PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
The Pentecostals and Their Scriptures
Hermeneutics has received a significant amount of attention in the pages of Pneuma.1 In an editorial in 1984, Mel Robeck raised this pair of questions: “What, if anything, do Pentecostals bring by way of a unique contribution to the understanding of Scripture? Is there anything uniquely Pentecostal or Charis- matic in the way that such individuals can and should approach Scripture?”2 The editorial introduced an issue that provided initial responses and also addressed the related topic of the legitimacy of a distinctive pentecostal the- ology.3 In two separate articles, Gerry Sheppard and Mark McLean responded directly to Robeck’s questions about a pentecostal hermeneutic.4 Sheppard demonstrated the oddity and tragedy of appropriating dispensational escha- tology—with its cessationist tendencies—to pentecostal ecclesiology, which presupposes the ongoing activity of the Spirit through the charismatic gifts. Given the socially constructed nature of interpretation, McLean argued that a pentecostal hermeneutic is inescapable, though at that time one had yet to be fully articulated. Following this issue, significant progress toward a distinc- tively pentecostal hermeneutic was achieved, much of which was presented at the annual meetings of the Society for Pentecostal Theology.
1 The first article in Pneuma to address the issue was Howard M. Ervin, “Hermeneutics: A
Pentecostal Option,”Pneuma3, no. 2 (Fall 1981): 11–25.
2 Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., “Experience, Hermeneutics, and Theology,”Pneuma 6, no. 2 (Fall 1984):
1–3.
3 A single article addressed the topic of a distinctive theology: David R. Nichols, “The Search
for a Pentecostal Structure in Systematic Theology,”Pneuma6, no. 2 (Fall 1984): 57–76. 4 Gerald T. Sheppard, “Pentecostalism and the Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism: Anatomy
of an Uneasy Relationship,” Pneuma 6, no. 2 (Fall 1984): 5–33; Mark D. McLean, “Toward a
Pentecostal Hermeneutic,” Pneuma 6, no. 2 (Fall 1984): 35–56. This issue also contained a
single book review by David R. Adams of Walter M. Dunnette, The Interpretation of Holy
Scripture: Issues, Principles, Models: An Introduction to Hermeneutics(Nashville: Thomas Nel-
son Publishers, 1984). Adams prefigured future articulations of pentecostal hermeneutics as
he critiqued the book for its commitment to a historical/theological method that was too
restrictive. Although the method may enable interpreters to comprehend the levels of mean-
ing “before/below” the text, it was incapable of dealing with the “layers of meaning above the
text” (77–79).
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi: 10.1163/15700747-03801026
1
116
waddell and althouse
Two major developments appeared in 1993. First, the inaugural issue of the Journal of Pentecostal Theology(jpt), along with its supplement series, became a focal point for constructive pentecostal scholarship on a number of academic fronts, though especially in the areas of biblical studies and hermeneutics. Issues of jpt have often contained dialogical sections in which prominent the- ologians and biblical scholars outside, though sympathetic, to Pentecostalism have been engaged by leading thinkers within the tradition. The editors of the journal—Chris Thomas, Rickie Moore, and Steve Land, along with Cheryl Bridges Johns and other colleagues at the seminary of the Church of God (Cleveland, tn)—have been dubbed the “Cleveland school.”5 Believing that Pentecostalism was a distinct expression of Christianity, distinct from Evan- gelicalism, this group sought to articulate a hermeneutic that was appropriate for their tradition. They focused on the final form of the biblical text and gave special attention to its narrative features. The group also held a deep commit- ment to the spiritual experience of reading Scripture with an expectation of encountering God in and through the text. For them, the sacred text was no mere historical artifact; rather, it was a place in which the Spirit would meet its readers and transform them into the image of Christ.6
The second major development in 1993 appeared in the pages of Pneuma. Under the editorship of Murray Dempster, this issue contained four articles and a review essay, all of which were completely dedicated to hermeneutics.7Influ-
5 James K.A. Smith, Thinking in Tongues: Pentecostal Contributions to Christian Philosophy,
Pentecostal Manifestos 2 (Grand Rapids,mi: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010), 6.
6 Attempting to cite this scholarship fully would require an extensive bibliography, so I cite
the following pieces as representative of the group. John Christopher Thomas, “Women, Pen-
tecostals and the Bible: An Experiment in Pentecostal Hermeneutics,” Journal of Pentecostal
Theology5 (1994): 41–56; Rickie D. Moore, “Canon and Charisma in the Book of Deuteronomy,”
Journal of Pentecostal Theology 1 (1992): 75–92; Steven J. Land, “A Passion for the Kingdom:
Revisioning Pentecostal Spirituality,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 1 (1992): 19–46; Jackie
David Johns and Cheryl Bridges Johns, “Yielding to the Spirit: A Pentecostal Approach to
Group Bible Study,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology1 (1992): 109–134.
7 Richard D. Israel, Daniel E. Albrecht, and Randal G. McNally, “Pentecostals and Hermeneu-
tics: Texts, Rituals and Community,” Pneuma 15, no. 2 (Fall 1993): 137–161; Timothy B. Car-
gal, “Beyond the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy: Pentecostals and Hermeneutics
in a Postmodern Age,” Pneuma 15, no. 2 (Fall 1993): 163–187; Jean-Daniel Plüss, “Azusa and
Other Myths: The Long and Winding Road from Experience to Stated Belief and Back Again,”
Pneuma 15, no. 2 (Fall 1993): 189–201; Joseph K. Byrd, “Paul Ricoeur’s Hermeneutical Theory
and Pentecostal Proclamation,”Pneuma15, no. 2 (Fall 1993): 203–214; Roger Stronstad, “Pente-
costal Hermeneutics: A Review of Gordon D. Fee, Gospel and Spirit: Issues in New Testament
Hermeneutics,”Pneuma15, no. 2 (Fall 1993): 215–222.
PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
2
the pentecostals and their scriptures
117
enced by the postmodern turn in literature and philosophy, these articles drew heavily on the general hermeneutics of philosophers Hans-Georg Gadamer and Paul Ricoeur. The articles shared the belief that interpreters inevitably bring the particularities of their location and experiences “with them into the inter- pretative act of understanding texts, whether the texts are biblical, behavioral, historical or performative.”8 Placing a high value on the social context of the reader raised a related question concerning the relationship of Pentecostalism to the larger Christian community—a discussion that was framed by contrast- ing Pentecostalism with Fundamentalism and conservative Evangelicalism.9
The appropriation of postmodern literary theory and the strong differentia- tion from Evangelicalism were met with mixed reviews. The following issue of the journal contained four articles written to provide critical feedback. Han- nah Harrington and Rebecca Patten (Skaggs) raised concerns regarding the danger of subjectivism, perceived to be inherent both in postmodernism and within literary approaches to the text that fail to take seriously the socio- historical background of the text.10 Bob Menzies’ feedback was blunt. Speak- ing of the “bandwagon” of postmodernism, his recommendation was “to jump off.”11For Menzies, “the assimilation of the modern Pentecostal movement into the broader Evangelical world [was] an exciting and positive event.”12 French Arrington offered a more tempered response. While not dismissing the utiliza- tion of historical-critical and literary criticism, he acknowledged that “the tra-
8
9
10
11
12
Murray W. Dempster, “Paradigm Shifts and Hermeneutics: Confronting Issues Old and New,”Pneuma15, no. 2 (Fall 1993): 132.
See Bill Faupel’s presidential address to the Society for Pentecostal Theology for a treatment of whether Pentecostalism is a subgroup of Evangelicalism or an authentic expression of Christianityinitsownright.D.WilliamFaupel,“WhitherPentecostalism?”Pneuma15,no.1 (1993): 9–27. Roger Stronstad’s critique of Gordon Fee’s hermeneutic is a good example of an attempt to differentiate pentecostal readings from evangelical ones. Stronstad, “Pentecostal Hermeneutics.”
Hannah K. Harrington and Rebecca Patten, “Pentecostal Hermeneutics and Postmodern Literary Theory,”Pneuma16, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 109–114.
Robert P. Menzies, “Jumping Off the Postmodern Bandwagon,”Pneuma 16, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 115.
Ibid., 119. Although Menzies has not advocated for distinctive pentecostal methodolo- gies, his utilization of redaction criticism in analyzing Luke-Acts has been invaluable in articulating an apologetic for the classical pentecostal doctrines of Spirit baptism and glossolalia as initial evidence. See Robert P. Menzies, The Development of Early Christian Pneumatology with Special Reference to Luke-Acts, jsnt Supplements 54 (Sheffield, uk: jsotPress, 1991); Menzies,Empowered for Witness: The Spirit in Luke-Acts,jptSupplement 6 (Sheffield,uk: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994).
PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
3
118
waddell and althouse
ditional methods of Pentecostal interpretation that emphasize multiple mean- ings and applications of a text have more continuity with postmodern modes of interpretation than the critical-historical methodology.”13 Gerry Sheppard’s article completed the feedback section—a full decade had past since his sem- inal piece on Pentecostalism and the hermeneutics of dispensationalism. He gave high praise for the level of philosophical sophistication in the earlier issue, although he had two major caveats. First, he highlighted an implicit racial bias, evidenced by the articles’ lack of engagement with African-American or Latino/a Pentecostalism. He warned, “In sum, the absence of adequate concern about the hermeneutics of racism, while acknowledging the positive signif- icance of racial-cultural differences, will distort our interpretation of salient features in the Pentecostal experience.”14Although progress is being made, this warning still needs to be heeded.15 Second, Sheppard questioned whether the generalhermeneutics of Ricoeur issufficient for pentecostalhermeneutics,rec- ommending instead the work of Michel Foucault. Furthermore, he sketched a theology of Scripture that draws on Friedrich Schleiermacher, Karl Barth, and Brevard Childs, and he appealed to Pentecostals todevelop a special hermeneu- tic for Scripture to complement the general hermeneutics they were already employing. By the end of this issue, one thing was clear: the development of a pentecostal hermeneutic was going to be anything but monolithic.
Since the early 1990s, scholarship on pentecostal hermeneutics has prolifer- ated.16A full survey is beyond the scope of this editorial, although any summary
13
14
15
16
French L. Arrington, “The Use of the Bible by Pentecostals,” Pneuma 16, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 102. Arrington’s article did more than offer feedback; it pushed the conversation further by articulating both a pneumatic and an experiential dimension to pentecostal hermeneutics.
Gerald T. Sheppard, “Biblical Interpretation after Gadamer,”Pneuma16, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 124.
Significant work has been done on pentecostal-contextualized theologies, though less work has focused specifically on contextualized hermeneutics. For a recent example see Rodolfo Galvan Estrada iii, “Is a Contextualized Hermeneutic the Future of Pentecostal Readings? The Implications of a Pentecostal Hermeneutic for a Chicano/Latino Commu- nity,”Pneuma37, no. 3 (2015): 341–355.
For a summary of many of the key developments see: John Christopher Thomas, “Pen- tecostal Biblical Interpretation,” in Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation, ed. S.L McKenzie (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), Vol. 2, 89–97; Lee Roy Martin, “Intro- duction to Pentecostal Hermeneutics,” in Lee Roy Martin, ed., Pentecostal Hermeneutics: A Reader (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 1–9; L. William Oliverio Jr., Theological Hermeneutics in the Classical Pentecostal Tradition, Global Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies 12 (Leiden: Brill, 2012).
PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
4
the pentecostals and their scriptures
119
would need to include the full-length monographs by Amos Yong and Ken Archer that focus on the interrelated roles of the Spirit, the community, and the text.17 Kevin Spawn and Archie Wright have also edited a collection of essays examining a pneumatic hermeneutic for the “renewal tradition.”18The eclectic approaches utilized in these essays demonstrate that focusing on the role of the Spirit in interpretation is compatible with a variety of critical methodolo- gies.
The following articles in issue two offer contributions to this ongoing dia- logue about how Pentecostals approach the biblical texts. The first article is an interview conducted by Bob Johnson with Walter Brueggemann. Various aspects of his scholarship have resonated with many pentecostal scholars, including his work on hermeneutics, the canon, preaching, and especially his work on the Hebrew prophets and the Psalms.19 The interview is lively, filled with a plentiful number of exclamation points. For those who are familiar with Brueggemann’s speaking style, his voice is recognizable in the text. The inter- view is rich with personal reflections, including a description of his life-verse (Psalm 119:105, Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path)— given to him by his father at his confirmation in the United Church of Christ. On the one hand, Brueggemann affirms the presuppositions of the historical- critical approach, although on the other hand, he states, “Thereal issue is how one adjudicates between those presuppositions and the idea that the Spirit still leads the text in new directions. This I believe is … the fundamental ten- sion that lies at the heart of our work and pentecostal hermeneutics.” As one of the reviewers noted, Brueggemann’s knowledge of Pentecostalism is somewhat limited, since his firsthand exposure has been primarily to pentecostal schol- ars, who tend to be less fundamentalist than their sisters and brothers in the pew.
17
18
19
Amos Yong, Spirit-Word-Community: Theological Hermeneutics in Trinitarian Perspective (Burlington, vt: Ashgate, 2002); Kenneth J. Archer, A Pentecostal Hermeneutic for the Twenty-First Century: Spirit, Scripture, and Community(London:t&tClark, 2004). Kevin L. Spawn and Archie T. Wright, eds., Spirit and Scripture: Examining a Pneumatic Hermeneutic (London: t & t Clark, 2012). The use of the phrase renewal tradition is an attempt by the editors to include various groups within pentecostal and charismatic Christianity—some of which may not identify with the monikerpentecostal. For example, Walter Brueggemann, The Prophetic Imagination (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978); Brueggemann, Hopeful Imagination (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986); Brueggemann,FinallyComesthePoet:DaringSpeechforProclamation(Minneapolis: Augs- burg Fortress, 1989); Brueggemann,The Message of the Psalms: A Theological Commentary (n.p.: Augsburg Publishing House, 1984).
PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
5
120
waddell and althouse
Rickie Moore is one of the Pentecostals who has influenced Brueggemann. Moore’s essay builds on his own previous work on pentecostal hermeneutics as he reflects on the priority of encountering God through the biblical text.20 He engages Brueggemann both in critique and in appreciation as he argues for a pentecostal doctrine of Scripture. The result is not so much a new method of reading as it is a revised doctrine of Scripture. He utilizes the metaphor of “the altar” to represent Scripture as a “kind of sacred space that we are graciously invited to enter.” Scripture in this scenario becomes the place in which interpreters encounter God and are transformed.
In the next article Steven Fettke develops a practical pentecostal theod- icy. Fettke dedicates the essay to and shares its authorial credit with the late Michael Dusing, his colleague who had suggested that they collaborate on the article. The authors’ personal experiences of suffering play a significant role in their perspective, which may also be found in their previous works.21 Dusing suffered for years from multiple sclerosis, and Fettke’s son suffers from autism. Framed in the genre of testimonial and drawing on trauma studies, the article interrogates the triumphalism found at times within the pentecostal church, and it provides readings of biblical texts that support a practical ministry for those who are suffering.
In his book Sanctifying Interpretation, Chris Green proposes that Pente- costals and Charismatics should follow the lead of Billy Abraham by reconceiv- ing Scripture in soteriological terms rather than epistemological ones, which would require the development of “models of interpretation that emphasize the way God works in and through our readings of Scripture to form us into Christlikeness.”22 In his article, Green applies his method to Romans 9–11. Rather than reading these chapters as a doctrinal treatise, he reads them as “a torrid theological performance.” When read this way, Green suggests, the imag- inations and affections of the readers are converted.
20
21
22
For a collection of his work see: Rickie D. Moore, The Spirit of the Old Testament, jpt Supplement 35 (Blandford Forum,uk: Deo Publishing, 2011).
Steven M. Fettke, “Caring Cultures: How Congregations Respond to the Sick,”Pneuma 32, no. 1 (2010): 137–138; Fettke, “The Spirit of God Hovered over the Waters: Creation, the Local Church, and the Mentally and Physically Challenged, a Call to Spirit-led Ministry,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology17, no. 2 (2008): 170–182; Michael L. Dusing, “‘Trophimus Have I Left at Miletus Sick’—The Case for Those Who Are not Healed” (paper presented at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Theology, Southeastern University, Lakeland, fl, May 14–16, 2002).
Chris E.W. Green, Sanctifying Interpretation: Vocation, Holiness, and Scripture (Cleveland, tn:cptPress, 2015), 113.
PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
6
the pentecostals and their scriptures
121
The final installments in this issue are Marty Mittelstadt’s review essay of Craig Keener’s four-volume commentary on Acts, followed by Keener’s re- sponse to the review. Keener’s encyclopedic treatment of the social-historical background is astonishing and would merit a review in any journal related to biblical studies. It is especially appropriate forPneumabecause Acts is paradig- matic for pentecostal and charismatic theology. Mittelstadt and Keener differ on their preferred methodological approaches. The former is more interested in narrative analysis, while the latter has dedicated his attention to the social- historical world around the text. What the reviewer and responder share in common with the text is its own charismatic, spiritual perspective of early Christian history and theology.
In closing, Pentecostals and Charismatics have never approached the Scrip- tures as simply another collection of texts. Though they may at times employ a variety of hermeneutical methods when reading the Scriptures, in the end the goal is to hear from God. Chris Green’s perspective seems most appropriate:
We should be careful not to miss the point: the Scripture does not merely tell about salvation. By the Spirit’s grace, the Scripture works salvation, renewing our vision of the world by transforming us at the depths of our being. So transformed, we begin to discover our place in the mission of God entrusted to the church, and to bring [God’s] goodness and justice to bear in the lives of our neighbors and enemies.23
Robby Waddell and Peter Althouse
23
Ibid.
PNEUMA 38 (2016) 115–121
7
Leave a Reply