Visit ebookmass.

com to download the full version and

explore more ebook or textbook

Analytic Christology and the Theological

Interpretation of the New Testament Thomas H.
Mccall

_____ Click the link below to download _____

[Link]
theological-interpretation-of-the-new-testament-thomas-h-
mccall/

Explore and download more ebook or textbook at [Link]

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

A theological introduction to the Old Testament Hamilton

[Link]
testament-hamilton/

Early Jewish Writings and New Testament Interpretation

(ESSENTIALS OF BIBLICAL STUDIES SERIES) C.D. Elledge

[Link]
interpretation-essentials-of-biblical-studies-series-c-d-elledge/

The Good Doctor Thomas H. Lee

[Link]

Kazantzakis’ Philosophical and Theological Thought 1st ed.

Edition Jerry H. Gill

[Link]
theological-thought-1st-ed-edition-jerry-h-gill/
Christology and Metaphysics in the Seventeenth Century
Richard Cross

[Link]
seventeenth-century-richard-cross/

Bergsonism and the History of Analytic Philosophy Andreas

Vrahimis

[Link]
philosophy-andreas-vrahimis/

Biblical Interpretation in Early Christian Gospels: Volume

4: The Gospel of John Thomas R. Hatina

[Link]
christian-gospels-volume-4-the-gospel-of-john-thomas-r-hatina/

Thomas Hamblin and the Bowery Theatre: The New York Reign
of "Blood and Thunder” Melodramas 1st Edition Thomas A.
Bogar (Auth.)
[Link]
the-new-york-reign-of-blood-and-thunder-melodramas-1st-edition-thomas-
a-bogar-auth/

Analytic Theology and the Academic Study of Religion

William Wood

[Link]
study-of-religion-william-wood/
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

OXFORD STUDIES IN ANALYTIC THEOLOGY

Series Editors
Michael C. Rea Oliver D. Crisp
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

OXFORD STUDIES IN ANALYTIC THEOLOGY

Analytic Theology utilizes the tools and methods of contemporary analytic

philosophy for the purposes of constructive Christian theology, paying attention
to the Christian tradition and development of doctrine. This innovative series of
studies showcases high quality, cutting-edge research in this area, in monographs
and symposia.

  :

Atonement
Eleonore Stump
Humility, Pride, and Christian Virtue Theory
Kent Dunnington
In Defense of Extended Conciliar Christology
A Philosophical Essay
Timothy Pawl
Love Divine
A Systematic Account of God’s Love for Humanity
Jordan Wessling
Voices from the Edge
Centring Marginalized Perspectives in Analytic Theology
Edited by Michelle Panchuk and Michael C. Rea
The Principles of Judaism
Samuel Lebens
Essays in Analytic Theology
Volume 1 & 2
Michael C. Rea
The Contradictory Christ
Jc Beall
Analytic Theology and the Academic Study of Religion
William Wood
Divine Holiness and Divine Action
Mark C. Murphy
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

Analytic Christology
and the Theological
Interpretation of the
New Testament
T H O M A S H . MC C A L L

1
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Thomas H. McCall 2021
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2021
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020945738
ISBN 978–0–19–885749–5
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198857495.001.0001
Printed and bound in the UK by
TJ Books Limited
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

For Alan Torrance

OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

Acknowledgments

I am convinced that the project of constructive Christology has much to gain

from deeper engagement with analytic theology and philosophy of religion.
I am also convinced that the project of constructive Christology should be
properly attuned to, and informed by, the insights of New Testament
scholarship. In addition, I am convinced that there are points at which
both analytic theology and biblical scholarship might benefit from inter-
action with one another. This book is born out of those convictions.
Accordingly, I employ the resources of both biblical scholarship and analytic
Christology to make progress on some important issues in dogmatic
Christology.
Various elements of some chapters have been previously published. Part
of Chapter 1 can be found in the Journal of Analytic Theology (2020). Part of
Chapter 4 was published in Caleb T. Friedeman, ed., Listen, Understand,
Obey: Essays in Honor of Gareth Lee Cockerill (Eugene: Wipf and Stock,
2017). Part of Chapter 5 previously appeared as “Professor Ward and
Polytheism,” in Philosophia Christi (2016), and parts of Chapter 6 were
published in the Journal of Analytic Theology (2019). These are published
with the gracious permission of the editors.
I am well aware—in fact, keenly aware—of my own limitations in this
effort. I am neither an analytic metaphysician nor a Nuetestamentler; I am
merely a systematic theologian. Accordingly, I owe much to the great
company of historical and systematic theologians, New Testament scholars,
and analytic philosophers of religion who have done much to guide, inform,
correct, and encourage me during this process. While of course all remain-
ing errors and flaws are my own, I am especially indebted to the members of
the Deerfield Dialogue Group: Doug Sweeney, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, James
Arcadi, David Luy, Scott Manetsch, Dana Harris, Madison Pierce, Michelle
Knight, Dick Averbeck, Lawson Younger, Eric Tully, and Steve Greggo. I am
deeply grateful to members of the Logos Institute for Exegetical and Analytic
Theology: Vi Bui, Harvey Cawdron, Joshua Cockayne, Kimberly Kroll,
Jonathan Rutledge, Mitch Mallory, Tim Pawl, Faith Pawl, Preston Hill,
Mike Rea, Oliver Crisp, Chandler Warren, Stephanie Nordby, Kevin
Nordby, Koert Verhagen, Judith Wolfe, David Bennett, Stef McDade,
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

viii 

Katherine Scheussler, Sarah Shin, Christa McKirkland, Taylor Telford, and

especially Andrew Torrance (with sincere apologies to any others who made
helpful comments and criticisms but whose names I may have forgotten).
The 2019–2020 Research Fellows of the Carl F. H. Henry Center for
Theological Understanding (Paul Gould, Craig Bartholomew, Jordan
Wessling, and Brian Matz, along with Matthew Wiley, Geoffrey Fulkerson,
and Joel Chopp) read several chapters and gave helpful feedback. I also wish
to express my gratitude to Jc Beall for his interest and very gracious
encouragement: and to Douglas Campbell for his wonderfully spirited and
invaluable interaction. Three anonymous referees for Oxford University
Press offered extremely valuable suggestions and criticisms.
Alan Torrance has been a constant source of inspiration. I hope that this
study is a proper (if inadequate) expression of gratitude, and truly it is an
honor to dedicate this book to him.
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

Table of Contents

Introduction 1
0.1 Analytic Theology and Reflection on Christ 2
0.2 Theological Interpretation and the Biblical
Witness to Christ 3
0.2.1 Theological Interpretation: An Initial Characterization 4
0.3 A Preview of Coming Attractions 5
1. Crucified with Christ: The Ego and the Omega 7
1.1 Introduction 7
1.2 The Apocalyptic Interpretations of Paul 8
1.2.1 The Apocalyptic Paul 8
1.2.2 Radical Apocalyptic Options 12
1.3 Toward Theological Analysis 16
1.3.1 Replacement Theories 17
1.3.2 Fusion Theories 24
[Link] The Theory of Final Assumptions 24
[Link] Too Many Persons? 25
[Link] Too Many Natures? 27
[Link] Too Many Sinners? 28
1.4 A Traditional Interpretation Reconsidered 30
1.5 Crucified with Christ: A Modest Proposal 33
1.6 Conclusion 38
2. The Faith of the Son: Pistis Christou Reconsidered 39
2.1 Introduction 39
2.2 The Current Debate 40
2.2.1 Faith in Christ: The Traditional “Lutheran” Reading 40
2.2.2 The Faith of Christ: A Recurring Proposal 41
2.2.3 Faith in and with Christ: Further Developments 43
2.2.4 Moving Forward: The Inevitability of Theological Interpretation 44
2.3 The Πίστις Χριστου Debate and the Humanity of Christ 47
2.4 Πίστις Χριστου and the Righteousness of God 48
2.4.1 Hays on the Christological Revelation of the Divine
Attributes 48
2.4.2 Keeping It Simple: Ressourcing Traditional Doctrines of God 51
2.4.3 Making It Complex: Contemporary Essentialism
and the Doctrine of God 52
2.4.4 Summary 59
Visit [Link] today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

x   

2.5 Πίστις Χριστου and Salvation 59

2.5.1 Hays’s Concerns 59
2.5.2 Reaching Backward and Moving Forward:
Ressourcement and Theological Interpretation 61
2.6 Conclusion 68
3. The Identity of the Son: The Incarnation and The Freedom
of God 69
3.1 Introduction 69
3.2 McCormack’s Gambit 69
3.2.1 The Barth Wars: The Opening Salvo 70
3.2.2 The Empire Strikes Back: Responses to the “Revisionist”
Proposal 73
3.2.3 McCormack’s Constructive Proposal 76
3.2.4 McCormack’s Theological Exegesis 79
3.3 Theological Analysis 83
3.3.1 Is It “Biblical?” Exegesis and Theology 83
3.3.2 Does It Hold Together? Concerns about the Coherence
of the Revisionist Proposal 91
3.3.3 The Issue of Divine Freedom 93
[Link] Necessitarian Versions 94
[Link] Non-Necessitarian Versions 98
3.3.4 The Identity of the Decider 103
[Link] The Father 104
[Link] The Son 107
[Link] The Decider 110
3.3.5 Some Final Observations 110
3.4 Conclusion 113
4. The Submission of Christ 114
4.1 Introduction 114
4.2 Hebrews 5:7-10: Some Initial Observations 115
4.3 Karl Barth and Thomas Aquinas on the Obedience
of the Son 118
4.3.1 Karl Barth on the Eternal Subordination of the Son 118
4.3.2 Thomas Aquinas on the Son’s Missional Obedience 120
4.4 Barth’s Gambit: A Theological Analysis 122
4.4.1 Barth, Consistency, and Monotheism 122
4.4.2 Barth and the Threat of Ontological Subordination:
The Authority of the Father 126
4.4.3 Barth and Hebrews 5 128
4.5 Obedience and the Beatific Vision: Reconsidering Aquinas’s View 129
4.6 Conclusion 134
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi

   xi

5. The Communion of the Son with the Father 137

5.1 Introduction 137
5.2 The Furor over Social Trinitarianism: Toward Clarity 139
5.2.1 Social Trinitarianism as Socio-Political Advocacy 141
5.2.2 “Social Trinitarianism” as “Eastern” (vs. “Western”) Theology 142
5.2.3 Social Trinitarianism as Theology that Employs
the “Social Analogy” 143
5.2.4 Social Trinitarianism as Theology that Makes Use
of the “Modern Notion” of Person 144
5.2.5 Social Trinitarianism and Intra-Trinitarian Love 147
5.2.6 Social Trinitarianism and Distinct Agency 148
5.2.7 “Real” Social Trinitarianism 149
5.2.8 Conclusion 150
5.3 An Anti-Social Proposal Analyzed 150
5.3.1 Ward’s Trinitarian Doctrine 150
5.3.2 Theological Exegesis and Philosophical Theology 154
5.3.3 An Analysis of Ward’s Christology 158
[Link] Some Concerns about the “Identity” Claim 159
[Link] Some Questions About the Divinity of Christ 163
5.3.4 Conclusion 165
5.4 The Communion of the Father and the Son: A Closer Look 165
5.4.1 The Love of the Father for the Son 165
5.4.2 The Father-Son Communion and the Issue of Agency 169
5.5 Conclusion 175
6. The Logos and His Logic 177
6.1 Introduction 177
6.2 Divine and Human: The Proposal 179
6.2.1 Beall’s Paraconsistent Logic 179
6.2.2 Logic and Theology: An Appreciative Interlude 182
6.2.3 The Christological Proposal 184
6.3 The True and the False: Issues for Further Consideration 185
6.3.1 Christ and His Creed 185
6.3.2 Christ and His (Possible) Worlds 189
6.3.3 Christ and His Church 194
6.4 The Lord’s Logic 198
6.4.1 Dominical Counterexamples? 199
6.4.2 Christ and Contradiction 202
6.5 Conclusion 204

Bibliography 207
Index 223
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 28/1/2021, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 22/1/2021, SPi

Introduction

Recent years have seen the flowering of something called the “theological
interpretation of Scripture.” This is, very roughly, what happens when
biblical scholars and theologians alike read the Bible to see what it tells us
about God. For several centuries, the discipline of biblical studies has been
not only distinguished but also separated from theological discourse. There
have been many notable exceptions, of course, but the all-too-common
results have been these: biblical scholars often interpret the texts with
other aims in mind (sometimes reading with a theological lens has been
discouraged as unscholarly and thus improper), and theologians often do
their work of constructive theology without serious engagement with bib-
lical scholarship or even with the Christian Scriptures. Recent years have
also seen the rise (or perhaps re-birth) of something now called “analytic
theology.” Analytic theology is, very roughly, what happens when philo-
sophers who are interested in doctrine and theologians who think that there
is (or might be) value in the appropriate use of philosophical tools get
together. It is now a burgeoning movement, and analytic theologians are
making contributions on a wide range of issues and topics, and from a variety
of perspectives and approaches. We have not, however, witnessed a great deal
of interaction between those who engage in the theological interpretation of
Scripture and those who practice analytic theology.
In this work, I take a few steps toward bringing these two seemingly
disparate approaches together. I do so out of the conviction that such an
exercise might be beneficial for both disciplines. I do not see them as
mutually exclusive; to the contrary, I am convinced that there is much
room for conversation and that both might be better for it. I do so as a
theologian, and I am keenly interested in a set of dogmatic questions and
issues that have been and remain important. These are focused in
Christology, and with respect to each of these questions or issues I work to
make progress by marshaling the resources of both theological exegesis and
analytic theology.

Analytic Christology and the Theological Interpretation of the New Testament. Thomas H. McCall,
Oxford University Press (2021). © Thomas H. McCall. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198857495.003.0001
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 22/1/2021, SPi

2  

0.1 Analytic Theology and Reflection on Christ

Before proceeding further, it might be helpful to gain a bit more clarity on

what is meant by terms such as “analytic theology” and “theological inter-
pretation of the Bible” (or “theological exegesis”). Let us start with “analytic
theology.” We might simply consider analytic theology to be a way of doing
systematic theology.¹ In this way of seeing things, it is, in William
J. Abraham’s words, “systematic theology attuned to the skills, resources,
and virtues of analytic philosophy.”² It is theology that is committed to
clarity in expression and rigor in argument.³ Seen this way, analytic theology
is systematic theology done with a particular set of commitments, goals, and
conceptual tools. Accordingly, analytic theology is simply theology done
with a commitment to employ the resources of analytic philosophy where
those conceptual tools might be helpful in the work of constructive Christian
theology.⁴
Such a description may be helpful as an initial characterization, but it only
takes us so far. The summary of Michael C. Rea takes us further, and it has
become something of a standard account of analytic theology. Analytic
theology is theology that shares much in common with the style and
ambitions of analytic philosophy. As such, it is committed to the following
desiderata:

(P1) Write as if philosophical positions and conclusions can be adequately

formulated in sentences that can be formalized and logically manipulated;
(P2) Prioritize precision, clarity, and logical coherence;
(P3) Avoid substantive (non-decorative) use of metaphor and other tropes
whose semantic content outstrips their propositional content;
(P4) Work as much as possible with well-understood primitive concepts,
and concepts that can be analyzed in terms of those;

¹ As Oliver Crisp has recently argued, e.g. “Analytic Theology as Systematic Theology,”
Journal of Open Theology (2017), pp. 156–166.
² William J. Abraham, “Systematic Theology as Analytic Theology,” in Oliver D. Crisp and
Michael C. Rea, eds., Analytic Theology: New Essays in the Philosophy of Theology (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2009), p. 54.
³ See Oliver D. Crisp, “On Analytic Theology,” in Oliver D. Crisp and Michael C. Rea, eds.,
Analytic Theology: New Essays in the Philosophy of Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2009), pp. 35–38.
⁴ As I put it in An Invitation to Analytic Christian Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity
Academic, 2015), p. 16.
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 22/1/2021, SPi

 3

(P5) Treat conceptual analysis (insofar as possible) as a source of evidence.⁵

We might usefully draw something of a distinction—albeit a rather rough

and ready one—between what might be called “soft analytic theology” and
“hard analytic theology.” Soft analytic theology is simply any theology done
with a commitment to the goals of clarity of expression, transparency and
rigor of argument, and accountability with respect to broader intellectual
standards. Hard analytic theology, on the other hand, does not hesitate to
employ specific theories, arguments, or conclusions drawn from mainstream
analytic epistemology, logic, metaphysics, esthetics, or moral theory. Hard
analytic theology goes beyond its softer versions, for it takes actual work
in analytic philosophy and presses it into service for the sake of doctrinal
analysis and formulation. For instance, in analytic theological treatments of the
doctrine of original sin, “soft” analytic theology strives for clarity of exposition
and transparency and rigor of argument, while “hard” analytic theology may
use recent developments in four-dimensionalist metaphysics in an effort to
make sense of “realist” versions of the doctrine.⁶ There is a sense in which the
“soft” version should not even be controversial but should characterize all
theology (although, sadly, it does not). But the “hard” cousin is sometimes
rather more controversial and a bit more elusive; it is often less accessible to
mainstream theologians and sometimes less interesting to them.⁷

0.2 Theological Interpretation and the Biblical

Witness to Christ

What do I mean by “theological exegesis” and the “theological interpretation

of Scripture?”

⁵ Michael C. Rea, “Introduction,” in Oliver D. Crisp and Michael C. Rea, eds., Analytic
Theology: New Essays on the Philosophy of Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009),
pp. 5–6. For further discussion, see Thomas H. McCall, An Introduction to Analytic Christian
Theology (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Academic, 2015), pp. 17–21.
⁶ Thus a sterling example of “soft” analytic theology on the doctrine of original sin would be
Ian McFarland, In Adam’s Fall: A Meditation on the Christian Doctrine of Original Sin (Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell, 2010). To see excellent examples of “hard” analytic theology in action on this
doctrine, see, e.g., Michael C. Rea, “The Metaphysics of Original Sin,” in Peter van Inwagen and
Dean Zimmerman, eds., Persons: Human and Divine (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007),
pp. 319–356, and Hud Hudson, “Fission, Freedom, and the Fall,” in Jonathan Kvanvig, ed.,
Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 58–79.
⁷ Although perhaps more interesting to scholars who approach analytic theology as philo-
sophers.
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 22/1/2021, SPi

4  

0.2.1 Theological Interpretation: An Initial Characterization

I mean something rather more than the characterization of Bruce

L. McCormack when he says that “rightly understood, ‘theological exegesis’
is nothing more than the exegesis of passages whose content is theological.”⁸
I do not mean less than this, but I do mean something more. As John
Webster puts it, “theological interpretation reads the New Testament as
apostolic Scripture,” and “it approaches the texts as acts of communication
whose primary author is God the Holy Spirit acting in, with, and through the
apostles.”⁹ To employ Daniel J. Treier’s helpful summary, “theological
exegesis deals with the Bible as a word about God and from God.”¹⁰
Accordingly, “Christians read the Bible as Scripture, authoritative as God’s
word for faith and life; thus, to interpret Scripture was to encounter God.”¹¹
Beyond this, there are several points that are important for a proper under-
standing of theological interpretation (as I see it, at least). First, while
theological interpretation need not be opposed to historical-critical study
of the Bible and indeed stands to benefit from it (and especially from the
wealth of knowledge offered by experts in studies of the ancient Near East,
Second Temple Judaism, and relevant Greco-Roman contexts), theological
interpretation is neither reducible to such study nor even finally accountable
to conformity to the conclusions of such studies.¹² Second, theological
interpretation views traditional (including “pre-critical”) exegesis as a
potential source of insight and such exegetes as fellow sojourners, allies,

⁸ Bruce L. McCormack, “The Identity of the Son: Karl Barth’s Exegesis of Hebrews 1.1-4
(and Similar Passages),” in Jon C. Laansma and Daniel J. Treier, eds., Christology, Hermeneutics,
and Hebrews: Profiles from the History of Interpretation (New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark,
2012), p. 158.
⁹ John Webster, “One Who is Son: Theological Reflections on the Exordium to the Epistle to
the Hebrews,” in Richard Bauckham, Daniel R. Driver, Trevor A. Hart, and Nathan MacDonald,
eds., The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 2009), p. 69.
¹⁰ Daniel J. Treier, Introducing Theological Interpretation of Scripture: Recovering a Christian
Practice (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), p. 36.
¹¹ Treier, Introducing Theological Interpretation, p. 13.
¹² For the responsible theological exegete, there may be occasions when outright rejection of
such conclusions is entirely warranted. See Peter van Inwagen, “Critical Studies of the New
Testament and the User of the New Testament,” in Thomas P. Flint and Eleonore Stump, eds.,
Hermes and Athena: Biblical Exegesis and Philosophical Theology (Notre Dame: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1993), pp. 159–190; Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 374–421; C. Stephen Evans, The Historical Christ and the
Jesus of Faith: The Incarnational Narrative as History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996).
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 22/1/2021, SPi

 5

and mentors.¹³ This does not, of course, mean that some interpretation is
better simply by virtue of being older (exegesis isn’t fine wine, nor is it like it
in all respects), nor does it mean that the responsible theological exegete
must agree with all that has been said in the past (indeed, it is impossible to do
so). But rather than assuming that whatever is most recent is obviously better
than what came before, the proper approach is one of respect and humility.
Third, while theological interpretation should not neglect historical-
grammatical approaches, it proceeds with a conviction that proper inter-
pretation of any particular text should be done within the broader canonical
context. In a manner not dissimilar to the theories of “emergence” that are
popular in the philosophy of physics and the philosophy of biology, the
whole has properties that are not reducible to the sum of the parts, and it is
not possible to arrive at a fulsome and adequate understanding of those parts
without appreciation both for those “emergent” properties and for the kind
of “top-down” causal effect that they have. Fourth, and more controversially,
theological exegesis (again, as I am doing it here) is disposed to view creedal
formulations as aids to proper exegesis rather than as barriers to the proper
understanding of Scripture. C. Kavin Rowe is correct when he says that there
is an “organic connection between the biblical testimony and the early
creeds, and the creeds can serve as hermeneutical guidelines to reading the
Bible because it is the biblical text itself that necessitated the credal
formulations.”¹⁴

0.3 A Preview of Coming Attractions

The proof is, according to the old cliché, in the pudding. So perhaps it will
help to offer an overview of what follows. I begin with chapters that offer
analytic engagement with important issues and recent proposals in New
Testament studies. In Chapter 1, I take a close look at Paul’s claims to be
“crucified” with Christ and to now share life with the incarnate Son.
Engaging especially with “apocalyptic” interpretations of Paul, I offer theo-
logical analysis of the current discussion, look at how the current debate in
biblical scholarship might map onto various metaphysical options, and
propose a way forward. In Chapter 2, I offer an analysis of the debate over

¹³ The locus classicus of the recent revival is David C. Steinmetz, “The Superiority of Pre-
Critical Exegesis,” Theology Today (1980), pp. 27–38.
¹⁴ C. Kavin Rowe, “Luke and the Trinity: An Essay in Ecclesial Biblical Theology,” Scottish
Journal of Theology (2003), p. 4.
OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 22/1/2021, SPi

6  

the “faith of Christ” in contemporary New Testament scholarship. Here

I take stock of the major extant proposals, and I suggest that theological
analysis shows that retrieval of older interpretations can help us adjudicate
this debate and move forward constructively.
In Chapter 3, I turn to consideration of some important issues in dog-
matic Christology as these are treated by “systematic” theologians, and
I bring both exegetical and analytic resources to bear upon contemporary
debates. Here I bring attention to the identity of the Son. Recent debates over
whether we can and should think of Christ as the logos asarkos are the focus
here. Contemporary debates over the proper interpretation of the theology
of Karl Barth have spawned additional interesting debates about Christology
and theology proper, and these are the subject of this chapter. Accordingly,
I first outline Bruce L. McCormack’s controversial interpretive proposal
about the relation of the doctrine of election to Christology and the doctrine
of the Trinity in Barth’s mature doctrine of God; following this I offer an
account of McCormack’s own constructive proposal. I then survey the
theological criticisms that are brought against it; here I look not only at
the criticisms that are raised with respect to the proper interpretation of
Barth but also and primarily at the crucial doctrinal issues. This leads to a
theological analysis of the proposal. Remaining in conversation with Barth,
Chapter 4 addresses the nature of the Son’s obedience or submission.
Proceeding in direct conversation with the proposals of Karl Barth and
Thomas Aquinas, I first summarize their positions, then raise some import-
ant theological issues, and then ask what a properly theological interpret-
ation of Hebrews 5:8 contributes to the discussion.
In Chapter 5, I turn to exegetically driven theological analysis of recent
proposals made by analytic theologians and philosophers of religion. I turn
attention to the important issue of the relation of the Son to the Father.
I approach this issue by first surveying some of the recent debates over
“social” doctrines of the Trinity. I work to gain some clarity on what is (or
might be) meant by the term “Social Trinity” as a label, I engage with
theological exegesis of some important New Testament texts that are directly
relevant to the contemporary discussions, and I apply this work to an
analysis of the recent analytic Trinitarian theology of Keith Ward. Finally,
in Chapter 6, I offer engagement with Jc Beall’s bold and novel suggestion
that we accept the traditional doctrine of the incarnation as a genuine
contradiction. Here I raise some distinctly theological concerns; in addition
to several issues that are historically grounded, I raise some concerns for his
view that come directly from the theological interpretation of the New
Testament witness to Christ.
 OUP CORRECTED AUTOPAGE PROOFS – FINAL, 2/2/2021, SPi

1
Crucified with Christ
The Ego and the Omega

1.1 Introduction

Paul’s declaration at the conclusion of the second chapter of his letter to the
Galatians is arresting. It is also rather unsettling, and it raises some very
interesting exegetical and important theological issues.¹ After saying that
those persons (and here he uses ΄Ημεις to include himself) who are of Jewish
ethnicity know that they are “justified” not through the works of the law but
by faith in Christ, after testifying that “we too have put our faith in Christ
Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ” (Gal 2:15–16), and after
adamantly denying that justification through such faith somehow legitim-
izes sin (μή γένοιτο), Paul makes this statement:

For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. I have
been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The
life I live in the body (ἐν σαρχί), I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved
me and gave himself for me (Gal 2:19–20).

Strikingly, Paul claims that “I am crucified with Christ” and “I no longer live,
but Christ lives in me.” What does he mean? Grant Macaskill says that this
text is “suggestive of an absolute transformation of identity.”² But just who is
this “I” who no longer lives? Who is the “I” who is said to now live? What is

¹ This passage is challenging at several levels (including exegesis). As N. T. Wright says, these
are “deliberately rich and dense formulations,” Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some
Contemporary Debates (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2015), p. 105. It is also central to Paul’s
theology. To quote Wright again, he says that this is the “decisive climax” of Paul’s teaching,
Paul and His Recent Interpreters, pp. 342–343. Martinus C. de Boer concurs: this is “the
theological high point of the first two chapters,” Galatians: A Commentary (Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press, 2011), p. 159.
² Grant Macaskill, Union with Christ in the New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2013), p. 221, cf., p. 225.

Analytic Christology and the Theological Interpretation of the New Testament. Thomas H. McCall,
Oxford University Press (2021). © Thomas H. McCall. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198857495.003.0002
Visit [Link] today to explore
a vast collection of ebooks across various
genres, available in popular formats like
PDF, EPUB, and MOBI, fully compatible with
all devices. Enjoy a seamless reading
experience and effortlessly download high-
quality materials in just a few simple steps.
Plus, don’t miss out on exciting offers that
let you access a wealth of knowledge at the
best prices!
Other documents randomly have
different content
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for

the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3,
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the
Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim
all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR
NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR
BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH
1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK
OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL
NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT,
CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF
YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving
it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or
entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide
a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation,

the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation,
anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with
the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or
any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission

of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
[Link].

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,

Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at [Link]/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can
be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the
widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many
small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to
maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating

charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and
keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in
locations where we have not received written confirmation of
compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of
compliance for any particular state visit [Link]/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where

we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no
prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in
such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make

any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of
other ways including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: [Link]/donate.

Section 5. General Information About

Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: [Link].

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how
to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

[Link]