| |
|
Mennonite Brethren Herald • Volume 46, No. 01 • January 2007 |
| |
||||||||
|
|
Typically, when I think of using a dictionary it’s about looking up the meaning of a word someone used that I don’t understand or making sure a word I want to use is spelled correctly. The thought of actually reading a dictionary never enters my mind. The increasing number of topical Bible dictionaries being published in the last 10 years challenges this limited perception of a dictionary’s value, however. Topical Bible dictionaries provide a wealth of information around a focused area such as the Gospels, Paul’s letters, or the background to Old Testament books. The Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible seeks to provide an evaluation of “contemporary issues and approaches pertaining to biblical interpretation” with the goal of enabling the church to better hear God’s voice in Scripture. Articles in the Dictionary cover four basic subject areas. First, we find articles discussing the history of interpretation, the message, and the theological significance of each book of the Bible. Second, a series of articles address the area of hermeneutics – defined as the theory of interpretation. Topics here include an assessment of critical approaches to the Bible (e.g. literary criticism) as well as specific issues in biblical interpretation such as the authority of Scripture, culture and biblical interpretation, or the use of proof texts. Third, several articles examine the interpretive approaches of different individuals (e.g. Luther) or communities (e.g. charismatic biblical interpretation; Asian biblical interpretation). Finally, various doctrines that have a bearing on biblical interpretation, including the incarnation and new creation, are discussed. The Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, which was Christianity Today’s pick as 2006 Christian Book of the Year, attempts to combine “an interest in the academic study of the Bible with a passionate commitment to making this scholarship of use to the church.” Despite this commendable desire, the target audience appears to be “biblical scholars, theologians, and pastors.” Many of the articles assume a specialized knowledge of hermeneutics and an awareness of current debates regarding biblical interpretation within scholarship. I’m not convinced that the predominately academic stance reflected in this dictionary makes it a resource that will be accessible by many within the context of local churches. This unfortunate gap is illustrated by editor Kevin Vanhoozer’s claim that the unique contribution of this dictionary is its focus on the theological interpretation of the Bible. I suspect, within the typical local church, this reference to a theological interpretation of the Bible gives an impression that what is being discussed is somewhat removed from the life of the church. This perception, however, is quite the opposite of what appears to be the intention of this dictionary, where the use of theological refers to the “conviction that God speaks in and through the biblical texts.” In evangelical congregations, unlike in some academic circles, this conviction is usually not in dispute. Nevertheless, the challenge of a theological interpretation of the Bible calls for the church to recognize its involvement in doing theology whenever it gathers together to participate in Bible reading, worship, teaching, and fellowship. Despite its potential inaccessibility, I would still recommend the Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible as a helpful resource for those teaching and preaching in the church, particularly when questions regarding biblical interpretation arise. Our need in the church to clearly understand and discern how we interpret the Bible continues to challenge us to reflect on what that interpretive process entails. In the end, however, the value of a dictionary will be judged by its repeated and frequent use rather than its need for a sporadic dusting. | |||||||
| ||||||||
| |
| |
| © 2008 Mennonite Brethren Herald Masthead and usage information |
| |
| | ||