Posted on 03/21/2018 8:45:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Of all the theological squabbles that have plagued evangelical Christianity over the years, especially in the West, a particularly profound division centers on the power of the Holy Spirit and the ways in which He is at work today.
Charismatics and noncharismatics who spoke with The Christian Post all concurred that steps can be taken toward mending this division, even as differences remain.
Those who believe that the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit — such as prophecy, tongues, interpretation of tongues, the working of miracles, and the others listed in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 — have continued to this day, called continuationism, are often associated with Pentecostalism or the "charismatic movement," as it is often called.
Some say that at long last, Pentecostals and charismatics are finally maturing theologically, after many years of being regarded as Bible-lite emotionalists, and that the growing presence of the supernatural in Christian churches is part of a great, worldwide move of God's Spirit that is in keeping with the witness of Scripture.
Other believers are just beginning to explore the supernatural more deliberately, admitting that while they believe in the continuation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit they don't actively use them. Yet others continue to think such gifts were only intended for a specific time in biblical history and are no longer operational, a view known as cessationism.
Grappling With the 'Sufficiency of Scripture'
For the perspective of one such cessationist, CP reached out to Eric Bargerhuff, a professor of theology at Trinity College in Florida and author of the book, The Most Misused Stories in The Bible: Surprising Ways Popular Bible Stories Are Misunderstood.
Despite the deep divide in the Body of Christ over this topic, Bargerhuff said he believes some progress can be made when asked how continuationists and cessationists might get over their differences, particularly when their beliefs have significant implications for what ministry looks like.
Finding a mutually understood language is critical, he says.
"Often times the debate is fueled by people who are talking past each other by using common terminology with differing definitions," explains Bargerhuff, a Reformed Baptist who studied under Reformed theologian Wayne Grudem, a continuationist.
"Similarly, others may be saying the same thing but are using different phrases. For example, one may say 'supernatural gifts of knowledge,' whereas someone else may use the idea of 'the gift of discernment,' though they are intending to say the same thing."
Bargerhuff further stressed that the conversation can be assisted by each side discussing what they mean by "sufficiency of Scripture," and the role that experience has in the entire debate. He said he's often heard people say they used to believe something about God's Word until they had a particular experience and then read that experience back into the Scriptures to justify its validity.
"The role of experience must be clearly defined and put in its proper place. Scripture interprets experience, not the other way around," he said.
Bargerhuff added that extremes on either side are unhealthy, such as when continuationists present themselves as "more spiritual" or at the very least "a higher class of Christian" than those who have not experienced the same things they claim to have experienced; or by contrast, when cessationists minimize the "affectionate side of Christianity" and make it "into an academic, cold, intellectual exercise."
"Therefore, mutual humility, an agreed upon vocabulary, a commitment to the centrality of the Gospel and first order doctrines, a willingness to test our convictions and experiences through the sound exegetical practices, and a deep commitment to unity are key components of working together," he said.
"It is very possible that our differences may continue to keep some Christians from working intimately together on some ministry projects, but the overall ability to agree together on the essentials of the faith must be a stronger chord that keeps us together on mission."
When Pentecostals, Charismatics Fail
Michael Brown, a messianic Jewish scholar, charismatic theologian and host of the Line of Fire radio program, told CP that "the charismatic movement has done a poor job of policing itself. There's really no question about that."
"And so our critics have had a field day."
But those critics have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bathwater, he insists, noting that whenever God restores something important to the Church, such as the doctrine of justification in Martin Luther's day — which was not a new revelation but a truth that had been buried and lost under many layers of tradition — such recoveries are never smooth transitions.
Brown, who's also the author of the upcoming book, Playing with Holy Fire: A Wake-Up Call to the Pentecostal-Charismatic Church, where he chastises Pentecostal and charismatic churches for their spiritual gullibility, sexual sin in leadership, misuse of finances, doctrinal error, personal flakiness, and misuse of "prophetic" utterances, even as he maintains that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are for today.
"If you look through Church history in the centuries before that there was still prophecy, there were still healings, there were people being delivered from demons. So this whole idea that it all stopped at a certain point, be it the death of the Apostles or the completion of the canon [of Scripture], is a complete historical fiction," Brown said, referencing Asbury scholar Craig Keener's two-volume work, Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts, in which Keener highlights how rationalist philosophy influenced subsequent generations of Christians regarding the supernatural.
He explained that Augustine once believed that the death of the last Apostle meant the end of miracles but ultimately came to reject that view.
"It is true that with Augustine that the gifts of the Spirit were normative in New Testament times and then in less than a two-year period they recorded more than 70 miraculous healings and he said there were miracles just like they saw in the New Testament. So in City of God, his definitive work, he absolutely reiterates those things," Brown said.
"As God continues to do what He has always done but in greater intensity and in measure in these days then we're recognizing that, OK, the Spirit continues to do these things based on Scripture. And to me, that's always the test: 1) look at the Word, 2) go from the Word to the experience and then look at history, but always first and foremost look at the Word," Brown said.
He went on to stress that what is key is that followers of Jesus believe in "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, not Father, Son, and Holy Bible."
"And when we speak of the sufficiency of Scripture we don't mean that we have a relationship with the Bible. We mean that God's Word is His one and only Word — that there is only one Bible and that nothing else can be called Scripture or claim to be the Word of God for all people."
Yet that Word does not tell us every experience we will or will not have, or how you meet with God in personal prayer, Brown said.
"What if you feel your heart burning?" he asked, referencing Cleopas and the words said on the road of Emmaus in Luke 24.
The questions that should be asked when engaging spiritual experiences, Brown insists, are, 'Is it God or not?' Is it contrary to Scripture? Is it in harmony with the larger testimony of Scripture? What kind of fruit does it bear?"
"So we use the creedal test and the moral test — what does it teach and what kind of fruit does it produce — and based on that we come to our respective conclusions," he explained.
Addressing Excesses, Serving the Whole Church
Author Jennifer Eivaz, whom CP interviewed in November about her book, Seeing the Supernatural: How to Sense, Discern and Battle in the Spiritual Realm, concurs that it's incumbent on believers who do believe in the continuation of the gifts and operate in them to recognize the places where theological messes have been made, and have the self-awareness and humility to repent.
"There have always been excesses with every movement [of the Spirit]," Eivaz said, mentioning the Azusa Street revival in 1906, long considered the birth of Pentecostalism in United States, where the gift of prophecy was notoriously abused.
"But we have to have a lot of humility; we have to be willing to say we're sorry," when people have been wounded by those excesses, she added.
When it comes to the gifts of the Spirit, remaining teachable and child-like is key, and maturity comes when you think about people, knowing their hearts and how they feel when we do mess up, "because we will mess up," she said.
Eivaz is based in Turlock, California, and her city is packed with churches, many of which in the past few decades were hostile to all things charismatic, she noted. But as her church, Harvest Christian Center — a "charismatic renewal" congregation she calls it — has sown into the city and served faithfully, relationships have been built and trust has been gained where fear once reigned. Today, she and her husband teach and equip spritually hungry Christians who hail from a variety of denominations how to move in the gifts of the Spirit with integrity.
She emphasizes that ministering in the supernatural is fundamentally about pointing people to Jesus, not the gifts themselves.Catholics, Protestants
"And we do not ask them to come to our church, we're not trying to offload anybody or tell them 'If you don't have the 'fire' of God in your church you should not be there.' We don't say that. I don't agree with that at all."
She made a point to mention that lately she has been studying the impact of stoicism on how Christians interact with God. When encumbered with a stoic mindset, spiritual experiences where people feel things tangibly, even feeling something as good and pure as God's love, are immediately viewed as suspect and unreasonable, and therefore should not be trusted. Such an approach shuts down the pathway to how the Holy Spirit might be communicating with people, she said.
"Acts Chapter 2 says that we are going to prophesy and going to have dreams. In other words, you get a set of eyes from the Holy Spirit that are distinctly spiritual. But too often people want to limit what you are and are not allowed to see according to their own comfort level."
Churches will often shut down supernatural-oriented themes because they have a very narrow view of how they think God can and should speak, she went on to say; the flip side is that some charismatics regrettably lack the discernment necessary to know when something is indeed outside of biblical boundaries.
'Functional Cessationists' Start Exploring the Supernatural
Meanwhile, the Reformed and other camps are somewhat divided on the issue. While some are admitting that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are indeed for today, they do not really know what to do about it practically and want to learn more.
Writing on the popular website Desiring God in October, Jason Meyer, pastor for preaching and vision at Bethlehem Baptist Church and associate professor of Preaching at Bethlehem College & Seminary in Minneapolis, outlined his "Confessions of Functional Cessationist." While he believes theoretically that the Holy Spirit's gifts have continued to the present, a "gap between theory and practice pricks my conscience."
Meyer argued that the passage most often employed by cessationists in defense of their stance, 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, which speaks of tongues, prophecies, and knowledge passing away "when the perfect comes" is a reference to the return of Christ, not the closing of the biblical canon.
"I have said things like 'I am open, but cautious' when it comes to sign gifts like prophecy, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. That statement about caution rightly stresses the need to "test everything" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Every experience must be examined by the searchlight of Scripture," he wrote.
But instead of "open, but cautious," Meyer noted that all too often he is "open, but overly suspicious," and has discovered that Scripture also tests our attitudes in addition to experiences.
"It was a little shocking to see how much my attitude is actually rebuked by Scripture. Paul commands Christians, 'Earnestly desire the spiritual gifts' (1 Corinthians 14:1). He characterizes the Corinthians as 'eager for manifestations of the Spirit.'"
Meyer tells his cessationist friends that a day is coming when he, too, will be a cessationist: "the second coming."
Yet something else might be driving greater cooperation and conversation between continuationists and cessationists.
Brown told CP that the increasing visibility and overt presence of the demonic in popular culture will precipitate an even greater awareness of the reality of the spiritual realm. He has personally met people who were not even Christians who, after encountering the overwhelming darkness of the occult, said it was so intense and devastating they knew there had to be a God.
"But I also find it interesting that when [Christian] people begin experiencing these powerful demonic strongholds, and people have to deal with it in real life, they come to the charismatics for help."
Such people often soon reconsider their cessationist views, he said, maintaining that Pentecostals have matured significantly in recent decades.
"And if you go back 50 years, we didn't have the wealth of fine biblical scholars, theologians, apologists, and philosophers, who today, are charismatic."
I saw the post number and wondered by my name wasn’t in it.
I have never been able to figure out how that happens because when I try to remove someone’s name, it demands a name in the field.
That does not references the gift of tongues in the least nor even praying in tongues.
It just says all kinds of prayers and requests.
It does not say that praying in the Spirit is praying in tongues.
The problem I see is that the teaching that *praying in the Spirit* = *Praying in tongues* has been so ingrained in people with the verses of Ephesians 6 and Romans 8 being used to support that claim, that people don’t realize that NOTHING in Scripture defines praying in the Spirit as praying in tongues.
Nor do the references to praying in tongues refer to praying in the Spirit.
The first sentence is ‘And pray in the spirit’
The book “Nine O Clock in Morning’ by Dennis Bennett would be helpful, as he is a priest, who sought out the answer to this. It’s $1.99 on Amazon, or easily found in Christian bookstore. You might find it interesting.
Enjoyed the conversation, and God bless you with ALL that he has to give you.
Yes, I see that.
Where does it say that praying in the Spirit = praying in tongues?
When we pray, we speak to God:
I Corinthians 14:2
2 For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries * “Pray in the Spirit” Ephesians 6 is speaking to God!
Gift of Tongues for Church needs Gift of Interpretation:
1 Corinthians 14:15–16
15 What is the outcome then? I will pray with the spirit and I will pray with the mind also; I will sing with the spirit and I will sing with the mind also.
16 Otherwise if you bless in the spirit only, how will the one who fills the place of the ungifted say the “Amen” at your giving of thanks, since he does not know what you are saying.
King James Bible
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries
*Note: “IN THE SPIRIT” is prayer to God, not a message to Church FROM God, as in Gift of Tongues.
RE: Is that nit-pickiness the best you can do to find some problem with the article?
Errr... nope. My question still is this -— How do we differentiate between someone who is incoherently saying something and a real heavenly language?
That is not nit-picking, it is trying to find a basis for discerning the difference.
RE: There are also angelic tongues. We need to always err on the side of giving the benefit of the doubt. The alternative is unthinkable.
Well, have at it then. My approach is always one of caution, while open to the gift of tongues today, I always err on the side of CAUTION.
We need a criteria to differentiate between what is real and what is psychological.
That is why I ask the questions I asked above.
RE:I have no clue. I have heard people who were “speaking in tongues” that sounded like nothing more than ticka-ticka-ticka-.........
Well, there you go, See this clip of Rodney Howard Brown and Kenneth Copeland “Speaking in tongues” (Start at 1:21 )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhwlvFKHFvQ
How do we know what they are saying?
RE: Again, there’s no indication that this gift would amount to a lesson in angelic grammar [do we even know that our minds could grasp the equivalent of angelic grammar—providing there is one?]. It would be the gift of knowing the meaning of the particular utterances in question.
If you know the meaning of an utterance, then you would know the grammar of the utterance.
When Angels appear in the Bible and speak to humans, they do not use angelic language to speak to them. They use LANGUAGE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND.
Let’s say you are able to interpret an angelic utterance for the edification of the church and you interpret it as “God So Love the World” for everyone to hear.
How there not a grammar? There will be a word for “God”, a word for “love” and a word for “World” in the utterance.
And if the same utterance is repeated, I would assume that the same words would come out of the person’s mouth.
You say: “Scriptures neither teach nor suggest the possibility of learning angelic languages.” But Neither does it suggest nor teach that we cannot LEARN the language. If you can interpret it, then why can’t you can learn it?
Matthew 5:20
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Not YOU....
You were simply courtesy pinged.
The post was directed to the first person in the *To:* line. Anyone else is just a courtesy ping.
Sorry for the confusion.
We don’t even if someone claims to be interpreting them.
Knowing that many of these charlatans have set up fake healings with people planted in the crowds, I don’t trust any of them.
Besides, Copeland’s theology is really whacked out.
I read both your posts, and I will answer to the best of my ability. First, a vignette.
When C. S. Lewis, as a boy, reached a certain age [12?] his father sent him to live with a tutor. The tutor met Lewis at the train station and proceeded to drive him home. It was a silent ride, and at length, to make polite small talk, Lewis remarked that he hadn’t expected the landscape to be so hilly.
The tutor rounded on him. “WHY?” he demanded. “WHY didn’t you expect it to be hilly?”
That was the tutor’s first lesson in forcing Lewis to always examine and question his assumptions and presuppositions. Lewis conceded that not everyone would have liked the approach, but said that for him it was, “Red meat and strong drink.”
We can benefit from that approach now. Namely, by utilizing it to separate what we know about angelic languages from what we assume.
What do we know? We know that angelic languages can be imparted as a spiritual gift, via speaking in tongues. We know that it’s impossible to understand and angelic language without an interpreter.
That’s all we know. Everything else is conjecture, assumption and/or presupposition.
Let’s examine our assumptions. How do we know that angelic languages have syntax similar to earthly languages, or that they have any syntax at all?
We don’t. We’re simply projecting onto angelic languages the the traits of earthly languages. Earthly languages are all we know, so we make the assumption that angelic languages are just like them, except with different vocabularies.
What evidence supports this assumption?
None/zero. We are finite, mortal beings who have never experienced the heavenly realm of angels. We haven’t the foggiest idea of what their languages are like. They are heavenly creatures; they live on a different plane. Yes, they can speak human languages. But that does not mean they’re limited to them.
The bottom line here is simple and straightforward. We have finite minds and a very limited set of experiences. We cannot reliably, or with even one scintilla of certitude, project that everything that exists in the heavenly realm is exactly like what exists on the earthly plane, with just a few superficial changes. I.e.: an angelic language may be *fundamentally,* essentially different in every way from its earthly counterpart. Just bc the Holy Spirit understands both languages and can not only gift the utterance of angelic tongues, but also their interpretation, does not require the languages to be essentially similar. It speaks only to the breadth and scope of the spiritual gifts.
I hope this is helpful. There are many things we don’t understand, or fully understand, now, that we will more fully understand in heaven.
RE: How do we know that angelic languages have syntax similar to earthly languages, or that they have any syntax at all?
We don’t.
__________________
If they do not have syntax, then how do they get translated to HUMAN LANGUAGE which DO have syntax?
Therefore, my assumption is — THEY MUST HAVE SOME FORM OF SYNTAX.
Hence, with modern technology, it is possible to record what a person is saying and to record what the interpreter is saying to see if we can glean the meaning of knows, verbs and pronouns.
Secondly, let’s look at the one making the interpretation.... when does he know the angelic language? Is it just a case of the spirit coming into him at that time which allows him to do the interpretation and then after that, the knowledge disappears, only for it to return once someone else speaks it? Or is it the case that he already has been given that knowledge and knows it like my Chinese teacher knows both English and Chinese?
I admit we are finite mortals and we cannot fathom everything abut God. Yet, we are told to be discerning.
There are just too many charlatans in existence claiming to be able to perform miracles and speak unknown languages for us to simply give anyone who claims he has this gift the benefit of the doubt.
If he really has the gift, there will be a criteria for determining this.
The main criteria we human beings have is to LISTEN to the meaning of the utterance and to understand its meaning and COMPARE what is being said with what we already know God said in scripture. We have no other way to do this than to listen to the interpretation.
And since,
1) A sound from a human being’s mouth is being uttered
2) The sound can be heard by the listeners.
3) The sound is interpreted for listeners in their language.
4) The interpreter knows the meaning of the words being uttered.
We have to conclude, based on the exercise of our sound minds that it has syntax, and it has meaning. Otherwise, how can it be translated to the language that we know?
Here’s another thing to ponder -— When Angels appear to humans, they never speak to them in angelic language... they speak to them in the HUMAN LANGUAGE.
The intent is always to make God’s message UNDERSTANDABLE.
Given this, I don’t see why if there are interpreters, the language cannot be learned.
Do you believe that the earthly, syntax-dependent languages created by an infinite, omnipotent, omniscient God are the only kind of languages God is capable of creating?
Is God limited by your understanding of how language and translation can and cannot function?
How about because information must make sense and be codable and decodable.
Claiming that angelic languages don’t necessarily have to have any structure or format is simply an excuse to justify calling the nonsensical verbiage that comes out of someone’s mouth as *angelic tongues*.
That angels have their own language is a perfectly reasonable conclusion. They HAVE to have words to describe things that belong to the spirit realm and we cannot even conceive of.
But I am sure of one thing, an angelic tongue is going to sound far superior to what most people who claim to be speaking in tongues that are angelic, utter.
You said it much better than me, in just a few words! Thank you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.