What would have been John Wesley’s attitude toward the modern doctrine and practice of Speaking in Tongues? Pentecostal churches teach that this is a necessary initial sign of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (a empowerment experience subsequent to Christian conversion). Other churches teach that spiritual gifts and miracles were signs that ceased after the age of the apostles. Where would Wesley have stood on these issues?
The evangelistic ministry and teaching John Wesley provided the impetus for the development of the Methodist & Holiness movements. The holiness movement, in turn, provided the seedbed for the emergence of early Pentecostalism. The original Azusa Street Pentecostalism in turn provided the impetus for the development of the modern Pentecostal & Charismatic movements — which have (somewhat ironically) often lost or even explicitly denied the Holiness / Sanctification themes in Wesley’s teachings.
That is a rather complicated schema. Is there any evidence of this later unfolding that is already present in Wesley teachings? Wesley distinguished between “extraordinary gifts” and “ordinary” graces of the Spirit. Speaking in Tongues would fall into the category of “extraordinary gifts.” Thus, he did not see the gift of Tongues as part of the abiding significance of the Pentecost event.
The original Methodist revival was a movement intended to produce “real Christians,” that is, Christians who would actually live out the faith they professed. In my opinion: we are in desperate need of such a thing today.
In the Methodist revival, the means used to achieve this goal were:
a message of experienced religion & holiness which drew heavily from the Bible,
large praise and preaching gatherings (the Societies),
small accountability groups (the classes, bands & select societies),
works of service and mercy (generally: addressing the needs of the poor or imprisoned).
This was not intended to produce “Church Growth” or some such thing, it was intended to produce Christians who visibly and noticeably loved God with all their heart, mind, soul and strength and their neighbors as themselves. What can be learned by this evangelistic & discipleship strategy for our day?
In a church that I pastored years ago, one of the church leaders expressed surprise when I gave sermons based on Old Testament texts. He had pretty much written off the Old Testament — at least, from what he knew of it — and I hadn’t. In fact, I enjoy preaching from an Old Testament story or text. I’m pretty open that I do not expound on the Old Testament the way a Jewish rabbi would. Yes, I try to understand the Old Testament in its historical context. But, for me that is just a beginning point. I also want to understand it (for the purposes of Christian preaching) in light of what God has revealed to us in Christ.
The following conception of the Spirit’s relation to the human person and to human community rings true for me.
Pannenberg sees in the heightened exocentric capability of humans the basis for their uniqueness from other animal forms. In the being-with-others that characterizes their existence, they are able to transcend themselves — to look back on themselves again — and thereby to develop self-consciousness. This exocentrically based development of self-consciousness indicates [this] to him as well as the connection between humans and Spirit. Pannenberg credits the self-transcendence required for this process to the action of the Spirit, who lifts humans above themselves, so that when they are ecstatically with others they are themselves. For this reason self-transcendence cannot be accomplished by the subject itself. Rather, all knowing is possible only through the Spirit. By extension, the same ecstatic working of the Spirit found in the individual is the basis for the building of community. In fact, community is always an experience brought by the Spirit, who lifts one above oneself.
The resurrection effectively reversed the charges against Jesus and confirmed his mission. We thus see that if he had saved his life at the cost of his proclaiming the divine lordship, he would have actually made himself independent of God and put himself in equality with him. ‘Whoever would save his life will lose it’ (Mark 8:35 par.). This was true of Jesus himself. He could not be the Son of God by an unlimited duration of his finite existence. No finite being can be one with God in infinite reality. Only as he let his creaturely existence be consumed in service to his mission could Jesus as a creature be one with God. As he did not cling to his life but chose to accept the ambivalence that his mission meant for his person, with all its consequences, he showed himself, from the standpoint of he Easter event, to be obedient to his mission (Rom. 5:19, Heb. 5:8). This obedience led him into the situation of extreme separation from God and His immortality, into the dereliction of the cross. The remoteness from God on the cross was the climax of his self-distinction from the Father. Rightly then, we may say that the crucifixion was integral to his earthly existence.
The cross gives meaning to the resurrection, the resurrection gives meaning to the cross. Each is incomplete without the other.
When we say Jesus was one with God we say this on the basis that Jesus fulfilled his whole mission — including death and resurrection. It is in this sense alone that Jesus was truly both fully human and fully God. Without the Cross we cannot make such a claim about Jesus. The Cross is integral to the message. “Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered; and having been made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him….” (Heb 5:8,9 NRSV)
I think this fact reminds us that preaching the Gospel has to emphasize actually telling the story of Jesus more than teaching ideas derived from the story. It is the life, death and resurrection of Jesus that constitutes the Gospel. If part of it is left out, other parts lose their true significance as well. The theological claims that Christians make can only be asserted on the basis of the whole story.
So, the preacher needs to ask: am I telling the whole story or just parts of it? Or: am I just giving advice, teaching some ideas, venting my frustrations, and never telling the story at all?
Moral advice, good ideas, criticism of the world’s ideas and trends, political programs — all these things do not amount to the Gospel of Christ. We need to ever learn anew what it means to “tell the old, old story” to our current generation.
It s wrong to suppose that people are too shallow and self-absorbed to hear it. Someone is always out there to complain that people today are too vacuous, ignorant, or unspiritual. Yes, people are exploring sexuality and gender in ways previous generations did not. Yes, there is sexual promiscuity. There are trends that have arisen in the realm of technology and the internet that are troubling.
It doesn’t mean people are stupid or have lost the spiritual hunger for meaning and connection that is naturally constitutive of human nature. Sexual promiscuity and high intelligence often go together. Sexual searching and spiritual searching are not totally unrelated — one can substitute for the other.
Yes, some young people are not satisfied with traditional answers. But, they are asking questions. And some may want serious and well-considered answers. Prevenient grace means that God’s Spirit is striving with even the most apparently unlikely people.
Let’s learn to tell the story of Jesus in ways that are engaging, fresh, and faithful.
So, the question Psalm 15 raises for us is this: Lord God, what is it like to be the kind of person who is fit to live in Your Presence from day to day?
I am reminded of a verse from the New Testament: “…if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7 NRSV). Walking with God means continually walking in the light of God. There is a kind of honesty and openness and transparency to it. Our hearts are open to God and to others — insofar as that is possible for us. Now, notice the qualities of the person who walks with God in this wholehearted devotion.
“For this reason, since the day we heard it, we have not ceased praying for you and asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of God’s will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that you may lead lives worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him, as you bear fruit in every good work and as you grow in the knowledge of God. May you be made strong with all the strength that comes from his glorious power, and may you be prepared to endure everything with patience, while joyfully giving thanks to the Father, who has enabled you to share in the inheritance of the saints in the light.” (NRSV)
The apostle Paul’s prayer in this passage can be outlined as follows:
Yesterday I introduced this prayer from the apostle Paul and gave some some personal reflections. There was a time when I don’t think I could have talked about the ongoing stages of the Christian journey without reference to the power of the Holy Spirit. And, that would be the way I would still speak of it today. But, in Colossians Paul uses terminology that is more focused on Christ than on the Holy Spirit.
So, as I was saying, this section of the letter displays another common feature in Paul’s letters to the churches. He generally assures the Churches to whom he writes that he is praying for them. Churches should know that their pastors and leaders are praying for them.
As is generally the case with Paul’s letters, he begins by letting the church know he is praying for them. He really believed in the vital importance of prayer. Prayer is at the foundation of all church renewal.
We are regularly encouraged to pray. “Pray in the Spirit at all times in every prayer and supplication. To that end keep alert and always persevere in supplication for all the saints.” (Ephesians 6:18 NRSV). We are given the examples of Jesus and Paul, who made prayer and intercession priorities in their lives and ministries. Before we need new ideas and quick fix solutions, we need prayer. Prayer is at the heart of Christian ministry and at the heart of the life of the Church.
This part of the letter is very important, and it’s going to take me a while to fully discuss this. I need to begin by pointing out something about this prayer that seems odd at first. So, first some brief introductory remarks, and then some personal reflections.
