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.

Jesus, the Word of God
“[T]he standing message of the Fathers to the Church Universal,” writes Georges Florovsky, was that “Christ Jesus is the Alpha and Omega of the Scriptures both the climax and the knot of the Bible.”[1] It was also unquestionably one of the most foundational theological assumptions of Luther and Calvin as well as other Reformers. Hence, for example, Luther argued that, “the function of all interpretation is to find Christ.”[2] In contrast to the so-called “objective” historical-critical approach, certain advocates of the Theological Interpretation of Scripture movement are exploring what it means to affirm that “… all texts in the whole Bible bear a discernible relationship to Christ and are primarily intended as a testimony to Christ,” as Graeme Goldsworthy put it.[3] Hence, “The prime question to put to every text is about how it testifies to Jesus?”[4]
We might say that Jesus is “the Word” of the words. T.F. Torrance succinctly captures the Christocentric focus both of a proper understanding of inspiration and of hermeneutics when he writes:
Since the Scriptures are the result of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by the will of the Father through Jesus Christ, and since the Word of God who speaks through all the Scriptures became incarnate in Jesus Christ, it is Jesus Christ himself who must constitute the controlling centre in all right interpretation of the Scriptures.[5]
We might view the relationship between the diverse words of Scripture and God’s one and only Incarnate Word by comparing it to the way syllables and letters relate to words we utter or write. Just as syllables and letters find their function in forming the words we utter or write, so the diverse words of Scripture find their sole function in uttering the name “Jesus.” Vern Poythress comes close to this perspective when he states: “The Bible contains many distinct truths in the distinct assertions of its distinct verses.” Yet, in light of the fact that Jesus presented himself as the truth, Poythress adds, “all these cohere in the One who is truth.”[6]
Scott Swain reflects this view when he notes that, while God speaks in a wide diversity of ways throughout the progress of revelation, “ultimately God speaks the same Word … the word Christ.”[7] He continues, “God communicates his Incarnate Word (Jesus Christ) through his inscribed Word (Holy Scripture) for the sake of covenantal communication and communion.”[8]
In this light, we might say that Jesus is thus the truth of all truths, the Word that is spoken in all true words, and the revelation in all that is revelatory in Scripture. Despite its remarkable diversity, when read through the lens of Christ, as Hugh of St. Victor expressed it, “the whole of scripture is one book, and that one book is Christ.”
[1] G. Florovsky, Aspects of Church History, Vol.IV (Belmont, Mass: Nordland Pub. Co., 1975), 38
[2] Dockery, “Christological Hermeneutics,” 191. F.W. Farrar, History of Interpretation (London: Macmillan, 1886), 232.
[3] Goldsworthy, Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics, 252; cf. idem, Preaching the Whole Bible, 21. For an excellent defense of a Christocentric approach to Scripture that is oriented toward its practical significance, see Smith, Bible Made Impossible, 93-126.
[4] Goldsworthy, Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics, 252; cf. idem, Preaching the Whole Bible, 21.
[5] T. F. Torrance, The Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Faith (Edinburgh: Clark, 1988), 39.
[6] V. Poythress, God-Centered Biblical Interpretation (Pillipsburg, NJ, 1999), 58.
[7] S. Swain, Trinity, Revelation and Reading: A Theological Introduction to the Bible and Its Interpretation (New York: T & T Clark, 2011), 25. See ibid., 37.
[8] Swain, ibid., 60.
Photo credit: Leo Reynolds via Visualhunt / CC BY-NC-SA
Category: General
Tags: Bible Interpretation, Cruciform Theology, Jesus
Topics: Biblical Interpretation
Related Reading

A Response to “Are Greg Boyd and I Reading the Same Old Testament?”
Collin Cornell has recently published a review of Cross Vision (CV) and, less directly, of Crucifixion of the Warrior God (CWG) in The Christian Century. In this post I will respond to the two major objections Cornell raises against these books. Cornell begins by recounting a discussion I had with a woman who was deeply impacted…

Podcast: Must We Believe in the Historicity of the OT Stories to Trust in the Bible and in Jesus?
Things get deep, literarily, as Greg discusses deep literalism. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0384.mp3

Classical Theism’s Unnecessary Paradoxes
The traditional view of God that is embraced by most—what is called “classical theology”—works from the assumption that God’s essential divine nature is atemporal, immutable, and impassible. The Church Fathers fought to articulate and defend the absolute distinction between the Creator and creation and they did this—in a variety of ways—by defining God’s eternal nature…

Why Did Jesus Curse the Fig Tree?
One of the strangest episodes recorded in the Gospels is Jesus cursing a fig tree because he was hungry and it didn’t have any figs (Mk 11:12-14; Mt 21:18-19). It’s the only destructive miracle found in the New Testament. What’s particularly puzzling is that Mark tells us the reason the fig tree had no figs…

Is Jesus Really God?
While it is true that Jesus Himself never comes out and explicitly says He is God in the Gospels, He is everywhere portrayed in terms that lead us to conclude to the same thing. He says things like “If you see Me, you see the Father,” “Honor Me even as you honor the Father,” and…

Challenging the Assumptions of Classical Theism
What came to be known as the classical view of God’s nature has shaped the common, traditional way that most people think about God. It is based in the logic borrowed, mostly unconsciously, from a major strand within Hellenistic philosophy. In sharp contrast to ancient Israelites, whose conception of God was entirely based on their…