Transcript THE TRADITIONAL DIVISIONS IN A SEMINARY CURRICULUM

ASIAN PENTECOSTAL
THEOLOGIZING:
Agendas and Issues
DATES: 28 Sept 2007
VENUE: AGBC, Singapore
THE TRADITIONAL DIVISIONS IN A
SEMINARY CURRICULUM
► Bible
– Biblical Theology
► Theology – Systematic Theology
► History – Historical Theology
► Praxis – Practical Theology
“Book-ends” Model – The
Pentecostals’ Leap of Faith
EARLY
CHURCH
Church
History
BIBLE
20th/21st C.
CHURCH
PRAXIS
Theology
History
Doing Theology in a Community
We believe that truth is not found in Spiritilluminated individuals, but in a community of
Spirit-illuminated individuals. Therefore, we
believe that the Body of Christ, both alive and
dead, must come together to understand
theology, shaping it from many perspectives
and differing experiences. This is doing
theology in a community.
Why not “Western” Theology?
► It
perpetuates Western world-view, values
and theological presuppositions.
► It relieves churches of other lands of the
urgent priority to develop their own
theologies.
► It unconsciously perpetuates an
unacceptable theological imperialism – the
idea that West is right & better.
Reasons for Rejection of non-Western
Cultures by Western Missionaries
► The
Rise of Colonialism
 Demonstrated the superiority of Western civilization
► The
Theory of Cultural Evolution
 Evolution legitimized superiority of Western civilization
in terms of history
► The
Triumph of Science
 Science and Christianity provided the intellectual
foundations for Western superiority
Therefore, period from 1800-1950 was “anti-contextual.”
(Paul Hiebert)
Ralph Winter’s “25 Unbelievable Years”
► Peak
of Western expansion in 1945 when
99.5% of non-Western world was under
Western domination
► By 1969, 99.5% of the world became
independent!
► Rise of nationalism and desire to express
Christianity in own cultural forms resulting
in uncritical contextualization
Beyond Culture
► Developmental
Stages:
 Superstition – spiritistic worldview
 Religion – communalistic worldview
 Culture – materialistic worldview
► TEF’s
contextualization: Missiology,
theological approach, educational method,
educational structure
► Now includes “technology” . . .
Culture and Christianity
► The
encounter between Christianity and any
culture is governed by the dialectic of rupture
and continuity
► There is no contextualization without a process of
creative re-interpretation
► Christianity never encounters a culture in its
“pure” form: the cultural and religious elements
are always intermingled.
Geffre, “Christianity and Culture” IRM 84 (1995): 17-31
Christ and Culture – 5 possibilities
Adapted from Richard Niebhur
Agreement:
Culture
idealized; we
are to perfect
it
Synthesis:
Christ stands
above culture
and yet
embraces it in
its highest
aspects to
transcend it
Conversion:
Culture is
fallen but
redeemable;
we seek to
recreate it by
converting it
to Christian
community
Tension:
Live the gospel
in an
unconquerably
immoral
society
separating
from culture
Opposition:
Deny or
reject culture
Beyond the “Indigenous Church
Principle”
Henry Venn & Rufus Anderson :
► Self-governing
► Self-supporting
► Self-extending/propagating
John Nevius’ Method
China’s “Three-Self Church”
But, still saddled with Western theological
systems, Western presuppositions, etc. A
4th category is needed: Self-theologizing
Two views of Revelation
► Proposition
 revelation is propositional in
nature; the goal is to
communicate the Christian
faith propositionally across
cultural and linguistic
barriers.
Hellenistic
► Existential
 revelation is the subjective
experience of God; the goal
is to communicate the
Christian faith in light of the
historical and cultural
context (and moment) and
God’s work towards human
fulfillment within that
moment.
Hebraic
TWO POLES:
► Static
► Dynamic
► Faithfulness
► Sensitivity
to the
eternal message of the
Word of God
► “Technical”
► Revelation
to the everchanging contexts of
the world
► “Popular”
► Relevance
Bipolarity in Pauline Theology
(Beker)
Think about “Center” and “Circumference”
in a circle . . .
Dualism, Monism, Holism:
A Simplistic Diagrammatic Representation
DUALISM: Separated
Categories. “Either/Or”
Greek/Western
“Neglected Middle”
MONISM: Confused
Categories. “Neither/Nor”
Eastern Mysticism
“Finding the Balance”
HOLISM: Separated but
Together. “Both/And”
Biblical Holism
“Holding the Tension”
THEOLOGIZING:
A CONTEXTUAL MODEL
Methodology & Model
STEPHEN BEVAN’S FIVE MODELS
OF CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGY
Creation
Oriented
Redemption
Oriented
Transcendental
Model
Anthropological
Model
CULTURE
Social Change
Praxis
Model
Synthetic
Model
Translation
Model
GOSPEL MESSAGE
Tradition
Evangelicals tend towards . . .
Redemption
Oriented
CULTURE
Social Change
GOSPEL MESSAGE
Tradition
Translation
Model
“VERTICAL” ISSUES
Uniqueness of Christian revelation
Worship Forms, Christian
sacraments, Church service
Ancestral Veneration, Funerary
practices
Food offered to idols
The Church & the Christian
“HORIZONTAL” ISSUES
Social Transformation, The Church and
the Community, poverty, blessings, etc.
Filial Piety, memorial/history, etc.
Political involvement, church & state,
church leadership, etc.
Family issues e.g. Marriage, Parenting,
etc.
Ethics e.g. bribery, nepotism, etc.
Asian festivals
EVANGELICALISM/ORTHODOXY
As defined from Willowbank report:
“We recognize as central the themes of
God as creator, the universality of sin,
Jesus Christ as the Son of God, Lord of
all and Savior through His atoning death
and risen life, the necessity of
conversion, the coming of the Holy Spirit
and His transforming power, the
fellowship and mission of the Christian
church and the hope of Christ’s return.”
Evangelicals are more interested in spiritual
(“vertical”) issues . . .
Bebbington’s Definition
Conversionism - the belief that lives need
to be changed
Activism - the expression of the gospel in
effort
Biblicism - a particular regard for the Bible
Crucicentrism - a stress on the sacrifice of
Christ on the cross. A second sense is to
look at evangelicalism as an organic group
of movements and religious tradition
Favored Positions
of Asian Theology
Philosophy
East instead of West
Methodology
“from below” instead of “from above”
Politics
left instead of right
Issues
horizontal instead of vertical
Traditional “Sources” for
Christian Theology
Bible
Tradition (History)
Reason (Philosophy)
Weightage depends on our traditions!
Roman Catholics
“Traditional” mainline churches
Evangelical churches
TENSIONS IN THEOLOGY
Text-Context
Which one comes first?
Form-Content
Can they be separated? Can truth be expressed without
form?
Meaning-Significance
Are they different?
Descriptive(Propositional)-Prescriptive
Which one is more important?
Etic-Emic
Should we choose one over the other?
All these need not be “either-or” choices.
We can have both alternatives held at tension.
Globalized (“Universal”; “Planetary”)
Theology
West and East still need each other:
• Emic – Analysis from an
“Insider” participant
• Etic – Analysis from an
“Outsider” participant
Hermeneutical area of meaning and
significance . . .
REVELATION:
RELEVANCE:
READER:
Parameters of the theological
(hermeneutical) process:
Revelation
Text, Objectivity
Relevance
Theology, Contextuality
Reader
Theologian, Subjectivity
All held in tension with each other
Revelation:Text, Objectivity
CREATION (God’s Works)
The heavens declare . . .
CONSCIENCE (God’s Witness)
A natural instinct of right and wrong
CHRIST (God’s Word)
The highest revelation of God
Relevance: Theology,
Contextuality
ALL theology is contextual
Irrelevance: Middle Ages, Monastic,
Cloistered Christianity
Kraft: theology, when perceived as
irrelevant, is in fact irrelevant
History: Historical(Chronos) &
Historic(Kairos)
The incarnational model
Reader: Theologian,
Subjectivity
Different “Readings” of the same text
Postmodernity and Reader-Response
Hermeneutics
Internalizing (instead of rationalizing
or relativizing) the truth
To understand the tensions . . .
REVELATION:
Text, Subjectivity
RELEVANCE:
READER:
Theology,
Contextuality
Theologian,
Subjectivity
To further clarify the picture . . .
REVELATION:
ORTHODOXY,
HEAD, FACT
RELEVANCE:
READER:
ORTHOPRAXIS,
HAND, REALITY
ORTHOPATHY,
HEART, TRUTH
Theology in flux
“The Bible is the Word of God”
River of “Living” Theology
“Jesus is Lord”
Two banks of the “River of Living
Theology”:
“Living” suggests continuing change
Point of Departure:
The Bible is Word of God
Climatic Declaration:
Jesus is Lord
Human and Divine tension BUT this
is NOT relativism
Incarnational Nature of the Bible
ULTIMATE MISSION:
“MISSIONS”
The only reason for Jesus leaving
the disciples behind on earth was
the Great Commission:
The Conclusion of Matthew’s
Gospel: Matt. 28:16-20
“Mountain” – The Climax
“Authority” – The Crux
“All” – The Comprehensiveness
AN EVANGELICAL APPROACH
TO CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGY
TEXT:
Revelation
“The Bible is the Word of God”
Parameters for
Contextual
Hermeneutics
CONTEXT:
Relevance
HERMENEUTICS
River of “Living” Theology
CRITIC:
Reader
Missiological
Motive:
“The Great
Commission”
“Jesus is Lord”
APPLICATIONS
ULTIMATE
OBJECTIVE
GENERAL DIRECTIONS OF
THEOLOGIZATION
TODAY
TEXT:
Revelation
“The Bible is the Word of God”
Parameters for
Contextual
Hermeneutics
CONTEXT:
Relevance
River of “Living” Theology
CRITIC:
Reader
“Jesus is Lord”
PAUL
Missiological
Motive:
“The Great
Commission”
IDEALLY, theologization should be
BI-DIRECTIONAL . . .
TODAY
TEXT:
Revelation
“The Bible is the Word of God”
Parameters for
Contextual
Hermeneutics
CONTEXT:
Relevance
River of “Living” Theology
CRITIC:
Reader
“Jesus is Lord”
PAL
Missiological
Motive:
“The Great
Commission”
Pentecostal/Evangelicals



Pentecostals have all the elements of
evangelicalism, with the addition of the
Baptism in the Holy Spirit with the
evidence of speaking in tongues.
Therefore, Pentecostals are sometimes
referred to as “Evangelical Plus.”
Of course, we can also view Evangelicals
(especially the Charismatics) as
“Pentecostals Minus”
TRINITARIAN CHRISTIANITY
Creation
Catholics
Liberals
Easter
Pentecost
Evangelicals
Pentecostals
Charismatics
3 “Divine Intervention” Events
SPIRIT
Culmination
The “Divine Intervention Events”
are God’s “Missionary Acts”
It is in the
concrete
relational and
experiential
interface
between God
and man that
the Trinity is
understood
better . . . and
not in the
traditional
conceptual
terms.
PENTECOSTAL
TRINITARIANISM
Complimentary
 Completive
 Culminative

NOT
 To compete
 To supplant
 To replace
I suggest that
this language
is better than
the oft-used
restorative,
revival,
remnant
terminologies.
WHY?
Schwarz’s Trinitarian Approach
According to
Father, Creator,
Schwarz, this
Body, World,
is based on our
Science, Liberal,
experiences of
Syncretism, Rainbow
the Godhead.
Therefore, this
is not an
Spirit, Pentecost,
Son, Calvary, Soul, abstract
Spirit, Church,
Christ, Scripture, conception but
a description of
Experience,
Evangelical,
Charismatic,
Dogmatism, Cross practical
realities.
Spiritualism, Dove
THE TRINITY AND SPIRITUAL GIFTS:
A Simplistic Pentecostal Model.
FATHER
“GIVER” (creator/source)
SON
“MEDIATOR” (apportions)
HOLY
SPIRIT
“GIFT” & “GIFTS” (empowers)
“ALL FLESH”
“HUMAN VESSELS”
(stewards)
TWO MODELS OF THE TRINITY
FATHER
FATHER
SON
HOLY
SPIRIT
WESTERN
MODEL
SON
HOLY
SPIRIT
EASTERN
MODEL
TRINITARIAN PNEUMATOLOGY

Western Model
Christocentric and Holy Spirit
may lose Its dignity in the
Trinity but it will remain a
“Christian” Spirit.
FATHER
HOLY
SPIRIT

Eastern Model
Focus on God’s
Fatherhood and Spirit
may be “released from
Christian bondage.”
SON
FATHER
SON
HOLY
SPIRIT
PENTECOSTAL & WESTERN MODEL
FATHER
SON
FATHER
SON
HOLY
SPIRIT
Theological model of
most Pentecostals
HOLY
SPIRIT
The “real” model of
most Pentecostals
Restoring Pentecostalism’s
Eastern/Orthodox Heritage
History: Stanley Burgess
 Spirituality: Simon Chan
 Theology: Amos Yong

Pentecostal Missions &
Contextualization of Trinity





Pentecostals as “true” Trinitarians; Trinitarians
with power
(Difference between “Pentecostals” &
“Charismatics” . . . )
Trinity is example of early effort at
contextualization – Jewish to Greek
The main stumbling block of Christian mission to
Islam is the doctrine of the Trinity
Pentecostals are at an advantage:
• Missionary zeal
• the “power/praxis” aspect

Pentecostals are weak in history & theology:
• Missionary zeal
• the “power/praxis” aspect
Results of Contextualized Missions






Planting Churches instead of Converting
Individuals
Coherence between Form and Meaning
Relevance of Christian message
“Kingdom” mentality – remove barriers
“Level playing field” for theological
enterprise
Ownership of missiological enterprise
Shifting Focus? Culture to Religion

Earlier Discussion: Missions and Culture
• Purely cultural and supracultural Gospel elements
identifiable and separable
• “Christian Faith” vis-a-vis “worldviews”
• Solution – simplistic

Current Discussion: Missions and Religion
• Religion and culture are admixtures of each other
• “Christian Faith” vis-a-vis “faiths”
• Solution – complex

Greatest Challenge today is Islam
• We see the complex contextualization issues here
• “John Travis” proposed the C1-C6 Spectrum,
opting/allowing for C5 (“Mosque Christians” or
“Messianic Muslims”)