Sarah Cooney on the Gifts
Sarah Cooney joined in a dialogue over my recent post on the gifts, and I found a reply she made very poignant. So much so, that I have reposted it here.
I wouldn't say that doctrine concerning the Holy Spirit fits into the category of 'relatively small theological differences'. It's a huge and critical difference. And from my recent Acts Bible study, I don't understand why it's so difficult for some 'charasmatic' circles to understand the Holy Spirit. Especially those circles who support the faulty idea that you recieve the baptism of the Holy Spirit after salvation instead of at the point of salvation, and along with this baptism experience speaking in tongues. This is a serious misinterpretation of the Bible which can be disasterous to other believers' walks with Christ.
Every experience should be examined in light of Biblical truth. It shouldn't be that 'we believe the gifts of the spirit continue to manifest', it should be 'the Bible supports that gifts of the spirit continue to manifest'. Just because you've 'experienced' something, doesn't mean the Bible supports it as true.
It is good that you have seen spiritual fruit, however, it concerns me when there seems to be a greater focus on 'experiencing' God (through speaking in tongues, being slain in the spirit, etc.) than on correct interpretation of the Bible and on correct doctrine. Is it good when 'numbers are added daily', but those people are not exposed to what the Bible supports as true but are instead encouraged to 'seek out' such experiences? We also must ask ourselves, who said that those things are the ultimate of experiencing God? I would say that if someone thinks things like speaking in tongues, being slain in the spirit, and uncontrollable laughter are the max when it comes to experiencing God, then I'd say, much like the Corinthian church, they haven't truly experienced God all that much. They are still relying on spiritual milk when it comes to experiencing God. Those things are not the ultimate.
Ashley [Keen], I'm not trying to be hostile or take jabs at you, but I've had a lot of trying experiences with people who have faulty doctrine and put all their emphasis on gifts and experience, people who've tried to convince me to do the same or make me feel like a lower Christian because of it. I almost fell into believing that I was 'missing something' because I had never spoken in tongues or been slain in the spirit. And that is so wrong. It's just another form of legalism. And I get tired of this argument.
I want to evidence the fruits of the Spirit and build those in me by growing closer to God and letting His Spirit fill me daily. Every person gets a Spiritual gift and I fully expect that I will use mine how God intended. I do not, however, need to center my walk on gifts. The Bible tells us to center our lives on Jesus and the spreading of the Gospel, not gifts or any other point of argument. I feel that too much of a focus on gifts is very unhealthy for churches, leading to superficial spirituality, not a deep relationship with God.
May 30th 2006 
6 Comments 
Jun 2nd 2006
very nicely (and humbly) put.
Jun 2nd 2006
Wow, that was so eloquently spoken. It is so true, though, because too many people rely so heavly on experience and emotion and lay biblical doctrine to the side. This "fault doctrine" as Sarah deemed it becomes a stumbling block for new believers who are trying to seek after God from the bible and not from experience. Sarah also made a great point that I like to emphasize when discussing this, the church of Corinth was an almost wicked congregation of believers and Paul wrote to them not in encouragement for their good deeds as he did to the Phillipians but in rebuke for their many errors. To base a doctrine so heavily on the actions of a church who the Apostle Paul accused of being babes in the faith continues to confuse me.
Jun 2nd 2006
Sarah, I have to say that I, in a large part, agree with what you have said. :) If my posts led you to believe that I think that pursuing the gifts of the spirit is more important than pursing Christ and growing to be like him -- then I'm sorry for that misconception. Also, I know what you mean when you talk of people feeling "left out" or "not as good as other Christians" because they have not had the baptism "experience" of the holy spirit -- Personally, I think that this is a crying shame.
I think, though, that there is equal harm in building up an idea that to know about God is to know God. (And I have had a lot of bad experience with people in this area, so please, forgive me my soapbox ;D) I could study everything there is to know about Christian doctrine, and be able to quote many many biblical scholars -- but still be a child in my Christian walk because I've spent time learning about God instead of seeking his presence. A friend of mine offered what I think is a really good parallel to this. Assume that there is a public figure that you have a lot of respect for, you spend a good deal of time learning about things he or she has done in the past, learning their habits, manerisms, about their character -- in fact, you become an authority on that person.
However, if the person who you've studied so diligently is pulled aside on the street, and they are asked about you -- Will they profess to know you?
The situation is different because, of course God knows us, he created us. But he also pursues us and wants to enjoy us. If we spend all of our time with our noses in books, reading the bible like a history lesson and Wait-a-minuteing his voice into our lives because we haven't finished reading the lastest tome of some great biblical scholar, we spend less of it enjoying his creation and seeking to know him better as he effects our life now we severely cheapen our walk with Christ.
Also note that although the Corinthian Church is made of spiritual babies -- he tells them that to grow they DO need to experience God. What then, does it mean for churches and doctrines who skip that crucial step of heart knowledge and passion for God's presence?
I'm not trying to be legalistic -- I, too, have had my fill of legalism. But for me to be real with God, I have to do more that know about him. Yes, I praise him for the work that he has done, and I back my studies with scripture, but I also have a driving need to be in the presence of the Lord -- it doesn't make me a "better" Christian or a I don't know, bah. It doesn't raise my opinion of myself higher than it should, it doesn't make me prideful, if anything it makes me more humble, because being in the presence of God is very humbling. It's just something that I know that I need and that without... well, my life wouldn't be as full in a very real and non legalistic way.
Oct 9th 2006
I have reposted this comment because I didn't realise that the comments had moved here and I wanted to see what you all thought.
“it concerns me when there seems to be a greater focus on “experiencing†God (through speaking in tongues, being slain in the spirit, etc.) than on correct interpretation of the Bible and on correct doctrine.†do you believe that God can be “experianced†if so how if not why do most christian churches both charismatic and non focus on christianity not being a religion but a relationship with God through Jesus. how can a true relationship not include experiances? “We also must ask ourselves, who said that those things are the ultimate of experiencing God? †who did say this? I don’t see this claim made or implyed here by anyone. I think that we can agree based on biblical evidence that we will not have the ultimate experances with God untill we get to heaven. this however does not mean that we cannot have any experiances with God while we are here on earth. That stance is obviously not supported by scripture. I do not really understand why cessationists spend so much time telling charismatics that how we experiance God is wrong and how they experiance God is right. We are all individuals and I think that it is logical that each of our relationships with God are different. each of the apostals had a different walk with God… does that mean paul was better then petter but not as good as John? No. they were just different. if you as an individual choose to not “seek the greater gifts†thats your porogative I do not think you should look down on your brothers and sisters in christ who do so though.
it should be “the Bible supports that gifts of the spirit continue to manifestâ€. Just because you’ve “experienced†something, doesn’t mean the Bible supports it as true. I agree on this aspect however there are many experiances that the bible never mentions that are still true. for example you’re reading this post on a computer computers are not mentioned in the bible that does not make them non-existant. in addition the argument on cessation or not is based on the interpretation of the God breathed bible by imperfect humans. we can be wrong in our interpretation I am willing to admit that about myself… are you? however even though we are capable of being wrong I think God knows this and helps us to learn from this in order to gain a more correct view. this is why I think arguing certian docterine that are not of a salvific nature is of limited merit. in other words cant we just agree on the gospel do our job and let other differencs of oppionon and preference take a back seat as less important?
Feb 13th 2007
I have to say that i dont agree. The word tells us to eagerly desire the spiritual gifts of God. Speaking in tongues is only one of the many gifts you can recieve from the holy spirit.I used to think like you until i really began to study and i asked the Lord to reveal it to me, and he did. He filled me with the holy spirit.
Feb 15th 2007
The word gifts is not in the original greek texts in I Cor 12:1.