The Berea Movement has strongly advocated the universality of power, and it has universally been seen by those who accept it. The contribution of the Berea Movement to the universalization of power is immense. The potential value of the Berea message (which is the basis of the Berea Movement) is great, but the Berea Movement has not yet made a similar global impact in comparison.

One important reason for this is that the universalization of the word was not supported. Power comes from God’s word. To achieve the universalization of power, the universalization of the word must take priority. Just as democracy succeeds when the citizens improve as a whole – for the Berea movement to succeed, more people must have access to the message of Berea and be continually nurtured by it. However, it has so far been restricted by two main causes.

Firstly, Semuon’s teachings should have been steadily supplied in the world’s major languages, whether by video materials or books, but they were below expectations. Because such work needed a high degree of expertise and long-term commitment, even those interested in missions were hesitant to get close. Instead, individuals or small groups occasionally visited foreign countries and did short-term mission work. It is like a squadron of ground troops jumping behind enemy lines (where enemy troops are clustered like bees) and thoughtlessly running about. Such methods can achieve the intended purpose locally, but it cannot change the overall tide of war. Before ground troops are deployed in an area, largescale bombing must first be carried out. Similarly, in order to succeed in the great war of the Berea Movement, the priority must be to introduce and supply God’s word on a largescale.

Secondly, the supply of God’s word was limited because it was done by ‘exclusive distributors’ in each language and country. In the past, Berea missions lacked the mature vision to map out a long-term strategy for each language. If a missionary or a native of that country supposedly volunteered to support the Berea Movement, various resources were supplied almost exclusively to that single person. Not only were there spiritual resources like God’s word, but the economic and human resources were immense. Because these ‘monopolists’ did not want to share the rights to supply the word with other missionaries or locals in that country, it seemed that the Berea missions produced a series of conflicts and could not go beyond very narrow boundaries.

In the desire to gain exclusive rights to supply the Berea message to a country, there was a tendency to maintain exclusive relations with Sungrak Church. In these cases, the missionary or individual did not want other on-site individuals or churches to connect directly with Sungrak Church, but only through himself. As a natural consequence, local churches that adapted to this environment and learned the message of Berea did not have any special affection and appreciation for Sungrak Church (the base of the Berea movement).

You cannot take after someone without affection and gratitude. Any church in the world that joins the Berea movement should have a direct and close relationship with Sungrak Church. This relationship should not be about supplying economic or human resources, but be based only on appreciating God’s word and being loyal to the Berea mission. Universal power can truly be successful when God’s word and relationships are both universally guaranteed.