Charismatic Christian Theology

[kton16]

I presume I showed up a little too late ehh? Sounds like ya'll settled everything.

 

[bushinoki]

kton, I think not at all. I could go on all day about the differences between Pentecostal and Charismatic, all though they have been pretty well summed up.

One that got missed though, is a lot of churches that call themselves Pentecostal tend to favor a more traditional church setting, whereas a Charismatic church will be a little more progressive. It can be one of the biggest differences.

 

[NorrinRadd]

Some people distinguish on the basis of history rather than doctrine. For them, "Pentecostal" refers to denominations that originated around the turn of the 20th C. and believe in "speaking in tongues," while "Charismatic" refers to the Spiritual-gifts renewal movement that began within "traditional" denominations around the 1960s.

 

[Jesusmyfriend]

Everyone Christian is Charismatic. Grace Gifts is the meaning of Charismatic, so if your saved by Grace rather than the Law of Moses then your Charismatic.

YouTube - verichip and the mark of 666

<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/ALRwf6EG7EU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/ALRwf6EG7EU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

Everyone Christian is Charismatic. Grace Gifts is the meaning of Charismatic, so if your saved by Grace rather than the Law of Moses then your Charismatic.

YouTube - verichip and the mark of 666

<object width="445" height="364"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/ALRwf6EG7EU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/ALRwf6EG7EU&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></embed></object>

While this may be LINGUISTICALLY and THEORHETICALLY correct . . . it is not practically correct.

Every Christian SHOULD be walking in the charisms of the NT . . . but alas many are NOT.

Oh, that all the people of God would persue Him for all that He is and would be in them . . . (sigh)

 

[fireandsalt]

I'm interested in a discussion on Charismatic theology.

AJ

Try googling charismatic theology forum. It may turn up interesting links.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

There are even chaismatics in "cults" and world religions.

 

[Holyroller125]

Actually the easiest way is to distinguish based upon Spirit Baptism.

Pentecostals strictly believe in a secondary experience with the Spirit termed "Baptism in the Spirit" of which tongues is the Initial Physical Evidence.

Charismatics widen the spectrum with a simple belief in the seeking, propogating and continuance of the Gifts of the Spirit. These may or may not ascribe to Spirit Baptism.

The distinction between the two theologies is primarily concerning Spirit Baptism while the two are united in the belief in the continuance of the Gifts of the Spirit.

I am a charismatic United Methodist.

First, I would say that charismatics do believe in being Baptized in the Holy Ghost. Second, the phrase "evidencal tongues" is where charismatics differ. Pentecostals tend to stress only "evidencal tongues". Charismatics are more balanced in that one particular gifts of the Spirit is not the initial or required evidence of being Baptized in the Holy Ghost. The Charismatic Movement did start historically because speaking in tongues was an imminent phenomenon in the historic denominations outside of institutionalized Pentecostalism. Finally, tongues is not the evidence or only evidence of Baptized in the Holy Spirit. God through time used tongues as evidence, but Bible does not say God has to or always uses tongues right when someone gets Baptized in the Holy Ghost. Bible does speak of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost closely related and manifested with speaking in tonges. Nevertheless, Faith is the evidence (Heb. 6:1-2).

Hope I Helped,

Holyroller125

 

[good2bBrad]

Well I dont know how you were raised or what your views are on charismatics is but let me tell you a little obout what I see. I would say that most Charizmatics are also nondenominational, Apostolic, pentecostal, and there are some that believe in the trinity but they did not start out that way or they came out of that beliefe. The differences amongst them are very minimal. The reason that this is such a hot topic is that most of them are spirit filled. Not tickling ears with docturnal hogwash. They are the real deal. When GOD visits a church with an outpouring then it grows and sometimnes gets stronger. If the theology is conducive for it. Other wise it splits. A lot of times Charasmatics flow into churches from other main stream denominations that except their biblical Acts experiance. The above is some of those churches. Those who have had the experiance usualy operate in power and can do things that those who have never had it can do. That realy irritates those who don't have it. Some even deny the experiance. That only shows what is in their hearts. Having a form of goldlyness and denying the power there of. In truth they actualy persecute the real Christians because they are afraid of them. They do good works to earn salvation. Christians who have been realy visited by God and are approved by him will endure some testing. Those who have no trouble in this life are not sons but bastards. The word says that not me. If you have had the experiance then you defenatly know God and he is known of you. If you havent had the experiance then Ask, Seek and Keep knocking untill you do. Now you may think that not all those who preforme miracles will enter heaven. That is true. There was a certain man in the bible who was casting out devils and the desciples ask the Lord about it. He said that those who are for us we should not hinder "paraphrased" The spirit was not given until pentecost. I don't care about what others say. If you have never had an ACTs pentecostal experiance you don't give up or whine until you do. Love cost u somthing. Always. The problem is that most are afraid of the experiance because they are proud and unwilling to loose some of the dignity and become vulnerable before God. They get lost in doctrine. The word tells us what pure religion is. Look it up in a concordinance. Paul said what sound doctrine was also. Ask, seek and knock.

 

[good2bBrad]

First of all it sounds like at one time you had some legitimate questions and then you were spoon feed with this we are all the same garbage. Mixed with don't wory every one goes to heaven, followed by some kind of progressive eartickling junk. Let me be the first to tell you that not all christians are charasmatic because the spirit gives the gifts and not all quote un quote christians have the holy spirit. That doesnt mean that God doesnt love you. It means that U havent shown him that you realy love him. He does not waste his time on people who are in love with this life and its comforts. Those who hate this life will find life eternal. Some people he gave natural gifts and others he gave spirtual Gifts along with the tangible infilling of the Holy Ghost. If you want the real thing you may have to give something up or go through a fiery trial. Don't ask the people who tell you what you want to hear though. You must seek out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Ask, seek and knock until you have an encounter with God. It will probably cost you though. How bad you want it?

 

[good2bBrad]

So is the experiance of charismata a cult phenominon? What are you suggesting exactly. If the spirit of God is realy operating in the people involved is it still a cult? Do you think God fills evry jo blow with the spirit.? Do you think that saying the right things and doing the right things is enough to get you into heaven? Do you think That you can fall from grace? Do you really know what grace is? Sure there are people with powers that come frome the devil in other world religions but to say that they are charasmatic might be a little wrong because that is a church word. At least I think so.

 

[AVBunyan]

The Gifts

All right – tongues – easy if you take the Bible as it stands and understand how God deals with Israel as a nation. Most make issue of prayer languages, interpreter or not and never cover what tongues are really for. Let’s get down to the basics. Remember, God deals with Israel as a nation differently than he deals with the body of Christ today.

According to the Bible tongues are for a sign (1 Cor 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign,…). The verse didn’t say tongues were for your personal edification, prayer time, public worship service, etc. Tongues are for a sign. Now, who require signs in the Bible? The Jews require a sign (1 Cor 1:22 For the Jews require a sign,….). Why did the Jews require a sign? It was a part of their history. When God and Moses had their conversation at the burning bush Moses said (and I paraphrase), “They are not going to believe me.” The Lord said, “I will give you some signs to authenticate your ministry.” Moses went to them and did signs and wonders and they believed. When the Lord came to Israel in the gospels he came with signs to authenticate his ministry and some believed. In fact the Pharisees came seeking a sign - Mat 12:38 “Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.” After Christ arose he gave the apostles the signs to authenticate their ministries they went about doing signs and wonders.

Next, tongues were not for believers but for unbelievers – “not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: - I Cor. 14:22. This is the clincher. Moses went to Jews who were unbelievers of his ministry. Jesus went to an unbelieving Israel with signs. Paul went to unbelieving Israel with signs. Also, the Jews were “unbelievers” in the sense that they did not believe that God would not bless the Gentiles. In Acts 2 where the signs and wonders took place Peter preached to thousands of “unbelieving Jews” and they believed after the message with signs and wonders (Acts 2:43).

Today tongues are used in churches for believers – in other words done for the edification of the speaker or hearer, which is contrary to I Cor. 1:22 and 14:22 (note both verses are 22 – can’t beat the book!)

Now, when you use your “tongues” in your church service are there any unbelieving Jews there? Maybe and maybe not but most likely not. When you are using “tongues” in your private prayer closet are there any unbelieving Jews there?

Let’s wrap it up – When God deals with Israel as a nation he uses signs and wonders as authentication. God is not dealing with Israel as a nation today – God is dealing with individuals. Tongues are for a sign and to unbelievers, not believers. Tongues are a sign of judgment to the unbelieving Jews. Also, unbelievers are “believing “ Jews in Acts who were didn’t believe the Gentiles could get in on the blessings.

Tongue speakers are not following this today one bit. I really don’t care about how good tongues feel to you and how excited you get when you utter your “tongues”. When you pray and speak in tongues are you doing it as a sign to unbelieving Jews? I don’t care if you saw millions at once speaking in tongues. What you saw were millions of deceived people led by an unclean spirit. They may be nice, polite, Bible-quoting people but they were deceived while they were nice, polite and quoting scripture.

I know you have a lot of verses you get from I Cor 14 but remember Paul is rebuking a carnal church of a misuse of a doctrine to the point where he calls them children in malice. Why you think you can find anything positive there to support your tongues beats the fire out of me.

Don’t judge tongues by your experience – judge your experience by the Bible. Anybody can think they speak in tongues. I’ve even seen people “practicing” their tongues so they wouldn’t lose them! Please, people! The great men of God of old wouldn’t and didn’t mess with that stuff for a minute and God used any one of them more then 10,000 tongue speakers today.
But you say, “Yes, but I still know what I know and I speak in tongues and others do so that proves it!” Fine, base your doctrine on feelings and experience and ignore the plain teaching of scripture.
Again, one last time with feeling – UNTILL YOU UNDERSTAND THAT GOD DEALS WITH ISRAEL AS A NATION DIFFERENTLY THAN HE DOES WITH THE BODY OF CHRIST TODAY THEN YOU CAN FORGET UNDERSTANDING THE GIFTS!

 

[Yitzchak]

The difference between Pentecostals and Charismatics is that Pentecostals belong to a Pentecostal church and Charismatics can belong to any denomination.
What they have in common is a belief in the charismatic gifts of The Holy Spirit being active today.

 

[Yitzchak]

The term Charismatic Movement describes the adoption (circa 1960 onwards for Protestants, 1967 onwards for Roman Catholics) of certain beliefs typical of those held by Pentecostal Christians by those within the historic denominations.[1] The term "charismatic" was first coined by Harald Bredesen, a Lutheran minister, in 1962, to describe what was happening at that time in the old-line churches. Confronted with the term "neo-Pentecostal," he 'the charismatic renewal in the historic churches.'"[2] The genesis of the Charismatic Movement however is variously attributed to Father Dennis Bennett, an Episcopal priest, in 1960. His book Nine O'Clock in the Morning gives a personal account of this period.[3]

The early Charismatics were nearly identical to Pentecostals in beliefs including the baptism of The Holy Spirit being a second work of grace and also that speaking in tonuges followed baptism in The Holy Spirit.

The idea that tongues was not a part of it and also the idea that The Baptism of The Holy Spirit was not neccesary to operate in the gifts came later as the movement grew and a more diverse group that was not a part of the original movement joined it's ranks.

 

[NorrinRadd]

...
I know you have a lot of verses you get from I Cor 14 but remember Paul is rebuking a carnal church of a misuse of a doctrine to the point where he calls them children in malice. Why you think you can find anything positive there to support your tongues beats the fire out of me. ...

It's easy: We have basic reading comprehension skills.

 

[Mathetes the kerux]

The Gifts

All right – tongues – easy if you take the Bible as it stands and understand how God deals with Israel as a nation. Most make issue of prayer languages, interpreter or not and never cover what tongues are really for. Let’s get down to the basics. Remember, God deals with Israel as a nation differently than he deals with the body of Christ today.

According to the Bible tongues are for a sign (1 Cor 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign,…). The verse didn’t say tongues were for your personal edification, prayer time, public worship service, etc. Tongues are for a sign. Now, who require signs in the Bible? The Jews require a sign (1 Cor 1:22 For the Jews require a sign,….). Why did the Jews require a sign? It was a part of their history. When God and Moses had their conversation at the burning bush Moses said (and I paraphrase), “They are not going to believe me.” The Lord said, “I will give you some signs to authenticate your ministry.” Moses went to them and did signs and wonders and they believed. When the Lord came to Israel in the gospels he came with signs to authenticate his ministry and some believed. In fact the Pharisees came seeking a sign - Mat 12:38 “Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.” After Christ arose he gave the apostles the signs to authenticate their ministries they went about doing signs and wonders.

Next, tongues were not for believers but for unbelievers – “not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: - I Cor. 14:22. This is the clincher. Moses went to Jews who were unbelievers of his ministry. Jesus went to an unbelieving Israel with signs. Paul went to unbelieving Israel with signs. Also, the Jews were “unbelievers” in the sense that they did not believe that God would not bless the Gentiles. In Acts 2 where the signs and wonders took place Peter preached to thousands of “unbelieving Jews” and they believed after the message with signs and wonders (Acts 2:43).

Today tongues are used in churches for believers – in other words done for the edification of the speaker or hearer, which is contrary to I Cor. 1:22 and 14:22 (note both verses are 22 – can’t beat the book!)

Now, when you use your “tongues” in your church service are there any unbelieving Jews there? Maybe and maybe not but most likely not. When you are using “tongues” in your private prayer closet are there any unbelieving Jews there?

Let’s wrap it up – When God deals with Israel as a nation he uses signs and wonders as authentication. God is not dealing with Israel as a nation today – God is dealing with individuals. Tongues are for a sign and to unbelievers, not believers. Tongues are a sign of judgment to the unbelieving Jews. Also, unbelievers are “believing “ Jews in Acts who were didn’t believe the Gentiles could get in on the blessings.

Tongue speakers are not following this today one bit. I really don’t care about how good tongues feel to you and how excited you get when you utter your “tongues”. When you pray and speak in tongues are you doing it as a sign to unbelieving Jews? I don’t care if you saw millions at once speaking in tongues. What you saw were millions of deceived people led by an unclean spirit. They may be nice, polite, Bible-quoting people but they were deceived while they were nice, polite and quoting scripture.

I know you have a lot of verses you get from I Cor 14 but remember Paul is rebuking a carnal church of a misuse of a doctrine to the point where he calls them children in malice. Why you think you can find anything positive there to support your tongues beats the fire out of me.

Don’t judge tongues by your experience – judge your experience by the Bible. Anybody can think they speak in tongues. I’ve even seen people “practicing” their tongues so they wouldn’t lose them! Please, people! The great men of God of old wouldn’t and didn’t mess with that stuff for a minute and God used any one of them more then 10,000 tongue speakers today.
But you say, “Yes, but I still know what I know and I speak in tongues and others do so that proves it!” Fine, base your doctrine on feelings and experience and ignore the plain teaching of scripture.
Again, one last time with feeling – UNTILL YOU UNDERSTAND THAT GOD DEALS WITH ISRAEL AS A NATION DIFFERENTLY THAN HE DOES WITH THE BODY OF CHRIST TODAY THEN YOU CAN FORGET UNDERSTANDING THE GIFTS!

According to the Bible tongues are for a sign (1 Cor 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign,…). The verse didn’t say tongues were for your personal edification, prayer time, public worship service, etc. Tongues are for a sign.

That is the SECONDARY usage of tongues. See chpt 12 and the first few verses of 14 (yea even the whole context of 14) to see that the PRIMARY usage of tongues (as with ALL the gifts) is EDIFICATION OF THE BODY.

Next, tongues were not for believers but for unbelievers – “not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: - I Cor. 14:22. This is the clincher.

Uh, no. ONLY WHEN THEY WERE FUNCTIONING AS A SIGN, which is their SECONDARY USAGE. Why would tongues be for unbelievers primarily when the direction of tongues is GODWARD? Is God an unbeliever? NOT AT ALL.

Today tongues are used in churches for believers – in other words done for the edification of the speaker or hearer, which is contrary to I Cor. 1:22 and 14:22 (note both verses are 22 – can’t beat the book!)

CONTEXT dear brother . . . the OVERWHELMING thought of 1 Cor 14 is USAGE TO THE CHURCH. Nice try tho. Hermeneutics 101 context determines meaning . . . and the mention of tongues being used towards God and FOR THE BODY out numbers your "signs for unbelievers" 10 to 1.

Now, when you use your “tongues” in your church service are there any unbelieving Jews there? Maybe and maybe not but most likely not. When you are using “tongues” in your private prayer closet are there any unbelieving Jews there?

Again, ur assertion is base totally upon ur limited reading of the text and isolation of one passage in particular when the whole pericope of 12-13 is about the gifts. Tongues are primarily 1st to God . . . sorry.

I know you have a lot of verses you get from I Cor 14 but remember Paul is rebuking a carnal church of a misuse of a doctrine to the point where he calls them children in malice. Why you think you can find anything positive there to support your tongues beats the fire out of me.

Really? Guess u might as well throw out Isaiah's predictions of Jesus . . . ya kno . . . since Isaiah is primarily a book of rebuke of carnal Jews . . . oh ya, Jeremiah and Ezekiel too . . . heck scrap all the prophets brother! I dont think so. THAT IS FIRE.

Don’t judge tongues by your experience – judge your experience by the Bible. . . . Fine, base your doctrine on feelings and experience and ignore the plain teaching of scripture

Yeah, exactly. But u should probably add unscriptural biases too . . . and make sure u include the whole context