 Many of the articles are lengthier than its 2007 counterpart and there are less pictures and advertisements in the 1987 edition as well. Numerous authors failed to have a focused article.  They often strayed on tangents of topics concerning whatever platform they were passionate about.  One such author, R.L. Dresselhaus, used scripture to introduce and conclude his topic but the bulk of his articles were concerning whatever opinion or platform he wished.  He, like others, did not have a focused target audience and switched between speaking to already converted peoples and unconverted peoples.  He often used reinforcing language to persuade readers of his own brand of theology.  Dresselhaus was not alone in this language style; numerous other authors of 1987’s Pentecostal Language used reinforcing language to persuade others of Assemblies of God beliefs, or, of their own personal opinions.  
Robert Cunningham, who was the editor of PE for over thirty years, wrote a piece about the mind.  His basic theory is that evangelicals are to give their entire minds to Christ.  The title of his article, “’ I Surrender All That I Think’ Beware of the brainwash [sic]” (4) suggests that the article is about being intellectual.  In reality the article is more about being anti-intellectual than anything else.  One of the main rewarding features of studying his article is that he shows a language pattern that matches Burke’s guilt-redemption cycle.  During the 1980s many scandals surfaced concerning the morality and ethics of Assemblies of God ministers.  He states, “That is why [concerning data stored in brains of believers] unscrupulous men resort to brainwashing.  They want to replace people’s beliefs with their own; and they will go to any length, using cruel methods if necessary, to do this” (4).  This is an indirect statement concerning the televangelists and other ministers of that day who were unethical.  In short, Cunningham was attempting to purge ministers of the Assemblies of God of the guilt surrounding moral failure. 
Another author in the April 26 issue of PE showed the same purging style.  Lowell Landstrom wrote the article, “Contemporary vs. Traditional Gospel Music” (8).  He writes of the danger rock and roll music imparts on evangelicals.  The true intent, however, of his article is defending his own belief in allowing up-beat music.  He states this very plainly throughout his text but then he makes a statement that marks his own guilt-redemption cycle, “We should beware of songs presented in the flesh rather than in the Spirit.  It is possible a sincere Christian can perform music that is carnal and harmful just as a sincere minister can inadvertently tell a story that is…suggestive.  This is why Paul the apostle said, ‘For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret’ (Ephesians 5:12) [parenthesis not researchers] For this reason, I do not endorse heavy metal Christian music” (9).  In truth Lundstrom is purging himself of an ever present sense of guilt in using contemporary music. 