In August of 2014 I was privileged to attend a worship service that formed the prelude to the Centennial Celebration of the Assemblies of God. This special worship service convened at my home church, Central Assembly of God in Springfield, Missouri. I arrived early but found that I was already too late. The sanctuary was packed with people from 120 different nations. But I am not easily dissuaded, so I moved through the throng and attempted to locate a seat in the balcony. Over 3,500 packed into the church, which was filled with the chatter of languages from around the world. I found an empty spot in the aisle on the very top step of the balcony. To my immediate right was a young man from Bangladesh. In front of me was a Christian brother from Africa, and to my left was a lady from Venezuela. It was a remarkable scene for Springfield, a rather small and monolithic community in the heart of the Midwest. I remember thinking that there is a lot of talk about diversity in the United States, but here you really have it. The media did not take much notice of this fact, but it was an amazing experience to hear the multiple languages around me as I entered and exited the sanctuary. I also heard an incredible array of languages during our times of corporate prayer.

Pentecostal prayer is seldom quiet and usually marked by a Spirit-led spontaneity. Although Pentecostal worship services center around worship, prayer, testimonies, and Christ-centered preaching from the Bible, you never quite know what will happen and in what order. Spontaneous prayer and worship might bring the entire congregation to its feet. Times of prayer that invite all the worshippers to simultaneously cry out in their own tongue—or in Spirit-inspired tongues—are not uncommon. This is true of Pentecostal churches in Africa, Latin America, Asia, Europe, and the United States. So, it was no surprise to find that in this gathering, composed of followers of Jesus from 120 different nations, there were times of prayer and worship that sounded a lot like that first Pentecost. In one stirring moment I recall hearing a cacophony of sounds, uttered by different voices and representing different languages, fill the sanctuary. The prayers during that moment of corporate worship were unintelligible, but beautiful.

The stunning diversity of the worshippers was not the only remarkable feature of this meeting. I found the unity that knit this diverse group together even more compelling and noteworthy. Here, amid this congregation seemingly representing “every nation under heaven,” there was a remarkable unity of faith and purpose. It was not a forced unity that destroyed cultural distinctives and individual expression; rather, it was a beautiful unity of shared experience rooted in our common faith in Christ. Our mother tongues may have been different, but we all embraced the same gospel and worshipped the same Lord.

This experience is not unique to special, large gatherings like the Centennial Celebration I have just described. Whether churches are large or small, whether they are located in the Global North or South, it matters not. Around the world in many Christian gatherings, but especially in Pentecostal churches, you can hear simultaneous prayer. While simultaneous prayer, “the corporate practice of praying different prayers at the same time,”1 is a global phenomenon, this form of corporate prayer has been modeled and encouraged in a special way by the Korean church, and particularly the Yoido Full Gospel Church (Seoul, South Korea). Indeed, Korean churches and missionaries around the world are known for their fervent prayers, which often take the form of simultaneous prayer. One North American observer described it this way:

Whenever a group of Koreans is praying, whether as part of a church service or spontaneously in small groups, someone takes the lead, guides the rest of the group in what to pray for, and then says, “Let’s pray.” At once, everyone prays out loud, according to the direction of the leader.2

The impact of this form of corporate prayer, which I have personally witnessed at the Yoido Full Gospel Church, is often very powerful. I concur with Diana Hynson’s assessment of simultaneous prayer as it is practiced in the Korean churches:

Rather than praying silently or one at a time, the entire class or congregation prays aloud together, creating a kind of Pentecost atmosphere. This swell of prayer, which God understands all at once, creates a thrilling, even mysterious, sense of unity in the wholeness of God’s community.3

In the following pages I will respond to a recent, thoughtful critique of the practice of simultaneous prayer offered by Scott MacDonald, a missionary to Africa. I greatly appreciate the biblical focus and clarity of MacDonald’s fine article and offer my response as an attempt to foster what I believe to be much-needed dialogue between Pentecostal Evangelicals and non-Pentecostal Evangelicals on this and related issues. The central question that MacDonald addresses is expressed in the title of his article: “Does Acts 4:23–31 Support the Practice of Simultaneous Prayer?”4 MacDonald suggests that we need to look elsewhere for biblical support for simultaneous prayer “since Luke only records a single prayer and the spontaneity of the prayer is married to the liturgical recitation of Psalm 2:1–2.”5 MacDonald concludes that with the prayer of Acts 4:23–31 Luke does provide us with a model for our prayers. He simply feels that Luke’s record at this point does not support or encourage the practice of simultaneous prayer as described above. We will explore MacDonald’s reasons for this judgment below. Our analysis of the prayer and MacDonald’s arguments will come in three parts: first, we will analyze Luke’s account of this important prayer of the early church; second, we will discuss the form or method of the prayer; finally, we will consider its content.6

1. The Prayer Revisited (Acts 4:23–31)

Immediately after Pentecost (Acts 2), in the first story Luke recounts, we begin to see the relevance and importance of the Spirit’s promised enabling for the newly anointed band of end-time prophets (Luke 12:11–12; Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8). The first story of bold, Spirit-inspired witness (Acts 3:1–4:31) takes place in the temple courtyard, centers on the dramatic healing of a man crippled from birth (3:6–10), and through Peter’s preaching highlights that Jesus is the “prophet like Moses” (3:22), whom God has “raised up” (3:26).7 Peter and John’s preaching incurs the wrath of the Jewish leaders, who demand that they stop speaking about the resurrection of the dead “in Jesus” (4:2). Peter and John’s courageous response to this command serves as a model for future generations of Christian disciple-prophets (4:19–20). The prayer that concludes this section includes requests for “great boldness” and “signs and wonders” (4:29–30). It, too, is paradigmatic for future readers of Acts who, Luke assumes, will also face opposition and persecution. While Luke’s Christian readers will face persecution, they will also experience the Spirit’s power in response to their prayers (4:31; cf. Luke 11:9–13).

1.1. The Prayer: Nature and Method (Acts 4:23–24)

Luke brings this literary unit (Acts 3:1–4:31) to a stirring conclusion with his portrait of the praying church. Upon “their release, Peter and John” return “to their own people” (i.e., a group of believers)8 and report all that “the chief priests and elders” said (4:23). When the beleaguered group hears of the threats and commands not to speak about Jesus, they respond with one heart and one mind. Persecution has a way of focusing the church’s attention on its central purpose. When the church has a clear sense of mission—a clear purpose—it is united. So, the disciples “raised their voices together [ὁμοθυμαδόν] in prayer” in response to their first experience of persecution.

Pentecostals are known for praying loudly, and for good reason. Spirit-inspired prayer, particularly that described in Luke-Acts, is seldom quiet (Acts 2:6, 11; cf. Rom 8:15, 26).9 Luke’s description here, “they raised their voices together,” also suggests loud, corporate prayer. The plural form of the verb, αἴρω (“they raised”), highlights the corporate nature of the group’s prayer. The term, φωνή, is a singular noun (literally, “voice”) and always refers to articulated speech.10 This construction—the plural form of αἴρω with the singular φωνή—is characteristic of Luke. For example, the ten lepers “lifted their voice” and said, “Jesus, Master, have pity on us!” (Luke 17:13). We also read that in Lystra the crowd, upon seeing a crippled man healed through Paul’s ministry, “raised their voice” and declared, “The gods have come down to us in human form” (Acts 14:11). In similar fashion, the crowd in Jerusalem “raised their voice” against Paul and shouted, “Rid the earth of him!” (22:22). These examples demonstrate that Luke frequently describes groups “raising” (plural form of αἴρω) their “voice” (singular form of φωνή) and then, with a clause introduced by the verb, “saying” or “said” (forms of λέγω), he offers a summary of the content of the group’s spontaneous, collective message.11 The message is always articulated by the various members of the group and generally in a loud and forceful manner. This survey of Luke’s language indicates that the prayer he describes in Acts 4:24–30 is neither pre-planned nor coordinated (i.e., liturgical), but rather spontaneous and corporate, with each member of the group giving voice together (ὁμοθυμαδόν) to their undoubtedly different but wonderfully harmonious prayers. Thus, Luke’s description of the content of the group’s prayer (4:24–30) is either a representative summary that depicts the general thrust of the collective prayers of the group or a record of one person’s concluding prayer that achieves this same purpose.

1.2. The Prayer: Content and Result (Acts 4:25–31)

The prayer that Luke records highlights four interrelated themes: God’s power (4:24); God’s plan (4:25–28); God’s purpose (4:29–30); and God’s promise (4:31). This prayer, like the sermon that precedes it, serves as a model for Luke’s readers. This prayer represents a fitting and faith-filled response to opposition and persecution. If this pattern of prayer is followed, it will redirect our focus away from the obstacles before us and center our vision on the God who has called us to represent him (Luke 10:16).

God’s Power (4:24). The disciples’ prayer begins in remarkable fashion. They cry out, “Sovereign Lord.” Normally, the term “Lord” in the New Testament is a translation of the Greek term, κύριος, which appears close to 200 times in Luke-Acts. However, here Luke uses a different term, δεσπότης. This term occurs 10 times in the New Testament and elsewhere in Luke-Acts only once (Luke 2:29). This term, the source of our English word, “despot,” designates one who possesses all power and authority. This single word is translated with the phrase, “Sovereign Lord.” Its use here is remarkable. Peter and John have just been arrested, spent the previous night in prison, and threatened. A small group of disciples gather and learn that the Jewish leaders who are supported by one of the most powerful empires the world has known have commanded them not to preach or teach “in the name of Jesus” (4:18). How does this besieged group respond? By calling out in prayer to the “Sovereign Lord,” the δεσπότης in whom all power and authority really reside. All power and authority rests in the “Sovereign Lord” because he is the creator, the one who “made the heavens and the earth and the sea, and everything in them” (4:24; cf. 14:15).12

God’s Plan (4:25–28). The prayer now shifts to an affirmation of faith, a declaration that the recent crucifixion of the Lord’s “holy servant, Jesus,” was foretold by the prophets and a part of God’s wondrous plan (cf. the divine δεῖ of Luke 24:7, 26, 44). This theme is introduced by a quote from Psalm 2:1–2 (LXX): “Why do the nations rage?… the kings of the earth rise up … against the Lord and against his anointed one” (Acts 4:25–26). We hear echoes of Psalm 2 elsewhere in Luke’s writing (Luke 9:35; Acts 13:33) and beyond (Rev 2:27). It is noteworthy that Psalm 2 records the Lord’s response to the rebellion of the kings and rulers. Is he worried? Not in the least. Rather, “He who resides in the heavens will laugh” (2:4 LXX). Acts 4:27–28 explains that these recent events, the conspiracy of “Herod and Pontius Pilate together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel” against the Lord’s “holy servant Jesus,” are the fulfillment of Psalm 2:1–2. The key verbal link is found in the description of Jesus as the Messiah (Χριστός), the one whom the Lord “anointed” (χρίω). Verse 28 states the matter clearly: “They did what your power [χείρ, literally, “hand”] and will had decided beforehand should happen.” The reference here to the “hand” (χείρ) of the Lord draws upon the rich imagery of the Exodus, for “by a mighty hand the Lord brought” his people out of slavery in Egypt (Exod 13:3 LXX).13 It also anticipates the disciples’ petition, “Stretch out your hand [χείρ] to heal and perform signs and wonders” (Acts 4:30), which also draws upon the language of the Exodus. “The Lord brought us out of Egypt with great strength and with a strong hand … and with signs and wonders” (Deut 26:8; cf. 4:34; 7:19).

God’s Purpose (4:29–30). At this point, the prayer of the disciples shifts from praise to petition. They first ask the Lord to “consider their threats” (ἀπειλή), a reference to the warning (ἀπειλέω) and threats (προσαπειλέω) of the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:17, 21). The disciples’ prayer not only expresses a clear understanding of the Lord’s identity—the all-powerful Creator and Lord of history—but it also reflects an admirable grasp of their own identity. With their petition the disciples identify themselves as “your servants” (plural of δοῦλος, 4:29). Jesus is the Suffering Servant (παῖς) of whom Isaiah prophesied (4:27; cf. 3:13, 26; 4:30; cf. Isa 52:13), but they too are the Lord’s servants (δοῦλος, δούλη, Acts 2:18).14 As the Lord’s servants, they have a clear purpose. They have been filled with the Holy Spirit and they are called to bear bold witness for Jesus (Acts 1:8; Isa 49:6). So, they now ask the “Sovereign Lord” to give them “[your servants] great boldness [παρρησία] to speak your word” (Acts 4:29). The disciples ask the Lord to give them precisely what Peter and John have just exemplified (4:13, 19–20).

The disciples’ petition includes one other important element. In addition to strength for bold witness, the disciples ask the Lord, “stretch out your hand to heal and perform signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (4:30). We have already noted how the references to “hand” and “signs and wonders” evoke well known descriptions of God’s deliverance of Israel from bondage in Egypt (Deut 26:8). Jesus, the Prophet like Moses, is now acting through his servants to accomplish an even greater salvation (Luke 24:46–47; Acts 3:17–26; 4:10–12). Jesus’s salvific work, which provides forgiveness of sins, is also marked by signs and wonders (Acts 2:19; 5:12–16). Just as Peter and John’s witness before the Jewish leaders anticipates the disciples’ petition for boldness, so also the healing of the man crippled from birth through “the name of Jesus” (3:6, 16; 4:10) foreshadows the disciples’ petition for the Lord to perform signs and wonders. These themes that are crucial for Luke’s narrative—bold witness and signs and wonders—are thus highlighted in Luke’s first description of the post-Pentecost ministry and prayer-life of the early church.

God’s Promise (4:31). The impact of the disciples’ prayer is described in terms that mirror previous promises in Luke’s narrative. Like on the Day of Pentecost, a tangible manifestation of God’s presence marks the answer to their prayers, the infilling of the Spirit (Acts 2:2–3; cf. Luke 3:21–22): “After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken” (Acts 4:31). Then we read, “they were filled with the Holy Spirit.” This description of the Spirit’s coming indicates that the implicit promise contained in Luke’s version of Jesus’s teaching on prayer (Luke 11:9–13) once again finds fulfillment in the lives of the disciples. The outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:4), as well as Peter’s more recent infilling (4:8), anticipate this experience. Luke’s message is unmistakable: along with Peter, the other disciples (including Luke’s readers) may also share this experience. For some, this reception of the Spirit may be their initial experience (i.e., their baptism in the Spirit); for others, it will be an additional “filling.” For all, however, this infusion of the Spirit’s power provides precisely what they need. So, “they spoke the word of God boldly [παρρησία].” This is a decisive answer to the petition of 4:29, but it also fulfills the prior promise of Jesus: “When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry … the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say” (Luke 12:11–12; cf. 24:47–49; Acts 1:8). While Luke’s Christian readers will face persecution (cf. 2 Tim 3:12), so also will they experience the Spirit’s power in response to their prayers.

2. Form: The Method of the Prayer (Acts 4:23–31)

We now summarize MacDonald’s arguments for viewing this prayer as liturgical in nature and offer our response.

2.1. MacDonald’s Liturgical Interpretation

MacDonald’s main problem with viewing the prayer in Acts 4 as supporting simultaneous prayer is that “while some of the content is spontaneously provided, the overall framework of the Acts 4 prayer is historical and liturgical.”15 MacDonald explains,

What happened? Presumably, one person prayed. The people may have orally remembered Psalm 2 in unison. The leader interpreted the psalm in prayer and then presented the community’s desire for perseverance in boldness. In this time of prayer, the community was of the same mind. And if ‘voices’ was intended to be literal, it could refer to the recitation of Psalm 2. Jewish background, early liturgy, and togetherness all played a part in the Acts 4 prayer, and it led to a unique prayer that was orderly and psalmic yet tailored to the immediate circumstances.16

If I read MacDonald correctly, he is suggesting that the community was unified in thought (they were of one mind), but the community’s corporate prayer was only articulated by one person, with the possible exception that the group might have chimed in together with the person praying as he or she recited the quotation from Psalm 2:1–2 (probably known to all). In other words, according to MacDonald, this passage does not describe a sizeable group of Jesus’s disciples simultaneously and spontaneously praying out loud, each one articulating their distinctive prayer in their own words.

MacDonald offers four arguments in support of his liturgical reading of this text. First, MacDonald points to the fact that this prayer is uttered in a Jewish context by Jewish followers of Jesus. The implication is that these Jewish followers of Jesus would be familiar with liturgical patterns of worship in which fixed prayers (like the Shema, the Shemoneh Esreh, and the Kaddish) were recited.17

Secondly, MacDonald states that “the prayer of Acts 4 starts ‘like a liturgical prayer rather than a spontaneous expression.’”18 Here he refers to the term, “Sovereign Lord” (δεσπότης), the reference to the Lord’s creative activity (4:24), and the quotation from Psalm 2:1–2 found in Acts 4:25–26. All of these features suggest to MacDonald that the prayer of Acts 4 is not an informal, spontaneous prayer uttered by a multitude, but rather a formal, liturgical prayer offered by a leader with others perhaps joining in for the recitation of the quote from Psalm 2.

Third, MacDonald suggests this liturgical interpretation is supported by the use of the article (ὁ) with “prayers” (plural of προσευχή) in the description of the early church found in Acts 2:42: “They devoted themselves to … the prayers.”19

Finally, MacDonald argues that Luke’s use of ὁμοθυμαδόν (“together”) speaks of a unity in thought and purpose rather than corporate speech. So, the phrase, the disciples “raised their voices together [ὁμοθυμαδόν] in prayer,” does not mean that the group literally prayed out loud together. MacDonald concludes, “The early church prayed together, but probably not in the literal sense of speaking simultaneously or in unison. Rather, the togetherness of Acts 4:24 means agreement.”20

2.2. My Response: A Charismatic Interpretation

The Jewish Context. I do believe that upon close examination each of MacDonald’s points noted above lose their luster. Let’s begin with the Jewish context. The mode of Jewish prayer was varied and included personal, spontaneous prayer (m. Berakot 4:4; 9:4; m. ʾAbot 2:13). But this is especially true of the Jewish Christian setting. Jesus’s prayer life and his teaching on prayer were unconventional in Jewish terms. This is illustrated most clearly in the Lord’s prayer (Luke 11:2–4). The three occurrences of Abba in the New Testament (Mark 14:35–36; Rom 8:15–16; Gal 4:6) demonstrate two surprising and vitally important facts about Jesus’s prayer life and his instruction to his disciples regarding prayer. Both of these facts must have shocked and scandalized many of Jesus’s Jewish contemporaries.

First, following his own personal practice (Mark 14:36), Jesus taught his disciples to pray in their mother tongue, Aramaic.21 He did not follow Jewish custom and teach his disciples to pray in the “religious” language of the Jewish people (Hebrew), the language of their Scriptures and their communal prayers.22 Jesus broke from these conventions and encouraged his disciples to pray in their heart-language. In view of the fact that many rabbis considered Hebrew to be the language of heaven—and thus, by extension, the only language that God heard—this is, indeed, a striking turn of events.23

Secondly, again, following his personal practice, Jesus taught his disciples to address God as “Father” (Abba) when they prayed. The significance of the term, Abba, has been hotly debated by scholars and theologians. However, this much appears to be clear. Abba was a term of respect and could be used by a student addressing his teacher. Yet more commonly it was also used by a small child when calling out to his or her father. Kenneth Bailey, who served as a missionary in the Middle East for over 40 years, describes discussing this term, Abba, with a group of Palestinian women. One exclaimed, “Abba is the first word we teach our children.”24

It must have shocked many of Jesus’s contemporaries when they heard him or his disciples address God as Abba. Although God is often described as being like a father in the Old Testament, nowhere is he there addressed directly as “Father.” If we expand our survey of the relevant Jewish literature beyond the Jewish Scriptures, we find that direct address to God in prayer as “Father” is exceedingly rare.25 So, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray in Aramaic and to begin their prayers by addressing God as “Abba, Father,” he was defying tradition. Jesus rejected the widely-held belief that we must use a special “religious” language when communicating with or about God. Additionally, he called and enabled his disciples to enter into a filial relationship with God characterized by deep intimacy. This intimate, filial relationship, so beautifully illustrated in the parable of the Gracious Father (Luke 15:11–32), is powerfully expressed with one word: Abba.

In view of the variety of perspectives on prayer in the Jewish, and especially Jewish Christian communities of the first century, I suggest that we should seek to understand the prayer of Acts 4 against the backdrop of prayer in Luke-Acts. A survey of prayer in Luke-Acts is revealing. Prayer in Luke-Acts is typically informal and charismatic (i.e., associated with the inspiration of the Spirit). For example, only Luke tells us that Jesus was praying when the Spirit descends upon him at the Jordan River (Luke 3:21–22). Luke alone describes Jesus’s ecstatic prayer: when “full of joy through the Holy Spirit,” he bursts forth in praise and speaks of his filial relationship with God the Father (10:21). And it is Luke who interprets the significance of Jesus’s teaching on prayer for his readers by rendering the key line, “how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!” (11:13; cf. Matt 7:11). Other instances of informal, spontaneous prayer or teaching emphasizing this approach to prayer (Luke 18:1, 10; 20:47) are found throughout Luke’s Gospel.26 This trend continues in Acts with many references that highlight the spontaneous, informal, and charismatic nature of the disciples’ corporate prayers.27 Luke’s narrative also frequently highlights the spontaneous and charismatic character of the prayers of individuals (Acts 9:11, 40; 10:9, 30; 11:5). When we add to this the charismatic nature of early Christian worship described in Paul’s epistles (1 Cor 14:14–16, 26) and Paul’s numerous references to Spirit-inspired prayer,28 Luke’s picture of the prayer life of the early church comes into sharp focus.

The Liturgical Beginning? What shall we make of the term, “Sovereign Lord” (δεσπότης), the reference to the Lord’s creative activity (Acts 4:24), and the quotation from Psalm 2:1–2 found in Acts 4:25–26? Do these features indicate that the prayer of Acts 4 is a formal, liturgical prayer offered by a single church leader? MacDonald’s conclusion at this point is highly debatable. All of these features sound much more like elements of a spontaneous prayer uttered by a community familiar with the Bible of the early church (the LXX) and directed to a specific need. The term, “Sovereign Lord” (δεσπότης) is rare, used of the Lord only five times in the NT and only twice in Luke-Acts (Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24).29 This is not a term that Christians normally used to refer to the Lord and thus it is unlikely that it was part of a liturgical prayer that they utilized. However, it is a term uniquely suited for this specific occasion. What better way to begin their prayer, facing as they were threats of persecution from a powerful foe, by calling out to the δεσπότης, the one who possesses all power and authority? The reference to the God of creation also flows naturally, for it is a wonderful way to acknowledge the Lord’s sovereignty. Additionally, the quotation from Psalm 2:1–2, clearly a text of central importance for and well known to the early church (Luke 9:35; Acts 13:33; Rev 2:27; 12:5), fits beautifully into this specific setting since it affirms the same truth. God is not threatened by these rulers’ threats. “The One enthroned in heaven laughs” (Ps 2:4).

The Prayers. What significance shall we attach to the use of the article (ὁ) with “prayers” (plural of προσευχή) in Acts 2:42: “They devoted themselves to … the prayers”? Not much. The argument that this grammatical feature suggests liturgical prayers are in view misses a vital point. The use of the article (ὁ) with “prayer” (προσευχή) is simply a matter of Lukan style. “Prayer” with the article occurs nine times in Luke-Acts and only three times without.30 As we have noted, the form of prayer described in the vast majority of these passages is spontaneous, and a number are clearly charismatic.

Together in Purpose, not Speech. Finally, MacDonald’s appeal to ὁμοθυμαδόν (“together”) as purely a matter of conviction does not do justice to what Luke actually says. Luke explicitly states that the disciples “raised their voices together [ὁμοθυμαδόν] in prayer.” Luke is fond of the adverb, ὁμοθυμαδόν. Acts contains ten of the eleven occurrences of ὁμοθυμαδόν found in the New Testament.31 This term speaks of the rich unity and sense of purpose that marked the early church. Additionally, this term calls to mind Luke’s earlier description of the disciples praying expectantly for the promise of the Father (Acts 1:14) and their practice of daily sharing fellowship along with prayer and worship (2:46). In view of the strong links that Luke forges between prayer and the inspiration of the Spirit,32 the use of ὁμοθυμαδόν here is not surprising.

David Crump states the matter well: “The community that openly and frequently prays together places itself in a perfect position to witness the Holy Spirit’s activity unfurled around them.”33 Pentecostals, who have rightly been noted for their emphasis on “tarrying together” around the altar, will resonate with this declaration, even if we might also want to highlight that, as a result of our prayers, we will also participate in the Spirit’s work. Pentecostals will also offer a hearty “amen” to Crump’s conclusion, “there is no better place to pray than with the assembled body of Christ.”34

However, in Acts 4:24 Luke says more than that the disciples shared a unity of purpose. He declares, “they raised [plural form of αἴρω] their voices [singular form of φωνή] together [ὁμοθυμαδόν] in prayer to God and said [form of λέγω].” As we have noted, Luke frequently utilizes this linguistic construction to describe the spontaneous, collective speech of a multitude of people.35 The final verb, “and said,” introduces a summary of the content of the group’s message. In each instance the context makes it clear that this message is articulated by the various members of the group and generally in a loud and forceful manner. It stretches credulity to suggest that the group in unison declares these exact words (i.e., choral speech). Clearly, Luke is summarizing the essence of the various utterances offered by the members of the group. In this instance (Acts 4:24), Luke describes the many members of the group “lifting their voices” and praying together. A natural reading of the text suggests that this involved many different people praying loudly at the same time (i.e., simultaneous prayer).

If we broaden our view and examine more generally Luke’s narrative, we can observe Luke’s penchant for summarizing group speech with a single representative voice. This is a part of Luke’s literary art, his narrative technique. So, for example, at Jesus’s tomb the two angels declare to the women (seemingly with one voice), “Why do you look for the living among the dead?” (Luke 24:5). The disciples gathered around the risen Lord and “asked him [again, seemingly with one voice], ‘Lord are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?’” (Acts 1:6). The diaspora Jews who had gathered together in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost were “utterly amazed,” so “they asked: ‘Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans?’” (Acts 2:7). This literary technique is found throughout Luke-Acts.36

All of this supports our conclusion that the prayer Luke describes in Acts 4:24–30 is neither pre-planned nor coordinated (i.e., liturgical); but rather, spontaneous and corporate, with each member of the group giving voice together (ὁμοθυμαδόν) to their undoubtedly different but wonderfully harmonious prayers.37

3. Content: The Message of the Prayer (Acts 4:23–31)

MacDonald suggests that the content of the disciples’ prayer, as well as the liturgical form, differs from that of contemporary simultaneous prayer. The disciples, we are told, ask for power to persevere rather than for deliverance. However, a close examination of Acts 4 reveals that the disciples’ prayer shows more affinity with contemporary calls for breakthrough and deliverance than MacDonald is willing to acknowledge. Ultimately, I believe the real reason that simultaneous prayer causes discomfort for many Evangelicals lies elsewhere.

3.1. Deliverance and Breakthrough

In 2007 I was invited by the Yoido Full Gospel Church (YFGC) to speak at a theological symposium, lecture in their seminary (The Youngsan Theological Seminary), and preach in the YFGC’s Friday evening service. So, that May I traveled to Seoul en route to China, where I lived and served at the time, and spent about a week there, ministering in various settings. My time in Korea was very inspiring. The YFGC was founded on May 18, 1958, five days before I was born. In very humble circumstances, David Yonggi Cho began to proclaim the good news of Jesus to a Korea ravaged and divided by war. In the face of tremendous hardships, suffering, and hopelessness, Cho declared that salvation and hope are found in Jesus Christ. Now, more than sixty-five years later, YFGC is the largest church in the world.

The amazing genesis of the Yoido Full Gospel Church has mirrored the remarkable growth of Pentecostal Christianity around the world over this past century. Sixty-five years ago, who could have imagined that Seoul, Korea, would be home to the largest church in the world? And back then who could have predicted that the Pentecostal movement would grow with such rapidity that scholars now label the movement as “the most successful social movement of the past century?”38

It was wonderful fellowshipping with the believers there, a number being old friends and students. I certainly got a glimpse of why this church has had such a dynamic impact on Korea and, indeed, the world. I shall not soon forget preaching in the Yoido Church’s Friday evening service. What an experience! It was thrilling to see and hear approximately 15,000 Korean believers singing praises to Jesus and praying with great fervor. Yes, I experienced simultaneous prayer in the YFGC, and it was a beautiful sight, an extraordinary sound. This experience reminded me in a fresh way of the power of prayer. It is absolutely amazing to see what God has done in Korea over the past sixty-five years! Korean church leaders will tell you that prayer is a major reason for the amazing revival that has transformed South Korea.

I suspect that the prayers of those initial members of the YFGC back in 1958 were probably different from those of their American counterparts. They were probably somewhat different from their Korean counterparts today. Each individual, each situation, each context often requires a prayer uniquely shaped for a specific purpose or need. Indeed, as the Apostle Paul writes, “the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans” (Rom 8:26). I do appreciate MacDonald’s call for us to pray regularly from the Psalms, to emulate Old Testament language and patterns in our prayers, and to acknowledge God’s sovereign purposes. MacDonald’s pastoral heart is evident in his exhortation: “Let the church militant raise her voice in unity with the church triumphant!” It is also true that balance is needed and that “the wealth of biblical prayer is an easy bridge to unite our times of corporate prayer, instead of dividing through overly personalized prayer practices.”39

With this pastoral concern in mind, MacDonald notes that “simultaneous prayer is often, though not always, deliverance and ‘breakthrough’ oriented.”40 He finds this emphasis lacking in the prayer of Acts 4, where the disciples ask for power to persevere rather than for deliverance. Although MacDonald’s point here has merit and deserves consideration, it perhaps needs to be balanced with an observation. In this prayer the disciples note that those who opposed Jesus, “did what your power [χείρ, literally, “hand”] and will had decided beforehand should happen.” The reference here to the “hand” (χείρ) of the Lord calls to mind the Exodus, for “by a mighty hand the Lord brought” his people out of slavery in Egypt (Exod 13:3 LXX).41 It also anticipates the disciples’ petition voiced later in the prayer, “Stretch out your hand [χείρ] to heal and perform signs and wonders” (Acts 4:30), which also draws upon the language of the Exodus. “The Lord brought us out of Egypt with great strength and with a strong hand…and with signs and wonders” (Deut 26:8; cf. 4:34; 7:19). Thus, an emphasis on deliverance and breakthrough can be seen in this prayer. Of course, the disciples pray that the Lord might enable them to be active participants in bringing this deliverance, this salvation, to others (Acts 4:29–30). And the Lord is not slow in answering their request (4:31).

3.2. Orderly Worship

I suspect the real problem that MacDonald and many of my Evangelical brothers and sisters have with the practice of simultaneous tongues is that it appears to be a bit chaotic. A cacophony of sounds confronts the casual observer and little or nothing cognitive is being communicated to the larger group. However, this is precisely where I believe we in the West might learn from our brothers and sisters in Korea, in Africa, and beyond.

Instinctively, we in the West struggle with the notion that unintelligible speech can be edifying and useful. Yet there are numerous examples of that which transcends rational description or understanding serving as a powerful vehicle of communication and an effective means of expressing emotions. Poetry and music in particular come to mind. There is, however, an even closer, biblical analogy to this kind of non-cognitive (at least to the larger group) yet edifying experience: the many references that present speaking in tongues as a form of doxological prayer.42 These texts, which describe the Spirit praying through the believer, link speaking in tongues with a strong sense of communion with Christ. This is perhaps most beautifully expressed in the Abba prayer of Romans 8:15–16 and Galatians 4:6. Paul declares that “the Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children” (Rom. 8:16). While the Abba prayer references charismatic prayer more broadly, it includes glossolalic prayer.43 Furthermore, Paul’s words here paint a powerful picture of what happens as the Spirit prays through us. We are caught up in the love of Christ and filled with joy as we begin to glimpse the significance of our divine adoption. Is it any wonder that human words fail to adequately express what we feel? Indeed, if non-cognitive, glossolalic, prayers can be edifying, how can we deny that simultaneous prayer, the corporate practice of praying different prayers at the same time, has value?

I would emphasize that Pentecostals together with Paul do understand that there is an important cognitive dimension to our faith and worship. Our mystical, non-cognitive experience of tongues is grounded in the gospel and biblical teaching. As a result, it is an experience that above all brings praise and glory to Jesus. If speaking in tongues for Paul and Pentecostals is a mystical experience, it is nonetheless an experience centered on Christ. Ulrich Luz, in his essay, “Paul as Mystic,” states the matter well. He argues that the gift of the Spirit is the experiential basis of Paul’s Christ-mysticism, which centers on “the conformity of the believer with the Lord Jesus in his passion and in his resurrection glory.”44 Luz notes that “the fear and panic at ‘enthusiasm’ and any theologia gloriae which marks out many Protestant theologians is unknown to Paul, for it is not a question of his own glory, but Christ’s.”45

In short, I do believe that there is an appropriate place for simultaneous prayer in the corporate life of the church. However, as with the experience of glossolalic prayer, this practice should be balanced with other edifying forms of prayer, particularly in the corporate setting.46 This is where MacDonald’s suggestions are particularly valuable.

4. Conclusion

In his fine article, Scott MacDonald correctly encourages the gathered church to pray regularly from the Psalms, to emulate Old Testament language and patterns in our prayers, and to acknowledge God’s sovereign purposes. This exhortation mirrors the prayer of Acts 4:23–31 in many respects. However, I do believe that Acts 4:23–31 describes simultaneous prayer, the corporate practice of praying different prayers at the same time. The Acts 4 prayer, when viewed against the backdrop of Luke’s literary style and his emphases on prayer, is seen to be neither pre-planned nor coordinated (i.e., liturgical), but rather spontaneous and corporate, with each member of the group giving voice together to their different but ultimately harmonious prayers. Even the content of the prayer, which draws upon Exodus imagery, echoes the themes of deliverance and breakthrough, prevalent in so many contemporary church settings. In short, the Acts 4 prayer shows considerable continuity with the contemporary practice of simultaneous prayer. Although Christians in the West often struggle with the notion that unintelligible speech, particularly in corporate settings, can be edifying, the apostolic church had no such reservations. Those first-century believers saw clearly that the Holy Spirit helps us pray, even in our weakness.

---

[1] Scott D. MacDonald, “Does Acts 4:23–31 Support the Practice of Simultaneous Prayer?,” Themelios 47.1 (2022): 60.[2] Trevin Wax, “2 Reminders from the Korean Church about Prayer,” TGC, 17 November 2016. Cited in MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 61.[3] Diana Hynson, “Learning the Practice of Walking with Christ,” The United Methodist Church: Discipleship Ministries, 25 January 2011. Cited in MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 61.[4] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 60–69.[5] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 60.

[6] This article will appear as a chapter in Wonsuk Ma and Robert Menzies, eds., The Spirit, Spirituality, and Leadership: Essays in Honour of Younghoon Lee (Oxford: Regnum, 2024). It is used with permission.

[7] All quotations from the Bible are from the NIV (2011) unless otherwise noted.

[8] This is clearly a smaller group than the full company (5,000 men) noted in Acts 4:4.

[9] Luke 1:15, 41, 67; 3:21–22; 4:14, 18–19; 10:21; 11:13; 12:11–12; 24:48–49; Acts 1:8; 2:4; 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9; 10:46; 19:6.

[10] The term occurs over 40 times in Luke-Acts.

[11] Luke 17:13; Acts 4:24; 14:11; 22:22.

[12] Note also Rev. 5:13; 14:7; Exod 20:11; Neh 9:6; Ps 146:6; Amos 9:6.

[13] Cf. Exod 3:19–20; 7:5; 13: 3, 9; 15:6.

[14] Holly Beers, The Followers of Jesus as the ‘Servant’: Luke’s Model from Isaiah for the Disciples in Luke-Acts, LNTS 535 (London: T&T Clark, 2015): 118–79.

[15] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 66.

[16] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 67–68.

[17] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 65.

[18] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 65. Here he quotes Jaroslav Pelikan, Acts, BTCB (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2005), 78, with approval.

[19] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 65, following Pelikan, Acts, 77.

[20] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 67.

[21] Kenneth E. Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008), 95.

[22] As Bailey notes, “The Aramaic-speaking Jew in the first century was accustomed to recite his prayers in Hebrew, not Aramaic” (Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, 95).

[23] Poirier, Tongues of Angels, 16: “b. Sabb. 12b: … and [did not] R. Yochanan say, ‘Everyone who petitions for his needs in Aramaic, the ministering angels will not attend to him, because the ministering angels do not understand Aramaic!’” See Russell Spittler’s review of Poirier’s Tongues of Angels in JBPR 3 (2011): 146–52.

[24] Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, 97.

[25] Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, 97.

[26] Luke 5:16; 6:12; 9:18, 28–29; 11:1; 22:40–41, 44–46

[27] Acts 1:14, 24; 2:4, 42, 47; 8:15–17; 12:12; 13:3; 14:23; 16:25; 20:36; 21:5; 28:8. For the noun “prayer”: Acts 3:1; 6:4; 12:5. Acts 6:6 (commissioning prayer) might be more formal, but it probably includes charismatic and spontaneous elements as well (see Acts 8:15–17; 13:3; 19:6; cf. 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6).

[28] For example, Paul frequently presents speaking in tongues as a form of doxological prayer: 1 Cor 12:2–3, 14:14–17; Rom 8:15–16; Gal 4:6; Eph 5:18–19, 6:18; Col 3:16; 1 Thess 5:19; and Jude 20.

[29] The other occurrences are found in 2 Peter 2:1; Jude 4; and Rev 6:10.

[30] With the article: Luke 6:12; 22:45; Acts 1:14; 2:42; 3:1; 6:4; 10:4, 31; 16:16. Without the article: Luke 19:46; Acts 12:5; 16:13.

[31] Acts 1:14; 2:46; 4:24; 5:12; 7:57; 8:6; 12:20; 15:25; 18:12; 19:29.

[32] Luke 3:21; 11:13; Acts 1:14, 2:1; 8:15–17; 9:17; 19:6.

[33] Crump, Knocking on Heaven’s Door, 194.

[34] Crump, Knocking on Heaven’s Door, 195. Crump (p. 181) lists 20 instances of prayer in the book of Acts, which he groups into three categories: (1) prayers with explicit content (Acts 4:23–31; 7:59–60; 8:15; 8:22, 24; 14:23; 26:29); (2) prayers with contextually implied content (6:6; 9:40; 12:5, 12; 13:3; 16:25; 20:36; 21:5; 28:8); (3) uncertain prayer notices without any clear content (1:14; 2:42; 6:4; 9:11; 10:2, 4, 9, 30; 22:17). For category three, Crump acknowledges he is reluctant to attribute contextually supplied content for fear of reading our theological biases into the texts (p. 181n4).

[35] Luke 17:13; Acts 4:24; 14:11; 22:22.

[36] A survey of Luke 24–Acts 6, seven chapters in all, reveals that this literary device is employed in the following texts: Luke 24:5, 19, 29, 32, 34; Acts 1:6, 11, 24; 2:7, 12, 13, 37; 4:1, 7, 13, 16, 19; 5:23, 29; 6:2, 11, 13.

[37] See also the forthcoming commentary on Acts, co-authored by Craig Keener and Robert Menzies, in the Word and Spirit New Testament Commentary Series, scheduled to be published by Baker Academic.

[38] Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 8.

[39] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 69, for all the quotes in this paragraph.

[40] MacDonald, “Simultaneous Prayer?,” 68.

[41] Cf. Exod 3:19–20; 7:5; 13: 3, 9; 15:6.

[42] 1 Cor. 12:2–3, 14:14–17; Rom. 8:15–16; Gal. 4:6; Eph. 5:18–19, 6:18; Col. 3:16; 1 Thess. 5:19; and Jude 20.

[43] For more on this see Robert Menzies, Speaking in Tongues: Jesus and the Apostolic Church as Models for the Church Today (Cleveland, TN: CPT, 2016), 139–46.

[44] Ulrich Luz, “Paul as Mystic,” in The Holy Spirit and Christian Origins: Essays in Honor of James D. G. Dunn, ed. Graham N. Stanton, Bruce W. Longenecker, and Stephen C. Barton (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 140.

[45] Luz, “Paul as Mystic,” 141.

[46] When the rules that Paul lays down for order in worship in 1 Cor 14:23–24, 27–28 (cf. 14:5, 13, 19) are evaluated in the light of the larger context of Paul’s writings, the specific situation addressed at Corinth, and Paul’s primary concerns, a rigid application of his “injunction” concerning uninterpreted tongues in our contemporary settings appears to be misguided. For my discussion of this important text and its application, see Menzies, Speaking in Tongues, 107–23, 151–52.

---