Strange Fire: Sorting Out the Issues Part 4: Lists and Assessments, Visions, Tongues, Healings

Thought I'd try to list the main problems with Charismatica as I've come to see them, as brought out by the Strange Fire Conference :

• Dishonoring / insulting the Holy Spirit by imputing either fleshly or demonic phenomena to Him;
• Profaning worship, which is what "strange fire" means (see Leviticus 10:1) by various antics designed to conjure up counterfeit phenomena that have nothing to do with worship as defined by the Bible;
• Misleading people by a false gospel into a false salvation, all over the world;
• Defrauding people by promises of prosperity or miraculous healing in the name of Christ, all over the world;
• By mistaking counterfeits for the gifts of the Spirit, either encouraging the development of psychic powers ("soul power" which has demonic implications), or outright demonic possession or at least oppression of people who either wrongly think they are Christians or ARE Christians (I'm not sure MacArthur is right that a Christian can't be demonized).  

These are obviously not minor or secondary issues, but so far, with the rare exception of the Pentecostal pastor I quote a couple posts back, Charismatics continue to accuse the Strange Fire Conference of unfairly criticizing fellow Christians about trivial matters, dividing the true body of Christ, and even being the heretics themselves.  But if these things I've listed are true,  Christians need to recognize that fact and leave the movement.

THE HONOR OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
In Part 2 of the interview at Challies' blog, MacArthur defines his main objective this way:

Rather than initiating another conference, I am more interested in sparking a movement committed to reclaiming the honor of the Holy Spirit. And I would be glad to stand with these men in that effort, for the glory of Christ and the good of His church.

Here are some more topics touched on in the MacArthur interview as he answers questions and objections posed to him:

VISIONS LEADING MUSLIMS TO CHRIST?

Do I believe that people in the Muslim world are actually seeing Jesus Christ? No, I do not. Paul stated in 1 Corinthians 15:8 that he was “the last of all” to see the risen Christ. So, I believe that precludes anyone outside of those listed in 1 Corinthians 15 of being able to claim legitimate visions of the resurrected Savior.

(The apostle John, of course, was one of those included in 1 Corinthians 15.  Accordingly, I don’t believe the book of Revelation sets a precedent for believers to expect genuine visions of Jesus to occur throughout church history.)

Furthermore, it is important to note that these individuals are still unbelievers when they reportedly have these experiences. Consequently, these experiences (whatever they are reported to be) cannot constitute examples of the charismatic gifts having continued, since spiritual gifts are only given to believers (1 Cor. 12:7)—and these people do not come to saving faith until later.

Finally, the New Testament clearly states that the way in which the gospel is spread in this age is through preaching. As Paul explains in Romans 10:14–15, unbelievers will not hear the gospel unless missionaries go to them proclaiming the good news of salvation.

He refers us to this blog  concerning the claims of Muslims being brought to salvation through visions, and to this one.

These blogs discuss the gullibility of Christians in believing uncritically whatever is reported of such miraculous events and show how the claims of visions fail by the Biblical standard, which says people come to faith through the preaching of the gospel, which leaves out visions.  They also discuss the validity of other charismatic claims, and the second blog has a link to another article at the first blog that discusses the claims to Muslim salvations through visions even more thoroughly.

I'm reminded of the book that may have been the first of this trend of Muslims coming to salvation through visions of Christ, I Dared to Call Him Father, written in 1978 by Bilquis Sheikh, which recounts her visions and dreams, including at least one of Jesus Himself, by which she came to the gospel completely on her own.  She even baptized herself in her own bathtub with nobody else present.

Then recently Ravi Zacharias on the radio mentioned a friend of his who when he was dying had a vision of Jesus coming into his bedroom and holding his hand, and Ravi raised no question about it, even said how Jesus knew that's just what his friend needed at that moment.

If these visions are not from God, what is their source?  Visions of Jesus can't be "Soul Power," something our own human powers could accomplish, nor even the "miraculous" powers Nee says were originally given to Adam.  What does that leave?  Well, it leaves Satan and his demons, right?  What else? 

SO:  If it's from Satan and his demons, that ought to be recognized as no mere secondary matter, right?  Not something to celebrate as Christians so often do.  How alarmed should we be about this?  Pretty alarmed, wouldn't you say? 

TONGUES

I've already brought up tongues in another context but MacArthur also discusses it:

In terms of potential dangers, I do believe that modern tongues is an unsafe spiritual practice. True worship takes place in spirit and truth (John 4:24), meaning it involves both the emotions and the mind. By contrast, a worship practice that empties the mind or consists of vain repetitions (Matt. 6:7) has more in common with pagan religion than true worship. The fact that modern glossolalia parallels pagan religious rites should serve as a major warning of the dangers inherent in this unbiblical practice...

A lot of the interpretative issues in Acts and 1 Corinthians 12–14 become clear by simply applying the basic rules of hermeneutics. For example, one of the most fundamental principles of Bible interpretation is that Scripture interprets Scripture, and that the clearer passage ought to be used to interpret the less clear passage. Regarding tongues, Acts 2 is explicit that the gift of tongues produced real human languages. When we allow the clearer passage of Acts 2 to govern our interpretation of 1 Corinthians 12–14, we can make a strong case that the tongues of 1 Corinthians were also real human languages. That simple observation undermines the modern charismatic practice of vocalizing irrational speech...

Phil Johnson also wrote a post today on the GTY blog specifically on tongues.

OK, then:  Either the practice of charismatic "tongues" is "Soul Power" which I've discussed here before, a misuse of a natural human ability that was given to Adam but distorted by the Fall and therefore not to be exercised but suppressed; 

OR those who speak these "tongues" are at least partially demon-possessed.  That is, the devil somehow has access to the tongue.  This is no minor matter.     

Seems to me this implication will eventually need to be discussed by those in the thick of these issues.

MIRACULOUS HEALINGS
Claims to healings were mentioned at the above-linked blogs, and were discussed at the Strange Fire Conference, but didn't come up in John MacArthur's interview.

The problem with the claims to miraculous healings you hear all the time in Christian circles is that there's NEVER any evidence given for them.  You're supposed to just believe the reports, but the reports may be many times removed from the event and the event may look nothing like the report you heard if you can ever get any kind of real information about it.  And besides, once you've become aware of the great number of claims that are either self deceptions or frauds, nobody's reports should be taken at face value.  Somebody is very very convinced that a family member was suddenly and miraculously healed of bursitis when the elders prayed for her, and that COULD be true of course, since they were praying according to the Biblical instruction, but still it makes you want to know details that you'll never find out from people who simply take such things without questioning them.  It's as if faith can only exist for such Christians if there ISN'T evidence.

Some charismatics seem to equate the idea of faith more with things like having faith in miraculous healings than faith in the word of God as such or faith in Christ as our Savior.  If you can't hold onto a prayer for a miraculous healing then you might as well regard yourself as lacking in faith, period.  Some see miraculous healings as practically essential for winning people to Christ, at least as the best possible kind of witness.  I'd say that's a pretty puny idea of faith but that doesn't win me any points with those of that opinion.  Nor does answering that it's the same as walking by sight rather than by faith.  No, holding on to a prayer for a miraculous healing forever and ever if necessary is some Christians' idea of true faith. 

You may hear of people who finally give in to medical solutions to serious physical problems after many years of praying for a miraculous healing, but who then feel almost like they committed a sin by doing that.  I know of one person who scheduled surgery only to get the strong sense that she was finally to be healed miraculously which led her to cancel the surgery.  Months went by and she was not healed, so she rescheduled the surgery.  But that hasn't changed her mind about expecting a miraculous healing.  Those of this persuasion may also believe the gospel promises to take care of us financially, which is a version of the Prosperity gospel, or health-and-wealth gospel.  They can get very impatient with Christians who are suffering financially, because of their supposed lack of faith.  (Didn't Jesus say "the poor you'll always have with you?"  Well, that's explained as people who lack faith I guess, they will always be with us).   This version of the gospel usually means the person watches TBN.   I don't know if TBN promotes this or not but I remember being startled to hear from a regular TBN viewer the very carnal interpretation of "the abundant life" Jesus promises us, as if it means having all the comforts of this life, rather than the spiritual life and power in Christ.   

How many of the claimed miraculous healings are INDISPUTABLY of God?  I personally don't know of a single one.  The evidence always comes out against the claims or isn't forthcoming at all.

How many of the claimed visions of Jesus Christ are of God?  Well, none of them are, if MacArthur's biblical evidence is correct.

And I don't know of a single proven instance of a charismatic tongue being an actual language.  And again, if MacArthur's biblical reasoning is correct, they are all not from God.

While I've heard of some supposed predictions by "prophets" coming true, I haven't actually seen any of these claims proved either.

And again, none of these miraculous claims are anything like those reported in the New Testament anyway.  The "prophecies" are more like psychic readings, and nobody claims infallibility for them as the Bible requires;  the "healings" are never provable and are usually limited to minor things like bursitis anyway;  the "tongues" are not a known language.  And so on. 

=====================
When I think back on my own experience as a fairly new Christian in the charismatic movement, what stands out for me is not any particular failed claim to the miraculous but the undermining of my fledgling discernment, the confusion I experienced with the nagging anxiety that some of the phenomena I'd been witnessing were just not right somehow, that the rationalizations weren't holding up, while I was being told it was all of God and I shouldn't question it.

This is what I consider to be the biggest offense of the Charismatic movement from my own personal point of view.   Of course God ordained my experience and He has His reasons for it all, but it seems to me the Charismatic movement is just about as big an Antichrist cultic snare as the Roman Catholic Church and as dangerous, preventing genuine salvations in many cases, perhaps even being a source of demon possession.

The first clear problem I saw was when my little charismatic group prayed for the Pope and that was an eye-opener, the first step onto solid ground outside the charmed circle.  Then I prayed for light on various "prophecies" and some other rather strange goings-on that had been bothering me, which I then began to see by the light of the Bible, and that pushed me over the edge and out of the movement.  Still, despite being MOSTLY freed from it I've never felt I was COMPLETELY freed from it.

So for me the anxiety and uncertainty I've gone through trying to understand all this over my entire Christian life is a big enough reason to describe the movement as dangerous.  It takes a huge toll on the Christian life.  It makes me think of Daniel 7:25, about the Devil wearing out the saints.   Being unable to resolve some of the questions leaves one in an uncomfortable state of inner conflict. 

I know many have taken up sides on these things and don't experience the sort of conflict I've experienced, but I've got to say it seems to me they should because the conflict concerns what the Bible says;  it's not a personal matter.

Strange Fire: Sorting Out the Issues, Part 1: John MacArthur Answers His Critics

(sorry, don't know how these got out of order.  If I'm up to it I'll switch them around later)

In a two-part interview by a Reformed blogger who invited him to answer various criticisms of the Strange Fire Conference, John MacArthur Answers His Critics, Part 1 and Part 2 , John MacArthur says he considers this a "vital issue" that needed a strong statement as a "trumpet blast," a wake-up call to a complacent and ambivalent Church.

Because the honor of the Holy Spirit is at stake, we were convinced that we could not remain silent...

The charismatic quest for extrabiblical revelation, subjective impressions, ecstatic experiences, and so on, represents a massive danger to the church. Error is still error, even if there are true believers who embrace and espouse it...

The reality is that the gospel being proclaimed and believed by the majority of charismatics around the world is not the biblical gospel...

[It] breaks my heart to think that hundreds of millions of souls are being caught up into a movement where they are being seduced by false forms of the gospel.

   In Part 2 he continues:

Now someone might ask, “But isn’t this a secondary issue?” I would respond by asking, “Is the true understanding of the dignity of the Holy Spirit a secondary issue?” That’s a frightening notion, since the worship of the true God in the true way is our highest priority. And this issue has dramatic implications both for how we view God and for how we worship Him...

[Most objections don't]... take into account both the severity and the ubiquity of the charismatic error on the global level. Errant pneumatology is not ancillary to the charismatic movement. It is the very thing that defines it. And when an entire movement is defined by a heterodox theology that threatens the purity of the church by tolerating and even promoting false forms of the gospel, it must be boldly confronted...

These are strong statements, but for the most part the Continuationists or Charismatics have been reacting against the very idea of criticizing "another branch of the Church" and denigrating the Conference as focusing on secondary issues to no good purpose, rather than addressing the actual arguments presented at the Conference.

Personal communications on it I've received from Continuationists have ranged from a disgusted objection to "such a trivial concern," calling it "just another doctrinal conference that divides Christians when we need so desperately to be unified against the evils we are facing," which unfortunately included a refusal to listen to any of it; to a lengthy denunciation of the Conference full of Bible quotes condemning the presenters as heretics, also without having heard any of it. 

To these Charismatics there is no point in addressing the issues, it doesn't even occur to them.  They believe they already know the issues, and criticism of the Charismatic movement is not something to discuss but something to denounce, period.  So far the trumpet blast hasn't gotten through to them.

Well, IS it a "massive danger to the church" or just a trivial secondary matter it would be better to let lie for the sake of unity, or even a heresy itself to challenge it?  ARE people being "seduced by false forms of the gospel" through the Charismatic movement?

As I've already said in other posts, I think the Conference made its case, that it is a great danger, which justifies holding such a Conference, and justifies further attempts to get it across to Christians who have been taking it for granted. 

However, it's important that the critics get it right, and what MacArthur calls a "quest for extrabiblical revelation, subjective impressions and ecstatic experiences" misrepresents what the Charismatics believe they are doing.  As I say in my previous post, Charismatics do believe they base their belief in the continuation of the "gifts of the Spirit" on the Bible so that it is not a matter of personal seeking of revelations or impressions or experiences but of being open to what the Holy Spirit brings to their spirit.  Getting this right is crucial if the debate is going to make any headway.
 

Strange Fire: Sorting Out the Issues, Part 3: The Source of the Charismatic "GIfts"

Having said that I think it's important to characterize the Charismatics' beliefs in their own terms, as the Holy Spirit's speaking through the human spirit, if the Strange Fire Conference is right that is not at all what is going on.  However, I'm still not sure it's right to characterize the actuality as promoting extrabiblical revelations, seeking subjective impressions and ecstatic experiences as John MacArthur put it. 

I think this glosses over the fact that these things are usually experienced as just happening to the person without being asked for, and because that is the way they occur and because the recipient believes he or she is a saved Christian the question of their source just doesn't come up.  Or if it does it is immediately squelched by the constant refrain that it is dangerous to doubt the Holy Spirit.  That this attitude amounts to a mental bondage as tyrannical as that of any cult or dictatorship also doesn't occur.

In any case, if you insist on characterizing these phenomena in terms of subjective mental states you are going to miss the whole point, and miss an opportunity to make Charismatics aware of the problem you want to get across to them.

THE PROSPERITY GOSPEL IS A HUGE OFFSHOOT BUT IT'S NOT THE ROOT

I'm glad to see the Pentecostal pastor I quoted in the previous post agreeing with John MacArthur about the Prosperity Gospel, and that's a big start, but he remains a Continuationist nevertheless, in opposition to MacArthur, while the Strange Fire Conference ultimately aims at the root of the whole thing, at the very idea that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit continue today.

And that gets us into the fundamental Pentecostal and Charismatic claims of miraculous healings from God, of genuine visions from God, of genuine prophecies from God, of a genuine gift of tongues from God. of a Baptism in the Holy Spirit that is separate from being born again, and so on. 

[Just heard on Pilgrim Radio an interview with Phil Johnson of the Conference, and tomorrow at the same time there will be an interview with Michael Brown for the Charismatic side, on the program His People. The program airs in Pacific Standard Time at 2:30 AM, 12:30 PM and 9:30 PM and can be heard online.]

MIRACULOUS GIFTS OR "LEARNED BEHAVIOR" OR "INTUITIONS"

On the radio show I just mentioned, Phil Johnson just described the phenomena claimed by Charismatics to be from the Holy Spirit to be in fact "learned behavior," and I've got to disagree with that quite sharply. 

I don't know if possibly some of it is, but I can guarantee you I never "learned" to "speak in tongues," it just happened to me one day while I was praying out loud during the few years I was in a charismatic church and a charismatic organization as well.  A whole stream of unfamiliar sounds came out of my mouth absolutely unbidden.  I don't remember what I was praying about but I wasn't even thinking about the gift of tongues, let alone asking for it, though I think I had asked for it from time to time before that.  At first I was elated -- Wow, it's true and I got the gift.  It turned out to be easy to just walk around letting my mouth produce those foreign sounds.  There was a definite pattern to them with repeating "words."  Sometimes they seemed to come out with an unidentifiable foreign accent too, even more oddly many different accents.  I even sang them.  It began to hit me as very odd that the tunes I was singing them to were nursery rhymes like Hickory Dickory Dock and Three Blind Mice and the tune Reuben Reuben.  This did bother me, I didn't know what to make of it, but I wasn't producing those sounds myself in any sense, they were being automatically produced as I simply opened my mouth and allowed them to come out.   I couldn't have imitated them consciously if I'd tried, though by now I can imitate many of them.  Years later I read that at least one other person quit the charismatic movement when he found his own "gift of tongues" coming out to the tune of a nursery rhyme.   Smart man.  I dragged on with mine for a few more years, very ambivalent about it but unable to get rid of it; and occasionally I discover it's still there though I try to suppress it.

So to MacArthur and Johnson and Company I have to say No No No, you are not going to get anywhere characterizing these productions of the mind and mouth that Charismatics experience as mere learned behavior or intuitions of any ordinary sort.   I'm not going to say there aren't any frauds but I know for a fact that these things can be produced apart from any normal mental process.   Michael Brown said on one of his shows that he "prays in tongues."  Well, from my experience it's quite possible to carry on for a long time producing these alien sounds and I suppose someone, taking his cue from a misread Bible verse or two, could assume they are "prayer."  My supposition is that they are about as far from prayer or worship as you can get, but the automatic nature of them may be enough to persuade a Charismatic believer otherwise. 

And if Cessationists don't recognize this they aren't going to persuade any Charismatics.

SOUL POWER OR DEMONIC?
 
For this sort of phenomenon those are really the only two options.  Eventually I want to do a more thorough discussion of "soul power,"  which comes from a Continuationist corner of the Church although today's Charismatics haven't given it any thought that I know of.  The Strange Fire people are not likely to accept much of it either, although in many ways it supports their criticisms of the Charismatic movement.  

The idea is that there are "miraculous" powers that were given to Adam but lost at the fall, or at least "buried in the flesh" as Watchman Nee puts it, that can be revived under certain circumstances (such as repetitive singing of choruses).  He thinks they are probably discovered by people through promptings by the evil spirits.  They include such "parapsychological" or "paranormal" phenomena as psychic powers, clairvoyance, telepathy, telekinesis and that sort of thing.  Psychic powers can imitate prophecy.  Nee says healings of a certain sort are even possible through these powers, a sort of mind-over-matter thing such as Christian Science preaches and some Hindus and others practice.

This kind of thing would explain the kind of phenomena that are being exercised in the Charismatic movement, the "prophecies" and the "healings" and probably also the tongues speaking.  Some at Strange Fire did mention "psychic" phenomena as a possible explanation.  Nee also discussed the so-called "holy laughter" that was a major element in the supposed "revival" called the Toronto Blessing, that he'd witnessed in China before 1933 when he wrote the book describing these things.  How this automatic laughter relates to soul power isn't clear but Nee recognized it as a counterfeit phenomenon that did not come from God.   Nee, and Jessie Penn Lewis whose work he built on, accepted the continuation of the gifts of the Spirit but he also recognized a very large number of counterfeits of those gifts that were being expressed at the same time, something we don't hear recognized by today's charismatics who seem uncritically to accept anything that calls itself prophetic or miraculous. 

In his interview about his critics, John MacArthur goes on to such subjects as visions and tongues, which also need to be discussed as something other than ordinary human phenomena. That will be the next post.

Strange Fire: Sorting Out the Issues Part 2: A Pentecostal Pastor Agrees with much of the Strange Fire Conference

In Part 2 of his interview to answer his critics, John MacArthur gives a link to a blog by a Pentecostal minister   who agrees in general with the Strange Fire Conference (this is a great article).  As MacArthur says, this is the sort of response he was hoping to get:

THE DANGER OF THE PROSPERITY GOSPEL IS ABOUT WHAT THE AVERAGE BELIEVER BELIEVES (not about how many Prosperity preachers there are):

I’m around average Pentecostals in my congregation and campus ministry. I’m not constantly around denominational leaders or scholars. And among most congregants the likes of Osteen, Meyer, Copeland, and Shuttlesworth are incredibly popular.

I’ve heard demands for MacArthur to evaluate us by looking at French Arrington or Stanley Horton. To be completely honest, my congregants have no clue who those men are (apart from perhaps a vague familiarity established by sermon references). My congregants do know who Kenneth Hagin is, or who T.D. Jakes is. I don’t think MacArthur’s concern is primarily with the Pentecostals who hold Horton in high esteem. It’s with the congregants who hold Jakes and Copeland in high esteem, and given that priority, MacArthur’s approach makes more sense.

MacArthur wasn’t looking to spark a debate in peer-reviewed literature. He was looking to engage at the popular level, and he has been wildly successful at this. It’s the popular level where the false teachers and excesses are often a problem, and it makes sense to aim there.

It should also be noted that TBN is exported to other countries. They broadcast all over the world. They broadcast to Christians who don’t have the benefit of owning their own Bibles. The incredible damage of Prosperity teaching in world missions must be carefully observed.

INCREDIBLE DAMAGE OF PROSPERITY TEACHING IN WORLD MISSIONS.  Nobody else on the Continuationist side has said such a thing that I know of.  And he concludes with this:

We Pentecostals and Charismatics needed to be offended, I’m afraid it may be the only thing that will make us think critically and Biblically about ourselves as a movement. And for this offense I want to thank John MacArthur and the participants in the Strange Fire Conference. The most hurtful thing about that conference is not the broad generalizations, sweeping condemnations, or lack of distinctions. For me as a Pentecostal the most hurtful thing about the Strange Fire Conference is my knowledge that far too many of the criticisms are true.

Right.  We can all read the books by the pastors and theologians but it's our friends in the congregations we hear from most, and although I'm no longer part of the charismatic movement I do still have friends who are.   Some are into the Prosperity Gospel or at least into the related idea that miraculous healings are promised to us if we ask for them.  They can quote the Bible on this. 

I may say more about this later but it seemed important for now to let this Pentecostal pastor be heard.

Getting Free of the Deceptions of Charismatica

After watching and rewatching the Strange Fire Conference it's been growing on me how amazing and deplorable it is that so many Christians can't discern the falseness of Charismatic phenomena, and I'm certainly including myself in that judgment.   After much prayer I had come to reject most of the phenomena I'd encountered in my Charismatic phase, and left the whole movement after a couple of years of involvement, but I still had some doubts and reservations I shouldn't have had. 

When John MacArthur at the Conference simply flatly denounced the movement as insulting to God and the Holy Spirit and in essence apologized to the Lord for anyone's ever mistaking the bizarre phenomena as coming from Him, it hit me how right he was and how we should ALL recognize that.  And why don't we?  Are we deceived Christians or are we Christians at all?  Even that is often not clear.  How many of us may even be demon-oppressed (or possessed) because of our involvement?

I had felt hopeless about ever settling the questions I had for years, a couple of decades really, having given up on being able to determine for sure whether there was anything of God in the movement or not. 

Some of us originally got involved in the movement because of personal experiences of our own that we attributed to God.  And some of the experiences may truly HAVE been of God.  Having had such experiences we are drawn to the movement because it majors on personal experience.  I know of people who feel they found the "truth" in a charismatic church, found a real relationship with God.  They love the enthusiasm, the emotion, whereas their previous experience of church had been "dead" and boring.

My very first experience of a church service, being taken there by a friend after coming to belief through reading, was in a Foursquare charismatic church.  I actually didn't like many things about it because my reading had led me to a reverence and adoration of God rather than the emotional enthusiasms I saw in the church, but I had no reliable way of judging at that time, being a new Christian and then for some period being around only charismatics.  I'd also become involved in occultic practices during my reading period, and that was no doubt exerting a strong influence on me too despite efforts to reject it.  Later, in another town, the first church I attended by my own choice was a Presbyterian church, and it took me a while to realize that it was a "liberal" church, that is, it wasn't true to the Bible.  So I left there and went to another Foursquare church.  Then I joined a charismatic "parachurch" organization.  All that lasted for a couple of years until I finally made my way to a Reformed church which was new in town at that time.  The preaching there was excellent, but I still had my reservations about the charismatic phenomena.  And even now, despite the effect of the Strange Fire Conference, I may still be deceived in some ways I have yet to discover.

I am writing all this with a view to getting across something about the hold these things have on people.  I have no doubt any more that the movement is satanic in its essence, yet I met many there I consider to be true Christians, and now I'm pondering how hard it is to get free of it.  It must be somewhat similar to a Catholic's bondage to the RCC, or a Mormon's bondage to their "church."

TORONTO "BLESSING" OR CURSE?
I was still involved in the Charismatic movement when the "Toronto Blessing" broke out and my first take on it was that it had to be a counterfeit.  Nevertheless, being surrounded by charismatics who were constantly warning against imputing satanic influence to a work of God I was kept in a state of suspended judgment about it.  That constant refrain about attributing God's work to Satan has a powerful effect, it's one of the devil's most effective strategies.  Few of us have enough of a grasp of the Bible to cut through that worry with certainty, and even praying for light as I did (and receiving a great deal of light in answer) didn't fully release me from my doubts.

Until the Strange Fire Conference I hadn't thought about the Toronto Blessing for years, but in the last few days I decided to learn something about it.  All I remembered was that it was known as the "laughing revival."  I watched a film about it at You Tube that presents it in a very positive light.  Very little of the more controversial phenomena the revival is known for was shown, very little of the laughter, very little of the jerking.  Instead it focused mostly on people's claims to have been emotionally healed of past "hurts," to have had bad marriages repaired, and a few claimed physical healings as well.   Much of this "healing" went on during the periods when they were out cold on the floor.

How difficult it is to find fault with such nice normal people as were interviewed for this film, nice people who had such nice experiences, who testify to having had their lives changed by this "revival," and to "loving Jesus more" as well as loving people more.

After I saw it I had to sit and think and pray for a while to get my head straight about it.  The main thing that became evident to me was that all the focus was on psychological or fleshly results, people "getting their lives back," now having happy marriages or happier lives; and they were all thanking God for this.  But this is a far cry from the teachings of Jesus, who tells us to LOSE our lives, not gain them, who tells us to take up our cross (consider ourselves dead to this world), die to ourselves daily and so on.    None of that was in evidence, nor a single word about sin and how we are sinners in need of salvation, nor anything of the gospel itself of salvation through Christ's death in our place,  In short there was nothing Christian about this "revival" at all from what was shown in that film.

"HOLY" LAUGHTER?
 This topic takes me back to the idea of "soul power" which I've posted on a few times.  I've always liked the "holiness" writers like Watchman Nee, which is probably one major reason I haven't been able to completely free myself from the spell of charismatica, since he and others in the Holiness camp accept the charismatic idea of the continuation of the spiritual gifts.  Now that I believe he was deceived about that it helps.

However, since he does accept the gifts for today you might think more charismatics would refer to his writings for support, but I haven't found that to be the case.  If they did they'd have to notice that he denounced "holy laughter" all the way back in 1933 when it was occurring in churches in China.  Unlike other supernatural phenomena he considered to be possibly authentic, requiring discernment to tell the authentic from the counterfeit, "holy laughter" he considered to be nothing but counterfeit [pp. 71-4, Latent Power of the Soul], so if charismatics had taken him seriously during the Toronto Blessing they'd have to have rejected that particular manifestation for sure.

And really, again it seems to me that we all ought to see such laughter as counterfeit, just the tone of it is a violation of the Biblical revelation of the character of God, so again I'm amazed at us that we hesitate on such a point as this.  The devil's manipulations are powerful, the fear of offending God by rejecting such phenomena for instance, when in reality we offend Him by accepting such things.

Nee also writes, in Latent Power of the Soul, that the devil can counterfeit all kinds of things that we'd never suspect to be counterfeits, such as "false repentance, false salvation, false regeneration, false revival, false joy ..." [p. 41]

We need all the help we can get from something like the Strange Fire Conference, to set us free from these things.

Here's a link to a page of articles exposing the errors of the Toronto Blessing:
Testimonies and Analyses of the Toronto Blessing

Interesting: I've read quite a few of those articles by now and what's particularly interesting to me is that while many of them identify the revival as the work of evil spirits they don't give up their belief in the charismatic gifts for today. This is a pretty common position these days, to see such things as merely excesses or deviations, but it seems to me now that they are the natural logical extension of belief in the gifts, or any false belief in supernatural occurrences, which gives ground to evil spirits.

Rethinking the Mark of the Beast

I always thought the Mark of the Beast, which is described in Revelation 13 as a mark put on hand or forehead of those who follow the Antichrist, would irrevocably damn any person who received it.  So when the Left Behind series said a person could repent of it I thought that was heresy.  Then I heard in the summer of 2012 of a Christian teacher who said the same thing and wrote a blog post suggesting he must be a heretic too.  

Now it looks like I should apologize for that as repentance from the Mark is taught by two Christian teachers I think highly of:

First, John MacArthur whose position is that no sin is unforgiveable if it is repented of.

Then, Chris Pinto who goes back to the Reformers, showing that they identified the Mark as connected with the Roman Catholic rite of Confirmation, which was said to implant an indelible mark on the confirmed person.  If that is the identity of the Mark, then obviously one can repent of it or nobody could ever be saved out of the RCC.  Pinto discussed the Mark in some recent radio shows:

http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_MARK.GOSPEL.REVELATION_10.17.13.mp3  Mark's Ending and the Mark of the Beast, October 17

http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_MARK.OF.THE.BEAST.TWO_10.21.13.mp3
The Mark of the Beast, Part 2, October 19

http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_HISTORY.MARK.OF.BEAST_10.21.13.mp3
History of the Mark of the Beast, October 25

http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_REPENT.MARK.BEAST_10.22.13.mp3
Repentance From the Mark of the Beast, October 25

Some ponderings in the immediate aftermath of the Strange Fire Conference

Well, the "dialogue" has heated up between the Cessationists represented by the Strange Fire Conference and the Continuationists or Charismatics who were the subject of the Conference's denunciations.

MacArthur and other Conference speakers were careful to say there are true Christians in the Charismatic Movement, and also that by their blaspheming or insulting of the Holy Spirit he (MacArthur) didn't mean THE blasphemy of the Holy Spirit that Jesus said will not be forgiven, which he characterized as a stubborn hatred of Jesus Christ that he does not impute to the Charismatics;  but some of the Charismatics aren't in a mood to be so generous to him, some classing HIM within the general apostasy we are witnessing today, accusing HIM of being the false teacher. 

The Conference grounded all its objections on the Bible, very effectively in my opinion, yet some of the Charismatics come back accusing MacArthur and company of being unbiblical.  Did they hear the arguments at all?  They don't address them at all, choosing instead to highlight perhaps a conclusion someone drew without the evidence that backed it up.  The Conference speakers concluded for instance that the Charismatic Movement is simply not Christian,  meaning the movement itself, its doctrines, not all its members, having clearly said many times that there are Christians within the movement;  but Charismatics insist that they condemned them ALL.  Were they listening at all?   It's easy to miss important points if you're perhaps disposed to pick up certain affronts to your beliefs and tune out the rest.  Just a thought.

Besides insisting on certain miracles, many of the Charismatics simply miss the point that nobody at the Conference said the Holy Spirit has completely stopped working, but that He works through Providences rather than miracles, and many of the Charismatics confuse the two in their objections to the Conference.  I many times pray for Biblical light on a particular subject and sometimes it comes to mind immediately.  That's not a miracle, that's a Providence.  Once years ago with Jehovah's Witnesses at the door I quickly prayed that God would show me what to say to them:  "I will not give My glory to another" from Isaiah came immediately to mind, which gave me a terrific starting point for talking to them.  Now THAT is Biblical, it HAD to be the Holy Spirit, but it was not a miracle, it was a providence.

Although I say I'm now a convinced Cessationist there still are some gray areas that concern me.  I am completely convinced that the GIFTS of the Spirit to individuals have ceased, that no one can rightly claim to BE a prophet or a healer these days;  but the Cessationists apparently have more in mind than that, that ALL miracles ceased after the apostolic age.  [Later:  Been listening to Pennington's talk again and he does say that God has done miracles since the apostolic age.  I did have the impression from others that they don't agree with that].  I've been praying about it and the answers do seem to keep coming back that they DID cease.  I ask about a particular phenomenon and something from scripture will come to mind that suggests it doesn't hold up to that standard.   I'm still not sure about some miracles many I know claim to have witnessed, including among family members; but many personal experiences and "communications" such as I have experienced over the years have not been holding up.

Yet surely the Lord can and does occasionally still do miraculous healings and even other miracles.  I think of brother Andrew back in the 50s who reported that God healed his war-shattered ankle at the moment he submitted to God's call to take Bibles into Communist and other nations hostile to Christianity.  I think of Corrie Ten Boom in the Nazi concentration camp whose bottle of medicine never ran out although she kept dispensing it to other women in her barracks.

But I'm not sure the Cessationists DO mean to exclude ALL such claims.  I've listened again to some of the talks and will keep listening but so far no clear light on this question.

In holding up some of my own past experiences to scrutiny over the last few days I've tried to be very strict with myself, "Do not spare, Lord, I want to know if I have been deceived."  There is something very convincing about such experiences, such as a sense of receiving a communication about some situation one is going through, a sense of being guided in a certain direction perhaps.   There is more I need to examine and I don't want to get into detail at this point, but as I say above the general result so far has been that they probably were not from the Lord.  I say probably because some of them were VERY convincing and in no clear way contradicted anything Biblical either.  SOME were shown to me in the Bible itself and those I'm not doubting.

Of course most Charismatics will claim to be grounded in the Bible, and wouldn't object to anything Steve Lawson said about Sola Scriptura, until he got into the Biblical interpretations of the Puritans and others who agreed that the gifts ceased at the end of the apostolic age. 

BASED ON THE BIBLE. 

I haven't yet heard Tom Pennington's talk again but want to soon, but still remember it as giving a very thorough BIBLICAL basis for the cessation of the gifts.

A Few Things I Learned from the Strange Fire Conference

Finally, after many years of uncertainty, now after hearing the Strange Fire Conference over the last three days I can say I am a convinced Cessationist, that is, I am finally convinced that the supernatural gifts of the Spirit that were given to the apostles of Christ and many believers of the apostolic era as well, are no longer in operation among Christians.  The speakers at the Conference all gave convincing Biblical, historical and other evidence for this position, and what a relief after so many years to finally have a settled view of this.

As I mentioned in the previous post, the talk by Tom Pennington on Day 2 was particularly eye-opening for me, as he thoroughly covered the Biblical examples of God's use of supernatural powers and miracles to authenticate His chosen spokesmen and His work, showing that there is no reason for us to have the same gifts as were needed to authenticate the mission of Christ and the founding of the Church as God's work.  But I also have to say that ALL the talks worked together building one upon another to consolidate and confirm that understanding.  I'm VERY grateful to John MacArthur and his team for putting on this Conference and I hope it will be as much of a blessing to many others as it has been for me.  From what I've heard, they had a very good audience following the streamed video from around the world.

********************************
The Conference is on You Tube now;  it's a bit hard to find all the sessions in order but it can be done.  You Tube also stops a lot on my computer so I may do better when they are able to get them posted on Grace's streaming video page again:  http://www.tmstrangefire.org/ 

Also, the Sunday (October 20)  service at Grace Community is going to be streamed at 10:30 AM PDT and MacArthur's message will continue the theme of the Conference.  They expect a great number of the Conference attendees to be present along with the regular congregation.

********************************

I just want to note a few things that I learned from the Conference:

90% of Charismatics around the world are Word-of-Faith or Prosperity Gospel believers, that is, those who follow the charlatans who promise health and wealth while fleecing the flock and living outrageously extravagant lives at the flock's expense, many of whom are extremely poor.

There is a music group called Jesus Culture that is apparently very popular with young people across all the denominations, whose hypnotic repeated phrases can serve as an enticement to Charismatic doctrine.  They come out of Bethel Church in Redding, California, one of the wildest Charismatic churches these days, where the kind of phenomena seen in the "Toronto Blessing" and the "Brownsville Revival" are experienced.   Video of both these phenomena and performances of Jesus Culture were shown at the Conference.

Pastor Conrad Mbewe of Zambia presented a sad picture of the biggest churches in Africa these days, which are charismatic churches, where the pastors are no longer preaching the word of God but behaving more like witch doctors and committing sexual sins with members of their churches, one pastor having fathered ten children by as many women in his church, and nobody condemns these practices.  We often hear that great revivals are ongoing in Africa, apparently based on these very large congregations, but Pastor Mbewe made it unfortunately all too clear that if this is revival it certainly isn't CHRISTIAN revival but something pagan to the core.

Over and over it was demonstrated at this Conference that absolutely nothing good has come out of the Charismatic Movement, that the supernatural powers claimed always turn out to be bogus and that there is a very high incidence of immorality among the leaders.  This ought to be apparent to those of us who have had experience of the movement, as so very very little of it is ever really convincing, it's mostly all rhetoric.

I think it was Steve Lawson who presented the information about the Puritans along with many others of the greats of the church through history as having specifically denounced the sort of claims to supernatural powers that are claimed by today's Charismatics, and specifically declared that the supernatural gifts had ceased.  This I want to hear again.

I was also interested to hear John MacArthur denounce the Jesus Freaks of the 60s and 70s for changing the style of the churches.  This included the change to casual dress and new music styles, both bringing the hippy culture into our standard Christian experience and laying the foundation for many of the excesses the Conference was exposing.  I'm so used to hearing that the Jesus Freaks were an authentic revival, that stuffy and hidebound churches had missed this move of God that saved thousands (which did happen), that I simply hadn't given any thought to the cultural impact they had on the Church, which was NOT for the better.  The general trend to trivializing and demeaning God and worship can be traced back to them.

Well, all that is off the top of my head and I may add to it later.   I was educated, exhilarated and uplifted by everything about this Conference, it was extremely well done in every way I can think of, from the program to the music to the best streaming arrangement I've ever seen.

However, after the Conference I found myself in a discussion with a very pro-Charismatic friend who hadn't seen the Conference and didn't seem to think he needed to see it, but threw all the usual Charismatic arguments at me, even accusing me of the usual spiritual failures Charismatics generally accuse nonCharismatics of.  I suppose that's to be expected and I also expect that the internet is going to be hopping with arguments about the Conference for some time to come. 

Strange Fire Conference: Medicine for the Church

I've been watching a wonderful Conference exposing the errors in the Charismatic Movement put on by John MacArthur's church in Southern California.  It started yesterday morning but I didn't hear about it until the evening.  I did hear the talk by the African pastor Conrad Mbewe as well as today's talks so far by MacArthur, Tom Pennington, Phil Johnson and the panel which just finished and they've all been great talks, even eye-opening for me.  I'll be coming back for the 7 PM PDT talk by Steve Lawson.  Then the Conference continues tomorrow as well.   It's being streamed live at http://www.tmstrangefire.org/

For years I've struggled with uncertainty about some of the charismatic phenomena, the claims to personal supernatural powers, especially the gift of prophecy but also healings and other miracles and so on, and although I pulled out of that movement in the early 90s after seeing through many of its errors, and have recognized even more errors as the years have gone by, there has always remained a bit of doubt in my mind.  I read books attempting to show how the whole thing is false, even John MacArthur's book Charismatic Chaos, without being absolutely convinced.

For one thing there are many true Christians in the charismatic churches, and if they don't see through it that contributes to my doubt. 

For another the arguments from the Bible have never been completely convincing, just too vague.

Well, today a pastor from Texas, Tom Pennington, finally mustered the Bible in a way that completely convinced me:  The men in the Bible who were able to perform miracles were ALWAYS men God had chosen to be His particular spokesmen, and the miracles were given to demonstrate that the teaching did come from God.  That was true of Moses for starters, of many others of God's people through the Old Testament, and it was especially true of the apostles who did miraculous works to show that Jesus Christ was truly from God.  And many in the early church had supernatural gifts for the same reason, to validate the work of Christ. 

They are careful to say that just because the supernatural gifts ceased because they are given for the specific purpose of ratifying a person or work as from God, that that doesn't mean God has stopped working in the world and in our personal lives, and may still do miracles if He so wills.

I hope the conference is going to continue to be available because I'd like to hear that talk again among others.   All the other talks have been excellent, it's just that right now this one stands out in my mind.

And a couple of remarks by Justin Peters on the afternoon panel also stand out.  His point was that true Christians can lend credence to false teachers by merely appearing with them, as on the Trinity Broadcasting Network, a point I've made about Jonathan Cahn's appearances on many charismatic shows, as well as on Glenn Beck.  Cahn is a charismatic but he should have more discernment than that.  

AND STOP GIVING CREDENCE TO ROMAN CATHOLICISM TOO:
Justin Peters also objected to Christians going on Fox News, say O'Reilly's show, giving credence to Roman Catholicism, even calling Catholics "brother," and that made me VERY happy.  It's so rare that anyone will call out anything Catholic these days and that's one of the biggest hidden rotten spots in today's Church.  Fox News as a whole should be shunned by Christians because the station as a whole is Roman Catholic.  It's so seductive because there are so many Catholics who have a right and even Christian understanding of what's wrong with this country, but the true Church has to wake up and agree not to give any support to that evil Antichrist system, the system whose doctrines cannot save but send millions to Hell every day, the system that martyred millions of true Christians down the centuries and is still looking only to regain the power it lost through the Reformation.

That's enough of a note for now.  I hope many who may not have known about it will listen to the rest of this conference, and I look forward to following the buzz that's sure to follow.

Replacement Theology again

	I just posted a comment I received while I was away for the last month, on a blog entry about Replacement Theology, the idea that Israel was God's chosen people but lost that status so that now the Church inherits the promises to Israel.   The comment writer advised listening to John MacArthur on the subject so I found a ten minute talk of his at You Tube.   I don't claim to be up on all the issues involved in this controversy and I may have some of it wrong, so comments on this post are welcome.    But here's my take on MacArthur's talk:   It may be that there is such a thing as Replacement Theology which describes Israel as having forfeited God's promises so that now the Church has replaced Israel in inheriting those promises.  I don't know for sure.  MacArthur calls those who believe in Replacement Theology Amillennialists.    Since I don't believe there are two different saved entities, the Church and the nation of Israel, but only one body of believers, the Church, I can be accused of a version of Replacement Theology.  But I'm not an amillennialist (I discussed this belief sometime ago on my End Times Monitor blog), and I don't think in terms of the Church "replacing" Israel AT ALL.  There is no such thing as "replacement theology" in reality in my view.   I haven't actually run across the idea as MacArthur describes it but as I said perhaps it is held by some.  In any case I don't share it.   I don't know what position I represent exactly but I am very sure it is not unique to me.  The idea is basically that the Old Testament is full of "types and shadows" of God's redemptive plan, types of Christ certainly in many OT figures, as well as in the tabernacle design, but also "Israel" was a type.  Types are symbols or templates or prophetic figures, they are not the Reality.  The Reality of the types of Christ is Christ Himself.   The earthly nation and people of Israel in the Old Testament were a type of the Church, the Jewish believers from Abraham on are all the Church, the Church in an incomplete form, which Christ completed.  The Church in the Old Testament also includes all the pre-Abrahamic believers, the Patriarchs from Seth to Noah for instance, and Job as well..    Certainly Israel was and is a real place on the planet, but it is nevertheless a type of something greater, something heavenly, that is the TRUE land promised to God's people.  Israel itself merely represents or typifies that promised land, it is not in itself that promised land, except in the most limited, temporary interim sense.    So it's not that the promises no longer apply to the Jews, it's that they ALWAYS applied to God's people whoever and whenever and wherever they are found -- "God's people" meaning BELIEVERS.  Not all Israel believed.  Israel in one type IS the Church, the Israel of the believing Jews.  There is no replacement, the promises belonged then and always to believing Israel AS the Church.    We are to understand the Old Testament through the New Testament.  One very important clue to how we are to understand the land given to Abraham for instance is to be found in the Letter to the Hebrews, which is quite clear that Abraham did not regard the earthly land of Canaan, now Israel, as the land God was promising to him:   Hebrews 11:9-10  By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:  For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.   If Abraham didn't view it that way why are so many these days insisting on this view of it?  On this planet we dwell in "tabernacles," or tents, as in an impermanent home, and with our father Abraham we look to another city altogether, built by God, as our permanent dwelling place.   The "land" of promise is not an earthly land at all.  "The meek shall inherit the earth," not a small portion of earth but the entire earth, a renovated earth.     NOW, if someone wants to argue that NEVERTHELESS God has plans for earthly Israel as the End Times are fast engulfing us, pointing to undeniable scriptural fact that great numbers of Jews will be ushered into the Kingdom of God, the Church, in these last days, and showing from scripture whatever references DO apply to an earthly fulfillment of the promises of God, I'm not going to object.  I think the fact that Israel has been reconstituted in our time and is now a state and now a focus of political and religious hatreds from enemies around the world is in itself a very clear indication that God has His hand on her, so I would expect that some of the OT scriptures DO apply to earthly Israel although I haven't done a study to determine which.  This view is all about God's plans to bring the six-thousand-year history He's overseen on this earthly planet to a fitting close that demonstrates that He is indeed God and Lord of Lords.  I also believe that Jesus will literally return to this Earth at the Mount of Olives.  There are scripture references that indicate plenty of events along these lines.   I regard the Millennium as yet future and expect it to be played out on this earthly planet as well.  All that seems quite possible to me from what scripture seems to say.   I'm also not going to suggest that the Jews won't have a specially favored position in the Millennium or the heavenly land of promise.  They were God's firstborn in a sense and I expect them to have places of honor.    Even so, all that plays out on this planet remains incomplete, remains type and shadow in a sense.  God will judge us for our lives here, but our promise is a heavenly promise, the New Jerusalem, not the old, and that is the promise to Jew and Gentile alike.  Ultimately a new heavens and a new earth, the old having passed away completely forever.
11:9  Πίστει παρῴκησεν εἰς τὴν γῆν τῆς ἐπαγγελίας ὡς ἀλλοτρίαν ἐν σκηναῖς κατοικήσας μετὰ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ τῶν συγκληρονόμων τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῆς αὐτῆς Textus Receptus InterlinearReverse Interlinear English (KJV)   [?] Strong's Root Form (Greek) Parsing   By faith g4102    πίστις pistis   he sojourned g3939    παροικέω paroikeō in   g1519    εἰς eis   the land g1093    γῆ gē   of promise, g1860    ἐπαγγελία epaggelia   as   g5613    ὡς hōs   in a strange country, g245    ἀλλότριος allotrios   dwelling   g2730    κατοικέω katoikeō in   g1722    ἐν en   tabernacles   g4633    σκηνή skēnē   with   g3326    μετά meta   Isaac   g2464    Ἰσαάκ Isaak   and   g2532    καί kai   Jacob,   g2384    Ἰακώβ Iakōb   the heirs with him g4789    συγκληρονόμος sygklēronomos   of the same g846    αὐτός autos   promise:   g1860    ἐπαγγελία epaggelia   11:9  πίστει παρῴκησεν εἰς γῆν τῆς ἐπαγγελίας ὡς ἀλλοτρίαν ἐν σκηναῖς κατοικήσας μετὰ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ τῶν συγκληρονόμων τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῆς αὐτῆς GNT Morph 11:9  Πίστει παρῴκησεν εἰς τὴν γῆν τῆς ἐπαγγελίας ὡς ἀλλοτρίαν ἐν σκηναῖς κατοικήσας μετὰ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ τῶν συγκληρονόμων τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῆς αὐτῆς Textus Receptus InterlinearReverse Interlinear English (KJV)   [?] Strong's Root Form (Greek) Parsing   By faith g4102    πίστις pistis   he sojourned g3939    παροικέω paroikeō in   g1519    εἰς eis   the land g1093    γῆ gē   of promise, g1860    ἐπαγγελία epaggelia   as   g5613    ὡς hōs   in a strange country, g245    ἀλλότριος allotrios   dwelling   g2730    κατοικέω katoikeō in   g1722    ἐν en   tabernacles   g4633    σκηνή skēnē   with   g3326    μετά meta   Isaac   g2464    Ἰσαάκ Isaak   and   g2532    καί kai   Jacob,   g2384    Ἰακώβ Iakōb   the heirs with him g4789    συγκληρονόμος sygklēronomos   of the same g846    αὐτός autos   promise:   g1860    ἐπαγγελία epaggelia   11:9  πίστει παρῴκησεν εἰς γῆν τῆς ἐπαγγελίας ὡς ἀλλοτρίαν ἐν σκηναῖς κατοικήσας μετὰ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ τῶν συγκληρονόμων τῆς ἐπαγγελίας τῆς αὐτῆς GNT Morph