New book on Biblical Theology

My Amazon Review of a new book on Biblical Theology by Klink III, Edward W., and Darian R. Lockett. Understanding Biblical Theology: A Comparison of Theory and Practice. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.

Big thanks to Klink and Lockett for giving us much to think about and for helping to clarify and nuance the discipline of Biblical Theology (BT) as practiced today. They have rightly identified the problem that biblical theologians with their respective biblical theologies seem to be talking past rather than to one another, with the result that BT might run the danger of becoming "a nose of wax, so pliant it loses any sense of its own boundaries or form" (kindle loc. 3629). To that end, they layout a taxonomy of 5 classifications of BT as practiced today, ranging from the more historical to the more theological in their outlook. For each type, Klink and Lockett helpfully provide an example of a major proponent of that particular approach. The discussions for each type of BT are nuanced and carefully argued, and enough details and specificity are flashed out without the reader feeling overwhelmed. This could serve as a crucial textbook for courses on BT as it would give a helpful and crucial overview of BT as practiced and understood today. My only letdown is that while Klink and Lockett admit the purpose of the book is not to decide and arbitrate between the different types of BT or come up with the definitive understanding of BT, it would have been more satisfying if they had offered some form of consensus on the different types of BT or draw out what actually unites these different types of BT which led to them being classified as "BT" in the first place. In other words, the book is strong on description, but perhaps some modest form of prescription would have been useful as well. The other comment is that more needs to be said about the relationship between Theological Interpretation of Scripture (TIS) and BT, rather than limiting to just Type 5 (BT as theological construction). Some of the BTs proposed (Type 3 onwards) share more similarities with TIS than what is presented. Not withstanding these two comments, Understanding BT is definitely a helpful book and one which would aid us as we continue to chart towards greater clarity in understanding this elusive but yet much needed discipline.

John Webster on hearing and knowing the Word of God

A short and powerful quote from Professor John Webster on how hearing and knowing the Word of God is both a genuinely creaturely act and an act enabled by the Holy Spirit at the same time:

"If human creatures hear and know [the Word of God], it is because God the Holy Spirit makes them hear and know. This hearing and knowing are genuinely creaturely acts - were they not, there would be no fellowship between God and creatures but simply a divine utterance into a void. But the hearing and knowing of human creatures are spiritual acts, that is, acts for whose description we must employ language about the Holy Spirit." 

 Webster, John B. “Biblical Reasoning.” Anglican Theological Review 90 (2008): 733–751 (quote from p.739).

Questions for the future of Hermeneutics

Having surveyed the history of hermeneutics as represented by its major thinkers and writers, Stanley Porter and Jason Robinson conclude with what they view as questions which the subject must continue to grapple with as it heads into the future (Hermeneutics: An Introduction to Interpretive Theory (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), kindle loc. 4079ff.):

 - Which element in the tripartitie relationship of author, text, and reader should take center place - the author and his/her intention within the text? The text and its cultural-historical context, or even the meaning that arises from just having the words and sentences laid out as such as the text? Or the reader’s present situation and socio-historically conditioned way of understanding the text?

- Does misunderstanding and radical difference or a pre-existing common accord, however slight, which thereby enables understanding come first in every experience of understanding? 

- What does it mean to cultivate a critical and reflective attitude, or for that matter, to be a virtuous reader? Is the cultivation of these attitudes mutually exclusive from methods?

- Is interpretation and objective or subjective act, or perhaps an inter-subjective play?

- Is there a correct interpretation? Or should we make do and concern ourselves with the best possible interpretation at the moment?

- What is the role of hermeneutics in theological and biblical interpretation?

Porter and Robinson conclude:

The important point to remind ourselves of here is that it is a mistake to rely on absolute categories when thinking about hermeneutics. We cannot rightly divide ways of thinking about hermeneutics into bipolar camps of either structuralism or poststructuralism, foundationalism or antifoundationalism, ontology or epistemology, textual or authorial, literary or philosophical, etc. These categories represent uneven tensions within hermeneutics that transgress simple boundaries and disciplinary lines... 

Hermeneutics is a hybrid of that which is, that which came before, and that which is becoming. It is ontological, epistemological, and far more... hermeneutics and interpretive theories continue to expand and develop in new directions... Our belief is that the future of hermeneutics will be one in which the very conception of what it means for humans to understand will continue to develop, most especially so as we find new and more helpful ways of describing our being-in-the-world and being-with-others - including our very complex and changing relationships with the written word. (loc.4120)

Seen in this light, there is indeed some truth in the words of Hans Robert Jauss (a reception-theory hermeneutician), “to understand is to understand differently, and still differently again.”