The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum What's wrong with Charismatics?

RefBap,
I decided to start a new thread for this. Hope this helps answer your question.

In reply to:

---

Also, I'm wondering: why wouldn't someone co-author a book with someone else just because they're charismatic?

---

I would say that I would distrust a charismatic because they are likely to put experience before the Scriptures. If their experience goes against scriptures, they will often throw away the Scriptures. Our experiences can be deceptive and are not a reliable way of receiving information from God. The Holy Spirit guides us into all truth through the Bible. We get into trouble when we believe that there is new revelation coming from God. The Scriptures are complete.
R.C. Sproul preached on the charismatic movement not long ago on Renewing Your Mind. He was involved in it for a time starting in 1965. He said that once when he received 6 job offers, 5 of his charismatic friends came to him each telling him that God told them to tell him to take one of the jobs and each one said a different job from what the others said!
He ended up taking the 6th one.
He said in the April Tabletalk,
"The more interpretations of tongues-speaking and prophesies I heard, the more false doctrine and false prephecy I heard. Several people spoke "prophesies" to me about specific things that would occur within a specific time period. Every single prophecy of that sort failed to materialize...
"My final departure from the movement came when I realized that I must live by the Word, as the Spirit never works against the Word but always with it and through it."
Susan

R.C. Sproul has made the comment: “In the present scene of American evangelism, Reformation theology is a minority report. [color:red]The dominant strands of theology that reign in current evangelical circles are dispensationalism and neo-Pentacostal charismatic thought.”

Have you every wondered why this sort of theology is so appealing to so many today and Reformation theology is a minority report? IMHO all theologies that go astray haven't grasped the True Gospel and they think something is missing. So they add what they think is missing.

Charismatic theology puts a lot of emphasis on one’s experiences. Charismatics tend to base much of their teaching on poor principles of Bible interpretation. One of their own, a Pentecostal by the name of Gordon Fee, has written this:

[color:red]“Pentecostals, in spite of some of their excesses, are frequently praised for recapturing for the Church her joyful radiance, missionary enthusiasm, and life in the Spirit. But they are at the same time noted for bad Hermenutics. First, their attitude towards Scripture regularly has included a general disregard for scientific exegesis and carefully thought out Hermenutics. In fact, Hermenutics has simply not been a Pentecostal thing. Scripture is the Word of God and is to be obeyed. In place of scientific Hermenutics there developed a kind of pragmatic Hermenutics. Obey what should be taken literally--spiritualize, allegorize, or devotionalize the rest. Secondly, it is probably fair and important to note that in general, the Pentecostal's experience has preceded their Hermenutics. In a sense, the Pentecostal tends to exegete his experience.”

This is not the appraisal of someone hostile to the movement, but the appraisal of one who is himself a Pentecostal. It’s like saying “we’re willing to give up sound doctrine so we can have a joyful experience.” Today we must know how to rightly divide the word of truth. Because if we don't, mishandling the Scriptures and not interpreting it properly just feeds endless confusion.

Wes

Susan, thanks for this thread. I'd agree with your basic assessment, but I'll be watching with interest to see what others have to say.

Wes<br><br>Now you know why I am no longer a charismatic. It wasn't so much that I believed the gifts of the Spirit had ceased, it was because most charismatics seem to put experience on par with the Word.<br>There are exceptions to this of course, I don't think I would say that about someone like John Piper.<br><br>Tom

Thanks, Susan. I don't speak in tongues, and I don't really want to, but I haven't studied this enough to know if I'm a cessasionist or not. When I asked why someone would hesitate to co-author a book with someone just because they were charismatic, I wasn't meaning the wacked out ones. I tend to look at people like Grudem and Piper as those who hold the Bible in high esteem, and I can't imagine them saying that personal experience should take precedence over Scripture.

Is Piper charismatic? Does he speak in tongues and if so, is that why he is considered charismatic?<br><br>

RefBap,<br>I have only heard a couple of Piper's sermons and in them he stressed that we need to delight in God. Perhaps that is not a bad idea because it is easy for some reformed people to be very intellectual about their faith and forget our first love. I don't know enough about Piper to know if it is fair to call him a charismatic or not. <br>Because of the article in Tabletalk, I would think that Grudem must believe that the gift of prophecy is for today in some way that must add to or contradict Scripture, or the author wouldn't have said Grudem's book denied sola Scriptura. Actually in the article in Tabletalk, the actual quote about Grudem's book that the author of the article used is from Dr. O. Palmer Robinson's book The Final Word. <br>I wonder what exactly is the gift of prophecy and is it for today or not? I have heard it defined that it is almost identical to the gift of preaching. I assume from those comments about Grudem's book that Grudem is talking about new revelation. <br>Susan

Susan,



In His Grace,

Wesley,
Thanks for your interesting comments.

In reply to:

---

IMHO all theologies that go astray haven't grasped the True Gospel and they think something is missing. So they add what they think is missing.

---

One of my friends who got into the charismatic movement as a new Christian was drawn in by the "high" she got from it. She was a former pot smoker, so maybe that is why it attracted her so much. I believe you are right that something is missing and they are trying to fill the void. Scripture alone is just too boring, they think.
R.C. Sproul was very impressed with his charismatic friends' fervency in prayer. He said that they would meet regularly in his home and would pray for hours at a time. On at least one occasion they prayed all night long.
Gordon Fee was amazingly honest in seeing the flaws in his own belief system. It is surprising that he would admit them.

Susan

Susan,<br><br>My pastor says that many people who are Pentacostals have certain practices in their worship services that resemble the Bible's account of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. It is by design and it's purpose is to raise one's awareness of the Holy Spirit's presence. Is it really the work of the Holy Spirit? People get caught up in the emotional aspects of this and think that it is the Holy Spirit's activity.<br><br>I have some friends that are Pentacostals and I have been to a couple of their worship services. The services I've been to are very emotional but not very strong preaching nor sound doctrine. <br><br>Somehow I don't see Piper and Grudem in this camp. What I've read by them is sound. However I haven't read their thoughts on the continuing of signs and wonders today. This has my interest and I intend to read more on this.<br><br>Wes

I guess I didn't realize that being charismatic in the way that people such as Grudem are had any bearing on other things such as adding to Scripture.

RefBap,

Let me answer your question with a question so that you might take some time to think this through.

If Scripture is "God-breathed" (2Tim 3:16; 2Pet 1:19-21) and by it's very nature a revelation from God, then how would you classify the same Holy Spirit speaking through another individual today?

In His Grace,

Wesley,



In His Grace,

I too walked in that movement for many years. Most of what has been said here is quite true. The Highway has a great collection of articles on the movement and on the Charismatic "gifts of the Spirit." No modern use of the charismata is valid, and I say that for two reasons: First because both scripture and subsequent history demonstrate that the gifts served a specific function for a period of about 40 years only, and secondly because my own 20-some years in the movement proves it as well.<br><br>Rare instances of some missionary giving the gospel to a remote isolated tribe in the own language which the missionary never learned is not the same thing as the biblical gift of tongues at all. The "manifestations" that pass for "gifts" today are nothing more than human invention; or in some cases, the work of demons seeking to deceive.<br><br>I created an e-mail loop for ex-Charismatics that has accumulated a library of testimonies and biblical examination of the movement, its history, and its practices. Anyone interested can have a look by visiting the groups web site at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ExCharisma. I don't mean for this to be a "plug" for my group, I only offer it as an additional resource for interested folks.<br><br>Grace and peace,<br>Robin<br>

Pilgrim, I suppose it would be revelation. I think there are some implications to this that maybe I don't understand. I should probably just read through that section in Grudem's Systematic Theology, but I was pretty sure that he was sola scriptura.