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 word

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

Related Reading

Is the Bible History?

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…

Jesus’ Different Kind of Nation

God called Abraham to form a unique nation by which “all peoples of the earth will be blessed.” The unique call of the descendants of Abraham was to become a nation of servant-priests whom God would use to reunite the nations of the world under his loving Lordship. The vision of a reunited humanity is…

Podcast: Is Cruciform Hermeneutics Simply Midrash?

Greg considers whether Cruciform Hermeneutics is just a complicated way of seeing what I want to see in the text, and offers nuanced thought for our more complicated hermeneutical challenges.    http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0307.mp3

The Cruciform Center Part 1: How Matthew, Mark and Luke Reveal a Cruciform God

In the previous series of posts I’ve argued that a merely “Christocentric” approach to God is too general, as can be shown by the widely different conceptions of God people arrive at, despite their claim to be “Christocentric.”  The confession that Jesus reveals what God is like is simply too abstract, for it leaves too…

Jesus and Nationalistic Violence

Throughout the Old Testament, we find Israel spoken of as God’s “chosen nation.” The Israelites were to be a nation of priests whom God wanted to use to unite the world under him (Ex 19:6). Since nationalism and violence inevitably go hand in hand, as Jacque Ellul and others have noted, the covenant God made…

Podcast: How Can We Objectively Know What is Literal in the Bible and What is Not?

Greg discusses bible interpretation, and all that that implies. Greg goes toe-to-toe with fundamentalist bible interpreters. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0088.mp3