I could not help but feel frustrated whilst reading "The God Catchers". I have not read Tenney's earlier "God Chasers", but will, when I come across it.

Tenney says frustration is good. Brokeness is good. Emptiness is good. Tenney hates religion. He hates church. Why? They get in the way of his earnest seeking from religion, from church, that which it proposes to offer — that is, God. Tenney claims he has experienced, on rare occasion, the "catching of God". It is, according to Tenney, a transient experience, which ultimately leaves one all the more empty, frustrated, and broken, which, he says is good, because this opens the way for more earnest seeking, which will lead to more transient experiences with the presence of God.

My frustration comes from two things:

1. Tenney is very good at telling us how to properly seek, the attitudes the Body of Christ should carry — we should be passionate in our quest. What frustrates me is that Tenney is terrible at relating to his readers what he found in his experience with the manifest presence of God. The buck stops with him simply relating to us that he has experienced Him, a couple of times, and that it was life-changing. I can relate to the fact that ethereal experiences are hard to relate in words, much less a personal experience with God. I think I could have done a bit better job than was shown here. I would expect some details to come forth from one who has experienced God on a personal basis. We simply do not find such details here. Instead, we are rushed along, and told that such an experience will only lead to a greater hunger for another such experience, and that we will be ruined for any lesser experiences. This is very frustrating — reading an entire book on seeking, with no clear clue as to what it is exactly that is sought. Will we see God the Father? Will we be transported into the Spirit? Will we be aware of our environment? Will we be capable of holding conversation with God? Are all experiences with God subjective and unique to the individual? If so, pray tell, what was Tenney's experience as? Why did Tenney hold back? Was he afraid at offending his readers with the Truth of his experience? Was he afraid at offending God by relating that which was intimate? Was what he experienced even possible to relate? If it was an experience, I would say that of course, it is possible, to in some way relate to others, and that there is a duty to relate such an experience. In this, Tenney failed.

2. Tenney uses his own children and himself as a father as a metaphor for the Body, and God the father. I won't say that this was not insightful, but I found it irritating to have to read about his daughter and he playing hide-and-seek, his daughter bringing him coffee, his daughter wanting smooches, him wanting to smooch on his daughter, and her, having grown older, not wanting smooches. As Parham told Seymour: "God is sick to his stomach!"

I wouldn't say that I did not enjoy "The God Catchers". I enjoyed it very much when Tenney waxed scripturally, which was rarely. I can't help but feel though, that I have come away hungry, having experienced in this book, another shallow and unsatisfying experience. Tenney may very well be pleased in this. ( )

Charismatic heresy. Period. ( )