Is Charismania Antichrist?

[Alfred Persson]

Is Charismania Antichrist?

ANTICHRIST
antichristos (ἀντίχριστος, 500) can mean either “against Christ” or “instead of Christ,” or perhaps, combining the two, “one who, assuming the guise of Christ, opposes Christ” (Westcott). The word is found only in John’s epistles, (a) of the many “antichrists” who are forerunners of the “Antichrist” himself, 1 John 2:18, 22; 2 John 7; (b) of the evil power which already operates anticipatively of the “Antichrist,” 1 John 4:3.- Vine, W. E., Unger, M. F., & White, W., Jr. (1996). Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville, TN: T. Nelson.


Its clear Christ combined the two, a false prophet assumes the guise of Christ by wearing "sheep's clothing", and rather than feeding the flock, he seeks to devour it.

15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.

Christ did not list spiritual experiences that distinguish a "true" from the "false prophet", rather He said "You will know them by their fruits."

16 "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?
17 "Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
18 "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.
19 "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 "Therefore by their fruits you will know them.


AS true prophets stumble on occasion because of their imperfect fallen nature (1 John 1:8-10; James 3:2), "perfection" cannot be the fruit Christ said distinguishes a true prophet from a false.

21 "Not everyone who says to Me,`Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 "Many will say to Me in that day,`Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
23 "And then I will declare to them,`I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!' (Mat 7:15-23 NKJ)


"Practicing lawlessness" is the fruit that identifies the miracle worker who NEVER knew Christ, not their profession of Him as "Lord", nor prophesying like a Christian. Even casting out demons and doing many wonders in Christ's name, is not the fruit that identifies the true prophet from the false.

As God's law is written in our Bibles, "lawfulness" is doing the "will of the Father" as the Bible commands.

As Lawlessness is being without law, "practicing lawlessness" is not doing the will of the Father as the Bible commands.

"Practicing Lawlessness" is a consistent choice to reject the will of the Father which today is recorded faithfully ONLY in our Bibles.

How much rejection of God's authority constitutes "practicing lawlessness"?

16 "You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles?
17 "Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.
18 "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.

Any rejection of the Bible's teaching, even on what seems of least importance (cp Luke 16:10), is the objective fruit that identifies those Christ NEVER knew***.

AS Christ never knew them its certain Christ's Holy Spirit NEVER prophesied, cast out demons or did the many wonders they claimed were done in Christ's name.

Therefore, it must have been the antichrist spirit who did the signs and wonders.

The apostle John confirms this objective fruit of obedience to God's Law the Bible, saying those inspired by the spirit of truth obey listen to the apostles [whose teaching today can be found only in the Holy scripture]:

6 We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. (1Jo 4:6 NKJ)

The teachings of "we, us" are those of the apostles, which today are found only the Bible, having been "once delivered":

3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. (Jud 1:3 NKJ)

The only "fruit" the antichrist spirit cannot counterfeit, that identifies the children it inspires, is "obedience to Scripture" because: "IF Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end. (Mar 3:26 NKJ)

Spiritism is the "mystery (or "secret power") of lawlessness" that is working (energeia 1753) in the Devil's children. Because these aren't God's children (Luke 11:10-12), they pretended to ask Him for fish or bread, but like Simon the sorcerer (Acts 8:19-20) what they really wanted was power to impress others. Hence, as God permits they receive a scorpion***, it is said He sends them the strong delusion:

9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders,
10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie,
12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

[Notice the contrast between antichrist's who prefer their experiential truth taught by the mystery of lawlessness, and Christians who are sanctified by the authentic Holy Spirit and so love and believe the truth. In contrast to the antichrists, these stand fast in the apostolic traditions that exist today only in our Bibles.]

13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth,
14 to which He called you by our gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.
16 Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and our God and Father, who has loved us and given us everlasting consolation and good hope by grace,
(2Th 2:9-16 NKJ)

So is Charismania antichrist? Can any name a wonder working prophet whose practice is OBEDIENCE TO THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD, especially where it conflicts with Charismatic practices and beliefs?

Otherwise, it appears this event has repeated itself in our time:

18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.
20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.
21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth. (1Jo 2:18-21 NKJ)

END

*** 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. (Rom 11:29 NKJ)

As Christ never knew them, these never received the gifts and calling of God. If the Devil asked God for bread, he would certainly get a serpent for his hypocrisy, so also an antichrist.

Some allege I'm blaspheming the Holy Spirit by questioning any sign or wonder a prophet do. However, that isn't what Christ taught:

31 "Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men.
32 "Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
(Mat 12:31-32 NKJ)

Only those who know they are speaking against the Holy Spirit, are guilty of eternal sin. I would never do that. I speak against a spirit that is disguising itself as Him.

 

[Moriah Ruth 777]

The word is found only in John’s epistles, (a) of the many “antichrists” who are forerunners of the “Antichrist” himself,

I found this very interesting. Many years ago I had belonged to a cult for three years where they believed that the leader of that time was the second Prophet to the second coming of Christ. His name was William Branham. He taught this and his followers also believed this. When he had died in a car accident in 1965 his followers believed that he would raise from the dead. And they continued on with his false teachings.

He started out well, however somewhere along the way he had a nervous breakdown and then when he had recovered from that he was not the same, his teachings began to change.

The term that the followers today use is Branham was the Forerunner for the second coming of Christ. Just like John the Baptist was the forerunner for the first coming of Christ. They try to use verses found in the last chapter of Malachi and also in the NT where John the Baptist is mentioned.

Now we all know that this is not the case and never will be the case. I would consider Branham as a false prophet for his time period and even for this time. Yes he was also very charismatic. His followers to this day is also very charismatic.

He taught against the trinity, denied the Deity of Jesus Christ, called the Holy Spirit an IT, instead of referring the Holy Spirit to a person as a HE, Him, etc.

Women had to dress a certain way, with long dresses and long hair, with no make up. If they did then Branham would call then harlots or Jezebels. However his own daughters and wife trimmed their hair and wore pants in the home.

He taught that all the denominations were the harlots of the mother harlot of the Roman Catholic church. He also taught the book of Revelations wrong and with many false teachings.

This cult still exists to this day and there is the cult here in my city that I live in as we speak. I was part of that group.

The photos that were shown of Branham was also very questionable. However one would wonder what spirit was hovering over him. In one photo it literally looked like demons with fire around him. Which I saw this on a building once, the exact same structure, etc.

Branham always referred to his angel that he states he had around him. He never mentioned the Holy Spirit that was with him, always the angel. What angel? He never tested the spirits.

I could go on with this. As I mentioned earlier he started out well in in the right teaching and doctrines of the bible. But after the nervous breakdown, he was never the same after that.

Moriah Ruth

 

[Moriah Ruth 777]

Another person that comes to mind is Todd Bentley. I had two encounters with this man that I knew was not godly in nature. I was attending a church that was leaning towards the Vineyard teachings. He would come to the church, preach and do healings. At that time he did NOT have all of the tattoos that he has today, nor did he have his head shaved. However something had happened along the way and he has not been the same since either. And I had watched this happened before my eyes. I do pray that he does come back to where he is to be in Christ.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"Is Charismania Antichrist?"

Ignoring the rest of the typical "Heresy Hunter" diatribe, the simple answer is:

LIke any other "Visible Church Movement" in the world -

SOME of what goes on is Legitimate, and Holy Spirit led -

And some of it is pure "Wildfire".

And IF Christians actually READ THEIR BIBLES (instead of books about the Bible by this or that "religious Celebrity"), then they'd be able to tell the difference.

Simple as that.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

"Is Charismania Antichrist?"

Ignoring the rest of the typical "Heresy Hunter" diatribe, the simple answer is:

LIke any other "Visible Church Movement" in the world -

SOME of what goes on is Legitimate, and Holy Spirit led -

And some of it is pure "Wildfire".

And IF Christians actually READ THEIR BIBLES (instead of books about the Bible by this or that "religious Celebrity"), then they'd be able to tell the difference.

Simple as that.

Quite possibly one of the best replies I've ever seen in my 3 years on CF....

 

[Alfred Persson]

"Is Charismania Antichrist?"

Ignoring the rest of the typical "Heresy Hunter" diatribe, the simple answer is:

LIke any other "Visible Church Movement" in the world -

SOME of what goes on is Legitimate, and Holy Spirit led -

And some of it is pure "Wildfire".

And IF Christians actually READ THEIR BIBLES (instead of books about the Bible by this or that "religious Celebrity"), then they'd be able to tell the difference.

Simple as that.

Frankly, I don't see any of it as of God, precisely because I do read my Bible.

How about naming names, point me in the right direction.

 

[Tobias]

Frankly, I don't see any of it as of God, precisely because I do read my Bible.

How about naming names, point me in the right direction.

Matthew

Mark

Luke

John

etc.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Matthew

Mark

Luke

John

etc.

My bad, I wasn't clear.

Christ said miracle workers guilty of even a little bit of lawlessness, which He defined as rebellion against the Word of God (the will of the Father), proves Christ NEVER knew them.

That means they don't do the signs and wonders by Christ's Holy Spirit, and never did.

Honest dispute about the meaning of the Bible isn't "practicing lawlessness", that is not a choice to rebel against the authority of the Bible and be without God's law.

Its when people put their experience above the authority of the Bible that they practice lawlessness. That is implied in Christ's words, they call Him "Lord Lord," but actually are lawless not doing what He commands.

AND Christ expressly said a good tree CANNOT bear bad fruit, therefore even if we see only one bad fruit, it can't be a good tree.

That's why I asked for names. For example, which charismatic churches demand tongues speakers be silent in church if there is no interpreter? Seems like a small thing, but refusal to do as Paul commanded, is lawlessness as defined by Christ.

But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. (1Co 14:28 NKJ)

Many charismatic churches acknowledge Paul commanded tongues speakers be silent in church if there is no interpreter, but allow speaking in tongues anyway.

THAT is practicing lawlessness, therefore Christ NEVER knew them, none of the wonders they do in His name, are being done by Christ's Holy Spirit.

Seems to me they are all lawless in this or some other area , so I asked "point me in the right direction, name the Charismatic church that is in 100% compliance with the authority of scripture, that obey it even when their experiences teach otherwise."

They don't have to interpret hard to understand text as I, they only have to acknowledge the text is the supreme authority and actually practice that preaching, especially when the meaning of the Bible text is apparent to all.

 

[Moriah Ruth 777]

I agree Alfred.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"Frankly, I don't see any of it as of God, precisely because I do read my Bible."

Funny - I read MY Bible also, came to exactly the opposite conclusion, and have been in, a Member of, and in leadership in "Full Gospel" Churches of both the Pentcostal, and Charismatic genres for MOST of the last 50 years (Spoken in tongues for the last 40).

And guess what!!!! - NOT ONE OF 'EM has been as completely "Perfect" as you apparently require to satisfy your hyperlegalistic approach to the Word.

"How about naming names, point me in the right direction."

Well - Down THIS way, there's the University Assembly of God in Waxahachie, TX, The "Oaks" Fellowship in Red Oak, TX, The "Timber Creek" Charismatic Baptist group in Flower Mound, TX and, of course, My present church, the "Church on the Hill" in DeSoto, TX. I'd recommend any of 'em as good Bible believing congregations (you did know it's the "congregation" that's the "Church" didn't you???).

UNFORTUNATELY, though, they all have PEOPLE in them - so probably not up to your rigorous standards for the PERFECT Church.

Sorry about that, y'all.

 

[Tobias]

My bad, I wasn't clear.

Christ said miracle workers guilty of even a little bit of lawlessness, which He defined as rebellion against the Word of God (the will of the Father), proves Christ NEVER knew them.

That means they don't do the signs and wonders by Christ's Holy Spirit, and never did.

Honest dispute about the meaning of the Bible isn't "practicing lawlessness", that is not a choice to rebel against the authority of the Bible and be without God's law.

Its when people put their experience above the authority of the Bible that they practice lawlessness. That is implied in Christ's words, they call Him "Lord Lord," but actually are lawless not doing what He commands.

AND Christ expressly said a good tree CANNOT bear bad fruit, therefore even if we see only one bad fruit, it can't be a good tree.

That's why I asked for names. For example, which charismatic churches demand tongues speakers be silent in church if there is no interpreter? Seems like a small thing, but refusal to do as Paul commanded, is lawlessness as defined by Christ.

But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. (1Co 14:28 NKJ)

Many charismatic churches acknowledge Paul commanded tongues speakers be silent in church if there is no interpreter, but allow speaking in tongues anyway.

THAT is practicing lawlessness, therefore Christ NEVER knew them, none of the wonders they do in His name, are being done by Christ's Holy Spirit.

Seems to me they are all lawless in this or some other area , so I asked "point me in the right direction, name the Charismatic church that is in 100% compliance with the authority of scripture, that obey it even when their experiences teach otherwise."

They don't have to interpret hard to understand text as I, they only have to acknowledge the text is the supreme authority and actually practice that preaching, especially when the meaning of the Bible text is apparent to all.

Lol. Sorry, I wasn't trying to give you a serious answer.

But I can...

-- Christ said miracle workers guilty of even a little bit of lawlessness, which He defined as rebellion against the Word of God (the will of the Father), proves Christ NEVER knew them.

You are going to have to post your scripture references for this. I can't imagine off the top of my head which one(s) you are referring to.

-- That means they don't do the signs and wonders by Christ's Holy Spirit, and never did.

How do you figure? Samson did all sorts of lawlessness, and the scriptures never mention a false spirit taking over, pretending to be God.

Most of the Bible we read about how God uses people who make mistakes. Unless you are making a distinction between honest error, and lawlessness. But I'm not sure how we would be able to tell the difference, if we are supposed to judge miracle workers based upon their actions.

-- Its when people put their experience above the authority of the Bible that they practice lawlessness. That is implied in Christ's words, they call Him "Lord Lord," but actually are lawless not doing what He commands.

Well, that's subject to interpretation. I'm certain the Pharisees thought they were following "The Word" when they put Jesus to death, according to the laws written in the scriptures. Meanwhile Peter was commended by Christ for his confession of faith, which I'm pretty sure he didn't read about in scripture!

But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. (1Co 14:28 NKJ)

Many charismatic churches acknowledge Paul commanded tongues speakers be silent in church if there is no interpreter, but allow speaking in tongues anyway.

THAT is practicing lawlessness, therefore Christ NEVER knew them, none of the wonders they do in His name, are being done by Christ's Holy Spirit.

Perhaps they have a different interpretation of this scripture than you do?

"let him keep silent in church" could simply mean not to speak out so that the entire church stops to listen to your message in tongues. Meanwhile it clearly says to "let him speak to himself and to God."

Are you trying to stop people from speaking to themselves and to God? Wouldn't preventing what the scriptures tell us to allow, be "lawlessness", according to your own standard of judgement?

 

[Alfred Persson]

"Frankly, I don't see any of it as of God, precisely because I do read my Bible."

Funny - I read MY Bible also, came to exactly the opposite conclusion, and have been in, a Member of, and in leadership in "Full Gospel" Churches of both the Pentcostal, and Charismatic genres for MOST of the last 50 years (Spoken in tongues for the last 40).

And guess what!!!! - NOT ONE OF 'EM has been as completely "Perfect" as you apparently require to satisfy your hyperlegalistic approach to the Word.

"How about naming names, point me in the right direction."

Well - Down THIS way, there's the University Assembly of God in Waxahachie, TX, The "Oaks" Fellowship in Red Oak, TX, The "Timber Creek" Charismatic Baptist group in Flower Mound, TX and, of course, My present church, the "Church on the Hill" in DeSoto, TX. I'd recommend any of 'em as good Bible believing congregations (you did know it's the "congregation" that's the "Church" didn't you???).

UNFORTUNATELY, though, they all have PEOPLE in them - so probably not up to your rigorous standards for the PERFECT Church.

Sorry about that, y'all.

Perhaps you can help me out again. I wanted the precise Assembly of God rebuttal to Fred Francis Bosworth (one of the founders of AOG) "Do all speak in tongues?: An Open Letter to the Ministers and Saints of the Pentecostal Movement" He doesn't seem to be "hyperlegalistic".

Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? (1Co 12:30 NKJ)

I can't find any direct rebuttal of this Pentecostal minister's insistence not all speak in tongues.

Also I'd like the BEST AOG rebuttal of those who say this teaches not all speak in tongues.

Of course I believe the text says what it says, not all heal, speak with tongues or interpret. But I want the "official" AOG interpretation of this text that actually treats the Greek ect., not simply run away from it to Acts 2.

Which by the way, says only 3.8% (120) of the 3,120 saved that day [100*(120/3120)], spoke in tongues. A definite minority. (And that was the Time of the gifts maximum manifestation in the church!)

38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39 "For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."
40 And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, "Be saved from this perverse generation."
41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.
42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.
43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.
44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common,
45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.
46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart,
47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.
(Act 2:38-47 NKJ)

Unlike the 120 who spoke in tongues, the 3,000 showed the outward physical evidence they received the Holy Spirit by their obedience to apostolic doctrine which is found today only in our Bibles and their "love for one another" John 13:35.

So it appears only a small minority spoke in tongues, the majority in Corinth wanted to forbid them---a minority cannot impose its will on the majority hence those wanting to forbid tongues, were in the majority:

39 Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues. (1Co 14:39 NKJ)

But happily they didn't have to, tongues ceased soon after this, never mentioned again in the NT. In fact, by 66 AD all signs and wonders were spoken of in the "past tense"

3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,
4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will? (Heb 2:3-4 NKJ)

But lets not get lost in the forest.

I want to focus on Pentecostal minister Bosworth's argument that not all speak in tongues. Let's treat that first and exclusively. Thanks in advance for your help.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Lol. Sorry, I wasn't trying to give you a serious answer.

But I can...



You are going to have to post your scripture references for this. I can't imagine off the top of my head which one(s) you are referring to.

I cited Matthew 7:23 and every other text I interpreted! How could you miss them? Read it again, treat those.

You should meditate, think real hard, on why you didn't see the Bible texts I exposited.

I recall myself doing the same thing to others who tried to reason with me, but then I was in a cult, and not thinking critically.

The first lesson of Critical Thinking---thinking SOUNDLY (2 Tim 1:7), and perhaps the hardest to practice---is to STOP ASSUMING what is being discussed, and actually listen to what the other person is saying:

13 He who answers a matter before he hears it, It is folly and shame to him. (Pro 18:13 NKJ)

At Amazon.com or other booksellers, excellent introductions to critical thinking, argumentation and debating, exist. I recommend them. A critical thinker will never accept unsound interpretation of scripture.

(Ignore any digs against God or Scripture, THOSE who do this aren't consistent, critically speaking. Its impossible to critically look through eyes that clearly were intelligently designed, at creation whose design is infinitely above our intelligence to do, and deduce there is no Infinite Designer God who created them both.)

So a consistent critical thinker will bow down on his face and confess Jesus Christ is God the Eternal Son, Second Person of the Holy Trinity, just as the apostles and prophets taught.

And the Bible empirically speaking, must be the very Word of God as the overwhelming mass of irrefutable internal evidence, proves it beyond any reasonable doubt. I prefer the "Received Text", Stephanus 1550 for the NT, Masoretic for the OT.

While the fact Christ taught never will a jot or tittle of God's truth be lost (Matt 5:18) is sufficient, its also critically consistent with God's invisible attributes clearly seen the His visible creation, nothing He created that has value is ever lost.

 

[ARBITER01]

But happily they didn't have to, tongues ceased soon after this, never mentioned again in the NT. In fact, by 66 AD all signs and wonders were spoken of in the "past tense"

Let me help you with something here, since you seem to be out of your normal environment,..

House Rules:

All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against its theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

Since you have admitted to being a cessionalist in your postings, you're not in a general forum section where you can beat up those that you disagree with.

Read the rules before you waste your time before us. Teaching against our beliefs here is a reportable offense.

Have a nice day

 

[Tobias]

I cited Matthew 7:23 and every other text I interpreted! How could you miss them? Read it again, treat those.

You should meditate, think real hard, on why you didn't see the Bible texts I exposited.

I recall myself doing the same thing to others who tried to reason with me, but then I was in a cult, and not thinking critically.

The first lesson one learns in thinking SOUNDLY, is to think on what is discussed, and not assume you know what is being said.

Really?


I thought you were asking questions. You know, politely like the CF rules permit.

Not debating. I showed you in scripture what I thought of each of your points. You are welcome.

If you want to continue to forbid tongues, in direct violation of scripture verses you have posted, please do so elsewhere.

 

[ToBeBlessed]

The Antichrist who is specific to the end times, will be satan reincarnate. Everything that God does, satan imitates.

The Antichrist will not be a spirit of .... something, it will be satan himself and this will be his one shot to challenge God.

We are told in the bible that there will come a time when satan and the fallen angels will be released from the fiery pit they are in now. The Antichrist WILL have men bow down to him, he will proclaim himself to be God. He will rebuild the temple in Jereuselem. He will sign a peace treaty with Israel and convince the Jews he is the Messiah they have been waiting for.

Half way through the 7 year peace treaty, he will break it.

Then all H*E*L*L* breaks loose.

It is all in the bible.

Now, satan's minions are preparing the world for him.

One thing in particular that the Antichrist will have that is interesting is that ALL the religions will unite under the false prophet. This is why many Christians fear the leaders who talk about all religions being the same, united under the same God.

Billy Graham started this with his doctrine and close relationship with the catholic church. Others, water down the gospel and make church a happy place where sin isn't mentioned. Others teach in direct contrast to the bible that there will be a 'latter rain'. This is not biblical and they will not be working for Christ's kingdom because Christ NEVER said that He needed anything for His second coming.

I see prophecy of the bible happening, many do. It's just like all the prophecy in the bible, it comes to pass.

The stage is being set now and for the past 40 years. We are being prepared to accept the Antichrist now. No doubt.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Let me help you with something here, since you seem to be out of your normal environment,..

Since you have admitted to being a cessionalist in your postings, you're not in a general forum section where you can beat up those that you disagree with.

Read the rules before you waste your time before us. Teaching against our beliefs here is a reportable offense.

Have a nice day

It says non WOF may discuss with WOF. Let's analyze that. According to your understanding, that is a violation of the rules.

One must be WOF to discuss with WOF.

Therefore you must be misinterpreting the rules.

So why not answer my question? I thanked you in advance for your help.

By the way, I don't recall Christ or His apostles telling the Pharisees they couldn't debate things because they weren't believers, do you?

It just doesn't seem like something a 1st century Christian would do.

 

[ARBITER01]

It says non WOF may discuss with WOF. Let's analyze that. According to your understanding, that is a violation of the rules.

One must be WOF to discuss with WOF.

Therefore you must be misinterpreting the rules.

So why not answer my question? I thanked you in advance for your help.

By the way, I don't recall Christ or His apostles telling the Pharisees they couldn't debate things because they weren't believers, do you?

It just doesn't seem like something a 1st century Christian would do.

The rules are there to keep out the riff raff that tries to infiltrate from time to time.

If you want to denigrate the gifts of The Spirit here before us in one of our Spirit-filled forum sections, then don't complain when mods start reproving you for it.

I'm not interested in a discussion about it, go to another forum section if you want badmouth what we do.

 

[Tobias]

It says non WOF may discuss with WOF. Let's analyze that. According to your understanding, that is a violation of the rules.

One must be WOF to discuss with WOF.

Therefore you must be misinterpreting the rules.

So why not answer my question? I thanked you in advance for your help.

By the way, I don't recall Christ or His apostles telling the Pharisees they couldn't debate things because they weren't believers, do you?

It just doesn't seem like something a 1st century Christian would do.

Yet, unlike Jesus with the Pharisees, I didn't notice that you were setting me up for a whammy with your innocent sounding questions.

Thus the reason for my offense; and a complete disinterest in pursuing this conversation any further!

 

[Bob Carabbio]

To begin with, Bosworth's tract is found in it's entirety at:

http://www.isom.vnsalvation.com/Res...oks/FF Bosworth Do All Speak With Tongues.pdf

It's a good read, and presents many of the standard cessationist arguments - with the "Slant" of one who has been baptized in the SPirit speaks in tongues, and accepts "tongues" as a legitimate Spiritual enablement.

Bosworth's belief (and the reason that he withdrew from the AG early on) was his disagreement with the establishment of an "Official dogma" - (Fundamental truth #8 - doctrine of Initial Evidence) - making "tongues" the ONLY OFFICIAL INITIAL EVIDENCE.

"Baptism in the Holy Spirit" (Fundamental truth #7) IS a "Core/Cardinal Doctrine" of the denomination - one of 4.

Bosworth (when you read the "tract") Spoke in tongues at will himself in what we'd call "Prayer in the Spirit" mode, and he led many people into the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, many of whom ALSO received the gift of speaking in tongues at the time. HE has no problem with that either before OR After his parting of the ways with the AG.

Bosworth's PROBLEM with the AG was that he DID NOT believe that the Bible supports a HARD DOCTRINE that "Speaking in tongues" was THE ONLY EVIDENCE that provided "proof" that the individual had ACTUALLY received the "Enduement of Power" promised by Jesus.

SO:

"Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? (1Co 12:30 NKJ)"

ANd the obvious implied answer here is NO.

"I can't find any direct rebuttal of this Pentecostal minister's insistence not all speak in tongues."

The AG.org site does make mention of Bosworth (and Donald Gee) particularly in the section: The Full Consummation Of The Baptism In The Holy Spirit Bosworth is spoken highly of as a person of integrity and character - that the AG considers to be in error.

"Also I'd like the BEST AOG rebuttal of those who say this teaches not all speak in tongues."

The article above is probably the best "Official word" on the subject.

"Which by the way, says only 3.8% (120) of the 3,120 saved that day [100*(120/3120)], spoke in tongues. A definite minority. (And that was the Time of the gifts maximum manifestation in the church!)"

Of course I shouldn't have to point out that you've made a classical "argument from silence". It IS TRUE that the Bible DOES NOT SAY anything whatsoever about ANY of the 3000 "Speaking in tongues". But it's a good idea NOT to form a doctrine on basis of what the Bible DOESN'T say.

"the majority in Corinth wanted to forbid them"

An Assumption on your part. Apparently a significant number of Corinthians were "Showing off their gift", and enjoying it.

"But happily they didn't have to, tongues ceased soon after this, never mentioned again in the NT. In fact, by 66 AD all signs and wonders were spoken of in the "past tense"

Really - Galatians speaks of "The one who DOES Miracles among you" in 53-57. I wouldn't argue that in the years following the "Apostolic age as the Visible Church descended into superstition ignorance and confusion, there's only sketchy evidence of the "Gifts" until the 19th century.

"I want to focus on Pentecostal minister Bosworth's argument that not all speak in tongues. Let's treat that first and exclusively."

Sure, but since I'm in agreement with Bosworth in his PRIMARY argument - i.e. that "Tongues" is not the ONLY "initial evidence", I'm not going to be that one that "Opposes him" strongly.

My 50 year association with the AG has produced several personal observations:

There are people who have NEVER spoken in tongues, but who exhibit the "Fruit of the Spirit", and communicate Spiritual things, and understandings in a unmistakably Christ-Like way.

There are folks who "Speak in Tongues" and who are mean, judgmental, and show NO overt Christian attributes whatsoever.

AND there are folks who "Speak in tongues", life Exemplary lives, flow in the love of Jesus, and minister with signs following.

"Speaking in tongues", "Interpretation", and "Prophetic utterance" can ALL be faked with a little practice (Back in the day the "Way International" for $300 would teach you how to do it). I could EASILY STAND in a Pentecostal service, and rip off a totally convincing "Message in tongues", AND an "Interpretation" that would fool anybody that wasn't operating in the gift of "Discernation of Spirits". It happens.

The LAST time I was prayed for (In an FGBMFI breakfast meeting in '73) to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit - NOTHING OVERT HAPPENED. About two weeks later I began speaking in tongues in the middle of a worship service (again at the FGBMFI at a dinner meeting). It was a totally non-emotional experience.

Before they WEREN'T there, and after they WERE, and 40 years later they still are. This would be Donald Gee's "Delayed evidence" teaching that the AG isn't too fond of.

Among a growing percentage charismatics World Wide, "Tongues" is considered to be AN "evidence", but so are other spiritual manifestations as well which would jive nicely with Bosworth's teaching.

In my case there WAS a "Satisfaction" connected with actually "Speaking in a tongue" (no more "Head rubbing sessions" among well-meaning, but ineffective Pentecostals).

But the REAL evidence that "Something had radically changed", was that within a month, I was given (by God) a Bible study to teach, and I did so for the next 5 years, or so - among a group of UCC folks, and The Holy Spirit kept me "Loaded for bear" - ALL OF WHICH would have been completely IMPOSSIBLE for me to have done before (because of my shyness, and "Fear of the face of man"). There had been an obvious "Enduement of power", which has extended to many other aspects of life.

And, of course I HAVE been burdened by the Holy Spirit to Interpret tongues many times, and occasionally to give Prophetic utterance. But NEVER to "Speak in tongues" in "Message to the congregation mode". SO in THAT sense - I don't "Speak in tongues" - even though I do constantly in private.

BUT - in 2014, in the U.S. the "Normative experience" among Pentecostals/Charismatics is that WHEN they are baptized in the Spirit, they will speak in tongues.

Some years back, Thomas Trask (General Superintendent of the AG) made the statement: "If the Present trend continues in our churches, within a decade we will be Pentecostal in NAME ONLY". The trend has continued, and in AG Churches in the Dallas area, it's exceedingly RARE to actually hear a "Message in a tongue", or an "Interpretation" during a service - Our plant manager attends at one of the largest AG churches in the area, and after 6 months he didn't KNOW it was a "Pentecostal church", or that it was an AG franchise.

We're not sure why -

Simple as that.