Upload
mount2011
View
216
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
1/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
Biblical Theology: Canon and Plain Sense
J. G. McConville
Professor of Old Testament Studies at The University of
Gloucestershire (www.glos.ac.u!
The Context
"i#lical Theology is a somewhat sli$$ery creature% which at times #ass in the sun
and at other times retreats &uietly% or even ignominiously% into the shade. 'f it
seems at first glance to have a sim$licity a#out it% this is dece$tive% and it has a
ha#it of changing its form when it reemerges for another $hase of its life. )t
$resent% "i#lical Theology shows signs of reaching its $rime% after a s$ell in the
wilderness. The last active $eriod of its life was associated with G. *. +right,s The
God Who Acts% -/ and also with the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament%
edited #y 0. 1ittel. This emergence of "i#lical Theology was ended% #y all
accounts% #y James "arr,s criti&ue of 1ittel% es$ecially in The Semantics of Biblical
Language-2/. 'n its wae% "revard Childs s$oe of a 3crisis, in "i#lical Theology%
and develo$ed what is variously nown as canonical criticism and canonical
theology -4/. 'n doing so he e5$ressly intended to find a new way of doing theology
for the church #ased on the two testaments. The s$irit of it was close to that of
"i#lical Theology% and the story of the latter over the last three decades must
unfold the former too.
'n these last days% however% there have #een sightings of "i#lical Theology itself%
a#road again in the theological landsca$e% a newly invigorated creature. ) leading
e5am$le is 6rancis +atson,s Text and Truth% -7/ in which he aims to reesta#lish
the genre% #eginning with a criti&ue of "arr,s attac on 1ittel% which he regards as
a tour de force. 8ot only so% #ut "arr himself has weighed in with a ma9or volume
http://www.glos.ac.uk/http://www.glos.ac.uk/7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
2/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
entitled The Concet of Biblical Theology% -:/ which turns out to #e a defence of
the idea (he $refers 3$an"i#lical Theology,!% though he understands it in a way
&uite unlie Childs or +atson.
+hat% then% is "i#lical Theology; )t the sim$lest level% it is letting the "i#le s$ea
today. The story as ' have introduced it has focused on the world of academic
theology.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
3/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
The title of this su#section seems to hesitate #etween two designations. "oth are
used% however% to refer to the method of inter$retation advocated #y Childs% with
good reason% #ecause the a$$roach not only aims to do theology% #ut also to
revise the way in which 3critical, reading of the #i#lical te5ts is done -=/. Criticism of
historical criticism is at the heart of the enter$rise. This is not 9ust a matter of
leaving those (historicalcritical! issues on one side while we get on with what
really matters% nor of 3moving #eyond, historical criticism% since in either case the
im$lied recognition of that method will return to $ut s$oes in inter$retative wheels.
So the criti&ue is more $ointed and severe. 6or +atson% historical criticism has
failed #ecause it has not led to contem$orary actuali>ation of the te5t. That is% it
fails #y its own standards% namely to $rovide the illumination of te5ts necessary to
their accurate inter$retation. This is $artly #ecause of the multi$licity of $ro$osed
solutions to $ro#lems $osed #y the method% so that the $romise of rogress in
understanding is ultimately illusory -?/. Christo$her Seit> argues too that the
method delights in so$histication% so that $ro$osed 3real, meanings% unearthed #y
historical and sociological study% run counter to what the te5ts seem to say on a
$lain reading -@/.
The conse&uence of this failure is that the canonical te5ts have a right to #e heard
as what they are% the Scri$tures of the church. The $oint can #e made in slightly
different ways. The stress can #e $ut on the right of the church to inter$ret the
"i#le as Scri$ture #ecause that is how it has received it and is related to it (the
tendency of Childs!. +atson% finding a 3formalistic tendency, in Childs% wants to
add that the canonical form of the te5t is the most suita#le for theological use%
#ecause of 3the theological 9udgment that the su#9ectmatter or content of the
#i#lical te5ts is inse$ara#le from their form, -A/. Though this thought is inde#ted to
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
4/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
inter$retation% it was secondary to the te5t in its final form. )nd in addition% the
as$ect of the te5t,s $osthistory (Jewish and Christian! #ecame $rominent% in a
move that has $roved im$ortant and influential. These wors% however% left o$en
the larger &uestions of how individual #oos contri#uted to a theology #ased on
the wider canon% and indeed how that wider canon might #e defined.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
5/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
#y segregating the $arts of the Old Testament and stressing their distinctiveness.
6or Childs% in contrast% e%erything is 3witness,. 6or e5am$le% on the Second
CommandmentD 3'n many ways% the story of the Golden Calf (*5. 42! offers the
most e5tended canonical witness regarding the use of images, ($. =?!.
+hile $TTCCis an e5am$le of an a$ologia for Old Testament theology% Childs
taes u$ the challenge of Biblical Theologyin BT$NT. )lready in $TTCC% "i#lical
Theology and Old Testament theology were distinguished in this wayD 3the tas of
#i#lical theology is to e5$lore the relation #etween these two witnesses -Old
Testament and 8ew Testament/% whereas the tas of Old Testament theology is to
reflect theologically on only the one $ortion of the Christian canon% #ut as Christian
scri$ture, ($TTCC% $. A!.
To see how the main section of the argument o$erates -4/ we tae as an e5am$le
the treatment of covenant% $eo$le of God% election. 6ollowing historicalcritical
reconstructions of covenant (742!% he turns to the way in which the testaments
relate. This is not 9ust a matter of noting contrasts #etween them. 0ather a
dialectical $attern emerges within #oth testaments (e.g. in the Old Testament%
#etween 'srael as 3a concrete% historical nation% as well as a transhistorical% even
ideal% reality,% 772!. The 8ew Testament,s relation to the Old% however% is
conceived as an 3a$$ro$riation, of it% or rather of certain strands of it. 'f there is
continuity #etween the testaments% it is attri#uta#le to such a$$ro$riation% and
furthermore% there is also discontinuity% that is% where the 8ew Testament has
declined to follow a $articular Old Testament line (for e5am$le% 3the early church
remained somewhat critical of the covenant theology of the Old Testament and
develo$ed only the one as$ect of the new covenant in the Syno$tic $assion
accounts% in Paul and in
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
6/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
of canonical #i#lical theology for Childs. The relationshi$ #etween the testaments
is conceived according to a $articular $attern% in which the movement is clearly
from Old Testament to 8ew Testament% yet in which the manner in which the
3discrete, voices unite in a common witness is never &uite articulated. The
section,s closing 3dogmatic reflections, identify the to$ics of Church and
synagogue% the sha$e of the modern church (assimilating indigenous forms!% and
the challenge of $olitical involvement. "ut it is not clear how these are identified
out of the foregoing.
't may #e that Childs has res$onded effectively to the charge of formalism% #y
esta#lishing that canonical theology involves theological reflection on the
interaction of the $arts% all oriented towards the central su#9ectmatter% Jesus
Christ.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
7/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
a$$roach to the Old Testament in the wor of 0. )l#ert> -:/. )l#ert> is convinced
that religious statements cannot #e understood a$art from the historical conte5t in
which they are made. This does not mean that )l#ert> is interested in mere
descri$tion of what was true in the $ast. "arr% in a sym$athetic treatment of the
wor% $oints out that its intention is to do inter$retation $recisely for the church%
and in the #elief that canonical tendencies 3ghettoi>e, inter$retation -=/. 'n
attem$ting to let the Old Testament s$ea% )l#ert> has chosen a very different
method from canonical theology. +hile he resists the synthesi>ing of varying
religious statements% which he sees as a $rocess of a#straction% canonical
theology demands synthesis. The issue% then% is $erha$s more a matter of
methodology than of intention. The recurrence of a history of religion a$$roach is
testimony to the demands of the historical nature of the material. ) similar $oint
might #e made a#out Stendahl,s distinction in inter$retation #etween 3what it
meant, and 3what it means,.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
8/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
sim$ly that one must do the historical wor first% then $roceed to inter$retation% a
view a$$arently im$lied #y Childs, re$rofiling of historical criticism in Biblical
Theology of the $ld and New Testaments% and a$$arently es$oused #y +.
"rueggemann -2B/. 't is rather that theological nowledge de$ends not only on
what the "i#le says% #ut also in some degree on historical nowledge. 6or
e5am$le% when we as what is meant #y 3God, in the Old Testament% of course it is
true that we now this #y reading the Old Testament story. +e get to now who
God is #y the story of the deliverance of 'srael from *gy$tian ca$tivity (Christo$her
Seit>,s essay on the meaning of the divine name as revealed to Moses is very
insightful on this $oint -2/!% and indeed in the $rolegomena to this in the Genesis
accounts of creation and of God,s encounters with the $atriarchs. That account%
however% is com$letely entwined with factors that we now #y means other than
merely reading the "i#le. 'n Genesis and *5odus% *l who meets )#raham% 'saac
and Jaco# is found to #e Iahweh% God of 'srael -22/. Iahweh is introduced #y
reference to a deity a#out whom we have nowledge from history and
archaeology. 'n other $arts of the Old Testament% Iahweh is nown in relation
(now in contradistinction! to "aal (or the #aalim!% a#out whom% again% we have
su#stantial e5tra#i#lical nowledge. *ven the central creedal affirmation of the Old
Testament% 3
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
9/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
$re$aration for theology% #ut that there is a ind of theological nowledge that
comes #y 3natural, means% that is% other than #y 3revelation, as that is usually
meant in theological discourse.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
10/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
is the voices of the #i#lical writers that have the final say. "arr,s other main
argument for natural theology H that the "i#le itself uses it H does not resolve the
tension #etween the two a$$roaches% for the $assages which may #e cited in
favour of the conce$t aim in fact to esta#lish #elief in the God $roclaimed #y the
#i#lical writers (so +atson,s criticism of "arr on this $oint! -2=/.
'f "arr were right in his #elief that theological nowledge can #e derived from
sources other than the "i#le% that might strengthen the case for a religious
historical reading of the Old Testament% in which the various voices of the #i#lical
writers could #e measured against a host of other voices in the #acground. 'f one
taes his contention out of the e&uation% however% we are still left with the
interde$endence of religion and theology. +e have seen this at the level of
e5egesis of $articular te5ts% and it is therefore clear why there is a com$licated
issue of methodology at the highest level of organi>ation (that is% a canonical
theological a$$roach or a religioushistorical one!.
Canonical Methodology
+hat is decisive for a canonical a$$roach to "i#lical Theology% in my view% is the
$ro#lem of the Old Testament. This $ro$osition may not seem immediately
$ersuasive% since wors of "i#lical Theology have #een conceived along
3historical, lines. The classic e5am$le is von 0ad,s $ld Testament Theology% -2?/
which has $roved more influential on inter$retation than its main methodological
rival% *ichrodt,s Theology of the $ld Testament-2@/. Kon 0ad,s wor is in reality a
wor of "i#lical Theology% #ecause it traces the action of God in history from the
Old Testament to the 8ew. Though von 0ad distinguishes his Theology from a
historyofreligions a$$roach% it has a certain affinity with the latter #ecause of its
method% #ased on historicalcritical e5egesis% of e5amining each cor$us of the
material in turn% in a historical se&uence. The $icture is #uilt u$ #y a series of
accounts of 'srael,s distinct faith e5$eriences of Iahweh. The methodology is
com$osite% as has #een well shown #y M. Oeming% who identified four categories
used #y von 0adD $romisehistory% traditionhistory% salvationhistory and
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
11/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
languagehistory -2A/. "ut the common denominator is history% and there is a
forward develo$ment from Old Testament to 8ew.
One of the $ro#lems with von 0ad,s analysis is the uneasy relationshi$ #etween
the history of 'srael discovered #y historical criticism and the understanding of it
e5$ressed #y 'srael,s faith. The $ro$osed a$$rehension of the meaning of history
#y faith $uts in &uestion the $recise role of historical criticism in discovering
theological truth. )s Oeming e5$resses it% von 0ad,s method 3transcends, historical
criticism% and in res$ect of the role of faith in inter$retation% he goes on to identify
and e5$ound the closeness of von 0ad to Gadamer,s hermeneutic -4B/.
The am#iguous relationshi$ to historical criticism in von 0ad is well e5$ressed #y
C. Seit>. Kon 0ad uses ty$ology as a means to #ridge the ga$ #etween an event
in the $ast (that is% 'srael,s historical e5$ressions of faith! and Christian theological
inter$retation in the $resent. That is% the ongoing 3tradition, #roadens the
significance of older events into the ty$ical. 'n Seit>,s view% however% this is
insufficient% #ecause other ty$ologies are thina#le than the 8ew Testament
3fulfilment,% and #ecause the category of ty$ology struggles to co$e with the fact
that the later writers of the Old Testament% ca$tivated #y the glory of the event%
3manifestly misdraw the historical $icture, -4/.
The $ro#lem also emerges starly in connection with the category of tradition
history. The $remise in this case is that the Old Testament,s writers engage in a
rece$tion of and reflection on e5isting theological traditions. 'n doing so% they ada$t
it according to fresh insights arising from new revelatory events. "y ado$ting this
$ers$ective von 0ad is a#le to argue that the decisive event of salvationhistory
that occurs in Christ is neither a#solutely new% nor an illegitimate move% since the
recognition of this latest saving act of the God of 'srael is sim$ly the last in a line of
reinter$retations of tradition in the light of new revelatory events -42/. 'f this seems
cogent on the surface% the small $rint should not #e missed. 'n a sense the new
insights achieved #y the #i#lical writers are rereali>ations of e5isting traditions%
and thus im$ly a validation of the tradition.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
12/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
is &uietly $assed over% and so re9ected% #y the $ro$hets, -44/. The issue raised #y
this is not the status of historical criticism as such% #ut of the Old Testament as
revelatory% since $arts of it here seem to #e in $rinci$le su$erseded.
This discussion of von 0ad therefore leads on to the &uestion of the relative status
of the testaments in "i#lical Theology. +atson% while a$$reciating von 0ad,s
3ty$ological inter$retation that sees the enfleshed +ord as the goal of God,s
history with 'srael,% critici>es him for largely not $racticing it -47/. Perha$s #ecause
he ultimately cannot #rea out of the traditional division #etween the disci$lines of
Old and 8ew Testament studies% he is almost e5clusively concerned with Old
Testament inter$retation as such% and 3he em$hasi>es the forwardmovement of
salvationhistory -his italics/ towards a final actuali>ation% at the e5$ense of the
retros$ective movement% starting from the final actuali>ation in Jesus% that is
essential to the $ractice of a Christian ty$ological e5egesis, -4:/. 'f Christ is 3the
+ord that was with God in the #eginning,% this im$lies not merely that the forward
movement of the Old Testament must #e com$lemented #y a retros$ective
movement from fulfilment #ac to antici$ation% #ut actually $receded #y it -4=/. )n
o$enended forward reading% not grounded in the centrality of Christ as witnessed
#y the whole of Scri$ture% is #ound to lead to relativism and $luralism. (The $oint
finds an echo in "rueggemann,s advocacy of $luralism in Old Testament
inter$retation% and his reluctance% accordingly% to allow Christology a $rivileged
$lace in it -4?/!. +atson,s claim% then% is that von 0ad,s declared $rinci$les are
indeed 3canonical,% #ut that in $ractice he has sim$ly failed to carry them through.
+atson articulates the relative status of the two testaments further in a $assage
that critici>es Childs, concern to maintain the inde$endent status of the Old
Testament% which% he finds% is #ound to lead to 3a radical 9udai>ing of Christianity,
-4@/.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
13/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
allowed to sha$e our understanding of the reality revealed #y ChristD 3'f the sco$e
of the Christevent is the whole of reality% then there is no danger that any of the
#readth and de$th of the e5$erience reflected in the Old Testament will #e lost.,
-7B/ This seems to me to #e entirely right. (' thin it is $refera#le to a remar of
Seit>,s% in a review of +atson,s #ooD 3The Old Testament has a hori>on that is not
e5hausted in what we can say a#out Jesus, -7/. This is true only in a certain
sense% that is% if Christology is not taen to em#race and e5$ress the $ur$ose of
the whole #i#lical revelation. The disagreement #etween +atson and Seit> at this
$oint is over definitions of 3Christological, and 3Trinitarian,!.
'n this connection% however% it is im$ortant to o#serve that +atson has argued% in
the same volume% for a recovery of the 3literal sense, in inter$retation% su$$orted #y
s$eechact theory. 'n that conte5t he offers a $ersuasive reading of Psalm 72% in
which he esta#lishes a connection #etween its original communicative intention (or
illocutionary force! and that which it has when used in modern conte5ts -72/.
#oth
affirm the need for this (though +atson $refers the term 3literal sense,!% #ut they
a$$ly the $oint differently% Seit> #eing critical of +atson,s overruling of one $art of
Scri$ture #y another -7=/.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
14/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
Plain Sense! oly "ar! and Canonical Method
Can the $lain sense of Scri$ture #e defended in the conte5t of a canonical
reading; The &uestion is scarcely new% and it has e5tensive ramifications%
including one of consistency #etween theory and $ractice. Seit>% in an essay on
3$lain sense, in relation to the to$ic of se5uality% finds a unanimity in the two
testaments on the to$ic of homose5ual acts% and ass in conse&uence for a #older
stance on this in the contem$orary atmos$here -7?/. This e5am$le has the
advantage% from a 3$lain sense, $oint of view% that the Old and 8ew Testaments
s$ea with the same voice (although it may #e o#9ected that nevertheless the te5ts
in &uestion raise hermeneutical issues that are not easily sidelined!. The idea of a
3$lain sense,% in my view% faces a more immediate test where the Testaments
a$$ear to disagree. Psalm 4?% and #ehind it Joshua and the
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
15/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
with the Old Testament,s own critical stance towards violence% he res$onds to the
o#9ection that if illing is wrong today it must have #een wrong then #y sayingD 3The
difficulty with this a$$roach to theology is that such a nonhistorical way of thining
is foreign to the "i#le% which does not wor with a#stract ethical $rinci$les, -7A/. ed in the critical theory that$laces it at the head (after Eeuteronomy itself! of the 3Eeuteronomistic
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
16/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
Strong narrative threads% however% lin Joshua to the $receding #oos% a factor
recogni>ed in the critical theory of the ed the $romise of land that had run through the
Pentateuchal story since God,s encounter with )#ram in Genesis 2D4. 'n the
light of the recent tendency to thin of Genesis1ings as the 3$rimary history, of the
Old Testament (#ased on narrative continuity% and also congenial to a canonical
a$$roach!% Joshua has a liminal function. +hile this term might #e used more
strictly of Eeuteronomy% it is true of Joshua too #ecause it mars the end of the
wilderness $eriod and non$ossession% yet is itself only a $relude to $ossessing. 't
is not yet the story of 'srael,s life in the land.
+hen this liminal $osition of Joshua is understood its relations to its canonical
environment can #egin to #e e5$lored. 6acing #ac towards the Pentateuch%
Joshua is the story of a $romise fulfilledD 3So Joshua too the whole land%
according to all that the O0E had s$oen to Moses,(Josh. 24!. The $relude to
this includes the e5odus% with its Passover victory over the $owers aligned against
God% echoed in Joshua :DB2% the first Passover feast held in the new land. The
con&uest itself is a counter$art and continuation of the overcoming of the *gy$tian
forces that tried to $revent the esca$e from slavery in that land. The #reaing of
the $ower of the *gy$tian &ing-:/ finds an echo in Joshua,s defeat of a host of
&ingsin Canaan (Josh. 2D?27!. This defeat of tyrannical ingshi$ is in turn% as
6retheim has well shown% a reassertion of God,s creative $ur$ose in contention
with the forces of chaos -:2/. Therefore the esta#lishment of 'srael in Canaan
#elongs to the divine $ur$ose to recreate that is signalled in the #i#lical story at
least from the floodnarrative (Gen. =D:AD?!. Joshua conceives of 'srael as a
$eo$le whose ing is Iahweh and which is constituted #y an act of deliverance
from slavery into freedom% a $eo$le whose unity is e5$ressed in its common
worshi$ of Iahweh (Josh. @D! while its $ossession of land and wealth is #y
divine gift and distri#ution. Iahweh,s ingshi$% furthermore% is mediated% not #y a
human ing (since neither Moses nor Joshua is succeeded #y his own heir!% #ut #y
Iahweh,s Torah% as taught #y Moses% de$osited #eside the ar of the covenant%
and made Joshua,s rule of life (Josh. D?@!. This vision is a $artial reali>ation of
the ingdom and salvation of Iahweh in the earth. The connection #etweencreation and covenant is forged #y the covenantrenewal with which Joshua ends
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
17/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
(Josh. 27!% with its e5$licit allusion to the $rimeval history% Terah% )#ram% and the
$olytheistic world in which the recreative $lan was conceived (Josh. 27D27!% and
its #asis once again in the 3#oo of the torah of God, (Josh. 27D2=!. The con&uest
of Canaan #elongs to this $icture of a reali>ation of the ingdom% #ecause it affirms
Iahweh,s victory over contesting $owers% the $relude to Iahweh,s rule in this $art
of the created world.
The "oo of Joshua faces forward to the continuing story of 'srael in its land. That
story is characteri>ed ultimately #y the loss of all that was gained under Joshua.
('n fact it #egins within Joshua% in a strain in the #oo that insinuates a measure of
failure to con&uer fully% an echo of the failure of faith that caused the first failure to
tae the land recorded in Eeuteronomy . Te5ts include Josh. 4D :D=4 -:4/!.
The worshi$ of Iahweh is com$romised #y the worshi$ of "aal. The ings of
Canaan find s$iritual successors in the ings of 'srael and Judah. *ven the
reforming 1ing Josiah is a ind of antity$e to Joshua% who remains a minor
$otentate even as he commands the reform% #ased on his rediscovery of the 3#oo
of the Torah, (2 1gs. 22D@!. on
to Iahweh,s universal rule (Pss. A4AA!. ) similar trend is found in 'saiah% which
contains a dis$ute with Psalm 2% in 'saiah 2D27.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
18/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
now no #ounds.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
19/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
20/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
must #e nown #efore the 'ncarnation with its 3vindication of the moral order,. The
violence of Joshua is thus #rought under the 9udgment of Christ. 'n the Gos$el
there has #een a vindication of the whole created order% far #eyond what was
antici$ated in Joshua. Joshua,s victory is assigned to contingencies of the $ast%
along with other Old Testament institutions% while 3Christ turns these fragmentary
utterances of God,s voice% in warrior trium$hs and legislative order% into a history
which culminates in the divine manifestation and vindication of created order, -=/.
Presuma#ly a similar case might #e made in relation to Psalm 4?. 'ts function in
the "oo of Psalms has some similarity to the Oracles against the 8ations of the
$ro$hetic #oos% es$ecially Jeremiah% where the
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
21/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
the historical character of the #i#lical te5ts and su#9ect matter. ' have tried to mae
a case for a canonical method% however% on the grounds that it is im$lied in the
conce$t of "i#lical Theology itself% whose central methodological $ro#lem is
$recisely that of the twotestament canon. The canonical a$$roach% however%
cannot entirely dis$ense with a historical dimension% #ecause of the historical
nature of the te5ts% and the im$ossi#ility of distinguishing ultimately #etween
religion and theology. "ut it is essentially in innercanonical relationshi$s that
"i#lical Theology is constructed.
The &uestion of canonical method has to do $artly with strategies of reading. +hat
is the $ro$er 3direction, of canonical reading% that is% should the Christian read
forward from Old Testament to the 8ew; 'f so% does one try to read the Old
Testament first as if without nowledge of the 8ew% as might #e im$lied #y a
commitment to the 3$lain sense,; Or does one e5$licitly read 3#acward to, the Old
Testament from the 8ew; To as these &uestions is to set u$ an im$ossi#le
alternative. 'nevita#ly Christians read the Old Testament in the light of the 8ew%
and towards the 8ew #ut e&ually a forward movement is structured into the Old
Testament $art of the canon% and to fail to o#serve this could only lead to a
misreading (thus with 6rei!. 6urthermore% the contours of an answer to any
$articular &uestion in "i#lical Theology are liely to vary according to the nature of
the &uestion -=4/.
There are greater difficulties than this% however% and advocates of a canonical
method actually $roceed in &uite different ways. +hile all agree that canonical
theology must #e governed #y its central su#9ect matter% namely Jesus Christ% this
does not in itself solve the $ro#lem of the relationshi$ #etween the testaments. 'f
the canonical a$$roach demands that all $arts of the two testaments ought to #e
heard% it does not follow that they will% since in some accounts $arts of the canon
can trum$ other $arts. (This was true in Childs, idea of discontinuity #etween the
testaments% in which the 8ew Testament did not acce$t the Old Testament,s
conce$t of covenant in its full range% as well as of +atson,s #elief that the original
communicative intention of Psalm 4? was cancelled #y the 8ew Testament,s
themes of love and forgiveness!. The advocacy of a $lain or literal sense is avalua#le em$hasis% #ut this way too lie no guarantees of unanimity% #ecause the
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
22/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
intention to hear te5ts according to their $lain sense leaves the &uestion how such
te5ts relate to the 3centre, still to #e negotiated. (The whole su#9ect of
hermeneutics in general is largely left aside in this $a$er% though of course it ought
to #e develo$ed in relation to this $oint. +atson has made im$ortant contri#utions
on it% and the to$ic is the su#9ect of a ma9or $ro9ect led #y Craig "artholomew -=7/!.
0eadings are affected in the end #y factors that go #eyond the acce$tance of a
canonical method. 'n a closing $ro$osal ' have tried to show how a difficult Old
Testament to$ic% the con&uest of Canaan% might #e assimilated into "i#lical
Theology. The attem$t showed% ' thin% that such an assimilation is $ossi#le%
contrary to versions of Christian theology which $refer to filter it out as
incom$ati#le with the Gos$el of love and forgiveness. 't also showed% however%
how much more is involved in "i#lical Theology than e5egesis% since the $ro$osal
de$ended on the significant hermeneutical ste$ of su$$osing that the Old
Testament story of God,s dealings with 'srael was relevant to our understanding of
the nature of the ingdom of God as $roclaimed and accom$lished #y Christ% and
to our thining a#out the sources of $olitical authority in the world generally.
Clearly these are dis$uta#le assum$tions.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
23/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
consensus% #inding Old and 8ew Testament witnesses% emerges% #ecause to do so would #e toadmit that the $lain sense had a certain $riority, Christo$her 0. Seit>% 3Se5uality and Scri$ture,sPlain Sense,% in Seit>% Word Without !nd(Grand 0a$idsD *erdmans% AA@! 422.-A/ +atson% Text" Church and World% ?.-B/ +atson% Text" Church and World% 2.-/ John "arton% 'eading the $ld Testament(ondonD ET% A@7!% $$. B4. Childs res$onds in
$ld Testament Theology in Canonical Context(Philadel$hiaD 6ortress% A@: $TTCC!% $. =.-2/ The idea of canon as the arena within which theology is done ($TTCC% $. :! is tem$ered withthe assertion of critical reflection on its contentD 3..the com$lete canon of the Christian church as theruleoffaith sets for the community of faith the $ro$er conte5t in which we stand% #ut it also remainscontinually the o#9ect of critical theological scrutiny su#ordinate to its su#9ect matter who is JesusChrist, (cf. Biblical Theology of the $ld and New Testaments-Minnea$olisD 6ortress% AA4 BT$NT/% $$. =?=@!.-4/ 'n the first $art of the #oo he deals with the sections of the two $arts of the canon one #y one.Then% in the ma9or $art% he addresses a num#er of theological themes in relation to #oth. 'n the first$art his $oints of reference are $rinci$ally historical critical. *.g. the treatment of the 9udges $eriodis hardly 3canonical, in any sense (7A:! H in s$ite of the following of a canonical order. Thereare enormous $ossi#ilities for theological inter$retation here (e.g. C. +right!% #ut not e5$loited.(Gottwald is cited in the #i#liogra$hy% #ut not mentioned in the te5t. The #i#liogra$hy is almost
e5clusively historicalcritical!. There is no 8ew Testament reflection. On Joshua% the canonicalreflection is in the main indistinguisha#le from redaction criticism. The reflections from the rest ofthe Old Testament are s$arse. The #i#liogra$hy is once again historicalcritical (747@!. 'n thissection% the treatments are at an introductory level% and stam$ed strongly #y traditional criticism(8" 3The Pro$hetic Traditions,% =?@B!.-7/ +atson% Text and Truth% $. 24% referring to Childs% BT$NT% ?224% where Childs e5$resslydistances himself from narrative theology% and from his own former $osition in #ntroduction to the$ld Testament as Scriture.-:/ 0. )l#ert>%A +istory of #sraelite 'eligion in the $ld Testament *eriod(2 vols.! (ondonD SCM%AA7!.-=/ "arr% Concet% $$. @24.-?/ +atson% Text" Church and World% $. 4.-@/ '#id.% $. 44.
-A/ Christo$her Seit>% Word Without !nd(Grand 0a$idsD *erdmans% AA@!% $. 422.-2B/ "rueggemann and three coauthors% in an introduction to the Old Testament% e5$ress theirintention to go #eyond historical criticism in order to inter$ret the Old Testament theologically% while#uilding on its results and remaining engaged in its $ers$ectives "ruce C. "irch% +alter"rueggemann% Terence *. 6retheim and Eavid . Petersen%A Theological #ntroduction to the $ldTestament(8ashvilleD )#ingdon% AAA!% $$. 2B2.-2/ Christo$her Seit>% 3The Call of Moses and the F0evelation of the Eivine 8ameD SourceCriticalogic and its egacy,% in Word Without !nd% $$. 22A7?.-22/ See 0. +. . Mo#erly% The $ld Testament of the $ld Testament(Minnea$olisD 6ortress% AA2!%for an account% and Seit>,s res$onse to Mo#erly in 3The Call of Moses,.-24/ Cf. P. E. Miller% 3God and the Gods,% in #sraelite 'eligion% $$. 4=:A=% es$ecially $$. 4@AABalso 0. +. . Mo#erly% 3Toward an 'nter$retation of the Shema,% in C. Seit> and 1. GreeneMcCreight% Theological !xegesis) !ssays in +onor of Bre%ard S, Childs(Grand 0a$idsD *erdmans%
AAA!% $$. 2777% who argues that 3one, may mean one uni&uely loved.-27/ This has #een well documented and inter$reted #y G. J. +enham% Genesis #(+acoD +ord%A@?!.-2:/ "arr% Concet% $. 4?.-2=/ +atson% Text and Truth% $$. 272=?.
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
24/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
-4/ Seit>% 3The % $. 4:! is G. von 0ad% 3Ty$ological 'nter$retation of the OldTestament, in C. +estermann% ed.% !ssays on $ld Testament +ermeneutics()tlanta John 1no5%A=4!% $$. ?4A% here $. 47.-42/ '#id.% $$. 2:2=.-44/ '#id.% $. 2:% referring to von 0ad,s Theology(vol. 2% $. 47:% German edition!.
-47/ +atson% Text and Truth% $. 2B:.-4:/ '#id.% $$. 2B:?.-4=/ '#id.% $. 2B?.-4?/ 3..recognition of the im$ortant role of the church in affirming and $assing on the
7/24/2019 Biblical Theology ~ Canon and Plain Sense - J. G. McConville
25/25
The Biblical Theology Briefings www.beginningwithmoses.org
-=7/ +atson% Text" Church and World% es$ecially $$. ::4. Craig "artholomew% Colin Greene%1arl MQller eds.% 'enewing Biblical #nterretation(CarlisleD PaternosterNGrand 0a$idsD Londervan%2BBB!% is the first of a $ro9ected eightvolume series.
This 'a'er was the (inlayson Memorial )ecture! *++,! and a''eared first in
The Scottish Bulletin of #-angelical Theology! ol ,/.* 01utumn *++,2! ,345
,67. 8t a''ears here with 'ermission. $o 'art of this article may be co'ied or
transmitted in any form without 'rior 'ermission from the 'ublishers.