Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Christian conversion experience: descriptions/analysis/links: input invited
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 119 of 199 (219606)
06-25-2005 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by randman
06-25-2005 6:44 PM


Re: charismatic experiences
Thanks for your comments. I'm not sure I want to get into a deep discussion about this. My own personal experiences with the charismatic movement ended with my recognizing --I have to say-- a MAJORITY of UNbiblical phenomena and doctrine, and I can tell you that after about a dozen years I'm still hurting from the experience.
I WANT the Holy Spirit to come in power. Maybe the most devastating result of that experience was the distrust of experiences of my own and now not knowing what to trust. I know great revivals by the Spirit have genuinely occurred, but the counterfeits are a big problem, not something to take lightly. I've spent quite a bit of time in prayer for revival since then, and I ask for DISCERNMENT to be a BIG part of it because of the unbiblical things that can go on.
But ALL the links I gave you are generally very understanding about strange phenomena occurring in the best of revivals as part of the way the Spirit hits people. None are mere unthinking debunkery at all. The one you have been commenting on seems very fair to me and I think you are seeing that too. If you read it through -- both parts (I know it's very long, I've been reading it myself today and still have half of part 2 to finish) -- you'll see that you agree with the main criteria for judging such things -- leaving Jesus out is a biggie, not preaching the Word is a biggie.
I wish he would name names too, but there are probably more problems than he wants to deal with that come from pointing the finger at a well known evangelist. He gives his address though so he might answer personal questions about that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by randman, posted 06-25-2005 6:44 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 2:37 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 121 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 2:42 AM Faith has replied
 Message 122 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 2:59 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 123 of 199 (219668)
06-26-2005 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by randman
06-26-2005 2:59 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
Good grief, man, I didn't get half of that out of the article. I guess I'm going to have to reread it. I thought he was quite fair myself. Well I don't have time now but later I'll give it some more thought.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 2:59 AM randman has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 124 of 199 (219671)
06-26-2005 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by randman
06-26-2005 2:59 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
Second thought. I don't think he said half those things. Really. You really need to quote him. Trying to figure out what you think he said is a big order.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 2:59 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 4:08 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 125 of 199 (219675)
06-26-2005 4:49 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by randman
06-26-2005 2:42 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
Third thought.
It is not heresy, imo, whether one is premillenial, postmillenial, or amillinial. Making such issues, which are very complicated in the Word, into questions of whether one is a "heretic" or not is completely false.
Most of Church history, no one believed in the pre-Trib rapture. If he wants to believe it fine. Men like Calvin and Luther were actually post-millenialists.
If you accept that Jesus will return, I think you shouldn't demonize a man just because he has a different eschatology than you. The author seems to think disagreeing with the Pre-Trib Rapture is heretical. That is unfounded and incorrect.
I searched the piece for anyplace where he discussed any kind of millennialism. There are exactly TWO places in the entire document where he uses the term "millennial" at all and these are in the context of discussing a sudden doctrinal sea change in the Assemblies of God of Australia. He is discussing the influence of the revivals on his own denomination, and how without consulting the congregations changes were made to established A/G doctrine to conform them to the beliefs of the revivalists. He identifies a number of heresies the A/G had avoided until then, one of which is the Latter Rain Movement which is definitely heretical on far more than its amillennialism, which is now being forced onto the A/G. This is the ONE place he mentions ONE eschatological view as heretical and he is right -- their version of amillennialism or Kingdom Now or Dominion theology is heretical. You have completely misrepresented his point.
Here is what he says:
http://www.intotruth.org/brn/overheads.html
Under "We Need Leaders" about 4/5 through the first part:
In the early years of the modern Pentecostal movement, there were a number of excesses and abuses of doctrine. As they came to the surface, the Assemblies of God fell on the right side of these issues, and rightfully declared many as heresy. The oneness movement, Signs and Wonders, and Charismatic movements, as well as the Latter Rain/Manifest Sons of God movement along with its Gnostic and Amillennial (known in some cases as Kingdom Now, or Dominion Theology) leanings were all basically rejected by the Assemblies of God. These movements, their doctrines, practices, and maybe we could even say "culture," did not disappear. For some reason, in some way, it seems that the errors in the Charismatic and Latter Rain movements have crept up on, and in some cases overtaken the Assemblies of God. The "River Revival" movement seems to be a resurgence of many of these past errors, re-packaged to be more appealing in our day. If you do some research on these movements/doctrines I mention, you will see many parallels. ....
The River Revival and the errors that preceded it, has brought the Australian Assemblies of God to the point that they are willing to embrace and accept "Kingdom Now or Dominion Theology." Specifically, the leadership of the Australian A/G forwarded that proposed at their General Council in May of 1999, that the words imminent and pre-millennial be removed from the doctrinal statement relating to the Second Coming of Christ, and the entire tenent relating to the millennium be removed from their Constitution. The Australian Assemblies of God will also be changing their name to the Australian Christian Churches, as well as a number of other controversial changes. This change was not being promoted by a small faction within the church, but from the top leadership. In the end, these doctrinal changes were never presented to the Fellowship, but the leaders did ask for and get approval and permission to ordain those who hold differing views on the second coming of Christ, and the Millenium.
Again, only ONE eschatology is identified as heretical, Kingdom Now, and it is in fact considered heretical by orthodox churches.
I'm also not a pre-millennialist but on the other hand I'm holding all that with a very light hand as I think there's something in most of the various views. Nevertheless his point wasn't to defend pre-millennialism so much as to point out that established A/G doctrine was summarily changed to conform to the revivalist views by a highhanded attitude of leadership which he identifies as a characteristic of the revivals.
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-26-2005 04:52 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 2:42 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 3:31 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 128 of 199 (219801)
06-26-2005 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by randman
06-26-2005 4:08 PM


Re: charismatic experiences
Randman, you seem to be so identified with this revival that you can't stand any criticism of it.
You are trying to excuse some errors of the revival on the basis of their preexisting the revival. I find that interesting, and unfortunately not a point for your side of the argument. Don't you have to ask yourself how if there were such unholy practices among leadership BEFORE the revival, what exactly it was that brought the revival? Why would God bless a church that is in such a condition -- unless He came to change their hearts? But that didn't happen, the practices are just as bad as ever. The most authentic revivals convict and transform the people.
You are also trying to discredit Stephen Pratel on the ground that he is pushing some peculiar Assembly of God thinking? How so? Sounds to me like he's going against the trend in the A/G at the moment and trying to call them back to what's good in their constitution. And isn't Brownsville A/G?
I think it is very risky to criticize such an obviously supernatural move as possibly not of the Holy Spirit, which is reason for extreme caution. However, he appears to have that caution to me, and he does a good job of spelling out the contradictions with the Biblical standard. The Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus Christ, and very little testifying of Jesus in any convincing sense goes on there. While I understand that Jesus is the center in some areas of these revivals, principally the A/G church, Pratel raises a good question if this is really Jesus or a false Jesus who is being accommodated to the practices of the day rather than worshipped as Lord.
You say there is lots of teaching, but you don't say much about it, and as Pratel says, the usual kind of teaching in these circles is on the revival itself, and the Bible is merely brought in here and there to support this or that, but is not preached through in depth any longer -- if it ever was in Pentecostal/charismatic churches. The only Pentecostals I know who preach the Bible faithfully are Chuck Smith and the many pastors he's trained, and it's interesting that these revivals haven't touched his Calvary Chapel congregations -- or at least not that I know of.
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-26-2005 08:41 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 4:08 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 11:20 PM Faith has replied
 Message 130 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 12:07 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 133 of 199 (219886)
06-27-2005 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by randman
06-26-2005 11:20 PM


Re: charismatic experiences
I have the same broad familiarity with many different kinds of churches and movements and in my experience the word of God is not systematically preached in the charismatic/Pentecostal groups with the exception of Calvary Chapel. It's not that it is ignored but it is selectively taught, and in my experience with a spin that really started bothering me. Systematic teaching may be received by members of such churches, however, through independent Bible study programs.
I don't agree with Assembly of God on most things but Pratel seems to be calling them back to what is Biblical in their foundation.
The same UK organization that published Pratel also has many articles on Kingdom Now / Dominionism and it's not mere "tangential doctrine." And I admire the discernment ministries. They do the Church a necessary service in confusing times when counterfeits and cults are abounding.
But if you want to know the truth, we are called to make disciples not just teach doctrine.
I know it sounds harsh, and given your commitment to the revival simply wrong, but what good does it do to make disciples to a false Christ or false doctrine? I'd like to believe otherwise. I was very involved in those things and there were reasons for that. The experience of the presence of God is wonderful, and much of that was real, and I don't want dry doctrine, but that's the point, such experience can be intoxicating and when it gets away from the truth people are inclined to rationalize it or ignore it for that reason.
I didn't leave it for frivolous reasons. From everything I've read and everything I've experienced, there is overall more falseness in those revivals and in all the "moving in the gifts" circles than the authentic. I know there are genuine Christians involved in these things and some good teaching, but as we know, the devil is quite willing to serve up a little truth with his lies.
I guess there's nothing else to say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by randman, posted 06-26-2005 11:20 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 1:48 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 134 of 199 (219887)
06-27-2005 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Gilgamesh
06-27-2005 12:27 AM


Re: Glossolalia (speaking in tongues)
Good grief, man, you think that learning to imitate glossolalia enough to deceive trusting people PROVES something? That's REALLY funny!
But I really would appreciate a study of tongues that purport to be genuine languages.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 12:27 AM Gilgamesh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 1:59 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 135 of 199 (219888)
06-27-2005 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by randman
06-27-2005 12:07 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
In England, at Holy Brompton, I am sure plenty of the Anglican (Episcopal) things persisted there as well. But if we were to criticize the River because the chief center for it in England is part of a denominational communion that just ordained a homosexual, that wouldn't be quite fair.
No, but if there is no repentance for that within the denomination or withdrawal from that denomination because of their not repenting, then THAT suggests something a little less than would be expected from a genuine move of the Spirit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 12:07 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 1:57 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 141 of 199 (219897)
06-27-2005 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by Gilgamesh
06-27-2005 1:59 AM


Re: Glossolalia (speaking in tongues)
It shouldn't be hard simply to tape people speaking in a language they believe is a true language, given your extensive experience in these circles.
I don't use it to deceive. I am merely doing exactly what Christians are doing when they themselves perform "glossolalia"; performing semi-relefxise verbal babble.
No you are not. You have no idea what it's like not even to be seeking tongues, to be suspicious of it even, and yet in the middle of praying out loud in ENGLISH to suddenly find oneself speaking this bunch of undecipherable sounds, and to have it continue in much the same patterns over YEARS. This is frankly DISTURBING to someone like me who isn't sure it is from God. But it certainly is not from me either.
The reason why I (and my friends) have performed it within Christian congregations is to test whether what we are doing is indistinguishable by those who should probably know.
This does not prove anything. People are infatuated with their OWN experience, they take what others do as just THEIR experience, they don't think about it or analyze it or even pay much attention to it as it's part of WORSHIP when their attention is on God. They don't expect to "know" anything about it. It might not in fact sound a whole lot like anything else they've actually heard but they will accept it because after all the Spirit works with individuals differently and no two experiences are alike. I think this proves absolutely NOTHING.
It is. The Christians in those congregations have no idea what my personal beliefs are and I never let on: they just assume I am also Christian, and for the duration and purposes of the test and it does them no harm to believe that.
But it also proves nothing about the source of these things in OTHERS. You are faking it but others are not. I know that from my own experience. What exactly it is I do not know but I wish I could just accept that it is from God and not be bothered by it.
And, yea, it does prove something. That glossolalia is not supernatural, but rather a learned, semi-reflexive phenomena.
It does not prove that at all. I suppose you might learn to credibly imitate birdsong or the call of the elephant. Would that make you a bird or an elephant or the bird and elephant fakers?
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-27-2005 02:18 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 1:59 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 142 of 199 (219898)
06-27-2005 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by Gilgamesh
06-27-2005 2:14 AM


Re: Glossolalia (speaking in tongues)
A phenomenal amount of Indians believed that Sai Baba was regularly performing miracles. Investigation by sceptics revealed that these miracles were merely sleight of hand tricks.
Most of it is pretty cheap stuff, but if they think they proved anything by merely imitating it, as magicians can do, I'm not buying.
Have you read Tal Brooke on his experiences with Sai Baba in India (Avatar of Night, Lord of the Air)?
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-27-2005 02:32 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 2:14 AM Gilgamesh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 4:02 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 146 of 199 (219923)
06-27-2005 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Gilgamesh
06-27-2005 3:35 AM


Re: A conversion experience analysis
IMO this is because there is no intellectual path to God
Depends on what you mean by "intellectual." I simply believed what a couple of Hindu gurus wrote in separate books about their experiences of God. Believed what they said, which later grew into a belief in Christ, pretty much by the cognitive means of sorting out truth from error. Had nothing to do with a personal experience or emotional anything. I just figured that for them to be agreeing on something like that it had to be true and from that point I read until I was persuaded that Christianity was the truth. The Bible is full of testimonies based on recognition that the gospel is the truth. This is a cognitive process, not an emotional process. GDR, on this very thread I believe, has claimed his conversion was also from simply being persuaded of the truth.
Had to make that comment. Now back to your post.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 3:35 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 148 of 199 (219926)
06-27-2005 4:04 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Gilgamesh
06-27-2005 3:35 AM


Re: A conversion experience analysis
You need to understand that you are ONLY addressing certain phenomena within the charismatic movement, you are NOT addressing Christianity as such, and baptism in most churches is FAR from a "conversion experience," it is a confirmation of a previous conversion, which is not part of anything emotional. You keep calling it a conversion experience but you are simply wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 3:35 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 151 of 199 (219932)
06-27-2005 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by Gilgamesh
06-27-2005 4:02 AM


Re: Glossolalia (speaking in tongues)
I've said it before... you are way too credulous. You are convinced by Sai Baba??? Is this another example of demons like astrology, which we dispelled above?
You are WAY too credulous about your powers to dispel demons.
If someone claims that they can do something which appears supernatural, and another person performs the same act, demonstrating what they did most certainly wasn't supernatural, why would you ever feel inclined to continue to believe the supernatural claim?
Because I have OTHER reasons for believing such things. Sai Baba has demonic power though his tricks are pretty silly. And, as I've said, your idea that the ability to mimic something disproves the authenticity of the thing mimicked is, frankly, staggeringly illogical. This CAN'T be your best argument against these things, can it? Uh oh, that one doesn't fly. You need better evidence than that.
You are buying Faith. You are buying bollocks, and lot's of it. Which is fine, except when you peddle it to others.
Have you read Tal Brooke on his experiences with Sai Baba in India (Avatar of Night, Lord of the Air)?
No. Should I really? Is this a tale about Sai Baba's miraculous powers told by a credulous git?
Well, it's an account of a sort of cultic brainwashing among other things, which might interest you. Tal Brooke started out entranced by this guru and spent time with him in India and tells the story of his experiences there in great detail, including some demonic happenings toward the end, and his conversion to Christ by some American missionaries in the neighborhood. He came back to Berkeley, California, where he now runs the Spiritual Counterfeits Project, which studies all kinds of spiritual phenomena from a Christian point of view. I think someone with your interests might possibly want to know something about their work. I hope you are also checking out the many other Christian discernment ministries.
And if you are studying faith healing you really MUST read up on Aimee Semple McPherson. I'm very surprised you haven't heard of her. She's really the queen of faith healing. Kathryn Kuhlman was another very famous healer, and William Branham. These are the ones who inspired Benny Hinn. They are NOT considered to be authentic by most of the Christian world.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Gilgamesh, posted 06-27-2005 4:02 AM Gilgamesh has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 4:52 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 152 of 199 (219933)
06-27-2005 4:29 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by randman
06-27-2005 1:48 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
The experience of "the presence of God" was "real" and "wonderful."
==============
That's what I am trying to get you to hang onto, that faith. What concerns me about these critics of they overblow things to the point that they weaken people's confidence and faith. One of the fruit of the Spirit is faith, and I don't want to point fingers, but quoting heresy hunters like Hanegraff raises a big red flag to me.
Randman, I discovered the problems with my charismatic milieu on my own. And where did I quote Hank Hanegraaf? Our faith must be in CHRIST, not in miracles or experiences or ANY phenomena.
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-27-2005 04:30 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 1:48 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 4:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 156 of 199 (219937)
06-27-2005 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by randman
06-27-2005 1:48 AM


Re: charismatic experiences
Overall there is simply this major problem of putting SO much emphasis on EXPERIENCE. Nobody wants to be deceived but that's how we get deceived, because we really don't have the ability to judge such experiences. The ONLY thing we can do is hold it up to the word of God, and a great deal of it fails by that test, a lot more than you are willing to recognize. The preaching that went on in the First Great Awakening was Biblical and focused on Christ and resulted in a deepening of genuine Christianity in the population. I DON'T see that in any of this current revival, always it is the spectacle and the experience that is emphasized, that people fell over, that they laughed for hours, that it felt good and that sort of thing. If the focus on Christ and the word of God were there I'd be more inclined to dismiss the bizarre phenomena as Jonathan Edwards did, as inevitable given the weakness of the human frame etc.
{EDIT: Sorry, felt strongly afterward that I should not have told the stories of real people who could conceivably be identified, so I have deleted them.
This message has been edited by Faith, 06-27-2005 03:27 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 1:48 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by randman, posted 06-27-2005 12:39 PM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024