A salvation-historical approach to biblical theology emphasizes the historical and progressive nature of revelation such that the Bible’s primary meaning is (too often) reduced to its reference to the sequential events of a special (salvation) history. After offering a general description of the development of the salvation-historical approach to biblical theology, the essay considers the representative example of D. A. Carson. Then, noting the criticisms of Hans Frei, Karl Barth, and Brevard Childs, the paper argues that limiting one’s biblical theology to a salvation-historical approach replaces Christ as the subject matter of both Testaments with “the temporally distinct and ordered stages of the history of salvation.” Although the insights of a redemptive-historical biblical theology are important, when taken as the exclusive methodology for biblical theology it risks flattening the relationship between the two Testaments and missing Scripture’s theological subject matter.

中文翻译：

---

纯粹救赎历史的圣经神学方法的局限性

救赎－历史学对圣经神学的研究强调了启示的历史性和进步性，因此圣经的主要含义（经常）被简化为对特殊（救赎）历史的序贯事件的引用。在对救赎历史方法对圣经神学的发展进行了一般描述之后，本文考虑了达·卡森的代表性例子。然后，注意到汉斯·弗莱（Hans Frei），卡尔·巴特（Karl Barth）和布里瓦德·柴尔德（Brevard Childs）的批评，论文认为，将圣经神学限制在救赎历史的方法之上，从而取代了基督成为《圣经》的主题，并带有“历史上的时间上有区别和有序的阶段”。的救赎。” 尽管救赎历史圣经神学的见解很重要，