• Help Spread the Fire
  • Click here to read Dr. Brown's latest article
  • Dividing Over Truth, or Just Plain Divisive? Dr. Brown Interviews Christian Leaders Regarding the Strange Fire Conference

    October 21, 2013 | 115 Comments

    Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

    [Download MP3]

    We continue to have server overload on our Line of Fire site, but you can listen to the whole interview on our YouTube channel.
     In the first hour, Dr. Brown speaks with Pastor Phil Johnson, the longtime editor and colleague of Pastor John MacArthur, and one of the principle leaders involved in the Strange Fire conference; in the second hour, he’ll speak with Pastor Adrian Warnock and Pastor Sam Storms, both of whom are Reformed Charismatics. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.

     

    Hour 2:

    Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Let us ground our faith in the Word with our eyes fixed on Jesus, embracing the Spirit, and embracing one another.

    SPECIAL OFFER! THIS WEEK ONLY!  

    This Week, Dr. Brown is Offering His Constructive Critique of the Charismatic Movement Through His Two in One Volume Book: Whatever Happened to the Power of God and It’s Time to Rock the Boat, Plus the Line of Fire Radio Broadcast Addressing the Strange Fire Conference with Guests Phil Johnson (From Pastor MacArthur’s Ministry), Sam Storms, and Adrian Warnock. Get These Resources Today for Your Gift of $25 or More, Postage Paid! (US Only)

    Call 1-800-278-9978 or Order Online!

    Other Resources:

    Cessationist Call-In Day

    Pastor John MacArthur’s Strange Fire Conference: Something Helpful or Something Harmful?

    Dr. Brown Shares His Concerns Before Pastor MacArthur’s Strange Fire Conference and an Appeal for the Real Work of the Spirit

    Spread the Word:
    • E-mail this story to a friend!
    • Facebook
    • Digg
    • del.icio.us
    • Mixx
    • MySpace
    • Technorati
    • Sphinn
    • StumbleUpon
    • TwitThis

    Comments

    115 Responses to “Dividing Over Truth, or Just Plain Divisive? Dr. Brown Interviews Christian Leaders Regarding the Strange Fire Conference”

    1. Ty
      October 21st, 2013 @ 10:58 am

      So thankful for todays show…. Show hasnt aired or happened yet…. but I talked to Dr. Brown through twitter and I already have faith that this discussion will bea catylst to produce fruits from the Strange fire confernce.

      God bless you all

    2. Greg Allen
      October 21st, 2013 @ 4:33 pm

      I am _not_ a “cessationist” but I do have a nagging question.

      Isn’t it a little too convenient that all modern Pentecostals speak in the “tongues of angels” rather than the “tongues of men” as they did in Acts 2?

      I’ve long wondered if the “tongues” of modern Pentacostalism bears any resemblance to the tongues of the New Testament.

    3. Ty
      October 21st, 2013 @ 4:40 pm

      ok.. maybe i was wrong. I wish Phil was giving time to address key questions rather than being talked over time and time again….

      But I still hope that good comes from this podcast and the Strange fire confernce

    4. Daniel
      October 21st, 2013 @ 4:59 pm

      This was a helpful show.

      It’s very perplexing that Phil Johnson can’t seem to see how he and Macarthur’s evidence does not justify their conclusions. They point to spiritually abusive people and conclude charismatic gifts are therefore ungodly. All the while, they could *agree* with orthodox charismatics that spritually abusive people are wrong (issue 1) – and then discuss in a congenial way the validity of and proper use of the gifts (issue 2). I get the impression that they didn’t even *look* for evidence that might challenge their sweeping conclusions. How sad, irresponsible, and (ironically) driven by emotion.

      2. I’ve found Sam Storms’ books Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts and Convergence both very good on these topics. The chart in the middle of Convergence that contrasts the respective emphases in cessationist churches and charismatic churches is especially insightful.

    5. Donn
      October 21st, 2013 @ 8:14 pm

      I applaud Dr. Brown for his patience. I find Mr. Johnson as dogmatic as Mr. MacArthur. Though he seems to be using a more gentle approach, I would have appreciated him more had he called out his “own” on his broad statements and misinformation just as he is asking Dr. Brown to nullify anyone within the charismatic realm. He cannot, but doesn’t understand why Dr.Brown doesn’t. He wants what he refuses to give. There will be no middle ground. It’s all about Jesus, but the bottom line is that their camp does not believe you have Jesus if you are from Pentecost or are charismatic. He denies, denies and denies again that is their message, while the audio from Dr. MacArthur states it emphatically. They are talking out of both sides of their mouths. I agree Mr. Johnson’s answers only address a segment of the church we all abhor. He refuses to see that. Does he really not see abuses in the cessationist movement?

    6. Ray
      October 21st, 2013 @ 9:01 pm

      I’m just wondering if there is such a thing as a Strange Fire Awareness Movement hospital, or food service for the hungry.

    7. anne
      October 21st, 2013 @ 9:06 pm

      I really notice that Michael Brown is using his tactic as a debater to trap Phil Johnson. He is always talking over Phil and not giving Phil the chance to answer the questions. It seems like he is not interested to listen to what Phil has to say at all. I get the feeling that he invited Phil to his show to attack him and make him look bad. While I agree with Michael Brown that not all people from the charismatic are fakes, I believe John Macarthur is right in confronting the deceivers in that movement.

    8. Ray
      October 21st, 2013 @ 9:15 pm

      The term “false prophet” came up more than once.

      It seems to me that there is such a thing as a prophet being wrong at times, and at such a time he can be considered to be a “wrong prophet” (at that time) and I suppose if he continues to be wrong, then for a longer period of time he could be considered a wrong prophet.

      If a prophet is being deceitful and not telling the truth about something that is a concern to you personaly and affects your life, he can be considered to be a false prophet at that time.

      Though he be considered a false prophet to one man, he may be a true prophet to another man.

    9. Donn
      October 21st, 2013 @ 9:24 pm

      I think after this, I am going to steer clear of all things John MacArthur… In one breath Phil Johnson called Michael Brown a brother in Christ (at the beginning) and in another he clearly condemned all he stood for. How can that be? It’s either or. Either you are a heretic or not as far as they are concerned, so how can one be both? Each time I hear something from this group, I am grieved. I feel sad, and hurt. I feel attacked. If we are to discern the spirits as the word says, this is all I need hear or know. They are deceptive, divisive and hurtful to the body of Christ.

    10. hector
      October 21st, 2013 @ 10:23 pm

      I thought it was a great discussion. Of course they’ll need more time to deeply discuss this issue. My opinion, cessasionism nor continuanism. I believe God is all powerful and does according to the counsel of his will. I always go back to Philippians 1:12-18. Now, I think Dr.Macarthur, and I love his writings, took it out of proportions. My thing with Dr Macarthur is, how can he be a reformer in theology, be a dispensacionalist and believe in a secret pre- trip rapture of the church. that really gets me confused. Blessings.

    11. Thomas
      October 21st, 2013 @ 10:41 pm

      The wheat and tares paraable is perfect to preach now

    12. Donna Howell
      October 21st, 2013 @ 10:41 pm

      Amazing he knows so little about the church he condemns……

    13. Greg Allen
      October 21st, 2013 @ 11:21 pm

      Is everybody going to ignore my post?

      Isn’t it a little odd that modern day tongues don’t resemble the 2nd Chapter of Acts at all?

      How do you know that the “tongues” you speak is anything like what the early church did?

    14. Ron
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 1:35 am

      Greg Allen – I’ve heard countless reports of people speaking in unknown tongues of men. Countless. Often for the purpose of evangelism. I one time heard a Christian radio personality pose the same question you posed to his audience, and there was no end of people calling in with stories of supernaturally speaking in tongues they didn’t know in the presence people who did know them. Sometimes it was accompanied by the spiritual gift of interpretation of tongues, and the person who knew the language naturally confirmed the accuracy of the person who interpreted by a gift of the Spirit.

    15. Ron
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 1:46 am

      Thank you Dr. Brown for so graciously hosting Phil Johnson today. I was astonished at his refusal to even admit that his statements might be a little broad-brushed when you would give him incontrovertible evidence to show that they were outright falsehoods. Very enlightening program today. I listened to the entire broadcast and can’t figure out what Ty is talking about — you gave him ample room to speak, as evidenced by all that dead air while you waited for him. You were a patient host in spite of his constant deflecting and maddening refusal to respond to the undeniable falsehood of his and MacArthur’s statements at the conference and in the book.

    16. Dr. Michael L Brown
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 2:04 am

      Greg,

      Acts 2 only occurred once in the NT; there’s no other recorded account that tells us specifically that other earthly languages were being spoken.

      That being said, I have friends of mine — even one non-charismatic — who have experienced understanding or speaking a foreign language for evangelism (or, it happened with their translator), with many other attested accounts today or through history. So, it still does happen, but what Paul describes as the norm for our practice in 1 Cor 14 is prayer from our spirit to God that our mind doesn’t understand when we pray in tongues. (When I pray in tongues, my mind is engaged in with the Lord in many ways, so it’s not being mindless but rather being in spiritual communion with the Lord through tongues and then mental communion with the Lord as He leads and directs.)

    17. Andrew Yeoman
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 2:08 am

      Greg, I encourage you to read some historical books in the early Pentecostal outpouring. Many of which give testimonies of young missionaries or pioneers in homelands, who upon their mission, would see and hear many remarkable instances of tongues being understood, and glorifying God!

    18. Tony Miano
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 2:22 am

      Phil certainly exercised a great deal of patience during this interview.

    19. Clyde Clymer
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 2:59 am

      I enjoyed the dialogue between Dr. Brown and Phil Johnson immensely. It was quite passionate at times and I was deeply grieved by some of the things MacArthur stated and Phil agreeing with those outlandish positions. I must admit though, I as more concerned about what I think is the real issue and I hope will come to a debate which Dr. Brown did mention and that is for qualified scholarly apologists to sit with each other and discuss cessationism and continuationism. That is the real and pertinent issue before us.

      Dr. Brown I hope a meeting transpires soon but I am also extremely concerned about such a meeting because of the potential for blaspheming The Holy Spirit. But then again my fear should subside because you will state that their(the cessationists)blasphemy is a result of ignorance. Well then let the games begin…:)…God bless

    20. Jabez H.
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:27 am

      It seemed an introduction to the issues of both sides, this program. I agreed with Phil Johnson’s assessment of some of the ministries of manipulative self administration which he mentioned, but found his characterizations of the general movement’s accused lack of charity or clarity of association with the Gospel of Jesus Christ unfounded from evidence encountered personally over years. When in need personally, at points of personal history, I’ve known charismatic believers to reach into their own wallets and share personal resources without request or qualification. When in need of personal admonition or moral or emotional support, only those operating in voice and deed with the presence of the Holy Spirit have come along side and touched where need for touching lives to heal or be helped was responded.

      Ceassasionist believers, though apparent lovers of hearing the written word expounded, seemed to have insulated hearts from actualizing what is prompted with a similar responsiveness known of those actively pursuing hearing the voice of a living Christ. The difference in sensibilities shown in interactions of this program seem to be about Mr. Johnson’s skepticism vs. Dr. Brown’s activism. As for the issues coming up for both, base lines of comparison need to be established to then make references to commonly understood concepts, behaviors, norms, and terms.

      Where Bible based hearers of the word (alt. spirit), even if sincerely grounded in the word (alt. spirit), have been known to generally have personal boundaries on offering personal time and resources to help come along side others and assist them with life challenges, something is missing as to being pots formed by the potter. As doers of the word, discernment and dedication to discovery of here and now application of its encouragement and illumination of direction shown are championed among Evangelicals of both persuasions. Forming connections apart from those operating with the named gifts and identified tendencies of the Holy Spirit taught by Paul and the Lord can be tedious where only parts of the written word given the 1st Century churches is regarded. Though not the foundational Gospel Paul identified, its additions, like the gifts, are given to us for reasons the Father chose before Jesus was sent into this world.

      De. Brown came across and teachable and humble to come together and meet the challenges discussed, Mr. Johnson came across as prejudiced and limited in offering a personal route to change this fact.

      Reasoning for drawing absolute and generally negative heretical labeling conclusions, as mistakenly made by Phil J., should not just be inductively applied to a whole movement from named example. Reasoning should be empirically applied to giving strengths and weaknesses assessments reagarding deductive evidence on attention made, fruit, behavior, and general assembly preoccupations of the faithful in discerning who is and is not a perswhich his gross misstatement on Charismatic benevolence. As they say, do the math, i.e. as Mike Brown challenged Phil, go and see what the Lord has done and is doing (in India, for example, as was offered).

      In 1972-73 I worked with Pat Robertson, then noted his medical and other benevolence missions through “Operation Blessing” as maturing from that initial season of association with the infatuation of charismatically based ministry applications. This was new broadcasting ‘territory’ at the time in the USA. I was privileged to help start a radio station covering three states in that timeframe: totally dedicated to Christian programming. It was a time of ground swell cooperation between the Spirit of God in Christ and people responding with personal commitments and actions of related faith.

      As Mike Brown pointed out, he has addressed excess and error in his writings and books, simply put. As he rightly resisted, the Holy Spirit has a voice and a purpose, which Phil Johnson only qualified in part (as both stated, to bring people to Jesus and a faithful testimony of Him).

    21. Jabez H.
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 5:05 am

      Note, editor, please remove this line and the partially edited posting just made above, leaving what is below.

      This program seemed an introduction to the issues of both sides. I agreed with Phil Johnson’s assessment of some of the ministries of manipulative self administration which he mentioned, but found his characterizations of the general movement’s accused lack of charity or clarity of association with the Gospel of Jesus Christ unfounded from evidence encountered personally over years. When in need personally, at points of personal history, I’ve known charismatic believers to reach into their own wallets and share personal resources without request or qualification. When in need of personal admonition or moral or emotional support, only those operating in voice and deed with the presence of the Holy Spirit have come along side and touched where need for touching lives to heal or be helped was responded. Hearers of the word only have not alike responded.

      Cessationist believers, though apparent lovers of hearing the written word expounded, seemed to have insulated hearts from actualizing what is prompted in human interchange with a similar responsiveness known of those actively pursuing hearing the voice of a living Christ. The difference in sensibilities shown in interactions of this program seem to be about Mr. Johnson’s skepticism vs. Dr. Brown’s activism. As for the issues coming up for both, base lines of comparison need to be established to then make references to commonly understood concepts, behaviors, norms, and terms.

      Where Bible based hearers of the word (alt., spirit), even if sincerely grounded in the word (alt., spirit), have been known to generally have personal boundaries on offering personal time and resources to help come along side others and assist them with life challenges, something is missing as to being pots formed by the potter. As doers of the word, discernment and dedication to discovery of here and now application of its encouragement and illumination of direction shown are championed among Evangelicals of both persuasions. Forming connections apart from those operating with the named gifts and identified tendencies of the Holy Spirit taught by Paul and the Lord can be tedious where only parts of the written word given the 1st Century churches is regarded. Though not the foundational Gospel Paul identified, its active additions, like the gifts, are given to us for reasons the Father chose before Jesus was sent into this world.

      Dr. Brown came across and teachable and humble to come together and meet the challenges discussed, Mr. Johnson came across as prejudiced and limited in offering personal routes to change this fact.

      Reasoning for drawing absolute and generally negative heretical labeling conclusions, where mistakenly made by Phil J., should not just be inductively applied to a whole movement from his named examples. Reasoning should be empirically applied to giving strengths and weaknesses assessments regarding deductive evidence on identified believers attention made, fruit, behavior, and general assembly preoccupations of the faithful: in discerning who is and is not a person of faith. Injury was accomplished by that which gave credence to his gross misstatement on Charismatic benevolence. As they say, do the math, i.e. as Mike Brown challenged Phil, go and see what the Lord has done and is doing (in India, for example, as was offered).

      In 1972-73 I worked with Pat Robertson, then later noted his medical and other benevolence missions and ministry evolution through “Operation Blessing”–as maturing from that initial season of association with the infatuation of charismatically based ministry applications. This was new broadcasting ‘territory’ at the time in the USA. I was privileged to help start a radio station covering three states in that timeframe: totally dedicated to Christian programming. It was a time of ground swell cooperation between the Spirit of God in Christ and people responding with personal commitments and actions of related faith. Being part of that ‘movement’, stemming from the ‘Jesus Movement’ of those of my youth and the Holy Spirit in that decade, we had little time ot training for self assessment. We did what inspiration activated.

      As Mike Brown pointed out, he has addressed charismatic excess and error in his writings and books, simply put. As he rightly resisted, the Holy Spirit has a voice and a purpose, which Phil Johnson only qualified by a very limited outlook (as both stated, to bring people to Jesus and a faithful testimony of Him). What lingers is whether sufficent contact was achieved to test the concerns of both responders to this program’s subject.

    22. Jabez H.
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 5:43 am

      #9, Dr. B., a good rebuttal, with excellent observations on the limited understanding presented of spiritual gifts by Mr. J. Paul goes into sufficient detail on what does and does not happen when speaking, praying, or praising in tongues. He also advocates for active spiritual gifts practices among the assemblies of God in Christ. Do you know of churches today in the USA which practice prophetic utterance and also judge it as it occurs? In other words, with order set up for prophecy to be actively judged by in assembly leadership and elder-recognized PROCESSES?

    23. Dan1el
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 6:28 am

      Phil would not concede that MacArthur painted with too broad a brush. Wow.

    24. Greg Allen
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 8:38 am

      Dr. Brown,

      Thank you for answering my question. I think it was being ignored because it is an uncomfortable one for Pentacostals.

      If you are “sola scriptura” about tongues — then I don’t think you can know that modern-day “tongues” is anything like what the New Testament church preached.

      Unless, of course, it conforms to the bible’s sole description of tongues in Acts 2.

      As I am sure you are aware, “language” is an equally, if not more, valid way to translate γλῶσσα. “Tongues” just sounds so much more mysterious!

      As for “turning ones brain off” while praying — I do this all the time! ;-)

      Seriously, this is where I only bless you in it. Words are way over-rated in prayers and especially worship. I, myself, prefer meditative silence rather than tongues but it is he same thing, in my mind. (And equally spirit-filled)

    25. Greg Allen
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 8:43 am

      Andrew,

      I have read fairly extensively about early Pentecostalism.

      I have also heard those stories of miraculous gifts of language — but, unfortunately, they have the quality of urban myth. It’s always a “friend” who has seen it.

      I have spent many years as a missionary, often among tongues-speaking people, and never saw it.

      But I dearly welcomed it! There were times when that gift would have really helped the gospel. But I never saw it.

    26. Dr. Michael L Brown
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 9:35 am

      Greg,

      Actually, I could say the same thing to you about “salvation”! If you are sola scriptura, how can you be sure you’re experiencing the same salvation that people in the NT experienced!

      And again, you are 100% misinterpreting the purpose of tongues in Acts 2, since Peter didn’t preach to the people in tongues but in Aramaic (or Greek).

    27. AaronC
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 10:20 am

      Should it surprise us that Dr. MacArthur thinks charismatics are not saved?

      In a 2010 video on the subject–”Is Speaking In Tongues Demonic?”–Dr. MacArthur calls speaking in tongues a “Satanic counterfeit,” near the end of this video (14:37).

      http://www.victorybaptistpocono.com/youtube/john-macarthur-is-speaking-in-tongues-demonic-part-3

    28. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 10:26 am

      Acts 2
      4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
      5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
      6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
      7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
      8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?…
      11 … we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.
      12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?

      The devout men understood the tongues in their native language. It does not say that the believers spoke in those languages. It would seem that YHWH gave the devout men the interpretation of the tongues.

      Acts 2
      13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.
      14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:
      15 For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day.

      The mockers evidently did not understand what the believers were saying. They thought that they were speaking nonsense to the point of thinking that they were in drunken stupors. Paul explains this:

      1 Corinthians 14
      21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
      22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
      23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

      Unbelievers will think that we are mad or maybe in a drunken stupor if they see what happened on the day of Pentecost. Mockers are unbelievers by choice, and proud of it. Tongues are a sign to them, according to Paul. Is this sign a good thing? Let’s look at the passage Paul quotes from:

      Isaiah 28
      9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
      10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
      11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.
      12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.
      13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
      14 Wherefore hear the word of the LORD, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.
      15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
      16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

      Learning line upon line and precept upon precept is not a good thing. It is for those that resist knowledge, truth and doctrine from YHWH. It is for those that refuse to grow up. It is so these “scornful men”/mockers will “go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.” They have made lies their refuge and think that they are immune to YHWH’s judgment. These are the people that tongues is a sign to. They do not understand the speech. They are left in confusion and do not see any use in listening intently and learning YHWH’s ways. They want to just barely inch along in accepting truth instead of fully embracing it. Ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth. (2 Tim. 3:5-7) This is the sign that tongues is to those that have chosen to believe not.

      1 Corinthians 14
      2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
      3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

      So in an assembly of believers there is not a lot of use for speaking in tongues…it is not a sign for believers. Prophesy is for the sincere believer. Tongues along with the interpretation is basically the same as prophesy at least as far as edifying the body. The message would be different since tongues is declaring YHWH’s greatness/worshiping Him and prophesy is edification, exhortation and comfort to the body.

      Acts 10
      44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
      45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
      46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
      47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

      Acts 2
      13 Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine.

      Now tongues as communication with YHWH edifies the one speaking, even though it would leave the hearer unedified. Tongues serves as a sign that YHWH is doing, or has done something, in the life of the person speaking…but to the derision of the unbeliever, scornful and mocker.

      1 Corinthians 14
      13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret…
      26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
      27 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.
      28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

      Many or all people can pray and sing in tongues while in a public meeting while the purpose is to communicate with and worship YHWH. If they speak in tongues for the purpose of ministry to the congregation, it must be accompanied by the interpretation of tongues or be discontinued.

      It is of deep concern when someone accuses those that speak in tongues of being crazy, drunk, or influenced by the devil. Tongues has become a sign to them…and we know to whom YHWH intended tongues to be a sign…

      I would not want to be in the shoes of a scoffer or scornful man that leads the people.

      Shalom

    29. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 10:30 am

      lofradio,

      Is there a reason that my comments are suddenly being moderated?

      Shalom

    30. lofradio
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 10:39 am

      Greetings Bo,

      As far as we can see none of your posts have been removed. Have you noticed some of your comments not being posted or removed? As long as your comments stay within the “Commenting Guidlines” none of your comments should have been removed. Thank you for your patience!

      Blessings,
      Line of Fire Radio

    31. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 10:44 am

      lofradio,

      Until recently, my comments were immediately posted. Now they say that they are in moderation and sometimes do not post for quite awhile.

      Just wondered if I said something that flagged me for going through moderation for each of my posts.

      Shalom

    32. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 10:45 am

      lofradio,

      It appears that it isn’t happening now. Hmmm?

    33. Daniel
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 11:17 am

      I commented above, but after some thought, here’s the discussion I think would peacefully and clearly define the issues:

      1) What is the biblical truth of the gospel that we can agree on?

      2) Are all the gifts valid today? Discuss. Maybe consult the “Four Views” book on the miraculous gifts, edited by Grudem.

      3) If “YES the gifts are valid,” then how do we practice them biblically?
      -What constitutes abuse, but not blasphemy?
      -What constitutes blasphemy?
      -When people incorporate “miracles” into other spiritual abuse, how can we distinguish true gifts from other heresies? And what’s the best way to respond?

      4) If “NO the gifts are not valid today,” can we disagree amicably with Christians who say “Yes” without considering them unregenerate heretics?

      4a) If “NO, this belief makes them all unregenerate heretics,” then we have an unnecessary division in the body and have excluded men like Grudem, Carson, Storms, Piper, Brown, etc. from the kingdom of God. (Even MacArthur won’t cross this line, although he flirts with it.)

      4b) If “YES, we can disagree about this as a secondary issue,” what can be tolerated graciously and what crosses the line into blasphemy?
      -How can we respond *together* to the blasphemers and heretics?
      -How and when does God still speak today (whether we call it a “gift” or not)?

      4b is where most Cessationist-Charismatic dialogues rightly live, but there’s so much commotion around Strange Fire because MacArthur has backed himself into 4a with many extreme statements (apparently without considering the implications?).

      For the sake of the body of Christ, I pray a peaceful, humble, gracious dialogue can continue.

    34. Greg Allen
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 3:23 pm

      Dr. Brown,

      >>Actually, I could say the same thing to you about “salvation”! If you are sola scriptura, how can you be sure you’re experiencing the same salvation that people in the NT experienced!

      We have a lot more examples of salvation in the New Testament than we do of tongues. With tongues we are working off a very small set of verses.

      The fact that you answered my question with a question is answer enough for me.

      Don’t get me wrong — I don’t think there is anything wrong with modern “tongues.” I just don’t see how it can possibly be defended them with “sola scriptura.”

      It’s fine to say that Acts 2 doesn’t apply to you — but then you have _no_ scriptural description of how tongues was practiced.

    35. Ray
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:02 pm

      What happened in Acts 2 was that the language that was the tongue (Unknown language to the one doing the speaking)was understood by people present, and this happened more than a few times on that day.

      I believe that was a witness God wanted to give that says so much, first that tongues is not gibberish, second that it honored God, magnified his work, was worship, and there is more.

      It has happened that someone who has been in a foreign country has heard the tongue and the interpretation and understood the tongue because it was the language he was familiar with back in the foreign country where he had been at, and the interpretation given in English was right on, according to the man who knew the tongue because it was the same language as the one he had known because he had lived in a particular foreign nation.

      This no doubt was a sign to the man.

      Unknown language to the one doing the speaking, but was known to one of the people present doing the listening because he happened to know that particular language.

      Tongues are either a language of men or of angels.

      When this was “noised abroad”, seems to suggest that people present who witnessed what had happened on that Pentecost day, began to hear what people said about what just happened, and no doubt people’s testimonies were similar, about how men who did not know such languages began to speak worhipful words of the Spirit in a language they themelves cound not have known, but some of the people present knew, because it was the language from where they were from.

    36. Ray
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:09 pm

      I think about the two “denominations” or “movements” in Jesus’ day, that of John the Baptist’s and his. They didn’t cut each other down did they? John was for Jesus and Jesus was in favor of John.

    37. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:41 pm

      Greg and Ray,

      Did you guys read post 28? Acts 2 does not say that they spoke in the native languages of the devout men that understood. It says that the devout men HEARD EVEY man in his native language. It was the gift of interpretation of tongues that allowed this.

      There were at least 12 languages by the list and certainly many more since there were men out of “every nation under heaven.” By the time you count dialects, it is impossible for 120 people to have spoken enough different native tongues for the vast number of people present in Jerusalem. Both the speaking and the hearing were gifts of the Spirit.

      Acts 2
      5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.
      6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language.
      7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
      8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?

      Nowhere in scripture does it say that the gift of tongues is a known human language. The only place that we have any idea of what tongues might be is in Paul’s description in 1 Corinthians 14. Here is what Paul says about tongues:

      1 Corinthians 14
      2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him…

      NO MAN UNDERSTANDS HIM! The gift of tongues requires the gift of interpretation when it is used in public for the edification of the body.

      1 Corinthians 12
      10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:

      1 Corinthians 14
      13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret…
      27 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.
      28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

      In Acts 10 and 19 there is no indication that anyone there understood the tongues being spoken, but it was recognized that that is what was happening. There is no precedent that the tongues is a human language in scripture, but quite the opposite. It is miraculous and needs a miracle to understand.

      Greg you have no foundation to stand on in your assertion to Dr. Brown.

      Ray, it is likely that Paul learned many of the common languages of his day.(Tongues of men.) He may be referring to speaking in tongues when he says he speaks in tongues of angels.

      There is just no place that says that speaking in tongues is human languages in the Bible.

      Shalom

    38. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:45 pm

      Greg,

      You wrote:
      “We have a lot more examples of salvation in the New Testament than we do of tongues.”

      Which examples do you speak of?

    39. wowo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:49 pm

      This is a test…Checking the moderation thing again.

    40. wowo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:52 pm

      lofradio,

      Is it now the norm for all comments posted to say, “Your comment is awaiting moderation.” after posting? It is certainly happening with me and it didn’t use to be this way.

      Shalom

    41. Bo
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 4:54 pm

      lofradio,

      Is it just after normal business hours that this happens?

    42. Ty
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 5:18 pm

      I love how this whole tread is about are gifts for today.

      My question is “Do you guys think the extreme segment (Dr. Brown says its the minorty, Phil says its the majority.. either way its a good portion)…Word of Faith & teahers teaching a false gospel should be addressed on a grand scale?

      Yes Dr. Brown address it… to the tune of lets say a few thousand… but in context the mega pastors that are exporting this false gospel are spreading it to millions upon millions. Shouldnt a response at least be attempted to get the attention of significant size audience?

      OR… are “we to busy saving souls” than protect the Gospel? This is the classic answer I have heard… “if we spent our time hunt down false teahers, we wouldnt be able to share the gospel”

      These topic was actaully the dominat them of the Strange Fire conference. Yes there was some cessantionism propganda, but teh divise talk was directed mostly at the goupd they felt were the extremes.. like Bentley, Hinn, & Bethel Church.

      So… address these issue, similiar to how Martin Luther did with 95 theis, John Calvin did, John Wesley did at things they saw as error.

      OR

      Just comment on small scale “your own congrgation” and ignore a mass scale respnse.

    43. Josh
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 6:30 pm

      This conversation was great, but I kept thinking of Luke 9:49-50.

    44. MrsWebfoot
      October 22nd, 2013 @ 6:47 pm

      Good conversation between Dr. Brown and Phil Johnson. I have been around the broad movement since the early 70s, both in the US and all over Latin America. There is one error that is common to all, and it is an offense to the Holy Spirit. It is taught consistently that speaking in tongues is the sign gift of a person’s baptism in the Holy Spirit. If a person has the experience of the baptism of the HS, then they WILL speak in tongues as proof of that experience.

      I have been in meetings where the speaker has pressured the whole congregation to speak in tongues. This is not uncommon, even in more mainline Pentecostal denominations.

      That teachings is offensive to the Holy Spirit, since the Word of God clearly says that He gives the gifts according to His will. Not everyone speaks in tongues.

      Now, I don’t care if people speak in tongues. It is a human tradition. For the sake of argument, I would say that at times, it may even be by the Holy Spirit. However, it is a grave error – and all groups are riddled with this error – to say that everyone baptized in the spirit will speak in tongues. It is also an abuse of the flock of God, since those who do not speak in tongues believe themselves to be second class Christians. In fact, there are still some who say that if a person does not speak in tongues they are not even saved.

      That is one glaring error that is offensive to the Holy Spirit who says that opposite in His Word.

    45. Despeville
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 12:59 am

      I applaud Phil Johnson for coming on this show knowing that the one with the mike has the power over the other speaker. This power was used as expected. I find it pitiful for Dr.Brown to try to speak about “how much would be done with Pastor MacArthur salary in third world country”. That was so below the belt. Wonder what could you do with all your income Dr.Brown and why do you suppose Pastor MacArthur does not do it? That was just so low as were evasions by Dr.Brown as to his support or pretending of ignorance as to what many Charismatic like Cindy Jacobs tell people. Over all it is good that the conversation happen but it would be much better if Dr.Brown would actually be consistent and not evade and manipulate.

    46. Andrew
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 1:03 am

      Michael, your interview with Phil Johnson was so frustrating! You talk over him, you run with statements that misinterpret what Phil says. You do too much self-promotion. This was not a balanced and fair interview. Very disappointed.

    47. Jordan
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 2:45 am

      Judging from the mocking laughter of the audience at the strange fire conference I believe that even though the gospel was most likely proclaimed with much zeal and concern for the truth it had very little spiritual value. Even though the gospel must be preached with facts, reason, logic and passion – pride is able to conceal and nurture itself within these things and even because of these things. Thus even though the message may have many valid points it will not bear good fruit. It is because of pride that we often fail to realize that we can stand firmly on God’s side doctrinaly yet stand on Satan’s side spiritualy. The prosperity gospel is a vicious and deceitful work of Satan but the Pharisee who prayed thus in the temple and commended himself will spew fourth the same poison when given a pulpit. May the Lord give us grace that we may truly walk in the light

    48. Strange Fire: Radio MP3 and Questions for cessationists
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:11 am

      [...] MP3 of the radio chat I had yesterday is available. It is in two segments Michael Brown speaks first to Phil Johnson and [...]

    49. Doug MacLean
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:42 am

      Dr. Brown invited a debate regarding cessationism. I hope this comes about. You could tell there were hard feelings from the entire tone of the debate. I agree that clips played of John McArthur’s statements in this segment were over the top. This makes dialogue very difficult. But it was probably better than this particular guest appeared because John McArthur quite frankly is overly arrogant in his presentation. For Dr. Brown the issue was the unfair accusations of John McArthur. For his guest it was the excess of Charismatics. As a result they were talking past one another. Dr. Brown made a general assertion that the frauds in Charismatic circle were no worse than the frauds in non-Charismatic circles. But this should not be the standard even though it may be that we have wheat in tares in both churches until Christ comes. John McArthur’s approach actually makes it harder to address the problems in the Charismatic movement. As long as the only issue is whether Cessationism is wrong we will not be able to address the issues of frauds and false prophets in Charismatic movement. There remains an open sore in the Charismatic camp from John McArthur’s words. I am concerned that the result of such an attack is that the frauds in the Charismatic movement get a pass because the focus is no on John McArthur’s over the top words rather than the problems in the Charismatic movement.

    50. Doug
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 7:43 am

      If tongues are not human languages but instead are some other form of communication with God, how do you differentiate the true from the false?

    51. Big Tex
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 9:02 am

      Doug,

      If tongues are human languages, and no one in the room speaks that language, how do you differentiate between the true and false? A sincere believer asking his Father for the Holy Spirit will not get a counterfeit.

      Lu 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

      Paul does not even go into the idea of false gifts or speakings with the Corinthians. He just says that if there is no interpretation of tongues they should suspend it for that meeting. If it wasn’t an issue to Paul, why would it be an issue to us? If we are dealing with sincere believers, we need only deal with the character of or the reason behind the tongues being spoken, whether they be true of false tongues.

      Is it for show or for edifying others? Is it disruptive or decently and in order? Is it submitted to authority or in your face, so to speak?

      I think that the false will fall by the way side if these issues are dealt with lovingly by elders in the body.

      You can read post 28 and 37 above for a treatment concerning tongues being human languages.

      Shalom

    52. Bo
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 9:05 am

      By the way Big Tex is Bo.

      I am still trying to find out why some posts are held up in moderation and some not.

      Shalom

    53. Big Tex
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 9:08 am

      That should have been: If we are dealing with sincere believers, we need only deal with the character of or the reason behind the tongues being spoken, NOT whether they be true of false tongues.

    54. Dr. Michael L Brown
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 9:50 am

      Doug,

      I assure you that abuses and excesses are not being overlooked, nor have they been for decades by charismatic leaders.

      The problem is when the good is lumped with the bad and true moves of the Spirit are rejected because people are uncomfortable with what the Spirit is doing or because they wrongly think that most charismatics are like the abusive ones.

    55. Dr. Michael L Brown
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 9:54 am

      Despeville,

      Thanks for your comments. To be clear, this was my issue: The vast majority of charismatics are NOT like the abusive TV preacher getting rich off the gospel. (For the record, I and all my staff and team receive quite modest salaries.) Yet an attack on charismatics worldwide is launched from a church building which must have cost millions of dollars to build by a pastor railing on the prosperity gospel yet making enough money to support 1,300 charismatic, Jesus-loving, Word-based, humble church planters in India. That was the point. I don’t begrudge Pastor MacArthur his salary and he might give it all away. So, the point was made for a reason, which I’d encourage you to consider. Again, thanks for weighing in!

    56. Dr. Michael L Brown
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 9:57 am

      Andrew, thanks for your comments, and I’m sorry you were disappointed with how I conducted the interview. We’ve actually received overwhelming appreciation for doing the interview with many deeply frustrated by Mr. Johnson’s failure to repudiate the outrageous statements made at the conference and to respond directly to questions asked, but I understand everyone has their point of view, and I appreciate you sharing yours here.

      You should realize that no door to air opposing views was opened to any of us at the Strange Fire conference, but I went out of my way (and will continue to do so) to allow people to air their opposing views on my show. Hopefully, you will recognize the positive step involved in doing this.

      God bless, and thanks again for sharing your perspective.

    57. Van
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 11:28 am

      I’ve witnessed this speaking in tongues phenomenon in person several times. I’ve seen videos of all the shaking, quaking and rolling around on the floor. Obviously these people are just trying to draw attention to themselves, to make other people believe that God is paying attention to them and giving them some special magical power. Meanwhile this same God completely ignores the fact that about 30,000 children died from poverty related issues, mostly starvation in the last 24 hours. So God is supposedly more interested in making people babble incoherently in some non-existent language than he is in starving and suffering children.

      John MacArthur says that this speaking in tongues is from the devil and Dr.Brown claims it comes from God. Now in any other avenue of study these men would first have to prove that the things [in this case deities] they ascribe this phenomenon to actually exist. But that isn’t the case when it comes to religion. In religion the leaders are never asked to prove any claims, any premise or ANYTHING – because we all know they can’t. In science the scientists tell us they really cannot prove anything absolutely. It would be nice if religious leaders would admit the same. I won’t be holding my breath.

    58. Bo
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 12:01 pm

      Van,

      How much money and time do you spend feeding the starving children? The number of Christian ministries that feed the starving and that provide medical services to them and those that donate to them prove that their deity cares. Do you really care about the starving as much as them and their deity? Or are you just setting up a straw man to wield your mighty sword against?

    59. Despeville
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 12:07 pm

      Dr.Brown,

      “a pastor railing on the prosperity gospel yet making enough money to support 1,300 charismatic, Jesus-loving, Word-based, humble church planters in India.”

      For the record, honesty and consistency sake would you please provide same statistic as to the money you make or this kind of calculations are reserved only for those you are disagreeing with?

      Thanks and looking forward to your calculation.

    60. MrsWebfoot
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 1:04 pm

      Well, if the good theologians inside the Charismatic movement would address the main glaring error that characterizes it, that would help a lot.

      Where can I go to find good materials from a Charismatic point of view refuting the idea that speaking in tongues is THE sign of the baptism in the Holy Spirit? If a person does not speak in tongues, then they have not yet experienced the baptism of the Spirit. Who is addressing this error?

    61. MrsWebfoot
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 1:40 pm

      BTW, I both know and have experienced the results of having been baptized in the Spirit, but I do not speak in tongues. That is in spite of my well-meaing, loving Charismatic friends who have pressured me to just give in and it will come. Who is wrong? Am I wrong because I maybe have not been sincere in asking for this gift, or are they wrong?

      Also, so that Dr. Brown can become better informed about Benny Hinn in India, just take a look at excerpts from his India crusades. Millions have been reached with the Gospel, according to Hinn. Hinn is very big worldwide. Most people think of him as being a Charismatic, and he comes highly recommended by my Charismatic friends. I’m surprised that Dr. Brown would not know of him, yet make disparaiging remarks at the same time.

      My point? I could really use something theologically sound from a Charismatic or Pentecostal point of view that would help people avoid the wolves that want to devour them. That’s all. The Charismatic movement is not going away, and I’m not saying that it should at all. It just needs a good injection of sound theology. I love to give my Pentecostal friends in a closed country copies of Grudem. It would be nice to have more like that, maybe specifically addressing some of the excesses. Not sure if you’re the guy for the job. Maybe?

    62. Ty
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 2:44 pm

      Mrs. Webfoot

      Thank you.

      I think this is the main issue at hand.
      We all mention and acknowledge the errors… but I would like the same asnwers u have. IS there a discenrment based group, with in the charismatic/Pentecostal movement….if so… pls ref ppl to them

      “My point? I could really use something theologically sound from a Charismatic or Pentecostal point of view that would help people avoid the wolves that want to devour them. That’s all”

    63. Daniel
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 3:13 pm

      MrsWebfoot and Ty,

      A good basic book is Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts, by Sam Storms, who was on this show. He has a whole sermon series on the gifts here, too: http://ow.ly/q6Uwy

      There are many others, but not to overwhelm, this may be a good start.

    64. Wayne Roberts
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 3:19 pm

      Thanks for the monologue and self promotion. It would have been nice to hear what Phil Johnson thought without being interrupted constantly.

    65. Ty
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 5:22 pm

      Daniel

      Thank you.

      we arent asking about a beginners guide.

      Example… & I dont like to call out names, but Creflo dollar (maybe not known to many, but has a huge pressence), mocks and denies trinity… yet, fellow Christian promote and recognize him as a brother that prmotes the proseperity message.

      He is TBN, reaching millions of people on a regular basis.

      There are others, but my pt is… while good Christian pastors will address in the pupit once in a while reaching there 200 to 1000 member congrgation…
      Is there a better more effective platform that addresses these?

      A book is good… but usually the people being decieved are not running to buy an Storm book or listening to line of fire podcast.

      Aer there any worldy respected thologian in the charimatic / Pentecostal body whose voice touchs millions or at least a grand scale…(more than your 1000 member congragation), that can address these type of things.

    66. Ty
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 5:24 pm

      lol

      “Begineers guide to Spriritual gifts”

      I know you didnt mean to be funny…but that was pretty funny

    67. Bo
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:07 pm

      MrsWebfoot,

      You wrote:
      BTW, I both know and have experienced the results of having been baptized in the Spirit, but I do not speak in tongues.”

      If I may ask, how do you know that you were baptized in the Holy Spirit? What are the results that you have experienced.

      Shalom

    68. Bo
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:10 pm

      lofradio,

      My last comment says above it: “Your comment is awaiting moderation.” Evidently this happens after your business hours. Is there some sort of setting that needs to be changed for my account, or is this the same for everyone now?

      Shalom

    69. Ty
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:22 pm

      Explanaiton

      TBN = is Trinity Broadcasting network. Suppose to be a Christian network

      Kind of Ironic a guy who denies trinity is on a network called Trinity (TBN

    70. Ray
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:53 pm

      It seems to me that there is nothing wrong with refering to the receiving of the holy Spirit into manifestation in this world by speaking in tongues, as a baptism of the Spirit.

      However if one teaches that if anyone has not yet received the baptism of the Spirit as evidenced by speaking in tongues, that such a one has not received the holy Spirit at all, that is not correct.

      Speaking in tongues is only one manifestation of the Spirit, and even if none of the manifestations are evidenced, it still does not prove that such a one has not yet received the holy Spirit.

      One must first have the holy Spirit in order to manifest it and there may be some time between the receiving of it and the evidence to be shown in this world.

      Also, many manifestations of the holy Spirit happen without much if any notice.

    71. Ray
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 6:59 pm

      Some people wait on God for speaking in tongues to happen to them while God waits upon them to act through faith to speak what he will put on the tip of their tongue if they were only willing to walk out through faith.

      Many times faith simply happens as a thing that can’t seem to be resisted while at other times, some earnest prayer and soul searching may be required.

      Many times we act by faith and don’t even realize it while at other times we go though a testing or trial as if to prove what we do indeed believe.

    72. MrsWebfoot
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 7:50 pm

      Thanks, Ty. What about Charismatic theologians who have written about men like Benny Hinn and others? I understand that men like Dr. Brown and others don’t want to be lumped in with the charlatans, but still. There is a need for men and women within the movement to take a close look at these guys like Benny Hinn. I have watched him on TV in the past. He is very popular among Charismatics, like it or not. Is it fair that he is one of the main faces of the Charismatic movement? Maybe not. The devil generally does not play fair.

    73. MrsWebfoot
      October 23rd, 2013 @ 8:19 pm

      Yes! That’s the kind of material I need. I’ll see if his book is in Spanish. Thanks, Ty.

    74. Ted
      October 24th, 2013 @ 12:25 am

      I have to agree with those who have stated that Dr. Brown came across as rude towards his guest and talked over him far to often. I also don’t see what the point was of calling John MacArthurs belief if Dispensationalism heretical in response to Phil Johnson’s criticism of some of Dr. Brown’s positions. That’s alot of quality Christians who hold and have held to that school of theology that you dissed there in a seemingly emotional response to being criticized. I’d expect better of you than that.

    75. Daniel
      October 24th, 2013 @ 7:42 am

      MrsWebfoot and Ty,

      I understand why you think “Beginner’s Guide” sounds funny :) – but that’s what you get when publishers determine a title. Storms said on this podcast, he would’ve named it something different.

      I read a lot and this book is one of the best I’ve read about what the Bible actually teaches about the gifts, why God gave them, and also how to discern true from false. MrsWebfoot, you mentioned Grudem. Storms is friends with Grudem and they communicate in a similar way.

      But if I’m still not understanding you, I hope you find what you’re looking for. :)

    76. Despeville
      October 24th, 2013 @ 8:10 am

      Dt.Brown,

      It has been a day since I asked you to be consistent and provide the same statistic you have used in your polemic against John MacArthur i.e.

      “yet making enough money to support 1,300 charismatic, Jesus-loving, Word-based, humble church planters in India. That was the point.”

      A day later and 13 new posts posted on the thread there is no answer from you and more importantly that question was dis allowed to be published… This is a perfectly legitimate, reasonable and honest question regarding yourself given that you made of it one of your main pseudo points in your interrogation of Phil Johnson this past Monday. If you are not willing to describe your income even in such general and remote terms do not do that with other people. That would be only honest and consistent. This censoring out of my legitimate question and your lack of answer only confirms for me and others your long observed tactics based on inconsistency, self promotion and hypocrisy. This is very unfortunate and I will do whatever I can to expose it. Thanks.

    77. Despeville
      October 24th, 2013 @ 9:28 am

      Dr.Brown, moderators, readers,

      For the record. My initial question regarding MacArthur’s and Brown’s income #59 was submitted on October 23rd, 2013 @ 12:07 pm and it was not posted sitting in “pending status” until my second post a day and another 15 posts later #76 submitted on October 24th, 2013 @ 8:10 am.

      Better later than never, so we are half way through. Waiting for the rest as asked twice.

    78. Dr Michael L Brown
      October 24th, 2013 @ 10:36 am

      Despeville, please understand that I don’t see 99.9% of posts and comments on all our different websites and pages, nor do I moderate this page, so your accusation is misplaced. I hope you can see that.

      The figures I was using were based on this: http://www.atruechurch.info/macarthur.html.

      My total salary, from the ministry I run, and from the church and school I founded, would be less than 1/5 of his.

      I do NOT associate Pastor MacArthur would financial fraud in ANY way, and I know of no scandals that he is attached to. My issue is to falsely blast hundreds of millions of people for preaching something they don’t preach, to condemn the “prosperity” doctrine (which I’ll discuss on the air in detail today), and then to make that much money — which could actually be used to support these godly, Jesus-centered, charismatic church planters by the hundreds.

      All that being said, you have actually violated our standards here with your personal attacks — especially your last two lines; also, no one here censored your comments, but the server overload has caused many delays and worse — and if you want to post here, you will have to step higher.

      And with that, I do forgive you for the attacks and hope you will follow the truth and not false information. May God’s grace and love triumph in your heart and life!

    79. Ty
      October 24th, 2013 @ 10:47 am

      Thanks Daniel

      I am familair with Storm and Grudem. Actaully watched a great debate between Grudem and Ian Hamilton, last night.

      Im sure your understand our question.
      I agree with Mrs Webfoot… that certain teachers are and have become thr general Face of the Chariamatic movement.

      one great thing abotu Strange Fire is…. more ppl are becoming aware of ‘somewhat’ (just kidding.. calm down ppl) sound Charismatic theologians like Dr. Brown, Wayne Grudem etc.
      But once the spotlight is shifted slightly to these respected scholars.. I hope ppl are not timid to address issue to the new size audience.

    80. Ty
      October 24th, 2013 @ 11:00 am

      Just for ppls information

      the two guest Dr.Brown had one do dialogue with regular ppl also. I good way to contact them with question or to just motivate or interact with them is on twitter at the name

      @AdrianWarnock
      @Samuel_Storms

    81. Despeville
      October 24th, 2013 @ 11:10 am

      Dr.Brown,

      Thanks, but my life and my heart has absolutely nothing to do with your arguments and how you use them in your public polemics. That is just base logic and factual thinking. Asserting that is simply a veiled personal ad hominem dressed up in a costume of pious talk. You could really do without that and I see you doing that time and time and time again with almost every person offering a critique of you. If you think people do not see this you are wrong.

      Second, My initial question regarding MacArthur’s and your income was posted what is now #59 and was actually submitted on October 23rd, 2013 @ 12:07 pm and it was not posted sitting in “pending status” until my today’s and second post a day and another 15 posts later #76 submitted on October 24th, 2013 @ 8:10 am.
      I understand that you do not read everything but others do and somehow they did have time to read other 13 or 15 posts between those two and post those while withholding from posting my simple and factual question… Given that interval as documented my accusation is not “misplaced” rather it points to certain consternation between your moderators as to what to do with a question about your income. That is what happened and at the very least.

      Third, your response as to your income is actually not provided in the very same way and statistical fashion you have provided it to describe John MacArthur in your conversation with Phil Johnson. Your today’s “1/5 of his” is not the same as “making enough money to support 1,300 charismatic” especially given a plethora of numbers quoted on this bizarre web site you have used as your source for this. Given that I will not ask for a third time. I think it is apparent that you do not want to be same about your income as you wanted to be about income of John MacArthur.

      Fourth, I wish you would go just the same about the income of hordes of false teachers who inhabit Charismatic movement and who rake in and pillage millions of dollars from mostly poor people to support their exorbitant lifestyle and all of that in the name of Jesus.

      Fifth, I am in no way associated with John MacArthur, his ministry or his church but I can smell double standards, manipulation and evasions from 9000 miles away.

      Sixth, I am not going to engage in self aggrandizement via pious talk of forgiving you anything. I just hope you will be one day consistent and equally harsh on yourself and your movement as you are on those who criticize you and your movement with many valid facts.

      Seventh, May God of truth bless you.

    82. Bo
      October 24th, 2013 @ 11:48 am

      Dr. Brown,

      And we would hope that both you and MacArthur would be generous givers to the poor with such salaries. It really doesn’t matter how much one makes, but what he does with the money. We can build our own kingdom or YHWH’s with little or lots. We can lavish ourselves like the rich man did in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, or we can be like Barnabas by sharing what we have.

      On another note, Phil Johnson didn’t seem to know of any charismatic groups that fed the poor and such. It is amazing how much we cannot see if we do not bother to look. He should have been able to see Latin America Child Care that has been operated by the Assembly of God since 1963. They help 100,000 children each day. How far did John MacArthur and Phil Johnson look?

      Shalom

    83. Bo
      October 24th, 2013 @ 1:49 pm

      And…it seems to me that Messiah called us each individually to be faithful with what has been given to us. Is there really anything in the scripture that calls us tho build hospitals, orphanages, schools, even church buildings. Is there anything in scripture that talks about large groups of people, call them churches or ministries if you like, doing these things either?

      Though these things can be good and can be efficient at meeting the needs of our fellow man, the issue in scripture is that the individual be faithful in what he has been given to manage. What if the so called “chariamatics” are made up of many many small groups instead of some big organizational superstructure? What if these small groups and even individuals contribute their time and wealth for smaller local individual needs? What if the lager groups do their charity to be seen of man…at least to a degree and the little guys go unnoticed? Will there be whole churches or ministries resurrected or will it be individuals that will be resurrected and judged according to what they have done in their bodies? The unsung little guy is where I place my vote for greatest in the kingdom and not on grandiose organizations. “In thy name we have done many mighty works.” might be the clarion call of the big guys, big churches and big ministries, but…

      Do you think that MacArthur or Johnson were thinking of the widow’s mite when they made their statements?

      Shalom

    84. Van
      October 24th, 2013 @ 6:16 pm

      Bo,
      I donate money, time and effort to a program that feeds chronically hungry children in the metropolitan area where I live. About one out of six to seven children in this area do not know where there next meal is coming from. So it’s a problem. Christians ministries doing charitable work doesn’t prove a thing about any deity. I’m not sure that doing charitable work because you believe God wants you to or because you want to earn rewards in some magic happy land after you die is commendable anyway. I’m certainly not looking for any kind of praise or reward for the charitable work I do or for the money I give. Just seeing the look on those little kid’s faces when we show up is all the reward I need.

    85. Ty
      October 24th, 2013 @ 6:19 pm

      Interesting writing by a pentecostal pastor on teh isseu at hand

      http://jjcaldwell.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/pentecostal-pastor-responds-positively.html?m=1

    86. David Lovi
      October 24th, 2013 @ 7:34 pm

      Dr. Michael Brown should be ashamed of himself for what he said in minutes 36-37 of the first hour, here is the quote, “In candor, when your biblical foundations are as off as…dispensationalism which are cardinal doctrines which you (Phil Johnson) hold to, I could question your Biblical literacy or your Biblical discernment…” -Michael L Brown

      Even more than that, he should be ashamed for blocking me on his facebook page for calling him out about this. Thats, just fine Doc. I will definitely tell my Dispensationalist friends what you think of them!

    87. Dr Michael L Brown
      October 25th, 2013 @ 1:11 am

      Despeville, your post moves me to pray for you all more. God’s grace and truth to you!

    88. Bo
      October 25th, 2013 @ 9:10 am

      Van,

      Keep up the good work. I am glad that you enjoy making kids smile. If only you didn’t have such a vendetta against those who believe in YHWH.

      Shalom

    89. Despeville
      October 25th, 2013 @ 9:25 am

      Dr.Brown,

      You are so lost in your ego that you cannot see past it. You can pray all you want none of that changes of what you do and do intentionally.

    90. Nicholas Petersen
      October 25th, 2013 @ 12:13 pm

      Despeville,

      It sounds like you are going to a great extreme here. Why not ratchet it down?

      Thanks, but my life and my heart has absolutely nothing to do with your arguments and how you use them in your public polemics – Despeville

      So let’s say you are right that in the heat of the argument with Phil Johnson or someone else, that Michael Brown won (or at least fought in) some of those arguments unfairly. The error you are going into is acting like Michael, in those cases, was intentionally being manipulative. That is so far from the truth! I’ve been told by my wonderful wife too many times to count in the last 11 years “that’s not fighting fairly,” and of course she was never right about that, I would never fight unfairly! But seriously, all of us are being refined, so I wish you would address your criticisms a bit more circumspectly.

      Michael, two things:

      1) It would be interesting to see a timing between Phil Johnson and yourself when you guys were on the air. It seems like you ended up with like twice the talking time (only counting the direct dialogue times). Phil was actually right when he said: ‘you ask a question and then don’t allow me to speak.’ It’s true. You would ask a question, and then without taking a breathe, go on, and on, and on laying out further arguments in favor of your position (all of which I agreed with, btw). Just imagine how frustrating this could get for the listener?! This is an honest criticism, unlike Despeville, just the need for refinement in all of us, in this case: ‘there’s a time to listen.’

      2) Sometimes when you don’t like the argument of a caller, you cut them off by saying: “Tony! Tony! Tony! (followed by a rebuke as if they were being intransigent)” You did this again in the last couple days, and it is SO frustrating to me, when you act like THEY were being intransigent, but in fact they were not, you just didn’t like their different viewpoint. This is the greatest obstacle to me listening regularly to the show. Can you hear this criticism Michael? It’s from a friend. I wrote you privately about this in the last half year with no response. This may be the kind of thing Despeville is reacting against, so maybe you could humbly consider if there are some refinements to consider, we all need refining ;) What I’m asking is that you just monitor the next time you want to cut someone off in that manner. You should not be constantly saying you welcome different perspectives, but then rebuke people as if they are intransigent, even though they were not shouting or anything remotely like that.

    91. Ty
      October 25th, 2013 @ 12:50 pm

      wow..

      Great layout of the issue in love, Nicholas Petersen.

      I must say i agree with 100% of it.

      I know it will get dismissed by many…the casual resposne i see is “well, I have many other ppl that say the exact opposite”

      That statement in itself dismisses the validity of the claim. And a few of us saying this about Phil are regulars on teh psot boards… so we are not Refrom Baptist with Calivinst leanings… that are just here to promote their theology.

    92. Nicholas Petersen
      October 25th, 2013 @ 1:35 pm

      And btw, the second part of the show with the two guests was awesome! Very well done to set that discussion up Michael, and to focus on the topic you did, which was the heart of the matter of having a living relationship with God, not just ‘the Holy Bible’ (we worship the author of the book, not the book itself!). The British guy had just so many terrific observations, and the same for the American.

    93. Anthea
      October 25th, 2013 @ 2:54 pm

      Dr Brown gave Phil Johnson more time than I would have. I have had the misfortune to read Mr Johnson’s blog on occasion, and found it to be the closest thing to a playground pack that I have seen since 1975. Sarcastic, superior comments that openly mock other Christians are not moderated or challenged, and the whole approach was very cliquey. An atheist who posted there about how he had lost his faith was treated in such a nasty manner that the opportunity to witness to him was completely wasted.

      When I realised that Phil Johnson was John MacArthur’s right hand man, I re-evaluated the whole Grace to You ministry. You are known by the company that you keep.

      This comment of mine is a bit strong, but reflects what I have observed.

    94. Ty
      October 25th, 2013 @ 4:22 pm

      Anthea

      “When I realised that Phil Johnson was John MacArthur’s right hand man, I re-evaluated the whole Grace to You ministry. You are known by the company that you keep.”

      Be careful with the Birds of feather flock together theory to discredit someone.

      I say this because Sam Storm, Dr. Brown, both assocaite with Mike Bickle who was apart of the Kansas City Prophets. I will not spread slander or accurate data on the Kansas City Prophets.

      BUT

      by your theory Bickle, Sam Storms, and Dr. Brown sould/could be dis-credited based on their assocaition.

      i am not of reform theology back ground so I find my self at odds with grace to you a lot… but i have admit that MAcArthur and his assocatiates offer value and insight on various things

    95. Despeville
      October 25th, 2013 @ 4:57 pm

      “So let’s say you are right that in the heat of the argument with Phil Johnson or someone else, that Michael Brown won (or at least fought in) some of those arguments unfairly.”
      ~ Nicholas Petersen

      “Why not ratchet it down?”
      ~ Nicholas Petersen

      Why? because of this below and so much more and especially in minister who is in public… See if you can “refine” or ‘ratchet it down” or perhaps you can just “pray for my heart” for demanding consistency and honesty also in light of this:

      ” Let your word be ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘No, no.’ More than this is from the evil one.”
      ~ Matthew 5:37

    96. Anthea
      October 25th, 2013 @ 5:24 pm

      That’s a good point, Ty, except that Phil Johnson is formally the leader of Grace to You. It’s not friendship alone, but a position of representing the ministry. I should have made that clearer.

    97. Van
      October 26th, 2013 @ 10:32 pm

      I don’t have a vendetta against those who believe in YHWH. I don’t have a vendetta against YHWH either. I don’t believe that deity exists. I have a vendetta against false religions of which yours is one.

    98. Bo
      October 26th, 2013 @ 11:11 pm

      Van,

      You do not believe that YHWH exists.
      You have a vendetta against false religions.
      So you think that belief in YHWH is a false religion.

      I am guessing that you think that you know all this for sure because you have all the facts in front of you and you have checked in every place and in every way to find out for sure if there is a deity called YHWH or not.

      Well I do not believe in the one that you worship either. The supposedly all knowing “VAN” has proven that he doesn’t deserve to be worshiped. Your deity is just too small for me. Too weak. Too uninformed. Too Van-like.

      Now if, on the outside chance, you do not know everything and have not investigated in every place and in every way, you might not want to speak like you have. You might want to say that you don’t know for sure or that you don’t want to know for sure. And I am under the impression that the latter is more probably the case.

      Shalom

    99. dave
      October 27th, 2013 @ 4:06 am

      I dont see the strange fire conference as being divisive because this group has little to no influence in the vast body of Christ. If charisma magazine hadnt even brought the conference to light not many would have even heard about it. Of course the majority of believers worldwide are due to the charismatic movement. These guys will come out with another book in 10 years or so, they are not worthy of any attention.

    100. dave
      October 27th, 2013 @ 4:12 am

      although did appreciate the interaction on the show, wouldnt give it anymore attention

    101. Robert C
      October 27th, 2013 @ 3:03 pm

      I have questioned several things on your ministry, now I no longer question anything . I no longer listen to you. I will pray for you

    102. Robert C
      October 27th, 2013 @ 3:03 pm

      I have questioned several things on your ministry, now I no longer question anything . I no longer listen to you. I will pray for you

    103. VJ
      November 1st, 2013 @ 2:08 pm

      Hello Dr. Brown,
      I heard your interview with Phil Johnson, and it prompted me to actually begin listening to each of the sermons/lessons from this conference.

      I just heard the first message from John MacArthur, entitled “Strange Fire” (message #1).

      I just wanted to say that around 20 minutes into the message, MacArthur does concede pretty clearly that he by no means says EVERY non-cessationist or charismatic is deceived or lost.

      In your interview with Johnson, you didn’t seem to acknowledge that concession.

      Thank you.

    104. Ryan P
      November 1st, 2013 @ 11:37 pm

      I’ve wrestled with many conflicts over the past few years since the Lord saved me. Unfortunately, this debate hits hard for me. I grew up in a charasmatic church and still haven’t landed on firmly on the issue. I also wrestled a lot with Calvinism/Arminianism, landing on the Calvaniststic side after beginning in strong opposition whne first addressed with the doctrine. One thing that I’ve noticed with many issuesin the church today is that there is a huge hurdle to jump in order to dialogue about any topic, what is it? Well, sin…anyone surprised? Those being sanctified are doing just that, growing and being conformed, but not there yet. So between chips on shoulders, smug assumptions, and people failing to say “hey, maybe this shoe fits me”, it’s pretty messy. I’ll sum up the 2 things that stuck out to me while listening to Johnson and Brown dialogue. Mr. Johnson did him self a huge disservice by not saying that some of the comments that were made at or before the conference were completely ignorant and assumptive. Dr. Brown did himself a hug disservice by refusing to call a spade a spade regarding false teachers. Yes, he addresses broad issues in the charasmatic church, but sometimes you have to clarify, “hey, that guy, he’s not one of us.” I also feel like there’s this idea that doing homework on someone makes you a heresy hunter. I’ve got family who wouldn’t dare question anyone who professes Jesus from the pulpit yet will examine a conservative politician to make sre that he is what he says he is. How silly is that? If you have the wrong Jesus and therefore the wrong Gospel then you lack the most essential Piece of the Christian faith. As Michael Ramsden puts it “If you Christ from Christian then you’re left with I-A-N…and Ian can’t save you.” I admire many people’s desire to have unity but it’s like watching a bunch of middle schoolers together playing recreational football and somehow the kid who says hey “I don’t wanna play with Billy cause he’s wearing brass knuckles.” Yet there’s some kid who just wants to play peacefully and passively and says “Billy just wants to play like the rest of us.” Okay so that’s not the best example. My point is as Shai Linne puts it “Today the only heresy is saying that there’s heresy.” It’s really nuts when you step back and look at it. Not to shift to politics but many can sit back and see that some representatives refused to sign the bill to pass Obamacare because of major concerns. These concerns were things that the left wing wasn’t willing to budge on either. Yet when those who oppose are addressed in light of the gov’t shut down, they are the bad guys who wanna cause conflict. The church needs to wake up. The argument should not be about accept the Gospel. If you are preaching the Gospel, then we’re cool. I grew up in a church that stressed the “deep” stuff. The fudamentalist churches where people didn’t speak in tongues, those were starter churches. The seeker friendly spots are doing what they can to heal those hurt by church by taking the Gospel, setting it aside and focusing on improvement and purpose. The Holiness church, they hate sin, well certain sin…not their sin but everyone else’s…you know the rebrobates who really offend God. The Reformed church who’s so busy inspect every detail of your doctrine that your life, good or bad, doen’t have time to be examined. I’ll try and finish if your preacher does not focus Jesus, the Messiah, the eternal Son of God. The One who made himself nothing and entered into humanity still divine and without a cursed nature like you and I. He lived a perfect sinless life in unbroken communion with the Father, whom all other natural born humans are enemies of. He was betrayed in accordance with scripture, delivered up to the suffer the exhaustive wrath of His Father on behalf of whomsoever would ever repent of sin (unrighteousness and self-righteousness, both are just as damnable) and place 1,000,000% of their trust in Jesus’ perfect life and right standing with God to be attributed to their bankrupt sinful account. How can this be? Because the father unleashes His wrath on the Innocent Lion who became a Lamb for His Bride, for His people. A group of people who did not seek God, followed Satan, and were infected to the core with sin. Like all humanity, the problem was not the sin they committed as much as it was the sin that they were infected with. The symptom, sin, is but only the indicator of an incurable disease. However the spotless Lamb of God became the bullseye and had the penalty for sin laid upon Him as if He were guilty so that He might in exchange lay His righteousness on His people. The perfect Judge carried out a perfect plan to save an evil criminals from their perfect Judge by substituting perfect Sacrifice, who is the Judge. God became a man and took the penalty from God due to man so that He could give men the righteousness of God and save men from God. Bet you wouldn’t have thought of that in a billion years. So bad news, you can do nothing to appease God’s wrath or accumulate the righteousness that God requires. Perfection is required. God doesn’t want your best, He wants His best. Good news, He offers His best as a gift. Give up throw your sin and pitiful attempts at being good in the trash and put your trust in Best God has to offer, His Son. He became nothing so His Father could justly adopt enemies and call us the Sons and Daughters of God. I got way off track but the Gospel’s the only think that will save anyone. Preaching anything less is futile. You need it all day everyday. Never lose your first love be blessed. Repent and believe…God’s so good He demands that you be saved. :o )

    105. Ryan P
      November 2nd, 2013 @ 8:42 am

      Sorry I had a Gospel blackout and completely lost my focus. Hope my point was stille expressed. Anything exalted over the Gospel. Yes there are other matters to address in the Christian life but you never leave the Gospel. How do you fight sin? The Gospel…you’re free from sin and it’s penalty. You’re not enslaved. Will you wrestle, for sure but the unregenerate don’t wrestle, they are deaf, blind and dead. How about marriage, the Gospel. See Ephesians 5. Parenting modeling repentance in your household. Showing your children they are sinful and in need of a savior. Teach them to trust you as you model the love of the Father. I’m sure that you get the drift. You don’t leave the Gospel for anything. Spiritual gifts are only effective in the local church if practiced in love, right? How do we learn to love? You guessed it, the Gospel. We love because we were first loved while we were enemies of God. Everything that happens in the church, home and personal life is to point to Jesus, plain and simple. We are to never forget that Jesus is our only way to be reconciled to God. He is the difference between you and the most immoral human you know. You would not be a son or daughter of God w/out the One who first loved you and gave Himself for you. Have a great day.

    106. Ryan P
      November 2nd, 2013 @ 10:09 am

      So maybe repentance for sweeping statements is in order so that you don’t throw a Michael Brown in with a Jesse Duplantis (personally listened to this guy talk about God as if He were Jesse’s subordinate. Likewise, Charasmatics need to drop this notion and fear of calling a “true move” a “false one.” If God knows your heart and you see non-sense that has nothing to do with the God of the Bible who seeks reconciliation through His Son and glory and honor through the work of the Spirit then seperate yourself. It’s simple, show people your error and concern and if they don’t hear you out move along. This is my biggest fear for people: EXPERIENCE DOES NOT VALIDATE TRUTH. If it does please tell me what you would do as Moses when the Egyptian magicians trhow down their rods? “Oh wow, we’ve got the same god!” How about Deut 13, the Prophet Muhammed, Joseph Smith, and on and on. Many think that the Lord would not let us be decieved if we use His name. I don’t agree at all. Make sure you know the character and nature of Yahweh before you are so flippant. He has revealed Himself in nature, scripture, and His Son. He operates through His Spirit but He has told us in scripture that we are preach His word, line upon line, precept upon precept. People are saved by the sharing of the Gospel. If they are not fed the Gospel, how can they be saved? It’s all through your New Testament. Letters written to Christians, none the less. So when you leave His word and use His name you run a great risk of creating and/or communicating a different god, a different gospel, and a different Jesus. Only Jesus has saved from the penalty due to sin and given freedom from sin to all who will believe on the innocent Scapegoat crushed by the Father.Preach the wrong Jesus and all of the bells and whistles, signs and wonders, law with no Gospel, health and wealth,or come pray this prayer garbage will leave people absolutely hopeless on the day of judgment and with no excuse. “We heard your name Lord!” Would that fly? He’s given us a Bible that reveals Himself to us. It reveals His Son and it was authored by His Spirit. I hope people will heal my hear on the matter. This burns in me all day. Examin the fruit of what some teach, not sound bites, but listen. If they’re giving and false Messiah and/or false Gospel then address their error if possible and warn others. Not to bash them but to love people. If you were in a drive thru and saw employees contaminating food would you not warn others? Some thing they’ve graduated from milk to meat when they’ve never been given milk and the meat is rotted and poisonous. Please hear me, only Jesus saves. Your faith doesn’t even save you unless it’s in Christ and the work He did for absolutely helpless enemies who were running from Him.

    107. Rodney P.
      November 3rd, 2013 @ 10:03 pm

      Good debate Dr. Brown! Phil Johnson was at the “Y” in the road where he could have chosen to admit that John Macarthur painted with a broad brush, or he could have chosen to keep his nice peaceful friendship with Dr. MacArthur. It’s too bad he didn’t choose the truth.

      I purchased many of MacArthur’s teachings over the years, but disagree with him concerning the Charismatic movement. Basically, John MacArthur is against anything that moves. It’s a shame that he feels that I’m lost and part of a movement that is not of God.

      For a lost person I am doing a lot of wrong things that will only advance the kingdom, not take away from. My wife and I have taken in strangers in our home and fed them, we did Foster Care for three years and helped five children, My friend and I started a ministry where we evangelized the Jehovah’s Witnesses and we did this by attending there services and evangelized them afterward, we went to their home bible studies by invitation and evangelized them, we also went to their annual conventions and passed out literature and evangelized them. We did all this because we were lost? Really John? Don’t put me, my wife, and friend in your little apostate thinking.

      I don’t say these things to toot my own horn, but rather to show you that I am not deceived. I can explain the new birth, explain from scripture that Jesus is God, and that he is the only way. I can defend my position from scripture why I believe what I believe.

      Thanks again Dr. Brown for taking a stand!

    108. Mike
      December 27th, 2013 @ 2:43 pm

      I’m arriving at this party late, but wanted to chime in all the same. Good dialogue here. I went to The Master’s College (of which MacArthur is president), and was a member of Grace Community Church for several years – so I am very familiar with both MacArthur and Phil Johnson, and personally know a few of the pastors there. I will say this about MacArthur, he stands for what he believes is right, and does not waiver from that; but he has a bad tendency to bomb the hospital to get the terrorists hiding inside. I don’t understand why he is drawing a line in the sand on this issue, especially when there are godly Christians with proven character on both sides of the aisle. In fact, I know for a fact that at least two of the professors in the Bible department at The Master’s College were continualists (or at least were not cessationist – if that makes sense).

      So overall, while I agree with many of the concerns noted by MacArthur, Johnson, and some of the others – they presented it in a divisive way, which does not foster proper biblical interpretation (in my opinion).

      Also, I see no need for personal attacks or questions of salary or associations. The bottom line is that the real debate is on what Scripture says, and I really wish MacArthur would have focused on that. There have been a lot of good posts on this board relating to Scripture – thanks to everyone! God Bless

    109. Mike
      December 27th, 2013 @ 2:53 pm

      One other thing I forgot to add – Matthew 7:15-20 speaks of knowing “false prophets” by their fruits. While I really enjoy some of MacArthur’s teachings, I think one of his problems is that he generally separates “true” and “false” based on an arbitrary line in the sand which he has drawn on certain theologies.

      If you fall on Continualist side then, well, you must either be unsaved or deceived by the enemy; but if you fall on the Cessationist side then, well, you’re okay and we won’t talk about your faults.

      It’s that type of divisive rhetoric that starts the conversation in attack mode. And I know MANY Master’s Seminary grads that use this preaching style, and then when people react negatively they say “They’re persecuting us just because we’re preaching the truth”.

    110. Sharon Bamburg
      February 6th, 2014 @ 10:56 pm

      I was raised Independent Baptist and born again in that church that taught against all Pentecostals and Charasmatics as demonic or just emotional. Although I had great bible teaching as our Pastor must have quoted scripture every other 30 seconds in each sermon but it was a dead church bound by doctrine and no life. After being a seeker of more truth and year of study and prayer I received the Baptism when hands were laid on me. I have only been slain in the spirit twice, other times I was pushed. Since that time, I tend to shake in church when worship is intense and when I testify of Jesus my body vibrates. I do not seek this nor do I wish to draw attention to myself as most people don’t unspderstand it, the ones that do understand it seem blessed by it. I do not want any experience that is not God inspired. I think Pentecostals and Charasmatics tend to tell stories and Baptists actually teach and preach.charasmatics are about receiving and the other denominations are about giving and sacrificing. If we could blend the good from both camps and discard the bad, it would awesome. I have been on both sides and neither have right.

    111. Disinterested Observer
      May 1st, 2014 @ 6:49 am

      I listened to the debate, and was rather disheartened by it. I don’t think that Paul would have been too pleased about this. I’m not one of the Reformed camp (I think that Calvinism is an assault on the character of YHWH), but even when I was a heathen I could see that Benny Hinn was a con-man. I was amazed that Michael agreed to appear on Hinn’s show for a chat about his book. One can imagine what Jesus or Paul would have said!

      (By the way, I have used an alias and have not disclosed my real e-mail address because I think it is prudent these days to do so: sites are so often hacked.)

    112. Gliocas | Strange Fire and the Charismatic Movement, Part 4 of 6
      August 26th, 2014 @ 4:55 pm

      [...] really did reject the excesses. After listening to Michael Brown’s radio program in which he talked with Phil Johnson (from Grace to You) and then with Sam Storms and Adrian [...]

    113. b.j.stone
      December 13th, 2014 @ 2:31 pm

      Tree of Life ‘Version’ (II Peter 3 not of strange nor restorative fire where human soul life might continue on attempting ‘reform’ down here) “the heavens will be dissolved by fire, and the elements will melt in the intense heat (in the “keeping with His promise”. ‘Strange fire Conference People’ ALL, who are not looking for a “new heavens” above, not looking for a “new earth” also ‘above’, not making every “effort to be found in shalom, spotless and blameless before Him”, for in their ‘catholic’ Universalism, they refuse to believe for to live out their “lives in holiness and godliness” (rather increasingly they argue falsely, even as ‘chosen frozen’, stubborn in their false assessments, of the coming “day of the Lord”, which “will come as a thief”, their need for “all to come to repentance” for “on that day”, when these heavens “will pass away with a roar, and the elements will melt” causing this tiny footstool’s complete ‘disintegration’, no human soul life remaining here (& for all both Reformers attempts, at reforming ‘from within, or without’, the promised buildup unto the “day of the Lord”, of the Universal Harlot Church, WILL HAVE SUDDENLY “come like a thief” taking both the attempted ‘Reformers’ and those whom they falsely believe can be ‘reformed’ here from Harlotry on this tiny ‘footstool’, instead for to AWAIT their own ‘order’ of ‘resurrection’ IN THE FLESH, far from this once a ‘Paradise’ example for first Adam, but no longer, for it cries out from this entire dust for ‘vengence’ of His ‘shed blood’, in, of, His promised ‘parousia’ sudden coming ).

    114. b.j.stone
      December 13th, 2014 @ 7:27 pm

      ‘Reformers’ insist somehow ‘quite mysteriously’ Jesus became ‘sin for us’ Who ‘knew no sin’ upon His OWN cross (rather than come out from the false Universal ‘gospel’ which is not a Biblical gospel ‘at all’). Paul wrote Jesus was ‘born’ in very same likeness of our very same sinful flesh, as a ‘partaker’ as we, of first Adam’s fall IN HIS ‘EARTHINESS’, from His own BIRTH to His OWN cross. No ‘mystery’ except for those who desire to become saved by attempting to ‘take up HIS cross’ by attempting to have Him ‘substituted’ for ‘their own sin’ (making Him the ‘sinner’, they claiming receiving ‘right standing’ with G-d His F-ther for allowing His Son to become ‘their sinner’ in their place, in ‘taking up His cross’ ? RATHER THAN faith coming ONLY by hearing a Rhema Word from G-d UNTO THEIR OWN SALVATION by Grace THRU FAITH, and once ‘born again’ TO THEN TAKE UP “one’s OWN cross”, and not His, in which only He could sweat great drops of blood unto His OWN command from His F-ther in obedience required UNTO ‘ENTIRE’ sanctification from this World of His, in which He voluntarily was ‘born’ in very same likeness of our very same SINFUL FLESH as we)

    115. b.j.stone
      December 15th, 2014 @ 12:21 pm

      from first hand knowledge back in the early 70′s, it’s the same ‘seemingly broad brush’ coming against the fear of continuing loss of parishioners over to ‘Word of Faith’ (then given most of TBN time reaching out to the ‘catholic world’ INCLUDING that of the catholic ‘Reformers’ attempting still to ‘reform’ the Harlot Church, which of course neither TBN nor ‘Grace to You’ can even ‘reform’ themselves, yet alone the public displays of ‘SPIRITUAL harlotry’ promised last days buildup UNTO these heavens on real ALL human soul life ending FIRE (of which ‘Strange fire’ Conferences, under different name in the 70′s was ALL about the ‘money’ being diverted from non-Charismatic, to the fast growing Charismatic/Pentecostal TV from Radio time, & same desire to live in large homes, parsonages, have the salaries they believe is fitting to their ‘study’ and ‘time’ spent in their schools attempting ‘Reform’ OF WHAT CANNTO BE ‘reformed’, not even of ‘baptism in REAL fire’ ending of soul life unto awaiting the next life IN THE FLESH resurrection FROM here). Jacob’s letter in New Testament was preached on both sides that they were not the ‘rich’ whom he was calling out as to last days leading up to ‘sudden destruction’ WEEPING AND HOWLING for the ‘miseries’ coming upon THEM (for both the non- and the taken over of Pentecostals called Charismatic ‘movement’ of these last days WERE, still are, steeped in ‘eschatology’ matching the ‘catholic Universal Nicolaitan Church OF HARLOTRY claims of being married to G-d’s UNIQELY sent Son to this tiny ‘footstool’ of HIS, BUT WHO WAS ‘LAST’ Adam, and HIMSELF ‘overcame’ this EARTHINESS we all have inherited from FALLEN ‘first Adam’, Eve & mother of ALL natural living soul ‘BODIES’ hidden within our very temporal ONLY outer ‘tent’). And as to ‘Jacob’s letter’, it was THROUGHOUT written to professing ‘believers’ and not to Donald Trumps of this world who are not seen by G-d to be holding back proper wages for TODAY’S 501C3 tax excempt ‘church’ statis which allows for ‘signers’ NOT bringing in “ALL” tithes AND OFFERINGS into the ‘storehouse’, and where volunteers receive only ‘promises’ of rewards in a ‘world BEYOND’ (which the leaderships themselves obviously have not stored up their hearts treasures in their ‘rivalries’ unto attempting ‘reform’ of WHAT CANNOT BE REFORMED) !

    Leave a Reply