ECT Catalog of Pentecostal scandals

musterion

musterion

Well-known member
I know from personal experience that not all Pentecostals or charismatics live scandalous lives. I was led to Christ in 1973 by an old-line Pentecostal who was a godly man, and I thank the Lord for the compassion he showed to this former “hippy” and for the biblical wisdom that he exercised in dealing with me.

At the same time, from its inception at the turn of the 20th century, the Pentecostal movement has been absolutely rife with moral and doctrinal scandals and ridiculous claims among its prominent leaders. . .
Click to expand...

An enlightening article. I'm surprised I forgot to include Hobart Freeman, the one guy TBN would never mention, but maybe he'll add him in later.

http://www.wayoflife.org/database/recent_pentecostal_scandals.html
 
JosephR

JosephR

New member
from must own post...Scandals can be found in any group of Christians

how does this help anyone?
 
Totton Linnet

Totton Linnet

New member
Silver Subscriber
Of course there are no Methodist scandals or Baptist or Presbyterian

The reason they put the Pentecostals in the spotlight is because they do win souls

On TOL are more than 2 score of folks saved through Pentecostal or charismatic ministries who now do nothing but throw mud at it.

Half the MADianites are ex-Pentecostals
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
musterion said:
Thank you for your input. Feel free to list where the article is in error.
Click to expand...
Wayoflife.org is built upon a crooked, unlevel, foundation. Begin there to understand it is a "pit", a snare of the enemy of Jesus Christ. They have one shallow message followed by chicken dinner socials to keep you happy. That is their "way of life". They present an easy believism salvation message and then it is off to serve the church which sheep have been inculcated to believing is the only worship possible, . . . being the cessationist' they are.
 
Nick M

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Totton Linnet said:
Half the MADianites are ex-Pentecostals
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we picked up a Bible and turned to Paul's letters which are always skipped. Really out of curiosity. But then it was obvious.

Therefore, tongues are a sign, not to those that believe, but unbelievers.
 
nikolai_42

nikolai_42

Well-known member
musterion said:
An enlightening article. I'm surprised I forgot to include Hobart Freeman, the one guy TBN would never mention, but maybe he'll add him in later.

http://www.wayoflife.org/database/recent_pentecostal_scandals.html
Click to expand...

Of all the "heresy hunters" out there, Cloud seems to be one of the more charitable and even-handed while at the same time not trying to excuse the errors. He genuinely seems to be concerned more about promoting sound doctrine (exposing false doctrine) than attacking personalities. Many forget what we are told to do :

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
Romans 16:17-18

{Paul repeats more or less the same thing to the Philippian church in Philippians 3:17-19}

In this case, he seems to be laying out the littany of 20th century issues in Charismatic circles. By doing so, one can contrast the true with the false. So I wouldn't come to the conclusion from this article that Pentecostalism is of the devil (as Cloud himself says, he came to Christ through the ministry of an old-time Pentecostal whom he calls "godly"). If anything, it's a testimony to the general gullibility (lack of discernment) of those who are Charismatic. Anyone who ever thought Robert Tilton was genuine...

Comparing Cloud's attitude with that, say, of John MacArthur, one finds a more irenic approach. While much of what MacArthur says is true, his line in the sand seems dangerous when he bases his conclusions at least partly on hearsay. Charles Parham was charged with being homosexual but continuously denied it. He was brought up on charges in San Antonio but those charges were later dropped by the DA. In other words, there was never any confirmation - it was an unsubstantiated rumor. But Dr. MacArthur presented it as part of his case against the man and his doctrine. He doesn't say the case was dropped but says he was charged. He uses that to impugn Parham's character. As far as I know, MacArthur never mentions that the charges were dropped. The point being that he's using an unfounded allegation against the man.

Overall, I thought it was a good summary of the weaknesses showing in the Charismatic movement.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
nikolai_42 said:
Of all the "heresy hunters" out there, Cloud seems to be one of the more charitable and even-handed while at the same time not trying to excuse the errors. He genuinely seems to be concerned more about promoting sound doctrine (exposing false doctrine) than attacking personalities. Many forget what we are told to do :

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
Romans 16:17-18

{Paul repeats more or less the same thing to the Philippian church in Philippians 3:17-19}

In this case, he seems to be laying out the littany of 20th century issues in Charismatic circles. By doing so, one can contrast the true with the false. So I wouldn't come to the conclusion from this article that Pentecostalism is of the devil (as Cloud himself says, he came to Christ through the ministry of an old-time Pentecostal whom he calls "godly"). If anything, it's a testimony to the general gullibility (lack of discernment) of those who are Charismatic. Anyone who ever thought Robert Tilton was genuine...

Comparing Cloud's attitude with that, say, of John MacArthur, one finds a more irenic approach. While much of what MacArthur says is true, his line in the sand seems dangerous when he bases his conclusions at least partly on hearsay. Charles Parham was charged with being homosexual but continuously denied it. He was brought up on charges in San Antonio but those charges were later dropped by the DA. In other words, there was never any confirmation - it was an unsubstantiated rumor. But Dr. MacArthur presented it as part of his case against the man and his doctrine. He doesn't say the case was dropped but says he was charged. He uses that to impugn Parham's character. As far as I know, MacArthur never mentions that the charges were dropped. The point being that he's using an unfounded allegation against the man.

Overall, I thought it was a good summary of the weaknesses showing in the Charismatic movement.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your input. Feel free to list where the article is in error.
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
Cross Reference said:
Wayoflife.org is built upon a crooked, unlevel, foundation. Begin there to understand it is a "pit", a snare of the enemy of Jesus Christ. They have one shallow message followed by chicken dinner socials to keep you happy. That is their "way of life". They present an easy believism salvation message and then it is off to serve the church which sheep have been inculcated to believing is the only worship possible, . . . being the cessationist' they are.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your input. Feel free to list where the article is in error.
 
nikolai_42

nikolai_42

Well-known member
musterion said:
Thank you for your input. Feel free to list where the article is in error.
Click to expand...

If all you're looking for is disagreement with the article, you won't find much with me. The one part that I think is dubious, is this paragraph :

Scandals can be found in any group of Christians, sadly, but scandals among Pentecostals and charismatics are significant because they claim a special anointing of God’s Spirit. They claim double blessings and triple anointings and super Spirit baptisms. They claim to operate in the Spirit and flow in the Spirit and talk in the Spirit and prophesy in the Spirit and laugh in the Spirit and soak in the Spirit and even get drunk in the Spirit. They claim to have the “full gospel” and the “four square gospel” and to operate in the “five-fold ministry.”
Click to expand...

This is a critical paragraph because he's trying to justify pointing the spotlight on Charismatics specifically. He's trying to make a case against the movement and make a quick connection between behavior and doctrine. The above paragraph lumps all Charismatics together as being showmen and being too free with their claims about being "in the Spirit". This simply isn't true. And many Pentecostals would reject most (if not all) of the people on the list as being those to avoid. Cloud claims a charitable attitude towards Pentecostals and fails to make a clear distinction between Pentecostalism and the Charismatic circus that has grabbed most of the attention. And the link between this chaos and the teaching can be made - but unless you are going to clearly define the issues with the teaching, this sort of introduction only serves to inflame. It's emotional rhetoric and broadbrush sweeping. But the details of each individual were - as far as I could see - correct.

What surprised me was that he didn't include Hinn's admitted spiritism in following the direction of Kathryn Kuhlman he had in a vision (where she spoke to him) and his visit to Aimee Semple McPherson's grave where he says he got more "anointing" (because it was so powerful on her even in death). That's a bigger red flag than any sexual misconduct (which, as Cloud points out, is found in every denomination).
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
nikolai_42 said:
If all you're looking for is disagreement with the article, you won't find much with me. The one part that I think is dubious, is this paragraph :



This is a critical paragraph because he's trying to justify pointing the spotlight on Charismatics specifically. He's trying to make a case against the movement and make a quick connection between behavior and doctrine. The above paragraph lumps all Charismatics together as being showmen and being too free with their claims about being "in the Spirit". This simply isn't true. And many Pentecostals would reject most (if not all) of the people on the list as being those to avoid. Cloud claims a charitable attitude towards Pentecostals and fails to make a clear distinction between Pentecostalism and the Charismatic circus that has grabbed most of the attention. And the link between this chaos and the teaching can be made - but unless you are going to clearly define the issues with the teaching, this sort of introduction only serves to inflame. It's emotional rhetoric and broadbrush sweeping. But the details of each individual were - as far as I could see - correct.

What surprised me was that he didn't include Hinn's admitted spiritism in following the direction of Kathryn Kuhlman he had in a vision (where she spoke to him) and his visit to Aimee Semple McPherson's grave where he says he got more "anointing" (because it was so powerful on her even in death). That's a bigger red flag than any sexual misconduct (which, as Cloud points out, is found in every denomination).
Click to expand...


Very good analysis, Nickolai! Obviously Cloud is agenda driven. Sad part is, what he is against, he needs.
 
nikolai_42

nikolai_42

Well-known member
Cross Reference said:
Very good analysis, Nickolai! Obviously Cloud is agenda driven. Sad part is, what he is against, he needs.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I don't think he is. I just think he's being hamhanded when it comes to distinguishing between the Charismatic movement that has capitalized on poor discernment and the Pentecostal beliefs that are more committed to scriptural truth. When you read the list of issues/people themselves, I think it is clear that he is not trying to advance an agenda other than full disclosure to sound the alarm. The problem is, I think the paragraph I quoted is the trumpet making an uncertain sound. The call to battle needs to be clear and concise.

Now it's obvious he doesn't believe Pentecostalism is biblical, but just like he doesn't agree with Calvinism, he has no problem counting Calvinists as brothers in Christ. Likewise Pentecostals. His measuring stick is scripture. But the issue he is raising is more complicated, I think, than he wants to make it. Maybe because it requires too much detail to flesh it out and people don't want to read that long. Maybe because he doesn't have the sophistication to do so. I just don't know that. But he doesn't have the imbalance that characterizes a lot of ministries that supposedly want to guard the faith from wolves.
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
nikolai_42 said:
To be honest, I don't think he is. I just think he's being hamhanded when it comes to distinguishing between the Charismatic movement that has capitalized on poor discernment and the Pentecostal beliefs that are more committed to scriptural truth. When you read the list of issues/people themselves, I think it is clear that he is not trying to advance an agenda other than full disclosure to sound the alarm. The problem is, I think the paragraph I quoted is the trumpet making an uncertain sound. The call to battle needs to be clear and concise.

Now it's obvious he doesn't believe Pentecostalism is biblical, but just like he doesn't agree with Calvinism, he has no problem counting Calvinists as brothers in Christ. Likewise Pentecostals. His measuring stick is scripture. But the issue he is raising is more complicated, I think, than he wants to make it. Maybe because it requires too much detail to flesh it out and people don't want to read that long. Maybe because he doesn't have the sophistication to do so. I just don't know that. But he doesn't have the imbalance that characterizes a lot of ministries that supposedly want to guard the faith from wolves.
Click to expand...

I understand and want to agree however, 'sounding the alarm' is their agenda and with nothing to back it up except the written word of God but only as they are given to understand it. Add to that is the presumption by believing it is and all others should follow their lead or be accused of believing another gospel.

I attended for a year or so, until I could no longer stand the shallowness of it all coupled with the lack of interest to know there is an intimacy with God that awaited those who would pursue it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top