Biblical Theology in the Life of the Early Church: Recovering an Ancient Vision

by Stephen O. Presley

Biblical Theology in the Life of the Early Church recasts biblical theology as a practice cultivated in Christian community rather than a solely academic pursuit. Stephen Presley argues that the early church fathers crafted an ecclesial biblical theology that was lived out communally and oriented believers toward beholding God's glory.

This volume brings patristic biblical interpretation into conversation with contemporary biblical theology, exploring how assumptions and methods of figures such as Irenaeus and Augustine can guide modern hermeneutics. Presley shows how early Christian theologians emphasized virtue and discipleship alongside exegesis, patiently shaping readers to inhabit Scripture's narrative. He illuminates the catechetical and liturgical scaffolding that informed patristic biblical theology, centered on Christ as the cornerstone.

Students and scholars of theology, church history, hermeneutics, and patristics will find valuable new insights.

Genres: Theology, Church History, Biblical Studies, Christian

216 pages, Paperback

Published April 29, 2025

Reviews

[Levi Moberg · Rating 5 out of 5]

Review forthcoming in Religious Studies Review

[Elliot H · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very helpful look into the way that the early church practiced Biblical theology. I particularly enjoyed the first 4 chapters. Presely does a good job of teasing out what the church father’s underlying beliefs and assumptions were when they approached the Scriptures and how these views informed their reading and exegesis of them. Presely consults and references a variety of church fathers throughout the book and the bibliography can serve as a great reading suggestion list if you are interested in reading early church writings.

[Matthew Bloomquist · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredible. I will be using this to walk through Biblical interpretation with pastors and teachers I disciple. I have interacted with so many of the guys Presley quotes (Levering, Frei, Carter, Boersma, Taylor, Radner, De Lubac, Seitz) over the last two years really doing a deep dive on premodern figural interpretation. This book has beautifully brought together all the things I’ve been learning so clearly and succinctly. I’ve chuckled so many times reading thinking “Yes! Someone in the reformed tradition gets it!”

Here are a few of my Reflections:

Biblical Theology in the Life of the Early Church Reflections
1.) The Church of Saint-Germain-des-Pres (Page 2)
a. The art on lining the walls of the Church of Saint-Germain-des-Pres portraying a robust Biblical theology amazed me. It led me to reflect on this: If understanding the Bible in a unified and typological way was this commonly assumed, how have we fallen so far away? When you read the Bible plainly the parallels that the art depicts seem to be clear and a natural Biblical and theological connection: Adam’s birth and Christ’s birth, Jesus baptism and Israel’s baptism in the Red Sea, Joseph and Jesus betrayal, Christ’s ascension and Elijah’s ascension. The average Christian I think would see these paintings, wonder at the unity of the Scriptures, and worship the triune God. Now, with the rise of higher criticism, many today would tear apart those paintings as they do the Scriptures.
2.) Metaphysics and Interpretation (Page 19 and 27)
a. The discussion of metaphysics and Biblical interpretation is essential, a topic which is rarely addressed. It was awesome reading Presley on how the Father’s metaphysical framework guided and governed their interpretation of Scripture. Everyone has metaphysical commitments and presuppositions that they take to the text. The question is what metaphysical framework you are bringing with you. The most fundamental questions such as do you believe in God and who God is are metaphysical. If your metaphysical framework does not arise from and is conformed to the Scriptures themselves, you will never interpret in a way “worthy of God”. Much interpretation today brings to the text a naturalistic, atomistic, mechanistic, nominalist metaphysic and epistemology leading to the denial of the supernatural and the death of the spiritual sense within the Scripture. It crucifies Christ who is the treasure hidden within the Scriptures as it rips him out of all interpretation.
3.) Ecclesial Biblical Theology (Page 7)
a. On page 7 Presley writes “Untethered from the church and without any shared theological and moral commitments, scholars are free to roam, creating meaning as their desires lead them. Without a worshiping community that embraces a way of life, or a rule of faith, the study of the Bible will remain stuck in an endless cycle of legitimization”. This quote led me to reflect on how humanism and the enlightenment was a major historical shift from reading the Scriptures as an ecclesial community to reading the Scriptures as an individual. The Reformation was necessary as the Church of Rome was no Church at all. The reading Ecclesial community was a horrible one because the rule of faith and theological and moral commitments of Rome were corrupt. Yet in departing from Rome, an unforeseen consequence among other factors, was the rise of individualism. Yes, all Christians should be able to read the Bible for themselves but they should never do it solely by themselves, divorced from a greater ecclesiological community where a common rule of faith and theological and moral commitments shape their interpretation.
4.) Universities and Interpretation (Page 7)
a. Building off the last reflection, when the individual is exalted above a greater tradition, then the individual becomes a tradition unto themselves. This is how expressive individualism has infiltrated the church today. If we reject tradition and begin to read the Scriptures as clay to mold into our own portrait we are in big trouble. This is what happens when biblical interpretation is not done in an ecclesiastical setting. The individual no longer comes to the Scriptures in reverent worship seeking to be shaped by the Scriptures, rather the Scriptures come to the individual in reverent worship seeking to be shaped by the individual. This is precisely what happened as the universities and scholars became the central hub shaping biblical interpretation. The German higher critics tore the Scriptures apart as they came to it with a naturalistic metaphysical framework. They already denied the supernatural so had to bend, twist, and destroy the Scriptures to conform to their worldview. When the Scriptures are studied apart from a ecclesiastical community, you move from a revelational epistemology to a rational epistemology.
5.) Theological Method of the Patristics (Page 9)
a. On page 9, Presley quotes Fred Sanders who argues that “it is senseless to try to retain the result of the early church’s holistic interpretation of Scripture- the perception of the biblical doctrine of the Trinity- without cultivating, in a way appropriate for our own time, the interpretive practice that produced that result”. This is so important, and I am so glad Presley included this, though I wish it was expanded upon more! So often pastors and theologians affirm the doctrinal standards produced by the early church such as the Apostles and Nicene Creed and then turn around and reject the father’s interpretive method that formed the creed. I don’t think that this is right or proper. If you accept the doctrines formed by the early church, you have to accept the practice that produced that result. I am not saying that you must agree with every single interpretation of every single church father. But broadly speaking, it is evident that the fathers all read the Scriptures as a unified whole that is Christologically loaded. You cannot accept these creeds and then reject their spiritual reading of the text, that is inconsistent and smells of chronological snobbery.
6.) The Beatific Vision and Biblical Interpretation (Pg. 16-17)
a. The beatific vision is a huge theme within patristic writing. The telos or end goal of gazing upon the beauty of the Lord shaped everything in the fathers’ lives, not only the way they lived but the way they interpreted Scripture. We live in a pragmatic culture that values productivity and production above all else. Everything is done as a means to get to an end. When applied to the interpretation of Scripture, this can be dangerous. Rather than coming to the Scriptures with a humble and contemplative heart ready to see the face of the Lord, we often come to just hear “tell me what to do”. Application is necessary but it must come in the proper place. You cannot put the chariot before the horse. The beatific vision must guide our interpretation today. We must read Scripture as an end in and of itself for in them we behold the face of God.
7.) The Rule of Faith and Interpretation (Page 21)
a. I loved Presley’s emphasis on the father’s understanding of the rule of faith. The rule of faith is absolutely essential for Biblical Interpretation. The rule of faith is formed from Scripture and then in turn governs our interpretation of Scripture. The rule of faith serves as theological guard rails governing all interpretation. Many accuse the father’s spiritual interpretation as making the text mean whatever you want. The fathers would despise this; in fact they did. Irenaeus accused the Gnostics of the very thing that postmodern interpreters accuse the patristics of! Any figural or spiritual interpretation of a text whos conclusion contradicts the literal sense (contradicting it being different from going beyond it) and falls outside the rule of faith is to be rejected.
8.) History and Interpretation (Page 24)
a. This is one aspect that I wish Presley explored more. What is the difference between “redemptive historical” exegesis which values things such as typology and “premodern” or “figural interpretation”. I think one of the biggest differences lies in one’s understanding of history. This difference is summarized by Matthew Levering’s quote on page 24 which reads “Christian biblical exegesis, in accord with the Christian and biblical understanding of reality should envision history not only as a linear unfolding of individual moments, but also as an ongoing participation in God’s active providence, both metaphysically and Christologically-pneumatologically”. History is moving forward linearly but it goes beyond that. If we look at the Old Testament as merely leaning forward and pointing to Christ, we can eclipse his sacramental presence contained within the Old Testament itself. The Old Testament becomes a sign to point us to the “thing” of the New Testament. The Old Testament should be read as a “thing” containing Christ in its womb. Now that the Christ has been fully revealed in the New Testament, we must go back to the Old Testament and see all the ways in which he was already there.
9.) Scripture and Liturgy (Page 28)
a. I loved Presley’s recovery of the importance of liturgy. In modern evangelical churches today, liturgy is rejected for various reasons, not least of which being that it is “roman catholic”. This is a fatal mistake. Every church has a liturgy. The question is not “should we have a liturgy?” but rather “what is our liturgy?”. Churches that do not follow a liturgical rhythm have a liturgical rhythm that is individualistic, spontaneous, and not open to public scrutiny. Our lives are constantly participating in cultural liturgies. You cannot avoid them. Therefore, it is important for the church to have biblical liturgies for her members to actively participate in as worship communities. We need to recover a Christian calendar and distinctly Christian worship services. These liturgies serve to pedagogically train us and form us, they form our desires and loves.
10.) Typology and Allegory (Page 97)
a. When talking about the interpretive method of the early church with others, one of the most common objections I face is the father’s use of allegory or the spiritual sense of scripture. These objections are summarized by Presley when he says, “when the fathers use typology, their interpretations are tolerable, or even laudable, but their allegories are bad because they supposedly read their own spiritual realities into the text”. I loved how Presley addressed the false sharp distinction between typology and allegory. “The literal gives way to the spiritual; both senses hold together in the very wording of the text”. The Fathers saw the spiritual meaning built into the literal. The literal reading gives way and shapes the spiritual meaning. Spiritual interpretations never contradict the literal but can go beyond it due to the divine mind orchestrating all of Scripture.

To Further Address:

1.) As mentioned above, one area that I would love to read more of Presley on would be the distinctions between a redemptive historical framework which is better than historical grammatical but still does not go far enough in my opinion in their Christology, the Spiritual sense, and understanding of history. Addressing this in more detail would be super helpful and beneficial. Really just comparing and contrasting the Patristics to the Reformers and Puritans, noting the continuity and discontinuity of their biblical theology (most definitely a project going beyond the scope and intent of this book)
2.) Another aspect that I would love to have read Presley on is the Eucharist in the liturgy of the church. An awesome connection in relation to this book would be how many churches understanding of the Eucharist parallels her understanding of the Scriptures. Just like the Scriptures, the Eucharist has been stripped of its spiritual sense in many churches today. Just as words are just words rather than signs sacramentally pointing to the real spiritual presence of Christ contained within the Scriptures, the Eucharist is just a meal of remembrance and no more. Scripture is read naturalistically, stripped of its spiritual sense and the Eucharist is eaten naturalistically, stripped of its spiritual sense. The Fathers saw the Eucharist as much more than this, it was the high point of the churches liturgy.

[Collin Scribner · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed going through this as I try to teach some guys at my church about biblical theology! All of these ancient guys immersed themselves in and saw their world through the real world that Scripture reveals. I bet Augustine would have loved to read Narnia since it seems like stepping through the wardrobe was what these guys were doing WAY before it was cool.

[Lindsay John Kennedy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I waver between three stars and four. The content is great but the book doesn’t reach its potential. I’ll err on 4 stars…

This book is well organized with a structure and flow that makes good sense. The content is strong and presented well. More, the thesis is great. We have much to learn from how the early church read the Bible. I love that he emphasized that, for the fathers, biblical theology is guided by the rule of faith, follows the narrative of scripture, glorifies Christ, both produces and requires virtue, and is done with and for the sake of the church (rather than for individualistic academic dissection). And Presley clearly knows the church fathers and their writings and his quotations are on point.

That said, I was surprised to conclude that the book was largely “fine.” My indifference is partly because I wasn’t stretched or challenged. I realize that’s subjective. I’ve read enough of the primary and secondary sources cited that Presley’s book felt a little too familiar. And I agreed with him so much that I realized I’m probably not the audience for it.

But that brings me to my deeper, less subjective issue—who is this book for? Presley’s conclusion says the following.

“The proper context for biblical theology, I contend, is not canon or historical context or even salvation history; it is the Christian community formed through the intertwining threads of confession and liturgy” (172)

The book argues that biblical theology should be done in the church, by the church, for the church. So to move this discussion out of the academy into the church to achieve this goal, the book should be written to serve seminary students and pastors, if not laypeople.

Given that, the book could have benefited from simpler prose with fewer interaction with and quotes from academics, fewer concepts being introduced to the reader, and more practical examples and application.

Some discussions veered into territory that felt more like the audience was fellow scholars: the author’s own peers. Topics were introduced without much explanation, eg the conversation around the spiritual sense and the definition of Prosopological exegesis felt muddier than clarifying.

The book was primarily descriptive of what the early church did and why. That’s helpful and inspirational, but I wish it provided the next step of how readers can emulate them.

The book concludes that the early church can guide the church into the future. I’m sympathetic with this goal. But I think it’d have been more successful for pastors and students, and especially laypeople, if it were more practical in equipping the reader to achieve the goal.

[Aaron · Rating 5 out of 5]

Biblical Theology is a popular topic of interest today, but is it really a new and novel way of reading the Word? In Biblical Theology in the Life of the Early Church, Stephen O. Presley recovers an ancient vision that recasts biblical theology as a practice cultivated in Christian community.

Biblical theology is a way of thinking about the unity of Scripture. Presley explains how the academic world is in disarray in its methodology of reading and interpreting through the lens of biblical theology. He presents a picture of incoherence, inconsistency, and fragmentation.

Christ in Scripture

In response, he calls us back to the ways of the early church fathers—from the apostles to Irenaeus to Augustine—and to the three things that worked together to frame their ecclesial biblical theology: Scripture, the rule of faith (key points and summaries of the thrust of Scripture—much like wedding vows), and liturgy.

I was encouraged to read that we don’t have to be scared or hesitant about finding Christ in Scripture. Presley shows that the fathers found Christ embedded throughout Scripture, especially by drawing on passages that point to the person and work of Christ in his first and second coming.

United by God

I was most moved by how the church and her liturgy help us find ourselves in the story and drama of Scripture. As we gather around the Word, we conform ourselves to Christ and make progress in our sanctification together. This communal life of following Christ is a beautiful picture of a realized, experienced, lived-out biblical theology.

This thought-provoking academic book is a deep and rewarding read that will cause you to wonder at the beauty of biblical theology and worship the God who unites it all together.

I received a media copy of Biblical Theology in the Life of the Early Church and this is my honest review. @diveindigdeep

[Chandler Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

“The early church's social imaginary was thoroughly theological and commensurate with their rule of faith. It is not possible to understand the methods of exegesis in the patristic period without understanding the theological assumptions informing those methods, assumptions infused within an ecclesial culture of interpretation that united the biblical texts in a drama of salvation under the guidance of God.”

This is a great and unique work from Stephen Presley. Having Fathers such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Augustine as his primary references, Presley walks us through the early church’s reverence for the Scriptures, and shows us how the Scriptures shaped the community and identity of the church as early believers understood themselves as living out the narrative of salvation history in their worship and pursuit of holiness. Presley also shows us how the early church understood the literal sense of Scripture as a grand narrative spanning from creation to new creation, and how the spiritual sense—the task of discerning Christ within the text—was embedded within this narrative. Presley also shows us how the early theologians taught us to have a Christian metaphysic and good theological assumptions (Scripture is God’s self revelation, interpretations must be worthy of God) as we approach the Scriptures. I also found this book enlightening in its discussion on the rule of faith as a narrative and theological summary of sound biblical teaching. A very helpful source for understanding patristic biblical interpretation and its value for the modern discipline of biblical theology.

[Matthew Bruemmer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Presley has developed thoughtful, insightful, and convicting points throughout the entirety of the book that are supported by well researched and condensed details of life in the early church. The structure of this book is really well thought out, providing easy accessibility to each point he is trying to convey while connecting to an overall call to relearn what it means to read the Bible through the lens of the Bible. I think like all great Christian authors, it can be a bit dense and repetitive at times but ultimately his multitude of early church father historical examples and background is insightful and helpful in thinking about our modern church. Although I think his summary is a little too negative to some great examples of churches in our current generation that are actively working the points he tries to make, I would still recommend this book as an excellent reminder of how the church operated in early days while still responding to the changing world around them.

[Brenden Wentworth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very insightful look into early church biblical interpretation and theological method!

Presley advocates for an “ecclesial biblical theology”—where the purpose, methods, and applications of theology are rooted in the community of faith, grounded agreed upon doctrine, and are arisen from presuppositions of belief.
In other words, “faith seeking understanding” is the most God-honoring way to approach the scriptures, rather than seeking to dissect them like a lab experiment or as any other book.

For the scriptures are not just “any other book”.
The Scripture is the Word of God and transformation unto Christ, the image of God, requires us to believe that when we read & digest Scripture we do so “before the face of God” as Augustine put it

Highly recommended for understanding the beauty, significance, and variety of patristic biblical interpretation

[Daniel Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very insightful and written superbly. I really appreciate the call to a holistic approach to Scripture from the Church Fathers. Although they were by no means perfect, they sought to live within the narrative of Scripture as they desired nothing more than to behold the face of the Triune God in Christ. This eclesial biblical theology Presley argues for was a helpful category to expand my mind when it comes to hermeneutics. I still don’t know what to make of some of the Patristic Hermeneutic, but I do feel compelled from reading this book to flood my life with the holy Scriptures for in them we come to know and love the one true God.

[Greg Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very helpful book.

I do wish two things were considered: (1) the larger arc of signum/res that is present in the early church. Particularly, that all things become signs that point to Christ when Christ becomes the hermeneutical lynch-pin. Including the reader, etc. (2) I think most readers who pick up this volume are probably quite comfortable with Christological interpretation (when talking about the spiritual sense of Scripture) but stumble when that same hermeneutic is used for seeing the church in most texts. Would have loved to have him address this issue. Maybe he does elsewhere.

Regardless, very clear and helpful book that weds interpretation and virtue.

[Colby Reese · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a good book. I don’t agree with everything he says in it, but the right, balanced understanding for what Presley argues with regard to the way we do biblical theology is spot on.