Argument #1 
Being “Slain in the Spirit” is Not Biblical

Now, as far as this specific argument goes, there are really two main positions. Firstly, there are those who believe that the manifestation is “anti-Biblical”. Secondly, there are those who believe that the manifestation is “extra-Biblical”.

However, there is nothing in scripture that specifically condemns the manifestation itself. The manifestation cannot be considered “Anti-Biblical”, as there is nothing in the Scripture that labels it as demonic or of the flesh. In fact, the opponents will say, “It’s not even found in scripture.” If that were true, what grounds would they have of labeling it as “anti-Biblical” in the first place? At that point, it would simply be “extra-Biblical”.

So those who say it is “anti-Biblical”, say so without any justification whatsoever.

Now what about those who say it is “extra-Biblical?”

I find it quite humorous that opponents of the manifestation will pick at the supporting scriptures with statements like, “Well, they fell but they didn’t fall backwards. They fell, but nobody laid hands on them.” They demand very specific mentions, yet the criticisms that they raise are themselves not found in Biblical specifics. Rather, they base their criticisms on Biblical principles. It’s insincere to then say that the manifestation cannot, therefore, be supported using the same approach.

If one is to believe, based upon the Scripture’s supposed silence, that the manifestation is something to be avoided, the same must commit to a very subtle form of hypocrisy, particularly if he denies that the silence can also be an endorsement.

After all, if the Scripture doesn’t address it, should not they be silent to condemn it, especially if they are so concerned about adding to the Scripture? Most who reject the manifestation do so because it is “extra-Biblical”. Yet their condemnation of the manifestation is itself “extra-Biblical”. We don’t see the apostles or Christ specifically condemning the “Slain in the Spirit” phenomenon. So if anything, the Bible’s silence on the issue should lead them to be silent on the issue; that is, again, if they are really that concerned with adding to the Bible.

But, in fact, that’s not their position. They base their opposition upon Biblical principles. If then the opposition is based upon principles like “defending the faith”, should we not then first look to see if the manifestation can be supported by Biblical principles?

In fact, it is supported by Biblical principles. My response to critics can be summarized in four premises that lead to one conclusion. Each premise is based upon a Biblical principle, and the principles together make a solid, undeniable conclusion, that the manifestation can be supported with scripture. My argument is as follows:

Premise A: God manifests His Presence.
Premise B: God’s Manifested Presence can cause a physical reaction.
Premise C: The Spirit dwells in us.
Premise D: The Spirit and His power can be transferred through touch.
Conclusion: Therefore, being “Slain in the Spirit” is Biblical.

So we take Biblical principles and apply them to being “Slain in the Spirit”. You won’t see that term in the Bible, but neither will you see “rapture” or “Bible” in the Bible. Just because something is not specifically mentioned – chapter and verse – does not mean that the foundational principles for it are not. The question we must ask then is not, “Is it in the Bible?” The question we must ask is, “Is it in God’s Nature?” And, if someone were to disagree, they would have to deny one or all of the premises above.

Premise A is so Biblically solid that I don’t feel I even need to show scriptural support for it. For we know that, in fact, God manifested Himself to people, time and time again. The same goes for premise C.

What about premise B? Does the manifested presence of God sometimes cause people to physically react? Indeed, it does.

“And it came to pass, when the priests were come out of the holy place, that the cloud filled the house of the LORD, So that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud: for the glory of the LORD had filled the house of the LORD.” – 1 Kings 8:10-11

“They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.” – John 18:5-6

“At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.” – Acts 26:13-14

In the instances above, those who fell at God’s glory did not do so voluntarily and did not do so out of reverence. They did not faint, and they did not collapse in fear. And they did not fall back out of surprise (yes, that’s an actual argument someone tried). They were simply unable to stand in the presence of God.

In each of the instances above, they fell because that is what the Glory and presence of God caused to happen.  It is very clear, from the Scriptures above, that God’s manifested presence can cause the physical human body to react.

Again, we are not looking for this specific instance: a preacher lays hands on someone and that person falls backwards. Rather, we are searching to see if the principle, that God’s manifested presence sometimes causes a physical reaction, is well founded.

Some would argue, “But in the Bible, they fell forward, not backwards like at revivals”. And they would be correct in speaking of other references besides the ones above. In the Scriptures above, they fell backwards and were also unable to stand. It is obvious that the manifested presence of God causes physical and emotional reactions. In the case with the priests, they were unable to stand.

But I don’t even think that’s the main issue for opponents. The effects of God’s presence on a human are both plainly and often seen all throughout the Old and New Testaments.

The challenger might here interject, “Yes, but nobody laid hands on them!” That leads us to premise D.

So how about it? Can the power of God be transferred through touch?

“When handkerchiefs or aprons that had merely touched his skin were placed on sick people, they were healed of their diseases, and evil spirits were expelled.” – Acts 19:12

“Jesus realized at once that healing power had gone out from him, so he turned around in the crowd and asked, ‘Who touched my robe?’” – Mark 5:30

“Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.” – 2 Timothy 2:16

“Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” – Acts 8:17

So we see, from scripture, that spiritual things can be transferred and given through the laying on of hands. The Spirit and His power can be transferred through human touch.

And what happens when the Holy Spirit and His power are present? In some cases, people are unable to stand or otherwise react physically. We see the reactions to the Glory of God all throughout scripture.

So to say that the manifestation is unbiblical, one must deny one or all of these premises. Otherwise, he cannot reject the conclusion.

Premise A: God manifests His Presence.
Premise B: God’s Manifested Presence can cause physical reaction.
Premise C: The Spirit dwells in us.
Premise D: The Spirit and His power can be transferred through touch.
Conclusion: Therefore, being “Slain in the Spirit” is Biblical.

Argument #2
Being “Slain in the Spirit” is Present in Other Religious Faiths or It Can Be Counterfeited

This next argument is a rather weak one that seems to be based more so on fear than on scripture. The argument is that, because it can be faked or duplicated, it must, therefore, be rejected. Opponents often reference Kundalini.

But think of the concept of the anti-Christ. If Christ’s identity can be faked then is Christ Himself therefore to be rejected? Of course not!

My point is that the existence of the fake does not prove the absence of the real. In fact, the enemy duplicates all sorts of God’s manifestations:

1. Moses vs. Egyptian Sorcerers
2. Prophets vs. Psychics
3. Word of Knowledge vs. Divination
4. Tongues vs. Satanic Tongues
5. Christ vs. Anti-Christ
6. Gospel vs. False Gospel
7. Church vs. Cult
8. Prayer vs. Incantation

You can counterfeit even the purest of things. This is why we are to judge with righteous judgment, according to the Holy Spirit.

“Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” – John 7:24

“For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:” – 1 Corinthians 12:8-10

The Church has been given the gift of discernment. We are to judge between the real and the fake. We have the Holy Spirit to guide us in these matters. He reveals, and He reminds. He guides us in the new and happening. At the same time, He grounds us in the foundational truths. He is our guide in all these things. So don’t let the fake discourage you from experiencing the real. If we reject the manifestation because of the existence of counterfeits, we must do the same with all else.