Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry - Assemblies of God ...

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry
Summer
2009
(Vol.
6)
Steady Saints in an Unsteady World
• Editorial
o "Steady
Saints
in
an
Unsteady
World"
by
Lois
E.
Olena,
D.Min.
• Message from the President
o "The
Way
I
See
It"
by
Byron
D.
Klaus,
D.Min.
• Lectures
o Inaugural
Lecture:
"Mission
in
a
Rapidly
Changing
World"
by
Johan
Mostert,
D.Phil.
o 2008-2009
J.
Philip
Hogan
Professor
of
World
Missions
Lectures
by
DeLonn
Rance,
Ph.D.
Third
Lecture:
Fulfilling
the
Apostolic
Mandate
in
Apostolic
Power:
Apostolic
Praxis:
Driven
by
the
Spirit
or
by
the
Wind
and
the
Waves?
• Feature-length Articles
o "Alta
M.
Washburn:
Iconoclastic
Pentecostal
'Trailblazer'
to
the
Tribes"
by
Joseph
J.
Saggio,
Ed.D.
o "Biblical
Champions
of
Female
Leadership
Assimilation"
by
Ralynn
G.
Willis,
D.Min.
o "The
Root
of
Busyness
and
Its
Counter-Cultural
Cure"
by
Kirk
Hadden
(M.Div.
2009)
o "A
Pentecostal
Perspective
in
a
Politically
Pugnacious
Environment"
by
John
Johnson
(M.Div.
2009)
o "A
Trinitarian
View
of
the
Cross:
Relational
Dynamics
Within
the
Godhead"
by
John
Johnson
(M.Div.
2009)
• Ministerial Reflection Papers
o "The
Discipline
of
Spiritual
Retreat"
by
Beth
J.
Davis,
D.Min.
(D.Min.
2009)
o "The
Trust
Factor"
by
Bryan
Jarrett
(M.A.
2007,
ORU;
Current
AGTS
D.Min.
Participant)
o "The
Place
of
Pressing:
Finding
Purpose
in
Pain"
by
Eric
Praschan
(M.A.
2006)
o "Effectively
Inefficient
Pentecostal
Leadership"
by
Stephanie
Nance
(M.Div.
2008)
o "Unleashing
Spiritual
Gift
in
Your
Congregation
Begins
with
Better
Biblical
Understanding"
by
Bob
Caldwell
(Ph.D.
2009,
Concordia,
Seminary;
M.A.
2003,
AGTS)
• Master of Arts in Theological Studies Paper (2009 Stanley M. Horton Award)
o "Wealth
and
Poverty
in
Lukeís
Gospel
and
Acts:
A
Challenge
to
the
Christian
Church"
by
Samantha
R.
Brewer
(M.A.
2009)
• Book Reviews
o Paul
Alexander,
Peace to War: Shifting Allegiances in the Assemblies of God.
The
C.
Henry
Smith
Series
9
(Telford,
PA:
Cascadia
Publishing
House,
2009)
426
pages.
Reviewed
by
Dr.
Martin
William
Mittelstadt,
Associate
Professor
of
New
Testament
Evangel
University,
Springfield,
Missouri
o Richard
J.
Erickson,
A Beginnerís Guide to New Testament Exegesis: Taking the Fear out of the
Critical Method.
(Downers
Grove,
IL:
InterVarsity
Press,
2005)
239
pages.
Reviewed
by
Bob
Caldwell
(Ph.D.
2009
Concordia
Seminary;
M.A.
2003
AGTS),
Ordained
minister
of
the
Assemblies
of
God
and
free-lance
writer.

o Luis
Palau
and
Timothy
L.
Robnett,
Telling the Story: Evangelism for the Next Generation.
(Ventura,
CA:
Regal,
2006).
192
pages.
Reviewed
by
Marshall
M.
Windsor
(M.Div.,
2004)
National
Evangelists
Representative
for
the
Assemblies
of
God
and
Adjunct
Professor
of
Evangelism,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary
o Faith
J.
H.
McDonnell
and
Grace
Akallo,
Girl Soldier: A Story of Hope for Northern Ugandaís
Children.
(Grand
Rapids:
Baker
Books,
2007).
240
pages.
Reviewed
by
Johan
Mostert
(D.Phil.,
University
of
Pretoria),
Professor
of
Community
Psychology,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary
o Dave
Workman,
The Outward Focused Life: Becoming a Servant in a Serve-Me World.
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Books,
2008).
189
pages.
Reviewed
by
Douglas
F.
Olena,
Ph.D.
candidate,
Cardiff
University,
Wales.
o Edited
by
Douglas
Jacobsen,
A Reader in Pentecostal Theology.
(Bloomington,
IN:
Indiana
University
Press,
2006).
240
pages.
Reviewed
by
Raymond
L.
Gannon,
Ph.D.
President,
Israelís
Redemption;
AGUSM
Missionary
and
AG
National
Representative
for
Jewish
Ministries;
Visiting
Professor
of
Missions
and
Jewish
Studies,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary;
and
Director
of
Messianic
Jewish
Studies,
The
Kingís
College
and
Seminary
o Sandra
Teplinsky
(Foreword
by
James
Goll),
Israelís
Anointing: Your Inheritance and End-Time
Destiny through Israel.
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Chosen
Press/Baker
Book
House,
2008).
224
pages.
Reviewed
by
Raymond
L.
Gannon,
Ph.D.
President,
Israelís
Redemption;
AGUSM
Missionary
and
AG
National
Representative
for
Jewish
Ministries;
Visiting
Professor
of
Missions
and
Jewish
Studies,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary;
and
Director
of
Messianic
Jewish
Studies,
The
Kingís
College
and
Seminary
o Sandra
L.
Richter,
The Epic of Eden: A Christian Entry into the Old Testament.
(Downers
Grove,
IL:
IVP
Academic,
2008).
259
pages
with
notes
and
glossary.
Reviewed
by
Roger
Cotton,
Th.D.
Professor
of
Old
Testament,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary
o Christopher
J.
H.
Wright,
The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of
Faith.
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Zondervan,
2008).
221
pages.
Reviewed
by
Roger
Cotton,
Th.D.
Professor
of
Old
Testament,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Steady Saints in an Unsteady World
Lois E. Olena, D.Min. (M.A. in Jewish Studies, 1989, Gratz College)
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Encounter Editor
Visiting Professor of Practical Theology and Jewish Studies
D.Min. Project Coordinator
Besides the normal dangers of cars, deer,
and dogs dashing in front of me, what I
watch out for most as I round the corners of
Missouri’s beautiful country roads on my
Yamaha 650 is… gravel. One patch of that
dreaded enemy, and I could be out of
commission—for weeks, or for good. Like
most people, I don’t like to “feel the earth
move under my feet.”
After all, who does? Even those shouting
hallelujah and singing “Victory in Jesus” all
day long do not like to lose a job, see their
investments go down the drain, receive a
foreclosure notice, or face a mountain of
medical bills incurred from catastrophic
illness. No one relishes bad news about a
friend or family member or welcomes that
feeling of being utterly overwhelmed—
regardless of the cause.
In this issue of Encounter, Dr. Johan
Mostert examines that reality of
destabilization—but describes what it looks
like on a global level and how Pentecostals
should respond. In his inaugural lecture,
“The Psycho-Social Implications for the
Pentecostal Academy in a Destabilized
World,” Mostert makes note of the unique
opportunity the Pentecostal Academy has in
finding itself at the “academic epicenter” of
the “global Pentecostal explosion”—an
explosion taking place in a
…seriously destabilized world context
with increasing global economic
inequality, financial instability, political
upheaval, rampant diseases, and the
inexcusable marginalization of the poor,
victims of war, and the disenfranchised.
As a South African who has witnessed some
of the world’s greatest suffering—whether
from poverty, hunger, political unrest, or the
AIDS pandemic—Mostert has good reason
to call for a holistic approach to ministry.
Such an approach not only embraces the
power of God, transforms the soul, and
helps disciple all nations in the ways of God
but also embraces social justice for the
widow, the orphan, and the poor—and soul
care for those broken from things like war,
abuse, or tattered relationships. As Byron
Klaus puts it, we must foster a ministry
approach that embraces “a compassion
rooted in the gospel that transforms.”
Faced with such destabilization on all fronts,
how can we believers manage the day-today
personal, community, and global
tailspins in which we often find ourselves?
The thread running through this issue of
Encounter addresses that crucial question
and provides solid words of wisdom and
encouragement by steady saints in an
unsteady world. Whether that unsteadiness
results from personal crisis (Praschan,
Jarrett), stress and burnout (Hadden, Nance,
Davis), ministry issues (Willis, Caldwell,
Cotton, Gannon), or global realities
(Johnson, Brewer, Mittelstadt, Mostert), the
timeless truths of Scripture still hold true

today: spiritual refreshing, fundamental trust
in the face of pain and questioning, and
simple faith that turns humble believers into
obedient trailblazers for God (Saggio,
Windsor, D. Olena).
At the heart of those truths is Spirit
empowerment. AGTS graduate, John
Johnson’s award-winning article, “A
Trinitarian View of the Cross,” (Ministry
magazine, Feb. 2009) speaks of the presence
of the Spirit at one of the most destabilized
points in human history—the Cross.
According to Hebrews 9:14, Christ offered
himself “through the eternal Spirit without
blemish to God.” That same Spirit
empowerment available to the Son at the
point of His greatest suffering is still
available to God’s people today—an
empowerment which, as Dr. DeLonn Rance
points out in his third Hogan lecture in this
issue, allows the believer to “fulfill the
apostolic mandate in apostolic power” and
be driven not by the wind and the waves but
by the Holy Spirit.
King David knew the steadiness of heart that
came only by setting the Lord continually
before him: “Because He is at my right
hand,” David said, “I will not be shaken”
(Ps. 16:8). Saints with steady hearts will be
the ones who—in spite of the situation
around them—can minister grace in an
unsteady world.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Message from the President: The Way I See It
Byron D. Klaus, D.Min.
President, Professor of Intercultural Leadership Studies,
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Martin Luther once said, “God hides His power
in weakness, His wisdom in folly, His goodness
in severity, His justice in sins, His mercy in His
wrath.” The core of the Christian faith does not
follow an earthly trajectory. Its logic defies the
bigger is better and more is preferable value
system of American culture.
I am increasingly convinced that effectiveness
as a Pentecostal leader owes surprisingly little to
sheer skill and much more to my clear and
conscious awareness of the present tense of
Jesus in my life. My observation is not meant to
minimize the requisite skills for effectiveness in
organizational life. I do want to acknowledge
that eternal business, which is the core of what
we do as leaders in the Church, requires the
eternal resource that only a deepening trust in
God can provide. Henri Nouwen put it this way,
The strategy of the principalities and
powers is to disconnect us from the
memory of God. When we no longer
walk in the presence of the Lord, we
cannot be living reminders of his divine
presence in our lives. We then quickly
become strangers in an alien land who
have forgotten where we come from and
where we are going. Then we are no
longer the way to experience of God, but
rather in the way of the experience of
God. Then, instead of walking in God’s
presence we start walking in a vicious
circle, pulling others into it. 1
In recent years, I have become more and more
aware of my own tendency of overreliance on
humanly devised resources. These assets are
readily accessible and can provide opportunity
for self-congratulations when used with success.
The problem is that they have a short shelf-life
and seem to have a voracious appetite for
“upgrade.” I am aware of my tendency to
default to the readily accessible resources to
ensure my leadership effectiveness. I am also
learning that trust in God is never simplistic but
rather the hard business of maturing in our walk
with God to realize that the work of ministry is
an enterprise with eternal dimensions that
requires eternal resources.
1 Henri J. M. Nouwen, The Living Reminder: Service and Prayer in Memory of Jesus Christ (New York: The
Seabury Press, 1981), 29.

Introduction
Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
The Psycho-Social Implications
for the Pentecostal Academy in a Destabilized World
I
am
extremely
honored
for
this
opportunity
to
engage
the
Pentecostal
theological
academy
in
public
dialogue
about
the
issues
that
lie
close
to
my
heart.
Since
my
appointment
to
the
faculty
at
AGTS
fourand-a-half
years
ago,
I
have
enjoyed
the
privilege
of
reflecting
academically
on
many
contradictions
and
dilemmas
that
have
created
significant
tensions
in
my
heart
over
the
past
few
decades.
These
tensions
have
driven
so
much
of
my
passion
and
formed
so
much
of
my
personal
philosophy
of
ministry
that
I
consider
it
opportune
to
be
able
to
submit
them
publically
to
the
academy
for
consideration
and
dialog.
Today
I
will
reflect
on
two
specific
issues
which
I
believe
directly
impact
us
as
Pentecostals
and
our
influence
in
our
world.
Let
me
first
enumerate
some
of
the
glaring
contradictions
that
have
so
significantly
formed
my
persona.
• I
am
a
white
African.
Inaugural
Lecture
Presented
on
February
18,
2009
by
Johan Mostert, D.Phil.
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary
Professor of Community Psychology
• I
am
a
thoroughly
modern
Westerner
(complete
with
a
Facebook
page),
but
I
am
also
(and
will
remain)
1
influenced
by
the
Majority
world
orientation
in
my
life.
• I
am
an
ordained
Pentecostal
pastor
and,
until
my
departure
from
South
Africa
in
2004,
a
certified
Psychologist
and
Social
Worker.
• I
am
a
biblically
conservative
Christian
whose
political
and
social
views
were
drastically
impacted
by
the
events
leading
up
to
South
Africa’s
miraculous
inauguration
of
democracy
in
1994.
• I
am
a
first
world
academic
with
a
passion
for
Majority
world
poverty
alleviation
and
development.
This
personal
history,
with
all
its
nuances
and
contradictions,
has
created
significant
political,
social,
theological,
and
intellectual
tension
over
the
past
three
decades
and,
undoubtedly,
influenced
the
way
I
interpret
my
social
world
and
reality.
Exactly
twenty
years
ago,
I
was
appointed
to
lead
my
church’s
National
Welfare
Department.
Within
months
of
taking
this
position,
Nelson
Mandela
was
released
from
prison
after
twenty-seven
years,
which
significantly

2
changed
the
very
fabric
of
our
society.
With
a
rising
tide
of
HIV
infections
buffeting
our
nation,
my
management
team
and
I
began
to
put
into
place
a
strategy
that
led
to
full
racial
integration
of
our
450-employee
organization,
the
migration
of
our
church’s
social
services
from
over-serviced
white
areas
to
significantly
under-serviced
black
townships,
the
racial
integration
of
institutions
for
orphaned
and
vulnerable
children
(OVC),
and
the
re-tooling
of
our
church
infrastructure
to
engage
the
devastating
AIDS
pandemic.
I
am
declaring
these
experiences
up-front
because
they
have
formed
the
context
that
nourished
the
strategies
I
consider
as
critical
for
the
future
of
the
Pentecostal
academy.
Since
my
transition
to
AGTS,
I
have
reflected
on
my
praxis.
I
have
undergirded
my
personal
experience
with
sound
theory
and
been
exposed
to
Pentecostal
global
thinkers
who,
like
me,
wrestle
with
the
concept
of
our
missio Dei
in
a
destabilized
world.
From
my
perspective,
I
want
to
suggest
two
issues
which
require
significant
engagement
and
purposeful
reflection
within
the
Pentecostal
academy
if
we
are
to
succeed
in
our
goal
of
training
and
equipping
global
leaders.
First,
AGTS
must
actively
take
personal
and
corporate
steps
to
more
purposefully
and
intentionally
prepare
Pentecostal
leaders
for
the
complex
psycho-
social
demands
of
today’s
pastoral
and
global
missional
ministry.
Second,
AGTS
must
broaden
its
understanding
of
the
single-purpose
nature
and
character
of
the
institution.
We
need
to
fully
embrace
the
calling
and
anointing
of
Pentecostal
psychologists,
counselors,
and
social
workers
as
professionals
and
full
partners
in
ministry.
I
want
to
further
suggest
that
the
importance
of
these
two
issues
have
been
significantly
magnified
by
our
context
and
two
very
profound
changes
in
our
world.
First,
as
we
launch
into
the
twenty-first
century,
we
find
ourselves
in
a
seriously
destabilized
world
context
with
increasing
global
economic
inequality,
financial
instability,
political
upheaval,
rampant
diseases,
and
the
inexcusable
marginalization
of
the
poor,
victims
of
war,
and
the
disenfranchised.
Second,
AGTS
concurrently
finds
itself
in
the
academic
epicenter
of
a
movement
that
has
caught
the
world
by
surprise—the
global
Pentecostal
explosion.
Allow
me
first
to
explore
these
two
contexts
that
give
rise
to
my
two
proposed
strategic
initiatives.
Context 1: A Significantly Destabilized
World
Over
the
centuries,
God
has
used
advances
in
civilizations
to
prepare
the
world
for
new
revelations
on
His
path
to
finally
establishing
for
himself
a
kingdom
of
kings
and
priests.
Hebrew
culture
laid
the
groundwork
by
giving
the
world
the
wisdom
of
God’s
law.
Greek
culture
spread
culture
and
language
throughout
the
known
world
in
preparation
for
the
coming
of
the
gospel.
Pax Romanus
facilitated
the
spreading
of
the
gospel
by
creating
roads,
global
peace
and
prosperity,
and
effective
international
communications
systems.
In
the
nineteenth
century,
the
British
Empire
spread
western
culture,
international
trade,
and
missionaries
throughout
the
known
world.
In
the
twentieth
century
Pax Americanus
destroyed
Fascism
and
communism.
World
equity
markets
at
the
end
of
the
century
experienced
historic
highs.
Scientific
breakthroughs
and
global
economic
and
political
alliances
spread
the
benefits
of

3
health,
incalculable
wealth,
and
personal
liberty
to
multiplied
hundreds
of
millions.
In
2005,
New York Times
best-selling
author
Thomas
Friedman
related
the
story
of
his
travels
to
India
where
he
witnessed
the
incredible
breakthroughs
of
the
Information
Technology
industry.
With
tongue
firmly
planted
in
cheek,
he
suggests
that
when
Christopher
Columbus
was
searching
for
the
western
passage
to
India
and
discovered
the
Americas
over
500
years
ago,
he
returned
home
and
was
able
to
tell
everyone
that
although
he
never
did
find
India,
he
could
at
least
confirm
that
the
world
was
indeed
round.
When
Friedman
returned
from
his
travels,
he
had
a
very
different
revelation.
I
actually
found
India
and
thought
many
of
the
people
I
met
there
were
Americans…
Columbus
reported
to
his
king
and
queen
that
the
world
was
round,
and
he
went
down
in
history
as
the
man
who
first
made
this
discovery.
I
returned
home
and
shared
only
with
my
wife,
and
only
in
a
whisper.
‘Honey,’
I
confided,
‘I
think
the
world
is
flat’ 1
Friedman’s
“Flat
World”
presented
a
very
positive
perspective
on
the
development
of
technology
and
epitomized
the
sense
of
triumphalism
with
which
some
greeted
the
conclusion
of
the
twentieth
century.
Uploading
and
podcasting,
outsourcing
and
offshoring,
supply-chaining
and
insourcing
have
created
an
efficient
and
interdependent
global
village.
Francis
Fukuyama
put
into
words
what
the
optimists
were
already
dreaming,
when
he
said,
this
is
“the
end
of
history.” 2 
For
all
intents
and
purposes,
the
universal
triumph
of
Western
liberalism
had
arrived.
An
almost
universal
acceptance
of
the
power
and
efficiency
of
the
global
market
economy
existed.
Developmental
economists
promised
that
the
“Washington
consensus”
(the
standard
reform
package
developed
by
the
IMF,
the
World
Bank
and
the
U.S.
Treasury
Department
in
1989
for
the
financial
crises
of
developing
countries)
would
spread
peace
and
prosperity
around
the
world.
However,
Samuel
Huntington,
Fukuyama’s
mentor
at
Harvard,
had
another
view;
he
predicted
that
the
new
global
order
would
spur
violent
conflicts
between
major
civilizations
as
cultural
and
religious
differences
drove
people
apart. 3 
The
global
pessimism
Huntington
touted
was
further
affirmed
as
the
conflicts
in
Iraq
and
Afghanistan
began
to
resemble
the
quagmire
of
another
Vietnam,
as
AIDS
kills
two
million
people
per
year
(mostly
in
sub-
Saharan
Africa),
as
genocides
and
civil
wars
expose
millions
to
lawlessness
and
dislocation,
and,
of
course,
as
stock
market
crashes
this
past
September
wiped
out
trillions
of
dollars
in
investments
and
pushed
the
global
economy
to
the
brink
of
financial
catastrophe
and
collapse.
As
my
little
brother
used
to
say,
“The
world
is
not
round;
the
world
is
not
flat;
the
world
is
crooked.”
At
the
beginning
of
the
twenty-first
century,
our
world
has
not
spread
the
privilege
of
the
few
to
the
many
and
has
become
seriously
and
tragically
destabilized.
Some
economists
suggest
that
not
only
the
U.S.,
but
also
the
entire
world
hovers
precariously
at
the
brink
of
a
global
Great
Depression.
The
frenetic
attempts
by
developmental
economists
to
“save
the
world”
and
to
ensure
that
global
wealth
is
fairly
distributed
is
driven
by
the
belief
that
a
destabilized
“Bottom
Billion”
(i.e.,
the
poorest
billion

people
in
the
world)
could
threaten
world
peace
and
become
breeding
grounds
for
global
terror. 4 
Jeffrey
Sachs
passionately
appeals
that
“the
end
of
poverty”
will
only
take
place
as
a
result
of
massive
increases
in
development
aid
to
poor
nations. 5 
On
the
other
side
of
the
economic
development
spectrum,
William
Easterly
counters
loudly
that
$2.3
trillion
of
development
aid
distributed
over
the
past
fifty
years
has
not
succeeded
in
wiping
out
poverty
in
the
Majority
world. 6 
The
tragedy
is
that
after
all
this
investment
“twelve-cent
medicines
do
not
reach
children
dying
of
malaria,
that
four-dollar
bed
nets
do
not
get
to
the
poor
to
prevent
malaria,
that
three
dollars
does
not
get
to
each
new
mother
to
prevent
millions
of
child
deaths.” 7
It
is
a
source
of
great
distress
to
me
that
international
development
economists
have
shown
more
concern
about
the
plight
of
the
poor
and
the
destitute
of
the
world
and
for
issues
of
injustice
and
global
fair
trade
than
we
Christian
Pentecostals.
It
is
distressing
that
Pentecostal
fervor
has
been
honed
in
such
a
manner
that
in
practice
we
have
effectively
paraphrased
Jesus’
words
to
now
say,
“The
Spirit
of
the
Lord
is
upon
Me,
because
He
anointed
me
to
preach
the
gospel
to
the
RICH,
He
has
sent
Me
to
proclaim
PROSPERITY
to
the
WEST,
and
recovery
of
MARKET
SHARE
to
the
G8,
to
set
free
those
who
BUILD
MULTI-
MILLION
DOLLAR
EDIFICES
IN
WHICH
TO
WORSHIP
ME
for
3
hours
a
week”
(not
Luke
4:18-19).
Perhaps
we
can
draw
inspiration
from
St.
Augustine
who
also
found
himself
at
the
end
of
an
era
in
400
A.D.
By
this
time,
the
Visigoths
had
sacked
Rome,
and
the
entire
Roman
Empire
had
begun
to
collapse
under
4
the
waves
of
barbarians
spilling
over
the
borders.
As
the
very
fabric
of
Roman
civilization
began
to
unravel,
he
penned
his
magnificent
epic,
The City of God.
The
hope
for
his
civilization
did
not
lie
in
Rome,
the
City
of
Man;
his
desire
was
for
the
New
Jerusalem,
the
revelation
of
the
sons
of
God,
the
manifestation
of
the
Church
of
Jesus
Christ,
the
Bride
of
Christ,
who
would
bring
healing
to
the
nations!
From
my
perspective,
if
it
is
the
intention
of
AGTS
to
be
relevant
to
our
destabilized
world
and
have
global
impact,
then
global
issues
require
a
much
higher
priority
within
our
Pentecostal
academy.
We
must
address
issues
such
as
global
poverty
and
disease,
the
heart-wrenching
tragedy
of
sexual
slavery
and
child
soldiers,
the
injustice
of
human
rights
abuses
and
the
persecution
of
those
who
stand
up
for
the
“faith
of
our
fathers.”
If
the
Lord
commanded
us
to
give
a
cup
of
cold
water
to
the
thirsty,
then
surely
the
provision
of
clean
safe
drinking
water
should
be
part
of
our
agenda.
The
Pentecostal
academy
has
to
become
the
Church’s
think
tank
to
strategize
for
mobilizing
the
resources
of
the
Church
to
meet
the
agenda
of
God’s
Kingdom!
Context 2: The Pentecostal Explosion
The
second
significant
context
that
impacts
our
world
is
found
within
the
global
Pentecostal/Charismatic
explosion.
In
the
midst
of
this
seriously
destabilized
world,
scholars
and
current
affairs
commentators
note
that
Pentecostalism
has
inexplicably
flourished.
In
a
special
report
on
Pentecostals
in
2006,
The Economist
declared,
“A
century
after
its
birth
Pentecostalism
is
redrawing
the
religious
map
of
the
world.” 8 
Referring
to
the
Azusa

Street
Revival
it
says,
The
great
secular
ideologies
of
the
19th
and
early
20th
centuries—from
Marxism
to
Freudianism—have
faded
while
Seymour’s
spirit-filled
version
of
Christianity
has
flourished.
Pentecostal
denominations
have
prospered,
and
Pentecostalism
has
infused
traditional
denominations
through
the
wildly
popular
charismatic
movement
…
LA’s most successful
export is not Hollywood but
Pentecostalism (emphasis
added). 9
In
a
recent
10-country
survey
of
Pentecostalism,
the
Pew Forum on Religion
and Public Life
suggests
that
Pentecostals
and
Charismatics
comprise
the
world’s
fastest-growing
religious
movements. 10 
At
least
a
quarter
of
the
world’s
2
billion
Christians
are
thought
to
be
members
of
these
movements
(compared
to
only
six
percent
30
years
ago). 11 
A
more
recent
report
from
South
Africa
found
that
in
a
five-year
period
between
the
last
two
censuses,
the
fastest
growing
religious
group
of
all
is
that
classified
as
“Pentecostal”
or
“charismatic.” 12 
In
this
short
period
(the
first
comparison
that
could
be
made
after
the
1994
democratic
election),
this
group
grew
by
55
percent. 13
In
addition
to
the
soteriological
and
ecclesiastical
impacts
of
Pentecostalism
in
a
destabilized
world,
I
am
energized
by
published
reports
of
the
developmental
impact
of
our
movement’s
efforts
to
lift
people
out
of
poverty.
From
the
earliest
days
of
the
Pentecostal
movement,
sociologists
have
commented
on
the
global
impact
of
Pentecostalism’s
“redemptive
lift.”
5
Pentecostalism
has
a
special
affinity
with
market-based
development
and
the
“Protestant
ethic,”
a
cluster
of
beliefs,
attitudes,
and
habits
that
underpinned
the
spectacular
economic
growth
of
north-west
Europe
during
the
Industrial
Revolution. 14
This
biblical
ethic
involves
a
disciplined
approach
to
work
and
family
life,
and
a
deferral
of
gratification
and
insistence
on
instant
consumption.
This,
in
turn,
led
to
capital
accumulation
and
economic
advancement,
prerequisites
for
the
successful
dawning
of
the
Industrial
Revolution.
Regarding
Pentecostals,
the
Economist’s
2006
study
states:
One
of
the
movement’s
central
messages
is
self-respect—
Pentecostals
are
‘dynamite
in
the
hands
of
God’
rather
than
deferential
servants.
Relying
on
ordinary
people
to
spread
the
word,
the
churches
are
particularly
good
at
conveying
the
rudiments
of
management.
They
teach
people
to
speak
in
public,
organise
meetings
and,
as
they
become
more
successful,
manage
large
organisations.
Easterly’s
approach
to
breaking
the
grip
of
international
poverty
should
appeal
to
us
as
Pentecostals,
as
we
see
development
as
the
result
of
a
personal
transformation
of
the
mind
(Rom.12:1-2)
and
as
a
process
that
needs
to
be
local-church
based.
He
provides
compelling
evidence
for
the
efficacy
of
local-community
based
development
where
homegrown
solutions
are
created
to
lift
people
out
of
their
poverty. 15 
Another
example
is
Muhammad
Yunus,
the
“Banker
to
the
Poor”
and
2006
Nobel
Peace
Prize
winner
who
has
shown
that
small
micro-

loans
to
poor
individuals
can
reverse
the
poverty
of
millions
and
confound
the
wisdom
of
the
macro-oriented
global
banking
institutions. 16 
As
Pentecostals,
we
should
be
at
the
forefront
of
community
transformation.
Implications for Traditional Bifurcation
Given
my
personal
life
context,
I
find
it
difficult
to
entertain
or
accommodate
a
theology
that
attempts
to
separate
the
formal
verbal
presentation
of
the
gospel
from
the
engagement
of
people
in
the
context
of
their
social
ills,
physical
needs,
and
suffering.
James,
the
brother
of
Jesus,
made
this
clear,
“If
a
brother
or
sister
is
without
clothing
and
in
need
of
daily
food,
and
one
of
you
says
to
them,
‘Go
in
peace,
be
warmed
and
be
filled,’
and
yet
you
do
not
give
them
what
is
necessary
for
their
body,
what
use
is
that?”
(James
2:14-17).
Since
we
first
began
to
present
classes
in
social
justice
here
at
the
Seminary,
Dr.
Klaus
has
presented
to
each
of
these
classes
the
theological
underpinnings
for
“a
compassion
rooted
in
the
gospel
that
transforms.”
As
he
explored
the
historical
roots
of
today’s
Western
bifurcation,
he
provided
me,
for
the
first
time,
an
insight
into
what
has
been
referred
to
by
Western
Church
historians
as
“the
Great
Reversal.”
In
essence,
Evangelicals
in
the
early
twentieth
century
distanced
themselves
from
modernism,
liberal
theology,
and
what
came
to
be
derisively
referred
to
as
“the
social
gospel.”
It
included
their
reaction
to
such
significant
cultural
impacts
as
the
Scopes
Monkey
Trial,
Darwinism,
and
the
rise
of
European
theological
liberalism
that
denounced
the
inspiration
of
Scripture,
the
virgin
birth,
and
the
deity
of
Christ. 17
6
Understanding
the
historical
development
of
this
bifurcation
has
provided
me
with
deeper
insight
into
the
continuing
reticence
of
the
Western
Church
to
embrace
the
holistic
message
that
once
characterized
the
church
of
the
nineteenth
century.
I
now
better
understand
the
underlying
fear
of
slipping
back
into
an
emasculated
“social
gospel”
where
therapeutic
efforts
to
help
people
“self-actualize”
replaced
the
message
of
salvation.
However,
over
the
last
century
there
have
been
significant
shifts
in
global
Christianity.
The
majority
of
the
Christian
Church
no
longer
lives
in
this
Western
Church.
At
the
beginning
of
the
twentieth
century
only
ten
percent
of
Christians
lived
outside
the
West;
at
the
start
of
the
twenty-first
century,
seventy
percent
of
Christians
live
in
the
Majority
world.
We
must
now
begin
to
recognize
that
what
was
once
the
periphery
of
the
Church
has
become
the
center,
and
the
center
has
become
the
periphery. 18
In
addition
to
this
massive
shift
away
from
the
West,
the
Majority
world
has
matured,
but
does
not
share
the
same
history
of
bifurcation
as
the
Western
Church.
In
Africa,
at
the
very
first
charter
meeting
of
the
Assemblies
of
God
leadership
association,
they
called
for
the
immediate
establishment
of
a
division
for
social
concern
because
the
future
of
the
Church
in
Africa
required
this. 19 
Two
of
my
colleagues
at
AGTS
have
ably
traced
the
tension
in
official
policy
on
the
primacy
of
evangelism
over
social
action
within
the
AG. 20 
These
works
demonstrate
that
even
during
the
most
evangelistically
oriented
periods
of
AG
history,
social
programs
have
been
widely

implemented,
even
if
they
were
officially
done
“under
the
radar.”
I
find
myself
theologically
at
home
within
an
emerging
group
that
Newberry
identifies
as
“advocating
a
new
understanding
of
the
kingdom
of
God
motif
in
order
to
develop
a
holistic
mission
theology
which
encompasses
an
active
social
concern
and
action
theology.” 21 
I
reiterate
the
voice
of
theologians
and
missiologists
such
as
Gordon
Fee,
Paul
Pomerville,
Murray
Dempster,
Peter
Kuzmic,
and
Douglas
Petersen:
Our
Western
concept
of
a
bifurcated
gospel
is,
at best,
a
reflection
of
our
unique
history
which
reflects
the
Great
Reversal,
and
at worst
reveals
an
ethnocentric
monocultural
imposition
that
fails
the
test
of
appropriate
cultural
indigenization. 22
It
is
within
this
narrow
context
that
I
understand
my
colleague,
DeLonn
Rance’s
appeal
during
his
Hogan
Chair
presentations
this
year.
He
stated,
“I
believe
that
the
greatest
contemporary
crisis
in
missions
is
not
AIDS,
malaria,
poverty,
illiteracy,
globalization,
urbanization,
the
global
economy
…
but
rather
the
lack
of
Missiological
reflection
by
those
engaged
in
apostolic
praxis.” 23
I
fully
understand
the
need
for
the
Western
Church
to
reflect,
as
well
as
the
latent
fear
of
Western
missiologists
who
still
remember
the
slippery
slope
of
the
“social
gospel.”
Although
I
understand,
I
must
point
to
the
global
context
into
which
we,
as
a
Pentecostal
academy,
are
launching
our
students.
After
all
our
reflection,
I
am
convinced
that
we
will
come
to
the
same
conclusion
as
did
Rick
Warren,
who
exclaims
incredulously,
“I’ve
got
three
7
advanced
degrees.
I
went
to
two
different
seminaries
and
a
Bible
school.
How
did
I
miss
the
2000
verses
in
the
Bible
where
it
talks
about
the
poor?” 24
The
African
Church
has
grown
immeasurably;
even
in
the
most
remote
village,
far
from
the
vestiges
of
modernity,
a
local
church
can
be
found.
Half
of
all
Africans
identify
themselves
as
Christians,
while
in
Sub-Saharan
Africa
this
number
shoots
up
to
sixty
percent. 25 
Nonetheless,
in
terms
of
all
the
global
development
indices
that
reflect
poverty
and
suffering,
Africa’s
nations
are
amongst
the
world’s
worst.
This
includes
the
Human
Development
Index,
the
Human
Suffering
Index,
the
Freedom
Index,
the
Corruption
Perception
Index,
AIDS
Infection
Rate,
Infant
Mortality
Rate,
and
the
list
of
Highly
Indebted
Poor
Countries
(HIPC).
Charles
Malik,
former
President
of
the
UN
Security
Council,
captures
my
thoughts
well
when
he
says,
“The
problem
is
not
only
to
win
souls
but
to
save
minds.
If
you
win
the
whole
world
and
lose
the
mind
of
the
world
you
will
soon
discover
you
have
not
won
the
world.
Indeed,
it
may
turn
out
that
you
have
actually
lost
the
world.” 26 
We
have
evangelized
Africa,
but
we
have
failed
to
“renew
her
mind”
(Rom.
12:1-2)
and
are
in
danger
of
losing
her
to
poverty,
disease,
and
misery.
I
cannot
consider
the
meaning
of
missio Dei
without
reference
to
issues
like
these
that
describe
so
poignantly
the
abject
absence
of
Kingdom
ethics
in
our
destabilized
world.
When
Jesus
emerged
from
the
desert
to
launch
His
formal
ministry,
He
proclaimed
that
the
Spirit
of
the
Lord
was
upon
Him
and
anointed
Him
to
preach
the
gospel
to
the

poor,
to
proclaim
release
to
the captives
and
recovery
of
sight
to
the blind,
to
set
free
those
who
are
oppressed (Luke
4:
18-19,
emphasis
added).
THIS
is
the
message
that
our
destabilized
world
needs
to
hear!
Implications for Soul Care
The
bifurcation
of
the
Great
Reversal
has,
however,
also
had
an
unfortunate
impact
on
the
Western
Church
by
reducing
the
breadth
of
the
Great
Commission
to
the
single
act
of
“religious
conversion.”
All
the
postconversion
functions
of
Matthew
28:19-20
have
been
significantly
neglected:
make
disciples of all the nations, immersing them
in the knowledge and experience of the
triune God, teaching them to observe all that
Jesus commanded us to do.
As
evangelism
has
continued
to
be
promoted
as
the
singular
valid
function
of
the
Church,
the
behavioral
modification
implications
of
the
gospel
have
been
sorely
neglected.
The
critical
significance
of
character
development
and
maturity,
as
envisioned
by
Paul
as
the
“fruit
of
the
Spirit,”
has
received
little
attention.
In
practice,
the
attainment
of
moral
attributes
such
as
godly
love,
kindness,
goodness,
and
self-control
(Gal.
5:22)
have
been
relegated
to
a
condition
that
is
to
be
attained
in
the
indistinct
future
when
the
Church
is
rescued
from
this
world
or
when
the
kingdom
of
God
supposedly
finally
arrives.
This
theological
prioritization
of
evangelism
has
created
a
situation
where
the
local
church
is
filled
with
people
bearing
significant
emotional
and
interpersonal
scars
but
left
without
the
shepherdly
oversight
and
adequate
care
of
their
pastors.
Marriages
are
under
significant
strain
and
divorce
rates
among
Christians
are
indistinguishable
from
the
general
population. 27 

Christian
8
psychologists
and
counselors
report
cases
of
child
abuse
and
non-accidental
trauma,
sexual
escapades
outside
of
marriage,
debilitating
phobias,
anxieties
and
a
variety
of
alcohol
and
dependency
issues
among
Christians.
Tens
of
thousands
of
veterans
are
returning
from
the
wars
in
Iraq
and
Afghanistan
in
a
serious
state
of
emotional
trauma
affecting
their
mental
health,
marriages,
and
ability
to
reintegrate
into
society.
Significant
numbers
of
them
are
suffering
from
post-traumatic
stress
disorder
(PTSD). 28 
For
the
first
time,
in
January
2009,
suicide
claimed
the
lives
of
more
American
soldiers
than
Al
Qaeda
and
the
Iraqi
insurgency
combined. 29 
All
of
these
significant
emotional,
formational,
and
discipleship
issues
have
become
the
reality
and
context
of
local
church
life.
Since
the
beginning
of
Church
history,
the
pastor
cared
for
the
souls
of
men
and
women. 30 
The
pastor
served
not
only
as
the
counselor
of
the
community
but
also
as
the
educator,
the
keeper
of
culture,
and
often,
even
the
doctor.
Over
time,
the
process,
which
sociologist
Talcott
Parsons
referred
to
as
functional
specialization
and
structural
differentiation,
took
place
as
each
of
these
fields
became
occupational
specializations
and
developed
apart
from
the
role
of
the
pastor.
Nevertheless,
the
role
of
counselor
remained
integrally
entwined
with
pastoral
ministry.
The
study
of
psychology
was
merely
a
metaphysical
exercise
philosophers
mused
about,
but
over
which
the
Church
always
exercised
full
authority. 31
A
century
ago,
difficulties
began
to
arise
when
a
non-clergy
professional
for
the
first
time
began
to
treat
individuals
for
their
psychological
problems.
Sigmund
Freud’s
“talking
cure”
was
an
historic
breakthrough

9
as,
for
the
first
time,
psychologists
scientifically
began
to
discover
the
therapeutic
power
of
cathartic
recollections
of
the
past
and
of
the
disruptive
impact
of
unconscious
defense
mechanisms.
Over
the
years,
the
insights
of
Freud
have
been
significantly
augmented
by
behaviorists
like
Wundt,
Pavlov,
and
Skinner,
by
humanist
psychologists
such
as
Carl
Rogers,
existentialists
such
as
Victor
Frankl,
and
cognitive
theorists
such
as
Albert
Ellis
and
Aaron
Beck.
Today,
the
vast
majority
of
therapists
have
integrated
elements
of
all
of
these
theoretical
schools
into
an
eclectic
mixture
of
empirically
validated
treatment
approaches. 32
The
reaction
of
the
Christian
community
to
the
encroachment
of
academic
professionals
onto
their
soul
care
function
paralleled
their
reaction
to
modernism
and
the
Great
Reversal.
While
mainline
churches
embraced
the
potential
value
of
psychotherapy,
Evangelicals
largely
split
into
two
camps.
One
camp
was
led
by
the
Reformed
theologian,
Jay
Adams,
who
declared
that
only
pastors
are
“competent
to
counsel”
and
that
the
cause
of
all
personal
problems
can
be
traced
to
demonic
activity,
personal
sin,
or
organic
illness.
There
was
no
room
in
Adams’
biblical
theology
for
therapy,
psychologists,
or
mental
health
professionals. 33 
Clinton
and
Ohlschlager
suggest
that
it
was
precisely
this
type
of
hard-line
denial
of
the
reality
of
psychological
distress
that
drove
millions
of
people
to
seek
help
from
mental
health
professionals
outside
the
church.
They
suggest
that
if
the
church
had
taken
its
task
of
discipleship
more
seriously,
and
not
retreated
into
its
priority
of
evangelistic
conversion
there
would
have
been
little
need
for
the
specifically
trained
Christian
counselor
today. 34
The
second
Evangelical
camp,
represented
by
the
Christian
Counseling
movement,
actively
engaged
the
academic
psychological
disciplines
and
attempted
to
interpret
to
the
Church
the
new
social
scientific
findings.
This
group
was
led
by
people
like
Clyde
Narramore,
Howard
Clinebell,
James
Dobson,
Gary
Collins,
and
Larry
Crab.
The
movement
has
grown
and
matured
over
the
last
two
decades.
The
influence
of
Pentecostally
oriented
therapists
like
Siang-Yang
Tan,
who
provides
APA
seminars
on
spirituality
and
cognitive
behavioral
therapy,
and
the
breakthrough
volume
by
McMinn
and
Campbell
on
“Integrative
Psychotherapy”
are
some
of
the
elements
that
are
bringing
believers
ever
closer
to
an
empirically
validated
Christian
psychotherapy. 35 
This
excitement
has
recently
been
reflected
by
Sutton
with
his
positive
evaluation
of
the
McMinn
and
Campbell
model. 36
The
time
has
clearly
come
for
us
to
elevate
the
ministry
contributions
of
Christian
counselors
and
social
scientists
in
the
hearts
and
minds
of
the
Pentecostal
academy.
We,
as
Christian
counselors,
see
our
ministry
as
integral
to
the
single-purpose
institutional
focus
of
the
Pentecostal
academy.
Christian
counseling
reflects
the
professionalization
of
the
soul
care
function
that
in
times
past
was
an
integral
part
of
pastoral
ministry.
In
our
minds,
it
is
inconceivable
that
pastoral
ministry,
and
particularly
the
chaplaincy,
could
be
adequately
engaged
without
a
thorough
understanding
of
the
psychosocial
dimensions
of
human
growth
and
development,
emotional
distress,
and
healing
models.
Nor
is
it
conceivable
that

10
pastoral
ministry
could
adequately
meet
the
complex
psychosocial
needs
of
God’s
people
without
the
active
participation
of
a
Christian
counselor
as
part
of
the
local
church’s
ministry
team.
Conclusion
It
should
be
clear
by
now
that
the
many
contradictions
and
cultural
programming
that
have
so
significantly
formed
my
persona
over
the
years
have
also
influenced
the
particular
passions
I
present
today
as
priorities.
Friedman’s
picture
of
a
flat
earth
has
created
a
global
village
where
human
suffering,
hunger,
and
destabilization
eventually
affect
all
of
us.
We
cannot
allow
future
leaders
to
pass
through
our
institutions
who
are
unable
to
contextualize
the
message
of
Jesus
Christ
as
the
One
who
saves
the
whole
person:
body,
soul,
mind,
and
social
relationships.
Our
future
leaders
will
be
expected
to
apply
the
gospel
message
in
an
increasingly
destabilized
world.
We
cannot
ignore
the
magnificent
social
lift
that
Pentecostalism
provides.
We
cannot
train
Christian
professionals
within
a
Western-oriented
bifurcated
gospel
that
effectively
separates
them
from
a
world
suffering
from
psychosocial
and
economic
distress.
In
conclusion,
what
are
the
psychosocial
implications
for
the
Pentecostal
academy
in
a
destabilized
world?
We
must
commit
ourselves
to
equip
pastors,
chaplains,
missionaries,
and
counselors
with
the
full
armor
of
God.
We
dare
not
forget
the
poor
(Gal.
2:10).
We
need
to
embrace
the
power
of
God,
who
not
only
transforms
the
soul
but
also
has
ordered
us
to
disciple
all
nations
in
the
ways
of
our
God
(Matt.
28:19-20).
We
need
to
embrace
social
justice
and
compassion
(Micah
6:8)
not
as
an
afterthought,
nor
as
a
delivery
system
to
“bait
and
switch”
unsuspecting
sinners
to
“win
their
souls.”
Compassion
is
the
act
of
love,
the
vital
expression
of
God’s
character
in
us
to
a
world
that
needs
to
experience
His
love.
Our
compassion
is
His
love
that
shines
through
us
and
which
brings
life
and
hope
for
the
widow,
the
orphan,
the
poor,
and
the
disenfranchised
(James
1:27).
May
we
at
AGTS
be
a
shining
light
to
the
nations.
Song for the Nations
Chris
Christensen
May
we
be
a
shining
light
to
the
nations
A
shining
light
to
the
peoples
of
the
earth
Till
the
whole
world
sees
the
glory
of
Your
name
May
Your
pure
light
shine
through
us
May
we
bring
a
word
of
hope
to
the
nations
A
word
of
life
to
the
peoples
of
the
earth
Till
the
whole
world
knows
there’s
salvation
through
Your
name
May
Your
mercy
flow
through
us
May
we
be
a
healing
balm
to
the
nations
A
healing
balm
to
the
peoples
of
the
earth
Till
the
whole
world
knows
the
power
of
Your
name
May
Your
healing
flow
through
us
May
we
sing
a
song
of
joy
to
the
nations
A
song
of
praise
to
the
peoples
of
the
earth
Till
the
whole
world
rings
with
the
praises
of
Your
name
May
Your
song
be
sung
through
us
©
1986
Integrity’s
Hosanna!
Music

Sources Consulted
Adams,
J.
Competent to Counsel.
USA:
Presbyterian
and
Reformed
Publishing,
1970.
———.
The Christian Counselor’s Manual.
USA:
Presbyterian
and
Reformed
Publishing,
1973.
Adsit,
C.
The Combat Trauma Healing Manual.
Newport
News,
VA:
Military
Ministry
Press,
2007.
Barna.
G.
“Born
Again
Adults
Less
Likely
to
Co-Habit,
Just
as
Likely
to
Divorce.”
In
The Barna Update,
August
6,
2001,
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=
BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=95
(accessed
January
17,
2009).
Benner,
D.
Care of Souls: Revisioning Christian Nurture and Counsel.
Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Books,
1998.
Bernstein,
A.,
ed.
Under the Radar: Pentecostalism in South Africa and its Potential
Social and Economic Role.
Johannesburg,
South
Africa:
The
Centre
for
Development
and
Enterprise,
2008.
Cannon,
C.
M.
“Rick
Warren:
Man
on
a
Mission.”
Readers Digest,
March
2009,
161-
165.
http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-people-and-stories/rick-warrenman-on-a-mission/article118935.html
(accessed
July
27,
2009).
Collier,
Paul.
The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can
Be Done About It.
Oxford:
University
Press,
2007.
Clinton,
T.,
and
Ohlschlager,
G.,
eds.
Competent Christian Counseling: Foundations and
Practice of Compassionate Soul Care. Vol.
1.
Colorado
Springs,
CO:
Waterbrook
Press,
2002.
Easterly,
William.
The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest have
Done So Much Ill and So Little Good.
New
York:
Penguin
Press,
2006.
Entwistle,
D.
N.
Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: An Introduction
to Worldview Issues, Philosophical Foundations, and Models of Integration.
Eugene,
OR:
Wipf
and
Stock
Publishers,
2004.
Friedman,
Thomas
L.
The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century.
Updated
and
Expanded.

New
York:
Farrar,
Straus
and
Giroux,
2005.
Fukuyama,
Francis.
End of History and the Last Man.
New
York:
Avon
Books,
1992.
11

Huntington,
S.
P.
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
New
York:
Touchstone,
1996.
Jenkins,
P.
The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity.
New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
2002.
Martin,
D.
Tongues of Fire: The Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America.”
Cambridge,
MA:
Blackwell
Publishers,
1993.
Mash,
E.
J.,
and
Wolfe,
D.
A.
Abnormal Child Psychology,
3rd
ed.
Belmont,
CA:
Wadsworth,
2005.
McGee,
Gary
B.
This Gospel…Shall Be Preached: A History and Theology of Assemblies
of God Foreign Missions to 1959.
Springfield,
MO:
Gospel
Publishing
House,
1986.
———.
This Gospel…Shall Be Preached: A History and Theology of Assemblies of God
Foreign Missions Since 1960.
Springfield,
MO:
Gospel
Publishing
House,
1989.
McMinn,
M.
R.,
and
Campbell,
C.
D.
Integrative Psychotherapy: Toward a
Comprehensive Christian Approach. Downers
Grove,
IL:
InterVarsity
Press,
2007.
Miller,
D.
L.,
and
Allen
S.
Against All Hope: Hope for Africa.
Phoenix,
AZ:
Disciple
Nations
Alliance,
2005.
Moberg,
D.
O.
The Great Reversal: Evangelism and Social Concern.
Rev.
ed.
Philadelphia
and
New
York:
A
Holman
Book,
J.
B.
Lippincott,
1972.
Newberry,
Warren
B.
“Major
Missiological
Motifs
in
North
American
Classical
Pentecostal
Missions.”
D.Th.
diss.,
University
of
South
Africa,
Pretoria,
1999.
———.
“Contextualizing
Indigenous
Church
Principles:
An
African
Model.”
In
Asian
Journal of Pentecostal Studies,
8,
no.1
(January
2005):
95-115.
“Pentecostalism’s
Rise.”
The
Economist,
http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RQDTNDG
December
19,
2006
(accessed
July
29,
2009).
Rance,
DeLonn.
“Fulfilling
the
Apostolic
Mandate
in
Apostolic
Power:
Apostolic
Praxis:
Driven
by
the
Spirit
or
by
the
Wind
and
the
Waves?”
Third
J.
Philip
Hogan
Lecture,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary,
Springfield,
MO,
January
20,
2009.
12

Riechhoff,
P.
“Time
to
Act:
More
Soldiers
Lost
to
Suicide
than
to
Al
Qaeda
in
January.”
In
Huffington Post
(February
10,
2009)
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/
peek/126213/time_to_act%3A_more_soldiers_lost_to_suicide_than_to_al_qaeda_
in_january/
(accessed
February
14,
2009).
Sachs,
Jeffrey
D.
The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time.
New
York:
Penguin
Books,
2005.
“Spirit
and
Power:
A
10-Country
Survey
of
Pentecostals.”
Pew
Forum
on
Religion
and
Public
Life,
http://pewforum.org/surveys/pentecostal/
October
2006
(accessed
July
27,
2009).
Sutton,
G.
“Christian
Psychotherapy
and
Psychology:
An
Analysis
of
an
Integrative
Psychotherapy
Model.”
In
Journal of Psychology and Theology,
36,
no.
1
(Summer
2008):
139-141.
Tan,
Siang-Yang.
“Use
of
Prayer
and
Scripture
in
Cognitive-Behavioral
Therapy.”
In
Journal of Psychology and Christianity,
26,
no.
2
(Summer
2007):
101-111.
“U.S.
Religious
Landscape
Survey.”
Pew
Forum
on
Religion
and
Public
Life.
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports#
(accessed
July
27,
2009).
Wright,
D.
J.
H.
The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative.
Downers
Grove,
IL:
InterVarsity
Press
Academic,
2006.
Yunus,
M.,
and
Jolis,
A.
Banker to the Poor: Micro-lending and the Battle Against World
Poverty.
New
York:
Perseus
Books
Group,
1999.
1 Thomas
L.
Friedman,
The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
(New
York:
Farrar,
Straus
and
Giroux,
2005),
5.
2 Francis
Fukuyama,
End of History and the Last Man
(New
York:
Avon
Books,
1992).
3 Samuel
P.
Huntington,
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
(New
York:
Touchstone,
1996).
4 Paul 
 Collier,
The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can be Done About It
(Oxford:
University
Press,
2007).
2005).
5 Sachs,
Jeffrey
D.
The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time
(New
York:
Penguin
Books,
6 William
Easterly,
The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest have Done So Much Ill
and So Little Good
(New
York:
Penguin
Press,
2006).
7 Ibid.,
383.
13

8 “Pentecostalism’s
Rise,”
The
Economist,
http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_RQDTNDG
December
19,
2006
(accessed
July
29,
2009).
9 Ibid.
10 “Spirit
and
Power:
A
10-Country
Survey
of
Pentecotals,”
Pew
Forum
on
Religion
and
Public
Life,
http://pewforum.org/surveys/pentecostal/ October 2006 (accessed
July
27,
2009).
The
ten
countries
studied
were:
Brazil,
Chile,
Guatemala,
India,
Kenya,
Nigeria,
Philippines,
South
Africa,
South
Korea,
and
the
United
States.
11 Ibid.
12 A.
Bernstein,
A.,
ed.
Under the Radar: Pentecostalism in South Africa and its Potential Social and
Economic Role
(Johannesburg,
South
Africa:
The
Centre
for
Development
and
Enterprise,
2008),
6.
13 Ibid.
14 D.
Martin,
Tongues of fire: The Explosion of Protestantism in Latin America
(Cambridge,
MA:
Blackwell
Publishers,
1993).
15 Easterly,
passim.
16 M.
Yunus,
and
A.
Jolis,
Banker to the Poor: Micro-lending and the Battle against World Poverty
(New
York:
Perseus
Books
Group,
1999).
17 D.
O.
Moberg,
The Great Reversal: Evangelism and Social Concern, rev.
ed.
(Philadelphia
and
New
York:
A
Holman
Book,
J.
B.
Lippincott,
1972).
18 P.
Jenkins,
The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity
(New
York:
Oxford
University
Press,
2002),
1-2,
12;
D.
J.
H.
Wright,
The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative
(Downers
Grove,
IL:
InterVarsity
Press
Academic,
2006).
19 Warren
B.
Newberry,
Major Missiological Motifs in North American Classical Pentecostal Missions
(D.Th.
diss.,
University
of
South
Africa,
Pretoria,
1999).
20 Gary
B.
McGee,
This Gospel…Shall be Preached: A History and Theology of Assemblies of God Foreign
Missions to 1959 (Springfield,
MO:
Gospel
Publishing
House,
1986);
Gary
B.
McGee,
This Gospel…Shall be
Preached: A History and Theology of Assemblies of God Foreign Missions since 1960
(Springfield,
MO:
Gospel
Publishing
House,
1989);
Newberry,
Major Missiological Motifs in North American Classical Pentecostal Missions.
21 Newberry,
176.
22 Ibid.
23 DeLonn
Rance,
“Fulfilling
the
Apostolic
Mandate
in
Apostolic
Power:
Apostolic
Praxis:
Driven
by
the
Spirit
or
by
the
Wind
and
the
Waves?”
(Third
J.
Philip
Hogan
Lecture,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary,
Springfield,
MO,
January
20,
2009).
24 C.
M.
Cannon,
“Rick
Warren:
Man
on
a
Mission,”
in
Readers Digest
(March
2009)
http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-people-and-stories/rick-warren-man-on-a-mission/article118935.html
(accessed
July
27,
2009).
14

2005),
23.
25 D.
L.
Miller
and
S.
Allen,
Against All Hope: Hope for Africa
(Phoenix,
AZ:
Disciple
Nations
Alliance,
26 Miller
and
Allen,
43.
27 Barna.
G.
“Born
Again
Adults
Less
Likely
to
Co-Habit,
Just
as
Likely
to
Divorce,”
in
The Barna Update,
August
6,
2001,
http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=95
(accessed
January
17,
2009).
28 C.
Adsit,
The Combat Trauma Healing Manual
(Newport
News,
VA:
Military
Ministry
Press,
2007).
29 P.
Riechhoff,
P.
“Time
to
Act:
More
Soldiers
Lost
to
Suicide
Than
to
Al
Qaeda
in
January,”
in
Huffington
Post,
February
10,
2009,
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/126213/time_to_act%3A_more_soldiers_lost
_to_suicide_than_to_al_qaeda_in_january/
(accessed
February
14,
2009).
1998).
30 D.
Benner,
Care of Souls: Revisioning Christian Nurture and Counsel (Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Baker
Books,
31 D.
N.
Entwistle,
Integrative Approaches to Psychology and Christianity: An Introduction to Worldview
Issues, Philosophical Foundations, and Models of Integration.
Eugene,
OR:
Wipf
and
Stock
Publishers,
2004).
32 E.
J.
Mash
and
D.
A.
Wolfe,
Abnormal Child Psychology, 3rd
ed.
(Belmont,
CA:
Wadsworth,
2005).
33 J.
Adams,
Competent to Counsel
(USA:
Presbyterian
and
Reformed
Publishing,
1970);
J.
Adams,
The
Christian Counselor’s Manual
(USA:
Presbyterian
and
Reformed
Publishing,
1973).
34 T.
Clinton
and
G.
Ohlschlager,
G.,
eds.
Competent Christian Counseling: Foundations and Practice of
Compassionate Soul Care, vol.
1 (Colorado
Springs,
CO:
Waterbrook
Press,
2002).
35 Siang-Yang
Tan,
“Use
of
Prayer
and
Scripture
in
Cognitive-Behavioral
Therapy,”
in
Journal of
Psychology and Christianity,
26,
no.
2
(Summer
2007):
101-111;
M.
R.
McMinn
and
C.
D.
Campbell,
Integrative
Psychotherapy: Toward a Comprehensive Christian Approach. Downers
Grove,
IL:
InterVarsity
Press,
2007).
36 G.
Sutton,
“Christian
Psychotherapy
and
Psychology:
An
Analysis
of
an
Integrative
Psychotherapy
Model,”
in
Journal of Psychology and Theology,
36,
no.
2
(Summer
2008),
139-141.
15

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry: Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Fulfilling the Apostolic Mandate in Apostolic Power:
Apostolic Praxis: Driven by the Spirit
or by the Wind and the Waves?
Part III of a Three-Lecture Series Presented by
DeLonn L. Rance, Ph.D.
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary:
Director of Intercultural Doctoral Studies
Global Missions Department Chairperson
Associate Professor of Intercultural Studies
2008-2009 J. Philip Hogan Professor of World Missions
That day when evening came, he said to
his disciples, “Let us go over to the
other side.” Leaving the crowd behind,
they took him along, just as he was, in
the boat. There were also other boats
with him. A furious squall came up, and
the waves broke over the boat, so that it
was nearly swamped. Jesus was in the
stern, sleeping on a cushion. The
disciples woke him and said to him,
“Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”
He got up, rebuked the wind and said
to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the
wind died down and it was completely
calm. He said to his disciples, “Why are
you so afraid? Do you still have no
faith?” They were terrified and asked
each other, “Who is this? Even the wind
and the waves obey him!” (Mark 4:35-
41, NIV)
I love this text because it seems to
accurately reflect my life. Like the disciples,
I am trying to get to the other side, trying to
be obedient to the Master’s instructions, but
so often in the middle of obedience, in the
center of His will, storms come up. I work
as hard as I can, use every gift, every
experience, and every tool at my disposable
to get the job done, but it doesn’t seem like I
am going to make it. Even though Jesus is
Third Hogan Chair Address, January 20, 2009
1
with me in the boat, He is on a break, sound
asleep. (He must have been exhausted from
ministry and able to rest so well because He
was totally trusting in the Father.)
The disciples had made many trips across
that lake. Most times, they crossed the lake
through hard work. They knew how to do
it—several were experienced fisherman—
but this time their illusion of control was
broken by the wind and the waves. They
were confronted by the reality that the only
way to get to the other side and experience
peace was through faith and trust in Jesus.
While the truth of this text can be applied to
personal salvation and the need to have
Jesus as the Master of one’s life to be able to
get to “the other side,” (i.e. an eternity with
Him), I believe it is also a word to the
Church regarding the missiological task.
Jesus calls the Church to an apostolic
praxis—to be about the business of carrying
the good news of the gospel to those who
have never had the chance to hear it. I see
Him in the boat calling out to the Church,
“Come on, Church. Let’s go to those who

have never heard, to the least reached, to the
inconvenient lost.” 1 He does not force
individuals or local churches into the boat of
apostolic praxis against their will, but to be
truly obedient, to be assured of His presence
(Matt. 28:19), the Church must enter that
boat.
When we are in the boat, we cannot get to
the other side without effort, but even with
our greatest efforts, unless Jesus intervenes
we will not get to the other side. Jesus brings
order out of missiological chaos, for He is
the Master of the wind and the waves.
Apostolic power enables apostolic praxis.
But what drives what, and how we do
missions? What motivates the believer’s
praxis? How do we determine direction and
action? How do we evaluate our missional
praxis? Are we driven by the Spirit or by
alternative sources of power, such as the
wind and the waves?
This afternoon, I am privileged to present
my third and final lecture as the 2008-2009
J. Philip Hogan Professor of World
Missions. This lecture on apostolic praxis is
a work in progress; it may raise more
questions than it answers and possibly
provoke heated debate as we move to
address specific missional actions in a
Spirit-driven missiology.
I will begin with a brief overview of the
previous lectures, followed by an
affirmation of the need for missiological
reflection to keep the missional enterprise
driven by the Spirit. This will be followed
by an examination of some of the alternative
sources of power that can seduce Pentecostal
leaders as we engage in missional action in
our contemporary world.
A Review of Previous Lectures
Through these lectures I seek to call the
Church, the apostolic/missionary people of
2
God, to a Spirit-driven missiology that
recognizes the need for dependence on the
Spirit for direction, empowerment, and fruit
in the missionary enterprise. This Spiritdriven
missiology does not merely give lip
service to the Spirit’s activity but depends
on the Spirit in missional praxis. In short, it
seeks to fulfill the apostolic mandate in
apostolic power.
The core values of a Spirit-driven
missiology include the following: (1) the
Lord fulfills mission through His Church by
the direction and power of the Holy Spirit,
(2) all members of the Church carry the
responsibility for the apostolic mandate to
reach all peoples with the good news of the
kingdom, (3) leadership equips the Church
by creating space for supernatural
encounters that are held to the standard of
the Word in contextually appropriate ways,
(4) effective missional praxis requires the
Church to paradoxically exert great effort
while relying fully on the power of the
Spirit, and (5) reliance on the Spirit requires
a commitment to prayer.
Jesus gave His disciples the mandate to
communicate the good news of the kingdom
of God to every person of every nation. This
good news was that through His life, death,
and resurrection the will of the Father came
present, revealing and creating—in spite of
the impossibility of sin and alienation—the
possibility of reconciliation of the universe
in Christ (Eph. 1:10). Centered in Christ,
this gospel calls men and women into
relationship with God and a renewed
relationship with each other; it forms a new
people—the apostolic/missionary people of
God.
Ray Anderson describes the apostolic
mandate with the following diagram:

The Apostolic Mandate 2
Gospel Church Mission
The apostolic mandate responds to the
missiological questions: (1) What is our
purpose as the Church? and (2) What is
God’s agenda in the world?
However, as Anderson correctly argues, to
maintain Christ’s ministry as His own, the
apostolic mandate alone is inadequate. 3 Just
knowing the purpose for ministry is
insufficient because ultimately, we, the
apostolic people, will begin to rely on our
own possibilities—deviant ministries
created by our own hand, in our own power.
One must ask not only, “What is our
purpose?” but also, “Where does the power
come from? Is Christ central? Is this Christ’s
ministry? Is this missional action the
creation of possibility out of impossibility
by the Spirit? Is the apostolic mandate
fulfilled in apostolic power?” These are the
questions that correspond to the oftneglected
theological mandate.
Anderson illustrates the theological mandate
with the following diagram:
The Theological Mandate 4
Gospel Church Mission
The theological mandate throws those
involved in missional action back to total
dependence on God. Gospel and mission—
though often dichotomized—are not
separated in the mind of God. Revelation
and reconciliation are one, as illustrated by
the incarnation. Christ’s ministry of
revelation and reconciliation is the only true
3
ministry of the Church. The apostolic and
theological mandates cycle as the Church,
the apostolic people of God, birthed in the
gospel, goes out into the world in missional
praxis giving witness to the gospel by
fulfilling mission in the power of the
gospel. 5 Doing theology is a process of
prayer that seeks to discern the will of God
(the mind of Christ) for a given situation and
in obedience acts according to that will as
empowered by the Spirit.
Today much “good” is done in the name of
missions, and in the name of ministry, but
unless it leads to revelation and
reconciliation, to new life in Christ, it is
neither ministry nor missions. Are we
willing to step out in faith and obedience to
the voice of the Master and serve in the
midst of the wind and the waves at the edge
of missional chaos and allow the Holy Spirit
to bring order—to make the impossible
possible? The missionary people of God
must create space for the actions of the God
of the impossible. The greatest miracle of all
is a sinner saved by God’s amazing grace.
An indigenous church is a community of
sinners saved by grace and birthed in a
specific context. It includes the people who
are Spirit-driven (Spirit-led and Spiritempowered)
to accomplish God’s purposes
for and through that community. Like the
various churches described in the New
Testament, particularly in Acts, these local
and national communities of faith are to be
Spirit-governed, Spirit-supported, and
Spirit-propagated. God, by His Spirit, calls
and equips local leaders to disciple and
mobilize believers in the faith and guides
them in discerning and fulfilling the will of
God for their community. As a responsible
community, the indigenous church turns to
the unlimited resources of the Spirit for its
sustenance so as not to depend on the
missionary, institutions, ministries, or

agencies. As a community of faith,
indigenous church members are impassioned
and empowered by the Spirit to reach their
neighbors, their nation, and their world with
the gospel.
Because God has chosen to communicate
through people, the apostolic mandate
cannot be accomplished without apostolic
leaders who operate in apostolic power.
Leadership in a Spirit-driven missiology and
praxis can be defined as a person (team)
with the God-given call (responsibility) and
the God-given Spirit empowerment
(capacity)—both natural and supernatural—
to create “space” for the Spirit to influence a
specific group of God’s apostolic/
missionary people toward God’s missional
purpose for that group. 6
The most important competency for
apostolic leadership is the ability to discern
the voice of the Spirit and to yield to Spirit
empowerment (both natural and
supernatural) in order to live in obedience.
Apostolic leadership enables the people of
God to live as people of promise—moving
from future to present by the power of the
Spirit by prioritizing the integration of the
Spirit’s missionary call and His gifts of
natural and supernatural empowerment in
missional theory, leadership development,
and apostolic praxis.
Apostolic Praxis: Driven by the Spirit
Before addressing specific missional
actions, I want to reaffirm the urgency of
missiological reflection noted above. I
believe that the greatest contemporary crisis
in missions is not AIDS, malaria, poverty,
illiteracy, globalization, urbanization, the
global economy, the least reached, or the
inconvenient lost, but rather the lack of
missiological reflection by those engaged in
apostolic praxis. For apostolic praxis to be
driven by the Spirit, the apostolic people of
4
God must continually engage in the process
of missiological reflection where those
active in missions cycle between the
apostolic mandate and the theological
mandate, between purpose and power,
between right thinking and right doing,
between New Testament methods and New
Testament power, and between “the map”
and “the fuel.”
Before I explain what I mean by “the map”
and “the fuel,” I need to define what I mean
by apostolic praxis. In a generic sense,
praxis is simply the practical application of a
theory; for theologians it includes both right
thinking (orthodoxy) and right doing
(orthopraxis). 7 Truth is known as it is
practiced. Paulo Freire affirms that true
reflection leads to authentic praxis, 8 and to
be truly human one must engage in a cycle
of experimental learning. 9 Cheryl Bridges
Johns notes, “Knowledge of God, therefore,
is measured not by the information one
possesses but by how one is living in
response to God. A person is ignorant or
foolish not because of the lack of awareness
of facts about God but rather because of a
failure to do the will of God.” 10
Apostolic praxis is how the Church lives out
the communication of the gospel in the
world. More than just action, it is a cyclical
process of action/reflection where the
Church’s action in response to the apostolic
mandate to make disciples of all nations by
going, baptizing, and teaching is defined,
directed, and empowered by the Spirit. It is a
process of contextualized action and
reflection by which the Church engages the
Word and the world. Every member of the
missionary people of God is called to
apostolic praxis.
In the following story C. S. Lewis illustrates
the importance of theology in order “to get
to the other side.”

Everyone has warned me not to tell you
what I am going to tell you … They all
say “the ordinary reader does not want
Theology; give him plain practical
religion.” I have rejected their advice. I
do not think the ordinary reader is such
a fool. Theology means “the science of
God,” and I think any man who wants
to think about God at all would like to
have the clearest and most accurate
ideas about him which are available.
You are not children: why should you
be treated like children?
In a way I quite understand why some
people are put off by Theology. I
remember once when I had been giving
a talk to the R. A. F., an old, hard-bitten
officer got up and said, “I’ve no use for
all that stuff. But, mind you, I’m a
religious man too. I know there’s a God.
I have felt him: out alone in the desert at
night: the tremendous mystery. And
that’s just why I don’t believe all your
neat little dogmas and formulas about
him. To anyone who’s met the real
thing they all seem so petty and
pedantic and unreal!”
Now in a sense I quite agree with that
man. I think he had probably a real
experience of God in the desert. And
when he turned from that experience to
the Christian creeds, I think he really
was turning from something real, to
something less real. In the same way, if
a man has once looked at the Atlantic
from the beach, and then goes and looks
at a map of the Atlantic, he also will be
turning from the real waves to a bit of
colored paper. But here comes the
point. The map is admittedly only
colored paper, but there are two things
you have to remember about it. In the
first place, it is based on what hundreds
and thousands of people have found out
by sailing the real Atlantic. In that way
it has behind it masses of experience
just as real as the one you could have
from the beach; only, while yours
would be a single isolated glimpse, the
map fits all those different experiences
together. In the second place, if you
want to go anywhere, the map is
absolutely necessary. As long as you are
content with walks on the beach, your
5
own glimpses are far more fun than
looking at a map. But the map is going
to be more use than walks on the beach
if you want to get to America.
Now Theology is like the map. Merely
learning and thinking about the
Christian doctrines, if you stop there, is
less real and less exciting than the sort
of thing my friend got in the desert.
Doctrines are not God: they are only a
kind of map. But the map is based on
the experience of hundreds of people
who really were in touch with God—
experiences compared with which any
thrills or pious feelings you or I are
likely to get on our own way are very
elementary and very confused. And
secondly, if you want to get any further,
you must use the map. You see, what
happened to that man in the desert may
have been real, and was certainly
exciting, but nothing comes of it. It
leads nowhere. There is nothing to do
about it. In fact, that is just why vague
religion—all about feeling God in
nature, and so on—is so attractive. It is
all thrills and no work; like watching
the waves from the beach. But you will
not get to Newfoundland by studying
the Atlantic that way, and you will not
get eternal life by simply feeling the
presence of God in flowers or music.
Neither will you get anywhere by
looking at maps without going to sea.
Nor will you be very safe if you go to
sea without a map. 11
As a missiologist I resonate with the need
for missiology to provide the map for
missional action. Right thinking on biblical
missiology must form our praxis, but the
map alone does not get us to our destination.
We need a vehicle—the community of faith,
and the fuel—the power of the Spirit, to get
there. We have a lot of “vague” missiology
being practiced today. As Lewis notes, “It is
all thrills and no work.” It’s hands-on but
going nowhere. The Great Commission will
not be accomplished by short-term missions
work or social action in the name of mission
that does not proclaim the truth of the

gospel. Nor will a clearly-defined
missiology get the job done.
The need for a map, fuel, and a vehicle was
brought home to me on a return trip from La
Moskitia in Honduras. At 7:00 a.m., Valerie
and I, with a short-term missions team,
boarded Missionair’s DC-3 on the gravel
runway in Puerto Lempira, Honduras. Our
take-off in this 1941 antiquity was
uneventful, except for the steady stream of
oil pouring out of the starboard engine. As
we neared San Pedro Sula, I noticed that our
flight attendant, wife of one of the pilots,
was beginning to look a little nervous.
Finally, she leaned over and said, “We need
to pray!”
When it was all over, we were informed that
there had been a tropical storm over San
Pedro Sula, and the pilots had been unable
to fly by instrumentation alone. Being
unable to fly over the weather, they tried to
fly under it. Because of the weather and
because we did not have a detailed map of
the mountain altitudes, we were flying blind
and very low. At one point, as I looked out
the window, we cleared the trees on a ridge
by what appeared to be no more than ten
6
feet. Finally, we were forced to turn out to
sea and head for La Ceiba, another airport
on the Honduran north coast. When we
communicated with the tower, they denied
permission to land because of the storm. Our
emergency ration of fuel was quickly being
consumed. Praying that the weather would
clear, we requested an emergency landing
on the island of Roatan. We almost missed
it, but the clouds cleared. After what seemed
to be a vertical drop, we landed safely.
Upon disembarking, we discovered that fuel
was not available. In an old hangar we found
some empty fifty-five gallon oil drums. We
put five of them in the back of an old pickup
truck, whose owner drove me into town to a
local gas station where I bought 260 gallons
of “super” gasoline. When we returned,
members of the airport personnel helped us
fuel the plane. After opening the tank, one of
the men asked us, “Were you on this plane?”
We said, “Yes, why do you ask?” He said,
“Because there is no fuel in this tank.”
Apostolic praxis requires that the Church
exercise right thinking and right doing. This
interrelationship is illustrated in the
following diagram:

Apostolic Praxis:
Driven by the Wind and the Waves?
The remainder of this lecture, utilizing the
metaphor of the boat, the ability to row, and
the wind and the waves, will address various
contemporary missiological issues through
the lens of a Spirit-driven missiology, the
missiology of the indigenous church. Will
the Church fulfill the apostolic mandate in
apostolic power, or will it be seduced by the
wind and the waves—the seductive powers
of a donor-driven, market-driven, ministrydriven,
personality-driven, program-driven,
or missionary-driven missiology?
What follows is a non-comprehensive list of
potential “drivers” of missions that may not
be Spirit-dependent with initial non-binding
recommendations. I offer it in the same
spirit of Melvin Hodges who stated in the
preface of the first edition of The Indigenous
Church, “The pattern presented in this
volume is suggestive rather than mandatory,
The Church in Apostolic Praxis
7
and its purpose is to aid the missionary to
proceed along right lines and avoid crippling
errors.” 12
The Boat: A Reliance on Material Resources
On occasion, missionaries act as if all that is
needed to get to the other side is a “really
good boat” (i.e., material resources, money,
organizational structures, strategies,
programs, ministries and donors). If you can
just raise enough money, buy that new
satellite or building, promote the project,
write the book, develop the curriculum,
grow the largest organization or ministry,
devise the most effective strategy, then the
job of global evangelization will be
accomplished. The related but nonverbalized
assumption is that if I have the
money or the resources, I have the power;
but if not, then apostolic praxis is
impossible. In order to gain access to the
resources, missionary action is driven by the
wants and vision of the donor (the

photograph of the newly built church, the
feeding of the starving, the schooling of the
child), the ego of the missionary, or the
forces of the ecclesial market (i.e. that which
can be financed by the church).
The missionary must be willing to say “no”
to “boats” not under the authority of Jesus
and be accountable to the national church
and to fellow missionaries in the use of
resources. Getting the approval of an
immediate superior or meeting the
requirements of the Internal Revenue
Service is insufficient. Accountability
demands submission one to another and
requires effort and time, but it is a long-term
investment in Spirit-driven apostolic praxis.
A practical recommendation that I give to
new missionaries for accountability is,
“Send your newsletters to your missionary
colleagues and to national leadership.”
As an example of a “boat” issue, examined
through the lens of a Spirit-driven
missiology, I would like to address the
construction of buildings. The missionary
needs to ask: Are buildings really a part of
apostolic praxis? Are they important and
necessary to the local and national church to
give witness to the glory of God and His
Church? Or is it about my legacy, my need
to see tangible evidence of my ministry or
pleasing my supporters and generating
personal and ministerial income? Are
buildings a means or a barrier to the
communication of Christ? What should they
look like? In response to these questions, I
offer a few practical recommendations:
Assist in building only what the national
church desires, needs, and can maintain.
Avoid building local churches. Invest in
building projects that can serve the entire
national church.
8
Avoid multiple teams on a single
project.
Avoid creating individual “missionary”
empires. Buildings should be the result
of corporate agreement by missionaries
and national leaders.
If building local churches is absolutely
necessary, be culturally sensitive; do not
sabotage local initiative or create
dependence. Include local leadership in
the decision-making process and allow
local participation. (e.g., providing
foundation, walls, and roof).
Build simply and functionally, but
aesthetically pleasing to local
congregation and culture. What is built
in the name of Christ should reflect
positively on Him in the perspective of
locales without violating biblical
principles of stewardship and modesty.
The Ability to Row: Reliance on Human
Effort
Missionaries are easily seduced by this
alternative power source. We act as if the
fulfillment of the Great Commission is “up
to me.” If I just work hard enough, pulling
on missional oars both night and day, by the
sweat of my brow I will get the job done. It
produces a missional praxis that is
missionary-driven, personality-driven, and
results-driven—one riddled with
competition, division, burnout, and broken
relationships.
Scripture affirms the need for individual
effort. Everyone is responsible before God
for their actions. In Assemblies of God
World Missions parlance, “Every tub sits on
its own bottom.” This means everyone is
responsible to work hard, raise their own
support, discern God’s will for their life and

ministry, and provide for their own spiritual
life and “member care.” Each individual is
released to exercise his or her function as a
member of the body of Christ.
The negative side of an emphasis on
individual effort is that there is an unbiblical
focus on the missionary rather than a
biblical focus on Jesus. In such case, actions
do not point to Jesus and end up creating
competition between missionaries. “My
ministry is the only important ministry,”
claims the missionary. “If you were a really
good missionary, you would be doing what
I’m doing.” As with extreme ecumenism,
this missionary-centered praxis violates the
body metaphor, binding finger to finger and
hindering flexibility and effectiveness. This
perspective makes the toe try to be a finger
or feel guilty or inferior because it is not the
finger. Missionaries get so wrapped up in
their “ministry” that they ignore missions
history and miss the kingdom perspective.
As a result, they constantly “reinvent the
wheel,” committing the same mistakes,
ending with an ineffective missional praxis
that is not Spirit-driven.
The Wind and the Waves: Reliance on
Alternate Sources of Direction and Power
The wind and the waves can drive apostolic
praxis in directions and powers contrary to
the Spirit. A partial list would include praxis
driven by culture, fear, security/comfort,
technology, globalization, political power,
and need. Due to the constraints of time, I
would like to briefly examine cultural
relevance, need, security, and short-term
missions.
Frequently, the claims of culture do conflict
with the demands of the gospel. The
demands and assertions of Scripture are not
“politically correct.” When truth is
subjugated by relevance to culture, sinners
are not really lost, hell does not exist, and
9
Jesus is not the only way. Tolerance
becomes the ultimate virtue. “If we will just
learn to get along, communicate better, and
help each other,” people say, “there will be
global peace.” Love makes no demands.
Relevance is important. We cannot
communicate the gospel unless relevant,
understandable cultural forms are used, but
the forms do not save. The good news of
Jesus saves, and to be good news, it must be
communicated in word and deed.
Communication experts claim that verbal
communication is the least effective and that
preaching should be eliminated as irrelevant.
Or more subtly, this generation seems to
identify with the words associated with
Francis of Assisi, “Preach the gospel always,
and when necessary use words.” It was our
chapel theme for the year we served at
Bethany University as missionaries-inresidence.
On the positive side it is a call for
integrity in the Church and the Christian
walk and an indictment of a duplicitous
church. Yet, words are always necessary for
salvation.
Could political correctness or the fear of
being perceived as intolerant radicals be the
wind keeping the Church from apostolic
praxis? As Dick Brogden noted, Francis of
Assisi endangered his own life to speak to a
Muslim sultan in Egypt. 13 Yes, word and
deed must match, but the reality is that no
one can fully live out Jesus in this age; it is
the gospel that transforms, not my life. My
life is simply a tool to communicate His
truth. We are ambassadors, not kings. We do
not rule, He does. Through the foolishness
of the preaching of the gospel people are
saved (1 Cor. 1:21). It may not make sense
to the world or this generation, but preach
the Word.
Apostolic praxis responds to human need
but is not need-driven. The ultimate need is

for reconciliation with God; all other needs
are temporary. Jesus fed the five thousand
but rebuked those who sought Him only for
temporary gain.
I want to be clear: responding to temporary
needs creates space for encountering Christ,
but apostolic praxis demands we keep our
focus on Jesus. Not every need constitutes a
call. Divine direction leads to reconciliation
with God. We must ask, “Are we motivated
by the compassionate love of God or guilt at
our abundance? Is it possible that we give to
be justified in our comfort? Is it good praxis
or God praxis?”
Experiencing fear in the midst of the storm
is a natural response, but to refuse to obey
His instruction out of fear is unacceptable
for any disciple. It parallels the response of
the rich young ruler to Jesus’ charge (Matt.
19:16-22). Craig Keener makes the
following astute and powerful commentary
on this passage: “The kingdom is not meant
to be an extra blessing tagged onto a
comfortable life; it must be all-consuming,
or it is no longer the kingdom.” 14 Why do
we seek God’s will? Is it His will we desire
or is it access to His power to guarantee a
comfortable life? Do we think that if we are
in His “perfect” will, we will be insured
against difficulty, turmoil, struggles, and
pain? We in the West truly have no notion
of the suffering of the global Church and the
thousands of followers of Christ who die for
their faith each year. We are so comfortable
that biblical eschatology and the urgency of
proclaiming His death until He comes are
undermined. One of the greatest threats to
apostolic praxis is the sense of entitlement to
a comfortable life, which is why the largest
number of missionaries of this generation
will come from the majority world.
One of the byproducts of globalization is the
increase of short-term missions as missional
10
praxis. It lends itself to Western cultural
values. The hands-on, “get it done”
mentality appeals to our individualism, our
pragmatism, and our time and task
orientation. Short-term missions
participants, in a very limited amount of
time, experience an exotic, romantic
environment, erect a building with their own
hands, experience the gratitude of a
“destitute” people, and return to their
comfortable home believing that they have
done their part to save the world and fulfill
the Great Commission. Some return again
and again to get their missionary “fix.”
Missional praxis in such cases is defined by
what can be done by missionary tourists in
two weeks.
Short-term efforts are especially vulnerable
to the missiological storm and the wind and
the waves. However, short-term missions is
not going to disappear in our global
environment and can make a positive
contribution to missional praxis if tied to
long-term effective apostolic praxis. These
contributions include:
the mobilization and formation of
“world Christians” as God’s missionary
people;
the creation of space where potential
missionaries can hear, confirm, or
inform their missionary call;
an introduction into the process of
raising support, travel, cross-cultural
communication, missiology, and
apostolic praxis;
encouragement to national believers and
provision of field needs;
direct participation in spiritual warfare;
intense communal discipleship;

a connection to the broader body of
Christ.
The concerns that must be addressed
include:
No Map! No missiological formation or
reflection, resulting in flawed praxis;
a de-emphasis on career missionaries
and the need for incarnational ministry;
a de-emphasis on the Church and
proclamation in word and deed (Church
planting and discipleship take more than
two weeks, two months or two years.);
a disproportionate percentage of
missions budgets are designated to shortterm
praxis;
faulty missiology—many short-term
participants come to believe that
missions can be accomplished with
short-term missions alone;
lack of contextualization and cultural
sensitivity;
not connecting to nor submitting to
national leadership;
the experience of a lifetime does not
convert to a lifetime of commitment.
Recommendations to maximize the
effectiveness of short-term efforts:
prioritize long-term missions;
balance financial investment;
provide orientation for long-term effect,
include missiology and spiritual
discernment;
11
affirm the potential positive impact of
short-term missions;
create space to hear the voice of the
Spirit and experience Spiritempowerment;
provide concrete venues of praxis to
express deeper commitment postexperience;
eliminate multiple trips;
increase connectedness to career
missionaries.
Ultimately, short-term efforts will be only as
effective as they are linked to missionaries
and national churches in long-term apostolic
praxis.
Practical Recommendations for a Spiritdriven
Apostolic Praxis
Hodges’ description of the missionary’s
ministry provides solid advice for
contemporary missionaries:
Remember the missionary’s primary
function is as a church planter/pioneer
(Two phases: (1) evangelism, (2)
teaching converts including the training
of national workers and leaders.)
A missionary is temporary in any local
area; the church must be the center of the
work.
Avoid maintenance ministries; move to
new fields.
Avoid measures that would stifle
indigenous efforts.
Refuse to occupy a position that a
national can fill.

Do not be jealous of his or her authority
or position, but be willing for others to
take the lead. The missionary’s spiritual
ministry will always provide his or her
proper place in the Body of Christ
whether he or she holds an office or not.
Withdraw at the proper time. Assume
new roles.
Influence through spiritual leadership.
Above all else, let the missionary
maintain his or her standing as a “man or
woman of God.” With this relationship
maintained, all other relationships will
be made easy. 15
To this I would add that to be involved in a
Spirit-driven apostolic praxis, you must:
Think and act missiologically.
Continually affirm the need as a
missionary people for the map, the fuel,
and the vehicle of the Spirit in order to
get to the other side and fulfill the Great
Commission.
Keep your eyes on Jesus. Peter began to
sink because he was distracted by the
wind and the waves. The full gospel is a
Christocentric gospel. Nurture the
spiritual life; tend your own spiritual
power base. Be accountable.
Individually and corporately create space
to discern Spirit direction and experience
Spirit-empowerment and renewal.
Make disciples: Plant and nurture the
Church. Christocentric means ecclesialcentric
because the Church is the Body
of Christ. The vehicle for apostolic
praxis is the Church.
Preach/proclaim the good news; only the
gospel saves.
12
Focus on people not programs. The
battle of this age is for souls; the
proclamation of the kingdom not its
realization.
Emphasize the importance of the career
missionary, incarnational ministry, and
the long-term. The missionary should
strategically invest for a life-time of
service in any given context, but be
willing and able to change at a moment’s
notice when directed by the Spirit.
Tell the Story. Narratives create space
for divine encounter. Testimonies
empower, build our faith, and provide an
environment where we can trust Jesus
for the impossible.
Conclusion
Jesus is already in the boat with the willing
on His way to those who have never heard.
He calls out to the rest of the Church, “Let’s
go over to the other side.” Those in the boat
are assured of getting to the other side
because He is in the boat. His presence will
go with us as we fulfill the Great
Commission. An indigenous New Testament
church does not just emerge. It is birthed by
intentionally following the way of the cross
in the power of the Spirit. The antidote to a
donor-driven, market-driven, ministrydriven,
or missionary-driven missiology is to
surrender our rights to power, recognizing
that it is not “my” ministry; it is God’s
ministry.
Most of the time being in the missionary
boat with Jesus is just hard work—a
constant battle to trust Him in the face of the
wind and the waves. I am so glad that
sometimes He stands and speaks peace,
bringing order to chaos. Apostolic praxis is
possible, because the Master of the wind and
waves promised it.

SOURCES CITED
Anderson, Ray S., ed. Theological Foundations for Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1979.
———. “A Theology of Ministry.” In Theological Foundations for Ministry, edited by Ray S.
Anderson, 6-21. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979.
———. Minding God’s Business. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986.
Bridges Johns, Cheryl. Pentecostal Formation: A Pedagogy among the Oppressed. Sheffield,
UK : Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.
Clinton, J. Robert. The Making of a Leader. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 1988.
Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove. IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1993.
Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press, 1974.
Gutierrez, Gustavo. A Theology of Liberation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1986.
Hodges, Melvin L. The Indigenous Church. Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1953.
Lewis, C. S. The Joyful Christian. New York: MacMillan Publishing Co., 1977.
1 I first heard the term “inconvenient lost” in a message presented by Dick Brogden at the Assemblies of
God World Missions Summit 2 in Cincinnati, OH on December 31, 2008.
2 Ray S. Anderson, Minding God’s Business (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986), 6.
3 Ibid., 7-8.
4 Ibid.
5 Ray S. Anderson, “A Theology of Ministry,” in Theological Foundations for Ministry, ed. Ray S.
Anderson (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), 6-21.
6 This definition is based on that given by J. Robert Clinton in The Making of a Leader (Colorado Springs,
CO: NavPress, 1988), 197.
7 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1986), 10.
8 Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (New York: Seabury Press, 1974), 52-53.
9 Ibid., 58.
10 Cheryl Bridges Johns, Pentecostal Formation: A Pedagogy among the Oppressed (Sheffield, UK:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 35.
13

2008.
11 C. S. Lewis, The Joyful Christian (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. 1977), 32-34.
12 Melvin L. Hodges, The Indigenous Church (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1953), 5-6.
13 Dick Brogden at the Assemblies of God World Missions Summit 2 in Cincinnati, OH on December 31,
14 Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1993), 98.
15 Hodges, 126-129.
14

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
ALTA M. WASHBURN: ICONOCLASTIC PENTECOSTAL
“TRAILBLAZER” TO THE TRIBES 1
Introduction
Joseph J. Saggio, Ed.D.
Northwest University, Kirkland, Washington
Associate Dean for Graduate Studies, College of Ministry
Associate Professor of Church and Culture & U.S. Missions
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Adjunct Professor
I have spent so much time reflecting over these past forty-two years God has
given us to minister the Gospel to Native Americans. We feel no regrets, [we] only
wish we could have many more years to work in this great Harvest for the Lord.
Clarence and I are consoled by the knowledge that our vision is perpetuated by
those whom our lives have touched.
-Alta M. Washburn, Trail to the Tribes, p. 100.
Historically,organizational and paradigmatic
shifts occur when radical, iconoclastic
leadership emerges, forcing the status quo in
new directions. Iconoclasts challenge us to
destroy our preconceived notions and stop
venerating the past. They urge us to examine
our previously held views and reshape our
vision for the future.
Alta M. Washburn (1906-1990) was one
such iconoclastic leader. 2 Largely
instrumental in the paradigmatic shift away
from a “missionary-driven” model to the
more “indigenous-driven” model of
leadership within the U.S. Assemblies of
God (AG) missions work among American
Indians, 3 Washburn was boldly innovative in
that she established the first Pentecostal
Bible college for Native Americans with the
stated objective of: “…train[ing] the Native
1
Indian worker in sound Bible Doctrines that
they may in turn go out to reach their own
tribes in the native language, thereby
spreading the Gospel quickly to every
kindred, tribe and tongue.” 4
In her role as a missionary church planter
and founder of a Bible institute, Washburn
was boldly innovative in her willingness to
serve in a “male-dominated” role and also to
promote the empowerment and equality of
Native Christian leadership at a time when
such a position was considered untenable by
many.
This article briefly examines the life and
ministry of this iconoclastic leader whose
two most enduring contributions to AG
missionary work among Native Americans
include her missionary church planting of
several congregations in the southwestern
United States, and the founding of the first

Bible training institute (today, a regionallyaccredited
Bible college) to serve the broad
tribal spectrum of American Indians, Alaska
Natives, and First Nations peoples in the
United States and Canada. 5 Washburn
distinguished herself in these two roles—
positions traditionally held by male leaders.
This paper also makes some brief
comparisons of the ministry of Alta M.
Washburn with that of Alice E. Luce, wellknown
AG missionary to Latin America
who later established the Latin American
Bible Institute (in La Puente, California and
along with Henry C. Ball, in San Antonio,
Texas). Although Washburn and Luce were
most likely unknown to each other, there are
some remarkable similarities in their
ministry trajectories that should be noted for
readers of missions history.
Moreover, establishing a Bible school for
American Indians may not seem radical
today, but in the late 1950s the concept of
indigenous ministry among Native
Americans within the Assemblies of God
had only begun to emerge. Despite full
gospel ministry to Native Americans being
chronicled within Pentecostal publications
as early as 1909, it really was not until the
late 1940s and early 1950s that Native
American indigenous leadership really
becomes visible in nascent form. 6 Early
Pentecostal Native leaders included Andrew
C. Maracle (Mohawk), Charles E. Lee
(Navajo), and Dick Boni (Apache). 7 Still at
that time, indigenous Native leadership was
quite rare, and the “missions-driven”
paradigm was still the prevailing
missiological model used within the
Assemblies of God among American
Indians. Various written reports from that
time period indicate that with very few
exceptions, missionaries provided the bulk
of leadership in evangelism and church
planting efforts among Native Americans. 8
Alta M. Washburn was a major actor in the
2
shift toward the realization that the
indigenous church principle needed to be
applied within the Native American field.
Biographical Overview
Born in Sandfork, West Virginia on June 28,
1906, Alta came to faith in Christ in 1931
when an unnamed itinerant evangelist
preached a series of tent meetings in
Clarksburg, West Virginia and the
surrounding communities. Initially resistant
to the gospel, Alta‟s Aunt Elva—a newly
saved Christian herself—evangelized her
twenty-five year old recalcitrant niece, who
had been suddenly stricken with a lifethreatening
case of scarlet fever. Paralyzed
and crippled, Alta lay dying and had a vision
of impending judgment if she refused to
accept Christ as Lord and Savior:
“Sometime after midnight I went into the
jaws of death. I was suspended over the
abyss of hell on a narrow slippery path,
struggling to climb and escape the creatures
who reached to drag me in [sic].” 9
Recognizing her need for a Savior, Alta
accepted Christ—some would say partly in
response to the all night prayerful
intercession held at her aunt‟s church in
Fairmont, West Virginia. Washburn‟s
conversion in 1931 included a call to
ministry as a missionary:
What a day to be remembered when
I arose from the bed that had long
held me prisoner. More glorious was
my deliverance from the bondage of
sin. Not only does that day in 1931
mark the date of my salvation and
healing, but it was the day I heard
God call me to be a missionary.
Little did I know what the future
held for me. 10

In the years to follow, Alta began to
internalize and “flesh out” the call of God
upon her life by serving as a youth worker,
then subsequently as a tent evangelist,
followed by a brief stint as pastor of the
First Assembly of God church in Salineville,
Ohio. 11 While serving at that church, Sister
Washburn once again felt the pervasive call
to the Native American mission field on the
San Carlos Apache Reservation in eastern
Arizona. In 1947 (the same year she was
ordained), Alta, along with her husband
Clarence, assumed the pastorate of the San
Carlos Apache Assembly of God that had
been founded in 1936 by missionaries Ernest
and Ethel Marshall; certainly it was one of
the first Assembly of God churches planted
among Native people, although this article
has already made previous reference to
Pentecostal missions to Indians as early as
1909. 12
This thriving church had been characterized
by a Pentecostal Evangel article in 1942
while under the Marshall‟s capable
leadership as “experienc[ing] a tremendous
revival characterized by overflowing
crowds, salvations, and reports of „signs and
wonders.‟” 13 Although warmly received by
the growing Apache congregation of over
100 converts, the Washburns found it
necessary to relocate to Phoenix, Arizona by
1947 after a brief sojourn in order for
Clarence to procure adequate employment.
Unfortunately job opportunities were
extremely limited in San Carlos at that time,
and the church was unable to supply an
adequate income for the Washburns‟
livelihood.
As they continued in their efforts to reach
Native Americans for Christ, the Washburns
established All Tribes Assembly of God in
Phoenix to reach the growing population of
southwestern Indian tribes moving to the
greater Phoenix area. Moreover, this was
3
part of their strategy to establish a means of
evangelistic outreach to the nearby Gila
River, Salt River, and Papago (now Tohono
O‟odham) reservations, as well as the Yaqui
Indian community in Guadalupe, near south
Phoenix. During the years that Alta served
as pastor of All Tribes AG (1948-1972), the
church not only continued to grow
numerically, but also exponentially through
its church-planting efforts by establishing
new works at Casa Blanca, Laveen, and Coop
(Gila River Indian Community), the Salt
River Indian AG on the Salt River Indian
Reservation, and the AG Church in
Guadalupe (Yaqui Indian). 14 Washburn had
an apostolic vision for church planting and
was an effective church planter long before
it became “the thing to do.” Cherie
Sampson, a Pima Indian and AG minister, is
part of Washburn‟s legacy because her
father and uncles were saved and called to
the ministry under Alta‟s ministry within the
Salt River Indian Community. Now pastor
of the Salt River Indian AG, near Scottsdale,
Arizona, Sampson remembers Washburn
fondly, “I would say that she was a woman
… ahead of her time. She forged ahead
when it wasn‟t popular for a woman to be in
this kind of ministry.” 15
If Washburn had remained exclusively
involved with pastoring and church planting,
she would still have had a successful
ministry characterized by the many souls
won to Christ and baptized in the Holy Spirit
under her ministry. Nonetheless, as an
iconoclast, Washburn was not willing to
“color within the lines.” Not only was she
convinced of her own calling, but she
recognized that many of the Native people
she served also had the callings and gifts to
assume roles as pastors, evangelists, and
other forms of church leadership.
By 1956, Sister Washburn recognized that in
order for American Indians to be

successfully empowered for church
leadership, a special school would need to
be created that would focus on equipping
Native Pentecostal indigenous leadership. A
conversation with Virgil Sampson, a Pima
Indian saved under Washburn‟s ministry,
resulted in a “seed being planted” toward
this possibility. Returning to the Phoenix
area after completing his education at an AG
Bible college that enrolled predominantly
white students, Sampson was frustrated at
his experience of cultural discontinuity
when he asked Sister Washburn: “[W]hy
can‟t we Indians have our own Bible
school? We can preach in our language but
we need a place where we can study the
Word together; a place where we have more
in common than in a school where most of
the students are Anglo.” 16
Challenged by this request, Washburn felt a
confirmation that this was indeed the
direction in which she was being led. She
records her response to Sampson‟s sincere
request, “That heart-felt appeal was another
confirmation that God was leading us into a
great challenge for Him. I was determined to
obey the Lord and see the answer He was
making clear to me.” 17 Up to that time few
Native leaders had attended any sort of
Bible college training; noteworthy among
the small number who had were Charles E.
Lee (Navajo), a graduate of (then) Central
Bible Institute in Springfield, Missouri and
Andrew C. Maracle (Mohawk), who
completed his studies at (then) Zion Bible
Institute in Barrington, Rhode Island. 18 In
Washburn‟s thinking, it was now time to
develop a specialized institution to serve
Native Pentecostal leaders.
On September 23, 1957, the All Tribes
Indian Bible School (ATBS) opened its
doors for the first time at 4123 E.
Washington Street in Phoenix, becoming the
first AG Bible School for Native Americans
4
established by the Assemblies of God. 19 It
began with very little “fanfare” in the
traditional sense and was run on a very
modest budget. According to Washburn:
We charged the students $1.00 a day;
only a token payment on the cost of
the school‟s operating expense. No
money came from the tribes for the
students‟ education in those days or
from parents who were practically all
living far below the poverty level.
But we trust[ed] God to meet each
day‟s need, and He never failed us. 20
Although ATBS began with little more than
a dream to empower and equip Native
Pentecostals for ministry, this vision took
hold in subsequent years. A number of
Native American graduates have come into
the ministerial ranks through educational
and spiritual formation at ATBS (and its
subsequent names). Alta Washburn
continued in her role as the institute‟s
principal 21 until 1965 when health concerns
forced her retirement from that work. She
remained as pastor of All Tribes Indian AG
until 1972 and remained in pastoral ministry
along with her husband until 1986. Rev.
Alta M. Washburn passed away on
September 16, 1990 after a lengthy illness
and just after completing her memoirs with
the assistance of Rev. Alma Thomas, longtime
missionary educator and close friend.
An Iconoclastic Legacy
Alta M. Washburn has, for a number of
reasons, left an iconoclastic legacy. In light
of the fact that modern Pentecostalism has
just passed its “century mark,” Pentecostals
have become more keenly aware of the
changing dynamics that prevailed
throughout the twentieth century, continuing
now into the twenty-first century.

First and foremost, Washburn was willing to
assume two roles traditionally denied to
women within modern Pentecostal circles:
senior pastor and president of a Bible
college. In 2006, only 3.97 percent of the
AG ministers serving as senior pastors were
women. 22 In the fifties it was almost
certainly less. 23 By 1957 when Sister
Washburn established ATBS, little historical
precedent existed for women serving as
heads of Bible colleges or institutes within
the Assemblies of God. 24 Not only was All
Tribes Bible School the first Bible training
school for Native Americans within the AG
since its inception, but Washburn was its
founding principal. 25 She cast her role as an
educator metaphorically in terms of that of a
“warrior,” protecting the “flock” from
unsound biblical teaching and exploitation
from unscrupulous evangelists. In that way,
she compared herself with David protecting
God‟s people against the “giant” Goliath. 26
Despite her non-traditional role as a woman
serving in educational and pastoral
leadership, church historian Angela Tarango
notes that in spite of Washburn‟s preeminent
role throughout the fifties and sixties, all
articles in the Pentecostal Evangel
highlighting her missionary and educational
activities listed her as “Mrs. Clarence
Washington.” Her first name was not
mentioned in print until her memoirs were
published, and she was always publicly
recognized in conjunction with her husband,
Clarence, who she viewed as an equal
partner in ministry despite his less visible
role. A skilled mechanic, Clarence
Washburn‟s background was essential in
keeping the buses running that regularly
transported students and parishioners to the
Bible School or church. He also helped a
great deal in building and maintenance
tasks. 27 Nonetheless, Alta greatly reverenced
her husband‟s supportive role in
undergirding her ministerial calling. She
5
credits him with encouraging her to remain
faithful to her role when she became
discouraged by the criticism of others.
Indeed, Alta regarded Clarence as her
pastor:
My husband rebuked me for being
affected by the criticism. Clarence
never felt a call to pulpit ministry,
but he ministered to me in my many
times of discouragement. Had it not
been for his love, encouragement,
exhortation, and standing by me, I
doubt if I could have accomplished
much for the Lord. In the truest sense
he was my pastor. 28
As a woman leading a Bible college,
Washburn had few role models. Among the
few women who had made inroads into
Christian postsecondary education at that
time was Alice E. Luce, a former Anglican
missionary to India, who joined the AG and
worked among Hispanics. Luce later
founded the Latin American Bible Institute
(LABI), originally located in San Diego,
California and that later moved to La
Puente, California. 29
Luce strongly advocated the teachings
earlier promoted in Anglican missionary
Roland Allen‟s 1912 groundbreaking work,
Missionary Methods: Saint Paul’s or Ours?
Like Allen, Luce believed that churches
established abroad should be free from
paternalistic oversight and become selfsupporting,
self-governing, and selfpropagating.
Upon joining the AG in 1915,
Luce spent much of her life and ministry
developing indigenous churches among
Hispanics within the United States using
LABI as a thrust for this venture. From the
onset of her involvement with the AG, Luce
was an articulate spokesperson for the
promotion of the indigenous church
principle; her writings just prior to the 1921

General Council held in St. Louis helped set
the stage for endorsing the Pauline
missiological approach of the three “self‟s”
previously mentioned. 30
Although I have no evidence that Washburn
either knew Luce or was even aware of her
contributions, I believe that Luce merits
mention as another iconoclast also greatly
instrumental in advocating a paradigmatic
shift in missiological philosophy and praxis.
Like Washburn, Luce established a Bible
training school at a time when women rarely
accomplished such feats. Moreover, Luce
established LABI in 1926—more than thirty
years before Washburn founded ATBS in
1957.
Washburn (like Luce) was an iconoclast in
that she was a strong advocate for the
indigenous church principle among
American Indians (as Luce was for
Hispanics)—at a time when the prevailing
philosophy of paternalism was still the
dominant paradigm among Native American
Pentecostal missionaries. Thanks to Luce‟s
far-sighted articles in 1921, 31 and later The
Indigenous Church, published in 1953 by
Melvin L. Hodges, missions efforts
beginning in the early twenties were
theoretically undergirded by a belief in
indigenous ministry within the local church
found on the foreign field. Although the
indigenous principle was becoming well
established in overseas ministry, there was
far less initial receptivity toward it among
Native American ministry within the AG.
Prior to 1950 it is difficult to find much
evidence within the AG that suggests that
the indigenous principle was taken seriously
as a missiological framework among Native
Americans. 32
However, in 1950 The Pentecostal Evangel
did publish an article that proudly
proclaimed that “the time for which we have
waited and prayed has come, and several
6
consecrated Indian young people have
stepped out to dedicate their lives to Christ
and His gospel.” 33 By this time significant
Native Pentecostal leaders such as Charles
E. Lee (Navajo) and Andrew C. Maracle
(Mohawk) were beginning to emerge—
leaders who would during their lifetimes
become role models for future generations
of Pentecostal Native leadership. It was also
during this same time period that Alta
Washburn began to receive her vision for
developing Native Christian leadership
within a cultural context that embraced
Native value systems and learning styles. 34
Although Rev. Washburn was widely
heralded by some as being innovative, not
everyone was in agreement with her vision
for establishing a Bible college to develop
Native American pastoral leadership. In fact,
early on, Rev. Washburn was admonished
that the Bible training school she had
established was indeed not to be used for
training Indians for pastoral ministry;
moreover, its sole purpose was to train
Native workers who would assist their
missionary pastors—who would be the
“leaders in charge.” 35 Thankfully, Washburn
did not heed those admonitions!
Finally, in order to fully appreciate the
innovation of her vision, the reader must be
cognizant of the fact that Native Americans
had no appreciable legacy in postsecondary
education at that time, and even today they
account for only .9 percent of the total
population of Americans in higher
education, although they are now
proportionately represented (per their
population size) within the broader national
demographic landscape. 36 In the fifties,
when Native American presence was
virtually non-existent within the academy,
Alta M. Washburn was an iconoclast
because she believed in providing American
Indians with an opportunity to “better”
themselves through education—even if it
was in a Bible school setting.

Historically, Native Americans have been
considered “at risk” for any form of higher
education, 37 and few have been willing to
make a significant investment of time,
capital, and other resources in advancing
their educational status. During the fifties it
was virtually unheard of to envision
American Indians and Alaska Natives
participating in any form of postsecondary
education. In 1928, less than thirty years
before the founding of the original All
Tribes Bible School, the Merriam Report, 38
the first comprehensive sociological and
educational analysis of the state of affairs
among America‟s indigenous peoples,
painted a grim picture—advocating a
paternalistic approach toward “bettering” the
Indian people. But notwithstanding,
Washburn‟s iconoclastic vision enabled her
to establish both a church that continues to
produce Native leadership and a school that
has evolved into the first and only
regionally-accredited Bible college for
American Indian and Alaska Native college
students in the United States.
7
In summary, I believe that Washburn (like
Luce) is characteristic of Pentecostal women
leaders who have worked within existing
ecclesiastical structures to reform and refine
the understanding of what women could do
without rhetorically challenging those
structures. Washburn did not forego her
responsibilities as a wife and mother in
order to fulfill her call to ministry. Yet she
chose the strong decisive action of
missionary church planting and promoting
the indigenous church principle among
Native Americans rather than attacking
existing administrative structures that
favored more paternalistic policies. She
chose to work within the organizational
context of the Assemblies of God and
brought reform through faithfully carrying
out her apostolic vision. Moreover, her
legacy is that of an iconoclastic, Pentecostal
trailblazer to the tribes whose life and
ministry has had a profound and farreaching
effect on evangelizing and
equipping Native Americans in fulfillment
of Christ‟s Great Commission.

1 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 37 th Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal
Studies at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, March 13-15, 2008.
2 Angela M. Tarango, an emerging church historian, has extensively researched modern Native American
Pentecostal missions within the Assemblies of God. Regarding Alta Washburn, while viewing her through a critical
feminist perspective, Tarango notes that even though Washburn was unconventional in her role as a female leader—
she would never herself have defined herself as a feminist although she undeniably helped to redefine and reshape
the role of women involved in Pentecostal Native American ministry. See Angela M. Tarango, “Assemblies of God
Missions to Native Americans,” Assemblies of God Heritage 29 (2009): 45-51, 69. Previously, I have noted
Washburn‟s efforts to balance her role as a wife and mother with that of her calling to full-time missionary work in
Joseph J. Saggio, “Alta M. Washburn: „Trailblazer‟ to the Tribes,” Assemblies of God Heritage 27 (2007): 28-33.
3 In this paper I use the terms: American Indians, Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Americans and First
Nations somewhat interchangeably to refer to the pre-Columbian indigenous peoples of North America. For a more
detailed discussion about the “indigenous-driven” model vs. the “missionary-driven” model among Native
Americans, specifically within the Assemblies of God, see Joseph J. Saggio, “Towards an Indigenous Model of
Native American Ministry in the Assemblies of God,” in Society for Pentecostal Studies: Memories of the Azusa
Street Revival: Interrogations and Interpretations, 35th Annual Meeting held at Fuller Theological Seminary, March
23-25, 2006, Parallel Session Papers: 336-343.
4 See Joseph J. Saggio and Jim Dempsey, eds., American Indian College: A Witness to the Tribes
(Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 2008), 66. This is quoted directly from an unpublished promotional
flyer from All Tribes Bible School, 1957. Over the years, the school (presently known as American Indian College
of the Assemblies of God) has undergone a number of name changes. It was referred to in its early years 1957-1965
as All Tribes Bible School. Subsequently, the name was changed as the institution grew and developed to American
Indian Bible Institute, American Indian Bible College, and in 1993 to its present name.
5 Today, American Indian College of the Assemblies of God (known as AIC for short) is located at 10020
N. Fifteenth Avenue in Phoenix, Arizona and operates as a regional college of the Assemblies of God under the
auspices of the Division of U.S. Missions. Their Web site address is www.aicag.edu
6 See Jeremiah Rundle quoted by A. H. Argue from personal correspondence to him, “Pentecost among the
Indians of the North,” The Latter Reign Evangel 2 (April 1909): 17. Although this may well be the first reference of
Pentecostal ministry among First Nations people, it is not the first reference of Indians receiving the baptism of the
Holy Spirit. For example, in (circa) 1903, Howard Goss, an early Pentecostal leader, reports an elderly Indian chief
receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit in a pre-Azusa Street revival meeting in Galena, Kansas. See H. A. and
Ethel Goss, The Winds of God (New York, NY: Comet Press, 1958), 11, 12 cited in Carl Brumback, Suddenly from
Heaven (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1961), 28. We also know that Native Americans were part of
the Azusa Street Mission under Pastor W. J. Seymour during the early part of the twentieth century. See Cecil M.
Robeck, Jr., The Azusa Street Mission and Revival: The Birth of the Global Pentecostal Movement (Nashville, TN:
Thomas Nelson Inc., 2006), 88.
7 See Saggio, “Towards an Indigenous Model of Native American Ministry in the Assemblies of God,”
(SPS 2006): 338-339. See also “Indians to Train for Service,” Pentecostal Evangel No 1897 (September 16, 1950):
12.
8 I have personally reviewed hundreds of articles (particularly brief missionary accounts from the
Pentecostal Evangel) from that time period and found that only a scant few acknowledge any form of Native
leadership until the late forties. For example, in 1948 at the first Indian Convention held by the Assemblies of God,
the anonymous writer records: “How the Apaches did drink in the Word of God as it was given by various visiting
missionaries as well as by the Home Missions Director, Brother Vogler, and by our General Superintendent E. S.
Williams, see “First Indian Convention, The Pentecostal Evangel No. 1770. (April 10, 1948): 10-11. This
convention took place on the San Carlos Apache Indian Reservation and featured Native participants and
8

missionaries from Arizona, Washington, and Idaho. Although there were some testimonies by young Native
preachers, the bulk of the preaching and leadership was clearly provided by Anglo missionaries.
9 Alta M. Washburn, undated correspondence, 1. See also Joseph J. Saggio, “Alta M. Washburn „Trailblazer
to the Tribes,” Assemblies of God Heritage, 27 (2007): 28.
10 Alta M. Washburn, Trail to the Tribes (Prescott, AZ: 1990), 4-5. See also Saggio, 2007, 28-29.
11 Saggio, 2007, 29.
12 See Jeremiah Rundle cited by A. H. Argue, 17.
13 See Saggio, 2007, 29. Herein I reference “Revival among the Apache Indians,” Pentecostal Evangel, No.
1474 (August 8, 1942):7. See also Jim Dempsey, “Part I: Assemblies of God Ministry to Native Americans,”
Assemblies of God Heritage 22:2 (Summer 2002): 8-9.
14 Saggio, 2007, 30.
15 Ibid., 32.
16 Washburn, 48.
17 Ibid., 48.
18 See Joseph J. Saggio, “Towards an Indigenous Model of Native American Ministry within the Assemblies
of God,” Pneuma, 31: 1 (2009, In Press). In this article I give a detailed account of the development of indigenous
ministry within the Assemblies of God of Native American ministers from its inception to the present time.
19 Subsequent institutions established to serve Native American students include Native American Bible
College founded in 1968 by Pauline Mastries, Charles Hadden, and Hubert Boese, and now located in Shannon,
North Carolina. Good Shepherd Bible Institute in Mobridge, South Dakota was founded in 1970 by Leo and Mildred
Bankson (later renamed Black Hills Indian Bible College in Rapid City, South Dakota). Its successor is the Institute
for Ministry Development, an intercultural distance education program for Native Americans. Far North Bible
College in Anchorage, Alaska was established in 1973 through the efforts of Arvin and Luana Glandon along with
Kenneth Andrus. See Saggio, 2007, 33 and unpublished promotional flyer from All Tribes Bible School, 1957.
20 Washburn, 55.
21 The original title was “principal” and was later changed to “president” under the subsequent leadership of
Rev. Don Ramsey beginning in 1965, see Don Ramsey, “Presidential Reflections … Don Ramsey” in American
Indian College: A Witness to the Tribes, ed. Joseph J. Saggio and Jim Dempsey (Springfield, MO: Gospel
Publishing House, 2008), 199, 204.
22 See Statistics of the Assemblies of God (USA),
http://ag.org/top/about/statistics/Statistical_Report_Summary.pdf (accessed September 7, 2007).
23 The Statistician‟s Office of the General Council of the Assemblies of God does not provide statistical data
on the number (or percentage) of women serving as credentialed ministers before 1977.
24 Alice E. Luce established Latin American Bible Institute (LABI) in 1926 in San Diego, California (later
moved to La Puente, Calfornia. See Gary B. McGee, This Gospel Shall Be Preached: A History and Theology of
Assemblies of God Foreign Missions to 1959 (Gospel Publishing House: Springfield, MO, 1986), 97. Also, Christine
Gibson, along with a few loyal supporters established Mount Zion Bible School in East Providence, Rhode Island in
1924. The school is now known as Zion Bible College and later occupied the former location of Barrington College
in Barrington, Rhode Island. As of Fall 2008 the school relocated to its new location in Haverhill, Massachusetts.
9

President Gibson served the school until her death in 1955 at age 75. See Pat Pickard, “Still Living by Faith and
Miracles after 70 Years: Zion Bible Institute, Assemblies of God Heritage 15:1 (Spring 1995): 17. Both Luce and
Gibson had just passed from the scene immediately before Washburn established All Tribes Bible School. Finally, I
must mention that Minnie T. Draper, Elizabeth V. Baker, and Virginia E. Moss established Bethel Bible Training
School, the Rochester Bible Training School, and the Beulah Heights Bible and Missionary Training School,
respectively. Although none of these women ever held ministerial credentials within the AG, their respective
ministries are recognized as having made significant contributions toward ministerial and missionary training of
early AG personnel. See Gary B. McGee, “Three Notable Women in Pentecostal Ministry,” Assemblies of God
Heritage 5:1 (Spring 1985-1986). McGee commends these three women as having success in establishing Bible
schools at a time when this was traditionally considered to be a man‟s calling.
25 As mentioned in a previous footnote, the title “President” was later conferred on Donald Ramsey, the
second person to head the Bible school. Later, in 1968 Pauline Mastries (who had served previously at ATBS) along
with Charles Hadden and Hubert Boese would found Eastern Bible Institute, in Shannon, North Carolina. This
institution would later be renamed Native American Bible College and moved to Fayetteville, North Carolina. Thus,
it might be argued that Alta Washburn set a precedent (at least within Native American ministries) for women to
assume leadership positions within institutions of postsecondary learning.
26 See Washburn, 48 where she made reference to David challenging Goliath found in 1 Samuel 17.
27 See Lillie Ward Neal, “Alumni Reflections … Lillie Ward Neal” in American Indian College: A Witness
to the Tribes, ed. Joseph J. Saggio and Jim Dempsey (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 2008), 355.
28 Alta M. Washburn, “Trail to the Tribes” in American Indian College: A Witness to the Tribes, ed. Joseph
J. Saggio and Jim Dempsey (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 2008), 54.
29 In 1926, concurrent with the establishment of LABI in San Diego, California, Luce‟s longtime colleague
and friend, Henry C. Ball, was also establishing another LABI in San Antonio, Texas. See McGee, 97.
30 See Gary B. McGee, This Gospel Shall Be Preached: A History and Theology of Assemblies of God
Foreign Missions Since 1959 – Volume 2 (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1986), 33.
31 Luce wrote three consecutive articles entitled “Paul‟s Missionary Methods” found respectively in the
January 8, January 22, and February 5 editions of The Pentecostal Evangel. Herein she elucidates some of the
missiological premises articulated in Roland Allen‟s book published in 1912, Missionary Methods: Saint Paul’s or
Ours? while also further “unpacking” indigenous ministry from a Pentecostal perspective that includes a theology of
signs and wonders. For additional biographical information on Alice Luce, I recommend Everett A. Wilson and
Ruth Marshall Wilson, “Alice E. Luce: A Visionary Victorian” in Portraits of a Generation: Early Pentecostal
Leaders, ed. James R. Goff Jr. and Grant Wacker (Fayetteville, AR: The University of Arkansas Press, 2002): 159-
176.
32 See my previous footnote comments where I explain that my view on the origin of indigenous Native
Pentecostal leadership is predicated upon review of hundreds of written sources detailing early AG ministry among
Native Americans as well as a number of oral interviews with key actors who have significant longevity within this
work.
33 “Indians to Train for Service,” Pentecostal Evangel No. 1897 (September 16, 1950):12.
34 I need to mention here that I do not mean “traditional” value systems whereby various Native religious
belief systems (including animistic and polytheistic belief systems are embraced, but rather non-religious cultural
traits such as “hands on” learning styles vs. the passing on of propositional knowledge via primarily written
codification, non-Western views of the family system, dietary preferences, clothing styles, recognition that English
is a second language for many Native people, etc. Ignorance of these cultural areas has caused historic “flash points”
in the ongoing attempt to successfully evangelize and disciple Native peoples into the Christian faith.
10

35 Having myself served for fourteen years at American Indian College in Phoenix as an administrator and
faculty member (1994-2008), I have had several conversations with Rev. Alma F. Thomas, Professor Emeritus at
American Indian College and long time U.S. missionary to Native Americans. The service of Rev. Thomas and her
late husband Lonnie to the College extends intermittently back to the early sixties. I have also spoken many times
with long-time missionary educator Rev. Jim Dempsey, who currently serves as Campus Pastor at American Indian
College. Dempsey has also confirmed that same belief through his own archival research and anecdotal evidence.
Finally, Angela M. Tarango references material documentation of similar conversations through her archival
analysis of the meeting minutes from June 2, 1956 pursuant to the establishment and incorporation of All Tribes
Bible School (the original name of the school) in Phoenix, Arizona. See Angela Tarango, “Institutionalizing the
Indigenous Principle: Sister Washburn and the American Indian College of the Assemblies of God, 1956-1965”,
unpublished research paper.
36 See National Center for Educational Statistics, Education Statistics Quarterly, vol. 7, Issues 1 &2,
Postsecondary Education, “Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2002 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year
2002.” http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_7/1_2/5_asp (accessed December, 3, 2007).
37 See for example Joseph J. Saggio and Laura I. Rendón, “Persistence among American Indians and Alaska
Natives at a Bible College: The Importance of Family, Spirituality, and Validation” in Christian Higher Education:
A Journal of Applied Research and Practice, 3 (Fall 2004): 329-347. Herein we detail how Native American
students have been historically “at risk” and how American Indian College serves as a role model of an institution
that has had some success at equipping Native students in light of its educational mission.
38 The full name of the report is The Problem of Indian Administration: Report of a Survey made at the
Request of Honorable Hubert Work, Secretary of the Interior, and submitted to him, February 21, 1928.
http://www.alaskool.org/native_ed/research_reports/IndianAdmin/Indian_Admin_Problms.html (accessed
September 14, 2007). This is a “must read” for those interested in gaining a deep historical understanding of the
relationship of the federal government to Native Americans vis-à-vis educational and social issues. It is clearly not
representative of modern thought; however, the prevailing attitudes toward American Indians had not changed
appreciably from 1928 up to the time of Alta Washburn‟s founding of All Tribes Bible School in 1957. Thus, I cite
this comprehensive report to help historically contextualize the issue of postsecondary education for American
Indians in the United States prior to 1957.
11

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Biblical Champions of Female Leadership Assimilation
Jesus set the model for leadership and
ministry through service instead of
dominance. 1 Rather than reflecting the
common understanding of authority, He
exemplified a new way to lead. This
counter-cultural approach marked the onset
of Christ‟s Kingdom. Jesus encouraged
women to follow His example and
empowered them to lead those around them
by providing opportunities for them to
influence others (Matt. 28:1-10, John 4:39-
42). Multiple examples of women in the
Gospels and the Early Church reveal that
women influenced those around them to
follow Jesus. This Kingdom influence
revealed their call to leadership.
Christ‟s counter-cultural approach to
leadership permeated His words, actions,
and relationships. The Apostle Paul also
followed Christ‟s leadership method by
using his words, actions, and relationships to
encourage females to lead in the Early
Church (Rom. 16; 2 Tim. 1 and 4; 1 Cor.
16). The presence of female leaders reveals
that Jesus and Paul implemented their
leadership even in a counter-cultural
manner. Jesus and Paul‟s words, actions,
and relationships provide insight into the
value they placed on women leaders and
how they assimilated them into the Early
Church authority structure. Further, their
words, actions, and relationships provide a
trans-cultural and timeless method of
assimilation for women into the Church
authority structure.
Ralynn G. Willis, D.Min. (D.Min, 2009)
AGWM India
1
Jesus and the Assimilation of Female
Leaders
The Gospel writers revealed Jesus‟ practice
of female leadership assimilation. From the
beginning of Christ‟s introduction in the
Gospels, the female presence subtly
confronted the cultural norm through the
inclusion of women in the genealogy of
Christ. 2 While female absence remained
normative in the Old Testament, the Gospel
of Matthew named four women in Christ‟s
genealogy: Tamar (1:3); Rahab (v. 5); Ruth
(v. 5); and the wife of Uriah (v. 6). 3
Additionally, it appeared that Luke
intentionally included three women and
three men in the report of Jesus‟ birth. 4
Jesus‟ words and actions revealed His
willingness to identify with female followers
and build healthy, rewarding relationships.
Jesus clearly modeled behavior that
challenged the status quo of culture and
religion; His approach included a countercultural
attitude and interaction with
women. 5
Words
Jesus used His words to equalize and
assimilate women into His Kingdom. He
viewed both males and females as capable
of grasping spiritual truth. 6 The story of
Mary sitting at the feet of Jesus exemplifies
that He taught women in the same way He
taught men (Luke 10:39, 41-42). Further,
Jesus commonly spoke to women directly, 7
defying the idea that men could not publicly
address women by freely conversing with

them 8 because women were not educated in
the Torah. 9 Rabbis did not want to educate
women in the Law and, as a result, men
treated women with little respect and
believed they could not contribute to the
conversation. 10
The words Jesus used in public indicated
His intentional defiance of the cultural
practice of treating women as subordinate
beings. 11 In contrast to the norm, Jesus
communicated spiritual truths using parables
that highlighted women as the heroines. 12
Jesus described His prophetic role with
feminine metaphors (Matt. 23:37-39). 13
When He taught about marriage, He
equalized the roles, responsibilities, and
rights of husband and wife. 14 He held private
and lengthy conversations with women. 15
Some of His most significant conversations
recorded in the Gospels were with women.
On His way to Golgotha, Jesus prophesied
to the women mourning His death (Luke
23:27-31). The final group Jesus spoke to
before the cross consisted of women. 16
Actions
Jesus used His actions to equalize and
assimilate women into His Kingdom. He
removed the woman‟s responsibility for
male lust (Matt. 5:27-30). 17 He defended
women in public. The Gospel of John
records the account of the woman caught in
adultery; Jesus acts extraordinarily by
defending her, confronting her accusers, and
placing equal responsibility upon the man
for this sin (8:1-11). 18 He blessed men and
women in the same way. 19 He allowed
women to touch Him to receive healing. 20
He also touched women and allowed a
prostitute to wipe away tears with her
uncovered hair (Luke 7:36-50). 21 The
significance of Jesus touching the crippled
woman in Luke 13:10-17 reveals his
2
intention to break cultural and religious
barriers to right relationship. 22
Jesus restored dignity and social status. 23 He
assimilated women into His ministry. The
Gospel of Luke records females financially
supporting and, most likely, ministering
alongside Christ while traveling with Him
(Luke 8:2-3). 24 Radical, counter-cultural
actions helped equalize and assimilate
women into His Kingdom. As a result of
Jesus‟ words and actions, women responded
to His message gladly, discovering a new
identity. 25
Relationships
Jesus developed healthy relationships with
women, equalizing and assimilating them
into His Kingdom. Jesus included women in
His ministry team, and some theologians
suggest that His female followers described
in Luke 8 functioned as disciples. 26 Unlike
other rabbis, Jesus allowed both male and
female disciples to accompany Him on His
travels. 27 Scripture provides numerous
examples of Jesus interacting with women,
revealing how He broke barriers associated
with race, class, and sex. 28 The Gospels
highlight the female presence in Jesus‟
ministry at the cross and resurrection,
revealing the loyalty of these women (Matt.
28; John 19:25-27; 20:1-18). They were true
disciples of Jesus—something other rabbis
would not allow. 29
Jesus‟ closest friends included Mary,
Martha, and Lazarus. Interestingly, more is
written about Mary and Martha than about
Lazarus. 30 Jesus taught Mary in her own
home in the same manner as He did male
disciples. 31 Normally, this advanced
education remained exclusive to male
students, 32 yet Jesus affirmed Mary as she
stepped outside a woman‟s traditional
domestic sphere because He was
unconcerned with upholding gender-based

oles. 33 Jesus‟ selection of Mary‟s
preference to learn from Him, over Martha‟s
activity, revealed Jesus‟ belief that a
woman‟s potential went beyond
homemaker. 34
Jesus redefined relationships in His
teachings, challenging abusive patriarchy. 35
His concern for equality in relationships
included the familial structure. Jesus
redefined family relationships in His
teachings by telling His followers not to call
anyone “father” (Matt. 23:9), identifying
those who do the will of God as His
“brother, sister, or mother” (Mark 3:31-35;
NB no mention of “father”), and declaring
that those who left all for His sake will
receive back houses, brothers, sisters,
mothers, children and land—but no fathers
(Mark 10:29-30). 36 Jesus allowed the term
“father” to apply only to God. 37
The Apostle Paul and the Assimilation of
Female Leaders
The Apostle Paul continues the countercultural
approach toward women that Jesus
exemplified in His life and ministry.
Contemporary church leaders‟ fixation upon
scattered texts within Paul‟s writings which
appear to restrict women leaders sometimes
overshadows Paul‟s evident strategy for
female leadership assimilation and his
intention to not apply the documented
restraints permanently and universally. 38
Although the Church continues to wrestle
with the meaning of these problematic texts,
Paul‟s words, actions, and relationships
reveal a constant and strategic
implementation of women into a variety of
leadership roles throughout the Roman
Empire.
Words
The Apostle Paul‟s writings provide
evidence of his support for women leaders
3
in the Early Church. New Testament
writers note women in the Early Church
functioning in positions of authority such as
apostles (Rom. 16:7), prophets (Acts 21:9),
deacons (Rom. 16:1), teachers (v. 3), and
evangelists (Matt. 28:10; John 4:39). 39 The
spread of Christianity from Judaism into
Greco-Roman culture and beyond created
the need to make Christianity easily
transferable into these new domains.
Though the New Testament records how
the Church wrestled with the challenge of
incorporating Christ‟s values and practices
into daily life, Paul‟s writings serve as an
ideal example of this challenge as he
assimilates female church leaders. He
advocates Christ‟s freedom and, at the
same time, provides Christian guidelines
for appropriate attitudes and behavior
within existing societal structures (Eph.
5:8-6:9). Paul provides clear evidence of
relationships with female leaders and
encourages the Church to embrace them
(Rom. 16:1-2). In addition, Paul names
female leaders serving in different positions
in the Early Church: Mary, Tryphaena,
Tryphosa, Persis, Julia, Olympas, Nereus,
Apphia, Nympha, and Lydia. In his
greetings he frequently notes something
significant about the female leaders‟
contribution (vv. 1-16).
The house church functioned as the
equivalent to the contemporary local
believers‟ assembly. The Apostle Paul
identifies the female hosts‟ names for
several house churches, which reveals the
existence of women pastors in the first
century: Acts 12:12 speaks of Mary, the
mother of John Mark; Acts 16:13-15, 40
speaks of Lydia; 1 Corinthians 1:11
mentions Chloe; 1 Corinthians 16:19 and
Romans 16:3-5 refer to Priscilla and
Aquila. 40 Paul‟s intentional recognition of
female leaders within his valuable

correspondence provides noteworthy
support for women leaders. 41
Actions
The backdrop of the society and culture of
the Roman Empire shows the significance of
the actions of the Early Church and, in
particular, the Apostle Paul. The book of
Acts reveals that women became central to
the growth and function of the church (e.g.,
Lydia in Philippi, Acts 16:13-14). Luke lists
the names of female converts among Jewish,
Samaritan, and Gentile believers; he
eventually lists the names of females before
males to reveal their prominent church
participation (Acts 5:14; 8:12; 17:4, 12, 16-
17, 34). 42 The practice of identifying the
female‟s contribution and participation in
gospel expansion displays the countercultural
actions reflective of Jesus. 43 Further,
the listing of Tabitha (also called Dorcas) as
“one of only two individuals recorded as
being raised from the dead through the
ministry of the Early Church” revealed the
prominence of women. 44
The Apostle Paul‟s counter-cultural actions
shine in Philippians when he addresses two
women, Euodia and Syntyche (4:2). Paul
calls them “coworkers” (sunergos) (v. 3),
the same term he uses regarding fourteen
men. 45 He describes them as leaders
contending alongside Paul for the gospel. 46
The term refers to “athletic combat found in
gladiator matches.” 47 The solution the
Apostle Paul presents for the disagreement
between these women reveals his elevated
value for female church leadership (Phil.
4:2-3). Rather than silencing these women
leaders, he behaves in an opposite manner
by encouraging them to cooperate and
directing male leadership to assist their
women coworkers. 48
4
Relationships
Greetings, salutations, and brief references
in the Pauline epistles provide clues to the
Apostle Paul‟s valued ministry relationships.
The Apostle Paul frequently mentions
Priscilla, a female leader and prominent
teacher in the Early Church. Priscilla and her
husband, Aquila, appear multiple times
throughout Acts and the Pauline epistles. In
the book of Acts, Luke depicts the Apostle
Paul‟s arrival in Corinth (Acts 18) also
referencing Priscilla and Aquila. After the
initial introduction of this team, the
positioning of Priscilla‟s name in the text
highlights her ministry prominence in
Christian circles. 49
Acts describes this excellent female teacher
as the foremost instructor for the learned and
fervent minister, Apollos (Acts 18:24-26).
Evidence reveals Priscilla‟s presence in
Ephesus, the very location of the female
teacher controversy. The Apostle Paul greets
her in 2 Timothy 4:19, and refers to her
leadership, sacrifice, and boldness in his
Roman letter (Rom. 16:3-5). The language
he uses in both instances indicates a close
relationship with this fervent ministry
couple. The indication that their ministry
extended beyond one specific region further
reveals the prominence of their spiritual
authority.
The Apostle Paul also appears to value his
relationship with the woman minister
Phoebe, referring to her as the deacon or
minister in the church of Cenchrea. Paul
promotes her leadership by encouraging the
church in Rome to receive and help her
(Rom.16:1-2). Further, he indicates her
significant contribution to his ministry
through his use of the masculine form of
diakonos. This term carries a general range
of authority that the feminine form
abdicates. 50 In God’s Women—Then and

Now, Deborah Gill and Barbara Cavaness
explain, “Though it is irregular for a woman
to be described by a masculine noun, it is
not a grammatical error. When, in Greek, a
female is associated with a masculine noun
the term is an official or ecclesiastical
title.” 51 The description of the office of
deacon is not described in detail, but the
extent of authority included administrative
and general responsibilities. 52 Further,
linking the term diakonos to a specific
congregation reveals the Apostle Paul‟s
intention to assign Phoebe a position of
authority in the Cenchrean church. 53 He also
implies Phoebe‟s prominence by titling her
benefactor or patron (prostatis) of the
church. 54
Describing Junia‟s apostleship as
“outstanding” and “prominent,” Paul reveals
Junia‟s significance to the Early Church as a
high-ranking female leader (Rom. 16:7). 55
Controversy regarding gender surrounds this
mysterious leader; historians wrestle with
the likelihood of Junia as female since the
masculine form would be an exception. 56
“Early Church Fathers acknowledged that
the text indicates Junia was both a woman
and an apostle. John Chrysostom writes,
„Oh! How great is the devotion of this
woman that she should be counted worthy of
the appellation of apostle!‟” 57 Theological
debates regarding Junia‟s gender erupted in
the thirteenth century, resulting in
translations rendering her as male with her
name altered to appear as “Junias.” 58 In fact,
no historical evidence exists that confirms
the use of Junias as a male name. 59 The
linguistic and textual issues evident in
ancient sources reveal the likelihood of
Junia as female outweighing male. 60
Like Jesus, Paul actively assimilates women
into church leadership through his words,
actions, and relationships. Although female
leadership assimilation does not constitute
the vast majority of Paul‟s content, the fact
5
that he greets and honors females within his
letters reveals the importance of their
presence and ministerial contribution. Paul‟s
letters were meant to be read aloud, so when
Paul mentions someone by name, he does so
intentionally. 61
Paul embraced the divine call to live as “a
servant of Christ Jesus” (Rom. 1:1) and, as a
result, relinquished the right to incorporate
his own cultural notions. Therefore, in
reflection of Christ‟s words, actions, and
relationships, the Apostle Paul continued the
counter-cultural approach inaugurated by
Jesus.
Both Jesus and Paul refused to concede to
cultural restrictions; therefore,
implementation of this Kingdom dynamic
remains possible even among cultures which
uphold derogatory and restrictive views
toward women. Neither propagated the
ideology that female ministry is contingent
upon culture. This ideology clearly
represents an ungodly concept which
Church leaders ought not to nurture as the
Kingdom of God expands to various
cultures.
Jesus exemplified how to assimilate women
into the church leadership arena, and the
assimilation begins with those already in
authority empowering women in practical
ways. The central focus ultimately remains
on how each person will use his or her
resources to ensure that all people called of
God receive a genuine opportunity to fulfill
that calling and bring God glory through the
expansion of His Kingdom.
Pentecostal Leadership and Assimilation
of Women Leaders
The examples given first by Jesus and then
by the Apostle Paul provide a strategy for
assimilation of women leaders that meets
modern challenges. The assimilation

methods Christ exemplified remain central
to the recommendations to all leadership,
whether influencing the Pentecostal
ecclesiastical culture on a micro or macro
level.
Pentecostal Leadership and Words
Words form ideas, and ideas influence
people. Just as derogatory language reveals
the heart of a person, complimentary,
inclusive language also reveals a person‟s
intentions. Jesus said, “The good man brings
good things out of the good stored up in his
heart, and the evil man brings evil things out
of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of
the overflow of his heart the mouth speaks”
(Luke 6:45). Leaders of the Church of Jesus
Christ should submit their speech to reflect
Jesus‟ Kingdom values.
Words used regarding gender issues need to
remain respectful in public and private
settings, female-only, and male-only
settings. In order to reflect Christ, male and
female ministers should refuse to engage in
derogatory language with regard to the
opposite sex including jokes, stereotypes, or
exclusive language. Male leaders need to
advocate for women leaders by encouraging
promotions and opportunities for
advancement. Godly leaders ought to
advocate for women in front of others, even
those who hold to contradictory viewpoints.
Both Jesus and Paul functioned this way.
Male leaders can promote advancement for
women in positions within the ecclesiastical
structure such as presbyter positions, district
leadership, and executive opportunities,
using words consciously and intentionally as
Jesus did when He empowered women
through His vocabulary. 62
Those in power positions ought to defend
women with words just as Jesus did when a
woman came to anoint Him (John 12:7).
6
They need to defend their ministries,
callings, and their right to glorify God
through using their gifts and talents (1 Tim.
4:14). Just as Junia, Priscilla, and Phoebe
needed the support of the Apostle Paul,
women still need the support of the
influential male leaders around them to help
open doors for ministry (Rom. 16:1).
Verbal proclamation continues to
characterize the overarching culture and
perpetuate Pentecostal values; therefore,
ample ministry opportunities for women to
preach only enhance the tradition. 63 The
church body could benefit from a feminine
perspective on scriptural passages. Further,
Pentecostal leaders should intentionally
ensure that female ministers appear on the
speaker docket; this inclusion will
complement male preaching and promote
female assimilation.
Pentecostal Leadership and Actions
Jesus‟ countercultural approach toward
women stands as the ultimate example for
leaders of the church. Leaders need to
encourage respect toward female ministers
by exemplifying it in front of the larger
community and by entrusting female leaders
with opportunities for public ministry.
Continued visibility of women ministers
creates opportunities to influence followers
and colleagues toward accepting women in
other ecclesiastical spheres. Human nature
drives people to value those similar to
themselves, but in the body of Christ,
diversity remains a necessary component for
health and balance (1 Cor. 12).
Actions that help remove barriers for women
ministers need to exist at lay leadership and
professional levels. These actions
encompass pastors maintaining awareness of
the female struggle within the larger society
and responding to this struggle by providing

esources to meet unique needs. Christ-like
actions include encouraging women
pursuing ministry callings through providing
educational scholarships, presenting
ministry opportunities, and advocating
prayer on their behalf. Due to family and
marriage limitations, some women called by
God may never fulfill their callings unless
this opportunity arises through the local
church they attend. Leaders exemplifying
Christ seek to provide opportunities for
ministry development, recognition, and
promotion within the local church so women
can fulfill their ministry calls. In the
professional arena, actions reflecting Jesus
Christ include inviting the lone female
minister to sit at the table during
professional meetings, hiring female
ministers at fair wages, providing preaching
opportunities, ensuring visibility for female
leadership, encouraging advancement by
intentionally nominating women for
leadership positions, and serving as an
advocate.
Pentecostal Leadership and Relationships
Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul valued and
cultivated relationships with the female
leaders around them. Pentecostal leaders
should nurture healthy working relationships
by seeking to erode gender discomfort rather
than ignoring it or maintaining an awkward
relational distance. 64 Resources in such areas
as mentoring, coaching, or relationships can
facilitate healthy, appropriate boundaries
between men and women serving Christ. 65
Senior pastors can implement coaching tools
7
to successfully oversee staff and guide
pastors supervising lay ministers.
The words Pentecostal leaders use in private
and public settings, the behavior they
exhibit, and the relationships they develop
between male and female ministers will help
break down the assimilation barriers for
women in leadership.
Conclusion
As the Church expands, the issue of how to
assimilate female leaders into church culture
will continue. The value Jesus placed upon
women should remain central as the gospel
message embarks into cultures that view
women as subordinates. Competing world
religions restrict women with rules and
regulations, enslaving them to inferior roles.
Christianity glistens with freedom and
equality for women. As Jesus and Paul
exemplified, no rules, regulations, or
cultural restrictions can prevent the powerful
effects of the permeation of Christ-likeness
as those in authority lovingly empower
women to serve alongside them in Kingdom
advancement. The Apostle Paul sums up this
new worldview: “You are all sons of God
through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you
who were baptized into Christ have clothed
yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew
nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female,
for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you
belong to Christ, then you are Abraham‟s
seed, and heirs according to the promise”
(Gal. 3:28-29).

1 Susan C. Hyatt, In the Spirit We’re Equal (Dallas, TX: Hyatt Press, 1998), 27.
2 Richard Coffelt, “Transformational Narrative as Primary Method in Activating the Divine Calling of the
Emerging Woman Leader: Curriculum Design and Assessment” (D.Min. diss., Regent University, 2006), 206.
3 Ibid.
4 Judy L. Brown, Women Ministers According to Scripture (Kearney, NE: Morris Publishing, 1996), 123.
Luke includes Zachariah, Elizabeth, Joseph, Mary, Simeon, and Anna.
5 Martin Scott, For Such A Time as This (London: P.S. Promotions, Ltd., 2001), 50-51.
6 Ibid., 129.
7 Brown, 132. “Before a large crowd of people Jesus stopped a funeral procession, spoke to the mother of
the young man who was dead, raised her son back to life again, and gave him back to her (Luke 7:11-15). He held
the hand of a little girl who had died, spoke to her, and raised her to life (Mark 5:21-24, 35-42). He called a crippled
woman out from the audience in a synagogue on the Sabbath, spoke to her, touched her, and made her well (Luke
13:10-13).”
8 Ibid., 52. Matt.15:21-28; Mark 5:33-34 and 7:24-30; Luke 8:47-48; John 4:4-42.
9 Aída Besançon Spencer, Beyond the Curse: Women Called to Ministry (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, 1985), 55-56.
10 Ibid., 58.
11 Brown, 132.
12 Scott, 56. “We find Jesus freely using a story about a woman to illustrate the love of God (Luke 15:8-10).
In effect he is saying, „God is like a woman who searches for her lost coin.‟ To use such blatantly feminine imagery
must have been very offensive in the patriarchal society of Jesus‟ day.”
13 Ibid., 51.
14 Brown, 131. Matt.15:3-4. “He denounced the ultimate symbol of male dominance in marriage, the right to
divorce a wife at will (Matt. 5:31-32) and identified this wrongdoing against women as being the result of man‟s
spiritual shortcoming (Matt.19:7-8). He taught that God‟s desire for marriage is found in the pre-fall account of
Adam and Eve rather than in any deviations or accommodations that have occurred as a result of the fall (Matt.19:3-
9).”
15 Scott, 52.
16 Brown, 134.
17 Ibid., 51. In the Judaism of Jesus‟ day, “the woman was always blamed for a man‟s lust. If a woman was
seen in public with an exposed face she could expect that men would lust after her. Jesus, however, did not blame
the woman but firmly placed the responsibility with the man for his behavior (Matt. 5:27-30). In Jesus‟ new order,
men and women were to look at each other differently; women were no longer to be seen as sex objects but as
people of equal value. Jesus radicalized the meaning of lust and adultery to include even the mental act of
dehumanizing women.”
18 Ibid. This account corresponds with Jesus‟ teaching on lust. He establishes equal responsibility for both
male and female for lustful behavior.
8

19 Ibid., 135. “Other Jewish rabbis would not have had direct dealings with women, but Jesus did so on a
number of occasions. The same blessings that He made available to men, He also gave to women—the physical
miracles of healing and the spiritual miracles of salvation.”
20 Scripture cites the woman bleeding for twelve years in Matt. 9:20-22; Mark 5:25-34; Luke 8:43-48.
21 Scott, 52.
22 Charles O. Knowles, Let Her Be (Columbia, MO: Knowell Publishing, 2001), 56.
23 Scott, 53. An example includes the woman crippled for eighteen years in Luke 13:10-17.
24 Coffelt, 210.
25 Scott, 55.
26 Coffelt, 210.
27 Knowles, 54.
28 Ibid., 54 He includes a list of females encountering Jesus. “The woman bent double (Luke 13:10-17),
Peter‟s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14-15; Mark 1:30-31; Luke 4:38-39), the woman with bleeding (Matt. 9:20-22; Mark
5:25-29; Luke 8:43-48), the woman at the well (John 4:4-42), the woman taken in adultery (John 7:53-8:11), Jairus‟
daughter (Matt. 9:18-19, 23-25; Mark 5:22-24, 38-42; Luke 8:41-42, 49-56), the widow of Nain (Luke 7:11-17), the
Syrophoenician woman (Matt. 15:21-28; Mark 7:24-30), the women who anointed his feet or head (Matt. 26:6-13;
Mark 14:3-9; Luke 7:36-50; John 12:1-8), Mary and Martha (Luke 10:38-42; John 11:1-44), Mary Magdalene (Luke
8:2), Joanna (Luke 8:3), and Susanna (Luke 8:3).”
29 Scott, 54.
30 Brown, 136.
31 Spencer, 58. “Sitting at a rabbi‟s feet was a position typical of rabbinic students expressing respect to
their rabbi. As Jose ben Joezer of Zeredah, who lived ca. 160 B.C., said, „Let thy house be a meeting-house for the
Sages and sit amid the dust of their feet and drink their words with thirst.‟”
32 Brown, 138.
33 Knowles, 56.
34 Spencer, 58.
35 Scott, 56.
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
38 Brown, 199. “How, then, did Paul treat the „woman issue‟ of his day? He treated it as less important than
evangelizing the world. He treated it as subservient to evangelizing the world. If the newfound liberty that women
had in Christianity was exercised too quickly or too extremely, and if this became an obstacle to anyone‟s perception
and acceptance of the gospel, then Paul told women to refrain from exercising their freedom.”
39 Crabtree, 25.
9

40 Ibid.
41 Hyatt, 30.
42 Brown, 155.
43 Gilbert Bilezikian, Beyond Sex Roles: A Guide for the Study of Female Roles in the Bible, 2nd ed. (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 128-129.
44 Brown, 155.
45 Ibid.,156. “Paul uses this term to refer to himself (1 Cor. 3:9), Aquila (Rom. 16:3), Urbanus (Rom. 16:9),
Timothy (Rom. 16:21; 1 Thess.3:2), Apollos (1 Cor. 3:5, 9), Titus (2 Cor. 8:23), Epaphroditus (Phil. 2:25); Clement
(Phil. 4:3), Aristarchus (Col. 4:10-11; Philem. 24), Mark (Col. 4:10-11; Philem. 24); Justus (Col. 4:11), Philemon
(Philem. 1), Demas (Philem. 24), and Luke (Philem. 24). It is noteworthy that Paul never used this word to designate
believers in general, but reserved it for references to his associates in the ministry. Four of these men were also
identified as apostles: Paul (Rom. 1:1), Timothy (1 Thess. 1:1; 2:6-7), Apollos (1 Cor. 4:6, 9), and Epaphroditus
(Phil. 2:25, „apostolos’ translated „messenger‟); therefore, being a „sunergos’ was not a small or casual designation.”
46 Hyatt, 29.
47 Brown, 156.
48 Ibid., 157.
49 Groothuis, 192. “The New Testament references to Priscilla and Aquila make it clear that, despite the
male-dominate culture, Aquila was not the leader and Priscilla his assistant. In fact, of the seven times the two
names are mentioned together, Priscilla is listed first four of those times (Acts 18:18-19, 26; Rom. 16:3; 2 Tim.
4:19). Because it was the custom to list the husband‟s name first, this reversal indicates Priscilla‟s importance in the
minds of the New Testament writers Luke and Paul. It also indicates that Priscilla was not teaching as a secondary
partner under the „covering‟ of her husband‟s spiritual authority.”
50 Deborah M. Gill and Barbara Cavaness, God’s Women—Then and Now (Springfield, MO: Grace and
Truth Publishers, 2004), 112. “In the past several decades, much scholarly effort has been focused on women
deacons and deaconesses in the Early Church. It has been learned that the order of deaconess (diakonissa) was not
even present at Phoebe‟s time, but was the creation of the later Roman (Catholic) church to restrict the role of
ministering women to serve women only. If Phoebe were a deacon (as opposed to a minister), however, her role was
the same as any deacon of the first century. It is inaccurate and belittling, therefore, to call her a deaconess.”
51 Ibid.
52 Groothuis, 196.
53 Stanley Grenz and Denise Muir Kjesbo, Women in the Church: A Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995), 88-89.
54 Groothuis, 196.
55 Ibid. “They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was” (Rom. 16:7).
56 Brown, 182-185.
57 Groothuis, 195.
58 Ibid..
10

59 Gill and Cavaness, 115.
60 Brown, 182-185.
61 Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis, and Gordon Fee, eds., Discovering Biblical Equality,
Complementarity without Hierarchy (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 120.
62 An example of progress in this is the resolution passed in the 2008 Southern Missouri District Council to
incorporate gender inclusive/neutral language into official documentation and district correspondence.
63 Grant Wacker, Heaven Below (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001), 112-120, 158. Wacker
explains that in early Pentecost the presence of well-known female preachers promoted Spirit baptism and new
opportunities. Some historians conclude that these “high-profile figures like Aimee Semple McPherson and Maria
Woodworth-Etter were exceptions who proved the rule.” Others believe “the Pentecostal revival afforded
opportunities for women that they did not enjoy in most denominational contexts.” One might conclude that the
subject of female preachers and ministers moved from a dormant position to an active discussion as a result of the
Pentecostal revival.
64 David Willis, “God‟s Call and Practical Methodology for Establishing Longevity in Ministry (D. Min.
Diss., Fuller Seminary, 2003), 121.
65 Recommended coaching books include Gary R. Collins, Christian Coaching (Colorado Springs, CO:
NavPress, 2001) and Jane Creswell, Christ-Centered Coaching: 7 Benefits for Ministry Leaders (St. Louis, MO:
Lake Hickory Resources, 2006), and Robert Hargrove, Masterful Coaching (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Publishers, 2003), and Thomas G. Crane, The Heart of Coaching (San Diego, CA: FTA Press, 2001).
11

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
The Root of Busyness and Its Counter-Cultural Cure
Kirk Hadden (M.Div., Intercultural Studies, 2009)
Originally presented as a spring 2009 AGTS course paper for
“Building the Disciple Making Ministry” with Dr. Stephen Lim.
A pervasive sense of hurry and urgency
drives contemporary Americans to be more
efficient, to get more done, to do more
things, and do it all at once. From CEOs to
high school students, most people concede
that their lives are constantly characterized
by one word: busyness. Yet most people
express pain over that fact, longing instead
for rest and a slower pace of life.
Due to an economic structure that rewards
hard work, the United States has the largest
economy of any single nation in the world. 1
However, the frenetic lifestyle of many
Americans seems to be breaking new
thresholds. People are working more, and
more people are working. 2 Even when not in
the office, technology connects Americans
to work while at home in the evening, on the
weekends, and even on vacation. Leisure
time is also busy, filled with more and more
activity and a sense that there are always
more obligations than time.
Excessive busyness impinges on health. Dr.
Archibald Hart expects that in the near
future stress-related diseases will be the
leading cause of death in the United States. 3
A constant state of hurry causes the body to
exist in a continuous mode of emergency,
which can result in enormous physiological
and psychological damage. The pace of
modern life rarely allows for rest, especially
the kind of rest the human body truly needs
to relax and heal itself. 4 In addition to
diseases directly caused by stress,
1
Americans also lack the sleep and exercise
they need to remain healthy. Richard
Swenson notes that in 1850, the average
American regularly slept nine and a half
hours per night. Today, it is closer to seven
and still dropping. 5
Busyness also takes a severe toll on human
relationships. In her landmark study, The
Overworked American, Juliet Schor noted
the effect of Americans’ increased busyness
on family relationships. Half of those
surveyed reported that they did not have
enough time for their families. 6 Her study
showed that between 1960 and 1986, the
time parents had available to spend with
their children dropped by at least ten hours
per week; it is likely that this fact is highly
linked to the significant increase in troubled
teenagers over the same period. 7 Busyness
can have drastic effects on marriage as well.
Surely the lack of time spouses spend with
each other in two-income families is
strongly linked to the huge increase in
divorce over the last several decades.
Busyness is the enemy of the American soul.
According to Dr. Siang-Yang Tan,
The enemy of our souls
knows full well how hurry
sickness or unrest can
ultimately destroy us. He will
do his best to keep us from
God’s rest. He entices us to
drive ourselves onward,

create ever more activity, fill
our emptiness with external
stimuli to avoid the disquiet
in our soul. 8
Carl Jung wrote, “Hurry is not of the devil;
hurry is the devil.” 9 Spiritual maturity and
discipleship take time. Just like relationships
with family, a deep relationship with God
requires unhurried time away from the many
distractions of life. A life of love requires
“interruptibility”—the ability to pause and
react with love to spontaneous needs that do
not appear on a schedule.
The Cultural Subversions behind
Busyness
Most busy people are, in fact, aware of the
harmful effects of “hurry sickness.” They
complain about their busy lifestyle and
express a longing for rest and a slower pace.
Why, then, do Americans continue to feel so
busy? More is at work than meets the eye.
The path to a healthier, slower life in which
deep discipleship can occur requires an
understanding of the underlying forces that
drive Americans to ever-increasing
busyness.
The Economics of Busyness
A short history of busyness in the modern
world provides helpful insights. Before the
industrial revolution, even the lowest classes
of society had plenty of free time. 10
Agricultural work included brief periods of
strenuous, long hours, but also many periods
of slowness and easier labor. In fact, when
eighteenth century merchants tried to
increase productivity from rural agricultural
workers by having them work at weaving
cloth in the winter, workers generally
preferred to have more free time with family
than to earn more money. In order to get
employees to work more, employers
discovered that the best way was to reduce
2
wages until employees were forced to work
more to support their families. 11
The progression continued throughout the
industrial revolution, increasing the work
day to twelve to fourteen hours a day, six
days a week. In response, labor unions
throughout the nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries organized to reduce
work hours. They were largely successful,
managing to reduce the work week to eight
hours per day, five days a week, resulting in
the modern, forty-hour standard. 12
Interestingly, the effort to reduce the
workday ultimately found friends among
employers as well, who observed that
shorter work days actually benefitted the
company. More rest meant workers who
worked harder and safer. More importantly,
economists observed that demand for
products could be increased if the average
consumer had more time off work in which
to spend their money. The strategy worked.
In fact, “Americans have been found to
spend more time shopping than anyone else.
They also spend a higher fraction of the
money they earn.” 13
This transition changed the meaning of
leisure. In the past, leisure meant slowing
down, spending time with family, relaxing
contemplatively in nature, and attending to
other mental and spiritual concerns. Today,
although working hours have decreased, it is
for another purpose—so that workers have
time to spend their hard-earned money. The
overall result is that even leisure time is
busy. The busyness of non-working hours
continues to increase with technological
developments and the ever-increasing
availability of hyper-sensory
entertainment. 14
Furthermore, because leisure time is now
associated with spending, workers are

motivated to work even more so they can
spend more. In a curious twist, after World
War II, American unions began pressing for
more opportunities to work overtime, while
in Europe, unions fought for and won a 35hour
workweek and longer vacations.
Currently, every year the average American
worker works approximately nine more
weeks than workers in France or Germany.
Pride and Shame
“Time is money” became a famous yet
unlikely equation in American culture. To a
large extent, money represents status and
power in American society. Consequently,
pride, another subtle cultural subversion,
draws people into perpetual motion.
Sociologist Robert Levine explains that the
equation of money with time means that
time becomes governed by the economic
law of supply and demand: “The busier a
person is, the more valuable is [his or her]
time.” 15 Levine explains the social
consequences:
People wait longer and pay
more for those whose time is
scarce. Busy lawyers and
performers … not only
charge more for their services
but people are willing to wait
longer to see them. Important
people are usually seen by
appointment only; and while
those of higher status are
allowed to make people
below them wait, the reverse
is strictly prohibited. 16
Therefore, being (or appearing) busy is a
way of exhibiting one’s importance.
On the contrary, wasting time is demonized.
Endless numbers of advertisements,
seminars, and popular magazine articles
focus on ways to multi-task, to work and
3
play more efficiently, and to do things more
quickly. Society exudes a persistent sense
that anything less is irresponsible, foolish, or
lazy. Busyness implies one’s importance and
productivity as a member of society; free
time implies that one is not contributing the
full measure expected of a citizen.
The Burden of Endless Opportunity
Sociologist Liah Greenfeld identifies an
additional underlying factor. Having studied
cultures going through troubled economic
times, she noticed that even workers who
must work long hours do not necessarily
express a sense of busyness. Instead, they
had one goal each day: provide for the
family. When they had done all they could
do for the day, they expressed a sense of
completion and could rest. 17
Americans still work more than other
nations, but actually work far less than in
times past. Despite this reality, people
experience an ever-growing sense of
busyness. Greenfeld states that this reality
has a lot to do with identity and freedom of
choice. In tough economic times, people do
not experience freedom of choice—
circumstances establish one’s identity.
People must provide for their family; once
provision is made, they may rest. Modern
Americans, however, experience a sense of
unlimited freedom. Therefore, Americans
endeavor to find the path that best suits them
as an individual. Americans sense the
freedom to choose their own identity and,
therefore, feel a tremendous burden to find
the right identity. Americans feel busy as
they “go shopping for identities, try them
on, accumulate them—and become oh so
very busy.” 18
In other words, Americans are not simply
seeking one identity but are simply taking
on more. A woman experiences multiple job
descriptions: parent, spouse, sibling, friend,

athlete, computer expert, artist, etc. For each
of these roles, she feels a list of
accompanying obligations. After work
hours, “leisure time” becomes a time to
fulfill this list of self-imposed obligations.
So instead of relaxing and enjoying time off,
she approaches it as yet another to-do list,
one which is never finished. 19 Unlimited
freedom results in unlimited responsibility
to define one’s own identity. “We have
become walking résumés. If you’re not
doing something, you’re not creating and
defining who you are.” 20 To be less than
busy is to admit one’s limits to the world.
The result is a generation of Americans too
busy to live the Christian life. The American
economic structure encourages the endless
cycle of working harder to earn more money
to spend more money. Americans are busy
because the culture values busyness as a
status symbol. In contrast, free time is
looked down upon as a waste of time, a
waste of life. Any “rest” time is seen in a
utilitarian sense as a way to work more
productively later. Americans are busy
because the culture advertises unlimited
freedom of identity and choice; therefore,
Americans feel an anxiety and a need to
define who they are by what they are able to
accomplish.
Sabbath: A Counter-Cultural Gift from
God
The Bible, however, does not value
busyness and productivity the way
Americans do. Instead, it values peace and
relationships—both with God and others—
that often require significant amounts of
time and a pace that would feel abysmally
slow to most Americans. The Bible also
values rest, not in utilitarian terms, but as
good and meaningful in and of itself. The
concept of Sabbath wraps up the biblical
value of slowness and rest.
4
Sabbath in the Old Testament
From the very beginning, God himself
carefully and emphatically laid down a
pattern of intentional rest. Many helping
professionals, such as counselors, doctors,
and ministers, feel a constant responsibility
to help others, but the Bible speaks of a
Creator God who rests—despite the fact that
the existence of the entire universe is
sustained by Him. God does not rest because
He’s grown tired or in order to work more
efficiently later but because there is inherent
meaning and value in rest. Jürgen Moltmann
writes,
God does not “rest” in the
sense of taking a break now
and then, in order to gather
strength for further tasks. …
This rest, this joy, this simple
being-there on the Sabbath is
the meaning of God’s entire
work … For the sake of this
celebration everything which
exists was created. 21
God’s rest becomes the pattern of the
Sabbath for the Jewish people. Of all the
commandments in the Decalogue, the
command to keep the Sabbath is the longest,
comprising almost a third of the passage:
Remember the Sabbath day,
to keep it holy. Six days you
shall labor, and do all your
work, but the seventh day is a
Sabbath to the Lord your
God. On it you shall not do
any work, you, or your son,
or your daughter, your male
servant, or your female
servant, or your livestock, or
the sojourner who is within
your gates. For in six days
the Lord made heaven and

earth, the sea, and all that is
in them, and rested the
seventh day. Therefore the
Lord blessed the Sabbath day
and made it holy (Exod. 20:8-
11). 22
It is also the most frequently repeated of any
of the 613 commandments given in the
law. 23
The Sabbath was not a suggestion or merely
good advice; the penalty for breaking the
Sabbath was capital punishment. This may
seem harsh to modern Americans, but it
strictly enforced a pattern of rest for the
Jewish people, not only for kings and
aristocrats, but also the lowest of slaves and
even for animals. Without God’s command
for strict enforcement of the Sabbath, the
lower classes might never have received an
opportunity for humanness, rest, and
relationship.
Sabbath in the New Testament
Today, the Sabbath is often seen as the
Jewish people’s great gift to the world.
Abraham Lincoln admonished, “As we keep
or break the Sabbath, we nobly save or
meanly lose the last best hope by which man
rises.” Henry George, the nineteenth century
political economist, wrote, “I believe that
the institution of the Sabbath is one of the
greatest benefits the human race ever had.”
24
Why, then, have American Christians so
abandoned the practice of a weekly Sabbath
rest, even more so than their secular
counterparts? Though referred to by some
Christians as the “Christian Sabbath,”
Sunday can scarcely be called a “day of
rest” for most Christians actively involved in
their churches, and certainly not for
ministers. Instead, true to the busyness of
the culture, activity marks the church and
5
the events of each Sunday. When church
functions are over, Christians are off to do
the weekly shopping before returning home
to catch up on household chores. Why did
the solemn blessing of the Jewish Sabbath
never make it into modern, American
Christianity?
A terrible misreading of the New Testament
provides the most likely explanation. The
Gospel accounts share numerous instances
where Jesus challenged the established
religious practices, especially concerning the
Sabbath. To the consternation of many
Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus publicly
healed on the Sabbath. Once, after having
healed a paralyzed man, He told him to pick
up his mat and walk—activities strictly
limited by pharisaical tradition. At other
times, Jesus and His disciples picked heads
of grain to eat since they were hungry.
Christians commonly interpret these actions
to mean that Jesus did not keep the Sabbath,
and did not intend His followers to keep it
either. They also point to Jesus’ saying,
“The Sabbath was made for man, not man
for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27). However,
even as this verse reveals, Jesus was not
arguing against the practice of the Sabbath,
but against the legalistic interpretation that
had robbed it of its essential meaning. The
pharisaical tradition had converted the
Sabbath from a day for healing and rest to a
day of legalistic burden and religious work.
Jesus’ correction pointed to the true
intention of Sabbath rest—an ideal time for
healing and rest, not for God’s benefit but
for that of humankind.
In fact, Jesus provides a model for rest.
Despite the short length of His ministry, the
Gospel writers note the many occasions in
which Jesus “would withdraw to desolate
places and pray” (Luke 5:16). Many times,
Jesus did so alone, but at other times He

ought His disciples into that place of rest
as well. In Mark 6:31, the disciples had just
returned from the preaching mission on
which Jesus had sent them, and “many were
coming and going, and they had no leisure
even to eat.” In response, Jesus invites them
to “Come away by yourselves to a desolate
place and rest a while” (v. 31b).
As the gospel entered new contexts within
the Roman Empire, it encountered new
challenges. In Judea, the world still stopped
on the Sabbath day, which made it easy for
Jews to practice the Sabbath, even if
tradition had changed its meaning. In Greek
and Roman contexts, however, not every
laborer was given such opportunity. Paul’s
letter to the church in Rome seems to
indicate that not all Christians were
practicing the Sabbath (Rom. 14:5-6).
Many Christians assume that Paul dismissed
the Sabbath. Indeed, in several places Paul
warns against judging others based on
whether or not they kept the Sabbath. 25
However, he does not eliminate the concept
of Sabbath. For Paul, the Sabbath
foreshadows the fulfillment of rest in Christ
(Col. 2:17). Therefore, Christians are not
bound to a legalistic interpretation of the
Sabbath, but still receive its benefit. In fact,
the fulfillment of Sabbath rest in Christ
invites Christians to enter rest even more
deeply.
The Sabbath for American Christians
What, then, does Sabbath mean for modern
American Christians? Certainly it should not
take on the legalism of Jesus’ day. As Paul
advised, it also need not be practiced on any
particular day. However, the depth of
meaning and the value of the Sabbath, as
expressed in the Old Testament, are to be
consummated in Christ, not lost. In Christ,
Christians may reinterpret the Sabbath in an
even broader sense, applying it to life as a
6
whole, rather than limiting it to a single
timeframe. In whatever way Christians
practice the Sabbath, it must include a
period of regular, genuine rest which
incorporates a time for guilt-free relaxation
from work of all kinds. It is not a time to
“catch up” on housework or other chores. It
is a time for simple enjoyment of life and
creation.
The Christian practice of Sabbath must also
include a drastic, counter-cultural slowing of
pace. Busyness is incompatible with the
model of ministry and spirituality
exemplified in Christ. The American sense
of endless obligation and need for multitasking
prevents the kind of slowness which
spiritual growth requires. “Holiness can only
be experienced by providing it with the
occasion, which is setting aside all other
preoccupations.” 26 John Ortberg reports a
conversation in which he asked his spiritual
mentor what was necessary to become
spiritually healthy. In response, his mentor
advised him, “You must ruthlessly eliminate
hurry from your life.” 27 The practice of
Christian Sabbath today must include this
ruthless elimination of hurry.
Richard Swenson suggests the concept of
“margin.” Many Americans overbook their
time, budget, body, and emotions. When
running at 100 percent or more, any
interruption to the schedule, any unplanned
delay, or even an unexpected opportunity,
causes stress and pain rather than the Christlike
response of love. Instead, Swenson
suggests that people should intentionally
leave wide “margins” in their time and
energy so that when the unexpected
happens, there is room to breathe—room to
respond with love. 28
The Christian practice of Sabbath also
challenges American believers to increase
their biblical understanding of calling in

order to counter the cultural temptation to
endlessly explore their own potential. The
culture presses for constant expansion of
identity—always in activity—in order to
prove one’s worth and stature by personal
accomplishments. By understanding one’s
call, however, a Christian can eliminate the
unnecessary pursuits that distract from the
most needful. The Sabbath invites the
Christian to admit one’s limits and refocus
on God’s true purposes for life. Perhaps
Christians have lost the sense of call without
the benefit of solitude with God required to
find it.
Conclusion
The practice of the Sabbath is profoundly
counter-cultural. It rebels against America’s
constant busyness, which is based on
materialism. It requires that believers
7
humble themselves and admit their
limitations to God and the world. Christians
must define themselves by something other
than their work or personal
accomplishments. Adhering to a Sabbath
rest necessitates a trust in God, rather than
self, for daily provision. It causes people to
value relationship with God and others
above work and entertainment. Sabbath rest
asks believers to unplug from the lights,
glitter, and constant activity of the world—
to shut out the noise—so they can hear the
quiet voice of God. It asks a person to slow
down enough to peer into his or her own
soul and deal with the difficult things of the
heart that one effectively ignores due to the
constant buzz of activity. Ultimately,
Sabbath rest invites believers to share in
God’s magnificent rest.

Works Cited
Central Intelligence Agency. “United States.” The World Factbook.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html (accessed
April 28, 2009).
Cross, Gary. “A Right to Be Lazy? Busyness in Retrospective.” Social Research 72, no. 2
(Summer 2005): 263-286.
Davis, Ellen F. “Sabbath: The Culmination of Creation.” The Living Pulpit (April-June 1998): 6-
7.
Greenfeld, Liah. “When the Sky is the Limit: Busyness in Contemporary American Society.”
Social Research 72, no. 2 (Summer 2005): 315-338.
Hart, Archibald D. The Hidden Link between Adrenaline and Stress. Nashville, TN: W
Publishing Group, 1995.
Horne, Martha J. “Sabbath and Compassion.” The Living Pulpit (April-June 1998): 22-23.
Levine, Robert. “A Geography of Busyness.” Social Research 72, no. 2 (Summer 2005): 355-
370.
Moltmann, Jürgen. “Sabbath: Finishing and Beginning.” The Living Pulpit (April-June 1998): 4-
5.
Ortberg, John. The Life You’ve Always Wanted. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.
Schor, Juliet. The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure. New York: Basic
Books, 1991.
Swenson, Richard. The Overload Syndrome: Learning to Live Within Your Limits. Colorado
Springs, CO: NavPress, 1998.
Tan, Siang-Yang. Rest: Experiencing God’s Peace in a Restless World. Ann Arbor: Servant
Publications, 2000.
1 Central Intelligence Agency, “United States” The World Factbook,
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html (accessed April 23, 2009).
1991), 3-15
1995), 3.
2 Juliet Schor, The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure (New York: Basic Books,
3 Archibald D. Hart, The Hidden Link Between Adrenaline and Stress (Nashville, TN: W Publishing Group,
4 Ibid., 36-41.
Navpress, 1998)
5 Richard Swenson, The Overload Syndrome: Learning to Live Within Your Limits (Colorado Springs, CO:
1

2000), 25.
264.
6 Schor, 11.
7 Ibid., 13.
8 Siang-Yang Tan, Rest: Experiencing God’s Peace in a Restless World (Ann Arbor: Servant Publications,
9 John Ortberg, The Life You’ve Always Wanted (Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 2002), 77.
10 Schor, 10.
11 Gary Cross, “A Right to Be Lazy? Busyness in Retrospective,” Social Research 72, no. 2 (Summer 2005):
12 Cross, 263-288.
13 Schor, 2.
14 Cross, 263-288.
15 Robert Levine, “A Geography of Busyness,” Social Research 72, no. 2 (Summer 2005): 368.
16 Ibid.
17 Liah Greenfeld, “When the Sky is the Limit: Busyness in Contemporary American Society,” Social
Research 72, no. 2 (Summer 2005): 319.
18 Ibid., 337.
19 Ibid.
June 1998): 22.
20 Schor, quoting a “time-use expert,” 23.
21 Jürgen Moltmann, “Sabbath: Finishing and Beginning,” The Living Pulpit (April-June 1998): 4.
22 Unless otherwise states, all Scripture references are taken from the ESV.
23 Ellen F. Davis, “Sabbath: The Culmination of Creation,” The Living Pulpit (April-June 1998): 6.
24 Quoted in “Quotations,” The Living Pulpit (April-June 1998): 32.
25 See Colossians 2:16 and Romans 14:5.
26 Niels-Erick Andreasen, quoted by Martha J. Horne, “Sabbath and Compassion,” The Living Pulpit (April-
27 Ortberg, 76.
28 Richard A. Swenson, The Overload Syndrome (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 1998), 15.
2

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry: Summer 2009, Vol. 6
A Pentecostal Perspective in a Politically
Pugnacious Environment
The purpose of this article 1 is twofold: (1) to
assess the current involvement of
Pentecostals/evangelicals in the political
realm; and (2) to raise three political
proposals in light of the largely negative
assessment: the principle of subsidiarity,
Grant‟s new social American compact with
deliberative democracy, and a politics of
love. These considerations, I believe, should
constitute a portion of the framework for a
Pentecostal political theology.
The need for a Pentecostal political
methodology could be demonstrated through
various avenues. One primary example is the
widespread negative view that non-
Pentecostals or non-evangelicals have of
evangelical/Pentecostal believers in terms of
their involvement in politics. 2 Tony Campolo
illustrates this point well when discussing his
experience at an Ivy League university.
Having asked the students what they thought
evangelicals believed, the response he
received had nothing to do with theological
convictions (what many ascribe as the most
important element of evangelicalism).
Rather, the students came to the consensus
that evangelicals consisted of Christians who
are: “anti-gay, anti-feminist, antienvironmentalists,
anti-gun-control, pro-war,
right-wing ideologues.” 3 The picture nonbelievers
have of Pentecostals/evangelicals
regarding politics has become bleak and
dismal.
John C. Johnson (M.Div., 2009)
Graduate Student, Hebrew Union College
1
Also, Christian “neutrality” 4 in the area of
politics hinders the progress of the state.
Eberhard Jüngel asserts that the articulation
of a theological understanding of the state
and its inherent responsibility to preserve
justice and peace is an essential task of
Christians, to the extent that they cannot
remain “neutral” in either the theological or
socio-political spheres. 5 Further, Richard J.
Mouw argues that biblically speaking,
Christians are no less than commanded to
interact with politics. Since American
democracy grants the right publicly to
criticize, review, debate, and challenge
policies and officeholders, in light of Romans
13, Christians now have the duty to make use
of that right. 6
Another factor pointing to the necessity of a
Pentecostal political theology is the
ambiguity in the biblical text concerning the
Christians‟ involvement in politics. This has
caused considerable confusion and
contradictory views among Christians today.
Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) notes
that the New Testament “is acquainted with
political ethics, but not with political
theology;” however, the Scriptures “always
reject the fanaticism that tries to set up the
kingdom of God as a political project.” 7
Therefore, a delicate balance must be struck
between the naïvely utopian Marxist or other
humanistic ideologies and the overly socially
pessimistic systems of some apocalyptic
pietists. Scripture reveals that the kingdom of

God is indeed “already, but not yet.” Ronald
J. Sider contends that, “far too often we miss
the profound political implications of Jesus‟
proclamation of the kingdom of God and the
resurrection‟s confirmation that Jesus was
indeed the Messiah who had ushered in that
long-expected kingdom.” 8 A Pentecostal
approach would undoubtedly see the impact
of Jesus‟ ministry as bringing personal
salvation, but it cannot stop there; rather, a
more holistic view of redemption needs to be
adopted. That is, while salvation involves
eternal security, it also involves redemption
of the whole person, in this life, now. Jesus‟
collision with the temporal world also brings
about an opportunity for the believer to work
through political structures in a beneficial
way for both the community of believers and
nonbelievers. 9
Beyond covering some of the basic reasons
for a necessity of a Pentecostal political
theology, and before offering some
proposals, a further assessment of the current
Christian political scene is in order. First,
Nicholas Wolterstorff, in the foreword to the
groundbreaking compilation of essays,
Evangelicals and Empire, notes that since
Hegel, “domination and liberation have been
the fundamental categories of social analysis
and critique [because theoretically out of the
two opposing forces will come the synthesis].
An authentically evangelical voice in the
discussion will question this and propose
instead that justice and injustice be the
fundamental categories.” 10 These categories
will be adopted in this essay since the
domination/liberation model is flawed on
account of exceedingly broad definitions that
condone movement toward tyrannical
oligarchy with little oversight. 11
This is witnessed by the burgeoning analysis
of American empire and evangelicalism‟s
role in that empire. As Benson and Heltzel
state, “Inasmuch as some evangelicals work
together with movements in the Religious
Right that are perpetuating the dark side of
empire—including U.S. practices of war and
torture, 12 neoliberal economic policy, and
unilateral, isolationist foreign policy—they
continue to participate in empire.” 13 Further,
global market fundamentalism, as Yong and
Zalanga call it, has become a hegemonic
force taking on the status of a religion itself,
and the rationality underpinning such
unbridled capitalism has invaded the Church
of Christ in the way they compete for market
shares (converts) by developing a product
with either mass consumer appeal or
specialization for a specific corner of the
market. 14 The question then is: Will
Pentecostalism be a medium for the forces of
biopower (“a subtle form of manipulation
that infects our brains and makes us
internalize the values of capitalism” 15 ), or
will it be a subversive movement
championing the struggle for justice against
the hegemony of empire? 16 If a movement
exists within Christianity that could
withstand the lure of American civil religion
and the global market fundamentalism tied to
it, Pentecostals and Charismatics could be the
ones capable of hurdling such a daunting
obstacle. 17 What is missing, however, is a
proper understanding of how to communicate
our ideals in the political sphere, what our
Christian faith means for our political
involvement, and what it truly means to be a
citizen.
First, one firmly entrenched perspective that
needs eradicating revolves around the
widespread belief that America is a Christian
nation that needs “taken back for God.” 18 As
Black notes, the United States has always
been a pluralistic nation; from the Articles of
Confederation through the ratifying of the
Constitution, the freedom of religion has
been a foundational principle of our
democracy. 19 Thus, the claim that
Christianity holds the right to dictate policy

in a certain direction is misguided to say the
least. Hence, Gregory Boyd‟s thesis in The
Myth of a Christian Nation deals with
American evangelicals‟ fusion of the
kingdom of God with the kingdom of this
world through political involvement as
nationalistic and political idolatry. 20 Further,
Boyd clarifies some misguided notions:
For some evangelicals [and Pentecostals],
the kingdom of God is largely about, if
not centered on, „taking America back for
God,‟ voting for the Christian candidate,
outlawing abortion, outlawing gay
marriage, winning the culture war,
defending political freedom at home and
abroad, keeping the phrase „under God‟
in the Pledge of Allegiance, fighting for
prayer in the public schools and at public
events, and fighting to display the Ten
Commandments in government
buildings. 21
Results of this presumptuous thinking are
widespread. Boyd highlights five
ramifications of this pervasive myth: (1) the
myth increasingly harms global missions; (2)
home missions are hindered because people
are misled into thinking that their civil
Christianity is real Christianity; (3) the
church is damaged when believers misplace
their trust in the wrong power; (4) as a result
of believing the myth, some, intentionally or
unintentionally, position themselves as moral
guardians of society, believing it their
duty/mission to preserve the moral fabric of
the nation; and (5) the myth creates the
notion of America as a theocratic nation
comparable to Old Testament Israel. 22
The need for a new kind of political thinking
is evident through the analysis of the
abounding myths, misplaced trust, and bad
theology. The following is a series of
proposals for a holistic Pentecostal political
theology that takes seriously the effects of
empire on Christian thinking, the myth that
America is a Christian nation, and the pitfalls
of global market fundamentalism. An eclectic
methodology has been used in terms of
borrowing portions from various authors and
perspectives and, in that sense, I have not
contributed anything new, but highlighted
what I think is important for Pentecostals to
consider in developing a more thorough
political theology. The proposals are all
guided, however, by the fact that while the
Christian faith impacts one‟s political
decisions, believers are citizens of a
pluralistic democracy. 23 Christians are first
citizens of the kingdom of God, but are in the
world. As Jesus prayed, “I do not ask that
you take them out of the world, but that you
keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15,
ESV). 24 Thus, Christians must take seriously
the fact that as citizens of the kingdom of
God, they also have responsibilities as
citizens of a democracy.
The Principle of Subsidiarity 25
Given the fact that Christians are both
citizens of the kingdom of God and the
world, a dilemma faced since Jesus‟
announcement of the kingdom and
extensively dealt with early on in
Augustine‟s City of God, Catholic political
theology developed the principle of
subsidiarity. This principle notices that
neither the Church nor government can solve
all societal problems. Thus, the two must
work together in partnership on social issues.
Since 1931, when the principle was first
introduced, a vital part of the idea has been
that government should not replace the
smaller forms of community, including the
church, because the church often remains
closer and more connected and thus is better
suited to aid the community. While the state
should not absorb these smaller communities,
they should provide assistance (subsidium)
when the churches are unable to contribute to
the common good. Most concisely, the
principle states, “government is an important,

necessary, and limited agent to provide for
the common good, but it functions best in
partnership with associations that are close to
the people and best able to meet their
particular needs.” 26
Jane E. Grant’s New American Social
Compact 27
In The New American Social Compact:
Rights and Responsibilities in the 21st
Century, Jane E. Grant examines the history
of the American social compact. This goes
beyond contract theories developed in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that set
forth a set of civil liberties and political
rights, and later in the nineteenth century
expand to a set of social rights. 28 The
compact expands these rights to include a
civic ethos. The civic ethos involves creating
a climate of interchange where the rights can
be either supported or contested as well as
the obligations that flow from them. 29 Such
obligations, as Grant sets out, “could include
responsibilities to others in one‟s own nation,
to future generations, to other nations and
their citizens, to stateless individuals, and to
other species and the biosphere.” 30 This new
compact and civic procedural ethos will
honor the civil, political, and social rights
already established in the United States
(procedural republic). It would go further,
however, in defining the particular
responsibilities and obligations of citizens. 31
In recent years a shift in the opposite
direction has taken place in government
where an emphasis on authorization has
supplanted that of accountability as people
vote on personal characteristics more than
ability to govern. 32 With such a shift no one
should be surprised—appalled yes, but not
surprised—to see a leader more influenced
by Niccolo Machiavelli and Thomas Hobbes
than Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. 33
Grant talks about many issues of the new
compact, but I will focus primarily on the
concept of democratic deliberation. Kurt
Richardson speaks of “democratic learning”
in his “Political Complexities and Rivalries
of Pneuma and Imperia,” but this seems to
end for him once the basic competencies
required of an active citizen in a democracy
are established. 34 As Richardson notes,
Christian pneumatology points to an
inherently egalitarian anthropology, pivotal
for a new social compact and proper
deliberation. 35
However, Grant provides some examples of
what such deliberation might look like. One
proposal involves deliberative panels in the
public sphere that would provide
recommendations to legislative and executive
bodies in the government. 36 Of course such
panels would have access to expertise in
politics, science, technology, and social and
economic information. 37 Such panels, unlike
participating in town hall meetings, may be
in some form partially obligatory, as is jury
duty. The particular model, though, is not as
important as the idea of public involvement.
Grant works from the ideas of Arendt and
Habermas, who asserted that deliberation,
when executed properly, can be
transformative because it generates proper
perspective. It focuses on the common good;
it provides ordinary citizens with access to
the public policy agenda. Since Americans
are typically uninformed about policy issues,
it provides access to information on complex
problems. 38 Finally, Grant notices that
communication and public deliberation
performed vital roles in forming the
constitutional state; likewise, communication,
public discussion, and deliberation are
necessary in the new compact as well. 39
A Politics of Love and a “Consistent Ethic
of Life” 40
In the others I do not look at what is like
myself, but at what is different in them,
and try to understand it. I can only

understand it by changing myself, and
adjusting myself to the other. In my
perception of others I subject myself to
the pains and joys of my own alteration,
not in order to adapt myself to the other,
but in order to enter into it. There is no
true understanding of the other without
this empathy. Together with the other I
enter into a process or reciprocal
change. 41
To arrive at community, Moltmann stresses
the need to know one another. In order to
know each other, people must come closer to
one another, make contact, and build
relationships. 42 It does not suffice to simply
see in „the other‟ a reflection of oneself and
to embrace that one in our own image. 43
Rather, a politics of love would initiate
reciprocity, an invitation into relationship. 44
This approach must move from mere
sentimentality to action, for according to
Jesus, the love of God comes to realization in
love for neighbor. 45 A politics of love then
works in conjunction with a new American
compact enabling deliberation to take place
fruitfully within a stimulated populace
because reciprocity takes the place of
individualism. 46 Thus, this link between the
two becomes much more than superficial.
A theology of politics founded in a consistent
ethic of life would further exemplify an
almost forgotten prophetic religious voice in
America that has brought about such great
changes as abolition, suffrage, and the civil
rights movement. 47 That voice, in love,
would never be partisan; it would remind us
of the downtrodden and those neglected by
society (the poor); it would challenge
national self-interest and individual selfinterest.
Politics of love would appreciate and
respect, as God‟s gift, the ecosystems, rather
than being mere users and abusers; it would
earnestly consider every possibility before
entering a war; it would act multi-laterally
instead of unilaterally; it would be selfless;
and finally, a politics of love would
encourage deliberation in order to experience
„the other.‟ While „the other‟ could be
anyone, the U.S. has millions of children
living in poverty, more than one billion of the
world‟s people live on less than one dollar
per day, and nearly half the world‟s
population (2.8 billion) live on less than two
dollars per day. 48 What would a politics of
love look like to them? Costa, Keller, and
Mercedes surmise:
Christian love for the poor has become
erotic when the „Christian‟ and the „poor‟
are no longer a distinct subject and object
but have become so close that the space
between them blurs and each benefits
from the rich subjectivity of the other.
The benefit can be at once mutual: whose
pleasure do we seek, our own or the
other‟s? When it is good we both are
fulfilled, or I am fulfilled in your
fulfillment, or vice versa, and I can barely
tell the difference: a hair‟s-breadth. The
neighbor is loved „as the self‟ when love
is practiced not out of any effort to do the
right thing but rather like the inhalation
and exhalation of one‟s own breath: it is
its own reward.
For those U. S. Christians who have been
so enamored by empire that love for the
other as the self seems much more like
piety than breath, perhaps a good start
toward coalition would be a deep breath
of the common air of the empire‟s
impoverished. 49

Bibliography
Amjad-Ali, Charles W., and Lester Edwin J. Ruiz. “Betrayed By a Kiss: Evangelicals and U.S.
Empire.” In Evangelicals and Empire, edited by Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin
Heltzel, 54-66. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.
Barth, Karl. The Church and the Political Problem of Our Day. New York: Charles Scribner‟s
Sons, 1939.
Benson, Bruce Ellis, and Peter Goodwin Heltzel, eds. Evangelicals and Empire: Christian
Alternatives to the Political Status Quo. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.
Black, Amy E. Beyond Left and Right: Helping Christians Make Sense of American Politics.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008.
Boyd, Gregory A. The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power is
Destroying the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005.
Brunner, Emil. Justice and the Social Order. Translated by Mary Hottinger. London: Lutterworth
Press, 1945.
Campolo, Tony. Red Letter Christians: A Citizen’s Guide to Faith & Politics. Ventura, CA: Regal,
2008.
Costa, Mario, Catherine Keller, and Anna Mercedes. “Love in Times of Empire: Theopolitics
Today.” In Evangelicals and Empire, edited by Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin
Heltzel, 291-306. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.
Ellul, Jacques. The Politics of God and the Politics of Man. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1972.
Grant, Jane E. The New American Social Compact: Rights and Responsibilities in the Twenty-First
Century. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2008.
Jüngel, Eberhard. Christ, Justice, and Peace: Toward a Theology of the State, in Dialogue with the
Barmen Declaration. Translated by D. Bruce Hamill and Alan J. Torrance. Edinburgh: T &
T Clark, 1992.
Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary. Vol. 2. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, 2003.
Milbank, John. “Liberality Vs. Liberalism.” In Evangelicals and Empire, edited by Bruce Ellis
Benson and Peter Goodwin Heltzel, 93-106. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.
1

Moltmann, Jürgen. God for a Secular Society: The Public Relevance of Theology. 1997. Translated
by Margaret Kohl. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.
Mouw, Richard J. Political Evangelism. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1973.
Niebuhr, Reinhold. “Christian Faith and Political Controversy.” In A Reinhold Niebuhr Reader:
Selected Essays, Articles, and Book Reviews, edited by Charles C. Brown, 46-8.
Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1952.
———. Christian Realism and Political Problems. Fairfield: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers,
1953.
———. Christianity and Power Politics. 1940. Archon Books, 1969.
———. “On Religion and Politics.” In A Reinhold Niebuhr Reader: Selected Essays, Articles, and
Book Reviews, edited by Charles C. Brown, 49-50. Philadelphia: Trinity Press
International, 1951.
———. Reinhold Niebuhr on Politics: His Political Philosophy and Its Application to Our Age as
Expressed in His Writings. Edited by Harry R. Davis and Robert C. Good. New York, NY:
Charles Scribner‟s Sons, 1960.
Phillips, Kevin. “Too Many Preachers.” In American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical
Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century, 99-264. New York, NY: Viking,
2006.
Pulliam, Sarah. “Evangelical Moderates: Are They Becoming Less Conservative? Or Are They
Just Saying So?” Christianity Today 10/14 2008. Christianity Today,
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/ 2008/november/5.16.html (accessed October 29,
2008).
Ratzinger, Joseph. Church, Ecumenism, and Politics: New Endeavors in Ecclesiology. 1987.
Translated by Michael J. Miller et al., 143-255. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2008.
Richardson, Kurt Anders. “Political Complexities and Rivalries of Pneuma and Imperia.” In
Evangelicals and Empire, edited by Bruce Ellis Benson, and Peter Goodwin Heltzel, 130-
40. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.
Sider, Ronald J. The Scandal of Evangelical Politics: Why Are Christians Missing the Chance to
Really Change the World? Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008.
Wallis, Jim. God’s Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It. New York,
NY: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005.

Wolterstorff , Nicholas. “Foreword.” In Evangelicals and Empire: Christian Alternatives to the
Political Status Quo, edited by Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin Heltzel, 7-10. Grand
Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008.
Yoder, John Howard. The Politics of Jesus. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1994.
Yong, Amos, and Samuel Zalanga. “What Empire, Which Multitude? Pentecostalism and Social
Liberation in North America and Sub-Saharan Africa.” In Evangelicals and Empire, edited
by Bruce Ellis Benson, and Peter Goodwin Heltzel, 237-51. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos
Press, 2008.
Oregon, 2009.
1 This paper was presented at the 38th annual meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies in Eugene,
2 Two examples, of which there are undoubtedly many, are Kevin Phillips‟ “Too Many Preachers,” in
American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century (New
York, NY: Viking, 2006), 99-264; as well as Janet E. Grant, though she only mentions the prospects of the Religious
Right‟s political agenda as a repugnant alternative to other proposals. See Jane E. Grant, The New American Social
Compact: Rights and Responsibilities in the Twenty-First Century (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2008).
Niebuhr commented on the Christian‟s temptation in light of the recognition of such a sinful world to
disavowing his or her own responsibility to contribute to a “tolerable justice” in the world‟s affairs. He noted, “A
Christian pessimism which becomes a temptation to irresponsibility toward all those social tasks which constantly
confront the life of men and nations—tasks of ordering the productive labor of men, of adjudicating their conflicts, of
arbitrating their divergent desires, of raising the level of their social imagination and increasing the range of their
social sympathies—such a pessimism cannot speak redemptively to a world constantly threatened by anarchy and
suffering from injustice. The Christian gospel which transcends all particular and contemporary social situations can
be preached with power only by a Church which bears its share of the burdens of immediate situations in which men
are involved, burdens of establishing peace, of achieving justice, and of perfecting justice in the spirit of love. Thus is
the Kingdom of God which is not of this world made relevant to every problem of the world;” Reinhold Niebuhr,
Reinhold Niebuhr on Politics: His Political Philosophy and Its Application to Our Age as Expressed in His Writings,
ed. Harry R. Davis and Robert C. Good (New York, NY: Charles Scribner‟s Sons, 1960), 153-4.
Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) warns that in Christianity‟s claim to the ultimate truth in the midst of
a pluralistic democracy Christians often comes across as politically intolerant, and this must be dealt with carefully.
Conversely, Ratzinger supports a dual system of government where the Church has no authoritative power over the
state per se; its impact rather comes through the Church‟s influence by its possession of the transcendent ethic that is
necessary for the rational grounding of the ethics that the state relies upon to enforce its policies. It is the Christian
faith that substantiates ethics and, in this sense, reason that is closed in on itself does not remain reasonable, while the
state that attempts perfection becomes tyrannical. Joseph Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism, and Politics: New
Endeavors in Ecclesiology, 1987, trans. Michael J. Miller et al. (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2008), 143-255.
3 Tony Campolo, Red Letter Christians: A Citizen’s Guide to Faith & Politics (Ventura, CA: Regal, 2008).
4 Either in the sense of the old Anabaptist isolationism, or simply remaining non-committal in most political
scenarios except those issues of utmost importance—these are usually rather arbitrary judgments.
5 It is further noted that, “One‟s hope is that this process may encourage us to move beyond „political
theologies‟ to „theological politics‟—a theologically driven approach to the state rather than a politically driven
approach to God. This would involve an approach which interprets our responsibilities to the state and within the state
in the light of God‟s inclusive, recreative and healing purposes held forth in God‟s Word of grace to humanity. Such
an approach to society, to culture, to the state and to the ecosystem would be both more radical and more liberating—
theologically and politically—than so much that has sought in recent times to lay claim to these attributes” [author‟s

italics]. Eberhard Jüngel, Christ, Justice, and Peace: Toward a Theology of the State, in Dialogue with the Barmen
Declaration, trans. D. Bruce Hamill and Alan J. Torrance (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1992), xix-xx.
6 Richard J. Mouw, Political Evangelism (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1973), 55.
7 Ratzinger, 204.
8 Pietists fall short by reducing Jesus‟ message to that of forgiveness of sins and personal salvation, while
Brunner argues that the kingdom of God is totally beyond the limits of earth and time. Thus, it has nothing to do with
our personal relationships in this life, the state, justice today, etc. Both of these understandings miss important facets
of the Christian message of deliverance. See Emil Brunner, Justice and the Social Order, trans. Mary Hottinger
(London: Lutterworth Press, 1945); and Ronald J. Sider, The Scandal of Evangelical Politics: Why Are Christians
Missing the Chance to Really Change the World? (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008), 64-71.
9 For an articulation of the legitimacy of forming a political ethic on the teachings of the New Testament, see
John Howard Yoder, The Politics of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994).
10 Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin Heltzel, eds. (Foreword by Nicholas Wolterstorff), Evangelicals and
Empire: Christian Alternatives to the Political Status Quo (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008), 9.
11 Several things are in mind here. For instance, free market enterprise or global market fundamentalism has
been increasingly given reign over the interests of the general public. Rampant deregulation that was originally put in
place, not as a Democratic hoax for more „big government,‟ but rather to serve as a check on profit-driven
corporations who are becoming more detached from the customers they are supposed to serve and with the purpose of
„speaking for the people.‟ The corporation then takes control of Washington, pays little attention to any harm they
cause the environment or the consumer, and no one is left to blow the whistle. The domination/liberation model then
leaves us with systems that are in many ways promoters of injustice while being lauded as the great synthesis of a
Hegelian framework. Some of this will be further developed in the following section on Empire.
12 The preemptive invasion of Iraq by the United States would have to be considered unjust by basically every
set of written standards on “unjust war” theory. [Note: Author‟s opinion. AGTS holds no official opinion on the justice
or injustice of the Iraq War.] Also, it is hard to miss the brutal dehumanization of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay
once they are situated beyond the reach of all legal codes.
13 Lester Edwin J. Ruiz and Charles W. Amjad-Ali describe the link theologically from Reformed traditions
with their double-predestinarian theology producing extremely unjust polities. This occurs when groups lay claim to
others‟ land, property, and labor as their own entitlements under the guise of the “blessings of God.” The theology
dominates U.S. foreign policy at the moment: America is the righteous nation who has done nothing wrong and is
preordained to a hegemonic status. The enemies on the other hand are totally wrong and immoral; they are
ontologically inferior and preordained to a negative status because they stand against God‟s chosen—the United
States. “This blissfully uncomplicated, simplistic, and misinformed understanding of self and „enemy‟ takes on
interesting, if amusing, forms. For example, the United States defines itself metaphorically as both David (because of
its righteousness and the justness of its cause) and Goliath (for who else but one specially blessed can have the power,
strength, and armor that Goliath displayed?). Such schizophrenia is at times totally unbearable and for its victims an
unmitigated disaster.” Charles W. Amjad-Ali, & Lester Edwin J. Ruiz, “Betrayed By a Kiss: Evangelicals and U. S.
Empire,” in Evangelicals and Empire, ed. Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin Heltzel (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos
Press, 2008), 57-8.
14 Amos Yong, and Samuel Zalanga, “What Empire, Which Multitude? Pentecostalism and Social Liberation
in North America and Sub-Saharan Africa,” in Evangelicals and Empire, ed. Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin
Heltzel (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008), 237.
15 They further state that, “liberal democratic societies may think they are free, but they are not because
capitalism turns their day-to-day life into a „social factory.‟” Yong and Zalanga, “What Empire, Which Multitude?”
238-9.

16 Ibid., 238.
17 The task is undeniably ominous. A shift has taken place from an older monastic-type piety which rejected
greed and affluence for the sake of God‟s blessings through simplicity, poverty, and serving others, where individuals
now seek success and as much wealth as they can possibly acquire with as little work as possible, often regardless of
the means. See Amjad-Ali & Ruiz, “Betrayed By a Kiss”, 54-66.
18 Amy Black, political science professor at Wheaton College, in agreement with Gregory Boyd‟s assessment,
tells of his congregation‟s reaction (also briefly mentioned in Boyd‟s introduction) when he delivered his six-part
sermon series dealing with Christianity‟s involvement in politics before the 2004 elections. While he received the most
praise he had ever received, he also lost 1,000 members of his 5,000-member church for preaching against the close
alignment of Christianity with American politics. He does not say we shouldn‟t participate in politics, but he does say
that the kingdom of God must not be equated with the pursuits of the Religious Right. His book is a timely
contribution to Christian Americans steeped in American civil religion of the Right and Left persuasion. Gregory A.
Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest for Political Power is Destroying the Church (Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 2005), 9-10; and Amy E. Black, Beyond Left and Right: Helping Christians Make Sense of American
Politics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008), 55-6.
19 Black, 17-8.
20 The guilt, for Boyd, lays both in the Religious Right and Religious Left camps. For both attempt a fusion to
some degree of the kingdom of God with a preferred version of the kingdom of the world, whether through specific
programs, particular political philosophies, or national interests. See Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation, 11.
21 Boyd also argues though that the Religious Left is guilty of the same thing when they make the
fundamentalists, the gay bashers, the Christian Coalition, the antiabortionists, and the Religious Right the enemy. This
is simply two versions of the kingdom of the world fighting each other as Boyd argues. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian
Nation, 12.
22 Boyd also prophetically speaks to American Christians when he points out our own hypocrisy and selective
morality, “We evangelicals may be divorced and remarried several times; we may be as greedy and as unconcerned
about the poor and as gluttonous as others in our culture; we may be as prone to gossip and slander and as blindly
prejudiced as others in our culture; we may be more self-righteous and as rude as others in our culture—we may even
lack love more than others in the culture. These sins are among the most frequently mentioned sins in the Bible. But at
least we‟re not gay!” Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation, 108, 111, 116, 127, 137-8, 147.
23 Politics is certainly a means for demonstrating God‟s love in action, but that does not mean that a Christian
political party (as is often proposed) is a valuable pursuit. The diversity of the body of Christ allows for varying
perspectives and allows for disagreement and discussion about differing views. An examination of the current
Christian perspectives on politics across the different denominations proves this point. Mainline Protestants (1/5 of the
electorate) typically highlight the role of Jesus as the model for Christian morality and thus call for political action on
issues of justice, equal rights, and racism. Their voting behavior has consequently been closely divided between the
two major parties in the recent past (55% voting for Bush in 2004). Evangelicals (1/4 voters) focus on personal
conversion which translates politically into emphasis on „family values‟ and issues of individual behavior—abortion
and homosexuality. They have therefore become a significant portion of the Republican voting bloc, 78 percent of
them voting to reelect Bush in 2004. Black Protestants (8 percent of the electorate) have been known for their
theological conservatism and political liberalism (ironically then, the same theological beliefs lead white evangelicals
to the right, lead blacks to the left). Kerry in 2004 received 86 percent of the Black Protestant vote, down from the 91
percent that Gore won in 2000. Finally, Roman Catholics (another 1/4 of the electorate) emphasize a broad range of
issues including family, community, and the poor. They have specific stances provided in the Catholic Social
Teaching on abortion, gay marriage, combating poverty, protecting the environment, etc. While historically favoring
the Democratic party, they have been recently more split between them and the Republicans. Fifty-two percent of the
Catholic vote went to Bush in 2004. Details from Black, Beyond Left and Right, 75-8.

24 The context of this passage clearly calls for a separation from the world by the people of God. This
separation, as Keener notes, produces organic community cohesion in the midst of the opposing interests of the world.
However, we remain in the world, and where believers and nonbelievers can interact and work together for just ends,
the opportunity should not be ignored. That is where the early Anabaptist separatism went wrong. Thus, political ends
that point to the inherent value of each person, that take poverty seriously, and that work toward a „consistent ethic of
life‟ should be collaborated on by nonbeliever and believer alike. On the John passage, see, Craig S. Keener, The
Gospel of John: A Commentary, vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003), 1057-61.
25 Information for this section can be reviewed in Black, Beyond Left and Right, 142-3.
26 Ibid.
27 This section looks at the proposals from my former professor, Jane E. Grant, The New American Social
Compact: Rights and Responsibilities in the Twenty-First Century (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2008).
28 Ibid., 1-2.
29 Ibid., 2.
30 Grant is here developing from the “civic republican” ethos that dominated early in the country‟s history,
then to the “procedural republican” ethos which became central through the 20th century, to now a new ethos that is
required that would incorporate valuable aspects from both the civic and procedural republics. Ibid., 2-3.
31 Ibid., 3-4. Typical of today‟s average citizen is a complete negligence of a sense of obligation. Liberalism in
the modern day has become devoid of duty, duty found in the German Grundgesetz (Basic Law or German
Constitution), Article 14.2 “Property involves obligation. It must be used for the benefit of all.” This essentially builds
a civil community unfeasible without serious reshaping of our common involvement. Grant states that the “United
States is not, in good faith, fulfilling its commitments to the people and the other nations in the world. We have
substituted force for diplomacy, arrogance for humility, and power for what is right.” Not only have we failed in many
respects as responsible citizens, but also the United States has continually neglected its commitment and obligations to
the world community by breaking numerous treaties and conventions of the U. N. This is detrimental when a leading
nation disregards the voice of the rest of the world population. Grant, The New American Social Compact, 137, 151.
Grundgesetz quoted in Jürgen Moltmann, God for a Secular Society: The Public Relevance of Theology, 1997, trans.
Margaret Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), 154.
32 Grant, New American Social Compact, 154.
33 Ibid., 154-5.
34 Anders Richardson, “Political Complexities and Rivalries of Pneuma and Imperia,” in Evangelicals and
Empire, ed. Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin Heltzel (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press, 2008), 139-40.
35 Ibid., 139-40.
36 She states earlier in the book that, “To a very great extent, liberal theory places individual autonomy (and
the derivative efficiency of the market) at the forefront of what society should value and protect. Yet, by so revering
individual liberty, liberalism, especially as it operates presently in the United States, diminishes, at least in the public
sphere and governmental sectors, the importance of providing opportunities for deliberative consideration of, and
concerted action on, questions dealing with shared obligations and public principles.” Grant, New American Social
Compact, 7, 152.
37 Ibid., 152.
38 Ibid., 151-3.

39 Ibid., 152.
40 This section admittedly sounds more vague and apparent. However, the fact that the Church has failed in
many respects to show a consistent ethic of life leads me to discuss it this way. Perhaps this could inform individual
Christians as to how they should view others in society and how they must act out their faith. The point that this must
go beyond sentimentality could not be overstated.
41 Moltmann, God for a Secular Society, 145.
42 Ibid., 133.
43 Ibid.
44 Trinitarian theology provides the most easily accessible and apparent, even eternal, foundation for such
political reciprocity. The link between Trinitarian theology and reciprocity needs to be dealt with more thoroughly as
this would provide a firm framework to further develop a political theology in this direction. The basic idea of
reciprocity came from Mario Costa, Catherine Keller, and Anna Mercedes, “Love in Times of Empire: Theopolitics
Today,” in Evangelicals and Empire, ed. Bruce Ellis Benson and Peter Goodwin Heltzel (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos
Press, 2008), 291-306.
45 Costa, Keller & Mercedes, 299.
46 While Niebuhr argued that the problem revolved around the Christian ethic being so pure that embodying it
in politics found difficulty because of the political reality of necessary conflict and coercion. It became, then, an
impossible ideal, just like any other idealistic or utopian political philosophy. The question is no longer whether such a
perfect love can permeate such stubborn political realities, whether it should compromise with them, flee them, or be
indifferent to them. The question now is whether or not those who know such a perfect love have the will to bring it
into the political sphere? If enough did, what would their involvement look like? Costa, Keller, and Mercedes
question, “If some critical Christian mass were to recognize the radicality of the love-command, an agapeic love freed
from the narrow restraints of morality, no longer exercised as a means of absolving oneself from debt to God, might its
elemental force of love be released into the world?” See, Reinhold Niebuhr, Reinhold Niebuhr on Politics: His
Political Philosophy and Its Application to Our Age as Expressed in His Writings, ed. Harry R. Davis and Robert C.
Good (New York, NY: Charles Scribner‟s Sons, 1960), 152; Costa, Keller, and Mercedes, “Love in Times of Empire,”
300.
47 See Jim Wallis‟ call for a new prophetic voice that is ready to emerge: Jim Wallis, God’s Politics: Why the
Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It (New York, NY: Harper SanFrancisco, 2005).
48 Ibid., 279, 291.
49 Costa, Keller, and Mercedes, “Love in Times of Empire,” 304.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
A TRINITARIAN VIEW OF THE CROSS: RELATIONAL
DYNAMICS WITHIN THE GODHEAD
John C. Johnson (M.Div., 2009)
Graduate Student, Hebrew Union College
Originally submitted to Dr. Frank Macchia as a course paper,
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary, November 29, 2007.
The article first appeared in the February 2009 issue of
Ministry®, International Journal for Pastors, www.MinistryMagazine.org
after it won third place in the magazine’s Student Writing Contest. Used by permission.
Ever since Georg Hegel, Karl Barth, and Karl
Rahner, the doctrine of the Trinity has enjoyed
a recent surge in theological reflection.
However, the issue of the Trinity at the
specific moment of the Cross—where the
purpose of the Incarnation climaxes—has
been rarely touched.
There have been a few notable contributors,
such as Jürgen Moltmann and Eberhard
Jüngel, but otherwise the topic, for the most
part, has been left alone. Many reasons exist
for this void; however, many abound for why
we should penetrate the depths of the
relational Trinitarian dynamic present at the
Cross.
First, the Cross represents one of the primary
modes of revelation concerning the triune
God. Second, our knowledge of the nature of
God can be greatly enriched by a deeper
understanding of what happened at the Cross.
And, finally, the realization of the magnitude
of what transpired at the Cross is more than
worth the effort in terms of teaching and
preaching value.
This article, then, will examine three
significant biblical passages on the issue of the
Trinity at the Cross, explore the relevant
1
theologians on the topic, and offer feedback
on the proposals of these theologians in the
discussion. Further, I will make one addition
concerning the current discussion on the role
of the Holy Spirit at the Cross.
Jesus at Gethsemane
Let us first look at some key biblical passages
that illuminate the activity of the Trinity at the
Cross. 1 A few portions of Scripture stand out:
the account of Jesus‘ prayer at Gethsemane,
His cry of dereliction on the cross, and
Hebrews 9:14.
Howard Marshall places the real struggle for
Jesus at the moment of His prayer to the
Father when He asks that the cup be taken
from Him. Here Jesus comes to terms with His
fate, so to speak—and, having done so, is then
able to endure with incredible poise what lies
ahead. 2 For Marshall, this makes sense
because, after this moment, Jesus‘ will is in
total alignment with the Father‘s and He sets
His eyes on the goal for which He came. In
other words, this change does not diminish the
utter desolation and anguish of the Cross but
simply portrays Jesus‘ mind as made up. 3

Peter Bolt notes the allusion to Psalm 42 in
Jesus‘ ―agitation‖ and ―distress,‖ with the
―where-is-your-God‖ cry asked by the
psalmist. 4 Bolt explains this instance as when
Jesus prepares for the cosmic battle, which
mandates some kind of disruption between
himself and the Father. 5 Not only must there
be a disruption, but the future of the entire
world, the future of the human race, our whole
existence is wrapped up in this passionate
exchange between the Son and His Father. 6
John Nolland believes, however, that Jesus
made up His mind well before the prayer at
Gethsemane. Rather, while the disciples at the
Last Supper participated in the benefits of
Christ‘s death, Jesus drank the cup of
commitment—commitment to His coming
death on the cross. 7
Further clarification of what unfolded in
Jesus‘ prayer can be gleaned from the imagery
of the ―cup.‖ In the biblical world, the cup
could convey the benefits that God provides,
such as love, comfort, strength, and fellowship
(Pss. 16:5; 116:3; 1 Cor. 10:16). 8 The cup can
also represent, and more often does, the
judgment of God upon sin (Isa. 51:17, 22; Jer.
25:15, 16; Eze. 23:31–34; Mark 14:36). 9 In
these examples, God punishes people by
making them drunk (a seemingly mild
consequence for many). In context, however,
God plays the role, not of the generous host
who welcomes guests but, rather, as the One
who hands down destruction. 10 Thus, when
Jesus cries out to the Father to take away the
cup, it must be seen as the growing anguish
(emotion) from the full weight of the Father‘s
anger against sin that will soon fall on His
shoulders. 11
Jesus on the Cross
Jesus knows this anger, because He
experienced it himself on the cross when He
cried out, ―My God, My God, why have You
forsaken Me?‖ Many have struggled with the
meaning of this cry. Donald Hagner laments
the impossibility of understanding what this
1
meant to Jesus; for, he asserts, these words
contain one of the most impenetrable
mysteries of the entire Gospel narrative. 12
Hagner further says that, perhaps, the words
should stand as they are—stark in their
incomprehensibility to our finite minds. 13
However, much can be deduced from the cry.
For instance, there‘s the obvious connection to
Psalm 22 from which Jesus quotes. 14 Indeed,
these words of Jesus have had many and
varied interpretations, but no substantial
reasons exist for not reading the pessimistic
pathos literally in which Jesus expresses
torment on account of the Father forsaking
Him. 15
The Holy Spirit and Calvary
Thus far, the first two passages have dealt
specifically (perhaps not as specific as we
would like) with the relationship between the
Father and the Son at the Cross.
Hebrews 9:14 gives us an insightful glance
into what or where the Holy Spirit was during
this moment: ―the blood of Christ, who
through the eternal Spirit offered himself
without blemish to God.‖ 16 Here the Holy
Spirit is seen as continuing His empowering
work that had been carried out throughout
Jesus‘ ministry, even up to Christ‘s death. 17
This must be seen as a mission of the Holy
Spirit, that is, to empower Christ, as He does
all believers, yet on the scale of par
excellence.
This two-directional hermeneutic (Christ‘s and
the Spirit‘s missions) does not threaten
Christology or the Cross, when positioned
within the salvific paradigm of ―from Father
back to Father.‖ 18 In fact, the Spirit‘s mission
here must be interpreted this way or the
Trinity collapses on the side of
subordinationism. 19 McDonnell writes, ―both
Christ and the Spirit are at the center but in
different ways: Christ as the ‗what‘ and the
Spirit as the ‗how.‘ ‖ 20 This fact serves as a
pivotal reminder that as the Christ, God in the

flesh, needed the Holy Spirit to walk with Him
daily for ministry, so do we, but ever more so.
The Trinity and Calvary
After this brief overview of three main texts
concerning the personal relationship between
Father, Son, and Spirit at the Cross, we can
unpack the dynamic a little more. 21 Moltmann
sees both the Father and the Son suffering at
the Cross and detects that the divine
consistency is at stake, the inner life of the
Trinity. At the Cross, the self-communicating
love of the Father becomes infinite pain over
the death of the Son. Likewise, the responding
love of the Son converts into infinite suffering
over being forsaken by the Father. What
happens at the Cross reaches into the very
depths of the infinite Godhead and, therefore,
puts its impress on the trinitarian life of God
for eternity. 22
Thus, for Moltmann, an almost drastic shift
exists from apatheia (the idea that God cannot
suffer) to suffering, which becomes the
foremost aspect of the trinitarian doctrine.
Moltmann claims that a God who cannot
suffer cannot love, and that a God who cannot
love is a dead God. Thus, a self-imposed
limitation surfaces that makes the relationship
within the Godhead, and with us, meaningful.
God has something at stake in all this. 23
Further, this Godforsakenness and
patricompassionism are not merely mirages
with which to identify, but rather events that
take place in God, a dialectic where He takes
everything of the ―far country‖ (all that is
opposed to God) into himself in order to
overcome it. 24
Moltmann is not the only theologian taking up
the theme of suffering at the Cross. Hans Urs
von Balthasar contends that, in some way, all
Three Persons of the Trinity suffer at the
Cross. 25 For Jüngel, there seems to be an
implicit suffering in the very fact that God is
love. Barth exclaims, unconditionally, that, as
a sinner, God rejects Jesus. Jesus stands not
only under the wrath of God, but because
2
wrath is necessary, Jesus stands under God‘s
sentence and judgment. 26 Further, He knows
that He must perish; He considers that He
must die and, thus, He is not merely in the grip
of death, but from the depth of His election,
He must constantly hear the voice that
reinforces the knowledge that He is in the grip
of death, and that He is lost. 27 The impact of
this constant inner voice must not be
understated or neglected in the light of Him
being the One and only elect of God in such
communion with the Father and Spirit that this
would indeed be a severe struggle within the
inner-trinitarian life.
The struggle is clearly felt not only on one
side but among both the Father and the Son.
Gérard Rossé points to the non-intervention of
the Father on the cross as a revelation of
himself, not despite His silence but because of
His inactivity. The abandonment of the Son
should be seen positively as the culminating
expression of the Father‘s love for the Son. 28
By not intervening at the Cross, the Father
actually carried out the sacrifice that Abraham
almost did with Isaac, an act that certainly
caused the Father great suffering. John 3:16
says that God the Father gave His only Son,
and Brown notices that in this verse, the role
of the Father becomes prominent. 29 In this act,
the Father gives His Son and risks, as
Moltmann would argue, the very consistency
of the inner-trinitarian life itself.
The Holy Spirit also takes part in this risk
during those few short hours at the Cross. If
the Father risks something by standing by idly,
then the Holy Spirit has just as much at stake.
Jüngel sees the Holy Spirit at the Cross as the
bond of love that holds the Trinity together. 30
At such a crucial time, when the unity of the
Godhead is most at jeopardy because of the
necessary abandonment, the Spirit becomes
the link, the glue that preserves the blessed
unity of the Trinity. 31 With Moltmann, one
finds that the Spirit is the link, but he gives
more focus to the communion of the wills as
pointing to the Divine Unity at the Cross.
Also, the Spirit for Moltmann plays a vital

ole in the action of bringing all Godforsakenness
into the divine being and
transforming it. 32 Thompson gives a warranted
critique of Moltmann on this point,
recognizing that for Moltmann the triune God
is an evolving subject who in Moltmann‘s
theology borders on tritheism (three separate
gods). 33
We move back now to Hebrews 9:14. If Jesus
was empowered throughout His ministry from
baptism through the healings, teaching, and
raising others from the dead, then surely the
Holy Spirit contributed more in the ministry of
the Cross than simply being glue. Rather,
without the empowerment of the Holy Spirit
living within Jesus, and in complete unity,
perhaps Christ would have succumbed to
pushing the cup aside. In all Three Persons,
the total self-giving is so evident that, in this
case, the Holy Spirit gives of himself fully to
the Son in order to strengthen Him for what
lays ahead—the Cross. Thus, while the Spirit
may be the bond of love between the Father,
Son, and Spirit at the Cross, 34 He also became
the empowering Presence within Jesus that
3
enables His humanity to endure the cup of
suffering and triumph faithfully.
Conclusion
1 All Scripture quotations have been taken from the ESV unless otherwise noted.
A trinitarian look at the Cross gives us an
insight into the community that is the Trinity,
and this can serve as the paradigm for our
communal thinking (eternal self-sacrifice). A
beneficial approach to the issue of the Trinity
at the Cross is one that adopts a modified
Moltmannian view, 35 which takes more
seriously the work of the Holy Spirit at the
Cross. The components of Jesus‘ bearing the
cup of suffering and the anguish it caused
Him, the suffering of the Father in giving up
His one and only Son, and the Spirit‘s
empowering bond are all pivotal factors in
God‘s work of redeeming a lost race. At the
Cross we have the clearest exposition of who
our sacrificing God truly is.
As Alister McGrath stated, the Cross forces us
to make a decision: To seek God here, in the
apparent defeat of the God-man and
abandonment of the Son by the Father at the
Cross, or to seek Him elsewhere. 36
2 I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek
Testament Commentary, eds. I. Howard Marshall & W. Ward Gasque (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans,
1978), 828.
3 Ibid.
4 Peter G. Bolt, ―The Cross: Where God Comes Close,‖ in The Cross from a Distance: Atonement in Mark’s
Gospel (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 109.
5 Ibid., 108, 109.
6 Ibid., 110.
7 John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek
Testament Commentary, eds. I. Howard Marshall & W. Ward Gasque (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 1099.
8 Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, ed. Leland Ryken, James C. Wilhoit (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 1998), 186, s.v. ―Cup.‖

9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid. It should also be noted that those who do not take Jesus‘ sacrifice seriously or reject it completely
will drink the cup of God‘s judgment (1 Cor. 11:27–30; Rev. 17:3–6; 18:6–8).
12 Donald Hagner, Matthew 14–28, Word Biblical Commentary, eds. Bruce Metzger, et al. (Dallas, TX:
Word, Inc., 1995), 844, 846.
13 Ibid., 846.
14 Raymond E. Brown, ―Jesus Crucified, Part Three: Last Events, Death,‖ in The Death of the Messiah, vol.
2 (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 1044.
15 Ibid., 1047. Brown in typical fashion gives the gamut of arguments against the literal interpretation of
which none are compelling. Most frequent is that Jesus is quoting the psalm and the listener/reader should
immediately know and jump to the last verse of the psalm. While this hermeneutic principle is valid in some New
Testament instances, in this case it would necessitate the reader recognizing the one verse as a psalm, knowing
which psalm, know the
entire psalm, detect in the agonizing reference an allusion to the triumph, and finally, in essence, read the
exact opposite meaning into the words than what is there. Further, taking the words literally does not in any way
diminish Christ‘s deity. Bolt also gives a good summary of the attempts to evade the literal meaning in The Cross
From a Distance, 127–30. As does John Stott—pointing out the claims that the cry is simply a cry of anger,
unbelief, or despair; that it is a cry of loneliness; or the common, cry of victory. John R. W. Stott, ―Looking Below
the Surface,‖ in The Cross of Christ (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 63–84. Moltmann in a different
approach gives six answers to the question of where God is during the cry. Jürgen Moltmann, The Way of Jesus
Christ, trans. Margaret Kohl (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 151–211.
16 It is no coincidence that in regards to the Holy Spirit, we are nearly relying on one word, dia, for our
perspective of the action of the Holy Spirit at the Cross. For of the Three Persons of the Trinity the Holy Spirit is the
One who is completely intangible and unseen, distinguished from the humanity of Jesus and the frequent interaction
with YHWH, the Father of Jesus. This study is somewhat of an effort to find what the role of the Spirit was in the
moment of the Cross. Precious few ideas have been offered, namely from Moltmann and Jüngel.
17 Anthony D. Palma, ―The Spirit and the Messiah,‖ in The Holy Spirit: A Pentecostal Perspective
(Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2001), 51.
1985): 210–212.
18 Kilian McDonnell, ―A Trinitarian Theology of the Holy Spirit?‖ Theological Studies 46, no. 2 (June
19 Ibid., 226.
20 Ibid., 227.
21 I will from here on assume the position with Moltmann, Barth, Jüngel, and others that the Trinity is the
mystery of salvation and the salvation comes through the Cross and thus the Cross is the basis/key for understanding
the nature and acts of the triune God. However, His being is not determined by these acts at the Cross as others will
say.
22 Moltmann, The Way of Jesus Christ, 173.
4

23 Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom (London: SCM Press, 1981), 38.
24 Moltmann, The Crucified God (London: SCM Press, 1974); John Thompson, ―A Trinitarian Theology of
Cross and Resurrection,‖ in Modern Trinitarian Perspectives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 61. Others
would disagree with Moltmann on this point of God taking into Himself the opposition. For example, Barth in
dealing with the communicatio idiomatum thought that God had in His nature those aspects which enable Him to
remain Himself while entering into the human predicament as reconciler. Jüngel then would say that ―God is able to
suffer and die
as man,‖ while remaining ontologically Himself. Quoted in Thompson, 56, 57.
25 Although for Balthasar the nature of God‘s love is also transformed at the Cross, becoming somehow
greater, at least enriched. Hans Urs von Balthasar, Mysterium Paschale, trans. Aidan Nichols (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1993), 136–147.
1987), 133.
1983).
26 Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, trans. G.W. Bromiley, vol. 2, pt. 1 (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1956).
27 Ibid.
28 Gérard Rossé, The Cry of Jesus on the cross: A Biblical and Theological Study (New York: Paulist Press,
29 Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John, 2d ed. (New York: Doubleday, 1970), 147.
30 Eberhard Jüngel, God as the Mystery of the World, trans. Darrell L. Guder (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
31 Badcock asserts that Jüngel‘s approach in defining God at the event of the Cross is both the strength and
the weakness of his argument. For the relation between the immanent and economic Trinity must be recognized, but
to say that God is ontologically defined by actions in time and space is to make Him contingent on His own creation.
Moltmann also makes clear in his writings that the triune God is to some extent not complete until the end. Gary D.
Badcock, ―The Holy Spirit in Contemporary Trinitarian Theology,‖ in Light of Truth & Fire of Love: A Theology of
the Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 170–211.
32 Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom, 122–128.
33 Thompson, 51.
34 I think it better to simply add the Holy Spirit to the objects being bonded. Then there is a self-inclusive
union and no implicit diminution. It is recognized that there is not intended subordination but the language is hard to
escape
especially if you are building the trinitarian doctrine from the event of the Cross (Jüngel).
35 Namely the idea that the Trinity is an evolving event not yet complete and the warning that he is often too
focused on the Three separate Persons while the unity slips away must be heeded.
36 Alister McGrath, ―The Crucified and Hidden God,‖ in The Mystery of the Cross (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1988), 102.
5

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
The Discipline of Spiritual Retreat
Retreat for most ministers involves a few
days of gathering with colleagues in a resort
setting for teaching, reflection, and
recreation. Sometimes these are times of
great renewal and restoration. At other
times, if ministers are honest, they return
home wearier than when they left. During
my years in ministry, I have experienced
many wonderful retreats and a few that did,
in fact, leave me exhausted. Packing,
traveling, too many meetings, jammedpacked
schedules, and the lack of sleep
sometimes take the joy out of a retreat.
Perchance it is not the retreat itself that robs
our joy. Maybe our joy escapes long before
the retreat. Perhaps we need more than wellorganized
events to maintain spiritual health.
For years I have heard about individuals
who practice the discipline of taking regular
personal spiritual retreats. I suppose I felt
that I lacked time, finances, or even the
desire to pack up and search for spiritual
renewal.
Recently, I took the advice of my spiritual
mentors and headed for the hills of Ava,
Missouri. The Ava abbey, like all of the
seventeen Trappist monasteries in the
United States, continues to honor the order’s
tradition of contemplation and study,
common worship, and daily work to sustain
the community. The Rule of Saint Benedict,
written by Saint Benedict in the sixth
century, guides every aspect of spiritual and
practical life at the Assumption Abbey.
Beth J. Davis, D.Min. (D.Min., 2009)
Director, AGWM CaringConnection
1
Initial Impressions
As a first-time retreatant, my heart and spirit
responded to the numerous rituals of daily
life at a Trappist monastery. Breathtaking
fall foliage surrounded me as the paved road
disappeared, and I slowly approached the
rustic grounds of the monastery. The
unassuming guest house and its quiet
ambience overwhelmed me. My first
feeling—a deep sense of peace—almost, but
not quite, produced tears. How fortunate that
my arrival coincided with mid-day prayer. I
slipped into the little chapel—a simple
austere structure, where the resident monks
chanted the Psalms, recited prayers, and read
from the Gospels. Anxiety ceased. My
spiritual retreat began.
Before lunch, I unpacked my few items in
the comfortable guest room—complete with
a single bed, desk, and well-worn recliner.
The faint smell of Pine-Sol permeated the
air, creating a sense of hospitality and
cleanliness. The room had no television, and
I noted that my cell phone had only one bar
of coverage.
Down the hallway, other guests and
retreatants gathered around the long lunch
room table. Although cordial in their
personal introductions, they refrained from
excessive conversation. Immediately I
sensed that I shared the table with ordinary
folks who, like me, were in search of
solitude and quiet.

Prayerful Pilgrims
Although conversations were minimal, meal
times did present opportunities for
interaction with the other guests. During my
three-day retreat, I learned a little personal
background about each of my fellow
retreatants. Mona has been coming to the
monastery for sixteen years. She comes
alone and usually spends a week. She works
as a drug and alcohol abuse counselor in St.
Louis, Missouri. When I asked what draws
her back each year, she quickly said, “The
peacefulness.” She explained that she arrives
with few expectations. Some years she
sleeps a lot. At other times she has
journaled, read, or walked. She pointed out
that the most difficult challenge was going
back to her world and continuing to cultivate
a peaceful disposition while working in an
extremely stressful environment.
Pat serves as a Methodist minister and was
on his second visit to Ava. He explained that
during his first visit he arrived in a state of
burnout. Conflict within his congregation
had left him depleted of both energy and
joy. His retreat at the monastery helped him
gain perspective at a critical time in his
ministry. This time, he is serving a different
church where, he claims, there are fewer
stressful events. He simply came to recharge
his batteries and to prepare to serve his
parish more effectively.
Tammy works as an oncology nurse. Like
me, she was on her first visit to the abbey.
As a single mom, grandmother, and peopleloving
caregiver, she finds little time for
herself. She brought craft projects, books,
knitting, and note cards with her and
planned to stay for ten days.
In future retreats, I will focus on more
silence and solitude. I discovered that
silence provided deep healing. A couple of
2
times during my retreat I felt as though I
was being robbed of this precious
commodity. Once when I was talking with
Mona at lunch, she began to tell me about
her stressful life. I love to listen, and always
enjoy hearing the personal journeys of
others. However, after just a few minutes
into her story, I recognized that I had shifted
back to my work mode. I continued to listen
politely, and then as soon as I could, I
excused myself and went back to my quiet
retreat.
Another morning, after early prayer in the
chapel, I sat meditating in the guest living
area with a cup of coffee. Pat came in and
started talking about his church, his wife,
who suffers with fibromyalgia, and his new
empty-nest syndrome. Once again, I was
aware that my soul needed time alone for
complete rest and recuperation.
On-site Observations
Sixty miles from home, I discovered a
culture extremely foreign from my own.
Simplicity reigned. The beautiful pine trees
mixed with the changing colors of fall
provided a perfect retreat atmosphere. I
crunched through dry leaves and took deep
breaths of clean air on the mile hike that led
to the Bryant River. My heart filled with
gratitude as I gazed on exquisite pools of
speckled trout. God’s creation had never
appeared more spectacular.
Seven times a day the monks meet in the
chapel for prayer and Scripture. They
welcome retreatants from every faith group
to join their worship. I felt uniquely
comforted by this repetition of sitting and
listening to the Word and prayers throughout
the day. It reminded me, as it does the
monks, of the importance of allowing the
Word to invade our lives continually, rather
than designating it to a daily devotional

experience. At each prayer time, a chime
rang throughout the monastery. Except for
the 3:15 a.m. chime, I responded to each
invitation to gather for prayer and Scripture.
This practice enabled me to continue in a
spirit of praise, thanksgiving, and worship
throughout the day, demonstrating the
integration of prayer and Scripture into
work, play, and rest.
Lingering Lessons
When I left the retreat, I took with me some
homework assignments. My time away from
ministry involvement had given me new
perspective and clarity of vision. In the
future:
I will plan retreats two times a year—
one in the spring and one in the fall.
I will schedule a day off during the
week, when possible, to compensate for
the many evenings, weekends, and
overseas ministry obligations that
consume my time.
I will take more quiet time to savor the
Word and listen to God. My thirty
minutes each morning paled in
comparison to the monks who integrated
prayer and Scripture into the daily fabric
of their work, study, and rest.
I will focus on replacing late evening
television, phone conversations, and email
with an intentional time of
contemplative prayer, soft music, and
Scripture.
I will strive to welcome guests into my
home. At the monastery, I learned the
value of unpretentious hospitality. When
offered with Christian sincerity, it
3
provides solace and warmth to weary
pilgrims. Simple meals, served with a
loving heart, set the stage for
community.
I will remember that it is better to speak
too little than too much.
I will recognize the signs of soul fatigue.
When I discover that I am no longer
interested in listening to the stories of
other pilgrims, I will slow down and
rest.
Conclusion
Scripture underscores the need for times of
solitude. When Elijah waited for the Lord to
pass by on Mount Horeb, the Lord was not
in the great wind, or the earthquake, or the
fire, but “in the sound of sheer silence” (1
Kings 19:13, NRSV). And, Mark’s Gospel
records that “very early in the morning,
while it was still dark, Jesus got up, left the
house and went off to a solitary place, where
he prayed” (1:35).
Illustrations from Scripture teach the
necessity of taking time away in solitude to
hear the voice of God. The instances vary in
length from a few moments to the forty days
that Jesus spent in the desert. The
commonality of these stories teaches the
importance of scheduling time for God to
speak and becoming quiet enough to hear
His voice.
Regardless of where a retreat takes place—a
week in a secluded mountain cabin or
simply a long walk in the local park—
creating space to hear God’s voice adds a
rich and necessary dimension to the earthly
journey.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer, 2009, Vol. 6
The Trust Factor
Bryan Jarrett
Lead Pastor, Northplace Church, Sachse, Texas
The following article is the manuscript form of a message delivered at AGTS on
January 29, 2009. The full audio message is available at
http://www.agts.edu/resources/audio_files/2009day_of_renewal/2009day_renewal_morning.mp3
Audio of the afternoon and evening Day of Renewal sessions is posted at
http://www.agts.edu/resources/sermons.html
Several years ago, I read a sermon
manuscript preached by John Maxwell on
the topic of trust. In the sermon, he asked
two questions. The first seemed safe
enough: “Do you trust God?” But the second
shattered my safety net: “Can God trust
you?” I have been wrestling with the answer
to these two questions for the last several
years and am convinced that a leader‟s
answer to these questions will determine his
or her effectiveness for the Kingdom. God is
looking for someone who trusts Him enough
to be trusted.
History has proven that when God is ready
to break into the world in an unprecedented
way, He searches for someone trustworthy
enough to be a vessel of His Kingdom
purposes. That man or woman often
becomes the catalyst God uses to change the
course of history. This understanding caused
me to pray that God would make me a man
of complete trust and total surrender—a man
God can trust.
When God was ready to break into Noah‟s
day, He gave Noah the ridiculous mandate
to build a gargantuan boat while the sun was
still shining. Noah did not argue; he trusted.
1
When God was ready to break into
Abraham‟s world in an unprecedented way,
he challenged Abraham‟s trust by asking for
Isaac. Abraham did not argue; he trusted.
Joshua could have trusted past
methodologies when facing the Jordan.
Instead, he shirked the safety net of tradition
and obeyed God‟s unique command and the
waters parted. David could have trusted
Saul‟s armor. Instead, he went beyond the
logical and the tangible, and trusted God to
slay his giant.
In each of these cases, God was asking these
same two questions: “Do you trust me?” and
“Can I trust you?” In every case, these
leaders trusted enough to be trustworthy.
They are our spiritual heroes today because
of their complete trust and uncommon
obedience. God was ready to break in and
do something supernatural in their time, but
His intervention was predicated on their
ability to trust Him. A. W. Tozer said,
The man of pseudo-faith will fight
for his verbal creed, but refuse flatly
to allow himself to get into a
predicament where his future must
depend upon that creed being true.

He always provides himself with
secondary ways of escape so he will
have a way out if the roof caves in.
What we need very badly these days
is a company of Christians who are
prepared to trust God as completely
now as they know they must do in
the last day.
Do You Trust Him? Can He Trust You?
The wisdom writer demonstrates that the
promises of God are contingent on the
obedience to His commands (Prov. 3:1-10).
“My son, do not forget my law, but let your
heart keep my commands; for length of days
and long life and peace they will add to you”
(3:1-2, NKJV). Obedience to the command
in verse 1 is the condition for the promise in
verse 2. The next eight verses continue to
establish this same motif. The promise of
God is only fulfilled when the command is
obeyed.
Trust and obedience are intricately
intertwined. The level of one‟s obedience
indicates the level of one‟s trust. My young
daughter has an unwavering trust in my
inability to fail. When I tell her to jump off
of a ledge into my arms, she does. Her
obedience indicates her trust. As she grows
older, her innocence will be shattered as my
vulnerabilities become more apparent. She
will learn to distrust me to some degree. Our
heavenly Father has no vulnerabilities and
deserves our complete trust. We demonstrate
our trust in Him and our trustworthiness for
Him as we walk in obedience to His
commands. John Sammis understood the
deep theological connection between trust
and obedience when he wrote in the great
hymn, “Trust and obey, for there‟s no other
way to be happy in Jesus, but to trust and
obey.”
2
We see this amazing theme throughout the
Scripture. In 2 Kings 3-5, three separate
historical events demonstrate the principle
that trust expressed through obedience sets
miracles in motion. Chapter 5 tells the story
of Naaman the leper, who was challenged to
dip in the river seven times. His obedience
was the catalyst for his miracle. Chapter 4
recalls the story of a widow who obeyed the
irrational command of the prophet to borrow
vessels when the ones she possessed were
empty. God met her at her level of
expectation and obedience.
In 2 Kings 3, an alliance of three kings
warred against Moab but the allied troops
and animals were trapped in a valley without
water. The kings inquired of the Lord
through the prophet Elisha for water. Before
the Lord would make the valley full of
water, He demanded that the troops make it
full of ditches. Once the troops obeyed His
command, God filled the valley full of
water. In the church, we have a plague of
“water wanters” and not enough “ditch
diggers.” Many people want the shortcut to
the blessing or miracle without paying the
price of alignment with God‟s commands.
God says, “If you want your valley full of
water, then make the valley full of ditches.”
Trust and obey.
In almost every miracle Jesus performed in
the New Testament, the recipient set the
miracle in motion by an act of personal
obedience to His command. He told the
lame man to “take up his mat;” the man with
the withered hand to “stretch forth his
hand;” the blind man to “go wash in the pool
of Siloam;” and the broken-hearted at
Lazarus‟ tomb to “take away the stone.” In
each case, trusting God enough to obey His
command set the miracle in motion.

The only promise of God not contingent on
our obedience is the promise of His love. He
loves unconditionally. All other promises
are conditional. According to the Lord‟s
Prayer in Matthew 6:12 and His statements
in Luke 6:37, even God‟s promise of
forgiveness is contingent on our willingness
to be obedient and forgive those who have
wronged us.
If we do the possible, God will do the
impossible. If we do the natural, God will do
the supernatural. If we will do what only we
can do, then God will do what only He can
do.
Everyone has a future. We cannot stop
tomorrow from coming. However, we can
align ourselves with God through obedience
and step into our preferred future. According
to Psalm 139:15-16, God penned the days of
my life in a book before I breathed my first
breath. Walking in trust and obedience
assures that I stay in the right chapter and on
the right page of His book. This “book” is a
snapshot of God‟s plan for my life.
Kay Warren, in Dangerous Surrender,
compares following God to gazing at an
undeveloped Polaroid picture. Many of the
younger, tech savvy people laugh at the
thought of a camera that spits out a grey
hard copy snapshot. To them it is funny. At
the time, it was instant gratification. Almost
instant—we had to wait and wave and blow,
until the grey matter finally began to give
way to the image of what we actually
photographed. Walking into our preferred
future with God demands that we trust Him
enough to say “yes” to the undeveloped
Polaroid that He hands us. Imagine God
handing out snapshots of people‟s futures.
They would excitedly run to Him to get a
glimpse of their tomorrow only to be
disappointed when the picture reveals no
3
real clarity. God is saying, “Do you trust me
enough to say „Yes‟ to My direction in your
life without knowing what tomorrow looks
like? Will you go for me without knowing
all the details?” The longer you walk in
obedience, the more you mature in your
trust, and the image of your future becomes
clearer. This may take months, but more
than likely, it will take years.
Several years ago, I signed a contract with
God. The front page of this contract says,
“Yes, Lord!” in bold letters and below I
have signed and dated it. The remaining nine
pages are completely blank. It is very
different from the contracts I have signed in
business dealings with people, where the
signature page is the last page, signifying
one‟s refusal to commit without having read
and agreed to all the details. Attorneys even
scour the small print to protect the
participants from unfair dealings.
Living a surrendered life of trust and
obedience, being the kind of man or woman
through whom God can rewrite history,
requires the willingness to say “Yes” on the
first page and trust God with the details on
the following pages. The pages of my
contract with God are blank because He
knows better than I do what I need. I submit
to whatever His sovereign will requires of
me. My contract is a memorial of my earnest
attempt to trust Him—a memorial of my
earnest attempt at becoming a man God can
trust.
God is Trustworthy
Before a person can have complete trust in
God, he or she must have an unwavering
commitment that He is trustworthy. This
revelation of God is not forged during the
good times. The litmus test of our trust in
God and His trustworthiness toward us

develops in the season of adversity. We sing
songs and preach sermons about
mountaintop experiences, yet most of us
spend our lives tirelessly climbing from one
mountaintop to the next, entirely
overlooking some of the deepest theological
truths and richest life experiences in the
valley of pain, tragedy, and sorrow. A quick
scan of a mountain range will quickly reveal
that the peak of the highest mountains is
beautiful but, for the most part, barren. Life,
growth, and fertility are in the valley. God
shapes our trust and our understanding of
His trustworthiness on the journey through
the valley.
Just weeks ago I found myself pacing the
halls of Medical City Children‟s Hospital in
Dallas in the middle of the night. My tenyear-old
had been diagnosed with a rare
blood disorder that threatened his life. Those
agonizing moments led to days and weeks of
questioning without real answers. In a
moment of prayer, the Holy Spirit reminded
me that God‟s care is constant. He is
trustworthy. Nothing was going to touch my
family that had not first touched Him. This
valley in my life did not take Him by
surprise. Back when I agreed to accept that
undeveloped Polaroid and sign a blank
contract, God knew this struggle was in the
contract. He knew this moment of pain was
in the picture. This tragedy did not mean
that God had disengaged, gone on vacation,
or even blinked for a split second, making
my life vulnerable. He is as much in control
of my tragedy as He is my triumph.
After my son was released from the hospital,
many in our church family joined me in a
twenty-one day fast that culminated in a
solemn assembly. The power of God was
tangible in that service when we gathered
around Cadyn to pray. The very next day
the doctor‟s reports were worse than they
4
had ever been. Why is it that innocent
children ask the hardest questions? When
the oncologist walked out of the room,
Cadyn said, “Dad, how can you fast for
twenty-one days, thousands of people be
praying for me, and I feel the power of God
like I did last night and still be sick today?” I
have two theological degrees and am
currently working on a third, but I found
myself having difficulty explaining apparent
injustices on God‟s behalf to a ten-year-old.
I simply reminded him to trust. God is not a
Santa Claus or a genie to approach with a
wish list. He is holy and sovereign. He cares
about our needs and hears our cries. Trusting
Him in this struggle will cause us to ask,
“What can I learn?” instead of “Why am I
sick?” I said, “Cadyn, don‟t let this sickness
define you. Let your faith define you. You
came into this diagnosis a little boy, if you
continue to trust, you will emerge as a
young man. I know this is heavy stuff for a
ten-year-old, but do you understand what I
am trying to say?” He said, “Yes, Dad, I
do.”
I heard his response but honestly doubted
his ability to grasp what so many older
believers cannot even grasp. However, the
next day I realized that “older” and “more
mature” are not synonymous. Cadyn‟s post
on his Facebook page said, “My platelets are
lower, but I‟m still trusting God.” Trust
Him. He is trustworthy.
We often make the mistake of trusting the
instrument of God‟s provision more than we
trust God. We are more interested in the gift
than we are the Giver. We are more in love
with the creation than we are with the
Creator. A. W. Tozer, in The Pursuit of God,
probably captures the concept best when He
suggests that God did not really want Isaac
when He asked for him. God really wanted
Abraham, and Isaac was the key to

Abraham‟s heart. God had to dethrone
Abraham‟s love of the creation to retake the
rightful place on the throne of Abraham‟s
heart.
A familiar proverb to most seasoned
believers is Proverbs 18:10, “The name of
the Lord is a strong tower; the righteous run
into it and are safe” (NIV). However, most
of us fail to capture the truth found in the
next verse, “The wealth of the rich is their
fortified city; they imagine it an unscalable
wall.” Those who trust in the Lord run into
His name for safety in the times of
adversity, but the self-reliant trust in their
own creations. Many people trust their jobs,
their retirement fund, their health, and their
education, imagining them to be “unscalable
walls” only to find that the answer is not in
the blessing but the Blesser.
When the Spirit of God began leading me
into deeper levels of trust, He started by
testing my obedience. Robert Clinton, in The
Making of a Leader, describes these
strategic incidents of testing as “faith
challenges” that God uses to move a leader
from one level in the development process
to another. According to Clinton, the
Scriptures show that God offers a challenge
to a leader‟s faith, and the response will
either be cause for Kingdom promotion or
correction.
My life has been filled with notable “faith
challenges,” but a few key tests of my
obedience have radically defined my life and
my level of trust.
In my first pastorate, I found myself in over
my head at several levels. At 26, I was shy
on experience but big on faith. The church
was struggling financially for multiple
legitimate reasons. I found my youthful
vision drowning in a sea of indebtedness and
5
lack of resources. I remember praying,
“God, even if I gave up my salary for an
entire year it would not make a dent in the
church‟s financial struggle.” God took that
statement and turned it into a test of my
obedience and challenge to my faith.
Over the next eighteen months, I began to
realize that my statement was not the overzealous
whining of a young pastor but the
verbalization of the greatest trust test of my
life. I knew it was irrational. I knew some
would not understand, but I knew it was
God. I also knew if I was wrong, I could
lose everything. Beyond the loss of material
things, I faced the threat of losing the
respect of my congregation and bringing
reproach on the church and the people I
loved. God‟s Spirit continued to whisper to
me that this act of obedience would provide
an opportunity for Him to reveal himself to
me in an unprecedented way and
demonstrate His power to a church and city
in desperate need of His visitation.
The stories of miraculous provision that my
grandfather had told me about were far
removed from my own experience. Most
people of my generation have never had to
trust God for their daily essentials and, in
some way, our prosperity has stunted our
spiritual growth. It is one thing to trust God
for a new Cadillac. It is altogether different
to trust Him for your next meal. I have often
wondered if the power of God seems to
manifest in greater ways in mission
environments because the people are
desperate and stripped of alternatives. God
took me on this journey to strip me of my
alternatives and reveal a dimension of His
nature I had never been privy to by personal
experience. My grandfather‟s faith had to
become my own.

Many believers in Western Christianity are
living with less than Jesus died for. We are
living below our privileges as children of
God, making safe plans while we engage in
“image-management” and call it ministry.
As churches and individuals, we set goals
and objectives safe enough that in case God
does not show up we can still “save face.”
But God is looking for opportunities to
establish His Kingdom in this world, and our
safe plans are robbing Him of those
opportunities.
From June of 2003 to June of 2004 my
family and our congregation met the God of
the book of Acts face-to-face. An act of
trusting obedience set a miracle in motion.
God provided manna for my family and
displayed His power for our church and city.
Hundreds of people from that church and
thousands from that community personally
lived those moments, and we will never be
the same. God proved himself trustworthy.
The struggles of that year and the thrill of
watching God unleash His power seem like
6
distant memories. Having transitioned from
that congregation to a larger, more affluent
metropolitan area, I assumed those days of
sacrifice were far behind me. I had paid my
dues, so I thought, until that same probing
voice began to challenge my comfort. God
laid another pivotal trust test before me in
this new location of ministry that required a
greater degree of sacrifice than the first. My
first response to Him was, “I have already
been through this season of my life! I passed
that test!” His response, “It‟s not a season.
It‟s a lifestyle.”
Walking with God is a “lifestyle” of
uncommon obedience, complete trust, total
surrender, and courageous faith. These
personal core values have surfaced in my
life while attempting to answer the
questions: “Do you trust God?” and “Can
He trust you?” God is poised to break into
our world in an unprecedented way. He will
find and use any man or woman who trusts
Him enough to be trusted. May His gracious
hands molds us into people that He can
trust!

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
The Place of Pressing: Finding Purpose in Pain
Eric Praschan (M.A.T.S., 2006)
Academic Advisor, University of Missouri Graduate School
A few months ago, I was seated in the
doctor’s office next to my wife, Stephanie,
as the neurologist matter of factly stated,
“The MRI tests revealed that you have spots
in your brain and neck indicating signs of
multiple sclerosis (MS).” My wife had been
struggling with numerous health issues for
nearly two years. Due to the variety of
symptoms exhibited in her body, several
different doctors had struggled to nail down
the primary problematic issue. After months
of tests, diagnoses, re-diagnoses, a
frustrating lack of answers, and an
unpredictable roller coaster of emotions, we
finally had an answer.
The heart is often unprepared for painful
experiences in life. When great pain finds
us, it is difficult to gain our bearings, for we
have entered a place of pressing. The place
of pressing is a season of pain that brings
spontaneous tears, a lump in the throat, and
long nights with too many unanswered
questions and too little sleep.
Pain is a constant reminder of our human
frailty, as well as an unpleasant, yet
powerful, reminder of our total dependence
upon God. The irony of pain is that God can
use it to spark spiritual growth within us.
God has an uncanny way of touching us
deeply when we are exposed and honest
before Him during the intense vulnerability
that occurs during painful experiences.
Therefore, our attitude toward pain
determines our availability to allow God to
1
usher growth into our lives during difficult
circumstances.
Pain bears the soul in raw form, causing
honest questions and reflections that might
not normally occur. When plodding through
the place of pressing, pretenses or façades
do not work; on the contrary, the soul’s
struggle for strength and the need for God’s
grace collide in full force. Pain brings us to a
place of brokenness where we must choose
to trust God while we are feeling too
helpless to rely on ourselves for answers or
strength.
Jesus entered the place of pressing on a
night when His closest friends could not
even stay awake to comfort Him. He knelt
down in the Garden of Gethsemane,
troubled and stricken with pain. His night
was filled with spontaneous tears, a lump in
the throat, too many unanswered questions,
and too little sleep. He understood the
purpose of His pain, and although His heart
yearned for an easier way than taking each
agonizing step through the place of pressing,
He offered a prayer that gives us the
perspective on pain which God would have
us choose: “Father, if you are willing, take
this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours
be done” (Luke 22:41).
Although not glamorous or desirous, the
process of pain is essential for growth.
Embracing pain is contrary to our natural
tendencies, but true trust in God’s

sovereignty necessitates that we open
ourselves to His leading, even if taking that
path means following Him through the place
of pressing. When faced with a season of
struggle, we often focus exclusively on the
pain; by choosing to adopt Jesus’
perspective of pain, though, we will look for
God’s larger purpose in the midst of the
season of struggle rather than focus only on
the reality and side effects of the pain.
King David also wrestled with painful
experiences throughout his life, but he did
not emphasize pain as the outcome. His
Psalms resonate with the acknowledgment
of God’s faithfulness in the midst of his own
frustration, confusion, and pain (Psa. 69:1-2,
13-17; 77:1-20; 86:1-7; 102:1-28).
Similarly, Paul attested that God’s strength
is made perfect in our weakness (2 Cor.
12:9-10). C. S. Lewis pinpointed the way in
which God uses pain to impact us and arrest
our attention: “Pain insists on being attended
to. God whispers to us in our pleasures,
speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our
pains; it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf
world.” 1
An accurate perspective of pain must be set
against the backdrop of God’s consistent
character. Consequently, when we enter the
place of pressing, the understanding remains
that God will continue to be the bedrock
upon which the soul can depend regardless
of the surrounding circumstances. God did
not promise life without pain (John 16:33).
But even when we hurt, when we weep,
when we suffer—He is still with us, and is
keenly interested in the process of our
working through the reality of pain. When
we find ourselves entering the place of
pressing, it would be easy to ask why it is
happening or attempt to escape. However,
God is more interested in how we respond to
2
the painful season, than He is in answering
our questions of why we are experiencing it.
Our best response to pain should be a firm
resolution to trust God regardless of what
happens. It is His faithfulness in the midst of
pain that enables us to trust Him. God may
bring instant healing or deliverance, or opt
not to do so because it may not be the most
beneficial action at the time. A season of
victory or celebration may not be
forthcoming, but God has much to teach us
in the midst of our struggle. Growth does
not come without stretching, and the place
of pressing is the perfect environment that
God can use to foster spiritual maturity
within us. In the place of pressing, we learn
to trust His heart even when we cannot see
His hand; we learn to believe His truths even
when we cannot feel His touch; we learn to
know who He is even when we do not know
what He is doing.
My wife is currently undergoing weekly
treatments for MS. This will be a lifelong
journey of learning to work through the
process of pain. Our faith is being built
stronger each day as we seek to see the
situation through God’s eyes instead of our
human eyes alone. Only with His
perspective can we fully understand the
value of the place of pressing, and only then
can we begin to comprehend how precious
pain can be in bringing us to a place of
surrender. We understand that God will heal
her body, whether in this life or the next. At
the core of this process, however, we are
discovering how God is more interested in a
deeper relationship with us than in simply
healing a disease. God can minister to us
just as powerfully through the process of
pain as He can through the product of a
complete healing, so we must choose to trust
Him tenaciously in the place of pressing

ecause only with trust in Him can we
perceive the purpose in the pain.
Jesus serves as our prime example on how to
respond to the place of pressing: “Not my
will, but Yours be done.” It is in choosing
this perspective that we can grow closer to
God in ways we did not know were possible.
We discover the beauty and the purpose in
the pain as God uses this season of struggle
not to destroy us but to grow us, not to
shatter us but to rebuild us, and not to
wound us but to heal us. This initiates a new
perspective. Instead of asking God, “Why
am I in pain?,” we can begin asking Him,
“What do You want to teach me in this
pain?” Only then can we truly understand
the purpose to be found in the place of
pressing.
1 C. S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York, NY: MacMillan, 1944), 91.
3
The place of pressing is not about the
intensity or longevity of the pain. In fact, it
is not about the pain at all. It is about one
thing and one thing alone: knowing Him
more. As we surrender to His will and allow
Him to guide us through the place of
pressing, we will come to understand that
pain is not an ending of our lives but
actually a progression in our lives when we
place it in His hands. We learn that the
power of His faithfulness far outweighs the
potency of the pain. This is why we can
choose to place our focus on Him and not on
the pain itself. It is this focus of knowing
Him more that enables us to enter the place
of pressing with hope in Him, to walk
through the place of pressing with trust in
Him, and to leave the place of pressing with
stronger faith in Him when the season of
pain has finally ended.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Effectively Inefficient Pentecostal Leadership
By Stephanie Nance (M.Div., 2008)
Administrative Coordinator for the Network for Women in Ministry
This year marks my tenth year in ministry.
Over the years, formal education, reading,
attending seminars, mentorship, and real life
experiences impacted my development as a
church leader. I also had the privilege of
applying learned leadership techniques with
a top quality ministry team. Despite my
training and a great support team, however, I
constantly struggled to complete my
leadership responsibilities efficiently and
remain effective in ministry. I could not find
a balance between the two. Eventually, I
collapsed on the sidelines, discouraged and
feeling completely ineffective as a leader.
When a professor recently asked me what it
means to lead “Pentecostal-ly,” I pondered
how efficiency and effectiveness should
look for a Pentecostal leader. I concluded
that leading “Pentecostal-ly” requires
inefficient leading. Sounds strange, but
efficiency is not something for which
Pentecostal leaders should strive. While this
sounds obviously contrary to standard
leadership teaching, both Christian and
secular, the reality is that Pentecostal leaders
are not called to lead in a standard way but
by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. The
Holy Spirit does not appear to be as
concerned with efficiency as the Western
World is, since He empowers people for
effectiveness rather than efficiency.
After pondering the difference between
efficiency and effectiveness, I determined
that efficiency focuses on producing
quantity by striving to limit time and energy
1
expenditure; effectiveness, however, focuses
on developing quality by requiring an
investment of time and energy.
My desire to become what I call “effectively
inefficient” came about from a random yet
God-ordained combination of events that
began with a challenge to write my first
doctoral level paper on leading “Pentecostally”
and culminated with the longest lunch
appointment of my life.
Lunch with a guy named Chad provided the
insights I needed to pull together my
wandering thoughts on effectiveness and
efficiency. It was six o’clock in the morning
when I jumped out of bed ready to take on
my efficiently scheduled day that I knew
would end with a feeling of accomplishment
and balance. What I did not foresee when I
left the house that morning was the twist that
would take place in this lunch appointment.
My perfectly timed and efficient one-hour
lunch with Chad turned into a four-hour
conversation. The intention of the lunch was
to discuss spiritual formation, but things
quickly went off course when I asked Chad
to share with me his spiritual journey. I
assumed Chad would give me a ten-minute
version. I did not expect to find myself
engrossed in a two-hour story about his
twenty-year run from God’s call while
making a seven-figure income in the
corporate world. His story amazed me, but
what grabbed my attention that day were his
thoughts on efficiency and effectiveness.

Chad told me of his days as a successful
businessman who supervised hundreds of
employees. All day he sat in his office
where he met with a different employee
every twenty minutes. Each would spend
two minutes in the waiting area with the
secretary, who would purposefully dialogue
with the employee about spouse, children,
and life. In the meantime, Chad sat in his
office and quickly reviewed what he needed
for the eighteen-minute meeting. After the
two minutes, the employee would be
escorted into Chad’s office where he or she
had eighteen minutes to discuss the purpose
of the meeting. During this time, the
secretary would e-mail or text Chad specific
information about the employee’s family,
suggesting he ask the employee about his or
her children or spouse. The employee, not
aware of the information exchange, always
responded enthusiastically to Chad’s interest
in his or her life. As he told me this, Chad
laughed with disgust and shook his head at
the extreme superficial connection.
Chad knew efficiency firsthand. He got
work done and reaped the financial benefits
of it. When asked how he had adjusted to
ministry after years in the corporate world,
he stated that the initial transition was not
difficult because pastors and churches worry
as much about efficiency as the corporate
world. One day, however, Chad realized that
Jesus could have used a chariot, yet He
chose to walk everywhere. He never seemed
to be in a hurry. Chad began to wonder why
Jesus would not choose to be more efficient
with His time. After all, a more efficient
Jesus would be more effective, right?
The truth is that efficiency does not equal
effectiveness. Chad realized that Jesus
walked so He would purposefully meet
people along the way to whom He could
minister. Jesus cared about the people on the
journey and not just the people at the
2
destination. By today’s standards, Jesus was
not very efficient. He became easily
sidetracked with peoples’ problems. He
spent time with the outcasts of society
instead of time with the people who could
help Him get His mission accomplished.
And He had a tendency to show up late.
Jesus clearly did not lead efficiently.
After hearing Chad’s story, I began to think
about Jesus and the apostles. I realized that
Jesus’ disciples followed their Master’s
inefficient leadership style. In Acts 6, the
apostles found themselves distracted from
the ministry because of the practicalities of
operating a food program. Instead of
planning their day efficiently and setting a
schedule to manage both a food program
and evangelistic ministry, they elected
deacons to manage the food program. The
apostles knew that their purpose was not to
be efficient by balancing everything. They
were called to be effective in their ministries
of preaching, teaching, healing, and
deliverance.
My friend Joel, who pastors a growing
church in New Jersey, exemplifies what it
looks like to minister effectively inefficient
in his ministry context. Joel spends his days
at one of three “office” locations: Panera
Bread, Starbucks Coffee, or Dunkin Donuts.
Refusing to lock himself away in a church
office, Joel finds that making connections
and conducting the necessary business of
ministry in the marketplace of his town is
more effective for his community and
church. Obviously, he would be more
efficient in the quietness of a church office
with fewer interruptions. Joel’s effectiveness
on the journey to Sunday has become as
important as his effectiveness behind the
pulpit. Joel has discovered what it truly
means to lead “Pentecostal-ly.”

Over the years, many mentors and leaders
have influenced my life. The ones worried
about efficiency impacted me the least. I
remember a conversation with a leader who
attempted to minister to me one day in his
office. At the strike of noon, he abruptly
stood up and said we were finished. I
understood his tight schedule, but when I
walked away, I could not shake the feeling
that I was just an appointment on his
calendar. The mentors and leaders who have
positively impacted my life treated me as a
person the Spirit brought into their lives in
whom to invest time and energy. No doubt,
there were times they were busy and found it
inefficient to talk with me. They chose,
however, to be effectively inefficient and, as
a result, shaped my life as a person and a
leader.
Leaders carry many responsibilities and face
many deadlines—all of which require time
and energy boundaries. Effectiveness often
demands the ability to work efficiently. It is
vital, however, that efficiency flow out of
the desire for effectiveness. I recently
completed a large ministry project that could
potentially impact thousands of people. This
project took a great deal of time and energy.
3
In order to meet the deadlines, I worked
efficiently. My choice to work efficiently to
meet those deadlines, though, flowed out of
my desire for effectiveness. That said, I still
struggle to understand how this works. I
admit I bypassed several opportunities to be
effective on the daily journey throughout
this last project’s completion.
The key is allowing the Holy Spirit’s
empowerment to clarify what effective
leadership looks like in my various ministry
contexts. To lead “Pentecostal-ly” is to
choose effectiveness over efficiency, the
journey over the destination, people over
productivity, quality over quantity. I desire
to follow in the footsteps of Jesus, the
Apostles, Chad, Joel, and my effective
mentors and leaders. Now, I do not try to
find a balance between effectiveness and
efficiency but recognize that in my quest for
effectiveness, efficiency will happen where
and when it must. I may have a calendar
filled with appointments, deadlines to meet,
and an agenda to complete, but I daily
choose to give it all to God and allow the
Holy Spirit to empower me with the ability
to lead effectively inefficient.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry: Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Unleashing Spiritual Gifts in Your Congregation Begins With
Better Biblical Understanding
Introduction
Bob Caldwell
(Ph.D. 2009 Concordia Seminary; M.A. 2003 AGTS)
Ordained minister of the Assemblies of God and free-lance writer
Many
believers
and
Christian
leaders
agree
that
regardless
of
how
effective
a
congregation’s
worship,
evangelism,
or
general
ministry,
there
is
a
dearth
of
the
move
of
God
within
the
church.
Why
is
this
so,
since
Jesus
declared
to
His
disciples
that
anyone
who
has
faith
in
Him
would
do
what
He
had
been
doing—in
fact,
“even
greater
things
than
these”
(John
14:12)? 1 
The
mighty
works
of
God
through
the
Church
permeate
the
book
of
Acts,
leaving
contemporary
believers
to
wonder,
“Why
don’t
these
supernatural
things
happen
among
us?”
I
believe
that
fundamentally
wrong
theology
passed
down
over
the
years
hinders
operation
of
the
gifts;
it
follows,
then,
that
the
application
of
proper
theology
will
increase
their
manifestation.
The Scope of Spiritual Gifts
Though
other
lists
of
gifts
occur
in
the
New
Testament,
only
those
in
the
list
in
1
Corinthians
12:1-11
are
called
spiritual.
Popular
teaching,
especially
from
non-
Pentecostals,
lump
all
gifts
of
God
together
(Rom.
12,
Eph.
4),
which
leads
people
to
think
that
if
they
exercise
a
gift
of
giving,
they
don’t
need
to
worry
about
prophecy.
This
is
wrong.
Though
gifts
of
mercy
and
1
helps
are
also
important,
Paul
encourages
all
believers
to
exercise
the
nine
in
1
Corinthians
12.
These
clearly
supernatural
gifts
are
the
ones
less
frequently
seen
in
our
churches
and
are
the
scope
of
this
discussion.
The Key Issue
Are
the
gifts
of
the
Spirit
given
to
believers
in
a
sense
in
which
the
believer
can
be
said
to
possess
them?
Is
it
even
legitimate
to
ask:
“What
is
(are)
your
gift(s)?”
The
belief
that
Christians
“possess”
gifts
of
the
Spirit
has
led
directly
to
the
paucity
of
these
gifts,
with
some
laypeople
simply
not
believing
that
they
possess
a
supernatural
gift
and
could
never
therefore
operate
in
that
realm.
Such
a
view
leaves
the
operation
of
gifts
to
the
pastor
or
the
more
“spiritual”
ones
in
the
church.
Impact of Teaching Gifts as Possession
Gifts
of
the
Spirit
as
possession
is
assumed
in
literature
that
helps
Christians
discover
their
spiritual
gift(s).
This
assumption
is
due,
first,
to
the
misapplication
of
the
body
metaphor
in
1
Corinthians
12,
maintaining
that
Paul
is
teaching
that
no
one
believer
exercises
all
gifts,
because
such
a
person
would
therefore
not
need
the
rest
of
the
body
of
Christ.
In
this
view,
possessing
only
a

2
couple
gifts
at
most
would
cause
each
member
to
need
the
others.
However,
in
the
body
metaphor,
Paul
does
not
argue
for
diversity
of
the
gifts,
rather
for
diversity
of
the
members.
1
Corinthians
12:14
reads,
“Now
the
body
is
not
made
up
of
one
part
but
of
many”
and
defines
those
parts
in
verse
27
as
people,
“Now
you
are
the
body
of
Christ,
and
each
one
of
you
is
a
part
of
it.”
If
gifts
are
not
possessions,
believers
can
return
to
a
more
biblical
understanding
that
each
one
needs
the
others
because
of
the
way
that
“God
has
combined
the
members
of
the
body”
(v.
24).
If
no one
possesses
a
gift,
but
each
could
be
used
in
all
gifts,
each
member
of
the
body
still
needs
the
others
as
only
God
determines
how
he
will
use
each
one
(v.
11).
Second,
those
who
hold
to
gifts
as
possession
do
not
recognize
the
important
distinction
between
gift
and
ministry
and
interpret
all
sections
of
1
Corinthians
12-14
as
a
reference
to
gifts.
Whereas
verses
3-11
of
1
Corinthians
12
deal
with
gifts,
verses
12-27
discuss
the
interdependence
of
believers
in
the
body.
Then,
beginning
with
verse
28,
Paul
addresses
church
offices
and
ministries.
Therefore,
the
rhetorical
questions
in
verses
29-30,
“Are
all
apostles?...Do
all
work
miracles?...Do
all
speak
in
tongues?”,
need
to
be
understood
in
the
context
of
the
offices
and
regular
ministries
of
verse
28,
not
the
gifts
of
verses
3-11.
A
doctrine
of
possession
of
gifts
gives
anti-
Pentecostals
ammunition
to
attack
all
Pentecostal
doctrines.
John
McArthur
criticized
any
concept
of
a
modern
gift
of
divine
healing
by
focusing
on
possession. 2
His
logic
is:

If
one
possesses
the
gift
of
healing,
then
the
gift
can
be
used
at
will
in
any
circumstance.
Since
no
one
can
heal
every
sick
person,
then
no
one
must
have
the
gift
of
healing.
Pentecostals
can
overcome
arguments
like
this,
but
only
by
abandoning
the
perspective
of
possession
of
gifts
and
coming
to
a
more
biblical
understanding.
Gifts Are Not a Possession
The
Bible
teaches
that
the
nine
gifts
of
the
Spirit
are
not
the
possession
of
the
believer,
but
rather
the
possession
of
the
Holy
Spirit
to
distribute
as
He
determines.
Although
this
position
has
not
been
articulated
enough
in
Pentecostal
circles,
G.
Raymond
Carlson
wrote,
The
gifts
are
gifts
of
the
Spirit.
As
such,
they
are
resident
in
the
Spirit.
They
are
manifested
and
not
imparted
[italics
added].They
are
manifested
according
to
the
will
of
God
and
not
according
to
our
merit….
Gifts
are
not
an
absolute
possession.
The
Lord
is
the
administrator
and
gifts
are
in
the
Spirit
who
indwells
the
believer.
The
consistent
manifestation
of
God
wills
that
we
are
to
be
filled
with
the
Holy
Spirit.
When
we
are,
we
have
the
potential
to
be
used
by
God
to
minister
to
any
need
that
may
arise
in
the
church.
Only
as
the
Holy
Spirit
supplies
the
gift
at
a
particular
moment
for
a
particular
situation
will
the
ministry
of
a
member
of
the
Body
be
effective. 3
In
fact,
some
believers
could
be
used
in
all
of
the
gifts.
Throughout
Acts
and
the
Pauline

3
Epistles,
Paul
evidences
all
the
gifts,
except
interpretation
of
tongues.
Further,
Paul
wrote
in
1
Corinthians
14:13,
“For
this
reason
anyone
who
speaks
in
a
tongue
should
pray
that
he
may
interpret
what
he
says.”
If
the
gift
of
interpretation
were
only
given
as
a
possession
to
some,
then
his
statement
would
be
meaningless.
Paul
encouraged
the
Corinthians
to
seek
to
interpret,
to
speak
in
tongues
(v.
5),
and
to
prophesy
(vv.
1,
5).
Therefore,
all
gifts
are
available
to
all
believers
as
the
Spirit
wills
them
to
be
exercised.
Christians
all
have
many
ministries
to
perform,
and
the
gifts
of
the
Spirit
help
fulfill
those
ministries.
Moving from Gifts to Ministry
In
practice,
however,
it
seems
as
if
some
believers
are
used
often
in
a
particular
gift.
In
this
case,
these
individuals
are
filling
a
ministry
position
(e.g.,
apostle
or
interpreter).
Though
the
person
will
exercise
other
gifts,
he
or
she
may
exercise
one
gift
more
frequently.
Even
here,
this
person
should
not
be
the
only
one
expected
to
use
that
gift
in
the
church.
Stanley
Horton
echoes
this
concept:
I
believe
1
Corinthians
12:11
means
the
Holy
Spirit
distributes
each
manifestation
[italics
added]
of
a
gift
as
He
wills.
The
gifts
are
in
His
possession,
not
ours.
12:31
and
14:1
indicate
every
believer
can
be
used
by
the
Spirit
in
any
of
the
gifts
as
the
Spirit
determines,
but
the
Spirit
may
use
certain
individuals
regularly
in
certain
gifts. 4
David
Clark
of
Vanguard
University
states,
“Rather
than
say
someone
‘has’
a
spiritual
gift,
I
prefer
to
say/teach
that
the
Spirit
manifests
himself
in
certain
ways
in
a
regular
or
characteristic
manner
through
people,
rather
than
to
say
people
‘have’
a
gift
which
might
be
misunderstood
in
the
sense
of
a
natural
talent.” 5
Theological Conclusion
The
gifts
of
the
Spirit
are
not
the
absolute
possession
of
a
believer.
The
Holy
Spirit
manifests
the
gifts
of
the
Spirit
through
individuals
as
He
chooses.
All
believers
who
have
received
the
Holy
Spirit
can
and
should
function
in
any
one
of
the
nine
gifts;
some
could
potentially
operate
in
all
of
the
gifts
of
the
Spirit.
Certain
believers
may
exercise
one
particular
gift
with
regularity,
such
as
tongues,
interpretation,
prophecy,
or
healing,
which
can
develop
into
a
ministry.
The
incorrect
teaching
that
gifts
are
possessions
has
shortchanged
believers
and
deprived
the
local
church
of
the
exercise
of
the
gifts.
An
accurate
understanding
among
pastors
and
lay
people
of
the
nature
of
the
gifts
of
the
Spirit
could
bring
to
fruition
Paul’s
desire
for
everyone
to
be
involved
in
the
exercise
of
the
gifts,
resulting
in
greater
ministry
and
glory
to
God.
Application
What
do
we
do
with
this
understanding
of
gifts
of
the
Spirit?
First,
pastors
should
teach
these
truths
and
tear
down
the
traditions
of
popular
piety.
Second,
this
biblical
teaching
should
replace
the
use
of
spiritual
gifts
surveys.
Third,
pastors
must
place
a
greater
emphasis
on
believers
being
filled
and
re-
filled
with
the
power
of
the
Holy
Spirit.
Fourth,
believers
and
leaders
alike
should
commit
to
being
used
in
the
gifts
of
the
Spirit.
Fifth,
leaders
should
lead
by
example

and
by
bringing
potential
leaders
alongside
to
learn
by
experience.
Sixth,
when
gifts
of
the
Spirit
are
manifested
among
the
members
of
the
congregation,
these
experiences
should
be
recounted
to
the
entire
church
as
an
exhortation
to
others.
1 All
Scripture
quotations
are
taken
from
the
NIV.
4
When
spiritual
leaders
acquire
correct
theology,
teach
it
to
the
church,
and
raise
expectation
levels
for
application,
believers
can
come
to
a
point
where
they
indeed
do
“greater
works
than
these,”
as
they
minister
to
a
hurting
and
needy
world
2 
John
F.
McArthur
Jr.,
The Charismatics
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
Zondervan,
1978),
134-5.
3 
G.
Raymond
Carlson,
Our Faith and Fellowship
(Springfield,
MO:
Gospel
Publishing
House,
1977),
64-65.
4 Stanley
M.
Horton,
private
correspondence
with
author,
May
27,
1994.
5 David
C.
Clark,
private
correspondence
with
author,
December
8,
1993.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Wealth and Poverty in Luke’s Gospel and Acts:
A Challenge to the Christian Church
Samantha R. Brewer (M.A.T.S. 2009)
Master of Arts in Theological Studies Paper, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
In April of 2004, the Bible and Theology Department of AGTS voted to present the Stanley M.
Horton Award annually at graduation for excellence in the writing of the paper for the
Theological Studies Seminar. The professor of record for the course makes recommendations to
the Department for their decision on potential recipients, and the award is announced during
graduation exercises.
On April 15, 2009, the faculty ratified Samantha R. Brewer as the recipient of this award. Her
paper follows.
Contents
Introduction
Inductive Literary and Exegetical Analysis
The Identity of the Poor
The Plight and Status of the Poor
Wealth and Poverty in Luke‟s Gospel
God‟s Perception of the Poor
Contrast between the Rich and the Poor
Eschatological Implications in Jesus‟ Teachings Regarding the Poor
Church‟s Historical Response in The Book of Acts
Historical Examples of Communal Benevolence Commended
Historical Examples of Individual Benevolence Commended
Church‟s Priority of Benevolence from Acts to Modern Times
A Challenge to the Christian Church
Surrendering Possessions
Dangers of Wealth
Instruction in Use of Wealth
Conclusion
Bibliography
1

Introduction
This seminar paper‟s purpose is to examine
an identifiable Lukan theology to the poor in
the Gospel of Luke and Acts. Luke
consistently maintains a theology to the
poor; therefore, this paper seeks to
determine the implications for the modern
Church and apply it to contemporary
theology by determining ways in which
Christians should respond to the financial
state of others, as well as how one should
maintain his or her individual economic
policies according to Luke and his
understanding of the teachings of Christ
regarding the poor.
Luke‟s social consciousness is generally
supported in five significant emphases: (1)
his considerable focus on the rich and the
poor, (2) prominent inclusion of women, (3)
acceptance of religious and social outcasts,
(4) healing as a noteworthy part of Jesus‟
ministry and that of His followers, and (5)
exhortations to and examples of almsgiving.
John Roth asserts that Luke has
“proportionally more material than the other
Gospels dealing with the rich and the poor” 1
and is “particularly fond of exhortations to
and examples of almsgiving.” 2 Walter
Pilgrim also emphasizes a Lukan theology to
the poor by stating that the subject of wealth
and poverty is of greater importance to Luke
than any other evangelist as part of both the
tradition of Jesus and as a message for the
Christian communities to whom he is
writing. 3 The subject of wealth and poverty
seems to be regarded by Luke as a “practical
test-case in the Christian realization of good
news to the poor.” 4 Luke offers a vast
amount of information involving economics
for the Christian community.
While this topic is essential to the Christian
community regarding both the believer‟s
2
common life and the responsibilities of the
Church, a conclusive theology has yet to be
determined. Kyoung-Jin Kim states that
many attempts have been made by Lukan
scholars in recent decades to define and
solve the problem regarding the Church‟s
theology to the poor. However, Kim asserts
that an adequate solution to this problem has
not been offered. 5 In the past, the Church
has debated the controversial topic of how
much responsibility rests on the Christian
community in this arena. Denominational
boundaries have often created friction
because of differing beliefs on obligation to
the poor. The Catholic Church has largely
maintained a specific accountability to the
poor, while some Pentecostal theologians
have depended on the prosperity gospel to
support their reasons for not aiding those
living in poverty. Other concepts such as
liberation theology have shaped the way the
Christian world perceives those living in
poverty. Examples of these denominational
concepts will receive greater attention and
documentation in another section of the
paper.
Many people in the Church, even within
recent years, have debated the Church‟s
responsibility of responding to the poor and
how that responsibility should affect the
individual believer‟s economic policy. Due
to the immense controversy in Christian
theology regarding the poor, seeking a
solution through Lukan theology is vital to
the Church. The current economic crisis has
encouraged interest in the Christian response
to financial responsibility as well. Analysis
of Luke‟s heavy emphasis on economics and
financial status in relation to Christ and His
followers could significantly aid the
individual believer and the Church in
understanding the roles each should play in
this realm.

In his article, “Why Has the Church Ignored
the Poor?” Shane Clifton quotes Karl Marx
who states:
The social principles of Christianity
justified the slavery of Antiquity,
glorified the serfdom of the Middle
Ages and equally know, when
necessary, how to defend the
oppression of the proletariat,
although they make a pitiful face
over it. The social principles of
Christianity preach the necessity of a
ruling and an oppressed class, and all
they have for the latter is the pious
wish the former will be charitable.
The social principles of Christianity
transfer the consistorial councilor‟s
adjustment of all infamies to heaven
and thus justify the further existence
of those infamies on earth. The
social principles of Christianity
declare all vile acts of the oppressors
against the oppressed to be either the
just punishment of original sin and
other sins or trials that the Lord in
his infinite wisdom imposes on those
redeemed. 6
While Marx does not adequately grasp
Christian theology, he rightly identifies the
Church‟s obvious neglect of the poor
throughout history. 7 This neglect must be
addressed. Clifton proposes that religion,
and Christianity in particular, has been
described as a significant part of the
problem in aiding the poor—even something
that should be put aside if the challenge of
poverty is to be adequately addressed. 8
Clifton provides an interesting example in
which a woman named Sarah Jane Lancaster
was condemned for establishing a soup
kitchen for the unemployed and told that
“the money spent in feeding the unemployed
would be better spent in evangelizing and
building up the church.” 9 The author states
that many reasons might exist as to why the
3
Church has not taken the condition of the
poor seriously. 10 “Perhaps the main reason,
however,” he states, “is that we have
misread the message of the gospel of Jesus,
and failed to follow His model and pursue
His mission.” 11 While attempts have been
made to settle the issue and identify a Lukan
theology from which the universal Church
can practically apply its message, one could
conclude that a fresher look is needed due to
the current economic crisis and the effect
this devastation is having upon so many
people. Christians must not only understand
this Lukan theology to the poor, but
practically apply the message in the life of
the Church and the individual believer.
This writer‟s method and approach involves
specific emphasis on differing theological
conclusions regarding Luke‟s writings about
the poor by incorporating the views of
theologians from differing denominational
backgrounds. To discover an answer
regarding the Church‟s perception of the
poor, the process involves the utilization of
various commentaries, dictionaries, articles,
and books surrounding Lukan theology
specifically. Methodology will also include
a brief discussion of the Church‟s historical
response to the poor and the implications
upon the modern day Christian community.
Looking to the universal Church in light of
its history will better inform the reader on
how scholars in differing denominations
have often interpreted Luke‟s concepts in
this area and what it has meant for the
Christian body. Combining the data from the
Church‟s historical response to the poor with
an exegetical breakdown of Luke‟s theology
to the poor in both his Gospel and in Acts
will provide a basis for an understanding of
how the Church and individual Christians
should respond to the poor in the modern
world. This methodology will also reveal the
way in which one should handle his or her
own financial state.

The evidence of research supports the view
that Luke does in fact possess a consistent
theology regarding the poor in both his
Gospel and in Acts based on the teachings of
Christ. A solution regarding the effect
Lukan theology to the poor has on moral
obligations for the Church will be provided.
Based on this evidence, this seminar paper
includes the presentation of an historical and
exegetical overview of Luke‟s economic
theology and practical application for the
universal Church‟s current state in the
modern world as it relates to the poor. This
information will also include an overview of
the economic and financial obligations of
the individual believer.
Inductive Literary and Exegetical
Analysis
The Identity of the Poor
When discussing a biblical theology to the
poor, it is essential that one understand who
exactly the poor were and the conditions of
the ones to whom Luke was writing or
speaking in his works. In order to
understand Lukan theology regarding the
poor, one must be aware of the Old
Testament idea of the poor in Israel
according to God‟s commands. Jesus was,
after all, a Jew, and the Scripture He used
was the Old Testament. Although poverty
was often identified in the Old Testament as
a result of sin (Prov. 10:4; 13:18; 21:17;
24:30-34; 19:15), the concept is most often
pointed out in reference with those who
were not considered poor and their failure to
live up to their obligations. 12 In his article on
the poor in the Old Testament, Allen Myers
asserts that the issue of poverty did not
significantly arise until Israel settled into
Canaan, due to their earlier equality as
slaves in Egypt. 13 God made special
provisions for specific groups of poor people
within the giving of the law (Exod. 23:6;
4
Lev. 19:9-10; Deut. 15:11; 24:19-22; Prov.
22:22-23; Isa. 25:4). 14 God kept the plight of
the poor in mind when giving instruction for
sacrifices. 15 The regulations regarding the
Sabbatical Year and the Year of Jubilee
were meant to keep any individual or group
from oppressing another group. 16 The issue
of poverty was addressed to the people as a
whole rather than to individuals, and unified
Israel was promised to avoid poverty if they
were obedient to God. 17
Myers states that poverty increased with the
rise of the monarchy, as changes in social
structure occurred. 18 The oppressed and poor
came to be seen as God‟s righteous people
(Ps. 9:9-10; 14:4-6; 37:14-15; 69:33; Isa.
3:15; Hab. 3:13-14). 19 Myers also affirms
that the hope of the coming age holds
special significance for the poor in Old
Testament understanding (Isa. 11:4; 29:19;
41:17). 20 This Old Testament consideration
of the identity of the poor would directly
influence the teachings of Christ, and,
therefore, Luke.
Peter Davids suggests that the material in
the Gospels regarding the rich and the poor
was set against a background of the society
in Jesus‟ day and the way in which Judaism
was responding to the world. 21 First-century
Judaism differed significantly from the
modern world, and was not made up of the
social classes of today‟s understanding. In
fact, the majority of the first-century
Palestinian world was made up of two
people groups: the rich and the poor. 22 The
religiously and socially wealthy could be
categorized into two main groups: the
observant Jewish leaders and those
associated with the Herodians and Romans
who were accepted for their power but made
outcasts for their lack of morality. 23 On the
other end of the spectrum, significantly poor
minorities existed in the larger part of
society. In fact, it seems that fairly large

segments of the population lived in or on the
edge of poverty. 24 Although a very small
middle class made up of skilled artisans,
medium land-owning farmers, and
merchants existed, almost everyone outside
the two major groups of wealthy people
were considered poor. 25 The poor would
include everyone from small land-owners,
tenant farmers, and traders such as
fishermen and carpenters down to those who
owned no land, did not possess artistic
skills, or were even slaves or beggars. 26
The Plight and Status of the Poor
Interestingly, the poor obtained their
classification through both economic and
religious standards. Davids asserts, “The
observant group justified their oppression
through legal interpretation, which in the
eyes of Jesus was viewed as more culpable,
for it appeared to put God on the side of
injustice.” 27 Because they continually lived
on the edge of existence, the financially poor
were often unable to observe the Jewish
standards as the Law required. 28
Consequently, poor peasants of the land, or
the “masses,” were looked down upon by
the religious elite as lax in their observance
of the Law and were given their title of
status as a religious rather than socioeconomic
classification. 29 In Old Testament
literature, the “people of the land” were
considered those who were not aristocrats or
were not Jewish and living in traditional
Jewish land. In rabbinic times, the
classification of “the masses” often referred
to those who were not observant of the Law
in comparison with the Pharisees. 30 If those
living on the edge of poverty did pay their
temple taxes as well as the taxes required of
Roman and Herodian rule, it is even more
likely that they lived on the brink of
poverty. 31
A modern-day understanding of poverty is
significantly different than the first-century
5
Judaic comprehension of the poor where the
vast majority of the population was
considered of poor status from both an
economic and religious standpoint.
Therefore, when Jesus speaks of “the poor”
it is likely that He not only refers to one‟s
financial state, but to the oppression by the
religious elite for one‟s standing in regard to
Jewish law.
The perception of possessions as evil in
Jewish tradition creates a common
misconception. 32 Many significant biblical
examples of wealthy followers of God can
be found throughout Scripture. However, the
response of the people with financial means
served as the important factor. Their
relationship with God and the way in which
they used their wealth determined their
status in the eyes of God. For instance,
Davids asserts that Abraham, Solomon, and
Job illustrate the connection between wealth
and the blessing of God (the “pietyprosperity
equation”), but a wealthy person
could only be considered as such in the eyes
of God if he or she demonstrated
righteousness and honor through charity. 33
Davids states, “Thus in Jewish tradition
Abraham and Job were singled out as being
wealthy persons who were righteous
because they excelled in generosity.” 34 For
example, Abraham‟s possessions increased
after he was called (Gen. 12:16). 35 Reemphasizing
the point, Pilgrim asserts:
There is a continuous
tradition running throughout
the Old Testament that
regards possessions as a sign
of God‟s blessings. In this
view, wealth and poverty are
regarded as good gifts of God
and the fact of possessing
wealth, even great wealth, is
interpreted as a sign of God‟s
favor. This is true already in

the patriarchal narratives of
Genesis, which describe,
often in great detail, the
considerable wealth of
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or
Joseph in Egypt (Gen. 13:2;
26:13; 30:43; 41:40). With
their large flocks and families
and numerous servants and
slaves, the patriarchs bear the
covenant promise of God
without any hint of God‟s
displeasure over their wealth.
Along with this, goes an
emphasis upon their
generosity and hospitality to
friends and foes alike. 36
Many Christians falsely perceive the biblical
text as stating that wealth and money are
evil and that having possessions is wrong.
However, one must not misunderstand the
message of Luke or any other biblical writer.
These biblical examples of righteous and
devout followers of God who lived in the
abundance of wealth reveal that one can
enjoy the blessings of God if done in a
correct manner. In support of this concept,
Deuteronomy 15:4-5 states: “However, there
should be no poor among you, for in the
land the LORD your God is giving you to
possess as your inheritance, he will richly
bless you, if only you fully obey the LORD
your God and are careful to follow all these
commands I am giving you today.” This
Judaic understanding is important for the
modern-day comprehension of how the
Jewish people perceived wealth. According
to Davids, during the time of Christ many
people lived in extreme poverty, and
confusion had taken over the Judaic
understanding of how to deal with the large
gap between the religious elite and the
“people of the land” living in poverty.
Jesus needed to reinforce the correct Judaic
understanding of how the wealthy should
6
handle themselves financially and the way in
which the poor should view their own
economic and religious state. While the
Pharisees and wealthy classes often viewed
the poor as religiously and spiritually poor,
Jesus‟ sayings contrast the poor with the
rich, instead of the greedy or wicked as in
the Old Testament. 37 This perception reveals
that economic issues were of great
importance in His day. 38
Luke‟s Gospel heavily focuses on the
presence and condition of the poor, the way
in which God viewed those living in
poverty, Jesus‟ attitudes, actions, and
teachings involving the poor, and His
warnings regarding their abuse and neglect.
Mel Shoemaker concludes that Luke‟s
Gospel is primarily addressed to those who
are actually far from poverty and
categorized as wise, influential, and of noble
birth, all of which are considered wealthy in
most cases. 39 Perhaps Luke‟s intent is to
proclaim to those of wealthy status the need
to care for those who did not share their
financial state. Throughout his article, the
primary passages Davids refers to in Luke‟s
Gospel that convey the idea of the “rich and
poor,” whether mentioned or implied, are:
4:18-21, 6:20 and 24, 12:16-21 and 33-34,
14:14 and 21, 16:9 and 19-31, and 16:19-3. 40
Bock also provides a list of texts in which
the poor or rejected are mentioned,
including Luke 1:46-55 and 21:1-4. 41
Wealth and Poverty in Luke’s Gospel
God‟s Perception of the Poor
At the beginning of Luke‟s Gospel, Mary
rejoices in God through song after receiving
the announcement of her pregnancy with the
Son of God. Record of her song, the
Magnificat, is found in 1:46-55, and she
specifically emphasizes the status of the
humble and lowly. Mary praises God for
choosing to use her as an instrument of

lessing in her lowly state (v. 48), exalting
those of inferior status (v. 51-56), and filling
the hungry with good things along with
sending the rich away empty (v. 51-53). 42 In
the first chapter of Luke, the reader is
already given a clear indication through
Mary‟s song that the poor are chosen of God
and are promised His rewards.
Perhaps the passage of greatest significance
in Luke‟s Gospel where the poor are
specifically mentioned is in 4:18-21. In this
particular passage, Jesus has just returned to
His hometown of Nazareth after being in the
wilderness for forty days during His
temptation. He reads from the scroll of
Isaiah and quotes Isaiah 61:1-2 which states,
“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he
has anointed me to preach good news to the
poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom
for the prisoners and recovery of sight for
the blind, to release the oppressed, to
proclaim the year of the Lord‟s favor.” Jesus
then tells those listening, “Today this
scripture is fulfilled in your hearing” (v.20).
This statement is the reader‟s first clue that
God gives the poor the priority of the gospel
message. This same passage, also found in
Matthew‟s Gospel, confirms that God‟s
special interest in the poor stems from the
Old Testament idea of God‟s care for the
poor. 43 This specific passage is extremely
significant because it provides the four
major emphases of the programmatic text
for Luke‟s writings: (1) the announcement
of Christ‟s ministry as the fulfillment of
God‟s salvation-time, (2) a statement giving
the content of Jesus‟ ministry based on the
Isaiah quotation, (3) the foreshadowing of
Jesus‟ suffering and rejection, and (4) the
foreshadowing of the gospel movement
from Jew to Gentile. 44
Pilgrim states that the phrase “good news to
the poor” in this particular passage might be
understood as introducing and directing the
7
following lines in which the concept of the
“poor” categorizes the captives, blind, and
oppressed. 45 As previously stated, the firstcentury
concept of the poor may not
necessarily be limited to those of low
economic standards. Davids confirms that
the poor referred to in this passage,
however, are the “people of the land” (am
hā āres) to whom He also sends His
disciples in Matthew 10:6-7. 46 One scholar
concludes that the poor in Luke‟s context
are put in Old Testament terms as those of
both social and religious humility, and that
Jesus‟ programmatic proclamation confirms
His fulfillment of Isaiah‟s prophecy for the
deliverance of the spiritually, physically,
socio-politically, and psychologically
oppressed. 47 Although this passage does not
specifically address the economically poor,
one can conclude that people burdened
financially were of high priority in Jesus‟
message of freedom and deliverance.
Contrast between the Rich and the Poor
Luke 6:20 and 24 provides an excellent
example of Jesus‟ contrast between the rich
and the poor during the giving of “the
Beatitudes.” He first admonishes the poor by
stating in verse 20, “Blessed are you who
are poor, for yours is the kingdom of
God…” while specifically looking at His
disciples. A few verses later (6:24), He
contrasts this statement with His warning to
the rich, “But woe to you who are rich, for
you have already received your comfort….”
Due to God‟s overarching love for all
people, one cannot conclude that Christ
despises the rich; however, one can see His
displeasure with the oppression of those who
base their status on riches and squander their
wealth on personal gain.
Jesus expresses obvious concern for the
salvation of the economically rich as well as
the poor. However, in Luke, He seems to

have a special interest directed toward the
marginalized and wants to make sure they
are cared for. Frank Thielman concludes,
“God‟s saving purposes involve, to some
extent, an economic leveling so that the
disparity between rich and poor is not as
great among God‟s people as it is among
those outside his people.” 48 These saving
purposes can be accomplished through the
giving of wealth to the poor as seen later in
Luke‟s Gospel. 49 Equality and the
discouragement of favoritism toward the
rich seem to be the key issues. Salvation
through Christ is not dependent on the
economic status of an individual. Giving to
the poor and to the causes of Christ rather
than living a life of greed will accomplish
Christ‟s purposes in significant ways.
Luke provides an excellent example of this
concept in the “parable of the rich fool”:
And he told them this
parable: The ground of a
certain rich man produced a
good crop. He thought to
himself, „What shall I do? I
have no place to store my
crops.‟ Then he said, „This is
what I‟ll do. I will tear down
my barns and build bigger
ones, and there I will store all
my grain and my goods. And
I‟ll say to myself, You have
plenty of good things laid up
for many years. Take life
easy; eat, drink and be
merry.‟ But God said to him,
„You fool! This very night
your life will be demanded
from you. Then who will get
what you have prepared for
yourself?‟ This is how it will
be with anyone who stores up
things for himself but is not
8
rich toward God. (Luke
12:16-21)
This parable clearly reveals Jesus‟
assessment of greed. This “fool” had not
given to the poor, which hindered him from
becoming “rich towards God.” 50 He instead
stored up for himself. 51 The parable is taught
in relation to the earlier matter of dealing
with possessions in verses 13-15 in the same
chapter. 52 In verse 33, Jesus states, “Sell
your possessions and give to the poor.
Provide purses for yourselves that will not
wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not
be exhausted, where no thief comes near and
no moth destroys.” This verse might confirm
Luke‟s particular emphasis on almsgiving,
especially when seen in relation to the
counterpart in Matthew 6:19-21. 53 By giving
to the poor rather than hoarding one‟s
wealth, the believer can further the cause of
the kingdom and become “rich toward
God.”
Jesus, while at the home of a Pharisee,
emphasizes the importance of humbling
oneself (Luke 14). Jesus implores the host to
invite the poor to dinner rather than the “rich
neighbors” who are fully capable of
repayment (vs. 12-14). Jesus states, “…and
you will be blessed. Although they cannot
repay you, you will be repaid at the
resurrection of the righteous.” Jesus clearly
confirms that blessing the poor results in
heavenly blessings. Pilgrim asserts that the
inclusion of “rich neighbors” at the
beginning of the parable perhaps alludes to
certain actions directed at creating relations
in order to gain selfish favors or
advantages. 54 Although this behavior would
be considered normal, Jesus “turns the norm
upside down” by defining the normalcy of
the Kingdom: inviting those who cannot
repay, give no advantage, and would
ultimately be a constant burden. 55 The
reward of exhibiting this agape-love to the

poor results in the eschatological reward of
salvation and doing the will of God. 56
Eschatological Implications in Jesus‟
Teachings Regarding the Poor
Luke 14 continues with a further admonition
regarding this same concept with “the
parable of the great banquet” in verses 15-
24. Jesus tells the story of a man who threw
a great feast but was turned down by many
guests who made excuses as to why they
could not come. The excuses all center on
circumstances involving wealth: the
purchase of a field, the purchase of an ox,
and marriage. 57 Finally, the host ordered his
servants to bring in the “poor, the crippled,
the blind and the lame” (v. 21b). When these
did not fill up the room, the owner called for
all to come in, saying that not one of the
men who were originally invited will have a
taste of the banquet (14:24).
This parable again indicates a high concern
for the poor and confirms the obedience
exhibited by the marginalized. Luke seems
to interpret this parable as confirming that
the wealthy reject God‟s generous offer
while the poor become grateful guests at the
banquet, displaying the eschatological
reversal of the poor and rich. 58 This parable
signifies that wealth can impede the rich and
prevent them from heavenly reward and
entering into God‟s kingdom. This
hindrance is created by selfish greed instead
of unselfish, agape love that is essential to
the gospel. 59 As Pilgrim concludes, “Thus
the parable as a whole serves to warn the
rich to accept God‟s invitation. And that
means to invite the poor and maimed and
blind and lame to their tables, lest God leave
them out of the heavenly banquet.” 60 Luke
emphasizes the renouncement of one‟s
possessions, again confirming that the
concern of wealth and poverty is at the
forefront of his priority: 61 “In the same way,
9
any of you who does not give up everything
he has cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:33).
In Luke 16:19-31, the author records another
story that emphasizes the importance of
taking care of the poor. In the story of “the
rich man and Lazarus,” the beggar, Lazarus,
receives no help from the rich man after
lying outside of his gate every day. When
both die, the rich man finds eternal torment
in hell while Lazarus resides in heaven at
Abraham‟s side. The rich man attempts to
beg for water from Lazarus, “But Abraham
replied, „Son, remember that in your lifetime
you received your good things, while
Lazarus received bad things, but now he is
comforted here and you are in agony‟” (v.
25).
This story provides one of the greatest
examples of Jesus‟ emphasis on giving to
the poor and the difference one‟s generosity
on earth makes in eternity. According to the
biblical text, the rich man does not deserve
the torment in hell based on what he did on
earth, but rather on what he failed to do. 62
He does not show love to God and his
neighbor, a commandment to all Jews as
seen in Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus
19:18. The appearance of Abraham is of
significance because the patriarch could
stand as representation of the spiritual ties
from which the rich man has severed
himself by ignoring the needs of others. 63
The rich man is unable to receive any help
as seen in Abraham‟s words: “And besides
all this, between us and you a great chasm
has been fixed, so that those who want to go
from here to you cannot, nor can anyone
cross over from there to us” (Luke 16:26).
This clearly indicates that the way in which
one deals with worldly finances significantly
impacts the afterlife. The truths exhibited in
the story of “the rich man and Lazarus”
concerning neglect of the poor essentially

elate to the integrity with which one
handles his or her finances.
A significant relationship exists between this
story and the parable of “the unjust steward”
found in Luke 16:1-15. In this story, the
steward fails to manage his master‟s funds
with honesty. In the end, he finally attempts
to use his entrusted wealth for the welfare of
poor debtors by decreasing their debt. 64 In
verse 9, Jesus states, “I tell you, use worldly
wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that
when it is gone, you will be welcomed into
eternal dwellings.” Kim concludes,
“According to 16:9 he would have been
received into the eternal habitations by the
help of his witnesses, that is, the recipients
of his benevolence on earth.” 65 This concept
contrasts with the latter parable of the rich
ruler in 16:19-31, in which the rich ruler
uses his wealth for the interest of selfish
ends. 66 “If we apply 16:9 to this case, he is
not received into the eternal habitations,
because no friend would witness to his
benevolence on earth, and he eventually
falls into hell, as described in 16:23. In this
sense, 16:9 can be regarded as a theme verse
which plays an important role in unfolding
the implication of both parables.” 67
Luke‟s Gospel emphasizes particular
concern for the poor in the story of
Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1-10). Jesus welcomes
Zacchaeus, a tax collector, despite his
wayward lifestyle of manipulation and
selfish greed. Zacchaeus shocks the crowd
by standing up and proclaiming, “Look,
Lord! Here and now I give half of my
possessions to the poor, and if I have
cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay
back four times the amount” (v. 8). Jesus
responds by stating, “Today salvation has
come to this house, because this man, too, is
a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man came
to seek and to save what was lost” (vv. 9-
10). One could conclude that Jesus, in part,
10
associates salvation with the desire to give
to the poor and aid others who are in need.
Luke utilizes Zacchaeus as an example to be
emulated by anyone who comes to
experience the salvation of God and give
generously to the poor. 68 If the “chief tax
collector” (v. 1) willingly provided for the
needy, surely the wealthy elite could learn to
generously care for others.
While many possible examples regarding
care for the poor exist in Luke‟s writing, the
previous stories stand as sufficient witnesses
to establish Lukan concern for ministry to
the marginalized. Luke obviously desired to
emphasize care for the poor and
downtrodden, especially from an economic
standpoint. He records much of Jesus‟
sayings regarding this thought process, and
he carefully includes many instances that
exemplify concern for the poor. Luke not
only focuses on concern for the poor in the
teachings of Christ in his Gospel, but he
continues this theme in Acts as well.
Throughout Acts, one can see concern for
the poor exemplified in the Early Church
and in the lifestyle of the apostles.
Church’s Historical Response in the Book
of Acts
Historical Examples of Communal
Benevolence Commended
Because the book of Acts is often revered as
an historical account rather than a
theological treatise, one can conclude that
Luke sought to exemplify the theological
principles found in his Gospel with the
circumstances and responses of the Early
Church. As Stanley Horton notes, “What we
find in Acts is the outworking of the Gospel
as recorded by Luke,” 69 clearly
demonstrating Luke‟s message of Christ‟s
life, death, and resurrection throughout the
Church‟s first generation. The book of Acts
does not present any clear exhortations

encouraging the rich to give alms to the
poor, but passages exist in which the motif
of almsgiving is clearly observed. Other
instances are also recorded in which
almsgiving and charity are performed by
individuals and the Church. 70
The first obvious instance in which Luke
refers to giving to the poor occurs in Acts 2.
At the end of the chapter, he describes the
fellowship of the new believing Church—a
familial type of community full of giving
and sharing. In 2:44-45, Luke states, “All
the believers were together and had
everything in common. Selling their
possessions and goods, they gave to anyone
as he had need.” Horton concludes that this
idea of Christian sharing and generosity was
neither communism in the modern sense,
nor communal living. 71 “It was just
Christian sharing.” 72 These early Christians
did not neglect the poor and needy, and
benefactors looked for ways to
accommodate those in need, including the
selling of property. 73 This same idea is
reaffirmed in Acts 4:32-37:
All the believers were one in
heart and mind. No one
claimed that any of his
possessions was his own, but
they shared everything they
had. With great power the
apostles continued to testify
to the resurrection of the
Lord Jesus, and much grace
was upon them all. There
were no needy persons
among them. For from time
to time those who owned
lands or houses sold them,
brought the money from the
sales and put it at the
apostles‟ feet, and it was
distributed to anyone as he
had need.
11
In Acts 6:1, Luke indicates that the Grecian
Jewish widows were being overlooked in the
daily distribution of food; therefore, the
apostles added more servers to their number
so that they would be able to tend to all of
their duties and responsibilities. This story
confirms that taking care of the needy was
of upmost priority in the minds of the
apostles. Kim asserts that the passage in 6:1,
along with that of 2:45 and 4:35, affirm a
common fund of the Jerusalem community
in Acts with the sole purpose of distributing
money or food to the poor and widows. 74 As
specifically confirmed in these three
passages, the motive of charity is highly
prevalent in the story of the Early Church. 75
A communal understanding of benevolence
is also exemplified in Acts 11:27-30 with
the story of the Antioch Church. After a
prophet from Jerusalem named Agabus
prophesied that a severe famine would come
over the Roman world (11:27-28), the
disciples decided to aid those in need by
sending gifts to those in Judea (11:29-30).
Once again, Luke includes an account which
reveals the importance of caring for those in
need within the Early Church. Responding
to the famine could be seen as a form of
almsgiving in which benevolence is
provided from an institution with wealth
towards an institution in need. 76 This
instance is later echoed in Galatians 2:8-10,
which states:
For God, who was at work in
the ministry of Peter as an
apostle to the Jews, was also
at work in my ministry as an
apostle to the Gentiles.
James, Peter and John, those
reputed to be pillars, gave me
and Barnabas the right hand
of fellowship when they
recognized the grace given to
me. They agreed that we

should go to the Gentiles, and
they to the Jews. All they
asked was that we should
continue to remember the
poor, the very thing I was
eager to do.
Antioch became Paul‟s home base
during his missionary journeys from
which he gathered the Jerusalem
collection. 77
Historical Examples of Individual
Benevolence Commended
While Luke illustrates the idea of
almsgiving and caring for the poor in
communal fashion, he also includes some
individual examples. For instance, Luke
gives an account of Tabitha, a disciple “who
was always doing good and helping the
poor” (Acts 9:36). In the story, Tabitha died,
and the other disciples rushed to Peter,
asking him to come and pray for her (v. 38).
Through the prayers of Peter, the Holy Spirit
raised Tabitha from the dead (v. 40). One of
the highly important points of this story,
however, is the fact that the widows stood
weeping at Tabitha‟s death showing Peter
the robes and clothing that Tabitha had
previously made them (v. 39). Kim
concludes that Luke may have recorded this
story in order to emphasize the significance
of benevolence, “such that Tabitha got her
life back because of her good works and
alms she had contributed towards the
poor.” 78
Another significant example of an individual
display of generosity and care for the poor is
Cornelius, as seen in Acts 10:2. Cornelius, a
“God-fearing” man “gave generously to
those in need and prayed to God regularly.”
According to Kim, this verse is significant
for several reasons. When Cornelius had a
vision from God, the angel told him that his
prayers and gifts to the poor had “come up
12
as a memorial offering before God” (v. 4).
Later on in the account of Cornelius‟
conversion, the reader is told that Cornelius
was “respected by all the Jewish people” (v.
22). These details reveal that Cornelius
earned recognition by God and his neighbors
for his faith, as well as his benevolent acts
towards those in need. 79 This passage
confirms God‟s acknowledgment of
Cornelius‟ prayers and generosity to the
poor resulting in the Jerusalem church‟s
approval of evangelism to the Gentiles. 80
The reader can clearly identify Luke‟s
emphasis on caring for the poor and needy
when he includes Jesus‟ command quoted
by Paul in Acts 20:35: “In everything I did, I
showed you that by this kind of hard work
we must help the weak, remembering the
words the Lord Jesus himself said: „It is
more blessed to give than to receive.‟” Kim
asserts that the context of the word “weak”
in this passage implies those lacking wealth
due to the use of the Greek word οί
άσθενούυτεѕ. 81 Interestingly, this
particular saying of Jesus is not found in any
of the four Gospels. 82 These words of Christ
were of such importance that Paul spoke
them in his final testimony. As Pilgrim
states, “We find this word from the Lord, „It
is more blessed to give than to receive,‟ to
be a most fitting conclusion to Luke‟s
presentation of the theme of wealth and
poverty and the proclamation of good news
to the poor.” 83 Luke obviously encouraged
care for the poor as a significant part of the
Christian lifestyle, revealed in the words of
Jesus himself. A final example of concern
for the poor in Acts is the statement in 24:17
in which Paul reveals that he came to
Jerusalem “to bring my people gifts for the
poor and to present offerings.”
While Luke‟s Gospel certainly confirms that
believers should aid the physically and
economically weak and welcome them into

the community, “this actually happens in
Luke‟s second volume.” 84 Acts of the
Apostles provides testimony to the ideas
proclaimed in Luke‟s Gospel and
exemplifies the true nature of Christian
benevolence. The Early Church in Acts
maintained a definite ministry to the poor
and was concerned for the overall wellbeing
of those in need. In fact, they often
sacrificed their own financial status in order
to aid others.
Church’s Priority of Benevolence from
Acts to Modern Times
Throughout history, the Church has
responded to the poor and economically
deprived in various ways. Some of the Early
Church Fathers followed the example of the
Early Church in Acts through their
economic assistance and concern for the
poor. For instance, John Chrysostom
considered almsgiving an act of worship and
an expression of love commanded by
Christ. 85
In the Protestant tradition, shifts have
occurred relating to care for the poor. While
the Protestant Church has based its
theological principles on justification by
faith, the relationship between caring for
those in need and the Christians‟ spiritual
well-being has created conflict at times,
specifically when attempting to discern
between those genuinely in need of help and
others who seek to take advantage of an
organization based on love and care. 86 The
Christian lifestyle in its walk of faith calls
for care toward others and examines the
affect this has on one‟s personal spirituality.
For example, Matthew 25:40 states, “The
King will reply, „I tell you the truth,
whatever you did for one of the least of
these brothers of mine, you did for me.‟”
This concept became difficult to maintain
and understand after the Middle Ages when
13
urbanization in Europe brought about a large
number of genuinely impoverished people
due to economic conditions as well as those
who made their way into a system of
voluntary poverty under false pretenses. 87
Therefore, questions arose regarding the
distinction between what Casey calls the
“deserving” and “undeserving poor.” 88 This
fact, along with Martin Luther‟s concern for
a “piety of achievement” created a debate
when discussing the length at which the
Church should concern itself with the issue
of poverty. 89
Reformation theologians, however, such as
Martin Luther and John Calvin, sought to
affirm good works as the fruit of
justification by grace through faith in Christ,
not as a cause of salvation. 90 Calvin believed
that the Church should properly respond to
poverty by assuming responsibility for its
alleviation. 91 Calvin saw an indifference to
the poor on the part of the rich as a highly
dangerous error because of a unity between
aiding the poor and its spiritual
connection. 92 Matthew 25:44-46 concludes:
They also will answer, „Lord,
when did we see you hungry
or thirsty or a stranger or
needing clothes or sick or in
prison, and did not help you?‟
He will reply, „I tell you the
truth, whatever you did not
do for one of the least of
these, you did not do for me.‟
Then they will go away to
eternal punishment, but the
righteous to eternal life.
These verses adequately support Calvin‟s
concern for the poor and the spiritual
connotations this has on an individual‟s
Christian life. Calvin also saw spiritual
connection between the poor and the
wealthy. 93 Protestant Pietism in the

seventeenth century brought about a
renewed emphasis on “love for the poor,” as
well as the “Evangelical Revival” and the
rise of Methodism through John Wesley in
the eighteenth century. 94 Wesley supported
an egalitarian understanding of the gospel
message that advocated weekly visitation to
the poor, as well as personal relationship and
hospitality toward those living in poverty. 95
This type of care for the poor was “an
„absolute duty‟ of the Christian, the neglect
of which could endanger one‟s „everlasting
salvation.‟” 96
One might observe that the Church‟s
concern for the poor became a dividing issue
primarily in the nineteenth century. The idea
of “pew renting” as a means of supporting
churches in maintenance and building led to
embarrassment of the poor who had to sit in
the “free pews” and disadvantaged section. 97
“Free churches,” opposing these practices
and attempting to create a sense of equality
in their congregations, opened the doors for
the poor to worship with the wealthy. 98
In the twentieth century, the Pentecostal
movement tended to minister to the poor as
a result of its heavy emphasis on responding
to the needs of the “whole person,” whether
physical, spiritual, emotional, or material. 99
However, the debates between
fundamentalist and liberal churches
regarding salvation and the “social gospel”
created a significant amount of conflict. 100
While liberals often concerned themselves
with the social needs of humanity, many
fundamentalists heavily focused on the
spreading of the gospel message to the
neglect of reaching out to meet other needs
of humanity.
The rise of liberation theology created a
significant amount of debate and conflict
regarding poverty and the oppressed.
Liberation theology, primarily expressed
14
within the Roman Catholic Church,
emphasizes the Christian mission to the poor
and oppressed through political activism. 101
Sin and injustice is seen in capitalism and
class war. 102 This type of theology is often
found in Latin America and among the
Jesuits, and is a form of Christian socialism
that arose after the Second Vatican
Council. 103 Liberation theology is extremely
controversial due to its justification for
revolutionary action. 104
Despite the conflict over liberation theology,
the Catholic Church has often exhibited a
strong mission to the poor throughout its
history. Such groups as the Jesuits set out to
aid the poor and give to the needy.
Catholicism stresses the need for the church
to give to the poor through the building of
schools and hospitals for the underprivileged
and through other forms of
benevolence ministry. 105 The option for the
poor has often become part of the Catholic
social teaching, especially in the experience
of the Latin American Church. 106 In their
1987 statement entitled Economic Justice
for All, the Catholic bishops in the United
States articulated five primary principles
regarding wealth and poverty:
1. Every economic decision and
institution must be judged in
light of whether it protects or
undermines the dignity of the
human person.
2. Human dignity can be realized
and protected only in
community.
3. All people have a right to
participate in the economic life
of society.
4. All members of society have a
special obligation to the poor and
vulnerable.

5. Human rights are the minimum
condition for life in
community. 107
The rise of the “prosperity gospel” in
present-day Pentecostalism has also sparked
debate in the Christian Church regarding
concern for the poor. Because this type of
theology primarily regards oppression as the
result of a lack of faith or sin in one‟s
personal life, no easy response to the issue
of widespread poverty exists. If prosperity is
understood as an overarching promise to all
Christians with God‟s blessing viewed as the
result of faith, then one assumes that those
suffering in extreme conditions of poverty
do not have faith or are under a type of
judgment. 108 Clifton states, “At the very
least, faith preachers are forced to ignore the
situation of the poor in the presentation of
their message, since the fact of extreme and
widespread poverty completely undermines
their message.” 109 While many people in the
Pentecostal tradition do not adhere to this
type of theology, such extreme views often
cause people in the Pentecostal tradition
who hold to the “prosperity gospel” to
practically ignore the needy and
economically deprived because of confusion
regarding how to respond.
While the Christian Church has responded in
various ways regarding concern for the poor,
many denominations remain confused
regarding this issue. Luke‟s writings,
however, seem to indicate the answer in a
clear and definite manner—offering
significant insight regarding the Church‟s
responsibility to the economically
oppressed. Through Luke‟s theology, one
can gain an overall understanding of Christ‟s
message to the poor and oppressed, as well
as the obligations of the Church and the
individual believer when responding to
those in need of financial assistance and
benevolence ministry.
15
A Challenge to the Christian Church
After thoroughly analyzing the Lukan
writings in both his Gospel and Acts, one
must determine that Luke emphasizes the
idea of “good news to the poor.” Jesus‟
ministry, announced with the utilization of
the Isaiah quotation in Luke 4:16-21, is
personified in the Gospel in social,
economic, moral, and spiritual
dimensions. 110 The embodiment of such is
found throughout Jesus‟ redemptive ministry
to the poor and hungry, sick and afflicted,
oppressed and captivated, and outcasts and
sinners. 111 As Pilgrim asserts, “For Luke‟s
gospel, these include hard social realities, as
well as deep spiritual needs.” 112 The reader
is provided with obvious confirmation of
Jesus‟ anointing to bring good news to the
poor in Luke 4, and this concept is affirmed
repeatedly in parables, stories, and
explanations throughout the biblical text in
Luke‟s Gospel. While Christ‟s “good news
to the poor” certainly refers to the spiritual
connotation of the salvation of their souls,
for Luke, this “good news” also includes
provision and care for physical and material
needs as well.
As previously discussed, determining who
might be placed under the actual category of
“poor” is questionable. The concept of the
poor in Lukan writing does not necessarily
refer simply, or even primarily, to the
economically deprived, but to those who
lived in an inferior status within Jewish
society. This would include anyone outside
of the religious elite or wealthy land-owners,
as well as those who lived in constant
oppression through illness or some other
condition of lower status. However, in
Luke‟s writings, Jesus is often shown
contrasting the rich with the poor in a large
variety of examples through parables and
other statements. Luke not only focuses on
the poor as inheritors of the gospel message,

ut also stresses Jesus‟ message of how the
poor should be cared for and records how
this was exemplified in the stories of Acts.
From a Lukan perspective, this information
alludes to the idea that Jesus‟ understanding
of the poor and their oppression was largely
through economic standards. Previously
mentioned texts, such as “The Rich Fool,”
“The Rich Man and Lazarus,” “The
Dishonest Steward,” the story of Zacchaeus,
and the text regarding sharing within the
primitive community confirm that “the poor
for Luke are the socially and economically
poor.” 113 Luke does not allow a mere
spiritualization of the concept of the poor
but requires a literal understanding;
therefore, implications must exist 114
Pilgrim asserts that Luke‟s message to the
poor results in three major themes in his
writings regarding wealth and poverty: (1)
the call to total surrender of one‟s
possessions, (2) warnings about the dangers
of wealth, and (3) instructions and
exhortations on the right use of one‟s
wealth. 115 Therefore, since a Lukan theology
to the poor is clearly confirmed, the
Christian Church must understand its
responsibility regarding such theology.
Surrendering Possessions
First, one must ask how the Church should
respond to the idea of “surrendering one‟s
possessions.” As previously stated, Judaic
understanding of wealth did not perceive all
possessions as evil. One cannot necessarily
conclude that Jesus was against all things
pertaining to wealth considering the
promises of God throughout the biblical text
regarding the blessings of God and the
material results as illustrated by many Old
Testament patriarchs. Numerous examples
exist throughout Scripture in which heroes
of God were those of high and wealthy
status. In fact, the Gospels, in general,
identify possessions as both necessary and
16
good gifts of God, a view seen in the Lukan
portrait of Jesus as well. 116
Jesus lived a life of itinerant poverty but did
not advocate or live a completely ascetic
lifestyle, as revealed in His participation in
banquets and fellowship with those of
means. 117 Many have suggested that the
answer to this problem in Lukan theology
rests in the biblical context. For instance,
Pilgrim suggests that the call to complete
poverty and abandonment is temporarily
limited to Christ‟s earthly disciples in His
time. 118 This idea might be confirmed by
Jesus‟ statement in Luke 22:35-38:
Then Jesus asked them,
„When I sent you without
purse, bag or sandals, did you
lack anything?‟ „Nothing,‟
they answered. He said to
them, „But now if you have a
purse, take it, and also a bag;
and if you don‟t have a
sword, sell your cloak and
buy one. It is written: „And
he was numbered with the
transgressors‟; and I tell you
that this must be fulfilled in
me. Yes, what is written
about me is reaching its
fulfillment.‟ The disciples
said, „See, Lord, here are two
swords.‟ „That is enough,‟ he
replied.
This particular passage might suggest that a
new form of discipleship is called for after
the resurrection/ascension. 119 While one
must be careful in separating the biblical
world from the present world, the thesis
supports the idea that Luke‟s portrayal of the
first followers as those who abandoned all
they had for the sake of Christ was intended
as a message for the wealthier Christians of
that day. Those of greater means were

challenged with the need to struggle more
deeply with their own personal use of
possessions as Christ‟s followers. 120 Luke‟s
understanding of this concept seems to
encourage an introspective look on the
sacrifice made for the sake of Christ and
how this affects one‟s own possessions.
This message is certainly applicable to the
Christian Church today. While some rare
cases exist in which one is asked to give up
every possession, in most cases, it is
uncommon when God asks Christians to sell
everything they own. However, the Lukan
text does force the believer to examine his or
her own emphasis on possessions and what
each has truly sacrificed for the sake of
Christ and His message. The Church must
acknowledge this perspective as essential to
its foundation and existence.
Dangers of Wealth
Luke spends a vast amount of time
portraying the dangers of wealth through the
use of parables and other explanations. He
obviously recognizes the corruption
resulting from the greed of those who look
to their wealth as a source of identity and
pride. Jesus recognizes the significant
danger of wealth, particularly in the example
of the religious elite. Many of Jesus‟ sayings
personify the love of wealth as Mammon,
meaning “possessions,” and equate such
love as idolatry, as seen by the ancient
Hebrew prophets as the means of drawing
people away from dependence and
commitment to God. 121 In fact, in the story
of the Rich Ruler (Luke 18:24-30), the man
becomes disheartened over the idea of
giving up his wealth. The result: “Jesus
looked at him and said, „How hard it is for
the rich to enter the kingdom of God!
Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through
the eye of a needle than for a rich man to
enter the kingdom of God‟” (vv. 24-25).
17
This idea is difficult to combat, especially
when such a large number of these types of
texts exist in Luke‟s writings. Luke
consistently encourages the idea that wealth
is a significant roadblock in the road to the
kingdom, specifically in doing the will of
God. 122 “„How hard it is for those who have
riches to enter the kingdom of God‟ sounds
the theme, which is then relentlessly carried
through. Only those who have left their
goods behind are offered the promise of the
kingdom.” 123
The ideas of wealth and discipleship appear
conflicting in Luke‟s writing. 124 While Luke
obviously desires to reveal the danger of
wealth, the believer can conclude that those
in possession of material means must
maintain a constant awareness regarding
their status. As previously discussed, one
cannot necessarily conclude that wealth
equates with sin or God‟s blessings.
However, Christians must recognize the ease
with which material temptations might
overtake a person who finds dependence on
his or her own ability regarding finances.
Luke‟s consistent reminders regarding the
danger of wealth obviously reveal his
emphasis on the importance of guarding
one‟s heart from the spirit of Mammon.
While wealth is not necessarily wrong,
believers must constantly recognize God as
the provider behind every possession.
Members of the body of Christ should
always regard themselves as under the
sovereignty of God and His purposes when
approaching financial obligations. This will
affect the way the Christian lives and the
way he or she uses money, especially
regarding those in need.
Instruction in Use of Wealth
Finally, Luke heavily focuses on
Jesus‟ exhortations regarding the
right use of possessions. In Luke

3:11-14, John the Baptist commands
the crowds: John answered, „The
man with two tunics should share
with him who has none, and the one
who has food should do the same.‟
Tax collectors also came to be
baptized. „Teacher,‟ they asked,
„what should we do?‟ „Don‟t collect
any more than you are required to,‟
he told them. Then some soldiers
asked him, „And what should we
do?‟ He replied, „Don‟t extort money
and don‟t accuse people falsely—be
content with your pay.‟
John‟s first answer to the crowds seems to
confirm the principle of almsgiving, though
the second and third answers relate to
individual financial circumstances. 125 In this
instance, Luke is concerned with including a
clear statement of how one should treat
those of lesser means regarding both aiding
those in need and in handling one‟s own
finances in a way that does not abuse others.
As Pilgrim states, throughout Luke‟s
writings, he “attempts to define and
encourage a discipleship of one‟s material
gifts in the service of love.” 126
Stories such as the ones previously
discussed in Luke 14, 16, and 19 and
evidence of the Church following these
examples in Acts exist as specific
confirmations regarding the obligation of
providing for people in need. Luke reveals
that possessions are blessings from God and
good gifts when used correctly. 127 Proper
use of possessions occurs in the service of
Christian discipleship and “agape-love”
when “caring for the poor, sharing with
those in need, and doing good even to one‟s
enemies receive the highest priority.” 128
Basically, Luke challenges believers to
change their selfish ways by sharing their
wealth with others. 129
18
Conclusion
Analysis of the Lukan text in both his
Gospel and in Acts reveals a clear message
regarding the poor. Not only does the author
confirm that Jesus brings the good news of
the gospel message specifically to the poor
in order to save their souls, but He also
comes to aid them in economic and social
ways. Luke also emphasizes the
responsibility of believers to handle their
own wealth correctly, while warning them
of the vast dangers associated with riches.
He consistently encourages giving to those
in need. The Church has a heavy
responsibility to aid those living in poverty,
as well as making sure that its own finances
are being handled wisely. While economic
crisis might instill a sense of fear,
discouraging one from Christian financial
duties, recognizing the importance of Jesus‟
emphasis on the poor and what it means for
the modern-day Christian remains essential.
Applying the Lukan concepts to the present
day, one must conclude that the Church has
an obligation to recognize the issue of
poverty and address it in an effective way
through outreach. A correct understanding
of Lukan theology indicates that the
Christian community is not only responsible
for the salvation of souls, but also for
participating in the social and economic
aspects of those in need. While the Church
must obviously beware of those who might
try to take advantage of this concept, it
should not neglect the poor as burdens or
outcasts.
Handling one‟s own finances, in light of a
Lukan understanding, involves recognizing
God as the provider of all possessions; it
also involves recognizing the correct
utilization of these possessions and caring
for those in need. As the National Council of
the Churches of Christ states, “Thus, the

expression of our love for God is
inextricably linked to the quality of our
relation with others. Care for the neighbor is
a means by which we testify to the power of
the resurrection of the Lord among us.” 130
19
According to Luke‟s teaching, the believing
community‟s responsibility rests in its
ability to handle finances in a manner
pleasing to God while exhibiting care for
others.

Bibliography
Bock, Darrell L. “Luke, Gospel of.” In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel B.
Green and Scot McKnight. Downers Grove, IL and Leicester, England: InterVarsity
Press, 1992.
Casey, Shaun, John Crossin, Eric H. Crump, A. Katherine Grieb, Beverly Mitchell, and Ann K.
Riggs. Love for the Poor: God’s Love for the Poor and the Church’s Witness to It. For
the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America, 2005.
http://www.ncccusa.org/pdfs/LFP-final.pdf (accessed January 22, 2009).
Cassidy, Richard J. Jesus, Politics, and Society. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1979.
Chilton, Bruce, and J. I. H. McDonald. Jesus and the Ethics of the Kingdom. Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1987.
Clifton, Shane. “Why Has the Church Ignored the Poor?” Pentecostal Discussions.
http://scc.typepad.com/scc_faculty_pentecostal_d/2006/09/why_has_church_.html
(accessed January 22, 2009).
Davids, Peter H. “Rich and Poor.” In Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel B.
Green and Scot McKnight. Downers Grove, IL and Leicester, England: InterVarsity
Press, 1992.
Hartnett, Daniel. “Remembering the Poor: An Interview with Gustavo Gutierrez.” America: The
National Catholic Weekly. http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?
article_id=2755 (accessed January 22, 2009).
Horton, Stanley. The Book of Acts. Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1981.
Johnson, Luke T. Sharing Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith. Philadelphia, PA: Fortress
Press, 1981.
Kim, Kyoung-Jin. “Stewardship and Almsgiving in Luke‟s Theology.” Journal for the Study of
the New Testament, Supplement Series 155. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1998.
Longanecker, Richard M. Galatians. Vol. 41 of the Word Biblical Commentary, edited by David
Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker. Dallas, TX: Word Books, Publishers, 1990.
Marshall, I. Howard, and David Peterson. Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts. Grand
Rapids, MI/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1998.
Myers, Allen, John W. Simpson, Jr., Philip A. Frank, Timothy P. Jenney, and Ralph W.
Vunderink. “Poor.” In The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1987.
20

Pilgrim, Walter E. Good News to the Poor: Wealth and Poverty in Luke-Acts. Minneapolis, MN:
Augsburg Publishing House, 1981.
Rhodes, Ron. “Christian Revolution in Latin America: The Changing Faces of Liberation
Theology.” Part 1. Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministries. http://home.earthlink.net/
~ronrhodes/Liberation.html (accessed April 1, 2009).
Roth, S. John. “The Blind, the Lame, and the Poor: Character Types in Luke-Acts.” Journal for
the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series 144. Sheffield, England: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1997.
Schottroff, Luise, and Wolfgang Stegemann. Jesus and the Hope of the Poor. Maryknoll, NY:
Orbis Books, 1986.
Shoemaker, Mel. “Good News to the Poor in Luke‟s Gospel.” Wesley Center Online.
http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyan_theology/theojrnl/26-30/27-1-08.htm (accessed January
15, 2009).
Thielman, Frank. Theology of the New Testament: A Canonical and Synthetic Approach. Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2005.
Tyson, Joseph B. Luke-Acts and the Jewish People: Eight Critical Perspectives. Minneapolis,
MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1988.
“What is Liberation Theology?” Got Questions Ministries. http://www.gotquestions.org/
liberation-theology.html (accessed April 1, 2009).
Wickham, Steve. “Jesus‟ Focus on the Poor and Marginalized in Luke-Based on Luke 4-16-30.”
Ezine articles. http://ezinearticles.com/?Jesus-Focus-on-the-Poor-and-Marginalized-in-
Luke-Based-on-Luke-4-16-30&id=1711664 (accessed January 15, 2009).
21

1 S. John Roth, The Blind, the Lame, and the Poor: Character Types in Luke-Acts (Sheffield, England:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 16.
2 Ibid.
3 Walter E. Pilgrim, Good News to the Poor: Wealth and Poverty in Luke-Acts (Minneapolis: Augsburg
Publishing House, 1981), 85.
4 Ibid.
5 Kyoung-Jin Kim, Stewardship and Almsgiving in Luke’s Theology (Sheffield, England: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1998), 13.
6 Karl Marx, On Religion (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974), 83, quoted in Shane Clifton, “Why has the
Church Ignored the Poor?” Pentecostal Discussions,
http://scc.typepad.com/scc_faculty_pentecostal_d/2006/09/why_has_church_.html (accessed January 22, 2009), 1.
341.
7 Clifton, 1.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid., 2.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid.
12 Allen C. Myers et. al, “Poor,” in The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987),
13 Ibid.
14 Myers, 341.
15 Lev. 5:7; 12:8; 14:21.
16 Myers, 341.
17 Deut. 15:4-5.
18 Myers, 341.
19 Ibid.
20 Ibid.
21 Peter H. Davids, “Rich and Poor,” in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. I. Howard Marshall
(Downers Grove, IL/Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 701.
Books, 1986), 17.
22 Luise Schottroff and Wolfgang Stegemann, Jesus and the Hope of the Poor (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis
23 Davids, 702.
22

24 C. McCown, “Palestine, Geography of,” The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 3:637, cited in Richard
J. Cassidy, Jesus, Politics and Society (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1979), 101.
25 Davids, 702.
26 Ibid.
27 Ibid.
28 Ibid., 703.
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid.
Cassidy, 110.
1981), 60.
31 H. Hoehner, Herod Antipas (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 79, cited in
32 Davids, 703.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid.
35 Luke T. Johnson, Sharing Possessions: Mandate and Symbol of Faith (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press,
36 Pilgrim, 19.
37 Davids, 703.
38 Ibid.
39 Mel Shoemaker, “Good News to the Poor in Luke‟s Gospel,” Wesley Center Online,
http://wesley.nnu.edu/wesleyan_theology/theojrnl/26-30/27-1-08.htm (accessed January 15, 2009), 4.
40 Davids, 701- 709.
41 Darrell L. Bock, “Luke, Gospel of,” in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. I. Howard Marshall
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992).
42 Pilgrim, 79.
43 Davids, 706.
44 Pilgrim, 64-65.
45 Ibid.
46 Davids, 706.
47 P. Hertig, “The Jubilee Mission of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke: Reversals of Fortunes,” in Missiology: An
International Review XXVI, No. 2 (April 1998) quoted in Steve Wickham, “Jesus‟ Focus on the Poor and
23

Marginalized in Luke-Based on Luke 4-16-30. “E-Zine Articles,” posted on November 20, 2008,
http://ezinearticles.com/?Jesus-Focus-on-the-Poor-and-Marginalized-in-Luke--Based-on-Luke-4---16-
30&id=1711664 (accessed January 15, 2009).
48 Frank Thielman, Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 142.
49 Ibid.
50 Davids, 705.
51 Ibid.
52 Kim, 136.
53 Ibid.
54 Pilgrim, 140.
55 Ibid.
56 Ibid.
57 Ibid.
58 Ibid., 141.
59 Ibid., 140.
60 Ibid., 141.
61 Ibid.
62 Kim, 189.
63 Ibid.
64 Ibid., 190.
65 Ibid.
66 Ibid.
67 Ibid.
68 Shoemaker, 6.
69 Stanley Horton, The Book of Acts (Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1981), 11 and 15.
70 Kim, 218.
71 Horton, 49.
72 Ibid.
24

73 I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson, Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts (Grand Rapids,
MI/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 1998), 487.
74 Kim, 246.
75 Ibid.
76 Ibid., 221.
77 Richard N. Longanecker, Galatians, vol. 41 of Word Biblical Commentary, ed. David A. Hubbard and
Glenn W. Barker (Dallas, TX: Word Books, Publishers, 1990), 70.
78 Kim, 219-220.
79 Ibid.
80 Ibid.
81 Ibid., 222.
82 Horton, 242.
83 Pilgrim, 159.
84 Thielman, 137.
85 Shaun Casey et al., “Love for the Poor: God‟s Love for the Poor and the Church‟s Witness to It,” National
Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America 2005, http://www.ncccusa.org/pdfs/LFP-final.pdf
(accessed January 22, 2009), 7.
86 Ibid., 8.
87 Lee Palmer Wandel, “Social Welfare,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation, ed. Hans. J.
Hildebrand (New York: Oxford UP, 1996), 77-83, cited in Casey, 8.
88 Casey, 8.
89 Carter Lindberg, “The Liturgy After the Liturgy: Welfare in the Early Reformation,” in Emily Albu
Hanawalt and Carter Lindberg, Through the Eye of a Needle, Judeo-Christian Roots of Social Welfare (Kirksville,
MO: The Thomas Jefferson UP at Northeast Missouri State University, 1994,) 177ff, cited in Casey, 8.
90 Casey, 8.
91 John Calvin, quoted b y C. F. Dumermuth, “The Holy Spirit, Calvin and the Poor,” in Asia Journal of
Theology 8.2 (1994): 408-409, cited in Casey, 9.
93 Ibid.
94 Casey, 10-11.
95 Ibid., 11.
96 John Wesley, “On Visiting the Sick,” Sermon 98. Quoted in Casey, 11.
25

97 Casey, 11.
98 Ibid.
99 Ibid., 12.
100 Clifton, 1.
101 “What is Liberation Theology?” Got Questions Ministries, http://www.gotquestions.org/liberation-
theology.html (accessed April 1, 2009), 1.
102 Ron Rhodes, “Christian Revolution in Latin America: The Changing Faces of Liberation Theology,” Part
1, Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministries, http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Liberation.html (accessed April 1,
2009), 1.
103Ibid.
104 Ibid.
105
Daniel Hartnett, “Remembering the Poor: An Interview with Gustavo Gutiérrez,” America: The National
Catholic Weekly, entry posted February 3, 2003,
http://www.americanmagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=2755 (accessed January 22, 2009), 1.
106 Ibid.
107 Casey, 19.
108 Clifton, 2.
109 Ibid.
110 Pilgrim, 83.
111 Ibid.
112 Ibid.
113 Ibid., 82.
114 Ibid., 83.
115 Ibid. 85.
116 Ibid, 124.
117 Ibid.
118 Ibid., 101.
119 Ibid.
120 Ibid., 102.
121 Davids, 705.
26

122 Pilgrim, 124.
123 Ibid. 122.
124 Ibid.
125 Kim, 170.
126 Pilgrim, 123.
127 Ibid., 146.
128 Ibid., 123.
129 Ibid.
130 Casey, 26.
27

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
Peace to War: Shifting Allegiances in the Assemblies of God
Paul Alexander
The C. Henry Smith Series 9 (Telford, PA: Cascadia Publishing House, 2009) 426 pages
Reviewed by Dr. Martin William Mittelstadt, Associate Professor of New Testament
Evangel University, Springfield, Missouri
“Military service is incompatible with the
gospel of Jesus Christ … a Christian cannot
fully follow the teachings of his Lord and
Master if he engages in armed conflict” 1
This declaration represents the
uncompromising attitude of the General
Council of the Assemblies of God (AG)
during the emergence of WWII. However, it
also appears in a polemic context amidst
shifting allegiances from an absolutist and
Bible-supported pacifist position adopted in
1917 to an essentially uncontested procombatant
position in 1967. In Peace to
War, Paul Alexander not only sets out to tell
this story but also tenders a passionate plea
for Pentecostals to revisit their pacifist
heritage.
Early Pentecostals applied their pacifist
impulse as an integral ethical element of
their “down to the roots” theology. They
capitalized upon theological encouragement
from numerous publications of Friends and
Holiness Christians including the Quakerturned-Pentecostal,
Arthur Sidney Booth-
Clibborn (1855-1939). Eschatological
urgency, an enthusiastic focus upon
evangelism, and the life and teaching of the
non-violent Jesus led these Pentecostals to
their unrelenting conviction. In spite of
opposition from the American populace, the
young AG maintained a majority peace ethic
through WWI and the tenuous years before
WWII. At the advent of WWII, the official
1
position remained intact, but also witnessed
the waning of its momentum.
Alexander narrates the gradual and complex
dissolution of the pacifist impulse. First, he
links the decline with the rise of patriotism.
Whereas early Pentecostals held to moderate
patriotism, succeeding generations succumb
to nationalism; the cumulative effect of
WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the Cold
War, Gulf War 1, 9/11, Afghanistan, and
Gulf War 2 creates a culture of war whereby
not only the average American but also
constituents of the AG embrace a perilous
blending of God and country. Second,
Alexander traces the impact of a hasty
alignment with Evangelicals. He locates
Pentecostal invitation to and acceptance in
the newly formed National Association of
Evangelicals (1942) as a critical event that
fuels an insatiable patriotic spirit. According
to Alexander, 65,000 AG soldiers in WWII
(note: the ratio of combatants to noncombatants
remains difficult to ascertain)
may rank as the primary reason for
invitation of Pentecostals to the Evangelical
table. Third, Alexander equates the fatal
blow with acquiescence to individual
conscience. Pentecostals surrender to
pragmatic realism. Since the military serves
as a vast mission field and Pentecostals
become employed in military chaplaincy,
the drift away from pacifism becomes
inevitable.

In his final chapter, Alexander turns from
historian to theologian and locates ultimate
dissolution of the pacifist position with the
AG failure to ask: “What about Jesus?” As
history will not correct itself, Alexander
suggests an answer not by way of individual
conscience or numbers, but by a return to
the Scriptures. In view of the fact that the
AG retains a high regard for the authority of
Scripture as “the authoritative rule of faith
and conduct” (the first of the denomination‟s
16 Fundamental Truths), Alexander finds
the AG failure to examine the Scriptures
astonishing. He notes that AG proponents
dare not leave ethical questions concerning
abortion and homosexuality to personal
choice. Regarding Spirit baptism, he offers
poignant rhetoric: if „“initial physical
evidence‟ has significantly less biblical
support than non-violence…, could tongues
as initial physical also be a matter of
conscience rather than of biblical
interpretation?” 2 Given the impossibility of
such scenarios, Alexander implores
Pentecostals to search the Scriptures and
discover afresh the non-violent story of
Jesus and Acts as an insistent critique of
racial, economic, and socio-political
acculturation.
Readers may not agree with Alexander‟s
conclusions, but his work deserves a wide
readership. Peace to War is a riveting story
by a quintessential theologian. Alexander
chronicles the risks and consequences of
1 Pentecostal Evangel, October 12, 1940, 13.
2
conscientious objection alongside a shifting
and accommodating worldview. His keen
awareness of Pentecostal history is matched
by critical theological and exegetical insight.
He dialogues with formidable scholars
including Pentecostals such as William
Menzies, Walter Hollenweger, Jay Beaman,
Murray Dempster, and Joel Shuman, as well
as non-Pentecostal sympathizers like Glen
Stassen (Foreword), John Howard Yoder
and Stanley Hauerwas. With prophetic
candor, Alexander calls the AG to foster
careful thinking and dialogue in hope of a
fresh renewal of the crucifist life, that is,
discipleship as the way of the cross. He
writes first and foremost to Pentecostals
unaware of and/or in disagreement with the
early Pentecostal practice of non-violence.
Peace to War should also serve the broader
Christian community. Readers from historic
peace churches (note the Anabaptist
publisher) will not only be surprised at a
Pentecostal peace heritage, but be
challenged to reflect upon their potential for
“drift,” the careless loss of an integral
distinctive. Given the current global crises,
readers from all traditions should find it
stimulating to think deeply about their
individual and collective response to war.
Finally, Peace to War is well-suited for
numerous undergrad and graduate courses
such as Pentecostal and/or American
religious history, theology, ethics, and
sociology/philosophy of religion.
2 Paul Alexander, Peace to War: Shifting Allegiances in the Assemblies of God, The C. Henry Smith Series
9 (Telford, PA: Cascadia Publishing House, 2009), 340.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
A Beginner’s Guide to New Testament Exegesis: Taking the Fear out of the Critical Method
Richard J. Erickson
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005) 239 pages
Reviewed by Bob Caldwell (Ph.D. 2009 Concordia Seminary; M.A. 2003 AGTS),
Ordained minister of the Assemblies of God and free-lance writer
Many present-day pastors and theologians
still view modern critical methods with
some suspicion, and rightly so. Most of
these methods arose from a generation of
scholars who sought to “free the Bible from
the church” and “treat it like any other
book.” This perspective led to ignoring the
message of the text, or at least of ignoring
any orthodox interpretation of it which could
be applied to modern life.
However, evangelical scholars have come to
grips with using these tools despite their
questionable parentage. When one maintains
a belief that the Bible is the Word of God,
the tools can then be employed to help
discover the fullest and clearest
understanding of the meaning of the text.
Richard Erickson does a valuable service by
showing how different critical tools can
profitably be applied to the text by
Evangelicals. In his hands, then, redaction
criticism is not a tool for showing how the
evangelist changed the early Jesus message
to create someone who would speak to later
concerns, but rather a tool for showing how
one evangelist’s slight differences in his
telling of a story adds new depth to the
understanding of what Jesus taught and did.
In this, he is to be commended.
1
Erickson, a professor at Fuller Theological
Seminary Northwest in Seattle, Washington,
draws on over twenty years of teaching New
Testament exegesis. Consequently, this book
would serve well as a textbook, either in a
classroom setting or by the pastor who
would systematically study the book to learn
more about interpreting Scripture for his or
her congregation.
In the first chapter, Erickson lists his
assumptions in approaching the New
Testament: (1) the Bible is the inspired
Word of God; (2) the Bible is the “Word of
Life;” (3) the Church needs pastors to teach
the Bible; (4) the Holy Spirit is the
interpreter. While he believes that exegesis
is best done from the original languages, his
book is written in such a way that those
without Greek or Hebrew knowledge can
still use it. A pastor can use this resource
without getting into trouble.
My one quibble is his treatment of textual
criticism. I also believe in the value of an
eclectic text in establishing the closest to an
original text; however, his emphasis on
external evidence is somewhat out of date.
While this has been the main focus of
textual criticism for 150 years (and still has
many advocates), a significant number of
textual critics have moved to a more
thoroughgoing eclecticism that gives greater

credence to internal evidence. Less
discussion of text families and more on
evaluating internal evidence would be
beneficial.
This work differs from the popular-level
book (also used in many classrooms), How
to Read the Bible for All It’s Worth, by Fee
and Stuart. The focus of the latter is
primarily on interpretation approaches to the
different genres of the Bible. A Beginner’s
Guide touches on genre, but highlights the
way that critical tools are applied to the
differing literature types.
2
This book would serve as a fine textbook for
a beginning class in New Testament
exegesis. I would also recommend it to
pastors who sense some inadequacy in their
interpretive skills. Taking a few months to
slowly work through this book would also
improve the content of one’s preaching.
With the current focus on expository
preaching (see the articles by George Wood
and Richard Dresselhaus in the Summer
2006 issue of Encounter), it is vitally
important for any preacher to begin with
solid biblical exegesis. Erickson’s book
provides a great place to start.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol.6
Book Review
Telling the Story: Evangelism for the Next Generation
Luis Palau and Timothy L. Robnett
(Ventura, CA: Regal, 2006) 192 pages
Reviewed by Marshall M. Windsor (M.Div., 2004)
National Evangelists Representative for the Assemblies of God
and Adjunct Professor of Evangelism, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
In their book, Telling the Story, Luis Palau
and Timothy L. Robnett partner to provide
strategic insights into the world of
evangelistic ministry—sharing thoughtprovoking
possibilities on where the gift of
the evangelist complements the Church at
large. Luis Palau, born in Buenos Aires,
Argentina, and mentored by Billy Graham,
has been involved in evangelistic ministry
around the world for over fifty-five years.
Expressing his concern over the Church’s
lack of involvement with evangelistic
ministries today, Palau asks how twenty-first
century evangelists can have credibility
without interaction with the Church: “In
what ways is the Church actively
identifying, training, affirming, utilizing,
and supporting gifted evangelists?” 1 Palau
gives an honest appraisal of today’s
situation, revealing how most young
evangelists are left to make it on their own.
Alternating the authorship of the book’s
chapters, Palau and Robnett reveal their
individual strengths and add character to the
material. Palau excels at encouraging those
desiring evangelistic ministry, but his
encouragement goes far beyond evangelists.
Communicating personal ministry insights
that will benefit any minister of the gospel,
Palau’s real life illustrations help “flesh out”
the foundational principles he has built upon
1
over the years and add to the inspirational
facet of the book. Robnett’s strength is to
approach evangelistic ministry from an
academic viewpoint. He does not seem to
have the same experiences on the road as
typical itinerant ministers today but has
studied extensively.
Robnett, director of Palau’s Next Generation
Institute, skillfully highlights the diverse
ministry roles of the evangelist, which can
vary widely throughout the Church. He
points out that in an era of rapidly changing
cultures and diverse demographics,
evangelists can easily embrace missions,
apologetics, church planting, pastoring,
teaching, administration, writing, and the
Internet. Regarding the issue of specialty
ministries in the evangelistic role, Palau says
that to whatever degree ministers allow the
Spirit to use them to bring in the harvest,
they are part of the evangelistic work. 2
Palau and Robnett both emphasize the need
for formal education and spiritual
development. If evangelists neglect the
activities that make for spiritual maturity,
they put their ministry at risk. As Robnett
notes, “I have seen too many evangelists
find security in their performance for Jesus
Christ, not their position in Christ. 3

On a practical side, the book includes
numerous ministry positions available to
evangelists for special needs and situations
but lacks specifics on actually beginning an
evangelistic ministry prior to incorporation.
It does, however, challenge the reader and
provides some excellent insights into
personal growth and development of an
evangelistic ministry and team. Palau and
Robnett advocate the team approach for
ministry and provide timely advice for
anyone considering event-type evangelism
within a community.
Palau deliberately challenges every minister
to “dream big dreams” for God. He says: “If
your dreams aren’t greater than finishing
your education, paying your bills, or raising
your children, then your vision isn’t
divine.” 4 The book is replete with similar
challenges and pushes the reader to think
outside the box. It also provides definitions
and insights to help young ministers
determine an evangelistic calling, as well as
how the church might incorporate
evangelistically gifted individuals into their
church model.
Many wonderful evangelists serve the
church today; however, leading a ministry
organization involves far more than eloquent
preaching or business savvy. As Robnett
states, “Organizational growth and
expansion come as the evangelist learns to
be a leader of a ministry, not just a
communicator of the good news.” 5 Leading
any ministry organization involves anointed
leadership skills, which require a life-long
learning mindset guided by the Holy Spirit.
2
Palau and Robnett share insights into
evangelistic messages, the need for
accountability, distractions to avoid, and the
importance of refocusing priorities. Palau
advocates ensuring that evangelism remain
the Church’s number one priority. “In
today’s Church,” he says, “part of the reason
why there’s no urgency to evangelize is
because we don’t deeply believe that the lost
are really lost.” 6 Assuredly, if we expect
people to hear, see, and feel the love of
Jesus Christ in our communities, we must
raise evangelism as a major theme in our
preaching, teaching, and daily living. Major
events and outreaches within our
communities are wonderful, but people will
remember the character of every-day living
long after events are over. Character still
speaks loudly—especially today.
Telling the Story’s strengths far outweigh
the slight weakness of a promotional tone
concerning Palau’s Next Generation
Alliance and its graduates. Palau’s
transparency inspires and challenges the
reader to new levels of commitment to God
and ministry, providing opportunity for
reflection and refocusing our own ministries.
Robnett’s academic excellence adds validity
to education’s anvil of knowledge, where all
encounter a keener edge with which to
minister. These authors have crafted a
timely resource for generations of
evangelism-minded ministers to come—
sharing wisdom and guidance from a
lifetime of service, and providing huge
possibilities for evangelist and pastor
partnerships within the Emerging Church
today.
1 Luis Palau and Timothy Robnett, Telling the Story: Evangelism for the Next Generation (Ventura, CA:
Regal, 2006), 19.
2 Ibid., 17.
3 Ibid., 44.
4 Ibid., 49.
5 Ibid., 126.
6 Ibid., 112.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
Girl Soldier: A Story of Hope for Northern Uganda’s Children
Faith J. H. McDonnell and Grace Akallo
(Grand
Rapids:
Baker
Books,
2007)
240
pages
Reviewed
by
Johan
Mostert (D.Phil.,
University
of
Pretoria)
Professor
of
Community
Psychology,
Assemblies
of
God
Theological
Seminary
On
April
12,
2008,
a
report
from
Kampala,
Uganda
announced
that
the
peace
deal
negotiated
since
2006
with
the
rebel
group,
The
Lord’s
Resistance
Army
(LRA),
was
finally
cancelled
after
LRA
leader,
Joseph
Kony
fired
his
chief
negotiator
and
failed
to
arrive
at
the
scheduled
signing
of
the
agreement.
I
remember
the
BBC
report
that
night
which
showed
the
negotiators
awaiting
Kony’s
arrival
and
the
cameras
taking
background
shots
to
be
able
to
report
the
next
day
on
the
news
that
the
twenty-three-year-long
nightmare
was
finally
finished.
But
even
today,
as
this
book
review
went
to
press,
the
internal
displacement
of
two
million
people
and
the
death
of
tens
of
thousands
more
continues;
the
end
of
this
political
conflict
is
still
not
in
sight!
Negotiators
are
still
trying
to
find
a
solution.
This
is
the
political
perspective—a
message
of
frustration.
In
2007,
Columbia
University
Press
published
the
book,
Women as Weapons of War,
in
which
the
feminist
philosopher,
Professor
Kelly
Oliver,
suggests
that
women
have
become
the
secret
weapon
of
modern
warfare.
This
is
the
feminist
perspective—a
message
of
global
exploitation.
But
in
that
same
year,
Baker
Books
published,
Girl Soldier: A Story of Hope for Northern
Uganda’s Children,
by
Faith
J.
H.
McDonnell
and
Grace
Akallo.
The
book
traces
the
history
of
the
atrocities
in
Northern
Uganda
under
the
evil
madman,
Kony.
It
relates
the
story
of
one
of
the
1
co-authors,
Akallo,
as
she
was
abducted
at
the
age
of
sixteen
and
forced
to
become
one
of
Kony’s
killers,
or
be
killed
herself.
The
authors
tell
how
Kony’s
henchmen
taught
the
thousands
of
child
soldiers
to
“kill
as
the
spirit
leads
them.”
They
tell
of
the
process
Kony
used
to
create
killer
children
in
the
death
camps
and
the
despair
Grace
experienced
as
she
was
repeatedly
raped
by
her
warrior
“husband.”
Girl Soldier
is
the
real
story
behind
the
scenes
of
today’s
news
headlines.
What
makes
this
book
stand
out
as
an
exceptional
story
is
that
it
does
not
end
with
the
message
of
despair
and
hopelessness
that
has
so
characterized
the
decades
of
strife
in
Uganda.
It
relates
the
story
of
Grace’s
escape
from
the
military
camp
during
a
battle
(after
God
spoke
to
her
in
a
dream),
follows
her
into
the
safety
of
a
World
Vision
refugee
camp,
and
then
later
to
the
United
States.

The
story
shares
the
process
of
her
healing
and
restoration
and
provides
the
gospel
perspective—a
message
of
hope.
On
the
cover
of
Girl Soldier
is
the
phrase,
Why it
Matters and What You Can Do.
This
book
will
help
restore
the
moral
compass
of
the
Church
by
focusing
attention
on
the
300,000
young
people
under
the
age
of
eighteen
being
exploited
worldwide
as
child
soldiers.
It
provides
practical
steps
which
Christians
can
implement
to
make
a
difference.
May
the
Holy
Spirit
allow
us
to
be
disturbed
by
this
book.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
The Outward Focused Life: Becoming a Servant in a Serve-Me World
Dave Workman
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008) 189 pages
Reviewed by Douglas F. Olena, Ph.D. candidate, Cardiff University, Wales
Dave Workman, senior pastor of Vineyard
Community Church in Cincinnati, Ohio,
presents stories and short reflections with
one purpose in mind—to encourage
believers not only to look at people outside
the Church, but to do something to make
their lives just a little bit better. Workman
encourages believers to engage outsiders’
attention by doing things with a different
attitude, distinct from the mercenary pose
that suggests, “We do good in the
community so that people will come to our
church.” He encourages Christians just to
love people irrespective of the
consequences. Most frequently, he notes, the
consequences are not obvious. People most
often take the small charity or kindness with
a smile and are never seen again. The
extraordinary, heart-wrenching stories that
fill this book remind the reader of the
neediness of one’s neighbors and how
connecting to people in the body of Christ
brings redemption.
The book is composed of short, one- to twopage
stories, each with a single focus,
organized into nine collections. Though the
collections are uniquely titled, with a few
exceptions, I had a difficult time identifying
clear distinctions between the stories. The
collections may just indicate differences in
emphasis instead of differences in category.
Aside from some quibble about structure,
the content of the book itself defocuses
1
structure. This is not a theological text,
unless one considers doing kindness to
people an interesting theological puzzle.
This is a book for those who do not spend
their lives with books. Workman aims to
demonstrate how, with no training and little
resource, one can make a difference. One
need not have completed Christianity 101 to
understand these principles. He does not
focus on Jesus’ profound answers to difficult
questions but merely points out that Jesus’
connection to the lost in His community, His
personal touch, His companionship, and His
interest in the welfare of people draws
believers into a community of caring
individuals. This reality serves as the light
set on a hill that should remain uncovered.
While not a “how to” manual, one could
certainly begin a ministry from the hints in
this book. Workman provides a Web site
where people can receive assistance in
implementing the principles presented:
http://outwardfocusedlife.com/
Although the book is not an autobiography,
Workman reflectively finds his way into its
pages. He tells of his journey toward
servanthood, his struggle with personal
attitudes that fight an outward-focused life,
and the appraisals of his own self-centered
motivations. However, being a servant
transforms a person, and so he includes that
process of transformation as part of the
story.

In the ninth collection of stories, Workman
connects the work and the worker. It is here,
in the process of becoming a new person in
Christ on the journey of life, that Workman
hits a home run. Not as a matter of utility or
intention, but as a matter of fact: serving
people changes the servant. Here the remark
2
of Jesus, that it is more blessed to give than
to receive, takes flesh in the modern church,
not in the antagonisms or ambiguities of
theological or doctrinal quarrels. Servants
with the right attitude are some of the
happiest, well-adjusted people in the world.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol.6
Book Review
A Reader in Pentecostal Theology
Edited by Douglas Jacobsen
(Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2006) 240 pages
Reviewed by Raymond L. Gannon, Ph.D. President, Israel’s Redemption
AGUSM Missionary and AG National Representative for Jewish Ministries
Visiting Professor of Missions and Jewish Studies, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Director of Messianic Jewish Studies, The King’s College and Seminary
Douglas Jacobsen and Indiana University
Press have done a service to Pentecostals
everywhere but especially to students of
Pentecostal historical theology with the
publication of A Reader in Pentecostal
Theology: Voices from the First Generation.
Jacobsen’s objective is to demonstrate the
chief sources of early Pentecostal thinking that
laid the foundation for Pentecostal and
Charismatic theologizing over the last one
hundred years. Notably solid cases of
Pentecostal foundation-laying, friendly
disputes, antagonistic confrontations, and even
show-biz eccentricities are illustrated in the
observations of the personalities and
proclamations of sixteen Pentecostal
pioneering pillars.
In the chronological order of each thinker’s
publications, Jacobsen has put forth a
biographical sketch on sixteen of the most
outstanding influencers—theologians,
denominational founders, or flamboyant
preachers—upon the early Pentecostal
movement. Each sketch is followed by writing
or sermon samples from each of these early
Pentecostal thinkers. The acknowledged
pioneers include two Euro-American women:
Maria Woodworth-Etter and Aimee Semple
McPherson; five African-American men:
1
William Seymour, Richard Spurling, Garfield
T. Haywood, Robert C. Lawson, and Charles
H. Mason; and eight Euro-American men:
Charles F. Parham, George F. Taylor, D.
Wesley Myland, William H. Durham, A. J.
Tomlinson, Joseph H. King, E. William
Kenyon, and F. F. Bosworth. Persian
immigrant Andrew David Urshan is also
included.
Jacobsen helps students of Pentecostal history
learn the original sources of the twenty-first
century’s ongoing debates surrounding: (1)
“Jesus Only” teachings versus Trinitarian
understanding of God (Haywood, Urshan); (2)
health and wealth, Kingdom authority
teachings (Kenyon); (3) the disappointment
with race relations in the Pentecostal world
(Seymour, Lawson); (4) advocates of highpowered
Christian organizationalism
(Tomlinson, McPherson); (5) restorationism to
book of Acts Christianity (Spurling); as well
as the more familiar (6) Spirit-baptism as the
first, second, or third work of grace and the
whole issue of the “finished work” (Durham,
Myland). Jacobsen’s introduction to the text
juxtaposes the various characters in terms of
their respective controversial emphases.

There can be little doubt that Pentecostal
thought has never been monolithic. But the
current differences in contemporary
Pentecostal and Charismatic teachings largely
find their initial reflections in sincere
theological attempts to deal with the new and
profound religious experience early
Pentecostals confronted during the first three
decades of the twentieth-century. Most all of
the points of theological contention had long
been under considerable discussion prior to
the initial adoption of what would become the
Statement of Fundamental Truths in the
original 1927 Assemblies of God constitution
and by-laws.
One example of vital contribution to
contemporary Pentecostal issues is the
recorded teaching of Maria Woodworth-Etter.
While she laid important groundwork for
expectation for a fresh outpouring of
Pentecostal power as early as 1894, she also
challenged traditional Christian thinking on
the role of women in ministry. It was not a
case of her challenging Christian
traditionalists merely by her own practice of
outstanding ministry as others have often done
since, but Woodworth-Etter openly confronted
a chauvinistic Christian society. This
undoubtedly helped the first generation of
modern Pentecostals more readily value
women in ministry. But the struggle in
Pentecostal ranks on this matter continues.
Moderns would be wise to witness her
argumentation as laid out in part in Jacobsen’s
work.
A second example of Jacobsen’s work is his
discussion of the “initial evidence”
controversy as traced back to Charles Parham
and F. F. Bosworth. Parham was the first to
declare tongues-speaking to be the initial
2
evidence of Spirit-baptism. Bosworth, one of
the 1914 founders of the AG, contended that
tongues were but one sign of Spirit-baptism
and offered that many non-tongues-speakers
had been more dramatically used of God than
many tongues people he had known.
Bosworth’s 1917 challenge to the AG position
and subsequent defrocking is included in the
text.
Douglas Jacobsen presents the essential
argumentation offered by these sixteen pillars
in a succinct and highly useful manner. My
criticism of his work would center on his
conviction that early Pentecostals were
immersed in dispensationalism along with
much of the Evangelical world. But it appears
the Pentecostal fascination with Darby/
Scofield dispensationalist thought only begins
to crystallize with Frank Boyd in 1925 and
was later more fully expounded in AG circles
by E. S. Williams and Ralph Riggs in the
1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. I was disappointed
not to find George Floyd Taylor’s and David
Wesley Myland’s teachings on the deep sense
of Pentecostal fraternity with the Zionist
movement mentioned, apart from a brief
“Latter Rain” allusion to nineteenth-century
rainfall. The sense of bond between early
Pentecostalism and the revival of the Jewish
homeland generated a broad conviction of
fraternal twin restorations to first-century
points of departure that would culminate in the
Second Coming.
Jacobsen seems to have fully overlooked the
long-standing twentieth-century Pentecostal
sense of affinity with “All Israel.” Nonetheless,
I believe his work should be a welcomed
addition to any serious student of Pentecostal
history.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
Israel’s Anointing: Your Inheritance and End-Time Destiny through Israel
Sandra Teplinsky (Foreword by James Goll)
(Grand Rapids, MI: Chosen Press/Baker Book House, 2008) 224 pages
Reviewed by Raymond L. Gannon, Ph.D.
President, Israel’s Redemption
AGUSM Missionary and AG National Representative for Jewish Ministries
Visiting Professor of Missions and Jewish Studies, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Director of Messianic Jewish Studies, The King’s College and Seminary
Sandra Teplinsky, a former attorney, and her
physician husband are both Messianic Jews
living in Southern California. Having been
a committed Jewish believer in Jesus for
decades while remaining committed to both
Jewish and Christian worlds, Sandra
Teplinsky offers a unique perspective on her
topic, Israel’s Anointing: Your Inheritance
and End-Time Destiny through Israel.
While Teplinsky brings a legal mind’s logic
to her important theme, she is not a biblical
exegete. Still her years of effectual ministry
equip her to present God’s truth in a solid
teaching and pastoral manner. More than
simply a “Jewish Roots” text filled with
Hebraic detail, she lays out a tender
perspective on the Christian need for a
proper Hebraic understanding of Scripture
and for a sense of fraternity with God’s
forever Chosen People. Her basic
eschatology seems to approximate that of a
post-tribulational dispensationalist.
The author makes a strong case for the
Christian need to identify with the Jewish
people, as had been the apostolic
1
expectation from the outset of the firstcentury
Church. Her hoped for
contemporary identification has little to do
with blatant Christian political support for
the modern State of Israel, as traditionally
Pentecostal and biblically sound as that can
be. Her chief concern rather is the spiritual
heritage Jews and Christians are to coinherit
and together walk out in the interests
of God’s Kingdom. 1
The divinely mandated unity of all God’s
people, as Teplinsky notes, does not nullify
God’s unique promises to “All Israel” as
understood and fully embraced by
patriarchs, kings, prophets, and apostles
alike. She advocates a solid and legitimate
Christian identification with Israel—one that
must appreciate the partnership God has
always intended for the two whom Jesus’
cross has made into “One New Man.” 2
Tracking related themes in the Hebrew
Bible, Teplinsky inspires fresh devotion to
intimacy with Christ through a creative look
at the Song of Solomon. She also offers a
fresh and insightful investigation into the

elationship between Ruth and Naomi to
illustrate the proper attitudes and
commitments Christians need to be
exercising toward the kinsman-redeemer
nation as well as proper Jewish behavior
toward faithful Christians. According to the
author, such divinely mandated reciprocity
leads to global redemption.
Teplinsky also points out the biblical
significance of the Sabbath and decries
modern abuse or total neglect of the oneday-in-seven
principle God allowed
humankind for proper rest and private
devotion. The Sabbath was not based upon
the Torah, God’s constitutional guideline for
ancient Israelite polity in the Promised
Land, but established upon God’s celebrated
resolve to cease from creative activity.
Christians, suggests Teplinsky, would do
well to follow the biblical pattern, not out of
any need to keep Jewish legal codes but to
capitalize upon the restorative season God
provides all.
Teplinsky, however, cannot support
traditional Christian lawlessness
(antinomianism). While Christians are not
responsible to strictly adhere to Israel’s
God-issued national constitution (Torah), to
not avail one’s self of the God-given
principles revealed in Torah is irresponsible.
Lovers of God will surely scrutinize the
Scriptures to discover God’s perspective on
holy living and thereby use Torah to help
inform one’s own commitment to holiness.
The same Holy Spirit inspired the Torah and
Paul’s epistles. In their pursuit of holiness
Christians are subject to the “Law of the
(same) Spirit.”
In her chapter on “Messianic Justice,”
Teplinsky addresses the pros and cons of the
2
highly profiled modern Christian Zionist
movement. While Christians should be
“blessing” the Chosen People as God
expects of His partnered co-laborers (Gen.
12:2-3), to withhold the Gospel from Jewish
people in order to avoid Jewish
establishment rejection is not biblically
consistent. The Jews need Jesus as much as
anyone; there is no salvation plan “B” for
the Chosen People. To appease Jewish
leadership by passively denying the
centrality of Jesus in all God’s dealings with
Israel is a practice that must be rejected.
Equally scandalous is the common practice
of such Christian Zionist groups to
deliberately avoid contact with Messianic
Jews in an attempt to gratify the unbelieving
Jewish community. Strange as it seems,
registers Teplinsky, the Christian Zionists
welcome Jewish relationships but only as
long as Jews remain unbelieving. Once Jews
come to faith in Jesus, they become pariahs
to both the Christian Zionists and the Jewish
world. Testimony is offered of how the
Christian Zionists annually pour millions of
dollars into supporting Israeli humanitarian
concerns, launching new Israeli businesses,
supporting Jewish orphanages and
immigrants, etc. However, Messianic Jewish
Israelis (now about 15,000) are
systematically deprived of Christian
assistance in spite of the fact Israeli law and
social mores are openly hostile to Messianic
Jews and manage to keep much of the
memberships of the one hundred Messianic
Jewish faith communities in Israel
impoverished.
Though she places the “whisking” away of
the saints at the close of the seven-year
tribulation, Teplinsky otherwise parallels
classical dispensationalist eschatological

thought. Surely Jesus will physically return
to a nationally restored Jewish people.
Ready to herald Jesus with “Blessed is He
that comes in the name of the Lord,” all
Israel will experience salvation in Jesus and
the infilling with the Holy Spirit.
Sandra Teplinsky’s insightful read is
innovative on many levels, highly
3
devotional, and spiritually inspiring on
nearly every page. Yet her book is
occasionally eccentric (e.g., Torah as marital
contract [ketubah] with Israel).
Nevertheless, I can recommend its ten
chapters not only for private devotional use
but for Christian study groups as well.
1
While Jews and Christians suffer “birth pangs” awaiting the Messianic reign, they need to be synergetic
heralds of the coming Kingdom—with prophetic testimony confirmed by supernatural workings of the Spirit in the
here and now as the Ruach of God utilizes the People of God, the One New Man, Jew and Gentile together.
2
There is no exegetical evidence anywhere in Scripture to support supersessionism (replacement theology),
a post-apostolic second-century extra-biblical but theological notion that conveniently forfeited God’s commitments
to Israel in favor of the Church as a “new” or “true” Israel.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
The Epic of Eden: A Christian Entry into the Old Testament
Sandra L. Richter
(Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008) 259 pages with notes and glossary
Reviewed by Roger Cotton, Th.D. Professor of Old Testament,
Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Sandra Richter’s excellent survey of the Old
Testament organizes the message for the
Christian by helping readers connect with
the Old Testament and use it effectively. She
compares her work to organizing a
“dysfunctional closet” in the understanding
of the reader (17-20). Richter accomplishes
her goal, although she could have done it
with less detail. The details she includes
throughout the book are enlightening and
help raise the knowledge level of the reader.
However, as an “entry” into the Old
Testament, those technical terms and
cultural background details could put off
some seekers who have little academic
background.
For the serious students just needing a
streamlined presentation of the essentials of
the Old Testament contents and message,
this book would make an excellent survey.
Richter includes helpful timeframe charts,
maps, and other figures. The book is very
well written, with brief essays on important
concepts throughout. The end notes and
glossary are informative and helpful. Richter
is very knowledgeable about Old Testament
issues and major subjects of ancient Near
Eastern background. She even presents a
view of Genesis 6 I had never heard. She
writes with a very good narrative style,
which is appealing for postmoderns who
want and need to grasp the story and
message of the Old Testament as God’s
1
Word. Her book also serves as a basic Old
Testament theology book. Her statement of
the Bible’s objective gives a good taste of
her approach: “to tell the epic tale of God’s
ongoing quest to ransom his creation” (15).
Richter’s theological approach seems to be
basically covenantal but not in a dogmatic
form. After presenting God’s original intent
for humanity in Eden—and Adam and Eve’s
destructive choice—she organizes the Old
Testament around God’s steps of restoring
humanity to Eden through His covenants
with Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, and
finally, the New Covenant in Christ. This
works very well, though I do not fully relate
to her view of different covenantal
administrations. I agree with most
everything else she says and found
confirmation throughout the book for much
of what I have been teaching, even several
of the exact phrases I use. I was especially
impressed that she asserts that the Bible
writers “did not write this amazing book in
some haphazard fashion” (69). Her emphasis
on the presence of God is another very
significant contribution. Her Wesleyan (and,
I believe, biblical) emphasis on human
choice is refreshing.
The one brief area where she seemed to
diverge a bit from the general view of the
Assemblies of God is the relationship of the
current nation of Israel to the Old Testament

promises. I agree with her about ancient
Israel being God’s theocracy on earth and
about the United States not being
“sponsored” by God (231). However, she
seems to say national Israel no longer has a
part in the plan of God; I disagree with that
concept.
2
I highly recommend this book. I believe it
will accomplish its purpose and make the
Old Testament understandable and usable as
it clarifies how the Old Testament presents
God’s salvation message for the world, from
its context.

Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry, Summer 2009, Vol. 6
Book Review
The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith
Christopher J. H. Wright
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2008) 221 pages
Reviewed by Roger Cotton, Th.D.
Professor of Old Testament, Assemblies of God Theological Seminary
Christopher Wright presents a careful and
scholarly exposition of the biblical texts in
their ancient Near Eastern context while at
the same time bringing a heart for the
mission of God to that exposition—
confronting biblical problems with “a
combination of honesty and humility,” as
John R. W. Stott notes on the dust jacket.
Wright’s major contribution focuses on the
area of ethics and relating the Old Testament
to the lives of Christians today. The God I
Don’t Understand is a byproduct of that
theological journey. He addresses major
areas of faith where difficult questions arise,
describes how he deals with those questions,
then reassures the reader that though his
love for and trust in God has only grown
deeper through the years he still struggles to
understand some things about God.
His four-part book addresses the big issues
of: (1) evil and suffering; (2) killing
authorized by God in the Old Testament,
specifically the conquest of the Canaanites;
3) the work of God through the cross of
Christ—how one man’s death changed
everything for mankind; and 4) what the
Bible clearly teaches about the end of the
world.
Wright first clarifies each issue then presents
a few basic points on each to provide clarity.
He successfully avoids endless details and
philosophical arguments. On evil, Wright
draws one of his interesting and carefully
thought out conclusions, “Evil does not
make sense”—it is a mystery (42). He also
concludes that “the Bible allows us to
lament, protest, and be angry at the
offensiveness of evil” (55). God has
ultimately promised that one day His
Kingdom will be fully in place through
Christ, and “we will have been delivered
from all evil forever” (71). These significant
samples illustrate the insightful and
beneficial reading Wright provides on this
issue.
On the second issue, the killing of the
Canaanites in the Old Testament, Wright
discredits three common explanations which
denigrate the Old Testament as mistaken and
sub-Christian. In summary, he calls for
understanding the context within the overall
plan of God and seeing the executions as
God’s just punishment of wickedness. In
dealing with these issues, he clarifies the
definition of key terms; rather than
accepting the accusations of critics who
accuse Israel of committing “oppression,”
“genocide,” or “ethnic cleansing,” he shows
that the biblical accounts of the killings do
not fit those terms as defined today. In the
end, Wright says the key is to read these
narratives in the light of the cross (107).

The understanding of the cross, the third
issue, focuses on the concept of substitution
and explains it in balanced, clear terms.
Wright shows that what happened to Christ
for the salvation of humanity is a matter of
several “both/and” statements in answer to
the “either/or” questions people pose. The
work of Christ on the cross involved both
God’s anger and His love, both shame and
guilt, both human wickedness and God’s
judgment.
Wright’s final topic, the end of the world,
contains various controversial sub-topics.
He puts the millennium, the rapture, and the
role for the land of Israel into perspective
without rejecting them. He helps Christians
focus on what is clear and certain in the
Scriptures and how this knowledge should
impact daily life. On the new creation, he
believes the new is not totally different from
the old in the sense of being a spiritual or
heavenly replacement for the created order
of earth (195).
The God I Don’t Understand helps the
reader realize that the Scriptures often do
not provide explanations for how things
happened in the past or will happen in the
future. Scripture rarely provides an
explanation for why things happen;
nevertheless, Christians can trust the Word
of God, knowing that these things are
certain and that God does what is best for
His children. In his conclusion, Wright
points the reader to Psalm 73, where the
presence of God makes all the difference for
the psalmist in dealing with the troubling
questions. Finally, he challenges believers
with a very practical application: “All our
behavior now must be governed by the
standards of the new creation” (220). Eternal
truths should affect our temporal choices.
Wright’s book creates a sense of hope and
joy in knowing the God of the Bible. This
book is both helpful and inspiring in its
exposition of the Scriptures concerning
these very important and troubling issues. It
is well-written, down to earth, and easily
understood by those who are not academic
theologians. I highly recommend it to
everyone who has an interest in dealing with
the difficult issues of understanding the God
of the Bible.