The Folly of Doctrinal Positions

It is very sad that we treat the Bible as a pharmacy where we pick pills as per our need instead of a food store where we must always take food to live.

We even read it with the same mindset, picking what agrees with what we choose to believe as opposed to using it to guide our belief.

And nothing shows our selective application of the scriptures as our doctrinal positions. One wonders how two churches can have diametrically opposing doctrinal positions yet confess that they picked them from the Bible. How many Bibles do we have? Is the Bible the problem or are we the ones who are selective readers of the same?

For our discussion I will choose only one such position knowing that it will attract enough vitriol to last a very long time.

For over a hundred years the Pentecostal movement has grown, even thrived. Yet do you know the pivotal doctrinal position in everything from constitutions to faith statements to testimonies?

I believe in the baptism (filling, receiving) of the Holy Spirit with the evidence of speaking in tongues according to Acts 2: 4.

Is that the only evidence on the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Bible? What about Exodus 31? What about 1 Samuel 10: 10 and 16: 13? That was the Old Testament. I know someone is protesting.

What about Ephesians 5: 18 – 21 and John 20: 22? That is not in Acts. Someone else may say.

What about Acts 4: 31 and 5: 3 – 5 and 7: 55 and 11: 24? Are those also not evidences of the presence and filling of the Holy Spirit? Do those who receive the Holy Spirit and manifest Him in these other ways also qualify as recipients in your churches? Can they even be accepted as members in your congregations?

Do we choose the evidence we want for God to manifest to us? If we do that is He really God and Lord of our lives. How submitted (worshipful) are we to God if He must do things the way we choose?

Are the Pentecostal/ charismatic tongues the same as the Acts 2:4 ones? A simple study of the gift of tongues will demonstrate that they clearly are not.

Why do I say that? The tongues in Acts were clearly understood by the bystanders from all over the world. The Pentecostal ones are the 1 Corinthians 14 ones because I have never seen or even heard of an instance where any bystander understood them. They are unknown to anybody, even the speaker, and must have an interpreter if we are to follow scriptural rules, rules I have never seen being practiced in Pentecostal gatherings where tongues are encouraged and practiced. I have however heard of instances on the mission field where the Acts 2: 4 tongues were manifested to facilitate the Gospel reaching the target group especially where the interpreter was playing games with the message.

Is that doctrinal position consistent with the totality of the scriptures?

How do we pick a verse out of its context and own it to justify the sectarian interpretation of our doctrinal position?  Why do we behave as if we are the ones who wrote the Bible like the Corinthians were asked (1 Corinthians 14: 36)?

I know there are enough people out there ready to stone me. And I am not afraid of that. What I ask is that the stones you throw are scriptures. Then we can have a holy fight.

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. (Isaiah 8: 20)

Some of that fighting will start because some have had the experience firsthand as happened at Asuza Street in 1906. And that is not what I have problems with. The problem is interpreting the Bible using that experience to an extent that you disqualify any other experience as unbiblical or unspiritual.

What between the Bible and the experience holds more authority? And that is the main problem with the doctrinal position. They elevate the experience above the scriptures to an extent of forcing people to have their experience before being admitted into their fellowship. And they are not alone.

I once had an experience that was so vivid during those searching times in the Pentecostal movement that lent credence to the side of my argument. I am glad that some friends confronted me with the scriptures so that I was able to look at that experience in the light of the scriptures. Then I had to trash it, however vivid it had been or strong it supported my argument.

We must give the Bible the sole authority status even as we look at our doctrinal statements. Then we can sift between preferences, opinions and experiences and the Word of God.  

What is the real test of the presence of the Holy Spirit? Some few verses I have mentioned talk about other aspects of that filling. But this is the clearest evidence of the filling that Christ gave.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7: 20 - 23)

The evidence is in the fruit of that filling and not the filling itself. And this is seen in Galatians 5: 22, 23.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

And that is why it is followed by my most quoted verses, not everyone who calls Me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven. This because the gift and workings of the gift are not of yourself but proceed from God. Only the fruit proceeds from us. And it is also amplified by 1 Corinthians 13 when gifts and their manifestation are examined in the context of heaven.

This is but one such doctrinal position. And they are rife wherever a church is. From predestination to assurance of salvation to choice to rapture to tribulation you will always find differing positions, some extreme opposites.

I have picked this because the pursuit of that evidence has wrecked the faith of many sincere searchers because God chooses to offer other evidence, evidence that is rejected outright by the Pentecostal movement as either unworthy or unscriptural. It has opened others to counterfeit spirits as their desperation grows when the evidence is not forthcoming.

I write this with intense sadness as I have witnessed some of that spiritual damage first hand. I was raised by Pentecostals and am not therefore speaking as a spectator. What helped me was that I discovered and agreed that the Bible has all the answers I need and therefore resorted to it when any confusion or desperation threatened. Sadly many do not head to that direction. And very few churches and spiritual superiors are not in the least interested in what the Bible says unless it is to fortify their position.

And this is the reason I encourage and assist believers to read the Bible for themselves from Genesis to Revelation. Then they will be able to get the complete Biblical position on most of the issues confusing believers. And it is made worse by pastors who enjoy keeping their flock in their ignorance for their own purpose. Then they will be able to fleece them without anyone being aware of the fact. And this explains why I am always treated with hostility by many church leaders, even called controversial and a critic of structures. Simply because I want everything we do and say examined in the light of the complete scriptures instead of the whims and interests of the leaders.

Will we look at our doctrinal position in the light of the scriptures?