FREE ESSAY ON THE CONTRIBUTION OF DIETRICH BONHOEFFER'S INTERPRETATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

THE CONTRIBUTION OF DIETRICH BONHOEFFER'S INTERPRETATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

"The Contribution of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Interpretation of the Old Testament"
In reviewing the works of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the study of the Old Testament seems to be
almost non-existent. It is not until his time in Tegel Prison, nearly one year prior to
his execution, that he fully commits himself to serious thought on the subject "My
thoughts and feelings seem to be getting more and more like those of the Old Testament,
and in recent months I have been reading the Old Testament much more than the New
(Bonhoeffer, Letters, 156)." Though his Old Testament study was fairly dicey and
incomplete, the contributions of his interpretation have been tremendous. Bonhoeffer's
distinct Christological approach to the Old Testament may not have pleased an orthodox
readership, but the "kerygma" and additional impact of it was in one word, masterful,
especially in view of the theological and historical context of his day. Due to his
tumultuous academic life resultant of the German crisis (Bethge 1025), his cohesion of
the Old and New Testaments centered in Christ was not systematically expressed and was
primarily encountered in his exegetical studies, sermons, and letters and miscellaneous
papers (Harrelson 115). As with all biblical interpretation, careful evaluation is
required.
View of the Bible
Bonhoeffer views the Bible as the place where God reveals himself to the individual in
the context of the church (Ballard 116). The Bible is not merely an instruction book or a
magical book of answers to confirm or order human thinking about God and the world. It is
not something to be manipulated, rather it to be come to humbly and in expectation of
God's revelation of himself in relation to humanity (Harrelson 116). It is where "God
speaks" to humanity and it listens (Kuske 20). To do otherwise is "to make man the
measure of the Gospel rather than to learn from the Gospel the true norm for human
existence (Harrelson 116)." 
This God who reveals himself and his plan in the Scriptures is, according to Bonhoeffer,
the God of the Old and New Testaments. Because God the Father of Jesus Christ in the New
Testament is the God of Abraham, Moses, and David in the Old Testament, he is the one God
of the one Bible (Kuske 23). The synthesis of the Old and New presents one complete
history on a continuum. This claim was highly significant in the historical and
theological context of Bonhoeffer's day and will be expounded upon later. To discard the
Old Testament is to negate the recognition of God's creation, his intimate involvement
with fallen humanity and a chosen people, and the preparation of the incarnation, death,
and resurrection of his Son, Jesus Christ who is the center of the Church. Bonhoeffer
will take this a step further and claim that the incarnation and crucifixion are found in
the Old Testament, further driving the need for the Old Testament(Harrelson 117). This
also will be discussed in more detail later. 
This united corpus of Scripture is considered the book of the Church. Bonhoeffer portrays
an almost symbiotic relationship between Jesus and the Church. As Jesus witnesses to the
church in the New Testament and provides life to it, so the church looks to Christ via
his biblical witness as its foundation. The Bible is where God speaks to the church,
revealing himself and his plan. This God is not the only the God of the Gospels and the
book of Acts, but he also is the God of the Law, Prophets, and the Writings, the one God
of the one Bible.
Given this framework, Bonhoeffer's view of the relationship between the Testaments and
Christ can be examined more closely. Because the New Testament is seen as the book of
Christ, Christ must be seen in the Old for the two to be seen as one. To overcome this
difficulty, he sees the entire Bible in relation to Jesus Christ (Harrelson 117).
By placing Christ at the center of Scripture, Bonhoeffer points to the necessity of
seeing the incarnation and crucifixion of Christ in the Old Testament (Kuske 47), as
Jesus is the word who became flesh (Harrelson 119). According to Bonhoeffer, the only
access to the Old Testament is through Christ. Because we can only know God and his
revelation through Christ, the only way we can read the Old Testament is through Christ
(Kuske 47). Speaking from a more historical standpoint, since Christ has been an active
part of the Trinity since the beginning of time, he cannot be exempt from the reading of
Old Testament Scripture.
What then should be done with this Christological view of the Old Testament? Bonhoeffer
writes, "In my opinion, it is not Christian to want to take our thoughts and feelings too
quickly and too directly from the New Testament (Bonhoeffer, Letters, 157)." This
enlightened view of the Old Testament should not be held in solitude, but should be used
to shed light onto the New Testament, providing a fuller, more comprehensive
understanding of the text. The dimensions of God's character, his relationship to his
people, and the lives of the people he blessed that are more "Old-Testament-specific"
such as Israel's reverence of God, God's wrath, and Israel's worldly living, work to
convey a more encompassing view of God and his desires for the church (Bonhoeffer,
Letters, 157). He beautifully describes this marriage of the Old and New,
It is only when one knows the unutterability of the name of God that one can utter the
name of Jesus Christ; it is only when one loves life and the earth so much that without
them everything seems to be over that one may believe in the resurrection and the new
world; it is only when one submits to God's law that one may speak of grace; and it is
only when God's wrath and vengeance are hanging as grim realities over the heads of one's
enemies that something of what it means to love and forgive them can touch our hearts
(Bonhoeffer, Letters, 157).
Bonhoeffer seems to be, knowingly or unknowingly, striving for a more holistic view of
Scripture even in his narrow Christocentic approach. In the holding together of these
witnesses, he sees a more lucid revelation of true "reality" in Christ.
To summarize, through Christ, the church is founded. Through the Church's reading of the
Old and New Testaments, Christ speaks to the Church. Christ is seen in the 
Exegesis
Three of Bonhoeffer's exegetical works (which are hardly exegetical at all as will soon
be evident) include his study of Genesis 1-3 (Creation and Fall, 1933), King David
(1935), and Ezra and Nehemiah (1936). By scanning the dates, one can see that these
studies were conducted early in his career. As tension mounted in Germany, he shifted to
a more pastoral focus, as he concentrated his efforts in the maintenance of the church in
Germany through his sermons and letters and papers. 
Bonhoeffer's early exegetical work in Creation and Fall clearly exemplifies the
centrality of Christ in relation to Scripture and more specifically Christ in the Old
Testament. He makes the observation that the world was created out of nothing by God, out
of the freedom of God. This is likened to the Christ's death and resurrection. Christ
submitted himself to the cross, died and rose again. In the same way, God chose to create
the world out of nothing. The implications of this correlation are found in the
significance of the resurrection. Jesus' death without resurrection would have spelled
the death of the Creator of the universe (Kuske 37).
He continues with the narrative of Adam and Eve. In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve have
complete freedom to love and act responsibly because the center of their existence is God
(more specifically, Christ, the cross, and the Church which will later be discussed),
symbolized by the Tree of Life. After partaking of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and
Evil, their freedom is limited by sin and death. Living is no longer pleasurable; it is
inescapable and monotonous (Harrelson 120). 
Here Bonhoeffer's Christological lens is evident in his insertion of Christ into the
Creation narrative. Is this insertion necessary in attempting to prod the Christian mind
as to the significance of Genesis 1 and following? Moreover, is this really exegetical?
One could hardly admit to this! Christ is not even mentioned, and it is doubtful that the
author's original intent was to signify his role in Creation (Harrelson 121). 
Bonhoeffer's study of King David yields an even more interesting interpretation than that
of Creation and Fall. According to Bonhoeffer, David is the "shadow" of Christ. The
shadow of Christ falls on David as the lives of the two parallel each other. Even though
David came before Christ in history, Christ existed eternally previous to David, yet the
life of David foreshadows and witnesses to Christ.
The lives of the two parallel in many ways. David's annointment into earthly kingship by
the Spirit is likened to the annointment of Christ at his baptism to messianic kingship
(Pangritz 146). Other parallels include the David's status as a justified sinner and
Jesus' as sinless, their humble entries into the city of Jerusalem (this stands in
opposition to the leadership of Bonhoeffer's Germany) (Pangritz 147), and their
association with the outcasts of society (Kuske 69).
One fascinating correlation is that of David's "confused" attempt to build a Temple for
God. Only God can build his "church". Jesus built the church and his followers became the
church. Bonhoeffer applied this finding to his situation. In this application, he
provided the encouragement that nothing including the Nazi regime could destroy the
church as it has been built by God. The church does not exist in man-made buildings and
institutions but in the hearts of men and women (Pangritz 147).
Lastly, David's victory over Goliath is seen in the light of Christ's triumph over death
(Kuske 69). This victory is not seen as David's victory but as Christ's. Bonhoeffer
deducts that because of this, Christ was inside David, his shadow (Kuske 72). The
"exegesis" of the story of David is another example of Jesus' presence in the Old
Testament. 
Out of the three examples of Bonhoeffer's exegesis, the study of Ezra and Nehemiah lends
perhaps the most far-fetched interpretation. In his work, he ignores the historical and
interpretive problems with the text and goes on to interpret it in his fashion (Harrelson
126). He sees God calling individuals to resist human effort to build a church (Kuske
81). In doing so, they experience accusation and the like, as they subsequently seek God
fervently and reform the church through discipline (Kuske 82). 
Neither biblical figures or places are mentioned. Instead the stories in Ezra and
Nehemiah are combined to reflect the German situation of Bonhoeffer's day. Is this
acceptable?
Sermon Example
Bonhoeffer's sermon on Psalm 58 (July 11, 1937) grapples with the difficulty in
understanding the biblical soundness of the desiring of vengeance. Should Christians be
permitted to utilize this form of prayer? Is it biblical (Kuske 85)? 
The person praying this prayer must be sinless. David is permitted to pray such a prayer
because Christ, the sinless one, was (as mentioned in the study of King David) in him.
Because Christ is sinless, he has the right to condemn injustice. In this Psalm, Christ
calls for the annihilation of evil and later enacts this in his death and resurrection.
David stands in the shadow of Christ, bearing witness to him (Harrelson 129). 
Bonhoeffer finds a way to present this Psalm in an acceptably "Christian" way. Is this
not the Old Testament, the Torah of the Jewish people? How can Genesis, the stories of
David, Ezra, Nehemiah, and others be read by the Jews if the Bible can only be read
through the revelation of Christ? Is Bonhoeffer swindling the Torah from the Jewish
people? This will be extrapolated more fully later on.
Letters and Papers
Toward the end of his life, most of Bonhoeffer's theological formation was recorded in
letters and papers to friends and family. Because of its fragmented nature, the meaning
of many of his ideas from this time is ambiguous, yet it is important to realize the
significance of his theology from this time period. Two important concepts in
Bonhoeffer's letters and papers are the "unutterableness of the name of God" and the
"world come of age". 
The "unutterableness of the name of God" refers to the Israelites' extreme reserve in the
use of God's name, YHWH. This was done out of a profound reverance and awe of a holy,
omnipotent God. By refraining from the use of God's name, the Israelites showed a
submission or a rendering of power to God. By displacing the use of God's name into God's
hands, they displace their control to God's control. Bonhoeffer saw this as integral to
the Christian understanding of relating to Christ appropriately (Kuske 99).
The "world come of age" refers to the Europe of Bonhoeffer. How is the Church supposed to
function in the modern world? In his Old Testament study, Bonhoeffer saw in Genesis that
God created Adam and Eve to relate freely in the Garden of Eden. They were able to do so
because God was in the center of their reality. He was Christ represented as the Tree of
Life (Harrelson 120). 
Bonhoeffer also notes in a letter to Eberhard Bethge, the significance of God's blessing
in the Old and New Testaments. This not only includes physical but material welfare. In
the Old Testament it seems that a blessing is given after suffering has been experienced,
and in the New Testament, the cross of Christ yields a blessing (Bonhoeffer, Letters,
374).
Following the example of Christ and the Old and New Testament communities, the church is
called to the sufferings of Christ in this world. The church like the Tree of Life is not
to be at the edges of the world but in the center, participating in the sufferings of
Christ (Green 123). This is not the entire picture. As the church in faith suffers in the
world, God blesses her with physical welfare and life. As the church must be in the
center of the world (outward), so must Christ be the center of the church (inward)
(Ballard 117).
Taking all of this into consideration, the church in the "godless world" envisioned by
Bonhoeffer is not one that merely has a specified niche for God and faith. It rather, as
a community, sees Christ as the ultimate meaning of the world. In addition, the church
recognizes Christ's incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection in and for the world and
has faith in him. Further, there will come a time when the church will discover the Bible
in a new, existential sort of way. The church is only to talk about God when the topic
comes up in conversation with unbelievers. In other times, the church is to challenge
them to discover the truth of the human condition in personal experience with the world.
This Christian life in a "godless world" involves both a private and communal faith and
commitment, a commitment to Christ and the world (Ballard 122). This dual commitment is
witnessed by both Old and New Testaments. 
Evaluation: Positive
In the evaluation of Bonhoeffer's interpretation of the Old Testament, more than just his
methodology needs to be taken into consideration. Give n the historical and theological
climate of his day, Bonhoeffer's work was truly brilliant. Two major contributions
resultant of his Old Testament study are the salvaging of the Old Testament for the
church by promoting the unity of both Testaments and his emphasis of responsibility and
action in the world. 
The question of the Christian treatment of the Old Testament was of great importance to
early twentieth century Germany. What should Christians do with the Old Testament? Is it
relevant for the church, and if it is, how should it be studied and applied? These
questions buzzed around theological circles stirring up much debate (Kuske 7). With the
strong pull of German nationalism and anti-semitism lurking more quietly in the
background, German theologians posed inquiries that were heated by nature, having great
impact on the church and country at large (Bethge 126). This was the situation Bonhoeffer
faced as a young theologian. The three predominant views of the Old Testament were the
rejection of the Old Testament, the Old Testament as a primitive development to the New
Testament, and the Old Testament as Scripture in unity with the New Testament.
When hearing the possibility of the rejection of the Old Testament, one almost
automatically assumes such a suggestion was made in centuries past. It is nearly
unimaginable that such a proposition was made merely 67 years ago (Bethge 335)!
Nevertheless this movement was modern. Two figures stand in the forefront of this
movement, Dr. Reinhard Krause and Adolf von Harnack. Though they both were striving for
the same goal, their reasoning was very different. 
In the winter of 1933 at the Berlin Sports Palace, a historical event that shook the
German Church took place. Pastors from all ends of Germany gathered to hear the address
of a certain man. These pastors converged as the leaders of the new Reich Church, and the
man for whom they traveled to listen to was Dr. Reinhard Krause, Berlin's Nazi Party
leader. In this meeting, Krause challenged these ministers to the immediate application
of the Aryan Clause and subsequent weeding out of non-adherents (Bethge 335). This new
church was to see to the "'liberation from the Old Testament with its money morality and
from these stories of cattle dealers and pimps (Bethge 335)'". anti-Semitism proved to be
a powerful force in the attempt to divorce the Old Testament from the Bible. 
A second resounding voice against the embracing of the Old Testament was that of Adolf
von Harnack. He stated that the Old Testament should not be counted as part of the Holy
Scriptures because it is irrelevant to the Christian church. Because of this irrelevance,
it should only be considered a helpful book to read. Never should it be held on the same
level of infallibility as the New Testament (Kuske 9). 
While arguments for the rejection of the Old Testament were raging, many were advocating
for the retention of the Old Testament because of its demonstration as a primitive
forerunner of Christianity. Proponents of this view see the Old Testament as archaic,
presenting mythological ideas of a religion that gets replaced by Christianity. The view
of the Old Testament as a "pre-stage" for the New does not certify the rejection of the
Old Testament, but rather it encourages the Christian to study and appreciate the
development of the Church and Christianity through the ages (Kuske 11).
Those on the more liberal end of this standpoint, cannot release the Old Testament from
its canonical status because some of the Old Testament is good and necessary for
Christian understanding. Some parts cannot be kept and others discarded. Logically, or
perhaps grudgingly, the Bible must be kept whole (Kuske 13).
The third position accepts the Old Testament as having equal status as the New Testament.
Both are holy and are complete only in their combined unity. Bonhoeffer embraces this
position in the tradition of Karl Barth and Wilhelm Vischer.
Works Cited
Anderson, Francis, I. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Old Testament," Reformed Theological
Review, 34
(May-August 1975), 33-44.
Ballard, Paul. "Bonhoeffer as Pastoral Theologian," Theology, 94 (1991), 115-123.
Barnett, Victoria J. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Ecumenical Vision," Christian Century, 112
(1995), 454-457.
Bethge, Eberhard. Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Biography (Revised Edition). Barnett, Victoria
J., ed.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000. 
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Letters and Papers from Prison (Enlarged Edition). NY: Touchstone,
1997. 
Klassen, A.J., ed. A Bonhoeffer Legacy. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981.
Green, Clifford J. "Bonhoeffer, Modernity, and Liberation Theology". In Floyd, Wayne
Whitson Jr. and
Marsh, Charles, eds. Theology and the Practice of Responsibility: Essays on Dietrich
Bonhoeffer.
Valley Forge, PA: Trinity, 1994.
- - -. "Interpreting Bonhoeffer: Reality or Phraseology?," JR, 55 (April 1975), 270-275.

Hummel, Horace D. "Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament," Dialog, 2 (1963),
108-117. 
Kaiser, Walter C. Jr. Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and
Teaching.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1981.
Kuske, Martin. The Old Testament as the Book of Christ: An Appraisal of Bonhoeffer's
Interpretation.
Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.
Harrelson, Walter. "Bonhoeffer and the Bible". In Marty, Martin E., ed. The Place of
Bonhoeffer:
Problems, and Possibilities in His Thought. NY: Association Press, 1964. 
McCrown, Wayne and James E. Massey, eds. Interpreting God's Word for Today. Anderson,
IN:
Warner, 1982.
McKim, Donald K., ed. A Guide to Contemporary Hermeneutics: Major Trends in Biblical
Interpretation.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986.
Pangritz, Andreas. "'Who is Jesus Christ, for us, today?'". In DeGruchy, John W., ed. The
Cambridge
Companion to Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Radmacher, Earl D. and Preus, Robert D., eds. Hermeneutics, Inerrancy, and the Bible.
Grand Rapids,
MI: Academie, 1984.
Rosenbaum, Stanley, R. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Jewish View," JES, 18 (Spring 1981),
301-307.
Murphy, Roland, ed. Theology, Exegesis, and Proclamation. NY: Herder & Herder, 1971.
Willis, Robert E. "Bonhoeffer and Barth on Jewish Suffering: Reflections on the
Relationship Between
Theology and Moral Sensibility," JES, 24 (Fall 1987), 598-615.
Bibliography
Works Cited
Anderson, Francis, I. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer and the Old Testament," Reformed Theological
Review, 34
(May-August 1975), 33-44.
Ballard, Paul. "Bonhoeffer as Pastoral Theologian," Theology, 94 (1991), 115-123.
Barnett, Victoria J. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Ecumenical Vision," Christian Century, 112
(1995), 454-457.
Bethge, Eberhard. Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Biography (Revised Edition). Barnett, Victoria
J., ed.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000. 
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Letters and Papers from Prison (Enlarged Edition). NY: Touchstone,
1997. 
Klassen, A.J., ed. A Bonhoeffer Legacy. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981.
Green, Clifford J. "Bonhoeffer, Modernity, and Liberation Theology". In Floyd, Wayne
Whitson Jr. and
Marsh, Charles, eds. Theology and the Practice of Responsibility: Essays on Dietrich
Bonhoeffer.
Valley Forge, PA: Trinity, 1994.
- - -. "Interpreting Bonhoeffer: Reality or Phraseology?," JR, 55 (April 1975), 270-275.

Hummel, Horace D. "Christological Interpretation of the Old Testament," Dialog, 2 (1963),
108-117. 
Kaiser, Walter C. Jr. Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and
Teaching.
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1981.
Kuske, Martin. The Old Testament as the Book of Christ: An Appraisal of Bonhoeffer's
Interpretation.
Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976.
Harrelson, Walter. "Bonhoeffer and the Bible". In Marty, Martin E., ed. The Place of
Bonhoeffer:
Problems, and Possibilities in His Thought. NY: Association Press, 1964. 
McCrown, Wayne and James E. Massey, eds. Interpreting God's Word for Today. Anderson,
IN:
Warner, 1982.
McKim, Donald K., ed. A Guide to Contemporary Hermeneutics: Major Trends in Biblical
Interpretation.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1986.
Pangritz, Andreas. "'Who is Jesus Christ, for us, today?'". In DeGruchy, John W., ed. The
Cambridge
Companion to Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Radmacher, Earl D. and Preus, Robert D., eds. Hermeneutics, Inerrancy, and the Bible.
Grand Rapids,
MI: Academie, 1984.
Rosenbaum, Stanley, R. "Dietrich Bonhoeffer: A Jewish View," JES, 18 (Spring 1981),
301-307.
Murphy, Roland, ed. Theology, Exegesis, and Proclamation. NY: Herder & Herder, 1971.
Willis, Robert E. "Bonhoeffer and Barth on Jewish Suffering: Reflections on the
Relationship Between
Theology and Moral Sensibility," JES, 24 (Fall 1987), 598-615.