Research interests
· Reformation theology and exegesis · Gender roles and gender issues		· The history of biblical interpretation · The significance of history for proclamation
My philosophy of teaching church history
Some years ago, I expressed my views about the place of church history in an essay entitled “Help from the History of Interpretation.” I invite you to read it here, in slightly revised form: There are many pervasive clichés about history. One is that history somehow has “lessons” that we ought to learn, and we ignore these lessons at our peril. (Most of us, I suspect, have rarely sensed that peril very keenly, though perhaps while sitting a history exam.) A second cliché often asserts how history repeats itself. A corollary, often applied especially to church history, is that there are no new heresies, only old ones in new wrappers. None of these observations seems to offer much comfort, particularly if there is no knowledge of any actual history to put some flesh on the bone. I myself, having spent fifteen years now as a student of church history, am ever more aware of how much danger there may be in these trite observations. For instance, take the question of history repeating itself. A year or two ago, alarms were being raised over the war in Bosnia: “History is repeating itself,” many cried. But which history? In fact, some saw Bosnia as a new Holocaust, while others saw it as a new Vietnam. Which view was correct? History is prone far less to profitable use than it is to partisan abuse. Both Christians and non-Christians — that is, if they don’t simply ignore the past — are constantly tempted to mine history for views friendly to their own, as if something were thereby proved. So what good is history, then? Click on this link to continue essay . . . .
FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS
On the occasion of my inauguration as full professor in February 2004, I delivered a lecture that expresses my sense of calling as an academic historian in the service of the Christian Church: Using the Bible in the Midst of Suspicion and Depravity In recent years, “theological interpretation” has become a bit of a buzzword. Almost everyone seems to think that it’s a great idea, why didn’t we think of it sooner, and we ought to havemore of it, because it will surely fix our problems — in seminary, in the pulpit, in the church and society at large. Well, maybe so. Nonetheless, there is still considerable uncertainty over what exactly theological interpretation is. So let me begin by offering you my own perspective. I’ll do this by describing some of the factors that have generated interest in this notion. After I deliver my own incisive analysis, I’ll tell you about what I think is missing from this proposed remedy. Click on this link to continue essay . . . .
INSTALLATION ADDRESS FOR THE BYKER CHAIR
In May 2006, I was installed as the Gaylen & Susan Byker Professor of Reformed Theology, and on that occasion I delivered an address that combined my commitment to Reformed theology with my passion for the history of interpretation: "I hate those who hate you, O Lord, . . . with perfect hatred" (Ps. 139:21f) How the Psalter Taught the Fathers and Reformers to Curse (or Not) It’s probably obvious that an inaugural address for a chair in Reformed theology ought to say something that is at least vaguely Reformed. But it also strikes me that I ought to offer you something that typifies the sort of research and writing that I am inclined to do. I like to do two things. I like to write about the history of biblical interpretation. I also like to write about John Calvin. However, by my own reckoning, only about half the time have I argued that Calvin got it right. Today, I’m pleased to address how the curses in the Psalms have been interpreted, and part of my pleasure derives from being able to commend to you a significant part of what Calvin said on this topic. Click on this link to continue essay . . . .
SELECTED publications
Reading the Bible with the Dead: What You Can Learn from the History of Exegesis that You Can’t Learn from Exegesis Alone. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007, in press. “Do you really want to be saved ‘by grace alone’?” Modern Reformation (September 2007), forthcoming. “History Without Footnotes: On the Road with The Da Vinci Code,” Sacred History, May-June 2006, 42–46. “A Conversation with the Reformation Confessions.” In Conversations with the Confessions, ed. Joseph D. Small. Louisville: Geneva Press, 2005. “Patriarchy and Prophetesses: Tradition and Innovation in Vermigli’s Doctrine of Woman.” In Peter Martyr Vermigli and the European Reformations, ed. Frank A. James III, pp. 139-158. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2004. “Calvin as Biblical Interpreter.” In The Cambridge Companion to John Calvin, ed. Donald A. McKim, pp. 58-73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. “Scripture, Tradition, and the Formation of Christian Culture: The Theological and Pastoral Function of the History of Interpretation.” Ex Auditu (2004): 22–41. “Preaching Texts of Terror in the Book of Judges: How Does the History of Interpretation Help?” Calvin Theological Journal 37 (2002): 49-61.
Writing the Wrongs: Women of the Old Testament among Biblical Commentators from Philo through the Reformation. Oxford Studies in Historical Theology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. “Calvin’s Exegetical Legacy: His Reception and Transmission of Text and Tradition.” In The Legacy of John Calvin: Calvin Studies Society Papers 1999, ed. David L. Foxgrover, pp. 31–56. Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 2000. “Teaching the Bible to Your Children: The Risks and the Rewards” (with Marianne Meye Thompson). Word and World 17/3 (Summer 1997): 295–300. Abridgement reprinted as “Teaching the Bible to Children,” Theology, News and Notes 44/4 (December 1997): 20–21.
“Hagar, Victim or Villain? Three Sixteenth-Century Views.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (April 1997): 213–33. Abridgement reprinted in Luther Digest 8 (2000): 46–50.
	“The Survival of Allegorical Argumentation in Peter Martyr Vermigli’s Old Testament Exegesis”; and “The Significance of Precritical Exegesis: Retrospect and Prospect” (with Richard A. Muller). In Biblical Interpretation in the Era of the Reformation, pp. 255–71, 335–45. Ed. Richard A. Muller and John L. Thompson. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. “‘So ridiculous a sign’: Men, Women, and the Lessons of Circumcision in 16th-Century Exegesis.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 86 (1995): 236–56. “Patriarchs, Polygamy, and Private Resistance: John Calvin and Others on Breaking God’s Rules.” Sixteenth Century Journal 25 (1994): 3–27.
John Calvin and the Daughters of Sarah: Women in Regular and Exceptional Roles in the Exegesis of Calvin, His Predecessors, and His Contemporaries. Travaux d’Humanisme et Renaissance 259. Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1992. “The Immoralities of the Patriarchs in the History of Exegesis: A Reassessment of Calvin’s Position.” Calvin Theological Journal 26 (1991): 9–46. “Creata ad imaginem Dei, licet secundo gradu: Woman as the Image of God According to John Calvin.” Harvard Theological Review 81 (1988): 125–43.
SO YOU think you WANT A Ph.d.?
Every year at least half a dozen Fuller students mention to me that they are (or are thinking about) going on for doctoral study. Some ask if they could drop by and chat with me about what it might mean to apply for grad school, or what it’s like to earn a Ph.D. or to pursue a career as a scholar. Others just want a reference from me. Are you one of these students? Regardless of which set of questions you’d like answered, I’ve drawn up a brief document that tells you what you need to know if you want a reference from me, then goes on to discuss some general questions about applying to grad school, including whether it’s worth your while. So, before you ask for an office appointment (which you’re welcome to do!), I would encourage you to read this document. Click on this link to download my Ph.D FAQ . . .