word and the spirit or the spirit and the word: Exploring the boundaries of evangelicalism in relationship to modern Pentecostalism, The

Trinity Journal, Fall 2002 by Yong, Amos

Regardless of how the dialogue turns out, the presence of Oneness beliefs in the pentecostal tent poses some extremely difficult theological and doctrinal questions which burden any consideration of the relationship between Pentecostalism and evangelicalism. If Oneness Pentecostals are finally accepted by Trinitarian Pentecostals as legitimate expressions not only of pentecostal Christianity in particular but as disciples of Jesus himself-and I, for one, sense that whatever else Trinitarian Pentecostals feel about Oneness Pentecostals today at the institutional levels, they are moving strongly in the direction of accepting rather than rejecting them as sisters and brothers in Christ at the inter-personal level-then any definition of evangelicalism which includes Pentecostalism will have to deal with this fact. Is it possible for the evangelical movement to stipulate the inclusion of Pentecostalism to nevertheless qualify such by adding "Trinitarian" or disqualify such by adding "Oneness"? Yet it is undeniable that this intra-pentecostal dispute between Trinitarians and Oneness has serious theological and doctrinal implications for Pentecostal-evangelical relationships. And, to top it off, evangelical cult-watchers would also certainly point out that at stake in the Oneness controversy is not only the doctrine of God, but also the doctrine of salvation since-the charge is-Oneness soteriology, at least as formally explicated, includes the necessity of both baptism in water and baptism in the Spirit as evidenced (according to classical pentecostal convictions) by speaking in other tongues. Let me therefore switch to the kinds of differences which sometimes appears to set Pentecostals and evangelicals worlds apart in terms of the expectations and norms of praxis and spirituality.

One of the ways to get at this set of questions is to explore the speculative hypothesis about whether or not evangelicalism may be considered as a Christianity of the second article while Pentecostalism derives its energy as a Christian spirituality of the third article.20 How valid, in other words, would it be to understand evangelicalism as a movement focused on the Word and Pentecostalism as one focused on the Spirit? Perhaps that depends on how Word-movement and Spirit-movement are defined. I would like to tease out this hypothesis by suggesting three contrasts: that between an evangelical soteriology centered on justification versus a pentecostal soteriology extended to include not only sanctification but especially the pneumatic endowment of power to witness; that between an evangelical piety focused on Scripture versus a pentecostal piety directed toward the manifestation of the charismata; and that between the church considered as the body of Christ versus the church considered as the fellowship of the Spirit.

I want to be clear in suggesting that these are not hard and fast lines which divide evangelicals and Pentecostals since, with the exception of tongues as initial physical evidence, both sides at least assent to the distinctive commitments of the other side to a greater or lesser (usually lesser) degree, even at the levels of theological reflection and doctrinal affirmation. But at some levels of praxis-- which, some would argue, reveals how doctrines and beliefs function, and therefore what they really mean to their adherents-- notice the following. First, evangelicals emphasize the believer's relationship with Jesus and right standing before God. This makes eminent sense given the Reformers' protest against the excesses and abuses that developed in medieval Christendom. Pentecostals, however, emphasize not only the second blessing of sanctification (especially those influenced by the Wesleyan-Holiness doctrine of entire sanctification), but also the second (or third) blessing whereby the believer receives the baptism of the Spirit in order to be empowered for witness (Acts 1:8). From the Oneness perspective, such is clearly in line with the central message of the Lukan soteriological paradigm: