Christology in the Book of Revelation

Home , Dominion Theology

THE PENTECOSTAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

A CONTRAST IN MISSION:

A PENTECOSTAL CONVERSATION WITH DOMINION THEOLOGY:

A SENIOR PAPER SUBMITTED

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF DIVINITY

STEVEN S. SPEARS

MAY 2012

A Contrast in Mission: A Pentecostal Conversation with Dominion Theology

Accepted by the Examining Committee:

Steven J. Land, President

Date

Sang-Ehil Han, Vice President for Academics

Date

Oliver McMahan, Vice President for Ministry Formation

Date

John Christopher Thomas, Academic Advisor/Reader

Date

iii

COPYING AGREEMENT

The physical format of this project is approved and accepted for copy and deposit in the seminary library:

Office of the Librarian

Date

Permission for copy granted if accepted for deposit. Any other revision or use would have to be approved by the writer.

Steven S. Spears

ABSTRACT

This study by Steven S. Spears entitled, “A Contrast in Mission: A Pentecostal

Conversation with Dominion Theology,” represents an attempt to show how one’s theology of God will profoundly affect one’s understanding of mission. This is done through three related project parameters of personal story, evaluation of Christian

Reconstructionism and its influence on current political trends, and biblical analysis. The project concludes with a visionary statement of future development and ministry.

In the formative years of the writer’s ministry, Dominion Theology was introduced in the church he attended. The devastating effect of this theology along with the moral failure of one of the church’s leaders resulted in the church’s decline and loss of influence in the community. The writer attempts to demonstrate how Dominion

Theology is one of the driving forces behind the current Christian political activism of the day. He argues that this is detrimental to the Church’s witness and offers an alternative vision to carry out mission.

The theology of mission the author proposes is derived from a careful reading of

Revelation chapter 5 as well as the integration of other biblical texts. This is not speculative or based on presuppositions, but is an attempt to be faithful to what can be discerned by a careful reading of the biblical narrative. The last section of this project offers a vision for ministry that is intentional about putting into practice the implications derived from the entirety of this project.

I dedicate this project to my wife, Darlene. She has been by my side from the beginning. We stand together as full partners in ministry and life. Her commitment to see that I reach my educational goals is a clear indication of her love and devotion.

PREFACE

My journey at Pentecostal Theological Seminary has taken many twists and turns.

The hand of God is evident not only in my own personal transformation, but in the transformation I have witnessed in my own family. My young adult children, two of whom are seminarians, have been wonderful dialogue partners and have helped me develop my worldview. This project reflects the struggles and triumphs of my personal story which has caused me to view the way God deals with his people in new and creative ways.

I want to thank Dr. Kim Alexander for her guidance and encouragement which actually began during my days at Lee University. After Dr. Alexander left the seminary to take a position at Regent University, Dr. Chris Thomas stepped in and graciously offered guidance as I completed my degree. Thank you Dr. Thomas for your guidance and encouragement and for the way you engage your students as equals. I especially would like to acknowledge all of the international students I have met during my time at the seminary. Their hard work and willingness to leave home and family have been great sources of inspiration for my journey.

Special thanks go to my wife and family for putting up with me as I processed my theology, a little too strongly at times, in the safety of our home. You guys are the best!

vii

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT……………………………….………………………….…….……..…v

DEDICATION PAGE……………………………………………….…….……..…vi

PREFACE………………………………………………………….……….…..…..vii

Chapter

1. MY DOMINION DILEMMA………...………..…..………..….....1

Introduction My Story Seeds of Sanctification Dominion Now Moving Beyond the Conflict

2. TAKING DOMINION……………..……………………...…...... 24

Introduction Christian Reconstructionism How Did We Get Here?

3. ANSWERING THE DOMINION QUESTION……..……..……48

Introduction Messianic Expectations The Witness of the Lamb Final Implications

4. VISIONARY STATEMENT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT....77

Prayer Discipleship Becoming a Missional Church Leadership Development Conclusion

BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………….….……93

viii

CHAPTER 1

MY DOMINION DILEMMA

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 for the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death. Romans 8.1-2 NRSV

Introduction

What is the mission of the Church? What are the factors that inform the church’s mission? Is it tied in somehow with the mission of Ancient Israel? In what way is it to be in continuity with the mission of Jesus? What role does the Spirit have in guiding and empowering the people of God in mission? What is the extent of the mission? Is it universal, or does it vary according to cultural and historical contexts? How are we to understand the relationship between advancing the Kingdom of God and Church mission? If they are viewed as one and the same, is it a geo-political or spiritual kingdom/mission? Or is it both? Is the Church to take over the kingdoms and nations of the world and usher in God’s kingdom? Should the church stand back and idly watch history unfold?

The weight of this line of questioning is easily discerned by the struggle the

Church has had in identifying and carrying out its mission throughout history. Within the context of my life, these questions have a two-fold relevance. First, as a young and

maturing Christian in the 1980s and early 90s, I was confronted with the wave of neo-

Reconstructionism1 that was sweeping through Charismatic and Evangelical Christianity.

This project is an attempt to show that the undercurrents of this theology run deep within much of North American Evangelical Christianity today. In point of fact, at the time of this writing, the United States is in the midst of its 2012 presidential election. From the pool of presidential candidates, particularly among Republicans, it is evident that some segments of the Christian community has so entrenched itself within the U.S. political process that it is difficult to find any separation between the two.

Second, Pentecostals are not immune to the attraction of power and influence offered by politics and Christian Reconstructionist thought.2 This project will serve as my personal reflection on the damage this trend is having on the witness of the church.

Within this conversation with Dominionism, I desire to offer a Pentecostal theology of mission that is grounded in a hopeful eschatology similar to that of the Dominionists. It is my understanding that theology must be grounded in the biblical tradition and informed by the Spirit if it is to be Christian. It is not my intent to be overly critical of Dominion

Theology or of those who adhere to it. I am not judging the motives of the heart or the salvation of anyone. My observations are more of a personal theological reflection than a scholarly debate, as called for within the parameters of this project.

This chapter will outline my exposure and reaction to what is commonly known as Dominion Theology. My understanding of the Church’s mission is born out of my

1 Theonomy, Dominion Theology, Dominionism, Theocratic Dominionism, Kingdom Now Theology and Christian Reconstructionism will be used interchangeably throughout this project. They are interrelated belief systems with a common voice. While it would be wrong not to recognize that within these groups there are varying theological and methodological distinctives, for the purpose of this project, I will focus on what is common among them. 2 The October 2011 issue of Charisma Magazine headlines the rise of Pentecostal influence in U.S. politics. In this issue, Pentecostal and Charismatic leaders and organizations are highlighted for their various levels of political involvement including the candidacy for president. 2

academic pursuits, as well as my life journey, which includes my conversion to Christ and involvement with the church in a Pentecostal context. My theology has been formed through a lifelong learning process. The course of my life has been forged by dedicated church participation and academic pursuits that are deeply entrenched in Pentecostalism.

I have been involved in the academy for sixteen of my thirty-three years as a born again believer. For the past eleven years, I have been connected with the Pentecostal

Theological Seminary full or part-time.

I adhere to a Wesleyan/Pentecostal ethos of theology and practice. Through this lens, the dual perspective of holiness and power undergird everything that would constitute how I believe faith should be lived out. There are certain fundamental truths that inform my worldview that are characteristic of a Wesleyan/Pentecostal hermeneutic.

They are fundamental to my understanding of the nature of God, the nature of the Gospel, the nature of the Church, and the nature of ministry (mission). Along with offering my life story, I will further develop my perspective of church mission as an outflow of my understanding of the Church and Gospel informed by one’s concept of the nature and mission of God.

My Story

I was born in Denver, Colorado on March 13, 1960. My parents, Kent and

Evelyn Spears, grew up in families that attended main-line denominational churches. It was not until after the birth of my younger sister, the fourth of five children, that my parents felt the need to start attending church again. My dad accepted a job in Florida and moved our family to the Tampa Bay area in 1964. My first memory of church was

standing at the baptismal font with my parents, baby sister, and two brothers. I vividly recall the very large hand of the Methodist minister placed upon my head as he baptized me. I was four years old.

I had a good childhood. The neighborhood I grew up in was middle class and family-oriented. My dad worked hard and was a perpetual student who eventually earned a PhD in engineering from the University of Florida. Yet, despite his work load, he always found time to spend with his family. My mom is a caring woman who made all of her children feel like they were her favorite. Both of my parents taught us the value of family, hard work, and education. In grade school, I was an average student; however, my junior high and early high school years were very awkward for me. I was small for my age and quite shy. Most of my buddies were heavily involved in team sports, which left me out of the gang as we entered high school. I did excel in my freshman and sophomore years academically; however, it was a very lonely and hurtful time in my life.

One summer night in 1975, I ran into a group of my friends on a street in our neighborhood. They seemed to be having a really good time. I asked what was going on, and someone handed me a joint. I took it and inhaled without any hesitation. I entered into a whole new world of friends and experiences that night. A new high school was built that same summer and I was zoned to attend. This new school was to be made up of students who lived in the unincorporated sections of the tri-city area of our county.

Those who played sports or had other academic considerations could defer and attend the older city schools. This created an even greater breach between my childhood friends and me. Reflecting on that crucial moment of my life, I am amazed, but not surprised at how

easily I accepted the invitation to smoke pot. It is an indication of how empty, needy, and weak I was as a person.

When I turned sixteen, I started working at a grocery store, which would prove to be a providential act of God. I had two close friends from my childhood who also worked there. Despite the fact that we would contribute to one another’s delinquency, their involvement in my life kept me from absolute despair as a young person. I am very grateful, even now, that they were there for me. However, my life was a mess. I went from an above-average student to one earning below average and failing grades. I felt like my life was spiraling out of control. It is not even worth mentioning the foolishness of my last two years of high school. I was so torn between what I knew to be right, and what I see now as my addictive behavior. I continued to attend the Methodist church. I went through confirmation, joined the church, and attended youth group. I believed in

God, but the grip that drugs and alcohol had on my life seemed to be unbreakable.

There was another influence speaking into my life during those years. A group of

Pentecostal believers from a local church worked at the same grocery store. They made it a point to share their faith every chance they could. In fact, several of the hardcore druggies that worked with us were converted and radically changed. The message I heard these Pentecostals share had both familiar and unfamiliar tones. I had heard about

Jesus’ love and heaven all of my life. I had never heard that I needed to be born again or that Jesus was coming back to earth. I certainly did not understand what they meant by speaking in tongues. Most importantly, I could not deny that they lived what they believed.

My high school senior year and graduation are a blur to me. The following summer was one big party after another. Despite the high times, I felt trapped, burned- out, and wasted. I was busted for possession a few times with no real consequences.

Since I was eighteen at the time, I considered them lucky breaks. I started selling marijuana, which led to a heightened sense of paranoia. As a result, my dealing days were short-lived. I had a real fear of going to jail, and there was that constant witness from the

Pentecostals. Eventually, I found the grace to begin to embrace the reality that the change I so desperately longed for was a possibility.

I vividly remember the Saturday that I accepted the invitation to attend my co- workers’ Pentecostal church. I was feeling extremely dejected. My high school grades and lack of drive for personal achievement kept me from even applying to any universities. I had just started my first semester at the local junior college when a co- worker invited me to attend church with him and his wife. He had gone through one of the most radical lifestyle changes I had ever witnessed. I accepted the invitation to meet him for breakfast before service without hesitation. This was a good strategy that ensured

I would be ready in time for church.

I later learned that there had been a prayer meeting at the church the previous night. They were holding special evangelistic meetings with a guest speaker named Bill

Stephens. They specifically prayed for my salvation. The service that morning was powerful. My heart was like ripened fruit. I was captivated as I listened to Bill’s own testimony of his deliverance and restoration from a life of heroin addiction. His story put me on the edge of my seat. I had never attended a church service that called for a response. I was one of the first to respond to the altar call. There were several people

who were delivered from drugs and alcohol that morning. One particular sister, Jane

Barbie, was at the altar with me. She was in her sixties and was marvelously delivered from alcohol as well. She never drank again, but died of liver disease two years later.

I went home and threw away all of my pot and drug paraphernalia. I had been binge drinking alcohol since the age of thirteen. For the last two years of my life, I had been either drunk, high, or both every day. I have never even been tempted to go back since I got up from that altar. The Lord took every desire away that morning and I was completely delivered. My enthusiasm for the changes in my life was met with skepticism and suspicion by my parents. It would take several years for them to appreciate fully my new way of living. I am pleased to say that both of my parents have come to know the

Lord in a rich and meaningful way since that time.

The cleansing I received was what I was longing for all of my life. I found a friend who would never leave me. I have never doubted the love and power of God since the day of my conversion. Jesus has always seen me through every situation I have experienced throughout my life. I thought I was so cool acting in such a careless way. I thought wild living was how to impress people. The day of my new birth, I realized that I was nothing but a burned-out kid going nowhere fast. When I think of Jesus’ desire to save me, my heart overflows with thankfulness and wonder. The Spirit immediately started working on my tendency to want to impress people. The Lord quickly helped me to overcome lying and a filthy tongue.

The weeks and months that followed were one mountaintop experience after another. I consumed the Bible and went to every meeting the church offered. The name of the church where I was saved was Faith Community Church, part of the Open Bible

Standard Churches (OBSC), a Pentecostal denomination headquartered in Des Moines,

Iowa. The church really functioned as a community of faith. Everyone seemed genuinely interested in my success as a Christian. I quickly realized none of my old friends wanted anything to do with my new life. My parents came to my water baptism and you could tell they were very uncomfortable by the look on their faces as entered the water I testified to my new life in Christ. They were convinced that I had joined a cult and wanted to know if the church owned property in South America. This was in

September of 1978, and cult leader Jim Jones was fresh on everyone’s minds.

The spring of 1979 was when I first sensed that God was calling me to go into full-time ministry. At that time, Faith Community Church was developing a relationship with a missionary family and held a conference to raise interest and support. Julio Ruibal and his wife, Ruth, had been working in Bolivia and were starting a new work in Cali,

Colombia. Our church became an integral part of that work. At the end of the conference, I responded to the call to make myself fully available to whatever God would call me to do. This developed into a desire to work with the Ruibals that would be fulfilled sixteen years later.

Just prior to the conference, I had begun to date the most wonderful girl I had ever met. Darlene Joy Okerstrom was the pastor’s daughter and had a smile that when she walked in would light-up a room. The day after my conversion, she started working at the grocery store where I worked. This was another providential act of God because I believe that if she had met me before my conversion, she may never have wanted anything to do with me. She eventually became my wife and partner in ministry. Before we started dating, she was extra nice to me and showed a genuine interest in my new

walk with Jesus. She even invited me to her birthday party, which made me feel even more connected to the community of believers. It took me three months to realize she was interested in dating me. It took me another month to ask her out. I can be somewhat slow at times.

Darlene has had a call on her life from childhood. I dated her for several months, until she pursued her lifelong dream of attending Oral Roberts University in Tulsa,

Oklahoma. I continued my studies at the junior college and kept up a regimen of letter- writing with Darlene. During her spring break, we attended a Jesus festival in Orlando,

Florida. After the festival, we became engaged. I finished my studies at the junior college and we were married on March 21, 1981.3

For the next eight years, we served as volunteers in many areas of the church and worked to support our family, but neither of us continued our education. Our focus was on youth ministry. We led worship and counseled young people. The call to ministry was never far from my heart. Whenever the Ruibals came into town, I would drop everything to do what I could to serve them. It seemed like an honor to serve people who put their lives on the line for their faith. Their visits always challenged Darlene and me. The call to ministry was there, but we got caught up in life. By March of 1989, we already had four of our five children. I could not complain, but with an unfulfilling job and no real direction, we were both looking for a change.

After nearly nine years of floundering, Darlene and I resolved to step out in faith, and under the covering of the church, we started making plans to move to Colombia to

3 It is hard to resist the temptation to write this testimony in the first person plural. Darlene is a vital part of my calling and ministry. I consider her to be a full partner in everything I do. We mutually support one another’s ministry and calling. Darlene is a gifted woman. As a mother of five, she attended Lee University full-time when we moved to Cleveland in 1998. She graduated Summa Cum Laude. She is an anointed piano player and worship leader. Our greatest desire is to work together in pastoral ministry. 9

serve as missionaries with the Ruibals. After meeting with the church board, it was unanimous; they would not support us or give us their blessing. This was the late fall of

1989, and Pablo Escobar and his Medellin drug cartel struggled to hold onto their control of the Colombian cocaine industry through a campaign of terror. The Colombian violence was the featured entertainment on the nightly news for weeks. The board’s decision was devastating for me, especially in light of Darlene’s dad being lead Pastor and head of the board. Yet, at the same time, I had feared that they would say yes. It was obvious to

Darlene and me that there were still issues that needed to be resolved in our lives before we could move forward.

Seeds of Sanctification

What happened next in my life was the genesis of an important transition that took place over several years. What follows is how I transitioned from a finished work understanding of sanctification into a Wesleyan/Pentecostal ethos. It was also during this time that I was first introduced to Dominion Theology.

In the late fall of 1989, the youth pastor of our church resigned. I will resist the urge to judge the motives of everyone involved, but I was offered his position. The consensus was that this might satisfy my longing to be in ministry. Darlene and I both had a desire to work together with her parents. Again, this would prove to be providential. I would become the youth pastor at the beginning of the next year. This gave Darlene and me a chance to visit churches for the purpose of observing how other youth groups were functioning. We even made a trip to Atlanta, Georgia to visit The

Cathedral at Chapel Hill founded by Earl Paulk. The leadership of Faith Community had

a casual relationship with their leadership, and we viewed them as on the cutting edge of what God was doing at that time. We visited other youth groups while in Atlanta, including Mount Paran Church of God. It was a very exciting time for Darlene and me. I was also planning on attending classes at our church’s Bible College starting in January.

We were finally going to be able to fulfill our desire to work in full-time ministry together.

In November, our church held a men’s retreat in central Florida. Our church enjoyed fruitful relationships with the leadership and pastors of the OBSC. One particular pastor, Butch Pluimer from California, was a favorite and spoke at this retreat.

I cannot recall what any of the actual topics, but I do remember the comradery among the men during that time. Things were really happening at our church. We shared our property with the local Christian television station. We had just finished our new building that seated two thousand. Enrollment at the college was growing, and church attendance ran about eight hundred. Tragically, this was all about to change, as sin and false teaching would unravel our little community with devastating results.

At the men’s retreat, I experienced what I would later understand to be a crisis moment of sanctification. I had no teaching on such an experience up to that time and did not fully understand it. The OBSC is a Pentecostal denomination, but they hold to a finished work understanding of sanctification. The church taught that the seeds of sanctification are planted at conversion, and growth is progressive throughout the rest of the believer’s life. While Faith Community Church was quite charismatic in theology and practice, it held to a high moral standard. However, there was an undercurrent of compromise that was eroding the spiritual dynamics of the church. During the next

several months, this would all come to a head. It was also at this time Dominion

Theology would be introduced to the church through the associate pastor.

The cabin I bunked in during the retreat was made up of a mixture of staff, lay leaders and members of the church. One night, the men of that cabin digressed into a crude exchange of off-color jokes that I am ashamed to say I thought were quite funny.

My older brother, who was not a believer, was very quick to share with me the jokes he heard on the construction site. The thought came to me that I would share these jokes with him the next time we got together. I had very little time to picture in my mind what my brother’s reaction would be, when like thunder I heard the Spirit of God question me,

“You’re going to share these jokes with your brother?” Conviction hit me so hard, I was pinned to my bunk. The fear of God surged though my soul like boiling water. I could not move or speak. I stopped laughing. I began to tremble. I do not remember if it was later that night or the next morning, but I took a long walk with the Lord and allowed the

Spirit to reveal to me just how far I had fallen.

It seemed like God was giving me a choice that weekend. Really, I had no option.

I resolved to hold onto the conviction I received that night, even though I did not fully understand what had taken place. I sensed that the dynamics of Jesus’ resurrected life were being appropriated into my life. This produced a renewed appreciation for the fear of God and his holy standard. I also received a renewed desire and power to overcome the sinful tendencies I had allowed to remain in my life since my born again experience in 1978.

This experience resonated in my spirit for two months. Only my immediate family was aware of the transformation taking place in my life. When I went to my

father-in-law, who was my pastor at the time, he did not adequately explain to me what was taking place. Moreover, there seemed to be a level of hostility in reaction to my desire to view this as normative. I stumbled in many areas during the next two years, including legalistic tendencies. However, I knew that the experience was real and from

God.

In January 1990, I began full-time work at the church and started attending the

Bible college that resided on our church campus. My first course was Joshua/Judges. The professor integrated E. M. Bounds’ text The Essentials of Prayer with a verse-by-verse exegesis of the Bible. One of the course objectives was to develop a greater appreciation for spiritual disciplines in the students. The goal was to help create a more dynamic relationship with God. Since my experience in November, I had already enjoyed a more meaningful prayer life, and the Bible seemed to come alive just as it had when I first believed. I knew I was in the right class. One of the major themes discussed in the course material was holiness. The professor was very intentional about moving the students towards Wesleyan/Pentecostal Theology.

I remember sitting through the classes, sensing that the Lord was speaking to me about what I had experienced two months earlier. After a few sessions, I shared my experience with the professor. He promptly told me that I had experienced a sanctification moment that lined up with Wesleyan thought. At that time, I did not fully grasp the implications of how this theology could and would eventually impact my life.

The conflicts that would soon arise in the church would divert my attention to other concerns. However, the seeds of this new appreciation for holiness were planted in fertile ground.

Dominion Now

The associate pastor of our church was a dynamic and talented worship leader, as well as a creative Bible teacher. His gifts opened doors for him to minister in various churches and conferences throughout the U.S. His contacts went beyond the OBSC and allowed our church to be connected with some very influential movements at that time.

By the 1990s, Christian television had become very popular. The contemporary worship movement was in full swing and Faith Community Church embraced it all. The running joke was that our church closets were full of props for every fad moving though

Christianity. We had all the banners, flags, streamers, dance outfits, drama, mime props, and dynamic worship any church could want. Of course, along with these came the latest teachings that we thought put us on the cutting edge of what God was doing in the

Church at that time.

Our connections in the greater church community would open the door for various guest speakers to come and minister. Much of this was tied into worship, which was a vital part of our services. It would be normal for our song service to last over an hour, followed by an hour of preaching and teaching. As time went on, I began to detect a recurring theme in the teaching that had to do with the return of Christ and the mission of the church. Instead of the Lord’s imminent return, the church was being told that it may be hundreds of years off. The Kingdom of God dominated much of what was being said from our guests and associate pastor.

New terminology was also being introduced like, dominion, kingdom now, and taking our city for Jesus. Rather than inspiring messages that called for devotion and holy living, the church was being told to take over the various social and political

institutions of society. I remember one guest speaker who told us to stop sending our young people to Bible college and start sending them to law and business schools so they could learn how to run the world. Looking back, it is amazing to realize how everything the church did was dominated by this teaching. Prayer and worship became focused as much on resisting the devil as it was on exalting God. Much of our praying and worship focused on the demonic hierarchy in the heavens that influenced social and political institutions. None of this seemed right to me.

The next year brought one controversy after another. Privately, I would speak to my father-in-law about my concerns. I sensed something amiss, not only with the

Dominion doctrine being introduced to the church, but also with those propagating it. I was young and new to the ministry. I loved my family, but I found it harder and harder to support what was taking place. Eventually, the associate pastor was caught molesting a young girl in the youth group. Rather than disciplining him properly, the OBSC moved him to another church out of state. I was not made aware of the moral failure even though

I was the youth pastor. It was not until legal action would be taken and the associate pastor was extradited back to Florida that I, along with most of the congregation, found out.

This caused quite a controversy. My in-laws were good pastors. People loved them and appreciated the care and ministry they received from them, but their emotional ties to the associate pastor would not allow my in-laws to see the harm being done to the church. The moral failure of yet another local pastor caused quite a bit of media attention. It seemed like every Sunday revealed a new development in the case. The dynamics of the situation began to have their effects on the congregation. The people

started a slow but steady exodus that would further weaken the morale and financial stability of the church.

Moving Beyond the Conflict

The conflict between my father-in-law and me was great.4 I would eventually resign my position and leave Faith Community. I was wounded and functioned out of a false sense of spiritual superiority. I started a small fellowship in my home, consisting of many disgruntled former church members, which was spiritually unhealthy. Had it not been for the leadership of my wife, I do not know where we would be today. In the spring of 1992, my family attended the Palm Sunday service of the Woodlawn Church of God in

Clearwater, Florida. Pastor Randy Morris, a long-time friend of Darlene’s family, would prove to be a source of healing that our family needed. After that Sunday, Darlene took our children to the Wednesday night classes and attended Pastor Morris’ Bible study.

She would come home and enthusiastically tell me everything she learned, but I would have nothing to do with organized religion. I finally went with her to one meeting for the purpose of proving to her that the pastor was teaching false doctrine. It took about two weeks of attending the Bible study for the conviction of the Holy Spirit to reveal to me my wounded spiritual condition. I canceled my home fellowship and encouraged everyone to attend the Sunday services with us.

Through Pastor Morris’ wisdom and loving guidance, not only would my relationship with Darlene’s dad be reconciled, but also my call to the ministry would be renewed. I eventually received my ministerial license with the Church of God (COG)

4 Space does not allow me to offer details of what transpired. Moreover, what took place caused a breach in our relationship that has subsequently been healed. To hash through the details would stir up old wounds that are best left under the blood of Jesus. 16

with Pastor Morris’ encouragement.5 This was an interesting new chapter in my spiritual formation. Darlene and I were very pleased to be a part of the COG. I enjoyed learning about COG history and the doctrines of the church. I had a successful job working for a food broker, but there was a nagging dissatisfaction with the direction I was going. The call to Cali, Colombia was as strong as ever, but by this time, we were several thousands of dollars in debt. Our indebtedness kept our hands tied, and we barely kept our heads above water. Ministry seemed out of reach.

One Sunday night, the COG State Overseer of Nebraska, Tony Weaver, prophesied over Darlene and me. He said we would be going into ministry and that the

Lord was about to rebuke the devourer in our lives. Time does not allow for detail; however, that day we received a contract to sell our home for enough cash to get us out of debt completely. The next morning, I was called into the corporate offices of the company I worked for and was given a new position with a ten thousand dollar a year raise. Bishop Weaver knew nothing about our situation. Ten months later, we were living in Cali, Colombia serving as missionaries with the Ruibals. Woodlawn Church of God became our major source of support.

There had been an urgency in our hearts to move to Colombia. By this time, we had all five of our children, ranging from two to thirteen years of age. It was October

1995, and our family and friends thought it wise for us to wait to leave until the start of the new year. Going against their well-meaning advice, Darlene and I decided not to wait

5 A relevant side note to this story is connected to my journey and lack of understanding at this time concerning sanctification. Being credentialed with the COG was subsequent to my sanctification experience. When it came down to placing a date next to the question about my sanctification experience, I did not know how to fill it in. I asked Pastor Morris about this, and he said not to worry about it. He would fill it in for me. I can only assume he was either embarrassed about the doctrine of instantaneous sanctification or unable to articulate it to me. To this day, I do not know what he put down. A future study of how COG pastors view sanctification may prove to be a useful research project. 17

even though we did not have our visas. We moved to Cali with thirty-five U-Haul boxes and as many backpacks as we could carry. Moving to Cali and working with the Ruibals was my life-long dream. Darlene would not have gone unless she knew it was from God, but the calling was mine. I thought I had arrived.

Six weeks after we landed in Cali, our pastor Julio Ruibal, was shot and killed as he was entering a city-wide pastor’s meeting. I responded with total unbelief. I thought

Julio was too important for this to happen. But it was true. Julio was gone. We stayed in

Cali for just over two years after Julio’s death. We served his family and the church in various ways. Life was difficult, but the Lord provided every financial need and gave my family a supernatural sense of protection. We lived through earthquakes, car bombings, and constant threats from the people responsible for Julio’s death. We even witnessed a gun battle between rebel and government forces when they used the bus we were on as a barricade across the road, so traffic would not drive through the gun fire. Reflecting back,

I am amazed at the peace we had through it all.

I eventually received missionary status with the COG. Through the World

Missions Department of the COG, I came into contact with Grant McClung. After hearing my story, he suggested that I finish my education so I could teach in a COG overseas seminary. It was not hard to detect deficiencies in my academic abilities, and

Darlene and I made plans to move to Cleveland to attend the seminary. We arrived in

July of 1998. My undergraduate degree was not accredited, so I had to attend two years at Lee University. This proved beneficial because I was not prepared at that time academically to start seminary work.

I thoroughly enjoyed the external studies program Lee University offered.

However, coming to the seminary was exhilarating. I was introduced to Dr. Land and Dr.

Thomas through several classes and I had nothing but high expectations of what I would receive from the seminary. Even some of the tedious courses on how to write research papers were welcomed due to deficiencies in my education and research skills. The very first concept I was confronted with was what it meant to be Pentecostal stemming from the Wesleyan/Holiness movement. I was able to embrace this understanding with relative ease because of my past experiences.

The primary reason I wanted to attend the seminary was to achieve a greater proficiency in Bible exegesis. I wanted to master the scriptures in order to become a better Bible teacher. What took place was a total transformation of who I was and what I understood the Gospel to be. Each course seemed to build on the previous ones. The various life situations I found myself in almost always correlated with the courses I was taking. Even when I had to leave the seminary due to finances and work, I continued reading and researching the various concepts introduced in the classes I had already attended.

During this time of self-study, my understanding of the nature of God, the Gospel, the Church, and the ministry were being re-formulated in my thinking. I explored theologies that are shaped by those on the margins. Liberation, Black, and Feminist theologies became more and more attractive to me. They began to help shape my understanding of God and how redemption is infused into the human condition from underneath. Studying other theologies helped me step out from the shelter of the theological constructs shaped by a North American prejudicial mindset. I became

convicted of narrow-minded thinking that refuses to see the need to think critically and embrace other traditions and ways of thinking that can help inform one’s understanding.

Upon my return to the seminary, I have been able to finish my course work rather quickly it seems, even though attending only part-time. Every course continues to challenge me as I give myself to the transforming effect of seminary life. I have finally found my voice, which is evident in my teaching and pulpit ministry. Three very important studies I have done in conjunction with seminary work pertain to the nature of

God and the nature and extent of the church’s mission. I conducted an intensive study of

Open Theology, which caused me to move away from the Platonic understanding of the divine perfections that permeate Christian theology. Also, Michael Gorman’s understanding of cruciformity6 has helped me understand God’s cruciform nature through the life and ministry of Jesus. Finally, my studies at the seminary, coupled with N. T.

Wright’s works on heaven, the resurrection, and the mission of the Church have helped me form a hopeful eschatology that may serve as a rebuttal to some of the issues raised by Dominion Theology.7

During the writing of this reflection, I have discerned God’s providential work in bringing about the transformation that I have needed to be a better minister of the Gospel.

Whether with right or seemingly wrong moves, God has directed my steps through

6 This will be discussed below. For now a simple definition of cruciformity is the understanding that God cannot be understood apart from the cross. Jesus’ life, death and resurrection illustrate the interconnectedness of the Trinity with the cross. God is cruciform in nature (Michael J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul's Narrative Spirituality of the Cross [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001], page 9). 7 Wright is helpful in understanding the continuity between this life and the Kingdom to come while fending off the neo-Gnosticism of our day (N. T. Wright, Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church [New York: HarperOne, 2008], pages 90, 208, 281). His works need to be read with a critical eye. For, while he celebrates the coming of a New Jerusalem, he seems to down play the newness of heaven and earth (Wright, Surprised by Hope, pp. 19, 104). For a good discussion on the newness of things to come, see John Christopher Thomas and Frank Macchia. The Apocalypse. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., forthcoming), page x.

circumstances and people to make me who I am today. I certainly have not arrived, but I feel as if I have come into my own. My journey with the Pentecostal Theological

Seminary has been a mixture of affirming, fine-tuning, and totally transforming my worldview. It has helped me to understand and embrace what it means to be Pentecostal in connection with the Wesleyan/Holiness tradition.

Looking back, I have to ask myself, if I had not received the sanctification experience in 1989, would I have had the moral fiber to discern what was taking place at

Faith Community Church? Would I have had the unction to take the stand that I did?

Would I have had the ability to conquer my fears and go to the mission field? Would I even be in the Church of God tradition?

There are certain fundamental truths that inform my worldview that are characteristic of a Wesleyan/Pentecostal hermeneutic. Moreover, the integration of various elements of other traditions and theologies with my understanding of Pentecost have helped me to recognize that one’s understanding of the nature of God, the nature of the Gospel, the nature of the Church, and the nature of ministry (mission) are interrelated.

A simple construct of these aspects of theology can be diagrammed as such:

This diagram is an attempt to illustrate how the mission of the Church is directly linked to and flows out of one’s understanding of the nature and mission of God. The entire

construct begins with one’s concept of God. Moreover, the Gospel, Church, and mission are intimately connected to this beginning point. The Gospel is the message of the mission, and the Church is the instrument by which God carries out the divine plan for creation. The mission of the Church is a continuation of God’s eternal plan and will reflect how one understands the essential nature of God.

It is my contention that Dominion Theological constructs are formed on the understanding that God is the sovereign law-giver over all creation. I will argue that this is based on a hyper-Reformed position which relegates the Gospel proclamation as forensic justification communicated in legalistic terms. The Church is viewed as the guardian or vicegerent working in cooperation with God to carry out God’s will for creation. This relegates the primary responsibility of the Church to the propagation and implementation of a mandate to take dominion and to educate people to submit to

Christ’s governance. Mission, therefore, takes place as the Church exercises its God- given authority to bring all governance on earth under the dominion of God.

This is a very simple introduction to the construct diagram and serves as an elementary explanation of how the four theological constructs of God, Gospel, Church and mission are interrelated in Dominion Theology. In chapter 2, I will offer a more detailed discussion, involving several foundational truths found in American

Reconstructionism. This branch of Dominion Theology formulates its theology from a hyper-Reformed Presbyterian view of God as the supreme law-giver. This is not to say that all those who have dominion tendencies are Presbyterian or Reformed in their theology. After this overview, I will discuss my personal views of the effect Dominion

Theology has had on the Christian political activism taking place in America today. Here,

I will try to show how wide-spread and detrimental to true Christian witness much of this has been. I will then offer in chapter 3 an analysis from various biblical texts that help me construct my understanding of the nature God and how this informs the Church of its mission. This will primarily focus on the life and mission of Jesus Christ, God’s Son, who is quintessentially God. The conversation that follows is intended to address the question, “what kind of God is the Church offering a world desperately in need of redemption?”8 I will argue that what one believes about Gospel, Church, and mission is intimately connected to the answer to that question.

8 Stanley Hauerwas and William H. Willimon, Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989), page 95. 23

CHAPTER 2

TAKING DOMINION

But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law. Galatians 5.18 NIV

Introduction

Why Dominion Theology? That is a fair enough question, given the fact that this theology seems to have little impact on the greater Christian community. It is not a widely known theology and it is less understood. The events that took place at Faith

Community Church almost two decades ago may not warrant such attention. However, it is my personal conviction that this was not an isolated case. It is interesting to note how the Contemporary Christian Music movement paralleled the growth and influence of the neo-dominion movement in North America.9 Like so many enthusiastic pastors wanting to keep their churches on the cutting edge, the associate pastor of Faith Community was no exception. He was instrumental in introducing the church to many of the new trends and practices of worship like interpretive dance, banners, flags, and sign language. Many of these trends were propagated through worship symposiums conducted by the

Charismatic branch of Dominionism. Along with the dance came the song to the tune of

9 Dominion Theology’s influence is evident by the nature of the songs and forms of worship being produced at that time. Themes of Spiritual warfare, dominion and the Church’s power marked the worship style that was emerging in the 1980s and 90s. 24

Dominion Theology. Dominionism has a long history that has influenced theology and mission for centuries.10 Moreover, many people fail to see just how extensive an influence Christian Reconstruction has on conservative Christian thought. 11 Perhaps it is time for a closer look.

There were two key elements of Dominion Theology that met resistance at Faith

Community. First, Dominion Theology inherently includes a postmillennial eschatological view of the future. 12 This is radically different than the dispensationalism many embraced at the church. Many of the congregants considered that the over-realized eschatology of Dominionism (the belief that the end of the age, spoken of by Jesus in the

Gospels, took place at the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70 A. D.) went against what they deemed to be clear biblical teaching on end-time events.13 Like many

Evangelicals and Charismatics, Faith Community Church held to the dispensational view of the end times. There was no room for the long term plan Dominion eschatology was offering.

The second point of contention involved the understanding of the Church’s mission. The militant agenda of Dominionism to take dominion over the political, economic, and religious systems of the world went beyond their understanding of the mission of the Church. The mandate for such dominion not only stems from the over-

10 This is the theology of the Catholic Church from Constantine to the present. The Magisterial Reformers also embraced this theology in a time when Christian influence in the West was being challenged by the eastern dominance of the ever expanding Ottoman Empire (Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity: Reformation to the Present (Volume 2), Revised ed. (New York: Prince Press, 1975), pages 689, 90. 11 Molly Worthen, 2008. "The Chalcedon Problem: Rousas John Rushdoony and the Origins of Christian Reconstructionism." Church History 77, no. 2: 399-437. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed Dec. 5, 2011), page 400. 12 This is the view that Jesus will not return until after the Church takes dominion of the political systems and social order of the entire world. 13 David Chilton, Paradise Restored: a Biblical Theology of Dominion (Tyler, Tex.: Dominion Pr, 1987), page 112. 25

realized eschatology, but also the use of the Old Testament Law. Their emphasis on Law was counter to the emphasis on grace. God’s Law is crucial to the Dominion agenda because they view God as sovereign law-giver and ruler over the cosmos. They proclaim that God will rule the world through the Church in an ever expanding mandate of dominion.14 Understanding the Christian Reconstruction view of God and how it relates to their view of the Church, the Gospel and mission is critical to my arguments in this paper.

I was among those who embraced dispensational eschatological views and found

Dominion eschatology and the accompanying agenda intolerable. Through my studies at the Pentecostal Theological Seminary, I have come to drop my dispensational views. I am in the process of developing a more hopeful eschatology than dispensationalism offers.15 One positive challenge Dominion Theology brings to the table is its critique of the pessimistic eschatology of dispensationalism. While I still disagree with many of the conclusions Dominionists have concerning eschatology and mission, I find their critique of dispensationalism insightful. This perhaps is a point of commonality that could open productive dialogue between Pentecostals and Dominionists.

14 Rousas John Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction (Vallecito, Calif.: Ross House Books, 1991), page 68. 15 I never adhered to the historical view of dispensationalism. What I did embrace were the eschatological views of John Darby, who, in the mid-1800s developed an end time theology that swept across the church and is believed by many Evangelical, Pentecostal, and Charismatic Christians today. The view offered by Darby’s dispensationalism is a very pessimistic one. Very few people will be saved according to dispensational theology. It goes beyond the belief in a premillennial return of Christ. In this view, there is a seven year period called the Great Tribulation in which Israel as a nation will embrace Jesus as their messiah and be restored as God’s chosen people. The rapture will take place before the Tribulation, so Christians will be spared the wrath of God. The only way for gentiles to be saved during this time is to become martyrs. The nations will come against Israel at the end of the age in the great battle of Armageddon. Jesus will return with the raptured saints to rescue Israel and establish his thousand year reign on the earth, which will be marked with peace and prosperity. Various proof texts are used to substantiate the various points of this eschatology (see Matt. 7.14; 22.14; Luke 13.23-25; 1 Thes. 5.9; 2 Tim. 3.2). The Book of Revelation is used as a road map to navigate one’s way though end time events, which Darby reads with a strictly futurist interpretation. 26

In this chapter, I will offer quick snapshots of six basic tenants that are foundational to Christian Reconstructionism. The analysis will be brief compared to the amount of material Dominion adherents have produced. After this analysis, I will close the chapter with my personal thoughts on how the Reconstruction movement in America has influenced Charismatics and Evangelicals resulting in a political alliance that is aimed at reinstituting the Christian values they say America was founded on. This has helped fuel a new and powerful political movement that is sweeping through the church.

Some even want to go beyond the reestablishment of basic Christian values. Their aim is to convert the United States into a theocracy ruled by the Law of God. I hope to show that this is taking place because there is wide spread theological schizophrenia in the church today. In point of fact, the radical goals of Reconstructionism go way beyond the political activism seen in Christian Conservatives. Moreover, the eschatology of

Reconstructionism is strikingly different than that of most Evangelicals and Charismatics.

As in every movement, those who espouse Dominionism do not agree on every point of their theology, or on the means by which they carry out the dominion mandate.

Therefore, it should be understood that various terms used to identify Dominionism will be used interchangeably as overarching definitive terms. I want to avoid any confusion that may be created by including Evangelical and Charismatics, who mostly embrace

Darby’s eschatology, with postmillennial Reconstructionism.16 Again, it will be important to note that while those in the various movements involved have similar goals, it would be wrong to label all Christians embracing political activism today as

16 It is interesting to note how the pessimism and fear of dispensational eschatology is being merged with political activism that is fighting for a more hopeful future. See satirist and author Daniel Radosh (Daniel Radosh, Rapture Ready!: Adventures in the Parallel Universe of Christian Pop Culture, 1st Scribner hardcover ed. [New York: Scribner, 2008], page 81). 27

Dominionists in the strictest sense of its meaning. In chapter 3, I will call for Pentecostals to integrate the construct diagram introduced in chapter 1 with a Pentecostal missiology based on a biblically-based understanding of God grounded in the person of Jesus Christ.

It is my hope that what I am proposing will provide a means to find our voice (our prophetic voice) in an age of confusion.

Christian Reconstructionism

My reaction to Dominion Theology in the 1980’s was uninformed (in my research, I have found several of the basic tenets of this theology, such as godly living, view of state, tithing, and a future based on hope, are very close to Pentecostal theological constructs). Simply to say that Dominion Theology is a system of belief with a goal of taking over the governments of the world and making them Christian is misleading. This section will explore the fundamental beliefs of Christian

Reconstructionism. The central figure of this movement is Rousas John Rushdoony. He established the Chalcedon Foundation in 1965 as a Christian educational organization promoting Christian Reconstructionism. R. J. Rushdoony, a retired orthodox Presbyterian pastor, formed the group along with a few of his colleagues and seminarians looking for a way to re-establish their brand of Biblical faith in society. The name Chalcedon comes from the Church council of AD 451. The name is associated with the fight for orthodoxy and represents Rushdoony’s desire to define and identify the mediating presence of God’s

Kingdom on earth. The early books and articles produced out of the foundation had

limited circulation and effect. Recently, the foundation celebrated its 40th anniversary with Rushdoony’s son, Mark, taking the helm.17

Another important figure in the Dominion camp is David Chilton. Chilton was a

Reformed pastor and editor of the Chalcedon Foundation’s Journal of Christian

Reconstruction from 1974 until 1981. His work helped take Christian Reconstructionism out of the back corners of Vallecito, California, into the mainstream of Christian conservative thought. His influence is recognizably attributed to the success of his own publications and the many TV and radio appearances in the 1980s, which gained acceptance. As a result of Chilton’s work on Eschatology, two TV evangelists, Pat

Robertson and Robert Tilton, are said to have changed from a dispensational to a postmillennial view.18 Molly Worthen notes that the proliferation of Reconstructionist publications in the 1980s and 90s had very little critical response.19 This may be one reason Reconstructionist thought is so prevalent in mainstream Christian conservative circles today.

There are six basic categories of Reconstructionism that will be discussed here: 1)

The Covenant Mandate, 2) Theocracy, 3) Biblical Law, 4) The Tithe, 5) The State, and 6)

Eschatology. The materials produced by the Chalcedon Foundation are extensive and cover a wide range of issues. Many sub-categories could be explored; however, an overview of these six categories should be sufficient to grasp the thinking that is helping to drive much of the conservative Christian political action today. The analysis offered will rely heavily on the book, The Roots of Reconstruction. This is a collection of R. J.

17 R. J. Rushdoony died in February 2001. This opened the door for his son to become president to the Chalcedon Foundation and Ross House Books. He is also editor-in-chief of Faith for All of Life as well as Chalcedon’s other publications. 18 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 328 19 Worthen, The Chalcedon Problem, page 400. 29

Rushdoony’s works compiled by the Chalcedon Foundation. David Chilton’s Paradise

Restored will also be referred to, especially for the discussion on eschatology.

The Covenant Mandate:

Dominion thought concerning a Covenant Mandate reaches back to what they call the creation mandate (Gen. 1.28). Restoration by covenant is a basic tenant of Dominion

Theology and follows a trajectory through the entire Old Testament and reaches into the

New Testament, where it is fully restored to fallen humanity through the atoning work of

Jesus Christ. Humanity’s restoration into covenant with God gives the Christian community the right to exercise dominion over the “nations”20 and supplies the impetus for the authority to do so.21 As will be discussed under the section on Law, covenant is important to dominion because of the way it binds the believer (and the entire cosmos) to the Law of God. God’s Law gives the moral fortitude to rule without being tyrannical. In other words, God’s Law restrains humanity from taking dominion for itself. Covenant gives clarity to the dominion mandate in order for the objectives of the movement to be fully understood and carried out. Without covenant, the basic urges of fallen humanity render dominion dangerous, nothing more than anarchy.22

Man was created in the image of God and commanded to subdue the earth and to have dominion over it (Gen. 1.26-27). Not only is it man's calling to exercise dominion, but it is also his nature to do so. Since God is the absolute and sovereign Lord and Creator, whose dominion is total and whose power is without limits, man, created in His image, shares in this communicable attribute of God. Man was created to exercise dominion under God and as God's appointed vicegerent over the earth. Dominion is thus a basic urge of man's nature. (italics mine)23

20 When dominionists speak of the nations, they are referring primarily to nation states and the systems that govern them. This would include the individuals living there. 21 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 67. 22 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 341. 23 Rousas John Rushdoony and Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law (Phillipsburg, NJ.: P & R Publishing, 1980), page 448. 30

In Dominion Theology, the Kingdom has its origins in the redemption brought through the atonement.24 Only redeemed humanity is fit to act as vicegerent for God. The atonement ushered in the age of the Kingdom, making it a present reality.25 They view it as having a “definitive-progressive-final”26 orientation that allows Dominionists to speak of the Kingdom of God in various temporal terms. While the emphasis is on the Kingdom here and now, it is no contradiction to refer to the Kingdom as being already inaugurated, progressively established, or in terms of future fulfillment. Progressively, they see the

Kingdom being established by exercising dominion through a variety of interrelated governing bodies. These bodies include but are not limited to family, education, health, church, and civil government.

The basic form of government is believed to be self-government with the family as the central biblically instituted governing body.27 All governing bodies are understood to be under Christ’s control according to Isaiah 9.6-7. This passage informs Dominionists that Christ’s reign will increase until all his enemies are under his feet. Therefore, there would be a variety of governing bodies under the sphere of God’s reign. Although the church is one of many governing bodies in the kingdom, its role is significant. The church is the educational body as seen in the model of the Levitical schools of ancient

Israel.28 Its role in evangelism is seen in Rushdoony’s driving philosophy of dominion as noted in the mission of Chalcedon “…to apply God’s word to every area of life and

24 This is understood to be the Kingdom in the Christian era although might be hesitant to use such language. In the section on eschatology, the rejection of the Israel and the transfer of the Kingdom to the Church will be discussed for clarification when the Kingdom began. 25 This will be discussed in more detail under the heading of Eschatology. 26 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 146. 27 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 64. 28 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 607. 31

thought and to summon the redeemed of God to their responsibilities in Christ our King”

(italics mine).29 They believe the Church is mandated to work towards bringing every individual and institution under the rule of God. Only when this is done will Christ return to earth. Until then, only the redeemed can be a part of the ruling members. However, they do believe that the majority of humanity will eventually be converted to Christ and enter into the ruling class. To understand how the Covenant Mandate functions through the various interrelated governing bodies, it is important to explore what they say about theocracy.

Theocracy:

Reconstructionists are working towards establishing a theocracy based on the theological premise that God is sovereign ruler over the cosmos. The only justifiable expression of that rule is when God and his Law30 rule without rival.31 Reconstruction theologians reach back to the Catholic experiment that took place from Constantine to the

Reformation. Their view of history was that, in the west at least, the public realm had belonged to God, and people lived in a free society under God’s realm of authority.32

Even though the Magisterial Reformers tried to hold onto power, the state co-opted the public realm from the church’s authority. To say that the church had the authority is a little misleading. Reconstructionists believe whole heartedly that all human authority is under the authority of God.

29 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page xi. 30 Law is capitalized not only because it is God’s Law, but Dominion Theology views the Old Testament, specifically the Law, as still binding to all humanity. More will be said about this in the discussion on Law. 31 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 64. 32 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 67. 32

The Church is just one of many governing bodies that owes its allegiance to the reign of God. Everything in the public and private arenas is in the religious domain of

God. The Church is seen as a guardian of that realm in covenant with God. Dominion is exercised by serving humanity, not through coercion.33 All of the redeemed are called to work towards establishing the rule of God. However, as one of many governing bodies, the Church cannot claim absolute control over the others, because God alone rules over all. This is a safe-guard in the Dominion model of theocracy. It allows every sphere of life to co-exist in a theocentric coalition of interdependent governing agencies. No one governing body has the right to control any other or go beyond their limited sphere of governance.34 The heart of this model is the covenant mandate to take dominion. This precedes all forms of institutionalization because in the beginning (Gen. 1.28), “the mandate was given to man as a man not a governing body.”35 This is how Dominionists justify the agenda of their mandate taking precedence over the state. For Dominionists, the state has a limited place in the Kingdom as one of many governing bodies, but the government over every institution and individual is God and His Law.

Biblical Law:

God’s Law is closely related to the Covenant Mandate. In a theocracy God’s Law is supreme. Grasping the importance of God’s Law is essential to understanding

American Reconstructionism under Chalcedon’s understanding of mandate that one grasps the importance of God’s Law. Everything has been placed in motion by God and

33 For an in-depth interview with R. J. Rushdoony on the use of coercion and the means of dominion see, Chalcedon, “Dominion,” Topics, http://chalcedon.edu/topics/dominion/ (Accessed December 5, 2011). 34 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 67. 35 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 68. 33

is subject to various laws, such as the laws of physics, physiology, sociology, religion, economics, and others.36 God’s Law is his Word, established for all time. This law-word is defined as the “already-Inscriptured-Voice”37 and is the authoritative word of God.38 It keeps humanity hemmed in and away from the dangers of lawlessness, especially among the redeemed who live within the Covenant Mandate. It also defines the terms in which the dominion mandate is to be carried out. In other words, the authority of God’s law- word supersedes all other authority and is to be obeyed completely. Because God always speaks authoritatively, this includes the Old Testament Laws.

It is not clear how far Reconstructionists are willing to take this mandate, since the laws of the State still govern our lives and do not allow them to carry out their mandate to the letter. Dominionists understand that biblical law is based on a system of restitution. God’s covenant with humanity is based on justice and mercy through restitution; atonement is interpreted as a form of restitution. Because Jesus lived in complete obedience to God’s Law, his death on the cross is understood as a type of substitutional death penalty that all people deserve. Rather than seeing Jesus’ atonement solely as a fulfillment of the Law, they believe that it necessitates living under God’s

Law. This is due to a Reformed understanding of the forensic nature of Christ’s atonement. It is achieved through strict obedience to every word (law) of God.

Restitution is the basis of a Kingdom-oriented society. It assures that people will understand that crime does not pay. Restitution for crimes committed goes beyond the practice between humans to between humans and God. Human to earth violations need

36 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 571. 37 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 341. 38 Mark R. Rushdoony, Chalcedon, “The Vision of R. J. Rushdoony,” Research Articles, http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/the-vision-of-r-j-rushdoony/ (accessed December 5, 2011).

to be covered by restitution as well. The story of the exile and the need to allow the land to have seventy years of Sabbath rest justifies this teaching (2 Chron. 36.21).39 For

Reconstructionists, to abolish restitution not only violates God’s revealed will, it cuts across the grain of God’s way to deal out justice and mercy. Incarceration is seen as an affront to God. They do not see it as a biblical concept. God deals with crime through restitution, and habitual criminals are to be executed.40 Rushdoony is serious about his commitment to this aspect of the dominion mandate:

To deny the death penalty is to insist on life for the evil; it means that evil men are given the right to kill, kidnap, rape, and violate law and order, and their life is guaranteed against death in the process. The murderer is given the right to kill without losing his life, and the victim and potential victims are denied their right to live … If I am loving and merciful to a murderer, I am unloving and merciless to his present and future victims. Moreover, I am then in open contempt of God and His laws.41

It is not just the violent criminals who are under the threat of death for their crimes. Any habitual law breaker, even of religious laws, is subject to the severest punishment allowed by law according to Rushdoony.42 It is no wonder some see Rushdoony as some sort of “American ayatollah.”43

Politics is an important realm of God’s supreme rule. This is because God is seen as the only true law-giver.44 Sovereignty belongs to God alone. The state has no right to create laws that dispense with any of God’s Laws. The ethics that derive from such humanistic philosophies are inadequate to govern humanity. Dominionists are dedicated

39 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 1009. 40 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 65. 41 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 78. 42 Worthen, The Chalcedon Problem, page 401. 43 Worthen, The Chalcedon Problem, page 400. 44 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 573. 35

to the principle that ethics and morality are grounded in God. Christian ethics and morals are “theocentric…having reference to His word and to his judgment.”45

The Tithe:

The covenant mandate is not a haphazard plan to take control of power.

Dominionists understand that this will take much time, energy, and money. This is a very patient movement. Their plans for the future are well laid out. It is based on a methodical education program and the belief that they are on God’s side. They understand the practical side of carrying out their dominion mandate. Economics is a sphere of life that must come under the Law of God. This is done through the institution of the tithe.

Dominionists teach that by tithing, believers put their faith in action. It is a godly action that is closely connected to their understanding of holiness. Holiness is defined as the believers’ ability to remake the world according to God’s law-word.46 By tithing, it is believed that Christians will submit to Christ’s governance and reorder the world around them in increasing numbers.47 They teach that they need to get back to the godly use of the tithe. In their understanding of government, the tithe is to be taken out of the hands of the church by creating a governing body that gives oversight to finance. As stated earlier, none of the governing agencies in the theocratic system have the right or power to usurp authority over the others. Everything comes under the authority of God. Therefore, the governing finance body has safeguards in place to keep it within its mandated sphere of service. This allows all of the finances of the Kingdom to be administered according to

45 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 573. 46 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 67. 47 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 63. 36

the tithe’s biblically mandated function. They depend on the regeneration of the human being and the submission to the covenant mandate to shield the system from corruption.

The tithe is understood to be God’s tax for the use of the earth.48 It is instituted to finance all of the other governing bodies that serve in the Kingdom. They see that in the

Old Testament, all the basic social needs of the community were provided for through the tithe.49 The state has no right to usurp a property tax on its people. The earth belongs to

God, and he alone has the right to tax or demand a tithe. Tithing is not understood as giving a gift. It is a matter of Law to pay tithes. It is the Dominionists’ belief that if every member of society tithed, there would be ample supply for every need. Moreover, it is their belief that by following this mandate from God’s law-word, they invoke the blessing of the Lord.

One outcome of full compliance is to eradicate poverty and usher in unprecedented prosperity.50 The tithe is seen as the solution to all the illegitimate taxes the state puts on citizens now. There would also be a very clear-cut governing body that gives oversight to the benevolence agencies. They realize that the creation of a new social order could not exist without a well-defined network of social institutions that would have to be financed. A Reconstruction reading of the Bible points to a fundamental law that has practical implications. The key to dominion is the law of

48 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 605. 49 There is one other census tax (head tax) that they also understand to be mandatory (Ex. 30.11- 21). It would be consigned to the state to collect and distribute as needed (Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 67.) 50 This is one of the impetuses of the last day’s harvest. All nations, including Israel, will see the prosperity of God’s people and be drawn to the Kingdom in unprecedented numbers. 37

the tithe.51 They see the institution of the tithe to offset what they claim to be the state’s way of gaining control over society by controlling the finances through unjust taxation.52

The State:

The battle Reconstructionists have with the nation/state(s) is viewed as more theological than political or legal.53 Attitudes toward the state-run institutions are quite antagonistic.54 In the same way they interpret the history of Western Europe under

Catholic domination before the Reformation, they believe that America during the colonial and the early stages of the United States was another Christian experiment.55

Soon after the revolution, the state once again co-opted society. They believe the state, not under God’s rule, is the enemy of the Kingdom and Church because it is in the hands of humanists.56 The issue is lordship, and they view the state as having become “the over- lord and ruler of man.”57 Because they believe the state is in the hands of humanists, the state has become the religion of the people and functions as a “saving institution.”58 The

51 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 605. 52 Here are seven principles of tithing offered by the Chalcedon Foundation: 1) The earth is the Lord’s, therefore, the tithe is a tax for the use of it; 2) It invokes God’s blessing for you’re cursed if you take from God; 3) It makes for a free society – all the social needs of society would be amply supplied; 4) The tithe is thus the financial basis of reconstruction. It is the means to recreate the necessary Christian institutions; 5) The tithe restores the necessary economic basis to society: it asserts the absolute lordship and ownership of God over the earth, and the God-given nature of private ownership under God; 6) The tithe restores the necessary spiritual basis to Christian action. Today, many people do give generously to various causes, but their giving is impulsive and emotional; 7) The tithe restores power to the little man. Today, it is the rich man who dominates most causes, his money counts; he can donate a hundred thousand or a million and make his influence felt. But a thousand little men who tithe can far outweigh the rich man (Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 608-609). 53 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 1007. 54 For a Christian to send their children to a state school is seen as an act of anarchy (Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 117). 55 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 606. 56 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, pages 605, 1005. 57 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 64. 58 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 63. 38

state’s current exercise of dominion is seen as perverted because it is not exercised under

God and for his glory.59

There are many issues pertaining to Reconstructionists’ distain for the state. A major contention concerns the use of finances. The state has no right to tax its citizens since the earth is the Lord’s, not the state’s. A major flaw in the state financial system of the U.S. is the welfare system. They label the foreign aid and welfare systems of the U.S. as false charity.60

Russia and the U.S. are today parasites living off the American people. There is no future for the American people until they rid themselves of the parasites, which means a radical change of perspective with regard to the nature of civil government.61

Reconstructionism calls for a social reordering. They fear that the state is actually acting against society as an “antisocial institution”62 working to destroy all historical connections to the past (namely religious). The state use of finance and the power of the tax is what they see as a means of control over every aspect of life from birth to death:

…the modern state seeks to create wealth, cradle to grave or womb to tomb security, and also to create money. Modern money, fiat, paper money is the result. It is state created money which is used to erode all traditional forms of wealth, and to place all wealth under the control of the state. We see today small family farms, in the same family for generations or from the colonial era, being sold because of taxes.63

For Dominionists, the state has made itself a god and to participate in such a system is sin and evil. Dominion Theology is a call to reorient the system that is under state control using the God-given mandate to bring the state and all of society under the rule of God now, for the Kingdom of God is here.

59 Rushdoony, The Institutes of Biblical Law, page 448. 60 Rousas John Rushdoony, “Bread Upon the Waters” Columns From The California Farmer, http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/subsidizing-evil/ (accessed December 5, 2011) 61 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 143. 62 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 65. 63 Rushdoony, The Roots of Reconstruction, page 145. 39

Eschatology:

Dominion Theology is a theology that espouses the postmillennial view of the

Lord’s return. The basic premise is that the Church will expand the Kingdom of God in ever-increasing influence over the political, economic, and educational systems of the world to bring every enemy under the rule of God (1 Cor. 15.25, Isa. 9.6-7). The timeline for their eschatology begins at the cross. Two very important aspects of the Kingdom’s dynamic took place in association with the cross. First, this was Israel’s ultimate act of rebellion against God and resulted in their being cut off as a geo-political locator of the

Kingdom.64 Only through individual repentance and faith will an Israelite be grafted back in (Rom. 11.17-22).65 The conversion of Israel will occur in mass just before the end of history. This will be triggered by their observance of the nations enjoying the benefits of

God’s salvation not through the threat of war.66 Second, Satan’s hold over the earth was broken. Jesus’ death is seen as a finished work that has rendered Satan and his entire army of demons totally defeated and rendered powerless against the advancement of the

Church.67

These two aspects of the work of Christ on the cross are crucial to the understanding of the Church’s authority and mandate to take dominion. With Israel’s rejection and Satan’s defeat, the (Gentile) Church has full rights to reign with God. The

Kingdom itself was inaugurated at Jesus’ ascension to the throne of God.68 This is why it is crucial for Dominionists to believe that the Church’s influence will be an ever

64 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 80. 65 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 127. 66 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 130. 67 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 72. 68 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 70. 40

increasing influence. Jesus is already reigning from heaven, and “the increase of His

Kingdom will see no end” (Isa. 9.7).

There are several aspects of dispensationalism that are addressed in the eschatology of Dominion Theology. First, they reject any two-phase rapture theory associated with the return of Christ. They believe the Bible makes it clear that there will be only one resurrection that includes the righteous and the wicked (Dan. 12.2; John

5.26-29; Acts 24.15; Rev. 20.11-25).69 Second, the imminency of Jesus’ return is offset by the realization that it will take a long time for the Church to overcome the world, probably thousands of years.70 Therefore, Reconstructionists are committed to a “long- term investment”71 in their pursuit of dominion. Third, the Tribulation ended at the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. The language they say that Jesus was using to describe the end of the age and tribulation taking place within that generation was literal

(Matt. 24.34; also see, Mark 13 and Luke 21). The judgment on Israel was imminent and was the cause of the Tribulation.72 Fourth, they offer a careful reading of the text which points out that the term antichrist is referring to the deceivers who were already active before the fall of Jerusalem (1 John 2.18-19; 2 John 7-11).73 They tie these verses to the great apostasy spoken of by Jesus (Matt. 24.4-13).

These first two aspects of their postmillennial answer to dispensationalism speak of the need for patience in carrying out the Dominion Mandate. They believe there will be an end to history and Christ will return to claim his right to rule the earth after the

69 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 144. 70 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 226. 71 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 325. 72 Chilton adds an Appendix to his book where he offers Josephus’ account of the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple in an attempt to give weight to his arguments (Chilton, Paradise Restored, pages 237-90). 73 Chilton, Paradise Restored, pages 109-110. 41

Church has secured it for him. However, the second two aspects of their argument, as I presented it, speak of the way they understand the New Testament’s teaching of the end of the age or last days (1 Tim. 4.1-3). They believe this to be referring to the last days of

Israel as a geo-political locator of the Kingdom of God. While this was stripped from them because of their actions concerning Jesus, they still held their identity as a nation- state and religious system (the Temple) that needed to be dealt with and judged. Israel is depicted as the Church’s greatest enemy that was destroyed through an act of God’s judgment, which marked the end of the tribulation period.74 The last days were indicated by the signs that came at Pentecost and ended at the destruction of the Temple.75 The end of history will be marked by the conversion of the nations on a massive scale where most of humanity is saved.76 This describes how the enemies of God will be subdued as the

Church takes dominion of the earth.

Conclusion:

The elements discussed demonstrate the commitment and thought

Reconstructionists have given to their theology. The absolute sovereignty and rule of God is the foundation of their understanding of the dominion mandate. Absolute dominion is how God works in the world to redeem all things to Him. They view God as the ultimate law and humanity is to come under that law. The gospel is presented as a means to bring sinners to acknowledge their rebellion and embrace the Covenant Mandate that brings them to God’s Law. The church is the vicegerent with God. It has been entrusted with the mandate to take dominion through evangelism and education. Mission is defined in

74 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 122. 75 Chilton, Paradise Restored, pages 117-19. 76 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 127. 42

terms of dominion as mandated by the law-giver. Dominion is not equated with revolution, but it is a long-term commitment to bring all things under the rule of God.

They offer a very optimistic eschatology where all the nations, including Israel, will eventually respond to the benefits of living under the rule and Lordship of Jesus Christ.

I would like to conclude this section with something I found lacking in their theology. Reconstructionists do not offer any definitive works on the Holy Spirit or demonology. This is not to say that they do not offer thoughts on both. Satan is still at work, but the struggle Reconstruction Theology addresses is the conversion and re- education of humanity. Satan is seen as working behind the scenes to bring about his own desire for dominion.77 References to the Holy Spirit relegate the activity of the Spirit to speaking the Scripture into existence, as opposed to speaking to individual believers today.78 Also, the Spirit is seen as the life force that sustains and gives the spiritual character to the nature of the believer’s life now (vocation) and at the future resurrection

(glorification).79 This de-emphasis on the spiritual is why the connection I see in the political action of Christian conservatism between Evangelicals, Charismatics, and

Reconstructionists is so peculiar.

How Did We Get Here?

After all this, some may still ask, So what? Why Dominion Theology? It was election year 1980. All three candidates, Republican, Democrat, and Independent, claimed to be Born Again. The Republicans won by a landslide, placing Ronald Reagan

77 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 220. 78 Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 341, and R.J. Rushdoony, Exodus: Volume II of Commentaries On the Pentateuch, 1ST ed. (Vallecito, CA: Chalcedon/Ross House Books, 2004), page 458. 79Chilton, Paradise Restored, page 145. And R.J. Rushdoony, Exodus, page 458. 43

in the White House as well as gaining a Republican majority in both the House and

Senate. This decisive victory seemed, to some Christians, to make Reagan and the conservatives God’s choice. It was at this time that a new Christian coalition was forming, pejoratively labeled the religious right. Leading figures included popular personalities like Pat Robertson, a Charismatic TV talk-show host; Jerry Falwell, a

Baptist minister; and D. James Kennedy, a Presbyterian pastor. There were many others who joined this new political crusade, which from its inception made strange bedfellows.

Before this, there had been Charismatic groups that operated from what I would describe as dominion tendencies. Most, if not all those involved in such movements, would reject the label Dominion because of their dispensational views of eschatology.

Charismatic Dominionism stems from the Latter Rain Movement of the 1940s, a hyper-

Pentecostal movement that believed the Church was on the brink of a worldwide revival that would be marked by a victorious church and overcoming saints reaching sinless perfection. One of the abhorrent teachings that sprang from this movement was the immortalization of the saints.80

From the Latter Rain Movement, other Charismatic movements with dominion tendencies can be traced either directly from or in association with its teachings. The

Manifest Sons of God, Shepherding and Word Faith/Positive Confession81 movements helped shape much of the popular Christian culture of the 1970s and 80s through the proliferation of books and religious broadcasting. Many subgroups have subsequently formed. The Spiritual Warfare, Tabernacle of David, worship symposiums, Five-Fold

80 Franklin Hall, The Return of Immortality (Phoenix, AZ: Hall Deliverance Foundation, 1976), pages 2-3. 81 This is a particularly influential movement. Their emphasis on prosperity and the believer’s ability to take authority by their own words are quasi-dominion characteristics. 44

ministry (movements that recognize apostles and prophets functioning today), and some of the new prayer movements all find their roots in Latter Rain teachings.

An influential Pentecostal minister who embraced the five-fold (new apostle/prophet) teaching, Dominionism, and postmillennial eschatology was Earl Paulk.

Paulk’s influence on other Pentecostals and Charismatics was prevalent as he enjoyed a season of notoriety in the late 1980s and early 1990s.82 Along with Pat Robertson, he was a leading Charismatic who helped bring Dominion teaching into the mainstream of conservative Christian thought. Another leading non-Charismatic advocate and teacher propagating Dominion ideology was Don Wildmon, a Methodist minister. Wildmon worked to educate Christians to become more active in their efforts to engage and influence society.

Fast forward to election year 2008, when George W. Bush, heir to Ronald

Reagan’s Christian Conservative movement, was leaving office. Southern Baptist Mike

Huckabee was the darling of the Christian right and in the early primaries showed some promise. After losing the nomination to John McCain in what could be best described as a desperate act to win the Christian vote, Pentecostal Sarah Palin was asked to be

McCain’s running mate. In the 2012 elections, it looked as if the flood gates were open to a whole new surge of Christian right-wing activity. Not only were several of the candidates unabashedly professing their Christian faith as part of their platform, but the

Tea Party formed in what seemed to be an attempt by the Christian right to co-opt the

Republican Party.

82 Paulk popularized the wearing of the clerical collar among Charismatics which has morphed in to the zoot suit in more recent days. 45

Once again, the question rings in my ear, So what? Should Christians abstain from the political process? Should Christians stand idly by while they see the country that they love being taken over by humanists? What are Christians to do when they see the laws of the land being eroded and their civil liberties threatened? I am not opposed to engaging the culture in every way possible. The point I am trying to make is two-fold.

First, I do not believe any one political candidate or party can claim to represent

Christianity as a whole. There is too much diversity in the body of Christ. Second, I do not see the United States or any other geo-political entity as being, or ever having been, a

Christian nation. I realize that this may sound almost blasphemous to suggest such a notion in some Christian circles. Educator, writer, and pastor Gregory Boyd did just that in his church in Minnesota in 2004, losing one thousand members after offering a sermon series entitled, Myth of a Christian Nation.83

Along with Boyd and many others, I believe that the political activism that attempts to represent the Christian voting bloc is hurting our Christian witness. While I believe the proclamation of the Gospel that Jesus Christ is Lord is a very politically- charged decree, believers must understand the nature of that proclamation if it is to reach into the hearts of lost humanity. The Reformed/Presbyterian Theology and eschatological bents of Dominionism run contrary to many of those in the Christian political arena.

Therefore, how can any one candidate represent Christendom as a whole? Moreover, their radical vision for Christian reconstruction for America is frightening. This has obviously not gone unnoticed by those outside of the Church.

83 Gregory A. Boyd, The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest For Political Power Is Destroying the Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007), page 10.

In chapter 3, I will propose a view of God that is radically different than that offered in Dominion Theology. The theology I present is not creative. Others have found that through a careful reading of biblical literature, a construct of theology can be formed with a view of God’s salvific work that is incarnational and cruciform in nature. This view of God is contingent on a clear understanding of Jesus’ nature and mission.

Understanding the person and mission of Jesus Christ is essential in understanding the

Gospel and the nature of the Church. I hope to present the material in such a way that will help construct a theology of mission that reflects a vision from a heavenly perspective. It is my desire to represent faithfully a biblical model of mission that accurately portrays

God’s desire to save humanity.

CHAPTER 3

ANSWERING THE DOMINION QUESTION

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! John 1.29 KJV

Introduction

How does the church define its mission? How do modern believers take the biblical example of the early church and translate it into effective ministry today? How does the church minister effectively within the plurality of culture and belief so prevalent today? What evangelistic methods are best suited for our day and age? Where is the prophetic voice of the church in such times? How do believers choose who will speak for the church? What type of and how much training should be required? What does age, gender, race, social status, education, or experience have to do with calling? How can believers know they are carrying out mission in a way that agrees with the will of God?

Is there a definitive Christian attitude that marks those who claim allegiance to the God of the Bible? Is there any such thing as a “Christian” nation? Is there a geo-political location for the Kingdom of God? How closely should the Church’s mission reflect the pattern of Jesus’ life, ministry, and teachings found in the New Testament?

In the biblical survey that follows, I hope to offer answers to some of these questions, as well as respond to the Dominion Mandate. In these pages, I will attempt to construct a Cruciform Theology of Ministry.84 The term Cruciform is derived from the understanding that the eternal nature of God is essentially cruciform; God cannot be understood apart from the cross. This is formulated through a focused look at the entirety of Jesus’ life and especially his death.85 It will be based on a narrative reading of the entire New Testament. I will attempt to prove my argument from two angles. First, I will offer a brief survey of the Gospel texts that point to a misunderstanding among 1st century Jews concerning messianic expectations. Their expectations not only created confusion among Jesus’ closest followers, but eventually led to his death on the cross. It is not my intention to build my argument on a series of proof texts, which the first section of this analysis may appear to be. My goal for starting here is to show the propensity of the human condition to hold onto deeply held beliefs despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. A simple reading of the texts from the Gospel narratives should suffice to demonstrate that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah.

Next, I will offer an exegetical study from Revelation 5 that will show how John intentionally offered a re-visioning of Jewish monotheism and messianic expectation.

The approach to the Apocalypse will be one that embraces the text of Revelation as a means to understand how to live in light of the end, rather than as a cipher to identify end-time events. The focus of this teaching will be on the characteristics of the Lamb in verses 1-7. The desired outcome of this study is to identify Jesus Christ’s divine nature

84 Although the theological constructs developed from this analysis are biblically based, credit is given to Michael Gorman’s term Cruciform. See (Michael J. Gorman, Cruciformity: Paul's Narrative Spirituality of the Cross [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001]. 85 Gorman, Cruciformity, pages 15-16. 49

as cruciform. I will argue that the identity and characteristics of the Lamb in Rev. 5 are the theological pivot point for the entire book. It is central to the major theme of faithful witness found throughout the book, which ties the believers’ identity and mission to that of Jesus. This theme begins with a description of Jesus in Rev. 1 and culminates with the two witnesses in Rev. 11. The trajectory that this theme takes points to a hopeful conclusion of history where the nations find healing in the Kingdom of God (Rev. 2.22).

This chapter will close with a reflection on the implications that this biblical analysis has on Christian mission today.

Gorman developed his understanding of the cruciform God from his reading of

Paul. He sees Philippians 2.6-11 as Paul’s “master story”86 in which all of Paul’s theology is to be understood because it is a definitive passage concerning Jesus’ deity and cruciform identity. I believe Gorman is correct. Space does not allow me to offer a proper exegesis of Paul’s cruciform theology from Philippians. To do so would be a duplication of what Gorman has offered in his monographs.87 Briefly, I will say that Phil.

2.6-11 defines what Paul is calling the Philippians to do by having the same mind that is in Christ Jesus (see vv. 1-5). For even though Jesus was God (was in the form of God, v.

6), he did not use this in exploitive ways (did not regard equality with God something to be exploited, v. 6). He carried out, to its most logical conclusion, what it means to be cruciform in nature (death on a cross, v. 8). This is the overshadowing context from which Paul’s cruciform theology is derived. What follows is my desire to show that the

86 Gorman, Cruciformity, page 88. 87 See Michael J. Gorman, Apostle of the Crucified Lord: a Theological Introduction to Paul and His Letters (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004), Gorman, Cruciformity and Michael J. Gorman, Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul's Narrative Soteriology (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009), 50

cruciform nature of God is not only found in Paul, but can be heard in other biblical voices as well.

Messianic Expectations

There are several pericopes offered in the Gospels where Jesus’ identity as

Messiah is either confused or completely denied by the characters involved. In these narratives, a level of frustration builds to outright hostility. It would seem that the messianic expectation of 1st century Judaism caused many to stumble and miss out on the life that Jesus had to offer as the true Messiah of Israel. This section of the biblical analysis is not intended to explain what the expectations were, but to show that Jesus did not meet those expectations.88

After completing the Gospels, the reader would know that John the Baptist played an important role in the early stages of Jesus’ ministry. John was born of extraordinary circumstance (Luke 1). John is seen as a prophet in the manner of the Old Testament prophets (Matt. 11.13; 21.26; Mark 11.32; Luke 20.6), and Jesus regarded him with highest esteem (Matt. 11.11; Luke 7.28). There were those who observed John’s ministry and wondered if he was the messiah (Luke 3.15). After his death, some believed Jesus was John raised from the dead (Matt. 14.2-3; 16.14; Mark 8.28; Luke 9.7, 19). His mission was to prepare the way for the coming messiah though a baptism of repentance

(Matt. 3.3; Mark 1.3; Luke 3.4). His baptismal ministry, however, was also a means for

John to identify who the Messiah would be. It would be the one whom the Holy Spirit

88 For an overview of 1st century messianic expectation see N. T. Wright, “The Resurrection of the Son of God,” Christian Origins and the Question of God Vol. 3, (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003): pages 557-559. 51

would rest on and remain (John 1.33), which took place at the River Jordan (Matt. 3.16;

Luke 3.22). John is found to be faithful in administering his call (John 1.15, 29; 5.33).

John’s witness was marked by fearless testimony. He even stood up to the ruler of that time which landed him in prison and eventually got him killed (Matt. 14.4-10; Luke

3.18, 19). With such a magnificent portrait of John’s faithfulness and understanding, the reader may be surprised to find that John had doubts about his revelation of Jesus (Matt.

11.2, 3; Luke 7.20). The text clearly indicates that John’s motivation for inquiring was from what he observed or heard Jesus was doing (Matt. 11.2; Luke 6.18). It would seem from the text that John may have been concerned with what Jesus was not doing. It is not explicitly stated, but it is hard not to observe that John put more faith in some pre- understanding of the messiah than from a clear revelation received from God. What is interesting about this story is that Jesus tells John’s disciples to go back and report to him what he is doing by quoting Old Testament messianic prophecies (Matt. 11.4; Luke 7.22;

See Luke 4.18; Isa. 61.1-2), something perhaps John had missed because of his preconceived ideas. John was in danger of taking offense to Jesus, because to him it seemed as if Jesus was not fulfilling John’s messianic expectations (Luke 7.23).

When Jesus asked his disciples what people were saying about him, they gave him all kinds of answers (Matt. 16.14; Mark 8.28; Luke 9.19). When he asked the disciples who they thought he was, Peter proclaimed with revelation knowledge that

Jesus was “the Christ” (Matt. 16.16-17; Mark 8.29; Luke 9.20). At this point, Jesus began explaining to the disciples that he was going to suffer at the hands of the Jews and they would kill him (Matt. 16.21; Mark 8.31; Luke 9.21). Peter obviously felt the need to correct Jesus and took him aside to rebuke him (Matt. 16.22; Mark 8.32). Jesus tells Peter

that he has human things in mind and not the things of God (Matt. 16.23, Mark 8.33).

This perhaps is a key to understand where our focus should be. It would seem that there is an inherent propensity to perceive things from an earthly or human vantage point, rather than from above.

James and John’s mother thought she would intervene and make sure her sons had a privileged place in the coming Kingdom (Matt. 20.21). When asked by Jesus, they assured him that they could follow him no matter what (Matt. 20.22). Jesus tells them that they will drink from the same cup, but who will be on his right or left is determined by the Father (Matt. 20.23). After the sign of feeding the 5,000, the followers of Jesus thought they could forcefully make Jesus their king (John 6.15). These two stories show a total misunderstanding of the nature of the Kingdom. The mother of James and John, as well as the followers in John 6, were looking for an earthly kingdom with Jesus as its king. The tragic part of the John 6 passage is that when Jesus spoke to them about the spiritual nature often Kingdom (v. 63), many of the disciples stopped following him all together (v. 66).

There is an interesting twist that takes place when Jesus’ authority is questioned

(Mark 11.27-33). Jesus fires back with a question concerning the authority of John the

Baptist (v. 29). It appears that the leaders of the Jews were more concerned about public opinion than finding the truth and refused to answer the question (v. 33). From the parable that Jesus gives right after this pericope, it would be plausible to understand that the Jewish leaders, like the tenants of the vineyard, recognized Jesus’ authority as coming from God. It could be that they simply refused to give Jesus his rightful place (Mark

12.7). It may be true that parables should not be applied too stringently to real life

circumstances, but the placement of this parable after Jesus’ confrontation with the

Jewish authorities is compelling.

Jesus also faced outright hostility and rejection in connection with his identity as the Messiah. In John 9, Jesus heals a blind man, the man is called to testify and Jewish authorities call Jesus a sinner (v. 24) and claim they do not know where Jesus comes from (v. 29). The man finds it ironic that Jesus offers such a miraculous sign, yet the

Pharisees fail to see who he really is (v. 30). The man testifies that Jesus is from God (v.

33). The Pharisees accuse him of being a sinner and excommunicate him from the

Temple (v. 34). Their refusal to see Jesus as sent from God is contrasted with the blind man who sees perfectly. In another confrontation with the Jews, Jesus tells them that he is to be crucified (John 12.32). They see this as an indication that Jesus cannot be the

Messiah because the Messiah remains forever (John 12.34). Not only this, but they refuse to believe despite all the signs he did (John 12.37).

The reader finds various levels of misunderstanding and commitment in these stories. Some came close to stumbling because of their preconceived ideas. Others continued to follow in spite of their lack of understanding, and some quit following altogether. The hostility of the Jews is quite telling. Some of the leaders may have recognized Jesus as the Messiah, but refused to give him his rightful place. Other Jews and their leaders just could not associate Jesus’ actions with their messianic expectations.

They became openly hostile towards Jesus and those who followed him.

These narratives reveal the difficulty people have in letting go of long-held beliefs. These texts indicate that there was a preconceived messianic vision the people of

Israel had and Jesus was not living up to it. Even someone portrayed as a stellar example

of faith like John was in danger of missing it. It would seem that even a revelation (John and Peter) would not be sufficient to break long held theological beliefs. The hostility of the Jews, despite seeing the signs, demonstrates how deep our beliefs can go and how hard it is to break from them. What does this tell us about the difficulty in convincing a hostile world who Jesus really is? What about our own ideas and misconceptions? I believe Revelation can help demonstrate how God radically transformed Old Testament messianic expectation into a Christian understanding of mission and witness.

The Witness of the Lamb Exegeses of Rev. 5.1-7

Introduction:

Allowing the text of Revelation to be read, heard, and studied on its own should give a discerning inquirer the ability to identify several dominant themes that develop as the text progresses. Major themes, such as the judgment of God, the redemption of the nations, worship, faithful witness and the role of the Spirit inform the reader/hearer that the purpose of Revelation goes beyond offering a key to identify end-time events. All of these themes converge in Rev. 5 and are closely associated with the Throne Room drama surrounding the scroll and faithfulness of the Lamb. This portion of the project will attempt to show how the portrait of the Lamb defines what it means to be a faithful witness as called for throughout Revelation. The Christology revealed in Rev. 5 will be central to this discussion, as its context and structure are explored alongside a reading of vv. 1-7. The premise of this paper will be that the faithful witness of believers is the means by which God will save the nations and is defined by the faithful actions of the

Lamb. I offer this exegesis in response to the distortions I perceive coming from dominion and dispensational-oriented interpretations.

Genre, Context and Structure:

The need to allow the text to speak for itself is self-evident. John is writing to a church in crisis both from within (compromise to social standards and false teaching) and from without (persecution). In Revelation, John offers an alternative imagination from a heavenly perspective that will help the people of God evaluate their situation and respond by taking appropriate action.89 The author accomplishes this through the skillful use of

Greek grammar and various literary genres woven into the fabric of the book.90

Unfortunately, the message can be obscured or completely lost due to the interpretive license taken by many who claim to have unlocked the secrets of future events, resulting in a response that may be foreign to the original intent.91 Faithfully interpreting, preserving, and passing the message of Revelation on to others are only parts of the

89 See John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (Livonia, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988), page 42. Or as Bauckham states the specific purpose of Revelation, “John’s visions were directed by a desire, not to mystify…but to promote spiritual insight…to direct our thinking and our orientation towards life.” Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy (New York: T & T Clark, 2005), 176. See also, Frederick J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John (NT In Context Commentaries) (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Trinity Press Int'l, 1998), page 3. 90 Revelation does seem to have a “mixed genre” (Michaels, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, page 21). To say that it is not apocalyptic because John uses ἀποκάλυψις (apokalupsis, apocalypse) only once (1:1) is negated by his use of extreme imagery and its resemblance to other first century apocalyptic writings. Moreover, the mediation of the message “by an otherworldly being” (Richard Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993], page 6) is reflective of other apocalyptic literature of the time. By structuring the prologue and epilogue as a first century letter and addressing it to seven specific churches, it takes the form of a New Testament epistle. Then there is the prophetic nature of the book, along with John’s description of the book as being “prophecy” (1:3; 22:10, 18, 19). Revelation is a testimony of a “Jewish Christian prophet” (Bauckham, Theology, page 2) couched in the form a “long letter” (Michaels, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, page 30) with apocalyptic features throughout. 91 Revelation’s effect on history is well documented. Many “disastrous interpretations” (John Christopher Thomas and Frank Macchia, The Apocalypse (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., forthcoming), page 50) have been offered due to a general misunderstanding of the purpose of apocalyptic writing (See Craig R. Koester, Revelation and the End of All Things, [Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001], page 29). 56

response. The call to keep (1.3; 22.7) the things written in it is also an active response that incorporates all that Jesus says and commands, and is informed by the way Jesus is portrayed as one who “has overcome” (5.5).92

Despite the high level of imagery, the Christology in Revelation is easily discernible. In fact, Revelation offers a portrait of Jesus that helps the reader/hearer to embed it deeply into his or her memory. These portraits act as aids to help the reader/hearer grasp the message of the book. Throughout Revelation, the themes that emerge with ever-increasing strength are made clear, despite the fact that it is shrouded in apocalyptic imagery. John’s opening statement leaves no doubt that this is a message concerning the character, work, and nature of Jesus Christ.93 The genitive of Ἰησοῦς and

Χριστός perhaps have double meanings, for they not only speak of the way the revelation will be transmitted from Jesus Christ, but they also inform the reader/hearer that what is to follow is about Jesus Christ.

92 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 83. 93 Rev. 1:1; The use of the genitive, translated “of,” may be “ambiguous” (Timothy Jenney, ed., Full Life Bible Commentary to the New Testament, ed. French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1999], page 1549). It is, however, important to understand the significance of its double meaning in the context of the entire book. There are those who use “from” (Davie E. Aune, Revelation 1-5 [Word Biblical Commentary 52a, Dallas: Thomas Nelson, 1997], page 12) and “by” (Mounce, Robert, H. The Book of Revelation, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Corp. 1977), page 64, as well as, Brian Blount, Revelation: A Commentary [NTL, New Testament Library, Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009], page 27) in their translations, indicating transmission only. They see Christ as solely the “agent” (Aune, Revelation, page 12; Mounce, The Book of Revelation, page 64) of the revelation. Ramsey gets it completely wrong and emphatically states that Revelation is not primarily about Jesus, even though he offers a helpful section on the Christology in Revelation ( Michaels J. Ramsey, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, [Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992], page 130). Blount’s commentary does hint that Jesus is being revealed (Blount, Revelation, page 28). It is the opinion of this writer that Aune and Mounce are only half-right. Clearly, Jesus was given the revelation from God in order to pass it on as part of the chain of transmission (God, Christ, angel, John, servants). This is important to understand because it constitutes a basis of authority for the book (rather than basing authority on the identity of its author, John). The fact that “John receives authority from Christ himself” (Christopher Rowland, Revelation [Epworth Commentaries, 1st ed., London: Epworth Pr, 1994], page 59) to pass on the revelation from God is all the authority the prophet needs. But the revelation is not only “from” Christ, it is “about” (Jenney, Full Life, page 1549) him as well. It is at this point that the true message of Revelation [i.e. “the revelation of God in Jesus Christ” (Rowland, Revelation, page 57)] can be found. 57

It is a message that goes beyond predicting specific eschatological events or the related Parousia.94 The central message of John’s prophecy is a revelation of the sovereign God at work in and through Jesus Christ.95 This is substantiated by three characteristics of the book. First, it is a single revelation, not multiple revelations. It is a revelation consisting of a single visionary experience portrayed in various scenes with four specific settings [on the island of Patmos (1.9), Heaven (4.1), a desert (17.1) and a high mountain (21.9)].96 Second, Revelation concludes the Christian canon and serves as a climactic extension of Old Testament prophecy. 97 Revelation is an unveiling of the purposes, plan, and nature of God to the church. This unveiling allows the church to view its present situation in light of the future so that the church will function as God’s faithful witness to the nations. The focal figure of this unveiling is Jesus Christ the

Lamb, who is seen as the one who has overcome in Rev. 5. Third, “the exalted

Christology”98 of Revelation demonstrates that Jesus is at the heart of the message. The

Christology in Rev. 5 and how it informs the actions and attitudes of the reader/hearer will be the focus of this study.

94 Preterists who view “what must soon take place” as an argument to interpret the book strictly as “a conflict taking place in the author’s own time” (Michaels, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, page 14) may be going too far. Obviously, John has something specific to communicate to the original recipients (the members of the seven historical churches mentioned in chapters 2 and 3). Moreover, at some level they may understand that they are already encountering the beast (See Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 382). However, in addition to this, the book’s relevancy to prepare for the Parausia cannot be negated. An important consideration to keep in mind is that John’s message is relevant for the entire Church age and the universal struggle against the beast. This understanding allows the reader to view their present situation in light of the future (Robert C. “Robby” Waddell, The Spirit of the Book of Revelation [Journal of Pentecostal Theology, Blandford Forum: Deo Publishing, 2006], page 33). This is the “moment of interpretation” (Robert W. Wall, Revelation [New International Biblical Commentary, Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991], page 5) and perhaps it would be helpful to understand that the four major views of interpretation, preterist, historical, futurist, and idealist are not mutually exclusive (Waddell, Spirit of the Book, page 1). 95 Rowland, Revelation, page 57 96 The change of settings is a part of the major divisions of John’s structure designated by the phrase ἐν πνεύματι (in the spirit), (Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, pages 5, 6). 97 Ibid., page 5 98 Mounce, Book of Revelation, page 148. 58

The purpose of the book stems from the pastoral aspect of all Scripture (see 2

Tim. 3.16, 17). Revelation is a book of wonder that calls for a response of faithfulness from the reader/hearer characterized by the faithfulness of Jesus.99 It is not to be seen solely as a means to interpret end-time events. This sort of misuse of the book has plagued the Church for centuries. Scholars and other interpreters have never come to full agreement on whether the information in the book relates to the past, present, or future.100

As is the nature of first century apocalyptic literature, one of the primary functions of

Revelation is to infuse a heavenly perspective into the emotions and thinking of the reader/hearer that invokes proper action.101 In Revelation, Jesus takes center stage together with God. He emerges as the hope of humanity in the image of a slaughtered

Lamb. This hope does not depend on whether every passage can be properly interpreted in light of a particular historical event. Hope for humanity is found in Jesus and his triumph over evil, which has already taken place. As the reader/hearer understands this message, he or she will be better equipped to overcome just as Jesus has.

Although not central as far as the written material of the text, Rev. 4 and 5 could be considered the heart of Revelation theologically.102 Moreover, it might not be going too far to recognize Rev. 5 as the pivotal point of the book.103 Its significance is related to the Christology found throughout Revelation that climaxes in and seems to hinge on Rev.

99 Michaels, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, page 146. 100 As mentioned earlier, Revelation is a book for the entire Church age even though John’s symbolism is not readily recognizable to the modern interpreter, it should be understood that the original audience could identify the symbolism John used to describe his experience (Waddell, Spirit of the Book, page 34). Also, Stephen S. Smalley, The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse (New York: IVP Academic, 2005), page 14. 101 Adela Yarbro Collins, Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse (Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox Press, 1984), page 144 102 Murphy, Fallen is Babylon, page 169 103 Rowland, Revelation, page 74 59

5.104 This is evidenced in several ways. It is first evidenced by the high Christology found throughout Revelation that converges around the drama of the scroll and the worthiness of the Lamb to unseal and look inside it (v. 5). The image of the Lamb occurs twenty-eight times in Revelation, designating it as John’s favorite metaphor used for

Jesus in Revelation.105 Rev. 5 is not only the first time the reader/hearer encounters the symbol of the Lamb in Revelation, it is also described with the greatest detail there. The description and activity of the Lamb in Rev. 5 is primary to all other references to the

Lamb and Jesus. Second, the worship that is offered to the Lamb who stands distinct from, yet on equal terms with, “the One who sits on the Throne” (4.2, 4, 9; 5.1, 13), unquestionably associates Jesus with the divine. In fact, the worship scenes in Rev. 4 and at the end of Rev. 5 act as an inclusio to the introduction of the Lamb. Third, everything that has taken place in Revelation up to this point, as well as all that follows, is to be interpreted through the Christological lens of Rev. 5. The images and drama of Rev. 5 reach back and forth throughout the book, creating a connection that ties all the

Christological images together. The slaughtered Lamb is none other than “Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first born of the dead” (1.5), as well as the faithful and true rider on the white horse (19.11). The drama surrounding the scroll (which only the Lamb is worthy to unseal and open) continues with the seals, trumpets, and bowls in the following chapter. The worship of the Lamb reaches back to Rev. 1 and John’s response to his

104It is observed that Rev. 5 offers the most significant Christology of the book (Grant R. Osborne, Revelation [Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002], page 253), due to the fact that the Lamb (Jesus) and the One who sits on the Throne (God) are intimately connected to each other by what they do and how they are worshipped. It might not be going too far to say that the entire book offers one of the most significant Christologies of the whole New Testament. 105 James L. Resseguie, The Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), page 119. As noted by Resseguie, the number twenty-eight is a significant 7x4 formula connecting completeness (seven) and the world (4) pointing to the “worldwide scope of [the Lamb’s] complete victory.” Richard Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, (Cambridge, Cambridge Press, 1993), page 67. 60

initial encounter with Jesus as well as forward to a very similar scene (19.6) at the climax of the book.106 It also acts as a polemic to the false worship given by the inhabitants of the earth to the dragon and the beast (13.4), as well as that attempted by John himself

(17.6; 19.10; 22.8). The identification of the twenty-four elders and four living creatures progresses through the end of the book, helping to identify them as all the redeemed and all living creatures respectively.107

Finally, the Christology of Revelation informs and defines the faithful witness of those who will “follow the Lamb wherever he goes” (14.4). Again, this culminates in

Rev. 5 relating Jesus’ faithful act of overcoming to the admonition to overcome in all the messages to the seven churches. This is defined by keeping what they have received

(3.3), keeping the commands of God (12.17; 14.12), keeping the words of the prophecy of this book (1.3; 22.7, 9), and being faithful unto death (2.10). These are definitively capsulated in the phrase “overcoming through the blood of the Lamb and through the word of their testimony and not loving their own lives even to the point of death” (12.11).

All this is informed by the faithfulness of the Lamb.

Revelation 5 is structured around the phrase καὶ εἶδον (kai eidon, “and/then I saw”). This is the first time the reader/hearer encounters this literary device that John uses throughout Revelation. It signals the introduction of specific or new elements as the various scenes develop, while at the same time keeping the unity of the vision intact.108

John uses it four times in Rev. 5 to designate four clear divisions in the chapter: the scroll

106 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 529. 107 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 528. 108 Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), page 252. David Mathewson, "Verbal Aspect in the Apocalypse of John: An Analysis of Revelation 5." Novum Testamentum 50, no. 1 (2008), In ATLA Religion Database, http://0-web.ebscohost.com.library.aca web.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=533ee01e-85bc-4567-8c9b-a9a43e414f99%40sessionmgr 12&vid=4&hid=7(18 April 2011), page 65. 61

in the hand of the one who sits on the Throne (5.1), the search for one who is worthy to open it (5.2-5), the Lamb (6-10), and worship offered to the Lamb and to the one who sits on the Throne (11-14).

There is a definite progression found in Rev. 5, bringing Rev. 4 and 5 to a dramatic climax. 109 This is reflective of the entire book and is connected to the major themes of worship, faithful witness, and the redemption of the nations. Most dramatic is the way the worship crescendos as the throne room scene expands to include the four creatures and twenty-four elders, myriads of angels, and finally every creature in heaven and on earth. It is also reflective in the way John skillfully uses the Greek tense forms to accentuate the progression of the narrative.110 While the worship scenes in both Rev. 4 and Rev. 5 are arguably two of the most significant aspects of the Christology developed in Revelation, this exegesis will focus on the juxtaposition of the Lion and Lamb and how the overcoming worthiness of the Lamb informs the reader/hearer to redefine messianic expectation and the implications it has on what it means to be a faithful witness.

A Reading of Revelation 5.1-7

The drama in the heavenly throne room from Rev. 4 continues in Rev. 5 as it opens with καὶ εἶδον (kai eidon, “then I saw”). The phrase’s function in Rev. 5 is to introduce a significant character and/or action.111 It is used four times in Rev. 5, suggesting that the props and characters of the drama that unfolds here are very important. The use of καὶ εἶδον also denotes a definite connection between the two

109 Murphy, Fallen is Babylon, pages 188, 189 110 Mathewson, Verbal Aspect in the Apocalypse of John, page 59 111 Smalley, The Revelation of John, page 127. 62

chapters as the second main division of Revelation continues to progress. In this instance, as well as (5.2, 5), it operates as a coordinating conjunction and may be translated “then.”112 Four times John’s attention is altered as the drama in Rev. 5 takes place all around him. What John sees is something very significant.

John sees something “on the right hand of the One who sits on the Throne.” John uses the preposition ἐπὶ (epi – “on”), indicating perhaps that the hand of God is open.113

The readers/hearers have already been introduced to “the One who sits on the Throne” in

Rev. 4. There, God is seen as the Almighty Creator who is worthy to be worshipped.

John uses this formula throughout Revelation as the main symbol for God.114 The right hand of God is not used in Rev. 4, but is a common OT symbol and would be recognized as an expression of power, authority, and God’s redeeming actions. Whatever is upon it must be of great significance.

John sees an unopened scroll with writing on the inside and back. In fact, the scroll is sealed with seven seals. John never explicitly tells what is written on the scroll.

The exact nature of the scroll is somewhat enigmatic, and various interpretations are offered to try to explain its purpose and content.115 There are clues given here, as well as in the rest of the book, that may help reveal its purpose and maybe even the content.

Various interpretations are offered to identify its content. Interpreters make use of

112 Brian Blount, Revelation: A Commentary (NTL, New Testament Library, Louisville, KY.: Westminster John Knox, 2009), page 98. 113 Grant R. Osborne, Revelation (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), page 247. 114 James L. Resseguie, Revelation of John, The: A Narrative Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Academic, 2009), page 39. 115 Smalley, The Revelation of John, p 127. See also, Osborne, Revelation, pages 248-250; David J. MacLeod, "The Lion Who is a Lamb: An Exposition of Revelation 5:1-7." Bibliotheca sacra 164, no. 655 (July 1, 2007): pages 323-340. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed May 3, 2011). http://0-web.ebscohost.com.library.acaweb.org/ehost/detail?vid=10&hid=21&sid=d50bb3b2- 3be8-4a53-a2aa-90f5f0b9cdcc%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db= rfh&AN=ATLA0001620664, page 325. 63

historical data and textual indicators, such as what takes place with the breaking of each seal, the physical composition of ancient scrolls including the material used to seal them, the fact that it has writing on the front and back, and the significance of having seven seals.

Attempting to maneuver through the various theories offered goes beyond the scope of this project. The fact that it is in the right hand of God and sealed with seven seals points to the divine purpose of the scroll.116 John uses the perfect passive participle of κατασφραγίζω (katasphragizo, “to seal”), indicating the intentionality of the act and may be translated “securely sealed.”117 It testifies to its validity, completeness, divine significance, authority, and secrecy.118 This scroll will play a major role as the rest of the book unfolds. The scroll in the hand of God is of great significance.

Verse 2 opens with the second formulistic phrase “then I saw” and ends with a question hinting that the secret is about to be revealed. John sees and hears “a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice.” This is the first of three dramatic appearances of a mighty angel in Revelation. Each appearance (5.2; 10.1; 18.21) comes at a critical moment in the narrative.119 John describes the action of the angel with the Greek word

κηρύσσοντα (kerusonta, “proclaiming”). What is taking place here is more than just a call.120 It seems that a mighty angel is needed here to function as a royal herald of the

116 Craig R. Koester, Revelation and the End of All Things (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001), page 76. 117 Smalley, The Revelation of John, page 128. 118 Osborne, Revelation, page 250. 119 Osborne, Revelation, page 250. 120 See, Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 208, Smalley, The Revelation of John, page 129, and Osborne, Revelation, page 251. 64

“one who sits on the Throne.”121 For the proclamation extends to the far reaches of the universe.122 This proclamation is of great significance.

The angel calls with φωνῇ μεγάλῃ (phone megale, “a great voice”), “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” Thirteen times John uses the phrase “great voice” to signify judgment in Revelation (6.10; 8.13; 10.3; 11.12; 12.10;14.7, 9, 15, 18;

16.1, 17; 19.1, 17).123 Perhaps John has a similar function in mind here.124 The scroll lies open in God’s hand. Anyone could simply walk up and take it from him, if he or she dared. The open access to the scroll would indicate that the worthiness of the one sought has to do with authority rather than moral or physical ability.125 The reader/hearer has already found the “one who sits on the Throne” to be worthy, associated with his authority over all creation in Rev. 4.126 The one found worthy to take the scroll from the hand of God would certainly be a figure of great significance.

Verse 3 reveals that no one in heaven, on the earth, or under the earth is judged able to step forward. This three-tiered understanding of the universe is a familiar Old

Testament description of the order of Creation (Exod. 20.4, 11; Job 11.8-9; Ps. 146.6).127

No creature in the known universe was found up to the task of taking the scroll from the hand of God.128 There is no indication that a thorough search had to be made. It is just stated as a matter of fact.129 This may indicate the need for divine intervention for the opening of the scroll to take place and signifies a difference between creature and the

121 Osborne, Revelation, page 251. 122 Smalley, The Revelation of John, page 129. 123 Blount, Revelation, page 142. 124 Note the action taking place at the appearance of the other mighty angels (10:1; 18:21). 125 Smalley, The Revelation of John, page 129, and Osborne, Revelation, page 250. 126 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 208. 127 Smalley, The Revelation of John, page 130. 128 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 208. 129 Osborne, Revelation, page 251. 65

divine, which is a major concern in Revelation.130 The fact that no creature was found worthy is quite significant.

In verse 4, John testifies to the emotional trauma he experienced at the angel’s judgment that no one was found worthy to take the scroll from the hand of God. For the fourth time, in as many verses, the scroll is mentioned. Focus on the scroll and its inability to be unsealed points to a dramatic breakdown in the progression of the book. It may seem to John that everything is about to come to a complete stop. John uses the imperfect active indicative for κλαίω (klaio, “to weep” or “to mourn”) modified with

πολὺ (polu, “much”) indicating an ongoing or perhaps bitter weeping taking place. Much attention has been given to the scroll in these four verses. Earlier, John was promised to be shown “what must take place after this” (4.1). Would it seem to John that the promise may be thwarted?131 His bitter reaction is also quite significant.

John’s weeping is dealt with by one of the elders introduced earlier in Rev. 4.

Using the present tense active imperative of κλαίω (klaie – weep) modified by μὴ is an appropriate response to John’s emotional outbreak. The elders introduced in Rev. 4 have a striking resemblance to how the entire church community is represented throughout

Revelation.132 Their proximity to the Throne may indicate that they possess special insights that would help John compose himself. The elder quickly follows up his admonition to stop weeping with what would have been words of great comfort and familiarity. “Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome, to open the scroll and its seven seals.” John’s ability to recognize “the Lion of the tribe of

Judah, the Root of David” as the OT messianic hope of Israel is clear. However, the key

130 Koester, Revelation and the End of All Things, page 77. 131 Osborne, Revelation, page 252. 132 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 195. 66

to understand the significance of the expression will be to interpret what it means to overcome.

Each of the messages to the seven churches ended with an exhortation for the churches to overcome (2.7, 11, 17, 28; 3.5, 12, 21). John’s use of the aorist active indicative of νικάω (vikao, “to overcome”) would indicate that this past and completed action would define what it means for the churches. The elder’s words take John from what may be described as the lowest point of the vision so far to the very height of Jewish messianic expectation. The words of the elder will prove to be of great significance.

John deploys a literary device used throughout Revelation that contrasts what

John hears to what he actually sees in verse 5. The third “then I saw” introduces John to the central theological symbol of the book. This symbol not only introduces the reader/hearer to the great paradox of the Gospel, it will define for the church what it means to overcome. John is told that the Lion of Judah has overcome, and as he turns to look, he finds a slaughtered Lamb. The location of the Lamb is telling, for he is “in the center of the Throne, the four living creatures and the elders.” There is a challenge on how to interpret the Lamb’s location exactly. The challenge comes from the Lamb’s actions in verse 7. There, John uses the second aorist active indicative of ἔρχομαι

(erchomai, "to come") which some interpret as showing distance between the Lamb and the Throne. However, the activity taking place does not necessitate distance but only the act of taking the scroll from the hand of God.133

The Johannine community would recognize Jesus as the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world (John 1.29), as well as the sacrificial nature of Jesus’ crucifixion.

133 MacLeod, The Lion Who is a Lamb, page 336. 67

Therefore, the symbol of the Lamb would not be understood as just another heavenly creature, although the Lamb is described in grotesque detail. For not only does he have an appearance of being slaughtered, he has seven horns and seven eyes. The contrast between the Lion and the Lamb is a significant development indeed.

Two important Christological themes can be explored through the study of the

Lamb motif in Rev. 5. First, there is the juxtaposition of the Lion and the slain Lamb.

Second, in the acts of worship and hymns that take place after these verses, the Lamb is placed in equal standing with God. By researching these themes along with a more exhaustive study, most of the other Christological images in Revelation can be unpacked.

The juxtaposition of the Lion and the slain Lamb is a powerful divergence that must have seized John’s attention. John contrasts these two images by utilizing a literary tool that differentiates what he hears with what he actually sees.134 What John hears is obviously taken from the traditional messianic imagery of the Old Testament.135 What

John sees is a “rebirth”136 of messianic understanding. It is hard to speculate how the reader/hearer would take such a contrast. Messianic symbols in apocalyptic literature are usually stronger and more forceful than what John offers in a lamb.137 The image of a lion connected with a great king like David would not be unusual. Moreover, hearing the angel announce that this Lion/King had triumphed would have brought up familiar Old

Testament messianic expectations. It would not be hard to imagine the startling reaction of the audience at the appearance of a lamb.138

134 See Rev. 1:12-17; 7:4,9; 21:9,10 135 G. B. Caird, The Revelation of St. John the Divine ( New York: Harper & Row, 1966), page 73. 136 Ibid. 137 Jenney, Full Bible Life Commentary, page 1573. 138 Koester, Revelation and the End of All Things, page 78 68

This striking contrast parallels the divergence between Jewish messianic expectations and the earthly life and ministry of Christ and is the key to interpreting the message of Revelation.139 Instead of the fierceness of a lion, John saw a passive lamb.

Instead of a conquering king, Jesus came as a suffering servant. The portrayal of Jesus as a lamb is almost unique to Johannine writing.140 Only in the writings of John is Jesus referred to as a lamb.141 His appearance in the throne room, although surprising, would be a familiar image to John. Some commentators mistake the symbolic significance of the lion and lamb by interpreting them as the “majesty and meekness which characterized the life of Jesus Christ.”142 This view seems to fall short of the tension created by juxtaposing the Jewish messianic symbol of the lion with the Christian understanding of the sacrificial lamb.143 The juxtaposition of these two images was not for the purpose of combining the features of the two animals. The image of the lamb actually replaces the

Old Testament image of the lion.144 It would even be legitimate to understand that

“lamb” could be substituted for the messianic lion of the Old Testament.145 The significance of the divergence of the symbols signifies the way God brings about victory

139 Aune, Revelation, p 373; Charles, J Daryl. "Imperial Pretensions and the Throne-Vision of the Lamb : Observations on the Function of Revelation 5." Criswell Theological Review 7, (September 1, 1993): page 85-97. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed May 3, 2011), page 87. 140 See exceptions 1 Cor. 5:7; 1 Peter 1:19. 141 Mounce, The Book of Revelation, page 145. 142 Bauckham, Theology, page 179. 143 Collins, The Apocalypse, page 274. 144 The passive imagery of the Lamb does not replace the aggression of the Lion completely however. In Revelation, Jesus fights against the unrepentant (2:16) and rebukes those he loves (3:19). Moreover, the people fear the wrath of the Lamb (6:16). In the end, he returns riding on a white horse with the armies of heaven following (19:11, 14), he uses his sword to strike the nations, and he will rule with an iron fist (19:15). 145 Caird, The Revelation, page 75 69

over his enemies. It informs the reader/hearer in how he or she is to relate to and overcome an antagonistic world system.146

The lion in verse 5 does not just morph147 into a lamb, but a lamb that appears to have been slain. This is an image of complete impotence. Nothing could have been further from a Jewish understanding of who the rightful heir to David’s throne should have been. The slain lamb is now alive, standing in the midst of God’s Throne. This is reflective of Jesus’ words from Rev. 1, “I am the living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive forever and ever” (1.8). The Lamb stands triumphant in the center of the universe, one with God. 148

The imagery found in the throne room scene should not be taken literally. It goes along with the nature of the book and is best understood as “a symbolic representation.”149 The lamb image is used to signify the means by which God triumphed over evil. The physical description of the lamb has great Christological significance.

The appearance of being slaughtered, yet standing, and the seven eyes and horns have

Old Testament connections. 150 These connections help to strengthen the argument that the lamb can be exchanged for the Old Testament image of lion.

146 Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 215. 147 Ibid., page 212 148 The throne is “encircled by the four living creatures and the elders” (5:6), beings that could easily represent the whole of creation (See Caird, Revelation, page 77). This expands to “every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them” (5:13). Here, another creature, the Lamb, takes his stand on the throne; the Lamb does not worship but is worshipped along with “the one who sits on the throne,” God. This is a powerful Christological symbol, which would seem contradictory to Jewish monotheism. Such authoritative statements like this would have been important for the early church as it struggled to develop its doctrine and liturgy (Bauckham, Climax, page118). 149 Mounce, The Book of Revelation, page 145. 150 Rowland speaks of “marks of sacrifice” (Rowland, Revelation, page 74); How does a slain lamb stand? Rowland describes this passage as having “curious Greek.” (Ibid.) The way the KJV and NIV translators worded it is hard to visualize. These alternative translations help clarify the word picture being presented. The seven eyes have an Old Testament reference in Zech. 4:10. However, one does not have to go back that far to see their significance and know what they stand for. They have already been associated 70

The Lamb appears to have been slain. Yet, it stands worthy to take the scroll and open its seals. The image of the Lamb, in place of the Lion, “forges a symbol of conquest by sacrificial death.”151 The Jews of John’s day had no such messianic understanding, despite the fact that the Lamb’s connection with Isaiah 53.7 seems obvious to modern readers. “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.” Isaiah goes on to describe the suffering of this individual. But in the end, “after his suffering…he will see the light of life and be satisfied. I will give him a portion among the great, and divide the spoils with the strong”

(Isa 53.11, 12). Preconceived ideas and the circumstances in which they lived blinded the Jews of this time, and they stand as a warning for Bible interpreters of all ages.

Conclusion:

The Christology in Revelation is informative primarily because it shows Jesus as one with creation and one with God. From the throne room scene in Rev. 5, Jesus is portrayed in the image of a slain lamb. The Lamb is seen as a creature among many creatures, yet more than a creature. Normally, apocalyptic literature shows the messiah figure as strong and powerful. In our study, the image of a lion was replaced by an image of impotence and failure. For God, however, it was the means by which he carried out

with the “attributes of God” in Rev. 4:5. All three of these references tell us that the seven eyes represent the Spirit of God. Moreover, in Rev. 5 the explanation of the seven spirits of God is also associated with the seven horns. “The horn is the symbol of strength, the eye of wisdom” (Caird, Revelation, page 75) as well as “perfect knowledge and vision” (Thomas and Macchia, Apocalypse, page 214). The number seven given to both the eyes and horns speaks of “completeness” (Mounce, The Book of Revelation, page 146). He has “irresistible might” (Ibid.) and “perfect knowledge” Ibid.). Together with the references mentioned above, they symbolize the omnipresent, (“range throughout the earth,” Zech. 4:10), omnipotent, and omniscient qualities of God in Jesus Christ. 151 Bauckham, Climax of Prophecy, page 183. 71

his salvific purposes. It is here that the Lamb identifies with the sufferings of fallen humanity. It redefines the reader/hearer’s understanding of power and success. It also demonstrates how God brings about victory over his enemies. From the text, it is understood that the triumph of the Lamb makes him worthy to open the scroll. His triumph also redefines the essential nature of the people of God. Instead of an exclusive

Jewish nation, the church is made up of people “from every tribe and language and people and nation.” The creatures of the throne room scene see the Lamb as one with

God. This evokes a response of worship, which carries significant theological implications in light of traditional Jewish monotheism.

Pentecostals need to take the cue from those who have gone before and read

Revelation in a way that is faithful to our ethos.152 We also need to allow the message of the book to define who we are and what our mission is to look like instead of the cultural norms that press in all around us. This will help us regain our prophetic voice in our society.

This is exactly what happened in Nicaragua during the Sandinista revolution. The

Sandinistas came into power with the help of both Protestant and Catholic churches. The oppressive regime was a unifying factor that moved these churches to identify with the poor and marginalized. Nicaraguan Pentecostals, while concerned for the welfare of those being terrorized, could not fully align themselves with the revolutionary spirit of their day. The propaganda from the Sandinista government sought to define what being

Christian meant in revolutionary terms.153

152 Waddell, The Spirit in the Book of Revelation, page 97. 153 Calvin L. Smith, “Revolutionaries and Revivalists: Pentecostal Eschatology, Politics and the Nicaraguan Revolution,” Pneuma. 30 (2008), page 67. 72

The Pentecostals would not allow the revolutionaries to press them into their mold resulting in great tribulation from all sides. They found themselves wondering if they were experiencing what they perceived to be the beginning of the Great Tribulation.154

Pentecostal spirituality must hold to its distinctive. Embracing who we are and not allowing others to define us will give us a vision of a life of faithfulness. What takes place is the transformation of the whole community to become faithful witnesses of Jesus

Christ. This is defined as holiness of life empowered by the Holy Spirit, moving all creation towards the coming Kingdom of God. This calls for pneumatic discernment and a faithful witness characterized by a willingness to suffer loss, so that the nations may find hope in the slaughtered Lamb of God.

Final Implications

The Jewish community missed the signs of Jesus’ first advent because of an ill- informed understanding of God’s nature. Even the disciples had a hard time letting go of their preconceived ideas. We should ask ourselves, What are some preconceived ideas that we hold that keep us from seeing Jesus for who he is? Where have we missed it in terms of the way we present Jesus to the world? Is our presentation of the way of salvation faithful to the Scriptures? Where does the Holy Spirit fit as we try to discern our way forward? How open are our communities to the leading and admonition of the

Spirit? Are we willing to listen to the Spirit and make changes, even if they may cause embarrassment or loss? What are we willing to give up in exchange for possessing a true and faithful understanding of who God is and our mission to serve him?

154 Smith, “Revolutionaries and Revivalists,” page 77. 73

There are several implications of the faithfulness of the slaughtered Lamb that can help the Christian community avoid making the mistakes of the past. First, reading

Revelation on its own terms cuts through the speculative theology offered by Dominion theology and Dispensationalism. Reading it with pneumatic discernment will help believers find a way of faithful living that is true to the nature of God and his vision for our lives. Second, by juxtaposing the Lion and the Lamb, John alters the Jewish understanding of messianic conquest, giving the reader/hearer a Christian reinterpretation.155 God did not overthrow his enemies by a show of force. This is the paradox inherent in the Gospel message that many misunderstand. 156 The image of the

Lamb offers a way of action that is faithful to the biblical tradition in ways that political or armed force can never be.

Third, the introduction of the slaughtered Lamb defines what it means to be a faithful witness. This reinforces the gospel message of overcoming love. The Dominion perspective seems to stumble over this message. John’s intent for this passage is a compelling critique against everything the world would define as success and power.157

Humankind tends to exalt the mighty, the beautiful and the well-educated. Today, many

Christians fail to keep this reinterpretation in mind. Many continue to stumble over

Christ’s humiliation as an example to follow. The need for suffering is negated in many

Christian circles and replaced by dominance and pride. In place of humiliation and suffering is a reliance on technology, political influence, large membership, big-name ministries and worldly techniques. Exalting such ideas demonstrates the need to read

Revelation on its own terms and with the help of the Spirit. A careful reading of the text

155 Bauckham, Climax of Prophecy, page 183. 156 Osborne, Revelation, page 254. 157 Rowland, Revelation, page 77. 74

will help expose the idolatrous tendencies and values that seductively define the wealth, success, and power of the dominant culture.158 The slaughtered Lamb not only serves as a symbol of God’s redeeming activity, it represents the climax of the redemptive lifestyle

Jesus led. Those who know the secret of “the invincible power of self-negating, self- sacrificing love”159 will be the ones who truly overcome in the end.

Fourth, the Lamb is worthy to open the scroll because he triumphed. The exact nature of the scroll and its content remain a mystery. It is safe to say that its content is of the utmost significance. No one could be found to open or “even look inside it” (5.3).

The triumph of the Lamb reversed this tragedy. Now the seals could be opened and the plan of God could move forward.160 This must inform the Church’s understanding of continuing God’s plan of salvation.

Fifth, the worthiness of the Lamb, according to the text, is based on what he did to overcome. The Lamb’s worthiness is stated in the song of praise, “because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased mortals for God” (5.9). This points us to the description of Jesus as “the faithful witness…who loves us and freed us from our sins by his blood” (1.5). The faithfulness of Jesus’ actions proved his worthiness to receive honor. Jesus’ faithfulness cost him his life. The Greek word for witness is where the

English derives the word martyr. Although 1st century use of μάρτυς (martus – witness) as well as Jesus’ death on the cross would not be understood as martyrdom, faithful witness in Revelation would point to faithfulness even at the cost of one’s life. As a

158 Michaels, Fallen is Babylon, page 137. 159 Bauckham, Theology, page75. 160 The events that take place at the opening of the seals seem to be related more to the particular seals than the content of the scroll itself (Mounce, The Book of Revelation, page 151). It is not clear from the text if the content of the scroll is ever revealed. What is evident from the text is that the plan of God unfolds as the seals, trumpets, and bowls are released. 75

result of Jesus’ willingness to go to the cross, the human race has been set free from the power of sin. Jesus’ faithful witness is definitive for those who will “follow the Lamb wherever he goes” (10.4).

Finally, the imagery of the Lamb and how it points to a cruciform understanding of God and mission is crucial to this entire project. This understanding is derived from the text, not from speculation. The reader/hearer understands that the symbol of the

Lamb represents divinity. In fact, what is dramatically portrayed in the final verses of

Rev. 5 is the symbol of the Lamb representing a divine symbol just as much as “the One who sits on the Throne.”161 It could not be substantiated any clearer than through the act of worship. In these verses, worship is directed to “him who sits on the Throne and to the

Lamb” (5.13). This is a radical divergence from traditional Jewish monotheistic acts of worship. It is based on the worthiness of the Lamb and clearly shows that while identified as God, the Lamb does not replace the One who sits on the Throne.

Why is the Lamb worthy? It is because he overcame and is able to open the scroll and read its contents. This is defined in his ransom of humanity by his blood. This reinforces the paradox introduced by the juxtaposition of the Lion and the Lamb. It demonstrates that the Lamb is acting out his divine nature while being slaughtered. This is clearly in line with Gorman’s cruciform understanding of God. It shows that Jesus is

God and that God is cruciform in nature and mission. It informs the Church that cruciformity is essential to understand the very nature of its message (Gospel) and mission. To construct our understanding of mission within the cruciform is God’s way of overcoming and being faithful to the one who is “faithful and true” (3.14, 19.11).

161 Bauckham, Theology, page 64. 76

CHAPTER 4

VISIONARY STATEMENT OF FUTURE MINISTRY AND DEVELOPMENT

My seminary experience has helped shape my reading of Revelation which offers a hopeful eschatology overshadowed by a cruciform understanding of God. In this concluding chapter, I will offer my thoughts concerning future education goals and how I envision my participation in the Church of God of Prophecy in light of these theological implications. My wife and I have already applied to several of our state offices, making ourselves available for pastoral appointment. There are several educational programs being implemented that continue to evolve within the COGOP to which I hope to contribute my time and talents. The pastoral model I will offer in this chapter reflects the core values of the COGOP as well as immediate challenges that face our movement.

What follows is my humble effort to faithfully fulfill my call within the context in which

God has so providentially placed me.

I believe it is important to integrate pastoral ministry and the academy as a means to develop a more informed and effective ministry. My time at the seminary has taught me the value of research and staying current with what is taking place in the academy.

The greatest contribution the Pentecostal Theological Seminary has to offer is the emphasis on practical theology. One of the strengths of the seminary is derived from the fact that so many of the professors function in some type of pastoral capacity in a local church setting. This is a model I hope to develop as I venture into pastoral ministry.

It is my desire to serve my denomination in three ways after graduation from the seminary. First, I would like to serve in a pastoral position as the Lord opens doors of opportunity. Second, I would like to work with the state and regional offices using my educational skills and experience in pastoral development and leadership training. Part of this phase of ministry would be to promote the Tomlinson College program already in place. Third, I hope to find opportunities to travel and conduct classes and seminars, passing Pentecostal theology and doctrine on to the next generation of leaders. Again, this may be in conjunction with already established COGOP educational programs.

There may be some type of campus presence in Cleveland, Tennessee in the near future that I would like to be a part of as well. However, if the trend of distance learning continues, I would like to do what I can to make the leadership development and educational efforts of the COGOP the best they can be.

Pastoral ministry in the COGOP is challenging as with all movements. Our denomination has very few large churches (150 members and up). Many of our congregations have fifty members or less. Many of these churches were thriving at one time and have paid for properties and buildings. Despite the opportunity, the COGOP is challenged in its efforts to find qualified people to pastor these churches. The denomination is also challenged because of the demographics of our leaders. Eighty percent of our licensed ministers are above the age of 40.162 We have more licensed ministers above the age of 60 than under the age of 40. Unless the COGOP finds a way to develop leaders, they will soon be facing a leadership crisis.

162 The statistics offered here were presented at the Tennessee State Convention in Murfreesboro, Tennessee in the summer of 2011 by Shaun McKinley Liaison to the General Overseer of the COGOP. 78

The COGOP is fortunate to have a good relationship with Lee University and the

Pentecostal Theological Seminary. There is also a partnership with the Gordon Conwell

Seminary, although that presents challenges of its own, being a Reformed seminary. The opportunities that these partnerships offer are hindered by the hesitancy pastors have in sending their young people to schools not associated with our denomination. There is always a threat that they could be pulled away to serve in other movements. There are plans to develop partnerships with Lee University and the Pentecostal Theological

Seminary that will offer young leaders the opportunity to receive a quality accredited education and still remain under the tutelage and influence of COGOP leadership. I have already made my intentions known to the educational leaders of the COGOP to see how my gifts and calling could be of service to the movement. One major hurdle is finances.

Many of the buildings on the old Tomlinson College property are condemned. This stands in the way of offering a campus for our young people, despite the partnerships we have with the various educational institutions.

I propose that the COGOP educational department set up a pilot program that would bring a small number of students to Cleveland as a means to kick-start a campus- type presence. The church I attend already owns apartment buildings that could house twelve such students. The prospective students would act as interns for various COGOP churches in the area. The qualified pastors and leaders in Cleveland would offer their time to teach these young people. The students could also serve in local churches in the area where they would receive hands on practical ministry training. This could take place in cooperation with Lee University’s CAPS program and our own licensing process.

Eventually, this pilot program could be taken to the Tomlinson campus as funds come available for property development.

As students graduate from the Bible college, they could be placed in the various churches that are in need of a pastor. Perhaps the churches they serve in would be willing to form a partnership with these new leaders to help them get started. Part of their educational process would be to get better acquainted with national and state leadership.

This would allow these emerging leaders to be exposed to the various needs and opportunities that are in each state. There may be some type of work program where tuition costs are offset by time spent in the field. The leadership challenge that the

COGOP faces is real and threatens our future; however, these challenges are not insurmountable. Within our organization, there are already systems in place that could be integrated in creative ways to meet the challenge. I envision this as an area where my ministry gifts can be used.

Another challenge facing the COGOP is overseas. This movement has emphasized indigenous leadership and is moving towards making the various regions outside the U.S. more autonomous. This has been a healthy move away from imperialistic tendencies and has allowed the COGOP the opportunity to embrace the diversity each region brings to the International Church. The challenge facing the

COGOP overseas is also educational. In South America specifically, the education that our pastors have received has been from Reformed institutions. The leadership in this region has reported that many of the pastors are unable to reflect critically on what they are being exposed to and have been unable to integrate Pentecostal beliefs into their

pastoral ministries. Many of our pastors in Colombia and Bolivia believe we are a

Reformed movement.

My background in South American missions draws me to such a situation. I believe these educational challenges can be addressed while still avoiding imperialistic tendencies. My experience at the seminary has taught me that education is more than receiving information. It needs to be transformational. This is best done in community. I believe with the right attitude educators can go into situations such as the COGOP is facing in South America and offer classes and seminars that meet the educational challenges. In so doing, I see no reason why the churches overseas should keep moving towards full autonomy.

As mentioned before, my education at PTS has radically transformed my understanding of the pastorate and mission of the church. I have moved away from any sense of nationalistic tendencies that would relegate the church to being seen as a sub- culture of society. I understand the church’s mission to be holistic, transformational, and counter-cultural and conducted under a cruciform understanding of God and mission. I see no other way to enter into such a ministry than to be intentional about offering a transformational incarnational cruciform model. The church culture of our movement will need more working models that serve the body of Christ rather than have the

International Offices push some type of agenda or program onto it.

There are many movements that are restorative in nature and function with such a model. I feel a strong calling to my movement and want to be an agent of change as the

Holy Spirit directs and enables. I recognize that it is important to network with various organizations and movements in order to meet the challenges of pastoring in our day. I

see the greatest need in the large metropolitan areas and hope to find a place that my wife and I can best use our gifts. What is interesting is that our heartfelt desire to work within an international context is easily met by the flood of immigrants coming to the U.S.

Moreover, the special needs that undocumented immigrants have would be an area of special concern.

Unfortunately, much of the church sees this wave of immigration as a threat not an opportunity. I see my ministry as a prophetic witness to the nationalistic concerns that are stifling the witness of the church today. God is bringing the harvest to us and it is as if we are despising the very gift of God. Like the slavery issue of the nineteenth century, perhaps this is one area of political activism in which the church needs to take a closer look. It is interesting that Dominion Theology takes the OT Law very seriously, yet tends to ignore what the OT Law says about the alien among God’s people. Like most challenges facing the church today, this is a spiritual problem that goes deep into the heart of God’s people. I believe those with such concerns can be a voice in and outside the church walls.

My passion for ministry is pastoral. In whatever setting I find myself pastoring, I would like to pursue four areas of church development as a foundation for my ministry.

First, the bedrock of any ministry should be prayer. Today, many prayer movements are springing up. This is very encouraging, even though some are not as healthy as others. I believe it is the pastor’s job to lead the congregation in the ministry of prayer that invites the manifest presence of God into the life of the church. It would be good to explore what is taking place in other movements and integrate new and healthy models of prayer into the local congregation. Second, we can learn from the efforts of our Dominion brothers

and sisters and create an atmosphere of discipleship that is intentional, formative and

Pentecostal. This means developing a discipleship program that will integrate every age group into a trajectory of Spirit-empowered service. Third, the church must be missional in every area of service. We can no longer afford to compete with the world through the programs we offer. The world will always be more relevant and cutting-edge because their budgets are bigger. That is not what we are called to do. People are hungry for the supernatural today. They are looking for real-life solutions. I believe the Pentecostal church has been put in place to meet such needs. Fourth, because of the current crisis, the church should focus its efforts on leadership development. We must find a way to bring our young people to a place of maturity where they will know that they have a place to use their gifts for the Lord. The following are a few thoughts for implementing these four fundamental areas of church ministry.

Prayer

The lack of prayer in the church today is evident by the absence of spiritual fervor and the fruitlessness of God’s people. The good news is that there is a groundswell of prayer revival showing up all over the world. This revival is cutting across denominational, cultural and societal lines of demarcation. One refreshing aspect of this revival is how many young people are living out this call with renewed creativity and enthusiastic expressions of worship. This youthful enthusiasm can help bring life and a renewed fervor to seek the Lord in a local congregation. As a pastor, I will work towards harnessing this energy created through communion with God in order to infuse life into every aspect of church ministry. The construct diagram presented in this project may be a

useful tool to help keep prayer theologically focused. Prayerfully reflecting on the nature of God, Gospel, Church, and mission may be instrumental in maintaining healthy theological grounding in every area of life and ministry. However this is done, it will be important to maintain creativity and enthusiasm.

I hope to develop a congregational prayer ministry where prayer is designed to ignite a deep sense of calling and imagination in those who participate in it. It is important to create an atmosphere where people find freedom to express themselves in decency and order. My goal will be to create a sense of wonder that invites and encourages people to go beyond the status quo that plagues much of North American

Christianity. It is a call to allow the Holy Spirit to infuse new life through prayer into every aspect of church life. Perhaps calling it a Prayer Initiative will help generate new thinking on what it means to be a people of prayer. I will be very intentional in my efforts to design such an initiative. It will point the participants to a greater understanding of prayer and what it means for the church to become a house of prayer.163 It will reflect a

Pentecostal ethos marked by a spirituality that goes deep into the soul of the person. It will be a call for Pentecostals to reflect on where they came from and what unique contributions they can make to the greater body of Christ in these last days.

Unfortunately, much of Pentecost has been swallowed up, and therefore diluted, by the Evangelical movement. Pentecostals face an identity crisis. We have lost our bearings. The future is shrouded by a fog of uncertainty because we are unable to navigate the spiritual and societal challenges of our times. Reflective prayer can change

163 This is more than identifying the sanctuary as a place of prayer. It is where the people and ministries of the church are saturated in prayer and each member understands their part in this vital ministry (See Cheryl Sacks, The Prayer-Saturated Church with CD: A Comprehensive Handbook For Prayer Leaders, New ed. [Colorado Springs, CO.: NavPress, 2007], 28-30). 84

all of this. One way to do this is to get in touch with our Pentecostal roots. To do this, I would integrate historical reflection with the pressing needs of our day in a way that puts us back in touch with the power Pentecostals once had to meet such needs. Several goals would be kept in mind: First, it will be essential to inspire a deep sense of knowing who we are and what place Pentecostals have in the body of Christ. The particular trajectory offered will go beyond the Wesleyan influence and will show how Pentecostal roots go deep into Reformation history.164

The second goal is to inspire a sense of faith that God wants his people to possess, the kind of faith that lets people know prayer really makes a difference. I believe it is very important to integrate historical content with a reflection on the modern prayer movement to show that God is working today, just as the Lord has done throughout history. Of course, discernment will be used to filter through some of the dominion and nationalistic-oriented movements that are out there. Third, the discipline of prayer should be modeled using various levels of accountability. Fourth, I hope to create a congregational prayer ministry that would have a local church specific prayer manual with its own set of goals, schedules, and leadership structure. Finally, I would challenge the people to answer this question, “What does the Pentecostal movement have to offer the prayer movement of our day?” Pentecostals cannot afford to be separated from what

God is doing in and through other movements. However, our greatest contribution to the body of Christ can only come when we know who we are and what God wants to offer through those who embrace what it means to be Pentecostal.

164 Phil Anderson has done just that in his travel journal to Herrnhut Germany. He notes that the Moravian church and Count Zinzendorf had a profound effect on John Wesley’s theology. See Phil Anderson, The Lord of the Ring (Ventura, Calif.: Regal, 2007), pages 146, 47. 85

Discipleship

Discipleship is critical for any movement if it is to continue forward as a viable expression of God working in the earth. Pentecostals have become theologically schizophrenic by undiscerningly identifying with Evangelical language and practice.

There are four aspects of discipleship that I would like to see developed in my ministry.

First, discipleship would be based on a proper understanding of the nature of God. I would never take away from the Restorationists’ high regard for the nature of God’s majesty and sovereign rule over all creation. However, as I have argued for in chapter 3, it would seem that God’s nature is essentially cruciform. It is Jesus Christ who has shown us the Father’s cruciform self. His life, mission and teaching inform our understanding of who we are (the Church), what we believe (the Gospel), and what we do (mission). All four aspects of the construct diagram presented in chapter 1 are crucial for the development of a biblically-sound discipleship program.

Second, within this construct I would integrate the five-fold Gospel. Each aspect of the construct would illustrate how the Pentecostal understanding of Jesus as Savior,

Sanctifier, Spirit Baptizer, Healer, and Coming King informs our spirituality and theology. For example, a discussion on the nature of God would not only focus on the obvious connections with Jesus. It would explain how the Father and Spirit are understood within the five-fold rubric. In a discussion on the church, perhaps an understanding of how each of these aspects of Jesus’ salvific work in believers is connected to sacraments of the church.165

165 Archer, Kenneth J. 2004. "Nourishment for Our Journey: The Pentecostal Via Salutis and Sacramental Ordinances." Journal of Pentecostal Theology13, no. 1: 79-96, page 79.

Third, I would coordinate each department of the church to follow a five-year plan that would take every disciple through a series of measurable objectives where growth and development could be tracked. As the pastor, I would work towards infusing a sense of movement in each member of the church with specific goals in mind. The goals would vary according to age, but the material for each group would be the same theme or topic. I have in mind an age-appropriate catechism with everyone involved.

Specific goals, such as the development of spiritual disciplines, how to read the Bible with our eyes and ears open to the Spirit, as well as theological concepts would be presented in such a way that a sense of synergy is created in the church. The synergy will take place as each child, young person, and adult is moved to a place where every member feels they understand his or her place in the body of Christ.

Becoming a Missional Church

I have a great burden to move believers towards a missional vision of the church.

This goes beyond ministering to those on the margins to joining them in ministry in an incarnational cruciform expression of God’s love. This will have to begin with an analysis of where the church is and how the church views itself. A church often views itself as missional because of the assumption that attracting people to its how missional is defined.166 The challenge of moving to a missional mindset will be to lead people to an understanding that they are on a journey that is designed to take the church beyond the building and into the lives of those in need of the Gospel.

166 Alan J. Roxburgh and M. Scott Boren, Introducing the Missional Church: What It Is, Why It Matters, How to Become One (Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Books, 2009), page 55. 87

Another challenge will be to stop the trend of looking to successful mega- ministries and thinking we can apply their missional formula or model into our context and see it thrive. Instead of a model, I believe pastors should begin to use vocabulary that stimulates the imagination. This is what Walter Brueggemann speaks of in his

Prophetic Imagination.167 This is the language of Pentecostalism, and we need to retrieve our voice. Words that spark missional imagination like journey, Spirit, and discernment all resonate with those who embrace the activity of the Spirit. Pentecostals should be on the forefront of the missional movement today instead of following sheepishly behind.

The problem is that many in the church are so bound to the attractional model, reaching into our community by inviting them to our next big event produces all kinds of activity with little results. Moreover, very few churches have what it takes to attract and then keep people around.

It is time for Pentecostals to offer real solutions to the needs all around our churches. Churches need to move away from competing with each other and into a hopeful future that actually addresses the needs of the lost. The confusion comes in the way many churches define mission. This is where prayer and discipleship are to be integrated together to offer a dynamic in the Spirit that moves the members of the church out from the four walls and into the neighborhoods of their cities. Our prayer initiatives and discipleship emphasis must be to push people into the harvest.

Keeping it as a matter of prayer and discipleship will keep mission from being program driven from the top down. People need the freedom to allow the Spirit to lead them instead of being driven by a program or latest perceived need of the community.

167 Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination, 2nd ed. (Minneapolis, MN: FORTRESS PRESS, 2001), page 67-68. 88

Most imported programs fall short of meeting the real needs of the local community.

This causes people to become frustrated and lose heart for mission. I believe that the

Holy Spirit can offer insight and hope for real change to take place. Leaders today must allow space for people to find the answers to the nagging questions that are on many people’s minds. It is evident that the rising generation is not going to embrace the impotence that plagues North American churches. It is time to find ways to give people space to voice their frustration and allow the Spirit to speak through them. This will take courage and discernment.

A mission-minded church will create a local model that offers believers a lifestyle to embrace rather than a program to follow.168 It should be a process in which the laity is empowered to act under the influence and power of the Spirit. In developing a missional program for the church, pastors need to be careful not to let the process get too bogged down with overanalyzing the situation. Discussion is healthy, but the people will want to see real movement taking place. I found this to be true at the church where currentlyI serve. Our former pastor cast a big vision with many dreams of reaching the community.

It not only became derailed with inaction, but much of what was taking place was from an attractional mindset. This is a journey that leaders and laity must take together. Pastors must avoid the trap of stepping in and acting as the experts, taking the power away from the laity. For me, it is matter of trust. Leaders must find a way to trust that the Spirit can and will work through the people of the church. Pentecostals may have something to offer here, but we must find our way back to the empowerment of the Spirit that is for all people, and not just the leaders.

168 Roxburgh and Boren, Introducing the Missional Church, page 154. 89

Finding the mission of the church can be a real mystery and adventure. Perhaps

Pentecostals could integrate stories from our past to help create the sense of wonder and creativity once again. Roxburgh and Boren speak of “mystery, memory and mission”169 that reminds me of a young Pentecostal movement that saw Spirit baptism and tongues speech as a call to reach the harvest at any cost. Tongues was a mysterious language that conjured up memories of a church once empowered to turn the world upside down. This sign was the evidence that God was truly in their midst. It was also a sign that pointed to other people groups of differing languages and cultures. It was a proof of God’s favor, empowerment, and mission.

We have lost our understanding of mystery, memory, and mission. It seems as though we have perfected our doctrinal statements, while at the same time we lost our ability to discern their proper use or know why we believe such things. They are words on a page rather than an experience that transforms our lives. Pentecostals have a rich heritage. It is time we get past the nostalgia and allow the Spirit once again to spark our imagination of what is truly possible. The missional vision is needed to bring the church back to reality. For too long we have allowed the charisma of personality to shape our ethos. We are lost in a fantasy of showmanship and the spectacular. What the world needs is a church that will not objectify them, but who will actually come alongside them in a way that is salvific and truly transformative.

169 Roxburgh and Boren, Introducing the Missional Church, page 39. 90

Leadership Development

In any pastorate I find myself, I hope to cooperate with the state and national leaders to create an atmosphere of learning and growth for the next generation of leaders.

I came to the seminary to earn my degree so I could teach at the college level. I see no reason why this could not be done at the local church. Internships could be the key to developing new leaders for our movement. We are facing a crisis, and we need to be creative in how we meet this pressing challenge. Internships not only offer rising ministers the practical training they need, they also provide a church with energetic and creative people that can help facilitate the discipleship and mission of the church.

Prayer, discipleship and mission would be integrated together to offer a viable place for new leaders to find their voice. This took place for me at the seminary. I was blessed to be able to work at a local church while I completed my studies. As I reflect on my journey, I am amazed at how far I have advanced in my ministry. I can truly say that working in the local church while completing my studies has helped me develop in such a way that would not have been possible without some type of internship experience. I feel

I have found my voice and have received the clarity needed to move forward with the confidence that I will be able to meet the challenges of pastoral ministry.

I would like the opportunity to provide the same type of training to leaders that cannot study in the traditional way. Internships at a local church setting under a distance type study program are something that needs to be developed and promoted in our movement. This may give the pastors of our movement the confidence they need to direct their young people into higher education. The COGOP needs to find inventive ways to raise up new leaders or we will find ourselves with a major leadership vacuum.

One important resource that needs to be more appreciated is our young women. Perhaps it will be these sisters who have the spiritual fortitude and creativity to reorient the church to all of the power and splendor God intends.

Conclusion

I hope to never stop pursuing the means to enrich my understanding of God and the mission the Lord has for the Church. I still have some desire to go on with more graduate work. Wherever ministry takes me, I will try to take advantage of whatever educational opportunities that location affords. I was encouraged by the pastors I sat with in various classes who already had their degrees. Some were from denominations that required ongoing formal education. This is a real challenge to Pentecostals and needs to be reflected upon more seriously. Of course, one of the greatest challenges facing

Pentecostals is that we become so educated that we may lose our dependence on the Holy

Spirit. This is why my time at the Pentecostal Theological Seminary was so valuable. I found men and women of God who embraced the fullness of the Spirit while engaging the academy in ways that benefit both church and academy. In closing, I extend my deepest gratitude to the professors at the Pentecostal Theological Seminary for their willingness to offer their lives to the ministry development of their students.

Bibliography

Anderson, Phil. The Lord of the Ring. Ventura, Calif.: Regal, 2007.

Archer, Kenneth J. 2004. "Nourishment For Our Journey: the Pentecostal Sia Salutis and Sacramental Ordinances." Journal of Pentecostal Theology13, no. 1: pages79-96.

Aulen, Gustaf. Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2003.

Aune, Davie E. Revelation 1-5 (Word Biblical Commentary 52a). Dallas: Thomas Nelson, 1997.

Banks, Robert. Paul's Idea of Community. Rev. ed. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Pub, 1994.

Bauckham, Richard, The Climax of Prophecy, Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2005

Bauckham, Richard. The Theology of the Book of Revelation, Cambridge, Cambridge Press, 1993.

Blount, Brian. Revelation: A Commentary (NTL) (New Testament Library). Louisville, KY.: Westminster John Knox, 2009.

Bork, Robert H. The Tempting of America: the Political Seduction of the Law. New York: Free Press, 1990.

Boyd, Gregory A. The Myth of a Christian Nation: How the Quest For Political Power Is Destroying the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007.

Brueggemann, Walter. Deep Memory, Exuberant Hope: Contested Truth in a Post Christian World. Edited by Patrick D. Miller. Minneapolis, MN.: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2000.

Brueggemann, Walter. The Prophetic Imagination. 2nd ed. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001.

Caird, G. B. The Revelation of St. John the Divine. New York: Harper & Row, 1966.

Camp, Lee C. Mere Discipleship: Radical Christianity in a Rebellious World. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brazos Press, 2008.

Chalcedon. “Dominion.” Topics. http://chalcedon.edu/topics/dominion/ (Accessed December 5, 2011)

Charles, J Daryl. "Imperial Pretensions and the Throne-Vision of the Lamb : Observations on the Function of Revelation 5." Criswell Theological Review 7, (September 1, 1993): 85-97. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost. http://0-web.ebscohost.com.library. acaweb.org/ehost/detail?vid=8&hid=21&sid=d50bb3b2-3be8-4a53-a2aa 90f5f0b9cdcc%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d# db=rfh&AN=ATLA0000904085 (accessed May 3, 2011).

Chilton, David. Paradise Restored: a Biblical Theology of Dominion. Tyler, Tex.: Dominion Pr, 1987.

Collins, Adela Yarbro. The Apocalypse (New Testament Message; A Biblical-Theological Commentary). Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1990.

Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination Livonia, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

Donelson, Lewis. From Hebrews to Revelation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.

Gause, R. Hollis. Revelation: God's Stamp of Sovereignty. Cleveland, TN.: Pathway Press, 1983.

Gorman, Michael J. Apostle of the Crucified Lord: a Theological Introduction to Paul and His Letters. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004.

Gorman, Michael J. Cruciformity: Paul's Narrative Spirituality of the Cross. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001.

Gorman, Michael J. Inhabiting the Cruciform God: Kenosis, Justification, and Theosis in Paul's Narrative Soteriology. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2009.

Gushee, Glen H. Stassen & David P. Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2003.

Gutiérrez, Gustavo. Essential Writings. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1996.

Hall, Franklin. The Return of Immortality, Phoenix, AZ: Hall Deliverance Foundation, 1976.

Hauerwas, Stanley. A Cross-Shattered Church: Reclaiming the Theological Heart of Preaching. Grand Rapids, MI.: Brazos Press, 2009.

Hauerwas, Stanley. The Peaceable Kingdom: a Primer in Christian Ethics. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1991.

Hauerwas, Stanley, and William H. Willimon. Resident Aliens: Life in the Christian Colony. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989.

Hull, Bill. The Complete Book of Discipleship: On Being and Making Followers of Christ. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2006.

Hull, Bill. The Disciple-Making Pastor: Leading Others On the Journey of Faith. Revised and Expanded ed. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Books, 2007.

Jarvis, Ernest David. More Than Conquerors. London: Allenson, 1935.

Jenkins, Philip. The Next Christendom: the Coming of Global Christianity. New York: Oxford University Press, USA, 2002.

Jenney, Timothy, ed. Full Life Bible Commentary to the New Testament. Edited by French L. Arrington and Roger Stronstad. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1999.

Jethani, Skye. With: Reimagining the Way You Relate to God. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2011.

Jones, James W. The Spirit and the World. New York: Hawthorn Books, 1975.

Kärkkäinen, Veli-Matti. One with God: Salvation as Deification and Justification. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2004.

Koester, Craig R. Revelation and the End of All Things. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2001.

Kraybill, J., Nelson. Apocalypse and Allegiance, Grand Rapids, MI., Brazos Press, 2010.

Land, Steven J. Pentecostal Spirituality: A Passion For the Kingdom. Sheffield, England.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.

MacLeod, David J. "The Lion Who is a Lamb: An Exposition of Revelation 5:1-7." Bibliotheca sacra 164, no. 655 (July 1, 2007): 323-340. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost. http://0 web.ebscohost.com.library.acaweb.org/ehost/detail?vid=10&hid=21&sid=d50bb3 b2-3be8-4a53-a2aa-90f5f0b9cdcc%40sessionmgr15&bdata=JnNpdGU9Z Whvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001620664 (accessed May 3, 2011).

Mathewson, David. 2008. "Verbal Aspect in the Apocalypse of John: An Analysis of Revelation 5." Novum testamentum 50, no. 1: (2008), In ATLA Religion Database, http://0-web.ebscohost.com.library.acaweb.org/ehost/pdfviewer/ pdfviewer?sid=533ee01e-85bc-4567-8c9b-a9a43e414f99%40sessionmgr 12&vid=4&hid=7 (accessed April 18, 2011).

McKnight, Scot. The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2011.

Metzger, Bruce, M. Breaking the Code, Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1993

Michaels J. Ramsey, Interpreting the Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992

Minatrea, Milfred. Shaped by God's Heart: the Passion and Practices of Missional Churches. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2004.

Moltmann, Jürgen. The Church in the Power of the Spirit: a Contribution to Messianic Ecclesiology. 1st Fortress Press ed. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Mounce, Robert, H. The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 1977

Murphy, Frederick J. Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John (Nt In Context Commentaries). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Trinity Press Int'l, 1998.

Newbigin, Lesslie. The Household of God. Eugene, OR.: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2009.

Osborne, Grant R. Revelation (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament). Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002.

Pierce, Gregory F.A. The World as It Should Be: Living Authentically in the Here-and Now Kingdom of God. Chicago: Loyola Press, 2010.

Radosh, Daniel. Rapture Ready!: Adventures in the Parallel Universe of Christian Pop Culture. 1st Scribner hardcover ed. New York: Scribner, 2008.

Resseguie, James L. Revelation of John, The: A Narrative Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Academic, 2009.

Rogers Jr., Cleon L. and Cleon L. Rogers III. New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament, The. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.

Rowland, Christopher. Revelation (Epworth Commentaries). 1st ed ed. London: Epworth Pr, 1994.

Roxburgh, Alan J., and M. Scott Boren. Introducing the Missional Church: What It Is, Why It Matters, How to Become One. Grand Rapids, MI.: Baker Books, 2009.

Rushdoony, Mark R. Chalcedon. “The Vision of R. J. Rushdoony,” Research Articles. http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/the-vision-of-r-j-rushdoony/ (accessed December. 5, 2011)

Rushdoony, Rousas John, and Rushdoony. The Institutes of Biblical Law. Phillipsburg, NJ.: P & R Publishing, 1980.

Rushdoony, Rousas John. The Roots of Reconstruction. Vallecito, CA.: Ross House Books, 1991.

Salter, Darius L. Prophetical-Priestly Ministry: the Biblical Mandate For the 21st Century Pastor. [1st ed. Nappanee, Ind.: Evangel Publishing House, 2002.

Smith, Calvin L. “Revolutionaries and Revivalists: Pentecostal Eschatology, Politics and the Nicaraguan Revolution,” Pneuma 30 (2008), pp. 55-82.

Smalley, Stephen S. The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse. New York: IVP Academic, 2005.

Thomas, John Christopher. The Pentecostal Commentary On 1 John, 2 John, 3 John (Pentecostal Commentary Series). Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 2004.

Thomas, John Christopher, and Frank Macchia. The Apocalypse. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., forthcoming.

Villafañe, Eldin. The Liberating Spirit: Toward an Hispanic American Pentecostal Social Ethic. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993.

Waddell, Robert C. (Robby). The Spirit of the Book of Revelation (Journal of Pentecostal Theology). Blandford Forum: Deo Publishing, 2006.

Wall, Robert W. Revelation (New International Biblical Commentary). Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1991.

Willard, Dallas, and Jan Johnson. Renovation of the Heart in Daily Practice: Experiments in Spiritual Transformation. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2006.

Wink, Walter. Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1992.

Worthen, Molly. 2008. "The Chalcedon Problem: Rousas John Rushdoony and the Origins of Christian Reconstructionism." Church History 77, no. 2: 399 437. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost http://0- web.ebscohost.com.library.acaweb.org/ehost/ pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=15b757d7-2a79-4cb9-8e65- 0aef7c37c010%40sessionmgr10&vid=10&hid=7 (accessed December 5, 2011).

Wright, N. T. The Resurrection of the Son of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God. Vol. 3). Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003.

Yarbro Collins, Adel, The Apocalypse, Collegeville, MN., The Liturgical Press, 1979.

Yoder, John Howard. The Politics of Jesus: Vicit Agnus Noster. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans Pub Co, 1994.

Yoder, John Howard. The War of the Lamb: The Ethics of Nonviolence and Peacemaking. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2009.

Yong, Amos. In the Days of Caesar: Pentecostalism and Political Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010.

Yong, Amos. The Spirit Poured Out On All Flesh: Pentecostalism and the Possibility of Global Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2005.