Why Brevard Childs matters to Evangelicals

While attending an undergraduate course I recall raising my hand and asking "isn't Paul referring to the Old Testament when he mentions 'scripture' in 1 Timothy 3:16?" The professor peering through his bifocals dismissed the question and nonchalantly moved on. Reflecting on that moment I attribute the professors lack of response to my overly confident and cocky attitude. I was an immature human being. However, immaturity aside the question remains.

The heart of this question revolves around the relationship between the Old and New Testaments. How does the Hebrew Bible coalesce with the Christian witness of the New Testament? Childs tackles the topic (among others) in his seminal book Biblical Theology. Although he in no conservative stalwart (he denies the authorship of Moses and affirms pagan influences in the development of the Old Testament), Childs does press to develop a canonical final form of the Bible which he says became a normative guide for Christian life, theology, and practice.

John Sailhamer, former Old Testament professor at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary appears to build upon Childs' canonical thesis. The New Testament not only affirms but continues the story of the Old Testament. Faith provides theological string holding Genesis to Revelation together. Further, God's covenant blessing, explained in the OT and finding assurance in Jesus of the NT is a primary theme in the narrative of Scripture. Stated differently, the the books of the New Testament tell about the Jesus of the Old Testament. Ever wonder why the The Gospel of Thomas is not in the canonical NT? Its story is not consistent with the Old Testament. True, similarities can be found in Thomas with the four canonical gospels, however clear misconceptions of Jesus is also painted by Thomas.

The approach taken by Childs also demonstrates his critical analysis of biblical criticism of the 18th century. Although he may find usefulness in what he opposes, Childs acknowledges that a Christian Bible needs to be treated differently than other books. Demythologization (Rudolf Bultman), The Quest for the Historical Jesus (Albert Schweitzer), and reading the Bible strictly as history, all come under the auspice of Childs. The Bible is relegated from theological and spiritual to historical or mere literature. For example, Childs attributes Gabler as the first biblical theological who opened the door for understanding biblical theology from a historical perspective. Liberal and conservative scholars find value in Gabler's work (Childs, Biblical Theology, p. 4-5). As a result, straightforward historical literal reading of the Bible became convoluted with other philosophical interpretations of the Bible. The issue of how history affects the Bible aside Childs aims to pull together the two facing cliffs which were split apart from one another since W. Bauer.