school known as ‘Scot- tish Common Sense Realism.’ The influence of Scottish Common Sense Realism will be traced through the voluminous literature known as ‘Christian Evidences,’ which provided the method and vocabulary used by Pentecostals for expressing the doctrine. In addition, the importance of camp meeting revivalism in the nineteenth century and particularly its emphasis on physical expressions, will be explored for its part in pre- paring leaders and followers alike for the Initial Evidence doctrine. Pre- millennialism will be examined for its part in providing the reason for pre-Pentecostals to seek for a physical sign and Restorationism will be studied for its role in suggesting where to look for that physical sign. Last, the rapidity of acceptance of the doctrine within the United States will be shown.

State of the Study The initial evidence doctrine is what sets apart the North American clas- sical Pentecostal movement as a separate and unique part of the twenti- eth-century church. At the outset it was the cause of separation between many who remained in the Holiness churches and those who went on to become part of the new Pentecostal denominations and movements. As such, it became for many Pentecostals their self-defined reason for being. And yet, the question why such a new doctrine would have been so rapidly accepted by so many people has not been examined from a historical or philosophical perspective. There are those who have at- tempted to explain speaking in tongues as a reaction to perceived pow- erlessness on the part of the speaker.6 Others have dealt with the subject of tongues as initial evidence without asking the ‘why’ question. The

5 ‘Combined Minutes of the General Council of the Assemblies of God, 1914-1920,’ Springfield, MO: The General Council of the Assemblies of God, 1922, p. 18, Flower Pentecostal Heritage Center DVD. 6 Robert Mapes Anderson, Vision of the Disinherited: The Making of American Pentecos- talism (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992).