Bethel school of supernatural ministry

[Daniel33]

What do you think of this Church/ministry?

And while we're at it, what are your views on Pentecostalism?

A friend of mine is most likely going there to study, but I'm a little skeptical. The school believes in a literal hell in addition to Christians being able to heal the sick, raise the dead and perform other miracles.

Any thoughts?

[Sarah]

I went to the website. Personally it makes me feel all anxious inside. I envision being pressured into 'evangelizing, laying on hands, and prophesying'. I feel a weight on my shoulders just thinking about it. Bluck!

[Pierac]

What do you think of this Church/ministry?

And while we're at it, what are your views on Pentecostalism?

A friend of mine is most likely going there to study, but I'm a little skeptical. The school believes in a literal hell in addition to Christians being able to heal the sick, raise the dead and perform other miracles.

Any thoughts?

Pentecostalism?

That's interesting?

If only they studied the first century synagogues... Here we have 1 Corinthians chapter 14. It is crystal clear as can be. It is most interesting how people avoid this altogether, but it is completely a synagogue service in operation without the slightest doubt, with certain modifications, grant you. Even some of the offices that were in the synagogue like the maethurgeman are mentioned, but not like ones today. It is a great deal different today than it was back then; maybe some revision needs to be made. I will say this, why not at least go by the standard that is here in the Scripture. But no one does.

Here is what it says in 1 Corinthians 14:23, "If therefore the whole church [ekklesia, the body of the people] be come together into one place," to the place of assembly. The word "synagogue" simply means a place of assembly. You could say "come to synagogue" but we would not use the term. If they "... come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that you are mad?"

Tongues simply mean languages. There are languages, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:1, that there are languages of men, and there are languages of angels. The most common languages of men were Latin, Hebrew and Aramaic. Paul says here, you Greeks coming together, if everyone speaks in different languages, the unbelievers would say you are mad, because look at the confusion going on. There was no order. Why do you not speak all in one language so that what you say can be profitable to people?

Most people today say this means some kind of ecstatic worship coming in under the inspiration of the Spirit. I am inspired by the Spirit quite often, I hope you all are, but I do not find myself having to do that, to come out with something that I do not know what I am talking about. Paul goes on to say that "the spirits of the prophets" were "subject to the prophets" (1 Corinthians 14:32). Many people today say they do not know what they said, how long they said it, or why they said it, but they said something. They probably did.

"But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believes not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth. How is it then, brethren? when you come together, every one of you has a psalm, has a doctrine, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying."  1 Corinthians 14:24–26

Paul is talking to the whole ekklesia here: "therefore the whole church [ekklesia] be come together" (verse 23). He is talking about layman, everyone coming together. He does not distinguish laymen from ministers, does he? In most churches that I have been in contact with, only the ministers have a right to bring a doctrine, to bring a song, to speak a language, to have a revelation, or something like that. Paul did not say that. He said when the whole ekklesia comes together, let it be done decently. By that he means let it "be done unto edifying" and in order. Oh, we do have the synagogue coming out here.

Verse 27, "If any man speak in an unknown tongue ..." It could be Greek, or a reading of Hebrew. "... let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret."  That is exactly what we have in every synagogue. You had a maethurgeman there who would listen to one language being said, and he would repeat back in the language of the people who could understand it, so they could hear what was going on, all for the edifying of the ekklesia. There is no use speaking to a lot of Greeks in Hebrew, when they do not understand Hebrew. However, when you read from the Old Testament, and it is in Hebrew, you better have someone there who can interpret.

The reason they had an interpreter was because the one who gave the reading from the Bible could not be the same one to interpret. There had to be another man over here listening so that he would then, in the same tone of voice, say what the other man said. If he did not say it exactly, this man would be right there to watch and to correct him. And the other man would watch the first. It was checks and balances because they did not have the Scripture like you have in front of you, because you can check me to see whether or not I am saying what it says. Back in those days they did not have it, they had to have this type of a situation. He says, let them be "by course."

Verse 28, "But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church [ekklesia]; and let him speak to himself, and to God."  Go ahead, he can read all the Hebrew he wants to, or give any message in Hebrew, but do it to himself, because the others cannot understand. If they cannot understand, then it is not helping, it is not "edifying."

Verse 29, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other [others, plural in Greek] judge." That is, other prophets, if they want to speak, let the others sit there to judge or comment, only two or three. The whole tendency is to let all types of people speak. Paul says two or three prophets. By prophets he does not mean people, necessarily, who are going to be foretelling events to occur in the future. A prophet was one who "forth-told" that is tells forth things, like a preacher. That is one of the classical meanings of "prophet."

"If any thing be revealed to another that sits by, let the first hold his peace. For you may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted."   Corinthians 14:30–31
Everyone could "prophesy," one by one, all, everyone in the congregation, but not all at once. You see, the whole tendency in Judaism is for everyone to speak at once. Let me tell you, if you have ever been to a synagogue service after the reading of the Law and the Prophets (where everyone is very, very careful), it gets pretty festive at times. It goes on,

"And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches [ekklesias] of the saints."   Corinthians 14:32–33
All the ekklesias of the saints are to be in this fashion. You must have order.

That is how our Lord spoke in the synagogues, that is how Paul, and the others spoke, and that is how the Gospel got out, because I tell you, when you get to the position where anybody can speak and express their opinion as it is in 1 Corinthians chapter 14, you have checks and balances. If you have a hierarchical system you will be taught what one man believes. If he is wrong, everyone will be wrong. If you can get everyone having their say so in balance, in a church service, in order, no confusion, then one person may say one thing another person does not like, but the other person has a chance to get up also, and say what he wants. Everyone hears it. Look at the checks and balances that go on.

That is why the Gospel was able to thrive in a good way, though they had error and heresy, but look, under this type of a banner, there was far greater protection than you can possibly imagine under a hierarchical system.

Just a thought,
Paul

[Lefein]

I can understand somewhat the idea of Bible-schools...but at the same time, I feel kinda grossed out by the whole idea of turning the Kingdom of God into a college course...

[micah7:9]

I personaly like (I do not go to any of them) Pentacostal, Oneness, and Black spiritual. I love the excitement, the energy and the faith and belief.  I get happy. I only pray that they would get the Truth and all its strength and power, rather than the theological, religious, and Hollywood crap that at least 90% of "christian" except and believe. The Father Will have ALL His world(creation) to be brought back to HIM in His WHOLE....He will lose NOONE, the human being, Adam of Gen.2:7 is the whole of what we are, and would contiune to be were it not for JESUS THE SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE WORLD. He made the sacrfice for all of that... "living soul," man, Adam, the  being that we all are,    UNTIL we are touched(and all will be touched) by HIs Saving Grace.

I believe that any church, rather than not going to one........Well it would be a very good choice.

[Sarah]

I suppose the reason the reading of the website kind of turns my stomach is that I grew up Pentecostal and while I have experienced true and beautiful operations of the gifts, I have also experienced men in power abusing their position putting heavy burdens on the people. I also struggle with the issue of education regarding my 8 and 10 year old children. Do I send them to a private school which has conflicting theological views to my own but at least they acknowledge and encourage Godly living, or put them in the public school and trust my own child-rearing? It is hard.

[onlytruth]

The church I used to attend is connected to them. I will say the same thing I said to them"hold ,it is time to stop our fleshly pursuit of the glory!they are good people but like Todd bently(went to my church)they get pushed to gain more understanding and the Carnel gets in the way.

[thinktank]

I suppose the reason the reading of the website kind of turns my stomach is that I grew up Pentecostal and while I have experienced true and beautiful operations of the gifts, I have also experienced men in power abusing their position putting heavy burdens on the people. I also struggle with the issue of education regarding my 8 and 10 year old children. Do I send them to a private school which has conflicting theological views to my own but at least they acknowledge and encourage Godly living, or put them in the public school and trust my own child-rearing? It is hard.

I think you should also consider the type of pupils being schooled there. If there's a lot of bad behaved, ill hearted pupils it makes school a hard place to grow up in and trust people.

[Nathan]

For me, spiritual truth is like DNA.  Nobody had to teach me my Father's manerisms and they never sat me down and tried to teach me that my physicalt traits had to follow after my Dad's  . .or Mom's for that matter . . .they just do because the DNA from both of them have created me inwardly to have their traits . . .I see the spirit in us doing the same thing. 

I "am" of a Pentecostal understanding, but having a school to emphasize manifestations isn't where my pursuit should be . . not for me anyway . . .it sounds like a continuance of yet another branch of religious banter.

[Sarah]

Yes, Thinktank, peer influence is one of the biggest considerations. I lean toward a school which excels in academic excellence and extra curricular programs, not considering the theology as high up on the list.