Frank Viola’s post yesterday, Strange Fire: A Refutation – Part I, inspired me to take my dusty copy of John MacArthur’s Charismatic Chaos off the shelf.
On the inside of the back flap, at the bottom of a page filled with pencil scribbled references and comments, I found a note I made on the day I finished the book: “Excellent! I do believe, however, that God still speaks to the individual concerning personal matters, as well as spiritual matters – of course within the framework of scriptural revelation. 8 January 1993.”
These words took me down memory lane, and reminded me of the liberation I experienced whilst reading the book. I was a young Pentecostal pastor at the time, disturbed and confused by my denomination’s insistence that only those who speak in tongues can claim the “baptism in the Spirit.” For over a decade I had felt like the ugly duckling. I didn’t understand the emotional reactions, the laughing in the Spirit (the Toronto blessing started here in South Africa, believe it or not!), the falling over, the thunderous preaching, the seeming openness to everything prosperity and Word Faith, and so on.
I tried to, believe me, but I could not. I resonated with Watchman Nee, Brother Lawrence and Andrew Murray, but not with my own church’s doctrine.
Chapter 8 of the book changed it all for me. It showed me that the “doctrine of subsequence” had no basis in Biblical theology, and prepared me for my flight from everything Charismatic some years later. I realized the book was somewhat one-sided and perhaps a bit reactionary, but I felt that I could identify with so many of the excesses mentioned by MacArthur that it did not bother me.
I did, however, disagree with the view that God does not speak to individuals in any way other than through the Bible. But this did not bother me much. It represented a certain understanding of revelation, well represented across the Reformed landscape, and did not detract from the book’s weight.
MacArthur had opened a non-Charismatic world for me, and I appreciated him for that.
Some of my richest years in ministry followed my departure from my old denomination. I became a Baptist, a Cessationist, an aspiring 5 point Calvinist (I failed dismally in the end. See my previous post.), a collector of Banner of Truth books, and a lot of other interesting things.
I also drew a cartoon that I cherish to this day:
Then, seven years ago, I stepped out of my new denomination and entered the weird and wonderful world of simple, non-institutional Christianity. The people that I met here were such an inspiration to my spirituality that I (temporarily) decided to overlook those things that I had been fervently crusading against for many years. You guessed it: I ended up loving them more than my commitment to everything anti-Charismatic.
And, in spite of their non-cessationist tendencies, they did not seem nearly as weird as the ones I had run away from in the late nineties.
And so my worn out pendulum (did I mention that I grew up Dutch Reformed?) swung back and silently came to rest in a green meadow besides still waters. The last thing it ever said, before breathing its last, was a gentle “Blessed are the balanced.”
What strikes me about this adventure was that my last big theological shift (I am no longer a Cessationist, as you may have gathered) was heavily influenced by something that had been a non-factor up to that point: Relationships. I discovered, in the context of the true ekklesia, that it was okay to love someone passionately whilst disagreeing with some of his or her views. But I also discovered that it was okay to adjust some of your own views in order for this to happen.
This may sound heretical to some, and extremely dangerous. But trust me: It’s not. The good Lord has built his church in such way that it allows for great relationships between people with different opinions (my wife believes in the rapture), but with an inbuilt proviso that such differences do not compromise our common life in Christ.
This shapes our theology more than mere “understanding”, and means that the blessings of real fellowship between believers with different opinions can only occur where Jesus Christ is the true life of the church. This is no cliché, but the reality of a common birth, a common Father, a common inheritance, a common passion. I have still to meet someone who shares all of these things with me but who is theologically so haywire that I feel I cannot have fellowship with them.
Interestingly, I have found that when people do cross God’s doctrinal boundaries (for the lack of a better term), the magic of the relationship dissipates. True heretics make bad prayer partners. You do not need to review Grudem’s Systematic Theology to arrive at this conclusion. You FEEL it, and you do so because God is faithful and he loves his church.
If I had read Charismatic Chaos later on in life, I may not have given it the glowing Amazon review that I did way back then. I think it helped a lot of people in my situation, and I will always appreciate it for that. But nowadays I tend to view truth somewhat differently. I believe it is not merely shaped cognitively, but also (and especially) relationally. The way in which John deals with “The Charismatics” (as the book was originally called) does not do relational justice to many dear sincere brothers and sisters in the Lord who merely hold to a different pneumatology than the rest of us.
As I once explained it:
Christianity is a relationship, and it should be approached as one. As with any romance, you learn as you go along. The main ingredients are desire, passion, intimacy, time spent together, willingness to learn, willingness to submit to the interests of the other, and so on. As a most intimate encounter of the life of another, it is something that can never be transferred merely cognitively. “Knowing the Lord” cannot be taught, as Jeremiah stated explicitly in his description of the terms and conditions of the New Covenant. It must be caught.
A young couple experiencing their first kiss gains a different type of knowledge than a monk reading about the biological processes accompanying a first kiss. We get a glimpse of this knowledge in the Old Testament statement “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain.” This type of covenant knowing can only take place when the knower’s life is dissolved in the encountered life — when the two become one. It is a knowledge that transcends all mental processes, although the memory thereof is preserved mentally, and can be discussed mentally.
This means that such a discussion is only fruitful between those who can relate to the experience. It’s like saying “So that is what your first kiss was like. Let me tell you about mine!” Cognition is not ruled out, but it is subject to an encounter that brings with it a revelation.
And so Christianity is not blind mysticism, nor is it extra-Biblical. Rather, it is an experience that becomes increasingly informed through practice and discussion. Of course such information can find its way into poetry, and lend itself to analysis. But it always remains subject to a living encounter between the lover and the beloved.
True church life is the collective experience of the above, and the inevitable celebration associated with it. It is one new humanity encountering Christ. It is the bride meeting her Groom. It is covenant knowledge experienced communally. It is to feast on the tree of life and share the experience of resurrection and growth. It also happens to be an experience of oneness with one another that transcends mutuality by far.
What do you think?
Justice of God 
Marvellous stuff, Tobie. I so resonate with your blog above. I think we have a role to play in issues like this, giving some considered wisdom and in return receiving wisdom even from the youngest of believers.
Amazing grace and robust peace to you and your wife.
Errol, I agree! I’ve been wanting to send you a mail re a conference that I really believe the time is ripe for in SA. If you drop me a mail at bigpicture@mweb.co.za we can exchange some thoughts. (Can’t seem to get hold of your email address!)
I appreciate your story, and candor in expressing your journey. I have been inspired by the writings of Dr. Michael Brown on this subject, in fact he wrote a very good refutation of John Macarthur’s strange fire as well.
http://askdrbrown.org/authentic-fire/
By the way, I disagree with the excesses of many in the charismatic/pentacostal movement as well, and have been on a journey towards balance. Bless you, brother.
Thanks for the comment and link, Chad. I’ve only just seen it. Bless you!
Hey Tobie… about that conference… and are you still meeting with Gideon and the guys?
Hi Christo – I only see Gideon every now and again as we attend two different fellowships here in Bloem, but mostly because I’ve been swamped with work for the last few months. That’s also the reason why we haven’t yet organised the conference, which remains a BURNING passion. If you are interested to assist in any way, mail me at bigpicture@mweb.co.za. (We need some agents up there in Gauteng to spread the word once we’re up and running!) Bless you.
I prayed on and off for a whole year for the “ability” to speak in tongues. Part of it was because I was desperate to experience “more of Jesus” and I was convinced that tongues was the way to go. Part of it was also because I wanted to show the church band who recently ousted me that I was more spiritual than they were :-). Suffice to say I am currently praying for the gift of healing – living in a pandemic and all :-). Nevertheless I had an experience that I still can’t say with utter certainty must be the Holy Spirit speaking through me because my skeptical nature simply does not allow it. All that I know is that it edifies my spirit. I must be the only Charismatic who has “blasphemed the Spirit” (tongue firmly planted in cheek) for something that he has experienced himself.
In the early days of my marriage when arguments between myself and Carla would still regularly escalate into domestic violence I found myself, after a particularly bad encounter, to be sitting alone, in total despair calling out to God to end my life because I could not bear my sin anymore. I was suddenly prompted to speak in tongues. Looking back it is difficult to explain my thought process. I felt so utterly depraved and beyond hope and destined for hell that I did not resist the thought because I really felt like I had nothing to lose. As I opened my mouth and strange syllables exited my mouth the following words entered my mind : “see you have just beaten your wife beyond anything reasonable and I Am still willing to live inside of you”.
I cannot describe the peace that followed that experience to anybody. I was so at peace that I went to Carla and told her I believe God had delivered me from my aggression. This was of course not true – the real battle, for my soul, had only just begun and only came to a conclusion more than 10 years later. But that night left a foundation that would see me through for years to come. Now that I am indeed showing the first signs of real fruits of repentance I look back and I am immensely grateful for God’s love and provision in that Jesus decided to love me, touch me and seal me “while I was demonstrably, yet a sinner who nevertheless called upon his name” – and do so in such a tangible way that the only thing that can take it away from me is my own skepticism. I only still groan at my own inability to communicate this love to my own children who have been left with mostly pain from growing up in a house of conflict.
In a way I am jealous of people like Mcarthur who does not need the “manifestation”. I did and still do and it came to me and I am longing for it to come to me in various ways every day and God bless him but this is something / an experience that no book, that Mcarthur or anybody else writes, can ever take away from me. I have taken Pascal up on this one. The evidence being equal – I’m sticking with that which nourishes my soul and saves me from despair.
And so, on the path to maturity, I found a prosperity church with people who love Jesus and believe all sorts of nonsense about his provision for them. But they love Jesus and are sold out to Him. And so I am fellow-shipping, with them, while calling their beliefs “doctrines of demons” to their faces (granted not all the faces). So far so good :-).
Real Christian unity is amazing. Like you say, in the post above, the “heretics”, for lack of a better term 🙂 (realizing that this word is becoming a problem), often sort themselves out.
P.s. I got Covid four weeks ago. This is entirely in keeping with my belief that bad things, including illness and premature death, can happen to Christians who believe Jesus is yes and amen to all the promises of God (again – tongue firmly in cheek) – I had two weeks of walking through the valley of the shadow of death feeling more sick than I had ever felt in my life. Carla had a venous sinus thrombosis, after two weeks, resulting in temporary weakness of the face and arm and an emergency admission to hospital for an MRI. Most of her power came back but she still can’t smell or taste. Joel only showed fever blisters and Bianca had one night of dry cough and tightness of chest. We are deeply thankful to be alive and severely humbled when we think of those who didn’t make it.
God bless you and Revien
Regards
Marinus
Thanks for the comment, Marinus. It blessed me in more ways than one.
“The evidence being equal – I’m sticking with that which nourishes my soul and saves me from despair.” I really love that. I am convinced that the essence of the New Covenant is a type of intimacy between the lover and the beloved that can never be publicized or elevated to a norm for others, unless of course we are interested in becoming pornographers. I recently read Song of Songs, and I believe this is the message of the book. I also believe this is why the book comes with a solemn warning in 2:7, 3:5 and 8:4. It’s weird, but I remember the Afrikaans words from my early childhood: “Moenie die liefde opwek voor dit die liefde behaag nie.” In my mind, this accords with Paul’s words to the Philippians after he has given them his testimony in Chapter 3: “Let all of us who are mature take such a view of things. And if on any point you think differently, God will make that clear to you also. Let us only live up to what we have attained.”
Interestingly, this word used for “what we have attained” in Greek is “kanon” – we get the “canon” of Scripture from this word – and it means measuring stick. Some translations use the word “standard” here. So the canon or standard or model of Christian behaviour is NEVER someone else’s subjective experience, no matter how mind-blowing and authentic that experience was. It is always our attainment, in the sense of the progress of our personal walk with Christ. And of course it is based on that which “pleases the love”, to use SoS’s term, in the sense of that which nourishes and nurtures the intimate relationship that exists between the lover and the beloved. This is the norm, and it blows my mind. Everything stands or falls before that which cultivates the love-relationship, and so it should be, for love is the fulfillment of the law. Thus, the person who is guided by the dictates of love’s intimacy, is the person who will keep all of the law, even if he/she is blissfully unaware of the dictates of the written codification of that law.
And so I think the “last word” on tongues is one that qualifies as a sacred experience between the lover and the beloved. I am fine with that. By its very nature it is not exportable, and so there is an in-built immunity against the cultic standardization of experience that has destroyed so much of the Charismatic movement’s reputation.
And yes, where people understand this they can happily dwell together in unity, even if some are still silly enough in their own immaturity to conceive of God as the cosmic butler who is there to serve them.
You don’t blast a toddler for being a toddler. You keep the Rattex away from him. It’s quite simple. Eventually his own maturity will keep him away from the Rattex.
Hello from the not so United States. MacArthur is a weenie. Don’t quench the Spirit. As for violence, your country is as bad as mine. The soil is cursed with violence. It helps to repent of nationalism, individualism, clannism, ethnicism, familism, etc and remember we are citizens of another world. As a South African of Dutch extraction throw in an extra prayer breaking all ties with Jean Calvin and his followers, just to be safe. (Cessationists and Judaizers they are)
Ok, now about Pentecost:
1. It was a required feast for the Jews. Hint: not optional for us, but necessary for the edification of the body of Christ.
2. It was a leavened feast. Hint: the flesh is in operation as well as the Spirit. God intends this to wear you out. Leavened bread is, however, real bread. It tastes good, at least much better than unleavened wafers.
3. It is the second of the three required feasts. The third is Tabernacles. (30, 60, and 100 fold, corresponding to the architecture of the temple). Do not go backwards, but continue forward into the Most Holy place aka Holy of Holies (the veil was torn when Christ died, signifying access, but there is no back door). To enter, observe Pentecost and mortify quick. Read Watchman Nee. Use faith, as usual. Tabernacles, like Passover is unleavened. Fact check all this.
4. If you know Candace, I’m a big fan.
5. I pray for you and yours to be healed, delivered, and perfected in Him!