Running around, singing “This is Halloween, this is Halloween” as I clean and pack. [Fri]

“What did you do to your face?” It’s a piercing Mr. Greeter Man. Thanks for welcoming me to church on Christmas Eve; it’s nice to see you too! [Sat]

Opening gifts at my grandparent’s - I just unwrapped a bottle of flea shampoo. Hmm, either I’m getting a puppy or ... [Sun]

When asked where they’d like to go for lunch, my sisters responded. “Can we get salad? We never have fresh vegetables.”  =/ [Mon]

 I think I just ate a battered fried moth. Oh, and my failed attempt to make churros saved others from consuming my new delicacy. [Tues]

“Before social media, we didn’t think to keep a moment-by-moment breakdown of our days and to broadcast this to the world. Before social media, we would not have cared to read it. Yet today many of us update our Facebook status and Twitter streams with near-religious fervor, almost as if we have not actually experienced anything until we’ve told others about it … what we haven’t shared with the world seems like it has hardly been experienced at all” (pp. 70-71)

A revision of an assignment for one of my classes, this blog is a reflection on the role of worship in the Book of Revelation. I found it interesting, so I thought I would share. The two books referenced are Charts on Revelation by Dr. Mark Wilson and The Revelation to John commentary by Stephen S. Smalley.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since God is worthy of all honor and praise,  it should be no surprise that worship is a major theme of the book of Revelation. The four living creatures, the elders, the angels, the heavenly voices, the great multitude, the saints, and the nations are all depicted worshiping God. The seven hymns in Revelation declare that: God is Holy (Rev. 4); worthy (Rev. 5); the source of salvation (Rev. 7); powerful to reward and to judge (Rev 11); marvelous, true and righteous (Rev 15); just in his judgments (Rev 16); and holy, victorious, reigning, and glorious (Rev 19) (Wilson, 74). Utilizing a combination of doxologies, acclamations, amen choruses, victory hymns, hymns of thanksgiving, praise hymns, and other songs, the book of Revelation lays a foundation of worshiping God both in heaven and on earth.

“The rejection of John’s attempt to worship the angel… and the command to ‘Worship God’ instead, is more likely to be related to one of the main themes of the Apocalypse. The seer is conscious of the insidious danger to Christian witness of idolatry, which has been in mind during the visions concerning Babylon…  A clear choice must be made between ‘Babylon’ and ‘Jerusalem’; and true worship means obedience to the one God, not to those like the beast who claim divine status, or even to God’s heavenly agents.” (Smalley, 486).

This blog post is taken from last week's assignment in my Global Pentecostalism class. It is my reflection on our readings on the foundational history of the Pentecostal movement (pre-Asuza street).
---------

Growing up,  I learned that “crazy Pentecostals” practiced “demonic” behaviors... [now]  I consider myself a Pentecostal (on most days) ... but I normally tell people that I am an evangelical semi-reformed charismatic Christian. My description is generally an effort to start a conversation while recognizing my multi-denominational background and attempting to avoid being put into a denominational box. Little did I know, my description of my own faith is actually a great description of the roots of the Pentecostal movement.

One of our texts; see Ch.2.

Pentecostalism is most certainly evangelical with a great focus on international missions. It is most certainly charismatic with an emphasis on the empowering of the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts. And though I never really thought of Pentecostalism as a Reformed,  after this week’s readings, I am reminded that Pentecostalism has emerged from a wide variety of influences including the Reformed tradition.

Drawing from Catholic mysticism, German Pietism, Zinzendorf and the Moravians, Wesley and the Holiness movement, the Keswick Convention and revivalism, and a number of global awakenings… Pentecostalism is most certainly a wider movement covering a greater spectrum than most people recognize. While many pinpoint Pentecostalism to Azusa Street, it is important to recall that there were three distinct streams of the foundational movement before that particular outpouring.

1. The Wesleyan/Holiness perspective- a fullness of sanctification is the second blessing
2. The Keswick/Reformed perspective - the baptism of the Spirit is an empowerment for service
3. The ‘third blessing’ perspective - which emerged into the beliefs that the baptism of the Spirit is a subsequent blessing evidenced by speaking in tongues.

It is also important to note that while many outpourings of the Spirit occurred with manifestations of the Spirit [and that each of these perspectives included the belief of a baptism/empowerment/infilling of the Holy Spirit subsequent to salvation], Parham was the first to indicate that speaking in tongues was an initial physical sign of Baptism of the Spirit [some time after each of these three streams were already gaining momentum]. It seems that the birth of Pentecostalism is often linked to this doctrine, when in all actuality there is a rich history before and beyond Parham’s conclusion.

Another observation that I found interesting was how abruptly some of the sub-movements came to a halt. It is interesting to note that momentum seemed to stop when the leaders involved became too prideful or judgmental.  [Just one example is Parnham himself.] After judgmentally trying to distinguish between true and false tongues, Parham’s movement fizzled out, a scandal occurred, and he lived the rest of his life in obscurity. Perhaps it is merely a coincidence, but it seems that humility and prayer played a key role in many of these outpourings.

Similarly, I think it is important to remain humble when considering the origins of Pentecostalism. Personally, one of the reasons I tend to stray from describing myself as a Pentecostal when initially asked for a denominational/doctrinal association is due to the fact that Pentecostalism seems to trace the beginning of the Holy Spirit moving back to Azusa Street while placing speaking in tongues on a pedestal because of the uniqueness of the doctrine at that time. 

How often does someone defend the history of manifestations of the Spirit by pointing back to Tertullian or Zinzendorf? Our narrow definition of Pentecostalism allows us to reference Acts 2 or the aftermath of Azusa, while failing to acknowledge everything that God has done in the almost two thousand years between.   Perhaps a recognition of a [more accurate] history would help bridge the gap between denominational Pentecostalism and other branches of Christianity.  Limiting the scope of Pentecostalism to Asuza and what follows eliminates the ability to connect with fellow believers with the same rich history and beliefs. It also diminishes our ability to encourage traditionally "non-Pentecostal" denominations to continue to seek the empowering of the Holy Spirit, as we are neglecting to recall that the gifts of the Spirit were prominent in North America and around the globe before our idea of denominational Pentecostalism was even initiated.

In contrast, when one takes a step back and really takes in the scope of the rich history of the global movement, it is humbling to be able to consider oneself a Pentecostal and exciting to know that Holy Spirit is still actively moving as Pentecostalism/Charismatic Christianity is the fastest growing faith in the world.

It's a weird picture, but there it is...

In the end, I've come to believe in something I call "The Physics of the Quest." A force in nature governed by laws as real as the laws of gravity. The rule of Quest Physics goes something like this: If you're brave enough to leave behind everything familiar and comforting, which can be anything from your house to bitter, old resentments, and set out on a truth-seeking journey, either externally or internally, and if you are truly willing to regard everything that happens to you on that journey as a clue and if you accept everyone you meet along the way as a teacher and if you are prepared, most of all, to face and forgive some very difficult realities about yourself, then the truth will not be withheld from you.

I started with tears, not because I am sad or because of the frequency of them in my life... but because this window is the most relevant at the moment. It provides a glimpse of why I am still sitting in a coffee shop in Ibiza instead of sitting at home in my apartment in Washington, D.C.

"Whenever you find tears in your eyes, especially unexpected tears, it is well to pay the closest attention. They are not only telling you something about the secret of who you are, but more often than not God is speaking to you through them of the mystery of where you have come from and is summoning you where, if your soul is to be saved, you should go next"- Fredruck Buechner as quoted in Windows to the Soul by Ken Gire (191).

My departure was scheduled for July 23rd, 11:25 p.m. In the week leading up to my flight, I kept discovering droplets of water falling from my face. Tears- a little uncommon, a little unexpected.

Flashback: leaving Ibiza last year. As my plane ascended, the water droplets started pouring from my eyes. Several hours of dripping facets under the eyelids. No real distress or sadness, just a feeling that I needed to return. And, so I did.

Several days ago, I sat on my balcony. Staring at the clouds, speaking to God through flows of spoken word and prayer, marveling at the tears falling down my cheek. It didn't want to think about leaving this place; it seemed like my pending departure was too soon and the unexpected tears- a week early, and a few too many- agreed with my sentiments. "Lord, why am I crying? I have a week left- that's a lot of time. Why am I crying already?? "

As I watched the cloud pass quickly overhead, I heard a voice in my head say this "like that cloud you will pass through quickly, but your presence still has an impact while you here and eventually you will return and pass through again." Fair enough, but why am I crying? What does that even mean?

Searching for answers, I looked toward the sky. The cloud seemed to slow. It lingered. And, suddenly I realized that my tears were indicative of a longing for a little more time, I wanted to linger here a little longer too.  But, was God leading me to stay a little longer? Were the tears and the imagery and the prayers really from Him? Or was it just wishful thinking? I asked God to have someone invite me to stay if He wanted me to stay.

The next day, I was invited to stay longer if I wanted to do so. My flights were able to be changed, the space for me here was confirmed, and God clearly made a way for me to linger here for just a little longer: three weeks longer.  Because I paid attention to my tears and asked for God to reveal their meaning, I have a little more time and a lot more joy and excitement in knowing that God has purpose for the next three weeks.

Those tears were not the only ones I have shed since being here. I have cried for lives that seem engulfed by hopelessness, for the abuse of alcohol and drugs, for the vulnerable who have been deserted by their friends, for the loss of innocence, for those imprisoned by injustice, for the deceptive sting of insecurity, for my brothers and sisters who have yet to find their way home to the Father... I've shed many tears for many people here in Ibiza and I find that each one is an indication of something deeper.

"So much is distilled in our tears, not the least of which is wisdom in living life. From my own tears I have learned that if you follow your tears, you will find your heart. If you find your heart, you will find what is dear to God. And if you find what is dear to God, you will find the answer to how you should live your life"- Windows to the Soul, Ken Gire- 195.

Sadly, I have been neglecting my blog. As I was discussing how I kept putting off uploading blog posts (they are half written saved in Word docs on my computer, I'm just lazy), someone asked me what I blog about.

Good question. Why do I blog? What exactly is this blog about? Why does it matter if I update it?

As I was pondering these questions, I was reading Windows to the Soul by Ken Gire. [Which is excellent and thought provoking, you should read it!] In his introduction to the book, Gire explains that windows are moments where we experience an intimacy with God.

At some of these windows, what we see offers simply a moment of insight, making us slower to judge and quicker to show understanding. At a few of them, what we see offers a word spoken to the very depths of who we are. It may be a word to rouse us from sleep and ready us for our journey. It may be a word to warn us of a precipice or guide us to a place of rest. It may be a word telling us who we are and why we are here and what is required of us at this particular juncture of the journey.... windows to the soul is where we hear those words  and where the journey begins." (11-12).

Well said. Gire continues to share some of the categories of windows in his own life: vocation, stories, art, wilderness, poetry, movies, memory, dreams, writing, scripture, humanity, tears, depression, nature....

While I could not seem to articulate why I blog when inquired, Gire seems to give an explanation that I feel comfortable borrowing and adopting as my own. I blog to share glimpses of those windows in my own life, to share where I see God and how those moments of revelation impact my own journey.


It has been a month since I have updated, and there have been many windows. I have some entries saved and stored, and others unwritten... but first, I want to pause and share a few insights from the windows mentioned in the book. Hopefully, they will provide some insight into my life at the moment and inspire whoever reads these to pause and look through their own windows.

"Our Christian habit is to bewail the world's deteriorating standards with an air of rather self-righteous dismay... "The world is going down the drain." we say with a shrug. But whose fault is it? Who is to blame? Let me put it like this. If the house is dark when night falls, there is no sense in blaming the house; that is what happens when the sun goes down. The question to ask is, "Where is the light?". Similarly, if the meat goes bad and becomes inedible, there is no sense in blaming the meat... the question to ask is, "Where is the salt?" Just so, if society deteriorates and its standards decline... there is no sense in blaming society; that is what happens when fallen men and women are left to themselves... the question to ask is "where is the church? Why are the salt and light of Jesus Christ not permeating and changing our society?" - John Stott, Issues Facing Christians Today, page 85.

You can learn much from a person by the books they recommend, and I plan on learning a lot through the book collection of the team here in Ibiza. Thus far, I have not been disappointed.

I just finished The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church by Alan Hirsch. It's a fantastic read, and I highly recommend it for anyone who is passionate about advancing the Gospel and expanding the Church.

In summary, the book examines what makes up the DNA of missional church movements throughout the course of history, focusing particularly on the early Church and the contemporary underground church in China. Incorporating a wealth of scripture and a number of academic disciplines, Hirsch concludes that there are six components of "Apostolic Genius":

1. Jesus is Lord
2. Disciple Making
3. Missional-Incarnational Impulse
4. Apostolic Environment
5. Organic Systems
6. Communitas (not community)

The theological belief that Jesus is Lord is the crux of the Church, and the other five factors are essential supporting elements. Rather than explain them all, I'm just going to encourage you to read the book and quickly reflect on what challenged me most.

In the chapter on Organic Systems, Hirsch references this quote from Neibuhr:

"there are essential differences between an institution and a movement: the one is conservative, the other progressive; the one is more or less passive yielding to influences from the outside, the other is active in influencing rather than being influenced; the one looks to the past, the other to the future. In addition the one is anxious, the other is prepared to take risks; the one guards boundaries, the other crosses [boundaries]." (190)

There is a fine line between the Church being a religious institution and being an authentic movement- the Body of Christ in this world. Discerning the distinction raises many questions. For instance,  Am I working for the expansion of an institution that contains doctrines regarding the Holy Spirit or am I working toward the advancement of the Gospel by yielding to and seeking the movement of the Holy Spirit?

In his conclusion,  Hirsch explains how the Church is returning to Apostolic Genius by incorporating lessons learned from a wide range expressions of the Christian faith. His last paragraph recognizes that the Pentecostal church has yet to truly embrace the Emerging Missional Church because its structure and systems are still reaping the success of the church growth models and methods (271). He suggests that the Emerging Missional Church is missing is the spark of the Pentecostal movement's passion for the work of Holy Spirit. While this sentiment is only briefly explored at the conclusion of the book, I find it extremely interesting as I'm also praying that the charismatic church will find its place as a catalyst in the Emerging Missional Church.

Pentecostalism is the fastest growing religion in the world, especially in unchurched regions. This is the question though: is Pentecostalism concerned primarily with expanding Pentecostalism or primarily with advancing the Gospel?  I personally know a number of Pentecostal/Charismatic missionaries whose only goal is to follow Jesus and do His work. The concern doesn't lie in the examination of the heart of individuals, but rather in the heart of the Church as a whole. Are missionaries and ministries too tied to organizations and jumping through too many bureaucratic hoops to follow and serve Jesus freely?

Of course accountability and structure are key, but has organization moved us toward following the ways of our respective institutions instead of being a fluid movement that follows the Way of Christ?

1. Individualism – the notion of cool is self-centered. (192)
2. Alienation- cool creates “in” groups and is inherently divisive. (193)
3. Competition- “people committed to being cool do not trust each other… and guard their inner sanctum of their hip cachet” (194)
4.  Pride/Vanity- Coolness feeds the ego. (196)
5. A Focus on the Now- “hip is temporary and transitory” (197)
6.  Rebellion- so much of the essence of hip revolves around rebelling against the mainstream and giving life to the revolutionary.  (199)
7. Reduction of Identity to Visual - Hipsters are often labeled by their unique outward appearance, neglecting to examine inward character. (200).

“Yes, Christianity is subversive. But that should not be the end goal of our faith. We shouldn’t enlist young hipsters to join the cause because they think Jesus is a [rebel]. They should join the cause because they need God’s grace, not because they want to take down some system or join some romantic revolutionary movement. A faith built on rebellion is, at the end of the day, not going to be very sustainable… Especially considering that Christ came to right the rebellion of man. All else but the gospel is rebellion. The cause of Christ is the one obedient cause.” – (188-189).

Most of my day consisted of reading Gadamer's take on philosophical hermeneutics, which I oddly kind of enjoy.  I am particularly challenged by a passage explaining a bit of what it means to understand the Gospel. Before I share the quote, here is a short snippet of Gadamer's hermeneutics.

Classic romantic hermeneutics viewed understanding, interpretation, and application as three separate processes. Gadamer, however, concludes that understanding is always interpretation. Furthermore, understanding and interpretation are always combined with application to form one unified process. While every individual approaches the process of understanding with their own presuppositions or prejudices, understanding is not the process of validating those presuppositions by finding a methodology that allows for an examination of the text or artwork or event that supports our preconceived notions. "On the contrary, the interpreter risks his own position to place [his presuppositions] in the light of the governing claim of the text" (Palmer on Gadamer in Hermenutics, 188)  This process of understanding actually alters our horizon as we interact with the text because it causes a fusion of horizons where the individual's perspective meets the perspective of the text.The individual's process of understanding is an event and must be viewed as such, which necessitates that "Understanding always include application to the present" (Palmer, 191)

"[Hermeneutics recognizes] application as an integral element of all understanding. In both legal and theological hermeneutics there is an essential tension between the fixed text- the law or the gospel- on the one hand and, on the other, the sense arrived at by applying it at the concrete moment of interpretation, either in judgment or in preaching. A law does not exist in order to be understood historically, but to be concertized in its legal validity by being interpreted. Similarly, the gospel does not exist in order to be understood as a merely historical document, but to be taken in such a way that it exercises its saving effect. This implies that the text, whether law or gospel, if it is to be understood properly-i.e. according to the claim it makes- must be understood at every moment, in every concrete situation, in a new and different way. Understanding here is always application." - Gadamer, Truth and Method, (307-308).

This paragraph is convicting because it causes me question how well I actually understand the Gospel. Do I apply it in every moment, in every situation, in creative and appropriate ways? Do I always apply the Gospel to my thoughts, words, actions- to everything that comprises my own horizon? No, I can't honestly say that I do, but I pray that some day I will.  Thankfully, as another one of our readings reminded us, the Holy Spirit plays a crucial role in understanding the Gospel. It's humbling to know that I don't fully understand the Gospel, but encouraging to know that I have the Helper to guide me as I continue this process of understanding the Word of God. 

I have read quite a few books that present themselves as life changing discussions about the afterlife, and generally I am disappointed with their contents. Andy Stanley's Since Nobody's Perfect, How Good is Good Enough? is a refreshing alternative to all the extended tract type books out there. Instead of opening with a "this is why you need to begin your walk with Jesus" mentality, Stanley invites the reader into a friendly 94 page dialogue about life and what may follow it.

The conversation centers around one important question: "Do good people go to heaven? If so, how good is good enough?". The first portion of the book is reveals that much of the world believes that living a good life is enough to get into heaven. Every religion seems to think that good deeds lead to a better afterlife (or next life). Is this a logical conclusion? If good is subjective, how can it be the standard for entrance to a pleasant afterlife? And, if a good lifestyle is the key to heaven, why hasn't God give us clear cut moral guidelines to get there? Stanley reveals that that Jesus offers a different perspective. Through the story of the thieves of the cross as recorded in Luke 23, the reader discovers that Jesus actually invites bad people to join Him in paradise (57).

The second half of the book further explores why Jesus' alternative makes more sense than trying to be good enough on our own. My favorite passage of the book is Stanley's attempt to address how it can be fair for a just and loving God to create a system where some good people may not get into heaven.

"Christianity is the fairest possible system in a world that is irreversibly unfair. As we will see, it is certainly more fair that a system predicated upon adhering to a list of rules that we can't find, created by a God who hasn't had the courtesy to explain the system. But before we broach the question of "Is Christianity fair?" we need to look at the assumption that fuels the fairness debate.... [if] you conclude that Jesus could not have been telling the truth because what he says is unfair, then you are using fairness as a test for truth.

For most people, choosing a religion is like choosing a flavor of ice cream- we pick what we like, what we are comfortable with, what suits our taste. That's understandable, but it's not very smart. The issue is not What do I like? or How was I raised? or What makes me comfortable? The issue is What is true?

I find that people don't like to be backed into a corner and forced to discuss religion in terms of true versus false. Again, understandable. But once you decide that people live forever somewhere, you are staking your eternity on what you choose to believe is true."(77-79)

Stanley is aware that the topic he is addressing is both uncomfortable and of eternal importance, and humbly invites us to consider it with him. For a short book, I think that he did an excellent job of challenging both non-Christians and Christians alike to consider what we think about heaven and how people get there.

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because I love blogging and I love books, I am giving "blogging for books" a try.  I received this book for free from WaterBrook Multnomah Publishing Group for this review.

This statistic is staggering, but not necessarily surprising. I think that it's sad, but true. One of the biggest problems facing the church today is a sense of complacency and a stagnated growth process. Here's a humble confession, for about three months (Nov-Jan), I would have had to admittedly include myself in this statistic. Somehow I don't think that I am alone. Unfortunately, many people hit a certain level of growth and then for whatever reason, seem to pause maturation- for either a season of life or indefinitely. The sadder thing is that we generally don't realize that we are doing so, and when the question is posed, we are reluctant to answer it with honesty.

Why is this the case? Why do people who stop growing? How is complacency such a problem in churches? Why isn't it more easily detected and resolved?   Gilliam offers six points of explanation.

• 1) We don't know what a disciple is. 
• 2) We don't know how to make them.
• 3) We don't know how the church's programs play a role in making disciples.
• 4) We don't know how to assess our progress and assure continued progress.
• 5) We don't know how to be model disciples as leaders, and we reproduce the same caliber disciples and future leaders.
• 6) We don't know how to intentionally change this problem without offending people or creating division. So we don't attempt to do so. 

While I agree that all of these components contribute to stunted maturity, points five and six strike particularly close to home. Both are reasons why I plateau and am reluctant to push others to maturity. One of my biggest weaknesses is I assimilate to the standards of the people around me. Likewise, I am not always the model disciple that I pray that others will be. Unfortunately, others assimilate to my less than ideal standard of leadership as well.  Another weakness of mine is a tendency to avoid controversy, offense, and divisiveness- especially when I know I'm supposed to be helping encourage maturity. Sadly, I tend to spend time around people who do the same.

Oh, what do we do when the things we read hit too close to home? Pray, repent and resolve to seek God's guidance for change. That is my intended course of action as I long to grow in maturity and to help others do the same.

"Therefore let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ and be taken forward to maturity... and God permitting we will do so" - Hebrews 6:1,3.

What then is our goal in maturity? What is the standard we strive to achieve as Christians?

"God's call is to all who believe is to be Christian in all we do." (Odgen, Unfinished Business, 247). 

Our responsibility is to hold one another accountable to that call.... here's to continued maturity until we are perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect. (Matthew 5:48).

Yesterday I posted an assignment on a discussion board for a class. Brilliantly worded, incredibly insightful, and totally answering the wrong question. I misread the discussion topic, and had to post a second response- one that was less impressive. At the point, I already embarrassed myself, so I left post posts on the discussion board to humbly admit my mistake.

Speedy reading is my specialty, but often means that I miss significant details-- like an entire phrase that changes the question that you are supposed to answer. Sadly, I often do the same thing when reading scripture; perhaps not with the overarching themes, but with smaller details that give great insight.

This week I began reading through Matthew again with some intentionality, and in the first three chapters alone, here are just three things I noticed that I never had before.

1) In Matthew 1:6, the genealogy account reads "David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife". Solomon's mother was Uriah. Somewhere in the back of my mind I knew that; it's mentioned in both  2 Samuel and 1 Kings and she is the one who secured his place as king. However, I never noticed that the genealogy of Christ mentioned her as "Uriah's wife". Matthew intentionally recalls that David's sin led to his marriage and eventually the birth of Solomon (after their first child conceived during the affair had died).

2) God loves to speak through dreams. Joseph was given instruction concerning the birth of Christ through a dream (Matthew 1). The magi were warned not to return to Herod through a dream (Matthew 2). Then a series of dreams tells Joseph to retreat to Egypt, return to Israel, and to go to Nazareth instead of Bethlehem. That's five dreams in a mere two chapters.

3) "And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham." Matthew 3:9. John the Baptist tells the Pharisees that being a child of Abraham has nothing to do with bloodlines. The stones themselves can become children of Abraham and enter God's covenant if God so chooses. It's a radical statement that would have been highly offensive and contradictory to the beliefs of the Pharisees.


I think I'm slowly falling in love with the Bible all over again...

There is so much that I want to blog, but most of my thoughts will probably never materialize on the screen. I'm in a season of self discovery, or perhaps re-discovery. Not by choice, but by circumstance. Apparently some seminary classes love to make you think about yourself and your future ministry.

One such class is called Spiritual Formation and one of our tasks was to read a book call Discover Your God-Given Gifts by Don & Katie Fortune. In summary, this couple created a personality test to inventory the motivational spiritual gifts of individuals.

By motivational gifts, they mean the seven gifts mentioned in Romans 12: Perciever (prophet), Server, Teacher, Exhorter, Giver, Administrator, Compassion person (mercy). They focus on these gifts because they are the ones that we possess as personality traits and we have control over exerting.  In comparison, the manifestation gifts (1 Cor. 12) are gifts to the people being ministered to, not the people acting as a conduit for ministry, and are dictated by the will of the Holy Spirit. Also, the ministerial gifts (Ephesians 4) are gifts to the church for the purpose of equipping the Body of Christ and these gifts are people rather than possessions.  Thus, the authors focus on the motivational gifts because they are the ones we actually possess  and that we choose to operate in or neglect based on our free will (14-18).

As Christians everyone ministers in all the gifts to a certain extent, but each individual has dominate gifts ingrained into the essence of who they are. If you are experiencing frustration, the authors of this book believe that there is a good chance that you are neglecting to operate in your gifts. Likewise, if you are finding joy in your spiritual life, it is likely that you are operating and developing your gifts.

So I took the quiz, and my top four categories were within eleven points of one another: Perciever (91/100 possible points), Exhorter (88), Teacher (82), and Administrator (80).  In other words,  I am designed to excel at meeting spiritual, mental, psychological and functional needs while declaring the will of God, encouraging personal progress, resourcing and teaching truth, and giving leadership and direction in the lives of those around me. Surprising? Not at all. Forgotten? Maybe.

The score sheet from this assessment reminded me of another personality inventory I took years ago. According to Strength Finder's, my top skills are: Achiever, Communication, Connectedness, Learner, and Self-Assurance. If you are familiar with the assessment, you'll notice that the qualities listed definitely affirm the motivational gift test results.


It's amazing to see how God has shaped and is continually shaping my personality. The challenge is continually choosing to live a life that exhibits that personality and to serve others by utilizing my personal gifts. When we neglect our gifts, we often feel incomplete and unsatisfied because we aren't fulfilling our God given purpose.

To be honest, that is kind of how I feel most days. I'm not referring to depression, but a sense of frustration because I feel out of place. The moments that I find most joy in are the times that I am praying with people, sharing the message of the Gospel, showing someone something new about God, studying God's word, or overseeing a group. I do find these joys in my life, but not often enough.

The questions that surfaces are: am I intentionally or subconsciously neglecting to step into the areas that highlight my giftings? Or are circumstances not providing the opportunity to choose to serve in those areas? Or is it some combination of the two? And how do I continue to utilize and develop my personality and gifts in a way that glories the One who created and is continually transforming me?

I just finished reading Alicia Britt Chole's Anonymous. The book looks at the importance of the years of Jesus' life before His public ministry.  The overall premise is simple: don't discount the seasons of life that seem unexciting or deserted; it is in those seasons that our character is developed and we are prepared for the moments of life that define our purpose. 

It's a quick read that offers a welcoming reflection of what it means to live life in the present.  Such a reminder is needed because I definitely feel like I am in an anonymous season of life.

My current existence is no where near what I believe God has purposed for my life. Truth be told, I am anxious and unsatisfied. I know God has great plans for my life, and I'm impatiently waiting for them to come to fruition. What Alicia reiterates over and over again in her book is that the character developed in the preparation seasons of life is a necessary qualifier to the moments of public ministry. Jesus resisted being tempted by Satan in the wilderness because he had spend years growing and maturing in preparation for his ministry and sacrifice.

To share the same sentiments through a more familiar metaphor, no athlete performs well in a televised game without first performing well in practices beforehand. While performance in the game is all that is recorded in the score book, no serious athlete goes into a practice session aiming to perform with mediocrity. And, no devoted athlete is content with the status quo; they are always trying to improve their skill set.

Thank God that I am in the anonymous season. I know that this isn't the big moment in my life, but I also know that I can do my best while I am here and strive to be better.  To continue the sports analogy, this is the season to develop my presence on the court and to strengthen my skill set. When the ministry I was destined for does come in due time, I pray that the preparation and growth that I am undergoing in this season of life will enable me to be led by the Holy Spirit, to exhibit Christ's character, and to give all the glory to God.

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]