Scripture and Theology in Context: An Introduction

Abstract

The chapter sets the stage for the volume by describing the state of the art and the particular contribution of the present book. The opening paragraphs outline the history of the interrelations between Scripture and biblical studies with theology in the pre-modern, modern and late-modern periods. This is followed by a brief introduction to each of the book’s chapters.

1 A Broken Relationship?

Christianity relates to the Bible. Yet here the questions begin: How can theology be derived from Scripture, how can faith be gained from text? These questions can be asked in biblical, historical and systematic perspectives: What is the theological status of the Bible? How have the Scriptures been received theologically through the centuries? And how should they be appropriated today? How can biblical studies, on the one hand, and systematic and constructive theology, on the other, interact in productive ways and be fruitful for the Christian faith in a 21st century context? These are the book’s leading questions.

For a long time in the past, biblical studies and systematic, or doctrinal, theology were closely linked to one another. However, in the modern period they became gradually separated which led to increasing subject specialization but also to a lamentable lacuna within the various branches of theology as the lack of dialogue between biblical studies and the various other theological sub-disciplines increased.1 In the recent past, the British New Testament scholar Francis Watson and others have expressed concerns about the mutual isolation vis-à-vis one another of the theological sub-disciplines Old Testament, New Testament and systematic theology.2 Separating the two domains of Scripture and theology is not always indicative of a healthy division of labour. According to Watson, this split between sub-disciplines also deeply affects biblical studies as such, where scholars of the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament, typically have little, if any, need of the New Testament. On a similar note, traditional New Testament studies only rarely pursue serious engagement with Patristic exegesis, early Christian doctrine or liturgical theology. Systematic theology in the past decades, on its part, has frequently undertaken major advancements quite independent of the biblical material or the longstanding dialogue with biblical scholarship.

However, cross-disciplinary approaches increasingly have found their way into the theological sub-disciplinary curricula, helping to set new agendas for how Scripture and theology may relate to one another. In a variety of contexts, scholars have sought to re-establish the time-honoured bonds between the disciplines. The present volume is part of this intellectual response, with contributions from scholars of various professional and denominational backgrounds. The book’s chapters together seek to reinvigorate the crucial interdisciplinary dialogue, involving particularly biblical, historical and systematic-theological perspectives. The anthology offers a cross-disciplinary academic response to various facets of what has often been perceived as a broken relationship between the domains. In this introduction, we will shortly sketch this situation and its historical genesis (sections 2–4) and explain how the chapters in this volume address it (sections 5–8).

Given the long tradition of Christian theology, the aforementioned divide between Scripture and theology is a relatively recent one. How did it come about? Somewhat oversimplifying, in the interest of conciseness and simplicity, we divide the history of biblical interpretation into three phases to situate the chapters of the present volume in a broad historical context: the pre-modern period (pre-Christian period–1500 CE), the modern period (1500–present), and, as its end-phase, the late-modern period (1970–present). For each of these three periods we will briefly characterize the Scripture-and-theology dynamic. In telling this story, we make transparent the framework we operate within, and how the chapters of this volume are connected to this framework.

2 The Pre-modern Period

Pre-modern scriptural interpretation, whether through the eyes of an Irenaeus, Origen or an Aquinas, was attentive to the theological world of the Scriptures as received in the Jewish and Christian faith communities. In the case of the former two church teachers, representing pre-Nicene theologizing, we can note a key phenomenon, underlined by the German theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg – namely that the early church presupposed the truth of dogmas. This is reflected in the Epistle to Diognetus (5.3) and in Origen (In Matt. 12.23): As “the Christian faith does not rest on human teaching”, it follows that Christian doctrines can be described as divine dogmas (dogmata theou), with God as guarantor for their claims to truth.3 This early revelatory view of theology was further affiliated with a unified view of the Scriptures, as noted by the Patristic scholar Frances Young: “The unity of the scriptures is recognised to have been a ‘dogma’ among the Fathers.”4 For the Christian faith communities and their leaders, these Scriptures were perceived as canonical5 and triune6 in character, associated with the triune Rule of Faith/ Truth (regula fidei/veritatis). As the Church Father Irenaeus underscores, “Whoever keeps the Rule of Truth, which they received through baptism, unchanged in their heart, will know … [the things taught] from the Scriptures” (Haer. III, 4.1). Both Irenaeus (Haer. I, 9.4–10.1; III, 1.2) and Tertullian (Praescr. 19) are representative voices of this faith, “the faith of those who believe in the Father and Son and Holy Spirit” (Tert. Prax. 2), referring to the sum content of apostolic teaching.7 Similarly, Clement of Alexandria, who also associates the church’s Rule, or Ecclesiastical Canon, with the Old and New Testament Scriptures and their interpretation. Clement writes: “The Canon of the Church is the agreement and unity of the Law and the Prophets with the [New] Testament delivered at the coming of the Lord.”8 To Irenaeus, Clement and other early exegetes and theologians, Christological and triune textual highlighting was further visible in the Greek Old and New Testament manuscripts themselves by means of nomina sacra (“sacred names”) demarcations; i.e., a delimited selection of specially sacred words, such as the Greek terms for “God”, “Jesus” and “Spirit”.9 British palaeographer C. H. Roberts nicely characterises these textual markers as “the embryonic creed of the first Church”.10 The early triune Rule-of-Faith structure, perceivable in text, liturgy and theology eventually took on a widely accepted expression in the Apostles’ Creed and, even more so, in the ecumenical Nicene Creed (C).11

On a more general note, the overall strong Christological focus in the faith communities, indicated through the regula fidei, nomina sacra demarcations and otherwise, was brought to bear specifically on the church’s Scriptures, and their interaction with theology. In Origen’s phrasing, “All the Scriptures are one book because all the teaching that has come to us about Christ is recapitulated in one single whole” (Ioa. Comm. V, 6).12 Similarly, Origen’s teacher, Clement, when in his Stromateis he connects Christ with Scripture: “For in the Lord we have the first principle of our teaching (ἀρχὴ τῆς διδασκαλίας), both by the prophets, the Gospel, and the blessed apostles.” (Strom. VII, 16.95)13

As for variations of exegetical-theological approaches among early scriptural expositors, we can notice the commitment to Christological fulfilment of prophecy (exemplified by Justin Martyr14); exegesis in line with the Rule of Faith (exemplified by Irenaeus and Tertullian;15 differently in Marcion16 and Gnostic biblical interpreters17); hermeneutical appeal to the literal, moral and spiritual meanings of Scripture (exemplified by Origen18); engagement with figurative, literal and Christian meanings of Scripture (exemplified by Augustine19); and theoretical discussion on the literal sense – and its relation to other senses – of Scripture (exemplified by Thomas Aquinas20). In the fourfold sense of...