These notes provide a basis for class discussion and for quizzes and exams. Use these guidelines as a basis of preparation for class discussion. For details about using the Lecture Notes materials click on . To display the Greek text contained in this page, download and install the free BSTGreek True Type fonts from Bible Study Tools.

Sources to Consult:
Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology online. S.v. "Biblical Theology." (http://www.biblestudytools.net/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/  (Type in Biblical Theology in the Lookup field)

Rosner, B.S. "Biblical Theology." In the New Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Exploring the Unity & Diversity of Scripture. Edited by T. Desmond Alexander,  Brians Rosner, D.A. Carson, and Graeme Goldsworthy, 3-11.  Downers Grove, Il: Inter-Varsity, Press, 2000.

Via, Dan O., Jr. What is New Testament Theology? Volume in Guides to Biblical Scholarship: New Testament Series, 1-5. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 2002.

        In defining NT theology, the larger discipline of Biblical Theology must first be examined in brief, since NT Theology represents one segment of the larger discipline.

        Rosner ("Biblical Theology," 10) defines biblical theology as "theological interpretation of Scripture in and for the church. [italics mine] It proceeds with historical and literary sensitivity and seeks to analyze and synthesize the Bible's teaching about God and his relations to the world on its own terms, maintaining sight of the Bible's overarching narrative and Christocentric focus." So defined, this discipline has holistic concerns from an exclusively Christian frame of reference. Jewish interests would naturally work off a significantly different understanding. Another important definition comes from the Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology: "Biblical theology is an attempt to articulate the theology that the Bible contains as its writers addressed their particular settings." Here the emphasis falls upon addressing the biblical writers in their historical context and letting them speak to their original intended audience.

        Every theological approach works from a set of assumptions or presuppositions. With Biblical Theology a whole host of assumptions form the foundation of the procedure, as well as powerfully influence the conclusions drawn from applying the adopted procedure(s). These presuppositions have to do with the assumed nature of the discipline, its objectives both short term and long term, the authority base upon which the theological procedure is built including especially a view of scripture, along with other possible assumptions. In order to understand a particular biblical theology, the reader needs to glean from the preface to the published works along with the content as much as possible regarding the scholar's presuppositions.

Questions for Discussion:
1. Compare and contrast several definitions of 'biblical theology,' noting similarities and differences.
2. Write out your working definition of 'biblical theology,' noting that it will be revised during the process of the semester's work.
3. Evaluate implicit assumptions in the various definitions of 'biblical theology.'

1.1.1 Theology Defined
          The English word 'theology' is defined as follows by the American Heritage Dictionary:
              1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
              2. A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions. Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
              3. A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary.
              [Middle English theologie, from Old French, from Latin theologia, from Greek : theo-, theo- + -logia, -logy.]

         Hendrikus Boers (What is Theology, 13) offers the following definition: "A coherent, logical, necessary system of general ideas in terms of which every element of our experience concerning matters relating to God can be interpreted." This working definition is based upon philosophical presuppositions drawn from Alfred North Whitehead's definition of speculative philosophy, as Boers acknowledges (p. 13). Thus, it reflects a modern Western cultural perspective on the issue of theology.

         This modern range of definition, of course, goes a significantly different direction than the Greek word Qeologiva from which it is ultimately derived. As Prof. Strecker ("Introduction," 1-2) describes, "Theology has been assigned the task of illuminating the meaning of the myth that expresses transcendent reality in the language of this world. This is the interpretation already given in the oldest example of the word 'theology' (qeologiva) in Plato's Dialogue 'The Republic,' (Resp 379A). Here Plato has his teacher Socrates inquire about the 'characteristic features of teaching about God' (tuvpoi peri; qeologiva"). Accordingly, theology has to do with myths; to it is assigned the task of bringing out the deeper meaning of the stories about the gods. Education in the fine arts can help us to perceive this meaning. Accordingly, theology has the goal of laying bare the structures on which the myth is based, and such a course of investigation -- when it happens in the right educational context -- has a political consequence. In both the Platonic and Aristotelian systems philosophy is the real science that deals with the world and human beings, so that they attribute to theology only a lesser, provisional rank in their systems. Stoicism, on the other hand, places theology in the last place in a series of philosophical disciplines (dialectic, rhetoric, ethics, politics, physics, theology); on this basis theology can be considered the 'crown' of the Stoic system. Since it follows immediately after 'physics,' it also stands for 'metaphysics,' which not only names its place in the series following physics, but can also affirm that the theological question addresses that which transcends physics. According to the Stoic understanding theology deals with those unavoidable issues that essentially concern human being as such. Humans know that they are determined by the universal law of the world, physis (nature), that is identical with the divine reason (nou'"). The individual human being must shape his or her life in harmony with this divine cosmic reason. Theology speaks of such an orientation to the world, understands human being as a constituent element in the order of the cosmos."

        Prof. Strecker ("Introduction," 2-3) calls attention to the further history of the Greek word qeologiva by reminding us that the word does not surface in the New Testament itself. In early Christian literature, it first appeared in Justin Martyr (Dial 56.113) in the second century, then in Clement of Alexandria and Eusebius. The usage by these Church Fathers "reflects a Hellenizing of Christian faith that in the post-apostolic age was smoothing out the differences between early Christian and Greek-Hellenistic thought. In contrast, in the New Testament there is not yet an intentional rational adjustment to the thought of the ancient world." (Strecker, "Introduction," 2).

       Boers (What is Theology, 14-15) provides a helpful summation of the problems of trying to define 'theology:'  "Thus we may conclude that what appeared to have been an obvious subject of reflection, the theology of the New Testament, is in fact extremely vague. It is something to which the Christian church did not give specific attention for many centuries, and now that the church has reflected on it for more than four centuries, there is very little agreement on the precise subject matter of such a theology. A look into the New Testament itself, in any case, does not reveal anything that could be considered with any degree of obviousness as a theology. Thus, it is also still not clear whether it is contained in the New Testament writers themselves or whether it is an underlying unity which has to be discerned by the interpreter, as Kümmel seems to suggest. And when it is assumed to be contained in the Hew Testament, there is no agreement on where it is to be found: only in Paul and John (Bultmann), or in the first three Gospels and the rest of the New Testament as well (Kümmel, Bonsirven). Furthermore, there is no agreement whether there are a number of theologies contained in it, for example, of Paul and of John (Bultmann), or a single theology for which there are a number of witnesses (Kümmel). Finally, it became clear that the term theology is not used unambiguously. It means one thing when used in relation to the New Testament as a whole, and something else when used in connection with something more specific within it, for example, the theology of Paul (Kümmel) or the theology of a maturing Christianity (Bonsirven)." Therefore, some observations are in order. (1) The perceived content and/or arrangement of theology largely determines the understood definition of the term 'theology.' (2) The issue of theology or theologies is crucial, and is linked to the issue of the unity and diversity of the New Testament writings. (3) Where does one locate theology in the New Testament? In the NT as a whole? Or, in some of the major writings within the New Testament? (4) What is the relationship of 'theology' in the modern understanding to 'religious belief' in the early church? (5) Since Christianity seems to have survived okay for centuries without a 'theology,' why does one become important today?

Questions for Discussion:
1. Compare the modern American definitions of theology to the ancient Greek philosophical understandings of qeologiva.
2. Assess the presuppositions implicit in the ancient Greek philosophical understandings of qeologiva.
3. If the New Testament contains no intentional 'theology', how can modern Christians develop a theology of the New Testament?

1.1.2 Foundations
        Via (What is NT Theology, 1-5) raises the issue of the two levels of understanding theology: historical understanding and hermeneutical understanding. That is, some approaches to doing New Testament theology view it as a descriptive project in which the assumed theological understanding of the early church is to be described as precisely and accurately historically as possible. The objective to learn what the early church believed, but not necessarily what the Christianity today should believe.

        On the other end of the spectrum is the hermeneutical understanding of theology in which links from past belief are related to a possible contemporary belief system in today's world. The 'then' and 'now' perspectives are linked up. As Via sets forth, Rudolf Bultmann set the agenda for this program almost a century ago with his system of demythologizing of the 'then' and recontextualizing of the 'now' using existentialist philosophy as the underpinning for the 'now' system. The limits of Bultmann's procedure have been frequently critiqued, but the basic agenda still remains very influential all across the modern theological spectrum. This approach sees the task of NT theology as prescriptive for today's Christian community as well as being descriptive of what has been believed.

         In between these two sides of the spectrum one can find a variety of approaches among New Testament theologians, which will blend aspects of both the historical and hermeneutical.

Questions for Discussion:
1. Identify (especially from Via, 1-5) where the major New Testament theologians fall on the above spectrum.
2. Assess the limitations of the historical approach. Also, of the hermeneutical approach.
3. What role should history play in developing a New Testament theology?
4. Where does the issue of the historical Jesus come into play?
5. What role should hermeneutics play in developing a New Testament theology?
 

1.1.3 Parameters
        In attempting to formulate an understanding of New Testament theology, the starting point for NT theology must first be established. No one seriously questions that this goes back to the beginning of Christianity. The early church is the starting point. But several issues arise immediately. What is the role of Jesus? His connection to the early church? How do we determine what the early church believed? What definition of 'early church' is appropriate?

        What role does scripture play in this starting point? Should the extra canonical materials play a role here? What about the writings of the Church Fathers? Determining the parameters of the starting point are crucial to where the process will culminate. Of course, the ultimate objective for doing NT theology will be influential here. If the objective is a descriptive historical approach, then inclusiveness in the starting point materials will be necessary. On the other hand, if a hermeneutically prescriptive objective is assumed, then a restrictive approach to the starting point materials is appropriate. Normally, only those materials presumed to be inspired scriptures would serve as the starting point sources.

        Once these starting point sources have been determined, then the issue of how to interpret them must be settled. This entails the adoption of an exegetical methodology that will do justice to understanding of these sources. Such will be explored in greater detail in topic 2.2, but some introductory consideration needs to be given at this early point.

        On the 'now' side of the theologizing process lie the questions of how NT theology relates first to Biblical Theology? Then to Systematic Theology or Dogmatics? And to homiletics? Of course, how these links of NT theology are perceived to those disciplines that grow out of biblical theology will depend upon one's own denominational bias as a Christian. For those with a creedal heritage NT theology is nothing more than a means to the larger end of dogmatics, that is, the detailed, systematic formulation of a Christian belief system that becomes standard for everyone to adhere to within a given denomination. Confirmation at the end of catechism classes culminates this process with a formal pledge of acceptance, that is, faith, of this system of doctrine. This understanding of faith becomes the foundation of one's experience of salvation.

        For those, however, who come out of the free church without a creedal heritage, NT theology may be as close to a formulated belief system as is ever achieved. Many groups with a confessional statement(s) of belief, such as Baptists, may attempt to set forth a theological declaration of doctrinal standards for the group, but as confessions of faith and not as creeds. Thus, they can never be binding on individual members of the group. They only state what is generally held in common by the majority of the denominational members, and thus serve as information especially to outsiders. In the free church tradition a confidence in the Holy Spirit to lead individuals and churches is central, along with a belief in the priesthood of each believer. This diminishes dependence upon an externally developed statement of doctrine as the authoritative basis for achieving conformity of belief within the group. When most of the group is following the Spirit's leadership the group will achieve any needed unity.

        Thus the connection of NT theology especially to systematic theology is important to determine for each individual. And it is just as critical in connection to homiletics. How the minister prepares sermons each week will be highly impacted by the theological formulation that has occurred in his/her training, especially in seminary studies. Methods of sermon preparation, as well as delivery styles, are related to the view toward biblical theology.

Questions for Discussion:
1.  Should extra canonical materials be included as foundational for a New Testament theology?
2. How should the connection of the Old Testament to the New Testament be perceived?
3. What is the proper connection of New Testament Theology to Systematic Theology (Dogmatics)?
4. How should NT theology impact one's approach to preaching?
5. Suggest a possible 'working definition' of New Testament theology.

Catholic Encyclopedia online. S.v. "Dogmatic Theology." (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14580a.htm)

Boers, Hendrikus. "The Meaning of the Term 'Theology.'"  What is New Testament Theology? The Rise of Criticism and the Problem of a Theology of the New Testament. Volume in Guides to Biblical Scholarship: New Testament Series, 12-14. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.

Brown, Colin, Ed. New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1986.

Ebeling, Gerhardt. "What is Biblical Theology?" in Word and Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963.

Goppelt, Leonhard. "The Discipline: Its History and Range of Problems." Theology of the New Testament: Jesus and the Gospels. Volume 1 of 2 volumes. Translated by John E. Alsup. Edited by Jürgen Roloff, 1:251-281.  Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1981.

Grech, Prosper. "Contemporary Methodological Problems in New Testament Theology." Biblical Theology Bulletin 2 (October 1972): 262-80.

Hasel, Gerhard F. New Testament Theology: Basic Issues in the Current Debate. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

Käsemann, Ernst. "The Problem of a New Testament Theology," New Testament Studies 19 (1973), 235-45.

Kattenbusch, F. "Die Entstehung einer christlichen Theologie. Zur Geschichte der Ausdrücke Qeologiva, Qeologei'n, Qeolovgo"," Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche, 11 (1930), 161-205.

Kraus, Hans-Joachim. Die biblische Theologie: Ihre Geschichte und Problematik. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970.

Morgan, Robert. Biblical Interpretation. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Strecker, Georg. "Introduction." Theology of the New Testament. Translated by M. Eugene Boring. Edited by Friedrich Wilhelm Horn, 1-8. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2000. (In the introduction Prof. Strecker raises two essential issues: What is "Theology of the New Testament?" and The Problem of a "Biblical Theology.")

Strecker, Georg. "Das Problem der Theologies des Neuen Testaments," in Georg Strecker, Eschaton und Historie. Aufsätze, 260-290. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979.

Created by   a division of   All rights reserved©