[Before anyone e-mails me to protest this article, let me answer your first two objections. 1. What will be written herein is not blasphemous to the Holy Spirit who inspired the holy Scriptures; we only speak against the opinions (since theology would be too complimentary a word) of many who have been swept up in the so-called “Pentecostal” movement. 2. I have not experienced “outpouring of the Holy Spirit,” as some erroneously call it. Nor will I–because I have no desire to depart from the Book to practice foolishness. Please feel perfectly free to pray for me and pity me because I do not have what you have, but if you wish to discuss this doctrine, I am not interested in your subjective experience; please confine yourselves to the objective Word of God.]
Last year some liberal I had been engaged with in e-mail correspondence signed me up for a liberal e-mail publication called Freedom’s Ring, published by longtime liberal Cecil Hook. I browse through it periodically, and the other day the following heading intriqued me: “Beyond the Sacred Page.” It turns out that this is the title of a book by Edward Fudge (another liberal), which Cecil Hook will be publishing and distributing.
Edward Fudge has written another book, The Fire That Consumes, in which he argues that hell is not eternal. He is also is a member of a congregation, Bering Drive in Houston, that encourages women to exercise leadership roles in the worship. One of that congregation’s elders defended their position at a Freed-Hardeman Forum ten years ago (for which I was present). Now Fudge has decided to inform us about the Holy Spirit.
The following quotations are taken from this Internet publication, Freedom’s Ring, April 15, 1998, Number 28, “Week 4 of 6.” Consider Hook’s buildup to the contents of the book.
Can we believe that God is as alive, powerful, and near us today as He was in Biblical times? This book is Edward’s courageous witness of ways God wondrously directs those who seek his personal guidance–“beyond the sacred page.”
The answer to the first question is, “Yes.” God has not died, none of His power has diminished even one iota, and His presence still fills the universe (Psalm 139). Evidently, Hook thinks there is a connection between this question and Fudge’s book, but none exists. There is nothing inherent in the power of God that proves Fudge is a courageous witness.
Speaking of the word witness, what is Fudge a witness to? Hook claims that Fudge witnesses to the ways that God wondrously directs those who seek his personal guidance. What does this phrase mean? It seems to imply that Fudge has prayed for the Holy Spirit to personally guide him and that God has done so, which means that the entire book is full of Fudge’s subjective opinions about what he thinks God has done for him.
Did the Holy Spirit tell him that what he inspired Paul to write about the role of women in the church was just cultural (though Paul circumvents all culture and cites as precedent Adam and Eve)? Did the Holy Spirit, in response to his prayers for guidance, assure him that all those things Jesus said about hell were false?
One can only imagine what kind of material is in this book; Hook gives the following hint.
“Although I was reared in a Christian home,” Edward writes, “my church taught that God does not operate ‘separate and apart from the word.’ And since we generally believed that we had correctly deciphered and interpreted the Bible, God’s guidance meant little more to me than following ‘true doctrine’ and teaching it to everyone else.
How horrible–to follow true doctrine and teach it to everyone else! How dull! How boring! It’s much more fun to make up your own teaching and see how many others you can get to swallow it. If the Bible says that souls will be lost in eternal torment, and we simply believe that and teach it to others, how drab. It’s much more colorful to teach the exact opposite–just to see how many will believe YOU instead of the Bible.
Anyone who thinks the sarcasm in the preceding paragraph is out of order may have missed Fudge’s own sarcasm–“we generally believed that we had correctly deciphered and interpreted the Bible.” Since he obviously does not mind including little digs at others, he should appreciate them when they return upon his head.
Did his church really teach that “God does not operate ‘separate and apart from the word'”? Such a doctrine would ignore the providence of God. Whereas the Bible teaches that the miracles would pass away (1 Cor. 13), it never says that God would quit working providentially. If so, where is the passage? Exercising His providence may involve the Holy Spirit or angels–even in conversion.
Consider the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch. Philip was told by the Spirit to overtake the eunuch’s chariot (Acts 8:29). He received a direct communication from the Holy Spirit in that instance. Could the same thing have been accomplished providentially? Certainly. God could arrange for a member of the body of Christ to meet a non-Christian on a given day at a given time just as He arranged for the ram to be present for Abraham’s use.
However, despite this unusual method of pointing out a good contact, Philip still preached Jesus to the eunuch (Acts 8:35). The Holy Spirit (even in the days of miracles) did not directly force someone to obey; conversion always came through the teaching of the word (Acts 11:13-14). So today, God may arrange providentially a meeting, but it is still the gospel that is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16).
God does work separately from (yet in harmony with) the Word. He always has. But that working must remain in the realm of providence and not in any way be interpreted as miraculous or direct.
“Yet all the time, I secretly longed for more–and so did many others I knew. But the living God was full of surprises! And, although he would never act contrary to his word revealed in the Scripture, he was determined to show me that he is not bound between the covers of a book–not even the Holy Bible. This is my testimony to some of these encounters with the living God these past 50 years.
“Longing for more” is scarcely a new phrase. I heard it 25 years ago from members of the church who had fallen prey to the teachings of the charismatic movement. What this idea means is that the Word is not sufficient; I have to FEEL something. The Deity of Christ, the blessings of salvation, the hope of eternal life–these are all right, but if I could just have some sort of personal experience! If I could feel the presence of God within me–if I could just feel his love or peace or power surging through me, I would know that God is and that He is alive. If I could speak in tongues or observe a miracle, I would know without a doubt that the Bible is true; it would become more REAL to me. The Bible is so impersonal; I need this Holy Spirit contact today for my spiritual well-being.
If it has not been apparent yet, ME is at the center of this theology. Pentecostals are spiritual New Agers. The focus of attention is not the Bible, the gospel, or New Testament doctrine. The center of attention is ME. The experience is everything; all else is secondary. And if logic is absent, a Scriptural case cannot be made for this “approach,” or if what is practiced contradicts the Bible, these things do not matter in a postmodern world which has rejected reasoning and embraced contradiction. If ME is at the center of religion, everything else may be sacrificed, such as Truth. We either decide that Truth is irrelevant, or we redefine it subjectively, so that this is MY truth, and that is YOUR truth.
As the huge congregation rises, the Spirit descends. Off come shoes: this is holy ground. Young and old, black and brown and white alike, hop, twist and dance in the aisles…. As if on cue, the hoppers and twisters drop to their knees. A man from France curls up in a fetal position, burying his face in the carpet…. Here and there someone begins speaking in tongues (55-56).
Can anyone seriously imagine Moses hopping and twisting around the burning bush? Such is sacrilege.
The article continues to describe “ministers” who touch their thumbs to people’s foreheads, after which they fall or stagger back, which they refer to as being “slain in the Spirit” (56), which is another invention of men not found in the Bible. If pressed for an explanation, Pentecostals will cite John 19:6. When Jesus acknowledged who He was to the soldiers, “they drew back and fell to the ground.” Notice, however, that 1) the text does not say that the Holy Spirit had anything to do with their reaction; 2) the soldiers were not termed slain; 3) no one laid a thumb, let alone a complete hand or fist, upon them, and 4) they were not converted (since they arose and took Jesus captive).
The only New Testament conversion that might be cited to support this practice is Paul’s. Although Paul fell to the ground, no one touched him, nor does the Bible attribute his falling to the Holy Spirit (Acts 9, 22, 26). Furthermore, when Paul preached the gospel, he did not instruct people that the Spirit will slay them like He did him. This is nothing more than a man-made, Pentecostal doctrine, which has now become an accepted tradition without any Scriptural authority whatsoever. But being knocked down by the Holy Spirit is a lot more exciting than the bland words of Jesus: “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32). Studying God’s written revelation to us just cannot compare to being “slain in the Spirit.”
All of the Pentecostal activities are long on feeling and experience while being very short on teaching and substance. Even the Newsweek article recognizes this point: “Typically, what gets thrown out of balance is the core doctrine of the Christian faith” (56). Some have even gone so far as to claim that the Bible is irrelevant, which would be an honest admission and in harmony with their beliefs (though very dangerous to say).
What else do they do? There is the Toronto blessing, which amounts to uncontrollable fits of laughter, hopping up and down (sometimes called pogoing), shrieking, and making animal sounds. R.C. Foster correctly said over thirty years ago in his monumental one-volume Studies in the Life of Christ: “More foolish ideas have been propagated to the square inch about the Holy Spirit and His presence and method of operation in our lives than any other theme one might suggest” (541).
As Newsweek observed: “None of this happened at the original Pentecost” (59). It is sad to see such nonsense perpetrated in the name of religion. The subjectivism in these matters is seen in one man who stated: “I’ve been overcome with peace and it blankets me, and nothing else matters in the world.” Again, notice the emphasis upon ME rather than God or Jesus the Savior.
And is this the place that Hook, Fudge, and others wish to take us?