Intro:
"I've gained a new understanding of why there is so much confusion about the charismatic gifts in the church. A powerful intimidation factor works against those who want to deal with the issues biblically. To critique charismatic doctrine or practice is commonly viewed as inherently divisive or unkind" (13).
1. Is Experience a Valid Test of Truth? [no]
"There is little doubt that most charismatics, if they are honest with themselves, would have to acknowledge that personal experience - and not Scripture - is the foundation of their belief system" (23). "Non-charismatics are often accused of opposing emotion and experience. Let me state as clearly as possible that I believe both emotion and experience are essential outgrowths of genuine faith. Many of my own spiritual experiences have been profound, overwhelming, life-changing events. Please do not think for a moment that I would defend a cold, inanimate religion based on a barren creed or some empty ritual ... Charismatics err because they tend to build their teachings on experience, rather than understanding that authentic experience happens in response to truth" (24). "Instead of responding to a proper interpretation of God's Word, [Charismatic] Christianity is collecting fantastic and preposterous experiences. The Bible is either mangled to fit those experiences or simply ignored altogether. The result is pseudo-Christian mysticism. Mysticism is a system of belief that attempts to perceive spiritual reality apart from objective, verifiable facts. It seeks truth through feelings, intuition, and other internal [subjective] senses. Objective data is usually discounted, so mysticism derives its authority from within. Spontaneous feeling becomes more significant than objective fact. Intuition outweighs reason. An internal awareness supersedes external reality. As we shall see shortly, mysticism is at the heart of modern existentialism, humanism, and even many forms of paganism - most notably Hinduism and its close ally, New Age philosophy. Irrational mysticism is also at the heart of the charismatic experience. It has subverted biblical authority within the movement and replaced it with a new standard: personal experience. And make no mistake - the practical effect of charismatic teaching is to set one's experience on a higher plane than a proper understanding of Scripture ... There are only 2 basic approaches to biblical truth. One is the historical, objective approach, which emphasizes God's action toward men and women as taught in Scripture. The other is the personal, subjective approach, which emphasizes the human experience of God ... Objective, historic theology is Reformation theology ... We begin with Scripture. Our thoughts, ideas, or experiences are validated or invalidated on the basis of how they compare with the Word. On the other hand, the subjective view is the methodology of historic Roman Catholicism. Intuition, experience, and mysticism have always played a central role in Catholic theology. The subjective view has also been at the heart of liberalism [see Voegelin's The New Science of Politics, i.e. liberalism as modern-day gnosticism] and neoorthodoxy. Truth in those systems is determined by intuition and feeling. Truth is what happens to you ... [same with] historic Pentacostalism, which began [c1900 at] a small Bible college in Topeka, KS, run by Charles Fox Parham ... a member of the Holiness movement, which teaches that entire sanctification - a spiritual state amounting to sinless perfection in this life - is obtainable by Christians through a 'second blessing'" (31-2). "Mysticism, or the idea that theology can grow out of personal experience, is not original with the charismatics. Several other key influences, all anti-Christian, have contributed to building the concept of experiential theology: existentialism, humanism, and paganism" (41). In 1967, Clark Pinnock understood that "experience alone is too flimsy a base on which to rest the Christian system." But by 1986, he had abandoned inerrancy and "endorsed the charismatic movement because of his own experience" (42). "Most pagan beliefs and practices find their roots in mystery religions spawned at Babel. By the time of Christ, people throughout the Greek and Roman world participated in [these] mystery religions" (42, e.g. Mithraism).
MacArthur cites a 1977 quote by Robert K. Johnson (in CT) that "Evangelicals are beginning to ... explore the possibility of an experientially based theology ... [influenced by charismatics or relationals] suggesting that theology must travel from Spirit to Word, not from Word to Spirit, the pattern of their [Reformation] heritage ... Their claim is that traditional evangelical theology is largely irrelevant or inadequate" (44, hmmm that's what the liberals, now the emergents, say too). I'm reminded of Arthur Kac's discussion in The Rebirth of Israel (Moody, 1950s?, SBC library) of "the modern crisis" (Dave Breese in 7MwRWG [see br-tph] says liberals adopted [hijacked] Kierkegaard's ideas in the 1950s [100 yrs after he wrote them] to provide a way out [or at least to appear so, and to avoid moving back to true religious faith in God] of the utter and complete failure of liberalism [e.g. progressive, optimism in the face of WWI, WWII, looming Cold War, i.e. 'the modern crisis'] and other mentions of this phenomenon, e.g. Berdyaev, ...). Hmmm [Aha!], I'm thinking that this 'crisis of modernity' that so exercised liberals during those days was actually no more, no less than THEIR (liberals) crisis of lack of faith and realizing their ideas DON'T cut the mustard! (in stark contrast to OUR [believers'] Scripturally informed [conservative] ideas, which DO satisfy, explain, predict, endure, comfort, ring true w/reality ...). Liberals: We have a problem here [a 'crisis'] ... Us: No, YOU have a problem, WE don't! ;) Maybe this is why even some [liberal] evangelicals were exploring existential approaches in the 1970s (and before and since). Pity the term 'evangelical' includes liberals, imports their [telltale] confusion, muddiness, guilt-riddenness, existential angst ...
2. Does God Still Give Revelation? [no]
"From the time of the apostles until the present, the true church has always believed that the Bible is complete. God has given his revelation, and now Scripture is finished. God has spoken. What he gave is complete, efficacious, sufficient, inerrant, infallible, and authoritative. Attempts to add to the Bible, and claims of further revelation from God have always been characteristics of heretics and cultists, not the true people of God" (64). "Because of the growing influence of charismatic teaching, much of the church may mistakenly abandon its cornerstone: Sola Scriptura, the principle that God's Word is the only basis for divine authority" (56). "Charismatics have abandoned the uniqueness of Scripture as the only Word of God, and the result is a spiritual free-for-all. A longing for something new and esoteric has replaced historic Christianity's settled confidence in the Word of God - ['fresh and new v. tried and true'] and that is an invitation to Satan's counterfeit. Confusion, error, and even satanic deception [hmmm, liberalism?] are the inescapable results" (57-8). "The canon of Scripture is closed" (60, Rev. 22:18-9). "... contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (61, Jude 3, basis of conservatism, i.e. what we need to conserve). Beware of 'false prophets ... [showing] great signs and wonders ..." (62, Matt. 24:24, and urging us to add to 'The Faith').
3. Prophets, Fanatics, or Heretics?
In this chapter, the author discusses 'The Kansas City Prophets' (now Metro Vineyard Fellowship, Mike Bickle, Bob Jones, Jones later disciplined for 'sexual misconduct' according to Wimber, who had invited the KC Prophets to join Vineyard 67), Montanism, Roman Catholicism, Neoorthodoxy, The Cults [Mormon, Christian Science, Jehovah's Witnesses, Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God i.e. Adventism, Moonies].
Hmmm, MacArthur discusses a difference he has with Wayne Grudem. "Grudem ... argues for 2 levels of NT prophecy. One is apostolic ... infallible and on a part w/both OT prophecy and the inerrant written Word of God. The other is the gift of prophecy, meant to edify, encourage, comfort. I would agree. But unlike Grudem I do not believe this 2nd level of prophecy is revelatory" (70, why call the latter 'prophecy,' better to call it 'God-given insight').
After discussing the KCP's claims to having received new prophecies, including Bill Hamon's suggestion to test for truth by a 'sensation in the upper abdominal area' [!? i.e. your 'gut,' ignore your mind, beliefs, theology, common sense 72], he says "the fact remains that since the canon of Scripture was completed [i.e. in NT times], no genuine revival or orthodox movement has ever been led by people whose authority is based in any way on private revelations from God [emphasis in original]. Many groups have claimed to receive new revelation, but all of them have been fanatical, heretical, cultic, or fraudulent. Both charismatics and non-charismatics need to consider whether there is a parallel between these groups and the modern charismatic movement" (73).
"Montanus was a 2C heretic from Phrygia who believed he was a prophet sent by God to reform Christianity through asceticism, the practice of glossolalia [speaking in tongues], and continued prophetic revelation ... [assisted by] 2 so-called prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla" (73). According to Eusebius, Montanus "exposed himself to the assaults of the adversary [Satan] through his unbounded lust for leadership ... opposed formalism in the church and boldly intimidated Christians by claiming his followers were more spiritual than those who had only the 'dead letter' of the Scriptures ... [modern charismatics seem to be] the spiritual heir[s] of Montanism ... At least one leading charismatic writer, Larry Christenson, even claims the Montanist movement as part of the charismatic historical tradition" (74-5).
"The Roman Catholic concept of tradition ... is open-ended. There is always the possibility of adding something that is equal in authority to the Scriptures ... From the 'unwritten traditions' [Council of Trent] ... it was a short step to the concept of the infallibility of the pope ... [and] such traditions as penance, purgatory, prayers for the dead, and an entire sacramental system. None of these things has biblical support" (75-7).
"Neoorthodox theology [J K S Reid, C H Dodd] claims that Scripture is not the objective Word of God, but [only] has the potential of speaking to people's hearts in a moment of meaning as they open themselves to it ... God never did really speak propositionally ... [only] personally in private revelation when we encounter him ... fatal flaw ... relegates God's revelation entirely to the arena of the subjective ... making personal feelings the ultimate rule. In the end it is simply another attempt to seek revealed truth beyond the Bible. Like the charismatic movement, it looks to human experience to find that truth" (78). Like the 2C gnostics and charismatics, neos are relying on 'pneumatic knowing' [i.e. gut feel, a mystical 'knowing beyond knowing' 80] to discern truth (for them). In his famous 'here I stand' statement, Luther appealed to Scripture and reason. "To attempt to define truth [as gut feeling or mystical knowing] ... is to place truth beyond the revealed Word of God ... Who can go beyond that? The [Bible] is sufficient for all our spiritual needs (Ps. 19:7-14). Extrabiblical revelation always leads to error!" (80).
The Mormons add to the Bible their Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price. Christian Science adds Mary Baker Eddy's Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Jehovah's Witnesses add their Watchtower Magazine, claiming its a "magazine without equal on earth ... due to the great Author of the Bible" (81). The Worldwide Church of God, founded by Herbert W. Armstrong, who also founded Ambassador College, The Plain Truth magazine and The World Tomorrow radio program, got started when Mrs. Armstrong "had a vision in which an angel laid out the entire system for her" (81).
The search for 'something more' (e.g. above and Edgar Cayce, L Ron Hubbard, etc.) "is really a path to something less ... filled with detours, dead ends, giant chuckholes - and very little else" (81). "The price of charismatic mysticism and subjectivism is much too high ... the uniqueness and central authority of the Word have been lost" (83). "There is no substitute for the Word of God. There is no 'something more.' Don't seek energy for the spiritual walk in the empty 'prophecies' of someone's imagination. Don't look for guidance in the uncertain counsel of feelings and intuition" (84). The Reformers had it right; Sola Scriptura!
4. How Should We Interpret the Bible?
5. Does God Do Miracles Today?
6. What Is Behind the "Third Wave" and Where Is It Going?
7. How Do Spiritual Gifts Operate?
8. What Was Happening in the Early Church?
9. Does God Still Heal?
10. Is the Gift of Tongues for Today?
11. What Is True Spirituality?
12. Does God Promise Health and Wealth?
Epilogue: How Should We Respond to the Charismatic Movement?
Hmmm, blogs are perhaps best seen as 'shrines to [a person's] experience'!
Hmmm, the rise of Pentacostalism coincided w/rise of Jamesian pragmatism. Same philosophy of subjectivism taken in 2 different directions. Both dead ends.