Brilliant. I am with uh spirit-filled sacramentarian scholastic super author Andrew Wilson. Thanks for joining us. In the demo, just the whole the whole day I've been. I've just been waiting for the alliteration.
SPEAKER_01You're a lover of alliteration and a turn of phrase. But particularly with the S's, it makes you sound like a character in a Julio Donaldson book or something.
SPEAKER_02Yes, and and making up words, which you quite like to do.
SPEAKER_01I do. I like I like the I like the power of making people think that they've not heard quite heard something but that it's familiar. So I just think it's quite an it's like I suppose a form of poetry that you're allowed to do still and put it on the cover. Although I wanted to put it as the title, but the publishers weren't having it because they didn't.
SPEAKER_02But it's there in the subtitle. So it's Spirit and Sacraments, Eucharismatic.
SPEAKER_01So Eucharistic, Charismatic, with Charis in the middle. I'm using my hands as if to indicate the blurring of these two.
SPEAKER_02You actually charge your hand at another neologism, which was uh uh ki Christianity could even be charistianity, which I thought was very bold. You know. Andrew Wilson takes the Christ out of Christianity.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I don't it would it wouldn't have gone well for me, I don't think, with many of my readers. But um but I do like I there's I love the word. But obviously, you know, the word charis, you know, is meaning grace, but it means not just grace and favour, but also thanksgiving. It's a very varied Greek word, which actually then means that it cashes out both in Eucharistia, which is Thanksgiving, but also charismata, which is gifts of grace. So you end up with this one beautiful Greek word that bridges together two very different sounding English words. And if you speak to an English person and they say they're charismatic, you would assume that's a very different sort of person from someone who says we celebrate the Eucharist in our church. Right. Um and I quite like the fact that the word charis binds them together somewhere. So that that was the that was the idea.
SPEAKER_02It's fantastic. And that charis is etymologically related to cara cara, joy. Is that right?
SPEAKER_01Uh yeah. Do you know what? I don't actually. I can't think what the common root of both of them would be, but that doesn't mean it isn't. I've just I don't that would be new to me if it were. Okay. But that doesn't mean it isn't. I think probably just there's there would be a lot of words like that, of course. Uh any more than caris and chrism or christos are related, or character, which is another word which I don't think is going to have to do with charis, so I'm not sure.
SPEAKER_02It's homework. For those at home, it is because you do run those two together. So chapter one Oh that's just a kind of yeah, that's an extra that's an added Brucey bonus of playing around the world. Yeah, so chapter one is Karas, and you talk about the gift and and God as the great giver, and I really enjoyed that that chapter. Thank you. Um, isn't it? I d I don't know. I well, I'm actually writing a book called The Gift at the moment. So it was sort of resonating with you than I realized. That's right. But better than me. But uh you r you reminded me of uh two other Wilsons. So so Doug Wilson and then Nate Wilson in particular. So in in his book uh Notes on a Tilter World or Death by Living, um there's there's that sort of ebullience. And I I think you all kind of love G.K. Chesterton. So that the there is that kind of joy-filled letting letting the emotion kind of carry the sentences and um and it's it's all to show that God is giver. Give it give us uh uh an excited look at God as giver again.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, so I I hit one way one way into it if it's something I hadn't thought about. I mean i in the abstract you could say everything that exists is gift, and and and the only things that are evil are the things where the enemy is effectively denied or twisted gifts which have been given for good. And you can make that point, and you can make a church historical point, and I do that through Augustine as well. But I think the one that got me as I was writing it was the fact that in incidental ways, almost all of the parables Jesus tells that include a figure who represents God, the character who represents God, the master or the father, or the you know, the guy who was running the banquet or inviting people to the wedding or the so or whatever. In almost all of them, that character, the God character, is giving away far more than he should. Far too much. It's like, you know, here we're gonna he's giving thousands of this, or he's giving far too many talents away, or too many miners, or far too many seeds, or he's scattering things too little. Inviting people, what are you doing? You need to cut it down. Oh no, no, no, give it some time, it's all right. He's continually giving, he's giving away half his estate. You think that he just said, you know, give me my half now. He should get a clip around the ear. And instead, the father says, Okay, fine, you get it, and I'll give my other son his as well. And you think he's continually doing that, and um, and I just find that such a and obviously that's true in his interactions with people as well. Take it, I'm gonna come to your house, all this. You think Jesus' picture of God, as he tells it in the parables, almost incidentally, even when it's not the point of the story, he just continually makes God this irrepressible giver. And I found that such a beautiful sort of insight that I hadn't seen when I started writing that chapter. I was thinking wanting to go down more down the creation line, which is as you say, is quite the sort of the Chesterton and Nate Wilson way of doing it. Um, but as I went through, I thought this is true throughout, and of course, the just the very word gift or grace just appears so much in the pages of scripture, and not only as a shorthand for saving you by grace, although of course very much so, and that at the centre, but actually even Christ as gift rather than just salvation as gift, you know, that this very strong sense of Jesus is the greatest gift God could give. And seeing that the by the time you get to the gift of Christ, you would think that's the sort of thing God would do if you've read if you've got the measure of who he is, you'd think he's that kind of person already, even though he hasn't yet done this.
SPEAKER_02Yes.
SPEAKER_01Um, and I think that was just beautiful because the stingy God or the the you know, the sort of strict and stern God, and all those sorts of images, which it's easy to say you don't believe in, but it's quite hard to loosen yourself from those shackles, I think. So sometimes just to hear the the irrepressible goodness of God and and the gift giving us of God is just really liberating.
SPEAKER_02Because Sinclair Ferguson talks about you know the lie that the enemy tells, and and always the lie that the enemy tells is that God is not giver, he is not good, he cannot be trusted, he doles out his blessings with a teaspoon and a scowl, as opposed to being an overflowing fountain of goodness. And therefore we are to be those who receive the gift, and and where you take things where they ought to be taken, we ought to eagerly desire more. Which, you know, you you make the human analogy and you and you say, you know, if someone gave you a gift and you say, Thank you, can I have some more? It's it sounds a little rude, but that's only because a human giver is limited, is exhaustible.
SPEAKER_01Yeah.
SPEAKER_02But the father of lights is not and of course that's o that is true.
SPEAKER_01But it interestingly, as you again, you sort of pro you probe that analogy, that's true of certain things that say, for instance, a father can give, um, an earthy father would say, Well, of course, I can't just keep giving you unending money or whatever it might be. But that's not true of lots of things. So, as in if it's a hug or if it's affirmation, you know, if it's time, if those things, actually, the right most appropriate response to a gift from a parent who loves you is to seek more of the gift. It's only when there is finitude or limitation that you don't do that in a sense, and that's not because it's not right to ask for the gift, it's because the parent isn't going to run out, or the parent might have other children with whom they have to share it, and there's a sort of there is a zero-sum game in the end, whereas that's never true with God.
SPEAKER_03Right, right.
SPEAKER_01And I think that would be even putting a pin in the spiritual gift side, I think just our attitude to God for grace. And you know, John Piper's book Future Grace, I read I don't know, 15 years ago or whatever. And he does that a lot. It's like the bet actually one of the best responses you can make to past grace is seeking future grace.
SPEAKER_03Yes.
SPEAKER_01And I I think that was one of the first times I'd heard it stated in that way. But again, the idea of God as gift giver, he loves it when we receive it. It's like, come to the fountain. If anybody's thirsty, I was just reading this morning, Revelation 22, like come on to the thirsty. Come, I will give you. You know, it's God's heart throughout the scriptures.
SPEAKER_02Right. And as parents, you you love to hear a child say, Again, again, again, you know. Yeah. Within limits. But yes, the the So the correct response of the recipient is not just to take the gifts and be content merely with that, but to eagerly desire more. And I guess that that plank of the argument will be important. Yes.
SPEAKER_01As as the book, and I think that's true of all kinds of gifts, although I think probably in spiritual gifts it's where you have that explicit eagerly desire spiritual gifts. You you th you're you're trying to make that connection early on in the book. But I think even for my charismatic friends, I think the same thing again is you've got to eagerly desire the gifts that God gives you, which may or may not come be in your tradition, be very prominent. What about bread and wine? You know. So gifts from God again, I just think bread and wine by being physical things which are probably less in our culture because we've got so much abundance of things to eat. But in most societies and most of history, the idea of being given a meal is such an act of favour and grace. It's such a sticky, real, tangible gift. It's actually easier to get your head around the fact that that's an act of beneficence or generosity than a spiritual gift is in many ways, because it's one in which you are I actually need food, and for someone to provide me with food, this is really uh a really beautiful way of expressing their kindness to me. And so I think that's true, and and of gifts that I'm not even mentioning in the book, really. The other things you can go back again and again to God and say, Lord, you are a giver of good things, we want to come to you for more.
SPEAKER_02Oh man. And and then you move into chapter two and more about the cara joy uh that we're meant to have. And and in a sense, I guess the logic of your argument, where you want to get us to in the book, you don't need chapter two. Or whatever chapter that that ends up in. The joy. I mean, I guess logically speaking, you don't need the joy.
SPEAKER_01You're basically saying it's a total non-sequence. And in a in a sense, I that's actually what happened. Well, it is what happened. So I was writing the book, I went charis, eucharistic, charismatic, eukarismatic. That's how I wrote it. And I was, I don't remember exactly where, but halfway through writing that shape of a book. And I just kept getting this niggling thinking, I wonder if there's a way of weaving in some other stuff about pursuits of happiness, which has always been something I've wanted to write a lot about. Um again, actually the influence of Piper's been very strong there for me. Uh just introducing me to that, but then as you say, the kind of Chesterton Lewis, many other writers who I've enjoyed who I've thought this is that's what I like about writers, is often that they have introduced me to happiness in God. And I thought actually, and then I think when I discovered the wordplay, the sort of carra caras, I thought that's how we that's how we can do it. Um so yeah, I think really saying this is good for us to seek gifts because God is a giver, but it's also good for us to seek things which will lead to our greater joy and happiness, and the two are obviously connected because when God gives you something, it's for your good and happier.
SPEAKER_02So and I guess the the ebullient joy that you might get, the spiritual buoyancy from that joy. Um because I I think what you want to do is you want to lead people on a journey, whether they're charismatic, towards more liturgical kind of worship, and and if they're more liturgical towards more charismatic worship. Um and I think they're not going to make that journey if if they don't think it's worth it, if they don't think that there is joy to be had at the end of it. I think your anthropology is that, isn't it? Yeah, it is.
SPEAKER_01Because people will uh people ultimately do what they think will lead to their happiness and actually what we're calling them to, whether believe us or not, is to, you know, the classic Jeremiah 2. But the problem with my people is they've forsaken the fountain and they've hewed out broken systems. They they've they've they haven't got something that's better than me and gone, actually I prefer that to God. They found something that's way, way worse, that's utterly inadequate. It doesn't satisfy them, but they're still continuing to go there because they have some measure of control or independence if they do. Whereas what they need to do is swallow their pride, repent of it, and then turn to the one who will truly satisfy them, and that's a a quest for joy. And I think that again that you know the Lord's Supper, the sacraments, baptism, actually I think, and I make the try and make this case, I think liturgy and a sense of uh Catholicity with a small sea, a unity with the wider church, as well as the spiritual gifts, which for someone in my position you'd expect to say, I suppose. All of those things that contribute to our joy when we uh accept and receive them. Because again, that's what a gift giver does. You know, it's following the sunbeams back to the sun, I think, is the again the Lewis image for that. So um you see something beautiful and then in experiencing it as beautiful and enjoyable, you are drawn to the greater joy that it points to.
SPEAKER_02So fantastic. And so so then the the next chapter you go into the Eucharistic kind of worship. And and I guess you've kind of been on a journey in in terms of that. What what was what's been your personal journey in terms of having a greater appreciation for Eucharist and baptism and liturgy and so probably the churches I've been in, uh there's always been a strong theology of baptism.
SPEAKER_01I mean, whether it's a theology people agree with, but it you know, there's a strong emphasis on it in the sense that it's a bit funny, it's a bit lopsided actually, in a kind of I think um some generic evangelical circles are a bit lopsided where there would be quite a prominent place for baptism, a big, you know, celebration, people bouncing off the walls and people get baptized, very strong because obviously believers' baptism, but you know, big tank, people go huge explosion of praise when people are baptized. The Lord's Supper, very much a a sort of much in in a in a justifiable way to some degree, a very much more somber experience, and we could talk about how to in what extent that's that's right and wrong, but but actually also people just feel looking and feeling a little bit weird, no real sense of how this connects to the wider shape of the what I will call the liturgy, but the the order of service or the everything that's happening in the meeting. Um and so often with a very strong celebratory, joyful, gift-based theology of baptism, and a slightly puzzled we know we should do this, but we don't really know why this is great, and we don't really feel like, yeah, we get to do this. And it can, in depending on how it's done, can, in again, in the charismatic sort of circles I've come from, be a little bit of an intrusion into what otherwise seems like a very happy time. So we have to, I suppose we should now just get very glum for a while and look in between our knees, put our heads in between our knees and stare. And then we'll raise a garry honor, yeah, but actually God is still alive, and you think, I don't really know. Now I and I had to suppose to some degree I'd grown up with that. I don't think anybody was trying to do that, but I think that's kind of how it happened. And then for some period of time, I was actually in a church where where we didn't do communion at all on Sunday, because it the theology was you do this in the in the small group or you do this outside of the Sunday service. And I think probably about ten or twelve years ago began um you know, we as a team in Eastbourne began reckoning with like I think we need to I think we do need to reintroduce this and I think we need to do this well and find ways of doing it so that it does it connects with the people. And actually that's been huge. So in the church in Eastbourne that I've been was part of leading for for ten years, I feel like we got to where many of the rest of the church have been for centuries, millennia. Um, but we got there too in a way, going, This is a actually at the end of the service, you'd often preach towards the table at the end, and then there'd be a gathering and people come out of their seats and come to the table, and there would be it would be in our setting anyway, a very worshipful, beautiful experience. That was a real invitation and joy. And I think as we did that, uh part of the point I'm argument I'm making in the book actually is that the the the habits we are accustomed to end up shaping our theology more than we realise, and probably by simply doing it and thinking about how we do this better over the course of that next five to ten years, it became much more embedded in my theology. And I read a whole I've read a lot more church history, I suppose, in the last ten years as well, which is helped too.
SPEAKER_02So And putting communion there into the service, that must change other things, mustn't it? Like the way you preach, for instance, as you say, if if if it's then an invitation to the table.
SPEAKER_01I think, you know, I'm sure this is going to raise the spectre of Anglicanism. Um but I think that the shape of Tom Cranmer's liturgy is so uh intuitively brilliant to me, even if you don't swallow all of it and even if you don't say all of those words, the the the the story being told in the way that he structures the communion service is so wise, I think, because you obviously are, you know, you have the invitation and you have the welcome and you have the reading of the law and you're confronted with the reality that you're a sinner, and then you pray, and then you uh receive other words and you confess the creed, and then you come through and the gospel is preached and then not just read but then declared over you, and it's after that that you then come to the table and from there you sing and then you are commission out into the world. And and in many ways that is with very, very different timing allocations. Obviously, we have a in my kind of church we would have a lot more continuous singing, we'd use the spiritual gifts in in ways which most many Anglican churches wouldn't, but but in a sense, that sense of where communion is and how it acts as the pivot between the preaching of the word and then this sort of joyful celebration of commission, I think is beautiful. And I don't think we would have got to where we are even as a local church in Eastbourne or in the one I'm now pastor at in London without a sense that communion appears in that sort of place in the service on a regular basis. Because if it doesn't, if it comes 15 minutes in because it's something you really know you should get out of the way. I don't believe we disparate, but it does sometimes for some people.
SPEAKER_02In Anglican churches too, you know. Well, I dare say some value. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01And uh so it's like, we don't quite know how to do a bit embarrassing. Okay, well let's do that and then we can get on with the the happy stuff. I don't think it's its formative significance in the life of the believer would ever have been seen to me.
SPEAKER_02I was at a church within the same family of churches that you you you belong to in sort of New Frontiers, and I think they had been very influenced by you and your writings on think theology and and and they um had begun doing weekly communion. And what was interesting about their thinking subsequent to that was that now that we have communion, we can't just shove it away. It can't just be okay, we're gonna sing a song and during the singing the first song, there'll be some trestle tables around the side and and go up and in your own time. With no liturgy because people weren't prepared for it. And they they they came to see that people actually became more religious in a negative sense without being directed as to what was happening. And so that they were finding that people who had never before in their lives crossed themselves. Oh, really? They didn't know what to do because they wouldn't be they weren't being led in any kind of liturgical form. And so they would go up to the table and they they just didn't know how to take the elements. They didn't know, you know, it's it's like in a uh y you go around the natural national portrait gallery and you don't know how long you're meant to stay in front of each each picture. You know, it's more and how how long I'm meant to meant to stay, you know, thinking about the death of Jesus and that kind of stuff. And without being led from the front, people didn't know how how to take the elements.
SPEAKER_01We've certainly I've certainly seen people uh you know I there's a there's a there's a scene in the West Wing when they've just got into the Oval Office having just won the election and Martin Sheen, who's playing the president, just says, Well you you can come in here, you can come and talk to me. What are you standing why are you standing 15 yards? Could everybody stop being weird or everybody stop being strange? Because there is something that happens with moments in a good way, something in us with moments of great grandeur and significance, like becoming the president or approaching Jesus, the cross, really, where we aren't quite sure how to do it. We don't want to be flippant, um, but also we haven't been habituated, does that work as a word, um, yeah, to how to do that boldly and yet reverently, and how to, you know, it's sort of Hebrews, let's approach the throne of grace boldly and approach God with reverence and awe for he's a consuming fire. You think, well, how do we do that? And in a sense, you then, as you say, you need to shape the way that your worship as a whole is structured in order to make that something that people can do and see, and actually just sometimes lead into it more than simply put it in the it put it somewhere in the meeting structure and invite people to go and do their own thing because they won't know what to do. And I remember one day we were teaching through the Exodus in Eastbourne about five years ago, and I just thought I really want to go to town on this and get through here to to a different sort of experience. And we told the story of the Exodus and sort of enacted it as we went, which is a very weird thing to do in a big church, but we literally then got people. We were going to sing when they sang the Song of Moses on the other side of the Red Sea, and then when they received manner, and so I mean you know, and or the Passover story, and we would actually go to the table and I had glasses of literal wine. It's pretty much the only time in our kind of church, it's always Jews. Um actually got it, got managed to get people with with wine and um and clinking, but glasses, not shot glasses or plastic cups, clinking, standing around celebrating, taking you got to say, Guys, you've got to take a hunk of bread, you've got to talk, and in although we don't do that every week at all, it was it's it I think it got us somewhere, or it felt to me like we it did, because it began to I suppose I hope you know train people in that realm, including me in that reality. This is a big celebration, as well as being something that's very serious, and those two things are not in conflict with each other.
SPEAKER_02Right. And we are embodied creatures, and and this is how we we we must inhabit stories in order to grow, and and those must be put into practice and earthed in uh tangible physical ways. And we we um put out on Twitter uh if anyone wants to ask Andrew Wilson questions. We we had a couple of people sort of say um they've enjoyed hearing your journey and seeing um how you've come to value the sacraments and that kind of stuff. And they they they've basically kind of asked, Are you not just Anglicurious? Why don't you go the whole hog? Yeah, come over to Canterbury.
SPEAKER_01I I ca I was I was actually um I f I I don't know if you know this, I was christened in Dick Lucas's church in St. Helens Bishop's Case. Um my parents got saved there in 1974, and when I was born, that's where I was so I was I was very I was in not just Anglican, I was like St. Helens Anglican. Um Hebrews Hebrews. Yeah, well quite and and actually then because I went to a boarding school as a teenager and because my parents were in a in a local Anglican church, and they are now. My my father's a effectively been leading an Anglican church for two years as a church warden, but with an interregnum, he's really the guy who's been running things. So um so there's a lot of Anglican roots in my family. That that's I it's not a in a sense the journey's kind of gone the other way.
SPEAKER_02Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Um which is primarily over the church government and baptism for me. They're the two areas where I'm just on a very different page, I think, from Anglicans. But I have, as I s already alluded to with particularly with Cranmer, I think just seen the power of the l the liturgy. I think so I have d my Mm, I have twin poles of you know, twin poles of Anglicanism, which I think in a sense the entire Anglican church oscillates between. So there are moments where you are here you you are reciting some of these phrases or having your worship shaped in that sort of in that way, in this beautiful prose with this beautiful sense of history and continuity, and thinking this is just a matter of how who is ever going to improve on earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust, or you know, to have it to hold from this day forward. Or all of those things, you know, and you know, we do not presume to come to this that type of mercifully think. I'm I'm never gonna I'm not gonna try. But at the same time, you have I had you have the experience when you're out in Nigeria and you're talking to your Anglican, trying to get your Anglican friend there to explain to you the layers of Anglican hierarchy, and he gives you 18. And he goes, Well, this is what a canon is, that's what a deacon is, that's an archdeacon. So an archdeacon's nothing to do with it. Oh no, no, not at all. And then this is what a dean is, and this is what and so probably that along with baptism are the two things that I go, I don't think I'm ever going to go there. Um I'm not gonna swim the whatever the road the river that runs through Canterbury is. I don't think that's gonna be me. Yeah. The canter. The canter, the river canter. Should we say that's what it is? That's it. Um but I have but I have hugely I I think what's happened to me is that I have been drawn back from throwing all of the babies out with those two bits of baptism water and bath water, I suppose. Um that for me had been enough to me to go, that that's I just don't get it. It's weird. And I and I'd associate it with a very boring school experience of church, whether it was a boarding school. But I have become so much more I'm such a fan, um, and I'm so grateful for Anglicans and Anglicanism, including, you know, Present Company included, and probably many listening, just for the combination of heritage, courage, and actually standing in the in our country, which I think is still makes a huge difference. I think I moved probably a bit on the extent to which established churches. I think there's I'm more ambivalent now, whereas I used to be very negative about that. So there's a whole bunch of ways in which I think I'm just so grateful for Angular, but I don't think there's a risk of me becoming one anytime soon.
SPEAKER_02You never know though. Never know. You've been on a journey. Um and then you move to uh charismatic gifts and uh pursuing those. Not just uh you you make a very strong case that the most popular position that seems to be in sort of roughly evangelical, um certainly American context, I'd say probably in the UK as well, is that we're open to spiritual gifts, but we're not going to pursue them. And you make a very strong case that that's the last that's that's the least logical position to take.
SPEAKER_00Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_01That's which is a bit provocative, but I I I I do believe it. And so my argument there is um you can make a strong you make a strong case for cessationism, and you do. You'd say this is just for the first century, so you shouldn't pursue the spiritual gifts because the and the Corinthians were supposed to, but you're not, and that's because something, a sea change took place, usually they would say towards the end of the first century, that means that those instructions simply don't apply to you. And I totally disagree with that argument, but I think it has integrity in as much as the things that people do in practice in their church and the things that they should do if their theology was correct, are the same. And I would like to think the same is true of the charismatic position, which is you are told you should pursue them and therefore you should. I think that's not to say that there aren't silly charismatics and there aren't silly or stuffy cessationists, of course there are, but that both positions, at least in outline, are consistent. You this is what I ought to do in the New Testament and that's what I will do. Whereas what I think has very commonly been true, probably more in the last I mean, I in in maybe not even the last hundred years. I d most of church history I don't think this has been the issue. Um, because people have either been no, no, no, or yes, yes, yes. But I think what we have at the moment is a lot of people, particularly from a uh conservative evangelical background, who might say, Yes, I believe it's conceivably for today, yes, I believe I'm a continuationist in a cautious way, or charismatic with a seatbelt or whatever phrase you use, but in practice I don't really pursue that at all, and I would be quite nervous if anybody did. And that's where I think I that I don't think you can defend from scripture. I think this is either and I'm it there's a rhetorical move there as well, because I'm trying to get people to see are you following through, are you actually applying what you say you believe? Um but I think there is it's not just rhetorical, I think there is a genuine desire, I think, for people to say. But I I think the blame for that lies on people like me, in large part, although I hope not exclusively, for not modelling and practicing the gifts wisely enough that people might say, Do you know what I think it is biblical, but every time I say it done, it's such a complete mess that I can't believe that it is biblical and therefore I'm gonna put a pin in it. Or or something like that. Do you see what I mean? Yes. And actually we could say similar things of the baptism of infants or something, where sometimes people could you think, I think this is just being done, I think this is just a thing. This is just a uh a ritual people do. No one really here is believing this does anything, but we're gonna do it anyway. And then that puts off people who might otherwise be more open to theological argument about it.
SPEAKER_02But abuse is no argument for no use.
SPEAKER_01Sure, it's not, and I and I think that's but that's fine and abstract, and that's the case I'm trying to make. But I also know that some of the reason for that is you know, somebody is nearly there theologically, and they read Don Carson's show in the spirit, and they go, Man, that's convincing. Like I think this is and then they think, do you know well, I'll go and have a look at my local ex-church. And so I don't think it's the case I don't think it's the case that we should ever we can ever stop silliness from happening in the practice of anything, uh ultimately, because you're still dealing with you know people who are often a bit of a mess. But I think the challenge upon charismatics, one of the ones, one of which I try and make in in that chapter and in a lot of what I do, is if it is not corrected or if it's not clarified or if it's not explained, or those sorts of things, uh then people have just got no sense that this is actually going to be handled with wisdom. So I think there's a there's an uh an onus on me and people like me, but I also think there is an onus on those who have become persuaded from scripture but of and so the argument that I I'm facing a lot at the moment on the sort of practical side, particularly with some of my American brothers, is like, hey, the miracles that you guys see are not as good as the miracles the apostles saw, and therefore they're not the same thing. And I kind of want to push at that in several different levels. I want to push at it and say, actually, I think Acts gives us edited highlights, but I don't think that's to say that the day in the life of the average person in Corinth was raising the dead before breakfast or whatever. So uh let's not exaggerate that, but also let's not minimize what's going on globally. I think probably what you would offer, and even in my church, but I think what you would often see what you what you might see, Mr. Conservative Evangelical, making that argument is based on actually a fairly narrow and actually relatively non-charismatic slice of the global church, which might mean you've got us you're slightly over-egging how much the apostles did it and under-egging how much we do today. But even if there is a gap, and I think to some degree there still is, because the apostles were with Jesus for three years and you know, they're at Pentecost and they're at the resurrection, I think there's you'd expect a difference. The response to that is to say, well, let's reach for more rather than say, Do you know what? I don't think it's quite as good, so we don't want to do it.
SPEAKER_02Because you make the parallel that that all sorts of things in Acts are better than we do today.
SPEAKER_01Well, you're a good evangelist then, but I've if you have ever seen 3,000 people from a standing startup become believers in one day and get that tied, you you have certainly haven't blown your trumpet about it. Let's put it. You need a Luke to somehow get the word out.
SPEAKER_02And therefore I don't say I'm a cessationist with regards to evangelism.
SPEAKER_01Sure. And I and so I think my case there is just I I would be prepared to concede some of it. I do. I I don't want to I'm not saying my level of spiritual giftedness in prophecy or healing or whatever is of the same level I don't is of the same level as Peter. My shadow doesn't heal people. My handkerchiefs don't heal people, you know. I'm not claiming that, but I am claiming that some gap between the apostles and me is not only true of these gifts, it's actually true of the gifts that most of my conservative friends practice and value as well. And slightly more facetiously, church discipline. You I people practice church discipline, but they don't see generally see people drop down dead in the middle of their meeting like Ananias and Sapphira. And that doesn't mean you you've lost the gift, it just means that it's there is a certain weight and power, and the Holy Spirit's like writing in bold capitals underline, These people are anointed by me to do the work I call them to. And that in a sense there is a a greater measure of that for not necessarily even all, but several of the apostles than would be known to me today. But I don't think that's a reason to disregard those things that are happening today.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. So you you make three um main arguments. Uh you you go from history, hermeneutics, and eschatology. So so take us take us through briefly. We've read the book. I have I haven't actually read the book. So um so historically, I mean interestingly, you you you kinda go all the way up to sort of Augustine, really, don't you, in in sort of church history and and show pretty much in terms of languages. And it's it's interesting that you consistently, I would say, describe tongues as languages.
SPEAKER_01I just use that word actually because I find because that because partly that's because that's what glossum means, and so and sometimes the word tongues just sounds spooky. And actually, because as a habit in church, I would literally I mean as a pastor of a charismatic church where people do speak in languages or tongues, and I need to explain to people what's going on, I would use the word languages because it's just not as freaky in all honesty. And also, can I come out of that embarrassing concession here? That I was in my early 30s when I first realized that over a thousand tongues to sing did not mean over a thousand red muscles in my mouth. Okay. Over a thousand languages. Because I just never seen it. And I just I can't remember the the the day you suddenly go, did you ever think that?
SPEAKER_02Uh no, that's the first time. Is that your first time? I think it's most people's first time now. Yeah. Over a thousand languages. You knew that. No, I didn't know that. I didn't know that.
SPEAKER_01Okay, so I mean over a thousand, I was thinking, and I just real image. And then when I suddenly realized, no, that's not what that means, I thought that's a good example of why the word tongues can be a bit unhelpful in English, where the word is different from the word for language. Whereas of course in many uh in many languages it's not. You have one word meaning both. Um so I do. But yes, so what was the question?
SPEAKER_02So uh uh in in it was a diversion, really. So when you talk about the early church all the way up to Augustine, you talk about all all these great luminaries from Irenaeus to Athanasius and all these all these people saying, um giving experiences of things like languages, but but also things like miracles and prof prophetic gifts and and all that kind of stuff. And then you you even sort of mentioned Spurgeon and that that very interesting case of of him saying, you know, I know what you stole. Um so I gu I guess you're saying that the the charismatic church is is the church, like in one sense, right?
SPEAKER_01I so I I think so. I I think the story I would tell, I suppose, is there's always a slightly more there's always a new one, you know, new and you can die death of a thousand paper cuts. That's another Spurgeonism, I think. Um But but broadly I'd say I think the first up until you know the middle of the fourth century, you have a lesser di probably a lesser degree than the apostolic age of the gifts, from what we can tell, and some writers, in like particularly Oregon, reflecting on that and saying this is not of the same order as the apostles, but it's still here, and then some other people being a bit more bombastic and saying, No, we're seeing all these amazing stuff, particularly the apologists, who are obviously which in some ways Oregon was an apologist too, but people really trash talking their opponents in the pagan world and saying, Come on, look at all these miracles, how can you deny that? Which is the way Totalin does it, and um and even Justin Martyr for him, it's so others, and so up until about the middle of the fourth century, you have a pretty robust the gifts are still here, the gifts are still being practiced, even if people are disagreeing in the extent to which those things are happening. Um and there's been a a series of abuses in the second century which have caused the church to pair back in some cases on some kinds of prophetic revelation, but not interestingly to stop talking as if it's still happening. With Augustine and Chrysostomy, you then we get the first sense that some of the some or all of the gifts have diminished or ceased. Although interestingly, Augustine says I think languages have ceased, but he's got a whole chapter in in fact, a whole book in City of God, which is basically elaborating look here are the spiritual gifts and how this plays into the wider role of what God's been doing through the the city of God. Then through the what we'll call the Roman Catholic era, at least in the West, um for much of the next thousand years it would just be assumed that miracles happened, but the w means by which miracles and even that God would continue to reveal things to people, but the means by which he did would, as time goes on, probably to become more and more likely to be the sorts of things that you and I might read and go, oh gosh, that's not the methodology we'd see in the New Testament. Um so there's that. And I think that's what means that then when the reformers come along, they say, prophetic gifts, we have people who are claiming successive revelation that comes after Scripture, and they're not that they're not on our side. Healing gifts, we have people who are going to relics and bones, and they're not on our side, and they're claiming healing, but they are the people who are opposing us. And obviously, apostolic gifts, we've got somebody who's claiming to be the apostle of Christ today, and he is very much not on our side. So you think there is a very strong basis in the and I think they're right about all three of those things, by the way. Yeah, and so they are there's a quite a strong kickback in Luther and Calvin and many others, which of course has influenced the Reform tradition ever since, but the Roman Catholic tradition far less, except in reaction. But then, of course, in the 18th and 19th century, you get the rise of Enlightenment thinking, which comes together, and you then get a sort of there's a functional materialism in the world. Yeah. So there's double doubly difficult for Western Christian Protestants, which most people listening to this probably are, to believe in the miraculous gifts, because you've got a reformed tradition in its context very explicably, and an enlightenment tradition in our culture, perhaps less defensively, but still, and they kind of come together, which then means that in order to kind of punch through that, you the Pentecostal movement goes really all out and does some things which a lot of those people would go, whoa, you can't say or do that.
SPEAKER_02But so that's a sort of yeah, yeah. Uh part of the question. And and how significant do you think the the Enlightenment is? Because for me, the Enlightenment totally puts me off even using the word supernatural almost as much as using the word natural, because I I know that it's come out of this double-decker view of the universe, and downstairs it's just the universe grinding along according to iron laws of physics. But upstairs, like if you want to maintain an upstairs, what you have to do is say it's nothing like the the predictable regular activity that happens downstairs. It's the freaky stuff, it's the spontaneous stuff. And and you almost, by opposition, um, the naturalists have to get, you know, ever more dry and dusty, and the supernaturalists have to get ever more spontaneous and spooky.
SPEAKER_00Yes.
SPEAKER_01And dramatic in order to try and validate it. And I think that's a big part of I don't the thing is, I don't I don't want to do the um you know the I don't want to do an ad hominem where you say big this is all enlightenment thinking anybody who disagrees with me is just because you've been swallowed the enlightenment. I think we're all children of the enlightenment. Oh, what's the phrase I think Jamie Smith uses in summarising Charles Taylor about secularism? He says some I can't remember what the word, I think he says something like we all believe in a closed heaven, even if some of us believe in skylights, which is quite an interesting phrase where I think in the medieval period, the line between you know lightning strikes, that's the that's the work of God, it's an act of God. It's not it's not electric elec electrons in the atmosphere. But now we'd all go, no, I all everybody, even if you're the most the most Benny Hinn believes effectively operates with a closed heaven view, but he just thinks there's plenty of skylights that you can come through. And I found that quite a helpful image to describe what I think you're saying. And in a sense, I've just got to deal with the fact that contextually that's not it may or may not be where I want us to be, but it is where we are. That's the kind of culture we have. And so you're right, when I I feel the need to nuance. I find Lewis on miracles, miracles are things which help the world become more like what they were meant to be, rather than things which m suspend nature, they actually help us become more fully natural. I think it's very helpful. But I don't know that there's any quick apologetic way round it. I think in some ways you have to show people, and then of course, do that to that extent, you are doing what the apostles did, which is to say the apostles may not have been dealing with people who didn't believe miracles are possible, but they were often dealing with people who didn't believe the God that the apostles preached was the true God. And in a sense, there's still a confrontation of deity and a demonstration of the kingdom in the healing of a person. It's just that what it means in their world and what in ours are different.
SPEAKER_02Yes. Are you cold? Should we put the heater on a little bit?
SPEAKER_00I think it's absolutely fine for you to say you're cold. Um I'm wearing a hoodie, um, so I'm I would expect to be warmer. You're a you're a white hot charismatic, so you you keep your burning.
SPEAKER_02I mean the glory cloud is here. I'm gonna stick the heater on just for a second. The trouble is because of the soundproofing, it then it then shoots up and becomes far too hot. But um, there we go. Let's stick the heater on. I do think there's something about I think an enlightenment kind of way of framing things is a kind of an up and down thing. Supernatural up here and and natural downstairs. And I I do see a kind of a C. S. Lewis kind of way of framing things, or an old creation, new creation thing, an overlapping of the ages, that you're you're kind of more on the horizontal axis, and there's this inbreaking in Christ and by the Spirit, the remaking of the world from within. And that's what kind of miracles kind of are today. I th I I think that's kind of that's a more helpful way of framing things. And I think it really helps when you get to sort of 1 Corinthians 13, right in between twelve and fourteen, the the supernatural, um, the the epitome of the supernatural for Paul was kind of, well, what's the natural? The natural is the way of Adam, it's the way of the flesh, it's the way of selfishness. What is the the pinnacle of the supernatural? It is not the way of selfishness, not the way of the flesh, not the way of Adam. It's love, you know. Yeah. Um, which is not to deny that twelve and fourteen are around it, and that there are all these other gifts to to it to enjoy. But I just I'd love to hear people more when they talk about supernatural, to you know, kind of we we do have a superpower called love, and like we can all we can all exercise that as the epitome of And and of course that his point there is is exactly in that eschatological, which is in some ways takes on to the third argument I'm making for the gifts in the book, which is that his the eschatological framework, the idea of the future breaking into the present, is exactly how he reasons in that chapter.
SPEAKER_01And he's effectively saying that if you were to use the gift of languages, for instance, in such a way as not to love your brother, you are pinning your hopes on one of the things that's just gonna run out at some point, it's gonna hit the buffers at some point. And I think it is a return of Christ. I think for him, Paul in that text, but love is not gonna hit the buffer. Love never does that. Love is gonna love never fails, it keeps going. And for all the people who read that at weddings, I don't know how many people are aware, this is oh, this text is to try coming to try and correct a group of people who have made the practice of spirit impressive spiritual gifts more important than the love of their brothers and sisters, and that's that's for Paul's like you can never do that. You totally misunderstood what God is giving you gifts for. So I think that eschatological read, the idea of uh a horizontal rather than a vertical, I and the future breaking into the now rather than the up breaking into the down, is much more biblical, uh, and certainly much more Pauline. And I also think it's a very good argument for using the gifts until the day Jesus returns, because every time Paul does that, he sets it up in contrast to the you know, this is the age to come, and that there's a we are now living in the last days, I think, in for Paul, we're living in between the gift of the Spirit and the return of Christ. And as long as that's true, these gifts are here for us to use and pursue. So, yeah.
SPEAKER_02And so the one thing we haven't touched on there is is really the the hermeneutical. So the I uh you you make the I think correct move that if that your burden of proof will be that that it's ceased, rather than the your burden of proof should be that it continues. That if five times Paul says eagerly desire the spiritual gift or the eagerly desire prophecy and all and all those sorts of things, then you've you've got to have a very good reason for not eagerly desiring that in the 21st century. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01Um then so that is that's the that's pretty much the case I make. And I think that obviously and I had a great debate with Tom Schreiner back in November, who's a just a wonderful guy who's made a good written made a good sociationist case, and the book came out at a very similar time. Um and people of course do have ways of meeting that burden of proof, or or of at least in my judgment, they don't quite succeed. But saying, Okay, yeah, we here's why we think that those instructions don't apply. Um and you can do that with integrity. I don't think they're I don't think they're persuasive for me, but I I can see how people get there. But what uh as we said before, what I don't think you can do is just say, Well, those their instructions are there, we don't really I don't really get that. The churches I'm in don't really seem to do that, so I think we'd probably just better leave it. I don't think that is something we can really do. I think we either have to say and pursuing looks different for different people, right? So for somebody from a very conservative background who's had no experience of these things, pursuing is I'm gonna pray. Say, Lord, I'd love to see you heal people through me. I'd I'd love to say next time I pray for a sick person, which I most people do, expecting God to do good things, right? Whether they're charismatic or not. Yeah, Lord, I want to pray. So it doesn't necessarily mean right, we're gonna lead the whole church to speak in tongues for half an hour on a Sunday morning or anything like that. Um who knows? It might at some point, but it certainly doesn't uh in most of my experience, even for me, and it very likely wouldn't for somebody for whom this was starting. But they're pursuing because they're saying, I want to speak in such a way that is gonna encourage, console, edify, build up my brothers and sisters, even if it's something that I'm even if I'm not the preacher that day. I'd I want to be able to do that. Um and I want to pray for people and see them healed, and I want to see God break in and the and the kingdom established on earth. So I think that's what pursuing can mean. I don't think it necessarily means jumping from full-on cessationist to full-on woo.
SPEAKER_02Uh one of the one of the tweeters uh said, uh, what do you make of um Tim Chally's kind of review of your book, which was which was charitable and and um drew out lots of positives, but one of the things he raised, and it was a question that I had as well, is um yes, okay, but what do we continue? Is what we see in the 21st century what Paul is talking about in Corinthians or what we see in Acts or is this that? And and I can think of a couple of things, like you know, prophecy. Um it's just interesting what we think of. You know, the the the most famous book on preaching written by a Puritan William Perkins was The Art of Prophesying, and and he just took it for granted that prophesying is heralding the voice. Of Christ in in in the community. And and what's interesting to me is I I love Martin Luther's kind of threefold word theology, that that he says that you know Christ is the eternal word, the scriptures are the written word, and proclamation is this third form of the word that cannot be divorced from Christ and Scripture. So you've got to be speaking of Christ scripturally. But to the degree that you do that, you are heralding the voice of Christ. And actually Luther's got a space in his theology that a lot of Presbyterians, for instance, don't. A lot of Presbyterians will say, ah, you know, if if someone addresses a charismatic congregation and says, I think God is saying to us all, X, I don't know how to distinguish that from Scripture, and therefore there's a there's a power clash. And you and you're thinking, actually, well, go back to Luther, because Luther's got a way of saying that. He's got a way of saying, well, look, there's this third form of the word, and it's not necessarily that you're in a pulpit when you do it. You can eyeball a brother or sister and herald the word of the word of Christ in lots of different ways. And I think we've So So I guess my question is, so prophecy, for instance, will mean a certain thing to a certain slice of the charismatic church today. Are we positive that that's what it meant for Augustine, for Irenaeus, and for Paul?
SPEAKER_01Uh no, because I'm certainly not that those three would all agree on it. I don't know that they would. Um I but I think and I think it depends how tight you'd we want definition to be. Um I I think So prophecy is a much better case study in some ways than the others, because I think healing is you know what a healing is. Uh you might disagree about the extent to which someone had a gift of healing, but it's kind of obvious. Whereas prophecy is more open to disagreement because you see the very obviously predictive prophecy, there's going to be a famine over there, and you guys need to send them money in Acts. Uh, you uh you clearly have a prophetic speech in Corinth, which seems you know, it's Paul's corrective is this anybody who prophesies speaks to another person for their edification, consolation, and encouragement. And you think, well, that sounds like a very open-ended, that could be almost any kind of public speech in the assembly. And then you could in theory have anything in between. And actually, when you read Acts, you think, well, the guys who prophesy, Judas and Silas, who were themselves prophets, travel around the churches telling them how to apply the Jerusalem letter. Uh, while they were praying and fasting, or worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, set apart Barnabas and Saul, which he'd already told them to do, and they went, okay, now we'll send them off on world mission. It's it's not particularly like dramatic. Wow, we'd never heard that. That's like, no, we knew we were supposed to reach the nations, and we knew these guys were supposed to go, and now we're just working on timing. So there is actually a number of different ways in which prophecy functions, even in acts. It's not always just predicting the future. There's a definition in the book I quote from Anthony Thistleton, which I think is really helpful. It's like a paragraph long. This is how prophecy functions for Paul in the Corinthians correspondence, and I think it's a really good discussion that is better effectively saying, may or may not be spontaneous, but it's public, exhortatory, encouraging, edifying, or confronting speech that builds up the addressees, and that nevertheless can mistakes can be made. And because it is spirit-prompted, but isn't that spirit underwritten in every detail, it needs to be weighed and tested. And I think that does cover some of the very agabus-y kind of prophets, which I've certainly been received things like that of extraordinary insight, like this is what's happening, you know, on one occasion, this is what was in your inbox this morning. Like, my goodness, that's terrifying. And what if it hadn't been something good in my inbox but had been bad? Um, genuinely, it's like, wow, it puts the fear of God into you, through to prophetic insights in the mix of preaching or a more prophetic kind of sermon, and including things like Charles Spurgeon, who you mentioned earlier, where you whether you would use the word he didn't use the word prophecy or not, but actually he told the story with all kinds of echoes of texts about prophecy in that in that passage. Where he's he says, This guy over here is soul as soul for fourpence. He just pilfered this amount and he didn't put in the offering. And uh, and I think so, in sense, the word is broad, and I think as such that definition would cover what Basil and Irenaeus and Paul all meant. Probably, I don't think Augustine quite, but I haven't read all of Augustine and there's plenty of it, would be different, certainly, from what Perkins would mean by it, but Perkins' view view would fit within that overall rubric, and I think Spurgeon's would as well. So I in a sense, I think it's the only the very tight definitions of prophecy, as in prophecy is only that speech which tells you something that no human being could possibly have known, either about the future or about your inner life. Uh that, of course, then is very that's very constrained and is quite narrow, but I don't think that's necessarily what Paul is doing in the Corinthian correspondence. I think there's a much broader range of speech that he's addressing. And so I think that definition actually includes many of those kinds of prophecies we've talked about.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. And so and what do we do with the abusive gifts? I mean, Emma and I were were childless for twelve years and and therefore had a lot of words come to us. And and for um for some, and and I think what what what kind of disturbs me more than the misuse of the prophecy is the the the failure to have a uh theology of suffering, a theology of the cross that entails a theology of suffering. Is because the words tended to be either you will have twins. We we we we had I think three different people say you will have twins and we haven't had twins. Um or people say you will get pregnant this year and didn't get pregnant that year. Or on the other hand, uh this is because there's Freemasonry in your family, or this is because of un unconfessed sin, or this is because of uh you're quenching the spirit in X, Y, or Z ways. So we we know that these things go wrong, but I guess you're saying you test the spirits. That's what one John Four Yeah, you do.
SPEAKER_01I I think one of the things I I'm I'm I'm thinking a bit on the fly about this at the moment because I had a conversation with Preston Sprinkler about this on his podcast a couple of weeks ago, about again about the abuse and he was talking about quite a lot of that which he'd seen. And I think one of the things that has occurred to me more is how rare if can I can you think of an example of a prophetic word being brought by one person to another person in the New Testament where prophetic speech is divorced from the assembly, which I assume I know it might be that these words are being brought in public, but I they they they don't sound like those sorts of in my church that would be extremely odd if somebody I mean once or twice in the 15 years I've been in charismatic church leadership has somebody said something that was a bit egregious and publicly, and of course then you have to deal with it publicly. I understand and leaders who are wise will obviously find ways of doing that graciously, but they have to you have to do it. You can't you can't let that kind of thing go. But a lot of the worst stories I hear are ones where usually it's somebody, and it's often if I can put it it's often somebody who I don't know how to I don't know how to know how to say this nicely. John Piper has an essay called Why Spirit Some Spiritual Gifts Attract Unstable People. And it's a really interesting comment from a continuationist on the way in which certain spiritual gifts seem to bypass the checks and balances that apply with the use of most other gifts, like leadership or teaching, or you know how to do that, and you know how to walk towards it, you know what you need to study, you know what you need to do, you know how to be trained, but prophecy seems to be a license to go up to anybody and say anything. And if that's happening, and it's happening and the habit of doing it at an individual level is quite rife in that church context without any testing or checking or balancing, I think there is a significant risk of the sorts of things you're hap you're talking about often happening, and you might some of them are right, but enough of them are harmful because when that kind of word is brought, it's not just wrong, it's damaging because it is upsetting. I mean, I and and I know plenty of stories of those sorts of words myself, particularly if somebody starts saying this is your because of your secret scene. You think that is not edifying or comforting or encouraging, even if it were true, which it clearly wasn't in that case. So I think there are some things we can do to stop that from and I think probably the habit, increasing habit of the very private word for somebody is part of it, and I think and I don't think that's in I don't I might be missing one, but I can't think of a scriptural example of that phenomenon. It's interesting. Um The assembly is the context for that kind of gift, as it is is is true for in many ways, pretty much all of them.
SPEAKER_02But I think in addition to that because profamy means speak before, doesn't it? Right. Thinking about it. So not just temporally, but speak before others.
SPEAKER_01So public. So there is a you uh prof uh I don't know that I can't think of the verb you're talking about there. But you I think yeah.
SPEAKER_02Oh, I'm I'd ten years ago I did. Yeah, New Testament Greek, but yeah.
SPEAKER_01Um pro I know priostame is stand before. And that and I may again, is this gonna be another one of my etymology ones where I don't know if Kara and Karas are related, so how could I possibly know this?
SPEAKER_02But anyway, homework people. Homework.
SPEAKER_01But the um but the point is there is an assembly context for all prophetic gifts like used like that that I can see in the New Testament. And the expectation, I a rule of thumb I would always use to people off uh exercising it is the bigger the ask you are making of somebody to change their current expectations, hopes, or behaviors on the strength of the word you're giving, the higher the bar needs to be that you're right. So if I come up to you and say, Glenn, I just really believe God is saying to you that his favor is on you and he loves you, right? I need a zero bar to say that because even if it wasn't prophetic insight, I believe God speaks to people like that. I I believe I was praying for people in a prayer meeting last night, speaking over them things which I know are true because they're in scripture, but I also think there's a timing and an application where they go, that's just what I needed to hear, because so I think that can be very spirit-led and very prophetic.
SPEAKER_02Yes.
SPEAKER_01But I don't need a very high test, so I'm very happy to do that quite quietly with somebody and it's just me and them and their friends. Yeah. But I think if you're saying you're gonna have a child and it's gonna change your life in the following ways, and you have twins, or it may be because of your city, you think, hang on a second, the bar to be cleared for that needs to be way higher. And the danger is if you apply the zero bar to the very high bar kind of prophetic guesses, you can really hurt people. Yeah. And I think mostly in the churches I've been in, that's been handled really well. But I'm not saying that means it's always true, and it certainly doesn't mean it's drawers true everywhere.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and isn't it interesting that 1 Corinthians begins with chapters 1 and 2, giving us a theology of the cross, which I think is just so vital before you even think about those issues.
SPEAKER_01Debunking worldly wisdom and worldly status and power. So many chapters before he gets, he's gone through many issues before he finally gets to spiritual gifts.
SPEAKER_00Right.
SPEAKER_01Um Although interestingly, even then, begins and says, You don't lack any spiritual gift one. You know, so and and he so Paul is he's quite breezy about the fact that they're gonna have the gifts, but he's very careful to hammer home the framework in the Corinthians, of course, his book ended by the cross at the beginning and the resurrection at the end. You think that's how to those are some of the things you need to have the big, you know, the big bricks in first.
SPEAKER_02And wouldn't wouldn't that be brilliant, speaking from a more conservative evangelical kind of slice of the church, if people just would eyeball each other a lot more and say God's grace and favour is upon you and you're in Christ and He bought you with His blood and wouldn't that be it'd be stunning. I mean, Dietrich Bonhoeffer said in Life Together that you know the reason why we have church is precisely so that those words can be delivered eyeball to eyeball, you know, because the Christ in the word of a brother is stronger than the Christ in your heart. You know, the Christ that you nurse in your heart. And so to exercise So whatever Yeah, so there are definitional issues. What is prophecy? What are words of knowledge? What are what are these encouragements? What are what's the shape of them? But my goodness, let's let's please exercise them in church, whatever whatever stripe you're you're you're from. Um let's just let's just finish with uh a couple of people have asked questions about which is easier to go from charismatic to eucharistic or eucharistic to charismatic, and what or what are what are the what are the characteristic barriers that people face when they work in the church?
SPEAKER_01So I don't know enough to know which is easier, although my sense is that in some ways neither of those are the hardest one. The hardest one is the person who is uh theologically persuaded-ish, but not really practicing and not really seeing any reason to change their practice. So I think and that's true on both issues, as we've talked about the charismatic one at some length, but it's also true on the liturgical Eucharistic side where people say, Yeah, we do, we we have, you know, we take communion every now and then, it's fine, nothing to worry. I think in some ways that's almost harder because if somebody's not really disagreeing with you, they're just going, there's a bit of a shrug, if you see what I mean. So I think that's probably where I think the the the challenge is. When people are debating and discussing and saying, is this biblical? Is it right? How would we practice if it were? What do we think? I don't have any concern in a way. I mean, I might disagree with the outcome, but I'm really thrilled it's happening. It's the kind of that makes me think I don't know how to do I'm just like a barrel of soap in the bath. Um hence your first two dense Indeed, I mean is to try and get to vision for it, the ex getting people's hearts to a place where they go, I'd actually quite like this to be true. As you know, you know, in apologetics you're doing Pascal, you know, you gotta people have got to want to want something to be true before they're really entertained whether or not it might be. Um So I think there's that. Um I think the obstacles I I on mu on probably on both sides are oddly similar. I mean they're totally different in terms of what they are, but they're very similar types of things, which is usually people who've seen them done badly.
SPEAKER_03I think.
SPEAKER_01I don't really certainly on the Eucharistic side, I don't know many people who have a strong biblical argument against having a strong emphasis on the sacraments in their meeting. You might have some for whom they would try and make a biblical argument that there shouldn't be any set form of words. Um, repetition. Yes, you probably would. Although even then, I think when you get things like, you know, sing psalms and hymns, or you think they there's clearly, you know, prayers are, you know, when you pray, you pray like this. Like as soon as you get as soon as Jesus is that you're going. I don't think set words can be wrong, otherwise I'm not sure what he was doing there. So, but it's often not a theological objection or an exegetical one or a historical one. It's I have they you know, I have seen people walk in going, the more we are miserable, sinners. And and and so I associate set a set prayer with and you and I probably you've I'm sure you've more than me been in churches where the the prayer of humble access is prayed with a sense of the accent is on, um you know, but you are the same Lord whose nature is always to have mercy, grant us and people are praying, going, Isn't God amazing? You've probably also been in churches where people are going, we do not put into conquering and there's no sense of joy, no sense of hope, it's just a pattern of words. And I think if you come from a church where that's what people do, and then you discover that that's not always what church has to be, you may never go back. And similarly with the charismatic gifts, as we've talked about at more length, that's exactly the same thing. But I think the person who has had words of the type you're talking about, I mean I just think it's I think it's remarkable when people who have experiences like you've just described continue to be theologically open and go, actually, yeah, I think this maybe this is something we need to think and pursue, and just pursue wisely rather than throwing the baby out. But I can see why people throw babies out when they have experiences of that nature. And to be honest, I can on the on the liturgical eucharistic side too. Yes. Because I think it can just look like you know, the adults don't seem to be enjoying it, the children don't seem to be awake, um, and you don't really know why we do this. It's just something. So I think in some ways, bad examples are often the reasons why people tack away from all kinds of things in the church, and as such, if somebody was to read my book and go, wow, I find that kind of convincing, but what do I do now? I think actually it's only in the building and establishing of churches that do these things wh well and with joy and grace as we where we started. Uh I think that's the only way really that people are going to be one to that. It's not ultimately gonna be at an argumentative level.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, you you make a great you you you make a great statement when you say uh Francis Chan said people because of the misuse go for caution when they should go for discernment. Yes. And I think, yeah, uh a very good word. And let's let's enjoy the gifts that the Father has given to us with joy. And uh yeah, there's more, there's more out there. So Andrew Wilson, thank you so much for the book. It's called Spirit and Sacraments.
SPEAKER_01An invitation to eukarismatic worship. There's a bit of call and response there. You're halfway there already, isn't it?
SPEAKER_02So then people go in peace to love and serve the Lord. In the name of Christ. Amen. Amen.