Category: gospel

The Difference Between Sheep & Goats

Ryan A. French

I gazed across a lush, green, undulating field that stretched as far as my eyes could see. This was somewhere in Wisconsin. I’d been driving for hours when I happened to notice farm signs peppering the little country roads. Growing up in a big city, I’d never seen large herds of… well, anything. So, I made a detour and found a farm. The sheep’s white contrasted sharply with the deep green of the fields. There were so many sheep that my untrained eye couldn’t count them. After a few minutes, a middle-aged farmer in stereotypical overalls and various layers of flannel called out to me with a thick Wisconsin brogue (they never pronounce the “g” at the end of a word). He was friendly and talkative in a quiet, hard-working midwestern way. Eventually, I asked him about raising sheep. “Sheep and goats,” he corrected. I didn’t see goats, so I asked, “Do you keep the goats somewhere else?” “Nah, they’re out there with the sheep,” he said. I squinted into the bright sunlight, still not seeing goats. Then, he added helpfully, “They’re hard to spot from a distance; they just blend in with the sheep.”

They Blend In

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you whom my Father blesses; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world (Matthew 25:31-34).”

A common thread runs through the Old and New Testaments, which likens God to a shepherd and us as His sheep. Surveys show that Psalms 23:1, “the Lord is my Shepherd,” is the most well-known verse in the Bible. Jesus added several layers to this analogy, like ravenous wolves disguised as sheep (Matthew 7:15), people who try to sneak into Heaven without using the sheep’s gate (John 10:1) and introduced the concept of pastoral under-shepherds (John 21:16). All of these are just examples, of course. False prophets aren’t literally wolves, but they are cunning and dangerous like wolves. Nevertheless, the shepherding and animal comparisons Jesus used are remarkably relevant today.

I’ve found that, much like looking over that Wisconsin field and struggling to differentiate the sheep from the goats, from a distance, sheep and goats blend together in our churches too. Eventually, the goats act like goats, or you get close enough to tell, but they can coexist for a long time. Interestingly, Jesus doesn’t have trouble telling the difference, but rather than separating the herd right now, He’s waiting until judgment day. God is content to let the goats play like sheep until the final moment when hearts are revealed at the throne. Until then, our church communities have goats blending in with the sheep. Occasionally, goats paw the ground, show their horns, and reveal their true nature. That can be especially sad if, up to that moment, you believed they were sheep.

You Should Smell Like Sheep

If you can forgive a transparent moment, I want to share a story that dramatically impacted my thinking on this subject. Years ago, an individual began attending services regularly, our church was much smaller, and I was far more naïve. He was shy and troubled. It took a long time to get his background story. He already had the Holy Ghost, but his church background was impossible to follow. He’d just been to so many places of every denomination and creed. It’s no exaggeration to say I spent countless hours on the phone counseling, in-person fellowshipping, or teaching Bible studies with him. But, no matter how much time I gave him, it was never enough.

In the beginning, he was incredibly faithful. But a strange cycle eventually manifested of randomly disappearing for months at a time. He’d attend a random church for a few months and then show back up at our church with a story about how badly that other church had failed him. The first several times this happened, I chased him down (figuratively) to check on him and encourage him to get settled here. I called, texted, and even knocked on his door. I quit doing that, however. You see, I realized if he was going to be faithful, it would take a heart change, not just an encouraging word.

One day he showed back up at church and aggressively confronted me, shouting, “You should smell like sheep!” He said, “Jesus left the church to find the lost sheep, and you should too!” I was stunned and hurt. I let guilt wash all over me. Had I been wrong not to keep chasing and chasing and chasing? I mean, Jesus did talk about leaving the flock to find the one lost sheep. I stammered and told him all the sincere things I could think of to assure him I cared about his soul and did indeed want to be a good pastor. I agreed to meet him for coffee very soon. He never returned my calls, and I didn’t see him again for six months.

The evening after that verbal ambush, I spent a good deal of time in prayer about the situation. As pastors do, I replayed everything in my mind over and over again. Did I do enough? Was I approachable? Am I inadequate? How can I duplicate myself so I can give everyone all the time they need? Lord, help me be a better pastor. Lord, how can I meet the insatiable needs and overwhelming demands? Lord, I don’t want to be responsible for lost sheep. And God let me twist in the wind for a good while before gently saying, “your job is to feed sheep, not chase goats.”

Sheep Wander, Goats Run Away

Put aside the fact that the Parable of the Lost Sheep (Luke 15:1-7) is really a story about winning the lost and not about chasing stray saints. But regardless, good shepherds search for lost sheep and do their best to bring them safely back home. Tragically, sometimes the wolves, the goats, the elements, or all three have already taken their toll when a shepherd locates them. Here’s a little observation the Lord helped me unearth: Lost sheep may wander away and get hurt or lost, but goats run away and resist being brought back to the fold. When lost sheep see their shepherd, they are happy and relieved. Yes, they might be embarrassed or ashamed too. But mostly, they are thankful for the help. Goats, on the other hand, are defiant, angry, and defensive. A goat isn’t going to let you put him on your shoulders and take him home, as Jesus described in the parable.

Grazers & Browsers

Goats have a well-deserved reputation for eating anything in sight. Sometimes they chew it up and spew it out. There’s a classic episode of The Andy Griffith Show where Barney and Andy hilariously deal with a goat that had eaten a crate of dynamite. The last thing they needed was a goat with a belly full of dynamite, headbutting something and going kaboom in the middle of Mayberry. And while that may be ridiculous, it is believable because goats are browsers. They don’t feed on grass or low-growth vegetation like sheep. So, the green pastures mentioned in Psalm 23 aren’t all that exciting to goats. And that is a crucial difference between sheep and goats. Sheep are grazers. They are content with green grass and will follow shepherds who lead them beside “still waters.”

Goats don’t want a shepherd. They’re never full. They leave churches because they “aren’t being fed.” That’s rarely the case. They have an appetite for thorns and thistles. They like faux shepherds who promise something better, something more exciting, more relevant, than godly pastures and still waters. When that gets boring, or they realize how unsatisfying that diet is, they move on to another place. While that’s fine for actual goats, people with a goat nature Jesus described reject living water and the bread of life (yes, I know I’m mixing metaphors). This is partially because goats are discontented by nature. Sheep have learned, as the apostle Paul said:

…I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content. I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: everywhere and in all things, I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need (Philippians 4:11-12).

Interdependent & Independent

I get that being compared to sheep carries a stigma. We’ve all heard derogatory comments about “sheeple,” “herd mentalities,” and “lemmings.” In America, at least for most of its history, personal independence is sought after and celebrated. And Jesus certainly wasn’t suggesting that we’re all alike or that Christ’s followers are supposed to be robots, mindlessly going with the flow. On the contrary, the Gospel is intensely personal and intimate. Everyone must have a close relationship with the Great Shepherd, so much so that they recognize His voice (John 10:27). If anything, remaining with God’s flock in His pasture takes great individual intentionality, sincere thought, and an extraordinary understanding of the greater good. By the “greater good,” I mean that sheep willingly trade their independence for interdependence. Because, let’s face it, complete independence is a total fabrication. Everyone needs someone or something, and sheep have realized they want and need the Great Shepherd.

But here’s the thing, if you want the Great Shepherd, you must accept that you are also getting His undershepherds and His flock. So, gaining the Great Shepherd gives you exclusive access to His pastures but also excludes you from wandering back to old fields. There will be fences, parameters, and requirements. You may not always understand or even like them, but you trust the Great Shepherd sees dangers you cannot see. Sure, the flock might slow you down or cramp your style, and it might be tempting to wander off and do your own thing for a while. You might misconstrue Christian liberty as freedom from the responsibilities of the flock. The apostle Paul addressed this carnal propensity in his letter to the church in Galatia: For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love, serve one another (Galatians 5:13, ESV). The apostle Peter described our obligation to the flock this way: Have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind (1 Peter 3:8, ESV).

Goats are all about “my” and “me.” Sheep are focused on community, the “us” and “we.” Goats are constantly looking for advancement for themselves, while sheep look to enhance everyone. That’s why Jesus emphasized things like, “The last shall be first, and the first last (Matthew 20:16).” It’s counterintuitive, but putting others first is the best thing you can do for yourself. Let me show you something people miss who think they can accept Jesus while rejecting His undershepherds and flock. During Jesus’ most famous teaching, the Sermon on the Mount, He gave an example of how everyone should pray:

Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil… (Matthew 6:9-13).

Did you catch it? Jesus didn’t say to pray, “My Father which art in heaven.” Instead, he said, “Our Father.” And don’t pray, “Give me this day.” Rather pray, “Give us this day.” Read the full prayer. Not once does Jesus use singular pronouns except when addressing the Father. Why? Because even in prayer, we must remember that we are part of a community more significant than ourselves. You can’t accept the Shepherd and reject your role in His flock. Sheep know this to be true.

Faithful & Playful

Even the flakiest, most undependable Christians take great comfort in knowing God is always faithful. I’m the first to raise my hand and say that what I probably love most about the Lord is that He will never leave or forsake me (Deuteronomy 31:8). In other words, God is never going to flake out on me. Yet, people who claim to be like Christ are often more playful than faithful.

It’s true that goats are more playful than sheep. This is because goats are more adventurous by nature. However, that doesn’t mean sheep aren’t playful. They are. They just don’t prioritize playfulness over faithfulness. Sheep know the ultimate goal is to hear the Great Shepherd say, “Well done my good and faithful servant (Matthew 25:23). Faithfulness always sounds boring until you need someone to be faithful to you. Likewise, loyalty seems mundane until you need loyalty.

Goats are not dependable. They’re terrible with follow-through. And they lack loyalty when the chips are down. But, oh, yes, they can be a lot of fun. Sometimes they’re a downright joy to have hanging around the sheep. But that playfulness quickly becomes annoying and occasionally destructive when faithfulness is required. Sheep, like having a good time. They need it and crave it. But they know when to take things seriously. They know how to listen for changes in their Shepherd’s tone. They’ve learned that fun at all costs isn’t worth the price.

Amiable & Onery

But, even with all that fun-loving independence, an orneriness lurks beneath the surface of a goat’s facade. The term “stubborn as a goat” exists for a good reason. Goats are indeed stubborn and hardheaded (literally). Goats are notoriously onery and rebellious. It’s their nature. Of course, some are more so than others. My grandfather would have called them cantankerous. Human goats are like that too. This puts them at odds with sheep, in opposition to undershepherds, and in trouble with the Great Shepherd.

While sheep are far from perfect, they have an amiable nature. They’ve learned to “strive for peace with everyone (Hebrews 12:14).” If it’s possible, and if they can do anything about it, they try to have peaceful relationships with everyone they encounter (Romans 12:18). This isn’t always easy. Still, it’s the will of the Great Shepherd, so they obey. After all, sheep don’t have to fight their own battles. Their Shepherd fights for them.

Shoats & Geeps

My daughter, our in-house animal expert, informed me that there are sheep-goat hybrids, usually referred to as “shoats” or “geeps.” I kid you not. The Bible never mentions these curious creatures. However, it does describe how every person has a war between two competing natures raging on the inside. You might say we’re all born with a goat nature, and the Holy Ghost gives us a new character. But even after receiving the Holy Ghost, we’re still a sheep-goat hybrid. That old goat nature desperately wants to take back control.

The apostle Paul lamented that the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the wishes of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other (Galatians 5:17). The apostle Peter called this inward struggle a war saying, “the passions of the flesh wage war against your soul (1 Peter 2:11).” Paul homed in on geeps that had transformed back into goats when he said: For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot (Romans 8:7, ESV). The transformation from sheep to goat and vice versa is always a possibility. Therefore, sheep must always be on guard, and goats have no choice but to repent or be lost.

Related posts:

  1. Oneness Theology, Church History & Where the Church Is Right Now – Podcast Transcript with Dr. Talmadge French
  2. Should Christians Drink Alcohol?
  3. What’s the Difference Between Godly Sorrow & Worldly Sorrow
  4. You Can’t Be A Church Leader If…
  5. The Anatomy of a Failure (A Scriptural Survey of Why Sincere Souls Fail God) – Article + Podcast
  6. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)
  7. COVID Carnality (The Cause & Cure)
  8. It Filled the House – The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels with Samuel Vaughn (Article + Podcast)

The Asbury Revival: A Word of Caution (Support Your Local Revival) with Timothy Hadden – Article + Podcast

Ryan A. French

I have to admit that the Asbury Revival hasn’t been majorly on my radar. I’m not super active on social media these days. By the way, cutting back on social media has been incredibly freeing for me. I have more clarity, fewer distractions, and more hope for humanity when not witnessing the daily media grime. Anyway, I’d seen a few clips here and there, but I didn’t start thinking seriously about Asbury until individuals began asking for my opinion. In that situation, I did what I often do: read what my friend Timothy Hadden had to say about it. In this case, he’s written two articles, Asbury Revival: A Cautionary Stance for the Church and Asbury Revival: A Follow-Up and Other Insights.

Apostolic Voice Episode 68

I was so impacted by those articles that I knew Tim needed to come and talk about it on the Apostolic Voice podcast (I’ve linked that episode below). We had a truly unscripted, from-the-heart, vulnerable discussion about a few concerns we share regarding some Apostolic verbiage surrounding the Asbury revival. I hope you enjoy it. If you’re enjoying Apostolic Voice, please leave us a five-star review on iTunes and give us a little encouragement. It means a lot. God bless.

Links Mentioned in Episode 68

    Related posts:

    1. The Development of Vision (Part One) by Timothy Hadden
    2. Support Your Local Pastor’s Wife
    3. Prayer, Revival & Spiritual Warfare with Joe Campetella (Article + Podcast)
    4. Takeaways from Church Planting (A Walk of Faith) – Podcast Episode 7
    5. The Artificial Face (Cosmetics, Make-Up, Body Modification & The Great Cover-Up) – Podcast
    6. Radically Apostolic! with Charles G. Robinette (Article + Podcast)
    7. Your Past Is Not Your Future with Coley Reese (Article + Podcast)
    8. Surviving Your Way Into Revival (Survive, Revive, Thrive, Repeat) – Article + Podcast

    What’s the Difference Between Godly Sorrow & Worldly Sorrow

    Ryan A. French

    For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of but the sorrow of the world worketh death (2 Corinthians 7:10).

    The Difference Makes the Difference

    In his second letter to the church at Corinth, the apostle Paul begins chapter seven by launching into a lengthy discussion about how to “perfect holiness” by “cleansing ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit (2 Corinthians 7:1)”. Inevitably, this dovetailed into a unique perspective on sorrow and repentance. Paul describes (and we’ll look closer at it in a moment) the difference between godly sorrow and worldly sorrow. It’s a vitally important distinction because one leads to spiritual death and the other to salvation. The difference makes the difference. We’ve all got to get this one right.

    Called to Stop Sinning

    The Bible teaches us that the Church is a called-out assembly. God has called us out of sin, and God has called us into holiness. We are supposed to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:16). That standard is very high because God is supremely holy. You might be thinking that it is impossible to be sinless. And in a way, you’re right. However, the New Testament reminds us repeatedly that we are to be without sin (holiness). In fact, 1 John 2:1 pauses and says, “Stop sinning. Just stop it!”

    My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not… (1 John 2:1).

    If you take the Bible and boil it down to its essence, the central theme is God’s grand plan to get humanity from sinfulness to sinlessness.

    Our Response to Sin is the Key

    It’s easy to start sinning, but it’s hard to stop. That’s basically been humanity’s problem from the beginning. For most people, defining what is and isn’t sin is problematic. Sin is so pervasive and normal that we don’t feel horrified by it. And if we don’t feel horrified by sin, we don’t think of it as all that bad. My struggles with sin have taught me that sin’s grip is hard to break. If you’re human, you have your own stories and struggles with sin too. I also know how enticing sin can be from the countless hours I’ve spent trying to help others find deliverance from every sin you can imagine. I’ve noticed through the years that the real issue isn’t that we have sinned (because we have) or if we will sin (because we will).

    The question that matters is, what will we do with our sin? How we respond to sin usually helps us stop or causes us to keep on sinning. Godly sorrow over sin produces genuine repentance, which allows the Holy Spirit to step in and empower us. Worldly sorrow leads to lackadaisical repentance, which only perpetuates sin in our lives. Worldly sorrow produces a self-sustaining cycle of sinfulness. Before highlighting the vital differences between godly and worldly sorrow, we must clear up an apparent contradiction in the Bible.

    Does God Cleanse Us, or Do We Cleanse Ourselves?

    Sin is a stain on our lives. God desires to present to Himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing (Ephesians 5:27). God is deadly serious about His church being holy and without blemish (Ephesians 5:27). That’s why we’re all in such desperate need of the blood of Jesus. Only His blood cleanses all the stains of sin. But do we cleanse ourselves, or does Jesus cleanse us? The passages below might be a little confusing at first glance.

    …let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Corinthians 7:1).

    If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9).

    To answer this question, we need to identify the context of these two verses. In the previous chapter, Paul clarifies his target audience, “for ye are the temple of the living God (2 Corinthians 6:16).” Clearly, Paul is talking about repentance to people who have already obeyed the Gospel and are in the Church. He’s referring to the ongoing process of sanctification (holiness), which requires continued repentance. We must skip forward to pinpoint John’s intended audience:

    These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God (1 John 5:13).

    So, it’s clear that John is writing about the initial salvation experience, when we first take ownership of our sinfulness, leading to repentance and obeying the Gospel. At that moment, God covers us with His blood.

    God’s Role & Our Responsibility

    At salvation, something compelling happens; when we repent, our sins are forgiven (1 John 1:9); at baptism, our sins are remitted (Acts 2:38); at the infilling of the Holy Ghost, we are empowered (Acts 1:8). God did the cleansing work at Calvary, and we stepped into that cleansing flow via obedience. However, regarding our continued walk with God, 2 Corinthians 7:1 clarifies that we must “cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” In other words, God does the initial work. Then He expects us to put some effort into the process from that moment forward. To be sure, His Spirit comes inside to help lead, guide, comfort, correct, convict, strengthen, and encourage us along the way. But the infilling of the Spirit doesn’t remove our free will. After salvation, God expects us to exercise an often-overlooked fruit of the Spirit – self-control (Galatians 5:23).

    Sometimes I hear church folks say, “if only God would give me the power over this ____ sin.” But God has already given us His Spirit. He’s already cleansed us. So now we must cleanse ourselves daily. If we’re not careful, we’ll use God as an excuse for our continued sin. God cleanses us first, and then we are responsible for walking in that cleansing. That’s the process of sanctification or holiness. In answer to the original question: Does God cleanse us, or do we cleanse ourselves? The answer is that God does the major cleanse first, and then we step in and do minor cleansing as we continue our walk with the Lord.

    A Simple Illustration

    A simple, albeit imperfect illustration, may help clarify this concept. Roughly once a month, I take our family SUV to a full-service carwash. They detail our vehicle inside and out. I do that because they have the equipment, chemicals, and expertise that allow them to do a thorough cleaning that I’m not capable of doing. It’s almost like having a new vehicle when they get done. I didn’t do the cleansing. They did. But if I eat a bagel in the car and crumbs fall everywhere, I must clean that mess myself. Otherwise, I’ve wasted my time and money on that professional cleaning job. They cleaned it first in ways I can’t do alone. But I still have a responsibility to keep it clean. In much the same way, that’s how walking in holiness works.

    Problems in the Corinthian Church

    In Paul’s first letter to the Corinthian church, he is very forthright with them. The church was super messed up with big-time problems and significant sin issues. For example, a young man was having an affair with his father’s wife (1 Corinthians 5:1). Even more revolting, rather than the church being grieved. They laughed about the situation like it was a joke (1 Corinthians 5:2). Paul was so angry that he demanded that if the guy refused to repent, they should turn him over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh (1 Corinthians 5:5). That leaven of malice and wickedness would destroy the whole church if they didn’t deal with it correctly (1 Corinthians 5:7-8). All this background is essential because we can now understand 2 Corinthians 7:8-11 and answer the question: What’s the difference between godly and worldly sorrow?

    I’m Not Sorry That I Made You Repent

    8 For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season. 9 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance… (2 Corinthians 7:8-9).

    In the above verses, Paul was trying to let the church know that his first letter (1 Corinthians), with its strong rebuke, was not intended to make them feel sorry but was a call to repentance.

    …for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. 10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of… (2 Corinthians 7:9-10).

    In other words, when you have godly sorrow. It leads to godly repentance, and you don’t have to confess the same sin repeatedly.

    …but the sorrow of the world worketh death. 11 For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things, ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter (2 Corinthians 7:10-11).

    The Contrast

    In his unique way, Paul carefully contrasts these two types of sorrow. They both lead to outward repentance, but only one is genuine. The result of godly sorrow is a change in behavior and attitude. But worldly sorrow brings death. It certainly brings spiritual death, but in the immediate, it might mean the death of a marriage, a friendship, victory, blessings, spiritual power, or family relationships. Tragically, in extreme cases, it could culminate in an untimely physical death because of sin.

    For All That Is in the World

    Anything derived from the world is compromised, “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world (1 John 2:16).” Worldly sorrow is derived from either the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, or the pride of life. So, for example, a person might feel sorrow for their sin because of the pain it produces. They feel that pain in their flesh, and that pain can be intense. It’s real! Emotional and physical pain caused by sin can become unbearable at times. And many people assume the remorse they feel because of their agony is genuine repentance. But if that remorse is a temporary emotion birthed from pain, it’s not godly sorrow.

    A second kind of worldly sorrow results from the lust of the eyes. People can be sorry because they see how sin has impacted their life; lost loved ones, broken relationships, wasted moments, embarrassments, and failures. Their kingdom might be crumbling before their eyes like a slow-motion nightmare. Consequences that used to seem so unlikely and distant come crashing into focus. They might think, “I’m going to lose my wife, kids, or job.” But ultimately, their focus is on their kingdom. Many people feel this kind of worldly sorrow and confuse it for genuine repentance. But true repentance is not self-centered. It’s God-centered.

    Thirdly, the pride of life produces another type of worldly sorrow. People may feel sorry because they are embarrassed that people can see their sins. They see their reputation going down the drain, their influence waning, or they feel disliked. Perhaps they want to be viewed in a more positive light. But the critical issue is their name. Again, the sorrow is selfishly motivated. Therefore, the resulting repentance is only skin deep.

    Me, Myself & I

    Worldly sorrow always brings the focus on me. It’s all about my feelings. My pain. My reputation. My happiness. But godly sorrow focuses on the fact that my sin has grieved God and others. Ephesians 4:30 warns us not to “grieve” the Holy Spirit. Godly sorrow is acutely aware that my sin has grieved the Holy Spirit. Godly sorrow isn’t just sorry because of sin’s consequences on my kingdom. It’s more concerned with God’s Kingdom. Godly sorrow isn’t worried about the reproach that I brought on my name but with the reproach that I brought on God’s name. As the prophet Nathan said to David after his horrific sin with Bathsheba, “You have brought great occasion to the enemies of the lord to blaspheme his name (2 Samuel 12:14).” Nathan was more concerned with how David’s sin would impact the world’s understanding of God than he was with king David’s reputation.

    Seven Characteristics of Godly Sorrow

    Paul doesn’t leave us with a nebulous definition of godly sorrow. 2 Corinthians 7:11 describes what godly repentance looks like in action. He lists seven things that accompany godly sorrow. Numbers are significant in the Bible, and the number seven represents completion and perfection. Therefore, it could be said that these seven things signify complete and perfect repentance.

    1. Carefulness

    Carelessness leads to sinfulness. A careful person is full of care, caution, and intentionality. Godly sorrow produces carefulness where casualness once reigned supreme. Decisions are weighed out and made thoughtfully. Every action is measured according to the Word of God. Godly sorrow refuses to blame sin on ignorance, incompetence, recklessness, or inattention to detail.

    2. Clearing of Yourself

    Godly sorrow doesn’t make excuses. It doesn’t blame other people or circumstances for sin. There’s no hiding, covering, manipulating, shifting, or maneuvering of responsibility. Worldly sorrow keeps things hidden and harbors secret sins and motives behind closed doors. Godly sorrow seeks to clear the air and clean the conscience. It thrives on transparency and always advocates for the truth to be displayed.

    3. Indignation

    Godly sorrow recoils at the thought of past sins. Old lifestyles aren’t viewed as the “good old days.” It doesn’t laugh at sin or find it entertaining. Carnal things that used to seem euphoric become repulsive. The thought of sin and evil produces anger, indignation, and disgust. Godly sorrow views sin as a vile thing to be detested. It doesn’t despise sinners, but it does hate sin. In much the same way as you would hate cancer while loving a cancer patient.

    4. Fear

    I’m always nervous when someone repents of a particular sin and says, “I know I’ll never do that again.” I’d much rather someone say, “I’m going to take every precaution possible to make sure I never fall into that sin again because I’m afraid of going back to that terrible thing.” You will take godly precautions when you have a healthy fear of a possibility. Furthermore, a little fear of the Lord is a good thing.

    5. Vehement Desire

    Godly sorrow is fueled by a fervent desire to serve God and avoid sin. Vehement means to show strong feelings. It’s forceful, passionate, urgent, and intense. It isn’t mellow, mild, or casual. Godly sorrow recognizes the seriousness of sin and its desperate dependence upon the Holy Spirit.

    6. Zeal

    The Greek word for zeal is spoudē, found twelve times in the New Testament. The primary meaning of zeal is “haste” or “diligence.” Meaning diligence in the sense of “earnest zeal.” It’s always used in the context of living out godly lives.[i] The idea is that godliness takes ongoing work and tenacious effort.  

    7. Revenge

    When godly sorrow is in play, everything in your being wishes you could return and fix the things sin has taken from you. So, in a certain sense, you are looking for revenge against the enemy of your soul. That’s why brand-new saints often get so on fire for God. They are avenging what the enemy stole from them when they were under the bondage of sin. Godly sorrow never looks longingly back toward Egyptian taskmasters.

    Final Thoughts

    It’s not hard to receive the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues. But if you’ve been around an Apostolic church for a while, you’ve probably noticed that some people seek the Holy Ghost for weeks or even months without being filled. The apostle Peter didn’t say, “repent and be baptized, and you might receive the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).” He said, “you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).” My experience has taught me that many people struggling to receive the Spirit are actually struggling with repentance. They might be sorrowful and going through the motions of repentance, but their sorrow is worldly and does not lead to life. Gently and lovingly, helping them to decipher the difference between godly and worldly sorrow can lead them to the breakthrough they need.

    [i] Renn, Stephen D., ed. Expository Dictionary of Bible Words. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2005.

    Related posts:

    1. Should Christians Drink Alcohol?
    2. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    3. It Filled the House – The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels with Samuel Vaughn (Article + Podcast)
    4. Oneness Theology, Church History & Where the Church Is Right Now – Podcast Transcript with Dr. Talmadge French
    5. It’s Beginning to Look a Lot Like Christ…
    6. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)
    7. Our God Is One with Dr. Talmadge French (Article + Podcast)
    8. Should Christians Dye Their Hair? (Article + Podcast)

    What Will Become of Us All? – A Poem

    Ryan A. French 
    White picket lines of peaceful persuasion
    Cannot undo the cost of invasion
    Endless fine lines of baser perversions
    Weakened strains of moral conversions
    Flawlessly wielding falsified searches
    What will become of us all?

    Cold, calculating meaningless data 
    Hiding underneath the smiling strata 
    Clinging to less fortunate ideas 
    Laughing, dragging, while dreaming of sions
    Intricate veins coursing with curses
    What will become of us all?

    Meanwhile, one white robed throng preaches the Writ
    Tenaciously keeping holy flames lit
    Falling valiant, bleeding from vicious slits  
    Ten thousand swords critically slashing hits
    Battered, beleaguered saints climb past ashen fritz 
    What will become of us all?

    One bright light pierces the eastern sky
    A triumphant shout falls from mountain highest   
    One brilliant white horse gracefully flies
    The armies of Heaven closely aligned 
    Every blood-stained voice shouts toward the sight
    What will become of us all?

    Related posts:

    1. Should Christians Drink Alcohol?
    2. Should Christians Dye Their Hair? (Article + Podcast)
    3. It Filled the House – The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels with Samuel Vaughn (Article + Podcast)
    4. COVID Carnality (The Cause & Cure)
    5. Special Guest L.J. Harry & Book Review of Ten Words: A Practical Look at the Ten Commandments
    6. Breakers, Takers, Givers, Makers – What Kind of Saint Are You? (Article + Podcast)
    7. Surviving Your Way Into Revival (Survive, Revive, Thrive, Repeat) – Article + Podcast
    8. Oneness Theology, Church History & Where the Church Is Right Now – Podcast Transcript with Dr. Talmadge French

    The Gates of Hell – A Poem

    Ryan A. French 
    I’ll take you to the gates of Hell 
I’ll show you what’s there
It’s a horrific, sadistic, gaudy affair
With twisted metals and steep swirling stairs

I’ll take you to the throne of Death
I’ll show you the way
It sits atop the fork of two great lakes
One called disunion, the other disgrace

I’ll take you to the bowels of Hades
I’ll show you who’s there
The liars, the lied-to, ordinary faces
With haunted red eyes and bent bloody feet

I’ll take you to the edge of Sorrow
I’ll show you the pain
The broken, intrepid, intricate traces
Longing to find relief yet complacent 

I’ll take you to the verge of Salvation
I’ll show you the plan
The death, the water, the rush of language 
Choice determines the end destination

    Related posts:

    1. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)
    2. It Filled the House – The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels with Samuel Vaughn (Article + Podcast)
    3. The Death of Reverence
    4. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    5. The Anatomy of a Failure (A Scriptural Survey of Why Sincere Souls Fail God) – Article + Podcast
    6. It’s Beginning to Look a Lot Like Christ…
    7. 9 Things to Remember When You’re Hurting
    8. Your Questions Answered (Article + Podcast)

    The Lynching of Leo Frank

    Ryan A. French

    An innocent Jew hung unjustly from a tree to the great delight of an onlooking crowd. Only a handful of quietly spoken words crossed his lips before he died. His accusers craved his death long before it occurred. He wasn’t given a fair trial. An actual murderer went free. And history will forever grieve the tragedy. Although the details are similar in many ways, I’m not referring to Jesus Christ. Instead, I’m referencing the undeserved lynching of Leo Frank.

    The Tragic Death of Mary Phagan

    For the sake of time, I can only give the highlights of a story that sparked national attention in the Atlanta area in 1913. “Little Mary Phagan,” as she became known, left home on the morning of April 26 to pick up her wages at the pencil factory in Marietta and view Atlanta’s Confederate Day parade. She never returned home.

    The next day, the factory night watchman found her bloody, sawdust-covered body in the factory basement. When the police asked Leo Frank to view her body, Frank became agitated. He confirmed personally paying Mary her wages but could not say where she went next. Frank, the last to admit seeing Mary alive, became the prime suspect. Sadly for Frank, he was a Northern-born, college-educated, wealthy Jewish man, making him the easy target of intense bias and hatred.

    A Sham Trial

    Cobb county prosecutor Hugh Dorsey painted Leo Frank as a pervert who was both a homosexual and also preyed on young girls. What he did not tell the grand jury was that a janitor at the factory, Jim Conley, had been arrested two days after Frank when he was seen washing blood off his shirt. Conley then admitted writing two notes found by Mary Phagan’s body. The police correctly assumed at the time that, as the author of those notes, Conley was the murderer, but Conley claimed, after coaching from Dorsey, that Leo Frank had confessed to murdering Mary in the tool room and then paid Conley to write the notes and help him move Mary’s body to the basement.

    Even after Frank’s housekeeper placed him at home, having lunch at the time of the murder, and despite gross inconsistencies in Conley’s story, both the grand and trial jury chose to believe Conley. In August 1913, the jury found Frank guilty in less than four hours. Crowds outside the courthouse shouted, “Hang the Jew.”

    Historian Leonard Dinnerstein reports that one juror had been overheard saying before his selection for the jury, “I am glad they indicted the… Jew. They ought to take him out and lynch him. And if I get on that jury, I’ll hang that Jew for sure.”

    Facing intimidation and mob rule, the trial judge sentenced Frank to death. He barred Frank from the courtroom because, had he been acquitted, Frank might have been lynched by the crowd outside.

    A Brave Man Tries

    Georgia’s higher courts rejected Frank’s appeals despite these breaches of due process, and shockingly the U. S. Supreme Court voted, 7-2, against reopening the case. Frank’s survival depended on then Georgia Governor Frank Slaton. After a 12-day review of the evidence, Slaton commuted Frank’s sentence to life imprisonment. He hoped to allow Leo Frank time to clear his name and for further evidence to come forward as tempers abated. Governor Slaton told his wife on the day he decided to commute Leo Frank’s sentence, “My conscience is forcing me to commute Leo Frank’s sentence, but that means I can’t possibly run for a second term as governor, my life will be in constant danger, and our reputations will be ruined in this state.” Without hesitation, she responded, “I’d rather be married to a dead hero than a living coward.”

    That night, state police kept a protesting crowd of 5,000 from the governor’s mansion. Wary Jewish families fled Atlanta. Slaton held firm. “Two thousand years ago,” he wrote a few days later, “another Governor washed his hands and turned over a Jew to a mob. For two thousand years, that governor’s name has been accursed. If today another Jew were lying in his grave because I had failed to do my duty, I would all through life find his blood on my hands and would consider myself an assassin through cowardice.”

    A Midnight Lynching

    On August 17, 1915, 28 men — described by peers as “sober, intelligent, of established good name and character”— stormed the Milledgeville, GA prison hospital where Leo Frank was recovering from having his throat slashed by a fellow inmate. They kidnapped Frank, drove him more than 100 miles to Mary Phagan’s hometown of Marietta, Georgia, and hanged him from a tree at the stroke of midnight. The Cobb county’s mayor and sheriff and former Georgia governor Joseph Brown were among the 28 vigilantes.

    Frank conducted himself with dignity, calmly proclaiming his innocence.

    Townsfolk were proudly photographed beneath Frank’s swinging corpse, pictures you can find with a quick online Google search today. When his term expired a year later, Slaton did not run for reelection, and the dishonest prosecutor, Dorsey, easily won the election to the governor’s office. None of the vigilantes were ever arrested or convicted of any crime. This story has gone down in the pages of history as Georgia’s Great Shame.

    The Deadly Silence of a Good Man

    In 1982, a death bed confession by a former office boy at National Pencil, along with hosts of other pieces of evidence, confirmed what many suspected. Alonzo Mann, 83 at the time he came forward, said he witnessed Jim Conley carrying Mary Phagan’s body to the factory’s basement on the day of her death. He kept silent, he said, because Conley threatened to kill him and his family.

    Self-Righteous Vigilantes

    Fascinatingly, from all the accounts I’ve read, the men who hanged Leo Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan did not go about it with a spirit of lawlessness or vindictiveness. They felt a duty to their state and commonwealth and a responsibility to the memory of Mary Phagan. In other words, they really thought they were correcting a breach of justice and doing the right thing. Now. Did their biased prejudice blind them to their own inconsistencies? Absolutely. Did they have their own sins and hypocrisies to deal with? Yes. Those men, who were otherwise upstanding citizens, committed a horrific act of unspeakable evil. They committed an atrocity while wearing self-aggrandizing badges of righteousness. They even called themselves the Nights of Mary Phagan. They died believing they’d done the right thing, and because they paid no earthly consequences, it seemed like a confirmation of righteousness.

    Crucify Him

    The people who screamed for the crucifixion of Jesus were the Old Testament equivalents of good church folks. They went to Temple services, paid their tithes, offered their sacrifices, and dressed right. The religious elites stirred them up, but the average saint got caught in the current of opinion and outrage. They believed in half-truths, complete falsehoods, and total misnomers. Folks otherwise considered “good” people released a murderer and killed their savior. This odd ability to consider ourselves good while being thoroughly evil is a product of The Fall. And therein lies the lesson within the lesson from the events leading to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Within each of us, “good” people reside carefully masked malevolence, unrealized potential for evil, and thinly veiled hypocrisy.

    The Lie of Innate Goodness

    The Western preoccupation with people’s (especially our own) relative goodness is astonishing and spiritually toxic. It’s harmful because when we think of ourselves as relatively “good” or “descent,” we compare ourselves to other sinful human beings. Thus, creating a hierarchy of acceptable and unacceptable sins based on our feelings, current culture, upbringing, socioeconomics, and personality. Historically, Christianity has endeavored to walk the fine line between radically affirming the value of all human life because it is created in the image of God while concurrently rejecting the humanistic philosophy which presupposes people are innately good. Muddying the waters, even more, is the fact that even if we accept that people are not inherently good, we easily exempt ourselves (and our loved ones) from that incriminatory viewpoint and reckon that we are good deep down. We hear of horrible things individuals did in the distant past and, with the delightful advantage of hindsight, assume we would never have participated in such a terrible thing. But truthfully, we don’t really know that to be a fact.

    Why Do You Call Me Good?

    In Mark 10:17-23, a wealthy young ruler came running to Jesus and offered a greeting he never intended to be controversial. He asked, “Good Master, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” As usual, Jesus responded to a question with another question, “Why do you call me good? There is none good but one, and that is God?” The man called Jesus “good.” The Greek word the young man used is agathos, meaning “intrinsically good.” This word was not used lightly nor for every good thing. Had the man made the leap that Jesus was indeed God, who was intrinsically good? Was he prepared to accept the full weight of his pronouncements?

    It became clear as the conversation continued that the young man considered himself quite good based on his actions. Maybe even intrinsically good. But Jesus zeroed in on the man’s secret sins: pride, love of money, and lack of generosity. And because he loved his money more than Jesus, he missed the opportunity to become a disciple. Or perhaps, we might assume the young man missed the broader point Jesus was inferring, which was that He was God manifest in the flesh and that alone made Him intrinsically good.

    Capable of Good & Evil

    To summarize a weighty biblical theme from this little interaction: Human beings are capable of both good and evil at any given time. Because we are capable of evil and often do bad things, we are not primarily good deep down. In fact, the deeper we go, the more malevolence we find within the human heart. To view ourselves and others as mostly good is to deny the reality and the seriousness of sin. Only God is good all the time. Only God is utterly incapable of evil. To think anything less of God is heresy. If humanity is essentially good, the cross was unnecessary, and the Bible is a colossal waste of time. Most Christians know this to be true but live as if it is not. We accept the grace and mercy of God and slowly begin to lean on our own goodness. And that’s the trap because once humans believe they’ve become thoroughly good, they do awful things without a hint of conviction or remorse. That is the very definition of self-righteousness.

    How Can It Be So Wrong When I’m So Good?

    Furthermore, most unsaved people believe their perceived goodness will buy them a ticket to Heaven. “After all,” they think to themselves, “only terrible people need saving, but I’m a decent person.” Meanwhile, they point fingers at other people’s splinters while ignoring the log poking out of their eyes. Self-justification says, “If I’m doing it, it can’t be so dreadfully wrong because I’m so good.” It’s sort of like the parent who criticizes everyone else’s kids but winks when their kids do the same things. How can that be? Well, their kids are innately better than your kids in their eyes.

    A Flawed Pentecostal Preacher

    I think it’s so interesting that God chose Peter to preach the first Gospel sermon on the Day of Pentecost. Of all the disciples, Peter was far from the most exemplary. By my hasty count, Peter failed twelve times before preaching that sermon. Of course, some of those failures were more severe than others. But some of them were pretty significant. Even outright sinful. To name a few, Peter, filled with selfish ambition, argued with the other disciples about who would be the greatest in the Kingdom of God. He rebuked Jesus for talking about His soon-to-be crucifixion and had to be severely corrected. He failed to stay alert in prayer during Jesus’ greatest hour of need. He denied Jesus with “oaths” and “curses” in the public arena. And after being completely overwhelmed by his sins and the self-discovery of his weaknesses, he abandoned the Apostolic Team and returned to his former life as a fisherman.

    Yet, Peter was still allowed to preach the first apostolic declaration of the Gospel. I don’t think that was coincidental. In God’s grand design, a man thoroughly acquainted with his internal badness faithfully preached the convicting of sins to a self-righteous crowd. Peter didn’t waver when he declared (and I’m paraphrasing), “You have taken Jesus with wicked hands and have crucified Him and slain Him (Acts 2:23).” He didn’t stop there, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God has made the same Jesus, whom you have crucified, both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36).” Only a man fully convinced of his own capacity for badness could preach with such convicting fervor. Because Peter had faced his personal heart trouble, he could see the disease in others who couldn’t see it for themselves.

    Convicts Always Recognize Convicts

    An individual who’d spent a great deal of time in prison once told me he could always spot someone who had served jail time in any setting. And they could spot him too. I witnessed that very thing several times while with him. It was intriguing to watch. You might assume it was because of tattoos, stern expressions, or something obvious. But it wasn’t. Two perfectly normal-looking people could walk past each other and instantly know they’d served time somewhere. Besides, tattoos are so common now that you’d hardly assume they’re prison-related.  

    When Peter called otherwise normal-looking people sinful cold-blooded murderers, it was a convict recognizing convicts. Because he acknowledged his sin, he could see there’s too. Peter’s conviction gave him the anointing to preach conviction. Notice the crowd’s response in Acts 2:37, “…When they heard this, they were pricked in their heart and said… ‘what shall we do?’” Peter didn’t convict them; they were already convicted and pronounced guilty by God. They just didn’t realize it until Peter made it clear. Thankfully, the burden of guilt doesn’t have to end with the punishment we deserve if we’ll obey the way of escape Peter preached. He said with God-given authority:

    …Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38).

    Reaching the Religious

    Nearly everyone Peter preached to that day was religious. They didn’t consider themselves bad or lost. Every preacher knows the most challenging crowd to reach is a group of smugly religious people. People who can lynch an innocent man in cold blood in the name of God. People who’ve tasted the loaves and fishes yet still shouted: “crucify him.” Or people who once were blind but now see after one touch from Jesus who now use those healed eyes to find fault in the one who gave them sight. Or folks who had no voice until Jesus touched them, and now their voices are lifted in gossip and slander. Somehow, Peter had to reach these people and show them their spiritual blindness. That’s still the mission of the Church today. However, we won’t fulfill that mandate until we attend to our sin and then call others to do the same.

    You Can’t Skip the Grave

    We love to tell the story of the resurrection. And that’s a good thing, but we can’t skip over the grave to get to it. There’s no resurrection without a painful death and a dark grave. We modern Christians are far more comfortable with the celebration than with the necessary conviction that must precede that celebration. We don’t like to think about it, but we’re no better than the crowds that shouted for Jesus’ death. Our sin put him on the cross just as their sin did. We’re full of corruption too. Evil is always crouched at the door, waiting to pounce on us. We might even be the modern equivalent of a Sadducee or Pharisee. We might have been photographed standing under Leo Frank’s swinging body with smug grins in a different time and place.

    Most folks want to skip right past the painful death-to-self repentance brings. But the apostle Paul, another flawed sinner turned preacher, called that death-to-self a daily process. Calvary brings graphic clarity to a twofold revelation: First, humanity is desperately sinful and deserves punishment. Second, God loves us so much that He took that punishment on our behalf and now offers pardon for our depravity. We aren’t good. Not even close. But He’s good—more good than we know. His blood can cleanse us from all unrighteousness, but first, we must face the ugly truth about ourselves. Letting the old you die hurts. It hurts a lot. But the resurrection that follows is worth it.

    Related posts:

    1. Oneness Theology, Church History & Where the Church Is Right Now – Podcast Transcript with Dr. Talmadge French
    2. Should Christians Drink Alcohol?
    3. It Filled the House – The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels with Samuel Vaughn (Article + Podcast)
    4. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)
    5. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    6. Our God Is One with Dr. Talmadge French (Article + Podcast)
    7. Radically Apostolic! with Charles G. Robinette (Article + Podcast)
    8. The Anatomy of a Failure (A Scriptural Survey of Why Sincere Souls Fail God) – Article + Podcast

    It Filled the House – The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels with Samuel Vaughn (Article + Podcast)

    Ryan A. French

    After reading It Filled the House (The Journey from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessel), I knew Samuel Vaughn needed to be a guest on the Apostolic Voice podcast. I’ve never met Samuel, but I knew we were like-minded thinkers from how his book was written. Vaughn is a systematic thinker. As the title suggests, It Filled the House takes the reader on a Holy Ghost journey from the book of Exodus to the New Testament. Actually, if you count some detours in the book, it takes the reader from Genesis to the New Testament.

    Systematic Theology Made Enjoyable

    Essentially, Vaughn has connected the theological dots between the types and shadows of the Old Testament and the explicit commands regarding the infilling of the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. Furthermore, It Filled the House does more than demonstrate the necessity of the Holy Ghost in the New Birth experience. It also highlights the continuing role of the Spirit in a believer’s life. But don’t mistake It Filled the House as a boring theological read. It’s not. Along the way, Vaughn scatters practical illuminations from the Scripture that encourage, uplift, and challenge our walk with God. It’s almost as if the systematic theological aspect of the book sneaks up on you from chapter to chapter, which is the mark of a good writer.

    When the Glory Cloud Seems to Be Departing

    Vaughn begins It Filled the House by noting the first instance the Bible refers to the glory cloud in Exodus 13:21-22. The cloud represented the Spirit of God, and it led them through the wilderness away from Egypt. The inference is that God’s Spirit still guides us today, but it does so internally rather than externally. It’s important to recognize that God purposefully led the Hebrews to a dead end at the Red Sea with Pharaoh’s army hot on their heels. And that’s the moment the glory cloud moved from the front to the back. Vaughn paints the picture like this:

    What beautiful imagery of the cloud floating over the children of Israel toward their enemy. But can you imagine the confusion and anxiety of Israel? The God that had been leading them in front was now behind them instead. What did it mean? Did it mean God was leaving them or walking away? No doubt, many within the group believed God’s repositioning to be abandonment. But God was not abandoning them. He was posturing Himself.

    Vaughn compares that Red Sea experience to how we often feel when faced with trials where God seems far away. I like the way Vaughn phrases the reality of what God was doing, “What we think is desertion is actually deterrence!” He continues:

    God goes before His people. Sometimes, God goes behind them as well. He provides direction from the front and protection from behind. God is acting as the bookends of provision and protection. He is truly the author and the finisher of our faith.

    God goes before His people. Sometimes, God goes behind them as well. He provides direction from the front and protection from behind. God is acting as the bookends of provision and protection.

    Years ago, the Lord illuminated something that impacted my understanding of How God operates. I was studying the armor of God in Ephesians 6:10-18. And I was a little troubled because there’s nothing listed in the vast array of God’s spiritual armor that offers protection for our backs. It’s as if our backs are completely exposed to attack. And my life experience informs me that most spiritual and physical attacks come from behind. During that time of prayer and study, God reminded me of how the glory cloud moved from direction to protection at the Red Sea encounter. The principle of God’s word is that if we always move in the direction God leads when opposition arises, if we have put on the whole armor of God, the Lord Himself will fight from behind, and the Spirit empowers us to battle forward.

    God Exposes the Egyptian False Gods

    God manifested His glorious presence with a cloud during the day, and at night that cloud morphed into a pillar of fire. God did not choose these two symbols randomly. These symbols exposed two of the most revered false gods in the vast pantheon of Egyptian gods. Vaughn gives a short history lesson to set up a profound point:

    The Egyptians worshipped the sun god, Ra, which used fire to create light. Another deity in their pantheon was the god, Shu. Shu was the god of the air and light. One of Shu’s responsibilities was to protect Ra from the evil snake-god Apep that tried to destroy Ra each night and prevent the sunrise.  

    Vaughn leaps to the crux of the lesson:

    God used fire at night to show that He could provide light when Ra could not, thus proving to Egypt that Ra was dead. He used a cloud that moved freely in the sky to show that He had power over the air, showing that Shu was no more.

    God used fire at night to show that He could provide light when Ra could not, thus proving to Egypt that Ra was dead. He used a cloud that moved freely in the sky to show that He had power over the air, showing that Shu was no more.

    God intentionally used symbols the Egyptians revered to prove that their gods were subdued. It was a magnificent display of God’s power over false gods, ideologies, and philosophies. Similarly, the Spirit of God is required for us today to expose falsehoods, strong delusion, and anything opposed to biblical Truth.

    The Spirit of God is required for us today to expose falsehoods, strong delusion, and anything opposed to biblical Truth.

    Types & Shadows Within the Exodus Story

    Warning: I’m going to seriously nerd out on this topic. So, if you’re a casual reader looking for quick points, go ahead and skip down to the next subject.

    The apostle Paul compared New Testament baptism to the crossing of the Red Sea in 1 Corinthians 10. Vaughn describes it this way, “The Red Sea is a shadow of water baptism for Christians today.” He continues, “Crossing the Red Sea, then, is akin to passing through the water for the remission of sins.” The typological imagery of the Hebrew’s deliverance from Egypt to New Testament salvation is fascinating. Each element of salvation and the Christian life is foreshadowed in the Exodus story.

    Egypt represents both the bondage of sin and the world from which we need saving. Moses, as the deliverer, then becomes a type of Christ. The captive Hebrew’s decision to leave Egypt is a type of repentance. As mentioned, the Red Sea is a type of water baptism. The cloud and pillar of fire become symbolic of the Holy Spirit. The Hebrew’s subsequent wandering in the wilderness post-Red Sea is a type of a believer’s life as a stranger and pilgrim in this present world awaiting entrance into the Promised Land. And, of course, the Promised Land itself is emblematic of our eternal home in Heaven.

    As Vaughn carefully points out, Acts 2:37-38 emphatically states that the three elements of the New Birth (or salvation) is repentance, water baptism in Jesus’ name, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost, first evidenced by speaking in other tongues (or previously unlearned languages) as the Spirit gives the utterance (or inspiration). Apostolics differ from numerous other persuasions in that we affirm the essentiality of baptism and Spirit infilling. However, this has caused some consternation when comparing the typology of the Exodus account to the apostolic view of New Testament salvation. The glory cloud typifying the Spirit of God leads them but does not fill them as the Spirit does in Acts 2.

    Vaughn does an admirable job of continuing the biblical narrative of the cloud going from the Tabernacle to Solomon’s Temple and finally into human vessels in Acts 2. He demonstrates that Scripture doesn’t leave the typology of the infilling of the Spirit unfinished or unfulfilled. However, as is often the case in Scripture, there’s a mixing of metaphors that completes the short-term picture emblematic of salvation in the Exodus account. For those who would like a resolution of salvific foreshadowing, it can be found in Exodus 15:22-27, which describes the Hebrew’s encounter with the bitter waters of Marah.

    Upon leaving the Red Sea (baptism), Moses led the people into the desert of Shur. The King James Version says, “Moses brought Israel from the Red Sea (Exodus 14:22).” The New Living Translation says, “Moses led the people of Israel away from the Red Sea (Exodus 15:22).” However, the literal translation of “brought” and “led” is that he “made them journey,” which is not a common expression in this context.[i] As you will see momentarily, the forcefulness of this language further drives home the Scriptural theme of moving from baptism to the infilling of the Spirit. Once again, I’m reminded of Acts 2:38 and its declaration to repent and be baptized, “and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” 

    After three days in the desert, they desperately needed life-giving water. This typifies the believer’s need to be filled with the Spirit to survive life in the wilderness (this world) traveling to the Promised Land (Heaven). Arguing that the infilling of the Holy Ghost isn’t necessary for salvation is like arguing that water isn’t essential for life. When the Hebrews finally reached the waters of Marah, it was too bitter to drink. Some commentators suggest the bitterness of the water referred to the taste due to high mineral content. As if people literally dying of thirst would fuss about bad-tasting water. I find that view ludicrous. Likely the water was undrinkable due to high salt content.[ii]

    Arguing that the infilling of the Holy Ghost isn’t necessary for salvation is like arguing that water isn’t essential for life.

    So, in Exodus 15:24, Moses cried out to God, and the Lord showed him a tree. Isn’t that amazing? Now we have a tree that becomes a type of the cross. Interestingly, this verse doesn’t describe Moses receiving any Divine instructions about what to do with this tree. Although perhaps we can take it for granted that the instructions were given. Regardless, Moses cast the tree into the bitter water, and it miraculously became sweet (drinkable). Furthermore, after tasting the sweet water, the people received a standard from the Lord to listen carefully to His commands and obey all His ordinances and decrees. That instruction came with a promise that if they were obedient, they would not suffer the diseases of the Egyptians, and they would find healing from the hand of the Lord (Exodus 15:25-26).

    Let me try to unpack all the New Testament parallels in that brief passage of Scripture.

    • We have no access to the life-giving water of the Spirit without the cross (1 Corinthians 1:18, 1 Peter 2:24-25, John 3:16, Galatians 2:20, Galatians 3:13, Philippians 2:5-8, Colossians 2:14, Colossians 1:19-20, Ephesians 2:16, 1 John 2:1-4, Romans 6:6, Isaiah 53:5).
    • There is no life (salvation) without the infilling of the Spirit (Romans 8:5, Romans 8:9, Romans 8:14, 1 Corinthians 12:13, 1 John 4:13).
    • Not only is the Spirit necessary, but it is wonderfully sweet.
    • The infilling of the Spirit enables us to live in obedience to the commandments of the Lord. It empowers us to overcome the bondage of sin. Without the Spirit, we would quickly be enslaved again by the world (Egypt) (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:8, Acts 4:33, 1 Corinthians 12:10, Hebrews 2:4)
    • The Spirit opens the door to the miraculous. Spiritual and physical healing are obtainable because of the cross and the successive working of the Spirit in and through God’s people (James 5:14-15, Matthew 18:18, John 14:12).
    • Because of the supernatural empowerment over sin the Spirit provides, we can be impervious to common ailments typical of Egyptian (worldly) lifestyles.
    • For reference sake, here is a list of other Scriptures that speak metaphorically of the Spirit as water (John 4:10-15, John 7:37-39, Isaiah 12:3, Isaiah 44:3, Revelation 21:6, Revelation 22:17, 1 Corinthians 10:4, 1 Corinthians 12:13, John 6:63, Exodus 17:6).  

    There is no life (salvation) without the infilling of the Spirit (Romans 8:5, Romans 8:9, Romans 8:14, 1 Corinthians 12:13, 1 John 4:13).

    Without the Spirit, we would quickly be enslaved again by the world (Egypt) (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:8, Acts 4:33, 1 Corinthians 12:10, Hebrews 2:4)

    Whew. Ok. One final thought on the typology found in the Exodus story: Exodus 16 introduces the miraculous manna from heaven that God provided for the children of Israel to sustain them during their wilderness wanderings. That manna typifies the Word of God a believer needs to be spiritually sustained today. Just as the people had to gather the manna for themselves each morning, we are to hide God’s word in our hearts daily. A day without feasting on the Word should be as rare as a day without food.

    Just as the people had to gather the manna for themselves each morning, we are to hide God’s word in our hearts daily. A day without feasting on the Word should be as rare as a day without food.

    Just as it was the ministry’s job to preserve the manna for future generations in Exodus 16:33, today it is the ministry’s responsibility to preserve the Word from generation to generation. Also, the Israelites grew tired of the manna. Eventually, their gratitude turned to ungratefulness, and they hungered for Egyptian foods (Numbers 11:6, Numbers 21:5). When the people spoke against Moses and the manna, God sent poisonous snakes among the people as a judgment. Here are a few lessons we should learn from the manna:

    Just as it was the ministry’s job to preserve the manna for future generations in Exodus 16:33, today it is the ministry’s responsibility to preserve the Word from generation to generation.

    • People who grow tired of the Word will attack the man of God over them.
    • Tiring of the Word is a sign of carnality.
    • The Word is our spiritual sustenance. We die spiritually without the Word, just as we would die physically without food.
    • Grumbling about the Word invites poisonous things into our lives.
    • There is hidden manna in Heaven for those who are victorious (Revelation 2:17).
    • Deuteronomy 8:3 tells us that God humbled the Israelites by letting them go hungry and then feeding them with manna to teach them that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God. Jesus quoted this Scripture while being tempted by Satan in the wilderness (Matthew 4:4).
    • Jesus was the Word made flesh (John 1:14), the Word incarnate (John 1:1-3), the Living Word (John 6:63), the bread of life (John 6:35). One of the most dramatic links between Old Testament types and shadows is in John 6:58, where Jesus refers to Himself as the “true bread” that came down from heaven. Jesus describes how the ancient Israelites ate manna from heaven, but it did not provide eternal life. In contrast, Jesus promises that the manna He provides will live forever.

    There is hidden manna in Heaven for those who are victorious (Revelation 2:17).

    Desire Invites the Divine

    Vaughn brings out a beautiful point from Moses’ forty days basking in the cloud of God’s glory as he received the Ten Commandments. I’d never thought of it this way, but Vaughn notes that the forty days on the mountain was a time of total isolation from people. While Moses was enjoying the presence of the Lord, the people were creating a golden calf and falling into idolatry. Vaughn says:

    It was when the people wanted to distance themselves from God and the man of God that God called Moses to meet with Him. Often when we are ostracized from people who feel threatened by our relationship with God, He will call us up to the mountain to stay a bit longer with Him.

    Often when we are ostracized from people who feel threatened by our relationship with God, He will call us up to the mountain to stay a bit longer with Him.

    There is inevitable loneliness that accompanies true dedication to the Lord. A social dissidence resides in the heart of every lover of God’s presence. As Vaughn says, “God will always lead you where He can be with you.” If God has to sever friendships to be with you, He will do it. If God is leading you away from a relationship, rest assured He is doing so to be with you. God calls you to climb the mountain, not as a punishment, but as an invitation to be with Him uniquely and memorably. Never allow peer pressure or the desire to fit in keep you from climbing the mountain and experiencing the glory of God. Vaughn stresses that it takes discipline to climb a mountain, and it requires spiritual discipline to enter into God’s presence today. Vaughn gives this insightful thought:

    God will always lead you where He can be with you. If God has to sever friendships to be with you, He will do it. If God is leading you away from a relationship, rest assured He is doing so to be with you.

    Never allow peer pressure or the desire to fit in keep you from climbing the mountain and experiencing the glory of God.

    The exclusive presence of God only seems exclusive to those who are unwilling to pursue Him. Praying, fasting, and studying are disciplines, but eventually, discipline becomes desire. And desire invites the Divine.

    The exclusive presence of God only seems exclusive to those who are unwilling to pursue Him. Praying, fasting, and studying are disciplines, but eventually, discipline becomes desire. And desire invites the Divine.

    The Difference Between the Cloud and the Glory

    Vaughn spends a good deal of time underscoring how the cloud of God and the glory of God are two distinct manifestations. In reference to Exodus 40:33-35, Vaughn states, “The cloud covered the tent of the congregation while the glory of God filled the Tabernacle.” You might remember that Moses asked to see God’s glory. But God responded that no man could look fully at His glory and live. Therefore, God only partially granted Moses’ request by allowing him to look at the hinder parts of His glory. Even that little glimpse of God’s glory was so powerful that it caused Moses’ face to shine with a brilliant light.

    The cloud was a shield or partition that covered the glory of God so the people could see it without really seeing it. But just as Moses’ shining face became a conduit for God’s glory to be glimpsed by the people, we can also become glowing lights of God’s glory for our generation. Consider this powerful quote from Vaughn:

    Can people tell we have been in the presence of God? We should have an afterglow of His character in our attitude if we are spending time with God. More time in the presence of love will make us more loving. More time in the presence of peace will make us peaceful. More time in the presence of joy will make us joyful. Consequently, the people you come in contact with will notice the difference, and it will brighten their day. If your life is not shining light into this dark world, then perhaps you are not spending enough time with God.   

    We should have an afterglow of His character in our attitude if we are spending time with God. More time in the presence of love will make us more loving. More time in the presence of peace will make us peaceful.

    If your life is not shining light into this dark world, then perhaps you are not spending enough time with God.

    The New Tabernacle of God

    Vaughn draws an interesting comparison between the Tabernacle in the wilderness and the New Testament Church. He begins by quoting a portion of John 1:14, “…and the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” Vaughn points out that “dwelt” is the Greek word meaning “to tabernacle.” Jesus became flesh so that God could tabernacle with humanity in a new way. Vaughn makes his main point, saying:

    Since the Tabernacle is a type of the Church, it can be argued that the Israelite camp represents our life. Just as the Tabernacle was at the center of the Israelite camp, we must build our lives around the Church, the dwelling place of God. God is not limited to a physical structure, but like the Tabernacle, the Church is a place where we regularly visit with God.

    Just as the Tabernacle was at the center of the Israelite camp, we must build our lives around the Church, the dwelling place of God. God is not limited to a physical structure, but like the Tabernacle, the Church is a place where we regularly visit with God.

    Three Factors Always Surrounding A Move of God

    In great detail, Vaughn builds the case beginning with Leviticus 9:22-23 and moving carefully to the book of Acts, that three common factors always surround or proceed a move of God:

    1. A house was built.
    2. There were consecrated people who followed instructions.
    3. There was a sacrifice.

    And there were two responses from God:

    1. The cloud.
    2. The fire.

    To prove his point, Vaughn walks us through the parallels between the move of God surrounding the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple. In both instances, a house was constructed, consecrated people carefully followed instructions, and sacrifice was present. And both times, God responded with a cloud and fire. In true systematic fashion, Vaughn intended these images to fill our minds so we could fully comprehend the spiritual formation of the New Testament Church. And he begins that comparison in a unique manner which few other commentators have touched upon, by quoting Jesus’ shocking declaration found in John 2:19-20:

    Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up… Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?

    Of course, those words were shocking to the listeners because they didn’t understand that Solomon’s corrupted temple was about to become irrelevant within the New Testament paradigm. The presence of God was about to relocate from the Temple to earthen vessels thanks to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. That same Spirit that raised Christ Jesus from the dead desires to dwell inside us individually (Romans 8:9-10). Vaughn says it best:

    It was never enough to have a house among His people; He wanted to be inside of His people. God wants more than to dwell among us; He longs to live in us! In the Old Testament, the Tabernacle preceded the Temple because the Tabernacle was a mobile place for a mobile people while the Temple was a permanent place for a permanent people. God’s glory dwelt in the fleshly temple of Jesus while He walked with humanity. Now He resides in the fleshly Temple of our hearts as a permanent fixture in our lives. Jesus was the living Temple. Now we are the living Temple! When we receive the Holy Spirit, we carry the glory of God around with us.

    It was never enough to have a house among His people; He wanted to be inside of His people. God wants more than to dwell among us; He longs to live in us!

    Jesus was the living Temple. Now we are the living Temple! When we receive the Holy Spirit, we carry the glory of God around with us

    The New House

    In the final pages of It Filled the House, Vaughn begins tying the threads of prophecy and biblical symbolism into a coherent thread. Once he is done, the reader can easily see the tapestry of God’s design woven throughout Scripture. Vaughn draws from Hebrews 3:6, reminding us that Christians are now the house of Jesus or the dwelling place of God. Remember, the first factor surrounding a move of God is the building of a house. Vaughn explains:

    The house built on the Day of Pentecost was not a physical structure like the Tabernacle or Temple. Instead, each individual became the Temple of the Holy Ghost. After the disciples were filled with the Holy Ghost on the Day of Pentecost, the Bible began referring to the group as the church.

    The house built on the Day of Pentecost was not a physical structure like the Tabernacle or Temple. Instead, each individual became the Temple of the Holy Ghost.

    The new house of God is bonded together, not with brick and mortar, but by the Holy Spirit. And while we are thankful for buildings dedicated exclusively to worshipping the Lord, buildings are not the church. The church is the collective body of Spirit-filled believers. Vaughn concisely drives that point home:

    Whereas the people of God once worshipped solely at a physical place that God had filled, they now become the structure that God fills.

    Whereas the people of God once worshipped solely at a physical place that God had filled, they now become the structure that God fills.

    In a scene intended to remind us of Moses’ Tabernacle and Solomon’s Temple, cloven tongues of fire descended upon the heads of the disciples in the Upper Room (Acts 2). Furthermore, they spoke in other tongues (previously unlearned languages) as the Spirit gave them utterance. God responded to their sacrifice with Divine fire. Here we see that the people in the Upper Room became the house, the sacrifice, and they followed instructions. Anyone longing to receive the Holy Spirit today must follow that example. In other words, if a person longs to receive the Spirit of God, they must present themselves as a temple longing to be filled. Also, they must empty themselves through repentance, therefore presenting themselves as a living sacrifice. And they must be completely obedient to God’s Word. Anyone willing to do so will undoubtedly experience the glory of God.

    The Superiority of the New House

    The moving of the Spirit from Tabernacle to Temple to Earthen Vessels was a necessary progression that God intended all along. And because God does everything perfectly, the new house of God comprised of Spirit-filled people is superior to the former houses made with human hands. For example, Vaughn astutely points out that Solomon’s Temple, although massive, was fixed in size while the people multiplied around it. Meaning the Temple in all its splendor could not have accommodated worship forever. No building is large enough to accommodate and contain the worship of the countless multitudes God is reaching towards. Vaughn says:

    Instead of adding to the Temple, God designed a new house that would always grow at the same rate as His people. This new house is called the church.

    Instead of adding to the Temple, God designed a new house that would always grow at the same rate as His people. This new house is called the church.

    This subject reminds us that when we become overly fixated on building better buildings rather than reaching souls, we have misplaced our mandate. That’s not to say that facilities aren’t good, necessary, and even wonderful. They are. Just as a family needs a house, the family of God requires a shared space that accommodates its needs. But there’s an old saying that applies to individual families, and it’s relevant to the church family as well: A house does not make a home. It takes far more than a building to make a group of people family, and it takes far more than a church house to make a group of people the church. Vaughn gives one last example of how the new house of God is superior to the Tabernacle and Temple of old:

    When we become overly fixated on building better buildings rather than reaching souls, we have misplaced our mandate.

    A house does not make a home. It takes far more than a building to make a group of people family, and it takes far more than a church house to make a group of people the church.

    Like the Tabernacle in Moses’ day, the church is mobile… Like the Temple, the church has the permanence of God’s Spirit within the hearts of the believers. In this way, the church carries both the mobility of the Tabernacle and the permanence of the Temple.

    Like the Tabernacle in Moses’ day, the church is mobile… Like the Temple, the church has the permanence of God’s Spirit within the hearts of the believers. In this way, the church carries both the mobility of the Tabernacle and the permanence of the Temple.

    As you can see, the Spirit enables, unites, excites, and invites the whole world into fellowship with God. The infilling of the Spirit isn’t a side doctrine or a menial gift for some super-elite people. It’s the very thing that makes the church the church.

    As you can see, the Spirit enables, unites, excites, and invites the whole world into fellowship with God. The infilling of the Spirit isn’t a side doctrine or a menial gift for some super-elite people. It’s the very thing that makes the church the church.

    [i] John N. Oswalt, “Exodus,” in Genesis Exodus, vol. 1 of Cornerstone Biblical Commentary. Accordance electronic ed. (Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008), 401.

    https://accordance.bible/link/read/Cornerstone_Commentary#4238

    [ii] Duane A. Garrett, A Commentary on Exodus, Kregel Exegetical Library. Accordance electronic ed. (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2014), 412.

    https://accordance.bible/link/read/KEL_OT-7#4063

    Link to purchase It Filled the House by Samuel Vaughn on Amazon.com

    Related posts:

    1. Should Christians Drink Alcohol?
    2. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    3. Radically Apostolic! with Charles G. Robinette (Article + Podcast)
    4. The Anatomy of a Failure (A Scriptural Survey of Why Sincere Souls Fail God) – Article + Podcast
    5. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)
    6. Prayer, Revival & Spiritual Warfare with Joe Campetella (Article + Podcast)
    7. The Development of Vision (Part Two)
    8. Our God Is One with Dr. Talmadge French (Article + Podcast)

    Your Past Is Not Your Future with Coley Reese (Article + Podcast)

    Ryan A. French

    Evangelist Coley Reese is a long-time friend. His ministry is a blessing, and it’s enjoyable talking with him. I knew we could sit down and talk about anything and have a good time, but I precisely wanted to focus on his conversion story. Because we have such different backgrounds, I wanted to learn from his past. I’m a fourth-generation apostolic, and Coley had no church upbringing. He’s the pioneer of Pentecost in his family, and that perspective permeates his ministry. I hope you’ll listen to the entire podcast (featured below). There’s no way I can cover even a tenth of the testimonies and nuggets of wisdom shared in our conversation. However, I want to share some highlights from the podcast in this post for those who prefer to read or as a quick reference for those listening and reading simultaneously. As always, thanks so much for reading and listening to Apostolic Voice. If you’d like to support this ministry financially, please follow this link www.anchor.fm/apostolicvoice/support. Or you can bless Apostolic Voice by leaving us a simple iTunes review at this this link www.podcast.apple.com.

    Helping Sinners Receive the Holy Ghost

    I’ve pulled several thoughts from Coley Reese’s conversion story: One, God can use backsliders and even totally unsaved individuals to push us towards the Truth. Two, a worshipping church will cause lost souls to feel a connection with God they don’t even understand. Three, it’s imperative that churches have at least a few individuals that know how to operate in the altar with wisdom, sensitivity, and apostolic boldness. Four, we must ensure that hungry hearts seeking the Holy Ghost understand how to repent and have repented of their sins. Otherwise, they will not receive the Holy Spirit, leaving them frustrated. All the shaking, praying, weeping, spitting, and gyrating in the world won’t change that fact. However, once a person has repented, we must encourage them to move past remorseful weeping, shame, doubt, and condemnation so they can accept God’s forgiveness and worship their way into the infilling of the Spirit.

    A worshipping church will cause lost souls to feel a connection with God they don’t even understand.

    It’s imperative that churches have at least a few individuals that know how to operate in the altar with wisdom, sensitivity, and apostolic boldness.

    We must ensure hungry hearts seeking the Holy Ghost have repented of their sins. Otherwise, they will not receive the Holy Spirit, leaving them frustrated. All the shaking, praying, weeping, spitting, and gyrating in the world won’t change that fact.

    Once a person has repented, we must encourage them to move past remorseful weeping, shame, doubt, and condemnation so they can accept God’s forgiveness and worship their way into the infilling of the Spirit.

    Feel Called to the Ministry?

    If you’re feeling called to the ministry, remember that God doesn’t care about your past, pedigree, education, or financial status. All God is concerned with is that you’re a willing vessel that can be used, changed, taught, and molded into His image. Often, we think of ministry and preaching in church or something lofty and mystical. But the reality of ministry is servanthood and sacrifice. If trash needs picked up, pick up trash. If chairs need set out or put away, do it. Do it without being asked. Stay longer than others, looking for ways to be a blessing in every church setting. If you are given a leadership position or an area of responsibility, refuse to view that as a stepping stone to something better. Throw yourself into those responsibilities, no matter how big, or small they seem, with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. That doesn’t mean you can’t or won’t feel called to something higher in the future, but if God can’t trust you in the process of exaltation, you will forfeit the higher calling. Many David’s have missed the anointing because they weren’t faithful in their father’s fields doing the menial work entrusted to them for that season of life.

    God doesn’t care about your past, pedigree, education, or financial status. All God is concerned with is that you’re a willing vessel that can be used, changed, taught, and molded into His image.

    The reality of ministry is servanthood and sacrifice. If trash needs picked up, pick up trash. Do it without being asked. Stay longer than others, looking for ways to be a blessing in every church setting.

    If you are given a leadership position or an area of responsibility, refuse to view that as a stepping stone to something better. Throw yourself into those responsibilities, no matter how big, or small they seem, with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength.

    Many David’s have missed the anointing because they weren’t faithful in their father’s fields doing the menial work entrusted to them for that season of life.

    You Don’t Know Me

    Coley Reese shared a story that moved me the most about the time he decided to preach at a homeless shelter without even being asked. This was long before he had much experience as a preacher, but he was passionate and wanted to do something for God. He simply got up and shared the plan of salvation as best he could. No one seemed like they gave his passionate sermon any attention. Twenty years later, he was preaching at Rev. Brandon Batton’s church in Columbus, GA, when a man walked up to him and said, “You don’t know me, but I was at that homeless shelter when you preached all those years back.” How amazing is that? A man was saved and serving God twenty years later because of one sermon that Coley Reese thought had been a moment of failure.

    The Ground Doesn’t Care Where the Seed Comes From

    Coley referenced a sermon by one of our favorite preachers, Rev. Wayne Huntley, called The Treasure’s in the Field. In that message, Rev. Wayne Huntley points out that the ground doesn’t care if the seed falls from the hands of a seasoned farmer, an inexperienced child, or a novice agriculturalist. All that matters to the ground is that it gets the seed. Could it be that we try too hard to package the seed just right and worry about our status too much? I think that analogy morphs well into another similar one; hungry people don’t care who hands them the food. They need their hunger satisfied. I think it’s time for us to all grab a handful of the Word and spread it everywhere we go until it finds good soil.

    Bishop Wayne Huntley points out that the ground doesn’t care if the seed falls from the hands of a seasoned farmer, an inexperienced child, or a novice agriculturalist. All that matters to the ground is that it gets the seed.

    Advice for Student Pastors and Ministers

    Before Coley Reese hit the evangelistic field, he was a veteran Youth Pastor with fifteen years of hard-earned experience. Some jokingly referred to him as the “Bishop” of Youth Pastors. I’d personally witnessed his excellence in that role and wanted him to give a few quick words of advice to Student Pastors and ministers connected to Apostolic Voice. I’m just covering the basics of his response in this summary: One, don’t feel pressured always to put on a high-energy event. Two, don’t be discouraged because students are paying closer attention to your words than they might seem on the surface. Three, it sounds trite, but kids don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care. Four, personal connections are more critical than your preaching. Five, don’t view your role in student ministry as a stepping stone to the next best position. Six, your life speaks louder than your words. Be a good example.

    F.A.N.O.S.

    While Coley and I discussed praying people through to the Holy Ghost, a thread popped up several times. The importance of leading people into repentance. Coley Reese mentioned how he often offers to repent with a person seeking the Holy Ghost. Sometimes, it’s good to call the entire congregation to repent together, which creates an environment of repentance. But evangelists and pastors may run into trouble when certain saints feel as though they are too sanctified to repent like an ordinary sinner. To push back against that ridiculous idea, I mentioned a marriage tip my wife, Taylor, and I have been using for many months.

    For the sake of memory, we use the acronym F.A.N.O.S. which stands for Feelings, Affirmation, Needs, Ownership, and Struggles. Essentially, we take turns on each topic once a day, sharing our current status related to those five topics. Depending on the circumstances, the process can take anywhere from five minutes to a few hours. Everything usually flows naturally for me until I get to the subject of ownership. That’s the moment I’m supposed to own up to mistakes, failures, or attitudes, whether big or small. The same is true for my wife. It’s incredible how many times I can’t think of anything to take ownership over, only to realize Taylor is hurting over my actions that day or vice versa. We have a happy, loving, intentional marriage, and if that’s true in our earthly marriage, how much more do we grieve God without realizing it?

    The bottom line is this. Repentance should be a daily activity in the life of a saint. We don’t always see actions the way God see’s our actions. It’s not that we technically sin intentionally, but we are frail humans in need of God’s constant grace. Beyond that, we should humbly demonstrate repentance so the lost can see it in action. If a call to repentance offends us, we probably need to repent of pride, arrogance, or self-righteousness.

    Repentance should be a daily activity in the life of a saint. We don’t always see actions the way God see’s our actions. It’s not that we technically sin intentionally, but we are frail humans in need of God’s constant grace.

    We should humbly demonstrate repentance so the lost can see it in action. If a call to repentance offends us, we probably need to repent of pride, arrogance, or self-righteousness.

    Takis Fuego Lime Flavored Meat Sticks

    Stick around to the very end of the episode to hear the entire Reese and French families taste and rate Takis Fuego Lime flavored meat sticks by Cattleman’s Cut. It was so much fun recording that tiny segment of Gross-Good-Great. We’d all love to hear your thoughts on the episode, your testimony, or your rating of Takis Fuego Lime flavored meat sticks. You can leave a voice recording at this link www.anchor.fm/apostolicvoice. Say hello, and we might just play it on the next episode. And friend, please know your past does not have to be your future. God can take you to heights and blessings you didn’t even know existed.

    The Treasure Is In the Field by Rev. Wayne Huntley

    Related posts:

    1. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    2. Radically Apostolic! with Charles G. Robinette (Article + Podcast)
    3. Connection vs. Carnality – In Student Ministry
    4. If We Want Our Kids To Stay In Church (Here’s Five Things We Need to Talk to Them About) – Article + Podcast
    5. The Anatomy of a Failure (A Scriptural Survey of Why Sincere Souls Fail God) – Article + Podcast
    6. Prayer, Revival & Spiritual Warfare with Joe Campetella (Article + Podcast)
    7. Let’s Be Honest – AV Interview with Jeremy Gove
    8. 9 Types of Church Services and Why We Need Them (Article + Podcast)

    An Open Letter to Dr. Jordan B. Peterson

    Ryan A. French

    Dear Dr. Peterson

    Please forgive the gimmicky aspect of this letter. Your immense popularity or repulsiveness (depending on whom you’re talking to) renders you unreachable by normal means. I’m under no illusion that you will see this letter. However, I sincerely hope this reaches you at some point. Allow me to begin by expressing my sincere earnestness in praying for your health and for the health and safety of your family, whom you seem to love dearly. Also, I’d like to thank you for your thoughtful, meaningful, and life-impacting contributions to national conversations. 12 Rules for Life has roused many forgotten young men to rally to the challenges of existence with courage, integrity, and goodness.

    Beyond Refreshing

    Along with millions, I’ve enjoyed listening to your podcast and following your lectures. I’ve cheered in admiration as you’ve resolutely refused to be cowed by woke media personalities or bullied into submission by cultural fads. You are a voice of reason, logic, and morality. That’s beyond refreshing in this post-postmodern or metamodernist culture (I’d love to hear your thoughts on post versus post-post versus metamodernism). It must be strange navigating the complexities of fame on a worldwide platform. I, for one, am appreciative that you do so with grace and kindness even when in strong disagreement.

    Your Popularity Among Christians

    I’ve heard you ponder the question of why you are so popular among Christians several times. And why your lectures on Genesis garnered overwhelming positive attention. Even though you are not a theologian, I thoroughly enjoy your religious conversations. Your influence has impacted me to take a renewed interest in Jungian psychology. I’m indebted to you for that as I quote Jung several times in a soon-to-be-released book that takes a biblical look at alcohol. Anyway, most people you speak with lean more philosophical than evangelical. Although you remain cautiously critical of “orthodox” Christianity, the liturgical influence on your religious (or philosophical) thinking is obvious.

    A Brief Context

    For the sake of transparency, I am a minister within a marginalized segment of Christianity. Interestingly, postmodernism helped and hurt us at the same time. It hurt in the sense that culture moved away from seeking or even believing in absolutes or Truth. Yet, it helped because we are less ostracized due to our beliefs (we were severely persecuted at the turn of the twentieth century). These words might sound a little foreign; I am a Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal Christian. We’re the fastest-growing religious movement in the world, even as liturgical churches are shrinking. In the past one hundred-plus years, we have exploded to the tune of approximately fifty million worldwide. Even though we are technically evangelical by definition, historically, our evangelical brethren have been loath to allow us that title.

    Answering the Question

    I mention my beliefs not because I expect you to find my theology particularly interesting (although you might). But because I believe my perspective allows a unique insight into your immense popularity among Christians of all stripes. You are tremendously popular in my circles and the converging circles of Christianity. And here’s why: You intellectually articulate the defense of our existence. That’s the nutshell version. Beyond that, you are the most intelligent person using your influence to help us maintain space and have a voice in the public space. Even when you don’t agree with everything we say or believe, you brilliantly defend our right to hold those thoughts and speak them out loud, whether in our churches, public forums, or the universities. Your unique one-foot in Christianity and one-foot outside Christianity stance gives you gravitas blatantly religious leaders can’t wield.  

    The Woke Wave

    Sincere Christians saw the woke wave coming decades before it hit culture full force. We were silenced and demonized in the public schools. Our children were bullied into submission by Stalin-like totalitarian tactics. The universities turned Christian shaming into an art form. I’ve been forbidden to open up city council meetings by praying in the name of Jesus. And that’s in the Bible Belt of the United States. That’s only one small aspect of the anti-free speech overreach directed at Christians in public forums. We’ve watched our cities covered in graffiti while the Ten Commandments were removed from our courtrooms. We’ve had to fight like mad to keep the government from forcing us to fund abortions for people on our payrolls. Same-sex couples who’ve never darkened the doors of our churches routinely try to force us to marry them in our buildings, hanging legal action over our heads if we don’t comply. If we dare try to help children suffering from gender dysphoria overcome their confusion lovingly, we’re called hate-mongers and worse. I could go on and on.

    You’re the Voice We Could Not Use

    We’re subjugated to name-calling constantly while being told to keep our mouths shut. Free speech is only allowed for certain woke groups these days. All this seemed to go from a simmer to a boil when the transgender movement began doing its best to force us into ignoring science and radically changing definitions. Then you stepped onto the scene and became the voice we could not use in that arena. Your brilliance, coupled with genuine humility, captured our consciousness. As we got to know you, we realized you were a true friend and a sincere moralist. And while we may approach morality from divergent directions, we hold it dear nonetheless.

    You’re Much Like Aaron

    In some ways, your notoriety reminds me of Aaron (greatly anticipating your book and lectures on Exodus). As you know, much has been assumed about the Bible’s description of Moses as being “slow of speech and slow of tongue (Exodus 4:10).” Was Moses simply inarticulate? Did he have a stutter? I’ve always leaned towards the theory that Moses had a speech impediment of some kind. Whatever it was, God wanted Moses to overcome it and speak. But Moses resisted God and failed to use his voice. God relented and sent Aaron to be Moses’ spokesman before Pharaoh and often before the people. Moses’ failure to speak up created a vacuum (particularly in the political and secular realm) that Aaron naturally filled. God even acknowledged that Aaron was intelligent and eloquent compared to Moses (Exodus 4:14-16). It seems you have become the confident voice the Church was too afraid or perhaps unable to use. You’re the unofficial spokesperson, if you will.

    The Overlooked Experience of Glossolalia

    Admittedly, my primary motivation for writing is a burning desire to humbly add something to an ongoing thread that permeates your conversations. First, you have mentioned a particular mystical religious encounter that was personal to you. Also, the question of transcendent, mysterious occurrences, their origins, and repeatability comes up periodically. Lately, I’ve been noticing more and more scientific questions involving the use of psychedelics to replicate (or achieve) a spiritually transformative experience. I find myself talking to your podcast through my air pods when these topics arise. Mainly because the transformative encounter described in these conversations, although rare in liturgical circles, are frequent experiences for Pentecostals. We experience many types of transcendent encounters with God, but most notable is what the book of Acts refers to as speaking in other tongues. Which can be a known language (although previously unlearned) or a heavenly language, but it produces an ecstasy and clarity like nothing in this world can offer. This biblical phenomenon is commonly referred to as glossolalia in academic circles. Apostolics consider it to be a necessary element in the process of redemption.

    Glossolalia’s Transformative Narrative

    Regardless, I’ve witnessed countless individuals give up smoking, various drugs, and alcohol without any withdrawal symptoms after experiencing glossolalia (we would refer to it as receiving the Holy Spirit). It’s that well-documented transformative religious experience you’ve mentioned at various times. I know how strange this can sound to a person unfamiliar with it. However, is it stranger than looking for answers in psychedelics? Having witnessed your intellectual curiosity at play, I’m reasonably confident you would find the data interesting at the very least. Hundreds of millions have experienced glossolalia. Many of those millions have been permanently changed for the good. If this sounds overly preachy, I apologize. I am a preacher, and there’s nothing I can do to change that reality. Believe it or not, I’ve tried very hard to avoid inserting gobs of theology, dogma, and personal opinions into this letter. My only hope is that perhaps you will use a measure of your vast intellect to investigate glossolalia with a level of openness. Whatever else, it can’t just be discarded outright or ignored with any genuine intellectual honesty. Just the plethora of historical biblical accounts (Isaiah 28:11-12, Mark 16:17, Acts 2:1-47, Acts 10:46, Acts 19:6) set a narrative that’s difficult to reject off-hand.

    Encouragement in Exodus

    Please continue to speak against impending malevolence courageously. May you and your family be blessed. I pray your body remains as strong as your mind. I’ll bid farewell with one of my favorite passages from the book of Exodus:

    8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. 9 And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: 10 Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land. 11 Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses. 12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel (Exodus 1:8-12).

    This passage encourages me when I’m feeling weak and insignificant, and adversaries seem intensely overwhelming. It’s a reminder that even enemies perceive the strengths that I can’t see. Furthermore, affliction placed upon righteous people is a precursor to growth and eventual deliverance.

    Sincerely, Ryan French

    Related posts:

    1. Radically Apostolic! with Charles G. Robinette (Article + Podcast)
    2. Should Christians Drink Alcohol?
    3. Oneness Theology, Church History & Where the Church Is Right Now – Podcast Transcript with Dr. Talmadge French
    4. Our God Is One with Dr. Talmadge French (Article + Podcast)
    5. Christianity Isn’t Dying (Dead Churches Are Dying)
    6. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)
    7. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    8. The Anatomy of a Failure (A Scriptural Survey of Why Sincere Souls Fail God) – Article + Podcast

    Our God Is One with Dr. Talmadge French (Article + Podcast)

    Ryan A. French

    Sweet Heat Skittles

    My father, Dr. Talmadge French and I, just finished recording America and End Time Prophecy, the Oneness of God & Miracle Mission’s Moments for the podcast (linked below). You absolutely do not want to miss that episode. Dad recounted major miracles he’s witnessed and experienced from his missions trips around the world. We talk prophecy, rapture stuff, and think about where America fits into all of that. And dad gives an updated count of the number of oneness Pentecostal believers worldwide. We taste and rate Sweet Heat Skittles at the end. That was fun!

    Our God Is One

    We mentioned the release of his best-selling book Our God Is One: The Story of the Oneness Pentecostals in the Serbian language during that conversation. Dad originally released Our God Is One in 1999. It’s incredible to think that twenty-three years later, it’s impacting the Serbian work of God and has become an instrument to bring trinitarian churches into the oneness movement! Which inspired me to summarize Our God Is One in this format. Usually, I would include the link to purchase the book, but it’s been out of print for several months. Thankfully, it will be reprinted, rebranded, and updated in the near future. Our God Is One is a unique blending of oneness Pentecostal history, theology, methodology, and statistical analysis. This summary is not a replacement for the book itself but rather a complementarian, precursor, or refresher for those who have already read it. From this point forward, I will refer to dad as Dr. French for the sake of readability.

    It’s All in Him!

    Most apostolics are familiar with George Farrow’s classic song penned in 1920, “It’s All in Him.” It isn’t shocking to hear lyrics like that now, but there was a time at the turn of the twentieth century when lyrics like “For in Him Dwells All the Fullness of the Godhead and Lord of All is He” would have reeked of heresy to most Christians. Dr. French opens by quoting that and several other notable self-designated Jesus’ Name Pentecostal anthems. In those early days of the oneness movement, songs like that were an expression of separation and a brave exclamation of revelation. George Farrow and others differentiated themselves from their trinitarian counterparts with rhythms and rhymes.

    Dr. French opens the book by quoting that great song in homage to those early oneness Pentecostal pioneers. Those first leaders couldn’t have imagined the phenomenal growth their movement would experience over the next one-hundred-plus years. In what Dr. French calls “those early, unassuming days of the movement,” their focus wasn’t on growth but correct doctrine and pleasing God.

    In the early, unassuming days of the Oneness Pentecostal movement, their focus wasn’t on growth but correct doctrine and pleasing God. -Dr. Talmadge French

    Important Definitions

    It would be challenging to follow Our God Is One or this article without clarifying definitions. Thankfully, Dr. French gives two helpful definitions right away. He defines Oneness Pentecostalism below:

    Oneness Pentecostalism is that theologically distinctive branch of the Pentecostal movement which emphasizes what it views as the Scriptural formula for water baptism – baptism ‘in the name of Jesus’ – and the absolute, indivisible ‘Oneness’ of God revealed in the full Deity of Jesus Christ. It emerged within the context of the fervor of restorationism and “back to the Bible” literalism at the turn of the century. Classical Pentecostalism’s argumentation for a return to “the Bible” regarding speaking with tongues and spiritual gifts was simply applied to the issues of baptism and the Godhead.

    Notice the term Dr. French used in the above quote, “Classical Pentecostalism.” For some, that might not be a familiar term, so he goes on to explain further:

    Oneness Pentecostals have usually been categorized as ‘classical’ Pentecostals, referring not only to their roots in the early movement but their shared belief in the essentiality of tongues as the “initial evidence” of the Spirit baptism.

    Doctrinal Distinctives

    The explosive growth of the oneness movement is intrinsically linked with its doctrinal distinctives. Dr. French gives a succinct overview of classical oneness theology:

    In its rejection of the classical conception of the Trinity, it embraced, in actuality, a highly Christocentric, simultaneous modalism of the Father, Son, and Spirit, in which Jesus is God. Jesus is the Yahweh of the Old Testament, the one and only God in totality, incarnate in the New Testament. The ‘Oneness of God’ is an all-encompassing Jesus-centrism in which Father, Son, and Spirit are not conceived as separate, distinct ‘persons’ within the Godhead, but rather as ‘modes’ or ‘manifestations’ of God.

    The explosive growth of the oneness movement is intrinsically linked with its doctrinal distinctives.

    The Oneness of God is an all-encompassing Jesus-centrism in which Father, Son, and Spirit are not conceived as separate, distinct persons within the Godhead, but rather as modes or manifestations of God. -Dr. Talmadge French

    Not unlike the theological constructs of early Jewish Christianity, Oneness theology link the Shema, “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One,” with the most primitive of the kerygmatic confessions of the early church – “Jesus is Lord.” That is, Jesus is the one and only Lord, the ‘totality’ of the Godhead, incarnate. Thus, He is not a part, or a second part, or second person, but God in totality, manifest in human form as the unique God-man. “Father” and “Son” are viewed simply as incarnational terms necessary for the discussion of God in His dual nature, God and man. Likewise, “Holy Spirit” is the distinguishing expression for “Christ in,” God indwelling, the believer at and after Pentecost, in the unique manner made possible only by the reality of the resurrection.

    Not unlike the theological constructs of early Jewish Christianity, Oneness theology link the Shema: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One, with the most primitive of the kerygmatic confessions of the early church – Jesus is Lord. -Dr. Talmadge French

    Oneness Roots

    Interestingly, Dr. French clarifies an often-asked question: Are oneness Pentecostal evangelical? And the answer to that is “yes.” The oneness movement is rooted in a passion for Jesus Christ, Scripture, life-changing new birth experiences, and evangelism. But that doesn’t mean mainstream Evangelicalism embraces the oneness movement. Dr. French mentions J.I. Packer, who referred to Pentecostalism as Evangelicalism’s “half-sister.” Sadly, that kind of pejorative, and worse, is historically typical. But oneness Pentecostalism traces its roots back to the holiness and restorationist movements of the nineteenth century, which, as Dr. French points out, “is sometimes referred to as ‘radical’ Evangelicalism.”

    At its onset, the oneness movement was shunned, ostracized, criticized, and belittled by Evangelicals and classical trinitarian Pentecostals. The oneness movement’s explicit rejection of Trinitarian doctrine combined with its strong holiness underpinnings has made it a target for charges of cultism, bigotry, and heresy. And while Dr. French acknowledges that the oneness movement has become more widely accepted, “mainstream” Christianity still views it derisively. Especially in light of Evangelicalism’s rapid drift away from moral absolutes, biblical inerrancy, and godly living. This creates what Dr. French calls the “dilemma and paradox” of the oneness movement. He boils it down in this statement:

    Their (the oneness movement’s) distinctive theological identity is, at one and the same time, both rooted in Pentecostal-Evangelicalism, and yet at enormous tension with it.

    Though rooted in the holiness movement and budding trinitarian Pentecostalism, the oneness movement is best described as restorationism. Dr. French describes it this way:

    Oneness Pentecostalism, within a dozen years of the rise of Pentecostalism, was birthed in a rekindling of restorationist fervor which swept through the entire movement, vigorously promoting a return to the New Testament baptismal formula and understanding of the Godhead.

    Oneness Pentecostalism was birthed in a rekindling of restorationist fervor which swept through the entire movement, vigorously promoting a return to the New Testament baptismal formula and understanding of the Godhead. -Dr. Talmadge French

    Pentecost In My Soul

    Few things capture the essence of oneness theology as accurately and concisely as the songs birthed in those early days. To illustrate this, Dr. French highlights the famous Black Holiness songwriter Thoro Harris who, after converting to Pentecostalism, penned “Pentecost In My Soul” in 1914. He wrote many beloved Pentecostal hymns such as “Jesus Only” and “All That Thrills My Soul Is Jesus.” Those songs and many others encapsulate the highly Christocentric pietism that made the oneness movement radically distinct from its counterparts. And it was enormously successful. But that doesn’t mean it was easy, Dr. French notes:

    Pentecostals were struggling with an inevitable clash with historic Christianity, the heritage of the Protestant Reformation, and their own spiritual identity. Central to this struggle was the conviction that the historic church, largely apostatized, required restoration to primitive Christian faith.

    To be sure, there was some disagreement about what primitive Christianity was in practice and theology. However, Pentecostals genuinely believed they were experiencing a ‘latter day’ restoration. And they viewed the Reformation as a steppingstone towards restorationism. Dr. French summarizes those early views this way:

    Pentecostalism, in this way, perceived the period from the Reformation forward as restoration, from Luther’s sola scriptura to Wesley’s holiness to Seymour’s Azusa revival. Oneness adherents have also identified elements within the Radical Reformation, especially Michael Servetus and the immersion and anti-Trinitarianism of the Anabaptists, as evidence of glimmers of restoration.

    Pentecostalism, perceived the period from the Reformation forward as restoration, from Luther’s sola scriptura to Wesley’s holiness to Seymour’s Azusa revival. Dr. Talmadge French

    Fundamentalist Influences

    It would be incorrect to say that Pentecostalism is rooted in Fundamentalism. However, it is substantially influenced by it. Dr. French is quick to mention there is “considerable” debate about “the extent and precise nature of Fundamentalism’s influence upon Pentecostalism.” He clarifies the distinctions and the influences, stating:

    Fundamentalism, like Pentecostalism, embraced premillennialism, dispensationalism, and the verbally inerrant inspiration of Scripture. At the turn of the century, as Pentecostalism was emerging, Fundamentalism was the point conservative force opposing the higher critics and the modernist attacks on the miracles of the Bible. Although these were issues with which Pentecostalism readily identified, it was tenuous indeed, for Fundamentalism opposed with equal rigor Pentecostalism’s belief in modern miracles and tongues.

    Regardless, Pentecostalism often utilized Fundamentalist arguments to further the points they agreed with. And even found Fundamentalist writers who openly favored oneness doctrinal positions.

    Higher Life Influences

    In 1875, the Keswick movement formed a holiness group that emphasized “higher life” and promoted “experiential holiness.” Dr. French states:

    Important themes included enduement with power and the infilling of the Spirit, stressed by such leaders as R.A. Torrey and D.L. Moody. Yet it rejected the phenomenon of emerging Pentecostalism.

    If I understand correctly, it seems John Wesley’s Methodism, including its holiness beliefs and emphasis on Spirit baptism, greatly influenced the Keswick movement, which influenced the early Oneness Pentecostals. Dr. French says it like this:

    As did their forerunners in the holiness movement, the Pentecostals emphasized holiness, enthusiastically and with restorationist zeal, as separation from sin and worldliness. And, due perhaps to the intensity of the restorationist motif as the dominant influence within Oneness Pentecostalism, the emphasis upon strict standards of holiness remains a prominent feature of the movement. Apart from the issue of the means of sanctification, holiness was considered a restored, essential element in the life of a believer. “A holiness preacher?” wrote D.C.O. Opperman, “God has no other kind. Might as well say `wet water’ as to say `holiness preacher.’”

    As did their forerunners in the holiness movement, the Pentecostals emphasized holiness, enthusiastically and with restorationist zeal, as separation from sin and worldliness. -Dr. Talmadge French

    Holiness was considered a restored, essential element in the life of a believer. A holiness preacher? wrote D.C.O. Opperman, God has no other kind. Might as well say wet water as to say holiness preacher.

    The Predominant Impulse of Oneness Pentecostalism

    Indeed, all of the above-mentioned theological strands converged at the dawning of the twentieth century to form the oneness movement. Even early healing movements helped weave conditions for Oneness Pentecostalism to emerge successfully. But Dr. French views restorationism as “the dominant and overarching influence amidst other significant streams which intermingled in important ways.” Unique to Oneness Pentecostalism was a predominant restorationist impulse that viewed the entire New Testament through the lens of the book of Acts. In doing so, they made the book of Acts accounts typical experiences for all believers.

    The Founding of Pentecostalism

    In addition to the “latter rain” metaphor, Pentecostal founders like Howard Goss referred to the movement as “the winds of God.” They spoke of tongues as falling “suddenly from Heaven.” And although glossolalia had occurred among earlier holiness movements sporadically, it was Charles Fox Parham that, as Dr. French says, “provided the spark which ignited Pentecostalism as a distinctive movement by theologically linking `tongues’ with the baptism of the Spirit.” Parham was the first to articulate that tongues were the evidence of Spirit baptism. Although he still considered tongues a “second work of grace.” Dr. French describes the early oneness movements preferences regarding their identity:

    Interestingly, Oneness Pentecostals tended to self-identify most readily with Parham’s original designation for the movement, “Apostolic,” even more so than the term “Pentecostal.” “Pentecostal” related mostly to the experience of Spirit baptism, whereas “Apostolic” was a more direct identification with the restoration of the doctrine, faith, and experience of the New Testament witness of the apostles.

    Early Pentecostal Controversies

    Like every movement, the early Pentecostal movement was plagued with controversies and fraught with disagreements. Dr. French describes debates that surrounded the issue of sanctification:

    William H. Durham, a Baptist minister from Chicago who experienced tongues at Azusa in 1907, opposed the commonly accepted holiness view of sanctification as a separate, second crisis experience, or a “second work of grace” distinct from salvation. Instead, Durham espoused a view that posited the work of sanctification in the single experience of conversion, not subsequent to conversion. This view was predicated on the sufficiency of Calvary to ascribe sanctification to the believer at the time of conversion but experienced as a spiritual process throughout life. Durham referred to this as the “finished work of Calvary” view of sanctification.

    But the sanctification issue paled in comparison to the Oneness controversy. Dr. French summarizes the debate saying:

    At issue in the Oneness controversy was the centrality of the name of Jesus in baptism, the soteriological significance of Spirit baptism, and the nature of the unity of the Godhead. The Oneness issue was commonly referred to as the “new issue” by its opponents, not for its novelty, but to distinguish the issue from the recent controversy over salvation.

    The early Pentecostal movement prayed in the name of Jesus, claimed healing in Jesus’ name, sang Christocentric songs, and “largely ignored” the precision of Trinitarian faith. So, it shouldn’t have been all that shocking that many would eventually desire to be baptized in Jesus’ name. Dr. French quotes Charles F. Parham on this subject:

    We were waiting upon God that we might know the Scriptural teaching of water baptism. Finally, the Spirit of God said: “We are buried by baptism into His death.” …Then how quickly we recognized the fact that we could not be buried by baptism in the name of the Father and in the name of the Holy Ghost because it stood for nothing as they never died or were resurrected.

    The Spark That Lit the Flame

    A Pentecostal camp meeting called the World-Wide Apostolic Camp Meeting took place in April of 1913. It was a much-anticipated meeting lauded as a great unifier. Yet, in actuality, it was the initial spark that lit the flame of the oneness movement, eventually separating it from Trinitarian Pentecostalism altogether. Canadian minister R.E. McAlister wasn’t the main speaker or even on the program. McAlister simply gave a short sermon as they were preparing for a baptismal service “in a pool near the big tent.” Dr. French describes the intense and pivotal moment this way:

    In a cursory defense of single immersion, McAlister noted that apostolic baptism was administered as a single immersion in a single name, Jesus Christ. “The words Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were never used in Christian baptism.”

    History records an “audible shudder” swept the preachers at the mention that the name Jesus was used exclusively in apostolic baptism. Of course, they tried to stop and sensor him, but the inspired words had already been spoken. The impact of that little sermon was far more significant than McAlister could have ever dreamed. Dr. French states:

    The implications concerning Jesus’ name baptism raised at Arroyo Seco fueled the theological flame within many who attended. John G. Sharpe, a young minister, was so moved that, after praying and reading the Bible all night, he ran through the camp the following morning shouting that he’d received a “revelation” of the power of Jesus’ name. Frank J. Ewart, G.T. Haywood, Harry Morse, John G. Schaepe, R.J. Scott, George Studd, R.E. McAlister, Andrew D. Urshan, Homer L. Faulkner, and Frank Denny… would soon enthusiastically embrace baptism in the name of Jesus as the exclusive apostolic formula.

    In Conclusion

    Our God Is One goes on in far more detail concerning various splits among Pentecostal groups, eventually forming oneness groups like the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World and the United Pentecostal Church International, and many others. He recounts the stories of now-infamous pastors who were hepatized in Jesus’ name and branded as heretics by their peers. Many of those pastors went on to rebaptize entire congregations in Jesus’ name as revival swept the world. But Dr. French is most acclaimed for his unparalleled documentation of modern Oneness Pentecostalism worldwide. In 1999, it was staggering when Dr. French provided careful documentation of twenty million Oneness Pentecostals. He updates the number on the podcast episode below, but you’ll have to listen for yourself to hear that.

    Related posts:

    1. Oneness Theology, Church History & Where the Church Is Right Now – Podcast Transcript with Dr. Talmadge French
    2. Baptism “In Jesus’ Name” and the New Testament Greek
    3. A Oneness Pentecostal – Making A Difference by Ellington Haywood Ellis
    4. Buried Alive (The Gospel According to the Bible) – Article + Podcast
    5. Radically Apostolic! with Charles G. Robinette (Article + Podcast)
    6. Should Christians Celebrate Christmas? (Article + Podcast)
    7. Don’t Settle for an iTunes version of the Gospel (Article + Podcast)
    8. What About Hell? – Everything You Need to Know (Article + Podcast)