1. Decreeing and Declaring

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

We believe that Scripture does not teach that believers have the power to decree and declare. The Bible does not teach that human beings possess sovereign power to create new realities, determine future events, compel circumstances, or force desired outcomes simply by speaking a “decree and declaration” formula. Sovereign and creative speech belongs uniquely to God, whose Word accomplishes His will because He alone is the Creator, Lord, and King over all things.

God Alone Speaks with Sovereign Creative Power

Scripture begins by presenting God as the One whose Word brings creation into existence: “Then God said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light” (Gen. 1:3). The heavens were made by the Word of the Lord, and all creation exists because He commanded it (Ps. 33:6–9). God declares “the end from the beginning” and accomplishes all His purpose because none can prevent His sovereign will (Isa. 46:9–11).

Paul likewise identifies God—not believers—as the One “who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist” (Rom. 4:17). This passage does not teach that Abraham created his promised future by speaking it into existence. Abraham trusted the God who had sovereignly promised what only God could perform. Biblical faith does not imitate God’s sovereignty; it relies upon it.

God’s Word accomplishes what He sends it to accomplish because it proceeds from His own omnipotent will:

“So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void, But it shall accomplish what I please” (Isa. 55:11).

No comparable promise is given concerning every desire, prediction, declaration, or command spoken by a believer.

Believers Proclaim God’s Word; They Do Not Create Reality

Christians are commanded to proclaim, confess, teach, testify, bless, encourage, warn, and speak the truth. These are powerful and necessary forms of biblical speech. Believers declare “the praises of Him who called” them out of darkness (1 Pet. 2:9), confess Jesus as Lord (Rom. 10:9), proclaim the gospel (Mark 16:15), and speak God’s truth with boldness (Acts 4:29–31).

Such a declaration announces what God has revealed or accomplished. It does not create truth, guarantee a preferred outcome, or exercise independent control over future events. The authority of Christian proclamation rests entirely in the truth and authority of the message God has given—not in the believer’s vocal intensity, confidence, wording, or use of a particular formula.

The prophets did not speak whatever they personally desired and then expect God to make it happen. They were required to speak only the Word God placed in their mouths:

“Whatever I command you, you shall speak” (Jer. 1:7).

Ezekiel was similarly instructed, “You shall speak My words to them” (Ezek. 2:7). Even Jesus declared that He did not speak independently but spoke according to the Father’s commandment (John 12:49–50). Therefore, no believer should claim greater independence in speech than the prophets, apostles, or the Lord Jesus Himself demonstrated.

Prayer Is Petition, Not Sovereign Command

Jesus taught His disciples to pray, “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10). Biblical prayer confidently approaches God, but it does not replace God’s will with human sovereignty.

The apostles did not ordinarily address circumstances as though their own speech controlled reality. When threatened, they prayed to the “Sovereign Lord” and asked Him to grant them boldness and to perform signs by His power (Acts 4:24–30). When Peter was imprisoned, the Church offered “constant prayer” to God for him (Acts 12:5). They did not treat prayer as a verbal mechanism that automatically produced their preferred result.

Scripture teaches believers to ask in faith while remaining submitted to God’s wisdom and will:

“Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us” (1 John 5:14).

James warns against speaking presumptuously about the future. Rather than declaring that a particular plan must occur, believers should say, “If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that” (James 4:13–16). Submission to the Lord’s will is not unbelief. It is the proper confession that God is sovereign, and we are not.

Faith Does Not Mean Faith in Our Own Words

Jesus’ teaching about speaking to a mountain must be interpreted within its own context:

“Have faith in God” (Mark 11:22).

The emphasis is not on faith in the believer’s ability to speak realities into existence, but on faith in

God. Jesus immediately connects the saying with prayer: “Whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them” (Mark 11:24). He also connects believing prayer with forgiveness and a heart rightly ordered before God (Mark 11:25).

Faith is not confidence that our words possess creative energy. Faith is confidence in the character, promise, wisdom, and power of God. The believer does not control God through speech; the believer trusts God through prayer.

Likewise, Jesus’ promises about asking in His name do not authorize using His name as a verbal formula to force a desired outcome. To ask in Jesus’ name is to ask as one who abides in Him, represents His interests, seeks His glory, and submits to His will (John 14:13–14; 15:7; 16:23–24).

The Tongue Has Great Power, but Not Divine Omnipotence

Proverbs states that “death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Prov. 18:21). This teaches that words have profound moral, relational, emotional, and practical consequences. Words can deceive, destroy reputations, provoke violence, crush spirits, communicate wisdom, reconcile enemies, encourage the discouraged, and proclaim the message of salvation.

The verse does not teach that human speech possesses God’s creative power or that every spoken statement becomes reality. The broader teaching of Proverbs concerns the consequences of wise and foolish speech, not the metaphysical creation of circumstances by verbal declaration (Prov. 12:18; 15:1–4; 16:24; 18:6–8).

James similarly describes the tongue as powerful because of the immense good or destruction it can produce through human relationships and conduct (James 3:2–12). Neither Proverbs nor James teaches that words function as spiritual laws compelling the universe to conform to human desires.

Job 22:28 Does Not Establish a Christian Decreeing Practice

The statement, “You will also declare a thing, and it will be established for you” (Job 22:28), is frequently used to defend the practice of decreeing desired outcomes. However, these words were spoken by Eliphaz, one of Job’s counselors. At the conclusion of the book, God rebuked Eliphaz and his companions for not speaking rightly concerning Him (Job 42:7–8).

A statement from a rebuked counselor cannot be removed from its literary context and treated as a universal promise that believers may decree circumstances into existence. Sound doctrine must be established from the clear and consistent teaching of Scripture, not from isolated statements spoken by people whose theology the biblical narrative corrects.

Delegated Authority Remains Subject to Christ

Jesus gave His disciples genuine authority to preach the gospel, make disciples, forgive in a ministerial sense, exercise church discipline, resist the devil, cast out demons, and minister in His name (Matt. 10:1; 16:19; 18:18; 28:18–20; Luke 10:17–20; John 20:21–23; James 4:7). Yet delegated authority is never autonomous sovereignty.

The apostles exercised authority as servants commissioned by Christ. Their power was derived, limited, and governed by the Lord who sent them. They did not teach that every Christian could determine the future, command wealth, eliminate all suffering, or guarantee healing through verbal decrees.

Paul could not merely decree that his “thorn in the flesh” disappear. He pleaded with the Lord three times, and the Lord answered according to His greater purpose: “My grace is sufficient for you” (2 Cor. 12:7–9). Paul left Trophimus sick at Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20), advised Timothy concerning recurring illness (1 Tim. 5:23), and thanked God for showing mercy to the seriously ill Epaphroditus (Phil. 2:25–27). These examples demonstrate faith, prayer, compassion, and dependence upon God—not sovereign control of circumstances through declarations.

Our Position

Therefore, the Association of Biblical Pentecostals rejects the teaching that believers possess inherent or delegated sovereignty to create reality, determine future events, guarantee healing or prosperity, cancel every hardship, or force spiritual and material outcomes through spoken decrees and declarations.

We reject the idea that words operate as impersonal spiritual laws by which believers can compel God, control the universe, or activate blessings through a prescribed formula. Such teaching confuses God’s sovereign speech with human confession, transforms prayer into command, and risks placing faith in faith, words, or techniques rather than in God.

At the same time, we affirm that believers should:

• Proclaim the promises and truth of Scripture with boldness.
• Confess Jesus Christ as Lord.
• Pray with faith, perseverance, and expectancy.
• Resist the devil in submission to God.
• Exercise spiritual gifts according to the Spirit’s will.
• Speak words that bless, heal, encourage, correct, and edify.
• Ask God for healing, provision, deliverance, and intervention.
• Trust God to answer according to His wisdom, goodness, timing, and sovereign purpose.

Biblical Pentecostal faith is neither passive nor unbelieving. We pray fervently, expect God to act, welcome the gifts and power of the Holy Spirit, and boldly proclaim what God has revealed.

Nevertheless, we recognize that power belongs to God, not to our formulas.

____________

2. The Prosperity Gospel

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

We believe the Prosperity Gospel does not represent the Scriptural teaching regarding prosperity. The Bible teaches that
God is good, that He faithfully provides for His people, and that every good gift ultimately comes from Him (Matt. 6:25–34;
Phil. 4:19; Jas. 1:17). Scripture does not, however, promise that every faithful believer will possess material wealth, enjoy
uninterrupted health, or experience continual earthly success. Nor does it teach that financial giving obligates God to
provide a predetermined monetary return.

Biblical Prosperity Is Broader Than Material Wealth

In Scripture, prosperity cannot be reduced to financial abundance. Biblical prosperity is fundamentally the condition of living faithfully under the blessing, wisdom, presence, and purposes of God. Joshua was promised success as he meditated upon and obeyed God’s law (Josh. 1:7–8). The blessed person of Psalm 1 prospers because he delights in God’s instruction and produces fruit in its proper season (Ps. 1:1–3). Such prosperity primarily concerns covenant faithfulness, spiritual fruitfulness, and the fulfillment of God’s calling rather than the accumulation of possessions.

The New Testament places its greatest emphasis upon spiritual riches: redemption, forgiveness, wisdom, grace, hope, righteousness, fellowship with God, and the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:1–5; Eph. 1:3–14; 3:16–19).

Believers may possess little in this world while remaining rich toward God and abundant in faith (Luke 12:21; Jas 2:5; Rev. 2:9).

God Provides for His People

We affirm that believers may confidently pray for daily provision. Jesus taught His disciples to ask the Father for their daily bread (Matt. 6:11). He assured them that the Father knows their needs and instructed them to seek first God’s kingdom and righteousness (Matt. 6:31–33). Paul likewise testified that God was able to supply the needs of the Philippian believers according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:19).

God may provide through employment, generosity, community, unusual circumstances, or miraculous intervention. Pentecostal faith rightly expects God to act. Nevertheless, divine provision must not be confused with a universal promise of luxury. Scripture distinguishes between necessities and excess, teaching believers to be content when their basic needs are supplied (1 Tim. 6:6–8).

Wealth Is Neither Proof of Faith Nor Evidence of Divine Approval

Material wealth is not a reliable measure of spiritual maturity, faithfulness, or God’s favor. Some righteous people in Scripture possessed considerable resources, including Abraham, Job, David, and Lydia. Others faithfully served God while experiencing poverty, hardship, persecution, or deprivation.

Jesus lived without earthly wealth and warned that He had nowhere to lay His head (Matt. 8:20). The apostles endured hunger, thirst, poor clothing, beatings, homelessness, and material need (1 Cor. 4:9–13; 2 Cor. 11:23–27). Paul sometimes experienced abundance and sometimes suffered need, yet he learned to be content in every circumstance (Phil. 4:11–13).

The heroes of faith included not only those who experienced remarkable deliverance but also those who suffered, were imprisoned, mistreated, and deprived of earthly security (Heb. 11:32–38).

Therefore, poverty must not automatically be attributed to unbelief, inadequate confession, insufficient giving, or hidden sin.

Likewise, wealth must not automatically be interpreted as evidence of righteousness.

Faith Is Trust in God, Not a Mechanism for Acquiring Wealth

Biblical faith rests in the character, promises, wisdom, and sovereignty of God. It is not a spiritual force that enables people to create wealth through positive words, mental visualization, or verbal decrees. Believers are instructed to ask God in faith, but they are also taught to submit their desires to His will (Matt. 6:10; 26:39; 1 John 5:14).

Words possess moral and relational power, and Christians should speak truth, blessing, faith, and hope (Prov. 18:21; Eph. 4:29). Scripture does not teach, however, that human words possess an inherent creative power comparable to God’s sovereign speech. God alone calls into existence that which does not exist (Rom. 4:17). Christian confession is an expression of trust in God, not a means of controlling Him.

Giving Is Worship, Not a Financial Transaction

The New Testament teaches generous, willing, and cheerful giving (2 Cor. 8:1–15; 9:6–11). God frequently blesses generosity by enabling believers to continue meeting needs and supporting good works. The principle of sowing and reaping is therefore biblical, but it must be interpreted in light of Paul’s teaching on generosity, righteousness, thanksgiving, and care for others.

Giving must never be presented as a commercial exchange through which a person purchases healing, protection, promotion, or financial increase. Spiritual leaders must not exploit vulnerable people by promising guaranteed monetary returns in exchange for donations. Peter condemned the attempt to purchase the gift of God with money (Acts 8:18– 23), and Paul warned against those who imagine that godliness is a means of financial gain (1 Tim. 6:3–5).

Christian giving should arise from love, gratitude, compassion, and devotion to God—not greed or manipulation.

Scripture Warns Against the Love of Money

The Bible does not teach that money itself is evil, but it repeatedly warns against greed, covetousness, and misplaced trust. Jesus declared that no one can serve both God and wealth (Matt. 6:24). He warned against every form of greed because life does not consist in the abundance of possessions (Luke 12:15). Paul identified the love of money as a root of many kinds of evil and warned that some, through their desire to be rich, had wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many sorrows (1 Tim. 6:9–10).

Those who possess wealth are commanded not to become proud or to place their hope in uncertain riches. They are to trust in God, do good, become rich in good works, and be generous and ready to share (1 Tim. 6:17–19).

Suffering Is Not Necessarily Evidence of Spiritual Failure

Jesus openly taught that His followers would experience tribulation, rejection, and persecution (John 15:18– 20; 16:33). The apostles taught that suffering may accompany faithful Christian discipleship and may produce endurance, maturity, hope, and deeper participation in Christ’s life (Rom. 5:3–5; 8:17–18; Phil. 3:10; Jas. 1:2–4; 1 Pet. 4:12–16).

We reject any teaching that routinely blames suffering believers for their lack of faith. Christians should pray boldly for healing, deliverance, provision, and restoration while continuing to trust God when answers are delayed, take a form different from what was requested, or are not answered at all – “Thank God for unanswered prayers.” Genuine faith remains anchored in God’s goodness even amid unresolved suffering.

Divine Healing Must Not Be Commercialized

We affirm that God heals and that the Church should pray expectantly for the sick (Matt. 10:7–8; Acts 4:29– 30; Jas. 5:14–16). Healing is an expression of God’s mercy and a manifestation of the Holy Spirit’s power. It is never a product to be purchased, a reward earned by giving money, or a benefit controlled by a minister.

Jesus commanded His disciples, “Freely you received; freely give” (Matt. 10:8). Any ministry that conditions prayer, prophecy, healing, or spiritual access upon financial contributions contradicts the character of the gospel.

Christian Ministry Must Be Free from Financial Exploitation

Spiritual leaders may receive appropriate material support from those they serve (Luke 10:7; 1 Cor. 9:7–14; 1 Tim. 5:17–18). Nevertheless, ministers must remain free from the love of money, dishonest gain, manipulation, and extravagant self-interest (1 Tim. 3:3, 8; Titus 1:7, 11; 1 Pet. 5:2).

Paul refused to manipulate people financially and reminded the Ephesian elders that he had not coveted anyone’s silver, gold, or clothing (Acts 20:33–35). He renounced disgraceful and deceptive methods in ministry (2 Cor. 4:2). Christian leaders must therefore handle money transparently, avoid coercive fundraising, and never use supposed revelations, prophecies, or promises of miracles to pressure people into giving.

The Gospel Centers on Christ, Not Personal Enrichment

The gospel proclaims the death, resurrection, lordship, and saving reign of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 15:1–4; Rom. 10:9–13). It calls sinners to repentance, to reconciliation with God, to the reception of the Holy Spirit, to participation in the body of Christ, to holy living, and to faithful witness.

Jesus did not call His disciples primarily to pursue comfort or wealth. He called them to deny themselves, take up their cross, and follow Him (Mark 8:34–36). The apostles did not preach financial enrichment as evidence of salvation. They proclaimed forgiveness, eternal life, the gift of the Holy Spirit, resurrection hope, and entrance into the kingdom of God (Acts 2:38–39; 3:19–21; 14:21–22; 20:20–27).

The supreme treasure offered in the gospel is God Himself.

We Affirm a Biblical Theology of Blessing

In rejecting the Prosperity Gospel, we do not reject God’s blessing, provision, healing, generosity, or supernatural intervention. We affirm that:

• God is a loving Father who cares for His children’s needs.
• Believers may pray confidently for provision, healing, employment, opportunity, and deliverance.
• God may entrust wealth to believers for stewardship, generosity, ministry, and the relief of suffering.
• Faithful obedience often produces wisdom, stability, fruitful relationships, and practical benefits.
• The Holy Spirit empowers believers to endure hardship and to serve faithfully in every circumstance.
• God’s ultimate promise is resurrection life and the restoration of all creation in Christ.

Biblical blessing must always remain centered upon God’s kingdom, governed by His will, and directed toward love of God and neighbor.

Conclusion

The Association of Biblical Pentecostals rejects the Prosperity Gospel because it distorts biblical faith, narrows divine blessing to material gain, commercializes spiritual ministry, and may burden suffering believers with false guilt. It replaces the cruciform pattern of Christian discipleship with an expectation of continual success and often treats giving as a means of personal enrichment.

We proclaim instead that Jesus Christ is our greatest treasure, the Holy Spirit is God’s incomparable gift, and eternal life in the kingdom of God is our enduring hope. Whether believers experience abundance or need, health or sickness, deliverance or suffering, they are called to trust God, practice generosity, pursue holiness, care for the poor, and remain faithful to Christ.

Our confidence is not that every believer will become wealthy, but that nothing can separate those who belong to Christ from the love of God and that their labor in the Lord will never be in vain (Rom. 8:35–39; 1 Cor. 15:58).

____________

3. Alcoholic Beverages

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

We believe that alcoholic beverages are not inherently sinful merely because they contain alcohol. Scripture recognizes wine as an ordinary part of ancient life, sometimes describing it as a gift to be received with thanksgiving, while consistently warning against its misuse.

The biblical distinction is not primarily between drinking and abstaining, but between sobriety and drunkenness, liberty and enslavement, wisdom and recklessness, self-control and excess.

Therefore:

• We do not teach that every use of an alcoholic beverage is sinful.
• We unequivocally condemn drunkenness.
• We affirm voluntary abstinence as honorable, prudent, and, for some people, necessary.
• We reject the condemnation of responsible believers merely because they do not practice total abstinence.
• We reject any use of Christian liberty that harms others, produces addiction, weakens one’s witness, violates the law, or places another person in spiritual or physical danger.

This position does not encourage drinking. It is a commitment to speak where Scripture speaks and to refrain from creating universal commandments that Scripture itself does not establish.

Alcoholic Wine in Scripture

The biblical words translated “wine” ordinarily refer to the recognized product of the vine, which could produce intoxication. The Bible does not need to condemn drunkenness from wine while simultaneously pretending that every positive reference to wine concerns an entirely different, nonintoxicating substance.

Scripture sometimes presents wine positively:

• Melchizedek brought bread and wine when he blessed Abraham (Genesis 14:18).
• Wine was included among the provisions of God’s covenantal blessing (Deuteronomy 7:13; 11:14).
• Israelites celebrating before the Lord could purchase “wine or strong drink” for the covenant meal (Deuteronomy 14:22–26).
• The psalmist praises God for giving plants for human cultivation, food from the earth, and “wine that gladdens the heart of man” (Psalm 104:14–15).
• Wisdom prepares her table and invites others to drink the wine she has mixed (Proverbs 9:1–6).
• Ecclesiastes associates eating bread and drinking wine with gratefully receiving the ordinary gifts of God (Ecclesiastes 9:7).
• Jesus transformed water into wine at the wedding in Cana (John 2:1–11).
• Jesus was accused of coming “eating and drinking,” in contrast to John the Baptist’s ascetic manner of life (Matthew 11:18–19; Luke 7:33–34).
• Paul advised Timothy to “use a little wine” because of his stomach and frequent illnesses (1 Timothy 5:23).

These passages do not command Christians to consume alcohol. They do, however, prevent the Church from declaring that every consumption of alcohol is intrinsically immoral.

The Lord’s Supper

Jesus took the cup and identified its contents as “the fruit of the vine” when instituting the Lord’s Supper (Matthew 26:27–29; Mark 14:23–25; Luke 22:17–20). This terminology was the ordinary biblical and Jewish manner of referring to wine.

Paul’s correction of the Corinthians further demonstrates that the wine associated with their communal meal was capable of intoxication: “One goes hungry, another gets drunk” (1 Corinthians 11:21). Paul condemned their selfishness, division, humiliation of the poor, and drunken abuse of the gathering. He did not teach that the presence of wine itself made the Supper sinful.

The sin in Corinth was not that the believers possessed wine, but that they consumed the meal selfishly and excessively, despised the Church of God, shamed those who had nothing, and failed to discern the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:20–34).

Scripture’s Condemnation of Drunkenness

Although Scripture does not universally prohibit drinking, its condemnation of drunkenness is unmistakable.

Wine becomes destructive when it deceives, dominates, impairs judgment, produces violence, encourages sexual immorality, wastes resources, or enslaves the drinker:

• “Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler” (Proverbs 20:1).
• Proverbs describes the sorrow, conflict, wounds, distorted perception, and compulsive desire produced by lingering over wine (Proverbs 23:29–35).
• Isaiah pronounces judgment upon those who pursue intoxicating drink from morning until night (Isaiah 5:11–12, 22).
• Jesus warns against hearts being weighed down by dissipation and drunkenness (Luke 21:34).
• Christians must walk properly, “not in orgies and drunkenness” (Romans 13:13).
• Drunkards who remain unrepentant will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9–10).
• Drunkenness is listed among the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19–21).
• Believers are commanded, “Do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18).
• Peter contrasts Christian living with the former life of sensuality, passions, drunkenness, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry (1 Peter 4:3–4).

The contrast in Ephesians 5:18 is especially important for Biblical Pentecostals. The Spirit-filled life is not characterized by impaired judgment, uncontrolled appetite, or fleshly excess. It is characterized by worship, thanksgiving, mutual submission, holiness, and Spirit-produced self-control (Ephesians 5:18–21; Galatians 5:22–23).

Addiction and Enslavement

Paul writes, “‘All things are lawful for me,’ but I will not be dominated by anything” (1 Corinthians 6:12). Even something that is not inherently sinful becomes spiritually destructive when it masters the believer.

Alcohol addiction is, therefore, incompatible with Christian freedom. A person who cannot consume alcohol without losing control should abstain entirely. A believer who has experienced alcoholism should not be pressured to demonstrate “liberty” by drinking again. In such circumstances, abstinence is not weakness but wisdom.

Churches should respond to addiction with truth, accountability, compassion, practical assistance, prayer, and appropriate professional care. Addiction should neither be excused nor treated merely as an opportunity for shame. The purpose of correction is restoration, freedom, healing, and faithful discipleship.

Christian Liberty and the Conscience of Others

Christian liberty is never permission to act selfishly. Paul teaches that believers must consider how their conduct affects others:

“It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble” (Romans 14:21).

Romans 14 does not establish a universal prohibition against wine. Rather, it teaches that love may voluntarily limit a legitimate liberty for the spiritual well-being of another person.

The Christian must therefore ask not only, “May I do this?” but also:

• Will this master me?
• Will it impair my judgment or self-control?
• Will it endanger another person?
• Will it tempt someone struggling with addiction?
• Will it damage my family or ministry?
• Will it violate the law?
• Will it bring reproach upon Christ?
• Can I do it with thanksgiving and a clear conscience before God?
• Am I acting from love rather than self-indulgence?

Paul declares that not everything lawful is helpful or edifying (1 Corinthians 10:23). Whether eating, drinking, or doing anything else, believers must do everything for the glory of God and seek the good of others rather than merely asserting their personal rights (1 Corinthians 10:24, 31–33).

Voluntary Abstinence

Total abstinence can be a wise and honorable Christian practice. Some believers abstain because of personal history, family experience, health concerns, ministry responsibilities, cultural circumstances, concern for weaker believers, or a desire to avoid all possibility of enslavement.

Such abstinence should be respected. No Christian should be mocked, pressured, or treated as spiritually immature for refusing an alcoholic drink. A church should always provide nonalcoholic alternatives and should never create social environments in which drinking becomes an expectation.

Nevertheless, voluntary abstinence must not be transformed into a universal law by which the salvation, holiness, spirituality, or ministerial faithfulness of every other believer is judged. Paul warns against submitting to man-made religious regulations that appear wise but are not genuine victory over the flesh (Colossians 2:16, 20–23).

Holiness is not established by adding commandments to Scripture. Holiness is life set apart to God through obedience to His Word and the transforming work of the Holy Spirit.

Qualifications for Christian Leadership

Scripture requires especially appropriate conduct from church leaders. An overseer must not be a drunkard or one controlled by wine, and deacons must not be addicted to much wine (1 Timothy 3:2–3, 8; Titus 1:7). Older women likewise must not be enslaved to much wine (Titus 2:3).

These qualifications do not require interpreting every use of wine as sinful. They require sobriety, dignity, wisdom, self-control, freedom from addiction, and conduct that is above reproach.

Because leaders influence others, they may choose stricter personal limitations than Scripture universally commands. Such limitations may be prudent, but they should be identified as personal or ministerial commitments rather than presented as divine laws binding every Christian.

Historical Christian Practice

The historic Christian Church generally distinguished between the use of wine and its abuse. Early Christians used wine in the Lord’s Supper while condemning intoxication and teaching moderation. Justin Martyr described Christians bringing bread and a cup of wine mixed with water for the Eucharist. Cyprian argued that wine, rather than water alone, belonged in the Lord’s cup. Clement of Alexandria explicitly acknowledged the Christian use of wine while repeatedly warning against intemperance and drunkenness.

It would be historically imprecise to claim that every Church or Christian before 1869 approved of drinking without qualification. Ascetic Christians sometimes abstained, Methodists opposed distilled spirits before 1869, and nineteenth-century temperance movements were already advocating total abstinence.

Nevertheless, the dominant historical Christian practice did not regard wine itself as inherently sinful. The widespread use of fermented wine in the Lord’s Supper across centuries demonstrates that the traditional concern was ordinarily drunkenness, intemperance, and abuse rather than the mere presence of alcohol.

The importance of 1869 is that Thomas Bramwell Welch developed a practical pasteurization process that kept grape juice from fermenting, making an unfermented communion substitute widely possible. This occurred within the nineteenth-century Methodist temperance movement. Even during that controversy, most churches initially continued using wine, while some temperance advocates sought alternatives. Thus, 1869 did not mark the first Christian concern about alcohol; it marked a major technological and cultural development that helped normalize unfermented grape juice in portions of American Protestantism.

Errors We Reject

The Association of Biblical Pentecostals rejects the following teachings and practices:

1. We reject drunkenness, drinking parties, intoxication, impaired driving, alcohol-fueled violence, neglect of family responsibilities, and every form of alcohol abuse.
2. We reject addiction and enslavement, recognizing that any substance must not master the believer.
3. We reject reckless appeals to Christian liberty that disregard weaker believers, recovering alcoholics, children, families, public safety, or the reputation of Christ.
4. We reject the claim that Scripture universally commands every Christian to consume alcohol. Drinking is permitted in Scripture, not required.
5. We reject the claim that every Christian who drinks responsibly is living in sin. Such a judgment goes beyond the written Word.
6. We reject the claim that total abstinence makes a person inherently more righteous or Spirit-filled. Abstinence may be wise and honorable, but righteousness comes through Christ, and holiness is produced through obedience to God and the work of the Holy Spirit.
7. We reject efforts to reinterpret every biblical reference to wine as unfermented grape juice merely to protect a later doctrinal tradition. Scripture must be allowed to speak according to its own language and historical setting.
8. We reject pressuring any believer to drink. Love must protect those whose conscience, history, health, or recovery requires abstinence.

Pastoral Commitment

We call every believer to sobriety, wisdom, self-control, love, and submission to the Holy Spirit. Where alcohol has become destructive, the Church must speak clearly and intervene compassionately. Where believers voluntarily abstain, the Church must honor their decision. Where believers partake responsibly, they must do so without drunkenness, addiction, pride, pressure, or disregard for others.

The question is not merely whether a beverage may be consumed, but whether Christ is being honored, the believer remains self-controlled, others are being loved, and God is being glorified.

Conclusion

We believe that Scripture does not condemn the drinking of alcohol as inherently sinful. Scripture does condemn drunkenness, addiction, reckless behavior, loss of self-control, and conduct that harms others or dishonors Christ.

Accordingly, the Association of Biblical Pentecostals affirms Christian liberty under the authority of Scripture, voluntary abstinence according to wisdom and conscience, compassionate ministry to those harmed by addiction, and the Spirit-filled self-control required of every follower of Jesus Christ.

We will neither call evil what God has not called evil nor use Christian liberty as an opportunity for the flesh. We will pursue holiness without legalism, liberty without selfishness, and sobriety under the gracious rule of Jesus Christ.

____________

4. Binding Satan and Demons

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

We believe that Scripture contains no command or example of the apostles or early believers attempting verbally to “bind” Satan or demons. This practice misapplies biblical passages concerning binding and loosing, Christ’s victory over Satan, and the restraint of spiritual powers. Although Scripture clearly teaches the reality of Satan, demons, spiritual warfare, and deliverance, it does not teach believers to address Satan with formulas such as “I bind you,” “We bind the spirit of fear,” or “Satan, we bind your power.” Biblical spiritual warfare is practiced through submission to God, resistance to temptation, faith, prayer, truth, righteousness, the proclamation of the gospel, and—when confronting an evil spirit directly—commanding it to depart in the name of Jesus Christ.

The Biblical Meaning of Binding and Loosing

Jesus’ statements concerning “binding” and “loosing” are frequently removed from their contexts and treated as instructions for restraining demonic spirits:

“Whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19; cf. 18:18).

In Matthew 16:19, binding and loosing are connected with the “keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In Matthew 18:15–20, the same language appears within Jesus’ instruction concerning confronting sin, establishing testimony, and making congregational judgments. Neither passage mentions Satan, demons, territorial spirits, curses, sicknesses, or unfavorable circumstances.

The language of binding and loosing concerns the exercise of kingdom authority in accordance with heaven’s judgment. It describes declaring or applying what heaven has already determined, not believers independently creating spiritual realities through verbal declarations. These passages, therefore, provide no biblical foundation for saying, “I bind Satan,” or for attempting to bind particular demons through spoken formulas.

Jesus’ Binding of the Strong Man

Another passage commonly used to support this practice is Jesus’ illustration of binding the strong man:

“How can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?” (Matthew 12:29; cf. Mark 3:27).

Jesus was not instructing His disciples to repeat the words, “I bind the strong man.” He was explaining the significance of His own ministry. His authority over demons demonstrated that He had invaded Satan’s domain and was plundering his house by liberating those held under demonic oppression. The binding of the strong man is an illustration of Christ’s superior power, not a verbal formula prescribed to believers.

Jesus cast out demons by commanding them to leave. He did not repeatedly announce that He was “binding” them:

“Be silent, and come out of him!” (Mark 1:25).

“You mute and deaf spirit, I command you, come out of him and never enter him again” (Mark 9:25).

Christ’s authority was demonstrated through direct command and actual deliverance, not through the use of specialized binding language.

The Apostolic Pattern

The book of Acts contains numerous confrontations with Satanic activity, persecution, sorcery, deception, and demonic spirits. Yet the apostles are never described as verbally binding Satan.

When Paul confronted a spirit of divination, he did not say, “I bind you.” Rather, he commanded:

“I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her” (Acts 16:18).

When the apostles encountered persecution, they did not conduct ceremonies to bind territorial spirits over Jerusalem. They prayed for boldness to continue proclaiming God’s Word:

“Grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness” (Acts 4:29).

When Satan hindered Paul, he acknowledged the opposition but did not claim to bind Satan:

“We wanted to come to you—I, Paul, again and again—but Satan hindered us” (1 Thessalonians 2:18).

When Paul instructed churches concerning spiritual warfare, he never commanded them to bind Satan or demons. Instead, he taught believers to stand in God’s strength by putting on the armor of God:

“Be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might” (Ephesians 6:10).

The armor consists of truth, righteousness, readiness produced by the gospel of peace, faith, salvation, the Word of God, and persevering prayer (Ephesians 6:14–18). These are the biblical weapons through which believers stand against the devil’s schemes.

Scripture Commands Resistance, Not Verbal Binding

The New Testament repeatedly tells believers how to respond to the devil:

“Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you” (James 4:7).

“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion. . . . Resist him, firm in your faith” (1 Peter 5:8–9).

Resistance begins with submission to God. It involves steadfast faith, obedience, vigilance, prayer, and refusal to yield to temptation or deception. Neither James nor Peter defines resisting the devil as verbally declaring Satan to be bound.

Jesus likewise taught His disciples to pray:

“Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil” (Matthew 6:13).

The biblical response to spiritual opposition is dependence upon God—not confidence in a spoken formula.

Satan Is Not Presently Bound in Every Sense

The claim that believers can bind Satan at will also conflicts with passages describing his continuing activity. Satan is portrayed as:

• Tempting believers (1 Corinthians 7:5; 1 Thessalonians 3:5).
• Scheming against the Church (2 Corinthians 2:11; Ephesians 6:11).
• Disguising himself as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11:14).
• Hindering ministry (1 Thessalonians 2:18).
• Prowling as a roaring lion (1 Peter 5:8).
• Accusing believers (Revelation 12:10).

If an individual believer could completely bind Satan by making a verbal declaration, the repeated New Testament commands to remain watchful, resist him, and stand against his schemes would become difficult to explain.

Scripture does teach that Satan will be bound for a divinely appointed period. However, revelation does not portray believers accomplishing this through prayer declarations:

“Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven . . . and he seized the dragon . . . and bound him for a thousand years” (Revelation 20:1–2).

This binding is performed by an angel acting under God’s authority at God’s appointed time. It is not accomplished by Christians repeating the phrase, “Satan, I bind you.”

The Authority of the Name of Jesus

Believers possess genuine spiritual authority, but that authority is derived from Christ and must be exercised according to Scripture. Jesus gave His disciples authority over unclean spirits and instructed them to cast demons out (Matthew 10:1, 8; Luke 9:1; 10:17–20). The apostles ministered in the name of Jesus Christ because His authority—not the wording of their formulas—brought deliverance.

The name of Jesus must never be treated as a magical expression. The sons of Sceva attempted to use Jesus’ name without truly belonging to Him or possessing His commissioned authority, and they were violently overpowered (Acts 19:13–16). Their failure demonstrates that spiritual authority is not located in merely repeating religious words.

Deliverance ministry should therefore remain Christ-centered, prayerful, sober, orderly, and governed by Scripture. Where an evil spirit is genuinely present, the biblical pattern is a direct command to depart in the name of Jesus Christ—not a speculative attempt to identify, bind, transfer, or negotiate with demons.

Christ’s Victory and the Believer’s Confidence

Rejecting the practice of verbally binding Satan does not diminish Christ’s victory. Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:8). Through His death and resurrection, He disarmed the rulers and authorities. He triumphed over them (Colossians 2:15). By His death, He broke the power of the one who held the power of death, that is, the devil (Hebrews 2:14–15).

Believers overcome Satan through Christ’s accomplished victory:

“They have conquered him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony” (Revelation 12:11).

Our confidence rests in Christ’s authority, His atoning death, His resurrection, His present reign, and His promised final victory—not in our ability to restrain spiritual beings through declarations.

Pastoral and Congregational Practice

The Association of Biblical Pentecostals, therefore,e teaches that believers should:

1. Submit themselves fully to God and resist the devil through steadfast faith and obedience.
2. Pray for deliverance from temptation, deception, oppression, and evil.
3. Put on the whole armor of God through truth, righteousness, faith, the gospel, salvation, Scripture, and prayer.
4. Test spiritual claims rather than accepting every alleged revelation or manifestation uncritically (1 John 4:1).
5. Proclaim the gospel, through which people are turned “from the power of Satan to God” (Acts 26:18).
6. Command genuine demonic spirits to depart in the name and authority of Jesus Christ when such confrontation is necessary.
7. Avoid speculative teachings concerning territorial spirits, demon hierarchies, inherited spirits, or binding rituals not taught in Scripture.
8. Refuse to replace pastoral care, repentance, discipleship, medical evaluation, or personal responsibility with unsupported claims that every struggle is caused by a demon that must be verbally bound.

Conclusion

We therefore reject the teaching that Christians are commanded to bind Satan or demons by verbally declaring them bound. The passages commonly used to support this practice do not contain such an instruction, and no apostle or early believer is shown doing it. Binding and loosing concern the administration of kingdom judgments under heaven’s authority; binding the strong man describes Christ’s victorious invasion of Satan’s domain; and Satan’s ultimate binding occurs by divine action at God’s appointed time.

We affirm the reality of spiritual warfare, the present activity of Satan, the authority of Jesus Christ, the power of prayer, and the biblical ministry of deliverance. Believers overcome spiritual opposition not through invented formulas, but by submitting to God, resisting the devil, standing in faith, walking in truth and righteousness, proclaiming the gospel, praying in the Spirit, and exercising Christ’s authority according to the pattern established in Scripture.

____________

5. The Lord’s Supper: Biblical Practice, Weekly Observance, and Authentic Elements

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

We believe that the Lord’s Supper is to be practiced biblically, weekly, and with authentic elements. Jesus Christ instituted the Supper using bread and the fruit of the vine and commanded His disciples to continue eating and drinking in remembrance of Him. The Church, therefore, should preserve both the practice and the elements established by the Lord rather than altering them in accordance with cultural preferences, convenience, denominational tradition, or later philosophical interpretation.

The Lord’s Supper is a sacred meal of remembrance, communion, proclamation, self-examination, thanksgiving, unity, and hope. In eating the bread and drinking the cup, the gathered Church remembers Christ’s body given for His people, confesses His blood shed for the establishment of the new covenant, participates together in the communion appointed by Christ, proclaims His death, and anticipates His return and coming kingdom.

Instituted by the Lord Jesus

On the night in which He was betrayed, Jesus took the bread, gave thanks, broke it, and gave it to His disciples, saying:

“This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19).

He likewise took the cup and declared:

“This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you” (Luke 22:20).

Matthew records:

“Take, eat; this is my body” (Matt. 26:26).

Concerning the cup, Jesus said:

“Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:27–28).

The Synoptic Gospels consistently preserve the actions and elements of the meal: Jesus took bread, blessed or gave thanks, broke it, and distributed it; He then took the cup, gave thanks, and gave it to His disciples to drink (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:14–20).

The Lord’s Supper is therefore not a ceremony created by the Church. It was instituted by Jesus Christ and entrusted to His disciples with the command:

“This do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25).

The Words of Institution

We believe the words of Jesus concerning the bread and cup should be received, confessed, and repeated as He gave them:

“This is my body.” (Matt. 26:26).

“This is my blood of the new testament.” (Matt. 26:28).

“This cup is the new testament in my blood.” (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25).

These words are inspired by biblical language and are sufficient for the Church’s faith and practice. Scripture does not require believers to define precisely how the bread is Christ’s body or how the cup is communion in His blood. The Church should therefore resist both explanations that diminish Christ’s words and philosophical systems that attempt to explain them beyond what Scripture reveals.

We reject the reduction of the bread and cup to merely subjective symbols whose only significance is the private memory of the participant. Jesus did not say merely, “This symbolizes my body” or “This symbolizes my blood.” Paul likewise describes the Supper as genuine communion:

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16).

The bread must not be treated as though it were unrelated to Christ’s body, nor the cup as though it were unrelated to His blood. In the Lord’s Supper, believers genuinely participate in the communion Christ appointed, while Scripture leaves the precise nature and manner of that communion expressed in its own inspired language.

We also reject transubstantiation, which attempts to define Christ’s words through the philosophical claim that the substance of the bread and wine changes into the substance of Christ’s physical body and blood while only their outward appearances remain. Neither Jesus nor Paul explains the Supper in such terms. Scripture continues to call the elements “bread” and “the cup” after recounting the words of institution (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:26–28).

We therefore neither explain Christ’s words away as bare symbolism nor expand them into a metaphysical theory that Scripture does not teach. We receive them as written and allow biblical language to remain biblical language without demanding an explanation beyond what God has revealed.

The Bread

The bread used by Jesus was the bread of the Passover meal. The Synoptic Gospels place the institution of the Lord’s Supper within the observance of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Matt. 26:17–19; Mark 14:12–16; Luke 22:7–15).

During Passover, leaven was to be removed, and unleavened bread was to be eaten:

“Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread” (Exod. 12:15).

Therefore, the bread Jesus took, blessed, broke, and gave to His disciples was unleavened bread (Exod. 12:15–20; 13:6–7; Deut. 16:3).

Jesus said concerning this bread:

“Take, eat: this is my body” (Matt. 26:26).

Paul likewise recounts:

“The Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:23–24).

The Church should therefore speak of the bread as Christ spoke of it: “This is my body.” It should not reduce this declaration to language that Scripture itself does not employ, nor should it attempt to explain philosophically what Scripture leaves undefined.

The breaking and sharing of the bread also expresses the unity of believers as the body of Christ:

“For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread” (1 Cor. 10:17).

The bread used in the Supper should therefore be actual bread corresponding to the Passover bread used by Jesus. Unleavened bread most faithfully preserves the biblical setting and authentic form of the meal. Substitutes that no longer constitute bread should not become the ordinary practice of the Church.

The Fruit of the Vine

Jesus identified what He and His disciples drank as “the fruit of the vine”:

“I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom” (Matt. 26:29; see also Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18).

Within the setting of the Passover meal, “the fruit of the vine” refers to wine produced from grapes. It is a biblical reference to the wine in the cup, shared during the meal.

Scripture regularly uses wine as the ordinary product of the vine and distinguishes its proper use from its abuse. Wine may gladden the heart when received rightly, while its excessive use produces intoxication and is condemned (Ps. 104:15; Prov. 20:1; Eph. 5:18).

Paul’s correction of the Corinthian Church demonstrates that the drink used in their observance of the Lord’s Supper was capable of producing drunkenness:

“For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken” (1 Cor. 11:21).

Paul condemned their selfishness, excess, division, and humiliation of the poor. He did not replace the element instituted by Christ. His correction was that believers should wait for one another, examine themselves, recognize the body, and partake reverently and soberly (1 Cor. 11:27–34).

The Church should therefore employ genuine grape wine in the ordinary observance of the Lord’s Supper. The abuse of wine does not invalidate its proper use. Scripture condemns drunkenness rather than the reverent, disciplined, and moderate use of wine in the meal Christ instituted.

Pastoral accommodation may be appropriate for individuals who cannot consume wine because of medical concerns, recovery from addiction, or other serious circumstances. Such accommodations should be treated compassionately as individual exceptions rather than used to redefine the authentic biblical element for the entire ChuChurch. The Meaning of the Cup

V. The Meaning of the Cup

In the institution narratives, “the cup” refers first to the wine contained in the vessel and received by the disciples. Scripture speaks of drinking “the cup” because the container represents its contents. The expression does not require that every participant drink from one physical vessel; it identifies the shared wine and the common participation signified by receiving it.

Jesus declared:

“Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:27–28).

Paul likewise writes:

“This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me” (1 Cor. 11:25).

The cup, therefore, includes several inseparable biblical meanings. It refers to the wine being received, is identified with the blood of Christ, proclaims the establishment of the new covenant, and expresses the believers’ common participation in the saving benefits of Christ’s death.

Paul calls it:

“The cup of blessing which we bless” (1 Cor. 10:16).

He then asks:

“Is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16).

To drink the cup is therefore to participate together in the covenantal communion appointed by Christ. It confesses that the new covenant was established through His blood and that forgiveness, reconciliation, and life are found in Him (Jer. 31:31–34; Luke 22:20; Heb. 9:15; 10:19–22).

In Scripture, a cup may also signify a divinely appointed portion or experience. Jesus spoke of the cup of suffering that He was about to drink (Matt. 20:22; 26:39, 42; John 18:11). Christ received the cup of suffering and death; through His self-giving, His people now receive the cup of blessing, covenant fellowship, communion, and salvation.

The cup should therefore not be reduced merely to a physical container. It is the biblical designation for the wine being received and for the covenantal communion in Christ’s blood expressed through drinking it.

Practiced According to Apostolic Teaching

Paul declared that the instruction he delivered to the Corinthian Church had been received from the Lord:

“For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you” (1 Cor. 11:23).

Paul did not treat the Supper as a secondary ceremony that could be reshaped without consequence. The Corinthians continued eating and drinking, but their divisions, selfishness, disregard for the poor, and disorder contradicted the character of the meal.

Paul, therefore, told them:

“When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper” (1 Cor. 11:20).

Their actions had so corrupted the practice that their meal no longer faithfully constituted the Lord’s Supper. Biblical observance, therefore, requires more than the mere presence of bread and wine. It requires a gathered body that honors Christ, recognizes fellow believers, waits for one another, practices self-examination, and participates with love, equality, reverence, thanksgiving, and sobriety (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:17–34).

It is to be served Weekly in the Gathered Church

The earliest believers devoted themselves continually to:

“The apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Acts 2:42).

The breaking of bread was not presented as an occasional addition to Christian worship but as one of the defining practices of the Church. Church later records:

Acts later records:

“And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them” (Acts 20:7).

The disciples gathered on the first day of the week with the breaking of bread, which was identified as a purpose of their assembly. The ordinary apostolic pattern, therefore, supports observing the Lord’s Supper weekly when the Church celebrates on the first day of the week.

The expression “as often as” does not establish an infrequent observance. It explains what the Church aims for whenever it eats the bread and drinks the cup:

“For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor. 11:26).

Weekly observance keeps the death, resurrection, communion, and promised return of Jesus Christ at the center of the Church’s red worship.

Remembrance, Communion, Proclamation, Examination, and Hope

The Lord’s Supper directs the Church inseparably.

It is remembrance, because Jesus commanded:

“This do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25).

It is communion, because the bread and cup are described as participation in the body and blood of Christ and express the unity of His people (1 Cor. 10:16–17).

It is a proclamation, because eating the bread and drinking the cup visibly announces the Lord’s saving death:

“Ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor. 11:26).

It requires self-examination, because believers must not participate carelessly, selfishly, divisively, or without discerning the body of Christ (1 Cor. 11:27–32).

It expresses hope, because the Church commemorates the Lord’s death until He returns and anticipates the day when Christ will drink the fruit of the vine anew with His people in the kingdom of God (Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:16–18; 1 Cor. 11:26).

Our Affirmation

The Association of Biblical Pentecostals, therefore, affirms:

1. The Lord’s Supper was instituted by Jesus Christ and entrusted to His Church.
2. The Supper should be practiced according to Scripture rather than governed primarily by denominational tradition, cultural preference, convenience, or philosophical speculation.
3. The ordinary apostolic pattern supports weekly observance when the Church meets on the first day of the week.
4. The words “This is my body,” “This is my blood,” and “This cup is the new testament in my blood” should be received and confessed as written.
5. The words of institution should neither be diminished through a merely symbolic interpretation nor expanded into the philosophical doctrine of transubstantiation.
6. Scripture does not require the Church to explain precisely how the bread is Christ’s body or how the cup is communion in His blood.
7. The biblical language of the Lord’s Supper is sufficient and should not be replaced by explanations that go beyond what Scripture reveals.
8. The bread used by Jesus was the unleavened bread of the Passover meal and should ordinarily be preserved as the authentic bread of the Supper.
9. The fruit of the vine is genuine grape wine corresponding to the element received by Jesus and His disciples.
10. The cup refers to the wine being received and expresses Christ’s blood, the new covenant, and the believers’ common participation in the communion established through His death.
11. The Lord’s Supper is a remembrance of Christ, communion in His body and blood, proclamation of His death, and an expression of the unity of His gathered people.
12. Participation should be accompanied by thanksgiving, reverence, self-examination, reconciliation, mutual care, sobriety, and recognition of the body of Christ.
13. The Lord’s Supper directs the Church to the promised return of Jesus Christ and the fulfillment of the kingdom of God.

Conclusion

The Lord’s Supper should occupy a regular and honored place in the worship of the Church. When believers gather on the first day of the week, they should devote themselves to the apostles’ teaching, fellowship, prayer, and the breaking of bread.

In eating the unleavened bread and drinking the fruit of the vine, the Church receives the elements instituted by Jesus and confesses His words as written: “This is my body,” “This is my blood,” and “This cup is the new testament in my blood.”

The Church would neither reduce these words to bare symbolism nor attempt to explain them through philosophical categories that Scripture does not provide. It should receive them with faith, reverence, and confidence in the sufficiency of biblical revelation.

Accordingly, we call the churches of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals to recover the simple, reverent, weekly, and authentic apostolic pattern: to gather faithfully, to break the bread, to share the fruit of the vine, to receive the words of Christ as written, to discern the body, and to proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes.

____________

6. Healing through the Atonement

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

The Redemptive Foundation of Healing

Human sickness, suffering, bodily decay, and death exist within a creation subjected to corruption because of sin. Although Scripture does not teach that every individual sickness results from a specific personal sin, it presents disease and death as belonging to the fallen condition from which Christ came to redeem humanity and creation (Genesis 3:17–19; John 9:1–3; Romans 5:12; 8:20–23).

Through His death and resurrection, Jesus defeated sin, Satan, death, and the powers that hold humanity in bondage (Colossians 2:14–15; Hebrews 2:14–15; 1 John 3:8). His redemptive work, therefore, provides the ultimate foundation for every aspect of salvation, including forgiveness, reconciliation, deliverance, resurrection, and the complete restoration of the human body.

All genuine healing is consequently grounded in the mercy and redemptive victory of God through Christ. Yet Scripture does not teach that every believer is guaranteed complete physical healing before the resurrection. The Atonement guarantees the final redemption of the body, but the full experience of that redemption remains future.

The Meaning of Isaiah 53

Isaiah declares concerning the suffering Servant:

“Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. . . . He was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities . . . and with his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:4–5).

This passage presents the Servant as bearing the total burden of humanity’s fallen condition. His suffering addresses sin, guilt, sorrow, affliction, alienation, and death. The healing described by Isaiah is therefore comprehensive, but its complete realization cannot be confined to the present life.

Matthew applies Isaiah 53:4 to the healing ministry of Jesus before the crucifixion: “He took our illnesses and bore our diseases” (Matthew 8:16–17). Christ’s healings demonstrated that the promised kingdom had entered history and that He was the Servant who would ultimately remove every consequence of the fall.

These healings anticipated the final restoration secured through His death and resurrection.

Peter later applies Isaiah’s words primarily to deliverance from sin:

“He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed” (1 Peter 2:24).

Peter’s immediate emphasis is spiritual and moral restoration: believers are healed from their sinful wandering and returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of their souls (1 Peter 2:25). This does not exclude physical healing from Christ’s redemptive victory. Still, it prevents the phrase “by his wounds you have been healed” from being reduced to an unconditional guarantee of present bodily health.

The Present and Future Dimensions of Healing

The New Testament presents salvation as both presently experienced and awaiting future completion. Believers presently possess forgiveness, reconciliation, eternal life, the Holy Spirit, and membership in God’s kingdom. Nevertheless, they continue to live in mortal bodies that experience weakness, sickness, aging, and death.

Paul teaches that believers who possess “the firstfruits of the Spirit” still “groan inwardly” while awaiting “the redemption of our bodies” (Romans 8:23). The presence of the Spirit does not mean that bodily redemption has already been completed. Rather, the Spirit is the guarantee that believers will ultimately receive their promised inheritance (Ephesians 1:13–14).

Complete physical healing will occur when Christ raises and transforms the bodies of His people:

“What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable” (1 Corinthians 15:42).

At the resurrection, the mortal body will put on immortality, death will be swallowed up in victory, and believers will be fully conformed to the glorified body of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:50–54; Philippians 3:20–21). In the new creation, God “will wipe away every tear,” and “death shall be no more,” neither shall there be mourning, crying, or pain (Revelation 21:4).

This is the complete healing promised through Christ’s redemptive work.

Divine Healing in the Present Age

Although complete healing awaits the resurrection, Scripture clearly teaches that God heals people in the present age. Jesus healed the sick as an expression of divine compassion and as a sign that the kingdom of God had drawn near (Matthew 4:23–24; 9:35–36; 12:28). He commissioned His disciples to heal the sick and proclaim the kingdom (Luke 9:1–2; 10:9).

After Christ’s ascension, the Holy Spirit continued to perform healings through the Church (Acts 3:1–10; 5:12–16; 8:6–7; 9:32–42; 14:8–10; 19:11–12). Paul identified “gifts of healings” among the manifestations distributed by the Holy Spirit according to His will (1 Corinthians 12:9, 11, 28).

The Church should therefore continue to pray for the sick, lay hands upon them, anoint them with oil, and expect God to act in mercy and power (Mark 16:18; James 5:14–16). We reject any theology that dismisses divine healing as merely an ancient phenomenon or denies that the Holy Spirit continues to distribute gifts of healing.

Present healings are genuine works of God, but they are signs and foretastes of the resurrection rather than the full removal of mortality—those whom Jesus and the apostles healed eventually experienced bodily death. Present healing temporarily overcomes sickness; resurrection permanently abolishes corruption and death.

Healing and the Sovereignty of God

Scripture does not teach that God heals every sick believer immediately or in every circumstance. The Holy Spirit distributes gifts “as he wills” (1 Corinthians 12:11). Paul asked, “Do all possess gifts of healing?” with the expected answer being no (1 Corinthians 12:30).

The New Testament openly acknowledges sickness among faithful believers. Epaphroditus became so sick that he nearly died, although God mercifully restored him (Philippians 2:25–27). Paul advised Timothy concerning his recurring stomach ailments (1 Timothy 5:23), and he reported that he had left Trophimus sick at Miletus (2 Timothy 4:20). These passages do not portray sickness as proof of unbelief, spiritual inferiority, hidden sin, or failure to claim an atonement benefit.

Prayer for healing should therefore be offered with sincere faith in God’s power and compassion, while remaining submitted to His wisdom and will. Biblical faith is confidence in God, not confidence in a particular outcome that God has not unconditionally promised. Like Christ, believers may pray boldly while saying, “Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done” (Luke 22:42; see also 1 John 5:14).

Faith, Suffering, and Pastoral Responsibility

We reject teachings that place the burden of an unreceived healing upon the sick person by automatically accusing that individual of deficient faith. Jesus sometimes connected healing with faith, but He also healed people who expressed no personal faith, healed children because of the faith of others, and acted solely from His compassion (Matthew 8:5–13; Luke 7:11–15; John 5:1–9).

Scripture recognizes that faithful Christians may experience suffering while continuing to trust God.

Believers may be outwardly wasting away even while being inwardly renewed day by day (2 Corinthians 4:16–18). Neither sickness nor suffering separates believers from the love of God in Christ (Romans 8:35– 39).

The Church must therefore minister to the sick with compassion rather than condemnation. We should pray expectantly, provide practical care, support appropriate medical treatment, and remain present with those whose healing is delayed or not received in this life. Seeking medical care is not contrary to faith. Scripture recognizes physicians and medicinal treatment without presenting them as rivals to divine healing (Luke 10:34; Colossians 4:14; 1 Timothy 5:23).

Our Affirmations

We affirm that:

1. Jesus Christ, through His death and resurrection, has defeated sin, Satan, corruption, and death.
2. The Atonement provides the redemptive foundation for the complete restoration of the whole person.
3. God continues to heal the sick through prayer, the laying on of hands, anointing with oil, providential care, medical treatment, and gifts of healing distributed by the Holy Spirit.
4. Present healings are signs of God’s kingdom and foretastes of the resurrection.
5. The complete bodily healing promised in redemption will be realized when Christ raises believers incorruptible and transforms their mortal bodies.
6. The Church should pray for healing with faith, expectancy, humility, compassion, and submission to God’s will.
7. Believers who remain sick are not spiritually inferior, abandoned by God, or necessarily lacking faith.

Our Denials

We deny that:

1. Every believer is unconditionally guaranteed complete physical healing during this present life.
2. Isaiah 53:5 and 1 Peter 2:24 should be interpreted as promises that no faithful Christian must experience sickness, disability, aging, or physical death.
3. Failure to receive immediate healing necessarily proves unbelief, hidden sin, improper confession, or spiritual deficiency.
4. Medical care represents a denial of faith in God.
5. The reality of suffering disproves either the goodness of God or the victory of Christ.
6. The Church should cease praying for supernatural healing merely because complete bodily redemption awaits the resurrection.

Conclusion

The Association of Biblical Pentecostals joyfully proclaims Jesus Christ as Savior, Healer, Deliverer, Baptizer in the Holy Spirit, and coming King. We believe that God continues to heal the sick and that the Church should earnestly seek the Spirit’s gifts and pray for those who suffer.

At the same time, we confess that the greatest promise of healing is not freedom from every illness before death, but victory over death itself. Present healing is a merciful sign of the kingdom; resurrection is its final fulfillment. Until that day, we pray with faith, care for the suffering with compassion, trust the sovereign wisdom of God, and await the return of Christ, “who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body” (Philippians 3:21).

____________

7. Touch Not God’s Anointed

A Position Paper of the Association of Biblical Pentecostals

We believe that the biblical statement, “Touch not God’s anointed,” has frequently been removed from its scriptural context and misused to shield ministers, church leaders, and religious organizations from legitimate questions, biblical correction, and necessary accountability. Scripture commands believers to honor faithful leaders, but it never grants any leader immunity from examination, correction, discipline, or removal when that leader departs from the truth, abuses authority, or persists in sin.

The Original Biblical Context

The expression occurs in 1 Chronicles 16:22 and Psalm 105:15:

“Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm.”

In Psalm 105, the “anointed” are not a special class of church officials demanding protection from criticism. The passage recounts God’s covenantal preservation of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their families as they wandered among nations and were few in number. God rebuked kings and restrained hostile rulers from physically harming His covenant servants (Ps. 105:8–15; cf. Gen. 12:10–20; 20:1–18; 26:6–11).

The word “touch” in this context refers to harming, attacking, oppressing, or laying violent hands upon those under God’s protection. It does not prohibit evaluating someone’s doctrine, questioning someone’s conduct, reporting abuse, confronting sin, or requiring accountability.

Therefore, Psalm 105:15 cannot legitimately be used to silence believers who raise scriptural concerns regarding the conduct or teaching of a minister.

David and “The LORD’s Anointed”

The expression is also commonly associated with David’s refusal to kill King Saul:

“The LORD forbid that I should do this thing unto my master, the LORD’s anointed, to stretch forth mine hand against him” (1 Sam. 24:6; cf. 26:9–11).

David refused to assassinate Saul or seize the kingdom through violence. He entrusted Saul’s judgment and removal to God. However, David did not believe that Saul was beyond criticism or confrontation. David openly confronted Saul concerning his injustice, exposed his wrongdoing, defended his own innocence, and appealed for righteous judgment between them (1 Sam. 24:9–15; 26:18–24).

Moreover, Saul’s anointing did not prevent Samuel from rebuking him, declaring that God had rejected him, and announcing the loss of his kingdom (1 Sam. 13:13–14; 15:16–29). The phrase “the LORD’s anointed” restrained David from murdering Saul; it did not prevent Samuel from correcting Saul or God from judging and removing him.

The same pattern appears in David’s own life. Although David was anointed as King, Nathan confronted him directly concerning his adultery and the death of Uriah:

“Thou art the man” (2 Sam. 12:7).

David’s anointing did not place him beyond prophetic rebuke, moral accountability, or divine discipline.

Jesus Christ Is the Preeminent Anointed One

The title “Anointed One” belongs supremely to Jesus Christ. He is the Messiah—the Christ—upon whom the Spirit of the Lord rested (Luke 4:18; Acts 4:26–27; 10:38). All legitimate ministry authority is derived from Christ and remains subject to His teachings.

No pastor, apostle, prophet, evangelist, teacher, bishop, elder, or ministry leader possesses an anointing that makes them unanswerable to Christ, superior to Scripture, or immune from the discernment of the congregation.

Under the new covenant, Scripture also speaks of all believers as having been anointed by God:

“Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God” (2 Cor. 1:21).

John similarly writes to the Church:

“But ye have an unction from the Holy One” (1 John 2:20; cf. 2:27).

The New Testament does not establish an elite class of “anointed” ministers whose words and conduct are exempt from examination. The Spirit is given to the body of Christ, and every spiritual manifestation must be judged according to Scripture (1 Cor. 12:7; 14:29; 1 Thess. 5:19–22; 1 John 4:1).

Biblical Leaders Must Be Examined

The Bereans were commended—not condemned—for examining Paul’s teaching by the Scriptures:

“They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11).

Paul did not demand unquestioning acceptance because he was an apostle. His message was open to scriptural examination.

Paul also confronted Peter publicly when Peter’s conduct departed from the truth of the gospel:

“I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed” (Gal. 2:11).

Peter’s apostolic calling did not make him immune from correction. When his conduct threatened the truth of the gospel and harmed other believers, public correction was appropriate.

Paul specifically commanded that elders who persist in sin be rebuked before the Church:

“Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear” (1 Tim. 5:20).

The preceding requirement that two or three witnesses establish an accusation against an elder protects leaders from careless or malicious accusations (1 Tim. 5:19). Yet once wrongdoing is properly established, the leader’s position does not shield him from correction. Scripture provides both protection from false accusation and accountability for actual sin.

Biblical Authority Is Servant Authority

Jesus expressly rejected the authoritarian patterns practiced by worldly rulers:

“The princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them.… But it shall not be so among you” (Matt. 20:25–26; cf. Luke 22:25–26).

Christian leaders are called to serve, not dominate. Elders must shepherd willingly, honestly, and humbly:

“Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock” (1 Pet. 5:3).

Spiritual authority is given for the edification of believers, not for their destruction or control (2 Cor. 10:8; 13:10). Leaders who use fear, intimidation, threats of divine judgment, demands for unquestioning loyalty, or claims of exclusive spiritual authority have departed from the pattern established by Christ.

A genuine anointing does not produce unaccountable power. It produces humility, service, truthfulness, holiness, love, and submission to the Word of God.

The Abuse of the Expression

“Touch not God’s anointed” becomes spiritually abusive when it is used to:

• Silence legitimate questions about doctrine or conduct.
• Prevent victims or witnesses from reporting abuse.
• Protect leaders who engage in financial, sexual, spiritual, or organizational misconduct.
• Portray disagreement with a leader as rebellion against God.
• Threaten critics with curses, sickness, judgment, or divine retaliation.
• Demand personal loyalty that belongs only to Jesus Christ.
• Discourage congregational discernment and scriptural examination.
• Prevent the correction, discipline, or removal of leaders who persist in sin.

Such uses reverse the purpose of Scripture. Rather than protecting the vulnerable from harm, the phrase is made to protect powerful people from accountability. God condemns shepherds who exploit, dominate, scatter, or neglect His flock (Jer. 23:1–4; Ezek. 34:1–10). He does not authorize them to use His name to conceal wrongdoing.

Honor Does Not Mean Unquestioning Submission

Scripture teaches believers to recognize, esteem, and honor those who labor faithfully among them (1 Thess. 5:12–13; 1 Tim. 5:17). Believers should avoid slander, malicious accusation, needless contention, and disrespectful conduct. Church leaders should not be condemned based on rumor, personal hostility, or unsupported allegations.

Nevertheless, biblical honor is never unconditional obedience. Believers must obey God rather than men whenever human commands contradict God’s Word (Acts 5:29). No spiritual leader has authority to require sin, suppress truth, conceal wrongdoing, violate conscience, or forbid proper accountability.

Submission to Christian leadership exists within submission to Christ. When leaders depart from Christ’s truth, believers remain responsible to discern, speak truthfully, protect the vulnerable, and follow the Lord.

Our Position

Therefore, the Association of Biblical Pentecostals affirms:

1. “Touch not God’s anointed” must be interpreted within its original biblical context. It prohibits violent harm against those under God’s covenantal protection; it does not prohibit biblical examination or correction.
2. No minister is above Scripture. The written Word of God must test every teaching, prophecy, spiritual manifestation, and ministry practice.
3. No leader is beyond accountability. Pastors, elders, prophets, apostles, teachers, and all other ministers remain subject to moral, doctrinal, congregational, and, when applicable, civil accountability.
4. Accusations must be handled justly. Leaders must be protected from false or malicious allegations, while credible accusations must be investigated honestly and without favoritism.
5. Persistent sin must be addressed. Established misconduct must not be concealed because of a person’s position, gifting, reputation, ministry success, or claimed anointing.
6. Victims and witnesses must not be silenced. Reporting abuse, criminal activity, exploitation, or serious misconduct is not an attack upon God’s anointed.
7. Spiritual authority must reflect Jesus Christ. Biblical leadership is humble, transparent, accountable, servant-hearted, and exercised for the protection and edification of the Church.
8. Jesus Christ alone is Lord of the Church. Loyalty to any minister, movement, organization, or tradition must never supersede loyalty to Christ and obedience to His Word.

Conclusion

We reject every use of “Touch not God’s anointed” that intimidates believers, conceals sin, excuses abusive leadership, or places ministers beyond biblical accountability. God’s servants should be respected, treated justly, and protected from false accusation, but they must also remain humble, examinable, correctable, and accountable.

The true evidence of God’s anointing is not the power to silence questions but the grace to walk in truth, holiness, humility, love, and service. Faithful leaders do not fear biblical accountability; they welcome the light, knowing that the Church belongs not to them, but to Jesus Christ, the Chief Shepherd and Lord of all (John 3:20–21; 1 Pet. 5:4).