Define Charismatic

TCassidy...

There is a saying, "There is no truth without proof."

You said it. Now, how about some proof that the Charismatic Movement is "anti-bible, anti-Christian, and anti-Christ."

And, it would be nice if you make some attempt to define Charismatic--which is the OP's question.

...Bob

 

Did you watch the video Bob? Those things right there are what we are saying, that charismatics do, are unscriptural. There are many many more videos exposing charismatic doctrine.

I'm sure if you open your Scriptures, you will find ample passages condemning this teaching.

Are you saying the dreams, slain in the spirit, holy laughter, flipping around, extrabiblical revelation, physical gyrations and manifestations, gospel is gain, name it and claim it are all biblical? (and there is much much more than this)

I love ya man!

 

In my personal be-it-ever-so-humble ( ) opinion: the fashion in which most pentecostal/charismatic churches, especially the faith-healer types that follow the model of Dutch Sheets and Benny Hinn, can be scripturally discredited by the following 3 verses:

1 Corinthians 14:19-21
19Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.
20Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.
21In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

It's obvious from the context of this part of the letter to the church at Corinth that the members are speaking in tongues; and they're doing so during the church service.

Now pay close attention to the rebuke/reproof Paul gives them throughout this chapter:
1) Paul, who in the same chapter says he speaks in tongues more than they do, says: Say 5 words that can be understood instead of 10,000 words that can't.
2) Paul calls them children in their understanding of this particular topic.
3) Paul quotes scripture saying that speaking in tongues does not lead people to the Lord.

I could pretty much leave it at verse 21; but combined with the other 2 verses, it seems to be a pretty scathing rebuke that emphasis on speaking in tongues is not correct.

But if you really want to put the icing on the cake, read verse 22: Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not....

Baptism of the Holy Spirit, in the manner that it is most commonly seen in pentecostal/charismatic churches these days, is "evidenced" by speaking in tongues, and is used by pentecostal/charismatic followers to "prove" in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit and salvation. However, verse 22 clearly says that's in incorrect application.

If someone is deadset on denying these 4 verses, there is nothing else in scripture that could be offered that will change their minds.

 

Don...

You may want to add some other versus from 1 Corinthians 14:

I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: (1 Cor. 14:18; KJB)


If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. (1 Cor. 14:27-28; KJB).​

I am sorry, but I just do not see Paul telling us speaking in tongues is anti-Christian or anti-Christ. After all, he admits in v. 18 that he himself speaks in tongues.

. . .

Calvinist guys . . . [rest of post deleted by BobinKY--I am sorry if my rant offended anyone.]

...Bob

 

None of this had a thing to do with Calvinism.

You've turned it into that all on your lonesome.

We've simply not embraced charismatics as you have, for apparent reasons, and you can't stand to think they have utter heresies and false teachings.

By the way, I'm not a calvinist. I'm a believer.

 

TCassidy...

Thank you for the references.

...Bob

 

Bob,
Go back and re-read point #1; I mentioned verse 18, just didn't specify it -- because right after he says "I thank God I speak with tongues more than ye all," he says, "I'd rather speak 5 words with understanding."

In other words, verse 18 is not a substantiation for speaking in tongues.

Now, Bob, don't forget: I've specifically qualified my presentation with my opening and closing statements: "the fashion in which most pentecostal/charismatic churches...these days."

Now, my challenge to you is: In context of the verses I provided, as well as in context of the entire chapter, re-read verses 27-28; then ask yourself: Why did Paul say "IF any man speak in an unknown tongue"?

 

We appear to have confused several issues here. It is a far stretch to group all non-cessationist denominations in the same group. There are huge doctrinal differences between Benny Hinn and the Vineyard, or even folks from Calvary Chapel.

I have great respect for John MacAurthur, but Mighty Mac has never met a successful ministry for which he has a compliment. I have heard his messages on tongues, and I respectfully disagree. MacAurther defines "tongues" as always speaking in a definite language that just happens to be not understandable to the speaker. But Paul clearly establishes that glossalalia is not always understandable. And what do we do with Paul's clear admonition in 1 Cor 14:39b "do not forbid....". So the cessationist view of sign gifts is not as crisp as some would maintain.

Wayne Grudem is a Calvinist theologian who clearly identifies himself as "Baptist" and yet his own views on the perpetuity of sign gifts leads him to worship in a "Vineyard" church. We have done a lot of knee jerk to Kenneth Copeland here and rightfully so. But not all charismatics are word of faith, name it and claim it modalists.

 

Where does Paul clearly establish that tongues are not always understandable?

 

Don...

I did as you requested. However, call me dumb or whatever, I do not get the point of your challenge.

Help me out, give me a clue.

...Bob

 

Here is an ABC News story about the Science of Speaking in Tongues. If you go to view the video--please note there are over 3,181 comments to the video. :tongue3:

...Bob

 

"Charismatic" is a broad term used to describe groups that focus on the ecstatic manifestations of the Spirit, or the gifts (charisma) of tongues, prophecies, healing and miracles. Greater weight is given to "spiritual" experiences rather than the sound exposition of the Scriptures.

They're much like the Pentecostals, only looser in terms of structure, public decorum and morality.

So now Bob tips his hand, and it's just the age-old discussion on tongues. Been there, done that and no amount of reasoning or evidence will change Bob's mind.

 

Bob, did you meet up with a woman who is Pentecostal/Charismatic? That's how most men get involved.

 

:laugh:

Always the woman's fault.

 

1 Corinthians 14

 

Not only does Aaron blame women, he even brings into question their morality!

Aaron said:

Of course, we've learned to expect this from Aaron!

 

Nope. My friend is a guy I used to work with. I attended the services at the African American Pentecostal church because I am a white Baptist (ancestors from Scotland) and I wanted to experience their services. So I accepted my friend's invitation and took a few weeks off from my regular church and fellowshipped with his congregation. He was an Assistant Pastor in the church and also played the steel guitar.

As I have said before, I am a retired businessman, not a pastor or church leader. So this particular church hop was fairly easy to do.

On the first night of services, after introducing myself, I apologized to the congregation for how their race had been treated in this country. I cried and many of the African American members cried with me. My suggestion to all white Christians is to seek out an African American congregation and do the the same. The congregation does not have to be pentecostal--it can be Baptist or whatever--and you do not have to join the church--just offer a sincere apology.

I was blessed in many ways at this church. However, after a few weeks, I knew the Lord was calling me to move on to another church. The next church, my current church is a Freewill Baptist Church, which is another spiritual blessing, another theology, and another story. You see, I used to belong to a reformed Baptist church--General Association of Regular Baptist Churches (GARBC). And before that I fellowshipped with Southern Baptist churches and Fundamental Churches. I have also fellowshipped with Methodist and Episcopalian churches. I move around. I have footprints in several theologies.

There are good Christians in churches everywhere. I think if you are not a pastor or church leader following a specific call from God, then it can be good to change churches every now and then--and be open to God speaking in new ways. Some members prefer to stay with the same church for 5 years, 15 years, 25 years, and longer. That is fine if they feel called to do so. I also feel it is fine (and Biblical) to move around in your fellowship.

. . .

I got into this Charismatic thread because I wanted to share how my personal experience did not agree with what some were saying. I knew I would be criticized, and I was.

I have no axe to grind here, except I felt led by the Holy Spirit to share how I was blessed by the people of that church.

And I have done that.

May God bless all of the readers of this thread.

...Bob

 

Oh, no. Now there will be a thread against church hopping.

I love being a sermon illustration. :laugh:

...Bob