for interpreting Scripture and is fundamentally informed by the sighs of
human hopes and yearnings especially for what is yet to come, then the
signs of the Spirit’s work are both discerned in the biblical account and
also in every generation’s ongoing efforts to bear faithful witness toward
the Day of the Lord.
Hence, orthodoxy (right thinking), orthopathy (right feeling), and
orthopraxy (right living) are intertwined so that a post-Pentecost-al
hermeneutics is a threefold chord of life in the Spirit practiced multi-cul-
turally, performed inter-culturally, and aspired to trans-culturally betwixt
and between the “that” of the apostolic testimony and the “this” of wit-
ness that the Apocalypse describes variously as deriving from every tribe
and language and people and nation. 39
NOTES
- Going back to my second book, Spirit-Word - Community: Theological
Hermeneutics in Trinitarian Perspective , New Critical Thinking in
Religion, Theology and Biblical Studies Series (Burlington, VT, and
Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd ., 2002). - For example, Yong, “Reading Scripture and Nature: Pentecostal
Hermeneutics and Their Implications for the Contemporary Evangelical
Theology and Science Conversation,” Perspectives on Science and Christian
Faith 63:1 (2011): 1–13; The Future of Evangelical Theology: Soundings
from the Asian American Diaspora (Downers Grove: IVP Academic,
2014); and (edited with Dale M. Coulter), The Spirit, the Affections, and
the Christian Tradition (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press,
2016), especially my concluding refl ections to this volume: “The Affective
Spirit: Historiographic Revitalization in the Christian Theological
Tradition.” - In this respect, I would differ from the proposals of the so-called “Cleveland
School” of Pentecostal studies—that seeks inspiration from the fi rst gen-
eration of modern Pentecostal spirituality—about which I have written
briefl y: “Salvation, Society, and the Spirit: Pentecostal Contextualization
and Political Theology from Cleveland to Birmingham, from Springfi eld
to Seoul,” Pax Pneuma: The Journal of Pentecostals & Charismatics for
Peace & Justice 5:2 (2009): 22–34. I am appreciative of their proposals as
charting important trajectories for contemporary Pentecostal scholarship,
but see my suggestion as providing a broader—albeit surely more general-
ized and abstract—account that would include theirs with other modern
Pentecostal hermeneutical options.
190 A. YONG