Printer Friendly Version

Particulars of Christianity:
310 Pentecostalism,
the Charismatic
and Faith Movements


The Test of Quality (or Ecstasy)

5 Tests for Authenticity: The Test of Apostolic Continuity
The Test of Origination
The Test of Quality (or Ecstasy)
The Test of Heresy
Defining the Test of Purpose and Verifiability
On Faith and Miracles
The Sign Sign-Giver Process
Applying the Test of Purpose and Verifiability (Part 1)
Applying the Test of Purpose and Verifiability (Part 2)

Section 1 | Section 2 | Section 3 | Section 4 | Section 5



As we have mentioned earlier, such passages as Exodus 7:11, Exodus 7:22, Matthew 24:11, Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22, 2 Timothy 3:8, 2 Thessalonians 2:9, 2 Peter 2:1, 1 John 4:1, and Revelation 19:20 instruct us that there will be false prophets, false teachers, and false signs and miracles. And because of this, passages such as Deuteronomy 13:12-14, Deuteronomy 18:21-22, 1 Corinthians 14:29, and 1 John 4:1-3 instruct us to examine the validity of those who claim to be operating in the supernatural power of the Spirit.

Because the Bible tells us there will be false prophets, false teachers, and false (or counterfeit) signs, wonders, and wonders, we cannot just assume that all claims of supernatural activity are from God. Instead, as instructed, we are to test those claims. But how are we to know which miracles are from God and which are false miracles?

Now, on this point we need to make a clarification. There are two ways that a miracle can be a "false" miracle. First, a miracle can be false if it's not really supernatural in nature but merely a matter of slight of hand or some other sort of trickery or illusion. Second, a miracle can be legitimately supernatural in nature and still be a "false" miracle if it does not come from God. This second type is a "false" miracle or "false" sign, not because it is not supernatural, but because even thought it is supernatural it is not from God and so its purpose is to deceive and mislead. There are prominent statements that indicate the existence of these legitimately miraculous events that are caused by the Adversary and not God.

2 Thessalonians 2:8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

Here in 2 Thessalonians, Paul speaks about the coming of the antichrist and how his coming is after "signs and lying wonders" which are the work of Satan. Now, the Greek word for signs is the word, "semeion" (Strong's No. 4592), it is translated 50 times as "signs" and 23 times as "miracle" in the New Testament. This word "semeion" can be found in the following passage where it is used to describe the miracles of Jesus.

John 2:11 This beginning of miracles [4592] did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

Likewise the word for "wonders" in 2 Thessalonians 2:9 is the Greek word "teras" (Strong's No. 5059.) "Teras" occurs 16 times in the New Testament and all 16 it is translated as "wonder." The second definition of "teras" is "miracle: performed by any one." "Teras" is used in the following passage to describe the miracles performed by the Apostles. In fact, we also see the word "semeion" right behind it, this time translated as "signs."

Acts 2:43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders [5059] and signs [4592] were done by the apostles.

And here are two more passages where we see these 2 Greek words used in reference to legitimate miracles performed by men of God, including Stephen as well as Moses and Aaron.

Acts 6:8 And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders [5059] and miracles [4592] among the people.

Acts 7:36 He brought them out, after that he had shewed wonders [5059] and signs [4592] in the land of Egypt, and in the Red sea, and in the wilderness forty years.

Additionally, Revelation also speaks of the False Prophet performing miracles in order to deceive the nations. The word for miracles in the following passage is also "simeion."

Revelation 19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles [5059] before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Because these 2 Greek words are used for both the miracles performed by Jesus, Moses, Aaron, the Apostles, and Stephen, there is no need to assume that the use of these Greek words in 2 Thessalonians 2:9 refers to tricks or illusions rather than actual supernatural events. Rather, because the same words are used in both cases, we should assume that these miracles that are the work of the Adversary are just as supernatural as those performed by these Godly men.

So, when we talk about false miracles, we are including both those events, which claim to be supernatural but are not and those events, which are supernatural but which come from the Adversary instead of God. And Justin Martyr also testifies to the existence of these supernatural yet false miracles in his day.

CHAP. XIII.--THE DECEITFUL ARTS AND NEFARIOUS PRACTICES OF MARCUS. 3. It appears probable enough that this man possesses a demon as his familiar spirit, by means of whom he seems able to prophesy,(6) and also enables as many as he counts worthy to be partakers of his Charis themselves to prophesy. He devotes himself especially to women, and those such as are well-bred, and elegantly attired, and of great wealth, whom he frequently seeks to draw after him, by addressing them in such seductive words as these: "I am eager to make thee a partaker of my Charis..."

In the above excerpt we see that Justin Martyr asserts it is "probable" that Marcus is actually prophesying, not just faking it, and doing so by the power of an evil spirit.

So, in reality, there are two types of false (or counterfeit) miracles. There is what we might call "fake miracles" because they are not really miraculous or supernatural at all. And there is what we might call "lying miracles," which are real miraculous performed by ungodly forces for the purpose of deception. We will use these two terms from this point forward in order to distinguish between these two types of counterfeit miracles.

Consequently, on one level testing the authenticity of miracles is a matter of verifying that the event in question is actually supernatural in character and not just a natural event portrayed as supernatural. But, just proving that an event is supernatural does not mean it is a miracle from God and should be accepted. Testing the authenticity of a miracle is also a matter of distinguishing between miracles from God and miracles that are not from God. And while it may be much simpler to test if something is indeed supernatural in character, how do we know whether or not truly miraculous events are from God or some other source?

Well, thankfully, we can answer this question in part by shifting our perspective. Instead of asking, "how can I tell the difference between authentic and counterfeit miracles?" we should ask, "how did the early church distinguish between authentic and counterfeit miracles?" Once we make this shift in perspective, all that is necessary is for us to find the standard test applied by the early church and then apply it to the modern occurrence of charismatic gifts. And the remarkable thing is that the standard employed by the early church will work for both types of counterfeit miracles, fake miracles and lying miracles.

The following passages are taken from Eusebius (263-339 AD) and from Asterius Urbanus (Second and Third Century AD) whom Eusebius is quoting to demonstrate the error of the Montanists. It should be noted that while Eusebius is categorized among the Post-Nicene writers (those who wrote after the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, Asterius Urbanus is considered part of the Ante-Nicene writers who wrote before the Council of Nicaea. The portions below deal explicitly with the distinction made between the authentic gifts of the orthodox churches and the counterfeit gifts of the heretics, such as the Montanists.

7 There is said to be a certain village called Ardabau in that part of Mysia, which borders upon Phrygia. There first, they say, when Gratus was proconsul of Asia, a recent convert, Montanus by name, through his unquenchable desire for leadership, gave the adversary opportunity against him. And he became beside himself, and being suddenly in a sort of frenzy and ecstasy, he raved, and began to babble and utter strange things, prophesying in a manner contrary to the constant custom of the Church handed down by tradition from the beginning." (Chapter XVI. The Circumstances Related of Montanus and His False Prophets.)

Here is the passage as written by Asterius.

12 There, they say, one of those who had been but recently converted to the faith, a person of the name of Montanus, when Gratus was proconsul of Asia, gave the adversary entrance against himself by the excessive lust of his soul after taking the lead. And this person was carried away in spirit; 13 and suddenly being seized with a kind of frenzy and ecstasy, he raved, and began to speak and to utter strange things, and to prophesy in a manner contrary to the custom of the Church, as handed down from early times and preserved thenceforward in a continuous succession. (The Extant Writings of Asterius Urbanus, From Book I.)

Notice that the "manner" in which the gifts occurred among orthodox churches was well known in the early Church. They were so familiar with the manner in which the gifts occurred that they could identify gifts that deviated from that customary orthodox manner. And this isn't really all that surprising. After all, they had at that time (or very recently) still had the gifts continuing in practice from the laying on of the apostles' hands.

As we have seen, by modern times, that continuity has long been broken so that all modern gifts are by definition a hypothetical restoration. This being the case, unlike the early churches, we have no direct experience of the apostolic gifts to compare modern gifts with. The fact that they did have personal experience of gifts, which had continuity to the apostles while we do not is yet another reason that we must rely on the standards of distinction that they employed for identifying counterfeit gifts.

Specifically, both Eusebius and Asterius note that gifts, which were accompanied by ecstatic behavior, raving, or babbling were outside the manner of the authentic gifts. Therefore, at that time, the early church identified which gifts were not authentic by the fact that counterfeit gifts involved this type of ecstatic behavior including raving and babbling. According to Eusebius and Asterius, gifts performed in ecstatic states were "contrary to the custom of the Church, as handed down from early times and preserved thenceforward in a continuous succession" and, therefore, should be rejected as counterfeit.

Asterius explains further.

"But the false prophet falls into a spurious ecstasy, which is accompanied by a want of all shame and fear. For beginning with a voluntary (designed) rudeness, he ends with an involuntary madness of soul, as has been already stated. But they will never be able to show that any one of the Old Testament prophets, or any one of the New, was carried away in spirit after this fashion. Nor will they be able to boast that Agabus, or Judas, or Silas, or the daughters of Philip, or the woman Ammia in Philadelphia, or Quadratus, or indeed any of the others who do not in any respect belong to them, were moved in this way." (The Extant Writings of Asterius Urbanus, From Book III. IX.)

According to Asterius no prophet in either Testament, Old or New "was carried away in spirit after this fashion." What fashion? Asterius has already stated, "into a spurious ecstasy," which ends in "an involuntary madness of the soul." And as we saw very near to the beginning of our study, Paul himself testifies to the lack of "ecstasy" and "involuntary" behavior among authentic prophets.

1 Corinthians 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints...37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

Here in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul testifies that "involuntary" behavior is not the manner of authentic prophecy. For according to verse 32, "the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets." Or in other words, the prophet does not lose self-control when prophesying. Like Asterius and Eusebius, Paul states that this is the custom "in all the churches of the saints." And so, like Asterius and Eusebius, Paul asserts that "confused" states of prophesy wherein the prophet behaves as if out of control are contrary to the custom of the orthodox churches established by apostolic tradition. And Paul concludes, that all the gifts should be done "decently and in order."

Thus, those who practiced the gifts in ecstasy, in confusion, in ravings, in babblings, and in lack of control should not be considered true prophets, for Paul instructed that "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual," that man must "acknowledge" that the things Paul wrote in this passage were "the commandments of the Lord." So, to deviate from this protocols and prophecy in ecstatic states was to disobey the command of the Lord, which is why the early church as documented by Eusebius and Asterius identified such mannerisms as the marks of counterfeit gifts. After all, who could prophecy or operate in a charismatic gift while simultaneously disobeying the Lord?

For this cause, we too can eliminate any reported occurrence of charismatic gifts that are performed in ecstatic states or that are accompanied by raving and babbling. Likewise, as we have seen from test No. 2, we can discount any movement in which the gifts initially occurred or involved as a norm ecstatic behavior, raving, rambling, or involuntary mannerisms.

Let us take for example the Shakers. Now, we already know that the Shakers should be rejected because of their stated heretical beliefs that Ann Lee is the female equivalent of Jesus Christ.

"One of the fundamental doctrines of the society was belief in the dual nature of the Deity. The male principle was incarnated in Jesus; the female principle, in Mother Ann." (Bartleby.com, The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001. "Shakers.")

"ÔMother Ann' had a series of revelations, after which she regarded herself-and was so regarded by her followers-as the female aspect of God's dual nature and the second Incarnation of Christ. (Britannica.com, "Shaker.")

Based upon these heretical statements, we can already discount the authenticity of the Shakers' charismatic gifts. However, the Shakers are also invalidated by the Test of Quality (or Ecstasy.)

"The Shakers derived originally from a small branch of radical English Quakers who had adopted the French Camisards' ritual practices of shaking, shouting, dancing, whirling, and singing in tongues." (Britannica.com, "Shaker.")

While Paul himself speaks of "singing in the spirit" in 1 Corinthians 14:15, which some have interpreted as "singing in tongues," when the Shakers operated in tongues they did so while shaking, whirling, and shouting. All of these behaviors are obviously recognizable as "involuntary," "ecstatic," and very similar to the ravings and babblings for which the early Church condemned as counterfeit the Montanists' gifts. (NOTE: We label these activities as "involuntary" because, when they occur in such groups it is claimed that they are not the result of human will or effort, but rather are prompted by the moving of the Holy Spirit.) So, because of this ecstatic behavior, we can conclude that the Shakers failed the Test of Quality (or Ecstasy), and that their charismatic gifts were counterfeit because they were "contrary to the custom of the Church, as handed down from early times and preserved thenceforward in a continuous succession," contrary to "the commandments of the Lord," and contrary to the manner of the prophets in both the Old and New Testament.

Likewise, we can also discount any particular charismatic group or movement, which originated in or at some point involved such ecstatic behavior similar to the behavior of the Shakers. Effectively, this means that any hypothetic restoration of the charismatic gifts that also includes either in its origin or in its ongoing practice any of the following is automatically disqualified as counterfeit: 1) ecstatic, involuntary, or disorderly behavior such as being slain in the spirit (by which a person involuntarily falls unconscious to the ground or becomes paralyzed), 2) shaking or dancing wildly, indecently, or uncontrollably, 3) laughing uncontrollably or making animal sounds or other strange noises, or 4) even shouting, raving, or babbling. Such things are completely contrary to the manner of gifts handed down in the early church by the Apostles in accordance with the command of the Lord and so they are the marks of counterfeit gifts.

And this doesn't only apply to the Shakers.

"Besides glossolalia, Pentecostals promote other gifts of the Spirit (charismata), including faith healing, prophecy, and exorcism. Ecstatic experience remains the unifying element of the movement." (Bartleby.com, The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001. "Pentecostalism.")

As the above quote demonstrates, ecstasy has been the hallmark and defining element of the modern Charismatic movement since its origins in the Pentecostal Movement, which is really just a previous stage of the same overall movement. Since the reemergence of the Charismatic gifts in modern times was born in ecstasy, the entire movement fails the Test of Quality (or Ecstasy.)

Furthermore, it is not enough for a movement or group to simply remove these ecstatic practices from their practice. So long as a movement began with ecstasy or even incorporated ecstasy at any time prior to the present, as soon as ecstasy occurs, the entire movement is invalidated thereafter because either the origin is invalidated by the marks of the counterfeit or the practice was previously corrupted by the marks of the counterfeit and so the continuity to the origin is broken even if the origin was authentic.

The prevalence and involvement of ecstatic behavior, disorder, shouting, uncontrolled mannerisms such as laughing, noisemaking, indecent dancing, raving, and babbling in both the historic rise of the modern Charismatic Movement as well as the current practice in many Charismatic groups strongly demonstrates that these Movements have failed the Test of Quality (or Ecstasy.) Therefore, the evaluation regarding this test favors the conclusion that the modern Charismatic Movement is more likely to be a restoration of the ecstatic gifts of the early heretics than a restoration of the authentic gifts of the early Church.