Christ or Chords? The Manipulated Emotionalism of Hillsong, Asbury, and Pentecostalized Evangelical Worship - by SCOTT ANIOL

Found here. Our comments in bold.
---------

Mr. Aniol will expend over 2000 words in this article. He will quote a good deal of Scripture, but not a single word of the Bible will be employed to actually document his many assertions about emotion or the role of music in the Church. Not one.

Besides the opening Scripture (Mt 22:37, which he does not explain) and a series of Scriptures regarding sobriety and self-control, Mr. Aniol will never Scripturally document any of his pronouncements. Not one. 

However, he will manage to quote several theologians and historical figures who agree with him. 

We must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

-------------------------

What is a Hyper-Cessationist? - by Ryan Denton (Part one and two)

Found here. An enlightening article explaining a difficult topic. Though we appreciate the author's work, he doesn't quote a single word of Scripture, yet he is able to quote theologians and historical figures at length. This mars an otherwise helpful presentation. 

-----------------------

As a capital “R” Reformed person, I would call myself a cessationist. This simply means that I believe God has “ceased” giving any new doctrine and/or new ethics. You could also describe it as the belief that there is no more canon to be given. It also means God will not give any more infallible revelation that has the authority of Scripture itself. 

But for some time now, I have been deeply troubled by some of the assumptions that the term “cessationist” now seems to carry. Cessationism has morphed into something dark and suffocating. It has become a thick, wet blanket used to smother anything that smacks of the supernatural. There are contemporary proponents of this type of cessationism who seem to think and teach that the term means God has no interaction with us apart from His Word, and that all miracles except for conversion have ceased. At the very least, claims of the miraculous are to be looked at with disdain and doubt. They teach there are no more spiritual gifts. There are no more “signs and wonders.” But such a view is not historical cessationism. It is a type of contemporary distortion that can only be described as “hyper-cessationism,” and its consequences could not be more dire.

Are There Two Levels of Prophecy? - by Scott Aniol

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-------------------------

This is not a Bible teaching, it is a refutation of Wayne Grudem's opinion.

The author will repeatedly appeal to the closed canon, almost a dozen times, but will never explain why contemporary prophecy is at odds with it. So that the reader will understand, there is an unstated premise: Cessationists believe that all prophecy is the pure, inerrant, authoritative words of God, and it must be written down and added to Scripture. Thus the cessationist assumes that prophecy = Scripture. 

The author never tells us this premise.

In fact, it is a problematic assumption. This is because there is no requirement that prophetic expression be included in the Bible. We can find no Bible verse that suggests such a thing. It's just not there.

This is crucial: The Bible does not tell us that contemporary prophecy needs to be added to the Bible.

To the contrary, we see all sorts of prophecy, miracles, and other supernatural events that didn't make the cut, as it were. For example, some of the great exploits of King Solomon were not deemed worthy of inclusion in the Holy Writ. Readers are directed to the "annals of Solomon," something we do not have today:

1Kg. 11:41 As for the other events of Solomon’s reign — all he did and the wisdom he displayed — are they not written in the book of the annals of Solomon?

King Saul prophesied to the extent that the people wondered if he was included among the prophets. However, we don't have any of those prophecies:

1Sa. 10:10-11 When they arrived at Gibeah, a procession of prophets met him; the Spirit of God came upon him in power, and he joined in their prophesying. 11 When all those who had formerly known him saw him prophesying with the prophets, they asked each other, “What is this that has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?

We don't even have the prophecies from this procession of prophets.

Agabus was a N.T. prophet worthy of special note. It is interesting that only one of his prophecies was quoted, (and a summary of another), while any other prophecies he might have spoken were omitted:

Ac. 21:10 After we had been there a number of days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.

Agabus' famine prophecy is only a summary, not the actual prophecy:

Ac. 11:27-28 During this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. 28 One of them, named Agabus, stood up and through the Spirit predicted that a severe famine would spread over the entire Roman world.

There are a number of prophets identified by name in the NT, yet we don't have any prophecies from them. Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, and Manaen:

Ac. 13:1-2 In the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. 2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”

Notice there came forth a prophecy, but the narrative doesn't even mention who spoke it. 

We also do not have any prophecies from Judas or Silas, even though they said much:

Ac. 15:32 Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers.

And these twelve men prophesied, but we don't have any record of their prophecies:

Ac. 19:6-7 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. 7 There were about twelve men in all.

Philip's daughters prophesied, but that all we know:

Ac. 21:8-9 Leaving the next day, we reached Caesarea and stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven. 9 He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied.

Even Jesus, as critically important are His words and deeds, was subject to editing by the Holy Spirit:

Jn. 21:25 Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.

Why would the author insist that contemporary prophecy violates the canon when so much of the prophetic mentioned in the Bible did not? Why do cessationists assume prophecy must be added to the Bible? Conclusion: It's an unbiblical assumption.

Lastly, in 1749 words the author does manage to quote some Scripture, but nothing he quotes bolsters his case. For these reasons, we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

------------------------------

What Does the Fellowship of the Holy Spirit Produce in the Life of a Local Church? - by JOSH BUICE

Found here. Our comments in bold

-------------------

The author does not teach the Bible. One cannot teach the Bible without quoting it. The author manages to quote but a single phrase of a verse, plus a couple of verse paraphrases and a closing, semi-relevant verse. So yet again we find a self-styled Bible teacher who can barely quote the Bible. 

Astonishing.

But he can quote John MacArthur...

He has a lot to say about nameless charismatics who are supposedly doing all sorts of incorrect things. But he is unable to cite a single example or even explain the relevance of his criticisms. After all, he's supposed to be teaching us about the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, not critiquing charismatics.

He asks a question in the title, but never actually explains the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, that is, the Holy Spirit who reaches out, desiring to connect with us and fill us. He discusses how the Body should interact with each other, but does not tell us how the Body should interact with the Holy Spirit, or how churches facilitate fellowship with the Holy Spirit.

How does the Holy Spirit have fellowship with us? Paul writes:

Ph. 2:1 If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit...

Paul concludes this "if" statement with: 

Ph. 2:2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose.

Carefully consider this: For Paul, fellowship with the Spirit is a pre-condition of being like-minded and loving. So we need to have fellowship with the Spirit (vertical) in order to properly engage our brothers and sisters (horizontal).

Further, the Greek does not have "with the" in  ...if any fellowship *with the* Spirit... The literal translation is "if any Spirit fellowship." Spirit-fellowship is how the church ought to be characterized.

The author will never discuss any of this, preferring instead to make vague assertions and general statements that teach little and edify even less.

-----------------

God Told Me: The Pentecostalization of Evangelical Theology - by SCOTT ANIOL

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-------------------------

The author makes some astonishing claims as he presumes his premises. Problem is, one must accept these undocumented premises in order for any of this to make sense. It's a logical and Scriptural nightmare.

But this is what we have too often found as we have examined some of his other articles.

The author will his best to bias the reader by his use of language. Thus he agendizes his explanation to tilt the debate to his perspective.

This is over 2600 words, including quotes. And it takes the author over 1000 words for the author to finally quote Scripture. Then when he finally does quote it in defense of his assertions he misrepresents it.

We don't like being lied to, so we must deem this Bad Bible Teaching.

Let's quote the entire passage, since the author never does: 

2Pe. 1:16-21 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eye-witnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” 

18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. 19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.

20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

----------------------

Understanding the True Nature of Tongues - by Scott Aniol

Found here. Our comments in bold.
----------------

The author is unable to quote more than a snippet of two Scriptures. That's it. He's a Bible teacher who does not quote the Bible.

The issue of tongues is perhaps one of the more complicated issues of the Church, and clearly the author is not up to the challenge. He doesn't appear to even be acquainted with the pro-tongues arguments, let alone the Scriptures that are contrary to his doctrine. 

Once again we must deem his work Bad Bible Teaching.

---------------------

What Is an Apostle? - by SCOTT ANIOL

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------

This is simply bad Bible teaching. There's no other way to describe it. The author doesn't get a single thing correct. He misreads Scripture, overlooks critical concepts, and simply misrepresents what the Bible says.

--------------------

No, Women Can’t Preach - by SCOTT ANIOL

Found here. Our comments in bold.

------------------------------

The author makes an attempt to explain his doctrine, and does so with more depth than we accustomed to seeing from these internet Bible teachers. Plus he actually quotes some Scripture, again, something we rarely see.

However, he leaves some pretty substantial logical gaps, and he also makes some assumptions based on his tradition, not the Bible.

Further, he completely botches his explanation of women teaching men. We think we can safely deem this article to be Bad Bible Teaching.

We also commented on another of the author's articles, where he made a poor attempt to explain why there are no apostles today.

--------------------------------

Worship Regulated by Scripture - by SCOTT ANIOL

Found here. Our comments in bold.

---------------------------

The author is going to tell us about Scriptural worship. If you thought that worship is our expression of our devotion and praise, or the posture of our hearts, you would be wrong. The author is actually going to explain how to properly conduct a Sunday church service.

He will go on and on for nearly 2900 words and explain virtually nothing. He makes various appeals to Scriptures that do not actually bolster his point. He is only able to make his case towards the end by invoking historic practice and a couple of theologians.

The author's position is tradition. He does these things because that's the way they have been done. It's all about the correct way to do Sunday service. In addition, he never discusses the Holy Spirit's role in the church gathering.

And sadly, nowhere does the author ever actually discuss the act of worship. 

-------------------------