Playing with Devil is no joke at all. Spiritual warfare can be fought in our own world like we know how. Indeed, if you have a power to cast out the demon, you would love to do this proverbially whole day. However, the Christians are misunderstood the word of God and take up the name of Jesus and casting out the demons. Sometime, they even consider themselves as truly spiritual by being able to practice exoticism. What a piety spiritual pride. Here is a part of article written by David Powlison.
The classic texts on spiritual warfare - Ephesians 6:10-20; James 3:14-4:12; 1 Peter 5:6-11 - teach a mode of fighting the devils bid for lordship that centers on the Word of the living God, faith, repentance, prayer, and obedience in the power of the Spirit. There is no hint of exorcistic methods in these passages, because the Bible does not view the problem of sin, especially in Christians, as linked to an indwelling demon who must be evicted.
Although the practice of exorcism has enjoyed popularity at various times and places in church history, the use of exorcism as a means of accomplishing sanctification or creating conditions for successful evangelism is a recent innovation. Where did this demon deliverance approach to ministry and the Christian life come from? Who teaches it? This view of spiritual warfare has been developing only since the late 1960s. There are at least four varieties of demon deliverance ministry within the species. They share fundamental common features, though they diverge in various particulars of both teaching and method. All believe that spiritual warfare grapples with the danger of demonic residents taking over like computer viruses on the hard disk of the soul and thus holding people in bondage to patterns of sin. The labels used here are only intended as rough markers. Authors frequently cite one another across the spectrum, usually favorably. While there is intramural skirmishing on secondary matters, they are close enough in their distinctive emphases to be considered variations of one movement.
First; Early charismatics were the first popular exponents of this new view of spiritual warfare (many subsequent charismatics have repudiated it). Pastor Don Bashams best-selling Deliver Us from Evil (1972) created tremendous interest and notoriety.
Dispensationalists developed the second variety of demon deliverance ministry. A pointedly noncharismatic approach arose in the circles around Dallas Theological Seminary and Moody Bible College and Institute. Authors of well-known books include Mark Bubeck (The Adversary, 1975), Merrill Unger (What Demons Can Do to Saints, 1977), and C. Fred Dickason (Demon Possession and the Christian, 1987).
A third variety arose in what has been called the third wave of the Holy Spirit, centering around Fuller Theological Seminary and the Vineyard movement. Well-known leaders have included the late John Wimber, C. Peter Wagner, Charles Kraft, John White, and Wayne Grudem, and distinctive emphases include signs and wonders, church growth, and third world missions.
A fourth variety might be characterized as broadly evangelical. Neil Anderson (Freedom in Christ Ministries, The Bondage Breaker, 1990), Timothy Warner (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Spiritual Warfare, 1991), Tom White (Frontline Ministries, The Believers Guide to Spiritual Warfare, 1990), Ed Murphy (OC International, the massive Handbook for Spiritual Warfare, 1992), and Ray Beeson (Strategic Spiritual Warfare, 1995) have all written fairly recent books weaving features of demon deliverance thinking into a more traditional evangelical perspective.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Holy Laughter? Drunk with Holy Spirit?
Some of youth has come to contact with "Holy Laughter" group by Innocent way. They have been influenced by these kind of experiences, so much so that it spread like fire among us. Here we stand, we can't tolerate this error but must test it out with God's Word.
'Holy laughter' is actually modern invention of sensational people like Rodney Howard-Browne and John Arnott who bring error by their miss-interpretation of the Bible. There is no such thing as lose control and chaotic behavior encouraged by the Scriptures. Instead, the Bible teaches us to be self-controlled and sober minded. Please do not be deceived by this kind of superficial, so called spiritual enlightenment. But rather we should be having simple faith that pleases God in our obedience and testimonial living. Here an article on this topic, written by Hank Hanegraaff the president of Christian Research Institute.
What Bible verses are most commonly used to support “holy laughter,” and what is your response to them?
Acts 2:13. One passage frequently abused in the current Laughing Revival occurs in Luke’s account of the day of Pentecost: “Some, however, made fun of them and said, They have had too much wine.”
Leaders of this “Counterfeit Revival,” like Rodney Howard-Browne and John Arnott, seem bent on convincing their audiences that the apostles were manifesting all of the characteristics of drunkards. “Why did they think the believers were drunk?” asks Rodney Howard-Browne. “Because they must have acted like drunk people” (The Reality of the Person of the Holy Spirit, 24—25). Laughing Revival advocates argue that, if it happened during the First Pentecost, then it should happen today in an even broader and more spectacular fashion in what many are calling the “Second Pentecost.”
If you look at the passage, the first thing you see is that only some said they were drunk. Second, those who identified them as drunk were scoffers. Others, far from being convinced of their drunkenness, were instead amazed that “each of us hears them speak in his own native language” (NIV). Luke says that they were amazed because these unlearned Galileans were “declaring the wonders of God in a language they could understand. Thus, they were clearly not emitting incoherent noises in a drunken stupor or slurring their words, but they were cogently articulating “the wonders of God.” Peter, in fact, spoke so powerfully that 3,000 people stampeded their way to Calvary.
If the apostles truly were acting like drunks, Peter would have likely given an alternative explanation for their actions — attributing their bizarre behavior to an overwhelming “spiritual intoxication.” Instead, he corrected the scoffers by saying, “These men are not drunk, as you suppose” (v. 15).
In truth, the Bible gives no evidence that the believers “acted like drunk people.” The only behavior disclosed and discussed in Luke’s narrative is speaking in tongues (vv. 4—11). There is therefore no basis whatsoever in the text for imagining or attributing any other action or conduct (such as laughing, falling down, etc.) to those Spirit-filled believers.
Ephesians 5:18. Another verse commonly misrepresented by Laughing Revival advocates encapsulates Paul’s admonition that we should “not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead,” Paul urges, “be filled with the Spirit.” Being “drunk in the Spirit,” according to holy laughter factions, is the God-ordained counterpart to being drunk on alcohol — hence, the rationale for the inebriated-like state and behavior of those caught up in holy laughter.
A careful examination, however, reveals that in no way can this passage be legitimately used to support “spiritual drunkenness.” To begin with, there is no reason to equate being filled with the Spirit with any form of “spiritual drunkenness.” In fact, the context of the passage indicates a consistent use of contrasts to differentiate ungodly behavior from godly conduct. For example, sexual immorality is contrasted with holiness (v. 3). Coarse jesting is contrasted with thanksgiving (v. 4). Foolishness is contrasted with wisdom (vv. 15—16). Likewise, drunkenness is contrasted with being filled with the Spirit (v. 18).
To understand what “being filled with the Spirit” means, one need only read the next few verses which spell out the details in unmistakable terms: “Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (vv. 19—20). Nowhere is there even a hint of the kind of erratic behavior promoted in Laughing Revival circles.
It is patently absurd to say that “spiritual debauchery” is the God-ordained counterpart to “plain old debauchery.” Or that precedents for indulging in “holy immorality,” “holy impurity,” and “holy greed” can be found in the Bible. Yet if “holy laughter” advocates are to stay consistent with their interpretation of verse 18, no other conclusion can logically follow — for the type of reasoning they use in claiming a biblical basis for so-called “spiritual drunkenness” can also be used to justify other “sanctified” acts of debauchery, immorality, impurity, and greed.
A representative picture of the Bible’s stance against the Laughing Revival phenomenon can readily be gleaned from various portions of Paul’s writings. The apostle listed, for example, “self-control” as one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:23) — clearly the opposite of the uncontrolled and chaotic activities that are characteristic of “holy laughter” gatherings. “Let us be alert and sober,” Paul told the Thessalonians (1 Thes. 5:6 NASB) as he contrasted drunkenness with sobriety (vv. 7—8). And to young Timothy, he advised to “be sober in all things” (2 Tim. 4:5). With so much emphasis on “self-control” and sobriety, the burden falls upon holy laughter proponents to reconcile their views with Scripture — a formidable, indeed impossible, undertaking.
Despite this impossibility, some still appeal to personal experience to validate their behavior. This, too, is a dangerous premise from which to operate. As fallen creatures our personal judgments are all too fallible — particularly when it concerns spiritual matters. We should not test experience in light of experience; rather, we should test experience in light of the final court of arbitration, the Word of God. This is precisely why God directs His people to search His written Word for counsel in matters of doctrine and daily living. Faithful followers of Christ must therefore look not to their own personal experiences, but to the Scriptures as the ultimate measuring rod. As Scripture itself exhorts us, “test all things” (1 Thes. 5:21; cf. Acts 17:11; 1 Tim. 3:16).
Even a cursory examination of the Scripture-twisting tactics of men like Rodney Howard-Browne and John Arnott reveals their propensity for taking Scripture out of context to develop a pretext for their convoluted notions. This is why today, more than ever, it is incumbent upon believers to be so familiar with the truth that when a counterfeit looms on the horizon, they will know it instantaneously.
— Hank Hanegraaff
'Holy laughter' is actually modern invention of sensational people like Rodney Howard-Browne and John Arnott who bring error by their miss-interpretation of the Bible. There is no such thing as lose control and chaotic behavior encouraged by the Scriptures. Instead, the Bible teaches us to be self-controlled and sober minded. Please do not be deceived by this kind of superficial, so called spiritual enlightenment. But rather we should be having simple faith that pleases God in our obedience and testimonial living. Here an article on this topic, written by Hank Hanegraaff the president of Christian Research Institute.
Counterfiet Revival-Article
STATEMENT DL045
Holy Laughter
STATEMENT DL045
Holy Laughter
What Bible verses are most commonly used to support “holy laughter,” and what is your response to them?
Acts 2:13. One passage frequently abused in the current Laughing Revival occurs in Luke’s account of the day of Pentecost: “Some, however, made fun of them and said, They have had too much wine.”
Leaders of this “Counterfeit Revival,” like Rodney Howard-Browne and John Arnott, seem bent on convincing their audiences that the apostles were manifesting all of the characteristics of drunkards. “Why did they think the believers were drunk?” asks Rodney Howard-Browne. “Because they must have acted like drunk people” (The Reality of the Person of the Holy Spirit, 24—25). Laughing Revival advocates argue that, if it happened during the First Pentecost, then it should happen today in an even broader and more spectacular fashion in what many are calling the “Second Pentecost.”
If you look at the passage, the first thing you see is that only some said they were drunk. Second, those who identified them as drunk were scoffers. Others, far from being convinced of their drunkenness, were instead amazed that “each of us hears them speak in his own native language” (NIV). Luke says that they were amazed because these unlearned Galileans were “declaring the wonders of God in a language they could understand. Thus, they were clearly not emitting incoherent noises in a drunken stupor or slurring their words, but they were cogently articulating “the wonders of God.” Peter, in fact, spoke so powerfully that 3,000 people stampeded their way to Calvary.
If the apostles truly were acting like drunks, Peter would have likely given an alternative explanation for their actions — attributing their bizarre behavior to an overwhelming “spiritual intoxication.” Instead, he corrected the scoffers by saying, “These men are not drunk, as you suppose” (v. 15).
In truth, the Bible gives no evidence that the believers “acted like drunk people.” The only behavior disclosed and discussed in Luke’s narrative is speaking in tongues (vv. 4—11). There is therefore no basis whatsoever in the text for imagining or attributing any other action or conduct (such as laughing, falling down, etc.) to those Spirit-filled believers.
Ephesians 5:18. Another verse commonly misrepresented by Laughing Revival advocates encapsulates Paul’s admonition that we should “not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead,” Paul urges, “be filled with the Spirit.” Being “drunk in the Spirit,” according to holy laughter factions, is the God-ordained counterpart to being drunk on alcohol — hence, the rationale for the inebriated-like state and behavior of those caught up in holy laughter.
A careful examination, however, reveals that in no way can this passage be legitimately used to support “spiritual drunkenness.” To begin with, there is no reason to equate being filled with the Spirit with any form of “spiritual drunkenness.” In fact, the context of the passage indicates a consistent use of contrasts to differentiate ungodly behavior from godly conduct. For example, sexual immorality is contrasted with holiness (v. 3). Coarse jesting is contrasted with thanksgiving (v. 4). Foolishness is contrasted with wisdom (vv. 15—16). Likewise, drunkenness is contrasted with being filled with the Spirit (v. 18).
To understand what “being filled with the Spirit” means, one need only read the next few verses which spell out the details in unmistakable terms: “Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (vv. 19—20). Nowhere is there even a hint of the kind of erratic behavior promoted in Laughing Revival circles.
It is patently absurd to say that “spiritual debauchery” is the God-ordained counterpart to “plain old debauchery.” Or that precedents for indulging in “holy immorality,” “holy impurity,” and “holy greed” can be found in the Bible. Yet if “holy laughter” advocates are to stay consistent with their interpretation of verse 18, no other conclusion can logically follow — for the type of reasoning they use in claiming a biblical basis for so-called “spiritual drunkenness” can also be used to justify other “sanctified” acts of debauchery, immorality, impurity, and greed.
A representative picture of the Bible’s stance against the Laughing Revival phenomenon can readily be gleaned from various portions of Paul’s writings. The apostle listed, for example, “self-control” as one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:23) — clearly the opposite of the uncontrolled and chaotic activities that are characteristic of “holy laughter” gatherings. “Let us be alert and sober,” Paul told the Thessalonians (1 Thes. 5:6 NASB) as he contrasted drunkenness with sobriety (vv. 7—8). And to young Timothy, he advised to “be sober in all things” (2 Tim. 4:5). With so much emphasis on “self-control” and sobriety, the burden falls upon holy laughter proponents to reconcile their views with Scripture — a formidable, indeed impossible, undertaking.
Despite this impossibility, some still appeal to personal experience to validate their behavior. This, too, is a dangerous premise from which to operate. As fallen creatures our personal judgments are all too fallible — particularly when it concerns spiritual matters. We should not test experience in light of experience; rather, we should test experience in light of the final court of arbitration, the Word of God. This is precisely why God directs His people to search His written Word for counsel in matters of doctrine and daily living. Faithful followers of Christ must therefore look not to their own personal experiences, but to the Scriptures as the ultimate measuring rod. As Scripture itself exhorts us, “test all things” (1 Thes. 5:21; cf. Acts 17:11; 1 Tim. 3:16).
Even a cursory examination of the Scripture-twisting tactics of men like Rodney Howard-Browne and John Arnott reveals their propensity for taking Scripture out of context to develop a pretext for their convoluted notions. This is why today, more than ever, it is incumbent upon believers to be so familiar with the truth that when a counterfeit looms on the horizon, they will know it instantaneously.
— Hank Hanegraaff
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
