In 2007 Dr. David Jeremiah offered a publication entitled "Unlock Prophecy." It features one of the most recognized Bible Prophecy teachers, Dr. Tim LaHaye. In the offer Dr. Jeremiah made the statement:
The 70 Weeks of Daniel, as recorded in Daniel 9:24-27, is literally the key to the prophetic word. It is the skeletal outline into which all prophetic events fit. By using this chart throughout your study of Daniel, you will be able to look back at history and trace the literal, accurate, detailed fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy and look into the future to the 70th week which is yet to be fulfilled.
I argue that this section of Scripture is truly the key to the pretribulational rapture view, but it is also misinterpreted. It is a key, but a key that will not unlock the door.
Know therefore andunderstand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make itdesolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.(Daniel 9.25-27 KJV)
In this verse I see the best argument for a seven year tribulation period being cut in half by the breaking of a peace treaty by the Anti-Christ. However, I would like to look more closely at this passage to show why I disagree with such an argument. Beginning in verse 25: "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. " Does this talk of the last days, or solely the return to Jerusalem and coming of Jesus as the Messiah via a birth in Bethlehem and eventual crucifixion and resurrection? I know some will say both, but I believe the coming verses may discount this if we see the Jews of today as lost, not a special saved race without Christ (as some evangelicals seem to imply and some come right out and say). The King James Bible Commentary says the following:
Unto the Messiah the Prince defines the termination point, or terminus ad quem, of the first sixty-nine weeks of years, meaning 483 years, as expressed by the phrase shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks. The significance of the marking off of the initial seven weeks, or forty-nine years, is uncertain, though it may refer to the time Ezra and Nehemiah labored to firmly set up the new Jewish state in Jerusalem. Those days could certainly be described as troublous times.
This commentary places the Daniel 9.25 passage squarely in the OT- seven weeks probably from the rebuilding of Jerusalem under Ezra/Nehemiah, and three and a half years of ministry of Christ at the end of the seven "weeks." While I understand many prophecies end up with a primary and secondary fulfilling, this one seems too specific to me. Ezra and Nehemiah were both alive and adults around this time and historically the time of their work on Jerusalem is equivalent to the prophecy in Daniel chapter 9.25. The King James commentary supports this possibility:
The terminus of the first sixty-nine weeks was unto the Messiah the Prince (vs. 25), indicating some point in His life, not His birth, because of the chronology involved. This is usually seen as a reference to His baptism, earthly ministry, or, sometimes, Triumphal Entry.
I believe the earthly ministry is the best answer, but I believe any would work. In Daniel 9.26 it says, "And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined." Here, I will want to focus on "the people" of the prince, as underlined above, because I believe the context emphasizes the people, not the prince. The Messiah, obviously Jesus, was cut off by His crucifixion and rose again to bring salvation to those who would believe.
After the Messiah is cut off, the people of the evil one, here the Romans fit the description, as being the ones who destroyed Jerusalem (historically known to be in 70 A.D.). The end was rushed in. Now the people are the focus here, not the Anti-Christ. They destroyed the city and that happened in 70 A.D.
Daniel 9.27 continues: "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week heshall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make itdesolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."
Who is "he?" I believe that since v.26 was in reference to the "people" of the prince who is to come, "he" would not refer to the Anti-Christ, but rather to the Messiah specified above- Jesus. The Messiah and the people are the only ones referred to above in previous related verses. And this does fit. Jesus was crucified three and a half years into his ministry and His perfect sacrifice made sacrifices unnecessary. He is the perfect Lamb of God without spot or blemish, our Passover. Once His blood was shed, forgiveness was instituted.
Now here the King James commentary disagrees with me for sure:
And he. He refers back to the prince that shall come of verse 26. It predicts the coming of the Roman Antichrist during the Tribulation Period after the Rapture of the church. He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week. The Antichrist will pledge protection of Israel for a seven-year period, but in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease. After three and one half years, the Antichrist will break his covenant with Israel and defile their new Temple. The New Testament confirms this in II Thessalonians 2:4 where Paul declares that the Antichrist, the man of sin, will sit "in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." Up until that point the Antichrist will have seemed to be Israel's protector.
As I said, I believe "and he" refers to the Messiah because the "prince that shall come" is not referred to, only the "people of" that prince.
Therefore, I do not believe a literal seven year tribulation period is prophesied in the book of Daniel, or for that matter, in the Bible. I believe that tribulation continues to grow during the end times. Furthermore, I believe Christ will come again before God pours out His wrath upon the earth.
The following is the 11 page paper I wrote for my Introduction to Theology class. I did not think it would pass the "muster," but my professor thought it was a good paper. That is encouraging. It is long, but that is because it was an 11 page paper. I have decided to keep it intact instead of separating it into sections.
Since early in the first century salvation has been the promise and goal of Christianity. Jesus came preaching a Gospel built on the Hebrew Scriptures and following the ministry of John the Baptist with a short period of overlapping ministries. Over the centuries there have been many ideas about the way to salvation. Many of these ideas do not square with the Biblical Gospels.
There are many groups that have faulty conclusions about salvation- faults that will lead to damnation for the deceived and the deceivers alike. However, there are also groups with Biblically orthodox views despite a great difference on many issues. Groups such as Calvinists and Arminians form the Evangelical and Fundamentalist movements. However, the core beliefs remain the same in each group. Arguments about predestination and limited atonement should not compromise the fact that each Christian is called to proclaim the Gospel of Christ to bring some to faith in Christ. Groups and denominations such as Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, Roman Catholics, Anglicans and Lutherans (among others) have at least a number of those who believe in Christ as the only way to salvation.
It is the duty of these believers, across denominational lines and theological groups, to reach unbelievers with the Gospel of Christ. The believers in these groups actually comprise the one True Church. It is the mission of these brothers and sisters in the family of God to put their disagreements aside and share the message that is foundational to the Christian faith, namely that it is, “by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.1” Salvation through Christ is a message believers must declare, it should be a common practice in their lives.
With this being said, however, it is clear that many believers either do not share their faith, or do so with little effect. The question is not who should be a witness for Christ, but how should we be a witness for Christ. What makes a person more effective in leading people into the Christian faith- into a real communion with God?
When building a house you begin by laying a foundation. The foundation to evangelism is recognizing that those without Christ are lost. They are not “okay.” If they die they will face their Maker for judgment- a judgment for which they will not be prepared. When the realization is that the penalty for this lack of preparation is eternity in torment, this no longer resembles a game. We can no longer argue between predestination and limited atonement. Whether we sing hymns or praise choruses, whether we use the “Authorized” King James Version or the New International Version of the Bible, whether the church's carpet is blue or gray, our preferences are irrelevant. Souls will be sacrificed without a fight if we fail to share the Gospel.
The Bible is clear that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God2” and that such sin has a disastrous price tag: “the wages of sin is death.3” In John, Jesus says, “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.4” These verses serve as a sample of how the Bible describes those who have not come to Christ in faith and repentance. They are sinners, condemned already and will receive the just reward for their rejection of the Gospel and the sin they have committed: eternal separation from God.
The unbelieving person, in rejecting the Gospel of God, lives out what in Calvinism is called Total Depravity. This does not mean that people are totally evil and unable to do anything “good,” rather it means that sin has reached every part of the being of man. It is this depravity that will not allow a person to turn to God in light of His obvious goodness and mercy. When the evidence would rightly lead to conversion, the unbeliever, in his depravity, rejects God. Calvin explained such an illogical ability to reject God this way:
You cannot behold Him clearly unless you acknowledge Him to be the fountainhead and source of every good. From this too would arise the desire to cleave to Him and trust in Him, but for the fact that man's depravity seduces his mind from rightly seeking Him.5
The Bible further describes people as unable to understand or seek God on their own6. It is to this mind-set that Christians bring a message of hope and salvation. The odds of conversion seem long, but the Gospel that comes with it is “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes.7”
With this foundation (of understanding the “lostness” and depravity of the unbeliever) the Christian can understand that this mission is serious and he must fully rely on God for the strength and power to succeed in leading souls from sin into salvation.
To rely on God, a Christian must allow the Holy Spirit to work in their lives and transform them into the likeness of Christ. In John 8.12, Jesus calls Himself the light of the world saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.8” However, Jesus also calls His followers the light of the world: “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.9” To be the light, is to be a reflection of the true light: Jesus. We are to live reflecting the Son of God much as the moon reflects the light of the sun onto the dark part of the Earth. The only way for unbelievers to see the light of Christ is to see Him “reflecting” through those He has saved.
Ideally, a Christian will live up to the holiness that he has been called to when God said in I Peter 1.16, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.10” Of course, this is a goal that Christians strive for while locked into a fleshly existence that rebels against obedience toward God. Jesus is what Carl F.H. Henry described in these terms: “The magnificent feature of Jesus Christ is that He not only proclaimed a superlative ethic, but He lived it out to the full.11” He also said that “He was more than the great Teacher of ethics. He was its great Liver,12” meaning that Jesus lived out the Gospel message. He practiced what He preached. As Christians, for our message to be effective, we must practice what we preach. If an unbeliever sees a Christian standing for righteousness one moment and treating someone poorly the next, the Gospel message has been compromised. The follower of Christ has done the work of the devil. He, in not reflecting Jesus in living the message, has become a hypocrite and a liar in the eyes of those around him that do not believe. However, in our imperfections, we can point to the perfection of the One whom we follow. The leaders of world religions have all espoused teachings that were beyond what they were able to attain. Jesus did not. He was perfectly in tune with His message.
Related to our life reflecting the goodness of Christ, we must be focused and separated. We are called to be “good soldiers of Christ Jesus,13” not being tied up by the cares and entanglements of the world. If the goal of our mission is to bring the unbelieving world the message of the Gospel, we are required to take the work seriously. We must focus on the task at hand. An army that does not take engagement with the enemy seriously will face certain defeat.
This focus should encourage a Christian to grow in the faith and share the Gospel with those who do not believe.
Also, the Christian should be separated from those things that would ensnare him. The message should be consistent with the lifestyle. Paul wrote in I Corinthians 6.9-11 that many things- lifestyles- exist that are incompatible with being a Christian. These are those things that will keep a person from entering Heaven. In II Corinthians 6.14-7.1 Paul calls Christians to separate themselves, contrasting the things of God against those that oppose Him, for example: “what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?14” The separation is called for in verses 17 and 18: “Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you, and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me, says the Lord Almighty.15” For unbelievers to have a reason to believe the life-changing message there must be a consistency between a believer's life and the message. There must be a separation from things that oppose God or Biblical ideas. Smoking marijuana and preaching the Gospel message, for example, creates confusion and does not demonstrate any reason for an unbeliever to take the message seriously.
In addition, the message stands on its own. It is a message of substance. It does not need a side show. When the Gospel is preached and it is the focus, it is powerful. When the focus becomes our own prosperity, our healing (physically), or our own talents, the Gospel is neutered.
It is true that when preachers begin to preach about prosperity and other non-Biblical ideas that detract from the power of the Gospel unto salvation, when people look to what God can do for them instead of what God has called them to do for Him, there is a lack of true conversions. If someone accepts the Gospel and calls himself a Christian on the basis of what God will give him or do for him, it is a shallow faith.
There are times when the truth of the Gospel is ignored to convert a church into more of a social club. Politicians are welcomed and coddled, the doctrines are set so as not to offend those with money and the messages tend to avoid controversy.
These are just a couple of examples of ways the Gospel can be compromised and rendered ineffective.
Another key to effectively winning lost souls to the Kingdom of God is through a serious prayer effort. I Thessalonians 5.17 says to “pray without ceasing.16” In his book, Praying in the Harvest: How to Pray for the Lost, Don Walton tells the story of when Spurgeon met with a young lady who had a serious burden to pray for her mother. She was fervently praying for her mother and became concerned that her mother might not find salvation. After hearing the young woman's concern, Spurgeon inquired about her father's salvation. She related to him that her father was not saved either, but she did not have a burden for him as she did for her mother. According to Don Walton, “Spurgeon assured the young woman that she should be far more concerned about the improbability of her father's salvation than the improbability of her mother's.17” The point being that Spurgeon felt that if God puts on us a great burden to pray for someone's salvation it may well be that He intends for that person to surrender to Him in repentance and unto salvation. As we are burdened we should take it seriously. Indeed, prayer must be fervent, but it also must be focused. When God places a person on our mind as we pray, we should direct our prayers toward that person. Praying for “everyone and every thing” is not as effective. Prayer must be seen as an investment. It is not just a quick thing to do and be done with. To effectively reach unbelievers Christians must devote much time to prayer. Don Walton says, “The question is: How long and hard are you willing to battle for the lost souls of loved ones and friends?18” Again, how hard are Christians willing to battle for those that will just cross their path? Calvin encouraged patience in prayer in these words: “If, with minds composed to this obedience, we allow ourselves to be ruled by the laws of divine providence, we shall easily learn to persevere in prayer and, with desires suspended, patiently to wait for the Lord.19” Calvin's thoughts on prayer correlate with this focus in that it takes perseverance and patience in praying for the lost effectively.
Finally, to reach the lost with the life-changing message of the Gospel of Christ, we must “go.” Jesus commanded His disciples to “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations...20” equipping them with the Gospel that is the power that results in salvation. Christians who wish to effectively reach the lost must leave the safety and security of the church building to bring the message to the lost. The church is a place to be built up, equipped and encouraged. It should be a place to be prepared to do the work of evangelism.
Effectively reaching the lost requires an underlying understanding that those who do not believe are in sin and in need of a Savior. They are bound for an eternity of torment. Christ is the answer to rescue them from perishing. As Christians understand the need, we must live lives that reflect Christ. We need to “walk the walk” as we “talk the talk.” Hypocrisy hinders evangelistic efforts. In living as a reflection of Christ, we should be different: separated and focused. The Apostle Paul said, “Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving.21” Our words should reflect purity not perversion. Our lives should show a seriousness about our faith in Jesus Christ.
With all this, we must commit to prayer for the lost- especially those whom God places in our thoughts as we are praying. Investing in prayer is a definite key to effectively reaching the lost with the Gospel of Christ.
Finally, we, as Christians, must go. Go and proclaim the Gospel of salvation to those who have not yet received it. This means go out of our church, out of our comfort zones, out of our cities and even out of our countries.
A whole-life approach is the most effective way to reach the lost.
ACH Paper: Greatest Christian Influence (20th Century)
12.7.08
The following is a paper I just completed for my American Church History class. I want to emphasize that it is not intended to be an apologetic for Pentecostalism, nor is it meant to criticize the movement either. There are elements of Pentecostal worship I believe are useful and spiritually valuable. There are other elements that I believe are either wrong or easily manipulated into something that is wrong. I do not believe that Pentecostals are lost for being Pentecostal. I believe many have some faulty understandings of Scripture, but there are many I can fellowship within many environments. This paper is intended to be as objective as possible.
“William Seymour and Pentecostalism”
The story of the modern Pentecostal Movement has its roots with a black preacher named William Seymour. He came from poverty, but played an important part in creating a movement that brought life back into Christianity. While the element of tongues may be questioned, the breaking of color barriers and the renewal of worship that sprung from the movement starting on Azusa Street in Los Angeles, California energized millions of Christians around the world. It may have led to some major, sickening abuses, but it also led to a new missionary zeal and a growing new segment of Christianity.
Even as a Reformed Southern Baptist, I can embrace the revitalization that occurred while I reject the sensationalism and the abandonment of Scripture found in some branches of Pentecostalism. Much like the First Great Awakening there are questionable practices, however, as Jonathan Edwards surmised, the benefit was important and valid despite the deviations. In some ways the Azusa Street movement was a successor to the so-called Second Great Awakening, and William Seymour was at the forefront. In fact, the modern Pentecostal Movement might well be considered the Third Great Awakening.
While it is true that throughout history there were movements including the use of tongues or prayer languages, the modern movement is the most widespread. An example of Pentecostal-type events is found in the 19th century story of a Pastor within the Church of Scotland, Edward Erving, who led his congregation in prayer and the outcome was people speaking in tongues and prophesying.1
Additionally, the reach for Christian perfectionism springing from John Wesley's teaching evolved into a teaching of a “second blessing” and finally into the teaching of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. From there followers of Charles Finney moved toward tongues and a change in the understanding of the “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” within the Holiness movement at that time. This, no doubt, came to influence the teachings of Parham and as a direct result, William Seymour.
William Seymour was born in Centerville, Louisiana in 1870. His parents were both former slaves, and his father fought in the War Between the States for the Union Army after the Emancipation Proclamation ordered the freedom of slaves held in the Southern States. William was baptized in a Catholic Church when he was about four months old. He was later converted through a Methodist church in Indiana and eventually joined the “Church of God Holiness Reformation Movement.2” It was with this group that William Seymour received his call to preach.
Seymour moved from Indiana to Ohio and became ill with small pox. It left him blind and scarred. However, after this event William surrendered to the call to ministry.
William Seymour moved to Houston and became a student of Charles Parham at Parham's Bible School. Unfortunately, in Parham's school, William Seymour was required to sit in the hallway to learn during the classes because of his race. Additionally, when blacks were in attendance at Parham's revival meetings, they would often have to sit in the back or outside the meeting area. Parham kept things well segregated as was typical, and often required by law during that time. Seymour was greatly influenced in his theology and methodology by Parham.
He received a call to pastor a small congregation in Los Angeles, California while studying in Houston. Parham assisted Seymour in moving to Los Angeles to pastor the church.
Due to the content of his message, specifically the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with evidence of speaking in tongues, William Seymour soon found himself out of favor with leaders of the church and the association with which they were affiliated. Some members of the church continued to support him and opened their home to his ministry. Soon after, people began to experience the phenomenon of speaking in unknown tongues and the following grew. They eventually moved to 312 Azusa Street, a building that was an African Methodist Episcopal Church and a stable in the past. The meetings grew and the media focused attention on the events. In these meetings people worshiped together across racial and gender boundaries. Seymour also used lay people in the ministry frequently, a break from the common traditions of the day.
When Charles Parham arrived to oversee, and in his intention, to consolidate the ministry, he was displeased with the lack of segregation and the “unbridled religious enthusiasm.3 ” Parham attempted to lead a rival congregation, but Seymour continued on in the Pentecostal Holiness ministry.
In later years, Pentecostalism would become more segregated once again, even Seymour excluded whites from leadership positions after a while. However, the barriers would be easier to cross because of his earlier work.
Several Pentecostal groups have ties to Azusa Street's revival and the work of William Seymour. Growing denominations over the twentieth century included the Assemblies of God and the Church of God in Christ. The Pentecostal movement would grow to include many smaller denominations or organizations, some of which are within orthodoxy like the Assemblies of God and others that denied cardinal doctrines such as the United Pentecostal Church.
The Pentecostal movement that gained steam at Azusa Street under the watch of William Seymour became known for excitement in preaching and in musical worship. Throughout the 20th century Pentecostal worship songs grew in popularity while providing energy and enthusiasm during the worship service. Toward the end of the 20th century the Pentecostal worship style, with its roots in the Azusa Street ministry, was even further popularized by Integrity, Hosanna and Vineyard music productions. They produced albums of worship sings in various styles that may have been seen as non-traditional. Many of the songs released have become staples across denominational lines.
Finally a new zeal for missions can be seen in the efforts of Azusa/Seymour influenced work of groups such as the Assemblies of God. They have established many churches in nations across the world with evidence being seen in that Pentecostalism has become very popular in Hispanic nations.
William Seymour is not as famous as many who followed him in the 20th and 21st centuries, but his work on Azusa Street in Los Angeles, California had a lasting impact on the groups that would follow. From Azusa there was a beginning of the softening of lines of a racial barrier in worship (especially in the Pentecostal world), a fresh breeze of worship music and new zeal for missionary work. William Seymour may be the leading influence in the fastest growing segment in Christianity during the 20th century.
This article contains one of the more balanced views of tongues and spiritual gifts. Pastor Don Walton is the founder of Time For Truth Ministries and a spiritual father to me. Please read on...
I can cause charismatics considerable distress by simply reading a question from 1 Corinthians 12:30, “Do all speak with tongues?” The obvious answer to this question is “no.” Likewise, I can prove to be quite bothersome to Baptists by simply reading a portion of 1 Corinthians 14:39, “…forbid not to speak with tongues.” Interestingly, all I’ve done in either case to incite such angst is read the Bible. Why, one wonders, are simple verses of Scripture so stressful to today’s saints.
I’m afraid many of us approach the Bible with entrenched, preconceived ideas. Therefore, when a verse of Scripture contradicts what we’ve already made up our minds to believe, our stomachs knot up. Rather than attempting to relieve our spiritual tummy aches by changing our beliefs to fit into what the Bible says, we try to change what the Bible says to fit into our beliefs. In our efforts to turn the meaning of Scripture more to our liking we often employ the well-worn maxims: “A better translation would be…,” “What the Greek actually means is…,” or the ever popular, “According to Dr. So and So, what this verse is really saying…”
Our International Mission Board’s recent decision to bar from board appointment missionaries who profess, as the board’s own president does, to having a “private prayer language,” serves as a good example of the unmanageable entanglements and untenable positions we paint ourselves into when we lay aside God’s Word for our traditions (Mark 7:1-13). Although I’m a proud Southern Baptist who believes ours is the greatest missionary enterprise in the world, I can’t help but be embarrassed by an IMB that bars missionaries with a “private prayer language” from the mission field while being presided over by a man with a “private prayer language.” Such duplicity is both inexcusable and inexplicable, not to mention detrimental to our mission work. It forbids God-called men and women from serving as Southern Baptist missionaries, as well as fosters to a lost and dying world an image of our convention as incomprehensibly conflicted.
Like IMB president, Dr. Jerry Rankin, I am no cessationist. I do not adhere to B. B. Warfield’s contention that the sign or miracle gifts passed away with the Apostolic Age. In all honesty, I’ve always suspected that the reason for the popularity of Warfield’s contention within our convention is due to the fact that it provides us with an excuse for the absence of the miraculous from our midst. If Warfield was right, then we are justified in replacing God’s power with church programs and spiritual gifts with human ingenuity; after all, there’s nothing else we can do in this present dispensation.
Although many Southern Baptists believe that anyone refusing to walk in lockstep with Benjamin Warfield is walking in lockstep with Benny Hinn; the truth is: one can refuse to warm his feet at the cessationist fire and still remain outside the charismatic camp. I wish all Southern Baptists would learn not to let someone’s abuse of the truth cause them to refuse the truth. Normally, when a truth is abused everyone reacts by moving across town to the opposite extreme. For instance, when charismatics insist that speaking in tongues is the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, cessationists react by moving across town and insisting that there’s no such thing as tongues. In the end, both extremes are wrong and the devil has pulled the rug out from under everybody.
Truth is always found in the middle of the two extremes. From the middle, let’s pick apart the charismatic and cessationist’s extremes. First, the charismatic proof texts for their belief that glossolalia is proof of the baptism of the Holy Ghost are all found in the Book of Acts. The Book of Acts tells us about the birth and infancy of the church. It is a book of transitions: from shadows (types of Christ) to substance (Christ Himself), from an Old Covenant to a New Covenant, from the law to grace, from a Levitical priesthood to a spiritual (royal) priesthood, and from the old Israel (the physical seed of Abraham, the church in the wilderness, and the wife of Jehovah) to the new Israel (the spiritual seed of Abraham, the church of God, and the bride of Christ).
Each incident cited by charismatics in Acts as proof that believers receive the Holy Spirit subsequent to salvation is actually a unique and unparalleled historical event. For instance, the second chapter of Acts tells us about the Day of Pentecost. On this once and for all historical occasion, the foretold promise of the Father is given to the church. The church is born! The people of God transition from an Old Testament people to a New Testament people. Obviously, the 120 believers gathered in the upper room on this most eventful day could not have possibly received the promise of the Father prior to Pentecost, since the promise had not yet been given. Furthermore, the tongues spoken on this occasion are not unknown tongues, as the charismatics allege, but other known languages, as is proven by the fact that everyone heard “the wonderful works of God” in their own language (Acts 2:1-11). Far from being the norm for every believer, this passage of Scripture tells us about a unique event in the history of the world that is never to be repeated.
In Acts 8, the Gospel goes for the first time to someone other than Jews—the half-breed Samaritans. These “dogs,” as they were called by the Jews, were so hated and despised that no Jewish believer could have possibly imagined God’s inclusion of them in the church of Christ. Thus, it was imperative that apostles from Jerusalem be present when the Spirit first fell in Samaria; otherwise, the Jews would have never accepted the Samaritans as their brothers and sisters in Christ. Interestingly, and much to the charismatics’ dismay, glossolalia is not mentioned at all in this entire passage.
In Acts 10, Peter takes the Gospel to Cornelius’ house. For the first time the Gospel goes to Gentiles. These Gentiles receive the Gospel and the Holy Spirit simultaneously; there is no lapse of time between the two. As the gift of the Holy Spirit is poured out on these believing Gentiles, Peter and his Jewish companions hear them “speak with tongues, and magnify God” (Acts 10:44-48). This outward sign of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and the Gentiles’ salvation was proof positive that God is “no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34). While Peter and his fellow-Jews may have attributed the salvation of Samaritans to the fact that they had some Jewish blood, the only explanation for the salvation of Gentiles was: “Whosoever will, may come!”
In Acts 19, Paul runs across some disciples of John the Baptist in Ephesus. Upon learning of their total unfamiliarity with the Holy Spirit and their baptism by John the Baptist, the apostle ascertains that these Old Testament saints needed to transition into the New Testament. Paul leads them to do so by leading them to Christ and into the waters of believer’s baptism. Afterward, the Holy Spirit came upon them and they “spoke with tongues, and prophesied” (Acts 19:1-7). I find it interesting that charismatics pull tongues from this passage as the lone proof of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Why is prophecy not equally acclaimed by them as proof positive of Spirit baptism? Why elevate the least of the gifts at the expense of the most important? It is, after all, “by the foolishness of preaching [prophecy],” that God is pleased “to save them that believe” (1 Corinthians 1:21).
The Bible plainly teaches that all believers have been baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13). John the Baptist preached that all men would be baptized by Christ, either with the fire of the Holy Spirit or the “unquenchable” fire of judgment (Matthew 3:10-12; Luke 3:16-17) And the Apostle Paul proclaims in no uncertain terms, “Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his” (Romans 8:9). When coupled with the charismatics’ attempt to turn unique, historical events in the Book of Acts into everyday, common occurrences in the lives of modern-day believers, these clear teachings of Scripture leave charismatics without a Scriptural leg to stand on in their argument for the baptism of the Holy Ghost as evidenced by speaking in tongues.
Now, let’s move across town and explore the problems with the cessationist’s reaction to charismatic error. First, many cessationists insist that there never was a gift of unknown tongues. According to them, the only gift of tongues spoken of in the New Testament was a miraculous ability to speak in other known languages previously unknown to the speaker. They cite the Day of Pentecost as a case in point. Although the tongues spoken on Pentecost were undoubtedly other known languages, there was also a spiritual gift of unknown tongues, as is plainly taught by the Apostle Paul in the fourteenth chapter of 1 Corinthians.
In 1 Corinthians 14:2, the Apostle Paul writes, “For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” Paul cannot possibly be speaking in this verse of the kind of tongues spoken on the Day of Pentecost, since they were spoken in prophesy (“unto men”) and not in prayer (“unto God”). Furthermore, the tongues spoken on Pentecost were not “mysteries” spoken “in the spirit” that no man could understand, but clearly understood by men who heard “the wonderful works of God” in their own languages.
What’s more, there was no need of interpreters on the Day of Pentecost. Each man heard the Gospel in his own language. Yet, the Apostle Paul speaks of the spiritual gift of “interpretation of tongues” (1 Corinthians 12:10, 30; 14:5, 13, 26-28). Obviously, this gift is not the natural ability of someone to understand their own language or other learned languages. For example, one would not say that a Brazilian had the spiritual gift of interpretation because of their ability to understand Portuguese, their native tongue. This leads us, much to the cessationist’s chagrin, to an inevitable conclusion. The only explanation for the spiritual gift of interpretation of tongues is the existence of a spiritual gift of unknown tongues, since it is the gift of unknown tongues alone that necessitates interpretation.
The good cessationist will argue at this point that whether or not there was a gift of unknown tongues is irrelevant, since tongues, along with all the other sign or miracle gifts, ceased long ago with the Apostolic Age. Although the cessationist’s argument that the miracle gifts were temporarily given to confirm the message of the Gospel until the canon of Scripture was completed is easily found in today’s Southern Baptist’s circles, it is impossible to find in God’s Word. Oh, I know about the transitive and intransitive Greek verbs in 1 Corinthians 13:8, as well as Paul’s teaching that tongues was a sign to unbelieving Jews of God’s impending judgment (see: 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 and Isaiah 28:11-12). Still, neither of these justifies the cessationists’ swipe at all things miraculous in today’s church or their assertion that the gift of tongues ceased with the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus the Roman in A.D. 70. Whereas it is easy to shoot holes in the charismatics’ proof texts, it is extremely difficult for cessationists to come up with any proof texts. They simply don’t have a single Scriptural peg to hang their hats on.
To be true to the Scripture, we must acknowledge that all the spiritual gifts still exist today. Moreover, we must come to realize the importance of discovering, developing and deploying our spiritual gifts in the body of Christ. The church will never be all that it can be for Christ in this world until each believer is ministering in and through the church according to his or her spiritual gifting. While spiritual gifts are given and operated in accordance with the Spirit’s will (1 Corinthians 12:7-11), not ours, each Spirit-given gift is vital to the church’s ministry and none should be forbidden as long as they are being operated under the Spirit’s anointing. This includes the gifts of unknown tongues and the interpretation of tongues.
Perhaps, the best way to explain the gift of unknown tongues is to call it the bypass ministry of the Holy Spirit. Have you ever been burdened to pray for someone or about something but didn’t know how or what to pray? If you have, you know how frustrating this can be. Those who possess the gift of unknown tongues often find the Holy Spirit bypassing them when they come to such a standstill in their intercessory prayers. When they don’t “know” how to “pray as [they] ought,” the Spirit kicks in and prays a perfect prayer of intercession “with groanings which cannot be uttered” (Romans 8:26). Although they do not know what the Spirit has prayed (1 Corinthians 14:14), they know He has prayed a perfect prayer of intercession through them.
While this gift is edifying to all who possess it (1 Corinthians 14:4), it is not edifying to others unless used in conjunction with the gift of interpretation (1 Corinthians 14:5, 13). Thus, the Bible teaches that the gift of unknown tongues is to be confined to one’s own private prayer life (1 Corinthians 14:28). It is never to be used in a public worship service unless someone with the spiritual gift of interpretation is present; and even then, only one at a time may speak and never more than three in a service (1 Corinthians 14:27-28). Of course, the church is to always discern and judge whether or not what it hears is of God (1 Corinthians 14:29-31). If it is not done in accordance with the Spirit’s will and under the Spirit’s anointing, then the prophets are to quickly bring all untoward spirits into subjection (1 Corinthians 14:32), for our God “is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” (1 Corinthians 14:33). (Written by Don Walton, 2006 Timefortruth.org)
This is what happens when wolves go out and are accepted as sheep. Todd Bentley is a con man and a liar. He is another con man in the line of Benny Hinn and Smith Wigglesworth. See below.
People are flocking to this charlatan in droves in total blindness.
Name: pregador27 Home: My Heart is in, Northern, Brazil About Me: I will cover anything I am interested in from my Christian view. I will not always be right, but I will always be well right of center.
I was born in NY, but moved to the South when I was about 6 yrs old. I went on a mission to Brasil in 1995 and met the woman who I would marry 5 years later. We now have two wonderful daughters. Meu coração é verde e amarelo. See my complete profile
