 Our world is hungry. Our world is thirsty, and thirsty for hope. The past few years have brought quite a bit of turmoil to our world and our nation. Controversial elections, racial tensions, a global pandemic, and even natural disasters and storms have set this world into a search for hope. People look for hope, seek for hope, and long for rest in all the wrong places. Some seek it in alcohol, others in relationships, drugs, and a host of other things humanity uses to mask the hopelessness and the pain that they feel. Into this world, we as the people of God have been sent with a message of hope. Yes, we proclaim a message that culminates in the Blessed Hope. Paul wrote to Titus, stating that we are “waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works” (Titus 2:13-14). I love what the prophet Zechariah wrote to the people of Israel who were looking for their coming King, “Return to your stronghold, O prisoners of hope; today I declare that I will restore to you double” (Zechariah 9:12 ESV). Prisoners of hope. I believe that God wants us to be empowered by the message of the Return and Reign of Christ, and to be able to see how the hope of the world is the hope of His return. If you look at Isaiah 11:1-16, I want to break down some great truths of Christ’s reign that offer hope to the world. See, we believe in the Soon Coming King. This is one of the pillars of the Pentecostal message, that Jesus is Coming Again. He’s coming to rescue and resurrect His people in the rapture of the church, but He’s also coming to rule and reign on earth in what we call the Millennium. The truth of Christ’s reign is proclaimed throughout the Scripture. While we see it explicitly mentioned in the book of Revelation, I believe many of the Old Testament prophets also proclaimed the reality of the Messiah’s reign on earth, a reign to which we still look today. That reign, that reality, is truly a message of hope to the world. And church, we should live today as prisoners of that hope. Jesus is coming again, and He will rule and reign. There are three truths related to Christ’s return that I believe should empower us to be bearers of hope in a hopeless world, empowered to share how the hope of the world is the hope of His return. There are three realities, three hopes of the blessed hope, that should enable us to truly live as prisoners of hope. The Hope of Justice, the Hope of Peace, and the Hope of Rescue. The realities of the past few years, with the turmoil and struggle that have been loosed in our nation, really stand in line with a host of issues that nations have faced for years. This portion of Isaiah was written to address King Ahaz.[1] Ahaz reigned from 735-715 BC, and one of the greatest threats He faced was that of Tiglath Pileser, head of the Assyrian Empire.[2] After a period of relative peace, there was a resurgence of violent military activity that threatened Ahaz’s kingdom.[3] Pileser’s reign sent the region into a tailspin and rocked the boat, if you will, shaking the confidence and peace of King Ahaz and threatening to utterly destroy the nation to the core.[4] It was into this time of upheaval and uncertainty that Isaiah closes the section with this prophecy of the coming of God’s Messiah. Into the instability of the nation, Isaiah prophesies a message of hope that would come when God’s ideal King came and reigned over Israel. This same message rings true today as we look at the instability of our world. The passage opens with a contrast between the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world. Notice that Isaiah speaks of a righteous branch that would come out of the stump of Jesse. This picture is meant to bring contrast between the Kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world.  Anyone ever cut down a tree? What’s left? A stump. Isaiah uses this picture to compare the two kingdoms. Earlier in chapter 10, Isaiah spoke of the King of Assyria as a tree whose “proud” branches would be loped off and forests destroyed.[5] In contrast to the strength, size, and pride of trees and forests, the Kingdom of God is pictured as arising as a branch out of a stump. This speaks to the humble beginnings of the Kingdom of Christ, something antithetical to the ways of pride and power in this world.[6]
In this humble kingdom, God promises to do something new. Notice that Isaiah says that this is arising from the root of Jesse. Jesse was David’s Father, and God made a covenant with David that one of his descendants would rule and reign forever, but rather than speaking of a son of David, here, Isaiah goes back to Jesse. Why? Because so many sons of David had wicked kingdoms that mirrored the kingdoms of this world rather than God’s Kingdom, so God’s going to go back to Jesse and start with a New David, the Lord Jesus Christ.[7] God’s doing a new thing and building a New Kingdom. We need the hope of the blessed hope. So let’s unpack the hopes of the blessed hope, the hope of Christ’s coming reign. The Hope of Justice The first reality that Isaiah highlights about the reign of the Messiah, the Hope of Christ, is the hope of justice. One of the great tragedies of the kingdoms of this world is the prevalence of injustice. Unjust judges, law courts that accept bribes, the rich and powerful paying off the system—a host of injustice pervades the world as we know it. Can I tell you a secret? It won’t change until a New King comes, the Lord Jesus Christ. Every kingdom of this world will be plagued by injustice, but when He comes, He will rule and reign with justice. Notice what Isaiah says. He speaks of this King being endowed by the Spirit for the task of judging rightly. In the Old Testament, the judges were spoken of as being anointed by the Spirit with the authority of God to make decisions. Later, this authority was transferred to the kings, who were understood to have been anointed to be agents of God, in the same sense as judges and prophets.[8] This coming King would be anointed to judge the world with equity and justice because of His empowerment by the Holy Spirit. Righteousness, here, means “what is right, just, normal; rightness, justness, of weights and measures.”[9] Equity, here, refers to a “level place, uprightness… level place (free from obstacles), fig. for place of safety, comfort, and prosperity…uprightness in government.”[10] How often do we see level playing fields in judgment today? This is the hope of Justice. Though the kingdoms of this world are full of injustice, there’s coming a kingdom of perfect justice. And this Perfect King will come and bring judgment. Now, one of the great realities of His reign is that He will bring justice and judgment to the wicked. The injustices of this world will be settled at the judgment seat when Christ meets out His perfect justice. Those who perverted justice, those who have mistreated others, and those who have carried out atrocities will be judged. They will have their day. Their sin, if not paid for by the cross, will be judged by Christ, and justice will be served. This is why God tells us, “It is mine to avenge, I will repay,” says the Lord. We can respond to injustice with forgiveness and grace, because we know that the accounts will be settled by the King when He comes. This is the hope of the blessed hope. The Hope of Peace Secondly, there’s the hope of peace. Not only will Christ’s rule be characterized by supernatural justice, but he will be empowered to bring about supernatural peace. There’s a series of pairs in verses 6 through 8 that illustrate the sort of peace that Christ is going to bring. What you’ll notice is that there are seeming enemies paired together—wolf and lamb, leopard and goat, calf and lion, cow and bear—all dwelling together in peace.[11] Further, it seems that there’s almost a return to the garden of Eden, as meat eaters begin eating plants again and no longer live by what Chisholm calls “the rule of tooth and claw.”[12] Often, much like our expectations today, people of the Ancient Near East looked forward to a day where a political leader would bring about that return to Eden, a time of paradise and perfection, a time of peace.[13] In fact, one Sumerian myth, Enki and Ninhursag, describe a situation where lions do not kill and wolves do not snatch the lamb.[14] This is the power of Christ, and the absolute transformation of the world that will take place when He comes to reign. Paradise will be restored, and there will be a removal of the curse that causes tension and harm within our world. Isaiah prophesies that no harm will be done.[15] Notice specifically how the passage speaks of a child playing over the adder’s den and playing with the cobra. Scholars believe this is a reference back to Genesis 3:15 where the seed of the woman will crush the seed of the serpent. That enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent is overcome.[16] Christ will remove and reverse the curse, bringing about a supernatural peace. In a world ravaged by war and natural disaster, doesn’t the hope of peace sound amazing? Friends, this is the hope of the blessed hope. There will be a complete renovation of the world that will bring about a supernatural peace such that no harm will be done in all the Kingdom. This is the hope of peace. The hope of the blessed hope. The Hope of Rescue In addition to the hope of justice and peace, Isaiah prophesies the hope of rescue. Praise God! In a world of injustice and turmoil, there’s a promise of rescue. Notice how Isaiah prophesies the gathering of a righteous remnant. See, in Isaiah’s time, the nation had been taken captive, but Isaiah’s hope is that a remnant will return and inherit the promise. The nation was taken captive in 722 B.C. by Assyria and removed from their homeland, deported to Mesopotamia.[17] Their homeland destroyed and living in a foreign land, Isaiah foretells and prophesies that a remnant would return home. When the King comes, He calls forth the remnant of God’s people from all nations and rescues them from their captivity.[18] The section is marked off by a literary device called an inclusio, where the author mentions something at the beginning of a passage and the end of a passage to emphasize the point. In this section, there’s a reference to the Lord’s Hand, Assyria, and Egypt in verse 11 and again in verses 15-16.[19] Isaiah is pulling on the idea of the Exodus, where the hand of the Lord wrought mighty works to bring God’s people out of Egypt and into the land of promise. This is a second exodus, not of Israel out of Egypt but of God’s people out of the nations of the world.[20] In a very real sense, the exodus and deliverance, and the captivity and deliverance of Israel become types and shadows of a Greater Exodus and Greater Deliverance of God’s People out of the sin and death of a fallen world. This is the return to Eden. Christ will call forth and gather His people and rescue them from the fallen world. And Revelation tells us that we will rule and reign with Him. One scholar calls this move in Isaiah a “Back to the Future” move, where Isaiah uses the past experience of Exodus as a picture of the presence and power of God that will bring about their future deliverance.[21] This New David, who initiates a New Creation, initiates a New Exodus by calling forth His people from out of the nations to which they had been scattered. There will be three groups of people represented in these people: the nations (that’s you and me), faithful Israel, and faithful Judah (those believing Jews who trust Christ as their Messiah).[22] Together, we will become a New People, a new humanity living in a New World with our King, Jesus. In this New World, there will be perfect justice and perfect peace. What a message of hope in a fallen world! Justice in a world of injustice, peace in a world of turmoil, and rescue from a broken system brought on by the curse of sin. This, my friends, is the hope of the blessed hope. This blog was adapted from a message preached at a Midweek Service in the Fall of 2023 at Abundant Life Assembly of God in Marion, IL. [1]Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, vol. 1 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 428. [2]David D. Pettus, “Ahaz, King of Judah,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016). [3]Ibid. [4]Andrew H. Bartelt, “Second Sunday of Advent, Year A,” in The Lectionary Commentary: Theological Exegesis for Sunday’s Texts, Volume One (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 320. [5]Jamieson, Faussett, & Brown, 443. [6]Gary V. Smith, Isaiah 1–39, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, The New American Commentary (Nashville: B & H Publishing Group, 2007), 270–271. [7]Robert B. Chisholm Jr., Handbook on the Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Minor Prophets (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 44. [8]Victor Harold Matthews, Mark W. Chavalas, and John H. Walton, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), Is 11:2. [9]Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), 841. [10]Brown, Driver, & Briggs, 449. [11]Jamieson, Faussett, & Brown, 443. [12]Chisholm, 44–45; J. Alec Motyer, Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 20, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 118. [13]Smith, 269. [14]Matthews, Chavalas, and Walton, Isaiah 11:6-8. [15]Smith, 273. [16]Motyer, 118. [17]Chisholm, 45. [18]Chisholm, 45. [19]Motyer, 119-120. [20]Motyer, 120; Chisholm, 45. [21]Chisholm, 46. [22]Smith, 276.
0 Comments
 If you’re familiar with Pentecostalism, you probably know that one of our distinctive teachings is the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the initial, physical sign of speaking in other tongues. We believe that when one comes into the full experience of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, they will begin speaking in a language they’ve never learned. For many Christians, this can be a stumbling block for coming into Pentecostalism. Are tongues really evidence of being baptized in the Holy Spirit? One of the clearest scriptures about doctrine of evidential tongues lies at the climax the book of Acts. Acts 1:8 is often viewed as an outline and overview of the book of Acts: But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” After their own Pentecostal experience, the apostles and believers began sharing the gospel, but for the first seven chapters of Acts, they hadn’t left Jerusalem! Up until the stoning of Stephen, they stayed close to home. After Stephen’s stoning, they were scattered about, preaching the gospel wherever they went. But Acts 11:19 tells us that these scattered believers only went about preaching the gospel to Jews. Their witness was limited to the Jewish people. Acts 10 highlights one of the greatest barriers they had yet to overcome. Peter, an obedient Jew, had never been unclean, so when God began to ask him to eat unclean foods he protested, “No Lord, I’ve never eaten anything unclean.” Three times, this happened. Immediately, Peter was asked to go to the home of Cornelius, a Gentile. No Distinction For a Jew to enter a Gentile home, they would be deemed unclean. Jews and Gentiles didn’t fellowship like that. But Peter, following the Lord, goes to the home of Cornelius and declares what God was teaching him. “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him” (Acts 10:34–35 ESV), Peter said, and goes on to preach the gospel to them. Before he finishes preaching, the Holy Spirit interrupts. “While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles” (10:44–45). How did they know that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was poured out on the Gentiles? “For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God” (10:46). The evidence of tongues demonstrated to the Jews that Gentiles had been baptized in the Holy Spirit. For the first time, they realized that God truly wanted to save non-Jews and welcome them into his family. God bore witness to what Peter was learning, God accepts all nations. Evidential tongues bore witness that God accepts all peoples into His family. One scholar noted that in the Old Testament, the presence of God was the distinguishing marker of Israel, making them distinct from all the other nations. Now, God was declaring, through all the languages of the world, that that blessing now dwelt on all who came to Christ, regardless of their nationality. Evidential tongues served to evidence that God made no distinction between Jew and Gentile, but welcomed all into His family. Speaking in Tongues was a declaration that all nations were acceptable to God and welcomed into His presence. A Lasting Defense Immediately on the heels of this experience, Peter is called on to defend himself for violating the Jewish law and eating with Gentiles. What was his defense? “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?” Acts 11:15–17 (ESV) The baptism in the Spirit with evidential tongues was his defense for taking the gospel to non-Jews, and preaching the gospel to the nations. Four chapters later, the question of whether non-Jews needed to become Jews in order to fully follow Christ came up again. As Paul and Barnabas were preaching the gospel among the nations, Gentiles were being saved, and some thought they needed to become Jews and follow the law. What was Peter’s defense? “And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. Acts 15:8–9 (ESV)  A Declaration of God’s Heart
So what’s the big deal about speaking in tongues? It’s a declaration of God’s heart that all peoples be saved and come into the Kingdom. It’s a living demonstration that God wants all nations, tribes, and peoples to worship Him and know Him. One of the phrases that shows up throughout Acts 11 and 15 is “no distinction.” What better way to show that than filling His people with His Spirit, and giving them the languages of the world to declare His praise? If you’ve struggled with the idea of tongues as evidence of being Baptized in the Spirit, ask God to fill your heart for the nations and a passion for the mission of reaching the lost. Praise Him, and maybe, just maybe, you’ll find your praise coming out in a language you’ve never learned. Ask God to allow His heart to become His heart, and allow that heart to come out of your lips in worship, prayer, and praise. Ask God to fill you with His Spirit, and the sign will follow.  She was a British educator in the late 1800s, inspired by a painting by John Ruskin. In this painting, the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is pictured as descending upon, not only the disciplines of theology, but the seven liberal arts and sciences. Her name was Charlotte Mason. Mason explains the painting this way:
But the Florentine mind of the middle ages went further than this: it believed not only that the seven Liberal Arts were fully under the direct outpouring of the Holy Ghost, but that every fruitful idea, every original conception, whether in Euclid, or grammar, or music, was a direct inspiration from the Holy Spirit, without any thought at all as to whether the person so inspired named himself by the name of God, or recognized whence his inspiration came.[1] Every thought, idea, and original thought were believed to be inspired by the Spirit. Advancements in science, observations in nature, business ideas and principles—these are rooted in the Spirit of Pentecost, Who is the source of all knowledge and ideas. This idea of Charlotte Mason is called The Great Recognition. The Great Recognition For Charlotte Mason, the Great Recognition held that the Holy Ghost was the True Teacher, and that every good educator merely partners with Him in revealing the good, true, and beautiful ideas that are present in today’s world. Mason developed a powerful method of education, but her thoughts are somewhat unknown today, except in the homeschool movements and some small Christian school organizations. Mason’s method took the teacher off of center stage in order to make room for the Spirit. In many, many ways, Mason was years ahead of her time, truly a prophetess of education. Central to her ideas, especially in the education of children, was the cultivation of habits through the transformation of the mind. With insights into neuroscience years ahead of her time, Mason developed a pedagogy that cultivated habits of attention, imagination, and good work in children, preparing them for a life of learning long after their time in a classroom came to an end. Pentecostals Meet Charlotte Mason Pentecostals, meet Charlotte Mason. I’d like to introduce Pentecostals to the thoughts and methods of this British educator and her Spirit-dependent pedagogy. Now, Charlotte Mason was an Anglican, so she would not be a theological Pentecostal, yet I believe her philosophy of education falls right in line with what modern Pentecostal scholars are beginning to articulate. See, I believe Mason developed a pedagogy that aligns with Pentecostal epistemology. Cheryl Bridges-Johns and Jackie David Johns were some of the first Pentecostal theologians to put forth a distinctive approach to knowing for Pentecostals. In their article on a Pentecostal approach to group Bible study, they develop this idea of Pentecostal epistemology where “to know is to encounter.”[2] They contrast a Greek conception of knowledge, where one learns about something, with a Hebraic understanding that is relational. For Pentecostals, to know God is to encounter Him, not simply learn about Him. In a similar vein, Mason’s educational philosophy held that education is the science of relations.[3] Pentecostal Education Pentecostals, so often, have not put forth a vision of education rooted in their unique understanding of God and the Spirit. Instead, they often followed the educational vision of their evangelical and fundamentalist counterparts, rooted as they were in the intellectual ideas of the enlightenment and scientific approach to the world. Sure, our Bible schools had a hidden curriculum where the gifts of the Spirit interrupted the classroom, but our general teaching methods were not intentionally cultivated to make room for the Spirit. What if we truly welcomed the Holy Spirit into the heart if the teaching moment? A Pentecostal Method of Education Modern scholars such as Amos Yong, James K. A. Smith, and the Johns have really opened up a dialogue about what Pentecostal education should look like. My doctoral work really introduced me to the thoughts of these Pentecostals and put forth a challenge that Pentecostal epistemology necessitates an intentional Pentecostal approach to teaching. My past two years in a Charlotte Mason school have put some flesh on the bones of a Spirit-dependent learning environment, shaped by a Pentecostal epistemology. I’ve seen Charlotte Mason’s philosophy at work, as her profoundly simple philosophy has filled the minds and hearts of students with living ideas across a very broad curriculum. As I’ve done so, I’ve found so many parallels with my research into Pentecostal education. What if Pentecostals taught from the foundation of The Great Recognition? What if we truly believed the Spirit was THE teacher, and our job was to cultivate an environment in which He was filling the minds of our students with great ideas? What if we too often get in the way when we teach, instead of putting great books into the hands of our students and letting the Spirit develop their minds? What if we were intentionally Pentecostal in the classroom? What if we let the outpoured Spirit breathe upon every book and every idea, from Systematic Theology to Introduction to Biology, from Homiletics to English Grammar? Perhaps this Divine Breath would reignite the minds and hearts of students with life-changing, world-shaking ideas that might just change the culture. Lord, let it be. [1]Charlotte Mason, “The Great Recognition,” The Parents Review, 7 (1896); https://www.amblesideonline.org/PR/PR07p052GreatRecognition.shtml. [2]Jackie David Johns and Cheryl Bridges Johns, “Yielding to the Spirit: A Pentecostal Approach to Group Bible Study,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology, 1, no. 1 (1992): 110. [3]M. Owen, “Education is the Science of Relations,” The Parent’s Review 16, no. 1 (1905). https://charlottemasonpoetry.org/education-is-the-science-of-relations/.  I’m odd and I know it. A Pentecostal who appreciates the church calendar? Who among the Pentecostals recognizes the seasons of the church calendar? Who among the Pentecostals uses the lectionary? And sacraments? About 5 years ago, I discovered the liturgical year and the lectionary. Probably through my engagement with scholars like Scot McKnight and N. T. Wright, I discovered a different approach to church life shaped by the story of Christ: Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Easter, Pentecost, and the Season After Pentecost. Some of those terms you’ve probably heard, others may be new or foreign if you come from a Pentecostal background. Pentecostals and liturgy are not often thought of together, yet Andrew Wilson wrote a book a few years ago that suggests that charismatic experience and the liturgy are not enemies. In fact, he argues for what he calls “Eucharismatic Worship,”[1] based on his study of 1 Corinthians, particularly chs. 11-14, that when the church comes together, there’s the presence of the Charismatic and the Eucharistic. Chapter 11 gives instruction on the practice of the sacrament of communion while 12-14 deal with the manifestation of the spiritual gifts. Thus, Paul believed that the Lord’s Supper and Prophecy, Communion and Speaking in Tongues, belonged together in the worship of the church. Thus, the eucharist and the charismatic are both elements of a Biblical worship service. Further, Paul recognized the timing of Pentecost as he set his travel schedule with the Corinthians (1 Cor. 16:8-9). This recognition of the feast of Pentecostal suggests that the worship calendar informed his travel schedule. Did Paul use a liturgical calendar? Are such practices Pentecostal, though? A Rejection of Formalism Early Pentecostals, especially in the Assemblies of God, struggled with the perceived deadness and ritualism they perceived in the liturgical churches. Their stance against religious formalism led them to distance themselves, even in their language, from the ideas of liturgy and sacraments, choosing rather to refer to them as ordinances and ceremonies.[2] In his article on Pentecostal liturgy, J. C. Holsinger highlights that despite this rejection, ceremonies and ordinances are still important elements of a culture. He points specifically to the marriage ceremony where couples repeat very similar words as they affirm their vows to one another. He states, “one of the most valuable purposes of ceremony—to educate and reaffirm important truths held in common, not just to provide a private or personal experience.”[3] Too often, however, as Holsinger notes, we have become such an individualistic culture that our church landscape has been so focused on individual spiritual experience that we’ve missed the larger, culture-shaping ordinances and ceremonies that remind us who we are as the community of God. Even in affirming these things, Holsinger still looks down on the idea of “liturgy” and “liturgical” worship.  Other Pentecostals have often recognized that sometimes the liturgical practices can, in a sense, be used to cover otherwise pagan lifestyles. Blanche King writes of those who practice the season of Lent first engaging in all sorts of gluttony and immortality before entering into a time of consecration and reflection in Lent.[4] He also suggests that the times of consecration and repentance in such liturgical seasons of Lent are present in Pentecostal revivals and thus unnecessary in the Pentecostal church. Perhaps he’s right. But what if we do need structured times of remembrance to shape our imaginations and lead us into the various seasons of a healthy Christian life? What if there are seasons, ordinances, and practices that, if present on a regular basis, remind us of who we are? An Embrace of the Reminder While I would say that the majority of Pentecostals probably follow the perspectives above in a rejection of liturgy and ritual, that cannot be said of all. As I was combing the pages of past Pentecostal periodicals on the subject, there are small articles and suggestions that the church calendar and her seasons can actually become part of a Pentecostal community. In April 1956, the Pentecostal Holiness Advocate included an editorial on the Church calendar, explaining the various times and seasons. Within that article, there’s an interesting, balanced perspective on these issues: “Our church does not go in for the paraphernalia of high church ritualism. And it's well we don't. But by the same token it is entirely possible to swing so far from this that we reach the other extreme of missing many significant and spiritual events.”[5] After the highlights of Easter, Eastertide continues to celebrate the 40 days Jesus walked with the disciples, leading up to Pentecost. In another editorial, the Advocate suggests that Pentecostals embrace this season to engage in active discipleship in Pentecostal doctrine: encourage reading, preach a series of sermons, plan prayer meetings, and conduct revivals.[6] What if we fully embraced the seasons of the church calendar and found Pentecostal expressions of discipleship within each season? There are many Pentecostals, hungry for a rooted, historical faith, that have truly been moving towards more liturgical practices. In fact, there are many former Pentecostals who have transitioned to the Anglican denomination and style of worship. Known as the Convergence Movement, there are whole denominations of Charismatic Anglicans uniting Charismatic experience of the Holy Spirit with Anglican, High-Church liturgy. William DeArteaga has observed this movement and writes of the growth of these new expressions of Charismatic Christianity. He notes some important issues, however, as many of these new Charismatic Anglicans have a tendency to emphasize the liturgy over the Charismatic. He writes:
Does Liturgy always lead to formalism? Is it possible to embrace structured remembrance in pursuit of revival? A Piece of Our Heritage There’s a forgotten link in Pentecostal history that might suggest that there’s a place for liturgy in the midst of revival fire. I know, I know. That sounds like a contradiction. What does the Anglican Prayer Book have to do with Pentecostal revival? Well, just ask John Wesley about that. DeArteaga notes that John Wesley remained a committed Anglican throughout his life, and oversaw the kindling of revival that birthed the Methodist movement globally. His revivals were marked by manifestations of the Holy Spirit that mirrored those of Toronto or Brownsville, where openness led of bodily experiences of the Spirit’s power such as laughing in the Spirit or falling under the power.[8] In fact, the Wesley brothers pursued an openness to the Spirit while at the same time distancing themselves from emotionalism and fanaticism. While the early Wesleyan revivals were very Pentecostal, they were also very liturgical or sacramental. The Wesleyan holy clubs were nicknamed “The Sacramentarians” because they took communion weekly.[9] Wesley used the Book of Common Prayer to guide the worship of the Methodists, but edited it to leave more room for the Spirit. Later holiness leaders followed suit. Phineas Bresee, the founder of the Church of the Nazarene, followed much of the Methodist Discipline in organizing his worship, but as his biographer put it, “While the Nazarenes respected traditional forms of worship and sometimes drew on them, they were interested primarily in the spiritual vitality that had produced those historic forms.”[10] Nazarenes originally called themselves the Pentecostal Church of the Nazarene, but later dropped Pentecostal because they did not embrace the Pentecostal distinctive of evidential tongues. Bresee’s first church, founded in 1898, was nicknamed “The Glory Barn.” There was a pursuit of Spiritual fulness and fire, even if they rejected the evidential doctrine of tongues. Today, there are Nazarenes who are fully evangelical in their worship and yet embrace elements of the liturgical worship such as the use of the lectionary in preaching. In my opinion, they offer some of the best examples of evangelical, sacramental worship in the Wesleyan spirit. Pentecostals and Liturgy I want to suggest that Pentecostals be open to the Spirit in the ordinances and liturgy of worship. Perhaps an embrace of the church calendar could structure our life together and aid us in forming disciples of Christ. What would Liturgical, Classical Pentecostal worship look like? What could it be like for the fires of Pentecost to burn bright in churches that build their life together around the story of Christ? What could the power of the Spirit bring to the baptismal waters and communion tables if the real presence of Christ were recognized? I, in no way, want to argue for cold formalism or dead ritualism. I do, however, wonder if our Wesleyan heritage could inform our worship where structured fires burn strategically. What if the next Pentecostal revival was a controlled burn? Could the liturgy help form people for Pentecostal fullness? [1]Andrew Wilson, Spirit and Sacrament: An Invitation to Eucharismatic Worship (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2018). [2]J. C. Holsinger, “Pentecostal Liturgy?,” Advance, 30, no. 5 (1994): 38. [3]Holsinger, 38. [4]Blanche L. King, “The ‘Lenten Season’—Is it Past?,” Pentecostal Holiness Advocate, 46, no. 50 (1963): 2. [5]Dallas M. Tarkenton, “The Church Calendar,” Pentecostal Holiness Advocate, 39, no. 48 (1956): 2. [6]Dallas M. Tarkenton, “Easter to Pentecost,” Pentecostal Holiness Advocate, 39, no. 44 (1956): 2. [7]William DeArteaga, “The Wesleyan Revival as a Model for the Convergence Movement,” Refleks, 5, no. 1 (2006): 79. [8]DeArteaga, 85. [9]DeArteaga, 85. [10]Carl Bangs, Phineas F. Bresee: His Life in Methodism, the Holiness Movement, and the Church of the Nazarene (Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press, 1995), 231.  As Pentecostal people, we love the power of the Spirit of God. Pentecostals are a people defined by a desire to see people step into the New Testament experience of the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Pentecostalism began with hungry people desiring more of the Holy Spirit, and specifically to find out the biblical sign they had been brought into Fullness of the Spirit. Students at Charles Parham’s Bethel Bible School in Topeka, Kansas read the book of Acts, and came to believe that speaking in other tongues was the initial physical sign one had been baptized in the Holy Spirit.
Power for Service Many of these early Pentecostals were baptized in the Holy Spirit, packed their bags in a coffin, and headed overseas to give their lives as missionaries for Christ. The missional, service impulse that flooded their souls with the filling of the Spirit was exceptional. Early leaders emphasized that Spirit-baptism brought power for witness and service, and rightly so, for Acts 1:8 clearly states “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (ESV). Power to be a witness is a primary purpose of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Power for Life If you look a bit further back to the roots of this movement, you’ll find the holiness movement. Just before the outbreak of the modern classical Pentecostal movement, many Holiness people were preaching the baptism in the Holy Spirit as power for life, power for sanctification. The Holiness Movement emphasized that through the power of the Holy Spirit, Christians could be made holy and transformed inwardly. Through the Spirit, Christians had the power to love God and love neighbor as God desired. This, they believed, was the fruit of the fullness of the Spirit—a life of love. Paul taught this fruit of transformation in our lives: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Gal. 5:22-23). Both/And Pentecostals – Life and Service If you look at the confession of faith of the Assemblies of God, the Statement of Fundamental Truths, our belief in the baptism in the Holy Spirit embraces both. Speaking of the Baptism of the Spirit, we believe that “With it comes the enduement of power for life and service, the bestowment of the gifts and their uses in the work of the ministry.”[1] Life and service. I believe much harm has come in modern Pentecostalism because we’ve forgotten our roots. We miss that dynamic combination of both life and witness, holiness and service, in the power of the Holy Spirit. The Fullness of the Spirit will bring much more than just speaking in tongues. It will also help you live a holy life. The Baptism in the Spirit brings spiritual power both to make you holy in your life and anoint your lips of witness. Church, let’s embrace a both/and faith from our heritage. Let us never be content with power for service without a transformed life. May we see the enduement of power as power for both life and witness, and may our lives and lips both be anointed to testify to the transforming grace of God. This article was originally written for publication in The Epistle, the publication of Abundant Life Assembly of God. [1]“Assemblies of God Statement of Fundamental Truths,” Assemblies of God USA, available from: https://ag.org/Beliefs/Statement-of-Fundamental-Truths; accessed 27 March 2025.  Goddess of nature, childbirth, wildlife, healing, the hunt, sudden death, animals, virginity, young women, and archery. If there’s one topic that often divides the body of Christ, it is often the role of women in ministry. There are usually two sides in this debate: those that believe God reserves leadership roles in the church to men and those that embrace women filling all levels of spiritual leadership. In theological terms, these two camps can be called complementarianism and egalitarianism. Usually, most people fall within a spectrum. It isn’t always a black and white issue within human hearts.
In complete honesty, this has been an issue I have wrestled off and on for years as I’ve studied the Bible. I’ve always believed that women can preach and teach the Word of God, yet I’ve wrestled with certain positions of leadership being held by women. Texts like 1 Timothy 2:12 seem on the surface to restrict the role of women in church leadership. In Bible college I actually wrote a paper on this text in which I concluded that women should not serve as lead or senior pastors. Yet as I have walked through some studies over the past few years, I have come to see that we often completely misunderstand this text. I want to pose that this text, rather than restricting women from the pulpit, actually brings correction and direction for women to pursue spiritual leadership in a godly and dignified way. 1 Timothy was written to the church at Ephesus, a church under the severe threat of false teaching. Paul is trying to protect the bride of Christ from falsehood throughout the entire letter, and it seems that many of these false teachers were targeting women and leading them astray. Rather than completely ban women from preaching, let me suggest that Paul is taking the unbridled passion of women under these false teachers to domineer and usurp men with false teaching, and instead bringing them correction and direction to be true ministers of Christ and His Word. Let me first tell you why I believe it is impossible for this text to believe that a woman cannot teach a man in church or pastor a church, and then address what I believe this text is teaching about women and spiritual leadership. What It Cannot Mean A cursory reading of Acts brings one into the story of Priscilla, Aquilla, and the Ephesian church. In Acts 18, Paul joins with a husband and wife in Corinth where he ministers bivocationally and teaches the Word of God. They become a part of the missionary band, and travel with Paul for a while, and then stop in Ephesus where they minister to a particular man named Apollos. Notice what the Bible says: “So, he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.” (Act 18:26 NKJV) Timothy served as the overseer of the Ephesian church, the very church in which Priscilla and Aquilla had ministered. We see in Acts 18, Priscila is teaching Apollos in Ephesus, helping him find the ways of God more fully. This means that the Ephesian Church had experienced a woman teacher of the Word of God, actually correcting another teacher. How could Paul be restricting something that in 1 Timothy that the church had already experienced? Further, Priscilla and Aquilla hosted house churches in Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome. The Bible records the names of Priscilla and Aquilla in a way that demonstrates an interchangeable equality in the roles and responsibilities they had within their house churches. Priscilla was a pastor-teacher in the Ephesian church, so 1 Timothy cannot restrict women from the office of pastor. Outside of this context, the Bible shows women as filling almost all of the 4 (or 5) functions of Ephesians 4:11. Junia is a woman named as an apostle (Romans 16:7), Anna is named as a prophetess (Luke 2:36), the Samaritan woman evangelizes Samaria after meeting Jesus (John 4) and women first proclaimed the resurrection (Matt. 28). Priscilla serves as a pastor/teacher. Further, Phoebe is named as occupying the office of deacon (Romans 16:1). Not one office of spiritual leadership is closed to women biblically. So, what then do we do with 1 Timothy 2, where Paul says “I do not permit a woman to teach?” Let me work through this passage, beginning at verse 11, and continuing on into chapter 3 to show that Paul is bringing correction, not prohibition, to the ministry of women in Ephesus. He is going to correct their doctrine and demeanor before pointing them in the direction of spiritual leadership. Demeanor The first issue that Paul addresses when it comes to women ministering in the church is that of their demeanor. It seems that a big part of the problem with women in Ephesus was the way in which they were pursuing spiritual authority within the church. Two words in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 bring out the demeanor that Paul was confronting. The desired behavior was a demeanor of silence or quietness that should accompany their learning. It is not a requirement of absolute silence, as in never speaking, but a call to a humble, quiet demeanor in learning the Word of God. Thayer defines this word as “description of the life of one who stays at home doing his own work, and does not officiously meddle with the affairs of others.”[1] It’s a descriptor of a lifestyle that doesn’t stir up others or lord it over them, but learns in humility. It’s related to the term earlier in 1 Timothy 2, where Paul writes “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence” (1 Timothy 2:2b). The word translated peaceable comes from the same root as the word silence. Paul is speaking to a tranquil and peaceable demeanor, not requiring the absolute silence of women in the church. Further, the word that Paul uses in verse 12 to describe the prohibited activity of women regarding authority speaks against a demeanor of abuse and usury that seemed to be infecting some of the people of the Ephesian church. Authentein is a Greek word translated various ways in English: “have authority” (NKJV), “exercise authority” (ESV), “rule a husband” (YLT). The actual use of the word is much more defined and harsher than the mere exercise of authority. In classical Greek, the word was first used to describe a murderer, and later came to describe someone who served as a mastermind or author of an act of violence.[2] It is used of perpetrators in contexts of murder, suicide, and violence.[3] Over time, it came to mean “master,” and is translated in one first century letter as “I had my way with him.”[4] As you can see, there are violent and manipulative tones to the word that would necessitate a prohibition from Paul. “I do not permit a woman to teach in a way that violently manipulates and controls a man,” might be one way of looking at what Paul was prohibiting. Paul wanted peaceable, gentle leadership, not domineering and violent control. Doctrine Beyond demeanor, Paul next outlines a correction to the doctrine being spread by many of these women. That word authentein can also be understood as describing the author or creator of something, and is used in the early church fathers to speak of God’s creative acts.[5] There was also a false teaching spreading in the regions of Anatolia that all things began with the Great Mother (Artemis, Diana, and later Eve), and that she had not sinned or been deceived because she had a special knowledge (gnosis) that guided and protected her.[6] These same teachers had a negative view of childbirth, and often discouraged women from having children, something God designed as a part of the mutual cultural mandate of Genesis 1. Notice that this makes perfect sense of Paul’s description of Creation in 1 Timothy 2: For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control. (1Ti 2:13-15 NKJV) Paul gives a line by line correction to this false teaching. Adam was formed first, not Eve or the Great Mother. Further, Eve was deceived by Satan and fell into sin. Also, she will be saved by faith and faithfulness to what God designed for the marriage relationship, namely the reproduction of faithful image-bearers. He directly confronts this doctrinal heresy being spread in this region by some Gnostic Christian sects. Direction After correcting their doctrine and their demeanor, Paul gives direction to women and men desiring to serve God’s church in spiritual leadership. “It is true that anyone who desires to be a church official wants to be something worthwhile” (1Ti 3:1 CEV). Many translations of 1 Timothy 3 translate the text using an assumed masculine gender, which used to be the case when addressing a mixed audience. “Hey guys” isn’t a statement that a group made up of entirely males, but an inclusive term often used to address a mixed group. What’s telling for me, though, is the gender of the term “church official” or “office of a bishop.” This word is a feminine singular term in the Greek, interesting to be sure, in that it appears directly after a discussion of the role of women in the church. Could it be that Paul, rather than restricting women’s roles in the church is actually encouraging them to pursue service as an elder or deacon? Therefore, if any [woman] desires the office of a bishop, [she] desires a noble task. (1 Tim. 3:1) Paul is giving direction to women who desired to serve God’s church. They were to do so sound in doctrine and humble in demeanor, and in line with the character qualities necessary for spiritual leadership, which Paul goes on to outline in chapter 3, first for elders (3:1-7), and then for deacons (3:8-13). What about that requirement that elders and deacons be “the husband of one wife?” Surely that restricts service to men, right? Well, not exactly. See, when it came to marital faithfulness, men had particular issues that women didn’t normally face. Women were expected to live faithful to their husbands, and faced harsh penalties for infidelity. Not so with men, however. Listen to a quote from one ancient source, describing the relationships of a typical man: “We have hetairai for the sake of pleasure, concubines for the daily health of our bodies, and wives to give us legitimate offspring and be the faithful guardians of our homes.”[7] The hetairai were a sect of professional escorts, reputable prostitutes if you will, that would accompany men to social banquets and functions. Rather than take their wives, they would take an escort to their company party, and have pleasure with them as part of the night. Further, regular relations with their slaves was a part of satisfying their sexual appetites. Their legitimate wives served to produce legitimate heirs and to manage their household.[8] Into this morass of immorality, Paul writes that a man was to be a “one-woman man.” That makes total sense when put against the historical culture into which it was written. Marital faithfulness was to be a characteristic of any man who sought spiritual leadership. He wouldn’t have escorts and concubines. He would be faithful to his wife. The phrase seems to become synonymous with monogamy, as Paul later takes the same idea and applies it to widows: “Do not let a widow under sixty years old be taken into the number, and not unless she has been the wife of one man” (1Ti 5:9 NKJV). The point is faithful monogamy within marriage. Thus, anyone with a God-given call and desire could fill the office of elder or deacon in the church, providing sound, spiritual leadership. They were to do so with a quiet demeanor, with sound doctrine, and with the biblical direction of character qualities laid out to spiritual leaders. Conclusion No, Paul doesn’t restrict the ministry of women, instead he gives correction and direction for their faithful service as both elders and deacons in Christ’s church. So, my friends, let her preach! Open your pulpits and your churches to the God-called daughters, Spirit-empowered prophetesses, and women gifted to lead. *This is an edited, rerelease of a blog I wrote 5 years ago in 2020. A few changes have been made, and a footnote edited to aid in the study of the topic. [1]Thayer,” Hesuchia,” E-Sword. [2]Marg Mowzcko, “ The Meaning OF Authentein in 1 Timothy 2:12, with a Brief History of Authent-Words,” Marg Mowzcko; available from: https://margmowczko.com/authentein-1-timothy2_12/; accessed 6 August 2020. [3]Ibid. [4]Ibid. [5]Deborah Gill and Barbara Cavaness, God’s Women: Then and Now (Colorado Springs: Authentic, 2004), 153. [6]Ibid. [7]Julia Neuffer, “First-Century Cultural Backgrounds in the Greco-Roman Empire,” Adventist Archives, available from: https://www.adventistarchives.org/first-century-cultural-backgrounds-in-the-greco-roman-empire.pdf; accessed 27 March 2025. [8]Ibid.  Bethel Bible School in Topeka, KS (From Marion Doss from Scranton, Kansas, USA) If there’s one thing that Pentecostals are not exactly known for, it’s education. Most Pentecostals are not known for their pursuit of education and advanced training. Interestingly, there’s a rich history of education within the early days of the Pentecostal revival, some of it that is not well known. Many Pentecostals know the origin story of Classical Pentecostalism, a movement that began in the study of scripture at Charles Parham’s Bethel Bible Institute in Topeka, Kansas. It was there that students felt, through their study of the book of Acts, that the initial sign of being baptized in the Holy Spirit was speaking in tongues. As students began to seek more of God, Agnes Ozman was the first to receive her Pentecostal experience in 1901. This was one of the major centers out of which the Classical Pentecostal movement arose—a Bible institute. Many Bible institutes began in those days to train Pentecostals. Pentecostals were not limited to Bible schools, however. Sometime last year, I began to notice an interesting piece of Pentecostal history. As I read through historical periodicals from the early days of the Pentecostal revival, I stumbled upon something that I think I missed in my study of Pentecostal history. Alongside early Bible institutes, there were a number of literary schools developed for the training of Pentecostal people. The Pentecostal Bible Institute As the fires of the Pentecostal revival began to burn, so did a desire to learn and grow in a knowledge of God’s Word. Within 10 years of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Topeka and 5 years of the move of the Spirit at Azusa Street, a number of Pentecostal Bible schools began operating throughout the United States. Coupled with camp meetings, people were urged to bring supplies to stay for an extended time of training.[1] One of these schools met for three months before the first General Council of the Assemblies of God in Hot Springs, Arkansas in 1914. A man by the name of Howard Goss rented the opera house for his church and D. C. O. Opperman conducted a school in that three months; students lived in a large building a mile away from the opera house and then would attend Bible studies in the opera house where the goal was to learn “how to pray, how to study the word, and how to know God and walk with him.”[2] A Bible school in Fort Worth, Texas provided training ground for a number of early Pentecostal leaders.[3] A S. Copley and J. R. Flower conducted a Bible school in Kansas City in the summer of 1909.[4] A later Bible school was started by D. W. Kerr in 1919 in San Francisco. Pacific Pentecostal Bible School opened on October 1, 1919, after a 12-year recognition of the need for a West Coast training center.[5] Partnered with the Glad Tidings Mission, it was believed that this school would become a strategic center for training works and sending them all around the world for Christian work. One of the hallmarks of these early Pentecostal Bible schools was a strong emphasis on practice. It was said of the Pacific School that in addition to courses in music and preaching, lectures and messages on missions, “There will be given abundant practice in leadership of meetings and daily practical work in street meetings, hospitals, and homes that the servants of the Lord in training may be thoroughly furnished unto every good work.”[6] The practical focus of these schools stemmed from their heart for the life of the Spirit. Gohr said Opperman sought to balance education and training because he did not want intellectual development to stifle or “overpower the deeper life of the soul.”[7] He also desired trained workers who did not land on the mission field with no knowledge of what to do. He felt that they should “learn to do by doing” and learn through Bible studies paired with prayer, fasting, and other practical ministry experiences. Such an ideal serves to express what scholars have identified as the interplay of experience, pragmatism, and action within Pentecostalism.[8]  Pentecostal Literary Schools In addition to these Bible schools, there was also a push for what are identified as literary schools. From what I can tell in my reading, literary schools were elementary and high schools operated by Pentecostals for the education of their children. As early as 1914, the General Council of the Assemblies of God officially recommended the literary school of R. B. Chisholm in Union, Mississippi for their people, and further suggested that their people avail themselves of any other Full Gospel or Pentecostal schools near them.[9] Interestingly, and importantly, there was a distinction between the literary training of children in the literary schools and that offered by Bible schools, such as T. K. Leonard’s Gospel School in Findlay, Ohio, a school devoted to Bible training.[10] The Pentecostal Holiness Church also offered multiple Bible and Literary schools: Falcon Holiness School, Holmes Bible and Missionary Institute, and Franklin Springs Institute.[11] There was distinction, however, in that the Holmes Bible and Missionary Institute was more focused on ministerial training, while Falcon and Franklin Springs focused more on the literary training of children.[12] Literary schools provided comprehensive education for children, with the Franklin Springs school advertising courses from 1st grade through 11th grade, and covering the standard curriculum of liberal arts training.[13] There was a Bible piece to the education, but the main focus was on the literary training. Daniel C. O. Opperman, after many years of running short-term Bible schools, opened a combined Bible and literary school in Eureka Springs, Arkansas, dedicating a large hotel on August 15, 1915.[14]
Could we have forgotten a major piece of our discipleship, especially that of our children? What would it look like for Pentecostal churches and people to catch, once again, a vision for the Pentecostal literary school? Now, I must admit, I’m biased. I teach third grade at an incredible Christian school in Southern Illinois, Ambleside School of Marion. I work in an environment where children are receiving a liberal arts education through an environment and a pedagogy that is incredibly dependent on the Holy Spirit. What would it look like for Pentecostals to reawaken this piece of our history and pick up the mantle once again? I’d like to make two suggestions that I think could spearhead the conversation for us today. An Incredible Heritage to Rediscover Gabriel Pethel notes that the rise of the modern Christian school movement coincided with the rise of the modern fundamentalist movement.[15] It began to counter the enlightenment, modernist worldview that was seeping its way into the educational systems of the day. In light of the cultural upheaval of the sexual revolution and, sadly, the desegregation of public schools, Christians flocked to Christan schools where their students would be sustained in a fundamentalist worldview, protected and shielded from the forces of secularism and cultural instability. Fundamentalism, however, has a number of flaws in its worldview, and tends not to be friendly to Pentecostalism. Most fundamentalists are not open to foundational Pentecostal beliefs in the least, and many are actively opposed to Pentecostal theology and practice. Two of the leading curriculum distributors of Christian educational materials are operated by Christian universities that are actively opposed to Charismatic practices. One web-site articulates, “Sign gifts as mentioned in the New Testament and observed in the early Church have fulfilled their purpose and are not a normative pattern for today.”[16] Another, “We are opposed to the charismatic movement and its sign manifestations, such as speaking in tongues.”[17] I am not saying that these resources are bad, in fact I used books from both publishers in my Christian education in high school. I only bring it to attention to discuss the possibility that it’s time for Pentecostals to reawaken Pentecostal education for a new generation. I’d like to suggest that the Pentecostal literary schools give a foundation and heritage for Pentecostals that pre-dates the modern Christian school movement. Pentecostals joined Catholics, Lutherans, and Mennonites who had begun to pick up the torch of education for the children of their movements as modernism began seeping its way in. Pentecostals have a history of teaching and educating children that traces back to the earliest days of the movement as schools were opened and recommended by the leading Classical Pentecostal denominations and fellowships in their infancy. It was desired that Pentecostal people find and support schools that would provide a Pentecostal education for their children. What if we recaptured that heritage today, and started a movement of Pentecostal schools, distinct from the modern fundamentalist roots of the modern Christian school movement? What might that look like? What if there were methods that aligned more foundationally with a Pentecostal worldview? I will write on this in the future, but through my training and experience, I have seen the philosophy of Charlotte Mason embrace a Spirit-driven educational model that shares some foundational practices that align with a Pentecostal worldview. A Sustainable Educational Partnership Not only do we have a heritage to rediscover, but I believe there could be a strategic partnership for Pentecostal colleges and universities. It’s no secret that Bible colleges are hurting today. The health of many, many Bible colleges is in question and many are struggling to stay afloat financially. Dwindling enrollments have made the sustainability of such schools extremely difficult. Many of these Bible and Literary Schools of early Pentecostals operated the school for children but also offered a three-year Bible curriculum for focused ministerial training as well. Could this be a missing piece in our educational strength and stability? What if we opened Christian schools, devoted to a Pentecostal education for our children, and also shared space and resources for ministry training schools? What if the faculty of the Christian school were trained and equipped to teach in the Bible school as well? What if the sharing of resources created a sustainable path of Christian education for all students, and created a realistic pathway to train the next generation, not only for vocational ministry by also for service in all God’s vocations throughout the world? Conclusion I certainly do not have all the answers for Pentecostal education, but I’ve begun to ask some questions. I think more Pentecostals need to begin to ask questions. A few Sundays ago, my pastor preached an incredible sermon about re-digging the wells of our heritage. He spoke on re-digging wells of Spirit-baptism, sanctification, healing, and other Pentecostal distinctives. Maybe it’s time to re-dig the wells of the Pentecostal literary school. Maybe it’s time for Pentecostals to re-embrace a vision of a liberal arts education for their children. What if we had Christian schools that did not simply follow the trends of Fundamentalist Christian education but put forth a distinctive Spirit-filled education? What if our practices were different from the local elementary school down the street and embraced a Pentecostal worldview? I’d like to invite you to join me in a dream—a dream for Pentecostal education. References: [1]Glenn Gohr, “D.C.O. Opperman and Early Ministry Training Short-term Bible Schools,” Assemblies of God Heritage 11, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 5. [2]Ibid. [3]Ibid. [4]A. S. Copley and J. R. Flower, “Summer Bible Schol in Kansas City, MO,” The Pentecost 1, no. 6 (April-May 1909): 1-2. [5]D. W. Kerr, “Pacific Pentecostal Bible School,” The Latter Rain Evangel 304 & 305 (September 6, 1919): 8. [6]Ibid. [7]Gohr, 6. [8]Ulrik Josefsson and Matthew T. Nowachek, “Practitioners and Pentecostalism: An Epistemological Investigation into Learning as Doing, Experience, and Reflection,” Pentecostal Education Journal 7, no. 1 (Spring 2022): 102-103. [9]General Council of the Assemblies of God, Combined Minutes of the General Council of the Assemblies of God in the United States of America, Canada, and Foreign Lands (St. Louis, MO: Gospel Publishing House, 1914), 7. [10]Ibid. [11]G. F. Taylor, “Camp Meetings and Schools,” The Pentecostal Holiness Advocate 3, nos. 12-13 (July 1919): 1. [12]A. C. Holland, “Franklin Springs Institute,” The Pentecostal Holiness Advocate 4, no. 13 (July 29, 1920): 9. [13]“Franklin Springs Institute Literary and Bible School of the Pentecostal Holiness Church, ” The Pentecostal Holiness Advocate 5, no. 17 (August 25, 1921): 8. [14]Daniel C. O. Opperman, “Magnetic Hotel, Home for the Ozark Bible and Literary School, Dedicated to the Lord,” The Word & Witness 12, no. 9 (September 1915): 2. [15]Gabriel J. Pethel, Christian Education in the 21st Century: Renewing a Transformational Vision (Master’s thesis, Cedarville University, 2011), 32-33. [16]“Position Statements,” Bob Jones University, available from: https://www.bju.edu/about/positions.php; accessed 14 February 2025. [17]“Biblical Foundations,” Pensacola Christian College, available from: https://www.pcci.edu/about/biblical-foundations.aspx; accessed 14 February 2025. |
Dr. jake TrueDr. Jake True is a teacher, pastor, and scholar in Southern Illinois. He is a Pentecostal pastor at Abundant Life Assembly of God, and a teacher in a local Christian school. He loves exploring learning and discipleship, with an emphasis on the role of the Spirit in education. Archives
June 2025
Categories |
RSS Feed
|
The Pentecostal Teacher
|
Contact ME |