The doctrine of the Holy Spirit has been present from the time of the primitive church and on into the 20th century. However, generally speak­ing, what has been lacking is His concrete influence in the same way that was evident in the early days of Pentecost, in the primitive churches, and among the proclaimers of the gospel at that time. That faith returned and started to grow among the holiness movements in the United States in the 19th century. It was faith in the fact that the Holy Spirit can presently fill the believer so that he/she speaks in new tongues, can prophesy, or become a channel for another of the spiritual gifts. That phenomenon of speaking in tongues began to increasingly appear throughout the world. The Pentecostal movement did not start in a vacuum. Its explosive spread in the 20th century was, however, a surprise.

I will now more intensely observe some central elements in the work of the Holy Spirit. These seem to have a pivotal role in the composition of the Pentecostal DNA.

The Importance of Baptism with the Holy Spirit

In our lives we strive for things that have significance. An athlete is ready to work hard in order to reach his/her ultimate fitness. A cook is ready to spend time in creating a unique taste experience. A musician repeatedly practices tone sequence until he/she is finally satisfied.

Jesus gave the promise of sending the Holy Spirit as the source of power for us. He did not say he would send power, but that He would send the Holy Spirit which would bestow power in us. The Holy Spirit is a person, one of the three persons of the Godhead. That fact provides the correct basis of our attitude toward Him. Power is impersonal. The Holy Spirit sees, feels, rejoices, mourns, comforts, defends, equips, serves, exhorts, upholds. It is important to us that He entrusts us with power. The Old Testament already gave a clear message regarding the Holy Spirit: “Not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord Almighty.” (Zech. 4:6)

“When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting …All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit…” (Acts 2:1-4) Their waiting was rewarded. The followers of Jesus were always focused on seeing His kingdom estab­lished on earth. He had taught them to pray for the coming of God’s king­dom. The will of God would be realized in heaven as well as on earth. This right expectation needed a correction in emphasis. It was not for them to know exact timetables. (Acts 1:7) There was something more important. Jesus instructed them in this way: “But you will receive pow­er when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” (Acts 1:8)

Receiving power is connected to the infilling of the Holy Spirit. It has a special purpose. This power is not for bodybuilding nor for boasting about brawn. It is power for service. Jesus did not send His servants out with their own power. His intent was to equip them extraordinarily well for the task He was sending them to accomplish.

This chapter is an excerpt from Arto Hämäläinen’s book, The DNA of the Spirit-Empowered Christians and Churches (2023). Part of the Peace by the Spirit Series.

The promise of the Spirit to the disciples was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost. At the same it gave birth to the church. The apostles served the multitude of thousands by leading them to faith in Jesus and by bap­tizing them. The power given to them enabled this action. The power was there for a purpose, for spreading the gospel, for giving birth and providing care for the community of believers, and for the spreading of the kingdom of God.

On the day of Pentecost, Peter reminded his hearers of the promised infilling of the Holy Spirit for all believers. “The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off – for all whom the Lord our God will call.” (Acts 2:39) Unfortunately, this emphasis and the desire for this privilege among the believers started to weaken in the churches during the following centuries. References to the work of the Holy Spirit can still be found long after the first outpouring of the Spirit, but the workings of the Holy Spirit were no longer a center of focus. Here and there people received charismatic experiences. In my home country, Finland, there were people in a few revival movements in the Lutheran church a few hundred years ago who had charismatic experiences such as speaking in tongues.³ The same kind of experiences took place in the history of many other countries.

The attitude of waiting for a filling with the Spirit is no longer at the forefront but remains in the background in many Pentecostal churches. The teaching about Spirit baptism and the steps toward receiving it have been forgotten or at least is very limited. The danger is that the meaning of the infilling of the Spirit is not understood or the experience of the infilling is not expected. The whole picture has somehow become distort­ed. To be filled has become a norm which is to be accomplished in order not to appear to be a lower level Pentecostal. This can lead to mental pressure and to a loss of the whole kernel of the matter. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is a gift, not a result of merit. Jesus taught that God loved His children and gave them good gifts including the Holy Spirit. “If you then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him.” (Luke 11:13)

God is pleased to give the fullness of the Spirit. Therefore, it can be expected without stress or any pressure. It is a gift. What else can we do when receiving a gift than to be thankful? Gratefulness is the basic atti­tude in waiting for it.

The undisputed leader of the Swedish Pentecostal movement from its beginning and for a long time after was pastor Lewi Pethrus. To be filled with the Holy Spirit was so important to Pethrus that he travelled to Oslo to meet with Methodist pastor Thomas Barratt for three weeks. The latter had experienced Spirit baptism some time earlier in United States, and was now teaching it in Norway. During those weeks, however, Pethrus did not experience Spirit baptism. “But I received something almost as precious than the very experience,” he writes later. The key matter to him was to understand that it is received by faith, as Paul writes in his let­ter to the Galatians: “I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you learned?” (Gal. 3:2)⁴

In the New Testament we find that some people had a special gift in leading people to experience being filled with the Holy Spirit. Peter and John were sent to Samaria where a revival occurred as a result of the work of Philip the evangelist. After they laid their hands on the new believers, they experienced the infilling of the Holy Spirit. People like them which have this special gift have been and are still in the churches. In Finland, we have had pastor Arthur Kukkula lead thousands of believers into Spir­it baptism, among them the internationally known evangelist Reinhard Bonnke. It took place when Bonnke was still a young boy. Kukkula could not imagine this teenager becoming one of the most effective gospel preachers ever, leading more than 17 million people to Jesus.

I also experienced the infilling of the Holy Spirit as a young boy of 12 years in my home city of Lappeenranta in Finland. Pastor Arthur Kukku­la was praying for me, and I still remember the moment when I received this blessing. Suddenly I felt like heaven was opened and a stream was flowing from there, touching my innermost being. I started speaking in tongues. It was very natural and spontaneous, something which I could not initiate myself.

Although God uses special people for leading others into the fullness of the Holy Spirit, it is important to remember that He is sovereign and acts as He likes. Many people have experienced the filling without any laying on of hands or special prayer. It is the Lord himself who pours out His Spirit, and people are only His servants, but not always needed. The Holy Spirit can fill a person in bed at night, or when he/she is driving the car, when jogging, preparing food, or when reading the Bible, etc. The most important factor is the openness or preparedness of the individual. Mary, the mother of Jesus had a very unique task. Through an angel she received an invitation to fulfill it. A special act of the Holy Spirit was involved in that experience. In receiving a promise, Mary’s attitude was a model for anyone who is waiting for the presence and leading of the Holy Spirit. “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May your word to me be fulfilled.” (Luke 1:38)

We are the Lord’s servants. As Peter taught on the day of Pentecost, the Lord has promised the gift of the Holy Spirit to every believer. Along with Mary let us say: “May your word to me be fulfilled!”

How can we be sure we have been filled with the Holy Spirit? What are the signs of it according to the New Testament?

1. “All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.” (Acts 2:4)
2. “The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God.” (Acts 10:45-46)
3. “When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.” (Acts 19:6)

In all of these contexts, speaking in tongues is mentioned as a conse­quence of the infilling with the Holy Spirit. In one case, prophesying also is mentioned. Even there, however, speaking in tongues is mentioned. This has been the foundational teaching of classical Pentecostalism re­garding the evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit. This is a major difference between the charismatic movement and classical Pentecostal­ism. Although there is some variance among Pentecostals in relationship to this sign, it is very clear, e.g. in the World Assemblies of God Fellow­ship (WAGF). This Pentecostal family includes about 68 million Pente­costals (2018).

The breakthrough of global Pentecostalism took place in Los Angeles in 1906. The infilling with the Holy Spirit accompanied with the sign of speaking in tongues had been experienced in Topeka, Kansas already in 1901. Agnes Ozman, a student in the Bible school there became a witness to the fact that Pentecostal experiences are not a phenomenon only of the first century.⁷ During the entire second half of the 19th century, in the American Holiness movement, there was typically an expectation of the baptism in the Holy Spirit. That was the ground from which the Pente­costal revival emerged.

The same was experienced also in my home country of Finland. In the beginning of the last century, Pietari Brofeldt described the expectancy in this way: “We all were surrendered before the face of God in order to receive the Holy Spirit who was promised to all who believe. We were so given up to this issue that we came together in the mornings and often returned by the last tram stopping in a coffee house for eating a porridge.” Brofeldt assumed that there were no more devoted waiters on the infilling of the Holy Spirit elsewhere. His observation was that the concentration was so much on waiting that thanking in faith was left to a lesser role.⁸ In any case, in the long run, people experienced the infilling of the Spirit which led to the breakthrough of the Pentecostal movement in Finland.

Although the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Los Angeles was decisive for the spread of Pentecostalism more than one hundred years ago, Pen­tecostal experiences took place in various locations around the world. The revival in Wales and in the Ramabai Pandita’s girls’ home in India, and a strong spiritual movement in Korea, paved the way for the global Pentecostal movement and were the first heralds for it.⁹

Questions to church leaders:

1. When was the last time that you taught about the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the importance of the role of the Holy Spirit?
2. When was the last time you prayed for the infilling of the Holy Spirit for those who are seeking for it?

PR

This chapter is an excerpt from Arto Hämäläinen’s book, The DNA of the Spirit-Empowered Christians and Churches. Used with permission.

Scripture quotations taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

The “NIV,” “New International Version,” “Biblica,” “International Bible Society,” and the Biblica Logo are trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Biblica, Inc. Used with permission.

Notes

Please see Arto Hämäläinen’s book, The DNA of the Spirit-Empowered Christians and Churches for complete citations.

³ J. Ruohomäki, 273, Aikamedia, 2009.

⁴ Pethrus, 97.

⁵ Ibid., 101-103.

⁶ Miller, 2005, 332.

⁷ Synan, 2001, 1.

⁸ Brofeldt, 1932, 30.

⁹ Anderson, 2013, 25-36.

Perspectives on Spirit Baptism is a collection of five scholarly essays that define Spirit Baptism from five traditions: Reformed (Walter C. Kaiser), Pentecostal (Stanley M. Horton), Charismatic (Larry Hart), Wesleyan (H. Ray Dunning), and Catholic (Ralph Del Colle). Each view is formatted as a chapter, which concludes with responses from the remaining four scholars. The space afforded each view differs widely in some cases. For example, the Reformed view is only 22 pages, whereas the Charismatic view is 64 pages long; the difference (42 pages) is longer than the Catholic view (39 pages). The Pentecostal and Wesleyan views are 48 and 49 pages, respectively. Regarding the responses, there is again a disparity. Horton’s responses total only six pages, while Del Colle amasses just over 14 pages (the average was 10 pages).

All of the contributors to this volume are terminal-degreed scholars, but were they the most qualified? What brings this question to mind are the credentials of Kaiser and Horton. These are highly distinguished scholars, but their forte is the Old Testament, whereas Spirit Baptism is a New Testament phenomenon. Both men are venerable patriarchs (Horton will soon be 90) of their denominations and have high degrees of name-recognition (which publishers desire), but I sensed a lack of edge and freshness in their presentations and responses.

Kaiser starts things off with a historical summary of the responses to Pentecostal theology by John Stott (1964) and James Dunn (1970). Mysteriously, forty years after Stott’s dividing of Scripture into didactic and historical, Kaiser makes the same mistake, favoring Paul’s “didactic” passages over Luke’s “narrative.” Kaiser ignores three and a half decades of scholarship, beginning with I. Howard Marshall (1970) and continuing to this day, that corrects the misguided notion that Luke was merely a historian.

Neither does Kaiser fare well in the department of fairness. In his attempt to connect Spirit baptism with conversion, he quotes Pentecostal scholar R. P. Menzies in order to counter him with a quote from J. B. Shelton (also a Pentecostal), but he unfairly ends the Shelton quote at a point that serves his purpose. Had he continued with the same sentence, it would have destroyed his point. Here is Kaiser’s quotation from Shelton: “[Although] Luke is not averse to associating the Holy Spirit with conversion. [Kaiser even omits the ellipsis that indicates an omission.]” Here is the omitted clause and next clause: “…this is not his major pneumatological thrust. Some misunderstanding has arisen when the role of the Holy Spirit in empowering for witness is confused with conversion.” But as serious as this violation of scholarship is, it pales in significance to Kaiser’s later mischaracterization of Larry Hurtado’s position on tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit baptism. He quotes Hurtado approvingly when the latter confirms that the NT does not raise the question of the initial evidence of Spirit baptism. Then he chastises Hurtado for not thinking that this renders the doctrine invalid and for thinking that experience “can fill in the needed evidence here!” (30). Kaiser has grossly misread Hurtado, whose last clause of the quoted essay reads, “…the doctrine of initial evidence, whatever its historic significance for institutionalized Pentecostalism, should be set aside as a sincere but misguided understanding of Scripture.” Was Kaiser so desperate to compare the supposed experience-based Pentecostal view of Spirit baptism to Evangelical rationalism that he totally misread Hurtado? Whatever the case, Kaiser turns Hurtado into a tremendous strawman, and he owes Hurtado an apology, since Hurtado seems to be on Kaiser’s side. Hurtado is not a Pentecostal but appears more like a Lukan cessationist who does not believe Luke intended to teach Theophilus anything about the relationship between tongues and Spirit baptism even though Luke, following contemporary Greco-Roman rhetorical conventions, strategically linked them in pivotal scenes that demonstrate the programmatic Christ sayings of Luke 24:45-47 and Acts 1:4-8.

 The Praying in the Spirit Series. 

Robert Graves making a presentation at the 2014 meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies.

Robert W. Graves wrote Praying in the Spirit (Chosen Books) in 1987, when it received great reviews from a number of Pentecostal/charismatic scholars and leaders including John Sherrill, Dr. Vinson Synan, Dr. Gordon Fee, Dr. William Menzies, Dr. Howard Ervin, Dr. Walter Martin, and Dr. Stanley Horton. It is the great privilege of the Pneuma Review to republish it here.

What They’re Saying Now: Some Non-Charismatics Reevaluate Tongues (Winter 1999)
What They’re Saying Now: Some Non-Charismatics Reevaluate Tongues

Some Marvelous Effects of Praying in the Spirit (Spring 1999)
Some Marvelous Effects of Praying in the Spirit

Focus of the Charismatic Experience: Tongues, the Holy Spirit, or Christ? (Summer 1999)
Focus of the Charismatic Experience: Tongues, the Holy Spirit, or Christ?

Just What Is the Nature of the Prayer Language? (Fall 1999)
Just What Is the Nature of the Prayer Language?

Better Than I Was, Not Better Than You Are (Winter 2000)
Better Than I Was, Not Better Than You Are

Part 1 of: That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Spring 2000)
That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Part 1)

Part 2 of: That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Summer 2000)
That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Part 2)

Figure 1 from: That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Summer 2000)
Consensus on First Corinthians 13 by Non-Pentecostal Scholars

Figure 2 from: That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Summer 2000)
Proposed Dates of Charismata Cessation

Figure 3 from: That Glorious Day When Tongues are Not Needed: Until Then … (Summer 2000)
Charismata in Post-Apostolic Church

Editor Introduction: How the Prayer Language Comes (Fall 2000)
Editor Introduction: How the Prayer Language Comes

How the Prayer Language Comes (Fall 2000)
How the Prayer Language Comes

Now That You’ve Spoken in Tongues (Winter 2001)
Now That You’ve Spoken in Tongues

Singing in the Spirit (Spring 2001)
Singing in the Spirit

Afterword: Beyond the Charismatic Experience (Summer 2001)
Beyond the Charismatic Experience

Praying in the Spirit: Works Cited (Summer 2001)
Works Cited

The 1987 version of Praying in the Spirit is also available for sale here (Kindle and softcover).

In June 2017, Robert Graves wrote:

Praying in the Spirit was updated and expanded this year. It is more than 65% longer than the original with current updates, new arguments, and added chapters. Of course, it needed it after 30 years! If you’re buying a copy make sure you get the Empowered Life Academic edition, 280 pages (Empowered Life Academic is an imprint of Harrison House Publishers).

This index was later included in the Winter 2023 issue.

In recent years, there have been several books from Pentecostal/Charismatic scholars challenging what has been the traditional—or default—pre-Tribulation, pre-millennial view of the end times within many P/C circles. Among these are Daniel Isgrigg’s Imagining the Future, and Not Afraid of the Antichrist by Michael Brown and Craig Keener [Editor’s note: See Brian Roden’s review]. Assemblies of God missionary scholar Robert P. Menzies adds to this discussion with his 2022 book, The End of History: Pentecostals and a Fresh Approach to the Apocalypse. While Brown and Keener mainly focus on the exegetical deficiencies of the pre-Trib position, and Isgrigg focuses on the historical development of A/G eschatology to show that the pre-Trib view should not be the only acceptable option for that denomination’s ministers, Menzies goes a step further and actively advocates for an amillennial stance.

The book is divided into two main parts and includes seven appendices containing various Pentecostal statements of faith as well as shorter excurses that did not warrant chapter-length treatment. Part One of the book consists of two chapters, the first of which addresses problems with dispensationalism, with the second dealing with issues regarding premillennialism in general. Part Two consists of four chapters, each one presenting two theological affirmations Menzies sees as important for the Pentecostal movement. The eight theological affirmations in Part Two are interspersed with expository sermons drawn from the book of Revelation that address each pair of affirmations. Much of the content of the sermons reflects Menzies’ experience working with persecuted believers in eastern Asia.

In this chapter, the author also touches on the issues of whether Revelation’s chronology is one of linear progression or recapitulation; literal versus typological fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies; continuity and discontinuity regarding Israel and the Church; and whether Revelation’s prophecies extend and add to other New Testament prophecies about the end times or reaffirms them in a new context.

Chapter Two, “Premillennial Problems,” raises issues the author encounters with premillennialist interpretation in general (including historical or classical premillennialism). First, Menzies points out the “thousand years” of the Millennium is only mentioned in one place: Revelation 20:1–7. No other New Testament writer, nor the other books attributed to John, make any reference to it. Menzies, who finds himself more in the amillennial camp, encounters difficulty in dogmatically affirming a literal one thousand year reign based solely on a seven-verse passage. For his second objection to the premillennialist view, the author again raises the question of chronology in the Apocalypse, opting for a recapitulation pattern rather than a linear recounting of events. Menzies next deals with the binding of Satan, the question of two resurrections, and whether the nature of Christ’s reign is physical and political or spiritual. But even after arguing strongly against general premillennialist interpretations, he concludes the chapter saying, “The hermeneutical approach and theological perspective of historic premillennialists are actually much closer to those of most amillenialists than to those advocated by dispensational premillennialists” (84).

Part Two of the book is titled “A Fresh Approach,” and gets into the more practical outworkings of Pentecostal eschatology. Menzies here proposes eight affirmations to which Pentecostals should hold, while avoiding disputable minutiae:

• We believe in the personal, visible, and bodily return of our Lord Jesus Christ.
• We believe that Christ’s return is imminent—that it could happen at any time.
• When Christ returns, he will judge all people: the righteous, his faithful followers, will enjoy eternal and perfect fellowship with him; the unrighteous will experience eternal separation from him and his wrath.
• God will consummate his redemptive plan in response to the prayers of his people.
• In these “last days” the church is called to bear bold witness for Jesus in the power of the Spirit.
• With his first coming, Jesus inaugurates God’s kingdom by decisively defeating the power of Satan, sin, and death. With his second coming, Jesus consummates God’s kingdom by destroying evil and redeeming his creation.
• The culmination of God’s redemptive plan includes the transformation of our world and the resurrection of our bodies.
• In these “last days” Christ calls his followers to pursue holiness by persevering and remaining faithful, even unto death.

The expositions of Revelation that accompany each pair of affirmations could easily be turned into sermons to be utilized in local churches. In regard to preaching and teaching the Apocalypse, Menzies writes, “We desperately need to highlight the central truths of the book of Revelation and other key New Testament texts that speak of Christ’s second coming, the ‘blessed hope.’ But we need to do so in a manner that avoids sensationalism and exaggeration and which is rooted in sober-minded and clear exposition of the biblical text” (p. 94).

The book concludes with seven appendices, three of which list the statements of faith of the Pentecostal World Fellowship, the World Assemblies of God Fellowship, and the U.S Assemblies of God, which provides a helpful comparison of the varying levels of specificity in the statements concerning the last things.

The fourth appendix compares and contrasts the eschatological stances of two major contributors to Assemblies of God theology: Menzies’ father, the late William W. Menzies, and the late Stanley M. Horton. The author points out that his father’s stance was premillennial but not dispensational, while it was Horton’s revision and expansion of the elder Menzies’ 1971 book Understanding Our Doctrine in the 1993 volume Bible Doctrines: A Pentecostal Perspective that greatly expanded the material on eschatology, going from one paragraph on the Rapture in William Menzies’ book to over three pages focused on a defense of the pre-Tribulation Rapture.

The fifth appendix gives a brief comparison of varying interpretations of “the kingdom of God,” while the sixth proposes two new categories for interpreting Revelation (the picture puzzle approach and the stained-glass window approach) the author feels work better than the traditional categories of preterist, historicist, idealist, and futurist. The seventh and final appendix restates in one location Menzies’ eight affirmations developed in chapters three through six.

Overall, I found the book an enjoyable read, even though I did not come away convinced by Menzies’ arguments for amillennialism. Perhaps it is my own leanings and bias in favor of historic premillennialism that keep me from understanding his line of reasoning, but I personally found the arguments unconvincing, though much better stated than I found Stanley Horton’s arguments for a pre-Tribulation view confusing in his book Our Destiny: Biblical Teachings on the Last Things, which I read for a class on eschatology many years ago.

The King is returning to judge, and He will reward the faithful and punish the evildoers. Knowing all the details of how that plays out is not as important as making sure as many people as possible are among the sheep that will receive rewards and the crown of eternal life. Therefore, we should not be quick to dismiss (or seek to disfellowship) someone who holds an end times view different from our own, but rather work together with all believers of good will who are seeking to carry the gospel message to the ends of the earth.

Reviewed by Brian Roden

Note from the Editor: On November 26, 2022, (after Brian Roden submitted this review) Robert Menzies wrote to friends and colleagues: “On November 16 Bob received news from the U.S. Assemblies of God Executive Presbyters (EPs) that they had determined he should be dismissed as an Assemblies of God (AG) minister in response to eschatological views expressed in his recent book, The End of History: Pentecostals and a Fresh Approach to the Apocalypse. This concluded a process that began some months ago.” If you would like more information about the on-going missionary work of Bob and Joanne Menzies in China, please Contact Us.

For a sample from The End of History: https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=Xr1dEAAAQBAJ

China for Christ (Fang Cheng)

Let us begin with what appears to the largest of the house church networks currently operating in China, China For Christ (sometimes called the Fang Cheng Church). The China for Christ Church began in the Fang Cheng district of Henan Province. It has grown very rapidly since the early 1980s and constitutes a large network of house churches which span the length and breadth of China.

On Nov. 26, 2002 I met with the top leader of the China for Christ Network, Brother Z. We met and discussed various items for about an hour and a half and then shared a meal together. While we were eating, Sister D, the second highest leader in the China for Christ Network, joined us.

During our meal Sister D, who was sitting next to me, raised a question about a book on Pentecostal doctrine that I had made available to them.[1] She suggested that baptism in the Spirit, although possibly an experience subsequent to conversion, could also take place at the moment of conversion. She felt the book implied that Spirit-baptism must take place after conversion. I assured her that we were all in agreement on this point and that when most Pentecostals speak of baptism in the Spirit as subsequent to conversion, we actually mean that it is logically subsequent to conversion, a distinct work of the Spirit. Temporally, both could occur at essentially the same moment (as with Cornelius and his household in Acts 10). We continued our discussion and Sister D indicated that their church was classical Pentecostal in nature.

The series, “Is the Chinese Church Predominantly Pentecostal?” is an excerpt from The Church in China. Robert Menzies used a pen name, Luke Wesley, to write The Church in China: Persecuted, Pentecostal, and Powerful (Baguio, The Philippines: AJPS Books, 2004).
Read the 2023 Author’s Preface to this series.

Sister D then stated emphatically that their church came to these classical Pentecostal conclusions, not of the basis of receiving this tradition from others; but rather, as a result of their own experience and study of the Book of Acts. She indicated that in the 1970s and 1980s they were quite isolated and experienced considerable persecution. In this context of persecution they developed their classical Pentecostal orientation. At this time their church began to grow. Today, as I have indicated, the China for Christ Network is widely recognized as the largest house church group in China.

I then asked the group if they felt the majority of Christians in China were Pentecostal. Brother Z answered and said that apart from the TSPM churches and various smaller house church groups, the vast majority were indeed Pentecostal. He considered, in addition to their own church, the China Gospel Fellowship, the Li Xin Church, and the Yin Shang Church to be Pentecostal.

On another occasion late in 2002 I had the joy of teaching in an underground Bible school associated with the China for Christ Network. During one of the breaks, the leader of the school showed me around and introduced to me some of the other faculty members. In the midst of our conversation, I noted that their theological tradition was similar (lei si) to mine (he knew of my classical Pentecostal orientation). He stopped, looked at me, and said emphatically: “No, our theological traditions are the same (yi yang).” Later, with great excitement, he spoke of the hunger for the things of the Spirit in the churches in the countryside.

This evidence, admittedly anecdotal in character, is substantiated by the responses I have received from the other researchers mentioned. Virtually all of them would agree that the China for Christ group should be classified as classical Pentecostal, although certainly there may be some in this large network that might be best described as Pentecostal.[2]
China Gospel Fellowship

The origins of the China Gospel Fellowship can also be traced to Henan Province. This network of house churches has grown rapidly since the early 1980s and now has evangelists working in virtually every province in China. I have developed close relationships with a young couple sent out as evangelists by this group. This couple has been very effective in planting churches among village people in our region. They are very open to all of the gifts of the Spirit listed in 1 Cor. 12:8-10. Their testimonies are laced with references to healing, visions, prophetic insight, and persecution. They also speak of being “filled with the Spirit,” an experience which enables them to face hardships and adversity. While they do not appear to view tongues as integrally connected to this experience, they do view tongues-speech as a valid and edifying experience. If this couple is reflective of the group as a whole, I would say that the group is Pentecostal. This conclusion is consistent with the judgments of the three other researchers I contacted with knowledge of this group, two of whom categorized the group as, at least, charismatic (A and B). One other (D) indicated that the group is Pentecostal in its orientation.

I have participated in a number of house group meetings associated with this group. The following example, an excerpt from my personal notes, reveals a bit of the excitement and sense of community that characterize these meetings.

On December 23, 2002 I participated in a house church Christmas service. I walked through the door of the small apartment, roughly 600 square feet in all, and entered into the main room. It was very simple, with concrete floors and bare walls. The walls were now adorned with Christmas decorations. One banner proclaimed, “Pu Tian Tong Qing” (The whole world celebrates [His birth] together). The crowd grew to the point that the small adjoining rooms had to be pressed into service. All told, around 70 people packed into the little sanctuary.

The people were simple, country people. This house church is situated at the edge of a large city. The people living in this area represent village people who have migrated to the city. Urbanization is taking place at a breath-taking pace in China. In cities across the country there are large populations of village people attempting to “make it” in the cities. It was apparent that these folks were marked more by the village than the city.

The service, [led by the capable young Chinese couple noted above], began and a sense of joy quickly permeated the small make-shift sanctuary. Songs and scripture readings celebrating Christ’s birth followed. It was then my turn to preach. I greeted the crowd, which now seemed like a large family, and began to share about Christmas.

After the short, simple message, a call to accept Christ as Savior and Lord was given. Nine people responded joyfully. There was a lot of clapping and celebration as they moved to the front of the room. I led the small group in a prayer of repentance, commitment, and thanksgiving and followed with a prayer of blessing.

The next stage of the service was filled with a number of truly amazing and very culturally authentic forms of worship. Small groups of believers, usually two or four, sang songs based on Scripture as they performed Christian folk dances. It was incredible – a wonderful form of worship which instructed and edified the entire group. Everyone entered in and the joy was almost tangible.

When the service finally came to an end, the nine new believers gathered together for instruction. I was especially touched by one family. The husband had just committed his life to Christ. He along with his wife and their small one year-old baby stood together. Their faces beamed with new-found joy.

The Yin Shang Church

This house church network began in Anhui Province in the late 1970s. It claims to have over 20,000 distinct congregations and approximately five million followers.[3]

On Nov. 25, 2002, I met with Brother C., the leader of the Yin Shang Network. Persecution was a major topic of our discussion. One of Brother C’s colleagues had been arrested a few weeks before our meeting and he was still in prison. After we prayed for this man, Brother C. noted that just two days prior to our meeting the Chinese government had conducted high level meetings with various departments within their bureaucracy. In these meetings they discussed their policy toward the house churches. The government officials concluded that they would strictly enforce new measures which demanded that all house churches register with the government. The government attempted to present this new policy as an opportunity for house church groups to register and receive government recognition. During our meeting, Brother C. received many calls from his colleagues asking how they should respond to the new policies. Brother C. said they would not register, but wait and watch how things developed. He felt that this new policy actually represented a new wave of persecution, not a new opening. In the past, the government had often issued fines for not registering. Now, Brother C. stated, they are intent on arresting people who do not comply. Brother C. indicated that they would only register if there were no conditions placed upon them. He stated that currently the government was asking for the names of leaders, the number and names of believers, and the location of their meetings. This was not acceptable to him. Approximately one month after our meeting, Brother C. was arrested and imprisoned. He is currently still being held in prison.

During the course of this meeting, Brother C. stated very clearly that the Yin Shang Church did believe in the baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. He stressed that they seek to maintain a balance between the Word and Spirit. Although I would not say that this group links tongues with Spirit-baptism in the classical Pentecostal sense, they are indeed Pentecostal. This was explicitly stated by Brother C.[4] It is likely that, in a manner similar to the members of the China for Christ Church (and, I would add, the early Christians in the book of Acts), their experience of persecution has shaped their theology at this point.

The Li Xin Church

This church takes its name from the Li Xin region in east central Anhui Province where it was first established. The church was founded around 1980 and was especially strong in Shandong, Anhui, and Henan. It then rapidly spread from this base to other parts of China. One of the strongest leaders of this movement is a woman.

I have not had much personal contact with this group or its leaders. One research colleague, D, who has had considerable contact with the Li Xin leaders insists that this group is Pentecostal, but that they are not classical Pentecostal in that they do not insist on tongues as the initial evidence of Spirit baptism. Another research colleague, A, characterized this group as charismatic with some Pentecostal leanings. B characterized this group as charismatic and C was not able to make a judgment due to lack of knowledge. It would appear that the group is predominately Pentecostal with some segments perhaps best described as charismatic.

The Word of Life Church

The origins of the Word of Life Church, sometimes called the “Born Again Movement” by outsiders, can be traced to 1968.[5] At this time, Peter Xu began to preach in his hometown in southern Henan. By 1979 he was leading a group of evangelists whose ministry was now reaching into other areas of Henan. Beginning in the early 1980s they experienced tremendous revival. Many accepted their message and hundreds of churches were established. In 1982 they began to send teams of evangelists to other provinces. The first teams were sent to Sichuan Province. Initially, a number of these teams were arrested and sent back to Henan. However, in spite of these setbacks, the church persevered and finally a strong work was established in Sichuan. This also became a major center of ministry.

In 1982 Peter Xu was arrested and imprisoned. However, he was able to escape from the labor camp and resume his ministry. In 1983 a wave of persecution came and many Word of Life evangelists scattered to other provinces. During this time they developed a “seven point missions strategy” (see below) and sent out other full-time evangelists to plant churches.

By 1988 more than 3,000 churches had been planted. Peter Xu was re-arrested in 1988 for attempting to meet with Billy Graham when he visited China. Xu spent three years in prison and was released in 1991. Xu was arrested again in March of 1997 and again spent three years in prison. He was released in May of 2000 and now resides outside of China. Since his departure from China, the Word of Life Church has experienced significant fragmentation. In 1998 an article in Christianity Today estimated that the church numbered around three million believers. This article also rejected some claims that this group was heretical and concluded that it was evangelical in character.[6]

The Word of Life bases its theology on John 3:3-5 and emphasizes that the only way to eternal life is to repent and have a new birth in Jesus. In some respects they are quite charismatic. They love the “Fire Bible,” the Chinese translation of the Life in the Spirit Study Bible, pray regularly for the sick, and are very much attuned to the power of the Holy Spirit.[7]

The have been criticized for supposedly emphasizing that believers must cry for prolonged periods of time in order to be truly saved. Thus, they have been called the “criers” and “the born again movement.” It is true that they are very emotional and frequently cry when they pray, but Peter Xu and other leaders insist that crying is not a requirement for salvation. It is quite possible that in a movement this size that some extremes might be propagated at the grass-roots level which do not in fact reflect the more orthodox views of the leaders.

Their theology, described as a “theology of the cross”, led to the following seven point missions strategy:

1. Preach the salvation of the cross in order to make sure one repents and experiences the new birth.
2. Take the way of the cross to persevere in faith during suffering.
3. Recognize that the TSPM embraces a worldly authority.
4. Plant churches (this is the goal of evangelism)
5. Build up spiritual life (through spiritual life training)
6. Build up fellowship (fellowship in church and with co-workers)
7. Grow through planting churches (send out evangelists, plant churches, and establish Bible schools).

My first encounter with this group came in Beijing in October of 1998. I had the joy of meeting with a group of eight Word of Life leaders. The eight leaders, who came from their ministry posts in various parts of China, were, with one exception, all young, in their mid-to late twenties. Most, however, had already been preaching for close to ten years. Seven of the eight were women. Their testimonies were incredibly inspiring. All but one had been in prison. One young lady who had been arrested along with Peter Xu the previous year had only recently been released from prison.

A colleague of mine asked one young lady, D, if she had been mistreated in prison. In a very matter of fact way, she said, “yes, they beat me.” She recounted how the prison officials tried to prevent her from preaching or praying: they beat her and shocked her with an electric baton in the chest. In spite of these difficulties, she was able to minister to many in prison. One prostitute was healed and accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior. On one occasion a guard attempted to rape her, but as she prayed the guard fell unconscious and had to be taken to the hospital. Their testimonies of God’s faithfulness and protection were filled with many stories of miraculous intervention.

Since this meeting in 1998 I have had considerable contact with various members of this group. On June 4, 2003 I interviewed one of their leaders whom I know quite well. I asked her about her group’s attitude toward spiritual gifts and baptism in the Holy Spirit. She confirmed that they were conservative evangelicals. She also stated that:

1. They do not encourage speaking in tongues. Although this may rarely happen, it is not really encouraged and a small element in the group would see it as demonic.
2. They emphasize healing, but they do not practice prophecy or speaking in tongues.
3. They do emphasize the importance of the Spirit’s power in their lives, especially in evangelism and ministry. And, although they might connect this with baptism in the Spirit, this appears to be an area where their theology is not clearly developed. They appear to be open to the Spirit’s empowering after conversion, but whether they would describe this as a definite experience available to everyone or connect this with Acts 2 is not clear. My friend did say said they did not emphasize the term, “baptism in the Holy Spirit.”

Image: Christian Lue

In short, the Word of Life Church represents an interesting mixture of conservative theology and experiential piety. They expect to see miracles, pray for healing, and look to the Holy Spirit for supernatural guidance and deliverance. At the same time, they are generally quite closed to some manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit, such as prophecy and tongues. One researcher, B, after classifying the group as “charismatic”, put it this way: “Overall, [the Word of Life Church is] similar to the Southern Baptists in theology (eternal security, etc.). Yet the first time I met Xu he was on his way to try to raise from the dead one of his workers who had suddenly died.” According to the definitions I have listed above, I would classify this group as non-charismatic. As I have indicated, they do not appear to see all of the gifts listed in 1 Cor. 12:8-10 as valid for the church today.

The House Church Statement of Faith

On November 26, 1998 a group of four house leaders, including the leaders of the China for Christ Network and the China Gospel Fellowship, signed a statement of faith that they had forged together during meetings convened throughout the previous days. This statement represents the most significant theological statement issued by house church leaders to date. It is thoroughly evangelical and organized around seven key headings: On the Bible; On the Trinity; On Christ; On Salvation; On the Holy Spirit; On the Church; and On the Last Things. The statement on the Holy Spirit is especially significant for this study. It reads:

On the Holy Spirit: We believe that the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity. He is the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of truth and the Spirit of holiness. The Holy Spirit illuminates a person causing him to know sin and repent, to know the truth and to believe in Christ and so experience being born again unto salvation. He leads the believers into the truth, helps them to understand the truth and obey Christ, thereby bearing abundant fruit of life. The Holy Spirit gives all kinds of power and manifests the mighty acts of God through signs and miracles. The Holy Spirit searches all things. In Christ God grants a diversity of gifts of the Holy Spirit to the Church so as to manifest the glory of Christ. Through faith and thirsting, Christians can experience the outpouring and filling of the Holy Spirit. We do not believe in the cessation of signs and miracles or the termination of the gifts of the Holy Spirit after the apostolic period. We do not forbid speaking in tongues and we do not impose on people to speak in tongues; nor do we insist that speaking in tongues is the evidence of being saved.

We refute the view that the Holy Spirit is not a person of the Trinity but only a kind of influence.[8]

This statement contains several significant declarations that highlight the Pentecostal leanings of its framers. First, the notion that charismatic gifts were given only for the apostolic period (cessationism) is explicitly denied: “We do not believe in the cessation of signs and miracles or the termination of the gifts of the Holy Spirit after the apostolic period.” Thus, it is not surprising that the statement also declares that the Holy Spirit “gives all kinds of power and manifests the mighty acts of God through signs and miracles.” This statement, at the very least then, identifies the framers and the house church groups they represent as charismatic.

But there is more. This statement contains another significant declaration: “Through faith and thirsting, Christians can experience the outpouring and filling of the Holy Spirit.” Since this “outpouring and filling” may be received by Christians, this phrase must refer to a work of the Spirit subsequent to (at least logically, if not temporally) the regenerating work of the Spirit experienced at conversion. Although the purpose or impact of this gift is not explicitly stated, it is interesting to note that the language used to describe the experience (i.e., “outpouring and filling”) is drawn from the Book of Acts.[9] It seems obvious that a strengthening or empowering of the believer by the Spirit in accordance with the experience of the early church as recorded in the Book of Acts is in view here. The only prerequisites for receiving this gift which are listed in the statement are “faith” and “thirsting.” Surely this is another way of saying that this gift is available to all earnest believers who desire it. This statement then speaks of an empowering by the Spirit that is distinct from conversion and available to every believer. It thus identifies the framers as not only charismatic, but Pentecostal as well.

Finally, let us examine the reference to tongues: “We do not forbid speaking in tongues and we do not impose on people to speak in tongues; nor do we insist that speaking in tongues is the evidence of being saved.” Tony Lambert, noting this passage, states: “the careful neutrality concerning speaking in tongues is very far from the extreme teachings current in some charismatic or Pentecostal circles.”[10] It is not entirely clear what Lambert has in mind when he alludes to “extreme teachings current in some charismatic or Pentecostal circles.” Is he talking about the belief held by classical Pentecostals around the world that speaking in tongues is the sign or initial evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit? If so, Lambert not only states that this doctrine is “extreme,” he also implies that this house church statement rejects this doctrine. I would suggest, however, that this ‘reading’ of the statement tells us more about the interpreter’s presuppositions than it does about the intent of the original framers. The phrase, “we do not impose on people to speak in tongues” probably should be taken in light of what follows to mean that they do not force believers to speak in tongues by means of emotional or psychological coercion (e.g., by declaring tongues to be a sign that they are truly believers).[11] It is highly unlikely that the framers, with this phrase, were consciously renouncing the initial evidence doctrine of classical Pentecostalism. This seems to be an obvious conclusion in view of the fact that one of the four cardinal framers is the head of a classical Pentecostal group, the China for Christ Network.

The only doctrine that the statement specifically rejects and which is relatively common in evangelical circles in the West is the doctrine that denies the current validity of speaking in tongues. The statement is very clear: “We do not forbid speaking in tongues.” The statement, of course, also rejects the strange and rare notion that tongue-speech is a sign of salvation. It is possible that this indeed is what Lambert has in mind when he speaks of “extreme teachings,” but it is such a rare and unusual doctrine, certainly not representative of mainstream charismatic or Pentecostal Christianity, that one can only wonder.[12]

In short, the statement on tongues does not appear to be a rejection of the classical Pentecostal position. However, it does not affirm this position either. It reads like a very diplomatic attempt to steer a middle path between two extremes. It rejects the position of those who would seek to forbid tongues and it refutes those who would seek to use manipulative means to force believers to speak in tongues. In fact, the careful way in which this statement is framed suggests that it is a wise compromise which accommodates both classical Pentecostals on the one hand and charismatics and (non-classical) Pentecostals on the other.

We are now in a position to highlight the implications which the house church statement of faith has for the question at hand. Our analysis has revealed that this statement is indeed significant. With its carefully worded phraseology concerning the work of the Holy Spirit, the statement of faith suggests that its framers and the churches they represent are, at the very least, Pentecostal and perhaps even classical Pentecostal in their theological orientation.

Summary

I have surveyed what are generally recognized to be the five largest house church groups in China. Collectively these groups almost certainly represent a significant majority of the house churches in China,[13] and possibly a majority of the Christian population in China as a whole. In any event, these groups represent a significant cross-section of the Church in China. More specifically, I have analyzed the theological orientation of these groups, particularly as it relates to Pentecostal and charismatic issues. My evaluation has been based on my own personal conversations, the findings of fellow researchers, and selected written documents. Although my conclusions must be viewed as somewhat tentative since hard sociological data in the form of grass-roots surveys are lacking, these conclusions are based on what would appear to be the most extensive research on this issue available to date.

My research suggests that the five groups should be categorized as follows:

1. China for Christ: largely classical Pentecostal, partly Pentecostal
2. China Gospel Fellowship: largely Pentecostal, partly charismatic
3. Yin Shang Church: largely Pentecostal, partly charismatic
4. Li Xin Church: largely Pentecostal, partly charismatic
5. Word of Life Church: largely non-charismatic, partly charismatic

Based on this analysis, I would conclude that the overwhelming majority of the Christians in China today are at least charismatic. This study suggests that 90% of house church Christians and perhaps 80% of the total Christian population in China would affirm that the gifts of the Spirit listed in 1 Cor. 12:8-10 are available to the church today.[14]

Furthermore, in the light of the significant strength of the Pentecostal groups listed above, it is reasonable to conclude that a significant majority of the Christians in China today are not only charismatic, but also Pentecostal in their theological orientation. I would estimate that 75% of house church Christians and 60% of the total Christians population in China are accurately be described by this designation.

It is also clear that classical Pentecostals represent a minority of the believers in China, but it is a significant minority nonetheless. This is evident from that the fact that what appears to be the largest house church network in China today is best described as classical Pentecostal. I would suggest that approximately 25% of house church Christians and 20% of the total Christian population in China are classical Pentecostal.[15]

In addition to these conclusions concerning doctrine or beliefs, some general observations may also be made concerning behavior. The praxis of the House Church Movement in China may be described as exhibiting the following characteristics:[16]

1. A strong emphasis on personal experience, often reflected in emotionally-charged prayers and worship. God is understood to be present, personal, and vitally interested in communicating with and relating to individual believers. Exuberant, participatory worship and emotional responses to preaching are quite common and might be described as typical.

2. A strong expectation that God will intervene in miraculous ways in the daily lives of believers. House church Christians exhibit a firm belief in God’s ability and willingness to work miracles in their midst. Their testimonies often refer to God healing the sick, raising the dead, granting special wisdom or direction, communicating through dreams, visions, or prophetic messages, providing boldness for witness, or granting miraculous strength and protection. This expectation is often expressed in an openness to the gifts of the Spirit and is certainly encouraged in part by such biblical passages as 1 Cor. 12:8-10.

3. A strong sense of their own weakness and dependence upon God. Perhaps due in part to their experiences of marginalization and persecution, house church believers often reflect a keen awareness of their own weakness and a strong sense of dependence upon God’s supernatural power and leading. This is reflected in an emphasis on receiving strength and encouragement from the Holy Spirit, often in specific moments of prayer. This perspective is undoubtedly patterned after the experience of the early church recorded in the book of Acts. It is often associated with the expectation that one can receive needed strength or encouragement through a definable experience, regularly described as being “baptized in” or “filled with” the Holy Spirit.

PR

Next Issue: Part 3: “Gaining Perspective: A Contextual Assessment”

This excerpt is part of Chapter 3 from The Church in China: Persecuted, Pentecostal, and Powerful (Baguio, The Philippines: AJPS Books, 2004). Used with permission.

Notes

[1] A Chinese translation of William W. Menzies and Stanley M. Horton’s Bible Doctrines: A Pentecostal Perspective (Springfield: Logion Press, 1993).

[2] B, C, and D all affirmed that the China for Christ Network is classical Pentecostal, although B and C suggested that some might be better termed Pentecostal. A’s response was more general, and simply acknowledged that this group and the others listed were at least charismatic and very often Pentecostal in orientation.

[3] D provided this information.

[4] A characterized this group as at least charismatic with Pentecostal leanings; B characterized this group as charismatic; C had little contact with this group; and D characterized the group as Pentecostal.

[5] The material for the following historical and theological survey of the Word of Life Church comes largely from two unpublished papers, both produced by Chinese Christians: one paper, “A Case Study of The Way of Life (New Birth): A Chinese House Church Network,” was written in March, 2001 by an outside observer; the other paper, “Our Church History,” was written by a Word of Life Church leader in April, 2003.

[6] Timothy C. Morgan, “A Tale of China’s Two Churches,” Christianity Today 42 (July 13, 1998), pp. 30-39

[7] The Life in the Spirit Study Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan/Life Publishers, 2003) was first published as the Full Life Study Bible (1992).

[8] See Tony Lambert, China’s Christian Millions, p. 62 for this English translation. I have included the sentence, “In Christ God grants a diversity of gifts of the Holy Spirit to the Church so as to manifest the glory of Christ,” which is found in the Chinese original, but which is omitted in Lambert’s version. This appears to be an editorial oversight.

[9] The Chinese characters translated “outpouring” (jiao guan) and “filling” (chong man) of the Spirit in this statement are also found in Acts 2:17 (“pour out”) and Acts 2:4 (“filled”) of the He He Ben translation, the standard and most widely used Chinese translation of the Bible.

[10] Lambert, China’s Christian Millions, p. 64.

[11] The Chinese characters translated by the phrase, “do not impose upon” (mian qiang) certainly convey the notion of “force.” There is perhaps a slight difference in the nuances of the English terms “impose” and “force”, with force representing a slightly stronger term. The semantic range of the Chinese term, mian qiang, would certainly include the stronger connotations of “force.”

[12] Only a few ‘Jesus only’ groups, such as the United Pentecostal Church, would affirm this doctrine. These are fringe groups very much out of sync with mainstream charismatic or Pentecostal groups.

[13] This conclusion was affirmed by A, B, C, and D. Of course there are other large, significant groups that are non-charismatic, such as the Wen Zhou Church and the Little Flock. (I might note that I have spoken to one of the leaders of the Little Flock and he indicated that he has had a Pentecostal experience which included speaking in tongues. This experience and his contact with China for Christ leaders has encouraged him to relate more constructively to other to this and other church groups.) However, there are also other large, significant groups which are Pentecostal as well. One such classical Pentecostal group which C relates to is 400,000 strong.

[14] A word concerning the method used to arrive at these percentages is in order. I have taken the largest five house church groups as representative of house church Christians in China as a whole. I have used the estimated strength of these five churches listed in the methodology section above to arrive at specific percentages. Although these specific numbers may be high, the general proportions they represent are probably relatively accurate. Thus, the percentages for house church Christians were: non-charismatic (10%); charismatic (90%); Pentecostal (75%); and classical Pentecostal (25%). I have considered the China Gospel Fellowship and the two Anhui groups to be largely, but not entirely Pentecostal. This accounts for the variance between the percentages for charismatics (90%) and Pentecostals (75%). As a result of my own personal observations and my reading of the research available, I have also assumed that in China house church Christians are three times as numerous as Christians affiliated with the TSPM churches. I then estimated, based on my own personal experience, concerning the percentage of TSPM Christians that might be classified as non-charismatic (50%), charismatic (50%), Pentecostal (20%), and classical Pentecostal (10%). This was the rationale, then, behind the final estimates.

[15] These conclusions are generally consistent with the assessment of the other researchers consulted: A suggested at least 90% of house church Christians were, at the very least, charismatic; B affirmed that a significant majority were charismatic without stating any specific percentages; C and D also indicated that very large percentages were charismatic and Pentecostal.

[16] We have already noted the strong biblical focus of the house church movement and need not repeat it here.

PneumaReview.com invites you to read this paper by Professor Eugen Jugaru and discuss the connection between joy and suffering.

Abstract

Suffering for the Christian faith and Christian worship exuberance, paradoxically have a common ground: a joy beyond understanding which comes from the Holy Spirit. The reality of this unusual and passionate experience: joy in sufferings and worship, was experienced by Christians in Romania, a country that for 45 years was ruled by a fierce atheist Communist regime. Their experiences were similar to the first-century Christians who after being beaten for breaking the interdiction to spread the Gospel, “rejoiced that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His (Christ’s) name” (Acts. 5:40-41). Two Christians remained examples for Romanian Christians by their determination in persecution, Richard Wurmbrand and Nicolae Steinhardt.

Also during the persecution in Romania, believers who were not imprisoned have also experienced a deep presence of the Holy Spirit in worship. These moments flooded their hearts with unimaginable joy which gave them power to forgive their enemies and to receive strength to face courageously the atheist regime.

I will be presenting the reality of joy beyond understanding in suffering and worship due to the presence and empowering of the Holy Spirit through the use of written narrative testimonies of Richard Wurmbrand and Nicolae Steinhardt as well as other written testimonies of Christians within the Pentecostal churches of Romania during the same period under the Communist regime. I will be providing an interpretive layer on the materials that will connect their responses to the work of the Spirit. By using current writings and observation I then will reveal the diminishing of this experience in contemporary post-Communism as reflected in the Christian experience in Romania.

Introduction

The theme of joy, whether it is viewed from a Christian perspective based on soteriological or pneumatological elements or whether from secular perspective, is a current topic due to general pessimism which seems to mark the contemporary generation. While we enjoy many of the products and services that did not benefited our parents it seems that there is an unseen enemy of joy that does not allow us to live our lives with great confidence and profound optimism. Joy of life today is overshadowed by the burden of stress, by the assault of various news media, especially negative news, by the fear of sickness or by anxiety of an unsure future due to multiple crises.

In this paper I will be presenting the idea that there can be a real and a deep joy, a joy beyond understanding, beyond the comprehension of our mind and reason, a joy in suffering and in worship, in prayers and songs for those who have accepted the Christian perspective on life. As an example to support this thesis I present the testimonies of several Christians from different denominations, who experienced a joy beyond understanding when they were imprisoned. Their experience can teach us today about the joy beyond understanding, a real joy that surpass difficulties of the life and can help us today when we have freedom and rights, but consequently less joy.

What is joy beyond understanding and how does this kind of joy manifest itself?

Joy beyond understanding is that state of spiritual exaltation that makes a person who has it to forget the difficulties of the life and to experience God’s presence in a very strong, real and personal way.

Joy beyond understanding and comprehension does not depend on the circumstances of life, it is rooted in God’s continual presence and grace, for it is a work of the Holy Spirit. Usually joy is that personal feeling due to certain achievements or because of good news received, but joy beyond understanding does not depend on such external input. Joy beyond understanding cannot be expressed well in words; it can be experienced, felt but not fully communicated in words.

The manifestation of joy beyond understanding can be expressed by a shining upon the face or even by tears of joy. Personally, I think that a smile and laughter can be a manifestation of joy, but does not suggests in the best way the depth of joy, it is not so deep as the tears of joy which cannot be stopped. I watched TV programs broadcasting live emotional meetings between people who have not met for many years, between life partners or between parents and children, and in most of these exciting meetings protagonists could not retain tears of joy.

The joy beyond understanding does not comes from a human predisposition toward happiness or, as I related before from the satisfaction of personal achievement, but its source is divine, it is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:20-22). When Paul contrasts the works of the flesh and the fruit of Holy Spirit, he revealed that among the items and fruit of the Spirit is also joy (Greek chara).

The authors of a Canadian Pentecostal Reader are to be commended for such an exemplary, seminal, and significant reference research resource. The heart and core of this monograph focuses on a collection of early 20^th Century primary sources in the form of Pentecostal newsletters, carefully reproduced in reprinted format, with minor and useful amendments. The newsletters are arranged from Eastern to Western Canada: Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and British Columbia, respectively. Canadian publication locations include the cities of Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Vancouver, and New Westminster. In the context, the authors describe that their collected primary newsletter “sources are historical, theological, testimonial, autobiographical, and biographical.” (1)

For introductory background information for each set of newsletters, the authors have taken a clever and consistent approach exhibiting and including ‘The People’, ‘The Publication’, and ‘Suggested Reading’. In addition, either external documented quotations or photographs conclude the introductions.

How refreshing to read experiential accounts of first-generation Pentecostals during the initial quarter of the 20^th Century!

Due to the length of Reader it appears that a wise decision was made not to include an index, but to give opportunity for the keen reader or scholarly researcher to secure a digital copy whereby any word or phrase of the book can be searched quickly and, if so desired, in sequence and comprehensively. Also, since The Canadian Pentecostal Testimony (Later renamed the Pentecostal Testimony, now: Testimony and Enrich) is largely available in digital form, the choice was made not to include this periodical among the set of primary newsletter sources for the book (2).

Further research and studies need to be conducted in regard to the following statement: “Ellen Hebden (1865-1923) is widely regarded as the first person in Canada to have the baptism in the Holy Spirit with the accompanying sign of speaking in tongues on 17 November 1906.” ([5]). It would have been helpful for the serious reader or researcher if this statement would have been documented, especially since this information is included in the first issue in May 1907 of The Promise ([12]-13) and since such a specific date is given. In my book review of Thomas William Miller’s Canadian Pentecostals: A History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada ¹, I called into question that Ellen Hebden was the first Canadian person to be baptized in the Holy Spirit accompanied by speaking in tongues in the 20^th Century (Pneuma 20: 1, Spring 1998, 119-20) ². I said, “it appears that John Loney of Snowflake, Manitoba (40-41) and not Hebden of Toronto was the first known Canadian, or at least the first known person in Canada to speak in tongues [in the 20th Century]. ³” (The Apostolic Faith, vol. I, 4 December 1906, 3) in Fred T. Corum’s Like As Of Fire (1981) ⁴ and in Wayne E. Warner’s The Azusa Street Papers (c1997), 24. ⁴ Warner was the former Director of the Assemblies of God Archives, Springfield, MO (8) ⁵. John Loney testifies, “I am in sympathy with your [William J. Seymour’s] work, am baptized with the Holy Ghost and fire, and have received the gift of some as of yet unknown tongue or tongues. It first came two years ago, and is proving more distinct and real. Believe God is preparing me for some special work in some part of his vineyard.” ⁶ (The Apostolic Faith, I, 4 December 1906, 3) in Fred T. Corum’s Like As Of Fire (1981) and in Wayne E. Warner’s The Azusa Street Papers (c1997), 24. Loney’s testimony could be interpreted that he was baptized in the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues as early as 1904.⁶

Reviewed by Laurence M. Van Kleek

Notes

¹ Miller, Thomas William. Canadian Pentecostals: A History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. Edited by William A. Griffin. Mississauga, ON: Full Gospel Publishing House, c1994. 40-1.

² Canadian Pentecostals Reviewed by Laurence M. Van Kleek, Pneuma (20:1 Spring, 1998). 119-121.

³ Ibid, 119.

⁴ Corum, Fred T.  Like As of Fire (A Reprint of the Old Azusa Street Papers). Wilmington MA:  Fred T. Corum, 1981.  Snowflake, Manitoba—John Loney. Dec ‘06, p. 3, col. 2 [Using Warner’s Index], Warner, Wayne E. The Azusa Street Papers. Foley, AL: Harvest Publications, c1997. 24.

⁵ Burgess, Stanley M., Editor and Van der Maas, Eduard M., Associate Editor. The New International Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Expanded and Rev. ed. Zondervan, c2002. 1185-86.

⁶ I discovered another Canadian, Harry S. Horton, who was baptized in the Holy Spirit, accompanied by speaking in tongues in the early 20^th Century. He was the father of the Late Dr. Stanley M. Horton. In 1906, Harry received this experience at a home in Winnipeg. (J. Shirley Morsch, Editor in Chief of the History Committee. Rejoice: A History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Alberta and the Northwest Territories. Edmonton, AB. The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. Alberta and Northwest Territories (Mackenzie District); Altona, MB: Friesen Printers, a Division of D.W. Friesen & Sons Ltd., [1983]: 1.J. Shirley Morsch says, “In Elmer Cantelon’s book, Harvester of the North, he reported that his mother, Mrs. Peter Cantelon, of the Manitoba Mather District near Cartwright, received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit in her home in 1906.” I confirmed such in Elmer J. Cantelon’s, Harvester of the North (Toronto, Canada: Full Gospel Publishing House, c1969): 69-70. As already was employed as a search strategy for Mittelstadt and Courtney’s book, “familysearch.org, ancestry.com, and newspapers.com” (3), plus 23andme.com, could be used to shed more light on the historical background of people of interest.

So, besides maintaining that Ellen Hebden was the first person in Canada in the 20^th Century to be baptized with the Holy Spirit and accompanied by tongues speaking on 17 November 1906, there is evidence that others, such as John Loney of Snowflake, MB, Harry S. Horton of Winnipeg, and Mrs. Peter Cantelon of the Manitoba Mather District near Cartwright also received this experience in the same year. The question is for those who consider January 1, 1901, as so sacred, who was first? Is this date especially sacred to God or is it traditionally and culturally sacred to us? If 1904 is accepted, John Loney of Snowflake, Manitoba would be first! But if 1906 is the acceptable year, how likely would it be that November 17^th, so late in 1906, would rule out Harry S. Horton, and Mrs. Peter Cantelon as not receiving the experience possibly earlier than Ellen Hebden? Also, Christian historian scholars need to be careful not to take an elitist position that may rule out testimonies of laypersons.

Dr. Stanley Horton grandmother, Miss Clara Sanford (later Mrs. Elmer Fisher) who lived in Pennsylvania, received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, with the tongues evidence, in 1880.” (Morsch: 1). Claude Kendrick gives further examples of the speaking in “TONGUES PHENONMENA” in the United States in the last quarter of the 19^th Century. See The Promise Fulfilled: A History of the Modern Pentecostal Movement. Springfield, MO: Gospel Publishing House, c1961. 34-6. Regarding experiencing the Tongues phenomena, in 1875, Rev. R.B Swan of Providence, RI; in 1879, W. Jethro Walthall of Arkansas; in 1890, Daniel Awrey of OH; and in1900 “Sarah A. Smith … in Tennessee” had such an experience. (Ibid, 11). So, during the last quarter of the 19^th Century, there is evidence the people being baptized with the Holy Spirit accompanied with tongue speaking. I do not minimize the value or worldwide impact of the Azusa Street revival, but rather agree with Eddie L. Hyatt that since the day of Pentecost such wonderfully blessed phenomena have been throughout history. See Eddie L. Hyatt, 2000 Years of Charismatic Christianity (Lake Mary, FL: Charisma House, c2002).

Introduction

I am personally fully persuaded that the Pentecostal/Charismatic movements have been raised up by God in manifestation of the miraculous power of the Holy Spirit through the Lord Jesus Christ. However, I have noticed two reflex reactions that often occur when the subject of miracles is raised. Either a defensive stance or a polemical mode is soon evident. A defensive stance can appear when someone who affirms the reality of miracles in the Bible and in the daily life of faith is confronted by someone who challenges that very possibility. A polemical mode can appear when someone who challenges what appears to be an incredulous acceptance of so-called inexplicable events is confronted with someone who believes that miracles do happen. As much as possible, I mean to avoid such negative and non-productive reactionary modes by developing an understanding that is non-defensive and non-polemical. In a word, it will be positive—and therefore, hopefully, constructive and productive.

Supernatural Worldview

Next, Pentecostals believe the realities of the cosmos exceed what can be quantifiably measured by man. There is more to life than can be studied in a laboratory. Without discounting the importance of scientific processes, indeed, with all due appreciation and respect for its appropriate use, Pentecostals are not at all ready or willing to limit all life entirely to that narrow account. To do so is the height of human arrogance. Pentecostals, therefore, embrace a cosmology recognizing the existence and activity of spiritual beings or entities in relationship with the so-called natural or sensory perceived world of being. Again, this cosmology (and ontology) is also rooted in the nature of “the God of the spirits of all flesh” (Numbers 16:22; 27:16; cp. Hebrews 12:9). Indeed, Christian anthropology requires recognition of the essentially spiritual nature of human identity and existence (1 Corinthians 14:32; Hebrews 12:23). Consistent with this affirmation of the holistic nature of all existence, Pentecostals not surprisingly expect there to be miraculous moments when the thin veil between Heaven and Earth is opened up and interactive encounters occur in myriad forms that may include otherwise inexplicable events as well as experiences of dreams, visions, and other divine communications and revelations (e.g. Genesis 22:11, 15; 28:12; Acts 2:2; 7:55-56; 9:3; Revelation 4:1-2).

Certainly, these intuitively insightful ways of being and knowing can fly in the face of reductionist systems prone to deny any but rationalistic and naturalistic versions of reality. However, Pentecostal spirituality and theology do not contradict logic or reason so much as they transcend them, rising above their aridity and rigidity to affirm and embrace a larger, more expansive and inclusive, vision of the nature of reality. It is not reason or scientific knowledge per se which is problematic but their misuse in the exclusion of the supernatural out of infatuation for the natural. We need not denigrate human logic or reason, much less the natural created order; but, we must not deify them either. At the risk of sounding harsh, I sometimes wonder if the outlandish fetish-like fascination of modern society with the material world order might be nothing other than a sophisticated violation of the Decalogue’s prohibition against idolizing the creaturely (Exodus 20:4). In any case, it appears evident that Pentecostalism’s belief in the supernatural is an inseparable part of its overall theological make up; it simply cannot be jettisoned without violating its own innermost ethos. And yet in their affirmation of the miraculous Pentecostal Christians are notoriously out of step with most of the modern world. Or are they?

These lectures were given as part of the 8th annual Stanley M. Horton Pentecostal Heritage Lectureship Series, held on February 3-5, 2015 at Evangel University and the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary.

These lectures were given as part of the 8th annual Stanley M. Horton Pentecostal Heritage Lectureship Series, held on February 3-5, 2015 at Evangel University and the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary.