Theological Hermeneutics in the Classical Pentecostal Tradition: A Typological Account

Written by L. William Oliverio Jr. Reviewed By Steven M. Studebaker

This book is the first comprehensive account of the history of Pentecostal theological hermeneutics. Works in Pentecostal theological method and hermeneutics appeared over the past decade. Premier examples are Amos Yong’s Spirit-Word-Community: Theological Hermeneutics in Trinitarian Perspective (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2002) and Kenneth Archer’s A Pentecostal Hermeneutic for the Twenty First Century: Spirit, Scripture, and Community (London: T&T Clark, 2004). Oliverio’s book adds the history of Pentecostal hermeneutics to this field of scholarship. More than a chronology, however, Oliverio categorizes the strategies of Pentecostal hermeneutics into four types: 1) the Original Classical Pentecostal Hermeneutic, 2) the Evangelical-Pentecostal Hermeneutic, 3) the Contextual-Pentecostal Hermeneutic, and 4) The Ecumenical-Pentecostal Hermeneutic. Henry May’s typological interpretation of the four forms the Enlightenment took in America inspires Oliverio’s approach to categorizing the history of Pentecostal hermeneutics.

Chapter one identifies the late-nineteenth century roots of Pentecostalism: Wesleyan-Holiness, American Revivalist/Radical Evangelicalism, the Keswick movement, and the dispensational and premillennial eschatology of John Nelson Darby. The constellation of beliefs and practices that came to a unique shape in early Pentecostalism arose from these religious and theological movements.

Chapter two describes the theological hermeneutics of the first generation of Pentecostals. Four principles grounded their hermeneutic: 1) the authority of the Bible, 2) the restorationist or Latter Rain motif, which shaped their view of their place in history, 3) the doctrinal grid of the four/fivefold Gospel, and 4) a pragmatic realism, which supported the direct correspondence they saw between their reading of the Bible and their religious experience. Oliverio situates this account in light of other interpretations of early Pentecostalism. Investigations of the thought of Charles F. Parham, William J. Seymour, Charles H. Mason, and Garfield T. Haywood provide the basis for Oliverio’s account of early Pentecostal hermeneutics. Oliverio makes the important, perhaps controversial, point that the interplay between biblical interpretation and experience was not unidirectional, but dynamic. The early Pentecostals formally affirmed the authority of the Bible and that their experience flowed from the pages of Scripture. In reality, however, their charismatic experience shaped their approach to and interpretation of Scripture.

Chapter three details the development of Pentecostal hermeneutics in the years between the World Wars. Oliverio argues that Pentecostal theology should be understood more as a theological trajectory that emerged from nineteenth century Evangelicalism than from early-twentieth century Fundamentalism. Thus, the early Pentecostals embodied the trajectory of American Evangelicalism that emphasized spiritual experience and piety. By the time that the early Pentecostals needed to formulate doctrine and theology, however, Fundamentalism was the dominant manifestation of the evangelical tradition. The Pentecostals readily adopted the Bible doctrines approach to theology and literal biblical exegesis popular among the Fundamentalists. Yet Oliverio maintains that the return to their theological predecessors in the evangelical tradition was not just a retrograde return to roots, but an innovative process of resourcing tradition and constructing a new and a hybrid theological tradition.

Chapter four covers changes in Pentecostal hermeneutics from the post-World War II era to the present day, which closely correspond to the post-fundamentalist evolutions in biblical hermeneutics among Evangelicals (e.g., Neo-Evangelicalism). The key difference between the literal hermeneutics of the Fundamentalists and the Neo-Evangelicals is that the latter draw more positively, though cautiously, on the critical methods of biblical studies. The basic belief in biblical authority for understanding God and all of human experience, however, remains the same. Oliverio also details the diversity of hermeneutical strategies among contemporary evangelical-Pentecostal theologians. They are Pentecostal versions of the Protestant evangelical emphasis on the authority of Scripture. Theological method assumes access to the authorial meaning of the biblical texts, which in turn serves as the foundation for first biblical theology and then systematic theology.

Chapter five charts the emergence of postmodern Pentecostal hermeneutics. The effort by Pentecostal theologians to account for the role of cultural context in ascertaining and creating meaning from texts is central to this hermeneutical approach. Scholars such as Timothy Cargal and Kenneth Archer argue that the uncritical adoption of the modern and historical-critical methods among Pentecostals takes them away from the theological insights of early Pentecostalism, fails to recognize the influence of social and cultural place on interpretation, and ultimately prevents the formation of Pentecostal readings of the Bible and theological perspectives. Oliverio covers James K. A. Smith’s creational-hermeneutic, the narrative and communitarian methods of John Christopher Thomas and Kenneth J. Archer, and Amos Yong’s Trinitarian-pneumatological hermeneutic.

Chapter six describes the emergence of an ecumenical approach to theology among Pentecostal scholars in the late-twentieth century. Key figures that nurtured an ecumenical orientation are David du Plessis, Ernest. S. Williams, and Cecil M. Robeck, Jr. Representatives of the ecumenical-Pentecostal approach include Frank D. Macchia, Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Simon Chan, and Koo Dong Yun. Oliverio convincingly argues that the contemporary ecumenical approach to theology is in continuity with the early Pentecostal movement, which emphasized charismatic spirituality that included believers from diverse Christian traditions. It stands in discontinuity, however, with the institutional form of Classical Pentecostalism that emerged and became dominant through the twentieth century. Classical Pentecostalism ignored its theological roots and regarded itself as an end-time renewal of the Spirit. The ecumenical-Pentecostal hermeneutic rejects the Classical Pentecostal contempt toward tradition. Moreover, it recognizes Pentecostalism as a tradition and engages in a positive and critical conversation with historical and contemporary Christian traditions.

Oliverio’s book is immensely readable for a revised dissertation (Marquette University, 2009). It makes the important argument that Pentecostalism did not simply borrow the theological categories of its Holiness and Reformed predecessors. The early Pentecostal theological hermeneutic—centered on the four/five-fold Gospel, the restorationist motif, biblical authority, and pragmatic realism—created a new theological tradition. The book effectively charts the development and diversification of theological methods among historical and contemporary Classical Pentecostals. One drawback is that the focus on the Classical Pentecostal tradition means that the figures within the broader Charismatic movement are not treated. For instance, Kilian McDonnell is a key figure in the Pentecostal and Catholic ecumenical dialogues. Because, however, he is a Roman Catholic the chapter on the ecumenical-Pentecostal hermeneutic does not discuss him at length.


Steven M. Studebaker

Steven M. Studebaker
McMaster Divinity College
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Other Articles in this Issue

The book of Ecclesiastes diagnoses humanity’s tendency to link the value of human life with permanent accomplishment in our work...

In the current fascination of younger evangelicals with the ethos of both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, John Henry Newman (1801–1890) has become something of a ‘poster child’...

A great deal of research has been done on the life and theology of Jonathan Edwards...

This article surveys the state of Edwards studies today, focusing particularly on its philosophical theologians who have zeroed in on Edwards’s doctrine of God...

This article critically examines Jonathan Edwards’s doctrine of the Trinity with a particular focus upon his understanding of the person of the Holy Spirit...