I hear some folks decrying an entertaining worship service. If “entertaining” means “filled with distracting cultural hoopla that keeps the masses opiated,” then I agree that’s a bad trend. Some of those decriers will maintain that a solemn service is the way to go, even if solemn becomes somnolent at times.
I hear other folks saying that people are bored in church, a major reason why men can’t engage traditional church meetings anymore. Those same people may very well be the ones seeking more cultural hoopla. Obviously, that’s not a popular response to those on the “entertainment in church is bad” bandwagon.
I hear the wrangling between those two sides and I wonder how they can possibly miss the third way.
If a church is compelled to be entertaining, then something is missing.
If a church is satisfied with being boring more often than not, then something is missing.
Or should I say someone.
If we have churches that feel compelled to be entertaining or are satisfied with being boring, then one thing is true: The Spirit has left the building.
The problem here is that churches on both sides of the argument don’t wish to face that reality because it only shows their spiritual poverty. And we all know to admit God’s not showing up on Sundays in what is supposed to be the gathering of His Children makes for bad marketing.
What’s most tragic about our willingness to make do without the profound presence of the Spirit is that we make peace with the emptiness. When I say that’s a little psycho, I mean the movie. Norman Bates kept believing mom was still alive and kicking even though her corpse moldered in the basement. Needless to say, no outsider thought much of Norman’s sanity.
It’s to our shame that enormous numbers of Christians have never attended a church meeting where the Spirit showed up in palpable presence so that the entire congregation knew it. 
That’s a tragedy of untold sorrow. Yet it’s what too many Christians face each Sunday in either their dead churches or their dog-and-pony-show excuses for a live one.
So people settle. And they do it with profound gusto. They’ll tell themselves this is the best it will ever be and embrace the lie simply because they’ve never experienced the Spirit dwelling in power.
Are we spiritually hungry? Or are we status quo? Are we afraid? Are we embarrassed? What explains our settling for what too many of us settle for?
Repent. Then gather your church together and don’t stop seeking the Lord until He sends His Spirit in power.
Because a church that doesn’t regularly experience that kind of divine presence of the Lord in their meetings in a palpable, unmistakable way isn’t a church at all.
And yes, I mean that.
And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness.
—Acts 4:31
More:
What a post!
That is everything I should have said about worship in my recent post, but was not eloquent enough to do so. Thank you.
Heather,
Feel free to comment with a link to your post! Every little bit helps the cause.
Some of those decriers will maintain that a solemn service is the way to go
Can you provide some examples of folks saying this?
Would be interested in perhaps doing a blog post on the idea and would like to cite.
We’ve had people leave our church because:
The teen serving communion was wearing a t-shirt
The pastor didn’t wear a suit
The organ wasn’t used, as that was the only instument sanctified for worship
The elders were too young
The use of praise music was “undignified”
On the other side, we’ve had people leave because:
The use of hymns was “boring”
The pastor wore a suit
The elders were too focused on prayer and teaching (and were too old)
There weren’t enough young people in the church (he couldn’t find a date)
There wasn’t enough focus on attracting youth with more modern music
Need I go on? Most of what people “come to church” for seems petty and small until one realizes that most people consider “church” as something they attend and receive from, as opposed to something they are and give themselves up for.
“most people consider “church as something they attend and receive from, as opposed to something they are and give themselves up for.”
I love the way you put that. I struggle with that attitude in me and around me, and see it holding back the Church. The Church is not just a building and it’s not a social club, but isn’t that what we so often reduce it to? We make it all about us and our petty comforts.
Jared,
You got me on that one, my friend. I’ve had thousands of encounters with the kind of thinking that wants to keep everything under wraps all the time, but I don’t have a folder full of references or a Firefox full of bookmarks I can point you to because I haven’t been purposefully filing them all.
If you want to write on this topic, I’ll see if I can help by taking better care to bookmark that attitude when I come across it on the Web.
To the point, I worry that excesses in some churches, especially charismatic, have poisoned the well for others. I think the noted “Toronto Blessing” set a bad standard, resulting in a lot of churches and church leaders clamping off genuine moves of the Spirit. I’ve encountered plenty of church leaders and normal, everyday Christians who would sooner die than be made uncomfortable by the Holy Spirit doing something “weird” in their church or personal life.
I’ve also known a lot of situations where people so tamp down emotion, for fear of becoming “emotional,” that the Spirit has no avenue to work. I mean, if God’s going to bring some serious repentance to a church, you can bet there’s going to be weeping involved. But too many people resist that like crazy, in the end resisting the Spirit Himself. They have no ability to discern what is actually happening, so they chalk it up to emotionalism and throw the whole thing out.
I also think that our reliance on church leaders to run our services like train stations run the trains on time also quenches the Spirit. I know that in our church, the leaders are very sensitive to letting “laymen” speak up if God is connecting with the average Joe in the seats. Nor are the leaders beholden to a formula for running the meeting. If they sense God wants to do something that’s not printed in the bulletin, they let Him lead. We have too many churches where we set one hour for the meeting and we’re going to make that sixty minutes if it kills us all. The order of service is the order of service and God Himself has no right to change it! But that’s stupid. We have to trust God and trust the people in the seats more than we do.
Just a few weeks ago, one man in our church approached the pastor with the need to speak and he was given the mic. He spoke for about five minutes on the need for repentance and something changed in the hearts of everyone there. Something wonderful broke out and the rest of the program was scrapped for that morning. Many people were convicted and blessed.
I know too many churches where that kind of thing would never be allowed to happen.
I think we expect too little of our church meetings, too. All over the Psalms you have the Psalmist pleading like some lovesick teenager, “When can I go to the temple to meet with God?” Sadly, we don’t set that kind of expectation in our church meetings because we don’t expect anything to happen except we sing a few songs and hear someone talk about something that’s supposed to make our lives better. We’ve programmed people to have such low expectations that we’re masters of meeting that goal. And so church becomes dull because our vision is dull. God’s only going to give us what we’re prepared to receive from Him. If we have no faith that He can more, He’s not going to force more on us. But if we come with high expectations—or what I like to call “faith!”—then He’s surprise us from time to time.
Does any of that help?
Kind of. I’m not sure I disagree with you.
But as one who has decried entertainment-driven worship and had someone then accuse me of wanting “boring” worship, that false dichotomy sort of grates against me. Those of who want the church to stop the concert aren’t arguing for “solemn” worship services.
So when I saw you saying essentially the same thing, it made me wonder if you had any examples. Cuz I see this logic lobbed my way and I don’t know where it’s coming from other than from assumptions.
I agree with you that there are probably people out there who want “boring’ church services. Just not sure they are very vocal or very influential.
On the other hand, there are lots of us decrying entertainment-driven churches and I’m hoping “they want solemn instead” isn’t meant to apply to us.
I spent part of my day yesterday explaining to a guy why at the service I teach in people lift their hands during worship and some remove themselves from the crowd to be alone in the back to sway and worship as they feel led.
So it’s weird to be talking about that on one hand and then hearing suggested by others that my solution for off-the-rails church is spiritlessness.
Jared,
I wasn’t directing this post at you or your church. I don’t know what you church is like, but from what I’ve read of your blog, boring doesn’t sound like what you’re experiencing.
I’ve been in a lot of dull churches that seem to wear their dullness like a badge of honor, especially if they’re trying to position themselves against the “religious nuts” who get “too emotional” in that church down the street.
Hey, we all know what I’m talking about, don’t we?
I do now! 🙂
Our church is in it’s death throes over this issue, but underlying it is a plethora of social, cultural, personal, and spiritual issues. It boils down to maturity and the desire to be in the presence of God.
Maturity helps us recognize His presence when we encounter Him. Much of what passes for “Spirit-filled” worship is nothing more that an emotional reaction to well-played, beautiful music. Many of the same emotions pointed to as the presence of the Spirit also occur at Yanni concerts. Or raves. Spiritual maturity helps us sort out the difference.
As someone else pointed out on another blog about this, the presence of God takes on many forms, just like the presence of another person, depending on the circumstance. I have never read, though, of someone in the bible knowing the presence of God and not falling on their face in awe and supplication. I see very little of that in Sunday morning worship, and I think that deep down, few of us really want to be in the presence of God because of the ramifications. We know, as Isaiah did, that we are people of unclean lips, but unlike Isaiah, we don’t really want that to change. We want salvation, but for many, the rule of God in our lives means giving up too much precious freedom.
Which of course begs the question: Just how crowded is the narrow path?
David,
Many people consider this loss of control, so they resist. But few are willing to set the limits of just what the standard is for being self-controlled. I mean, if I cry in church, is that loss of control?
To many people, anything that makes them look weak or different before others becomes “loss of control.” I think that’s an enormous error that shuts down much of what God wants to do when we get together as believers. Multiply that thinking out by several hundred church members and you’ve got a big problem.
We’re too in love with our status, our carefully honed image, to be weak before God. Better we all be stoics.
And as you know, that kind of thinking rules far too many churches and individuals.
“I have never read, though, of someone in the bible knowing the presence of God and not falling on their face in awe and supplication. I see very little of that in Sunday morning worship, and I think that deep down, few of us really want to be in the presence of God . . .”
While I understand your intentions, I beg to differ. On the day of Pentecost, the Spirit fell upon the disciples and the result was that Peter had to stand up and declare “they are not drunk as you suppose.” I’ve been fortunate. I’ve been in services just like that where virtually everyone in the room was drunk in the Spirit. I’ve been in services where the praise was so great that you were amazed that you were not in heaven when you opened your eyes. I’ve also been in those services where His presence was so rich and holy that nobody dared to move (sometimes for over 45 minutes).
God’s Spirit has many, many kinds of manifestations, some of which are mocked by those who haven’t a clue, but as for me, I endeavor to go wherever the Spirit of God is moving. I can’t imagine a Christianity without that.
This is off topic, so please forgive me. I just wanted to give you sincere thanks, Dan. I’m midway through Mere Christianity, and it is just what I needed. I’ve been on a profound spiritual journey for several months, and the clarity of C.S. Lewis- and Dan Edelen- have been manna to me. I have not yet set foot in a physical church, but I feel like I have been making good progress in solitary study. So thanks.
Leta,
You’ve blessed me greatly with your comment. I’m so pleased to hear you’re being filled with good things from the Lord.
I pray you can find a good church. If you let me know what town you live in, I might be able to help you find a good church. No promises, but I’ll see what I can do.
Dan,
That was an exceptional and insightful post! You’ve zeroed in on the most fundamental issue of the saints gathering as the church. We worry about a lot, invest in a lot, program a lot, but what really matters is whether or not God shows up. If He does, little else matters, if He doesn’t, fault will be found with any and everything.
SLW,
I think most of our problems in the American Church are related to our inability to properly discern the words of the Holy Spirit speaking to us now. We either tune Him out or we put bogus words in His mouth. That elusive, godly middle ground escapes too many churches.
I think I’ll write more on this next week.
wow
amen
well-said
thank you
Brian,
You’re welcome. Thanks for the kudos.
I am commited to calling the Church back to the unity that was prayed for by our Lord and experienced in the early church. I see the Holy Spirit doing this work again in almost every expression of the called and beloved of Christ. It is a tiny minority at this point, but there are those that long for it thoughout the body! Here is an example from a Greek Orthodox brother’s blog. I find all this very encouraging. You are doing your part too, Dan. Thanks be to God!
http://cost-of-discipleship.blogspot.com/2007/09/faith-of-apostles.html
Well, here was my summer. First I am in a dead church and for some reason God won’t release from it. It’s all “What do you think we should do,?” rather than “Let’s pray and find out what God wants.”
Second, I visited four churches this summer and almost fell asleep in three. The fourth actually had the Holy Spirit coming forth in the speaker (but certainly not the worship). But then the speaker was a guest. I don’t know what happens when the pastor speaks. I thought perhaps it was where I live – So. California. But I am hearing this from almost everyone under 65 I talk to on the net. For some reasons the odler folks generally like the things the way they are.
So that’s my story.
Diane,
I’ve got to believe some decent church exists in SoCal. What’s wrong with Hayford’s old church?
Dan,
I hear what you are saying and I totally agree,proably why I go to two churches right now.
In House2House there are articles about “Jesus has left the Building” explaining thoughts similiar to what you are saying… but are house church advocates.
I remember several of my abusive churches talking about how the word “ICHABOD” was written on the front of the church door.
I really don’t want to go down that path again. Would appreciate your thoughts on this when you are able…?
Dave,
I don’t want to Ichabod anyone. Nor do I want people to abandon churches right and left only to get into some other church that’s just as bad or worse.
I wish people would stay where they are and be positive forces for betterment within their existing churches. I understand that people move, too, but let’s try a bit harder to make do with where God has put us.
What I find interesting is that the entertaining churches are ALSO the boring ones. When you have known the Lord Jesus, entertainment for those without the Spirit is just… dull.
However…
Because a church that doesn’t regularly experience that kind of divine presence of the Lord in their meetings in a palpable, unmistakable way isn’t a church at all.
This is wrong and I’m angry that you wrote it.
1. If the churches in Revelation were still churches, I don’t see how “palpable and unmistakable” is a mark of the church.
2. Israel did not cease to be Israel, even when God was silent. (Think of the time between Malachi and Matthew.)
3. Your quote from Acts is a descriptive quote and not a prescriptive one. It says what happened, not what we must have happen.
4. The New Testament believes in formal worship! Paul’s “Whenever you gather…” it doesn’t describe “palpable and unmistakable” Spirit presence as a mark of the church.
5. The day of Pentecost was not a formal gathering in the sense that Paul describes. It would seem strange to make that the mark of formal worship.
6. Pentecost is not a daily or weekly event. It was a one-time event. Elements may be repeated but it’s marked out in the Bible as a unique event.
7. “Palpable and unmistakable”… has the Spirit ever worked in an unmistakable manner? I don’t think he has. Ever.
The nature of the Spirit’s work is a subjective experience. By demanding that everyone have an experience of the Spirit in this manner is a ruse – what does He do? Does he inspire jumping and shouting or quiet introspection?
And what if he inspires jumping in you but a quietness in your church? When then? Should you leave your apostate church, which isn’t any church at all?
Or should you humble yourself and commit to your family, and maybe experience the spirit in a new way?
If there’s one thing that drives me crazy it’s the idea that people who don’t experience charismatic gifts are not real Christians. Satan loves this attitude because it keeps people “looking for the Spirit [usually: ‘looking for cool worship’]” and breaking the bonds of fellowship.
All the same, love to Dan and all the brothers here
J.Kru
J. Kru,
Thanks for writing. Let me address your statements:
1. If the churches in Revelation were still churches, I don’t see how “palpable and unmistakable is a mark of the church.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. Please explain further.
2. Israel did not cease to be Israel, even when God was silent. (Think of the time between Malachi and Matthew.)
The difference between the OT and the NT is that the Holy Spirit now dwells inside believers. For this reason, your comparison is not valid. If anything, God’s silence in the intertestamental period is an INDICTMENT against Israel. Are you sure you want to apply that to the modern American Church?
3. Your quote from Acts is a descriptive quote and not a prescriptive one. It says what happened, not what we must have happen.
The “prescriptive” vs. “descriptive” argument, to me, is a smokescreen. Please name one positive depiction of a NT practice that fails to conform to God’s ideal. You can’t. The reason you can’t is that the prescriptive and descriptive cannot be separated. People who wish to do so do so because they cannot deal with the reality of the depiction and what it means for us. Yet the Book of Acts does not exist in the Scriptures so we can comfortably sit back and say, “Oh well, that was then. What we have today is altogether different.” That’s what they call around my part of the country an “excuse.”
The depictions in Acts are of what Watchman Nee calls “the normal Christian life.” If your experience does not match that depiction, then the better question would be, “Why not? And what can I do about it?” That’s the whole reason this blog exists: to get Churches to wake up to the reality they’re missing in how they do church.
Acts is the blueprint. If we don’t follow it, then we can’t call ourselves a NT Church.
4. The New Testament believes in formal worship! Paul’s “Whenever you gather… it doesn’t describe “palpable and unmistakable Spirit presence as a mark of the church.
Tongues shared and interpreted? Prophets speaking? People weighing what the prophets said? Outsiders coming in only to find themselves stunned by what is going on in the church? Prayer meetings shaken? The dead raised? Healings?
Are we reading the same Bible?
5. The day of Pentecost was not a formal gathering in the sense that Paul describes. It would seem strange to make that the mark of formal worship.
The passage you felt was being used as a prescriptive rather than descriptive one was post-Pentecost.
Even then, Paul wrote extensively how best to use the gifts displayed at Pentecost in post-Pentecost church meetings.
6. Pentecost is not a daily or weekly event. It was a one-time event. Elements may be repeated but it’s marked out in the Bible as a unique event.
Pentecost is the sign of the Church. It is the validation and commission of the Church. For that reason, it has not passed away. As Peter rightly noted by ascribing the events of Pentecost to the prophecy of Joel, that validation persists until the Lord returns.
As far as “elements being repeated,” that’s the whole point of my argument, isn’t it? The power manifest on the day of Pentecost continues. The Holy Spirit dwells in His people and dwells among them, too. And not just as some kind of mental assent on our part, but in a real (palpable) way. If He doesn’t, then whatever that meeting is, it’s not a meeting of the true Church.
7. “Palpable and unmistakable… has the Spirit ever worked in an unmistakable manner? I don’t think he has. Ever.
If you are part of a church that cannot discern the difference, then for the sake of your soul, get out and find one that believes that the Spirit works in an unmistakable manner! I mean that, too. If we cannot discern the Lord from anything that is not the Lord, then we have no right to call ourselves Christians. Christians know the Lord—or at least they should.
If that answer doesn’t satisfy you, consider the millions of people who have received healing in the name of Christ Jesus. Ask them whether that healing was an unmistakable act of through the workings of the Holy Spirit. Ask Cornelius if the Spirit visiting the gift of tongues upon his household was a questionable act from an unsubstantiated source.
In fact, ask anyone today who has been delivered of a besetting sin, whether the Holy Spirit had anything to do with or not. Or how about something as simple as conversion?
If I’m reading you wrong on this, please let me know, but it seems as if you’re ascribing nothing miraculous or testable to the power of the Holy Spirit!
Hi Dan –
I’ll give a general response.
First, my intention is not to stir up contention, so I’ll try to stick to the point. For the record, I don’t know if I can call myself “Pentecostal” or “Charismatic” (and I’m not yet sure I understand the difference) but I am definitely believe in the NON-cessation of Spiritual gifts. There is nothing in Scripture that says that gifts, prophecy, or tongues has stopped, so I won’t either. And I hear and know of amazing things that do happen. At the same time, I acknowledge that there is a difference between the expression of the gifts in former days and currently, just based on my observation. In Acts 4:21, “the place in which they were gathered was shaken.” I’ve never been in a building that shook b/c of the Holy Spirit. I’ve never even heard of it. I’ve never heard of people born blind and crippled being healed. But I have of injured bodies healing very rapidly, and cancer disappearing, and a little boy’s white blood cell counts rising from 0 to 500 so he could get further chemo. But his leukemia never went away. And I do see a trend in the New Testament away from an emphasis on gifts and toward an emphasis on the Word. (Think 1 Cor. vs. 2 Tim.)
What I was hearing you say, Dan, and what I was responding to was that “If a church doesn’t experience these manifestations of the Spirit, it’s not a real church.” (I don’t know if you meant to include a reference to a Spirit-caused earthquake 🙂
Statements like these really, really upset me. Because we are one body. Some Christians are charismatic, some are not. Look at the two Episcopal churches in Virginia. They don’t practice any charismatic gifts, but the Spirit was strong enough to get them to leave the safety of the Episcopalian corruption for the Anglican provinces of Africa. Was the Spirit working?
Neither Calvin nor his followers practiced the gifts. Yet graduates of the seminary in Geneva went to France to plant churches, knowing that the average lifespan after leaving Geneva was 2 years. Was the Spirit working?
Look at the OPC. Liturgy. Argument. Theology. Not my favorite place in the world. But if you spend time with an OPC congregation, you will find that they show hospitality like they get paid to do so, and you’ll hear that 80% of their missionaries are in the 10/40 window. They further invest in the hard soil of nations like Japan. Is the Spirit working?
In all three examples, the Spirit is working. But not in a “palpable and unmistakable” manner. You could call it a political decision, fanaticism, or self-righteousness. But I believe it is the Spirit indeed working. In the midst of quietness and liturgy and planning.
Now with #2 above, my point was that even though Israel was indicted, IT WAS STILL ISRAEL. Even thought the Prophets were silent, IT WAS STILL ISRAEL. And Churches without special gifts are STILL CHURCHES. Just like Churches with crummy theology are still churches.
I argue against stodgy, reformed people who want to say that Pentecostals are not really Christians, and that Arminian churches are not real churches. Now, I think that Arminianism smells like smoke, but they’re real churches. And now I’m arguing against you.
If you want to say that Jehovah’s Witnesses are apostate, great. They are. Mormons? Apostate.
But if you want to say that non-pentacostal/charismatic churches are apostate, Jesus will have words with you on the last day. And if anyone wants to say that non-Reformed or non-Roman Catholic or non-Baptist or non-KJV only churches are apostate, the same holds true. Don’t further your theological agenda at the expense of your brothers.
Now, I may have ascribed something to your post that wasn’t there. You just mentioned conversion or deliverance from sin. I agree with you. But I know your theological background, and so do your readers. And I’ll stand by my critique, because if I could misread you, so could the boys over at Team Pyro (whom I have tangled with before, just FYI.) You’re a popular writer, Dan, and you’re at the point where for the sake of the body of Christ, you’re going to have to be specific and clear.
Thanks for hearing me out
J.Kru
J. Kru,
I’m not calling for people to pack up and leave their existing church to go to a Pentecostal or charismatic one. I see no benefit in leaving a church to go to one that might be more screwed up.
But what are we doing with what we have where we’re at? That’s 90 percent of what God is asking from us. I don’t care what denomination or church we’re in, is the Spirit moving in power? If not, something needs to be done!
Spiritually-sensitive people know when the Spirit is working. And let’s not hold up the Reformation as the be all and end all of faith, either! Sometimes I get a little tired of hearing how profound the Reformation was. People will glory in the Reformation while they sit in a dead Protestant church.
What’s profound today? Where is God moving today? If we can’t answer that question, then we’ve got a lot of soul-searching to do.
J. Kru, I don’t think you get what Dan is saying at all.
I have felt the presence of the Holy Spirit in a traditional Lutheran Christmas Eve service as well as Charismatic services in other places. I have also experienced dead services in more than one denomination.
People forget that we are talking Spirit here. Not physical or emotional,but spiritual. Our bodies and our emotions do react to the Spirit, it’s true, but we are not speaking of that, I think.
Connie,
One of the biggest mistakes we modern, post-Enlightenment Christians make is to divorce the spiritual from the physical and the emotional.
God made Man as a tripartite being, body, soul, and spirit. We must understand this! Adam was perfect because all three parts of His nature were perfect and meshed perfectly. They were meant to function as a whole.
Today, a Christian has his spirit re-activated by the indwelling Holy Spirit. That’s going to have ramifications for the soul and for the body, especially as the body reflects the operating of the soul. Just because some one is weeping doesn’t mean that the Holy Spirit is not the cause of that weeping! We can’t say, “Oh, she’s just being emotional, so it’s not the Lord.” That’s a great lie! We can’t toss all three parts of a tripartite being into separate boxes and try to analyze them apart from each other. God did not make us that way!
Excellent post Dan
J.krui said:
If there’s one thing that drives me crazy it’s the idea that people who don’t experience charismatic gifts are not real Christians.
I’m not sure that is being implied here.
For me discernment is always a great tool.
I don’t judge a service on whether I get goosebumps or struggle to stay awake. For me it’s about an eager expectation and a desire to worship our Lord with a sincere heart. I long to draw near into His presence and yes, as has already been mentioned, our bodies and emotions can react to the Spirit, but I firmly believe that when I show up and have that anticipation of the Holy Spirit moving and ministering, something happens and I thank God for that.
Douglas,
People who don’t manifest charismatic gifts are not somehow lesser Christians! I never claimed they were and never will.
But when we’re talking about the work of the Holy Spirit, we can’t throw out the charismatic gifts and pretend that doesn’t change the Church, either!
People don’t have to be speaking in tongues in a church for the manifest presence of the Spirit to dwell. But, if the Spirit is dwelling and the gifts are flowing, then we shouldn’t despise them, either.
See, we fall into pits when we make statements that are at the extremes and then claim them as the norm. We Christians need to be more judicious in this regard. I know I try to be a middle-grounder on this blog.
I forgot to say that at present I am reading an excellent book by all people a Baptist pastor. In fact, he is the one who replaced the late Adrian Rogers at Bellevue Baptist church in the Memphis, Tenn. area.
His name is Steve Gaines and his book is entitled, “When God Comes to Church.” I would swear this guy might be a Charismatic Baptist. The whole book is about allowing the Holy Spirit to run your church, its services and programs. His does and the church where he used to pastor does. He reports that the results are phenomenal.
My main point in reporting this is I am so happy that there are those outside the Charismatic/Pentecostal stream that understand this and are actually putting it into practice too.
Boy, Diane, I envy the time you have to read books as much as you do!
Sounds like a good book. I may need to look it up.
Dan, THANKYOU! I am a relative newbie to the world of blogging and have been close to tearing my hair out at times with some of the unbalanced things I’ve been reading. Thankyou for bringing a well balanced and well written blog into my world!!! Many of those I speak to online are fed up with church as we know it and wish to disassociate themselves from it, yet I am convinced that it’s better to stand up and be counted IN the system than to walk away and write it off. Thanks for being a solid voice of reason.
Rachel.