This English translation of a lecture delivered in November 2011 on the occasion of the author’s installation as Professor of New Testament at Uppsala University (Kelhoffer 2012) addresses several conceptual and methodological questions about New Testament Exegesis, including: ‘What is New Testament Exegesis?’, ‘What does it mean to call New Testament Exegesis an academic discipline?’ and ‘How can this discipline be relevant for other disciplines?’ A central argument is that the current balkanization of biblical studies is undesirable and that scholars who use more traditional or newer methods should engage, rather than talk past, each other. It could help to foster that process if we attend to a misconception of the ‘historical-critical method’ as a single method. Additionally, ‘the linguistic turn’ holds promise for future discussions.
AchtemeierP.J.1970 ‘On the Historical-Critical Method in New Testament Studies: Apologia pro Vita Sua’, Perspective11: 289–304.
2.
AuneD.E. (ed.) 2006Rereading Paul Together: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives on Justification (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic).
3.
BaaslandE.1995 ‘Neutestamentliche Forschung in Skandinavien (und Finnland)’, Berliner Theologische Zeitschrift12: 146–66.
4.
BarstadH.M.1980 ‘The Historical-Critical Method and the Problem of Old Testament Theology: A Few Marginal Remarks’, Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok45: 7–18.
5.
BechtlerS.R.1998Following in His Steps: Suffering, Community, and Christology in 1 Peter (SBLDS, 162; Atlanta: Scholars Press).
6.
BoissevainJ. 1966 ‘Patronage in Sicily’, Man n.s. 1/1 (Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland): 18–33.
7.
BourdieuP.1986 ‘The Forms of Capital’, in RichardsonJ.G. (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (New York: Greenwood): 241–58.
8.
ByrskogS.2005 ‘Bibelvetenskap i Sverige’ [‘Biblical Scholarship in Sweden’], Tro & Liv5: 15–21.
9.
CharpentierJ.1927 ‘St. Thomas the Apostle and India’, Kyrkohistorisk årsskrift27: 21–47.
10.
ClarkE.A.2004History, Theory, Text: Historians and the Linguistic Turn (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University).
11.
CollinsJ.J.2005The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
12.
DunnJ.D.G.1983 ‘The New Perspective of Paul’, Bulletin of the Johns Rylands University Library of Manchester65: 95–122.
13.
DunnJ.D.G.1990Jesus, Paul, and the Law: Studies in Mark and Galatians (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox).
14.
EbelingG.1950 ‘Die Bedeutung der Historisch-kritischen Methode für die Protestantische Theologie und Kirche’, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche47: 1–46. [ET: ‘The Significance of the Critical Historical Method for Church and Theology’, in idem, Word and Faith (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1963): 17-61.]
15.
EggerW.1987Methodenlehre zum Neuen Testament: Einführung in linguistische und historisch-kritische Methoden (Freiburg: Herder).
16.
FitzmyerJ.A.SJ2008The Interpretation of Scripture: In Defense of the Historical-Critical Method (New York: Paulist).
FridrichsenA.1929 ‘Det nye testamentets tanker om religiös mottagelighet og uimottagelighet’, Norsk teologisk tidsskrift30: 1–14.
19.
FryeR.M.1973 ‘On the Historical-Critical Method in New Testament Study: A Reply to Professor Achtemeier’, Perspective14: 28–33.
20.
FryerN.S.L.1987 ‘The Historical-Critical Method: Yes or No?’, Scriptura20: 41–70.
21.
GerdmarA.SyreeniK.2006Vägar till Nya Testamentet: Metoder, tekniker och verktyg för nytestamentlig exegetik [Ways to the New Testament: Methods, Techniques and Instruments for New Testament Exegesis] (Lund: Studentlitteratur).
22.
GerhardssonB.1994Fridrichsen, Odeberg, Aulén, Nygren: Fyra teologer [Fridrichsen, Odeberg, Aulén, Nygren: Four Theologians] (Lund: Novapress).
23.
GerhardssonB.2000 ‘Anton Fridrichsens bild av den judiska fromheten och dess företrädare’ [‘Anton Fridrichsen’s Presentation of Jewish Piety and Its Predecessors’], Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok65: 19–32.
24.
GerhardssonB.2005 ‘Uppsalaexegetiken’ [‘Uppsala Exegetes’], in BrohedI. (ed.), Sveriges kyrkohistoria, VIII: Religionsfrihetens och ekumenikens tid (Stockholm: Verbum): 392–95.
25.
GunkelH.1913 ‘Ziele und Methoden der Alttestamentlichen Exegese’, in idem, Reden und Aufsätze (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht): 11–29.
26.
HagnerD.A.1991 ‘The New Testament, History, and the Historical-Critical Method’, in BlackD.A.DockeryD.S. (eds.), New Testament Criticism & Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan): 71–96.
27.
HartmanL.1976 ‘New Testament Exegesis’, in RinggrenH. (ed.), Uppsala University 500 Years, I: Faculty of Theology at Uppsala University (Uppsala: Uppsala University): 51–65.
28.
HengelM.1973 ‘Historische Methoden und theologische Auslegung des Neuen Testaments’, Kerygma und Dogma19: 85–90.
29.
JohnsonA.F.1983 ‘The Historical-Critical Method: Egyptian Gold or Pagan Precipice?’ Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society26: 3–15.
30.
KäsemannE.1967 ‘Vom theologischen Recht historisch-kritischer Exegese’, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche64: 259–81.
31.
KelhofferJ.A.2000Miracle and Mission: The Authentication of Missionaries and Their Message in the Longer Ending of Mark (WUNT, 2.112; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
32.
KelhofferJ.A.2005The Diet of John the Baptist: “Locusts and Wild Honey” in Synoptic and Patristic Interpretation (WUNT, 176; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
33.
KelhofferJ.A.2007 ‘Early Christian Studies among the Academic Disciplines: Reflections on John the Baptist’s “Locusts and Wild Honey”’, Biblical Research50: 5–17.
34.
KelhofferJ.A.2010Persecution, Persuasion and Power: Readiness to Withstand Hardship as a Corroboration of Legitimacy in the New Testament (WUNT, 270; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).
35.
KelhofferJ.A.2012 ‘Nya testamentets exegetik som akademiskt ämne med relevans för andra ämnen’, Svensk Exegetisk Årsbok77: 55–70.
36.
KelhofferJ.A.2013 ‘Reciprocity as Salvation: Christ as Salvific Patron and the Corresponding “Payback” Owed by Christ’s Earthly Clients according to the Second Letter of Clement’, forthcoming in New Testament Studies.
LinnemannE.1986Wissenschaft oder Meinung? Anfragen und Alternativen (Neuhausen: Hänssler). [ET: Historical Criticism of the Bible: Methodology or Ideology? Reflections of a Bultmannian Turned Evangelical (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990).]
39.
MaierG.1974Das Ende der historisch-kritischen Methode (Wuppertal: Theologischer Verlag Brockhaus). [ET: The End of the Historical-Critical Method (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1977).]
40.
MarinB.1967Föreläsningsämnen vid professorsinstallationer i Uppsala 1855–1966 [Lecture Topics at Installations of Professors in Uppsala 1855–1966] (Skrifter rörande Uppsala universitet. C, Organisation och historia; Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis).
41.
MartinT.W.2000Review of Steven R. Bechtler, Following in His Steps: Suffering, Community, and Christology in 1 Peter (SBLDS, 162; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1998), in Review of Biblical Literature, 26 May 2000; online (25 November 2011): http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/2198_1315.pdf.
42.
NeyreyJ.H.2005 ‘God, Benefactor and Patron: The Major Cultural Model for Interpreting the Deity in Greco-Roman Antiquity’, JSNT27: 465–92.
43.
OlssonB.1999 ‘Förändringar inom svensk bibelforskning under 1900-talet’ [‘Transformations within Swedish Biblical Scholarship during the Twentieth Century’], in EilertH., et al. (eds.), Modern svensk teologi (Stockholm: Verbum): 68–135.
44.
OsiekC.2009 ‘The Politics of Patronage and the Politics of Kinship: The Meeting of the Ways’, Biblical Theology Bulletin39: 143–52.
45.
OsiekC.2009Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and Lutheran World Federation
SallerR.P.1982Personal Patronage under the Early Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University).
51.
SandersE.P.1977Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Minneapolis: Fortress).
52.
StenströmH.2011 ‘Tidsspeglar—Ett bidrag till samtalet om forskarnas ansvar’ [‘Mirrors of Time: A Contribution to the Conversation about Scholars’ Responsibility’], in LundborgP.KarlssonJ. (eds.), Människan är alltid större—vänbok till biskop Martin Lind (Linköping: Linköpings stift): 119–44.
StrömP. (ed.) 2011Nya professorer: Installation hösten 2011 [New Professors: Installation Fall 2011] (Skrifter rörande Uppsala universitet. B, Inbjudningar 165; Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis): 41–46.
55.
SvartvikJ.2006Bibeltolkningens bakgator: Synen på judar, slavar och homosexuella i historia och nutid [Biblical Interpretation’s Alleys: The View of Jews, Slaves and Homosexuals in History and Nowadays] (Stockholm: Verbum).
56.
SwartleyW.M.1984 ‘Beyond the Historical-Critical Method’, in SwartleyW.M. (ed.), Essays on Biblical Interpretation: Anabaptist-Mennonite Perspectives (Text-Reader Series, 1; Elkhart, IN: Institute of Mennonite Studies): I, 237–64.
57.
TroeltschE.1913 ‘Über historische und dogmatische Methode in der Theologie’, in idem, Gesammelte Schriften (Tübingen: Mohr): II, 729–53.
58.
VogelsW.1980 ‘Les limites de la méthode historico-critique’, Laval théologique et philosophique36: 173–94.
59.
WrightN.T.1978 ‘The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith’, Tyndale Bulletin29: 61–88.
60.
WrightN.T.1980‘The Messiah and the People of God: A Study in Pauline Theology with Particular Reference to the Argument of the Epistle to the Romans’ (dissertation, Oxford University).
61.
WrightN.T.1992The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress).
62.
WrightN.T.1997What St. Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
63.
ZetterholmM.2009Approaches to Paul: A Student’s Guide to Recent Scholarship (Minneapolis: Fortress).
