Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Jim Ober January 23, 1995 09:16:14 From : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 #73271 Jim, I have been reading your posts for several weeks concerning the Toronto phenomenon. Please allow me to share a few thoughts. I am a pastor of a new Calvary Chapel. In case you are unfamiliar with the CC's, the foundation of what we do is verse-by-verse exposition of the Scriptures. I would consider us to be very mildly charismatic; we reject the bulk of what passes for the "charasmatic" experience in churches today, but do believe in the validity and biblically-based operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit for our day. I have several friends, in other churches, who I thought were sound in the faith, who have latched onto this Toronto thing. So, being one open to something that is truly of God (and not wanting to repeat the mistake so often seen in the past by church leaders who rejected out of pocket genuine movements of God; ie, the Great Awakenings, Azusa St.,etc.), I began to investigate. I gathered info on RH Browne, listen to some excerpted tape materials, and prayed. Finally, I and one of my elders went to a local Vineyard fellowship were this was "happening". I was saddened by what I saw & heard. First, the message (yes, there was a short bible study) was extremely divisive - it was basically, get with us or get ran over. After the study, the pastor promised God was going to show up with "signs & wonders". Sorry, but God declined. However, what did happen was what I believe the pastor was referring to; a few people "slain", a couple laughing, one jerking, one making sounds like she was having a baby and rocking back and forth on the floor, on her back. (what broke my heart is that this was a personal friend of mine) Needless to say, from all my research and my personal observation, I can say conclusively that this is not of God. Are some people having genuine expereinces with God? Yes; I in my quiet time with the Lord have been known to laught with joy, cry, etc., but as you pointed out, I always had the self-control to stop at any time. But, the driving force behind this is NOT of God. In reference to the debate between the Word and the Spirit (which is ridiculous when you think about it - the Holy Spirit wrote the Word!!), I think it would be wise for all to consider the words of Donald Gee, the foremost PENTECOSTAL theologian of this century; "The one golden rule is to bring question & every difficulty to the written word of God - and then submit to it. However attractive a temporary deviation from the Scriptures may appear, it is always fraught with tremendous danger. Safe progress is only assured as we hold fast the faithful Word. We believe the Bible contains all the light the church in any age will ever need on any subject." (from "Concerning Spiritual Gifts", close of chapter 13) Thanks for all your work on this topic, In Jesus, Darrell Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 January 23, 1995 21:06:05 From : Tim Rettger, 72074,1743 #73516 >>However attractive a temporary deviation from the Scriptures may appear, it is always fraught with tremendous danger. Safe progress is only assured as we hold fast the faithful Word. We believe the Bible contains all the light the church in any age will ever need on any subject." << Sufficient and Efficient for instruction and doctrine! I liked your post....and I hold to the fact that His Word is complete for our instruction. IN Christ Tim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 January 24, 1995 21:21:02 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #73873 Darrell, The driving force behind this is NOT of God as you have observed. Some have tried to frame this issue as charismatic vs. anti-charismatic. (And that is part of the deception) Such is not the case. Donald Gee's view of the authority of scripture is what is in question here. Of course Gee is right. Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 January 27, 1995 15:36:20 From : Tricia Tillin, 100074,3125 #75011 >> Needless to say, from all my research and my personal observation, I can say conclusively that this is not of God. << Darrell, excuse my butting in, but I was pleased to see your mature assessment of this phenomenon. I have been researching this for nearly a year, and while I began with an open mind, the testimonies I have been receiving have shown all too clearly the damage this is doing. There is also emerging the fact of it being experience-driven. For instance, two letters I received this week: QUOTE ONE: "When I questioned (the eldership) about Toronto, and gave scriptures in support of my fears, I was told by the leading elder that the Word of God had failed them, and that they were now going with signs and wonders because they wanted growth..." 2nd Quote - from a lady who lives in Ontario: Some Vineyard people held a prayer meeting at our church and most of the elders are going to the Howard-Browne meetings in Florida next week. People from our church have come back from Vineyard with weird chopping arm movements, strange head-ducking signs - it reminded me of the Masons...some recent news from the Airport. John Arnott recently stated that soul winning was top priority but "I don't believe that anymore". He said God's river had been flowing now for 2,000 years and has been called by many names - Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Pentecostal and many others. He confessed that meetings were "out of control" but that "the river of Ezek 47 becomes uncrossable in fact, unmanageable". These statements, especially the first, are interesting in light of the information we recently had from a family friend who is pastor of an Arab church in-----------. He decided he'd better check out Vineyard after some of his men went there and subsequently lost their zeal for street evangelism. In fact, he couldn't get them to do any witnessing and one even told him that he'd had a revelation at Vineyard that Jesus wasn't God. On the evening he attended, women were lined up at the front for prayer with a line of elders behind them. It ended up with them seeming to simulate the sex act. Indeed, one pair embraced passionately, with the leadership doing nothing about it." End of testimony. So, you see that with this sort of evidence coming in, I can hardly believe it is ALL of God, as some would claim. Obviously, I cannot interview the people personally, at least not just yet, so you will have to take their statements on trust. They were not written in an attempt to destroy Vineyard, but were personal remarks in a private letter. Tricia Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Tricia Tillin, 100074,3125 January 27, 1995 17:31:25 From : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 #75047 Thanks for your kind comments. My wife & I have several friends who have been pulled into this; at this point, I believe all we can do is to pray. And, I certainly believe you are correct in your observation that the bottom line of this is the sufficiency and validity and relevancy of the Word of God. I'll cast my lot with it, for sure Thanks again, Darrell Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 January 28, 1995 10:50:15 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #75306 ---> And, I certainly believe you are correct in your observation ---> that the bottom line of this is the sufficiency and validity ---> and relevancy of the Word of God. I'll cast my lot with it, ---> for sure. Amen to you and Tricia. Even Jonathan Edwards to whom many of the Toronto advocates point to justify these strange manifestations wrote this: "They who leave the sure word of prophecy - which God has given us as a light shining in a dark place - to follow such impressions and impulses, leave the guidance of the polar star to follow a Jack with a lantern. No wonder therefore that sometimes they are led into woeful extravagances." (JE, On Revival, p.14) "Why cannot we be contented with the divine oracles, that holy, pure word of God, which we have in such abundance and clearness, now since the canon of Scripture is completed? Why should we desire to have any thing added to them by impulses from above? Why should we not rest in that standing rule that God has given to his church, which the apostles teaches us, is surer than a voice from heaven? And why should we desire to make the Scripture speak more to us than it does?" (JE, Some Thoughts, p.404) 1:19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. (2 Peter 1:19-2:2) God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 28, 1995 16:23:10 From : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 #75475 Great quote from J.Edwards!! Let's pray that the fall-out from this will not be too farreaching, and the carnage not catastrophic. In Jesus, Darrell Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : DARRELL PRUITT, 75407,3146 January 28, 1995 21:21:00 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #75594 ---> Great quote from J.Edwards!! <--- Thank you. Thought it might offer some balance. His name is being used to affirm the practices of the alleged "Toronto Blessing". If he would've approved them as is asserted, then it must be alright. He did not encourage the physical manifestations and tried to restrain his congregation. Anyone who has read "A Treatise on Religious Affections" can see his contention was that the occurrence of physical effects proved nothing one way or the other. He deferred to biblical criteria in verifying a true work of God. ---> Let's pray that the fall-out from this will not be too ---> farreaching, and the carnage not catastrophic. Let's just pray without ceasing all the way around! God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 31, 1995 15:08:23 From : Tricia Tillin, 100074,3125 #76560 >> Anyone who has read "A Treatise on Religious Affections" can see his contention was that the occurrence of physical effects proved nothing one way or the other. He deferred to biblical criteria in verifying a true work of God. << Hello Annie, Thanks for the interesting quotes from J Edwards. As it happens I opened up my mail this morning (snail-mail that is!) to find the book "Jonathan Edwards On Revival" which contains "Distinguishing Marks..." and "A narrative of surprising conversions..." as well as other essays. I opened it up to browse and found the exact same passage that you just quoted. Imagine my surprise when I found it in your message this evening! I think God is trying to tell us something. I also read today some extracts from a book about Wesley. Wesley also spent a lot of time denouncing strange manifestations. He was very balanced, and did not deny that God could move in mysterious ways, especially when sinners were under conviction, but he never suggested that bodily contortions were to be encouraged, nor that they should continue after the person got saved. Thanks again for your message. Tricia Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Tricia Tillin, 100074,3125 January 31, 1995 18:33:10 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #76632 ---> I think God is trying to tell us something. I do believe He is as well. ---> Thanks for the interesting quotes from J Edwards. You're welcome. ---> As it happens I opened up my mail this morning (snail-mail ---> that is!) to find the book "Jonathan Edwards On Revival" which ---> contains "Distinguishing Marks..." and "A narrative of ---> surprising conversions..." as well as other essays. Imagine that! I have just sent up a lengthy quote from Edwards' "Distinginguishing Marks..." here myself. Speaking of incoming information in the mail, I just read an interesting passage by Jonathan Edwards taken from Ian Murray's biography of him (p.193). It seems an important distinctive since much has been made of Sarah Edwards and her physical manifestations in an attempt to "prove" Jonathan would have condoned the goings on up in Toronto. Jonathan Edwards says of his wife, Sarah: "She had formerly been subject to unsteadiness and it was many ups and downs in the frame of mind, being under great disadvantages through a vaporous habit of body, and often subject to melancholy, and at times almost overborne with it, having been so even from early youth". He adds that even after 1742, "Vapours have had great effects on the body, such as they used to have before, but the soul has always remained out of their reach". Edwards appears to view his wife's condition as more typical of her emotional make-up and certainly not of any special spiritual significance at all, doesn't he? God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 February 1, 1995 11:03:06 From : Frank W. Clement, 74152,1223 #76891 Dear Annie, I have just tapped into this thread and find what you and Jim and Tricia have been saying, especially concerning any connection or approval that Jonathan Edwards might have given the holy laughter phenomena, is just great. Those who think that Edwards would have given his approval of such "subjective experiences" as we see in Toronto and elsewhere simply do not know Edwards. Upon reading many of his works I find him to be one of the most solid and discerning men of his or any other time. His writings are a blessing. So, anyone who cares to use Edwards in defense of the laughter phenom. should read, The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God, or The Experience that Counts (to name a few), or they're going to find out they're holding a cobra in their hands. In his book "Religious Affections" he distinguishes between what is true and what is false. Affections are a part of us and they are right and good WHEN they are centered on the Lord and are stirred up by true visions and revelations of Him. Such affections are usually accompanied with tears of love, joy, & thanks because our God is so wonderful and good (to say the least) and worthy of all our praise. Or they may even be accompanied by laughter, not prolonged hysterical laughter, but a laugh that proceeds from the mouth of one who is standing in awe of Him realizing that He has you in His hand and no power can take you out. (Makes me laugh and shout with joy every time to know that my God is in absolute control.) But the "mindless" seeking after signs and wonders (i.e. laughing/roaring/shaking violently etc.) that we see in Toronto and elsewhere, would not be tolerated long by Edwards. In fact he said that IT WAS THESE VERY THINGS WE SEE HAPPENING AT TORONTO; that had also started to manifest themselves shortly after the Great Awakening began; THAT FINALLY QUENCHED THE SPIRIT AND ENDED THE AWAKENING. By this and the Scriptures he clearly distinguishes what are works of the Spirit of God and their effect and what are works of Satan and their effect. Night and day! (To those with eyes to see) (And they use Edwards to justify their phenomena? No way!) Enjoy your posts, Annie. God bless you. Biff Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 February 2, 1995 14:32:00 From : Tricia Tillin, 100074,3125 #77391 Annie, So glad somebody is exposing the Edwards fiasco! One of my friends had the flu recently but phoned me very excited because he was able to spend some days just reading Edwards devotionally. He hasn't had much to do with the TE, and wasn't very aware of the way Edwards is being quoted, but he said in a very agitated way, Tricia, what Edwards says is just totally the opposite to the TE! He's now going to spend more time on it and write something exposing the abuses. I wish he could be writing this message, but - we will just have to wait. In the meanwhile, I thought I would re-post parts of a message I sent to another forum, just in case anyone had not seen it. MESSAGE BEGINS:============================================================ >> Have you read John MacArthur's latest book "Reckless Faith". He demolishes the argument that anything that Edwards ever said would support what's going on in Toronto.<< No, it is not yet available in the UK, I think. I will try to get hold of it. >> Here is a quote: "Such emotional outbursts in the Great Awakening invariably happened in response to the messages preached. There were no random or irrational eruptions of raw passion. If there was weeping, it was provoked by genuine sorrow. If there was wailing, it reflected real terror of the Lord. If there was laughter, it was the expression of a joyful heart, not just empty spontaneous hysterics."<< Yes, those who have really read Edwards know for sure that his is now being abused as the "leader" of a new cultic form of Christianity that places the manifestations above scripture and glories in feelings rather than faith. The manifestations in previous revivals (and there were NOT as widespread as some would have you believe) were caused by deep sorrow over sin - they were experienced mainly by unbelievers and "professors of religion" (= backsliders and nominal christians) and when these people came through, by the grace of God, to an understanding of their salvation, and to peace and forgiveness, they STOPPED manifesting these signs of conviction! In no way whatsoever did Edwards, Wesley or any other revivalist lead Christians to CONTINUE seeking for and receiving prayer night after night, so that the manifestations could continue. Even ongoing evidences of overpowering joy, such as to cause Mrs Edwards to "swoon" (a common event with Mrs Edwards, so I am informed!) were not encouraged and were kept in check, lest they becoming the prominent factor in the revival. Here is an extract from a review of "Catch The Fire" by Malcolm Jones, writing in "Evangelicals Now" January 1995.(UK) "Christian leaders are warned that they may be excluded from the move of the Spirit that will take place...because many of them will disqualify themselves by not responding to what the Father will be saying (p.30) This makes the work of a reviewer somewhat precarious. For though we are invited to Toronto in order to "check it out" and are encouraged to "test the spirits", the required conclusions are also made very clear. The last time Jonathan Edwards is wheeled out, it is so that we will be in no doubt that our response to "The Toronto Blessing" will determine whether we are "for or against the king" (p.204), Evidently, there is no middle ground. ...the author spends one chapter explaining what he sees as the biblical foundation for recent happennings at Toronto. it seems that "the biblical record is full of accounts of people being physically moved when they experienced God's immediacy" (p.45) Such a deduction is not to be wondered at when the words "he makes me to lie down" (Ps23) take on new meaning for "those who have done carpet time at the airport" (p.51). The major chapter in the book, taking up to one third of the volume, is devoted to drawing paralleles between the revival associated with Jonathan Edwards and what is happenning at Toronto. Why is it that other evangelistic heroes - eg, luther, Whitfield, Spurgeon and Graham - have suddenly been eclipsed by our dear brother Edwards? Could it possibly be that our concern for salvation of the lost has been replaced by the cult of self-fulfillment? As I read the chapter carefully, I couldn't help noticing a profound difference between the cautious approach of the Edwards's to their experiences and those of the Toronto leadership. In her records of events, Mrs Edwards kept saying "I could with difficulty refrain" and "I could scarecely forbear". At Toronto all caution seems to have gone to the winds as considerable pressure is felt to line up and "receive prayer". END OF QUOTE. Tricia Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Tricia Tillin, 100074,3125 February 3, 1995 15:12:28 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #77870 ---> So glad somebody is exposing the Edwards fiasco! I was rather stunned when I began to carefully evaluate the writings of Edwards against what was being ascribed to him up in Toronto. At best, it is very poor scholarship and, at worst, blatant proof-texting. Neither scenario is very becoming. ---> One of my friends...said in a very agitated way, "Tricia, what ---> Edwards says is just totally the opposite to the TE!" I have found that to be the case, too, at every turn. ---> He's now going to spend more time on it and write something ---> exposing the abuses. I wish he could be writing this message, ---> but - we will just have to wait. I am looking forward to seeing what his research unearths. Please let me know if you can. ---> No, it [Reckless Faith] is not yet available in the UK, I think. ---> I will try to get hold of it. If you will email me your address, I will try to get a copy and send it to you air mail if you like. ---> Here is a quote: Thank you for taking the time to copy your post from the RF over here. It was very enlightening. God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 28, 1995 22:35:31 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #75622 Annie, Thanks for the quotes. The Edwards revival and many others are often used to proof "experience" this move. (Apparently proof texts haven't been working very well.) It is interesting that Jonathan Edwards never said, "God is bigger than his word." If one wants to detect a counterfeit one can't just boldly proclaim the similarities. One must look carefully for the differences. And they are there for all with eyes to see. The counterfeit is good but it isn't perfect. Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 29, 1995 02:11:12 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #75671 ---> Thanks for the quotes. <--- You're welcome. ---> The Edwards revival and many others are often used to proof ---> "experience" this move. (Apparently proof texts haven't been ---> working very well.) I would encourage people to read the works of Jonathan Edwards for themselves rather than basing a conclusion upon selected quotes alone. It is why I listed the specific page numbers in my quotes. The two central figures in the Great Awakening, Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield, were both avowed Calvinists all their Christian lives. Therefore, I find the following comments by William DeArteaga on the audiotape of 10/13/94, Toronto Vineyard Airport 9:15 AM meeting puzzling. He blames Calvinism for shutting down the Great Awakening revival, credits Edwards with developing the Protestant "theology of discernment" and yet its two primary figures _were_ Calvinists: "Calvin has no theology of discernment....We all now associate the Great Awakening with Jonathan Edwards and his great books on the Awakening....So, really, Jonathan Edwards developed the Protestant theology of discernment as far as I can see....his theology is probably the best that there has ever come around. So, that's one incident where the Pharisees stopped revival." In his book, Quenching the Spirit, the primary theological "bully" is Calvinism and on pp.32, 52, DeArteaga asserts: "Calvinist theology could not interpret the spiritual experiences that were to accompany the Great Awakening....using the assumption of Calvinist theology, Charles Chauncy ensured the defeat of the Awakening." How could such assertions be accurate in light of the fact that Jonathan Edwards was always a Calvinist? I do not believe they are correct. When the Great Awakening died out, Edwards evaluated the reasons why and concluded it was not the opposition who were the cause of it as Ian Murray states in his biography, "Jonathan Edwards", p.216: "He came to believe that there was one principal cause of the reversal, namely, the unwatchfulness of the friends of the Awakening who allowed genuine and pure religion to become so mixed with 'wildfire' and carnal 'enthusiasm,' that the Spirit of God was grieved and the advantage given to Satan." It is obvious Edwards believed the Awakening was quenched by fanaticism, extremism, and not "pharisaism". DeArteaga equates pharisaism with Calvinism, which leads back to incongruence when the steadfast Calvinistic leanings of Edwards and Whitefield are carefully examined. DeArteaga, even well aware of Edwards' conclusions about fanaticism ending the Awakening, makes the following comments in his book, p.55: "In spite of Edwards' own theories, it seems that the Great Awakening was not quenched because of its extremists. It was quenched because of the condemnation of its opponents. This condemnation demoralized the supporters and marred the faith of the public to the point where they no longer welcomed the presence of the Spirit." DeArteaga has no historical evidences to support those allegations, rather, the historical evidences _refute_ those suppositions. It is very strange. ---> It is interesting that Jonathan Edwards never said, "God is ---> bigger than his word." No, quite the opposite. His views on using biblical criteria to substantiate a genuine work/move of God are clear. ---> If one wants to detect a counterfeit one can't just boldly ---> proclaim the similarities. One must look carefully for the ---> differences. And they are there for all with eyes to see. The ---> counterfeit is good but it isn't perfect. The most dangerous counterfeit is always the one which most closely resembles the truth. It is usually the nuances and subtleties by which error is discerned in matters like this. Which is why the perfect "theology of discernment" is found in Scripture: "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path." (Ps 119:105) "and if you call out for insight and cry aloud for understanding, and if you look for it as for silver and search for it as for hidden treasure, then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. For the LORD gives wisdom, and from his mouth come knowledge and understanding." (Prov. 2:3-6) God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 29, 1995 15:45:27 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #75795 Annie, The discussion of Calvinism and revival is quite interesting. An ironic twist is that a kind of "false" Calvinism is helping to keep this move moving. Many seem to say if it's of God you can't stop it, and if it isn't it will die on it's own. (ie: No theology of discernment is even to be used. Except by the leaders, who just "KNOW"). Many seem to be unconcerned about how many might be hurt before the end comes. What is happening is that some people believe they just "know" the truth. If everything, scripture, history, EVERYTHING has to be adjusted to what people "know", it will be so adjusted. The "theology of discernment" here is that if you ROTFL you will know and if you don't you won't. As one advocate put it,"You need to see with your own spiritual eye." And what of those who have seen it that way and are unconvinced? They just saw it in the wrong church. What if it is Rodney Howard-Browne himself? Well even Rodney makes mistakes (This one is starting to get popular). Personal experience has become the standard of truth for EVERYTHING. Logic and reason, scripture and history, just aren't going to work. So these tools of the mind have to be discredited. And many are trying to discredit those tools. It must be a little frustrating to read what Edwards actually wrote in it's totality and then see how he is being proof-texted to defend the indefensible. Don't be surprised if the story starts to change as a result of your posting. You may get a,"He doesn't really mean..... He has just been misunderstood...." You shine the light on one error and another pops out of the woodwork somewhere else. Scripture doesn't move. The Holy Spirit doesn't move. He is omnipresent. But boy does this move, move. Trying to dissect confusion is always a dangerous enterprise but it is interesting that the Calvinists are now being associated with the Pharisees. One can only wonder who they are going after with that one. (For the record I'm not a Calvinist ). Perhaps the plan is to try and discredit everyone. The one thing that RHB has said from the beginning that is true, is that NO MAN can stop a true move of God. But what happens if this one is stopped? Perhaps they are already looking for some theological "insurance" Keep your light shining bright. It's a blessing to all who seek truth. Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 30, 1995 19:45:13 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #76251 ---> Many seem to say if it's of God you can't stop it, and if it ---> isn't it will die on it's own. Yes, and the proof texts quoted in defense of "it" are Gamaliel'scomments in Acts 5:38-39: "Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these menalone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of humanorigin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be ableto stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting againstGod." However, it is important to look at the context of "the presentcase" Gamaliel was referring to. What were Peter and the otherapostles preaching and teaching? Christ and Him crucified, arisenand exalted, as Acts 5:29-31 tells us: "Peter and the other apostles replied: We must obey God rather thanmen! The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead--whom youhad killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him to his ownright hand as Prince and Savior that he might give repentance andforgiveness of sins to Israel." Therefore, if the same things were being taught in Toronto - Christand Him crucified - the proof text might be valid, but I do notfind that the case at all. A word count of the transcripts from the audiotape teachings at theToronto Airport Vineyard from early fall through mid-Decemberyielded some alarming results. What the condensed chart representsare the times references are made to the Holy Spirit and prophecy(or prophetic or prophesy) without any simultaneous reference toJesus. The number of times the Holy Spirit is reduced to beingreferred to as an "_it_" are so staggering I stopped trying to count. I have condensed the list of speakers but the results not shown were equally as skewed and disturbing as the sampling below: Jesus proph* Spirit John Arnott 22 19 65 Wes Campbell 52 159 154 Guy Chevreau 3 4 17 Randy Clark 6 21 42 William Dearteaga 6 14 28 Jack Deere 8 10 14 Mark Dupont 46 145 63 ------------------------------------------------- Grand Total: 143 372 383 "Prophetic", "Prophecy", "Prophesy" are referenced _229_ more times than Jesus, who is the central focus of revelation and God's redemptive plan. In fact, the Bible _is_ the testimony of Jesus Christ. "Spirit" or "Holy Spirit" are referenced _240_ more times than Jesus, about whom the Holy Spirit is to testify as John 15:26 tells us: "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me." (See also John 14:16, 26) Clearly, those teachings do not place the emphasis where Scripture tells us it should be. Which ought to be a source of grave concern within the professing Body of Christ. "What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death," (Philip. 3:8-10. See also John 17:3, 1 Cor. 1:21-23, Gal. 6:14) God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 31, 1995 21:16:04 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #76696 >>> Yes, and the proof texts quoted in defense of "it" are Gamaliel's comments in Acts 5:38-39:<<<< It is interesting that Paul's teacher Gamaliel has become the favorite role model of many. As you say he was effectively defending the gospel and defending the men who preached it from certain death. Another aspect of the whole presentation in Acts is the boldness and conviction with which all of the apostles preached and taught. When Toronto can duplicate the form, the error is so obvious that anyone can find it. When Toronto tries to cover it's error, the message is confused. The one time that form and message SEEMS to match is when the subject of the alleged great coming revival is brought up. There is a dramatic contrast between Randy Clark's confused answer on discernment and his speech on revival. Of course it is far easier to speak boldly about what isn't in scripture (a great coming revival) and hasn't happened. What is covered in the Bible is a great end time deception which all are called to watch for. This delusion is characterized by false christs, a false gospel and counterfeit signs and wonders. Without the Bible how does one tell the true from the false? Enthusiasm is no substitute for truth, but it is an effective and appealing counterfeit. Your statistical study is quite telling. The emphasis of this move is clearly NOT on Jesus or His Word. Advocates of this move have said "God is bigger than His word" and "Can do what He Wills" but apparently, in the minds of many, He isn't bigger than the prophets who take the stage in Toronto and is "sure" to do what THEY say. Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 February 3, 1995 15:12:00 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #77871 ---> Your statistical study is quite telling. I have a few more pertinent statistics you may find interesting as well, Jim. The word count search from Bible software on the same words ("Holy Spirit", "Spirit", "Jesus" and "Proph*") from the New Testament (only) yielded these results: Jesus or Christ: 1230 Spirit: 324 Proph*: 203 ---> The emphasis of this move is clearly NOT on Jesus or His Word. The facts certainly seem to support your conclusion, Jim. To keep everything in perspective, I am going to rerun the portion of a previous post where the original statistics were: *************** A word count of the transcripts from the audiotape teachings at the Toronto Airport Vineyard from early fall through mid-December yielded some alarming results. What the condensed chart represents are the times references are made to the Holy Spirit and prophecy (or prophetic or prophesy) without any simultaneous reference to Jesus. The number of times the Holy Spirit is reduced to being referred to as an "_it_" are so staggering I stopped trying tocount. I have condensed the list of speakers but the results not shownwere equally as skewed and disturbing as the sampling below: Jesus proph* Spirit John Arnott 22 19 65 Wes Campbell 52 159 154 Guy Chevreau 3 4 17 Randy Clark 6 21 42 William Dearteaga 6 14 28 Jack Deere 8 10 14 Mark Dupont 46 145 63 ------------------------------------------------- Grand Total: 143 372 383 "Prophetic", "Prophecy", "Prophesy" are referenced _229_ more times than Jesus, who is the central focus of revelation and God's redemptive plan. In fact, the Bible _is_ the testimony of Jesus Christ. "Spirit" or "Holy Spirit" are referenced _240_ more times than Jesus, about whom the Holy Spirit is to testify as John 15:26 tells us: "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me." (See also John 14:16, 26) Clearly, those teachings do not place the emphasis where Scripture tells us it should be. Which ought to be a source of grave concern within the professing Body of Christ. "More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish in order that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; (Philip. 3:8-10. See also John 17:3, 1 Cor. 1:21-23, Gal.6:14) *************** I have been a little slow this week, but I will get back with you on the other posts you have sent me. Thank you for your patience. God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 30, 1995 22:47:14 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #76331 ---> (ie: No theology of discernment is even to be used. Except by ---> the leaders, who just "KNOW"). That is an interesting point you raise. In the Toronto Airport Vineyard audiotape transcript of October 13, 1994, William DeArteaga refers to a lack of a "theology of discernment" prior to Jonathan Edwards: "Jonathan Edwards developed the Protestant theology of discernment." In his book, "Quenching the Spirit", he states: "Edwards was at a tremendous disadvantage because he had no readily available theology of discernment....The Reformers rejected the need for discernment when they threw out the whole of Catholic mystical theology." (p.55) In his mind, basically, a (Protestant) "theology of discernment" simply did not viably exist prior to Jonathan Edwards. He would do well to read "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God" which shows Edwards unequivocally had a very sound criteria for discernment of "spiritual phenomena": the Word of God. Anyone who has read Edwards works along these lines cannot seriously place him "at a tremendous disadvantage because he had no readily available theology of discernment". Yes he did, he always did - Scripture: "My design therefore is to show what are the true, certain, and distinguishing evidences of a work of the Spirit of God. And here I would observe that we are to take the Scriptures as our guide. This is the great standing rule which God has given to His church, in order to guide them in things relating to the great concerns of their souls. Scripture is an infallible and sufficient rule. It undoubtedly contains sufficient precepts to guide the church in this great affair of discerning a true work of God. Without such principles, the church would lie open to woeful delusions and would be exposed without remedy to be imposed on and devoured by its enemies." ("Religious Affections", p.332) Furthermore, Edwards always asserted that "spiritual phenomena" - feelings and physical manifestations - proved _nothing_ one way or the other. He was as equally concerned that false works not be advocated as he was that true works not be deterred. Jonathan Edwards did not cater to _either_ of the extremist "camps". He was faced with what he called "wildfire", the fanaticism, encouragement of and emphasis on physical manifestations advocated by James Davenport and the "mere lifeless formality" advanced by the other camp. He endorsed _neither_, contended against both extremes and took his stand on the Word of God and maintained: "Practice is the proper evidence of Christian fortitude. A good soldier is proved, not at home, but in the field of battle. As holy practice is the chief evidence of our being possessed of grace, so the degree in which our experience is productive of practice, shows the degree in which our experience is spiritual and divine. Whatever pretensions we may make to great discoveries, great love and joy, they are no further to be regarded than as they actually influence our practice." ("Religious Affections", p.344-5) In spite of the fact that a negative generally cannot be proved, DeArteaga attempts to define his idea of what a _non_-discerning theology (?) is. However, a definition of "non-discerning theology", even one as ambiguous as follows does not serve to validate the opposite - "spiritual phenomena" as evidence of a "discerning theology" (10/13/94 transcript): "He did not, Calvin has no theology of discernment. Because in discernment you have to have the possibility that some spiritual phenomena is true, some is from the devil, and some is just from the flesh. Those are the three categories of what happens when you have a spiritual phenomena....Well, for Calvin, since all spiritual phenomena and powers stopped with the apostles, there is not a category of possibly true from the Holy Spirit, it's all, it has to be of the flesh or of the devil. So if you have spiritual phenomena -- you see, that's a non-discerning theology." DeArteaga never defines his idea of the "theology of discernment". He is more interested in justifying the experience (subjective feelings, manifestations) of spiritual phenomena than in any kind of real discernment at all whether Scriptural or otherwise. It is in this quest he and other Toronto advocates have with great bias inequitably attempted to utilize the writings of Jonathan Edwards. So, what _would_ Jonathan Edwards say today about the "Toronto Experience"? One need only avail themselves of his writings, to read his magnificent sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" to see where he placed his emphasis in preaching and teaching. Even George Whitefield wrote in the end that he had been carried away by subjective impressions at the height of it all. He gave precise examples of his error in that regard. So, go, read the legacy a Jonathan Edwards left behind and contrast his preaching and teaching to Toronto. You will see the most notable differences. One is anathema to the other. "They who leave the sure word of prophecy - which God has given us as a light shining in a dark place - to follow such impressions and impulses, leave the guidance of the polar star to follow a Jack with a lantern. No wonder therefore that sometimes they are led into woeful extravagances." (Jonathan Edwards, On Revival, p.14) "Why cannot we be contented with the divine oracles, that holy, pure word of God, which we have in such abundance and clearness, now since the canon of Scripture is completed? Why should we desire to have any thing added to them by impulses from above? Why should we not rest in that standing rule that God has given to his church, which the apostles teaches us, is surer than a voice from heaven? And why should we desire to make the Scripture speak more to us than it does?" (Jonathan Edwards, Some Thoughts, p.404) "And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts." (2 Peter 1:19) God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 31, 1995 11:31:22 From : John T. Stevenson, 74301,224 #76487 /~~~~~\ Wow!!!! | ^ \ | A tremendous |/ Q Q \| post! \| A |/ This is CIN | \_/ | at its finest \___/ (whether you happen to agree with Edwards or not). -|- John T. Stevenson -|- | 74301,224 _|_ _,-^\__ -|- "It is Finished!" _,--' _-' ^~\__|__ ^~~\ Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 31, 1995 21:16:09 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #76697 >>> DeArteaga never defines his idea of the "theology of discernment". >>>> The less you put on the table the less you have to defend. When Peter spoke a Pentecost he made his case from scripture, BOLDLY and with AUTHORITY. Toronto says prove us wrong. (That is all they can say). >> It is in this quest he and other Toronto advocates have with great >> bias inequitably attempted to utilize the writings of Jonathan >> Edwards. Well the Bible hasn't worked out so well. Too many people have copies. So it's grab another straw. Edwards had no problem choosing between scripture and experience to set a standard. Scripture sets the standard. I fully expect a great "revival" accompanied by great signs and wonders. But it will be a great counterfeit. (See 2Thess 2) Without the Bible who will know the difference? That is what the rebellion is all about: Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. (2 Thessalonians 2:3 NIV) Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 31, 1995 18:14:06 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #76623 ---> It must be a little frustrating to read what Edwards actually ---> wrote in it's totality and then see how he is being proof- ---> texted to defend the indefensible. It certainly is bewildering, if not frustrating. Here is another pronouncement attempting to exploit Jonathan Edwards for the sole purpose of authenticating what is happening both in Toronto and elsewhere: William DeArteaga, Toronto Airport Vineyard, 10/13/94, 9:15 AM session: "And every revival has a predominant theologian, you know. Historians say, well in this revival, Charles Finney was the predominant figure here and theologian of that revival, etc., etc. And the Lord has already chosen the predominant theologian of this revival. It's not me! It's Jonathan Edwards. And every book on revival out there, including my book does central chapters on what did Jonathan Edwards says about revival. We're commentators on Jonathan Edwards. That's really true." Let us look at why Jonathan Edwards would _not_ consider himself the "predominant theologian" of the alleged "Toronto blessing" and "revival": "An erroneous principle, than which scarce any has proved more mischievous to the present glorious work of God, is a notion that it is God's manner in these days to guide His saints by inspiration, or immediate revelation....As long as a person has a notion that he is guided by immediate direction from heaven, it makes him incorrigible and impregnable in all his misconduct." (Jonathan Edwards, "Some Thoughts Concerning the Present Revival of Religion in New England", p.1:404) Again, Edwards writes: "Many godly persons have undoubtedly in this and other ages, exposed themselves to woeful delusions, by an aptness to lay too much weight on impulses and impressions, as if they were immediate revelations from God, to signify something future, or to direct them where to go, and what to do." "I would therefore entreat the people of God to be very cautious how they give heed to such things. I have seen them fail in very many instances, and know by experience that impressions being made with great power, and upon the mind...are no sure sign of their being revelations from heaven." (Jonathan Edwards, "On Revival", pp. 104, 141) If DeArteaga is one of the historians for the Toronto Airport Vineyard, it is very difficult to believe he does not know Jonathan Edwards was a cessationist. Edwards believed prophecy _ceased_ along with the other charismatic gifts after the completion of the canon of Scripture. Surely DeArteaga, a historian, could not have missed Edwards account of his cessationist views and the reasons he notes in _detail_ for holding them in the following works?: 1. Jonathan Edwards, "Charity and Its Fruits", pp.38, 44-47. 2. Jonathan Edwards, "On Revival", pp.137-. It is of no small importance to note in the same transcript, DeArteaga declares: "Phariseeism is the heresy of orthodoxy which is basically correct ideas...ironically, the core problem with the Pharisee is that he cannot recognize the present work of the Holy Spirit....Well, for Calvin, since all spiritual phenomena and powers stopped with the apostles, there is not a category of possibly true from the Holy Spirit, it's all, it has to be of the flesh or of the devil. So if you have spiritual phenomena -- you see, that's a non-discerning theology....We all now associate the Great Awakening with Jonathan Edwards and his great books on the Awakening....So, really, Jonathan Edwards developed the Protestant theology of discernment as far as I can see....his theology is probably the best that there has ever come around. So, that's one incident where the Pharisees stopped revival." Either DeArteaga, and Toronto Vineyard by sanction as well, are inordinately confused or they have exhibited an astounding degree of prejudicial license in the historical presentation of the works of Jonathan Edwards, or both. Jonathan Edwards was a cessationist and only a calculated revisionist's recall of "history" could overlook that inescapable fact. DeArteaga has completely and utterly contradicted himself. His circular logic and assertions are: 1. Calvinism equals Phariseeism which equals the heresy of orthodoxy, which is basically correct ideas. 2. Calvin had a "non-discerning theology" because he was a cessationist. 3. Jonathan Edwards developed the "Protestant theology of discernment". 4. Jonathan Edwards' "theology", himself both an avowed Calvinist _and_ cessationist, "is probably the best that there has ever come around". Therefore, because Jonathan Edwards indisputably demonstrates in his writings (referenced above) both that he is a cessationist and why, DeArteaga has inadvertently called the cessationist _beliefs_ of the historical figure he and Vineyard point to as the cornerstone of their movement - "the predominant theologian of this revival" - heretical. Continued....... Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 January 31, 1995 21:40:31 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #76712 >>>> Either DeArteaga, and Toronto Vineyard by sanction as well, are inordinately confused or they have exhibited an astounding degree of prejudicial license in the historical presentation of the works of Jonathan Edwards, or both.<<<<<< Both? Truth just isn't important to Toronto. Keeping the party rolling is. People just KNOW that this is of God. They KNEW before any questions were asked. And so men have been blinded by a counterfeit light of their own imaginations. Thanks Annie for you hard work in researching this. What is likely to happen next is that all of this will be casually dismissed. And the advocates will go looking for a new error to try and sell. But once one starts on the wrong foundation one can NEVER get things to line up properly. This new move is NOT of God. Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 31, 1995 18:14:11 From : Annie Bynum, 74152,1550 #76624 Continued......2/2 I want to reiterate and emphasize these points about Jonathan Edwards: 1. He always maintained that "spiritual phenomena" - feelings and physical manifestations in and of themselves - proved _nothing_ one way or the other. 2. He was as equally concerned that false works not be advocated as he was that true works not be deterred. 3. Jonathan Edwards did not cater to _either_ of the extremist "camps". 4. He was faced with what he called "wildfire", the fanaticism, encouragement of and emphasis on physical manifestations advocated by men like James Davenport and the "mere lifeless formality" advanced by the other camp. He endorsed _neither_ extreme. Given his well-expressed views about the over-emphasis and excesses advocated during the Great Awakening from the pulpits of men like James Davenport, it is clear that Jonathan Edwards would most certainly _not_ wish to be viewed as the "predominant theologian" and historical figure of this present movement coming out of Toronto Airport Vineyard. Furthermore, one would never have found Jonathan Edwards emphasizing the "prophetic", reducing the third Person of the Triune Godhead, the Holy Spirit, to an "it" on innumerable occasions, while not even concurrently mentioning Jesus Christ, of whom the Holy Spirit is to testify. Rather, a careful survey of his writings finds his emphasis rightly placed on preaching and teaching "Christ and Him crucified" and contending, _not_ from "fresh [extra-Biblical] revelation", but Scripturally "for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3). Consider carefully his words which follow and contrast them with where the focus and emphasis are placed, evidenced in the teachings coming out of Toronto Vineyard, and determine for yourself what Jonathan Edwards would have to say about all of this alleged "Toronto blessing", "season of refreshing" and "revival" if he were here with us today: "The spirit that causes people to have a greater regard for the Holy Scriptures and establishes them more in the truth and divinity of God's Word is certainly the Spirit of God. "The devil never would attempt to beget in persons a regard to the divine Word. A spirit of delusion will not incline persons to seek direction at the mouth of God. 'To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them!'is never the cry of evil spirits who have no light in them. On the contrary, it is God's own direction to discover their delusions. Would the spirit of error, in order to deceive men, beget in them a high opinion of the infallible Word? Would the prince of darkness, in order to promote his kingdom of darkness, lead men to the sun? "The devil has always shown a mortal spite and hatred towards that holy book, the Bible. He has done all in his power to extinguish that light, or else draw men off from it. He knows it to be that light by which his kingdom of darkness is to be overthrown. He has long experienced its power to defeat his purposes and battle his designs. It is his constant plague. It is the sword of the Spirit that pierces him and conquers him. It is that sharp sword that we read of in Revelation 19:15, which proceeds out of the mouth of Him that sat on the horse, with which He smites His enemies. Every text is a dart to torment the old serpent. He has felt the stinging smart thousands of times. "Therefore the devil is engaged against the Bible and hates every word in it. We may be sure that he never will attempt to raise anyone's esteem of it." (Jonathan Edwards, "The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God") "I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths." (2 Tim. 4:1-4) "We are further resolved that we will preach nothing but the Word of God. The alienation of the masses from hearing the Gospel is largely to be accounted for by the sad fact that it is not always the Gospel that they hear if they go to places of worship; and all else falls short of what their souls need. "God being with us, we shall not cease from this glorying, but will hold the whole of revealed truth, even to the end. You cannot leave out that part of the truth which is so dark and so solemn without weakening the force of all the other truths you preach. Brethren, leave out nothing. Be bold enough to preach unpalatable and unpopular truth. Remember, you will have to give an account, and that account will not be with joy if you have played false with God's truth. "What marvel if, under some men's shifty talk, people grow into love of both truth and falsehood! People will say, 'We like this form of doctrine, and we like the other also.' The fact is, they would like anything if only a clever deceiver would put it plausibly before them. They admire Moses and Aaron, but they would not say a word against Jannes and Jambres. We shall not join in the confederacy which seems to aim at such a comprehension. We must preach the Gospel so distinctly that people know what we are preaching. 'If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself for the battle?'" (Charles Haddon Spurgeon, "The Greatest Fight in the World") "Fight the good fight of faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called, and you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses." (1 Tim. 6:12) God bless, Annie Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Toronto phenomenon To : jim ober, 71043,3424 February 1, 1995 15:07:23 From : Scott, 75202,3210 #76979 Holy Laughter - A New Phenomenon? I submit the following information taken from "SCP Newsletter" Volume 19:2, Fall 1994. Kundalini Energy - Typically described as a powerful energy source that lies dormant in the form of a coiled serpent at the base of the spine. Reportedly, when it is stirred and set free it is able to effect spiritual and physical healings. Authors Christina and Stanislov Grof, "The Stormy Search for the Self" tell how kundalini energy can be set off by a spiritual teacher or guru. The Grofs, New Agers, write, "individuals involved in this process might find it difficult to control their behavior; during powerful rushes of Kundalini energy, they often emit various involuntary sounds, and their bodies move in strange and unexpected patterns. Among the most common manifestations ... are unmotivated and unnatural laughter or crying, talking tongues... and imitating a variety of animal sounds and movements." (p. 78-79) Bhagwhan Shree Rajneesh in "Dance Your Way to God" writes, "just be joyful.. God is not serious ... this world cannot fit with a theological god ... so let this be your constant reminder - that you have to dance your way to God, to laugh your way to God!" (p.229) Ramakrishna the Indian saint went into daily trances (samadhi). During these trances one would fall down in a rapturous state of super-concious bliss (ananda). These trances lasted anywhere from a few minutes to several days. They often included uncontrollable laughter or weeping. He reportedly could put others in this state with a single touch to the head or chest. Swami Baba Muktananda gave "guru grace" to his followers with his touch. Folowers showed varied manifestations including uncontrollable laughing, roaring, barking, hissing, crying, shaking ... African Kung Bushman of the Kalahari. The Grof's list parallels between the Kundalini awakening and the dance (trance dance) of the African Kung bushmen who "enter a profound altered state of consciousness associated with the release of powerful emotions such as anger, anxiety and fear. They are often unable to maintain an upright position and are overcome by violent shaking. Following these dramatic experiences, they typically enter a state of ecstatic rapture..." Qigong. Yan Xin, known to people of China, delivered a talk in San Francisco in 1991 at the Masonic auditorium. The 5/16/91 San Francisco Chronicle reported, "minutes into his talk, several began experiencing what Yan Xin call spontaneous movements ... before long, the scene began to resemble a Pentecostal prayer meeting with many people waving their arms and making unintelligible sounds." Yan reportedly told his audience, "Those who are sensitive might start having some strong physical sensations - or start laughing or crying. Don't worry. This is quite normal. The article reported that the Qigong revival started sweeping China in 1985 and said that 50 to 60 million Chinese have gone to see Yan. Subud. J. Gordon Melton in "The Encyclopedia of American Religions" identifies the practice of "latihan" as the central element of the Subud faith. It is a group process. "often accompanying the spontaneous period are various body movements and vocal manifestations - cries, moans, laughter and singing ... During this time, people report sensations of love and freedom and often, healings." I'm interested in people's thoughts on this matter. Do we accept each of these as authentic signs and demonstrations of God's power? Why should we welcome them within the New Wine movement but reject them in the other movements? Are they not real experiences? Why aren't more people bothered by the fact that Scriptural models (I believe they are nonexistent) for these actions are sparce while cult examples of the same behavior are abundant? May God grant us true wisdom and discernment. By Grace, Scott Linscott Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : Robert M. Sexton, 71754,1402 January 23, 1995 04:42:02 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #73233 Bob, Thank you for the reply. When the Lord turned on my light switch I laughed "in the spirit" for nearly 2 weeks off and on, cried too. Trying to explain, justify or even analyze such an experience in oneself or others is probably impossible. All I can say is that what happened to me and what has been described as happening to others are at significant variance with one another. The principal difference is in the area of being able, and WILLING, to exercise self- control (Which is a fruit of the Holy Spirit). But some objective observations are possible. First what happened to me was a RESULT of understanding the gospel in my heart for the first time. With this new move the reaction is triggered by crowd psychology, or "priming the pump" with a,"Ha-Ha, Ho-Ho, Ha-Ha...." or the layi hands for the express purpose of producing the manifestations (or a combination of these). EVERY report that I have seen from advocates and skeptics alike reveals that the preaching of the Word takes a back seat to spreading the manifestation. That is a major difference when compared to what happened to me, or for that matter, what happened in the Johnathan Edwards' revival, which is the major "proof experience" for this new move. The Biblical commandment we we have for assisting the Holy Spirits evangelistic efforts is the preaching of the gospel in word (Ro 10) and deed (Mat 5-7). As for fruit, immediate results are not especially useful in judging anything, as the Lord Himself explained. Good "roots" are critical for sustainable spiritual life. There is an open hostility in this move toward reasoned Biblical study. And that guarantees that good roots will never be put down. As you are a pentecostal, I am sure that you are familiar with the relevant texts in the book of Acts and 1Co 12-14 which lay a clear foundation for the modern manifestation of the gift of tongues. That foundation is so clear that the burden rests with the anti-tongues movement to show that this gift is not for today. But that is a REASONED conclusion from scripture. Ironically it is 1Co 14's teaching on decently and in order and not like a madhouse that creates the greatest problem for this new move. The first time I cited 1Co 14 over on the RF, in connection with this new move, I got charged with blasphemy. There is a lot more here, but the files in the section 2 library go into it in far more detail than I can in a series of messages. I encourage you to take a look at the files. I would be glad to post a list if you like. There were several excellent points in your last message I would like to address. On Science. The first question is what is science? My professional training is entirely in the field of experimental science. Said science can tell us much about a very few things. One could argue that the entire modern world was built on the foundation of: Force = mass * acceleration (even though F = MA is hardly an "absolute truth.") But because of that success, scientific "thought" has been applied to other non-mechanistic fields (such as the nature and origin of man) in the hope of getting similar results. This effort has clearly been a failure. Once one moves beyond the world of the mechanistic, the observable and the repeatable, "science", as popularly defined, becomes worse than useless. It offers the promise of knowing all things which it can never do. >>>> "Throughout my discussion, I will be sustained --- and liberated --- by the concept of complementary. For if I ask a question from one point of view, I will have one answer. But if I ask the same question from another, and quite different, point of view, I may very well have a second answer. The second may be inconsistent with the first, but it can viewed as complementary. And the two answers taken together will provide a richer, truer picture than either separately." Therefore, using human reason and logic on top of Bible interpretation can lead to apparently contradictory results. For example, "once saved always saved" versus "losing your salvation" and "saved by grace" versus "faith and obedience", "baptism is not required" to "baptism is required," and "Free Will" versus "Predestination." <<<< These are excellent insights. Biblical truth is usually more that some either\or dichotomy that ends up forcing one to pick some pos clearly contradicts some other portion of scripture. Finding the deeper truth is a matter of reason and revelation working together to resolve the apparent contradictions that clearly exist in scripture. The missing dimension is the dynamic of growth. 2Peter 1:3-11, Mat 5-7. The Spirit and the Word cooperate together to increase both our faith and knowledge. Faith and works cooperate together to increase faith and works. I tell the predestination folks that if I don't have free will, I was certainly programmed to believe that I have it, and who am I to argue with my programmer. The Bible has some profound promises on wisdom: But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. (John 16:13 NIV) If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. (James 1:5 NIV) Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is-- his good, pleasing and perfect will. (Ro. 12:2 NIV). Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. (Eph. 6:17 NIV) Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 22, 1995 16:39:03 From : Robert M. Sexton, 71754,1402 #73029 Jim: JO<<<<>>> I have read about the Toronto thing and it seems a little weird --- to say the least --- and I am Pentecostal. Generally, I am pretty good at spiritually discerning things, but I haven't witnessed or followed the Toronto happenings. However, both when I was Baptized in water and when I received the Holy Ghost, I was _very_ happy. The Book of Acts describes new converts as "rejoicing" at their conversion. I do know that people occasionally get a Holy Ghost blessing and are very happy --- laughing and dancing and praising God. Certainly joy and rejoicing are Scriptural: Luke 24:52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: Luke 24:53 And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen. Acts 8:8 And there was great joy in that city. Acts 13:52 And the disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost. Rom 14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Rom 15:13 Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost. Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Gal 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 1 Th 1:6 And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost: James 4:7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. James 4:8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. James 4:9 Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up. 1 Pet 1:8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory: 1 Pet 1:9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls. 3 John 1:4 I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth. Is the Toronto thing a manifestation of God or Satan? I don't know until their fruits are manifest. Scripture says: Mat 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Mat 24:25 Behold, I have told you before. Mat 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Eph 4:14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; 2 Tim 2:15 Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Tim 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 2 Tim 2:17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 2 Tim 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. 2 Tim 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. JO<<<>>> Human logic, reasoning, and thought can be very much in error. I have studied this for some time now. I was especially alarmed to read the books "Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty" by Morris Kline (1980) and "The Mathematical Experience" by Philip J. Davis and Reuben Hersh (1981). I always thought that Mathematics was the essence of pure human logic and reason but was surprised to find that this ultimate bastion of human endeavour and thought was flawed. That was a shock! Another book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn (1970) put another "nail in the coffin" of pure unbiased scienfific reasoning. I know we have to use reasoning, logic, and thought, but the longer I live I see that this approach occasionally leads to erroneous and contradictory results. The Emil Brunner book "Revelation and Reason" presents an excellent discussion of this based on the Bible. I was struck by the following excerpt from "Religions in America", page 302: "Throughtout my discussion, I will be sustained --- and liberated --- by the concept of complementarity. For if I ask a question from one point of view, I will have one answer. But if I ask the same question from another, and quite different, point of view, I may very well have a second answer. The second may be inconsistent with the first, buit it can viewwed as complementary. And the two answers taken together will provide a richer, truer picture than either separately." Therefore, using human reason and logic on top of Bible interpretation can lead to apparently contradictory results. For example, "once saved always saved" versus "losing your salvation" and "saved by grace" versus "faith and obedience", "baptism is not required" to "baptism is required," and "Free Will" versus "Predestination." Of course, it takes a _certain_ amount of reasoning and thought to even read and understand the Bible. But when it comes right down to, if our human thinking doesn't agree with God's Revelation, then _we_ are the ones in error. As an example in Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Modern physicists should consider that this one statement includes all the elements of modern physics: time, energy, space, and mass --- several thousand years before Albert Einstein. God Bless, Bob Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : Robert M. Sexton, 71754,1402 January 23, 1995 04:42:02 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #73233 Bob, Thank you for the reply. When the Lord turned on my light switch I laughed "in the spirit" for nearly 2 weeks off and on, cried too. Trying to explain, justify or even analyze such an experience in oneself or others is probably impossible. All I can say is that what happened to me and what has been described as happening to others are at significant variance with one another. The principal difference is in the area of being able, and WILLING, to exercise self- control (Which is a fruit of the Holy Spirit). But some objective observations are possible. First what happened to me was a RESULT of understanding the gospel in my heart for the first time. With this new move the reaction is triggered by crowd psychology, or "priming the pump" with a,"Ha-Ha, Ho-Ho, Ha-Ha...." or the layi hands for the express purpose of producing the manifestations (or a combination of these). EVERY report that I have seen from advocates and skeptics alike reveals that the preaching of the Word takes a back seat to spreading the manifestation. That is a major difference when compared to what happened to me, or for that matter, what happened in the Johnathan Edwards' revival, which is the major "proof experience" for this new move. The Biblical commandment we we have for assisting the Holy Spirits evangelistic efforts is the preaching of the gospel in word (Ro 10) and deed (Mat 5-7). As for fruit, immediate results are not especially useful in judging anything, as the Lord Himself explained. Good "roots" are critical for sustainable spiritual life. There is an open hostility in this move toward reasoned Biblical study. And that guarantees that good roots will never be put down. As you are a pentecostal, I am sure that you are familiar with the relevant texts in the book of Acts and 1Co 12-14 which lay a clear foundation for the modern manifestation of the gift of tongues. That foundation is so clear that the burden rests with the anti-tongues movement to show that this gift is not for today. But that is a REASONED conclusion from scripture. Ironically it is 1Co 14's teaching on decently and in order and not like a madhouse that creates the greatest problem for this new move. The first time I cited 1Co 14 over on the RF, in connection with this new move, I got charged with blasphemy. There is a lot more here, but the files in the section 2 library go into it in far more detail than I can in a series of messages. I encourage you to take a look at the files. I would be glad to post a list if you like. There were several excellent points in your last message I would like to address. On Science. The first question is what is science? My professional training is entirely in the field of experimental science. Said science can tell us much about a very few things. One could argue that the entire modern world was built on the foundation of: Force = mass * acceleration (even though F = MA is hardly an "absolute truth.") But because of that success, scientific "thought" has been applied to other non-mechanistic fields (such as the nature and origin of man) in the hope of getting similar results. This effort has clearly been a failure. Once one moves beyond the world of the mechanistic, the observable and the repeatable, "science", as popularly defined, becomes worse than useless. It offers the promise of knowing all things which it can never do. >>>> "Throughout my discussion, I will be sustained --- and liberated --- by the concept of complementary. For if I ask a question from one point of view, I will have one answer. But if I ask the same question from another, and quite different, point of view, I may very well have a second answer. The second may be inconsistent with the first, but it can viewed as complementary. And the two answers taken together will provide a richer, truer picture than either separately." Therefore, using human reason and logic on top of Bible interpretation can lead to apparently contradictory results. For example, "once saved always saved" versus "losing your salvation" and "saved by grace" versus "faith and obedience", "baptism is not required" to "baptism is required," and "Free Will" versus "Predestination." <<<< These are excellent insights. Biblical truth is usually more that some either\or dichotomy that ends up forcing one to pick some pos clearly contradicts some other portion of scripture. Finding the deeper truth is a matter of reason and revelation working together to resolve the apparent contradictions that clearly exist in scripture. The missing dimension is the dynamic of growth. 2Peter 1:3-11, Mat 5-7. The Spirit and the Word cooperate together to increase both our faith and knowledge. Faith and works cooperate together to increase faith and works. I tell the predestination folks that if I don't have free will, I was certainly programmed to believe that I have it, and who am I to argue with my programmer. The Bible has some profound promises on wisdom: But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. (John 16:13 NIV) If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. (James 1:5 NIV) Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is-- his good, pleasing and perfect will. (Ro. 12:2 NIV). Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. (Eph. 6:17 NIV) Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 23, 1995 11:45:25 From : Robert M. Sexton, 71754,1402 #73323 Jim: JO<<<>>> I am _always_ turned off by manipulation and crowd psychology!!!! When I started my trip back to the Lord in 1981, I went to every church that was open because I was so hungry for the Word of God. Some of the wilder churches did some very _weird_ stuff. Like _teaching_ people a "prayer language." I didn't know enough about the Bible then, but I certainly was troubled in my spirit at that behavior. If they (Toronto) are manipulating the crowd to manifest the "manifestation," then they are totally wrong! In a Pentecostal church, the Spirit and manifestion of the Spirit comes either because of Praise, Worship, or anointed preaching of the Word. Not due to some pulpit manipulation. On the day of Pentecost, Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Note, "as the Spirit gave them utterance," not as "someone taught them" or "someone manipulated them." 1 Cor 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. 1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 1 Cor 14:40 Let all things be done decently and in order. <<<>>> The "science" of pyschology is an excellent example. Man is not a machine, but created in the image of God. It is foolish to think that someone can tell what is going on inside someone's head! I mean, sometimes I have a hard enough time figuring out my head, much less someone else! BTW, try understanding a teenager! That is living proof that pychology and the rest of the "social sciences" are built on flawed premises. Pyschology, especially, is built on lies and half-truths. For example, to gather data, you tell the test group one thing, and the control group another. One or both groups have been lied to or tricked or manipulated in some manner. And from this, they expect to extract "scientific" data. All they get are falsehoods. A science built on lies will not stand. <<<>>> I was scanning Emil Brunner's "Revelation and Reason" and he points that (to paraphrase) logic, reason, science, etc. work (usually) on "things", or objects in the world. To apply the same tools to human thoughts, intellectual ideas, and God is not justified, and frequently erroneous. To interpret the Bible, one must "rightly divide the word of truth" and take and consider the revelations in the Bible. Not, as some have done, start with a philosophy and superimpose that on top of the Bible. I mentioned several of these in my previous post to you. Enough for now. Get the Brunner book if you can find it. It is very interesting. God Bless, Bob Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 24, 1995 12:20:12 From : Jon Larsen, 76131,1535 #73702 Some interesting thoughts and wisdom. I to received the Baptism and did have one small experience of holy laughter. And a few years ago, I was going through a second very intense repentance and couldn't hardly believe God touching me in such a way, considering my sin. It was an example of His Grace in my life. You doe well, by compareing current teaching and experiences too the scripture, Jesus's promises and the advice by Paul. The excesses in the vineyard movement seems frightening to me. And has caused some doubt in my Penticostal experiences. Especially since some good teachers are still very much opossed to the second baptism. I do believe my receiveing baptism was an act of obedience. And the Baptism is scriptural. the question is what of the Vineyard experience is of God and what is not. God seems to really pour his blessings on baby christians, and really show his love and power in magnificant ways. I say this realizing there are probalby no scripture to back that statement up. Also I know God is patient and His love covers a multitude of sin. I suspect the leaders of this movement need to be prayed for much. For if they do not continue to grow satan shall get a foothold, and this has happened in most of our revivals of the past. what was started out in the spirit and returns to a more of a fleshy kind of thing, as in the problem with the Hebrews. Returning to the flesh can be both a legalistic flesh or a soulish flesh too. One other thing about the Pentalcostal movement on Azuzu St. It had many people for and against. And they had there problems too. But I believe history is proving the validity of it. People have been empowered since those days to preach the gospel, and set the captives free in such a way which we have not seen since the early church. On science and creation. I heard it said once that science can only answer the question of how. It has not authority to do anything but understand how things work. But not to answer why or what for. I know how I got on this earth, but don't know exactly for what purpose God has for me. Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : Jon Larsen, 76131,1535 January 25, 1995 22:39:23 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #74236 Jon, (Part 1 of 2) Let me tell you about my experience which is probably not that unusual. I grew up in a Christian home, but for me the real excitement was elsewhere, in the world of science, the rational, the deterministic. Religion was a creed that one affirmed, the world of the supernatural largely a myth. Then when I was about 22 years old I went through a series of experiences that made the supernatural very real to me. But I had no real grounding in scripture to guide and anchor any of this. I went from a dead profession of a good creed, to a living worship of spirits. I went from the frying pan into the fire. This was not in the company of some new age cult but in the company of professing Christians. When one becomes aware of the reality of the world of the spirits, a critical decision point is reached. One must decide what to do about that world. Those whose religious tradition has no experience with such things never teach about them. And those who have experience in this area tend to assume that the discernment of that which is "of God" and that which is "of Satan" is easily accomplished by a simple analysis of immediate results and commitment. This and the related threads could really be retitled proper discernment. Improper discernment and methods of discernment are at the root of what has caused this move to move with the power and speed that it has. Some have suggested that the spirit is Holy but the people are in error. In fact the cause and effect is just the opposite. Because of poor discernment a deceiving spirit has been able to invade the church. Even if one rejects this view the following will happen. Because those affected by this spirit have no root when it comes to things of the spirit, they stand wide open to be deceived. Meanwhile the leaders speak about spirits in a one dimensional sense. In effect they say, "It has power, it FEELS like God so it must be God." NOT ALL SPIRITS ARE FROM GOD. And Satan does not come as the man of sin. He comes disguised an ANGEL OF LIGHT. Feelings and superficial analysis are a disastrous standard for discernment. Here is a key question. Why would a loving God allow people who profess to be seeking Him to be demolished by a deceiving spirit? So they learn about deceiving spirits. Some have to learn the hard way. But that is not the "A Plan" which is to learn from scripture. The Holy Spirit wrote the New Testament and He is not divided against himself. The first obvious test is this; does the "spirit" testify consistently with scripture. If not, it's not the Holy Spirit. It is interesting that advocates go backward to defend this move. But God's plan moves forward. For example Paul explicitly teaches that the model at Pentecost is NOT to be used in a church service. At Pentecost 120 people spoke in tongues. (They all spoke in tongues at the same time). Here is Paul: So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and some who do not understand or some unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind? (1 Co 14:23 NIV) We are not in the Old Testament and not at the very beginning of the age of the church. A second test concerns the character of the spirit. The Holy Spirit's WORK is to turn men's hearts to Jesus. He doesn't speak on His own. One should carefully consider the WORK of the Holy Spirit. Here is a major component: But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you. (John 16:13-15 NIV) This is a transfer of knowledge, and an amazing promise to transfer ALL TRUTH. Some see this as a supernatural zapping with truth, and sometimes it may manifest that way. But usually it is a combination of study and diligently seeking (our part) with the Holy Spirit providing the understanding and heartfelt certainty. Effort and reward go together throughout the New Testament. God is not the author of confusion (It should not be hard to determine who is the author of confusion). True Godly heartfelt understanding comes with a clarity of intellectual understanding. A true revelation from God should speak to heart and mind alike, with clarity. As the 5 month long discussion of this issue on CIS will show, that clarity is conspicuous by it's absence. Immediately after the profoundly bizarre events at Pentecost, Peter got up and BOLDLY and with AUTHORITY explained FROM THE BIBLE exactly what was happening and what it meant. The Holy Spirit is omnipresent, everywhere at the same time. One is not to go anywhere to find Him: At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect-- if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time. (Matthew 24:24-25 NIV) The Lord says He is ALWAYS with us: And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." (Mat. 28:20 NIV). He never leaves us, no matter how things seem. He explicitly warns us not to go places looking for Him. But this new move is about experience chasing, no matter how much the advocates of the move try to deny it. People are not flying half way around the world to hear John Arnot preach. Continued..... Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : Jon Larsen, 76131,1535 January 25, 1995 22:39:19 From : jim ober, 71043,3424 #74238 (Part 2 of 2) People are deceived about how God works IN people. Why should someone need to be touched from the outside by a God who lives on the inside? This new move is an act of spiritual adultery. It is a denial of the power of God living inside every true believer. Said error of the spirit led God to use Babylon to destroy ancient Israel. There is no new thing under the Sun. Writing of God's ministry to the Gentiles (the Church) and comparing it to His work with ancient Israel, Paul wrote: But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. (Romans 11:20-21 NIV) The context here is conditional but the rebellion makes it a certainty: Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. (2 Thess. 2:3 NIV) Ancient Israel was supremely confident that it lived under divine protection and it did. Rome wasn't Israel's problem (Romans 13). Israel was Israel's problem and God sent the Romans to destroy Israel for that very reason. God offered everything He had, Himself, but it wasn't enough. They wanted more of God. The church of the modern pharisee and the church of spiritual adultery each see the other as the enemy. But God is their enemy and by the time they find that out it will be too late. God has already given us everything we need. (2Peter 1:3-11) But everybody wants more of God. What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. (Ecc. 1:9 NIV). You are right that we should pray for the leaders of the Vineyard and of the other churches affected by this move. John Wimber has an admirable passion for God. That is undeniable. But passion without understanding is as disastrous a combination as there is in this life. God promises to provide ANY of us wisdom without finding fault: If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. (James 1:5 NIV) ..to guide us into ALL truth, and to reward those who DILIGENTLY seek Him: But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. (Hebrews 11:6) But we have to seek God alone, not our desires for experience, or good looking results, no matter how Godly such things may appear: But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. (Mat. 6:33 NIV) People need to be very careful about judging anything by external appearances. >>> I heard it said once that science can only answer the question of how. It has not authority to do anything but understand how things work. But not to answer why or what for. I know how I got on this earth, but don't know exactly for what purpose God has for me. <<<< Well the so called scientific study of origins seeks to explain HOW you got here. ALL that modern experimental science can say is that based on REPEATED OBSERVATIONS, an event (a) predictably precedes another event (b). Anything beyond that is speculation. True experimental science is a powerful tool. So men try to label as science anything that they do. The hope is that the reputation of "real" science will enhance their image in the eyes of an ignorant world (as it does). Given Ecc 1:7 one can build a science of theology. (based on repeated observation). It's one conclusion is that every age ends in deep apostasy and widespread ignorance among the people "of God" as to the nature and extent of that apostasy. God is clearly un-dispersing his ancient nation and putting it back together on the edge of the property He promised to his good friend Abraham. Abraham's descendants, physical and spiritual, have never had permanent possession of ALL of that promised land (from the Nile to the Euphrates). One needs to soberly consider why He is doing such a thing at this time. Many believe that God is through with the Jews as a chosen people. What few are willing to consider is that he might be through with the institution we call the church. But that is nothing new. As for your "purpose". First one must put on the helmet of salvation and take up the true sword of the spirit. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. (Eph. 6:17 NIV). God's plan extends into eternity. His salvation insures that life will not end at the grave. The mind has to be focused on the view that our earthly life is but a blink of the eye compared to our total life. God's plan for you is an eternal plan. The Word of God gives specific instructions for finding your calling and making it sure in your heart. 2Peter 1:3-11 is the place to start. Jim Forum: Ministry Outreach+ Section: Issues Awareness Subj : Laughing & Foundations To : jim ober, 71043,3424 January 26, 1995 07:35:08 From : Jon Larsen, 76131,1535 #74378 Jim, thanks for the time you spent writing to me. I do know from experience that yes satan does come as an angel of light. I was decieved by that once and repented and was delivered through some Penticostal christians that had understanding and discernment. I was fortunate. One thing I did notice in old testiment was God warned the Isrealites that He would raise up false people that would produce miricales, to test the people of Isreal, to see if they would stay true to Him or not. I believe that He does this to this day. In hearing of the extremes of this new movement I found myself doubting the whole Penticostal movement. I do believe that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is for today and needed very badly. I believe this primarily is for the upbuilding of the Body of Christ and not for personal gratification. My goal is to Follow Jesus for my time hear on earth. And I believe that is where our Growth and maturity is based. I was shown How disobedient I have been in my life. And my hope is to learn to trust and obey. Yes the Christian Church has been in times of judgement and in times of plenty. We don't have a history to be proud of. But Jesus said to Peter that the gates of hell, will not prevail against the chruch he was to build. Now we know that Jesus didn't say that we wouldn't lose some battles on the way. But just as we lost some battles in wwII our enemy didn't prevail. And we have the promise in Rev. that Satan will be defeated. Paul also writes in Rom. that in the end time many Jews will come to the Lord. I suspect these times are closer than ever. Jesus did say that the Truth sets people free, and that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth. Jon