317-548-2146

Although John O’Keefe and R. R. Reno explore the dialectical strategies of the Church Fathers in combination with lexical and associative strategies that often inform the development of typological and allegorical readings, the question at hand is much more specific: “Was Athanasius’ dialectical strategy of reading the Scriptures a valid exegetical methodology?” The question is within the context of the famous Christological argument between Arius and Athanasius, and accordingly, asks the question without reference to the resolution of the disagreement. O’Keefe and Reno already make a strong case for Athanasius’ dialectical logic, but is his approach a valid exegetical method? When approaching the topic of dialectical strategies in modernity and beyond, it is difficult to avoid engaging Hegelian philosophy and Barthian theology or at least a nod to Socrates and Zeno. However, reading modern thought or Greek philosophy into the question causes further problems. Accordingly, the focus will remain on Scripture and the validity of a dialectical strategy in exegesis.

Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers 182x300 - Dialectical Bible Interpretation

Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers

Three aspects of a dialectical strategy need addressed.  First, and most importantly, a dialectical strategy illuminates meaning. In fact, a reading devoid of dialectical methodology risks completely misinterpreting the “plain meaning” of the text. Although dialectical strategies can quickly exponentially increase in complexity, the following analysis touches upon a few basic illustrations for purposes of proving its validity. One of the most well-known examples is between Paul and James. Paul states, “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law” (Romans 3:28).[1] Alternatively, James states, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Interestingly, both Paul and James use Abraham to prove their point. Ultimately, most scholars suggest that James is not undermining faith, but highlighting that faith finds fulfillment in action; they go hand in glove as one cannot exist without the other. Thus, the tension is resolved or synthesized. However, for purposes of the question posed, consensus regarding the resolution is not as important as the impact on exegesis. I contend that it is not possible to interpret James 2:24 without its juxtaposition with Romans 3:28. If this is the case, then a dialectical strategy is not just valid, but required. Said differently, just as a proper interpretation of James 2:24 is not possible outside its historical context, it is also not possible outside its juxtaposition with opposing concepts. The process is reflective of intertextuality, but is more appropriately categorized as interpretive correlation, which provides a safeguard against reductionism, and simultaneously, enhances the accuracy of interpretation.

Second, a dialectical strategy maintains the unity of Scripture. Without a dialectical strategy, Scripture becomes nothing more than a compilation of divergent texts with unresolvable tensions. However, the wisdom of God becomes manifest in paradox, which unites the themes of Scripture into a cohesive whole. The thematic correlation ultimately supplies the necessary ingredients for the accurate development of theology as represented by Athanasius. Examples abound. However, a relatively recent emphasis in New Testament theology is inaugurated eschatology. Is the kingdom of God here now, or is the kingdom of God not yet here? Yes. Ironically, a recent popular business book by Jim Collins and Jerry Porras, Built to Last, spends time teasing out the ideas of “the genius of the and,” as compared to the “tyranny of the or.”[2] Dialectical strategies integrate the mentality of the former, and thus, inaugurated eschatology has provided a unity necessary to support theology proper.

Third, a dialectical strategy is not about compromise or polemics. Most uncompromising positions are polemical, but not with a dialectical approach. An example is something as simple as the biblical idea that “good is good,” and simultaneously, “bad is good.” In one of his letters to the Corinthians, Paul states, “And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work” (2 Cor 9:8). It certainly seems like God gives sufficiency (the good) to believers, which lead to good works (the good). However, James states, “Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds…that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing” (James 1:2-4). James seems to be saying that it is the difficult circumstances (the bad) that leads to lacking nothing (the good). In this example, compromise is illogical. An interpretation that suggests a middle ground, such as that a little less good or a little less bad is the reality that leads to blessings, is absurd. Furthermore, a polemic that only good circumstances lead to good outcomes, or only bad circumstances lead to good outcomes is not only unnecessary, but misses the interpretive point of both passages.

Without question, a dialectical strategy of reading the Scriptures is a valid exegetical methodology. Importantly, a dialectical strategy illuminates the meaning of the text, maintains the unity of Scripture, and is neither compromise nor polemical. However, the strategy is a valuable tool for biblical interpretation.

_______________________________________

[1] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2008).

[2] James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras, Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies (New York: Harper Collins, 2002), 43–45.

 

Bibliography

  • Collins, James C., and Jerry I. Porras. Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies. New York: Harper Collins, 2002.
Wilder - Dialectical Bible Interpretation
Derek Wilder Executive Director
DEREK WILDER, PhD, is the Executive Director of Lives Transforming Group, Inc., a Christian counseling ministry focused on personal transformation, and the author of FREEDOM and Minds on Fire. Wilder has a Master of Theological Studies, an MDiv in Pastoral Counseling, and a PhD in Biblical Exposition. Wilder's scholarly focus lies in Pauline studies, with his doctoral dissertation specifically examining the ontological implications present in the eighth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Wilder, an adjunct professor, founded Convergence Therapy, integrating cognitive therapy and grace-based theology into the accredited college course: “Thought Life & Spirit Growth.”