The Bible in Theology and Preaching was written by Donald K. McKim with the purpose of discussing the various theological positions in contemporary society, and how those schools of thought view the Scriptures. Each chapter undertakes to discuss a particular school of thought in such a way as to bring to light the questions of Biblical authority and how that perception of authority influences the presentation of Biblical material by those associated with the particular methodology. McKim begins in chapters I & II with the two broad ecclesiastical traditions of Catholic and Protestant, and from chapter III – XIV discusses various theological positions in society. One is indebted to McKim in the latter chapters for the brief but descriptive chapter titles that easily allows the reader to quickly identify the basic position to be considered. The following discussion is an extremely truncated presentation of the material McKim presents in the individual chapters.

Before making any remarks, it should be noted in the interest of full disclosure that this author would be considered by McKim a Protestant among the ranks of the Fundamentalists with a sprinkling of Scholastic Theology. Therefore, any critique of the various theological positions described by McKim in this work are subject to those suppositions. The author, on the other hand, considers himself nothing more than a Christian with a high view of Scripture concerning both inspiration and authority. With this in mind, as McKim describes the various theological positions one notices that the major thrusts in men’s understanding of the authority of the Scriptures seems to go from a more external locus of authority to a more internal.

Beginning with the overall Catholic and Protestant positions, Scriptural authority has a more external locus. Even though the Catholic position includes authoritative decisions of the various Councils and Pope, the Scriptures form the backbone of the authoritative position with a strong emphasis on inspiration. Even though the traditional Protestant position excludes decisions made by the Pope, there are creedal formulations that act alongside the Scriptures as authoritative. For both of these overall theological positions (even having deep and abiding disagreements regarding authority), the Scriptures are seen authoritative in and of themselves and this in turn drives a deep commitment to textual and expository homiletics.

In chapters III – XIV, in the discussion of the individual theological positions, one begins to see the development of a more internal locus of authority, except perhaps in the Fundamentalist and Scholastic theologies. For example, there are those theologies that place the interpretation of the Scriptures against the experience of the individual; i.e., Neo-Orthodox, Existential, and Narrative theologies. What is taken as authoritative from the Scriptures is directly related to how the Scriptures influence the individual’s experience in this life. As McKim’s analysis continues, the authority of the Scriptures becomes related to not only the individual’s experience, but also how that experience is tied to an over-riding social, moral, or ethnic concern; i.e., Latin American Liberation, Black, Asian, Feminist theologies. The plight or expectations of the group become the leading edge of interpretation, and the use of Scripture grows out of that plight or expectation. The Scriptures are then enlisted in an “us vs. them” homiletical pattern.

Process Theology, for example, defines what is important and applicable to the individual by how much experience that individual has interacting with the Scriptures. It certainly is true that what a person experiences can either reinforce a Biblical teaching or principle, but for the Scriptures to remain constant as the Word of God they cannot be seen as beholding to the perception of an individual for validation and confirmation. Latin American Liberation Theology, for example, does take the experience of the individual into account, but the major thrust in interpretation focuses on, and over develops, a single aspect of the Scriptural themes. There are certainly themes of liberation and freedom that are expressed in the Bible, but those themes are never seen – in and of themselves – the end of the process for the child of God. Even the Exodus narrative, which does teach freedom and liberation, is not only about freedom and liberation. The theme of the Exodus is the people of God being liberated so that they may become servants, may perform the mandates of God as God instructs, and may become people that God can use in his design.

When the Scriptures become overlaid with a personal or group ethos, the Scriptures become less the voice of God and more the voice of the individual or group.

One certainly appreciates this thorough and insightful work produced by McKim and feels that a resource such as this may find a welcome place in the personal library of those that study and practice theology, apologetics, or homiletics. As one reads this work it becomes apparent that it would be well suited for those that seek a concise understanding of the various theological methodologies, and how those methodologies interact with the Scriptures and homiletics. As one holds to a high view of the Scriptures and their authority over all aspects of our life, one is constantly seeking to understand the position of others, so a fruitful and intelligent conversation may ensue. Common ground should be sought in every discussion and knowing where common ground may lie can do nothing except facilitate interaction between those with slightly different, or even those with strongly competing views, of Scriptural authority. One is well convinced that philosophical or theological presuppositions can greatly influence both interpretation and homiletics, but one is also convinced that every Biblical scholar seek to apply the highest standards to themselves so that a true interpretation and unbiased presentation of the Scriptures may be an attainable goal.

Quotes from the work:

“As long as theologians and individual Catholics do not move against the established doctrines of the church, they may proceed as they deem best in their systematic work” (17-18).

“Both Lutheran and Reformed churches since the sixteenth century have been confessional churches. That is, these churches have looked to various confessions or declarations of faith as their norms or sources for doctrine” (30).

“The shift for the locus of authority from the ‘external’ Scriptures to the ‘internal’ religious experience represents a reaction to the way in which the Scriptures were understood in the light of the modern biblical research of the period” (43, Liberal Theology).

“Barth recognized that the words of the biblical witnesses were human words and were thus limited in terms of space and time. The Scriptures could not themselves be a substitute for the Word of God” (83, Neo-Orthodox Theology).

“However, doctrinal statements that originate from Christian Scripture are not to be accepted only through appeals to authority. They must be judged on the basis of their self-evidency” (120, Process Theology).

“As William A. Graham put it, “A text becomes ‘scripture’ in active, subjective relationship to persons, and as part of a cumulative communal tradition. No text, written or oral or both, is sacred or authoritative in isolation from a community”” (156, Black Theology).

“Three general approaches of feminist theologians to feminist interpretation may be distinguished. These interpretive procedures carry with them hermeneutical theories. The task of each approach is ‘to ground its analysis in the experience of women’s oppression’” (180, Feminist and Womanist Theologies). ( )