Five Things Theologians Wish Biblical Scholars Knew

Hans Boersma's brief but incisive work emerges from his decades of experience straddling the boundary between biblical scholarship and systematic theology. Writing as a theologian who takes biblical studies seriously, Boersma addresses what he sees as a growing disconnect between these two disciplines that were once more naturally integrated. The book represents his attempt to bridge a methodological and philosophical chasm that has widened particularly since the Enlightenment, when historical-critical methods began to dominate biblical scholarship often at the expense of theological interpretation.

Boersma's five central arguments challenge biblical scholars to reconsider their relationship to theological tradition and method. He contends that Scripture itself resists purely historical approaches, arguing instead for the legitimacy and necessity of spiritual interpretation alongside historical analysis. He advocates for renewed attention to the church fathers and their exegetical methods, particularly their willingness to find Christ throughout the Old Testament. Boersma also argues that biblical scholars should embrace rather than bracket questions of truth and meaning, suggesting that the text's theological claims deserve serious engagement rather than methodological suspension. He calls for recognition that the canon itself represents a theological achievement that shapes how individual texts should be read, and finally argues that biblical interpretation conducted within the believing community offers insights unavailable to purely academic approaches.

The work has resonated particularly within circles seeking to recover theological interpretation of Scripture while maintaining scholarly rigor. Boersma's arguments participate in broader conversations about postcritical biblical interpretation and the relationship between faith and academic method. Who should read this: Biblical scholars willing to engage theological questions about their methods, theologians seeking to articulate why biblical studies matters for their work, and students navigating the apparent tensions between devotional and academic approaches to Scripture. Those committed to purely historical-critical methods or seeking detailed exegetical demonstrations rather than methodological reflection may find less value here.