Dear Sir,
Richard Simpkin tells us (February EN ) that:‘It’s not as if there are two different types of church – ‘Word’ churches and ‘Spirit’ churches’.
Sadly, there are; I have been an active member of both types. In my experience they together make up the vast majority of evangelical churches. Both types sincerely believe that they have the right balance between Word and Spirit, while looking down on those who differ. Word and Spirit are active in both types of church, but are limited by peoples’ understanding and expectations.
Both types ignore certain (different) aspects of the Word; biblical aspects of the Spirit’s work ignored by one are overly emphasised by the other. It is wrong to insist that the Spirit can only work through the Word, as Simpkin and other cessationist evangelicals claim. Interestingly, he himself gives an example of a non-Word work of the Spirit, when he speaks of Spirit-given assurance of salvation (Romans 8.16); this is quite distinct from, and complementary to, the Word-based assurance we find in other passages. I fear he may be confusing the two.
Both types engage in substitution: they expect the Word/Spirit to carry out functions in spiritual life which rightly belong to the Spirit/Word.
I grew up as a cessationist. When later I became a charismatic I became more of an evangelical, not less. I did not discard any of my Bible; instead I now believe and practise parts of the Bible which previously I had ignored.
Yours sincerely,
