Wilkerson Has Partaken Of "Holy" Laughter?

sermonindex Jun 16, 2004

In his sermon, found on this iste, "The Gift Of Righteousness", Pastor David Wilkerson claims that he believes in and has experienced the manifestation os uncontrollable laughter; he claims in this sermon that this was of the Holy Ghost. (Begin listening to the particular sermon in question at 4 minutes)Now, here's the problem:Pastor Wilkerson literally blasts the holy laughter movement in his sermonn "Reproach of the Solemn Assembly"; he says, "thousands are dying...what are you laughing about?"Would someone please explain this apparent contradiction to me?Daniel

J

jeremyhulsey Jun 16, 2004

Daniel,There is a world of difference between laughing for joy in the Lord because He is making you holy, and an unsanctified person manifesting laughter in the face of an unchanged life.In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

Amen Jeremy! I agree!The only problem is that Wilkerson said and claimed to have UNCONTROLLABLE laughter and he SPECIFICALLY said he was NOT coming against the laughter movement in his sermon. Check the sermon out and get back.In Christ, Brother Daniel

R

RobertW Jun 17, 2004

When I listened to the sermon it seems that it was a bit older compared to some of the more recent sermons. Based upon what I have followed in His ministry I would say that he certainly did not intend to identify himself with what we regard now as the "Holy Laughter Movement" with Rodney Howard Brown and others. Scaling the language barrier is sometimes difficult as we may use similar or identical terms and be pouring different meanings into those words (or catch phrases). When He spoke of his laughter it seemed to be more of a personal testimony of God working in Him something that He certainly did not go to seed on and felt it was an isolated thing given of God for a certain purpose at a certain time. This is WAY different than the Holy Ghost Bartender madness that vexes anyone who is concerned with genuine repentance. Wilkerson has wept much over the years in sermons I have heard and if God in his prayer closet deemed it necessary to pour a very special grace upon him, I would not interpret that as partaking of "Holy Laughter" in the coercive and vexing fashion which those who have promoted and probigated it. Wilkerson has preached more tears to me than he ever could laughter. Often he silences the crowd when they try to applaud or laugh or something. As for Jimmy Swaggart; pointing out apparent contradictions in Dave Wilkerson's ministry will not rebuild Jimmy Swaggart's. I have attended his crusades and defended him in the late 80's as so many wanted to see him come down. I have listened frequently to Sonlife Radio to see where Jimmy seems to be in terms of His walk with God and the focus of his ministry. I was priveledged just last year to hear him RARELY discuss his fall into sin and I took some fairly good notes. Jimmy has historically taken on a lot of people in his time (Jim Baker, PTL, etc.). He is more effective preaching the CROSS. If Jimmy Swaggart is ever to be restored to a place of ministry and repentance and holiness style messages; God is going to have to do it. In the mean time we must refrain from sowing discord among brethren as it is an abomination to God. If there is one thing that really upsets me its to see my boys arguing and fighting. That is a real NO-NO! Is it not also the grief of God's heart? God Bless,

C

crsschk Jun 17, 2004

Thanks Robert, most helpful!

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

The only problem is that Wilkerson said and claimed to have UNCONTROLLABLE laughter and he SPECIFICALLY said he was NOT coming against the laughter movement in his sermon. Brother Daniel I am just wondering what point you are trying to come to? Are you saying that Wilkerson is pro for some of the laughter revival manifestations? I know that he is strongly preaching against the prosperity movement, and I do believe him and carter conlon are firmly against most of these phenomenon that don't line up with the scriptures. I personally was able to go to NYC about 8 months or more ago and I visited TSC and Brooklyn Tabernacle and there was no manifestations such as laughter and the sort but just full-heartly worship and preaching of truth from the scriptures.

T

TheophilusMD Jun 17, 2004

When He spoke of his laughter it seemed to be more of a personal testimony of God working in Him something that He certainly did not go to seed on and felt it was an isolated thing given of God for a certain purpose at a certain time. This is WAY different than the Holy Ghost Bartender madness that vexes anyone who is concerned with genuine repentance.I was in the church when Ps. David preached that message and, yes, it was a personal testimony of how the Lord made him laugh. I have sat under Ps. Dave's ministry since February 1993 and since Ps.Carter Conlon came to Time Square Church and not once was there any laughter manifestation in the church like the "bartender madness." That our pastors are against this "movement," as it is called, is both unequivocal and explicit.

R

Rahman Jun 17, 2004

I think the following scriptures pretty much sums up the consequences of any Christian not practicing what we preach, and especially those of us in the national and international eye ...Rom.2[1] Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.[2] But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.[3] And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?[4] Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?[5] But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;[6] Who will render to every man according to his deeds:[7] To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:[8] But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,[9] Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;[10] But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:[11] For there is no respect of persons with God.[21] Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?[22] Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?[23] Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?[24] For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.[25] For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.Gal.6[1] Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.[2] Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.[3] For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.[4] But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.[5] For every man shall bear his own burden.[6] Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.[7] Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.[8] For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.I'm so glad that our Lord has brought me to such a place of Christian maturity that I no longer stumble when other men of God (whomever) trip and fall (for whatever reason) ... Know why? ... Because my faith, hope and trust is in Jesus Christ alone ... Only He is infallible, sinless and worthy of casting stones ... Amen

T

TheophilusMD Jun 17, 2004

I think the following scriptures pretty much sums up the consequences of any Christian not practicing what we preach, and especially those of us in the national and international eyeMaybe I did not explain it well. It is best to listen again to the exact words said by Ps. David Wilkerson. The reason why he gave the testimony is to differentiate what's happening in the "holy laughter movement" and a genuine experience of joy in the Holy Ghost.

R

Rahman Jun 17, 2004

TheophilusMD,My post was a double entendre of which you may not know about, which has to do with another thread that brother Daniel posted in regards Jimmy Swaggart, and how so many Christians have judged him so adversly ...So what my post addresses is whether a man of God is fallen from grace and judged in carnal sexual sin by many, or whether he falls from grace by seeming to totally waffle docrinally, in the greater panorama of God's plan our preoccupation with such matters is like our straining at gnats while swallowing camels ... The bottom line being that if any person in God doesn't practice what we preach, adverse reaping is gonna come because it's a universal law of God ... Brother Swaggart has certainly reaped adversly and still is, and right now brother Wilkerson seems to be in question by brother Daniel regarding whether or not he's waffled doctrinally on this horrible laughing revival craze ...I listened to the sermon in question and was shocked to hear Brother Wilkerson say that he's laughed for hours in the Spirit, and it certainly sounded contridictory to me in light of his withering sermon against said laughter craze ... But are we gonna stumble, and question, and argue, and harraunge, and judge the people of God who trip and fall? ... Or are we gonna keep stepping in our own pace with the Lord, while praying that our fallen commrades will be quick to getting back up in repentance, and be humble enough to accept the fact that their fall is gonna bring them a certain time of reaping adversly ... So here are my main points scripturally, secumb to (in the dark) what you vehemently contradict and it will turn around and ravage you visciously (in the light) ... We reap in spades what we sow ... whatever it is ...If brother Wilkerson is guilty of having in his eye the splinter of attempting to fit in by becoming one of the laughing boys, then brother Daniel's question is but the genesis of his adverse reaping ... I hope this makes better sense, if not I rest from this thread for I've got my hands full (as the Spirit has so recently reminded me) with this giant beam protruding from my own eye ...In Him,Bro. R

J

jeremyhulsey Jun 17, 2004

After listening to this sermon, it doesn't sound like any kind of endorsement for the Holy Laughter movement. He's just not condemning those who have had an experience with the Lord as though all "holy laughter" is intrisicly evil or a false manifestation. There are testimonies from some very godly people early in the Pentecostal movement that reported experiencing holy laughter. It's not that "holy laughter" is automaticly bad, but that there is a categorical and qualitative difference between one who is experiencing the Lord and another who is being confirmed in their rebellion.I have one sermon where Bro. Wilkerson talks about himself being slain in the Spirit. He contrasts the true against the false. His final statement went something like "If the Lord's gonna lay you down, He's gonna lay down a clean vessel!" The jist of his sermon was that we often bypass the laver of cleansing to go straight to the altar for a blessing.(I'll have to search my tapes to see exactly which sermon it is.)I came up with a statement at bible school that sort of goes with this, "Truth without fire is dead. But fire without truth is deadly."In Christ,Jeremy Hulsey

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

Your statement on the issue was brief and certainly to the point!I could not have said it better myself!Notice in my originbal post I DEFINATELY did not claim wilkerson was "endorsing" the various movements and false revivals among us; I was simply ASKING.... :)Why did I post this issue? To receive individual responses to Wilkerson's sermon.Husley, you LITERALLY have stated what I have always believed...each word posted by you is the word in my own heart.I have been "slain" in the Spirit twice in my life as a Believer; once when I was 17 years old and once when i was 24, and the same PAOC Evangelist (Silas Matchett) prayed for me on both occassions, and this man is a Holiness Pentecostal who knows his God as all do who are truly Redeemed.Both occassions I was literally struck to the floor weeping and sobbing over the Holiness of God and my own sin present before me; both times a definate change took place, a softening of my heart towards the Spirit of Christ.Does God move? Yes!The thing I learned at VBCI (Victory Bible Colleges International) is that the Lord moves in PATTERNS, PROMISES and in STRANGE WAYS, as David described His Spirit in Psalms.Example: Philip ran as fast as the Chariot in Acts; however, does God give a promise, "Thou canst run as fast as a car" ? No; thus we call this a STRANGE ACT of God.Example: People all through the Book of Acts prayed in other Tongues, prophesied, spoke the Word with boldness,etc etc, and in ACts 2:39 it says that the Gift of the Spirit is a PROMISE to all who are afar off.....The Spirit in PERSON is a PROMISE indeed.Example: Each time a nation/individual turned FROM God TO idols/sin, God's PATTERN was to pour out wrath....EVERY SINGLE TIME, except where repentance was sought and found.Thus, Wilkerson and anyone else who has had experiences that are starnage are not always in "the wrong".My Pastor friend (best friend and Mentor, Pastor Daniel Jalbert who is also a friend of TSC) saya it like this: If God gives you an experience that cannot be validated by the WHOLE of Scripture, tell no one and leave it to you and the Lord alone as precious and special between you and He.Pastor Dan Lirette

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

No, dear brother; not implying, suggesting or doing otherwise with this issue on Wilkerson.What was my point? My point was simply that I wanted input from others; Wilkerson DID make reference to personal UNcontrollable laughter and he also, in other sermons, blasted the laughter Movement.I think the issue DESERVES probing, don't you and others believe so?I asked a Pastor friend of mine to hear it and he was confused as he listened to Wilkerson...and you will note some other posts here which show the same.The issue IS and issue, dear brother.....Now, PERSONALLY, I love Wilkerson and know that he is NOT agreeing with the Laughter Movement in any way.....It IS good to know if OTHERS see it the same and if not, shouldn't we explain to them what Wilkerson is truly saying here instead of allowing the young and weak to believe something that WIlkerson is NOT even claiming?Point is, and the posts bear it out, that people HAVE misunderstood Wilkerson.Now we have a chance to show that Wilkerson was NOT referring to HIS laughter experience as that of the Toronto style experience.GBUDaniel

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

Brother Robet; are you upset with any of my posts? It seems that you have taken a vengeful stance against me and/or my posts.Just wanted to know, sinmce these are your words....."As for Jimmy Swaggart; pointing out apparent contradictions in Dave Wilkerson's ministry will not rebuild Jimmy Swaggart's." Brother, my Swaggart and Wilkerson post have NOTHING to do with one another and I am NOT seeking to discredit Wilkerson; he's the best Man of God alive and with us today presently.Why would you believe I was seeking to discredit Wilkerson?Pray, my dear Brother, when making such a statement as that as you have.You claim that I wanted to discredit Wilkerson to build up Jimmy Swaggart?That is certainly not ANYTHING that I sought to do; I love and listen to both of these men on a consistent and regular basis.Swaggart and Wilkerson are two of my all time favorite ministers.Though your words show a clear slant against Swaggart himself, I will say that I need not discredit anyone, Wilkerson or otherwise, to "rebuild Swaggart's Ministry"...God will hold Swaggart up, brother...not Dan Lirette.God is the lifter of men's souls; and He delights in taking care of Swaggart and all others who have repented.GBUDaniel.

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

My point was simply that I wanted input from others; Wilkerson DID make reference to personal UNcontrollable laughter and he also, in other sermons, blasted the laughter Movement.Thank you for clarifying brother but I would like you to consider that the method you used to attract attention to your point was not done that well. I first off had the impression by reading the title that Wilkerson is part of the laughing revival movement and if a person doesnt take the time to read the entire thread they might draw a quite assumetion or conclusion. There has been and continues to be much flack towards brother Wilkerson. Even at one point Wilkerson concedes of not even wanting to go to church because people on the streets would say 'are you a false prophet?' etc and it would grieve him so much. Thats why I think it would be better to rather speak of wilkerson in this situation in better terms.I think brother Hulsey came up with a great summation of the matter and I would also say that no man is perfect as your stated also brother daniel.This might seem abit off topic but im a firm believer in the principle of seeking light and truth and the darkness will be exposed as a consequence. If I am stumbling around in the dark with a lamp and trying to point out all the wrong things it will end up being a futility. But rather if I (we) as the body of Christ become once again the light and salt of the earth, then the counterfeit christianity will be seen for what it is.Brother Keith Daniel gives this call very powerfully in this sermon: The Sermon on the Mount (video)

sermonindex Jun 17, 2004

First, Brother Greg, let me say MSN Messnger just cut out! So I came here! heheI agree with your statement fully, and if i seemed to have posted my thread in a manner that may not have been appropriate to some, I ask your forgiveness.One contention, however, with a statement you made, Brother Greg:"...I think it would be better to rather speak of wilkerson in this situation in better terms."Should this not apply to Swaggart and any other we make reference to?Thank you also for pointing out the method used; greater wisdom wiull be used next time; God DID promise to give me some ;) lol. Damniel

sermonindex Jun 18, 2004

Should this not apply to Swaggart and any other we make reference to?I would think there is a volume of difference between swaggart and wilkerson. The maturity and determination in his walk with God is something that is note worthy and to be admired. Wilkerson seems to have been through much controvesy and has spoken out on many key issues: judgement, false gospels, etc. He has been faithful with his call of a watchman over the nation of America and I pray God keeps him true to that purpose. If brother wilkerson feel into dubious sin of a manner that is not to be named once amongst the saints then I would say that would be a very damaging witness to the entire body of Christ in America.Towards brother Swaggart, I believe as do others that he has truly repented. But he cannot expect to gain back spiritual success and the favor of the people. And what really worries me is that He is acted as though nothing really happened and rarely mentions his backslidding. I would think he would be a broken man now in the hands of the potter and be more grave and serious over spiritual matters. I watched him on the internet TV once a few months back and he was having a good ole pentecostal time, which is fine! but as I said there is volumes of difference between Wilkerson and Swaggart. And not to be make more dissension but wouldn't your reasoning apply to other men such as John Wimber, Kenneth Copeland and the likes who if you did ask them would say they are seeking the face of God like no other man. I am sure all these men repented also, will not the judge of all the earth do right? I think many man's souls are in God's hands and we can speculate but rather that energy would be better used preaching the 'true gospel' the truth that is in Jesus Christ. And stop focussing on the falacies of others even how dubious and maligned they are.The church needs to be the salt of the earth once again.

T

Tears_of_joy Jun 18, 2004

I first off had the impression by reading the title that Wilkerson is part of the laughing revival movement and if a person doesnt take the time to read the entire thread they might draw a quite assumetion or conclusion.For this reason, I suggest the title of this thread to be changed.It really gives bad impression for those who don't know and haven't heard brother Wilkerson and will read only the title.

sermonindex Jun 18, 2004

To all who think/believe that the title of this post implies Wilkerson as one of the "laughing believers"...well, without AT ALL seeking to be ignorant or unloving (and I mean that Brethren).... let me ask:Does anyone understand what the rules of English Composition are measured by?Take a look at the title.... You don't even have to GLIMPSE at it to see the question mark (?) .It's called a question; not a statement.Within a question there can never be any implication except by the own biased perception of the reader; this is Composition friends.If any of you have taken the title to be offensive or imlicated, according to the ruled of English, it HAS to be because of a perceived interpretation on YOUR part, simply because a question mark completely excludes any statement of fact, and gives only a query.Why is it that some write about the TITLE? It's not a title; it's an imposed (not implied) statement.Daniel

sermonindex Jun 18, 2004

It's not a title; it's an imposed (not implied) statement.Dan Lirette, A False Prophet? Brother I think the above example shows that this is not always a suitable method to draw a conclusion. Clearly the above statement is not correct you are not a false prophet but it brings into peoples minds the idea of you being one, Therefore to address the subject away from the person's name would be more suitable? I really never learnt english grammer and was a drop out in school but it seems like better edicate.