CYBERJOURNAL FOR PENTECOSTAL-CHARISMATIC RESEARCH
Toward an Asian Pentecostal
Theology[1]
Dr. Wonsuk Ma
Asia Pacific Theological Seminary
In the past two decades, the
validity of Asian theological reflection has been forcefully argued not only by
liberal theologians, but also Evangelicals.[2] Nevertheless, a consensus has emerged
through critical Asian theological reflections for the legitimacy of Asian
theology. However, the question
remains: How shall we construct such a theological framework? Meanwhile, the century-old Pentecostal
movement is experiencing several paradigm shifts in their theological reflections. Case in point, various theological concerns
were raised in two recent conferences: Brighton Conference of World
Evangelization (1991)[3]
and Globalization of Pentecostalism conference in Costa Rica (1996). In particular, the stance on constructing a
Pentecostal theology was convincingly argued by participants from various parts
of the world and traditions. Despite
this progress, there are many basic unsettled issues in doing Pentecostal
theology, let alone Pentecostal theologies related to specific contexts. As an example, the exact nature of the
baptism in the Spirit, the primary Pentecostal distinctive, continues to be
hotly debated.
Since both Asian and Pentecostal
theologies are still in their formative stages, it is not surprising to note
the variety of questions that surface, such as: Is it necessary? If so, then
why?; Is it feasible?; Are there areas which Asian theology, provided that it
will come its way sooner or later, would not be able to address; i.e., What are
its limitations? If the construction of an Asian Pentecostal theology is
justifiable, how should we approach it, especially in the light of the existing
path, which Asian theology has taken?
Consequently, this paper intends to
probe the possibility of doing theology from an Asian Pentecostal
perspective. The main concern is how
such a theological reflection would have a positive value, particularly within
the context of a broader Asian theology.
The present discussion is meant to raise an awareness among the Asian
Pentecostal thinkers concerning their unique capability and calling to engage
in theological reflections within their local context. Secondly, this discussion will include
attempt to explore ways to effectively communicate some theological reflections
in relevant ways to the Asian recipients.
With this in mind, the discussion will progress from theology in
general, to Asian theology, and then finally to an Asian Pentecostal
theology. In addition, several
pertinent elements of Pentecostal theology will be incorporated in the first
two segments of the discussion.
1. Theology
Simply defined, theology is a
process which takes the divine truth, the revelation of God, then applies to a
specific human setting. By doing this,
theology allows God to speak to human beings.
The process can begin from either end: divine truth or human needs. With this simple definition,[4]
one can easily recognize three critical elements in theological reflection.
1.1. The Elements
There are two primary sources in the
theological process. The first is a
divine source (D): God’s revelation.
God reveals, not only who He is, but also what His will is in two
venues. One is through His words. This includes the written revelation, the
Scripture, as well as revelation through experiences. Through contemporary events, God continues to reveal His
character and will. The other is God’s
revelation in history, or in deeds. The
history of Israel is viewed as God’s revelation of his salvation history (e.g.,
Acts 7:2-50; 1 Cor 10:1-5). Ideally,
this divine source is to serve as the subject of any theological endeavor. The prime task is to interpret these divine
messages. In the case of scripture,
this takes careful exegesis of the texts.
Knowing that the texts were given to ancient people, the first work of
the exegete is to find out “what it meant to them, then and there,” before one
can present it into the present situation, in the “here and now.”
The second element is a human source
(H): contemporary human setting. After
the interpretation of the ancient text, the message should be “redressed” to
contemporary settings in mind.
Different social, cultural, and religious settings present different
human needs. The key word in this
process is “relevancy”: how to make God’s message applicable to the
contemporary people. As the human
setting is viewed through God’s word, this functions as an object of the
theological process. This human group
also serves as the addressee for any theological communication. The first two can also be termed as the text
and the context, respectively.
The third is an agent mediating the
two elements. This theologizer (T) is a
human instrument bringing the two elements together for God’s message to become
relevant to contemporary human beings.
The theologizer must be part of the two worlds: the divine and
human. He or she must be a believer in
God in terms of word and deed.
Non-believers cannot truthfully do theology, on behalf of
believers. This, of course, assumes
that the theologizer is a contemporary member of a given society. [5]
1.2. Models
Theoretically, there are three
possible models, depending on the various dynamics influenced by the three
elements.
1.2.1. Emphasis on the Divine Element
The conservative theological camp often represents this model. Normally, there is a strong emphasis on the biblical authority. And the goal is naturally to bring humans to terms with the reality of the divine realm. The theologizer takes a role of a proclaimer, as we often see from the Old Testament prophets. Hence, the primacy of the divine truth is clearly manifested. As a weakness, however, it tends to be detached from the human needs and quests. As a result, theology exists for theology’s sake, rather than making God’s truth relevant for the Christian recipients.
D T H
1.2.2. Emphasis on the Human Element
In many ways, this approach represents the opposite of the above discussion. Usually, the liberal Christian camp popularizes this approach. God and His revelation are seen as change agents of human situation. Human needs, whether physical, political, cultural, or economic, become the beginning point of an theological journey. For instance, liberation theologians see the Bible, especially the Book of Exodus, as providing a divine paradigm for, and even an endorsement to, efforts to “liberate” human beings from any form of oppression. Even the use of force is justified in liberating the oppressed. These advocates thank that theology provides a legitimate ground for such actions. This approach has succeeded to make God’s message, directly involved in human affairs. Despite this, as often observed, God’s words are sometimes forced to mean more than what they were originally intended. In this case, the theologizer may assume a position similar to that of a priest, representing the needs of the people to God.
H
D T H
1.2.3. The Ideal Model
The ideal model is obviously, one in
which the theologizer is personally involved in both elements: divine and
human. The theologizer first ought to
establish an intimate relationship with God.
In the Bible, this is often referred to as an experience related to as a
call to service. In Isaiah, for
instance, the prophet was allowed by divine providence, to witness what was
taking place in the heavenly realm (Isa 6:1-2). In this crisis experience, he not only experienced strong
conviction of God and His sovereignty (vv. 1-4), urgency to communicate God’s
plan to his own people (vv. 8-9), but also a divine commission from God himself
(vv. 9-10). This experience and
conviction sustained the prophet’s challenging ministry, but also caused his
message to be truthful to God’s intention.
Of course, one should not conclude, that the prophet had a single crisis
experience. The initial spiritual
experience may have well resulted in a subsequent and on-going relationship
with God.
The theologizer should also be a member of the society which forms the theological context as well as the addressees. He or she must be an active member of the time and place, a participant of social issues and struggles. If the theologizer is an outsider, he or she should not only understand the settings, issues, and struggles, but also have sympathy to the people who are in the community. This often takes places either by participation or through meaningful relationships with members of the community. The theologizer is intimately involved in the divine and human realms.
D T H
2. Asian Theology
There has been a growing consensus
for the validity of an Asian theology or theologies. For Asian theology, the two sources prime sources remain unchanged. However, the nature of the human element or
the context is radically different from the “traditional” western
theology. This “cross-cultural nature”
also necessitates another dimension in theologizing: communication.
2.1. Asian Theological Elements
2.1.1. Divine Source
It seems the divine side of the
theological sources remain unchanged, even though the work is done for an Asian
audience. However, a careful
observation will prove, that even this requires a close examination. Of course, God’s words do not change. It is rather, human perceptions of God’s
revelation are transitory. Asian should
remember that the revealed words were given to Orientals (Hebrews for the Old
Testament, and primarily Jews for the New Testament). Since God uses human thought mechanisms, His revelation assumes a
close affinity to Oriental worldviews.
In a way, God’s revelation has already been “contextualized” to various
human settings. Historically, then
God’s revelation has been “contextualized” into the western worldviews. Therefore, in Asia, Christianity is viewed
as a “western” religion, in spite of its distinct Oriental origin. So, Asian theologizers ought to “recover”
the scripture in the Oriental context to best accommodate their psychology.
2.1.2. Asian Context
Probably the most critical segment
is the human setting which forms the context for the theological process.[6] This can be roughly divided into two
groups. The first are more traditional
elements; “Traditional Asian culture”
is a convenient expression. This
includes uniquely Asian world views, thought pattern, family system,
traditional social structure, and religions.
Prevailing animistic influences in Asia makes the theological reflection
far different, from what one would do theology in the West. We should also remember, that all major
religions, as well as new ones, come from this part of the world. At the same time, one should not expect a
universal Asian culture. Plurality
characterizes the vast differences in culture and religion, among Asian
communities.
The second is the contemporary
setting. A rapid change characterizes
the Asian society, although the nature of change can be radically different
from one place to another. For
instance, the current political issues in Mongolia are unlike what the
Indonesian issues. Rapid urbanization
in many Asian countries not only changes skylines but also brings new life
styles. Harvey Cox argues that this
uprooted mass have been drawn to Pentecostalism out of their social and
cultural dislocation. The changes in
social, political, economic realms all require careful consideration in the
theological endeavor, if theology is going to serve the people.
These unique Asian contexts present
enormous challenges for the theologizer.
At the same time, we need to recognize that this can provide surprising
and creative vehicles to convey God’s truth.
It is particularly true because the prevailing biblical worldview shares
many commonalties with contemporary Asian thought patterns and cultures.
2.1.3. Communication
This is an additional dimension
required in Asian theology. This does
not mean that traditional western theology does not require a communicational
dimension. For two reasons, however,
the significance of this dimension in western theology is less obvious. First, the western culture has been
“Christianized” or rather Christianity has been “westernized,”[7]
so in effect, the perceived cultural distance between the divine theological
source and the human setting is minimal, if not non-existent. Second, as a consequence, in the west, the
addressees of the theological message are found in the pew rather than in the
market place. Theology is for church
use, and one assumes that every one is found in this sphere. Language found in the scripture is commonly
used in daily life, at least until recently.
The falsity of these assumptions is apparent, but the perceived need for
careful consideration on the communication process is deceptively minimal.
On the contrary, Asian theologians do their work not exclusively for church use, or for in-house consumption.[8] Asian theology needs to find its way in bringing the theological fruits to the vast non-Christian world. This process requires at least two considerations: the identification of the addressees and the method of communication. The identification of the target audience (A) and their life context is done by examining the human element, since the contexts for theologization and communication are identical. The method of theological communication, however, necessitates a careful selection of proper language, symbols, and forms. Assuming a considerable amount of theological communication is addressed to non-believers, it is necessary for the communicator to avoid obvious Christian expressions and terms, rather culturally indigenous language must be employed. This also requires the communicator to employ communication methods that are familiar to Asian thinking patterns. Intuitive presentation is preferred to logical reasoning. Story-telling is a prime mode in communicating theological messages to Asians. One comments of its effectiveness among folk-Muslims in Africa, whose worldview shares many similarities with Asians:
. . . an approach called
“storying” is reaping solid results among the 204,000 Kotokoli people in
Togo. Stroying involves going through
the Old Testament orally with Muslims. . . . The approach is especially helpful
in reaching tribal people who cannot read and write, and has also served to
break down barriers.[9]
The
“storying” approach, in this particular case, results in new converts “to
remain in their culture and with their families.”[10]
2.1.4. “Asian” Theologizer
This all amounts to a great
responsibility for the theologizer. And
often the theologizer assumes the communicator’s role (T/C). First of all, the theologizer needs to be
part of the two sources, as discussed above.
Then the perceived “cross-cultural” nature of theological task requires
a critical role for the theologizer. In
addition to being a believer in God in terms of His revelation in words and
deeds, he or she must be Asian in context and perspective. This immediately identifies the theologizer
with an Asian living in Asia. But more
importantly, he or she much possess Asian intuition, thinking pattern, values,
and perspectives shaped by the shared Asian culture. The theologizer must be a living member of Asian social, political, economical, and cultural
context. He or she must exhibit
sympathy to the Asian contexts which are often represented by suffering and
oppression. This does not necessarily
mean that all Asians possess such quality, nor non-Asians are not qualified to
participate in theological activities in this region. In truth, born and raised within the context more often than not
makes one less sensitive to the significance, needs and settings. For this reason, non-Asians, widely exposed
to the needs and contexts may have a better sense of necessity for theological
articulation. The issue is the
theologizer’s awareness of, and involvement in, the Asian context.
2.2. Possible Models
Having three primary elements with
an agent (a theologizer), one can have numerous possibilities. One set of the three possibilities is that
the theologizer can align him/herself to one of the three variables while
paying less attention to, or even neglecting, the remaining two. Another possibility is the second set of
three combinations. The scenario is
when the theologizer is aligned to two elements, while paying less attention or
neglecting the remaining one.
2.2.1. Emphasis on the Human Source and the Target
Obviously, this demonstrates a great interest in the human realm of the theological task. Contextual relevance can be seen to be important in doing theology and in communicating its message. This often results in the negligence of the divine source. In some cases, the primacy of human settings can distort the scripture to mean what they want to hear. In a worst case, communicated “Christian” message may be in truth a message of traditional religious beliefs with a Christian outlook. One should not forget that in any theological task, the divine revelation is the ultimate source.
D H
T/C
A
2.2.2. Emphasis on the Divine Source and the Target
This case presents a setting, whereby the divine revelation is taken, as well as the “then and there” biblical messages are communicated in a familiar cultural mode. This model without doubt succeeds in telling the truth in a relevant way. However, as the human theological context is somehow overlooked, the divine revelation may not be able to “speak to the situation” even if the language and mode is culturally relevant. One example is from the ancient biblical stories which are retold with Asian symbolism and equivalence. David can be a boy watching carabaos in a muddy rice field, or Jesus rebuking a mango tree. It takes creative imagination. Yet the traditional messages fails to interact with contemporary Asian situations.
D H
T/C
A
2.2.3. Emphasis on the Divine and Human Sources
This model neglects the communication process and the target. Much emphasis is given to the traditional theological thinking, and relevant issues are well addressed in the light of God’s revelation. Earlier works on Asian theology tend to fall into this category. The seminal work by Veitch illustrates this approach. He first assumes that the climax of the New Testament is the resurrection of the Lord and that the entire New Testament is written in the light of this event. Then, he continues, that we, Asian Christians, need to constantly ask a question, “What does it (the resurrection of the Lord) mean for the majority of mankind (sic) who live in Asia?”[11] In this otherwise excellent proposal, he assumes that theology in Asia takes place among “us” (or “we”), that is, within the church. He failed to see another critical dimension in doing an Asian theology.
T/C
D H
A
2.2.4. The Ideal Model
The ideal situation is, of course, that all three elements are organically integrated into the theological process. This can happen, as the theologizer/communicator is not only aligned equally to the three elements, but also part of them. In reality, however, the role of the theologizer/communicator may be shared by a few individuals. For instance, the recently launched Asia Bible Commentary series under the sponsorship of the Asia Theological Association assigns a team of three for each book. An exegete or biblical scholar will work with the ancient text in its given context and hearers in mind. Then a theologian or missiologist will theologize the exegeted exposition “in the light of the interpretation by the Church universal and the plurality of issues in the Asian context.”[12] Lastly, “a practical theologian with pastoral experience or a competent pastor will add pastoral insights.”[13] This may not strictly correspond to the communicational dimension in our discussion. However, the fact that an experienced pastor, presumably Asian, is to expect to make contextually relevant applications and communicate them in culturally acceptable forms is an important consideration. In any case, the role of the theologizer/communicator is extremely critical. He or she must have an equal sympathy of, and commitment to, all the three elements and their dynamics. If the theologizer/communicator is not within the community, i.e., non-Asian, he or she ought to have an incarnational relationship in the Asian contexts, as well as to the communication procedure.
D H
T/C
A
3. An Asian Pentecostal Theology
Having briefly considered various
critical issues and elements pertaining to theology and Asian theology, it is
then necessary to add the final element to our journey of theologization. It is perhaps in order to discuss briefly
the validity of doing an Asian Pentecostal theology.
3.1. The Needs
Do we really need an Asian
Pentecostal theology, or a Pentecostal Asian theology? What is an Asian Pentecostal theology hoping
to fulfill which a more generic Asian theology cannot achieve? How would Asian Pentecostal theology enhance
the human understanding of God, among Asians as well as in the whole
world? What will an Asian Pentecostal
theology contribute to the expansion of God’s kingdom?
The first thing to consider is if an
Evangelical Asian theology suffices to meet our theological needs. If not, then
one needs to probe where that theology fails.
A more specific question will be if Asian Evangelical theology is
adequate to address inherent spiritual/pneumatic concerns. With a more keen awareness of the spirit
world, Asians have numerous “spiritual” questions, such as bad dreams, traditional
omens, feng-shu, etc. Concerns of average Asians are non-Christian
in nature. It is unlike the West, where
theology is primarily addressed to people in the church. In Asia, theology should be adequate to address
to non-churching and non-Christian multitudes.
In the past, especially in the Christian circle, these concerns have
been single-handedly condemned as superstition, and thus not worthy of
mentioning, let alone trying to resolve the concerns. It is then conceivable that many Christians have two allegiances,
as the standard theology is not capable of helping Asian in these “spiritual”
problems.[14]
An equally probing question which
will help us to determine the validity of an Asian Pentecostal theology is:
What distinct contribution has Pentecostal theology made to the wider theological
world in the past, and presumably in the west?
Once we can identify deficiencies of traditional theology and the
distinct contribution of Pentecostal theology, there are at least two
theological worlds from which Asian Pentecostals can draw their clues.
3.1.1. The Historical Significance
The Pentecostal movement emerged
from a distinct social, intellectual and religious environment in Europe and
America, tailored to serve the distinct needs of the time. Menzies lists factors, such as: “theological
bankruptcy” in the midst of humanistic intellectualism, and a tension between
the liberal Christianity with its social gospel and the opposite conservative
camp characterized by Fundamentalism.[15] From the very beginning, Pentecostalism has
been the religion of the lowly, including the poor, racial minorities, women,
and uneducated. It shook the complacent
and optimistic mainline Christianity in America. The Pentecostal spiritual awakening, in a way, prepared the
society for the coming harsh times including the war years and the
depression. This eschatological
movement looked forward to the coming of the Lord, as earthly hope seemed an
impossibility.
In Asia, Classical Pentecostalism
became a relatively later phenomenon, compared to other major Christian groups:
Roman Catholics, Anglicans/Episcopals, Presbyterians, Methodists, Lutherans,
and other denominations. This creates a
number of implications. As being a part
of post-World War II movement, Pentecostal missionaries were not directly
linked to colonialism, as other groups were identified in this respect.[16] If the colonial history is one of the
“Critical Asian Principles” for any Asian theological attempt,[17]
the post-colonial nature of Pentecostalism obviously has an advantageous appeal
to Asians.
This also implies that, issues which
Asian Pentecostals face today are different, from those that Western
Pentecostalism faced in its formative stage.
For instance, the early, immediate eschatological expectation in the
West is not apparent among Asian Pentecostal churches. This can be traced two possible sources: 1)
Western Pentecostalism had lost its original eschatological emphasis by the
time it was introduced to Asia; and/or 2) Pentecostal messages were preached to
the nations that recently came out of war after being colonized. In the midst of national struggles, the
Pentecostal missionaries brought a message of God’s power and hope to meet the
contemporary needs of the people. This
resulted in a more “this-worldly” messages than the “other-worldly” ones. Another example, maybe of less prominent
attention is the issue of speaking in tongues.
One can argue that the issue had been resolved or at least debated
enough, and the Asian Pentecostals assumed the consequence of the western
debate. However, it is possible that
the Asian social and religious settings and needs require the Asian
Pentecostals to concentrate on more pressing issues, such as God’s intervention
in daily lives, in the midst of acute poverty.
The lesser emphasis on eschatology and a more context-sensitive
Pentecostalism in Asia has assumed a different profile, than the western
Pentecostal churches. For instance,
earlier messages of David Cho to the suffering masses after the devastating Korean
War were constructed around two emphases: 1) God’s power to heal and solve
human problems through the Holy Spirit; and 2) Human faith in God’s miracle
power. He is in fact a product of the
miracle-faith principles. This
combination resulted in a message of hope even in this world. The “can-do” spirit is the immediate
consequence.[18]
3.1.2. The Theological Significance
The rise of the modern Pentecostal
movement has created a powerful theological stir. Its radical theology and practices were bluntly ridiculed by
Christians and secular media. Yet, its
important theological contributions are readily recognized. Several of them stand out.
First, the movement introduced to
the theological world, a fresh emphasis on the person and work of the Holy
Spirit. Traditional theology including
Reformed Theology has elaborated on the theology of God, the Father, and the
Son, but almost neglecting to develop a balanced Pneumatology. In the beginning, Pentecostal writings were
modest in form, generally in sermons, Sunday School material, articles of
church news papers, or magazines. This
does not preclude the occasional appearance of critical theological discussions
among the Pentecostal circles. However,
serious Pentecostal academic works on the person and work of the Holy Spirit
sharply increased in volume around the early 80’s at least in North America.[19] In the meantime, some Evangelicals have been
motivated to write on the person and work of the Holy Spirit, some times in the
form of criticism against Pentecostal beliefs.[20]
The second theological contribution
is the “democratization of theology,” for the lack of a more suitable
expression. Much of the traditional
theology and worship were carried on by selected religious specialists, namely
clergy and trained theologians. Lay,
and especially women, participation was minimal. The eruption of the Pentecostal movement single-handedly
challenged this stereotype. The
experience of God’s power in the baptism of the Spirit was taken as God’s
anointing for service.[21] With the divine commission with the
“anointing” from the Spirit, human or organizational approval and commission
had a relatively less significance among the early Pentecostals. Many early Pentecostal preachers and
missionaries did not even have Bible school training. Ministry was “democratized” by elevating lay people to the level
of priests. In this process,
particularly notable is the active women’s role in the movement. Early Pentecostal pioneers included many
women.[22] Nevertheless, through the
institutionalization, women’s role became either limited[23]
or indirectly discouraged.[24] However, a significant number of women
contributed to missionary activities.
Cavaness recently notes that at least in six Asian national Assemblies
of God bodies, women either became first Pentecostal missionaries or played a
vital role in the formation of the national Assemblies.[25] Another “democratization” comes in the area
of worship. The participation of the
congregation (laity) in worship was truly active in many areas. Laying on of hands by the congregation
became a daily scene. Manifestations of
the Spirit included being “slain in the Spirit,” prophesying, and speaking in
tongues in public worship were some avenues, where the congregation actively
partook in worship. However, most
significant, as far as theologizing is concerned, is the practice of
“testimony.” Here, regardless of church
position, sex and education, members freely shared their experiences with
God. This is where “personal theology”
was constructed and expressed to the wider body. In this, the laity was encouraged, not only to formulate their
personal theological interpretation of daily experiences, but also to take an
active part in constructing a wider Pentecostal theology.[26] This makes Pentecostal theology distinctly
“people’s theology,” versus the traditional elite theology.
The third, closely related to the
previous points, is the restoration of God’s immanent aspect. Religion has a tendency to set their deities
as far apart from the human level as possible, so that their “other-worldliness”
and consequently their supremacy will be enhanced. This sets the deities beyond the reach of the laity. In the process, the prominence of religious
specialist, whether Shamans, mediums, witch doctors, priests, ministers, or
pastors, increases. Consequently,
hierarchy and institutionalization among the religious specialists further
develop. A similar phenomenon occurs in
the divine realm, as well. An
increasing number of “middle class” deities are uncovered to mediate the
mundane human concerns, which are too insignificant to call for the attention
of the supreme deities. In some
religious systems, mechanical divine decrees and laws rule the believers’ life
and concerns. Christianity is not an
exception. God becomes more transcendental
by diligent theologians and communicators (in many cases, preachers). God is often an unreachable, obscure, and
abstract being somewhere “up there.” It
is revival movements which bring afresh the immanent aspect of God to the
Christian community. In this sense, the
Pentecostal movement is historically a revival movement. Suddenly, “this worldly” (“down here”)
concerns enter into public worship.
Daily problems are regularly expressed such as sicknesses, financial
problems, relational conflicts, family problems, business concerns and every
imaginable “earthly” issue. It is done
in anticipation of God’s direct intervention in human situations. Pentecostalism narrowed the distance between
God and us.
The fourth is again related to the
immanent experience of God: the experiential dimension of religious life. Traditionally, theology has been a cognitive
and intellectual undertaking. This can
be traced to the Hellenistic reasoning and modern scientific research. Even in Christianity, “decent” worship,
frequently found in so-called high churches, comprises of liturgy, order of
worship, choir, hymns, homily, and well-worded prayers. God has been set so far apart, any
communication with him requires proper rules and orders. Any experiential expectation, especially
with the emotional aspect of human existence, has not been a part of the
standard Christian life. The
Pentecostal experience has challenged the stereotypes from the very beginning. The core of the message is human experience
with the Spirit, called the “baptism in the Spirit.” The consequence of this experience ranges from a deep spiritual
conviction, speaking unknown tongues almost uncontrollably, slain in the
Spirit, sobering repentance, shaking, laughing, jumping, and many other
expressions. With the freedom to
exhibit overwhelming emotions, Pentecostal worship seems chaotic to
outsiders. However, only those who have
these experiences can understand and appreciate the dynamic and overarching
control of the Spirit in the seemingly chaotic situation.
There are still other theological
significance which the Pentecostal movement has brought to the theological
world. The eschatological emphasis is
directly linked to the prevailing understanding of the tongues and Spirit
baptism. Also a distinct Pentecostal
hermeneutics has emphasized the narrative material of the Bible. The present popularity of narratology can in
part be traced to the Pentecostal movement.
3.1.3. The Missiological Significance
The early Pentecostal pioneers perceived
the eschatological significance of the baptism in the Spirit. It was often labeled as the “Latter Rain” in
comparison with the first Pentecost recorded in Act 2. The outpouring of the Spirit signified, for
them, the imminent return of the Lord.
This gave such urgency to spread the Gospel, that even preparing church
buildings was not perceived as necessary.
True significance was found in Act 1:8, the Pentecostal experience was
understood to be an empowerment for witness even to the uttermost part of the
world. They utilized all the available
means spanning from radio ministry, traveling evangelistic teams, tent
meetings, production and distribution of tracts and small magazines, and
crossing the ocean with an one-way ticket.
It is all to convert the heathens at home and in foreign lands.[27]
Speaking in tongues gained a special
significance in foreign missionary work.
In the beginning, the tongues were understood as a missionary language
gift, to give ability to preach in a foreign language which one has not
learned.[28] Soon, they found out that this was not the
case. However, this initial
misinterpretation did not affect their missions’ zeal and commitment. Many early Pentecostal missionaries were not
properly trained in the Bible and theology.
But their strong commitment, earnest expectation of God’s miracle and
healing, and their endurance won them many legacies.[29] “Signs and wonders” became the hallmark of
the Pentecostal missionaries.
3.1.4. The New and True Ecumenism
The congregation of the Azusa Street
Mission was composed of the lowly and the “colored people and sprinkling of
whites,”[30] and this
was a radical demonstration of God’s power.
The work of the Spirit brought down the racial, denominational, and
social barriers.[31] However, this powerful work of inter-racial
unity was quickly marred by human spirit of division.[32] Often, the racial issue, rather than a
theological difference, played a key role in the subsequent schisms among
Pentecostal groups.[33] This was unfortunate, even to justify the
phenomenal growth and influences of white Pentecostal groups including
Assemblies of God, Church of God, Foursquare Church and others.[34] In this sense, the recent abolition of the
white Pentecostal association is truly a miracle.
It is an encouraging providence of
God, therefore, that there arouse a stream of Pentecostal ecumenical activists,
such as David DuPlessis,[35]
Vinson Synan, Cecil M. Robeck, Jr., Simon Chan and others. These ecumenists have constantly called for
the breaking of dividing walls as seen in denominationalism, racism, sexism,
and clergy-lay dichotomy. It is
commonly spoken of that true ecumenism can take place only by participation of
two areas: 1) social works; and 2) in the ministry of the Holy Spirit. The
Holy Spirit is the only true unifying force, motive, and agent. Therefore, it is critical for Pentecostals,
especially among the Classical Pentecostals, to recognize that the work of the
Spirit is far larger than the previous Pentecostal boundaries. When Pentecostals failed to recognize the
Pentecostal message was meant to be a gift to the entire Christianity, another
form of “cross-denominational” Pentecostal outpouring took place, i.e., the
Charismatic Movement. Pentecostals should
outgrow their narrow denominationalistic attitude, and rather become heralds
and messengers of the unity of God’s people in the Spirit!
3.2. The Theological Elements
An Asian Pentecostal theology
inherits the identical set of the theological elements. However, each element assumes an added
significance. It appears that notably
difference is found in the divine element (text), the human element (context)
and the theologizer.
3.2.1. The Divine Element: Pentecostal
Truth/Distinctives
A Pentecostal theology by nature has
an added dimension to an Evangelical pneumatology. Pentecostals tend to emphasize
the radical aspect of the person and work of the Holy Spirit. This includes miracles, healings, baptism in
the Spirit, and the spiritual gifts normally found in 1 Cor 12:4-11. We should also remember that this
Pentecostal theology is Asian. Then a
standard theological question an Asian Pentecostal should constantly ask is, by
borrowing Veitch’s proposal for Asian theology: “What does the intervening work
and coming of the Spirit means to us as Asian?” However, theology is more than
finding a meaning; it is transforming.
Hence, we should further ask questions concerning, “What changes can the
Spirit make in our lives, in particular with our Asian struggles?” Also considering the missiological
significance of the Pentecostal blessing, one needs to ask: “How does this
conviction require us to live and act?”
One further consideration is the
role of the Pentecostal experience in doing theology in Asia. The conviction and understanding of
Pentecostal truth is essential. This
should not merely be an acquired knowledge, but a first hand encounter with the
Spirit. Hence, one can say that the
divine element in Pentecostal theology has a complementary experiential factor.
3.2.2. The Human Element/Context
The human element in an Asian
Pentecostal theology is identical to that in an Asian theology. The unique cultural plurality and
contemporary changes should be taken into consideration. However, in Asian Pentecostal theology, one
should pay a special attention to the rich Asian perceptions of the spiritual
world. Unlike the western world, many
Asian societies hold the fundamental animistic beliefs in one way or another. Malevolent spirits are believed to cause
sickness, misfortune, and disturbance especially in dreams. Many of the “high religions” of Asia, also
provide a fertile ground for the awareness of spiritual beings. This has a direct bearing on the Asian
Christian’s religious experiences and our interpretation of them.
Also pertinent is the spiritual
dimension of human struggle.
Modernization in Asia tends to neglect, just as its western predecessor,
the spiritual factors in human life and suffering. Coupled with the native consciousness of the spiritual world,
Asian Pentecostal theologians need to pay a close attention to this.[36]
This spiritual environment and
awareness among Asians provides not only a fertile ground for Christian
theology, but also a risk of creating an animistic Christianity.[37] One example suffices to illustrate this
concern. A radical theologizing attempt
was recently presented by Hyun Kyung Chung in the 7th General Assembly of the
World Council of Churches in Canberra, Australia. Accompanied by nine other Koreans as well as two Australian
Aboriginal dancers, she performed a dance.
Its main motif was to appease the “han
spirits,” who were oppressed and even killed unjustly. Consequently, they are filled with the han, bitterness and anger. She is quoted to argue that “we can feel,
touch and taste the concrete, bodily historical presence of the Holy Spirit in
our midst.”[38]
3.2.3. The Theologizer/Communicator
The preceding discussions point to
the critical role of the theologizer/communicator. First of all, he or she not only understands, and has allegiance
to, the truth of God; but also is part of, or at least possesses sympathy to,
the struggles and sufferings of Asians.
Again, for being “Asian,” I would apply that same principle as discussed
above. Meanwhile, he or she should be
sensitive enough to the Asian’s awareness of the spiritual world, and its
implications to the theological process.
For Asian Pentecostal theology, it is naturally Asian Pentecostals who
will undertake the job. For this
theological task, the theologizer/communicator should understand the spiritual
dynamics in Asian thinking. For
instance, the central concern of power among animists greatly influences how to
formulate a theology for these Asians, and what Pentecostal theological
element(s) should be emphasized.[39]
Then, must one be a Pentecostal in
order to do Pentecostal theology? I
would argue so, for the experiential significance. The impact of a personal Pentecostal experience is often so revolutionary
that one’s once-unshakable theological outlook can change radically. Substantial cases are numerous.[40] One may argue that “sympathizers” can
participate directly in Pentecostal theology.
The contribution of such theological reflections from outside will be
helpful up to a certain point.[41] But as a non-Christian cannot do theology
for Christians, Pentecostals should not expect non-Pentecostals to do theology
for us.[42]
4. Then, So What?
Having discussed all the elements
and procedures, what does that mean to us, especially to us, Asian Pentecostal
educators of the Bible and theology?
Here are some significance and moderate proposals.
4.1. The Primacy of the Divine Source
A Pentecostal’s strong conviction
comes from his or her experience with God’s power in the Spirit. This often has been an object of scorn by
the mainline Evangelical Christianity.
However, it is the experiential aspect of the Spirit which makes
Pentecostals who they are. One laments
the “Evangelicalization of Pentecostalism” in recent years, presumably as the
Pentecostal groups are identified with the Evangelicals.[43] The movement of the Pentecostal groups
towards the Evangelical churches brought the long-awaited recognition, as a
“decent” Christian group. However, this,
coupled with other factors, has caused the Pentecostals to be less appreciative
of their distinctives, and consequently to loose some of them.[44]
The significance of the Pentecostal
message can best be preserved and enhanced, only when Pentecostals remain
truthful to their distinct beliefs and practices. This should be preached in the pulpit, not for the sake of the
distinctives, but for the maximum contribution to the church at large and for
the blessing of the people. What
happens, however, in a local church has much to do with the Bible school
training which the pastor has received.
Pentecostal Bible schools and seminaries should not exist to compete
with other Evangelical schools. Rather,
they exist to train people to spread the Pentecostal blessing, in addition to
traditional Evangelical theology.
In any theology, the primacy of the
text should always be stressed and established, in spite of the critical role
of the contemporary settings. The
divine source is the subject of theological work. When the context takes a priority, the context often determines
the selection and interpretation of the text(s). This generally results in an unbalanced emphasis on the setting. Han
theology, Minjung theology, Buffalo
theology, Liberation theology are but a few examples.
Also critical is the historical and
theological significance of the Pentecostal movement in the West. We Asian Pentecostals, then, need to ask
questions such as, “Then what historical significance do we find in an Asian
Pentecostal movement?” And “What
implications do those theological significance in the West provide the Asian
Pentecostal church, and how do we apply them in our settings?” Every Christian movement has its own
historical and theological mandate. It
is particularly important to ask, “How our Pentecostal conviction compels Asian
Pentecostals to witness of Christ to fellow Asians?” and “How can we achieve
this missiological mandate?”
4.2. The Critical Significance of Asian Context
What does it mean to be an Asian Pentecostal
theologian? It calls for the uniqueness
and critical role of the context/addressee.
His or her mandate is to be faithful to the truth of God and to the
struggles of fellow Asians. However, it
is an irony, that while western seminaries are adding new courses and majors in
Asian cultures, religions, and the church; Asian Bible schools and seminaries
are merely communicators of the western theology. This is simply wrong.
Schools are here not to duplicate western theology, but to train Asians
who will in turn bring God’s revelation to the human setting and struggles in
Asia. If we put much emphasis on
Israel’s history, but neglect issues surrounding us, such as poverty,
corruption, street children, the sex industry, oppressive rules, human rights
issues, devastating environmental concerns, rising price, etc., are we doing
our job right? Asian Bible schools and
seminaries must make a conscious effort to make God’s truth relevant to Asians,
but not necessarily to American Christians.
This should be reflected in a school’s philosophy, objectives,
curricula, faculty training, and literature.
Theologians, Bible school teachers, and pastors should pay close
attention to the local issues like “the Holy Spirit as the Mother God” once
popular in the Cebu area of the Philippines, as much as they do to Luther’s
reformation theology.
4.3. The Central Role of the
Theologizer/Communicator
The critical role of the Asian
Pentecostal theologizer/communicator has been repeatedly stressed. Then who are they? They are Bible school teachers, pastors, and theologians in
Asia. These front-liners not only face
a challenging living environment in which theologizing takes place on a daily
basis, but also are affected by their cultural and religious traditions. There is a strong potential for a
“corrupted” theology of the S/spirit, because of their awareness of, and
possible involvement in, animistic practices.
It is also true that there are numerous “folk Pentecostal” groups in the
Philippines, Indonesia, and other Asian counties.[45] Also the arrival of new Pentecostalism,
i.e., the Toronto Blessing and Third Wave movement, pose even another
challenge. In truth, every Pentecostal
Christian participates actively in the formation of his or her Pentecostal
theology, and this rather “democratized” nature of the Pentecostal theological
activity can complicate the situation.
In the area of communication,
probably Pentecostalism, among modern Christian traditions, possesses elements
and forms which are either close to, or easily identified with, Asian values
and ways. Story-telling, a popular
Asian medium of communication and preservation of traditions is also a common
form through which Pentecostals have formulated their theology. Asian Pentecostals should take full advantage
of this effective means of communication which is well attuned to Asian
culture.
4.4. A Need for Theological Platforms
Now, let us say that a young Asian
Pentecostal Bible school teacher formulates a theology on any given topic. Suppose it might be a simple comparison of a
biblical theme and a cultural practice or a real life struggle. [46] He or she does this as a practicing
Pentecostal, by taking God’s expectant intervention to a human setting. Would this theologizer/communicator just
preach his or her theological reflection on Sunday, and that’s it? We need a good academic platform in which
Asian Pentecostal theological reflections are published. This will function as a place of
sharing. Such an academic publication
will encourage creative and experimental theological reflections. This will also promote dialogue among
Pentecostals, as well as with the wider Christian world in Asia. The wide spread of Pentecostal movement in
Asia and the formative nature of Pentecostal theology in general, urgently call
for a good theological platform.
However, such a publication should not purport to be a duplicate of
western Pentecostal journals! There are
already a few young Pentecostal organizations such as Asia Pacific Theological
Association and Asia Charismatic Theological Association. Who knows that God is preparing them for
such a time as this?
Having stressed the aspects of a
micro, or in this case local, Pentecostal theology/theologies, what are we
going from there on? The ultimate goal
of constructing local theologies, let’s say, “Igorot Pentecostal theology of
land,” etc., is not to create theological regionalism (or provincialism). Nor is Asian church called to Asianize
Christianity, while we may have to de-westernize traditional theology. It is rather to contribute to, and enrich, a
larger macro Pentecostal theology.