Peter Fenwick looks at the roots of the Toronto blessing.
It is the Church's task to proclaim God's will and intentions to the world: a world which over the past 50 years has progressively abandoned God's laws and standards.
The condition of society is now so serious that many Christians, myself included, believe that only a full-scale revival can reverse this moral decline.
Since January 1994 the Toronto Blessing has been hailed as either a great revival or its precursor. Because of the earnest desire for revival in the hearts of many it is understandable that these claims have been widely accepted, but we must recognise that their hopes and expectations have led many people to embrace the movement without fully considering all the implications.
Can we be sure that the Toronto Blessing was a genuine move of God? There were many features of the Toronto Blessing which have given me grave cause for concern; features which, if unchecked, will seriously impair the church's ability to perform its God-given task.
My greatest fear springs from the fact that the Bible no longer occupies the place which once it did in the evangelical community. Indeed, the whole controversy surrounding the Toronto Blessing is in fact a major battle for the Bible. Traditionally, evangelicals have sought a firm biblical foundation for all matters relating to doctrine and conduct. It is my contention that the Toronto Blessing represented, in its day, the most recent stage in a process whereby this tradition is being gradually eroded. Am I right to fear that it will soon be abandoned altogether?
In this article I will set out the stages which preceded the Toronto Blessing in the process of erosion to which I have referred. It will, I hope, become clear that the Toronto Blessing is no sudden or unexpected phenomenon; but that in fact the ground has been well prepared by the acceptance of previous unbiblical practices.
Over the next two weeks I will also offer an explanation as to why the Church has become vulnerable to such errors and indicate the features of the Toronto Blessing which are unbiblical.
Because of earnest desire for revival, many have embraced the Toronto movement without fully considering all the implications.
Unbiblical Practices
During the 1980s and early 1990s a number of practices were introduced, mostly in the charismatic churches, which had either no biblical foundation or only a very dubious one. These practices were accepted without question and are now a normal part of much charismatic theology. Here are some examples.
End of meetings ministry times
This is now a normal part of many charismatic meetings, both in churches and in joint celebrations. People are called forward for prayer and usually laying on of hands, with a view to deliverance from rejections, hurts, abuses, fears, inadequacies and such-like; the hope is that they will go on in a more positive way of living. Sometimes people are prayed for in order to receive particular gifts. Usually the subjects of prayer have little, if anything, to do with the content of the sermon.
All of this has been a common part of charismatic meetings for a long time, despite the fact that there is neither precedent nor teaching anywhere in the New Testament for this practice.
It has to be said that it has not created any significant opposition, since it has seemed harmless enough and has surely been practised out of good motives; what can possibly be wrong with seeking to bless someone? The fact that in many cases the same people come forward time after time has also not raised too many questions.
'Word of Knowledge' healing meetings
This again is a very common charismatic practice. Someone, usually from the front of the church, but not exclusively so, makes a succession of statements to the effect that, 'There is someone here with...' and there follows the recital of a number of ailments. People are expected to stand, declaring themselves to be the person referred to. Prayer is made and the whole procedure moves on. There is often little or no checking out as to whether a healing has taken place.
However, the real point at issue is that this technique was never practised by Jesus nor by any of the apostles at any point in the whole of the New Testament. This has not been considered important by those concerned, since the assumption is that from time to time some people do actually get healed, and therefore the feeling is that if it works, albeit occasionally, it is acceptable.
During the 1980s and early 1990s a number of practices were introduced, mostly in the charismatic churches, which had either no biblical foundation or only a very dubious one.
Demons as the cause of sin
Over the last 40 years or so, there has been an ever-increasing tendency to identify demons as a primary cause of sin in Christians. It goes without saying that if a demon is causing certain sinful human behaviour, then repentance for sins is not appropriate and is rarely called for; the matter will be dealt with by exorcism. The blame for sin can be laid fully at the door of the demon.
Once again this is profoundly contrary to New Testament practice and teaching.
The doctrine of territorial spirits
It has for a number of years been sweepingly assumed that hamlets, towns, cities or nations are dominated by specific spirits whose size and power is appropriate to the population mass over which they are said to rule.
It is consequently assumed that effective evangelisation of such a location will not happen until these territorial spirits have been engaged in spiritual warfare and decisively expelled. This is not the same as praying for the conversion of one's friends and family. It is praying for the extermination of these evil spirits and very often actually addressing them.
There is not a shred of New Testament teaching or practice to support this kind of activity. The theology of it is based on a passage in Daniel (10:13) where the Prince of the kingdom of Persia is said to have withstood an angelic helper sent by God to Daniel. This Prince of the kingdom of Persia hindered the angel for 21 days.
It is pure speculation to assert that this Prince was a demon. Since Daniel was not waging spiritual warfare in the modern sense of the word; since there is not another single example in the whole of the Bible of this sort of activity; and since we are given no theological explanation of it all, it is therefore astonishing that a definitive theology has been built up from this brief incident and has introduced into the charismatic church what is now a very dominant practice.
As I have already said, this practice is deemed to be vitally necessary before proper evangelisation of a particular territory can be expected to succeed. For almost 2,000 years the Church has not known this dogma and consequently has been unable to engage in this activity. It is amazing that it has nevertheless achieved such astounding success at different times and in different places.
These practices were accepted without question and became a normal part of much charismatic theology.
Christians Vulnerable to Error
The whole point of presenting these examples (and there are others) is to demonstrate that the charismatic movement has been taking on board teaching and practices that have either no, or at best flimsy, biblical foundation and turning them into dogma.
It is almost certainly true that many members of charismatic churches do believe that there actually is a biblical foundation, and this fact will raise a different concern in subsequent articles.
But the ground for accepting such practices has been well and truly prepared and into this situation there has come an even more unbiblical teaching, namely the Toronto Blessing.
Next week: Two factors which have made the charismatic church vulnerable to departures from biblical truth and practice: the rise of restorationism and a decline in biblical knowledge.
First published in 1995. Revised and updated (including all references to time frames) November 2017. Previous articles in this series can be found here.
