Redemptive-Historical Hermeneutics and Homiletics

Debates in Holland, America, and Korea from 1930 to 2012

Hyun

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2015
• eBook ISBN: 9781630879839
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

This book focuses on redemptive historical hermeneutics and homiletics within New Testament theology. This is a valuable legacy of the Reformed tradition, despite differences in interpreting and preaching Bible texts that surfaced in Holland (1920s and 1930s) and the United States (1970s onwards) before influencing Korean Reformed churches. The background, origin, distinctiveness, and development of these theological debates is explored and evaluated before the features of redemptive history in Korea are identified. The influence of Western redemptive-historical scholars on the Korean debate are also analyzed.Here is a major and contemporary contribution to reformed-historical hermeneutics and homiletics that is relevant for Korean Reformed churches, but also for all Reformed churches worldwide.

1

Introduction

First of all I describe my aims in this book, before defining key terms and then providing a brief outline of the homiletical controversy in Holland, America, and Korea concerning redemptive-historical Reformed preaching.

Aims

My first aim is to describe the background to, and development of, the debates in Reformed circles, especially in Holland, America, and Korea, concerning redemptive-historical preaching. I regard this as a necessary aim, if only for the reason that, in Korea especially, many preachers and scholars who argue over redemptive-historical preaching do not appreciate the complex history of the debate or the relationship between the Dutch and American debates. It is too often wrongly assumed in Korea, but also in the West, that the Dutch and American debates in the 1930s and 1980s respectively were similar, if not almost identical. In addition, in order to engage in detailed research concerning the relationship and differences between the Dutch, American, and Korean debates, it will be helpful to provide a clear outline of that history later in the chapter.

My second aim is to explore critically, and compare, the distinctive features of both the Dutch and American debates relating to redemptive-historical preaching. Many scholars, like Edmund P. Clowney (1961),1 Sidney Greidanus (1970),2 and Cornelis Trimp (1986),3 critically examined the original Dutch debate, but their examinations are now dated and have crucial weaknesses in their treatment which I identify and discuss in chapters 3 and 4. A new debate relating to redemptive-historical preaching occurred in America in the late 1980s and continues until today, necessitating a reexamination of the original debate in relation to the new debate. This preliminary research is also essential for the proper examination of the redempive history debate in Korean churches, because the latest Korean debate follows a similar course to that of the previous two debates, as I intend to show.

Recent surveys of the Dutch and American debates, like those of John Carrick (2002)4 and Stefan T. Lindblad (2005),5 are, however, inadequate for several reasons. Firstly, a participant in the American debate, such as Carrick, is unable to be detached from his preference for one of the debating parties. Secondly, Carrick’s research is inappropriate because it focuses mainly on the limited issue of his own concern, that is, the issue of the imperative mood in the biblical text. Such an approach thus fails to explore the comprehensive characteristics of both sides in the debates. Thirdly, Lindblad attempts to be more fairly objective in dealing with both debates, but he is concerned much more with the American than with the Dutch debate. Moreover, he identifies the American debate theoretically with the Dutch one, but this is misleading because each debate has its own distinctive features, with different theological roots and contexts. These factors must be respected in seeking a competent understanding of both debates, and their distinctive features must be recognized. No study has been undertaken which compares the two debates alongside an acknowledged and thorough recognition of their respective theological roots and ecclesiastical contexts. In this respect, my research is necessary and original.

My third aim is to examine the influence of the Dutch and American controversies on redemptive-historical preaching in Korean Reformed homiletics. The redemptive history debate in Korea, which occurred in the late 1990s, expressed a dependence of Korean Reformed preaching on the previous two redemptive history debates in Holland and America. Scholars like Sung-Jong Shin6 and Sung-Kuh Chung7 identified the homiletical problems in the Dutch Reformed churches in the 1930s with those in Korean pulpits today. However, this approach is misleading because the theological and cultural contexts of the Korean churches are different from those of the Dutch churches involved in the debate. Consequently, the current redemptive history debate in Korea has been somewhat confused regarding subsequent developments in the West. I deem it necessary to examine the influences of both the Dutch and American debates on Korean redemptive-historical preaching.

My final aim is to sample Korean Reformed preaching, with a view to identifying, comparing, and evaluating any distinctive features which may be found in redemptive-historical preaching in Korea. There has been a general agreement amongst participants in the Korean debate that Korean redemptive-historical preaching requires further reflection and development. I have chosen Won-Tae Suk’s case as an example of redemptive-historical preaching in Korea. This will be investigated in chapter 7.

Definitions

I now turn to the definition of key terms used in this work. This exercise is essential because some of these terms are understood differently by scholars. I am eager to achieve precision in my own use of these terms in order to avoid any possible misunderstanding.

Redemptive History

This term has been given different connotations, even by those who claim to use and advocate the redemptive-historical method. A number of key works were published between 1945 and 1970 dealing extensively with this theme, including, for example, Oscar Cullmann’s Christ and Time (1945) and Salvation in History (1965); Eric C. Rust’s Salvation History (1962); and Isaac C. Rottenberg’s Redemption and Historical Reality (1964)...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Redemptive History
• 3. The Dutch Debate
• 4. The American Debate
• 5. Confusion and Definitions
• 6. The Debate in Korea
• 7. Conclusion
• Bibliography