Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics: Foundations and Principles of Evangelical Biblical Interpretation

by Graeme Goldsworthy

While there are many books on hermeneutics, Graeme Goldsworthy's perception is that evangelical contributions often do not give sufficient attention to the vital relationship between hermeneutics and theology, both systematic and biblical. In Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics , Goldsworthy moves beyond a reiteration of the usual arguments to concentrate on the theological questions of presuppositions, and the implications of the Christian gospel for hermeneutics. In doing so, he brings fresh perspectives on some well-worn pathways. Part I examines the foundations and presuppositions of evangelical belief, particularly with regard to biblical interpretation. Part II offers a selective overview of important hermeneutical developments from the sub-apostolic age to the present, as a means of identifying some significant influences that have been alien to the gospel. Part III evaluates ways and means of reconstructing truly gospel-centered hermeneutics. Goldsworthy's aim throughout is to commend the much-neglected role of biblical theology in hermeneutical practice, with pastoral concern for the people of God as they read, interpret and seek to live by his written Word.

Genres: Theology, Biblical Studies, Christian, Christianity, Religion, Nonfiction, New Testament

341 pages, Hardcover

First published February 28, 2007

About the author

Graeme Goldsworthy is an Australian Anglican and Old Testament scholar. Now retired, Goldsworthy was formerly lecturer in Old Testament, biblical theology and hermeneutics at Moore Theological College in Sydney, Australia. He is the author of "According to Plan" (IVP, 1991), "Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture" (Eerdmans, 2000) and "Proverbs: The Tree of Life" (CEP, 1993). Goldsworthy has an MA from Cambridge University and a ThM and PhD from Union Theological Seminary in Virginia.

Reviews

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Most pastors may secretly be glad that they can leave the formal study of hermeneutics behind in seminary. "Hermeneutics," after all, is not a word that is especially useful to common pastoral discourse. Drop that one in a conversation or sermon and people are likely to respond, "Herman who?!" However, since one of the primary vocations of the pastor is to interpret and apply the Word of God to the People of God, hermeneutics is never really left behind. We all have presuppositions and ideas which control the way we read and understand Scripture. The question is, are these presuppositions derived from the Scriptures themselves and consistent with the Gospel, or are they derived from philosophical and cultural influences of which we may not even be aware?

Graeme Goldsworthy's new book, Gospel-centered Hermeneutics: Foundations and Principles for Evangelical Biblical Interpretation, is a profound study of the ideas and issues involved in hermeneutics - and especially the importance of taking the Gospel of the Crucified, Risen, and Exalted Christ as our starting point for interpreting Scripture. The book is divided into three parts and nineteen chapters, followed by a bibliography, and Name and Scripture indices.

Part One: Evangelical Prolegomena to Hermeneutics

Part one contains four chapters dealing with concepts foundational to the task of hermeneutics and the remainder of the book. Those chapters are:
*The Necessity for Hermeneutics
*Presuppositions in Reading and Understanding
*Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics
*Towards a Biblical Theology of Interpretation
Goldsworthy states that "hermeneutics is about communication, meaning, and understanding" (24). These are the three dimensions involved in hermeneutics: the message/text, the sender/author, and the receiver/reader. Hermeneutics is about bridging the gaps (of language, culture, history, literature, etc.) that exist between the receiver/reader and the message/text and sender/author. When it comes to Scripture, God is the communicator, God's word is the message, and God's people are the receivers/readers.

The primary aim of this book is to show how all three of these dimensions in hermeneutics find their center in the person and work of Christ. "The gospel of Jesus Christ reveals him as the Word of God who is the truth. Jesus as the divine communicator, the saving message, and the human receiver demonstrates where the heart of true hermeneutics lies. The gospel is the power of God for salvation, which includes hermeneutical salvation" (53). Part one lays the groundwork for this kind of thinking and shows "from creation, through fall and redemptive history, to the new creation reveals a consistent approach to the basics of hermeneutics. In essence it shows that hermeneutic failure is due to human sin. The fact that we struggle for meaning and understanding as fallen creatures in a fallen world is ultimately problematic only if God has not acted to redeem the situation. But, because we believe he has acted redemptively in Christ, it is to this Christ that we must turn for hermeneutic salvation" (85).

Part Two: Challenges to Evangelical Hermeneutics

Part two is probably the most challenging section of the book, yet its value is great. The author shows how the Gospel has been "eclipsed" by the "invasion of non-biblical philosophical frameworks into the interpretive process" (91). What follows is both a survey of the history of hermeneutics and a biblically-faithful critique of the various schools of thought. In eight chapters Goldsworthy discusses The Eclipse of the Gospel in:
*The Early Church
*The Medieval Church
*Roman Catholicism
*Liberalism
*Philosophical Hermeneutics
*Historical Criticism
*Literary Criticism, and
*Evangelicalism.
The twelfth chapter on "The Eclipse of the Gospel in Evangelicalism" is especially insightful and relevant. This chapter is well worth reading, even if some readers preferred to skip over other parts. Goldsworthy deals with:
*Quietism: evangelical Docetism
*Literalism: evangelical Zionism
*Legalism: evangelical Judaism
*Decisionism: evangelical Bultmannism
*Subjectivism: evangelical Schleiermacherism
*`Jesus-in-my-heart-ism': evangelical Catholicism
*Evangelical pluralism, and
*Evangelical pragmatism
His summary of this chapter contends that "The irony of modern evangelicalism is that many of its aberrations have occurred because of a siege mentality and an attempt to ward off the effects of the enlightenment. When evangelicals become reactionary, they can often flee unwittingly into the arms of another enemy waiting in the wings . . . [The] matters raised in this chapter should move us to be more diligent in allowing the gospel to shape our hermeneutics, even if this means appearing to be somewhat tiresome in our questioning of some of the traditions of our evangelical culture" (180).

Part Three: Reconstructing Evangelical Hermeneutics

This final section contains the more positive and most valuable contributions Goldsworthy makes to the field of hermeneutics. In chapter thirteen, he begins by outlining several presuppositions for Gospel-centered interpretation:
*The sole content of Scripture is Christ (unity)
*Scripture is self-authenticating (authority)
*Scripture is clear and self-interpreting (meaning), and
*Christ is Lord of the Scripture

Chapters fourteen through eighteen take up the literary, historical, and theological dimensions of Scripture (chapters sixteen and seventeen respectively addressing "the two Testaments and typology" and "biblical and systematic theology") and contextualization. Chapter nineteen, "The Hermeneutics of Christ" is a summary of the main argument of the book, showing how interpretation of Scripture is shaped by the person of Christ, the work of Christ, the glorification of Christ, and the Spirit of Christ.

The following paragraph is an example of how Goldsworthy's Christ-centeredness works on a practical level: "The hermeneutics of the doing of Christ the fulfiller demand that we read carefully the Old Testament as a testimony to what he achieves in his life, death, and resurrection. The gospel is so dependent on its Old Testament antecedents that we can easily overlook some of its dimensions and texture if we do not carefully examine what it is that he fulfills. The Old Testament perspective on eschatology, with all the rich variety of its expectations of restoration, finds its resolution in the work of Christ. This includes the promises concerning the people, the place of God's kingdom, the temple, and redemption from sin. It also includes the promise of a new creation. Thus the hermeneutics of the cross of Christ must go beyond forgiveness of sin to the new creation. Jesus on the cross was putting the universe back together; he was restoring the true order of creation" (304).

Conclusion

This is not one of the easiest books I've read, but it is one of the most important. I found myself not just reading, but studying this book - rereading, highlighting, and taking notes. It is now on my mental list of books to read periodically. I would highly recommend this book to pastors and preachers who desire to be biblically-faithful and Christ-centered in their teaching and preaching of Scripture. For those who feel daunted by the length and weight of the book, I would suggest reading chapters one through four, nine, twelve, and sixteen through nineteen. But I think that pastors who will risk this book will find it compelling enough to return to again and again.

[Anne Michal]

Read for class. One of those books I could probably read 10 more times before fully grasping it 😅 but i really enjoyed the contextualization chapter

[Parker · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a book in which what is stated positively is generally quite good, while what is rejected is frequently misunderstood.

First, while Goldsworthy sets out to present an "evangelical" hermeneutic, what this ends up meaning is a Van Tillian hermeneutic. That doesn't make it wrong, necessarily, but I believe the author should have been more reserved in his presentation and more explicit about the source of his convictions. Like typical presuppositionalists, as well, he often speaks as though certain doctrines (e.g., Scriptural self-authentication) are the sole possession of Van Tillians (despite the fact that the concept of self-authentication was a hallmark of Reformed thought for hundreds of years before Presuppositonalism was a twinkle in Van Til's eye).

Second, the author is absolutely right to reject the notion of absolute objectivity in hermeneutics. This concept is a modernist myth that, unfortunately, still prevails in many quarters.

Third, Goldsworthy is correct that Christian theism and the presuppositions involved in believing the Gospel have massive implications for biblical interpretation. This must be taken very seriously.

Fourth, as is often the case with followers of Van Til, the author firmly rejects natural theology in a way that is not consistent with the doctrine of common grace. This also means that he refuses to welcome any philosophical ideas that originate with pagan thinkers. In his Presuppositional mindset, believers may be able to borrow concepts or themes from unbelieving philosophy, but cannot accept any pagan philosopher's views as essentially correct.

Fifth, following from point four, Goldsworthy is unnecessarily harsh in his criticisms of both the early Fathers and (in typical Van Tillian fashion) Thomas Aquinas. To his mind these men were all syncretists who failed on core issues related to hermeneutics. He also fails to acknowledge the dependence of his own camp upon the transcendental logic and worldview theory of Immanuel Kant. I can't help but think Goldsworthy would actually fail his own test here.

Sixth, the author's dependence on biased secondary sources makes all of his historical claims dubious. He does not cite Thomistic scholars, for example, on Thomas. He cites fellow presuppositionalists, who are not generally known for their accurate readings of Thomas. His discussion of Postmodernists like Derrida, also, is spoiled by his failure to consult primary sources, or even sympathetic sources. The sources he cites are books like Carson's The Gagging of God, a book that has been rather sharply criticized by some for its poor interpretation of Postmodern thought.

In brief, the positive theses of this book are generally sound and quite helpful. But the work is so full of scholarly blunders and critical errors that I don't think I would recommend it to anyone.

[Robert Hasler · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, I think there are some helpful sections (especially toward the end) about the literary, historical, and theological dynamics of biblical interpretation, macro-typology, and the unity/distinction principle running through many elements of the text not just theologically but canonically as well.

However, the author's Van Tillianism intrudes on the text as a whole and makes some sections particularly frustrating. For example, the entire middle section on the history of biblical interpretation is replete with condemnations of non-Christian influences on hermeneutics. Yet, the author regularly adopts non-Christian influences (e.g. speech-act theory) when it suits him. Can nonbelievers say true things and positively contribute to hermeneutics or not? Ironically, for all his insistence on the principle of unity/distinction, he refuses to acknowledge one of the most important distinctions: that of God the Creator and God the Redeemer. Precisely upon that distinction can we rightfully acknowledge that men can fail to know their Creator but say true (albeit incomplete) things about the nature of his creation, including language, communication, and knowledge.

And this really gets to a broader issue with Neo-Calvinism generally and their insistence that the Gospel not just be the hermeneutical key to special revelation but the hermeneutical key to all reality. Yes, all things were created through and for Christ (Col. 1:16). But radicalizing the soteriological claim of the Bible as they do leads to fideism at worst and epistemological hubris at best. It is, in effect, to reject the role and purpose of natural revelation as a source of true knowledge about God and reality. One can say true things about the stars and planets, about politics and markets, even the dynamics of language and hermeneutics, but those things remain incomplete apart from Christ. This is especially important when we consider the conversation between biblical theology and dogmatics, the latter having often borrowed from pagan insights in ways that are now confessionalized in ecumenical creeds. Of course, doing this well won't subject the divine revelation to "autonomous reason" but will 'plunder the Egyptians' for the sake of theological clarity.

All that to say, I think the weaknesses of the first two-thirds of the book almost overwhelm the strengths of the last third. Perhaps I'll enjoy Goldsworthy the biblical theologian more than Goldsworthy the hermeneutical theorist and apologist.

[Ben Adkison · Rating 5 out of 5]

About a year-and-a-half ago, I begin reading Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics by Graeme Goldsworthy, and I just finally finished. I've been reading, more like plodding, through this text with my good friend, Richard Baliko. Richard lives in Macon, MS and I live in Nashville, TN, so we video skype once a week and discuss a chapter of the book at a time. I studied hermeneutics in seminary, but not with this book, so reading Goldsworthy's treatment has been a new experience for both of us.

This is a great book to say the very least, but it's waaaaaay more technical than I expected (or at least it's waaaaaay more technical than the previous hermeneutics book I read). However, I can unequivocally say that reading through Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics is a worthwhile endeavor.

The book is broken up into three main sections: 1) Evangelical Prolegomena to Hermeneutics, 2) Challenges to Evangelical Hermeneutics, and 3) Reconstructing Evangelical Hermeneutics. To explain those headings a bit, after setting out a brief vision for how and why hermeneutics should be done in section one, Goldsworthy then deconstructs wrong approaches to Biblical interpretation in section two, and then reconstructs a proper method of Biblical interpretation in section three. Through these sections, which span a little more than 300 pages, Goldsworthy masterfully points everything towards Jesus and His gospel. To use Goldsworthy's words:

"The purpose of God's word is to bring us to God through the salvation that is in Christ. It does this by revealing his plan and purpose, by conforming us more and more to the image of Christ, and by providing the shape of the presence of God with his people through the Spirit of Christ" (317).

This book has been extremely helpful in expanding my understanding of Biblical theology and its role in proper interpretation, and its up-to-date treatment of more recent trends, such as postmodernity.

I'm no expert, so I can't say this is the "best" hermeneutics book, but it's darn good. If you're up for the challenge, it's a rewarding read.

5 out of 5 cups of black coffee!

[Evan · Rating 2 out of 5]

A big meh. I had high hopes for this book. I'm not sure how one can write a book on this topic without having read (or quoting) primary sources of historical figures. It is a good introduction nevertheless. Though a bit long for an introduction. Meh.

[Mitchell Lenartowicz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Felt like I was drinking out of a fire hose with this one with so much info coming at you at once but it was a for hose with Limon Cello La Croix. If you’re enlightened like me you’ll know that means it a good thing. This was my first read for seminary so there’s definitely a huge learning curve with that but as I got going and began getting familiar with the authors presupposed understanding of the readers familiarity with church history and philosophy it became a lot of fun to read. The way he concludes and wraps up the book focusing on why a gospel centered hermeneutic is not just a philosophical idea but one instructed by scripture I thought was phenomenal. Definitely a great read I’d love to go back to and recommend to anyone with a dictionary on hand, there are a lot of words that end in “…ology” you’ve probably never heard of…or maybe that’s just me.

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

Goldsworthy's thesis is that a proper hermeneutic can never be achieved without taking into account Christ, his gospel, and the word of God as God's revelation of the gospel. Thus he argues that we need to examine our presuppositions, and make sure they are faithful to Scripture, before we attempt to formulate a theory of biblical interpretation. There were a number of great points in this book, and I am in complete agreement with the fundamental thesis. At times, though, it lacked clarity of organization, and all the parts did not contribute equally well to the whole message. But still recommended.

[Grant Carter]

Wonderful book. Convincingly shows how the whole Bible is all about Christ

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics suffers the same fate that every other articulation of presuppositional apologetics suffers, because this is a van Tillian approach to hermeneutics. The author hopes to bank on the historical Jesus Christ as the linchpin of his hermeneutical approach without recognizing that the received Christ of history is a product of a particular hermeneutic. It's like working from the insights of Aristotle without recognizing Aristotle's influence.

Now, of course, there's nothing inherently wrong with working from an interpretative tradition. In fact, I'd argue that this is an inescapable part of interpreting. There are horizons of interpretation that are open to us merely by virtue of our being in one or another place or time. But the failure to recognize the conditioned nature of one's interpretation lends an unearned objectivity to one's interpretation. That is to say, one posits that because X is true, it necessarily follows that Y interpretation is correct, but X is the unexamined first principle without which Y stands suspended in mid-air. I write more about that here.

That's the formal problem with presuppositionally-grounded apologetics and hermeneutics. Nothing grounds faith but scripture; but what grounds scripture? There's no place for external verification. One appeals to the word of God as the word of God without justifying the appeal because there's no place or reason to attempt the justification. In like manner, the interpretation has only to appeal to the received Christ of scripture -- particularly, the received Christ of scripture as interpreted by the Western reformed church. Again, there's nothing particularly problematic about this kind of approach so long as one recognizes that theirs is an historically- and culturally-conditioned interpretation. There is no room for Scottish common sense realist readings, in which the plain surface-level is adequate.

There is another significant problem. Throughout the work, Goldsworthy makes explicit identifications of the "incarnate Word" and the "inscripturated Word." On several occasions, he seems to point to the dual-nature of Christ as the fundamental basis for treating scripture as a simultaneously human and divine document. Intuitively, this comes across as entirely without justification. At best, there is an analogical relationship between the two entities. More likely, there is simply a formal similarity rather than organic identification.

Altogether, it's a well-enough book for those convinced of a presuppositional approach and a broadly reformed hermeneutic. His historical overview, despite its dearth of primary sources, is helpful as a survey. However, the positive vision that he sets out is fraught with some fairly serious problems.

[Todd Miles · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is good, but I was hoping that it would be better. Part 2 of the book is difficult to follow, but Parts 1 and 3 describe and then guide a Christ-centered approach to Hermeneutics. His work on the different issues in Hermeneutics and how they detract from the message of the Scripture is especially helpful. I will use Parts I and III in Advanced Hermeneutics.

[Asher D Barnes · Rating 1 out of 5]

I had to read this for a class and quite honestly it sucked

To summarize my thoughts on this so I don’t have to dwell too heavily on this book:

He used only secondary sources and pretty wildly mischaracterized the early church and most of church history. Pretty basically a refusal to go into primary sources is already horrible but to claim the early church had a bad hermeneutic and then poorly connect it to the Pauline letters about people clinging to anti-gospels that make them feel better, is doing what you said was bad in the first place. You are poorly connecting a verse to someone that contradicts your point of view to make yourself feel better.

[William Russell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Goldsworthy does a good job addressing many theological-hermeneutical issues from a presuppositionalist standpoint. In many ways it is classic Goldsworthy, maintaing an emphasis on biblical-theological reflection and Christ as the hermeneutical centerpiece of the Scriptures. Many will likely find his discussion a bit technical and difficult to navigate, but if you are familiar with the field of biblical interpretation, the book offers helpful insights into reflection on the theological interpretation of the Christian Scriptures.

[Josh G. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some great principles and analysis scattered throughout. I disagree with his commitment to a Van-Tillian presuppositionalism, but agree with his Reformed theology. As such, I felt a bit torn throughout several sections that dealt with the concepts of first principles, presuppositions, and nature/grace distinctions. Otherwise, the historical sections were very helpful and the identification of pot-holes common to different streams — especially the evangelical stream — were great.

[Michael Barrett · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book provides a great overview of a Christocentric hermeneutic, as well as lengthy discussion of rival theories and methods of interpretation throughout history.

Strengths:
-Coherent philosophy
-High view of God and his word
-Dialogue with other scholarship
-Compelling vision

Weaknesses:
-Shallow treatment of church history
-Low accessibility for lay persons
-Simplistic summary

[Gina Mcandrew · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this for a class on hermeneutics and is probably one of the driest books I have ever read, with repetitive motifs that state the obvious. Neither theory nor history need to be boring and this was basically a practice to see how many long, academic words could be used in one sitting. While the premise was good, the presentation was disappointing and impractical.

[Paul LaBarbera · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent book. There were many things that I did not understand and would need to reread, but the things that I grasped were very helpful in understanding how to interpret and apply Scripture. I will definitely be using this as a resource to revisit hermeneutical principles throughout my walk with the Lord.

[Leroy Zumack · Rating 4 out of 5]

I hesitated giving the book 5 stars vs four. Either way an excellent survey of hermeneutics. Graham cites authors of many works on the question of hermeneutics. He has given much for me to ponder I appreciate this author very much.

[Travis Johnston · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was decent. Dry throughout the history of hermeneutics section. The last three chapters made the whole book worth the effort.

[Kris Jarchow · Rating 3 out of 5]

A bit repetitive with analytical concepts but did offer different considerations of application with background into the origins of hermeneutics

[Chris Scroggs · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this as part of a seminary class. It offers a great view on keeping Christ at the center of scripture.

[Earl Pestano · Rating 4 out of 5]

Historical and Sophisticated!

[Alec Holloway · Rating 4 out of 5]

Solid stuff in here. Very academic, so if you are into that, this is a good resource.

[Elizabeth Sullivan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is extremely hard to read. The author should just state what he means instead of thinking every other word needs a thesaurus search.

[Zachary Hall · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is truly a Christ-honoring explanation of what God-centeres hermeneutics is. Goldsworthy's book should be read by every pastor and teacher of God's word.

[Evan Mackey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Where your Biblical Theology journey should begin...

[Steve Stanley · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars

[Rebecca Norton · Rating 3 out of 5]

[3.5]

[Parker James Lipetska · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.7 Hard read but important

[Tengxiang · Rating 4 out of 5]

Goldsworthy clears my misconceptions about interpretations in the early church history.