Tag Archives: tongues

How to lead the singing/interpreting at a Pentecostal Church

There are instructional videos for all sorts of things on YouTube. This one’s a doozy.

If you can stick it out until about 5 minutes – through two gibberish sessions and two vague interpretations that would make Johnathan Edwards (the psychic, not the theologian) proud… you’ll hear that there’s a movement and things are breaking free. And there are vibrations. Things that don’t belong. He says “the right things will remain” – I can only hope that this movement dies a rapid death.

It’s easy to be one of these training facilitators. You don’t have to write your own stuff. You just let the people on the floor do your job for you.

Urgh.

That’s my one-word tongues response to this video.

Alpha bet ends

The Guardian’s atheist journalist who attended Alpha has finished. His experience makes for fascinating reading. It’s honest. Critical. And engaging.

He ends up deciding that atheists are far better off hanging out with Christians than yelling at them. Which is refreshing. And has some great insights into the good, the bad, and the ugly of evangelism.

Check it out.

He’s also got an insightful interview with the head of the Alpha movement, Nicky Gumbel, about all sorts of things to do with the course. It’s worth a read.

One of the criticisms I’ve heard of Alpha (I haven’t done it) is its focus on tongues – here’s what Gumbel says…

Yes, I think it’s one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It’s not the only gift and it’s not right at the heart of the New Testament, but it is there, and I think we don’t give it much more emphasis than the New Testament gives it, which is not very much. If you came to our weekend and heard it I don’t think you would feel this is something that is weird.”

Interesting. He has a longer treatise on tongues that is also pretty on the money. I won’t reproduce it all here.

My favourite quote in the whole Alpha Male series was this one – describing the low point of the experience for journalist, Adam Rutherford:

“The low point followed, when Barbara, with whom I had had fun, explained that following my sturdy but polite defence of science and attack on healing (the most galling session), she became convinced that with regards to the supernatural, there was “something rather than nothing”. I had managed to reinforce her latent suspicion of science towards a more faithful position. Christ alive, how disappointing is that? She is thoughtful and intelligent. She listened and argued with me, and chose an emotional and visceral position instead. As I do this for a living, I will certainly modify my rhetoric as a result.”

Yeah. Cop that atheists who think being smug is the way to change minds.