Author

Dr Ibukunolu Isaac Olodude is a Lecturer in the Department of Linguistics and African Languages, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. He holds a B.A. degree from Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria, where he graduated as the best male student in the Faculty of Arts in 2006. He also possesses MA and PhD degrees in Linguistics from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. His areas of specialization are African Studies, Sociolinguistics, Applied Linguistics, Discourse Studies and Gender/Sexuality Studies, while his research interests include the intersections of language with religion, identity, public health, migration, ecology and gender. He is a member of the West African Linguistic Society (WALS) and the African Association for the Study of Religions (AASR). He is a Visiting Fellow of the Leeds University Centre for African Studies (LUCAS) and the Ife Institute of Advanced Studies (IIAS).

JDTREA 2026,5(2): 103–126

Introduction

This article examines the linguistic construction of identity in selected Pentecostal churches with large membership in Nigeria as well as the Daesoon Jinrihoe religious movement in Korea. It highlights the idiolects and sociolects associated with the leaders of the religious movements, judging from popular statements often said by them, which serve as identity markers for these churches. This is because language plays a crucial role in constructing institutional and collective identities and it is central to the negotiation of identity especially in religious communities. In Nigerian Pentecostal Christianity, leaders of churches use distinctive linguistic expressions and statements that function as identity markers, shaping not only how congregations perceive themselves but also how outsiders recognize each denomination. Ritualized statements, idiolects, greetings, declarative slogans, lexical innovations, and prayer formulas are more than rhetorical devices; they are performative acts ( Austin 1962 ; Butler 1997 ) that reinforce theology, authority, and communal belonging. These statements are symbolic practices that solidify the theological orientation, spiritual authority, and communal ethos of each denomination. This article analyses the linguistic practices of four selected Nigerian churches—Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), Deeper Life Bible Church (DLBC), Dunamis International Gospel Centre, and Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries (MFM)—with attention to how their leaders’ statements construct distinct identities. It also explores statements from the leaders of the Daesoon Jinrihoe religious movement in Korea.

Research Methodology and Theoretical Framework

The study adopts an ethnographic methodology, particularly participant and non-participant observation to harvest the lexicons and statements that have constructed an identity for the selected churches. Data were obtained by listening to the sermons of the leaders of the churches available on their website. Information about the churches, including their aims, vision and mission statements are all available in the public domain on their websites. The researcher also visited some of the church locations in Nigeria over a seven-month period between January and July 2024, and participated in their services to gather information on how these symbolic statements reinforce communal belonging and construct distinct identities. The researcher also conducted unstructured interviews with some leaders and members of the selected churches to generate critical data about spiritual leadership in the selected churches and how the leaders’ statements shape the negotiation of identities within the church membership. Furthermore, several commonly expressed statements and phrases frequently used by leaders and official teachings within the Daesoon Jinrihoe religious movement in Korea were drawn directly from the movement’s doctrinal materials including the canonical scripture and museum sources available on their website (eng.daesoon.org), reflecting how its leaders communicate core principles and inspirational guidance to members of the movement.

The article also draws insights from Bucholtz and Hall’s (2005) sociocultural linguistic framework, which notes that identity is not fixed but constructed through interactional practices, including ritualized expressions and repeated linguistic patterns which end up as forms of the individual’s idiolect or the group’s sociolect.

Olodude (2021) notes that the use of language differs in style from person to person and from group to group, hence, the existence of language varieties among individuals and social groups. Certain individuals chose to speak in certain way different from others all in a bid to carve out a unique identity for themselves. The peculiar language use or style of an individual referred to as idiolect serves as a marker of identity for the individual, while at the societal level, the peculiar language use of a social group is referred to as sociolect or sociolectal variations. This is the peculiar language style of a social group which only in-group members understand among themselves. The sociolect of a social group serves as a very important identity marker for the group and makes them distinct from other groups, with respect to language use and style ( Edwards 2009 , 19–22). This study notes that the sociolect of the leaders of the selected churches falls under the third sociolectal purpose identified by Grabias, which is expressiveness. The use of the popular phrases and words serve the purpose of group identity expression for the churches.

Language and Identity

Edwards traces the derivation history of the word Identity. According to him, the word was derived from the Latin word “idem” which means, the “sameness of an individual at all times or in all circumstances…the fact that a person is oneself and not someone else” ( Edwards 2009 ). Identity therefore seems to be what makes an individual unique. Individuals have features and characteristics that distinguish them from others.

Chew opines that “identity is used as an umbrella term to describe a person’s expression of their individuality or affiliation to a group. Some identities are individual while others are more expressive of social or group membership” ( Chew 2014 , 51). Identity is who people are, how they see themselves, and the group they identify with. Identity seems to be dynamic and could be multifaceted, hence the tendency for people to possess multiple identities. Dorian puts it this way that people “will redefine themselves when circumstances make it desirable or when circumstances force it on them” ( Dorian 1999 , 25). In other words, since we belong to different social groups, people tend to take on different identities by associating with different social groups, as the situation demands.

Bichani (2015) goes further to identify four types of “identity” as follows:

Personal identity: Every individual has features that distinguish him or her from any other person. These features could be biological, physical, psychological, and so on. It may be gender, complexion, attributes, beliefs, education, etc. which differentiates an individual from the other.

Social identity: This is the collective identity of a social group. People come together to form social groups and usually have some features, attributes and characteristics in common that bind them together. They usually have a sense of belonging to the group.

Ethnic identity: Padilla (1999, 115) defines ethnic identity as an “individual’s membership in a social group that shares a common ancestral heritage”, while Norton (2006, 2) defines it as “the relationship between an individual and other members of a particular ethnic group… who are considered to share a common history, a common language…” Joseph (2004) sees ethnic identity as focusing more on “shared common descent, cultural heritage and political aspirations for autonomy” (cited in Garri and Mugaddam 2015). From these definitions, members of the same ethnic group share things in common. Usually, they have the same history, cultural background, and ancestral heritage and have a common language for communication. The people of Ile-Ife, for instance, would be seen as an ethnic group, based on the above, and share the same ethnic identity.

Religious Identity: This is when people identify themselves with their faith or religious beliefs, rather than their membership of any other social group. For instance, a devoted Hausa Muslim in Ile-Ife could prefer to rather introduce himself first as a Muslim and value his faith above his ethnic identity of being a Hausa indigene.

Bichani (2015) omitted one major type of identity in her classification which is linguistic identity. The role of language goes beyond communication as it plays a very important role in identity construction and reconstruction. Language shapes how people perceive themselves and can therefore be said to be a form of identity in itself. It is quite obvious that individuals do not exist alone, in line with the popular saying that “no man is an island”. Individuals are attached to different groups which could be social, professional, ethnic and religious. It is this attachment that leads to the “us” versus “them” syndrome. We often delineate boundaries, and once these boundaries are delineated, the concept of in-group allegiance and favouritism comes in. This is in line with the main findings of the Social Identity Theory ( Tajfel 1979 ). It was this theory that later metamorphosed into the Ethnolinguistic Identity Theory on which this study is based. Language has often been seen as a medium of communication. The reality, however, is that language is far more than that. Certain languages are tied to certain social groups and in fact such languages are oftentimes the markers of such identities.

Chomsky differentiates between “competence” and “performance” ( Chomsky 1965 , 3). According to him, modern theories of language analysis should only focus on “competence”, which is “an idealized capacity, a mental capacity” of language knowledge. This is in contrast with “performance” which is the production of actual utterances. Chomsky believes that “performance” is usually influenced by several extraneous societal factors. Modern linguists however are realizing the fact that language analysis goes beyond seeing it as a mere medium of communication. Edwards opined that “any investigation of language that considers only language will be deficient and inappropriate limitations and restrictions will cripple insights” ( Edwards 2009 ).

One main societal factor that interacts with language is the identity-marking function of language. Earlier, we had highlighted four different types of identity identified by Bichani. These are personal, social, ethnic and religious identities. Each of these identities has its unique and peculiar language markers. Language as a form of personal and social identity marker shall be examined below.

Personal identity marker: Certain individuals use language in certain ways that are peculiar to them. This is referred to as “idiolect.” The idiolect of individuals mark them out and once the individual speaks, other members of the society easily recognize who is speaking. It may be the voice pitch, tone, pronunciation, style, or frequent use of certain words or jargon by the individual. All these form the idiolect which is the identity marker of the individual.

Social identity marker: Individuals belong to different groups in society. Some of these are social class, professional groups, gender groups, age groups, etc. It is a well-known fact that these social groups have particular language varieties peculiar to them. These peculiar language varieties are referred to as sociolects. In addition, we often refer to these sociolects as the “register” of the group. Sociolect or the register of a group is an identity marker that clearly distinguishes a social group from another. This consists of the linguistic repertoire available and exclusive to a social group. Certain professional groups have particular registers which they choose from in communicating. For instance, medical doctors have a way of communicating among themselves to the exclusion of out-group members. Only in-group members of the profession would be able to decode what is being communicated. Also, certain age groups have their peculiar way of communicating among themselves.

Norton views the concept of identity as “dynamic and constantly changing across time and place… constructed by language” ( Norton 2006 , 3). In other words, people tend to change identity from time to time and from place to place. This is because people do not exist in isolation. We meet with different groups and make contact with diverse people from varied backgrounds, languages and cultures. People therefore associate with and sometimes assimilate the culture and language of people they come in contact with. As a result, one individual could have more than one identity based on the social groups he belongs to. This is in line with Dorian’s view that individuals “will redefine themselves when circumstances make it desirable or when circumstances force it on them” ( Dorian 1999 , 25). This is what Bichani refers to as having “multiple and overlapping identities” ( Bichani 2015 ). Identity is therefore multifaceted and highly dynamic.

There is no gain-saying that language has a strong relationship with identity. Joseph (2004) views language and identity as inseparable (cited in Chew 2014). Hollington puts the relationship this way “a desire to sound different and express oneself differently…” ( Hollington 2016 , 147). It is quite obvious that when people come together as social groups, it always comes with a desire for self-expression and self-assertion. Language is usually the vehicle of self-expression, either for individuals or for groups. Garri and Mugaddam (2015) opined that “language is the easiest determinant of unveiling others’ identities”. This is perhaps why we often ask the question “where are you from?” for the addressee to reveal their identity.

Language may also be a tool to either keep people “out” or “in”. In other words, each social group has its peculiar language which serves as a means of excluding outsiders from the group. Chew added that “language is the key factor which defines, erects and maintains (or eradicates) social boundaries that exclude those who believe and behave differently” ( Chew 2014 ). Language choice thus becomes a veritable means of distinguishing the “we” from the “them”. Identities can be said therefore to be facilitated by language.

The second school of thought believes that language is not as important to identity as it is being paraded. They argue that there are lots of ethnic groups that have held on to their identity, even though language shift has occurred to their language. Canagarajah (2008) and Kumar et al. (2008) gave examples of Tamil and Hindi identities, respectively that have been sustained, despite the occurrence of language shifts in their language. Kumar et al. (2008) opined that “if a group considers language a core value, it will hold language central to its identity and will be likely to view language shift as a shift in culture.” This school of thought believes that while some cultures hold language central to their identity, some other cultures are not tied to their language, hence a detachment from their identity.

The third school of thought believes that “a group’s language affects the construction of its identity.” ( Bichani 2015 ). In other words, an individual’s language identity has a way of influencing his language choice and vice-versa. This school of thought therefore believes that language and identity interdepend on each other. This is the case of the Hausa ethnic group which this study investigates.

Language and Religion

The intersection of language and religion has attracted increasing scholarly attention, though the field remains relatively underexplored. Omoniyi and Fishman notes that “the onus remains with sociolinguistics… to fill the current gap in the disciplinary neglect of the language variable in the field of the sociology of religion” (Fishman 2006, 13). Similarly, Chew (2014) observes that while religion is often studied as a social institution, the role of language in shaping and sustaining religious identity has received comparatively less attention.

Religion cannot function independently of language. Religious experience extends beyond the material into the realm of the supernatural, and communication is central to this encounter. Believers address God through prayers, songs, chants, and sermons, while divine communication is perceived through scripture, revelation, and spiritual impressions. As Hatoss affirms, “language controls and reaches the supernatural, e.g. the language of prayers; it is a vital tool for reaching God, has a strong symbolic power, and is a tool for expressing identity… Since verbal communication between God and His followers is an essential part of most religions, most churches adopt a covert or overt ‘language-religion-ideology’” ( Hatoss 2012 , 96).

This close link is often discussed in terms of religiolinguistic choices ( Hary and Wein, 2012 ), highlighting how languages function as vehicles of the sacred and as markers of group belonging. Sacred texts such as the Qur’an or Bible were revealed in particular languages and are transmitted through these linguistic forms. Ritual practices—prayers, hymns, chants, and liturgies—are likewise deeply shaped by language, making it indispensable to religious identity. Language is therefore central to religion, functioning as both a symbolic and functional tool for transmitting faith, preserving sacredness, and fostering identity. The use of Arabic in Islam and ritualized Korean in Daesoon Jinrihoe as highlighted in the next sections demonstrates how language anchors religious life, while adaptive strategies on some occasions illustrate its flexibility in new environments. Ultimately, religiolinguistic choices not only sustain traditions but also negotiate cultural and social change, underscoring language’s indispensable role in religious identity.

Arabic as the Liturgical Language of Islam

Islam provides a clear example of the interdependence between language and religion. Arabic is not only the liturgical language of Islam but also the original language of the Qur’an, which Muslims believe to be the unaltered word of God. Qur’anic recitation in prayer is performed exclusively in Arabic, even by non-native speakers, reinforcing the global symbolic status of Arabic as both a medium of worship and a sacred identity marker ( Chew 2014 ).

Marranci’s (2007) ethnographic research on Muslim migrants in Scotland and Northern Ireland illustrates this dynamic. Despite living in predominantly English-speaking contexts, migrants maintained Arabic as central to religious practice, perceiving it as crucial to safeguarding religious and cultural identity. For many, Arabic symbolizes the purity of faith, with translations regarded as distortions of divine meaning. Even Muslims unfamiliar with Arabic often memorize key phrases for prayer, thereby reinforcing Arabic’s centrality in religious life.

Language Variation in Religious Practice

Marranci (2007) further shows how language use in religion is contextually flexible. In Scotland, most mosques conduct Friday Juma’at sermons in Arabic, though some supplement this with English or Urdu summaries to cater for diverse communities. In Northern Ireland, however, sermons are predominantly delivered in English, with Qur’anic verses translated for accessibility. This illustrates how religious identity anchored in Arabic may coexist with linguistic adaptation to local sociolinguistic realities, thereby producing a dynamic interplay between faith and language.

The Daesoon Jinrihoe Movement in Korea: Ritual Language and Identity

A parallel case outside of Islam is the Daesoon Jinrihoe movement in Korea, one of the largest new religions in the country. The movement underscores how language functions as both a doctrinal medium and a ritual instrument in shaping identity. Daesoon Jinrihoe teachings, centered on the revelations of Kang Jeungsan, were initially transmitted orally and later codified in texts such as the Jeon-gyeong.

In ritual contexts, the movement employs formalized chants, invocations, and recitations distinct from everyday Korean. This ritual register marks a boundary between the ordinary and the sacred, reinforcing collective identity among adherents. The use of such expressions shows how Daesoon adherents linguistically participate in constructing a shared worldview.

At the same time, Daesoon Jinrihoe illustrates the balance between tradition and modernity in religious language. While scriptures and rituals preserve older registers of Korean and classical references, sermons and outreach increasingly employ contemporary Korean, ensuring accessibility to younger generations. This dual approach parallels Islam’s balance between Arabic recitation and vernacular preaching, demonstrating how religiolinguistic choices preserve identity while adapting to modern contexts.

The cases of Islam and Daesoon Jinrihoe highlight the dual function of language in religion: as a sacred medium preserving doctrinal purity and as a social tool enabling accessibility and cohesion. Whether through Arabic recitations in Islam or ritualized Korean in Daesoon practices, language mediates the sacred while anchoring group identity. Yet, contextual adaptations—such as English sermons in Northern Ireland or modern Korean preaching in Daesoon temples—show that linguistic practices in religion are fluid, shaped by community needs and sociocultural realities.

Results and Discussion of Findings

Identity construction in the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG)

The Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) was founded by Pa Josiah Olufemi Akindayomi (1909–1980) in 1952. The founder of the church was said to have chosen Pastor Enoch Adejare Adeboye, an erstwhile mathematics lecturer at the University of Lagos, Nigeria, who joined the church in 1973, to succeed him as General Overseer. The church has one of the largest memberships in Nigeria and its vision and mission is “to make heaven; to take as many people with us; and, to have a member of RCCG in every family of all nations”. Currently, there are about 2000 parishes of the RCCG in Nigeria alone, over 50,000 parishes worldwide and over 9 million members worldwide in 197 countries and territories (www.rccg.org).

The General Overseer of RCCG, Pastor E. A. Adeboye, is renowned for his ritualized opening declaration which always announces his ascension to the pulpit: “Let somebody shout halleluyah.” This utterance functions as a ritualized greeting that signals the start of worship and the presence of the General Overseer. This statement has become a household statement in RCCG, as whenever the statement is uttered even outside the congregation, RCCG comes to mind. In fact, this introductory announcement has been adopted by both Pastors and members of the church and has become a distinct and indelible linguistic identity marker for the church. The ritualized opening which initially could be said to be part of the idiolect of the General Overseer, Pastor Adeboye has now turned to becoming a sociolect for members of the church, as the statement is now associated with RCCG. From the perspective of Gumperz’s (1982) interactional sociolinguistics, this utterance serves as a contextualization cue that signals the transition into worship and instantly frames the interaction as sacred. Most times, after the ritualized introductory statement, the General Overseer often swings into a worship mode singing songs of praise to God which the church’s worship team immediately joins in echoing the songs. The entire congregation also unitedly join in singing the song which then sets the tone for the sermon of the day to be delivered by the General Overseer, fondly referred to as ‘daddy G.O’.

The statement creates a call-and-response dynamic that unites the congregation in one voice, reinforcing collective participation. Its call-and-response form fosters immediate participation and unity, collapsing the distance between pulpit and pew and reinforcing solidarity among members. Over time, the phrase has acquired indexical significance ( Silverstein 2003 ): it directly evokes RCCG’s identity whenever uttered, whether inside or outside the church. As an identity marker, the statement points to RCCG and its worship culture. Theologically, “hallelujah” underscores themes of praise, joy, and victory, reinforcing RCCG’s identity as a worship-driven, globally inclusive movement. RCCG is known for its strong praise and worship culture which manifests from top to bottom and across all strata of the church.

A central identity marker in the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) under Pastor E. A. Adeboye is the recurrent theme of pastoral assurance and intimacy with God. This theme is expressed through a distinctive set of discursive practices that emphasize divine closeness, blessings, and spiritual safety. One of Adeboye’s most recognizable phrases is “My Daddy says…”—a personalized way of referring to God that conveys both intimacy and immediacy. By invoking God as “Daddy”, Adeboye shifts the believer’s perception of the divine from distant majesty to familial closeness, positioning God as a caring father actively involved in the daily affairs of His children. This discursive habit also reinforces Adeboye’s identity as God’s confidant, the one through whom divine messages are directly relayed to the congregation ( Ukah 2008 ; Kalu 2008 ).

In addition, Adeboye frequently employs declarative authority in his sermons and prayers, using expressions such as “I decree…” or “I prophesy…”. These performative utterances are not treated as mere words but as acts of blessing and spiritual intervention that members believe carry divine authority. Through such declarations, Adeboye assumes the role of a spiritual father who guarantees divine covering and ensures that no member leaves a service without a word of assurance ( Peel 2016 ; Marshall 2009 ). Closely tied to these declarations are his reassuring blessings: “It shall be well with you,” “God bless you mightily,” and “So shall it be in Jesus’ Name.” These phrases often conclude prayers, sermons, or prophetic messages, serving as ritual affirmations of God’s favor. Their repetition creates a sense of continuity and reinforces the expectation that every encounter in RCCG ends with divine reassurance ( Ojo 2006 ).

Adeboye’s soft-spoken tone and calm delivery further enhance this theme. Unlike the fiery or flamboyant styles associated with some other Pentecostal leaders, his gentle manner communicates humility and quiet authority. This rhetorical style reinforces RCCG’s identity as a spiritual family defined not only by holiness but also by intimacy, safety, and assurance of God’s presence ( Ukah, 2008 ). Theologically, this emphasis on pastoral assurance and intimacy reflects the Pentecostal conviction that believers enjoy a direct and personal relationship with God ( Anderson, 2013 ). In RCCG, Adeboye models this intimacy through language, teaching members to approach God as a loving father while relying on the prophetic assurances of their spiritual leader. Consequently, this theme functions as a powerful identity marker that unites RCCG members worldwide, cultivating a collective sense of belonging, divine protection, and ultimate hope in God’s promises.

Identity construction in the Deeper Life Bible Church (DLBC)

The Deeper Christian Life Ministry (DCLM) with the church arm known as the Deeper Life Bible Church (DLBC) was founded in 1973 by Pastor Williams Folorunso Kumuyi. He was a mathematics lecturer at the University of Lagos and started a Bible Study group with just 15 university students before resigning from the services of the university to lead the church in full time capacity. The then Bible study group later metamorphosed into the now Deeper Life Bible Church. The church has planted over 500 churches in Lagos and over 5000 in the rest of Nigeria. The church has its headquarters in Gbagada, Lagos, Nigeria, from which it has sent missionaries to over 40 countries across the globe (www.dclm.org). The church is one of Nigeria’s most influential holiness movements. A significant feature of the church’s growth and consolidation lies in the ways its leader, officially referred to as the General Superintendent (GS), constructs identity through his recurrent statements and discursive practices. Pastor Kumuyi’s rhetoric does not only function as preaching; it also builds a shared worldview that marks Deeper Life members as distinct within the broader Pentecostal landscape ( Kalu 2008 ; Ojo 2006 ).

The General Superintendent (G.S.) of the Deeper Life Bible Church (DLBC) is known to always announce his presence on the pulpit with the phrase “Praise the Lord”. Pastor W. F. Kumuyi’s opening phrase is often delivered with a unique intonation, illustrates how idiolect ( Crystal, 2008 ) can become institutionalized, anticipating a uniform congregational response. He usually says it in a unique manner with the whole church usually responding with a thunderous “hallelujah”. As soon as he mounts the pulpit, everyone can almost anticipate that the phrase would be the first set of words from his mouth. The unique delivery of the phrase creates a leader-centered idiolect, anticipating congregational response and reflecting the church’s strong discipline and order. This is his idiolect which is usually copied by all other overseers and pastors to carve a unique identity for the church.

Furthermore, there is a regular prayer statement from the G.S. which has become a household name in DLBC. It goes thus:

“As I succeed, you will succeed

As I make progress, you will make progress

Everywhere I go in life, you will go there…”

The above statement is an identity marker for the church. At a point, the statement with the voice of the G.S. became the ringing tones in the mobile phones of most members of the church.

Another popular statement which serves as identity marker for members of DLBC is the following: “No lack; no loss; no limitation”. This was a prayer made by the G.S. which suddenly turned to an identity marker for members of the church to the extent that most members of the church converted the statement into a car sticker and can be found on the car of almost all members. The slogan “No lack; no loss; no limitation” now functions as a portable linguistic emblem as members reproduce it on stickers, phones, and in prayers, extending church identity into everyday life. The reproduction of these slogans on stickers, ringtones, and cars demonstrates how enregisterment ( Agha, 2007 ) extends church identity beyond worship settings into everyday life. DLBC therefore constructs an identity of holiness, order, moral discipline, belief in the promise of divine provision and collective participation in divine progress. The church is known for its stance on holiness and righteousness and Pastor Kumuyi is often tagged a ‘holiness preacher’.

The declarative prayers such as “As I succeed, you will succeed” and the slogan “No lack; no loss; no limitation” highlight what Bucholtz and Hall (2005) term authentication, where linguistic practices authenticate the spiritual authority of the leader while transferring divine success to members. The prayer declarations (“As I succeed…”) construct an identity of transference, where the leader’s spiritual and all-round progress becomes a prototype for members’ success—reinforcing loyalty and hierarchical spiritual authority.

One of the defining features of Kumuyi’s discourse is his uncompromising emphasis on holiness. Statements such as “Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord” or “Heaven is real; Hell is real—where will you spend eternity?” position Deeper Life as a community whose identity is rooted in moral purity and spiritual vigilance. This doctrinal insistence creates a counter-cultural identity in which members see themselves as separated from the secular world, upholding a lifestyle of modesty, purity, and consecration. Scholars have noted that this emphasis reflects the Holiness tradition that shaped early African Pentecostalism (Marshall, 2009; Kalu, 2008). Kumuyi frequently frames his sermons around admonitions such as “Examine yourself whether you are in the faith” or “Don’t play with sin—it will destroy you.” Through such warning language, members are reminded that spiritual carelessness has eternal consequences. This rhetorical strategy shapes a vigilant, self-examining identity where believers are encouraged to live with a heightened sense of personal responsibility. Ojo (2006) observes that such moralistic preaching distinguishes DLBC from prosperity-oriented Pentecostal churches, situating it as a reformist voice in Nigeria’s religious marketplace.

Another central marker of identity is Kumuyi’s eschatological emphasis. Statements like “Jesus may come today—are you ready?” cultivate a sense of perpetual readiness within the congregation. The church is constructed as a “remnant” community living in anticipation of Christ’s imminent return. This orientation toward eternity serves both as motivation for holy living and as a distinguishing mark of Deeper Life spirituality. Peel (2016) identifies this eschatological urgency as one of the enduring features of African evangelical identity, where expectation of the end continually shapes Christian practice. Furthermore, Kumuyi’s sermons are marked by constant appeals to the authority of scripture. Phrases such as “The Bible says…” and “Open your Bible to…” reinforce the centrality of the Word of God in shaping both doctrine and practice. In doing so, Kumuyi constructs Deeper Life as a Bible-centred community, distinct from expressions of Pentecostalism that emphasize charisma, material prosperity, or emotional experiences over scriptural grounding. This aligns with Ukah’s observation that African Pentecostal leaders often use scripture-saturated speech as both a legitimizing and identity-marking practice ( Ukah 2008 ).

A recurrent theme in Kumuyi’s discourse is separation from the world. By invoking biblical injunctions such as “Come out from among them and be ye separate,” he underscores the expectation that true Christians must stand apart from the world. This separation is reinforced through lifestyle codes concerning dressing, entertainment, and social conduct. The effect is the construction of a communal identity that is deliberately distinct, defined by visible and spiritual boundaries. As Kalu (2008) explains, such practices create a Pentecostal counter-culture in which difference from the world is both theological and performative.

Also, Kumuyi’s frequent references to the corporate character of the church—phrases like “We are a Bible-believing church”—emphasize discipline, order, and collective holiness. Members are not just individual Christians but part of a disciplined body tasked with being “light in the world.” This rhetorical framing strengthens the sense of belonging and responsibility that sustains DLBC’s cohesion as a religious movement. Ojo (2006) highlights that this collective discipline is central to Deeper Life’s reputation for moral strictness and organizational order. Pastor Kumuyi’s statements and rhetorical strategies serve as powerful tools for constructing the identity of Deeper Life Bible Church. By emphasizing holiness, moral vigilance, eschatological urgency, scriptural centrality, separation from worldliness, and corporate discipline, he positions the church as a holy remnant within contemporary Nigerian Pentecostalism. In this way, Kumuyi’s discourse does more than convey doctrine; it performs identity work, shaping how members understand themselves, the world, and their ultimate destiny ( Marshall 2009 ; Ojo 2006 ; Kalu 2008 ; Ukah 2008 ).

Identity construction in Dunamis International Gospel Centre

The church was founded on 10 November 1996 by Pastor Dr Paul Enenche. The church moved to its present site in Airport Road, Abuja, Nigeria in 1997 and in November 2018, it completed its 100,000 seat mega auditorium called “The Glory Dome” making it the church with the largest building with a single roof in the world. The church is named after a Greek word Dunamis meaning ‘power’ (www.dunamisgospel.org).

The identity of Dunamis is shaped through both declarative and innovative language. Phrases like “Where is your place? Above only, that is my place” articulate a theology of elevation and dominion, positioning members as destined for superiority. The rhetorical question “Where is your place?” constructs a collective self-image of superiority and dominion, emphasizing the theology of elevation (“above only”) which the church holds on to dearly. The phrase enacts what Butler (1997) describes as performativity: language here does not merely describe status but creates a reality of dominion. By repeating the statement, members of the church, through faith, believe that they are positioning themselves for dominion over evil and negative forces.

The statement “If the devil cannot hinder your givings, then he cannot hinder your receivings” encapsulates prosperity theology framed as reciprocal covenant practice. The prosperity declaration reinforces a reciprocal theology of covenant which aligns material blessings with spiritual discipline.

Notably, Dunamis demonstrates linguistic creativity through coinages such as olatricity and olatrified (derived from the Idoma word ọla meaning fire, blended with English electricity/ electrified). These lexical innovations and coinages demonstrating code-switching and blending as identity work fuse local culture with global Pentecostal discourse, grounding the church’s identity in both Nigerian linguistic heritage and transnational Christian charisma. These coinages exemplify what Irvine and Gal (2000) call iconization, where linguistic forms symbolize spiritual power. Dunamis thus positions itself as a church of power, prosperity, and innovative expression.

The church also has portable linguistic emblems such as:

Origin: Dunamis; Warning: Do not trespass

Members of the church often reproduce this on stickers placed on their cars, houses, etc. This statement reinforces the image of superiority and dominion which the church identifies with and symbolize the possession of spiritual power by the members of which there is a subtle warning to non-members not to dare confront them. Members of the church believe that by identification with the church, as members, they have dominion over evil powers and human trespassers. One of the most dominant rhetorical features of Enenche’s preaching is his constant invocation of power, fire, and glory. Statements such as “You shall experience power, fire, and glory in your life!” or “Dunamis means power—the power of the Holy Ghost at work” define the church’s core identity. Through these utterances, Dunamis is framed as a movement of supernatural empowerment. Members internalize the idea that they are carriers of divine energy, and this collective identity is continually reinforced through testimonies of miracles, healing, and deliverance.

Another dominant feature of Enenche’s statements is his militant language of victory and warfare. Expressions such as “Every agenda of the enemy against your life is destroyed” and “You shall not be a victim; you shall be a victor” establish members as triumphant Christians. This discourse constructs a militant, warrior-like identity where the congregation is seen as actively engaged in spiritual battle against evil powers. The emphasis on victory over defeat strengthens the self-perception of Dunamis believers as overcomers and spiritual conquerors. In addition, Enenche frequently leads the congregation in corporate confessions. Statements like “I am a child of God” or “I cannot fail, I cannot be defeated” are repeated in unison, transforming sermons into communal affirmations. These practices foster a sense of belonging and reinforce a shared self-definition as victorious, faith-filled believers. Through these rituals, identity is not only preached but performed in collective participation.

Identity construction in the Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries (MFM)

The Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries (MFM) which started as a small prayer group of 24 people in 1989 held its first service as a church on April 24, 1994. The church that has now grown to a mega church has branches in the United States, Canada, Europe, the Caribbean, Asia, and indeed every continent of the world. Its international headquarters is in Yaba, Lagos, Nigeria. (www.mountainoffire.org). The church was founded and headed by Pastor Dr. Daniel Kolawole Olukoya as General Overseer with the appellation ‘Daddy G.O.’ and supported by his wife, Pastor Sade Olukoya also tagged ‘Mummy G. O.’. There are seven Assistant General Overseers and other Senior Pastors and Ministers.

Some of the key phrases identified as the sociolects of the church include:

“Die by fire”

“Any power from my father’s house attacking me, die by fire.”

“Powers from my father’s house, catch fire, catch fire.”

These phrases embody a militant linguistic identity, constructing MFM as a church of spiritual warfare and deliverance. The leadership of MFM employs militant prayer language such as “Die by fire” and “Any power from my father’s house attacking me, die by fire.” This constitutes an incantatory register of spiritual warfare, marked by repetition, aggression, and fiery imagery. The repetitive, aggressive structure (“die by fire”, “catch fire”) functions like an incantatory battle cry, reinforcing urgency, intensity, and violent confrontation of spiritual enemies. These utterances illustrate Austin’s (1962) notion of illocutionary acts—they are not just descriptive statements but performative, functioning as battle cries that enact spiritual warfare.

The reference to ancestral powers, “from my father’s house”, situates MFM’s discourse within an African cosmological belief of generational and territorial spiritual forces, making the language resonate deeply within Nigerian spiritual contexts. By rallying against “powers from my father’s house”, members of the church tap into culturally resonant narratives of generational curses. Within the Nigerian cosmology and among Pentecostal Christians, there is the strong belief in the existence of ancestral and generational curses which they believe have the potentials to distort and alter present and future progress if not dealt with aggressively and violently. There is a frequent reference and allusion to the bible verse which says “...the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force” (King James’ version of Matthew chapter 11 verse 12). Members of MFM therefore invoke fire on these evil forces through performative utterances which function as battle cries, reinforcing MFM’s collective identity as a deliverance-oriented, fire-branded movement committed to violent confrontation of perceived spiritual enemies and evil powers.

Identity Construction in the Daesoon Jinrihoe Movement in Korea

Daesoon Jinrihoe is one of the largest new religious movements in Korea anchored on the belief in the existence of the “Supreme God of the ninth Heaven” (Gucheon Sangje) who is believed to have incarnated in Kang Jeungsan (1871–1909)” at the end of the 19th century. The movement was later reorganized and got its new name Daesoon Jinrihoe in 1969. The origin and roots of the movement have been found to be tightly connected to both the religious traditions of diverse Eastern and Western religious movements ( Alam 2024 ). In carrying out its mission and practising its doctrines, the movement carries out what it terms the basic works of “propagation, edification and spiritual cultivation” through charity aid, social welfare and education. The religious movement currently has religious facilities including five temples; 120 local fellowship buildings and 200 local fellowship halls spread across different parts of Korea. (www.eng.daesoon.org).

There are a number of statements and quotations from Daesoon Jinrihoe leaders and the canonical scriptures which work together to construct the identity of the movement—both internally (for members) and externally (for the wider world). These quotes collectively provide a window into the spiritual heart of Daesoon Jinrihoe—spanning cosmic vision, moral cultivation, and the transformative path toward ultimate liberation and harmony which the movement preaches and can be summarised as consisting of the following:

1. Cosmic-Historical Identity

Jo Jeongsan’s proclamation that “This new year is the Gyehae Year, the start of a new cycle of Won…” situates Daesoon Jinrihoe within a grand cosmic timeline that signals a new beginning. This links the movement’s existence to a new era in universal history, presenting followers as participants in a divinely ordained transformation. Identity here is eschatological as Daesoon believers believes that they are not just part of a Korean religious group, but pioneers of a new world order.

2. Spiritual-Moral Identity

Statements like “Sincerity itself is the Dao of Heaven” and “Cultivate the Dao with extreme sincerity” construct members as moral practitioners whose identity is grounded in inner refinement. Similarly, verses from the Daesoon scriptures such as “Even Heaven is afraid of a man who believes in Me and keeps his mind right” elevate faithful and morally upright individuals into spiritually powerful beings. The Daesoon identity is therefore tied to moral self-cultivation, sincerity, and correct conduct rather than mere ritual membership.

3. Ethical-Communal Identity

Leaders of the movement emphasize “Resolution of Grievances for Mutual Beneficence” and “Priority of others before oneself.” These doctrinal statements mark Daesoon Jinrihoe as a community of reconciliation and mutual aid, contrasting against a world seen as fractured by grudges and selfishness. Members’ identity is defined through ethical practices of harmony, gratitude, and collective care—not just individually but communally. This collective ethos differentiates Daesoon followers from secular society and other religions by foregrounding relational healing as central to the salvation of souls.

4. Global and Universal Identity

Statements like “Our Dao is not confined to our country alone; it encompasses the whole world and even the entire universe” and the founder, Park Wudang’s insistence that “Only through worldwide propagation will it become possible to vastly save all sentient beings” construct Daesoon Jinrihoe as global in mission. The movement thus claims a universal scope: not a parochial Korean sect but a religion with cosmic significance that covers the entire universe. This identity positions Daesoon Jinrihoe alongside world religions, seeking legitimacy on the global stage. The statement therefore seeks to affirm a global identity rather than a localised movement within Korea alone.

5. Prophetic and Transformative Identity

Jo Jeongsan’s statement “I am the one who will spread forth the Degree Number of the Later World of Fifty Thousand Years, and you are the ones who will attain the Dao” establishes the founder as a prophetic mediator of divine authority. Followers’ identity is bound to that prophetic mission. Members of the movement see themselves as agents of a world transformation, co-workers with Sangje (the Supreme God). The movement thus frames itself as a chosen community with a divinely mandated destiny.

6. Identity as a Religion of Renewal

Verses from the Daesoon scriptures like “With only fire and water, you shall sustain your life even though you live on a stony peak” symbolize resilience and spiritual renewal in hardship. This constructs Daesoon Jinrihoe as a religion that thrives in difficulty—its identity is one of perseverance, survival, and hope. Members are not passive believers but active participants in re-creating the world into an Earthly Paradise.

Conclusion

The statements of church leaders in Nigerian Pentecostalism demonstrate that linguistic practices are central to identity construction. The linguistic practices of these churches reveal how statements in form of idiolects from leaders become sociolects which function as performative acts of identity construction rather than mere descriptive statements. RCCG’s joyful and ritualized introductory statement “Let somebody shout halleluyah” foregrounds praise and inclusivity for the church; DLBC’s declarative slogans and ritualized prayers emphasize holiness, discipline, and transference of blessing; Dunamis innovates linguistically to frame dominion and prosperity in a culturally rooted manner. It blends prosperity, power, and lexical innovation rooted in local culture; while MFM asserts a militant deliverance identity through warfare metaphors. In line with Bucholtz and Hall’s (2005) framework, these linguistic identities are emergent, interactional, and intersubjective, reinforcing each church’s theological orientation and communal ethos. Together, these linguistic identities not only distinguish one church from another but also demonstrate the central role of language in shaping collective belonging, theological orientation, and social visibility in Nigerian Christianity. Similarly, the statements of the leaders of the Daesoon Jinrihoe movement in Korea, highlights a combination of cosmic vision, ethical self-cultivation, communal responsibility, and universal mission which carves out an identity for the movement and distinguishes Daesoon Jinrihoe both within Korea and in its aspiration toward global religious legitimacy.

Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.