Are All Sins Equal? by Kyle Butt, M.Div. Colton Scott

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=2831

Are All Sins Equal?

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div. Colton Scott

At Apologetics Press, we receive numerous questions on various topics. One of the more commonly asked questions is, “Are all sins equal?” In order to answer such a question, we must go to the only definitive source that can speak with authority concerning sins: the Bible. When we do, we see that the answer depends upon the context in which the question is asked.
In one sense, the answer is, “Yes, sin is sin.” James 2:10-11 says: “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For He who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.” From these verses, we see that any sin is enough to convict a person as a sinner. John said as much when he wrote: “Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4). So, even though cultures may view certain sins as more or less important than others, the Bible teaches that any deviation from God’s law is enough to keep an individual from the presence of the Lord if that sin is not forgiven.
This point is further underscored in the story of the rich young ruler (Luke 18:18-27). The rich young ruler explained to Jesus that he had kept all of the commandments from the time of his youth. Jesus responded to him by saying, “You still lack one thing. Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.” At these words, the young ruler left sorrowfully. Though he had kept all of the commandments save one, he was still living in sin, due to the fact that he valued his wealth more than his relationship with God. According to Jesus’ statement, the young man only lacked “one thing,” yet it was still enough to keep him from the presence of the Lord. So, in this context, all sins are the same.
However, the fact that any sin can condemn a person does not mean that all sins are judged the same, or have the same spiritual consequences. The Bible plainly states, in numerous places, that God considers some sins to be “greater,” or more evil than others. For instance, in Exodus 32:21, Moses asked Aaron: “What did this people do to you, that you brought so great a sin upon them?” Obviously, this is comparative language, indicating that Aaron’s sin was more evil, or had greater implications than some other sin. We see this concept carried over into the New Testament as well. In Matthew 5:19, Jesus said that whoever breaks “the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven.” Clearly, certain commandments were considered “least” and, by comparison, others must have been considered “greater.” The concept of “greater” commandments is found in Matthew 23:23. There Jesus chastised the Pharisees for “neglecting the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith.” His point was very clear; the failure to tithe a tiny amount of spices was much less of a sin than the failure to administer justice and mercy to one’s fellow man.
Perhaps the most explicit demonstration of this principle is expressed in Jesus’ conversation with Pilate. In John 19:11, Jesus said to Pilate, “[T]he one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” His statement could not be more direct. The individual responsible for delivering Jesus over to Pilate had committed a sin greater than the sin committed by Pilate.
With this in mind, a person may wonder how all sins can cause a person to be lost, but some sins are judged to be greater than others. A simple illustration will suffice to make this situation clear. Suppose that a person borrows money from the bank to buy a $10,000 car. That person pays the bank back $9,000, but stops making payments on the car. What will happen? The bank will repossess the car, even though the person paid off all of the balance except $1,000. Any unpaid balance is enough to lose the car. Now suppose a person borrows $10,000 on a car and does not pay any of it back. What will happen? The bank will repossess the car. In these two cases, does one person have a greater debt than the other? Certainly, the one who still owes $10,000. But are both debts, even though they are of unequal value, enough to cost both borrowers their cars? Yes. [NOTE: At Apologetics Press we have answered related questions such, “Are There Degrees of Punishment and Reward?” (see Butt, et al., 2000), and “Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit—‘The Unpardonable Sin’” (Butt, 2003).]

CONCLUSION

We can see that the Bible explicitly and clearly tells how God views sins. Sins vary in terms of judgment and weight, yet any one sin is enough to cause a person to lose his or her soul if left unforgiven. In view of this truth, let us all strive to faithfully obey God so that the blood of His Son Jesus Christ can continually cleanse us from all of our sins, from the least to the greatest (1 John 1:7).

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle and Alden Bass and Bert Thompson (2000), “Are There Degrees of Punishment and Reward?” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=212.
Butt, Kyle (2003), “Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit—‘The Unpardonable Sin,’” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1218.

Faith, Evidence, and Credible Testimony by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=4146

Faith, Evidence, and Credible Testimony

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

It might surprise some to learn that Thomas was not the only “doubting disciple” immediately following Jesus’ resurrection. Do you recall what happened when Mary Magdalene, the first person to whom Jesus appeared, went to alert the mourning apostles of Jesus’ empty tomb and resurrection? When the apostles “heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe” (Mark 16:11, emp. added). According to Luke, the words of Mary Magdalene and the women who accompanied her seemed to the apostles “like idle tales” (24:11) or “nonsense” (24:11, NASB). Later, when the two disciples on the road to Emmaus reported to the apostles how Jesus had appeared to them as well, the apostles “did not believe them either” (Mark 16:13). When Jesus finally appeared to the apostles (not including Thomas) on the evening of His resurrection (John 20:19), He questioned their “doubts” (Luke 24:38) and “rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen” (Mark 16:14). Then, when Jesus appeared to the apostles eight days later, this time with Thomas present, Jesus instructed him to “not be unbelieving, but believing” (John 20:27).
Those closest to Jesus during His ministry initially doubted His resurrection from the dead and were justifiably rebuked for their unbelief. Although many of us likely would have been guilty of the same doubts, still, the apostles should have believed the witness of Mary Magdalene as soon as she testified to the empty tomb and risen Savior. Believers today, however, must be careful not to misinterpret Jesus’ rebukes of unbelief as promoting the popular notion that Christianity is an emotion-based, feel-good religion where evidence is unavailable or unnecessary.

EVIDENCE

Since the Bible repeatedly testifies that the faith of Christians is grounded in truth, reason, knowledge, and evidence (Romans 1:20; Psalm 19:1-4; John 5:31-47; Acts 1:3; 26:25), some wonder why Jesus rebuked the apostles for doubting His resurrection prior to seeing Him alive (Mark 16:14; cf. Luke 24:38). Had Jesus expected His apostles to have faith in His resurrection without proof? And why did Jesus tell Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29, emp. added)? Was Jesus commending an unverifiable, fickle faith?
The fact is, neither Thomas nor any apostle was rebuked for wanting evidence of Jesus’ resurrection. They were rightly rebuked, however, (1) for doubting the credible evidence they had already received, and (2) for demanding more evidence than was necessary for them to have solid faith in the risen Savior.

Prophecies

The same Man Whom Peter confessed was “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16); the same Man Whom the apostles had seen raise Lazarus from the dead (John 11:43-44); the same Man Whom they saw transfigured (Matthew 17:5-9); the same Man Who had worked many amazing miracles in their presence (John 20:30); the same Man Who foretold precisely Peter’s triple denial (Matthew 26:34,75); the same Man Who accurately prophesied His own betrayal, scourging, and crucifixion (Matthew 20:18-19): this same Man repeatedly prophesied of His resurrection, even foretelling the very day on which it would occur (John 2:19; Matthew 12:40; 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:32). So well known were Jesus’ prophecies of His resurrection from the dead on the third day that even His enemies were aware of them. In fact, the “chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, saying, ‘Sir, we remember, that while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, “After three days I will rise.” Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal Him away’” (Matthew 27:62-64).
So why did Jesus rebuke His apostles for their unbelief following His resurrection? Was He implying that they should have behaved like simpletons and believed everything they ever heard from anyone? (“The simple believes every word, but the prudent considers well his steps”—Proverbs 14:15.) Not at all. Jesus had every right to rebuke His apostles’ unbelief, first and foremost, because they refused to believe His Word (cf. Romans 10:17). They had seen Him raise the dead. They had witnessed His perfect life. They had heard His consistent words of Truth, including His repeated and accurate prophecies of various matters, including His betrayal, arrest, scourging, and crucifixion. They had every logical reason to believe what Jesus had prophesied about His resurrection. Everything they had ever seen and heard from Jesus was pure, right, and true. However, rather than expect a risen Redeemer on Sunday morning, such an idea “appeared to them as nonsense” (Luke 24:11, NASB, emp. added). Rather than traveling to Galilee and searching for the living Lord as soon as the Sun appeared on the third day (Matthew 26:32), they remained in Jerusalem behind closed doors “for fear of the Jews” (John 20:19).
Jesus wanted His disciples to understand about His death and resurrection. He told them: “Let these words sink down into your ears, for the Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hands of men” (Luke 9:43, emp. added). He desired for them to have a sincere, strong, evidence-based faith. Sadly, fear, preconceived ideas about the Messiah and His kingdom, and spiritual blindness (Luke 9:44; cf. 2 Corinthians 4:4) initially interfered with the apostles’ belief in His resurrection.

Credible Testimony

When Jesus told Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29), was He condoning a careless faith? Was He advancing the idea of an emotion-driven, feel-good religion? Should we expect Christians living 2,000 years this side of the resurrection of Christ to have a reasonable faith in the risen Savior? If, unlike Thomas and the rest of the apostles, Jesus has never appeared to us, how can we expect to have a fact-based faith?
The same God Who rightly expects His human creation to examine the evidence and come to a knowledge of Him without ever literally seeing Him, is the same God Who expects man to follow the facts that lead to a resurrected Redeemer without ever personally witnessing His resurrection. No one believes in God because they can put Him under a microscope and see Him. No one can prove He exists by touching Him. We cannot use the five senses to see and prove the actual essence of God (cf. John 4:24; Luke 24:39). What we have at our fingertips, however, is a mountain of credible evidence that testifies on God’s behalf. The very existence of finite matter testifies to a supernatural, infinite, eternal Creator. The endless examples of design in the Universe bear witness to a grand Designer. The laws of science (e.g., the Law of Biogenesis) testify to God’s existence. [NOTE: For additional information on the existence of God, see http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12.]
A reasonable faith in Jesus’ resurrection is, likewise, based upon a mountain of credible testimony. Just as credible testimony (and not first-hand knowledge) has lead billions of people to believe, justifiably so, that Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and George Washington were real people, millions of Christians have come to the logical conclusion that Jesus rose from the dead. Nineteen-hundred-year-old eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ resurrection exist in the most historically documented and accurate ancient book in the world—the New Testament. The event was foreshadowed and prophesied in the Old Testament (Psalm 16:10; Jonah 1:17-2:10; Matthew 12:40). Though very serious preventative steps were taken to keep the lifeless body of Jesus buried (Matthew 27:62-66), the tomb was found empty on the exact day He promised to arise. The body of Christ was never found (and, no doubt, first-century skeptics, especially the impenitent Jews who put Him to death, would have loved nothing more than to present Jesus’ dead body to early Christians).
The once fearful and skeptical disciples quickly transformed into a courageous, confident group of Christians who suffered and eventually died for their continual belief and teachings regarding the resurrected Lord. Hundreds of early Christians were able to testify to having seen Jesus firsthand after His resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Tens of thousands of once-skeptical Jews, not the least of which was Saul of Tarsus, examined the evidence, left Judaism, and confessed Jesus Christ as the Son of God (Acts 2:41,47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:7; 21:20). What’s more, these same Jews changed their day of worship from Saturday to Sunday (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2). As with evidence for the existence of God or the inspiration of the Bible, the cumulative case for the resurrection of Christ from credible testimony lies at the heart of a fortified faith.

CONCLUSION

Jesus rightly rebuked His apostles following His resurrection. They should have believed Mary Magdalene because she was a credible witness who said nothing more than what the Son of God had previously said many times would happen: He would arise on the third day following His death. What’s more, the blessing that Jesus mentioned to the apostle Thomas (“Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed”—John 20:29) was not an endorsement of a blind, emotion-based, feel-good religion, but Heaven-sent support for the truthful, credible evidence that leads the open-minded, truth-seeker to confess Him as “Lord and God.”

“How Come Earth Got All the Good Stuff?” by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2624

“How Come Earth Got All the Good Stuff?”

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Stuart Clark, of New Scientist magazine, recently asked the question, “How come Earth got all the good stuff?” Of all the planets in our solar system that allegedly formed naturalistically “from the same cloud of gas and dust that surrounded the sun more than 4.5 billion years ago,” why is “Earth...so suitable for life” (Clark, 2008, 199[2675]:29)? Stuart acknowledged:

We know that its distance from the sun provides the right amount of heat and light to make the planet habitable, but that alone is not enough. Without the unique mix of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulphur that makes up living things, and without liquid water on the planet’s surface, life as we know it could not have evolved. Chemically speaking, Earth is simply better set up for life than its neighbours. So how come we got all the good stuff? (p. 29).

How did Earth get to be just the right distance from the Sun so that it receives “the right amount of heat and light to make the planet habitable” (emp. added)? How did Earth get such a “unique mix” of all the elements that make up living things? How did Earth “acquire its life-giving water supply?” (p. 29). Did Earth become the “just-right” planet by happenstance?
Clark said that our best hope to find clues about Earth’s origin is from meteorites, since “they formed at the same time as the planets” (p. 29). However, he admitted: “[T]here are subtle differences that are proving tough to explain. For example, the mix of oxygen isotopes in chondritic meteorites does not match those found on Earth. So far no one knows why, but since oxygen is the most abundant element in the Earth’s crust...it is a mystery that cannot be ignored” (p. 29, emp. added). Regarding Earth’s “life-giving water supply,” Clarke suggested that “[t]he most popular explanation is that the water arrived later, in the form of icy comets from the outer solar system that rained down in the period known as the ‘Late Heavy Bombardment.’ As yet, though, there is no firm evidence to confirm this as the source of Earth’s water” (p. 30).
Though atheistic scientists have attempted to answer these and similar questions for many years, still no one has a legitimate naturalistic explanation for what New Scientist calls our planet’s “biggest mysteries” (p. 28). To conclude that Earth received just the right amount of “carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and sulphur” by time, chance, and non-intelligence is irrational. When does time, chance, and non-intelligence ever produce such wonderful effects? To conclude that the estimated 326 million cubic miles of water on Earth (“How Much Water...?,” 2008) are the result of “icy comets from the outer solar system” raining down on Earth millions of years ago is equally absurd.
The fact is, adequate non-intelligent, random, naturalistic causes for the “just-right” Earth do not exist. The only rational explanation for the precise design of Earth, the cosmos as a whole, and life on Earth is an intelligent supernatural Creator.

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork (Psalm 19:1).
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools (Romans 1:20-22).
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God” (Psalm 14:1).

REFERENCES

Clark, Stuart (2008), “How Come Earth Got All the Good Stuff?,” New Scientist, 199[2675]: 29-30, September 27.
“How Much Water is on Earth?” (2008), Livescience.com, [On-line], URL: http://www.livescience.com/mysteries/070621_llm_water.html.

Abortion and the Twin Towers by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=1228

Abortion and the Twin Towers

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Undoubtedly, every American who was old enough to be aware of life’s circumstances, will forever remember where he or she was when news spread that first one, and then a second, airliner had crashed into the World Trade Center, followed by a third collision into the Pentagon. The images and the scenes that followed for days, weeks, and months are forever imprinted into our thoughts and seared into our memories. So are the feelings and the impressions: disbelief, fear, uncertainty, anger, disgust, sadness, and sympathy.
The spectrum of emotions, thoughts, and attitudes that most Americans felt are so diverse and complex that putting them into words may not be easy or adequate. The average American surely felt a great sense of outrage at the injustice of what had been perpetrated upon large numbers of innocent people. The American sense of patriotism was offended, which elicited a corresponding desire for vengeance and due retribution. One of the most heart-rending features of the collapse of the twin towers was the original estimate of anticipated dead: 5,000. However, in time, the final tallies—though terribly tragic—were much lower: 266 died in the ill-fated hijacked airliners while 2,823 died in the twin towers—a total death toll of 3,089 (Feldner, 2002).
Many other horrifying spectacles riddle human history in which thousands, even millions, of people have been slaughtered by their fellowman. The human mind has difficulty in grasping the Jewish holocaust of Hitler’s Nazi regime, which resulted in the extermination of a staggering estimated six million men, women, and children. Reflect upon the torture and killing of multiplied thousands by dictators like Stalin or Saddam Hussein, not to mention the killing fields of Cambodia. How can man’s inhumanity to man possibly be so extensive in its magnitude?
Is the repulsion and revulsion that is evoked by these travesties due simply to the loss of life? Or is humanity’s outrage due to the fact that lives were snuffed out unjustly and unfairly—that those lives were “innocent” of any wrongdoing that their persecutors alleged as justification to terminate their lives? If the former is true, why is no great issue made of the death toll that takes place in the United States everyday? That figure stands at 6,674 (Sutton, 2003)—more than two and a half times as many people as those who died on 9-11. That’s how many people die every day in America—not to mention the thousands who die every day around the world. Why do we feel no great heartache for these multitudes—akin to that which we felt on the occasion of 9-11?
If the latter is true, i.e., that we are outraged, not at the mere loss of life, but at the fact that innocent human beings had their lives taken from them unfairly, and that they had done nothing to deserve such, then where is the outrage concerning the termination of innocent babies by means of abortion? We view with great indignation those “terrorists” who dared to attack and destroy the unsuspecting objects of their callous brutality. Yet, since 1973, abortion clinics and doctors have been slaughtering the unborn population of the United States to an extent that makes the perpetration of previous atrocities in all of human history seem trivial. In the United States alone, more than 43 million babies have been aborted! In 2000 alone, more children died from abortion than Americans who died in the American Revolution, the Civil War, World Wars 1 and II, the Korean War, Vietnam, and the Gulf Wars combined (“Abortion,” 2003). In fact, one American baby was killed by abortion every 24 seconds.
The number of adults who died on 9-11 is surely tragic. But the number of innocent, unsuspecting children who never are permitted to complete their development, to proceed with their lives, to make their own choices, and to pursue their potential as human beings created in the image of God, is more than tragic. At least the terrorists thought they were pleasing their god and achieving his will against what were perceived to be Western degradation and spiritual corruption. But to snuff out the lives of innocent children for the economic and social convenience of mothers is despicable and inexcusable. Those who extinguish these innocent lives are without justification.
The mind has difficulty even comprehending 43,000,000 murdered babies—let alone envisioning the lost potential for good for the entire human race. Make no mistake, the “hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:17) will one day face the consequences of their actions (Ecclesiastes 12:14; Hebrew 9:27).

REFERENCES

“Abortion in the United States: Statistics and Trends” (2003), [On-line], URL: http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html.
Feldner, Emmitt (2002), “9/11: Search For Survivors Began Almost Immediately,” [On-line], URL: http://www.wisinfo.com/sheboyganpress/news/911/911_5775905.shtml.
Sutton, Paul (2003), “Births, Marriages, Divorces, and Deaths: Provisional Data for October-December, 2002,” [On-line], URL: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr51/nvsr51_10.pdf.

Chronology and the Cleansing of the Temple by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=660&b=Luke

Chronology and the Cleansing of the Temple

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

One of the most popular alleged Bible discrepancies pertaining to chronology—and one that skeptics are fond of citing in any discussion on the inerrancy of Scripture—is whether or not Jesus cleansed the temple early in His ministry, or near the end. According to Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus cleansed the temple during the final week leading up to His death on the cross (Matthew 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46). John, however, places his record of the temple cleansing in chapter 2 of his gospel account, between Jesus’ first miracle (2:1-12) and His conversation with Nicodemus (3:1-21). How should John’s gospel account be understood in light of the other three writers placing the event near the end of Jesus’ ministry? Skeptics question, “Did Jesus enter the temple and drive out the money changers early in His ministry, or near the end?”
Most often, it seems, the explanation heard regarding this difficulty is that there was only one temple cleansing—near the end of Jesus’ life—and John’s placement of this event at an earlier time is the result of his “theological,” rather than “chronological,” approach to writing his account of the life and teachings of Jesus. The problem with this explanation is that, although overall John may have been a little less concerned with chronology than were the other writers, a straightforward reading of the text favors the position that this particular clearing of the temple was not something that occurred near the end of Jesus’ life. The record of Jesus’ first miracle, beginning in John 2:1, begins with the phrase, “On the third day….” This section ends with John writing the words, “After this…” (2:12, Greek meta touto). Following verse 12, John then begins his account of the temple cleansing saying, “Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand…” (2:13). It certainly would appear to be “out of the ordinary” for John to jump ahead nearly three years in the life of Jesus to an event that occurred in Jerusalem during the last week of His life, only then to backtrack to a time prior to “the second sign Jesus did when He had come out of Judea into Galilee” (John 4:54). Admittedly, John would not have erred in writing about the temple cleansing earlier on in his gospel account if the Holy Spirit saw fit to mention the event at that time. (Perhaps this would have been to show from the outset of Jesus’ ministry that He “repudiated what was central to the Temple cults, and further that his death and resurrection were critically important”—Morris, 1995, p. 167.) A better explanation of this alleged contradiction exists, however: There were two temple cleansings.
Why not? Who is to say that Jesus could not have cleansed the temple of money-hungry, hypocritical Jews on two separate occasions—once earlier in His ministry, and again near the end of His life as He entered Jerusalem for the last time? Are we so naïve as to think that the temple could not have been corrupted at two different times during the three years of Jesus’ ministry? Jesus likely visited the temple several times during the last few years of His life on Earth (especially when celebrating the Passover—cf. John 2:13,23; 6:4; 11:55), likely finding inappropriate things going on there more than once. Do churches in the twenty-first century sometimes have problems that recur within a three-year span? Have church leaders ever dealt with these problems in a public manner multiple times and in similar ways? Of course. (“How soon men forget the most solemn reproofs, and return to evil practices”—Barnes, 1956, p. 196.)
What evidence does a person possess, which would lead him to conclude that Jesus cleansed the temple only once? There is none. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke recorded a temple cleansing late in Jesus’ ministry, much evidence exists to indicate that John recorded an earlier clearing of the temple. It is logical to conclude that the extra details recorded in John 2 are not simply supplemental facts (even though the writers of the gospels did supplement each others’ writings fairly frequently). Rather, the different details recorded by John likely are due to the fact that we are dealing with two different temple cleansings. Only John mentioned (1) the oxen and sheep, (2) the whip of cords, (3) the scattering of the money, (4) Jesus’ command, “Take these things away,” and (5) the disciples’ remembrance of Psalm 69:9: “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up” (2:17). Furthermore, John did not include Jesus’ quotation of Isaiah 56:7, which is found in all three of the other accounts, and stands as a prominent part of their accounts of the temple cleansing.
In view of the major differences in wording, in setting, and in time, as well as the fact that, apart from the work of John the baptizer, nothing in the first five chapters of John’s gospel account is found in Matthew, Mark, or Luke, “we will require more evidence than a facile assumption that the two similar narratives must refer to the same event” (Morris, p. 167). There is no chronological contradiction here.

REFERENCES

Barnes, Albert (1956), Notes on the New Testament—Luke-John (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Morris, Leon (1995), The Gospel According to St. John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), revised edition.

Why I am no longer a Pentecostal by William (Bill) Davis

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davis/William/Charles/Jr/1952/Pentecostalism.html

Why I am no longer a Pentecostal

There were no miracles, no power, no gifts, no healings, nothing but the theatrical antics and delusions of men. What was claimed for the great power of God was nothing more than musical hype and psychologically induced emotionalism.

I would like to begin by giving some background information concerning my roots in Pentecostalism. I believe it is important for anyone reading this to understand that I am not someone new to the Pentecostal or Charismatic movement. My roots go down deep into Pentecostalism. I was a third generation Pentecostal. My maternal grandparents were “old time” Pentecostals and my grandfather was a Pentecostal preacher of the old style. As a matter of fact, I was a Pentecostal before there was anyone known as a “charismatic.”

Actually, in the old days most people did not call themselves Pentecostals, they called themselves Holiness or Full Gospel. I never remember my Dad calling himself a Pentecostal. He always said he was Holiness. This is one reason Pentecostals in the old days were branded as “holy rollers.” The point I am trying to make is that I am no stranger to Pentecostalism, its doctrines, its worship and its experiences. Neither am I a stranger to charismatic doctrines, worship and experiences.

I was in Pentecostalism over 50 years of my life. As a boy I can remember the old camp-meeting days when we worshiped under a tin roof and sawdust on a dirt floor. My family’s roots were originally in the Congregational Holiness denomination - a group that splintered off from the Pentecostal Holiness. I grew up in Jacksonville, Florida, a fairly large city, where you could always find a variety of Pentecostal churches to attend. While attending the Arlington Church of God at the age of twenty, I believed I was being “called” into the ministry and so I started preaching. The following year I was married. In time, my wife and I eventually ended up in the Assemblies of God where I was a licensed preacher for 27 years.

There are those who might speculate as to what caused me to change my mind about being a Pentecostal. Did someone talk me out of it? Did I read someone’s book? What happened? I would say it has been a journey. Even though I was exposed to and had learned many incorrect methods and views of Bible interpretation (hermeneutics), I did know, believe and understand that the Bible was/is the word of God and we needed to read it and follow it. For some time, I had recognized certain problems and inconsistencies within the Pentecostal church. These were difficult to overcome at first. But as time went by, I would discover bits and pieces of truth. The problem was, I still couldn’t put it all together. I couldn’t get the full picture.

During my 50 plus years as a Pentecostal, I had been involved in countless Pentecostal and charismatic influences. It would be safe to say that I have been in hundreds of various meetings or gatherings in one form or another. I attended several meetings involving the “Prophetic Movement.” In one conference we were taught how to prophesy to people. They call it being “activated.” My wife and I made two trips to Toronto for “Catch The Fire” conferences. This is where the famed “Toronto Blessing” took place.

We spent five months attending the “Brownsville Revival.” When I say five months, I mean we didn’t miss a service unless we were having a service at our church. We were there night after night, often times not leaving until midnight or later. During that period I also served on the Brownsville prayer team. A short time after this five month period at Brownsville, we too started holding similar services at our church. These meetings lasted for a whole year. Various charismatic speakers came and held meetings, praying and prophesying over people night after night, week in and week out. We initially started these meetings with a woman who claimed to have a gift of healing as well as being a preacher, teacher and prophetess. I found out later that she actually believed herself to be an apostle. Our services with her lasted around three months. A variety of speakers came in, each claiming to have their own unique “gift” or “calling.” When we did not have any special speakers, my wife and I conducted the meetings ourselves. During this time a lot of people were prayed for, prophesied over, claimed to see visions and angels, laid in the floor, spoke in “tongues”, shook, vibrated, laughed, cried, wailed, made animal sounds and of course claimed to be healed. However, after a year of this our church was no better off than before. After all the claims of healings, salvations and miracles, no one was any different. After the scores of people who attended and our building being packed night after night, our attendance was less and our finances depleted. By this time, my wife and I felt depleted ourselves. We had put our hearts and souls into these efforts because we believed it to be God-approved; and who doesn’t want to experience the same power and miracles we read about in the New Testament? I can’t tell you how many hours we spent in prayer or the number of meals we fasted, all because we wanted nothing more than God. But after all of this, it wasn’t God that we saw, it was man. From Toronto, to Brownsville, to Cottage Hill, and many more places I could name, there were no miracles, no power, no gifts, no healings, nothing but the theatrical antics and delusions of men. What was claimed for the great power of God was nothing more than musical hype and psychologically induced emotionalism.

In time, as I reflected over the past two years and then over all of the years I had been in Pentecostalism, I slowly began to realize I was in error. I began to see how deceived I was. Then one night something happened that caused me to completely change course. I kept a Bible by my bedside and would usually read a few verses before going to sleep. As I was reading, I came to John 3:5 where it says, “Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” The phrase, “born of water” stood out to me. In the past I had always read over these words, mentally dismissing them on the basis of what I had heard or been taught. The teaching usually went something like, “the word ‘water’ here doesn’t actually mean water.” For some reason ‘water’ always meant something other than the obvious. That evening I finally decided to accept what I read in the Bible like it was written. I accepted the simple fact that Jesus said what He meant and meant what He said. I realized there was nothing in the context that suggested the word water was anything but water. There was no reason to believe Jesus meant anything other than what He said. It was also obvious that to be born of water referred to water baptism. I found this could be confirmed by other New Testament references such as Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3- 6,17-18 and 1 Peter 3:21. From that point on I knew I had to find a people who taught the Bible just like it is written without any man-made religious additions.

A person has to be a realist when it comes to the Bible. As long as people continue to make excuses for the flaws and inaccuracies of their respective denomination, they will never come to the knowledge of the truth. We have to be honest as students of Scripture. If not, the religious discrepancies we see will vanish in the haze of feeble excuses and unsound explanations by false teachers.

Sometime later, after coming to the Lord’s church, I discovered a saying that had been coined generations ago: “The Bible only, makes Christians only.” There’s one thing for certain, if you follow exactly what the New Testament says without the input of any outside religious source, you will end up being simply a Christian - nothing more and nothing less. You cannot strictly follow the teaching of the New Testament and end up being in a denomination because they all are creations of men. You can only end up a Christian.

Please understand that what I have to say is not meant as an attack on people. There are many sincere, misguided souls in the Pentecostal and charismatic ranks. I know because I was one of them. However, I will attack the lies and heresies of men. False doctrine(s) should always be exposed. We must be willing to earnestly contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3).

PENTECOSTALISM TEACHES FALSE DOCTRINE

Through the years I saw how Scripture was often misunderstood, taken out of context and misapplied. As a Pentecostal, I noticed how we would greatly emphasize some passages and completely ignore other passages. Some verses seemed to hold great authority while others were insignificant.

PENTECOSTALISM TEACHES FALSE DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE GIFT OF TONGUES

Pentecostals fail to accept that New Testament tongue speaking was an understandable language. Acts 2 describes what happened on the day of Pentecost. “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4).

There is nothing in Acts 2 that would indicate they spoke an unintelligible language or gibberish. The word “tongues” in this passage is glossa ... the tongue; by implication a language. The word “utterance” means to enunciate plainly, that is, declare: say, speak forth.

The continuing context reveals that understandable languages were being spoken. Acts 2:6-11, “Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.”

The word “language” in verse 6 and the word “tongue” in verse 8 is the Greek word dialektos which means a discourse, that is, a dialect; a language or tongue. We can see from the Greek as well as the context that these were known, human, languages.

I must say in all fairness that nowadays due to education, many Pentecostals have accepted the fact that “tongues” in Acts chapter two means a known or understandable language. However, every other place in the New Testament where tongues are mentioned they still hold to the idea that it is a non-understandable language, something mysterious. How Pentecostals or charismatics arrive at this conclusion is based on a misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 14. They misunderstand Paul’s meaning of “unknown tongue.” They believe the meaning of “unknown tongue” is something different from the tongues spoken in Acts chapter two. They believe it to be something mysterious and non-understandable. They fail to recognize that the word “unknown” is not in the Greek text and the word “tongue” is the same Greek word as in Acts chapter two.

It must be remembered that the miraculous gift of speaking in tongues was that a man could speak in a language he had never studied or learned. Nonetheless, it was still an intelligible language because those in the audience who spoke that language could readily understand what he said. What is amazing to me is the fact that Pentecostal and charismatic missionaries, without exception, all either attend language school or work through an interpreter when going to a foreign country while all the time claiming to have the New Testament gift of tongues!

When we sum it up, it is easily concluded that Pentecostalism makes three mistakes concerning speaking in tongues:

1) Pentecostalism ignores the law of “first mention.” This simply means that once something is initially established to be a certain thing or way, there is no reason to believe it changes and becomes something different unless the context reveals it to be different.


2) Pentecostalism fails to understand the meaning of “unknown tongue” in 1 Corinthians 14. It forces an interpretation on the text that is inconsistent with Acts chapter two and the entire New Testament. The word “tongue” in 1 Corinthians 14 is the same Greek word (glossa) as in Acts 2:4.

3) Pentecostalism fails to understand the context of 1 Corinthians 14. Paul is not praising the Corinthians for their use of tongues, he is correcting their use of tongues. He is basically saying, “You’ve got it all wrong. Tongues are not for personal use or personal satisfaction.” When no one was present to interpret for others to understand, they were to remain silent (1 Cor. 14:27-28).

PENTECOSTALISM IGNORES THE PRINCIPLE OF “ORDER” IN A WORSHIP SERVICE

Growing up in the Pentecostal Church, I saw that chaos and confusion were eagerly encouraged in worship. This disorder was not only encouraged, but was the gauge by which a worship service was judged. Everyone was encouraged to speak in tongues - all at the same time! This was and is considered to be a spiritual apex in a worship service; a sign of spirituality.

However, 1 Corinthians 12 clarifies the fact that not everyone would have the gift of tongues. When Paul begins to enumerate the gifts, he starts by saying, “to one is given...” (v.8) in order to indicate that not everyone would have that respective gift. Nor would everyone in the church have a spiritual gift at all. Paul went on to make this clear in the closing verses of chapter 12 where he asked rhetorical questions. “Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret” (1 Cor. 12:30)? The obvious answer to these questions is in the negative.

Every Christian during New Testament times did not have the gift of tongues. However, when tongues/languages were spoken, there was to be a proper order to their functioning. “If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God” (1 Cor. 14:27-28). They were to take turns when they spoke, with no more than two or three taking their turn. There must also be someone to interpret so everyone in the audience could understand what was spoken.

The idea in Pentecostal worship was that the more people there were speaking in tongues at the same time, the more spiritual your church was - the greater the moving of the Spirit. But this concept is never taught in the New Testament. Notice what Paul says; “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” (1 Cor. 14:33). And then in 1 Cor. 14:40, “Let all things be done decently and in order.”

The Holy Spirit did not come to give an emotional experience. He did not come to excite, stimulate or cause anyone to flail, thrash or whirl about uncontrollably.

PENTECOSTALISM PLACES A PRIMARY IMPORTANCE ON EXPERIENCE

The Bible has a secondary place with Pentecostals as compared to experience. This does not mean they do not claim to love and honor the Word of God. They do. However, they constantly show by their actions that experience is far more important than what Scripture says.

Pentecostalism is all about feeling good. Charismatics speak about celebrating where worship is concerned. They all want an emotional high when they come together for worship. They believe these positive emotions are an indicator of the presence of God and that presence takes priority over what is written.

Listen to one of the leaders in the Assemblies of God. George O. Wood writes: “As Pentecostals, we intuitively approach the biblical text in a manner different from most of our evangelical brothers and yes, sisters. We factor in the element of experience as a lens through which we look at Scripture.” (enrichmentjournal.ag.org/200102/008_exploring.cfm)

The problem with this is that it leads to subjectivism. When experience is your highest priority, truth becomes subjective, Scripture is ignored.

Steve Hill of the Brownsville Revival said: “In these latter days preaching and simply teaching the word is no longer sufficient, the Spirit has to get involved, through signs and wonders due to much sin that abounds.” (Brownsville, 12/14/96)

John Wimber of the Vineyard movement stated: “There’s nothing in Scripture that supports these kinds of phenomena that I can see, and I can’t think of anything throughout the church age that would. ... So I feel no obligation to try to explain it. It’s just phenomena. It’s just people responding to God.” (Holy Laughter, Albert James Dager, 1996). It’s interesting that Wimber openly admits that the charismatic phenomena that was taking place (such as in Toronto) had no Biblical authority or historical precedent.

During the Toronto and Brownsville revivals it was not uncommon to hear many of the leaders and teachers make the declaration, “God will offend your mind in order to reveal your heart.” Since they could not justify what was taking place in those meetings by the Scripture, they felt this statement gave the phenomena approval. So even though they deny it, Pentecostals openly disregard the Scriptures and appeal to feelings or experience as their ultimate source of truth. It becomes evident that going by emotionalism leads people into fanaticism.

Pentecostals wrongly believe that their precedent for emotionalism was established on the day of Pentecost. They believe the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost was more about an emotional experience than anything else. They stumble over the simple truth that the apostles spoke foreign languages by the operation of the Holy Spirit in order to communicate the wonderful truth of God (Acts 2:11). The context of Acts chapter two never reveals that the Holy Spirit came as an emotional experience as we see Pentecostals encouraging today. Emotionalism was not the purpose of the Spirit’s coming. There is nothing bizarre taking place in Acts two or any other place in the New Testament. The Holy Spirit did not come to excite anyone. He did not come to stimulate anyone. He did not come to cause anyone to flail, thrash or whirl about uncontrollably. The Spirit came sovereignly, filled the apostles and they spoke in languages they had not learned.

You may ask then: Where do Pentecostals get this idea? They go by what was said by some who observed the apostles speaking in languages they obviously had never learned. Acts 2:13 says, “others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.” From this simple statement an entire theological philosophy has been constructed. They use this statement in order to encourage all types of strange and bizarre behavior during worship, even to the point of people making animal sounds while they go into a trance-like state. Statements are often made like, “We’re drunk in the Spirit.” Or, “This is the new wine.” Rodney Howard- Browne often encourages flippant, foolish and silly behavior by saying “This is Joel’s Bar...belly up to the bar!”

Notice what the apostle Peter says as he sets the record straight. “For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day” (Acts 2:15). Peter emphatically denies their mockery. But Pentecostals have been led to believe the opposite. They believe the apostles were drunk, inebriated, intoxicated - falling down drunk. Sadly, they teach this is what the Holy Spirit does to people. Had the apostles been drunk, Peter would have admitted it. He would have pointed out that the apostles were made drunk by the Spirit and not by wine.

We can no more take what outsiders (enemies of the church) said on the Day Pentecost as fact than we can take what the enemies of Christ said about Him (cf. Luke 7:33-34). If we did so, we would have to believe that Jesus was a glutton and a drunk. Proper hermeneutics is the key to understanding the Bible.

PENTECOSTALISM TEACHES FALSE DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE CHURCH

Pentecostal and charismatic churches believe in women pastors and teachers over whole congregations. They believe Joel’s prophecy quoted by Peter in Acts two gives them the license they need. Acts 2:16-18, “But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy.” They believe that when the text says “daughters” and “handmaidens” would prophesy, that it justifies women as pastors, as elders, etc. This, of course, is a gross misunderstanding of the text.

The significance of the pouring forth of God’s Spirit upon all flesh is that the Gospel was to go to all mankind just as Jesus said in the great commission (Mark 16:15-16). Prophecy (inspired teaching) was one of the spiritual gifts during the first century (cf. 1 Cor. 12:8-10); but, once its purpose was served (the inspired, complete, perfect, written word delivered), it was/is no longer in operation - it ceased (cf. 1 Cor. 13:8-10). However, even during New Testament times when spiritual gifts were exercised, women never assumed the position of preacher or teacher over a congregation. There is nothing in Joel’s prophecy that indicates a woman can serve as an elder or be put in charge over a congregation. There is nothing any place in the New Testament that suggests women can serve in the eldership or leadership of the church. Actually, the opposite is true. Paul writing to Timothy said, “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (1 Tim. 2:11-12).

When we were in Panama City, a preacher friend of mine called one day and asked me about this verse in Timothy. He wanted to know what I thought it meant. I paused for a moment and said, “It probably means what it says.” He wasn’t too pleased with that answer because his wife taught the adult Bible class at his church. As a matter of fact, he completely rejected that meaning of the passage because it wasn’t what he wanted it to mean. But the Scripture is clear on this subject. Notice what Paul said in 1 Cor. 14:34, “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.”

Some Pentecostals contend that Paul was dealing with a cultural issue that has no bearing on today’s society when he gave this prohibition. Of course, to make such an assumption is to play fast and loose with the integrity of the text. Actually, postmodernists use this ploy on any biblical text they desire to change.

PENTECOSTALISM TEACHES FALSE DOCTRINE CONCERNING SALVATION

They teach an incomplete plan of Salvation. It is some combination of “just believe” or “repent and believe” or “pray the sinner’s prayer and ask Jesus to come into your heart.”

However, in the old days, Pentecostals did not believe in the sinner’s prayer. The old Pentecostals came out of the early holiness movement, so they believed in the mourners’ bench. They believed you were to come down to the altar and “pray through” to salvation. Basically, you “prayed through” for everything; salvation, sanctification, the baptism in the Holy Spirit, etc. A person “prayed through” until they felt like God had saved them. But due to the influx of various denominations through the Charismatic movement, Pentecostals have now adopted the more common or popular style.

The Assemblies of God web site states concerning salvation: “WE BELIEVE...Every Person Can Have Restored Fellowship with God Through ‘Salvation’ (trusting Christ, through faith and repentance, to be our personal Savior).” [1 of 4 cardinal doctrines of the Assemblies of God]

The International Pentecostal Holiness Church in their doctrinal statement says: “We believe, teach and firmly maintain the scriptural doctrine of justification by faith alone (Romans 5:1).”

How is it that both of these denominations claim the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit and His guidance and yet they don’t agree with each other? And, how is it that the Holy Spirit inspired James to say “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (James 2:24)? Yet, the Pentecostal Holiness claim a person is justified by faith alone? Obviously, both cannot be inspired by the Holy Spirit. They can’t both be right. The Holy Spirit didn’t inspire James to say one thing and the Assemblies of God and the Pentecostal Holiness something else! They treat the Holy Spirit as though He has Alzheimer’s!

Denominational churches make a mockery of God in their doctrinal statements. If divine healing is such a privilege and readily available to Pentecostals, then why isn’t it happening among them? Why do they run to the doctor at the first sign of a sickness? Why are so many on prescription drugs? Why do they have surgery and other costly medical treatments just like everyone else?

PENTECOSTALISM TEACHES FALSE DOCTRINE CONCERNING DIVINE, MIRACLE HEALING

They are confused over the purpose of miracles. The purpose of miracles was not to make our lives better or free from care. In this world, a Christian lives a normal life just like anyone else. When people are taught they can have a miracle and it doesn’t happen, they often become angry and bitter against God. Flamboyant preachers constantly promise the people health and wealth. Without fail, all of these preachers become wealthy by the donations of their followers and consequently receive quality medical care from the best doctors! These teachers make outlandish claims and promises which are neither backed by Scripture nor substantiated by facts.

In a foolish attempt to try to promote modern-day miracles, one famous individual wrote a book called, “A Miracle a Day Keeps the Devil Away.” However, what many people call a miracle is nothing more than something good happening or things going their way. It’s this kind of nonsense that causes an unsaved world to mock the Bible and scoff at the existence of God.

The serious student of Scripture will find that miracles did not happen all the time throughout the ages. They have always had a limited operation. They were not being doled out like candy at a child’s birthday party every time someone had a cough or a migraine. Jesus illustrates this fact in Luke 4:25-27 when He said, “But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land; But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow. And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.” Jim Sheerer states of these passages; “Jesus uses two stories to show that God has always been selective with his miracles. The miracles were not to amuse people, but were to confirm God’s prophets and further God’s plan of salvation.” (Sheerer Commentary on the New Testament)

A careful study of the Scriptures reveals that miraculous gifts were given to serve the purpose of confirming God’s Word. Even in the days of Moses, the miracles that were performed confirmed what the prophet said as well as God’s purpose for the Israelite nation. In the days of Christ, miracles confirmed His ministry and Messiahship. Jesus challenged the unbelieving Jews to examine His miracles when He said, “But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me” (John 5:36). Jesus does not beat around the bush. He draws their attention to the works He had performed without hesitation. He clearly states their purpose by saying “the...works ...bear witness of me.”

In the Gospel of John, Jesus tells the Jews that if they did not believe his words that he was the Son of God, they should believe in Him because of His miracles. “If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him” (John 10:37-38). His miracles were the evidence that He was speaking the truth.

Jesus pointed the disciples to His works as proof of His divinity when He said, “Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake” (John 14:11). The works of Christ were the confirmation that He was the Messiah (John 20:30-31).

Miracles also served the purpose of confirming the Gospel after Christ ascended. The apostles were to continue in the ministry of Christ for the purpose of establishing the church. As Jesus said to them, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father” (John 14:12). These works were for the purpose of confirming their apostleship and that the words they spoke were from God. Notice what the Scripture says: “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following” (Mark 16:20). “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will” (Heb. 2:3-4)?

Paul makes reference to the apostle’s special ability in miracles by saying, “Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds” (2 Cor. 12:12).

Once the Scriptures were complete (i.e., there was no more divine revelation to be given), miracles ceased (1 Cor. 13:8-10; Jude 3). Pentecostals don’t understand the purpose of miracles and this lack of understanding leads to confusion and frustration.

But notice the official doctrinal statement of the Assemblies of God: “Divine healing is an integral part of the gospel. Deliverance from sickness is provided for in the atonement, and is the privilege of all believers.” http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Statement_of_Fundamental_Truths/sft_full.cfm#12

According to the dictionary, the word integral means, necessary: being an essential part of something or any of the parts that make up a whole. Synonyms are: essential, vital, basic, fundamental, central. (Encarta: World English Dictionary & (P) 1998-2004 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved)

According to their doctrinal statement, receiving divine healing should be no harder than becoming a Christian. But, if divine healing is such a privilege and readily available, then why isn’t it happening among their members? Why do Pentecostals run to the doctor at the first sign of a sickness just like everyone else? Why are so many Pentecostals on prescription drugs just like everyone else? Why do Pentecostals have surgery and other costly medical treatments just like everyone else, if divine, miracle healing is their privilege like they teach?

Logic demands that if you teach that divine healing is for today, then it must of necessity take place. Notice what the Bible shows when Peter and John stood before the council: “If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole; Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. ... And beholding the man which was healed standing with them, they could say nothing against it” (Acts 4:9-10,14). The Apostles had proof of the miracle working power of God. They were not just claiming something that never happened or could not be proven. The man was genuinely healed and standing there for all to see. This was a fulfillment of Mark 16:20.

Pentecostals teach that divine healing is just as much a part of the atonement as forgiveness of sins. But none of it can be backed up. No one anywhere sees it taking place. There are many claims of miraculous, divine healing taking place, but they cannot be either seen or substantiated. There are a lot of people who claim to be healed of something internal, something unseen. Even then, most of these (if not all of them) receive some type of medical assistance or treatment.

At the churches where I have been, there were people who went to doctors all the time, but when they got better, everyone claimed divine healing. That’s not divine miracle healing. Three surgeries and eight prescriptions later is not divine healing! That’s nothing out of the ordinary. Friend, I spent over 50 years in Pentecostalism and never saw one genuine miracle! Just before I left the Pentecostal church I went to visit and pray for an elderly woman who was in her 80s. She said to me, “You know Bro. Davis, after all these years I’ve never seen a miracle!” She had probably been in Pentecostalism longer than I had, but in a moment of honesty, as she struggled with her physical weakness and sickness, she had to admit the absence of ‘miracle healings’ in the Pentecostal church.

Miraculous gifts have been “done away” because the canon of Scripture has reached “perfection” - completion (1 Cor. 13:8-10). They are no longer needed.

PENTECOSTALISM IS A CREATION OF MAN

Pentecostals themselves admit its beginnings were in America around the turn of the 20th century. Oral Roberts University makes this claim: “The Pentecostal movement is by far the largest and most important religious movement to originate in the United States. Beginning in 1901 with only a handful of students in a Bible School in Topeka, Kansas, the number of Pentecostals increased steadily throughout the world during the Twentieth Century until by 1993 they had become the largest family of Protestants in the world.” (http://webapps.oru.edu/new_php/library/holyspirit/pentorg1.html)

The Assemblies of God official statement says that “the beginning of the modern Pentecostal revival is generally traced to a prayer meeting at Bethel Bible College in Topeka, Kansas, on January 1, 1901.” http:// www.cai.org/bible-studies/history- pentecostal-movement

It is only fair to mention the fact that the Church of God claims tongues speaking around 1896 even though the group did not call themselves Church of God until 1907. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_God_(Cleveland,_Tennessee)

The point is this: these groups were clearly started by men in America during the early part of the twentieth century. That makes them nearly nineteen hundred years too late to be the Lord’s church (Matt. 16:18). And, even though they may try to claim relationship with the Christians in Acts chapter two, it doesn’t work. No Christians in the book of Acts or during the first century ever called themselves Pentecostals. As a matter of fact, no one throughout church history ever called himself a Pentecostal. The actual term Pentecostal is derived from Pentecost, the Greek name for the Jewish Feast of Weeks. It commemorates the anniversary of the day God gave the Torah to the entire nation of Israel assembled at Mount Sinai. True Christians do not attempt to identify with Jewish feast days, they identify with Christ. The book of Acts tells us the disciples were called “Christians” (Acts 11:26).

While I was still a Pentecostal I remember listening to a preacher friend get all emotional about being a Pentecostal and how we should act like Pentecostals. As I sat there, my mind began to reflect on the book of Acts and how that no one in the early church ever referred to himself as a Pentecostal and how that no one was ever called a Pentecostal. I thought, “Why are we calling ourselves by something different than the first century Christians?” And then I realized, if we are calling ourselves by something different, it must be because we are something different than what they were. My friends, I don’t want to be something different than what the early Christians were. I don’t want to be a part of some modern concoction of man. I just want to be a Christian!

William (Bill) Davis

This article appeared in the June, July & August 2013 issues of “Seek The Old Paths.” www.seektheoldpaths.com

Formated copy for printing

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Make your own monument by Gary Rose

"I don't get no respect!" was his catchphrase and in this life he was a comedian. I enjoyed watching his performances and still remember some of his work - anyone recall "Take my wife- PLEASE!"? I never met him, but anyone who sees his headstone will wonder what his life was like. If you are curious, here is a link---  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Dangerfield. 

All this begs the question: What will I leave behind?

The Bible says...

1 Timothy, Chapter 5 (WEB)

 ²⁴ Some men’s sins are evident, preceding them to judgment, and some also follow later.  ²⁵ In the same way also there are good works that are obvious, and those that are otherwise can’t be hidden.

The answer to my question: Everything about me, good and bad. The thing is- those things will determine my eternal fate at the judgment. You and I can't change the past, but we can determine to change the present and affect our future. And the future isn't written in stone (until we expire).