Theodore of Mopsuestia’s Commentary on Psalm 44: A Study of Exegesis and ChristologySyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference PortalThe National Endowment for the HumanitiesThe International Balzan Prize FoundationDavid A. Michelsoncbsc_adminRecord added to Zotero bycbsc_adminSyriaca.org: The Syriac Reference Portalhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/4KVJKQGE/tei
Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
2024-08-15-04:00
Born digital.
CREATED: This bibl record was autogenerated from a Zotero record.Harry SperoPappasTheodore of Mopsuestia’s Commentary on Psalm 44: A Study of Exegesis and Christologyhttp://syriaca.org/cbss/4KVJKQGEhttps://www.zotero.org/groups/a_comprehensive_bibliography_on_syriac_studies/items/4KVJKQGEhttps://www.zotero.org/groups/4861694/items/4KVJKQGE2000Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 350-428) was the greatest biblical exegete of the Christian school of Antioch. In the Commentary on Psalms 1-80 , his interpretation of Psalm 44 (LXX) provides a focal point for examining his biblical exegesis and Christology.
A detailed examination of Theodore's commentary on Psalm 44 identifies three key terms--[Special characters omitted.] , [Special characters omitted.] , and [Special characters omitted.] . Throughout the Commentary on the Psalms , Theodore is concerned with the narrative meaning of Scripture ([Special characters omitted.] ), not with its spiritual meaning ([Special characters omitted.] ).
'A[Special characters omitted.] designates the narrative sequence or its train of thought, related both to the biblical text and its logical meaning but identified with neither. It mediates between text and interpretation and reveals the how of exegesis.
[Special characters omitted.] , as an exegetical term, designates the who of Scripture: the role that David, as speaker of all the psalms, assumes along with the person about whom he speaks.
`[Special characters omitted.] designates the subject matter or what of each psalm, set within a specific historical situation. Both [Special characters omitted.] and [Special characters omitted.] demonstrate Theodore's concern to grasp the biblical story in its literary integrity and historical setting.
The exegetical character of [Special characters omitted.] , [Special characters omitted.] , and [Special characters omitted.] suggests a pronounced exegetical character of Theodore's Christology in his commentary on Psalms 2, 8, and 44. In fact, for him there is no difference between exegesis and theology. Theodore understands the single [Special characters omitted.] of the Incarnate Lord exegetically, not theologically. Based on the [Special characters omitted.] , he assumes that Scripture speaks of the Incarnation within a narrative context, not as an isolated event. When Scripture distinguishes between the divine and the human in Christ, it follows the distinction between the uncreated and the created. Using biblical language, he is content to describe the union in terms of a single, shared honor and a single, uniting [Special characters omitted.] .
However deficient Theodore's Christology may be, there seems to be no evidence that he intends to divide Christ into two persons. He teaches a unified Christ who is discovered in the one [Special characters omitted.] that David assumes, in the one [Special characters omitted.] that the Bible describes, and the narrative and its meaning toward which the [Special characters omitted.] points.
Pappas, Harry Spero. “Theodore of Mopsuestia’s Commentary on Psalm 44: A Study of Exegesis and Christology.” Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2000.
Harry Spero Pappas, Theodore of Mopsuestia’s Commentary on Psalm 44: A Study of Exegesis and Christology (Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 2000).Antiochene schoolChristologyOld TestamentPs 45PsalmsTheodore of MopsuestiaV CEexegesishermeneutics