In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

1 The Theological Interpretation of Scripture and the Question of History The questions raised for theology by modern historical consciousness go to the very heart of Christian faith and its core tenets. For that reason they are of profound import for the doctrine of Scripture and the practice of reading Scripture theologically. Yet although the issue of history is often recognized in connection with the claims of historical criticism, these deeper questions rarely receive extensive or adequate theological investigation in recent literature on the theological interpretation of Scripture. The present chapter sets the scene for that conversation. I draw on Ernst Troeltsch’s classic account of modern historiography and the challenges it poses for Christian theology to draw out the implied difficulties for the theology of Scripture. I then show how four prominent, contrasting proposals in this field, for all their other strengths, fail to adequately address these challenges, even where they acknowledge their pertinence. Brevard Childs, Sandra Schneiders, and Kevin Vanhoozer represent the most theologically developed accounts of Scripture in terms of a canonical approach to biblical theology, theological hermeneutics, and the selfcommunication of the triune God, respectively, which I take to be the three most prominent ways of pursuing the theology of Scripture at present. Finally, Murray Rae has offered one of the most developed responses to the challenges posed by Troeltsch for the theological interpretation of Scripture, incorporating the strengths of a wide range of theological resources. The limitations of these authors in respect of the problem posed by Troeltsch are both indicative of the need for further work and help clarify the nature of that task. 15 Historical Method and Dogmatic Theology: Ernst Troeltsch Ernst Troeltsch offers a thoroughgoing analysis of modern historical consciousness and historical method and the profound challenges of enduring significance they pose to Christian theology, not least for theology and the interpretation of the Bible.1 A brief examination of his account of these challenges will clarify the nature of the problems they pose for the theology of Scripture and its theological interpretation today. On Troeltsch’s account, the development of historical method is one of a number of shifts that have transformed the context for modern religious thought.2 The critical historiography that has flourished since the Enlightenment has resulted in the full development of modern historical reflection.3 From this perspective, the history of humanity is thoroughly enmeshed with natural history—it “merges in the evolutionary history of the earth’s surface”—and is inextricable from the impact of its physical contexts and its changing social life.4 It forms “an unspeakably complex, yet altogether coherent, whole of immeasurable duration both in the past and in the future” in which we must discover ourselves and the origin and reason for our existence. When we see ourselves in this way as so thoroughly immersed in history, historical inquiry becomes a vital, existential concern. As Troeltsch explains, modern historical inquiry evinces three interrelated methodological procedures that follow from the way of seeing history he has just articulated. The first of these is that of analogy. This procedure is based on the claim that we have a key to understanding, explaining, and reconstructing what might have happened in the past on the basis of the similarity that obtains between events we observe, both within and without 1. As Roy Harrisville and Walter Sundburg claim in their useful overview of his context and thought in The Bible in Modern Culture: Baruch Spinoza to Brevard Childs, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 146–68. They point, for example, to Peter Stuhlmacher, Historical Criticism and Theological Interpretation of Scripture, trans. R. Harrisville (London: SPCK, 1979). Edgar Krentz remarks that Troeltsch’s essay “On Historical and Dogmatic Method in Theology” (discussed below) “still haunts theology,” in his The Historical-Critical Method (London: SPCK, 1975), 55. Troeltsch is also given a prominent position in expositions of the problem of history in a number of more recent works, e.g.: C. Stephen Evans, The Historical Christ and the Jesus of Faith: The Incarnational Narratives as History (New York: Clarendon, 1996), 185ff.; Murray Rae, History and Hermeneutics (London: T. & T. Clark, 2005), 16 and 154–55. See also Gregory Dawes, The Historical Jesus Quest: The Challenge of History to Religious Authority (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 196. 2. “Historiography,” in Contemporary Religious Thinkers: From Idealist Metaphysics to Existentialist Theologians, ed. J. Macquarrie (London: SCM, 1968), 76–77. 3. “Historiography,” 80–81. 4. “Historiography,” 81. 16 | Divine Eloquence and Human Transformation [18...

Share