Let's Worship Like It's AD 59?

What is the outcome then, brethren? When you assemble, each one has a psalm, has a teaching, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.  If anyone speaks in a tongue, it should be by two or at the most three, and each in turn, and one must interpret; but if there is no interpreter, he must keep silent in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God.  Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment.  But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent.  For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. (1 Corinthians 14:26-33 NASB)

Worship in 2014 is typically only slightly removed from a liturgical format.  Modern contemporary worship points to their music styles, and preaching styles, but in reality, everyone still sits facing forward to pay attention to the 'leader' on the 'stage'.  This is not the 'format' in the early church, and for a variety of reasons, it's probably not practical to try and recapture that style and let it be representative.  But are there elements that perhaps we should?

So, what Paul describes in chapter 14 of 1 Corinthians, after hammering them for two chapters on their over emphasis on tongues, is worship where each person can participate (setting aside verses 34-35 - see my previous entry). One may have a psalm, or a teaching, or revelation (prophesy, see verse 30), a tongue (interpreted, see verse 28).  All can participate, but Paul's point is to participate in turn, each giving way to the next.  In this way, the participation is characterized by love for each other and building up the church.

So what would that look like in a modern/contemporary setting?  I don't know that a format or arrangement like we have today is very conducive to such 'participation'.  First off, the layout where everyone faces forward separates the worshipers from those leading in worship.  To participate in this format, participants would need to come forward, and the focus shifts to them rather than on what they do to participate.  It can be done, but it lends itself to awkwardness as people move around the worship center.

The second hurdle is the concept of 'participation' by the congregation is not currently in vogue.  People attending church don't think of themselves as 'participants', so starting out it would be awkward simply because of the paradigm shift necessary.  I think most churches are comfortable with the anonymity of others leading/participating.  Initially, the narcissists and 'dramatic' personalities will see participation as the 'answer to their prayers' and a 'sign from God'; which it isn't.  That too will be awkward, but it will also present an opportunity for a congregation to grow past self-focus, and opportunities for lovingly dealing with such a focus.

Overcoming the format and paradigm are where I believe the largest problems lie.  It doesn't matter what changes are made, it will be awkward for a time, so a commitment toward a new paradigm would have to be made by leadership, and frankly, that may be the most difficult change.  I know I wouldn't feel comfortable making it.  There are the competing restraints of concern for leading the church astray, and losing the 'center stage' (that's just reality, anyone would have that concern but not everyone would confess it).  Both serve to hinder widening participation. 

But is it even right to change now?  What are the benefits?  While it may be true, wider expression of gifts in worship could have benefit; is any benefit worth the trouble Paul addresses in this church?  Notice that their wide expression didn't hinder unloving behavior nor blatant sin in the participants.  So, such expression didn't increase 'holiness'.  It seems to be more a question of worship style almost.  Except for one thing, a thing not included in the verses above but included in verses 24 and 25.  Prophesy (not preaching) provides the Holy Spirit an opportunity to address specific people about specific things within the congregation.  It's probably one of the most terrifying elements to such 'widening' within worship.  Since the Holy Spirit knows everything about us, anything He wishes can be disclosed to improve our relationship with Him.  It's one thing to 'confess', it's a whole other thing to be 'called out'.

There are other things or effects, which in my ignorance, I can't even imagine at this point.  What would a word of knowledge be like?  What would a 'random teaching' fit like in worship?  One of the interesting things is that there was no mention of 'healing' as a part of 'worship'.  Not that it wasn't a part of the Corinthian worship, but perhaps 'healing' was supposed to be a gift in a more personal, intimate setting.  Such a setting would be more about the healing by God than about the person 'gifted', but couldn't the same thing be said about tongues or prophesy?  I don't think Paul is here limiting which gifts might be expressed in worship, but rather trying to give direction on their orderly use.  It's a practical application of love in the expression of gifts.

So my personal application has more to do with widening my acceptance of the work of my Master's Spirit than anything else.  As I grow in that area, I'm sure I will need to revisit these chapters to make sure the expression of gifts is done 'in turn' and orderly.  But since in my role(s) in my church, I don't really make such changes in my congregation, perhaps my personal application will be more in my own personal expression in worship and my acceptance of the expression of others.  I suppose time will tell on this one.

Unified Variety

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.  And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord.  There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons.  But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. (1 Corinthians 12:4-7 NASB)

So the first thing I learned about spiritual gifts from Paul in this chapter is that they don't form the 'litmus test' for a relationship with Jesus.  Now I learn that the differences are by divine design.  And Paul goes to great lengths to explain this.  Again, I infer from this that the church in Ancient Corinth just didn't get this point.

It seems that the gifting of the believers by the Holy Spirit became an opportunity to point at each other and judge their value by their gift; their value to God, value to the church, and value as a person.  That had to be frustrating to the Holy Spirit.  It also illustrates how easy it is for the deceiver to twist the work of God in the hearts of His people.   What was intended to empower the church for God's Kingdom became the thing that tore them apart.

In the midst of this discussion, Paul lists gifts mixed in with 'ministries'.  In fact, to begin, he uses three words, 'gifts', 'ministries', and 'effects'.  But the last one is simply a generic term for whatever is done through work.  So, 'works' might be better.  Later on the in this chapter it is combined with 'power' and we get 'miracles' or 'works of power' from it.  But here it's just work.  I think that using all three terms is important, saying that all three come from the same Spirit, all three are for the benefit of the whole body/bride/temple of Jesus.

All three things, including 'work' are called 'manifestations' of the Spirit, at least in most translations.  Great word, but not very common in our culture.  Other options for translating could be 'revelations', 'clear announcement', 'disclosure', 'making known', 'evidencing'.  But essentially, it's the obvious indication of the Holy Spirit of His presence and work within a church.  It's the Spirit of Jesus saying, "Here I am!"  But sometimes, these clear indications of His presence are used by His people to indicate their own importance over against their fellows.  What was supposed to unify is used to divide.

Now, I get at least two things from that.  First, the Spirit of God doesn't gift perfect people who He knows will only use it for exactly what He wants and nothing else.  Second, the Holy Spirit doesn't, when the wheels come off the rails, take it back immediately.  This seems to be a instance of our Savior putting up with imperfect people once again, tolerating their failures, weaknesses, and silliness; at least for a time.  This gives me hope because I'm so in there.  But it also convicts me of my own judgmental attitude.  How quick I am to point fingers at the imperfections of others, yet such imperfections are no more disqualifying than my own.  Even 'correction' within the 'Body of Christ' is supposed to be unifying.  But too often, in my heart, I'm divisive.

This 'unified variety' within the church is illustrated by Paul using the metaphor of a body.  As he wraps it up, he points out how weaker and less 'presentable' parts are held in higher esteem and/or modesty.  His point is that we don't treat those with more obvious powerful gifts with greater honor, there's no need to.  Instead, we should be honoring those with less obvious gifts more, protecting them more.  We, or I, don't do this in church, but I need to do it.  Whether ministries, or expression of gifts, or whatever work is done, those with the 'crap jobs' should be honored more than even the pastor.  That may sound wrong to us, and it sounded wrong to them too.  Paul's point is that those who are in obvious positions, out in front, before the crowd, they get their attention just in what they do.  It's the others who are so easily lost in the background.

When I visit a new church, figuring out who the pastor is from among the people never takes long.  Eventually he stands up before everyone and announces himself.  Not so the nursery workers, the church 'cleaning crew', or those who spent hours working on the grounds making sure the plumbing and electrical work on Sunday.  They don't stand up and announce themselves, they're the ones who are hard to spot, who's names I can never remember.  They're the ones church should take great care to protect and honor.

Some minister from a gift, some simply work it.  Both do so and the Holy Spirit is revealed.  Some are considered 'ministers' and others 'workers'.  Both are used by the Holy Spirit to reveal Himself.  So my pastor makes my Master obvious.  My worship leader (minister of worship, first worshiper, or whatever you call that position) makes my Master obvious.  And the people in the nursery wiping noses and changing diapers while teaching the Bible make my Master obvious.  Those on Saturday cleaning up after the 'thundering herds' of last week make my Master obvious.  The guy who everyone calls when something breaks, the small group leaders, the people others gravitate toward to discuss their 'issues', and those who others see in worship caught up in the presence of our Savior, all reveal the Spirit of the Creator, our Savior.

Somewhere in there I'm supposed to 'reveal' my Master as well.  To the extent that I do, I'm obedient to my Master with the gift and work He's given me.  To the extent that I lose sight of the work and gift given to me, and focus on to whom it might make me 'superior', I fail, and I sin. 

This is the second lesson on gifts I discovered and hopefully learn from this chapter.  Eventually, I will discuss with you an even MORE excellent way, but that's for next week... probably.

Who Is 'In'? Who is 'Out'? How Do I Know?

Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware.  You know that when you were pagans, you were led astray to the mute idols, however you were led.  Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus is accursed"; and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:1-3 NASB)

My personal and group study of 1 Corinthians was driven by a desire to explore what Scripture says about 'spiritual gifts'.  There's a lot of controversy between groups and even within groups who call themselves Christians or 'believers' or 'Christ-followers' on this subject.

Few topics (actually none that I can think of) instill this sort of divisiveness between groups of believers.  One side fears this topic like no other, creating the most outlandish reasons for not permitting practice of spiritual gifts.  On the other side, it seems Scripture is almost optional, and personal experience preempts the inspired words of our Savior.  It's the oddest thing.  But it's not a new problem.

Paul enters into this topic toward the end of his letter to the Corinthian church.  He has beat them verbally over divisiveness and pride, ministers from outside and sin within, marriage and 'food sacrificed to idols'; and several other failures along the way, all actually quite common in our own day.  Having done all that, he turns to this topic.  What first stopped me in my tracks was how he began.

First off, this problem seems to be a Gentile problem.  I thought it would stem from either both sides or from the more Jewish among them, but it doesn't.  My error is probably in that I'm not familiar with pagan practices of the First Century Roman culture.  Clearly though, '...when you were pagans,' can't refer to Jews.  The second part though, that they were led astray to mute idols, obviously sets up what he says next, but I can't clearly make the connection.  "...no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, 'Jesus is accursed'; and no one can say 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit." How does that relate to the pagan problem of being led astray to mute idols?

And for those of you who, like me have blown by this while reading the chapter, never really paying much attention to it, consider that to really get what he's saying in the rest of this chapter, possibly the rest of this discussion, we need to get this introductory statement.  This forms the 'cornerstone' of the rest.  Without it, our understanding is skewed somewhat.

So, the problem isn't with the second part itself, that's pretty straight forward.  And really, it's not with the first part, that makes sense; sort of defines what a pagan is in the first place.  The problem is how the two connect.  So, here's what I do with it:  Paul is defining who is in and who is not in a relationship with God versus over against an accusation that some are still 'pagan' in their practice.  Sounds simple enough.  But, he's doing this only because it's not as 'obvious' to the Corinthians as it should be.  What I mean is that the church in Corinth was accusing each other of not being 'led by the Holy Spirit', and since this falls here in the letter, I'm assuming their accusation had to do with this topic.

This should sound rather familiar because it still happening today.  Groups that overly focus on spiritual gifts tend to 'grade' believers on how 'gifted' they are, and on whether or not they have certain gifts.  Paul is starting out clearly arguing against such judgements.  So, to begin my own study here, I will say the same thing Paul is saying, "STOP IT!"  Very therapeutic.  Okay, that's out of my system. 

I find it interesting that the only determining factor between those who do and those who don't have a relationship with Jesus is the declaration that He is Lord.  Why is the also the element we have the most problem living out as well?  I hesitate to stand and accuse the people to whom Paul is writing as I'm actually standing with them accused of a similar problem.  My specific behavior is different, but the problem is the same, "Is Jesus truly my Lord if I behave this way?"  I must declare Jesus is Lord, which can only be done by the Holy Spirit.  But I must live that out; behave consistent with that statement; and declare with my life that He is my Lord.  Then others will see through my life that He is Lord of all.

The point here is two-fold: 1) the determining factor of who is in and who is not is declaring Jesus is Lord, not 'gifting'.  2) My declaration that Jesus is Lord should be obvious to both the blind and the deaf (what I say and what I do - calm down, it was a metaphor).  Okay, now I'm ready to discuss gifting...or rather 'unity of the church.'

One And Many: Divine Church Design of Ephesians 4

In Multiply by Francis Chan, the second section, "Living As The Church", begins with "Life In The Church".  That chapter mostly wraps around Paul' description of church in Ephesians 4:1-16.  It's a passage well worth some detailed study.  Paul puts a ton of stuff in a small amount of space.  I'm going to walk through the passage as it broke down for me.

First, there is the call.  The call should inspire us to live in humility and enduring patience; essentially a shorter list of the Fruit of the Spirit (i.e. Galatians 5:22-23).  But here Paul makes much of 'unity', providing a long list of 'ones'; one body, Spirit, hope, Lord, faith, baptism, and Father.  This unity is part of the response to the call.

Then Paul contrasts the unity and 'ones' with what we each have.  So to each of us was given a gift; and rather than one gift, there are many.  He then cites (perhaps incorrectly) Psalm 68:18, inferring that not only did Jesus give us gifts, but also fills all things; therefore has authority over all things.  The point Paul makes is that these many gifts come from one Source, and that Source is Supreme.

Paul then lists some of these 'gifts' specific to 'roles' or 'positions of leadership' in a church rather than the typical list of 'Spiritual gifts' he lists elsewhere.  These gifts are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers.  It's not a list of leaders; overseers, elders, and ministers (deacons) are missing and would be expected to be here if this were a list of leadership positions.  Instead it's a list of gifted 'roles'.

The work of these many roles is equipping for service and enabling growth as the body of Christ. The goal progresses through unity of faith and knowledge of Jesus into complete maturity of all that Jesus is.  What happens then is that outside influences of erroneous teaching and perspectives don't create chaos in the church.  Instead, speaking the truths of Scripture, we all grow into that mature submission to Jesus, the One uniting us, holding us together in love.

This is a great picture of how local churches can function.  I don't think it happens very often.  I know I fail in at a few places along this progression.  I'm pretty sure others struggle in the same areas and a few others.

First off, all this stems from living inspired by my call.  This is the first place I struggle.  I'm not 'inspired' by my call.  I know I'm called, and I worship within that call, but my actions aren't driven by it as they should be.  In other words, that the Creator of the universe has specifically called my name to relate to Him has little influence in my life.  Others around me, just as frail and silly as I am are more inspiring to me.  I worry about what they think, what they want, or what they do; rather than being driven by what my Master thinks, what He wants, and what He does.  It's totally backward and ludicrous.

The second area this falls apart for me is in the short list of 'fruit'; humility, gentleness, patience, and so on.  Those are impossible without the inspiration of my calling.  They are also the only way the unity of the Spirit can be maintained, so I'm hung there as well.  Because of this progressive failure, when I do teach, even the content of the 'ones', it fails to build and equip because I don't have those other qualities that validate my teaching.  Clearly I'm not living out what I teach, so why would others learn from me?

So, my goal is to find that inspiration.  The content of my personal study and my corporate worship needs to be full of wonder of this calling, and I need to be focused on the One calling rather than the noise of those around me.  This is what will transform me, and with me, my church, and with us, our community.  And then the world.  I'm in.  I'm on it.

To Be Healed

At Lystra a man was sitting who had no strength in his feet, lame from his mother's womb, who had never walked.  This man was listening to Paul as he spoke, who, when he had fixed his gaze on him and had seen that he had faith to be made well, said with a loud voice, "Stand upright on your feet." And he leaped up and began to walk. (Acts 14:8-10 NASB)

Right before Jesus was crucified, He told His disciples that one benefit for them that He ascend back to heaven was that they would do even great things than Jesus had done (John 14:12).  The allusion was to the arrival of the Holy Spirit in power, but this statement has still "haunted" some believers.  There is an entire belief system within modern Christianity which holds that the Holy Spirit no longer does miracles.  That's an over simplification, but the "cessationist" belief is that He no longer works this way, and only did so while the church was getting started.

The problem is in interpreting what Jesus meant by "greater works".  The easiest and most common is to interpret it to refer to the miraculous signs Jesus did throughout His ministry.  Jesus, in His arguments with the Jews would call on them to believe the miracles and refer to those to overcome their disbelief.  Since the statement is in John, and this call to the Jews is in John, and John records the reception of the Holy Spirit differently (i.e. sooner than Acts 2), I conclude that when John records this statement of Jesus he too considers it to refer to the miracles.  After Jesus leaves, the miracles seem to become less prevalent.  Peter does many and then they seem to fade.  Paul does a few, but only a few.  Or does he?

Luke is the recorder of the explosion of the church in the First Century, and while he includes specific miracles less and less as Acts progresses, he does make references to "signs and wonders" performed.  This statement is what makes up for what is lacking in his specific references to miracles.  In other words, lots of miraculous signs occur, but he only mentions a few specifically, where they are important to piece of his plot or scene (or city, like here in 14:8-10).

It's my theory that cessationists beliefs are more a reaction against ecstatic practices of "spiritual gifts".  I have problems with most of these practices as well because of the unbiblical views they espouse.  There is no biblical support to put in place a "spiritual hierarchy" based on "gifting".  Such a view is actually preached against by Paul in the very books often used for support.

But it is also wrong for cessationists to ignore other passages which not only permit, but promote the use of spiritual gifts, even "ecstatic" ones.  I have a pastor friend who calls them "special effects" gifts.  The problem is that there are inherent problems associated with these expressions of the Holy Spirit.  Not the least is that they must be seen and understood in submission to the Holy Spirit rather than the other way around.  But another issue is the problems such expressions can cause when they become the focus instead of the One dispensing them.  These two issues are very closely related.

In Lystra, the focus quickly shifted from the message of Paul and Barnabas to the two men themselves.  It would seem that such a miracle was virtually unheard of in that region.  What I infer from that is that even "magic" of a dramatic sort was also unusual.  On Cyprus, the proconsul was impressed, but not to the point of worshiping Paul and Barnabas.  The miracle produced through Paul was to blind a magician.  So, he may have been somewhat acclimated to "dramatic special effects".  Here in Lystra, not so much.  They think gods have come down as men.  But even so, miracles of healing and raising the dead can't be common.  They have to be shocking reversals of universal assumptions about the world and how it works.  That is one reason Jesus came in the first place, was to push back on such assumptions.

The problem I see is that healing and other expressions of the Holy Spirit are hampered by the lack of what Paul saw in the lame man.  Paul saw that he had faith to be made well.  Where is ours?  Do I have such faith?  Or have I given up hope that my Master still works this way in this world of His?  I have a friend who has just gone through a very radical cancer surgery as the final step in combating a very aggressive form of cancer.  So far the results are the best that could be hoped for.  He is in ICU and recovering.  The doctors believe they got all of the cancer and were able to effectively rebuild the affected organs.  There may be complications to come, but that part which was trying to kill him is gone.  Is this healing from God?  Why not?  But am I able to have faith that God could have done it without the doctors?  That's where the rub comes.

I don't believe that I have a choice, but to accept my Master as Master over all physical life.  If He can and did "breathe" life into existence, then what sense does it make to not believe He still has mastery over it?  If the Spirit of the Living God decides, for the edification of His people, to heal someone, through someone else (for instance, doctors) or on their own, who can speak against it?  Is there something God is not "permitted" to do in this world?  It's not "my world" or "our world", it's His.  He made it.  So why would I limit my Master in His work, either through me, or, more likely, around me?  Paul stared straight at this guy, saw he had faith to be healed, and in a loud voice (as opposed to his "orator voice") commanded him to stand.  It wasn't Paul healing him, it was Paul telling him to act on being healed.  God healed the man.  Isn't this always the case? 

So whether healing, tongues, prophecy, or other gift of the Holy Spirit, I must seek to perceive the hand of my Master and not be distracted by either the act or the agent.  Perceiving the Spirit of my Master I should worship!  But if I don't perceive the Holy Spirit, and all that remains is the act and/or actor, then I should address the circumstances boldly.  The Scriptures will help me understand the difference.

From Zero to Hero, and From Hero to Zero

But Saul, who was also known as Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, fixed his gaze on him, and said, "You who are full of all deceit and fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease to make crooked the straight ways of the Lord?   Now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you will be blind and not see the sun for a time." And immediately a mist and a darkness fell upon him, and he went about seeking those who would lead him by the hand.   Then the proconsul believed when he saw what had happened, being amazed at the teaching of the Lord.   Now Paul and his companions put out to sea from Paphos and came to Perga in Pamphylia; but John left them and returned to Jerusalem. (Acts 13:9-13 NASB)

Until this time, the character of Saul has followed everyone else in lists.  He was listed with impressive people, but while fade into obscurity, his name changes and suddenly everyone's hanging around him.  The timing is before a Roman proconsul with the same name, Paul, and as Saul/Paul confronts a false prophet.  From then on his name is Paul.

But the change is without fanfare or comment on the change.  Saul aka Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, gazes at the false prophet.  There's no comment on the connection between the names (it seems to be euphonic only). The companions of Paul travel from Paphos to Perga.  There's no explanation of why Barnabas is no longer taking point, or why it's not "Paul and Barnabas" at this point.  Paul seems to have eclipsed everyone.

I notice a few things here that I find interesting.  First off, there's no record that Barnabas has a problem with this.  This guy has been a true encouragement all along, and now he sees a "protege" of his taking flight.  Well, something like that perhaps.  For whatever reason, it seems that he is willing to relent, to give up that prime position without a fuss.  It may not have even been an issue really, just felt like a natural progression.  But does it mean anything that Barnabas is from Cyprus; that he sells a field from there?  It doesn't seem to.

I suppose that these changes that my Master brings about are to be acceptable to me as well.  Like Barnabas, I should be willing to take a one-down on issues, be willing to fade into the background.  This week I have had to eat a bit of crow, and I have to admit, I didn't like the taste.  The way I could have avoided it was to just let things be, or at least ask around before assuming I knew what was happening.  I was prideful and in a hurry.  Barnabas does not seem burdened with that problem.  He's not really in a hurry, and he does not seem prideful.

I mention this because I believe that my Master has given me both the gift and the task of encouragement.  I am constantly amazed at how ineffective such a gift is when I full of myself.  It actually works in reverse and I discourage.  So I myself am naturally discouraging, but my Master has gifted me in an area I am naturally weak and given me the job of encouraging.  So, like Barnabas, I am to be an encourager.  Like Barnabas, I am supposed to build people up.  But like Barnabas, that's not going to happen if I don't take the time to shed my pride and take time to be present with those I am called to encourage. 

If I want to stand back and watch a "Paul" emerge onto the stage, I have to be willing to stand back.  But even before that, I have to be willing to go through the transition from leading and guiding to following and supporting.  If I'm not willing to do that, I'm never going to see what my Master will do with the amazing people with whom I serve.  I have to be willing to go from zero to hero, but also from hero to zero.  It must be my Master who designates who and for how long he makes the hero.  It is my job to submit to His designation for however long He designates.

Pardon me, I think I heard the oven ding.  My humble pie must be finished.  Gotta go, it's breakfast.

Baptized, Filled, or What?

There is a division within groups of believers about specific belief regarding spiritual gifts.  One side believes that after a person is saved they then need the baptism of the Holy Spirit before they can truly live the life Jesus intended.  The other side of that view is that, at the point someone believes, they fully receive the Holy Spirit, and that IS the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

I waded into this discussion while pastoring in Northern Idaho among the wackiest sets of believers anywhere (some were members of my church).  It was an interesting learning experience.  I waded into the discussion on the side believing that the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurs when someone is saved.  As a result of what I discovered in Scripture, I had to modify that view to somewhere in the middle.

Perhaps a semantic issue is at work here.  The term “baptism of the Holy Spirit” is rare, not even occurring in some translations.  The term I looked up was “filled with the Holy Spirit”, which occurs rather frequently in Acts.  What I found is that the normal occurrence of the term was in reference to the present condition of the person which explained why there were able to take the action they did (or at least that’s my interpretation, and I can discuss that further if someone wants to pursue the subject).

There were only two exceptions to this, one more than I expected.  The first exception was the event of Pentecost where the believers were “filled with the Holy Spirit” as an event with reference to time.  That one I expected.  But, later on, in Chapter 4, the believers pray and are again “filled with the Holy Spirit” as an event with reference to time.  That one surprised me.  That indicated to me that this event can happen to the same people more than once. 

Why I say I ended up in the middle though is because the effect of the second filling was boldness, not speaking in tongues.  It seems that tongues came either initially, or isn’t referred to at all.  Unfortunately, this didn’t please either side of the discussion, and left me with more enemies than friends.  How dare I side with Scripture rather than them, what was I thinking?  Anyway, once again I found that my Master seems less interested in sides of arguments among His kids than the kids are.

So, to once again invoke the voice of my lovely wife, “so what?”  Well, what I believe from this is that I am full of my Master’s Holy Spirit.  But I also know that I can seek Him in prayer and experience the rush again of His Spirit enabling me to speak with boldness.  When I compare my abilities, skills, and knowledge against the onslaught of evil in this world, I don’t stand up well.  I need the resource of my Master just to stand, and the empowering of His Spirit to stand boldly.

Today, I endure the knife of a doctor before I head to work.  I face the last day of the fiscal month with my team behind and my manager under fire for it.  I look forward to a long weekend, but with lots of stuff in it.  Some of this I can handle, but a lot if it is beyond me.  So, knowing I face it with the power of the Spirit of my Master means that I can face this day with boldness.

Oswald Chambers' "My Utmost For His Highest": May 27th.

The Love In My Life

Yesterday, my wife and I performed a wedding ceremony together.  It was our first time ever doing one together.  It was my first one in over 10 years.  In the ceremony, the description of love in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8a is used, which is very common.  Today, the entry from Chambers uses this same passage.  He could have focused on many different facets of this passage, but he focused on a characteristic of this love, not found here, but rather alluded to in Galatians 5:22.

Spontaneity as a quality of love is what my wife has always wanted me to have with her (all you husbands out there know what I mean).  But in the sense Chambers uses the term, he means it’s not something achieved by determined effort, but rather noticeable as I look back.  Then I see that I was loving, kind, not boastful, not proud, enduring all sorts of things, and so on.  By looking back over the path down which I’ve been led, I see where I have become more like my Master.  I wish I would see more of those places, but I see more now than I have for many years.

Love, as Paul describes it in the letter to the Corinthians, is the greatest gift of the Spirit of my Master.  Paul is quick to point out how much superior it is to tongues, prophecy, and knowledge specifically.  He points out how love is not arrogant or self-inflated, which was the result of the afore mentioned gifts in the Corinthian Church.  Paul is trying very diligently to help the church in Corinth see the answer to their problems is a deeper devotion and submission to Jesus, and less of a self-focus.  In that city, everyone seeks to climb higher, faster, with more money and affluence, and they all want the attention of everyone else (sort of like Hollywood today). 

This answer to problems, my problems is true for me today.  When I submit my moments to Jesus, I will be surprised when I look back, to see where His qualities have shown through my own.  When I focus on my Master instead of myself, I will experience something that I will be unable to notice in the present, but only as I look back over into the past to this time, just as Chambers said.  I have experienced that.  I do today.  Today, though I also see where my cynical response to traffic in the car with my daughter yesterday was reflected back to me this morning.  It is a poignant reminder of the frailty of my character, and the importance of further devotion to my Master.  It’s not just my life being affected, but that of my daughter.  I am teaching her improper responses to whatever does not go her way in her timing.  I need to show her differently.

So, faith, hope, and love remain, these three, but the greatest of these is love.  As I have said in a couple of sermons, faith will get me into heaven, but love enables me to bring friends.  Hope forms the foundation of faith, faith creates the safe space to love, and love is the evidence of my Master’s work in me.  I guess I have some devoting and focusing to do.  I hope I will look back over today, and see the marks of my Master’s love.  I believe He will make it so.

http://www.myutmost.org/04/0430.html