A Christocentric hermeneutic is an approach to biblical interpretation that sees Christ as the central focus and fulfillment of the entire Bible. This view reads both the Old and New Testaments in light of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The Old Testament is seen as pointing forward to Christ, containing prophecies, types, and foreshadowings of His coming. The New Testament reveals how Jesus fulfilled these anticipations. So the whole Bible is understood as a unified revelation centered on the redemptive work of Christ.
In contrast, a Christotelic hermeneutic does not see Christ as the central subject matter of Scripture. Rather, it views Christ as the end goal toward which the Bible story is moving. According to this approach, the Old Testament is best understood in its own original context, as the story of God’s dealings with Israel. The New Testament then shows how Christ is the climax and ultimate purpose of that story. So God’s revelatory work did not simply point toward Christ but reached its intended goal in Him. The Bible’s parts are unified by their movement toward this overarching telos or end purpose found in Christ.
Some key differences between these two views:
- A Christocentric reading sees Christ directly predicted/symbolized everywhere in the Old Testament, while a Christotelic reading focuses first on the Old Testament meaning in its own context.
- Christocentric interpreters tend to read New Testament meanings back into Old Testament texts, while Christotelic interpreters try to preserve the integrity of the historical progression from Old to New Testaments.
- Christocentric interpreters downplay distinctions between Old and New Testament theology, seeing unvarying truth about Christ throughout Scripture. Christotelic interpreters see progressive revelation, with the New Testament providing the culminating revelation of God’s purposes.
Advocates of a Christotelic approach argue that it better accounts for the diversity and historical particularity of the biblical documents. It also prevents the distortion that can occur when the Old Testament is interpreted prematurely through a New Testament lens. Proponents believe it provides a framework that holds together the unity and diversity of Scripture.
On the other hand, advocates of a Christocentric hermeneutic believe it gives a more cohesive approach to the Bible’s meaning. They argue that the Christotelic method underemphasizes the pervasive testimony to Christ that exists (though sometimes implicitly) throughout the entire Old Testament. This view sees Scripture as an essentially unified revelation focused on the person of Christ from beginning to end.
Key Elements of a Christocentric Hermeneutic
Here are some core features of a Christ-centered approach to biblical interpretation:
- Christ is the central theme of Scripture – The Old Testament anticipates and prepares for Christ’s coming. The New Testament then reveals Him as the fulfillment of Old Testament promises and patterns. The Bible is fundamentally unified by its common message about Christ.
- All Scriptural meaning is found in relation to Christ – Christ gives coherence to the whole biblical narrative, so all passages are best understood in light of their relation to Him. Proper interpretation requires connecting each text to the central revelation of Christ.
- The Old Testament is oriented toward the future revelation of Christ – The Law, prophets and writings of the Old Testament do not just reflect God’s work in old covenant Israel. More fundamentally, they aim and prepare for the new covenant to be accomplished in Christ.
- There is essential theological unity between the testaments – Although there is organic development between the testaments, the essential message about salvation in Christ remains the same. Both Old and New Testaments proclaim the gospel of God’s grace.
- The New Testament provides the true interpretation of the Old – While the Old Testament must first be understood in its own context, the New Testament provides the divine lens through which the ultimate meaning of the Old Testament becomes clear. The New Testament authors’ inspired interpretations of the Old Testament should guide our own.
- Christ is present in the Old Testament text, not just in hindsight – The Old Testament authors and audiences would have glimpsed the Christological significance of their writings. Because the Spirit of Christ was at work in them, their messianic hope was rooted in actual experience of His presence.
Key Principles of a Christotelic Hermeneutic
Here are some defining features of a Christ-goal oriented approach:
- Each part of Scripture must be understood in its own historical context – The human authors of Scripture were involved in particular covenants, settings, and redemptive events. Sound interpretation requires sensitivity to each passage’s original language, cultural background, literary form and place in salvation history.
- The Old Testament speaks first to old covenant Israel – Although anticipating the work of Christ, the Old Testament speaks directly to the historical situations and concerns of Israel. It should not be interpreted prematurely through the lens of the New Testament and the Christian church.
- The New Testament provides the consummate perspective on God’s unified redemptive plan – The ending point of Scripture provides definitive insight into the unified storyline and theology of the whole. The New Testament authors responsibly elucidate the ultimate significance of the Old Testament.
- Christ is the climactic goal of God’s revelation – All Scripture builds toward and finds its coherence in Christ. He is the long-promised Savior, the central figure in Israel’s story. All biblical promises and purposes are unified and fulfilled in Him.
- There is genuine theological development between the testaments – While God’s character and saving purposes remain unchanged, His progressive revelation unfolds organically through the biblical covenants. There are important theological differences between Old Testament Israel and the New Testament church.
- The Old Testament should be interpreted on its own terms before asking how it points to Christ – Seeking Christocentric interpretations too quickly obscures the historical particularity of Old Testament texts and imposes premature meanings not intended by human authors nor understood by original audiences.
Strengths of a Christocentric Hermeneutic
Proponents argue that a Christ-centered reading strategy has these strengths:
- It sees all Scripture as a unified divine revelation focused on Christ. This respects the coherence and consistency of God’s redemptive work revealed through human authors.
- It finds deep meaning as all parts of the Bible are related to the central figure of Christ. Details reflect His significance when viewed in relation to the whole.
- It avoids over-compartmentalizing the differences between the Testaments. Old and New Testaments proclaim one saving message, not two divergent theologies.
- It recognizes intertextual connections between biblical texts anticipated by their divine Author. God designed earlier Scripture to foreshadow later revelation in Christ.
- It reflects how Jesus and the apostles interpreted the Old Testament as a witness to Himself (Luke 24:27; John 5:39). It takes a “Christotelic” approach modeled by Christ.
- It sees both Testaments as equally and fully the word of God. Later revelation doesn’t change the meaning of earlier Scripture but clarifies it.
Concerns with a Christocentric Hermeneutic
Critics argue that a Christ-centered hermeneutic has these weaknesses or dangers:
- It flattens the distinctive historical contexts and covenantal structures which shape the meaning of biblical texts for their original audiences.
- It often reads New Testament meanings anachronistically back into Old Testament passages, distorting the human author’s intended meaning.
- It downplays important theological diversity between the Testaments resulting from progressive revelation.
- It expects specific predictions and symbols of Christ where the human author expressed no such conscious intention.
- It arbitrarily connects texts to Christ without controls on typological and allegorical interpretation. Historical literal meaning is disregarded.
- It assumes that the messianic significance of many passages would have been clear to Old Testament audiences prior to New Testament revelation.
- It diminishes the “otherness” of the Old Testament and the historical distance between the Testaments that God chose to utilize.
Strengths of a Christotelic Hermeneutic
Advocates argue that a Christ-goal oriented reading strategy has these strengths:
- It recognizes God’s accommodation to particular historical circumstances in the text’s original context and language. This takes Scripture’s humanity seriously.
- It seeks first to hear each passage on its own terms as a word from God given in a particular time and covenant. This avoids distorted meanings.
- It preserves important theological distinctions between Old and New Testaments that resulted from the progress of revelation.
- It Christological connections only where there are interpretive clues in the text itself sufficient to establish intentional foreshadowing by the human author.
- It resists arbitrarily allegorizing Old Testament stories, allowing these texts to retain their historical literal sense.
- It acknowledges the “already-not yet” dynamic of Old Testament prophecy and messianic expectation. The meaning unfolds progressively.
- It respects the historical journey of God’s people through the ages as they processed the unfolding revelation of Christ.
Concerns with a Christotelic Hermeneutic
Critics argue that a Christ-goal oriented approach has these weaknesses or dangers:
- It treats the Testaments too independently, exaggerating differences in meaning and downplaying their unified message about Christ.
- It largely confines messianic meaning to New Testament hindsight, minimizing anticipations of Christ that would have been perceived by Old Testament saints through the Spirit.
- It puts too much focus on the human dimension of Scripture, assessing meaning only by the human author’s conscious intention. The divine Author’s unified purpose in revelation is underappreciated.
- It allows less anticipation of Christ in the Old Testament than that reflected in New Testament interpretation and the gospel presentation of the apostles.
- It inhibits finding the full meaning of earlier revelation in light of later commentary provided within the Bible itself.
- It engenders skepticism about typological and symbolic connections between the Testaments that are warranted by biblical interpretation.
- It adopts an overly “flat” reading of prophecy that fails to respect the dimensionality, escalation, and ultimate scope of messianic promises that surpass the prophet’s limited human vantage point.
Summary Comparison
In summary, while both approaches affirm the same divine inspiration and authority of all Scripture, some key differences emerge in emphasis:
- The Christocentric method stresses the unity of Scripture in its pervasive messianic focus, while the Christotelic method stresses diversity between human covenant eras.
- The Christocentric approach downplays historical particularity in favor of the unified theology centered on Christ, while the Christotelic approach emphasizes historical particularity and diversity.
- Christocentric interpreters utilize more typology and intertextual links between the Testaments, while Christotelic interpreters focus almost exclusively on authorial intent within each immediate context.
- Christocentric interpreters anticipate more specific prophetic foreshadowings of Christ in the Old Testament, while Christotelic interpreters operate with an “already-not yet” understanding of prophecy.
These differences result in contrasting readings between the two hermeneutical approaches, especially in interpreting prominent messianic passages. But adherents of both approaches share a high Christology and a commitment to embrace Scripture as God’s authoritative, infallible word.