There is an often recycled, though largely flawed, argument used against those of the faith who embrace the more exuberant charismatic manifestations and expectations of present day Christianity. Namely this: if it is not in the Bible, it is not of God. It is a simple and persuading argument. It is also incredibly limited.
The chicken curry I ate last night is nowhere to be found in my Bible, yet God still made the chicken, and I am sure if the Israelites in Moses' day knew how good South African chicken curry is they would gladly eat it too. Or perhaps, they are like many Christians today, who would refuse to share such a meal with me, based on the grounds that no one ever cooked that way in the Bible.
What I have written above may sound like a ridiculous illustration, but it would not be the first time a Pentecostal has made a meal out of scripture. In fact, we were founded by such an act.
Peter: the charismatic weirdo
God only knows the drama that went on when Peter tried to explain his rooftop trance to the other Jewish believers. That unlawful and unscriptural incident found in the book of Acts chapter 10, where God asked him to first kill and then eat unclean animals.
How, and if, he found scriptural backing to defend his experience I don't know. Although his authoritative position in the church would have surely benefited his credibility, if Peter shared his experience today we would find he exhibited all the symptoms of a charismatic weirdo.
Firstly, he was hungry, and such people are prone to strange dreams and imaginations. Secondly, he claimed to have been in a trance, which, according to Google is: 'A half-conscious state characterised by an absence of response to external stimuli, typically as induced by hypnosis or entered by a medium.'
Suspicious of the unknown
Thirdly, what Peter saw was not only biblically troublesome contextually, but more than that, his vision seemingly overrode scripture.
All of the above would have given evangelicals more than enough reasons to disassociate themselves completely from someone whom Jesus should never have trusted to lead his church.
So how did Peter's vision find ultimate approval amongst the perplexed Church? The Holy Spirit! His presence gave the answer before the question arose. His movement, evidenced through the infilling and outpouring of the Spirit amongst the Gentiles, was proof enough. The Gentiles even got baptised in the Spirit before repenting or saying a sinner's prayer! There goes the Pentecostal second blessing doctrine! A few evangelical assumptions probably copped a hit as well.
Controversial workings of the Holy Spirit
This begs the question: Is Scripture to be interpreted in light of the working of the Holy Spirit, or is the working of the Holy Spirit to be interpreted by Scripture? Yes and Yes...but...
I have always been involved in controversial Christianity. I was filled with the Spirit through the renewal that swept over the world called the Toronto blessing. A revival where people fell, jerked, rolled, shook and laughed uncontrollably like they were roaring drunk. I have seen hundreds of people get gold teeth, plates and bridges all at once through a simple prayer. I have seen gold dust and gemstones appear in meetings and even the family home.
Last week our church hosted Todd Bentley, perhaps the world's most controversial evangelist, and as I did previously, I witnessed God do miraculous healings through Todd's tattooed arms. I watched video footage of a man and a young boy being raised from the dead in his most recent crusade in Pakistan. Three people were resurrected in one meeting.
Compare with scripture
Many still say it is dangerous to expose oneself to such manifestations as you may get deceived, yet without going into in depth detail, which a subject like this surely invites, I offer one point: it is not these movements that bring most error, the most dangerous doctrine and error are found where there is no present and visible moving of the Spirit amongst the Church.
Why?
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.2 Peter chapter 1 verses 20-21.
Peter's first principle when understanding the Bible is that Scripture did not come to us but by the moving of the Holy Spirit, therefore it cannot be interpreted without the moving of the Holy Spirit. You can preach about Acts chapter 2 all you want, but until you get drunk in the Holy Spirit yourself, you just won't understand!
Joshua Robbie is currently serving the Lord under Pastors Ronnie and Shirley Naidoo of KZN Celebration Centre in Tongaat South Africa. He and His wife Rene' moved from Australia to South Africa in April 2016.
Josh Robbie's previous articles may be viewed at http://www.pressserviceinternational.org/josh-robbie.html