Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: A comparative analysis of John Calvin's christological exegesis of Zechariah
Author: Burcombe, Colin
ISNI:       0000 0004 6061 9593
Awarding Body: Queen's University Belfast
Current Institution: Queen's University Belfast
Date of Award: 2016
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Although there has been a recent increase in research of the exegesis of the Reformer, John Calvin, few analyses have come from scholars in Biblical Studies and none has focused on Calvin's commentary on Zechariah. This thesis undertakes an original study of Calvin's exegesis of Zechariah, with a particular interest in his christological exegesis. This subject connects with a wider and growing interest in the Christ-centred interpretation of Scripture and the developing biblico-theological approach to Old Testament exegesis. First, 1 consider Calvin’s exegetical methodology (chapters 2-4). After identifying Calvin's christotelic understanding of Old Testament prophecy, his christological approach to angels, and his interpretation of messianic metaphors, the thesis turns to what was a central method for Calvin's christological Old Testament exegesis: typology. This leads into a discussion of how the New Testament use of Old Testament prophecy affects Calvin's interpretation of the Old Testament. The second main section (chapters 5-6), focuses on comparative analysis of Calvin’s exegesis. It begins with a patristic commentator with whom Calvin is often compared, Theodore of Mopsuestia. It determines that while he and Calvin have much in common, Calvin's exegesis is by comparison much more christological. The comparative analysis concludes with a study of the Old Testament exegesis of Martin Luther. While the scholarly consensus is that Luther is more christological than Calvin, the evidence of his Zechariah commentary does not support this. In the third and final section (chapter 7), the thesis concludes by drawing together the clear outcomes and some of the significant implications from the research and by suggesting areas for future study.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available