We also should rightly be passionate about reaching people who need Jesus. It should be extremely important for us to want to contextualize the message and the function of our ministries into the culture we are trying to reach. It should grieve us when things are done poorly or insensitively in our churches, and lost people are unnecessarily disinterested, confused or turned away.
So how do we see the full release of the gifts of the Spirit and pastor the use of these gifts in such a way that ensures their highest edificational value and impact?
Before I share with my thoughts about this, I need to clarify where I stand on some things personally-so that you can pick up on the context from which I speak.
So how to we practice 1 Corinthians 14 which challenges us to adjust the use of the gifts in a way that brings the greatest degree of edification?
There are five principles that guide my pastoral leadership in this area. Let me humbly suggest them as a basis for dialogue on this subject. By no means do I think that I the expert with all the answers. I simply share my best attempts at elevating edification in the use of the gifts.
Let me start with the easiest (I will save the other four principles for later posts).
#1 - DEMONSTRATION
In my opinion, the hesitancy we often have about the use of the gifts is more about their traditional lack of transformation and also the hyper-emotional style in which they are often shared. I don't want to be offensive in being this transparent, but I have to admit that I have been in many services where a gift has been shared and it has very little transformational impact.
It is true that our churches can at times settle into a 'pentecostal liturgy' where a vocal gift is expected at specific times in really good worship services. But when the Holy Spirit truly is involved in the manifestation of a gift--there should be a traceable result.
I think we all agree that effective use of the gifts is one of the most relevant means of ministry that we have at our disposal. What is more relevant to a sick person than a gift of healing? What is more relevant to a person needing guidance than a word of wisdom? I could go on!
But what about when people or churches cease to effectively use the gifts? Sometimes we form habits in our services that may not truly be a demonstration of God's power.
What's the solution? Let me suggest two applications to this first principle:
When there are testimonies of changed lives due to our use of the gifts there will be an explosion of desire for more. When we hear of someone being saved because of a specific prophetic message, or someone who had cancer who was healed, or a bi-lingual person who was in a service who understood both the tongue and the interpretation--there will be no debate as to the relevance of the gifts.
But if there is a pattern of use with no testimony of power, then we should rightly pause and evaluate not only how we can increase our relevance--but also how we can increase the true manifestation of GOD'S POWER.
13 comments:
Absolutely! I heartily agree with everything you've just said and it excites me to hear it from somebody not in Chi Alpha.
I've seen many wonderful displays of God's power through the gifts and I've unfortunately also observed many simply following a programmed response: typically tongues and interpretation or being slain in the Spirit as the two most abused manifestations.
Our revivalist tradition is both our greatest asset and our greatest curse. Asset in that it drives us to strive for a passionate and exuberant faith, but our curse for the same reason.
I watched "Jesus Camp" the other day, which isn't a particularly fair depiction of Pentecostalism, but not surprising and one scene in particular stands out when a small girl describes the difference between a "dead" church and a "living" church. I had to sit back and agree with the video's unspoken criticism on that note that we have brainwashed many into thinking that God only moves in certain ways.
So, if a quiet point hits in worship, then obviously somebody has to give a tongue and interpretation... or if there's an alter call, then people have to fall out in the Spirit because these are the things that we've said are the "signs" of God's presence and power.
How short sighted we have become?
1 John 4:1
1 Cor 14:32
I recently read a 2006 book entitled, "Eat, Pray, Love" by Elizabeth Gilbet. Ms. Gilbet gives an intelligent and witty true account of her spiritual journey. She begins the book at an all time low – an account of divorce and depression at the age of 31 while professionally quite successful. She then takes the reader though her search for God, a search taking her to Italy, India an Indonesia.
The book begins with the author in NY. After an initial crisis induced prayer, the next step on her journey was an unexpected desire for a spiritual teacher. He new boyfriend attended spiritual services. He advised the following: “If you’re not too freaked out by the idea of being in a room with several hundred people chanting God’s name in Sanskrit, you can come sometime.”
Here is her response: “I joined him the following Tuesday night. Far from being freaked out by these regular-looking people singing to God, I instead felt my soul rise diaphanous in the wake of that chanting. I walked home that night feeling like the air could move through me, like I was clean linen fluttering on a clothesline, like New York itself had become a city made of rice paper—and I was light enough to run across every rooftop. I started going to the chants every Tuesday.”
How is it that this intelligent author, (a finalist for the PEN/Hemingway Award for her story collection, a finalist for the ‘National Book Award and the National Book Critics Circle Award for a previous novel), was attracted and not repulsed by a room full of people chanting to a god?
Sometimes I am confused at who exactly makes up the culture of people who reject a demonstrative altar time and the physical evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Religions of other cultures are becoming more commonly embraced, and these religions are more demonstratively mystic than ours. So why are we afraid our services will become embarrassingly spiritually demonstrative? If a room full of people chanting to a false god is attractive, a room full of people praising the true God should be captivating.
Our communities are filled with people in crisis like Ms. Gant.
I believe there are many intelligent unbelievers looking for God, who would openly and gratefully accept the chance to meet God on a deep level. There are intelligent unbelievers who would enter a church service for the first time, hear an utterance in tongues with interpretation and return again and again because they would be captivated by the deep things of God.
But when the Holy Spirit truly is involved in the manifestation of a gift--there should be a traceable result.
And how do you measure this result? I don't think the results are immediately traceable. I also think the operation of the gifts, along with the worship and preaching, have a composite, accumulative effect, which cannot be linked to any one aspect of the service.
One sermon, one worship song, one use of the gifts may not bring dramatic and immediate results, but over time the effect can be powerful. Just like one tile does not make the mosaic picture. It's when all the pieces are creatively put together that the picture emerges. I think the creativity of the Holy Spirit in knowing which parts to insert, in which place, and at the right time makes the service transformational and beautiful.
Growing up in a rural Pentecostal church, you could set your clock by the messages in tongues by the two self appointed elderly ladies in the church. At a point in the service when it would be the most disruptive, and when it would scare the bejesus out of the younger-folks (who were already scared about missing the rapture and the Soviet threat)—out it would come! First the tongues (loud and impassioned) followed by the interpretation (usually in KJV verbiage). I was always a little surprised that the God of the universe didn’t have something more specific to say to us beyond, “The Lord is pleased with your praise” or “God sees your faithfulness.” Important encouragement for sure, just not very specific!
I’ve come to recognize now that these were emotion-laden people (depression era folks)—they had experienced hard times (and still were). They were godly people—just not very sophisticated. It seemed more that they were simply trying to vocalize “groanings to deep for words.” What matters to me today is that the gifts of the Spirit are not divorced from the fruits of the Spirit. I have little concern for your spiritual manifestations if I can’t observe your spiritual lifestyle. The fact is that God is not interested in people’s spiritual lives…he’s interested in their entire lives… “Verily, verily I say unto you…Thus saith the Lord…!”
But if there is a pattern of use with no testimony of power, then we should rightly pause and evaluate not only how we can increase our relevance--but also how we can increase the true manifestation of GOD'S POWER.
This is it...you hit the nail on the head. I think most of us want the gifts to flow freely. It's just that we've grown weary of having a gift exhibited in a service and have it completely tank whatever was happening in the service. Instead of a feeling of "wow, that was powerful," it's a feeling of "wow, I think I might crawl under the chair and count the pieces of gum...wait a minute...I can't do that...I'm the pastor!"
Since a series on the gifts I did back in March (processing some of these thoughts with the church), our church has kind of been in what you would call a "pause" on the gifts. I really think it's one of the healthiest things we've done in the short life of our church (not that it has been easy). 2 things have happened since:
1. A greater revelation of the fact that the gifts aren't ONLY for our public gatherings, but for every day life.
2. An understanding that there are more gifts than the highly public tongues, interpretation, and prophecy. The "other gifts" are just as vital.
Scott
Some very good comments here. One of the things that I would think most pastors in the AG deal with. I think the points brought up Jeff are right on.
One of my frustrations as a Pastor ( and in retrospect of growing up in the AG) is that many of those that are functioning in the gifts, tongues specifically, on Sunday morning, are quite frequently the most judgmental, self-righteous, and non-loving people when it comes to the family of faith. Many deem themselves self-appointed old testament prophets ready to set everyone straight. This is not always true, I also know a few that are very used in the gifts and have the life of character and love of God flow through them.
Also how many pastors have had to deal with the emotionally unstable (really need a therapist type) prophets in the congregation?
Can't say we have all of this worked out yet but one of the ways we have helped stop some of the abuse by the unstable and unloving is to require that anyone that wants to be prophetic in the congregation must join our leadership team in prayer prior to the service. Otherwise we do not recognize them as a prophet or speaking on behalf of God. If you aren't serious enough to spend an hour in prayer prior to the service to get into unity with the rest of the leadership team, there is no way I am trusting you to have the floor during the service.
This pretty much eliminated almost all of those that were unstable and really off balance. It seems this type is also very against accountability and doesn't really pray that much after all. :)
Our next step has been to challenge those that are being used of God to make sure that the rest of their life lines up with the fruit of the spirit and the use of the spirit to guide there lives outside of Sunday morning church (ie. work, family, neighborhood.) Yes they might have a word from God, but nothing destroys credibility for long term ministry more then having a message every Sunday, but being void of love and the "anointing" in real life outside of the church.
We also talk freely with those of us that gather in prayer on whether we thought it was of God or not, or which parts were of God. Sometimes human behavior keeps us talking after the actual God part is done.
Just a few ideas that have really helped me. Not saying we have really figured it all out or that I think we really understand anything clearly about the moving of the Spirit...but we hope to someday.
"that many of those that are functioning in the gifts, tongues specifically, on Sunday morning, are quite frequently the most judgmental, self-righteous, and non-loving people when it comes to the family of faith"
That is so true it isn't even funny.
Also, the comment about the interpretation of tongues always being so vague and simple - absolutely spot on. We know God wants us to "praise Him" and so on. I want to hear a prophecy or tongues/interpretation just once that isn't trite and cutesy.
It is exciting to have a prophecy that introduces the speaker's message and it also is encouraging to the speaker. It is cool when a prophecy dovetails with the next chorus in the PowerPoint series. It is good to have a prophecy that encourages one family (that you know nothing about) return to the mission field and then they decide to go based partially on the prophecy. It is comforting to prophecy that we can stand in faith and look to God to meet our needs and then in the next week you are surprised your job of 19 years ends. These are some of the prophecies I remember off the top of my head.
The preceding prophecies may not appear wonderfully powerful to the entire congregation, but they are important and part of whole. Utterance gifts do not need to shake the ground to accomplish God's purpose.
I find it interesting that we can spend so much time teaching on the gifts of the Spirit, and the level of confidence with which we speak. Especially since Paul (and Peter) make only casual references to lists of gifts. I also find it interesting that we try to make the events of the book of Acts normative for our Sunday worship gatherings--when they describe the activity of the Spirit over an extended period of time, in a variety of settings. Most interesting though is our insistence on Luke's description of the HS baptism experience as the end-all in Christian spirituality. This is interesting in that it doesn't find much prominence or press in any of the other writings to the churches by the author's of the epistles (including Paul).
I went to one of our small Bible Colleges where the "gifts" were often said to be in operation. After attending hundreds of chapel services over a period of 4 years, I'll have to say my most favorite was when a visiting Rabbi was asked to address the student body on what orthodox Jews believe. During an an open question and answer, some student contested the Rabbi about Isaiah 53..that was followed by an "econ-omy-honda-shappa-sacdra-sacdraseea" message in tongues and then the interpretation, which went like this...."He, Hee,Hee is the Messiah" I was totally embarrassed for the poor Jewish man and our little Bible school. In all the years I have been in the Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches, I have heard very few NT examples of true prophecy. NT prophecy is for edification,exhortation and comfort.It's not for letting off steam. It's not so the emotional believer can bring confusion into the body..In fact, Paul said that he would "rather bring 5 words of instruction" than "ten thousand words in an unknown tongue" in the public meeting. Paul never advocated what we see as a common practice today... the free-for-all,anything goes charade.He told us to be sensitive to the unbeliever that would come among us. He told us not to whip up the saints to all speak in tongues and "create" an environment in which God could work. In fact Paul said if we intentionally did that, the unbeliever would leave saying that we were "mad" (1Cor. 14)Thats not a good thing no matter how you cut it.
Pete Pentecostal said: "The preceding prophecies may not appear wonderfully powerful to the entire congregation, but they are important and part of whole." Why not just pray for the Spirit's guidance to talk with your friends and take responsibility for your words. Why do we have to call spiritual guidance or advice "prophecy"? Isn't the point of being "Spirit-filled" that we have the Spirit operating in our lives, every conversation, every action, every attitude? Were there times when Jesus was not Spirit led or "prophesying"?
May I suggest something to our AG blogging community? I think it is time to do some self-policing.
In my church, if someone sends an unsigned letter it is immediately thrown in the trash. If someone does not have the character to put their name to their thoughts and opinions, we do not respond. Period. No exceptions.
I would like to call us all to stop responding to anyone who posts anonymously. If you are going to blog, let us know who you are. If you don't know how to set up a profile, learn how before you decide to wade into the blogging waters.
This type of forum requires a certain level of transparency. Anonymity in my experience is a dangerous place to live on many levels. On the Future AG blog, some of the most caustic, inflammatory, and uncharitable responses have come by way of "anonymous."
From here on out, I vote that we ignore all anonymous postings. I would also encourage bloggers to take a few minutes and complete your profile. Letting people know who you are can go a long way toward helping you to keep your comments between the ditches.
My thought for the day.
I have made an interesting observation through the years about the exercising of tongues and interpretation in a local church. I have been in churches where it was taught that tongues are a prayer out of the worshiper's spirit unto God (1 Corinthians 14:2), and all prophesy is to be directed horizontally to the body of Christ.
In these churches, invariably, the interpretation will always be vertically directed to God.
I have also been part of churches where this distinction is not a part of the teaching on spiritual gifts. In these churches it seems that tongues and interpretation are often interpreted as a word of prophecy.
My question to the blogging community is this: do you insist or regularly practice one pattern over the other? Do you think it matters?
Is it possible that in churches where the second model is practiced, that while encouraging, even powerfully impacting words are given, that an element of the power of tongues and interpretation are lost when the prayer offered to God is not interpreted?
Post a Comment