This blog post has been revised and turned into a chapter in The Rethinking Series.
The series includes each book in PDF, Kindle, and Nook formats.
Click here to view the Table of Contents for each book and how to get it
Frank Viola | Beyond Evangelical
Official Blog of Author & Speaker Frank Viola. Digging below the surface and moving beyond the shallows in today's Christianity.
Rethinking the Gifts of the Spirit: Part X
Rethinking the Gifts of the Spirit: Part IX
JUST A THOUGHT: But it would be really interesting if ONE DAY, we discover that gifts were never in the ORIGINAL INTENT of God, but simply living a life in COMPLETE union with Him; speaking His language and doing things His way (only partaking of the fruit of LIFE). Perhaps there is a HIGHER LEARNING. JUST A THOUGHT, BUT…. Love you all. Ruth
This is right on. My Pastor & I (who have charismatic backgrounds) hang out with a Southern Baptist Pastor from time to time. We think he operates in gifts he wouldn’t theologically accept. For example, when praying for us, sometimes he “reads our mail;” God gives him words of knowledge. There are other instances as well. I have no doubt he is gifted by the Holy Spirit! It is important not to get hung up on jargon. As Paul says, we should avoid arguments about words (1 Tim. 6:4).
Very thought provoking analogy you’ve made here, Mr. Viola. I never stopped to consider the “medication” and the “labels” before… Excited to read Part XI!
To AkaGaGa: Although I too have strong issues with any groups that practice infant baptism/confirmation like the Reformed, and although many people have the same experience as you, there are many people who do meet the Lord growing up in such an environment and whose confirmation is meaningful to them. You don’t have to know or use the label ‘born again’ to BE born again in Christ.
What is needed in ALL branches of the church in America is more focus on the Lord. If He is exalted, He will draw people to Himself in spite of the doctrinal errors. But it is always a bad idea to exalt a specific action or ceremony to the level of ‘magic’ (even the ‘sinner’s prayer’!) without emphasizing that there has to be a reality to it. We on the more charismatic end of the spectrum can be just as bad.
You make good points, Angela, and I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. There were, in fact, “real” Christians at the Reformed church, although few in number. Mostly, though, they were people who went to church once a week and considered their “Christian duty” done. And you’re right that the Pentecostals/Charismatics have their problems, as well.
God, of course, can and does meet people wherever they are, whether in a church with bad doctrine or a whorehouse.
What I can’t seem to get passed is teaching that keeps hidden what is truly needed to live with the in-dwelling Christ. For myself, I do not have peace endorsing (by my presence) such teaching.
This has all become moot, though, as my husband and I left the institutional church, whatever flavor, a few years ago.
I was raised in the Charismatic church, and have recently left it behind and joined the reformed church. To say that the difference between the two is a difference in “varying conversational styles” could not be any more false. I think that it’s very irresponsible of an author to write an article like this when he has clearly not been involved deeply enough in the cult of the Charismatic to understand the abuse and utterly false teachings that they impose on their congregations on a regular basis. I urge you to spend a couple of months enmeshed on the “signs and wonders” or the “prosperity gospel” movements, and watch people mindlessly give away their savings as a direct result of extra biblical revelation, or spend hours meditating on their “personal prophecies” while their bibles sit on the shelf collecting dust before you claim to have any understanding of this topic in the future.
Donna: First, the post never stated that *all* disagreements on this issue are based in a diverging conversational style. But many are. I’ve been part of *both* Reformed churches and Charismatic churches in the past and as you can see from the comments, what I’m saying here is reality for many.
Second, your comment characterizes all Charismatics and Charismatic churches with the worst elements of the movement. Your description of Charismatics do not fit people like Adrian Warnock, Francis Frangipane, and a host of others. It would be like someone coming on here and denigrating *all* Reformed people and churches because of the abuses of *some* neo Reformed churches today.
I hope that clarifies things.
Great teaching using the metaphors. I hate, as I am sure that Jesus hates as well, the camps/denominations that the Church has divided itself into. It grieves my spirit to see and experience the divisions when many things that divide her are from the lack of understanding or love of one another.
Frank,
This is a helpful way to navigate through the theological minefield. Thanks for the analogies.
These days I don’t rely much on labels instead I ask what you mean by conservative/liberal/Reformed/Pentecostal, etc., and generally proceed from there.
I use NVC (non-violent communication) as a tool when communicating with people I know are going to have different opinions from my own.
Historically, it’s a shame that having one’s jargon/catechism/confession at odds with another could have cost one’s life.
This is personally interesting to me as I’ve walked in both camps. I was nominally raised in a small Reformed church, but drifted away from God as a teenager. At age 39, I was born again (over the internet!) and then spent several years in a Pentecostal church.
Then I returned to the Reformed church for a few years. While I was there, I determined, as you have, that many of the differences were largely semantics. I saw the gifts of the Spirit operating in a limited way, but they were never identified as such.
After some research, reflection,and prayer, however, I discovered that some of the differences are more substantial. The most important from my perspective is being “born again.” That phrase AND that concept were never heard in the Reformed church, neither when I was a child nor as an adult. Consequently, when the Lord was calling me to make a commitment to Him, my human help didn’t come from that church, but from a man 2800 miles away using the internet.
I puzzled over this for years, and didn’t understand how we were required as third graders to memorize John 3:16 – yet we completely ignored John 3:3 and being born again.
On digging through church documents on the internet, however, I discovered that the Reformed church believes we are “born again” into the church (althought they don’t use that phrase) when we are baptized as infants. We then “confirm” our commitment as young teenagers by becoming church “members.”
For myself, this is not an issue of semantics. I know that before I was born again at 39, I did not have Christ in me. I have only to look at the things I did and thought before then. I know the exact moment that the Holy Spirit entered me to take up residence, and began the process of making me more like Christ.
If left to the Reformed church, I would never have known that I needed to repent and turn my life over to Jesus. No one ever told me there was something I had to do. It was simply assumed that I was a “Christian” because I was baptized as an infant.
This makes so much sense. Thanks so much Frank.
This is an excellent way of clarifying the issue. In fact, I believe this whole issue extends far beyond the subject of spiritual gifts. It includes the ways the Body of Christ describes it’s belief systems. Every “camp” has their insistence on what’s “biblical” or “scriptural” and it boils down to using words in different ways and meaning the same thing in the end. Although I’m a strong proponent of accuracy with God’s Word, I think much of the strong debates and divisions are fostered by the pride of leaning on our own understandings (what we think we know…or KNOW we know). It seems to me alot like “new phariseeism” Great teachings, Frank!
That is the best anaology of the cross-denominational argument inherent in gifts teaching today. thanks for this series, it’s been a great read and i look forward to teaching a small group study on it soon.
“Rather than hone in on the specific rhetoric that one employs, it’s wiser to seek to hear and understand the reality of another’s experience—realizing that the person may describe it in a way that is foreign (and sometimes irritating) to our ears. As we seek to do this, we can better learn Jesus Christ from one another”
That’s real good stuff. Thanks for the illustrations, they do a really good job of bringing home the point. Great post.