"Helping You Equip Others"
  Contact us

Donate to the Pneuma Foundation through JustGive–recommended for international contributors

   The March 2001 Pneuma Informer

In this Issue:



Editor's Note

As one of the founders of the Pneuma Foundation, I am continually surprised at the warm reception the publications of this ministry have had. I am also pleased with the favor we have received from so many regarding our vision and purpose, and our positions such as never asking for financial contributions.

This should not have been a surprise. We know now that our suspicions were true. There are many other Pentecostal and charismatic leaders who have seen the need and have longed for a balanced biblical Pentecostal/charismatic perspective that is doctrinally sound and relevant to the needs of the local church.

We do need to continue to ask for your prayers and feedback. There are so many movements and issues today, we all have a great need to know the direction to go and whom to be listening to. We do not claim to have all the answers, but we desire to work through these issues with you in order to move forward together in what God has us doing in this day and hour.

I invite you to contact me through the mail or through E-mail. It is always a pleasure to converse with our members and friends. Send me an email at Editor. I also invite you to look at the end of this E-newsletter for our principles of ministry and our vision for leading Pentecostal and charismatic believers to a greater understanding of God's Word.

Thanks for being a part of this ministry.


– Raul Mock, Executive Editor
March 2001

Resources You Can Use: History Evangelism

Visiting ancient European churches or art museums isn't the sort of thing most people have in mind when they talk about evangelism. Yet, as the founder of L'Abri, Francis Schaeffer, proved cultural evangelism is one of the most effective ways of reaching totally unchurched people.

Now Irving Hexham, a student of Schaeffer and professor at the University of Calgary, has produced an innovative Web Site devoted to what apologists call "pre-evangelism." It's doesn't directly preach the gospel. Rather it allows the rich Christian heritage found in European culture to proclaim God's glory in a low-key way intended to attract the secular traveler interested in history. There's a section on great Christian leaders with numerous rare portraits and another that helps visitors appreciate and understand the significance of different styles of church building and Christian art.

The Christian Travelers Guides Web Site, which is linked to the new Zondervan Christian Travelers Series of books, also provides valuable information for Christian travelers about Christian heritage tours, places to stay, and even what to do with kids on a European vacation. This Web Site can be found at: www.christian-travelers-guides.com [this link may not be working as of August, 2003]



Excerpts from the Spring 2001 issue (Vol 4, No 2) of the Pneuma Review

The Pneuma Review is a quarterly printed journal of ministry resources and theology for Pentecostal and charismatic ministries and leaders.



From "Singing in the Spirit," from the Praying in the Spirit Series, By Robert Graves

Not long ago I had in my office on separate events two ministers from different churches. One was a minister of music, the other a senior pastor. Each one of them told me of a woman in his church who could not, as the saying goes, carry a tune in a bucket. Pastor William Sipes of North Mesquite Assembly of God in Texas spoke very candid y of having stood next to his parishioner and having painfully experienced her attempted singing. "She would sing off-key with a very broken and cracked voice," he remembered. There is, of course, nothing new about this. But Reverend Sipes testifies that something incredible happened when this woman sang in the Spirit. A once broken, cacophonous voice became a velvet, melodious one. Reverend Claude Plunk's story is identical to this. In addition, he noted a visible change as well: "her face seemed to radiate the joy of the Lord."

I, too, have heard Christians who were not known for their singing ability break into glossolalic singing that far surpassed the quality of their normal and natural voices. This is not to say that all glossolalic singing will be better than native singing. In fact, if it is, it may be the exception rather than rule. But singing in tongues is certainly scriptural. Paul calls it singing in the Spirit as opposed to singing with the mind. It is right out of 1 Corinthians 14: "So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind" (verse 15; emphasis added). Unfortunately, this is all that Paul had to say about singing in the Spirit. As a matter of fact, this is all the entire Bible has to say about singing in the Spirit. It only seems logical, though, that if one can speak and sing in his native language and one can speak in tongues, he should be able also to sing in tongues. If one can speak, one can sing. (Incidentally, since Paul may have meant singing in the human spirit, some may question my calling it singing in the Spirit, upper-case. I feel, however, given its context, that it is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit and results from a mixture the human and the divine. Therefore, it is at once singing in the spirit and singing in the Spirit.)

There is a problem, however. If the Church is going to practice singing in Spirit and if the Bible says so little about it, how is the Church to use such singing? The answer, we know, must come from Scripture. And it seems to me that the best approach is to apply what the Bible has to say about (1) music in general, (2) singing in general, and (3) speaking in tongues. I do not believe that the practice of singing in the Spirit will be misused if handled in this manner. Not only can we draw principles of structure through this approach, but we can perhaps get a better idea of the meaningfulness of the glossolalic utterance.

All but two religions have divorced music from worship. It is true that many religions have their melancholy and even macabre chants and dirges, but only Judaism and Christianity have developed music to a high degree of proficiency and integrated it into divine and joyful worship (McCommon, p. 5). In light of the importance of music in Christianity (someone has said that there has been no great revival that was not closely linked to song), it is not difficult to understand the old adage "Music is a handmaiden of religion." Music, as a servant, waits upon its master. Music turns men's minds toward God-this is its purpose in the Church, not to entertain but, through the emotions, to deepen man's relationship with God and to intensify his yearning, as lowly creature, to worship the High Creator (Alford, pp. 19-20).

Music loosens us from the rationalism that can constrict the mind and spirit. Sometimes, as I have suggested, our minds can actually come between us and God; the same anchor that saves a vessel from beaching and thus destruction may also serve to fasten it to the bottom of the sea when it should be racing towards its destination. Music loosens the spirit from its earthly moorings, from the rivets of rationalism and strictures of the cerebral. Music takes us beyond word intelligibility in its attempt to express the inexpressible (Johannson, pp. 96-100).

Music takes us to the mystery, the wonder, the awe of God. We cannot follow the gray-nerve road of the cortex and get all the way there. At some point we must leap from the stationary platform onto the mystical transportation music provides. As has been said, music can indeed take us into another world and "unveil heights and depths in life not otherwise accessible to our observation" (Hunter, ed. pp. 34-35).

Has the similarity between glossolalia and music occurred to you? It seems that one could build an apologetic for glossolalia upon the analogy of music. Both are articulate, but neither expresses explicit meaning. Both use the creativity of the individual as it is inspired by the Spirit. Both bypass propositional statements in order to take the worshiper beyond the earthly to the Mystery of the Other. And both are universally accessible.

Furthermore, music is charismatic in more than the general ways mentioned. In 1 Samuel 10:1-6, the anointing of Saul is recorded. Samuel poured oil on his head and gave him instructions that would lead him to a group of men prophesying while enjoying the playing of musical instruments: "As you approach the town," Samuel told him, "you will meet a procession of prophets coming down from the high place with lyres, tambourines, flutes and harps being played before them, and they will be prophesying." Samuel continues, "The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you in power, and you will prophesy with them; and you will be changed into a different person." Obviously, music is no stranger to charismatic activity. It may even be said that one enhances the other. In 1930, Presbyterian Alexander McCall, commenting on Saul's charismatic experience, said, "This is one of the several instances in Scripture in which music furnishes the atmosphere which makes divine power effective" (Hunter, ed. p. 131).

The writer of 2 Chronicles records a scene around the ark of the covenant "All the Levites who were musicians . . . stood on the east side of the altar, dressed in fine linen and playing cymbals, harps and lyres. They were accompanied by 120 priests sounding trumpets . . . Then the temple of Lord was filled with a cloud, and priests could not perform their service because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the temple of God" (5:12-14). The New American Standard Bible says that "the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud . . ." (verse 14). In other words, the priests were involuntarily prostrated, so powerful was the divine presence in that musical assembly.

I mentioned earlier the melancholy dirges of other religions. Judaism and Christianity provide a striking contrast to this kind of worship. All references to music in the Scriptures are in the context of joy and happiness (Topp, p. 16). In fact, Scripture suggests music ceases when joy ceases (Psalm 137; Amos 8:3,10). Singing in the Spirit works very much the same way. It, too, is a result a life overflowing with joy. This is apparent from the very expressions on the faces of those singing in the Spirit. Glossolalic singing is one way of following James' command: "Is anyone happy? Let him sing psalms of praise" (5: 13). It may even be said that the use of the prayer language in singing may actually replace anxiety and mourning with peace and joy. Even as the music from David's harp eased Saul's discomfort (1 Samuel 16: 23), so the charismatic experience of singing in the Spirit may bring comfort to the singer.

I am amazed by the many statements non-charismatics make about music that are remarkably applicable to glossolalic singing. For example, as your read the following quotations, substitute singing in the Spirit for music and see if the statements do not retain their meaningfulness:
Music . . . endeavors . . . to express that which is too luminous, too high, too holy for the ordinary language of public address. [And it] . . . came into being as man's effort to express the ineffable qualities he feels in nature, in humanity, and in the realm of the Spirit. . . . The ordinary language of ordinary day cannot express our most exalted thoughts, and we grasp for a symbol more adequately thus to do. (Hunter, ed. p. 228)
Thus far, I have been discussing instrumental music as it affects worship and its kinship to glossolalic singing. There is, of course, another side of music, the vocal side. The way in which the writers of Scripture address the use of songs is, I believe, a telling commentary of their appreciation of song (and regard for the Creator) and their opinion of its appropriateness to link man's spirit with the Holy Spirit.

Isaiah wrote, "Sing for joy, O heavens . . . shout aloud, O earth beneath. Burst into song, you mountains, you forests and your trees. . ." (44:23). The poet of 1 Chronicles said, "Let the sea resound, and all that is in it; let the fields be jubilant, and everything in them! Then the trees of the forest will sing, they will sing for joy before Lord . . ." (16:32-33). If it may be said to inanimate objects, "Praise the Lord," how much more should the only creatures with God-consciousness praise the Lord? Jesus hints of this praise mandate in His hyperbole to the Pharisees who had told Him to rebuke the followers who were offering up honor and praise upon Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem. "I tell you," Jesus said, "if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out" (Luke 19:40). It will be a sad day indeed when the Church of the Lord Jesus takes a second seat to rocks!

There are hundreds of other references in the Scriptures. In fact, the longest book of Bibles is a song book-the Psalms. Since a thoroughgoing theology of singing in the Spirit based upon explicit statements of Scripture is impossible, we must turn to what the Bible says about singing in general. The Scriptures provide several important principles the we might apply to singing in the Spirit.

Before it is thought that I am building assumption upon assumption, it might be wise to show that there are some explicit statements about singing in the Spirit that warrant comparing it to singing in one's native language. In the Scriptures, singing may be divided into three types: (1) praise, (2) petition, (3) thanksgiving. The term "praise," it seems, may be broad enough to include "thanksgiving." We can distinguish songs of praise from songs of thanksgiving, by the reason behind the song. The reason for praise would be the nature of God. "Jehoshaphat appointed men to sing to the Lord and to praise him for the splendor of his holiness as they went out at the head of the army saying: 'Give thanks to the Lord, for his love endures forever'" (2 Chronicles 20:21). On the other hand, the reason for giving thanks is the activity of God. For example, the Israelites sang a song of thanksgiving to God for their deliverance from the armies of Pharaoh: "Sing to the Lord, for he is highly exalted. The horse and its rider he has hurled into the sea" (Exodus 15:21). The familiar words of the psalmist, "He leadeth me . . . he restoreth me . . .," are words of thanksgiving for the activity of God in the life of the psalmist.

Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 14 that glossolalic singing is for praise and thanksgiving: "I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind. If you are praising God with your spirit, how can one who finds himself among those who do not understand say 'Amen' to your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you all are saying? You may be giving thanks well enough, but the other man is not edified" (verses 15-17, emphasis added).

In addition to offering praise and thanks unto the Lord, songs may be used to petition the Lord. The Psalms are full of petitions: "Help me, O Lord my God; save me in accordance with your love" (109:26); "Teach me your way, O Lord. . . . Turn to me and have mercy on me; grant your strength to your servant . . ." (86:11, 16); "Hear my cry, O God; listen to my prayer" (61:1); "I cried out to God for help; I cried out to God to hear me. When I was in distress, I sought the Lord; at night I stretched out untiring hands . . ." (77:1-2). Certainly, we can petition Lord with singing. Too often we forget this. And Romans 8:26-27 suggests that we may also present to God our petitions in a language of the Spirit: "We do not know what we ought to pray, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will."




Editorial: Words Heard on a Random Walk By H. Murray Hohns


I remember walking down one of those lovely wide stairways that used to descend into hotel lobbies. This one was in the Bellevue Stratford Hotel in downtown Philadelphia, and my walk took place on July 4, 1964. While I am long gone, the hotel is still there though it has undergone a number of renovations and name changes.

I still remember that descent since when I reached the lobby floor I overheard a woman standing nearby loudly say, "My God, this place is full of Holy Rollers." Her tone was anything but joyful, nor did it indicate pleasure at her discovery. Her voice was strident and derisive. There was no question that she wanted out of there and that she wanted to be away from all those strange people now.

Perhaps it is the irony I felt 37 years ago that makes me remember this incident. I had come to the hotel in the hope of becoming a "Holy Roller." The Full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship International was holding a regional convention at the Bellevue Stratford that weekend. I had come 90 miles to get there because I badly wanted what this lady obviously detested.

My delight is that God graciously granted my hope that night and that I have been a "Holy Roller" for many years. I really do not roll around in my expression of personal piety, but I knew what the lady meant and I think you do as well. I wonder sometimes if anything ever happened to that woman to change her feelings. Did God ever use that wonderful gift of closeness to reveal Himself to her? Are her feet on the highway of holiness? Or did she miss the One to Whom she owed all.

Abraham and Sarah had an experience somewhat akin to that which I just described. We find it in Genesis 12 and 13 where we read that soon after Abraham and Sarah arrived in the land to which they were called and which had been promised to them as an eternal possession, they were on their way to Egypt to avoid starvation. Why would God call them to a place where they would face a famine and have to leave right away to go to a place they did not belong?

We read further that Abraham began to get frightened as he approached Egypt and that he was soon concocting a scheme to protect himself. Did you ever get scared when you were in the center of the will of God and do something to help the Lord protect you? Well Father Abraham sure did. He got his wife to agree to pass herself off as his sister since her beauty was such that her husband figured he would soon be dead once she was spotted.

Sarah was beautiful according to Scripture and obviously to Abraham's view. Sarah was also 65, which means we might have to re-think our first thoughts when we read this portion. Now I know that Sarah lived to 127, but I submit there was something more to Sarah's beauty than figure and face.

Nonetheless when Pharaoh heard about this lady that had just arrived in a caravan, the word was she was something to behold and we read that he took her into his palace. Something happened there that made Pharaoh treat Abraham extremely well.

What happened? Why did Pharaoh reward Abraham? Could it be that Sarah brought the presence of God into the palace for the first time ever? Sarah lived meritoriously. She was filled with the presence and knowledge of God. Did the famine occur so that these two could bring that overwhelming presence into part of the world where it had never been before? Sarah added a dimension to that palace that still reverberates in that part of the world 3,500 years later.

You and I often have an opportunity to bring that precious presence to places and people where it has never penetrated or permeated. You can add dimension to the life of others. Our meritorious behavior can win ladies at the bottom of a hotel staircase to want to be filled with God's Spirit, or our behavior can mean she and others are "out of here" and sadly miss what God had intended. Being a believer is not easy. There is a challenge and responsibility when you live in the Kingdom of God. Sarah set a powerful example when she traveled that year. Will we?




From "The Secret Codes in Matthew: Examining Israel's Messiah" from the Messianic Foundations Series, by Kevin Williams. Part 1.

In 1997, At the Church of the Good Shepherd in Wayne, Ohio, an Israeli believer (and incidentally, an ordained Assembly of God pastor) asked the congregation, "Who can tell me the first verse of the Old Testament?" Naturally, everyone chimed in; "In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth."

"Quite right," he said. "It appears we have a room full of Torah scholars."
Knowing better, the group smirked coyly.
"Okay," he continued. "How many of you know the first verse of the New Testament?"
A still hush fell over the sanctuary. Perplexed faces glanced at those seated around them, like an unstudied pupil trying to spy answers off a neighbor's paper.
"Come now," came his prompting. "Isn't this a New Testament church? Certainly you know the first verse of your Scriptures as well as you know the Torah."
Again, uneasy quiet.
In truth, the vast majority of Christians do not know the first verse of the New Testament:

"The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham . . . ."

It doesn't sound terribly exciting does it? On the surface, it doesn't have that same sense of drama we find in Genesis 1:1. It's merely a list. If you've spent any time in the Pentateuch, you know how the lists of genealogies can go on and on filling up columns of text that are frequently used as a cure for insomnia.

Yet, these are the Holy Scriptures. Everything that appears is there for a divine purpose. They are a part of the incredibly designed and ordained record of the Almighty God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (which is in its own right, a genealogical label distinguishing the God of the Bible from the pagan gods).

If genealogies are important to the Creator of the entire universe, if the precious pages of the Word of God have space dedicated to a genealogical record, isn't it logical to surmise that there must be a message there for us? If not for us, certainly for someone!

In Orthodox Judaism, three systematic approaches are taken when trying to understand Scripture. Each has a relevance all its own and applies to the reader's life, usually at the level of study. These three approaches can often be used as well when studying the B'rit Chadasha, the New Testament.

The three approaches are:
   P'shat = literal
   Remez = deeper figurative
   Sod = deeper spiritual


A fine example to illustrate these three interpretive forms is found in John 7:38 "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.'"

Using the p'shat form, the simplest, most literal application, John 7:38 feels very lyrical. Believe in the Messiah and something wonderfully poetic happens and flows out onto others around you. Even if the actual reality is missed on the reader, the grand imagery it paints is relevant on some level of appreciation. However, if you take the time, you cannot find in Scriptures any verse, which reads, "From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water." So what are you to do?

This is when the rabbis would take a look at the remez application. The simple meaning, or p'shat, paints a delightful picture, but there appears to be something else going on, particularly since there is no directly quoted Scripture verse in John 7:38. The meaning, using the remez interpretation, requires us to look at the figurative meaning of the verse. In this case, looking at the broader context of the entire Scripture. Where is "living water" referenced in the Hebrew Bible? All of these passages come into play in discovering the remez meaning of John 7:38. Living water has a role to play in the Tanakh (Old Testament) and each reference may have relevance to Yeshua's proclamation.

Looking into this second level of biblical understanding requires work on behalf of the Bible student. Generally, it is not handed to you. Rather, it is more akin to asking your mother how to spell a word, and being told, "Go look it up in the dictionary." We like to be spoon-fed, and the Bible does spoon-feed us instruction. But if we will mine a little deeper, putting some effort into it, we uncover so much more and are made richer by the experience.

There are rabbis who will take a passage of Scripture and dig even deeper, applying the sod model. As we examine Matthew further, we are going to dig into the living water-known in Hebraic studies as the mayim chayim-and reveal some of its meanings within ancient Judaism. These meanings will give us a sod understanding of Yeshua's statement on a deeper, spiritual level.

The purpose of this study over all, as we glean the passages of Matthew, is to reveal the remez and the sod interpretations where reasonable and applicable. We assume that the reader already has a firm grasp of the p'shat, or literal interpretation. This will not only give us an Hebraic perspective of this gospel of Jesus Christ, but it will help us peer beneath the surface into the depth of Scripture and what the Messiah was saying in his life, death, and resurrection. When we are done, and we are asked, "Was Jesus the promised Messiah?" we will be able to answer with a stronger conviction that resounds, "Yes and Amen!"

Let's begin with those genealogies in the first chapter of Matthew. . . .




From "Pentecostalism and Ecumenism: Past, Present, and Future" by Amos Yong. Part 2 of 5

II. Classical Pentecostal Objections to Ecumenism

Given this biblically defined ecumenism, then, why is it that most Pentecostals remain staunchly anti-ecumenical? While many reasons have been given, three stand out as representing a fair consensus. First, Pentecostals believe that the unity of the Church should be understood spiritually rather than visibly. Second, many Pentecostals believe that the ecumenical movement represents churches that have betrayed the essence of the gospel, especially doctrinally. Finally, correlative with the previous objection, Pentecostals are generally concerned that non-Pentecostal churches are devoid of the life that is found only in the Spirit of God as 'pentecostally' experienced and defined, thus fulfilling the biblical prophecy of widespread apostasy in the last days. Let me respond to each in order.

Objection 1: Spiritual rather than visible unity

Pentecostals have always valued the spiritual unity that they have found in the experience of the charismata, especially speaking in tongues. Manifestations of tongues and other spiritual gifts are, for them, a more incontrovertible sign of the Spirit's presence and activity in their lives and congregations. The institutional, organizational, and architectural forms of non-Pentecostal churches do not impress Pentecostals. These are considered to be merely outward signs of pomp and circumstance that all human constructions can display, but which do not guarantee inward and spiritual vitality. Rather, these outward paraphernalia are symptomatic of the hierarchicalism, patriarchalism, and traditionalism endemic to the history of the church, all of which has been conveniently covered up or obscured by stain glass windows, Gothic architecture, and iconography that is distracting at best and bewitching at worst. The point is that the unity of the church is found, not in outward forms of organization and agreement, but in the spiritual togetherness that genuine Christians experience through the Spirit in the name of Jesus.

A brief response proceeds along three lines. First, Pentecostals should recognize that this argument actually has its roots in the Reformation and post-Reformation era and is driven by an ideology of individualism. The basic assumption is that God works first and foremost through individuals and not institutions or organizations. Just as sola Christus neglected the Holy Spirit, sola fide neglected sanctifying works, and sola Scriptura neglected the role of tradition in reading and interpreting the Word of God, so did the unspoken emphasis on the individual neglect the centrality and importance of the community of faith. Since the Reformation, the Church has been struggling to counteract the influential but exaggerated importance of Luther's "here I stand!" A myriad of individuals after the German reformer have come to similar conclusions regarding their parent Protestant churches and movements resulting in the emergence of innumerable denominations.

Pentecostals are especially prone to such developments given the restoration of the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers during the Reformation. Empowered by a dynamic and liberating experience of the Holy Spirit, Pentecostals have understood their lives and ministries as commissioned by the Spirit. This includes an emphasis on spiritual freedom that makes for an even greater tendency toward individualism, independence, and self-aggrandizement. The fragmentation of Pentecostalism into hundreds of thousands of house churches, independent churches, parachurch groups, apostolic, prophetic, evangelistic and teaching ministries operating in isolation, not to mention denominations as well as sects and (even!) cults, is evidence of this infection with the individualist strain.

This accent on individualism, however, does not tell the entire story about why Pentecostals claim to understand the unity of the Church in spiritual rather than visible terms. Now, I cannot speak for the 500 million plus Pentecostals estimated today that represent the breadth of global Pentecostalism; rather, my Pentecostal affiliation is more specifically North American, and of the classical type that traces its roots back to denominations emerging out of the Azusa Street revival. Yet I sometimes wonder if Pentecostals reject as valid outward forms of structural unity because they are motivated by fear-fear that they would be compromising their former decisions to come-out-from-among-those visible denominations; fear that pursuing such relationships would jeopardize their identity as Pentecostals; fear that visible unity would camouflage the lack of spiritual fervor; fear that outward signs would eliminate reliance on the inner witness of the Spirit. These are, along with other issues yet to be discussed, legitimate areas of concern. But to recoil from engagement simply because there are issues of concern is inappropriate, and this especially for Pentecostals who claim to be led by the Spirit.

Finally, however, I find it odd that Pentecostals object to the notion that there have to be visible signs of unity for the Church given their own insistence on the import of outward signs. Most classical North American Pentecostals continue to hold to some version of tongues speaking as evidence of receiving the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Glossolalic tongues in these cases are outward signs and manifestations-"initial physical evidence," as some denominations put it-of the Spirit's infilling. Why would the true unity of the Church not be accompanied by such outward signs and evidence as well? Christians are coming to increasing agreement that the gospel truthfully proclaimed and faithfully lived out is not only spiritual. Rather, it is most truly spiritual when practically embodied, whether in concrete acts, tangible encounters, palpable manifestations, physical healings, and, I would suggest, visible signs. Perhaps it might be objected that visible signs do not translate to structural or organizational unity, or that the evidence of Spirit baptism is biblically derived in contrast to the goals of the ecumenical movement. I have addressed the biblical issues above, and will focus on the ecumenical movement itself below. Part of my motivation for accepting the invitation of the editor of The Pneuma Review to write this piece is to present evidence for a biblical and "pentecostally" informed ecumenism to the readers of this journal. I ask you to render judgment at the conclusion of this article.

Read the rest of this article in the Spring 2001 issue of the Pneuma Review.