SEARCH

Showing posts with label Gifts of the Holy Spirit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gifts of the Holy Spirit. Show all posts

What’s so special about spiritual gifts?

Are spiritual gifts supernatural abilities, possessed by select Christians? Who has them and why? How do Christians receive spiritual gifts? What are they for and what do they show us about Christianity and ourselves? These are only a few of the frequently asked questions that this article addresses concerning the 'gifts of the Holy Spirit'.

This article originally started as a summary of Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology Chapter 52 (IVP, 1994), but then grew and developed into a more specific response to some aspects of Pentecostalism and the charismatic understanding of gifts of the Holy Spirit particularly.

We know that interest in spiritual gifts is at an all-time high in modern times, since theological expositions of the New Testament in earlier times did not even contain chapters on the subject, more often than not. However, Grudem observes that today, most systematic theologies will contain a specific treatment of the subject – largely in response to the Pentecostal and charismatic movements, and questions arising since interest in the subject accelerated at the end of the 1800s during the Holiness Movement in America.

Are spiritual gifts supernatural?

In his Systematic Theology, Grudem explains that the gifts are not necessary miraculous or ‘supernatural’ – it depends on how you define the ‘miraculous’. If a miracle is “any direct activity of God in the world” then all spiritual gifts are miraculous because they are all powered by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:11; cf. vv. 4-6) But in this sense, everything that happens in the world would be miraculous (Ephesians 1:11; Dan 4:35; Matt 5:45). And then, in that case, a miracle would not exist, because you could not find anything that was not miraculous.

Therefore, we need to define a miracle in a narrower sense. A miracle might be considered as “a less common activity of God which raises people’s awe and wonder and bears witness to God” [1]. And in this case, it becomes clearer that some gifts such as prophecy and healing fit into this category because they bring amazement at the activity of God – while other gifts such as leadership, administration, giving and encouraging, do not.

This understanding is consistent with the six New Testament passages listing spiritual gifts (Romans 12:6-8; 1 Corinthians 7:7; 1 Corinthians 12:8-10; 1 Corinthians 12:28 Ephesians 4:11; and 1 Peter 4:11), where the NT includes ‘natural’ abilities with the more ‘miraculous’ abilities in its lists of spiritual gifts.

These passages emphasise that it is the same Holy Spirit who gives all spiritual gifts, and works them; both miraculous and non-miraculous gifts. The same Spirit may empower an act of mercy as provides miraculous healing – and for the same purpose and ultimate effect: to build Christ’s church.

What is a spiritual gift?

Does this mean that all abilities are in fact gifts of the Holy Spirit? While it is true that all the abilities we think of as ‘natural’ are from God (1 Corinthians 4:7), not every natural ability should be considered a spiritual gift because Paul explains that all spiritual gifts must be given “for the common good” (1 Corinthians 12:7) by the Holy Spirit who ‘empowers’ them (1 Corinthians 12:11) in order that they might “edify” the church (1 Corinthians 12:26), i.e. they must work for the building up the church – the Spirit enables them to work as part of Christ’s work, affecting his activity of building his body.

Therefore, this also means that not all abilities in use by Christians for the purpose of serving the church can be considered gifts of the Holy Spirit. While the God providentially works out “all things” for the good of Christians and his church (Romans 8:28), including evil acts done in or outside the church, the gifts of the Holy Spirit always come with his special, direct and good work in and for the church: Paul says the Corinthians were “enriched” in all their speech and knowledge as spiritual gifts came to them (1 Corinthians 1:5-7).

In general, when natural gifts such as teaching, helps, administration or musical gifts are given power (‘empowered’) by the Holy Spirit they show increased effectiveness and power in their use. So, we can in a sense distinguish between doing something with ‘natural’ (i.e. human) ability and doing the same thing when it is accompanied by power given by the Holy Spirit: we see the effect of the Spirit’s sovereign work in achieving the things that only he can do through our acts of service – unbelievers turning to the Lord, believers laying down their lives for one another.

In other words, a spiritual gift is an ability of one of Christ’s people, that the Spirit himself uses by providing it with his own power, to accomplish Christ’s own work. Therefore, spiritual gifts not only must be put to work for the purpose of building the church, but they also work in building up the church – that is, they have that Spirit enabled effect.

So putting that all together, a spiritual gift is simply an ability that is used by the Holy Spirit to serve the church; they are gifts of the Holy Spirit because he gives them his power for Christ’s own work of building his church – that is, they come with the ‘special effect’ of the Spirit when used in his service.

Are spiritual gifts special, or common to all?

Pentecostal teaching and the charismatic movement’s emphasis on a second experience for empowered Christian living and service has taught that the power of the Holy Spirit, including the reception of his gifts for effective ministry and service as a Christian, is only given to that subset of Christians who have received baptism with the Holy Spirit (for more about this topic elsewhere on this blog).

But the NT is clear that every Christian has one or more gifts of the Holy Spirit; that is they are common: “As each has received a gift, employ if for one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace” (=multi-faceted / variegated) (1 Peter 4:10; see also 1 Corinthians 12:7, 11).

So being ‘gifted’ by the Holy Spirit is in fact not ‘special’ at all – it is common to all Christians; everyone is “able” because the Holy Spirit gives power to (empowers) the efforts of one or more of the abilities possessed by each and every individual in his body. In a very real sense, he uses us all to build his church by his power (Ephesians 4:4-16).

So, spiritual gifts are actually common, while given special effect by the Holy Spirit who uses them to accomplish Christ’s unique work in us his church; they are both common and special at the same time – common because they are given to all, special because they all affect the Spirit’s special work in his church!

Therefore in the church, the ‘special’ is ‘common’ place!

How do you know if you have a particular spiritual gift?

How strong or effective does a Christian’s ability need to be before we could consider it a spiritual gift? Wayne Grudem points out that although the NT does not directly answer this question, Paul speaks of these gifts as useful for the building up the church (1 Corinthians 14:12), and Peter likewise says that each person who has received a gift should remember to employ it “for one another” (1 Peter 4:10); therefore, these gifts/abilities must be strong enough to function for the benefit of the church, whether for the congregation or for individuals in it.

The fact that the NT insists that everyone member of Christ’s church has a gift to use should not worry Christians who feel they don’t know what gifts they possess or how to ‘discover’ (or uncover) these God-given abilities. Instead, we need to remember what the NT says about the Spirit’s use of what we might consider otherwise ‘natural’ abilities: God gives us all our abilities and his Spirit can use any of our abilities to accomplish Christ’s work (= spiritual gift).

And the NT does not limit the types of gifts that Christians possess, which he uses. The six different passages (Romans 12:6-8; 1 Corinthians 7:7; 1 Corinthians 12:8-10; 1 Corinthians 12:28; Ephesians 4:11; 1 Peter 4:11) that list spiritual gifts name 22 gifts, however, each of these lists are different and the only gift in each list is prophecy (if we ignore 1 Corinthians 7:7, which lists two gifts not listed in any of the other lists!).

So Paul was not giving nor aiming to give exhaustive lists. He could have listed many others; it depends entirely on how specific we want to be.

Therefore, since spiritual gifts are simply particular abilities that an individual has been given with sufficient strength for its use to be of effective service to his church, spiritual gifts are not mysterious and necessarily “supernatural”; they are more often simple strengths and particularly developed abilities that all Christians experience.

It is true that gifts may vary in strength (Romans 12:16); this is part of the Holy Spirit’s sovereignty (1 Corinthians 12:11). A person's gift (e.g. admin or teaching) may not be strong enough for the entire congregation to benefit, if the church is large enough or if others have that gift more highly developed – but that same person in a different context (a smaller younger church, or with a small group within the church, or with younger people) may find that his/her gift is relatively strong and very effective/beneficial.

And of course, gifts can be neglected (1 Timothy 4:14) and may need to be rekindled (2 Timothy 1:6). Though gifts are usually “possessed” by an individual (permanently) (i.e. “I have the gift of prophecy”; he is a “leader”), this does not mean that they can be exercised ‘at will’ – we see this with gifts such as healing or evangelism, where it is more obvious that the effect of the Spirit’s power always depends entirely on the Holy Spirit’s sovereignty: “he apportions [=continues to apportion / continually] to each one individually as he wills” (1 Corinthians 12:11).

Some gifts, however, may be given for a particular unique need or event (e.g. Stephen’s strength and vision from the Spirit when he was being martyred). And in another sense spiritual gifts are not permanent at all – this is more obvious with some gifts such as marriage, which can come to a sudden end. And in the same way, the Spirit may withdraw any gift or cause it to be stronger for a time, or weaker: he is Lord.

In fact, all gifts will come to an end; in the end, all the spiritual gifts will be withdrawn (1 Corinthians 13:8-13) because they will not be needed– the imperfect will disappear. [Note that in Romans 11:29, “the gifts and call of God are irrevocable” is in that context talking about God’s continuing purpose for the Jewish people – spiritual gifts are not in view].

But we are all responsible to God with what he has given us to use effectively, for the good of his church. And we are also responsible to grow in the use of those abilities he has given us like good stewards.

How do you know what gift you have?

Know your abilities! The NT writers assume you will know what gifts you have; they only talk about using them; particularly telling us to use them! (Romans 12:6-8; 1 Peter 4:10). If you don’t know what your gifts are, either you have not been given enough opportunities to serve/use your abilities – or you are not taking opportunities to serve/use your abilities. If it is a matter of you not getting involved/doing much – you can begin by asking what needs to be done and/or what opportunities exist in your church? And particularly, “what gifts are most needed in my church for building it up?”

You can also ask of yourself, what interests/desires and abilities do you have that could be used to build up the church? You can also ask your church/leaders to give you some advice and/or feedback about yourself and your abilities. Ask God to give you the will and commitment to find out what you can do / what needs to be done and increasingly use the abilities God has given you to help the church with that work.

Try serving in different ways in different areas of the church/ministry. (Sunday school, welfare/helps, prayer, fundraising and giving, administration, leading a bible study, organising a youth event…) Then continue to use the abilities and the opportunities that you have, which are given by God. Be content but also increase your abilities and opportunities as you are able.

Are there particular gifts that all Christians have in common?

If gifts are common to all, are some of the gifts ‘common’? (I.e. given to all Christians; e.g. Does every Christian have the gift of teaching or prophecy)?

Paul is clear in 1 Corinthians 12:29-30 that everyone does not have any one of the gifts (“Are all prophets? Are all teachers?” etc) So, even though it may be true that everyone ‘can’ teach – in the sense that everyone has some ability to teach others (and the same applies to evangelism and many other abilities), we need to remember that a spiritual gift is an ability that the Spirit puts to a special effect.

It is true that every Christian does have, in a sense, some ability related to all of the gifts – for example, we can all pray for healing, we can all serve, and lead or teach in the right context to a degree etc. But those with a spiritual gift, in one area of ability, are those who have been given a particular strength and effectiveness in that area by the Holy Spirit for service to his church.

And this is what he chooses to vary across each member of his body (1 Corinthians 12:4-31). He gives to each as he wills (1 Cor 12:11); he arranges the body as he chooses (1 Cor 12:11). Not all are apostles, teachers, preachers and pastors!

What do gifts show us about Christ?

Gifts express Christ’s sovereignty and varied grace! This should humble us; Christ’s sovereign provision of the Spirit’s gifts to his church should give us contentment, not discontent with what we’ve been graciously given! God gives his church an amazing variety of gifts which expresses the variety of his grace. So, we should appreciate and recognise people who have gifts that differ from ours and also differ from our expectations of what gifts should look like.

And a healthy church will have a great diversity of gifts, and this will not lead to fragmentation, but to greater unity (1 Corinthians 12:12-26). This is of course counter-culture to the world, which creates unity by joining together with people similar with like abilities. But the Holy Spirit’s expression in the church is a community of people who are different from each other; God’s wisdom is expressed in this by creating a community of diversity because this requires us to depend on one another for unity (1 Corinthians 12:12-26).

Therefore, God gives us our differences so that we will have to depend on one another. So, we shouldn’t be actually trying to create homogenous, isolated, self-sufficient and self-dependent communities in the first place – but diversified and inter-dependent ones.

What do gifts show us about the Church?

Gifts should unify the church because they are a common work of one Spirit that we all share! The same Spirit gives and works all gifts, whether they amaze people or not (1 Corinthians 12:4-6). So, we should be cautious of thinking of some gifts as supernatural and others as natural. The NT does not make this distinction but emphasises the opposite: they are all gifts given by the same Spirit who works them all in every one of us.

Therefore, the Pentecostal and charismatic understanding that considers some gifts as being more ‘from the Spirit’ than other abilities, devalues and deemphasises those other good effective abilities that the Lord gives for his church.

However we shouldn’t swing the other way either, overemphasising the ‘natural’. After all, if we believe that God is really among us, we will know that he can and may do anything “supernatural” among us at any time. The natural/supernatural divide is really a false dichotomy; the NT worldview is a continuous interaction between the physical and spiritual world, between the visible and the unseen realm behind it.

What do gifts show us about ourselves?

Gifts of the Spirit really show us where our hearts are at as individuals; they do this by revealing what motivates us in our Christian service. The NT commands us to seek gifts in order to show love, not to show off! Seeking after gifts for this purpose is good since they are abilities for the common good, for serving the church (Recall: they are abilities empowered by the Holy Spirit in service of the church).

It follows then that if our hearts are in the ‘right place’, we will seek the most useful gifts that will enable us to serve the church the best/most (1 Corinthians 14:12). In fact, the NT says that the greatest gifts are the gifts that build up the church the most (1 Corinthian 12:31). E.g. The Corinthians were told to seek prophecy most of all because it would build up and benefit the congregation the most (1 Corinthians 14:1-5).

So, as Christians, we should be seeking to identify which gifts are most needed in our churches and praying that God would give those gifts to us and/or to others. Our motivation should not be affected by how impressive or amazing we think one gift is over another; our motivation should be the needs around us (within our church/of the church).

We mustn’t forget that Simon the Sorcerer (Acts 8:19) and Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) came under judgment for motives of self-seeking and self-glorifying. This is because Jesus who gives the gifts of the Holy Spirit is also Lord. If we have the greatest gifts but not love, we are nothing (1 Corinthians 13:1); is it really out of love that you desire what you are seeking?

What do gifts show us about Christianity?

We get judged on the effort we put into the task, not the tools we get put into our hands! Gifts are only tools we’re given; we get judged on our effort and faithfulness in our task as Christ’s servants. We all have the same task, and that is to obey Christ in serving his church until he returns. It’s our godliness and obedience that will be rewarded, not the tools he has given us on the job.

In fact, spiritual gifts have little to do with spiritual maturity. The Corinthians were incredibly gifted but were “worldly” (1 Corinthians 3:1). Since gifts are given to all, it follows that even the most immature Christian may be the most gifted! We must never forget that God works in all things, including through unbelievers and enemies of Christianity too! (Matt 7:22-23). So whatever we do – we mustn’t evaluate ourselves or any other Christian on the basis of ability/giftedness!

The whole purpose of spiritual gifts is obedience to Christ with the aim of doing our best to love others, caring, building the church, and living as a holy community. If God chooses to give us one gift or another, what does it matter? It is his decision to direct what he wants his church to receive and benefit from. And we know that when he comes again, he will “give to each one according to what he has done.” This will be an individual judgment based not on what was given but on what we did with what he gave us; it’s not the effect we have had on others or the result we have achieved that matters (as this comes from him, not us!) – but it’s the effort that we gave to him (arising from our faithfulness to him), which is the gift that will please him on that Day.

Gifts of the Holy Spirit: 1 Corinthians 12:1-11 and Pentecostals

The Apostle Paul gives the ignorant Corinthians one criteria to determine genuine Christian spirituality: Holy spirituality looks like people confessing Jesus as Lord. Formerly they had been led and influenced by speechless idols. Now the power of the Spirit had led them to confess Jesus as their Lord. (v 1-3). This is the first thing they need to realize because it is the mark of what is actually genuinely spiritual.

Spirituality begins and ends with the Lordship of Jesus. His Lordship is what spiritual gifts are all about. In v 4-6 it is this same Spirit, the same Lord, this same God, who gives the diversity of the different gifts and service and workings in all of us. And all given for the good of us all, his church.

God is not only the author of spiritual gifts (and not us), they are also his working (not ours). And not only that, he uses the gifts he has given us to serve the good of others (not of ourselves directly).

What is Pentecostal spirituality? Whether or not we speak in tongues? Why are spiritual gifts so important to Pentecostals? Do spiritual gifts increase our own experience of spirituality? Are they given by God to esteem us? Do we become more and more spiritual, the more work we do in the church?

What is repeated and emphasised by Paul throughout the list of gifts in 1 Corinthians 12 is the sovereignty of the Spirit; the Lordship of Jesus. To one is given this gift, to another that. But all are the work of the one and same Spirit: the Spirit who led us to confess Jesus as Lord.

And now he leads us to serve others with what he has given us. And he gives as he determines. He is Lord.

John Wimber changes his mind: Phillip Jensen

© Matthias Media 1990
This article was first published in The Briefing, no. 45/46, 24 April 1990, pp. 3-6. It is reproduced here with permission. For more information about The Briefing, visit www.thebriefing.com.au.

Just prior to the Spiritual Warfare Conference in March, John Wimber met with three of Sydney's leading evangelicals. The discussions, which lasted just under three hours, were requested by some Sydney people who had reservations about the Signs and Wonders ministry. Present at the meeting with John Wimber were Jack Deere and Paul Cain from the Vineyard Ministries, Dan Armstrong from Kairos, and John Woodhouse, David Cook and Phillip Jensen from Sydney. Although the meeting was conducted privately at John Wimber's hotel it was agreed from the outset that what was said privately would be published openly later. Careful notes were made of the discussion.

We began the meeting by asking John Wimber if his public preaching and private views were the same. We explained that it was rumoured that there were differences.

Hurt by this accusation, John very generously and openly declared his views with the kind of humility, compassion and laid-back friendliness for which he is well known. Six areas of discussion ensued:

• the use of money
• the healing miracles
• power evangelism
• the sufficiency of the Scriptures
• the concern for truth
• the divisiveness of the Signs and Wonders ministry.

1. The use of money

We were assured by John that profits from the Australian conferences would not go to him personally, nor to his American organization, but were invested in the continued growth of the Vineyard International Ministry. We were promised that a full account of the books would be sent to us by Kairos Ministries, the local group responsible for financial arrangements.

2. The healing ministry

John seems persuaded that great miracles of healing are taking place by God's work in the world today. He rejects the idea that he is a healer; it is God who heals. He quickly and freely gives countless anecdotes of healing, and promises that documentation of the Vineyard's Ministry of healing will be forthcoming.

He admitted that not all diseases are equally responsive to healing. Blindness, for example, has a success rate of 3-8%, depending upon the cause of the blindness—blindness from disease having more healings than blindness from accidents or birth.

Three issues need to be dealt within assessing these claimed healings:

a. the facts—whether genuine miraculous intervention by God is actually taking place
b. the theological significance of whatever miracles take place
c. how we handle the issue pastorally.
a. The first issue was tackled by raising the possible healing of children with Down syndrome. This genetic disease cannot be caused or healed by psychosomatic ‘mind-over-body’ factors. It is an ideal test case disease, being relatively easy to diagnose genetically both before and after the ‘healing’.

John Wimber claimed to have prayed over more than 200 children with Down syndrome. To his genuine disappointment, only one of the 200 have shown any sign of healing. This one child still has many of the symptoms of his problem (i.e. visual features), but has been able to reach “the lower end of the normal range” in educational attainments. John was careful to emphasize that it was the lower end, but within the normal range.

The healing rate, then, for Down syndrome is 0.5%, and the healing that did take place was only partial (unlike Jesus' healings). Why this disease is so resistant, John has no idea. On further consultation with doctors working in this area, we have been assured that for a Down syndrome child to be in the lower end of the normal range of academic achievement is not unusual or remarkable, let alone miraculous. From a medical viewpoint, John Wimber's 0.5% success rate with Down syndrome is less than is achieved through the efforts of health professionals.

The implication this has for other ‘healings’ of backaches and headaches seemed to escape John Wimber completely. We know that many illnesses are psychological or psychosomatic. We know of the placebo effect where a patient takes what he believes is a cure for his problem (but which is actually a sugar pill), and improves. The evidence so far suggests that John Wimber heals in the ‘sugar pill area’. The area where the New Testament speaks of healing and where he talks of healing seem to be wholly resistant to his ministry. That is, to put it bluntly, it is to be seriously doubted that any miraculous healings are taking place at all. (The failure so far to provide Christian doctors with cases to verify from the Sydney conference only contributes to the growing doubt over any genuine miracles. See Philip Selden's account on page 19.)

b. The second issue is the theological significance of healing. Given the very low percentage of healings, we asked John Wimber if he considered that his healings were like Jesus' or the Apostles'. He quickly and rightly saw that they were quite radically different. We asked about the claims of his books and his previous teaching that the powerlessness of evangelicals lay in their failure to pray for and claim the Signs and Wonders of the Kingdom, seen in Jesus and the Apostles. He replied that thanks to the advice of Jack Deere, he had come to understand that the current miracles fit into the New Testament not at the point of Jesus and the Apostles and the coming of the Kingdom, but in 1 Corinthians 12-14 and the gifts of healing.

This change of mind seriously compromises the stance of the previous Signs and Wonders conferences, Vineyard Ministries and John Wimber's books. He was asked if he would be explaining this change of mind to the Sydney conference, but he declined. (As it turned out, both views were expressed during the course of the week.)

c. The third issue of healing is the pastoral consequences of the claims for miracles. John Wimber is very open about not being healed himself. He also said that he does not promise healing for everyone or blame lack of faith as the sole reason for lack of healing.

However, when asked if he would be open with enquirers and tell them of the small probability of healing, he declined. He wants to encourage people to put their faith in God and call upon him for healing. He wants people to know that God can heal and wants to heal, and therefore to ask expectantly. He paralleled this to salvation/forgiveness. He said that we do not say to people that they only have a chance of being saved. We say that God can save and wants to save, and so we encourage people to put their faith in God and call for forgiveness. Such a confusion of categories is appalling.

Like a politician, John Wimber is not promising unequivocally that each person will be healed. But it would seem that his mixture of generalization and over-confidence results in all but the wary being misled.

3. Power evangelism

One of the most contentious parts of John Wimber's speaking and writing has been his distinction between evangelism and power evangelism, with the resulting distinction between Christian conversion (inferior and superior).

When this matter was raised, John Wimber expressed dissatisfaction with his teaching both in Canberra (where he spoke of ‘natural’ and ‘supernatural’ evangelism) and in his book. He explained that his book was not written by him, but came from tapes and notes of his seminars. He had not read the manuscript in detail or critically before its publication.

When asked to publicly repudiate this false distinction (between natural and supernatural evangelism), to withdraw his erroneous book and to desist from talking of power evangelism, he equivocated. The book is wrong and “needs re-writing” and he was “wrong” in his address at Canberra, but somehow this is not to be taken as a serious problem.

He agreed that the book on power evangelism was imbalanced, lacking as it does any real exposition of the gospel or evangelism. However, this was due to the manner of its composition and plain oversight.

4. Sufficiency of Scriptures

This topic was more difficult to discuss because of the need for precise terminology to avoid misunderstandings.

John Wimber was keen to stand in the Evangelical tradition, upholding the inspiration and authority of the infallible and inerrant Scripture which is sufficient for all matters of the Christian life. However, this was because he had not understood the implications of his ‘words of knowledge’, which go well beyond Scripture and play an essential part in his Christian living. John's adviser, Jack Deere, assured him and us that he did not believe in the sufficiency of Scripture.

Thus, the ministry of gifts is used to add significantly to the Scripture as the authoritative voice of God for Christian living.

5. Truth

No-one claiming to be a Christian can be unconcerned about truth. All of us must vote for it, along with motherhood, prayer, the Lord's supper and apple pie.

John Wimber's teaching on ‘The Third Wave of the Holy Spirit’ proposes that the Pentecostal movement at the turn of the century and the Charismatic movement of the 1960s were truly movements of the Holy Spirit. However, John Wimber thinks that some of the central teachings of these two movements (concerning baptism in the Spirit and the place of tongues) were wrong. So the movements which taught error were inspired by the Spirit of truth!

This kind of confusion of truth and error is reflected in his books when opponents of evangelical faith are portrayed as having conversions or being great saints and advocates of signs and wonders. This is particularly so with his ready acceptance of Roman Catholics.

When the matter was raised with John, he refused to countenance criticism of charismatics. He accepted that healing in the name of Mary was wrong. He pleaded ignorance of some of his Roman Catholic examples in his books. He didn't know much about them; in fact he did not even know who they were or that he had cited them.

6. Unity

The discussion of truth led naturally to the issue of unity. John Wimber sees the ‘third wave’ as a unifying force for Christians. Those outside it see it as divisive. Each can blame the other for the divisions.

It was suggested that the ‘third wave’ was not so much uniting Christians as re-aligning them on the basis of common experience instead of truth. This was denied by John; he wanted to say that truth was important.

When challenged about our unity in the cross, he again denied that he had been distracted from the cross, or that he allowed the signs and wonders ministry to be less than cross-centred. The Vineyard songbook was cited, where 52 out of 53 songs fail to mention the cross! John agreed that this was awful. He has tried to correct this, but his writers have very little or no theological training. (Those present at the evangelistic rally held on the Thursday night of the conference may have noticed the striking absence of the cross or repentance in the preaching.)

Discussion ranged widely and freely over these topics for almost three hours. The meeting concluded with an invitation to cancel the Spiritual Warfare Conference and to go home to America.



Summarizing such a meeting is very difficult. On all appearances, John was trying to answer the questions of his critics honestly and openly to satisfy us and to gain our fellowship, goodwill and acceptance. The concluding invitation to cancel the conference was an obvious disappointment to him. He did not seem to expect our continued dissatisfaction with his answers.

However, his lack of theological understanding and education makes him a most dangerous friend. He is like the ‘loaded dog’ of Henry Lawson's story. It is his friends who are most likely to be damaged by his errors.

None of us has to be right 100% of the time in order to teach. But the teacher is judged with greater strictness for the damage that he can do. We teachers must be clear on the basics, ready to admit error, quick to correct and withdraw misleading ideas, and willing to take responsibility for our faults. We must work hard to be accurate and to be accurately understood.

From the outset of our discussions, John said that God had told him not to read anything critical of his ministry because it would discourage and embitter him. He has followed this advice, and relies on his friends and co-workers to screen all critical material.

John Wimber has changed his mind on cardinal points of his teachings, yet he will not come clean publicly and denounce his former ideas. Rather, he continues to express himself in a confusing mixture of old errors, and new and contradictory insights. The truth that he does teach only further confuses Christian people into following his thoughtless theology.

In encouraging people to get in touch with the ‘supernatural’, he misrepresents the effects. In seeking unity, he welcomes and promotes the enemies of the gospel. In emphasizing extra-biblical phenomena, he undermines the centrality of the cross, the power of the word of God, the sufficiency of Scripture, and the unity of our common commitment to the truth of the gospel.

He maybe compassionate, loving, genuine and sincere, but so was the loaded dog!
Phillip Jensen | Briefing #45 | April 1990 talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

Healing: Barnett & Jensen

© Anzea Publishers 1973
This article is an excerpt that was first published in The quest for power | neo-pentecostals and the New Testament by Paul Barnett and Peter Jensen (Sydney: Anzea Publishers, 1973, p. 89-97). It is reproduced here with permission.

There has been a good deal of publicity given recently to healings reported among Christian people. These have often been linked with the worldwide ‘charismatic’ movement. It is said that just as Jesus and his disciples worked miracles, and miracles were reported in the first centuries of the church’s life, so the same power for miraculous healing is available today. It is sometimes alleged that the church’s inexperience of the miraculous has prejudiced the proper understanding of the Bible, but now Christians are realizing the enormous potential of their faith, and reading the Bible aright.

Influential theologians have maintained, indeed, that miracles ceased after the New Testament period. Augustine was one (fourth century). John Calvin (sixteenth century) was another. Calvin’s argument was that the purpose of Biblical miracles was to attest the validity of the message; they are linked, therefore, with the revealing word of God. Since that word has now been spoken, miracles are no longer necessary.

It was certainly not through lack of experience that Calvin took this line. On the contrary, he knew of all too many miracles—the spurious wonders used to bolster up the unbiblical and sometimes superstitious theology of the opponents of Protestantism. The real problem was not lack of the miraculous but the abundance of it. This remains the problem.

The Roman Catholic Church has always endorsed the possibility of contemporary miraculous healing. The histories of the saints were filled with such tales. Over five hundred miracles were associated with Becket and his shrine, for example. Images, relics, shrines, holy water, all had reputations as healing agents. Nor did all Protestants reject the notion.

To take one example, George Fox, the Quaker leader, was credited with a hundred and fifty cures. But it was not only the Quakers who made these claims—other sects did too. Even more interestingly the King of England was said to be able to heal the disease of scrofula (called the ‘King’s Evil’) by touch. Hence, for example, Charles II touched 90,000 sufferers over the years, and did so in the context of a piece of ritual conducted by his Anglican chaplain. Many claimed to have been cured.

Claims for miracles, especially healing miracles, were common in the nineteenth century—we have only to think of Lourdes and Mary Baker Eddy. They continue to this day. There is thus nothing especially new about this phenomenon.

One thing is clear, that there does not need to be any Christian content to the situation. Some healers are orthodox Christians, some are heterodox, others are spiritualist, others have no religious faith, others have led immoral lives. Claims have been made and believed on behalf of all such groups, and the claims are of equal impressiveness.

It is true that Christians must rejoice when God heals the bodies and minds of men, and especially when he gives them a new heart in regeneration. However, they realize that wholeness is God’s ultimate, not his immediate, purpose. Without a doubt God’s aim is to create a new heaven and a new earth, to dwell himself among men, to wipe away every tear from their eyes and to put an end to death and mourning and pain (Rev. 21:1-4). In that time God’s people will have ‘spiritual bodies’, that is, bodies ruled by the Holy Spirit.

Since the resurrection of Jesus the last days have set in; the world to come and the old age are overlapping. Christians, for example, are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but we still groan inwardly as we wait for God to make us his sons and set our whole body free. We have been saved, though only in hope (Rom. 8:18, 23, 24). We have much, but we are not yet perfect for we still sin (1 John 1:8), and we still groan. Christians still wear glasses and undergo the ageing process at the same rate as others. Wholeness is God’s ultimate purpose; it is not with us yet.

This may be seen by the fact that not every disease is cured. Not one of the early Christians escaped old age, sickness and death. Paul observed the process of decay at work in his own body, but did not check its progress by a healing miracle. On the contrary, he fixed his gaze on the eternal and declared that death would be preferable to life since he would then be with the Lord (2 Cor. 4:16-5:10).

It is worth noting some words of Dr. D. Treloar at this point, speaking of degenerative diseases:

These diseases start at birth, at which time we start both to live and to commence dying. During childhood and adolescence they are masked by the physical and functional development of the individual. ‘Middle age’ is the euphemism applied to the time at which they commence to become apparent and ‘old age’ to the time when they are unmistakably so. NO ONE HAS EVER DIED OF ‘OLD AGE’, nor, for that matter, of ‘NATURAL CAUSES’. People do die, IN old age OF degenerative diseases. Normally they are those of the heart, circulation, brain and kidneys. The treatment of these diseases is difficult, unspectacular and usually palliative. Because of their slow progression, their common incidence and the common acceptance of ‘wearing out’ as a general principle, the very nature of these diseases is usually overlooked.1
The Holy Spirit is certainly at work within us, but as a guarantee of our future life with God, not of present healing (2 Cor. 5:5).

We can understand, then, why it was that a man like Paul, who did work miracles by the power of God, did not always do so when confronted with disease. He reminds the Galatians that it was a bodily illness that originally led to him bringing them the gospel, ‘and you resisted any temptation to show scorn or disgust at the state of my poor body’ (4:14 NEB). When Timothy is afflicted by frequent ailments he suggests a medical remedy, ‘use a little wine …’ (1 Tim. 5:23).

It may be that Paul suffered from chronic illness. The word translated ‘weakness; in 2 Corinthians 12:7-9 is the same as that rendered ‘sickness’ in James 5:14. At any rate, Paul’s fervent prayer in respect to this disability, that it may be removed from him, was not granted. Whether or not we understand Paul to be unique at this point, it is the testimony of people who exercise a ministry in the area of healing that there are occasions when, despite the offering of faithful and persistent prayer, no cure is granted.

We also hear of Epaphroditus who was dangerously ill (Phil 2:26, 27) and Trophimus, who was so sick that Paul left him behind (2 Tim. 4:20); there does not appear to be any question of a miraculous healing.

Thus we must be very careful of statements which assure us that God’s will is perfect soundness of body (or ‘wholeness’) for every Christian. Such sentiments are only helpful if they apply to that day when Jesus returns, for that is when they will be true for all. However, this is not to deny that there is healing, nor that God can if he so pleases work quite independently of natural means to cure anyone.

In fact, Christians have always believed that God can heal people, and prayed for the sick privately and in church. Doubtless many have been cured as a result of these prayers. Certainly, too, Christians have not been bold enough in seeking God’s favour at a time of sickness, and have shown lack of faith.

But the fact of healing does not necessarily indicate a miraculous intervention by God for two main reasons.

First, the devil can do signs and wonders. This is the teaching of the Bible at several points. For example, the false prophet of Deuteronomy 13:1-5 is capable of miracles, and Jesus himself warns us, ‘False Christs and false prophets will arise and show signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect’ (Mark 13:22). Paul says, ‘The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved’ (2 Thess. 2:9, 10). Thus a person’s ministry can never be recommended to us on the grounds that ‘it works’. So does the devil’s! We must always ask, ‘Is it true?’, and the only measuring stick is the word of God.

This is a vital point. It is natural to conclude that a healer’s ministry is authenticated by the miraculous. Yet miraculous cures are produced in the ministries of spiritualists and agnostics as well as Christians of all descriptions and they can quite possibly be the devil’s work to lead men astray. It may even be said that the presence of the miraculous is a warning sign for us to listen all the more carefully to the accompanying message, testing what we hear against the Bible.

Second, due notice must be taken of the ease with which mistakes are made. In 1956 the British Medical Association gave a list of six factors which help to account for magical ‘cures’: (a) mistaken diagnosis; (b) mistaken prognosis; (c) alleviation of the illness; (d) remission; (e) spontaneous cure; (f) simultaneous use of other remedies.2 We need to remember particularly the evidence, as yet not fully fathomed, that our minds have a big influence on our bodies. Certain types of disease are very susceptible to treatment of the mind—or the increase of ‘faith’.

Naturally, we rejoice when any good thing befalls us, explicable or not. But when it comes to knowing what God says, we should read the Bible. Failure to observe this can lead to situations of personal torment as does failure to observe the Bible’s teaching on the conditional nature of prayer.

There are magnificent promises in the in the scripture to do with prayer. Take James 5:15, where we read, ‘… the prayer of faith will save the sick man, and the Lord will raise him up’; and again, ‘… whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you will receive it, and you will’ (Mark 11:24). These are encouragements to faith in God, for this is a necessity in prayer.

But of course we must realize that God does not give us the things which are contrary to his will. If I prayed that the ocean would dry up, then it is hardly likely that God would grant my prayer, even though I evacuated my mind of any doubt that he would act. Jesus exemplified this principle in Gethsemane: ‘Remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what thou wilt’ (Mark 14:36). Many of our prayers, unlike his, are malicious or foolish or ignorant, and the loving God does not heed them. Note the clear teaching of 1 John 5:14, 15: ‘And this is the confidence which we have in him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us.’

It is interesting also to hear Paul’s comment on prayer in Romans 8:26, 27: ‘Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words. And he who searches the hearts of men knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.’

Thus we cannot force God’s hand by the intensity of our prayer for a particular object; we may indeed well doubt that it is God’s will for us to be healed, for example, for in our ignorance we do not know his plans for us. He may want to make us perfectly whole by allowing us to succumb to disease and take us to heaven. What we ought not to doubt is God’s fatherly care and protection for us whatever the outcome. Here is rest indeed and about this Jesus says, ‘Doubt not.’

In fact, to criticize those who remain unhealed as men of small faith is to make nonsense of the commitment of those numerous Christians who have suffered for long years but have been shining lights to those around them. These are heroes and heroines of faith—who dares accuse them of faithlessness?

Concerning the promise of healing in James 5:14-16 there are several observations to make.

First, there is no one who takes it on face value, because this would mean that Christians would never need die, and also because of considerations like Paul’s thorn.

Second, this provision is not to be classed with the Lord’s miracles or the apostles’. Those had the quality of immediacy and directness, whereas the arrangements suggested here are more akin to that which was open to any devout Jew with the Old Testament in hand (e.g., Psalm 41).

Third, the language is ambiguous, since both the word ‘healed’ and the word ‘raise’ can refer to an earthly experience or a post-death experience. It may be that James has in mind here the ultimate salvation (or healing—the word is the same) assuredly available to the Christian, whatever the outcome of his present disease. That is to say, we may read the passage like this:

Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer of faith will save [heal] the sick man [i.e., either save him from the disease, or eternally], and the Lord will raise him up [i.e., either from his bed or on the last Day]; and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven [in either case]. Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed [or saved eternally].
This is not to suggest that James had one or other of these readings in mind—rather that he had both. This accounts for his perfect confidence in the future of the sick person.

Fourth, the ‘prayer of faith’ spoken of reminds us of the conditional nature of prayer—God’s will for individuals has yet to be seen. It would be unbearably cruel to torment a patient with the exhortation to have more or better faith if all the time it was the Lord’s will to perfect him in heaven. There is no justification whatever for combining the words ‘prayer of faith’ exclusively with the passage that speaks of belief in prayer in Mark 11:24. Further, the unwillingness to submit to illness under God can have deleterious effects on the person’s family and character. This impatience to be ‘whole’ does not constitute real faith.

Fifth, perfection of our bodily and spiritual prowess is not promised or envisaged by God before the return of Jesus. Our present position in the fallen world needs to be taken into account.

There is, therefore, a way of thinking about healing which is dangerous for the children of God.

First, it assures men that God’s will is for their cure, or their ‘wholeness’, but it misses the Biblical emphasis that suffering is the lot of the Christian, and that our hope lies in the coming of Jesus. Sickness and sin and all kinds of imperfection characterize this present age and individuals have no promise that they will escape this. Sometimes God does cure; sometimes he does not.

Second, it teaches that faith in prayer is not so much fixed on God but on the thing which is prayed for. Thus, if you believe sufficiently strongly in a particular request, then it will be granted, even if God does not approve. This pernicious thinking leads people into great torment; when God does not answer a prayer in the positive, the fault must be their own, for not believing hard enough! This time, let us summon up enough ‘faith’ for it to work… The result can be mental torture and self-scrutiny, not faith in God.

Third, it commends itself to people on the grounds that ‘it works’, while forgetting that false prophets and teachers will do the same. In so doing attention is distracted from the central question: ‘Is it true?’ The great danger then is that men and women will wander off into the delusive fog of mystical experience, ignoring the light of the Bible, perhaps finding health for the body, but losing the very things which made for health of the soul.
---

1. Reproduced by permission from a paper presented to the Diocese of Sydney Commission of Enquiry into the Charismatic Movement by D. Treloar.
2. Diving Healing and Co-operation between Doctors and Clergy (B.M.A., 1956), p. 10. talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

Prophecy: Barnett & Jensen

Some notes on prophecy in the New Testament

© Anzea Publishers 1973
This article is an excerpt that was first published in The quest for power | neo-pentecostals and the New Testament by Paul Barnett and Peter Jensen (Sydney: Anzea Publishers, 1973, p. 101-106). It is reproduced here with permission.

Most people would agree that a definition of prophecy must allow for the inclusion of prediction while showing the concept to be wider than merely seeing the future. The prophet’s business is to make known God’s will, now and for the future.

The Old Testament prophets predicted events. But they also applied the teaching of the law of Moses to the actual situation in which they found themselves. We see both elements of the prophetic task in Nathan, for example, as he confronts the guilty King David:

… Why have you despised the word of the Lord, to do what is evil in his sight? … Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house … (2 Sam. 12:9,10).
It is an inadequate reading of the Old Testament which separates prophecy from preaching or the exposition of scripture. The prophetic word was checked against the law (Deut. 13:1-5), but it was also filled with insight by the law. It was exposition with a contemporary edge. It is significant that the prophet Elijah journeyed to Mount Horeb in his day of depression, for it was there that Moses received the law (1 Kings 19:8ff.).

In the New Testament there is evidence of a class of person called a prophet, who seems to have functioned in a parallel way with the apostles in proclaiming God’s message. Hence we read that the church is being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20) and that the revelation of the coming of Jews and Greeks into the one body was committed to apostles and prophets (Eph. 3:5). It is not surprising therefore to hear that when Christ gave gifts to men it was only some who were apostles and some prophets (Eph. 4:11). Paul makes it clear that not all can expect to be prophets (1 Cor. 12:29).

Yet since Paul also exhorts every Christian to desire the gift (1 Cor. 14:1), it may mean that it is the office of a prophet that is exclusive, rather than the occasional exercise of the faculty (cf. Acts 2:17). Not every Christian may prophecy, but the group may be wider than those designated ‘prophets’. It is necessary therefore to investigate what may be involved.

The prophet must have an authentic knowledge of God’s mind (1 Cor 13:2). The communication of that knowledge is for the purpose of upbuilding, encouragement and consolation (1 Cor.14:3). Since it is rational speech, as opposed to unintelligible glossolalia, learning and instruction ensue (1 Cor. 14:19,31). These observations comply with the evidence in Acts, especially Acts 15:32. There,

Judas and Silas, who were themselves prophets, exhorted the brethren with many words and strengthened them.
The use of the word ‘exhort’ in connection with prophecy is significant. The word itself has a range of possible meanings—to summon, to call for help, to appeal, to encourage, to request, to comfort, to conciliate. In the noun form it is the word translated ‘encouragement’ in 1 Corinthians 14:3. It certainly entails, therefore, a warm-hearted speech, calculated to move the hearer.

For his part, the hearer must be discriminating. Not all that calls itself prophecy can be classified as God’s word (1 Cor. 14:29, 1 Thess. 5:20, 21; cf. 1 Cor. 14:37, 38). There must be good order, so that no one with a message from God is denied the opportunity to speak (1 Cor. 14:30).

There is evidence that specific prediction played a part in prophecy. Agabus is twice reported in this role (Acts 11:27-29, 21:11). So, too, men were designated for certain jobs (1 Tim. 1:18, 4:14; cf. Acts 13:1, 2). But concern for the future was wider than this.

If we examine 1 Thessalonians it appears that words of Jesus are used by Paul as a basis for his teaching about the future, especially the aspects of judgement and the second coming. For example:

For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep (1 Thess. 4:15).
Significantly, the Thessalonians are to ‘exhort one another with these words’ (4:18 RV mg.). This passage fits easily into the Old Testament category of prophecy, and not surprisingly it contains the exposition of a word of scripture (i.e., Jesus’ words)—all geared to the specific problems of the readers.

The same is true of Hebrews 3:7-4:13. The whole epistle is called a ‘word of exhortation’ by the author (13:22 RV) and this section is to stimulate the recipients to exhort one another (3:13).

The passage is an exposition of Psalm 95 with a sharp application to the present situation of the readers. The author begins with his text (3:7-11). He then proceeds to draw out its significance, referring back to it when necessary:

For we share in Christ, if only we hold our first confidence firm to the end, which it is said, ‘Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.’ Who were they who heard and yet were rebellious? … So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief. Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest remains, let us fear lest any of you be judged to have failed to reach it.
He concludes his exposition with a reference to the future:

So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God; for whoever enters God’s rest also ceases from his labours as God did from his (4:9,10).
The suggestion that we have here a piece of prophecy preserved for our inspection is strengthened by the way in which he apparently identified what he has said with God’s word (4:12) and the remarkable similarity that this word of God has with the prophecy which is described in 1 Corinthians 14.

In Hebrews, as the writer concludes his exhortation, he writes of it:

The word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And before him no creature is hidden, but all are open and laid bare to the eyes of him with whom we have to do (4:12, 13).
In 1 Corinthians 14:

But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you (14: 24, 25).
The passage in Hebrews and 1 Thessalonians are characterized by an appeal to future judgment. It may well be that the prophetic word of 1 Corinthians 14 is the gospel, since men worship God when they hear it. If this is so, then it too will have a strongly futuristic and judgemental theme (cf. Paul’s preaching to the Gentile outsider in Acts 17).

The same is true of the one New Testament book which calls itself prophecy, the Revelation (22:19). It is actually that form of prophecy called an apocalypse, carefully thought out, and suffused with Old Testament allusions. Its theme is Christ’s victory and judgement; it is in part predictive; and it exhorts, encourages and edifies.

While it is true, therefore, that the prophet and the teacher are distinguished in some passages (Eph. 4:11; Rom. 12:5f.; 1 Cor. 12:29), yet this ought not to lead one to the conclusion that their ministries exclude one another. The explanation of God’s word figures in both. It may be that the prophet’s role arose more from the situation, whereas the teacher’s arose from the scriptures. But the list of gifts in Romans 12, for example, does not preclude the possibility that the one person may have several gifts, nor that gifts like giving and showing mercy (12:8) or prophecy and teaching (12:6,7) may overlap.

There is a distinction discernible from the Biblical texts, on the level of securing the revelation. To the prophet there may come ‘a revelation’. Thus we read in the case where one prophet is already speaking,

If a revelation is made to another sitting by, let the first be silent (1 Cor. 14:30).
However, neither the mechanism whereby such a revelation comes nor the style in which it is uttered is described anywhere, and we are free to see it as a non-ecstatic and ‘natural’ process, especially in light of verse 32:

… and the spirit of prophets are subject to prophets.
Or, as the NEB has it,

It is for prophets to control prophetic inspiration.
Nor are we told that such a revelation is necessary each time a prophet speaks. In fact the reverse is probably the case, since some of the mysteries about which they speak will be of such importance that the prophet will repeat his message many times (see Eph. 3:5, 6).

Perhaps we are bound to see it as a ‘natural’ process in the light of John 11: 50, 51, where the enemy of Jesus, Caiaphas, prophesies all unknowingly, that Jesus will die for the nation.

If this discussion is correct, then it will follow that a neo-pentecostal author like Michael Harper in his book on prophecy has been too rigid in distinguishing prophecy from preaching and teaching:

A preacher usually prepares, speaks and expounds the word of God. But a prophet speaks directly under the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Both have a part to play in the edification of the Church—but they should not be confused.1
The quote also shows that he insists that prophecy has a different method from that employed in preaching—the revelation comes directly from God. It appears that the natural mind ceases to operate. We would not deny that this can be the case, but we would maintain that this is too narrow a view of prophecy in the light of the careful human thought and interaction with existing scripture evident in the writings of Isaiah or Jeremiah, or Paul, or in Hebrews or Revelation.

Certainly we do not intend to reclaim the possession of sole right to speak afforded to most teachers in the churches. This may indeed be necessary in some few places, but surely the teacher can exist side by side with the men and women who come with a word of upbuilding, encouragement and consolation, especially fit for the situation of the hour.
---

1. Prophecy, M. Harper, 1964, p. 8. talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

The gift of tongues: What 1 Corinthians 14 describes

Pentecostal tongues: Unknowable utterances

Pentecostalism believes that 'speaking in tongues' is a God-enabled prayer language using unintelligable human utterances that have a spiritual effect. Though the Greek word for “tongues” (glossolalia) means “languages,” Pentecostals know that in most instances the tongues-speaking practiced in their movement is unknowable in its nature. Before the revival of 'tongues' at the turn of the nineteenth-century, Christians who later joined the Pentecostal movement were expecting the gift of languages to equip the Church for worldwide evangelism to the unreached millions in their mother-tongues. However after 1906 the movement recognised that the activity in their churches being called 'speaking in tongues' did not involve human languages and was not evangelistic.

Ideas about the nature of tongues developed in these early years. While still acknowledging that the tongues-speaking enabled by the Spirit in Acts 2:4 were known dialects of countries foreign to the speaker, Pentecostals began to view 1 Corinthians 14:2 as identifying another type of tongues. This was based upon the view that if “no one understands him” and his words “utter mysteries with his spirit,” then this tongues-speaking mustn't be actual languages but 'unknown utterances.' Since this passage describes 'praying' in a tongue, speaking to God not men, to praise God and give him thanks, Pentecostalism embraced the concept of tongues as a prayer language with God-empowered unintelligable human utterances that have an impact upon the spiritual realm (as opposed to preaching with foreign identifiable human languages as in Acts 2.)

Before examining the Pentecostal notion of two types of tongues, being the miraculous gift of languages and God-given utterances of unidentifiable meaning, it is important to realise that the practice of both types of phenomenon have been reported throughout history in the secular, religious and Christian world. (See The history of tongues).

Corinthian tongues: foreign languages

There are at least several reasons from the text why the type of tongues spoken by the Corinthians were identifiable human languages:

Different kinds

The passage in 1 Corinthians 12 first listing tongues as a manifestation of the Spirit describes the activity as “speaking in different kinds of tongues” (1 Corinthians 12:10, 28). The fact that there are different kinds of tongues suggests that languages are in view. 'Different' tongues are the 'other' tongues of the nations given on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4), where after the crowd of foreign speaking Jews heard them praising God in each of their own native tongues. (Acts 2:11).

Speaking a tongue

Although the Spirit is described as generically giving different kinds of "tongues," (plural) or enabling people to speak in other "tongues" (plural), 1 Corinthians 14 does not describe individual persons speaking in "tongues." Every reference in 1 Corinthians 14 to an individual with this ability describes them as one who speaks in "a tongue" (singular). This activity is speaking a singular language with a specific identity.

None without meaning

The passage in 1 Corinthians 14 indicates that Paul thought of ‘a tongue’ as actually conveying meaning: In reference to tongues he says, “there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning.” (1 Corinthians 14:10) This is why they were capable of being interpreted.

Speaking words

When refering to tongues the Apostle implies that this activity involves communication. He describes it as “speaking” (1 Corinthians 14:13) and describes the utterances as actual “words,” (1 Corinthians 14:18) which by definition are units of language that communicate meaning. They are not merely sounds produced with the tongue. Paul describes the activity as 'speaking to God,' 'praying' to God, 'praising' God, 'thanking' God and speaking 'to oneself' (1 Corinthians 14:2, 14, 16-17, 28).

Saying “Amen”

Paul implies that someone who speaks in a tongue has an idea of the meaning of his words. He says, "If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say "Amen" to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified.” (1 Corinthians 14:16-17) Paul implies that the speaker has the ability to say “Amen” to his prayer as opposed to those who cannot because they do not know what he is saying. If the speaker himself was also among those who do not understand then he also would not be able to say "Amen" to his thanksgiving and would therefore also not be edified. Although the speaker does not have complete understanding of what he is saying, the Apostle does not include the speaker among those who do not understand at all.

Speaking to oneself

Paul clearly says that a tongue edifies the speaker (1 Corinthians 14:4) and that the he speaks to himself as well as to God (1 Corinthians 14:28). He implies then that the speaker is himself encouraged by the meaning of his message. (1 Corinthians 14:16-17) He is praising and giving thanks to God, saying "Amen" to the prayer and being edified by it, but the other man is not edified because he does not understand its meaning.

Speaking a message

In 1 Corinthians 14:26, Paul lists “a tongue” together along side “a hymn”, “a word of instruction”, “a revelation”, and “an interpretation,” all of which are capable of strengthening the church. All of these activities involve word-based messages. The fact that Paul insists that a tongue given in a church must be interpretted does not suggest that the original utternance was without meaning. Quite the opposite, to 'interpret' is literally the activity of explaining the meaning of a message given.

Is it possible that Pentecostal tongues have the same nature as those practiced by the Corinthians, as described in 1 Corinthians 12-14? These were not unknowable utternances, for they were not without meaning; this activity was not merely making sounds with the tongue, but speaking words of thanks to God; these speakers were not all-together ignorant of what they were saying, for they were at least edified by their words. The only similarity between the ‘tongues’ practiced in Pentecostalism and those described in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is that in both cases the mind of the speaker can be described as being 'unfruitful’. This is not an adequate basis for concluding that their identities are common.

Corinthian tongues: unknowable utterances?

There are other reasons in the text of 1 Corinthians 14 that leave open the possibility that the nature of the tongues spoken by Corinthian Christians were not miraculous gifts of foreign languages (that can be compared to those in the Acts narratives).

The mind unfruitful

Paul says in regard to the one in Corinth who spoke in tongues, "no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.” Paul is likely generalising the audience to say that no one present understands the speaker; He seems to be implying that his words are a mystery to his audience, though not necessarily to the speaker. However, Paul describes the mind as “unfruitful” when he prays in a tongue (1 Corinthians 14:14). He may mean that the speaker it not thinking through his words before he speaks; he is not deliberately choosing his words as a bilingual speaker would, but instead is being given in a foreign tongue words from the Spirit to speak and only retrospectively being aware of what he has said.

If however Paul means by 'unfruitful' that it is impossible to understand the meaning of a tongue by listening or speaking it (without God-given interpretation), his words may be a complete mystery to all except God alone. This would allow the possibility that the tongue-speaking is not referring to an actual language at all.

In the first-century Hellenistic world and earlier, ecstatic utterances in unknown or unintelligible speech were commonly practiced by pagan prophets, magicians and sorcerers. [1]. It is possible that the nature of the tongues spoken by Corinthians were actually this very human activity that the Corinthians brought into their Christian lives from this type of pagan past.

Stop thinking like children

Paul acknowledges that the Corinthian practice is from God, in the sense that everything is from God, whether good or bad, human or miraculous. (Romans 11:36) All things ultimately come from him and he uses all things to work for the Christian their good of conformity to Christ's image (Romans 8:28). Rather than simply instructing the Corinthians to stop using tongues, he sympathises with them and reframes their behaviour in the light of the gospel and God’s purposes for the church. Since this is Paul's approach, it should be ours also.

Paul's message to the Corinthians is nonetheless a rebuke for immaturity. They are like a two-year-olds who do not know how to do things for others. He portray tongues as an undesirable gift because it doesn’t achieve God’s goal for the church, which is mutual edification. Edification comes by prophesying to one another, by which God speaks his word through Christians to other Christians to encourage and comfort them. He instructs the Corinthians to cease speaking in tongues in the church unless they can interpret their messages. Without interpretation a tongue only encourages the speaker. Only with interpretation can a tongue work for the common good.

Since the Corinthian and Pentecostal tongues do not likely share the same identify, Pentecostalism should be more careful when applying verses such as 1 Corinthians 14:4 to their own practice: “he who speaks in a tongue edifies himself”. The great danger of the Pentecostal emphasis on tongues is that this activity does not bring edification as Paul explains it. The point of 1 Corinthians 14 is that Christian strengthening and Christian encouragment comes from mutually understanding God's word.

A sign for unbelievers

The tongues spoken of in 1 Corinthians 12-14 were a ‘sign’ for unbelievers: “Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is for believers, not for unbelievers.” (1 Corinthians 14:22) In its context 1 Corinthians 14:22 is preceded by a quotation from Isaiah 28:11-12 where unbelieving Israel are told they'd soon hear the foreign tongues of the Assyrians coming to destroy them. Here ‘tongues’ were given to unbelieving Israelites as a sign of their judgement. Paul uses this quote to warn the Corinthians that similarly if they speak with tongues that listeners do not understand it is a sign to them that they are under God’s judgement. People become Christians when they come to understand God’s word; a sign of being a Christian is understanding God’s word when it is heard. And so Paul says, “tongues are for unbelievers” who are under God’s judgement, for they are the ones to whom God’s word comes without meaning.

How do Pentecostal tongues function as a sign of judgment against unbelievers? The lack of explanation in Pentecostalism of 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 is telling. The tongues described in the Corinthian church were a sign to any listener not understanding their content that they were under God's judgment. Similarly, modern day tongues practiced by Pentecostals in churches, if they are indeed unknowable utternances, are a sign to any listener of God's judgment in the church on unbelievers. For these tongues divert attention from God's word and so deprive listeners of the only message that can save them.

Theological confidence

It is hard to believe how anybody could claim perfect confidence in her or his own reading of 1 Corinthians 14, for this passage contains so many difficulties. However, the meaning of the passage is clear enough. Much of what has been read into this passage and brought to it from personal experience can not justly be read out of it.

The Pentecostal practice refered to under the title of ‘tongues’ is given by God, as all things are. (Romans 11:36) Something that helps Christians maintain a focused adoration on God and brings no mutual or individual harm is a good thing. However, this is not reason enough for a theological position claiming that the present day exercise of Pentecostal tongues have the same identity as those described in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 or the Acts narratives.

More on this topic

How Pentecostalism developed over time

Tongues and Spirit-baptism: What Pentecostals believe

The history of tongues

- -

[1] Grant. R. Osborne (Ph.D., University of Aberdeen), “Tongues, Speaking in,” Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd Ed., Paternoster Press, 2001, p. 1206. talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

The Miraculous Gifts of the Holy Spirit: The Pentecostal basis

The Pentecostal emphasis on power can be dated back to the Keswick movement and earlier, when in Great Britain Dwight L. Moody began emphasising the need for the Spirit's empowerment for Christian service and the idea of Spirit baptism as a second blessing of the Spirit's power (1874). In America the Holiness movement began to developed. “Restoration theology” emerged, teaching that “Spirit baptism fully restored the spiritual relationship that Adam and Eve had with God in the Garden of Eden” [1] and that a sign of the end of the church age would be a restoration of the New Testament sign gifts to the church. (As early as 1830 Edward Irving had taught that the “extraordinary” gifts would be given again by the Spirit to the church in the period just prior to the Second Coming of Christ). Since Spirit baptism brought a restoration of the relationship intended by God in the Garden of Eden, “the higher life in Christ could also reverse the physical effects of the Fall, enabling believers to take authority over sickness.” [1] A. B. Simpson and A. J. Gordon were among those who began teaching healing in the atonement.

The basis for the Pentecostal position on miracles

Pentecostals argue the point that miraculous gifts such as healing, tongues, prophecy and exorcisim are promised to Christians. Pentecostalism relies heavily upon four passages for its position: Mark 16:9-20, in which Jesus is described as saying ‘signs will accompany those who believe;’ James 5:14-16 in which James states, 'Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church... And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well;' 1 Corinthians 14:1 that instructs Christians, 'eagerly desire spiritual gifts' within the context of the miraculous (1 Cor 12:8-10); and Isaiah 53:4-5 where it is taught that Christ on the cross became our “sickness-bearer” as well as our “sin-bearer.” However a careful reading of each of these passages disqualifies them as a basis for an expectation of the miraculous activity of God within the church.

Mark 16:9-20, A promise of the miraculous to Christians?

In Mark 16:17-18 Jesus is described as saying, "these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well." Diligent readers of Scripture will see that the earliest and most reliable manuscripts do not contain this section of Mark's gospel. This is not of the least significance. The fact that the early manuscripts of Mark do not contain Mark 16:9-20 undeniably means that this section was added later by a different author to a copy of the gospel, probably to give the work a more 'natural' ending. It may be apparent to careful readers that the flow of Mark 16:9-20 does not fit Mark’s characteristic style. It should be clear to Pentecostals that these quotes were added at a later stage to manuscripts by someone other than Mark himself. The unavoidable conclusion of this logic is that Mark 16:9-20 is not apostolic and therefore is not a part of the cannon; these statements are not a part of Scripture. They should not therefore be used as a basis for any theology.

James 5:14-16, A promise of physical healing for Christians?

In support of an expectation of healing, Pentecostals quote James 5:14-15, in which James writes, "Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well...” This seemingly straightforward passage may seem to indicate that any sick Christian may be healed by the faith-filled prayer of church elders. However this passage cannot be read as an absolute promise of healing for sick Christians, for otherwise there would be no need for any Christian to ever be sick, as was the Apostle Paul, (Gal 4:14, 2 Cor 12:7-9) [2] Timothy, (1 Tim 5:23), Epaphroditus, (Php 2:26-27) and Trophimus. (2 Tim 4:20) The Pentecostal reading of this passage should also make it possible for someone to avoid death altogether. If all that were needed to stay well was the prayer of believing elders, why should anyone need to die at all, as did the Apostles themselves who initially demonstrated the use of these gifts. James 5:14-16 is not as straightforward as Pentecostalism makes out.

In the first place, the passage should be read in the entirety of it's context: “Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective. Elijah was a man just like us. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops. My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.” (James 5:14-20)

Firstly the context of this passage prohibits any comparison with the spiritual gifts of healings and miracles, for it neither promises nor describes anything immediate or direct or even miraculous. Secondly, the language of ‘healing’ as being ‘raised’ is quite ambiguous, and could refer to an experience in this life or to the perfect healing after this life.

Thirdly, the repeated emphasis of the passage is salvation from the consequences of sin. The topic is brought up four times. The first mentions forgiveness from sin, (v. 15) the second, healing, (v. 16) the third, 'salvation from death' and the fourth, 'covering' sins. (v. 20). The language of ‘raising’ and ‘saving’ may refer to physical healing from sickness that are a result of God’s judgement on Christians for certain sins. The context does relate the healing of the sickness to the forgiveness of specific sin (vs. 15-16). This view offers a likely explanation for why elders are involved.

Examples within Scripture of this sort of sickness can be found in 1 Corinthians 11:29-30 and Revelation 2:22-23. The prayer ‘offered in faith’ indicates reliance on God’s grace. To ‘have faith’ is not to have a power to bring about healing despite the will of God, but to place ones trust in God himself who alone is gracious to heal. In this case the 'prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well' because God’s revealed purpose for his judgement on Christians is not an act of final condemnation, but of Fatherly discipline (1 Cor 11:32). Clearly, James 5:14-16 cannot be used as a basis for an expectation of the miraculous healing as the usual and continuous activity of God within churches.

1 Corinthians 14:1, A command to desire the miraculous gifts?

Pentecostals maintain that since 1 Corinthians 14:1 teaches Christians to 'eagerly desire spiritual gifts' within the context of the miraculous, (1 Cor 12:8-10) therefore the sign gifts such as healing, prophecy and tongues should be ever present in healthy churches. But once again due consideration must be given to the wider context, for Pentecostalism uses 1 Corinthians 14:1 to teach the exact opposite of what Paul is actually saying.

In the first place, the Greek word ‘gifts’ does not appear in the original text in this passage, nor does it in 1 Corinthians 12:1! A Greek reading of this verse (and others like it in the section) would not suggest the topic of ‘gifts’ at all [3]. In the wider context of the book Paul is addressing what it means to be ‘spiritual’ in general. A more accurate way of understanding the intended meaning of this verse might be 'desire earnestly [to be] spiritual' or 'desire earnestly spiritual [things], but especially that you may prophecy'. Similarly, verse 12 might read something like: 'since you are zealous of spiritual [things], seek to abound for the edification of the church'.

The Corinthians thought they were spiritual because of their abounding manifestations of the Spirit. Instead, in his entire letter, Paul corrects them by explaining that a spiritual person is one who understands God’s wisdom in the gospel through the revelation of the Spirit (1 Cor 1-2); spirituality is to regard the Apostle’s message and ministry itself as supremely spiritual (1 Cor 3-4); it is to honour the Holy Spirit by being holy in ones physical body and in the church (1 Cor 5-7); it is to use ones freedom and knowledge in Christ to serve one another in love by building up one another with prophecy and it is conversely not to indulge in idolatry or the self-centred use of ones knowledge or the self-centred use of gifts like tongues to building up only oneself (1 Cor 8-14); being spiritual is to stand firm on the gospel of the resurrection (1 Cor 15-16).

No verse in the book of 1 Corinthians can be justly cited to form a basis for an emphasis on desiring and seeking spiritual gifts themselves. In fact, this is the very problem in thinking that Paul is seeking to correct: we should rather desire and seek to be spiritual people, which is not the same thing as having the manifestation of the Spirit in our midst. For the Corinthians had plenty of the Spirit's gifts and yet Paul rebukes them for being unspiritual and worldly.

Isaiah 53:4-5, Teaching on healing in the atonement?

In Isaiah's famous suffering servant song (Isaiah 53) he prophecies about the Christ, “Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.” (Isa 53:4-5). Then in Matthew 8:16-17, Matthew writes of Jesus, “many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: "He took up our infirmities and carried our diseases."”

Pentecostalism has long concluded from upon these texts that healing was achieved for Christians by Christ's work at the cross. They conclude that Isaiah 53:4-5 promises healing by Jesus for Christians as a result of his work of atonement. Kenneth Copeland and Kenneth Hagan are contemporary American teachers who advocate this line of thinking.

However the use of Isaiah 53:4-5 as a basis for the belief that healing is as readily available to Christians as is forgiveness of sins is a false logic. Firstly, Matthew 8:16-17 is not a reference to Christ's work of atonement but to his healing ministry which preceded it. The Apostle Matthew has unavoidably taught that Isaiah's prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus activity of healing “all the sick” before his death on the cross. Secondly, the Apostle Peter's quotation of Isaiah 53:4 in 1 Peter 2:24 shows that this prophecy applies to Christians as a reference to the forgiveness of sins. Isaiah's words themselves occur in the wider context of a passage all about justification from transgression (Isaiah 53:5-12). The Apostle Peter interprets, “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.” [4]

Therefore, the commonly quoted texts used in support of the Pentecostal position on the miraculous gifts - Mark 16:17-18, James 5:14-16; 1 Corinthians 14:1; 1 Corinthians 12:8-10; Isaiah 53:4-5 - are not fit as basis for an expectation of the usual and continual activity of these signs gifts in the life of churches.

More on this topic

Gifts of the Spirit: What Pentecostals believe

The miraculous gifts: what the Scriptures promise

The gift of tongues: What the Scriptures describe

- -

[1] Gary B. McGee (Ph.D., Professor of Church History, Chair, Bible and Theology Department at Assemblies of God Theological Seminary), Systematic Theology, Chapter 1 “Historical Background”, Logion Press, 1995, p. 12.

[2] In 2 Corinthians 12:7-9, the Greek translated ‘weakness’ is the same word translated ‘sickness’ in James 5:14.

[3] The New American Standard Version indicates this by placing the word 'gifts' in italics.

[4] Stott, John. The Cross of Christ, IVP, 1986, p. 224-245. talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

The Miraculous Gifts of the Holy Spirit: what the Scriptures promise

What does the New Testament promise about spiritual gifts? A restoration of miracles, healings and tongues to the Church in the last days in preparation for the End? That is what Pentecostalism from its origin has believed. Pentecostalism began with a widespread desire for the gift of tongues (foreign languages) for world evangelisation and the desire for a restoration of the 'full gospel,' involving Spirit-baptism as a post-conversion experience of empowerment with the miraculous sign gifts such as healing.

The claim that God restored the miraculous gifts of the New Testament period to the church in the revivals of the early 1900s is questionable. Such a belief assumes that these gifts were in some way 'lost' in the first place. The Bible nowhere indicates that God would at some stage in early church history cease to give any of the spiritual gifts. Similarly, the Scriptures nowhere promise that God would continue to give them continuously throughout church history. And even more critically, the Scriptures nowhere promise an end-time restoration of the sign gifts such as prophecy, tongues, miracles and healing.

It is likely that God has continued to give all of his gifts to the church right throughout its history. It is certainly possible that God has enabled Christians to genuinely speak the tongues of the same identity as those of the New Testament period, for example. Similarly, God may well have used the prayers or involvement of many Christians to do genuine miracles or healing. He may also have allowed Christians to provide genuine prophecy of the same nature as that in the New Testament period.

But if the New Testament does not actually promise miraculous activity to Christians, what has God promised about spiritual gifts?

Warning: The promise of miracles

The New Testament does instruct Christians to expect miraculous activity in the last days. But remarkably, for Pentecostals at least, these instructions warn Christians to expect miraculous activity in the world! Christians are instructed to be very cautious about genuine miraculous activity from non-Christians and false-Christians and even from Satan himself. We are to test everything, holding onto only that which is good.

In order to understand this point it is vital to realise that none of the spiritual gifts themselves require a Christian context or content. Claims and evidence of miraculous activity have come from all sides of society and history. This includes spiritualists, agnostics, members of the occult and those leading immoral lives. Any claim to a miracle or healing does not necessitate the work of God for three reasons:

Firstly, mistakes are all too easy to make, especially in an overly keen state of mind. There are multiple factors that might account for so-called healings. These include wrong diagnosis and healing as a result of other causes. Other causes of healing include the natural bodily process of recovery and the use of bodily aids like therapy, medication and treatment.

The second and third reason why a miracle or healing does not necessitate the work of God are given by the New Testament itself when specifically warning Christians about what to expect in these last days.

Secondly, the Scriptures warn that false prophets will come who will be able to do miracles, signs and wonders that deceive and lead astray Christians (Mk 13:22, cf. Deut 13:1-5).

Thirdly, the Scriptures also warn that in the last days Satan himself will deceive people with powerful signs and wonders because of their refusal to love the truth (2 Th 2:9-10).

Therefore the presence of miraculous activity is not necessarily a sign of spirituality and the work of God. It is a warning sign. It should cause us to listen all the more carefully to the accompanying message being preached (or not preached), testing it against the Scriptures so that we are not lead astray from the gospel to something that is different and therefore false.

The Pentecostal case

Pentecostals argue the point that miraculous gifts such as healing, tongues, prophecy and exorcisim are promised to Christians. Pentecostalism relies heavily upon three passages for its position: Mark 16:9-20, in which Jesus is described as saying ‘signs will accompany those who believe;’ James 5:14-16 in which James states, 'Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church... And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well;' and 1 Corinthians 14:1 that instructs Christians, 'eagerly desire spiritual gifts' within the context of the miraculous (1 Cor 12:8-10). However a careful reading of each of these passages disqualifies them as a basis for an expectation of the miraculous activity of God within the church. But that's for the next article.

More on this topic

The miraculous gifts: The Pentecostal basis

Gifts of the Spirit: What Pentecostals believe

The gift of tongues: What the Scriptures describe

talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.

Gifts of the Holy Spirit: What Pentecostals believe

Pentecostalism began with a belief that in its origin God was restoring New Testament Christianity by bringing a discovery and recovery of the ‘sign’ gifts to the Church, including tongues, interpretation, miracles, healing and prophecy.

In the nineteenth century, those in the Holiness movement assumed that speaking in tongues had ended with the close of the Early Church period but that the other gifts such as healing and miracles should still be available to Christians. However, by the turn of the nineteenth century, a widespread desire for the gift of tongues had also emerged. This was coupled with the already existent desire for a restoration of the ‘full gospel’ [1] involving Spirit-baptism as a post-conversion experience of empowerment that enabled the exercise of these sign gifts.

The Holiness movement revivals that occurred at the beginning of the twentieth century that gave birth to Pentecostalism involved miracles, healing, tongues-speaking, prophecy and discernment gifts. The expectancy of a restoration of the miraculous gifts to the Church as a mark of the end of the Church age lead early Pentecostals to interpret these events surrounding their origin as this end-time restoration of the ‘Apostolic faith’ in preparation for Christ's return.

Pentecostal churches today continue to place central importance on miraculous and prophetic gifts in the life of the church. All spiritual gifts of the New Testament period are expected to be in use within healthy churches as God’s provision for his body. Such spiritual gifts are seen as an essential part of God’s working within his Church. They are not only to be desired but actively sought.

More on this topic

Where did Pentecostalism come from? (The Holiness Movement)

Why did Pentecostalism begin?

How did early Pentecostals view themselves?

- -

[1] The ‘full gospel’ or ‘fourfold gospel’ is summarized as ‘Christ as Savior, Baptizer, Healer, and Coming King.’ (A. B. Simpson).

talkingpentecostalism.blogspot.com | joe towns: christian discussion on pentecost, charisma, pentecostal and charismatic beliefs, the Bible and Jesus; including the origin and history of pentecostalism, baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, gifts and miracles, divine healing and word of faith, prosperity and wealth, praise and worship, guidance and hearing the voice of the Holy Spirit.