The things I do for you, my reader.
After finishing part two of this series in response to Strange Fire, I sat down to continue to hunt for more biblical arguments to refute. For page after page, instead I read salacious details about a string of scandals affecting mostly TV preachers. Most of these people I have never even listened to, and am only vaguely aware of. They really don’t seem to be part of my corner of the charismatic movement. They don’t speak at conferences I go to. Their books are not sold in our bookstores. Most people in our churches don’t even watch them. Perhaps we really do need to talk in terms of “charismatic movementS.”
As you can imagine, though, I did find it rather depressing, and wondered what the point of it all was. After all there have definitely been scandals in non-charismatic leaders too over the years, thought perhaps less spectacular and less well known.
So no wonder I got a bit grouchy and tweeted the following (there were a few more where these came from too!)
I asked previous question as someone who doesn't watch Christian TV & hence probably has a better impression of charismatics than otherwise!
— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) October 24, 2013
Reading page after page of sordid moral failure & fraud. What does this prove except depravity? And how is this profitable? #StrangeFire
— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) October 24, 2013
I feel like I am wading through a cesspit. This is not how I like to spend my time. What was @johnmacarthur thinking? Eph 5:12 #StrangeFire
— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) October 24, 2013
@AnitaMathias1 @mmellmmar it was reading about the sins of charismatics that was grieving me. Ive set myself a task and will press thru!
— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) October 24, 2013
"The modern Charismatic Movement falsely calls itself evangelical because it undermines the authority & sufficiency of Scripture" NO NO NO!
— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) October 24, 2013
Has anybody else noticed the deafening silence of leading Christian figures about #StrangeFire controversy on either side?
— Adrian Warnock (@adrianwarnock) October 24, 2013
One of the tweets above quotes a section which clearly states that MacArthur doesnt believe charismatics can really be evangelicals. Makes me wonder if this is why he is notably absent from the list of council members for the Gospel Coalition. Could he not tolerate being part of such a body which includes some charismatics?
Anyway, the section that includes that quote needs to be addressed here in this series:
In spite of the severe error and potential damage being done by this supposed new “revelation,” some charismatic churches continue to regard modern prophecy as more important than the Bible . . . Most churches do not go to that extreme, of course. However, such examples represent the logical end of the charismatic insistence that God is giving new revelation to the church today. If the Spirit were still giving divine revelation, why wouldn’t we collect and add those words to our Bibles?
The reality is that the modern Charismatic Movement falsely calls itself evangelical because it undermines the authority and sufficiency of Scripture.
It is neither orthodox nor truly evangelical to elevate spiritual experiences, including imagined revelations from God, above the Bible. Speaking of his own eyewitness experience at the Transfiguration, the apostle Peter gave this revelation:
For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. (2 Peter 1:16–19 esv)
At the Transfiguration, Peter witnessed an unparalleled supernatural spectacle. He had a genuine divine, heavenly experience. Even so, the apostle knew that Scripture (“the prophetic word”) is “more sure” than even the most sublime experiences. Peter’s point is precisely the issue that many charismatics fail to understand. Human experience is subjective and fallible; only the Word of God is unfailing and inerrant, because its Author is perfect . . .
The sad fact is that biblical truth has never been the hallmark of the Charismatic Movement, where spiritual experience is continually elevated above sound doctrine.”
– John MacArthur, Strange Fire
At the beginning of this quote MacArthur tries to be nuanced when he says most churches dont go this far, but the nuance quickly disappears as it so often does! Who does he think he is to reject outright the entire charismatic movement as devoid of biblical truth, and a place where experiences is always seen as superior to doctrine? I really wonder if he has ever visited a charismatic church where the Bible is honoured. I have been a member of such a church almost all my life. I am confident that the churches I have been in are far from unique.
In fact there are two arguments for us to address:
Argument: It is inevitable that if you believe in revelatory experiences you will see them as greater than scripture
Counter-argument: Actually, this very passage demonstrates an answer to this argument. Peter had perhaps the most sublime spiritual experience ever in the history of the world and yet he still believes that Scripture is more certain, more reliable! There is almost no need to say anything more. But, I will add that Paul tells us to test prophecies, and this testing is surely to be done in comparison to the unchanging, inerrant Scriptures that we have been given by God.
As an example of how typical charismatic thought views prophecy I refer you to the following few posts of mine. I hope you will agree that there is no evidence in this series that we are elevating such experiences above the Bible. This viewpoint is really very typical for charismatics and pentecostals:
Argument: Any prophecy should be included in the Bible if it is genuine
Counter-argument: This is a fallacious argument that bizarrely keeps coming up. Once you accept that prophecy today is not authoritative and that doctrinal revelatory activity has ceased why would you even consider adding a prophecy to Scripture? All of the links, I mentioned above would also address this. The fact is that even in biblical times not every prophecy was included in Scripture. The following is a list of just some of the poeple we know prophesied and who’s prophetic words were not collected and put into our Bibles:
- Saul’s prophecies
- Jonahs prophecies which gave him the reputation of a prophet before the Ninevah episode.
- The schools of the prophets in Elijah and Elisha’s day
- “All Flesh” in Acts 2
- Ananias in Acts 9:17-18;
- Philip’s daughters in Acts 21:8-9;
- The Corinthians in 1 Cor 12-14;
- The Thessalonians in 1 Thess 5:20-1;
- The prophecies which launched Timothy’s ministry: 1 Tim 4:14.
And that is not even a complete list…anybody who can think of others are welcome to add them in the notes below. But I think it is clear that prophecy in the Bible is not always connected to Scripture writing, and in fact in many cases above the people prophesying were not even the Apostles.
To be continued….
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In