Each chapter in the commentary covers a section of the SOET. Much like a commentary on the Bible, the chapters explain the wording in each sentence of the SOET. In addition, the chapters give some sense of how the doctrine has been considered by Pentecostals historically, the way in which the commentary is aiming to be intentionally Pentecostal, and also different contextual issues that each section is aiming to address. This includes cultural issues and issues that were raised by members of the PAOC during the process of forming the SOET.

The book explains that “the intended audience includes the pastor/teacher, those preparing for ministry, and of course, the many in our congregations who want to know what we believe” (page xvi).

Unlike the SOET itself, the commentary does not represent the official position of the PAOC, in as much as the PAOC General Conference did not vote on the commentary. As the preface states, the commentary is “meant to be suggestive and helpful for teaching and preaching. We make no claim that the explanations of the SOET are necessarily the official ones, nor that the comments contained herein are the only ones to be made” (page xv).

I had the privilege of being one of the contributing authors to and editors of the commentary. Now I look forward to revising the SOET again… maybe 2042….or 2052?

If you haven’t already seen them, you might be interested in some of my personal reflections on the SOET:

• The Changing of the PAOC’s Statement of Faith … Again
• Pentecostals and the Trinity: On the PAOC’s Refreshed Statement of Faith
• Pentecostal(?) Eschatology in the PAOC’s Proposed New Statement of Faith
• 7 Ways the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith Adds Pentecostal Spice
• What about Tongues? Spirit baptism in the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith
• Refreshed! The PAOC’s New Statement of Essential Truths

You can order copies of the commentary by calling the PAOC office at 1-800-779-7262 or emailing orderdesk@paoc.org. Copies are priced at $10 each, and $8 each for orders of 10 or more (plus shipping). See here for more information about the commentary.

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Comments on “Essential Truths: The PAOC Statement of Essential Truths Commentary” appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

As I noted three previous posts, the new SOET adds Pentecostal flavour, including in the eschatology section and the Spirit baptism section.

The Process

As the “whereas” section of the preamble to the resolution noted, the PAOC’s “Theological Study Commission [TSC] conducted a seven-year project that included

• research into both our early tradition and current Pentecostal scholarship,
• a General Conference presentation of drafts of the Spirit Baptism and Eschatology sections,
• and a consultation process that included every district and live-streamed Town Halls on every section of the proposed Statement of Essential Truths…
• and…each district consultation contributed to changes that appear in the proposed Statement of Essential Truths.”

The Discussion

Before the floor was open for discussion, the TSC co-chair, Dr. Van Johnson, shared remarks in his typical humous style. He noted how we had healthy discussions during the process of refreshing the statement. He spoke about how we formed a statement that emphasizes a message of hope, bringing emphasis to the Spirit’s empowerment to preach salvation in Christ as we await “our great hope,” namely, the return of Christ.

Many were curious about how the discussion would go before the vote. Following parliamentary order, discussion went back and forth between those who spoke against the motion and in favour of the motion. To the surprise of many, there actually wasn’t much discussion.

There were only three people who spoke against the motion. The first two expressed a concern that was not based on anything within the SOET itself, but a concern about the removal of the sections on marriage and tithing to a distinct “position and practices” section. The third person who spoke against the motion (via an email submission) mentioned a few concerns, but I don’t remember the details.

Jim Cantelon, who spoke of his family’s long history in the PAOC, was the first to speak in favour of the motion. Dr. Randy Holm, a former professor of mine, also spoke in favour of the motion. I’m sure many more would have spoken in favour, but it wasn’t necessary.

The Vote

After the third person spoke against the motion, there was a “call for the question.” To me, there was a clear sense that those who were in the room felt they had already invested years in the process, they were on board with the result, and were ready to get to the vote!

The resolution to adopt the refreshed SOET passed with 84% in favour.

“ The resolution to adopt the refreshed statement passed with 84% in favour.

Appreciation

Van Johnson had remarked on how the PAOC General Superintendent, David Wells, was courageous to allow this process to happen. Like so many, I also appreciate Wells’ leadership and his engagement throughout the process.

After the vote, David Wells expressed appreciation for the many hours of work that were put in by members of the Theological Study Commission. This resulted in a standing ovation.

Imagine. A Pentecostal family giving a standing ovation to those who spearheaded a theological project.

While I’m sure the expression of appreciation was sincere, I got the feeling it was probably also an expression of joy for the new statement that we had just affirmed.

You can watch a recording of the event here (from the 5:36 mark).

You can read the refreshed Statement of Essential Truths here.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• What about Tongues? Spirit baptism in the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith
• 7 Ways the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith Adds Pentecostal Spice
• Pentecostal(?) Eschatology in the PAOC’s Proposed New Statement of Faith

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Refreshed! The PAOC’s New Statement of Essential Truths appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Added Pentecostal Emphasis: Missional Empowerment

Where most of the proposed SOET is condensed in comparison to the current Statement of Fundamental and Essential Truths (SOFET), the Spirit baptism section is the only section that is slightly longer in the SOET—118 words vs. the current 94 words.

Shocking.

The current [now previous] SOFET affirms that baptism in the Holy Spirit results in “power to witness.” The proposed SOET brings even more focus to this, giving attention to this Pentecostal emphasis within both paragraphs of this section of the SOET. The first paragraph states that it empowers believers to proclaim “with speech and action…” and the second paragraph notes that Spirit baptism empowers believers “to be his witnesses with speech and action…”

The hope is that the added emphasis on the missional nature of Spirit baptism will spur the Church on its Spirit-empowered mission and remind us all that the point of Spirit baptism isn’t just so that we can all sit around speaking in tongues. While it’s great that Spirit baptism can enhance our private spirituality, there is more to Spirit baptism than this alone. (I explain the significant value of speaking in tongues in chapter 4 of my book Simply Spirit-Filled.)

“ The point of Spirit baptism isn’t just so that we can all sit around speaking in tongues.

What about Other Results of Spirit Baptism?

When I presented an earlier draft of the Spirit baptism section at the 2018 PAOC General Conference in Victoria, BC, I remember when one attendee stood at a microphone and suggested that the SOET should state that sanctification is another result of Spirit baptism.

My response was that the proposed draft accentuates the historic Pentecostal emphasis that Spirit baptism results in empowered witness (Acts 1:8). This is something that is “essential” and that the PAOC General Conference can agree on. By contrast, we might have differing opinions regarding the connection of sanctification and Spirit baptism.

Nevertheless, the SOET’s emphasis on empowered witness does not hinder one from preaching that through baptism in the Holy Spirit a person “comes to know Christ in a more intimate way and … grow spiritually.” These words, which are not in the proposed SOET, are found in the current SOFET.

Added Pentecostal Emphasis: The Significance of Tongues

One thing that the proposed SOET adds that is not in our current SOFET is an explanation of the link between the significance of baptism in the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. To quote from Canadian Pentecostal theologian Peter Neumann, “Why Tongues and Not Purple Hair?”[1] In other words, why would tongues be a suitable sign for Spirit baptism?

Speaking in tongues isn’t just a random sign—though purple hair would be. Rather, as the proposed SOET explains, speaking in tongues, which is an act of communication, “signifies the nature of Spirit baptism as empowering our communication.”

BUT…What about Initial Evidence?

Some might wonder if the section on Spirit baptism is less Pentecostal since the words “initial evidence” are not present. Interestingly enough, the phrase “initial evidence” did not appear in the PAOC’s SOFET until 1980. And the PAOC wasn’t less Pentecostal before 1980.

“ The phrase “initial evidence” did not appear in the PAOC’s SOFET until 1980.

When the proposed SOET speaks of “the sign of speaking in tongues,” it is reengaging language from the PAOC’s first SOFET (1928-1980). That earlier statement included two sentences regarding tongues: 1) Spirit baptism “is indicated by the initial physical sign of speaking with other tongues,” and 2) “the baptism of the Holy Spirit is regularly accompanied by the initial physical sign of speaking in other tongues.”

Aside from the fact that this earlier SOFET uses “sign” and not “evidence,” you might also note that it includes the qualifier “physical,” which the PAOC hasn’t included since 1980. The phrase “regularly accompanied by” also raises questions.[2]

If we go back even earlier, before the PAOC had its own statement of faith, in February 1926 the PAOC’s publication The Pentecostal Testimony printed the Assemblies of God’s statement of faith. It said that “the full consummation of the baptism of believers in the Holy Spirit is indicated by the initial physical sign of speaking with other tongues.” The “full consummation of” language also raises questions.

Some in the PAOC may feel that the familiar language of “initial evidence” presents a clearer and more definite relationship between speaking in tongues and Spirit baptism. But this simply isn’t the case. The reality is that PAOC credential holders already interpret the phrase “initial evidence” in a variety of ways. For example, some would argue that “initial evidence” means “immediate evidence” or “only evidence,” whereas others would not. Some would argue that “initial physical sign” means the same thing as “initial evidence,” but others would not. It turns out “initial evidence” isn’t as clear and definite as some might think.

“ PAOC credential holders already interpret the phrase “initial evidence” in a variety of ways.

Privileging Tongues

One might argue over what qualifiers (initial? physical? regularly accompanied by? full consummation of?) the proposed SOET should or shouldn’t include with the term “tongues” or “sign.” Nevertheless, it is clear that the SOET privileges tongues. The SOET presents “the sign of tongues” as unique—otherwise it wouldn’t be the only sign that the SOET mentions.

The SOET’s affirmation that “the sign of speaking in tongues indicates that believers have been baptized with the Holy Spirit” is justified given that the book of Acts reports three occasions where those who were baptized in the Spirit “began speaking in tongues” (Acts 2:4, 10:46, and 19:6).

Not what I would write!

The proposed SOET is not what I would write. And the proposal is different than what the PAOC’s Theological Study Commission (of which I am a part) had originally drafted. This includes the section on Spirit baptism.

That’s because the SOET that the General Conference will vote on next week (May 2022) has been revised many times over the last 7 years as a result of thoughtful theological reflection and input from people across the PAOC.

As I wrote previously, the SOET is not meant to reflect the theology of one individual, nor even of a small group of individuals. And, indeed, this draft statement is a statement that reflects the views of the PAOC community.

After years of open discussion and multiple opportunities to submit feedback regarding the SOET drafts, I expect that attendees at General Conference will not have much time to speak to the motion to adopt the proposed SOET. So, over these last 3 posts I have now given some extended explanation for why I am “in favour of the motion”…even though the SOET would be better if I just wrote it myself (ha ha).

You might also be interested in these posts:

• 7 Ways the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith Adds Pentecostal Spice
• The Changing of the PAOC’s Statement of Faith … Again
• Pentecostal(?) Eschatology in the PAOC’s Proposed New Statement of Faith

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post What about Tongues? Spirit baptism in the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

Pentecostal Flavour

Some of the added Pentecostal flavour likely came about without intention, given the natural Pentecostal inclination of everyone who contributed to the proposed Statement of Essential Truths (SOET).

At the same time, the SOET does intentionally take Pentecostal theological sensitivities into account. This is reflected in the “whereas” statement for resolution #10 (the General Conference resolution to affirm the new SOET), which notes that the project “included research into both our early tradition and current Pentecostal scholarship.”

The things I identify here are not necessarily unique to Pentecostals, but they do reflect ideas that are true to Pentecostal spirituality, thereby resulting in a statement with a stronger Pentecostal flavour.

I don’t mean to suggest that Pentecostals should aim to be different—even if we are a little spicy at times. Our aim should be to be biblical. But, it just so happens that I think Pentecostal theology is—on its best days—a faithful expression of biblical teaching. I’m sure Baptists and Methodists feel the same way .

Given these qualifications, here are 7 ways the PAOC’s proposed statement of faith adds Pentecostal spice:

1. Anointing

The refreshed SOET adds that Jesus was “anointed by the Spirit” (Luke 4:18). This affirmation is important as it grounds believers’ Spirit-empowered mission in the mission of Christ, who is by definition “the anointed one” (in Greek, Christos means “the one anointed”…with the Spirit).

On the one hand, knowing that believers today are anointed with the same Spirit that Jesus received gives us expectation for the wonderous ways that God will work through us. On the other hand, Pentecostal theologian David Courey reminds us not to become triumphalistic because the Spirit-anointed Jesus suffered and was rejected, and his Spirit-anointed disciples may experience the same fate.[1]

2. More Holy Spirit

There is a section on Spirit baptism and the spiritual gifts in the current Statement of Fundamental and Essential Truths (SOFET), but the section on the Holy Spirit only emphasizes the personhood and deity of the Spirit—both important and orthodox affirmations!

In the refreshed SOET, the paragraph that focusses on the Holy Spirit adds a little more spice as it describes the Spirit as giving life, drawing people to salvation, and making all believers children of God. Like the current SOFET, the refreshed SOET also adds numerous references to the work of the Spirit throughout the rest of the statement.

3. The Bible Today

Like the wider evangelical community, the current SOFET emphasizes (rightly so!) God’s past relationship with the Scripture. It was inspired (past) and, therefore, the original manuscripts, which we no longer have (past), were without error.

The refreshed SOET exhibits how Pentecostals view the Bible as more than a book of errorless facts to be unearthed through historical-grammatical interpretation, but as a place where God still speaks and through which we continue to encounter God today.

The SOET emphasizes that the Bible is (today) revelation of God’s “saving purposes,” that it is (today) true and trustworthy, and (similar to the SOFET) that the Spirit still (today) “enables its interpretation and application.”

4. The Resurrection and Ascension as Vital for Salvation

The current SOFET focusses on Christ’s atoning work on the cross. The resurrection is presented only as proof of Christ’s atoning work.

The refreshed SOET, by contrast, recognizes that “the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ provide the way of salvation.” As the Scripture states, Christ “was raised because of our justification” (Romans 4:25) so that he could send the Spirit and we could receive the Spirit—or be justified—by faith (Galatians 3:1-9). Without the resurrection, this would not have happened, and we would still be in our sin (1 Corinthians 15:17).

In other words, as Pentecostal theologian Frank Macchia emphasizes, the goal of the cross was not only a declaration that we are not guilty, but also for God to send the Spirit via the risen Christ, and to thereby embrace humanity through the Spirit.[2] And so, the second paragraph in the Salvation section of the SOET begins, “Salvation means [among other things] to receive the Spirit.”

5. The Transforming Presence of God

The refreshed SOET adds that “central to the church is the shared experience of the transforming presence of God.” Similarly, Pentecostal theologian Keith Warrington describes Pentecostal theology as a “theology of encounter” with God.

The SOET continues with an affirmation that the actions of the church (e.g., discipleship and the Lord’s Supper) are in response to, and I might add in the midst of, this “shared experience” of God’s presence.

6. Gifts of the Spirit

While the present SOFET is obviously not cessationist(!), the refreshed SOET is even more explicit in affirming that the Spirit continues to give “all gifts” (not just some) to the church.

7. Women Leaders

The refreshed SOET is also explicit in affirming the Spirit “empowers leaders, both female and male.” This is consistent with the Pentecostal and biblical emphasis that Jesus pours the Spirit out on “all flesh / all people” (Acts 2:17)—women and men—with the result that the early Church had female deacons, like Phoebe (Romans 16:1).

The SOET’s affirmation is also consistent with Pentecostalism’s pre-institutional days when women had unrestricted access to ministry positions and with the PAOC’s recent “Statement of Affirmation Regarding the Equality of Women and Men in Leadership.”

And More…

One could explain how many other aspects of the SOET add Pentecostal flavour. For example,

• the section on God is now placed before the section on Scripture,
• there are more references to the kingdom of God,
• the refreshed SOET adds a tip of the hat to Pentecostalism’s historic Arminian/Wesleyan majority view of salvation,
• healing is presented “as a foretaste of our future restoration,”
• and…and…

But What About Spirit Baptism and Eschatology?

Ah, you noticed that I didn’t say anything about Spirit baptism and eschatology, did you?

I’ve commented on the Pentecostal nature of the eschatology section in my previous post.

And my comments on Spirit baptism seem to warrant an additional post. So, I now expect to finish and publish a post on Spirit baptism at some point in the future.

For now, I speak in favour of resolution #10.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• The Changing of the PAOC’s Statement of Faith … Again
• Pentecostals and the Trinity: On the PAOC’s Refreshed Statement of Faith
• Pentecostal(?) Eschatology in the PAOC’s Proposed New Statement of Faith

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post 7 Ways the PAOC’s Proposed Statement of Faith Adds Pentecostal Spice appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

I expect that attendees at General Conference next month, when the proposed statement will be voted on, will only have about a minute to speak to the motion, so I will give some extended explanation here for why I am “in favour of the motion.”

Eschatology that is More Pentecostal? For sure!

Like much of the proposed Statement of Essential Truths (SOET), the section that focusses on eschatology, with the title “Restoration,” adds some Pentecostal emphases that are not in the PAOC’s current SOFET [now, previous SOFET].

“A passion for the kingdom” is core to Pentecostal spirituality. Consistent with this, the proposed statement affirms “Christ will complete at his second coming the restoration begun when he initiated God’s Kingdom at his first coming.” This emphasis on the kingdom of God that is already coming, but not yet fully here, is core to Pentecostal eschatology.

Another new statement that adds Pentecostal flavor to the proposed statement is the affirmation that at the second coming, Jesus Christ will “defeat all powers that oppose God.”

Though not uniquely Pentecostal, I also appreciate the addition that final “judgement is God’s gracious answer to humanity’s cry for justice to prevail throughout the earth and is consistent with God’s character as loving, holy, and just.”

And the final “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” just makes me want to raise my hands and start speaking in tongues.

Unreasonably Short?

Anyone who compares the proposed SOET to the current SOFET will note that there is significantly less detail regarding eschatology in the proposed version. The proposal has only 169 words on “Restoration,” whereas the current version includes 326 words on “The End of Time.”

In many ways, the proposed, condensed version marks a return to the past. After forming in 1919, the PAOC functioned from 1920-1927 with a “Statement of Fundamental Truths” (SOFT) that included just under 200 words on eschatology.[1] It included an affirmation of “the rapture of believers,” but without an assertion of its timing, and of “the premillenial and imminent coming of the Lord.” This is similar in content to the proposed SOET—though the specific words “rapture” or “millennium” are absent, the 2022 proposal maintains the “imminent return of Christ.”

Over the years, the PAOC added increasingly more detail to its statement on eschatology. In 1928 the PAOC approved a revised version of the SOFT, expanding the eschatology section slightly to 210 words. This revision added a statement that the rapture “takes place before what is known as the Great Tribulation.”

“ Over the years, the PAOC added increasingly more detail to its statement on eschatology.

In 1980 the PAOC further expanded its “Statement of Fundamental and Essential Truths” (SOFET). Even though Scripture references were moved to footnotes (reducing the word count), the eschatology section was expanded to 343 words. This version added in numerous details such as Christ’s “victory at Armageddon,”  explicit mention of the land of Israel, and that “unbelievers remain after death conscious of condemnation until the final bodily resurrection and judgment of the unjust.” It also moved to an explicitly pre-tribulation view of the rapture.

In 1984 the General Conference amended the SOFET in a way that marked somewhat of a return to the 1928 position, allowing for either a pre-tribulation or mid-tribulation view of the rapture.[2] The paragraph on “The Tribulation” was condensed, but added that the Antichrist would emerge in the midst of the tribulation.[3] Today, as of April 2022, the eschatology section of the SOFET is fairly detailed at 326 words long.

Less Detail on Eschatology is the Norm Among Other Canadian Pentecostals

Most other Canadian Pentecostal denominations include less detail on eschatology than the PAOC, and most do not reference the rapture or even the millennium. This points to the fact that there is nothing inherently Pentecostal about numerous eschatological points that are in the PAOC’s current SOFET.

“ There is nothing inherently Pentecostal about numerous eschatological points that are in the PAOC’s current SOFET.

Despite the reduced length, the PAOC’s proposed 169-word paragraph on eschatology is still more words than all but one Canadian Pentecostal denomination that I looked up:

• The Apostolic Church of Pentecost in Canada’s Statement of Faith includes only 26 words on eschatology.
• The Canadian Assemblies of God belief statement includes 50 words. This includes an affirmation of “the rapture of the Church,” but with no assertion regarding its timing.
• The Fellowship of Christian Assemblies (also Pentecostal) includes only 39 words on the topic.
• The Church of God in Western Canada’s Declaration of Faith has only 53 words in its two declarations on eschatology. Unlike the other statements I looked at, it explicitly affirms the “premillennial second coming of Jesus.” It doesn’t use the word rapture, but implicitly affirms the idea without being specific regarding its timing.
• The Foursquare Church’s Declaration of Faith is the only statement I looked up that gives significantly more space to eschatology than the PAOC. Their document, written by early Canadian Pentecostal evangelist Aimee Semple McPherson, is 16 PAGES, yet its four distinct sections on “The Second Coming of Christ,” “Judgement,” “Heaven,” and “Hell” (totaling 560 words) contain no reference to the millennium or the rapture.

Pentecostal Eschatology Outside Canada

If we look at Pentecostals outside of Canada, we also see little detail regarding eschatology:

• The Pentecostal World Fellowship’s Statement of Faith includes only 36 words on the topic.
• The World Assemblies of God Fellowship’s (WAGF) Statement of Faith includes 113 words on “the End of Time.”
• The Assemblies of God’s (USA) Statement of Fundamental Truths comes in at 232 words.

Clearly, the amount of detail regarding eschatology within the PAOC’s current SOFET is not the norm among Pentecostal statements of faith.

Dispensational Eschatology ≠ Pentecostal Eschatology

Beyond that, most Pentecostal theologians and historians would say that dispensational eschatology, which has led to the significant detail in the PAOC’s SOFET, is actually contrary to Pentecostal theological intuitions. For example, Amos Yong claims that dispensationalism is not “conducive to pentecostal spirituality.”[4]

Similarly, Matthew Thompson maintains that “Pentecostalism in North America…lost its distinctive core due to its lack of theological consistency in adopting evangelical theologies,” by which he specifically means “Pentecostalism’s ill-advised adoption and adaptation of Scofieldian dispensationalism”[5]

Some ways that Pentecostalism conflicts with dispensational beliefs are

1. Pentecostals experienced the dramatic and miraculous gifts of the Spirit, whereas dispensationalism was characterized by cessationism—dispensationalists believed that the gifts of the Spirit ceased after the age of the apostles.
2. Pentecostals believed Christ was coming soon and that they were empowered by the Spirit to lead an end-of-time revival before his return, whereas dispensationalists believed that each dispensation would end with a time of apostasy, including the Church age which would precede the return of Christ.
3. Pentecostals emphasized the already/not yet of the kingdom of God, meaning that as the Spirit is active today, the kingdom of God is already present, even though it has not yet fully come. By contrast, dispensationalism makes a sharp line between the Church age and the kingdom age.[6]

The system of dispensationalism does not fit well with Pentecostal theology and experience. Given this, Peter Althouse notes that “Pentecostals had to modify the dispensational script significantly to include their own theological distinctives.”[7]

“ The system of dispensationalism does not fit well with Pentecostal theology and experience.

But not all Pentecostals have held to dispensational eschatology. Larry McQueen’s study of Pentecostal history reveals there was a variety of views regarding eschatology in early Pentecostalism.[8] Quite clearly, dispensational eschatology ≠ Pentecostal eschatology. McQueen adds, the more one “takes Pentecostal theology and spirituality into account, the less dispensational it [Pentecostal eschatology] appears to be.”[9]

A Rejection of the Past?

As noted above, the condensed eschatology section of the proposed SOET is similar to the SOFT that the PAOC had prior to 1928. So, in some sense, the PAOC is returning to its roots.

At the same time, the absence of language like “rapture” or “Armageddon” or “Antichrist” does not indicate that the PAOC is rejecting these ideas that are currently in the SOFET. Indeed, the proposed SOET still allows for pastors within the PAOC to continue preaching these ideas.

By analogy, the phrase “the new heaven and the new earth” is absent in the proposed SOET, but surely no one would conclude this means that people in the PAOC cannot or should not believe in such an idea!

At the same time, the reduced detail in the eschatology section does allow for a variety of views within the PAOC regarding some eschatological issues.

The Aim of a Statement of Faith

If I were to write the statement of faith for the PAOC, it would look different than it does. Each member of the PAOC’s Theological Study Commission feels this way.

This is a good thing. Because a denomination’s statement of belief is not meant to reflect the theology of one individual. Given this, it makes sense that it would allow for some diversity of eschatological thinking, just like the PAOC did in its earlier years.

What About the Rest of the SOET?

In my next blog post, I intend to explain 7 ways that the PAOC’s refreshed SOET is more Pentecostal in nature than the current SOFET. In the meantime, I encourage you to read the proposal for yourself (if you have access to it) and consider which ways you think the SOET reflects Pentecostal emphases.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Pentecostals and the Trinity: On the PAOC’s Refreshed Statement of Faith
• The Changing of the PAOC’s Statement of Faith … Again
• The Holy Spirit and Eschatology (The Last Days)

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Pentecostal(?) Eschatology in the PAOC’s Proposed New Statement of Faith appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

I have served on the PAOC’s Theological Study Commission for some years and have participated in drafting and editing the refreshed SOFET. It was due for a vote in 2020 at the PAOC General Conference, but was delayed for obvious reasons. Now the plan is to vote in May of 2022. As we prepare for the vote, we have been publishing some brief articles reflecting on the proposed SOFET. You can view my article on the Trinity by clicking on the image to the left.

Interestingly enough, when the PAOC first published a SOFET in 1928, 29 per cent was devoted to the doctrine of the Trinity. The section is much shorter today, but the PAOC still affirms the doctrine. As I write in the article, “without the Trinity, you have no gospel.”

Click here or on the image above to access the article.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• PAOC Clergy on Tongues and Spirit Baptism: Changing Views
• Tales of Visiting a Oneness United Pentecostal Church
• Theological Vitality in the PAOC Today

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Pentecostals and the Trinity: On the PAOC’s Refreshed Statement of Faith appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

A Complicated History

Like the history of the relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Canada, my own history as an Indigenous person is complicated.

You see, due to racism, my father’s family hid the fact that they were Indigenous. While this is sad, it may have saved my father’s life. Given all the unmarked graves that were discovered at residential schools across Canada this past summer, I’ve wondered if my grandparents had not hidden their Indigenous identity, would my father have ended up in a residential school and died? …in which case, I would not be here (there were no unmarked graves found at the Shubenacadie residential school in Nova Scotia, but many children did die there).

As an adult, my father asked my grandfather if they were Indigenous. My grandfather smiled and said yes. By the time I was in high school (or earlier—I don’t remember), this was becoming part of my identity. Eventually I became a member of the Qalipu First Nation and a status “Indian.” And my children have grown up understanding their Indigenous identity. This is a little about me.

The rest of what I will share below is certainly not the most important things that could or should be said on Canada’s first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, but they are some things that have been on my own mind recently.

Indigenous ≠ “Indigenous Spirituality”

People sometimes speak of “Indigenous spirituality” as though every Indigenous person shares the same spirituality. Given the variety of ways that Indigenous people practice their spirituality, it might be better to speak of Indigenous spiritualities. As an example of this, I was speaking with a friend this week who said that he grew up Métis and that “traditional Indigenous spirituality” was not part of his upbringing.

Another thing we need to realize is that MANY Indigenous people in Canada are Christian. This is a truth that must be included in discussions as we seek truth in truth and reconciliation. To cite one example, the rate of Indigenous people who identify as “Pentecostal” (my own Christian tradition) in Canada (3.4%) is nearly three times that of the rest of Canadians (1.2%).[1]

Should We Participate in Indigenous Spiritual Practices?

One thing that concerns me is that in the commendable attempt to support reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canada, people are often encouraged to participate in “traditional Indigenous spirituality.” In some cases, they are even pressured to. I learned recently of a teacher (non-Indigenous, I understand) who told a class that if they didn’t want to participate in a certain Indigenous practice, they better have a good reason not to, since we are living on treaty territory and the traditional land of the Métis people. How ironic that an individual at a Canadian educational institution (remember residential “schools”) is now pressuring students, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to participate in Indigenous spiritual practices.

Because they care and want to be respectful and supportive of reconciliation, I suspect that many non-Indigenous Christians will be inclined to participate in such practices. I am concerned that they will do so without reflecting on the significance of this.

Many Indigenous Christians have reflected on this question. Some Indigenous Christians feel that they can participate in some “traditional Indigenous practices” in some places and at some times. That is, in certain situations they will recontextualize some Indigenous practices by infusing them with Christian meaning (here is one example with respect to smudging).

Some other Indigenous Christians are not comfortable with this approach. They feel that they can not engage in such practices regardless of the setting because they do not feel that they can divorce the practices from the spirituality that is most frequently associated with them. And so, for them, to engage in such practices would amount to inappropriately combining Christianity with another religion (syncretism).

The Canadian Church Has Much to Do

On a completely different note, I am reminded today that Christians, and churches specifically, need to contribute to reconciliation in Canada.

Many people, including pastors, might not realize that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action includes 4 that are directed at the Church (see numbers 58-61). Even if you or your church tradition did not run the residential schools, there is still work to be done.

Consider, for example, the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada (PAOC, with whom I am ordained). They did not run any residential schools. Nevertheless, in 2012, an official statement of apology, forgiveness and reconciliation between the PAOC and its Indigenous leadership was read and signed during the PAOC General Conference. This is certainly not the end of the PAOCs work toward reconciliation, but it is a valuable step.

I would add that it is not only the role of denominational leadership to address reconciliation—individual local churches also have a role to play.

What You Can Do

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, which represents many Christian groups in Canada, has a helpful page listing ways that churches and individuals can observe the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. See also action steps listed here and some ideas and resources here).

Also, take some time to listen to the stories of some residential school survivors. One example is here:

In conclusion, let us all follow Jesus teaching: “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9).

________________________________________

[1] Wilkinson, “Canadian Pentecostal Diversity,” p. 22.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• 3 Ways the Holy Spirit Works Among Non-Christians
• Stop “Applying the Blood of Jesus”…Because You Can’t
• Should Christians Declare or Decree Things over Their Lives?

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Some Indigenous Reflections on National Day for Truth and Reconciliation in Canada appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

I am looking for the following information (or whatever you are comfortable providing):

• Name
• Degree, institution, and convocation year (or in progress)
• General area of study (e.g. NT, Systematic Theology)
• Primary areas of expertise (e.g., Pneumatology, Reformation history)
• Dissertation title
• Current placement (e.g., church, school)
• Contact information

You can either post your information below as a comment on this blog or e-mail me your information at agabriel(at)horizon.edu. I would prefer that you NOT e-mail me your full CV. Rather, please just send me the information as listed above so I can easily copy and paste it into my database.

Thanks!

Again, please pass the link to this web page on to people that you know.

To get the party started, I will start off with my information below…

[originally posted Monday, March 12, 2012; updated December 2020]

The post PAOC / PAONL Credential Holders with Doctorates (or in progress) appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

You can access the editorial that Dr. Alexander mentioned in the journal Pneuma for free online at this link.

And here is a link to the book we discussed: What Women Want: Pentecostal Women Ministers Speak for Themselves.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Pentecostal Women in Ministry: Ambiguity and Affirmation in the PAOC
• Tales of Visiting a Oneness United Pentecostal Church
• Pentecostal-Charismatic Theology of Worship

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Pentecostal Women in Ministry, What they Want, and #MeToo appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.

You might also be interested in these posts:

• Pentecostal-Charismatic Theology of Worship
• The Lord’s Supper in Pentecostal Theology
• Spirit Baptism in Current Pentecostal Theology: Part 1 – Frank Macchia

Andrew K. Gabriel, Ph.D., is the author of Simply Spirit-Filled: Experiencing God in the Presence and Power of the Holy Spirit as well as three academic books, including The Lord is the Spirit. He is a theology professor at Horizon College and Seminary and serves on the Theological Study Commission for the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada. You can follow him on Facebook or on Twitter.

The post Pentecostal Political Theology appeared first on Andrew K. Gabriel.