As a former charismatic, it must be said that our collective energy should not be expended to muse about what Charismatics have to offer. Rather, we must cast down her arguments and witness to those held captive by her aberrant theology.
~Doron Gladden
A brother asked in response to the above post:
Doron, I've been having this discussion with a Pentecostal friend this morning in Asia. He has a master of Div. and he says, although he is Pentecostal he doesn't believe in the prosperity preachers and their teaching. My question is, even though they preach faithful healing, but agree in the major doctrines of salvation from Scriptures, should we continue to disprove their teachings or just embrace them as brothers? For example I love the preaching of Leonard Ravenhill and know from his preaching is a true godly man but I don't agree with all of his doctrines. Thanks brother.
Doron's excellent response:
Great question dear brother. Pentecostals, although vulnerable to the Charismatics, are not always Charismatic. Charismatics latch themselves onto Pentecostalism. What I would propose to brothers and sisters, as we interact with Pentecostals, is to come alongside them biblically so that their evangelistic zeal is biblical, refined and informed by sound doctrine. The standard of any preacher is that life, practice and sound doctrine are above reproach. I would come alongside Pentecostals. If they are willing to receive instruction, they are his. If not, they are faithful to the errors of their belief system and thus proving to be insulting the spirit of grace. The faithful Charismatic and in some cases the faithful Pentecostal believes in triumphalism (or a higher life 'christianity'). So to them, you and I are either lower tier believers in the sin of 'missing out' on God's will. Or we do not have the Holy Spirit. The implication of not having the Holy Spirit is that we are unregenerate. The teachers, or some should know and adhere to this; with the sheep we must be more delicate to explain what their system really espouses. Pentecostalism is only a 107 year old belief system (born of course out of other systems). It rightly desired to react against cold-orthodoxy, but left itself vulnerable to Charismatic teaching because of its core doctrines (extra-biblical revelation, apostolic succession, 2nd work of grace, aberrant views of sanctification etc..).
I would also add that we must, with great longsuffering and a fervent heart compelled by love for the biblical Christ, address the 'secondary issues'. The secondary issues in pentecostalism/charismatic teaching are not systematized as such in their belief. They are core and salvific. To not adhere to what we would label as secondary issues, implies by their perception, that we are in unbelief. This is where we cannot 'agree to disagree'. If tongues were a small issue, it would be a stand alone issue. But to say if we do not speak in tongues, we do not have evidence of the Holy Spirit is a salvation issue and fallacy which must be rebuked. To say one must give or he dishonors God is one thing. To proof text passages and say, if we do not give we are cursed is another (especially since Paul's great declaration that there is now therefore no condemnation for those in Christ). So if we see the teachings of Charismatic and Pentecostal beliefs as core, foundational and essential it would affect our approach to them. A faithful Pentecostal and faithful Charismatic would dogmatically affirm doctrines which conflict with biblical truth. If a brother who is in the pentecostal belief system begins to question their doctrines and make the statement that their beliefs are secondary, he is either a bit misinformed as to their core beliefs or ready for the whole counsel of God, thus ready to come out of their teaching.
No comments:
Post a Comment