John Collins: Encounters With Biblical Theology

This skeptical attitude toward the Bible, however, is interpreted by Collins as a virtue. Of course, everyone approaches the Bible with biases; and it is precisely this point that makes John Goldingay’s warning so terribly relevant. Those who “pretend to be objective and critical and then find their own (Enlightenment or existential or feminist) concerns in the texts they study need to take a dose of self-suspicion.”¹⁰

In considering the readership of Pneuma Review, it seems unlikely that this volume will have much appeal. Collins’ radical skepticism toward the biblical record, coupled with his laborious academic language, and the unstated assumption that the reader has a solid grasp on the history of the biblical theology movement, will likely turn away many readers. Yet, despite these cautions, Collins’ work is not without benefit. James Sanders captured the serviceable aspect of his book when he concluded, “As new generations come along with their fresh approaches and methods, Collins’s voice can help to guide new efforts to seek viable ways to bring the biblical past into the present in ever-changing contemporary and responsible terms.” With this in view, then, perhaps some will find this volume helpful as they attempt to understand the depth of the “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (Ephesians 3:8, NIV).

Reviewed by Jeffrey Anderson

Preview the book here: http://books.google.com/books?id=UgY0Q3xsfisC

Notes

1. John J. Collins, Encounters With Biblical Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005).
2. Collins, Encounters With Biblical Theology, 1.
3. Collins, Encounters With Biblical Theology, 18.
4. Collins also states, “At the risk of appearing old-fashioned and out of touch with the latest trends in academia, I believe that we can (i.e., move beyond replacing one set of prejudices with another).” See Collins, Encounters With Biblical Theology, 43.
5. Collins, Encounters With Biblical Theology, 3.
6. Krister Stendahl, “Biblical Theology, Contemporary,” in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 4 vols. (Nashville: Abingdon Press 19621), 1:418-432. Reprinted in Krister Stendahl, Meanings: The Bible as Document and as Guide (Fortress, Philadelphia, 1984), 11-44. Stendahl pointed out that this distinction didn’t really come into focus until the 1920s, with the rise of the critical method known as the “history-of-religion school.”
7. Gordon Fee & Stuart Douglas, How to Read the Bible for All its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 23.

8. For a helpful introduction to this perplexing question see the chapter entitled “The Promise of Evangelical Theology” in Kenneth J. Collins, The Evangelical Moment: The Promise of an American Religion (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005); Nancy Murphy and Werner Kelber, eds., Beyond Liberalism and Fundamentalism: How Modern and Postmodern Philosophy Set the Theological Agenda (Trinity Press International, 1996); and Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979).
9. James A. Sanders, for example, describes Collins as “An Irish Catholic with no personal investment in defending any particular view of ‘Scripture’ …Collins is an astute observer of serious efforts to make theological sense of the Bible. He has critiqued such efforts without attempting himself to do a biblical theology.” See Sander’s review of Collin’s work in Review of Biblical Literature (RBL), July, 2006, http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/4968_5586.pdf,
10. John Goldingay, Models for Interpretation of Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 45.

Tags: Biblical, collins, encounters, john, theology

Category: In Depth, Summer 2008