Comprehensive in scope, this book covers every aspect of biblical theology. Chapters are devoted first to the nature and task of biblical theology and then to major themes within the biblical message — God's order, God's servant, God's people, and God's way. Each section of the book also features an extensive system of helpful cross-references. Not only is Scobie's attempt to bridge the biblical testaments admirable, but he also takes great care to present scholarship that is at the same time informed by, and relevant to, the daily life and work of the church. The result is a book that is relevant to readers everywhere.
Accessible to teachers, clergy, students, and general readers alike, this book will reinvigorate the study of the Bible as the unified word of God.
Comprehensive in scope, this book covers every aspect of biblical theology. Chapters are devoted first to the nature and task of biblical theology and then to major themes within the biblical message — God's order, God's servant, God's people, and God's way. Each section of the book also features an extensive system of helpful cross-references. Not only is Scobie's attempt to bridge the biblical testaments admirable, but he also takes great care to present scholarship that is at the same time informed by, and relevant to, the daily life and work of the church. The result is a book that is relevant to readers everywhere.
Accessible to teachers, clergy, students, and general readers alike, this book will reinvigorate the study of the Bible as the unified word of God.
Paperback
-
SHIP THIS ITEMIn stock. Ships in 1-2 days.PICK UP IN STORE
Your local store may have stock of this item.
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
Comprehensive in scope, this book covers every aspect of biblical theology. Chapters are devoted first to the nature and task of biblical theology and then to major themes within the biblical message — God's order, God's servant, God's people, and God's way. Each section of the book also features an extensive system of helpful cross-references. Not only is Scobie's attempt to bridge the biblical testaments admirable, but he also takes great care to present scholarship that is at the same time informed by, and relevant to, the daily life and work of the church. The result is a book that is relevant to readers everywhere.
Accessible to teachers, clergy, students, and general readers alike, this book will reinvigorate the study of the Bible as the unified word of God.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780802849502 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Eerdmans, William B. Publishing Company |
| Publication date: | 12/01/2002 |
| Pages: | 1058 |
| Product dimensions: | 6.14(w) x 9.21(h) x 2.17(d) |
Read an Excerpt
The Ways of Our God
An Approach to Biblical TheologyBy Charles H. H. Scobie
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company
Copyright © 2002 Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing CompanyAll right reserved.
ISBN: 0-8028-4950-4
Chapter One
A. The Definition of Biblical Theology
A-1. WHAT IS BIBLICAL THEOLOGY?
The term "biblical theology" (BT) is widely used at the present time. There are encyclopedias of BT and journals devoted to BT, and people occupy chairs of BT. In the closing decades of the twentieth century there was renewed discussion of the possibility of writing a full-scale BT, a development that has given rise to hope in some but skepticism in others. Examination of the various uses of the term, however, quickly reveals widespread disagreement regarding its meaning. "Biblical theology," as J. L. McKenzie (1974) has said, "is the only discipline or sub-discipline in the field of theology that lacks generally accepted principles, methods and structure. There is not even a generally accepted definition of its purpose and scope" (15; see the extended discussion of problems of definition in J. Barr 1999: chaps. 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12). On the other hand, there are those who have argued that "Biblical theology presents probably the most profound challenge for the Biblical scholar in the latter part of the 20th century" (Hasel 1982: 80).
If progress is to be made in the study of BT, the question of definition is clearly crucial. The term is a relatively modern one. As far as is known, itwas first used in a book, Teutsche biblische Theologie, by W. J. Christmann, published in 1629 (no copies are known to have survived). In 1643 H. A. Diest published a volume entitled Theologia Biblica. The term became quite widely used in the eighteenth century, and continues to be used down to the present day. Of course, it is a fallacy to assume that what is meant by BT did not exist prior to the seventeenth century just because the term did not exist. Conversely, not everything that has been labeled "biblical theology" in the past two or three hundred years necessarily merits being thus designated.
It might seem that all that is needed is an examination of the two component parts of the term, "biblical" and "theology." "Biblical" is the adjective from the word "Bible," which in turn is derived from the Greek ta biblia and the Middle Latin biblia. Ta biblia means "the books" (biblion, meaning "book" or "scroll," is a diminutive of biblos, the regular Greek word for "book"; see Arndt and Gingrich 1957: 140). Though the word is found in Dan 9:2 and 1 Macc 12:9 referring to the sacred scriptures of the Jews, it is basically a Christian usage found first in 2 Clem 14:2 (second century A.D.?) and eventually becoming widely employed as the standard designation of the sacred scriptures of the Christian church (A. Stewart 1898: 286). When the term passed from Greek to Latin, it also passed from a neuter plural (ta biblia = "the books") to a feminine singular (biblia = "the book"), "the transition being no doubt assisted by the growing conception of the Bible as the one utterance of God rather than as the multiplicity of voices speaking for Him" (286).
The term "Bible" can be used in a broadway as, for example, when it is said that "the Koran is the bible of Islam." And it certainly is quite common to refer to the Jewish Scriptures as "the Hebrew Bible." In order to avoid any confusion, however, the term will be used here to refer to the books of the Old and New Testaments that constitute the Christian canon of Scripture, i.e., the collection of those books that are recognized as normative for the faith and life of the Christian church.
"Theology" identifies the concern of the discipline with theos, "God." The term has seldom been understood in a narrow sense, however, as dealing only with the revelation of God himself, but is generally taken to include also God's relation to the world and to humankind, and related topics. There is certainly room for debate as to exactly what should be included in "theology"; for example, does it include the discussion of ethical questions, or is biblical ethics to be regarded as a completely separate discipline from BT?
"Theology" means the logos of theos, and this raises one of the most contentious aspects of any definition of BT. Logos (word, language, reason) in compounds of this type generally denotes the written, rational, systematic, scientific study of a given subject area (cf. biology, sociology, and so on). There are those who would contend that since the biblical material is so diverse and, with its varied literary forms (history, poetry, drama, parables, and so on), actually contains very little "theology," therefore a biblical theology is impossible. Such a view, it may be argued, presupposes a very narrow conception of theology as rigid, systematized, doctrinal, and propositional in form. Through its diverse literary genres the Bible does give expression to an understanding (or understandings) of God in his relation to the world and to humankind. It is the testimony of the community that accepts the Bible as canonical Scripture that this understanding, though diverse and culturally conditioned, nevertheless represents the revelation of God; in and through the human words can be discerned the word of God. This understanding of God's revelation can indeed be the subject of scholarly study. Such study, as in any discipline, must be ordered in some way; what is important is that the "order" is one that arises from and is appropriate to the subject matter itself (cf. Hasel 1984: 126).
"Biblical theology" thus ought to mean something like the ordered study of what the Bible has to say about God and his relation to the world and to humankind.
It is often pointed out, however, that the term "biblical theology" can be understood in two different ways. It can be taken to mean a Christian theology that is based up on the Bible, what Ebeling (1963) called "theology that accords with the Bible, scriptural theology" (79). The problem with this is that all forms of Christian theology claim to be based in some way upon the Bible. The term might be used in a comparative sense, so that, for example, Karl Barth's theology might be said to be a "biblical theology" in comparison to Paul Tillich's, which might be characterized as more "philosophical." But this is not very satisfactory since, like both Barth and Tillich, all Christian theologians in all ages are in their own way seeking to understand what the biblical revelation and the traditional teaching of the church mean for their own day. This is better designated as "dogmatic theology" (Barth called his major work Church Dogmatics) or "systematic theology."
The second possible meaning of "biblical theology" is "the theology contained in the Bible, the theology of the Bible itself" (Ebeling 1963: 79), and this definition is the one that is preferred by most scholars.
Such a definition, and indeed such a way of posing the question, assumes that a clear distinction can and must be made between the teaching of the Bible itself and the way that teaching is to be understood and applied today. The Bible was written in the course of a one-thousand-year period, in times quite different from our own in many ways. Even if we accept the Bible as divinely inspired and normative for faith, it still has to be interpreted and applied in each new generation. What we may find very hard to grasp is the fact that the idea of making a clear separation between what the Bible meant in its original historical context and what it means for Christians today is a relatively modern one; it became possible with the rise of modern historical consciousness and was clearly enunciated only toward the end of the eighteenth century.
This explains why many people regard BT as a relatively modern development. Almost all discussion of the subject begins by referring to the famous inaugural address of J. P. Gabler at the University of Altdorf in 1787, entitled (in English translation of the scholarly Latin of the original) "An Oration on the Proper Distinction between Biblical and Dogmatic Theology and the Specific Objectives of Each" (see translation and commentary in Sandys-Wunsch and Eldredge 1980). Gabler is generally assumed to have advocated the strict separation of BT and dogmatics. Hence BT is taken to be a "historical concept" while dogmatics is a "normative concept" (Ebeling 1963: 79). Or, to use the distinction made in a much-quoted article by Krister Stendahl (1962) in the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, BT is concerned with what the biblical text "meant," whereas dogmatic theology deals with what it "means" (see further below, B-7). The implication of this is that BT is a historical discipline that can be pursued quite independently of the church and the ongoing Christian community. Anyone can participate in the study, whatever their personal religious views, provided only that they have the necessary scholarly equipment (knowledge of the original languages, familiarity with the secondary literature, and so on). This is still a very widely held view of BT today. However, it poses two extremely serious problems.
Firstly, it results in the rather ludicrous view that no such thing as BT existed prior to 1787 (or thereabouts)! Surely it is obvious that from an early stage the church was concerned in some way with seeking an ordered understanding of what the Bible says about God and his relationship with the world and humankind.
Secondly, beginning in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, the study of BT was increasingly pursued as an independent and essentially historical discipline. As we shall see, what this led to was the division of BT (into OT and NT theology), the decline of BT (as it was absorbed by the history of religion), and finally the virtual demise of BT. While the development of the historical, critical study of the Bible brought great gains, unfortunately it also increasingly drove a wedge between academic biblical studies and the use of the Bible by the church. Many biblical scholars today hold that the historical study of the Bible has shown it to be so diverse in its contents that any idea of an ordered, consistent, overall "biblical theology" is a sheer impossibility. It is true that the term "biblical theology" is often used in a loose way to refer to any kind of historical study of the contents of the Bible. Thus the study and exegesis of a passage from one of Paul's letters might be referred to as an example of BT. This loose use of the term only creates confusion and should be avoided. Such a study is better classified "NT theology," or more accurately "Pauline theology."
Thus biblical scholarship today finds itself in an impasse. Students entering the field for the first time may be pardoned for scratching their heads in some bewilderment upon discovering that BT did not exist prior to 1787 and that it cannot be regarded as existing today in any strict sense of the term!
A-2. INTEGRATED, INDEPENDENT, AND INTERMEDIATE BIBLICAL THEOLOGY
The approach to BT that is advocated here is based on taking seriously both component parts of the term, "biblical" and "theology," and on recognizing that the ordered study of what the Bible says about God and his relations with the world and humankind certainly did not begin in the late eighteenth century, but has been (in one form or another) a concern of the church throughout its history up to and including the present day (cf. Robertson 1971: 65). As soon as the Gospels, Paul's letters, and other books began to be read alongside the Hebrew Scriptures in the early Christian church, and as soon as Christians began to study this twofold scriptural heritage and ask how it was to be understood and how it was to guide and direct the faith and life of the church, a form of BT came into being. It is true that no sharp distinction was drawn between the teaching of the Bible and the teaching of the church; the one was largely integrated with the other. Thus I have suggested (Scobie 1991a: 37-38) that the period prior to the eighteenth century could be characterized as a period of integrated biblical theology.
From the earliest stages of this period the church faced what still constitute the two greatest problems raised for Christians by the use of the Bible, the problem of unity and diversity and the problem of interpretation. As early as the second century, Christian writers are seen to be wrestling with the problem of how "the books," written over so many years by so many people, can be regarded as "the Book," or the revelation of the one God. How can the Hebrew Scriptures and the new Christian writings both be regarded as authoritative when they are so different? How is the church to deal with four Gospels that tell the story of Jesus in such diverse ways? In other words, how can unity be found in the midst of such diversity?
The other problem was that of interpretation or hermeneutics. Groups like the Gnostics had their own methods of interpretation which the church considered to be in error. How then is Scripture to be interpreted within the church?
It is true that the answers the church gave to these problems are not necessarily identical with the ones Christian thinkers would give today. And it is true also that these problems are more acute today than in the second century. Modern historical studies have emphasized the diversity of Scripture to a far greater extent. And the fact that we live between two and three thousand years after the books of the Bible were written, and in a world in which so much has changed, causes even greater hermeneutical problems. But the differences should not be overexaggerated. On reading some of the discussions of Scripture in early Church Fathers, one is often surprised at how modern the issues sound.
The rise of a new historical consciousness in the eighteenth century did certainly revolutionize the study of Scripture. The history of biblical interpretation is never simple, but it is broadly true that the dominant trend of the last two hundred years has been the drawing of a sharp distinction between the original theology of the Bible, which is to be investigated by historical methods, and the later dogmatic theology of the church. BT understood in this way is an academic discipline that can be pursued in complete independence from the church. Hence I have suggested calling this an independent biblical theology. For many people today this still constitutes their understanding of what BT is. Yet, as indicated at the end of the previous section, it is this approach that has led to a dead end.
The approach advocated here is not one that disparages the historical study of Scripture. It does not seek to turn the clock back to a precritical age. But it is aware of the shortcomings of the historical-critical approach, and seeks to go beyond it to a new understanding of BT appropriate to a postcritical age. BT is not to be undertaken in independence from the life of the church, the community that recognizes the Bible as its canonical Scripture. What will be proposed here may be called an intermediate biblical theology, for it is seen as a bridge discipline, standing in an intermediate position between the historical study of the Bible and the use of the Bible as authoritative Scripture by the church (cf. Scobie 1991a: 49-52). BT accepts and builds on the historical study of Scripture, but it is not simply concerned with what the Bible "meant." It is also concerned with what the Bible "means" as a canonical whole, and thus cannot be separated from the process of biblical interpretation.
The issues involved in thinking through a new approach to BT are complex, and so me knowledge of the history of the church's use of the Bible is a necessary precondition both for understanding the impasse in biblical studies today and for finding the way forward to a more satisfactory position.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from The Ways of Our God by Charles H. H. Scobie Copyright © 2002 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
| Preface | ix | |
| Introduction | xii | |
| Abbreviations | xv | |
| Part I | Prolegomena to a Biblical Theology | |
| A. | The Definition of Biblical Theology | 3 |
| A-1. | What Is Biblical Theology? | 3 |
| A-2. | Integrated, Independent, and Intermediate Biblical Theology | 6 |
| B. | The History of Biblical Theology | 9 |
| B-1. | The Early and Medieval Period | 9 |
| B-2. | The Reformation | 12 |
| B-3. | The Emergence of an Independent Biblical Theology | 13 |
| B-4. | Gabler's Definition | 15 |
| B-5. | The Rise and Fall of Biblical Theology | 16 |
| B-6. | Old Testament and New Testament Theology | 18 |
| B-7. | From Theology to Religion | 20 |
| B-8. | The Revival of Theology | 22 |
| B-9. | From Theology to Theologies | 25 |
| C. | New Directions in Biblical Theology | 29 |
| C-1. | Questioning of the Historical-Critical Method | 29 |
| C-1.1. | "Authenticity" | 30 |
| C-1.2. | Hermeneutics of Consent | 32 |
| C-1.3. | The Continuing Validity of the Historical Approach | 33 |
| C-2. | The Canonical Text | 34 |
| C-2.1. | The Literary Approach | 35 |
| C-2.2. | The Canonical Approach | 38 |
| C-3. | The Church as Interpretive Community | 40 |
| C-4. | A Revival of Biblical Theology | 42 |
| C-4.1. | Tradition History | 42 |
| C-4.2. | Biblical Themes | 43 |
| C-4.3. | Biblical Theologies | 44 |
| D. | The Method of Biblical Theology | 46 |
| D-1. | An Intermediate Biblical Theology | 46 |
| D-2. | A Canonical Biblical Theology | 49 |
| D-2.1. | Scripture and Canon | 49 |
| D-2.2. | Tanakh and Old Testament | 51 |
| D-2.3. | The Canon of the New Testament | 55 |
| D-2.4. | Biblical Theology Is Limited to the Canon of Christian Scripture | 58 |
| D-2.5. | Biblical Theology Is Based on Both Old and New Testaments | 58 |
| D-2.6. | Biblical Theology Is Based on the Content of the Christian Canon | 60 |
| D-2.7. | Biblical Theology Is Based on the Structure of the Christian Canon | 65 |
| D-2.8. | Biblical Theology Is Based on the Text of the Christian Canon | 71 |
| D-2.9. | Biblical Theology Is Based Primarily on the Final Canonical Form of the Text | 73 |
| D-2.10. | Biblical Theology Will Reject a "Canon within the Canon" | 75 |
| D-3. | A Cooperative Biblical Theology | 76 |
| D-3.1. | Old Testament and New Testament | 76 |
| D-3.2. | Biblical Studies and Theology | 77 |
| D-3.3. | An Ecumenical Approach | 77 |
| D-4. | A Structured Biblical Theology | 79 |
| E. | The Structure of Biblical Theology | 81 |
| E-1. | Alternative Approaches | 81 |
| E-1.1. | The Systematic Approach | 81 |
| E-1.2. | The Historical Approach | 83 |
| E-1.3. | The Thematic Approach | 85 |
| E-2. | The Relationship between Old and New Testaments | 88 |
| E-3. | The Pattern of Proclamation/Promise: Fulfillment/Consummation | 91 |
| E-4. | The Framework of a Biblical Theology | 93 |
| E-4.1. | God's Order | 94 |
| E-4.2. | God's Servant | 95 |
| E-4.3. | God's People | 97 |
| E-4.4. | God's Way | 97 |
| E-5. | Unity and Diversity | 99 |
| E-5.1. | Creation and History | 100 |
| E-5.2. | Individual and Community | 101 |
| Part II | A Sketch of Biblical Theology | |
| 1-5 | God's Order | |
| 1. | The Living God | 105 |
| 2. | The Lord of Creation | 148 |
| 3. | The Lord of History | 189 |
| 4. | The Adversary | 233 |
| 5. | The Spirit | 269 |
| 6-10 | God's Servant | |
| 6. | The Messiah | 301 |
| 7. | The Son of Man | 335 |
| 8. | Glory, Word, Wisdom, Son | 365 |
| 9. | The Servant's Suffering | 403 |
| 10. | The Servant's Vindication | 441 |
| 11-15 | God's People | |
| 11. | The Covenant Community | 469 |
| 12. | The Nations | 509 |
| 13. | Land and City | 541 |
| 14. | Worship | 567 |
| 15. | Ministry | 613 |
| 16-20 | God's Way | |
| 16. | The Human Condition | 655 |
| 17. | Faith and Hope | 700 |
| 18. | God's Commandments | 741 |
| 19. | Love Your Neighbor | 799 |
| 20. | Life | 880 |
| Outline of Part II | 928 | |
| Bibliography | 949 | |
| Indexes | ||
| Authors | 1022 | |
| Subjects | 1035 |