It was with joy that I read through this perceptive article by Dr. Wonsuk Ma. Dr. Ma is a Pentecostal scholar whose ministry experience was gained in four countries. A large portion of his spiritual and academic development grew in the Philippines where he and his wife were engaged in evangelism, church planting among mountain tribal groups, and heavy involvement with the Asia Pacific Theological Seminary. As a result of his enriching experiences, he developed a strong sense of what it means for Pentecostals to undertake ‘Mission in the Spirit’. Dr. Ma is both a skilled writer and teacher. Indeed, his insights serve as valuable resources to the wider Body of Christ.

This short article, focusing on the tragic examples of Samson and Saul, was motivated by the dire need to address the issue of moral failure in charismatic leaders. In particular, the question being explored is whether the intention of the Spirit’s presence includes both internal transformation as well as empowerment for external tasks. Dr. Ma sets out to prove that the internal working of the Spirit is no less important than the outward empowering. His goal in writing this article is to demonstrate through systematic examination of the stories that these heroes’ failure to receive the private and internal transformation of character led to their ministry failure.

Because this is a topic so close to my own heart, I was more than delighted to read what this scholar had to say. Though there are several other characters whose lives may have been examined, Samson and Saul were chosen because of the frequency in which the Spirit is mentioned in their stories (four positive mentions for Samson – Judg. 13:25; 14:6,19; 15:14, and ten mentions of ‘spirit’ for Saul: five refer to an evil spirit from God – 1 Sam. 16:15,16,23; 18:10; 19:9, two to the Spirit’s departure and opposition – 1 Sam. 16:14; 19:23, leaving three positive references – 1 Sam. 10:6,10; 11:6).

A great insightful from Dr. Ma is that these initial experiences of the Spirit with these men (Judg. 13:25; 1 Sam. 10:6-9) were:

1. more private than public, away from people,
2. with no enemy or danger coming against them, and
3. with no public exploit immediately undertaken.

Their primary experiences are described as Samson being ‘agitated’ and Saul was ‘turned into a different person’, and ‘having received another heart’. What does it mean to be made restless by the Spirit? What does it mean to have a new heart? The author uses a variety of cross references throughout scripture to shed much light on these phrases! Does not the Spirit grant radical inner change which cannot be attributed to human behavioral change?

How do these three observations carry meaning for us? Are our initial experiences of the Spirit meant to take us out of our comfort zones, open our eyes to a new way of perceiving the world around us, to make us more fully aware of our life’s calling and stir us towards it? Are these initial Spirit stirrings meant to cause us to enhance God’s giftedness, and to challenge us to submit to the process of character development? If that is truly the case, then the author correctly argues that divine success through us is dependent upon an appropriate response from us.

Wonsuk Ma

The purpose of Wonsuk Ma’s article is to open further theological dialogue between classical Pentecostals (the “First Wave”) and the Third Wave movement. He does this by first giving a brief overview of the origins of the Third Wave and a definition of the movement according to its best-known proponent, C. Peter Wagner, “… a further evolution of the two earlier movements which emphasized the Holy Spirit and the contemporary manifestations of the Spirit” (page 189).

The specific focus of this article is upon the “lower-level” power encounter, or deliverance ministry for individuals, as this concept is developed and employed by missionary anthropologist Charles Kraft. He reproduces notes from a deliverance session he participated in while a doctoral student at Fuller Seminary, where Kraft is a professor in the School of Mission. From this he looks at the similarities and some of the differences between Pentecostal and Third Wave assumptions about the supernatural. He does this by comparing his own Asian, classical Pentecostalism to the theories and practices of Charles Kraft.

In the opinion of this writer, Ma’s article stuck to his intention, being “designed to challenge the Pentecostal movement to reflect upon its own current direction, and only incidentally to critique the Third Wave” (p. 193).

Wonsuk Ma discusses what Pentecostals can learn from Charles Kraft in regards to pastoral concern, deliverance ministry, and theological challenges. He then looks at some of the criticisms that have been leveled at the Third Wave. He presents the criticisms and then evaluates them from a Pentecostal perspective, showing at each point that which Pentecostals should be reminded of or challenged by.

Although this article may not be a good introduction to the Third Wave (and certainly it was not intended to be), it is an introduction to the challenge of having greater dialogue between the three waves of charismatics. Wonsuk Ma’s heart is obviously to see increased dialogue develop between Pentecostals, charismatics, and the Third Wave. “Pentecostals and Charismatic scholars, with a common experience of the Holy Spirit, have constantly enriched each other’s theological understanding. … For the same reason of sharing common ground, the Third Wave should be invited to join constructive dialogue with the First and Second Waves. The common ground for this dialogue will again be the belief and experience in the supernatural work of God” (p. 205).

Ma closes by contending that God is speaking to the Pentecostal movement through the rise of the Third Wave. If God is speaking, let us then be certain to hear His voice.

Reviewed by Raul Mock