The Ohio Independent Baptist, May 1971

• • • ris eviv by Dr. Kenneth Good The current cross-denominational phenomenon known as the "Charismatic Revival" or "Charismatic Move– ment" has been the occasion for considerable notice among some of our churches. This Neo-Pentecostalism has moved out beyond its traditional confines and has successfully invaded liturgical and non-liturgical churches alike. Many of our people are asking questions about such matters as "speaking in tongues" and the related "sign gifts." In an attempt to understand this movement, considerable time and effort were expended in attendance at confer– ences, study of their current literature, and a re-examina– tion of the Word of God. The result has been a series of three studies as follows: ( 1) "Seven Reasons Why I Do Not Believe That the Current So-Called Charismatic Revival Is a Genuine Work of the Holy Spirit" ; ( 2) "Im– portant Questions to Ask of Those Who Believe They Have Spoken Jn Tongues"; and (3 ) "An Examination of 1 Corinthians 12-13-14 With Reference to the Gifts of the Holy Spirit ." The present, brief article is but the first section of Study Number One which states the author's conviction that the so-called "Charismatic Revival" is indeed not a genuine work of the Holy Spirit becau e of its attitude towards and its relationship to the Scriptures as the Word of God. A Wrong Emphasis Anyone who has any familiarity at all with this move– ment will be at once impressed with their tremendous emphasis upon human experience. Sufficient stress is placed upon this aspect of their general message to make it ob– vious that any proper evaluation must begin at this point. This is evident both in their conferences and in their liter– ature. The relationship of their dependence upon human experience to the minimization of Scripture is the first obvious fact to be observed in a proper discernment of the truth . We note therefore: 8 ( I ) Their spoken messages emphasize experience at the expense of Scripture. The written Word of God is our "only infallible, and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice." This fundamental concept is based squarely upon such passages as Psalm 138: 2; Isa. 8: 20; Mt. 4 : 1-10; 5:18;. 24:35; Rev. 22 :18, 19, and upon the ob~1ous pr actice of the Lord and His apostles in their at t1tu?e towards,. and use of, the Holy Scriptures. Thi s concept ts not basic to the spokesmen for the Charismatic Revival irrespective of their lip-service to the few key texts they delight to quote . One will read MAY, 1971 that their conferences are advertized as "Holy Spirit Teaching Missions " but one will discover upon attend– ing these sessions that the speakers do not take up the Bible in any serious attempt to give an exposition of the Word of God. This writer attended some of these meetings with his New Testament, expecting to be able to discuss these matters from the Scriptures with the "teachers," only to be disappointed. The mes ages heard in these sessions, conducted by the recognized and advertized leaders of the movement, and specifically directed towards ordained ministers of . the various denomination , were strikingly devoid of anything vaguely resembling Bible exposition, to say nothing of Scripture exege is. Teaching sessions they most emphatically were not. The messages heard were overwhelmingly experiential in tone and consisted almost exclusively of somewhat lengthy personal testimonies with a rare Scripture quoted, cited, or merely alluded to - and this usually in fragmentary form. It is impo1 tant to observe that this is quite contrary to the genuine Pentecostal example. While these spokes– men from the Charismatic Revival delight to refer to the Day of Pentecost and its attendant phenomena, they actually present a glaring contrast to the Apostle Peter in the t11anner of their speaking. In this they unwittingly re– veal the fact that they do not stand in the Holy Spirit– Apostolic tradition. A brief examination of Acts 2 will reveal the discrepancy between the modern move– ment and the Biblical example. Peter's message wa in answer to a direct question concerning the phenomena of that day (v. 12). The apostle, under full control of the Holy Spirit, went first to the Word of God (vv. 16-21), and continued in irs careful exposition (vv. 22-36). His message was approxi– mately 50% Scripture and 50% explanation. The Pentecostal message was obviously expository, not primarily topical nor merely experiential. The current leaders of the Charismatic Revival present a striking contrast to the man God used to first explain the gift of tongues. In so doi ng they reveal that they are not the spiritual succe sors of the original possessors of thi gift. Their emphasis upon experience at the expense of Scrip– ture ident ifies the movement as other than a genuine work of the Holy Spiri t. (2) Their p rinted messages m aximize experience to the minimization of Scripture. In an a ttempt to under– stand their me sage, literature recommended by thei r THE OHIO INDEPENDENT BAPTIST •