골즈워디의 <복음중심의 해석학>에 대한 나셀리의 서평

댓글 2

책 소개, 서평

2010. 5. 15.

그래엄 골즈워디의 <복음중심적 해석학>에 대하여 미국 복음주의 신학회 저널에 실린 앤드류 나셀리의 서평을 여기 퍼서 소개합니다. 2010년에 박사학위를 하고 도날드 카슨을 돕는 일을 하고 있는 나셀리라는 젊은 복음주위 신약 학자의 앞으로의 활동을 기대하면서 살펴 보게 됩니다. 이미 2006년에 밥존스에서 박사 학위를 하고 트리니티에서 신약학으로 다시 학위를 한 나셀리는 밥존스 출신이면서도 상당히 기대되는 복음주의 신약학자로 등장하고 있다고 여겨집니다. 2008년 복음주의 신학회 저널 51 호 387-89에 실린 이 서평을 살펴봅시다. 늘 그렇듯이 중심이 되는 것을 고딕체로 바꾸었습니다.

-----------------------------------------------

JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY  51 (JUNE 2008): 387-–89. BOOK REVIEWS
(Aavialable at: http://andynaselli.com/wp-content/uploads/2008_review_goldsworthy.pdf).

 

Graeme Goldsworthy, Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics: Foundations and Principles or Evangelical Biblical
Interpretation  (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2006), 341 pp. $29.00.

 

 

 

 


Goldsworthy is a praiseworthy author of a string of books and articles on biblical theology, and he identifies with conservative evangelicalism, Anglicanism, Calvinism, amillennialism, and presuppositional apologetics. He is now a retired lecturer at Moore Theological College in Sydney, Australia, where he has taught hermeneutics since 1995.
       The title reflects Goldsworthy's conviction that "hermeneutics focuses on the gospel as it has its outworking in the realm of our understanding of the Scriptures" (p. 16). The subtitle, however, may be partly misleading, because unlike many other hermeneutics texts, this one does not focus on general and genre-specific interpretational "principles." Rather, it constructively criticizes hermeneutics that obscure the gospel.
       The body of the book has three major sections. In the first, "Evangelical Prolegomena to Hermeneutics" (pp. 21-85), Goldsworthy addresses evangelical foundations and pncsuppositions. One presupposition is that the Bible is God's infallible word because' it says so (pp. 32-35). God created humans to have knowledge that is "true though finite,"
not "absolute and exhaustive" (p. 35; cf pp. 53,55), Augustine's epistemological stance,

p. 389

 

 -I believe in order to understand," rightly subordinates "human reason and undertanding" to "divine truth and revelation" (pp. 41-42). "Non-Christian presuppositions" are "self-referenttially incoherent" (p. 42; cf. 184), "The gospel is the interpretational norm for the whole Bible," as well as all reality (p. 63). Biblical theology, which "is essentIally the exammation of the individual parts to see how they fit into the big picture," is "uniquely appropriate for" understanding "what kind of hermeneutical model fits the world-view of Christian theism" (p. 68).
              The section major section, entitled "Challenges to Evangelical Hermeneutics"(pp. 87-180), selectively highlights eight significant hermeneutical errors that "eclipse" the gospel. The metaphor recognizes "that eclipses are not always total and can even be partial enough to pass unnoticed by all but those trained to look for them" (p. 90). Although they have many positive features, the hermeneutics of the following eight frameworks eclipse the gospel: the early church's unwarranted allegory and typology; the medieval church's "unbiblical philosophical categories" (p. 108); Roman Catholicism's contradiction of Justification by faith alone; liberalism's domestication of God; philosophIcal hermeneutics' proud self-subjectivity; historical criticism's naturalistic presuppositions: literary niticism's focus on the text and reader rather than the Author/author, and evangelicalism's "hermeneutical perfectionism" that views their positions on key issues as infallible.

       Many evangelical readers will likely find the chapter on evangelicalism (pp. 167-80) to be the most interesting, insightful, convicting, and controversial. It surveys eight evangelical aberrations that approach Scripture naIvely: (1)Quietism: evangelical Docetism; (2) literalism: evangelical Zionism; (3) legalism: evangelical Judaism; (4) decisionism: evangelical Bultmannism; (5) subjectivism: evangelical Schleiermacherism: (6) "Jesus-in-my-heart-ism": evangelical Catholicism; (7) evangelical pluralism: and (8) evangelical pragmatism.
        The book's third major section, "Reconstructing Evangelical Hermeneutics" (pp. 181- 313), evaluates how to reconstruct gospel-centered hermeneutics, which includes delineating the extent to which evangelicals can profitably use other hermeneutical frameworks without compromise (p. 193). Here are four highlights: (1) Goldsworthy tentatively adapts speech-act theory (pp. 215-16). (2) Preachers should utilize history but not "set up dichotomies between the Bible as history and as literature or theology"; question the Bible's "overall historical timeline and metanarrative'" isolate narrative details "from the big picture and the goal of the gospel": or let historicity overshadow the theological message (pp. 228, 231-331).  (3) Macro-typology includes not only "facts, persons and events," but "entire epochs or stages within salvation history." Thus "any person, fact, or event in the Old Testament is a type of Christ to the degree that its theologIcal function foreshadows that of Christ" (p. 248; cf. pp. 252-57). The hermeneutics of Jesus and the apostles demonstrate that the OT is "all about Jesus," but "many Christians want to go immediately to consider how the text is about them" (pp. 251-52). Every text in the OT and NT is connected to Christ (p. 252), and "the primary application of all texts is in Christ, not in us or something else" (pp. 256-57).  (4) Biblical theology is a key to gospel-centered hermeneutics, but it is "probably the most neglected in all the literature on hermeueutics" (p. 258; cf. pp. 15, 312-131). Biblical and systematic theology are interrelated disciplines that should influence each other within the hermeneutical spiral (pp. 267-72). Goldsworthy concludes with a practical eleven-step hermeneutical checklist (pp. 308-13).
        The weaknesses in the volume are relatively minor. (1) It includes a handful of typographical errors (e.g. pp. 36 n. 18, 202, 205) and inconsistently changes "centred" to "centered" on the cover and title page while keeping Australian spellings everywhere else (2) The subdivisions for some chapters are artificially parallel and could use further
subdivision (e.g. chap. 21). (3) Goldsworthy relies heavily on secondary literature, especially in Part 2. (4) Sometimes he lists strings of quotations or ideas from other


p. 389
authors with little interaction or analysis. (5) By cautiously questioning the value of studying Jewish exegetical methods (pp. 92, 245), he does not seem to give sufficient weight to the Bible's historical character. (6) The definitions of key terms are not always clear. For example, although he quotes a variety of definitions of "hermeneutics" (p. 25), he does not clearly present his own. Another example is contrasting his reference to "Krister Stendahl's distinction between what the text meant (exegesis) and what It means (hermeneutics)" (p. 203), the divisions in the Interpreter's Bible for "exegesis (what it meant)" and "exposition (what it means)" (p. 205), and "Krister Stendahl's now famous distinction between 'what it meant' (biblical theology) and 'what it means' (systematics) (p. 267). Goldsworthy appears to equate exegesis and biblical theology on the one hand and hermeneutics, exposition, and systematics on the other. My understalldmg is that hermeneutics refers to theoretical interpretational principles and that exegl'sis is the application of those principles. Goldsworthy recognizes this distinction (p. 205) but does not follow it.
        The book's strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. It is Christocentric, conservatively evangelical, and fitting as an upper-level graduate textbook. The most common theme is unmistakable: hermeneutics is based on and must center on the person and work of Christ. Goldsworthy demonstrates the need for a robust biblical theological method that exalts Jesus, which is exactly what his book does.


Andrew David Naselli
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, IL