Want Some Answers ???

Open Letter to Pentecostals and Charismatic's.

Historical Perspectives

The modern Pentecostal movement commenced in the early 1900s in the USA.  At the very start "uplifted hands" characterized this movement and music with 'loud and decisive rhythm'. At the very start devotees claimed to experience 'electric shocks' 'unconsciousness', 'healing', 'uncontrollable laughter', 'holy dance', 'slain in the Spirit', and tongues. Numerous claims of miracles were given as proof God was at work. Even newspapers mentioned it.  The Times April 18 1906 - 

"Mouthing.... (what) no sane moral could understand... devotees of the weird doctrine practice the fanatical rites, preach the wildest theories and work themselves into a state of mad excitement... the howlings of the worshippers who spend hours swaying forth and back in a nerve-racking attitude..."

'Criticism and opposition' from Press or public was considered from "wicked men". And "the work of the Devil" but "free advertising". The pioneer leaders defended the bazaar stories, insisting Luther's doctrine of "justification by faith" would have been 'extravagance and fanaticism' in Luther's day. So their experience was similar. What might be considered "error" could be "the refraction of some greater truth". Frank Bartleman, (leader Azusa Street gathering) mentions uncontrollable shaking and shivering, speaking in tongues for "five hours". Unable to sleep 'every night for three months'. He said some went into 'trances' and unconsciousness "for hours"... "some for three or four days". Others "forgot to eat or sleep for nights and days". One occasion God came "so near... two thirds of the people" ran out of the house "scared out of their senses". He said people "would fall all over the house, like the slain in battle...the scene often resembled a forest of fallen trees". Many, "...prostrate on the floor for hours" (1)

Criticism raged when the Pentecostal pioneers insisted the San Francisco earthquake was God's judgment on a 'wicked city'. 3,000 died in the 1906 disaster. But criticism was claimed to come from "hell... to stop the message". Critical Christians were "grieving the Spirit", devil controlled and deserving God's judgment. 'Tongues' called "absolute perfection" (C Parham 1901) were also considered God's "rebuke to the 'jazzy' religious songs of the day". And a "real missionary language" like those of Pentecost "through which the heathen shall hear in their own language the wonderful works of God". So "missionaries" went "forth... to all nations". But in remote lands they soon discovered nobody understood their ‘tongue’. Without money to return home or unable to work resulted in some starving to death (2)

There was no organ or hymn books used in these first services at Azusa Street. Lack of church order was considered "divine order" and 'godly'. Any service arrangement was considered disgraceful, requiring "apologies". While 'tongues' was described as "the climax in abandonment". They said, only after "complete abandonment" of self, can God work in a "new way". So from the height of "God-control" came the total loss of self-control.  Pioneers looked back on these as the 'good ol days'. As the movement grew they said, 'divisions multiplied' and services became "fake".

We can admire the zeal of Frank Bartleman traveling extensively preaching 'revival' regardless of his constant sicknesses. Sickness, he believed, was the devil trying to kill him. Numerous miracle and healing claims fueled the whole affair. Yet Pentecostals "were no healthier than those of any other church". Taking medicine was was regarded as 'disobeying God' and healing claims were hounded by "instances of failure". (3) Pentecostals were "constantly looking for miracles" and anything not "easily explained" was considered "miraculous".

Bartleman compared Azusa St., to the Walsh Revival (which was absurd). Azusa was not a revival. The Walsh Revival added to all denominations, it "embodied Christian unity". Whereas Azusa St., was apart from the "ecclesiastical establishments". Mainstream Christianity knew little, or rejected it as heresy, expelling Pentecostals at least until 1928. The Walsh Revival had nothing of what characterized Azusa Street "The Holy Spirit descended upon us not indeed as a rushing mighty wind yea as a gentle zephyr..." (4)

Mormons at this time were also claiming "similar things" to those at Azusa St. And followers of Edward Irving (1792-1834) in Scotland and London as early as 1830 also claimed tongues, prophets and healing. They taught sickness and death was a Satanic attack or God's judgment. Irving had three children sicken and die and his wife unwell for years. But belief that sickness was Satanic or God's doing was cruel. "When healing did not come" people "lingered in agony". The Cholera epidemic in 1831 in England was claimed to be "sent by God as his judgment" and only "prayer and fasting" could bring deliverance.

In England (as Azusa St) "Much of the strength of this charismatic activity arose from the fact that the tongues were widely believed to be actual languages" (5) And so limited, "except in the case of missionaries going to a foreign land".

They did not urge missionary candidates 'to study languages', tongues would be a new way to preach to "foreign lands". As tongue speakers increased this became untenable. Tongues were easily proven false and opposition increased. So the emphasis shifted, that tongues can only be known by a Holy Ghost 'interpretation'. Some speakers disturbed by this felt the genuineness of the whole concept was at stake. Then another emphasis shift was the idea tongues were for 'joy and strength.' That was questionable, eye witnesses described tongue speakers -

Those with the "gift" wanted all controls removed, but lack of self-control caused 'differences' and 'divisions'. When the 'power' came upon some, they left the building so as not to offend other worshippers. While some would "put a handkerchief to the mouth to stop the sound" not to 'alarm' others.

These early Pentecostals claimed all must "bow to the utterances of the Spirit of God", as the "authority of a prophet". They had "infallible directions", the "voice of God" and it was "equal in authority to the bible".  They were so "overwhelmed with the certainty that God was commanding" they did "incredibly extreme" and "extraordinary" things. (6)  On reflection they were considered absurd, and some "uttered heretical" doctrine. Yet information received while "in the power" was treated with utmost respect. If an utterance proved incorrect it was claimed to be "misunderstood". Anything true was 'of God', anything false 'of Satan' and this added to confusion. Some utterances would "often contradict one another", others were "meaningless". So the idea of recording them was quickly dropped.

A "willingness to believe that new revelations were being given by God" has been the foundation of numerous heresies throughout Church history.  A failure to understand 1 Corinthians 13:8-13. The dogmatic assurance tongues and prophecy was 'the voice of God' ruined the career of Edward Irving. And will ruin the faith of any who adopt it. It robs the scriptures of their finality and authority and strikes at the very foundation of Christianity. It robs any man any definite 'Thus saith the Lord' on any subject.

Today Pentecostalism is the normal for millions of churches'. Is this of God? Are the miraculous 'sign gifts' given to the early New Testament church here today? One thing is for sure, in the bible they fulfilled a purpose and were genuine. But to answer these questions, I suggest the answer is all about a crisis of authority.

 It's your choice. Either you base what you believe on the bible, or the claims, experiences, stories and feelings of yourself or men.  Do we see in Pentecostalism today uncertainty, deception and division? i.e. [1] Why would any "movement of the Holy Spirit" cause division? (i.e. within Pentecostalism) [2] Would the Holy Spirit make people behave like they're drunk? [3] When believers came to Jesus in worship, did they -

Today, what's happening is anything is accepted as 'worship'.

Share a verse with these people they respond, "I don't care what you say, or how you interpret that verse, I KNOW these things are for today".

They mention stories, experiences, claims and feelings they or someone had. And so base their belief on experiences and feelings. Experience shouldn't formulate doctrine. Experience is not the test of genuineness, it can be misleading. Something can 'feel-right' but be wrong. Scripture must judge experiences & determine what's true.

Jesus warned of signs and wonders that deceive, if possible the very elect. John warned, "don't believe all who claim to have the Spirit, but test them…" The Bible is the test of truth. If so, it must have authority over all claims and the final say. God's Word and the Holy Spirit go together. The "Sword of the Spirit" is "the Word of God" (Eph.6:17) It doesn't slay you when reading, but tells the truth about the Holy Spirit.

His work (a)

Those under the Holy Spirit's CONTROL or POWER should display "self control"

(b) the Filling of the Spirit is not mystical. It is pagans who are carried away and over come with their gods (1 Cor.12:2).

(c) the evidence of spirituality is the Fruit of the Spirit, not spiritual gifts (Corinthian's had all the gifts yet were "carnal" 1 Cor.1:7, 3:1 3-4). Evidence is seen in behaviour, habits, commitment, words, character. But anyone can speak what they call "tongues" (Mormons, Roman Catholic, Buddhists, Jesuits, Muslims, Quakers) The Tongues practice fits anywhere, requires no doctrinal modification, only doctrinal acceptance.

Consider 1 Cor.14:21. If you can understand why the Gift of Tongues was given, you know why it ceased.

"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak to this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, says the Lord. Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not… but prophecy is for believers".

 A sign is not for its own sake but teach a truth. God use it to reveal His plan. It was prophesied Isa.28:11 “For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people….” “This people” is Israel, the Jewish people. Tongues had special significance to them, not to Gentiles. Why? They were often in captivity, they spoke other languages. Paul wrote "For the Jews require a sign…" Tongues indicated -

-  Jesus was their Messiah and sent the Holy Spirit.

-  they had rejected God's Word - Isa.28:11-12

-  God would leave them to the discipline of those of other languages.

-  but Gentiles will receive the message.

Now lets trace this sign through -

Book of Acts

Acts 2, First Christians were Jews. Tongues was a sign the Holy Spirit was given vs.2-3. Before the unbelieving Jewish people vs 2:7, 12-13. It was a sign. Note they said, "Do we not hear them speaking in our native tongues where we were born"? vs.2.8 (hear what?) "the wonders of God" vs.2.11. So they were real languages with meaning, a real miracle, linked to the Messiah.

Acts 8 First Samaritans became Christians (Acts 8:14). Jews had no dealings with the despised Samaritans (Jn.4:9). IF tongues occurred, (no mention) it silenced any Jewish-unbelief Samaritans truly received the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10 First Gentiles became Christians. They were also despised by Jews. So it would have silenced Jewish-unbelief that Gentiles truly received the Holy Spirit. "For they heard them speak in tongues and magnify God" (10:46). They understood what was spoken.

Acts 19 John's Disciples, Jews and representatives of Old Testament saints. There was Jewish opposition there Acts 19:9-12. Many signs were done. Tongues should have silenced any unbelief that Jesus sent the Holy Spirit, who did not come by Jewish Law (Gal.3:2). It also confirmed Paul as an Apostle. So again, tongues served as a sign.

Scripture doesn't -

But Christians receive the Spirit at the new birth, (Jn.1:13 3:3, 5-6) placed into Christ's body ("baptized" 1 Cor.12:13). Today neither Jew nor Gentile experience tongues at conversion.

So Tongues was NOT for believing Gentiles but the unbelieving Jewish nation. No signs are given for the Jew today. Seeking signs indicate unbelief. There are other reasons Tongues ceased.

The Church at Corinth.

At the sea-port at Corinth they faced opposition from Jews, so Tongues may have served as a sign. BUT it didn't fit into a church gathering (1 Cor.14:4-5, 28). "Believers" don't need signs (1 Cor.14:21 2 Cor.5:7). Tongues wasn't significant to Greek Christians (1 Cor.1:22) and likely few languages were known. So it solved no problem but created them. Paul said it was useless without interpretation; you can interpret a real language (1 Cor.14:6-12). What people speak today has no intelligent communication.

So we come back to the crisis of authority. Some will claim tongues is 'an angelic language they speak in heaven'. Some disagree, 'no it's a private language between you and God'. Others say 'no its a real but unknown earthly tongue'. This won't do. In NT times the bible describes it as real languages. Speaking gibberish today won't make anyone closer to God and has no value for the Church.

Why 'tongues' today –

(a) Why would God give His Word (the Bible) in a language we all understand? (b) Then select someone to speak to us in a language no one understands? (c) Then select one who thinks he understands and speak to us in the language we understand? But wait there's more. It must agree with God's Word – or God hasn't spoken to us in any language we understand at all. Now if it must agree with God's Word, then God's Word is what we need, not tongues.

So New Testament Tongues wasn't incomprehensible, it had information.

Gifts of Apostleship, Prophecy, Dreams & Visions, gifts of knowledge were given for information and a special reason. The early church had a disadvantage without the New Testament. So God gave special revelation gifts and confirmed the message with signs. Paul says these revelation gifts only mirrored/truth, & weren't permanent.

1 Cor 13:8 "prophecies will cease; tongues will cease; knowledge, will pass away. We know in part and prophesy in part but when that which is perfect is come, (God was sending it) the imperfect shall be done away."

Three things cease – Prophecy Tongues, Gifts of Knowledge the means by which truth was proclaimed in the early church without the New Testament. (1 Corinthians is a book written in the transition period of Acts, no one had a New Testament 'bible'). These gifts were "in part" (partial illumination) an imperfect situation compared to "that which is perfect". This relates to scripture, or we are still in the "dark", an imperfect situation. Our mode for receiving truth in this time would be via prophets, tongues, and gifts of knowledge. And that is simply rubbish for we receive truth via scripture not by those.

Paul does NOT refer to a sudden change. 13:11 "When I was a child, I spoke as a child; when I became a man, put away childish things." That's a slow transition, not a sudden Rapture. It's not "when we go" but “when it is come".

Note, the words "mirrored, darkly, childhood-manhood, know in part, know fully, face to face," are consistent with illumination. When the whole is come, the part is "done away". Isn't it amazing!!  It just so happens that Scripture is vital for illumination. It has the answers to all the big questions about God, life, death, right and wrong, where we came from, who we are, etc. The bible is God's revelation to all this and for knowing God, a face to face revelation.

1 Cor.12-14 is the last mention in the chronological order of the gift of tongues  eg –

(1) "And among the Jews of Ephesus (19:11) and the Christians of Corinth (1 Corinthians 12:10) there were miracles, as doubtless elsewhere also. But there were no miracles seen by Felix or Festus or Agrippa; and, as already noticed, when Paul stood before Nero the era of miracles had closed. The miracles of Acts 28:8, 9 are chronologically the last on record, and the later Epistles are wholly silent respecting them". (Sir Robert Anderson  THE SILENCE OF GOD  p.87)

(2) "The gifts of healings, like the other sign gifts, were temporary, given to the church for authenticating the apostolic message as the Word of God. The Great Commission does not include a call to heal bodies but only the call to heal souls through the preaching of the gospel." (MacArthur, J. 1st Corinthians. NT Commentary)

(3) Mk.16: "These signs have followed the preaching of the gospel. But they are not signs to continue the preaching of the gospel. They disappeared even in the early church..... Even before the end of the first century, the sign gifts were no longer the credentials of the apostles. The test was correct doctrine (see 2 John 10). It is the Word of God that is the great sign in this hour." (McGee, J. V. Thru the Bible commentary. (Vol.4 p.236)

(4) "There is no evidence of the continuance of this gift (tongues) after apostolic times nor indeed in the later times of the apostles themselves; this provides confirmation of the fulfillment in this way of 1 Cor. 13:8, that this gift would cease in the churches, just as would “prophecies” and “knowledge” in the sense of knowledge received by immediate supernatural power (cf. 14:6). The completion of the Holy Scriptures has provided the churches with all that is necessary for individual and collective guidance, instruction, and edification." (Vine, W. E., Expository Dictionary (Vol.2 p.636)

(5) "But that gift of healing, like the rest of the miracles, which the Lord willed to be brought forth for a time, has vanished away in order to make the new preaching of the gospel marvelous forever." (Calvin J. Institutes of the Christian Religion  Vol. 4 p.463)

(6) "Tongues, they shall cease'. The significance of the Greek word (pauō) indicates that tongues would soon be “cut off” as their necessity in the process of New Testament revelation ceased. It is important to note that tongues are never mentioned again in the New Testament after this warning. Paul employs the neuter because he does not contemplate an individual. Thus, that which is perfect cannot refer to the coming of Christ Himself." (Hindon, Kroll ed. KJV Bible Commentary 1 Cor.13:8)

So historically that’s what happened. Part-gifts began to vanish even before the New Testament was complete. That’s why Tongues are not mentioned in Joel's prophecy – they were temporary.

That's why the writings of the early church fathers show miracle SIGN gifts had gone. Anyone can check that. The only tongue speakers or prophets in the first five hundred years of church history were regarded as heretics.

That's why the rest of Church history doesn't give the thousands of examples of miracle SIGN gifts we should expect to find, if they had continued. Yet with any miracle claim, scripture has authority over history and tell us what we should expect, regardless.

What Do We Find?

Mark 16 - "They went forth preaching, the Lord working with them, confirming the word with signs".

Hebrews 2:3 "the Lord confirmed to us by those that heard him; God giving them (the apostles) witness, with signs, wonders, miracles and gifts of the Spirit…"

That's what happened. God confirmed the Apostles with signs as they "went forth preaching". Today all kinds of people are claiming miracle gifts. Is God giving His stamp of approval on them? Yes or No? If you answer "no". But wait, that's the very reason WHY the signs were given in the first place. To confirm their message.

So if we believe they are given today, we should join a church with the most miracles 'Oh no, we can't do that'. Why not? Because "they might contradict the bible in practice and doctrine". So the bible is the test of correct doctrine – not the signs gifts? Yes! So God will not, and cannot give such miracle gifts today.

If He did, that would {a} detract from the testimony of scripture, already confirmed by miracles. And {b} belittle the miracles God gave to authenticate scripture.

Today if one drank poison and lived – it might indeed be a miracle, but wouldn’t prove the bible. God doesn't expect us to believe miracle claims today but does expect us to believe His Word which has greater authority than miracles. Note the real gift of healing in bible days -

Peter's shadow was enough for healing (Acts 5:15-16) Paul's handkerchief or apron was enough (Acts 19:11-12) Peter could say "In the name of Jesus Christ rise up and walk. And immediately he was healed…" Ac.3:6

What Does Paul Mean? - "Prophecy is for believers"

Firstly, the difference between - illumination (given today) and revelation (not given today).

(1) A Bible prophet received direct revelation of truth apart from scripture & they expounded scripture & reveal the future. As God revealed truth to them, they passed it on (1 Cor.15:3 Gal.1:11-12). It was like a miracle of knowledge. We preach what we know but they had information no one else had.

(2) After scripture was complete AND Apostles and prophets died, their office ceased. Scripture took their authority.

(3) In these days, scripture only refers to false prophets. Real prophets would conflict with the bible's authority/sufficiency, & suggest its "imperfect" and we see "darkly".

(4) Modern day prophets are notorious for getting it wrong. They say we must "test them according to the bible" but if so, it proves if we have the Bible, we don't need them. God doesn't need them to speak, but when He speaks, it must be according to His Word, never part from it.

(5) When one today says, "Thus saith the Lord…." he's pretending God is speaking. Either it's deception, imagination or one fooling himself or lying, or it could even be Satan at work. And as the Apostle John warned, such a person may not necessarily even be a Christian. Cults & false doctrine start with those pretending to be "prophets" - Joseph Smith, John Thomas, Charles Russell, Herbert Armstrong, Mohammad, Rev Moon, Jim Jones, etc.

Conclusion

The answer to whether the sign gifts are given today is found in the scriptures, if so then once again we don't need to seek the answer from the claims of men.

Another evidence for their absence is the huge mess in churches that claim them today - the deception, trickery, & confusion. There are no advantages or benefits. While this is only an observation, its reasonable evidence why God wouldn't give them today (we couldn't handle them). To blame their absence on unbelief goes against God's sovereignty – it's God who gives gifts, not men who get or take.

You disagree? Write and tell me why. mpp@xtra.co.nz 

Footnotes

[1] Azusa Street. The Roots of Modern Day Pentecost. F Bartleman. Logos Inter. 1980. p.34, 36, 45 56, 87, 88, 104.

[3] The Life of Edward Irving. A Dallimore. Banner of Truth Trust 1983. pg.160, 165.

[4] The Welsh Revival.  T Phillips  Banner of Truth Trust 1989. p.1-3. 23, 42, 44

[5]  Ibid.,  A Dallimore. p.115. 131.

[6]  Ibid., A Dallimore. p.131, 133