William Sloos

A day off from writing; Outer Banks, North Carolina

2012-01-23T23:21:00.001-05:00

Pentecostal History Class, Historical Tours of Toronto

2011-12-09T01:54:00.001-05:00

2011-12-09T01:51:00.001-05:00

2011-12-09T01:49:00.001-05:00

2011-12-09T01:46:00.001-05:00

Pentecostal History Class 2011

2011-11-25T05:31:00.001-05:00

The Conflict between Dispensationalism and Early Pentecostalism and the Emergence of the Latter Rain Motif by William Sloos

2011-11-25T05:27:00.001-05:00

Introduction

Following the birth of the Pentecostal movement in the early twentieth century, Pentecostals were confronted with dispensationalism, a prevailing fundamentalist theology that conflicted with their emerging ecclesiastical and eschatological distinctives. Developed in the mid-nineteenth century by John Nelson Darby, dispensational theology was a system of interpreting biblical history as a series of successive dispensations culminating in a clearly defined eschatological framework. Although early Pentecostals concurred with most dispensational hermeneutics, their experience of Spirit-baptism prevented them from accepting two significant dispensationalist tenets: 1) the gifts of the Holy Spirit had ceased following the apostolic period and 2) the church age would end in apostasy. Clearly apparent to Pentecostals, the charismatic gifts had not ceased after the apostolic age, but were now being restored to the church through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Moreover, because of the restoration of the charismatic gifts, the church age would not end in apostasy, but rather the church will experience a global end-times revival prior to the imminent return of Christ. This significant difference in ecclesiology and eschatology set the early Pentecostals at odds with dispensationalism. Unable to explain the theological implications of their charismatic experience through dispensational theology, Pentecostals would turn their attention to the latter rain motif to articulate their emerging distinctives. This paper examines the conflict between dispensationalism and early Pentecostalism and explores how early Pentecostals found an alternative theological framework to articulate their ecclesiological and eschatological distinctives.

The Origin and Nature of Dispensationalism

Although dispensational theology is not expressly covered in the ancient creeds of the church, throughout history theologians have endeavoured to map the divine timeline marked out in Scripture. Emerging as a formal comprehensive system of biblical interpretation, dispensationalism was first developed by an early nineteenth century group of theological students in the early Brethren movement in Ireland. John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), a former Church of Ireland cleric, formally systemized the hermeneutical scheme and subsequently exported the highly eschatological interpretive methodology to North America during a time of heightened end-times expectations. Helping to popularize Darby’s innovative exegesis, Rev. Dr. C. I. Scofield published the Scofield Reference Bible (1909) which intertwined dispensational teachings with prophetic and apocalyptic literature in the King James Version of the Bible. Despite allegations regarding Scofield’s questionable financial dealings, bigamy, and falsifying a doctoral degree, he sold millions of copies and helped to firmly cement dispensational theology in the fundamentalist doctrines of early twentieth century evangelicalism. For evangelicals, dispensational theology not only upheld the fundamental truths of Scripture that were under attack by the rising tide of Modernism, but also provided a fitting interpretive system to understand end times prophecy that appeared to be unfolding around them.
As a systematized concept of biblical interpretation, dispensational theology describes how God manages the affairs of humankind in specific time periods or dispensations throughout history. Each dispensation is comprised of a unique governmental relationship between God and humanity and includes a particular responsibility placed upon humanity in accordance with each governing relationship. As well, each dispensation has its own requisite demands for faith and obedience according to God’s progressive revelation. Beginning with creation and moving throughout history, each successive dispensational epoch is characterized by a common pattern consisting of a test of faith to determine whether people will choose to align themselves with God’s economy, followed by their inevitable failure and subsequent judgment for disobedience.

Based upon the consistent use of a normal, plain, or literal interpretation of Scripture, dispensational theology insists there are seven dispensations that can be deduced from the Scriptures. The seven dispensations are as follows:
1. Innocence (between creation and the Fall, see Gen. 1:28)
2. Conscience or Moral Responsibility (between the Fall and Noah’s flood, see Gen. 3:7)
3. Human Government (from the flood to the call of Abraham, see Gen. 8:15)
4. Promise (from Abraham to Moses, see Gen. 12:1)
5. Law (from Moses to the death of Christ, see Ex. 19:1)
6. Church (from the resurrection to the present, see Acts 2:1)
7. The Kingdom or The Millennium (see Rev. 20:4).

The church age, also known as the dispensation of grace, begins with the resurrection of Christ and ends with the rapture of the church, followed by a seven year tribulation period where God pours out his wrath on an unbelieving world and apostate church. In addition to this complex dispensational system, there is also a clear distinction between Israel and the church. Dispensational teachers have contended that, throughout history, God has pursued two separate soteriological programs, one program involving the church or the “heavenly people” and the other involving Israel or the “earthly people.” The church, comprised of both Jew and Gentile believers, is considered an independent program that does not advance or fulfil any of the biblical promises given to Israel. The present church age is regarded as a period in which Israel is temporarily set aside from the dispensational program, but when the church is raptured, God will then proceed with fulfilling his eschatological purposes for national Israel. The return of the Jews to Palestine in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries made many evangelicals especially receptive to the eschatological system of dispensational theology and aided in creating and sustaining an expectation that the church age was drawing to a close, the rapture was imminent, and God was about to turn his attention back to Israel.

An Emerging Pentecostal Ecclesiology and Eschatology

Within this heightened eschatological context of the early twentieth century, the Pentecostal movement exploded onto the religious landscape with an emphasis on the baptism of the Holy Spirit with speaking in tongues according to the biblical pattern of the first Pentecost in the book of Acts. In North America, the epicentre of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was the Apostolic Faith Mission at Azusa Street in Los Angeles, where people from all over the world came to seek the Lord for their personal Pentecost. With three services a day, seven days a week, for forty-two months, thousands of seekers received an ecstatic spiritual experience that revived their faith and transformed their lives. In addition to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, people attending services at Azusa Street also reported experiencing conversions, healings, miracles, deliverances from addictions, and exorcisms. Arising from these experiences was a revitalized ecclesial praxis that centered upon the restoration of the charismatic gifts according to the apostolic paradigm. Illustrating the significance of this apostolic restoration, Seymour proclaims, “All along the ages men have been preaching a partial Gospel…He is now bringing back the Pentecostal baptism to the church.” With optimistic certainty, Seymour adds “The Lord is restoring all the gifts to His Church” and “it is heaven below.” Unlike the pessimistic views of dispensationalism, early Pentecostals believed that they were experiencing the reclamation of all that had been lost through the centuries, the recovery of the power and gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the reviving of the one true church of Christ. This new ecclesiology led Pentecostals to consider themselves, not merely another denomination, but rather a divinely initiated movement designed to restore the fullness of the Holy Spirit evidenced by miracles, healings, signs, and wonders.

In conjunction with the emerging Pentecostal ecclesiology, the restoration of the charismatic gifts also led to the development of a uniquely Pentecostal eschatology. Believing that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit was the fulfilment of Bible prophecy and signalled the arrival of the “last days,” Pentecostals were consumed with actively and urgently proclaiming the gospel prior to the imminent return of Christ. This emotive end-times sentiment pervaded early Pentecostal communities and fuelled their homiletics, periodicals, and missionary endeavours. Emanating from Pentecostal pulpits, preachers urged listeners to ready themselves for Christ’s return. Early Pentecostal publications would also reverberate with the pressing message of the imminent return of Christ and the important task of witnessing to lost people before the end of the age. The impending eschaton also inspired many Pentecostals to serve on foreign mission fields with the conviction that every person must hear the gospel before Christ breaks through the clouds. Anderson states, “The significance of this teaching for Pentecostals was that their belief in the ‘soon’ coming of Christ with its impending doom for unbelievers lent urgency to the task of world evangelization.” Confident that the restoration of the apostolic church was a clear indicator of the shortness of time, Pentecostals made evangelism their primary concern and viewed themselves as participants in the global harvest. “This is a world-wide revival,” declares Seymour, “the last Pentecostal revival to bring our Jesus. The church is taking her last march to meet her beloved.” “We are expecting a wave of salvation go over this world…There is power in the full Gospel. Nothing can quench it.” Rather than the present dispensation ending in apostasy, Pentecostal expectations were charged with enthusiastic optimism that they were partners with Christ in the last days. Deeply rooted in charismatic experience, these ecclesiological and eschatological distinctives soon established themselves within the emerging Pentecostal community and became the pervading ethos that characterized the movement in its earliest years.

The Conflict between Dispensationalism and Pentecostal Distinctives

Conflicting with the developing ecclesiology and eschatology of the burgeoning Pentecostal movement was the prevailing dispensational doctrines dominating the current evangelical culture. Despite having an affinity with many elements of dispensational hermeneutics, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit created an obvious theological quandary for early Pentecostals. Dispensational theology teaches that the Pentecostal experience of the baptism in the Holy Spirit, speaking in tongues, and the sensational or sign gifts of the Spirit were not normative for the church age, but were only intended to inaugurate the church and terminated after the apostolic period. “Tongues and the sign gifts are to cease,” states Scofield’s commentary on spiritual gifts. Moreover, dispensational views also stipulate that each dispensation, including the church age, concludes in human failure and apostasy, setting any conception of an end-times revival at variance with the established dispensational paradigm. As Scofield emphasizes repeatedly throughout his text notes, “the predicted future of the visible Church is apostasy” and “the only remedy for apostasy is judgment” and “catastrophic destruction.” He adds, “The predicted end of the testing of man under grace is the apostasy of the professing church and the resultant apocalyptic judgments.” Inherently pessimistic, dispensationalism presents a powerless church with a degenerating future. With Pentecostals enjoying the restoration of charismatic power and gifts along with increasing reports of global revival, dispensational theology became increasingly inconsistent with the Pentecostal experience. Alert to these variants, some outspoken dispensationalists judged the budding Pentecostal phenomenon as unbiblical and even sourced in the demonic; a theological wedge was widening between the two camps.

Since early Pentecostalism had not formed a satisfactory explanation for their emerging distinctives, many early Pentecostal leaders tried to articulate their theological understanding by using various forms of familiar dispensational language. Evidence of these theological inconsistencies can be found scattered throughout early Pentecostal writings, highlighting the challenge Pentecostals had in defining their ecclesiology and eschatology against traditional dispensational theology. To illustrate, William Seymour comments about the restoration of Pentecost but then states that “we are living in the eventide of this dispensation.” Charles Parham borrowed much of his eschatology from dispensational theology despite the inherent conflicting ideas. Often attempting to merge the Pentecostal experience with dispensational hermeneutics, Parham teaches that the “last days” would be marked both by the restoration of the apostolic church and also by great apostasy. This theological paradox continues with William Durham who also tried integrating Pentecostal restoration with dispensational theology stating, “In the end of the days the Lord has poured out His Spirit, as in the beginning of the dispensation, and has undertaken to restore to His own spiritual church all that she has lost through the failure and unbelief of man.” Numerous early Pentecostal teachers employed dispensational language to describe the outpouring of the Holy Spirit despite the obvious inconsistencies. Without a suitable framework to interpret the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit, early Pentecostal leaders struggled to assimilate their charismatic distinctives with popular dispensationalism and began turning their attention to the latter rain motif.

The Latter Rain Motif

The concept of the latter rain motif did not originate with the birth of the Pentecostal movement, but was developed out of nineteenth century Wesleyan-Holiness teachings. Nevertheless, the latter rain motif would become the prevailing theological methodology for framing the restorationist phenomena that pervaded early Pentecostal thought. Developed from a typological reading of some Scripture passages, the basis for the latter rain metaphor asserts that the chronology of the church spiritually parallels the rainfall patterns in early Palestine. The term is initially found in Deuteronomy 11:10-15 where God promises the Israelites that, if they would serve him with all their heart and soul, he would give them the “early” and “latter” rain. According to ancient Mediterranean agricultural customs, to produce a bountiful harvest, a farmer requires rain at two critical points in the growing cycle. Following the planting, the first or “early rain” is needed to cause the seed to germinate. Additionally, just before the crop is harvested, a “latter rain” is needed so the grain will produce a high yield at harvest time. In Joel 2:23 and 28, this agricultural model is reconfigured as a prophetic metaphor to indicate the divine timeline for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the church age. The first outpouring of the Holy Spirit occurred on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, symbolizing the “early rain” that gave life to the church. Between the early and latter rains was the long, arid period of Christendom’s apostasy and corruption during the Middle Ages. When the second outpouring of the Holy Spirit occurred at the dawn of the twentieth century, it was indicative of the “latter rain,” spiritually saturating the land in preparation for the great harvest of souls before the coming of the Lord. For early Pentecostals, the latter rain motif complemented their experience and affirmed the restorationist and revivalist ethos that defined the movement. As opposed to dispensationalism, which rejected the possibility of an end-times outpouring of the Holy Spirit, adopting the latter rain motif provided biblical legitimacy to the emergent Pentecostal movement and affirmed the existing notion among early Pentecostals that they were part of God’s overall eschatological timetable.
Embracing the latter rain motif gave the early Pentecostals a fitting theological framework to articulate their ecclesiology and eschatology. Although they never discarded the dispensational doctrines of salvation history and most elements of Bible prophecy, the latter rain motif became the primary apologetic for the Pentecostal movement and gave Pentecostal proponents a meaningful and emotive biblical apologetic to explain the restoration of the charismatic phenomenon. Reflecting on the emphasis early Pentecostals placed on the latter rain motif, Blumhofer states:
While they [early Pentecostals] unquestioningly embraced most of Darby’s view of history, early Pentecostals rejected his insistence that the “gifts” had been withdrawn. They introduced into his system their own dispensational setting where the gifts could again operate in the church. The device through which they legitimated those gifts was their teaching on the latter rain.

For early Pentecostals, the adoption of the latter rain motif seemed to remedy the theological impasse with dispensationalism- at least within the Pentecostal community. By superimposing the latter rain motif onto dispensational theology, Pentecostals retained a relatively functional framework for interpreting prophecy and enjoyed biblical support for their charismatic experience. Despite the inherent inconsistencies with merging these two theologies, the pragmatism of the early Pentecostals creatively negotiated between the conflicts and charted a new theological trajectory towards the development of a uniquely Pentecostal theology.
The latter rain motif quickly took root in early Pentecostal publications throughout North American and came to define the ecclesiology and eschatology of the fledgling Pentecostal movement. Many started calling the Pentecostal revival the “Latter Rain Movement” after one of Parham’s published reports describing the beginning of the outpouring of the Spirit at the turn of the century. Additionally, articles began circulating with titles such as, “The Promised Latter Rain Now Being Poured Out on God’s Humble People,” and “Gracious Pentecostal Showers Continue to Fall.” Around the same time, a Pentecostal periodical out of Chicago assumed the banner “Latter Rain Evangel,” emphasizing the increasing popularity of the latter rain sentiment throughout the Pentecostal movement. Seymour asserts that God “gave the former rain moderately at Pentecost, and He is going to send upon us in these last days the former and latter rain” (italics mine). W. C. Stevens describes Pentecost as “saturating rains” marked by “atmospheric convulsions” breaking out “here and there in identical kind in various localities.” David Wesley Myland, a Canadian-born Pentecostal pastor, wrote an influential book describing the early Pentecostal movement entitled “The Latter Rain Covenant (1910).” Fused with “latter rain” thematic expressions, his book relates the prevailing eschatological ethos among early Pentecostals. Believing that they were living in the final “cloudburst” of Holy Ghost power, Myland wanted everyone to get “totally soaked” by the “latter rain” which was falling so copiously from heaven. Although the latter rain metaphor had its limitations, early Pentecostals used it liberally to articulate their ecclesiological and eschatological distinctives and their favourable position within God’s plan of redemption history.

Despite the early Pentecostals’ innovative synthesis of the latter rain motif with dispensational theology, the fundamentalists were not amused. Already strongly disapproving of Pentecostal devotional ethics and restorationist claims, when the Pentecostals creatively modified dispensational theology to accommodate their charismatic experiences, a deep and long-lasting wedge was placed between the two religious groups. While Pentecostals treated the dispensational interpretive framework with value and even willingly promoted the sale of the Scofield Reference Bible, the fundamentalists were staunchly opposed to the “Pentecostal distortion.” Blumhofer states:
Dispensationalism, as articulated by Scofield, understood the gifts of the Spirit to have been withdrawn from the Church. Rejecting the latter rain views by which Pentecostals legitimated their place in God’s plan, dispensationalists effectively eliminated the biblical basis for Pentecostal theology; and although Pentecostals embraced most of Scofield’s ideas…they remained irrevocably distanced from fundamentalists by their teaching on the place of spiritual gifts in the contemporary church.

Regardless of the opposing opinions between fundamentalists and Pentecostals, the early Pentecostals could not deny their experience. Whether their experience was accepted or rejected by fundamentalists was irrelevant; the emergence of the charismatic gifts were irrefutable proof that God was restoring his church. Driving the Pentecostal movement was not doctrines, creeds, or theological constructs, but an intense spirituality sustained by an equally intense conviction that what they were experiencing was not only biblical, but was also a prophetic fulfilment of God’s eschatological agenda. Moreover, the ensuing division between fundamentalists and Pentecostals became a catalyst for furthering the development of a more defined Pentecostal ecclesiology and eschatology that went beyond the latter rain motif towards a more well-informed biblical and theological context in the following decades. Although dispensational theology maintained its usage in Pentecostal circles throughout the twentieth century, the development of the latter rain motif enabled early Pentecostals to biblically support their unique distinctives in the midst of opposing theological viewpoints.

Conclusion

Within the heightened eschatological context of the early twentieth century, the Pentecostal movement burst onto the religious landscape. The emergence of the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the charismatic gifts signalled to Pentecostal believers that they were experiencing the end-times restoration of the apostolic church. Confronting the early Pentecostal movement was dispensationalism, a prevailing fundamentalist theology that conflicted with the emerging Pentecostal ecclesiological and eschatological distinctives. Dispensational hermeneutics insisted that the charismatic gifts had ceased following the apostolic age and the church age would end in apostasy prior to the return of Christ. To the early Pentecostals however, it was visibly evident that the Holy Spirit was empowering the church for a global end-times revival. Unable to explain the theological implications of their Pentecostal experience through dispensational theology, Pentecostals adopted the latter rain motif according to the prophecies in the book of Joel which anticipated a “last days” outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Believing the “early rain” to be the first Pentecost in the book of Acts, the early Pentecostals were certain they were now experiencing the “latter rain” of the Holy Spirit in preparation for a great harvest of souls prior to the imminent return of Christ. Although early Pentecostals retained most elements of dispensational theology, the latter rain motif became a dominant apologetic for the early Pentecostal movement and provided an adequate theological framework to articulate their emerging ecclesiological and eschatological distinctives. As the Pentecostal movement progressed, a more defined Pentecostal theology developed, but the latter rain motif remains an integral part of understanding early Pentecostal thought in the midst of conflicting theological opinions.

Revival at Azusa Street

2011-08-04T11:05:00.000-04:00

Pentecostal Identity: Christ the Healer

2010-11-30T08:52:00.003-05:00

Introduction

As the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC) approaches a centenary of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation throughout Canada and the world, there is a common desire among us to preserve our unique theological identity. Central to our shared identity is the understanding of Christ as Healer. Alongside the other four-fold theological underpinnings of Christ as Saviour, Baptizer, and Coming King, Christ as Healer remains an enduring, vibrant, and revitalizing feature of authentic Pentecostal faith and ministry. While discussing the shifting landscape of Pentecostal theology at the Communities of Practice at National Conference in Edmonton in 2010, the belief and practice of divine healing was mutually acknowledged as a prevailing quality of the contemporary Pentecostal church. Moreover, while vigorous debate surfaced concerning other aspects of our doctrinal distinctives, divine healing continues to have widespread support within our fellowship. Still, there remain a number of significant issues within the theology of divine healing that require our attention. Following a brief historical reflection of divine healing in early Pentecost, let me share with you about three critical issues continuing to face our movement: 1) the double atonement healing theology, 2) the relationship between medical science and divine healing, and 3) the nature and function of the gift of healing. Intended to further our national conversation about divine healing within the Canadian Pentecostal context, I will conclude by proposing a way forward in our shared theological journey by exploring the theology of suffering, the place of Christ in our healing theology, and our need to recover the missional nature of divine healing.

Historical Reflection

To effectively grapple with our Pentecostal identity as a movement, it is essential that we listen to the voices of our early pioneers. Grant Wacker, in his seminal monograph on the social context of early Pentecostals, declares, “if tongues defined the movement, healing gave it life.” In his assessment, divine healing was the dramatic visible manifestation of Christ’s conquest over the enemy. While testimonies of Spirit-baptism were relatively similar, divine healing testimonies ranged from “runny noses dried up to dead bodies raised to life – and everything in between.” Testimonies were proclaimed with the vividness of New Testament vocabulary or the simple prose of a medical report, yet all were punctuated with enthusiasm for the modern-day restoration of the apostolic gifts. “Canes, crutches, medicine bottles, and glasses are being thrown aside as God heals,” proclaims William Seymour. Ellen Hebden writes, “Cases of asthma, fever, rheumatism, lung troubles, drug habits and other diseases that are common to all humanity have been cured by divine power.” “Jesus is our family doctor” claims Zelma Argue, “No case is either too small or too difficult for Him.” So persuaded that Christ was able to heal every sickness and disease, early periodicals repeatedly exhorted believers to decline all medical means and “take the Lord as your healer.” From the earliest days, the understanding of Christ as Healer was well-established within the Canadian Pentecostal consciousness.

Current Challenges

1. The Double Atonement Healing Theology

Despite the faith and fervour among early Pentecostals that proclaimed Christ as Healer, the theology of divine healing has had an unattractive underside that has persisted to this day. Adopted by early Pentecostals was the soteriological notion that salvation and divine healing is assured in the atonement of Christ – a supposed double atonement. Key biblical texts supporting this doctrine were Is. 53:4-5 “by his stripes we are healed” and Mt. 8:14-17 “He Himself took our infirmities, and bore our sicknesses.” Advocates contended that these texts connected the act of healing to the efficacy of Christ’s death on the cross; that through Christ’s death, He triumphed over Satan and conquered sin and sickness, thereby making salvation and healing equally and universally available to all believers. Early believers would dub this the “double cure for the double curse.” Leaving little room for the sovereignty of God, the natural laws of nature, or the reality that we live in a fallen world, the appropriation of salvation and healing was completely dependent on the exercise of faith in Christ’s atonement. Those who were unable to receive their healing were largely considered to have inadequate faith to apprehend what Christ had already secured for them at Calvary.

Embracing such a rigid healing theology generated considerable tension among those who failed to find relief from their suffering. Articles would surface that would fault suffering believers for their existing ailments and handicaps, such as a 1956 article in The Pentecostal Evangel entitled “Why Many are Not Healed,” which outlines numerous reasons why suffering believers fail to apprehend their healing. Visually accenting the article was a picture of a man languishing in a wheelchair- his physical disability persisting due of his lack of faith. This theology also generated tension among missionary families who trusted in Christ’s atonement to protect them from sickness. When loved ones died from malaria and other diseases, missionaries struggled to explain such devastating circumstances, often insisting that their loss must have been the will of God. Furthermore, when early Pentecostal preachers of this double atonement theology later suffered age-related illnesses, propagation of their once triumphant healing theology suddenly grew silent. Unfortunately, remnants of the double atonement theology persist today and some Pentecostal believers continue to maintain that Christ has secured their healing at Calvary- all that is required is to claim their healing through the exercise of faith. Although we believe every benefit is mediated to us by Christ’s work on the cross, we cannot ignore the fact that we live between two ages – the present evil age and the age to come. The harsh realities of pain, suffering, and death persist between the brokenness of a fallen world and the in-breaking of God’s future full redemption.

2. The Relationship between Divine Healing and Medical Science

Emerging from our shared Pentecostal history has been a persistent suspicion concerning the role of medical science in the lives of believers. The rousing tune “Who’s report do you believe? We shall believe the report of the Lord,” is often interpreted to triumphantly declare God’s good report over and against the dire report of the family physician. Some Pentecostals have embraced the romantic notion that the early believers were so faith-filled that they rejected all doctors and drugs and simply believed for their miracle. Largely overlooked is the fact that during the early days, medical science was exceedingly primitive. Calomel (an insecticide) was given for stomach aches; a remedy for arthritic pain was a total dental extraction; a freshly killed chicken was applied to skin infections; the same medical syringes to treat livestock were also used to inoculate children. During an epidemic of diphtheria in New York in the nineteenth century, two out of three patients treated by a physician died, in contrast to only two of nine patients treated only with “ice packs and prayer.” Too often we are ignorant to the harsh realities of the early years and simply admire the faith of early Pentecostals when in fact many likely recuperated from their illnesses by simply avoiding the doctor. In the contemporary context, we have been exceedingly privileged to live in a technologically advanced society dedicated to health and wellness. As we exalt Christ as Healer and pray for the sick and suffering, we recognize that divine healing is not in conflict with medical science but functions cooperatively, manifesting through prayer and the wisdom and skill of medical practitioners.

3. The Nature and Function of the Gift of Healing

Another area of discussion within the theology of divine healing is the notion that someone can “possess” the gift of healing. According to Paul, some are given gifts of healing (1 Cor. 12:9), suggesting that some believers may receive a greater proclivity to heal the sick. With this in mind, however, Ronald Kydd makes several observations about the nature and function of the gift of healing. First, the gift of divine healing flows out of the mystery of God and can not be formulated, categorized, and marketed. Jesus himself did not follow any set blueprint or formula- the only evidential pattern in Jesus’ healings was the presence of Jesus Himself. Second, the stereotypical healer does not exist. From the emotive Oral Roberts to the hushed William Branham, from the flamboyant Kathryn Kuhlman to the laidback John Wimber, there is not one like the other. Third, despite the claims of healers and their supporters, reports of divine healings are often overstated. Proper medical verification and reporting are rare and even rarer are those who admit they were not healed, creating confusion between genuine healing and what may be merely pleasing to the imagination. Fourth, possessing the gift of healing does not guarantee the presence of sound doctrine. Advocates of divine healing have often treaded on the fringes of orthodoxy with extra-biblical claims and behaviours. Within this seemingly precarious milieu of divine healing, functioning in the gift of healing requires a considerable measure of maturity, responsibility, and humility. However, as the gift is appropriately exercised and evaluated within the Body of Christ, excesses are minimized and doctrinal soundness maintained, divine healing can be a catalyst for the inbreaking of the power of God in the local church.

A Way Forward

1. Developing a Theology of Suffering

To further our national conversation about divine healing within the Canadian Pentecostal context, I believe there is a need for the development of a thorough and practical theology of suffering. Within our churches, a prevailing narrative of triumphalism exists that minimizes the harsh realities of sickness and suffering. Largely neglected by Pentecostals who have traditionally viewed suffering and the Spirit-filled life as incompatible, the Luke-Acts paradigm paints an entirely different picture. A consistent Christological and apostolic theme, suffering was an ever present reality in the early church and an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. Within the contemporary context, emphasis on the triumph over suffering resonates from songs and sermons but there is little room for prayerful dialogue concerning the mystery of suffering. As the Holy Spirit relates to miracles, signs, and wonders, the Spirit also relates to suffering and weakness; living in the shadow of the cross and in the power of the Spirit are not mutually exclusive but are indicative of life in Christ.

2. Centring our Healing Theology on Christ

Second, the theology and practice of divine healing must remain centred on Christ. According to Francis MacNutt, the existing practice of divine healing centres far too much on the individual. For nineteenth century Lutheran theologian Johann Christoph Blumhardt, locating divine healing solely on the person of Christ was essential to his ground-breaking healing ministry. After praying unsuccessfully for over two years for the deliverance of a demon possessed woman, Blumhardt began to fast in accordance with the instructions of Jesus that some demonic forces can only come out by prayer and fasting. While interceding for the woman, she suddenly shrieked, “Jesus is victor! Jesus is victor!” and she immediately received complete deliverance. For Blumhardt, this experience demonstrated that the all-encompassing work of Christ was sufficient for healing. While this dramatic deliverance launched Blumhardt into the spotlight of the emerging divine healing movement, he never held a healing service, never prayed for lines of waiting people, never looked for instantaneous healing, never hesitated to recommend a physician, and never felt that he had to prove anything about himself or his ministry. For Blumhardt, it was not about what he had accomplished – Jesus was the source, means, and victor over all manifestations of evil and is completely capable of dealing decisively with all sickness and disease. In the contemporary Pentecostal context where gifted personalities are routinely elevated and celebrated, Blumhardt’s healing theology and praxis is worthy of further study.

3. Recovering the Missional Nature of Divine Healing

Finally, recovering the missional nature of divine healing is essential to fulfilling our mandate as a national fellowship. For Jesus, the locus of divine healing was not confined to the synagogue, but abundantly disseminated among the populace. Healing the sick and suffering was an essential component in his Spirit-empowered assignment to proclaim kingdom of God. However, in our contemporary seeker-sensitive ministry settings, divine healing has often been concealed from seekers in our attempt to shield them from some of the more charismatic eruptions of our traditional praxis. Recapturing the notion that divine healing is intrinsically missional and is intended for the purpose of gospel proclamation realigns our ministry template to embrace divine healing as a vital means of evangelism. Rather than seeker-sensitive services, we need seeker-sensitive believers who are willing to take divine healing to the street corner, coffee shop, and next-door neighbour. If it is true that divine healing remains an enduring, vibrant, and revitalizing feature of authentic Pentecostal faith and ministry, it must become fastened to our shared mission of gospel proclamation and extend beyond the walls of the church. As Spirit-filled partners with Christ consumed by the call of mission, we not only preach the gospel, but we also heal the broken-hearted and bring recovery of sight to the blind. As Canadian Pentecostals in the twenty-first century, we not only affirm Christ as Healer, but we actively minister to bring healing to a broken world until His return.

Bibliography

Argue, Zelma. What Meaneth This? Winnipeg, 1924.

Baugh, Edith, Misc. Notes, The Latter Rain Evangel, Jan. (1913): 13.

Burgess, Stanley M., ed. The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and
Charismatic Movements. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.

Hebden, Ellen K., “Testimony of Sister Bessier Hird,” The Promise, May (1907): 4.

_______, Ellen K., “The Pentecostal Work in Toronto,” The Promise, February (1909): 2.

Kydd, Ronald A. N. Healing through the Centuries. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers,
1998.

MacNutt, Francis. Healing. Altamonte Springs: Creation House, 1988.

Menzies, William W. and Robert P. Spirit and Power: Foundations of Pentecostal
Experience. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

Parham, Robert L. Selected Sermons of the late Charles F. Parham Sarah E. Parham.
Baxter Springs, KS: Apostolic Faith Bible College, 1941.

Richey, Raymond T. “Why Many Are Not Healed,” The Pentecostal Evangel Sept. 9
(1956): 4-5.

Seymour, William, ed. The Azusa Street Papers: A Reprint of The Apostolic Faith
Mission Publications Los Angeles, California (1906-1908). Foley, AL: Together in Harvest Publications, 1997.

Sloos, William, Minutes from COP Dialogue, Edmonton, AB, 12 May 2010.

Steele, Volney, M.D. Bleed, Blister, and Purge: A History of Medicine on the American Frontier. Missoula, MN: Mountain Press, 2005.

Wacker, Grant. Heaven Below. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001.

Defining Pentecostal Identity: Differences between Charismatics and Classical Pentecostals

2010-11-30T08:42:00.004-05:00

Introduction

As the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC) approaches a centenary of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation throughout Canada and the world, there is a mutual desire to rediscover its unique theological identity. Throughout its storied history, the PAOC has encountered a number of pentecostal-like charismatic movements that have challenged Canadian Pentecostals to re-examine their sense of self within the highly pluralistic Canadian religious landscape. One of the most significant and influential movements to challenge the identity of Canadian Pentecostals has been the Charismatic Movement. Dubbed “the new Pentecost” by Donald Gee, this mid-twentieth century North American religious movement experienced distinctively pentecostal blessings and phenomena, yet remained outside any denominational framework or shared confession of faith. Within the contemporary context, the next generation of the Charismatic Movement, known also as the neo-charismatic movement or the “Third Wave,” is advancing its pentecostal-like theology and practice among post-denominational and independent churches throughout the world. Now considered to actually outnumber all Pentecostals in numbers and in annual converts worldwide, the Charismatic Movement has little traditional Pentecostal ties but is a prime mover in the pentecostalization of the global Church. From the house-church movement in China to the indigenous churches in Africa to the Toronto Blessing, the Charismatic Movement continues to experience remarkable growth. With its burgeoning religious popularity, the Charismatic Movement appears to have blurred the theological lines that classical Pentecostalism once struggled to establish. “It is often impossible now to distinguish between ‘Pentecostals’ and ‘Charismatics,’ states Allen Anderson. Whereas Classical Pentecostals had historically defined the parameters outlining the doctrine and experience of pentecostal spirituality, the Charismatic Movement has proposed a far more inclusive, open-ended, and multi-dimensional approach to the work of the Holy Spirit. Stemming from this emerging theological diversification is what appears to be an erosion of Classical Pentecostal identity. Has the third wave overcome the first wave? Are there any discernable differences between Charismatics and Classical Pentecostals? P. D. Hocken’s article “Charismatic Movement” compares the Charismatic Movement with Classical Pentecostalism and identifies nine key differences between the two movements. This paper will examine Hocken’s theses to understand the differences and propose a way forward in defining PAOC identity within the global pentecostal/charismatic family.

Differences between Charismatics and Classical Pentecostals

1. Origins

Hocken argues that the naissance of the Charismatic Movement was far more diverse than that of the Pentecostal Movement. Highlighting how the Charismatic Movement never had an Azusa Street as a geographical point of genesis, people under the umbrella of the Charismatic Movement received Spirit-baptism through a variety of connections and influences:
•direct contact with Pentecostals or charismatics already baptized in the Spirit
•growing experience of spiritual gifts following the rediscovery divine healing
•outbreaks of glossolalia in circles praying for revival (more in Europe than America)
•bible studies (especially in the book of Acts)
•divine interventions among people who knew nothing of the Pentecostal blessing
Although many of these influences were also part of the early Pentecostal experience, the majority of early Pentecostals came into the movement though revival meetings that were erupting throughout North America. The Charismatic Movement however, attracted followers through a variety of diverse pathways, some of which were made possible by the pioneering efforts of early Pentecostals.

2. Missions

One of the defining characteristics of early Pentecostals was their missionary impetus. When believers were filled with the Spirit, many of them would set their sights and focus their energies on evangelism- often on a global scale. Not only was Pentecostalism birthed on the heels of the foreign missionary movement of the late nineteenth century, but Pentecostals also equated their baptism in the Spirit with power to witness. Within the Charismatic Movement however, their missional aims were largely consigned to sharing Spirit-baptism with fellow church members. According to Menzies, Charismatics tended to “see their role as a revitalizing influence within their own tradition.” Although the Charismatic Movement’s missionary impulse has increased over the years, especially among restorationist, non-denominational, and para-church groups, classical Pentecostalism has consistently upheld world missions and gospel proclamation as a central component of their theology of Spirit-baptism and consequently their pentecostal identity and mission.

3. Holiness

Historically an emotive flashpoint for Pentecostals and Charismatics, differences in their perspectives of holiness has been a defining feature of these two movements. According to Hocken, this division in devotional and moral ethics largely stems from the socio-religious context of each movement. When Pentecostalism was birthed in the early twentieth century, not only did many Pentecostal pioneers have Holiness backgrounds, but holiness codes were part and parcel of the fundamentalist/evangelical religious culture. When the Charismatic Movement emerged however, it was a different generation and culture where holiness inclinations were not as passionate and concentrated; charismatic practitioners were also from a multiplicity of confessional backgrounds that did not reflect a Pentecostal holiness framework. When people received Spirit-baptism within the Charismatic Movement, Pentecostals expected that their reception of the Spirit would birth a pentecostal-like transformation towards holiness. When this did not occur, Hocken notes that Pentecostals became increasingly suspicious about the authenticity of their experience in the Spirit. Furthermore, this persisting moral variance between Pentecostals and Charismatics also influenced how each group understood how seekers received Spirit-baptism. Whereas Pentecostals would “tarry for the baptism” with much soul-searching, contrition, and confession, Charismatics would simply pray for people to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit without a concerted insistence on personal repentance and particular modes of religious propriety.

4. Ecclesiology

Unlike Pentecostals, who traditionally viewed Spirit-baptism as a highly individual event designed to empower believers to fulfil their unique God-ordained purposes in the world, the Charismatic Movement has a more corporate view of the work of the Spirit. For Charismatics, the Holy Spirit is given to renew the existing Church as a whole. These sentiments have been strongest within the sacramental-liturgical traditions, where Spirit-filled believers have remained within their denominations and have contributed to the rediscovery of covenant relationships and spiritual gifts within the corporate body. It is interesting to note that the Charismatic Movement’s pneumatological framework is more inclined towards the Pauline texts that emphasize the corporate life of the body of Christ rather than the Lukan perspective that depicts the outpouring of the Holy Spirit descending on individuals and groups of believers.

5. Ecumenicism

Although both movements have experienced their share of criticisms from the broader religious community, Charismatics have been able to cross confessional boundaries far more than Pentecostals. During the early years, Pentecostals were ostracized from the larger evangelical community and were duty-bound to theologically validate their experience in the Spirit. By the time the Charismatic Movement emerged on the horizon, a number of factors were at play that would enable Charismatics to enjoy a greater interdenominational influence. First, Pentecostal pneumatology, already in its second generation, was permeating the religious landscape and was becoming less offensive and more respectable. Second, coinciding with the rise of the Charismatic Movement was the emergence of the Ecumenical Movement which created a greater receptivity to various pneumatological ideas. Third, those who had experienced the baptism of the Spirit and remained in their churches were able influence others from within their traditions more so than if they left to join established Pentecostal churches. As early as 1955, charismatic believers were holding meetings within their mainline denominations by arranging opportunities for seekers that featured the anointing of the sick and prayer for healing. Although it did generate some controversy at the time, within a few years, virtually every American denomination had been introduced to the work of the Spirit through the Charismatic Movement. Although the openness and acceptance of the pentecostal message among the broader Christian community would likely not have been possible without the Charismatic Movement, it was the Pentecostals who loosed the proverbial jar a generation earlier.

6. Eschatology

Coinciding with the emergence of Pentecostalism was an enduring evangelical preoccupation with the events surrounding the end-times. Within this context, Pentecostals, with their Scofield Bibles in hand, largely accepted the dispensationalist teachings promoting the pre-millennial second coming of Christ. Conversely, the Charismatic Movement has not sanctioned any particular eschatological standing despite the heightened “end-times” consciousness resulting from their experience of Spirit-baptism. Within the Third Wave camp, there are voices that oppose the pessimism of pre-millennialist propositions, yet there remains little eschatological cohesion and consistency within the movement.

7. Healing

A central component of both the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements is an enthusiastic belief in divine healing. Despite the shared confidence in divine healing, the patterns resident within each movement demonstrates some differences. While Pentecostals have engendered a more demonstrative divine healing praxis with a focus on physical restoration, Charismatics have largely concentrated on inner healing with a focus on emotional recovery. Hocken’s explanation for this distinction is worth noting: “This contrast reflects differences in social background and theology. Awareness of mental states is more characteristic of a middle-class milieu than of working-class people, and the theology of many charismatics is more sympathetic to psychology than that of many Pentecostals.” Although Hocken attributes the socio-economic contexts of each movement as a way to explain their respective distinctions, there likely are further contributing factors such as how each movement interprets Scriptures related to divine healing, their common healing practices, and the explanatory style of the suffering and healed within their faith communities.

8. Spirit-baptism

If there is one central theme to both Classical Pentecostals and Charismatics alike, it is that a person can have a personal encounter with the Holy Spirit. Classical Pentecostals traditionally hold that all Christians should seek a post-conversion crisis experience called the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Referring to the Lukan narrative as their modus operandi, Pentecostals cite multiple examples of biblical characters receiving Spirit-baptism some time following their conversion, underscoring how these examples are to be normative for all believers. The Charismatic position does affirm a subsequent crisis experience of Spirit-baptism, but it is understood more as an actualization of the Spirit given at conversion and less a gift of the Spirit for vocational empowerment.

9. Initial Evidence

As part of their theological validation of Spirit-baptism, historical Pentecostal denominations affirm that speaking in tongues is the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism. The Charismatic view however, refuses to make any such “law of tongues,” contending that simply providing glossolalic evidence can not and should not be the sole signifier of Spirit-baptism. Other than the fact that Charismatics refuse to make a “law of tongues,” there is little continuity among Charismatics regarding a theology of glossolalia. Early Charismatic leader Dennis Bennett highlighted how “tongues are part of the package” when it comes to Spirit-baptism while contemporary charismatic leader Larry Hart teaches that one “may or may not speak in tongues when baptized in the Holy Spirit, but speaking in tongues is still seen as a normal part of Spirit-filled living available to all.”

A Way Forward: Defining PAOC Identity

With such theological variability within the contemporary context, it is easy to see how the Charismatic Movement has blurred the theological lines Pentecostals once struggled to establish. From a distance, I agree with Allen Anderson that “it is often impossible now to distinguish between ‘Pentecostals’ and ‘Charismatics’.” However, if we were to zoom in for a closer look, I believe that there are three significant Pentecostal characteristics that contribute to the formation of a unique identity with the global pentecostal/charismatic family: foundational, missional, and reinventing.

a) Foundational – The Value of our Shared History

Emerging from Hocken’s article is the inimitable position Pentecostals have as founders of the modern outpouring of the Spirit. Not only did early Pentecostals proclaim an experience of Spirit-baptism and pioneer a theology of Spirit-baptism while it was unpopular and persecuted, they also blazed a trail for future generations of Spirit-filled believers. Without the revolutionary initiatives of early Pentecostals, the Charismatic Movement would have had to break its own ground, defend its own experiences, and develop its own theologies. Unfortunately, so many Pentecostals know so little about their own history to truly appreciate the pioneering work of their spiritual forbearers. Perhaps it takes a non-Pentecostal such as Harvey Cox to remind us of our unique place in the world:
Pentecostalism has become a global vehicle for the restoration of primal hope. The movement started from the bottom. A partially blind, poor, black man with little or no book learning outside of the Bible heard a call. Seymour was anything but a Paul of Tarsus, trained by the leading religious scholars, or an Augustine of Hippo, schooled by the most polished Roman rhetoricians, or a Calvin or Luther educated in the original languages of scripture. He was a son of former slaves who had to listen to sermons through a window and who undoubtedly traveled to Los Angeles in the segregated section of the train. Yet under Seymour’s guidance, a movement arose whose impact on Christianity, less than a century after his arrival in Los Angeles, has been compared to the Protestant Reformation.

For Canadian Pentecostals, our heritage differs from the American story, yet it remains a rich tapestry of Spirit-led and Spirit-empowered believers whose sacrifice paved the way for our own faith journey. Despite the changing times, tapping into our shared heritage is one of the most valuable exercises in rediscovering our unique identity. Although classical Pentecostalism now shares the road with the Charismatic Movement as the global torchbearers with the message of the Spirit, to rephrase the words of Killian McDonnell, behind every Charismatic stands a classical Pentecostal.

b) Missional – The Value of our Shared Mission

Having identified some of the differences between Pentecostals and Charismatics, an indispensable quality of Pentecostalism continues to be its inherent mission of global evangelization. Permeating almost every theme is the intrinsic awareness of a lost world and the need for Spirit-empowered witness. Although the context changes and new voices emerge, Pentecostalism remains anchored to gospel proclamation. Experiences may be debated and theologies disputed, but sharing Christ is a non-negotiable feature of the Pentecostal message and an essential component of Pentecostal belief and practice.

c) Transformational – The Value of our Shared Capacity to Transform

Not only is Pentecostalism missional at its heart, but it is also intensely pragmatic and able to continually reinvent itself into new and relevant ways of communicating the gospel without compromising its core beliefs. Although some have described the blurring theological lines within contemporary Pentecostalism as an identity crisis and a worrisome fragmentation of a divinely ordained religious institution, Jacobsen explodes this myth by stating that Pentecostalism was never united enough to fragment in the first place. For example, early Pentecostalism was endemic with theological controversies: holiness Pentecostalism, finished work Pentecostalism, and Oneness Pentecostalism- each vying for the hearts and minds of Pentecostal believers. Within the contemporary context, the Charismatic Movement has challenged Pentecostals on many of its historical doctrines and belief systems, but the most contentious issues today still pale in comparison to the historical debates of the past. Rather than perceiving Pentecostalism as suffering an identity crisis or fragmentation, a more accurate and helpful way of understanding Pentecostalism is to return to the understanding that it is a movement and vastly capable of reinvention. While denominations grow stale and stagnate, movements are always changing and consistently and creatively reinventing themselves according to the shifting cultural and religious landscapes. Pentecostalism is movement not a denomination- and its identity lies in its inherent ability to reinvent itself with the timeless foundational and missional message of Christ for generations to come.

Bibliography

Anderson, Allen. An Introduction to Pentecostalism: Global Charismatic Christianity.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Brand, Chad Owen, ed. Perspectives on Spirit Baptism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman,
2004.

Burgess, Stanley M., ed. The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and
Charismatic Movements. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.

Cox, Harvey. Fire From Heaven. Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 1995.

Jacobsen, Douglas. Thinking in the Spirit: Theologies of the Early Pentecostal Movement. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003.

Menzies, William W. and Robert P. Spirit and Power: Foundations of Pentecostal
Experience. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

Stronstad, Roger. The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1984.

Synan, Vinson. The Century of the Holy Spirit. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2001.

Synan, Vinson. The Holiness-Pentecostal Tradition: Charismatic Movements in the
Twentieth Century. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.

Wacker, Grant. Heaven Below. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001.

Integrative Book Review: Pentecostal Theology

2008-07-23T15:14:00.002-04:00

Introduction
Since the dawning of the Pentecostal movement in the early twentieth century, a growing body of theological scholarship has emerged with a specific focus on the role of the Holy Spirit in the life and mission of the Church. No longer able to ignore the influence of Pentecostalism on the broader Christian community, religious scholars have been compelled to examine and evaluate the biblical basis for the baptism in the Holy Spirit, ecstatic tongues speech, and the charismatic missionary impetus that characterizes the Pentecostal faith. Pentecostal scholars have also produced theological commentaries with exegetical excellence and doctrinal soundness in support of a Pentecostal perspective. Having thoughtfully selected and read the eight hundred pages of required reading for the course, this paper will examine the main issues discussed in the reading, synthesize the arguments, and apply the insights to ministry in a Pentecostal context.

To effectively discuss the theological issues in contemporary Pentecostalism, it is essential to understand the historical context and origins of the movement. Although Pentecostals have historically romanticized their birth by describing it as falling directly from heaven, Menzies’ book, Spirit and Power, illustrates how the Pentecostal movement is principally a derivative of the holiness and fundamentalist traditions. In the late nineteenth century, a deep spiritual hunger permeated through Wesleyan congregations producing a shared conviction in the following elements: a second blessing for sanctification, an expectation of divine empowerment, the gift of divine healing, and an imminent premillennial eschatology. Various other Christian groups from the Refomed tradition were also seeking a “deeper” or “higher life” experience in God and began holding conferences in Keswick, England, with the expectation of Spirit-empowerment. Coinciding with the spiritual hunger of these holiness groups, the fundamentalist movement also gathered strength as a reaction to the rising tide of modernism and liberal theology. When believers within these two groups began experiencing Pentecostal revival around the turn of the twentieth century, they appropriated the methodologies and theological values from their respective traditions and applied them into their nascent and developing Pentecostal theology. Although some scholars have contended that the Pentecostal faith is essentially an experiential religion and absent of any sound theological grounding, this perception is misguided. From its conception, the Pentecostal movement has been shaped by both a deep spiritual hunger and an intense desire for biblical truth.

Despite the fact that Pentecostals have traditionally embraced a high view of Scripture, for most of their existence they have failed to produce an adequate defence for the doctrine of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. With the emergence of the Charismatic Movement, Third Wave, and a greater openness to the work of the Spirit among Evangelicals, Pentecostals have been exposed to a number of contrary positions which has forced them to better articulate their pneumatological convictions. In his book, Perspectives on Spirit Baptism, editor Chad Owen Brand has compiled a thought-provoking and insightful volume discussing the doctrine of the baptism in the Holy Spirit from five different church traditions. The Reformed view contends that the reception of the Holy Spirit occurs at Christian initiation and there is no subsequent post-conversion experience of Spirit-baptism. With a strong Christological emphasis, the Wesleyan perspective also rejects the notion of Spirit-baptism as a subsequent experience and argues that the Spirit is received at conversion and initiates the work of sanctification in believers toward their ultimate perfection at the consummation. The Charismatic position does affirm a subsequent crisis experience of Spirit-baptism, but it is understood more as an actualization of the Spirit given at conversion and less a gift of the Spirit for vocational empowerment. In addition, the Charismatic view also refuses to affirm tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism for fear of categorizing believers according to their levels of spiritual experience. From a Catholic point of view, although there is a plurality of theological interpretations, they essentially understand the baptism in the Holy Spirit as an experience within their sacramental system that renews the gifts and graces of confirmation. Differing from each of these perspectives is the Pentecostal view which contends that Spirit-baptism is a distinct experience subsequent to conversion that empowers believers to be witnesses for Christ and is evidenced by speaking in tongues. With all these diverse and competing theological voices, confusion is inevitable. For Pentecostals wishing to claim their position as the one closest to the teaching of Scripture, testifying to their personal experience of Spirit-baptism is an inadequate explanation for their interpretation of the biblical text; a rigorous and biblically sound Pentecostal apologetic is necessary for the development of a proper theology of the Spirit.

According to Stronstad in The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke, the central issue of debate over the doctrine of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is a fundamental disagreement over the hermeneutical understanding of the diverse literary genre of the New Testament. Stronstad argues that Paul’s pneumatology is developed from his epistlolic material which is essentially didactic, while Luke’s pneumatology must be deduced from his historical narratives. Regrettably, the majority of scholarship on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit has been largely viewed from a Pauline perspective while Lukan pneumatology has been relegated to an inferior position of theological influence due to its narratival genre. This traditional overemphasis on Pauline literature over Lukan literature has produced a deficient pneumatology and has generated considerable confusion regarding the nature and characteristics of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. To rehabilitate Luke’s inferior status as a theologian, Stronstad makes three critical observations: a) Luke’s two-volume work has literary and theological homogeneity, b) Luke’s historiography has its own theological character, and c) Luke is a theologian in his own right and with his own message. When these elements are taken into consideration and Luke is recognized as a theologian independent of Paul, Luke’s pneumatology creates some challenges for those scholars who have consistently understood Spirit-baptism as a means of conversion or sanctification. Contrary to the soteriological perspective, Luke teaches that the role of the Holy Spirit is vocational and is intended to empower believers to carry out the eschatological mission of global gospel proclamation.

Following his remediation of Lukan hermeneutics, Stronstad unpacks Luke’s unique theological message by identifying how the Old Testament and Jewish Hellenistic historiography has influenced his pneumatology. From his review of the Old Testament, Stronstad discerns that the prophetic anticipation of the charismatic Spirit of God is focussed on a single charismatic leader (Is. 11:2; 42:1; 61:1) and a community of people who are both renewed (Is. 59:21; Ez. 36:26-27) and empowered (Joel 2:28-29). Within the intertestamental period, Stronstad identifies how charismatic activity had ceased but there existed a collective expectation that charismatic activity would be restored with the emergence of the Messiah who would be both Spirit-anointed and Spirit-empowered. When Luke introduces his readers to Jesus, he deliberately portrays the infancy narratives (Lu. 1:5-2:52) with dramatic outbursts of charismatic activity, emphasizing his theological interest in presenting Jesus as the fulfilment of the long-awaited charismatic prophet. These episodes contain a variety of typological, programmic, and paradigmatic elements that compel Luke’s readers to look for additional patterns of charismatic activity throughout the narratives. Later in the text, the Spirit descends on Jesus, empowering him to fulfil his role as the Spirit-anointed, Spirit-led, and Spirit-empowered charismatic Christ (3:1-4:44). Modelled after the prophetic ministries of Isaiah, Elijah, and Moses, Jesus continues to function in the power of the Holy Spirit in word and deed throughout his public ministry. When the day of Pentecost comes, Jesus transfers the charismatic Spirit from himself to the waiting disciples so that they also will be empowered to perpetuate Christ’s prophetic eschatological mission to the ends of the earth (Ac. 1:8; 2:4).

Stronstad’s monograph The Prophethood of All Believers highlights how the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost fulfils Joel’s prophecy, actualizes Jesus’ promises, and the inaugurates the prophethood of all believers. First, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit fulfils the ancient oracle of the prophet Joel, who anticipated a new age when all of God’s people, regardless of race, gender, or social status, receive the prophetic outpouring of God’s Holy Spirit (Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-21; see also Num. 11:29). When the onlookers hear the disciples prophesying and engaging in ecstatic tongue speech at the Temple, Peter addresses them by applying Joel’s prophecy as the explanation for the charismatic activity being witnessed. Second, the day of Pentecost actualizes Jesus’ multiple pre- and post-resurrection promises that the disciples would be baptized in the Holy Spirit, endued with supernatural power, and vocationally equipped for ministry in both word and deed. Third, through this transfer of the charismatic gift, Jesus inaugurates a community of Spirit-baptized prophets who, having already been regenerated (Lk. 10:20), receive their empowerment to perpetuate the mission of Christ from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. Moreover, as the historical account of the early church unfolds, Luke’s readers become aware that the gift of the Holy Spirit was not confined to the disciples but was programmic and paradigmatic for the believers throughout the Lukan narratives (Acts 2:39; 8:15-17; 9:17; 10:44-46; 19:1-7).

Conclusion
Emerging from an examination of Lukan pneumatology, it is apparent that Spirit-baptism is a distinct experience subsequent to conversion that empowers believers to witness for Christ and is initially evidenced by the outward sign of speaking in tongues. Contrary to the traditional Reformed and Wesleyan perspective which contends that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is soteriological, Luke intends his readers to understand that the charismatic gift of the Holy Spirit is vocational. Moreover, just as Jesus functioned as a charismatic prophet and the disciples functioned as a charismatic community of prophets, the church is also intended to be charismatic community and engaged in Spirit-filled, Spirit-led, and Spirit-empowered ministry. Although large segments of the contemporary church have been suspicious of charismatic activity, the charismatic character of the early church makes it essential that churches re-examine their orthodoxy and orthopraxy in light of Luke’s theological paradigm. Furthermore, it is critical for Pentecostal believers who have experienced the baptism in the Holy Spirit to reassess the purpose of their experience and not neglect the vocational intent of Spirit-baptism as the means of empowerment for witness within their context.

Bibliography

Brand, Chad Owen, ed. Perspectives on Spirit Baptism: Five Views. Nashville:
Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004.

Menzies, William W. and Robert P. Spirit and Power: Foundations of Pentecostal
Experience. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000.

Stronstrad, Roger. The Prophethood of All Believers. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1999.

Stronstad, Roger. The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, 1984.

Suffering As An Expected Consequence Of Spirit-Empowered Gospel Proclamation: A Lukan Paradigm by William Sloos

2008-07-23T15:03:00.005-04:00

Introduction

With Pentecostal scholarship largely preoccupied with securing a sound biblical theology of Spirit-baptism within the broader evangelical community, examining the relationship between Spirit and suffering remains a critical issue for contemporary Pentecostals, especially those living in the Western or Minority World. Recent trends in Pentecostalism within the Minority World have embraced a devotional ethic that pursues the benefits and blessings of God instead of exemplifying a life of Spirit-empowered witness. Rather than sharing in the sufferings of Christ to reach a lost and sinful world, Pentecostals have been increasingly lured into accepting the myth that Christ came primarily for their health, wealth, and inherent right to personal happiness. Resembling the dominant worldviews of Western culture and privilege, Pentecostal spirituality has become increasingly focussed on self and less focussed on modelling the mission of Christ to liberate and redeem fallen humanity. The Holy Spirit is no longer considered the one who empowers for witness, but has been redefined as the source for stimulating sensory and spiritual experiences that have little to do with the world outside of the church. This pneumatological reorientation has not only separated contemporary Minority World Pentecostals from their siblings in the Majority World who continue to embrace a Spirit-empowered missional teleology, but has also detached them from their historical roots and the missionary impetus that defined the movement in its early years.

Cognizant among early Azusa-era Pentecostals was a conviction that suffering would be an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. In his book Thinking in the Spirit, Jacobsen demonstrates how a number of prominent early Pentecostal theologians linked the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the likelihood of experiencing occasions of suffering. Early twentieth century holiness Pentecostal George Floyd Taylor believed that being Spirit-filled would provoke intense opposition and predicted that “as soon as many receive the gifts of the Spirit, persecutions will arise that will scatter us to every corner of the earth.” Pentecostal evangelist William Durham asserted that the emergence of a Spirit-baptized church would incite a global satanic-inspired persecution and ominously declared that “it would only be a short time before Pentecostal martyrs would be lying dead in the streets.” Richard Spurling, following his Spirit-baptism near Camp Creek, North Carolina, in the mid-1880’s, described how Spirit-empowered witness would inevitably lead to persecution at the hands of unbelievers and religious people alike. Echoing the apostolic exhortations to encourage faithfulness despite the risks of Spirit-empowered proclamation, Spurling writes:
they will persecute us, they will mock and say that we are a band of cranks and are fanatic, and say all manner of evil against us falsely for Christ’s sake. Not because they love God or holiness or the church but because they love honor, money, division, a great name and greeting in the markets, chief seats in the council, conferences, and associations; but some will persecute us because of their honest zeal, believing they are right. But I trust the Lord will give all my brethren spirit and light to see the truth and enough love for God to accept it, at any cost. Moses like, Christ like, Paul like, Luther like, in fact, like every one who would do God’s holy will and not the will of man.

Largely neglected by contemporary Pentecostals, these intense yet biblically reflective sentiments infused early Pentecostal thinking and inspired many Spirit-baptized believers to preach the gospel at home and abroad despite the risk of persecution and suffering. Recognizing some of the pneumatological and missiological parallels between Luke-Acts and early Pentecostalism, there is a current need to re-examine the role of Spirit and suffering within the Lukan narratives to assist in the rehabilitation of a more biblically balanced missional pneumatology that revives the passion for Spirit-empowered proclamation within the contemporary context.

Objective

A traditional favourite among Pentecostals, Luke-Acts has been the most important biblical template for the development of a Pentecostal distinctive of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Although the broader evangelical community has been recently introduced to an increasing number of excellent scholarly works promoting a Pentecostal hermeneutic for Luke-Acts, Luke’s theology of the Holy Spirit in relation to suffering has received comparatively minor attention. Within the past decade, only a few books have examined this subject from a Pentecostal perspective. William and Robert Menzies’ book, Spirit and Power, includes a chapter on suffering that argues that Pentecostals have a theology of glory, but have an inadequate theology of the cross and have subsequently failed to appreciate the full range of God’s providential care. Harold Hunter and Cecil Roebeck’s book, The Suffering Body, contains a short survey of a charismatic theology of suffering from a Lukan perspective and asserts that the Holy Spirit has a central role in the lives of suffering believers. Easily the most influential work by a Pentecostal scholar to date concerning a Lukan theology of the Spirit and suffering is Martin Mittelstadt’s recent monograph, The Spirit and Suffering in Luke-Acts. Mittelstadt persuasively argues that Spirit-inspired ministry consistently encounters acceptance and rejection throughout the Lukan narratives. Rejection to Spirit-inspired ministry results in suffering and opposition, but serves to advance the gospel and is ultimately part of God’s plan. Although Mittelstadt’s seminal work will influence this study, I will be narrowing the focus to specifically concentrate on how Luke presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

To substantiate this argument, this study will examine the following main characters in Luke-Acts: John the Baptist, Jesus, the disciples, and Paul. Although each of these characters has a unique missional journey, their experiences share common elements that generate a singular message: suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation. What is more, the stories of these characters collectively span Luke’s entire two-volume narrative, illustrating one of Luke’s overarching intentions to present his readers with examples of Spirit-filled prophets who courageously proclaimed the gospel despite being aware that their actions would lead to occasions of suffering. Since the Lukan community was encountering outbreaks of persecution within their own context, learning about these suffering charismatic prophets served to comfort and strengthen the church and encourage them to persevere in the midst of their own suffering. As Luke’s readers patiently waited for the triumphant return of Christ, these examples also informed them that their suffering was not exclusive to their particular situation but was an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation within the broader Christian narrative.

Through literary analysis, this study will examine John the Baptist, Jesus, the disciples, and Paul from four components to construct an analogous trajectory of suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation. The first component explores the vocational assignment of each of the characters to demonstrate how they all receive the task of proclaiming the gospel. Paralleling the Old Testament prophets who were divinely assigned to boldly declare the word of God, these suffering charismatic prophets are all given the mission of proclaiming the gospel within their own contexts. Although there are nuances and variations to their particular vocational assignment of gospel proclamation, Luke demonstrates to his readers that gospel proclamation is an essential part of the discipleship journey. The second component investigates how the Holy Spirit empowers each character to fulfil their vocational assignment of gospel proclamation. Luke’s consistent portrayal of the Spirit as the source of prophetic inspiration which empowers these characters for effective service emphasizes the importance of the Spirit in gospel proclamation. Building on the common elements of the previous two components, the third component researches the data within the narratives to identify how suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation. For each of the characters, Luke provides hints within the text to suggest that each character will not be immune to the prospect of suffering as they perform their vocational assignments. Through the verbal and physical abuse of the local community, religious authorities, or political leaders, each character is expected to encounter occasions of suffering, even suffering unto death. To confirm Luke’s expectations that suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation, the fourth and final component studies the actualization of suffering in each of the characters. Repeatedly violent and disturbing, these experiences of suffering confirm Luke’s earlier warnings and notify Luke’s readers that their suffering is not exclusive to their particular context but is a normative experience for all believers who participate in proclaiming the gospel in the power of the Holy Spirit. Through these four components, an analogous trajectory will emerge that supports the claim that suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. Concluding the study, I will synthesize the material and present a challenge for the contemporary Pentecostal context.

John the Baptist

a) Vocational Assignment
Prior to his birth, John’s vocational assignment was prophetically articulated by Gabriel to Zacharias while he was performing his priestly duties in the sanctuary. Zacharias is informed that his son, though yet to be conceived, has been divinely appointed for a specific task:
he will turn back many of the sons of Israel to the Lord their God. And it is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous; so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord (Lk. 1:16-17, NASB).

During an era in Israel’s history when there was little prophetic activity, John was divinely assigned a prophetic assignment to “turn” people back to the Lord. Fulfilling the expectations of the prophet Malachi (Mal. 3:1; 4:5-6), this pre-conception commissioning to “turn” was freighted with the understanding that an essential feature of John’s vocation would involve gospel proclamation. According to Marshall, the verb ἐπιστρέφω (“to turn”) can also be translated “to convert” and is employed later in Luke-Acts in reference to Christian conversion in response to gospel proclamation. When Peter proclaimed a paralytic healed in the name of Jesus, “all who lived at Lydda and Sharon saw him, and they turned to the Lord” (Acts 9:35, italics mine). When defending himself before Agrippa, Paul described his vocation as a divinely appointed witness to “turn [the Gentiles] from darkness to light” (Acts 26:18, italics mine). Thus for Luke, “turning” people to God was inexorably linked to gospel proclamation and would become a defining feature in John’s upcoming vocational assignment to restore and revive Israel’s relationship with God. Furthermore, Luke reports that John would be enabled to minister “in the spirit and power of Elijah.” Although the prophet Elijah functioned both as a miracle worker and preacher, his primary role was undeniably proclamation. As Elijah boldly proclaimed the word of God (1 Ki. 18:20-40), Luke informs his readers that John’s vocational assignment would also involve the task of prophetic proclamation in advance of the Messiah (cf. Lk. 1:76; 3:18).

b) Spirit-empowerment
Contained within the birth announcement, Luke informs his readers that John will be “filled with the Holy Spirit, while yet in his mother’s womb” (Lk. 1:15). Contrary to Turner and Fitzmyer, who argue that John is a transitional figure and his charismatic experience is confined to a particular epoch unrelated to the church age, John’s Spirit-infilling is instead part of an emerging pattern of charismatic activity that is unfolding in the Lukan narratives. Although John’s intrauterine Spirit-filling is unique in the Lukan corpus, Luke’s readers are discovering that the infancy narratives are overflowing with occurrences of charismatic activity that inspire prophetic proclamations within the devotional community. Not only is John filled with the Holy Spirit, but Elizabeth (Lk. 1:42-44), Mary (Lk. 1:48-55), Zacharias (Lk. 1:68-79), Simeon (Lk. 2:29), and Anna (Lk. 2:36-38) each experience charismatic activity that produces a restoration of prophetic discourse. Since prophecy had ceased in Israel up to this point, this charismatic outburst within the infancy narratives strongly indicates that Joel’s prophecy that the Spirit would be poured out upon all flesh is becoming a reality (Joel 2:28). Moreover, this renewed charismatic activity corresponded with Judaic theological expectations that believed that prophecy would be restored with the coming of the Messiah and herald the dawning of the last days. With the emergence of this charismatic activity within the infancy narratives, followed by the bestowal of the Spirit on Christ at his baptism (Lk. 3:22) and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:4), it is apparent that John’s Spirit-filling is not associated with a transitional age within salvation history, but is emerging as a normative experience for the prophetic agents of God.

Within this atmosphere of charismatic activity, John’s prenatal reception of the Holy Spirit empowers him to fulfil his vocational assignment of gospel proclamation. Employing the expression, “filled with the Holy Spirit,” Luke introduces his readers to a phrase he uses another nine times in his narratives and is directly associated with Spirit-enabled prophetic proclamation (Lk. 1:41, 67; Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 7:55; 9:17; 13:9; 13:52). Apart from John’s Spirit-filling which occurred in his mother’s womb, every other episode where Luke describes people as being “filled with the Spirit” they subsequently engage in various Spirit-inspired prophetic speech patterns. By using this expression, Luke is intending to demonstrate that the infilling of the Holy Spirit is inextricably related to the function of prophetic phenomena. Furthermore, John’s preparatory Spirit-infilling becomes a programmic event in the lives of Christ and his followers prior to the commencement of their own mission of gospel proclamation. Thus when John is born and later appears as an adult in the Jordan wilderness, Luke has made his readers aware that John’s Spirit-filling has empowered him to fulfill his vocational assignment of gospel proclamation to “turn” people back to God in the spirit and power of Elijah.

c) Vocational Risks
Although Gabriel informs Zacharias that John’s birth was an answer to their prayers and would bring them “joy and gladness” (Lk. 1:14), John’s divine mission of Spirit-empowered proclamation contains some risks that would invariably lead to occasions of suffering. First, as noted earlier, John functioned “in the spirit and power of Elijah.” This typological correspondence would cause Luke’s readers to recall that Elijah, though powerfully used by God, frequently encountered occasions of suffering related to his prophetic ministry (i.e. hunger, persecution, threats of death, criticism, rejection, displacement, fear, loneliness, and depression; cf. 1 Kings 17-19). Aligning John with Elijah would alert Luke’s readers that John may also encounter occasions of suffering related to his prophetic ministry. In fact, any alignment with the prophets of Israel’s history would spoil any notion that John would enjoy a long and prosperous life. Second, Gabriel informed Zacharias that John would only turn back “many,” but not all, suggesting that his message will be opposed and rejected by some (Lk. 1:16). Thus, despite receiving an angelic visitation informing Zacharias that his son would be “great in the sight of the Lord” (Lk. 1:15), it is clear that John’s mission will be fraught with risks and that he will most likely encounter suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

In the actualization of his prenatal appointment, John’s public ministry emerges when he is found in Jordan wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins (Lk. 3:1-20). Again, Luke provides hints that John’s message may encounter opposition. First, as a harbinger of future events, Luke opens the narrative by listing the names of the current local Roman governmental officials highlighting the potentially hostile socio-political climate within which John is ministering (Lk. 3:1). According to Green, Luke’s mention of these leaders, especially Pilate, Herod, Annas, and Caiaphas, are identified as people who will play important roles in opposing current and future messages of gospel proclamation. Second, despite being a herald of good news, the nature of John’s preaching was severe. Punctuated with Semitisms (“brood of vipers” Lk. 3:7), John criticizes the Jews for thinking they will escape the eschatological judgement merely by the virtue of their racial heritage. Like the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed the word of God without restraint, John’s harsh tone suggests that his message might offend some people enough to take exception to his message. Coupled with the warnings inferred from his birth announcement, these cautionary tones all serve to underscore how Luke presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

d) Experience of Suffering
Expectations concerning John’s experience of suffering as a Spirit-empowered prophet do not materialize immediately. Despite his reprimandatory language concerning the people’s empty religiosity and perceived privileged status as children of Abraham, Luke portrays John’s ministry as largely acceptable by the diverse crowd. Even tax collectors, who were renowned for their dishonesty and exploitation, respond favourably to John’s preaching and receive water baptism. Emphasizing the widespread effectiveness of his gospel proclamation, Luke reports that “all were wondering in their hearts about John, as to whether he might be the Christ” (Lk. 3:15). Although Jesus later reports that the Jewish religious authorities criticized John by saying “He has a demon!” (Lk. 7:33), for the most part, John’s message generated a widespread restoration and revival of faith among the people.

Following a largely successful wilderness campaign where many people repented and were baptized in water, Luke abruptly concludes the pericope by informing his readers that John is about to encounter opposition. Expectations of John’s suffering materialize when he aggressively reproves Herod for his inappropriate relationship with his brother’s wife and other “wicked things” (Lk. 3:19). Contrary to the general attitude of the multitudes who largely accepted John’s stern message of repentance, Herod rejected his rebuke and “locked John up in prison” (Lk. 3:20). According to Josephus, John was imprisoned in Herod’s palace at Machaerus and, given Herod’s vicious and barbaric inclinations, it can be assumed that John’s detention was likely served under harsh conditions. For John, the experience of imprisonment paralleled the experience of many Old Testament prophets. The prophet Micaiah was imprisoned for proclaiming the word of the Lord while the false prophets spoke freely to king Ahab (1 Kings 22:27). Jeremiah was falsely accused, beaten, and “put in the cistern house, in the cells, and remained there many days” (Jer. 37:15-16). Consistent with Luke’s typological framework, not only would John preach prophetically as an Old Testament prophet, but he would also suffer as an Old Testament prophet. Although Luke turns his attention to Jesus immediately after John was imprisoned, later in the narrative Luke notes that Herod had John beheaded (Lk. 9:7-9), affirming for Luke’s readers how John’s vocational assignment ultimately cost him his life. Yet, John’s suffering was not in vain, for Luke records Jesus’ commendatory words to the multitudes concerning John: “I say to you, among those born of women, there is no one greater than John” (Lk. 7:28).

Summary
Establishing the paradigm of suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation, John is introduced to Luke’s readers as a divinely appointed messenger to prepare the people for the coming of the Messiah. Before his birth, John is given the vocational assignment of gospel proclamation to turn people back to God in the spirit and power of Elijah. To empower him to fulfil his vocational assignment, he is filled with the Holy Spirit while still in his mother’s womb. Despite being filled with the Holy Spirit for his divinely appointed task, Luke provides clues in the text that suggest that John will likely suffer for his Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation: John is aligned with Elijah who experienced suffering as a prophet of God (Lk. 1:17); John’s message will be accepted by many, but not all (Lk. 1:16); John ministers in a hostile political environment that includes leaders who will oppose the gospel (Lk. 3:1); and John’s message is severe, suggesting that some may be offended at his condemnatory message (Lk. 3:7-9). Luke’s warnings materialize when John reproves Herod for his iniquitous behaviour and is consequently imprisoned and later martyred. For Luke’s readers, John the Baptist’s story initializes a developing paradigm within the Lukan narratives that presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation.

Jesus

a) Vocational Assignment
Despite the angelic announcements of the miraculous birth of Jesus in the infancy narratives, Luke waits to explicitly disclose Jesus’ distinctive vocational assignment until the commencement of his adult ministry. While attending his hometown synagogue, Jesus stands and reads from the Isaiah scroll: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor. He has sent Me to proclaim release to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind, To set free those who are downtrodden, to proclaim the favourable year of the Lord” (Luke 4:18-19; Is. 61:1-2; 58:6, italics mine). As Jesus subsequently applies the Isaiahic prophecy to himself, Luke informs his readers that a central feature of Jesus’ forthcoming ministry will be gospel proclamation. First, Jesus states that he will εὐαγγελίζω (“preach”), emphasizing his role as a preacher of the gospel to the marginalized and those neglected by the socially and economically privileged. Second, Jesus asserts repeatedly that he will κηρύσσω (“proclaim”), asserting his role of liberator-proclaimer to deliver, heal, release, and herald the favourable year of the Lord. Throughout the narratives, Luke interchanges these two terms along with διδάσκω (“teaching,” cf. Lk. 4:31) to underscore the importance of the spoken word of God to Jesus’ overall ministry. Although Jesus will also perform many miracles, healings, and wonders, Menzies states that the Isaiahic passage “undeniably emphasizes preaching as the most prominent dimension of Jesus’ mission.” Just as Isaiah functioned as a Spirit-anointed prophet, so Jesus will fulfil his vocational assignment through Spirit-empowered proclamation.

b) Spirit-empowerment
Empowering Jesus to fulfil his vocational assignment of gospel proclamation, Luke reports that the Holy Spirit came upon him following his water baptism. While Jesus was praying, “heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove” (Lk. 3:21-22). Although Luke does not reveal what effect the descent of the Spirit had on Jesus at the time, the occasion fulfils the Old Testament promise that God would put his Spirit “upon” his servant (Is. 42:1). Later in the text, when Jesus emerges at the Nazarethean synagogue, he publically declares himself to be Spirit-anointed (Lk. 4:18), confirming to Luke’s readers that the descent of the Spirit at his baptism was in fact his anointing in preparation for his prophetic-messianic office (cf. Acts 4:27; 10:38). Moreover, Jesus’ application of the term “anointing,” places him in continuity with the Old Testament prophets who were also anointed and empowered by the Spirit to proclaim the word of God (1 Sam. 10:10; 16:12-13; 1 Ki. 19:16; 2 Ki. 2:15). Thus, with the Spirit descending upon him at his water baptism, Jesus became the Anointed One and the exclusive bearer of the Spirit to fulfil his vocational assignment of gospel proclamation.

Resulting from Jesus’ anointing, two things can be observed as it relates Jesus’ journey as a suffering charismatic prophet. First, Jesus’ anointing preceded the inauguration of his vocational assignment. Just as John was “filled with the Spirit” prior to the commencement of his public ministry, Jesus’ anointing was a necessary prerequisite that empowered him for prophetic proclamation. Talbert states:
It is noteworthy that in the plot of the Third Gospel Jesus found it necessary to receive an empowering for ministry before he embarked on his public career. He had been conceived by the Holy Spirit; he had been dedicated to God by his parents as a babe; he had personally identified with his parents’ decisions about him and consciously assumed the yoke of the kingdom of heaven. Yet none of these could substitute for the necessary anointing-empowering given him after his baptism. What is needed for adequate ministry in the Lukan understanding is a prior empowering by God’s Spirit.

Although Jesus was the Son of God and the presumptive Messiah-King, even he required the anointing of the Holy Spirit before he assumed his messianic mission. Emerging as a vocational-charismatic blueprint within the Lukan narratives, Luke is demonstrating to his readers that Spirit-empowerment is essential for proclamation.
Second, Jesus’ Spirit-anointing was programmic for his entire ministry. Following his anointing, Luke’s readers are repeatedly informed that Jesus is filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. When he enters the wilderness, Luke records that Jesus was “full of the Holy Spirit” and “led about by the Spirit” (Lk. 4:1). When Jesus returned to Galilee, he came in the “power of the Spirit” (Lk. 4:14). Jesus also experienced the joy of the Spirit (Lk. 10:21) and the inspiration of the Spirit (Acts 1:2). As Luke narrates Jesus’ public ministry, he frequently uses the terms “power” (δύναμις) and “authority” (ἐξουσία) to describe the enduring anointing of the Spirit in his life (Lk. 4:14, 32, 36; 5:17, 24; 6:19; 8:46; 9:1; 10:13, 19; 19:37; 20:8; Acts 2:22). Moreover, Jesus teaches about the Spirit (Lk. 11:13; 12:10; 21:15) and promises the gift of the Spirit to his disciples (Lk. 12:11-12; Acts 1:4-5, 8). Retrospectively, Peter reports to the Gentiles: “You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power” (Acts 10: 38). From Jesus’ water baptism until the day of Pentecost, Jesus’ anointing functioned as a continuous flow of the Spirit’s power throughout his public ministry, empowering him to fulfil his divinely commissioned task of gospel proclamation.

c) Vocational Risks
Despite Jesus’ triumphant declaration in the synagogue, Luke has already indicated that Jesus’ vocational assignment of proclamation will contain some risks that will most likely lead to occasions of suffering. Climaxing the Lukan infancy narratives, Simeon’s second oracle introduces Luke’s readers to the first hint of impending trouble and conflict in the story of Jesus. Contrasting the optimistic tone of the first oracle where Simeon praises God for the privilege of seeing the promised salvation in the form of the Christ child, his second oracle contains a sobering prophecy announcing that the emerging mission of Christ will be met with considerable human resistance. Serving as a preview of the upcoming conflict between Jesus and the people of Israel, Simeon addresses Mary saying: “Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel, and for a sign to be opposed- and a sword will pierce even your own soul- to the end that thoughts from many hearts may be revealed” (Lk. 2:34-35). Simeon’s Spirit-inspired words inform Luke’s readers that Jesus will cause a diametrically opposed pattern of response among the people of Israel that could potentially lead to occasions of suffering within the unfolding of Jesus’ vocational assignment of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation.

Conditioning Luke’s readers for what is about to be fulfilled in the narrative, Simeon’s programmic prophecy contains three components that anticipate Jesus’ rejection and potential for suffering. First, Simeon states that the child will cause “the fall and rise of many,” indicating that people will be divided in their response to Jesus, some accepting him and others rejecting him (Lk. 2:34a). Second, Jesus will be “a sign to be opposed,” implying that those in the emerging community who incorrectly interpret the sign of Jesus are those who reject him and stand in opposition to him (Lk. 2:34b). Third, Jesus will reveal the “thoughts from many hearts,” referring to Jesus’ exposure of the hidden thoughts and negative attitudes of those who accept and reject him (Lk. 2:35a). Combining these elements, Simeon’s prophecy indicates that Jesus’ career will be full of conflict, hostility, and rejection. Cunningham rightly observes that Simeon’s prophecy institutes a persecution theme of promise and fulfilment that involves the suffering of the Messiah and the partial rejection of Jesus. With the promise of rejection and persecution assured as an anticipated pattern in the unfolding story of Jesus, Luke’s readers are coming to grips with the reality that Jesus will most certainly encounter occasions of suffering as an expected consequence of his Spirit-empowered proclamation.

d) Suffering Experienced
Although many people respond favourably to Jesus, Simeon’s ominous prophetic forecast prepares Luke’s readers to view the subsequent unfolding of the narrative with the expectation that Jesus will endure significant opposition and even suffering by those who reject him. First, Jesus’ own local community misunderstands the nature and scope of his announced mission; they respond with rage and “drive him out of the town” and attempt to “throw him down the cliff” (Lk. 4:29). Second, Jesus faces opposition from the Pharisees, scribes, chief priests, captains, elders, rulers, and Sadducees who all view him as a threat to their social, religious, and political agendas and their pursuit of governing God’s people. Kingsbury states that these religious leaders regarded Jesus as a false messiah “who undermines their authority, misleads the people, and violates the law, traditional values, and temple cult.” To protect their valued interests and preserve their shared perception of nationhood, they oppose Jesus and reject his Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. Early in his ministry, the scribes, Pharisees, and other religious leaders question the source of Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Lk. 5:21), his association with tax collectors and sinners (Lk. 5:30), and his provocative determination to heal people on the Sabbath (Lk. 6:7). After Jesus performs a healing on the Sabbath, the scribes and Pharisees are furious and “discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus” (Lk. 6:11). As Jesus begins his journey to Jerusalem, opposition towards him intensifies and the religious leaders scheme together to eliminate him. Though many people in the crowd accept him, the chief priests and the teachers of the law attempt to trap him (Lk. 20:1-8). At Jesus’ trial, the entire Sanhedric council falsely accuses him saying, “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king” (Lk. 23:2). Third, in concert with Jesus’ local community and the Jewish religious leaders, the local political authorities also reject Jesus and initiate his suffering and death. The Roman leaders berate Jesus and treat him with contempt. The soldiers heap insults upon him and members of King Herod’s guards ridicule and mock him by dressing him in a stately robe before sending him back to Pilate to be crucified (Lk. 23:11). The extent of Simeon’s prophecy is blatantly obvious in the narrative, alerting Luke’s readers that even Jesus is not immune to the prospect of suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

Summary
Following the paradigm of suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation, Jesus is introduced to Luke’s readers as the long-awaited Messiah who has come to liberate and redeem fallen humanity. While attending his native synagogue, Jesus identifies his vocational assignment as gospel proclamation in fulfilment of the Isaiahic prophecy. Empowering him to fulfil his vocational assignment, Jesus receives his Spirit-anointing following his water baptism. However, as Luke’s readers have already witnessed in John the Baptist, they discover that suffering is also an expected consequence of Jesus’ Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. As predicted by Simeon’s second oracle, Jesus encounters rejection and opposition throughout his ministry. Verbally and physically harassed and abused by his native community, the religious authorities, and the political leaders, Jesus is eventually arrested, tortured, and crucified. Although his messiahship, missional appointment to fulfil Scripture, and resurrection distinguish Jesus from the other suffering charismatic prophets in Luke-Acts, Jesus’ example is an integral part of the Lukan paradigm that presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation.

The Disciples

a) Vocational Assignment
Differing from John’s and Jesus’ disclosure of their vocational assignment, the disciples’ vocational assignment of gospel proclamation is progressively revealed. First, Jesus models gospel proclamation to the apprenticing disciples (Lk. 5:12-8:56). Second, Jesus sends the disciples on their own short-term missionary journey of gospel proclamation to the surrounding villages (Lk. 9:1-12). As a precursor to the commissioning of the disciples following Jesus’ resurrection, Luke reports that Jesus “called the twelve together, and gave them power and authority over all the demons, and to heal diseases. And He sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God, and to perform healing” (Lk. 9:1-2, italic mine). As an extension of Jesus’ vocation, the disciples are directed to κηρύσσω (“proclaim,” cf. Lk. 4:18-19) the message of the kingdom of God to all who will listen. Following Jesus’ death and resurrection, he reappears to the disciples and commissions them with the task of proclaiming the gospel to all people. Luke states:
Then he [Jesus] opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and He said to them, ‘Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and rise again from the dead the third day; and that repentance for forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem’” (Lk. 24:45-47, italics mine).

Since the disciples have been mentored by Jesus, have observed his death and can attest to his resurrection, Jesus appoints them as witnesses (μάρτυς, see Lk. 11:48; Acts 1:8) to both Jews and Gentiles beginning in Jerusalem (Lk. 24:48). Although the disciples are instructed to wait for their Spirit-empowerment, it is apparent that an essential component of their forthcoming vocational assignment will involve gospel proclamation (Lk. 24:49).

b) Spirit-empowerment
As a foretaste of their Spirit-empowerment at Pentecost, Jesus provisionally endues the disciples with δύναμις (“power”) and ἐξουσία (“authority”) to fulfil their vocational assignment of gospel proclamation for their short-term missionary journey to the surrounding villages (Lk. 9:1-2; cf. Lk. 4:36). Their immersion in the Spirit occurs on the day of Pentecostal when Jesus baptizes the disciples in the Holy Spirit. Following Jesus death and resurrection, Christ appears to the disciples to inform them that they will be “baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now” in fulfilment of John the Baptist’s prophecy (Acts 1:5; cf. Lk. 3:16). Shortly thereafter, while the disciples were praying, they “were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance” (Acts 2:4). According to Stronstad, “By juxtaposing the narrative about John’s prophecy that Jesus would baptize in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4-5) and the Pentecostal narrative (Acts 2:1-21), Luke makes it plain that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the disciples was their being, ‘baptized in the Holy Spirit.’” Furthermore, Stronstad argues that, based on the paradigm of Jesus’ own anointing with the Spirit, the baptism in the Holy Spirit that the disciples experience is their anointing for ministry. Other scholars disagree with this argument. Dunn maintains there is an epochal significance for the Pentecost episode which enables the disciples to enter into the “kingdom of God” or “salvation” during the turn of the ages. Turner argues that the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit “is the chief means of the disciples’ ongoing and deepening experience of salvation.” However these views fail to recognize the established vocational-charismatic blueprint already established in the Lukan narratives which clearly demonstrates that the Holy Spirit is given to empower people for gospel proclamation. Just as John was “filled with the Holy Spirit” (Lk. 1:15) and Jesus was “anointed” with the Spirit (Lk. 3:22; 4:18) before they embarked on their respective missions, the disciples also receive the gift of the Spirit in advance of their mission to witness to the resurrected Christ. Moreover, Jesus himself defined the purpose of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit when he explained to the disciples: “you shall receive δύναμις when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses” (Acts 1:8). Rather than viewing Spirit-baptism as soteriological, Luke continually demonstrates to his readers that Spirit-baptism is to empower the disciples to fulfil their vocational assignment of gospel proclamation. Green correctly observes that “Luke understands Jesus to operate throughout his ministry in the sphere of the Spirit’s direction and power. And he understands that those who will continue Jesus’ mission, the divine project, must also receive the Spirit and move forward under the Spirit’s influence.” As the narrative unfolds, it becomes apparent that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is programmic and paradigmatic for the early church and continually empowers believers to boldly proclaim the gospel to the nations (cf. Acts 4:8, 31; 5:32; 6:10; 8:25; 9:27; 13:46; 14:1, 25; 16:32; 18:25; 19:6, 8).

c) Vocational Risks
In Luke 12:1-12, long before their Spirit-empowerment at Pentecost, Jesus alerts the novice disciples to the fact that suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation. First, Jesus identifies the Pharisees as their antagonists and stresses that they cannot be trusted: “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy” (Lk. 12:1). The word “hypocrisy” in contemporary language suggests that the Pharisee’s were merely dishonest or insincere, but according to Green, this view is unsupported by the Lukan narratives. “Hypocrisy” is a transliteration of the Greek term ὑπόκρισις and is used in the Septuagint for “a person whose conduct is not determined by God and is thus godless.” That Jesus had recently encountered rejection by the Pharisees fuels this perception and indicates to the disciples that they can also expect godless treatment and harsh resistance from the Pharisees. Jesus’ second warning shifts the focus away from the Pharisees and directly addresses how the disciples should respond to threats of persecution. “And I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more than they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who after He has killed has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him!” (Lk. 12:4-5). With these ominous words, Jesus notifies his disciples that suffering, even martyrdom, is a likely event in their prospective ministry as Spirit-empowered prophets. Despite these threats, they are not to fear their persecutors, but are to remain steadfast in their loyalty to God. Furthering these warnings, Jesus concludes the didactic episode by presenting the disciples with an interrogation scenario that they will certainly encounter. “And when they bring you before the synagogues and the rulers and the authorities, do not become anxious about how or what you should speak in your defence, or what you should say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say” (Lk. 12:11-12). As expected, Jesus predicts that the same group of religious authorities that persistently threaten his life will also threaten the disciples’ lives. Although the disciples will have the Holy Spirit to help them during their time of need, Mittelstadt is correct when he states: “this passage is programmic for it prepares Jesus’ disciples for the future – when they will meet with hostility and be subject to persecution.” Aligning the disciples with John the Baptist’s and Jesus’ experience as suffering charismatic prophets, the disciples discover that the Pharisees cannot be trusted, suffering- even martyrdom is expected, and they share the same opponents- the Jewish religious authorities. Through Jesus’ early warnings to the disciples, Luke’s readers are reminded that suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation.

d) Experience of Suffering
Shortly after the disciples are baptized in the Holy Spirit, Jesus’ prophetic warnings of opposition and suffering are fulfilled. When Peter and John heal the lame man at the temple and garner an audience to proclaim the gospel, Luke records that “the priests and the captain of the temple guard, and the Sadducees, came upon them, being greatly disturbed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them, and put them in jail” (Acts 4:1-3, italics mine). Noticeable from this initial episode of persecution is how Luke presents the disciples in continuity with John the Baptist and Jesus. Both John the Baptist and the disciples are imprisoned; both Jesus and the disciples are opposed by the religious authorities. Although Peter and John are released unharmed from this encounter, they brazenly inform the religious leaders that they “cannot stop speaking what we have seen and heard,” indicating to Luke’s readers that the pattern of suffering due to Spirit-inspired speech will not only continue but likely intensify (Acts 4:20).

Suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation continues for the disciples when the high priest and his associates are filled with jealousy and lay “hands on the apostles and put them in a public jail” (Acts 5:1-18). When an angel miraculously releases them from their captors, the angel expressly orders the disciples to persist in proclaiming the gospel, saying “stand and speak to the people in the temple the whole message of this Life” (Acts 5:20, italics mine). Obedient to the angel’s instructions, the disciples are found proclaiming the gospel when they are recaptured and interrogated before the Sanhedrin who intend to “slay them” for their seditious behaviour (Acts 5:33). Flogged and commanded to “speak no more in the name of Jesus,” the disciples are released and rejoice, not because their lives were spared, but because “they had been considered worthy to suffer shame for His name” (Acts 5:42). The disciples’ confession not only highlights their profound identification with the suffering of Christ but also demonstrates to Luke’s readers that proclamation and suffering are inseparable elements of the discipleship journey. Shortly thereafter, a great persecution emerges against the church. Stephen is stoned to death because of his Spirit-empowered discourse to the Jews (Acts 7:54-60). Saul begins “ravaging the church, entering house after house; and dragging off men and women, he would put them in prison” (Acts 8:3). Cunningham notes that Luke’s description of Saul as “ravaging” (λυμαίνομαι) the church is a very graphic term used in the Septuagint relating to wild animals tearing at raw flesh. As the persecution against the believers broadens, Luke reintroduces political figures who incarcerate, abuse, and murder the disciples (cf. Lk. 3:1). Herod mistreats the disciples and has “James the brother of John put to death with a sword” and proceeds to “arrest Peter also” (Acts 12:2-3). Evident in these vivid and violent episodes, Luke interweaves a pattern of proclamation and suffering throughout the narratives, emphasizing how suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation.

Summary
Building on the Lukan paradigm of the suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation, the disciples follow the established trajectories of John the Baptist and Jesus. As an extension of Jesus’ vocation, the disciples are assigned the task of gospel proclamation, first to the surrounding villages in Israel, then to all people in all nations. To enable them to fulfil their vocational assignment, Jesus provisionally endues them with power and authority and then later baptizes them in the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. However, Jesus clearly forewarns the disciples that their future careers as Spirit-empowered prophets will be met with opposition and suffering. Jesus cautions the disciples to be alert to the hypocrisy of the Pharisees (Lk. 12:1), counsels them not to fear their persecutors who may execute them (Lk. 12:4-5), and advises them to depend on the Holy Spirit when they are interrogated before the Jewish religious authorities (Lk. 12:11-12). Jesus’ words prove accurate when the disciples are arrested, imprisoned, threatened with death, interrogated, flogged, stoned, abducted from their homes, abused, and stabbed; Stephen and James are martyred for their Spirit-empowered witness. Despite their maltreatment at the hands of the religious and political leaders, the disciples consider themselves privileged to share in the sufferings of Christ. Like John the Baptist and Jesus before them, the disciples are part of the Lukan paradigm that presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

Paul

a) Vocational Assignment
While Paul, then Saul, was staying at Judas’ house, still blind from his vision of the risen Christ, Ananias receives a divine message concerning Paul’s vocational assignment. Through a vision, Jesus informs Ananias that Saul “is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel” (Acts 9:15, italics mine). Unique in the Lukan narratives, the phrase “to bear My name” (βαστάζω ὄνομα) conveys the idea of carrying a message. According to Cunningham, when interpreted in the context of Paul’s larger vocational assignment, the phase undoubtedly contains a missiological thrust that implies gospel proclamation. Confirming this claim, Bruce observes that this passage suggests that Paul will function as a “messenger who would proclaim the good news in Jesus name.” This assertion is confirmed when Paul, following his healing and Spirit-empowerment, immediately begins to “proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, ‘He is the Son of God’” (Acts 9:20, italics mine). When Paul’s mission is inaugurated in Acts 13, he preaches first to Jews and then to Gentiles, establishing a pattern of gospel proclamation throughout his missionary journeys. Later when Paul is giving a defense of his faith before Agrippa, Paul reaffirms his vocational assignment saying that Jesus appointed him as a “minister and a witness” to testify to the Jews and Gentiles (Acts 26:16-17). Programmic for his life and ministry, Paul’s vocational appointment of gospel proclamation continues to the conclusion of the Lukan accounts when he is found in Rome “preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all openness, unhindered” (Acts 28:30).

b) Spirit-empowerment
Corresponding with the vocational-charismatic blueprint in the Lukan narratives, Paul receives the empowerment of the Holy Spirit prior to embarking on his vocational assignment of gospel proclamation. When Ananias arrived at the house where Paul, then Saul, was staying, Ananias laid his hands on him and said: “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight, and be filled (πλήθω) with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 9:17). Since Luke makes no mention of the inception of the Spirit or of the manifestation of any prototypical charismata, Turner claims that “the laying on of hands was for healing alone,” and not for Paul’s Spirit empowerment. Contrary to Turner’s assessment, it is more likely that Luke never felt any obligation to repeat the specifics of Spirit-empowerment in every single episode of this two-volume corpus. Luke’s readers were already familiar with the pattern of Spirit-filling (John the Baptist, Lk. 1:15), Spirit-anointing (Jesus, Lk. 3:22), and Spirit-baptism (the disciples, Acts 2:4); repeating the details was presumably unnecessary. According to Stronstad, “Luke’s silence makes it clear that he can be quite indifferent to both the timing and the phenomena associated with the gift of the Spirit. It is equally evident that Luke’s primary concern is with the fact of God’s calling and equipping.” Affirming Stronstad’s position that this episode was in fact Paul’s Spirit-empowerment, Bruce states:
Ananias laid his hands on Saul, but it was the power of Christ that in the same moment enlightened his eyes and filled him with the Holy Spirit. Such filling with the Spirit was the indispensable qualification for the prophetic and apostolic service mapped out for Saul in the Lord’s words of v. 15; henceforth Saul performed this service as one endowed with heavenly power.

Paralleling the experiences of John, Jesus, and the disciples, Paul receives the empowerment of the Holy Spirit that enables him to fulfil his forthcoming vocational assignment of gospel proclamation.

c) Vocational Risks
Concentrated in a single phrase, Luke explicitly discloses to his readers that suffering is an expected consequence of Paul’s vocational assignment of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. Within the same vision that informed Ananias of Paul’s prophetic appointment, Jesus announces the following programmic words to Ananias: “I will show him how much he must suffer for My name’s sake” (Acts 9:16, italics mine). Much to Ananias’ astonishment, the persecutor is about to become the persecuted. To describe the difficult experiences that Paul will encounter on his missional journey, Luke states that Paul will “suffer” (πάσχω), a term occurring ten times in the Lukan narratives. Notably, eight of the ten times Luke employs the word πάσχω, he refers explicitly to Jesus’ passion (Lk. 9:22; 17:25; 22:15; 24:26, 46; Acts 1:3; 3:18; 28:5), placing Paul in continuity with the path of suffering experienced by Christ. Additionally, Luke reports that Paul will suffer because of the “name” of Christ (i.e. “suffer for My name’s sake,” Acts 9:16). According to Cunningham, associating Paul with the “name” incorporates him into the line of those who have already suffered for the “name” and perpetuates the warnings made by Jesus to his disciples that they will be hated, arrested, and persecuted “on account of my name” (Lk. 21:12-17). As Luke narrates Paul’s journey of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation, one thing is certain: suffering is not only expected, it is assured.

d) Experience of Suffering
Immediately following Paul’s vocational assignment and Spirit-empowerment, Jesus’ foreboding forecast becomes perceptible when Paul is found proclaiming the gospel in the synagogues in Damascus. Emerging again as the primary antagonists in the Lukan narratives, the religious authorities conspire to murder Paul, leading to his rather unceremonious escape through a whole in the city wall (Acts 9:24-25). The pattern of proclamation and suffering resumes when Paul appears later in Jerusalem and was “speaking out boldly in the name of the Lord,” but the Jews were “attempting to put him to death” (Acts 9: 28-29). When Paul becomes the principal character in the latter portion of the Acts narratives, it becomes apparent that suffering manifests actively and persistently wherever he proclaims the gospel. The list of various kinds of persecution suffered by Paul as a result of his gospel proclamation include: trials (Acts 16:20-21; 18:12-16; 22:30-23:9; 24:1-22; 25:7-12; 25:24-26:29); imprisonment/captivity (16:23-24; 21:33-28:31); beating (16:22); plots/conspiracy (9:23, 29; 13:50; 14:4-5; 14:19-20; 17:5-9; 20:3, 19; 23:12-15, 20-21, 30; riots (16:22; 17:5-8, 13; 19:29; 21:27-32; 23:10; 26:21); forced exodus (13:50; 14:6, 19-20; 16:39-40; 17:10, 14, 33; 20:1); mocking (17:32); stoning (14:19); left for dead (14:19). Although threats against his life and verbal and physical attacks continue throughout his missionary journeys, Paul confidently declares to the disciples, “I am ready not only to be bound, but even to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 21:13-14). Confident in the sovereignty of God and committed to the cause of Christ, Paul continues to fulfil his vocational assignment of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation despite the enduring onslaught of persecution and suffering.

As Luke narrates the Pauline missional journey, Luke’s readers are alerted to the fact that Paul considers proclamation and suffering as essential components of following Christ. His perspective is detected on many occasions, two of which will be highlighted here. First, after having suffered persecution by the Jews in Antioch and Iconium, Paul encourages the disciples to persevere despite the consequences saying, “Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14: 22; cf. Lk. 24:46). Cunningham observes that the word “tribulations” (θλίψις) does not refer to the general troubles and hardships common to humankind, but specifically relates to identifying with Christ in the mission of gospel proclamation. As a result, Paul views his sufferings as an anticipated and necessary reality in his vocational assignment and hopes to rally the disciples’ courage to continue proclaiming the gospel despite the cost. A second example is found when Paul farewells the Ephesian believers saying:
“the Holy Spirit solemnly testifies to me in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions await me. But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, in order that I may finish my course, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:23-24).

Rather than exclusively presenting the Holy Spirit as the one who empowers, Luke also presents the Holy Spirit as the one who informs Paul about his imminent sufferings. That the Holy Spirit is informant as well as the source of spiritual empowerment demonstrates to Luke’s readers that suffering is an unavoidable reality in their discipleship journey. For Paul did not consider suffering as an isolated possibility, an unfortunate risk that might be avoided, or as something that the Holy Spirit would always deliver him from, but he viewed suffering as inexorably interlocked with the mission of Christ in the world. According to House, Paul’s ministry was an example to Luke’s readers because he “served Christ by embodying the suffering of Jesus.” In other words, Paul’s suffering was an essential part of his ontology of discipleship and was considered a normative experience for all believers who actively follow Christ in gospel proclamation.

Summary
An essential component of the Lukan paradigm of suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation, Paul follows the trajectories established by John the Baptist, Jesus, and the disciples. Divinely appointed to “bear” the name of the Christ to Jews and Gentiles, Paul is charged with the vocational assignment of gospel proclamation (Acts 9:15). Empowering him to fulfil his vocational assignment, Ananias lays his hands on Paul and he is “filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 9:17). Within the same episode however, Luke reveals that Paul’s forthcoming mission will be characterized by suffering- placing him in continuity with the path of suffering experienced by Christ (Acts 9:16). As Paul’s mission unfolds, it becomes unmistakably evident that hostility, opposition, and persecution follow Paul wherever he proclaims the gospel. Nevertheless, through his sufferings, Paul confesses his identification with the sufferings of Christ and exhorts the disciples to persevere in proclaiming the gospel despite the consequences (Acts 14:22; 21:13-14; 20:23-24). For Luke’s readers, Paul completes the paradigm within the Lukan narratives that presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

Synthesis and Challenge
Through the examination of the missional trajectories of John the Baptist, Jesus, the disciples, and Paul, it is apparent that Luke presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. As suffering charismatic prophets, the characters are divinely appointed the task of gospel proclamation and are subsequently empowered by the Holy Spirit to fulfil their vocational assignment. However, despite their prophetic commissioning, Luke informs his readers that each of the characters’ missional journeys contain risks that could invariably lead to occasions of suffering. First, Luke aligns John the Baptist with the prophet Elijah, who frequently encountered occasions of suffering related to his prophetic ministry. Moreover, Luke reports that John would turn back “many,” but not all, suggesting that his message will be greeted with opposition and rejection. Luke’s implicit warnings are fulfilled when Herod imprisons John and later has him beheaded. Second, Luke warns his readers through Simeon’s second oracle that Jesus’ mission will be met with considerable human resistance that will likely lead to occasions of suffering. The extent of Simeon’s prophecy saturates the narratives as Jesus suffers persistent verbal and physical abuse at the hands of the local community, religious authorities, and political leaders, culminating in his crucifixion. Third, Luke alerts his readers that Jesus’ disciples will also encounter suffering for their Spirit-empowered proclamation. Jesus warns his disciples about the godlessness of the Pharisees, the threat of martyrdom, and the certainty of being interrogated by the religious authorities. As Luke’s readers discover, Jesus’ ominous forecast is proven accurate when the disciples encounter each of these elements throughout their missional journey. Fourth, Luke discloses to his readers that Paul will “suffer” for his ministry of gospel proclamation. Punctuating the remaining portion of the Acts narratives, Paul endures hostility, opposition, and persecution wherever he proclaims the gospel. Collectively, these suffering charismatic prophets illustrate a paradigm within the Lukan narratives that presents suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered proclamation.

As the Lukan community endures outbreaks of persecution within their own oppressive and antagonistic environment, discovering how suffering was expected in the missional trajectories of John the Baptist, Jesus, the disciples and Paul informs their own journey of discipleship. First, Luke’s readers learn that the expectation of suffering is normative for all believers. If the Lukan community considered their experience of expected or actualized suffering exclusive to their own situation, Luke’s narratives would counteract this belief and assure them that their experiences are consistent with the suffering of the charismatic prophets in Luke-Acts. Second, Luke’s readers realize that the expectation and actualization of suffering follows the path of suffering established by Christ. Cunningham observes, “the persecution Jesus experienced continues on in the experience of those who bear his name, continue his work and witness to who he is.” As the Lukan community persists in proclaiming the resurrected Lord, they place themselves on the continuum with Christ and the journey of his passion. Third, Luke’s readers discover that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is essential to cope with the threat of suffering. A constant presence in the Lukan narratives, the Holy Spirit is portrayed as one who fills, anoints, empowers, helps, and informs believers throughout their treacherous mission of gospel proclamation. Since the gift of the Holy Spirit is not confined to the suffering charismatic prophets of the Lukan narratives but is universally available, the vocational-charismatic blueprint of Spirit-empowerment depicted in the Lukan narratives serves to persuade the Lukan community to regularly seek the infilling of the Holy Spirit in advance of further outbreaks of opposition and persecution. Fourth, Luke’s readers learn that suffering is to be expected wherever the gospel is publically declared. According to House, “suffering is a major force in the gospel’s expansion. It is a rare thing for the Way to spread without it.” Established as a pattern in Luke-Acts, suffering follows Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation. As Luke’s readers endeavour to proclaim the gospel within their own hostile context, they will experience what the Lukan characters had previously experienced: that the gospel moves, but never without pain. Fifth, Luke’s readers realize that, although the expectation of suffering is disheartening, the promise of resurrection awaits. Luke has informed them that Jesus has conquered death, ascended into heaven, and reigns at the right hand of God. As Stephen’s stoning demonstrated to the Lukan community, those who face martyrdom can be assured the resurrected Christ will receive them into their eternal dwelling (Acts 7:56-59).

Within the minds of contemporary Western or Minority World Pentecostals, applying the Lukan paradigm of suffering as an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation has its challenges. Currently, Minority World Pentecostals are benefitting from an age of peace, prosperity, freedom, and religious tolerance that scarcely resembles the world of Luke-Acts. Rather than models for contemporary faith and practice, the Lukan narratives serve more as emotive anecdotes that hark back to a distant generation of courageous believers. The expected or actualized suffering of the Lukan characters is more accurately reflected in the experiences of believers in many nations of the Majority World where opposition to Christ remains an ever-present reality. Menzies recounts the opinion of a Chinese house church leader who apply stated, “when Chinese believers read the book of Acts, we see in it our own experience; when foreign Christians read the book of Acts, they see in it inspiring stories.” Nevertheless, for contemporary Pentecostals in the Minority World, the Lukan paradigm that suffering is an expected consequence of Spirit-empowered gospel proclamation is a stark reminder that there is a cost to following Christ. Just as John the Baptist, Jesus, the disciples, and Paul proclaimed the gospel despite the consequences, it is critical that Pentecostals rediscover the role of Spirit and suffering within the Lukan narratives to reflect a more biblically balanced missional pneumatology that revives the passion for Spirit-empowered proclamation within their own context.

Bibliography

Bovon, Francois. Luke The Theologian. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2006.

Bradley, James E. “Miracles and Martyrdom in the Early Church: Some Theological and
Ethical Implications.” Pneuma 13:1 (1991): 65-81.

Bruce, F. F., ed. The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Book of
the Acts. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979.

Cunningham, Scott. ‘Through Many Tribulations’: The Theology of Persecution in
Luke-Acts. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary 9. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1981.

Green, Joel B. New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Gospel of Luke.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Green, Joel B. The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel
of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997.

Horton, Stanley, M. What The Bible Says About The Holy Spirit. Springfield: Gospel
Publishing House, 1976.

House, Paul R. “Suffering and the Purpose of Acts.” Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 33:3 (1990): 317-330.

Hunter, Harold D. and Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., eds. The Suffering Body: Responding to the Persecution of Christians. Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster Press, 2006.

Jacobsen, Douglas, ed. A Reader in Pentecostal Theology: Voices from the First
Generation. Indiana University Press: Indianapolis: 2006.

Jacobsen, Douglas. Thinking in the Spirit: Theologies of the Early Pentecostal
Movement. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2003.

Jenkins, Philip. The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2007.

Juel, Donald. Luke-Acts: The Promise of History. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1983.

Karris, Robert J. “Luke 23:47 and the Lukan View of Jesus’ Death.” Journal of Biblical Literature 105/1 (1986): 65-74.

Kingsbury, Jack Dean. Conflict in Luke: Jesus, Authorities, Disciples. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1991.

Marshall, Howard I. The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel
of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978.

Menzies, Robert P. Empowered for Witness: The Spirit in Luke-Acts. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

Menzies, Robert P. “A Review of The Spirit and Suffering in Luke-Acts: Implications for a Pentecostal Pneumatology by Martin Mittelstadt.” Evangelical Quarterly 78.2 (2006): 174-176.

Menzies, William W. and Robert P. Spirit and Power: Foundations of Pentecostal
Experience. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000.

Mittelstadt, Martin William. The Spirit and Suffering in Luke-Acts: Implications for a Pentecostal Pneumatology. T&T Clark International: London, 2004.

Moessner, David P. “The Christ Must Suffer’: New Light on The Jesus- Peter, Stephen,
Paul Parallels in Luke-Acts.” Novum Testamentum 28:3 (1986), 220-256.

Neyrey, Jerome H. The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1991.

Robeck, Cecil Jr. “The Dark Side of the Gospel.” Pneuma 11:1 (1989): 1-2.

Stronstad, Roger. The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson
Publishers, 1984.

Stronstad, Roger. “The Charismatic Theology of St. Luke Revisited (Special Emphasis
upon Being Baptized in the Holy Spirit).” McMaster Theological Studies Series 1 (2008): 101-122.

Stronstrad, Roger. The Prophethood of All Believers. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1999.

Talbert, Charles H. “The Way of the Lukan Jesus: Dimensions of Lukan Spirituality.”
Perspectives on Religious Studies 9:3 (1982): 237-249.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts 1: A Literary Interpretation.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts 2: A Literary Interpretation.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

Turner, Max. Power from on High: The Spirit in Israel’s Restoration and Witness in
Luke-Acts. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000.

Warrington, Keith. “Healing and Suffering In The Bible.” International Review of
Mission 95:576/577 (2006): 154-164.

Wigoder, Geoffrey, ed. Illustrated Dictionary & Concordance of the Bible. Jerusalem: G.G. The Jerusalem Publishing House, 1986.

Martin Luther's Study at the Wartburg Castle

2008-04-28T11:37:00.001-04:00

Healing in the Atonement: The Healing Ministry of John Alexander Dowie by William Sloos

2008-04-24T14:30:00.005-04:00

Introduction

Within the theologically informed and spiritually charged atmosphere of the second half of the nineteenth century, John Alexander Dowie emerged as one of the more colourful healing evangelists on the American religious landscape. At the zenith of his popularity, Dowie claimed over 250,000 followers world-wide with hundreds of people claiming healings at his meetings. Emphasizing the authority of Scripture and a personal faith in Jesus, Dowie taught that healing is sourced in the atonement of Christ and is assured for all repentant believers. His soteriological perspective of healing began to appear when, as a young pastor in his native Australia, a dying woman was instantly healed in response to his prayers. Resulting from this experience, Dowie made healing through the atoning work of Christ a central feature of his evangelistic ministry. Through his widely circulated weekly periodical, Leaves of Healing, Dowie declared that all sickness and disease originates in the demonic, but due to Christ’s defeat of Satan through his atoning sacrifice, healing is available to every person on the condition that they repent of their sins and exercise their faith. Critical to preventing further afflictions and maintaining physical health was the avoidance of demonic influences such as medical treatment and pork products. Despite Dowie’s extreme theology and increasing eccentricity later in life, his healing ministry experienced tremendous success and influenced many lives. This paper will demonstrate how Dowie’s healing ministry was soteriologically oriented and grounded in the atonement of Christ. Divided into two parts, the first part of the paper will be an overview of Dowie’s life and ministry and the second part of the paper will explore his theology of healing.

Dowie’s Life and Ministry

Born in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1847, John Alexander Dowie immigrated to Australia as an adolescent. Sensing the call of God on his life, he returned to Scotland to study theology at the University of Edinburgh and then returned to Australia to commence his pastoral ministry with the Congregational church. After a succession of pastorates, he quickly climbed the ecclesiastical ladder and eventually garnered a prestigious position as pastor of the Collegiate Church in Newton, a suburb of Sydney.

While serving in the Newton parish, Dowie’s life was dramatically changed when he witnessed a miraculous healing in response to his prayers. This experience convinced Dowie that divine healing is not just provided, but is assured in the atonement of Christ, a conviction that would radically transform his theology and ignite a healing ministry that would gain international attention.

According to Dowie’s own testimony in Leaves of Healing, his life-changing experience occurred when a devastating plague was sweeping over eastern Australia in 1875. Within a few weeks, Dowie had officiated at over forty funerals, including many from his own congregation. Exhausted and wrestling with thoughts of how a loving God could allow such immense suffering to persist, Dowie was called to pray for a young lady of his parish who was near death. Entering the room where the ailing woman lay, Dowie met her doctor and discussed the seriousness of the woman’s condition. Resigned to her inevitable fate, the doctor said to Dowie, “Sir, are not God’s ways mysterious?” Indignant at the doctor’s insinuation that the woman’s disease was given according to divine providence, Dowie became angry. “That is the devil’s work,” Dowie declared, “and it is time we called on Him Who came to destroy the work of the devil.” Persuaded from his reading of Scripture that the benefits of the cross also include healing, Dowie laid his hands on the woman and boldly interceded for her recovery in the name of Jesus. Opening her eyes, the woman reported feeling better; the fever had disappeared and she was completely healed. Through this experience, Dowie became convinced that Jesus is both Saviour and Healer through his atoning work on Calvary.

Following several very successful years pastoring his own church in Melbourne, Australia, Dowie received a vision from God calling him to carry his message of divine healing to every nation. Fused with soteriological language, Dowie recalled his vision: “I…had to carry the Cross of Christ from land to land, and bid a sin-stricken and disease-smitten world to see that the Christ Who died on Calvary had made atonement for sickness as well as for sin, and that with his stripes we are healed.” Eager to proclaim the healing power of Christ through the atonement, Dowie left Australia for San Francisco in 1888 and began holding healing crusades along the Pacific coast. Eager for greater exposure, Dowie travelled to Chicago to coincide with the 1893 World Exposition and opened a healing booth on the fair grounds where he exhorted thousands of spectators to repent, put their faith in Christ, and receive their healing.

Settling in Chicago, Dowie organized his followers into the Christian Catholic Church, opened healing homes, started his publication, and began conducting services in the spacious Zion Tabernacle. With his ministry increasing in numerical and financial strength, Dowie began attracting the attention of the local authorities. Concerned with the activities occurring in his healing homes, Dowie was charged with practicing medicine without a licence. Although he was never convicted, these charges garnered national attention for Dowie, who took the unsolicited publicity to rail against what he called the “Hosts of Hell in Chicago,” including the apostate clergy, lying press, “medical butchers,” dispensers of “distilled damnation,” and anyone else that opposed his message. Despite alienating many in the community, thousands of people from across the social spectrum flocked to Dowie’s meetings in the hope of experiencing healing in their bodies. Confident in the healing power of Christ, Dowie laid his hands on the sick and prayed for their recovery resulting in hundreds of testimonies of people claiming to be healed.

Dowie’s expanding ministry was soon paralleled by his increasing apotheosis. On New Year’s Eve 1899, Dowie unveiled plans for the development of a utopian community that would function as a theocracy in which he would be the sole interpreter of God’s laws. The community, known as Zion City, located north of Chicago, eventually grew to over 8,000 inhabitants with plans to expand to 200,000. During this time, Dowie became increasingly more eccentric. He consecrated himself as “Elijah the Restorer” and “the first apostle of the renewed end-times church.” As Dowie prepared to establish other Zion cities around the world, he suffered a mild stroke which caused his hold on the vast ministry to unravel. With his health failing, he faced mounting evidence of financial mismanagement, charges of marital infidelity, and rumours that he was suffering from mental delusions. Disgraced, Dowie died in 1907, largely ignored by the thousands who were once devoted to him. Had he lived, there was speculation that he would have eventually claimed to be the reincarnation of the Messiah.

Dowie’s Theology of Healing

First, sharing similar theological perspectives with other faith healers of his era, Dowie claimed that divine healing is assured in the atonement. He stated, “We teach that the Atoning Sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ covers all kinds of sin and its consequences, of which disease is one.” Emphasizing biblical texts that support his doctrine, especially Isaiah 53:5 which states, “with his stripes we are healed,” Dowie directly connected the act of healing to the efficacy of Christ’s death on the cross. Through his death, Christ triumphed over Satan and conquered sin and sickness, making salvation and healing equally and universally available to all believers. To affirm his teachings, Dowie published countless testimonies that linked divine healing to the atonement. Testifying to his healing after Dowie prayed for him, one person remarked: “Christ atoned for all sickness and diseases as well as for all sin and sorrow. He took them on the cross.” Through this and other testimonies, Dowie consistently emphasized how Christ secured both salvation and healing through his atoning sacrifice on the cross.

Second, all sickness is sourced in the demonic. Rejecting the Reformed model that insisted that sickness was given according to divine providence and was to be endured with passive resignation, Dowie asserted that only Satan is the author of sickness and disease. “It cannot be for God’s glory that any of His children should be unhealed,” Dowie declared, “since God is never glorified in our sickness anymore than in our sin, for both sin and sickness are clearly Satan’s work.” Considering sin and sickness as collaborative devices used by Satan to keep humanity in bondage, Dowie argued that Christ’s purpose for coming was to destroy the work of Satan and bring complete salvation and healing to sinful and suffering humanity. Leaving no room for the sovereignty of God or the natural laws of nature, Dowie drew battle lines between Satan and Christ; people either side with the devil and remain in their sins and sicknesses, or they come to Christ and receive salvation and healing through his atoning sacrifice.

Third, repentance and faith precedes and sustains healing. Embracing the broader soteriological implications of the atonement, Dowie articulated that individuals must first accept Christ as their Saviour before they accept him as their Healer. “I declare that until a man has quit his sins,” Dowie asserted, “he cannot be healed…I further declare that repentance toward God must be followed by faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and that salvation is precedent to healing.” Since faith was the means by which healing was apprehended, Dowie maintained that healing could never be received by a sinner; only those who were regenerated and exercised their faith were healed. Furthering his theological argument to an extreme degree, Dowie went on to claim that, “it is the privilege of all who believe in him [Christ] to enjoy perfect and perpetual bodily health.” As implausible as this declaration is, it logically corresponds with Dowie’s soteriological perspective; since the atonement provides enduring salvation, it must also provide enduring health. On the other hand, when believers became sick, it is undeniable evidence that they have unconfessed sin or insufficient faith.

Fourth, avoiding demonic influences such as medical treatment and pork products were critical to preventing further afflictions and maintaining physical health. Often railing against doctors and drugs, Dowie taught that seeking the help of a physician demonstrates a complete lack of faith in Christ. “You may take the Bible and search it from Genesis to Revelation,” Dowie stated, “and you can not bring me a passage where it is written: ‘If any of you is sick, let him call for a doctor.’” For Dowie, divine healing was only effectual when sick people transfer their faith from human efforts to the victorious Christ. In addition to his distain for medical treatment, Dowie also demanded that all pork products must be avoided. Derived from the Gospel story where Jesus permitted the legion of demons to enter a herd of swine, Dowie contended that “devils have taken possession of pigs ever since.” Since diseases were sourced in the demonic, eating pork subjected people to demonic influences and made them susceptible to physical afflictions. Supporting his anti-pork convictions, Dowie reported, “there is not a case on record of an orthodox Jew having cancer, not one.” Fearing that such destructive influences would undo what Christ had accomplished, ordering the avoidance of doctors, drugs, and pork products was Dowie’s way of preserving the benefits of Calvary for his followers.

Emerging from Dowie’s extreme healing theology is the awkward issue of unanswered prayer. What happens when repentant believers exercise their faith but do not receive their healing? Dowie’s response was unequivocal: “we say that each received according to his faith” Essentially, Dowie argued that since healing has been provided through Christ’s atoning death, it is the individual’s proper exercise of faith that determines whether or not they receive their healing. “While many are healed instantaneously,” Dowie taught, “others, through lack of faith as lack of willingness to comply with God’s requirements concerning consecrated living, go away unhealed, leaving their bodies in the power of the destroyer.” Placing the responsibility for healing solely on sick person, Dowie’s doctrine likely caused many people to feel anxiety and guilt over their inability to produce sufficient faith to be healed. An example of the harmful nature of Dowie’s doctrines surfaced when popular Methodist evangelist R. Kelso Carter contracted malarial fever. Refusing medical treatment and acting only in faith, Carter went to Dowie in search of healing. After praying for the evangelist, Dowie expressed confidence that Kelso would be healed. However, Kelso’s physical condition remained unchanged and he subsequently fell into a deep depression. After six months, Kelso acquiesced and took medicine, fully recovering within a couple weeks. Reassessing Dowie’s views on divine healing, Kelso insisted that Dowie overemphasized the certainty of healing in the atonement. Admitting that God does heal, but not everyone or every time, Kelso and other evangelical leaders began to view divine healing more as a divine favour and only an ancillary rather than essential part of the gospel.

Conclusion

Apart from his grandiose claims and scandalous downfall, Dowie’s healing ministry left an indelible imprint on the American religious landscape of the late nineteenth century. Discovering the healing power of Christ while praying for a dying woman in his native Australia, Dowie linked the source of divine healing to the atonement of Christ. Convinced that Satan is the author of all sickness and disease, Dowie claimed that Christ’s death on the cross defeated the works of Satan and provided both salvation for sinners and healing for the sick. Through the confession of sin and the proper exercise of faith, healing is assured for all believers. Through the avoidance of demonic influences such as medical treatment and pork products, health is maintained. Although many reported being healed through his ministry, Dowie’s optimistic theology overemphasized the certainty of healing. Applying select Scriptures to support his doctrine, Dowie deduced that since healing was proffered to humanity through the atonement, receiving healing was completely dependent upon the faith of the supplicant. Those believers who were unable to manufacture sufficient faith and failed to receive their healing were regarded as spiritual failures. While appearing to accentuate the grace of God through the atoning sacrifice of Christ, Dowie’s extreme theology depicted God as a discriminatory benefactor who only distributes the benefits of the atonement according to the meritorious efforts of the suffering. Despite his unbalanced and harmful theology, Dowie’s unbreakable confidence in the healing power of Christ impacted countless lives and contributed to the emerging Pentecostal movement that continued to proclaim the message of divine healing through the atoning work of Christ.

Bibliography

Burgess, Stanley M., ed., Van Der Maas, Eduard M., ass. ed. The New International
Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 2003.

Cook, Philip Lee. “Zion City, Illinois: Twentieth Century Utopia.” PhD diss., University
of Colorado, 1965.

Curtis, Heather D. Faith in the Great Physician: Suffering and Divine Healing in
American Culture, 1860-1900. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2007.

Dowie, John Alexander, ed. Leaves of Healing. Vols. I-XVIII. Chicago: John Alexander
Dowie, 1894-1902, Zion City: Zion Publishing House, 1903-1906.

Faupel, D. William, “Theological Influences on the Teachings and Practices of John
Alexander Dowie,” Pneuma 29:2 (2007): 226-253.

Goff Jr., James R. and Grant Wacker, eds. Portraits of a Generation: Early Pentecostal
Leaders. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2002.

Kydd, Ronald A. N. Healing Through the Centuries: Models for Understanding.
Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.

Lindsay, Gordon. John Alexander Dowie: The Life Story of Trials, Tragedies and
Triumphs. Dallas: Christ for the Nations, Reprint 1980.

Synan, Vinson. The Century of the Holy Spirit: 100 Years of Pentecostal and
Charismatic Renewal. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001.

Synan, Vinson. The Holiness-Pentecostal Tradition: Charismatic Movements in the
Twentieth Century. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1997.

Wacker, Grant. Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 2001.

Spiritual Gifts: A Fresh Look by David Lim - Summary and Reflection by William Sloos

2008-04-24T14:27:00.003-04:00

Summary

Intending to provide a scholarly, yet practical study on the gifts of the Holy Spirit, Spiritual Gifts: A Fresh Look is an insightful resource for Pentecostal leaders interested in understanding the purpose and function of spiritual gifts within the local church. Written by David Lim, who is currently the lead pastor at one of the largest Assemblies of God churches in Singapore and former Bible college instructor at Western Pentecostal Bible College in Canada, the book takes readers from a thorough examination of the biblical text to practical instructions on the use of spiritual gifts within the body of Christ. Maintaining a holistic perspective that includes both concise biblical commentary and pastoral concerns, Lim aims to encourage churches to start exercising the gifts so they can experience Spirit-empowered ministry and guide churches already operating in the gifts so they can flourish in the fulfilment of their mission. Emphasizing that the gifts were never designed to be optional for the church, but are essential to the church’s function, Lim frames his theology of spiritual gifts within a missions-oriented theology. Geared towards empowering the church to reach the community, the patterns of the primitive church are rediscovered with the hope of equipping believers to flow in their particular gift mix to build up the body of Christ, love their neighbours, and proclaim the gospel.

Divided into two parts, the first part of the book is a biblical commentary on the gifts of the Holy Spirit from the book of 1 Corinthians. Chapters one and two focus on 1 Corinthians 12 and examine the problems that arose in the Corinthian church in their use of spiritual gifts. Highlighting how the Corinthians used the gifts of the Spirit to promote spiritual superiority within their ranks, Lim underscores how the gifts are intended to build, empower, and shape the church in an interdependent and loving environment. Building on this discussion, chapter three reviews 1 Corinthians 13 and reveals how love is the indispensable quality needed for the proper operation of the gifts. Concentrating on 1 Corinthians 14, chapter four explains the differences between the gifts, the value of the gifts, and the proper order of the gifts during the worship service. Concluding part one, chapter five harmonizes Paul’s teaching on the gifts from 1 Corinthians 12-14, Romans 12, and Ephesians 4 and reveals the interconnectedness of Paul’s theology regarding the operation of the gifts within the body of Christ.

The second part of the book is a summary of three sermons that analyze the practical functioning of the gifts within the contemporary church. Chapter six asserts that the expression of the gifts must not merely be an occasional incident, but should be an ongoing experience that is established on a lifestyle of worship and ministry. Emphasizing the prophethood of all believers, chapter seven reveals how to minister in the utterance gifts or “anointed speech gifts” and offers guidelines for their proper usage in a public service (246). Focussing on the Paul’s message to the Ephesians, chapter eight explains how worship empowers believers for mission and is a medium for gift ministry. The book concludes with a helpful discussion on the theology of healing, providing solid biblical basis for the claim that healing is in the atonement of Christ.

Analysis

An issue that has come to the forefront of pastoral theology in recent years has been the significance of the seeker sensitive movement largely advocated by Bill Hybels and the Willow Creek Association. Not wishing to introduce unbelievers or seekers to some of the more demonstrative elements of spirituality, the seeker sensitive movement has influenced Pentecostal churches to reduce or remove the operation of the utterance gifts from the public service. Contending that the gifts are meant to be experienced by everyone, including unbelievers and inquirers, Lim argues that every person should have the opportunity to witness the body of Christ operating in its full range of activities. “The Bible does not relegate the gifts to a corner of the church,” writes Lim, “rather it promotes their proper exercise and explanation (152)”. Instead of shielding unbelievers or seekers from the operation of the gifts of the Spirit, Lim suggests that through the proper exercise and explanation of these gifts, people can be convicted by the Holy Spirit and drawn to salvation. According to Lim, prophecy confronts people with the word of God and calls them to repentance; tongues and interpretation are miraculous signs of the presence of God and, though they may harden some hearts, they illicit a response that invites people to recognize that God is in their midst (159). Acknowledging the need for sensitivity and an environment of love and acceptance, Lim asserts that the anointed speech gifts are intended to function in the public service and are able to speak directly to the hearts of unbelievers to facilitate genuine repentance (162).

Another issue that befalls many Pentecostal and charismatic churches is the unwillingness to properly assess prophetic messages. Clearly emphasizing that all anointed utterances must be discerned by the body of Christ and must stand under the scrutiny of the Scriptures, Lim encourages churches to implement an evaluation matrix that effectively appraises prophetic utterances. Without devaluing the supernatural element within the prophecies, certain criteria must be met to affirm the public utterance gifts. Examining both the content of the message and the lifestyle of the messenger, Lim suggests that the “gifts should be evaluated as to Scriptural truth, application to the immediate hearers, the flow of the service, the discernment of the leadership, and the sensitivity of others to the Spirit (249).” Although such enquiry might curb the liberty of some people who believe the prophetic word should be unimpeded by these evaluations, with proper teaching and tender guidance, an environment can be established that is safe and receptive to the supernatural impartation of the word of God.

After reading the book and being thoroughly enriched by Lim’s capable exegesis and beneficial instruction, I have some questions regarding his theology of healing. First, regarding the gift of healing, Lim states that no one has the gift of healing, but rather the gift is given by God for specific situations and specific times. He goes on to say, “the one who prays for the sick person does not receive the gift; the one who receives the gift of healing is actually the sick person” (76). Although I agree that no one possesses the gift of healing, suggesting that the sick person is actually the one who receives the gift of healing seems to confuse the understanding of the nature of spiritual gifts. If the same logic is employed for the gift of prophecy, then the one who prophecies does not have the gift, but the ones who hear the prophecy receive the gift. I understand that being healed is a gift from God however it is not a spiritual gift according to 1 Corinthians 12 but rather the result of the proper functioning of the person with the gift of healing.

Second, Lim claims that it is always God’s will to heal with the qualifying statement, “unless God has a higher will for the immediate situation” (294). While I believe God’s intention is for the good of his creation, I find Lim’s claim is too simplistic and somewhat presumptuous. Suggesting it is always God’s will to heal unless he has a higher will for the immediate situation implies that God should heal more often than not heal. This claim overemphasizes the certainty of healing over the sovereignty of God and diminishes the sufficiency of grace during times of suffering.

Third, while people wait on God for their healing, Lim suggests that they “positionally claim total healing, practically claim progress” (292). Bordering on the confessional practices of the Word-Faith doctrine, Lim suggests that sick people declare themselves healed according to Jesus’ finished work on Calvary. Despite Lim’s optimistic theology, there is no evidence in the biblical text that anyone claims their healing without being completely healed. Why is it so difficult to admit that God has not healed? Paul and Silas did not positionally claim liberation from the prison; they worshipped God despite their chains. Paul did not positionally claim healing from his thorn; he leaned upon the sufficiency of God’s grace. Lim’s exhortation to positionally claim healing is an unbiblical and potentially harmful instruction that can cause believers to overlook the immense value of developing an honest and straightforward, yet trusting relationship with God in the midst of challenges and difficulties.

Quotable Quote
“Human as it is, the Church often adopts extremes. One extreme is a subjective, naïve use of the gifts that dismisses the rest of the Church as being unspiritual. The other extreme is to react to negative experiences by avoidance: The fire is feared because of possible wildfire, or, as the Chinese proverb puts it, we trim the toe to fit the shoe (273).”

Bibliography

Lim, David. Spiritual Gifts: A Fresh Look. Springfield: Gospel Publishing House, 1991.

LeadershipNext: Changing Leaders in a Changing Culture by Eddie Gibbs: Summary and Reflection by William Sloos

2008-04-24T14:24:00.003-04:00

Summary

Aiming to guide current and emerging church leaders within the rapidly changing post-modern context, LeadershipNext: Changing Leaders in a Changing Culture is an insightful resource that maps out how Christian leadership must adapt to the new cultural realities of the twenty-first century. Written by Eddie Gibbs, Senior Professor of Church Growth at Fuller Theological Seminary, the book not only identifies the immense changes occurring in society and calls the church to transformation, but also provides practical instruction for meaningful and authentic ministry within the present generation.

Arguing that traditional leadership styles must change or risk becoming irrelevant to the culture, Gibbs exhorts church leaders to interpret the times and be willing to redefine leadership towards a missional and kingdom-embracing theology. He opens the book by identifying trends that are leading to the demise of the traditional church, such as the decline in the church going population (including the alarming rate of under thirty-five year olds that no longer attend church), the weakening of denominational structures, and the inadequate number of seminary-trained leaders to replace aging clergy. In response to these trends and the immense changes occurring in society, chapter one identifies successful church leaders as those who are able to discern the times and respond in prompt and appropriate ways. Chapter two argues that, despite the ambiguity and unpredictability of the current age, the realignment of ecclesiastical leadership roles and styles is necessary to engage the broader culture. Embracing a “retro-future” methodology, that is, looking at future trends and also at the paradigm of the early church, chapter three examines the mandate of the Great Commission and its indivisible relationship to the missional understanding of the church. Turning his attention to leadership structures, chapters four and five discuss how the hierarchy of the traditional church must give way to a more decentralized leadership style that functions more as a team that includes both paid staff and volunteer leaders. Chapters six through eight concentrate on the leadership qualities that are being modelled by the emerging generation of church leaders that have embraced the team oriented approach to ministry. Unwilling to sidestep the challenges of team ministry in the post-modern context, chapter nine candidly addresses some of the personal costs associated with the risk of presenting the gospel message in a style unfamiliar to the traditional paradigm. In the final chapter, Gibbs calls for change in the way new leaders are identified and equipped and suggests a new educational model that combines theological training with practical ministry in a context that enables and empowers emerging leaders for meaningful, long-term ministry that embraces a holistic and missional ecclesiology.

Analysis

Consistently weaved throughout the book, Gibbs addresses the concept of discipleship in contemporary Western Christianity. Arguing that the church has a misguided understanding of the biblical concept of discipleship, Gibbs explains how people are brought to a point of decision for Christ but are often neglected in their emerging journey of faith and are subsequently stunted in their spiritual growth following their salvation. He writes, “Western churches suffer from a chronic problem of undiscipled church members, an environment that serves as the perfect breeding ground for nominal Christianity” (79). Examining the early church, he notes that in the first three centuries, the emphasis was not on going to church, but on being the church, being the “called out ones” (79). Opposed to a building or an institution, the original intention of the church is to be a body where one belongs, is built up in the faith, and equipped for ministry (80).

Gibbs asserts that the discipleship-making process has been neglected because of a flawed interpretation of the biblical mandate of the church (70). He argues that the church has somehow embraced the notion that there are two distinct mandates for the church: the “cultural” mandate to love neighbours and the “evangelistic” mandate to preach the gospel. This distinction between biblical directives has created a dysfunctional ministry practice that has deceived people into thinking that their Christological mission is to merely love one another and witness to the lost, altogether abandoning the call of discipleship that is so clearly demonstrated throughout Matthew’s Gospel (80). The church has failed to turn decisions for Christ into disciples of Christ and, in doing so, has fashioned a gospel of convenience and entertainment that does little to produce Christ-likeness, life transformation, and Spirit-empowerment. According to the Gospel of Matthew, Gibbs stresses that the Great Commission is not merely about presenting the gospel to bring people to a point of decision, but is also about journeying together along the path of discipleship. When the church re-establishes the priority of discipleship and begins to develop people who are wholly committed to following Christ in every area of life and are actively engaged in the local and global vision of Christ’s reign, the mission of the church will be repositioned to penetrate the culture with the love of Christ (89).

Convinced that the renewal of discipleship is a significant component of the future growth and health of the church, Gibbs candidly discusses the costs that emerging leaders will encounter if they embrace the leadership model of discipleship in their own ministry contexts. Since the kingdom of God is not based on a hierarchical structure that functions from a position of authority, but rather on servant leadership exemplified in Christ, church leaders who follow the example of Christ will discover that leadership is “more about scars than stars” (180). If emerging leaders are willing to follow Christ and not be bound by the conservative voices within the traditional church, they will need to take risks when starting new faith communities or leading new movements. If leading traditional churches, the temptation to maintain the status quo or “ghetto mindset” must be resisted in favour of stepping out into uncharted territory for the sake of the kingdom of God. The challenges can be overwhelming and can include: opposition to change and new ideas, criticism, enduring loneliness, competing priorities, setbacks, decision-making pressures, limited resources, high leadership turnover, physical and emotional weariness, and the fear of personal or shared failure (194). The costs of following Christ can be high, but wise leaders can find success by keeping their focus on the vision of the kingdom of God.

Having spent five years of ministry leading a traditional congregation in need of revitalization and renewal, I find Gibbs’ evaluation of the costs associated with risk-taking leadership accurate. Within my previous context, despite the awareness among congregants that the church was disconnected from the surrounding culture and required substantial transformation, implementing change was a painful process that required patience and perseverance. Developing a mission and vision, reorienting the budget and finances towards missional objectives, modernizing and streamlining infrastructure, renewing the worship experience, and launching and completing a comprehensive building program were all components that contributed to the necessary changes, but it came at a significant personal cost. Despite the sacrifices and challenges however, the congregation tangibly experienced the faithfulness of God on numerous occasions and were eventually better positioned to reconnect with their community with the message of the gospel. Unquestionably, there are costs to fulfilling the mandate of the call of God and the results are never guaranteed; Gibbs’ honest assessment of the costs of risk-taking leadership is a valuable contribution to the study of ministry in the post-modern context and can assist emerging leaders in preparing for the challenges associated with leading a kingdom-embracing movement of transformation.

Quotable Quote
When a community or movement is more than ten years old, new pastors should expect to pay a price in terms of resistance or intransigence because in that amount of time institutional norms become increasingly entrenched. It is sobering to reflect that the most conservative institutions in the church today began as radical movements in their inception. Yesterday’s radical leaders become today’s conservatives who are seldom prepared to pay the high price of innovation a second time around (184).

Bibliography

Gibbs, Eddie. LeadershipNext: Changing Leaders in a Changing Culture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005.

The Pentecostal Pastor: A Mandate for the 21st Century - Summary and Reflection by William Sloos

2008-04-24T14:20:00.003-04:00

Summary

Aimed at nurturing the emerging Pentecostal clergy of the twenty-first century, The Pentecostal Pastor is a compilation of articles covering a wide variety of topics related to pastoral ministry in the contemporary Pentecostal context. Written by Pentecostal pastors, college presidents, and denominational leaders, each of the seventy-three contributors discuss practical pastoral theology through the lens of their own experiences in the field of Pentecostal leadership. Intended for current pastors or students preparing for ministry within the Assemblies of God or other Pentecostal denominations, the book is a valuable resource that addresses many aspects of Pentecostal ministry.

Following an introduction by Thomas Trask, the former general superintendent of the Assemblies of God, the book is divided into six units of study. Unit one explores the priorities in the pastor’s life and covers issues concerning the pastoral marriage, devotional life, time management, sermon preparation, and personal accountability. Additionally, a series of articles examines how a pastor should relate to a new church, other pastors in the community, and the previous pastor of the church. Building on unit one, unit two analyzes the pastor’s personal life and candidly discusses some of the unique struggles currently facing pastors. Handling stress, financial pressures, physical and emotional health, and sexual ethics are some of the topics addressed. Entitled, “Preparing for Revival, unit three analyzes the practical and spiritual functions of ministry in the Pentecostal context. The authors in this section concentrate on issues related to developing a mission and vision, igniting and pastoring a revival, mobilizing people for ministry, and incorporating effective methods of evangelizing the local community. Addressing administrative matters, unit four focuses on working with church boards, leading congregational business meetings, understanding the legal system, managing conflict, and overseeing the organizational functions of the local church. Unit five, entitled “Ministry to the Body,” is concerned with developing healthy working relationships in the ministry. Church growth strategies, team building, staff cohesion, and senior pastor and pastoral staff relationships comprise some of the themes in this chapter. The final unit attends to matters related to the Pentecostal service and addresses the function and flow of the Holy Spirit, the importance of the Pentecostal distinctives, the role of music, and the development of Spirit-led preaching, worship, and altar services.

Analysis

Examining the relationship between senior pastors and pastoral staffs, author Wayde I. Goodale contends that one of the greatest contributing factors to the short tenure of associate pastors is strained staff relationships (326). Citing several examples from his own experiences in ministry, Goodale stresses that senior pastors have a tendency to become isolated and walk alone in their lives and ministries. They can become absorbed with the pressures and demands that come with their position and neglect the importance of functioning as a team (328). As the national coordinator for ministerial enrichment for the Assemblies of God, Goodale recognizes that healthy interpersonal relationships between senior pastors and their associates are critical in maintaining unity and often facilitate in creating strong, successful, and enduring ministries (327). Using the example of Christ and his relationship with the disciples, Goodale exhorts church leaders to work in unity, spend time together, submit to one another, show respect, be encouraging, and bring correction when necessary (328). Despite the demands of a busy schedule, it is vital for senior pastors and associates to intentionally invest in their relationships so that they can realize their shared ministry goals in a supportive and compassionate environment.

Having served on three different pastoral staffs prior to becoming a lead pastor, I understand the importance of developing healthy relationships between senior and associate pastors. When a nurturing and trusting relationship has been developed, associates will support and sustain the senior pastor though many challenges and difficulties. Since there is a sense of unity and harmony among the pastoral team, when criticisms or complaints are levelled against one member of the pastoral staff, everyone stands together. However, when the senior pastor has not taken the time or effort to invest in developing authentic relationships with the pastoral associates and a pervasive sense of disconnect exists among the staff, the expectation of genuine loyalty to the senior pastor may not be as forthcoming when challenges emerge. Unfortunately, some senior pastors believe that they need to maintain a certain distance from their associates to maintain their level of authority. However, Goodall reminds senior pastors that, since Jesus considered himself to be friends with the disciples (Jn. 15:15), senior pastors should also regard their associates as friends and strive to build authentic relationships with each of them (327). When genuine friendships are cultivated, standing together though difficult times becomes a natural response as opposed to a professional obligation.

Another issue given considerable attention throughout the book is the concept of vision. Supported by the frequently repeated verse, “Where there is no vision, the people perish” (77, 220, 379, 477; Proverbs 29:18, KJV), a number of authors exhort pastors to have a clear vision for: the church (477), the pastor’s study (76), staff and associate job descriptions (420), and Christian education (426-428). Articles also instruct church leaders on how to develop, communicate, and maintain a vision in their local ministries. J. Don George, lead pastor at Calvary Temple in Irving, Texas, asserts that the essential element to growing the ministry of the church is through the formation and the strategic implementation of a vision. He states, “Great churches are not built without vision. Local churches do not continue growing without vision (477).” Of greater importance than a prime location, spacious facilities, state-of-the-art equipment, or any other of the modern devices that many believe are critical to church growth, George states that a well-articulated, easily understood, and functional vision is the one factor indispensable to fulfilling the Great Commission (477). According to George, having a vision is necessary for purposeful involvement, moral discipline, endurance, and ultimately success in the kingdom of God (477-8).

I contend however, that having a vision is not the key that unlocks the door to ministry success in the Pentecostal context. Although I do not dispute the importance of having a shared goal, it seems that the current trend in church leadership thinking suggests that merely developing and implementing a creative vision is the solution for growing the local assembly. Emulating the business world, vision has become a fashionable catchphrase among church growth proponents. Church growth is far more dependent on a number of complex variables than simply relying on a particular vision. The history, reputation, and emotional health of the church, inter-personal relationships among parishioners, financial pressures, community demographics and openness to the gospel are just a few of the factors that influence the potential for church growth. Moreover, having a vision cannot be a substitute for the ongoing discernment of the will of God. Suggesting that having a vision is the key ingredient to church growth is an flawed over-simplification and has likely distracted many pastors from seeking God for a “revelation” (Proverbs 29:18, NIV) that would begin to address some of the immense and persistent spiritual needs of their church and community.

Quotable Quote
“Yes, ministry to the body can break a pastor’s heart; it can drain strength; it can turn hair gray. But it is the highest honour that can be bestowed upon any person by the Lord of the Church. That divine franchise is, indeed, a distinct privilege (453).”
-Everett Stenhouse, Assistant General Superintendent for the AG (1986-1993)

Bibliography

Trask, Thomas E., Wayde I. Goodall and Zenas J. Bicket. The Pentecostal Pastor: A Mandate for the 21st Century. Springfield: Gospel House Publishing, 1997.

Practioners: Voices Within the Emerging Church: Summary and Reflection by William Sloos

2008-04-24T14:16:00.003-04:00

Summary

Consisting of a compilation of essays, dialogues, and monologues, Practitioners: Voices Within the Emerging Church, is a thought-provoking examination of post-modern ecclesiology by a diverse group of forward-looking leaders within the emerging church. Recognizing the immense change taking place in contemporary Western culture, these practitioners discuss their concerns with the traditional church, reflect on the Scriptures, reassess spirituality, and contemplate a variety of innovative ideas that facilitate genuine spiritual formation and social transformation in the post-modern setting. Convinced that the present church must be willing to change to remain relevant to the culture, the book explores alternative methods of relating the gospel to people in a variety of contexts. Unquestionably passionate, real, honest, and at times, controversial and offensive, the nine authors believe the church must embrace a new missiology that is centred on authentic, loving relationships with all people, regardless of socio-economic status, race, or sexual orientation.

Chapter one, written by Greg Russinger, lead “missionary” at The Bridges Community, an alternative church affiliated with The Foursquare Church, sets the standard for the book by exploring the life of Christ to discover how the church can embrace his redemptive mission in the world. Believing that Jesus’ ministry primarily took place within community, Russinger explores what the church could look like if it reflected the relational and communal heart of Christ. Rather than being confined by the moral judgment systems of others or inflexible church polity, Russinger envisions a missiology that is lived out according to the “rhythms of hospitality,” where people are welcomed into a loving and caring relationship that personally introduces them to the transformative power of Christ and the cross.

The following chapters expand on the notion of living according to the missional heart of Christ and present a vast assortment of ideas, thoughts, and visions for the future of the church. Chapter two focuses on reviving the sacrament of prayer that combines the transformative practice of intercession and social action. Chapters three and four explore the use of storytelling, media, and the visual arts as a means of communicating the gospel and expressing worship to God. Chapter five wrestles with the concept of what it means to be a “missional people” and how petty religiosity within the traditional church is often a barrier to the journey of discipleship modelled by Chris. Building on the idea of missional living, chapter six explores the role of justice in the life a Christ-follower and asserts that caring for the poor is not an option, but is rather an essential function of every believer who wishes to reflect the message of the gospel. The following three chapters of the book take a closer look at the future of the church, its leaders, and its followers, and provide a series of conversation starters that examine how the emerging generation thinks about God and how the church can penetrate the culture through creativity, imagination, and in “rhythmic harmony with God.” Closing out the book, the final chapter contains a series of journal entries from an urban missionary in London, England, who engages his community through “incarnational” living- being Jesus to the poor, hurting, abused, and disenfranchised.

Analysis

Endeavouring to be defined by the simplicity of living for Christ, another author and post-modern practitioner, Pete Greig, contends that there are three areas that every leader must address to be truly missional (147-8). First, every leader must focus on the fruitfulness of their private spirituality. According to Greig, there are many church leaders who speak a lot about God, criticize the traditional church, or identify what they perceive to be the needs of the current culture, but have little personal passion for God. Second, every leader must engage with those who are marginalized by society. When leaders define themselves outside of the poor, the oppressed, and those who do not share similar worldviews, Greig suggests they are unable to find true revelation and the true authority in Christ. Connecting with others who are not Christians or those outside of the common social stratum reshapes theology and influences the way ministry is understood. Third, every leader must live in community. Greig contends that many academic people consider themselves specialists on issues related to postmodernity and the church but actually live highly individualized lives. Without living in community, it is impossible to model the redemptive heart of Christ to others. For those practitioners wishing to lead truly missional lives according to the pattern of Jesus, every person needs to be living at the juxtaposition of these three things.

Building on the idea of what it means to be missional, Canadian church leader and equipper Joyce Heron proposes that the church needs to reassess its ministry of mercy or what she calls “Christian tourism in poor neighbourhoods” (154-157). She describes how justice is often relegated to a department of a church, but rejects such a narrow perception and suggests justice should be the function of every believer. Emphasizing that there are over four hundred references to meeting the needs of the poor and oppressed in the Scriptures, Heron concludes that “God has an absolutely massive bias toward the poor, and that as one of his followers, I’m supposed to manifest that same bias” (155). Rather than merely setting up church programs or popping in and out of the lives of the poor, which only perpetuates the “us and them” dynamic, to see real community transformation, the church must actually become friends with people who are marginalized. She contends that the church will never see the poor as people until they build authentic long-term relationships with them and personally share in the change Jesus makes in their lives.

Undoubtedly, the practitioners who endorse this concept of the missional church that is centred upon spiritual formation and community transformation also have some challenging comments about the traditional church. Although many express a desire to bridge the modern church with post-modern ideas or, at least, “take the best of the modern” and move on, one practitioner contends that the traditional church has debilitated believers by telling them what to think rather than how to think on a variety of levels (247). Doug Pagitt, pastor of Solomon’s Porch, a holistic, missional community in Minneapolis, Minnesota, argues that preaching does not work in the post-modern context because it creates the wrong socialization construct (186). He states, “the act of one person telling a bunch of other people how life is supposed to go” is essentially a flawed mechanism because it ignores the importance of dialogue within the community. Additionally, the theological concept of ordination, that one person is distinct from the rest of the people, is an enormous problem in the post-modern context (193). Rather than having one person with the “power,” leadership should emerge through different people at different times. As well, traditional churches have been told they need to have a mission/vision statement that defines who they are and what they do (180). Doing so confines them to a particular obligation when the church should be constantly making room for the purposes of God. Too many churches are concerned with having the right mission statement; instead, they should be regularly discerning the Spirit and asking, “What is the agenda of God and how are we uniquely postured to join into it?” (180). Other existing concerns with the traditional church model identified in the book include the problem of spiritual performance and professionalism, religiosity without missionality, promoting a self-centred faith built on personal convenience, and the unbiblical “weird subculture, ghetto thing” that pervades the traditional church culture (136).

Despite the abrasive tinge to some of the comments about the traditional church, the emerging church practitioners have correctly identified some very critical issues facing the traditional church. Not only are the traditional methodologies no longer viable in the current cultural context, but it also seems that the traditional church has strayed from its essential Christological mission. A religious subculture has evolved that includes its own embedded patterns of activity, language, and symbolic structures that support its activities with value and importance. Within this sub-culture, the church has spent an excessive amount of resources servicing its own people and facilitating ministries that have little or nothing to do with penetrating the surrounding community. Evangelism is rarely about engaging in authentic relationships with unbelievers, but is rather focussed on promoting a program in the hope that outsiders may attend and eventually incorporate the conventional belief systems of the faith community. The missional concept of genuinely befriending the poor or oppressed is rare, highlighting how fortified the common social circles are among traditional believers. Given these concerns, the traditional church is need of revival, but not a revival based upon a fleeting ecstatic experience which the church continues to regard as the pinnacle of spirituality, but rather a revival of the eternal mission of Christ to enter into the world of lost and broken people with the message of liberation and reconciliation. Clearly not everyone is able to have an inner-city ministry like Joyce Heron, but through the gifts and power of the Holy Spirit, believers can move beyond their familiar and safe surroundings and egocentric worldviews and enter into an unpredictable and often uncomfortable environment where the poor, oppressed, and hurting people can be introduced to the living Christ.

Quotable Quote (94)
“Fundamentally, we are at a crossroads in the Church at a massive level, and culturally we would call it postmodernism. It’s essentially the idea of deconstructing, unpacking and reworking. It happened to literature and literary criticism in the 1940s and 1950s and is still happening; it started in our culture in the 1960s and continues; it began in business in the 1980s; and its finally happening in the Church after the year 2000.”

Bibliography

Russinger, Greg and Alex Field, eds. Practitioners: Voices Within the Emerging Church. Ventura: Regal Books, 2005.

The Baptism in the Holy Spirit and the Emerging Church: Theological Foundations and Practical Applications by William Sloos

2008-04-24T10:07:00.003-04:00

Introduction

According to the teachings of Scripture, the baptism in the Holy Spirit is an experience that empowers and equips believers to be witnesses of the resurrected Christ. Prophesied in the Old Testament, Joel anticipated an outpouring of the Holy Spirit on all people that would produce prophetic speech and spiritual manifestations. In the Gospels, Jesus teaches the disciples that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is an immersive and empowering event that is received through prayer. Initially occurring on the day of Pentecost, the Acts narratives record how Spirit-baptism is an experience subsequent to and separate from salvation, initially evidenced by speaking in tongues, and available to all believers. Considered an essential experience in the discipleship journey, the baptism in the Holy Spirit was continually demonstrated in the early church, empowering and equipping the disciples for ministry and fuelling their missionary endeavours.

Endeavouring to rediscover the essential message of Christ and share it with the post-modern generation, the emerging church has become a significant movement within the Christian community over the past twenty years. Prophetic, post-modern, and praxis-oriented, the emerging church counters the methodologies of the traditional church and embraces a missional ecclesiology that actively participates in spiritual formation and community transformation. Considering themselves to be post-evangelical, they refuse to be identified with the religious ideologies that dominate contemporary evangelicalism, preferring to be viewed as an authentic community of Christ followers. Striving to live out the life and mission of Christ within the post-modern culture, the emerging church actively participates in the redemptive work of God through social justice, helping the poor, and advocating for the marginalized in their communities.

Following the example of the early church, introducing the experience of the baptism in the Holy Spirit to the emerging church can be a transformative experience. Since the nature of Spirit-baptism is oriented towards mission, embracing the experience can supernaturally empower and equip the emerging church to fulfil their missional endeavours. This paper will argue that the experience of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is grounded in the teachings of Scripture and can empower and equip the emerging church for effective ministry in the post-modern generation. Divided into two parts, the first part of the paper will explore the theological foundations for the baptism in the Holy Spirit and the second part of the paper will practically apply the principles of Spirit-baptism to the emerging church within an urban Canadian context.

Part 1: Theological Foundations for Spirit-Baptism

The following study will examine the theological foundations for the baptism in the Holy Spirit by reviewing the Old Testament prophecies of Ezekiel and Joel, the pre- and post-resurrection teachings of Christ, and Luke’s account of the early church in the Acts narratives.

1. Old Testament Prophecies about the Holy Spirit

Climaxing on the Day of Pentecost, the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit was prophesied centuries earlier in the Old Testament. Although there are many references to the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament, two specific passages in Ezekiel and Joel are particularly important in understanding the unique roles the Holy Spirit will fulfil in the lives of New Testament believers. The first passage is in Ezekiel 36:25-27, which speaks prophetically about how God will cleanse his people from their sins, give them a new heart and also a new spirit. To effect this spiritual transformation, the Lord states, “I will put my spirit within in you, and make you follow my statues and be careful to observe my ordinances” (NRSV). Through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, God promises to inhabit his people and guide them in righteousness. In this passage, the function of the Holy Spirit anticipated by Ezekiel refers to the New Testament concept of regeneration and finds affirmation in Paul’s writings when he explains how the Holy Spirit dwells in all believers (Rom. 8:9, 14-16; 1 Cor. 6:19).

Notably different from the Ezekielian prophecy, the second passage concerning the coming of the Holy Spirit is found in Joel 2:28-29. Without any references to indwelling people or affecting inner transformation, God promises: “I will pour out my spirit on all flesh.” Echoing Moses’ wish “that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit on them” (Num. 11:29), Joel’s prophecy reveals God’s plans to impart his Holy Spirit to all people, not just prophets, kings, and judges. Resulting from this divine outpouring, the prophecy indicates that people will engage in prophetic speech and other supernatural manifestations. Following the Day of Pentecost, when the disciples were “filled with the Holy Spirit,” (Acts 2:4) Peter repeats Joel’s prophecy with the understanding that the prophetic announcement is fulfilled and the outpouring of the Spirit is for everyone. The significant difference between Ezekiel’s prophecy which declares that the Holy Spirit will indwell people and Joel’s prophecy which proclaims that the Holy Spirit will be poured out upon people clearly indicates that the Holy Spirit will have a dual function in the lives of new covenant believers.

2. Jesus’ Teaching on the Coming Holy Spirit

Despite the unprecedented and dramatic descent of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, the event did not come as a surprise to the waiting disciples. According to Roger Stronstad, the gospel of Luke demonstrates that Jesus had been instructing the disciples concerning the outpouring of the Holy Spirit before and after his resurrection. Prior to his resurrection, Jesus’ first recorded incident of teaching about the Holy Spirit is in the context of prayer. “If you then, who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him” (Lk. 11:13). This text suggests that Jesus considers the Holy Spirit a gift that is given by the Father to those who ask. Not coincidently, when the Holy Spirit descended on the Day of Pentecost, it was preceded by the prayers of the disciples.

The second pre-resurrection teaching occurs when Jesus informs his disciples that the Holy Spirit will be with them and counsel them when they face persecution. Encouraging the Twelve, Jesus declares, “do not worry about how you are to defend yourselves or what you are to say; for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that very hour what you ought to say” (Lk. 12:12). Reaffirming this promise just before his death, Jesus tells the disciples, “I will give you words and wisdom that none of your opponents will be able to withstand or contradict” (Lk. 21:15). Following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Jesus’ promise finds fulfilment on several occasions throughout Acts. Peter’s questioning by the Sanhedrin about his preaching is one illustration. Luke notes that he was “filled with the Holy Spirit” and, despite being “ordinary” and “uneducated,” he spoke with “boldness” (Acts 4:8-13). Through Jesus’ teaching and later fulfilment, Luke shows how the baptism in the Holy Spirit equips and empowers believers to bear witness to the resurrected Christ, particularly within the context of a hostile environment.

According to Stronstad, Jesus makes three post-resurrection promises concerning the Holy Spirit that are specific and directly relate to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. The first of these promises unveils Jesus’ intention to endue his disciples with supernatural power in advance of their mission to witness to the resurrected Christ. “I am sending upon you what my Father promised,” Jesus declares, “so stay here in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high” (Lk. 24:49). Highlighting the unity of the Godhead in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, Jesus informs his disciples that the Father’s gift of the Holy Spirit is sent through the Son with the expressed purpose to fill them with spiritual power. Commanding them to wait in Jerusalem for the promised gift, Jesus intends to empower his disciples with the same power that anointed his ministry to liberate and redeem fallen humanity (Lk. 4:14).

The second post-resurrection promise indicates that the coming of the Holy Spirit will not just be an empowering event, but also a baptismal event. Recalling John the Baptist’s earlier prophecy that Jesus would “baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Lk. 3:16) Jesus says to his disciples, “For John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now” (Acts 1:4). With the baptism of fire reserved for eschatological judgment, Jesus describes the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit as an immersive experience that will plunge the disciples into the life of the Holy Spirit.

Though implicit in the previous promises, Jesus’ third and final promise explicitly reveals the purpose of Spirit-baptism for the disciples. Jesus states, “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Emphasizing the missional purpose of the outpouring of the Spirit, Jesus explains to the disciples how the Holy Spirit is their source of power that will enable them to witness to the resurrected Christ in the world. Following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the disciples immediately begin experiencing the enabling power of the Spirit as they speak in tongues and declare the mighty works of God to the amazement of an multinational crowd that had gathered outside the upper room (Acts 2:4-11).

3. The Nature and Characteristics of Spirit-Baptism in the Acts Narratives

Building on the prophecies of the Old Testament and the words of Christ, attention will now concentrate on the nature and characteristics of Spirit-baptism within the Acts narratives.

3.1. Subsequence and Separability

First and foremost, the baptism in the Holy Spirit is an experience subsequent to and separate from conversion. Although some scholars contest this argument suggesting that there is not a subsequent experience after conversion, but the gift of the Holy Spirit is only given at regeneration, these claims are not convincing against the backdrop of the Lukan narratives. When the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the waiting disciples on the day of Pentecost, it is widely accepted that the disciples had already repented for their sins and entered into a new life in Christ. Jesus alludes to their conversion prior to Pentecost when he tells the seventy-two to “rejoice that your names are written in heaven” (Lk. 10:20). Moreover, when Peter and John were sent to the Samaritans to pray that they might receive the Holy Spirit, the text clearly states that the Samaritans had previously “accepted the word of God” and had been “baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 8:15-16), indicating they were regenerated prior to their baptism in the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, three days after Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus, Ananias prayed that he would be “filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 9:17), emphasizing the subsequent and separate experiences of regeneration and Spirit-baptism. According to David Lim, “The Early Church expected a separate, distinct, and vital experience of an enablement of power in the Holy Spirit.” Following the Pentecostal outpouring, it appears that the early church not only understood the that the baptism in the Holy Spirit was subsequent to salvation, but also recognized the importance of having every believer receive this experience.

3. 2. Initial Evidence

The initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is speaking in tongues. Recalling Joel’s prophecy that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit will result in people engaging in prophetic utterances, when the disciples were filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, Luke notes that they all spoke in tongues (Acts 2:4). This pattern continues when the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household and they were heard “speaking in tongues and extolling God” (Acts 10:46). On another occasion, when Paul laid his hands on the Ephesian believers, Luke reports that the Holy Spirit came upon them and they “spoke in tongues and prophesied” (Acts 19:7). Although other episodes of Spirit-baptism in the Acts narratives do not explicitly give evidence of tongues speech, John Wyckoff contends that it would have been obvious to Luke’s readers that believers spoke in tongues when they were Spirit-baptized so he did not always feel obligated to point it out. While many scholars acknowledge that tongues often follow this experience, some do not agree that tongues are the initial evidence for all Spirit-filled believers. Clark Pinnock contends that tongues should be seen as a noble and edifying gift but not normative for everyone who is baptized in the Holy Spirit. Despite some differing viewpoints, there is substantial and convincing evidence that tongues is the initial evidence of the baptism in the Holy Spirit within the Acts narratives and should be expected in all believers.

3.3. Availability

The baptism in the Holy Spirit was understood to be an experience for all believers and continues to be available today. Following the Pentecostal outpouring, Peter addresses his fellow Israelites and exhorts them to repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus, and receive the “gift” of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Recalling the words of Jesus who referred to giving of the Holy Spirit as a “gift” (Lk. 11:13), Peter emphasizes the universal availability of Spirit baptism and the expectation that the charismatic experience would continue to be received by believers beyond the current age. “For the promise is for you, for your children,” Peter states, “and for all who are far way, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him” (Acts 2:39). Affirming Joel’s prophecy, which understood the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to be continually being fulfilled throughout the last days, Peter publicly declared that the baptism in the Holy Spirit was not intended merely for the upper room gathering, nor was it a one time event, but was designed to be experienced for all believers. Although some scholars maintain their opinion that the charismatic experience ceased after the apostolic age and is no longer available, countless millions of Christians continue to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit around the world, demonstrating that the Pentecostal experience did not expire at the end of the apostolic age, but remains an empowering and life-transforming experience in the contemporary context.

3.4. Purposes

Although the purposes of the baptism in the Holy Spirit are as vast and diverse as the dynamic nature of God’s Spirit, this section will highlight two significant ways the charismatic experience influences believers. First, the baptism in the Holy Spirit empowers believers for gospel proclamation in the world. Prior to the day of Pentecost, Christ informed the disciples that they will be filled with δύναμις, meaning force, miraculous power (usually by implication a miracle itself) to “be my witnesses in Jerusalem, in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Through this anointing of spiritual power, Christ enabled the disciples to fearlessly proclaim the gospel of salvation to a lost and broken world. To illustrate, when Ananias was instructed by the Lord to pray for Paul to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit, the Lord clearly articulated the purpose for his infilling: “he is an instrument whom I have chosen to bring my name before Gentiles and kings and before the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). Clearly apparent from the text, although Paul was converted, he was not sufficiently prepared to commence his missionary activities without first being empowered by the Holy Spirit. This is not to say that believers who have not received the baptism in the Holy Spirit would be ineffective in their witness, but just as the Holy Spirit empowered Jesus for his mission, so the Holy Spirit empowers believers for their mission to bear witness to the resurrected Christ.

Second, the baptism in the Holy Spirit equips believers to function in the gifts of the Spirit. Although the Bible records many miraculous demonstrations of the supernatural in the lives of Old Testament individuals and in the lives of New Testament believers both before and after their baptism experience, there is definitely a higher incidence of spiritual gifts operating through Spirit-filled members of the early church than there was prior to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. More than just speaking in tongues, the baptism in the Holy Spirit is the gateway that leads to numerous supernatural manifestations of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers. Shortly after Pentecost, Luke highlights how the Spirit-anointed leaders of the early church began functioning in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, stating, “Awe came upon everyone, because many wonders and signs were being done by the apostles” (Acts 2:43). Not confined to the apostles, Luke also illustrates how other members of the early church community functioned in the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit. Stephen, who was “full of the Holy Spirit” went around doing “great wonders and signs among the people” (Acts 6:5, 8). Additionally, Philip, who was also Spirit-filled, preached the gospel to crowds of people, performed miraculous signs, exorcized demons, and healed the sick (Acts 8:6-7). For Luke, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecostal was a critical turning point for the disciples; they had entered into a new relationship with the Holy Spirit that enabled them to continue the mission of proclaiming Christ to the world through the power and gifts of the Holy Spirit.

4. Summary

Throughout the Scriptures, it is clear that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is an experience that empowered and equipped the early church for their mission to bear witness to the resurrected Christ. The Old Testament prophecies anticipate a dual role for the Holy Spirit: to indwell people for regeneration and to fill people for prophetic empowerment. Jesus’ pre-resurrection teachings describe the Holy Spirit as a gift given by the Father to everyone who asks and a counsellor for the disciples when they face persecution. Following his resurrection, Jesus describes the coming Holy Spirit as an immersive event that will empower the disciples for witnessing. Throughout the Acts narratives, the baptism in the Holy Spirit is an experience subsequent to and separate from conversion and is initially evidenced by speaking in tongues. Most importantly, Spirit-baptism is to be a normative experience for every Christian that empowers them to witness and equips them to function in the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Part 2: Practically Applying Spirit-Baptism to the Emerging Church

Understanding that the baptism in the Holy Spirit is grounded in the teachings of Scripture, part two of this study will concentrate on the practical application of Spirit-baptism in the emerging church within an urban Canadian context. Divided into three parts, the first section will identify the nature and characteristics of the emerging church, the second part will outline a four step plan to implement the baptism in the Holy Spirit in the emerging church, and the final section will address some concerns that emerging church leaders may encounter when implementing Spirit-baptism into their ministry context.

5. Understanding the Emerging Church Context

Starting in the early 1990’s, the emerging church has become a significant movement within the Christian community that focuses on rediscovering the essential message of Christ and sharing it with the post-modern generation. According to Scot McKnight, there are five key elements that define the nature and characteristics of the emerging church. First, the emerging church is prophetic. Consciously provocative, McKnight notes how the emerging church believes that the traditional church is no longer able to communicate the gospel to the contemporary post-modern culture. Rejecting traditional church methodologies, the emerging church endeavours to model authentic Christianity to their community according to a missional ecclesiology that embraces the life and mission of Jesus. Second, the emerging church is post-modern. Within this framework, the inherited meta-narratives that have previously explained the knowledge and experience of the modern culture have been replaced with local narratives that facilitate the interpretation of present reality. Rejecting the propositional truths that have anchored the traditional church, the emerging church is on a “faith seeking understanding” expedition that desires to experience authentic spiritual formation without the religious construction of the previous generation. Third, the emerging church is praxis-oriented. Rather than hearing about the gospel from a pulpit, the emerging church embraces a missional ecclesiology that actively participates in community transformation through the redemptive work of God in the world. Fourth, McKnight contends that the emerging church is post-evangelical. Unwilling to be lumped together with the dominant evangelical religious sub-culture and its specific theological, social, and political leanings, the emerging church prefers to be seen as an authentic community of Christ followers that accepts everyone regardless of socio-economic status, race, or sexual orientation. Last, the emerging church is political. Positioning themselves more with the Liberals than the Conservatives, Jonathon Smith contends that the emerging church tends to be more ideologically aligned with the political parties that are committed to the poor and the marginalized. Although they do not approve of abortion and gay marriage, they strongly support political initiatives that fight for social justice and equality within their communities.

6. Introducing Spirit-Baptism to the Emerging Church

Fuelling the emerging church movement is a missional ecclesiology that focuses on spiritual formation and community transformation within the post-modern context. Since the nature of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is oriented towards mission, embracing the experience can supernaturally empower and equip the emerging church to fulfil their missional endeavours. To introduce the baptism in the Holy Spirit to the emerging church, this section will implement a four step process modelled after the biblical pattern: teaching, experiencing, practicing, and sharing.

6.1. Teaching

Prior to the reception of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, Jesus taught the disciples about the person and work of the Holy Spirit. Both his pre- and post-resurrection teachings informed the disciples about the nature and characteristics of the coming outpouring of the Holy Spirit. As missional leaders within the emerging church, teaching about the baptism in the Holy Spirit introduces people to the charismatic experience in a welcoming and informal conversational environment. Since one of the features of the emerging church is the rediscovery of ancient stories of spirituality, emerging leaders can engage their churches in a communal dialogue about the person and work of the Holy Spirit directly from the biblical text. According to futurist Leonard Sweet, the ancient ways are more relevant than ever. Writing in Post-Modern Pilgrims, he states:
The mystery of how ancient words can have spiritual significance in this new world is evident in the cultural quest for ‘soul’ and ‘spirit.’ The very talk of soul and spirit is the talk of a very ancient language, a first century language largely abandoned by the modern world but a language more fitting today than ever.

With an emphasis on the Old Testament prophecies, the words of Christ, and the Acts narratives, emerging leaders can facilitate conversations about the ancient workings of the Holy Spirit and the relevancy of Spirit-baptism to the contemporary context. Through sensitive dialogue and open discussion, those truly desiring to model authentic Christianity may begin to express an interest in venturing to the next phase in the discipleship journey: the experience of being baptized in the Holy Spirit.

6.2. Experiencing

Following Jesus’ pre- and post- resurrection teaching, the next step for the disciples in their journey of faith was the actual experience of Spirit-baptism. Taking place during a worship event in an upper room in Jerusalem, Luke describes the event in dramatic detail:
When the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability (Acts 2:1-4).

Since the desire to experience authentic spiritual formation is a common maxim among emerging church participants, learning about the baptism in the Holy Spirit will inevitably lead some to start seeking the baptism in the Holy Spirit. To facilitate their reception of the experience, emerging church leaders can provide a variety of spiritually-sensitive worship settings where seekers can gather for times of authentic praise and prayer in anticipation of the supernatural gift. When the Holy Spirit is poured out in these worship environments, often those who receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit have an intense spiritual experience and are overcome with emotion. Speaking in tongues for the first time, they are suddenly able to commune with Christ in a way not previously experienced. For Byron Klaus, the ability to speak in tongues enables believers to experience an entirely new level of spirituality. He writes:
Speaking in tongues is a vital part of the worship encounter, relating us directly to God. It transcends the ordinary limitations of speech and enters a level of encounter with God that goes beyond mere lip service. It allows a person to act in accordance with new and previously unimagined possibilities not drawn out of already existing perceptions of reality.

Affirmed through Joel’s prophecy, this new level of spirituality through the baptism in the Holy Spirit opens the door to prophetic utterance speech, dreams, visions, and other supernatural manifestations that edify both the individual and the church. Through this life-changing experience, the Holy Spirit becomes a central part in the development of authentic spiritual formation and the primary motivator for participation in the kingdom of God.

6.3. Practicing

The next step in the disciples’ journey of faith was to put their experience into practice. Following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, Luke reports that the disciples immediately began fearlessly proclaiming the gospel to the gathered crowds (Acts 2:14) and demonstrating the power of the Holy Spirit through signs and wonders (Acts 2:43). The disciples were aware that their experience was not simply for their own benefit, but was designed to fuel their mission to spread the good news of Christ to all people. Since the emerging church is praxis-oriented and already actively participating in the redemptive work of God in the world, integrating their experience of Spirit-baptism with a missional ecclesiology will take ministry to an entirely new level of effectiveness. According to Lim:
The baptism in the Holy Spirit is not primarily a qualifying experience but an equipping experience. It enables Christians to do the job more effectively. The person who is fully yielded to the Holy Spirit will find a greater dimension of ministry than could be realized without the infilling.

Through a variety of creative ministry initiatives, Spirit-filled emerging churches can incorporate practical, hands-on community service projects through the anointing of the Holy Spirit. When helping the poor and marginalized, not only can Spirit-baptized believers support their physical and social needs, but also minister to their spiritual needs as well. When standing up for social justice issues in the political sphere, having the discernment, wisdom, and boldness of the Holy Spirit is critical to being heard among competing voices. When praying for the moral deficits of the inner-city, developing intercessory prayer groups that engage in spiritual warfare through the power of the Holy Spirit can create unimaginable possibilities for healing and reconciliation. When emerging church participants put their experience into practice, ministry effectiveness increases, lives are transformed, and the redemptive work of Christ is extended throughout the urban community.

6.4. Sharing

The fourth step in the journey of faith for the disciples was the ongoing ministry of sharing the experience of Spirit-baptism with others. According to Luke’s account, after the disciples received the baptism in the Holy Spirit and started putting their experience into practice, they also began to pray for others to receive the experience. To illustrate, after Ananias was filled with the Holy Spirit, he prayed for Paul to receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17); in turn, Paul laid his hands on the Ephesian men and “the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied” (Acts 19:2-7). Recognizing the immense value of Spirit-baptism to the overall mission of the church to witness to the resurrected Christ, the disciples earnestly passed on the gift of the Holy Spirit to others. When the emerging church imparts the gift of the Holy Spirit to others, more people are empowered and equipped to participate in the redemptive reign of Christ in the world. Keeping the experience insulated is not an option; the very design of baptism in the Holy Spirit is outward and focused on the kingdom of God. In his book, Pentecostal Spirituality, Steven Land writes, “The passion for the kingdom is the ruling affection of Pentecostal spirituality and not the mere love of experience for experience’s sake.” Just as the disciples shared the experience with others, when the emerging church explains the baptism in the Holy Spirit to fellow believers and prays for them to receive the gift, they are fulfilling the mandate of their missional ecclesiology to be an authentic, life-giving, and Spirit-led community of Christ followers in the post-modern context.

7. Addressing Post-Modern Suspicions about Spirit-Baptism

Although the baptism in the Holy Spirit is supported in the biblical accounts of the early church and is expected to be a normative experience for all believers, practically applying Spirit-baptism in the emerging church may provoke some negatives responses. According to Eddie Gibbs, the overarching meta-narratives existing in the biblical text are often obstacles to the reception of biblical teaching among post-moderns. He states, “Big stories [grand meta-narratives] that provide an explanation of life and that demand the total allegiance of ‘true believers’ are assumed to be controlling devices or power grabs.” Moreover, Gibbs asserts that when biblical teaching is framed in propositional statements and presented as absolute truth for all people, post-moderns become suspicious and often end up rejecting the church’s message. To avoid presenting doctrine as an overarching meta-narrative or a propositional truth, Gibbs offers a more promising approach that focuses on the “little” story. To apply his approach to the practical application of Spirit-baptism in the emerging church, it would be beneficial for believers who have already experienced the baptism in the Holy Spirit to share their personal story with others. By integrating the “little” stories of how God spiritually empowers and equips people for ministry with the ancient accounts of the early church through the Acts narratives, the message of Spirit-baptism is communicated in a non-confrontational manner. Although there will always be some dissenting or disapproving voices, sharing the message of the baptism in the Holy Spirit through story helps to minimize some of the doubts in the post-modern generation.

Conclusion

Grounded in the teachings of Scripture, the baptism in the Holy Spirit is an experience that empowers and equips believers to be witnesses of the resurrected Christ. Anticipated by the prophet Joel, taught by Jesus, and experienced by the followers of Christ throughout the Acts narratives, the baptism in the Holy Spirit was an essential part of the missional ecclesiology of the early church. Practically applying the experience of Spirit-baptism to the emerging church can increase ministry effectiveness, transform lives, and extend the redemptive work of Christ in the world. Modelled after the biblical pattern, emerging leaders can introduce the experience of Spirit-baptism by teaching on the nature and characteristics of the Holy Spirit from the biblical text. For those desiring to experience the baptism in the Holy Spirit, emerging leaders can facilitate the reception of the experience by providing worship settings were people can gather for times of authentic praise and prayer. When people receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit, they can put their experience into practice through a variety of missional initiatives that witness to the resurrected Christ. As they minister, they can also share their experience by telling their story and praying for others to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Although there are challenges to presenting the concept of Spirit-baptism to post-moderns, avoiding overarching meta-narratives and emphasizing personal stories can minimize some of the doubts inherent in post-modern thinking. For the emerging church, the desire to personally experience authentic spiritual formation and participate in community transformation makes the experience of Spirit-baptism an essential component in their overall missional ecclesiology. By embracing the ancient charismatic experience, the emerging church can be empowered and equipped to be effective witnesses of the resurrected Christ to the emerging post-modern generation.

Bibliography

Anderson, Allan. An Introduction to Pentecostalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2004.

Gibbs, Eddie. LeadershipNext: Changing Leaders in a Changing Culture. Downers
Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2005.

Hammett, John S., “An Ecclesiological Assessment of the Emerging Church,” Criswell
Theological Review 3:2 (2006): 29-49.

Horton, Stanley M. Systematic Theology. Springfield: Logion Press, 2007.

Horton, Stanley M. What The Bible Says About The Holy Spirit. Springfield: Gospel
Publishing House, 1976.

Land, Steven J. Pentecostal Spirituality: A Passion for the Kingdom. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1993.

Lim, David. Spiritual Gifts: A Fresh Look. Springfield: Logion Press, 1991.

McKnight, Scot, “Five Streams of the Emerging Church,” Christianity Today 51:2
(2007): 34-39.

Palma, Anthony D. The Holy Spirit: A Pentecostal Perspective. Springfield: Gospel
Publishing House, 2001.

Russinger, Greg and Alex Field, eds. Practitioners: Voices Within the Emerging Church.
Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 2005.

“The Baptism in the Holy Spirit: The Initial Experience and Continuing Evidences of the
Spirit-filled Life,” Position Paper of the General Council of the Assemblies of God (USA), http:www.ag.org/top/beliefs/position_papers/pp_4185_spirit-filled_life.cfm, (accessed March 3, 2008).

Sampson, Philip, Vinay Samuel & Chris Sugden, eds. Faith and Modernity. Oxford:
Regnum Books, 1984.

Smith, Jonathon. “The Emerging Church.” Lecture, Agincourt Pentecostal Church,
Scarborough, ON, March 7, 2008.

Strong, James. Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries. QuickVerse for Windows on
CD-ROM. Version 2007, 2003.

Stronstrad, Roger. The Prophethood of All Believers. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1999.

Stronstad, Roger. Spirit, Scripture & Theology: A Pentecostal Perspective. Baguio City,
Philippines: Asia Pacific Theological Seminary Press, 1995.

Sweet, Leonard. Post-Modern Pilgrims. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers,
2000.

A Review of Anthony D. Palmas's View of Spirit Baptism by William Sloos

2008-04-24T09:59:00.002-04:00

This paper will discuss the success of Anthony D. Palma’s defence of the doctrine of subsequence and initial evidence and comment on the manner in which he defends his views against other scholars.
Subsequence

Despite the opinions of many scholars who contend that there is no distinct and identifiable charismatic experience of the Spirit apart from regeneration, Palma provides solid and convincing biblical evidence of a post-conversion Spirit-baptism that was not only taught but also experienced in the early church. Engaging in a Pentecostal hermeneutic that employs the medium of history to convey theological truths, Palma explores all the narrative examples of Spirit baptism in the Lukan texts and identifies specific characteristics and patterns that clearly indicate a Pentecostal experience subsequent to salvation. He demonstrates how the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2; Joel 2) is programmic for the early church and establishes a paradigm of post-conversion Pentecostal experiences that empower believers for evangelism. Following the Day of Pentecost, the author examines the Samaritan Pentecost (Acts 8:14-20), Saul’s Spirit-baptism (Acts 9:17), Cornelius and his household’s Spirit-baptism (Acts 10:44-48), and the Ephesians’ Pentecost (Acts 19:1-7). From his inductive study, Palma observes that in three of the five narratives surveyed (Acts 8; 9; 19), those who had an observable charismatic experience were already converted for some time. In the two remaining narratives, though they do not explicitly state that conversion preceded the baptism in the Holy Spirit, conversion prior to Spirit-baptism is implied (Acts 2; 10). The emerging pattern clearly indicates that there is an experience in the Holy Spirit that is separate from and subsequent to conversion that was occurring among the believers in early church.

Responding to scholars who have opposing opinions, Palma confronts their arguments with a reasonable and convincing explanation of the biblical texts in question. In response to Bruner’s and Haenchen’s contention that the Spirit-baptism of the Samaritan converts (Acts 8) was the exception that proves the rule (the rule being that believers receive the Spirit at the time of conversion), Palma reminds readers that Luke never denies the indwelling work of the Spirit at the time of regeneration, but rather seeks to highlight the distinct nature of the charismatic experience subsequent to salvation. Other scholars, such as Dunn and Hoekema, who argue that the Samaritans were not regenerated at the time of their Spirit-baptism but were actually receiving salvation instead of a subsequent Pentecostal experience, Palma notes that Luke records that the Samaritans had previously “accepted the word of God,” a phrase synonymous with genuine conversion throughout the Lukan narratives. Despite the contrary viewpoints of other scholars, Palma is successful at defending the doctrine of subsequence by mapping the patterns present in the biblical accounts and providing sufficient evidence to support the understanding of Spirit-baptism as an experience subsequent to conversion.

Initial Evidence

Beginning his defence of the doctrine of tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism, Palma highlights how inspired utterance occurs when the Holy Spirit comes upon people throughout biblical history. When Joel’s prophecy was fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost and the disciples were baptized in the Holy Spirit, they responded with inspired utterance in the form of tongues-speaking. Following the Day of Pentecost, the narrative theology of the book of Acts consistently repeats the pattern of tongues-speaking as the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism, establishing a normative paradigm for believers in the early church. Despite the fact that nowhere in the Scriptures is there a propositional statement identifying tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism, Palma highlights how “all” the people spoke in tongues in Acts 2 (also see Acts 10), suggesting that tongues is regarded as the immediate empirical manifestation that authenticates the Pentecostal experience.

Evident from Palma’s book, there are numerous scholars who oppose the concept of tongues being the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism. Objecting to the notion of initial evidence, Carson states that Luke records several places where individuals are said to be filled with the Spirit without any indication of the evidence of tongues. Responding to Carson, Palma suggests that Luke did not feel obligated to mention tongues explicitly at every single occasion of Spirit-baptism, but cumulative evidence within the text undeniably supports the doctrine of initial evidence. Carson also suggests that if tongues is the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism, the evidence of wind and fire should also be normative signs present in the Pentecostal experience. However, unlike the evidence of tongues which is identified or strongly implied in numerous texts, wind and fire were only present on the Day of Pentecost and are not mentioned anywhere else in the narrative where people are Spirit-baptized. Dunn, another scholar who opposes the Pentecostal doctrine of initial evidence, contends that, though Luke intended to portray tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit-baptism, Luke’s accounts are “crude” and “undiscriminating,” emphasizing Luke’s unbalanced and rather undependable theology. However, for those who have a high view of Scripture, Luke’s descriptions of the early church’s post-conversion encounters with the Holy Spirit are divinely inspired and more than adequate for the formation of doctrine. Despite these and other opposing voices, Palma presents a biblically sound and convincing defence of the doctrine of tongues as the initial evidence of the Spirit-baptism and considers the manifestation of tongues normative for every believer who receives the Pentecostal experience.

Bibliography

Palma, Anthony D. The Holy Spirit: A Pentecostal Perspective. Springfield: Logion
Press, 2001.

The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation Vol. 1: The Gospel According to Luke by Robert C. Tannehill by William Sloos

2007-12-07T23:15:00.001-05:00

Summary
Robert C. Tannehill’s monograph, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation (Volume 1: The Gospel of Luke, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986) is a commentary on the narrative unity of the Lukan narratives, examining how the text’s individual narrative units contribute to accomplish Luke’s overarching purpose to demonstrate God’s redemptive plan through Christ and his followers. Recent developments in biblical and non-biblical literary narrative criticism have allowed the author to examine the Lukan texts from a new perspective, offering insights into the language, patterns, contrasts, ironies, pathos, and many other features that make up the literary whole. Tannehill’s effort to probe the text through the lens of narrative criticism reappraises some of the familiar dominant themes in Luke, further enhancing the understanding of the text and illuminating previously uncharted narrative trajectories and progressions of Lukan thought.

Similar to the other Synoptics, the Gospel of Luke is written in a vivid, episodic style, yet with little apparent linkage to the sequence of the story as a whole. From Luke’s second volume, it is clear that the author is proficient at stringing together common themes and producing a coherent story, yet the low contextual nature of the Gospel narrative appears to leave significant gaps in the story, leaving modern readers without a seamless understanding of the unity of the narrative. However, after careful analysis of the plot and major characters, a single controlling purpose emerges- the purpose of God, connecting the individual episodes and creating a rich literary tapestry that enhances the understanding of unity of the text and its interpretation.

To assist in unravelling the complexity of the narrative connections and elucidating an interpretive context for understanding the mission of Jesus and his witnesses, Tannehill explores key literary disclosures that function as signposts, providing direction through the narrative maze and enabling the identification of various thematic routes within the text. Special attention is given to a wide range of individuals and groups encountered in the narrative and Jesus’ developing relationships with these groups or individuals. The author examines Jesus’ ministry to the oppressed and excluded, his interactions with the crowd, his encounters with authorities, and his relationships with the disciples and followers. Avoiding technical terms of literary theory employed by other commentaries, Tannehill seeks to enliven Luke’s literary design to achieve narrative and ideological progression and emphasize how the narrative rhetoric unfolds to effectively communicate how God’s purposes are accomplished in the world.

Review of Chapter Eight: The Risen Lord’s Revelation to His Followers (Luke 24)
To bridge the story between Luke’s first and second volumes, the narrator concludes his Gospel with four major scenes, the empty tomb, the journey to Emmaus, the appearance in Jerusalem, and the departure of Jesus. Following an analysis of the narrative unity of these four scenes, Tannehill discusses: 1) Luke’s use of irony, 2) the unanswered question of why Jesus had to die, and 3) the return to initial themes of the book.

First, to contrast the difference between human understanding and God’s wisdom, Luke’s use of irony rises to a new level in the resurrection account. During the Emmaus narrative, the disciples fail to recognize their travelling companion as Jesus and inadvertently try to explain to Jesus about himself. Though Luke’s implied readers are aware of the true identity of the stranger, irony pervades the scene as the disciples rebuke the stranger for his ignorance when they themselves are the ones who do not understand. By dramatizing the blindness of the disciples through this ironic scenario, Luke enables his readers to see how human beings are ignorant to the reality of the resurrected Christ and thereby pedagogically informing them that they should not be like the disciples, but believe that Christ’s words are true and he is alive. In addition to the resurrection story, Luke also saturates his narratives with ironic twists to demonstrate a prevalent Lukan theme of opening people’s eyes to the truth.

Second, Tannehill’s analysis of the final scenes in Luke triggers a discussion concerning the unanswered question of why Jesus had to die. Though Luke centres the conversations on the tragic death and miraculous resurrection of Christ, there are no strong assertions that Jesus’ death was for the atonement of sins. Unlike other parts of the New Testament that explain the theological purposes for Jesus’ death, Luke never mentions how Jesus’ death specifically fits into God’s saving plan. Luke’s rendering of the value of the death and resurrection of Christ as simply a fulfilment of Scripture seems a rather insufficient explanation. However, Tannehill argues that Luke is less concerned with theological applications and more concerned that the disciples recognize the predictive significance of particular scriptural passages. Rather than writing a theological treatise on the purposes of God, Luke presents Christ in the same light as Israel’s prophets, who proclaimed the word of God, but are rejected and killed by their hearers. Associating Jesus with the Old Testament prophets exposes a “sacred pattern” and illuminates the disciples to the prophetic significance of Scripture as an effective means of sustaining and guiding faith. Additionally, Luke’s primary focus on the death of Christ as prophetic fulfilment establishes a model of suffering for his followers to emulate. Rather than understanding his death as the achievement of a divinely exclusive function, his disciples recognize that following the example of Christ not only includes struggling against evil and surrendering the will, but suffering even unto death. From this perspective, Luke’s implied readers also become aware of the call to discipleship and the costs of such a commitment, recognizing that the path to glory involves a life of suffering. Luke’s exclusion of any theological explanation for the reason of Christ’s death may be intentional; he is more interested in presenting Christ as the fulfilment of a sacred pattern of prophets who suffered and died for the truth and the supreme example for others to follow.

Third, Luke concludes his Gospel by returning to the initial themes of the book, drawing parallels with the birth narratives and the atmosphere and attitude of joy. The story begins with a description of the angelic announcement of the birth of Christ, followed by expressions of great joy and praise to God; after witnessing the ascension of Christ, the disciples are overcome with great joy and praise. The story begins in the temple, where Zechariah encounters an angel and where Simeon blesses God; the story ends with a return to the temple, where the disciples remained continually. Unmentioned in Tannehill’s book is the theme of blessing that begins and ends the Gospel narrative. The story opens with Zechariah unable to bless the people after emerging from the temple (1:22) and closes with Jesus’ bestowal of blessing prior to his ascension into heaven (24:51), providing readers with a sense of affirmation that the purposes of God have been accomplished. Though only a few are identified here, many more thematic parallels exist between the conclusion and the beginning of the narrative, serving to bring a literary completeness and positive resolution to the story and prepare Luke’s implied readers for the reading of his second volume.

The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation Edited by Jerome H. Neyrey (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991) by William Sloos

2007-12-07T23:13:00.002-05:00

Summary
Jerome H. Neyrey’s The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation is a collaborative effort of a group of scholars to apply the social sciences to the Sitz im Leben of the Luke-Acts narratives. Broadening the scope of the historical-critical method, the authors employ a systems approach to examine the social structures of early Roman Palestine during the time of Christ and the early church. Intended to unearth the embedded cultural meanings implicit in Luke’s two-volume work, the authors explore the values, social institutions, modes of social interaction, perceptions, expectations, and conventions of first century Mediterranean society, illuminating readers to the distance and difference between the worlds of New Testament society and contemporary culture. Without such awareness, the authors contend that modern readers are impaired in their understanding of the meanings behind the texts and can incongruously apply their textual interpretations from an anachronistic or ethnocentric perspective. To avoid the hazards of reading modern cultural beliefs and practices back into the text, basic social scientific methodologies are employed to enable a proper historical-critical interpretation of the biblical narratives. Through the lens of social scientific criticism, which views the broad social system and the coherence and interrelation of its components, readers are better able to understand how Luke’s texts and context shape the author’s perspective, compositional strategy, and message. Divided into three sections, the book surveys the basic societal institutions, social psychology, and the mediations of culture. For the purpose of this review, a chapter from each section that has served to effectively increase comprehension of the Lukan narratives and community is highlighted.

Part I Chapter Two: Honour and Shame in Luke-Acts
Considering the priority and length given to the second chapter, understanding the social dynamics of the honour and shame phenomena dominant in ancient Mediterranean culture seems to be paramount for modern biblical interpreters. Though elements of honour-shame phenomena are evident in modern Western culture, the honour-shame socialization within Jesus’ culture is significantly more acute, defined, and pervasive. Honour is defined as the positive value of a person as they see themselves and as others see them within their social community. Completely dependent on the acknowledgment and recognition of others, honour serves as a social ranking that enables a person to function in specific ways with superiors, equals, and subordinates according to the embedded, preset, and acceptable cultural cues of the society. Like a social currency, possessing greater degrees of honour serves to heighten a person’s social standing and rightful place in society; those without honour are considered as having no value or worth and are ignored, ridiculed, or harassed by the community.

From the beginning of Luke’s Gospel, the author prepares his implied readers to perceive Jesus as an honourable person by clearly documenting Jesus’ royal and priestly genealogy. Additionally, Luke magnifies Jesus’ superior status as God’s special agent, describing him as “Christ” and “Son of God” and heralding his birth by angels, prophets, and by God himself, thus ascribing Jesus a position of honour from conception. Throughout Jesus’ ministry however, his honour was constantly challenged in the ubiquitous, communal tug-of-war of challenge and riposte. The challenge-riposte of Jesus’ culture typically resembles a pattern of four components: claim, challenge, riposte, and public verdict. In Luke 13:10-17, in the narrative of the straightened woman, Jesus frees a woman from her infirmity, making a claim that he possesses God’s power to heal. The ruler of the synagogue challenges Jesus’ claim by accusing him of breaking the Sabbath, thereby breaking God’s laws. Jesus rebuffs the challenge by issuing a riposte, indicting the challenger and his followers with hypocrisy, stating that they free their animals to give them water on the Sabbath. In response to the challenge, the public rejoices and his adversaries are shamed, acclaiming Jesus as the winner of this particular contest. Due to Luke’s high context writing style where details are assumed, not explained, the honour-shame scenarios that Jesus encounters throughout his ministry are easily missed by modern readers, however they are a key component in understanding the multiple dimensions of Jesus’ social interactions, provide a literary and social form to interpret conflicts, and help modern readers appreciate the agonistic quality of the Lukan community.

Part II Chapter Eight: Temple versus Household in Luke-Acts
From an etic perspective, the Jerusalem temple and the private household, two major social institutions in early Roman Palestinian society, are intentionally set in contrast to each other to demonstrate the diverging spheres of Judaism and Christianity and to chart the transition from outward religion to Spirit-empowered faith. The Jewish temple is depicted as a disaffecting and isolating institution, detached from the common human community. Though regarded as a holy place, for Luke, it had lost its influence in bringing people into relationship with God. Rather than being the place of mercy, justice, and salvation, its complicity with Rome and the oppression and exploitation of the people has rendered the temple as an ineffectual social establishment. Contrasting the social space and life of the temple, the household is portrayed as a centre of the new Jesus movement and is the dominant locus of Jesus’ teaching and healing ministry. The household is a place receptive to the gospel and a rampart of mercy and justice for those who have been victims of temple mistreatment. Fostering strong social relationships and reciprocity, the household becomes the new social institution for Christian faith, practice, power, and proclamation. Luke’s use of these opposing social realities comprises a major theme and plot device weaved throughout the Gospel narrative, emphasizing how the household model, not the temple, has become the most appropriate image of the practical functions of the kingdom of God.

Part III Chapter 13: Ceremonies in Luke-Acts
The final chapter of the book examines traditional Jewish ceremonies, focussing on Luke’s narrative of Jesus’ eating habits as a template to examine the meanings and customs surrounding food, meals, table fellowship and table etiquette. Meals and table fellowship are highly composite social events that reveal patterns of social relations, social rankings, group solidarity, and economic transactions. Within the meal-as-ceremony motif, first-century social roles specify that people exclusively eat with others with whom they share common values. When Jesus was found eating with tax collectors and sinners, he was harshly criticized because his table-fellowship was less than what was expected of a prophet. Regarded by some as a “glutton and a drunkard” for his table-fellowship behaviour, Jesus breaks the social rules and upsets the accepted norms. Instead of eating with the religious elite and reinforcing the roles and statuses of the social milieu, Luke thematically portrays Jesus as using meals as occasions to highlight the social stratification of the community and to introduce a new paradigm where all people are invited to participate in table-fellowship. Illustrated in Jesus’ instructions at a banquet, he exhorts his host not to invite kinsmen or rich neighbours to his feast and perpetuate social segregation, but rather to invite the poor, maimed, lame, and blind and create a new inclusive and integrated community- a bold proposition, given the rigid cultural traditions. Additionally, Jesus introduces new map of places for partaking meals together, such as the feeding of the 5000; though they were unclean, Jesus welcomes them to the meal table, dramatically illustrating his strategy to treat all people as equals. Moreover, Jesus creates a new map of things, namely, toppling the Jewish dietary laws and declaring that all foods are clean and may be eaten, illustrated when Jesus sent the disciples out to preach, instructing them to eat whatever is set before them. Luke provides ample scenarios to examine these complex ceremonies from a social science perspective, not only enabling readers to decipher ancient cultural codes, but also enhance the understanding of the mission of Christ to disrupt and overturn traditional conventions of society and liberate and restore all people.

Reflection Paper on John Wesley's Journal

2007-12-07T23:08:00.001-05:00

Objective
This paper will reflect on John Wesley’s journal and discuss the following three components: What does Wesley’s journal reveal about John Wesley and early evangelicalism? What things are noticeably absent from Wesley’s journal? What is the value of reading Wesley’s journal?

John Wesley and Early Evangelicalism
Christopher Idle’s abridgment of The Journey of John Wesley (272 pages, Herts: Lion Publishing, 1986) portrays the founder of Methodism as a fervent evangelist, an inspiring social activist, and intensely committed to a life of rigorous personal discipline. Upon his return to Britain from Germany in 1739, his reputation as a fervent evangelist began to emerge on a national scale. Though inclined to believe that preaching was meant to be performed inside a church, Wesley quickly recognized the value of using the outdoors as a venue to share the gospel. Following an invitation from his colleague George Whitefield, Wesley began “open air” preaching to large crowds throughout the region, expounding on the Scriptures with sermon titles such as, “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink”, and “Christ, our wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption”. As he preached, listeners commonly experienced conviction of their sins, would often plead for mercy, and yield to unusual physical manifestations. Following one oration, Wesley reports that a woman in the crowd “sunk down…in a violent agony both of body and mind; as did five or six persons…at whose cries many were greatly offended”. Despite the offending outbursts, harsh criticisms from various Anglican clerics, and even harassment from angry mobs, thousands of people responded positively to his dynamic invitations to repent and receive Christ. Reflecting on the missional value of his outdoor evangelistic campaigns, Wesley states, “What a marvel the devil does not love field-preaching! Neither do I: I love a commodious room, a soft cushion, a handsome pulpit. But where is my zeal, if I do not trample all these things underfoot in order to save one more soul?” Wesley’s obsession “to save one more soul” fuelled his ministry throughout his entire life and became one of the defining features of early evangelicalism.

In addition to his well-travelled evangelistic campaigns, Wesley was also an inspiring social activist. Always concerned for the welfare of the underprivileged, he actively raised funds and mobilized ministry teams to help the sick, poor, hungry, unemployed, and prisoners. On one occasion, Wesley reports collecting donations to provide enough food to feed up to a hundred and fifty poverty-stricken people a day. On another occasion, he exhorts the people of the United Society to “bring what clothes each could spare”, “give weekly a penny”, employ “all the women who are out of business”, and “visit the sick…every other day”. Following his instructions, he organized ministry teams and required they meet weekly to report on their progress and discuss how they can increase their effectiveness in relieving the suffering of others. Upon discovery of the plight of eleven hundred French prisoners in Bristol and moved by their miserable circumstances, Wesley promptly raised funds, bought linen, had the material sewn into suitable clothing, and distributed. Convinced of his biblical mandate to help the poor, Wesley actively inspired others to social activism and organized his Methodist societies towards the same end, contributing to the social transformation of society and establishing a prevalent social consciousness throughout early evangelicalism.

Wesley’s journal also reveals that he was intensely committed to a life of rigorous personal discipline. When sailing for Georgia, Wesley would meticulously account for every minute of the day, rising at 4 a.m. for private prayer and ending the day with spiritual exercises before returning to bed at 9 p.m. Wesley’s journal rarely reports that he had a spare moment or enjoyed leisure time; even the words of his mouth were to be held accountable. One entry in 1738 describes his resolutions: “to labour after continual seriousness, not willingly indulging myself in any the least levity of behaviour or in laughter- no, not for a moment; to speak no word which does not tend to the glory of God”. Thirty-seven years later, when reflecting on the means by which God has blessed him, Wesley states: “(1) my constantly rising at four for about fifty years; (2) my generally preaching at five in the morning…; (3) my never travelling less, by sea or land, than four thousand five hundred miles a year.” Though Wesley’s disciplined life and strong work ethic is extraordinary, he expected similar behaviour from his followers, at times reproving their “self-willed” conduct without restraint.

John Wesley’s journal also reveals many characteristics that marked the attitudes and atmosphere of early evangelicalism. First, an emphasis on personal repentance and the need for individual conversion dominated evangelistic meetings. Wesley describes the response of his audience following one of his sermons saying, “all the people seem to be deeply affected…the fear of God is on everyside; and rich and poor ask, ‘what must I do to be saved?’” Second, emerging within this intensely spiritual atmosphere was a pervasive receptivity to the Holy Spirit, often resulting in unusual and emotionally- charged manifestations. Wesley, persuaded that outward signs often accompany inward transformation, frequently witnessed people physically responding to the influence of the Holy Spirit and described their behaviour using adjectives such as “trembled exceedingly”, “strong convulsions”, “groans”, “strong cries and tears”. Third, converts to the evangelical message were expected to embrace a virtuous lifestyle, abandoning indiscretions that previously constrained them. Modelled piously by Wesley himself, personal holiness became the accepted visible evidence of a life surrendered to Christ. When questioning whether the Irish were Christians or not, Wesley regarded their religions affiliation of little consequence; what mattered was that they “have the mind that was in Christ, and walked as he walked”.

Things Absent from Wesley’s Journal
Wesley’s journal primarily centres on John Wesley the evangelist and social activist; very little is discussed about his marriage. From his various personal accounts, it can be surmised that he considered marriage useful only for the benefit of gospel proclamation. His own marriage seemed more of a hindrance to him and, when his wife eventually left him, his journal entry marked the event with little more than a passing comment. Was the serious nature of his parents’ marriage a poor model? In a letter from Wesley’s mother to his father in 1712, she describes their home as a place of strict religious devotion and seriousness, dedicated solely to the spread of the gospel. Devoid of any congeniality, she claims to be rigorously fulfilling her maternal roles and continuing to support the local church in his absence. Not only was Wesley raised in a sombre and austere home, but throughout his life, he would often comment on the tension between the temporal and the eternal realms, consistently elevating eternal matters to a superior level. Reflecting on his other-worldly attitude, he writes, “I seek another country, and therefore am content to be a wanderer upon the earth” and “I must not build tabernacles. I am to be a wanderer on earth, and desire no rest till my spirit returns to God.” Though John Wesley shares little information about his private thoughts regarding his marriage, it seems he inherited the seriousness of his parents and assumed the other-worldly aspects of his faith, preventing him from personally experiencing contentment and creating a detachment from the common social institutions of his culture.

Value of Reading Wesley’s Journal
Wesley’s journal is a significant literary contribution for those interested in studying the life of John Wesley, an extraordinary historical figure who radically transformed the religious landscape of eighteenth century Britain and contributed to one of the most significant reformations of Christian spirituality and practice since the Reformation. The journal offers an emic account of Wesley’s personal thoughts and experiences, providing a vivid picture of his heart and mind, struggles and doubts, trials and triumphs. Additionally, Wesley’s journal gives readers a glimpse into the nature, atmosphere, and attitudes of early evangelicalism, with its ardent and tireless evangelists, persuasive preaching, acute awareness of personal sin, crisis conversions, strange manifestations, and deeply committed followers. Essential reading for church history students, the journal is also an important primary source for examining British revivalism and the birth of the Methodist movement. Furthermore, Wesley’s journal is a significant literary contribution for those wishing to understand not only the history of the evangelical church, but also the religious, political, moral, and social worldviews of modern Western civilization. Wesley’s evangelistic fervour, social activism, and rigorous personal discipline have left an indelible imprint on contemporary Christian theology and spirituality and his evangelical legacy continues to resonate in pulpits around the world.

Faith and Education Reform: How Egerton Ryerson's Evangelical Faith Influenced His Vision for the Future of Public Education in Ontario by Wm. Sloos

2007-12-07T23:03:00.001-05:00

Introduction
Architect of modern education in Ontario, Egerton Ryerson (1803-1882) is one of the most prominent and influential evangelicals in Canadian history. As Chief Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada, Ryerson reformed and modernized an impoverished, unregulated, and discriminatory school system that inadequately functioned to educate the children of the burgeoning colony. At the heart of his educational vision was his evangelical faith; a faith formed early by his mother’s Methodism, experiences at camp meeting revivals, and personal conversion to Christ. Ryerson’s conviction that education was second only to religion as God’s highest purpose for human beings was strengthened by his years as Methodist minister and missionary to First Nation peoples. When given the opportunity to confront the suppressive Anglican establishment, he rose to the challenge and led the struggle to overturn the power imbalance. Inspired by the writings of John Wesley and motivated by his Methodist theology, Ryerson became a tireless political activist and administrator, effectively navigating through the turbulent political system and successfully managing to inaugurate a new era of publicly funded, universal education, based on Christian principles. He created an environment in which conversion to Christianity was facilitated through the promotion of Christian knowledge and a broad range of subjects useful for the formation of responsible citizens. Gaining full government approval in 1871, Ryerson’s School Act transformed the deplorable condition of the school system into a standardized and competent educational model unobstructed by rigid denominationalism. This paper will argue that Egerton Ryerson’s evangelical faith influenced his vision for the future of public education in Ontario and most of English-speaking Canada.

Early Years
Egerton Ryerson’s early years were defined by his Loyalist upbringing and his conversion to evangelical Christianity, two features that were to have a profound influence on his career. Joseph Ryerson, his American father, served as a Loyalist officer in the American Revolutionary War. The increasingly hostile atmosphere against the Loyalists following the war forced Joseph to flee north to New Brunswick, eventually relocating to Upper Canada. After settling in the Long Point Settlement of Vittoria, he became part of the loyalist establishment, pioneering new land and defending loyalists’ principles against threatening American republicanism. Egerton, the fifth of six sons born to Joseph and Mehetable Ryerson, was too young to participate in the War of 1812, but recalls a brother badly wounded in battle, a memory that fortified a deep and enduring affection to his native land and desire to protect and preserve the British Crown in Upper Canada. During Ryerson’s political career, his loyalist heritage and affections enabled him to straddle political lines between the Tories and the Reformers, a position he exploited to his own advantage in the implementation of his educational reforms.

Although Egerton’s father was a staunch Anglican, his mother was a devout Methodist who modelled a personal and vibrant faith to her sons, reinforced by the frequent visits of Methodist circuit riders and the wave of evangelical revivalism sweeping across the Niagara region. Following in the footsteps of his three older brothers, Egerton experienced a personal and dramatic conversion to Christ. Fused with Puritan-like sentiments, Ryerson vividly describes his spiritual regeneration in his memoirs, stating, “My consciousness of guilt and sinfulness was humbling, oppressive, and distressing; and my experience of relief, after lengthened fastings [sic], watching, and prayers, was clear, refreshing, and joyous. In the end I simply trusted in Christ.” Following his conversion experience, Egerton describes how his faith generated a radical transformation in his perspective, attitude, emotions, and focus, reporting, “I henceforth had new views, new feelings, new joys, and new strength. I truly delighted in the law of the Lord…from that time I became a diligent student.” It is ironic, given his future as the leader of education reform in the province, that he associated his regeneration with his enhanced ability for learning.

Despite his father’s intense opposition to Methodism, considering it contrary to the values of Anglicanism, Egerton continued to attend Methodist meetings and secretly study any theological literature he could acquire through his Methodist acquaintances. Seeking to mitigate his father’s hostility however, he relented from becoming a member of the Methodist church until he was eighteen, when a Methodist circuit rider finally persuaded him to officially join the church. Discovering his son’s intentions to formalize his affiliation with the Methodists, Egerton’s father promptly issued an ultimatum that Egerton either leave the Methodists or leave the house. Recognizing the decree was absolute, Egerton reports, “I had the aid of a Mother’s prayers…and a conscious Divine strength according to my need. The next day I left home.” Though he was later reconciled to his father, this episode highlights Egerton’s independent spirit and dedication to his Methodist faith regardless of the consequences, characteristics that would follow him throughout his career and inform his resolutions as education reformer.

Ministry Years
Over the next decade, Egerton Ryerson’s ministry as an itinerant preacher and missionary would develop his leadership skills, oratory competence, and educational convictions, and prepare him for his highly publicized confrontation with the Anglican establishment. During his classical studies at the Gore District Grammar School in Hamilton, Ryerson experienced a crisis moment where he reported receiving a divine call to serve as a Methodist minister. Though feeling inadequate for the post, he accepted the invitation and availed himself to the apprenticeship of the Methodist circuit preachers. Firm in his decision, he writes in his diary:
I have this day finished twenty-two years of my life. I have decided this day to travel in the Methodist Connexion and preach Jesus to the lost souls of men. Oh, the awful importance of this work! How utterly unfit I am for the undertaking!

After formal recognition by the Canada Conference, the governing body of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Upper Canada, Ryerson became the minister of the Yonge Street Circuit, covering a geographic triangle between Pickering, Weston, and the south shore of Lake Simcoe. Following John Wesley’s road-tested pattern for saddle-bag preachers, Ryerson’s Sundays consisted of riding horseback for thirty miles, preaching three times, and teaching two classes. In addition to his itinerancy, Ryerson also served as a missionary, holding camp meetings with the Mississauga and Mohawk peoples and even living and working with the Ojibway First Nation of the Credit River settlement. Despite common prejudices about the supposed inferiority of the native population, Ryerson expressed a genuine affection for them and strived to gain fluency in their respective languages. Through generous donations received from the churches on his circuit, Ryerson also constructed a school for the natives and taught them agriculture and economics. After successfully completing his ministerial probation, he was ordained in 1827 and spent the following two years assigned to the Cobourg and Ancaster circuits.

During these rigorous years as a preacher and missionary, one event would thrust Ryerson into the public eye, offering him a historic opportunity to address the religious and educational discrimination of the colony’s deep-rooted Anglican establishment and prepare the ground for his subsequent educational reforms. John Strachan, the leading Church of England cleric in Upper Canada, held the prestigious position as executive of the Family Compact, a collective of wealthy, Anglican elites, who controlled the government and exercised a monopoly over the business, financial, and educational affairs of Upper Canada. Aimed at preserving the social stratification of the colony’s class structure and attacking the swelling Methodist movement, Strachan delivered a sermon condemning the Methodists, describing them as “ignorant American enthusiasts, unsound in religion and disloyal in politics.” Unrestrained, he ridiculed the Methodist clergy, calling them “ignorant persons who had forsaken their proper callings to preach what they neither understood nor cared to learn.” To suppress the strengthening influence of the Methodists and fortify the Anglican hold on power, Strachan demanded that the government grant exclusive Anglican access to the Clergy Reserves and prevent Methodist clergy from solemnizing marriages or holding any titles to church buildings, parsonages, and cemeteries. Strachan’s biased and derogatory statements ignited feelings of indignation among the Methodists and calls went out for an immediate response.

Already having gained a significant reputation among his colleagues, Ryerson was invited to craft a reply to Strachan’s malicious homily, now widely circulating in print throughout the colony. Countering Strachan’s accusations, Ryerson succinctly laid out his claims, citing the inherent dangers of siding with the Established Church, the erudite nature of the Methodist clergy, and Methodist devotion and loyalty to the British Crown. Ryerson’s rebuttal, appearing in William Lyon Mackenzie’s newspaper, produced a sensation within his denomination. The Methodist Quarterly Review remarked that “No other previous publication had ever defended the Methodists of Canada, and nobody had presumed to question the arrogant claims of the Established Church.” Ryerson’s pointed response kindled a debate within government circles and, within four years, legislation was passed permitting other Non-conformist denominations to own land and allow their clergy to marry and baptize. Though further reforms were longer in coming, Ryerson’s achievements for the Methodist cause inspired him to broaden his attack on the Anglican establishment by addressing their discriminatory policies on education, an endeavour that would define his primary mission in life.

Superintendent of Education
After serving as the founding editor of Methodist newspaper The Christian Guardian and the first principle of Victoria College, Ryerson was offered an appointment by Governor General Charles Metcalfe to serve as the Superintendent of Education for Canada West. At the time, Metcalfe was attempting to build a broad support base among both political parties and cross denominations in an effort to avoid appearing too partial towards the Anglican establishment. Appointing Ryerson to a position within his administration would appeal to the Methodist constituency and other moderates throughout the province. Pleased with the new political climate and interested in the opportunity to give leadership to the development of a national education system, Ryerson accepted the position and immediately began focussing his attention on the deplorable conditions of the provincial school system.

At the heart of Ryerson’s vision for educational reform was his evangelical faith, informed by his admiration for John Wesley and his loyalty to Methodist theology. John Wesley, who died only twelve years prior to Ryerson’s birth, was a major influence on Ryerson’s educational philosophies. Having visited Wesley’s home in England and preached in his chapel at City Road, London, Ryerson connected with Wesley at a deeper level than most of his Methodist colleagues, admiring his passion for learning, rigorous scholarship, and support and promotion of educational institutions. To promote the value of education based on the tenets of the Christian faith, Ryerson frequently referred to Wesley’s teachings in his editorials, letters, and political speeches. Following Ryerson’s death, The Methodist Quarterly Review lauded Ryerson by describing him as one of the “sons of John Wesley,” aligning him with Wesley’s intellectual aptitude and advocacy of educational ideals.

Ryerson’s commitment to Methodist theology, especially his high view of Scripture and millennial eschatology, played a central role in defining his blueprint for a national education system. Ryerson’s educational philosophy, based on a Wesleyan view of moral science, consisted of two primary assumptions: he assumed that all people needed Christianity as the means to true happiness and consequently, he assumed that any system of public instruction should be grounded on Christian values. This entailed teaching a basic form of Christianity to all students, informed not by ecclesiastical doctrines, but by the plain use of Scripture. Refusing to yield to any particular ecclesiastical distinctive, Ryerson believed that school teachers were to inculcate simple biblical principles, creating an environment in which conversion to Christianity would be normative and social harmony, self-discipline, and loyalty to the properly constituted authorities would be commonplace. Responding to critics who believed that he was placing too much emphasis on the need for Biblical instruction in the classroom, Ryerson counters, “I think there is too little Christianity in our schools, instead of too much; and that the united efforts of all Christian men should be to introduce more, instead of excluding what little there is.” In the era prior to the debilitating impact of Darwinism and higher criticism upon the general acceptance of the Bible, Ryerson contended that the Christian faith and particularly the Bible belongs at the heart of any thriving educational system and considered its usage in the schools a sacred and divine right.

Additionally, Ryerson’s millennial eschatology also informed his educational philosophies. Derived from his nineteenth century Wesleyan Methodist theology, Ryerson maintained that a Christian society, working together through a variety of religious and secular organizations, could usher in the anticipated millennial reign of Christ. At the Second Advent, Christ would bring the development of moral advancement to its culmination and inaugurate a perfected civilization in conformity with the kingdom of God. Traces of Ryerson’s eschatological trajectory are frequently seen in his editorials in The Christian Guardian. To illustrate his understanding of the capacity for evangelical faith to advance civilization toward perfection, he states in one article that Christianity is the only religion that can provide “man” with "wisdom to instruct him, mercy to pardon, grace to sanctify, power to strengthen him, -enlightening his understanding, awakening his conscience, subduing his will, renewing his heart, regulating his passions, expanding his prospects and hopes to a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory." Implementing universal, state-funded, Christian education played a central role in this process and, though education was incapable of regenerating society on its own, Ryerson believed it was an essential component in creating an environment where people could be converted in preparation for the fulfilment of eschatological hope.

Educational Reforms
Following a study tour of the educational models in Europe and the United States, Ryerson submitted a series of reports to the government of Upper Canada, laying out his vision to revolutionize education in the province. To achieve his goals, he began by centralizing the control of the school system under the guidance of a General Board of Education, which would be responsible for the management of local school boards, assessing teachers, standardizing curriculum, and developing libraries. Recognizing the academic advances occurring in society, Ryerson desired that a wide variety of subjects be taught in addition to the Bible, including composition, geography, drawing, history, music, natural science, physiology, agriculture, and politics. He established teacher training institutions and progressively set higher standards for the certification of elementary school teachers. One of his most daunting tasks was reorganizing how education was funded. Suggesting that all people should contribute property taxes to fund education regardless of whether they had children in the system caused many objections, some criticizing the proposal as a form of communism, others fearing that such a strategy would create an upsurge in criminal behaviour. Ryerson’s annual town hall meetings throughout Upper Canada garnered favourable support, but the issue remained a point of contention for years. Ryerson’s persistence paid off however, and by his retirement, 4000 of Ontario’s 4,400 school boards were entirely funded by local taxes. Though he had to make some concessions, the greatest being his acknowledgment of the public’s legal right for the maintenance of a separate Catholic school board, Ryerson achieved his goal of inaugurating a publicly funded, universal education system free from denominational control, yet established on Biblical values. His comprehensive educational reforms in Ontario became a model for education in the newly formed territories of British Columbia and the Northwest, and eventually became a template for the majority of the Canadian provinces.

Conclusion
Influenced by his evangelical faith, Egerton Ryerson transformed Ontario’s impoverished, unregulated, and discriminatory education system into a modern, universal, publicly funded model based on Christian principles. Converted to Christ as an adolescent, Ryerson later entered the Methodist ministry and served as an itinerant preacher and missionary. Given the opportunity to respond to Strachan’s deprecating homily, Ryerson established himself as a capable pugilist in the battle for religious rights in the colony. Having entered the public sphere, he began addressing the deplorable conditions of the school system, convinced it must be accessible to everyone, regardless of economic status or religious affiliation. Through his tenure as Superintendent of Education, Ryerson implemented his comprehensive vision for educational reform. Inspired by the life and teachings of John Wesley and informed by his Methodist theology, including his high view of Scripture and millennial eschatology, Ryerson established a national education system that would develop honest, self-controlled, responsible, and productive citizens who are both self-sufficient and dependent on God. With his evangelical faith central to his vision for educational reform, Ryerson became the architect of modern education in Ontario and most of English-speaking Canada.

Bibliography

Doucet, Claude W. “Egerton Ryerson, 1803-1882.” Ryerson Archives (June 2002). No
pages. Cited October 22, 2007. Online: http://www.ryerson.ca/archives/ egerton.html.

Gidney, R. D. “Ryerson, Egerton,” in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography. Vol. XI
1881-1890, edited by Francess G. Halpenny, 783-795. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982.

McDonald, Neil and Alf Chaiton, eds. Egerton Ryerson and His Times. Toronto:
Macmillan Company of Canada Limited, 1978.

McMullin, Stanley E., “Ryerson’s Rule,” Horizon Canada English ed. in the Canadian
Reference Centre Database. No pages. Cited October 23, 2007. Online:http://
web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=3&hid=14&sid=3ade9a3b-64f2-4b8d-9fa8-3c7aa3d95b82%40sessionmgr2.

Ryerson, Egerton, Rev. The Story of My Life. Edited by J. George Hodgins. Toronto:
William Briggs, 1883.

Shepherd, Victor. “Egerton Ryerson: From Methodist Itinerant to Chief Superintendent
of Education (1803-1882).” Touchstone 3:20 (2002) 38-46.

Sissons, C. B. Egerton Ryerson: His Life and Letters. Vol. 1. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1937.

Steinacher, C. M. “Ryerson, Adolphus Egerton.” In the Biographical Dictionary of
Evangelicals, edited by Timothy Larsen, 569-571. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 2003.

Thomas, Clara. Ryerson of Upper Canada. Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1969.

Whedon, D. D, ed. Methodist Quarterly Review. Vol. LXV. New York: Phillips & Hunt,
1883.

The Eschatological Status of the Faithful Departed from 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 by William Sloos

2007-12-07T22:59:00.001-05:00

Introduction
In 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, Paul responds to the Thessalonian church’s concern over the eschatological status of the faithful departed with a consolatory teaching about the hope of Christian believers in the Parousia (Keck, 723). Despite their knowledge about the second coming of Christ, the Thessalonian saints were uncertain as to how the faithful departed will participate in the eschaton (Keck 723). Since several members of their faith community had died, the church was grieving their loss and concerned that their departed loved ones had been excluded from the glorious hope of the anticipated Parousia (DeSilva, 539). Recognizing their grief, Paul reassures the believers that those who have died in Christ have not been separated from the blessings and promises of God, but instead will be resurrected and reunited with the living at Christ’s return (Bruce, 104). Their departed loved ones have not suffered any disadvantage by dying before the Advent, but all believers will share in the final triumph of God together (DeSilva, 539). The following study will examine Paul’s teaching on the eschatological status of the faithful departed based on an exegesis of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

Compositional History
Pauline authorship of 1 Thessalonians has been historically affirmed by the ancient canons of Marcion and Muratori, who place the epistle among Paul’s works (Gaebelein, 232). Early church fathers, such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria all acknowledge the apostle Paul as the author of 1 Thessalonians (Gaebelein, 232). Additionally, Canonicity of 1 Thessalonians was recognized early throughout Christendom, attested by its inclusion in the Old Latin and Old Syriac versions of the New Testament (Gaebelein, 232). As well, given biblical and secular evidence, it is largely affirmed that Paul composed 1 Thessalonians from the city of Corinth some time during the spring of A.D. 50 (Acts 18:5; 1 Thess 3:6) (Gaebelein, 233). Informed of the condition of the Thessalonian church by Timothy (1 Thess. 3:6-7), Paul wrote the letter to the Thessalonian believers to encourage them in the face of persecution, affirm his apostolic authority, address some areas of individual and community life that required upgrading, and respond to their concerns about the eschatological status of the faithful departed (Gaebelein, 233).

Genre and Structure
The literary genre of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 follows a typical pattern for ancient letter writing and includes elements of didactic response, consolation, and encouragement (DeSilva, 531). For the purpose of this study, the structure of the passage will be broken down according to the following divisions (Gillman, 272):
Verse 13 Opening Words
Verse 14 Kerygma and Implications
a) Jesus died and rose again
b) The dead with Jesus
Verse 15-17 Description of the Parousia and Implications
a) Series of end time events
b) The living and the dead with the Lord
Verse 18 Closing Words

Historical Context or Sitz im Leben
At the time of Paul’s first epistle to the Thessalonians, the city of Thessalonica was a thriving commercial port city along the Aegean Sea (DeSilva, 528). Despite being ruled by Rome, the city preserved much of its Greek political, cultural, and spiritual identity, including the worship of idols (1 Thess. 1:9-10) (DeSilva, 528). In the late 40’s C.E., a church had been conceived in Thessalonica when Paul travelled there and preached in the synagogue (DeSilva, 528). After a group of converts was formed consisting of both Jews and Gentiles, the fledgling church located to Jason’s house where they could worship together, grow in their faith, and await the return of Christ (DeSilva, 528). Within this new faith community, many of the converts encountered strong opposition from their family and friends, causing them considerable internal distress (1 Thess. 1:6; 3:3-4) (DeSilva, 528). Realizing the strain on the new converts, Paul sent Timothy to encourage them in the midst of their afflictions (1 Thess. 3:1-5) (DeSilva, 528). After receiving a positive report from Timothy on the Thessalonian believers’ ongoing steadfastness in the face of hostility, Paul pens his first epistle to them, exhorting them to remain strong in the faith and instructing them on several matters that concerned them, especially the eschatological status of the faithful departed in light of the return of Christ (1 Thess. 3:7; 1 Thess. 4:13-18) (DeSilva, 528).

Literary Context and Canonical Placement
The 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 passage is part of the last large unit of the epistle (4:1-5:22) that centres on the theme of faithful and ethical living in light of the imminent return of Christ (Keck, 723). The passage also fits into the larger theme of the epistle which primarily focuses on renewing the bond of friendship between Paul and the Thessalonian church, encouraging them in their commitment to Christ, and addressing some of their personal concerns (DeSilva, 539). Additionally, the passage is also consistent with other Pauline epistles and the latter half of the New Testament Canon which supports emerging communities of faith throughout Asia Minor (DeSilva, 475).

Literary Analysis of the Text
Opening Words (Verse 13)
Introducing a new topic in his epistle, Paul begins by saying, “Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant,” a common Pauline locution that is generally used to politely capture the attention of his hearers (4:13, NIV) (Morris, 135). Following his preface, he launches into the issue that was concerning the Thessalonians, specifically the eschatological status of the faithful departed (Morris, 135). Apparently the Thessalonian believers had some knowledge about the Parousia, a term used in classical Greek meaning “arrival” or “coming” and frequently applied in Hellenistic literature to describe the official visit of a sovereign or epiphany of a deity (McArthur, 658). Within the Christian tradition, the concept of the Parousia of Christ was mostly likely derived from the Olivet discourse in the Synoptic Gospels, especially in the Matthaean corpus which speaks of an imminent, dramatic, visible return of Christ to usher in the millennial age (Bruce, 95, McArthur, 659). Despite their knowledge of the Parousia of Christ, the Thessalonian believers were uncertain as to how deceased members of their faith community figured into the eschatological scheme (Bruce, 95). Since the believers were under the impression that the Parousia would occur within their lifetime, they were puzzled as to the status of those who died in advance of Christ’s return (Morris, 135). Realizing their grief and concern, Paul proceeds to clarify the matter and illuminate the believers to the true eschatological status of their departed loved ones (Bruce, 96).
Following Paul’s opening statement, he shares with the Thessalonian church that those who have died have merely fallen “asleep” (κοιμάω) and that they should not grieve “like the rest of men, who have no hope” (4:13). Although many religions speak of death in terms of sleeping, the metaphor is most applicable in a Christian context (Morris, 136). For Christians, death is no longer the adversary; since the risen Lord has overcome death, believers who die in the present age merely await their resurrection at the dawn of the next age (Morris, 136). Knowing that those who have died in the faith will receive the promised resurrection, Paul exhorts the believers not to grieve like other people, who considered death simply as the cessation of life with little hope for the future (Ascough, 522). For the Christian however, there is no reason for despair because those who have died have simply “fallen asleep” and will wake up with Christ in the Parousia (Morris, 137).

The Kerygma and Implications (Verse 14)
a) Jesus died and rose again
After exhorting the Thessalonians not to despair over the faithful departed, Paul presents his theological teaching on the eschatological status of believers who have died prior to the Parousia (Gillman, 272). First, he gives the kerygma, or gospel proclamation, stating “We believe that Jesus died and rose again,” a primitive confession of faith reflecting the essence of the gospel message that Christ has triumphed over death (4:14a) (Gillman, 272, Bruce 97, Witherington, 115). For Paul, this definitive declaration of the death and resurrection of Jesus is not based on some philosophical speculation or elaborate religious myth, but rests on sure historical foundation (Morris, 138). Having set forth the basis for his eschatological argument, Paul then proceeds to illustrate how the resurrection of Christ is the guarantee of eschatological hope for every believer and especially for the departed faithful (Morris, 139).

b) The dead with Jesus
Due to the indisputable nature of Jesus’ victory over death, Paul is able to cast the entire phrase in the form of a conditional statement, arguing that because Christ died and rose again, “God will bring with Jesus those have fallen asleep in him” (4:14b) (Bruce, 97). Although the exact meaning of the phrase has been disputed, with scholars debating about whether the deceased Christians will be brought with Jesus from heaven or simply brought back from the dead, the message to the Thessalonian believers was simple: those who have died in Christ will not be excluded from the Parousia (Witherington, 115). Rather than being excluded, the faithful departed of the Thessalonian church will be resurrected to new life when Christ returns (Witherington, 115).

Description of the Parousia and Implications (Verses 15-17)
a) The end time events
Continuing his teaching on the eschatological status of the deceased members of the Thessalonian church, Paul now begins to graphically illustrate how these departed loved ones are involved in the Parousia of Christ (Plevnik, 281). First, Paul states that “the Lord himself will come down from heaven,” emphasizing it will not be an angel or any other divine messenger that will descend from heaven, but Christ alone will be responsible for bringing the present age to a close (4:16a) (Morris, 142). Second, the coming of the Lord will be inaugurated with great majesty and honour, similar to the celebratory arrival of a reigning sovereign (Morris, 142). He will appear with a “loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God,” all audible sounds that suppose the coming of the Lord is not a secret or silent event, but a visual and audible experience (4:16b) (Witherington, 119). Third, Paul states that “the dead in Christ will rise first,” indicating to the Thessalonian believers that not only will their departed faithful be included in the Parousia, but they will rise prior to the living saints, suggesting a position of privilege (4:16c) (Plevnik, 281-282). The believers’ loved ones who have died waiting for the coming of the Lord will not be excluded, but instead will be the initial recipients of resurrection life at the spectacular and glorious coming of the Lord (Keck, 724).

b) The living and the dead with the Lord
After the departed faithful have been raised, Paul informs the Thessalonian saints that those who are still alive will be “caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air” (4:17a). The verb “caught up” (ἁρπάζω) is one that means “to seize” or “to carry off by force,” implying a sudden swoop or rapture that cannot be resisted (Bruce, 102). Suggesting a type of bodily assumption, the living believers will be supernaturally “snatched away” and brought into the exalted world of the living Christ (Plevnik, 282). Thus, not only will the departed faithful be raised with Christ in the eschaton, but the grieving Thessalonian believers will also be reunited with their loved ones and miraculously assembled together to meet the Lord in the sky (Morris, 144).

Closing Words (Verse 18)
Recognizing that the Thessalonian church was grieving over the loss of their loved ones and uncertain of their eschatological status, Paul now exhorts the believers to “encourage each other with these words” (4:18). Given the truth about the resurrection of the departed faithful in the eschaton, the believers can console one another and continue their expectant hope of the soon return of Christ (Keck, 725).

Main Themes and Theological Message
The main theme of Paul’s consolatory word about the eschatological status of the departed faithful focuses on Christian hope (Keck, 725). The Thessalonian church was grieving the loss of their loved ones and unsure of their participation in the anticipated Parousia of Christ. Concerned that their deceased loved ones may have been excluded from the blessings and benefits of the return of Christ, they receive a teaching from Paul informing them that, because of the death and resurrection of Jesus, their faithful departed will fully participate in the glorious eschaton (Keck, 725). Contrary to the unbelieving community who have no hope for the future, the Thessalonian saints have hope beyond the grave (Ascough, 522). Death is not their final destination, but merely a prelude to a glorious resurrection and a permanent reunion with their loved ones (Witherington, 123).

The theological message of Paul’s teaching on the eschatological status of the faithful departed contributes to the broader understanding of the nature and scope of the Parousia of Christ (Witherington, 130). Using vivid imagery to describe the ancient arrival of a reigning sovereign, the coming of the Lord will be heralded with a “loud command,” the “voice of the archangel,” and the “trumpet call of God” (4:16). Arriving in his travelling party will be the faithful departed, now resurrected to new life and awaiting their grand reunion with the living believers (Witherington, 122). Resembling a greeting committee who goes forth from a city to meet the arriving sovereign, the living believers will be “caught up” in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air (4:17) (Witherington, 123). A dramatic depiction of future events, Paul’s teaching provides believers with a framework to understand how Christ will return for his church and usher in the new age (Witherington, 123).

Theological Implications and Applications
Within contemporary evangelicalism, there is a popular school of thought that uses 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 to endorse a secret rapture theory, where believers mysteriously disappear from the earth prior to the Parousia of Christ (Morris, 145). Despite the widely held belief however, it is very difficult to fit a secret rapture theory into this passage (Morris, 145). Paul was clear that when the Lord returns, he will descend with “a loud command,” the “voice of an archangel,” and the “trumpet of God.” Though some suggest that the sounds will only be audible to believers, there is no support for such a claim in the text (Morris, 145). Moreover, this passage is the only place in the New Testament that speaks unambiguously of a rapture of believers (Morris, 145). With no other clear texts supporting a secret rapture theory in the Scriptures, it is difficult to consider this passage relating to anything but a description of the Parousia of Christ (Witherington, 130). Theologian Ben Witherington III contends that the secret rapture theory is an unacceptable interpretation of the text which promotes a false sense of security among believers, giving them the impression that Christ will clandestinely rapture them before the re-emergence of global persecution and martyrdom. He states:

There will be no ‘beam me up Scotty’ effect for the last generation of Christians. Rather there will be suffering and martyrdom, just as there was in the time when John wrote Revelation (Witherington, 130).

Rather than a secret rapture, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 describes the triumphant return of the living Christ. His coming will not only be majestic and spectacular, but will also be visible to the entire world. Like the Thessalonian church, the contemporary church may also have to endure persecution and martyrdom as the present age draws to a close, but the church has a firm hope in the anticipated Parousia of Christ and looks forward to the resurrection of the saints to eternal life.

Finally, Paul’s consolatory teaching to the Thessalonians about the eschatological status of their deceased loved ones remains a source of comfort for the contemporary church (Keck, 725). Though grief is a natural response to the loss of a loved one, the community of faith does not grieve like those who have no hope (Keck 725). Distinguished from the unbelieving world, Christian hope is founded on the death and resurrection of Jesus and anticipates the Parousia where Christ will return to unite all believers in eternal life (Morris, 146). As I personally officiated at funerals for both believing and unbelieving families, the difference in grief is significant. When a Christian dies, though family and friends grieve their loss, they are confident that one day they will be reunited again. Knowing that separation is temporary, there is comfort and consolation in the midst of sorrow. Conversely, unbelieving families experience profound hopelessness and despair; uncertain of any eschatological future, they are without any assurance of seeing their loved one again. Paul’s message to the Thessalonian saints about hope beyond the grave is a message that must be declared again to the current culture, illuminating people to the promise of resurrection through faith in Christ.

Bibliography

Ascough, Richard S. “A question of death: Paul's community-building language in 1
Thessalonians 4:13-18,” Journal of Biblical Literature, 123 no 3 Fall (2004), 509-
530.

Bruce, F. F. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco: Word Books, 1982.

DeSilva, David, A. An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods &
Ministry Formation. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 2004.

Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary 11. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1990.

Gillman, John. “Signals of transformation in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 47 no 2 Ap (1985), 263-281.

Keck, Leander E., ed. The New Interpreter’s Bible XI. Nashville: Abingdon Press,
2000.

McArthur, H. K. The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: An Illustrated Encylopedia.K-Q. Edited by George Arthur Buttrick. New York: Abingdon Press, 1962.

Morris, Leon, The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991.

Plevnik, Joseph. “The taking up of the faithful and the resurrection of the dead in 1
Thessalonians 4:13-18,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 46 no 2 Ap (1984), 274-283.

The NIV Study Bible. New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985.

Witherington III, Ben. The Problem with Evangelical Theology: Testing the Exegetical
Foundations of Calvinism, Dispensationalism and Wesleyanism. Baylor
University Press: Waco, 2005.

Messiah As Spirit and Fire Baptizer from Luke 3:15-17 by William Sloos

2007-12-07T22:55:00.001-05:00

Introduction
From the outset, readers of Luke’s Gospel discover that both John and Jesus are chosen for a divine purpose from conception. John’s mission is to be a prophet and prepare the people for the coming of Jesus, the Messiah. As the narrative progresses, John is found in the desert wilderness, proclaiming a message of repentance and forgiveness of sins, performing water baptisms, and instructing people in righteousness. During his ministry, crowds following him wonder if he might be the long-awaited Messiah. Responding to their speculations, John illuminates his listeners to the identity and mission of the coming Messiah, describing him as a man of superior status, a baptizer of Spirit and fire, and an eschatological judge. This paper will examine John’s description of the anticipated Messiah based on an exegesis of Luke 3:15-17.

Compositional History
Since the author of the Gospel of Luke is not identified in the text, the most reliable information concerning Lukan authorship originates from early church tradition. Irenaeus, a second century Christian apologist, ascribes the authorship of the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles to Luke, a close travelling companion of Paul, a claim uncontested by the early church fathers. Though some scholars contend that Luke-Acts could have been written as late as the second century, most scholars agree that Luke wrote his two volumes from an undisclosed location during the Roman siege of Jerusalem, likely between A. D. 60-70. Addressed to Theophilus and likely intended for a wide readership, Luke’s purpose of writing was to produce an organized account of God’s plan of salvation, accomplished through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and continuing to unfold through Christ’s followers.

Genre and Structure
The literary genre of Luke 3:15-17 is a Greek and Semitic narrative written in dramatic prose with some Hebrew and Aramaic metaphors and expressions. For the purpose of this study, the structure of the passage will be broken down into a verse-by-verse analysis and follow an outline informed by the The Anchor Bible:
Verse 15 The People’s Curiosity
Verse 16 John’s Response
a) The Messiah’s Superior Status
b) The Messiah as Spirit and Fire Baptizer
Verse 17 Messiah as Eschatological Judge

Historical Context or Sitz im Leben
Reminiscent of Israel’s desert wanderings in the Exodus, the setting for John’s prophetic ministry takes place in the wilderness near the Jordan River (3:2-3). Luke identifies the story occurring during the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, presumably during 28-29 C.E (3:1). In addition to naming Tiberius, Luke also identifies a number of political leaders including Pontius Pilate, governor of Judea, and Herod, tetrarch of Galilee, information Luke supplies less to indicate chronology and more to introduce characters who will oppose the work of God in subsequent accounts. Moreover Luke’s identification of these political figures serves to emphasize the oppressive Roman rule currently enforced in Palestine and magnify hopes of Messianic liberation among the Jewish people.
Literary Context and Canonical Placement

The Luke 3:15-17 passage is the concluding segment of a larger narrative that describes John’s public ministry as a forerunner of the Messiah. Readers are introduced to John’s prophetic mission at his conception in chapter one and witness the fulfilment of his mission in chapter three, concluding with his final public discourse before his imprisonment by Herod. This brief passage, describing the identity and mission of the expectant Messiah, also fits into the larger Canon by confirming numerous Old Testament prophecies concerning the Messiah, sets the stage for the commencement of Jesus’ public ministry, anticipates the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost, and foresees the eschatological reign of Christ.

Literary Analysis of the Text
The People’s Curiosity (3:15)
John’s harsh words of imminent judgment, calls for repentance, and demands for moral change, still the crowds respond to him by volunteering to be baptized in water and expressing interest in his message about ethical and social transformation. Messianic expectations were in the air and John’s prophetic ministry caused people to speculate whether he might be the one to liberate and redeem Israel from their oppression. Luke uses the word προσδοκάω (“expectation”) to describe the optimistic feelings of the people, suggesting that there was a collective eschatological anticipation for the appearance of the Messiah, causing the people to view John as the potential embodiment of their hopes.

John’s Response (3:16)
Aware of the people’s curiosity as to whether he might be the Messiah, John publicly responds with a solemn declaration about the nature and characteristics of the true Messiah.

a) The Messiah’s Superior Status
Speaking to his desert followers, John declares that “one more powerful than I will come,” redirecting their speculative theories and emphasizing the Messiah’s superior status. To further the people’s understanding of the vast difference between himself and the Messiah, John states that he is not even worthy to untie the Messiah’s sandal-thongs, a culturally sensitive metaphor that dramatically illustrates John’s inferior position compared to the greatness of the Messiah. In Roman Palestine, rabbinical teachers were seldom remunerated monetarily and their disciples would often show their appreciation for them by performing a variety of personal services. The untying of the sandal-thong however, was considered too menial a task for a disciple, illustrated by the rabbinical saying, “Every service for which a slave performs for his master shall a disciple do for his teacher except the losing of his sandal-thong”. To unfasten sandal-straps was considered a humiliating task, done primarily by slaves; John states that he is not even worthy to be the Messiah’s slave, let alone disciple, clearly highlighting to the crowd that their speculations are drastically misplaced and that they should consider John a lowly servant, not the Messiah.

b) The Messiah as Spirit and Fire Baptizer
Continuing to contrast their roles, John reveals that, though he baptizes with water, the Messiah will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Since the crowd was being baptized in water by John, they clearly understood the concept of baptism as an immersing or drenching exercise, but how did they understand John’s description of the Messiah as a Spirit and fire baptizer? In the Old Testament, the Spirit of God consistently came upon or possessed the heroes of Israel, empowering them to perform unusual feats and filling them with wisdom, prophetic utterances, and divine inspiration. Not only is Spirit-empowerment or Spirit-filling prominent in Israel’s history, but Isaiah prophecies that the Messiah will possess the fullest endowment of the Spirit of God (Is. 11:1-5) and Joel predicted that in the last days the Holy Spirit would be “poured out” upon all people (Joel 2:28). The understanding of a Messianic figure empowered and empowering others with the Holy Spirit would not be a foreign concept to John’s listeners. Linking the Holy Spirit to the language of baptism would have given John’s listeners a sense that they too will be immersed or drenched by the Spirit.

Fire is also a common theme in Old Testament literature, but rather than an empowering force as the Spirit, fire is often associated with judgment. Within the context of unbelieving Israel, prophets used fire as a symbol of judgment as do several Jewish apocalyptic sources. In addition to a symbol of judgment, fire also served a theophanic purpose symbolizing the presence of God to the people of Israel. Numerous times God reveals himself from the midst of a fire or describes himself as a devouring or consuming fire. Throughout Israel’s history, fire has symbolized both destructive and theophanic traits; its very attributes indicate holiness, inapproachability, mystery, consumption, and purity. Combining the attributes of judgment and theophany serve to intensify the image of the holiness of God in contrast to the sinfulness of humanity. Though some New Testament scholars argue that fire baptism relates to the Spirit baptism of Pentecost, to John’s hearers, a Messianic figure coming to baptize with fire would point to a cleansing and purifying of unrighteousness, clearly identifying his role as eschatological judge.

For the writer of Luke-Acts, John’s identification of the Messiah as Spirit and fire baptizer is clearly an anticipation of future events that John could not have imagined. The promise of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is reiterated by the resurrected Christ in Acts 1:5 and fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended on the Upper Room gathering. Immersing Jews and Gentiles, men and women, the Holy Spirit continued to empower converts throughout the Acts narratives, even baptizing John’s disciples in Acts 19:1-7. John’s description of the Messiah as Spirit baptizer informs his followers that they can expect a future Spirit baptism as part of the unfolding of God’s redemptive mission. The Messiah as fire baptizer however, confronts those who ignore the call to repentance with the certainty of final judgment, as informed by the following verse.

The Messiah as Eschatological Judge (3:17)
The theme of Messiah as eschatological judge is further developed by introducing an agricultural metaphor in the explanation. John depicts the Messiah as a farmer during harvest time who performs the ancient practice of separating wheat from chaff. After loosening grain from the husks, a farmer would take his winnowing fork and toss or fan the threshed grain to the wind to separate the light chaff from the heavy kernels. After separation is complete, he would then take his winnowing fork and move the grain from the threshing floor to his storage facilities; the left over chaff would be discarded. In describing the metaphor, John actually presumes that the process of winnowing has already been accomplished and all that remains is the heap of grain on the threshing floor which still needs to be cleared. With his winnowing fork in hand, the Messiah is the one who will come and clear the threshing floor, taking the wheat into his barn and consigning the chaff to the fire. From this picture, it can be surmised that John considers his ministry the actual winnowing process, separating the repentant from the unrepentant. Consequentially, the mission of the Messiah is portrayed as one who will pronounce ultimate judgment on the people based on their response to John’s message and thus clear the threshing floor by preserving the repentant and condemning the unrepentant. Though the judgment of Christ is not actualized in the Lukan narratives, John presents the judgment of the Messiah as imminent and eschatological in scope, creating an acute sense of urgency among the people to align themselves with righteousness and escape the “unquenchable fire” reserved for the wicked.

Main Themes and Theological Message
Luke 3:15-17 is marked by dramatic contrasts and both positive and negative messages concerning the coming of the Messiah. Contrasting himself with the coming of Jesus, John reveals that not only is he not the Messiah, but that he is not even worthy to be considered his slave. His confession of the superior identity of Christ reaffirms that Jesus is the Son of God and Saviour, a dominant theme throughout the Lukan narratives and essential to Luke’s overall theological message of the redemptive plan of God through Christ. Additionally, John’s depiction of the Messiah as Spirit and fire baptizer suggests both a positive and negative image of the expectant Messianic figure. Jesus as Spirit-baptizer points to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost which empowered the church to bear witness to the resurrected Christ. Conversely, Jesus as fire-baptizer is a potent sign of the severe judgment that awaits unrepentant humanity. Though John considered his message as “good news” (3:18), the certainty of impending judgement for unrepentant sinners confronted his listeners and reinforced a consistent message weaved throughout both the Old and New Testaments.

Theological Implications and Applications
Considering himself even less than a slave, John makes a clear distinction between himself and the anticipated Messiah. Though his ministry is under the anointing of the Holy Spirit (1:15; 1:80), attracts larges crowds, and enjoys positive results, John does not even consider himself worthy enough to untie Jesus’ sandal-thong. At first glance, his self-effacing comments seem somewhat undeserving, yet John recognizes the baseness of his humanity in comparison with the supremacy and majesty of Christ. John’s extraordinary example reminds contemporary readers that a servant attitude is essential for all Christians and that, no matter how successful or esteemed they are, they should regard themselves as humble servants of Christ.

Furthermore, observing Jesus as both Spirit and fire baptizer should ignite both a desire for God and fear of God in contemporary readers. As Luke later describes in his second volume, the baptism of the Holy Spirit transforms Jesus’ followers, empowering them to be his witnesses throughout the world and drawing them together to form vibrant, multi-racial, Christ-centred communities. Though two millennia have past since the day of Pentecost, the power of Spirit-baptism is still available to empower believers in their commitment to fulfil the mission of Christ. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was a personally transforming experience that continues to strengthen my walk with God and empower me to fulfil the call of ministry on my life. Jesus as fire-baptizer however, points toward the eschatological judgement of the repentant from the unrepentant and is a vivid reminder of Christ’s continuing call for genuine repentance and commitment to holy living. The ominous warning should concern contemporary society, realizing that the coming of the Lord is closer now than when John sternly warned his followers. As well, I am personally compelled to live a penitent life, conscious of my failings and quick to repent for personal transgressions, knowing that sin is a serious matter to God. John’s description of the Messiah as Spirit and fire baptizer contains both blessing and judgement, the fullness of the Spirit and the severity of holiness, contrasting attributes that necessitate the attention of all humankind.

Bibliography

Charles, J. Daryl, “The Coming One/Stronger One and His Baptism: Matt 3:11-12, Mark
1:8, Luke 3:16-17,” Pneuma, 11:1 (1989), 37-49.

DeSilva, David, A. An Introduction to the New Testament: Contexts, Methods &
Ministry Formation. Downers Grove: Inter Varsity Press, 2004.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A, ed. The Anchor Bible. The Gospel According to St. Luke 28. New York: Doubleday, 1981.

Freedman, David Noel, ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary 1. New York: Doubleday,
1992.

Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary 8. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1990.

Green, Joel B. The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel
of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997.

Keck, Leander E., ed. The New Interpreter’s Bible IX. Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1995.

Klassan-Wiebe, Sheila, “Luke 3:15-17, 21-22,” Interpretation 48.04 (1994), 397-401.

Marshall, Howard I. The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel
of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978.

Morris, Leon, ed. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Luke. Leicester: Inter Varsity Press, 1988.

Neyrey, Jerome H. The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts 1: A Literary Interpretation.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986.

The NIV Study Bible. New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985.

The Theme of Acceptance and Rejection in Luke based on Simeon's Second Oracle Luke 2:34-25 by William Sloos

2007-12-07T22:45:00.001-05:00

Introduction
Climaxing the Lukan infancy narratives, Simeon’s second oracle introduces Luke’s readers to the first hint of impending trouble and conflict in the story of Jesus. Contrasting the optimistic tone of the first oracle where Simeon praises God for the privilege of seeing the promised salvation in the form of the Christ child, his second oracle contains a sobering prophecy announcing that the emerging mission of Christ to liberate and redeem fallen humanity will be met with considerable human resistance. Serving as a preview of the upcoming conflict between Jesus and the people of Israel, Simeon addresses Mary saying: “This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed. And a sword will pierce your own soul too (2:34-35, NIV).” Simeon’s Spirit-inspired words inform Luke’s readers that Jesus will cause a diametrically opposed pattern of response among the people of Israel: those who accept Jesus compared with those who reject him.

Preparing Luke’s readers for what is about to be fulfilled in the narrative, Simeon’s programmic prophecy contains four components that anticipate the tension between acceptance and rejection. First, Simeon states that the child will cause “the falling and rising of many,” indicating that people will be divided in their response to Jesus, some accepting him and others rejecting him (2:34a). Second, Jesus will be “a sign that will be spoken against,” implying that those in the emerging community who incorrectly interpret the sign of Jesus are those who reject him and stand in opposition to him (2:34b). Third, Jesus will reveal the “thoughts of many hearts,” referring to Jesus’ exposure of the hidden thoughts and negative attitudes of those who accept and reject him (2:35a). Fourth, Simeon concludes his unsettling prophecy by informing Mary that “a sword will pierce your own soul too,” suggesting that Mary must also decide whether to accept or reject Jesus for herself (2:35b). The following study will analyze the theme of acceptance and rejection in the four components of Simeon’s programmic prophecy and trace their trajectory through the Gospel of Luke.

The Falling and Rising of Many in Israel
The first component of Simeon’s programmic prophecy announces to Mary that the Christ child “is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel” (2:34a), indicating that people will be divided in their response to Jesus, some accepting him and others rejecting him. These words inform Luke’s readers that the ministry of Jesus will be summarized by the spatial movement of people, those who fall and those who rise in response to him. Although some scholars take this reference to suggest a double experience of the same people, those who will be brought low and are later raised up by the gospel, it is unlikely since Luke uses the word πτῶσις, indicating a state of collapse or downfall, a common word for the effect of judgment on the wicked. These falling and rising images relate back to the “stone” passages in Isaiah, where God is depicted as setting up a stone “that causes men to stumble” (Isa. 8:14-15) and “a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation” (Isa. 28:16). The “stumbling” metaphor in Isaiah is understood as an image of judgment; those who reject the cornerstone stumble while those who trust in the cornerstone receive God’s salvation. Since Jesus is God’s agent of judgment and salvation, these Messianic texts were easily related to the incarnate Christ and used repeatedly in the New Testament (Rom. 9:33; 1 Pet. 2:6-10) to illustrate how Jesus will cause division among people, with some accepting him and others rejecting him.

As Luke’s Gospel unfolds, the image of those who fall and rise begins to take shape. John the Baptist causes division among his listeners resulting from his stern proclamations, informing them that they can be replaced by “stones” if they fail to “produce fruit in keeping with repentance” (3:7-9). At Jesus’ inaugural address to the synagogue congregation in Nazareth, he articulates how his mission will cause future division among the people and subsequently experiences the rejection of his own community and leaves to preach elsewhere (4:23-24; 28-29). Luke’s decision to include Jesus’ saying that “no prophet is accepted in his hometown” (4:24) was not a mere restating of a common one-liner, but was an essential component to his theological presentation of Jesus as being intricately and irreversibly defined by his acceptance or rejection by the people of Israel. Simeon’s ominous prophetic insight into the coming division of Israel reaches a dramatic literary climax when Jesus characterizes himself as the one who causes a positive or negative response in people. Addressing his disciples and the crowds following him, he states:

Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law (Luke 12:51-53).

When Luke records this difficult saying of Jesus, his readers recall Simeon’s programmic prophecy that Jesus will cause the falling and rising of many in Israel and not only realize that Simeon’s Spirit-inspired words are being fulfilled, but that they too must be prepared for potential division within their own families as it relates to accepting or rejecting Christ.

Following Jesus’ declaration that he came to bring division on the earth, the narrative begins to demonstrate the coexisting nature of the two people groups, those who fall and those who rise in response to Jesus. When the Pharisees approach Jesus and warn him that Herod wants to kill him, Jesus expresses sorrow for Jerusalem because the people are unwilling to accept his protective care (13:33-35). Later, when Jesus enters Jerusalem, he weeps over the city because of the people’s failure to see him as the Messiah. Due to their blindness, Jesus pronounces future judgment upon them, stating that they will be thrown “to the ground” because they “did not recognize the time of God’s coming” (19:44). Contrasting those who fall because of their rejection of Jesus, Luke concludes the pericope by noting the acceptance of others who “hung on his words,” underscoring the coexistence of the two people groups as forecast by Simeon (19:48).

The “falling and rising of many in Israel” also indicates the social upheaval and reversal of common social order caused by the presence of Jesus. Those who believe they belong in the centre of the kingdom of God will be rejected and those along the periphery will be accepted. When Jesus teaches the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector who both ascend to the temple to pray, one rejoices in his righteousness, the other weeps at his sinful condition. Pointedly, Jesus remarks that it is the tax collector who returns home justified, “for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (18:14). During the Sermon on the Plain, Jesus pronounces blessings upon the poor, hungry, and persecuted, but woes to the wealthy, satiated, and highly esteemed, overturning the conventional social constructs of early Roman Palestine (6:20-26). Additionally, Jesus’ exhortation that “there are those who are last who will be first and first who will be last” also emphasizes how Jesus overturns social customs, marking the unmistakable dividing line between those who rise and are accepted and those who fall and are rejected in Simeon’s prophecy (13:30).

A Sign that will be Spoken Against
In addition to Jesus causing division among the people, Simeon also states that Jesus will be “a sign that will be spoken against” (2:34b), implying that those in the emerging community who incorrectly interpret the sign of Jesus are those who reject him and stand in opposition to him. The concept of a child representing a sign recalls the prophecy in Isaiah where the child Emmanuel is given as a sign to indicate God’s judgment over the house of David (Isa. 7:14). Isaiah also contains several passages that associate a sign, banner, or ensign that is to be raised as a summons and warning to the nations that God is about to demonstrate his power for the judgment and salvation of Israel and the Gentiles (Isa. 5:26; 13:2; 18:3; 49:22; 62:10). With the sign motif already evident in the Old Testament, Simeon’s prophecy of Jesus as “a sign to be spoken against” is weighted with the consequences of divine judgement. Those who fail to interpret the sign of Jesus correctly will also encounter his judgment. Luke concretizes the relationship between sign and judgment later in the narrative when Jesus warns the crowds that, just as the sign of Jonah announces judgment on Nineveh, “so also will the Son of Man be to this generation” (11:30). With the consequences of divine judgment looming over those who fail to correctly interpret the sign of Jesus, Luke’s readers become cognisant to the terrible future awaiting those who reject Jesus and stand in opposition to him.

Simeon’s dire prediction that Jesus is “a sign to be spoken against” prepares Luke’s readers to view the subsequent unfolding of the narrative with the expectation that Jesus will endure significant opposition by those who reject him. When Jesus’ own community misunderstands the nature and scope of his announced mission, they respond with rage and “drive him out of the town” and attempt to “throw him down the cliff” (4:29). Opposition continues when the scribes, Pharisees, and other religious leaders question the source of Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (5:21), his association with tax collectors and sinners (5:30), and his provocative determination to heal people on the Sabbath (6:7). After Jesus performs a healing on the Sabbath, those who oppose him are furious and “discuss with one another what they might do to Jesus” (6:11). As Jesus begins his journey to Jerusalem, opposition towards him intensifies and the religious leaders scheme together to eliminate him. Though many people in the crowd accept him, the chief priests and the teachers of the law attempt to trap him (20:1-8). At Jesus’ trial, the Jews falsely accuse him saying, “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king” (23:2). Words and actions against Jesus are furthered by the Roman leaders, who berate Jesus and treat him with contempt during his passion. The soldiers heap insults upon him and members of King Herod’s guards ridicule and mock him by dressing him in a stately robe before sending him back to Pilate (23:11). The extent of Simeon’s prophecy that Jesus will be “a sign to be spoken against” is alarmingly unmistakeable in the narrative, alerting Luke’s readers that not everyone will accept Jesus, but rather he will be rejected and opposed by many. Moreover, because of the oppositional reaction to Jesus, the Lukan community learns that there is a personal cost to following him and the sign of Jesus may actually continue in their own communities, provoking additional opposition. With the threat of judgment looming over those who incorrectly interpret the sign of Jesus however, Luke’s readers also recognize that those who reject Jesus will face retribution.

The Thoughts of Many Hearts Will be Revealed
Following the pattern of acceptance and rejection, the third component of Simeon’s prophecy states that Jesus’ will reveal “the thoughts of many hearts” (2:35a), referring to Jesus’ exposure of the hidden thoughts and negative attitudes of those who accept and reject him. Consistent with the language of the New Testament, Simeon’s use of the term “thoughts” (διαλογισμός) refers to an adverse human disposition and oppositional attitude to the purposes of God. Moreover, Simeon’s presentation of Jesus as the discerner of the “thoughts” of “hearts” plays a critical function in the ensuing conflicts of the narrative, informing Luke’s readers that Jesus is continually aware of the internal condition of human hearts in response to his words and deeds.

Jesus’ exposure of hidden thoughts and negative attitudes towards him occurs throughout his ministry, beginning with the healing of the paralytic. After Jesus forgives the sins of the crippled man, Luke gives his readers an exclusive glimpse into the hidden thoughts of the Pharisees and the scribes who wonder to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (5:21). Knowing their negative thoughts, Jesus challenges their flawed reasoning and publicly shames them before the crowd. Later in the synagogue, Jesus’ opponents observe whether he would perform a healing on the Sabbath. Luke records that Jesus “knew what they were thinking” and proceeds to heal the man with the withered hand “in front of everyone,” angering the Pharisees and teachers of the law and igniting a discussion about “what they might do to Jesus” (6:8, 11). Jesus’ exposure of the secret thoughts of his opponents not only reveals their hostile attitudes towards him but also shows their rejection and opposition to the purposes of God. When Jesus teaches the parable of the tenants who kill the owner’s son, Jesus uses the parable to reveal the hidden agenda of the scribes and high priests, who were looking for a way to kill him. At the conclusion of the parable, his opponents realize that Jesus had discerned their wicked thoughts for he had “spoken this parable against them” (20:19). Jesus’ ability to reveal his opponents’ thoughts underscores the tension that pervades the entire narrative and notifies Luke’s readers that Jesus is not informed by mere appearances, but rather searches the hearts and exposes the thoughts of all who reject the purposes of God (16:15).

In addition to revealing the hidden thoughts of his opponents, Jesus also exposes the spiritual immaturity and weak faith of his disciples. After an argument ensues among the disciples as to which of them would be the greatest, Jesus is recorded as “knowing their thoughts” and responds to their faulty pattern of thinking by teaching on the importance of being the least in the kingdom (9:46). Later, as Jesus and his disciples were walking along the road, several well-intentioned people approach Jesus with the desire to become one of his disciples. When one man says to Jesus, “I will follow you wherever you go,” Jesus detects his superficial pledge and responds by clearly stating the cost involved in being one of his followers (9:57-58). After Jesus’ resurrection, he appears to the disciples and asks, “Why are you so troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?” (24:38). His knowledge of their thoughts enables him to address their lack of faith and confirm his promise that he would rise again. By exposing the hidden thoughts of his disciples, Jesus reveals the condition of their hearts and exposes their immaturity, insincerity, and doubts. His revelations divide true followers from false ones and prevent anyone from assuming a neutral position within the emerging community of disciples. When Jesus states to the crowds, “there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known,” Luke’s readers are reminded of Simeon’s ominous prophecy and recognize that Jesus reveals the hidden thoughts and negative attitudes of those who reject him and his followers as well (12:2).

A Sword Will Pierce Your Own Soul Too
Simeon concludes his unsettling prophecy informing Mary that “a sword will pierce your own soul too” (2:35b), a phrase that appears to interrupt the flow of the oracle and turn the focus of the prophecy away from the people of Israel and squarely on Mary. While several opinions of the meaning behind this difficult phrase have been documented, most scholars settle on one of two views. The first view insists that, because Mary was the first person to hear and accept the good news concerning the coming of the Messiah, she too will encounter opposition by many in Israel. Aligned with her son as “a sign to be spoken against,” she will suffer as she witnesses her son’s rejection and crucifixion. At the sight of Jesus hanging on the cross, the intensity of her anguish will be like a sword piercing her soul. However, this view of Mary as the sorrowing mother violates a proper interpretation of the text since the Lukan description of the passion does not include Mary. The scene where Mary stands at the foot of the cross is found only in John’s Gospel and there is no indication that Luke’s readers would have been aware of the Johannine passion accounts. Therefore, for a proper understanding of Simeon’s prophetic words to Mary, the meaning must be derived entirely from the Lukan Gospel.

Recognizing the thematic string of acceptance and rejection weaved through Simeon’s oracle, the image of the sword should not be regarded as a metaphor for pain as in the earlier view, but rather of as a symbol of judgment. This image is observed in the Old Testament, where Ezekiel prophecies that nationwide disobedience will rouse the judgment of God and provoke him to dispatch a series of disastrous calamities upon the people, including punishment by the sword which kills both “men and their animals” (Eze. 14:17). Within the prophetic imagery, God uses the sword to judge between those who accept him and those who reject him; the use of the sword conveys a selective judgment, destroying some and sparing others. The imagery of the sword of judgment in Ezekiel corresponds with the pattern of acceptance and rejection in Simeon’s second oracle. Just as the sword divides those who accept God from those who reject him in Ezekiel, the sword will also divide those who accept Jesus from those who reject him in Simeon’s prophecy. The fact that Simeon directs the prophecy of the sword of judgment towards Mary emphasizes that she is not excluded from the rest of Israel, but she also must determine the significance of Jesus for herself, whether to accept Jesus as the Christ or reject him.

With this view in mind then, Simeon’s words bring the pattern of acceptance and rejection from a national to a personal level. If Mary thought that her maternal relationship to the Messiah would ascribe a special place of honour for her in the kingdom of God, Simeon’s words quash such sentiments. Despite the kinship between Jesus and Mary, she must also wrestle with the challenge of correctly interpreting the sign of her son and meet the same discriminatory demands as the people of Israel. However, as Luke’s readers discover, Mary will have difficulty understanding the nature and scope Jesus’ mission to liberate and redeem fallen humanity. She will struggle to grasp his message, his rigorous demands for discipleship, and his rejection by Israel. Undoubtedly, Simeon’s dire predictions have tempered Mary’s joy and informed her that she too must decide whether to accept or reject Jesus as the Christ.

Mary’s difficulty in correctly interpreting the sign of Jesus is demonstrated in the Lukan narrative. When Jesus is twelve years old, his parents find him sitting in the temple among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Luke records their reaction to Jesus saying they were “astonished” and they “did not understand what he was saying to them” (2:48, 50). Despite their inability to understand what they saw and heard, “Mary treasured all these things in her heart” (2:51). Later, Jesus’ mother and brothers search for Jesus and find him ministering to the crowds. When Jesus was informed that his family wants to see him, he replies, “My mother and brothers are those who hear God’s word and put it into practice” (8:21). Though Luke does not record Mary’s response to Jesus’ terse remark, readers are informed that entrance into Jesus’ eschatological family does not result from a physical relationship, but in a relationship of obedience to the will of the Father. In another example, when Jesus is proclaiming the word of God, a woman in the crowd calls out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you” (11:27). Jesus responds, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it” (11:28). Though Mary is not present in the story, Jesus’ response directly places his mother on the same level as others in Israel, also requiring her to hear and obey the word of God. Later, Jesus speaks to the division he causes between families, reminding Luke’s readers of the challenge Mary will have in learning that access into the kingdom of God transcends even family ties (12:51-53). Though Luke describes Mary as the “Lord’s servant” early in the narrative, Simeon’s prophecy that “a sword will pierce your own soul too,” is a sobering warning for Mary that she too must decide the significance of Jesus for herself and accept or reject him as the Christ (1:38).

Conclusion
Culminating the Lukan infancy narratives, Simeon’s second oracle enlightens Luke’s readers to the opposing pattern of response that Jesus causes among the people of Israel: some accept him and others reject him. First, Jesus causes “the rising and falling of many,” indicating that people are divided in their response to him, some accepting him and others rejecting him. Second, Jesus is “a sign that will be spoken against,” implying that people who incorrectly interpret the sign of Jesus are those who reject him and stand in opposition to him. Third, Jesus reveals the “thoughts of many hearts,” referring to Jesus’ exposure of the hidden thoughts and negative attitudes of those who accept and reject him. Fourth, Simeon informs Mary that “a sword will pierce your own soul too,” suggesting that Mary must also decide whether to accept or reject Jesus for herself. Each of the four components of Simeon’s programmic prophecy has introduced Luke’s readers to the theme of acceptance and rejection in the narrative and has prepared them for the contentious nature of the emerging mission of Christ to liberate and redeem fallen humanity.

Bibliography

Arndt, William F. Concordia Classic Commentary Series: Luke. St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1956.

Bock, Darrell L. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Luke 1:1-9:50.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Brown, Raymond E. “The Presentation of Jesus (Luke 2:22-40),” Worship 51.01 Ja
(1977), 2-11.

Cunningham, Scott. ‘Through Many Tribulations’: The Theology of Persecution in
Luke-Acts. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Evans, C. F. Saint Luke. Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990.

Gaebelein, Frank E., ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary 8. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1990.

Green, Joel B. New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Gospel of Luke.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Green, Joel B. The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel
of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997.

Keck, Leander E., ed. The New Interpreter’s Bible IX. Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1995.

Marshall, Howard I. The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Gospel
of Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978.

Mittelstadt, Martin William. The Spirit and Suffering in Luke-Acts: Implications for a
Pentecostal Pneumatology. T&T Clark International: London, 2004.

Neyrey, Jerome H. The Social World of Luke-Acts: Models for Interpretation. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1991.

Nolland, John. Word Biblical Commentary 35 Luke 1-9:20. Dallas: Word Books, 1989.

Soards, Marion L. “Luke 2:22-40: The Presentation of Jesus,” Interpretation 44.04 O
(1990), 400-405.

Tannehill, Robert C. Luke. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996.

Tannehill, Robert C. The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts 1: A Literary Interpretation.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986.

Valiquette, Hilaire. “Handed over to the Gentiles”: The Centrality of Persecution for
Missiology,” Missiology 26.04 O (1998), 431-443.

The Hebden Mission, at 651 Queen St. E., Toronto, was Canada's first Pentecostal church. Ellen Hebden received Spirit baptism here on Nov. 17, 1906.

2007-08-22T19:25:00.001-04:00

Review of Wayne Grudem's book "The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today" by William Sloos

2007-08-10T23:25:00.001-04:00

Summary

Wayne Gruden’s book, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Wheaton, Crossway Books, 2000), is a comprehensive and biblical review of prophecy in the Scriptures. With balanced hermeneutical methods, he unveils the nature of the Old Testament prophets, the prophetic ministry of the New Testament, and the value and practice of prophecy in the contemporary church. Combining sound deductive reasoning with a relevant didactic approach, he also discusses the issues that have emerged within evangelical Christianity regarding the office of apostle and prophet, clearly rejecting their contemporary usage with solid exegetical evidence. He also tackles those who position themselves on both sides of the spiritual gift spectrum- the “cessationists”, who believe that the prophetic gifts are no longer for today, and those in the charismatic camp who place an overemphasis on prophecy. He strikes a practical balance, encouraging both sides to take a closer look at the biblical data and be receptive to a new approach. With Scriptural safeguards in place, he also encourages those who have never been exposed to the gifts of prophecy to expand their understanding and be open to the experience of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

Beginning in the Old Testament, Grudem states that the prophets functioned as messengers from God who spoke with absolute divine authority. Since the prophets’ words were the very words of God, the messages were beyond challenge and demanded strict obedience. However, in the New Testament, the apostles took over where the Old Testament prophets left off. Citing a number of parallels, Gruden notes how the apostles were divinely appointed, spoke with absolute divine authority, and wrote the inspired books that make up the canon of the New Testament (27-29, 235). Though the apostolic ministry ended when the apostles passed away, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost bestowed the gifts of the Spirit upon the church, enabling people to prophesy revealed messages from the Lord. Though the nature of the gift of prophecy is delivered through imperfect human means and requires evaluation by the church, it is for the church’s benefit and is intended to be in operation until the return of Christ.

Reflection
Grudem, as an ordained Baptism pastor, is surprisingly refreshing in his approach toward spiritual gifts. He repeatedly highlights Paul’s exhortation in 1 Corinthians to “eagerly desire” the gifts of the Holy Spirit and especially the gift of prophecy. Throughout the book, he highlights how prophecy is intentionally designed for the “upbuilding”, encouragement, and comfort of the church and is a ministry all believers can potentially participate in and develop through sound biblical teaching and the leading of the Holy Spirit (140).

Regarding the controversial issue of the office of the prophet in the contemporary church, Grudem provides a number of biblical examples that deny the existence of the office of the prophet even in the early church. He states that there is no evidence of tension between the gift of prophecy and the office of prophet anywhere in the New Testament (157). In other words, there did not exist any privileged group who held a leadership position over those who had a prophetic gift among the churches. He also states that no one had the ability to prophesy at will, but the gift of prophecy was instead a spontaneous gift, used whenever someone received a revelation from the Holy Spirit (170). Additionally, Grudem notes how the prophetic gift was something that could mature and develop through faith, and was not something someone had ownership of, emphasizing the “progressive” over the “possessive” nature of prophecy in the New Testament (175). Thus, the office of prophet was not in operation in the early church and is therefore incongruent with the context of the contemporary church.

The author also illustrates how the gift of prophecy, or congregational prophecy, was never considered on the same level with Scripture. Instead, prophetic utterances were subject to the authority of Scripture and the careful evaluation of the church (209). He provides five different examples in the New Testament where prophecy was placed in a subordinate role to Scripture, citing how the church is called to “test” and “weigh” prophetic words, and how, on at least two occasions, prophecy was either inaccurate or disregarded (286). The nature of prophecy in the New Testament is thus, not authoritative, but is instead the impartation of divine revelation conveyed to and through an imperfect human being, or as Grudem defines it as, “an unreliable human speech-act in response to a revelation from the Holy Spirit” (76).

The author’s description of apostles, as an exclusive group of divinely appointed and empowered men who operated under the same authority as the Old Testament prophets, is a novel perspective that has significant theological implications for the evangelical church. If it is true that the apostles held a divinely appointed position that enabled them to preach repentance, deliver people from demons, and heal the sick with greater authority and spiritual power than the rest of the church, then any contemporary teaching that suggests that the believer has the same authority as the apostles would be inaccurate. As an example, the passage in Matthew 10, where Jesus gives his disciples authority to drive out evil spirits and to heal every disease and sickness, is often preached and applied to contemporary Christians who believe they too, possess the same authority for deliverance and healing in their own context. However, if this authority was only granted to the apostles, who operated under a parallel authority to the Old Testament prophets, this exclusive authority cannot be applied to other followers of Christ. Though there are other passages in Scripture that denote the believer’s authority in Jesus’ name, Christians would be in error if they appropriated apostle-only passages and applied them to their own lives. However, since this is a common belief among evangelicals, could these Christians have a false sense of spiritual authority, believing they have the same authority as the apostles? Though Grudem does not address these issues, his theological understanding of apostles necessitates a reexamination of how certain apostle-only New Testament passages are personally applied in the contemporary church.

Another area that Grudem discusses is the role of women in regards to prophesying and judging prophecies in the church. He states that New Testament teaching clearly encourages women to participate fully in the prophetic gifts but forbids them, or exhorts them to “keep silent” with regards to the evaluation of the prophetic words. Paul’s instructions, though considered gender disparate by the current cultural context, conversely highlights the inclusive nature of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Understanding that the divinely imparted message is filtered through the human mind, men and women will prophecy differently, according to the uniqueness of their gender, enabling a creative interpretative method that has the ability to speak intimately and powerfully to everyone in the church. Though the ecclesiastical leadership roles differ when it comes to judging the validity of the prophecies, the prophetic gifts are equally available to both genders and are designed to operate corporately and speak personally.

Grudem has also confirmed most, if not all, of the commonly held doctrines regarding prophecy in The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC). Though there are divergent opinions at times, generally speaking, the PAOC has historically promoted the operation of the public gifts of prophecy in the local church. They have also emphasized that prophetic utterances are not considered the word of God, but are merely human words about something that God has brought to mind. The PAOC has also encouraged the evaluation of prophecies according to Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians, with the right to reject utterances that do not build up or encourage the church. The primacy of Scripture has been maintained and continues to be the only divinely inspired authority of the revealed will of God. Though people have attempted to bring new revelations or teachings about prophecy, the traditional views remain consistent with the teachings of Scripture for the benefit of the local church.

Review of Peter C. Wagner's Book "Apostles and Prophets" by William Sloos

2007-08-10T23:20:00.002-04:00

Summary
In Peter C. Wagner’s book, Apostles and Prophets: The Foundation of the Church (Ventura: Regal Books, 2000), he argues that Christ intended the church to be built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets according to Ephesians 2:19-20. He believes that the New Testament endorses the concept that the apostle and prophet are not simply spiritual gifts that function in the body of Christ, but are governmental positions or “offices” that should be strategically operating in positions of ecclesiastical authority. He notes that, even though the church has embraced the office of pastor, teacher, and evangelist, it has yet to submit to the leadership of the apostle and prophet, leaving the church disempowered and disengaged from its divinely appointment mandate (9). Wagner suggests that when the church decides to come under the intended authority of the apostle and prophet, it will experience a new level of influence in the world and a greater degree of power and blessing through the Holy Spirit (89).

Wagner indicates that the office of the prophet began to emerge in the 1980’s, even though it was largely isolated from mainstream evangelical Christianity. Though the majority of church leaders rejected the prophetic office, believing that there were no new revelations other than the Bible, the movement continued to develop and, according to Wagner, is now powerfully influencing churches around the globe. He notes that the function of the prophet, similar to that of the Old Testament prophet, is to receive God’s divine revelation or “rhema word” and boldly declare it to the church. The author also argues that the office of the prophet is not only Biblical, but when “hitched” to the office of the apostle, is essential in fulfilling Christ’s design for church governance (74).

In the 1990’s, the office of the apostle emerged in some evangelical circles and, though not as controversial as the prophetic office, is creating a shift in the orthodoxy and praxis of traditional church government (21). Instead of working within the parameters of the traditional church governance model, such as Congregational or Presbyterian, the office of the apostle functions on a new level of authority, placing ultimate decision making ability on the individual as opposed to the congregation or committee (25, 34). The apostle in this position receives a greater amount of spiritual authority from the Holy Spirit, providing a completely new level of spiritual authority to the church. Akin to the ministry of the apostle Paul, Wagner suggests that apostles operate within a sphere of influence over a specific network of churches or church leaders. Apostles also receive divine revelation, either directly from God or through their connection with the prophetic office, which provides spiritual guidance and instruction to their specific sphere of ministry (34).

Reflection
Wagner has christened this new system of church government as the “New Apostolic Reformation” and has confidently claimed it will completely revolutionize the church. This movement has become what Wagner calls, “an extraordinary work of God” that is “changing the shape of Protestant Christianity around the world” (21). He even goes as far as saying that this development, “could possibly be an even more radical change than the [Protestant] Reformation” (22). However, drawing parallels to the Protestant Reformation seems not only premature, but also terribly overconfident. Instead of providing sound biblical exegesis to support his claims, he prefers to lean heavily on his reputation and expound on his own experiences and ideas.

Wagner’s concepts are based on a skewed hermeneutic that suggests that the church remains in a state of incompleteness until the offices of apostle and prophet are restored. The idea that the church is incomplete without the apostles and prophets inherently diminishes the sufficiency of Scripture and the authority of Christ. The office of the prophet diminishes the significance of the Word. Why would a believer search the Scriptures when they can visit the prophet and receive a personal message from God? The office of the apostle, which confers someone with divine authority, diminishes the need for every believer to pursue Christ. Why would a believer pray and seek the Lord when they can simply obey the directives of the apostle? This proposal leads to extremes: it increases the office holder and decreases Jesus. The church must continue to find divine truth exclusively in the Word of God and find authority in the person of Jesus Christ; promoting ideas that suggest otherwise has the ability to open doors to spiritual abuse, heresy, and cultic activity.

Wagner himself seems to fall prey to some strange, prophetically directed behavior that most mature believers would strongly discourage. In 1998, upon receiving a prophecy from an associate about an upcoming stock market fluctuation, he openly admits to moving around his retirement funds and, in doing so, making the “equivalent of a generous year’s salary” (103). Though his maneuver turned out to be a good financial decision, it implies that one can seek prophetic messages for a variety of matters including personal gain. This behaviour resembles the common practices of psychics and mediums, who help people with everything from love to lottery tickets. The biblical gift of prophecy, according to Paul in 1 Corinthians, was not for any other reason but for the up building, encouragement and comfort of the church. Wagner’s apparent liberal treatment this gift is clearly outside the parameters of biblical teaching and is reason enough to reject it completely.

In the concluding chapters of the book, Wagner relates the poignant story of John Wimber and his relationship with the Kansas City prophets. Though Wimber originally embraced the prophetic movement and promoted the ministry within the Vineyard churches, he was later disappointed by a prophecy regarding an upcoming revival in England that turned out to be false. He later admitted that the prophetic movement derailed the progress of the Vineyard movement and was evidently deeply hurt and disillusioned by the unrealized prophecy. In spite of this embarrassing debacle, Wagner remains a strong believer in the prophetic movement and naively believes that the movement simply requires the apostolic relationship to bring structure and accountability. He fails to recognize the grief this has caused, not only for a colleague, but also for the Vineyard fellowship. It is bizarre that after spending most of the book promoting the apostolic-prophetic movement, he would end his book with an example of its profound failure.

There is no doubt that the apostle-prophet church government system could appear attractive to many church leaders today. The church is urgently seeking a ministry or program that will launch the next great revival before the second coming of Christ. Church leaders are tired of the sluggishness of the democratic process and committee meeting after committee meeting; most pastors genuinely desire a move of the Holy Spirit and long to see the restoration of the New Testament church in their current context. However, the Scriptures repeatedly warn the church to be on their guard against false teachers and false teaching. This “New Apostolic Reformation” may appear like the key that unlocks the door to revival, yet it would not be the first time the church is deceived by well-intentioned people. The church must continue to stand firm on the sufficiency of Scripture and the authority of Christ and resist the temptation to grant ecclesiastic authority to those who claim the status of apostle or prophet, regardless of their spiritual giftedness or passion for God.

Review of Roger Stronstad's Article "A Baker's Dozen and Many More" by William Sloos

2007-08-10T23:18:00.002-04:00

Summary
Roger Stronstad’s article, A Baker’s Dozen and Many More: Observations on the Roles of Apostles and Prophets, is a brief study examining the biblical understanding of apostles and prophets and applying the data to the doctrines and teachings of the “Apostolic Movement” occurring in the evangelical/charismatic church today. The author begins by defining the term “apostolos”, meaning, “sent one”, or according to the Septuagint (LXX), “a messenger from God” (3). He subsequently explores the common uses of the word in the New Testament, describing the apostolic ministry of John the Baptist, and the greater apostolic ministry of Jesus Christ, noting both were men “sent” from God for a specific purpose. Jesus, having been the divine apostle, becomes the “apostle-maker” and appoints twelve apostles, commissioning them to go out in the world preaching repentance, casting out demons, and healing the sick (6). After the death and resurrection of Christ, the apostles appoint Matthais to replace Judas, and later Jesus himself adds Paul to those functioning under the apostolic authority.

Stronstad suggests there are at least five factors that outline the criteria of the office of the apostle in the New Testament. These factors include: 1) receiving a direct call from Jesus, 2) being an eyewitness to the ministry of Christ, 3) having a divinely appointed mission, 4) being an eyewitness to the resurrection, and 5) being empowered to perform miracles, signs, and wonders (25). These conditions were met by the twelve apostles and, except for Paul, can not be applied to later apostles since the criteria is time sensitive and can only pertain to those who have been with Jesus. Thus, the apostolic authority that rested upon these twelve men and Paul ended when they past away and cannot be activated or confirmed upon others within the church age, nor can there be successors to the apostolic anointing.

Regarding Paul’s apostleship, though he is not identified as an apostle in Acts and was not an eyewitness to the ministry of Christ, he identifies himself as an apostle in his epistles and is among those considered to have an apostolic appointment. Since he was a late convert to Christianity, it was impossible for him to have been an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry, but his conversion experience with the resurrected Christ and his subsequent commission qualifies him for the office of apostle under the same mantle as the twelve. Aside from not being an eyewitness to the ministry of Jesus, he does meet the remaining apostolic standards including receiving a divine call and mission, and the ability to performed signs and wonders (10). Thus, Paul is part of the divinely appointed apostolic authority of the New Testament, enabling him to give leadership to the fledging churches across Asia Minor under the anointing of the Holy Spirit.
However, there are references to other apostles not numbered among the twelve and Paul, such as Barnabas, Andronicus and Junia, Silvanus and Timothy, but Stronstad argues that they function as missionaries, or “sent ones”. Essentially, they have a supportive role, appointed to assist the apostles and the churches, and are not to be considered among those who have received a divine appointment from Jesus to spread the gospel. Consequently Stronstad argues that there are two uses of the word “apostle” in the New Testament, the twelve and Paul- who make up the exclusive “baker’s dozen”, and those who serve in an apostolic function but are a part of the apostolic office.

Additionally, Stronstad discusses the role of prophecy in the New Testament, observing that the day of Pentecost was a point of transfer, where the resurrected Jesus, who was Spirit-led, Spirit-empowered, and Spirit-anointed, pours out the Holy Spirit upon his disciples, empowering them to be a prophetic witness for Christ to the ends of the earth. He notes that this experience is an extension of Jesus’ prophetic ministry, and is “programmatic” for the entire church (20). Even though the apostles and Paul operate in the prophetic anointing, Paul notes that prophecy was “one of the most prominent gifts in the church in Corinth” and was not limited to an exclusive group, but was for all the people of God (23). Thus, Stronstad concludes that the office of apostle is limited to the twelve apostles and Paul, and ceased with their deaths but the gift of the Spirit of prophecy is not restricted to the apostolic age but continues throughout the church age (27).

Reflection
Stonstad states that the apostolic age ended with the death of the apostles and, according to the Bible, cannot possibly function in the church today. Though there is a movement to restore the office of the apostle in the contemporary church, the author passionately defends his position by asserting the there is no contextual evidence that would suggest that the apostles were meant to continue as divinely appointed leaders of the church. Those who suggest otherwise are engaging in faulty hermeneutics and their biblical interpretations are, as the author notes, “built on a foundation of sand” (26).

Though relegated to footnotes, he reviews the two texts that the proponents of the office of apostle and prophet use to justify their practices, namely the “foundation” reference in Ephesians 2:20 and the “five-fold” reference in 4:11. Since the criteria for apostleship, by Paul’s own definition, is impossible to fulfill today (1 Co. 15:8), these texts must only refer to the ministry of the apostles and prophets during the time of Paul’s ministry and are not meant to be applied after the apostolic age. Thus, biblical evidence seems to indicate that the offices of apostle and prophet have no place in the contemporary church and is a misinterpretation of Scripture by those promoting this new model of church governance.

If what Stronstad is suggesting is true, what are the implications for churches who embrace this extra-biblical model of ministry? If churches are restoring the office of apostle and prophet and granting a level of authority beyond biblical parameters, it appears that these churches could be unwittingly engaging in unorthodox or pseudo-ecclesiastical practice at best, and at worst, heresy. If these churches are submitting to the authority of the apostle and prophet, they are inadvertently putting themselves in a position where Biblical principles could be threatened and even undermined. Though appearing to be “of the Spirit”, this apostolic renewal could lead these churches down a path to destruction, bringing to mind Peter’s warning about the false teachers who will “secretly bring in destructive heresies…and many will follow their destructive ways” (2 Pet. 1-3, NKJV).

Stronstad’s article illuminates the biblical evidence regarding prophets and apostles in the New Testament and exposes the faulty interpretations of those who promote the office of apostle and prophet in the contemporary church. His work illustrates the importance of exegetical study and proper biblical interpretation and enables the church to make wise decisions, not based on the latest fads and trends, but on the authority of Scripture. Though churches who have adopted the office of prophet and apostle claim that this new approach is modeled after the New Testament and has rejuvenated their ministries, they are vulnerable to the failings of the individuals they empower, opening the door to division and deception within the body of Christ.

A Review of David Cartledge's Article "Blueprint for Change" by William Sloos

2007-08-10T23:11:00.001-04:00

Summary
David Cartledge, an Australian author and Pentecostal leader, speaking at an Assemblies of God (A/G) conference in 2002, shared how the apostolic movement has had a profound impact on the A/G in Australia. His message, derived from his book “The Apostolic Revolution”, was geared to challenge the A/G in the United States to consider and embrace the office of apostle as a new model of church leadership and government. Apostolic leadership, he contends, has transformed the church in Australia, citing a 700% increase in the number of churches and a 2000% increase in church attendance over the past twenty years. With stirring language and deep conviction, he exhorts the conference to engage this new church governmental structure, believing it is the catalyst for growth and the answer for churches entrenched in bureaucracy and organizational inertia.

Underpinning Cartledge’s argument is the understanding that organizations have a way of watering down and destroying creativity, innovation, and progress (7). He suggests that churches led by a congregational governmental structure are commonly resistant to change and are controlled by lay people who burn out pastors, imprison ministry gifts, and keep the church in a state of stagnancy (3). He also states that these church organizations, in their attempts to protect themselves from failure and the resulting consequences, implement rules and regulations that foster mistrust among pastors and keep churches isolated from each other. Under these conditions, churches become more interested in preserving the status quo than reaching and evangelizing their communities, creating a static environment that hinders growth and progress. However, according to Cartledge, since the Australian A/G launched the apostolic model of church leadership in the late 1970’s, these confining and cumbersome elements were exchanged for a new unprecedented level of blessing and liberty that revolutionized the Pentecostal movement nationwide.

Cartledge states that the nature of this apostolic leadership model elects apostles who have a recognized leadership anointing, have “a unique impartation of the Word of Wisdom” and have the freedom to release people in their ministry gifts (3). Though the apostles do not have a specific title, they do function similar to the New Testament model of apostleship that provides clear leadership, not by regulations and decrees, but by leading by example. They are purposeful and intentional in their evangelism and church planting goals, with a strong emphasis on developing relationships and mentoring emerging leaders within their sphere of influence. Instead of a “top down” mentality, where elected officials lead from behind their desks, apostles are directly involved in ministry and are often church planters themselves. With this model, change is constant, growth is deliberate, and multiplication is expected and experienced throughout the movement.

Reflection
The growth of the Australian A/G over the past twenty years is remarkable and their results are enviable for any organization. Their effort to reduce cumbersome government structures and raise up Spirit-filled leaders with a passion for evangelism and church planting has borne tremendous fruit. Empowering and releasing people in their ministry gifts are not only thoroughly biblical, but also life transforming for the participants. Instead of upholding the status quo and towing the party line, leaders can lead, people can dream, and visions can be fulfilled. They have reinvented themselves and are influencing and impacting their communities for Christ at a level not experienced in their history.

Cartledge illustrates how the former congregational governmental model in the Australian A/G was detrimental to the health and progress of the movement. It was to blame for the abuse and demoralization of pastors and their families, the promotion of isolation and unwarranted regulations, and the “tyranny of the ministry gifts”, resulting in ministry futility throughout the denomination for many years (3). He states that the Australian A/G has had a “tragic history”, but believes the new apostolic approach has turned the tide and ushered in a new era for the denomination. However, any form of ecclesiastical government, whether congregational or apostolic, if permitted to operate at an unhealthy level for too long, such as the Australian A/G, can also create the same dire conditions. As seen in the political world, there are dysfunction and abuse across a wide spectrum of governmental structures, from democracies to dictatorships and everything in between. Thus, the issue may not be the type of governmental structure, but the nature and health of the governmental structure itself that has caused the static and lifeless conditions of the church’s history.

Though Cartledge notes how the “Apostolic Revolution” was birthed during a visitation by the Holy Spirit and essentially credits this paradigm shift for the changes in the Australian A/G, there are questions about the authority and function of the apostles within the organization. For instance, what is the nature of the apostolic governmental structure in the Australian A/G? How are apostles elected and how are they held accountable? What level of authority do they hold and can their authority be challenged? Do they operate unilaterally or are they bound by a system of checks and balances that sustain integrity within the organization? Cartledge does not go into detail in his lecture to the conference delegates in Texas, however, if this new apostolic leadership model functions at an unrestrained level, there is certainly potential for serious problems.

Nevertheless, according to Cartledge, the apostolic experiment is now over twenty years old and is continuing to garner tremendous results. If the present system of leadership is effective and beneficial to both pastors and churches, and people are being transformed by the gospel, then this model is something worth exploring for other denominations who find themselves in similar circumstances. Though there are inherent dangers in the apostolic governmental model, no model is perfect, nor should any church or organization be too attached to any one model and neglect learning from one another. In the end, however, regardless of whether church leaders function as apostles or any other description, there must be accountability, integrity, and humility that reflects the leadership model of Christ at every level.

The Bible and Healing: A Medical and Theological Commentary by John Wilkenson - A Reflection by William Sloos

2007-08-10T23:07:00.002-04:00

John Wilkinson’s monograph, The Bible and Healing: A Medical and Theological Commentary, is a comprehensive examination of the references to health and healing found throughout the biblical text, with an emphasis on both the medical and theological perspective. Beginning in the Old Testament, he systematically explores the indigenous concept of health, assesses diseases, and reviews the healing practices of the ancient community of Israel. In the Gospels, disease and healing are analyzed with the focus on the distinctive healing ministry of Christ, followed by the record of healing in the Apostolic Church. Drawing special attention to Paul’s thorn in the flesh, the author offers insights as to its possible identity, proposing its cause was likely malaria- a common and frequently debilitating disease that would correspond with the description given by Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. The author concludes with a brief history of healing in modern times and provides a proper biblical framework for the theology and practice of healing in the contemporary church. With this summary in mind, this reflection paper will interact with three major issues within the book: 1) the broad definition of health in the biblical text, 2) a Pauline theology of suffering, and 3) the interpretation of the use of anointing oil and its implications for the contemporary church. A final paragraph will be included that will highlight several issues that were not included in the book which require further exploration.

First, upon review of the definition of health in the biblical text, Wilkinson has uncovered its multi-dimensional scope that goes beyond merely the physical and encompasses a broad spectrum of components. In the Old Testament, the definition of health covers well-being, righteousness, obedience, strength, fertility, and longevity. The New Testament adds to the range of understanding by including health as life, blessedness, holiness, and maturity. Concerned with more than the material or bodily function of humankind, the Bible’s vision of health expands to embrace the soul and spirit with an intentional emphasis on the divine-human relationship. Weaved throughout the text, this comprehensive portrait of health pervades every area of human life and is ultimately measured by the standard of the fullness of Christ.
Wilkinson highlights the word σωτηρία, a noun meaning “the condition of being safe and sound” to expresses the wide-ranging concept of health in the Bible (25). Used throughout the Old Testament in reference to deliverance, the word came to have a rich religious application, not only for the nation of Israel, but also for the individual believer who trusted in God for deliverance from their enemies. In the gospels, the verb σώζω, is also used to denote both healing and deliverance, not only from danger or disease, but more importantly from the scourge of sin. Pauline literature also used the word σωτηρία, to reflect the salvific act of Christ in response to the sinful state of humankind, intertwining the physical and spiritual aspects of health and wholeness. This diverse interpretation of the word throughout the biblical text implies that, theologically speaking, health and salvation are inseparable and affect the whole human being, demonstrating the holistic mission of Christ not only to deliver the soul from spiritual death, but extend health and wholeness to human beings living in the present age (25).

Second, Paul’s thorn in the flesh experience provides a thoroughly biblical model for dealing with issues relating to suffering. According to Wilkinson, Paul understood that his affliction had a meaning deeper than the merely physical or pathological (232). After being denied the repeated request for the thorn to be removed, the apostle experienced the providential and compassionate nature of God in the midst of suffering. Though Paul’s illness was supplied by Satan, God kept Satan on a tight leash, never allowing the disease to permanently cripple him, but only to operate periodically as required. As well, the affliction provided a means for sustaining grace in the midst of human weakness, enabling Paul to boast, not in his own accomplishments, but in the power of God. As Wilkinson suggests, Paul’s experience with the thorn in the flesh enables the believer to understand the deeper meaning of suffering in their own life, knowing that their suffering is not an accident or outside the purposes of God, but can instead become a source of spiritual strength (235).

Third, as a Pentecostal pastor who has regularly used anointing oil in healing services, Wilkinson’s exegetical study of James 5:13-18 is very interesting to me. According to the text, when the elders were called in by the sick person they were to anoint them with oil and pray for their healing. The author argues that this custom was essentially referring to the medicinal use of the oil rather than the religious one and proposes that James had no intention of connecting the anointing with oil to anything more than as a medicinal remedy (249). For James, anointing oil served as a two-pronged approach to healing, spiritually through the prayer of faith and medically through the application of olive oil. Since olive oil has little medicinal benefit in the current Western context, this claim renders its use in the contemporary healing service as a meaningless practice. In my experience however, many Pentecostals would agree that the use of olive oil is not for any medicinal use, but is highly valued as a symbol of the presence of God and remains a cherished tradition in the Pentecostal context.

Many Pentecostal believers, as I have discovered, draw a link between James’ instruction to anoint with oil to the Old Testament use of anointing oil as a symbol of God’s special presence and favour. In the desert wanderings, Moses was instructed to make anointing oil for the purpose of sanctifying its applicants as holy to the Lord. Though the substance Moses concocted was somewhat different than common anointing oil, the sacramental value and meaning behind the substance is comparable. Wilkinson contends that viewing anointing with oil as a sacrament is faulty since it implies that God is not present in cases of praying for the sick where oil is not present. It is arguable however, that anointing oil serves in the healing service just as bread and grape juice serve in the communion service- as visible symbols that aid in faith. The majority of believers likely recognize that God is present at a prayer meeting whether anointing oil is used or not and also understand that anointing oil does not contain any magical remedy, but stands as a symbol that functions as a tangible faith-builder, connecting the miracle-working power of God in the ancient community of Israel to the contemporary community of faith.

On the other hand, Wilkinson’s understanding of James’ instruction to anoint the sick with oil as merely a medical treatment has considerable implications for the Pentecostal concept of healing. Over the years, I have witnessed many sincere Pentecostal believers who, when facing illness, especially mental illness, have chosen not to seek medical help but to simply trust God for their healing. Unfortunately, this has resulted in many people going untreated for very treatable conditions and has caused needless suffering. If the author is correct, James’ theology of healing fully embraces the spiritual as well as the medical, implying that Christians, in addition to prayer, should also seek medical means to treat their illnesses. This interpretation would be illuminating for many believers who feel they lack faith by taking medication or visiting their doctor. Helping people of faith to recognize the biblical affirmation of medical treatment would be a positive step in the Pentecostal tradition, lifting the stigma of perceived faithlessness and enabling people to confidently secure help for their physical needs.

Finally, Wilkinson’s book raises several questions that could have been dealt with at greater depth. First, when the disciples were unable to heal the epileptic boy, Jesus responds to the disciples by stating, “This kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting” (Mt. 17:21 KJV). Though more recent manuscripts have cast some doubt as to the inclusion of the word “fasting”, is there a relationship between healing and fasting in this particular case or in the general praxis of healing? Second, in Luke 4:39, Jesus finds Peter’s mother-in-law sick with a fever and he rebukes the fever, or speaks to the illness. Since there is no reference to demonic influence, can an illness be spoken to as a living thing and is “speaking to the illness” a suggested method of praying for a sick person? Third, there are many passages in the gospels that proclaim an unqualified nature of faith when it comes to prayer, such as “whatever things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive” (Mt. 21:22 KJV). In my experience, these verses and other similar verses confuse the understanding of the tension between healing and suffering and require further explanation as to how to treat these passages when someone is not healed of their illness. Last, the passage in Isaiah 53:5 which states, “And by His stripes we are healed”, has been often linked to physical healing, however is this connection theologically valid and is there an association between “His stripes” and the healing power of Christ? Nonetheless, Wilkinson’s book is an excellent theological handbook for the contemporary church, providing an important resource for constructing a proper theology of health and healing.

Bibliography

Wilkenson, John. The Bible and Healing: A Medical and Theological Commentary.
Exeter: British Publishing Company, 1998.

The Devil, Disease and Deliverance by John Christoper Thomas: A Reflection by William Sloos

2007-08-10T23:02:00.001-04:00

John C. Thomas’ book, The Devil, Disease and Deliverance: Origins of Illness in New Testament Thought, explores the sources of affliction in the biblical text and forges a proper biblical theology of sickness and disease by examining actual cases in the New Testament narratives. Allowing the gospel and epistle writers to speak on their own terms, Thomas performs a thorough literary analysis, probing the text from multiple angles and offering thought-provoking insights. Recognizing the popularity of healing and deliverance within Pentecostal/charismatic circles, the author seeks to reduce the confusion and bring a measure of clarity to a rather controversial topic. Beginning with James’ epistle, Thomas discusses the roles confession and anointing oil have in praying for the sick. In the Pauline and Johannine corpora, the origin of infirmity is identified as either from God, the devil, or natural causes- a consistent theme weaved throughout the book. The synoptic gospels provide deeper analysis of the link between infirmity and demon possession and explore the practice of exorcism. The book concludes by framing a biblical approach to illness and suggests how prayer, discernment, confession, exorcism and medication are all means of healing and recovery. With this summary in mind, this reflection paper will interact with three major issues in the book: 1) divine origin of affliction, 2) the challenge of discerning demonic influence and, 3) the importance of discernment with regards to identifying sources of infirmity, concluding with a brief paragraph of some unanswered questions.

First, Thomas’ portrayal of God being a source of infirmity and even death in the New Testament is an unexpected and illuminating contention regularly emerging throughout the book. The author collects several pieces of evidence to support his claim including the story of the man born blind from birth (122), Zechariah’s mutism (196), Saul’s loss of sight (258), and Elymas’ blindness (278), with each case clearly identifying God as the cause of the affliction. What is interesting about this grouping is that each person was afflicted for a different purpose, whether to display the healing power of God, as a response to disobedience, a means to salvation, or to execute punishment. Additionally, each of these narratives also illustrate the ease with which the biblical writers attributed responsibility to God for the cause of affliction, highlighting a relatively neglected theological concept that God can be the source of infirmity to serve a variety of purposes. Even more disturbing is the case of Ananias and Sapphira who were struck dead, recipients of God’s judgment for lying to the Holy Spirit (243). Though Satan is involved in the episode, God is clearly the cause for the severe outcome. In addition to Ananias and Sapphira, Herod was also struck down for his failure to give God glory, a punitive action culminating in his body being eaten by worms (265). Herod’s demise, along with the other examples, serves to demonstrate that sin, demonic forces, and natural causes are not the only origins of affliction, but also the hand of God. In these accounts, God displays his equivalent nature between Old and New Testaments, his impartiality with respect to judgement, and his demand for reverent fear and holiness in the community of faith.

As a Pentecostal pastor however, I believe this concept of God as a possible source of affliction in the life of a believer is a rarely considered notion. In the current expression of Pentecostal faith, a number of slogans dominate religious thought such as, “God is good, all the time…all the time, God is good” and the frequently cited phrase, “God won’t give me more than I can handle” – a misquotation from 1 Corinthians 10:13. These and other such messages, which have infiltrated modern theology, propagate a false reality of God, reducing him to mere shadow of his true nature. The consequences of this flawed vision of God produce a pervasive impertinence within the contemporary church, leading to a general disregard for personal holiness, humility, and authentic worship. However, if God was a source of affliction in the Old and New Testaments, there is no theological rationale to suggest he would be any different in the contemporary context- a reality that calls for greater reflection by the body of Christ.

Second, Thomas’ research has identified two types of demonic activity that occur in the biblical text, namely demon possession and affliction caused by demonic influence. There are several well-known pericopae in the gospel accounts that pertain to demon possession, such as the epileptic boy in Mark 9 and the Gadarene Demoniac in Luke 8. However, affliction caused by demonic influence is considerably more challenging to define. The account of the stooped woman in Luke 13 sheds some light on the proposition. After being bound in her infirmity for eighteen years, Jesus finds the woman in the synagogue and heals her (221). Later in the passage, Jesus identifies Satan as the one responsible for causing her debilitating affliction and, though she was not demon possessed, her condition did stem from demonic influence. This text provides the clearest evidence of affliction caused by demonic influence, supporting the idea that even a righteous person could be affected by evil sources (226).

However, the difficulty arises in identifying whether the origin of an illness is caused by demonic influence or merely from natural causes. The author highlights two accounts in the gospels where he suggests the probability of demonic influence, but since there is no explicit indication of demonic influence in the text, I believe the argument is debatable. First, Jesus finds Peter’s mother-in-law suffering in bed with a great fever and, standing over her, addresses the fever directly and rebukes it from her body (198). Though there is no explicit evidence in the text to support the idea she was afflicted by demonic power, the author proposes that Jesus’ method of healing, specifically speaking directly to the illness, suggests he was actually addressing demonic forces and not the fever itself. However, can Jesus’ method of healing not instead demonstrate his authority over nature, including the human body? By speaking directly to the fever, Jesus proves that he is Creator God and, just as he spoke creation into existence, he is also able to rebuke illnesses by the spoken word. The second account is found in Luke 8 where Jesus calms the storm by rebuking the wind and the waves (211). Though the pericopae that bookends this account concerns the deliverance of demons, again there is no explicit evidence to suggest an evil source is behind the storm, as the author implies. I do not believe Jesus’ verbal command method of healing in both cases suggest the existence of demonic influences, but rather indicate natural causes over which Christ has authority. Implying that either the fever or the storm might originate from demonic influences when there is no explicit evidence, could invariably detract from the theologically rich depiction of the supremacy of Christ as Lord over nature.

Third, a central theme throughout Thomas’ book is the importance of discernment in identifying sources of affliction. Since some diseases are attributed to demons but others are not, the gospel writers seem to indicate that discernment was a natural part of the ministry of Christ and is an expected and necessary part of the faith community (189). The account in Luke 11, where Jesus encounters a man suffering from mutism because of demon possession, serves to illustrate the ability Jesus had to distinguish the source of the infirmity (216). As earlier noted, mutism was also the affliction of choice employed by God to discipline Zechariah, emphasizing that the source of the affliction cannot be determined simply by how it manifests physically, but must be discerned spiritually. In the encounter with the man with mutism, Jesus discerns that the affliction did not originate from God, natural causes, or even demonic influence, but was a direct result of demon possession which he subsequently cast out of the man, restoring his speech. Additionally, Peter discerned the deceptive intentions of Ananias and Sapphira and, because of his actions, protected the integrity of the fledgling church and instilled reverent fear in faith community. Undoubtedly, just as the gift of discernment was critical to the healing ministry of Christ and the functioning of the apostolic church, the gift of discernment is also essential for the contemporary church, not only to effectively minister to the broad spectrum of needs within the body of Christ but also to protect the church from immoral activity and demonic attacks.

Finally, reading Thomas’ book on the origins of illness in New Testament thought raised some questions for further exploration. What is the author’s perspective of the nature of the Pool of Bethesda in John 5? Regarded as a place of healing for the multitudes of afflicted people, the word “Bethesda” has surfaced in modern times and has been widely used in the names of Christian churches and charities. However, according to the biblical description of the nature of the pool, only the most able-bodied person was cured when the waters were stirred, leaving those in greatest need unhealed. Does this custom not imply demonic origins and should the Pool of Bethesda be regarded more with a sense of contempt than as a place of healing? Second, what is the difference between “deliverance” and “exorcism”? John Wilkinson, in his book The Bible and Healing, states that the verb ἐξορκίζω, meaning “to exorcise” does not occur anywhere in the New Testament, using the word ἐκβάλλω instead, meaning “to drive out”.[1] What is the reason for this distinction and is it inappropriate to connect the word “exorcism” with the healing ministry of Christ? Nevertheless, Thomas’ has produced a very insightful and thought-provoking monograph, highlighting the various origins of disease and providing a proper biblical theology for healing in the contemporary context.

[1] John Wilkinson, The Bible and Healing: A Medical and Theological Commentary (Exeter: British Printing Company, 1998), 89.

Bibliography

Thomas, John Christopher. The Devil, Disease and Deliverance: Origins of Illness in
New Testament Thought. Sheffield: Academic Press Ltd., 1998.

Wilkenson, John. The Bible and Healing: A Medical and Theological Commentary.
Exeter: British Publishing Company, 1998.

Graham H. Twelftree's "Jesus the Miracle Worker: A Historical and Theological Study" An Appreciation and Critique by William Sloos

2007-08-10T22:54:00.001-04:00

In the mid-eighties The Jesus Seminar was formed, consisting of a group of scholars who meet twice a year to search for the historical Jesus. Their findings, not only published in academic journals but also covered in popular magazines and television news programs, depict a Jesus devoid of the miracle working attributes portrayed in the Gospels. Their scholarly assessment about the historical Jesus contends that he never cured any diseases, never turned water into wine, did not raise Lazarus from the dead and certainly did not rise from the dead. Deliberately provocative, The Jesus Seminar drew the battle lines between those who insist the Bible is the only source of religious authority as God’s revelation to humanity and those who consider the traditional conception of miracle irreconcilable with the modern understanding of both science and history. Within this tempestuous atmosphere, Graham H. Twelftree’s monograph courageously endeavours to help unravel the current issues over the miracles of Jesus, postulating that the vast majority of the miracle stories in the Gospels can be read as reliable reports of those who witnessed the ministry of Jesus.

Jesus The Miracle Worker: A Historical and Theological Study is a significant work (470 pages), covering an important feature of the ministry of the historical Jesus. Written for the theology student as well as those interested in the issue of the historical Jesus, this book is comprehensive, yet sensibly organized and readable. Through a combination of exegetical, historical, and theological approaches, the purpose of the monograph is to introduce people to the miracles of Jesus by tackling the following four objectives: 1) to discuss how the Gospel writers understood the miracles of Jesus, 2) to try and determine how Jesus understood his miracles, 3) to see to what extent the miracle stories of Jesus reflect what actually occurred in history, and 4) to examine how the results have impacted the quest of the historical Jesus. In light of these four objectives, the book divides into five parts. Part one establishes the major issues and highlights significant contributions to the study of miracles in modern times. Part two attempts to answer the question, “How did each Gospel writer understand the miracles of Jesus?” Incisively, Twelftree allows the Gospel narratives to stand on their own, enabling the reader to become familiar with the miracle stories in question and allow the biblical text to speak first and on its own terms. Part three primarily sets the parameters of historical methodology and grapples with the issue of how Jesus himself may have understood his miracles in relation to his overall ministry. Having argued that Jesus was a powerful miracle worker, part four puts the biblical evidence to the test of historiography to determine if the miracle stories can be shown to contain any reliable historical probability. Finally, part five draws some conclusions about the miracles of Jesus in history and makes a valuable contribution to the ongoing quest for the historical Jesus. The remainder of this review offers a brief overview of Twelftree’s work and an assessment of its strengths and weakness.

The Contents
The first two chapters (Part 1) set the stage for the discussion of Jesus’ miracles by defining what a miracle is and addressing the question of whether miracles did occur and if they occur today. Twelftree brings to the fore such influential theologians such as David Friedrich Strauss and Rudolph Bultmann who propose that the miracles of Jesus are founded in mythology and essentially have no rightful place in history. Others argue that the miracle stories have been embellished to portray Jesus as someone worthy of attention; others contend that the Gospel writers actually believed what they were reporting was miraculous, but looking back on the miracles through a scientific lens, can all be explained naturally. Contrasting the plethora of philosophical, theological, and scientific objectors to the reality of miracles, Twelftree highlights how recent opinion polls in Britain continue to illustrate how the modern person continues to believe in the supernatural. He concludes by stating that the contemporary scientific worldview, devoid of the supernatural, is not adequate to describe and interpret the breadth of human experience. Further, the distance between first century and modern human experience is not as great as some believe, making it quite reasonable to suppose that miracles are possible.

Using redaction and narrative criticism to guide his interpretive approach, the next six chapters (Part 2) explore how the Gospel writers regard the miracles of Jesus beginning with Mark, followed by Matthew, Luke, and the Fourth Gospel. The miracle stories in Mark, accounting for almost one-third of the Gospel- a greater proportion than any other Gospel, are directly related to Jesus’ teaching, his immense popularity, his conflict with evil, his call to faith and prayer, and serve as models for the disciples to emulate. His miracles are also portrayed as incredibly powerful and effective, leaving the reader with the impression that Jesus could in fact, be God. In Matthew, the miracles serve to support Jesus’ message of salvation and portray him as the new Moses who fulfils Old Testament hopes as the Messiah in word and deed. Dominating the Luke-Acts narrative is both the distinctive role of the eschatological Spirit in empowering Jesus to perform miracles and the interrelatedness of healing and salvation, forming a multi-dimensional holistic ministry of Christ. Unique to the Fourth Gospel is the noticeably sparse reporting of miracle stories, yet despite the small amount of material, the authors express Jesus’ filial relationship with the Father and demonstrate how Jesus’ miracles are at the heart of his earthly ministry. Concluding that the miracle stories are essential to the Gospel writers’ understanding of the person and work of Christ and are thus likely to have occurred, the author now turns his attention to the historical Jesus and establishes the necessary framework to assess the historicity of the miracle stories.

Chapters nine and ten (Part 3) address the question of whether the historical Jesus actually performed miracles. Recognizing the capricious nature of the project, Twelftree emotionally prepares the reader by explaining that the journey about to be taken will be like a walk through a minefield. After appealing for open mindedness, the author reaffirms the value of the venture by noting that the basic understanding of who Jesus is, the truth of his message and the integrity of Christianity depends on Jesus having performed miracles. From the perspective of the Gospel writers, without the miracles of Jesus, there would be no Christianity, making the historicity of the miracles of central significance. With this in mind, the author courageously proceeds to establish his methodology, setting forth eighteen theses to use as a basis for his approach. These theses fit into the following seven categories: burden of proof, demonstration, historicity, multiple attestation, dissimilarity, plausibility, and coherence. As the miracle stories are filtered through this complex, though admittedly primitive, methodology for investigating the historicity of the activities of Jesus, Twelftree addresses some of the challenges, recognizing that authenticity and certainty is a complex notion that ought to be expressed in terms of a range of possibilities along a spectrum as opposed to any black or white expectations.

Having established that the Gospel writers believed that Jesus performed miracles and that Jesus himself understood his miracles as the activity of God, chapters eleven through sixteen (Part 4) set out to determine if the miracle stories have any historical foundation. In a systematic fashion according to the type of miracle, Twelftree examines the supernatural accounts, searching for evidence in an attempt to try and prove the possibility of their historicity. Though space limits a thorough analysis of his findings, the author discovers that the majority of miracles, twenty-two to be exact, can be judged with a high degree of confidence to have most likely occurred in the life of the historical Jesus. Of the remaining seven miracle stories, too little data was available to contend their historical reliability with the same degree of confidence. Fearing he may have offended some with his conclusions, Twelftree reemphasizes that this exercise has not been intended to call into question either the value of the Bible, the identity of Jesus, or his ability to perform miracles, but rather to reconstruct the historical Jesus with historically verifiable material that attests to him being a miracle worker.

The final chapter (Part 5) is a summation of the four objectives including a chronological review of how the Gospel writers understood the miracles, comprising a wide-ranging, theologically rich, and homiletically valuable inventory of the nature and attributes of Christ. In addressing the questions regarding the historical Jesus, Twelftree sums up his final argument by definitively asserting that any reconstruction of the historical Jesus must emphasize that he was a powerful miracle worker- an unwelcome outcome for those who have laboured so diligently to disprove the biblical witness of Christ. Nevertheless, the Fellows of The Jesus Seminar would be amiss to ignore Twelftree’s monograph and his ground-breaking conclusions, achieved not through the lens of faith, but through judicious historical analysis.

Strengths
Graham H. Twelftree has published a masterful work, well documented and lucidly argued, and one which will undoubtedly influence any future discussions of the historicity of Jesus’ miracles. There are a number of reasons for its significance. First, the author displays a vast knowledge not only of the miracles of Jesus, but also an exhaustive understanding of New Testament history and theology. A brief perusal of his published work indicates his expertise (43 published chapters and journal articles, 12 published books, 21 published reviews, and 11 works in progress). Regardless of whatever one might think of his conclusions, his level of erudition demands that this volume not be overlooked. Second, though the task of testing the historicity of the miracles of Jesus is a courageous endeavour, fraught with critics on either side, Twelftree recognizes the remedial nature of such a project, believing that a corrective is needed to reinstate the miracles of Jesus as a major component in a reconstruction of the historical Jesus. The author also optimistically claims that faith will want to be informed about the Jesus of history- a contention that, in reality, may not be so widely received as he wishes.

Third, coming from a theologically conservative perspective, one of Twelftree’s greatest strengths is his high view of Scripture. Instead of jumping into the debate of the historicity of miracles, the author begins his research by allowing the text to speak for itself on its own terms. As each miracle story is examined, Twelftree addresses conflicting arguments about what the Gospel writer meant with a return to the facts of the written text. He seeks to understand the miracle stories by discovering how the Gospel writers have gone about plotting their narratives and handling the details of their material to convey their message to the first readers. Combating the literary deconstructionism that has traditionally characterized the search for the historical Jesus, Twelftree’s respect for and treatment of the text is apparent and appreciated.

Fourth, Twelftree is not bound by the interpretive systems of other theologians or commentators. Since he is led by the text, the author is not tempted to embrace the exegetical frameworks that are commonly accepted, but is willing to question certain textual constructs and divert from their set structures. To illustrate, within the three groups of miracle stories in Matthew eight and nine, H. J. Held and Jeremy Moiser both attribute particular thematic systems to each set of miracles. Twelftree argues contrary to the proposed systems, suggesting that their thematic schemes are not found to dominate the respective collection of miracles. Instead, each miracle story contributes to a variety of themes and cannot be bound to a single particular idea. Throughout the text, the author continues to question assumed textual constructs and allows the text to determine the route of interpretation.

Fifth, for the theological student, Twelftree’s inclusion of the major philosophical and theological contributions is of tremendous benefit. Though the monograph may be, at times, cumbersome for the layperson, discussing the central arguments of Hume, McKinnon, Bultmann, Macquarrie, Tillich and others all aid in understanding the broad and complex nature of the issues surrounding the quest for the historical Jesus.

Sixth, though Twelftree takes great pains not to allow his own pre-understanding to influence the direction of his research, in the end, he is unapologetic about his findings. His conclusions undeniably lead to the fact that Jesus is God and Messiah. Instead of shielding the reality or deflecting some of the implications, he clearly states the revolutionary significance of his research. Though careful not to offend or criticize those with alternative views, he repeatedly emphasizes that, in response to the question, “Did Jesus perform miracles?” the answer is an incontrovertible and resonant “Yes!” Those who wish to withdraw from the question of historicity for fear of discovering that the miracle stories can neither be dismissed as either mythical or as narrative creativity have little place to hide. Twelftree declares that the miracle stories cannot be shifted to the periphery of the life and ministry of the historical Jesus, but are front and centre and can no longer be overlooked.

Weaknesses
Though Twelftree’s monograph stands as a masterful exposition of the theological and historical understanding of the miracles of Jesus, there are some minor chinks in his methodological armour. First, at times the author is a bit too hasty in dismissing other arguments to his own line of reasoning. To illustrate, in his assessment of the miracles in the Lukan narratives, he wishes to portray Jesus as having a balanced ministry between word and deed. To contrast his aim, he very briefly highlights Robert Menzies argument that proposes that Luke, in keeping within the bounds of pre-Pauline understanding of the Spirit, is mainly concerned with the primacy of “word” or verbal proclamation. Without giving more than a sentence to Menzies’ argument, Twelftree quickly dismisses the proposal and furthers his theory that Luke’s principle aim was to portray a balance among various aspects of Jesus’ ministry. The reader is left to wonder why Menzies’ argument was not more fully developed to provide a better understanding of the differing opinions. Admittedly, Twelftree had an enormous amount of material to cover and was not interested in producing an exhaustive commentary. However, some opposing arguments require more development rather than less, not only for the sake of clarity, but to better inform the reader of other significant voices within the study.

Second, the author’s exegetical meanderings into allegorization was unexpected. Though infrequent, the occurrences seem to force a claim for the historicity of a particular miracle story, bringing some suspect exegesis to an otherwise masterful work. The miracle story where Jesus turns the water into wine involves the filling of six jars of water. Twelftree argues that the number six would have been a significant number to the Johannine community and contends that the six jars, instead of the perfect number of seven, means that the coming of the expected reign of God waits completion in the resurrection and Parousia. In the miracle story of the catch of fish, where the net did not break despite the large haul of fish, Twelfth indicates that the most natural interpretation of the net not breaking is that the church is able to contain all who can be brought into its compass. Further, the 153 fish that were netted, according to Twelftree, are intended to reflect the fruitfulness, life, and immortality represented in the resurrection. This type of biblical interpretation is laden with pitfalls and opens the door to a whole other dimension of interpretive possibilities. Though using allegory in this manner may have aided the miracle stories test for historicity, it is not a proper way to interpret the Gospels and hopefully does not detract from the overall value of the project.

In conclusion, as a Pentecostal, reading Twelftree’s monograph was both thought provoking and rewarding. Upon discovery of the book’s premise to discover the possible historicity of the miracle stories, the first impression was admittedly rather shallow, questioning the value of such an endeavour. The quest for the historical Jesus was regarded as little more than a pursuit of futility and Twelftree’s objectives illustrated a lack of faith in the Word of God as a reliable or infallible witness to the miraculous activity of Christ. However, the author articulated how this exercise was not intended to a call into question either the value of the Bible, the person of Jesus, or his ability to perform miracles, but rather to better comprehend the Bible and understand Jesus, his message, and the very essence of Christianity. Imploring the reader, Twelftree argues that the truth of the message of Christ and the integrity of the faith depends on Jesus having performed miracles. Without the miracles of Jesus there would have been no Christianity. Illuminated to the value of the project and the theological wealth of the outcomes, it has become clear that this task is critical to the witness of Christ in the contemporary culture and an invaluable resource for anyone who desires to be an effective apologist for the faith. The results speak for themselves. Jesus cannot be seen only as merely a prophet, good teacher, or Jewish holy man, he is a miracle worker and, as emphasized in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus is God himself, acting mightily among his people in history. The implications of this project are highly significant, not only for the Fellows of The Jesus Seminar and their ongoing quest for the historical Jesus, but also for the church, who will need to re-examine their view of the person and work of Christ against the evidence of the Gospels weighed in history.

Bibliography

TWELFTREE, GRAHAM H. JESUS THE MIRACLE WORKER: A HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL STUDY. DOWNERS GROVE: INTERVARSITY PRESS, 1999.

Jurgen Moltmann on the Suffering of God - A Critical Reflection by William Sloos

2007-08-10T10:31:00.001-04:00

Summary
In Jurgen Moltmann’s article, "The Crucified God: God and the Trinity Today" in Alister McGrath's The Christian Theology Reader (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007.), he argues how the cross of Christ demonstrates the suffering of God for the sake of fallen humanity and is essential in understanding the inner relationship between the Father and the Son. He states that through the suffering of the Son on the cross, the Father also experienced suffering, though distinct from the experience of the Son. While the Son suffered the physical pain of the cross and the pain of being abandoned by the Father, the Father suffered because he abandoned his Son. This suffering however, was not like the suffering of created beings, which is associated with their fallen state, but was rather a voluntary suffering whereby God allowed himself to be affected by external influences, specifically his love for fallen humanity. Contrary to Aristotle’s God, who was loved by all but was incapable of loving, the Christian God has the capacity to love and the capacity to suffer for that which he loves. This suffering of both the Father and the Son illustrates how they are of the same substance and, even though they suffered differently, they were united in their suffering for the sake of fallen humanity.

The cross also illustrates the triune nature of God and is, according to Moltmann, the most concise expression of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. Combating the heresies of the Patripassians who held to a monarchian theology that believes the Father was crucified through the Son, or the Theopaschites, who believe the divine nature of Christ died on the cross, Moltmann emphasizes how both the universality of the Godhead and the distinctiveness of the three persons are present in the atonement. In effect, Moltmann argues that the Trinity must be understood in the context of the cross, which reveals the unity of God in the context of faith, affirming the traditional orthodox doctrine of the nature of God.

Additionally, Moltmann argues that the cross is essentially a divine act involving every member of the Trinity, stating that the Father allowed the Son to sacrifice himself through the Holy Spirit. Pointing to the passage in Romans 8:32 which states, “God did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all,” he states that the Father abandons, or “gives up” his Son and is separated from him, and the Son is abandoned, or “given up” by the Father, and this “giving up” is the Holy Spirit. That is, the separation experienced between the Father and the Son occurred through the means of the Holy Spirit. This abandonment and separation at the cross is thus a Trinitarian event, whereby each person of the Trinity directly participates in the salvific design: the Father abandons, the Son is abandoned, and the Spirit is the means of the abandoning, to reconcile human beings back to God.

Critical Reflection
Moltmann’s argument of a suffering God effectively illustrates the love that God has for fallen humanity. If one voluntarily suffers on behalf of something or someone, they must love that something or someone because suffering is a painful experience; one would only choose to suffer if one considered that something or someone worth suffering for, and that is love. As an illustration, if a foreign army is attacking a country and a citizen of that country volunteers to join the army and then suffers in battle defending their country, that citizen must consider their country worth suffering for, and thus, must love their country. In the same way, God, who was under no obligation or compulsion, chose to abandon his Son and suffer the pain of separation because of his love for fallen humanity. In the freedom of his perfect nature, God demonstrated perfect love to an undeserving and fallen humanity.

Within human relationships, if a father chooses to abandon his own son and separate himself from the torment of his son’s suffering, the father either does not love his son, or considers something or someone worth enduring the pain of his actions. Since it is understood from the Scriptures that God is love, he must by his own definition, love his Son. He thus must have considered fallen humanity worth the pain of abandoning the Son he loves to death on a cross. If he considers fallen humanity worth such personal suffering, he must love human beings, and love them with the same love that defines his divine nature.

In addition to loving human beings, his altruistic and selfless act displayed in the atonement also shows that he values human beings. If God values human beings, it is arguable then that he is interested in having a relationship with them, caring for their needs and guiding their lives for all eternity. Why would anyone go through such pain and suffering if they did not intend to pursue a relationship with them afterwards? The cross is therefore, not just a means of providing salvation to fallen humanity, but represents God’s passionate and intimate concern for all people and his unselfish desire to engage in a personal and eternal relationship with each human being.

Implications
If God willingly chose to abandon his Son and experience the pain of separation for his love of fallen humanity, then he must be a God who is worth obeying and worshipping. By his actions displayed at the cross, he has shown human beings that he is a good and loving God and is interested in liberating human beings from sin and its consequences. Thus, it would be reasonable and fitting for those human beings who have received the benefits of the cross through faith to live their lives in a manner that pleases him. Through the acts of obedience and worship, in accordance with the revealed Word of God, human beings can demonstrate their gratefulness to the one who has suffered for their salvation.

Additionally, Molmann’s claim that the cross is the central focus of the Christian faith is very significant for the contemporary church. Among the liberal community of faith or those espousing a social gospel, the cross has lost its significance and simply stands as a symbol of the Easter story, irrelevant to the current cultural context. Conversely, some influential brands of evangelicalism are promoting a prosperity gospel that is contrary to the message of the cross. However, the message of the cross is the gospel, proclaiming the love of God for all people and demonstrating the magnitude to which the Trinity went to rescue fallen humanity. Without the emphasis on the cross of Christ, the nature of God is misunderstood, the value of salvation is diminished, and the church’s message is emptied of its power.

In conclusion, Jurgen Moltmann contends that the cross of Christ is essential in understanding the relationship between the Father and the Son, and how their suffering, though unique, was united in their love for fallen humanity. Additionally, the author illustrates how the triune nature of God is evident in the cross of Christ; God suffered the loss of his Son, the Son suffered the pain of the cross, and the Holy Spirit was the means by which the event was accomplished. In his argument, Moltmann also passionately demonstrates the immense love God has for fallen humanity and his willingness to suffer on their behalf.

Richard Bauckham on Jurgen Moltmann's Eschatology - A Critical Reflection by William Sloos

2007-08-10T10:29:00.002-04:00

Summary
In the article, “Richard Bauckham on Jurgen Moltmann’s Eschatology” in Alister McGrath’s The Christian Theology Reader (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), Richard Bauckham contends that one of the most important achievements in Moltmann’s theology is his rehabilitation of eschatology for modern biblical faith. Contrary to Schweitzer, Dodd, Bultmann and other theologians of the modern era who considered biblical eschatology objectionable to contemporary minds unless modified to reflect a more figurative or abstract interpretation, Moltmann asserts that restoring biblical eschatology reinstates the reliability and relevancy of the Christian faith in the modern world. Instead of the church rejecting or retreating from the process of constant and radical change in the modern experience of history, a reorientation of faith towards the future compels the church to dynamically reconnect with the contemporary world and redirect it towards a future kingdom. For Moltmann, the very essence of the gospel is rooted and grounded in eschatological faith and is an empowering factor in transforming the present in the direction of the promised future.

Thoroughly Christological in nature, Moltmann’s understanding of biblical eschatology is centred upon his understanding of the resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection of Jesus is the promise of Christian hope and the eschatological future of all reality. Moltmann sets forth his argument by contextualizing the resurrection of Jesus against the backdrop of Jewish history and theology. Throughout the Old Testament, the God of Israel revealed himself to his people through his promises of future hope. Within this promissory framework, God resurrects the crucified Christ from the dead, enacting the supernatural fulfilment of his divine pledge. The resurrection of Jesus not only demonstrates the certainty of God’s promise of future hope, but also anticipates the resurrection of all the dead, the new creation of all reality, and proclaims the coming of the kingdom of God.

Moreover, this idea of resurrection as promise is further magnified when juxtaposed with Moltmann’s dialectical understanding of the cross and resurrection as contradiction. First, the contradiction of the cross and the resurrection is itself eschatological, contrasting the reality of death and the promise and new life. Though the cross represented death, the resurrection symbolizes life for the dead, righteousness for the unrighteous, and a radically new future. Second, the contradiction of the cross and resurrection are characterized in the identity of Jesus. Jesus did not merely survive the cross; he who was wholly dead has been wholly raised, dramatically illustrating the radical and total transformation of the Son and characterizing the nature of transformation in the eschaton, where the hope of creational resurrection will ultimately be fulfilled.

Thus, for Moltmann, Christian eschatology is hope; hope for a different world, free from all evil, suffering, and death and filled with the presence of God. Completely transcendent of history and the machinations of humanity, this radical change will be completely achieved by God according to his teleology. However, this hope is not without effect on the present. The resurrection of Jesus activated a process in history that moves the world in the direction of future transformation by affecting change in the existing world. This progression of change is, for Moltmann, achieved by the church, who demonstrates to the world that transformation is not only anticipated but is effectual in the contemporary context. Instead of being other-worldly and disengaged from reality or resigned to the inalterability of world affairs, the promise of hope in the eschaton ignites and empowers the church to seek and activate all opportunities to effect change and express the divine nature of resurrection promise to the world. Thus, for the Christian, the eschaton is not only an anticipation of restoration, but is the central motivating factor in viewing the present world as transformable in the direction of the promised hope of resurrection.

Implications
Richard Bauckham states how Moltmann’s eschatology differs from other prominent theologians of the modern age whose liberal theologies have pervaded the church and influenced the pulpit of the twentieth century. Instead of relegating biblical eschatology to the attic of Christian theology, considering its concepts embarrassing to the logicality of modern thinking and irrelevant to contemporary faith, Moltmann resists the theories of his counterparts and restores the biblical concept of future hope. Reviving the notion that there is not only a real future kingdom to come, but the anticipated future kingdom is active in the present world, Moltmann recovers the eschatological significance of Scripture, which for him, seems to represent a corpus that not only speaks to the past and present, but also speaks to the future. Identifying the promise of hope motif as existent in the history of Israel and demonstrated in the resurrection of Jesus, he reveals the biblical trajectory of hope that will ultimately be achieved in the future eschaton. This perspective implies that the Bible is not just a voice of antiquity, but a relevant voice that can speak to the modern Christian about living in the present in light of the anticipation of the consummation of the kingdom of God.

Additionally, Moltmann inexorably ties biblical eschatology to ecclesiology, emphasizing how the promise of future restoration serves as a stimulus for the church to actualize change in the present. Instead of the church perceiving the world to be following a hopeless and unchangeable course, eschatology becomes the central motivating factor and vision of hope to bring the world into alignment with the promised future. Viewing the world as transformable in the direction of the eschaton liberates the church from accommodation to the status quo and sets the church critically against it, enabling it to seek and activate present possibilities that arouse an active expectation and awareness of the eschatological future. Though the church lives in the present world of evil, sin, and suffering, the future kingdom is anticipated, preventing the church from being absorbed by the corrupt conditions and, though suffering the contradiction of present affliction in light of future restoration, the church actively pursues new impulses of change that direct the world towards the future eschaton. Thus for Moltmann, eschatology is intrinsically linked to the mission of the church as the motivating force to actualize change in the contemporary context.

Lastly, Moltmann’s rediscovery of biblical eschatology confronts the community of faith with the challenge of living according to the biblical principles of the approaching kingdom. Recognizing that this present world will be wholly restored in the future, believers are compelled to thoughtfully examine the nature of their relationship to the world and its value systems. Though tempted to be conformed to secular patterns, believers are called to live according to the expectations of the kingdom in anticipation of the ultimate fulfilment of the promised future. Just as Jesus successfully engaged the world without being contaminated by the world and effected change with eschatological motivation, the believing community is also called to avoid being polluted by the world, yet live in the world as agents of change in anticipation of the coming kingdom of God.