|
|
|
|
|
"When the sky is the limit, it's easy to neglect foundations." Jimmy Long, Generating Hope
My wife and I joined a Vineyard church in 1994, the year that the renewal broke out in Toronto. It wasn't long before Vineyard churches in Canada were strongly impacted, and soon the renewal became a source of blessing to hundreds of thousands of believers world-wide. Yet unprecedented blessing shouldn't make us blind to the problems raised by some theological streams in renewal.
We moved to a new community in 1998 and joined another church in renewal. New Life was still Vineyard in name, but had left the values and teaching behind in favor of new directions. Though we didn't know it at the time, this made a great difference in the philosophy of ministry and in the direction of the teaching. New Life was flirting with Restorationism, in the early days via the relational connections to Kansas City Fellowship, and more recently via the connections to the CNET team and Lance Wallnau.
In the fall of 2000 my wife and I left New Life after two years of participation. We left in spite of the fact that the Lord was doing many good things there, and we continued to love and respect those in leadership. Why did we leave a church community that was participating actively in the renewal movement?
It wasn't an easy decision. At the time there were many things that were unclear, but we felt a growing disease. We couldn't articulate all the reasons for our discomfort at the time. It was clear to us that the Lord was leading us out, but we didn't understand why.
You may be under the influence of Restorationism yourself; it is increasingly common, particularly in charismatic circles. But even some of those who teach from Restorationism don't know its history, its dangerous approach to Scripture or its lack of solid biblical foundations. This article is intended to address these elements.
Restorationism and the Rebirth of the Latter Rain
In a message delivered before the First World Pentecostal Conference in Zurich, Switzerland in 1947, David J. Duplessis concluded his address to the delegates with this statement: "There is nothing that can ever take the place of the Holy Spirit in the church. Let us pray for a greater outpouring than ever, and remember when the flood comes it will overflow and most probably cause chaos in our regular programs."
There was a prophetic ring to DuPlessis' declaration, for within a number of months, a controversy erupted within the Pentecostal theatre threatening to split the movement wide open and usher in the predicted chaos conditions. History came to identify this controversy as the "Latter Rain Movement," with its origins in North Battleford, Saskatchewan in 1949. It's lax exegesis of Scripture became the cause of their doctrinal drift on a variety of theological themes.
In his book The Third Force, author Gordon F. Atter, a recognized authority on the history of Pentecostal revivals, cites a number of distinguishing traits which doctrinally set the Latter Rain Movement apart from orthodoxy. His list includes:
While the effects of the movement were minimized by 1955, it has not faded from view. It exists today in a more contemporary form as "Restorationism," an eschatological reading of Scripture calling for a 'recovery' of Davidic worship, praise and service, said to have been lost to the Church between the death of the Apostles and the Dark Ages. This 'recovery,' which is said to have commenced from the time of the Reformation under Martin Luther, supposedly enables man to experience all that God had planned in the very beginning.
Close cousin to the "Latter Rain," Restorationism may be identified under a broad assortment of other names: New Kingdom Teaching, Ultimate Movement, the Praise Movement, Manifest Sons, the Melchizedek Order, the Tabernacle of David.
One cannot expect uniformity on all matters of creed among Restorationists. Like a patchwork quilt, its proponents display a variety of shades and hues. While you may be in touch with some aspects of the Restoration movement in your own church or your own circles, you may not find agreement on every element presented here. But the broad outlines should be apparent. I will look at the salient features of the teaching of contemporary leaders who claim a Kingdom-Now emphasis, and respond to the challenges they create for charismatic evangelicals.
Restorationism: Words and the Word
There are two necessary elements needed in order for an individual to adhere to Restorationist or Reconstructionist teachings.
1. a view of prophecy and prophetic teaching that assigns almost equal authority as Scripture
2. A spiritual and allegorical method of interpretation, as opposed to historical and grammatical methodology
Apart from this methodology, it is impossible to justify teachings like the restored Tabernacle of David, Kingdom Now theology or the particular amillennial approach to prophecy and the restored church.
Among Restorationists, the prophetic voice is of paramount importance. Consider the words of Earl Paulk in his book The Wounded Body of Christ:
. . . prophetic voices of God must take the lead and speak as God in the flesh . . . . Before the church can become the glorified church God is waiting for, our ears must be open to hear prophetic words of God. It is not prophecy to teach what has already been prophesied. Prophecy opens up to new revelation, insight and dimension.
Paulk continues this theme by further informing us that ". . . the prophet is the only means God has of communicating to the world." We are advised that "Mysteries are being unfolded today for the church that have never been understood . . ." This idea is further expanded in his book, Ultimate Kingdom. In Chapter One, "Principles of Interpretation," we read: "Many things that were not recorded are now being revealed unto the sons of God by the Holy Spirit."
The Bible is the written Word of God and because it is, the Old and New Testament Scriptures are authoritative and inerrant. In all matters of doctrine it stands infallible. However, Paulk would have us believing and yielding to the 20th. Century utterances and revelations in the same measure as canonical Scripture. It is not that Restorationism denies the revelatory quality of Scripture. Rather, it subtly exchanges the Bible (the "then" word) as the reforming voice within the Church for a "now" Word.
The "now" word arrives in several dimensions.
We'll look at these claims one by one. While many are familiar with the broad outlines of restorationism, not even restorationists themselves always understand the foundation they are building on.
Restorationism: A Prophetic Timeline
On Sunday morning, April 21st, at New Life Christian Fellowship in Kelowna Lance Wallnau of the CNET team presented a teaching. He outlined the standard Restorationism timeline. I'll quote directly from John Bevere's new book "The Fear of the Lord," where John uses the same outline.
"Come, let us return to the Lord; for He has torn, but He will heal us; He has stricken, but He will bind us up. After two days He will revive us; and on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live in His sight." Hosea 6:1-2
This passage is a prophetic Scripture describing God's refinement of His church in preparation for His glory. He has torn but He will heal. A day with the Lord is a thousand years (2 Pet.3:8). It has been two full days (two thousand years) since the resurrection of the Lord. We are on the verge of God's reviving and restoring His glory to His temple. The third day speaks of the thousand year reign of Christ when He will live and reign in our sight. Hosea gives further instruction about how to live and what to pursue as we prepare for His glory. (p.123)
"Let us know, let us pursue the knowledge of the Lord. His going forth is established as the morning: He will come to us like the rain, like the latter and former rain to the earth." 6:3
To John Bevere and the Restorationists, "we are rapidly approaching the latter rain of God's glory" p.115. John believes that the Lord has revealed to him the truth of the connections noted above. John would readily admit that the interpretation he brings to Hosea 6 is based on a spiritual interpretation of the Word rather than a literal one.
So, is it a big deal? We know that the Lord is going to return. Why not in our day?
Certainly it is possible. But rather than wait for Him or become preoccupied with a particular prophetic and end-times scheme, we should continue on with the ordinary day to day work of building the kingdom. But there are other problems with the Restoration system.
GO to Part II - Restorationism: Dominion Theology
|
Emerging Women / Renovare / Christians for Biblical Equality / Soul Horizon / OpenSource Theology / Jesus Radicals / Regeneration / New Phuture / The Off Ramp / Cutting Edge / Relevant Magazine / The Living Room / Vine and Branches / Sacred Future / Church Next / Reality / Waves Church / Matthew's House / Ginkworld / FutureChurch / MethodX / TheOOZE / ginkworld / ::seven:: / emergent village / Highway Video / Sojourners / Ship of Fools / Beyond / Next-Wave / ThePowerSurge / dtour
|
• © 2006 Len Hjalmarson.•
Last Updated on September 9, 2005
