What do you think?
Rate this book
Tic-Tac Ted - Aprenda As Horas Com Ted
"This is a book on theological hermeneutics. It is a plea for being hermeneutical about theology and for being theological about hermeneutics. It is an argument for treating the questions of God, Scripture and hermeneutics as one problem. This one problem defines what I call 'first theology'" (from the preface).
In twelve chapters, Kevin Vanhoozer explores various dimensions of doing first theology and illuminates not only how we can talk about God but how we can begin with the Word of God and act on the basis of that Word. Blazing a pathway for recovering the unity of biblical studies and theological reflection, he addresses the challenges presented by the contemporary so-called postmodern situation, especially deconstructionism. Not only does a way of doing God-centred biblical interpretation come to light through Vanhoozer's explorations, but the triune identity of a God who is communicative, loving and sovereign also comes into focus.
This is a book for students, pastors and teachers who have an interest in the nature of God, the nature of Scripture, the nature of theology, and the nature of hermeneutics and how they are all necessarily interrelated to the glory of God.
In twelve chapters, Kevin Vanhoozer explores various dimensions of doing first theology and illuminates not only how we can talk about God but how we can begin with the Word of God and act on the basis of that Word. Blazing a pathway for recovering the unity of biblical studies and theological reflection, he addresses the challenges presented by the contemporary so-called postmodern situation, especially deconstructionism. Not only does a way of doing God-centred biblical interpretation come to light through Vanhoozer's explorations, but the triune identity of a God who is communicative, loving and sovereign also comes into focus.
This is a book for students, pastors and teachers who have an interest in the nature of God, the nature of Scripture, the nature of theology, and the nature of hermeneutics and how they are all necessarily interrelated to the glory of God.
Textbook Binding
First published June 1, 2002
15 people are currently reading
188 people want to read
About the author
Kevin J. Vanhoozer
68 books186 followersKevin J. Vanhoozer is currently Research Professor of Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. From 1990-98 he was Senior Lecturer in Theology and Religious Studies at New College, University of Edinburgh. Vanhoozer received a BA from Westmont College, an M.Div from Westminster Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. from Cambridge University, England having studied under Nicholas Lash.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
March 8, 2025
A criminally underrated collection of essays.
August 29, 2015
Vanhoozer breaks the mold of awesomeness in his work on speech-act theory and bibliology. Like many theologians of the 20th century, Vanhoozer begins his theology (the prolegomena) with God as a communicative agent. Fortunately, this is where the similarities end. Vanhoozer brilliantly defends both classical theism and reformed theology by incorporating the Australian philosopher J.L. Austins work in the field of Biblical hermeneutics. He does this by first analyzing speech as an act. When we see speech as an act we understand a number of things right away; speech has an intention behind it, it is a causal act (meant to produce and effect) and it is act of one able to speak or communicate. Moreover when we see the Bible as an act of its divine author we can better frame the intentions of God and the effect the Bible is meant to produce in the believer. Not only this but we can also describe the Bible as containing multiple kinds of actions. After all communication doesn't merely have a declarative or instructional quality but can also have many other qualities; storytelling, song writing, recording, commanding, questioning etc. Based upon these qualities the nature and intention of the act can be analyzed. Finally, identifying speech as an act ties speech to its author. An act of communication contains an element of contextualization from the very author which spoke it. Therefore there is a uniqueness to two communicative actions committed by two authors or speakers even if the words spoken by the two authors are exactly the same. This doesn't mean, however, that no two speech acts can't have the same intention or meaning.
Indeed, this is precisely where illocutionary force comes into play. When the author, or locutor, speaks his speech sends a force which can also be called the message he intends to convey. This illocution is then recieved and interpreted by the interlocutor or hearer/reader. The effect on the interlocutor by the locutor is the perlocution. Now when the interlocutor misunderstands or misinterprets the locutors illocution means the illocution or intention of the author did not achieve its end.
The implications of what seems to be a rather basic insight are enormous. For one thing, understanding speech acts as unique to their author allows us to re-frame our doctrine of inspiration such that the distinction between words and ideas becomes moot. That is to say, given that God is perfect and that his speech acts have specific intentions through scripture we must say that God governed the words used by the authors in scripture to bring those intentions to fruition. Thus while a Verbal Plenary view of inspiration might be more or less correct, it is fairly crude in its depiction. Moreover it is clear that because there is more than one quality or kind of speech act, scripture cannot be summed up merely by its propositional content but more broadly by its illocutionary force. While there might be propositional content in the 10 commandments what they intend to convey is an obligation put onto God's people by Himself.
This brings another astounding insight to the table; God's Word is inherently covenental. The Bible assumes a covenant between the reader and author. This means that for the reader to truly understand or attain the correct perlocution from the text, the reader must be in covenant with God. And this is where things get doubly interesting; only God through His Spirit can produce this perlocution. Indeed, the Spirit can be called the divine Perlocution; making God's Word effectual in the believer. Oh but wait there's more; Christ the Son can be viewed as the illocution; the message spoken by the Father and received in the believer by the Spirit. Thus the distinction between the Bible as the Word of God and Christ as the Word of God becomes all the more interesting since clearly the illocution of scripture is still Christ.
These are just a few bits and pieces from Vanhoozers book. I would obviously recommend it.
Indeed, this is precisely where illocutionary force comes into play. When the author, or locutor, speaks his speech sends a force which can also be called the message he intends to convey. This illocution is then recieved and interpreted by the interlocutor or hearer/reader. The effect on the interlocutor by the locutor is the perlocution. Now when the interlocutor misunderstands or misinterprets the locutors illocution means the illocution or intention of the author did not achieve its end.
The implications of what seems to be a rather basic insight are enormous. For one thing, understanding speech acts as unique to their author allows us to re-frame our doctrine of inspiration such that the distinction between words and ideas becomes moot. That is to say, given that God is perfect and that his speech acts have specific intentions through scripture we must say that God governed the words used by the authors in scripture to bring those intentions to fruition. Thus while a Verbal Plenary view of inspiration might be more or less correct, it is fairly crude in its depiction. Moreover it is clear that because there is more than one quality or kind of speech act, scripture cannot be summed up merely by its propositional content but more broadly by its illocutionary force. While there might be propositional content in the 10 commandments what they intend to convey is an obligation put onto God's people by Himself.
This brings another astounding insight to the table; God's Word is inherently covenental. The Bible assumes a covenant between the reader and author. This means that for the reader to truly understand or attain the correct perlocution from the text, the reader must be in covenant with God. And this is where things get doubly interesting; only God through His Spirit can produce this perlocution. Indeed, the Spirit can be called the divine Perlocution; making God's Word effectual in the believer. Oh but wait there's more; Christ the Son can be viewed as the illocution; the message spoken by the Father and received in the believer by the Spirit. Thus the distinction between the Bible as the Word of God and Christ as the Word of God becomes all the more interesting since clearly the illocution of scripture is still Christ.
These are just a few bits and pieces from Vanhoozers book. I would obviously recommend it.
September 17, 2009
I always enjoy Vanhoozer. This volume is a collection of (mostly?) previously published articles. Some of the articles are fantastic. Some are just okay. The basic beef I have with the articles that aren't spectacular is that while Vanhoozer does a wonderful job of articulating problems, deconstructing proposed solutions, yet fails to spend an adequate amount of time demonstrating how his alternative is superior. I'd have to go over each chapter to give more detail. Maybe later. But all in all, I'm glad I read this book and would definitely recommend it.
April 27, 2021
Read large parts of this book for an essay. As I’ve dipped into “Drama of Doctrine” quite a bit I can see that “First Theology” is not Vanhoozer at his most gripping! At times it is quite hard going, but there are gems within it.
July 8, 2014
Kevin Vanhoozer (KV) bases this prolegomena off of speech-act theory. He is working from several methodological presuppositions, all of which I think are sound: our understanding of God and our understanding of Scripture presuppose one another (or are correlates). This is helpful because it alleviates the problem of whether we need to start with God or Scripture.
His book has three parts: God, Scripture, and (Cultural) Hermeneutics.
God
KV raises the problem of whether the Trinity belongs in a philosophy of religions. He advances the standard claims against pluralism: whenever a pluralist defines a "core" of all religious beliefs, that core is inevitably exclusivistic--it excludes other categories (57).
Drawing from themes by Robert W. Jenson, KV places God's identity in his self-identifying acts as the God of Israel. Before that he notes the problem of the term "identity." Does it mean ontological sameness or self-constancy in the case of God? According to Paul Ricoeur, the God of the Philosophers is the God of idem-identity (bare essence; ground of being, the ineffable One swallowing the Many). This makes differentiation of any sorts (persons, relations) a movement towards non-being. By contrast, the God of Israel is the God of ipse-identity (constancy, covenantal fidelity). God identifies himself as Israel's God and ties his name to a promise. This is not the god of the philosophers. Very fine section.
Effectual Call as Case Study
KV perceptively notes that the doctrine of effectual call is simply an example of the problem of the God-world nexus. Does God operate on the world in a causal manner merely, or is the relation one of calling, speech? As Descartes noted, the God-world nexus is seen in the following problem: how does the mental (God, mind, spiritual, etc) have any effect on the physical?
KV proposes we see this relationship in communicative categories. If there is a God-world nexus, the "calling" is the "communicative joint" (118). The Word that summons has both content and illocutionary force (energy).
Speech Act Terminology
Before continuing it will be helpful to explain key speech-act terms. A perlocution is what one brings about by one's speech act (120). Locution is the speaking (154). Illocution is the content and intent of the Locution.
Scripture as Speech-Act
KV proposes that speech-act theory allows us to transcend the debate between revelation as content and revelation as act, since Speech-Act includes both (130).
He has some good responses to high-church readings of Scripture and tradition: "I see no reason that cognitive malfunction could not be corporate as well as individual" (223). He notes the Anabaptist claim to "read in community" is not that materially different from the Romanist/EO claim that the Church reads the Bible.
This claim to “self-referentiality is artificial; it disconnects the text from the extratextual world and from the process of reading…[quoting Francis Watson] To regard the church as a self-sufficient sphere closed of from the world is ecclesiological docetism” (Vanhoozer 216).
Indeed, such a position reduces to “interpretive might makes right. One may very well question the grounds of such optimism: the believing community in Scripture is too often portraryed as unbelieving or confused, and subsequent church history has not been reassurring either” (219)
And Vanhoozer asks the most painful and unanswerable of questions: how can we guard against the possible misuse of Scripture? If we have to read the Bible with the church, we have to posit the corollary: the church’s interpretation is what counts. But what are the criteria so we know the church interpreted it correctly? The Holy Spirit will guide it. Well, what about Heira? That doesn’t count.
It’s kind of like the definition of pornography: I’ll know it when I see it.
Conclusion
The book is mostly magnificent. The final sections on Cultural Hermeneutics have promise, but only if you are already interested in that topic.
His book has three parts: God, Scripture, and (Cultural) Hermeneutics.
God
KV raises the problem of whether the Trinity belongs in a philosophy of religions. He advances the standard claims against pluralism: whenever a pluralist defines a "core" of all religious beliefs, that core is inevitably exclusivistic--it excludes other categories (57).
Drawing from themes by Robert W. Jenson, KV places God's identity in his self-identifying acts as the God of Israel. Before that he notes the problem of the term "identity." Does it mean ontological sameness or self-constancy in the case of God? According to Paul Ricoeur, the God of the Philosophers is the God of idem-identity (bare essence; ground of being, the ineffable One swallowing the Many). This makes differentiation of any sorts (persons, relations) a movement towards non-being. By contrast, the God of Israel is the God of ipse-identity (constancy, covenantal fidelity). God identifies himself as Israel's God and ties his name to a promise. This is not the god of the philosophers. Very fine section.
Effectual Call as Case Study
KV perceptively notes that the doctrine of effectual call is simply an example of the problem of the God-world nexus. Does God operate on the world in a causal manner merely, or is the relation one of calling, speech? As Descartes noted, the God-world nexus is seen in the following problem: how does the mental (God, mind, spiritual, etc) have any effect on the physical?
KV proposes we see this relationship in communicative categories. If there is a God-world nexus, the "calling" is the "communicative joint" (118). The Word that summons has both content and illocutionary force (energy).
Speech Act Terminology
Before continuing it will be helpful to explain key speech-act terms. A perlocution is what one brings about by one's speech act (120). Locution is the speaking (154). Illocution is the content and intent of the Locution.
Scripture as Speech-Act
KV proposes that speech-act theory allows us to transcend the debate between revelation as content and revelation as act, since Speech-Act includes both (130).
He has some good responses to high-church readings of Scripture and tradition: "I see no reason that cognitive malfunction could not be corporate as well as individual" (223). He notes the Anabaptist claim to "read in community" is not that materially different from the Romanist/EO claim that the Church reads the Bible.
This claim to “self-referentiality is artificial; it disconnects the text from the extratextual world and from the process of reading…[quoting Francis Watson] To regard the church as a self-sufficient sphere closed of from the world is ecclesiological docetism” (Vanhoozer 216).
Indeed, such a position reduces to “interpretive might makes right. One may very well question the grounds of such optimism: the believing community in Scripture is too often portraryed as unbelieving or confused, and subsequent church history has not been reassurring either” (219)
And Vanhoozer asks the most painful and unanswerable of questions: how can we guard against the possible misuse of Scripture? If we have to read the Bible with the church, we have to posit the corollary: the church’s interpretation is what counts. But what are the criteria so we know the church interpreted it correctly? The Holy Spirit will guide it. Well, what about Heira? That doesn’t count.
It’s kind of like the definition of pornography: I’ll know it when I see it.
Conclusion
The book is mostly magnificent. The final sections on Cultural Hermeneutics have promise, but only if you are already interested in that topic.
September 29, 2012
Of Vanhoozer's trilogy, this book is the lowest rated (though 4 outta 5 aint bad!). Still, lots of deliciousness in this book. The chapters on Scripture are tremendous. Also, the chapter where Vanhoozer reworks the Reformed doctrine of "irresistable grace" in light his linguistic theology is brilliant! Worth the price of the book alone.
This gets 4 stars since I don't like books that are basically a bunch of lectures and/or articles put together in a book. It makes it less seamless.
This gets 4 stars since I don't like books that are basically a bunch of lectures and/or articles put together in a book. It makes it less seamless.
August 5, 2010
The articles collected here are important for understanding Vanhoozer's development as a theologian. Many of the themes that now appear in Remythologizing Theology are peaking under the skirt.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews