Gifts from God, tongues, and recent claims made by 'prophets' and 'miracle workers'

[pinacled]

I think what bothers me though is that Macarthur is lumping people together based on one section of their beliefs. He doesn't admit that they do proclaim Jesus as their Savior. He lets their other theological stances take precedence and then calls the entire group unChristian. He is trying to weed out the goats instead of seeing the sheep in there as well. It's wrong.

He must have forgotten the parable. Wheat and Tares.

And to answer the OP
Many times Paul says I speak as a man.
So how do you discern when he spoke with a tongue of angels?

Paul
What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.


Our Lord is Faithful

(Psalm 147:1-20; Hebrews 10:1-18)

1What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision? 2Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. 3For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?


4God forbid: yea, let God be TRUE, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

5But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? [Is] God unrighteous who taketh vengeance?
(I speak as a man )
6God forbid: for then how shall God judge {5719} the world? 7For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?

8And not [rather], (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say, ) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I think the verse he quotes from Proverbs indicates that people believe they are righteous when in fact they are not, and the verse from Romans appears to talk of how Israel strives for her own righteousness rather than falling back on the righteousness of Christ.

The latter verse seems to have nothing at all to do with the charismatic church (or indeed any other part of the church today, other than for comparison purposes); the former verse seems to be a generic observation that some people are evil. To use the Romans verse to describe any particular section within the church seems like a comparison rather than a direct application, in which case the person doing the comparison needs to demonstrate why the comparison is sound. Likewise the Proverbs verse is a generic observation that requires reasoning before it can be applied to anyone.

It's perfectly true to say "some men watch baseball" but to simply present that observation as evidence that you personally watch baseball is unfounded. If I want to claim that you as an individual watch baseball I need more than a generic "some men watch baseball" to back it.

(I use watching baseball as an example because it's safe and I figure few people will be offended at the implication that they may, or may not, watch baseball)

Baseball!!!! What a hideous game

 

[MoreCoffee]

I am inclined to see that passage from Matthew that is the theme of John Macarthur's sermon/presentation as having fairly direct relevance to a debate about charismatic practises today even though the passage deals with the last judgement and the claims of people who appear to be surprised that their "mighty works" do not impress the Lord as he sits in judgement. The reason why I think it is relevant is that the claims made by those being judged appear to be based on their miracle works (it is possible that the works are not actually miraculous but the people seem to be relying on them as if they were). The passage reads thus:

The two ways
'Enter by the narrow gate, since the road that leads to destruction is wide and spacious, and many take it; but it is a narrow gate and a hard road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

False Prophets
'Beware of false prophets who come to you disguised as sheep but underneath are ravenous wolves. You will be able to tell them by their fruits. Can people pick grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? In the same way, a sound tree produces good fruit but a rotten tree bad fruit. A sound tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor a rotten tree bear good fruit. Any tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown on the fire. I repeat, you will be able to tell them by their fruits.

Genuine Disciples
'It is not anyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," who will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but the person who does the will of my Father in heaven. When the day comes many will say to me, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, drive out demons in your name, work many miracles in your name?" Then I shall tell them to their faces: I have never known you; away from me, all evil doers! 'Therefore, everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like a sensible man who built his house on rock. Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and hurled themselves against that house, and it did not fall: it was founded on rock. But everyone who listens to these words of mine and does not act on them will be like a stupid man who built his house on sand. Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and struck that house, and it fell; and what a fall it had!'
(Matthew 7:13-27 NJB)
​

It is evident that making a claim to prophesying, casting out demons, and working miracles is no guarantee of a heavenly reward and it is evident that some who claim charismatic gifts today make claims to these things yet lives lives of luxury (health & wealth gospel televangelists, for example) while teaching their impoverished supporters to "plant a seed of faith by making a donation [to them and their television ministry]". This is especially egregious in parts of Africa where wicked men pretending to be MEN OF GOD exploit their congregations.

Well it’s a joy to be back here, this morning, and to bring God’s Word to you. And I thank you for those words of commendation, Phil. What I’ll do this morning is basically answer the question, “Are we preachers, or witch doctors?” Now that’s sounds strange, I know it, to the American ear, but that’s a very relevant question for my own situation back home because that’s a matter that I have raised, it’s something I have dealt with in my blog because it’s a pertinent question. There’s been clearly a shift in the way in which “evangelicals,” I keep putting that in quotation marks, relating to the pastoral ministry.

To get us going, I want us to begin by reading 2 Timothy chapter 3. The passage that clearly demonstrates before us something of what a true preacher of the Word of God ought to be occupied with. Second Timothy chapter 3 and verse 16, while you’re getting there, let me quickly say something of what I said two evenings ago, that it will be a broad sweep that I’ll be giving you across what’s happening back home in Africa. Invariably some people will be caught up in that broad brush that may not completely fit into the description, but I trust you’ll appreciate that I only have so much time with me. So clearly that’s at least something you can bear with in order to achieve the greater good.

Second Timothy 3 and verse 16, the Apostle Paul writes, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness so that,” there’s the famous phrase, “the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of His appearing and His Kingdom, I give you this charge, preach the Word. Be prepared in season and out of season, correct, rebuke and encourage with great patience and careful instruction.”

I’ll end my reading there. This is the last surviving epistle that the Apostle Paul wrote on the eve of his own departure. As the last chapter goes on to say his conscience of the fact that he will soon leave this scene of his labors, more or less the way in which the Lord Jesus Christ in the Upper Room discussed was also speaking and ending with the prayer that we quoted last time. Both of them are conscious that they are living but with their departure will not come the end of the Christian church and so there is a defining moment in which they are saying this is what you ought to concentrate on. The Lord in His prayer, the Apostle Paul in a direct exhortation. ... (click here for the rest of the sermon transcript.)

 

[tango]

I am inclined to see that passage from Matthew that is the theme of John Macarthur's sermon/presentation as having fairly direct relevance to a debate about charismatic practises today even though the passage deals with the last judgement and the claims of people who appear to be surprised that their "mighty works" do not impress the Lord as he sits in judgement. The reason why I think it is relevant is that the claims made by those being judged appear to be based on their miracle works (it is possible that the works are not actually miraculous but the people seem to be relying on them as if they were). The passage reads thus:
The two ways
'Enter by the narrow gate, since the road that leads to destruction is wide and spacious, and many take it; but it is a narrow gate and a hard road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

I would agree that there are many warnings against the excesses of the hypercharismatic church, and the specific mention of people who thought that by doing all those impressive looking things in the name of Jesus they would be OK does appear to put those groups directly in the line of fire. Had he stuck to that he could have made the case on that basis alone. Throwing in vague references from Proverbs without indicating how they are relevant watered down the point, to the extent that I missed his mention of the Matt 7 warning completely.

It makes more sense to focus on what the bad teachers are teaching and how it clashes with Scripture. One example I've often used is Brent Engelman who, in one of his lessons on prophecy, writes "Finally when the visions begin,trust they are from God and receive them like a child." (source: http://www.freebibledownload.net/PropheticTraining/SeerRealmLesson4-PropheticTraining.pdf - page 10) which doesn't fit very well with Paul writing "test all things, hold fast what is true" (1Th 5:21) or John writing "do not believe every spirit but test the spirits" (1Jn 4:1). When someone is offering prophetic training (which is itself a rather odd concept) that teaches the exact opposite of what Scripture teaches it's pretty easy to tag them as a false teacher.

In one of his books (I'd need to look up the reference) Bill Johnson warns of those who criticise teachers who show the signs listed in Mark 16. That seems like twisted logic - leaving aside the issue that some scholars don't believe that particular passage was in the original texts anyway, the idea that "if you believe, these signs will follow you" doesn't imply "if these signs follow you, you are a believer". Had Mr Johnson complained about Christians attacking other Christians who showed the fruit listed in Gal 5 he would have had a stronger case but as it stands he's falling foul of the "all apples are fruits but not all fruits are apples" logical fallacy.

False Prophets
'Beware of false prophets who come to you disguised as sheep but underneath are ravenous wolves. You will be able to tell them by their fruits. Can people pick grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? In the same way, a sound tree produces good fruit but a rotten tree bad fruit. A sound tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor a rotten tree bear good fruit. Any tree that does not produce good fruit is cut down and thrown on the fire. I repeat, you will be able to tell them by their fruits.

This is one of the problems with the huge international ministries. Since I've mentioned Bill Johnson and Brent Engelman by name already, let's stick with them. I have never met either man and probably never will. I have no idea how Mr Johnson treats his congregation, his wife, his children, his staff, the slow checkout assistant. I cannot comment one way or the other regarding whether he is kind, patient, joyful, whether he has peace, self-control etc. So I cannot judge him, I cannot know him, based on the fruits of his life. But I can see other fruits, namely what he teaches, and I can see many problems in what he teaches. So while I cannot judge one way or the other as far as his walk with God is concerned I can judge his teaching to be dangerous and decide not to follow wherever he is going.

Genuine Disciples
'It is not anyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," who will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but the person who does the will of my Father in heaven. When the day comes many will say to me, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, drive out demons in your name, work many miracles in your name?" Then I shall tell them to their faces: I have never known you; away from me, all evil doers! 'Therefore, everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like a sensible man who built his house on rock. Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and hurled themselves against that house, and it did not fall: it was founded on rock. But everyone who listens to these words of mine and does not act on them will be like a stupid man who built his house on sand. Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and struck that house, and it fell; and what a fall it had!'
(Matthew 7:13-27 NJB)
[/INDENT][/INDENT]
It is evident that making a claim to prophesying, casting out demons, and working miracles is no guarantee of a heavenly reward and it is evident that some who claim charismatic gifts today make claims to these things yet lives lives of luxury (health & wealth gospel televangelists, for example) while teaching their impoverished supporters to "plant a seed of faith by making a donation [to them and their television ministry]". This is especially egregious in parts of Africa where wicked men pretending to be MEN OF GOD exploit their congregations.

This is where "if you love me, obey my commandments" paired with "a new commandment I give to you, that you love one another as I have loved you" falls aside to make way for the idea that we are somehow required to have mighty signs and wonders following us every day of our lives and we're somehow lacking if we don't. And yet from what I've seen the hypercharismatic churches are very good at making decrees and proclamations and very bad at actually accomplishing anything with them. They'll seize on the tiniest signs that "God is with them" but when they struggle to pay the rent and cancel winter events because they can't afford the heating nobody wonders if maybe God isn't blessing them as mightily as they are proclaiming. And a great revival is always just around the corner, just around the corner.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You wrote an interesting post. John Macarthur's choice of theme passage was, in my opinion, astute. The claims made by the miracle-working people to whom the Lord says "I have never known you; away from me, all evil doers!" are similar to claims made by some in charismatic/pentecostal circles today but that does not prove them to be among the "evil doers" who are condemned at the last judgement, yet is ought to raise a warning alarm for us as we observe what people do and say and have an opportunity to look at the fruit their teaching and works produce. Is it creating godly humble and holy people in their meetings or is it creating something else in those people? That's a relevant question. But I think even more relevant are the questions one ought to ask about the content of their teachings. Is their teaching true, can it be shown to be true or is their teaching reliant on unproven claims? These matters appear to form the core of John Macarthur's objections even if his preaching brings in various extraneous matters which distract from the main issues.

I would agree that there are many warnings against the excesses of the hypercharismatic church, and the specific mention of people who thought that by doing all those impressive looking things in the name of Jesus they would be OK does appear to put those groups directly in the line of fire. Had he stuck to that he could have made the case on that basis alone. Throwing in vague references from Proverbs without indicating how they are relevant watered down the point, to the extent that I missed his mention of the Matt 7 warning completely.

It makes more sense to focus on what the bad teachers are teaching and how it clashes with Scripture. One example I've often used is Brent Engelman who, in one of his lessons on prophecy, writes "Finally when the visions begin,trust they are from God and receive them like a child." (source: http://www.freebibledownload.net/PropheticTraining/SeerRealmLesson4-PropheticTraining.pdf - page 10) which doesn't fit very well with Paul writing "test all things, hold fast what is true" (1Th 5:21) or John writing "do not believe every spirit but test the spirits" (1Jn 4:1). When someone is offering prophetic training (which is itself a rather odd concept) that teaches the exact opposite of what Scripture teaches it's pretty easy to tag them as a false teacher.

In one of his books (I'd need to look up the reference) Bill Johnson warns of those who criticise teachers who show the signs listed in Mark 16. That seems like twisted logic - leaving aside the issue that some scholars don't believe that particular passage was in the original texts anyway, the idea that "if you believe, these signs will follow you" doesn't imply "if these signs follow you, you are a believer". Had Mr Johnson complained about Christians attacking other Christians who showed the fruit listed in Gal 5 he would have had a stronger case but as it stands he's falling foul of the "all apples are fruits but not all fruits are apples" logical fallacy.



This is one of the problems with the huge international ministries. Since I've mentioned Bill Johnson and Brent Engelman by name already, let's stick with them. I have never met either man and probably never will. I have no idea how Mr Johnson treats his congregation, his wife, his children, his staff, the slow checkout assistant. I cannot comment one way or the other regarding whether he is kind, patient, joyful, whether he has peace, self-control etc. So I cannot judge him, I cannot know him, based on the fruits of his life. But I can see other fruits, namely what he teaches, and I can see many problems in what he teaches. So while I cannot judge one way or the other as far as his walk with God is concerned I can judge his teaching to be dangerous and decide not to follow wherever he is going.



This is where "if you love me, obey my commandments" paired with "a new commandment I give to you, that you love one another as I have loved you" falls aside to make way for the idea that we are somehow required to have mighty signs and wonders following us every day of our lives and we're somehow lacking if we don't. And yet from what I've seen the hypercharismatic churches are very good at making decrees and proclamations and very bad at actually accomplishing anything with them. They'll seize on the tiniest signs that "God is with them" but when they struggle to pay the rent and cancel winter events because they can't afford the heating nobody wonders if maybe God isn't blessing them as mightily as they are proclaiming. And a great revival is always just around the corner, just around the corner.

 

[tango]

You wrote an interesting post. John Macarthur's choice of theme passage was, in my opinion, astute. The claims made by the miracle-working people to whom the Lord says "I have never known you; away from me, all evil doers!" are similar to claims made by some in charismatic/pentecostal circles today but that does not proven them to be with "evil doers" who are condemned at the last judgement yet is ought to raise a warning alarm for us as we observe what people do and say and have an opportunity to look at the fruit their teaching and works produces.

This is the key, we need to look at people and see their fruit rather than just accepting what they say blindly. One of the things I've noticed is that it seems the more charismatic a church becomes the less it relies on Scriptural testing. Some of the hypercharismatic types seem to make a habit of specifically discouraging testing (e.g. Brent Engelman, who I quoted further up). I've seen comments on The Elijah List (I'd need to look up references, don't have them to hand) that talk of how to test a prophetic word, but it's all about internal feelings and doesn't mention Scriptural testing. Other "prophetic words" have been presented with the concept of "by the mouths of two or three shall the matter be established" and presented as something you can rely on because the "prophet" and webmaster agreed it was sound. (I wanted to get two other people to say it was garbage and therefore have it established as both sound and garbage). Truth be told any time a teacher doesn't want to be tested I immediately regard them with much suspicion.

Is it creating godly humble and holy people in their meetings or is it creating something else in those people. That is a relevant question.

It needs to be creating humble people but also people who are Scripturally sound. When discussing one particular teacher with a friend who followed him I questioned his teachings and the answer I got back was that he was "a very Godly man and would never speak anything unbiblical". No sense of looking to see if my concerns had any merit, my friend had met the teacher and that was that.

It's also hard to see the humility in the kind of proclamations and decrees that act as if we can merely speak things into being based on our own desires. I've seen a church pull Job 22:28 out of context and use it to justify people declaring what they want to happen. I often wondered what would happen if someone declared the exact opposite, although from what I gather of their teachings you'd end up in a silly game of "oh yes it is, oh no it isn't" as each proclamation would cancel the previous one. One person in particular seemed incapable of praying for a medical condition without endlessly breaking off curses first. I got to the stage where I seriously wondered if we were talking about the same god.

But I think even more relevant is the questions one ought to ask about the content of their teachings. Is it truth, can it be shown to be truth or is it relying on unproven claims (like speaking in the 'tongues' of angels) and working mighty works that cannot be established to have really happened when one wants to examine the claims. I can't help but think that these matters form the core of John Macarthur's objections even if his preaching brings in various extraneous matters which distract for the main issues.

I think part of the problem is that some of the more supernatural elements of a Christian walk don't necessarily fit neatly into human analysis. A prophetic word may be immediately relevant to someone present; it may not be relevant until later. In the case of Daniel some of his utterances have still not been fulfilled. Miraculous healings don't happen under laboratory conditions, and basic medical confidentiality means that presenting them as miracles to a far-flung audience inevitably expects a lot of trust. Personally when I'm presented with talk of a miracle that happened somewhere far away I typically file it under "I don't know" because I have no way of verifying whether it happened, whether it was a miracle, and by what power the miracle occurred.

Striking a balance between accepting everything put in front of us and rejecting everything supernatural is inevitably a difficult process. It's easy to say it, but "do not despite prophecies, test all things, hold fast what is good" isn't always an easy balance to strike. I fear Dr MacArthur falls foul of "do not despise prophecies" while the more charismatic sections of the church fall foul of "test all things".

I think Dr MacArthur is right to raise major concerns with the hypercharismatic churches and some of their bizarre beliefs, although in doing so it is very easy to throw out the proverbial baby with the bath water.

 

[MoreCoffee]

...
I think Dr MacArthur is right to raise major concerns with the hypercharismatic churches and some of their bizarre beliefs, although in doing so it is very easy to throw out the proverbial baby with the bath water.

On the matter of bathwater and babies. This presentation was interesting.

A transcript of the presentation is available here http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/TM13-9

 

[tango]

On the matter of bathwater and babies. This presentation was interesting.

A transcript of the presentation is available here (cut for brevity)

I read the transcript, there was a lot of it and I read it with increasing dismay. Largely because so many of the comments in it were accurate.

It is true to say that within sections of the charismatic church there is a shocking, even terrifying, lack of discernment. The people who claim to be "spirit filled", sometimes to the extent of implying that people in other churches are not "spirit filled", and yet see nothing wrong with teaching that directly contradicts the Bible (for example, the toxic teaching of Brent Engelman I mentioned above). It's pretty sad when someone in a leadership position decides what is good or not based on whether they have "checks in their spirit" alone, and even more sad when something that teaches the opposite of what the Bible teaches doesn't register.

It is sad when sections within the charismatic church judge everything based on their feeling of it, accept or reject doctrine on whether or not it "feels right" or "resonates with their spirit", or use the kind of arguments (usually heavily featuring words like "anointing" and "flesh") that could be copied word-for-word to support a diametrically opposition position to the one they are supporting. If I ask someone for Scriptural backing I don't want to be told "don't think, just drink" or that I'm using fleshly reasoning and missing out on the anointing. When I'm concerned about the teaching people are accepting and suggesting a Bible study to explore the matter further I don't want to be told (as one church leader told me) that they "weren't going to get into a debate". All I wanted was to see some Scriptural support for what they were doing

That said to write off any manifestation of spiritual gifts also violates Scriptural calling. Paul didn't tell the Corinthian church not to be using the gifts of the spirit, he told them how they should be used. He didn't tell the Thessalonians to ignore prophecies, he told them to test things. John wrote to test the spirits, not to reject any spiritual activity because it couldn't be from God.

I am honestly starting to conclude that at least one of the Bad Guys referenced in Revelation most likely relates to some of the hypercharismatic movements. Dominion theology appears to me to be building the kingdom of the beast, and the "mighty signs and wonders" linked to the beast and to false prophets seem to have a worrying correlation to the teachers who seem to be long on claiming miracles even when their teaching directly contradicts the Bible. Having read the other chapters in Brent Engelman's online prophetic training (I linked to one chapter above) the primary conclusion I drew was that I do not recognise the god he describes. For good measure if someone doesn't at least appear to be a Christian and yet performs signs and wonders they will be pretty obvious. Someone who claims the name of Christ and performs miracles will most likely be accepted by many.

If it were as simple as "signs and wonders are bad" then there would be nothing to test, there would be no need for discernment.

It is sad that the charismatic movement has left itself so wide open to criticism, much of which is entirely justified. That said, when mining gold it requires dredging through many tons of rock to extract a few grams of gold. Many seams that are worth mining have so little gold in them that you wouldn't even see it by eye, and yet the precious gold is still in there. I think in the same way the charismatic church has a huge amount of excess baggage, a not trivial amount of toxic teaching that really does need to be addressed even if it does offend people, but still there are those who don't jump on every passing bandwagon and can construct a sentence that doesn't contain the word "anointed".

Short version, I agree with many of the criticisms within the article but don't accept that there is no baby in there.

 

[MoreCoffee]

...
Short version, I agree with many of the criticisms within the article but don't accept that there is no baby in there.

I wonder if there is one and if it is worth all the destruction and error to believe/pretend that there is a baby in the turgid dirty bathwater.

One man from Africa was in the conference and he has first hand experience of what the message of the current Charismatic/Pentecostal movement is working in his country. Here is a presentation from him.

The transcript is available here https://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/TM13-5

 

[tango]

I wonder if there is one and if it is worth all the destruction and error to believe/pretend that there is a baby in the turgid dirty bathwater.

One man from Africa was in the conference and he has first hand experience of what the message of the current Charismatic/Pentecostal movement is working in his country. Here is a presentation from him.

The transcript is available here https://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/TM13-5

It's easy to see why that kind of position is taken, especially in the light of the silly excesses of some within the hypercharismatic church and some of the Bible botching so frequently seen to support the sillier positions they take.

At the same time to reject everything would be akin to rejecting the entire church on the back of the child abuse scandals. Yes, the abuse scandals are a disgrace and have to be rooted out but to conclude that every minister is an abuser is not a sound conclusion. In the same way some of the hypercharismatic ministers spread toxic theology but to assume that everybody who claims to be hearing God is a nutjob doesn't make sense.

I'm increasingly minded to reject just about any speaker who wants to appear at a huge rally and charge people to attend, especially if they announce they will be prophesying during the event. There's nothing to hear from God unless God is speaking, and last I heard God spoke on his terms rather than on ours.

 

[tango]

Another thought on reading the transcript, one particular point that stood out was the lack of people saying "I'm going to the Bible Study".

It reminds me of a minister of a hypercharismatic church who I asked to meet with to discuss the Scriptural basis, if any, of some of what he was allowing in his church. He refused to "get into a debate", and when I explained I wanted to go back to Scripture to determine which of us was right (because it was clear one of us was wrong, and possibly badly wrong), he consistently refused. Yet curiously he later seemed quite happy at the thought of me leading a Bible study in his church, even while still showing no interest in figuring whether my teaching would be badly wrong.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Another thought on reading the transcript, one particular point that stood out was the lack of people saying "I'm going to the Bible Study".

It reminds me of a minister of a hypercharismatic church who I asked to meet with to discuss the Scriptural basis, if any, of some of what he was allowing in his church. He refused to "get into a debate", and when I explained I wanted to go back to Scripture to determine which of us was right (because it was clear one of us was wrong, and possibly badly wrong), he consistently refused. Yet curiously he later seemed quite happy at the thought of me leading a Bible study in his church, even while still showing no interest in figuring whether my teaching would be badly wrong.

Perhaps he was feeling safe in the knowledge that his flock were more interested in prophecies and miracles and exercising their gifts. Maybe he felt assured that no matter what you said and what passages were presented in the end their experiences would trump your explanations.

 

[Chris1611]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPvs_psxx7Q

This is a great interview on the matter, also by MacArthur.

He highlights "Any man that wishes to come after Me, let him first deny himself". Faith is about self-denial, not self-fulfillment.

 

[tango]

Perhaps he was feeling safe in the knowledge that his flock were more interested in prophecies and miracles and exercising their gifts. Maybe he felt assured that no matter what you said and what passages were presented in the end their experiences would trump your explanations.

Perhaps. I'd have thought that people there would at least care enough to investigate and respond to allegations that their teachers are presenting the exact opposite of what Scripture teaches, and if that didn't generate a response I'd have thought the allegation that some of their chosen teachers are building the kingdom of antichrist would have got something more urgent than "I'm busy, I'll get to it eventually" (followed by nothing for several months). I think someone offering a credible Scriptural argument that my preferred teachers could even be considered to be building the devil's kingdom would generate enough concern that I'd want to look into it.

As I've often said in many settings (including this forum, and the situation with this particular church) if all people are doing is going on how something feels then they might as well be a buyer and seller at a market arguing over whether the bag of sugar is actually a full pound, with the buyer claiming it's light and the seller claiming it's fine, but with neither of them willing to put it on a scale and settle the matter. If we're not going to go back to Scripture as a consistent source of objective truth we're closer to following Aleister Crowley and "do what thou will shall be the whole of the law".

 

[MoreCoffee]

Perhaps. I'd have thought that people there would at least care enough to investigate and respond to allegations that their teachers are presenting the exact opposite of what Scripture teaches, and if that didn't generate a response I'd have thought the allegation that some of their chosen teachers are building the kingdom of antichrist would have got something more urgent than "I'm busy, I'll get to it eventually" (followed by nothing for several months). I think someone offering a credible Scriptural argument that my preferred teachers could even be considered to be building the devil's kingdom would generate enough concern that I'd want to look into it.

As I've often said in many settings (including this forum, and the situation with this particular church) if all people are doing is going on how something feels then they might as well be a buyer and seller at a market arguing over whether the bag of sugar is actually a full pound, with the buyer claiming it's light and the seller claiming it's fine, but with neither of them willing to put it on a scale and settle the matter. If we're not going to go back to Scripture as a consistent source of objective truth we're closer to following Aleister Crowley and "do what thou will shall be the whole of the law".

People do care about the bible even when they place their own experiences in a very high position for deciding what is true and what is not. It's hard to ignore one's experiences. The trouble comes when the experience isn't all it is claimed to be but the claims re-enforce the experience until a feeling of awe in the presence of God becomes a Divine revelation and feelings present in the group at the front (who are falling down and laughing) become 'contagious', as such feelings can, and then the claims work on the feelings until they become a gift of Divine Laughter. People have an amazing capacity for self deception. I have been in meetings where people who I know and who are usually quite sober in their thinking fall down and laugh and accept as truth what other claim about the laughter.

It's the capacity of self deception that makes a timely warning seem unimportant. The buzz of experiences and claims of revival or of the mighty work of the Spirit all tend to drown out the few warning voices raised about odd and disturbing behaviours or troubling teaching. I've been alive for quite a while and watched quite a lot of Charismatic and Pentecostal meetings, seen the dancing, the people being slain in the spirit, the singing in the spirit, and many other things that are called by some 'manifestations of the Holy Spirit' and I have seen the aftermath and the migration from one meeting to another depopulating a formerly popular church (leaving it in debt) and populating a new one (encouraging the leadership to borrow for new and expanded premises). I've seen friends go from "on fire Spirit Filled ministers" to discouraged cynics and in three cases to atheists. I've watched "healing is in the atonement" advocates ardently preaching their message only to see them change their minds as age creeps up on them and infirmity sets in. Yet all of these changes observed do not register in the collective memories of the movement. Each new youthful congregation accepts the same sorts of claims forgetting what befell their elders. The turnover that I've witnessed in the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements convinces me that those movements can only survive as long as new recruits are available to fill the depleted ranks left as the older members lose heart and move on to something else. Most of the older members still cling to the idea of current gifts and miracles but their feet do the talking as they walk out and join the local Church of Christ or Baptist Church so that they can have some stability.

I am inclined to see the buyer and seller of the sugar that your post mentions as neither willing to test the weight nor willing to check if it is sugar and not sand. Maybe nice white sand. But sand nonetheless, whose true nature is not known until tasted and by then the buyer has paid and the seller has moved on to sell to somebody else in some other place.

 

[tango]

People do care about the bible even when they place their own experiences in a very high position for deciding what is true and what is not. It's hard to ignore one's experiences. The trouble comes when the experience isn't all it is claimed to be but the claims re-enforce the experience until a feeling of awe in the presence of God becomes a Divine revelation and feelings present in the group at the front (who are falling down and laughing) become 'contagious', as such feelings can, and then the claims work on the feelings until they become a gift of Divine Laughter. People have an amazing capacity for self deception. I have been in meetings where people who I know and who are usually quite sober in their thinking fall down and laugh and accept as truth what other claim about the laughter.

It's the capacity of self deception that makes a timely warning seem unimportant. The buzz of experiences and claims of revival or of the mighty work of the Spirit all tend to drown out the few warning voices raised about odd and disturbing behaviours or troubling teaching. I've been alive for quite a while and watched quite a lot of Charismatic and Pentecostal meetings, seen the dancing, the people being slain in the spirit, the singing in the spirit, and many other things that are called by some 'manifestations of the Holy Spirit' and I have seen the aftermath and the migration from one meeting to another depopulating a formerly popular church (leaving it in debt) and populating a new one (encouraging the leadership to borrow for new and expanded premises). I've seen friends go from "on fire Spirit Filled ministers" to discouraged cynics and in three cases to atheists. I've watched "healing is in the atonement" advocates ardently preaching their message only to see them change their minds as age creeps up on them and infirmity sets in. Yet all of these changes observed do not register in the collective memories of the movement. Each new youthful congregation accepts the same sorts of claims forgetting what befell their elders. The turnover that I've witnessed in the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements convinces me that those movements can only survive as long as new recruits are available to fill the depleted ranks left as the older members lose heart and move on to something else. Most of the older members still cling to the idea of current gifts and miracles but their feet do the talking as they walk out and join the local Church of Christ or Baptist Church so that they can have some stability.

I am inclined to see the buyer and seller of the sugar that your post mentions as neither willing to test the weight nor willing to check if it is sugar and not sand. Maybe nice white sand. But sand nonetheless, whose true nature is not known until tasted and by then the buyer has paid and the seller has moved on to sell to somebody else in some other place.

Sorry I dropped the ball here, I read it on my tablet and meant to reply later, but of course having read the thread it didn't show up on my "unread" list.

I sometimes wonder just how much people do care about the Bible, other than using it as a source of handy verses to cherrypick to support what they are doing. Experience is a hard thing to ignore - if the Bible appears to contradict what we can clearly see in front of us that definitely represents a challenge that needs an answer more useful than "have faith". If nothing else the Bible apparently contradicting what we can see right in front of us is probably a good sign we've misunderstood the meaning of the Bible.

The problem with using feelings is that they are so easily manipulated. At my previous church I was aware of when the young people would go to some big get-together and come back gushing about how awesome it was to "be among 20,000 people all praising God". The cynic in me often wondered how many were praising and how many were there for a good sing-song that happened to mention God in the lyrics. (The cynic in me was born of experience, having myself once been a teenager and confused the euphoric feeling that comes from a good gig with a move of God - it took me many years before I realised why that euphoria faded so fast and that it wasn't anything wrong with me or my faith). A good hour or so of upbeat music, particularly repetitive music, can do all sorts of things to our heads and if we mistake that feeling for God at work we'll seek it out like a drug, only to realise later (hopefully not too much later) that what we have is a succession of layers wrapped around each other like an onion but with nothing of value at the heart of it. That can be very damaging to someone's faith (I know this from experience, having concluded that however many times I went forward I couldn't maintain God's presence and eventually stopped even trying. It took over 15 years of involvement in the occult before I was ready to even consider that God might still be calling me.)

Feelings and experiences are also really strange things to use as guides when experience should clearly show that a theology isn't working. The theology that "you will declare a thing and it will be established for you" (to rip Job 22:28 brutally out of context and stand on a promise God never even made) sounds soothing, it sounds like we're effectively little gods who can speak things into existence and mold reality to suit our will. But it should be pretty clear after a while, when events are cancelled for yet another winter because the cost of heating the church is too much, when bills are paid late because there isn't the money to pay on time, when rent is in arrears and the few staff members end up forgoing their salary because the church doesn't have the money to pay them, that declarations and decrees aren't actually achieving anything.

A church can survive as a financially viable entity if, as you described, the burned out and newly-cynical people leaving are replaced with at least as many young and enthusiastic recruits. Purely from the perspective of maintaining membership and cashflow, if someone can be persuaded to drum up some extra support, once they've recruited two or three new people it doesn't matter if they then burn out and leave, feeling like yesterday's newspaper that's tossed aside today. The organisation doesn't need very many people to stick around long term if there's a steady stream of young people all fired up and wanting to go to where the action is happening. And if 90% of this year's intake of young people leave feeling used, burned out and cynical who cares - there's another year's worth of bright-eyed young things ready to take their place and maybe even pay for the privilege.

It's tricky to find a sense of balance. I still believe that the gifts of the Spirit are for today as much as any other time, I just don't accept the hypercharismatic insistence that miracles should be a daily occurrence. The Book of Acts is effectively the edited highlights that condenses many years into 28 chapters. To expect to see the entire book repeated before our very eyes every Sunday morning in church is a tall order to say the least. And of course there's the small pesky detail that God gets to call the shots on what he does and when, and although we get to ask for miracles we don't get to demand them, claim them as our birthright, or otherwise manipulate God into doing our bidding. Trying to use spiritual forces to mold reality to our own desires is more akin to sorcery than prayer.

 

[MoreCoffee]

As an experiment and relying upon you all not to cheat, see if you can pick which parts of this song are in Finnish and which are not.
...

...

 

[tango]

As an experiment and relying upon you all not to cheat, see if you can pick which parts of this song are in Finnish and which are not.
...

...

Just out of curiosity, what's the point in doing this? I know nothing about the Finnish language and make no claims to have any supernatural gift of interpreting tongues.