As we seek to chart a way forward into our second century, many Pentecostals are re-looking at the fundamentals that have defined them as a stream within Christianity. Thus, some Pentecostal theologians are re-examining and redefining the ‘full gospel’, the fourfold or fivefold revelation of Jesus Christ as Savior, Healer, Sanctifier, Spirit Baptizer, and Coming King. In this article, the author surveys these discussions on the ‘full gospel’ and looks into the book of Revelation for a fresh perspective on this topic. It is argued that each aspect of the fivefold revelation of Jesus is reflected in Revelation to some degree, but not always in the way Pentecostals have taught it. Therefore, a dialogue between classic Pentecostalism and Revelation opens up new ways of looking at both.
William Oliverio JrTheological Hermeneutics in the Classical Pentecostal Tradition (Leiden: Brill2012) p. 32; D. William Faupel The Everlasting Gospel (JPTSup 10; Blandford Forum uk: Deo 2009) pp. 28–30 229–30. The classic North American Pentecostals used various names to describe themselves such as ‘Full Gospel’ ‘Apostolic Faith’ ‘Latter Rain’ and ‘Pentecostal’ (Anderson Introduction to Pentecostalism pp. 56 60–61).
Cf FaupelEverlasting Gospel pp. 96–114on the historical background to this. See also Mathew K. Thompson Kingdom Come: Revisioning Pentecostal Eschatology (JPTSup 37; Blandford Forum uk: Deo 2010) pp. 52–53.
Though see FaupelEverlasting Gospel pp. 289–90on how this stance was modified by followers of the ‘New Issue’ in North America. See also Amos Yong Spirit-Word-Community: Theological Hermeneutics in Trinitarian Perspective (Eugene or: Wipf and Stock 2002) pp. 30–31.
Cf ThomasThe Apocalypse pp. 93–94; Richard Bauckham The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1993) p. 75; G.K. Beale The Book of Revelation (nigtc; Grand Rapids mi: Eerdmans 1999) p. 191; Stephen S. Smalley The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Apocalypse (Downers Grove: ivp Academic 2005) pp. 35–36.
Cf ThomasThe Apocalypse pp. 225 231. However Smalley points out that ‘the sacrifice of Christ in this hymn appears to be untypically Johannine since its character is objective and indeed Pauline’ (Smalley Revelation to John p. 137).
See discussion in ThomasThe Apocalypse p. 386. As Thomas notes the passive here has previously referred to the work of God. Beale contends that the healing of the beast was only apparent (Beale Revelation p. 689).
Cf WaddellSpirit of Revelation pp. 138–50; Thomas The Apocalypse p. 3; Melissa L. Archer ‘I Was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day’: A Pentecostal Engagement with Worship in the Apocalypse (Cleveland tn: cpt Press 2015) pp. 130 140 175–76. Comp. Skaggs and Benham Revelation p. 27; Bauckham Theology of Revelation p. 116.
See the survey in ThomasThe Apocalypse p. 683. Waddell also argues that the ‘angel’ of Rev. 10 is the Holy Spirit (Waddell Spirit of Revelation pp. 158–60) which seems unlikely. See also Smalley Revelation to John p. 562.
ThomasThe Apocalypse pp. 23 225 227. This is a controversial area tied in with discussions of authorship and ‘Johannine schools’ but I think Thomas’ argument is strong. Cf Stephen S. Smalley Thunder and Love: John’s Revelation and John’s Community (Milton Keynes uk: Word Publishing 1994) pp. 37–40 57–63 67–69. Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza has argued against such close links (The Book of Revelation: Justice and Judgment [Minneapolis mn: Fortress Press 1998] pp. 85–113). But she conceded that ‘an author could have access to various Christian traditions’ (p. 101). If so then the audience of Revelation could also be familiar with traditions related to John.
Comp. ThomasThe Apocalypse p. 227; Osborne Revelation p. 257; Bauckham Theology of Revelation pp. 112–13; Waddell Spirit of Revelation pp. 177–78 189; Waddell ‘Apocalypse of John according to Craig R. Koester’ p. 20. Smalley speaks of the ‘seven spirits’ being ‘sent out on a mission to the whole world’ (Smalley Revelation to John p. 33; see also p. 133).
Cf WaddellSpirit of Revelation p. 165 172–73. Waddell sees measuring as representing ‘divine protection of God’s people’ (pp. 165 167–68). Aune argues it ‘signifies preservation’ (Aune Revelation 6–16 p. 630). However in at least some cases measuring is connected to construction (Isa. 28.16–17; Jer. 31.38–39; Ezekiel 40–42; Zech. 1.16; 4.9–10).
Cf WaddellSpirit of Revelation pp. 166 174. Other interpretations of the temple in Revelation 11 are possible: it could be the second temple a future ‘third temple’ the temple in heaven or something else but I think seeing it as the church is at least feasible in view of Rev. 1.20 and makes sense of the ‘protection and vulnerability’ that Thomas notes (Thomas The Apocalypse p. 327; see surrounding discussion in pp. 324–27). See also discussion in Aune Revelation 6–16 pp. 596–98.
Cf BauckhamTheology of Revelation pp. 86–88; Waddell Spirit of Revelation pp. 187–88; Thomas The Apocalypse p. 342; Aune Revelation 6–16 pp. 628–29. (Aune argues strongly that ‘gave glory to God’ equals conversion). But see discussion in Allan J. McNicol The Conversion of the Nations in Revelation (London: T & T Clark International 2011) pp. 9–10 123–27.
Already by 1908it was clear that this ‘imminence’ would not be realised in the way expected by the Pentecostals (cf Faupel Everlasting Gospel p. 228). Smalley argues that in Revelation the Parousia is ‘perpetually imminent’ (Smalley Revelation to John pp. 37 568).
See discussion in AuneRevelation 1–5 pp. 188 221–22. Beale concludes that Christ’s ‘coming’ in Revelation ‘is understood better as a process occurring throughout history’ and concluded with his ‘final’ coming (Revelation p. 198). Comp. Smalley Revelation to John p. 83.
E.g. Duffield and Van CleaveFoundations pp. 519–46; see Althouse Last Days pp. 9–44 and McQueen Eschatology Chapters 3–4 on the historical development of Pentecostal eschatology and Warrington Pentecostal Theology pp. 311–13 regarding shifts in millennial thinking among uk Pentecostals in recent years.