So here’s the question JCE… Are Pentecostal/Charismatics agents of revelation? Meaning, are they receiving new instruction from God that they can hear… does God speak to them audibly (even in a “still small voice")?

BeHim are you talking about God revealing new doctrine type things, or are you suiggesting that God does not guide us in understadning scripture, or lead us.

The Bible seems to suggest the Spirit will teach us, gives us words to speak etc..

If you mean that you are wary of the idea that God is providing people with special extr-biblical instrutions on the “hidden truths” then I am with you.

If you are saying the Holy Spirit no longer has a function, then I would need to see that in scripture, becasue everything I have read and studied says the opposite.

JCE - Indeed, too long of a theological dissertation for the purposes of this blog.  I’ve done the same myself here, when something I felt passionate about caught my eye (and my keyboard).  But since I enjoy participating, I’ve determined to be more careful.

You did make my point early in your post though:

[Absolutely, if we are only referring to what makes one “saved”, and therefore joint heirs together as members of the Body of Christ, this is a non-essential issue and should never be allowed to surface in a way that could divide us on that plain.]

That is exactly what I was saying . . .

So BeHim - PLEASE.  I had no intention of beginning a theological debate. That is not needed in this forum, because I think the target audience is pastors and church staff.  We already have wrestled with theology and doctrinal issues - or we wouldn’t be in vocational ministry. 

My point, as you know because you’ve already commented on it, was to agree with Garrett, that one sign of church health is being able to cooperate with other churches (and denominations) that have quite different doctrinal views, on behalf of our community and our shared commitment to the essentials - reaching people with the Gospel of Jesus.

My comparison to dispensational and charismatic theology was for no other purpose than to show these as non-essentials that don’t keep us from being ministry partners in the community.

Here was Todd’s point for discussion:

[Think about each statement as it relates to your church. Identify strengths and build on them. Identify weaknesses and take measures to improve those areas.]

The one about cooperation jumped out at me because we’ve recently talked at staff meetings about how we can come along side some other smaller churches.  The question about doctrine came up.  We hashed it out.  No solid plans, but we did agree (as a staff at least) that we should be willing to link arms in service to the community with any Christian church - including Catholics.

Please don’t be tempted to argue with me about Catholics.  I bring it up because Garrett’s point about church health was exactly what our staff has been discussing recently - and that is where we landed. Now our task is to put our money where our mouth is.  I’ll keep you posted.  As a large commuter church in a declining neighborhood, I hope we’ll learn to be better partners with small churches.

I’d love a response with practical advice about that specifically, I’ll be sure to pass the advice along at the next staff meeting.  But please not theology lessons, okay? 

BTW – everyone on this blog is completely anonymous to me, including you and JCE.

BeHim,

1.) No I do not know Wendi beyond the three or four posts of hers I have read here.  To my knowledge, I do not know anyone posting here.

2.) No, BeHim, I’m not suggesting there is no one way to do Church. But I am suggesting that the way to do Church, at least from my limited experience, whenever it does end up being the right way, will always be void of legalism, permeated with grace and tolerant of weaker brethren not yet matured beyond their need to “GET IT RIGHT”!

3.) I don’t know BeHim, you decide...if the theological premise that baptism in the Holy Spirit and cessation of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, were proven to you as completely false, and you knew the experience for the early Church in that regard to be available, alive and well in the Church today...how would you answer your own question about agents of revelation and new instruction? I’ve never met a P/C Spirit Filled believer who made such a claim; only heard a lot of accusations about such.

Wendi,

I will do my best to avoid future verbosity and theological extendedness.

You wrote, “My comparison to dispensational and charismatic theology was for no other purpose than to show these as non-essentials that don’t keep us from being ministry partners in the community.”

I believe that you truly mean that, and many of us who are P/C have absolutely nothing in us to keep us from walking with and working side by side in ministry with those who do not embrace our understanding and experience, especially since a significant portion of those who are P/C (self included) have come here from a cessationist background.  We could not see before and now we do.

The problem that exists as far as inability to flow together in fellowship, worship, preaching, teaching and ministry outside the Church, comes almost exclusively from those who reject our belief and experience, not the other way around. We would be very unlikely to require a non charismatic to operate in a gift of the Holy Spirit when he/she does not even believe in it let alone have the power to do so. But you can rest assured that the majority of anti-charismatics would expect us to not prophesy, not give words of wisdom or knowledge, not lay hands on the sick expecting them to be healed, not cast out demons...and definitely not speak or pray in tongues if we are in their presence, their church or working together in ministering to thers.

I’m so sorry, but for us, these gifts are essential ingredients in authentic ministry and to lay them down, treat them as theologically insignificant opinions, and refuse to go there would require direct disobedience to the leading presence of the Holy Spirit and denouncing His presence and purpose in our lives.

NO CAN DO!

Since I think I started the HS discussion, let me see if I can bring it back on point.

Personally, I think any and every gift can be abused. Every strongly held belief can become an obsession.  Either is UNHEALTHY . . . for the individual, the church, the kingdom witness of the universal church. 

JCE - My experience has been the same as yours.  The “anti-charismatic” camp is much more militant in espousing their position and criticizing those on the other side. It’s dishonoring to the unity of the church.  None of us should be asked to lay down their gifts. God intends to use every element of our “wiring” as we serve.  Don’t ever do it, no matter what the cessationist asks.

I would bet that what Jeff Garrett had in mind when he wrote that healthy churches cooperate, is an AG, Baptist, and Lutheran, church going together to sponsor a neighborhood outreach.

Such a thing is unlikely to happen if any one has been vocal against the doctrines and practices of another.  It would serve us well to think through what potential ministry we compromise when we choose to criticize. 

The ED for our local YFC and ESA chapters both are part of a large Four Square church in town.  Both are often invited as guest speakers, but would never get such invitations if they’d been publicly critical of particular churches or belief systems.  Because they are offered such platforms, the ministry in our community is blessed.  I am a trainer with a Christian publishing company.  If I made it a point to criticize Christian churches with different doctrinal views than my own, I’d not only lose my job, I’d compromise my kingdom influence.

There is an influential pastor of a mega-church here in CA that has done that very thing (not just anti-charismatic, anti-seeker, emergent, women, . . .) I like to envision him being assigned to his section in the heavenly choir, and God making him sing for all eternity, standing between the woman pastors, charismatics, postmoderns and emergents - with BH and RW leading choir practice every Wednesday night.

I find the mean spirited methods or JM and others to be scripturally wrong. 

Please do not reply and get us onto a JM, BH, RW rabbit trail.  No need, no purpose served, neither or us persuading the other -we already know that, right?

JCE,

I didn’t feel it went over the edge… Truth is, I enjoyed it a lot! I just know that that fella who runs this forum likes us kids to stay on point whenever we can. (Thank, Dad!) And your point is well taken, for the health of the church in general. One of the things I think non-Pentecostal/Charismatics find very disturbing about P/Cers is that whole prophecy as new revelation thing, and based on my experience with it, I agree with their assessment.

I have found it VERY disturbing when somebody has opened their mouth in a prayer service and begun with something like “Oh my children...” and then went on to spout the same exact stuff he’s been saying in meetings et cetera forever, or just throwing a couple of interesting uplifting minor prophet quotes together. You know what I’m talking about, right? “I’ve longed to gather you together, I want to pour out my blessing...” ya da ya da ya da. Don’t get me wrong, my theology is definitely Charismatic, I’m even a bona-fide tongue-speaker, but let’s face it, this theology gets abused… And THAT is unhealthy, and leads to the kind of backlash you see from the anti-P/C set. Who can blame them?

Which is why I try to be as charitable with everybody as I possibly can, even when I disagree. (I think that’s a HUGE one, and we’ve seen it illustrated time and time again both positively and negatively on this very forum!)

Later,
Peter

Peter,

That is soooooooooooo true Bro!!! And non P/Cer’s have valid evidences for such foolishness in our camp to be sure.

In such times I want to stand up and say in a deep toned, authoritatively sounding voice..."Thus saith the LORDAHH...I DID NOT SAY THAT!!!

Wendi,

Amen and thanks.  You are an encourager to be sure.

Actually though, that very thing is not at all out of the question. I am currently seeking His face for understanding as to whether it is in the plans for me to embark on another church plant.  That is exactly the kind of church my heart is panting after. I’m from San Diego, but serving in the Houston area right now.  We’ll see.

No, that’s not what I’m saying, a worldview is more than A belief but a “set” of beliefs.

Worldview - a worldview is a network of presuppositions which is not verified by the procedures of natural science, but in terms of which every aspect of man’s knowledge and experience is interpreted and interrelated.

A presupposition is an elementary assumption or basic commitment or foundational principle

JCE, you said [So here’s the question JCE… Are Pentecostal/Charismatics agents of revelation? Meaning, are they receiving new instruction from God that they can hear]

Well, speaking as a guy who is P/C in my outlook… absolutely NOT… and I am afraid that some of them actually think they are. I totally agree with you. God’s revelation comes through Himself and His Son and His Holy Spirit… who has spoken through the prophets, so therefore through the Written Word (alongside the Incarnate Word).

SO off topic, but here’s one for you. Unhealthy churches see themselves as instruments of Revelation, Healthy churches see themselves as instruments of the Gospel, the revealed Word of God… (There… it’s back on topic!)

BeHim,

My thing about being pi..ed off that God hasn’t spoken audibly to me was a joke!

Question for you...how did Paul come to be saved?  I’ll answer it myself...he was accosted by Jesus Himself. The last I checked Jesus was the WORD! You seem to have an agenda to somehow take me as a representative P/Cer to the place of being people who are outside the realm of orthodoxy and adherents of heretical doctrine. It ain’t gunna work bro!

I am totally at peace giving you ammunition to fire my direction by stretching relationship with the Word you are referring to.  I’m not a Bible worshipper and to this day have found no Scriture to suggest I ought to be.  To be quite frank, you have to make a faith based ASSUMPTION to make the 66 books of the Bible be literally from the hermeneutic perspective, let alone spiritual truth, the explicit point of reference Scripture is referring to when you wrote,
“Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God… you’re undermining Scripture itself and if you’re truly Christ’s disciple you’re going to “abide in His Word” John 8:31 through oral teaching or written.”

I believe as much as you do that these books are the infallible, inerrant, Holy Spirit breathed Word of God.  I even wrote earlier that nothing would come that would conflict with them. But I have to tell you I do not now nor ever will have a level of intimate REAL RELATIONSHIP with the Bible that I do with Jesus, the Holy Spirit and my Father.

I prefer to take the Spirit of the Word which gives life than to turn my life in Him into death by living by the letter of the Word.

Your source may very well be Scripture, and I have no problem at all with your indocrinated choice to live with that. I am an extremely blessed man to be fortunate enough to have Scripture, even more blessed to have been fortunate enough to learn the original languages and develop the tools of studying Scripture that I have. I cannot, in fact, read any portion of the Bible without amazement at the way the Lord speaks to and works in my life through it.

Evidently, it has never been your experience to meet a person who had never been preached to, never been to Church, never even heard the name of Jesus, never read a single Bible verse nor heard a single Bible verse, who was moved upon by the Holy Spirit, convicted of their sinful state and visited by the Lord, repented and received Him as their LORD and SAVIOUR, and gone on to maturity in Christ.

Well brother, it has been my experience on more than one occasion.  you see, the Word was made flesh and came and dwelt among us.  Not only that, but from the perspective I’m reading in what you write, even the power of Scripture as the Word of God is undermined and even worse not recognized for the POWER it truly possesses.  BeHim, the Word of God, as Scripture, is IN THE EARTH!  Yes, in its canonized form it is all you say it is, but it is far, far more.  It cannot be contained or more appropriately imprisoned by that process of canonization so that the only way life can be found through it is to declare the book the ALL in ALL source of the Christian life, and then superimpose upon its letter our man created literature and science based methodology for apprehending its life giving power.  Scripture in its format of the Bible, is a visible manifestation of the Spirit of the Word of God. 100% His Word.  100% infallible.  100% inerrant. And my ability or inability to rightly interpret it has absolutely ZERO to say about that! It does however, providing my study received truth and understanding of the Word through the Holy Spirit, have a great deal to say about the authenticity and authority of anything I would teach or speak into another person’s life.

I will spend a little bit of time in your camp concerning the Word, and possibly even repent and recant of my position, if you can give me even one single passage of Scripture contained in our 66 books of the Bible that INSTRUCTED us to gather those specific books, compile them together, declare them to be the complete revelation of God, and to establish the principles of hermeneutics as the only valid means of understanding what God has spoken or is speaking. To do so you cannot just be automatic when calling those compiled and canonized books to be what the Word in Scripture is speaking of. You’ll have to literally give me Scripture from within the Bible detailing the process ordered by God that resulted in what we call today the Holy Bible.

I’m jealous, can’t go see Narnia yet. I know without a doubt you are my brother in the Lord, and whether we come into agreement here or not, I speak only love, grace and peace to you in the Name of Jesus.

JCE

I hope you are not suggesting that a person can be saved through general revelation since this would fly in the face of Romans 1 and the Noetic effect of sin.

[I prefer to take the Spirit of the Word which gives life than to turn my life in Him into death by living by the letter of the Word.]

Why wouldn’t you want to live by the infallible, inerrant, Holy Spirit Breathed word of God unless you’re suggesting there is a better more fruitful more righteous way of living outside of the Word of God.

Are you creating your own moral standard or is God whispering a new moral standard in your ear?  You see, you keep communicating two opposing beliefs.

[Your source may very well be Scripture, and I have no problem at all with your indocrinated choice to live with that.]

What other source of revelation are you going to live by other than Scripture?

Is God whispering sweet messages in your ear by which you are to live by like our ancient heretical Gnostics?

Scripture is the ONLY, and I mean ONLY, rule for Faith and Practice which you adherently oppose.

[I will spend a little bit of time in your camp concerning the Word, and possibly even repent and recant of my position, if you can give me even one single passage of Scripture contained in our 66 books of the Bible that INSTRUCTED us to gather those specific books, compile them together, declare them to be the complete revelation of God, and to establish the principles of hermeneutics as the only valid means of understanding what God has spoken or is speaking. To do so you cannot just be automatic when calling those compiled and canonized books to be what the Word in Scripture is speaking of. You’ll have to literally give me Scripture from within the Bible detailing the process ordered by God that resulted in what we call today the Holy Bible.]

So are you suggesting because the Scripture doesn’t provide a detailed process of canonization that we can reject Scripture?

You can’t give in one hand and then take away with the other.  “You can’t say the Bible is the infallible, inerrant; Holy Spirit breathed Word of God.” Then attack the very canonization of Scripture.

Let me ask you some questions JCE… Are there books in the Bible that should not be there?  Did God make a mistake in the past 2000 years in giving us the 66 books of the Bible?  Is special revelation not complete?

I cannot believe that I am arguing for the canonicity of the infallible, inerrant, Holy Spirit breathed Word of God to a person who actually claims that it is the infallible, inerrant; Holy Spirit breathed Word of God.

You can’t give with one hand and take away with the other hand.

I believe the New Testament books of the Bible are a fallible collection of infallible books, since the church’s canonization of the Bible is fallible.

Are you going to align with Rome’s position that the New Testament books of the Bible are an infallible collection of infallible books, since Rome states the church is infallible?

Or are you going to align with the higher critical heresy of limited inerrancy that the Word of God is fallible and in some way incomplete or inadequate?

If you have any other position on the canonization of Scripture, I would like to hear it.

Three tests or benchmarks for canonicity of the books of the Bible:
1. Apostolic origin (written by an Apostle or written by someone under the direct sanction of an Apostle.
2. Reception by the primitive church (circulated letters of the epistles) did the books have he reception of the early primitive Christian community as authoritative.
3. Compatibility. (the compatibility of the doctrine of the controversial books with the doctrine of the inner core of New Testament books that were not controversial) i.e. Hebrews

Narnia was great BTW.  I highly recommend it.