A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library
A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library A History of Christian Doctrine #3 - Online Christian Library
A History of Christian Doctrine saved people from other churches rather than by converting the lost from a lifestyle of sin to holiness. When their megachurches mushroom, there often seems to be little concern for ministerial ethics, qualifications for spiritual leadership, and discipleship of every member. How do the Charismatics relate to Pentecostals? Initially, Trinitarian Pentecostals had great reservations about the Charismatic movement, but today there is widespread acceptance, interaction, fellowship, mutual influence, and mutual transfer of ministers, churches, and members. In 1994, major Trinitarian Pentecostal and Charismatic organizations joined together in the Pentecostal/Charismatic Churches of North America (PCCNA), which replaced the Pentecostal Fellowship of North America (PFNA). While we have discussed various practices and emphases that are typical of Charismatics, we must also note that many classical Pentecostals, especially trinitarians, have adopted many of them. Although Pentecostalism gave rise to the Charismatic movement, the latter is now exerting greater influence on the former. The Charismatics have generally prevailed on matters of holiness and fellowship, and they are significantly affecting forms of worship, views of end-time prophecy, and the initial evidence doctrine. Classical Pentecostal organizations have taken clear stands against the doctrinal innovations of Charismatics, however. For example, the Assemblies of God has adopted official position papers against the Positive Confession doctrine, the Kingdom Now doctrine, the excesses of the Shepherding movement, the belief that Christians can have demons, absolutist views on divine healing, and 316
The Charismatic Movement attempts to teach or imitate speaking in tongues. 315 Oneness Pentecostals generally oppose the distinctive doctrines and practices of Charismatics, although some have followed Charismatic trends. In return, Charismatics usually do not see the Oneness doctrine as a problem, but they object to the doctrine of salvation and holiness lifestyle of Oneness Pentecostals. In 1997, Charisma published the first significant analysis of Oneness Pentecostals by Charismatics. It noted their many achievements but exhibited an agenda of trying to move them toward the Charismatic position. It based its analysis primarily upon views and reports of ex-members rather than interaction with Oneness theologians. The article accused Oneness Pentecostals of “legalism,” “elitism,” being “mean-spirited,” “judgmentalism,” “hypocrisy” and embracing “a flawed theology of salvation by works”—with no awareness of the irony of judging them so harshly based on a few disgruntled sources. 316 From a Oneness Pentecostal perspective, there are many honest-hearted, Spirit-filled people in the Charismatic movement. Indeed, many have received the full Acts 2:38 experience of salvation. The movement has led millions of people to a more biblically based faith and a greater spiritual experience with God. Nevertheless, it has fallen short in restoring them to the full apostolic doctrine and lifestyle. It still needs a revival of the message of the almighty God in Jesus Christ and the message of scriptural holiness, both inwardly and outwardly. In many cases, the movement has actually created significant barriers to further spiritual progress. Multitudes outside the movement have been turned away by foolish, unbiblical doctrines and practices and by the poor examples 317
- Page 266 and 267: A History of Christian Doctrine Rai
- Page 268 and 269: A History of Christian Doctrine Ray
- Page 270 and 271: A History of Christian Doctrine spi
- Page 272 and 273: A History of Christian Doctrine Chr
- Page 274 and 275: A History of Christian Doctrine Spi
- Page 276 and 277: A History of Christian Doctrine lif
- Page 278 and 279: A History of Christian Doctrine Wil
- Page 280 and 281: A History of Christian Doctrine wit
- Page 282 and 283: A History of Christian Doctrine The
- Page 284 and 285: A History of Christian Doctrine the
- Page 286 and 287: A History of Christian Doctrine com
- Page 288 and 289: A History of Christian Doctrine rec
- Page 290 and 291: A History of Christian Doctrine for
- Page 292 and 293: A History of Christian Doctrine had
- Page 294 and 295: A History of Christian Doctrine den
- Page 296 and 297: A History of Christian Doctrine Chu
- Page 298 and 299: A History of Christian Doctrine and
- Page 300 and 301: A History of Christian Doctrine Bre
- Page 302 and 303: A History of Christian Doctrine Wit
- Page 304 and 305: A History of Christian Doctrine sho
- Page 306 and 307: A History of Christian Doctrine God
- Page 308 and 309: A History of Christian Doctrine hav
- Page 310 and 311: A History of Christian Doctrine off
- Page 312 and 313: A History of Christian Doctrine ind
- Page 314 and 315: A History of Christian Doctrine of
- Page 318 and 319: A History of Christian Doctrine of
- Page 320 and 321: A History of Christian Doctrine Sta
- Page 322 and 323: A History of Christian Doctrine (ex
- Page 324 and 325: A History of Christian Doctrine Of
- Page 326 and 327: A History of Christian Doctrine Pen
- Page 328 and 329: A History of Christian Doctrine the
- Page 331: Appendixes
- Page 334 and 335: A History of Christian Doctrine Sec
- Page 336 and 337: A History of Christian Doctrine act
- Page 338 and 339: A History of Christian Doctrine but
- Page 340 and 341: Appendix C Answering the Charge of
- Page 342 and 343: A History of Christian Doctrine 3.
- Page 344 and 345: A History of Christian Doctrine 5.
- Page 346 and 347: A History of Christian Doctrine dai
- Page 348 and 349: A History of Christian Doctrine It
- Page 350 and 351: A History of Christian Doctrine 350
- Page 352 and 353: A History of Christian Doctrine Him
- Page 354 and 355: A History of Christian Doctrine in
- Page 356 and 357: A History of Christian Doctrine Lor
- Page 358 and 359: Appendix E Major U.S. Pentecostal O
- Page 360 and 361: A History of Christian Doctrine Nam
- Page 362 and 363: Notes Chapter 1. The Pentecostal Mo
- Page 364 and 365: A History of Christian Doctrine MA,
A <strong>History</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Christian</strong> <strong>Doctrine</strong><br />
saved people from other churches rather than by converting<br />
the lost from a lifestyle <strong>of</strong> sin to holiness. When<br />
their megachurches mushroom, there <strong>of</strong>ten seems to be<br />
little concern for ministerial ethics, qualifications for spiritual<br />
leadership, and discipleship <strong>of</strong> every member.<br />
How do the Charismatics relate to Pentecostals?<br />
Initially, Trinitarian Pentecostals had great reservations<br />
about the Charismatic movement, but today there is widespread<br />
acceptance, interaction, fellowship, mutual influence,<br />
and mutual transfer <strong>of</strong> ministers, churches, and<br />
members. In 1994, major Trinitarian Pentecostal and<br />
Charismatic organizations joined together in the<br />
Pentecostal/Charismatic Churches <strong>of</strong> North America<br />
(PCCNA), which replaced the Pentecostal Fellowship <strong>of</strong><br />
North America (PFNA).<br />
While we have discussed various practices and<br />
emphases that are typical <strong>of</strong> Charismatics, we must also<br />
note that many classical Pentecostals, especially trinitarians,<br />
have adopted many <strong>of</strong> them. Although Pentecostalism<br />
gave rise to the Charismatic movement, the latter is<br />
now exerting greater influence on the former. The Charismatics<br />
have generally prevailed on matters <strong>of</strong> holiness<br />
and fellowship, and they are significantly affecting forms<br />
<strong>of</strong> worship, views <strong>of</strong> end-time prophecy, and the initial<br />
evidence doctrine.<br />
Classical Pentecostal organizations have taken clear<br />
stands against the doctrinal innovations <strong>of</strong> Charismatics,<br />
however. For example, the Assemblies <strong>of</strong> God has adopted<br />
<strong>of</strong>ficial position papers against the Positive Confession<br />
doctrine, the Kingdom Now doctrine, the excesses <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Shepherding movement, the belief that <strong>Christian</strong>s can<br />
have demons, absolutist views on divine healing, and<br />
316