Historical theology?

[unkleE]

I wonder if some of you history buffs can point me in the right direction please.

We have often discussed how theological views have changed over 2000 years of christian history. For example, Augustine and Genesis, geocentrism, and literal inerrant interpretations of the Bible vs allegorical.

I would like to understand this stuff a little more - i.e. have a holistic understanding rather than just a few isolated examples. So I'm wondering if anyone can point me to a few decent references (book or web), and/or summarise for me, how the 1st century Jews and the earliest church fathers addressed the following questions:

1. How to interpret the Bible?

How much is history in the modern sense, and how much is more allegorical or otherwise non-literal (albeit still important)? How would this have varied between Genesis and Malachi, and in the NT? I've heard it said that inerrancy is only a post reformation concept, and looking at how the NT writers quote the OT seems to support that, but has this been documented?

2. How to interpret the barbaric elements in the OT, especially those actions and commands attributed to God?

Did they interpret these literally? Did they try to justify God's actions or just accept them?

3. I suppose both questions come down to - how did the different worldviews understand truth, historical fact, spiritual truth, etc?

From all this, I'd then like to consider how all this relates to our modern positivist, scientific physicalist age, and how we should understand our faith and how to explain it to those who now have such a different way of viewing things to the Biblical writers.

I realise this is a big question, and I've only very inexpertly outlined it, but any comments would be welcome. Thanks.

[bjorn]

Good questions!

The two best titles may be:

"Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period" by Richard Longnecker -
www.amazon.com/Biblical-Exegesis-Apostolic-Richard-Longenecker/dp/0802843018

"How to Read the Bible: A Guide to Scripture, Then and Now"
by James L. Kugel - www.amazon.com/How-Read-Bible-Guide-Scripture/dp/074323586X/ (and his "The Bible As It Was").

Summing up (far too short):

It was not usual to read the texts as "plain history" (though they tended to take it as that as well, though rarely as important). Instead it seems to have been read more allegorically/typologically/symbolic, more as midrash than material history.

BTW, Copan replies to critique of his take on the OT issue in EPS - www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=63&ap=1, based on some recent scholarship.

[himself]

Although later, this is instructive:
Augustine, On Christian doctrine
www.newadvent.org/fathers/1202.htm

in particular:
II 28-30
III 5
III 10 (How We are to Discern Whether a Phrase is Figurative.)
III 11 (Rule for Interpreting Phrases Which Seem to Ascribe Severity to God and the Saints)
III 12-13 (Rule for Interpreting Those Sayings and Actions Which are Ascribed to God and the Saints, and Which Yet Seem to the Unskillful to Be Wicked)
III 18 (We Must Take into Consideration the Time at Which Anything Was Enjoyed or Allowed)
etc.