logical imagination will include, but not obliterate the specifi cities of Asian
and American—considered separately and together—experience and per-
spectives, broadly considered. The goal, however, will be to demonstrate,
at least in part, the distinctiveness of Asian American contributions to this
broader conversation not in order to argue that they are indispensable to
theological hermeneutics but to exemplify how multi- and inter-cultural
approaches are unavoidable and can be fruitfully developed. 22 This fi nal
section will outline the parameters for this thesis via exposition of the
triad of terms in the essay’s main title. We will discuss, in order, how rules,
affections/motivations, and behaviors/purposes are hermeneutically sig-
nifi cant within this Pentecostal and, more precisely, post-Pentecost-al
proposal.
The Science of Interpretation: A Post-Pentecost-al Paradigm
I denote what is being proposed as a “post-Pentecost-al” model because I
do not want to confl ate prematurely the apostolic hermeneutic with that
of modern Pentecostalism. Surely my own formulation of such an apos-
tolic approach to interpretation has been forged out of my own Asian
American Pentecostal experience, but insofar as our goal is a trans-cultural
hermeneutical ideal, any modern Pentecostal set of sensibilities, even if
colored by Asian American lenses, that are to be viable will need to be
warranted biblically. Within this framework, however, post-Pentecost-al
means not only with the apostles, but also after the apostles, in particu-
lar, after and with the reception of the apostles and their witness in the
Christian testament.
Toward this end, then, our Asian American articulation of a post-
Pentecost- al hermeneutic can be understood as normed by at least three
sets of “rules” or guidelines. First, we have to read scripture as the apostles
themselves read scripture. The Acts 2 narrative indicates that the Pentecost
experience was understood scripturally, according to the prophecy of
Joel. 23 Here I am looking less for interpretive rules as developed in the
modern so-called science of hermeneutics than to observe how apostolic
meaning-making grasped their experience of the Spirit’s outpouring via
appeal to their scriptural tradition. Herein was what might be called a
“this- is- that” approach that comprehended their present experience (the
Day of Pentecost manifestation of the Spirit) according to their canonical
heritage (in this case, the Joel prophecy immediately but then later in Acts
2, also via retrieval of Davidic, wisdom, and psalmic texts). In short, such
184 A. YONG