Strange Fire

[AndOne]

From my experiences being at a lot of Pentecostal/Charismatic churches, they are very very sympathetic to the WOF movement and my opinion for that, are just as bad. Not to mention, they have a twisted view about faith, the Holy Spirit, and their authority on matters is never Scripture, it is mostly their own experience, and their own version of the Holy Spirit. I have family members that eat this stuff up hook, line, and sinker.

Again - lumping them all into one group. It's a mistake.

 

[AndOne]

I know many won't agree with me, but I agree with lumping pentecostal/charismatic/roman catholic and wof in the same category as Mormons. They don't talk about the Biblical Holy Spirit or even Jesus Christ for that matter.

So John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, and J . I. Packer should be lumped in the same group as Mormons?

 

[AmericanSamurai]

So John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, and J . I. Packer should be lumped in the same group as Mormons?

No, they're not in those denominations.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Dr. James White Takes a look at the issue....

I decided to dedicate the entire program today to reviewing the first call Michael Brown took on The Line of Fire on Tuesday. It seemed to provide an excellent basis for actually addressing the most important elements of this controversy.

The Dividing Line 10/24/2013 - YouTube

I listened to part of Dr. White's broadcast, and he is convincing. Here of late, I have been leaning more towards cessationalism, it is difficult though because of my upbringing, my family, and even where I have to go to Church (I say "have to" because my wife and parents go there and on my dad's side related to the pastor, my wife started teaching Sunday school). I've been around continualists all my life (Assembly of God especially), and it is a commonly held belief in the area where I live. Though I am a Calvinist, and in an extreme minority where I live, I am convicted and convinced to not back down from the importance of the essentials of Calvinism and Reformed theology. If I had MacArthur's view of cessationalism, for conscience sake, I would mostly likely have to move away, and that is not in the realm of possibilities for me, not at this time. Were I in a different life situation, it would be easy to fully embrace cessationalism, but I have to deal with the way it is.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

So John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, and J . I. Packer should be lumped in the same group as Mormons?

Speaking of Mormons, I think MacArthur would have had a better conference, if it addressed the false religion of Islam (a book was released by James White on it this year). The charismatic movement does not compare to the threat of Islam. What really concerns me, are the mainstream media efforts to brainwash the general public into thinking that Islam is a religion of peace and the "terrorists" are just "extremists". The liberal media idiots seem to fail to understand that Islam and it's primary mission, undermines the foundation America is built on, freedom.

 

[Osage Bluestem]

These conferences are stupid occasions for pride and conflict.

 

[JM]

Why is modern Calvinism (not Reformed theology but Calvinism) driven by Conferences?

 

[gord44]

From an outsiders view, they seem like a couple of primadonas using their faith as a vehicle to drive their ego driven agendas. Look at me! Look at me!

The meek shall inherit the earth and all that.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

From my experiences being at a lot of Pentecostal/Charismatic churches, they are very very sympathetic to the WOF movement and my opinion for that, are just as bad. Not to mention, they have a twisted view about faith, the Holy Spirit, and their authority on matters is never Scripture, it is mostly their own experience, and their own version of the Holy Spirit. I have family members that eat this stuff up hook, line, and sinker.

My dad's mom and dad were Pentecostals, my grandpas parents were, my dad's sister and her husband, my dad, my mom (though not entirely moreso when I was young), and other family. My parents never got caught up in the WOF or "name it claim it" and they always frowned on the money begging televangelists. My grandma and grandpa on my dad's side did watch televangelists regularly, and my grandma may have been sympathetic, though not my grandpa. My family remembers the 80's Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggart scandels that shammed the Charismatic/Pentecostal movement. I do not think any of my family were/have been/are sympathetic towards "Oneness Pentecostals". All of them had/have much in common with fundamentalism. All of them had/have much in common with Arminianism. So far as authority is concerned, well fundamentalists hold the Protestant view, and hold to Biblical inerrancy, and would tell you the Bible is the Word of God and the ultimate authority. Their view of faith is no different than the average Methodist/General/Free Will Baptist. So far as emphasis on the Holy Spirit goes, in the Pentecostal Churches themselves, I'd have to say it varies from Church to Church from sermon to sermon, perhaps from season to season. Maybe I just come from a "level headed" family (for the most part), I don't know, but I do know my family though not perfect, so far as living their faith daily is concerned, has set as Christ-like of an example, as I have ever witnessed, and at the same time, mostly without a legalistic attitude/spirit. My dad is about as humble of a person as I have ever known (though not as patient as he used to be, but he's old now and diabetes probably has something to do with it), and I have known more people than I can remember, which might not be saying much. My best Church experiences are from my childhood, when my parents attended an Assembly of God Church, and no other Church experiences have compared. You talk about fellowship, for years there was genuine sweet fellowship there, and a berean spirit I have not witnessed since. I have so many memories there, and it's difficult to put into words really, it's something you would have to have "been there". Of course, the memories and experiences there was not perfect, the last year or two we went there, I had problems with one boy, and a couple of boys who were brothers, even so the good memories there outweigh the bad. Anyway, there is a great deal of diversity within the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement, just as there is in any denomination. Imagine if MacArthur took his Calvinism as seriously, he wouldn't be a Baptist, because as you probably know, Arminian Baptists and Particular Baptists are in the same overall denomination, at least on paper (WCF), all Presbyterians are Calvinists, the Baptists however do not have an agreed upon confession, the free will Baptists would never agree to the LBC. But evidently, to MacArthur, these are just minor details, Calvinism is a great conversation piece...I hope you can see what I am getting at.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

So John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Sam Storms, and J . I. Packer should be lumped in the same group as Mormons?

...and D.A. Carson and Matt Slick. All fine Calvinists in my humble opinion.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Why is modern Calvinism (not Reformed theology but Calvinism) driven by Conferences?

Good question, I don't know, but there is strength in numbers. To go back in time and be part of a Puritan conference...can you imagine? Owen alone would have us mortified on the floor "slain".

 

[AndOne]

Speaking of Mormons, I think MacArthur would have had a better conference, if it addressed the false religion of Islam (a book was released by James White on it this year). The charismatic movement does not compare to the threat of Islam. What really concerns me, are the mainstream media efforts to brainwash the general public into thinking that Islam is a religion of peace and the "terrorists" are just "extremists". The liberal media idiots seem to fail to understand that Islam and it's primary mission, undermines the foundation America is built on, freedom.

Agreed - ironically the first I heard of this SF conference was through listening to James White's podcast!

 

[JM]

I wonder if, a hundred years from now, people will look back at the Strange Fire Conference as some kind of church council?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I wonder if, a hundred years from now, people will look back at the Strange Fire Conference as some kind of church council?

Strange council

 

[Keachian]

I wonder if, a hundred years from now, people will look back at the Strange Fire Conference as some kind of church council?

Do we view the Westminster Assembly, Savoy Conference, Savoy Assembly, or the meeting of Baptist ministers in this way?

 

[JM]

Do we view the Westminster Assembly, Savoy Conference, Savoy Assembly, or the meeting of Baptist ministers in this way?

Those who practice theology within the "church" usually do. Modern Christians tend to practice theology with a post-Enlighenment mind set where they approach the biblical text and say, "I will use my intellect and reason alone to find the meaning and declare it!" Christians did not practice theology like this before the the so-called Enlightment period. History and tradition were always consider important, although not authoritative. If what you believe has been condemned or can be traced to a heterodox movement you should pause to consider if what you believe is true or not. Reformed minded folks do look to creeds and confessions as important theological landmarks.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Let's Ask John MacArthur Some Hard Questions | Challies Dot Com

I asked the question: "Dr. MacArthur, I ask these questions as a Calvinist. Do you believe Arminians are in error concerning Soteriology? Do they rightly divide Scripture concerning the Gospel? I ask this question because (most) Baptists do not divide over differences in Soteriology, and yet a Free Will Baptist would never affirm the LBC. Would you say that the Doctrines of Grace are essentials or non-essentials? How important is unity in the essentials? I ask these questions because evidently, it would seem, according to you, cessationism and continualism is an essential issue worth dividing over, while the Doctrines of Grace are not?"

Another person asked the question: "Dr. MacArthur, as one committed to a futurist interpretation of New Testament prophecy, do you not see the two witnesses in the Revelation as an example of prophetic ministry in the New Testament era? Or do these gifts become operative again after the "rapture" of the Church?"

 

[AmericanSamurai]

Funny comments in that blog.^

 

[AmericanSamurai]

The problem with 'Moderate Charismatics' is that all the fruit loops are grinning from ear to ear that these 'Reformed folks' affirm all their beliefs thus making them valid.

I don't agree with every little thing that Johnny Mac preaches, but I do on this issue of the gifts.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

The problem with 'Moderate Charismatics' is that all the fruit loops are grinning from ear to ear that these 'Reformed folks' affirm all their beliefs thus making them valid.

I don't agree with every little thing that Johnny Mac preaches, but I do on this issue of the gifts.

One of the biggest problems I have with the Strange Fire conference in general is that it sends the message that one cannot be both Charismatic and a Calvinist, and that is hurtful. You may think "well I wouldn't want Charismatics to be Calvinists anyways", but then that is cutting one's nose off to spite one's face. It is far more likely a Charismatic may change and revise their Charismatic beliefs if they became Calvinists, than otherwise. As it is, Strange Fire just poured gasoline on the fire, reinforcing anti-Calvinist beliefs.