Sign Gifts Semi-Safe House

[Paul Christensen]

Right.
But don’t judge all Pentecostal or Charismatic churches by such behaviour.
That’s what I am getting at.

And some of these reports are not even true, just made up by people who have an axe to grind.

I don't. I was blessed in my early 20s that I was trained in the things of the Holy Spirit by a traditional, old time, Pentecostal pastor who believed that in order to move in the Holy Spirit, one had to be a person of prayer and the Word. He wouldn't have had a bar of churches like Bethel or Hillsong, and he would have treated prosperity preachers like Kenny Copeland as total heretics. He was so strict that when I was invited to have dinner with a couple from a local "Oneness" Pentecostal church, he said that if I went, I should leave his church. I complied with his wishes because I knew that the Holy Spirit had called me to his church, and looking back over the years, I'm glad I obeyed him.

 

[Paul Christensen]

My big fear is the sensual, since I am a pretty emotional driven person. But I think I go to a really good church and know my spiritual life has sky rocketed since going to a church where the signs gifts are taught and practiced. I stopped praying in tongues after Teen Challenge, because I was afraid of them. I thought my experience was fake. I thought what I heard in my head when I prayed sometimes was demonic and either ignored it or rebuked it. When I finally realized I needed to pray about them, God revealed to me they are true, so I started using them in prayer, and have regularly for the last three years. No one in my last church knew I did, and I never did in the church. And when I told someone, she spoke and acted as if it was demonic...

I just had to be true to God and this church now is awesome. I know there are fake churches out there, but I have witnessed some pretty genuine experiences here and learning a lot. Like, it isnt every Sunday we get a tongues and an interpretation. First time since Ive come actually (and around a year now). And it was about pressing into God.

I was involved in the New Zealand Teen Challenge ministry in Palmerston North NZ, but was fortunate to work with a leadership of people from Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist, and Pentecostal churches. This gave a good balance of teaching, and avoided excessive behaviour.

I don't know much about Teen Challenge in the U.S. but I have viewed a couple of David Wilkerson messages on Youtube and found him very loud and almost judgmental in his manner of preaching. So if Teen Challenge where you were was dominated by that sort of thing, I can understand your fear. David Wilkerson may have started off with sound attitudes as shown in his book "Cross and the Switchblade", but in later years I think he became more extreme, especially when he started prophesying to the nation, something I don't believe in.

I believe in the gift of tongues, and I pray in tongues all the time. But I would never go along with the loud uninterpreted utterances in many Pentecostal churches. I sometimes wonder if tongues is being used as some kind a mantra to try and bring down the presence of God, and so the louder it is spoken the more God's arm is twisted to get Him to do what these people want Him to do.

I see nothing wrong with praying quietly in tongues in support of people being ministered to at the altar call. I was doing that one evening, and a New Zealand Maori lady, Mrs Samuels turned to me and told me that the Holy Spirit spoke through me in her Maori language things to encourage her in what she was going through at that time. That shocked me because I didn't know anything about the Maori language at that time.

Tongues is primarily used as prayer to God, and Jesus clearly said that when we pray we are to go into our private chamber and pray to God in secret and He will reward us openly. Even when engaging in supportive prayer in a meeting, it should be quiet and unobtrusive, not loud and public. When speaking out in tongues for interpretation, it is an intercession for the word of prophecy to be released. It is a short, sharp intercession in tongues clearly recognised for the purpose in which it is spoken. Not all believers have this public gift because it is a ministry to the body of Christ and the Holy Spirit selects those whom He chooses to speak it in this fashion.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Further to my previous post about the proper use of the gifts and the use of "thus says the Lord" as inserting inappropriate authority into a prophecy making it difficult for others to judge it.

I knew someone in my last Charismatic church who would, when he wanted to give a "word of knowledge" to someone, he would say, "I sense that..." and so on. This is a cunning way of saying, "The Lord has told me to say this to you." which is using an authority that we have no right to use. If the Lord is speaking directly, it is as though He is speaking Scripture. The reality is that there is no new Scripture further to what He has already said in the written Scriptures in the Old and New Testaments.

If a person is going to say, "This is what the Lord is saying", then they should quote the actually written Scripture, because that is the true Word of God. The person can go on to give his own exposition of the Scripture, but must say, "This is how I think this Scripture could be applied to you." What this means is that by quoting the Scripture, the true Word of God is given, but it is then made clear that the exposition is the speaker's own opinion on what he thinks is the application of the Scripture to the hearer.

If a person comes to be and says, "thus says the Lord", or "I sense that...", I immediately respond by saying, "I will wait until the Lord speaks to me directly to confirm what you sense that you are hearing from the Lord." In this way, I am protecting myself against a divination spirit imbedded in a prophetic word.

 

[Mayflower]

Further to my previous post about the proper use of the gifts and the use of "thus says the Lord" as inserting inappropriate authority into a prophecy making it difficult for others to judge it.

I knew someone in my last Charismatic church who would, when he wanted to give a "word of knowledge" to someone, he would say, "I sense that..." and so on. This is a cunning way of saying, "The Lord has told me to say this to you." which is using an authority that we have no right to use. If the Lord is speaking directly, it is as though He is speaking Scripture. The reality is that there is no new Scripture further to what He has already said in the written Scriptures in the Old and New Testaments.

If a person is going to say, "This is what the Lord is saying", then they should quote the actually written Scripture, because that is the true Word of God. The person can go on to give his own exposition of the Scripture, but must say, "This is how I think this Scripture could be applied to you." What this means is that by quoting the Scripture, the true Word of God is given, but it is then made clear that the exposition is the speaker's own opinion on what he thinks is the application of the Scripture to the hearer.

If a person comes to be and says, "thus says the Lord", or "I sense that...", I immediately respond by saying, "I will wait until the Lord speaks to me directly to confirm what you sense that you are hearing from the Lord." In this way, I am protecting myself against a divination spirit imbedded in a prophetic word.

Being cautious is wise. And to guard the tongue out of zeal for God is important too. I do firmly believe that God really does speak through people, and there are some things in the past year that have absolutely blown my mind and transformed past theological thinking. But Id rather be able to tone things down and think about things, rather then not knowing at all. I was never open to tongues or dreams or anything else until Teen Challenge. If I didn't live around it a year, I probably would still be closed off to it. I just automatically shrugged it off in limited box thinking that my understanding of scriptures was right. But no, I see the effects of these gifts and experience them myself. Some things, like prophetic utterance, I am pretty new too. I do want to proceed with caution and feel bad starting out in understanding it for speaking in ways I know nothing about. I encourage learning myself, and earnestly seek God out on the matters for newer believers or those in faith interesting in growing in spiritual gifts. I really do now.

As far as the sign events, let them happen as they happen and thank God if/when you experience it.

 

[Sabertooth]

Being slain in the spirit is not really in the Bible - I think something like it is described when King Saul was prophesying

The most often-cited example is the arrest attempt of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane [John 18:6]. He had to rephrase His answer so His "captors" could remain standing...!

I wonder if it is something you study or it just pops in the head. Pastor's wife interpreted.

No study, but I think that they hear it in their own language (when no one else does).

 

[Triumph1300]

He was so strict that when I was invited to have dinner with a couple from a local "Oneness" Pentecostal church, he said that if I went, I should leave his church.

Really?
A pastor telling me to leave "his" church for having dinner with people from another church.... wow
That would be a bit much for me.

 

[Mayflower]

The most often-cited example is the arrest attempt of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane [John 18:6]. He had to rephrase His answer so His "captors" could remain standing...!

No study, but I think that they hear it in their own language (when no one else does).

WOW never noticed that.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Really?
A pastor telling me to leave "his" church for having dinner with people from another church.... wow
That would be a bit much for me.

In the 1960s, in the Pentecostal movement in New Zealand, there arose the "Jesus only" movement which denied the trinity. It was a form of modalism. It split the Pentecostal church right down the middle and caused a lot of conflict among Pentecostal Christians.

The "oneness" Jesus only movement in Palmerston North were aggressive in proselytizing young people from other Pentecostal churches. The pastor discerned that the people who were inviting me to dinner had the intention of recruiting me to the "Jesus only" movement. Because I was just 21 years old, and only three years in the faith, he laid down the law to me for my own spiritual protection.

Modalism is a heresy which corrupts the Christian life and prevents believers making spiritual progress because the Holy Spirit will not have any fellowship with that doctrine. My pastor was conducting himself as a genuine pastor should and did not want doctrinal corruption getting into the church for which he was responsible under Christ.

When God calls a pastor to a church, He gives that pastor full responsibility for the members of it. In that sense it is "his" church, and he will have to account for the way he conducted his ministry at the judgment seat of Christ.

In those days, I was immature and unaware of the serious implications of even fellowshiping with members of the movement that was invading the Pentecostal churches and poaching members from it. These days, I see it as wasps invading beehives. The "oneness" Pentecostal movement is a cult, and it is the character of cults to poach people from other churches through deception and persuasion, and the main victims are immature novices in the faith.

Therefore my pastor was conducting himself in a faithful and godly manner, and I had and still have these many years later, total respect for his action.

 

[Triumph1300]

Do I have this correctly? Would you as a 21 year old not be allowed to eat with unbelievers, atheists, Catholics or any other people this pastor considered non christians? And this pastor would kick you out of the body of Christ for doing so. I just want to make sure I understand where you are coming from...it seems bizarre to me, specially because you were an adult and not a small child. Did he kick out other people because they associated with others without his approval.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Do I have this correctly? Would you as a 21 year old not be allowed to eat with unbelievers, atheists, Catholics or any other people this pastor considered non christians? And this pastor would kick you out of the body of Christ for doing so. I just want to make sure I understand where you are coming from...it seems bizarre to me, specially because you were an adult and not a small child. Did he kick out other people because they associated with others without his approval.

It was not a simple matter of having a meal with someone from another church, or an unbeliever outside of the church. My church was not exclusive in that sense. If it was just a matter of having a meal with fellow Christians or even non-Christians, then my pastor would have had no problems with it.

The issue was that the people who invited me to dinner had the intention of recruiting me to their "Jesus only" movement. He knew what these people were like, because several years before I joined the church in 1970, the "Jesus only" movement not only split the church in two, but almost destroyed the ministry that the church had among the Maori people in the region. The movement was an evil, invasive movement and my pastor wasn't having a bar of it. Maybe, he was being over-strict about it and didn't know me well enough that I wasn't going to be influenced, but when it came to a matter of loyalty to him, I chose loyalty and obedience rather than my own self determination.

So, you may be reading things into my experience that were not actually there.

 

[Triumph1300]

Ok, I understand now. I know the oneness issue is controversial.
I do have friends attending UPC.
( I do have lunch with them once and awhile, so I better watch out. Lol)

 

[Grunt Hemlock]

I used to live 100 feet from a UPC church. I went a couple of times and liked it. When I read a book their pastor gave me - I saw the NON-TRINNIE stuff. Never went back. It was a shame - people were nice.

 

[Grunt Hemlock]

Eat lunch with 'em, Triumph! Bless the food in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost!

 

[Triumph1300]

No reason to be hostile to them.

 

[Hidden In Him]

When I read your post I immediately thought of David and Jonathan. I believe that was a bond of God, because they were totally loyal to each other and although they were not gay, it was described that their bond was stronger than that of a man and a woman. So, we have in the Bible the characteristics of a God-ordained bond between two people. Jonathan's loyalty to David was stronger than that to his own father Saul.

Yes, although I think similar bonds can be formed between Christian men and women as well, even unmarried men and women. I think the key element is a deep-seated respect and admiration for one another stemming from the Spirit of God upon them and the call upon their lives. I think it can also extends through the soul as well, and becomes a bond that is closer than with a brother. I recall reading the passage on Jonathan and David when they first developed that bond, and it was because Jonathan was struck by David's loyalty to both his father and the kingdom.

Another God-ordained bond is the one between the genuinely converted Christian to Christ. Loyalty to Christ transcends all other loyalties. Jesus said that those who love others more than they love Him are not fit for the kingdom of God. When people told Him that His mother and brothers were outside wanting to see Him, He asked, "Who are my mother and brothers? Those who are My disciples."

Good verse. Christ will always come first in God-ordered relationships.

Here is an interesting question: A young man in the church is attracted to a young woman named Grace. He prays about it and a Scripture comes to him, "Grace and peace be to you from Jesus Christ, the Son of God". So he interprets that to be that God has chosen Grace to be his wife. But Grace doesn't concur. So, if the young man becomes bonded to her and keeps on insisting that she is the one for him, is that a bond of God or is it soulish?

Lol. All depends. Is he hearing from God, or is she? If he actually is, she may come around eventually. If she is, he'll have to snap out of his delusion and catch a clue, so time will tell if he heard from God or not.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Around 20 years later, I re-established contact with a friend who founded a prophetic ministry. He taught the correct use of the gifts, and this was like a breath of fresh air for me. He ran a fortnightly "equipping" meeting and bi-monthly prophetic days, where he and his team trained people in the correct use of the gifts, and had group workshop sessions to put the teaching into practice. The Holy Spirit would become involved in those sessions, and we saw some good things happening. This restored my faith in the present day gifts of the Spirit.

I'm glad this happened for you. Sort of depressing when the only examples we see are bad ones.

In fact, the elderly pastor of the Pentecostal mission church (not one in the Charismatic church) I attended as a 21 year old in the early 1970s taught that if the Holy Spirit was present, people got healed, demons were cast out, and prophecies were clearly seen as encouraging and upbuilding love letters from God. He believe that when he prayed in tongues, things happened, and they did. The only time I witnessed the glory of God coming down in a meeting was under that man's ministry. But there were no kundalini manifestations, rather than people fell on their knees weeping their hearts out to God and getting right with Him, the fallow ground in their hearts broken up and softened before Him.

Yes. I've been in meetings similar to this as well. People go silent, and you will see the power of God working on people and bringing them to tears.

In fact, the elderly pastor of the Pentecostal mission church (not one in the Charismatic church) I attended as a 21 year old in the early 1970s taught that if the Holy Spirit was present, people got healed, demons were cast out, and prophecies were clearly seen as encouraging and upbuilding love letters from God.

I think the one place where we have disagreed in the past is that a message from God is always uplifting and encouraging. But I can understand why if your experience was exceptionally good with this man, you would be won over to that argument.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I used to live 100 feet from a UPC church. I went a couple of times and liked it. When I read a book their pastor gave me - I saw the NON-TRINNIE stuff. Never went back. It was a shame - people were nice.

Exactly. I knew some very nice UPC people as well - American Indian - and I liked them so much and heard so many good things about the church that I was strongly tempted to go visit. But the doctrine was such a red flag I never could. I thought the same thing: It's a shame, because in other respects they were great people.

 

[Paul Christensen]

I'm glad this happened for you. Sort of depressing when the only examples we see are bad ones.


Yes. I've been in meetings similar to this as well. People go silent, and you will see the power of God working on people and bringing them to tears.


I think the one place where we have disagreed in the past is that a message from God is always uplifting and encouraging. But I can understand why if your experience was exceptionally good with this man, you would be won over to that argument.

Thanks for sharing.

I don't know whether I have share this example of a word of knowledge that was not positive for the person receiving it. It concerned a church elder who came forward for prayer and the preacher had a word of knowledge that the married elder was in an adulterous relationship. The preacher knew that if he had blurted it out in front of everyone it would have destroyed the elder and severely damaged the church. So he asked the Lord, "How do I share this word of knowledge without causing a nuclear explosion?" The Lord replied, "The bare facts of the word is for you. Now I will give you a word of wisdom on how to share it. Tell the elder that ensuring faithfulness to your family will continue My blessing on his life." The preacher shared the word of wisdom the Lord gave him and the elder broke down and confessed his adulterous affair. As a result, the elder was successfully counselled, his marriage was saved, the stability of the church was preserved, and although the elder had to stand down from eldership until his domestic situation was stabilised, he eventually returned to ministry and the blessing of God continued in his life.

So, I agree that a word of knowledge can be negative, and can reveal sin, but along with the word of knowledge there must be a word of wisdom for how it should be shared. Often a word of knowledge can be the basis of a prophetic word, and so the word of wisdom is needed to be able to phrase the resulting prophecy so that those responsible for the sin are convicted of the Spirit without "collateral damage" to innocent people.

Too often, negative prophecies are given without that word of wisdom, and serious harm to churches and people have resulted from "friendly fire".

This reminds me of Achan's sin which caused the defeat at Ai. Joshua got the word of knowledge that the defeat resulted from sin in the camp, so he enquired of the Lord and received the word of wisdom to know how to have that sin revealed. We know the rest of the story about how the guilty person was revealed. Interestingly it involved a person who did his best to hide his guilt and he was found out. But I wonder if he had immediately confessed, fallen on his knees and begged for mercy and might have saved his life and that of his family? Who knows? The Scripture says that it is better to fall on Christ and be broken, than have Christ fall on us and we be crushed to powder.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Exactly. I knew some very nice UPC people as well - American Indian - and I liked them so much and heard so many good things about the church that I was strongly tempted to go visit. But the doctrine was such a red flag I never could. I thought the same thing: It's a shame, because in other respects they were great people.

There are two relevant Scriptures to be considered here: We see through a glass darkly, and we have the treasure in earthen vessels. What these Scriptures tell us is that none of us have a perfect take on everything to do with the nature and character of God. Therefore I support tolerance to those who have their faith in Christ, but an imperfect view of Him. I think the final judgment is Christ's, and He looks on the heart rather than the extent of their knowledge of spiritual matters.

If a UPC Christian is putting their trust in the finished word of Christ on the cross and His resurrection from the dead, then for anyone to condemn them to hell because they don't accept the trinity, is pre-empting Christ's judgment of them. This is not to say that I would bond myself into a UPC church because of the anti-trinitarian doctrine, but as the risen Christ acknowledged that there were faithful godly believers in all of the seven churches, including the ones that had serious problems, especially the one right near the very seat of Satan, and the other one that had the doctrine of the Nicolatians, and still the other one that was dominated by the Jezebel prophetess.

So, in the last judgment God will be looking for those who put their faith in Christ, knowing that any deficiencies in knowledge would be corrected when believers get to glory.

Now, this could also apply to cult members like LDS and JW. Who knows whether there will be members whose hearts are right with God, although their heads are confused? So we give them the benefit of the doubt, although we don't accept their doctrines.

 

[Triumph1300]

There are two relevant Scriptures to be considered here: We see through a glass darkly, and we have the treasure in earthen vessels. What these Scriptures tell us is that none of us have a perfect take on everything to do with the nature and character of God. Therefore I support tolerance to those who have their faith in Christ, but an imperfect view of Him. I think the final judgment is Christ's, and He looks on the heart rather than the extent of their knowledge of spiritual matters.

If a UPC Christian is putting their trust in the finished word of Christ on the cross and His resurrection from the dead, then for anyone to condemn them to hell because they don't accept the trinity, is pre-empting Christ's judgment of them. This is not to say that I would bond myself into a UPC church because of the anti-trinitarian doctrine, but as the risen Christ acknowledged that there were faithful godly believers in all of the seven churches, including the ones that had serious problems, especially the one right near the very seat of Satan, and the other one that had the doctrine of the Nicolatians, and still the other one that was dominated by the Jezebel prophetess.

So, in the last judgment God will be looking for those who put their faith in Christ, knowing that any deficiencies in knowledge would be corrected when believers get to glory.

Now, this could also apply to cult members like LDS and JW. Who knows whether there will be members whose hearts are right with God, although their heads are confused? So we give them the benefit of the doubt, although we don't accept their doctrines.

Good points.