Chapter 10.14

A History of Super-supernaturalism

The Making of a Monumental Delusion

 

Table of Topics

A) The Condemnation of the First Super-supernaturalists: the Montanists

B) The Condemnation of Super-supernaturalism for 1600 years of Christianity

C) The Modern “Waves” of Super-supernaturalism

C.1) The “first wave”: Classic Pentecostalism

C.2) The “second wave”: “Charismatic renewal”

C.3) The “third wave”: The Vineyard Movement

D) The Modern Approval & Popularity of Super-supernaturalism

Extras & Endnotes

Primary Points

• When Christians just as spiritual as any today have virtually universally avoided super-supernaturalism like a spiritual plague for over 1600 years, we should be very slow to significantly differ from them.
• The first false teaching popular and serious enough to cause the first synod was Montanism and it was condemned for the very things that are unique to modern super-supernaturalism today.
• Pentecostalism in America essentially began on the very first day of the twentieth century, January 1, 1900, when Charles Parham laid his hands on a young women who began to speak gibberish supposed to be Chinese.
• Parham’s false teachings, racism, and immorality should cause concern over the roots and fruit of this movement that has swept Christianity.
• The “first wave” of super-supernaturalism was an embarrassment to Christians, which is an effect that no real move of the Holy Spirit has ever had in either biblical or Church history.
• “Charismatic renewal” has been the most divisive movement in the history of Christianity, causing more local church splits than any other doctrinal issue ever has.
• Contrary to super-supernaturalist doctrine, real moves of the Holy Spirit do not offend other Christians because “love . . . is not rude”.
• The supposed “third wave” of the Spirit was instigated by a homosexual hypnotist.
• The doctrinal retreat and defeat that has occurred regarding super-supernaturalism in only the last one tenth of one percent of Church history is unparalleled in all the history of Christianity
• Although the conclusions and biblical arguments of our study in the following chapters might be considered the minority view today, throughout those 1600 years it would have reflected the almost universal view of the most respected Bible teachers.

A) The Condemnation of the First Super-supernaturalists: the Montanists

While today the beliefs, claims, and practices of super-supernaturalism are widely accepted with little concern, throughout Church history they have been denounced and condemned as demonic and heretical deceptions. That does not prove that the same should occur today, but when Christians just as spiritual as any today have virtually universally avoided super-supernaturalism like a spiritual plague for over 1600 years, we should be very slow to significantly differ from them. While elsewhere we go into more detail concerning the history of each miraculous gift in question, here we share a rather brief overview. ^[1]

The first group within Christianity to exhibit super-supernaturalists tendencies were the Montanists, named after a self-proclaimed “prophet” named Montanus. This movement began on the heels of the Apostolic Age around the year 170, spread widely throughout the known world, and persisted into the eighth century. As the standard reference Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature puts it:

Montanism, in the first place, sought a forced continuance of the miraculous gifts of the apostolic church which gradually disappeared as Christianity became settled in humanity, and its supernatural principle was naturalized on earth. ^[2]

Likewise, one of the most respected Church historians, Philip Schaff (1819–1893) writes:

Montanism . . . was an excessive supernaturalism and puritanism against Gnostic rationalism and Catholic laxity. It is the first example of an earnest and well-meaning, but gloomy and fanatical hyper-Christianity, which, like all hyper-spiritualism, is apt to end in the flesh. Scenes took place similar to those under the preaching of the first Quakers, and the glossolalia [tongues speaking] and prophesying in the Irvingite congregations. The frantic movement soon far exceeded the intention of its authors, spread to Rome and North Africa, and threw the whole church into commotion. ^[3]

Because the Montanists believed themselves to be the special recipients of a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit Dr. Schaff adds that they:

called themselves the pneumatics, or the spiritual church, in distinction from the psychical (or carnal) . . . church. . . . They put a great gulf between [themselves as] the true spiritual Christians and the merely psychical; and this induced spiritual pride and false pietism. ^[4]

Along the same lines, the well-known Presbyterian theologian Donald Bloesch writes:

The Montanists heralded the new age of the Spirit and the fulfillment of Christian baptism in a baptism of the Spirit. They were eager to reclaim the charismatic gifts, including prophecy and speaking in other tongues (glossolalia). . . . The Montanists saw themselves as the illuminati, the specially enlightened. ^[5]

There are two remarkable things about the Montanists that directly apply to our current topic. First, their similarities to modern super-supernaturalism are undeniable. They claimed a special reception of the Holy Spirit, practiced a version of the gift of tongues that did not involve miraculously speaking in foreign human languages, and they claimed the gift of prophecy but never predicted the future.

Secondly, they were virtually universally judged as dangerous to the sound doctrine and spiritual health of Christians. Accordingly, Kenneth Latourette, former Professor of Church History at Yale relates:

The first . . . synod [gathering of early Church leaders] . . . was held to deal with Montanism. The movement was condemned as heretical and its adherents were expelled from the Church and debarred from communion. ^[6]

 

The very first false teaching that was popular and serious enough to bring the leadership of the early Church together was Montanism and it was condemned for the very things that are unique to modern super-supernaturalism today. While those Christians less than a century after the Apostolic Age condemned and excommunicated the Montanists as dangerous heretics precisely because of their “charismatic” claims, the Church today lauds similar claims as a movement of the Holy Spirit. ^[7]

So we are left to ask again, why has the mood of Evangelical Christianity changed so dramatically on this issue over the last one tenth of one percent of Church history? The simple answer is that during those same 30 years, American Christianity has experienced a significant decline in the pursuit and value of doctrinal purity in general, and has increasingly abandoned Authentic Christianity and defined spiritual success

B) The Condemnation of Super-supernaturalism for 1600 years of Christianity

Super-supernaturalism and its claims to the miraculous gifts of the Spirit occurred sporadically among Christians until around 1900. Without exception, these self-proclaimed “movements of the Spirit” were condemned by the most spiritual, committed, fruitful, and learned Christians of their day. The Jansenists, French Prophets, Shakers, Irvingites, and early Mormons all emphasized precisely what super-supernaturalism emphasizes today, and they were all condemned as unbiblical, dangerous, deceitful, and divisive movements of the flesh, if not the devil.

While modern super-supernaturalists can claim that our Christian forefathers were misguided in their reaction to claims to the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, it cannot be denied that for well over the first 1600 years of Christianity, after the Apostolic Age, claims to the miraculous gifts were extremely rare, and when they did arise they were denounced and avoided like a spiritual plague. This, of course, is discussed in much more detail elsewhere in KOG. ^[8]

C) The Modern “Waves” of Super-supernaturalism

In the previous chapter, we noted the popular perspective that the twentieth century experienced three distinct “waves of the Holy Spirit” reflected in Pentecostalism in the early 1900’s, “charismatic renewal” in the 1960’s and 70’s, and the “third wave” in the 80’s and 90’s. We would like to suggest that both the roots and much of the fruit of these so-called “waves of the Holy Spirit” have been characteristically unholy. Regardless of how popular super-supernaturalism is today, the nature of its beginnings is an important aspect of evaluating its true nature today.

Accordingly, Rick Joyner, a foremost leader of super-supernaturalism today writes:

Understanding how true moves of God begin is crucial. . . . Just as the genetic code that determines what a grown man will look like is set at conception, the genetic code of entire movements is usually set even before their birth. ^[9]

Mr. Joyner’s words are self-condemning because, unfortunately, the “genetic code” of the supposed “three waves of the Holy Spirit” has some considerable flaws.

C.1) The “first wave”: Classic Pentecostalism

The twentieth century, of course, marks the beginning of super-supernaturalism in America. Pentecostalism in America essentially began on the very first day of the twentieth century, January 1, 1900, when Charles Parham (1873-1929) laid his hands on a young women who began to speak gibberish supposed to be Chinese. Accordingly, the Pentecostal historian Walter Hollenwager describes Mr. Parham as, “the “inventor” of the doctrine of tongues as the initial, outward sign of the Baptism of the Spirit” ^[10]

While we discuss this incident further elsewhere, it would seem his false teaching concerning the baptism of the Holy Spirit, grandiose expectations laid upon young college students in his classes, and demonic influences all coalesced to create an atmosphere in which speaking in tongues manifested itself. ^[11]

In addition to Mr. Parham’s ardent belief that speaking in tongues was the evidence that someone had been baptized in the Holy Spirit, he also believed that “one need only receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit and he could go to the farthest corners of the world and preach to the natives in languages unknown to the speaker.” ^[12] Pentecostal historian Vinson Synan relates that when Mr. Parham’s teaching was put to the test by missionary Alfred Garr in India “it ended in failure.” ^[13] Mr. Parham was correct, of course, (unlike his glossaist contemporaries) to claim that the biblical gift of tongues was the miraculous ability to speak in foreign human languages just as it had occurred at Pentecost (cf. Acts 2:1-12). ^[14] However, we believe Mr. Parham was wrong to think anyone he knew actually had the gift.

In addition, Mr. Parham taught that Anglo-Saxons (whites) were God’s chosen race. ^[15] Blacks were not allowed to sit in his classes but were forced to sit in a hallway. ^[16] Mr. Parham was against mixed marriages and felt that there should be a separation of the races at church services. In fact, while contemporary leaders of super-supernaturalism such as Rick Joyner refer to Charles Parham as the “true spiritual father . . . of the modern Pentecostal Movement,” ^[17] Mr. Synan reveals that Mr. Parham spent “the later years of his life as an avid supporter of the Ku Klux Klan.” ^[18] One would think this would be a great embarrassment to those within Pentecostal/Charismatic circles today who are spearheading a noble effort to bring whites and blacks together.

Finally, because of the many allegations of sexual immorality that surrounded Mr. Parham’s life, and actually being arrested in 1907 for homosexual activity, it is worth noting the remark of respected Church historian Edith Blumhofer that, “Pursued by charges of sexual infraction, Parham was rejected by a large percentage of his followers in Texas and increasingly ministered on the peripheries of mainstream Pentecostalism.” ^[19]

Charles Parham is the recognized modern founder of a phenomenon that has swept Christianity in the last century, and his unbiblical teaching regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the gift of tongues, and his racism, and immorality should cause some concern regarding the roots and fruit of this movement.

Considering Mr. Parham’s view of blacks, it is remarkable that the next recognized leader of the Pentecostal movement ^[20] was a “Southern Negro [who was a] short, stocky man, [and] minus one eye,” ^[21] and who Mr. Synan says, “was given to dreams and visions.” ^[22] His name was William Seymour (1870-1922), a student of Mr. Parham’s (although one of the black “hallway” students). Although William Seymour understandably took offense at Charles Parham’s bigotry, he wholeheartedly embraced his idea that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was solely evidenced by speaking in tongues.

In the early years of the 1900’s Mr. Seymour moved to Los Angeles and began meetings that would prove to be a watershed event in super-supernaturalism. Hank Hanegraaff, the well known head of the Christian Research Institute and a member of charismaticism himself, writes in his very important book, Counterfeit Revival:

On April 18, 1906, subscribers to the Los Angeles Times were startled by the headline “Weird Babel of Tongues.” The article proclaimed: “New Sect of Fanatics Is Breaking Loose; Wild Scene Last Night on Azusa Street; Gurgle of Wordless Talk.” . . .

The notoriety only served to fan the flame. As news spread, people from across America headed to Azusa Street to “catch the fire.” The endtime restoration of Pentecostal power proved to be so compelling that Christians and cultists alike suspended their meetings and headed to 312 Azusa Street. Together they engaged in the “jerks” . . . It wasn’t long before “spiritualists and mediums from the numerous occult societies of Los Angeles began to attend and to contribute their seances and trances to the services.”

In time things got so out of hand that “Seymour wrote Parham for advice on how to handle ‘the spirits’ and begged him to come to Los Angeles to take over supervision of the revival.” When Parham arrived, he was outraged at the spiritual pandemonium he encountered. He forcefully denounced the “hypnotists and spiritualists [occult mediums] who seemed to have taken over the services.”

While Seymour was sympathetic to Parham’s concerns, he refused correction, and the two pillars of Pentecostalism suffered an irreparable falling out. Seymour barred Parham from ever preaching at Azusa Street again. Parham, in turn, denounced Seymour as “possessed.” ^[23]

Doesn’t the types of things occurring in these meetings tell us something about the character of their leader, and what he was teaching? Why would occultists feel so comfortable in, and attracted to, Mr. Seymour’s “revival?” We would suggest it was because there was very little authentic Christian spirituality or teaching occurring.

In spite of the false doctrine, demonic practices, and virtually universal rejection of authentic Christian leaders in America regarding William Seymour’s ministry, modern super-supernaturalists have made him a hero. Rick Joyner, for example, regards his “remarkable leadership at Azusa” ^[24] as the key to supposedly giving the Holy Spirit the freedom that He needed in “the recovery of lost truth”:

In spite of almost constant pressure from world renowned church leaders, who came from around the globe to impose what they perceived to be needed order and direction on the [supposed] revival, for over two years Seymour held the course and allowed the Holy Spirit to move in His own, often mysterious ways. ^[25]

It is amazing how much we are prone to revise history when such revisions can serve to support our present delusions. Mr. Seymour had absolutely no biblical support to claim that his “revival” was of the Holy Spirit. ^[26] Tongues and emotional worship services are features of demonic religions around the world, and there was little in the first supposed “wave of the Spirit” to prove that it was. Simply put, the first modern super-supernaturalists were not known by anyone as exemplary examples of supernatural virtue, the only real sign of a wave of the Holy Spirit.

Essentially, at this point in the history of super-supernaturalism, it was regarded as a non-Christian cult by Evangelicals. Philip Jenkins, Distinguished Professor of History and Religious Studies at Penn State, relates in his insightful book, Mystics and Messiahs: Cults and New Religions in American History that the rise of super-supernaturalism was generally caught up with the rise of American cults such as Christian Science and Mormonism, and widely considered a non-Christian cult itself by the Christian community.

Dr. Jenkins relates:

The 1880’s were an exciting time of growth for the new movements promising spiritual healing, which coalesced into the church of Christian Science and the various schools of New Thought. . . .

Mind-cure [like Christian Scientists] continued to attract a powerful and lasting religious polemic because it seemed to be importing into Christianity ideas with strong occult and Asian connotations, misleadingly labeled a rediscovery of an authentic Christian tradition. . . .

In their first decades, Holy Rollers [so named because of their habit of rolling on the ground during their worship services], or Pentecostals, were consistently viewed as another classic cult, though they were usually deemed so outrageous and even ludicrous as not to need the detailed refutation offered by scholars. . . . In fact, some Pentecostals did accept heretical and anti-Trinitarian views, but we rarely find their opinions denounced by the theologians [because] . . . Pentecostalism was beneath contempt and chiefly featured in the mainstream media as a source of humor or shock value. If New Thought [i.e. Christian Science] was a modernist fad of the leisured, Pentecostalism seemed a bizarre irruption of pre-Christian primitivism into the twentieth century. They were the “Noisyrenes.”

[Nonetheless] the movement did not lack critics . . . the most savage attacks came from evangelicals, unsurprisingly given the . . . sense that Pentecostals were leading believers away from the revealed truth. Evangelicals stressed the faddery of the new movement, all the more so given its origins in the cult wonderland of Los Angeles, “the home of almost numberless creeds.”

British critics scorned a movement born in America, “the land of wonder-meetings and freak religions.” This was no Christian development, but a snare of Satan. . . . Enemies of Pentecostal fervor charged that the movement enticed the faithful to desert reason for a dangerous emotionalism. . . . Pentecostalism was mindless enthusiasm in the old sense of that word. . . .

In southern California, the dividing line between the Pentecostals and the New Age sects was never as hard and fast as one might expect. . . . At Azusa Street, evangelist William Seymour was repeatedly troubled by mediums and occultists who used Pentecostal services as a setting for seances, and a visiting preacher was shocked to see “the manifestations of the flesh, spiritualistic controls, [and] saw people practicing hypnotism at the altar over candidates seeking the baptism” . . . .

The two seemingly incompatible strands of belief, Pentecostal and New Age, were also united by their belief in spiritual healing. . . . Sinclair Lewis remarked that although spiritual healings like Sister Aimee’s [McPheerson] would soon become a feature of evangelistic services, they were in the early days more closely associated with Christian Scientists and New Thoughters.

Pentecostal sects, like the New Age groups, also had strong female components in their leadership. However little it superficially resembles New Thought, Pentecostalism was similarly denounced as a vehicle for Oriental and occult influences. ^[27]

However, it was not only the Church which initially denounced super-supernaturalism but, less importantly the press did as well. Accordingly, Dr. Jenkins reports that during this time:

Life magazine offered a harrowing photo spread of snake-handling services, with captions describing “cultists” and “hysterical saints.” . . . When these . . . believers spoke in tongues, the magazine reported this as “a frenetic gibberish to which the cultists resort.” Newsweek similarly portrayed [Pentecostals as] a “weird cult” of “fanatical, jerking, cultists.” ^[28]

And we are to believe this was a second Pentecost? Let us note that in the real Pentecost the gift of tongues was readily recognized by unbelievers as a miracle from God (cf. Acts 2:1-12), whereas in this supposed Pentecost, it is recognized only as “frenetic gibberish.” Accordingly, the leaders, doctrines, and practices of the “first wave” of super-supernaturalism was an embarrassment to Christians, which is an effect that no real move of the Holy Spirit has ever had in either biblical or Church history. Authentic movements of the Holy Spirit do not, and never have, alarmed or embarrassed authentic Christians. But that was precisely the foremost effect of the “first wave” of super-supernaturalism in America, which certainly suggests a defective “genetic code” indeed.

C.2) The “second wave”: “Charismatic renewal”

Regarding what would be considered the “second wave” of this supposed modern outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Hank Hanegraaff relates:

Most historians point to April 3, 1960, as the official birthdate of the charismatic movement. On this Sunday Father Dennis Bennett (1917-1991), an Episcopal priest, publicly announced to his parishioners that he had received the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues. . . .

By 1963 the topic of tongues had become a common subject of conversation in Christian circles. [In an article in Eternity magazine] a Lutheran [charismatic] Pastor [referred to charismatic phenomenon] as ‘charismatic renewal,’ the first time this designation was used in a definitive manner. . . . This new designation reflected definitive distinctions between the [supposed] first and second waves of the Spirit.

In the first wave, tongues were typically considered the evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. In the second, tongues were thought to be an evidence. Furthermore, while it had been common for first wave leaders to encourage their devotees to become denominational Pentecostals, prominent second wave leaders urged followers to remain in their denominations and effect change from within. They were convinced that only through the restoration of charismatic gifts would there be hope for global revival. . . .

Todd Hunter [national coordinator of the Association of Vineyard Churches] believes that the second wave crested in 1977 at a hugely successful interdenominational charismatic conference in Kansas City. After that the charismatic renewal was “forever divided” and began “to lose its steam.” ^[29]

A prominent feature of “charismatic renewal” was its beginnings and spread in essentially spiritually dead mainline denominational churches, including to a great extent Roman Catholic churches, in which sound doctrinal teaching from Scripture had been abandoned and even the Gospel unheard of. Nor did “charismatic renewal” begin with sound doctrinal teaching or the preaching of the Gospel in these relatively dead churches. And again, the fruits of this supposed outpouring of the Holy Spirit were never known to be exceptional holiness or love, but in fact, the opposite.

“Charismatic renewal” turned out to be the most divisive movement in the history of Christianity, causing more local church splits than any other doctrinal issue ever has. Not only did thousands of churches experience people being torn from their membership by super-supernatural doctrines and practices, but no religious movement has experienced more splits among themselves than this one.

For example, if one were to compare the number of church splits among Baptist since 1960, with those occurring in super-supernaturalists churches, everyone knows that the splits in the latter far exceed those in the former. It is no joke that one of the reasons for the growth in the number of super-supernatural churches is because of the selfish, proud, destructive divisions that have occurred among them.

Accordingly, charismatic historian Richard Quebedeaux admitted that wherever this so-called move of the Holy Spirit occurred, Christians, “were profoundly disturbed by the confusion and division that seemed to attend the appearance of Neo-Pentecostalism in their denominations.” ^[30] Likewise, Dr. Paul G. Hiebert, former Distinguished Professor of Mission and Anthropology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School has written:

Unfortunately, divisions frequently occur when renewal takes place. This is true also in the Charismatic Movement, which, particularly in third world countries, has been characterized by divisions and sectarianism. ^[31]

What divisive authentic spiritual renewal could Dr. Hiebert possibly have in mind? The first century awakening divided believers from unbelievers. This was the essence of the division that occurred in the Protestant Reformation as well. The foremost and most respected leaders of the Great Awakening in the eighteenth century were unanimous that it was the spiritual fakes and super-supernaturalists that caused confusion and division among believers, not the movements of the Holy Spirit.

Along these lines, an article appeared in Christianity Today in 1975 that told the following story:

J. Grant Shank, Jr., writing in Christianity Today described the arrival and departure from his church of a group of a dozen tongue-speakers. Grant Shank, pastor of a Nazarene church (a group that maintains second blessing and Arminian teaching) gave these friends a warm welcome. There were smiles all round, hand-shakes and the familiar expression, much repeated, ‘praise the Lord!’

After several months, relates Shank, it was obvious that these newcomers regarded themselves as spiritually superior with a ‘know-it-all’ attitude giving the impression that the non-glossolalia [tongues] members had not ‘arrived’ spiritually speaking. This seemed to blind them to the fact that there were serious deficiencies in their own lives in the area of disciplined living. . . .

[P]astor Shank . . . was deeply grieved. He noted that I Corinthians 12 teaches unity and that whatever brings disunity is not to be tolerated. He could see a split coming in his church and after doing his best to offer a basis of cordiality and understanding with the tongue-speakers he was compelled to admit defeat.

He had hoped that the additions would be a blessing to the assembly and result in soul-winning but he came reluctantly to the firm conclusion that the tongue-speakers ‘did not have the Holy Spirit.’ They were possessed with a counterfeit, a fake. They were living on an ego trip, a manufactured religious ‘High.’ The daily lives of these people did not match their witness, and so they hurt him, the congregation, and their own testimony as well as the cause of Jesus Christ.

The tongue-speakers left for another church but pastor Shank has noted that these people become ‘church hoppers’ and when they move on they do not hesitate to take people with them and when they have left ‘they criticise with barbed speech persons in the previous church.’ ^[32]

This story reflects the experiences of a multitude of congregations during the so-called “charismatic renewal” in the 1960’s and 70’s. Instead of bringing a blessing of unity, humility, and peace among Christians, which any real movement of the Holy Spirit will do, the most prominent feature of this movement was that a multitude of Christians and churches experienced the painful destruction of their relationships with one another.

This is rather alarming considering the fact that, “God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints” (1 Cor 14:33). Such things smell demonic, not divine. The “the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3) will automatically occur when the Holy Spirit is truly operating within and among Christians. Relational upheaval and turmoil among God’s people are the works of another spirit.

Contrary to super-supernaturalist doctrine, real moves of the Holy Spirit do not offend other Christians because “love . . . is not rude” (1 Cor 13:5) and the “in your face” antics and claims of the “second wave” of super-supernaturalism in America had just that feel. Instead of earning the respect of their Christian peers by their virtue, they repelled them by their arrogance, weirdness, and unbiblical doctrines and practices, and no super-supernaturalist can point to any other authentic movement of the Holy Spirit that affected authentic Christians the way super-supernaturalism has.

Of course, super-supernaturalist claim that the many divisions that occurred during this supposed “wave of the Spirit” were a result of the Church’s unwillingness to welcome a new move of God. In reality, “charismatic renewal” was introducing and promoting Montanist interpretations of Scripture and experience that had been rather universally condemned as heretical, dangerous, and even demonic by the godliest people in the Church for over 1600 years.

For all of these reasons, the virtual universal response to “charismatic renewal” by Evangelical Christians was rejection, warning, and condemnation. The foremost teachers of Evangelicalism in that day biblically debunked and denounced it, including Anthony Hoekema (What About Speaking in Tongues?, 1966), Robert G. Gromacki (The Modern Tongues Movement, 1967), Merrill F. Unger (New Testament Teaching on Tongues, 1971), Francis Schaeffer (The New Super-spirituality, 1972), Joseph Dillow (Speaking in Tongues, 1975), Douglas Judisch (An Evaluation of Claims to the Charismatic Gifts, 1978), and Richard B. Gaffin (Perspectives on Pentecost, 1979), and a number of scholarly articles in such respected journals as the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Bibliotheca Sacra, Westminster Theological Journal, and Grace Theological Journal.

Therefore, while “charismatic renewal” found open doors in theologically liberal, non-Evangelical denominations, it was essentially rejected by Evangelical Christianity until the 1980’s.

C.3) The “third wave”: The Vineyard Movement

Many believe that super-supernaturalism would have remained in those liberal non-Evangelical denominations, and eventually died out, except the deception found another open door through the relatively liberal Fuller Theological Seminary and John Wimber (1934-1997). Accordingly, the charismatic scholar Hank Hanegraaff continues in his Counterfeit Revival:

Just as the “charismatic renewal is beginning to peter out” something “dramatic happened.” Along came a man named John Wimber who, according to such church growth leaders as Peter Wagner, “spawned the third wave—the third wave of the Holy Spirit in this century.” [As if the Spirit has only, or mostly, been active only in modern super-supernaturalism?]. . . .

While the first and second waves had restored such supernatural gifts as tongues and healing, the third wave would restore super Apostles and Prophets. Counterfeit Revival leader Jack Deere says that with the third wave would come endtime Apostles and Prophets who would “do greater works than the Apostles, than Jesus, or any of the Old Testament Prophets.”

Paul Cain, whom Deere believes to be one of these endtime Prophets, says that the emerging third wave will “contain the good [?] of all previous moves and much more. . . . [Cain says] When God “releases His mighty wave it’s going to engulf everybody. . . . Something’s going to come so strong to you that you won’t even know that there be any baptism of the Holy Ghost compared to the enormous baptism you’re about to receive.” ^[33]

We are still waiting for this false prophet’s predictions to come true.

The premier leader of the “third wave” is, no doubt, John Wimber. ^[34] Erwin Lutzer, longtime teacher at the Moody Bible Church writes of Mr. Wimber:

The late John Wimber, who founded the Vineyard Movement, said that the two most important miracles for impressing unbelievers are “falling [being “slain”] in the power of the Spirit and filling teeth.” Some of the Vineyard Prophets actually claim to “smell God” when those seeking healing come to them as the walls of their offices dissolve and they see visions of the person’s past. Clouds with dollar signs appear over the heads of people in an auditorium who have financial problems.

John Armstrong is quite correct when he writes, “Advance courses in healing are offered, as though it were training in the magical arts.” Such an approach blends nicely with the superstition, magic, and spiritual dimensions of the New Age Movement.

No wonder Wimber actually defended the practice of employing medieval relics in healing. “In the Catholic Church for over a 1,200-year period people were healed as a result of touching the relics of the saints. We Protestants have difficulty with that . . . but we healers shouldn’t, because there is nothing theologically out of line with that.” ^[35]

Nonetheless, Mr. Wimber wanted to be considered a consistent Evangelical, which one has to wonder about when he said, “I identify myself as a ‘conservative evangelical’ in my theology. I identify myself as something other than that in my practice.” ^[36]

Mr. Wimber’s apparent looseness with the Scriptures may be further demonstrated by his response to an earthquake that hit southern California on December 3, 1988. He believed it to be a prophetic omen and:

[Wimber] concluded that the interpretation of this omen would be found in Jeremiah 33:8 [because the earthquake had hit at 3:38 A.M.]. Wimber explained that “near judgment” had “come on the Vineyard as a result of immorality in the ranks.” . . . . But God’s promise through Jeremiah 33:8 was “I will cleanse them—the Vineyard—from all the sin that they have committed against Me” . . . .

As Wimber went on to say, God Himself appeared to [Paul] Cain and told him that since the sins of Vineyard leaders had been forgiven, “I [Wimber] was the man that he [Paul Cain] had been looking for [the “endtime Apostle”] and . . . we were the people [the Vineyard Association of Churches] and this is the movement that God wants to endorse and begin this ministry with.” ^[37]

In addition, it would seem that Mr. Wimber had a habit of embellishing the truth (i.e. lying) for his own advantage at times. ^[38] It is pointed out elsewhere that super-supernaturalist theologian Max Turner admitted the same regarding Mr. Wimber’s claims to the abundance of healing occurring in the Vineyard Churches. ^[39] Mr. Hanegraaff relates what would appear to be intentional deception on Mr. Wimber’s part in his own description of how the “third wave” of super-supernaturalism began:

It was Mother’s Day 1979, and all hell broke loose. John Wimber had invited a young evangelist to speak during the evening service at his church. He says the “power encounter” that took place that night was “similar to the one described at Pentecost.” . . . Here’s Wimber’s recollection of that unforgettable evening:

I had invited a young man to speak at the evening service of the church at which I had only recently become pastor, what would later become the Vineyard Christian Fellowship in Anaheim, California. . . . I was apprehensive about him, but I sensed God wanted him to speak nevertheless. He had been used by God to lead Christians into a refreshing experience of the Holy Spirit, and it was obvious to me that the congregation needed spiritual renewal. . . . That evening he gave his testimony, a powerful story of God’s grace. As he spoke, I relaxed. Nothing strange here I thought.

Then he did something that I had never seen done in a church gathering. He finished his talk and said, “Well, that’s my testimony. Now the church has been offending the Holy Spirit a long time and it’s quenched. So we are going to invite it to come and minister.” We all waited. The air became thick with anticipation—and anxiety. Then he said, “Holy Spirit, come.” And it [it? As if it is a power, not a Person?] did! (I must remind you that we were not a “Pentecostal” church with experience or understanding of the sorts of things that began to happen. What happened could not have been learned behavior.)

People fell to the floor. Others, who did not believe in tongues, loudly spoke in tongues. The speaker roamed among the crowd, praying for people, who then immediately fell over with the Holy Spirit resting on them. I was aghast! All I could think throughout the experience was “Oh, God, get me out of here.”

In the aftermath, we lost church members and my staff was extremely upset. That night I could not sleep. Instead, I spent the evening reading Scripture, looking for the verse, “Holy Spirit, come.” I never found it. By 4:30 in the morning I was more upset than I was earlier at the meeting. . . . I . . . found a box of books about revivals and revivalists and began to read them. By 6:00 I had found at least ten examples of similar phenomena in church history . . . ^[40]

First, we will see below that Mr. Wimber is flat out lying about his church not having “’Pentecostal’ . . . experience or understanding.” Secondly, what in Scripture or Church history would lead us to think that losing church members and making pastoral staff “extremely upset” is a fruit of the Holy Spirit’s work? Finally, whatever “examples of similar phenomena in church history” that Mr. Wimber found, none of them were considered by contemporaries as evidences of the Holy Spirit’s work. This we demonstrate at length elsewhere. ^[41]

Carol Wimber describes this same event as the “watershed experience that launched us into what today is called power evangelism . . . [although] she disagreed with her husband on the date (John says it was 1979, Carol says it was 1981).” ^[42] Much of Carol’s rendition significantly differs from John’s, but she concurs that it seemed the Holy Spirit had visited them. She adds:

One fellow, Tim, started bouncing. His arms flung out and he fell over, but one of his hands accidentally hit a mike stand and he took it down with him. . . . The majority of young people were shaking and falling over. At one point it looked like a battlefield scene-bodies everywhere, people weeping, wailing, and speaking in tongues, much shouting and loud behavior. . . .

Some members of our staff were fearful and angry. Several people got up and walked out, never to be seen again-at least they were not seen by us. But I knew that God was visiting us. I was so thrilled, because I had been praying for power for so long…. I got up and started stepping over bodies and putting my hand next to them. I could feel the power, like heat or electricity, radiating off of their bodies.

I asked one boy who was on the floor, “What’s happening to you right now?” He said, “It’s like electricity. I can’t move!” I was amazed by the effect of God’s power on the human body. I suppose I thought that it would all be an inward work, such as conviction or repentance. I never imagined there would be strong physical manifestations. ^[43]

This is the “watershed experience” that launched the supposed “third wave of the Holy Spirit.” Only one question needs to be answered. Where in Scripture is the power of the Holy Spirit manifested in “bouncing,” “shaking and falling over,” “heat or electricity radiating off of bodies,” or paralysis? As we discuss elsewhere, these mindless antics have no biblical support whatsoever, and if they were not faked or of the flesh then they were demonic. ^[44]

Many have tried to claim some sort of supernatural authentication of the foundational event of the “third wave” by telling the following story that Carol Wimber shares:

By 5 A.M. John was desperate. He cried out to God, “Lord, if this is you, please tell me.” A moment later the phone rang and a pastor friend of ours from Denver, Colorado, was on the line. “John,” he said, “I’m sorry I’m calling so early, but I have something really strange to tell you. I don’t know what it means, but God wants me to say, ‘It’s me, John.” That was all John needed. He didn’t have to understand the trembling or why everything happened as it did. ^[45]

As we will see, this too was a fabrication of the Wimber’s.

After relating the version of the events as told by charismatic leader John White in his book, When the Spirit Comes with Power, the charismatic author Hanegraaff concludes:

What John Wimber portrayed as a “power encounter similar to the one described at Pentecost” is in fact founded on fantasies and fabrications. First, even a cursory examination of the three preceding accounts reveals broad ranging discrepancies. . . .

Second, John Wimber says he could not find any scriptural basis for what happened Mother’s Day 1979. He determined the devastation to be divine rather than demonic on the basis of a phone call that portended to be a message from God. The conditions and content of the call, however, are a matter of serious dispute.

The caller, Tom Stipe, says the story that “he had been awakened early, with the impression that God wanted him to give Wimber a three-word message” and that he had “no idea what the message would mean” is patently false. . . . Only after Wimber had told him about the events that had transpired did he offer any encouragement or support. . . .

Third, after spending several years studying historical revivals and revivalists, I find it hard to believe that Wimber could have objectively researched and reviewed “at least ten examples of similar phenomena: . . . all between 4:30 and 6:00 A.M.

Fourth, Wimber says what happened . . . was “something that I had never seen done in a church gathering.” He claims he was so “aghast” at seeing people fall to the floor and loudly speak in tongues.” In truth, however, he had seen all this and much, much more before. More to the point, he had done it all before. In 1978 for example, the year before “the evangelist” came to his church, he graphically portrays not only being slain in the spirit but slaying others in the spirit as well. . . .

Fifth, Wimber says that what happened . . . “could not have been learned behavior.”. . . however . . . both he and his congregation had long before experienced the slain in the spirit phenomenon. . . . His wife in fact wrote that in early April of 1978 “John went around the room praying for us, and an incredible power was released from his hands. He touched the people and they fell over. To John it was as though spiritual power came from his hands like electricity.”

Sixth, in a 1981 message titled “Spiritual Phenomenon: Slain in the Spirit—Part 3,” Wimber says, “in my life the Holy Spirit has never knocked me down. . . . I’m very open to it, but it’s not something God has done for me or to me.” Yet, as we have seen [in other quotations Hanegraaff provides], he previously claimed to have been knocked down both publicly and privately. ^[46]

And as for the man who came and initiated the whole bizarre affair that night, his name was Lonnie Frisbee, and as Hanegraaff succinctly puts it, he “was a hypnotist struggling with homosexuality. In 1995 he died of AIDS.” ^[47] Accordingly, before Mr. Frisbee’s supposed Christian “conversion,” he was known to have been a practicing hypnotist who dabbled in the Occult. ^[48] And as one of Mr. Frisbee’s biographers put it, “Lonnie’s homosexuality was documented as a bit of an open secret in the church community and he would “party” on Saturday night then preach Sunday morning.” ^[49] Sadly, Mr. Frisbee was divorced from his wife because his super-supernaturalist pastor had an affair with Mrs. Frisbee.

Mr. Wimber was in no way alarmed by Mr. Frisbee’s antics, but began traveling the world with him, both claiming to perform many healings and miracles for people. Accordingly, Mr. “Frisbee was integral to the development of what would become Mr. Wimber’s ‘Signs and Wonders’ theology.” ^[50] Lonnie Frisbee, the claimed instigator of the “third wave of the Spirit” is just one more example of the unholy root of this movement.

If John Wimber truly believed that the “power encounter” of that night “was similar to the one described at Pentecost,” then he was unfortunately deceived. More than that, it would seem he had lied about the foundational event of supposedly the “third wave” of the Holy Spirit, and it was anything but holy. Supernatural, perhaps, but not holy.

Let us note here that the men mentioned above are the foremost influencers of super-supernaturalism in the past and today. We have not simply picked out obscure individuals with shady credentials in order to discredit the movement. On the contrary, every one of them is portrayed as a spiritual hero in super-supernatural literature.

So then, what is the original and current “genetic code” of modern super-supernaturalism in America? A popular but heretical movement in the second century that was excommunicated from orthodox Christianity, a racist Ku Klux Klan member arrested for homosexual behavior, a revivalist who attracted occultists, the most divisive movement among Christians ever, another homosexual with hypnotic powers, a habitual liar (we’re sorry, there seems to be no other word for it), who believed God caused an earthquake just to communicate to his church that they were God’s chosen leaders of revival, and he was the “endtime Apostle.”

Does it surprise us then that for over 1600 years godly people had condemned whatever super-supernaturalism occurred among them? Which says a lot about a Church today who embraces it.

D) The Modern Approval & Popularity of Super-supernaturalism

We have already noted the historical fact that Christians have universally condemned super-supernatural doctrines, practices, and claims as demonic heresies since Montanism in 170 A.D., through the Middle Ages and Protestant Reformation, and into the early 1900’s. Accordingly, the Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, published just before the outbreak of Pentecostal phenomena in America, and considered a premier reference for the Christian scholar for decades, notes under the heading of “Spiritual Gifts”:

It is the prevailing view that the charisms, some of them at least, as those of miracles and tongues, belong not essentially and permanently to the Church, but were merely a temporary adventitious efflorescence of the apostolic period. . . and afterwards disappeared from history, giving place to the regular and natural kind of moral and religious activity. ^[51]

Today, however, the very same things are widely considered the foremost evidence of the Holy Spirit’s operation. Such a phenomenal change in popular opinion regarding a doctrinal issue is unparalleled in all the history of Christianity.

Super-supernaturalist theologian Max Turner partially illustrates this unprecedented reversal when he writes:

In September 1909, some fifty-six leaders of the Gnadau Alliance (the Pietist-Holiness current in German evangelical Protestantism) published the infamous ‘Berlin Declaration,’ which essentially maintained that the Pentecostal Movement was ‘not from on high, but from below,’ and that demons were at work in it. Amongst the reasons for branding it so were the curious manifestations (notably tongues), and the (alleged) propensity for prophecy to replace obedience to the word of God.

By 1990, the Pentecostal churches, together with their spiritual children in the Charismatic Renewal movement, and New Church movements, together formed 23.4 percent of the totality of the world’s church-member Christians (and by far the largest group in Protestant Christianity). The Pentecostal denominations are now respected members of broader evangelical alliances, and the Charismatic streams within the traditional denominations are similarly regarded. The earlier demonizing interpretation of the movement would receive little, if any, assent, except in the more bigoted extremes. ^[52]

Dr. Turner’s snapshot of the history of the debate regarding modern super-supernaturalism is revealing. Although for the most part looked upon with dread and dismay by Evangelicals throughout its first 70 years of existence, in the last 30 years, the movement has gained such popularity that Turner can say that the earlier critiques [and even today’s] were merely “bigoted extremes.”

Likewise, Assemblies of God seminary professor Douglas Oss writes:

The shift in the evangelical community with regard to miraculous gifts reached dramatic proportions by the late 1980’s. . . . Although there were inklings during the previous two decades, many Pentecostals did not realize just how pervasive a shift it would prove to be.

Even with the earlier publication of influential works such as Wayne Grudem’s books on prophecy and D. A. Carson’s Showing the Spirit, or developments such as Jack Deere’s departure from Dallas Theological Seminary because of his own spiritual and theological paradigm shift (detailed in his published testimony, Surprised By the Power of the Spirit), many Pentecostals were surprised at the extent of the change. With historical positions less entrenched, the realization dawned within most sectors of the Pentecostal community that there would now be increased opportunities for dialogue with noncharismatic evangelicals. ^[53]

While in the 1960’s and 70’s one could find a number of scholarly evaluations of super-supernatural doctrines, practices, and phenomena, by the 1990’s such writing was virtually absent from American Christianity. For example, illustrating the mainstream and relatively very recent acceptance of super-supernaturalism, the well known Baptist theologian Millard Erickson, would seem to abandon his usual candor and thoroughness on difficult doctrinal issues when it comes to this one. In his popular Christian Theology he devotes less than eight pages to the whole topic of “Miraculous Gifts” (as opposed to Grudem’s three substantial chapters). And worse than really not saying anything, what Dr. Erickson does say seems contradictory and wholly inaccurate. First he writes:

Because the issue has a significant effect on the fashion in which one conducts one’s Christian life, and even on the very style or tone of the Christian life, the question [of whether or not the miraculous gifts have been restored to the Church] cannot be simply ignored. ^[54]

Yet that is essentially what he does in his very brief comments on the issue. In just a few sentences he glosses over centuries of biblical studies and historical research with general statements that he fails to substantiate such as:

In my judgement it is not possible to determine with any certainty whether the contemporary Charismatic phenomena are indeed gifts of the Holy Spirit. ^[55]

And then, to add insult to injury for those who believe the Bible does have something to say regarding the issue, Dr. Erickson makes what would seem a most unfortunate statement:

In fact, it may be downright dangerous, in the light of Jesus’ warnings regarding blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, to attribute specific phenomena to demonic activity. ^[56]

In addition to what would seem a gross misapplication of what it means to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, ^[57] Dr. Erickson ignores the many warnings we are given in the NT that would compel us to carefully evaluate super-supernaturalist claims and “test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

Likewise, the respected Presbyterian theologian Donald Bloesch reflects the prevalent confused acceptance of super-supernaturalism when he writes:

While people of faith should be encouraged to embark on charismatic ministries, we must never base our confidence and assurance on ecstatic experiences and gifts. ^[58]

Why not? If indeed “charismatic ministries” are of the Holy Spirit and worthy of being encouraged as Dr. Bloesch claims, then we would be in sin to not base a great deal of confidence in them. God is not in the habit of tricking us as such a statement implies.

The doctrinal retreat and defeat that has occurred regarding super-supernaturalism in only the last one tenth of one percent of Church history is illustrated as well when the Evangelical Free turned super-supernaturalist pastor Doug Bannister writes:

Nearly every evangelical pastor I know who was taught the doctrine of cessation [historicism] in seminary has since rejected it. These pastors and I have traveled a path similar to one Dr. John Piper described to his congregation in a series of sermons he was preaching on the miraculous gifts. Dr. Piper is the pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis and a seminary professor at Bethel Seminary.

On February 25, 1990, Dr. Piper preached a sermon titled “Are Signs and Wonders for Today?” He began by holding up two stacks of books. One stack represented the cessation [historicist] tradition, the other stack the view that God still gives the miraculous gifts today. After reviewing the arguments from both points of view, he concluded by holding up the cessationist books [and saying] “I find in this tradition virtually every teacher that I’ve loved and benefited from. . . . I love these men. They are my kind of people. But I don’t find their arguments compelling.” ^[59]

This would be a sharp departure from Dr. Piper’s self-professed theological mentor Jonathan Edwards. Unfortunately, his inability to find compelling biblical arguments against super-supernaturalism may be due to the fact that scholarly and biblical evaluations of it haven’t been published since the 1970’s.

Likewise, we note the doctrinal journey of the eminent Baptist NT scholar Thomas Schreiner who wrote in 1996:

I believe that [super-supernaturalist Jack] Deere’s central thesis is correct. Cessationism [historicism] cannot be sustained through a careful study of the Scriptures. The spiritual gifts are still operative today, and we are exhorted to seek them diligently. Like Deere, I was trained in cessationist circles, and I am extremely grateful for the Biblical training I received. Indeed, I believe that the very exegetical method they taught me led me to renounce cessationism. The text should always be reforming our inherited theology.

I still have many questions, because I have not often experienced or seen dramatic manifestations of the spiritual gifts. But I have heard too many reputable accounts from people like Deere to think that my experience is the circumference of reality.

Ultimately it is his careful exegesis of the Biblical text that convinces me that he is correct in the major thesis of this book. I am not persuaded by every single argument made in the book. For instance, I am not convinced that the gift of Apostleship is still available today, but it would take too much time in this brief review to interact with that issue.

In any case, it does not follow from the cessation of the apostolic office that the rest of the spiritual gifts have ceased. In conclusion, Deere seems to be right when he says that it is experience, not the Biblical text, that has led most people to become cessationists. ^[60]

Yet, for all of Dr. Schreiner’s confidence in the super-supernatural teachings of ones like Jack Deere, just two years later he wrote:

In my own personal journey I have not settled upon a “position” on spiritual gifts. I was initially convinced upon reading Grudem and Deere, but further reflection has raised some doubts. ^[61]

Indeed, throughout this section of KOG we will argue many reasons to have a lot of doubts about the teachings of Wayne Grudem and Jack Deere.

The recent rise of long-condemned super-supernaturalism is also reflected in the fact that in the academic realm of Christian theology, super-supernaturalist teachers have become a significant part, if not a dominating force at many of the most influential and traditionally Evangelical seminaries in the world including Fuller, Gordon-Conwell, Regent, Trinity, and Wheaton.

Likewise, the Pentecostal NT scholar Gordon Fee was given the editorship of the influential New International Commentary on the New Testament series, and assigned the volume on 1 Corinthians in which he predictably interprets Paul from a Pentecostal perspective.

Accordingly, Sinclair Ferguson, former Professor of Systematic Theology at Westminster writes:

The cessationist [historicist] position, which once prevailed without serious rival as the accepted orthodoxy in the Reformation churches, is today widely regarded as reactionary and, indeed, as potentially quenching the Spirit. Continuationism or restorationism [i. e. super-supernaturalism] now bids well to become normative evangelical orthodoxy. . . . If this is so, misinterpretation [of both Scripture and super-supernaturalists’ experiences] on a large scale seems to have taken place in the twentieth century. ^[62]

One of the few exceptions during this period is respected Bible teacher John MacArthur, reflected in his book, The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective, published in 1978 and then updated and reprinted in 1992 as Charismatic Chaos. In it Dr. MacArthur addresses the topic in his characteristic “swimming against the tide” manner. Although some may not like Dr. MacArthur’s style, and even all of his opinions, one reason for his popularity, at least among laymen, is his willingness to call a spade a spade when it comes to doctrinal issues.

Some have probably justifiably accused Dr. MacArthur of using unnecessarily sensational examples of super-supernaturalist practices, and relying as much on negative super-supernaturalist experiences to prove his point, as he does careful biblical and theological arguments in Charismatic Chaos. However, no one has yet provided a biblically based refutation of his general conclusions.

Jack Deere’s book, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, written in 1993, certainly is not such a refutation. The glowing reviews by noted Christian leaders and the widespread acceptance of Deere’s super-supernaturalist tract in the Christian community, reflect the current state of affairs on this issue.

Subsequently, noted Christian apologist J. P. Moreland claims something that would have been considered heretical for over 1600 years of post-apostolic Christian history:

For learning to make progress in Kingdom power, you can’t do better than Jack Deere’s two books with Zondervan entitled Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (1993) and Surprised by the Voice of God (1996). ^[63]

On the contrary, we believe several subsequent chapters of KOG will demonstrate our fear that Mr. Deere has written two of the most deceptive and doctrinally unsound books ever accepted in Christian circles.

Not only does the popularity of Mr. Deere’s books reflect the popularity of super-supernatural phenomena in general, its popularity would seem to expose the doctrinal shallowness of contemporary Christians. The real persuasiveness of Deere’s books are not his “biblical” arguments, which apparently for many Christians would not seem necessary anyway. It is his experiences that invite us to follow his folly. Thankfully, Dr. Thomas Edgar’s book, Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit (1996) has provided a very biblical, thorough, and convincing refutation of Mr. Deere’s essentially experience based, but admittedly persuasive, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit.

It would seem that super-supernaturalists possibly recognized that even with the popular, although primarily experiential writings of Mr. Wimber and Mr. Deere, the movement still did not have clear biblical warrant. However, the respected exegetical ability of the Pentecostal NT scholar Dr. Gordon Fee in his First Epistle to the Corinthians (1987), the acceptance of much super-supernatural doctrine by the respected NT scholar D. A. Carson in his Showing the Spirit (1987), ^[64] and the theological expertise of Wayne Grudem in his Systematic Theology (1994), have served to give the movement a biblical spin that would seem more than sufficient to convince most Christians.

With the continued spectacular growth of super-supernatural churches in the 1990’s, its phenomena have become widely accepted as a biblical, positive, and valuable practice in the Body of Christ. Even among those who would not accept the “biblical” part, it is nonetheless tolerated. For sure, because of the apparent success of super-supernaturalism, tongues speaking, for example, is no longer that “crazy aunt in the attic” that they were once at least tempted to be embarrassed about. It is now a badge of honor, and when theologians and exegetes the likes of Fee, Carson, and Grudem write about it in such glowing, persuasive, and “biblical” sounding terms, we can be assured that the phenomenon is not only here to stay, but will continue to separate the Church into the spiritual “haves” and “have nots.”

So why has the beliefs and practices of super-supernaturalism become increasingly acceptable to the rest of Evangelical Christianity? Has the Bible changed? Were the best and brightest of the Church wrong about their interpretation of the Bible and super-supernatural claims and experiences for over 1600 years? The answer to all these questions is an affirmative “No.”

First of all, the Bible has not changed. Secondly, the vast majority of Bible teachers from 300 A.D. to 1980 taught that the practices and beliefs of super-supernaturalism were unscriptural, misleading, dangerous, and possibly demonic. ^[65] Although the conclusions and biblical arguments of our study in the following chapters might be considered the minority view today, throughout those 1600 years it would have reflected the almost universal view of the most respected Bible teachers.

If one desires to deny that twentieth century charismaticism is the most divisive doctrinal delusion in the history of Christianity, then they need to refute the biblical and historical arguments given for the traditional position on the gift of prophecy in Book 9, on miracle working in Book 11, and on the gift of tongues in Book 12.

So we are left to ask again, why has the mood of Evangelical Christianity changed so dramatically on this issue over the last one tenth of one percent of Church history? The simple answer is that during those same 30 years, American Christianity has experienced a significant decline in the pursuit and value of doctrinal purity in general, and has increasingly abandoned Authentic Christianity and defined spiritual success as numerical growth, popularity, crowds, buildings, wealth, dynamic speakers, and spiritual experiences. Super-supernaturalism has excelled in the very things that the rest of American Christianity has pursued, and it would seem that it has therefore become increasingly difficult to critique such overwhelming and apparent “spiritual success.” However, as we argue in the next chapter, that “success” has been greatly exaggerated, just like just about everything else in super-supernaturalism.

Extras & Endnotes

A Devotion to Dad

Our Father in Heaven, we are reminded today that we have a very real and sinister enemy. Unfortunately he is invisible and we are prone to focus on what we can see, hear, and touch. Oh God, may we not be led to think that the real enemy is our super-supernatural brothers and sisters.

Help us to obey the Apostle’s instructions to Timothy: “The Lord’s servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will” (2 Tim 2:24-26).

Let us ponder for a moment what the great deceiver has done. He has led, and continues to lead, multitudes of our siblings into serious, damaging, idolatrous, and unbiblical beliefs and practices. And those beliefs and practices have understandably divided us.

And yet, it would seem when we try to tear down that dividing wall, when we try to expose the evil one with the Word of Truth, those same brothers and sisters in Christ are merely offended, and the dividing wall goes higher. And there stands the devil, in the middle, laughing at us all, because both his deception and the division become even greater.

Gauging Your Grasp

1. What is the significance of the fact that the most godly Christians virtually universally avoided super-supernaturalism like a spiritual plague for over 1600 years?

 

1. What was the reason the first synod of the early Church met? What was the result? How does this relate to the modern debate regarding super-supernaturalism?
2. How and when is Pentecostalism considered to have begun in America? What are characteristics of its beginning that make it suspicious of claiming to be a movement of the Holy Spirit?
3. What was the general response of Evangelical Christianity to early Pentecostalism? Why has it changed so dramatically today?
4. Historically, what was the foremost fruit of the “charismatic renewal” of the 1960’s and 70’s? What does this indicate about the “renewals” source?
5. According to the history of the supposed “third wave” of the Spirit in the Vineyard Church, who was instigator of this movement? What characteristics of this man cause doubt that he led a movement of the Holy Spirit?
6. We claim the doctrinal retreat and defeat that has occurred regarding super-supernaturalism in only the last one tenth of one percent of Church history is unparalleled in all the history of Christianity. Do you agree or disagree and why?
7. We claim that while the conclusions and biblical arguments of our study in the following chapters might be considered the minority view today, throughout those 1600 years it would have reflected the almost universal view of the most respected Bible teachers. What is the significance of this? Why do you think the beliefs and perspectives on charismaticism have changed so quickly and radically?

Recommended Reading

• Satisfied by the Promise of the Spirit by Thomas R. Edgar, (Kregel, 1996). This is a rare and good biblical critique of many aspects of super-supernaturalism.
• Counterfeit Revival by Hank Hanegraaff (Word, 1997). A very well researched expose on super-supernaturalism from someone within the Charismatic movement himself.
• The Heavenly Man: The Remarkable True Story of Chinese Christian Brother Yun, Brother Yun and Paul Hattaway, (Monarch Books, 2002). Relates several believable stories concerning miracles that do not violate biblical teaching on this topic.

Publications & Particulars

1. For the history of miracle working in the Church see chapter 11.7. For tongues see chapter 12.13. ↑

2. John McClintock and James Strong, “Montanism,” Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature CD-ROM (Ages Software, 2000) ↑

3. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church Electronic Edition STEP Files (Findex.com, 1999), II:110. ↑

4. Ibid. ↑

5. Donald Bloesch, The Holy Spirit: Works and Gifts (Intervarsity, 2000), 88. ↑

6. Kenneth S. Latourette, A History of Christianity (Hendricksen, 1975), 129, 132. ↑

7. For further discussion of the early history of claims to miraculous gifts in the Church see applicable sections of chapter 11.7. Particularly regarding the Montanists see section 9.13.D. ↑

8. For further discussion of the history of claims to miraculous gifts and the Church’s response see chapter 11.7. ↑

9. Rick Joyner, “Azusa Street, The Fire That Could Not Die,” Morning Star Journal, 6, 4 (1996) 62. ↑

10. Walter J. Hollenwager, Pentecostalism (Hendrickson, 1997) ↑

11. Regarding the bizarre beginning the modern “tongues” movement see section 12.13.F. ↑

12. Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Eerdmans, 1971), 111. ↑

13. Ibid., 103. ↑

14. Regarding the biblical nature of the gift of tongues as a real human language see chapter 12.2. ↑

15. Synan, 101. ↑

16. Hank Hanegraaff, Counterfeit Revival (Word, 1997), 126. ↑

17. Rick Joyner, “Azusa Street, The Fire That Could Not Die,” Morning Star Journal, 6, 4 (1996) 63. ↑

18. Synan, 109. Parham’s obvious racism exposes the inexcusable bias in the current Wikipedia entry on him which tries to define him as a segregationists rather than a racist. See http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Charles_Fox_Parham. ↑

19. Edith L. Blumhofer, “The Christian Catholic Apostolic Church and the Apostolic Faith: A Study in the 1906 Pentecostal Revival” in Charismatic Experiences in History, Cecil M. Robeck Jr. ed. (Hendrickson, 1985), 145. ↑

20. Pentecostal historian Walter Hollenwager writes concerning the founder of Pentecostalism:

    Two controversies dominate Pentecostal historiography. The first is who is at the root of the modern Pentecostal movement? Is it William Joseph Seymour, the black ecumenist and pioneer from Los Angeles, or is it Charles Fox Parham, the “inventor” of the doctrine of tongues as the initial, outward sign of the Baptism of the Spirit? . . .

    It is not just a historical but also a theological controversy, for it decides what one considers to be the heart of Pentecostalism. The fact that most printed Pentecostal declarations of faith contain the “initial evidence” doctrine speaks for the second answer. On the other hand, the fact that in many Third World Pentecostal churches (and as of late also in many Western Pentecostal churches) speaking in tongues does not seem that prominent, I and that many Pentecostals have never spoken in tongues, speaks for the first answer. (326)

    However, considering the fact that Seymour was a disciple of Parham, it is obvious who really deserves credit (or blame) for being the founder of Pentecostalism. It is, of course, obvious why Hollenwager and other Pentecostals would like to distance themselves from Parham’s heretical teachings. ↑

21. Dictionary of Christianity in America, ed. Bruce Shelley, (InterVarsity Press, 1990), 865. ↑

22. Synan, 103. ↑

23. Hanegraaff, 143. ↑

24. Rick Joyner, “Azusa Street, The Fire That Could Not Die,” Morning Star Journal, 6, 4 (1996) 69. ↑

25. Ibid., 62. ↑

26. Regarding the lack of Holy-Spirit virtue in super-supernaturalism see section 5.6.B. ↑

27. Philip Jenkins, Mystics and Messiahs: Cults and New Religions in American History (Oxford University Press, 2000), 45, 59, 64-5. ↑

28. Jenkins, 160 ↑

29. Hanegraaff, 143-44. ↑

30. Richard Quebedeaux, The New Charismatics: The Origins, Development, and Significance of Neo-Pentecostalism (Doubleday, 1976), 163. ↑

31. Paul Heibert, Anthropological Insights for Missionaries (Baker, 1999), 157. ↑

32. Erroll Hulse, “The Charismatic Experience”; online at http://www.the-highway.com/charismatic1_Hulse.html ↑

33. Hanegraaff, 144. ↑

34. Wimber’s most popular books include, Power Healing (HarperOne, 1991) and Power Evangelism (Regal, 2009). ↑

35. Erwin Lutzer, Who Are You to Judge? (Moody, 2002), 214. ↑

36. “John Wimber: Friend or Foe?” reprint from The Briefing (St. Matthias Press, 1990), 19. ↑

37. Hanegraaff, 148-49. ↑

38. Regarding the fraud of John Wimber see section 11.8.F.3 ↑

39. See section 11.8.F.3. ↑

40. John Wimber, Power Evangelism (Regal, 2009), 24-25. ↑

41. See section 5.6.B. ↑

42. Carol Wimber, “A Hunger for God,” in Kevin Springer, Power Encounters (Harper & Row, 1988), 12. ↑

43. Hanegraaff, 199-200. ↑

44. Regarding potentially demonic charismatic worship practices see chapters 4.10-11. ↑

45. Hanegraaff, 199-200. ↑

46. Ibid., 202-204. ↑

47. Ibid., 205. ↑

48. The Son Worshipers, 30 minute documentary on the Jesus Movement circa 1971. Edited by Bob Cording and Weldon Hardenbrook. ↑

49. Documented in the movie about Lonnie Frisbee: Frisbee: The Life and Death of a Hippie Preacher. ↑

50. “Lonnie Frisbie, Wikipedia, online at http://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Lonnie_Frisbee. ↑

51. Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (Ages Software), “Spiritual Gifts” ↑

52. Max Turner, The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts (Hendrickson, 1998), 347; underlining added for emphasis. ↑

53. Douglas Oss, Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?, Wayne Grudem (Zondervan, 1996), 239-40. ↑

54. Millard Erickson, Christian Theology (Baker, 1998), 894. ↑

55. Ibid., 895-6. ↑

56. Ibid., 896. ↑

57. For further discussion of the sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit see section 4.13.C. ↑

58. Donald Bloesch, The Holy Spirit (Intervarsity, 2000), 295. ↑

59. Doug Bannister, The Word and Power Church (Zondervan, 1999), 180. ↑

60. Thomas R. Schreiner, JETS 39:1 (March 1996), p. 152. ↑

61. Thomas Schriener, JETS 41:4 (December 1998, p. 654. ↑

62. Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit (Intervarsity, 1996), 223, 237. ↑

63. J. P. Moreland, Kingdom Triangle (Zondervan, 2007), 201. ↑

64. While Dr. Carson is critical of super-supernatural practice in Power Religion: The Selling Out of the Evangelical Church? (Moody, 1992), his promotion of super-supernatural doctrine in Showing the Spirit (Baker, 1987) greatly hinders any critique he might make. ↑

65. Regarding the history of the Church’s response to super-supernaturalism see chapter 11.7. ↑