Interpretation 63, 2 (2009) on Calvin

One of the journals I pay money to subscribe to is Interpretation, published by Union Theological Seminary.

Given that 2009 is the 500th anniversary of Calvin’s birth, the latest issue explores aspects of Calvin’s work as a biblical interpreter.

The following summaries are my edited combination of the abstracts and comments from the editorial introduction.

Randall Zachman
Oracles, Visions, and Oral Tradition: Calvin on the Foundation of Scripture
Randall Zachman argues that Calvin has a deep appreciation for the importance of oral tradition, and for revelation received in oracles and visions immediately from God. For Calvin, according to Zachman, the foundation of Scripture is the oracles and visions revealed to the patriarchs, transmitted through generations by an oral tradition that faithfully preserved these oracles. Zachman goes on to argue that Calvin even authorises certain practices or doctrines as applicable to the church of his day based on such oral tradition. Scripture is a form of the Word of God, but a relatively late one, and one that does not supersede oracles and visions.

Elsie McKee
Calvin and Praying for ‘All People Who Dwell on Earth’
Elsie McKee notes that Calvin’s interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:1–2 apparently leads him to hold both a doctrine and a practice of prayer for ‘all people’ that may seem contradictory to his teaching on predestination. McKee argues, on the contrary, that Calvin is preeminently a biblical theologian who addresses the themes presented in Scripture, including both predestination and prayer. Calvin expands upon earlier patristic and medieval readings to a truly universal prayer for the world.

David C. Steinmetz
Calvin as Biblical Interpreter Among the Ancient Philosophers
David Steinmetz shows the extent to which Calvin as a student of Scripture was also steeped in classical culture and literature. He argues that in many places it is impossible truly to understand Calvin’s arguments unless one has some knowledge of the Greek and Roman authors to whom he refers. And yet, Calvin is not captive to any of the classical schools of philosophy (he maintains a distance from his favourite philosophers Plato and Seneca, for instance). For Calvin, there could be no sharp division between ‘Athens and Jerusalem’, between sacred and profane knowledge. All truth was the revelation of God’s providential hand, and the Christian need not fear seeking truth wherever it may be found. For Calvin, the only proper response to this rich intellectual heritage for a devout Christian people called to love God with their minds as well as with their hearts must always remain profound gratitude.

James Brashler
From Erasmus to Calvin: Exploring the Roots of Reformed Hermeneutics
James Brashler explores the roots of Calvin’s biblical scholarship in the first generation of the Reformation, especially in Christian humanists like Erasmus of Rotterdam. He argues that Calvin’s dependence on these earlier scholars has not been sufficiently explored or acknowledged, partly because Calvin himself is so reticent about the sources of his learning (he does not provide the footnotes in his commentaries and sermons). It is also because some of the first generation reformers – with the exception of Luther and Zwingli – have not received as much scholarly attention as has Calvin. Brashler is particularly intrigued by the resonances between Oecolampadius’ and Calvin’s respective commentaries on Isaiah.