By Spencer D Gear
openclipart
I never thought that I would ever get to the point of saying, âI am ashamed to be identified with that churchâ. But I am embarrassed and ashamed over what I witnessed in a house church in the home of Jack and Joan (not their real names) in a northern Brisbane suburb on Sunday, 3 November 2013. This is how it unfolded.
The house church meeting/gathering starts with a barbecue lunch (all people bring their own meat to barbecue and a salad to share) and my first visit was on Sunday, 20 October 2013. The church meets on a 2-weekly basis. I was recommended to this church by a person who attends a house church in a southern Brisbane suburb. There were a couple of issues in that first meeting that I wanted to raise in the group on 3 November, but I wasnât able to raise it in the group meeting for reasons I shall now explain.
The issues I wanted to raise were:
(1) Does this group have a statement of faith in order to stop false doctrine from being perpetrated in the group?
(2) In the meeting of 20 October, some people were speaking in tongues out loud for all to hear, but there were no interpretations. This is forbidden in 1 Corinthians 14 and I was a âforeignerâ to that group (1 Cor 14:11).
(3) There seemed to be a strong emphasis on tongues. What is this groupâs view of the spiritual gifts of tongues and interpretation? Do some believe one has to speak in tongues as evidence of salvation?
For the barbecue lunch, I was sitting at the kitchen table and engaged in conversation with Ken (not his real name). He was an older man (my guess would be that he could be aged about 70 and had been a Christian for about 40 years, based on his testimony. Ken has had a long association with the charismatic movement, especially a couple of smallish Pentecostal-charismatic denominations. I told him that I wanted to raise some matters that emerged from the meeting two weeks ago. He said it was OK to raise them with him as we sat at the table.
As we were talking, a group of people (perhaps about 10) was forming in the lounge room and there was some singing of songs accompanied by guitar and piano. Some louder shouts were beginning to come from that room.
Statement of faith
I told Ken that I wanted to ask if the group had a statement of faith. He said that other charismatic churches with which he had had association had statements of faith but they didnât have much impact.
I said that a statement of faith was a guide to prevent false doctrine from infiltrating the group from, say, the Mormons wanting us to become gods, JWs who didnât believe in the deity of Christ, tongues as a requirement for those who are saved (which is a doctrine of the Revival Centres in Australia). He was not aware of one for this house church. He said that he used to accept such a view but not now, since the Holy Spirit had changed the openness with which he ministers and has experiences in the group. He is overcome by the Holy Spirit at times and has all kinds of emotional/spiritual experiences. He would not expect that Jack would accept the need to have a statement of faith.
Speaking in tongues without interpretation: You are foreigners
I then spoke to Ken about the amount of speaking in tongues in the group 2 weeksâ ago. It seemed to be an overemphasis to me. One person shared that when she spoke in tongues she used three different languages.
I then turned in my Bible to 1 Corinthians 14:9-12,
So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, 11 but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. 12 So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church (ESV, emphasis added).
I emphasised 1 Cor 14:11 that when there is tongues without interpretation, this is the result: âIf I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to meâ. I said that I was a foreigner to what was said in tongues 2 weeksâ ago as I heard the tongues without interpretation and this was not edifying for me. The Scripture says that tongues without interpretation makes many people into foreigners in a group where that happens.
At this point Ken asked if I was a fundamentalist. My response was that I was an evangelical charismatic. On further reflection after the meeting, I concluded that I should have asked him: What do you mean by fundamentalist? I sensed that he had some pejorative understanding. The fundamentalists at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries were those who accepted the fundamentals of the faith regarding the nature of God, Scripture, Christ, salvation, etc. See the article, âWhat is fundamentalism?â for an understanding of why the original fundamentalists came to be called fundamentalists. This article states, âFundamentalism … is a movement within the church that holds to the essentials of the Christian faith. In modern times the word fundamentalist is often used in a derogatory senseâ.
Ken admitted that he knew what I was driving at, but he didnât agree with my view on I Cor 14:9-12 in which tongues needed interpretation if it was in a group setting. He said that tongues were also a prayer language. I agreed, but said that that needed to be practised in private where nobody else could hear and no interpretation was needed. This is part of my understanding of 1 Corinthians 14:14-19,
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 15 What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also. 16 Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say âAmenâ to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17 For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. 18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19 Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue (ESV).
I said that tongues as practised at home when âmy spirit praysâ, âI will pray with my spiritâ, and âI will sing praise with my spiritâ, should be something done in private. However, if it is in public, an interpretation is necessary. I emphasised that if tongues is in a group with 2 or more, interpretation is needed. Otherwise the people would be âforeignersâ as they didnât understand the foreign language and could not be edified. Thatâs what 1 Corinthians 14:11 teaches.
Enter an antagonist
In the midst of this conversation, Ken and I were joined by Jack and a younger man in his 20s whom Iâll call Wally (not his real name). Wally became a listener to this conversation and did not participate. So I continued the discussion that Ken and I were having that tongues without interpretation in a group is making people foreigners in the group â foreigners who do not understand the language, the gift of tongues.
Jackâs immediate response was, âThatâs your interpretationâ. I said that I was using grammatical, historical and cultural principles of hermeneutics to reach that conclusion. This is the common method of interpreting any document. I was a foreigner 2 weeks ago because I did not understand what was being said (on the basis of 1 Cor 14:11). He replied: âThatâs how you feltâ. I said it had nothing to do with how I felt. What happened to me was exactly as the Scripture stated: I will be a foreigner to the speaker and thatâs exactly what I was. I was a foreigner and it was out of order and âall things should be done decently and in orderâ (1 Cor 14:40). By this time Jack was raising his voice at me and I was probably raising mine in return. I had to do this to overcome the noise that was coming from the other room â screaming, slapping sounds, and barking by the people who were supposedly under the influence of the Holy Spirit. It didnât sound too holy to me. I could see two people on the floor crawling on their knees, shouting, banging the floor, and barking.
At this point Ken interjected: âYou probably donât like whatâs going on next doorâ (in the adjoining lounge room). I agreed.
âThatâs your interpretationâ as a logical fallacy
I thought about this later. What was Jack doing when he would not listen to the plain meaning of what 1 Cor 14:11 was saying in that âIf I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to meâ? Jack did not want to deal with the content of this Scripture so he diverted attention by accusing me: âThatâs your interpretationâ.
This is what I should have said (afterthought is often helpful as we consider our experiences): âJack, you have just committed a red herring logical fallacy by diverting attention away from the content of 1 Corinthians 14:11 to another topic â your topic. The issue is that the listener is a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker is a foreigner to the listener if, in a public meeting (which this house church was), tongues is not accompanied by interpretation. By calling attention to my hermeneutics (interpretation), he was diverting attention away from the real issue â the plain meaning of 1 Cor 14:11. I wanted to discuss the failure for the listener to be edified and being treated as a foreigner when the gift of tongues was not accompanied by the gift of interpretation.
What is a red herring logical fallacy? The Nizkor Project explains that âa red herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to âwinâ an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topicâ.
In this circumstance, Jack tried to divert attention away from tongues without interpretation to accuse me: âThatâs your interpretationâ. What should have been done was to look at what 1 Cor 14:11 was saying and what it meant. What does the text really say? And by application, were the leaders of this house church (Jack and Joan) acting contrary to Scripture by allowing tongues to be spoken for all to hear, but without interpretation? Why were they not correcting what was going on?
At the point Ken said, âYou probably donât like what is happening in the other roomâ, I agreed. It was a shocking loud level of shouting. What were the neighbours thinking was going on? I was disgusted and embarrassed.
Jack jumped in and said that in the 1970s he was living in a town on Queenslandâs Darling Downs, Toowoomba being the largest City and commercial centre of this region. He was not living in Toowoomba:
Map of Queensland (Darling Downs, W of Brisbane, courtesy Wikipedia)
He said that he was associated with the charismatic renewal in that town and an Assemblies of God minister in Toowoomba, Aeron Morgan (he pronounced his name Aaron), opposed it and Ken was taking the opportunity to oppose Aeron Morgan in the 3 November conversation I had with him. I told him that I was a personal friend of Aeron Morgan (who is now in the Lordâs presence, having died a few months earlier). I was on the faculty of the Commonwealth Bible College (Assemblies of God of Australia) when it was located at Katoomba NSW, 1977-1980 and Aeron Morgan was principal.
I didnât say this to Ken (I should have), but I expect the reason why Aeron would have opposed the charismatic chaos of the charismatic movement of the 1970s on the Darling Downs (if it has any resemblance to what I saw on 3 November 2013 in northern Brisbane) was because Aeron was a Pentecostal minister and Bible teacher who knew the Scriptures. He knew that much of what was happening in charismatic meetings was contrary to the instructions of 1 Corinthians 12-14 and other passages, so he would have spoken out against it because it was unbiblical. For a biblical understanding of the gifts of the Spirit, see Aeron Morganâs book, The biblical testing of teachings and manifestations (2005).
For the Christian Witness Ministriesâ memorial tribute to Aeron Morgan after his death, see âHome call of Aeron Morgan 1934-2013â.
This is why Aeron would have spoken against what was happening in some charismatic meetings in the 1970s and elsewhere. He wrote:
I am disturbed and distressed by the trends away from the Scriptural position and the more existential climate now apparent on the neo-Pentecostal Church scene. I make an effort to speak to this as a serious concernâŠ.
There is observed an increasing readiness to accept all manner of strange teachings and questionable manifestations as being of God, the naĂŻve and mindless validating of all kinds of weird and abnormal phenomena, without the applying of any Biblical test to them. This is most serious and needs addressing urgently (Morgan 2005:39, 45).
Aeron Morgan (courtesy Christian Witness Ministries)
Aeron wrote of âthe abnormal conduct of misguided Charismaticsâ, which is a gentle and mild way to describe the chaotic behaviour that I encountered in that charismatic house church in Brisbane (Morgan 2005:172). He wrote:
It appears that in recent times something of this dubious conduct has taken place where people have witnessed in the meetings certain behaviour with others which has been claimed to be the work of the Holy Spirit, and consequently they in turn have given themselves to âmanifestingâ in a like manner. It has not been a work of the Holy Spirit, but the result of psychological manipulation, autosuggestion, and in some instances what appears to have been certain hypnotic influence. This is very serious, for it reveals two things:
(a) How easily many people are accepting teachings and practices on the strength of what they are told or witness, without any discernment.
(b) It shows up the serious lack of discernment and judgment of these things by those leaders who profess to be âfull of the Holy Ghostâ. It can only be described as gross irresponsibility on the part of those who ought to know better. Their failure cannot be excused. It must be condemned. Such persons are not fitted for the role of leadership. Leaders in Christâs Church are to be âWatchmenâ, considering as a divine obligation the spiritual welfare of His people before any personal interest (Morgan 2005:177-178).
Aeron Morgan has rightly pointed out the extremism of the alleged âToronto Blessingâ. He drew my attention to an article in Charisma News that reported on the 10th annual âCatch the Fireâ conference at the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship, formerly known as the Toronto Airport Vineyard where the supposed outpouring of the Holy Spirit was âmarked by unusual physical manifestations among believersâ (Charismaâs language). The report noted that at this 10th anniversary meeting,
“The Toronto Blessing” is a phrase coined by British journalists to describe what movement insiders say is an incredible outpouring of the Holy Spirit marked by unusual physical manifestations among believers. It began in Toronto and quickly spread. TACF senior pastor John Arnott told Charisma that the Catch the Fire conference in 1994 was “catalytic in spreading the fire of God around the world.”
Ministry leaders from all corners of the earth came to that first October conference. “They were shocked by the intensity of what happened to them,” Arnott said. “It launched them into a whole new dimension of ministry.”
Those who came to Catch the Fire 10 Years On hoping to witness or share in similarly shocking experiences weren’t disappointed. Attendees and speakers alike participated enthusiastically in the partylike atmosphere. Countless individuals could be seen jerking spastically, laughing, shaking, weaving drunkenly or falling backward into the arms of catchers (Sommer 2013, emphasis added).[1]
See an example of the âCrazy dog manâ behaviour of the Toronto Blessing on YouTube.
With the kind of party-like, unbiblical behaviour happening in the lounge room (which I could see) of that house church on 3 November 2013, I chose to shake Kenâs hand and leave the house. He was not open to reasoning biblically from the Scriptures to address the unbiblical manifestations that were happening in that church.
I sent the first draft of this article to a friend in the USA who was a Pentecostal minister and missionary in a mainline Pentecostal denomination for 18 years. He is no longer with that denomination but continues his Pentecostal manifestations (tongues) in his prayer life. Of my article, he wrote:
I also visited the Toronto church where the so-called ‘Toronto blessing” was going on.
What you described sounds a bit like the events at the Toronto Blessing. I didn’t have a problem with them because, in my opinion, they were not representative of a “normal” church service. In fact, they called it “renewal” by which they meant a renewal of the joy of the “first love” of salvation. (As I understood their meaning.) Some people were acting very strangely but my thoughts were that people come as they are with the baggage they are carrying and God meets them there.
I find this to be an excuse to allow all kinds of disorderly, chaotic happenings in charismatic meetings, but all in the name of ârenewalâ and âblessingâ. He did not mention a word about the order of 1 Corinthians 14 and the need that âall things should be done decently and in orderâ (ESV), or as the New Living Translation puts is, âBut be sure that everything is done properly and in orderâ (I Cor 14:40 NLT), or, â But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly wayâ (NIV).
In his commentary on 1 Cor 14:40, Pentecostal minister (Assemblies of God, USA) and Greek exegete, Dr Gordon Fee, states that the last clause in verse 40
summarizes the argument of vv. 26-33: ‘Everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.’ The word ‘fitting’ [euschemenws] argues again for propriety in the assembly (cf. 11:13); the word ‘orderly’ [taxin] echoes its opposite, ‘disorder,’ from v. 33, and along with that verse strongly implies that the assembly in Corinth was in disarray. The implication of the argument throughout has been that speaking in tongues is the guilty party. With these words, therefore, the argument is brought to a fitting conclusion (Fee 1987:713).
Reflections
As I reflected on what happened on 3 November 2013, these thoughts came to mind:
- I am grieved to have been in the presence of a church that resisted biblical order and testing of the charismata (gifts of the Spirit) in action.
- I saw and heard the horrific, strange spirit of the alleged Toronto Blessing and the Pensacola Revival, with the screaming, barking and banging of the hands as a supposed Holy Spirit manifestation. In my estimation, it was another spirit in action.
- I was seeing an unholy spirit manifesting chaotic behaviour in contrast to the order required from the teaching of 1 Corinthians 12-14.
- It was interesting that Wally, in his 20s, chose to stay and listen to the conversation among Jack, Ken and Spencer, rather than joining in the group chaos in the next room. Why? His language was that he was raised on these kinds of manifestations in the charismatic mainline denominational church he attends and found our conversation more interesting. His church has a strong charismatic influence. What he heard in the next room was nothing strange to him.
- I was thinking of what the neighbours would have been thinking with all the noise happening in that house. If this happens every two weeks, couldnât the neighbours become concerned enough to phone the authorities about the noisy behaviour coming from that house.
- There was no way that I could get through to Jack about the unbiblical disorder he was promoting in that house church. The manifestations in that place were contrary to the biblical order required.
- Jack seems to be a dominant person in that group. He would not listen as I attempted to expound the Scriptures in a calm manner.
-
No wonder John MacArthurâs updated Charismatic Chaos book (1993 Zondervan) is now titled, Strange Fire (2013 Thomas Nelson) and MacArthurâs organisation conducted a âStrange fireâ conference in the USA. What I heard on 3 November was strange fire from a source that was not holy. For a counter view to John MacArthurâs cessationist âstrange fireâ promotion, see Roger E Olson, âStrange fire fundamentalists and the Holy Spiritâ.
- I have decided that I will never ever be a part of that kind of church again. It has made me very wary of associating with charismatics â until I know the nature of biblical order/disorder that they practice when the church comes together. Unless they require biblical order in charismatic manifestations from 1 Cor 12-14, I’m not interested in participating.
- Jack and Ken do not have their roots firmly down into the practice of biblical Christianity when it comes to the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit. Testing the spirits and practising manifestations according to the biblical limits do not seem to be on their agenda. ‘Anything goes’ is how I describe what happened in that house church on 3 November 2013. I highly recommend Aeron Morganâs book, The biblical testing of teachings and manifestations (2005).
- I have questions about whether these charismatics could find it difficult to know the differences between their experiences of the Spirit and the Mormonâs burning in the bosom to convince the LDS people of the truth of Mormonism. On what grounds could the charismatics be correct in their existential experience and the LDS experience wrong? Consider the LDS teaching which states:
-
9:7 âBehold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.9:8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.9:9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from meâ (Doctrine & Covenants 9:7-9, emphasis added).
-
I will not commit the logical fallacy of generalising what happened on 3 November 2013 to all or many charismatic groups. This would be committing the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization. It is âalso known as: Fallacy of Insufficient Statistics, Fallacy of Insufficient Sample, Leaping to A Conclusion, Hasty Inductionâ. It is explained: âThis fallacy is committed when a person draws a conclusion about a population based on a sample that is not large enoughâŠ. Since Hasty Generalization is committed when the sample (the observed instances) is too small, it is important to have samples that are large enough when making a generalization. The most reliable way to do this is to take as large a sample as is practical. There are no fixed numbers as to what counts as being large enoughâ (The Nizkor Project). To know that there are people within the Pentecostal/charismatic movement that oppose unbiblical manifestations is an encouragement to keep looking for openness to the spiritual gifts where biblical order is maintained. The ministry of the late Aeron Morgan is one such example. Christian Witness Ministries[2]also is supportive of the charismatic gifts in contemporary church gatherings, but within the boundaries set out in 1 Corinthians 12-14.
- Aeron Morgan wrote that âin the face of increasing activity of false teachers, the proliferation of false teachings, and the âfeverâ with many for more spectacular and sensational charismatic signsâ, we need to be aware of âthe warnings of Christ Jesus our Lord himself, and of the apostles, as to what will be in these last daysâ. His exhortation and prayer were: âMay God preserve us from the false, and grant us a great and genuine move of the Holy Spirit that will be undeniably from above. In our desire to see God at work let us beware [of] the readiness to accept anything that just âappearsâ to be authentic. Let us apply the tests as outlined [in his book], and be sure that what we approve is truly of the Lord and in accordance with His Wordâ (Morgan 2005:255, 257).
- I remain convinced that a house church is the best environment in which the genuine charismatic gifts (1 Cor 12-14) can function. In my region, I have not been able to find such a house church.
- To expose some of the controversial issues of John MacArthurâs labelling the charismatic phenomena as âstrange fire’, see the articles:
John F MacArthur Jr (courtesy Wikipedia)
Christianity Today article, âUnderstanding the charismatic movementâ (October 18, 2013).
âJohn MacArthur vs. Mark Driscoll: Megachurch pastors clash over charismatic theologyâ (Religion News Service, October 18, 2013).
âA Final Appeal to Pastor John MacArthur on the Eve of His ‘Strange Fire’ Conferenceâ (Charisma News, October 15, 2013).
Tom Schreiner reviews John MacArthurâs book, Strange fire (Thomas Nelson 2013) â The Gospel Coalition.
âJohn MacArthur and Strange Fireâ (Tim Challies, September 26, 2013).
Dave Miller (SBC Voices), ââStrange Fireâ: John MacArthur is RightâŠand VERY Wrongâ, 18 October 2013.
Conclusions
Although John MacArthur is a cessationist who does not support the continuing gifts of the Spirit of 1 Corinthians 12-14, the titles of his books, Charismatic chaos and Strange fire accurately describe what went on in the charismatic house church meeting I attended on 3 November 2013.
Charismatic commotion and confusion were alive and well at this gathering. It demonstrated a low view of biblical authority where extreme human performance was the guide of what should happen in a charismatic church gathering. More than ever there is a need for the teaching in Aeron Morganâs book, The biblical testing of teachings and manifestations (2005). For a description and biblical assessment of the gift of prophecy, see Wayne Grudemâs, The gift of prophecy: In the New Testament and today (1988).
Charismatic strange fire is dangerous because it assaults biblical integrity. It exalts experience as a prominent determiner of what is right and wrong when the gifts are manifest in a church gathering. What is the biblical position?
1 Thessalonians 5:19-22, Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies, 21 but test everything; hold fast what is good. 22 Abstain from every form of evil (ESV, emphasis added).
1 John 4:1-3, Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already (ESV, emphasis added).
1 Corinthians 14:1-12, 29-33, 39-40, Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. 2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit. 3 On the other hand, the one who prophesies speaks to people for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. 4 The one who speaks in a tongue builds up himself, but the one who prophesies builds up the church. 5 Now I want you all to speak in tongues, but even more to prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be built up.
6 Now, brothers [and sisters], if I come to you speaking in tongues, how will I benefit you unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or teaching? 7 If even lifeless instruments, such as the flute or the harp, do not give distinct notes, how will anyone know what is played? 8 And if the bugle gives an indistinct sound, who will get ready for battle? 9 So with yourselves, if with your tongue you utter speech that is not intelligible, how will anyone know what is said? For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are doubtless many different languages in the world, and none is without meaning, 11 but if I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be a foreigner to the speaker and the speaker a foreigner to me. 12 So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the churchâŠ.
29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. 30 If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. 31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, 32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peaceâŠ.
39 So, my brothers [and sisters], earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40 But all things should be done decently and in order (ESV, emphasis added).
1 Corinthians 12:7-11, 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills (ESV, emphasis added).
Acts 17:11, Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so (ESV).
(1) âFalse teaching is a malignancy that corrupts and destroys. False manifestations will lead people astray and cause more damage than [people] might deem possibleâ.
(2) âThe Scriptural guidelines for testing teachings and manifestations are there for the spiritual blessing and mutual edification of the believers who fellowship in any local church. Our Lord wants the best for His people, to prepare them for that Day when He will appearâ.
(3) âWe must be watchful as we see emerging signs of âthe apostasyâ of these end times (2 Thess 2:1-3), and preserve our âlove of the truthââ [2 Thess 2:10] (Morgan 2005:254, 255-256 ).
|
Works consulted
Fee, G 1987. First epistle to the Corinthians (The New International Commentary on the New Testament, F F Bruce, gen ed). Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Grudem, W 1988. The gift of prophecy in the New Testament and today.[3] Eastbourne: Kingsway Publications.
Morgan, A 2005. The biblical testing of teachings and manifestations. Spring Lake, MI: Dust & Ashes Publications.
Sommer, L 2013. Around the world in 365 days: Toronto blessing celebrates 10 years. Charisma Magazine (online). Available at: http://www.charismamag.com/spirit/devotionals/around-the-word-in-365-days?view=article&id=1104:toronto-blessing-celebrates-10-years&catid=154 (Accessed 4 November 2013).
Notes:
[1] In Aeron Morganâs book (2005), he stated that this information came from Charisma News Service (online), 8 January 2004, and that the article was titled, âToronto blessing: Just as anointed after 10 yearsâ. He accessed it on 8 January 2004 at: http://www.charismanews.com/a.php? Article ID=8437 (Morgan 2005:179, n. 132). Such an article is no longer available online at Charisma News and the Sommer (2013) article seems to be an update of the previous article. However, a copy of the 2004 article seems to be that at: http://www.openheaven.com/forums/printer_friendly_posts.asp?TID=494 (Accessed 4 November 2013).
[2] This in no way is meant to state that all teachings on this site are supported by this researcher. For example, I do not support the Received Text (Textus Receptus) as the most reliable Greek NT nor of the King James Version and the New King James Version English translations that are based on this NT text. Also, I am not supportive of the eschatology of dispensational, premillennial, pretribulationism promoted on that site. For views that oppose this perspective, see my articles:
(1) The Greek Text, the KJV, and English translations;
(2) Excuses people make for promoting the King James Version of the Bible,
(3) Does Mark 16:9-20 belong in Scripture?
(4) The King James Version disagreement: Is the Greek text behind the KJV New Testament superior to that used by modern Bible translations?
(5) What is the origin of the pre-tribulation rapture of Christians?
[3] A revised edition is available from Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books 2000. See: http://www.crossway.org/books/the-gift-of-prophecy-in-the-new-testament-and-tpb/ (Accessed 4 November 2013).
Copyright © 2013 Spencer D. Gear. This document last updated at Date: 12 November 2015.