"A Letter that Killeth": Toward a Reassessment of Antiochene Exegesis, or Diodore, Theodore, and Theodoret on the Psalms

Abstract

The condemnation of Theodore of Mopsuestia and the subsequent consignment of his writings to historical obscurity is usually explained primarily as a rejection of Antiochene Christology. Ancient sources close to the matter, however, suggest that the problem was not so simple and that the resistance to Antiochene ideas extended to exegetical practices as well. Although usually cast by modern scholars in the role of misunderstood victim, it seems that, upon close examination, ancient authors had justifiable reasons to resist the Antiochene project. The exegesis of Diodore of Tarsus, Theodore of Mopsuestia, and, to some extent, Theodoret of Cyrus was methodologically restrictive and theologically weak. It tended to sever the linkages uniting the Old with the New and weakened the ability of the Bible to function as a Christian text. Rather than seeing Antiochene exegesis as a forward-looking project that was suppressed, we should consider it instead to be a backward-looking project that failed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.