Watch the following short videos (the longest one is just over a minute in duration) and see if they adhere to Paul’s admonition in 1 Corinthians 14:40 “But all things must be done properly and in an orderly manner.”
Christ Alone Wyoming
Proclaiming the Truth of Christ-Centered Theology
Christ Alone Wyoming 
I didn’t watch the videos. I don’t want to.
Once you seen one of these types of videos you have seen them all.
Let me guess what I would have seen had I watched them.
People rolling on the floor, some shaking, some laughing, some running around etc.
But, I can’t comment on anything, because I haven’t watched them.
LikeLike
These people are possessed I have seen it in Africa and Australia it’s sad, the spirit is the same and it’s not from God the Father.
LikeLike
Hi, this is not a specific comment on the this post but just a general comment on your site. It almost felt like coming home when I stumbled on your blog. Some of my fav preaches/pastors/teachers were here. Guys like John MacArthur, John Piper, Paul Washer and also saw some of my fav websites posted here. Me I’m an ex JW(never baptized as one)who came to know Christ as my Saviour 8 years ago. I had to go through the process to rid myself of 4 and a half years of JW brainwashing when I accepted Christ as my Saviour. The only way I did this was through the power of the Holy Spirit, reading His Word and systematically breaking down the false doctrine bit by bit. Today I’m so grateful for God’s grace, mercy and unfailing love which I cannot fully comprehend but am just constantly blown away by it on a daily basis.
I’ve recently migrated my hopefully encouraging and sometimes amusing stories to a blog. I really do enjoy apologetics(’cause of my background) but God has not led me in this direction as regards my blog. So I’ve put it up for the world to see and read. Thanks for your passion regarding this blog and I will also be visiting all the individual bloggers in time. Regarding this post I always quote that piece of scripture from Paul when my friends ask me about a church service that has upset and disturbed them.
LoCTY!!!!
LikeLike
I would be careful about posting these videos. I had been watching the Florida Revival videos to examine what was going on down there. Next thing I know, we had to deal with an evil presence in our home. Whatever Bentley is into is being transferred through media. Please be careful in posting his videos. It carries an ‘anointing’ alright, but it sure isn’t Godly.
LikeLike
If we ever needed a picture of what kinds of shenanigans were going on at the church in Corinth, and why Paul had to write 1st Corinthians 12-14, you could not find any more perfect examples than what is in those videos. 1st Corinthians 14:23–“23 Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of your mind?”
Heck, I’m a believer and I’d say these people are out of their mind.
LikeLike
I am fast becoming convinced that there is some form of demonic influence in all this. Coming from that sort of background, I am firmly convinced that a lot of the nonsense we are witnessing down at Lakeland is spurred on by our adversary the Devil.
LikeLike
Well, Where do we read in the Bible that people are rolling over the floor? I can’t find not even one vers what says that the Lord Jesus or one of His apostles where dancing, or rolling over the floor, or where “drunk in the Spirit.” These poor people are not only “slain in a spirit” but slain with blindness by the same evil spirit too. What we must do is praying for these unhappy people in order that they may see the truth. This is not a “move of God.”
LikeLike
This is the work of the Holy spirit i guess none of the commentators read the bible. Read it so you will understand. AS it said on Acts 2:13 Some, however, made fun of them and said “They have too much wine.” Read the whole Acts to from the beginning This event is when the apostles are speaking in new tongues.
LikeLike
You’re kidding, right? You really think the apostles would have condoned this kind of nonsensical trash? This was the very thing the apostle Paul warned church after church to avoid.
No, Truth, it is YOU that need to go back and read YOUR Bible, and stop twisting the word of God to suit your own fleshly desires, lest you fall into the same delusion that Bentley’s followers succumbed to. (If you don’t believe me, read what 2nd Thessalonians has to say about those to whom God will give strong delusion–then tell me whether you still believe THAT part of the Bible as much as you claim you believe the other parts–or if you only believe the parts you want to believe.)
LikeLike
One day Jesus Christ will rule and reign over this earth in a very visible way. He will be physically present in Jerusalem as King. This reign will last for 1000 years, and is sometimes called the “millennial kingdom.” People from all the nations of the earth will travel to Jerusalem to worship the King. “Yea, many people and strong nations shall come to seek the LORD of hosts in Jerusalem, and to pray before the LORD.” (Zechariah 8:22)
This will be a fulfillment of the one of the Lord’s great purposes for the Jewish people: to be a witness of God’s glory to the Gentiles. This does not mean that today the Jewish people hold a privileged position over everyone else. Under the New Covenant everyone becomes a child of God the same way: by grace through faith in Christ Jesus. There is “no difference” between Jews and Gentiles when it comes to salvation. (Romans 10:12)
When Jesus Christ went to the temple in ancient Israel, He was angry about what the Jews had done to the “Court of the Gentiles.” This was supposed to be a place where Gentiles learned to worship the One True God, but instead it had become a way for the temple priests and leaders to make a profit. (Matthew 21:12-13)
It is clear from the Bible that those who know God are to share that knowledge with those who do not know God. Under the Old Covenant, the Jews were supposed to be good examples to Gentiles, and to share their faith with unbelievers. Under the New Covenant, Christians are supposed to do likewise toward those who are without Christ. This is a sharp rebuke to those who would gear their church services toward either profit or entertainment. Certainly people who trust in Christ have every reason to be joyful – especially when we congregate together. But we must be very careful of the external appearance of our worship. “If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?” (I Corinthians 14:23)
The proclamation of the Word of God and prayer – not exuberant confusion – should be given the most time, the most attention, and the most emphasis whenever there is the possibility of an unbeliever coming in among an assembly of believers. “But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.” (I Corinthians 14:24-25)
LikeLike
Truth- the ‘tongues’ the Apostles spoke in was referencing to speaking in another language, one their hearers understood because it was their ‘native tongue’. It would be like you going to a foreign nation and speaking the word of God in that native tongue, all by supernatural power. Keep in mind, the Apostles weren’t ‘learned’ men, they had no schooling of any kind. Their surroundings and upbringing was primitive. They were common, ordinary men. They didn’t study foreign language; in order for God to proclaim His truth through them, He had to supernaturally empower them to speak in other tongues/languages. Notice Acts 2:6, …’because everyone heard them speak in HIS OWN LANGUAGE.’ This is referencing to speaking in tongues. It is not gibberish, which is what most of the Pentecostal Charismatic tongue speaking is…unintelligible babble. Also, speaking in tongues was to be done biblically. If no one is able to interpret what is being said, then Paul commanded the Corinthian church to remain silent {read 1st Corinthians 14:1-31} Because the Gospel is available in nearly every language, speaking in tongues ceased with the Apostolic age.
LikeLike
Raymond White: I’ve got a strange question for you. I’ve been doing internet (blogs) evangelism to Mormons for almost a year, and was wondering if there are any websites where christians and JW’s dialogue. There are dozens of these for LDS and christian dialogues. Thanks for your testimony of GOD’s love and faithfulness.
LikeLike
lyn,
On what scriptural foundation do you base your assertion that “Because the Gospel is available in nearly every language, speaking in tongues ceased with the Apostolic age.”? Do you mean to imply that the Gospel was available in nearly every language by the time the apostle John died around the year 100 A.D., and therefore tongues ceased at that time? Do you believe tongues are the only spiritual gift to have ceased at that same time, or do you believe others ceased as well?
In Christ,
CD
LikeLike
No, I do not mean to imply that at all. I apologize for the run on sentence in my post. I should have proof read it.
I do believe what John MacArthur says concerning 1 Corinthians 13:8, {“love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will fail, whether there are tongues, they will cease, whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away”}…he says, “Paul uses a different word for the end of the gift of languages, thus indicating it will cease by itself, as it did at the end of the apostolic age. It will not end by the coming of the “perfect”, for it will already have ceased. The uniqueness of the gift of languages and its interpretations was, as all sign gifts, to authenticate the message and messages of the gospel before the New Testament was completed. Tongues were a sign to unbelievers; that tongues have ceased should be clear from their absence from any other books in the NT, except Acts. Also, its absence from church history in the first century is evidence of its ceasing…appearing sporadically and then, in questionable groups. The NT makes no mention of Paul actually exercising the gift, nor does Paul in his own writings make mention of a specific use of it by any Christian” John MacArthur
I do not believe those who claim to have a new revelation by God are trustworthy, for He has spoken, and His words are found within the bible.
LikeLike
Germit,
I’ve found that almost all JWs refuse to dialog on the internet. The Watchtower advises them to only discuss things when they have the upper hand, like a surprise knock on your door. If you do get into an ongoing conversation with someone who has JW beliefs, they’re probably not in good standing with the Watchtower. The JWs are truly in a mind control cult.
If you see them around town going door to door, stop and talk to them. Otherwise, I’ve had little success in getting them to talk to me. You can check out this post about witnessing at the JW convention.
Thanks,
Bill
LikeLike
Thanks for the clarification, lyn.
I confess that I find myself in agreement with John MacArthur far more often than not, but on this particular subject he’s just flat wrong. Please allow me to illustrate.
“Paul uses a different word for the end of the gift of languages, thus indicating it will cease by itself, as it did at the end of the apostolic age. It will not end by the coming of the “perfect”, for it will already have ceased.”
MacArthur simply employs an a priori assumption that tongues ceased at the end of the apostolic age based upon his own presuppositions, when there’s no Biblical reason to leap to such a conclusion. No exegesis of the passage, no allowing for scripture to interpret scripture, just a bald assertion. I’m sorry, but even for someone as learned and godly and esteemed as John MacArthur taking the position “Because I said so” just doesn’t cut it.
“The uniqueness of the gift of languages and its interpretations was, as all sign gifts, to authenticate the message and messages of the gospel before the New Testament was completed.”
At best this statement is grossly misleading, at worst it’s patently false. Clearly it’s true that the miraculous sign gifts did often serve to attest to the authenticity of the messenger, but according to scripture this wasn’t their only function. Like many cessationists MacArthur creates artificial constructs wherein he allows for the supernatural sign gifts, such as tongues, to operate up to a point, but no further. The glaring problem for the cessationist is that the Bible doesn’t support this position at all. The truth is that the Bible does not restrict sign gifts, such as tongues, to attestation only. The truth is that in addition to their role in attestation, the inspired Apostle Paul also teaches that the miraculous sign gifts serve for both personal and corporate edification (1 Cor. 12:7-10 & 14-27; 1 Cor 14:18-19; 1 Cor. 14:5). At this point one must ask if individual believers and the broader church are still in need of edification today.
“Tongues were a sign to unbelievers; that tongues have ceased should be clear from their absence from any other books in the NT, except Acts.”
This second half of this false assertion has already been refuted above, and I wonder how many books of scripture need to contain God’s divine revelation for Christians to submit to it and believe that God really, really meant what He said? The last time I checked 1 Corinthians is still in the canon of scripture, and the subject of the gift of tongues is still present there (I did a quick check and it’s even in the MacArthur study Bible! *grin*). Furthermore if tongues were a sign to unbelievers only as MacArthur alleges then why were tongues spoken in Acts 10 and Acts 19 in the presence of believers only? So much for that theory.
“Also, its absence from church history in the first century is evidence of its ceasing…appearing sporadically and then, in questionable groups.” This is terribly weak reasoning and is atypical of John MacArthur’s usually solid teaching. I can only assume he’s grasping for straws in order to set up his straw man arguments. To argue from silence is very weak, and even if it were true that the appearance of miraculous phenomena such as sign gifts only appeared “sporadically” in the early church, what does this prove except for the continuation of the gifts? MacArthur himself seems to recognize the weakness of his argument, and therefore he tosses in a bit of gratuitous ad hominem (“questionable groups”) in order to further muddy the waters.
“The NT makes no mention of Paul actually exercising the gift, nor does Paul in his own writings make mention of a specific use of it by any Christian.” Eh? Well, I don’t know what translation MacArthur was using when he wrote this, but in my Bible Paul specifically mentions exercising the gift, and in fact large swaths of the book of 1 Corinthians are addressed to Christians using (and abusing) the gift (i.e. the Christians at the local church at Corinth). Facts are such pesky things!
“I thank God, I speak in tongues more than you all; however, in the church I desire to speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, rather than ten thousand words in a tongue.” – the Apostle Paul (1 Cor. 14:18-19) What? The Apostle Paul thanks God that he speaks in tongues more than all of the “tongue-happy” Corinthians?!? Surely I can be excused if I simply take the Apostle himself at his word.
I do not believe those who claim to have a new revelation by God are trustworthy, for He has spoken, and His words are found within the bible. Amen! And this is precisely why I must believe in the ongoing availability of the gifts of the Spirit, because the Word of God testifies to them and nowhere teaches of their cessation; only the traditions of men teach such a thing. The authority and finality of the closed canon of scripture is not threatened by the validity of the ongoing gifts of the Spirit. God cannot be divided against God, and if these gifts weren’t a threat to inspired scripture before the close of the canon (and according to scripture they weren’t), then they certainly aren’t a threat after the canon was closed. For more on the subject may I recommend this brief overview.
Semper reformata!
In Christ,
CD
LikeLike
To all our readers and contributors,
I know there are many who disagree on this issue and the debate will never be fully concluded until we arrive at perfection through our glorification. At that point, we will know ALL things and the issue of tongues will not be one there. However, in the meantime, I am afraid that there are some questions and points which necessarily arise during the present time that I feel must be addressed. Part of the doctrines at stake are what is being found today in many charismatic or pentecostal circles. Either those who hold to cessationism have a legitimate argument or those who argue for all the gifts for today have an argument. Personally, I do not believe there is room for both on this matter.
1. It must be noted that the main position of DefendingContending is one of a cessationist standpoint. With respect to Coram Deo, this is one point on which we disagree, but which does not negate the other excellent articles and doctrinal blogs that my brother has posted in the past. Up to this point, we have not really had any in-depth discussions to try and hash out any of the points and it has not been a stumbling block to internet fellowship! 🙂
2. I believe that to conclude that John MacArthur is “just flat wrong” because one disagrees with the matter of the cessation of gifts or wishes to practice them from an argument of silence or assumption would be a huge jump. I would find actually that the use of straw men would be more predominantly found in the writings of some well-known authors who try to “prove” that they have the ability to speak in tongues, yet strangely never do in public forums.
3. Of all the sign gifts, tongues, normally falls in last position when any listings are given particularly in 1 Corinthians. I find the emphasis that is placed on tongues to the normal exclusion of other gifts is a serious problem.
I have shared some of this before, but this would be where I believe tongues would be defined.
1. With MacArthur, we would agree that it was for unbelievers but this word is not being used exclusively as pertains to the matter of salvation. When Cornelius spoke in tongues, there were unbelieving Jews present. They were unbelieving in that they did not believe (or struggled with the thought) that salvation was for anybody but the Jews. When Cornelius and those present spoke in tongues, it was a confirmation that they (the Romans) had truly been accepted into the Church. When the disciples believed in Corinth, here I will quote MacArthur on Acts 19:6, “This served as proof that they were part of the church. They also needed tangible evidence that the Holy Spirit now indwelt them, since they had not heard that He had come.” Again, we have an issue of unbelief or disbelief if you will.
2. Apart from the examples found in Acts and references to the usage in Corinthians (but no actual situations where tongues took place), there is nothing found anywhere else in the New Testament where tongues is used or even implied that it was in continuation.
3. When Paul mentions that he speaks with tongues more than all, he is not speaking of some “heavenly” or “angelic” language! Being a very learned man and probably a member of the Sanhedrin as well as a free-born Roman, it is quite probable that he spoke 4 or 5 languages if not more.
4. At no point during the usage of tongues do we find the liberty of supposedly speaking in an “unknown” tongue which the speaker does not understand. Many who claim the use of tongues today believe that in so-called “private” prayer languages which many have tried to describe to me as “allowing” them to go before the Throne of Grace and the devil cannot understand my prayer. Yet God is a personal God and 1) would understand the “heart” (that which they are most familiar) language, and 2) the evil one is a fallen angel and would certainly know the language that was spoken by those angels who never fell. To assume that there is a “new” angelic language is just as great an argument from silence and not worth considering.
5. The Book of Acts is a classic example of the use of tongues. Peter spoke and each man “heard” in their own language. I do not believe there is any other logical or biblical explanation other than that Peter spoke and somewhere between his lips and the ears of the hearer, the Holy Spirit made it possible for each individual to understand in their “heart” language.
Most of Church History shows that tongues have rarely been used or exhibited in a Biblical fashion. I would question why if ALL the gifts are for today why there are no situations recorded for us that show even a remarkable resemblance to that of the early New Testament church. I would also question why if tongues was last in the list, why those who make much of tongues do not give the same credibility to the matter of miracles or healing. You cannot have the one without the others being fully present and I have yet to see miraculous healings (or even hear of such) as were found in Acts. NOBODY today has that kind of power or gifting given to them like Peter & John at the gate Beautiful or Paul when his very shadow brought complete healing (not partial, not over-a-period-of-time, etc.)
I do not feel threatened by the matter of tongues in regards to the canon. I do question (after much study) why we need to have any extra-biblical revelations today when as 2 Peter 1:3 notes, that we have been given all that pertains to life and godliness. The Scriptures are clear that all we need to know in this life is found in the Word of God. Edification of the saints comes through faithful exposition of the Scriptures.
There is no question that the church is in need of edification, but it would be a stretch to believe that through the use of tongues we will be edified yet not seek for the same level of edification through the manner of prophesying, miracles, healing, etc. Yet, strangely as mentioned previously these are absent. It is largely subjective for me to say that I have “spoken” in tongues for who will disbelieve me. It is far easier to prove a false prophet or show that somebody really has no gift of healing when the individual “healed” does not actually get healed as seen in the Scriptures.
I would challenge all who read including Coram Deo and Lyn to continue studying the Scriptures for they will not speak against each other. The truth is in the Word of God and must not be left to our own devices.
LikeLike
It grieves me to read this comment thread. I am speaking as one who has received the gift of tongues as it is promoted today. I’ve had the experience. I have since been convinced that Biblical tongues was never a ‘private prayer language’ and that what I was experiencing, although a genuine experience, was not from God, nor inline with His Word. I am confident the Lord has forgiven me for using ecstatic utterance and calling it ‘prayer.’
I am grieved even further when I observe the soft stance many are taking on this issue; it appears as if they’re not aware just how dangerous a faulty pneumatology can be.
It is my desire to write on this topic further, as there is much error to correct, and many faulty presuppositions. Regrettably, some have written against the Charismatic movement citing extreme examples of Charis-mania as primary support for the Cessationist position. This may be a line of evidence, yet it should not be primary and has unfortunately left many people rejecting any exegesis and theological conclusions contained in their work.
I think it would be helpful for readers of Defending. Contending. and Cal.vini.st, if I were to compile an online bibliography of books, sermons, articles etc., to provide those interested in further study with some more in-depth material.
I’ll begin work on this soon, and then post it here as well as at Cal.vini.st.
Out of interest for those referring to themselves as Reformed Charismatics, Dr. R. Scott Clark recently wrote a piece, Must Reformed Christians Be Cessationist? in which he answers in the affirmative.
LikeLike
I heartily agree with TDP about (at least) two things that he’s said on this subject:
1) “I know there are many who disagree on this issue and the debate will never be fully concluded until we arrive at perfection through our glorification.”
2) “Either those who hold to cessationism have a legitimate argument or those who argue for all the gifts for today have an argument. Personally, I do not believe there is room for both on this matter.“
Amen!
The truth is that somebody is actively embracing false doctrine in this matter because the positions held by each side are mutually exclusive. This leads me to NWB’s comment; first I want to apologize to you, my brother, if my any of my words served to grieve you. The Lord knows that I’m not seeking a platform for this issue, nor do I have any desire to see a dust up over this particular doctrine, but His will be done. For my part while I don’t relish the idea of having an intense, public, intramural debate here at DefCon (in fact I personally loathe the thought), I am nevertheless commanded by scripture to offer a loving, prayerful and vigorous defense of scripture when the Word of God is being mishandled, whether intentionally or by ignorance, as I am fully persuaded is the case with cessationism.
Furthermore we are in agreement that a faulty pneumatology can be very dangerous, just as a faulty ecclesiology or a faulty eschatology can be. I had no intention of expanding this subject, but I read the link you provided to Dr. Clark’s blog, thank you for providing it. No doubt many non-cessationist Reformed theologians will surely be surprised to learn that they’re not actually Reformed because Dr. R. Scott Clark says so. When did Dr. Clark become the Protestant Pope? *grin* I’m jesting of course. I enjoy “the Heidelblog” and I read there from time to time, but I must confess that while my thinking and theology is “Reformed” in many aspects, I’m not by any stretch of the imagination “Reformed” in the classical sense – not by a long shot. In particular I utterly reject paedobaptism and amillennialism as being error riddled and unbiblical “traditions of men” doctrines along the same line as cessationism. In point of fact I think these three doctrines are “kissing cousins” of sorts, although I’ve not researched their genesis and development carefully enough to put forth a cogent argument at this time. Here again we can clearly see that one side or the other is embracing false doctrine on each of these issues which barely even begins to scratch the surface of the myriad, non-essential doctrinal disagreements among confessing Christians.
Happily even with all of our differences we here at DefCon remain in one accord in our Christology and soteriology which things allow us walk together, serving side by side through much tribulation, being counted as aliens by the world. Yet, for me at least, this spiritual reality admittedly does serve to make the scorn of our Father’s children sting all the more.
In closing I’d like to note that it is a faithful saying when NWD observed: “there is much error to correct, and many faulty presuppositions” [on this subject]. And, may I add, on many others. Of course each side is persuaded the other side is committing error and holding to faulty presuppositions, therefore the ultimate test is – as TDP has rightly suggested – “What saith the scriptures?”
Grace and peace to you,
CD
For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. (Galatians 1:10)
LikeLike