Modern Chaos: The Charismatic and Pentecostal Movements (5:35)

You throw this out constantly but it's meaningless. I suppose numbers are supposed to be impressive.

Let me ask you: Mormonism is growing at a phenomenal rate. Does that mean it's Biblical or that people are getting saved? You confuse numbers with salvation.

Using the right Bible is meaningless if you don't obey what it says.

Granted, no one teaches absolutely true doctrine across the board; but Pentecostalism was built on a foundation of error. The New Apostolic Reformation is one of Pentecostalism's illegitimate children, and it's probably the one single group that's that's leading people astray more than any of 'em.

Are you confused between being converted and being saved, born again ? there are more Catholics than any other christian denomination. Those are the numbers that are meaningless.

But people getting saved means something different, for a start it means that the Holy Spirit is working with the message delivered, THAT is what ought to cause spiritual folks to just stop and think before they start slagging.

The truth is among us who do believe in the new birth and the kingdom of God, that is to say by and large evangelical churches it is the Pentecostal and Charismatic churches that are winning souls.

It doesn't mean the Pentecostals are perfect but it does mean they doing something right.

My pentecostalism is built solely upon my own personal pentecost. You'll find that to be most other people's experience ... if you are looking for a doctrine or teaching that will baptise you in the Holy Spirit you will have failed therein and will continue to do so.

You claim a lot of people in Pentecostal churches are getting saved; far more than in any other church. On what do you base this? Has someone done a study? Do you base it simply on the number of new church plants?

I do know that a lot of churches exaggerate the numbers to keep the cash coming in. I'm not saying this is the case here, but without something solid to back you up, making such an ambitious claim is just grandstanding. And furthermore, no one's impressed.

You claim a lot of people in Pentecostal churches are getting saved; far more than in any other church. On what do you base this? Has someone done a study? Do you base it simply on the number of new church plants?

I do know that a lot of churches exaggerate the numbers to keep the cash coming in. I'm not saying this is the case here, but without something solid to back you up, making such an ambitious claim is just grandstanding. And furthermore, no one's impressed.

I don't really know the literature, but my understanding is there is academic missiology and church growth literature documenting the growth of Pentecostal and Charismatic churches. I know that a lot of former Buddhists and their children and grand children among Chinese communities are now Christians in Indonesia. This would apply to Reformed denominations also at least to some degree, but large numbers of them go to Pentecostal and Charismatic churches. There has been great growth in Africa, multiple millions.

One of the western evangelists in Africa, Reinhart Bonkke, was Pentecostal. You might say he was like a Pentecostal Billy Graham to Africa, except Reinhart Bonkke's meetings were many, many times larger.

But how would anyone know how many true "salvations" there are? Just like with any church, the Pentecostal church is full of people who are no more saved than there are in the Catholic church or LDS. Numbers alone are meaningless. Church leaders fudge the numbers all the time.

Tithing isn't scriptural BTW. It's an entirely false doctrine introduced by greedy people for greedy people.

Can you give me some actual examples? I know there is a quote from a theologian who had not researched the issue in the 1800s who said there was no reliable evidence for miracles after the apostles or the first century or something along those lines. Some authors will repeat this, as if it proves something, instead of examining church history for themselves. Some of them will also quote Warfield, apparently without having finished his book, because they do not even mention the fact that Warfield had to grasp at straws to try to figure out how to make Ireneaus, champion of historical orthodoxy, still be sincere while reporting miracles. Warfield had his own doctrine not taught in scripture related to the cessation of certain charismata. There are numerous websites you can go to for lists of examples of spiritual gifts.

I know of two late men who get labeled with the grandous title 'church fathers' who either reported not experiencing speaking in tongues or came up with reasons while it was for the past-- Augustine and Chrysostom, both kind of late to be given the title. As far as any of them saying 'those gifts ceased', including miracles, prophecy, etc., please produce a source for any respected church leader during the era who made the argument. It is easy to use church history to prove your case when you make up what church history says or just repeat authors who have done the same.

I've poked around this online book from the 1800's that does a bit of a historical study of the topic: <https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Suppressed_Evidence.html?id=JkopAAAAYAAJ>. Most of it is in English. You may need to be a bit of a polyglott to read all the quotes. I've already mentioned Burgess _The Spirit and the Church: Volume I-- Antiquity_ which deals with the era. I saw this one back in high school so it has been a while. An account of Athanasius prophesying comes to mind.

I am not an expert in this stuff, but The Shepherd of Hermas, whether you like the theology or not, mentions the fact that prophets prophesied in the church, and this was probably mid-second century. I have mentioned Irenaeus testified to brethren operating in spiritual gifts: prophecy, foreknowledge, healing, tongues, etc.

In subsequent centuries there are the miracles of St. Martin of Tours. St. Partrick is also another one to look at. Numerous healings, even resurrections of the dead, are attributed to him. Within the two works that historians recognize as his own share his testimony of being directed to escape to freedom from Ireland by a vision and being instructed to return to Ireland, his field of ministry, by a supernatural voice. There many other examples.


It's supernatural, but it's confusing terminology if there is a list of spiritual gifts, one of them is called 'working of miracles' and you call them all 'miraculous gifts.'

I think you are confused and you have a hair trigger on the character attack button.



They don't usually call themselves Charismatics, though, not in the US at least. 'Apostolics' have different soteriology, considering tongues as a sign of salvation.



The Bible says divers tongues is among the manifestations of the Spirit given as the Spirit wills. Do you agree with that? Do you have any reason to decree that the Spirit does not will to give this now? Do you have any reason to think that those in the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements are not recipients of the grace of God?



You are the one disregarding history. Numerous accounts, small percentage-wise perhaps, of individuals healing, performing miracles, prophesying, seeing visions, etc. is evidence for continuation. But Biblically, there is no reason to believe doctrines or the way scripture reveals God acts in the church expired after the first century.

Is okay to murder? It's after the first century. The most recent teachings against murder we have in the Bible were in the first century? What about fornication? First century again. Can drunkard bishops/overseers be appointed? Well, that restriction on bishops/overseers was in the first century. Does God still save through faith in Jesus' Christ? Those verses you read about that are from the first century. Does that make them not valid?

I can't find an expiration date at the end of any of these books of the Bible.



Skimming that, it looks like he is talking about a couple of movements. The Bickle quote I saw does not say that 80% is normative. He may believe it is, or he may not. I don't know. I also did not see an actual source for the Bickle. Some of the quotes about prophets making 'mistakes.' The context of the quote needs to be clear. One might say that Moses or Elijah made mistakes. Moses was slow to circumcise Gershom. Elijah may have allowed himself to be overtaken by despair. That's not the same as false prophecy. I know for a fact that not all people who claim to be prophets and not all Pentecostals think that less than 100% prophecies are acceptable.



I've heard and read some stuff from John MacArthur. He may be accurate or inaccurate in his explanation. But I wouldn't trust him to rightly convey the understanding or intention of someone explaining spiritual gifts, certainly not the apostle Paul's. The last I checked, he still has a sermon up on his website suggesting that Paul was addressing the issue of the Corinthians speaking in 'pagan' tongues. He promoted the linguistic nonsense theory that the singular Greek word rendered 'tongue' referred to pagan tongues while the plural referred to the real thing in I Corinthians 14. That would have Paul instructing the Corinthians in verses 27-28 to allow an interpreter to interpret a pagan tongue for the congregation. I've seen some of the arguments he made about quotes from other preachers in his books, too.

If 80% of prophecy in the Charismatic is true prophecy, then that's something to consider.



I considered that might be a possibility. But I don't know your mind. Try not to be too sensitive. In context, why would you make the comment you did unless you wanted your reader to suspect that is what you meant?



Paul doesn't break them down into these categories. I do not see why supernatural, non-mundane gifts would be excluded from the category of 'providence', so I do not see how the categories are that helpful.

You misunderstood the article about Bickle. He was admitting that 80% of prophecies were false.
It appears to me that you want to be vague and mysterious about tongues. If the apostles spoke foreign languages without learning them, that is clearly miraculous. So, it appears to me you are dishonest about this also. I think it just shows your bias.

Again, I am addressing the P/C errors, but you keep trying to defend the movement on what you consider good about it. All this looks to me like you just want to argue. When you do agree with me on the errors, you mostly deflect it by saying things like "not all..."

But how would anyone know how many true "salvations" there are? Just like with any church, the Pentecostal church is full of people who are no more saved than there are in the Catholic church or LDS. Numbers alone are meaningless. Church leaders fudge the numbers all the time.

The Pentecostal church, like many others, is big business. The way they prosper is to get tithers in the seats; salvation actually plays a very minor role these days.

Tithing isn't scriptural BTW. It's an entirely false doctrine introduced by greedy people for greedy people.

I do not know why you continue to attack me and assault my character. I have been very clear about my beliefs about what genuine speaking in tongues is-- the tongues of men, or possibly of angels. Generally, those present do not understand, at least in a church setting. God can arrange an Acts 2 type event if He chooses, where those present understand. I do not rule out psychologically generated tongues or even intentional human counterfeits, demonic counterfeits. I have repeated my stance on speaking in tongues in great detail over and over again over pages of conversation with you. There is no justification for yet another attack on my character. You called me disengenous. So that you do not sin in your conversations, you should either refrain from accusing people or go to the trouble to refresh your memory from previous conversations.

You make blanket statements. I seem to recall that you believe people in these movements can be saved. It does not make much sense that followers of Christ would not receive spiritual gifts as the Spirit wills, based on scripture.

I was referring to your avoidance of saying that Biblical tongues was miraculous, and downplaying it by denying that some of the gifts listed in 1 Cor. 12:28 are not miraculous in nature, and claiming that my usage of the word 'miraculous' is confusing, compared to the term used in that passage. It just seems to me that you appear to be confused in the matter of what is miraculous and what isn't. But I know that you're much more intelligent and knowledgeable than that, so I have to conclude that you are purposely dishonest, by covering up your understanding and making your conversation vague about it. To such responses, I find it very frustrating, and it seems to me to show an unwillingness to agree on clear matters.

But you still want to make it about continuationism vs. cessationism, which I've stated numerous times that conversation doesn't accomplish anything. So then, if you want to continue making it about the c. vs. c. issue, then talk to someone else, because I'm not going to debate with you on that, because it's an endless debate, which I have seen from scholars much more knowledgeable than either of us.

I made the point that one of the gifts is 'the working of miracles' so calling gifts 'miraculous gifts' could be confusing terminology. That doesn't justify your false accusations of dishonesty. Nor does your accusation make any sense based on the conversation we are having.

The accuser of the brethren job is already taken.


You brought up church history, so I responded. If you don't want to discuss that topic, it's up to you. I do not share all of your preferences, nor am I bound by them.

But how would anyone know how many true "salvations" there are? Just like with any church, the Pentecostal church is full of people who are no more saved than there are in the Catholic church or LDS. Numbers alone are meaningless. Church leaders fudge the numbers all the time.

The Pentecostal church, like many others, is big business. The way they prosper is to get tithers in the seats; salvation actually plays a very minor role these days.

Tithing isn't scriptural BTW. It's an entirely false doctrine introduced by greedy people for greedy people.