Last week I spent approximately fifty two hours in a leadershipgathering in Adelaide put together by Peter Steicke and some of his mates whoare part of a group called “Starfish Oz.” ( http://www.thestarfishproject.net/html/welcome.html) There were approximately twenty leaders from nearly every state and territoryin Australia. Many of them were strangers to one another prior to thegathering. The bloke who facilitatedthis gathering was Neil Gamble from a town called Spokane in Washington state,USA. Most of us had not met him before. ( http://www.fathershand.net/home.html)
What ensued over the hours we spent together was an experience thatdefinitely opened a few windows and may well open a door or two in myexperience as a believer but also as a Christian leader. It’s hard to put the idea into wordsbut I would say what we experienced was collective intimacy with God.
For many years now I have come to value intimacy with God. it is pretty much the reason I get upreally early and go into our facility in the city and spend time seeking theLord and time interceding for all kinds of things. I would say that like all forms of intimacy it takes moretime than you think and more commitment than you are generally willing to make.Like all forms of intimacy there are times when the encounter with God is anexponential synergism and others where it seems to be the simple sum of what Isay and do. Even though I haveclocked up a few hours by now I couldn’t really say I am any closer tounderstanding it, just more convinced about its foundational value. Similarly I have had experiences ofhearing clearly from God and other times where I seem to read a lot and say alot but not hear much at all. Ialso know that if I don’t spend the time in seeking the Lord and wanting todiscover a deeper knowledge of him it won’t happen an other way.
But that’s personal intimacy. This was about collective intimacy. Now that’s a totally different challenge. I can’t really say that I have been ina group where there has been genuine collective intimacy with God. I have been in places where there hasbeen great worship - but even a good worship leader can be as much a hindranceto collective intimacy as a help. It is often part of our default to the idea of the experience beingdependent on the giftedness of a few individuals rather than the genuinecontribution of all. I have alsobeen in some wonderful prayer meetings with some intrepid intercessors. There has been strong participation,but I wouldn’t say we often, if ever, experienced collective intimacy.
That’s why this experience in Adelaide opened some windows and Ihope it opens some doors. When Ispeak about “opened windows” I am talking about the experience of “seeing”something happen. Open windows aremeant to invite us to find an “open door.” This is where we get to experience this for ourselves. It iswhere we live what we have seen rather than just seeing it. So often we sit somewhere with peopleand “see” what they are talking about. Seeing something new or different or exciting is always an experience initself. Sadly it often becomes the total experience. We can even live our whole lives just discovering newwindows to look through. What suchwindows are inviting us to do is to find the door that will allow us to livethe experience. Sometimes the dooris hard to find. That doesn’t meanit is not there.
Is it possible that God has created communities of people who aremeant to contribute to and experience the presence and fellowship or the Fatherand the Son together. I am notspeaking about sitting in a congregation listening to an anointedpreacher. I am talking about anexperience where everyone’s contribution is as valuable and as important aseveryone else’s. in addition, I amtalking about the opportunity for everyone in the room to go away with the sameexperience of God. This is whathappened for the first time on the planet in the upper room on the Day ofPentecost. Everyone experiencedthe empowering presence of the Holy Spirit, everyone spoke in tongues andeveryone responded by extolling God. It was the collective experience that impacted the crowds that came, notthe name of a preacher.
It is an outworking of a very important new testament principle: thepriesthood of all believers. Wepay lip service to it but don’t really experience much of it.
During the time we spent together in Adelaide we experienced somecontributions from some people (including myself) where what was shared wassubjective but sincere rubbish. The important thing for Neil Gamble was not ride shotgun for God andshoot down everything that was whacky. He had too much faith in the transcendent power of God for that. When we would have times to “listenout” for what God might be saying he found a way to make sure everyone sharedand we began to experience God using both the profoundly spiritual to thesubjective soulish to get us to our destination. the important matter was to do it collectively - everyonecommitted, everyone responsible and everyone involved. The result was then an experience inwhich everyone would be essential.
The experience made me realize yet another way we have relied on“Old Testament” principles to substitute for genuine New Testament ones. In the Old Testament a few people didcertain things on behalf of the rest. We have done this be separating ordained people from the rest. in the Pentecostal and Charismaticstream we have done the same thing - except we differentiate between supposedlyanointed people and less anointed or not anointed Isn’t it weird how we end up doing the same thing in adifferent way.
Test it out for yourself. What you generally find in any group of believers meeting to share insome expression of the grace of God (worship, prayer, Bible Study etc.) thequestion of who shares what often depends on personality - the outgoing ones dothe talking and the others do the listening. It is often not to do with sharing what the Holy Spirit hasrevealed, but with what opinion a person has. What if the challenge were to experience fellowship with theFather and with his Son Jesus (1 John 1). The challenge would be to share what you had experienced of thatfellowship, not your opinions, your best story or your knowledge. If everyone shared responsibility forthat, then everyone would need to share what they believed God had placed intheir hearts. It would also followthat every person sharing that would make an equally valid contribution to theresult.
There were a lot of aspects to this. What was attempted was for a group of followers of Jesus tobe together in order to collectively hear from the Father and collectivelyrespond. That raised a lot ofissues IN people as well as issues BETWEEN people. It required a transparency and a holy desire that sometimesneeded to be challenged and changes made.