I begin with what is becoming an international argument: the relationship of theology and biblical studies. The issue is not only who gets the first or final word, but who sets the categories. Does theology or does biblical studies? Here are three books that are reshaping the conversation and that are right in the middle of this intense conversation:
Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance have edited a fine volume. The title is: Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics
. Contributions are Ross Wagner, Bockmuehl, Moberly and NT Wright, along with Carleton Paget, Jan Muis, John Webster, Ben Viviano, Alan Torrance, Oliver O'Donovan, Bernd Wannenwetsch and Kevin Vanhoozer.
The last contributor to the previous is the editor of two volumes: Theological Interpretation of the Old Testament: A Book-by-Book Survey 
and Theological Interpretation of the New Testament: A Book-by-Book Survey
.
These two books provide models and examples of what theological
interpretation looks like.
Here's the issue: Why did the earliest Christians, say the patristic
period, not read the Bible the way historic critics do? Did they seek
to determine meaning in historical context or did they swoop the text
up into the theological message of the Bible and even extend it? And,
as this discussion always suggests, where does the authority lie? In
the historic context or in the Spirit-shaped theological
interpretation? Well, these are the sorts of questions being raised.
These three books are a good place to start.
But, if you want to see this stuff in action I recommend the beautiful study of how the early fathers read the Bible and how they can teach us how to read the Bible by Frances Young, whose disabled son -- Arthur -- and whose experience that God is there whether she believe in him or not changed her course of study and faith. She tells this in her book, now about a year old, Brokenness and Blessing: Towards a Biblical Spirituality
. This book is rich in theology, history and authenticity. One of the best books I've read of late.
InterVarsity has dreamed up a great idea: pair a leading theologian with an on-the-ground practitioner. The books are called "resources for reconciliation". Two of the volumes I have:
Two well-known leaders, Stanley Hauerwas and Jean Vanier, write about the prophetic witness of weakness in Living Gently in a Violent World: The Prophetic Witness of Weakness (Resources for Reconciliation)
.
Emmanuel Katongole (prof at Duke) and Chris Rice (worked with the Voice of Calvary Ministries and now part of the Duke Center for Reconciliation) write about justice, peace and healing in Reconciling All Things: A Christian Vision for Justice, Peace and Healing (Resources for Reconciliation)
.
Now two more books. T.F. Torrance's lectures and thoughts on Christ and the incarnation, the subject that he mastered and informed the entire Christian church in the 20th Century, have now been edited and put together in Incarnation: The Person and Life of Christ
.
Theology is done by humans and that means autobiography is at work, so it is refreshing that Jurgen Moltmann, famous German theologian, has put together his own story in A Broad Place: An Autobiography
.
and Theological Interpretation of the New Testament: A Book-by-Book Survey.
These two books provide models and examples of what theological
interpretation looks like.
Here's the issue: Why did the earliest Christians, say the patristic
period, not read the Bible the way historic critics do? Did they seek
to determine meaning in historical context or did they swoop the text
up into the theological message of the Bible and even extend it? And,
as this discussion always suggests, where does the authority lie? In
the historic context or in the Spirit-shaped theological
interpretation? Well, these are the sorts of questions being raised.
These three books are a good place to start.But, if you want to see this stuff in action I recommend the beautiful study of how the early fathers read the Bible and how they can teach us how to read the Bible by Frances Young, whose disabled son -- Arthur -- and whose experience that God is there whether she believe in him or not changed her course of study and faith. She tells this in her book, now about a year old, Brokenness and Blessing: Towards a Biblical Spirituality
. This book is rich in theology, history and authenticity. One of the best books I've read of late.InterVarsity has dreamed up a great idea: pair a leading theologian with an on-the-ground practitioner. The books are called "resources for reconciliation". Two of the volumes I have:
Two well-known leaders, Stanley Hauerwas and Jean Vanier, write about the prophetic witness of weakness in Living Gently in a Violent World: The Prophetic Witness of Weakness (Resources for Reconciliation)
.Emmanuel Katongole (prof at Duke) and Chris Rice (worked with the Voice of Calvary Ministries and now part of the Duke Center for Reconciliation) write about justice, peace and healing in Reconciling All Things: A Christian Vision for Justice, Peace and Healing (Resources for Reconciliation)
.Now two more books. T.F. Torrance's lectures and thoughts on Christ and the incarnation, the subject that he mastered and informed the entire Christian church in the 20th Century, have now been edited and put together in Incarnation: The Person and Life of Christ
. Theology is done by humans and that means autobiography is at work, so it is refreshing that Jurgen Moltmann, famous German theologian, has put together his own story in A Broad Place: An Autobiography
.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Not all systematic theology is like Wayne Grudem and is ignorant of biblical theology. Sure, some systematicians can be like that but there are great examples of good systematicians who are brilliant exegetes and take the biblical material very seriously. Colin Gunton, and Hans Boersma are two who come to mind fairly quickly in this area. in particular, Boersma's book Violence, Hospitality and the Cross blends the insights of biblical theologians with systematics quite brilliantly.
People also need to remember that for every bad systematic theologian who proof texts and deals with the biblical material poorly, there are bad biblical theologians who often justify bizzare and irresponsible readings of the text and history that have significant negative effects on the doctrinal fidelity of the church. Biblical theologians are often good at blowing apart the work of systmeticians but are often too lazy or cant be bothered putting it back together again. James Dunn's work on the christology of Jesus springs to mind here, where he essentially denies the preexistance of Christ in Paul but does little to actually explain how this effects theology as a whole. The reader is simply left with a classic "history of religions" perspective on the development of christology.
Hi Dr McKnight,
I'm an occasional reader of your blog, but I have never commented before. You mentioned the Bockmuehl volume "Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible". I personally bought this book for the final section, which I thought would deal with theologies of Scripture. As a former evangelical, I'm trying to find a doctrine of Scripture which is 'high' enough that it can be said to be a genuine authority, yet 'low' enough to accept the possibility of historical/theological error. Unfortunatley, I haven't found such a doctrine yet.
Do you have any recommendations for further reading? Perhaps you have covered it on your blog at some point? Thank you.
Hey Chris. Since nobody else is answering you, then I will give it a try! I'm not exactly sure what you're looking for Chris. I'm not sure if you're looking for a book which fits the characteristics you describe, or if you yourself would like to fit those characteristics through further study and you're asking for book recommendations to help get you there. I would say the majority of scholarship is as you describe, they just wouldn't explain it like that. A close study of the scriptures, along with an understanding of how ancient historiography works has caused many to re-evaluate the "historicity" question. Many wouldn't deny the historicity of these events, but they just don't look at them in some woodenly literal newspaper account style. The Bible is not a weather report that just "give you the facts," but it's written by authors trying to convey a message and tell a story with a particular bent, so naturally there are going to be some things that aren't "literal" in the sense that we take the word. As far as theological error goes, now you're getting into hermeneutics. The topics of progressive revelation and the diversity of scripture should help you there.
As far as books to help you with your endeavor, the first that came to mind is Peter Enns' work "Inspiration and Incarnation." For a view that goes even further than Enns, see Kenton Sparks' "God's Word in Human Words." Sparks buys into all the higher critical theories but claims to be Evangelical and hold the Bible as his genuine authority. James Dunn has written a work geared towards NT studies called "Unity and Diversity" that could be helpful, though it's a bit academic. These are the only three that come to mind at the moment.
Chris,
I think you may be looking for something more scholarly, but I am reading Scot's Blue Parakeet currently, and it is helping me. I wouldn't say I am looking for a doctrine of scripture, but, then again maybe I am. What your wrote describing your current position toward scripture is close to mine. I also read Peter Enn's book that Luke (#10) mentions above. I liked it. But Scot's point that we are reading the Bible improperly if it is not making us more loving towards God and others really resonates with me. He writes a lot about a relationship with the Bible that will make us more loving.
God bless you in your search.
Thank you both of you (and Scott)
I have read Peter Enns' book, I think his dicussion of the OT in the NT is excellent and may well be working towards a solution in that area. I will add both the Blue Parakeet and James Dunn to my list (Kenton Sparks is already on there). I understand what you are saying about the Bible needing to be understood in context, not by our 21st century standards, I'm interested in a doctrine that can allow for error even when Scripture has been properly understood in context.
Happy Christmas!
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.