VI. Whose Charismatic Interpretation?
WHOSE CHARISMATIC INTERPRETATION ?
Current discussion of Pentecostal and charismatic hermeneutics often dominates discussion about sound Spirit hermeneutics. What is it, however, that makes a hermeneutic distinctively Pentecostal or charismatic? The vast majority of Pentecostal scholars would demur from many popular Pentecostal and charismatic interpretations that have been foisted on the church, such as hard-core Word of Faith teaching.
Some have argued that the global Pentecostal community provides a safety net for interpretation, but whose interpretations in that community count? Few of us would advocate including the interpretations of movements that sociologists classify as pentecostal that nevertheless have deified founding figures in place of Jesus. Likewise, few of us would place syncretistic teaching about ghosts on a level with obvious biblical teaching supporting the continuance of spiritual gifts.
Do we then appeal to the global community of pentecostal scholarship? Yet the diversity of hermeneutical approaches among Pentecostal, charismatic and other Spirit-emphasizing scholars is almost as wide as the circles in which they were trained. What is distinctive about and usually present in these forms of Spirit hermeneutics is the embrace of experiencing the text. I continue to suggest, however, that such an embrace must be supplemented with attention to the shape of the texts. Because they are texts, often in genres recognizable to their first (and often even subsequent) audiences, God inspired them in a form that is accessible to those who know how to read texts. Thus for reading them from the standpoint of faith, we will always need not just the text or just the Spirit, but always Word and Spirit together.