Life after "Strange Fire"

I've made no secret of my struggle to maintain interest or passion in theological/spiritual matters this past year or two.  I still believe in God (not so sure about the church thanks to past experience).  But this is a work in progress - certainly not an unfinished story.  A few issues sparked my interest - for example, John Macarthur's "Strange Fire" conference of a few months ago.

A brief history with Macarthur:  As I was growing up in Dunstable and discovering an experiential relationship with God, my church and senior pastor were going in polar opposite directions.  And Macarthur's "Charismatic Chaos" was the instruction manual flogged around Dunstable for that.  I have always fervently believed my pastor Stanley Jebb's motto that; "the unexamined opinion is hardly worth holding".  So I read "Charismatic Chaos" and found it thoroughly interesting.  It didn't persuade me in the slightest of anything - apart from human beings are human beings and make mistakes.  Oh - it also persuaded me that John Macarthur was a throughly negative, unpleasant individual who was having a nasty effect on the pastor and my church - and it was something and someone I didn't want to be like in the slightest!

So the mention of "John Macarthur" usually makes me roll my eyes.  That's why when C J Mahaney started preaching for Macarthur - some reformed/charismatics were thrilled and thought it meant Macarthur was "softening" in his anti-charismatic views and maybe the bald-headed one was impressing him with his sense.  Rubbish.  All "Strange Fire" proved was that in fact Mahaney is taking the same path my pastor in Dunstable took, and is taking all possible steps to reject charismatic life in his church (apart from apostolic authority - in all but name).  A quick glance at Mahaney's "church programme" proves that - no room for the Holy Spirit there!

So I was interested today to find a You-Tube video of Macarthur speaking about the follow-up from the "Strange Fire" conference.  He has taken a lot of stick (quite rightly) for his harsh and intolerant suggestions that charismatics are not Christians.  This is his answer - and essentially he sticks by his views.  Another book is promised to answer his critics (around 26 minutes).  But what particularly interested me was Macarthur's taking on of Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones and John Piper in particular (38:12) - namely that pastors and preachers have NO business seeking an anointing or unction from on high to preach!

Astounding.

Here it is;

The "Dangers" of Charismatic Worship!

I've still been thinking and lurking-reading the continuing "Strange Fire" and John Macarthur controversy.  I do look forward to reading the book when it becomes available in this country at some point.  But the issue Macarthur has with "charismatic" worship does deserve careful thought.  Do the songs we sing and love potentially deceive and lead us astray?  Or in fact do they bring us close to the Throne of Grace and a living encounter with the Risen Son of God?

There are two scenarios I can think of in my church experience.  The more reformed/functional cessationist settings were my home church in Dunstable when Stanley Jebb had taken it out of the charismatic movement and essentially banned all choruses.  We sang hymns and raising of hands was not approved (and tongues were most certainly forbidden!).  The other reformed/functional cessationist situation was when I lived in Bristol and attended the SGM church for 2 years - and most of their SGM songs were "cross-centered".

The other scenario of course has been the charismatic churches I have attended, and the glorious conferences that seek to teach the whole gospel - Cross through to ascension and glorification and outpoured Holy Spirit.  Now cessationists would shudder I am sure at the examples I present - but if you can ignore the raised arms and upturned faces to heaven - hear the words!



I love particularly;

"You have overcome the grave, Your glory fills the highest place - what can seperate me now?  You tore the veil, You made a way when You said that it is done!!".



And this amazing one; "Worthy is the Lamb! Seated on the Throne!  I crown You now with many crowns - You reign victorious!  High and lifted up - Jesus Son of God! The Darling of Heaven crucified - worthy is the Lamb".

How much more Gospel-filled can you get?!  Because the fact is - the Son of God isn't hanging on a cross broken and dying.  So what is the point of "kneeling at the old rugged cross"?  Of course we will be forever grateful for His sacrifice, but like Pilgrim in John Bunyan's classic - that is where our burdens roll away!  We are then free to stand and march on towards the Celestial City knowing that one day we will see Him face to face!

I would just add a final video which I think strikes powerfully at the heart of this "charismatic/cessationist" controversy.  It is by Noel Tredinnick - the Music Director at All Souls Church Langham Place (neither person nor church could be called charismatic in any way!).  But Tredinnick was speaking about worship in particular - the wonderful "Prom Praise" concerts held yearly at the Royal Albert Hall in London.  And he said this (the video is below);

"Now worship is two-way.  Our hearts are being lifted through the music to Christ.  We are adoring Him - we are singing our praise to the living Saviour.  That is one way - the arrow is going up.  But at the same time there is that moment, where God comes down if you like.  The veil of His robe fills the temple - His Presence.  There is a sense of His holiness where God is coming down into our midst - and that is a very exciting moment to behold".


I would suggest that is the issue.  Cessationists want to (as it seems) put God in heaven and leave Him there.  And to suggest that He is not only willing but eager to come down and reside among His people seems to shock and horrify them.  That's nothing new - it was apparent throughout revivals through the centuries.  There have ALWAYS been the rigid prayer meetings continuing to meet weekly to pray for revival, even though outside and around them God is saving souls by the thousands.  It is that eagerness to see God come - I think - which perhaps leads some charismatics to embrace experience that is of the flesh.

But that is no excuse to change one's theology and limit God to what He can and cannot do - as Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones said quite rightly - the greatest sin of the evangelical church and all that is wrong with "Strange Fire".  As this post was touching on worship - it seems appropriate to end with another version of "The Power of the Cross" sung by Chris Bowater at the (also charismatic) Bible Week - "Grapevine".

"This Movement (Charismatic) has Diminished Music" - John Macarthur

One of the aspects of the "Strange Fire" conference that slightly staggered me and infuriated me was the utter lack of logic and consistency reported by men who proudly call themselves "men of the Word" - and indeed near the end of Macarthur's final session seems to proudly liken himself to Timothy "guarding divine revelation".  What do I mean by that?  Macarthur made many blunt and straightforward statements that many of his "spin doctor" fans sought to water down.  To be fair to Macarthur (and I respect him for it, as much as I find his sheer arrogance dislikable) - he didn't seek to do so.

And he stated rather proudly he doesn't care about offending people.  So I feel little shame in joining the right and proper robust responses against him.

He stated charismatics are, in his eyes, unsaved - and he stuck by it.  But even he seemed to flounder a little when confronting issues such as the fact that equally credible and respected theologians such as John Piper or Wayne Grudem would not agree with his hyper-cessationist, anti-charismatic views.  Adrian Warnock reported from the Q and A session in the conference that he seemed to bluster;

"With John Piper, that is a complete anomaly. That is just so off everything else about him ... Even Wayne Grudem. I look at this as an anomaly [in his theology]. I don’t know and don’t need to know where this impulse comes from".

The thrust of Macarthur's argument too about worship seems highly inconsistent.  His spin-doctor fans on Twitter seem to claim "of course he is not throwing the entire baby out with the bathwater" - apparently Macarthur likes Stuart Townend's "The Power of the Cross".  Whether he does or doesn't, or maybe doesn't realise Townend comes from Newfrontiers flagship church "Church of Christ the King" in Brighton - he is clear on his views of charismatic worship offering to the church universal.  Challies reports;

"MacArthur disagrees with this opinion. He is convinced that the contemporary style of music in the charismatic movement is the entry point of false doctrine into our churches. A church rooted in historical doctrine and hymns will be reluctant to embrace this music. This movement has diminished music by taking it out of the area of the mind and reduces it to feelings of the flesh".

There are thousands of songs from charismatic songwriters I could quote but as "the Power of the Cross" was cited - let's focus on that;



I love this song because it particularly highlights and preaches the power of the complete gospel.  And if Macarthur maybe would claim that this song from Townend is an "anomoly" like he sees Piper and Grudem's more charismatic pneumatology - I would rather counter that I think (I don't know - I haven't heard a testimony of how he wrote it) but actually Stuart Townend's charismatic experience and encounters with God indeed aided and inspired him to see the glorious gospel in it's entirety!

A key example of this is - to me - the baptism of the Holy Spirit (and for clarity's sake - I remain Lloyd-Jonesian in my understanding of this).  Macarthur presumably would class this among other "demonic" doctrines.  But I loved the way that Terry Virgo at Stoneleigh Bible Week 2000 drew the vital paralell between the ascension of Jesus the risen Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.  For those with no time to hear the clip - here's what Terry said;

"Every person filled with the Holy Spirit is a proof and demonstration that Jesus Christ is not a corpse in some hidden cave in the Middle East.  Every Christian filled with the Holy Spirit is proof that He ascended on high ... only resurrected, ascended Messiah's can give the Holy Spirit.  Dead corpses aren't very good at it.  It is a demonstration He is alive!  It is His coronation gift!".



I would counter Macarthur's vitriol that the charismatic movement has spread in such entirety because it is "offering the world what it wants" - rather I think the charismatic movement is reminded the church what real life in the New Covenant is.  Of course I would not claim, as some charismatics do, that reformed evangelicals are "dry, dead and dusty" (although some are).  Neither would I claim that ALL charismatic churches are "alive, exciting and in right relationship with the risen Christ".

I actually believe that many charismatic movements and streams have become dry, flabby and complacent.  Back in the 1970s and 80s there was much talk of "building a house for God".  House churches thrived and there was a passion to relive New Covenant life.  There are many charismatic (so-called) churches I visit and one can almost predict what "gift" will be manifested.  And this complacency has no-doubt fuelled Macarthur and other anti-charismatic views.

Suddenly (thanks to people like Mark Driscoll - well-intended as he is) the focus has become "mission" - and the endless buzz word is "mission".  If your church is not "missional" then you should be ashamed of yourself - we are led to believe.  Many charismatic churches have seemed to have forgotten that true life in the Spirit and an enjoyment of the Presence of God naturally leads to a passion for the lost.

As John Piper said;

"Mission exists because worship doesn't".

Oh that many of us could remember the words of Terry Virgo at Stoneleigh Bible Week 1998 - we are a "dwelling place for God in the Spirit".  Oh for churches springing up (or being revived truly) across the UK.  Less of the silly counterfeit and more of reality!!

Calling for a New Charismatic Resurgence!!

I've been having a fantastic chat with two former members of my home church in Dunstable about the "coming upon" of the Spirit over on Facebook - provoked by Alex Buchanan's wonderful ministry. Not everyone is aware that during his unique ministry, Alex was a co-pastor at our church in Dunstable and actually dedicated me as a baby. Alex was more famous for his prophetic ministry as a "pastor to pastors" with people such as Terry Virgo and R T Kendall.

I was reflecting on the current life of the charismatic empowering gifts in the local church and it seems to me that once again there has been polarising in the church (especially in the UK). Classic "charismatic" churches have happily settled down into what is "normal" seeing a few manifestations on a Sunday. Cessationist churches most certainly do not. And "open but cautious" churches accept the concept of the charismatic but I guess rarely see it. There is rarely (I think) the "heavenly divine intervention" of spiritual gifts where non-believers are profoundly affected to the point of falling down and saying; "Truly God is among you!".

John Piper wrote famously; "Mission exists because worship does not".

It seems to me that churches are pouring resources into mission - when no one seems to be examining the desperate need for a revival of life, of a charismatic resurgency in our churches - seeing God in the risen Jesus Christ walking among His churches. 2006 and 2007 were years of some excitement and anticipation for me personally among other friends - Rob Rufus's presence at the Brighton conferences here in the UK seemed to suggest that God was moving in this country.

I began to collate a post on the "Spirit of God" blog called "A List of Online Resources for the Charismatic Resurgence". I have loved re-reading it - it reminded me of so much encouraging material I wrote with friends back in those times! The actual post was inspired by my friend Jesse Phillips - an SGM pastor in Florida - who asked the question;

"... if blogs could contribute to a reformed resurgence, could not the blogosphere also contribute to a charismatic resurgence, particularly by increasing people's faith for gifts such as prophecy, faith, miracles or healing?".

In his excellent book, "The Tide is Turning!" - Terry Virgo wrote;

"On the whole we too have grown up in a generation that has not seen the mighty acts of God as our forefathers did. We have not seen revivals during which thousands flock into the churches to get right with God. Unlike our fathers we have not known whole towns change, with demonstrations of power and incredible manifestations of the glory of God. The majority of our generation knows nothing of these things so we may closely identify with the Israel of Gideon's day".

One of the reasons I love drawing people in my parent's generation out about the events in their days - the life that they saw in the 1970's and 1980's was because it is faith-building! It reminds us that God can and does intervene in life! Just because we do not see the mighty acts of God directly here in the UK at the moment - does NOT mean that He cannot and does not do it! Yet so many Christians adapt their theology to meet their experience and as a result our faith drops.

My dearest pastor friend Pete Day wrote this in a blog post;

"I would encourage anyone who God prompts to begin to contribute to the charismatic resurgence! Let's fan the flame in each other's hearts and fan the flame for revival".

I am challenged and would like to re-devote this blog to doing exactly that and "fanning the flame for revival". Of course my other concerns and interests remain - such as my friends in Sovereign Grace and the troubles they are going through - but revival surely must be our primary concern and (as Dr Lloyd-Jones said); "The greatest need of the hour".

Passing of a Prophet

I was saddened to find out today that Alex Buchanan was taken to glory at the end of last year. Alex Buchanan (for those who don't know him) was a fantastic man of God and a prophet who lived through the Charismatic Movement and had an incredible influence and encouragement on key men such as Terry Virgo and R T Kendall.

More personally Alex was an assistant pastor in Dunstable for a time while I was a child at New Covenant Church. He actually dedicated me and my parents told me that when he did - he prophesied over me. Alas they can't remember the detail of the prophecy but it's an inheritance that I hold dear - knowing that such a servant of God spoke words of life over me as a baby. Sadly for us as a church he left and moved on - but this was a good thing for the country as he became (as Terry called him); "A pastor of pastors".

Mum and Dad always remembered his preaching and ministry in Dunstable fondly - the sermon that they would talk about the most is one on the Song of Solomon. Alex saw this precious book biblically as key in representing the relationship between Christ and His Church. It's exciting to find out that ministry has been preserved on his website - "Musings on the Song of Solomon". One key truth about the book, he said;

"I suspect that many people avoid preaching from it because they do not have a sufficient grasp of the overwhelming and intimate love of God for His people, there¬fore they find that they cannot get to grips with it. Or some, especially men, are afraid of appearing sentimental or super spiritual if they speak too extravagantly about God".

I think this fear is behind the "sex manual" interpretation that Mark Driscoll and C J Mahaney hold on the Song of Solomon.

There will be a memorial service for him at Westminster Chapel on the 18th June at 2pm - with worship led by Graham Kendrick - which I shall be making every effort to attend. I think it will be a glorious time of remembering his ministry!

Dancing in Church!!

I remember a church members meeting in Dunstable when stakes were being firmly driving into the charismatic coffin - Stanley Jebb and some of the elders were discussing some elements of charismatic life that they didn't like - and this included dancing. Apparently David Fortune (then elder and now a prison worker in London) had done some research to disprove the practice of dancing as not having biblical precedent.

I've always greatly enjoyed dancing - particularly at the Stoneleigh Bible Weeks or the Brighton conferences. It truly is a marvellous way of expressing joy and celebration in God. And I remember once wondering and pondering whether the more that the church snuffs out dancing as a biblical way of church life, the more Christians will seek out dancing in night clubs to continue to express that emotion.

So I'm absolutely thrilled that Lex Loizides has written a recent blog looking at the history of dancing. Here it is - in fullness;

Dancing in Church!

The Origins of Dancing in Church!

It may be unrealistic to try and specify a moment when dancing in church meetings became popular.

The specific reason for such exuberant joy is obvious to all who know the power of the gospel.

This was highlighted with characteristic insight by CH Spurgeon who noted that Isaiah 35:6 states that the mute man doesn’t merely talk but ‘shouts’ and the lame man doesn’t merely walk but ‘leaps’, when the power of the gospel works in his life!

In the truest sense, then, the origins of dancing in church are in the normative human responses of those who are freed by the power of the revelation of the love of God in Jesus Christ. This ‘gospel revelation’ is communicated to them by the Holy Spirit. This may well be why so many charismatics quote the verse ‘Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty!’ (2 Cor 3:17)

‘This is the Holy Ghost, Glory!’

And now we return to the early Methodists, who at the close of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th Century, began to dance!

This, let it be known, was considered dangerous and divisive, but from this distance of time, the descriptions are humourous:

‘At the spring sacrament at Turtle Creek in 1804, Brother Thompson had been constrained just at the close of the meeting to go to dancing, and for an hour or more to dance in a regular manner round the stand, all the while repeating in a low tone of voice: “This is the Holy Ghost, Glory!”

‘But it was not till the ensuing fall or beginning of the winter that [they] began to encourage one another to praise God in the dance, and unite in that exercise, justly believing that it was their privilege to rejoice before the Lord, and go forth in the dances of them that make merry.’

The Methodists used popular tunes, from the ‘drinking-saloons and playhouses’ and added new Christian lyrics.

Shaking Hands during Worship

Winthrop S. Hudson, in his article, ‘Shouting Methodists’ relates how it was common to shake hands during the close of a service, whilst still singing:

‘Shaking Hands while singing was a means, though simple in itself, to further the work. The ministers used frequently, at the close of worship, to sing a spiritual song suited to the occasion and go through the congregation and shake hands with the people while singing.

‘And several, when relating their experience at the time of their admission into the church fellowship, declared that this was the first means of their conviction.

‘The act seemed so friendly, the ministers appeared so loving, that the party with whom the minister shook hands would often be melted in tears.’

Other ‘Physical Manifestations’

At the risk of casting doubt over the credibility of the main body of these American Methodists, yet unable to resist an hilarious final paragraph, I quote Hudson once more concerning some physical phenomena that was reported amongst some of them.

An eye witness reported that sometimes, before being impelled to dance, a person’s head would ‘fly backward and forward, and from side to side, with a quick jolt.’ This phenomena was given a name: ‘the jerks’!

‘Sometimes…the whole body would be affected. The more a person labored to suppress the jerks, the more he staggered and the more rapidly the twitches increased.’

Although this was observable, it was not considered proper to merely imitate this behaviour in order to appear more spiritual! So that’s sorted that out!

In the mean time, don’t be afraid to truly rejoice in the magnificent salvation that you have received in Christ!

(Quotes from ‘Shouting Methodists’ by Winthrop S. Hudson, Encounter Magazine 1968)

© 2010 Lex Loizides

Learning from the Fathers of the Past

There is so much that can be learnt from the men and women that have gone before us. One of the things that concerns me most in organised religion these days is to see great heroes of the faith changing their vocabulary and methods to simply become "contemporary" in the way they see it. I've been reading through some of my collections of Restoration magazines and found an amazing interview that Wesley Richards did with eight of the key leaders of the charismatic movement of the 1970's. It was from the May/June 1987 edition and I've typed it out.

Richards begins by commenting on why the name "Restoration" was chosen;

"The name was chosen to 'emphasise our conviction that the Spirit of God 'is moving within the church today, not merely to renew what exists but to restore so much that has been lost or neglected".

Here's the interview;

Question: Why has this emphasis on the restoration of the church come about? Why wasn't the

most recent 'renewal' movement of the Spirit — which most of these men were part of — adequate?

Gerald Coates: 'The renewal movement did spill out into a very broad constituency. Through Michael Harper and others, folk such as myself were exposed to a quality of teaching, a perspective of church life and a ministry of the Spirit which revolutionised us. 'I'm not sure that Michael Harper is as aware of that as we are, but he actually had a lot to do with the beginning of the house-church movement. But we couldn't follow God and be obedient to him within the existing church structures. Many folk felt that allowing the Holy Spirit to come into Anglicanism, Methodism, 'Baptistism' or whatever would simply brighten up the worship and liven up the pulpit.

And, of course, it may do so, but that's very superficial and cosmetic. God wants to go much deeper. The baptism in the Spirit doesn't make you a better Anglican or a better Methodist. It makes you a worse Anglican, a worse Methodist, because Jesus isn't an Anglican or a Methodist and he won't fit into either. If the purpose of the renewal movement was to renew denominational Christianity, it has failed hopelessly. 'That's not to say that God hasn't done — and isn't still doing — wonderful things through it. But when you consider that it has been going now for over 20 years, it's a remarkable indictment of the renewal movement that there are so few thoroughly renewed churches today, in terms of both heart and structure.'

Arthur Wallis: Perhaps the foremost reason for the manifest decline in the renewal movement was the unwillingness in many quarters to face up to the implications of reformation. What was

needed was a fresh kind of obedience to what God was causing to break forth from his Word. It would be wrong of me to judge brethren, because I don't know how much light they had —how much they saw. Nor do I know how much instinctive recoiling there was from a path that was going to mean, "I haven't got to be clobbered again, have I, by some of my friends and colleagues?" But the fact that people began to withdraw indicates there was not an embracing of what God was saying and doing. The Spirit of God was in some measure quenched and grieved. There wasn't that quickening of faith for the next phase because people were a bit afraid of what the next phase would mean. I think some retracted on what they had experienced and sank back
into the old ecclesiastical rut. 'Others were busy maintaining what they had and thought, "This is it. Let's see it spread, but we mustn't go too far. We mustn't start challenging the historic structures."

Roger Forster: 'Renewal is not an end in itself. Unless you are prepared to improve cosmetically what is corroding. And whatever great moves there have been in renewal — which I rejoice over for the sake of those who have been blessed — have really been personal renewals, whereas God is seeking a corporate renewal which is not possible within those structures. He may choose, in his mercy and grace, to bless individuals there, but I don't see any hope that those great, creaking institutions will be turned around.

Barney Coombes: 'As I look around, there are very, very few churches which ever changed the wineskin — particularly Anglican churches. You could probably count on one hand those that made any significant changes. Then the ones that actually did make ultimate changes left the Anglican church as they sought to walk in obedience. Believers' baptism was, and still is, a big issue. People such as David Pawson, who preach it very clearly, are increasingly seen to be persona non grata in that sort of circle, where at one time he was quite popular.

Question: So, if renewal has fallen short, in what ways have the restorationists helped the church of Christ to move forward?

Clive Calver: I think the whole emphasis on worship, both physical and verbal, has been very important. I have heard a number of denominational leaders endorse that. The house churches have also taught us that we mustn't just sit in pews —we've got to learn how to relate. It's fair and valid to say that the emphasis on teamwork has come from the house-church movement. I think also that a strong affirmation of evangelical orthodoxy has come from within the movement. In the midst of the turmoil in certain of the established denominations, house churches have looked like a bastion, standing for the truth, and that has been fundamentally important — it has helped to strengthen the church's backbone a bit more.

Bryn Jones: 'One essential emphasis has been that, whereas we all believe in body life, what we are saying inside the context of restoration is that body life doesn't mean a free-for-all —it means freedom under government. It means you are totally free to express what is in keeping with the will of God and the ways of God. And the way God expresses his will and keeps us in his ways is by a government that he has established within his body. If we don't heed that government, we will either substitute some other form of control or we will have a charismatic free-for-all, which will eventually lead to a disintegration of the group.

Terry Virgo: 'The prophetic vision and refurbishing of the hope of the church through prophetic preaching has been complementary to what God has done spontaneously. When we gather in our thousands in Bible Weeks and sing songs full of prophetic truth, people are not just focusing on their own individual walk with God; they are responding to the sense of being a people of destiny, caught up in the great purpose of God. Again, the emphasis on the need for local churches to be built on apostolic foundations has been crucial. This plumb line has been applied to the previous foundation of church life, which has normally been the tradition in which that company has grown up. I believe that what has come to be known as the house-church movement has a voice for the whole church. It is tremendously important that we fight against the attempt being made to corner us and put us outside. We have to bring a leaven to the whole lump.

Arthur Wallis: 'We have emphasized that God wants a structure through which to work and move, one that is capable of containing the full release of the Holy Spirit without the nets breaking or the structure giving way — without the thing splintering and disintegrating. Then there has been a strong relationship emphasis — that the body of Christ consists of members who are in relationship. Where commitment, love, loyalty and trust break down, the

church breaks down. God designed it that way. He doesn't want it to work without that sense of relationship and commitment.

Gerald Coates: God has given his heart back to the church. Prior to what we know as the charismatic movement, worship, teaching, church life and theology were very cerebral. Now we've got some heart back in our worship, teaching, theology and eschatology, and that's making us laugh and cry.

Question: What about allegations that the house churches have been arrogant, authoritarian, elitist and factious and 'already a denomination' — to mention a few? How do the leaders of the various streams/teams react to the charges levelled against them?

Terry Virgo: 'We have not been elitist. If people look at the facts rather than the rumours, they will see that we have sought to hear from men of faith and gift who have not necessarily been

within our own framework. But we've not sought, under some strange pressure, to have any speaker in just to demonstrate that we are open to anybody, nor have we necessarily joined in every inter-church endeavour in order to demonstrate that we are broad-based. We haven't been authoritarian either. The BBC radio programme, "Front Room Gospel, interviewed people

at random among us and found no trace of that kind of thing at all.

Bryn Jones: 'Right from the start, when those in denominations perceived — rightly — that relationship based on spiritual authority called into question leadership structures that were merely constitutional or ecclesiastical, stories began to circulate that were quite apocryphal. Even where there were elements of truth, they were exaggerated out of proportion. There has been an effort to discredit the exercise of spiritual authority as being something oppressive. You had wild stories of excess, where people's door-keys had to be handed over and

bank books were demanded from them. As far as I'm aware, all those stories in this country were fictional. I never personally found any credible support for any of them. I don't believe we're exclusive. I do believe that in large measure we are the ones who have been excluded. One

thing we do admit to is being clear, and I think our clarity is often taken for exclusivism. What we're saying is that what we believe we will practice.

Now some people are frightened when they see clear practice. They don't mind talking to us privately. Often, the people who in public are very vocal about our being exclusive are in full agreement with us in private. But they say, "You shouldn't really expect us to practise that and do that. We might hold it privately but we've got to wait for some magic moment for God to make the time right for it to be done." But, let's be clear, at no point are we calling people to leave their denominations. We've said it again and again, put it in writing, recorded it on tapes and repeated it at Bible Weeks: it is only where your denomination compromises your conscience in terms of the Word of God that you have a choice to make. We shouldn't impose on people what is the level of our faith and conscience. We should respect the other man's judgment, as Paul teaches in Romans 14.

Barney Coombes: 'One mistake we've made — and John Wimber is having to face the same problem — is that when there's a move of God, because of the thirst and hunger in the hearts of God's people, the followers become more extreme than the leaders. Jesus had the same problem. I mean, his disciples wanted to bring down fire to destroy people! 'People have suddenly heard this message of restoration and started running with it. But revelation didn't

suddenly fall out of the sky to Bryn Jones, Arthur Wallis or myself. It's something we've grown into. A lot of people have been hurt byincessant singing, pride about our own sacrifice and the decisions we'd made and so on, all of which runs completely counter to the gospel's message about being poor in spirit.'

Tony Morton: 'Our mistake has been that, in blazing a trail and seeking to be obedient to God, we have sometimes alienated ourselves from brethren we need, men who have held the truths of the gospel with integrity to the best of their knowledge. We've created a gap — a gap which

needs to be bridged again for the sake of everybody. The body of Christ is not going to be further separated through the ministry of apostles and prophets but, as Ephesians 4 promises, actually brought together. I believe that in the great drive that has been born of the Spirit within many men to establish new churches, to create a new status quo which is New Testament oriented though not perfect, something has happened which has become almost the opposite of God's intent.

We have alienated ourselves from men of God in charismatic and Pentecostal situations who could have blessed us, and whom we could have blessed. It has almost become a competitive issue as to whom God will own. I don't think anyone has intended that. But through our insecurities and our need to prove something, probably plus the pressures of having to get on with the work, we have failed actually to declare the glory of our common kingdom-oriented, church-oriented intents. That's a major blemish about which God is addressing us now. God is changing things!

Gerald Coates: 'I often wish I could write books and give talks that were acceptable. That would make me more likeable and lovable! But every time I put pen to paper, every time I open my mouth, I feel this great anger and anguish on God's heart about the state of the church in general in Britain and the fact that there are so few voices crying out on God's behalf about it. And so I find myself having to do it. Obviously there are things I've said which should have been dosed with more compassion. But equally, there are things I've said which have been compassionate and kind, where I might have done God a far greater service by being really honest.

Bryn Jones: We are men who go for what we believe, but we have often been deeply hurt by what has been thought of us collectively, and some of us have been deeply hurt by what has

been said to us individually. At times, some of the people questioning our motives are those we

least expect. I think in all we've done we've sought to keep our motives pure. I've heard some say we're so cold that we don't let anything hurt us, that we just plough on and aren't sensitive

enough. And then I've heard others say we're so sensitive that we take too much heed of what is said and don't pursue things aggressively enough. Sometimes I've faltered in my pursuit of what I was convinced of because of the hurt I felt or the questioning of our motives by others. I can truthfully say that we could have planted churches in a lot more towns and cities of this country if we hadn't been sensitive to what others felt. We have deliberately curtailed our advance in many areas, and in some places actually withdrawn after giving in, because of the feelings others had about us being there.

Question: The future, not the past, is clearly dominating the leaders of the new churches?

Barney Coombes: Contrary to accusations of just being little 'blessing' groups, my opinion is that those who have embraced the kingdom are the most outgoing, innovative, creative, sacrificial people around today. My own observations are that the restoration pioneers are far from changing down a gear, content with their impact on the church to date. Instead, they are moving into overdrive, with their sights set on affecting the destiny of the nation. In private conversation, as well as public interviews, I found leaders who, far from being intoxicated by so called 'success', were full of a sober realism concerning the immense challenges ahead if the church is going to make a significant breakthrough back into the mainstream of national life in Britain.

Terry Virgo: 'God has spoken to us strongly about reaching the nation through large churches. We were praying about how we could influence the media and speak to the nation. God told us through a prophetic word that we weren't ready to speak to the media, but that God would build large churches, as a result of which the media would come to us and ask us what was happening. Through that we would begin to get a voice. I believe we will see a revived, restored church emerging across the nation. I've been in full-time ministry since 1963 and I have never

known such a time of continual conversions. It's only a steady trickle, but the tide is coming in.

'But when we begin to see large numbers being saved and vested interests being touched — and as we grow in strength and begin to speak out more on moral issues such as abortion — I believe there will be a backlash. In England there will probably be an attack on leaders to undermine their integrity. I think also there will be an attempt to undermine what they would call fundamentalism, attacking Christians for not being free thinkers and caricaturing them as Bible-reading obscurantists.

Barney Coombes: 'I am very encouraged about future prospects! It excites me to see young men and women coming forth with commitment, abandonment and recklessness to serve God. If that continues, I can see some amazing things happening.'

Bryn Jones: 'I believe that the whole body of Christ is going to experience a huge spiritual awakening. That doesn't mean we'll be without persecution, though. We're on the very threshold of a tremendously positive future. I see the rains of God over our land. I see the flame of the Holy Spirit burning in all our cities. I see a largescale spiritual revival.

Revival of Worship

I'm still reading through my old "New Covenant Songs" book - the worship songbook that my home church used to use before it inherited the "Praise!" hymnbook that I detested from FIEC. Why did I detest it? Mainly because of the poor mutilation of words in classic hymns in an attempt to make it more "contemporary". But that's an aside and one I won't embark on.

I found this comment written in the foreword of

the "New Covenant Songs" book that I can't believe I haven't noticed before. It said;

"Times of renewal bring new hymns and spiritual songs to birth and such a time as the present season of refreshing is no exception".

The charismatic movement was unique for birthing worship leaders such as Stuart Townend, Nathan and Lou Fellingham, Kate Simmonds and of course who can forget Graham Kendrick and many many more from different streams. Ironically their songs are sung by churches and denominations that would baulk at charismatic theology!

Our church in Dunstable was no exception to birthing new songs - we had some very beautiful songs mainly written by women such as Joy Hammond and Joan Barr. I used to love this one;

"The Lord our God is a great God, lift up your voice and praise His Name,

The Lord our God is a mighty King, lift holy hands and bless His Name.

Royal priesthood come bow before His throne, bring a sacrifice of praise,

Holy Nation exalt before Your God; He is worthy of our praise".

Although this one wasn't written by someone from our church, it was a real favourite during our growing up years and I loved it;

"O Lord our God how majestic is Your Name, the world is filled with Your glory,

O Lord our God, You are robed in majesty, You've set Your glory above the heavens,

We will magnify, we will magnify the Lord enthroned in Zion!

We will magnify, we will magnify the Lord enthroned in Zion!

O Lord our God, You have established a throne, You reign in righteousness and splendour,

O Lord our God the skies are ringing with Your praise, soon those on earth will come to worship;

O Lord our God, the worlds are made at Your command, in You all things will hold together,

Unto Him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb, be praise and glory and power forever!".

Interestingly the pattern we saw at Dunstable was that when backs were turned on the Charismatic Movement, we began abandoning the new spiritual songs I'm reading through and reverted to the older Wesley/Whitfield-esque hymns. There's so much that comes from times of refreshing - the church is revived, new songs of worship are written and inspired by fresh encounters with God and most importantly of course the lost are saved.

Do it again Lord - and please don't miss out the United Kingdom!

Deifying Human Beings?

I have been reading J Lee Grady's book; "The Holy Spirit is NOT for Sale" and must be honest - some of it makes for painful reading. Grady is criticising some of the charismatic movement's excesses in the book - however I must say this. It is easier to accept criticism from someone who is "in the family" (i.e. a charismatic themselves). I have been over familiar with John MacArthur's vitriolic criticisms of all things charismatic for too long and have largely ignored what he said - because the man is a self-confessed cessationist and I doubt has ever had a spiritual experience of God in his life. Grady's criticisms while hard to hear can be more easily understood.

His latest chapter addresses Paul Cain - a well-known and at times controversial servant of God. I found this chapter painful because I know that some of Paul Cain's prophecies have had tremendous impact on churches and people I love - such as Newfrontiers ("changing the expression of Christianity around the world"). Grady had sat in one of Paul Cain's meetings in 1989 and documented and evaluated the prophecies Cain brought and suggested that they were false (such as wondering whether Cain had access to church directories - hence he could quote people's names and addresses).

To be honest - I don't know. I've heard very accurate prophecies quoting names and addresses from people like Paul Cain, Todd Bentley and Joshua Mills at the Glory and Grace Conference in Hong Kong. Could the prophecies they brought have been falsified and made up? Sure. Could they have been of God? I think so. We just don't know. Does that uncertainty nullify the gift of prophecy? NEVER!

Let me say this clearly - it is the most stupid and heinous error to state the gift of prophecy (or any other spiritual gifts the Holy Spirit graciously gives) has ceased - just because of the errors and excesses of some Christians.

But I think Grady brings a really helpful series of recommendations to this issue of servants of God who perhaps display the gifts of God in a less than "perfect" manner. His first point is not limited to the charismatic movement I strongly believe - followers of the "New Calvinist" movement who similarly deify non-charismatics such as Mark Driscoll, John Piper and C J Mahaney;

1. Don't deify human beings.

Grady writes; "Thousands of Christians had put Cain on a pedestal where no man or woman belongs. People expected him almost to be like God. It was a setup for disappointment - and ultimate failure".

I have observed some disappointment and uncertainty creep in with John Piper's very honest decision to take a sabbatical. Some of his "followers" have criticised him and others have wondered if he is in trouble. I wonder what would happen to the loyal SGM masses if C J Mahaney were to fall morally? I know he preaches often about humility and states he is the "worst sinner he knows" but would his followers and SGM survive? The fact is this - these men are ALL human beings. ALL are prone to sin. ALL are prone to mistakes. And ALL have been saved by grace and grace alone. BUT .... ALL can be used awesomely by God.

The genuine words that Paul Cain brought such as "changing the expression of Christianity" are not nullified in my eyes by his humanity. Because that was a word from God to Newfrontiers which they have responded to in faith and is being fulfilled steadily.

Don't abandon the prophetic words brought by human prophets just because they are human and may make mistakes. God is the same - and the word of love He brought still stands.

2. Don't Elevate Anointing over Character.

Grady said; "When Paul instructed Timothy to choose leaders for the churches he had planted, he gave a long list of qualifications. None of these had anything to do with supernatural anointing. Paul did not tell Timothy to choose men who could heal the sick, raise the dead or interpret dreams and visions. In fact the only anointing he required was to teach the Scriptures".

He goes on; "What this shows us is that while spiritual gifts are needed for the advancement of the Kingdom, they don't authorize people to be out front. Just because a person has a powerful anointing doesn't mean they should be given a role of influence in the church".

3. Dismiss the Sensational.

Grady quotes Todd Bentley and the 2008 Lakeland Revival in a critical manner - he clearly does not like Bentley's modus operandi. Again - I found this difficult to read because on the one hand I do agree that Bentley had some unfortunate methods. But I watched the Lakeland Revival avidly during early 2008 and I do believe that God was at work during that time. Some people I greatly respected from Rob Rufus's church in Hong Kong went to visit Lakeland and brought back a "good report" - they're not the kind of people to be swept away by emotionalism. So - let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater - like Paul Cain, Lakeland wasn't all bad.

But Grady's summary was good; "When a carnal man gets involved in the miraculous ministry of the Spirit, he will try to sensationalise it, bottle it and sell it. We should never support this kind of charismatic circus sideshow".

4. Teach and Practice Discernment.

Grady writes; "We cannot avoid deception without the Holy Spirit's supernatural work among us. Discerment is something we learn by experience as our spiritual senses are trained ... Discernment is manifested by a "knowing" - a deep, gut-level sense that something is off-base".

Once again Grady cites the manifestation of gold dust in a critical manner and praises a pastor who allegedly had it tested prior to a meeting and found the gold dust was plastic. Because the said pastor cancelled the meetings where the gold dust was appearing, Grady said the pastor protected the church from "spiritual pollution". Maybe some gold dust is plastic. Maybe some of it is from heaven. I suspect that there are some genuine experiences where gold dust may appear - but from those genuine experiences, stems a desperation for it to appear.

True spiritual discernment does not come from despising anything "odd" - but rather keeping the focus on God. Don't pray for gold dust to appear. Pray for God Himself to be welcome.

5. Enforce accountability.

Grady writes; "Because so many charismatics have left their established denominations and developed a distaste for religious control, we now have the opposite problem. Our movement is too independent ... Ministers who refuse to submit to standards of accountability are spiritual renegades - and God says rebellion is the same as the sin of witchcraft".

Interestingly in another chapter Grady writes disapprovingly of the Shepherding Movement and the call of Ern Baxter and his brothers to see such accountability among churches. So one presumes he sees something of a need for a balance. The Shepherding Movement was roundly condemned - but what Ern Baxter, Don Basham, Charles Simpson and Bob Mumford recognised was that church movements were all shaped like pyramids with "one man" at the head. Their aim was to bring those leaders together in a relationship of accountability. I don't see the problem resolved despite the condemning of Baxter et al's attempt. Newfrontiers has Terry Virgo at the head. SGM has C J Mahaney at the head. Mark Driscoll is at the head of whatever he heads. And so on. These men may protest that there is accountability "within their ranks". But it would be a brave man who would call a C J Mahaney to task - particularly when he has been put where he has by C J Mahaney.

As you may be gathering - I am enjoying the issues that J Lee Grady is raising but don't agree with them all. I don't like some of the examples he uses - but this issue of "deifying human beings" is a vital one.

The Holy Spirit is NOT for Sale!!

I love it when I walk around a Christian bookshop and I experience a book title reaching out and grabbing me (not literally). This latest book by J Lee Grady (Editor of Charisma Magazine) is called; "The Holy Spirit is Not for Sale!". I have heard of Grady but am not familiar with him. It was the foreword by Dr R T Kendall that made me knew I had to buy it. R T Kendall is one of my heroes and those who have sat under his preaching as I have know that he is not fooled lightly (some may disagree with that - but that's my personal opinion). Dr Kendall wrote;

"I could not put this book down. It is compulsive reading. But it is more than that: it is essential reading for every person who professes to be a charismatic Christian ... this book could be a turning point for the charismatic movement".

What caught my attention the most in flicking through the book in the bookshop was how J Lee Grady is drawing on the experiences of the Third World for US here in the Westernised world to learn from. I am tired of the concept of the Western world sending "missionaries" to the Third World. Like the risen and glorified Christ said to the church in Revelation 3:17;

"You think you are rich - but you are poor".

We have wasted our glorious inheritance of various movements of the Holy Spirit and have allowed theological pride and snobbery to quench the power of the Spirit. The fact that Dr John Piper has to even answer the question; "Do you believe we should cast out demons today?" - suggests a complete blindness on the part of the Western church in ignoring the gospel.

Anyway one chapter that stood out to me straight away was dealing with the issues of spiritual authoritarianism. Grady writes; "How can we know when a particular church or church leader is crossing into the danger zone of authoritarianism? Here are seven warning signs I have detected in my own experience".

1. Lack of accountability.

Grady writes: "If a pastor or a church leader is not open to correction from his colleagues, he has set himself up for failure and displayed a blatant form of pride".

2. Lack of acceptance of other denominations, churches or ministries.

Grady writes: "We need to expect our leaders to display an attitude of humility towards the rest of the Body of Christ".

3. An atmosphere of control.

Grady says; "Authoritarian church leaders are masters at using Scripture to manipulate people. They often quote 1 Chronicles 16:22; "Do not touch My anointed ones". Another favourite is Hebrews 13:17; "Obey your leaders and submit to their authority" ... such passages can be used to intimidate people and keep them from challenging wrong. Some pastors don't recognise the difference between valid criticism and slander".

4. Dominating attitudes in leaders, usually manifested by haughtiness and anger.

"Tyrants are surprisingly similar. Because they want to control their surroundings, they often blow up when people do not conform to their demands or don't do so as quickly as they wish. We might expect bullying in the corporate world but we should not tolerate it among church leaders".

5. Emphasis on leaders hearing God for the people, rather than encouraging them to hear God for themselves.

I should add that one of my major concerns with Sovereign Grace Ministries recently came from Jeff Purswell's well publicized comment; "You" (speaking to SGM preachers) "are standing in the very stead of God". That scares me because surely it puts SGM church members in a difficult position. If your SGM leader preaches something that worries you - you are not just disagreeing with man. You are disagreeing with someone "standing in for God".

Grady writes; "In authoritarian church situations, members are not encouraged to seek God's guidance for themselves. Rather they are urged to conform to their leader's preferences ... thus the church members develop an unhealthy dependence on man in order to function spiritually and a diminished ability to trust God".

6. Leaders assuming ownership of their people and churches.

Grady says; "In authoritarian churches ... the church is governed once again like a dictatorship ... pastor's salaries remain undisclosed and the pastor maintains control of the church board if there is one ... such a system is a far cry from the biblical view of the church as a living organism, kept vibrant as each member plays a part. All church members should share a sense of ownership in the local church".

7. Women viewed as inferior.

This is one that I am particularly fierce about. I've got one mother and seven sisters and have grown up in two churches that do have the tendency to treat women as inferior. I'll never forget one experience sitting in a home group and seeing the pastor turn to his heavily pregnant wife and say; "Dear - will you go and make the coffee?". What?!?!?! Why can't you get up off your backside and go and make it!?

Grady writes; "In most (authoritarian churches) women are viewed as important only in their function as wives and mothers and they are not encouraged to step beyond these confines to pursue ministry opportunities ... women eager to be used by God or to share their spiritual insights with church leaders are branded rebels or "Jezebels"".

This is Not a Phase which is Passing!

I was out for a run today and was enjoying the newly converted Dales Bible Week worship to my iPod. One of my favourite "70's" songs is "I hear the sound of rustling". Here it is - the quality is poor and apologies for that. It comes from a 70's audio tape. But I love it;

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

The particular line that grabbed me was this;

"And this is not a phase which is passing - it's the sound of an age that is to come".

I love the passion with which the gathered thousands sung it and I found myself wondering where they are today and how they are today. I have no doubt whatsoever that the majority of them gathered at the Dales sung that song with all their hearts and believed it. But was the 70's a "phase that has passed?". Or have we been left with an incredible legacy? I felt there are two challenges;

1. To my parent's generation (those who were there at the Dales Bible Week).

Have you lost your "first love?". Have you lost the fire that so excited and motivated you during those incredible years in the 1970's? Yes - the Yorkshire showground is now empty - where thousands once sung their praises to God. Yes - the Stoneleigh showground is now empty - where even more worshipped and danced before the Lord. But the truths that were preached and the revelations that were shared during those days? Has heaven said they are no longer true? Parents - you need to remember and not forget what you experienced during those days.

Or this WILL become a "phase" - a happy memory that you think back to with nostalgia rather than a truth that will touch a world.

2. To our generation (those who grew up as "charismatic" babies).

Have we taken up the baton? Our parents passed on so much to us - many of the key teachers of that day are still faithfully teaching the Word of God - men such as Terry Virgo. True some such as Bryn Jones and Ern Baxter have been taken to glory already and are now cheering us on as heavenly witnesses. But have we watched and learned from much of the pioneering that took place during those days? What are we doing to take the spiritual inheritance to a waiting world? We can't just sit here and expect to continue to receive "daily manna" from our parents generation. It's time to get up and go out and get it ourselves!

It's time to see the nations burn with the fire of God - nothing short of that will see the "nations flow to Zion!".

"An Honest Conversation" - EMA Assembly 2010 - Part 2

Last week (I think) I posted the first half of a Panel Discussion held at the EMA Assembly in London this year - present were Terry Virgo, Hugh Palmer, Vaughan Roberts, John Coles and Liam Goligher. The first half of the discussion focused around what the leaders DID agree on. The second half moves into what they DON'T agree and gets interesting!

Vaughan Roberts (V.R): Thank you Liam – over to you John.

John Coles (J.C): I was hoping to hear the wisdom of the other people because I am at a bit of a loss to know what the other reasons were. We obviously have so much in common here. The roots of many of us are the same – my own spiritual history is much the same as Hugh’s. We were working in Scripture Union camps together in the summer holidays at the same time – I went on one of Dick Lucas’s original reading parties and my background was with 2 curacies in conservative evangelical churches. I was appointed to be a vicar of a liberal, middle of the road church. It was in that context that I felt the way I presented the gospel at that stage didn’t actually have power to lead people to Christ.

So I was propelled into saying “God there must be more than this to get these people converted” – it was a real longing to see the lost saved that made me pray for a greater empowering of the Spirit because obviously that is what the Spirit comes for. When I began to get my eyes opened to the wider, charismatic/Pentecostal world and church and instead of seeing the church through the blinkers of my own training up to that point then I realised there was a lot more beyond my own experience up until that point. The more I learned the more I realised I have to learn now. God is bigger than any of us understand in part. We are all life-long learners and should be willing to learn from all sources that God is doing all around the world.

Take for example the Anglican church and the issues of morality and sexuality – we praise God for the orthodox church in Asia and Africa. Now some people heard me talk about what I was learning and feared that I was rejecting what I had learned before. So sometimes what we are saying – that is all that people think we are saying. Rather than we are saying – this, AND all this! So I sadly found myself being distanced from some people in friendship. I was going to other conferences to learn the new things I wanted to learn which was always on the basis of what I had already learned rather than in order to reject what I had already learned. I think by and large gatherings like this gather one group of people and gatherings at New Wine gather other groups of people learning other things at other stages in their lives. At times we have got to get together and realise what we DO have in common. This is why I think this is a very healthy thing what we are doing – and it is a real privilege for me to be here today.

V.R: I would love to hear the historical perspective of Hugh and Terry in a moment but I wonder if we could broaden it out – so far the emphasis has been on what we hold in common. And it may be that you feel it was accidental but I suspect behind it are some fairly important differences as well as other things we should never have divided on. So as you continue on the historical issue, are there big differences and if so what are they that we should never have divided on? We will start with you Hugh.

H.P: Yes – ‘historical perspective’ is one of those big words isn’t it and I am I not sure I have got a broad enough perspective for that but personally, coming just after Liam had invented rock music *laughter*, university days as John said – there were folk who thought of themselves as charismatic. Speaking in tongues was a big thing in those days but we were all involved in the same Christian union and same gospel business. At some point down the line there came a point where our differences became more important to us than the things we had in common. It may have been conscious or it may have been unconscious. I remember in my first curacy a guy coming up to me who would have been charismatic if you like and he said; “Well of course you would say that wouldn’t you because you are an evangelical”. I said; “Well you are as well aren’t you?”. He said; “No, no I’m a charismatic”.

It was the first time I had heard someone define themselves as charismatic over and above being evangelical. Before we had been evangelical and some were charismatic and others weren’t. Many of the folk when I was up in Norwich – and the trouble with these labels is that they are stereotypical and static but let me just use them as shorthand and say I mean nothing more than that. They come from Brethren backgrounds and had been well drilled in the Scriptures.

Somewhere in their mid-teens it had all gone a bit dry and the new life and fervour and passion that they had got was linked with their experience of receiving the Spirit and their theology of it. I remember as they enthusiastically gathered and talked to disciples and students what struck me was that they were living this experience on the 15 years of the bedrock of Bible teaching they had got. They were teaching the thing that had captured their hearts at the moment and I said; “You do realise what you are passing on is actually different from what you have got for that very reason – you have just taken the very top layer and removed the other”. Again I remember sitting with a charismatic friend hearing a teacher explain why baptism in the Spirit wasn’t a second experience and so on and he went through Acts and so on and I remember my friend saying; “Well I can buy all of that – but are you going to leave people sitting complacently in their chairs?”. The danger of the conservative side was that we taught the Spirit in terms of what the Spirit was not and what we shouldn’t believe and shouldn’t think. Then you end up in different streams and groups and we don’t meet each other and rub shoulders and we don’t test each other at all and now we don’t know whether we are people who don’t know each other and have some differences or whether we have different gospels that are coming out.

V.R: I would love to hear you Terry on the historical perspective as you will have as good an insight as any but I would also love to hear about where are the differences we differ on?

Terry Virgo (T.V): I think probably down through the centuries there have been differences that have driven quite hard wedges into the body of Christ. For instance the issue of Anabaptists in terms of harsh and judgemental decisions which we now look back in a very different light as the years have slipped by and I celebrate days like this and the friendships that we have come to experience certainly on this platform and reflected out across the room. Divisions do come not necessarily always through theological difference through quick reactions, quick caricaturing (if you think that you must be that – or you were seen with him the other day and he definitely thinks that).

So that runs ahead of you in quite a dangerous way. I was first invited many years ago to speak at a conference called Spring Harvest and you had to tick on a form whether you were charismatic or reformed. And I ticked “charismatic” AND “reformed”! *laughter*. And I would feel before God that I am a “conservative evangelical” – and I have never identified that. I know some people would say I am charismatic and not an evangelical. I have never identified with that and have always felt horrified by that. I would say my desire is to conserve biblical Christianity. In that sense “conservative”. Some people read “conservative” as “cautious” – what do I mean “conservative”? Do I mean English caution? Or do I mean conserving what the Bible says? So to pick up Vaughan’s last words – where do we differ and where do our differences lie, I would say I am personally trying to conserve Biblical Christianity as far as is possible in the 21st century with its downloading and jet planes.

I feel one of my greatest fears would be a doctrine of “cessationism” – that the Christianity of the Bible is different to a Christianity of today.

So for many of us – how and when we receive the Spirit would be a debate point we can spend some time on. But we all very generously want to feel we are experiencing something of God’s fullness. But are we also saying we want that to result in Biblical Christianity in the sense that there was power evident, supernatural things happened? That’s what Biblical Christianity was – are we saying we think that should be something different today? Are we saying that the sort of thing that happened through the apostles and the New Testament church continues today? Men like Stephen and Philip and the way they preached the gospel and the gospel advanced included that supernatural element or are we saying that was an empowering to get the gospel “started”? That would be held by some and they would say there are seasons. I know that for myself I feel I am a conservative evangelical – I want to conserve what I feel is in the Bible which would include what the Bible speaks of – which would include supernatural elements in the Bible.

Never seeing that in opposition to Biblical exposition, the teaching of the Word, building lives on Biblical revelation but moving on with the empowering aspects. I personally feel I guess within the UK now and its complete loss of Christian foundation we are more back to the kind of culture that Paul and the apostles invaded – where there is nothing you can draw from. When Billy Graham came to England in the 50s and 60s he could almost be like an Old Testament prophet and say “Come back to the truth that you actually know”. You can’t do that anymore and I think it is more like Paul’s day where the Gospel came not in word only but power – which I think was attesting signs. I think globally the advance of the gospel which is taking place in many other maybe southern hemisphere nations are seeing phenomenal break through.

I have just been reading in your bookshop here a book I haven’t seen before – the “Journals of John Tsung” – I have read about him before and he is an evangelist with phenomenal signs and wonders that took place through his ministry that led to vast numbers of people being converted. I would feel that is biblical Christianity and I would like to conserve it. So for me that is “conservative evangelicalism”.

V.R: You have mentioned two things and spent a bit longer on signs and wonders and we will come back to that. You have also raised the question of how and when the Holy Spirit comes. I guess going back 30 or 40 years that was the major point of division. The whole question of “baptism in the Holy Spirit” and some then changed the terminology but still expected some kind of second blessing. The inevitable question there – are there two types of Christian and that ended up being a cause of division up and down the land. Do you want to say a bit more about your own view on that Terry and then we will hear from others? Because I think clearly this has been a significant point of difference.

T.V: I think to say “two kinds of Christian” is very much oversimplifying our whole breadth of Christian experience. There may be those who have been plunged into water and there may be those who have been sprinkled. There may be those who say they have had a “sanctification experience” like Keswick used to teach – I didn’t. So all sorts of divisions and I would say to say there are two kinds of Christian is a very great oversimplification and I certainly wouldn’t live with that or accept that. To me how you receive the Spirit – and we could certainly spend a long time talking about that! – I feel personally in the New Testament there was a “coming upon” of the Spirit. The great Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones says that the teaching that says you have experienced everything at the new birth – that doctrine is the greatest reason for the quenching of the Holy Spirit over the last half a century. He felt very strongly about that. I think there is an argument for that. I feel the coming “upon” of the Holy Spirit which I see in the New Testament. For example when Jesus said to the disciples; “Wait till the Spirit comes upon you” – they knew what that meant. They had their Old Testaments – they knew of men like Gideon and men like Samson. People we have been hearing about who were suddenly “empowered”.

V.R: If I may just come in – would you see that “coming upon” as an infilling for a particular task that might happen on a number of occasions or would you expect for the unbeliever who has come to Christ and been forgiven, that there would be then a moment when the Holy Spirit comes in a significant moment unlike the extra fillings for particular tasks?

T.V: I would not feel it was for a particular task in the New Testament. No.

V.R: Thank you – Liam, any reaction on this particular issue which clearly has been a cause of difference?

L.G: And it still is! My view is that when someone is baptised into Christ by the Holy Spirit they receive the Holy Spirit and the progress we make in our Christian life is that more and more of our lives are captivated by, controlled by, empowered by and enabled by the Holy Spirit as we respond to the Word of God, as we grow in our relationship with God, as we pray. I personally think that some of us do not expect anything from God. By that I do not mean great experiences but I am saying that some of us do not expect that God will make a difference to us. Even though intellectually we do believe that the Bible can change a person, we experientially do not expect any change in ourselves.

We go to church on Sunday and we expect that the preacher will say something that will draw from us the “aha! I hadn’t seen that before!”. That is about as far as our expectation from church is concerned. That there will be a little insight into how that text will link with this. We will hear a good talk and go away feeling that the Bible was adequately taught and handled but without any expectation that anything will change in me or in the lives of unconverted people who may be there. So for me without having to create any unbiblical process – it seems to me that just living under the Word of God, if that word is (as we heard this morning from John Piper) Spirit and life then one would expect the Word of God would be changing people and that Christ would be encountering people through His Word and that we would have the expectation of things happening in our lives. I would say that a lot of signs and wonders are tied to the roles of the apostles and the early church – they were authenticating the ministry but I would expect that there are things that happen in ordinary Christians lives which are analogous to (not the same as) things you would find in Scripture and I would expect that to be happening. So the kind of things you (to John Coles) described – that happens! To me that happens quite frequently in Christians lives!

This kind of things happens! I believe in the ministry of angels – we believe in the ministry of angels! Do we think that there are things happening in our lives that are so unusual that there must have been the involvement of angels? Do we believe in the providence of God? Well the providence of God incorporates my dream life – it incorporates every area! Do I think the providence of God could stir me to have a dream that encourages me to prayer about something because there is something coming up? I would say we don’t need to use biblical categories in an unbiblical way and I hope that’s not disrespectful to those who hold a different view – I would simply expect in a living relationship with the Lord.

V.R: Thank you – we are beginning to merge these two areas. So John, any reflection on what’s called the “2nd blessing” or on the signs and wonders and then we will come to Hugh.

J.C: I think the word “expectation” is an important word here. When the Holy Spirit gives birth to a new Christian what are the possibilities for that new Christian and what do we as teachers teach are the possibilities? The possibilities are probably far beyond what any of us have yet realised – because God is able to do more than we ask, think or imagine. So the issue is am I letting the Holy Spirit lead me into all that God says and dreams and becomes possible for me? And then am I teaching others to expect more than I or we have yet experienced of Him? Or am I saying “Don’t expect”.

So when I prayed the prayer to receive Christ into my life at the age of 17 and a half – I was told; “Don’t expect to feel any different”. I imagine quite a lot of people here were told that. You didn’t therefore feel any different because you shut down that expectation.

Now project a number of years on and here am I now for the first time in my life in a charismatic meeting and there are some “words of knowledge” whereby the speaker’s team sense that God is saying there are people in the room with particular needs and they are going to pray for those people. And one of them describes a rash I have on my hand which I have just developed in the previous week between the base of the 1st finger and the thumb on my left hand – exactly where my problem was. I found myself at the front of the meeting being prayed for in front of everyone a few moments later. They didn’t tell me they were about to use me as a guinea pig because I had never been to one of these charismatic meetings before – I didn’t know that was the trap door I was about to fall through. As they began to pray for me someone in the gathering collapsed on the floor and the person praying for me stopped and immediately began to pray for this person as if they were having a heart attack. I interrupted him and said; “No they are not having a heart attack – they are just being set free”.

This person had been a student member at the church where I had done one of my curacies and had come to me during that time and had talked to me about the ministry of the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit and whether this was normative Christianity today. I said to them; “I wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole – don’t expect that thing today, it’s not normal and it’s not necessary”. As a result that person had shut down all that side of their spiritual life for the next four years. In this meeting when they saw me – myself being set free from that lack of expectation and experience they themselves were also being set free from the chains I put around them which basically said; “Don’t expect to have this kind of New Testament Christianity”. So coming back to expectation what are we teaching as possible for 20th century Christians today?

It is not a question of “have I been filled? – did I have a great wow experience in the past that immediately lead to the use of any of the supernatural gifts (1 Cor 12)” and whether or not that was synonymous with when I was converted. The question is – whether NOW I am being filled with the Spirit so NOW I am living a life with an equal expectation of a supernatural interventionist God as they did in the New Testament?

And am I teaching that to the people I am pastoring and teaching such that – for instance – and this is where the rubber meets the road such as characteristic of charismatic or conservative evangelical church and the way we use the terms. By the way I really love Terry’s way of describing “conservative” as “conserving”! How then do we do evangelism? Do we go and knock on doors and say “Can I talk to you about Jesus?” or do we (a la Luke 10) go and knock on doors and say; “Is anyone sick so I can pray for you?”. And the consequence of the expectation I have been speaking to you about is that every Christian can do the latter and not just the former! Going and blessing a house with peace and saying “Can I pray for anyone that’s sick” – will also open the doors which leads to evangelism and ultimately a relationship with Jesus Christ.

V.R: Thank you John. Hugh?

H.P: If you don’t have the Spirit of Christ then you don’t belong to Christ Paul says. I have been confronted before by people who tell me I might be Christian but I haven’t received the Spirit and I need that before I can be properly Christian – and my answer to that is, look you can tell me I’m not a Christian but don’t tell me I am a Christian but don’t have the Spirit. I can’t be in that sort of weird no-man’s land – it doesn’t seem to be a biblical one. To say there is some kind of necessary thing I need over and above – I struggle with hugely. I must be able to say that at one end but commands like “Go on being filled with the Spirit” have no place in my mindset, my heart-set, my expectation. It seems to me the danger of the label can be that we have just got a box.

And if you have got a label then everything I have in that box is where you are, whereas it seems to me that there is much more of a spectrum – so you can take things whether it is tongues or healings. Actually expectation is an important word – so is there the expectation that all this is mandatory which I would raise huge question marks by in the New Testament. So it seems to me that those are some of the labels we have got to grapple with and it doesn’t always help us. I suspect we may have people at the far ends on some points and even we may be at the far ends on some of these points.

V.R: On one particular issue in light of what John has just said – in your evangelistic programme at All Souls, if you are not knocking on doors and offering healing are you in some ways being sub-biblical? How would you respond to some of the things John has been saying about signs and wonders? Are you missing out on something that should be normative? Because I take it that isn’t the way you do evangelism?

H.P: We may do it differently from you Vaughan! (*laughter*). I am not convinced as I read through the New Testament that remains normative. Which is not the same thing as saying I shouldn’t expect it ever. As I read on there are all kinds of illustrations around Jesus and the Gospels and the early church and certainly those signs and wonders and miracle works certainly should be seen at least as endorsing the revelation of the Apostles but as I read on in the New Testament and the letters and so on, there seems to me to be significantly less emphasis that way and as I read them less expectation that is the normative thing. I don’t find Timothy being expected to. Now we can say well it was just so obvious that he didn’t have to say it. I am not convinced by that. Nor am I trying to say that is the only expectation for those miracles in the New Testament –

But I would want an expectation level that doesn’t have it as normative and mandatory without reducing it to; “Oh it can’t and won’t happen so if I hear of a healing then there must be something manipulative about it”.

V.R: We are running out of time and I just sense we have touched on some huge issues – which was always going to happen. We are talking briefly but it may be that you are really frustrated and something hasn’t been said that you really wanted saying or a false impression has been given. Where then do we go from here – what are the on-going challenges for us? Can we work together? Can’t we? What should we be saying to one another? So it’s an opportunity really to say what you want as we draw to a close.

T.V: I think it will be when I’ve gone out of the door that is when I will think; “Oh I should have said that!”. I honestly celebrate the relational developments that have made this possible. They have not always been there. 20 years ago there was a lot of hostility which I feel is not present now. And it has been a joy to celebrate common ground – evangelically common ground speaking at conferences. This last Sunday I was speaking in Croydon and I understand there were 21 churches represented there and I did something similar in Aberdeen and Dundee – right across the city. Things like New Word Alive have been a great, great joy to stand on the same platform with people who would have different ways of doing local church and I really celebrate that. I would urge that we hear one another through and that we are sure we understood what was being said and I am sure we can be in danger of highlighting something. When we got started people made all sorts of accusatory comments which people in our ranks thought; “Why did they say that?

That’s not what we are at all!”. I think those days have gone. I thank God so much for that. I think there is a genuine appreciation and celebration of other people’s success – I genuinely believe that – we praise God for people who do church differently to us, the success they are enjoying, and the breakthroughs that they see. I think there’s a lot of borrowing from one another that is quite fascinating. Earlier on John Coles spoke about our worship songs flowing over. We have the great privilege of having Stuart Townend and Nathan Fellingham in our local church. It was great to be invited to speak at Keswick and virtually every song that came before I preached was written in my home church. I thought; “Well this is lovely!”. That we can enjoy comradeship – it’s a delight and I would encouragement that more and more – hearing one another through. Yes so maybe we do differ on our expectation of the supernatural which is the thing we just came to an end on. I think we would say we live in the “Now but not yet” – we do live in the limitations of that whole eschatological overlap that we will not see everything break through yet but our levels of expectation – yes I know I want my levels to be pushed through.

V.R: Time is running out so let’s keep it fairly prompt. Liam?

L.G: There’s a sense of which if you have been listening very carefully you will have noticed that everyone is a cessationist up to a degree. The question is of degree really. There is nothing we are saying that what is happening in our churches is actually exactly what happened in Acts. We are not seeing what happened in Acts as an actual reality. If anyone said that I think we are diminishing what is going on in Acts in terms of the quality/quantity of the signs and wonders that are going on there. Many of my charismatic friends are quick to say; “Well it’s not quite the same – we have apostles today but they are not quite the same”. My own view is that the remaining issue is the issue of revelation and continuing revelation. That is the heart of the thing and I would want to emphasise.

I would want to say that prophecy and tongues have to be taken together as revelatory things and that revelation is complete in Christ and He is the final Word and that gets into the Bible and we have it. Now having said that I believe the Holy Spirit acts along and through the Word – that He uses it in ways and with power in our lives and in ways that are not always as tied down as we would like them to be. I don’t think the unusual is normal. But I do think the unusual happens. Certain things are not normative in the church – the normal means of grace are the way God normally works. But absolutely if we believe in the sovereignty of God – we have to say that things will happen that are extraordinary. We pray for healing in our church! The elders pray for healing regularly.

V.R: I am going to have to stop you there Liam – time is very short. John and then Hugh?

J.C: Our nation needs Jesus – how do people come to faith in Jesus? He said; “Believe Me because of what I am saying but if you cannot believe Me because of what I am saying, believe Me because of the works I am doing”. How do people come to faith? Some will come to faith through their minds. Hearing, reasoning and responding. Some will come through other felt needs being met. I think that is the issue of the words being preceded by the works. From my experience when the two happen together we are seeing a wider cross-section of our community coming to Christ as a result of both those two things. What’s the implication of this? For local mission some churches may well emphasise the Word. Some may more emphasise the works and felt need evangelism. Let’s just rejoice that they are complimentary that more may come to faith in Jesus because without them – they are lost. That is what we are going for friends – that the lost may be saved. That hell may be plundered and heaven populated. People can come through the Word or through the works – they did in Jesus day and let’s make sure they are still coming. If another church emphasises the Word or the works in a way that we are not, instead of criticising let’s firstly commend and give God’s blessing on each other’s churches – and as in Oxford let’s try to work together as much as we can.

V.R: Thank you John.