A Pentecostal Pastor in General Support of Strange Fire Conference

Original Title of Article: A Pentecostal in (General) Support of the Strange Fire Conference

Date of post: Oct. 24th, 2013

by Josiah Batten

The issue of John MacArthur’s recent Strange Fire Conference (and forthcoming book) is all the rage in the Evangelical blogosphere right now. Truth be told, I’m impressed by the attention the whole thing is drawing. If you know anything about MacArthur you know he is a cessationist, and that he has promoted cessationism publicly for quite some time.

I gather the issue is not MacArthur’s cessationism, which is well-known. The issue is that MacArthur has thrown down the theological gauntlet. He’s not merely saying continuationism is wrong, he’s saying it’s wrong and dangerous. While I was not at the conference, reports I read had MacArthur likening Charismatics to Mormonism, saying that Evangelicals will challenge 14 million Mormons, but are silent in the face of half a billion Charismatics. This is inflammatory, perhaps even reckless, speech.

But as you may have gathered from the title, I’m not writing this post to point out MacArthur’s errors or where I disagree with him (though such disagreements do exist). That I’m writing in general support of Strange Fire implies I have particular differences with the conference and some of its themes. This post is about my support of the conference, not my differences with it.

You might be curious about how I, as a Pentecostal pastor, could possibly support any conference that fundamentally challenges the theological foundation of my movement and condemns many of its practices. My reasons are simple:

1. Any error John MacArthur espoused at the conference, and any recklessness he demonstrated, is far less than the errors and recklessness we see in much of the modern Charismatic movement.

We may say that things like barking in the Spirit represent the fringe of the Pentecostal Charismatic movement. In some cases, this is true. I have no doubt that if the General Superintendent of the Assemblies of God (George O. Wood) saw a congregant doing this that he would confront them about it. But George O. Wood is, unfortunately, NOT the public face of the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement. The most prominent and popular Pentecostal/Charismatic pastors tend to be TBN broadcasters. And what we get from TBN is error after error, from false prophecies galore to Prosperity "Gospel” nonsense. People hear "Charismatic” and they think "Todd Bentley” or "Bethel Church, Redding.”

I know many Charistmatic/Pentecostal leaders have responded to Strange Fire with calls for distinction. We want a distinction between those with common sense and Biblical fidelity in our movement and those who lack this (like Todd Bentley, Benny Hinn, and nearly every other pastor on TBN). But let’s be honest here, we Pentecostals have failed to make such a distinction, and that brings me to my second point.

2. Pentecostals and Charismatics are allergic to doctrinal distinction and discernment.

I wish I could say I was lying about the sentence I just wrote, but I am not. We want cessationists like John MacArthur to draw careful distinctions between different groups in our movement, but we ourselves refuse to draw such distinctions. This refusal has primarily come in the form of SILENCE regarding false teachers and false prophecies. While we Pentecostal pastors and academics often do not buy the Prosperity nonsense, we refuse to condemn those who teach it.

A few years ago, as an undergraduate student, I attempted to publish a paper in a peer-reviewed Pentecostal/Charismatic journal. In retrospect, my article was probably not up to academic par (I was an undergraduate student, mind you). The basic idea behind the article was to point out certain denials of the sufficiency of Scripture within some of the more popular teachings in our movement. I went after, for example, C. Peter Wagner and his book 7 Power Principles I learned After Seminary. I also challenged Prosperity teaching and one or two other things. My article was rejected for publication, but the editors of the journal did not cite academic quality (which could have been amended by adding a few more sources and revising a few footnotes) as the reason for the refusal. Instead, they said while they agreed with much of the content of my article it was too divisive and would not be published. I could have accepted something like "You don’t have the academic credentials we want” or "You need to add additional sources” or something like that. But no, the stated reason for the refusal was divisiveness.

I recognize the value of unity, but a unity not grounded in and centered on the truth is merely a superficial unity. If we Pentecostals want John MacArthur to make distinctions when he calls out the Charismatic movement for its abuses, then maybe we should be the first ones making distinctions and calling out heresy and excess where we find it.

Where are the orthodox Pentecostals condemning Oneness Pentecostalism (modalism)? Do we hold the nature and character of the Triune God in such low esteem? Where is the unified front of Pentecostal and Charismatic pastors speaking out against the Prosperity Gospel? Where are the Pentecostals warning about the creeping influence of Open Theism in our movement? Where are the Pentecostals upholding and demanding the regulative principle of worship in our services?

The answer is, sadly, that the Pentecostals/Charismatics speaking out on such issues are the real fringe. We put ourselves in the difficult position of upholding truth and doctrine in the midst of a movement that tends to value experience. When we do speak out against abuses and false teachings, even our brothers who agree with us tend to warn us about being too "divisive” and not being "sensitive to the Holy Spirit.” Perhaps those who are truly sensitive to the Holy Spirit are those offended by the abuses and lies taught in His Name. If we fail to expose known lies we become implicated in their continuation.

3. The false teachers have more influence than we think or admit.

While we’re on this topic, the abuses and excesses of the Charismatic movement are often rejected by certain pastors (though they are accepted and promoted by others) and denominational leaders. But let’s not forget the people in the pew. As an associate pastor, I often speak out against the Prosperity Gospel. But I know, despite this fact, that there are certain congregants who continue to believe it. In my involvement with Chi Alpha I’ve often spoken out against Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen, and T.D. Jakes. It seldom fails that I offend a brother or sister when I do so.

Why does this matter? Because I’m on staff at a small church. I’m around average Pentecostals in my congregation and campus ministry. I’m not constantly around denominational leaders or scholars. And among most congregants the likes of Osteen, Meyer, Copeland, and Shuttlesworth are incredibly popular.

I’ve heard demands for MacArthur to evaluate us by looking at French Arrington or Stanley Horton. To be completely honest, my congregants have no clue who those men are (apart from perhaps a vague familiarity established by sermon references). My congregants do know who Kenneth Hagin is, or who T.D. Jakes is. I don’t think MacArthur’s concern is primarily with the Pentecostals who hold Horton in high esteem. It’s with the congregants who hold Jakes and Copeland in high esteem, and given that priority, MacArthur’s approach makes more sense.

MacArthur wasn’t looking to spark a debate in peer-reviewed literature. He was looking to engage at the popular level, and he has been wildly successful at this. It’s the popular level where the false teachers and excesses are often a problem, and it makes sense to aim there.

It should also be noted that TBN is exported to other countries. They broadcast all over the world. They broadcast to Christians who don’t have the benefit of owning their own Bibles. The incredible damage of Prosperity teaching in world missions must be carefully observed.

4. We routinely ignore the regulative principle of worship.

Much of MacArthur’s criticism has been aimed not merely at doctrinal issues like the Prosperity Gospel, but at practical issues like what is allowed in worship. If you’re Todd Bentley, you say the Holy Spirit demands things like kicking women in the face. If you’re like most Pentecostals/Charismatics, you permit being "slain in the Spirit” despite the fact there’s scant Biblical evidence for such a practice. If you’re like me, you think we should only promote and permit that which can rightly be found to be the normative practice of Scripture.

Honestly, this puts me at odds with many fellow Pentecostals/Charismatics. The people promoting the really strange practices, people like C. Peter Wagner and his "power principles,” and their followers are incorrigible. They are not open to rebuke, even if that rebuke comes from the Bible. I speak from experience as a Pentecostal. But we Pentecostals have allowed things that seemed harmless, even though they don’t seem to come from Scripture, and now we are increasingly seeing things that are harmful and that still don’t come from Scripture. But we have no experience saying "no” to anything in worship, so we implicitly or explicitly say "yes” to everything.

What’s really concerning about the whole thing in most Pentecostal/Charismatic circles a debate about the regulative principle of worship is not even underway. We just don’t care about it. We’re at risk of nullifying the commands of God for the sake of our traditions. We need to rigorously Biblically evaluate our movement’s practices in worship.

5. We functionally ignore Sola Scriptura.

This point follows from the last one. While we tend to uphold Sola Scriptura intellectually and verbally, we tend to ignore it functionally. This is true not only in worship, but in evangelism, church growth, counseling, and church government. Let’s be honest, most of our Pentecostal churches (mine included) are run by boards of trustees that have more in common with corporate America than anything we find in the Bible.

We want to grow our churches by applying the marketing strategies of corporate America. We, a movement dedicated to the work of the Holy Spirit, consistently outsource our counseling to bloody secularists. We buy into pop-psychology about love languages.

If what I’ve just said sounds like Evangelicalism as a whole, you can probably understand why John MacArthur is so upset. I don’t think all (or even most) of the above problems originated in our movement, but our movement’s adoption of the above practices along with it’s explosive growth has gone a long way to carry these things further into the identity of the broader Evangelical movement. We Pentecostals and Charismatics are now very influential, and we haven’t always used our influence intentionally or responsibly.

We need to recapture our dedication to the sufficiency of Scripture and the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. We need to articulate our understanding of spiritual gifts in such a way as to not conflict with the sufficiency of Scripture. If the effect of our teaching is that people look to a subjective experience for guidance and assurance before they look to Scripture for those things then our teaching is dangerous and needs to be corrected.

Conclusion

I know in what I’ve said I probably have not sounded much like a Pentecostal. But it is because I love my heritage and my movement that I grieve deeply for it. What we love greatly is capable of hurting us deeply. And I have been hurt by the abuses and lack of Biblical fidelity in my own movement.

This doesn’t mean I agree with everything John MacArthur says. I remain a continuationist, he a cessationist. We have some real differences. This doesn’t mean I always agree with the way John MacArthur stated his rebukes, some of them were too general and lacked necessary distinction.

But an overly broad condemnation of real problems is better than no condemnation of the problems at all. We Pentecostals and Charismatics needed to be offended, I’m afraid it may be the only thing that will make us think critically and Biblically about ourselves as a movement. And for this offense I want to thank John MacArthur and the participants in the Strange Fire Conference. The most hurtful thing about that conference is not the broad generalizations, sweeping condemnations, or lack of distinctions. For me as a Pentecostal the most hurtful thing about the Strange Fire Conference is my knowledge that far too many of the criticisms are true.

God bless,

Joey

Source: http://questiontradition.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/a-pentecostal-in-general-support-of-the-strange-fire-conference/

I came across this article in the OP when reading the interview of John MacArthur on which there is another recent thread. In that interview MacArthur refers to and quotes from this article by this pentecostal pastor and says he was very encouraged by it. MacArtur also says in that interview that he sometimes enjoys fellowship with another pentecostal pastor despite their differences. So that tells me that MacArthur's main motive for producing the strange fire conference seems to have been to confront the abuses of the charismatic movement, not to disfellowship from solid continuationist believers.

All error is satanic in origin is something John MacArthur often says,
No one has an issue with John MacArthur for pointing out the errors of the Charismatic movement including Charismatics such as the brother who wrote that article. But That is not what John MacArthur is doing. He went far beyond that to attacking the Holy Spirit himself.
I hear so much talk about the strange fire camp, but none about the NO Fire camp. Both of these camps are sending people to hell. You can not overcome error with error.

Couldn't find anything better than the words of George Whitefield to answer John MacArthur, so, here you have it:

" A great noise hath been made of late, about the word enthusiast, and it has been cast upon the preachers of the gospel, as a term of reproach; but every Christian, in the proper sense of the word, must be an enthusiast; that is, must be inspired of God or have God, by his Spirit, in him. St. Peter tells us, "we have many great and precious promises, that we may be made partakers of the divine nature;” our Lord prays, "that we may be one, as the Father and he are one;” and our own church, in conformity to these texts of Scripture, in her excellent communion-office, tells us, that those who receive the sacrament worthily, "dwell in Christ, and Christ in them; that they are one with Christ, and Christ with them.” And yet, Christians must have their names cast out as evil, and ministers in particular, must be looked upon as deceivers of the people, for affirming, that we must be really united to God, by receiving the Holy Ghost. Be astonished, O heavens, at this!

Indeed, I will not say, all our letter-learned preachers deny this doctrine in express words; but however, they do in effect; for they talk professedly against inward feelings, and say, we may have God's Spirit without feeling it, which is in reality to deny the thing itself. And had I a mind to hinder the progress of the gospel, and to establish the kingdom of darkness, I would go about, telling people, they might have the Spirit of God, and yet not feel it.

But to return: When our Lord was about to ascend to his Father and our Father, to his God and our God he gave his apostles this commission, "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” And accordingly, by authority of this commission, we do teach and baptize in this, and every age of the church. And though we translate the words, "baptizing them in the name;” yet, as the name of God, in the Lord's prayer, and several other places, signifies his nature, they might as well be translated thus, "baptizing them into the nature of the Father, into the nature of the Son, and into the nature of the Holy Ghost.” Consequently, if we are all to be baptized into the nature of the Holy Ghost, before our baptism be effectual to salvation, it is evident, that we all must actually receive the Holy Ghost, and ere we can say, we truly believe in Jesus Christ. For no one can say, that Jesus is my Lord, but he that has thus received the Holy Ghost.

Numbers of other texts might be quoted to make this doctrine, if possible, still more plain; but I am astonished, that any who call themselves members; much more, that many, who are preachers in the church of England, should dare so much as to open their lips against it. And yet, with grief I speak it, God is my Judge, persons of the established church seem more generally to be ignorant of it, than any dissenters whatsoever.

But, my dear brethren, what have you been doing? How often have your hearts given your lips the lie how often have you offered to God the sacrifice of fools, and had your prayers turned into sin, if you approve of, and use our church-liturgy, and yet deny the Holy Spirit to be the portion of all believers? In the daily absolution, the minister exhorts the people to pray, that "God would grant them repentance, and his Holy Spirit:” in the Collect for Christmas day, we beseech God, "that he would daily renew us by his Holy Spirit;” in the last week's Collect, we prayed that "we may evermore rejoice in the comforts of the Holy Ghost;” and in the concluding prayer, which we put up every day, we pray, not only that the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, but that "the fellowship of the Holy Ghost” may be with us all evermore.

But further, a solemn season, to some, is not approaching; I mean the Easter-days, at the end of which, all that are to be ordained to the office of a deacon, are in the sight of God, and in the presence of the congregation, to declare, that "they trust they are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost, to take upon them that administration;” and to those, who are to be ordained priests, the bishop is to repeat these solemn words, "Receive thou the Holy Ghost, now committed unto them, by the imposition of our hands.” And yet, O that I had no reason to speak it, many that use our forms, and many who have witnessed this good confession, yet dare to both talk and preach against the necessity of receiving the Holy Ghost now; and not only so, but cry out against those, who do insist upon it, as madmen, enthusiasts, schismatics, and underminers of the established constitution.

But you are the schismatics, you are the bane of the church of England, who are always crying out, "the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord;” and yet starve the people out of our communion, by feeding them only with the dry husks of dead morality, and not bringing out to them the fatted calf; I mean, the doctrines of the operations of the blessed Spirit of God. But here is the misfortune; many of us are not led by, and therefore no wonder that we cannot talk feelingly of, the Holy Ghost; we subscribe to our articles, and make them serve for a key to get into church-preferment, and then preach contrary to those very articles to which we have subscribed. Far be it from me, to charge all the clergy with this hateful hypocrisy; no, blessed be God, there are some left among us, who dare maintain the doctrines of the Reformation, and preach the truth as it is in Jesus. But I speak the truth in Christ, I lie not; the generality of the clergy are fallen from our articles, and do not speak agreeable to them, or to the form of sound words delivered in the Scriptures; woe be unto such blind leaders of the blind! How can you escape the damnation of hell? It is not all your learning (falsely so called) it is not all your preferments can keep you from the just judgment of God. Yet a little while, and we shall all appear before the tribunal of Christ; there, there will I meet you; there Jesus Christ, the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls, shall determine who are the false prophets; who are the wolves in sheep's clothing. Those who say, that we must now receive and feel the Holy Ghost, or those who exclaim against it, as the doctrine of devils."
George Whitefield

I have asked repeatedly on threads in this forum to present proof from the scriptures that God no.longer works in the miraculous ad He did in the New Testament. To the best of my knowledge no scriptures were given.

Oracio I gather from your post you hold to cessationusm. Brother what scriptures do you use to support your view.

Bearmaster.

My concern is with this attitude of strong disdain toward all cessionist believers coming from many contunuationists, many of which are on this forum. Preaching against MacArthur and his ministry and falsely accusing him and misrepresenting him will not help accomplish anything but discord within the Body of Christ brother.

As to your question about scriptural support for cessationism this is an article which I believe gives good arguments(I'm not saying I fully agree with it because like I said I'm still praying about this issue):

http://www.gty.org/resources/distinctives/dd06/the-gift-of-tongues

What is puzzling is that John MacArthur is a capable Bible teacher. Yet the scriptural evidence he cites to support the cessation of certain spiritual gifts is sorely lacking. One has to resort to theological twisting to defend this doctrine.

By the way Dr. Michael Brown who carries academic credentials equal to John MacArthur has asked for dialog with MacArthur on the issue of cessationism. So far John MacArthur gas not responded to Michael Brown.

Dr. Brown is also a completed Jew and a Spirit filled man of God. He has spoken out on the abuses of the charismatic movement even before MacArthur did.

Bear

Untobabes, that was a great piece from Whitefield on the need for receiving the Holy Ghost at conversion as opposed to having a dead religion that does not save. That was the whole issue during the time of the Great Awakening. MacArthur would have no disagreement with that piece from Whitefield.

Here's a short piece taken from one of MacArthur's articles on assurance of salvation and the witness of the Spirit(Let's be careful not to quickly write someone off and wrongly characterize them as someone holding to certain erroneous views. That happens when we have an unjustified spiteful attitude toward someone):

"Do You Experience the Ministry of the Holy Spirit?...Let's look at other ministries of the Spirit. What about fellowship with God? It is the Spirit who leads you to cry out "Abba! Father!" (Gal. 4:6) as a sign of your intimacy and communion with God. What about praise? Who is it that lifts your heart to praise and adore God? Who is it that compels you to sing with meaning and devotion? In Ephesians 5:19, Paul explains that the filling of the Spirit leads to "speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord." What about the fruit of the Spirit, which Paul describes as "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, [and] self-control"? (Gal. 5:22-23) Those attitudes are spiritual graces. Have they graced your life as a whole?

Have you ever ministered in a spiritual way through helping someone, giving to someone, or speaking to someone about Christ? Those are evidences of the Spirit of God. Do you actually experience His ministry in your life? In Romans 8:16, Paul explains that "the Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God." Now don't expect Him to whisper into your ear, "You're a Christian, you're a Christian, believe Me you're a Christian!" There's no audible voice, nothing esoteric or mystical, but something very concrete. He bears witness by providing you with evidence of His presence in your life--by illuminating Scripture to you, drawing you into fellowship with God through prayer and praise, producing spiritual fruit to grace your life, and enabling you to minister effectively to others.

If the Spirit is in your life, that's evidence that you abide in God and He in you (1 John 4:13). So be assured. Don't let your heart condemn you, damn you, tell you you're not a believer. Recognize the Spirit's work in you. There's no reason to doubt and be unstable."

Source: http://www.gty.org/resources/positions/p06/is-it-real

Amen brother Bear, I appreciate and accept that. I too apologize if I unknowingly exaggerated on your strong stance against MacArthur's cessationism.

It just grieves me to see discord among the brethren over non-essentials. I know and fellowship with believers on both sides of this, and I know that some continuationist brethren absolutely despise MacArthur and cessationism to the point of flat out disrespect and completely speaking out against him and his ministry.

I know MacArthur is not completely innocent here but two wrongs don't make a right, right? He probably did exaggerate a bit in some blanket statements about Charismatics as a whole. But I also believe he has made it abundantly clear that he does not mean to say every single charismatic or continuationist is unsaved. I believe what he meant is that the main stream charismatic movement is by and large filled with false converts and that's largely due to the abuses and false teaching within the movement.

"It just grieves me to see discord among the brethren over non-essentials. I know and fellowship with believers on both sides of this, and I know that some continuationist brethren absolutely despise MacArthur and cessationism to the point of flat out disrespect and completely speaking out against him and his ministry."

Brother,

if it grieves you to see discord among the brethren, then why even bring up the "Strange fire" conference? I can't think of anything that is more devisive and has created more discord in the Body of Christ than the Strange Fire conference.

John MacArthur has made some serious false statements against Charismatics. He is clearly in error about the gifts of the Spirit and cessationism, and he criticizes anyone that does not see it like he does, even to the point of questioning their salvation.

So once again, if you are for the unity of the Spirt among the brethren, why even bring up this conference? It is only going to bring in division on this website, and I hope Greg and Paul nip it in the bud before it gets full blown.

Mike

Mike, it was not I who started calling out MacArthur's cessationistic view regarding reports of visions. I know that brother bear has already apologized but I felt I had to say that because you seem to imply I started this whole discussion. That other thread generated much negative response and divisiveness and spite toward MacArthur.

My point in starting this thread was to point out that even a Pentecostal pastor saw the validity of that conference even though he did not agree with all of it. That pastor was honest enough to acknowledge the serious error within the charismatic movement.

There are many teachings and/or posts or threads on here even from moderators which point out the serious errors of word of faith prosperity preaching. This is not something we should be afraid of or against if we have a love of the truth.

I can disagree with someone over a point if doctrine because we interpret scriptures differently. No biggie and happens all the time.

What is upsetting to me deliberate and dishonest twisting is scriptures.

Charismaniacs do it; charismatics shouldn't. John M is doing it and knows better.

What is upsetting to me deliberate and dishonest twisting is scriptures.

awakened writes:

I don't know of anyone holding a anti-cessationist conferences or anti-calvinism conferences...why do it, it would just create so much division.

Paul--

In the other thread where we were discussing this, Sree posted a portion of an interview with John M about whether Muslims were really having visions of Jesus.

MacArthur says no because of the passage in 1 Cor 15 where Paul said he was the last apostle to see the risen Jesus. However in that passage Paul is clearly making a list of those who had seen him, and says that up to that point he was the last.

MacArthur is intentionally twisting that scripture to mean that Paul was saying he would be the last to ever see Jesus. The text in no way can be taken in that sense and I think MacArthur is being dishonest in his view of the meaning of that passage to support his paradigm. Because if he admits people are still having real visions of Jesus then his paradigm begins to crumble.

The same is true about pretrib rapture. It would be very difficult for him to seriously consider another view because it would mean having to admit he was wrong all those years which would be very difficult for someone in his position to do.

I am not saying this to disparage him because like I have said I truly respect him and have benefited from his ministry. But how often do we see someone like him ever make a change in a major point of doctrine? When they have built up huge ministries with a certain type of followers with certain expectations there are huge practical considerations when it comes to admitting error.

I have to seriously wonder, for those who can't seem to get over the fact that John McArthur (JM) is a cessationist and always try to basically attack him, do you yourself enjoy and follow the teaching of the likes of Benny Hinn, Copeland, Meyers, Dollar, Johnson, Bentley, Wagner, etc.? Because it really seems like you do as you can't seem to realize the real damage and reproach these have brought to the name of Christ and His Church, or am I just missing something here? Yes, we can all have differing interpretations on certain things in scripture, and I know for a fact that even the best so called preacher or pastor doesn't have everything 100%, but something that is clear is that JM is someone who has dedicated his life's work to the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. And although you may not agree with him on many particulars, he at least makes the effort to present the gospel of Christ unadulterated and true, this is without a shadow of a doubt, whereas the names listed above fail to do so and seem to glory in that fact as they almost unashamedly teach a contrary gospel of health and wealth and new age mysticism...if we are to unite on any grounds, this would be it, the gospel of Jesus Christ that we all love and cherish and value and by which we are saved. If anyone presents a contrary message, as scripture says, let them be accursed, which sadly is what you find as the deceived go from bad to worse in their heresy and error. We (on the charismatic side of things) have no right to say anything against JM until we actually begin to start addressing openly the issues that have been brought up from both within (continuationists) and without (cessationists) and stop choosing to remain silent and passive "in the name of unity." It's as if a man owned a plot of land with sheep and there happened to be a man in a neighboring field who he didn't get along with. The neighbor one day came to him and tried to warn him of a wolf he saw near his field, but the man would not listen to his neighbor and would yell at him to have concern for his own field and not butt in on affairs that did not concern him. This unfortunately led to an altercation between the two, which allowed the wolf to come in and begin to devour the sheep in both fields. I believe this is precisely what is going on today and we haven't woken up to the reality and gravity of the situation...Lord help us in our blindness that we may see, open our ears that we may hear, give us hearts to understand the times that we are living in where you spoke of the great falling away that is to happen before your soon return, bring us back to your Word and your glorious gospel that we may be able to know and discern your will in these dark and troubling times.

tbsounde2-

Personally the teachers you mention sicken me. And for the 500 th time I really like and respect JM. I listen to him frequently and have read quite a bit that he has written.

That is why I don't like it when he misrepresents scripture. I can't just give him a pass on that. You can't ignore that just because you support his overall purpose.

And while the persons you mention sicken me there are 1000s and 1000s of charismatic believers who are not like them and who are doing great things for the Kingdom. JM lumps all the good with the bad which is also wrong. In other words while I agree with him in his calling out of the excesses and errors of charismaniacs he is greatly overstating his case.

TMK writes:

That is why I don't like it when he misrepresents scripture. I can't just give him a pass on that. You can't ignore that just because you support his overall purpose.

While JM is a solid Bible teacher in many respects, he is not perfect, he is a mere man like the rest of us. He is a brother in Christ. If he is wrong about cessationism or exaggerating in his stance against the mainstream charismatic movement, pray for him. But please don't make him out to be this evil villain out to destroy the work of the Spirit of God. He has good solid reasons for rejecting and confronting TBN-type charismatic false teaching.

Oracio-

For heavens sake I am not vilifying him. Others here may have but not me.

If you look at my last post I said I agree with his calling in condemning the excesses of the charismatic movement.

This is a discussion forum so I am just discussing how I disagree with him in the interpretation of that passage. No reasonable reader of scripture would come to the conclusion he did. My point is that he does not need to do this to make his point. I don't think bible teachers of his caliber need to do so and I just wish he wouldn't do that. I believe what has happened is that he has gone too far in what he condemns in the charismatic movement and has backed himself into a corner and he will not be able to extricate himself. There are reasonable persons in the charismatic movement who want to dialogue with him but he won't do so. I wish he would just agree to sit down and have a civil discussion-- it doesn't even have to be a debate. By my suggesting this I am not vilifying him- it is what Christian brothers with differing views should do.

TMK, please forgive me if my last post sounded too harsh toward you. I don't believe I had a condescending attitude toward you but I know it could have easily come across that way. I was just trying to make some honest and blunt points.

Respectfully, instead of respected continuationist believers trying to dialogue with or debate JM concerning cessationism, I think it would better for them to start joining him in confronting and exposing wof prosperity preaching. In many cases it would mean they would have to completely break from certain circles of influence they are part of, and I'm afraid some are not willing to risk that or suffer the consequences of that.

One solid example of a Pentecostal preacher who did not shrink back from exposing wof false teaching was David Wilkerson. Currently Carter Conlon seems to have the same kind of boldness. I praise God for them. I wish there were more like them but they are few and far between. May God raise up more like them in these dark times.

I believe that strange fire, false teachers and prophets, counterfeit manifestations of the Spirit need to be addressed and dealt with, but not by John MacArthur.

Personally, I don't want someone lecturing me about the "strange fire" that He sees in the Church, when he doesn't know what the "true fire" of the Spirit is because he rejects it. Most Pentecostals and Charismatics are not going to listen to him, because MacArthur rejects the very gifts of the Spirit that they have been operating in for years.

And what about those that don't believe in the true manifestations of the Holy Spirit? What good is John MacArthur doing for them? He is only confirming and solidifying them in their doubt and unbelief, and keeping them from operating in the very gifts that God has placed within them for the building up of the Body of Christ. He is shutting the door to healing for them, and because they believe that he is solid in the teachings of the scriptures, they are being robbed of the whole council of God, the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, and the power of God to enter in to their ministry.

There is a very good and obvious reason why John MacArthur will not debate with Michael Brown on the false accusations that he has made concerning charismatics. This is a debate that he cannot win, because John MacArthur knows the scriptures. He knows what the Word says about healing and the other manifestations of the Holy Spirit, and he would have to cut up his New Testament and skirt around the truth to be able to prove his point.

There are many brothers and sisters that post on this forum that believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and the true manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit. I donn't know of a one of them that are trying to defend the false teachers and prophets or the "strange fire" that is taking place in many places.

There is going to be "strange fire" wherever there is true fire. The revivals of the past have proved this out, but we don't need any more heresy hunters that are not discerning but that classify any type of supernatural manifestion as being "strange fire." This is one of the enemie's tactics to stop a revival or move of God in it's infancy.

Let us pray for true discernment in the Body of Christ. "Let us prove all things and holdfast to that which is good." (1Thessalonians 5:21).

Mike

Quote: I think it would better for them to start joining him in confronting and exposing wof prosperity preaching.

Exposing WOF prosperity preaching, while pulling a salary of $402,444 from Grace to You and $103,000 from The Master's College and Seminary during 2011. Add to that Grace Community Church salary, speakers fees and book royalties.

Good balanced teaching by Shane Idleman that was posted on Sermon Index.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iovoQ1Xh4NY

Quote: "In many cases it would mean they would have to completely break from certain circles of influence they are part of, and I'm afraid some are not willing to risk that or suffer the consequences of that."

Absolutely true. I agree. This problem applies to every leader of a ministry- charismatic or non-charismatic.

Agreed TMK.

Mike, from the tone of your posts regarding JM, I take it that you cannot stomach his teaching. I respect that, as I on the other hand cannot receive from Michael Brown sometimes because of his close ties with wof preachers and some of his other views. I guess that's always going to be a reality on a forum like this. We will not all like the same preachers. That's okay. My point in all this is, may we learn not to cut off from fellowship those with whom we disagree with on non-essentials. WOF is not a non-essential issue, it is seriously harmful and I am a testimony of how harmful it is having been under that teaching for a few years till the Lord opened my eyes and set me free.

I really like Mike Brown and when you listen to his sermons you would get no clue that he has any dealings with prosperity teachers and the likes of Benny Hinn.

Long ago I sent him an email because I was troubled because I once heard him mention Benny Hinn in a positive light and it bothered me. He did respond and I will try to find it.

I don't believe he personally holds with the charismaniacs based on his writing and preaching and what I hear on his radio show.

Ok I found Dr browns response to me. This was from 2008:
-----------------

Todd,

I don't know Benny personally, nor do I follow his ministry. Some of my close friends, however, know him very well, and they assure me that he is quite sincere and devoted to Jesus and certainly not a charlatan. His style may be offensive to some and at times his teaching has raised eyebrows, but that is a far cry from being a charlatan.

In any case, you should not read too much into a passing comment made by me in a message, either positive or negative, and with regard to Benny Hinn and other leaders, wherever possible, believe the best about them unless you have firsthand information to the contrary.

Blessings,

Dr. Brown
-----------------

As you can tell I told dr brown I thought Hinn was a charlatan.

TMK, I'm sure you're not the only one from whom MB has heard this concern over the years. For him to endorse Hinn recently and team up with him calls into question his discernment regarding seriously false teaching. I would hope here at SI there wouldn't be a need to reason about the heretical nature of Hinn's ministry because it should be obvious. But I don't know, maybe it's not as obvious as I think.

Octacio,

In Michael Brown's book "Authentic Fire",
he is very gracious and complimentary
towards John MacArthur, even seeking
dialogue with him, Michael Brown has
wanted to avoid the strife and division that
he saw coming as a result of the "Strange
Fire" conference, but John MacArthur
seems to think that going after Charismatics
is more important than maintaining the
unity of the Spirit,

With John MacArthur being a Charismatic
is equivalent to embracing "strange fire."

Mike

Quote:
". For him to endorse Hinn recently and team up with him calls into question his discernment regarding seriously false teaching."

Yes I really can't understand this because dr Brown prides himself in standing for truth. I'd like to have a discussion with him about it. But the fact is that the mere appearance of Benny Hinn in his strange outfits is so off-putting to me that I never watch him and really have no insight into his ministry or beliefs. In other words since I know very little about Hinn other than some financial scandals it would be hard for me to have an intelligent conversation about him.

Maybe the forum associated with dr browns radio show discusses this. I will check it out.

Here is a link to dr browns radio show where he discussed his appearance on Hinn's program. I haven't heard it yet.

Below are a lot of listener comments mostly negative with some responses from dr brown.

I think dr brown has very solid character but he may have made an error in judgment here.

http://www.lineoffireradio.com/2014/01/03/dr-brown-answers-your-questions-and-talks-about-his-appearance-on-benny-hinns-tv-show/

TMK, yes I was already aware of that discussion in which Brown tries to defend his endorsement of Benny Hinn.

Mike, for whatever reason MacArthur did not feel it necessary to dialogue with Brown. However, he did pass on the dialogue to his right hand associate Phil Johnson who has similar credentials and was a key leader of that conference. Here is the link to that discussion:

http://www.lineoffireradio.com/2013/10/21/dividing-over-truth-or-just-plain-divisive-dr-brown-interviews-christian-leaders-regarding-the-strange-fire-conference/

Or if you prefer YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoxlfDW3WxA

In that discussion Brown asserts he is strongly against the excesses and abuses within the charismatic movement. Then right after that he turns around and teams up with Benny Hinn. Then he tries to defend that action by saying he has not really looked into Hinn’s ministry and has found nothing wrong with Hinn. I’m like, "Come on bro!” Many have been voicing serious concerns for years about Hinn. For those who do not support WOF and understand the serious error found therein, it doesn’t take much looking into to see that Hinn is part of that heretical movement. The fact that Brown endorsed Hinn recently after much warning about Hinn, makes Brown lose all credibility with me and many other believers. And it further confirmed the need for WOF to be exposed and confronted with the truth of God’s Word, whether by cessationists or otherwise. Again, if Brown is indeed opposed to WOF why the endorsement of Hinn? It just doesn’t make any sense.

Mike, another thing I want to discuss is your statement that cessationists don’t know anything about the authentic fire of the Holy Ghost. Many cessationist believers would find that quite offensive. Paul Washer is a cessationist. Does he know nothing about authentic fire? Many of the puritans were cessationists.

At the end of my last post I meant to say that many of the great puritan preachers were cessationists who did not even believe in a second baptism of the Spirit apart from conversion. Preachers like Thomas Watson, Horatius Bonar, George Whitfield, Richard Baxter, Charles Spurgeon, and the list can go on and on. Today I would compare to them preachers like Steve Lawson and MacArthur at times. For example, can we really say this kind of preaching by Steve Lawson is not filled with the fire of the Holy Ghost?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JQOBMi4QS8

And I know we can also find much fiery and anointed preaching from Pentecostal preachers such as David Wilkerson. My point is that condescending comments toward cessationists will not help here.

That is exactly how I felt after listening to Michael Brown and Phil Johnson's discussion and then seeing Brown's teaming up with Benny Hinn, I was like "what is going on here, it seems like saying one thing and doing something completely the opposite." Also how can someone as notable as Brown not see and discern and call out people like Hinn (as he so easily did against MacAurthur)? To claim that he is or was not aware does not seem 100% honest in my opinion, which gets to the question of is it coming down to the fear of offending and facing the consequences of really standing for the truth. Because as a pentecostal/charismatic, it is far easier to attack a cessationsit like MacAurthur than a "fellow" charismatic like Hinn. But I can't say for certain as I can't see into men's hearts and the Lord will be the judge of that in the end, but it just literally boggles my mind and makes me quite discouraged actually...

Also, it really makes me sad when people think that supernatural gifts and the like are THE real working of the Holy Spirit...when Christ made it clear that you can do all those things and still go to hell. To make such a statement that cessationists do not know the real work of the Spirit is quite arrogant and misguided if you ask me because the REAL work of the Spirit is regeneration.

Preach it tbsounde2! I have high respect for pentescostal and/or charismatic believers who really do take a strong stand for the truth and are willing to suffer any consequences for that.

after lisenig to most of what brown said on his raido that tmk posted in the link ,,,he seems verry sincere and i would say he will be true to his word ,,that if the things said about beeni him are true ,and i know they are by the way ,,he will bring these things up to hinn personly and reprove him

you guys should hear what brown says befor saying he is actualy teaming up with hinn

brothagary writes

you guys should hear what brown says befor saying he is actualy teaming up with hinn

Brother, I listened to that discussion in its entirety a few months ago when it first got released, as well as the discussion with Phil Johnson before Dr. Brown went on Benny Hinn's program. TMK mentioned that he voiced concerns to Brown way back in 08. And as I stated I'm almost positive TMK couldn't have been the only person Brown heard that concern from. Brown has had plenty of time throughout the years to check out Benny Hinn, T.D. Jakes, etc. But he says he has not had time. I say baloney. If he really had a love of the truth he would have been checked out Hinn long ago and found serious issues with his teaching and ministry.

awakened writes:

Which of these camps is worse than the other? You say the wof guys and maybe you are right but if for example I was living back in John Calvins day I am pretty sure I would have been strung up by the neck. Sure, they don't actually murder people anymore, but I have seen first hand that same "murderous" spirit take hold and control so called men of God and entire churches.

I'll give you that brother. I guess I was mainly considering the current widespread deception that has been infiltrating multitudes of churches worldwide.

And lots and lots of people end up getting hurt...all in the name of standing up for the truth...hmmm.

For me this isn't about taking sides anyway, all these players have issues, and most of them are tainted by money and a lust for recognition and power. Frankly if the Lord was to give his assessment about the lot of them I think we would have a repeat of Revelations 2 and 3 all over again. That's why I don't faun over any preachers, streams or camps or any man for that matter....just Jesus...keeps it clean and simple that way:)

The discouraging thing for me was to see so much animosity directed toward JM on this forum and toward cessationism in general. But I guess I'll just have to learn to deal with it and move on respectfully.

Brown has had plenty of time throughout the years to check out Benny Hinn, T.D. Jakes, etc. But he says he has not had time. I say baloney. If he really had a love of the truth he would have been checked out Hinn long ago and found serious issues with his teaching and ministry.

Some of the convictions I held to in 2004 have been changed now in 2014. 10 years of learning to look unto Jesus has split the light into different hues. The glass is still dark, but I am catching more light as I continue to admit the glass is dark.

Brother Paul, I will receive that exhortation and will be more lenient toward Dr. Brown and hope that he will take heed to his mistake of joining Benny Hinn on his program. I will agree with your balanced admonition not to completely write off either men of God(JM or MB) at this point in time.