Your response to this is predicated on your understanding of the verses I provided as not applying to the situation.
On the contrary, I think that trying to understand the verses in that way is reading modern Pentecostal/Charismatic practice onto the Scriptures in an ahistorical way.
But perhaps I also was too general in my challenge. If you consider the whole of the video the setting, the laying on of hands, the prayers being said over her, the background, I am not defending all of these only that it is possible to be overcome by the presence of God and to fall down.
I would argue that when people fall down when encountering the presence of God, it is usually forward, onto their knees, and they remain conscious and in possession of their faculties. They are not knocked out.
Have I looked at Fr. Alexis' book? I'm looking at it right now it's in my library. I'm very familiar with Fr. Alexis and even had the privilege of interacting with him on a review/response exchange in a professional journal for an article he submitted. And yes, I'm familiar with the other links too. Including the one you provided that I copy/paste from when I'm feeling too lazy to summarize the story from St. Porphyrios.
If you're not convinced by Fr. Alexis' book or the articles, then this argument will quickly become circular. It's clear that I'm not going to convince you of anything or vice versa. That's fine as far as it goes. Your assessment of your experiences in Pentecostalism/Charismatism is between you and God. As a historian, I can only speak to where such things entered the historical record and whether or not such things have a place in the life of the Orthodox Church. Of course, I can also speak to my own experience, which seems to differ in many ways from yours.
No, I'm speaking of the way things were done at the Church I left which as you have already noted seems to be different from your previous experience. We didn't video these things they were more low key and private not some spectacle to be broadcast.
I'm asking for something analogous. I didn't attend the same church as the woman in the video, but what she and her friends were doing was very close to a lot of what I saw in the churches I did attend.
I'm familiar with the history good, bad, and ugly. It was one of the classes I had to take before getting the ministerial license I used to have.
I expected you would be. I'm just saying, their reading of Scripture to justify the novelties they introduced was an inaccurate one (particularly in the case of Parham).
The Churches voice is in some ways varied and in others too broad. Which is one of my complaints in any thread on this topic. I presented the story on St. Porphyrios and glossolalia specifically because it would seem to contradict some of what is said in Orthodox circles, including in Fr. Alexis' book.
Only if one reads Pentecostal/Charismatic practice onto what the monk is doing. I don't see it through that lens. I think to do so is as big a mistake as reading Pentecostal/Charismatic practice onto Scripture.
Yes, jurisdictions and synods have condemned the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement but my contention has been and remains the movement has too many parts to fit into a blanket condemnation. Take again Fr. Alexis' book there are things I agree with him about parts of the Pentecostal/Charismatic movements' beliefs and practices that I and the church I used to go to would have condemned with him. There are also ways in which my former church did not resemble at all what he was talking about, or perhaps even your own experiences.
At first blush, I am inclined to disagree, not only because of my own experiences and my study of the origins of the movement, but also because I've paid close attention to the global Charismatic movement in places like Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia and haven't found anything there of value either, but I would like to learn more about your church and others like it. Where could I start?
my bad, apologies
No apologies necessary. I just wanted very much to clarify that I don't deny the authentic work or gifts of the Holy Spirit in any way, shape, or form. I just advocate being careful to distinguish them from things I think are spiritually dangerous. I say this partially as a historian who has studied the origins of Pentecostalism in some detail (I haven't published on it or anything. It's not my field. But it is an area of interest, especially as it relates to African and African-American spirituality) but more so as someone who has seen things in Pentecostal circles that I know for sure was not the work of God and that scared the living daylights out of me. I appreciate that our experiences were apparently very different, and I'm willing to consider your point of view, and would like to learn more about your former church.
Here we agree at least some but perhaps not all the way. Because again I do not defend all Pentecostalism/Charismatism, some is rightly to be condemned. Still, as I said previously, in my opinion the movements have too many parts for blanket condemnation of them all.
Cool. Like I said, I'd like to learn more and would appreciate whatever information you could give me. As I said though, I've followed the Global Charismatic Movement with great interest, and so far, have not seen anything that would challenge my view as it has been established by my own experiences and my research into the origins of the movement. I've also not seen any evidence of the things that began in the American South in the historic or Biblical Church. Any information you could send my way would be appreciated.