Charismatic Baptists

[OzSpen]

I am going to a SBC in which the pastor seems to really push the gifts of the spirit - mostly healing, dream, visions. Not much by way of toungues - however he doesn't think that one has ceased either. Seems like every Sunday morning I hear reports of the miraculous that people have experienced in the church.

Frankly I find this refreshing - but it hasn't been the norm from my experience in the SBC. Does anyone else go to a similar type church in the SBC?

Just curious...

Because I don't live in the USA, I can't attend a SBC. However, there are a good number of Baptists in my part of Queensland that are charismatic/Pentecostal in their view of the continuing gifts of the Spirit for today.

One of the best books on the continuing gift of prophecy that I have ever read is by a Reformed, charismatic Baptist, Dr. Wayne Grudem. I highly recommend his book, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today.

I find nothing problematical about a pastor and a Baptist church who are pursuing the gifts of the Spirit for today. However, I do find it problematical if these gifts are out of control and anything goes, without the NT requirement: "But all things should be done decently and in order" (1 Cor. 14:40 ESV).

The NT teaching is:

Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especialy that you may prophesy (1 Cor. 14:1 ESV).

In Christ,
Oz

 

[His_disciple3]

I admire you for holding to your beliefs, even when not popular. I am not a cessationalist, but not strongly in that position. Like you, it's because there are portions of scripture there. The problem is, I've never seen any depth spiritually come out of the emphasis on the spectacular gifts. There is a lot of good spirited worship and a real heart-felt love for the Lord that seems to be kindled in a lot of people. But the trade off in sins of the flesh is really sad.

I don't want any to misunderstand, I'm not saying charismatics are more sensuously fleshly than non-charismatics, I'm just commenting on what I've observed in those I've known and all the articles I've read over the years.

There seems to be a high degree of emotions and feeling that goes with the charismatic atmosphere, and the flesh thrives on feelings as much or more than it thrives on willfullness and intellectual pride. In fact, there is a good side to the flesh as certainly as there is a bad side. The bad side is characterized by unrighteousness; the good side is characterized by self-effort and self-righteousness. The flesh cannot distinguish between the rush one gets from a strong intense worship experience and the rush one gets by one's besetting sin, whether that be a fantasy of a sensuous woman, or getting good and mad at something or someone. A life governed by sensual feelings, no matter how good they start out being, will eventually make the person weak toward the baser sensuous urges. The flesh is the flesh. This is no doubt why there have been so many cases of sexual sin in the charismatic community. Aside from the doctrine, when one caters to feeling and is governed by feeling, then he is susceptible to many feelings.

Consequently, sometimes we can forfeit a deeper and more victorious life over sin for a life that just feels good. I would rather have Christ leading me in a life characterized by the principles of Romans 6 and 8 and Galatians 2:20, Christ enthroned and Self in the position of death where Christ put him, than a flamboyant exuberant emotional walk that ends up making me attached to the feelings.

5 years ago, my wife and I attended what had been an American Baptist church, now independent but strongly Baptist, but they had just in recent years got a pastor who had a charismatic background. When we left, he was emphasizing gifts more and more, but the preaching was pathetically shallow. The final straw when I decided we had to leave was when I noticed my wife reading her Bible through the sermons on multiple occasions. The pastor cared more about wonderful experiences than he did the depth and victory of his flock.

I hope this doesn't happen at your church; but it is a good thing to watch out for - whether the person cares for depth of growth or just flamboyant exuberance.

God bless,
H.

you say the flesh thrives on emotions, well we are not to grieve the Spirit, we are to rejoice in the Spirit sounds like to me there are emotions with the Spirit also.
you speak alot of the flesh which I say walk not in the flesh but in the Spirit!
you say the flesh can not determine between worship and sin I say if this is true one has a discernment problem not a flesh problem.
you say a life governed by sensual feelings is bad I say it ain't about feeling God, but it sureeee do feel good when we do!
you say "This is no doubt why there have been so many cases of sexual sin in the charismatic community" I say that a bpatist church in this community had the pastor run off with the piano player, I say that just recently that one of the l;eading baptist churches in this area, the pastor was caught in a internet sexual affair with a lady,
you say alot negative stuff about charismatics. I ask is this the fruit we are suppose to be producing for other members of the Body of Christ. if we say that Jesus Christ was the Son of God then we are borned of God. this is the foundation of our faith. I am a Charismatic baptist I believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, my Spirit say that Jesus the Christ came in the Flesh, what saith you ?? if you agree then we are my friend in the same body, so edify the Body not tear down!

 

[OzSpen]

If cessationist doctrine is really true, was St Benedict (12th Century AD) a liar? His story is that when one of the workers at the Benedictine monastery on Monte Cassino was killed when a wall fell on him, the broken body was brought down to him. He got down and prayed and the man came back to life and went back to work. If cessationism is true, that could never have happened, but it is clearly written in the history books.

All of the church fathers right through to the fourth century AD reported healings and deliverances, and successive movements, including Catholic monks reported the same, right through to the start of the 20th Century. None of these people were Pentecostals, because Pentecostalism didn't start until the early 1900s.

The fact is that tongues, healing, deliverances faded out when the Church became institutionalised, and when there was a great influx of pagans into the church at the end of the Third Century who brought all that influence in. This is why many churches have great ornate buildings and other rituals adapted from the former pagan worship.

So it was the Church itself that caused the miracles to fade away, not God. But every group of people through the centuries who have put Jesus first, have experienced signs, wonders and miracles. All you have to do is to read a bit of Church history.

John Wesley had 250 documented healings during his ministry. He even prayed for his horse and it got healed!

The early Baptists were just as Charismatic as the Pentecostals were. They had healings and demons cast out and all sorts of things. Read the early history of the church. But it became institutionised as successive generations of people joined the demonination who were not as committed to Christ as the ones before and put the institution of the church before Christ, and so the miraculous faded out, just like every other denomination that started with the miraculous.

You will find that in about 25 years, the Pentecostals will be just like the Baptists today - hardly any tongues, healings and miracles; and plenty of cessationists in its congregations. They are going that way already. Many Pentecostal churches no longer practice tongues, deliverances and healings. All they have are the hymn sandwich services that other "traditional" churches have.

Oscarr,

Thanks for another excellent post with exceptional insight.

When I first began attending charismatic/Pentecostal churches in the early 1970s, there was open worship with an opportunity for the gifts of the Spirit to function if the Lord so desired. There was many a time when i heard tongues with interpretation, the gift of prophecy, the word of knowledge, etc.

However, when I go to Pentecostal or charismatic churches in my part of the world, it is entertainment mode and no opportunity for the gifts to function. I plan next week on inquiring about a Pentecostal mid-week meeting to see if the gifts are allowed to function. My general understanding is that the Pentecostals are heading towards a contemporary evangelical church format.

I long for the day when 1 Cor. 14:26 again happens in our churches:

What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up (NIV).

What's happening in your part of NZ?

In Christ,
Oz

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Oscarr,

What's happening in your part of NZ?

In Christ,
Oz

Thanks for your encouraging comments.

There has been a recognition among Baptist churches in NZ, because of the general decline that was happening, that something needed to happen. Those churches that recognised that there needed a return to the operation of the gifts of the Spirit and did something about it, arrested the decline and started to grow.

The interesting thing is that these churches retained their essential Baptist character and did not change into "Charismatic" churches with the associated characteristics. The two Baptist churches that I have friends in practice the gifts of the Spirit in line with the fruit of the Spirit, especially in the areas of kindness, gentleness and self control, areas which some Pentecostal and Charismatic churches have forgotten.

What I would like to see is the same happening in the Presbyterian Church (of which I am an elder). It is going through a decline in many areas at present, and I think they have to face the same issues. There are a couple of Presbyterian churches that have embraced the gifts of the Spirit, while remaining essentially Presbyterian in character, and they are healthy, growing churches.

I think that what is happening in these churches is a reflection of the "third wave" of the Holy Spirit, where the supernatural gifts of the Spirit can operate in churches without the need for those churches to change their essential traditional character. This means that an Anglican Church (for example) can still have its liturgical services and yet see healings, deliverances, prophecies, etc happening in the life of the church.

Even though I subscribe to Pentecostal theology foundations (not necessarily the excesses practiced in many of today's Pentecostal/Charismatic churches), I have no desire to leave my Presbyterian church because it is my "family", and my position as elder is opening doors of ministry into other traditional churches that would not be open to P/C ministries.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

As a Pentecostal, you probably see it that way. I, on the other hand, see it as biblical and correct.

I think that is open for discussion, but I am not allowed to do that here and I must respect the good people on this forum. But if you want to come over to the Charismatic Debate Forum, I would be quite happy to discuss what the Bible says about our diverse views. This does not mean that there is any obligation to accept anything you don't believe, but it is good for us to understand where each other is coming from.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I think Wesley and Benedict were both in deep unbiblical error. So the very mention of their names makes me skeptical before we move any further. Especially Wesley. I think Wesley for instance was used by the devil to corrupt the Christian Church with a false man centered gospel so his experiences if they were even true were probably from the wrong spirit.

Read this:
Is cessationism biblical?

I know that I have to take care not to go beyond posting informational material on the thread, and not to enter into debates, out of respect for others here (because I have a different icon).


But just by way of information, Benedict was a product of the church of his time, which had generally departed from the simplicy of the faith. But there were many in that church who did not subscribe to the shonky doctrines but tried to remain faithful to the teachings and commands of Christ. God honoured their faith by working with them. My contention is that the purity of the Christian faith that we enjoy these days is because of those saints of the RCC who refused to go along with the wrong doctrines and who fought to stay faithful to Christ even though in many cases it cost them their lives. Benedict was one of those. If he wasn't, God would not have performed the miracles that happened in his ministry, because God is the only one who can raise a person from the dead. So, the miracles vindicated his personal faith in Christ, even though his head might have been a bit messed up doctrinally.

Wesley was Arminian (I am Calvinist, by the way), so he might have been a bit messed up with some of his doctrines, but the historical fact is that because of his ministry, the revolution that happened in France was prevented from taking place in England (it was a close-run thing though). He had 250 documented genuine healings during his ministry, and I think that this vindicates his personal faith regardless of some wrong thinking that he might have had concerning the freedom/bondage of the will.

Jesus said in John 10 (or thereabouts) that if there were no signs and wonders vindicating His ministry, then don't believe His words, and if people had trouble believing His teaching, then believe the signs and wonders that He performed to show that the Father was in Him and He was in the Father. Jesus also said that as He was in the world, so are we, and that the works He did, we can do also. These are what Jesus actually said. So, supernatural signs and wonders following the preaching of the Gospel to prove that Jesus is really alive and the Gospel is really true, is quite Biblical.

God looks on the heart, and even if the head is messed up, He can still use a person effectively in ministry. When the Scripture says "These signs shall follow those who believe...they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover". Notice that the Scripture does not say, "These signs shall follow those who have every doctrine absolutely correct in their heads".

Accusing Wesley of being "of the devil" is nothing new. The Pharisees accused Jesus of the same thing because He also did not fit their precise doctrinal position. God has used Calvinists and Arminians to further His work with remarkable instances of His mercy and grace toward sinners, so it seems that the Calvinist/Arminian issue is not very high on His agenda.

Now, I am not defending the Pentecostal/Charismatic church. I think that there is a lot of shonky doctrine emerging from that quarter. That is why I am quite happy in my orthodox, traditional Presbyterian church, abiding by the Westminster Confession. I also have Calvin's commentaries on most of the books of the Bible, plus a copy of his Institutes, which I think are the best of good theology ever compiled. I think that the English Puritans were the best Bible teachers, and every revival the church has ever had since their time is mostly inspired and influenced by John Calvin's teaching.

God could even use Balaam's donkey to bring about His truth, so He can use anyone if need be.

There is a very good book that gives a sound overview of Pentecostal theology, and useful for separating the meat from the bones of current Pentecostal/Charismatic practice. Here is the title:


Foundations of Pentecostal Theology [Hardcover]
Guy P. Duffield
Guy P. Duffield (Author)
(Author), Nathaniel M. Van Cleave (Author)

You will find that most of what is written is not far from what you might believe already. You will also be able to compare this foundation and what is going on in churches and see quite clearly that many practices are not consistent with the theological foundations of the Pentecostal movement as understood by good sound scholars of it.

 

[Hupomone10]

you say "This is no doubt why there have been so many cases of sexual sin in the charismatic community" I say that a bpatist church in this community had the pastor run off with the piano player, I say that just recently that one of the l;eading baptist churches in this area, the pastor was caught in a internet sexual affair with a lady,

I also said this:

I don't want any to misunderstand, I'm not saying charismatics are more sensuously fleshly than non-charismatics, I'm just commenting on what I've observed in those I've known and all the articles I've read over the years.

you say alot negative stuff about charismatics. I ask is this the fruit we are suppose to be producing for other members of the Body of Christ. if we say that Jesus Christ was the Son of God then we are borned of God. this is the foundation of our faith. I am a Charismatic baptist I believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, my Spirit say that Jesus the Christ came in the Flesh, what saith you ?? if you agree then we are my friend in the same body, so edify the Body not tear down!

I believe I am edifying you by discussing the danger of a life of feeling vs. a life of faith. If there was a snake in the trail just ahead of where a friend was walking, would I be edifying him by not warning him about it?

Blessings, dear brother.
H.

 

[Blessedj01]

wow I went to a baptist church once and heard about 45 minutes worth talking about money for three weeks in a row! what's your point, are you saying you never heard them talking about money at a baptist church??

Actually, no. Not on the scale that I heard these guys talking about it.

The entire service, from start to finish, was all about raising not just SOME money, but millions and millions of dollars with EVERYONE pledging some kind of block-sum financial support.

I'm not saying that's bad in and of itself but it came across to me in an odd way. The church was already massive and obviously wealthy, with a large member base.

I just kept thinking that maybe money isn't the answer, maybe spiritual change is more important and for the people of the church to actually get out there and be real.

Like I said, I don't disagree with it completely - but it's not my version of Christian faith.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

I know that I have to take care not to go beyond posting informational material on the thread, and not to enter into debates, out of respect for others here (because I have a different icon).


But just by way of information, Benedict was a product of the church of his time, which had generally departed from the simplicy of the faith. But there were many in that church who did not subscribe to the shonky doctrines but tried to remain faithful to the teachings and commands of Christ. God honoured their faith by working with them. My contention is that the purity of the Christian faith that we enjoy these days is because of those saints of the RCC who refused to go along with the wrong doctrines and who fought to stay faithful to Christ even though in many cases it cost them their lives. Benedict was one of those. If he wasn't, God would not have performed the miracles that happened in his ministry, because God is the only one who can raise a person from the dead. So, the miracles vindicated his personal faith in Christ, even though his head might have been a bit messed up doctrinally.

I don't really believe the benedictine miracles happened. There are many wild stories of miracles and relics and such among the Roman Catholics. I don't believe those either. Because I don't believe that God validates false theology.

Wesley was Arminian (I am Calvinist, by the way), so he might have been a bit messed up with some of his doctrines, but the historical fact is that because of his ministry, the revolution that happened in France was prevented from taking place in England (it was a close-run thing though). He had 250 documented genuine healings during his ministry, and I think that this vindicates his personal faith regardless of some wrong thinking that he might have had concerning the freedom/bondage of the will.

I'm glad you are a Calvinist. So am I. However, I don't believe that people get saved because of Arminian theology but in spite of it. I don't believe God would validate it. A so called "confirmed" healing from Arminians doesn't mean anything to me. Look at Benny Hinn. How many "confirmed" healings doeshe have? I don't believe God is with him so I don't believe any of them are real because he is a heretic.

Jesus said in John 10 (or thereabouts) that if there were no signs and wonders vindicating His ministry, then don't believe His words, and if people had trouble believing His teaching, then believe the signs and wonders that He performed to show that the Father was in Him and He was in the Father. Jesus also said that as He was in the world, so are we, and that the works He did, we can do also. These are what Jesus actually said. So, supernatural signs and wonders following the preaching of the Gospel to prove that Jesus is really alive and the Gospel is really true, is quite Biblical.

The signs and wonders were there to vindicate his ministry and the apostles after that we have the scriptures that bear witness to them.

That is why I am quite happy in my orthodox, traditional Presbyterian church, abiding by the Westminster Confession. I also have Calvin's commentaries on most of the books of the Bible, plus a copy of his Institutes, which I think are the best of good theology ever compiled. I think that the English Puritans were the best Bible teachers, and every revival the church has ever had since their time is mostly inspired and influenced by John Calvin's teaching.

That's good. I agree with you there. I only differ from the Westminster on Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Other than that I'm all on board with it and the three forms of unity. I confess the LBCF 1689.

There is a very good book that gives a sound overview of Pentecostal theology, and useful for separating the meat from the bones of current Pentecostal/Charismatic practice. Here is the title:


Foundations of Pentecostal Theology [Hardcover]
Guy P. Duffield
Guy P. Duffield (Author)
(Author), Nathaniel M. Van Cleave (Author)

You will find that most of what is written is not far from what you might believe already. You will also be able to compare this foundation and what is going on in churches and see quite clearly that many practices are not consistent with the theological foundations of the Pentecostal movement as understood by good sound scholars of it.

I reject Pentacostalism and am not interested in it. I am happy being a Reformed Baptist as I believe that is the most biblical. I am a cessationist and will support that view within my Church. I believe I am following God's word on this and all things must agree with the bible or I reject it and I believe that the continuation of those kinds of gifts isn't biblical. We have a closed canon of scripture and that is all we need until Christ returns in glory. All the signs needed are in the witness of the Holy Spirit on the hearts of believers.

 

[AndOne]

Because I don't live in the USA, I can't attend a SBC. However, there are a good number of Baptists in my part of Queensland that are charismatic/Pentecostal in their view of the continuing gifts of the Spirit for today.

One of the best books on the continuing gift of prophecy that I have ever read is by a Reformed, charismatic Baptist, Dr. Wayne Grudem. I highly recommend his book, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today.

I find nothing problematical about a pastor and a Baptist church who are pursuing the gifts of the Spirit for today. However, I do find it problematical if these gifts are out of control and anything goes, without the NT requirement: "But all things should be done decently and in order" (1 Cor. 14:40 ESV).

The NT teaching is:

In Christ,
Oz

Thanks Oz - I'm quite familiar with Grudem's works - read just about everything his has written on this topic and others. Though I'm not in agreement with everything he teaches on this topic I would be remiss if I didn't credit him (along with Sam Storms) with contributing greatly to my current understanding and acceptance of the gifts. Same goes with the current teachings of the Sovereign Grace ministries - though I am Baptist to the core despite all that...

 

[OzSpen]

Thanks Oz - I'm quite familiar with Grudem's works - read just about everything his has written on this topic and others. Though I'm not in agreement with everything he teaches on this topic I would be remiss if I didn't credit him (along with Sam Storms) with contributing greatly to my current understanding and acceptance of the gifts. Same goes with the current teachings of the Sovereign Grace ministries - though I am Baptist to the core despite all that...

I've been greatly blessed by Samuel Storms response to cessationism and his contribution to this book (some pages missing online) is one of the best I have read: Are Miraculous Gifts for Today: 4 Views (Zondervan).

In my part of the world it is not unusual to find some charismatic Baptists, which is something that my wife and I would not have expected when we were married in a Baptist church in SE Qld 44 years ago.

In Christ, Oz

 

[His_disciple3]

I also said this:I believe I am edifying you by discussing the danger of a life of feeling vs. a life of faith. If there was a snake in the trail just ahead of where a friend was walking, would I be edifying him by not warning him about it?

Blessings, dear brother.
H.

well just pray to Jesus then that He would send fire down and destory all the charismatics. But I am sure He will tell you the same as He told the disciples, "for he that is not against us is for us"
Now since you went this route let me say that Blaspheme has been defined by your scholars as the rejection of the Holy Spirit as He draws you to Jesus. but Blaspheme means to speak evil of, so before you preach that all charismatics are of the devil, you had better be right, for if There is only one or a hand full that are of the Spirit of God, then you have just blasphemed the Holy Spirit! and seeing that Joel 2 and Acts 2 says that the days when God will pour out His Spirit on all flesh ends with the sun darkening and the moon turning to blood on the notable day of the Lord comes. then we are still in the days when your sons and daughters will prophesy and God will show wonders in heaven above and signs in the earth. so let me warn you of the snake ahead of you if you blaspheme the Holy Ghost my friend, like wise blessing to you my brother!

 

[WinBySurrender]

I think that is open for discussion, but I am not allowed to do that here and I must respect the good people on this forum. But if you want to come over to the Charismatic Debate Forum, I would be quite happy to discuss what the Bible says about our diverse views. This does not mean that there is any obligation to accept anything you don't believe, but it is good for us to understand where each other is coming from.

Oh, Oscar, I've been there done that, only not on an Internet forum. I've got good friends who attend/are members of Pentecostal churches. We've come to an easy understanding that we talk about Christ and that's it, because to talk of and compare doctrines causes a rift neither of us wants.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

[/size]

I don't really believe the benedictine miracles happened. There are many wild stories of miracles and relics and such among the Roman Catholics. I don't believe those either. Because I don't believe that God validates false theology.


The signs and wonders were there to vindicate his ministry and the apostles after that we have the scriptures that bear witness to them.


That's good. I agree with you there. I only differ from the Westminster on Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Other than that I'm all on board with it and the three forms of unity. I confess the LBCF 1689.

I reject Pentacostalism and am not interested in it. I am happy being a Reformed Baptist as I believe that is the most biblical. I am a cessationist and will support that view within my Church. I believe I am following God's word on this and all things must agree with the bible or I reject it and I believe that the continuation of those kinds of gifts isn't biblical. We have a closed canon of scripture and that is all we need until Christ returns in glory. All the signs needed are in the witness of the Holy Spirit on the hearts of believers.

If it works for you, great. For me, I can't find any reference at all in the New Testament that supports cessationism. Perhaps you can, because you are saying that you are following God's Word.

Of course the real test for you will be facing someone you love dying of a terminal disease before their time, and you have the choice of praying for them to be healed, or just standing them watching them die. I wonder what you will do then?

It is interesting that people who maintain stoutly that it is not God's will to heal people, when they or their loved ones get sick, they rush off to the doctor and do all they can to get cured. They seem to see the doctor as greater than God somehow.

But then, all we need is just one genuinely documented case of a person being instantly healed of a terminal cancer, which the medical profession has given up on them, to show that cessationist theory is not as reliable as some people think.

Question: How did St Patrick win the whole of Ireland from pagan worship in one generation?

 

[pilgrim1999]

No doubt there are a good many SBC pastors who are continuationists. But my guess is that most of them would take an "open but cautious" view and would not have the emphasis of the pastor noted in the OP. But there are some who are quite charismatic and are very open with it.

With regard to the IMB guidelines regarding private prayer language, etc, I think it's safe to say that the baptism guidelines adopted at the same time do not represent the understanding and practice of the majority of Southern Baptist churches. More probably agree on banning charismatics from the mission field than would agree with the baptism guidelines that basically reject all immersions that weren't performed in Baptist churches or non-denominational churches who basically agree with Baptist doctrine.

Apparently the perceived problem was missionaries planting full blown charismatic churches on the foreign mission field.