Do Charismatics attempt Apologetics?

[Robert]

Kyle - I can't dispute that. Maybe someday I'll cross paths (literally, not just on the internet) with a moderate Charismatic and we can commence a meaningful dialogue.

[Rod]

Thanks for joining in Kyle. You have some honest and valid concerns about defending Charismatic/Pentecostal behaviors.

But i'm not really interested in behaviors - all I want is truth. Being excited about church and spirituality is very normal (every religion does it... especially the Muslims.) So prayer, community outreach, love and fellowship, and traditions can be had at any meeting of the Cosmic deities. But an evening at the local pub probably has more truth attached to it.

I honestly don't think Charismatics are interested in the real Jesus...and neither are liberals or hippies - and don't get me started on Christian bikers.

So we are still at phase 1 of this discussion: The real Jesus and carefully reading scripture for truth.

[Rod]

Do I hate charismatics or consider them hellbound? No. They are like an emotional little brother who is desperate for peer attention and tries sex, drugs, and music just to fit in and rise up in his circle of thugs.

So what does the Bible say? It wonderfully gives Charismatics just enough rope to hang themselves - they seldom realize that rope has more practical uses and it's abusive to hang oneself.

So here's the core truth issue:
Charismatics love the book of Acts. Yet they only really like a few specific verses - the ones that give them HOLY SPIRIT power.
They love tongues, healings, miracles...but don't understand the purpose and authority behind these things. Many are basically gnostics who claim a special knowledge of Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

I've read 100's of accounts of people who have left the charismatic movement. They all say the same thing: "We didn't realize what we were getting into...and we didn't carefully read our Bibles."

It seems the real Jesus and old dusty Bible are NOT enough excitement for most charismatics - they need some magic sprinkled on their crusty old religion.

But I say once you get into the Bible and the real Jesus it's anything but boring. Ask Joni Eareckson-Tada her opinions on charismatics (She agrees with me) and yet Charismatics keep stating how wonderful she is... this shows us how clueless many of them are. Now if you can get Joni to speak in tongues and be healed i will most likely change my mind. *I'll wait...

[Kyle]

Rob your basic generalization of charismatics shows an incredible ignorance of the subject. There are all kinds of charismatics and streams of churches that would not fall into your category, mini prefer not to be called charismatics but believe and practice the gifts of the Spirit. I lived in Holland for many years and few north American evangelicals realize that Corrie ten Boom and brother Andrew of Open Doors the famous Bible's smuggler. Two of the most famous Christians of the 20th century both Dutch both practice and promoted speaking tongues they were charismatic. They're not known for this because they were balanced Christians loving God sharing the gospel and greatly loved the word of God. So I wonder where they fallowing the real Jesus? If you could tone it down Rob we could have a real discussion but your over-the-top accusations show incredible ignorance of the subject trust me you're ignorant.

[Kyle]

Why don't we go to the Bible and discuss this you give me a verse and let me respond.

[Rod]

Kyle quote:
" If you could tone it down Rob we could have a real discussion but your over-the-top accusations show incredible ignorance of the subject trust me you're ignorant."

Just setting the mood. (who's brother Andrew?)

I'm going to have to look into Corrie Ten Boom and any Pentecostal behavior she might have had. Thanks for the heads up.

[Rod]

Kyle this isn't about verses - it's about the whole Bible. But you have a valid point. Let's start somewhere. Like I said; "this is about truth."

My other concern is: How far does your charismatic behavior and theology go? How can you ever tell if it's gone too far? who are YOU to judge another charismatic?

[Rod]

1 Corinthians 12:
4Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. 7To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

I sure would like to see some miracles... Every claim I have ever researched has proven to be a stupid lie. And this is from (me!) a person who thinks God can do a miracle anytime he chooses.

Show me one missionary who can go to a foreign country and speak tongues instantly to share the Gospel and i'll be impressed. Instead - every missionary I have ever met has had to spend years living and learning the language and culture of people to write and share the Gospel with them...
yet we have charismatics who claim to bypass all this legwork and (mostly in suburban cultures where nobody needs to translate) get instantly translated for rooms where nobody NEEDS to understand some rare language.

We have a Bible in almost a thousand languages, The Bible is complete, we are no longer in a desperate hurry to spread the early church and validate it's authority.
So why speak in tongues Kyle?

[Robert]

Aw, c'mon Brother Rod, tell me a story about Christian bikers. I've got to get out more - all I talk to are golfers, swimmers, prospectors (they're certainly as odd as bikers, but their God is gold), and retired Army tank commanders.

[Rod]

Verse: " 8For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom"

I'd be happy to see this gift pop up more.

Verse: " to another prophecy"

I'm still waiting for a freakin good prophecy.

verse: " to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit"

Lots of charismatic healings - yet no amputees or totally blind or deaf people being healed... I've checked 100's of false accounts and testimonies. God can sure heal, but he's very selective - i'd be more worried about Satan playing with people's health.

Verse: "to another the ability to distinguish between spirits"

I enjoy this one. I wish some charismatics exercised this. Be sure to give demons their credit when due.

1 Corinthians 14 is amazing. Paul discusses the point and dangers of gifts. It would be great if more charismatics payed attention to this great wisdom.

[Rod]

Robert comment:
"Aw, c'mon Brother Rod, tell me a story about Christian bikers."

I've been surrounded by them for years. Nice enough people. I don't think they know where normal biker lifestyle ends and Christianity starts. They want the best of both worlds (i'm probably guilty of this in many areas as well.)

"We look like BIG BAD BIKERS, but our ministry is...?" (possibly to big bad bikers). And they do toy rides (don't the Hells Angels do those too?!)
"We got lots of tattoos and expensive motorcycles..."

Like I said "Nice people". But often they don't seem to grow past the baby stage of Christianity and proper theology.
I'd rather be surrounded by Christian bikers than Peaceful Charismatics - at least one group is honest about their commitment and savior.

[Rod]

Here's a fun thing I just read about tongues:

Quote:
". There are those who tell us that the tongues in First Corinthians are ecstatic utterances not known in any country on earth. They base their conclusion on the term “unknown” which appears in 1 Corinthians 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, and 27. But the reader of this chapter in God’s Word must not fail to observe that the word “unknown” in every place where it appears is in italicized letters, which means that it does not occur in any Greek manuscript but was inserted by translators. The Holy Spirit did not direct Paul to write that the tongue is unknown."

Interesting.

[Kyle]

So Ron, you want to discuss the nature of Tongues in the NT?

Based on the comment above you say tongues are a literal language of the earth?
Is that correct?

[Kyle]

You say.
The Holy Spirit did not direct Paul to write that the tongue is unknown."

Explain
1Co 14:2 For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit.

[Rod]

A great place to start Kyle. (and feel free to start a thread about Crazy Bible loving Fundy's and how dangerous they are. I would even appreciate that.)

1 Cor. 14:2 is fascinating.
"For one who speaks in a tongue speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit."

And how often did this happen in the Bible? To how many of God's people or prophets? What training or careful instructions does God give us on this?

Kyle if God wants you to speak in a mystery tongue that nobody understands (not even you?!) then go for it. Just make sure it's the God of the Bible.

Of course - I have another theory.

[Rod]

Could this be similar to the Groaning of the Holy Spirit?

Romans 8:
…25But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it. 26In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words;

1 Thessalonians 2:13
And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe.

_______________________________________________

So what do we do with all this information? We don't run up and down the church isles playing games with it. We try to understand how God is functioning through us. And here's the connection:

The Holy Spirit is involved in US, and communicating with God and Jesus at the same time. This is not a parlor trick or some freaky Fortune teller behavior - it is simply an inward communication within the Trinity.

Just a theory of course. The most important part is what Paul says at the end of 1 Corinthians 14:
" 32and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. 33For God is not a God of confusion but of peace."

We have a complete and trustworthy Bible. WE no longer have prophets or all of the gifts. God gave us something better:

luke 16:
29“Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30“ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
31“He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”

If only Charismatics would spend more time listening to Moses and the Prophets (we can include Jesus in that too!)
And stop listening to each other babble unintelligibly.

[Kevin]

Hi, Rod, Robert, Lee, Jake, Cay, Brent, David & Kyle

I'm new to Goodreads, and was just browsing the Christian discussion groups to see which ones might be worth joining. After reading this discussion I seriously doubted whether there would be any point in my spending time here. But I am a Charismatic with a serious interest in apologetics; though I personally detest the term because of its vernacular associations. I absolutely refuse to 'apologise' for Jesus Christ or his Word!

Since it appears to be correct protocol to post first in the Introductions thread, I have presented my credentials there. At this point, I will simply refer you to a study I wrote a number of years ago entitled 'The Power of His Resurrection,' which discusses the Biblical teaching on the Fruits and Gifts of the Holy Spirit and provides responses to a number of the points raised in this discussion. If Rob, Robert, or anyone else wishes to look at this and raise counter-arguments, I am prepared to respond further if necessary.

Lee, I appreciate what you said in your first posting and agree with most of what you said. But, although it is true that Jesus normally emphasised the importance of faith in those he healed, this was not the case with all his miracles. Sometimes it was the faith of others (Mk 2:5) and other times, especially when it came to raising the dead, multiplying food, etc., it was his own. But he actually attributed all of his miracles to God's power - see John 5:19, 30 & 14:10.

Kyle and David, thank you especially for your contributions: also, Jake and Cay. Rod and Robert, I realise that you may have been deliberately overstating your case to provoke a reaction. But I fear that others of the contrary opinion may well have been put off contributing because they felt that you were not really prepared to listen. That would be a shame, as there are a number of really important issues touched on in the things you say.

[Lee]

Hi, Kevin! We do sometimes get a little intense, it's the nature of the beast, just ignore it lol.

[Rod]

Welcome here Kevin.

All of this chatter is a part of Apologetics. You must defend your beliefs - if you can't do it here amongst people who love Jesus then good luck doing it with atheists or Muslims.

I agree with you: charismatic is a blanket term that now has media meaning and often Pentecostal type folks only adhere to certain bits of this behavior and thought. So not all Charimatics are alike. (although CHARISMA magazine might think differently?)

IF everything charismatics do is about JESUS - then i would be slightly impressed. Less Harry Potter... more CHrist.

But this is a wonderful place to discuss your concerns. Hold nothing back. If I have to defend my Fundamentalism - then liberals, charismatics, Pope worshipers and wannabe Christian Buddhists have to defend their choices as well. And it's FUN!

[Rod]

But just to be a jerk:

Kevin, why do apologetics? Just heal your audience or do some supernatural magic (mumbling/levitating/glowing)...or raise the dead many times like Smith Wigglesworth did (mostly he raised his dead wife over and over again, that will convince them beyond all doubt. Logic is boring compared to Holy Spirit miracles. You can also cast out a demon or two - this is popular in some areas.

Like I said before: I'll speak in tongues as soon as I see the fire on everyone's tongue and a whirlwind going all Hurricane style around the room.

Acts 2
…2And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. 4And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.…

Bring on the mighty WIND.

[Rod]

On a serious note:

Kevin how do you protect people from BAD charismatic teachings and lies?
How do you tell the difference between Benny Hinn, Todd Bentley, Kenneth Copeland, Smith Wigglesworth, Paul & Jan Crouch...

Do you just easily accept all charismatic behavior as having the authority of God, and blessing of the Spirit? What is your test?
OR does it all come down to the Word of God? Those noble Bereans of course -----

Acts 17
Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.

I'll just bypass the possible bad teachings and lies - and go straight for the scriptures.

[Jake]

Hi Kevin, welcome to the group.

[Kevin]

Hi, Lee & Rod. Thanks for your greetings.

Rod, You say, 'if you can't do it here amongst people who love Jesus then good luck doing it with atheists or Muslims.' Sadly, I have often found it easier doing it with atheists or Muslims. There are, of course, those in these camps who are every bit as blinkered in their attitudes as any pseudo-Christian cultist: but I have also talked with quite a number who were genuine seekers after truth and lovers of God. They just didn't know where to look.

'I'll just bypass the possible bad teachings and lies - and go straight for the scriptures.'

Right.

'Kevin, why do apologetics? Just heal your audience or do some supernatural …'

“And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” (1Cor 9:20-22)

With the Greeks on Mars Hill, Paul resorted to apologetics. Of his next stop, in Corinth, he says, “And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” (1 Cor 2:1-5)

'Like I said before: I'll speak in tongues as soon as I see the fire on everyone's tongue and a whirlwind going all Hurricane style around the room.'

You'll be waiting a while then. There are 3 passages in Acts describing where the people spoke in tongues (2:4, 10:45-6 and 19:6) but the Spirit only appeared in the wind and tongues of fire on the Day of Pentecost. And Paul tells us ' I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all.' (1 Cor 14:8).

'Bring on the mighty WIND.'

AMEN. (1 Cor 4:19)

'How do you tell the difference between Benny Hinn, Todd Bentley, Kenneth Copeland, Smith Wigglesworth, Paul & Jan Crouch...'

Start by accepting that all Christians have faults (I could easily single out any number of non-Charismatics: but I won't). The example of scripture is that we should not reject the good things that people say and do just because of those faults. If we did that, we'd end up having to tear out huge chunks of the Bible itself. Forget David – he was an adulterer. Solomon was a womaniser and backslider. How could you ever trust Peter again, after he had denied Jesus so easily? Jesus did. Forget Mark – he was the one who ducked out of working with Paul and Silas. Oh no – wait a minute – didn't Barnabus give him a second chance to make good? But didn't Peter nearly split the church at Antioch by his double-mindedness? Had Jesus made a mistake? No, of course not. (1 John 1:8-2:2).

'Do you just easily accept all charismatic behavior as having the authority of God, and blessing of the Spirit? What is your test?
OR does it all come down to the Word of God?'

Yes, it does. To Jesus, the living Word of God, our perfect saviour and example, to the Bible, his written word and to the Holy Spirit, its only true inspiration and expositor. (2 Tim 3:16, 2 Pet 1:20-21)

So pursue after all God has for you, to be the best you can be for God, brother.

“And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.
…
“Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.”
“Pursue love, and desire spiritual gifts, ...” (1 Cor 12:28-30, 13:4-7, 14:1a.)

[Peter]

Hello Kevin,

I have appreciated your input and comments. Even though I'm a Christ-follower, I don't speak in tongues. I, of course, know other Christians who do. From my understanding of the scriptures, tongues is one of many spiritual gifts and like the other spiritual gifts, some members of the Body of Christ have that particular gift, while others have other spiritual gifts, so that we Christians collectively, as a body or unit are complete.

However, I have come across the perspective that tongues is a sign of "having the Holy Spirit" or being "sealed with the Holy Spirit" and along with that comes the expectation that all Christ-followers should speak in tongues.

I'm interested to hear your understanding on the Biblical teaching vis a vis these two perspectives.

[Kevin]

Hi, Peter,

Firstly, any believer who has put their trust in Jesus as their Saviour and Lord has the Holy Spirit living within them (Rom 8:9-10). It is the Holy Spirit who baptizes us into the Body of Christ (the church) amd we are 'sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.' (Eph 1:13)

It is certainly possible to make a case from Scripture that speaking in tongues is the 'initial evidence' of a person receiving the Baptism in the Holy Spirit: but that case is not conclusive. Nor is 'havng spoken in tougues' what matters most from God's point of view. God's purpose is for us to 'be filled (present tense) with the Spirit,' (Eph 5:18) in order that we might be witnesses to Him (Acts 1:8). Those who strut around imagining that they are more spiritual than others just because they can speak in tongues, without following through on Jesus' commands are seriously deluded. (Mt 7:22-23).

But it is my personal belief that the gift of tongues is available for all believers. This is because, unlike the other nine gifts listed by Paul, its primary purpose is as a language of personal prayer and praise to build up the one using it (1Cor 14:2-4). That is why Paul has to rebuke the exhibitionism of the Corinthian believers: yet can still say, 'I thank my God I speak with tongues more than you all,' (1 Cor 14:18).

Rod is correct in suggesting that there are similarities between tongues and 'groaning in the Spirit' (Romans 8:26). Both are about those situations when we feel a burden or desire to pray that defies our ability to put it into words. Using tongues is one way of expressing those feelings. I personally find it especially precious when I am seeking to praise God. I don't know about you: but it takes me less than 30 seconds to reach the limits of my vocabulary when describing Him – and even most of those words seem pathetically inadequate. So I love Paul's inference that when we pray in tongues we may even be using tongues of angels (1Cor 13:1). Now I'm sure they must have some better words to describe Him! :)

N.B. This is only a brief response (though longer than I had intended). You can find a more detailed exposition in the study I mentioned earlier, 'The Power of His Resurrection.' Hope it helps.

[Peter]

Thanks for the response Kevin; it was helpful. I'll have to think about your point about tongues being available to all believers, unlike the other gifts.

[Kevin]

Thanks, Peter.

Note that I am not saying that the other gifts are not potentially available to all believers. In Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians he makes a distinction between the 9 'manifestations' of the Holy Spirit listed in 12:8-10 (commonly known as 'the gifts') and our personal roles within the church, of which he gives a sample listing in 12:27-28.

It is in this latter context that he says, 'Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?' (12:29-30) You may not have a recognised ministry as a prophet, teacher, healer, etc.: but that does not preclude the Holy Spirit from using you to exercise any of the gifts if the need arises.

Did Stephen's administrative calling prevent him from working miracles (Acts 6:8)? Or was the Lord deterred from using Ananias to minister to Saul because of his apparent obscurity (Acts 9:10-18)?

[Rod]

Tongues and praying in the spirit is such an interesting issue in scripture:

I have seen endless amounts of incoherent babbling in the church - when nobody understands it (especially the babble?) people then assume it's Holy Spirit speech - or unintelligible angel talk.

Did God put this in the scripture to confuse people and give them the hope of spirit babbling? Why sure he did. For the same reason he never came right out and voiced his disgust of polygamy... people can now play and warp these teachings to their hearts desires.

At one point tongues were amazingly useful, and having the 1st century Christ followers all being filled with the spirit for the glory of the church. Communication amongst foreigners and from the Holy Spirit to God was essential.

1 Corinthians 14
13Therefore, one who speaks in a tongue should pray that he may interpret. 14For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful. 15What am I to do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will pray with my mind also; I will sing praise with my spirit, but I will sing with my mind also. 16Otherwise, if you give thanks with your spirit, how can anyone in the position of an outsider say “Amen” to your thanksgiving when he does not know what you are saying? 17For you may be giving thanks well enough, but the other person is not being built up. 18I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19Nevertheless, in church I would rather speak five words with my mind in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue.

These are my 5 words.

[Rod]

So actually speaks in tongues to share the Gospel with a foreign speaking individual would be an amazing blessing and miracle by God. (I have yet to see this happen in my thousand tongue viewing experiences.)
I have met 100's of missionaries who have NOT SPOKEN IN TONGUES and had to laboriously spend a few years developing language skills to share the Gospel across our great planet - If only we could get the pentecostals to DO THIS?! Never seems to happen - how strange?!

So the next challenge is praying in the spirit. It sure sounds nice enough. Here's a thought:

1 corinthians 14
22Thus tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers, while prophecy is a sign not for unbelievers but for believers. 23If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds? 24But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, 25the secrets of his heart are disclosed, and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.

IT is one thing to speak normally so that all the human race can comprehend - it is another to speak the truth of God and have only those with the Holy Spirit understand.
I have chatted with thousands of atheists, muslims and supposed Christians: they often cannot understand the truth of scripture (or even comprehend it).
Like the thief on the cross: Luke 23

40But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”

This was the Holy spirit speaking. I guarantee it meant nothing to the OTHER thief at Jesus other side - and yet to all Christians this is deep and powerful.

Same as when Peter said in Matthew 16
Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Acts 4
Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders,


Matthew 10
…19"But when they hand you over, do not worry about how or what you are to say; for it will be given you in that hour what you are to say. 20"For it is not you who speak, but it is the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.

Acts 4
25who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spirit,
“‘Why did the Gentiles rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?"

The Holy Spirit speaking to us and through us is not a toy to be abused - but an HONOR. If you are babbling incoherently that means ONE THING - YOU ARE BABBLING INCOHERENTLY! Stop it.

[Cay]

Rod, you are going overboard with so many quotations that you are the one babbling.

In my view all things that are good from God aka who are holy are to used as special and in love.

I think that when Paul says that he he is speaking more in tongues than anyone else he just subtracts the babbling.

I personally have seen the spirit use me during the iron curtain in Hungary and in Romania giving testimony in a tongue that convinced people to get baptized. However I first found out about that and of a healing that happened there ten years later. However I am not using this usually, but as with all gifts of God they are a blessing when they are used as the spirit tells, not as we feel right.

[Rod]

I agree with you Cay - I hate long posts.

We don't come here expecting to change anyone's opinions. This is simply a place to carefull work through our thoughts.

Cay I'm assuming you didn't see how all those verses fit together?

[Kevin]

Rod, I find your comment about not expecting to change anyone's opinions rather sad.

Obviously, we don't have the power to change anyone - only the Holy Spirit can do that: but if you really had no expectation that sharing God's Word can change people's outlook and their very lives, then you would be wasting the life and gifts that God has given you.

On the issue of using tongues as a vehicle of communication with outsiders, you are making a fundamental mistake in assuming that this was the primary purpose of the gift. Paul makes it clear that, without an interpretation, an utterance in tongues is of no direct value to anyone except the speaker and God. The only scriptural example of a tongue being recognised and understood by the hearers without the intervention of an interpreter was on the day of Pentecost. And for those who could not (or would not) understand the reaction was precisely as Paul describes in 1Cor 14:23.

It is comparatively rare for tongues to be recognised: but it does happen sometimes. Cay appears to have had an example of it. A friend of mine was once present when someone gave a message in 'perfect Muscovite Russian,' even though the speaker had no knowledge of it. These incidents serve as a 'sign' to encourage us to believe the message. But without an intelligible message there is nothing to believe.

When Paul thanks God that he 'speaks in tongues more than all of you,' (1Cor 14:18) he is not talking about his preaching. He did not need an interpreter. Raised in Tarsus, as a Roman citizen, he would have been fluent in both Greek and Roman. And, having studied in Jerusalem under Gamaliel, he was also fluent in Aramaic and Hebrew. But neither he nor Barnabus appeared to speak or understand Lycaonian in Acts 14:11-14.

It would be highly convenient if we didn't have to learn all those foreign languages to communicate with people. But you need to remember that the one speaking in tongues has no initial understanding of what they themselves are saying, and none whatever of what their hearers may say back to them. If we are to disciple people then we must not only be understood but also learn to listen to and understand them. And learning to speak and understand their language is a necessary first step.

OK. It's a long post - again - and I know you hate long posts. But I do believe that if you are noble enough to search the Scriptures, we may yet come to agreement.

[Rod]

Kevin comment: "Rod, I find your comment about not expecting to change anyone's opinions rather sad."

How often did Jesus change someone's opinion? Or Paul? WE share the truth (hopefully) and let people's heart's desires lead them where it may.

Kevin it seems you didn't comprehend my post very well. Here on Goodreads, in an apologetic group, we shouldn't be ONLY here to convert and recruit - we are sharing and discussing the world of Apologetics. Did you think I was referring to why we exist on planet Earth? That would be an entirely different discussion.

[Rod]

It appears my point of this entire thread is accurate:

Since charismatics are so dedicated to their supernatural gifts - they really don't need apologetics. Why go to the shopping mall to evangelize (after applying academic efforts in the areas of Science, Philosophy, Theology, History...) when you can go have Wizard Holy Spirit Gift battles (with Hindu Guru's for instance) and fully convince atheists beyond all doubt by casting out some demons, raising the dead, Healing a missing limb or hemorrhoids, chanting in a foreign language unknown to anyone in the Mall...Or just give some really impressive prophetic insights to those passing by - maybe tell them what their next shopping purchase will be.

So we can conclude:
Charismatics have no skepticism towards their supernatural gifts - therefore Apologetics in the classical sense is not really required. Hence, Benny Hinn does not require Apologetics. According to charismatics - the Bible has spoken.

So the next question is: Can we do both? Why bother?

[Kevin]

Rod, you say,”'it seems you didn't comprehend my post very well. Here on Goodreads, in an apologetic group, we shouldn't be ONLY here to convert and recruit - we are sharing and discussing the world of Apologetics. Did you think I was referring to why we exist on planet Earth? That would be an entirely different discussion.”

I think we are both having some difficulties understanding each other. I never said that we were ONLY here for that purpose. But, personally, my primary reason for engaging in Christian apologetics is to help others hear and understand the truth of the gospel. But we cannot force anyone to believe and should not attempt to: that is the Holy Spirit's task.

Then, in you most recent post, you say, “It appears my point of this entire thread is accurate: Since charismatics are so dedicated to their supernatural gifts - they really don't need apologetics. ...” I am at a complete loss to understand how you maintain these conclusions in view of the fact that I, as a charismatic, have taken great care to answer the points you raise - including the reason why apologetics are important - logically and from scripture and you do not yet appear to have effectively addressed any of the points I have raised.

I did note the verses and points you raised in your message #79, but did not trouble to comment on most of it because I agreed with all the scriptures and most of the comments you made. I do think that your understanding of 1 Cor 14:22-25 is defective and commented on your apparent assumption that tongues are meant to be primarily for evangelism.

I totally agree that “The Holy Spirit speaking to us and through us is not a toy to be abused - but an HONOR.” But I think your comment, “If you are babbling incoherently that means ONE THING - YOU ARE BABBLING INCOHERENTLY! Stop it,” is ill-advised and contrary to the principles set out by Paul in Rom 14:10-13. Yes, I know he is discussing disputes over food and feast days: but it seems to me that he is also setting out a principle that should be applied in all cases of reasonable doubt regarding conduct and scriptural interpretation.. I have many times heard foreigners (and sometimes even UK natives!) speaking in what sounded like mere babble to me; but I have mostly been wrong about that. Therefore I am sticking with Paul's instructions: “Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.” (1Cor 14:39)

Looking back on my previous answers to your questions, you may feel that I have not adequately answered your question, “Do you just easily accept all charismatic behavior as having the authority of God, and blessing of the Spirit? What is your test?” If you would like me to comment further on this, I will do so: but probably not till next weekend.

[Rod]

Kevin I just reread all of your posts.

You chat greatly about Charismatic gifts, you attempt to defend and justify charismatic gifts, you give meaning and purpose to your charismatic gifts...

I didn't see you do, or really discuss, apologetics in anyway. Like all charismatics - it's all about the gifts. Why do anything else when you are a walking Harry Potter? (healings, parsel tongues, fighting demons, prophecies, word spells. Interesting similarities eh?)

So here is your chance: try and bring the discussion around to Christian Apologetics from a charismatic perspective. I'm curious what your thoughts are.

[Rod]

Maybe I should clarify:
The world of Christian Apologetics is increasingly huge. There are endless areas to specialize in like: History, geology, language, culture, religions, philosophy...

From my experience - charismatics defend charismatics.

Why study history when you can just cast a demon of doubt out of someone?

[Rod]

EVeryone should go on youtube and watch:

Lakeland: the movie. (featuring Todd Bentley) "O my FREAKIN' goodness" is all I can say...

[Robert]

Rod - I'd vowed to quit posting as this board has taken a strange turn with a strange cast of characters, but it's imperative I offer my two cents. Against the admonition of Scripture the newbies seem to want to BOAST of their good works. God has given me some spiritual gifts (not healing, speaking in tongues, or prophesy so I couldn't be charismatic), but tools I can use in spreading the Word for which I thank God, but don't go around bragging or say "look at me, I cast out demons". Christ can be dissected into many pieces and the general practitioner here seems to pick his lot. Lee does compassion, David peace and love, charismatics inner cleansing, and Rod obedience. Is no one trying to absorb Jesus' teaching in toto, or do followers start out that way and splinter off into their own special interest groups? Full disclosure - I'm far too mean spritied to be ANYTHING like the Lord, but can at least appreciate his complete message and relay it. Either an individual is growing in the FULLNESS of the Lord or he's regressing into the wants and needs of his own psyche (sin). Not much of the former on this board lately.

[Rod]

That is an important issue Robert - what IS Jesus teaching in total? Will any of us embrace it all during this lifetime?

My thoughts are: it's extremely dangerous when people attempt to make a religion out of one or two specific (or favorite) points.
Right now there seems to be a huge emphasis on "Grace" ministries and revival. This is guilty of the same thing you mentioned Robert. What must people discard in order to put Grace first???

Robert I don't see myself as particularly obedient. (more, hopefully, as the years go on). I just want the Truth of Jesus. Which means I have to pay attention to the entire Bible to even slightly understand what this is.

My hobby is comparing religions. And there's nothing scarier than watching other religions borrow specific aspects of Jesus to fund their efforts - then they attack the other "Undesired" teachings and Biblical information about Christ. Love, Peace, Compassion, and Obedience fuel endless cults.

WE can only do our best until we get to Heaven and enjoy the Fullness of the lord.
P.S. - Elijah was a bit mean-spirited. So was Moses. (you haven't murdered any false teachers and Golden Calf dancers?)

[Kevin]

Rod, you say,

“Kevin I just reread all of your posts.
“You chat greatly about Charismatic gifts, you attempt to defend and justify charismatic gifts, you give meaning and purpose to your charismatic gifts.
“I didn't see you do, or really discuss, apologetics in anyway. Like all charismatics - it's all about the gifts.”

Thank you for re-reading my posts. But may I remind you that you began this discussion as follows:

“This ought to get people chatting. A good rowdy discussion on charismatics ability to use logic to defend their faith (or understand it,”

Given that this was your avowed purpose in starting this thread, it hardly seems proper for you to now cry 'foul' because I have done as you asked. (Except for the 'rowdy' bit: I have no wish to pillory you or any other fellow-Christian, even if we do disagree on some points).

You say, “The world of Christian Apologetics is increasingly huge. There are endless areas to specialize in like: History, geology, language, culture, religions, philosophy...”

I know: and in my original posting on the introductions thread I pointed to some of my earlier work on 'Jesus Christ – the History Maker.' Did you ever read it? If so, I would be interested to hear your comments.

As far as this particular discussion is concerned, it may be your opinion that I have not 'done apologetics' properly because I focussed on giving you scriptural reasons for what I believe and practice. But I am content to let others judge that for themselves. But should you choose to persist with this debate, I will continue to answer you from scripture, and demand that you be prepared to to the same, seeing you insist that scripture is your final authority in this matter,

Robert, thank you for your remarks. I really appreciate them. And if you feel that I am personally in need of correction on this matter, please feel free to point this out. We can all get mean-spirited or big-headed at times: but, 'As iron sharpens iron, So a man sharpens the countenance of his friend.' Prov 27:17.

[Rod]

Good comment by Kevin:
"Given that this was your avowed purpose in starting this thread, it hardly seems proper for you to now cry 'foul' because I have done as you asked. "

I realized this was a possibility when challenged your position on apologetics. But what I was expecting you to say was that "You are vastly interested in all of the OTHER areas of apologetics".

I was hoping you would defend your needs for all areas of Apologetics. But i'm not convinced you have this need - or that your Christian beliefs really require it.

There is no proper way to do apologetics. Any logical and passionate way to defend the Gospel in our lives is useful. My question is still: "Why defend anything when you have Harry Potter Holy Spirit Wizard Power?" Just WOW everyone with healing, tongues, prophecies, shaking, Holy laughter...

I'm not really interested in YOU or other charismatics throwing verses at me to defend your Pentecostal outpourings. I know where you come from - I'm curious where you're GOING? And why you would need logical apologetics to get you there?

Like many great Christians have said: "If I had the power to heal - I would immediately head to the local hospital and empty it."
And this NEVER happens. Hmmmmm?!

I'll look into your HISTORY MAKER Kevin. Sounds interesting.

[Rod]

An actual Apologetic side discussion for Kevin.

I read through your "Jesus Christ - A History Maker" site. Wonderful information. You had one or two sources I haven't come across. Great stuff! (Doesn't in anyway change my view of charismatics). :c(

I said this recently, and i'm curious what you thought of it - I've never heard any other scholar comment on it. Here goes:

I had an atheist tell me that Jesus' full doings are a myth (and so is his general existence) based on the lack of documents about our Christ. True - there are only a few.
But then I told the atheist (who adores Bart Ehrman and all the Borg/Crossan crap) that isn't it interesting we have almost 100 pseudo-gospels from around the 1st century? How come those are seldom mentioned as sources of Jesus?

Of course they are comical and unreliable sources - but they are still SOURCES. It's funny how people keep trying to push them to earlier and earlier dates...and yet those same people often claim Jesus was not widely recorded? Now when atheist and liberal scholars are both using the same sources: we know something crazy is happening.

Got any thoughts Kevin?

[Kevin]

To my mind, Rod, both your question, “I'm curious where you're GOING? And why you would need logical apologetics to get you there?” and your observations about the reaction of atheists and liberals to the apochryphal gospels are interrelated.

To take the second issue first, whenever I hear about things like this I am reminded of the old saying, “It's amazing what men will believe, as long as it's not the Bible.” Yes, something crazy is happening: both parties are desperately looking for some reason – any reason – to reject the plain teachings of the gospels. And this is in spite of the fact that, on straight historical grounds, the NT documents are far and away the most reliable record of Jesus' teaching.

Their motives, however, are generally somewhat different. Those of liberal persuasion want to follow Jesus, but are offended at some of the things he said:. So they want to believe that he didn't really say them. To them, the alternative sayings of the pseudo-gospels are a lifeline, as they can pick the one that suits them best. But the atheist is looking for a reason to reject Jesus' teachings. They want to argue that the accounts of his life and teachings simply cannot be trusted; so the more outlandish and contradictory the claims, the better this suits their purpose.

N.B. This is a simplification: there are those in the agnostic/atheist camp who are genuinely seeking truth, just as there are true lovers of Jesus who are genuinely confused by all the doctrinal claims and counter-claims. The apologist's primary task is to reach out to, and help those people.

But both atheists and liberals need to argue that the detailed and historically verifiable accounts of the NT writings are elaborations from the allegedly 'earlier' fables of the pseudo-gospels. Unfortunately for them, this view simply does not fit the historical facts.

From time to time I've had someone ask me, “Well, what about the Gospel of X?” and then go on to cite this as the latest and best authority on the teachings of Jesus. On several occasions, it's been one I'd never heard mentioned in serious scholarly debate. I would generally make some comment that, if it were, it's strange that the disciples Jesus appointed as His representatives didn't seem to have known about it. But since I believe that, as followers of The Truth, we need never fear truth, I've usually made a mental note to check back on the validity of the claim.

I have done this on a number of occasions, and it has always turned out that the scholarly consensus is that the document is of significantly later date than the gospels, and their authors either unknown or of far lower standing than the NT writers. The nearest to a genuine claim to early authorship is the Gospel of Thomas, which may well be derived – in part – from documents similar to the sources mentioned by Luke. But other parts are highly suspect. I discuss this in more detail at life.liegeman.org/historymaker/thomas.html.

The point you make about the fact that this is still documentary evidence is certainly valid although it also has limitations. Even negative evidence, such as statements against Jesus in the Jewish writings are evidence of his historicity: but the more fantastic the stories about him, the easier it becomes to dismiss them as 'just stories' – and the historical Jesus along with them.

Which brings me back to your question about where I'm going and its connection with logical apologetics.

I was in the camp of those who had decided that the gospel stories about Jesus were just too far-fetched to be believed. I could see that if they were true, then Jesus had an undeniable claim on my life. I could see that, according to the Bible, Jesus demonstrated his claims and subsequently proved his resurrection through signs and wonders. But he also said that the same - and greater - signs would follow his disciples. And I personally hadn't seen any myself: nor had I met any Christians who seriously believed that such things did happen today. I'd read Frank Morrison's 'Who Moved the Stone?' But although his argument was well presented its fatal flaw, in my view, was that, if Jesus really was alive today, then his disciples should be demonstrating the same power today: and they weren't.

But when I found myself amongst a group of Christians that did believe these things were for today and were expecting – and seeing – miracles in the name of Jesus, my resistance cracked, and within a few days I was praying the sinner's prayer and handing my life over to Jesus,

But this post is getting too long and I'm running out of time, so I'll stop there for now...

[Rod]

Kevin comment:
" it's strange that the disciples Jesus appointed as His representatives didn't seem to have known about it."

Very fun point. Thanks. Worth looking into.