Journal of Beliefs & ValuesVol. 30, No. 3, December 2009, 289–302

ISSN 1361-7672 print/ISSN 1469-9362 online© 2009 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/13617670903371589http://www.informaworld.com

‘Where the Spirit leads’ – the development of Pentecostal hermeneutics

John Christopher Thomas*

Pentecostal Theological Seminary, Cleveland, TN, USA; Bangor University, Wales, UKTaylor and FrancisCJBV_A_437336.sgm10.1080/13617670903371589Journal of Beliefs & Values1361-7672 (print)/1469-9362 (online)Original Article2009Taylor & Francis3030000002009

This article traces the development of Pentecostal hermeneutics by focusing on thetouchstones in this emerging discipline. Whilst the literature devoted to this topicis enlarging at an astounding rate, and not all worthy pieces can be cited, thisarticle focuses especially on approaches that appear to be most constructive. Thisstudy acquaints the reader with significant figures in this discipline and with someof the major contours and characteristics of this hermeneutical approach.

Keywords: Pentecostal hermeneutics; Gerald T. Sheppard; Howard M. Ervin;Mark D. McLean; Russell Spittler; Rick D. Moore; John McKay; J.C. Thomas;Larry R. McQueen; Kenneth J. Archer; Robby Waddell; Lee Roy Martin

Gerald T. Sheppard

One of the first scholars to advocate for intentional reflection by Pentecostals on thenature, purpose, and meaning of Scripture in ways consistent with the tradition wasthe late Gerald T. Sheppard (PhD, Yale University), who at the time of writing was anAssistant Professor of Old Testament at Union Theological Seminary in New Yorkand an Ordained Assemblies of God minister. The occasion of his two part series wasthe then ongoing debate about whether a group was fully evangelical if they did notexplicitly affirm the inerrancy of Scripture (Sheppard, 1978a, 1978b). Arguing histor-ically, Sheppard provides extensive evidence to demonstrate that the Assemblies ofGod had consistently identified with the more moderate evangelical tradition, ratherthan fundamentalism, in attitudes toward Scripture, being received by the formergroup and rejected by the latter. However, he notes the growing tendency toward amore rigid position on Scripture that is not in keeping with the impulses of the denom-ination’s earlier history. In part two of the study, Sheppard explores the history ofPentecostal attitudes toward Scripture by means of early Assemblies of God literatureobserving that the tradition had been characterised by a literal, not historical (in thesense of historical critical), sense of the biblical text – informed by their religiousexperience (1978b, 14). Thus, the Bible was used to offer a theological interpretationof their experience. Departing from the rules of dispensational interpretation, theydiscerned that the Old Testament and the Gospels were addressed literally to thechurch and world in which they lived (1978b, 16). According to Sheppard early Pente-costals were not interested in choosing sides between liberal or conservative uses ofhistorical critical methods, but instead were interested in a ‘spiritual criticism’. Ratherthan canonising authorial intent, the Word of God must be discerned canonically

*Email: cthomas@cogts.edu

290 J.C. Thomas

(1978b, 17). Likening fundamentalists and modernists to Pharisees and Sadduceeswho are interested only in the meaning of the text for its original audiences, Sheppardargues that for Pentecostals the biblical text addressed their lives immediately. Thispresent tense of the Bible guaranteed the relevance of their spiritual experiencesincluding tongues, gifts, healing, etc. (1978b, 17–18). The thrust of Sheppard’s workurges the Pentecostal community to be more consistent with these earlier attitudes anduse of Scripture, rather than following a modernist paradigm that may or may notrepresent their ethos. He concludes, ‘the past Pentecostal practice of interpretingScripture is not fundamentalistic but is dependant on a spiritually informed discern-ment and intuition. It is a form of interpretation open to ordinary people with anextraordinary book’ (1978b, 19). Sheppard follows up these studies with a later articlethat again challenges the tradition to think more intentionally about a Pentecostalapproach to Scripture (Sheppard 1984). Specifically, he seeks to demonstrate thatearliest Pentecostalism was not dispensational in its eschatology and that there areinherent dangers in adopting uncritically a hermeneutical approach that is at odds withthe way the tradition approaches Scripture. He concludes that if applied consistently,such an uncritical approach undermines some of the defining hallmarks of the Pente-costal tradition.

Howard M. Ervin

If Sheppard calls for Pentecostals to be more Pentecostal in the way they think aboutScripture, the late Howard M. Ervin, Professor of Old Testament at Oral RobertsUniversity, is one of the first scholars actually to propose a Pentecostal hermeneutic.Awarded the ThD in Old Testament from Princeton Theological Seminary, Ervin, aSpirit filled Baptist, called for a self consciously Pentecostal hermeneutic in his 1981article, ‘Hermeneutics: a Pentecostal option’. Working at the intersection of threemajor hermeneutical trends, Ervin assesses and critiques existentialism, historical-critical exegesis, and the new hermeneutic in his construction of a Pentecostal herme-neutic in this carefully nuanced study. According to Ervin:

What is needed is an epistemology firmly rooted in the Biblical faith with a phenome-nology that meets the criteria of empirically verifiable sensory experience (healing, mira-cles, etc.) and does not violate the coherence of rational categories. A pneumaticepistemology meets these criteria, and provides a resolution of (a) the dichotomybetween faith and reason that existentialism consciously seeks to bridge, though at theexpense of the pneumatic; (b) the antidote to a destructive rationalism that often accom-panies a critical-historical exegesis; and (c) a rational accountability for the mysticismby a piety grounded in sola fidei. (Ervin 1981, 12)

The strength of a sound grammatical historical exegetical tradition is that it givespriority to the text of Scripture itself, but its weaknesses have been its placement intoservice by rationalistic and propositional theologies as well as its insensitivity in rela-tionship to issues of the numinous found within the text. Though the new hermeneuticis responsive to the numinous within the text, its weakness is its demythologisingtendency to reinterpret the intentionality of the numinous within, while an existential-ist hermeneutic is in some ways held captive by what is and is not acceptable to ‘themodern mind’, despite the fact that recent developments in a variety of fields, withregard to what people believe is possible, have shown that ‘the modern mind’ mightitself be a construct that is somewhat out of touch with contemporary religious

Journal of Beliefs & Values 291

attitudes in the (then) twentieth century and may be in need of some assessment andrevision if not jettisoning (1981, 14–15).

For Ervin, the Word of God is the ultimate, transcendent, eschatological, apoca-lyptic word; the word above all human words. ‘It is a word for which there are no cate-gories endemic to human understanding. It is a word for which, in fact, there is nohermeneutic unless and until the divine hermeneutes (the Holy Spirit) mediates anunderstanding’ (1981, 16). Thus, as the testimony of Scripture bears out, it is notpossible to penetrate to the heart of Scripture apart from the Holy Spirit (1981, 18)!Such divine encounter, which includes the mediums of dreams, visions, theophanies,miracles, and other such manifestations, raises the prospect of intuitive, non-verbalcommunication between God and humankind (1981, 21). The word experienced indivine encounter is not a spoken kerymatic word that is received simply at a cognitivelevel. As Ervin notes:

When one encounters the Holy Spirit in the same apostolic experience, with the samecharismatic phenomenology accompanying it, one is then in a better position to come toterms with the apostolic witness in a truly existential manner. ‘Truly existential’ in thesense that a vertical dimension to man’s existence is recognized and affirmed. One thenstands in ‘pneumatic’ continuity with the faith community that birthed the Scriptures.(Ervin 1981, 22)

The Pentecostal interpreter who so experiences the Spirit now reads the Scriptures‘“from within”, accepting its own idiom and categories, not imposing the alien cate-gories of a nineteenth century mind-set upon them’ (Ervin 1981, 23). At the sametime, the Pentecostal interpreter discovers that, ‘The Scriptures are now read withinthe pneumatic continuity of the faith community, and that community is much largerthan the post-Reformation communities of the West’ (1981, 23). A Pentecostalhermeneutic that insists upon ‘the experiential immediacy of the Holy Spirit’ resultsin contacts with non-material reality (such empirical evidence as divine healing,prophecy, miracles, tongues, and exorcism) leading to ‘a truly existential andphenomenological response to the Holy Spirit’s initiative in historical continuity withthe life of the Spirit in the Church’ (1981, 23–24). Thus for Ervin, a Pentecostalhermeneutic manifests itself in a pneumatic continuity for the Pentecostal interpreterin experience, faith, and doctrine – both within Scripture and the experience ofhistoric church (1981, 24).

Mark D. McLean

Three years after the appearance of Ervin’s proposal, still another call for a Pentecos-tal hermeneutic appeared by Mark D. McLean (PhD, Harvard University), an Assis-tant Professor in Biblical Studies and Philosophy at Evangel College in Springfield,MO (McLean 1984). McLean makes his thesis known in the introduction:

it is my contention that not only is a Pentecostal hermeneutic a vital necessity if we areto have an effective ministry to our ‘modern’ world, it is inescapable. A Pentecostalhermeneutic will either be a well articulated, canonically based expression of normativeChristianity, or the twentieth century Pentecostal movements will wither after the deathsof their charismatic leaders and become the religious oddities discussed in the openingchapters of future books like Gelpi’s which study the twenty-first or twenty-secondcentury ‘neo-charismatic’ movements. If we lose our hold on the Bible, that infalliblerule of our faith, and conduct, we are lost. (McLean 1984, 36)

292 J.C. Thomas

Following David Kelsey’s lead McLean seeks to focus attention on the discrementhat governs theology and our experience of the mode of God’s presence pro nobis(1984, 37). Specifically, he wants to explore how Pentecostals experience thepresence of God and use the Scripture in their common life together. According toMcLean there will be differences between Pentecostal theologians and non-Pentecos-tal theologians owing to the marked differences in the expectations of the rightful roleand function of the Holy Spirit in the differing communities (1984, 38). For thePentecostal is convinced of the continuity of the Spirit’s activity from creation to thepresent time and is convinced that these are the last days announced by Peter inActs 2. The danger to the Pentecostal church from the non-Pentecostal evangelicaltradition is an exegetical and hermeneutical approach that posits a fundamentallydifferent understanding of the mode of God’s presence amongst the biblical writersand believers of today, owing to the fact that while some evangelical interpretersposit that while God was an active causative agent in biblical times he will not beactive again to the same degree until the end of time (1984, 39). McLean argues thatthe other internal danger is the seductive call of a neo-orthodoxy whose conclusionsmust change from time to time owing to more recent discoveries in extra-biblicalmaterials (1984, 43). A more radical danger comes from the neo-liberal tradition thatchallenges the very premises of a Pentecostal worldview that believes God to be anactive agent in the world. For Pentecostalism to have a relevant voice in such a ‘natu-ralistic culture’ its witness must be accompanied not only by the fruit of the Spirit,but the gifts of the Spirit as well. The powerful witness of the Spirit must be visible,but at the same time, Pentecostals must not be backed into a naïve understanding ofthe biblical language with regard to the speech of God. For when Scripture says thatGod spoke often one sees that he spoke via vision, dream, the cloud of his glory, heal-ings, interpretation, tongues, prophecy, etc. Thus, Scripture can provide the wallsaround our interpretive communities, protecting us from straying too far in one direc-tion or the other. McLean concludes:

It is simply time to admit that the Pentecostal understanding of the mode of God’s pres-ence among his people in conjunction with our use of Scripture in the common life ofthe Church results in a Pentecostal hermeneutic and theology, that at major points isdifferent from an orthodox non-Pentecostal hermeneutic and theology. The task beforeus now is to realize and explore the implications of that fact for our understanding ofGod’s continued activity in the world, for our understanding of our witness to that activ-ity in the world, and for our understanding of our self-identify and tasks given to us bythe living, acting and speaking Creator of all things. (McLean 1984, 50)

Russell Spittler

In a 1985 contribution to Robert K. Johnston’s edited volume, The use of the Bible intheology: evangelical options, Russell P. Spittler (PhD, Harvard University) offers hisown testimony with regard to his interpretative practice as a Pentecostal in a studyentitled, ‘Scripture and the theological enterprise: View from a big canoe’ (1985).While not proposed as the model for a Pentecostal hermeneutic, or perhaps even amodel, Spittler, who at that time served as an Associate Professor of New Testamentat Fuller Theological Seminary, nonetheless anticipates later discussion on hermeneu-tics by constructing his essay as a narrative, which: describes some early Pentecostalways of doing theology, offers an accounting of his formative churchly influences,and identifies the impact of the schools he attended upon his theologising. With this

Journal of Beliefs & Values 293

discerning reflection upon his formative influences and the contexts within which heworks in mind, Spittler then offers ‘A theological sample’ of his approach by exam-ining 1 Cor. 11.2–16. He states his goal in this way, ‘I understand myself to be astudent and listener to the Word of God. It is enough if, reading carefully, I can hearthe word of Him whose voice I know’ (1985, 65). The analysis he offers consists ofproviding a bit of background information on the church at Corinth, describing theoverall context of his chosen passage within the letter, giving attention to the structureand interpretation of the text, and seeking to make application of his reading. Thestudy concludes with an analysis of the theological sample chosen where he makesseveral generalisations with regard to the use of Scripture in theology amongstcontemporary classical Pentecostals, based on his own personal experience. First, henotes that for the most part Scripture serves to nourish personal piety, as well as defin-ing evangelism as the chief concern for the church. Though this approach might bethought simple, natural, if not ahistorical, Spittler is not prepared to describe thisapproach as defective; ‘it is not so much wrong as limited’ (1985, 75). Second, theconvergence of historical, lexicographical, linguistic, and archaeological approachesoften leads to exegesis that is virtually life changing. Third, exegesis is capable ofputting one in the ‘vestibule of truth’, but it is Holy Spirit that opens the inner door(1985, 76). The integration of history and piety is essential in this interpretativeapproach (1985, 76). Fourth, the historical critical method, though legitimate, is inad-equate without the pietistic enhancement of faith, hope, and love for individual andcommunity.

Rick D. Moore

In a short study published in an in-house seminary publication, Rick D. Moore (PhD,Vanderbilt University), Assistant Professor of Old Testament at the Church of GodSchool of Theology, makes an impassioned plea for a Pentecostal approach to Scrip-ture (Moore 1987). Drawing on the emerging work of his seminary community,Moore began to outline the contours of a Pentecostal hermeneutic. First, he affirmsthat ‘the Holy Spirit addresses us in ways which transcend human reason’ (1987, 4).Not only does such take place through the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12.14) but in moresubtle ways as well (Rom. 8.1–27). Such an approach makes room for ‘emotion aswell as reason’, ‘imagination as well as logic’, ‘mystery as well as certainty’, ‘narra-tive and dramatic as well as … proposition and systematic’ (1987, 4). Scripture is notjust an object to be interpreted but the living Word that interprets us as well. Second,‘Experience is vital to knowing the truth’ (1987, 4). A Pentecostal approach to Scrip-ture includes ‘an inseparable interplay between knowledge and lived-experience,where knowing about God and directly experiencing God perpetually inform oneanother’ (1987, 4). This knowledge is not simply information but transformation, ayada ( ) kind of knowing, as this term appears in the Old Testament for marital aswell as covenantal intimacy. For the Pentecostal, each encounter with Scripture callsfor a response to its transformative invitation. Third, ‘the Spirit calls every individualbeliever to be a witness of the truth (cf. Acts 1.8)’ (1987, 5). The Pentecostal under-standing of the priesthood of all believers is joined by belief in the prophethood of allbelievers resulting in an expectation that all believers, despite their particular individ-ual giftings, are called upon to ‘walk in the light as it shines upon his/her path’, topartake firsthand and bear firsthand the word to others both within the community andbeyond. Fourth, ‘knowledge of the truth is inseparable from active membership in the

294 J.C. Thomas

localized body of Christ’ (1987, 5). For it is in the body that the Spirit speaks asnowhere else – a reality demonstrated by the experience of the early church in Acts15. In his conclusion, Moore makes clear, in no uncertain terms, that those workingwithin the theological tradition of Pentecostalism have no choice but to give them-selves whole heartedly to the development of such an approach, ‘if we are to surviveand our children are to become Pentecostal’ (1987, 11).

Following up this initial call in an article that appeared some five years later,Moore’s next contribution sought to explore the contours of a Pentecostal hermeneuticby means of an engagement with the Book of Deuteronomy (1992). Placing his studywithin the shifting paradigms of the late 1980s and early 1990s, Moore offers a read-ing that builds upon the final form of the text. His specific purpose in this investigationis ‘to look at the way in which the Book of Deuteronomy sets forth the place and roleof both inscripturated word and prophetic utterance’ (1992, 76), dialectical elementswhich his experience as a Pentecostal help to surface in the text – a discernment whichboth those in the historical critical tradition as well as conservative Evangelical schol-ars have impeded. In this carefully argued study Moore notes how the dialecticalnature of divine revelation is captured in Deut. 4.5–8 especially in the words, ‘Forwhat great nation is there that has a god so near to it as Yahweh our God is to us when-ever we call him? And what great nation is there that has statutes and ordinances sorighteous as all this law which I am placing before you today?’ Thus, Israel’s canonis denoted by ‘statutes and ordinances so righteous’, with prophetic revelation denotedby the words ‘a god so near’ (1992, 83). This dialectical pattern is shown by Mooreto be present throughout the Book of Deuteronomy, so much so that in many ways itbecomes a, if not the, defining paradigm of the book. As such, the charismaticprophetic word has an extraordinarily important role in order to ensure that Israel doesnot violate God’s written word. For Moore, this dialectical understanding of revelationensures that one does not have a Spirit-less Word (rationalism), on the one hand, or aWord-less Spirit, on the other hand (1992, 91). It is the tension of the canonically writ-ten word and the charismatically spoken word that must be preserved in a Pentecostalhermeneutic – a tension that much of modern Western theology has found ways toeliminate (1992, 92).1

John McKay

In 1994 an article appeared that was based upon years of reflection and exploration,written by a former lecturer in biblical studies at Hull University, John McKay (PhD,Cambridge University). Taking an autobiographical form, this essay describes theauthor’s reflection about the impact of his experience of Spirit-Baptism upon hisapproach to biblical interpretation (McKay 1994). His aim in this publication is ‘tohelp students searching for a Pentecostal approach to studying the Scripture’, owingto his conviction that there is an urgent need for such ‘a fresh approach to Bible teach-ing’ for those working within the worldwide revival of faith (1994, 18). Using termi-nology like ‘prophetic’, ‘charismatic’, ‘Pentecostal’, and ‘spiritual’ interchangeably,McKay seeks to highlight an approach to Scripture that takes the experience ofbaptism in the Spirit and spiritual gifts seriously. Utilising the phrase, ‘Removing theveil’, found in 2 Cor. 3.16–17, McKay recounts the tension he experienced betweenhis academic study of Scripture and his new found walk in the Spirit after his experi-ence of Spirit Baptism. In the university, McKay notes, individual students of Scrip-ture are taught to become analysts of the text, an exercise that can be pursued by

Journal of Beliefs & Values 295

anyone whether ‘Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, atheist, agnostic or whatever’, while inhis Spirit-filled existence he found that the Spirit was revealing any number of truthsto him about the Scripture that until that point had been closed off to him (1994, 19).For McKay, ‘academic biblical study (whether pursued by liberal or conservativescholars makes little difference) and prophetic Christianity, operate at two very differ-ent levels’ (1994, 19). Using the analogy of the world of drama McKay sees theformer as the critics who review a performance and the latter as those who stage andeven act in the drama. The problem is how can the two live together, or even more,how can the same person do both? The experience of the Spirit generates numerousrevelatory disclosures for the charismatic that allows one to see the text anew, as whenthe veil is taken away (1994, 21). McKay’s own experience of the Spirit lead him notonly to discover the immense spiritual treasures within the book of Deuteronomy, abook to which he had previously given considerable academic attention, but to almostevery other book of the Bible as well!

One of his discoveries was that charismatics approach the text differently thanbiblical literalists, whose doctrine of literal inspiration of Scripture leads to the prac-tice of reading, studying, learning, and obeying the text but never criticising or ques-tioning it, on the one hand, and biblical critics, who tend to reduce the text to thereflections of religious people about God, not the revelations of God, on the otherhand. Rather, ‘… charismatics are prophets, or at least prophetically sympathetic,and so read the Bible with the eye and intellect of prophetic persons’ (McKay 1994,24). Though, he acknowledges, such a claim may appear arrogant to those outside thetradition, it is in keeping with the claims of Paul, Tertullian, and others. Put simply,‘Conservatism is a theology of biblical literalism, liberalism a theology of biblicalcriticism, but I would call the charismatic approach a theology of biblical experience– or perhaps better, “shared experience”’ (1994, 26). As such, charismatics are awareof the similarities between their own experience and that of the prophets, apostlesand Jesus, and that they themselves are participants in this same drama of salvation.This orientation leads to a prophetic appreciation of spiritual gifts, which in turnrefuses to say with liberal theologians that such experiences must be understood interms of mythology and legend, or with fundamentalists who make doctrinal notexperiential claims. For the charismatic, prophecy cannot be reduced to naturalsagacity with liberal approaches, nor reduced to the literal and mechanistic under-standing of inspiration of the fundamentalist. This approach also leads to a greaterappreciation of the Bible as prophetic literature or charismatic biographies. ForMcKay, all of Scripture can be approached in this way and understood as ‘The dramaof salvation’, an approach that underscores the continuity between the apostolicchurch and the church of today and calls for the biblical interpreter to be activelyinvolved in the drama, not function simply as an observer. McKay goes so far as tosay that such an approach to Scripture can often result in a better appreciation of themessage of the Bible amongst less literate people than amongst those who haveobtained three years of academic training in a university department of theology, ortheological college, or seminary (1994, 37). This approach also recognises that theSpirit makes such ones witnesses not analysts; witnesses to the truth not persuadersof others to accept the reasonableness of their message; simple witnesses to thethings they have seen and heard. While academic training has many gifts to give,which McKay acknowledges in his own life, those who seek a prophetic experienceof the Bible must be willing to set aside his or her role as critic and have the courageto step onto the stage.

296 J.C. Thomas

J.C. Thomas

My own first formal attempt to contribute, in writing, to the construction of a Pente-costal hermeneutic came in an article published alongside the contributions of JohnMcKay mentioned earlier (Thomas 1994). Trained in biblical studies (PhD, Universityof Sheffield) I was at the time of publication Professor of New Testament at theChurch of God School of Theology in Cleveland, TN, USA. In this piece, I sought toexplore one possible paradigm for a Pentecostal hermeneutic, derived from the NewTestament itself, and then to test the paradigm by applying it to a particularly chal-lenging theological issue facing the church. Settling on Acts 15 as a text worthy ofutilisation, owing to its strategic place in both the early church and the Pentecostaltradition, the next section of the study was devoted to a careful narrative read of thispassage. The issue to which this passage is devoted is whether or not gentile believersin Jesus had to convert to Judaism in order to become full-fledged Christians. A care-ful reading of the text revealed the following components in the hermeneutical para-digm modelled in Acts 15. First, the important role of the community is obvious, as itbecomes the place where the discernment and assessment of the testimonies offeredby those who speak takes place and is the context from which the leader of thecommunity, James, speaks. Secondly, the role of the Holy Spirit is almost startlinglysignificant, as the experience of the Spirit in the community by means of the conver-sion of the gentiles generates the context for the discernment of this issue, leads James(and the community) to the choice of the Scripture appropriate to this context, and ulti-mately leads them to the final decision of which James says, ‘seems good to us andthe Holy Spirit’. The third component of the hermeneutical approach found in Acts 15is the role and place of Scripture. Interestingly enough, the interpreters moved fromtheir context to the text of Scripture. The passage cited was chosen from a largenumber of Old Testament texts that were diverse in terms of whether gentiles were tobe included or excluded from the people of God, a choice that the community’s expe-rience of the Spirit helped to determine. The stipulations agreed upon for gentileadmission to the church, which were crafted out of a variety of texts, appear to havebeen temporary in nature. While the authority of the text in this paradigm is clear,

in contrast to the way in which propositional approaches to the issue of authority func-tion, Acts 15 reveals that the text’s authority is not unrelated to its relevance to thecommunity, its own diversity of teaching on a given topic, and the role which the Scrip-ture plays in the constructing of temporary or transitional stipulations for the sake offellowship in the community. (Thomas 1994, 50)

In the next section of the study I sought to apply this paradigm to the issue of the roleand function of women in ministry. The worshipping Pentecostal community, perhapsin contrast with some other Christian communities, know first hand the experience ofthe Spirit in its midst with regard to the giftedness of women for ministry. The tradi-tion is filled with testimonies of how women have encircled the globe plantingchurches, founding schools and orphanages, publishing journals and monographs,working with the poor and oppressed, as well as preaching, singing, teaching, proph-esying, and supporting the church financially. Such experiences of the Spirit wouldlead the Pentecostal interpreter to examine all texts related to women in ministry inScripture, texts in which women are identified as apostles (Rom. 16.7), prophets (Acts21.9), teachers (Acts 18.26), evangelists (John 4), etc., not simply the silencepassages.

Journal of Beliefs & Values 297

To the objection that might be raised on the basis of the silence passages, one can onlyrespond that this objection is quite similar to the one that some of those present in Acts15 could have produced regarding the exclusion of the Gentiles from the people of God.Despite the fact that a couple of silence passages do indeed exist, the powerful testimonyof the Spirit coupled with numerous New Testament passages that clearly support aprominent role for women in ministry necessitate a course of action which not onlymakes room for women in the ministry of the church but also seeks to enlist all thetalents of these largely underutilized servants of the Lord in the most effective way possi-ble for work in the harvest. (Thomas 1994, 54)

Thus, a Pentecostal hermeneutic built upon Acts 15 would involve the components ofthe community, the Spirit, and the text.

My additional explorations in the area of Pentecostal hermeneutics has led me topropose a Pentecostal approach to the teaching of New Testament Introduction that ismulti-disciplinary in its approach (Thomas 2002), a distinctive Pentecostal approachto the writing of commentaries (Thomas 2004), and intentional engagement with thePentecostal tradition and broader Christian tradition by means of the utilisation ofWirkungungsgeschichte (Thomas and Alexander 2003).

Larry R. McQueen

The first monograph length study devoted to a single book from a Pentecostal perspec-tive was Larry R. McQueen’s Joel and the Spirit: the cry of a prophetic hermeneutic,a published version of his ThM thesis completed at Columbia Theological Seminary(1995, 2009).2 This innovative piece begins with an articulation of his attempt at aPentecostal hermeneutic, which includes (1) a dialogical approach in which a distinc-tive Pentecostal pre-understanding will illumine aspects of the text left undiscoveredby other readers and ‘a fresh critical reading of Joel will facilitate a clearer articulationof Pentecostal eschatology and ecclesiology’ (2009, 5); (2) approaching the book‘both in terms of its historical and literary significance as well as its character as“living” word of God’ (2009, 5); and (3) a communal context so that ‘This study maywell be viewed, therefore, as one attempt to hear the voice of God through the text ofJoel and to witness to that voice for the sake of a deeper communal knowing of theGod who alone has the final word’ (2009, 6). McQueen’s analysis of ‘The Themes ofJoel and the Promise of the Spirit’ (2009, 12–36) reveals three dominant genres orthemes: lament, salvation, and judgment, each of which is closely tied to the promiseof the Spirit in Joel. He concludes:

In response to the lament or repentance of the community, the spirit of Yahweh waspromised in the immediate context of salvation with impending universal judgment onthe nations serving as the larger context. Thus the outpouring of Yahweh’s spirit wouldfunction as both a sign of salvation and of judgment. (McQueen 2009, 64)

McQueen next trances the development of these same genre and themes from Joel inthe New Testament, with discussions of Luke-Acts, the Pauline literature, and otherNew Testament writings (2009, 68–103). This analysis reveals a great deal of conti-nuity between the themes of Joel and their New Testament development, with one ofthe major differences being the universal application of Joel’s framework (2009, 65).The next part of McQueen’s study is to trance the themes of Joel in Pentecostalism(2009, 68–103). In this engaging chapter McQueen examines the literature of themovement’s first generation demonstrating that these three genres are held together in

298 J.C. Thomas

ways remarkably similar to their New Testament treatment. He devotes the last halfof this chapter to a call for revisioning Pentecostalism that would include (1) thenecessity of an eschatological framework for the tradition, (2) the recovery of lamentwithin the movement, and (3) the need for Pentecostalism to be a prophetic commu-nity as a sign of salvation and as a sign of judgment. In his final chapter, entitled‘Confession of a Pentecostal Reader’, McQueen concludes:

by opening up myself up to what may be termed the prophetic hermeneutic of the Spirit,I was made aware of the cry of a prophetic hermeneutic in the book of Joel. A prophetichermeneutic is an interpretive event in which pathos and reason, Word and Spirit areintegrated as the human subject is made aware of the Spirit’s reinterpretation of a lifesituation or worldview. Such a hermeneutic arises from the depths of lament and takesshape in the meeting of human cry and divine response. The reader-hearer cannot remain‘objective’ in such a hermeneutic, but is drawn into the process to become receptor andinstrument of the Spirit’s critique. The interpreter, having been claimed and transformedby the Spirit, becomes prophet of the Spirit’s claims. Interpretation in such a model doesnot ‘explain’ and thereby contain and silence truth but rather remains open in its cry tobe lived out in the tensions of obedience, transformation, and resistance. Such was thecase with the prophet Joel; such is my hope in the appropriation of Joel’s claims.(McQueen 2009, 108–9)

Kenneth J. Archer

The first full length study of Pentecostal hermeneutics appeared in 2005, with thepublication of Kenneth J. Archer’s A Pentecostal hermeneutic: Spirit, Scripture andcommunity (2005, 2009),3 which is as close to a state of the art study on Pentecostalhermeneutics as exists. Archer (PhD, University of St Andrews), then an AssistantProfessor of Theology at the Church of God Theological Seminary, begins with anintroductory chapter where he among other things contextualises the study within hisown narrative journey as a Pentecostal believer. Defining the Pentecostal tradition asa para-modern movement, Archer places the hermeneutical practices of early Pente-costalism within the context of other nineteenth-century interpretive approaches,including Common Sense Realism, academic anti-modernist fundamentalism, thepopularistic pre-critical Bible Reading Approach, the synthetic method, and dispensa-tionalism. Next, Archer carefully examines scholarly assessments of early Pentecostalinterpretation as set forth by Russell Spittler, Grant Wacker, David Reed, and DonaldDayton, before proposing his alternative analysis called ‘The Bible Reading Method’,an exegetic method he deduces from the sermons, Bible teachings, testimonials, andPentecostal historiographers. Archer says that this method:

Was a commonsensical method that relied upon inductive and deductive interpretivereasoning skills. Once the biblical data was analyzed, it was then synthesized into a bibli-cal doctrine. Harmonization was the acceptable and necessary way to synthesize all thebiblical data on a particular subject. (Archer 2009, 101)

Archer then gives specific examples of early Pentecostal interpretation with regard toBaptism in the Holy Spirit (2009, 103–12) and with regard to baptism in the name ofJesus only (2009, 112–25), an understanding that arose in a later stream of the tradi-tion. This is followed by an identification of the hermeneutical filter through whichthe Pentecostal story and identity are understood and meaning is made, with specificattention given to the Central Narrative Convictions of the Pentecostal community thatJesus is Saviour, Sanctifier, Holy Spirit Baptiser, Healer, and Soon Coming King. The

Journal of Beliefs & Values 299

current trends in Pentecostal hermeneutics are engaged, both the hermeneutical issuesraised by those outside the Pentecostal movement, such as James D.G. Dunn and DaleBrunner, and those raised in the debate within Pentecostal scholarship with regard tothe differences and similarities between Pentecostal and evangelical approaches toScripture, concluding with a withering critique of the evangelical historical criticalmethod. In his construction of a distinctively Pentecostal hermeneutic, Archer is crit-ically informed by recent developments in semiotics, narrative analysis, and readerresponse criticism. Building constructively with much profit on my earlier work,Archer proposes a tridactic negotiation for meaning that draws upon the biblical text,the Pentecostal community, and the role of the Holy Spirit, offering a significant andperhaps the most comprehensive paradigm for those interested in the topic of Pente-costal hermeneutics.

Robby Waddell

The next major contribution to Pentecostal hermeneutics came fast on the heels ofArcher’s monograph from Robby Waddell (PhD, University of Sheffield), then anAssistant Professor of New Testament at Southeastern University in Lakeland, FL. Inthis most extensive and detailed investigation of the pneumatology of the Apocalypseto date (Waddell 2006), Waddell employs the methodology of intertextuality to gainleverage on the topic. Beginning with an overview of the history of research on therole of the Spirit in the book of Revelation Waddell not only reveals the major faultlines amongst interpreters on a variety of pneumatological points, but also the way inwhich the contexts of the various interpreters influence their own interpretations. Hemakes his own intentions clear:

In this study, I seek to offer a new contribution to the understanding of the role of theSpirit in the Apocalypse, a pro nobis understanding which acknowledges the influencesof my own cultural and spiritual context. The goal is to inquire unto the intertextual rela-tionship between my own confessional context in a Pentecostal interpretive communityand the literary references to the Spirit in the Apocalypse. (Waddell 2006, 37)

In order to accomplish this goal, Waddell engages in a detailed and sophisticated anal-ysis of philosophical and literary origins of the emerging discipline of intertextualstudies, includes a survey of the appropriation of intertextuality in Revelation studies(the work of J.-P. Ruiz, Steve Moyise, and G.K. Beale in particular), and concludesthis chapter, which he entitles ‘The Roundabout of Meaning’, with reflections on therelationship between intertextuality and contextualisation as a means of forwardingecumenical dialogue. This leads Waddell to articulate his own theological contextfrom his interpretation of the role of the Spirit in the Apocalypse. In this chapter,‘Hearing what the Spirit says to the Churches: profile of a Pentecostal reader of theApocalypse’, describes the origins and theological ethos of Pentecostalism, engagesthe emergence of a ‘Pentecostal theological hermeneutic’, surveys the previous(though limited) scholarly work on the Apocalypse, before proposing a Pentecostalhermeneutic for Revelation. Waddell highlights four aspects in his proposedhermeneutic. First, he argues that Pentecostal readers would be struck by the fact thatthe first word in this book, (apocalupsis), orients the reader to expect ‘toexperience a revelation of Jesus Christ as Jesus unveils the meaning of the text for thereader’ (2006, 124). Second, the status of Scripture, revealed in the Rev. 1.3, ‘Blessedis the one who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy and keep what is

300 J.C. Thomas

written therein, for the time is near’ points to the way in which the relationshipbetween orally spoken and written prophetic word, the relationship between properlyinterpreting and keeping the prophetic words of this prophecy, and the communalcontext in which such interpretation occurs are all intimately connected to oneanother. Third, owing to the dynamic interplay for Pentecostals between ‘Word’ and‘Spirit’, a Pentecostal hermeneutic of the Apocalypse should take place within acommunity in which ‘the prophethood of all believers’ is valued and lived out. Fourth,a final component in this four-fold approach to the Apocalypse involves the Pentecos-tal’s approach to Scripture itself, which includes fearing God in worship and Biblereading. Owing to the Pentecostal’s expectation of encountering God when readingScripture, and John’s own reaction to his encounter with Jesus in Rev 1.17, ‘the fearof the Lord is at least an initial requirement in the interpretation of scripture for thePentecostal’ (2006, 130). At this point Waddell is prepared to engage the pneumatol-ogy of the book more fully in the final major chapter of the study entitled, ‘The Faith-ful Witness of a Pneumatic Church: The Spirit of Prophecy and the People of God’.Contextualising the study by identifying the four ‘in the Spirit’ phrases around whichthe book is structured and discussing the identity of the little scroll of Revelation 10,Waddell turns his attention to a careful reading of Rev. 11.1–13, which he sees as theprophecy in nuce. Waddell concludes:

The role of the Spirit in the Apocalypse is to inspire the prophetic witness of a pneumaticchurch. The Spirit serves as the presence of God in the church represented as the sevenflames which burn before the throne (4:5) and upon each of the seven lampstands. More-over, the hearing formula at the end of each of the seven prophetic messages suggeststhat the Spirit speaks the words of Christ. Indeed, the Spirit serves as Christ’s represen-tative of power and knowledge symbolized as seven horns and the seven eyes of theLamb (5:6). As a prophet who is in the Spirit, John calls the church to be faithful in spiteof a hostile world. The church is commissioned by the Spirit to function prophetically inthe world (cf. Joel 2; Acts 2). Thus the Spirit in the Apocalypse is the ‘Spirit of Proph-ecy’. (Waddell 2006, 189)

Lee Roy Martin

The most recent major contribution to Pentecostal hermeneutics comes from Lee RoyMartin (DTh, University of South Africa), Associate Professor of Old Testament atthe Church of God Theological Seminary. Martin describes his monograph as:

a Wesleyan-Pentecostal literary-theological reading of the book of Judges thatexamines the role of God in the narrative of Judges, giving primary attention to thenarratives of divine speech in which Yahweh addresses the Israelites as a whole(Judg. 2.1–5; 6.7–10; 10.6–16). The study is Wesleyan-Pentecostal in the sense that Iacknowledge both the conscious and unconscious influence that my Holiness-Pentecostal community of faith exerts upon my interpretation, and I am attempting toproduce a pro nobis study that will enrich the biblical component of Pentecostal lifeand practice. The methodology of the study is literary-theological inasmuch as Iemploy synchronic literary/rhetorical methods in the critical study of Judges as anarrative theological text. I chose to examine the role of God in the narrative ofJudges because, although God is the most prominent character in Judges, his role hasbeen largely overlooked by previous scholarship and because the Pentecostal world-view places God precisely in the center of life. … Therefore, it is by means of aPentecostal literary-theological approach to Judges that I am striving to hear the voiceof Yahweh and then to communicate that voice to the academy and to my commu-nity of faith. (Martin 2008, 1–3)

Journal of Beliefs & Values 301

After an extensive chapter devoted to Judges scholarship, which ranges from the Ante-Nicene Fathers to post-critical studies, Martin expends considerable energies inconstructing his own Pentecostal approach to Judges entitled, ‘A Pentecostal “hear-ing” of judges: the goal of Pentecostal interpretation’. Contextualising his studywithin the broader hermeneutical conversations of the biblical studies guild and withinthe emerging discipline of Pentecostal hermeneutics, Martin constructs his ownapproach around the term ‘hearing’ owing to the fact that:

(1) it is a thoroughly biblical term; (2) it accords with the orality of the biblical and Pente-costal contexts; (3) it is relational, implying the existence of a ‘person’ who is speakingthe Word; (4) it denotes a faithful adherence to the Word, since in Scripture to hear oftenmeans to obey; (5) it implies transformation, since the hearing of the Word produceschange; and (6) it demands humility because, unlike the process of ‘reading’ Scripture,‘hearing’ entails submission to the authority of the word of God. (Martin 2008, 53)

The remainder of the monograph is devoted to a careful hearing of the speeches ofYahweh directed to the entire community, which lead to the realisation, among otherthings, that there is an inner tension between Yahweh’s anger and his compassion inthe book. His gift of covenant ‘exposes him to personal risk and makes him vulnerableto rejection, offense and personal injury’ (Martin 2008, 231). This tension is left unre-solved and invites the hearer to live in and discern this tension. Thus, the hearer iscalled upon to hear the message in a comprehensive sense.

Concluding observations

This survey outlines the development of Pentecostal hermeneutics over the last 35years. Not only have some of the major contributors been identified and their worksbriefly described, but something of the contours of the emerging constructions alsobegins to take shape.

First, it is clear that these attempts at constructing a Pentecostal hermeneutic envi-sion an interpretive approach that is not beholden to pre-existing theological grids intowhich a Pentecostal approach must be force fitted. Rather, these attempts reflectconstructive work that seeks to rethink basic issues and build from the ground up.

Second, it also becomes apparent that these attempts are far from the approach offundamentalism or even the evangelical use of historical criticism. Rather, they drawupon and are in dialogue with a variety of scholars and methodological approachesspanning the theological and interpretive landscape.

Third, though diverse in their attempts, each of these constructions takes the roleof the Holy Spirit and the experience of God in the community very seriously and asessential to the interpretive process.

Fourth, the communal context of the Pentecostal community is also taken as anabsolutely necessary component.

Fifth, far from being a frozen word, Scripture is viewed as dynamic and inviting,a veritable universe of terrain that awaits readers and hearers who identify with andlong for the experiences to which Scripture and a variety of communities of the Spirittestify.

Notes1. This and many of Moore’s other excellent contributions to Pentecostal hermeneutics may

be found in his forthcoming publication, The Spirit of the Old Testament.

302 J.C. Thomas

2. See now McQueen (2009) to which reference is made in the following discussion.3. See now Archer (2009) to which reference is made in the following discussion.

Notes on contributorJohn Christopher Thomas (PhD, University of Sheffield) is Clarence J. Abbott Professor ofBiblical Studies at the Pentecostal Theological Seminary in Cleveland, TN, USA and AssociateDirector of the Centre for Pentecostal and Charismatic Studies at Bangor University, Wales.

ReferencesArcher, K.J. 2005. A Pentecostal hermeneutic: Spirit, scripture and community. JPTS 28.

London: T&T Clark.Archer, K.J. 2009. A Pentecostal hermeneutic: Spirit, scripture and community. Cleveland,

TN: CPT Press.Ervin, H.M. 1981. Hermeneutics: A Pentecostal option. Pneuma 3, no. 2: 11–25.Martin, L.R. 2008. The unheard voice of God: A Pentecostal hearing of the Book of Judges,

1–3. JPTS 32. Blandford Forum: Deo.McKay, J. 1994. When the veil is taken away: The impact of prophetic experience on biblical

interpretation. Journal of Pentecostal Theology 5: 17–40.McLean, M.D. 1984. Toward a Pentecostal hermeneutic. Pneuma 6, no. 2: 35–56.McQueen, L.R. 1995. Joel and the Spirit: The cry of a prophetic hermeneutic. JPTS 8.

Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.McQueen, L.R. 2009. Joel and the Spirit: The cry of a prophetic hermeneutic. Cleveland, TN:

CPT Press.Moore, R.D. 1987. A Pentecostal approach to scripture. Seminary Viewpoint 8, no. 1: 4–5, 11.Moore, R.D. 1992. Canon and charisma in the book of Deuteronomy. Journal of Pentecostal

Theology 1: 75–92.Moore, R.D. Forthcoming. The Spirit of the Old Testament. Blandford Forum: Deo.Sheppard, G.T. 1978a. Word and Spirit: Scripture in the Pentecostal tradition – Part one.

Agora 1, no. 4: 4–5, 17–22.Sheppard, G.T. 1978b. Word and Spirit: Scripture in the Pentecostal tradition – Part two.

Agora 2, no. 1: 14–19.Sheppard, G.T. 1984. Pentecostalism and the hermeneutics of dispensationalism: The

anatomy of an uneasy relationship. Pneuma 6, no. 2: 5–33.Spittler, R.P. 1985. Scripture and the theological enterprise: View from a big canoe. In The

use of the Bible in theology: evangelical options, ed. R.K. Johnston, 56–77, 233–36.Atlanta, GA: John Knox Press.

Thomas, J.C. 1994. Women, Pentecostals, and the Bible: An experiment in Pentecostalhermeneutics. Journal of Pentecostal Theology 5: 41–56.

Thomas, J.C. 2002. Pentecostal explorations of the New Testament: Teaching New Testamentintroduction in a Pentecostal seminary. Journal of Pentecostal Theology 11, no. 1: 120–29.

Thomas, J.C. 2004. 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Pentecostal Commentary Series. London: T&TClark International.

Thomas, J.C., and K.E.E. Alexander. 2003. ‘And the signs are following’: Mark 16.9–20 – Ajourney into Pentecostal hermeneutics. Journal of Pentecostal Theology 11, no. 2: 147–70.

Waddell, R.C. 2006. The Spirit of the book of Revelation. JPTS 30. Blandford Forum: Deo.