A friendly place for discussing the New Testament...and other passions of mine.
I think biblical studies should not be limited to a particular aspect (or subcategory) of theology(such as...historical/theological studies). One should not divorce these particular subcategories mentioned above ( history and theology). The historical aspect of theology (kind of) sets the foundation for its theological implication; for it reminds us of what happened in the past.Whereas the theological aspect builds upon such foundation.Thus good biblical studies should be done and interpreted in light of theology and history.blessings,Joseph
"good biblical studies should be done and interpreted in light of theology and history"I firmly agree. I'm always wary of writers who think they can sufficiently downplay the historical dimension in the Bible by simply claiming that the writers were not attempting to write History and were instead writing Theology. As you suggest, the theological dimension must be properly grounded in the historical.That said, I'm still inclined to think more work should be done in New Testament Theology [even Old Testament Theology :-) ]. I guess that's why Christology is so interesting to me right now. My primary motivation for finishing my thesis in fact is to move on to Paul's Christology.More to come on the role of history in interpretation later:-)MO
nice, comfy place you got here :)..
Please ... don't make me wait ... give me more on the role of history in interpretation!!! After reading how you used it in your Faith and Mission article, I can't wait to hear where you're at ... now ;)
That article was written almost four years ago. That said, I can speak of some evolution in my thought process on that subject. Don't expect anything soon. I'm willing to suggest that people like Sailhamer might be misunderstood. However, a closer reading of his OT Theology would be in order.MO
Post a Comment