While Western churches have long developed a soteriology-centered pneumatology, the widespread Pentecostal movement that arose in non-Western churches, especially in Third World churches, in the 20th century prompted a new perspective on pneumatology.
The Korean church also experienced explosive growth in the 20th century through the experience of various gifts of the Holy Spirit.
However, compared to the intense spiritual experiences experienced in church settings, theological reflection that can view and interpret those experiences from a biblical perspective is still significantly lacking.
This may be one of the greatest regrets of the Korean church.

A book that can be called the 'definitive edition' of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit has finally been published in Korean.
The author of this book, Max Turner, is currently the world's most widely recognized expert on pneumatology.
The fact that his outstanding academic achievements have been translated into Korean is itself a valuable gift to the Korean theological community.

We have already shown that for Luke receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit did not mean experiencing the Holy Spirit as a person.
So the question that arises here is this:
“What act or series of acts does the “gift of the Holy Spirit” given to Christians refer to?” The problem with the claim that it refers (simultaneously) to the initiation of sonship and the empowerment for mission becomes clearer now.
These claims involve, at least conceptually and potentially, quite different activities of the Holy Spirit.
Although everyone may need the former from the beginning of their Christian life, we generally consider missions a gift given to mature Christians, and “empowerment for missions” a gift that follows later.
Some might rationalize these notions by taking the position that Luke was trying to emphasize that the Holy Spirit works through all Christians from the very beginning of their faith life to encourage them to do missions.
If this is true, it is reasonable to say that they receive the Holy Spirit as an empowerment for missionary work at conversion-initiation.
But to do that, he must prove that he believed it.
If Luke saw the Holy Spirit as beginning to work only later and only in some Christians, then it would be semantically inconsistent to say that he regarded the gift of the Holy Spirit given at conversion-initiation as an empowerment for missions.
---From “Chapter 2: Various Explanations of the Basic Characteristics of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit”

In chapters 3-5 above, I have raised significant questions about many of the interpretations offered today regarding the Jewish concept of the “spirit of prophecy.”
I have given a proper definition of the “spirit of prophecy” and have noted the archetypal gifts associated with it: charismatic revelation and wisdom, spontaneous prophetic utterances, and charismatic praise.
Although the “spirit of prophecy” was not considered (within Judaism) the source of charismatic proclamation (which developed in Christianity), the Holy Spirit and (more specifically) the “spirit of prophecy” were accepted as sources of supernatural miracles and were also recognized as having the potential for spiritual and ethical renewal.
This was especially true of the “Messianic tradition” reflected in Isaiah 11:1-4, upon which Luke based his account.
Thus, within Judaism, there is no clear distinction between the “spirit of prophecy” and the “charismatic spirit,” as Menzies argues, nor is there a clear distinction between the spirit of prophecy and the “salvationary spirit.”
This conclusion implies that the “spirit of prophecy” cannot be assumed to be unrelated to Luke’s concept of salvation, nor can it be considered a secondary gift of empowerment for missionary work.
Nor can we infer that Luke distinguished the Holy Spirit from the ministry of supernatural power.
We need to look closely at how Luke treated this current of Jewish thought.
---From “Chapter 5: The Spirit of Prophecy, Ethical Influence, and Salvation in Intermediate Judaism”

Within the narrative, the views attributed to John the Baptist (or any other character) and those of the narrator/implied author need to be separated, at least potentially.
From Luke's perspective, John the Baptist was the very prophet Israel had been waiting for.
Therefore, his words can never go unfulfilled.
But even though Gabriel had assured his readers that John would be filled with the Holy Spirit from birth (1:15) and Jesus had praised John the Baptist as “greater than a prophet” and “the greatest among those born of women” (7:26-28),51 Luke recognized that there were some limits to John’s understanding (cf.
7:18-21).
He further knew that the salvific event, when combined with traditional hopes, took on a “form” quite different from that previously expected.
The author Luke takes his readers right to the heart of this irony when he records the disciples' despair on the road to Emmaus when they say to the resurrected Jesus, "We had hoped that it was he who was to redeem Israel" (24:21).
In fact, Luke himself sees that much of John the Baptist's promise recorded in 3:16-17 was fulfilled beyond Pentecost (Acts 1:5; 11:16) in a completely unexpected way.
But he preserves the essence of John the Baptist's words, as we will see shortly.

---From "Chapter 7: John the Baptist's Promise"

The hope for God's reign and Jesus' kingship is linked throughout Luke's Gospel with the hope for Israel's new exodus, liberation, and restoration.
Thus, John the Baptist promises that the one to come will “purify” Israel with the Holy Spirit and fire (3:16).
Luke portrays Jesus as partially fulfilling this hope during his earthly ministry.
But his full kingly rule (1:32-33) extends even beyond his arrival in Jerusalem (Luke 9:51; 19:11-27; 23:42).
Acts 2:33-36 asserts that Jesus began this promised reign through his exaltation to the right hand of God as David's Lord (Psalm 110:1).
He is now in a position to “restore” Israel.
But how can the Lord, seated at God's right hand in heaven, exercise His sovereignty to restore Israel? The final passage of Luke (24:44-49), the prologue of Acts (1:3-8), and the Pentecost address offer the answer: He exercises this sovereignty through the gift of the Holy Spirit, who made Him Lord.
The remainder of Acts supports the picture of the exalted Messiah as the exalted Messiah, and key passages suggest that Israel's restoration was already underway.

---From "Chapter 10 Pentecost"

We have noted that among the texts dealing with the reception of the Holy Spirit, with the exception of Pentecost (Acts 1:8; 2:4, 11), only once (Acts 9:17, 20) is the first gift of the Spirit given directly as an empowerment for preaching and witness.
This is consistent with other pictures in Acts.
Although the empowerment of the Holy Spirit for witnessing is a very important aspect of Luke's pneumatology, Luke does not, overall, portray the majority of Christians as actively engaged in evangelism.
In Jerusalem, those who proclaimed the gospel, performed miracles, and carried out the “ministry of the word of God” were not generally the group of believers, but the apostles (6:2; cf.
4:33).
The evangelism that Luke sees is primarily the task of the twelve disciples in Ephesus, Paul, and especially those empowered with power, such as Stephen (6:8, 10), Philip (8:5-40), Barnabas, John, Mark, Silas, Timothy, and Apollos.
They were also undoubtedly evangelists and co-workers (cf. Luke 8:4, 11:19-20, etc.) beyond those mentioned by Luke.
19:22; 20:4).
---From “The Pentecostal Gifts Given to the Church in Chapter 12 of the Book of Acts”

Therefore, the Holy Spirit of Pentecost is not simply “a gift of power bestowed upon a sanctified life,” but rather a “power from above,” a charismatic prophetic spirit that transforms, shapes, (and sanctifies) the community, guides the mission of the community, and empowers it.
This position is therefore very closely related to that presented in Gordon Fee's work on Paul and the Acts of the Apostles and to that articulated in Lederley's more theological analysis.
For Luke, converts must receive the Holy Spirit without delay, for the Spirit of prophecy is the only means by which the heavenly Lord can communicate with his people, guiding them and assuring them of his love, enlightening them about the meaning of forgiveness of sins, promoting obedience, imparting wisdom and understanding that make a changed life possible, and empowering their lives of service and witness.
For the author of Acts, without the spirit of prophecy, a reconciled community, a knowledge of God, and a joyful service to Him are impossible, and those who are “filled with the Spirit” are beacons illuminating the less intense ways in which the Spirit works through the congregation.
It is not surprising, then, that Luke thought that the Holy Spirit should be given within the broader complex of conversion-initiation (while preserving within this a certain degree of divine sovereignty and freedom of the Holy Spirit).
The challenge here is to provide a coherent doctrine on the relationship between baptism of conversion and the Holy Spirit, as is already being developed by authors in the broader charismatic church tradition.

---From "Chapter 14 Conclusion"