Todd Bentley

[Faulty]

I have not attended a Bentley meeting, nor would I. I have watched his messages on live TV, and on YouTube. I have also visited his website and read his teachings. I have also read testimonies from people who were in his meetings or were on his staff.

I would definately be interested in hearing Bentley speak about Lakeland without 'sugar-coating it', because what I have heard him say has definately been sugar-coated. If you could point me to a transcript, or video or teaching where he speaks candidly about Lakeland, I would absolutely read/watch it.

His video podcasts are free on iTunes under the name "Fresh Fire with Todd Bentley". They go all the way back to the time of his "restoration" in March 2009.

 

[mrmccormo]

We're not discussing the difference between Paul and Apollos, but Bentley and the Word of God.

Are you saying it doesn't matter what a teacher believes?



peace,
Simon

At the least, it seems like it doesn't matter what a teacher does, according to some people's casual attitude toward Bentley. I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say that it doesn't matter what he believes, either, as long as signs and miracles (which OF COURSE are always 100% genuine and have NO chance of being counterfeit EVER in ANY way, right?) are manifesting in his meetings.

 

[MadameGuyon]

We're not discussing the difference between Paul and Apollos, but Bentley and the Word of God.

Are you saying it doesn't matter what a teacher believes?

peace,
Simon

Well, at last, after more than 120 posts on this thread, we're finally getting to the crux of the matter.

What is the biblical criteria given for defining whether someone is in Christ ( a brother or sister in the Lord)?

Would you share what you believe that to be?

 

[MadameGuyon]

At the least, it seems like it doesn't matter what a teacher does, according to some people's casual attitude toward Bentley. I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say that it doesn't matter what he believes, either, as long as signs and miracles (which OF COURSE are always 100% genuine and have NO chance of being counterfeit EVER in ANY way, right?) are manifesting in his meetings.

You know mrmccormo, words of this sort don't allow for a productive conversation from which we and the readers of the thread could benefit. It's just a snide insinuation on the character and intelligence of those you don't agree with.

 

[Simon Peter]

His video podcasts are free on iTunes under the name "Fresh Fire with Todd Bentley". They go all the way back to the time of his "restoration" in March 2009.

Thanks faulty, but I'm aware of Bentley's videos being available, but I don't want to troll through hundreds of hours of videos in the hope of finding Bentley speak candidly about Lakeland.

MadameGuyon,

You said, "He talks of what happened at Lakeland and doesn't sugar-coat it."

Again, can you please point me to a transcript, or video or teaching where Todd speaks candidly about Lakeland? Thanks.

Well, at last, after more than 120 posts on this thread, we're finally getting to the crux of the matter.

What is the biblical criteria given for defining whether someone is in Christ ( a brother or sister in the Lord)?

Would you share what you believe that to be?

I have no idea if Bentley is 'born again' or not. The issue is whether he is a false teacher or not. The Biblical criteria for assessing a church leader is:

1. Character
2. Doctrine

Bentley fails both in spades.

How do you determine whether a church leader is legitimate or not?


peace,
Simon

 

[mrmccormo]

You know mrmccormo, words of this sort don't allow for a productive conversation from which we and the readers of the thread could benefit. It's just a snide insinuation on the character and intelligence of those you don't agree with.

Defenders of Bentley have - more or less - completely refused to entertain the idea that his manifestations and the things that occured during his meetings were false. Some might admit that he did have character flaws. Others might admit that he was living a life of sin. But I have yet to see the pro-Bentley crowd admit to the possibility that the manifestations at his meetings were false.

I am fully aware that the sort of things that occured at Bentley's meetings can be from God. But simply proving that something can be from God (a very broad, non-specific assertion) does not prove that Bentley's manifestations are from God (a very narrow, specific assertion).

Until we begin to test the spirits and actual go beyond the simplistic argument of "these things exist, therefore Bentley's meetings were genuine", I will continue to insinuate and disagree, though I have never insulted anyone's character nor intelligence. I've merely pointed out what appears to be a very obvious contradiction/hole in the pro-Bentley defense.

 

[Tobias]

Defenders of Bentley have - more or less - completely refused to entertain the idea that his manifestations and the things that occured during his meetings were false. Some might admit that he did have character flaws. Others might admit that he was living a life of sin. But I have yet to see the pro-Bentley crowd admit to the possibility that the manifestations at his meetings were false.

I am fully aware that the sort of things that occured at Bentley's meetings can be from God. But simply proving that something can be from God (a very broad, non-specific assertion) does not prove that Bentley's manifestations are from God (a very narrow, specific assertion).

Until we begin to test the spirits and actual go beyond the simplistic argument of "these things exist, therefore Bentley's meetings were genuine", I will continue to insinuate and disagree, though I have never insulted anyone's character nor intelligence. I've merely pointed out what appears to be a very obvious contradiction/hole in the pro-Bentley defense.

Posted earlier in this thread:

Personally, I dodge the issues over doctrine because I expect they are mostly just denominational differences. I don't care to hear anybody's anti-charismatic or anti-NAR hate slung around again, so I sidestep the issue.

I've always seen the big issue as an unbelief in the possibility that God can use an imperfect man for a while, until the sin overtakes him and God can use him no longer. It's like it's supposed to be understood, that if any sin, or any doctrinal error is pointed out, then it proves that the Anointing we all felt on the guy was not real but fake.


However, I am starting to get curious as to what these horrible doctrinal errors are. I'm starting to second guess myself, and my ability to recognize them when I hear them. Though probably, they are nothing more than your own personal objections to stuff that is taught by thousands of churches across the nation. In which case, expecting Bentley to humbly repent is a bit far fetched!

Do people just assume that they are in control of God? And that if someone comes along teaching stuff they disagree with, then it is most certainly NOT God anointing this person's ministry, and working the signs and wonders?

Is this why the belief in the spirit of Kundalini is so popular, because people just can't fathom the possibility that their pet doctrines might be wrong, or God might overlook doctrine all together, and actually be the One behind the miracles in someone else's ministry??????

How exactly would you propose we go about determining whether it was the Spirit of God, or kundalini that worked in Lakeland? I don't think anybody's denying that false spirits attempt to work in and around the meetings where God shows up in power. So finding just a few examples of people making mistakes or allowing themselves to be used by the wrong spirit for a few minutes; won't really help to determine which Spirit/spirit was responsible for the majority of what went on there.

Can you show me scriptures that explain how the spirit of kundalini works in Spirit filled meetings?

 

[mrmccormo]

@Tobias

I'm curious why the argument has to focus on proving/disproving the spirit of kundalini. Since that word doesn't even appear in the Bible, I'm not sure how one would go about proving or disproving it.

What I was getting at is that so far the argument in defense of Bentley's manifestations has been "the Bible says this stuff is real because of such-and-such, therefore Bentley's manifestations were real". Obviously, I'm distilling it down, but I feel that is quite a leap from one conclusion to the other. Yes, this stuff might be real, but based on the deceptions uncovered in Bentley's ministry and in his own life, the notion that the manifestations were false is far more likely.

At the day of judgment, when people come and say "but Lord, did we not prophecy and perform miracles and cast out demons in Your name" and Jesus responds "I never knew you", could it be possible that if Jesus were to continue the conversation, He may have said "those manifestations were false"? There is no evidence (for or against, so it's conjecture at this point) that the miracles performed by those who were cast away were actually from the Lord.

 

[Tobias]

@Tobias

I'm curious why the argument has to focus on proving/disproving the spirit of kundalini. Since that word doesn't even appear in the Bible, I'm not sure how one would go about proving or disproving it.

What I was getting at is that so far the argument in defense of Bentley's manifestations has been "the Bible says this stuff is real because of such-and-such, therefore Bentley's manifestations were real". Obviously, I'm distilling it down, but I feel that is quite a leap from one conclusion to the other. Yes, this stuff might be real, but based on the deceptions uncovered in Bentley's ministry and in his own life, the notion that the manifestations were false is far more likely.

At the day of judgment, when people come and say "but Lord, did we not prophecy and perform miracles and cast out demons in Your name" and Jesus responds "I never knew you", could it be possible that if Jesus were to continue the conversation, He may have said "those manifestations were false"? There is no evidence (for or against, so it's conjecture at this point) that the miracles performed by those who were cast away were actually from the Lord.

So why did you bring it up? If you yourself admit that all we have is conjecture either way?

 

[Tobias]

As far as false spirits that come into the Church and imitate the Holy Spirit, that seem to be quite popular in the eyes of those who disagree with the doctrine that is being preached, I am quite curious to know how they work!

#1 Are they discerned solely by those who dislike the teachings? Supported only by the assumption that "false" teaching will open the doorway up for false spirits to operate? And that the Holy Spirit will sit back and do nothing, unless we repent of the false doctrine?


If the Holy Spirit can be imitated, to where people cannot tell the difference, then this is an issue that needs to be taken into account when reading the Bible. Samson by all rights (according to this belief) should not have been filled with the Holy Spirit when he found himself in danger while sleeping with a prostitute. Did a false spirit imitate the Holy Spirit, and rip the gates off the city and carry them to the top of a mountain?

If sin in our lives, or gullibility to listen to ministers who have sin in their lives, causes false spirits to imitate the HS, then this would have to be the case with Samson. If however the theory is that false teaching creates this window of opportunity... doesn't that depend upon the hardness of heart in the people? IOW, to say that the Holy Spirit abandoned thousands of people, is tantamount to judging them all as being hard hearted and turned over to the wiles of Satan by the Father, who promises us to give the Holy Spirit to any who ask.

 

[Tobias]

After spending a few weeks basking in the Glory of God watching the Lakeland revival on tv, Todd started talking about sites on the internet that were opposing him. He said that he almost regretted doing a search on the name "Todd Bentley".

My wife thought she'd check it out. She started reading what people were saying against him, and it really started to bug her. So she prayed about it. And she said that God told her; "Who are you going to trust, Me or them?" So she turned her attention back on the meetings and let God continue to minister to her.



When the subject of false teaching comes up concerning Lakeland, I think we need to also consider the teachers online who have spoken false things about Bentley and his ministry. Who do we trust? Do we trust these ministryless people who claim to speak on behalf of God, that their facts concerning the situation are all valid and true? do we read between the lines of what they have to say, and use common sense to judge whether they are speaking simply against unrepentant sin, or using it as an excuse to also attack a servant of God?

This btw is my assessment of the whole situation (be it right or wrong). That the false teaching has mostly come from the enemy, attacking Bentley and what God attempted to do through him. Todd made mistakes, there is no doubt about that. But the gift of discerning of spirits has me looking at those who attack him as the ones following the lies of the enemy, not those who acknowledge both his accomplishments and his failures. Not that I claim my abilities are infallible, I am in fact only human, but this is the position from which I state my opinions.

 

[mrmccormo]

So why did you bring it up? If you yourself admit that all we have is conjecture either way?

I said that my explanation of the story about the sheep being separated from the goats was conjecture. The previous paragraph stands.

Why does Bentley's defense boil down to "these manifestations are real in the Bible, therefore Bentley's manifestations were real" and "God used sinful people in the Bible, therefore God used Bentley". Such leaps are horribly illogical and if we're going to discourse, we might as well use our God-given reason.

As far as false spirits that come into the Church and imitate the Holy Spirit, that seem to be quite popular in the eyes of those who disagree with the doctrine that is being preached, I am quite curious to know how they work!

#1 Are they discerned solely by those who dislike the teachings? Supported only by the assumption that "false" teaching will open the doorway up for false spirits to operate? And that the Holy Spirit will sit back and do nothing, unless we repent of the false doctrine?


If the Holy Spirit can be imitated, to where people cannot tell the difference, then this is an issue that needs to be taken into account when reading the Bible. Samson by all rights (according to this belief) should not have been filled with the Holy Spirit when he found himself in danger while sleeping with a prostitute. Did a false spirit imitate the Holy Spirit, and rip the gates off the city and carry them to the top of a mountain?

If sin in our lives, or gullibility to listen to ministers who have sin in their lives, causes false spirits to imitate the HS, then this would have to be the case with Samson. If however the theory is that false teaching creates this window of opportunity... doesn't that depend upon the hardness of heart in the people? IOW, to say that the Holy Spirit abandoned thousands of people, is tantamount to judging them all as being hard hearted and turned over to the wiles of Satan by the Father, who promises us to give the Holy Spirit to any who ask.

Once again, trying to use the "God used sinful people, therefore he used Bentley" argument? Sorry, but that doesn't fly.

The reason why false teaching is associated with false spirits is because the Bible associates false teaching with false spirits, didn't you know? Galatians 1:8. It's a total red herring to say "gee, why are Todd Bentley's opposers the only people who are discerning his supposed false teaching?" Did it occur to you that perhaps they oppose him because of his false teaching?

The worst part of this situation is it appears that as long as the miracles keep flowin', people don't care where they come from, how they're taught, or who is manifesting them. Every excuse in the book is made as long as we can maintain "the miracles were from God". Heck, some of you folks are even willing to admit that Bentley was bankrupt of character and perhaps even taught false things, but who cares? Because his manifestations were real, right?

That's the clincher. No one is admit to that the manifestations themselves were false, even though every indication is that they were. They came from amidst false teaching. They came from a false teacher, a man clearly exhibiting the exact characteristics that Paul warned us false teachers and men of division would exhibit.

But no. We can't go down that road. The manifestations were real (despite Scripture, despite common sense) just because...they are.

 

[Yitzchak]

At the least, it seems like it doesn't matter what a teacher does, according to some people's casual attitude toward Bentley. I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say that it doesn't matter what he believes, either, as long as signs and miracles (which OF COURSE are always 100% genuine and have NO chance of being counterfeit EVER in ANY way, right?) are manifesting in his meetings.

I do not think it is a casual attitude that people are having. I think it is merely a more liberal and modern mindset which has a different paradigm for evaluating a ministry than the conservative mindset has.



Like I said earlier in this thread. There is a huge part of this which is a liberal versus a conservative approach. The conservative viewpoint has an up side and it also has a downside. The liberal approach also has it's up side and it's down side.

The thing that I am curious about is why would we expect Todd Bentley to act like more of a conservative than a Southern Baptist , when he is obviously more liberal in his approach to many things. Todd Bentley is too liberal for my taste , but I can accept that God uses liberals sometimes.

I have friends who are old fashioned conservatives from a Spirit filled back round.They are against drums and electric guitars and loud music being used in worship. They prefer hymns. Or take for example , the tatoos and piercings that Bentley has. From a conservative mindset , that alone would disqualify Bentley. My conservative friends expect a suit and tie to be worn by a minister. Divorced and remarried. Another strike against him. The fact that he drinks a drop of alcohol would disqualify him in many conservative circles. Smoking , cussing , hanging around thew wrong people , etc.

I can remember years ago , a conservative minister preaching against Keith Green because he had long hair and looked like a hippie. Based on that , he dismissed Keith Green's ministry. He also was critical of the Jesus movement and wearing blue jeans.

It may not be about blue jeans and drums in the worship band , but reading the discussion on here and on the internet , in general , most of the controversy seems to be centered around issues where Bentley is a little bit loose about his Theology and practices.

The majority of problems that people are having with Todd Bentley are not the specific incidents of his falling into public sin. It seems to be more of a stance against his entire ministry. His sins are just gas on the fire that was already burning.The specific issues listed seem to be issues that one would find in almost any liberal or even a moderate Charismatic ministry.

There are many non denominational Charismatic ministries that have loose accountability and accept every angel sighting at face value. They report testimonies of anything from gold dust to a promotion at work.

I have attended several of these churches in my travels. The speakers frequently weigh heavily upon some personal experience or word that they received. Often they cite divine guidance for every little detail from the song choice in worship to which sermon they preach on. If I had a dollar for every time a pastor said that they had a sermon prepared and during the worship they changed their sermon to a completely different one based on a personal word that they received five minutes before the sermon.

In my experience , there are hundreds , maybe thousands of little Charismatic churches across North America which have similar practices and beliefs to what Todd Bentley does. Personal words , angel sightings , emotional experiences , etc.

A blunt observation. Much of the criticism seems more directed at Charismatic practices as a whole rather than just at Todd Bentley. Todd Bentley pushed the envelope a little bit , but seems a lot like the typical Charismatic.

I think one of the defining virtues of the Charismatic movement has been to be a bit more open minded and to welcome new experiences which are outside of the usual tradition. The down side is that sometimes it can get a little bit flaky. That has always been the criticism of the Charismatic movement , as far back as I can remember.

So my question to you is this. What sets apart Todd Bentley from the more general criticisms which have been leveled against Charismatics for the past forty years , or so ?

After all , Bentley is not known for being an ultra conservative Pentecostal holiness preacher. So why this high standard for Bentley that 90% of Charismatic leaders would not meet ?

Isn't the divorce and remarriage rate around 50% for Charismatic ministers ? I think I have yet to meet someone who went through a divorce that was all neat and proper. By comparison , Bentley's seemed tame.

So isn't this criticism merely a more general criticism against liberal practices in the Charismatic movement ?

 

[Tobias]

I said that my explanation of the story about the sheep being separated from the goats was conjecture. The previous paragraph stands.

Why does Bentley's defense boil down to "these manifestations are real in the Bible, therefore Bentley's manifestations were real" and "God used sinful people in the Bible, therefore God used Bentley". Such leaps are horribly illogical and if we're going to discourse, we might as well use our God-given reason.


Once again, trying to use the "God used sinful people, therefore he used Bentley" argument? Sorry, but that doesn't fly.

The reason why false teaching is associated with false spirits is because the Bible associates false teaching with false spirits, didn't you know? Galatians 1:8. It's a total red herring to say "gee, why are Todd Bentley's opposers the only people who are discerning his supposed false teaching?" Did it occur to you that perhaps they oppose him because of his false teaching?

The worst part of this situation is it appears that as long as the miracles keep flowin', people don't care where they come from, how they're taught, or who is manifesting them. Every excuse in the book is made as long as we can maintain "the miracles were from God". Heck, some of you folks are even willing to admit that Bentley was bankrupt of character and perhaps even taught false things, but who cares? Because his manifestations were real, right?

That's the clincher. No one is admit to that the manifestations themselves were false, even though every indication is that they were. They came from amidst false teaching. They came from a false teacher, a man clearly exhibiting the exact characteristics that Paul warned us false teachers and men of division would exhibit.

But no. We can't go down that road. The manifestations were real (despite Scripture, despite common sense) just because...they are.

I'm not sure how you are getting any of that from what I said.


What cannot be imitated is the presence of my God. I suppose for those who do not know Him personally, there is no way to judge which god is showing up, except by carefully listening to the words spoken by the preacher and peering at him through his window to see if he is sinning in his personal life.

However, the Presence of God is known to His people. When He shows up, our spirits leap within us and bare witness to His presence. This isn't about miracles or signs and wonders. This is about feeling His presence.

For the most part, I cannot tell you what Bentley preached on in Lakeland. All I remember is what God was speaking to me while Bentley was preaching. God Himself ministered to me, which is actually quite typical when a minister yields the meeting over to the Holy Spirit and allows God to move. It happens in any good church I've attended, and during any anointed preaching.

Healing still baffles me. I have no witness in my spirit, or any other knowledge of what is going on when someone claims to be healed. If every last claim to healing that has occurred in church over the past 30 years turns out to be fake, I would be very disappointed with my brothers and sisters in Christ. But I think it is best to give them the benefit of the doubt and trust their integrity at least to some extent. Not one ounce of my faith is founded in other people's claim to miraculous healing.

It is not the miracles, nor any of the other manifestations that attracted me to Lakeland. It was my God speaking to me, and causing me to be humbled before Him in a manner in which I could not deny.

 

[Child of JC]

I do not think it is a casual attitude that people are having. I think it is merely a more liberal and modern mindset which has a different paradigm for evaluating a ministry than the conservative mindset has.



Like I said earlier in this thread. There is a huge part of this which is a liberal versus a conservative approach. The conservative viewpoint has an up side and it also has a downside. The liberal approach also has it's up side and it's down side.

The thing that I am curious about is why would we expect Todd Bentley to act like more of a conservative than a Southern Baptist , when he is obviously more liberal in his approach to many things. Todd Bentley is too liberal for my taste , but I can accept that God uses liberals sometimes.

I have friends who are old fashioned conservatives from a Spirit filled back round.They are against drums and electric guitars and loud music being used in worship. They prefer hymns. Or take for example , the tatoos and piercings that Bentley has. From a conservative mindset , that alone would disqualify Bentley. My conservative friends expect a suit and tie to be worn by a minister. Divorced and remarried. Another strike against him. The fact that he drinks a drop of alcohol would disqualify him in many conservative circles. Smoking , cussing , hanging around thew wrong people , etc.

I can remember years ago , a conservative minister preaching against Keith Green because he had long hair and looked like a hippie. Based on that , he dismissed Keith Green's ministry. He also was critical of the Jesus movement and wearing blue jeans.

It may not be about blue jeans and drums in the worship band , but reading the discussion on here and on the internet , in general , most of the controversy seems to be centered around issues where Bentley is a little bit loose about his Theology and practices.

The majority of problems that people are having with Todd Bentley are not the specific incidents of his falling into public sin. It seems to be more of a stance against his entire ministry. His sins are just gas on the fire that was already burning.The specific issues listed seem to be issues that one would find in almost any liberal or even a moderate Charismatic ministry.

There are many non denominational Charismatic ministries that have loose accountability and accept every angel sighting at face value. They report testimonies of anything from gold dust to a promotion at work.

I have attended several of these churches in my travels. The speakers frequently weigh heavily upon some personal experience or word that they received. Often they cite divine guidance for every little detail from the song choice in worship to which sermon they preach on. If I had a dollar for every time a pastor said that they had a sermon prepared and during the worship they changed their sermon to a completely different one based on a personal word that they received five minutes before the sermon.

In my experience , there are hundreds , maybe thousands of little Charismatic churches across North America which have similar practices and beliefs to what Todd Bentley does. Personal words , angel sightings , emotional experiences , etc.

A blunt observation. Much of the criticism seems more directed at Charismatic practices as a whole rather than just at Todd Bentley. Todd Bentley pushed the envelope a little bit , but seems a lot like the typical Charismatic.

I think one of the defining virtues of the Charismatic movement has been to be a bit more open minded and to welcome new experiences which are outside of the usual tradition. The down side is that sometimes it can get a little bit flaky. That has always been the criticism of the Charismatic movement , as far back as I can remember.

So my question to you is this. What sets apart Todd Bentley from the more general criticisms which have been leveled against Charismatics for the past forty years , or so ?

After all , Bentley is not known for being an ultra conservative Pentecostal holiness preacher. So why this high standard for Bentley that 90% of Charismatic leaders would not meet ?

Isn't the divorce and remarriage rate around 50% for Charismatic ministers ? I think I have yet to meet someone who went through a divorce that was all neat and proper. By comparison , Bentley's seemed tame.

So isn't this criticism merely a more general criticism against liberal practices in the Charismatic movement ?

Balance. Excellent Post.

 

[Mich7]

There are many non denominational Charismatic ministries that have loose accountability and accept every angel sighting at face value. They report testimonies of anything from gold dust to a promotion at work.

I have attended several of these churches in my travels. The speakers frequently weigh heavily upon some personal experience or word that they received. Often they cite divine guidance for every little detail from the song choice in worship to which sermon they preach on. If I had a dollar for every time a pastor said that they had a sermon prepared and during the worship they changed their sermon to a completely different one based on a personal word that they received five minutes before the sermon.

In my experience , there are hundreds , maybe thousands of little Charismatic churches across North America which have similar practices and beliefs to what Todd Bentley does. Personal words , angel sightings , emotional experiences , etc.

A blunt observation. Much of the criticism seems more directed at Charismatic practices as a whole rather than just at Todd Bentley. Todd Bentley pushed the envelope a little bit , but seems a lot like the typical Charismatic.

I think one of the defining virtues of the Charismatic movement has been to be a bit more open minded and to welcome new experiences which are outside of the usual tradition. The down side is that sometimes it can get a little bit flaky. That has always been the criticism of the Charismatic movement , as far back as I can remember.

So my question to you is this. What sets apart Todd Bentley from the more general criticisms which have been leveled against Charismatics for the past forty years , or so ?

Have to agree with you on the charismatic movement...you can get flaky services that are not of God and also services that are genuine moves of the Spirit..but that is the same with anything in Christianity...false teachers...true teachers...false prophets....true prophets...etc. My personal opinion ( and it is only my opinion) on Bentley is that what bothers me is the violence in his services...Yeah I know that Smith Wigglesworth supposedly hit people with tumors in the stomach for them to receive their healing but it still bothers me.

The example I read which was a while ago ( and I may get the details wrong...it has been a while) was that Bentley said something about a older woman that was praying at the altar and he said that God told him to go kick the woman in the face with his boot and he did...and this supposedly caused revival to break out or the Spirit to move or something like that. It just doesn't feel right to me...not only is it violence but it's interrupting communication between God and one of His children. Others may disagree with me and that's fine but for me it was a red flag.

 

[Svt4Him]

Have to agree with you on the charismatic movement...you can get flaky services that are not of God and also services that are genuine moves of the Spirit..but that is the same with anything in Christianity...false teachers...true teachers...false prophets....true prophets...etc. My personal opinion ( and it is only my opinion) on Bentley is that what bothers me is the violence in his services...Yeah I know that Smith Wigglesworth supposedly hit people with tumors in the stomach for them to receive their healing but it still bothers me.

The example I read which was a while ago ( and I may get the details wrong...it has been a while) was that Bentley said something about a older woman that was praying at the altar and he said that God told him to go kick the woman in the face with his boot and he did...and this supposedly caused revival to break out or the Spirit to move or something like that. It just doesn't feel right to me...not only is it violence but it's interrupting communication between God and one of His children. Others may disagree with me and that's fine but for me it was a red flag.

And at another one of his meetings. God told him to kill his first child. He said he actually got his child to bring the tools to kill him with, and lied to him the whole way up. Oh, wait a sec...

 

[Faulty]

And at another one of his meetings. God told him to kill his first child. He said he actually got his child to bring the tools to kill him with, and lied to him the whole way up. Oh, wait a sec...

Seems to me that at the one "meeting" the child was never harmed. Meanwhile, the woman still was kicked in the face.

So, the "comparison" is actually a stark contrast. Interesting.

 

[Svt4Him]

I seemed to recall Abraham having faith that even if the child died, God would bring him back. But regardless, the woman was harmed? I don't seem to recall that part of the story. I guess it's only stark to those who want it to be. Interesting.

It is always amazing how we take stories of Biblical events and never realize how weird they would have been to those watching. Does it prove or disprove anything? Nope, only amazing.

 

[Tobias]

nm