Hypnosis In Christianity Exposed!

[Biblicist]

Please watch the videos, or what, are you too scared to?

Why are you afraid? Has a spirit of fear descended down upon you?

"Afraid", no, but I am struggling to keep myself from falling into a spirit of boredom.

As the videos are not all that long (and that I have a few days off from work due to a cold) I have started to go through the videos where I noticed that “Harville and Edwards were both formerly members of the “Word of Faith” movement” which means that they are not so much Pentecostal but wof.

This is the point that I have tried to make on a number of occassions, you need to pick your sources and apply them very carefully as there is absolutely little (if any) value with trying to present material to a Pentecostal that has come from an ex-woffer. That's like having a Calvinist trying to explain to an Arminian about the love and grace of God, more often than not, the Arminian will usually only see them talking about an unloving and uncaring God.

 

[random person]

"Afraid", no, but I am struggling to keep myself from falling into a spirit of boredom.

As the videos are not all that long (and that I have a few days off from work due to a cold) I have started to go through the videos where I noticed that “Harville and Edwards were both formerly members of the “Word of Faith” movement” which means that they are not so much Pentecostal but wof.

This is the point that I have tried to make on a number of occassions, you need to pick your sources and apply them very carefully as there is absolutely little (if any) value with trying to present material to a Pentecostal that has come from an ex-woffer. That's like having a Calvinist trying to explain to an Arminian about the love and grace of God, more often than not, the Arminian will usually only see them talking about an unloving and uncaring God.

And all you do is scoff and use misdirection, because the WOF is not the subject of these 2 videos.

Methods of hypnosis employed by the charismatic movement is the subject. AND VERY, VERY little else.

 

[Biblicist]

Here are the two videos I pray you'll watch:

Having now seen the two videos it’s hard to know where to start as there is a lot of material that is spot on and other material that is either misleading or given out of context. With Harville, the first problem we have is that he seems to be directing his material directly toward the so called ‘signs & wonders’ movement which I agree is more often than not a collection of misguided ideas but this movement is often in contrast to what most Pentecostals will accept.

My two main concerns with the videos has been with their over-generalisation and with how they have unwisely connected too many things with hypnotism, where most of the things that they are talking about comes from nothing more than an overrealised imagination that has been coupled with an individuals often less than stable emotional makeup. One factor that they don’t refer to is with how many people are prepared to ‘act the goat’ for a crowd where they will display exorbitant emotions to be noticed by others.

Then there are those in these meetings who are actually demon possessed where the antics of some of the less than credible celebrity ministers will bring out these demonic body actions without having the wisdom to deal with them.

With the reference to Rick Joyner’s false Gospel, many Pentecostals and charismatics (including me) will agree that a lot of what he says is simply ridiculous.

To summarise, the material in these two videos (where some of it has value) can be very hard for the cessationist to understand as they are looking in from the outside, whereas the more prudent Pentecostal and charismatic has a better chance of understanding these things because we have experienced the power of the Holy Spirit and where we have also seen how speakers can both intentionally and unintentionally manipulate meetings through music and the use of keywords. Of course the same can be said for many cessationist-evangelical meetings where we often come across materiel that talks about how cessationist church leaders will manipulate alter-calls with music and suggestive wording; which is certainly not demonic but definately unwise and even carnal.

Edit:Typo second last line.

 

[Biblicist]

And all you do is scoff and use misdirection, because the WOF is not the subject of these 2 videos.

Methods of hypnotism employed by the charismatic movement is the subject. AND VERY, VERY little else.

As your a cessationist, where you are looking into the things of the Spirit from the outside then it can be very easy for you to be misled by what you are seeing in these videos. My words are not about 'scoffing' where they are being directed squarely to the point of what they are saying.

Over the years I have had many invaluable discussions regarding numerous problematic 'celebrity' wof type ministries where we have learnt a lot from each other, but I have noticed that the average cessationist can too easily be confused by the whole thing as their humanist worldview is openly in opposition to both the Person and ministry of the Holy Spirit. This is probably why many less experienced cesssationsts lean toward the two videos that you have presented as this type of medium can be much easier to throw around than serious theological reflection, which is probably why you have in most part failed to engage with the material that I have presented - where I grant that your approach may very well fit in with your agenda.

 

[random person]

As your a cessationist, where you are looking into the things of the Spirit from the outside then it can be very easy for you to be misled by what you are seeing in these videos. My words are not about 'scoffing' where they are being directed squarely to the point of what they are saying.

Over the years I have had many invaluable discussions regarding numerous problematic 'celebrity' wof type ministries where we have learnt a lot from each other, but I have noticed that the average cessationist can too easily be confused by the whole thing as their humanist worldview is openly in opposition to both the Person and ministry of the Holy Spirit. This is probably why many less experienced cesssationsts lean toward the two videos that you have presented as this type of medium can be much easier to throw around than serious theological reflection, which is probably why you have in most part failed to engage with the material that I have presented - where I grant that your approach may very well fit in with your agenda.

Review of the Distinctive Features of Pentecostalism

Emotional Religion​

So, in the light of all this information, should we conclude that Christianity is intellectual and unemotional? Certainly not. True religion involves the whole of man’s nature. While it must be ruled by what is understood in the mind, the will is never deactivated and the emotions are to be fully engaged also.

Genuine emotionalism arrives by way of the truth. The true word of God moves the heart as well as stimulating the conscience and the intellect. Truth touches the whole man and invigorates him. Sects employ a variety of methods to play directly upon the emotions thus bypassing the brain and rendering the will passive.

This is why they are so popular, it is like cheap entertainment which simply stimulates the emotions without requiring mental contributions. It is unthinking. As the mind is inactive, as the volition (will) is reduced to passivity, people become very emotionally sensitive and very suggestible. This condition is similar to intoxication from liquor or drugged euphoria, both conditions being a fertile field for hypnotic control. People begin to be free to act in ways that would never occur in their normal state.

The techniques used to induce this emotional altered state are many: music, especially repetitive, sentimental or rhythmic music; empty meditation (concentration upon nothing); vigorous movements; long periods of standing, especially with raised hands, extended emotional ‘worship’ and so on. The point is that emotionalism concentrates on one aspect of the soul. It overstimulates one area of man’s nature which creates a false sense of excitement. Eventually, because it is abnormal, it will result in exhaustion and depression if continued.

Pentecostalism fostered such an emotional approach. A typical statement is that of a writer in Confidence magazine [the leading early English Pentecostal journal published by Alexander Boddy], ‘a word of caution from experience ... use the greatest care to keep one’s head out of the way’. Well, the Holy Spirit works on the basis of the Word, which he inspired. While religion is not to be merely intellectual, it must be rationally based upon the word. This does not lead to rationalism, but reasonable obedience to God’s word, even if that word is unusual in the current age (like being baptised, breaking bread, giving to get etc.). Getting one’s head out of the way is never demanded by scripture. Taking up our cross, for instance, means denying ourselves, our pride, our wishes, not removing our brains. Anti-intellectualism is a key technique of religions that depend upon passivity and experiences.

As false religions have used these techniques for thousands of years to induce euphoria, phenomena and power (e.g. healing from an occult source), Christians should be aware of the methods so that they can be avoided. The Bible never encourages us to use these tools to gain a heightened spiritual state. Any blissful experience which God chooses to give arises from a direct confrontation with Jesus and involves words which are rationally understood (see the transfiguration narrative for instance). Yet genuine worship of God will include a valid use of emotion. It is right for the heart to be warmed as a result of contemplating God’s attributes, especially his mercy and grace. Our reaction to the errors of Pentecostalism is not to be dry as dust, cold and formal. We should be Biblical, our church meetings addressing the needs of the whole man.

Tongues​

Little needs to be said about this most famous feature of Pentecostalism. However, a couple of points are apposite. Frequently, special gifts were regularly conferred on people only while they were in an ecstasy. Sung tongues often produced supernatural sounds beyond the abilities of the human voice. Sometimes sounds were heard that were not produced by the voice at all. The singer was unable to repeat this in a conscious state. Similarly, some spoke in foreign languages. One authenticated event took place in India where a man seeking the gift forced himself into an altered state by repeated, rapid bowing, followed by repeating the phrase, ‘Praise the Lord’ for an hour, until it became gibberish. Shouting these monosyllables for 15 minutes, he suddenly broke out in high class Persian, Arabic and then Sanscrit poetry for 45 minutes, none of which he knew before.

Now both these types of experience require a supernatural power, without doubt. One would be hard pressed to say that they are mere psychological extremes. However, we can also say that they are not produced by the Spirit of God for these reasons:

• These sorts of experiences have no Biblical foundation.
• The preparation (exampled above and repeated in many a tarrying room) finds no parallel in scripture. Gifts were there given sovereignly, with immediate effect.
• Neither of these types of experiences produce edification to the body, yet this is the purpose of the vocal gifts given to individuals (1 Cor 14:27-28).
• The Holy Spirit gives gifts which are controlled by the person.
• The Holy Spirit does not induce passivity or lack of self control.
• Occult devotees express similar gifts by using a similar technique.
• Demons use this technique, only being able to control a man’s mind when he has been rendered passive. This is why the supernatural element vanishes when normal consciousness is achieved again.

One has to conclude that such examples are Satanic counterfeits of the Biblical gift of tongues. Furthermore, the idea of tongues being the initial evidence of Spirit baptism has no basis in scripture, yet this was the heart of the movement for decades, as was an over emphasis on tongues over against all the other spiritual gifts, and despite the scriptural prioritisation of prophecy. Pentecostals have realised that this old focus is an embarrassment to their increasingly close Evangelical friends and have downplayed tongues for some time.

A further problem is the techniques used by Pentecostals to initiate the utterance of tongues in seekers of the experience. It is often the case, as with Mormon Joseph Smith, that people are told to work the sounds up. Leaders have even foolishly told their followers to practice speaking and experimenting in tongues in order to get the gift. The New Testament gift was sovereign and required no gradual repetition and practise, Tongues developed this way must surely be suspect, especially as it is known that tongues can be produced by many conditions in unbelievers such as: motor automatism, psychic catharsis, collective psyche and memory excitation, let alone expectant flesh. Even Pentecostal historian Walter J. Hollenweger admits that tongues are present in pagan religions and is frequently only psychological in Pentecostal circles. Euphoric experiences and ecstatic tongues are known amongst the Jehovah’s Witnesses as well as the Mormons. Demon possessed tribesmen in Africa have been witnessed speaking in languages they did not have familiarity with. Tongues is a feature of certain Muslims, Tibetan monks, Indian fakirs, witch doctors, Maori shamans, Jamaican Pocomania, even Innuit tribes. Occultists are well known for using this phenomena. In recent years, extreme radicals in the art world have taken to self mutilation as the ultimate artform/performance. Many use religious language in describing this and some speak in tongues during the lacerations. None of this should surprise the Bible student. Isa 8:19 explains that demons provoke people to chirp (peep or whispering noises like birds) and mutter (Hebrew = moan, groan, growl, roar, mutter). The point is that tongues is a poor basis for determining anything, especially to confirm that the Spirit of God has done a certain work in a person. The evidence of his work is the fruit of the Spirit. If tongues can be so easily and commonly counterfeited, it must not be allowed centre stage in any apologetic, yet Pentecostals did exactly this for nearly 100 years.

Origins Of Pentacostalism

 

[Biblicist]

I was wondering, as all atheists are by their very nature cessationists, should I find some Youtube videos about the connection between atheism and cessationism; after all, as hard-core cessationism is nothing but "another system of unbelief", this might be a reasonable thing to do. As homosexuality and things such as alcoholism are rampant througout cessationist ranks, should I maybe post some Youtube videos about this as well?

 

[random person]

I was wondering, as all atheists are by their very nature cessationists, should I find some Youtube videos about the connection between atheism and cessationism; after all, as hard-core cessationism is nothing but "another system of unbelief", this might be a reasonable thing to do. As homosexuality and things such as alcoholism are rampant througout cessationist ranks, should I maybe post some Youtube videos about this as well?

It isn't "another system of unbelief" it is a system of discernment. As proven by my previous post, many of today's nonchristian religions "speak in tongues", in fact both the Mormons and JWs speak in tongues. They're continuationists.

Are they speaking in tongues under the power of the Holy Spirit? And if, in your opinion, they do not, I ask why?

What qualifies your "gibberish" but disqualifies their "gibberish"?

 

[Biblicist]

It isn't "another system of unbelief" it is a system of discernment. As proven by my previous post, many of today's nonchristian religions "speak in tongues", in fact both the Mormons and JWs speak in tongues. They're continuationists.

Are they speaking in tongues under the power of the Holy Spirit? And if, in your opinion, they do not, I ask why?

What qualifies your "gibberish" but disqualifies their "gibberish"?

Having spoken to a number of Mormon missionaries over the years about this, as they are at a loss on this question where they know of no-one in their movement who speaks in tongues then I will have to ask you to provide a source for your information.

I know that Joseph Smith's view of tongues was that he believed that one day the mormon missionaries would be able to spread the Gospel to people groups where their missionaries did not know that language of the people, but this is obviously a lame duck defination which was obviously never realised as this is not the purpose of tongues.

As for the JW's supposedly speaking in tongues, I would love to see a source for this. If it was the case then we would have the situation where the JW's would be in ahead of those evangelical cessationists who for whatever reason do not to pray in the Spirit - now that would definately be novel, err . . . confusing!

 

[random person]

Having spoken to a number of Mormon missionaries over the years about this, as they are at a loss on this question where they know of no-one in their movement who speaks in tongues then I will have to ask you to provide a source for your information.

I know that Joseph Smith's view of tongues was that he believed that one day the mormon missionaries would be able to spread the Gospel to people groups where their missionaries did not know that language of the people, but this is obviously a lame duck defination which was obviously never realised as this is not the purpose of tongues.

As for the JW's supposedly speaking in tongues, I would love to see a source for this. If it was the case then we would have the situation where the JW's would be in ahead of those evangelical cessationists who for whatever reason do not to pray in the Spirit - now that would definately be novel, err . . . confusing!

http://ldsblogs.com/9576/mormon-q-and-a-do-mormons-speak-in-tongues

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989275

 

[Biblicist]

http://ldsblogs.com/9576/mormon-q-and-a-do-mormons-speak-in-tongues

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989275

That's a very helpful link which I had come across before and of course it supports my understanding that Mormons (or at least Joseph Smith) believed that tongues could be used to evangelise the lost whose language their missionaries did not speak.

"However, Mormons approach this gift a bit differently than some religions do. We believe there must be a practical reason for speaking in tongues or in interpreting tongues. For instance, a missionary might be new in a country and not able to speak the language very well yet. However, he finds himself talking to someone who has a very serious question and who is spiritually prepared to learn truth. The missionary may find that he is able to answer the question as if he spoke fluently".
​

The Mormons also add in a different slant to how some view tongues as being a supposed tool for evangelism where they say:

"While mastering a new language usually takes many, many years, missionaries master their language surprisingly quickly, even when they’ve struggled with new languages in school.While mastering a new language usually takes many, many years, missionaries master their language surprisingly quickly, even when they’ve struggled with new languages in school".​

So for the Mormon they see the gift of tongues as being the ability of the Holy Spirit to enable their missionaries to learn a particular language quicker than they normally wood - I wonder how many of their language students have come to realise that this is nothing more than a convenient twist that has no basis in reality.

JW Definition of tongues:

"Definition: A special ability given through the holy spirit to some disciples in the early Christian congregation that enabled them to preach or otherwise glorify God in a language other than their own".​

As with the above quote, the JW's have also rejected that tongues is for today in various other places within the quote.

To summarise; The two links that you have provided fully support my contention that these two cults do not speak in tongues.


Edit: Both of these cults are hard-core cessastionists where the JW arguments have obviously been used by many cessationst-evangelicals over the years.

 

[Biblicist]

Double post.

 

[Biblicist]

I'm looking forward to a reply to my posts where I pointed out how you mistook the Mormon and JW position regarding tongues.

 

[Biblicist]

When reading various pieces of material by the Mormons regarding their take on tongues, unless you have a clear understanding of what they mean (or what even they think it means) it can admittedly be a bit confusing as with the following: link

"In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the gift of tongues is manifested every day among the thousands of missionaries serving around the world. Missionaries learn foreign languages and the interpretation thereof with astonishing ease, and words come to them that they have not mastered. The gift of tongues has also been manifest in other, singular events, such as at the dedication of the Kirtland Temple. But speaking in tongues is not a part of normal church meetings, such as sacrament meeting or testimony meeting".
​

For the Mormon, it has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit speaking non-communicative words to the Father where they see it as God helping their missionaries to learn another language more quickly than they normally could. Now that would definitely be something that a lot of Christian Bible College students probably secretly pray for just prior to sitting an exam on Greek.

 

[random person]

I'm looking forward to a reply to my posts where I pointed out how you mistook the Mormon and JW position regarding tongues.

If anything sadly, the Mormons and JWs have a better grasp on the gift of tongues than the Charismatics.

 

[Biblicist]

If anything sadly, the Mormons and JWs have a better grasp on the gift of tongues than the Charismatics.

As you completely failed to understand the material that you mis-quoted, is this the best that you can do. Though your first choice, which was to remain silent was probably the better option!

 

[random person]

As you completely failed to understand the material that you mis-quoted, is this the best that you can do. Though your first choice, which was to remain silent was probably the better option!

The better option is "abandonment" and "liberal spirits"?

 

[Hillsage]

As you completely failed to understand the material that you mis-quoted, is this the best that you can do. Though your first choice, which was to remain silent was probably the better option!

I appreciated your position here Biblicist. And keeping silent would have been his best recourse, but getting a powerless 'last lick' in seems to make some posters here feel as though they really did win a fight. You answered all his points fairly and equitably, and he obviously dodged your statement above several times IMO.

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

This is why I'm Catholic. I go to Mass receive the Eucharist and as far as I'm concerned that is a real honest to goodness religious experience.

 

[Biblicist]

This is why I'm Catholic. I go to Mass receive the Eucharist and as far as I'm concerned that is a real honest to goodness religious experience.

Did you happen to engage with the Holy Spirit while you were there?

 

[Aelred of Rievaulx]

Did you happen to engage with the Holy Spirit while you were there?

For us Catholics the Holy Spirit is the Katechon, and this notion is Eucharistic as it is pneumatological.