![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0KwYfDWm8ezugeWTWrTtz9Zg7kQVijmH5-9uIQE1s3zZwZxAw0xGD7PNGsPh5Ty_gzIIuVDKnaErUYIVPiR1EKIxMc9MDYwHUCc91Dh_HbmXuohebs80q1AK-J8NoBoSYgS8O/s200/dramadoctrine.jpg)
To this analytical scrubbing, Vanhoozer has "systematically" responded in a helpfully succinct manner.
As Kostenberger, a "declared Vanhoozer fan" notes, Drama "is not for the faint-hearted" as "it is a hermeneutical tour de force." Though he commends Vanhoozer for the way he "continues to wield his prolific pen and [challenge] Christian theologians to contextualize their approach to biblical interpretation in the postmodern context in which we increasingly find ourselves," Kostenberger nevertheless raises various significant issues in Vanhoozer's work.
I think that Vanhoozer gives adequate answers to most of Kostenberger's primary concerns, and helpfully nuances specific parts of his own argument along the way. He ends by asserting,
I think we both want to affirm the Bible’s multi-perspectival truth. Ironically, the key difference between us may lie not in our estimate concerning the genre not of Scripture but of systematic theology. But this, I have to confess, is something I am still very much working through…This cordial (and informal) dialogue between a NT scholar and a Systematic Theologian is at once helpful and encouraging. It's also good to read Vanhoozer at the "blog" level, where I can understand 67 % of his words (rather than the normal 34 % rate I experience when reading his published tomes).
related posts
Kevin Vanhoozer
May 9, 2007
7