The Azusa Street Revival¹ and its fruitfulness have been accorded honours and impacts far greater and more significant than historical contexts within the ancient identifications of the foundational manifestations of the move and historical imprints of the Spirit of God. Seymour, too, has become a prominent figure in the history of modern Pentecostalism (Martin 2024), often portrayed subjectively and superficially, much like Christopher Columbus, who was biasedly declared the man who discovered the American continent, disregarding the pre-existing populations. Instead of contextualising the history of Christopher Columbus within imperialism and recognising the pre-existence of the American continent (Brink 2018), modern Pentecostalism inherits this attitude from the birth of New Testament Pneumatology as if the Spirit of God was inactive before Acts 2 and the emergence of the Church age (Green 2012).

This article, in the context of objectivity, aims to show that features of Pentecostalism within the Spirit of God leadership perspective are older and broader than New Testament Christianity in its various forms, including classical Pentecostalism (first wave), the charismatic movement (second wave) and the charismatic renewal movement (third wave), which are identified with modern Pentecostalism (Mashau 2013:2). It focuses on liberating the Holy Spirit from the confines of the New Testament to a historical flow, recognising that the Spirit of God has been active throughout all phases of time, including the Second Temple period (STP) (Levinson 1995a).

Moreover, within the broader context of asserting the STP with various conceptions of the Spirit of God,² the following has contributed to the lack of attention (Levison & Rabens 2012):

Scholars viewed the early Judaism period as merely a background serving early Christianity instead of a field of study in its own right. They also wrongly assumed that Jews believed the Spirit of God had withdrawn and prophecy had ceased during the Greco-Roman era.³ References to the Spirit in early Judaism have recently become accessible in reliable editions and various translations, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls,⁴ Pseudepigrapha, Philo, Talmud and others.⁵ These perspectives provide the foundational rethinking necessary to approach the world view of the ‘Holy’ Spirit leadership in the historicity of modern Pentecostalism through the lens of the STP (Pitts & Pollinger 2013).

As Pentecostalism can be found in all major historical trends of the Christian Church – early church, Middle Ages, Reformation, and post-Reformation (Mashau 2013:2) – it is equally important to realise that the foundations, being and workings of the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of God cannot be originated (Gn 1:1–2) and limited to the New Testament phases of the Church. Such a perspective would be a contradiction, isolating the Holy Spirit from the deep, rich phases that predate the Apostolic Church (Warfield 1972:2). Second Temple Period context, its influence on Paul’s understanding of the Holy Spirit, foundational contestations that benefitted Christianity and modern Pentecostalism: two-fold law perspective, Pioneer of Synagogue perspective, resurrection perspective, existence of angels’ perspective and Josephus Prophetic gift perspective are key focus of this writing.

The written and oral law form the twin foundational identities of the Pharisees’ doctrine (Basser 2012:174; Grabbe 1996:41–44; Nickelsburg 2003:165), embracing the Pentateuch through their perspectives. Both approaches¹⁰ are seen as complementary, consisting of the written law and the oral law, which includes the teachings of the prophets and the oral tradition¹¹ of the Jewish people (Mpeta 2022:2). The teachings of the Prophets should be viewed with recognition of the Spirit behind their role, as the Prophets cannot operate effectively without the guidance of the Spirit (Razafiarivory 2020). Therefore, the prophetic teachings and oral traditions within the Pharisees’ oral and written law must be understood with the impact of the Spirit in mind (Grabbe 2003).

It is crucial to recognise the Spirit of God in the doctrine of the Pharisees. This recognition provides a broad-based view that the Spirit of God was active during the Second Temple era, influencing the Pharisees and their contemporaries. As Epstein (1986:96) notes, the Pharisees believed that if the Torah included the oral law, interpreters could discover its true meaning from the written text as applied to their times. These interpreters, seeking true meaning from both the written and oral law, were guided by the Spirit of God.

The Pharisees believed that if the Torah only meant the written text of the five books of Moses, it would be impossible to obey under new conditions and realities (Epstein 1986:96). Their resistance to the rigidity of the written law through the oral law suggests the Spirit of God provided wisdom beyond the written law. The oral tradition, as the carrier and accomplisher of the written law’s purpose, relies on the work of the Spirit of God. Different conditions can only be met through the oral tradition with the Spirit of God at work. This makes the Pharisees’ approach to the law two-fold: propagating the oral tradition (Van Der Toorn 2023:385) and recognising the workings of the Spirit of God. Their perspective on the five books of Moses is progressive and people-conscious, embodying the oral tradition and acknowledging the Spirit of God.

The realities of the diaspora and the spirit of oral law interpretation led to the flourishing of synagogues, supplementing the centrality of the Temple in Jerusalem (Epstein 1986:12). This scriptural interpretation resulted in a hermeneutic system relevant to the national reality and the need for worship continuity beyond the Temple (Mpeta 2022:2). Like the Prophetic Spirit and oral traditions, which could not be confined to one place, the emergence of the synagogue symbolises the Spirit of God’s wisdom through creativity beyond established institutions like the Temple.

The Pharisaic support for the emergence of synagogues demonstrates that their oral tradition was another dimension in which the Spirit of God was at work. The Pharisees’ leadership approach ensured that Judaism had a progressive approach to religious life. This progressive approach was guided by the Spirit of God through the written and oral law. While they valued the centrality of the Jerusalem Temple, there was a need to go beyond the physical temple. Josephus, as cited by Furstenburg (2004), shows that the Pharisees believed God could be worshipped even away from the Temple and outside Jerusalem, as evidenced by the existence of synagogues and the sending of money to the Temple.¹² Otzen (1990:118) notes that the idea of universal priesthood emerged from the Pharisees’ people-conscious leadership. The Pharisees saw the need for religious worship beyond Jerusalem and the Temple, fostering the synagogue institution.

The synagogue affirmed the Pharisees’ progressive mindset. Otzen (1990:104) shows that synagogue worship allowed individual piety to express itself in ways impossible in Temple worship, expanding the scope of physical and religious expressions. The synagogue became a relevant institution for those scattered across the diaspora, reflecting the Pharisees’ belief that the law should be interpreted with relevance to new conditions. This innovation did not contradict the Temple’s centrality but supplemented it. The Pharisees, with their two-fold view, became the relevant religious group pioneering synagogue worship outside traditional Temple worship in Jerusalem. They perceived the law as the norm for every detail in an individual’s life.

The emergence of synagogues was not intended to replace Temple worship but to supplement it. The centrality of the Temple¹³ was upheld, but a more universal approach was needed. Otzen (1990:103) shows that synagogue worship was meant to supplement Temple worship. The synagogue, pioneered by the Pharisees’ leadership, covered dimensions the Temple could not. Epstein (1986:12) notes that the synagogue, with its elaborate liturgy, could take the place of the Temple for prayer and worship. This innovation, born from the oral law perspective, reflects the Pharisees’ people-conscious leadership within the developmental process of the Jewish people’s holistic nature.

The notion of the resurrection of the dead is one of the most critical issues in the history of the Jewish people (Chilton 2019). The Pharisees, a religious sect, also anchored their religious identity through the belief in the resurrection of the dead.¹⁴ As a group zealous about the unfolding and interpretation of the law, they firmly held this belief (Johnson 1985:17). This belief became one of the sentiments that defined the identity of the Pharisees within the scope of religious life in Second Temple Judaism and beyond (Sinniscalchi 2020). Although they had a conservative attitude towards political and religious issues, this did not prevent them from propagating the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead among the Jewish people at large.¹⁵

The doctrine of the resurrection of the dead may seem minor, but within the sect of the Pharisees, it was a doctrine they could not compromise (Mpeta 2022:4). This perspective is evident in the New Testament, where Saint Paul (Ac 23:6–8) shows his historical identity as a Pharisee. He uses the issue of the resurrection of the dead to divide the unity between the Sadducees and the Pharisees, aiming to affirm that he deserves to be charged. By using this issue, it is shown that the Pharisees, who were in unity with the Sadducees, needed to reconsider their view of him as an enemy. Whether the writing is correct or not, the relevant point is that the Pharisees and the belief in the resurrection of the dead were inseparable. It is no wonder that the Pharisees found it impossible to continue seeing Paul as a person against their standpoint (Luhrmann 1989).

In principle, the Pharisees’ belief in the resurrection of the dead was one of the complex ingredients that collectively established the roots of their identity. Nickelsburg (2003:163) also shows that the Pharisaic belief in the resurrection of the body is attested in the New Testament. Therefore, within their beliefs, the resurrection of the dead emerged as part of their doctrinal package, impacting even the scope of Christianity.

As angels appear throughout scripture, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, the belief in the existence of angels has been sustained by groups such as the Pharisees, in contestation against groups like the Sadducees, who were antagonistic towards this doctrinal stance (Buttigieg 2023:83). Prophetic spirit has also been viewed as an angel according to Philo of Alexander perspective (Levinson 1995a, 1995b). This too carries the foundational posture, which shows that aspects of Pentecostal characteristics with the divinity of the Spirit have been part of the features causing and effecting diverse views of the beliefs of the Pharisees and other groupings.

The Pharisees’ twofold approach seems to have been the source base of this identity and beliefs. No wonder, because of their progressive tendencies, their interpretation of the Torah continued to develop and remained a living force in Judaism (Grabbe 1996:44). Moreover, during various critical moments for the Jewish people, Epstein (1986:111) shows that it was the Pharisees who generated among the people a spirit that proved mightier than a sword and a loyalty that has stood the test of centuries. This Pharisaic action cannot be divorced from the spiritual dimensions recognising the spiritual hand beyond the scriptural stipulations.

This supernatural belief in angels cannot be seen as something far-fetched from the mindset conscious of the Spirit of God and its manifestation even through divine beings. Oral law can be perceived as a dimension that extended the uniqueness, inclusivity and freedom of other beliefs, such as the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels and the prophetic realities inspired by the Spirit of God. Therefore, it is from this perspective that the Pharisees can also be associated with the doctrine of the existence of angels (Mpeta 2022:4), and the incubator of the Spirit of God working beyond the written law.

The life of Josephus,¹⁶ within the Second Temple era, shows that the Spirit of God and its giftings were also a reality with discernible footprints. His religious upbringing from a priestly family indicates that spiritual life and spiritual awareness were central to the religiosity of the Jews of the Second Temple era. This demonstrates that the spiritual inheritance of the Old Testament cannot be separated from the Second Temple era and embraced solely by the emergence of the Christian era. The Spirit of God cannot be entirely silent to the hearts that had the foundational roots of God’s manifestation to their previous generations (Pitts & Pollinger 2013). Such a perspective falls within the understanding of the Spirit of God’s characteristics, which aim to transcend eras such as the STP.

Josephus’s historical path portrays him as a traitor to the Jewish people, and his mention does not carry a positive posture among the Jews at large (Rappaport 2007). However, the perspective of the Jewish people cannot entirely negate the positive aspects of Josephus’s identity and experiences. His study of three major sects shaped his spiritual life. His intervention as part of a delegation to Rome, pleading for priests on the wrong side of Roman law, shows the stature of someone with leadership qualities serving his nation. His appointment as the commissioner in Galilee portrays him as someone who was significant in national participation for the common good of his Jewish people. Therefore, Josephus was not just an ordinary person in both leadership and spiritual life (Thackeray 2024).

After surrendering to the Romans, Josephus found himself at a moment of defeat, with his life at the mercy of his captors. However, when Josephus was led into Vespasian’s presence, he dramatically prophesied that Vespasian would become the next emperor (J.W. 3.3.9; 399–401). This prophetic utterance became a reality as Vespasian was acclaimed emperor in A.D. 69 after Nero’s suicide in A.D. 68 (Helyer 2002:339).

This prophetic gift through Josephus undoubtedly links with his spiritual upbringing and the commitment he had as he navigated through the three sects: the Sadducees, Pharisees and Essenes. The prophetic gift manifesting before Vespasian is a testament that spiritual gifts were alive within those committed to the pursuit of the things of God, even in the STP. This perspective cautions against viewing Pentecostalism as something entirely new or limited to the Christian age. Instead, it should be seen as new experiences building on old ones, including the pre-Early Church, Middle Ages, Reformation, Post-Reformation and Modern Pentecostalism.