Comments on: The Holy Spirit in Mission: Interview with Gary Tyra (Part One)

By: JP Moreland's Web » The Holy Spirit in Mission: Interview with Gary Tyra (Part Two)

Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:26:49 +0000

[...] this blog post, we continue our interview with pentecostal-evangelical scholar, Gary Tyra, regarding the contribution and implications of his [...]

By: Deso

Deso — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 01:48:37 +0000

Let me make a (probably subtle) itsiinctdon from my experience and I think what the two of you are describing: There’s the issue of tongues as the initial physical evidence that one has been baptized in/with the Spirit subsequent to salvation and then there’s the issue of tongues as litmus test of one’s position in Christ. It seems like these two issues are being lumped together. I’ve never seen initial physical evidence used in an orthodox Pentecostal context to suggest that a person is not saved. In truth, careful believers (be they clergy or laity) stress the physical part of it in order to show that one can very well be full of the Spirit and never have spoken in tongues (i.e., never experienced the physical evidence). The most important evidence is the fruit of the Spirit. I will admit that I’ve heard the unfortunate language that one who doesn’t speak in tongues doesn’t have the Spirit but when pressed I’ve always come to see that they don’t actually mean that; they simply mean that one hasn’t been baptized in/with the Spirit so far as they can tell. I’ve corrected a number of ministers on this sloppy use of language and the majority of them have received the correction. Now the second issue is one that I have unfortunately seen plenty of, i.e., Christians who do speak in tongues considering themselves superior to Christians who do not. I’m ashamed to say that early on in my walk with Christ I exhibited this very pride about tongues. This idea is implied in the label Full Gospel, which some churches append to themselves. The idea that fullness involves tongues and somehow those who don’t speak in tongues lack something is an idea that’s alive among many Pentecostals/Charismatics. But I would say that even these folks don’t generally say that someone who doesn’t speak in tongues isn’t saved or a good Christian; they simply say that they’re missing out on something and haven’t ascended to the level of people who do speak in tongues (again, I’m speaking of orthodox Pentecostals).

By: Prophetic Work is Deeply Missional Work : Society of Vineyard Scholars

Prophetic Work is Deeply Missional Work : Society of Vineyard Scholars — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 17:01:46 +0000

[...] Tyra’s several decades of pastoral leadership and communication pays off in this 200 page book. For while he is an engaging and adept theological thinker, conversant with the likes of Amos Yong, Christopher Wright, Leslie Newbigin, and Alan Roxburgh, he writes accessibly and winsomely for thoughtful non-academic types. Yet, his footnotes are plentiful and substantive in order to pleasure academically interested readers. Pastors will find him to be thorough and attentive to practical theology considerations, a mark of his ministry, which we discuss in a recent, multi-part interview at jpmoreland.com. [...]

By: Deso

Deso — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:56:59 +0000

Wow, lots of action since I last cehcked in. John: No worries. Brian: Re: What one means by physical It’s simply that speaking in tongues can be seen and heard by outside observers and seen, heard, and felt by the speaker. Performing a healing is certainly a physical manifestation of the Spirit’s operation in a believer’s life. But from the pattern we see in Acts tongues were the initial physical evidence displayed when people have been filled with the Spirit. Again, there’s other, arguably more important evidence (i.e., the fruit of the Spirit), but fruit is cultivated over time. Re: How I have navigated the danger of a two-tiered Christianity I simply note that salvation is not tongues dependent. Jesus never spoke in tongues to the best of our knowledge. I also like to point out that tongues has a proper function within the body and if it’s not functioning properly then it is more of a hindrance than a help. Sadly, the Corinthians error is alive and well in Pentecostal/Charismatic circles. I often point to 1 Corinthians 13 in order to explain just how arrogance over tongues is exactly the opposite of what our attitudes should be concerning them. I also point out Paul’s simple statement that all don’t speak in tongues. We can argue all day over whether or not all can speak in tongues, but it’s moot, we already know that all don’t. So what then? Are they any less a part of the body? Of course not! The Spirit manifests himself as he wills. And I’ll just add one thing: The Pentecostal doctrine of the Baptism in/with the Holy Spirit isn’t novel or unique to Pentecostalism; it’s merely taken over from the Wesleyan Holiness movement’s doctrine of a second blessing (i.e., entire sanctification), which shares more than a few points of commonality with the Orthodox doctrine of theosis and to some extent the Roman Catholic doctrine of Confirmation. The unique feature is the emphasis on speaking in tongues as the initial physical evidence that one has been baptized in/with the Spirit.