What can the “Pentecostalization of worship” refer to, if we have removed the overtly charismatic acts of praying in tongues, healing, and so forth? In a series of upcoming articles, I will argue that Pentecostal worship has a matrix of distinctives that is a clear break from historic, Protestant worship, or even the worship that preceded it. These distinctives are not unique to Pentecostalism, and some of them originated before it existed. Nevertheless, they represent much of the esprit de corp of self-identified Pentecostals when it comes to worship, and certainly represent an innovation in Christian worship. 

It’s hardly disputable that global Christianity has been overwhelmed and colonized by the Pentecostal and charismatic movements. After Roman Catholicism, the Christianity identified variously as charismatic, Pentecostal, Prosperity Gospel, or Latter Rain (with all its permutations and differences) makes up by far the largest percentage of what is classified as Christian. In just over 100 years since its beginnings in Azusa Street, California, it has come to dominate Christianity, and particularly the Christianity spreading in the Global South and and South-east. The growing and new-born Christianity in South America, Africa, and south-east Asia is overwhelmingly of the Pentecostal kind.
Non-Pentecostals, or cessationists as they are sometimes called, have dwindled into the minority. Very few voices have been raised to counter the theological distinctives of Pentecostalism: an emphasis on the supernatural sign gifts of the Holy Spirit, a belief in the baptism of the Spirit subsequent to salvation, and assorted novel views on healing, prosperity, and spiritual warfare. A notable exception was John MacArthur’s 2013 Strange Fire conference and subsequent book. By and large, cessationists simply accept their minority status, and defend their theology when asked.
But perhaps far more insidious has been the quiet takeover of Christian worship by Pentecostalism, even in those churches that reject the theology of continuationism. Worship forms are far more portable than doctrinal statements, and tend to insinuate themselves gradually and quietly. A popular song, emerging from Pentecostal or charismatic roots, finds a home in cessationist circles, because its theology is either orthodox and acceptable to cessationists, or sufficiently banal to fit in almost anywhere. This is not intrinsically problematic; it simply illustrates how worship forms travel across denominational lines in ways that sermons and Bible studies do not. Of course, some of the the most distinctive Pentecostal acts of worship remain out-of-bounds for cessationist churches: praying in tongues, announcing prophecies, public laying on of hands for healings or exorcisms. What arrives incognito is the Pentecostal understanding of the act of corporate worship, with its accompanying postures, approaches, and expectations.
As cessationist churches post vigilant patrols at the doctrinal boundaries, but offer open borders to charismatic songs, music, forms of prayer, and overall sentiment, a quiet transformation takes place.
Read More
Related Posts:

As is often the case, we need some care, wisdom and discernment as to when and how we might deal with the sin, error or failings of others. But contrary to the views of some, there certainly is a place for public rebuke – even for naming and shaming. It is interesting to see this with the Apostle Paul for example. There seem to have been at least eight individuals who were publicly named by Paul as having failed him or gone off the rails. Whether for betrayal or for sinful activity, Paul had no problem in calling them out in public.

Balancing biblical truths is always a tough gig. We can easily go off into one extreme while trying to avoid another. Consider the issue of dealing with other believers. On the one hand we are told repeatedly in Scripture that we are to be kind to others, forbearing, patient, forgiving, gentle, humble, and so on.
A main reason for all this is because we tend to be guilty of the same things we dislike in others. We all can be just as proud and rude and impatient and unloving and unfair as the next person. So we need to offer grace to others, just as God offers us grace. Let me share just three verses on this.
Paul in Ephesians 4:32 puts it this way: “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” And Galatians 6:1 speaks about how we should consider ourselves while we deal with others and their sin.
He says this: “Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.” That verse does deal with the issue of rebuking others and calling out sin – but more on that in a moment.
A third text we should bear in mind is Matthew 18:21-22: “Then Peter came up and said to him, ‘Lord, how often will my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?’ Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you seven times, but seventy-seven times’.” That is actually one of the most encouraging texts in all of Scripture. I fail the Lord every single day, and yet he still forgives ME. So I need to extend that much forgiveness to others as well.
But on the other hand, Scripture tells us repeatedly that we are to call out sinful behaviour and false teaching. It tells us often about the need to challenge one another, to rebuke, to warn, and to sound the alarm. We are not to be indifferent or careless about the need to hold others to account, just as we are to hold ourselves to account.
So how are we to reconcile these two seemingly opposing sets of commands of Scripture? How can we love and be forbearing with others, yet at the same time uphold high standards and call out sin? One way to understand this is to keep this oft-heard principle in mind: private sin, private rebuke; public sin, public rebuke. I have discussed this elsewhere: here.
As I explain in that piece, there is in fact a place for calling out others – but it depends on when and where and how we do this. If a person I know of has some sin problem, I am to go to him alone, as in Matthew 18:15-20. The whole world does not need to know about the matter, and a private conversation will do, hopefully.
But if, say, a person writes a book for the whole world to see, and it contains some rather unhelpful and even unbiblical material, then one can publicly deal with that book if needed. Some years ago a noted Australian Christian leader put out a quite bad book with the title, You Need More Money. It was so bad that I penned a review of it, and also shared that review with other Christian publications.
Read More
Related Posts:

Christians obviously disagree, individually or corporately, over many matters—distinctive beliefs, ministerial philosophy, practical applications, etc. But disagreement is not necessarily the same as persistent disobedience or unbelief. If possible, we should enjoy what levels of fellowship we can have and handle disagreements as charitably as possible.

We must contend for the faith. Jude commands us, “Contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).
But we must not be contentious. Speaking on head coverings, Paul gave a prohibition against contentiousness that applies to any situation: “If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God” (1 Cor 11:16).
What does it meant to contend? What does mean to be contentious? And how can we contend while not being contentious? By reviewing the meaning of contend and considering the meaning of contentious, I’ll attempt to answer these questions below.
Defining the Term Contend
In a previous post, we examined the word contend:
The word translated “contend” has the idea of expending intense effort and energy. It comes from epagōnizomai, a relative of agōnizomai, from which we receive our English word agonize. Jude’s form of the word is used only here, but its relative refers elsewhere to fighting (John 18:36) or to participating in an athletic contest (Heb 12:1). Whether as a verb or noun, the New Testament repeatedly uses this word as a metaphor for aspects of the Christian life: salvation (Luke 13:24), perseverance (Heb 12:1), self-control (1 Cor 9:25), prayer (Col 4:12), suffering persecution (1 Thess 2:2), and the gospel ministry in general (Phil 1:30; Col 1:29; 2:1; 1 Tim 6:12; 2 Tim 4:7).
Following Christ, controlling ourselves, praying, suffering, and ministering to others—all of these activities require intense efforts on our part, a struggle made possible by the power of Christ (cf. Col 1:29). Opposing false teachers and their teaching, contending, is one of these struggles, and Jude urges us to contend for the faith.
So, here in Jude, contending is intensely opposing heretics and their heresies that have crept into God’s church.
For this post, I thought it would be helpful to add some thoughts on contending without being contentious.
Defining the Term Contentious
Paul concluded his instruction on head coverings with a prohibition against being contentious: “If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God” (1 Cor 11:16).
“Contentious” stems from philoneikos, used only here in the New Testament. If broken into its parts, this word literally means “a lover of victory.” Someone who has an inordinate love for victory has to be right in every dispute. And the sad thing is this—sometimes this love for being right is so blinding that a contentious person thinks he is right in his love for being right. People like this are contrarian, quarrelsome, and contentious.
Read More
Related Posts: