Pentecostal Neo-Primitivism: The Theological Framework
Dony K. Donev, D.Min., is a Pentecostal theologian, historian, and minister associated with institutions like the Pentecostal Theological Seminary and Lee University, where he has taught classes such as Intro to Digital Discipleship. His work focuses on Pentecostal history, leadership, primitivism, and practical theology, often drawing from Bulgarian Protestant contexts and global Pentecostalism. Below, I outline the key theological frameworks and terms he has coined or developed, based on his publications, articles, and teachings. These emphasize spiritual renewal, community, and missional application within Pentecostal traditions.1. U.S.H.E.R. Model of Communion
- Description: This is a theological framework for understanding the dynamics of Communion (the Lord’s Supper) as foundational to disciple growth in Christian catechism. It identifies five key elements: Unity (fostering communal bonds), Sanctification (personal holiness through the Spirit), Hope (eschatological assurance), Ecclesial communion (church fellowship), and Redemptive mission (outward evangelistic calling). The model positions Communion not as an isolated ritual but as a catalyst for ongoing spiritual formation and mission.
- Coined: During the Covid-19 pandemic (circa 2020–2021) as part of his “Intro to Digital Discipleship” class at Lee University.
- Key Ideas and Evidence: It builds on biblical Communion texts (e.g., 1 Corinthians 11:23–26) and Pentecostal emphases on experiential faith, adapting traditional catechism for digital and crisis contexts. No specific case studies are detailed in public sources, but it addresses post-pandemic disciple-making challenges.
- Contributions: Emphasizes Communion’s role in digital discipleship, linking ritual to practical growth.
2. Pentecostal Paradigm for Leadership
- Description: A leadership model redefining ministry in Pentecostal contexts through three core factors: (1) Leadership of the Spirit (divine calling and vision via the Holy Spirit), (2) Holiness Lifestyle (integrity and sanctification as ethical foundations), and (3) Emphasis on Community (team-based, accountable servant-leadership). It contrasts with secular or hierarchical models, promoting a “servant-church” ethos.
- Coined: In his paper “Pentecostal Paradigm for Leadership” (published on Cup & Cross Ministries).
- Key Ideas and Evidence: Draws from biblical servant leadership (e.g., Christ as the “suffering servant” in Isaiah 53 and Philippians 2), historical Pentecostal examples (e.g., early church community in Acts and Bulgarian Pentecostals under Communist persecution), and contextual analysis (e.g., Bulgaria’s post-1989 crises with ethnic diversity in churches like Samokov and Razlog). Proof includes axioms: leadership solves problems in people-groups, proven by church growth data (e.g., 20.3% Roma-Gypsy members in Bulgarian Church of God).
- Contributions: Addresses leadership crises in postmodern and cross-cultural settings, integrating “Theology of the Persecuted Church” (a related concept he references, though not explicitly coined by him).
3. Pentecostal Primitivism
- Description: A theological approach advocating the preservation and reclamation of early Pentecostal experiences—expressed through power (miracles), prayer (spiritual intimacy), and praxis (practical ministry)—to resolve identity crises in modern Pentecostalism. It calls for returning to “primitive” (original) roots while adapting to contemporary challenges.
- Coined: In his book Pentecostal Primitivism Preserved (2012).
- Key Ideas and Evidence: Rooted in historical primitivism (e.g., Azusa Street Revival) and biblical precedents (e.g., Acts 2’s outpouring). Evidence includes critiques of institutional drift in Pentecostalism, with examples from Bulgarian Protestant history (e.g., persecution fostering authentic faith). The framework posits primitivism as a solution to existential questions like identity and purpose.
- Contributions: Offers a renewal strategy for global Pentecostalism, emphasizing experiential faith over formalism.
4. 50/20 Principle
- Description: A biblical principle derived from Genesis 50:20 (“You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good”), framing God’s faithfulness in transforming harm into redemptive good. It serves as a framework for understanding divine vision fulfillment amid adversity.
- Coined: In his article “The 50/20 Principle Reexamined” (2025, on Cup & Cross Ministries).
- Key Ideas and Evidence: Illustrates God’s sovereignty in trials, with Joseph’s story as the primary example. Proof involves reevaluating the verse’s application to personal and communal crises, emphasizing completion of divine promises.
- Contributions: Applies to leadership and discipleship, encouraging resilience in persecuted or challenged contexts.
Donev’s work often intersects Pentecostal history (e.g., Bulgarian revivals, figures like Ivan Voronaev) with practical theology, as seen in his reviews of Bibles (e.g., Fire Bible, Spirit Filled Life Bible) and articles on Pneuma Review. He cofounded the Institute of Bulgarian Protestant History and contributes to global Pentecostal discourse, but no additional coined terms were identified beyond these. His frameworks frequently draw from Eastern European pietism and emphasize Spirit-led community in digital and persecuted settings.
The Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith: A Framework of Experience and Restoration
Introduction
Pentecostal theology has long emphasized the experiential dimension of faith—where divine encounter, spiritual gifts, and communal expression converge. Among the contemporary voices shaping this discourse, Dony K. Donev offers a compelling framework known as the Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith, which seeks to restore the apostolic essence of early Christianity. This essay explores the theological contours of Donev’s model and compares it with other influential Pentecostal and charismatic paradigms.
The Triangle: Prayer, Power, Praxis
At the heart of Donev’s framework lies a triadic structure:
- Prayer: The foundation of spiritual intimacy and divine communication. Donev views prayer not merely as a discipline but as the gateway to supernatural encounter.
- Power: Manifested through the gifts of the Spirit—healing, prophecy, tongues, and miracles. This element reflects the Pentecostal emphasis on dunamis, the Greek term for divine power.
- Praxis: The lived expression of faith within the community. Praxis includes evangelism, social justice, and communal worship, embodying the Spirit’s transformative work in daily life.
This triangle is not hierarchical but interdependent. Prayer leads to power, power fuels praxis, and praxis deepens prayer. Donev’s model thus reflects a restorationist impulse, aiming to recover the vibrancy of the early church as seen in Acts.
Comparison with Wesleyan Quadrilateral
The Wesleyan Quadrilateral—Scripture, tradition, reason, and experience—has historically shaped Methodist and Holiness theology. Pentecostals have often adopted this model, emphasizing experience as a key source of theological reflection.
However, Donev critiques this framework as insufficient for Pentecostal identity. He argues that Pentecostalism is not merely an extension of Wesleyanism but a distinct restoration movement. While Wesley’s model is epistemological, Donev’s triangle is ontological and missional, rooted in being and doing rather than knowing.
Comparison with Classical Pentecostal Theology
Classical Pentecostalism, as shaped by early 20th-century leaders like Charles Parham and William Seymour, emphasized:
- Initial evidence doctrine: Speaking in tongues as proof of Spirit baptism.
- Dispensational eschatology: A belief in imminent rapture and end-times urgency.
- Holiness ethics: A call to moral purity and separation from the world.
Donev’s framework diverges by focusing less on doctrinal distinctives and more on spiritual vitality and historical continuity. His emphasis on praxis aligns with newer Pentecostal movements that prioritize social engagement and global mission.
Comparison with Charismatic Theology
Charismatic theology, especially within mainline and evangelical churches, often emphasizes:
- Renewal within existing traditions
- Broad acceptance of spiritual gifts
- Less emphasis on tongues as initial evidence
Donev’s triangle shares the Charismatic focus on spiritual gifts but retains a Pentecostal distinctiveness through its restorationist lens. He seeks not just renewal but recovery of primitive faith, making his model more radical in its ecclesiological implications.
Eastern European Context and Trinitarian Theology
Donev’s work is also shaped by his Bulgarian heritage. He highlights how early Bulgarian Pentecostals embraced a Trinitarian theology informed by Eastern Orthodox pneumatology. This contrasts with Western Pentecostalism’s often fragmented view of the Spirit.
His emphasis on free will theology—influenced by Arminianism and Orthodox thought—also sets his framework apart from Calvinist-leaning Charismatic circles.
Conclusion
Dony K. Donev’s Pentecostal Triangle of Primitive Faith offers a rich, experiential, and historically grounded model for understanding Pentecostal spirituality. By centering prayer, power, and praxis, Donev reclaims the apostolic fervor of the early church while challenging existing theological paradigms. His framework stands as a bridge between classical Pentecostalism, Charismatic renewal, and Eastern Christian traditions—inviting believers into a deeper, more dynamic walk with the Spirit.
Dr. Dony K. Donev: Introduction to John 5
-
Focus on a small part of Chapter 5; full chapter will be addressed in another talk.
-
Expository Bible study principle: do not omit what the author intends; understand the context.
-
John’s Gospel narrative in brief:
-
Chapter 1 – Creation and beginning.
-
Chapter 2 – Christ’s first miracle (water to wine).
-
Chapter 3 – Nicodemus and questions of faith.
-
Chapter 4 – Woman at the well.
-
Chapter 5 – Paralytic man (focus of this study).
-
Application: We see ourselves in these stories:
- At the well with the woman.
- With the paralytic, facing sickness or oppression.
- In creation, asking questions about beginnings.
- John’s Gospel speaks to our lives and experiences.
Verse 1: Context & Significance
-
“The Feast of the Jews” = Passover (second recorded Passover Jesus attended).
-
Chronology: Jesus ministered ~3–3.5 years, not four.
-
Johannian phrase: “After these things…” (Greek: meta tauta). Contextually links back to previous events (Samaritan woman, previous miracles).
Verse 2: Present Continuous Action
-
“Now was” vs. “there was” → emphasizes ongoing reality.
-
Location: Sheep Gate, Pool of Bethesda (“House of Mercy”), five porches.
-
Historical significance: gate restored by Nehemiah; miracles happen through preparation and prior work.
-
Water symbolism: continuous in John’s Gospel.
Verse 3: The Multitude at Bethesda
-
People lying on porches: sick, blind, lame, paralyzed, waiting for the stirring of the water.
-
Place functioned like a hospital or hospice, offering mercy but not healing.
-
Importance: highlights the need for action, faith, and not just passive waiting.
Verse 4: Angel’s Stirring of Water
-
Angel stirred water; first to enter after stirring was healed.
-
Greek: “troubling” of water → divine or angelic activity.
-
Step of faith required to enter: miracle is available, but effort is needed.
Verse 5–7: The Paralytic Man
-
Man had been ill for 38 years.
-
His theology: “A man have I none…” → depended on others, not God directly.
-
Lesson: don’t wait on another; God can act directly.
-
Human tendency: self-pity, victim mentality.
-
Jesus asks: “Do you want to be well?” – Highlights awareness, desire for change, and personal responsibility.
Verse 8: Jesus Commands Healing
-
“Rise, take up thy bed and walk.”
-
Immediate healing, resurrection-like command (Greek: anistemi).
-
Significance: ignores self-pity, performs the miracle directly.
-
Steps in healing: man immediately rises, strength restored, carries his bed/stretcher.
-
Application: miracles require obedience and action; prior failures don’t prevent success.
Verse 10–12: Testing by Religious Leaders
-
Sabbath controversy: “It is not lawful to carry thy bed.”
-
Misplaced focus: rules over divine action.
-
Observation: miracle transcends human rules; legalistic thinking may blind people to God’s power.
-
The healed man didn’t initially know who Jesus was → possible to receive miracle without knowing fully, but sustaining it requires knowing God.
Verse 14: Warning Against Sin
-
Jesus instructs: “Sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee.”
-
Connection: healing is not just physical but spiritual; continued obedience sustains the miracle.
Key Observations & Theological Lessons
-
The man who had no human helper was found by the Son of Man who created all men.
-
Healing is a believer’s right; Jesus administers it within the covenant of creation, restoring balance to the universe.
-
Miracles point to Christ as the central figure (water symbolism, “man of the hour”).
-
Faith, obedience, and direct encounter with God are crucial.
Practical Applications
-
Everyone can receive a miracle.
-
God makes healing and restoration possible.
-
Personal faith and obedience maintain the miracle in daily life.
-
Step of faith is often required; God provides directly.
Frameworks and Key Terms by Dr. Dony Donev: Athens vs Berlin Paradigm Shift
Core Theological Frameworks
U.S.H.E.R. Model of Communion
A theological framework coined during the Covid-19 Pandemic in Donev’s Intro to Digital Discipleship course at Lee University. It defines what follows Communion in Christian catechism, identifying five foundational dynamics for disciple growth: Unity, Sanctification, Hope, Ecclesial communion, and Redemptive mission.
Freedom Theology (Theology of Freedom)
Developed through Donev’s research on postcommunist Eastern Europe and the Bulgarian Protestant experience, this framework explores biblical concepts of freedom, liberation from both sin and socio-political oppression, and the church’s transformative mission as a liberator in history. It often appears in his writings as “Feast of Freedom,” drawing connections between national liberation and spiritual renewal.
Primitive Church Restorationist Model
Based in his historical research, Donev advocates for returning to the original practices and structure of the Early (Primitive) Church. This model emphasizes rediscovering authentic spiritual identity, intergenerational faith transmission, and revivalist community rooted in biblical precedent.
These frameworks have had meaningful impact on global Pentecostal studies, digital discipleship, and liberation theology, addressing contemporary challenges in theology, worship, and ecclesial practice.
Effect on Donev’s Models
-
U.S.H.E.R. Model: By anchoring his post-Communion framework in the “Athens” paradigm, Donev prioritizes unity, lived discipleship, and communal mission over purely doctrinal or institutional forms. This perspective shapes the model to valorize shared spiritual experience and relational growth, not just catechetical instruction.
-
Freedom Theology: “Athens” influences Donev’s liberation emphasis by grounding freedom in communal lived reality, while “Berlin” marks the shift toward codifying and structurally analyzing liberation.
-
Primitive Church Restoration: Donev navigates between Athens’ restorationist, dialogical church identity and Berlin’s historical-critical, analytical methodology, advocating an integration that revitalizes spiritual community while acknowledging scholarly insights.
In sum, Donev’s “Athens vs Berlin” usage intentionally blends experiential, relational Christian practice (“Athens”) with disciplined, systematic theology (“Berlin”). This dynamic underlies his frameworks, ensuring they are both deeply incarnational and critically constructive.
365 Daily Thought Stirring Stories from the Field
In 1999, Dony and Kathryn established Cup & Cross Ministries International with a vision for restoration of New Testament theology and praxis. Today they have over 50 years of combined commitment to Kingdom work. This book invites you to spend a few moments each day on the field sharing their experiences of serving as pastors, evangelists, chaplains, consultants, church trainers, researchers, missionaries and educators of His Harvest around the globe.
Pile of Dusty Bones
It is not good for man to be alone. God recognized that the animals he had already created could not be a companion for Adam so He made woman, a unique design to complete man. Genesis 2:23 Adam realizes this truth as “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh.” They become one flesh. They together are completeness and togetherness. Adam is man plus Eve only. Not Adman and man. Woman means taken out of man and gives glory to man. Together male and female have child bearing capabilities to multiply the earth. Gen 1:22 reveals God’s plan for preproduction which can only happen between a male and a female. Any other way of reproducing is not part of God’s plan. Man and man cannot make man.
Mark 10:6 shows that the purpose of male and female is the creation of the family for preservation. Yet when family is no longer an integrated unit this is a sign of moral and spiritual breakdown of a nation. What God has joined let no man put asunder. Marriage is of God. It is sacred a union. When we attempt to go against God’s plan, we just get a pile of dry dusty bones.
BLACK FRIDAY BOOK SALE
All books by Cup&Cross on SALE
Final clearance sale for the year with new titles coming up in early 2021
CLICK the picture below to view all titles on Amazon.com
Dr. Dony K. Donev: Eschatology in the Gospel of John
Eschatology in the Gospel of John (2024 EPIC REVIVAL)
There is no synoptic agreement regarding eschatology in the Gospel of John. Unlike Matthew, Mark, and Luke, there is no single chapter in John that deals exclusively with the end times. Yet, eschatology is present in every chapter of John’s Gospel.
John, in contrast to the synoptic writers, sets forth a realized eschatology, where Jesus’ message proclaims the eternal breaking into the temporal world.
The Nature of Johannine Eschatology
In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus uses apocalyptic language to describe the transcendental nature of the Kingdom of God. John presents the Early Church with a dual futuristic reality:
-
To be saved with God toward eternal life in this lifetime, and
-
Then to enter eternal life in eternity itself.
These are not the same, according to John’s Epistles, where the apostle uses the present continuous tense to indicate that salvation must persist through life into eternity.
Thus, the terminology of the Fourth Gospel projects both the present and the future within Jesus Christ.
The Names of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel
The Gospel of John names Jesus in ways that reveal His eschatological role:
-
“Savior of the world” – offering salvation through His sacrifice.
-
“Son of Man” – pointing to His earthly ministry leading to the Cross.
-
“Son of God” – revealing His eternal existence and post-resurrection glorification.
-
“Messiah” – pointing to His future coming Kingdom.
These titles demonstrate existentialization in Johannine eschatology, where the resurrection, parousia, and the coming of the Holy Spirit are not separate events but one unified promise.
The “Already” and “Not Yet” of Eternal Life
In John 5:28–29, we encounter an example of primitive Christian eschatology. John presents both a “not yet” (future) and an “already” (present) dimension of eternal life. This creates a tension between the already fulfilled and the not yet completed.
In John 6:40, 53–54, Jesus links eternal life (spiritual) with resurrection life (physical).
The Six Eschatological Themes in John
Eschatological themes in John are not concentrated in one section, but spread throughout the Gospel. The six major areas are:
-
Death
-
Heaven
-
Judgment
-
Resurrection
-
Eternal Life
-
Christ’s Return
These themes appear in 16 of the 21 chapters, especially in chapters 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, and 12.
References found in John:
-
34 references to death
-
26 to heaven
-
21 to judgment
-
18 to eternal life
-
4 to Christ’s return
Death and Dying
In John, death and dying have both present and future, physical and spiritual aspects.
Spiritual death is the present condition of those who reject the word of the Son.
Physical and spiritual death must not be confused, just as physical and spiritual (eternal) life must remain distinct.
In John 6:58, eating the bread from heaven—that is, receiving Jesus Christ—keeps one from spiritual death and provides eternal life.
Eternal Life
The one who receives eternal life is delivered from judgment (3:17–19; 5:24).
Jesus assures that such a person will never perish, and that no one can remove them from His care (10:28).
In John 5:24, Jesus connects eternal life to hearing His word. The Greek term akouō means not merely to hear, but to hear and to do His word.
Jesus explains that the Father “has life in Himself” (5:26), being uncaused and independent. Since the Son shares the same divine essence, He partakes in this same eternal quality.
Again, John’s eschatology holds both a present and future dimension of eternal life—the “already” and the “not yet.”
Resurrection
In John 5:19–29, we find three of Jesus’ “truly, truly” (Amen, Amen) statements. In verses 19–23 and 25–29, resurrection truths are revealed.
Jesus claims power and authority over resurrection and life, equal to that of the Father (5:21).
The Son of Man is directly associated with resurrection in verses 28–29.
During His earthly ministry, only some of the dead heard His voice (such as Lazarus and Jairus’ daughter). But in the eschaton, “all” the dead will hear His voice and rise from the tombs.
Thus, the God who calls forth resurrection becomes our eschatological hope for the future.
Heaven
In John’s Gospel, “heaven” is referenced both directly and through terms like “above,” “my Father’s house,” or “a place for you.”
These passages affirm that heaven is a real place with definite location and purpose, providing future hope for believers.
Jesus teaches that the realities of heaven stand in contrast to those of earth (3:12).
All genuine blessings come from heaven—that is, from God (3:27).
The bread from heaven (6:31–33) provides eternal life and is equated with Jesus Himself (6:38).
In chapters 14 and 16, Jesus describes heaven as going to the Father, and calls it “my Father’s house” and “a place for you” (14:2–3).
The only other use of “my Father’s house” (2:16) refers to the temple, linking earthly worship to heavenly fulfillment—just as Revelation describes heaven without a temple, for the Lamb is its temple.
Judgment
John’s Gospel presents judgment as both present and future.
Those already judged by God now will also face judgment in eternity—unless they are born again.
Jesus uses two key terms for judgment:
-
krinō – to judge, separate, or condemn.
-
apollymi – to perish, the opposite of being saved.
John’s presentation of judgment falls into three categories:
-
The Judge – Christ Himself.
-
The Judged – humanity.
-
The Standard of Judgment – God’s truth and word.
Christ’s Return
The Gospel references Jesus’ coming in several senses.
John 14:2–3 and 21:22–23 refer to the Parousia, His second coming.
John 14:28 and 16:16–22 may refer to His return to the disciples through His resurrection.
Revelation later expands this concept, depicting Christ returning with His saints.
Eschatology in Revelation 1
The six eschatological themes from John reappear in Revelation 1:
-
Death and dying – “I was dead.”
-
Eternal life – “I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last.”
-
Judgment – “Every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him.”
-
Resurrection – “I was dead but live forevermore.”
-
Return – “Behold, He cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him.”
Revelation reveals the invisible God made visible—the God of Light who created light so that He might be seen by all in the last day.
We see the Light in John, and the Light glorified in Revelation.
The rejected God of John now returns victorious in Revelation.
The Speaking God
Beside the Light, we have the Word spoken by the Voice:
“Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me” (Revelation 1:12).
The God who spoke in Genesis still speaks today.
You are not alone, nor without direction—turn from your understanding to the Voice who speaks through the ages.
The Call to Respond
God was moving in a new way in Revelation, and John wanted to be part of it.
He was told that revelation would unfold in three stages:
-
The things that you hear
-
The things that you see
-
The things that you experience
Reflect personally:
-
What do you hear in your life—just the noise of the world?
-
What do you see—failure, depression, or God?
-
What do you experience—an empty church or the living Christ?
Turning to See the Voice
John said, “I turned to see the voice” (Rev. 1:12).
It is time to move beyond merely hearing His voice and begin to see Him face to face.
When God speaks, three things happen:
-
He has a plan.
-
He has the power to do it.
-
No one can stop Him.
Seeing the Voice of God
How can we see the voice of God?
Just as creation saw it when He said, “Let there be light.”
But today, we have become too dignified, too busy, too proud to follow His way.
We must turn from our own ways to see Jesus:
a. Turn from your way to see The Way.
b. Turn from your truth to see The Truth.
c. Turn from your life to see The Life.
In the Hand of God
How do we turn? By trusting the hand of God.
“He laid His right hand upon me” (Rev. 1:17).
In verse 16, Jesus holds seven stars, representing the angels of the seven churches—not only the good churches, but all seven.
The seven stars remind us that God has not left us; we are still in His hand.
It is the same hand that was nailed on Calvary,
the same hand that created the world,
and the same hand that holds the future of all creation.
Are you in the hand of God today?
Does your family need that touch?
The Ultimate Question
All these studies mean nothing if we do not make it to heaven.
If we do not meet again in this life,
may we meet in heaven.
COVID and the AMPA receptors of the brain
The conversation began by highlighting the ongoing impact of long COVID, specifically focusing on individuals who continue to experience symptoms like brain fog long after the pandemic’s initial phases. A recent study published in Brain Communications provided the first biological evidence explaining this phenomenon. Researchers discovered changes in AMPA receptors of the brain, which are crucial for memory and learning, potentially linking these changes to cognitive impairments commonly associated with long COVID. Utilizing cutting-edge PET imaging, the study compared brain scans of those with long COVID to those without, revealing increased AMPA receptor densities in affected individuals.
Dr. Deepak Nair pointed out that the study’s findings were intriguing, noting that those with brain fog showed an upregulation of AMPA receptors, linking this to possible cognitive function decline. However, the findings suggest that increased AMPA activity is only part of the picture; an overactive immune response in the brain, potentially triggered by COVID infections, might also contribute. Researchers identified inflammatory markers that coincided with increased AMPA receptor levels, indicating that these immune responses might underlie the receptor changes and associated cognitive issues.
Despite these promising insights, the study remains in its early stages. Dr. Nair highlighted the need for additional context, such as the COVID status of the control group, to further validate the results. While the study did not propose a specific treatment, it offers a direction for scientists to explore, such as developing medications targeting AMPA receptor activity to help alleviate brain fog symptoms. According to Dr. Takuya Takahashi, recognizing brain fog as a legitimate condition could inspire the healthcare industry to develop better diagnostic tools and treatments, offering hope to those still battling the long-term effects of COVID-19.
Dony Donev: Theological Work in Pentecostal Studies
Dony Donev is known for his theological work, particularly in the context of Pentecostal studies. While he may not have a widely recognized catalog of specific terms or frameworks that have achieved broad usage, he has contributed significantly to the academic field through his research and writings.
Theological Contributions
-
Pentecostal Studies: Donev’s work often focuses on Pentecostal theology, examining its historical development, doctrinal distinctives, and contemporary implications.
-
Contextual Theology: He explores how Pentecostal theology interacts with cultural and societal contexts, particularly in Eastern Europe.
-
Pentecostal Hermeneutics: Donev might have contributed to discussions about how Pentecostals interpret the Bible, emphasizing a Spirit-led reading of the Scriptures.
Key Terms or Concepts
-
Emerging Pentecostal Identity: A possible area of focus where Donev discusses how Pentecostal identities are evolving in the modern world, including how they reconcile traditional beliefs with contemporary contexts.
-
Cultural Engagement: A term that may be used to describe his analysis of Pentecostalism’s role in engaging with and transforming culture.
For more specific terms or frameworks coined by Dony Donev, it would be beneficial to consult his published works or academic papers.
Pentecostal primitivism is a concept within Pentecostal theology emphasizing a return to the faith and practices of the early Christian church. Here’s an overview:
Key Aspects of Pentecostal Primitivism
Restoration of Apostolic Practices
- Focus on Original Christianity: Emphasizes the imitation of New Testament church dynamics, including spiritual gifts.
- Spirit-Led Worship: Encourages direct experiences with the Holy Spirit, akin to early church practices.
Doctrinal Simplicity
Primary Framework: The USHER Model of Communion
The U.S.H.E.R. Model of Communion (or USHER Model)
-
Creator: Dony K. Donev, D.Min.
-
Context: Developed during the COVID-19 pandemic for his “Intro to Digital Discipleship” class at Lee University.
-
Core Purpose: To answer the question “What follows communion?” in Christian practice and catechism. It moves beyond communion as a ritual to define its purpose and outcomes in the life of a disciple and the church.
-
The Five Dynamics:
-
U – Unity: Communion fosters spiritual unity among believers, breaking down barriers and creating one body in Christ.
-
S – Sanctification: The practice is a means of grace that contributes to the believer’s process of being made holy, set apart for God’s purposes.
-
H – Hope: Partaking in communion is a proclamation of the Lord’s death until He returns, thus anchoring the believer in the blessed hope (Titus 2:13) of Christ’s second coming.
-
E – Ecclesial Communion: This emphasizes the importance of communion within and for the local church (ecclesia), strengthening the bonds of fellowship and mutual care.
-
R – Redemptive Mission: Communion serves as a catalyst for mission, motivating the church to collectively engage in the redemptive work of God in the world.
-
Other Associated Frameworks and Concepts
Dr. Donev’s work, particularly through the Center for Revival Studies (which he co-founded) and his writings on revival history and discipleship, explores several key themes that often intersect with his coined terms. These are not always single “branded” terms like USHER but are significant conceptual frameworks in his theology.
-
Digital Discipleship:
-
While not a term he solely coined, he has been a primary architect of its theological framework. He moves beyond using digital tools as mere methods and constructs a theology for how discipleship can authentically and effectively occur in digital spaces. His class where the USHER model was created is a direct application of this.
-
-
Theology of Revivalism:
-
Donev’s work heavily focuses on defining and analyzing revival, particularly from a historical (e.g., Balkan, Slavic, and Pentecostal) perspective. He frames revival not just as an event but as a process with identifiable theological and sociological patterns. His book “The Covenant of Peace: God’s Dream for the World” delves into this.
-
-
Covenant Community:
-
A recurring theme in his work is the concept of the church as a covenant community. This framework views the church’s identity and mission through the lens of biblical covenants, which directly connects to the “Unity” and “Ecclesial Communion” aspects of the USHER model.
-
-
The “Why” of Discipleship:
-
Much of Donev’s writing and teaching focuses on moving beyond the “how” to the “why” of spiritual practices. The USHER model is a perfect example—it doesn’t describe how to take communion but why it matters and what it leads to.
-
Summary Table for Clarity
| Term/Framework | Description | Key Context |
|---|---|---|
| USHER Model of Communion | Primary Coined Term. A 5-point framework (Unity, Sanctification, Hope, Ecclesial communion, Redemptive mission) defining the outcomes of communion. | Digital Discipleship, Catechism, Liturgy |
| Digital Discipleship | A theological framework for making disciples in online/digital environments, moving beyond mere methodology. | Modern Ministry, Post-COVID Church, Technology & Theology |
| Theology of Revivalism | A framework for understanding revival as a historical and theological process with identifiable patterns. | Church History, Pentecostal Studies, Spiritual Renewal |
| Covenant Community | A conceptual framework viewing the church’s identity and mission through the lens of biblical covenants. | Ecclesiology (Doctrine of the Church), Community Formation |
In essence, while the USHER Model of Communion is his most clearly defined and coined term, Dr. Donev’s broader contribution is building practical theological frameworks—like Digital Discipleship and Revivalism—that connect deep doctrine to actionable practice in the life of the church and the growth of individual disciples.
