Early Church and Charismatic Error

Theology and Politics from a Conservative, Biblical Perspective

Listen to this article

What I continue learning about the early church fathers, what they believed and what they had to deal with, is fascinating. Those men of old, who were generally either direct disciples of the original apostles or once removed, fought for truth as revealed by the apostles. Previously, we noted how the seeds of the New Age movement took root (via Gnosticism’s many branches), during the first and second centuries and how that was dealt with by church fathers.

As it turns out, seeds of the Charismatic Movement and its error were also alive and well during the second century. Satan’s chosen man at the time was Montanus, who lived in Asia Minor during the second century, and claimed to be a prophet of God. I imagine him being a problem to the churches that existed there through the work of the apostle John and his disciples.

It’s always interesting when a person rises to the fore claiming a special connection with God that no one else has. Many people will follow that person in the hopes of gaining the same thing. It’s how we are wired, which goes back to the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve had been warned by God to avoid eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, so Satan made it available to them by twisting truth to his advantage. This is exactly what cult leaders do. Montanus came along with promises of tremendous spiritual insight from the Holy Spirit (working through Montanus of course), that would elevate average Christians to truly Spiritual versions.

Montanus said and believed things in his day that reminds me of similarities of my involvement in the Charismatic Movement of the 1970’s. There were plenty of people then who evidenced what Montanus did and believed back in the second century. To them it was part of their spiritual journey to God and whether they meant to or not, they tended to lord it over others.

Montanus had been a priest in an Asiatic cult called Cybele. He joined the church and claimed to have the gift of prophecy. Eusebius, a third-century church historian, wrote the following of Montanus: ‘In his lust for leadership, he became obsessed and would suddenly fall into frenzy and convulsions. He began to be ecstatic and speak and talk strangely, and prophesied contrary to that which was the custom from the beginning of the church. Those who heard him were convinced that he was possessed. They rebuked him and forbade him to speak, remembering the warning of the Lord Jesus to be watchful because false prophets would come’ (Ecclesiastical History, 5.16.1). Montanus was joined by two women, Priscilla and Maximilla, who also prophesied in trance-like or ecstatic states.[1]

The cult of Cybele was seriously pagan. Readers can learn about it at this link.[2] Please be warned that the link includes graphic terminology for the types of things involved. This was in Montanus’ background when he allegedly converted to Christianity. Cybele was the second century version of today’s “feminist” movement, among other things.

At times, Montanus insisted that the Holy Spirit spoke directly through him and because of that, what he said was the truth and should be fully embraced. However, his over-the-top antics often made people question him. This is why many came to believe he was actually possessed by demons. His demeanor was in sharp contrast with the prophets of old (or even during New Testament times with prophets then), who simply spoke rationally and without all the ecstatically charged strange speech or doing so in a trance.

Moreover, there were times Montanus claimed to be the Holy Spirit. Reminds me of numerous cult figures who end up claiming to be God in the flesh. Anyone who dismisses them is guilty of dismissing God Himself.

Montanus claimed to be the actual embodiment of truth sent by the Holy Spirit. As in the case of the average Charismatic, “Followers of Montanism also claimed inspiration for themselves, saying that their words of revelation were as authoritative as anything in Scripture. Often, they could not even be understood. They were known for speaking in tongues, prattling, and chanting nonsense.“[3]

This is exactly what I recall about the Charismatic Movement. I heard and witnessed all the strange sounds and sights around me and I understood little of it. It was simply noise. I was told that this was God working and to not fight it. The truth though is I always wondered how anyone could get anything out of any of these things (except possibly an intense feeling), that would speak to our critical thinking?

The Montanists differentiated themselves from ‘ordinary’ Christians in that they were ‘Spirit-filled,’ and other Christians were not. The Montanists saw themselves as possessing a more advanced form of Christianity, having received a special baptism of the Spirit that enabled them to live a life of holiness.[4]

This description is exactly what I was met with during my involvement in the Charismatic Movement. Those of us who did not speak in tongues were said not to have yet experienced the “fullness” of the Holy Spirit baptism. We were somewhat pitied. But not to worry, we should persevere in prayer, trusting in God and it would one day happen when our faith had risen to the required level. Yet, it was clear there was a dichotomy between the “haves” and the “have nots” in the Charismatic Movement. Those who had it were seen as better, more spiritual.

Montanus always taught things that projected him high above others. This is true of every cult leader (or political dictator), and that continues in today’s numerous versions of the Charismatic Movement as well.

This is also unfortunately generally true of too many pastors in our non-Charismatic pulpits today. They come to see themselves as unable to fail or fall. When they speak from the pulpit, they believe they speak without error and if you think they’re speaking error, its’ due to jealousy or for being less spiritual, even if you point them to Scripture.

Montanus and his two prophetesses, who together called themselves “the Three,” taught a strict moral code. Lengthy fasts were required. Marriage was discouraged, and second marriages were prohibited outright. Montanists refused any compromise with Roman authority, and many Montanists died as martyrs. Montanus himself urged his followers to ‘seek . . . to die the martyr’s death, that He may be glorified who has suffered for you. (Tertullian, De Fuga in Persecutione, 9)[5]

Isn’t that something? The “three.” The three what? Stooges? An attempt to be seen as the Trinity? For goodness sake, look at what they tried to enforce on others, as is true of all cults. Lengthy fasts (not healthy), marriage discouraged (not healthy), second marriages prohibited (maybe, depending on the situation). It’s ultimately done for one thing: controlling followers.

Montanus’ followers stood against Rome, which resulted in many instances of martyrdom for them. They were actually taught to pursue the martyr’s death to be “glorified.” There is nothing in Scripture commanding us to actively pursue martyrdom. However, there will continue to be martyrs, just like the few hundred Christians brutally massacred in Nigeria several days ago by Muslim Militia. Those Christians didn’t seek it and I’m sure they didn’t want it, but they succumbed to it because that is what occurred and now they live in His Presence. I would personally like to just close my eyes one night and slip away to eternity or be Raptured (and selfishly, before my lovely wife dies), if that’s His will, but it may not be. I do not, however, need to deal with that possibility now though, do I? If it comes to that, He will give me grace and strength to deal with it.

Like all cults that eventually get so weird only the most diehard brainwashed members continue to stay with them in spite of their crazed beliefs, Montanus also got to a point where he made some seriously audacious claims. Fortunately, many Christians then fully rejected him then because of it. But his error came back almost 2,000 years later with the Azusa Street Revival, which began the modern Charismatic Movement in America in 1906. It morphed into several things over the decades with the latest version today being the New Apostolic Reformation.

Montanism taught that the Holy Spirit had come (in the form of Montanus) to purify the church in preparation for the soon return of Jesus Christ. They looked for the New Jerusalem to descend from heaven to a plain in Phrygia near Pepuza, the Montanist headquarters in Asia Minor. To better prepare for the coming kingdom, many Montanists migrated to that area.

This is so absurd, it’s easy to see why Montanus and his teachings were rejected. The Holy Spirit came in the form of Montanus? How convenient but certainly blasphemous! He obviously was claiming himself to be God therefore he actually had the spirit of the Antichrist. He was also clearly in error about the coming New Jerusalem, which he said would come down some place in the area of Phrygia (not Jerusalem, Israel).

Some twenty years after introducing himself to the world as God’s prophet, the Church rejected him and his two prophetesses. Today, he’d probably be highly esteemed and surrounded with gullible Christians who rarely open their Bibles and because of that lack any real biblical foundation. He’d be pastoring a Mega-church with people flocking to it because too many go by feelz instead of the truth of God’s Word. I say that not to condemn because I was at that point in my life years ago. I never want to be there again because it is only through the reading and study of His Word that we gain knowledge of God and through it, we also gain discernment.

It is so good to know that most Christians outright rejected Montanus with the notable exception of Tertulian? What’s up with him? I have no idea. But initially Eleuterus, the twelfth bishop of Rome, also embraced Montanus until Irenaeus physically went to Rome to convince Eleuterus to reject Montanus and his anti-biblical teachings.

As I’ve said before, the early church fathers after the apostles really had their hands full. Several apostles like Paul, Peter and John, warned their readers what would begin to occur after they were gone. Satan wasted no time. The apostles saw the writing on the wall and we need to see it as well. No, we’re not apostles, but by studying to show ourselves approved unto God, we should be able to discern truth from lies. When we see the lies, we need to be vocal in calling them out because we never know when our words might help pull others out of the fire.

What I’m finding as I read the early church fathers is that they comment so much on Scripture and verify what they believed and fought for (handed down by apostles), that it is giving me a new understanding and commitment to His truth!  In the days, months and years ahead, God will allow Satan more power to usher in His final world order, which will be fraught with problems and difficulties and will lack full cohesion. In other words, it is destined to fail.

However, in the midst of it, God expects and wants me to persevere in being a Great Commission Christian. This can only happen when I fully understand what the early church fathers (and the apostles), went through as they shared the truth of the Gospel every day mostly to a people who often rejected it out of hand. That result did not dissuade them and they kept going because they knew that eventually, someone else would receive the truth they presented. So, they did not grow weary. They endeavored to not give up and they pushed on, keeping the empty cross of Christ always before them, signifying His resurrection and eternal Presence.

God is with us. Who can be against us?

[1] https://www.gotquestions.org/montanism.html

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Ibid

Theology and Politics from a Conservative, Biblical Perspective