An Endless Optimistic/Oft Disappointed Charismatic is Grateful for Strange Fire!

I've been reflecting on and following some of the Twitter feed discussing John Macarthur's "Strange Fire" conference and I am actually becoming increasingly grateful both personally and as a church observer for what it has done.  I think initially I was furious and thought "Here we go again" - re-living his influence on my beloved home church in Dunstable and the anti-charismatic spirit it brought.

But what it has done has made me reflect and remember why I AM an unashamed charismatic and STILL believe and hope and look for the encounters and interventions of God by His Spirit that the Word of God promises.  I do bitterly regret the last few years of being "prone to wander" from God and His church but my hope and longing for Him has remained unchanged.  I am aware that many of John Macarthur's spirit would immediately discount anything I have to say - "Well he's a backslider - and therefore probably unsaved anyway!".  But the benefit to being on the outside of accepted church circles is that you can say what you like and not fear the consequences of being "excommunicated"! (I'm not sure if the double jeopardy legal principle applies to excommunication - I hope so).

A Small Testimony:
As I said in my previous post on "Strange Fire" I have been charismatic in theology and experience since I was baptised in the Holy Spirit back in 1999.  But if I am honest I would say that while my theology and belief hasn't changed (if anything increased in longing) my experience hasn't been that much measured up to what many charismatics claim, believe or experience today.  My beliefs and theology were built upon by much reading of many books after the senior pastor Dr Stanley Jebb changed his theology and thus the church's.

It wasn't long into my reading that a biographical sermon of John Piper's on Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones led me primarily to his glorious book "Joy Unspeakable" and then more broadly into the whole published works of the Doctor and his remarkable ministry (still take pride of place in my library!).  I should add I still find it remarkable that my pastor Dr Jebb actually sat under Dr Lloyd-Jones for some time as part of his fatherly ministry to younger pastors - and I didn't seize on the link or pick up interest in Dr Lloyd-Jones over 18 years of being under Dr Jebb's ministry.

I heard balanced reformed/charismatics like Dr Ern Baxter (who rapidly became my number one hero!) and taught that a "tension" MUST be held between Word and Spirit.  I think this explains my initial excitement when I first encountered C J Mahaney and PDI (now SGM) as well as of course my ongoing love and appreciation for Terry Virgo and Newfrontiers ("Fundamentally we are a Word and Spirit movement" - Terry Virgo, Brighton 2009).  To go to Stoneleigh Bible Week in 1999 and 2000 and finally in 2001 was a taste of heaven itself almost!  Heavenly worship and singing, the spiritual gifts in evidence and awesome preaching - a demonstration if you will of Ern Baxter's fervent belief that it WAS possible to experience God in all His fullness as the Word of God lays out!

Seeking More:
Throughout my life I have sought to look for and hunger for more, and have had the opportunity to go to many conferences or hear great or renowned men and women of God.  For example I went with my dear friend Pete Day to the Word, Spirit and Power Conference at Westminster Chapel in London in 2001.  We heard and saw Dr R T Kendall (a man I already hugely respected) but also Paul Cain - a famous (now infamous) prophet who had links back to the Kansas City Prophet movement.  I had heard his prophecies were acutely accurate and so I was fascinated, open and hungry to see him.

Was I impressed?  If I'm honest - not particularly.  I couldn't say in integrity any of his prophecies were as I had heard.  Did that make me discount the gift of prophecy?  No.  Of course now it is well known that Paul Cain has fallen into sin - and for many that discounts him and his gift.  Does it mean any of his prophecies were not true?  No.  It just means that Paul Cain was and is a human being and "prone to wander".

Through that conference we heard that Rodney Howard-Browne (of Toronto Blessing fame) was coming to speak at Westminster Chapel at R T Kendall's invitation.  So me and my dad went down.  Our church "missed" the Toronto Blessing due to Stanley Jebb's views on it - and I was eager to see if there was anything in it!

Was I impressed?  Again not particularly.  I wasn't "slain in the Spirit".  At one point Rodney got us all to join hands and sing some sort of "silly" song and people at the end of our pew did fall - hence I "almost" did!  It didn't bother or impress me, but neither did it make me discount the present moving of the Holy Spirit and the fact that some have been touched powerfully by God through Rodney's ministry.

Probably the most powerful visit I did make was a few years back, when I travelled alone to Hong Kong and to the very FIRST (and as yet only!) "Glory and Grace Conference" hosted by the incredible Rob Rufus and City Church International.  I did encounter God powerfully, became over-awed by the true glory of the gospel and the power of the Cross and His resurrection and what that meant for me personally (far more in that one week than I had attending a Sovereign Grace ministries "cross-obsessed" church for 2 years!)

Strange Fire?:
These initial experiences made me hunger to know more of God, alongside reading the Bible about promises such as from 1 Corinthians 14:24 and 25;

"But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an ungifted man enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so he will fall on his face and worship God, declaring that God is certainly among you".

To me this is one of the clearest Scriptural indicators of the potential power of the prophetic gift.  I admit I have not seen unbelievers convicted by much of modern prophecy today.  But just because I have not seen or experienced it, does NOT take away from the Word of God!  And one of my greatest frustrations with the cessationist viewpoint outlined by what seems like the WHOLE of the "Strange Fire" conference is exactly this;

Demonstration of excess and spurious means the genuine is not present or real.

RUBBISH!  How can these men who so-called claim they honour and value the Word of God really discount entire portions of Scripture just by the presence of excess?  I look forward to hearing the DVD strreams of "Strange Fire" but I am supremely unimpressed by Tim Challies summaries of the complete lack of exposition - particularly by alleged-"excellent" Bible teacher John Macarthur himself.

It seems appropriate to end this reflection by re-quoting Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones;

"The greatest sin of the evangelical church is to put God into a box and tell Him what He can and cannot do".

That is the only "Strange Fire" I see - but I remain grateful to Macarthur et al for re-stirring a passion within me to seek God through His Holy Spirit.  I have sorely missed Him these past two years!


Reformed and Charismatic from Terry Virgo on Vimeo.

Jesse Phillips on Experiencing God

I wonder if any readers remember Jesse Phillips - one of the wonderful pastors at Metro Life Church in Florida. It's a church on my hit list to definitely visit one day when money permits not least to finally meet Jesse and Janelle! But Jesse used to run a brilliant blog I loved called; "Prophetically Speaking". Due to demands on his time he had to sadly discontinue it. But I was sorting out my computer files today and found a Word file I am so glad I kept. When I knew that he was going to stop the blog, I saved all his blog posts for just such an occasion.

I was refreshed by reading this again and re-challenged!

Here's some of what he wrote. We need sensible charismatics who can argue from Scripture when you have cessationists such as Phil Johnson attacking charismatic doctrine (and not arguing from Scripture but experience I might add);

Cessationists can be driven by experience

What if I told you, "We need to go start a revival"? Or, "We need to experience more of God's power and have some amazing encounters with the Holy Ghost"? Or, "What the church really needs is an outpouring of the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts"?

How would you respond? You'd probably be concerned that I was turning into some kind of wild revivalist. You would think back to your own experience of how people abused the gifts and would be concerned that I was headed in the same direction.

You may say something like, "I know where that goes and we don't want to go there again." There is certainly much wisdom to be gained from experience. It does not make sense to keep repeating the same mistakes again and again.

There is, however, a universal human tendency to overreact to abuse and misdiagnose the problem. Whenever someone is shot and killed on the street, all of us face the temptation to ask how the criminal came into possession of a gun before asking why hatred filled his heart. Guns can be misused, but they are not the fundamental problem. The fundamental problem is in the person doing the abusing not the thing that is abused.

As good as wisdom from experience is, it also has limitations. It can lead to these misdiagnoses of problems.

And so, if you were to tell me, "I know where that goes" I would venture to ask, "Even though that's where it led last time, is it possible that it might not lead to the same place this time?" What if we were able to pursue the same things, yet learning from the abuses, be able to enjoy them in a way that is proper this time around?

There is a fine line between gaining wisdom from experience and investing authority in experience.

One of the reasons why people warn against things like revivalism and hot pursuit of the spiritual gifts is because some revivalists are emotionalists, placing authority in experience rather than scripture.

But here's my argument: it's just as easy for people who have had bad experiences to be driven by those experiences, rather than scripture. People who move away from the 'experiential' can, ironically, be just as driven by experience, either their own or others that they want at all costs to avoid. This is simply a different form of experientialism.

Many cessationists and others who have seen the abuses of the spiritual gifts would rather 'not go there' because of bad experiences. They invest authority in percieved bad experiencs and this motivates them toward avoidance, allowing their experiences to unduly influence their opinions on what is true and right.

Is there really a difference between being driven by bad experiences and idolizing good ones? Aren't both things different sides of the coin of experientialism?

I think that cessationists can be experientialists in as much as they think, "This can't be God's will, look at all this abuse." It's one thing to defend your view from scripture (which many cessationists, to their credit, try to do), and quite another to base it on your experience, good or bad.

I think that many cessationists and 'functional cessationists' are somewhat experiential, perhaps a bit more influenced by bad experiences, or the potential of, or the report of, than they they might be aware.

The person who has had a bad experience, and doesn't want any more bad experiences is just as driven by experience as the person who strongly wants a positive experience. The only differences that one is driven positively and the other driven negatively.

We must recognize the differences between abusing the gifts and the gifts themselves. We must also recognize the limitations of the wisdom that comes through experience. Finally, all of us, cessationists, charismatics and everyone in between, must learn to pursue experiences without investing them with authority.

There's one thing we can all be certain of: we'll never fully experience anything that we pursue only cautiously, God or his gifts.

Dave Holden's Plea for Charismatic Gifts and the Presence of God!

I was profoundly moved to read this plea by Dave Holden on his fantastic blog;

"As more and more "Charismatic" churches seem to have less and less gifts operating in their public meetings and performance rather than participation seems to be the way thing are going, I want to make an impassioned plea that we continue to stay biblical and truly "charismatic " by having more participation and less performance.

Gifts are wonderful. They are not optional and they are vital for enhancing our worship of Jesus, encouraging the members of the church and for impacting the unbeliever with the reality of a living God ... It's time for more Holy Spirit activity, not less. So let's expect more gifts to be in operation..

That statement really fit in with what I read in Dr Lloyd-Jones yesterday in his "Revival" sermons. Quench not the Spirit - should be our cry! Not "decently and in order"! We do not need calls for control and for restraint. We need to be awakened with the Spirit of revival! Dave Holden said elsewhere on his blog this;

"Revival: Why not NOW and why not HERE?".

A Report from Churchcentral, Birmingham (Newfrontiers)

So today Scott and I visited Churchcentral - our closest Newfrontiers church (about a half hour walk away). The reason? I was very excited to see on Terry Virgo's twitter feed that he was coming to preach this morning! Terry had come up last night to speak to the Birmingham elders and wives. He is a hard man to follow so knowing he was so close was a temptation too great to miss as well as being one of the few men I would travel miles to get to.

So here's how we found it;

Denomination:

Newfrontiers.

The building:

A very grand Edwardian style school in Edgbaston in Birmingham next to the University of Birmingham campus.

The neighborhood:

Nicer part of Birmingham - lots of students.

The cast:

Jonathan Bell (the Senior Pastor), Mark Titheridge (worship leader) and Terry Virgo himself.

What was the name of the service?

Sunday Morning.

How full was the building?

250 or so plus.

Did anyone welcome you personally?

Yes we were welcomed warmly by two men waiting outside the building and then even more warmly by a guy inside the building. He asked if it was our first time (I said yes) and told us where there were some free chairs - a really helpful pointer as the hall was quite packed.

Was your pew comfortable?

Yes moderately comfy.

How would you describe the pre-service atmosphere?

We deliberately arrived when the worship had just started - our new ploy to avoid uncomfortable chat such as; "So ... where do you normally worship?".

What were the exact opening words of the service?

See above. They were singing a Simon Brading song; "The God of Time and Eternity" when we arrived.

What books did the congregation use during the service?

None. A Powerpoint projector.

What musical instruments were played?

A guitar, a keyboard, drums.

Did anything distract you?

Nope not really. Probably the only thing was looking around during the worship because we couldn't see Terry. A tad concerned he was ill and couldn't make it! Fortunately he and Wendy walked in with Jonathan Bell around 12:00 probably from the first 09:15 service.

Was the worship stiff-upper-lip, happy clappy, or what?

Very powerful, moving and full of the Presence of the Spirit. We only sung around three songs but there were many contributions from people across the congregation. Prayers, readings of Scripture and a couple of prophecies.

Exactly how long was the sermon?

Around 50 minutes.

On a scale of 1-10, how good was the preacher?

9 and 1/2. Vintage Terry!

Text and summary of sermon:

2 Kings 9:1-9 - the 4 lepers.

Terry opened by talking about church history being full of God's interventions. You cannot project church history like a business. At times it does look as though God has forgotten His church and then He breaks through! The church is the business of an interventionist, active God who chooses to act.

The context of the text - the people were promised by prophecy that by tomorrow food would be cheap. The people may have expected an SAS crack squad but the story turns on 4 lepers.

These four people had no other agenda and nothing to live for. The incredible power of people whom nothing else matters. They were powerful because they were reckless with no other agenda.

The second point Terry made was the one that REALLY got and challenged me. He drew attention to verse 9 of the text; "they entered and ate and drank and carried silver and gold and clothes and then moved to the next tent". Terry noted that this text is usually preached in a typical evangelical fashion; "You are saved - now go out and serve!". But he asked - do we take time to enjoy the benefits of salvation? Did you taste any of the goodness of the food?

We are not always filled with that sense of wonder now it is mine now! It is an amazing discovery - Jesus Christ is MY righteousness! I WOKE UP THIS MORNING SPOTLESS IN THE SIGHT OF GOD!

The early apostles burst into the street after the Spirit fell on them drunk - they didn't care because the Spirit had fallen! It is possible as Christians to not be excited in the wonder of the gospel because we do not look too closely. The leper's first thought must have been "What have we stumbled upon?!". The leper's got their spoil of the victory. The word "spoil" appears countless times in the Bible - spoil is what you get when a battle is won!

God gives gifts freely. It is all ours because of His victory! Terry was speaking at a seminar at "Together in the North" on the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Many people had not yet received the Spirit because they didn't understand it is a free gift! Miracles, healings and miracles can be freely received because of Him! Come and take! Let's receive because it is free!

We come to God hidden in the obedience of Jesus Christ!

This story tells us that when we have no other agenda and you are reckless - then you are dangerous! Have we found what has been left in the tent? The enemy has fled!

Which part of the service was like being in heaven?

The sermon. Terry once again demonstrated his outstanding gifting - that he can preach a sermon and it is EXACTLY what I needed to hear!

And which part was like being in... er... the other place?

The sheer dread of hearing the words; "We are going to take a short break before the sermon".

What happened when you hung around after the service looking lost?

Terry closed the message by bringing some words of knowledge about people with different health needs and said he wanted to pray for them. We left.

How would you describe the after-service coffee?

Not sure - didn't try it.

How would you feel about making this church your regular (where 10 = ecstatic, 0 = terminal)?

6 - definitely thinking about it!

Did the service make you feel glad to be a Christian?

Yes definitely!

What one thing will you remember about all this in seven days' time?

While we were praying during the worship I had a vision of two cogs grinding and making an awful noise and felt God was saying that I have let disappointment and cynicism in the church start to affect me. As I was watching I saw a hand pour a bottle of oil over the cogs and watched them start to move smoothly and speedily again. I felt Him graciously remind me of His true wonderful and gracious heart!

John MacArthur asks "Have we forgotten the Holy Spirit?"

I was very challenged by a recent tweet of John Macarthur - where he asked; "Have we forgotten the Holy Spirit"? He went on to make the point that a decade or more ago all we ever heard about was talk of the Holy Spirit - even though much was debate and discussion. And now? Now he suggested that once again the Holy Spirit has sadly become the "forgotten member of the Trinity".

I was profoundly challenged by this. As we grew up in Dunstable and observed the church steadily making it's way from it's reformed/charismatic balance to staunchly cessationist - John Macarthur and his book; "Charismatic Chaos" was a book often quoted (and one I profoundly resented). It's only recently I have come to appreciate MacArthur's wider ministry! But my impression growing up was that Macarthur was most definitely not a man "pro" the Holy Spirit in action! So for him to say this - what's going on? I think he is right in many ways:

1. Baptism in the Holy Spirit: The traditional charismatic debates such as the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit have all but quietened. Many reformed/charismatics have striven to "not speak about this" for the sake of unity. Interestingly enough even men who strongly defend the Biblical position of the baptism of the Spirit as a distinct, definite experience such as Terry Virgo are not permitted back into the "evangelical camp"! Movements such as Newfrontiers that traditionally accept this position seem to rarely teach on it (apart from the occasional seminar at a conference) because it is seen perhaps as an established truth. I would guess that Alpha courses would be the place where this is still taught.

2. Charismatic Gifts: Most evangelicals tend to hold the "open but cautious" position that they accept the gifts of the Holy Spirit have not ceased - as cessationists such as Macarthur strongly teach. But such evangelicals would not actively seek and pursue such gifts for use and enjoyment in the church setting. For example I recently attended Grace Church in Bristol - part of the SGM group of churches. Their leader C J Mahaney has progressively taken a similar route to my former pastor Stanley Jebb - quietening on teaching on the baptism of the Holy Spirit, emphasizing indwelling sin and the Cross more than the Presence of the Holy Spirit and most recently the removal of the term "apostolic". I was a member of Grace Church in Bristol for 2 years and rarely saw use of the charismatic gifts (occasionally prophecy and never tongues or the word of knowledge). However I was really encouraged to hear the senior pastor preach strongly and encourage seeing these gifts still!

Again what seems to me as an observer is that both positions have polarized somewhat. The cessationists are consistent and never see what they don't believe or expect. The "continuationists" (or the "open but cautious") group would teach now and then that the gifts are expected but without active hope and faith may not see regular manifestations of the Spirit (other than the occasional "spontaneous" Scripture reading!). And the charismatic groups may not teach regularly because it has become the "norm".

3. Revival: - when people such as Mark Heath and I were growing up in Dunstable, it was regular practice to pray passionately for revival. My greatest teacher in prayer was our pastor Dr Stanley Jebb - he was an awesome example of intercession. I will never forget him exhorting us to pray "as though oxygen was limited". Even though the Charismatic Movement was perhaps declining in freshness - there was enough expectation of the Presence of the Spirit to go on longing for more. Then when the Toronto Blessing arrived in the 1990's, Brownsville and later Lakeland and now the Bay of the Holy Spirit Revival - all these "times of refreshing" have led to a refreshing of hope for a greater outpouring of the Spirit.

Or have they? Terry Virgo spoke often of how prayer and expectation for revival was key in his growing up. Has hope declined somewhat? Are we not so sure that God is preparing to move? Hence our prayer and intercession has also waned?

So what are we to make of John Macarthur's challenge? Good it may be that debates/disagreements have quietened down. Good it may be that men such as Rob Rufus, John Piper and Mark Driscoll are bringing discussion of the gospel back to the fore - but surely any true gospel should automatically see an increased manifest Presence of the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit really is "forgotten" as Macarthur suggests - then that gospel surely is missing a vital Person.

Stanley Jebb was speaking at the "Life in the Spirit" conference in 1987 on "Reformed Doctrine and Charismatic Experience". It was an outstanding talk and in my opinion a template that could have saved many churches from charismatic excess and error and, if applied, could have saved other more cautious churches from throwing out charismatic life. But in particular he said this;

"It is my conviction that sound biblical doctrine plus the life and power of the Holy Spirit could be well nigh unstoppable. In a sense reformed doctrine is the fuel - and the Holy Spirit is the fire and we need to have the doctrine and see it set on fire by the power of the Holy Spirit".

We need so much more. I always think the Word of God lays down the standard of Spirit-life we should be seeing in churches. For example; can any church claim they see this?

An unbeliever entering a church and hearing all prophesying - is convicted and repents, worshipping God? - (1 Corinthians 14:24-25).

A prophet interrupting another prophet because he has a word to bring, the first sitting down and deferring to him? - (1 Corinthians 14:30).

At the end of a church prayer meeting, the whole place was shaken (physically) and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit? - (Acts 4:31).

Review of "Joy Unspeakable" (Martyn Lloyd-Jones) by Mark Heath

My old Dunstable friend Mark Heath has written an excellent review of one of my favourite books; "Joy Unspeakable" by Dr Martyn Ll0yd-Jones. It's really fitting that I read this review so early in 2011 as I have been reflecting on my deep need for a new filling of the Spirit of God and a desire - a desperate desire - for a year of encounters with Him.

It's so good I am going to reprint in

full so here it is;

"This book contains 24 sermons from Martyn Lloyd-Jones on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Lloyd-Jones is of course well known and highly regarded in evangelical circles for his outstanding preaching gift. However, the position he argues for in this book is a controversial one, particularly amongst those who otherwise would agree with his every word.

In this book, Lloyd-Jones builds a biblical case that the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is a distinct experience from conversion. He sees it as the most urgent need for the church of the present day to be baptised in the Spirit, which he believes is the same thing as saying that we need revival.

The first chapter establishes his conviction that the baptism or “sealing” with the Spirit is distinct from conversion. Amongst many examples he gives, he points to Jesus’ own experience of being baptised with the Spirit. He is keen to emphasise the experiential nature of the baptism – it is a kind of “drenching” with the Spirit.

The chief marks of the baptism he highlights are a great joy, a real assurance, and power for witness. He does not believe that it is directly related to sanctification, although it is of course a great encouragement to growth in holiness. He urges those who do not have “joy inexpressible” to seek the baptism. He does not believe that the baptism can only be received once.

Pentecostals and charismatics however should not assume he is uncritically “on their side” in this debate. Though he rigorously refutes cessationism, he also critiques certain charismatic ideas as well. Perhaps most notable is his stress on the sovereignty of God in giving the baptism and gifts. He rejects any assumption that you simply have to follow certain steps to receive them, or that they can be “claimed”. He is highly suspicious of anything that could be interpreted as psychological manipulation or the power of suggestion. Instead he urges people to earnestly seek to receive the baptism, but at the same time indicates that we cannot force God’s hand.

He manages to show tremendous balance throughout. He is aware of the danger of quenching the Spirit on the one hand, and of gullibly being led into error on the other, and is equally forceful in warning against both. Perhaps most impressive is his determination to follow the Scriptures wherever they lead, even if that put him at odds with many of those who moved in the same reformed evangelical circles. He was determined not to interpret Scripture in light of our experience, but to evaluate our experience (or lack of it) in the light of Scripture.

Throughout the book, he illustrates his points with stories of people throughout history who have met with God in remarkable ways. Some have criticised him for making the baptism seem “out of reach” to ordinary people by focussing on these particularly exceptional examples. But that would be slightly unfair, since he takes pains to point out that this experience is available to all kinds of people, even those with the most level-headed of dispositions. Others criticise his emphasis on the sovereignty of God by appealing to Luke 11:13 as a promise that we will receive when we ask. However, he does address this concern, and again it is his determination that we settle for nothing less than the real thing that prevents him from endorsing various charismatic attempts to guide people into receiving the experience.

Although this is quite a long book, I would say it remains essential reading for those wanting to fully examine the biblical evidence on the matter of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. He shows how almost all the evidence in the gospels and Acts points in this direction, and is willing to interact with all the counter-arguments that are usually raised (including 1 Cor 12:13). Most importantly though, it stirs up a hunger to personally receive more of the Spirit, and calls us to earnest prayer for our churches to experience true revival".

Dave Holden Blog!!

I just absolutely have to draw attention to one of (in my opinion) the unsung heroes of Newfrontiers - Dave Holden. For a couple of years Dave hasn't spoken at "Together on a Mission" - I'm at a loss to understand why. I greatly appreciate and value Dave's preaching. He speaks so simply and so easily to understand but with such profound anointing. So I always tend to be on the watch hoping that Dave comes our way - but alas, as yet, I still hope!

I was thrilled today to find that Dave Holden has his own blog run at his home church - New Community Church in Sidcup, London. He blogs as he speaks - simply yet profoundly.

A couple of blogs I want to draw attention to;

1. Writing about the Newfrontiers Prayer and Fasting event and the focus on Revival, Dave said;

" One more thing, I still believe in the importance of the restoration of the Church. My passionate prayer is that restoring the Church is not an end in itself, but is actually vital for revival. Maybe the last 40 years of restoration has all been key, for when revival comes, the church will be able to contain, channel and overflow the power of revival in an unprecedented way, which will result in amazing lasting fruit to the glory of Jesus".

2. This blog in particular awakened such a hunger and an ache within me. WHY, WHY, WHY is this attitude so rare in Christian leaders particularly in the United Kingdom? Dave wrote about "Encountering God" and said;

We held an Encounter God evening at NCC. For some time now we have felt that we do not have enough time to just wait on God and minister to one another in the things of the Spirit, so we set aside an evening to do just that. It was a wonderful time and people turned out in great numbers.

It's great to be in a church where so many want more of God. Many were refreshed in their experience of God, many more moved on in gifts of the Spirit as they were encouraged to bring words over others for the first time. We had the privilege of leading several people into the baptism in the Holy Spirit. It's such a joy to see people being overwhelmed by the Spirit for the first time and reminds me of the importance of laying hands on people to receive as well as giving them the time to really breakthrough".

3. Another subject close to my heart - Dave wrote a blog on the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I've noticed that many cautious charismatic churches are now watering down the active Presence and power of the Holy Spirit. They are calling themselves "continuationist" - a subtle but definite change. Rather than identifying themselves as churches that practice and believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, they are simply identifying that they believe the gifts of the Spirit have "continued". Dave writes;

"We continue to encourage folk to contribute in all of our meetings and to expect God to use them in the gifts of the Holy Spirit. As more and more "Charismatic" churches seem to have less and less gifts operating in their public meetings and performance rather than participation seems to be the way thing are going, I want to make an impassioned plea that we continue to stay biblical and truly "charismatic " by having more participation and less performance.

Gifts are wonderful. They are not optional and they are vital for enhancing our worship of Jesus, encouraging the members of the church and for impacting the unbeliever with the reality of a living God. 1 Cor 12-14 makes little sense if the expectation was not to have the operation of the gifts in our regular meetings".

And finally - and probably for me most importantly;

"It's time for more Holy Spirit activity, not less. So let's expect more gifts to be in operation".

I really look forward to being able to benefit from Dave Holden's incredible ministry through this blog and will be following it closely. New Community Church in Sidcup have a couple of other blogs related to the church - one in particular worth a read is;

"Sermon Q and A Blog" - a chance for listeners to text in their questions to the preachers.

Arthur Wallis on Apostles and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit

I spent last night sorting through my collection of New Wine and Restoration Magazines and was incredibly stirred to read two articles by Arthur Wallis. It seemed to me from my understanding that Arthur Wallis was seen as the elder and respectable statesman of the Charismatic Movement. Leaders such as Bryn Jones or Terry Virgo often came under criticism for various theological or ecclesiastical stands that they took. Arthur Wallis never seemed to - that I could read.

I know in my home church - New Covenant Church in Dunstable - Wallis was held in high esteem by Stanley Jebb and the leadership and indeed he came to speak at several of our "All Saints Nights" - celebration evenings of worship and preaching. So to find these articles on issues that are so important to me was an exciting find.

1. "Apostles" - from Restoration Magazine - November/December 1981.

A few key quotes to encourage you to read the article;

"We need to see these men as primarily those who brought the word of revelation and direction into the living situations where God was building His church ... the view that apostles and prophets have passed away, and that spiritual gifts have ceased both rest on the faulty premise that the completion of Scripture rendered them obsolete".

Arthur Wallis answers this faulty premise;

"Though we have inspired writings, we still need inspired utterances and having the Word of revelation, we still need men (and women) of revelation".

He concludes this excellent article;

"The Ephesians 4 Ministries of today are concerned primarily with an experiential foundation, one that has to be freshly laid for every redeemed community that comes into being ... for many 'Apostles today?' is nothing more than a hypothetical question. If, as we believe, the end-time shakings are upon us then the ministry of the apostles will become increasingly crucial".

I was amazed that he wrote this article in 1981 - he is addressing a perspective on apostles that is only really being preached and taught maturely recently. Proof of his unique gifting as a teacher.

2. "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" - from Restoration Magazine - March/April 1979

Once again I found this article amazingly advanced in revelatory teaching for the time in which it was written. Arthur Wallis drew on the typological teaching from Exodus - baptism in the Red Sea and in the cloud - to apply it to New Covenant life today. We need to be baptised in water just as we need to be baptised in the Holy Spirit. He said;

"God's people under the New Covenant need to be initiated into Christ as His Old Covenant people were initiated into Moses, that is by a baptism in cloud and sea. Neither water baptism nor Spirit baptism is an optional extra for the committed Christian".

One of the key words that the Word of God applies to the receiving of the Spirit is the word "upon". It seems that a lot of the more conservative church get confused with this and believe that if one has not received the Holy Spirit then it is an issue of "holiness". Arthur Wallis writes;

"The word that is used consistently and repeatedly to describe what happens in the Baptism in the Spirit but is never used simply of conversion is "upon". Th Old Testament prepares us for this. Anointing oil was poured "upon" the head of prophet, priest and king, not to make them God's people (for they were already that) but to fit them for their special service. God put the Spirit that was "upon" Moses "upon" the elders of Israel to equip them for leadership.

The Spirit coming "upon" the Lord Jesus at the Jordan was not to make Him more holy than He was - an impossibility - but that the works and words of God ... might be manifested in Him ... Later in the Acts we read how the Spirit came "upon", fell "upon" and was poured "upon" different groups of disciples. Paul reminds Titus of the "Holy Spirit that was poured upon us richly".

And Wallis asks;

"Have you had an "upon" experience of the Holy Spirit?".

I do hope both articles are of considerable interest! We dare not forget either of these two vital subjects - Apostles and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Speaking of Arthur Wallis - if anyone is interested in reading more early Charismatic material by him - I do strongly recommend looking at the "Revival Library" website - they have preserved some of the early conference notes which he hosted! Even more exciting (to me anyway!) - the "Revival Library" have carefully made available a complete collection of the Restoration Magazine - from which I have made these links available here. Only £19.99!

Disobeying Commands?

Something occured to me yesterday. Traditionally in the charismatic/cessationist debate, we charismatics are always accused of being "frothy" and "experience-obsessed" while cessationists pride themselves on honouring and being committed to "the Word". And in the debate is often based around; "I experienced this" and the response; "It doesn't matter - your experience is irrelevant - they've ceased".

However there ARE a number of Scriptures that cessationists have never answered. If these Scriptures are to be read as they appear then many so-called "men and women of the Book" are being disobedient to the very Word of God that they claim to honour and revere. Here's two that spring to my mind;

1. 1 Thessalonians 5:20; "Do not despise prophetic utterances".

So does not Stanley Jebb's statement; "Calling silly remarks prophecy" come dangerously close to despising what actually may be prophetic utterances? That does not mean of course that "silly remarks" never happen - of course they do. But I would not like to put myself in the position of being guilty of despising this gift of the Holy Spirit and thus quenching Him.

2. 1 Timothy 1:18; "This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you fight the good fight".

Again to cite Stanley Jebb (only because he is the cessationist I probably most know and most read) - he writes; "So, since the final word has been spoken, such signs are neither necessary nor possible". Necessary? Possible? So how does this take into account this clear instruction from Paul the apostle (and writer of most of the New Testament) that there is a degree to which the gift of prophecy is ESSENTIAL for fighting a good Christian fight? Is this not a clear reason as to why the Word of God tells us not to despise prophecy?

And finally - a verse that a former friend of mine and former blogger - Jesse Phillips - used to base a lot of his writing on;

3. 1 Corinthians 14:1: "Pursue love, yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but especially that you may prophesy".

Of course love is our primary calling (lest cessationists accuse me of ignoring the context of 1 Corinthians 13) but what of this command - clear command - of Scripture to "desire earnestly" spirituals but ESPECIALLY that we may prophecy? When did you or I last hear from the pulpit a sermon exhorting us to eagerly desire the bestowing of spiritual gifts but especially prophecy?

Just a few Christmas thoughts of mine. For me personally I want to ensure that 2010 is a year of heeding these commands of Scripture - that I honour prophecy and use them as a God-given grace gift to fight a good fight and thereby eagerly desiring especially prophecy.

Dr Lloyd-Jones on the Baptism of the Spirit and Tongues

A quick quote from Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones. I'm reading his chapter on the gift of tongues and he has a rather persuasive argument (everything Dr Lloyd-Jones says is rather persuasive) that I'm not used to in my charismatic experience. He is arguing that Christians cannot speak in tongues at will. At first when I read it I didn't agree but I'm increasingly beginning to see the logic. Hopefully will post some more quotes and thoughts soon.

For now - here's his opening statement in the sermon;

"Let me say again that one of my main objects in this whole series of sermons is to safeguard the doctrine of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. There is a tendency on the part of some, because they dislike the gifts and the manifestations and the excesses to throw out the doctrine of the baptism of the Spirit with it. Let me underline this important fact - you must differentiate between the two. It is possible for a man to be baptized with the Holy Spirit without ever speaking in tongues".

I wish this critically important statement could have been taken to heart in my church history. It would have saved a lot of pain and heartache and upset. For this is definately my observation - that doctrine has been changed BECAUSE of dislike of excess and manifestations. And I just cannot fathom why that should happen. Paul the apostle never once commanded the Corinthians to STOP using the gifts of the Spirit and they were most guilty of excess. He commanded right use - and that surely should be our practice too.

Cessationism = Careful or Quenching?

Any who step across the portals of this blog will know I do not have a high opinion of the cessationist position. I have no shame in stating I passionately believe that all gifts of the Holy Spirit are given and distributed "as He will" today and are for the building up and edifying of the risen Lord's church. It was useful to be reminded by Stanley Jebb's recent blog post however that some cessationists don't like the claim that they are skeptical and guilty of quenching the Spirit;

"Christians who hold to a cessationist position are not skeptics nor unbelievers but are generally concerned conservative or reformed evangelical Christians who hold certain views about miracles, signs and wonders".

Traditionally the expectation has been on charismatic Christians to explain why they believe gifts should and do happen today. I think the environment has now changed - thanks to theologians such as D A Carson and Wayne Grudem and my favourite - Gordon Fee - along with others who have argued rationally and intellectually that there is NO Biblical statement that suggests the gifts of the Holy Spirit have passed away or ceased. Therefore I believe that that it is now upto cessationists to prove themselves.

If Stanley Jebb is correct in stating that cessationists are neither skeptics nor unbelievers but simply "concerned" Christians who hold to the supremacy of the Word of God then they need to argue consistently from Scripture - and not resort to scaremongering or citing examples of excess such as the "tortilla lady" that so upset John MacArthur. Cessationists claim to stand for orthodoxy. Stanley Jebb calls cessationists; "Concerned conservative or reformed evangelical Christians" - so the question we are left with is; "Is orthodoxy enough?".

Dr Martyn Ll0yd-Jones would think not;

"It is becoming clear to everybody - at least it should be - that the Christian church today is failing and failing lamentably. It is not enough even to be orthodox ... people want a word of authority ... We need authority and we need authentication. It is not enough merely that we state these things and demonstrate them and put them logically. Is it not clear that we are living in an age when we need some special authentication - in other words we need revival".

During the sermon Dr Lloyd-Jones then goes on to speak about cessationism. He begins by working carefully through the New Testament passages that demonstrate the gifts of the Spirit never ceased and summarises;

"It is perfectly clear in the New Testament times, the gospel was authenticated in this way by signs, wonders and miracles of various characters and descriptions. And you cannot begin to understand the New Testament, the epistles as well as the book of Acts without holding that fact in your mind".

One of the things that really irks me about cessationism is that they have divorced signs and wonders and gifts of the Spirit from the gospel - the spreading flame. The New Testament shows clearly that unbelievers are to come into the midst of believers "standing and prophesying" and the result is that they will be convicted, will fall down and confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. Spiritual gifts should impress and attract the world!

To distort the Word of God to claim these have ceased has stunted and robbed unbelievers of a means by which God intended to reveal Himself to them.

Let us be clear! 1 Corinthians 14:24 does NOT state (in this instance) that unbelievers come in and hear the "preaching". It speaks of them coming in and hearing the "prophesying" - the inspired, instant, Spirit-inspired utterances of the gathered church! Orthodoxy? What is "cautious" orthodoxy doing to save the lost masses in London, Birmingham, Bombay, Calcutta and of course China? Caution? Dr Lloyd-Jones summarises this cessationist argument as;

"We have got the truth so you do not need anything miraculous or supernatural".

His answer?

"The Scriptures never anywhere say that these things were only temporary - never! There is no such statement anywhere! "

This post is not the place for a careful work through of the Scriptures cessationists like to use to claim the charismatic gifts have ceased (such as 1 Corinthians 13). My question is - are cessationists justified in claiming they are not trying to quench the Spirit but are rather "cautious" orthodox evangelicals. We must state the obvious - I don't believe ANY Christian would deliberately (at least I hope not) quench the Holy Spirit. Sadly they do. But I think the jury must remain out. All I see still of cessationist arguments are a people who are gripped by a spirit of self-control. They do not like being subject to the Holy Spirit and His designs and plans for advancing His church.

My personal experience and childhood is vastly different. I remember a glorious childhood growing up in a charismatic (yet never out of control) church. I remember what seemed like hours of heavenly worship standing with my parents watching and learning as they seemed "lost in wonder, love and praise". Sometimes someone would speak out in a strange tongue - and it didn't seem odd. It seemed fascinating. I remember even some of the elders bringing carefully weighed prophecies (rarely "silly remarks" that I remember as Stanley Jebb claims) that lifted even our hearts as children to God.

Then I remember the environment changing very definately. People eager to share prophecies would go up to the platform and speak with the elders and be sent down to their seats without being allowed to share (we would call it the "walk of shame"). Choruses and love songs were sung less and less and painfully tuneless hymns were sung more and more. Non-Christian friends of the family who would visit with us would ask; "Why have you lot become so miserable?".

Caution is okay - but it is a fine balance to walk before caution becomes quenching of the Holy Spirit. Let Dr Lloyd-Jones have the last word;

"This to me is one of the most urgent matters at this hour. With the church as she is and the world as it is, the greatest need today is the power of God through His Spirit in the church that we may testify not only to the power of the Spirit but to the glory and praise of the one and only Saviour - Jesus Christ our Lord".

Criticising Moves of God? Think Carefully ...

I noted previously that City Church International held a series of "Miracle Healing Meetings" in Hong Kong. The Sunday morning was a particularly incredible time of heavy anointing and of the manifest Presence of God. I've drawn attention to Rob's prophetic song - and I do URGE everyone to listen to it. The message was vintage Rob - and he was addressing Pharisees and legalists. He wasn't happy. But I do believe it is a message whose time has come (and will shortly be transcribed and published on the Rob Rufus blog). The Pentecostal/Charismatics traditionally have been criticised by the Reformed section of the church for not being "Word-based" enough. The emphasis and demand for orthodoxy has been overpowering.

Yet I have been reading John MacArthur's New Testament commentary on 1 Corinthians and I remain puzzled as to why no one applies the same stringent "tests" to a so-called academic who is held in great esteem by people such as C J Mahaney. For example those who "eagerly desire spiritual gifts" (as being obedient to 1 Corinthians 14:1) are told by MacArthur;

"The Corinthians were to stop seeking gifts because to do so is both persumptious and purposeless".

Further on MacArthur seems to contradict himself by on the one hand declaring;

"God does not bypass men's minds either to reveal or to teach His Word. There were no ecstatic, bizarre, trancelike experiences related to divine action or the prophet, such as occured and occurs with demonic revelation".

Did he not read the book of Acts where Peter fell into a trance just before going to Cornelius's house? We can therefore safely assume that ANY trances or ecstatic experiences that occur within the church today would be classed by MacArthur as demonic (and I guess that answers his views on the Lakeland Outpouring). Yet bizarrely enough MacArthur does seem to believe that there is a demonic counterfeit to spiritual gifts;

"People do not counterfeit what is not valuable. Satan counterfeits the Spirit's gifts because he knows they are so valuable in God's plan".

I don't understand how MacArthur can be so inconsistent in his exposition of pure Scripture and yet be very quick to point a finger of judgement at the flaws of men such as Todd Bentley or Rodney Howard-Browne or Bob Jones. Rob Rufus doesn't either. He said this:

"Isn't it amazing that as God begins to focus on what He is doing in Florida and He is breaking out across the world and the church has cried out for decades for a mighty move of God's Presence and healing - that when God brings it, some of the church is not happy with who He is using and they are not happy with the package or with tattoos on the man and go and dig out all the snot and all the stuff about Bob Jones's past. People are sending emails about what I must go and look up about Bob Jones and the sin he did in his past.

I am NOT interested! What I want to know is - is that God there? If God chooses to use Todd Bentley at the age of 32 then I say as a 53 year old - thank You Lord for Todd Bentley! Thank You for a new generation carrying the message of healing!

How can you listen to Bob Jones - do you know what he did 10-something years ago? How can you read the Psalms? That guy who wrote the Psalms is a weirdo - I tell you. Watch out reading the Psalms - you know you are reading the writings of a man that God was inspiring to write - that man saw a beautiful chick on a rooftop that he manipulated and connived as the king of Israel to get her? And he had illegitimate sex with her! Oh! Then she fell pregnant! Oh! Big problem now! What is she going to do when her husband finds out? Who happens to be one of the king's best friends?! So he betrayed his close friend and called him back from the battle and makes his friend drunk. Oh! Made his friend drunk!? So his friend would be so drunk and would go in and have sex with his wife and then he would think he made her pregnant!

You are reading the Psalms of a guy who wrote them and yet did this?! The husband said; "I'm not going in to be with my wife because my friends are out on the battlefield and I am not going to have that privilidge while they are out there". So he goes back to the battlefield and David arranges for Uriah to be murdered. Sure great was his repentance and David realised how serious what he had done and he repented from the depths of his heart and never did anything like that again in his life and when he died, God said; "This is a man after My own heart - who served My purposes in My generation".

We have got Pharisees in the church world and we have got Sadducees and I tell you - this is a true saying. If you are bleeding don't swim with the sharks. If you are bleeding and you are swimming with the sharks, do not let them know you are bleeding. I wouldn't want to fall into serious sin in much of the modern church because they will rip into you and rip your reputation apart. They will display your dirty washing across the internet and over email. They will disqualify you forever standing in ministry again. I felt the Holy Spirit say that He is getting quite angry with this. He said that these people who are always criticising the ones that I am using - He said, I am going to start scrutinising their lives and bringing out their dirty washing because when you operate in self-righteousness and pride then you forfeit the protection of grace because God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.

All these criticising, judgemental people have got stuff in their own cuboards that they are covering up. It is coming out in the open. The Holy Spirit is going to bring that stuff out. So I bless what God is doing in Florida - I bless Todd Bentley and I bless Bob Jones! I bless the prophets of God - I bless the work of God - I bless the fact that 25 people have been raised from the dead!".

Invading the Impossible, Ern Baxter and Back to Bristol

I have finally finished transcribing the awesome Part 10 to Rob's series on "Invading the Impossible" and what an addition it is! The whole theme of the sermon is; "Let God Impress You". How freeing is the message of true grace! So far I have published:

Invading the Impossible - Part 1 - "How to Make the Promises of God Manifest in Your Life".

Invading the Impossible - Part 2

Invading the Impossible - Part 3

Invading the Impossible - Part 4 - "Dealing with Disappointment".

Invading the Impossible - Part 5 - "Refusing to Accept the Unacceptable".

Invading the Impossible - Part 6 - "Overthrowing Religious Control".

Invading the Impossible - Part 7 - "What Does Jesus' Exaltation Mean for Us?".

Invading the Impossible - Part 8 - "Overthrowing Religious Control - Part 2".

Invading the Impossible - Part 9 - "Invading By Reigning".

Invading the Impossible - Part 10 - "Let God Impress You".

I have said it before. Rob Rufus has spoken about having books inside him that will be published - I so pray that this is one of them! Secondly I have managed to upload a video of Ern Baxter speaking at New Covenant Church in Dunstable on his last visit just before he went to glory. He was speaking on the vital subject; "The Spirit and the Word". In this clip Ern highlights the dangers of living charismatic life without the Word of God. But on the other hand he makes this wonderful statement:

"The reason that I am a charismatic tonight is that for 60 years I have had the most delightful manifestations and evidences of the Holy Spirit in my life that I wouldn't trade for anything!".

There are so-called "Reformed charismatic" churches today that are investigating why the gifts of the Holy Spirit are not occuring in their meetings anymore but no one seems to know why it is vital that the gifts of the Spirit do happen in church meetings when we gather together! Surely Ern Baxter's comment (and indeed the entirety of Rob Rufus's 'Invading the Impossible' series) makes it clear! It is about God manifesting Himself! It is about encountering God! It is about knowing Him and being known by Him!

Here is the clip from You-Tube:



Finally I am just about to travel down to Bristol with Scott and visit the SGM church my family attends. It's the first time I have been back since my problems with them almost 3 years ago so quite a big step! The pastors have agreed to allow me back for this Sunday because my two younger sisters are getting baptised so it will be a day of mixed emotions I am sure. I may write something about the visit if there is something worth saying.

Liberating Leadership

"And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ..." (Eph 4v11-13)

This is a passage of scripture which I love so much. When I first studied it properly, it changed my understanding of church. However, I am not here to defend apostles today, Terry Virgo does that far better than I can. Rather I want to write about what leadership is for.

It is a great honour to be posting here on my favourite blog site. I do so at Dan's invitation, and I say at the outset that this is effectively a joint post, reflecting something very much on our hearts. The inspiration came from a comment that Dan made over at SGuncensored (comment 23). He said:

"We are coming close to the crunch of the issue surely? Essentially the issue is - does the Bible teach that church leaders speak for God? And when they do speak do we therefore take their words as God Himself? Surely the answer must be no! If that was the case then
1. Why has the Word of God been given.
2. Why has the Holy Spirit been poured out?
3. Why does the New Testament speak of “you (corporate) are a royal priesthood, a holy nation”?
Please hear me, I’m not saying that Christians leaders are irrelevant! I believe passionately in Ephesians 4 - that such ministry are the gifts of the ascended Christ. But I wonder if we still are retaining a degree of Old Testament Law thinking and haven’t truly grasped that we are ALL a royal priesthood and therefore ALL have the right of access to the manifest Presence of God and can all pray to Him and hear from Him? Surely it’s Old Testament Law thinking to still look to such leaders (one leader - many members) to hear from God?"

Dan's comment really stirred something in my heart about the need to have a correct, New Covenant view of leadership. So after some time sharing on the telephone, we felt it would be helpful to give an overview of what leadership is for, what the leaders are called to, and also what the members of the congregation are called to. So here goes:


The call of leadership

It says "to equip the saints for the work of ministry." That is a high calling; that the members of the flock - all the flock - grow up and are able to minister fruitfully in whatever their gifting is. The leadership is not for the benefit of the leaders, but with the ultimate purpose that the whole body reach maturity in the faith, every one doing their part.

Ephesians 4 gives a vision of leadership that enables every member to be fully released in their gifting, not ministry by the exclusive few.


The call to the body

The ministry of every member is taught throughout Scripture. Here are some examples:

The priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2v5, 9)
So every member is a priest. There is no "priestly class" that has superior access into the presence of God, no-one who has a greater standing before God, no-one whose prayers carry a greater weight before God. Every single believer in the congregation is a priest - equally, with equal right to be in God's awesome presence, equal right to seek His face and to manifest His glory.

Heb 7v27 tells that a priest offered up "sacrifices, first for his own sins and then for the people's". Now Jesus has offered the one perfect sacrifice - so there is no more sacrifice for sins - but there is a principle here of priesthood; the priest did not only enter God's presence for himself, but also for the people. In the same way, as priests of the new covenant, not only do we have access into God's presence for our own blessing, but also for the blessing of others. We can enter in and pray for ourselves; we can also enter in and pray for others. Every member is qualified to minister the grace of God for others. We don't need to go and have hands laid on us by the pastor or elders (although they can just as any other member can). We are a body, a kingdom of priests - all of us - with the right to enter in and the authority to minister the grace of God to others.

The prophethood of all believers (Acts 2v17-18)
Here Peter is quoting Joel 2, and it is very clear that every single servant of God should receive the Holy Spirit and thus be enabled to prophesy! Of course, in 1 Cor 12-14, there are clearly those who have the gift of prophecy, as well as other gifts, but the point being made is that every believer has the ability to hear from God, to dream dreams, to see visions. Just as there are evangelists but we are all called to witness, there are those with gifts of healing but we can all pray for the sick, so there are prophets but all have the potential to hear from God.

Hearing from God is not the exclusive realm of leadership. I would hope that leaders lead by example and make it their business to seek His face and to hear His voice for the direction of the fellowship, but God can speak to anyone in the fellowship. It was Moses that cried out "Oh, that all the Lord's people were prophets and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them" (Num 11v29). Moses had the heart of a true shepherd.

The gifting of all believers (1 Cor 12v7, 1 Peter 1v10)
"Each one" has a gift. The gifts are given "for the profit of all". Attendance at meetings is not the goal of church. A body is living - that means each member is active; gifts are manifesting. If these things are not present, it doesn't matter how large the church is, how dynamic the leadership is, the church itself is missing out of the purpose of God. If the gifts are given to build up the church, then if every member is not functioning, the church is not being built up as God intended.

This is such a challenge to leadership. Are leaders actively nurturing the flock in such a way as to encourage people to exercise their gifts? These needs liberty - yes liberty to make mistakes and to learn, and to grow.

The goal of maturity for all believers (Eph 4v13, Col 1v28-29)
It troubles me when I read of churches where leaders have to be consulted about almost every area of life. As well as giving the leader too much control (Jesus is our Master), such excessive authority stunts growth. When someone is a new Christian, it can be necessary in discipleship to cover very basic issues (in one recent discipleship class, one of my fellow leaders had to explain that it was right to pay bills), but believers grow up. When my children are older I wouldn't dream of telling them that they can't go and live in a particular city or nation; while I might advise them, it is their decision.

It is the Lord's purpose that every believer grows to maturity, knowing what is right, having God's wisdom, dependent upon Him, not upon men. That is not to say leadership becomes irrelevant. Just as parents of grown children will always run to help at times of crisis, so the leader continues to help. But this is not control, this is tending to the wounded soul, loving, listening, praying, advising, encouraging.


What leaders do - God's way

Good leadership will provide an atmosphere where such mature life flourishes. To many leaders such an atmosphere might appear dangerous - with prophets speaking that which may bring direction to the church; with beautiful examples of godliness which change the leader's own walk; with glorious times of worship where everyone is pressing into the glory of God and the leader finds himself standing in awe - his leadership forgotten - because the presence of God is so sweet; where new leaders are emerging, even those to whom the leader will say, "God is raising up you now, it is time for me to move on."

Leadership is not given to stunt growth, but to release growth.

Leadership is not given to mediate between the people and God, but to point people TO the one Mediator and lead them into the fullness and freedom of what He has accomplished once for all.

Leadership is not given to pray on behalf of the people but to teach people the true power of prayer.

Leadership is not given to replace the Holy Spirit but IMPART the Holy Spirit!

Leadership is not given to see, facilitate and accomplish vision but to visualise vision and lead the charge towards the accomplishment of the said vision.

Leadership is not called to never move beyond the Cross but, standing firm on the glorious truth of the Cross, advance forward in freedom and liberty and take the Promised Land.

To quote, Rob Rufus - "I want to build myself into redundancy in this church because that is the purpose of the five-fold ministries - is to equip and train the believers so that we become redundant in the locality." Glorious!

But how?

"Shepherd the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood" (Acts 20v28). Shepherds care, feed, heal and protect, and shepherds know their sheep (John 10v14) - the shepherd is not aloof, but has real relationship with the flock.

From his own example, Paul said, "For I have not shunned to declare to you the whole counsel of God" (Acts 20v27). The leader teaches, from the whole of scripture, not just his favourite doctrines.

"Be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity" (1 Tim 4v12). Leaders should be godly examples - and not in outward conduct - but in love, in speech, in spirit; there is a spirit about the leader (even the presence of the Holy Spirit Himself) which impacts the lives of those in his care - or should.

"Give attention to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine" (1 Tim 4v13). Yes, the scriptures must be read, the truth must be declared, the flock should be lovingly exhorted concerning what is right, sound doctrine is important. Paul tells Timothy later "hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim 1v13). He says that having waxed lyrical about the grace of God shown to him. Thus the true shepherd will lay a foundation of the grace of God. It is grace that heals the wounds of the enemy's accusation and so it must be declared from the rooftops.

"And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance that they may know the truth" (2 Tim 2v24-25). We must be true to scripture - correction is biblical! But how correction is done is very important. It is to be done gently, with patience, with humility. If a leader meets opposition, the first place he should go is before the Lord; he should be searching his heart "is it me, Lord?" But if confrontation is needed, the surely it must come with tenderness and love, with a longing that the person would be set free by the truth. Sometimes the rebuke might have to be sharp (see Titus 1v13), but it is with the aim "that they may be sound in the faith."

"Preach the Word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching" (2 Tim 4v2). The leader is a faithful teacher, not necessarily teaching what is popular, but patiently seeking to convince and challenge, and lovinging stirring up the whole flock to obey the Lord and grow.

"Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfact in Christ Jesus. To this end I also labour, striving according to His working which works in me mightily" (Col 1v28-29). A leader is passionate, longing for the maturity of every person entrusted to his care. That passion is expressed here by words like "labour" and "strive". A leader must strive with His energy, so He must be much in the presence of the Lord, and completely dependent upon Him. So surely he should be passionate in prayer, urgent in preaching and explaining the truth, faithful in serving.

What a high calling!! Yet, there is great encouragement: "...our sufficiency is from God, who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor 3v5-6).


What the body does

Leaders are actually a part of the body, but I am using the term here to describe those in the church who are not leaders, that is, the remainder of the flock. What are the flock called to?

Submit!
Yes it is scriptural, and just because it is abused doesn't mean it can be ignored. Now, when we seek to understand what a scripture means, our interpretation must not contradict other scriptures - if it does then there is something wrong with the interpretation. So submission does not mean blind and silent obedience - it simply cannot given the scriptures above concerning the call of the body. A healthy church is a maturing church and maturing children have a thirst for knowledge and ask questions! So submission does not mean silence!

Submission does mean respect, and it means following the leadership as they lead and pioneer the vision God has given to the church. It means trusting the leadership to make godly decisions, and responding to the lead (unless it is clearly unbiblical or immoral) even if we think "well perhaps that might be better" because we know Jesus is the Chief Shepherd and these are men who will give an account.

It means praying for leaders, forgiving leaders when they get it wrong (because they will as they are fallible), it means talking to leaders rather than simply about leaders.

Submission shows love and honour. Out of such an attitude, submission also means a humble questioning and sharing concerns, suggesting perhaps a different way, seeking greater understanding and sharing prophetic revelation.

And leaders in this atmosphere of trust, who have an ear for the Holy Spirit, will listen for His voice not just in their own meetings, but through the flock aswell.

Seek!
Earnestly and passionately seeking God themselves. Not for the pastor to do all, or to have all the answers. It's already been said that leadership is given, not to pray on behalf of the people but to teach the power of prayer and not to mediate but to point TO the mediator.

Speaking from my experience as a pastor - and I am not having a "go" here at all, just observing - there is a culture in many churches that "I'll ask the pastor to pray for me" or "I'll ask the pastor what to do." Now, of course, the pastor should pray for the flock, and give advice where needed, BUT - every member can seek God for themselves. Every member can hear the voice of God themselves.

Some of this culture may have come from leaders encouraging an unhealthy dependency, and it is time for us to break free. There is only ONE mediator (and that is Jesus, not the pastor). We are all priests - with freedom to come before the throne of grace to find mercy and grace to help in time of need. The veil is torn for us ALL.

Desire!
Earnestly desiring spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophecy (1 Cor 14v1). This is a command, and it is not only given to leaders. Now again, leadership control can quench the use of spiritual gifts - but so can a lack of congregation desire! It is vital that every member sees his or her calling to desire the grace gifts of God -whatever He may give to each one - for the edifying of the body of Christ.

So often it is portrayed that leaders are indispensible. I have learned that is not true - when I was ill and out of action for two months last year, I learned that the fellowship could still mature without me!! But the scripture teaches that in one sense we are all indispensible, or at least all vital to the healthy functioning of the body of Christ - "If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling?" (1 Cor 12v17).

We are all responsible for our own desire for these gifts (and for the Giver Himself). Let's not be passive in these things.

Pursue!
Pursue the glory! There is a tragic statement by the children of Israel in Ex 20v19: "You speak with us, and we will hear; but let not God speak with us, lest we die!" The people stood at a distance and only Moses went right into the glory.

But we're in the New Covenant now!!! We can all press into the glory of God. We must!! We need the cloud to drench us, the whole of God's people.


In summary

We are a priesthood and prophethood of all believers. We all have a ministry gift and place in the body of Christ. We are all called to maturity. We are all invited into the Most Holy Place. Leaders are called to lead, yes. But - together we make the dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

I passionately believe it is time to break free from old covenant thinking into the glories of the new covenant reality, which is ours through Christ. The book of Hebrews tells us again and again, this is a better covenant, with better promises. The old was the shadow of the reality.

Let's come out of the shadows...

John MacArthur Believes in Prophecy ... !!

Yes really. I will explain that in a bit.

Both Ern Baxter and Stanley Jebb were of the opinion that it is important to not simply limit your diet of theological books but also to read books that are contrary to your views. However I have been deliberately limiting my diet of books to those I know will feed my soul and fire my passion for God. In recent days I have decided to extend that rule for two reasons. Firstly I have plenty more reading time on my hands due to my working night shifts in the community and secondly CLC in Birmingham were selling John MacArthur's Commentaries on the New Testament for extremely cheap prices - £25 down to £9.95!

I brought 3 volumes to begin with. Two volumes on the Book of Romans and one volume on the Book of 1 Corinthians and began reading 1 Corinthians yesterday. I want to present a number of quotes and concepts that MacArthur deals with because I have found it a useful exercise reading his commentary. Firstly let me make it perfectly clear that I don't disagree with MacArthur lightly. It is clearly evident from his books that he is a righteous man who has spent his considerable lifetime studying the Word and desiring to present orthodox truth as he sees it. He is trained theologically and I am not. He has a number of degrees and I don't (in theology). But some things he says don't see to match up logically and further more MacArthur himself actually allows assessment of what he says (p304);

"No preacher or teacher of the gospel should resent having what he says judged against Scripture".

Points of Agreement.

I didn't think I would find myself including this category but I read a number of comments in the commentary on 1 Corinthians that I agreed with - although not maybe in the way that John MacArthur would have hoped his readers would! He said this concerning the spiritual gifts (p278);

"Every member of Christ's church has been given supernatural endowments, gifts of God's Holy Spirit, which through the Spirit are God's divine means of ministering His Word and power among His people and to the world".

MacArthur then went on to present a useful method of "testing all things" (p278) - a comment that may have been useful with Mark's concerns over Rob Rufus.

"God's gifts build up; Satan's counterfeits tear down".

And again;

"People do not counterfeit what is not valuable. Satan counterfeits the Spirit's gifts because he knows they are so valuable in God's plan".

John MacArthur on Apostles.

In beginning his commentary on 1 Corinthians, MacArthur obviously comes to Paul's opening comments in chapter 1; "called as an apostle". Unsurprisingly MacArthur deals with the contemporary issue as to whether apostles exist still today. He writes (p4);

"Apostles were chosen by God to work in the founding and forming of the church, after which time apostles ceased. When all the apostles had died, the office of apostle no longer existed. They were selected, sent and empowered by God for that period in the history of the church which was over when their lives were over".

This argument puzzles and intrigues me. MacArthur doesn't take the traditional argument that apostles are not required due to the completed canon of Scripture. He argues that apostles have ceased because those appointed as apostles have died out. Surely this argument suggests that the apostles were somehow special within themselves rather than the Biblical argument in Ephesians 4 that the ministry of apostles are gifts from the ascended Christ to the Church for it's bringing to maturity.

John MacArthur on Spiritual Gifts.

MacArthur defines spiritual gifts thus so;

"Spiritual gifts are divine enablements for ministry, characteristics of Jesus Christ that are to be manifested through the body corporate just as they were manifested through the body incarnate".

Once again I would agree with this but maybe not in the way that he wants or desires! But then moving into his commentary on chapters 12 to 14 MacArthur does something that is odd. I am familiar with the argument but I still have yet to understand where Scriptures indicates that this is so. He writes (p297);

"A thorough examination will yield the truth that spiritual gifts fill two major purposes; the permament gifts edify the church and the temporary gifts are signs to confirm the Word of God".

What then are the gifts designated as permament and what are those designated as temporary? Well he argues that the permament gifts include speaking or verbal gifts - prophecy, knowledge, wisdom, teaching and exhortation and also nonverbal gifts - leadership, helps, giving, mercy, faith and discernment. Temporary gifts were (apparantly) to authenticate the Word of God;

" ... until the time the Scriptures were completed and became self-authenticating".

So much for a general outline. I would ask again - where is the division shown in Scripture? Or more directly (as this is the text he is commenting on and apparantly exegeting) where is the division shown in 1 Corinthians 12?

John MacArthur on Healing.

As we can expect MacArthur makes the traditional evangelical "get-out-clause" that God is indeed sovereign and "can heal if He wishes". The implication that one gets from reading the entire commentary is that God is clearly not expected to wish to heal. By contrast MacArthur speaks approvingly of medical work as a preferred alternative. He writes (p301);

"As did all the others with the gift of healing, Paul used it sparingly and only for it's intended purpose. It was never used solely for the purpose of bringing physical health".

How would this compare with verses in the New Testament that speak of the Lord Jesus Christ like this;

"When evening came they brought to Him many who were demon possessed and He cast out the spirits with a word and healed ALL who were ill" - (Matthew 8:16 - NASB).

"Jesus was going through all the cities and the villages teaching ... and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness. Seeing the people He felt compassion for them" - (Matthew 9:35 - NASB).

Healing never solely for the purpose of bringing spiritual health? What of the ten lepers He healed, one of whom only returned and responded to His Lordship that we know of?

John MacArthur on the Gift of Miracles.

MacArthur attributes this gift also to being a temporary sign gift. He defines a miracles as being a supernatural intrusion into the natural world and it's natural laws, explainable only by divine intervention. Thus far - no problem. However MacArthur makes a statement about Jesus Christ that causes me some difficulty. He said;

"Scripture indicates that Jesus lived a quiet, normal life as a child and as a young man exercising absolutely no supernatural powers until the wedding at Cana".

This may be the first indication of the Lord's miracle power but this statement seems to me to do injustice to the baptism of the Spirit that came upon Him in the River Jordan. Futher more if the Lord's preserved His supernatural power until the wedding at Cana then why did the devil tempt Him to turn stones into bread or to throw Himself off the temple? If the devil knew like the Lord that MacArthur's hypothesis was correct and Jesus was only to perform miracles to prove something then why would Jesus perform miracles with the devil as the sole witness?

John MacArthur on the Gift of Prophecy.

This is where I got interested. Rather than arguing with traditional cessationism as I had assumed, MacArthur wrote (p303);

"We will assume here that prophecy is a permament edifying gift".

However all is made clear when MacArthur goes on to define the gift of prophecy as such (p303);

"A prophet of God, therefore, is simply one who speaks forth God's Word and prophecy is the proclaiming of that Word. The gift of prophecy is the Spirit-given and Spirit-empowered ability to proclaim the Word effectively".

Clearly what he is arguing is that prophecy is preaching and a prophet is a preacher. But what then of the clear argument in 1 Corinthians 14:1 that we should earnestly desire spiritual gifts especially prophecy? MacArthur writes (p303);

"The apostle is not suggesting that every Christian should seek personally to have a gift of proclamation but that all Christians collectively should want that gift to be ministered among them".

So suddenly prophecy is no longer a gift of the Spirit that should and can be ministered by any member of the Church for the common good but it has become a gift purely and solely for the preacher/teacher (for clearly no other Ephesians 4 Ministry exists). There is no call clearly for anyone but the teaching elders to have anything to say in the corporate Body of believers.

John MacArthur on the Gift of Discernment.

Rather than being a special spiritual gift that may be bestowed again on any member of the body of Christ, MacArthur makes some interesting comments that clearly but his book "Charismatic Chaos" in contrast. Without stating it clearly - we are left in no doubt that he sees himself as having the gift of discernment. Consider these comments (p305);

"It is the ministry of those with the gift of discernment to help seperate the wheat from the chaff ... God still empowers some of His people to unmask false prophets and carnal hypocrites. He gives them insight to expose imitations and deceptions that most Christians would take as genuine".

The implication is strange. On the one hand MacArthur seems to be fighting for the supremacy of the Word of God and it's total sufficiency however on the other hand he is suggesting here that "most Christians" are liable to deception by false prophets (presumably false preachers?) were it not for those few who have the gift of discernment to unmask these wolves in sheeps clothing.

John MacArthur on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Jesse Phillips makes it clear that 1 Corinthians 12:13 is used by most of those who would claim that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is synonymous with conversion and is mostly non-experimental. MacArthur does not disappoint such an expectation and writes this but it is somewhat confusing;

"It is not the Holy Spirit's baptism but Christ's baptism with the Holy Spirit that gives us life and places us into the Body when we trust in Christ ... the Son is the Baptizer and the Holy Spirit is the agent of baptism".

But that is not what 1 Corinthians 12:13 says! The verse makes it clear that on the other hand it is the Holy Spirit who is the baptizer ("By one Spirit") and the body of Christ who is the agent of baptism ("into one body"). Surely the real root of the problem with the concept of a baptism in the Spirit that is one of power and brings assurance of sonship is this comment;

"Many erring teachers today have used a wrong interpretation of the baptism with the Spirit to divide off from the Body an imagined spiritual elite who have what the rest do not".

This of course is the time-old traditional argument against the baptism of the Spirit and one that you will only hear from those who deny the presence and power of such a grace gift from the risen and ascended Christ.

What of MacArthur?

There is much talk around of being "Together for the Gospel" and I must confess to wondering just how important an issue this is. Should we keep quiet about these things for the sake of unity? It is important and it should be discussed because what is at stake is the supremacy of the Word of God. Both bible-honouring charismatics and John MacArthur cannot be correct. If John MacArthur is correct then all bible-honouring charismatics are at worst practicing spiritual gifts and are demonically inspired and at best are wasting time manifesting gifts in the flesh.

My over-riding feeling from reading the commentary on "1 Corinthians" is that there is a downgrading on the emphasis of every member ministry. One of the wonders of the Charismatic Renewal is that suddenly church wasn't about one pastor doing everything but every member had the capability of bringing something of God to the corporate gatherings. John MacArthur deals with the verse that speaks of everyone "hath a tongue, hath an interpretation" as being solely and purely for the Corinthians. If that is so then why is it included in Scripture and why are we told that "all Scripture is profitable"? In John MacArthur's commentary we are left with the impression that there is nothing for us "laity" to do but come to church and hear the preacher preach the Word of God.

There is much more that could be said and I may post again when I have finished the three volumes but I confess to being disappointed with what I have read so far. John MacArthur is clearly a faithful and devoted servant of Jesus Christ and a lover of His Church. He says he is devoted to truth and defending it and indeed the motto of his preaching is "Unleashing God's truth one verse at a time". I focused on the more controversial topics that he deals with - there is much in the commentary that is excellent and I do agree with.

But I don't understand why a man who so devotedly believes in the Word of God needs to read into Scripture so much of his presupposed views. I hope that the volumes on Romans get better but I am glad that I brought them for the bargain price they were.

One final question. Most of MacArthur's "illustrations" of 1 Corinthians 12-14 come from the Charismatic Movement. How would his commentary have shaped up if he had written it prior to Azusa Street? I wonder if his comments and his concerns would have been the same.