|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: "I'm getting a picture…"
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Twangist:
So why bother telling people to "weigh prophecy" or in the context of bigging up prophecy in 1thess to "test all things and hold fast to that which is good"? Why waste good ink?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? Because of false prophets?
in the church ....
Why are prophecy and discernment tied together as a double act? Why did Paul pay little heed to the prophesys in Acts 21? They weren't false prophets but he weighed what they said. quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it is possible that he was trying to tamp down on a situation driven by influences from the local strain of mystery religion (in which ecstatic utterances were rife).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but not probable in most NT scholars I've read ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then - to be frank - you should read more widely.
The rate I'm putting away the mince pies then I'll be doing most things more widely!
Why the emphasis on ecstatic? And what internal proof (exegesis not eisegesis) do you have in 1Cor to assume that?
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Chris Stiles was using Hinn as an example, Twangist. He knows perfectly well that not all charismatics are into Benny Hinn.
I would suggest that you can see similar techniques at work, albeit in a milder form, in many charismatic meetings.
It's like the Toronto thing, I got into that and was as pleased as punch when I discovered that I could pray for people and they'd fall over.
I soon realised that it was very, very easy to induce an atmosphere and expectation where this sort of thing was going to happen. I backed off at that point. I wouldn't write it all off ... but getting involved in a hands-on kind of a way showed me how this stuff 'worked' and the kinds of dynamics that were at play.
Now, don't get me wrong - I'm not for a moment suggesting that I was deliberately manipulating people - I don't believe I was. But we all collectively bought-into a culture of cues and suggestibility where this sort of thing could be replicated and repeated almost at will.
It's the same with most instances of tongues and what generally passes for prophecy.
In and amongst, you'll find the real thing ... it's not the case that it isn't there. But it's surrounded by a lot of noise.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
quote:
Generally I'm very suspicious of over precise statistical figures - especially when quoted without any kind of confidence interval. I've seen that treatment of the word of knowledge in question - and some of his figures are - frankly - pulled out of the air.
you said - words of knowledge are vague and fluffy and cold reading
I said - not always, here are some examples (and Lewis does give his working out)
you said - (wavey hand) oh they don't count ...
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
Some thoughts on the text of 1Cor
Most effective strategy of dealing with false prophets - don't give them the floor a 2nd time. I suspect that this is the point of the first 3 verses of Chap 12. Very little subjective discernment or weighing is required just an objective doctrinal test. No need to hold fast to the good - 'cos there ain't any.
When Paul is talking about spiritual gifts in the church he says that they come from the Lord, the Spirit and have the purpose of building up the church, they may be abused and even rendered void by a lack of love but at no point (even if Paul is flattering the Corinthians) are their origins considered to be false, counterfeit or pagan, (quite the contrary).
The instructions about weighing etc. refer to when "two or three prophets" have spoken. These folk must have had a degree of recognition within the community (i.e. they weren't false prophets) for a prophetic gift or Paul wouldn't have called them prophets.
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
So why bother telling people to "weigh prophecy" or in the context of bigging up prophecy in 1thess to "test all things and hold fast to that which is good"? Why waste good ink?
Eh? Because of false prophets?
quote:
quote:
it is possible that he was trying to tamp down on a situation driven by influences from the local strain of mystery religion (in which ecstatic utterances were rife).
but not probable in most NT scholars I've read ...
Then - to be frank - you should read more widely.
I have. And I've never come across this one. Can you give me a source? And some peer reviews?
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I can't cite chapter and verse on the possible links with local mystery religions, Ramarius, but Chris Stiles may be able to.
I've certainly come across observations that there were parallel phenomena going on in local mystery religions - Corinth wasn't far from Delphi if I remember rightly.
In fact, I came across something the other day - I'll need to look it up - that suggested that these things might have been going on in Corinth (and in the ancient world more widely) anyway and that what the Apostle Paul did was to accept, recognise and effectively 'Christianise' them.
I'm not sure this is the same of suggesting any direct correlation. It's merely stating the fact that ecstatic utterances of various kinds were a feature of 1st century religion in some places so it's no real surprise to come across Christian versions of the same or similar ...
I don't really have an issue with that, thinking about it. But we don't know. It's all speculation.
@Twangist
I agree with the strategy of not giving false - or jejune? - prophets the floor a second time. Shame it isn't applied so widely today.
As for the apostle Paul's comments on the regulation of prophecy - in that it implies that these things are always of divine origin. That's reading rather too much into the text. Why the need to weigh things if the origin was always clearly God the Holy Spirit?
Sure, he wants to limit the quantity - why, to make it possible to WEIGH things. It is saying the exact opposite to what you are making it out to say.
What he's saying is this, 'Look, so many of you are all talking at once or trying to contribute that it's impossible to weigh and consider the content properly. It's better if two or three prophets speak (rather than half-a-dozen, say) and the others can then weigh what is said.'
And yes, I think these 'prophets' were most likely people with some recognition in the community ... if you look at the Didache it appears that the 'office' of prophet, if you can call it that, continued for some time. It also suggests that their utterances were binding and authoritative ... but also that if they ask for money and so on then that's a good indicator that they aren't the real deal.
Other than the principle - don't all speak at once, let everything be done decently and in order - I'm not sure we can use these verses as a blue-print.
The instructions about weighing etc. refer to when "two or three prophets" have spoken. These folk must have had a degree of recognition within the community (i.e. they weren't false prophets) for a prophetic gift or Paul wouldn't have called them prophets.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Waterchaser
Shipmate
# 11005
|
Posted
Gamaliel - my understanding of your position is that you believe that God does talk to his people and does intervene supernaturally in situations in response to prayer for instance by healing; but that it is vanishingly rare for him to do either.
Is that a correct understanding of where you are coming from?
If so why do you think God's interaction with us would be so rare give that he describes himself as our heavenly father?
Posts: 310 | From: Luton, UK | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
@Gamaliel. If the assertion is that the Corinthians could have had a pre-Christian view of prophecy from local religions - yes that's distinctly possible. You could even had some people who were previously pagan prophets, although might have been expected to include this in his list of "..and so were some of you" in Ch 6:10.
But as Twangist says, Paul doesn't question the genuineness of the prophetic gifts at Corinth so whilst it's an interesting speculation, there's no warrant from the text that Paul was correcting some hang over from the mystery religions. It's clear that he positively encouraged the use of spiritual gifts, prophecy in particular.
It's helpful to focus on the positive result Paul wanted to see as well as the negatives he was correcting.
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ramarius, the point isn't the genuineness or otherwise of the prophecies at Corinth, but their frequency ... and whether they 'taught' anything worthwhile ...
Just because the Apostle Paul considered the prophecy that operated at Corinth as the genuine article it doesn't mean that he would have regarded anything that thee or me or anyone else today came up with as the same ...
We just don't know.
Tantalising as it might be to do so, I really don't think - beyond the broad principles and some parallels - that we can use 1 Corinthians 12-14 as a prophecy manual today.
I'll dig out some references on the pagan/Christian prophecy thing when I have more time. I'm not sure there's enough evidence to posit a direct connection ... it's just that these things co-existed in some way.
@The Waterchaser:
Yes, I do believe that God does speak to us and that he does intervene supernaturally. As to whether this is more or less common than it used to be ... I can't say. We do have Christ's words to indicate that these things aren't necessarily everyday occurrences:
See Luke 4:25 - what are we told? That there were many widows in the days of Elijah yet the prophet was sent to only one ... and, in verse 27, that there were many lepers in the time of Elisha but none of them were cleansed apart from Naaman the Syrian.
I've not heard those verses preached on too many times in charismatic settings ...
Does that mean that God was any less a heavenly Father in the days of Elijah and Elisha than he is today?
How many lepers have you seen cleansed? How many widow's sons have you seen raised from the dead?
We're all going to die one day. As sure as eggs are eggs. Does that make God any less a heavenly Father?
If God heals people or speaks via prophecies and pictures (or visions) and what-have-you, that's up to him. We can't manufacture these things or create conditions that will make it more likely ...
I can no more conjure up a genuine prophecy by going 'GNNNNNNnnnnnn ...' and screwing up all my faith and determination than I can fly.
But I can come out with stuff that would convince a lot of people on this thread that I'm a prophet ... it's just a case of using the right sounding language. Really. The bar has been set that loosely.
I have no idea why God apparently answers prayer and heals people in some circumstances and yet doesn't appear to in others. It's a mystery. I can live with the ambiguity.
I'm not claiming spiritual maturity, but C S Lewis did say that miracles and signs and so on were for the immature ...
I do think that there's an element in all of this of wanting reinforcement for our faith by seeing something tangible that can be reduced to convenient and handy sound-bite or testimony.
I'm not sure it works as neatly as that. If it did then it would happen all the time. It doesn't. And anyone who claims that it is are either misguided, undiscerning, in denial or else setting the bar at such a level that almost anything can pass muster as a 'word from the Lord' or an apparent healing.
That isn't to say that these things don't take place. They do. But they don't happen as often as we'd like or as often as many proponents claim.
That's my position. These things happen more than cessationists will allow and less than many charismatics will admit.
I don't see how that's a puzzling or a strange position at all. It seems to fit with the available facts.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
Apologies for breaking in on this long and interesting conversation. I have a question aimed at those who are critical of these charismatic experiences.
I understand that, from many points of view as well as my own, this phenomenon may not meet the ethical test of "do good."
However, I'm wondering about that other test: "first, do no harm." What exactly is harmful about the charismatic experience as described in the OP? Who is harmed? What is the nature of the harm, if such exists? Is any harm done really all that important in God's larger scheme of things?
Thanks.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
Delusion and the danger of manipulation? Living in a fantasy world instead of what's real? I've certainly seen stuff that appeared to be such.
Apologies, I've not followed the thread all the way and I would guess that these points have already been made.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by roybart:
Apologies for breaking in on this long and interesting conversation. I have a question aimed at those who are critical of these charismatic experiences.
I understand that, from many points of view as well as my own, this phenomenon may not meet the ethical test of "do good."
However, I'm wondering about that other test: "first, do no harm." What exactly is harmful about the charismatic experience as described in the OP? Who is harmed? What is the nature of the harm, if such exists? Is any harm done really all that important in God's larger scheme of things?
Thanks.
For me, the harm comes in that things like "pictures" give an image of God that is woefully (and harmfully) misleading.
Whilst I am sure that the church leaders involved would deny it vigorously, the message that comes across to ordinary people is that God is rather misleading and deliberately vague.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It can also raise people's expectations only for them to be cruelly dashed ... I know of more than one instance of people being told that they would be healed of cancer or that a loved one would be healed from a terminal illness of one kind or other ... only for that not to transpire.
I'm sure that Ramarius, Twangist and Jolly Jape would be the first to distance themselves from such things though.
On the whole, I think the jejune 'pictures' and things are relatively harmless, but the danger they pose, IMHO, is that they can trivialise the whole thing ... indeed they can make the entire Christian faith seem pretty trite.
I also think that they can encourage a rather 'bless me, bless me' form of spirituality and vulnerable people can stay in a state of constant spiritual infancy and dependency.
I hardly ever attend the services at our parish church where the 'words' and 'picture' and so forth are likely to be given - for some reason God doesn't love the people at the other services sufficiently to speak to them this way, but we'll put that to one side for a moment ... ![[Biased]](wink.gif) - but from what I can gather on those very rare occasions when anyone 'responds' to one of these 'words' it's always the same people ...
I think they cheapen things and debase the coinage.
In my case, rightly or wrongly, they've effectively driven me away from services where this sort of thing happens. Some would argue that I'll lose out as a result.
In which case it would be like the story of the boy who cried 'Wolf!'
I've become so hardened by hearing so many duff and trite so-called prophecies that I might not recognise a real one when it comes along ...
I say that partly tongue in cheek, but I think there is something in that. It's like the old adage that the opposite of faith isn't doubt but certainty. If anything drives people towards atheism it's fundamentalism. Atheism and fundamentalism are two sides of the same coin in many ways.
So the more duff and crap pictures and prophecies there are around the more chance there is of the genuine being missed.
Now I'm going to be attacked for deigning to suggest or discern what might be duff or crap. Simple, virtually every so-called prophecy I've heard in recent years.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
Thank you, Mark, Oscar, and Gamaliel, for addressing my questions.
My own take is that the charismatic movement seems sufficiently isolated and self-involved that it does no harm to anyone. If it gives pleasure, or the feeling of direct access to the real presence, fine.
My only direct contact with charismatics occurred in the early 60s,s when I was invited to a "prayer group" meeting in a Manhattan RC church I attended. I've always been interested in unfamiliar worship choices, and had a personal wish to expand my own prayer life, so I went to several sessions. They were held in what was called the "upper room" (significant nomenclature ). There seemed to be an informal leadership structure, with two members taking the lead in everything, modelling the experiences that others were urged to have, and rewarding those who "had" such experiences with praise and encouragement. Others were more or less ignored.
My own sense of the possible "harm" involved was:
a) the impression that newcomers and seekers were being manipulated (or at least molded) by the leadership and
(b) the realization, apparent over time, that many of those who became most involved tended to lose interest in, and withdraw from, involvement in a social justice ministry. (These were the early days of the civil rights, anti-Vietnam-war, and anti-poverty movements.) That particular group became rather closed-off from larger concerns, which I interpreted -- rightly or wrongly -- as a sign of self-centeredness rather than God-centeredness.
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
[quote] Originally posted by roybart:
However, I'm wondering about that other test: "first, do no harm." What exactly is harmful about the charismatic experience as described in the OP? Who is harmed? What is the nature of the harm, if such exists? Is any harm done really all that important in God's larger scheme of things?
While agreeing with Mark and Oscar (above) I don't think the subject of 'pictures' can be considered in isolation, when assessing damage.
These picture are merely symptomatic of a greater malaise. Indeed, I find it hard to think of any positive influence which has been exerted by the charismatic movement since its inception.
But as regards to actual harm, I'll put that under three headings, though there are probably more.
1. Damage to unity in the church.
The charismatics' predeliction for false teachers, false teaching, flaky manifestations, false prophets, self-indulgence dressed up as spirituality, fadishness (and often, scorn or even contempt for those who disagree with them) is an open wound on the the body of Christ.
It not only causes division at the denominational level, but at the church and even the individual level, too. I'm sure I'm not the only person to see a church tear itself apart over some aspect of charismatic doctrine. Are little bits of plastic glitter, or gold teeth, or 'angel oil' really worth the cost in relationships? Charismatic beliefs and practices drive a wedge into the body of Christ - weren't the nails enough?
2. Damage to the Christian witness.
It would be easy to major on the prosperity scammers under this heading. The 'gospel of greed' is not just an insult to Christ, it is an insult to all those condemned as 'faithless' or 'secret sinners', because God hasn't chosen to make them rich or healthy. But this evil has come to represent the face of Christianity to so many people outside of the faith. They see the televangelists, and they either laugh at our gullibility, or they are embarrassed for us.
Or perhaps they tuned in to Scam Digital's presentation of the Florida fiasco, where leaders of the charismatic movement - self-proclaimed apostles and prophets - 'commissioned' the unregenerate scumbag Bentley.
Or maybe they've just watched 'services' from Bethel, Redding, or one of its many imitators, and wondered what the Hell happened to the God of the bible....or even to discernment.
These things are a disgraceful witness to our faith, and yet - increasingly - they are precisely what people associate with Christianity.
But I've saved the worst for last.
3. Damage to individuals
I'm not talking about all those people who have been driven out of church, because they were shamed into believing that their lack of healing was their fault. I'm not talking about those who have left in dismay, when the reality didn't live up to the hype....or even those who turned their backs because they couldn't be part of the charade any longer.
I'm talking about those who are still in the charismatic movement.
Those whose walk with God is crippled by the ever-increasing burden of baggage they are being asked to carry - the new teachings, the manifestations, the pressure to conform - to speak that word, burble that tongue, describe that picture...on pain of rejection as 'unspiritual'.
Those whose relationship with God is wounded, because the sum total of stuff they are required to believe actually portrays a different God...and everything we believe about God will always affect our relationship with him.
Those who never, ever get to become true disciples of Christ, because there is no-one in that position themselves, to teach them how to be one. There is often a culture of immaturity in these churches,represented - not least - by the obsession with power and spiritual gifts, and the neglect of the fruit of the Spirit
Those who spend their time 'claiming' things from God, because that's what they've been taught. Those who claim 'territories' and rebuke principalities and powers, because they've bought into the skewed version of spiritual warfare promoted by their church. And those who 'cast demons out' of inanimate objects, do 'spiritual mapping' and practice deliverance ministry on people who actually need to repent, because they've swallowed the hogwash on offer.
And those who will rarely - if ever - see a genuine and unimpeachable instance of divine intervention, because God doesn't want to dignify or endorse this belief system....and they are trapped in it.
And that's why we have these pale imitations of spiritual gifts - that's why dubious pictures and vague impressions abound - because, generally speaking, the people in these churches desire to see God working though them, but are so often ill-prepared to become people he could actually use. And so these things (and others) have to be contrived, to maintain the illusion that God is working among them.
Perhaps someone else on this thread can come up with a positive contribution we can attribute to the charismatic movement. But if it's going to outweigh the damage done, it will need to be pretty spectacular.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
quote:
Generally I'm very suspicious of over precise statistical figures - especially when quoted without any kind of confidence interval. I've seen that treatment of the word of knowledge in question - and some of his figures are - frankly - pulled out of the air.
you said - words of knowledge are vague and fluffy and cold reading
I said - not always, here are some examples (and Lewis does give his working out)
you said - (wavey hand) oh they don't count ...
I think you are misreading what you said.
I have no issue with God working miraculously. I have no issue with Lewis' larger hypothesis (which is that God was working in the Wimber meetings but it tended to be quite rare).
I have no problem with that particular instance of a 'word of knowledge' being genuine - even if I don't accept the particular statistical probabilities that Lewis assigns - somewhat arbitrarily to particular parts of that word of knowledge.
I don't think you can pick the particular example he treats statistically and make it representative of all prophecies/words of knowledge. Lewis himself is fairly clear in his material that it was somewhat exceptional.
And no, not all charismatics are into Hinn - though I suspect if you look on the fringes of most charismatic churches whatever their origin - you'll be rather surprised at peoples reading and viewing material. However - if you are going to accept the miraculous, you need to have a standard of discernment that rules out the more egregious examples of abuse.
Take a look at the Bethel thread again - look at the somersaults Ramarius pulls to avoid directly saying that Kevin is talking crap when he claims that his son walked on water. That's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
quote:
it is possible that he was trying to tamp down on a situation driven by influences from the local strain of mystery religion (in which ecstatic utterances were rife).
I have. And I've never come across this one. Can you give me a source? And some peer reviews?
It's been a while since I read this, and I'll see if I can dig up some papers. I don't believe the claim was that the gifts themselves were thus rendered fake - it was more that the practice of the gifts was borrowing from various Dionysian related cults. Direct exegesis of the text certainly points to the worship being fairly disorder - something Paul was keen to correct. Glossolalia itself was already a term in use for ecstatic utterances that occurred elsewhere.
Robert Gundry had a paper in which he mentions in passing how Paul re-defines 'mystery' as something that has been revealed, similarly the 'cymbal and clanging gong' of 1 Cor 13 according to him may be a derogatory reference to the manner in which ecstatic states were reached in mystery religions.
Wayne House wrote a summary paper on the topic which was published by the ETS, though only part of it appears to be online.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@The Rhythm Methodist ... I think you've overstated your case. I do think that there are positive factors in the charismatic scene ... but I'd also suggest that the most positive aspects of the charismatic scene lie in those aspects they share with broader Christendom in general.
I think the emphasis on the immanence of God, a particular charismatic characteristic is a good and positive thing. It is expressed in different ways elsewhere and isn't absent in any part of the Body of Christ from what I can see ...
But the charismatics do emphasise that and remind us of it ...
Not all charismatics have bought into the flakier aspects, the Bethels and Bentleys and prosperity gospellers. Twangist, Jolly Jape and Ramarius do represent the more rational and balanced end of the spectrum. There may be the occasional lapse or blindspot, but hey, we're all guilty of those.
I think Roybart's point is well made ... there can be a certain amount of manipulation and also an other-worldliness and super-spirituality that often prevents charismatics from engaging with real issues ... but then, I think the same charge can be levelled at conservative/non-charismatic evangelicals.
At its best, charismatic spirituality can remind us of the immanence of God and give a sense of transcendence. At its worst it gets into snake-oil territory. It can be difficult to discern where one begins and the other ends ... I think the boundaries between 'acceptable' charismatic practice and the dubious elements is highly porous.
For my own part, I don't think I'd ever be happy or fit in with a full-on charismatic fellowship ... but neither do I want to be involved with an overly cerebral and Scholastic form of evangelicalism either.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
@ Gamaliel - yes, I can see that it might sound harsh. I certainly wasn't trying to convey the impression that all charismatics are guilty of all those things, all the time....though I guess it could be read that way. I was really just trying to address the harm question, and I think - as examples - they are relevant to that.
Immanence is an interesting one....I can see why you say that, and I wouldn't argue with it. Yes, I would agree that a sense/understanding of God's immanence must be a positive. It's something which can be a bit patchy in some churches, but it's fair to say the charismatics are strong on that.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
One's greatest strength is often one's greatest weakness, and whilst I'd say they were strong on this aspect they are often pretty whacky in the way they work it out on the ground.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
quote:
it is possible that he was trying to tamp down on a situation driven by influences from the local strain of mystery religion (in which ecstatic utterances were rife).
I have. And I've never come across this one. Can you give me a source? And some peer reviews?
It's been a while since I read this, and I'll see if I can dig up some papers. I don't believe the claim was that the gifts themselves were thus rendered fake - it was more that the practice of the gifts was borrowing from various Dionysian related cults. Direct exegesis of the text certainly points to the worship being fairly disorder - something Paul was keen to correct. Glossolalia itself was already a term in use for ecstatic utterances that occurred elsewhere.
Robert Gundry had a paper in which he mentions in passing how Paul re-defines 'mystery' as something that has been revealed, similarly the 'cymbal and clanging gong' of 1 Cor 13 according to him may be a derogatory reference to the manner in which ecstatic states were reached in mystery religions.
Wayne House wrote a summary paper on the topic which was published by the ETS, though only part of it appears to be online.
Some local culture creeping into the church perhaps. It's plausible although I'd be intereted in seeing what the actual argument is (stil not clear about the point you're making or its relevance). The question you need to focus in was what was Paul's end game? What was the good he was looking to promote? Paul started by addressing negatives, and whilst we can learn from that we would be foolish to lose sight of the positive to which he encouraged the Corinthians to aspire.
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
@TRM
You asked
Perhaps someone else on this thread can come up with a positive contribution we can attribute to the charismatic movement. But if it's going to outweigh the damage done, it will need to be pretty spectacular.
The Alpha course?
[ 22. December 2012, 22:30: Message edited by: Ramarius ]
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Some local culture creeping into the church perhaps. It's plausible although I'd be intereted in seeing what the actual argument is (stil not clear about the point you're making or its relevance). The question you need to focus in was what was Paul's end game? What was the good he was looking to promote? Paul started by addressing negatives, and whilst we can learn from that we would be foolish to lose sight of the positive to which he encouraged the Corinthians to aspire.
Well this point is actually tangential at best to my initial argument.
Basically Grudem and others argue that; NT prophecy is fallible (given the particular interpretation of the Agabus story) therefore the injunctions in Corinthians to weigh prophecy was directed at this particular fallibility.
My point was that this superimposition is what is not automatic. Even if we assume NT prophecy was fallible in it's essential nature, there were still other things going on at Corinth that might lead Paul to warn about the need to weigh prophecy. Therefore the fact that Paul warns about the need to weigh etc cannot be used to prove that NT prophecy was fallible.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Perhaps someone else on this thread can come up with a positive contribution we can attribute to the charismatic movement. But if it's going to outweigh the damage done, it will need to be pretty spectacular.
The Alpha course?
The good bits being copied from Iwerne, and the addition being the Holy Spirit weekend which most people miss out on? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Pentecostalists and charismatic Christians have taken the Gospel to humdreds of millions of people all over the world. That trumps all the petty whinges we've been having here (even the ones I agree with...)
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Some local culture creeping into the church perhaps. It's plausible although I'd be intereted in seeing what the actual argument is (stil not clear about the point you're making or its relevance). The question you need to focus in was what was Paul's end game? What was the good he was looking to promote? Paul started by addressing negatives, and whilst we can learn from that we would be foolish to lose sight of the positive to which he encouraged the Corinthians to aspire.
Well this point is actually tangential at best to my initial argument.
Basically Grudem and others argue that; NT prophecy is fallible (given the particular interpretation of the Agabus story) therefore the injunctions in Corinthians to weigh prophecy was directed at this particular fallibility.
My point was that this superimposition is what is not automatic. Even if we assume NT prophecy was fallible in it's essential nature, there were still other things going on at Corinth that might lead Paul to warn about the need to weigh prophecy. Therefore the fact that Paul warns about the need to weigh etc cannot be used to prove that NT prophecy was fallible.
On Corinth in particular, "weighing" prophecy doesn't necessarily mean its fallible. More a case of making sure you ask the question "how do we respond to this" by asking how much "weight" or seriousness should be attached to a particular prophetic word. The fallibility of prophecy is better shown in the Thessallonians passage - "test everything and hold to the good."
By the way, can you give me an example of a spoken post-resurrection prophecy in NT - good bad or otherwise - apart from Agabus?
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Pentecostalists and charismatic Christians have taken the Gospel to humdreds of millions of people all over the world. That trumps all the petty whinges we've been having here (even the ones I agree with...)
Indeed. Here's a
reflection from the centenary year of Azuza street. Pity there aren't more Pentecostals and Black Pentecostals on the Ship to enrich us with their perspectives. The scale and growth of Pentecostalism over the last century reminds us that whilst we are an interesting and diverse group on these boards, we're not particularly representative of global Christianity.
--------------------
'
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'd agree with that - with some caveats. One might as well suggest that because the Roman Catholic Church is the largest single Christian church and does a lot of good work, it would be churlish to debate issues such as Papal Infallibility or Transubstantiation or the filioque clause or whatever else ...
Overall, I agree, though, the charismatic and Pentecostal movements (the classic Pentecostals in particular) have brought the Gospel to many hundreds of millions of people.
I think it was Juan Carlos Ortiz who said that if the Pentecostals had spread love, peace, justice and understanding with as much alacrity as they had the 'speaking in other tongues' then the world really would have noticed a difference ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
By the way, can you give me an example of a spoken post-resurrection prophecy in NT - good bad or otherwise - apart from Agabus?
Why differentiate spoken prophecy from the other examples of divinely mediated communication in Acts - Peter's vision, and Paul's vision for example.
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Pentecostalists and charismatic Christians have taken the Gospel to humdreds of millions of people all over the world. That trumps all the petty whinges we've been having here (even the ones I agree with...)
As Gamiliel said above. Additionally, if you go back to the 50s/60s it would look like most of the Gospel spreading had been done by the mainstream evangelical movements (Baptists, Anglicans, Lutherans etc). The reason why Christianity in the LDCs have a a visible pentecostal/charismatic cast is more to do with them having undergone their own version of the Charismatic Renewal in the 60s/70s and early 80s than with massive mission work on the part of existing pentecostal/charismatic movements. There was an additional factor of these versions of the renewal being seen as more indigenous than the older line churches.
In reality, mainstream evangelicals still do a lot more genuine mission work than charismatic/pentecostal movements.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
That's Christendom all over Gamaliel. Everything, ANYTHING but the open arms of Christ.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
By the way, can you give me an example of a spoken post-resurrection prophecy in NT - good bad or otherwise - apart from Agabus?
Why differentiate spoken prophecy from the other examples of divinely mediated communication in Acts - Peter's vision, and Paul's vision for example.
Why not answer the question?
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
By the way, can you give me an example of a spoken post-resurrection prophecy in NT - good bad or otherwise - apart from Agabus?
While I'm sure Christ Stiles is more than capable of answering your question, I'd like to offer a couple of examples (in case he's fallen victim to the inevitable Christmas chaos, and can't get back to his PC).
I guess you are looking for the sort of thing that was understood as prophecy at the time - accurate, predictive information....delivered by a Godly person, who could have no prior knowledge. Something with the divine imprimatur, in fact. And ideally, we should have confirmation that their statements were proved true.
A couple which fit that description are to be found in Acts 5:9, and Acts 13:11. Perhaps there's more, but that's what I came up with, off the top of my head.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ramarius
Shipmate
# 16551
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
By the way, can you give me an example of a spoken post-resurrection prophecy in NT - good bad or otherwise - apart from Agabus?
While I'm sure Christ Stiles is more than capable of answering your question, I'd like to offer a couple of examples (in case he's fallen victim to the inevitable Christmas chaos, and can't get back to his PC).
I guess you are looking for the sort of thing that was understood as prophecy at the time - accurate, predictive information....delivered by a Godly person, who could have no prior knowledge. Something with the divine imprimatur, in fact. And ideally, we should have confirmation that their statements were proved true.
A couple which fit that description are to be found in Acts 5:9, and Acts 13:11. Perhaps there's more, but that's what I came up with, off the top of my head.
Excellent examples.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 950 | From: Virtually anywhere | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ramarius:
Why not answer the question?
A cursory glance at Acts had me pick up the example in Acts 13, so thanks TRM for the other one. I'm sure there are others.
At any rate the answer is 'more than one'.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
I think the modern understanding of 'the prophetic' has perhaps been coloured rather too much by what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14:3 "But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort".
That has sometimes been interpreted as people bringing words or impressions that are encouraging or comforting. I don't believe that was Paul's intention. I don't think he wanted to instigate a culture of exchanging platitudes and pleseantries. Rather, it seems that he was commenting on a natural response to God's revelation - that people will find genuine prophecy uplifting and empowering....and that (of itself) is important to the church.
Biblically - and excluding those prophecies which may be couched in metaphorical terms and/or refer to events in the distant future - prophecy was generally specific, incisive, important (often life-changing) and commonly predictive.
Sometimes, there was judgment involved - but even looking at those examples from Acts 5 and 13, they must have been very encouraging and strengthening for those who were getting it right.
I do think there is a misunderstanding in some quarters, which leads people to believe God has effectively abandoned historical prophecy, in favour of stuff which might be warm and fuzzy, but has little or no meaningful content.
Of course, just reading on from that quote from Corinthians, it is plain (in verses 24/25) that prophecy is far more than just trotting-out a few happy phrases. There is actually no reason to believe that Paul - or the early church - would recognise such banalities as prophetic, or that Paul was suggesting that strengthening encouragement and comfort were now to be derived from such things, rather than from prophecy as it had always been understood.
I get the feeling (or dare I say the impression) that 1 Corinthians 14 has contributed much to lowering the bar, and yet there really isn't anything there to suggest the fundamental nature of prophecy has changed. But perhaps others see it differently?
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Rhythm Methodist:
I get the feeling (or dare I say the impression) that 1 Corinthians 14 has contributed much to lowering the bar, and yet there really isn't anything there to suggest the fundamental nature of prophecy has changed. But perhaps others see it differently?
It appears that this - and Grudem's particular interpretation of prophecy in general - has very little historical precedent (unless you consider groups like the Zwickau prophets). Just like the explanation of tongues as 'of men and of angels' it stems from attempts to explain why mass prophecy seemed - on the most part - to consist of failure.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'd agree with that TRM and Chris Stiles.
In a PM someone has suggested that I'm after a quiet spiritual life and would rather the charismatic dimension would go away.
I would suggest that those of us - TRM, Chris Stiles and others - who are taking a more rigorist line - and I say rigorist rather than sceptical - are the ones who are taking the harder path.
It's a lot easier to go with the flow and accept the platitudes and pleasantries as geniunely prophetic than it is to exercise a rigourous approach.
Anyway - Merry Christmas folks and God bless us everyone.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
quote:
Orinally posted by chris stiles:
Just like the explanation of tongues as 'of men and of angels' it stems from attempts to explain why mass prophecy seemed - on the most part - to consist of failure.
Good point, Chris. It does seem that rather novel scriptural interpretations are used in support of both prophecy and tongues (as we see them exercised now). I think there might be a clue in there, about their validity.
quote:
Originally posted by Gameliel:
I would suggest that those of us - TRM, Chris Stiles and others - who are taking a more rigorist line - and I say rigorist rather than sceptical - are the ones who are taking the harder path.
It's a lot easier to go with the flow and accept the platitudes and pleasantries as geniunely prophetic than it is to exercise a rigourous approach.
Your "harder path" is my "road less travelled".... but it amounts to the same thing. It's particularly difficult as a church leader, when there are those in your care with these inclinations. You want to take them to Jerusalem, but they are hell-bent on dragging the whole fellowship to Corinth. It would indeed be easier to give in, to ignore scripture and disregard discernment. But I rather suspect - one day - I would be called to account for it.
I hope all on this thread - of whatever persuasion - have a terrific Christmas!
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Hope you had a good Christmas TRM ... and are continuing to do so ...
The charismatic thing is not so much a 'road less travelled' with me as one I've been down and followed until it disappeared over the edge ... I'm heading back, if not in the opposite direction (ie. towards cessationism) but in a direction that takes account of some of the insights and scenery along the charismatic road but from a different view-point.
It would be hard to be a church leader with people wanting to tug things further down a charismatic branch-line ... but it can be done. I knew a Baptist minister from a fairly conservative background who'd gone in a slightly post-evangelical/generous orthodoxy direction and who successfully pastored a charismatic fellowship for about 10 years. He was open to the 'gifts of the Spirit' and so forth but told me that he hadn't fully embraced the charismatic thing because of (his words) 'the degree of manipulation that appears to be involved in getting these things to happen ...'
I thought he was spot on. These things don't just happen spontaneously for the most part - although I believe they can do - but they are generally inculcated, taught and picked up over a period of time ... with all sorts of cues and suggestibility - both subtle and direct.
I think these have to be born in mind in any evaluation of these things.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
Thanks Gamaliel - had a great Christmas, and hope you can say the same.
quote:
These things don't just happen spontaneously for the most part - although I believe they can do - but they are generally inculcated, taught and picked up over a period of time ... with all sorts of cues and suggestibility - both subtle and direct.
Words of wisdom, as I have come to expect from you.
So much of what we see is learned (or required) behaviour. I would like to think that most people who promote these experiences are primarily victims of self-deception, rather than wilful purveyors of a deliberately deceptive agenda (that could be self-deception on my part, though!). Perhaps they start with a legitimate longing to see God move among them, but then become willing - even eager - to attribute just about anything to his hand. And then they underpin their illusion by drawing others into it.
Even so, it is sad that so many people claim divine authorship for things which are often desperately mundane, or otherwise clearly a manifestation of 'the flesh'. I have long suspected that people who do that are significantly less likely to witness genuine divine intervention: it is difficult to imagine that such an intervention would be taken as anything other than an endorsement of their doctrines.
Your Baptist minister friend mentioned manipulation. That has been my experience, too - and has not been confined to just "getting things to happen". I've had to deal with people of this ilk who have tried to manipulate the whole direction of the fellowship, as a prelude to inflicting their baggage on the rest of us.
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Absolutely, TRM ...
In my restorationist days, many people left the traditional denominations to join the fledgeling 'house-churches' or 'new churches' because they felt they weren't at liberty to 'express themselves' or 'exercise their gifts'. They used to bring all sorts of horror-stories of how ministers or church-meetings (many were Baptists) tried to quench the Spirit or box in charismata and so forth.
I'm sure some of this was based on bitter personal experience. I remember one girl who was literally poked in the back by an old lady wielding an umbrella when she started to raise her hands charismatic fashion in workship in a Baptist chapel ...
However, it never seemed to occur to these people how damaging the effect of their leaving or marching out en masse had on the people and ministers they left behind. Some of the ministers at the churches they left were literally broken by the experience. They'd tried really hard to keep things together, to accommodate the charismatics whilst keeping the 'traditionalists' on board ... and that what did they get for their pains? A kick in the teeth.
I had got the impression that this kind of 'let's leave and set up our own church' or 'let's drag everybody kicking and screaming in a charismatic direction whether they like it or not' tendency had died down. It seems from your post that it hasn't.
It must put everyone in a difficult position.
I think that the motivations for 99.9% of charismatics are genuine - but it's a bit like reading shadows on the wall or patterns in the hearth. The more they look for 'evidence' to authenticate their experience the more they apparently find - even if it is less than convincing to everyone else.
I think part of the problem is that there is 'enough' there to convince them (and others, including myself) that there is a baby in the bathwater. But the baby beneath the surface and the bubbles begins to assume a larger size than is warranted by the evidence - it becomes not a baby but a toddler or even an adolescent ...
People bend over backwards to try to insist that this or that prophecy is true or that this or that healing has applied and not worn off once the hype-level has subsided and the placebo effect has dissipated.
You've only got to look at how long it took Wimber to acknowledge that the 'tokens of revival' prophecy about the Docklands revivalist event was duff. He brought his family over from California on the basis of it and genuinely believed that revival would break out at the meetings and spread through the East End and into the rest of London and from thence all around the country.
When it didn't happen he said, "Ah, well, the prophecy didn't say 'revival', it said 'tokens of revival' and I believe we saw those ..."
Almost anything can be acclaimed as 'tokens of revival' of course - but as we all know, a ra-ra-ra and feel-good meeting does not revival make.
Eventually, when pressed, he conceded defeat and was man enough to admit that he'd got it wrong.
I wish some of these others would show similar levels of integrity. Gerald Coates has been banging on about the same duff prophecies for years without making any concessions, as far as I know, to admitting that he may have been mistaken.
On these Boards Chorister can bear witness to what happens when a charismatic faction gets its teeth into a church and effectively elbows everyone else out cuckoo-fashion.
In my experience 'put up or shut up' is the default position of most charismatics in instances like this - although I am aware that there are some lovely charismatics who don't fit into this particular mould.
Years ago, I heard how an embittered former Pentecostal had observed, 'When the gifts of the Spirit come in through the door, love flies out of the window ...'
Harsh? Perhaps. But it's been the experience of many people I'm afraid.
As soon as you start to claim a divine imprimatur for your utterances and so on then you're effectively setting yourself up as your own Pope and above contradiction. No matter how hard anyone says, Cromwell like, 'I beseech thee in the bowels of Christ, consider whether you may not be mistaken ...' you will continue to argue that black is white and white is black rather than budge a millimetre.
That's the danger of it. Millions of mini-charismatic Popes who aren't in the least bit interested in what anyone says provided they've got their own personal hot-line to heaven that trumps any objections or the still, small voices of calm, balance and moderation.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Rhythm Methodist
Shipmate
# 17064
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I had got the impression that this kind of 'let's leave and set up our own church' or 'let's drag everybody kicking and screaming in a charismatic direction whether they like it or not' tendency had died down. It seems from your post that it hasn't.
Alas, not in my experience. I had to deal with a couple of people who had been immersed in the teachings of Gerald Coates. Talk about wicked and manipulative - they were even caught barefaced-lying about a 'word from God'.....so he obviously taught them everything he knew.
quote:
I think part of the problem is that there is 'enough' there to convince them (and others, including myself) that there is a baby in the bathwater. But the baby beneath the surface and the bubbles begins to assume a larger size than is warranted by the evidence - it becomes not a baby but a toddler or even an adolescent ...
We possibly look at this slightly differently, but I don't suppose we're very far apart on it. I said upthread that "there is no baby in this particular bathwater". By that I meant - when it came to pictures, impressions weird manifestations, etc (and to continue the analogy) they were looking in totally the wrong bath. If we are to call the Holy Spirit 'the baby', I think he's in an entirely different bath....probably lying there, neglected, getting wrinkly and turning blue with cold (awful image, but I'm sure you get my drift). I just don't think he's anything to do with these things, which have all been concocted in recent times. Though I suppose it would be possible that a genuine intervention of God could take place, only for it to be mistaken for a manifestation of one of these made-up ideas.
I well remember Mr Wimber, who you mention. I had some correspondence with him, in regard to his organisation's apologetic for the Toronto manifestations: they had taken every scriptural use of words like 'fall', 'laugh' and 'cry', and claimed they were all biblical precedents for Toronto. Absolutely no regard for context whatsoever! That's like saying crying at my wife's funeral, is a precedent for the next time I shed a tear peeling onions. A scriptural illiterate, our friend John!
Posts: 202 | From: Wales | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that Wimber was scripturally illiterate, but I do think that he, and others like him, were inclined to play fast and loose with the hermeneutics at times.
I was quite into the Toronto thing at first, but quickly backed off when I realised how easy it was to induce these kind of experiences.
I wouldn't have cited chapter and verse to back these things up though ... although I might have suggested that they could fall into the general 'signs and wonders' category rather than matching specific verses. Nobody knows what the various 'schools of the prophets' got up to in the OT ... but Saul and the others apparently got up to some odd things ...
Although I've yet to see any Toronto proponents lying out all night under the stars or running around with very little clothes on ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Absolutely, TRM ...
In my restorationist days, many people left the traditional denominations to join the fledgeling 'house-churches' or 'new churches' because they felt they weren't at liberty to 'express themselves' or 'exercise their gifts'. They used to bring all sorts of horror-stories of how ministers or church-meetings (many were Baptists) tried to quench the Spirit or box in charismata and so forth.
I think these things aren't specific to charismatic movements per se .. so much as to do with a baptized version of a secular trend of some kind (in this it was individualism and the new spirituality in some cases).
I think there are remnants of this sort of thing in some of the older denominations (including parts of Anglicanism).
quote:
Years ago, I heard how an embittered former Pentecostal had observed, 'When the gifts of the Spirit come in through the door, love flies out of the window ...'
I'm convinced that to the extent that this is intrinsic to charismaticism a lot of this is to do with appetites for various things being confused and mixed up. I'm sure that experiences of this kind can end up serving as vehicles of self-expression, self-validation or even 'romance' on some kind of level. You'll often see outbreaks of immorality following 'moves of the spirit', and I'm not sure it's all down to poor teaching/exegesis.
Of course, the million little pope situation exacerbates everything.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Drewthealexander
Shipmate
# 16660
|
Posted
@Chris Stiles. You wrote
] You'll often see outbreaks of immorality following 'moves of the spirit',
Really? Do you have any evidence for that? And this
Of course, the million little pope situation exacerbates everything.
Our Orthodox friends would say that this is an issue with Protestantism per se. We might also want to explore how this manifests itself in non-charismatic churches.
Posts: 499 | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Drewthealexander ... there are well documented outbreaks of immorality attending 'revival' - from the US frontier revivals of the early 1800s to the Camp Meetings of the Methodists ...
Animal spirits, young people worked up ...
Heck, there were even breakaway Orthodox groups in 19th century Russia who would flagellate themselves into a frenzy and engage in mass orgies as part of their rituals ...
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
I don't think that Chris is citing cause and effect, but I suggest that it is the height of naivety to suggest that were there is religious enthusiasm of one form or other you aren't also going to get carnality and fleshly enthusiasm of another kind. These things are linked.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I don't think that the mini-Pope situation is confined to charismatic circles either ... it can be just as prevalent in conservative evangelical circles.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Drewthealexander
Shipmate
# 16660
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I don't think that Chris is citing cause and effect, but I suggest that it is the height of naivety to suggest that were there is religious enthusiasm of one form or other you aren't also going to get carnality and fleshly enthusiasm of another kind. These things are linked.
I'll see how Chris clarifies his own point.
I'm not quite sure I understand the point you're making. Carnality is a fact of human nature - are you saying that spirituality is more likely to exacerbate carnality? Or is it that the effects of carnality are given greater attention when they arise in a spiritual context? And since you are saying that where there is religious enthusiasm you also get fleshly enthusiasm, isn't that positing cause and effect?
I don't want to split hairs, but there is a world of difference between fleshly enthusiasm (which can be quite harmless) and sexual sin.
[ 28. December 2012, 14:28: Message edited by: Drewthealexander ]
Posts: 499 | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Of course there is.
Chris can speak for himself, but all he is suggesting - if I read him correctly - is that there is a connection between 'enthusiasm' of all kinds and sexual licence.
I'd have thought that was obvious.
None of these things happen in a vacuum. It doesn't matter how spiritual we are we still have dangly bits.
Samson lifted the gates from Gaza and then went and slept with a prostitute.
I know of a very charismatic assistant pastor in a charismatic fellowship who would speak in tongues and prophesy every single meeting then would drive down to his city's red-light district to pay for kinky sex. It later transpired he was abusing his own kids.
Now, I'm not saying that this was BECAUSE he was the assistant pastor in a charismatic fellowship but I am saying that lively and enthusiastic worship can serve as a cover for more fleshly enthusiasm ... the same thing can happen in other worship styles and traditions of course.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
