"Since we are in the Charismatic, non-Word of Faith category, what are your thoughts about speaking in tongues?"
Personally, I was Saved in 1962 in a Baptist environment, initially indoctrinated by them, and jumped about a year later into the Assemblys of God, where I've been for most of the last 49 years except for an decade running with the Charismatics in the '70s, and a period of AWOL in the '80s.
I was "Baptised in the Holy Spirit" (to use AoG vernacular) in '73. did "speak in tongues", and still do 39 years later. I HAVE manifested both Prophetic utterance, and Interpretation of tongues at least. I have NEVER been burdened to manifest a "message in tongues" in a public meeting.
Obviously, then, I'm not OPPOSED to "tongues", but don't particularly care for the DOCTRINE of "Initial evidence" which tends to be vigorously defended by Historic Pentecostals, but not so much by Charismatics - most of whom still see it as a "Normative component" of the "Baptism in the Holy Spirit".
"I post this question here because it is my understanding that this is the issue that divides the charismatics from the WOF/AOG/Pentecostals."
I would totally disagree here, and state that the INITIAL disagreement (Late '60s through the mid '70s) between the "Historic Pentecostals" (including the AoG) and the early Charismatics was more one of "Clothesline Holiness".
Since the "Charismatics" tended to be out of the more "Liberal" churches", they tended NOT to be "Holy" (Movies, Alcoholic beverages, Dress codes, Hair length, Makeup, etc.) in the way the "Historic Pentecostals" were. The Charismatics didn't care for our "Rules and Regulations", so we (the Pentecostals) rejected 'em.
And the Charismatics - who were in many cases REALLY experiencing God up front and personal for the first time, visited OUR churches, found them "dead" and "formal" (which they WERE by comparison), and went ahead with their OWN meetings.
When the Charismatic OUTPOURING (1966-1978 or so) ended MANY Charismatics flowed into the Pentecostal denominations, including the AoG, and had a liberalizing effect on us, so that now there's not much actual difference between the genres.
About the only thing we had in common in the early years was "Tongues".
WoF is an originally "Pentecostal" concept publically introduced by Kenneth Hagan in the '40s-'50s, and REALLY popularized (and blown out of proportion) by folks like Kenneth Copeland. Most WoF are out of the "Pentecostal/Charismatic? genres, and as a result, most ALSO Speak in tongues.
"What do you believe?"
That's MY story and I'm a-stick'in to it, y'all!!!