The New Apostolic Reformation

Earlier today, in suggesting one of the links on the lower right column of this blog, a website was recommended to me suggesting similarities between the two organizations.  The organization that I named was the magazine Modern Reformation. This magazine is the doctrinal hard copy of the White Horse Inn radio show.  The organization compared to these is the New Apostolic Reformation on a site that is called Global Spheres.  Here are the links:

Modern Reformation           WhiteHorse Inn                   Global Spheres

If you are familiar with WHI and MR, I apologize in advance.  The stated goals of these two organizations is:

We believe that each generation must rediscover and apply the gospel to their own time. We long to see a second reformation – a modern Reformation take hold of our churches and return them to the God-honoring, Christ-centered, Spirit-wrought places of worship they should be….  So, we’re putting our time and resources to work toward one, helping Christians “know what they believe and why they believe it.”

It is important to understand that their discussion is all about doctrine, all about the Gospel.  The theme is that you do not even attempt to answer questions about the world until we have the Gospel straight.  We’ll see how this works in a bit.

The stated goal of GS and the NAR is:

NAR has no official statements of theology or ecclesiology, although a large number of us do happen to agree upon many somewhat radical conclusions. Most of us have long track records of service within traditional Christianity, and we have needed to go through paradigm shifts to get where we are now. Keep in mind that one of the affects of every paradigm shift is that some people get pulled out of their comfort zones. One of the reasons for opposition to some of the more radical ideas of NAR is that certain people have decided not to change and they are upset with those who have chosen to change.

So, while one group seeks to return to Christ-centered, Bible-centered, confessional (or creedal) historic Christianity, the other group is seeking to leave this mold.  Let’s look at some specific planks of the NAR and evaluate them in terms of the historic Reformed traditions that are represented by WHI and MR. 

Apostolic governance.  This conversation is in terms of modern alignment of prophets with apostles.  The first thing for the Reformed mind to grasp is that these terms are not restricted in Pentecostal minds to the Biblical period.  Even when we will accept that prophecy in terms of using prophetic voice in teaching and instructing is a modern exercise, we would never presume to use the term “Apostle” outside of its Biblical context or timeframe.  This whole concept is a non-category to the Reformed mind.  While most Pentecostals will assume incorrectly that the reformed are all cessationists, believing that all gifts of the spirit ceased at the death of the last apostle, our understanding of the gifts of the spirit are still very much “confined” by scripture.  The understanding of the gifts of the spirit in the Reformed mind is that they are rooted in the John 14 and 16 passages as exemplified by the sermons in Acts.  In other words, the Holy Spirit was sent to testify to the truth of the Scriptures concerning Jesus Christ.  No more and no less.  The Pentecostal mind, for reasons that I personally do not understand, does not feel that this is sufficient understanding of these gifts.  This position is further fleshed out in the next few concepts. 

The office of prophet.  The Reformed will note quickly that it is always Old Testament scripture that refer to the office of prophet.  (Yes, there are 1 Corinthians 12 and 14, but that is really not the scope of this post.)  We will go on to state in a matter of fact manner that the purpose of those OT prophets was to testify to the coming messiah.  We will point to Matthew 3 and say that John the Baptist was the last of the OT prophets; because we had no need of prophets in that sense once Jesus began His earthly ministry.  But the Pentecostal will point to those same OT promises out of redemptive historical context and say look at these verses!  Here are the examples quoted by Dr. Wagner:

Surely God does nothing unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7)  Believe in the Lord your God and you shall be established; believe His prophets and you shall prosper. (2 Chronicles 20:20)

Note for ESV users, the word prosper is translated succeed for us, thus you can see immediately where that difference leads.  Yes, this is the style of Biblical interpretation that leads to the prosperity “gospel.” On another day, we can do proper Biblical exegesis of these two passages, but that is not the purpose of this post.

Dominionism.  Here we have another non-category for Reformed believers.  This word is best translated into our categories as a sort of theology of Glory.  As most of us are amillennial in our eschatology, we need to keep touch with the premillennial dispensationalism that remains the mainstay of Pentecostal theology.  This term is a gradual conversion of the world to Christianity, or the granting of dominion over the earth as it is in heaven.  This is a far cry from our understanding of the Great Commission that we hold completely satisfies the requirements prior to the second coming of Christ.  By dominionism, these Pentecostals hold that conversion of at least a majority of the earth to Christianity is necessary to induce the Second Coming, or create the necessary conditions for the Second Coming.  We will not be discussing raptures or raptors or rafters in this post.

A theocracy.  This is putting the cards on the table.  Here is where we finally can look at tangible differences that both sides understand.  The Reformed position is that the only Biblical theocracy on the planet past, present and future was First Temple Israel.  The Pentecostal, dispensational system insists that a vital part of dominionism is a Christian theocracy.  That we Reformed not only see this as unnecessary, but disagree on its Biblical foundation, is to see into the heart of the gulf between the groups.  The two kingdom motif is a category distinction that does not exist in the Pentecostal world.  It would take a careful exegesis of several parables to teach the doctrine of two kingdoms, again beyond the scope of this post, so I will defer to past and future posts on this topic.

Extra-biblical revelation.  While both groups hold that the Holy Spirit is very active in the world today, because the Pentecostals overlook the normal “relatively mundane” gifts of the Holy Spirit, they assume incorrectly that the Reformed do not have a robust doctrine of the Holy Spirit.  Instead, the work of the Holy Spirit becomes one of extra-biblical revelation.  This is not seen as directly affronting John 14 and 16.  This is seen through an interpretation of those passages that hangs upon this part of one verse.

When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. (John 16:13 ESV)

From this half of one verse out of context, we get all of this extra-biblical revelation.  Read Dr. Wagner’s defense of this topic.  The violence that he does to the authority of scripture is the typical liberal working over.  The irony that a group that holds to the supposedly more enlightened view of the Holy Spirit has such a narrow view of inspiration when it comes to the Canon.  Arguing over the inclusion of the Apocrypha when it doesn’t support any of their arguments seems remarkable!

Supernatural signs and wonders.   Rather than spend any more energy on this topic, I’ll give it the same of course treatment that Dr. Wagner does.  Once we get to this part of the discussion, our world views, our Biblical views, our eschatology, our theology are so far apart, that I agree with him that this is an of course moment.  For the record, most Reformed to not doubt supernatural signs and wonders in the least.  They occurred all through the Bible.  They always occurred in reference with bringing Glory to God and bringing light to the story of redemptive history at that point in revelation. Our current point in the redemptive historical timeline we call the interadvental period.  Therefore, supernatural signs and wonders, when they begin to occur, should warn us that the Second Coming is truly at hand.

The last segment of Dr. Wagner’s perspective is called Relational Structures.  This is such a noncategory for the Reformed, I will defer any explanation for now.  I would like, instead to turn to the Reformed Confessions.

 The Reformed Confessions and Historical Documents

Here is the last link I will supply for this post.  It also exists at the bottom of the right column.  At this website, all of the historic Protestant confessions and catechisms can be found.  This is a valuable resource.  My Pentecostal friends, in order to understand this Reformed group with whom you so often disagree, it might be helpful to study your own history.  Eventually, you will run into one of these documents.  On this blog, I have a completed review of the 39 Articles and about ¾ of a review of the Heidelberg Catechism.  In order to have a discussion with someone who differs from your opinion, it is first important to understand their opinion.  Ignorance of these documents and their importance in the development of Protestant churches in the last 500 years is really inexcusable.  These documents are in the background of any conversation that you have with a Reformed Protestant on doctrine.

The WHI and MR have these confessions in mind when they give their mission statement that I quoted at the outset.  When you read them, you will begin to understand what we mean by the authority of scripture.

– Ogre –

Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

It was asked of me this past week, whether I believe in baptism of the Holy Spirit. This is a complicated topic. First, I will describe what is usually meant by the concept of baptism of the Holy Spirit. Second, I will describe what I would refer to as a more orthodox theology concerning this issue.  Finally, I will demonstrate through textual references, which of these two positions is more biblically authentic.

The concept of baptism of the Holy Spirit is usually put forward by Pentecostal groups concerning the idea of a higher level of Christian. In this theology, what we find is that the individual is baptized into Christ through water, and then requires a second baptism by the Holy Spirit, or by fire, into the higher, more complete realm of being a Christian. The basic theology this mode of thinking requires is a separation of justification from sanctification. What this entails is that justification occurs at the time of water baptism, while sanctification occurs sometime later based upon an experience of the individual involving the Holy Spirit. This also leaves several areas of concern regarding the relationship between true believers and the idea of the so-called “carnal Christians."  Carnal Christians are justified by baptism, but continue to lead lives of a lower level of piety, never making Jesus “Lord of their life” and continuing to live as if there was no baptism.  In fact, they could become atheists and still claim their baptism for salvation.  But the higher level Christian, the "mature Christian," has a baptism of the Holy Spirit, an experience in which that person feels the touch of the Holy Spirit transform their lives.  The usual manifestation that is considered proof of this baptism by the Holy Spirit is the skill of glossolalia or speaking in tongues. Other gifts of the Holy Spirit are also considered within the realm of proof of this baptism by the Holy Spirit. Typical of this group are prophecy, dreams, visions, healing, and other such activities.  The rewards of this higher level are usually discussed in terms of “jewels in my crown,” referring loosely to Zechariah 9:16, 2 Timothy 4:8, Revelation 2:10, and 1 Peter 5:4.  There is no true exegesis that occurs in this theology, but rather an eisegesis based upon a whole house of cards created by bad hermeneutics.  What this means is that when we give away logic to the devil, we have no framework in which to interpret the Word.  Said another way, if two passages seem to say the opposite, then your understanding of one or both is wrong.

The orthodox Reformed look at this theology is decidedly different. First of all, sanctification is not considered a separate event from justification. Rather, sanctification and justification occur simultaneously at water baptism. Because justification and sanctification occur simultaneously, there is the possibility, nay, the necessity, of a person being justified, sanctified and in the process of becoming sanctified, all three simultaneously, based upon the single event of water baptism.  Therefore, there is no category for separate events of justification and sanctification. The categories of carnal Christian and higher level Christian are nonexistent.  There is only one category of believer.  There are two types of people in church, but the categories are decidedly different.  In a future post, if reminded by the recipient of this missive, I will breakdown these reformed categories based upon Covenant Theology.

Coming back to our discussion of the Holy Spirit, once again, a full systematic theology is helpful in discerning the differences between these two views of the works of the Holy Spirit. Starting with the impact of original sin, and using the classic debate between Augustine and Pelagius as a template for the discussion, we can lay out three basic positions on the impact of Adam's sin on humanity. In the full Pelagian position, the sin of Adam is not imputed to all of mankind. Adam merely introduces the possibility of sin into the world.  Free will remains untouched.  Adam is a bad example. In the semi-Pelagian position, Adam tarnishes humanity with sin; and the ability to choose well, free will, was tarnished, but is redeemable by Christ. The Augustinian position is decidedly different. Augustine viewed original sin as introducing a condition of sin to mankind whereby all aspects of mankind were affected by sin. This includes free will. Therefore, mankind became incapable of following the law. Mankind became incapable of seeking God.  A full Pelagian has no need of Jesus.  A semi-Pelagian is grateful to Jesus for making salvation possible, but still has to work out his own salvation.  The Augustinian is in a real jam.  He is in a desperate plight and has no way out on his own.  The Augustinian is in desperate need of divine intervention. 

The role of the atonement is likewise viewed through different lenses. The full Pelagian view of the atonement is that Christ was the perfect example, where as Adam was the sinful example. There was no real need for Christ to die, because it was his good example that matters to us.  He teaches us ultimate virtue and morality.  The semi-Pelagian view of the atonement is that Christ wipes our slates clean including our free wills making us now capable of filling the law. Again, Christ makes salvation possible.  The Augustinian view of the atonement is that Christ imputes righteousness to believers, justifying them on judgment day, but it does not affect our free will or our condition of sin. We remain in Adam while we are in this world.  But the righteousness of Christ has been accounted to us and our sin has been accounted to Christ in the great exchange.

Extending each of these logically to the area of sanctification, we can now make the following conclusions. A full Pelagian worldview actually has very little need for Christ. In this system, Adam is merely a bad example, while Christ is a good example. Since a believer in this system really didn't get much from Christ's death, resurrection and ascension, there is plenty of room for "something else." It is into this feeling of emptiness, that the Pentecostal places this idea of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Because nothing much was attained by the sacrifice of God’s son, more is required to attain our full eternal reward. The semi-Pelagian view of sanctification is one in which we are constantly working towards perfection. Because our slate was cleaned by Christ, we are now on a cosmic balance scale of sorts hoping to tip our scale towards the side of righteousness. The Holy Spirit's job in the system is to lend assistance in our endeavors toward righteousness. The Augustinian view of sanctification is different. We are at once justified and simultaneously sanctified at the time of baptism. We are in a lifelong process of being sanctified simultaneous with our declaration of justification and sanctification. Our efforts are genuinely in the direction of righteousness because we are covenant members with Christ and through Christ. But these works have no bearing on our righteousness, because our righteousness was declared to us as being imputed from Christ to us at time of baptism. Similarly, our sin is imputed to Christ; so that time of judgment, we may approach the throne of God with confidence clothed in the righteousness of Christ. Christ has already bore the sin of the believers, having once and for all time been the perfect sacrifice for our sins.

So, which argument has the best support from Scripture? Let's start by looking at the Prophets.  In Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel and others, mankind is clearly declared incapable of following the law. Several of the Psalms echo this problem. Paul's summary of this Old Testament view of the sin of mankind can be found in Romans 3: 1-20.  No one does good; no, not even one. No one seeks God. Their mouths are an open grave. Several places discuss this as well within the parables and teachings of Jesus. Matthew 5: 48 gives us the words be you therefore perfect.  So, logically, if Jesus is telling us to be perfect, and Paul points out that we can't be perfect, we have a problem. Therefore, the bigger view of Jesus, that is, the Augustinian view, becomes necessary to solve this problem.

So, if the Holy Spirit isn't here to give us a second baptism of sorts, why did Jesus send the Holy Spirit? Lucky for us, Jesus answers this question for us.  John 14 to 16 gives us a detailed description of the work of the Holy Spirit. The job of the Holy Spirit is to testify about Jesus, his work, his purpose, his identity, and his saving grace. It is the Holy Spirit that gives us the gift of grace, the gift of faith, the gift of knowledge in the redeeming work of Christ through his death, resurrection and ascension. The Holy Spirit is actually quite busy without doing parlor tricks on our command.  The reason the Pentecostal believes that there has to be more, is that the Pentecostal does not understand original sin, the Holiness of God, and just how absolutely desperate his plight actually is.  Without a full understanding of sin and the condition of sin, we cannot appreciate how truly amazing Grace really is.  The bigger the problem, the bigger the solution has to be.  Augustinians have no need for something more.  The work of Christ and his Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, has to be absolutely huge beyond imagination to accomplish redemption for the believers.

The usual places to which the Pentecostal references the Holy Spirit are Acts 2 and 4, 1 Corinthians 12 and 14. A basic tenet of hermeneutics is that the Bible should interpret the Bible. Interpretation of these passages without account for the John passages is bad hermeneutics. But more than that, interpretation of Acts 2 without regard to the actual sermon by Peter in that same chapter is bad hermeneutics. A reasoned approach to all of these passages is to keep things in Biblical and redemptive historical context. Look and see what the context of speaking in tongues is in Acts 2.  The apostles are not babbling senseless noise. They are speaking in the native languages of all of the different peoples who are there to hear them. 3000 people were converted that day, not because of some emotional experience, but because of the convincing words of the apostles in their testimony about the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, I can say that is because of the work of the Holy Spirit that I believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore, I can say that because of the work of the Holy Spirit at my baptism, I am a new covenant member in Christ. Therefore, I can say that because of the work of the Holy Spirit, I have knowledge of the gospel, of Christ's redeeming work on the cross, and of the justification and sanctification that his death, resurrection and ascension earned on my behalf and was imputed to me at baptism, but that I will not actually receive until death or the last day, whichever comes first. Truly, the Holy Spirit has been very busy in my life.

Just shoot the camel….

…Ogre is going to eat it, anyway.

That straw that didn’t quite break the camel’s back, well….

I lasted as long as I could stand it; really, I did.  So many people are saying how wonderful and spirit filled it was today.  It looked to me like the Holy Spirit left the building.  I’ll go over the morning up to the point that I left, and then relate some things that I’ve heard about third hand.

The key to good snake oil salesman is to know your audience.  To have identified our church as Pentecostal was half of his battle.  He didn’t care if there were a few dozen like me who have a more orthodox bend to us.  He wanted to whip up the majority into a frenzy by the end.  While I don’t like salesmanship at the front end, the advantage of doing it that way is that people get to leave the building on their adrenaline high and go straight to the product tables.  He’s probably tried it both before and after his pitch and knows that he gets higher sales doing it before the pitch.  After he spent ten minutes selling us stuff, he got down to business.

When he was selling a CD on prophesy and Egypt, relating Isaiah and Jeremiah passages to the “rapture,” I knew that his website was fairly accurate.  I was about to experience the full blown American Pentecostal revival.  His ability to quote scripture in person was about as skilled in person as it was on the website.  This guy claims to have been a pastor for 42 years, a number that meant either serious hair dye or pastoring at the age of 5.  In all of those years, I have serious doubts that he has actually read whole books of the Bible in one sitting.  I don’t think he’s ever had any serious Biblical study.  He seems to open the Bible and pick a verse; then figure a way to explain how that verse fits what he wants to say.  But let’s try to go chronologically, so that I don’t leave out anything fun.

Once he finally got to the beginning of the speech or sales pitch (I can’t bring myself to calling it a sermon,) he used the word “Jesus” for the first of only two times in the next 45 minutes.  We heard him quote 1 Corinthians 12 as all good Pentecostals do.  And then the message began.  We were being taught the ten ways the devil attacks you.  Just so you know up front, I made it through seven and I can’t remember them all, so relax.  The one that made an impression was that the devil always attacks you before a blessing.  The other major point was that the attack is proportional to the blessing.  Therefore, a Christian wants to have misery and misfortune because there are certainly great blessings at the other side of these problems.  Another point in this series was that curses from the devil have a shelf life, sort of like bologna or ham.  God already knows the expiration date of your suffering and the onset of your blessing.  You can’t make this stuff up, actually you can, but I didn’t.  It seems sort of convenient that these attacks come before a blessing starts.  I’ll let you guess how to get your blessings started.  It really isn’t that difficult.  Look down, in your back pocket, in that folded piece of leather, that has paper in it….

Here is the point when my brain shut down completely.  Our hero says that he didn’t get this message from the Word; instead, he got it from his experience.  Talk about the wrong thing to say to me!  So, instead of hearing any actual preaching today, we were going to hear him wax somewhat eloquently about his experience…his experience of what?  I’m still not sure.

Eventually, he got to the point where he needed to start riling up the crowd.  Because we are a skeptical group, slow to catch on to the cues, he started shouting into the microphone.  Wow!  What incredible insight!  If you shout, what you have to say is more important!  Who knew?  Once we had an adequate level of whooping and hollering going on, it was time for the strutting across the stage and the glossolalia.  Yes, he went there.  In my defense, I wasn’t the only person who walked out just then.  There were at least a dozen who found exits amongst the clamor.

After I left, I heard there was an alter call.  Hundreds of people came up to the stage for him to sort of randomly touch a few people.  Those who were missed got a sort of “oh, well, I’ve done this before” feeling out of it.  I would say that was true, but I don’t want to be too obvious.

Now, let’s analyze what we saw.  First, there was almost no discussion of the Bible.  For any Pentecostal worth his salt, the New Testament consists of 1 Corinthians 12 and 14, James, Mathew 5 1-16, and that’s about it.  A few key verses can be pulled out of context to supplement our knowledge as needed.  The Old Testament consists of Psalms, Proverbs and the major prophets, but you may never tackle more than 2 verses at a time.  That would be contextualizing, and that is not a Spirit led way to read the Bible.  Verses from the Pentateuch can be used as needed for insertion of imperatives.

Revelation exists in so much as you must learn to interpret all of the bowl judgments and seals.  This is considered advance Bible study and requires a series of CDs on the topic, that incidentally must be updated every time a date for the rapture passes with all of us still here on planet earth.  There will be a new book or CD to explain each news flash from the Middle East.

Jesus?  Oh, the Bible is about Him, but we need to stay relevant.  Relevance is like clothing styles: if you are relevant today, you are obsolete tomorrow; therefore, you must keep changing.  The problem with that is that the Bible hasn’t changed in a few centuries or more (17?).  Not only does being relevant quickly make you irrelevant, once you are irrelevant, you aren’t even true.  Think about that line for a moment.

I have to say that my pastor invited this nut case to my church.  He endorsed this nonsense.  He is usually better at quoting Bible passages than our guest wolf, occasionally venturing even into the safe parts of Romans, chapters 12 and up, on rare occasion.  But the fact that he saw this charlatan on television and decided that we needed this stuff in our church may have been the proverbial last straw.

Tuesday is the new Sunday, at least for me.  Come on homily!  I’m ready for you now.

--Ogre--

Not the last straw, but the camel needs a chiropractor

This weekend, my church has invited one of those Pentecostal Rock Star preachers to come and visit us.  We get that about a dozen times a year.  I was reading the “Statement of Beliefs” posted on his website, and of course this led to a post.  I think it is important to have statements of faith.  It is also important to do the leg work on your website that demonstrates that you actually have a mature theology in Christ to understand the scripture.  When reading this statement of faith and the scripture cited to support these beliefs, I felt that he merely did a search on a particular word and then used the first scripture that came up without actually reading the passage.  Let me highlight some items for discussion.

The rapture = the blessed hope.  The scripture cited is Titus 2:13.

13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

I am sitting here chuckling to myself as I notice that the heading for Titus 2 is “Teach sound doctrine.” I have read Titus many times before, and again just now.  Nowhere in that Epistle does the word “rapture” appear.  In fact, I can’t find the word anywhere, but I’ve dealt with that elsewhere, including my current series on Daniel.  I do believe in the glorious second coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.  It will happen on the Last Day when he comes in Judgment.  What’s this about a rapture?  I’m hoping for something a bit larger than a cosmic dog whistle to whisk me off the earth before things get really nasty.

Healing = The redemptive work of Christ on the cross provides healing of the human body in answer to believing prayer.  This time he cites 1 Peter 2:24.

24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

This guy is kidding, right?  A passage dealing with justification and substitutionary atonement given as a rebuke to yield to His authority also has a double meaning for faith healing?  Tell me about that past tense, passive voice of the last verb: you have been healed.  It is already done.  There is nothing else to do.  This is an indicative.  This is news, good news.  What is this guy doing to the scripture?  Notice that I’m not belittling anyone’s view of healing miracles.  The Bible is full of them.  What I am focused on here is that the scripture cited does not support the practice as this guy practices it.  It doesn’t even support it as Jesus practiced it.  It is not even about healing in a physical sense.

Baptism in the Holy Spirit = The baptism in the Holy Spirit, according to Acts 2:4, is given to believers who ask for it. 

4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Here we come to everyone’s favorite skill: speaking in tongues.  Please, oh please, tell me that if you want to talk about glossolalia, you will at least use 1 Corinthians 12-14 rather than the most clear example of what tongues really are in Acts 2:4.  Just to humor me, read the next paragraph from Acts.  There were Jews from many nations and they heard the sermon in their own tongue.  Please tell me you understand that this is not glossolalia, this is as clear as can possibly be a gift of languages.  He could not have done worse at citing scripture for his case.

Holy Spirit = Regeneration by the Holy Spirit is absolutely essential for personal salvation.  This time he cites Titus 3:5.

5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,

I have railed against this notion of the Baptism by the Holy Spirit in the past, and it is truly a much larger issue than I want to tackle here.  Short version:  There is but one Baptism for admission into the New Covenant with Jesus.  It is done with water.  Our hero doesn’t even quote the correct passage in Matthew to defend immersion versus sprinkling or pouring.  There is no second Baptism.  That isn’t Biblical.  There is not a higher level of Christian who can perform parlor tricks.  I’ve written on the Sacraments elsewhere, so I’ll not repeat myself.  There is no such thing as a “carnal Christian.” It might be that once or twice in my life that I have uttered a string of disjointed, unintelligible syllables, but it was not because of the Holy Spirit.

One more time, in small words: the Holy Spirit ONLY acts to reveal the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  If someone claims to be telling you prophesy about you, or themselves, or aunt Martha because they had a vision from the Holy Spirit, that is a sure fire test that the “vision” is false.  The Holy Spirit ONLY acts to reveal the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  If someone tells you that the Holy Spirit told them what flavor coffee to order or which lane to take on the freeway, and that this caused them to avoid botulism or a horrible wreck, while being very fortunate for them, this is not a true vision.  The Holy Spirit ONLY acts to reveal the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 

And so this weekend will be entertaining to say the least.  I’ll try not to laugh out loud.  I will be in church and I will find that crumb that Frank told me to look for each week.  I know it will be in there somewhere.  I leave you with this portion of the Olivet Discourse from Matthew 24.

--Ogre--