Notes & Articles - Notes and articles from

I am often asked what I believe about “the gifts of the Spirit.” My typical answer is that I believe in them . . . all of them. However, I believe in and practice them without the classic charismatic packages and Pentecostal wrappings.

A large chunk of my life in the institutional church was spent in charismatic circles. I benefited from being in those circles, and God taught me a great deal about the supernatural workings of His Spirit through them.

About sixteen years ago, however, I came into an experience of the Spirit’s work and power that looked nothing like what I had seen in any charismatic or Pentecostal church to which I belonged or visited. For me, it was a new experience of the Spirit. One that was less artificial, less contrived, and less centered on the Spirit Himself. Rather, it was an experience that was authentic, pure, and centered on the Lord Jesus Christ.

For this reason, I am neither a cessasionist (those who believe that some spiritual gifts have ceased) nor a charismatic (those who emphasize spiritual gifts). Instead, I consider myself to be a post-charismatic.

[Note: What I’m about to write is based on my experience in the Pentecostal/charismatic movement. Your experience may differ.]

I believe John Wimber was the first to use this term. Lee Grady, editor of Charisma magazine, estimated that in 1990 that there were as many as 92 million people who described themselves as post-charismatic. In more recent times, Rob McAlpine has been writing thoughtfully on the subject. I owe parts of my definition of “post-charismatic” to him and Wimber.

When I say that I’m a post-charismatic (or neo-charismatic), I mean the following:

I believe that the authentic gifts of the Holy Spirit are still operative in the church today. Not only do I believe in them, but I’ve experienced them. However, I also believe that the artificial wrappings that have been attached to them should be discarded. For they distract us from Christ.

I believe that being “Spirit-filled” cannot be narrowly defined to refer exclusively to those people who have demonstrated one particular spiritual gift at some particular point in their life. On that score, I had a particular experience with the Holy Spirit in 1983. Some would say that I was “filled with the Spirit” because of it. However, I would argue that I was filled with the Spirit before then as well as many times afterward (see Acts 2:4, 8, 4:31; Acts 9:17; 13:9, 52; Ephesians 5:18-20).

I’ve grown tired of the excesses and abuses that many modern charismatics have fallen prey to in both practice and teaching. These excesses and abuses go way back to when the movement was spawned. It’s one of the birth defects that Pentecostalism was born with.

I’m against humanly-engineered hype and pulpit showmanship and calling it “the moving of the Spirit.” Perhaps you’ve seen this before. You pour in the right prayers, sing the right songs with the right fervor, turn the crank, and “the Spirit’s moving” comes out of the bottom.

I’m leery of “personal prophecies” that justify ridiculous practices, ludicrous decisions, and fly in the face of Spirit-inspired wisdom.

I cast a skeptical eye on the exaggerated and sometimes fabricated stories of the miraculous. That includes the puffing up of numbers when healings or saved souls are calculated. (I’ve discovered that if a Pentecostal/charismatic reports a figure of souls saved or sicknesses healed, you would be wise to cut it in half and divide by two. Typically, that will yield the accurate number.)

I’m against the elitist attitude among some who purport to possess spiritual gifts.

I’m against views of the Spirit that end up dividing believers into the “haves” and the “have nots”—those who have had a particular experience and those who have not.

I’m against those doctrines that promote seeking wealth and material prosperity from God at the expense of caring for the poor and relieving the sufferings of the oppressed.

I’m opposed to the idea that spiritual transformation normally takes place in one-time miraculous encounters rather than by a long-term process of being conformed to Christ’s image by the instrument of His cross.

I’m against using the Holy Spirit and His gifts to make human beings the center of the universe.

I’m against promoting an intoxication with the restoration of the gifts of the Spirit. (The only thing worth being intoxicated with is Jesus Christ.)

I’m critical of the legalism that was born into the bloodstream of the Pentecostal movement and later infiltrated the charismatic mind.

I’m skeptical of any activity, natural or supernatural, that claims to be a work of the Holy Spirit if it doesn’t bring attention to the Lord Jesus.

I believe that the real fruit of prayer is not spiritual insight, spiritual revelation, or spiritual encounter, but the transformation of character. To my mind, the product of real prayer is what Ignatius of Loyola called the instrumentum conjunctum cum Deo (an instrument shaped to the contours of the hand of God).

I believe that spiritual maturity is not the ability to see the extraordinary, but the ability to see the ordinary through God’s eyes. Consequently, no matter how wonderful our experience or encounter is with God, the test of it’s worth is in the fruit it bears in our lives and the lives of others.

Consequently, I believe in the operation of the Holy Spirit, but without the classic charismatic and Pentecostal trappings. The reason is simple. To my mind, they are artificial, learned by imitation, and detract us from the reality and centrality of Jesus Christ. So while I’m post-charismatic, I’m certainly not post-Holy Spirit.

If we need a restoration of the Holy Spirit today, it’s a restoration of His pure and undefiled working.

So if I’m against all of the above, what am I for? I’m for the centrality, supremacy, and exaltation of the Lord Jesus Christ.

To my mind, the Holy Spirit has but one job. It’s to reveal, to make known, to magnify, to glorify, to make central and supreme the Lord Jesus Christ.

The following is a revealing quote from Frank Bartleman. Bartleman was part of the Azusa street revival that gave birth to the modern Pentecostal/charismatic movement in the early 1900s. To my mind, his words were prophetic and ahead of their time. He foresaw the dangers of co-opting Jesus Christ by putting the Holy Spirit on the throne. He wrote,

In the beginning of the Pentecostal work, I became very much exercised in the Spirit that Jesus should not be slighted, ‘lost in the temple,’ by the exaltation of the Holy Ghost and of the gifts of the Spirit. There seemed to be a great danger of losing sight of the fact that Jesus was ‘all in all.’ I endeavored to keep Him as the central theme and figure before His people. Jesus will always be the center of our preaching. All comes through and in Him. The Holy Spirit was given to “show the things of Christ.” The work of Calvary, the atonement, must be the center for our consideration. The Holy Ghost will never draw our attention from Christ to Himself, but rather reveal Christ in a fuller way. We are in the same danger today.

There is nothing deeper nor higher than to know Christ. Everything is given by God to that end. The ‘one Spirit’ is given to that end. Christ is our salvation and our all. That we might know ‘the breadth, and length, and depth, and height of the love of Christ’ (Ephesians 3:18-19), ‘having a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him’ (Ephesians 1:17). It was ‘to know Him (Christ),’ for which Paul strove . . . We may not even hold a doctrine, or seek an experience, except in Christ. Many are willing to seek power from every battery they can lay their hands on in order to perform miracles, draw attention and adoration of the people to themselves, thus robbing Christ of His glory and making a fair showing in the flesh . . . Religious enthusiasm easily goes to seed. The human spirit so predominates the show-off, religious spirit. But we must stick to our text—Christ. He alone can save. The attention of the people must first of all, and always, be held to Him . . . Any work that exalts the Holy Ghost or the gifts of the Spirit above Jesus will finally end up in fanaticism. Whatever causes us to exalt and love Jesus is well and safe. The reverse will ruin all. The Holy Ghost is a great light, but will always be focused on Jesus for His revealing (Frank Bartleman, Another Wave of Revival, Springdale: Whitaker House, 1982, pp. 94-96).

One of the churches I planted taught me a great lesson on this score. Their meetings were completely open, participatory, and indelibly centered on Jesus Christ. They had no building. No clergy. No set order of worship.

Each member would share his or her experience and insight into Christ as a result of seeking Him the week beforehand. That church had a steady flux of visitors. Most of these visitors would remark, “All they talk about is Christ. They seem to have a deep experience of the indwelling of Jesus.”

One particular Sunday, a couple of Pentecostals visited the church. When the meeting was over, they sat with some of the brothers and asked, “How come you guys don’t ever talk about the Holy Spirit? All you talk about is Christ.”

One of the young men who was in his early 20's answered with wisdom that exceeded his years. He said, “Well, maybe it’s because the Holy Spirit only speaks about one thing—Jesus Christ.”

I was not present for that meeting; the story was rehearsed to me. But it is one I shall never forget.

If you wish to determine if a person is full of the Holy Spirit, listen to his words and watch his life. As far as his words go, he will have but one obsession. It will be Christ. And his life will match his words. He won’t be perfect by any means. Nor will he be above making mistakes. But he will exhibit a spirit of kindness, honesty, and an inclusive openness to all of God’s children . . . the outstanding marks of Christ’s character.

Awhile back a friend of mine was perplexed about a certain minister whom he had sat under for years. He said, “Frank, I don’t understand. This man’s message was Christ-centered. He talked a lot about Christ. But as I got to know him personally, I discovered that he lied constantly, he ridiculed and demeaned others, he was always jealous of other people whom God blessed, he was very sectarian, and he was highly egotistical. He also hurt many people even though he preached against hurting Christians. I don’t understand it.”

My response was simple. A person is not Christ-centered just because they preach the centrality of Christ. If they contradict the nature of Jesus by their character (their consistent, patterned behavior), they are not Christ-centered despite the rhetoric they parade.

Let me pass on a word of advice. If you ever hit a fork in the road with the people with whom you church, there’s one sure way that the Lord will get what He wants. Drop whatever is causing the problem, and let it go into death.

There is nothing that we must cling to except for the Lord Jesus Christ. Nothing! So let that other thing that your group is dividing over go into death. Give it up, and watch what the Lord can do.

This is the principle of death and resurrection. Whenever we place something into death, if it was born of Christ to begin with, it will return again. It will come forth out of the ground. But when it comes forth, it will always look different from what it looked like before it went into death.

A group of Christians that I was a part of did this very thing with respect to our initial differences about the Holy Spirit. The result: the gifts of the Spirit operated in a very natural, unassuming way. There was no grandstanding or bluster. It was truly organic—out of life. We had learned the lesson of stripping down to Christ alone. Perhaps I’m wrong, but somehow I believe that this is what the Lord desires when it comes to the work of His Spirit in the earth today.

*****************************************************************************************************

Discipling Viral Disciplers

I no longer try to start simple/house churches. I think house churches are great. They provide a place for people to experience participatory, everyone-matters church life. They provide a way for people to really connect into authentic, one-another community. They often provide a place for people to recover from some of the pains caused by institutional church life. But house churches are no longer the end game for me.

Jesus invited us to join him, organically, in the reproduction of life. His church is a living, thriving, reproducing organism (Mark 4) that allows life-in-the-Spirit to spread virally from one disciple to the next. His church is alive as illustrated by a seed (Mark 4) that brings forth 30, 60, or 100-fold reproduction. That is the life of the kingdom. His life in me is passed on to the life of another (2-fold) which is passed to the life of another (4-fold) which is passed to the life of another (8-fold), etc. That is the way of organic/viral life and this is what the kingdom IS. This is ultimately what Jesus invited us to become part of: discipling viral disciplers.

When I have made house churches the end game, I have discovered that they do not naturally reproduce nor become movements. In fact, house churches have a shelf life. They may serve a purpose for a season, but when that season ends (and it will) the “movement” is over. The influence of a house church is temporary.

This explains why Jesus did not ask us to go and “make gatherings or churches.” He did not ask us to go and “make house churches.” He said, “go and make disciples.” This shift from starting gatherings to making disciples (who go and make disciples) goes to the very heart of the matter. Discipling viral disciplers is the end game. This places us squarely in the midst of reproductive life that the kingdom is intrinsically about. We become movement-starters not church-starters. We release disciples who will influence the world throughout their lifetime and beyond as those they disciple disciple still others.

Now, not to confuse the issue, but often in the work of discipling viral disciplers I will be gathering people together in a manner that looks an awful lot like a simple/house church. Absolutely! But the underlying DNA makes all the difference. When I reach and disciple a viral discipler, that person is going to gather with other viral disciplers for encouragement, and then, as each of them reaches others, still more gatherings will take place. So, along the way, house churches are started. But, but rather than being the end game, they become a means to support the life that is being reproduced from one disciple to the next. The house church gatherings themselves will shift, change, morph, end, and re-establish themselves in new forms but the movement of disciples who are reproducing disciples will continue.

Sustainable kingdom-life does not take place just because of the way we gather. But it does take place when we step into the role Jesus called us to: making disciples who know how to make disciples.

As mentioned, starting house churches and discipling viral disciplers (who gather in house churches) might look very similar on the outside. But the process is very different! When we start house churches, our focus tends to be on the gathering—what to do, how to do it, what it looks like, etc. We say to ourselves that we are learning to “be” the church 24/7 (and we may even go do missional things), but often our priority remains on developing the structure/form of simple house church gatherings. When following Jesus and inviting others to follow him becomes our focus (discipling viral disciples), we will have to shift from the “gathering” mentality to the “lifestyle-going” mentality. This shift changes the processes we walk out from top to bottom. And, this shift will propel us from being church-starters to movement starters (where churches spring up along the way).

There is much more to share about the process of discipling viral disciplers, but suffice it to say that it does ask us to examine our own “followership” as a starting point. Jesus, the adventurous, undomesticated, on-the-move God invites us to join him daily where He is working. What does that look like for me today? What does it really mean for me, today, to be the church (Jesus’ follower) in the world? From that starting point, we can begin to look at and grasp a process that will “infect” others who will then “infect” others to fully follow Jesus. Ah… a movement!

Where do you go to church?

I have never liked this question, even when I was able to answer it with a specific organization. I know what it means culturally, but it is based on a false premise--that church is something you can go to as in a specific event, location or organized group. I think Jesus looks at the church quite differently. He didn't talk about it as a place to go to, but a way of living in relationship to him and to other followers of his.

Asking me where I go to church is like asking me where I go to Jacobsen. How do I answer that? I am a Jacobsen and where I go a Jacobsen is. 'Church' is that kind of word. It doesn't identify a location or an institution. It describes a people and how they relate to each other. If we lose sight of that, our understanding of the church will be distorted and we'll miss out on much of its joy. Complete Article

The familiar voice on the phone brought back incredible memories of the friendship we had shared, even though it had been almost two years since we had last spoken. "What has God been doing in you?" he asked after we had exchanged pleasantries.

Before I realized what I was saying, the words rolled off of my tongue: "Over the past few years God has defied to the nth degree every expectation and desire I had for my life." I was so surprised at my own answer and how smoothly it had flowed from my lips that as I paused to think about it an uneasy silence hung on the line.

After a few moments he spoke again, quite tentatively, "And is that a good thing?"

I remember chuckling as I answered, "It is the best thing!"

"Really?"

"Yes! In every way, what Father has accomplished in me was far better than anything I had tried to produce for myself."

I was probably as surprised by the answer as he was. My life is far from any idealized existence I'd been taught to dream. The last few years had brought many painful circumstances that I would have changed in an instant had I the power to do so, as well as a number of disappointed hopes that I thought were as much God's idea as mine.

What I realized in that moment, however, was that none of those things mattered anymore. Somehow in this incredible journey he had guided me toward a deeper level of freedom. What had for most of my spiritual journey been a great source of frustration--that God would not meet my expectations of him--had in fact been his hand setting me free from the worst kind of bondage.

I wanted him to please me; he wanted me to be free of the need to be pleased. Painful circumstances and disappointing expectations had been the incubator in which God wanted to teach me to stop trusting my expectations for my life and embrace his. Complete Article

To comment about or discuss any articles on this page please go to our Forum

OUR FAITHFUL GOD                                                           SET FREE IN CHRIST
STAND FAST IN ONE SPIRIT                                                AN ENCOUNTER WITH CHRIST
WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO                 DANGEROUS LOVE AFFAIRS
FOUND FAITHFUL                                                              REPENTANCE AND FORGIVENESS
FISHERS OF MEN                                                              MARKS OF A GOOD MAN
IMITATORS OF GOD                                                           LISTENING AND DOING
BUILDING UP THE CHURCH                                                   A DESCRIPTION OF THE RIGHTEOUS

OUR CURRENT ARTICLE

*****************************************************************************************************

Discipling Viral Disciplers