Share this post on:

A polarised debate goes on between different stripes of Christians over the place of experience in Christianity. One side asserts that experiential faith (what the Puritans used to call “experimental religion”) is fundamental to a living, supernaturally-empowered relationship with Christ. The other side asserts that experiential religion is of passing interest, for spiritual experiences range from the genuinely God-given to the wildly false and even demonic, and vary widely among different personality-types. Ultimately, say these Christians, what matters is allegiance to truth, both in belief and behaviour.

In moments of clarity, we agree with both sides, because we are aware of what each side is against: dead formalism (“a straight as a gun barrel theologically, and as empty as one spiritually”, said one) and untethered spiritual adventures (“glandular religion”, as coined by another). Pentecostalism’s strongest selling point has been the supposed vividness of its promised supernatural experiences, both in corporate and private worship. The idea of direct revelation, ecstatic utterances, and marvellous deliverances present a kind of Christianity that appears enviably immediate, sensorily overpowering, and almost irrefutably persuasive. Particularly for Christians coming from a religious background of set forms, liturgical routines, and even unregenerate leadership, the contrast appears to be one of old and false versus new and true.

Sadly, many true believers within Pentecostalism find out within a short space that the promise of overwhelming spiritual experiences begins to lack lustre after a time, and the corporate worship in pursuit of spontaneous spiritual highs can become as tedious and predictable as a service read verbatim from a prayer book. Pentecostalism’s pursuit of intensity and spontaneity in worship turns out to be an idol that both cheats and forsakes its worshippers.

Deeply embedded in the Pentecostal psyche is the idea that the Spirit of God is wedded to spontaneity and freedom of form. It is the very “openness” to His movements, unrestricted by an order of service or set forms of prayer, that supposedly invites His unpredictable arrival, manifested in intense, even ecstatic, spiritual experience. Being spontaneous and extemporaneous demonstrates “openness” and “receptivity”, whereas insisting upon our own forms quenches what the Spirit may wish to do.

Similar to this is the notion, almost unquestioned in Pentecostal thinking, is the idea that for a spiritual experience to be real, it must felt. That is, intensity is the mark of authenticity. When the Spirit manifests Himself, the worshipper should expect some kind of moment of feeling deeply loved, close to God, or intimacy. The pursuit of a Pentecostal worship service is the experience of intense intimacy.

Errors are only compelling to the degree that they contain some vital truth, now heavily distorted. The truth is that both extemporaneity and some form of intense spiritual experience are part of true, living Christianity. The problem is when the experience of intensity is sought for its own sake, and when the method of extemporaneity becomes a tool to manipulate the Spirit (whom we supposedly agree cannot be manipulated or controlled – John 3:8).

Intensity of spiritual experience ebbs and flows, like all emotional intensity. The man who is forever in pursuit of his fading feelings of dizzy infatuation with a woman is an infant in an adult body, trying to hang onto what is meant to lead him on to loves that are both stronger and more serene. In wanting to pickle an experience so that we may open and enjoy it at any time, we distort and destroy the very experience. We make an idol of a pleasure, and its revenge upon us is to become less pleasing each time. Trying to capture intense spiritual experience in every corporate worship service is as tiresome as a man trying to reproduce the precise circumstances of his first date with his now-wife, and doing so every Friday night, in hopes of “re-capturing the spark”. Sentimentalism is more than feeling; it is trying to “feel our feelings”, and lather in the pleasure of a feeling. But unavoidably, and ironically, when we pursue intensity in worship, we have shifted the focus from God Himself to a supposed experience of God.

Similarly, some kind of extemporaneity represents engagement with and understanding of what we are doing and saying in worship. Rare is the preacher who prays and preaches without the slightest deviation from his scripted prayers and fine-tuned manuscript. Such a man soon begins to sound like a spiritual jukebox, and his congregation tunes him out. However structured our services, we must be in them, and mean them, and speak in our own voices. Extemporaneity, like intensity, is a good thing in moderation.

The Pentecostal error is to confuse preparedness with independence, thinking that extemporaneity represents trust in God, a willingness to say and speak only as directed in the moment, while preparedness is rooted in pride and self-reliance. In this way of thinking, preparedness is actually an affront to God, or an act of pride, or an unwillingness to be childlike and pliable during corporate worship. Of course, no Pentecostal congregation are absolute purists in this regard. That is, a consistent application of the principle would mean singing songs without pre-set lyrics with music composed in the moment, sermons made up on the spot, and so on.

Again, we can acknowledge the truth: some preparedness can be a refusal to pray and trust God. But the correction of that error is to prepare and pray, not to eschew preparation altogether. Indeed, the Spirit of God rides best in His own chariot, the Word He inspired. Therefore, the more the Word of God dwells richly (Col. 3:16) in our hymns, prayers and sermons, the more filled with the Spirit we will be (Eph 5:18-19).

Share this post on:

5 Comments

  1. Avatar David

    P Williams

    And so, what do you suppose is the root of the problem, what is it that all these denominations have in common? They search the scriptures and yet do not come to Jesus, some very learned, some very genuine but all without understanding of what God has written and has plainly shown them.
    Why do you suppose God destroyed the Tower of Babel, and why He instructed Moses /Israelites to build a movable tabernacle, and what did He mean in 2 Sam 7 when He asked David if He ever told him to build Him a house? Why do you think Jesus said to the religious men tear down this temple and I will build it back in 3 days?

    Do you not know that Christ does not dwell in buildings made by humans? Neither can He be summoned like the proverbial genie in a bottle! His Spirit comes as He wills it , and He converts the heart of believers into His tabernacle and He builds His Church that is the Body of Christ, one soul at a time, as He calls them out of the Kingdom of darkness and seals them for His Kingdom! Until He returns we are to live as if in a temporary tabernacle, housing the Spirit of God, following Him as we move about in this world, we to be IN THE WORLD BUT NOT OF IT! TO BE AS SALT AND LIGHT. We are to live out what He has worked in us, be a lliving sacrifice, our very lives are to be our WORSHIP, in continual awareness of His presence, walking and talking with Him, is our continual prayer/ this is our communion with God, to be listening to Him, sharing His Love as we work, and walk through this world seeking to help others in any way we can, always prepared to give the reason for our Hope that they may know Him, and be changed by an encounter with Jesus Who lives in us.
    Jesus had only one command and that was to Love God with all your heart mind body and soul and to Love others as He has loved you/us… He never said go to church, He never taught any religious doctrine, He did quite the opposite as He railed against the religious men, and went into synagogues casting out demons…

    Therefore don’t “go to church”, but be the Church going into all the world teaching this Gospel …

  2. Avatar David

    David

    How strange then, that Paul, Peter, James, John, etc, all planted churches, pastored churches, and wrote their letters to churches. The New Testament was essentially letters to local churches. The New Testament knows nothing of a free-floating Christian with no allegiance to a local body anywhere. Indeed, the very concept of baptism is a public identification with a public body of believers, with whom one is commanded to assemble (Heb 10:25), and commanded to read the Scriptures (1 Tim 4), pray (1 Tim 2), partake of the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11), and sing (Col 3:16). The 28 one-another commands of the New Testament do not mean “be broadly kind to another Christian should you bump into one”. They mean, act like this to your fellow brethren with whom you have covenanted in a local church.
    The universal church is invisible, international, transcends time and space, and has one Shepherd, Jesus. The local church is geographically located, visible, assembles and has elders and deacons, and exists in particular times and places. This is not some hidden Gnostic doctrine – it is as plain as day to anyone who reads the New Testament without an anti-ecclesial agenda.

  3. Avatar David

    I appreciate you mentioning the importance of preparation (with prayer). Whenever I hear a man get behind a pulpit and say “I had a message prepared, but God gave me something else to say”, I want to get up and leave. The fear of God is lacking in our churches. [Also listened recently to some messages you had on the topic of revival on Sermon Audio and they were much appreciated as well].

Leave a Reply to P Williams Cancel reply