The unity and diversity of Scripture The unity and diversity of Scripture

which ultimately aims (i.e. at the canonicallevel) at testifying to Jesus Christ.

Rather than take a stand with either theexegete or the systematician exclusively, then,the biblical theologian seeks instead to fosteran interdisciplinary approach to biblical inter-pretation which aims at textually mediatedtheological truth. Biblical theology is nothingless than a theological hermeneutic, a regulalegei (a rule of reading). As such, biblical the-ology is not merely a matter of repackagingthe conceptual content of the Scriptures, but away of having one's heart, mind, and imagin-ation alike schooled in the ways of seeing andexperiencing the world according to the manyliterary forms and the one canon, whichtogether constitute the word of God written.

See also: BIBLICAL THEOLOGY; UNITY ANDDIVERSITY OF SCRIPTURE; RELATIONSHIP OFOLD TESTAMENT AND NEW TESTAMENT.

BibliographyJ. Barr, 'Biblical Theology', IDBSup, pp.

104-111; C. Bartholomew, Reading Ecclesi-astes: OT Exegesis and HermeneuticalTheory (Rome, 1998); B. Childs, BiblicalTheology of the Old and New Testaments(London, 1992); H. Frei, The Eclipse ofBiblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth-and Nineteenth-Century Hermeneutics ( NewHaven, 1974); W. Jeanrond, Text andInterpretation as Categories of TheologicalThinking ( New York, 1988); A. LaCocque

IntroductionThroughout most of the history of the church,the unity of *Scripture has been assumed andits diversity taken less seriously. Apparentcontradictions or tensions between one partof Scripture and another have been harmon-ized. Typology has been seen as a key to un-derstanding the NT use of the OT. Difficult

and P. Ricoeur, Thinking Biblically: Exegeti-cal and Hermeneutical Studies (Chicago,1998); R. Lints, The Fabric of Theology: AProlegomenon to Evangelical Theology( Grand Rapids, 1993); R. Lundin, C.Walhout and A. C. Thiselton, The Promise ofHermeneutics ( Grand Rapids, 1999); R.Morgan with J. Barton, Biblical Inter-pretation ( Oxford, 1988); P. Noble, TheCanonical Approach: A Critical Reconstruc-tion of the Hermeneutics of Brevard S. Childs(Leiden, 1995); C. Seitz, Word without End:The OT as Abiding Theological Witness( Grand Rapids, 1998); K. Stendahl, 'Biblicaltheology, contemporary', IDB 1, pp. 418-432; A. Thiselton, 'Biblical theology andhermeneutics', in D. Ford (ed.), The ModernTheologians ( Oxford and Cambridge, MA,2 1997), pp. 520-537; W. VanGemeren (ed.),A Guide to OT Theology and Exegesis(Grand Rapids, 1999); K. Vanhoozer, 'Fromcanon to concept: the "same", the "other"and the relation between biblical andsystematic theology', SBET 12,1994, pp. 96-124; idem, Is There a Meaning in this Text?The Bible, the Reader and the Morality ofLiterary Knowledge ( Grand Rapids andLeicester, 1998); F. Watson, Text and Truth:Redefining Biblical Theology (Edinburgh,1997); N. T. Wright, The NT and the Peopleof God (London, 1992).

K. J. VANHOOZER

passages have been allegorized, and the prin-ciple of the regula fidei (`the rule of faith') hasled to clearer texts being used to interpretmore opaque ones. Since the Enlightenment,however, much of this has changed. A salu-tary emphasis on biblical theology – hearingthe message of each book and each author inits own terms – has developed, but in conse-quence the unity of the Bible has often been

denied. The last 200 years of biblical interpre-tation have been dominated by claims thatthere are irreconcilable conflicts among theauthors of Scripture, and by theories of thetradition history of both Testaments that con-flict with the data presupposed by thecanonical form of the Scriptures themselves.

A movement of the 1950s and 1960s,sometimes called simply the biblical theologymovement, reacted against these trends andsought to identify 'centres' that unified eitherthe OT or the NT or both. That quest, how-ever, has been largely abandoned. Todayunity in Scripture is perceived for the mostpart only by advocates of canonical criticismand by evangelicals who continue to believethat Scripture does not contradict itself as atheological corollary of their acceptance of itsinspiration. D. N. Freedman (The Unity ofthe Hebrew Bible), J. Hultgren (The Rise ofNormative Christianity) and J. Reumann ( Va-riety and Unity in New Testament Thought)are among the most important recent excep-tions from other theological traditions.

Of the many issues that could be profitablyexplored, we will focus on three: 1. the questfor a centre in each Testament and in the Bi-ble as a whole; 2. a model for the unfoldingunity of the biblical narrative; and 3. thequestion of how to respond to the diversity(especially the apparent contradictions ofScripture), including the issue of 'develop-ment'.

Centres in Scripture

The OT

Many different proposals have emerged for aunifying centre of the OT. Various scholarsattempt to trace the predominance of a singletheme, for example, covenant, promise, themighty acts of God, communion, the life ofGod's people, dominion, justice or righteous-ness. Others identify pairs of themes, for ex-ample, law and promise, election andobligation, creation and covenant, the rule ofGod and communion with humankind or sal-vation and blessing. Some pairs of themesinvolve polarities, such as the presence versusthe absence of God or the legitimation ofstructure versus the embracing of pain. It hasbeen argued that holding together these an-tinomies is a key to finding unity withindiversity. Still other writers point simply toYahweh, or God, as the sole unifying element

within the older Testament.Certain scholars find unity in a complex of

multiple themes. Hasel concludes, 'A seem-ingly successful way to come to grips with thequestion of unity is to take the various majorlongitudinal themes and concepts and expli-cate where and how the variegated theologiesare intrinsically related to each other' ( NewTestament Theology, pp. 218-219). One ofthe most ambitious and compelling proposalsfor finding a unifying structure comes from E.A. Martens ( God's Design: A Focus on OldTestament Theology [ N. Richland Hills,3 1998]), who perceives a fourfold design ofGod in Exodus 5:22 – 6:8 which recurs inevery major section of the OT: to bring deliv-erance; to summon a peculiar people; to offerhimself for his people; to know and give themland.

The NTAgain, single themes have been suggested as acentre for the NT: kingdom, gospel, right-eousness, justification, reconciliation, faith,new creation, salvation or salvation history,eschatology, Israel or the new Israel, the crossand/or the resurrection, the love of God, exis-tential anthropology and covenant. Perhapsmost common of all, Jesus (or Christologymore generally) has been identified as a cen-tre.

Again, various combinations of themeshave also been proposed. C. H. Dodd (TheApostolic Preaching and Its Developments)turned to the speeches in Acts and the pre-Pauline creeds to find elements of an earlykerygmatic summary of foundational doc-trine. A. M. Hunter (Introducing New Tes-tament Theology [London, 1957], p. 66)suggested that a reporter's digest of an earlyChristian sermon might have read like this:`The prophecies are fulfilled, and the NewAge has dawned. The Messiah, born ofDavid's seed, has appeared. He is Jesus ofNazareth, God's Servant, who went aboutdoing good and healing by God's power, wascrucified according to God's purpose, wasraised from the dead on the third day, is nowexalted to God's right hand, and will comeagain in glory for judgment. Therefore let allrepent and believe and be baptized for theforgiveness of sins and the gift of the HolySpirit.'

D. Wenham (`Appendix', pp. 12-13) sug-gests a multiplex centre involving the context

The Unity and Diversity of Scripture

64 65

The unity and diversity of Scripture The unity and diversity of Scripture

of God the creator's intervening through Jesusto complete his saving purposes for his peo-ple, the centre of Jesus as Spirit-filled Messiahand Son of God, the community of those whoreceive Jesus and his salvation by faith, hav-ing the Holy Spirit of sonship and beingcalled to live as a restored community in lov-ing fellowship with God and one another, andthe climax of the mission of restoration com-pleted at the Lord's return when he judges theworld and finally overthrows evil to vindicateGod's people and restore all creation. Finally,E. Lemcio (in JSNT 33, p. 6) finds a six-partkerygma which recurs in all major portions ofthe NT: `(1) God who (2) sent (Gospels) orraised (3) Jesus. (4) A response (receiving,repentance, faith) (5) towards God (6) bringsbenefits (variously described).'

The entire BibleThe most common examples of perceivedunity in both Testaments combined can bedescribed under the headings of promise—ful-filment, type—antitype, salvation history, arelationship with the living God, inter-textuality and Christology. Some scholarspoint to narrower themes such as mono-theism, God's covenant faithfulness, God'sreign, righteousness, the covenants, election,grace and the response of obedience, the peo-ple of God, Exodus and new Exodus, creationand new creation or sin and salvation. Again,multiplex solutions have been proposed, forexample, the existence of God, God as creatorof a good world, the fall of humanity and thefact of election (Hanson and Harvey, in H. G.Reventlow, Problems of Biblical Theology inthe Twentieth Century, p. 159). P. Stuhl-macher ( How to Do Biblical Theology[Allison Park, 1995], p. 63) offers an excel-lent narrative summary of the story of bothTestaments: 'The one God who created theworld and chose Israel to be his own peoplehas through the sending, the work, and thedeath and resurrection of his only Son, JesusChrist, sufficiently provided once and for allthe salvation of Jews and Gentiles. JesusChrist is the hope of all creation. Whoeverbelieves in him as Reconciler and Lord andobeys his instruction may be certain of theirparticipation in the kingdom of God.'

EvaluationClearly the OT is necessary to an under-standing of the background and meaning of

both individual terms and broader concepts inthe NT, not to mention the explicit quota-tions or allusions from the Old in the New.Conversely, for the Christian, the OT cannotbe properly understood and applied withouttaking into account how NT revelation has orhas not changed specific laws and principlesfrom previous eras of salvation history. Thebroadest proposals for centres in each Testa-ment, God and Jesus respectively, and a uni-fying theme for the entire Bible such assalvation history, best reflect the unity of thebooks. But one may ask how valuable thisinsight is, and whether such general themessignificantly distinguish the canonical mate-rial from other Jewish and Christian literatureof the time. Yet the narrower proposals allseem to exclude certain material within thecanon or at least move certain books or por-tions of books to the periphery, if not tocreate an explicit canon within the canon, anapproach methodologically inappropriate forthose wishing to respect Scripture's own viewof the inspiration and relevance of every sec-tion (e.g. 2 Tim. 3:16). Proposals combiningseveral themes imply that the unity of Scrip-ture may be likened to a picture album of afamily over multiple generations — consider-able diversity within a common gene pool (cf.R. L. Hubbard, Jr., 'Doing Old Testamenttheology today', in R. L. Hubbard, Jr., et al.(eds.), Studies in Old Testament Theology[Dallas and London, 1992], pp. 36-37).Clearly, there are 'family resemblances' (touse the language of Wittgenstein) amongmany of the proposed centres, despite therebeing no consensus on an exact theme or ter-minology.

Proposals like those of Lemcio or Stuhl-macher have the particular advantage ofpreserving in nuce the narrative form of thewhole of Scripture. It is not often asked if it isnecessary to reduce that which is couched instory form to a single theme or proposition.Perhaps it is more appropriate to considerhow the story might be retold in its simplestform. Treating the Bible as narrative suggestsa model for demonstrating in greater detailthe unfolding unity and diversity within Scrip-ture. One may summarize the plot line of thenarrative literature, recognizing that otherliterary genres of Scripture are embedded inthis larger 'historical' framework. Despite thediversity of Scripture, it is remarkable how ifone follows the putative chronological se-

quence presented by the books themselves,each successive narrative consistently buildson antecedent Scripture in what seems to be avery conscious and straightforward fashion.

Stories typically lend themselves to the de-velopment of major themes through the eyesof their principal characters. Just as Jesus'parables consistently present a triadic modelinvolving the interaction between a God-figure and contrasting subordinates, so onemay posit a triangular structure for the wholenarrative of Scripture, in which God in Christrelates to both his followers and his oppon-ents. God's creative purposes, at first appar-ently thwarted, are followed by a plan of re-demption and restoration which some peopleaccept and others reject. The four major peri-ods in this narrative are related to creation,the fall, redemption and the consummation ofall God's purposes. Didactic material in thelaw, the prophets and the wisdom and epis-tolary literature describe how God's peopleshould live within this broader historicalframework.

The unifying plot of Scripture

The OT

The Bible begins with an account of creationand the primeval history of humanity (Gen. 1— 11). In Genesis 12:1-3, God singles out theindividual Abraham and promises him seed,land and a blessing for the nations. The restof Genesis describes the obstacles to the im-mediate fulfilment of these promises and endswith Joseph and his brothers sojourning inEgypt. Exodus makes clear that God can de-liver his people, but the golden calf (Exod.32) and the wilderness wanderings (Num.)again delay God's blessing. Yet between Egyptand Canaan, God singles out the Israelites ashis elect people and gives them the law incovenant form at Sinai, including promisesand stipulations for their coming inheritanceof the land (Exod. 20 — Lev. 27). Deuter-onomy anticipates that inheritance by re-peating and contextualizing the law, whileJoshua describes the conquest, both booksincluding covenant renewal ceremonies (Deut.27 — 30; Josh. 5:2-12; 8:30-35).

But not all the nations are dispossessed.Hence Judges follows, with its `Deuter-onomistic' cycles of reward for blessing andpunishment for disobedience. The book endswith God's people in near anarchy because

`Israel had no king' (Judg. 21:25). Samuelemerges as the first of the prophets andanoints the kings who will inaugurate the eraof the monarchy. The books of Samuel andKings narrate the rise and fall of that monar-chy: the high point of Israel's enjoyment of itspromised blessings; an extension of the cove-nant to include a Davidic dynasty (2 Sam.7:14); and the downward spiral of disobedi-ence during the period of the dividedkingdom, with God's people finally takenaway into exile.

Thus ends the first two of the four majorsections of the OT according to the sequenceof the Hebrew canon — the law (Gen. — Deut.)and the former prophets (Josh., Judg., 1 and 2Sam., 1 and 2 Kgs.). Regardless of one's theoryconcerning the composition of these books,each successive narrative consciously buildson the previous one. The Pentateuch centreson God's promise of the land of Canaan tohis people and culminates with their arrivalon its borders. Yet Joshua, the first of theformer prophets, follows so naturally fromDeuteronomy that even critical scholars havespoken of a Hexateuch, uniting Joshua withthe five books of the law. On the other hand,the theology of Deuteronomy so clearly per-vades the former prophets that they have beenlinked by postulating a Deuteronomistic his-torian who wrote them all.

The third section of the Hebrew Scriptureis the latter prophets (Is., Jer., Ezek. and 'theTwelve' [minor prophets]). These books sup-plement the 'primary history' of the first halfof the OT. They can all be historically locatedwithin the chronological framework of thestory of the divided kingdom, exile and resto-ration. References to prophets appear initiallyin the historical books (esp. important areSamuel, Nathan, Elijah and Elisha). Theseearlier, non-writing prophets resemble thelater writing prophets in their powerful minis-try of word and deed. Historical narrative(often parallel to antecedent Scripture — cf.esp. Jer. 52 and 2 Kgs. 25) is interspersedwith prophetic oracles, suggesting that thelatter prophets are consciously supplementingthe stories that preceded them.

The prophetic rebukes of Israel are basedon the Sinai covenant and especially criticizethe Israelites' failure to respect the principlesof social justice that permeate the Torah.Isaiah's suffering Servant passages develop thetheme of sacrifice as necessary for forgiveness

66 67

The unity and diversity of Scripture

of sins, so central in the book of Leviticus.The latter prophets' concern for the nationsprepares the way for the universal spread ofthe Gospel. Despite the distinctives of eachprophetic book, one finds again and again anannouncement of the Israelites' sin and ofimpending judgment, coupled with the prom-ise of later restoration and comfort and thatthey will again obey God's word.

The 'writings', the fourth section of theHebrew canon, is the most amorphous, yet itclearly belongs in the 'family'. The Psalmsformed Israel's worship book. Their contentsand even their superscriptions demonstratethat many emerged as responses to specifichistorical contexts. Especially noteworthy aredetailed recountings of God's past deeds, asdescribed in the earlier narrative literature(e.g. Pss. 44, 68, 78, 89, 105, 106, 136).Psalm 119, by far the longest of the Psalms, isentirely a meditation on Torah. The Proverbsoffer more generalized wisdom for all walksof life, but centre on the fear of the Lord asthe beginning of wisdom (Prov. 1:7). Like thePsalms, they share key themes, especiallyabout creation, which presuppose the teach-ing of the Pentateuch. Job in part forms acounterpoint to the rest of the canon in af-firming suffering as a mystery locked in God'sinscrutable sovereignty, which cannot be ex-plained merely as a punishment for sin, as it isso often in the Deuteronomistic history. Nev-ertheless, the canonical framework in whichJob's narrative is embedded (chs. 1 — 2; 42:7-17) meshes with the rest of the OT, with Job'sultimate material reward even in this life forhis faithfulness against all odds.

The five scrolls (`Megilloth') compriseRuth, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Lamen-tations and Esther. Ruth reflects God's carefor Gentile women, yet is linked with the`primary history' by Ruth's role as KingDavid's ancestor. Song of Songs and Eccle-siastes are linked with King Solomon,whether or not he is the actual author of ei-ther work. As erotic love poetry, Song ofSongs is unique in the canon, but it agreeswith the rest in affirming the goodness ofGod's creation, even in its most material andearthy dimensions. Ecclesiastes, like Job,functions as 'protest literature', describing theinsoluble mysteries of this transient life. But ittoo ultimately affirms enjoyment of God'sgood creation alongside fearing God andkeeping the commandments (12:13). Lamen-

68

tations forms a fitting sequel to Jeremiah,bemoaning Israel in exile and Jerusalem inruins. Esther too focuses on God's care forJews in exile, through a Jewish queen in Per-sia, even though God never appears by namein the book.

The remaining writings are similarly dis-parate and yet are tied in with previous ca-nonical literature. Daniel's ministry inBabylon recalls Joseph's role in Egypt anddemonstrates the triumph of the kingdom ofGod over the kingdoms of this world, a for-mative theme for the NT as well. TheChronicler's work parallels that of the Deu-teronomistic historian, but from a pro-Judah,pro-Davidic perspective. But it actually spansthe whole period of history from creation toexile, after which comes the repatriation nar-rated in Ezra-Nehemiah. There are enoughlinks between Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiahto suggest to some common authorship. In-terestingly, in the Hebrew Scriptures,Chronicles comes last, after Ezra-Nehemiah,as if to close the canon with its review ofnames and events from Adam onwards.

In numerous ways the OT remains self-consciously open-ended. The manifold prom-ise of Genesis 12, elaborated in Exodus 5 — 6,supplemented by the law, transformed by themonarchy of Samuel/Kings, to be fulfilled inthe coming Day of the Lord as predicted bythe prophets, has not been fully consum-mated, certainly not in perpetuity. ThusMalachi (3 — 4) looks forward to a comingpurification of the temple by the Lord him-self, Jeremiah (31) to a new covenant withGod's people, Ezekiel (36) to a new heart andspirit in Israel, Joel (2) to a new age in whichthe Holy Spirit is poured out upon all God'speople indiscriminately and Isaiah (e.g. 2; 25;65 — 66) to a glorious material world, an es-chatological banquet and ultimately newheavens and a new earth. All this is clear,even apart from specific texts whose interpre-tation is disputed but which are taken in theNT as Messianic prophecies (e.g. Pss. 2; 16;22; 45; Is. 7:14; 9:6; Mic. 5:2). And the endof the historical narrative finds Israel, whilerestored to her land, still subject to foreignnations and with a rebuilt temple whosegrandeur pales in comparison with the templeof King Solomon (Hag. 2:3).

The NTNeither the intertestamental period nor the

rabbinic era saw any greater fulfilment ofthese OT promises, though the century ofliberation inaugurated by the Maccabees(167-63 BC) certainly raised Israel's hopesand rekindled Messianic fervour. Many of thedetails of OT prophecy are not literally ful-filled in NT events either, but there is reasonto think that God intended the age of Jesusand the apostles to inaugurate their fulfil-ment. Some OT promises may have beenforfeited through Israel's disobedience; otherswere meant to be interpreted spiritually; andthe fulfilment of still others is postponed untilChrist's return. No one could have deducedthe NT from the Old or created all of its de-tail out of the Old. Yet the lines of corres-pondence are clear and impressive (H. H.Rowley, The Unity of the Bible, pp. 99-100).

Jesus came announcing the arrival of thekingdom of God. God would again rule overhis people. By choosing twelve apostles,Christ was forming the nucleus of a new ortrue Israel. His teaching fulfilled the law, evenwhile reinterpreting and transcending it(Matt 5:17; Luke 24:44). His ethic centredon love, in clear continuity with the OT'sdouble love-command for God and neighbour( Matt. 22:34-40; cf. Deut. 6:5; Lev. 19:18).His miracles demonstrated the presence ofGod's reign. His passion and death typologi-cally fulfilled various passages in the Psalmsand Prophets and more straightforwardly fit-ted the model of Isaiah's suffering servant (Is.52:13 — 53:12). His resurrection is seen as thebeginning of the general resurrection, alreadyanticipated in Daniel 12:2. N. T. Wright (Je-sus and the Victory of God [London andMinneapolis, 1996]) helpfully sums up Jesus'message as the announcment of the end ofexile, despite the presence of Roman troops.The true enemy is Satan, not Rome, and thecentral element of liberation is the forgivenessof sins, not political independence. And allfour Gospels agree that Jesus was the Christ,the Son of Man, the Son of God and theLord.

The book of Acts is the only other histor-ical narrative in the NT, carrying forward thestory of the community Jesus established. It isan account of the transformation of a unique-ly Jewish sect into a significant worldwidereligion, in fulfilment of God's promise thatAbraham's seed would be a blessing to all thenations of the earth.

The epistles comprise apostolic instruction

The unity and diversity of Scripture

for that ever-expanding community in diversesettings and circumstances. At first glancePaul seems to present a quite different mes-sage from that of Jesus, but they agree thatChristianity is the fulfilment of Israel and thatpeople are made right with God by faith inChrist, not by works of the law. Paul's infre-quent references to the details of Jesus' life arebalanced by his frequent allusions to histeaching. In writing to Christian individualsand churches, Paul presupposes knowledge ofthe Christian kerygma and builds on it. Onemay trace distinct theological trajectoriesacross the spectrum of Judaism to Hellenismin Hebrews and the 'Catholic Epistles' (Jas.; 1and 2 Pet.; 1, 2 and 3 John; Jude) but they areunited to the kerygma by their core Christol-ogy (e.g. Heb. 1:1-4; 1 Pet. 2:21-25; 1 John4:1-3). James is perhaps the most distinct ofthese letters, but it resembles the wisdom lit-erature of Proverbs and frequently echoesJesus' ethical instruction. And all the epistlesfit into the broader historical narrative of Je-sus and the churches that his followerscreated in the 1st century.

It is appropriate for both the NT and theScriptures as a whole to end with the Apoca-lypse, prophesying the complete fulfilment ofall the Bible's predictions, and full of allusionsto Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel. Rev-elation's final chapters expand upon Isaiah'snew heavens and new earth (Rev. 21 — 22),and form an inclusio with Genesis 1— 2, withfrequent parallels between the original cre-ation and the new creation.

All in all, the Old and New Testaments to-gether provide a remarkably unified story-lineconsidering the diverse authors, audiencesand circumstances of their various books. 'Inno other literature besides the Bible do someforty authors or editors, writing in a period ofover a thousand years, in places and culturesas widely separated as Rome and Babylon,succeed in developing a body of literature thateven at a first inspection gives an indicationof being a unity' (D. P. Fuller, 'The Import-ance of the Unity of the Bible', p. 65).

The diversity of ScriptureIn the midst of Scripture's unity, we must notlose sight of its diversity (cf. esp. J. Goldin-gay, 'Diversity and Unity in Old TestamentTheology', and J. D. G. Dunn, Unity and Di-versity in the New Testament). This takesseveral forms. The books of the Bible are

69

The unity and diversity of Scripture

written by different authors, in different timesand places, to different audiences in distinctcircumstances, using various literary genres.Each book thus displays unique purposes andthemes. In some instances, different portionsof Scripture are so closely parallel that we canpostulate a literary relationship between themand assume that their differences are inten-tional: sometimes theologically motivated;sometimes merely for stylistic variation. Deu-teronomy consciously updates various laws ofExodus and Leviticus for more settled life inthe Promised Land. Chronicles retells signifi-cant portions of the Deuteronomistic history,adding, omitting and rewording to highlightits focus on the southern kingdom, its kings,the temple and the priestly service. Each ofthe four Gospels clearly has its own slant onthe identity of Jesus and the nature of hisministry, while 2 Peter seems to have revisedand supplemented Jude to combat a newgroup of false teachers in a new context.

It is important, therefore, to understandeach biblical author or book in its own right.Identical words may be used differently bydifferent writers in different contexts. Luke,for example, regularly uses 'apostle' to referto one of the Twelve, whereas Paul uses it fora variety of individuals, including himself,who function as early Christian missionaries.He reflects the etymology of apostolos:`someone sent on a mission'. The famous`contradiction' between Paul and James isresolved once one understands that theauthors use the key terms 'faith', 'works' and`justify' in somewhat different ways.

Diversity may emerge within a given bookof Scripture as well. Joshua 11:23 narrateshow the Israelites 'took the entire land',whereas 13:1 observes that much of the landremained to be taken. These seemingly con-flicting statements are better explained ascomplementary perspectives on one under-lying reality. The Israelites had indeed dis-possessed their neighbours of a substantialportion of Canaan (ch. 12), but their failureto follow up their victories kept them fromconquering it all (13:3-6). J. G. McConville(`Using Scripture for theology') finds twokinds of unity and diversity within the OT,which might also be found in the NT. First,there are divergent but complementary datathat may be combined into a larger, morecomplex whole. Here Scripture is prescriptive.Second, there are genuinely conflicting data

70

that reflect specific teaching for specific cir-cumstances in biblical history. These obvi-ously cannot all be equally normative in thesame way at the same time, but sometimesfunction prescriptively in parallel contextstoday, while at other times remaining merelydescriptive.

The key to a proper appreciation of the di-versity in biblical theology, therefore, is tointerpret each book as a literary integrity inits own right, in the light of the unique cir-cumstances and purposes that generated it,and of antecedent Scripture and other rele-vant historical background. On the otherhand, the pervasive unity of Scripture meansthat if the resulting interpretations of twodifferent passages or writers produce an irre-concilable contradiction, it is legitimate to askif one has interpreted both correctly. ThatJews and Christians have historically believedthat no Scripture, properly interpreted, con-tradicts another, means that one should ex-haust all reasonable options for harmonizingtexts before announcing the discovery of aninsoluble problem.

Illustrations of diversityOne of the most important kinds of diversityamong the books of the Bible is their distinct-ive themes. Among the minor prophets, Amoshighlights social justice; Joel, the coming dayof the Lord; Haggai, the rebuilding of thetemple; and Habakkuk, the problem of evil.In the Gospels, Matthew presents Jesus as theSon of David; Mark, the Christ incognito;Luke, the Saviour of all humanity; and John,the Logos, Lamb and God incarnate. In thePentateuch, Genesis focuses particularly onGod's promise to bless the nations throughthe seed of Abraham; Exodus on God's pres-ence; Leviticus on sacrifice and holiness;Numbers on national failure; and Deuteron-omy on the re-establishment of the covenant.Among Paul's epistles, Galatians emphasizesChristian freedom; Ephesians, the unity of thechurch; Philippians, rejoicing in all circum-stances; and the Pastoral Epistles, churchorder.

There are also diverse genres, subgenresand literary forms. 1 Thessalonians is a letterof exhortation; 2 Corinthians, an epistle ofapostolic self-commendation; Philippians, afamily letter of friendship. Within a Gospelone finds parables, miracles, proverbs andpronouncement stories; in the Psalter, psalms

of praise, lament, imprecation and prayer fordeliverance. And all Scripture may be subdiv-ided into prose and poetry.

Harmonization of diversityHarmonizing apparently discrepant texts is alegitimate technique which most historians,ancient and modern, utilize. The fact that thechurch has at times proposed implausibleharmonizations of Scripture does not in-validate the method. Interpreters of ancienttexts must plead a cautious agnosticism ifa majority of data falls together into aharmonious whole, but a minority seems atfirst glance not to do so. It is legitimate toleave certain questions open, particularly inthe light of the vast amount of informationabout the ancient world which is simplyunknown.

Many of the most plausible harmon-izations of texts are not strictly additive; thatis, they do not claim that two apparently dis-crepant statements are both part of a largerwhole. Apparent contradictions may be dueto a corrupt text, to a misunderstanding ofunusual or literary forms or to a lack of his-torical or chronological precision amongancient writers. Apparent 'doublets' may re-flect similar but distinct incidents. Rugged`seams' may stem from divergent sourceswoven together somewhat loosely. Under-standing the theological or redactional dis-tinctives of a given writer may resolve otherproblems (For examples of all these types ofharmonization, with reference to the OT, theNT and other ancient texts, see C. L. Blom-berg, 'The legitimacy and limits of har-monization'.)

`Development' as a source of diversityGod's progressive revelation allows for devel-opment in Scripture in numerous ways. Anexcellent example is the OT's progressive un-derstanding of an afterlife. Initially Sheolseems little more than the grave or a veryshadowy existence beyond. But by Daniel 12,resurrection of both just and unjust is articu-lated, and the NT even more clearly deline-ates the nature and occupants of heaven andhell. Or again, God may act differently in dif-ferent ages. In the OT, his Holy Spirit comestemporarily on special people for special actsof power. After Pentecost the Spirit perma-nently indwells all Christians (Rom. 8:9).

Less plausible theories of development in-

The unity and diversity of Scripture

elude those that require the rearrangement ofbiblical chronology or the disregard of signifi-cant scriptural data: for example, the viewthat Israel evolved from a polytheistic to amonotheistic religion, or the idea that anolder priestly emphasis on ritual was latersupplanted by a prophetic stress on morality(cf. instead the mixture of holiness laws inLev. 19 and contrast Ps. 51:16 with 19).Similarly, in the NT, theories of developingChristology must come to grips with Jesus'self-understanding and the high Christologyof the early chapters of Acts and the pre-Pauline creeds. Theories of a developing insti-tutionalization in ecclesiology must accountfor Matthew 18:15-20 on church discipline, 1Corinthians 14 on the orderly use of charis-mata and the church officers of Philippians1:1.

One must approach even more cautiouslytheories of theological development withinone given writer over a very short period oftime. It is not likely, for example, that Paulfirst thought he would live to see the parousia(1 Thess. 4:15, AD 50) but later changed hismind (Phil. 1:23, AD 62). In no passage ofPaul's does he claim to know for certain thathe will live until Christ's return (or that hewill not). Where development clearly doesappear in Scripture, it is better to speak ofevolution than of revolution, of organic de-velopment than of mutation or distortion, orof the unity one finds in a robe with manyfibres, not all of which extend the length ofthe twine, but each of which grows out of andis tied into a previous strand (I. H. Marshall,`Climbing ropes, ellipses and symphonies: Therelation between biblical and systematic the-ology', in P. E. Satterthwaite and D. F.Wright [eds.], A Pathway into the Holy Scrip-ture [Grand Rapids, 1994], pp. 208-211).

ConclusionIn short, the unity and diversity of Scripturemust be acknowledged and held in a delicatebalance. More liberal scholarship tends tofocus so much on diversity that the unity dis-appears. More conservative scholarship tendsto focus so much on unity that the diversitydisappears. Without a recognition of the unityof Scripture, the canon in its entirety cannotfunction as the authoritative foundation forChristian belief and practice as historically ithas done. Without an appreciation of the di-versity that comes from hearing each text,

71

New Testament use of the Old Testament

book and author on its own terms, one risksmisinterpreting Scripture and not discerningwhat God intended to say to his people at anygiven point in their history. Theologically, theunity of Scripture marks out clear limits ofthought and behaviour beyond which indi-viduals or 'churches' may not legitimately becalled Christian. On the other hand, the di-versity of Scripture demonstrates how no onesect or ecclesiastical tradition has a monopolyof the truth. One can become heretical bybeing either too broad-minded or too narrow-minded!

See also: CHALLENGES TO BIBLICAL THEO-LOGY; RELATIONSHIP OF THE OLD TESTAMENTAND NEW TESTAMENT.

BibliographyP. Balla, Challenges to New Testament

Theology (Tubingen, 1997); C. L. Blomberg,`The legitimacy and limits of harmonization',in D. A. Carson and J. D. Woodbridge (eds.),Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon ( GrandRapids and Carlisle, repr. 1995), pp. 135-174; R. B. Dillard, 'Harmonization: A helpand a hindrance?' in H. Conn (ed.), Inerrancyand Hermeneutic ( Grand Rapids, 1988), pp.151-164; C. H. Dodd, The Apostolic Preach-ing and Its Developments (London, 1936); J.D. G. Dunn, Unity and Diversity in the NewTestament (London and Philadelphia, 1977);R. T. France, 'Development in New Testa-ment Christology', Them, 18.1, 1992, pp. 4-8; D. N. Freedman, The Unity of the Hebrew

IntroductionIt is difficult to overemphasize the importanceof the function and influence of the OT in theNT. There are quotations of or allusions tothe OT in every NT writing except Philemonand 2 and 3 John. It is quoted with intro-ductory formulas (`it is written') and without.

Bible (Ann Arbor, 1991); D. P. Fuller, 'TheImportance of the Unity of the Bible', in R. L.Hubbard, Jr., et al. (eds.), Studies in OldTestament Theology (Dallas and London,1992), pp. 63-75; J. Goldingay, 'Diversityand Unity in Old Testament Theology', VT34, 1984, pp. 153-168; G. F. Hasel, NewTestament Theology: Basic Issues in theCurrent Debate ( Grand Rapids, 1978); idem,Old Testament Theology: Basic Issues in theCurrent Debate ( Grand Rapids, 4 1991); A. J.Hultgren, The Rise of Normative Christianity(Minneapolis, 1994); E. E. Lemcio, 'Theunifying kerygma of the New Testament',JSNT 33, 1988, pp. 3-17; 38, 1990, pp. 3-11; J. G. McConville, 'Using Scripture fortheology: Unity and diversity in Old Testa-ment theology', SBET 5, 1987, pp. 35-57; J.Reumann, Variety and Unity in NewTestament Thought ( Oxford, 1991); H. G.Reventlow, Problems of Biblical Theology inthe Twentieth Century (Philadelphia, 1986);D. Rhoads, The Challenge of Diversity: TheWitness of Paul and the Gospels( Minneapolis, 1996); H. H. Rowley, TheUnity of the Bible (London and Philadelphia,1953); W. VanGemeren, The Progress ofRedemption ( Grand Rapids and Carlisle,1988, 1995); D. Wenham, 'Appendix: Unityand diversity in the New Testament', in G. E.Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament( Grand Rapids and Cambridge, 1993, 1994),pp. 684-719.

C. L. BLOMBERG

Paraphrases and allusions appear; sometimesthe allusions comprise no more than a wordor two. In other places the NT reflects OTthemes, structures and theology. The NTwriters appeal to the OT for apologetic,moral, doctrinal and liturgical reasons. Theevangelists seek in various ways to show howJesus understood Scripture, fulfilled Scripture,

and was clarified by Scripture. The OT isrepresented even more prominently in thewritings of Paul and in Hebrews.

Of more importance than its use in the NTis the theology of the OT. The OT's view ofGod, of humanity, of covenant, of the elec-tion of Israel and of judgment forms the pre-supposition that underlies the theology ofJesus, his disciples, and the writings of theNT. Apart from the OT the NT would makelittle sense. Explicit quotations of the OT, aswell as the numerous allusions, provide only apartial indication of the foundational functionthe OT plays in the theology of the NT. Care-ful consideration of the function of the OTclarifies at many significant points the foun-dational doctrines of the NT.

Functions of the OTThe OT is quoted with introductory formulas(e.g. 'in order that it be fulfilled'), andsometimes without; many paraphrases andallusions are made through the use of a fewkey words or phrases. With regard toexegetical style, scholars have pointed topossible parallels with pesher as practised atQumran (esp. in Matthew, Paul andHebrews) and parallels with rabbinic midrash(esp. in John and Paul). The OT seems tohave three principal functions: 1. legal, 2.prophetic and 3. analogical. Legal inter-pretation has to do with determining what isrequired of the one who has faith in God (orin Jesus). Prophetic interpretation has to dowith what has been fulfilled in Jesus' adventand what is expected to be fulfilled in thefuture. Analogical interpretation has to dowith comparisons. Typology is a familiarform of analogical interpretation. Severalexamples of these principal functions are con-sidered in the following sections.

Jesus and the GospelsJesus' use of the Scripture is at points similarto its use by the rabbis of his day. Thereforemuch of his teaching and use of the OT isfamiliar to his hearers. However, the eschato-logical orientation of Jesus' interpretation ofScripture parallels more closely scripturalinterpretation at Qumran, while its pneumaticemphasis reflects Jesus' own experience of theSpirit in his life and ministry. Thus Jesus'understanding of the OT often struck familiarchords, which attracted hearers, and yet hisunderstanding was at points distinctive and

New Testament use of the Old Testament

unexpected, which challenged his hearers,including his closest followers.

Citations of the OT in the Gospels reflectthe Hebrew (Matt. 11:10, 29; Mark 10:19;12:30; Luke 22:37), the Greek (Matt. 18:16;21:16; Mark 7:6-7; 10:8; Luke 4:18; 23:46;John 12:38), and the Aramaic (Matt. 4:10;Mark 4:12; 9:48) versions. Given the natureand origin of the material, the respective con-texts of the evangelists, and the fact that theywrote their Gospels in Greek, such diversity ishardly surprising. But citations attributed toJesus also reflect the same diversity. SinceJesus probably did not speak Greek, he prob-ably did not quote the Greek version (Lxx).But the Greek citations are not necessarilyinauthentic, that is, deriving from the Greek-speaking Church after the time of Jesus. Inmany cases Jesus' citations of Scripture havebeen assimilated to the wording of the Greek,especially when the point that he makes is notlost in such assimilation.

Legal interpretation of ScriptureIn most respects Jesus' view of the legalportions of Scripture was essentially that ofhis Palestinian contemporaries. Whentempted by the devil (Matt. 4:1-11; Luke4:1-13), Jesus responded with appropriatecitations from Deuteronomy 8:3 (`Man shallnot live by bread alone'), 6:16 (`You shall nottempt the Lord your God'), and 6:13 (`Youshall worship the Lord your God', RSV).

When asked what the greatest commandmentwas, Jesus cited Deuteronomy 6:4-5 (`Hear 0Israel ... love the Lord your God with yourwhole heart ... '; cf. Mark 12:29-30) andLeviticus 19:18 (`You shall love yourneighbour as yourself'; cf. Mark 12:31).Deuteronomy 6:4–S was part of the Shemathat an observant Jew was to recite twicedaily (cf. Mishnah Berakot 1:1-4). The ideaof loving one's neighbour as oneself and sofulfilling the whole law is found in Jewishsources: 'This [Lev. 19:18] is a great principlein the Torah' (Sipra Leviticus on Lev. 19:18;cf. Genesis Rabbah 24.7 [on Gen. 5:1]).There is probably an allusion to the two com-mandments in combination in the Testamentsof the Twelve Patriarchs: 'Each of you speaksthe truth clearly to his neighbour ... Through-out all your life love the Lord and oneanother with a true heart' (Testament of Dan5:2-3); 'Love the Lord and the neighbour'(Testament of Issachar 7:6); they are also

New Testament Use of the Old Testament

7372