Why Pentecostal Churches Are Growing

In 2009 the University of Southern California established the Pentecostal and Charismatic Research Initiative (PCRI) with a $6.9 million grant from the John Templeton Foundation. In a news release dated February 24, 2009, PCRI spokesperson Donald Miller states, “We are interested in why Pentecostalism is growing so rapidly, what impact it is having on society, and how it is different in various cultural settings.”¹²⁵ The initiative will “foster innovative social science research in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the former Soviet Union, by providing up to $3.5 million in grants.”¹²⁶ While I applaud this worthy project and wish all of the researchers associated with it well, I must admit that in my less charitable moments I wonder how valuable and helpful the information gleaned from this research will be in answering the central question: Why are Pentecostal churches growing? My skepticism is rooted in the fact that this initiative appears to intentionally ignore or, at best, minimize the theological dimension of the Pentecostal movement and seeks to answer this important question largely in sociological terms. This sort of reductionistic approach seems destined to provide, at best, limited, and possibly even distorted, results. It is akin to studying why birds can fly, without considering their feathers.

Lest I be misunderstood, let me say that I do believe that the PCRI will provide interesting, and in many cases valuable, data. It will undoubtedly illuminate some of the cultural trends that have facilitated the rise of the Pentecostal movement around the world. However, if the central question really focuses on why Pentecostal churches are growing, then I would suggest that the PCRI should have spent a good portion of their money inquiring into the biblical ethos and theological values that shape the Pentecostal movement. Now, I am not so bold as to suggest that my own attempt to answer this question in the following pages will yield results as comprehensive and nuanced as the combined wisdom of the sociological research; however, I would note that my wisdom on this matter comes at a fraction of the cost. In fact, I do believe that I might have something unique to offer. The reason for this bold claim is simple: sociology can help us describe the “what,” but it struggles to help us understand the “why.” I believe this is particularly true of the rise of the modern Pentecostal movement, which points beyond human horizons to a God who delights to work in and through us.

If we are to understand why Pentecostal churches are growing, we above all will need to understand what Pentecostal Christians believe, what energizes their lives and witness, what sets them apart and makes them unique. In short, we need to understand why Pentecostals are different. It is this “why” question that inevitably takes us back to the question of belief, to the theological values of grass-roots, ordinary believers. My father was fond of highlighting the fact that theology, experience, and behavior are all interrelated. What we believe is impacted by, but also guides, our experience. Our beliefs give meaning, coherence, and direction to our experience; and in this way, impact and shape our behavior.

This recognition of the interconnectedness of our beliefs, experience, and behavior leads me to insist that Pentecostal convictions are an essential part of Pentecostal experience and praxis. We cannot speak of one as if it were totally independent of the others. For this reason, I believe that the question of why Pentecostal churches are growing is at its heart a theological question. Indeed, I am convinced that there are five theologically-oriented reasons for the unique and rapid growth of the modern Pentecostal movement. Without taking into account these core convictions, which are shared by Pentecostals around the world, one cannot provide an adequate answer to our central question. Let us examine, then, the five characteristics and related convictions that drive this influential and growing movement forward.

 

1. Missional DNA

Pentecostal experience and praxis are shaped, in large measure, by the stories contained in the book of Acts. The central texts that Pentecostals around the world memorize and feature are Acts 1:8, “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,” and Acts 2:4, “All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.” These texts and the related stories of bold missionary endeavor that follow in the book of Acts provide the templates for our understanding of baptism in the Spirit. They shape Pentecostal experience and give direction to our mission. Within the larger Christian family this emphasis is unique and it gives the Pentecostal movement a profoundly missional ethos. This is, in my opinion, one of the key reasons why Pentecostal churches are growing. It is certainly a central reason why scores of missionaries, most with meager financial backing, left the Azusa Street Revival and traveled to diverse points of the globe to proclaim the “apostolic” faith. I would suggest it is also why Pentecostals today constantly share their faith with others. Bold witness for Jesus is recognized as our primary calling and the central purpose of our experience of the Spirit’s power. Missions is woven into the fabric of our DNA.

This perspective, this missiological emphasis gleaned from Luke-Acts, is unique to Pentecostals. While Pentecostals have featured Luke’s Gospel and the book of Acts, other Protestant churches have highlighted the Pauline epistles. The great truths of the Reformation were largely gleaned from Romans and Galatians and the other writings of Paul. The terminology “justification by faith” echoes Paul. So, following the lead of Luther, Calvin, and the other reformers, the Protestant churches have largely emphasized the Pauline epistles as their core texts.

This Pauline emphasis has, to a large extent, shaped the Evangelical movement. Elsewhere I have outlined how Evangelicals, in a knee-jerk reaction to liberal scholarship that challenged the historical reliability of Luke’s writings, rejected the notion that Luke was a theologian.¹²⁷ Evangelicals maintained that Luke and the other Gospel writers were not theologians; they were historians. In Evangelical circles any discussion of the theological purpose of Luke and his narrative was muted. The Gospels and Acts were viewed as historical records, not accounts reflecting self-conscious theological concerns. Of course this approach essentially created a canon within the cannon and, by giving Paul pride of place as the “theologian” of the New Testament, had a significant Paulinizing effect on Evangelical theology. Evangelicals are just now beginning to come to terms with the theological significance of the biblical narratives.

Certainly Evangelicals have, in their own way, highlighted the missionary call. Generally this has come by way of the Great Commission in Matthew 28:18–20. This text has perhaps been more acceptable to Evangelicals than the commissioning material in Acts, since here Jesus is the One who has “all authority” and there is no overt commission for His disciples to work “signs and wonders.” Yet, even here, tensions persist. Is this commission valid for everyone in the church? And how does Jesus’ authority relate to the disciples He sends out? Here the Pentecostal reading of Acts provides clear and ready answers. On the basis of their reading of Acts, Pentecostals affirm that every disciple is called and empowered and every disciple is encouraged to expect that “signs and wonders” will accompany his or her witness. Evangelicals tend to be, at best, less clear on these matters.

More recently, Third Wave Evangelicals have highlighted the role of spiritual gifts in evangelism.¹²⁸ But, as I have pointed out elsewhere, this perspective, rooted as it is in Paul’s gift language, fails to offer a solid rationale for a high sense of expectancy with respect to divine enabling.¹²⁹ When it comes to spiritual gifts, the attitude of many is quite passive. Perhaps verbal witness is not our gift. What is lacking here is a clear promise of empowering that extends to every believer. Pentecostals find this in the narrative of Acts (Acts 1:8; 2:19). Furthermore, Luke highlights more than simply “signs and wonders.” His narrative is also filled with examples of bold, Spirit-inspired witness in the face of opposition and persecution (e.g., Luke 12:11–12; Acts 4:31). This staying power is an undisputable focus in Luke’s narrative, and it has been central to Pentecostal missions as well. Here again we need to hear Luke’s unique contribution.

I do not wish to minimize in any way the significance of the great doctrinal truths of Paul’s writings. I merely point out that since Paul was, for the most part, addressing specific needs in various churches, his writings tend to feature the inner life of the Christian community. His writings, with some significant exceptions, do not focus on the mission of the church to the world. So, for example, Paul has much to say about spiritual gifts and how they should be exercised in corporate worship (1 Cor. 12–14); however, he is relatively silent when it comes to the Pentecostal outpouring of the Spirit. It is probably fair to say that while Paul features the “interior” work of the Spirit (e.g., the fruit of the Spirit, Gal. 5:22–23); Luke features His “expressive” work (Acts 1:8). Thus, by appropriating in a unique way the significant contributions of Luke-Acts, Pentecostals have developed a piety with a uniquely outward or missiological thrust.

This Lukan and missiological emphasis, transmitted largely through the stories in the book of Acts, also points to a significant difference that distinguishes the Pentecostal movement from the Charismatic movement. Whereas the Pentecostal movement from the beginning has been a missionary movement, the Charismatic movement has largely been a movement of spiritual renewal within existing, mainline churches. Here, the names are instructive. The term Pentecostal points us to Pentecost and the missionary call and power that is given to the church (Acts 1–2). The term Charismatic, by way of contrast, points to the spiritual gifts that serve to edify the church, particularly as it gathers together for corporate worship (1 Cor. 12–14). Both movements have blessed the wider church and brought fresh insights and much-needed spiritual energy. However, the missiological legacy of the Pentecostal movement is conspicuous. The same cannot be said for the Charismatic movement.

Their unique appropriation of Luke-Acts not only distinguishes Pentecostals from their Evangelical and Charismatic brothers and sisters, it also highlights a significant difference that separates them from the liberal wing of the Protestant church. It should be noted that many liberals, unlike their Evangelical counterparts, have given more attention to the Gospels, and particularly to Jesus, than to Paul. In fact, some liberals go so far as to claim that Paul distorted or obscured the “pure” teachings of Jesus. It would appear, at least with this emphasis on the gospel narratives, that liberals and Pentecostals might find some common ground. But here again we encounter a major difference. Whereas liberals seek to understand Jesus in the light of a critical scholarship that discounts the possibility of the miraculous, Pentecostals, without hesitation, embrace the miracle-working Jesus of the New Testament who is both fully human and fully divine. The difference is profound. One has an apostolic faith to proclaim. The other is left with little but pious platitudes. Again, it is not difficult to see why one is a missionary movement and the other is not.

 

2. A Clear Message

Pentecostals, largely because of their unwavering commitment to the Bible and particularly the book of Acts, have a clear and uncomplicated message. The message of the apostles is also their message: Jesus is Lord and Savior. The simple message that “salvation is found in no one else” (Acts 4:12), only in Jesus, shines brightly in a world full of relativism, moral chaos, and spiritual darkness. Indeed, as sociologist David Martin notes, Pentecostals are having a tremendous impact among the poor of Latin America precisely because of the clarity of their message. With reference to the challenges facing poor families in Brazil, which are often ravaged by the pull of “a culture of machismo, drink, sexual conquest, and carnival,” he writes: “It is a contest between the home and the street, and what restores the home is the discontinuity and inner transformation offered by a demanding, disciplined faith with firm boundaries.”¹³⁰

The clarity of the Pentecostal message flows from the simple, straightforward manner in which we read the Bible. As I have noted, Pentecostals love the stories of the Bible. We identify with the stories that fill the pages of the Gospels and Acts, and the lessons gleaned from these stories are easily grasped and applied in our lives. For Pentecostals, the New Testament presents models that are to be emulated and guidelines that are to be followed.

It should be noted that our approach to doing theology is not dependent on mastering a particular set of writings, say, the works of Luther; or coming to terms with a highly complex theological system. Pentecostals also do not worry much about cultural distance or theological diversity within the canon. We do not lose sleep over how we should understand the miracle stories of the Bible or how we might resolve apparent contradictions in the Bible. Our commitment to the Bible as the Word of God enables us to face these questions with a sense of confidence. Furthermore, our experience of God’s presence serves as a constant reminder that calls us back to the basic purpose of our reading in the first place: to know God and His will for our lives more clearly. Finally, our sense of connection with the apostolic church and its mission, encouraged by the similarities between our experiences and those described in the biblical text, call us to focus on the challenge before us. Though we know that Jesus is the victor, the battle still rages. We have been called to serve as Jesus’ end-time prophets. So we read with purpose. Their stories are our stories.

In a world still populated by a huge number of illiterate or semi-literate people, the simplicity of the Pentecostal approach, rooted as it is in the biblical narrative, is often appreciated. The stories of the Bible and the stories of personal testimony often play an important role in Pentecostal worship and instruction. These stories make the communication of the message much easier, especially when cultural barriers need to be hurdled. This is particularly so when the stories connect with the felt needs of the hearers, as is generally the case with stories of spiritual deliverance, physical healing, and moral transformation. Most of the people who inhabit our world believe in God (or at least gods) and spiritual power. They simply do not know Him. They usually do, however, have a clear sense of their needs. In our world, a narrative approach that takes seriously the spiritual needs of people and the miraculous power of God is destined to win a hearing.

I would also add that, in accordance with the record of apostolic ministry contained in the book of Acts, Pentecostals have focused their attention on proclaiming the gospel and not on political or social action. This is not to say that Pentecostals have not had a significant social impact. On the contrary, Pentecostals around the world are the church of the poor and their virtues of “betterment, self-discipline, aspiration, and hard work,” nurtured by the life-transforming power of the Spirit experienced in the community of believers, enable this often marginalized group to survive and prosper. As David Martin aptly notes, “Pentecostals belong to groups which liberals cast in the role of victim, and in every way they refuse to play that role.”¹³¹ Although it often goes unrecognized, Pentecostals around the globe are having a dramatic social impact. But they are doing so precisely because they are focused on a clear biblical message of repentance, forgiveness, and transformation. This message builds worshipping communities that embody and foster virtues that build families, empower women, nurture children, and enable the poor to prosper.¹³²

The people who talk the most about helping the poor are generally not the poor. They also frequently lack the spiritual resources necessary to deal with the fundamental issues that confront the poor. In the contest between the home and the street, more is needed than helpful instruction and handouts. Nothing less than the transforming power of God’s presence is needed to foster the individual discipline and build the caring community required to win this battle. This is exactly what Pentecostals feature. Their approach is not the result of detailed sociological analysis or demographic studies. It does not flow from the pages of numerous case studies or the reports of well-heeled relief agencies. Rather, their approach flows from the book of Acts. By and large, Pentecostals do what Graham Twelftree suggests was the practice of the early church: they preach and demonstrate with signs and wonders the gospel to those outside the church; and they apply social justice within the church.¹³³

This approach has the advantage of featuring a message that clearly centers on the Word of God and thus serves to unite the community of faith. The farther afield the church moves into the realm of political or social action, the less it is able to speak with clarity about its suggested course of action. Should Christians support a welfare state as a compassionate choice for the poor? Or should they encourage less government intervention so that individuals and churches have more freedom and resources to minister to them? These are the kind of questions that individual Christians often consider. However, because these questions are not directly dealt with in the Scriptures, they normally generate conflicting responses. Pentecostals have, for the most part, avoided theological reflection and philosophical speculation that takes the church away from its apostolic foundations and its central truths. They show little interest in political theology or interfaith dialogue. Some may see this as a weakness, but I think history has shown that it is a great strength.

 

3. Signs and Wonders

Pentecostals routinely pray for the sick and take seriously the commission of Jesus to preach the good news and heal the sick. Again, the record of Acts is crucial, for the signs and wonders of the apostolic church form models for our contemporary practice. The impact of this approach is hard to miss.

One recent study of a Pentecostal group in Brazil, cited by Martin, found that almost half of the female converts and roughly a quarter of the male converts came to conversion through illness. “Pentecostals seek out those in need where they are, and the need is often signaled by illness.” The study noted how the locals faced “all the maladies of poverty from worms and parasites to dehydration and undernourishment, from snakebite to ovarian cancer.” In this context, prayer for healing takes on special significance. Martin eloquently describes the typical Pentecostal convert as “someone who has restored the home, holds the Bible fiercely in hand, and finds in the Holy Spirit the ecstatic lover of the soul and healer of body. For those whose words are discounted in the wider world He gives the Word as well as the tongue to express it.”¹³⁴

My own experience also confirms the important role that prayer for the sick plays in the growth of the Pentecostal church. On one occasion I attended a meeting of a house church in a large Chinese city. I traveled to the meeting with an American Christian who described himself as a “mild cessationist.” We arrived at the designated apartment early and noted that a group of five or six ladies had already arrived. My friend was curious about their stories and asked me, “How did these ladies become Christians?” So I said, “Let’s ask them.” I proceeded to translate the ladies’ responses to our question. Each one of the ladies referred to a miracle of healing, either in their own lives or in the life of a family member, as they described their journey to faith in Christ. In China this is by no means unusual, but rather, the norm.

The significance of this Pentecostal emphasis on prayer for the sick should not be minimized. Historically, Christianity has often expressed ambiguous and, at times, sub-biblical attitudes toward the body. The Gnostic tendency to view the body as evil and a prison of the soul has too often influenced the church. The result has been an emphasis on “the saving of souls” with little concern for the body and the concrete, physical needs of people here and now. Yet Pentecostals declare a different message. While Pentecostals are careful not to downplay humanity’s desperate need for forgiveness and moral transformation through the Spirit, they also boldly proclaim that Jesus is the Healer.

Pentecostals insist that divine healing is a sign of the presence of the Kingdom of God and that it should not be a rare and unusual experience limited to a select few. They call every believer to live with a sense of expectancy, recognizing that Jesus delights to bestow gifts of healing and bring physical wholeness to His people. This holistic understanding of humanity also enables Pentecostals to relate the gospel directly to the matter of material need. For example, David Yonggi Cho declares that God is a good God and as such, He wants to bestow upon us material, as well as spiritual and physical, blessings. Cho encourages believers to “lay aside the thinking that spiritual blessings and heaven are all we need, and that material blessings are out of place for us.”¹³⁵ Although some have criticized Cho for proclaiming what they believe to be an unbiblical “prosperity gospel,” I believe Allan Anderson’s words of warning need to be heard:

It is important to realize that Cho did not develop his teaching on success and prosperity from the context of the affluent West and the North American “health and wealth” preachers . . . it was in the context of the slums of Seoul among people recovering from the horrors of the Japanese occupation and the Korean War when Cho began to preach that poverty was a curse.¹³⁶

Additionally, it should be noted that Cho’s message is solidly Christocentric, centering on Jesus and His redemptive work.¹³⁷ This focus on Jesus and living in order to glorify Him brings balance to Cho’s message. “We must remember,” admonishes Cho, “that whatever we do, God is measuring the work we do for Him in a qualitative, not quantitative way. … Only the work which is done by the power of the Holy Spirit can be acceptable in the Kingdom of God.”¹³⁸ Indeed, for Cho, material blessing is inseparably related to mission. Cho declares, “We are in God’s business. We are in business to make a profit, not in money, but in souls.”¹³⁹ This outward, service-oriented focus separates Cho’s discussion about prosperity from a self-centered hedonism. And, while Cho highlights God’s desire to bless his people, he also speaks of the necessity of persevering through suffering and hardship: “Many people think that when you have faith, everything will flow easily, with few problems encountered. But it is important to remember that this is not so.”¹⁴⁰ In fact, Cho sees suffering as the pathway to spiritual growth. He writes, “The deeper our faith becomes, the more we have experiences that challenge us to allow God to break us, but the more we experience brokenness, the deeper our faith becomes.”¹⁴¹

The Pentecostal message, then, centers on the all-embracing salvation found in Jesus. It is designed to encourage faith and bring hope to people living in the midst of hopelessness and despair. And Pentecostals do not hesitate to relate the gospel to the whole spectrum of human need, whether it be spiritual, physical, or material. This holistic approach is a refreshing correction to traditional theologies that ignore the body and its needs. Ulrich Luz’s perceptive comments concerning Paul’s “theology of glory” might be aptly applied to the holistic theology of Pentecostalism as well. Luz notes that “the fear and panic at ‘enthusiasm’ and any theologia gloriae which marks out many Protestant theologians is unknown to Paul, for it is not a question of his own glory, but Christ’s.”¹⁴²

 

4. Limited Church Structure

Pentecostal churches tend to be congregational in polity and they do not have established or strict academic prerequisites for church leadership. This means that leaders in the church are recognized and selected by the members of the congregation largely due to the quality of their spiritual life and their pastoral gifting. Pentecostals place great importance on one’s sense of a call, spiritual gifting, and ministerial practice. They resist bureaucratic control, fearing that it will limit Spirit-inspired vision. New churches are often birthed spontaneously, planted by believers with little formal training who sense the Spirit leading them to “step out in faith.” These spiritual entrepreneurs frequently work through family relationships or friendship networks, moved by a sense of calling and spiritual vision. They are encouraged to develop vision and take risks through their participation in the life of the church. There is a strong egalitarian sense in the Pentecostal community, with every one encouraged to contribute. This is, of course, facilitated by an emphasis on gifts of the Spirit and symbolized in speaking in tongues, which can be viewed as a sacrament that is not limited to or controlled by the clergy.

By way of contrast, churches that are highly institutional and tightly structured do not tend to encourage or nurture the charismatic dimension. A key reason for this has to do with the way leaders are selected and how services are conducted. Churches that select leaders on the basis of their training and their standing within the institution are often unable to make room for many spiritually qualified and gifted leaders. The more rigid the selection process, the harder it is to make allowance for gifted leaders who do not fit the normal pattern. This problem is clearly illustrated in the government-sanctioned church of China (TSPM),¹⁴³ where the process for becoming an ordained minister is very narrowly defined.

A prospective minister must, above all, study at a TSPM seminary. This is tremendously limiting since educational levels in the countryside are often too low for admission, the prospective student must have recommendations from a TSPM pastor and thus prior experience in a TSPM church, and the number of students admitted into TSPM seminaries each year is ridiculously low due to government restrictions. After graduation, the young believer often serves an apprenticeship in a designated church under designated leadership. Given the mixed character of the TSPM, this can be a most challenging experience for earnest young believers. Finally, the ministerial candidate must be viewed as acceptable by both church and government leaders in order to be ordained.

With these factors in mind, we can understand why so many gifted young believers gravitate to house church settings. Here is an environment where they can exercise leadership gifts without going through a rigorous process that in most cases is not open to them anyway. Many opportunities to explore and develop their sense of calling are available in small group settings. And, while underground training opportunities are increasingly available to house church Christians, strong emphasis is placed on practical ministry. This tends to foster and strengthen the development of spiritual gifts. In the house church, anyone may emerge as a leader. The only qualifications are spiritual in nature.

It is important to note that TSPM churches tend to be dominated by the clergy. They do not feature participation or ministry on the part of the laity. If possible, the Sunday worship services are always led by professional clergy. Furthermore, small group meetings where lay leadership might be encouraged and developed are often not tolerated. Meetings must take place at designated places, at designated times, and with designated leadership. This limitation seriously impacts the life of the church, for these are precisely the contexts where gifts of the Spirit might be exercised and the body built up.

Of course the house churches are extremely different. Virtually everyone participates and anyone may contribute a song, a testimony, or a prayer. When I attend TSPM churches I am always encouraged, but generally I know that I will not be an active participant in terms of edifying the larger group. When I attend a house church service, I always go with a sense of expectancy, knowing that I will have many opportunities to share, to pray, and to encourage others.

These contrasts are not unique to the churches of China. Many traditional and state churches around the world insist that their ministers go through a rigid path of professional training. They also emphasize a clear path of hierarchical authority that features accountability. This kind of institutional approach may foster stability, but it also encourages conformity and stifles flexibility, creativity, and risk-taking. Fundamentally, the ministry is often viewed differently: it is seen as a profession to pursue rather than a calling to follow.

The ethos of Pentecostal churches is noticeably different. We may sum up by saying that Pentecostals are the “free market capitalists” in the economy of church life. Rigid control from a central bureaucracy is rarely tolerated; rather, the calling, gifting, and vision of every believer is affirmed and encouraged. Churches are thus planted with little or no encouragement or financial support from denominational leaders, often by surprising people —it matters not if they are young, unschooled, or female—with a strong sense that God has called and empowered them for the task at hand. Little wonder that Acts 4:13 is a favorite Pentecostal text: “When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.” Pentecostals see this life-transforming encounter with Jesus as the essential ingredient for effective ministry. Since other qualifications fade into insignificance by comparison, everyone is potentially a pastor, evangelist, or missionary. The church is, after all, a community of Spirit-inspired prophets.

Many will point to the obvious risks inherent in this rather loose approach to church structure. An emphasis on strong, visionary leaders easily can lead to “apostolic” authoritarianism.¹⁴⁴ This danger is somewhat mitigated by the emphasis on the gifts and calling of every member in the  congregation. However, tensions between strong leaders can often lead to church splits. What about the obvious potential for schism? This is certainly a natural and perhaps inevitable consequence of this more organic, charismatic approach to church life. Yet this weakness also contains within it an important strength. While churches tend to become more bureaucratic over time, the seeds for renewal are always germinating and ready to burst forth into fragrant life. As Martin notes, “For each instance where enthusiasm cools into settled forms and rationalization, there are others which break the moulds, above all in the huge population of the non-western world.”¹⁴⁵

 

5. An Emphasis on Experience

Although Pentecostals have always been people of the Book and committed to the Bible, they have also been quick to emphasize that the same experiences that shaped the life of the early church are available today. The New Testament church represents a model for their life and ministry, and this includes their experience of God. As the narrative of Acts reveals, the apostolic church was marked by powerful experiences that generated remarkable courage and intense emotions. How else do we explain the courageous witness of Peter and John (Acts 4:8–20) or the remarkable tranquility and compassion of Stephen (Acts 7:60)? How else do we explain the visions, the joy, the ecstatic praise, and the unwavering conviction that Jesus is alive? The early Christians were gripped by their experience of God.

Many in the modern era shied away from the enthusiasm of the apostolic church, viewing it as a primitive and relatively uncouth response to religious truth. They felt that enlightened and civilized people should respond in a more cognitive and serene manner. But none of this dissuaded Pentecostals from embracing the biblical record and seeking a profound encounter with God in Christ through the Holy Spirit. This approach has enabled the Pentecostal movement, at least in modern times, to bring together an emphasis on experience with a commitment to the authority of the Bible. Rather than seeing these twin themes as competing with one another, most Pentecostals view them as complementary. Certainly, Pentecostals would affirm the importance of a cognitive grasp of basic, fundamental truths. Thus, Pentecostals have established thousands of Bible schools around the world. However, Pentecostals do not tend to look to creeds or doctrinal statements for a verification of true faith. A cognitive understanding of doctrinal truth may be helpful and even necessary, but it is not proof of spiritual vitality. Rather, Pentecostals see fervent prayer, a willingness to suffer for the gospel, and a deep sense of God’s leading as signs of true spiritual life. Pentecostal theology is, at its heart, a theology of encounter.¹⁴⁶ Pentecostal doctrine—with its emphasis on baptism in the Spirit, speaking in tongues, and gifts of the Spirit—and Pentecostal praxis reflect this reality.

This positive and welcoming attitude toward experience marks Pentecostal services around the globe. Pentecostal meetings, although generally following a simple pattern of singing, preaching, testimonies, and prayer, nonetheless are often punctuated by manifestations of the Spirit and frequently end with an extended time of corporate prayer. The manifestations of the Spirit might take the form of a word of prophecy, a message in tongues (which is then interpreted for the congregation), or a word of encouragement. Most services end with an altar call “so that the goal of the preaching can be sealed with a season of prayer.”¹⁴⁷ This time of prayer is viewed as the true climax of the service and an important opportunity for people to encounter God in a personal and tangible way. At this time special needs may be voiced. When a request for prayer is offered, the individual is frequently surrounded by a group of supportive intercessors who, with the laying on of hands, cry out to God on behalf of the person in need. Routinely, the sick are anointed with oil and prayer for healing is offered. Those struggling with temptation or addictions may be bathed in prayer as well, with the prayer extending until there is a sense of spiritual breakthrough or victory. Although this dynamic and participatory type of worship service is perhaps less common in the large Pentecostal churches of the West, generally even in these churches one can find a small group setting where these kind of experiences are encouraged and nurtured. It all makes for an interesting and exciting time. Pentecostal services are rarely dull.

In a world filled with people who long to experience God, to feel His presence, and encounter Him at a deeply personal and emotional level, this kind of dynamic worship service is very attractive.¹⁴⁸ The largely cognitive and sedate approach of traditional churches fails to connect with these needs. In fact, for the many illiterate or semi-literate people who populate our planet, a cerebral approach is virtually incomprehensible. They desire to meet God: a God who is tangible, whose presence can be felt, and whose impact can be seen and heard—a God who has power over evil spirits and who can change lives. Pentecostals proclaim that this is the God who is revealed in Jesus. The contrast with the cold, liturgical formalism and largely cognitive orientation of the traditional churches is evident. Is it any wonder that Pentecostal churches are growing?

Some will still remain skeptical. They will ask: Is not this approach to church life, with its emphasis on ecstatic experience, emotional response, and spiritual power, filled with inherent dangers? Might it not encourage us to feature emotionally manipulative methods and to focus on superficial matters? Yes, undoubtedly, there are dangers. However, there is more danger in an approach that fails to make room for the full range of human experience, including the emotions, in our encounter with God. I have observed that post-Enlightenment Westerners tend to be far more worried about “emotional excess” than their brothers and sisters in the East. As a result, they often do not allow significant room for the place of emotions in their spiritual encounters. Non-westerners delight in “feeling” God’s presence. If the biblical record is to be our standard, then perhaps we in the West should take careful notice.

 

Conclusion

I have argued that Pentecostal church growth flows naturally from five characteristics that mark Pentecostal church life. Each of these characteristics may be traced to the distinctive way that Pentecostals emphasize and read the book of Acts. While Pentecostal churches adapt to the various settings and cultures in which they exist, these foundational characteristics transcend specific cultural settings. They are common to Pentecostal churches around the globe precisely because all of these churches share a common commitment to the Bible and, more specifically, to a preferential reading of Acts. In short, since Pentecostals view the early church as described in the book of Acts as their model, the narrative of Acts represents a powerful and cohesive force that shapes global Pentecostal praxis.

As we have noted, each of these characteristics entails a certain amount of risk. Bold proclamation of the gospel often leads to persecution. A focus on evangelism and discipleship may be ridiculed by a world that only values material prosperity and remains blind to the holistic impact of the gospel. The message that miracles of healing and spiritual deliverance accompany the in-breaking of God’s reign may also be rejected by skeptics as unscientific and manipulative. A church that accepts leaders with limited theological training and strong vision clearly runs the risk of chaos and schism. And, finally, an emphasis on experience will often be criticized by the affluent and cultured as superficial and unsophisticated. There are many reasons why the traditional churches have chosen not to take the Pentecostal path. Yet Pentecostal churches, for the most part, have been able to navigate these risky roads. They have pursued the journey with joy and a strong sense of purpose. And they have succeeded.

Perhaps a key to the success of Pentecostal churches can be found in their willingness to take risks. Desperate people take risks. They have little to lose. Historically, Pentecostals have been people with little to lose. As a result, they have been desperate for God. Globally, the majority of Pentecostals still live on the wrong side of the tracks: they are the poor, the powerless, and the marginalized.¹⁴⁹ So, they are hungry for God. And so, too, they recognize that they are absolutely dependent upon Him. Pentecostals talk about God’s power because they know that they are weak. They pray for God’s healing and deliverance because they have no other hope. They seek God’s presence because only in Him do they find joy and peace. In a word, Pentecostals are desperate. And Luke’s narrative reminds us that God loves to work in and through desperate people:

 

He has brought down rulers from their thrones,

but has lifted up the humble.

He has filled the hungry with good things,

but has sent the rich away empty. (Luke 1:52–53)

 

PR

 

This is Chapter 5 from Robert Menzies, Pentecost: This Story is Our Story. Used with permission.

 

Notes

125 See Miller’s comments at www.usc.edu/uscnews/newsroom/news_release.php?id=558.

126 Ibid.

127 See Menzies and Menzies, Spirit and Power, 37–45.

128 See for example John Wimber and Kevin Springer, Power Evangelism (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1991).

129 Menzies and Menzies, Spirit and Power, 145–58.

130 David Martin, Pentecostalism: The World Their Parish (Oxford: Blackwell, 2 002), 1 06; prior quote from 105.

132 For an objective but positive assessment, see Martin, Pentecostalism.

133 Graham H. Twelftree, People of the Spirit: Exploring Luke’s View of the Church (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 203. Twelftree concludes, “Social action, in terms of caring for the physical needs of the outsider, plays no part in Luke’s view of mission” (203). On the priority of proclamation over social action in Luke’s view of mission, see also Robert Menzies, “Complete Evangelism: A Review Essay,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 1 3 (1998), 1 33–42. More affluent Pentecostals are beginning to engage in a variety of creative approaches that enable them to connect with non-Christians, including business enterprises and social programs. Whether they will be able to maintain their historic focus on the priority of sharing the gospel and making disciples remains to be seen. Since, from a Pentecostal perspective, the gospel is our most precious gift, I would suggest that love demands nothing less.

134 Martin, Pentecostalism, 106. Prior quotes from 105–6.

135 David Yonggi Cho, Salvation, Health, and Prosperity: Our Threefold Blessings in Christ (Altamonte Springs, FL: Creation House, 1987), 54–55. 136 Allan Anderson, “The Contextual Pentecostal Theology of David Yonggi Cho” in David Yonggi Cho: A Close Look at His Theology and Ministry, eds. W. Ma, W. Menzies, and H. Bae (Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies 7, no. 1 [Baguio: APTS Press, 2004]), 155.

137 See Anderson, “David Yonggi Cho,” 154.

138 Yonggi Cho, The Fourth Dimension, Volume Two: More Secrets for a Successful Faith Life (Plainfield: Bridge Publishing, 1983), 16.

139 Yonggi Cho, Fourth Dimension, Volume Two, 2.

140 Paul Yonggi Cho, The Fourth Dimension: The Key to Putting Your Faith to Work for a Successful Life (Plainfield: Logos, 1979), 140.

141 Yonggi Cho, Salvation, 39.

142 Ulrich Luz, “Paul as Mystic,” in The Holy Spirit and Christian Origins: Essays in Honor of James D. G. Dunn, eds. G. Stanton, B. Longenecker, and S. Barton (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2004), 141.

143 TSPM stands for “The Three Self Patriotic Movement.”

144 In his book on the Charismatic movement in Britain, Nigel Scotland chronicles a litany of problems related to authoritarian tendencies in church leadership. Although past extremes appear to have sobered the movement and much progress has been made, the abuse of “apostolic” authoritarianism is clearly a key concern for the future (Charismatics and the Next Millennium: Do They Have a Future? [London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1995], see chapters 4 and 5).

145 Martin, Pentecostalism, 176.

146 Keith Warrington, Pentecostal Theology: A Theology of Encounter (London: T & T Clark, 2008), 21.

147 Menzies and Menzies, Spirit and Power, 185.

148 Scotland notes that whereas “Western evangelicalism was very much a one-dimensional affair in which the middle classes … looked for ‘sound teaching,’” the charismatic movement, with its experiential focus has met a growing desire for “deeper emotional and spiritual satisfaction” (Charismatics, 24).

149 Martin concludes, “We have in Pentecostalism and all its associated movements the religious mobilization of the culturally despised, above all in the non-western world, outside any sponsorship whatever, whether of their own local intelligentsias, or of the clerical and secular intelligentsias of the West” (Pentecostalism, 167).