Interpreting the New Testament

Webster Response Assignment Student: Karina Loayza

ASSIGNMENT – WEBSTER RESPONSE

We need to start our discussion with a definition of exegesis as the task of determining and

stating as accurately as possible the meaning of some document or part of thereof1. In our present

discussion this “document” under scrutiny is the Holy Scripture, this distinction about the subject

adds to our definition that exegesis is the defining activity, or the practical task, of theological

reason2. Thus, we could establish that there is a vital relation between the task of exegesis and

theology as one of “crops-soil”, so we should examine first and foremost the soil from where the

crops take their nutrients.

By discussing Webster’s insights about theology we will be in a good position to answer whether

or not the influences of exegetical self-understanding are fruitful. Webster goes on to say that the

office of theology is to be part of the church’s responsibility to guide the believers in their

reading of Holy Scripture, and this office has the following consequences: First, theology has a

pastoral responsibility over the Church, regarding the provision of godly instruction in order to

conform the believers to the image of Jesus Christ. In this sense, we can notice that the heart of

theology is a shepherd’s heart preoccupied for nurturing his flock with good pasture and not a

scholar’s heart seeking for knowledge and wisdom. Second, the guiding of the Church in the

reading of Scripture needs to be by exemplifying submission to Holy Scripture as God´s Word.

Regarding this, Webster has much to say but we can summarize his discussion by saying that

Scripture is God’s Word because it is God’s servant for the accomplishment of His Redemptive

Plan, that it has been sanctified by God in order to be a divine instrument of His revelation to

humankind. By locating the doctrine of Scripture as part of the doctrine of God, as Webster

proposes, we would have a much better starting point for the task of exegesis because we need to

1 Filson, Floyd. 1948. “Theological Exegesis.” Journal of Bible and Religion, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Oct., 1948). 2 Webster John, Holy Scripture: a Dogmatic Sketch (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003) pp.135

Interpreting the New Testament

Webster Response Assignment Student: Karina Loayza

approach Scriptures not as masters of the Word but as pupils, nor as critics but learners in its

school3. Third, Holy Scripture is the center of theology not a subdivision within it, which means

that all theological work is directed to the reading of Scripture. Again, regarding this Webster

has an interesting view because he prefers the term “reading” rather than “interpretation”. Now

this has a repercussion of our understanding of exegesis which has “interpretation” as an aspect

of his work. But we need to indicate that by using the term “reading”, Webster is trying to

change our attitude in our approach to the text. “Interpretation”, he says, gives much more

attention to the interpreting subject as that through which the text become relevant, in other

words, that it is by giving clarity to the text that it becomes alive. If we follow Webster´s lead we

need to incorporate our “reading” of Scripture within the economy of Grace of God, as an event

part of God´s revelatory self-giving to us4. In this faithful “reading”, the work of the Holy Spirit

is present, we are not on our own capacities and skills, and these are at the same time are

sanctified to be instrument of the economy of Grace. Finally, the rhetoric of theology is shaped

by its end, which is no other that the edification of the Church by means of reading of Scripture.

In contrast to classical theology which aim was to make true Disciples of Christ, modern scholar

theology has often adopted much of the standards of modern intellectual discourse5. Moreover,

regarding written instruction of Christian theology, Webster calls out attention to the content of

more classical commentaries which is reflection upon major biblical texts6, in contrast to modern

theology which its content is free reflection upon the linguistic, historical and literary

information. We would do well if we examine our aim in doing exegesis of the biblical text.

3 J. Calvin, “John Calvin to the Reader” in J.T. McNeill, ed. Quoted in Webster John, Holy Scripture: a Dogmatic

Sketch. pp. 77. 4 Webster John, Holy Scripture: a Dogmatic Sketch. pp.87 5 Ibid. pp. 131 6 Ibid. pp. 132

Interpreting the New Testament

Webster Response Assignment Student: Karina Loayza

What is the center of our arguments, not only in our exegetical work but also in our teaching?

We should declare along with Paul, that those who are not called by God seek signs and wisdom,

but we preached Christ crucified.

After examining the call of this kind of theology in the midst of modern scholar theology, and

after going back in time to listen to older saints which minds were Christocentric and their hearts

were pastoral, we need to take a stand in our position about who is going to be the real authority

in our exegetical work: Our interpretation as the final judge, or God as he reveals to us through

His Word. It is not an easy stand, and we agree with Webster, that it will take a share of the

embarrassment and censure which accompany its exile7. I think we need to be aware of the

influences we may have in our exegetical work, but also we do need to converse with others who

are standing in a different place than we are, in order to be a beacon of hope holding fast to the

teaching of the apostles and preaching Christ crucified.

7 Ibid. pp. 135