We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
The Reformers and the Centrality of Christ
The Christocentric nature of the Church’s hermeneutic approached a zenith in the Protestant Reformation. While Luther and Calvin rejected allegorical interpretation, in theory if not in practice, they nevertheless relied on typology and other creative hermeneutical strategies to discern how Christ was the subject matter of the OT.
For Luther, Jesus was “the Word” in the most fundamental sense of the term, while the Bible was “the Word” in the derivative sense that it bore witness to him. In his famous preface to James, Luther went so far as to claim that the “proper touchstone for judging all books” is the extent to which they proclaim Christ. “Since all Scripture witnesses to Christ (Rom. 3:22ff),” and since “Paul is determined not to know anything save Christ (I Cor 2:2),” it followed for Luther that any book “that does not teach Christ is not yet apostolic, even though St. Peter or St. Paul does the teaching.”[1]
On this basis, Luther infamously concluded that the book of James was “an epistle of straw” in the original 1522 version of this preface. Reiterating the same point, a common refrain running throughout Luther’s writing is that, when properly interpreted—viz. with the eyes of faith and in light of Christ— one can discern not only that all Scripture is about Christ, but that it is about Christ alone. “The entire Old Testament refers to Christ,” he proclaims.[2] “Take Christ out of the Scriptures,” Luther rhetorically wonders, “and what else will you find in them?”[3] Similarly, it is for Luther “beyond question that all the Scriptures point to Christ alone.”[4] Like a letter a man first closed but then “afterwards broke it open,” so too, Luther says, “the Old Testament is an epistle of Christ, which after His death He opened and caused to be read through the Gospel and proclaimed everywhere.”[5]
Likening Scripture to the cloth the baby Jesus was wrapped in, Luther at one point states that “[t]he law and the prophets are not rightly preached or known save we see Christ wrapped up in them.”[6] Indeed, “when viewed aright,” he states, “all stories in Holy Scripture refer to Christ.”[7] His most powerful Christocentric statement, reflecting Paul’s profession to know nothing except Christ crucified, is found when Luther boldly proclaims: “I see nothing in Scripture except Christ Crucified.”[8]
Though he is certainly less rhetorical than Luther on the topic, Calvin also strongly affirmed a Christocentric hermeneutic. Commenting on John 5:39, for example, Calvin states: “We ought to read the Scriptures with the express design of finding Christ in them,” he asserts.[9] So too, the one thing “we should…seek in the whole of Scripture,” Calvin avers, is “truly to know Jesus Christ.”[10]
The Reformers clearly confessed that in Christ we find the foundational unity of both Testaments, for both are portraits of Christ, the only difference being in “the manner of painting.”[11]
[1] “Preface to James”, Luther’s Works, Vol. 35, Word and Sacrament, ed. E. T. Bachmann (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1960), 396.
[2] WA 11.223.
[3] WA 18.606.
[4] WA 10.576.
[5] WA 10:11.181.
[6] Sermon on Luke 2:1-2, WA 10.11.80.
[7] WA, 4.153.
[8] WA 4.153.
[9] Calvin, Commentary on the Harmony of the Evangelists, tran. W. Pringle (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 219 (see fn. 141)
[10] Preface to French translation of the NT, cited in Greidanus, Preaching Christ, 141.
[11] Calvin. Commentary on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to The Hebrews , tran. J. Owen (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979), 222. See S. Edmondson, Calvin’s Christology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 168–81 and E. J. Alexander, “The Supremacy of Jesus Christ,” in John Calvin: A Heart for Devotion, Doctrine, and Doxology (ed. Burk Parsons; Orlando: Reformation Trust, 2008), 109. Barth notes that, in contrast to the liberal theologies of Ritschl and Schleiermacher, Luther and Calvin didn’t have to try to be “Christocentric,” for their theologies were grounded in Christology from the outset, which, Barth rightly contends, is the only way a theology can be truly Christocentric. CD I/2:350–51
Photo via VisualHunt.com
Category: General
Tags: Christocentrism, Cruciform Theology, John Calvin, Martin Luther
Related Reading
Rachel Held Evans Interviews Greg on Benefit of the Doubt
We shared an interview that Frank Viola did with Greg yesterday, and we’re thrilled to share an interview that Rachel Held Evans posted today. Rachel is very familiar with the resistance and criticism that comes when dearly held beliefs are challenged. We feel like she is a kindred spirit in this regard. We hope you’ll…
A Dialogue with Derek Flood: Is the Bible Infallible?
I’m happy to see that Derek Flood has responded to my four part review of his book, Disarming Scripture. His response—and, I trust, this reply to his response—models how kingdom people can strongly disagree on issues without becoming acrimonious. And I am in full agreement with Derek that our shared conviction regarding the centrality of…
The Cross Reveals God’s Love
The central way Christ functions as the perfect image and exact representation of God is by dying on the cross. While Christ’s entire life manifests the true God, Christ came primarily to die. It was his death that defeated the devil and freed us from bondage. The one who does what is sinful is of…
Confronting the Divine Montage
The superiority of Jesus’ revelation over a montage view of God (see previous post) is captured when Paul and the author of Hebrews utilize an analogy of a shadow verses reality. Paul instructs his disciples not to “let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a…
Who Rules Governments? God or Satan? Part 2
In the previous post, I raised the question of how we reconcile the fact that the Bible depicts both God and Satan as the ruler of nations, and I discussed some classical ways this has been understood. In this post I want to offer a cross-centered approach to this classical conundrum that provides us with…
Does Paul Condone Vindictive Psalms? A Response to Paul Copan (#1)
In a recent paper delivered at the Evangelical Theological Society, Paul Copan raised a number of objections against my book, Crucifixion of the Warrior of God. This is the first of several blogs in which I will respond to this paper. (By the way, Paul and I had a friendly two-session debate on Justin Brierley’s…