Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by luke1616, Dec 29, 2010.
Use scripture, experiences and whatever you like.
These links work for me.
Wikipedia's article on Charismatic Movement
Dictionary.com's shorter definition on charismatic
website for Charisma Magazine
Did you know that Wayne Grudem is a Calvinist who holds the charismatic gifts are for today--I think the term he uses to refer to himself is noncessationist charismatic.
If you pursue an honest study of charismatics, you may find, as with most other Christian groups, charismatics do not deserve all of the things that are said about them.
And finally, many of our ancestors on the American frontier followed charismatic-like practices at camp meetings and other religious services.
I am not charismatic, but I am charismatic-friendly.
. . .
I am glad you started this thread. I read about your spiritual healing experience in the thread: Another Spirit. Have you had any other charismatic experiences?
I can't agree with Charismatic doctrine. Slain in the Spirit, Word-faith, Kenneth Copeland "theology", "healers", "name it and claim it", holy laughter, drunk in the Spirit, faith in faith, seducing Spirits, dreams, unbiblical revelations, gain is gospel, gain is godliness, gain is Gods will, and other false teachings have a grip on this group. All are unbiblical. Just google any of this and the charimatics are its proponents.
This group has become as hard to define specifically as the Gnostics were. Much confusion comes about then. Quite interesting actually.
I reject their teachings. Wayne Grudem doesn't prove them to be OK. The Bible shows us otherwise, by their doctrines as above not being Scriptural.
Seems like it is very hard to actually define what is and what is not Charismatic. I suppose a Catholic might term a protestant as such.
Honestly, I think there's quite a wide range of what we can term "charasmatic". I'm sure some would call us "Baptacostals" at our church because we use lively music, raise our hands in worship and get on our knees when the Spirit leads us there. But then there are the wacky, hanging off the rafters, people dropping like flies sort of thing. THAT is what I don't agree with at all.
Yes, charismatic is hard to define.
For example, some churches embrace spiritual healing and foot washing, but not holy dancing or speaking in tongues. Some only embrace foot washing.
However, I am afraid your thread will not be warmly received here on Baptist Board. This board has a bias toward all things reformed and, as the Wikipedia article explains, the reformed community for the most part does not embrace the charismatic movement.
Still, you may find some charismatic-friendly folks like myself.
Actually, last year I accepted the invitation from a work associate to attend an African American Pentecostal Church. I am a white Baptist, but I have never attended either an African American congregation nor a Pentecostal congregation. So, I thought I would take a few weeks off from my regular church and attend my friend's church.
Here is a link to the faith and doctrine of my friend's church. As you can see, the doctrine is very much a Christian doctrine. And the comments you hear on Baptist Board about charismatics not being Christian are just not true, at least from my experience at my friend's church.
One of the worship aspects I miss from my friend's church is the use of the steel guitar. Here is a clip of a young man playing the steel guitar in a fashion similar to the way my friend played the steel guitar at his church.
Steel guitar demo clip
Steel guitar how to play clip
Here is a link showing a charismatic HOGC in full swing.
Are you saying you accept the doctrines I mentioned as biblical in saying you accept charismatics?
Or do you reject those?
Or, is doctrine like this not important, only love, so we should embrace doctrines like this and throw away sound doctrine for the sake of love, and just say that it's meaningless to claim that the dreams they have, and doctrines they have, i.e. slain in spirit, gospel is gain, word-faith, name it and claim it, and many more, are unscriptural?
Where do you draw the line on doctrine? Or do you not draw one, and all is fair game?
There are many labels you can attach to "charismatic" but at the end of the day the common thread running through them is speaking in tongues. To them it is the only sure sign of the gift of the Holy Spirit. I am not a cessationist like many here are but scripture does not teach that you must speak in tongues to have the gift of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it teaches just the opposite.
I find their style of prayer and worship repugnant, but it's not sinful and I would not condemn them for it. My only problem with charismatics is that most of them have a "better than thou" attitude. Come to think of it, so do some of the Calvinists around here. :laugh:
The only way I know how to answer you is from my experience at my friend's pentecostal church. In an earlier post in this thread, I included a link to the doctrinal statement at my friend's church. Is there anything in that doctrinal statement that does not agree with your doctrinal statement?
Let me say I found my friend's church to be much in line with the early church of the New Testament. They backed up each of their practices with scripture references. And the expository preaching was some of the best I have ever heard--John MacArthur has nothing over the traveling preachers I heard at my friend's church. On some Sundays several preachers delivered sermons, some were driving in from other states. Much like the early Christians in the New Testament.
The services were a bit long. Sunday services went to 3 p.m., while the Wednesday and Friday evening services sometimes went past 11 p.m. The Friday evening services were their "Spirit" services when most of the speaking in tongues, spiritual healing, holy dancing, and such took place. The Friday evening Spirit services sometimes went past midnight. I did not observe any casting out of evil spirits. But I did observe falling down and trance-like states at the Spirit services.
I do not know much about the rest of the practices you spoke against in your post; therefore I cannot say whether I observed them at my friend's church.
Finally, I was warmly received by the congregation of my friend's church. :1_grouphug:
Oh, I almost forgot to mention it, the fish dinners at my friend's church were some of the best eating I have ever had. :tongue3:
I recommend Charismatic Chaos by John MacArthur. "The charismatic movement of the past quarter-century has made an impact on the church unparalleled in history. But one legacy of the movement is confusion and mushy thinking."
Also, The New Testament and New Pentecostalism by George W. Dollar.
And, of course, Charismatism, Awakening or Apostasy? by O. Talmadge Spence.
I'm not going to stick to a doctrinal statement, nor do I think eternal truth is to be found in your personal experience. Anyone can say anything. Doctrinal statements do not always address all they/one believe(s), but serve sometimes as a smoke screen, then you truly experience their doctrine in their services.
Let's be realistic. Let's stick to doctrines practiced, not a statement, such as the ones I have mentioned above, practiced, seen, and experienced in the real world.
Where do you draw the line on these, if you do at all?
When these practice and embrace the above practices, as I have mentioned, slain, gospel of gain, word faith, laughter & other manifestations, &c, do you cast them aside (the practices), say they are not important all we need is love, say in essence it's OK for them to believe these things that the Scriptures speak against, and embrace those who do such in love, no matter what they believe, for the sake of unity, v. sound doctrine?
Also, lets keep this away from your experiential truths (what you experienced at your buddies church, since there is a bigger world out there) and stick to the Scriptures. We are safer there than we are in what you or I have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears.
Personal experience is no base for truth whatosoever, so let's dump that. It's subjective. Let's stick to the objective truth of God's Word. I hope that is OK with you.
Looks like the anti-charismatic attacks are starting up.
Guys, instead of reading a book from someone in your own doctrinal tradition and then preaching a sermon against the charismatic movement...Why don't you get out of your churches and attend some charismatic churches. Talk with some real charismatic leaders and find out why they believe what they believe.
You may find that you really do not know what you were preaching against.
Why not answer my questions instead of relying on personal experience, v. God's Word?
Why tuck tail when it gets hard? If what you do and embrace is sound, then answer it instead of running away like you are doing now.
Answer my previous post.
It's relevant. Stop your running away and pointing fingers. Answer.
Your not answering and choosing to run and point fingers speaks volumes.
By the way, I have experienced all of this in the real world, not just in books. So stop the accusations like others have only gotten this from some second hand knowledge, except for, of course, yourself, to whom you allude to as some repository of truth via personal experience.
Answer my post. You threw your opinions out there, now answer what is asked of you instead of accusing and running.
I hate to be the one to break the news to you--but what you receive from God's Word (by reading the Bible) is a personal experience, as is everything else in your life.
This is my last post with you on this thread. Go argue with a dead tree--maybe it will listen to you.
Yep. You tuck tail instead of facing the real facts and answering to what is really happening.
I hate to break it to you, but what I receive from God in His Word is not my personal experience at all. That is (saying it is personal experience) to say it is subjective, i.e. "me" when in fact it is objective truth, i.e. "Him." :thumbsup:
If fighting against all the false doctrines I have mentioned is simply some "personal attack" to you instead of a stance upon His word, then what else do I need to say when Scriptures speak plainly about this. I'll choose to stand upon His Word whether it be popular to you or not.
It's called a personal relationship with Truth.
While I do not completely agree with Bobinky. I think he has answered the questions put before him. He just didn't answer the way the poster thought he had the right to require of him. So Bobinky gets attacked! (and by a pastor?)
Not even close. He tucked out to avoid answering them, as is very clear.
He answered the questions put before him?
This one was never answered:
Show me where he answered the questions set before him, as you say he has, and I will rest my case. Otherwise, what you say is a mere reaction and not true whatsoever, other than you saying he has, with no proof, neither by you, nor in this thread. :thumbsup:
Speak truth, it is clearly seen. He NEVER answered me. Show my questions and his answers to them as proof. I'll be waiting.
Thank you Bob in Kentucky for sharing your personal experiences. It must of been strange to "step out of the box" so to speak but shows courage to not fear even if we disagree with someone else's doctrine or practice.
I have and that's why I reject it. My experience was enough to make me give up Christianity altogether, but the Lord would not let me and instead led me to sound doctrine through the Baptist church.
Not attacking, just sayin'
If you don't mind, what happened when you went?