Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
65
Roger Stronstad,
The Charismatic
Theology ofSt. Luke, (Peabody
M.A.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.,
1984),
96
pp. paperback
$4.95 ISBN 0-913573-11-6
Reviewed
by Gary
M.
Burge*
by
This brief but
helpful study
is a master’s thesis
supervised Ward Gasque at Regent College in
1975.
A revision of Stronstad’s
( 1980) 32-50]
Old Testament section
appeared
once before in Pneuma
[Vol.
2:1 1
and this contribution
provides
for us the breadth of his
thinking
on the
subject
of Lucan
pneumatology.
The
subject itself has been covered at
length by
numerous writers and I have noted the same thesis advanced
recently by
M. M. B. Turner of London Bible
College
in his 1980 Cambridge Ph.D. thesis
[“Luke and the
Spirit.
Studies in the
Significance
of Receiving the
Spirit
in
Luke-Acts”].
The tone of Clark
Pinnock’s
traditions
conversion/ domesticated in vocation, service, on the
writings
represented
emerges Spirit
Preface
and the author’s
is writing The book is a stinging
.
conclusion’tips
us off that to a certain extent Stronstad
with
passion-dare
we suggest with
polemic.
and
timely
rebuke to those,
say,
in the Reformed or
Wesleyan
who believe that the
Spirit’s
chief work is found in
initiation or sanctification. Stronstad wants to free the
Spirit
of traditional
theology
and find his place anew
and witness. Above all he grounds this effort
of Luke who, it is claimed,
possessed
a charismatic view of the
Spirit.
The tone and substance of the effort is
well on
page
81 f:
“A fresh picture of the gift of the Holy Spirit in Luke-Acts
from the investigation: Luke relates the gift of the
. ‘
to service and witness; that
is,
to vocation. In
other
words,
in Luke’s
–
theology
of the
Holy Spirit
the
activity
of the
Spirit
is
always
charismatic in both
and result. Luke’s charismatic
theology
is
an Old Testament
heritage,
an
experimental
dimension, frequent prophetic activity,
and no
temporal
limitations.
Only
those who resist
can continue to
interpret
the
gift
of the
in Luke-Acts to be an initiation-
purpose characterized
by
the evidence
‘ Holy Spirit
conversion
experience.”
the hermeneutical
theologically oriented),
Testament
‘
‘
options for interpreters
of independent
and
theologically
‘
carefully
After
scanning
Luke
(e.g.,
Luke is
Stronstad reviews the chief means
by
which the Old
presents
the
Spirit.
Here is where Stronstad
puts
to use the abused term “charismatic.” That
is, even in the
Old Testament a consistent motif of vocation,
Spirit transfer,
and
1
66
confirming
evidence is found. In other words the
Spirit
came to do things, powerful things, among
God’s
people.
He
acts,
not
simply inspires!
This is epitomized in the
descriptions
of the messiah who would be the ideal charismatic
figure: anointed, equipped,
and called for his mission. In particular it seems as if the
gift
of prophecy was the central
gift
known and this is confirmed when in the intertestamental
period Spirit
and
prophecy virtually
become
synonymous.
Stronstad contends that Luke is consciously dependent on this Old
Testament/ Jewish
tradition and has even imitated
Septuagint style.
He finds this in Luke’s
portrait
of Christ
(chap. 3),
Luke’s record of Pentecost of Acts
‘
(chap. 4), and the rest of the spirit-texts
(chap. 5).
On the whole his conclusions are
very compelling, although
he is at his best in Lucan
christology
because the prophetic
motif is so evident.
‘ _
very [Observant evangelical
readers will note a remarkable bit of form criticism on
page 46!]
His case becomes
considerably
weaker when he delves into Acts. Is
prophecy always
the net result of
being
“filled with the
Spirit” (54f)?
I am not sure. Pentecost
certainly
witnessed
prophetic activity among
the
disciples,
but is it forced to
say
that in Peter’s speech _. the prophetic gift
of the
Spirit
is announced
(57-58)? Perhaps.
Things
become all the more tenuous when we examine the conversion stories of Acts.
Certainly
Luke sees some
soteriological connection with the
Spirit.
That is the
message
of Acts 8! If
not, why
was an apostolic rescue-team rushed to Samaria? To distribute gifts?
James Dunn’s
exegesis
of these texts seems
satisfying inasmuch as he
joins
the
Spirit
to salvation and then sees charismatic evidences as one
outgrowth.
The case of the
Ephesian disciples (Acts 19) is similarly
vulnerable. Was Paul not
asking
an initiatory question
in 19:2? Because the
disciples subsequently speak
in tongues and
prophesy
Stronstad concludes that Paul must . have been
asking
if
they
received the
gift
of
prophecy. Again, Dunn’s
handling
of the
passage
is not wrestled to the
mat,
but
still, it is discharged with zeal: “Dunn’s
interpretation
of this narrative demonstrates that he fails to understand either Luke or Paul”
(p. 68).
I do not know Dunn
well,
but I do not believe that his deficits
.
are ‘
quite
that
sweeping.
In the
larger picture, Roger
Stronstad has served us well. While we may argue about the
particulars
of this
passage
or
that, still,
the message
of
Luke/ Acts
is
unequivocal.
The
Spirit
acts in
power
to the
gift, equip,
and call. The sanitized
pneumatology
current in many
of our mainline denominations is a far
cry
from this. The extent to which Stronstad leads us to
pause
and note our
2
67
theological
and
experiential
deficiencies will determine his success. I for one would give
him
high
marks.
*Director of Bible and Religion King College,
Tennessee
3
