Can a Baptist be Charismatic?

Again, I have to say that you have proven nothing. You have given your assertion eg: re 'teleios' and then restated it. That is not proof, that is opinion, to which you are of course entitled along with the rest of us, but please don't call it proof!

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

"Be careful when reading older literature that you do not read in MODERN definitions. A friend was reading of the Great Welsh Revival and it talked of the outpouring of the Spirit, etc etc. She questioned my strong stance against the sham "gifts" (immitation of the Spirit) of modern tongues in relationship to that historical account."

I agree, and have made much effort not to mis-interpret them....for example one could find many cases of Baptists and Puritans speaking of 'prophesying,' but they meant by that only preaching without notes!

 

IMO, A Charismatic is a Charismatic;
And A Baptist is a Baptist.
And never the twain shall meet.
DHK

 

You obviously don't live in the UK, then...

Yours in Christ

Matt (who knows that DHK lives in Canada but posted the above for ironic effect)

 

You will have to enlighten me Matt. I firmly believe what I said. I will give you the reason why.

The first and most important Baptist distinctive is:
The Bible is our only rule of faith and order. It is the foundation of all that we believe. If it is not based on the Bible (our faith, our doctrines), then we reject it.)

The Charismatics reject this very basic premise (perhaps not all, but many, if not most.) Most that speak in tongues, also believe in the gifts of prophecy, words of knolwedge, God speaking through visions, dreams, etc. In other words they believe in an open ended revelation--that God is still giving out revelation today. That is why we here so often: "God spoke to me," "God revealed this to me," "God said this to me," This is what God said to me in a vision," etc. The Charismatic treats these events as actual revelations from God, on par with the Bible.
The Bible, on the other hand is closed revelation. It is the inspired Word of God, that God passed down to mankind. It is His roadmap, guidebook from
God to man, that He intends to follow. He never intended us to follow any other revelation, whether it was the Book of Mormon, the Tradition of the Catholic Church, or the experiences of the Charismatics. We have but one authority, the Bible. Those who claim they have another authority violate the most basic principle of any Baptist, and therefore cannot be Baptist.

That is why I label a Charismatic a Charismatic, no matter what he may label himself: baptist or otherwise. Baptists and Charismatis do not mix in my books. They never did historically, and they still don't.
It is like the J.W.'s in some ways. They consder themselves Christian. But are they? Just because they say they are doesn't make them so. Just because a Charismatic says he is Baptist doesn't make him so.
DHK

 

Re enlightenment, ask and ye shall receive : the charismatic movement in the UK, as well as encompassing the Elim and AoG Pentecostal Churches plus the Restorationist New or House Churches (think Vineyard and you're kind of there but a bit different), also pervades most of the 'historic churches', including most Baptist churches.

Also, as I have said elsewhere, the term 'charismatic' seems to mean something a bit different over here than it does on your side of the Atlantic. Most charismatics I've known (and I've known and continue to know a lot)regard the WoF movement and people who broadcast on or watch TBN generally as at worst heretics and at best fruitcakes. Most that I've come across do not speak in 'tongues' publicly.

As for adding to or departing from Scripture, yes, we do believe in the gifts of the Spirit being for today; that is our interpretation of I Cor 12-14, inter alia, and it is a reasonable one, as is your more cessationist interpretation; we believe that in so holding we are being faithful to Scripture, not detracting from it. No charismatic outwith TBN that I know in this country - whether I know them personally or through their medium- to high-profile ministry - views words of knowledge or prophecy etc as being on a par with Scripture; indeed the likes of Kenneth Hagin etc were rounded on and condemned by the charismatic mainstream/ 'establishment' here for doing just that on a number of occasions. I think that part of the problem here is both in terminology and experience: if you see someone on TBN stand up and say "Thus saith the Lord: in the Last Days I will raise up the Sons of God who will be nurtured by the Latter Rain and then the Antichrist will be elected Prime Minister of Israel and wage war on the Church and there will be the Last Battle of Armageddon (sp?) in April 4th, 2006", you would - quite rightly - treat that as being suspect. But that is not my experience of the charismatic movement here. Our typical usage of the so-called revelatory gifts boils down largely to what I suspect you would call:-

1. Guidance -either individual eg: "should I apply for this job, Lord?" - or corporate eg: "should the church hire this particular minister and buy the plot of land next door to expand our premises?"

2. Illumination - the 'logos' Word becoming the 'rhema' Word eg: The Holy Spirit shining HIs light on a particular Scripture so that I can apply it to my life more effectively.

3. A combination of #1 and #2.

Of course, the problem comes when someone tries to covert these specific revelations into some kind of general doctrinal position - converting the 'rhema' back into some kind of 'logos'; eg: God acting in a unique way in a unique individual's life in a unique set of circumstances, and then that person going a writing a book about it called "The Secret to an Effective Christian Life" or something. That is of course the cardinal error of the WoF movement; one which, as I hope I have made clear, UK charismatics would, by and large, be among the first to condemn

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

I think then we are in more agreement then was first apparent. I do believe that the genuine gifts of the Holy Spirit have ceased. But defined by the Bible these gifts were miraculous in nature, and cannot be duplicated as they were carried out in the Apostolic Age, especially: miracles, tongues, healings, prophecy, and so on.

I also believe that there has been such a counter-reaction by some Baptist Churches to the Charismatic Churches that there has not been enough teaching on the Holy Spirit. There are definite commands in Scripture concerning the Holy Spirit:
Be ye filled with the Holy Spirit.
Quench not the Holy Spirit.
Advice about being illumined by the Holy Spirit.
Being led by the Holy Spirit.
We have the witness of the Holy Spirit.

But these have nothing to do with the gifts of the Holy Spirit which ceased in the first century. The ministry of the Holy Spirit is still alive and well today. He has come to convict of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement.

Without God, the Holy Spirit's guidance and illumination (of Scripture), I would never have become a missionary. It was the Holy Spirit the led the way, opened up the doors, gave me peace about the situation, and guided me to the place of service where God wanted me. All of this has nothing to do with the supernatural gifts that were given in the first century.
DHK

 

Good post, DHK. I thought it was awfully odd that during the early church thousands were accepting Christ, but out of ALL of these Christians; they kept laying ill people so that "Peter's shadow" would fall on them for healing. With all of these thousands of Christians running around, why were they not taking up the healing gift and lightening Peter's load?

 

Well for one thing, it is extremely hard to refute someone's testimony of receiving a word of revelation or some ecstatic experience when there is something in scripture that is the same,regardless of whether it is in context or not. If someone professes to have had such an experience that we, as Baptists, discount but can go to scriptures and point out a similarity.. it is very difficult to get them to believe the truth.
My first post here and I did not read the entire 10 pages or so, but I am also of the cessationist persuasion concerning the apostolic gifts.
One woman came down to Baton Rouge to promote a book that she wrote. The book was based on her experience in which she claims she had been taken to hell for a tour. Many of my deaf friends fell for this and purchased her book. Naturally, I was looked upon as the devil because I tried to tell them I did not think this was true. I had them tell me the story and was able to find a way to refute the testimony finding that parts of it were in violation of correct doctrine.
In her story, she claims that Hell is like a person's body, that the newly dead enter at the mouth and are then sent to their destiny depending on the lives they lived. On the left arm, she claimed this was populated by christians who had died in backslidden state. So, there was my chance to refute the whole testimony. Most of the times, I dont have enough testimony or nothing that I can refute, and my friends go on believing the lie.

 

Dr. Tim, that was an interesting post. It is amazing what people will believe in, especially if it is put into print.

I wonder where the biggest sinners went.

 

down to the foot.. down there.. where there is foot fungus and toe cotton! the WORST punishment a man could imagine.

 

When judging what charismatics believe I listen to what thier leaders (Hinn,Kenneth Copeland,Dollar) have to say. Aside from thier teachings on the gifts and the name it and claim it theology they teach my most serious problem with thier teaching is the "little Christs" teaching they are putting out. We can strive to become like Christ , but it is He who died on the cross and rose again to pay the price for our sin,that we cannot do.