Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club discussion

This ought to get people chatting. A good rowdy discussion on charismatics ability to use logic to defend their faith (or understand it, for that matter).

I asked my VERY charismatic Mother to name one Apologetic book written by a Charismatic... I'm still waiting for an answer.

My response is:
Why use logic and historical, geographic, philosophical etc. reasoning when you can just raise the dead or do a miracle or two. At least heal them of that stubborn extra long leg.

I just heard a NEW ONE:
Many faith healers are healing the deaf... well, they are healing only hard of hearing folks who are deaf in one ear.
And people wonder why atheists think we are retards.

Better yet: Just speak in tongues - that'll impress the atheists. A good miracle will win them over.

But this conversation should go deeper than this. If all we have is emotional spirituality with very little factual reliance - will this help people? Will this give New Believers a solid core to stand on Biblically?

If your faith is emotional and miraculous: will another more emotional and miraculous religion come by later and steal it?
Do Charismatics see a purpose for Apologetics? OR are spiritual gifts enough?

Am I the only person here SURROUNDED by Charismatics? I hope so.
P.S. Todd Bentley (raving Charismatic lunatic) is from my city. Glad he moved to Florida, or anywhere...

Rod - I'm not sure what exactly your point is. If the Bible says it's a spiritual gift that people talk in tongues, then obviously some do. If Scripture says some can heal by faith, then some can. Charlatans, of course, abound in all fields, ESPECIALLY religion. Maybe charismatics are to you as liberals are to me - naive laughingstocks who do incalculably more harm than good by either faking a gift or misusing it.

Rod - Ha! Ha! Now I get it - I'm surrounded by liberal idiots, you're surrounded by charismatic fruitcakes. May God bless and deliver us elsewhere!

My point is When do Charismatics get around to using apologetics? And why would they?

Yes Robert, some spiritual gifts were amazing and useful back in the book of Acts - when the church was VERY QUICKLY being established. So desperately that God put Ananias & Sapphira to death just for lying in his new organization. I don't see much of that in the Charismatic movement??? Wonder why?
OF course we used to have talking donkeys and snakes as well. The donkeys don't seem to have slowed down any...

I'm not sure what's worse: Violent Muslims, Liberal hippies for Jesus, or Charismatic insanity?

I think there's more truth from the talking donkey than the other 3 combined.

Here's my problem with Charismatic logic:

Why carefully and theologically/Biblically reveal the Historic Jesus to someone... when I can just tell them about how Jesus came to me in a vision and we floated off to Heaven/Hell and fought the dragon together - then we had Ice Cream. Who needs to READ it when I lived IT!?

Or better yet: Watch the DVD of Heaven Is For Real. Who needs an old dusty Bible and historic theologians when we have Blue-Ray on the large screen with popcorn?

Is this just complain and mocking? Why YES!
But the heart of it is much more serious. What has authority on the word of God: a modern prophet with bad theology or a trusty book written by Moses and the Prophets?

One of my favorite verses in that old Book.

Luke 16:31
"But Abraham said, 'If they won't listen to Moses and the prophets, they won't listen even if someone rises from the dead.'"

I'm guessing Abraham hasn't watched the Burpo kid movie yet?

Rod - deep down you know there are no modern prophets and the fakirs are merely emblematic of the decline in Christianity the true Biblical prophets predicted 2500+ years ago. Instant gratification theology bears no good fruit and will attract no committed converts, just hangers-on. The corrupt West is dying it's inevitable spiritual death and your Charismatic kooks are just temporary electrocardial spikes. Rod, the persecution has just begun, I'd like to tell you things on the Christian front will improve, but they won't. Hang in there, brother, and try to put the whole sad matter in Sriptural perspective.

When Jesus did miracles, they were called signs, and indicated God's involvement. That WAS the logic, according to the evangelists: miracles are a sign of God. If this is so, wouldn't miracles performed by charismatic Christians also prove God's involvement? So who needs apologetics?

Of course, Jesus himself did not attribute his miracles to God's power. He attributed their success to the faith of those whom he healed.

Good point, Lee - if faith can get your kinks miraculously straightened out on earth, then it surely ought to get your soul into heaven.

Tertullian was a charismatic (he was a Montanist) and he wrote lots of apologetics books, one even titled "The Apology".

More recently, there are at least a few charismatic apologists you can find (well, it is always up in the air what counts as apologetics...but that aside):

Wayne Grudem - a Calvinist charismatic (the entire Sovereign Grace Ministries is charismatic apparently).

Gordon Fee - top notch Bible scholar

Stanley Horton and David Pawson were two other names I recognized on the list.

I'm sure there are more. Besides, your question, "Why use logic and historical, geographic, philosophical etc. reasoning when you can just raise the dead or do a miracle or two. At least heal them of that stubborn extra long leg" could as easily be applied to Jesus and Peter. Why bother with all those miracles Jesus, why not get some good philosophical reasoning!

Tertullian is a great Patristic example, David.

Thanks for some good thoughts David.

The authority was still in the making during the 1st century. We now have a complete Bible & the Holy Spirit as a comforter. Every religion claims supernatural feats... That is no longer an authority on truth.

Religions in Jesus' day all claimed supernatural feats too. It wasn't a reliable indication of the gods' allegiance back then either.

Nevertheless, charismatics have carved out their niche, and it's an interesting one. Pentecost and the arrival of the Spirit as told by Acts is a fascinating testament to charismatic Christianity.

Seems to me I spoke in tongues BEFORE I came to the Lord (some might say nothing has changed). The Spirit indwelling in Acts was a group deliverance, while most of ours is more private (unless we were saved revival-style). My experience is that salvation was obtained without any earthshaking personal transformation - I just realized through the mercy of the Lord that a new Master was needed and I had to serve someone other than myself. Isn't this typical or do most start quaking and babbling Aramaic? I feel I can accomplish apologetics without whirling like a dervish, but maybe the agnostic masses are only impressed if your head shakes like a bobble-head doll.

stick a bobble-head in your dash and you lose all credibility with me. But since my understanding of Christian salvation has changed radically from my conservative days, I tend to think of the process as a moment of enlightenment. It usually arrives only after much biblical study coupled with a new willingness to set aside inborn misconceptions about the Bible, Jesus and the Church. You suddenly see Jesus' mission in a new light and think "hey...THAT is a Jesus I can get behind!"

I guess all our new members are afraid to voice in on this.

I'll try and find some new topics.

Lee - I'm glad you can "get behind" 5% of Jesus' teachings, but what do you do with the other 95%? Pretend He was misquoted in the Gospels? Relegate most of His messages to obsolesence? Advocate that He has "come again" with a new dictum only liberal Christians can understand? Just curious.

Rod - a nation of sheep; a church of sheep - wool and mutton everywhere! (It'd be OK if they were in the Lord's flock, but they mostly make their own sinful lamb chops)

On the odd chance your question is sincere, Robert, the idea is to understand who the historical Jesus was and what he cared about.

Lee - does this mean Jesus is not a God of timeless universality, but merely a man constrained by 1st century pedantics?

I grew up in a charismatic church and I can definitely tell you that apologetics is very much on a lot of their minds, especially among the younger folks. Typically a first-generation believer has had some earth-shattering experience to ground their faith, so they will often see apologetics as unnecessary.

But their children, who never were miraculously healed or saved or delivered from drug addiction, won't be able to say, 'He came in like a whirlwind and I've never been the same.' They will often have a very serious interest in apologetics.

As far as logic is concerned, I've seen no more logic in this group than I've seen in charismatic churches in general (that is neither a compliment or an insult). I have, however, seen radically different assumptions - assumptions which determine the results of that logic. I think, therefore, it would be better to attack those assumptions than to belittle people's reasoning capabilities.

Just a thought.

As stated before in another discussion. Most people arguing on logic have never investigated the epistemology of logic. Otherwise you would have experienced things like the Peano axioms or Gödel's incompleteness theorems. And if you know them then almost all that is stated here on logic is wrong.

Artistic logic is virtually worthless except as a word game. An initial premise such as: "All dogs are loyal" suffers because one must first unequivocably establish what characteristics a dog must possess and then what attributes are indelibly associated with loyalty. This in itself is a subjective impossibility and no objective criteria can be agreed upon to continue. Argument ensues (like on this board) and we all chase our tails (but have fun doing it).
At least in the scientific method an observation must lend a hypothesis that can actually be tested by quantification giving you a clear "Yea or nay". Not perfect by any means, but an upgrade from semantics.

And this is why I don't waste my time with scholars and academics who get lost rambling on the definitions of terms... and never actually dig into the discussion at hand.

Stay focused people. The topic is right in front of us.

Rod, if you change in 1 Corinthians 1:22 the jews for the charismatics you get what you are asking. And asking this among people that read and write books will get the answer that the Greeks are better as they ask for wisdom. However in the world both attempts are not working that well.

OK, Rod, I'll get back on topic. Unlike you, I don't personally know any charismatics? My closest encounter would be with the J.W.'s. When an unimpressive guy comes around in a shiny suit fresh off the Salvation Army rack accompanied by a frumpy lady with an ill-fitting dress made out of material from an old couch, I dismiss them pronto. I know: this is arrogance and not in accordance with Scripture, but I'm an impressionable human and I have my instant biases. SO, they are attempting apologetics of a sort, but few are buying because the mode of delivery is no different from a vacuum cleaner salesman.

Hi guys, I am new to the group, and if you don't mind I will drop in some thoughts when I am able.

To current pentecostal/charismatic apologists that are quite will known are -

Dr. Michael Brown is a well-known apologist and scholar and has written on several subjects and debated with the reformed scholar Dr. James White on the Ariun controversy.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6....


Rice Brooks is an leader of a church movement, you would say its part of the "New apostolic reformation" He is also an apologist/evangelist. His new book is in all the book stores "Gods not dead".
It is connected with the new movie and DVD this out.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...

Debated on the same side with Dr. James White against the Ariun position. Sorry :)

Kyle - we're glad you're here - perhaps you can clear up some of our misconceptions. My problem goes something like this: to me, the true disciple of Jesus goes about his mission stealthily, without fanfare, and shunning the limelight. Charismatics, by their overt behavior, seem to crave attention. Is my observation valid?

Robert that sums up what I deal with: Charismatics and their desperate attempts at attention.

Robert you will know you have met a charismatic when you are politely (and emotionally?) informed that you are not a real/functional Christian because you have not had the 12th blessing, 4th Baptism of the ?, and a delightful authoritative showering of miraculously showy gifts.

Apparently YOU, me, Billy Graham, Chuck Swindoll, Ravi Zacharias, and numerous other Jesus followers are just not up to snuff!

Thanks Kyle.

Dr. Michael Brown is an interesting person. I've read 2 of his books on Judaism. Amazing - and not ONE mention of anything charismatic in them. So I still kind of like him.

However, He has been known to appear on Sid Roth's "It's supernatural" tv show. I honestly don't believe any Bible believing (or reading?) Christian would spend 10 seconds on a show that stupid and theologically ignorant.
My guess is Michael Brown never bothered to actually watch the show or research it... he'll probably drop in for a guest appearance on "Real House Wives of Orange County" next. Having failed to research the shows content and mission statement of course.

I just checked - YES mr. Brown is a charismatic SUPERNATURAL Sid roth loving NUT! Just like my MOM. So i have to like him a bit.

I sure do enjoy Dr. James White. I'm watching a youtube debate right now with a Muslim and Him. He's kicking theological butt.

Sorry guys, I thought this form was talking about if there are any charismatic apologist.

To your question Robert it seems to me that they're all kinds of charismatics just like they're all kinds of evangelicals or fundamentalist. Most of the streams or churches that I have known or been a part of are made up a regular Christians trying to grow in Christ, trying to love their families etc. But I suppose you're talking about the more TV evangelist type. Am I correct?

Is this form a place to have a true dialogue? A lot of the statements seem very provoking.

Just saw your comments Rod. I live in Ireland so it's a bit late I'll try to respond tomorrow thanks for your response.

Kyle you can always say what's on your mind here. All is fair in love & war. I do enjoy provoking! (But I do it honestly.)

As hard and outright opinionated I am on topics - I love when someone can stand their ground and prove me wrong. I have embarrassed myself a few times over the years. But seldom does my theology at large get adjusted anymore - the Bible is what it is.

Yes, there are many levels of Charismatics. And some people who are not Charismatic but attend one of their churches. The saddest is people who don't know any better - they assume all Jesus' churches are equally theologically and Biblically sound (Some even view Mormons as another branch of evangelical christians.)

I am NOT talking about tv charismatics. I'm discussing next door (having drum circles and exorcising demons in my local Christian bookstore) charismatics. YEs, coffee never tasted the same there again. "Sheeeesh!"

And YES, many do attempt apologetics. But it seems they do it loosely - no real reason too... just use HooooOOOOOOOOlllly SppppppPPPPiiiiirittt Power!
Why heavily discuss theology when you can just caste out a demon or two of doubt?

Robert where do you live where there are no Charismatics? How's the real-estate market - I'm moving in.

Rod - El Paso; it's 75% Catholic here. Hard to find any decent Protestant Churchs except around Ft. Bliss. There are a few real small Pentecostal gatherings, but they're such a tiny percentage of the population I've never run into them.

El Paso. Wow! One of the few places I haven't been to. (that part of New Mexico/Texas or the Carolina's or Virginia's.)

Robert is there any water there? All I found on the maps were a few ponds?

I just found the Crazy Cat Arroyo going through there. Looks like a creek on the map. How big is it?

This is more interesting to chat about than Abe's nonsense.

Ha! Ha! Oh, it's a desert alright. The Rio Grande forms the border between Texas and Mexico here. Sometimes it even flows pretty heartily when there's a good snow melt off the San Juan Mountains in Colorado. What is Abe up to? I would think of a Christian Apologetics board as infertile ground for recruiting Islamofascist terrorists. Arroyos are conduits for mountain water to cascade downwards. We have a mountain chain (Franklin's) running right throught the middle of the city so earthen dams need to be built at the base of arroyos.

Cool Robert. I love landscapes and maps. I'm fascinated by waterways and city structures. I definitely need to visit El Paso someday.

Rod - come on down, we'll hit that Starbucks (and a good Mexican Cantina). If I get to your part of Canada, I'll look you up. I need a moosehead for my wall.

Guys I'm going to go ahead and exit, this discussion is not on the intended topic stated.

Well, Kyle if you'd have contributed a little more food for thought, then maybe Rod and I wouldn't have needed to entertain each other.

My apologies, I should have read more of the post. Then I would have had a better feel for it.



If you guys can try and restrain from
blanket character assassinations or generalizations on Pentecostals – charismatics I would like a bit of dialog. I can not respond as often as I would like.

Trust me I'm aware of the public image that is portrayed and of the many problems seen in the North American church. But I live in Europe. Where these churches are really growing
and don't have the image that you are talking of there.
My problem is the Bible itself, What we see in Gods Word. Its clear that God works in a very powerful supernatural way and there are gifts given to the church and no where dose it state they are taken away.

Kyle - I think Rod has had numerous unpleasant experiences with them so relegates Charismatics to the liability column. I've only brushed up against them, usually when they're making noise, so I regard them as a screeching Mockingbird. Kyle, help us to have a better appreciation of the qualities that make them a unique entity bringing something worthwhile to the church which should be valued not scorned.

Thanks Robert.
When I talked to many Evangelical brothers that know many different streams of churches. They would say that the strength of many not all pentecostals/charismatics churches would be 1.A strong devotion to prayer & church prayer meetings.2.A zeal for God and His Kingdom. 3.Praise & worship and writing of many new songs. 4.Outreach into the community in all kinds of ways. 5.Church planting & world missions 6.Simple faith in Christ. There are many weakness also. Every movements have strengths and weakness.

Thanks, Kyle for the briefing. I prefer not to let my left hand know what my right hand is doing when I'm on a Mission so their style isn't for me in that respect. Otherwise, I'm pretty outgoing and effusive so we'd probably get along fine.

Not all are like you are used to some are more Baptis some more reformed its a big mix. You just know about the extrem.