Aside from the Bible, I have never read a book that has convicted, challenged, and inspired me to change more that A.W. Tozer's Mystery of the Holy Spirit. This compilation of sermons is an unapologetic call to a radical Spirit-filled life.  When I think of men who lived a spirit-filled life, Tozer  definitely makes my list. In fact, I am known to tell people that if they read only one book discussing the work of the Holy Spirit, they should read this book.

After realizing that my radical faith is being tempered by my surroundings and my stubbornness, I decided to read through the sermons again. Once again, I was challenged and inspired by Tozer's  divinely inspired words. This time though, I was also challenged and inspired by Tozer's humanity. At several points in the book, I strongly began to question statements made by Tozer. I questioned his critique of rock music, his dismissal of television.. and his critique of the charismatic church movement.

In Chapter 9, Tozer explains why he doesn't want to be associated with churches that have branched forth from the Azuza Street Revival. Honestly, I was a bit taken back by this statement. Most of his sermons in this compilation are focused on "being filled with the Spirit" as an experience subsequent to conversation and a continual lifestyle needed to fully serve and worship God. He talks about miracles, spiritual warfare, healing, answered prayer, and emphasizes worship. Almost everything in this book sounds extremely charismatic to me, yet Tozer is rather harsh toward the pentecostal church. 

Why? He states that the movement has put the gift of tongues above its Biblical place and no movement that is extra-biblical can be trusted. (p.146). I completely agree that anything that isn't supported by the Bible cannot be trusted, but Tozer's critique of the movement -articulated as the concluding lines of a sermon- never examines the charismatic church's doctrine or practice through the lens of scripture. Tozer simply states his point and tells anyone who disagrees to come talk to him in person. I wish that I could take him up on his offer because I have been contemplating this one paragraph all day. 

I desire to live a Spirit-filled life,  and  I believe that God has called me to help believers grow in relationship with the Holy Spirit.  I have had many conversations about baptism/filling/anointing of the Holy Spirit as a result. Often, these conversations will turn to the topic of glossolalia- better known as speaking in tongues.

Over the years, my stance on the filling of the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues has greatly developed and changed. (And, I am totally open to it continuing to change as long as the Spirit leads.) I once refused to believe either existed. Now, I truly believe that the infilling of the Holy Spirit is an experience subsequent to conversion, and that baptism in the Holy Spirit is usually followed by receiving the gift of a personal prayer language aka speaking in tongues. Do I believe that it is possible to be filled with the Spirit and not speak in tongues? Yes, I do. However, I believe that  the biblical model promotes a correlation between baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues, and more often than not, people who are filled with Spirit speak in tongues. When someone is filled with the Spirit, it is the first time that they completely submit control to God and allow His Spirit to infiltrate every aspect of their life. The tongue is the most difficult aspect of humanity to tame (James 3:8), and giving the Holy Spirit control means giving Him control over our tongues as well. Even so, I fully believe that there are plenty of people who have been filled with the Spirit that have spoken in tongues- even if just a syllable or two... and either don't realize it or choose to not do it again.

For example, I have a friend who had believed that she had been filled with the Spirit, yet began to question her spirituality because she had never spoken in tongues. While praying about the situation, God revealed to her that she had indeed been filled with the Spirit and had been praying in tongues for several years. My friend loved to sing and would often sing spiritual songs in prayer with no recognizable words. She was worshiping God, and never considered the possibility that her songs were actually sung in her prayer language.  Likewise, I have friends that I know have been filled with the Spirit and will openly admit their refusal to speak in tongues because of their unwillingness to relinquish control even though God has given them that gift in the past.

With all this said, I  have never - or at least have never intentionally-  told someone to seek the gift of tongues. Actually, I would highly discourage people from seeking any spiritual gift for the sake of having the gift itself.  I fully recognize that many people fake speaking in tongues to seem more spiritual or desire speaking in tongues so badly that they unconsciously conjure up their own prayer language or worse. I would hate to inadvertently lead anyone to either of those scenarios, and  I am terrified of doing so. What I try to do is encourage people to seek God and to pray that their life is within His will. I try to encourage people to pray for God to fill them with His Spirit in increasing measure so that they can walk in the will of God and so that His presence flowing through them can be a witness to others.  I do also mention how speaking in tongues generally comes alongside the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Because I do believe that a prayer language can be received by any believer and I believe in its benefits,  I encourage people to be open to speaking in tongues and I suggest that those with this gift use it as a disciplined part of their daily prayer life.

I say all that to say this: Tozer's comment made me stop and consider my beliefs. What do I believe is the role of the baptism of the Spirit is? How does speaking in tongues as a personal prayer language fit into that equation? And, have I gone off the Pentecostal bandwagon and started un-biblically elevating tongues beyond their proper place in scripture? Also, are my words and my actions lining up with my beliefs? 

After prayer and consideration, my conclusions are as follows. I don't know everything about the Holy Spirit, and I am human so I will never have a perfect pneumatology. I also recognize that the same is true about Tozer and every other theologian. My belief regarding the baptism in the Holy Spirit can be summarized in Acts 1:8: The Holy Spirit fills believers in order to empower them for witness. I will always believe that the anointing of the Spirit is continually needed for ministry.

Unlike Tozer, I do believe that speaking in tongues is the initial physical sign of the infilling of the Spirit because it is indicative of the body being completely surrounded to God (if only in that moment).  Like Tozer, however, I would agree that Pentecostalism has a history of elevating this gift above its biblical place in scripture. I would also agree with both Tozer and the apostle Paul in saying that speaking in tongues is the least of all gifts. As the least of all gifts though, I think it has the potential to increase and to build other spiritual gifts because it is a personal edification that builds our faith and connects us with God's Spirit.Also, I think speaking in tongues is one of many important components of a mature faith. In my experience speaking in tongues is greatly beneficial. Some days I hate that I have come to this conclusion, but everything I have studied and experienced has proven this sentiment to be true. See this post for an explanation.   Even so, I don't believe that either the filling of the Spirit or speaking in tongues should be end goals in our faith (a common mistake of the charismatic church), but rather a small step towards an ever increasing relationship with Christ and ministry through His Spirit on His behalf.

With that said, I have two observations. The first is regarding Tozer's statement, and the second is regarding my own thoughts and beliefs. I think it is important to recognize that Tozer was a prominent member of the Christian and Mission Alliance church. Pentecostal denominations like the Assemblies of God and the Foursquare church where greatly influenced and built from members of the C&MA and the Holiness movement. He addresses Pentecostalism during a divisive era in the Spirit-filled church. Tozer accurately dismisses the extreme viewpoint that speaking in tongues should be the focal point of faith, but may be using that truth to defend his denomination from faction by outwardly dismissing the entire movement toward charismatic renewal. I think that often, those filled with the Spirit, adopt a doctrine that makes prayer language an optional gift from God in order to avoid division, to protect themselves from having to address the issue that some Spirit-filled Christians do not speak in tongues because they don't know that they a prayer language is available to them or don't want to do so, and to protect people from jumping off a dangerous charismatic cliff like the church in Corinthian where people used tongues in disarray and argued about whose prayer language sounded better.

My second observation is that I have not jumped on the Pentecostal bandwagon, but rather have resisted doing so so much that I have hindered my own walk with God. My problem is that I am not living a life where I continually seeking to be filled with the Spirit and I am not utilizing my prayer language. Why? Because I honestly don't want to be that person that discusses baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues constantly. I don't want to be that person that can't be trusted because they elevate one aspect of biblical Christianity above others in an unhealthy manner. However, in not wanting to be that person, I make such a point to promote balance and to diminish the false assumption that I have jumped on the tongue talking crazy train, that I diminish the power and freedom of a Spirit-filled life.  I am not living a Spirit-filled life at the moment. The truth is that the Spirit is in my life, but I am also filling my life with my will as a supplement to God's will. If my life where Spirit led, I could discuss whatever topic God led me to discuss without fear of being misunderstood. If my life were Spirit led, I would be reading my Bible, praying, praying in tongues, worshiping, serving, and utilizing all my gifts in increasing measure. If I prayed in tongues half the amount of time that I talk about praying in tongues, I wouldn't have to worry about the perceptions of others because the gifts and fruits of the Spirit would be evident in my life.

I used to pray that I would be like Tozer, but I'm pretty sure that I no longer want to pray that prayer. The fact of the matter is that Tozer was human, a very lonely and depressed human at that. My prayer should have been that I would live the Spirit-filled life that Tozer desired. I still maintain that this is the best initial book for people to read regarding the Spirit-filled life, and I recognize that Tozer's comment regarding speaking in tongues as evidence of infilling is a minute statement.  And frankly, I don't care what people believe the specific evidence is because the true evidence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the the presence, gifts and fruit of the Spirit in an individual's life and ministry. God can speak for Himself regardless of the doctrines of man. Tozer was often quoted with saying "Seek not, forbid not" in regards to the question of speaking in tongues. I think that's a great mantra: we should never seek the gift, we should only seek the Giver.

With that said, I leave you with this:

"If the Lord's people were as eager to be filled with the Spirit as they are to prove they can't be [or to prove that they can be ... or to prove whether that filling involves speaking in tongues or not], the Church would be quite a different Church".  -Tozer. (49), [commentary mine]