Controversial: I saw this on a web site - from a "Reformed Baptist"

[MoreCoffee]

Okay, we have had some continuation V cessation threads in CH and they seem to create more smoke than light so maybe raising the topic is going to be unfruitful but maybe it need not be. Here's what I saw on a web site (Grace to you) run by Cessation advocates associated with John MacArthur's work. If that upset you stop reading now.

If you are still reading then here is a list of stages that the author gave for how a defence of Continuation by a Charismatic is likely to run:

• Dogged insistence that the gifts of prophesy, tongues, and healing continue to the present day.
• Vague anecdotal evidence in support of the continuation of those gifts.
• Unshakable confidence that the worst charismatic abusers and charlatans represent only the renegade fringe of the movement, and that they wield limited influence among mainstream charismatics.
• Staunch refusal to name, criticise, or publicly disavow those abusers and offenders at the supposed fringe of the movement.
• Dire warnings that rejecting anyone who claims to speak on behalf of the Holy Spirit or wield His power is tantamount to rejecting the Spirit Himself.
• Total disinterest in discussing or debating any doctrinal or ecclesiological issues other than continuationism versus cessationism.
• Confident assertions about the explosive growth of the charismatic church worldwide, and blithe acceptance that everyone who claims to be a charismatic is an authentic believer.

The author describes the approach (somewhat unkindly) as Foxe’s Book of Charismatics With Hurt Feelings

If you are still reading then take a look at the web page and let me know what you think of the things written in it.

 

[psalms 91]

After reading this I dont need to look. I dont pretend to understand their way of looking at things any more than they understand mine. I refuse to get in another discussion regarding spiritual things when they get trampled on the ground. It is fleshly to expect proof of miracles and spiritual miracles, that is the flesh crying out I refuse to accept someones healing etc.

 

[Ackbach]

After reading the website, I can say that the author's main point is the second list, not the first list that you have:

1. Is there any statistical evidence that proves the so-called “lunatic fringe” of the charismatic world is not actually the mainstream of the movement? Compelling statistics were produced at Strange Fire that indicated the prevalence of prosperity theology in mainstream charismatic churches. Can those numbers be contradicted, or is it time to reconsider who is truly on the fringe?
2. What is the responsibility of charismatic leaders to police their own movement beyond the walls of their individual churches? Who will be willing unequivocally to call out heretics and charlatans? And why are so many charismatics comfortable with false teachers serving as the face of their movement?
3. What constitutes the true, biblical gospel? And what deviations from it qualify as apostasy and heresy? In particular, how do you make sense of the rise of charismatic expressions in the Catholic Church? Is it possible to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit while continuing to reject the biblical gospel?
4. Is Oneness Pentecostalism heresy? Or is perverting the doctrine of the Trinity not really such a big deal after all?
5. How are manufactured experiences—like seeding air conditioning vents with gold flakes and promoting man-made prophecies—helpful or encouraging for true spiritual growth? Why should the proliferation of phonies give anyone confidence that the real thing even exists?
6. Is the prosperity gospel biblical? If not, doesn’t it fall under the curse of Galatians 1:8–9?
7. When it comes to Scripture’s instructions and prohibitions for life in the church—for example, Paul’s clear teaching about female pastors, or his admonition for only one person at a time to speak in tongues—how seriously do we need to take those things today? Again, are these matters worth dividing over?
8. Does the gift of tongues as practiced in charismatic churches today bear any resemblance to the supernatural events on the Day of Pentecost, or any other expression of the gift of tongues found in the book of Acts? If not, why is the dramatic difference acceptable for continuationists?
9. If today’s prophets are not held to the biblical standard of one-hundred percent accuracy, what standard is there for people who make false prophecies? Or is modern prophecy nothing more than a crapshoot?
10. Finally, in the immediate aftermath of Strange Fire, Phil Johnson made an appearance on Dr. Michael Brown’s radio program. Phil issued Brown a challenge—which Brown accepted—to produce any audio of Mike Bickle or someone of similar influence in the charismatic movement making a clear presentation of the gospel. We’re still waiting for that audio.

The first list, while not unimportant, pales in comparison with the importance of this list.

In fact, the author prefaces this second list with the paragraph:

So in the interest of advancing the conversation beyond the endless defense of continuationism, let us table that part of the discussion. If it helps, imagine that we’ve conceded that point of debate. (We haven’t, but that’s beside the point at the moment.) There still remains a whole raft of questions and issues that need to be addressed. Questions like:

This is a big clue that the author, while not wanting permanently to table the continuationism debate, believes this second list is considerably more important.

 

[Lamb]

This quote from the article caught my attention:

In fact, the major gripe I had with my old mainstream Pentecostal church was the same gripe I have with the church growth and emergent movements—a failure to rightly preach the gospel.

Are they preaching a different Gospel?

 

[MoreCoffee]

This quote from the article caught my attention:


Are they preaching a different Gospel?

Could be. Appears to be in the eye of the beholder.

 

[MoreCoffee]

After reading this I dont need to look. I dont pretend to understand their way of looking at things any more than they understand mine. I refuse to get in another discussion regarding spiritual things when they get trampled on the ground. It is fleshly to expect proof of miracles and spiritual miracles, that is the flesh crying out I refuse to accept someones healing etc.

Sounds like one of the stages ... Total disinterest in discussing or debating any doctrinal or ecclesiological issues other than continuationism versus cessationism.

 

[psalms 91]

If it is with an understanding of spiritual things in the spiritual rather than in the natural thyen you are right. If you expect me or anyone else to present proof of miracles then that tells me exactly what is speakinmg be it flesh or spirit.