Strange Fire Stuff

The main argument of the Strange Fire Conference appears to have been that any Charismatic belief engenders a lack of discernment, enabling the worst sort of Charismatic excess.  That’s it.  Pretty simple statement, right?  Now I didn’t attend or listen to the messages, but I know that’s the argument.  I read one article by Phil Johnson, saw some tweets, and I think it’s pretty clear that that was the argument.

But it’s worse than that.  Charismaticism is a spiritual distraction from the gospel.  Try telling a poor man that his real problem is sin, his real danger is hell, and the real solution is the cross.  He’s caught up in trying to figure out the magic formula to get on the Holy Spirit Gravy Train to sudden wealth and comfort.  Work with him though you may, when he goes out into his neighborhood a dozen “churches” tell him they have that formula, and the gospel is snatched away.  Charismaticism plays the role of the birds in the Parable of the Sower.

~Tom Chantry


Phil Johnson agrees.

Elsewhere Johnson states:

"For that very reason, I don’t much like generalizations in a context like this. I therefore tried in my seminars to be very specific. For example, in a breakout session titled “Is There a Baby in the Charismatic Bathwater?” my main goal was to explain as precisely as possible why we don’t believe there is a safe zone in the whole universe of charismatic conviction. I also wanted to explain why we believe some of the finest and best-known Reformed non-cessationists are unwittingly providing cover for aberrant people and movements in some of the most problematic districts of the charismatic community. I quoted, named, and documented a fair number of specifics."

~Phil Johnson, Grace To You

I've said that myself re: men like Piper who give cover (aiding and abetting) to the Charismatic Movement. It's good Johnson said it. However, my question is: then why did Johnson and MacArthur give cover to men like Piper, whom they named, by saying he's a great friend, they love him,  learned a lot from him, he's a great teacher, etc. but that he needs to come out against the Charismatic movement?  (As if that's all that's wrong with Piper. Its not. That's the least of his problems.) Seems to me that's exactly the same thing Piper does with his hand-holding of the Charismatics. By doing so, in some ways, Johnson and MacArthur undid what the SFC had set out to do: draw a clear line between biblical Christianity and Charismaticism/Word of Faith/NAR. Many a person went right back to quoting and  hailing Piper the Charismatic. And yes, Piper is a Charismatic. He went out of his way to show himself in locked-step with Sam Storms (a Charismatic named at the Strange Fire Conference), and corrected MacArthur's portrayal of Piper as an "anomaly".  In other words, his loyalty was made clear.