Date/Time
Date(s) - October 22, 2014
7:00 pm - 8:30 pm
Location
Trinity Western University (Northwest Auditorium)
Categories No Categories
Canada Research Chair in Interpretation, Religion and Culture Lecture Series – Scripture, Theology, and Culture: Acts of Interpretation
Dr. Stephen E. Fowl, Professor of Theology, Loyola College of Maryland – “Historical Criticism, Theological Interpretation and the Ends of the Christian Life”
Time: 7:00 – 8:30 pm
Location: Auditorium, Northwest Building
Biblical interpretation is moving in a direction that gradually recognizes and seeks to redress a longstanding separation of biblical studies from ecclesial theology. To correct dogmatic abuse of scripture, historical criticism had justly drawn attention to the socio-cultural and historical dimensions of biblical texts, but largely neglected the Bible’s role as sacred text within a believing community. Over the last generation, theological interpretation has received renewed attention and seeks to close this gap. The tension between critical analysis of the Bible as an ancient text and its foundational function for the church’s faith has always existed, but historical criticism and modern hermeneutic theory has increased our awareness that biblical interpretation depends on a complex interaction of theological tradition, cultural influences, and exegetical practices. This speaker series features a combination of case studies, of concrete ‘acts of interpretation,’ and broader reflections on the intersection of exegesis, theology, and science and culture to address the question how a faithful, ecclesial reading of scripture handles these complexities of interpretation.
Abstract: The past 20 years have witnessed a robust renewal of interest in reading Scripture theologically. This paper will trace out some of the reasons for this renewal. It will then consider three issues that seem to demand the attention of theological interpreters. The first looks at the pressure to come up with a clear definition of what constitutes theological interpretation. The second argues that the time is no ripe for a less fevered evaluation of the relationships between theological interpretation and the practices of historical criticism. Finally, I will raise this question: if theological interpretation is to flourish into the future, how will future theological interpreters be formed?
Sponsored by the Canada Research Chair in Interpretation, Religion, and Culture.
For more information contact Natalie Boldt at [email protected].