Redemptive deification in the "Commentary on the Gospel of John" by Cyril of Alexandria: an examination of doctrinal presuppositions
In pre-eighteenth century Europe, the task of interpreting Scripture was considered a theological enterprise, and the certainties of faith were developed in the ecclesial community through the process of this exegetical and theological reflection. The development of a modern critical approach to Scr...
| 發表在: | Melita theologica |
|---|---|
| 主要作者: | |
| 格式: | Print Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| 出版: |
2019
|
| In: |
Melita theologica
Year: 2019, 卷: 69, 發布: 2, Pages: 153-171 |
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity NBF Christology |
| Further subjects: | B
Bible. John -- Commentaries
B Theology, Doctrinal B Bible. John -- Criticism, interpretation, etc B Cyril, Saint, Patriarch of Alexandria, approximately 370-444 |
| 總結: | In pre-eighteenth century Europe, the task of interpreting Scripture was considered a theological enterprise, and the certainties of faith were developed in the ecclesial community through the process of this exegetical and theological reflection. The development of a modern critical approach to Scripture in the eighteenth century aimed to break free of the patterns that had shaped Christian Biblical interpretation for centuries. The traditional teaching about verbal inspiration was undermined and Scripture was seen as a fallible human product. The interpretation of Scripture became independent of dogmatics and a breach developed between a purely historical interest and Christian God-talk. This article aims to probe the problem whether the theologian can legitimately explain Biblical texts in a way which goes beyond historical exegesis, but which seems to be required by the theologian’s own dogmatic beliefs. In order to consider this problem, we have chosen a Commentary on John’s Gospel written by one of the Fathers of the Church: Cyril of Alexandria (c.376-444 CE). We will compare Cyril’s understanding of soteriology in this Commentary with that of John in order to see what is the common ground, if there is any, between the two authors in this regard. We will probe what is defensible and what is indefensible in Cyril’s efforts to interpret John’s Gospel by asking how far do Cyril and John speak the same theological language, and how far do Cyril’s Nicene doctrinal presuppositions make him speak a language remote from John and use the text differently from its author’s intentions. We will divide Cyril’s arguments into three main sections: (i) the relationship of Cyril’s soteriological arguments with his understanding of the obedience of Christ; (ii) the effects that Cyril’s notion of soteriology have on those who believe in Christ as the Son of God; (iii) the relationship which Cyril attributes to the coming of the Son of God with his Passion, Death and Resurrection. It may seem paradoxical that we have chosen an ancient commentator representing the Eastern tradition in Biblical interpretation for our investigation. Someone may raise the question: what has Cyril to do with our modern approach to the Gospel? However, the very fact that Cyril is nearer to John in time and culture than we are, may mean that he has something to teach us. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1012-9588 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Melita theologica
|