Bible Study Is the Charismatic Movement Dangerous and Heretical?

  • CFN has a new look, using the Eagle as our theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • CFN welcomes a new contributing member!

    Please welcome Beetow to our Christian community.

    Blessings in Christ, and we pray you enjoy being a member here

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

If someone claims to be an apostle or prophet how does one know they we sent by Holy Spirit?

What if they get 1 prophecy wrong?

What if they cant heal or raise the dead?

If these people are real, how come they are not as widely known as the original 12 apostles?

You would think they would be very influential within Christianity.

Where are those that interpret dreams, interpret real languages (tongues)?
 
Called and chosen by Jesus Christ.
But, baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with being called to be an Apostle.

What in scripture says this doesn't happen today?
There is nothing in Scripture to say it will or should continue happening, so the default is to what we do know--that the requirements to be an apostle can no longer be met.
 
There is nothing in Scripture to say it will or should continue happening, so the default is to what we do know--that the requirements to be an apostle can no longer be met.

Well that's an interesting post. But let me ask you this then. What would your answer be if someone pointed to Ephesians 4, and said that based on this text they are still needed for today, both for the edifying of the body of Christ but the continuing growth of the body in love?

I will highlight the particular verses I'm talking about, and keep in mind that I'm referring to the continued need of both apostles and prophets, since both are mentioned in the passage.

11 He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. (Ephesians 4:11-16)
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkman
But, baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with being called to be an Apostle.

I disagree. I see that it was the apostles who had been the authority to lay hands on believers to receive the Holy Spirit; the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Scripture teaches that it was the Apostles who came down from Jerusalem to Samaria to administer the Baptism with the Spirit.

Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. Acts 8:14-17

To me, this is a sign of an Apostle.

I see this today and have experienced this in my own life.



JLB
 
  • Like
Reactions: GodsGrace
Well that's an interesting post. But let me ask you this then. What would your answer be if someone pointed to Ephesians 4, and said that based on this text they are still needed for today, both for the edifying of the body of Christ but the continuing growth of the body in love?

I will highlight the particular verses I'm talking about, and keep in mind that I'm referring to the continued need of both apostles and prophets, since both are mentioned in the passage.

11 He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. (Ephesians 4:11-16)
So if the modern Apostles have visions and write letters to be included in their Bible what then?

Look up the NAR movement and it's just about that
 
So if the modern. Apostles have visions and write letters to be included in their Bible what then ?

Look up the nar movement and it's just about that

Hey Jason.

Touched on NAR in Post #128.

As for the rest, visions, dreams and prophecy are going be a common characteristic of the entire end-time church (Joel 2:28), but regarding anyone who comes along and tries adding anything to the Bible, they should be publicly shunned and exposed.
 
Hey Jason.

Touched on NAR in Post #128.

As for the rest, visions, dreams and prophecy are going be a common characteristic of the entire end-time church (Joel 2:28), but regarding anyone who comes along and tries adding anything to the Bible, they should be publicly shunned and exposed.

Most visions I find are anything but from pentecostals. It occurs but not that many as the ones that take it too far.

I'm one who who has had these and I'm weary of them unless confirmed and I won't buy it until as such .
 
Most visions I find are anything but from pentecostals. It occurs but not that many as the ones that take it too far.

This might be a matter of who you are running with. I really don't keep up with "most Pentecostals." Pentecostal churches are not a denomination so it doesn't really work like tracking the Catholics or the Southern Baptists or anything. It's all down to individual churches, so I just keep track of the ones I'm associated with, which is actually very few.

As for taking things "too far," I don't see much of it where I am. Now I will say I think I have seen what you are talking about elsewhere, and I don't like it. I'm probably a bigger opponent of that business than you are in fact. Posted on it once in another thread. Let me see if I can find the post...

This one right here:
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkman
This might be a matter of who you are running with. I really don't keep up with "most Pentecostals." Pentecostal churches are not a denomination so it doesn't really work like tracking the Catholics or the Southern Baptists or anything. It's all down to individual churches, so I just keep track of the ones I'm associated with, which is actually very few.

As for taking things "too far," I don't see much of it where I am. Now I will say I think I have seen what you are talking about elsewhere, and I don't like it. I'm probably a bigger opponent of that business than you are in fact. Posted on it once in another thread. Let me see if I can find the post...

This one right here:
I should make a thread and post a map and discuss the poverty and locations of charismatic churches within them

It can't all be of God to have churches next to each other like this . It's crazy . On one route I had three churches within a mile on one street !

That isnt common to pentacostals only. But I find it strange.
 
I should make a thread and post a map and discuss the poverty and locations of charismatic churches within them

It can't all be of God to have churches next to each other like this . It's crazy .on one route I had three churches within a mile on one street !

That isnt common to pentacostals only. But I find it strange.

They like areas that are prosperous already, because that's where the money is.

It's also one of the places where peddling a financial "gospel" is more welcome, and where you can more easily milk a citizenry because they're already materialistically minded to begin with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkman
Alright, well that sounds good then. If I should ever run across it I will give it a look. Discussing the NAR at all is like low hanging fruit. No serious Charismatic gives them the time of day, and yet they become a major talking point with the Cessationists because they're often only interested in discussing the blatant distortions.

As a person who would say he is a "soft Cessationist," I think of the N.A.R. movement in association with Pentecostals because both groups adhere to a Continuationist view. As I explained, though, I don't think mainstream Pentecostals deserve to be lumped-in together with the hyper-charismatics of the N.A.R. as though they are identical. Personally, I don't have much problem with a fellow believer who takes a Pentecostal perspective on the gifts of the Spirit, but my hackles go up, you can be sure, when I run across a fan of the N.A.R.
 
They like areas that are prosperous already, because that's where the money is.

It's also one of the places where peddling a financial "gospel" is more welcome, and where you can more easily milk a citizenry because they're already materialistically minded to begin with.
Can't say for sure as these are not big churches but small ones .let me post one image .




 
Last edited:
Not according to the Bible.


Except that while the office of Apostle does those things, preaching and teaching are clearly also separate offices:

I teach.
I'm not an apostle.

I stated that an Apostle does ALL that has been mentioned...
ALL

1Co 12:28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues.
1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?
1Co 12:30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? (ESV)

Eph 4:11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, (ESV)

And then there is this:

1Co 4:9 For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men.
1Co 4:10 We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in honor, but we in disrepute.
1Co 4:11 To the present hour we hunger and thirst, we are poorly dressed and buffeted and homeless,
1Co 4:12 and we labor, working with our own hands. When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure;
1Co 4:13 when slandered, we entreat. We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world, the refuse of all things.
1Co 4:14 I do not write these things to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. (ESV)

Does this sound like any "apostle" existing today? Sounds exactly the opposite, doesn't it?

Also:

2Co 11:1 I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. Do bear with me!
2Co 11:2 For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.
2Co 11:3 But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.
2Co 11:4 For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.
2Co 11:5 Indeed, I consider that I am not in the least inferior to these super-apostles.
2Co 11:6 Even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not so in knowledge; indeed, in every way we have made this plain to you in all things.
2Co 11:7 Or did I commit a sin in humbling myself so that you might be exalted, because I preached God's gospel to you free of charge?
2Co 11:8 I robbed other churches by accepting support from them in order to serve you.
2Co 11:9 And when I was with you and was in need, I did not burden anyone, for the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied my need. So I refrained and will refrain from burdening you in any way.
2Co 11:10 As the truth of Christ is in me, this boasting of mine will not be silenced in the regions of Achaia.
2Co 11:11 And why? Because I do not love you? God knows I do!
2Co 11:12 And what I am doing I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do.
2Co 11:13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.
2Co 11:14 And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
2Co 11:15 So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. (ESV)

Apart from the biblical requirements to hold the office of Apostle being only historical and can in no way apply to anyone today, there is a serious problem with appealing to signs as evidence:

Mat 24:24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. (ESV)

So, we see that Satan and his servants disguise themselves as angels of light and servants of righteousness and are able to "perform great signs and wonders." Therefore, we cannot appeal to signs and wonders as evidence that a person is an apostle. It goes back to the historical requirements.

Besides, which of today's "apostles" has endured the following?

2Co 11:23 Are they servants of Christ? I am a better one—I am talking like a madman—with far greater labors, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death.
2Co 11:24 Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one.
2Co 11:25 Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was adrift at sea;
2Co 11:26 on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers;
2Co 11:27 in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and exposure.
2Co 11:28 And, apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches. (ESV)

Not that it matters at this point, but if anyone wants to make the argument that since today's "apostles" are doing the signs the Apostles did, proves that today's "apostles" also hold to the office of Apostle, then, to be consistent, the above things do as well. How many of today's "apostles" are trying to plant churches in areas that have never heard the gospel? How many are trying to minister to believers in countries that are hostile to the gospel? How many are willing to give their lives to reach those who have never heard? My guess is none.

Something else to consider is how many are associated with Word of Faith? Maybe none, but I suspect most, if not all, are. Bill Johnson and Bethel are associated with the New Apostolic Reformation, but he is a false teacher who mixes New Age beliefs with Christianity. If there is such a lack of spiritual discernment (which really just requires knowing the Bible) in the NAR, then that puts that whole organization into serious, serious doubt.
Yes. There are those who do the things above today.

Here's where maybe the misunderstanding is:

An Apostle is a very specific person of whom the NT speaks.
There were 12 Apostles and there will never be anyone else like them.

The OFFICE of Apostle exists to this day.

Let's see if this makes sense:

Jesus made Peter the foundation of the church. THE FOUNDATION...Jesus is the corner stone.
Peter was an Apostle.

Peter laid hands on the person coming after him.....
Since Peter was the Bishop of Rome - and the "first Pope" ,,,, the succession went to the next person.

This is why the CC, the very first church that was present when the Apostles were present,
is called The Apostolic Church.

Bishops that are in the CC to this day...
occupy the OFFICE of Apostle.

Apostolicity of mission means that the Church is one moral body, possessing the mission entrusted by Jesus Christ to the Apostles, and transmitted through them and their lawful successors in an unbroken chain to the present representatives of Christ upon earth. This authoritative transmission of power in the Church constitutes Apostolic succession.

This Apostolic succession must be both material and formal; the material consisting in the actual succession in the Church, through a series of persons from the Apostolic age to the present; the formal adding the element of authority in the transmission of power. It consists in the legitimate transmission of the ministerial power conferred by Christ upon His Apostles.

No one can give a power which he does not possess. Hence in tracing the mission of the Church back to the Apostles, no lacuna can be allowed, no new mission can arise; but the mission conferred by Christ must pass from generation to generation through an uninterrupted lawful succession. The Apostles received it from Christ and gave it in turn to those legitimately appointed by them, and these again selected others to continue the work of the ministry. Any break in this succession destroys Apostolicity, because the break means the beginning of a new series which is not Apostolic.
source: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01648b.htm
 
Can't say for sure as these are not big churches but small ones .let me post one image .




There was one more on that street but it was razed .I will likely dream the old job to remember it one day .lots of adventures on that street with criminal activity there .
 
Well I was gonna say that I can't really either since I don't know these churches. Could be that they are just spawning, and heavy into training other pastors who then branch out on their own.

Not "branching" all that far then, aye? :)
There are quite old .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hidden In Him
An Apostle is a very specific person of whom the NT speaks.
There were 12 Apostles and there will never be anyone else like them.
Well, there were at least 13, including Paul, and likely 14 with James, Jesus's brother (Gal 1:19).

The OFFICE of Apostle exists to this day.

Let's see if this makes sense:

Jesus made Peter the foundation of the church. THE FOUNDATION
That's one interpretation.

Peter was an Apostle.

Peter laid hands on the person coming after him.....
Did he? Where is that in Scripture? Which person was this?

Since Peter was the Bishop of Rome - and the "first Pope" ,,,, the succession went to the next person.

This is why the CC, the very first church that was present when the Apostles were present,
is called The Apostolic Church.

Bishops that are in the CC to this day...
occupy the OFFICE of Apostle.

Apostolicity of mission means that the Church is one moral body, possessing the mission entrusted by Jesus Christ to the Apostles, and transmitted through them and their lawful successors in an unbroken chain to the present representatives of Christ upon earth. This authoritative transmission of power in the Church constitutes Apostolic succession.

This Apostolic succession must be both material and formal; the material consisting in the actual succession in the Church, through a series of persons from the Apostolic age to the present; the formal adding the element of authority in the transmission of power. It consists in the legitimate transmission of the ministerial power conferred by Christ upon His Apostles.


No one can give a power which he does not possess. Hence in tracing the mission of the Church back to the Apostles, no lacuna can be allowed, no new mission can arise; but the mission conferred by Christ must pass from generation to generation through an uninterrupted lawful succession. The Apostles received it from Christ and gave it in turn to those legitimately appointed by them, and these again selected others to continue the work of the ministry. Any break in this succession destroys Apostolicity, because the break means the beginning of a new series which is not Apostolic.
source: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01648b.htm
That's what they say, without biblical basis. Besides, why make the argument to Rome? Why not Jerusalem, which came first, and where it seems James was head and put on equal footing with Peter?

I suppose, though, that if one wants to rest their case on Peter and Apostolic succession, we must then accept that the Popes are not infallible. We see in the NT that Paul rebuked Peter for his serious error, which means that Peter was not infallible, and so neither are the Popes infallible in their judgements. That is part of what sola scriptura means--only the Bible is the infallible and final authority for believers. Of course, history shows the sometimes grievous errors made by Popes, including the current one, which in my opinion, does away completely with Apostolic succession.

Of course, that is not what is meant by apostle in this thread, which refers to those in certain sects of Evangelicalism that call themselves apostles.
 
Well I was gonna say that I can't really either since I don't know these churches. Could be that they are just spawning, and heavy into training other pastors who then branch out on their own.

Not "branching" all that far then, aye? :)
Davis temple is older then me ,the other probably as close .there are one hundred year old Churches near each other that are so close you can easily walk from one to the other .
 
Well, there were at least 13, including Paul, and likely 14 with James, Jesus's brother (Gal 1:19).


That's one interpretation.


Did he? Where is that in Scripture? Which person was this?

Peter gave to Timothy Apostolic succession.
Hebrews 6:1-3
1Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. 3And this we will do, if God permits.


Jesus gave to the Apostles the Great Commission.
The Apostles were to choose mature men in the faith to carry on the work of Jesus.
2 Timothy 2:2
1You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. 3Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.


1 Timothy 5:21
21I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality. 22Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin.



Not just anyone could teach, etc. in the early church.
Jesus gave this commission to a select few....those whom He trained for years.
Then THEY passed on this task/office to others.

If anyone can teach - then how could your word be any more important than mine?
It becomes a matter of opinion.

That's what they say, without biblical basis. Besides, why make the argument to Rome? Why not Jerusalem, which came first, and where it seems James was head and put on equal footing with Peter?
Because James was not HISTORICALLY in equal footing with Peter.
Because HISTORY teaches that it was Peter who was consulted in times of trouble, or with questions of faith.

I suppose, though, that if one wants to rest their case on Peter and Apostolic succession, we must then accept that the Popes are not infallible. We see in the NT that Paul rebuked Peter for his serious error, which means that Peter was not infallible, and so neither are the Popes infallible in their judgements. That is part of what sola scriptura means--only the Bible is the infallible and final authority for believers. Of course, history shows the sometimes grievous errors made by Popes, including the current one, which in my opinion, does away completely with Apostolic succession.

This Pope, like him or not, continues in Apostolic succession....or it would have ended long ago with heretical popes.
Also, we're not discussing the pope here or infallibility. No one in the CC believes the pope is infallible.
He's a man just like every other man and is fallible.
I'm not here to teach what infallible means.

Of course, that is not what is meant by apostle in this thread, which refers to those in certain sects of Evangelicalism that call themselves apostles.
I did say that there were only 12/13 Apostles.
Those men were special in that they had lived with Jesus and experienced His resurrection.

The OFFICE of Apostle still exists....
but not in Protestantism.
Succession was broken at the reformation.

I don't intend to turn this into a Catholic/Protestant debate since I'm not Catholic.
I do find, however, that Protestants refuse to study church history.
I've had to do this.

Seems like church history ended with Revelation instead it continued on.

But I digress...