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.”
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. “Take Christ out of the Scriptures,” Luther rhetorically wonders, “and what else will you find in them?” Similarly, it is for Luther “beyond question that all the Scriptures point to Christ alone.” 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.”
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.” Indeed, “when viewed aright,” he states, “all stories in Holy Scripture refer to Christ.” 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.”
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. So too, the one thing “we should…seek in the whole of Scripture,” Calvin avers, is “truly to know Jesus Christ.”
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.”
 “Preface to James”, Luther’s Works, Vol. 35, Word and Sacrament, ed. E. T. Bachmann (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1960), 396.
 WA 11.223.
 WA 18.606.
 WA 10.576.
 WA 10:11.181.
 Sermon on Luke 2:1-2, WA 10.11.80.
 WA, 4.153.
 WA 4.153.
 Calvin, Commentary on the Harmony of the Evangelists, tran. W. Pringle (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 219 (see fn. 141)
 Preface to French translation of the NT, cited in Greidanus, Preaching Christ, 141.
 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
All the violent scenes in Revelation are symbols for the battle of truth and deception. They never involve literal violence. In fact, they symbolize ANTI-VIOLENCE. The ingenious way John helps us get free of deception of trust in violent power is by taking a standard violent symbol and juxtaposing it with a symbol that undermines…
Even though I argued for interpreting the final form of the biblical canon as opposed to using the history behind the text in my post yesterday, I am not endorsing the radical post-modern view that biblical texts possess “semantic autonomy” and thus lack any historical referentiality. While I have no problem whatsoever accepting that God used folklore and myth…
Dan and Brianna tackle some tough questions: —Is it okay for Christians to be cremated? —How can we preach from the OT with authority? —What should a Christian academic know in a secular school? http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0320_overflow_1.mp3
If the violent depictions of God in the Bible are not completely accurate, isn’t all of Scripture up for debate?
Question: I’m very intrigued by your cruciform hermeneutics and can’t wait for your book (Crucifixion of the Warrior God) to come out. But I have to say that it strikes me as dangerous. You’re basically saying that the violent portraits of God in the OT are not completely accurate. But doesn’t this place us flawed…
In week five of this sermon series, Greg Boyd discusses what the church should look like in the lens of the cross. A universal Church was born out of the ministry of Jesus, and this Church is empowered to look like the Cross. In this sermon, Greg shows us why it’s so important, as the…
In response to my work, some have argued that I tend to overemphasize Christ. In light of the claim that in Jesus we have the one and only definitive Word of God and that no previous revelation should ever be placed alongside him or allowed to qualify what he reveals about God, some allege that…