"A hermeneutic of trust can have the salutary and paradox effect of making us better historians and scholars of Scripture than those who don't believe." (p.10).
This is a bold statement, but I think Hagner makes an important point here. Too often the hermeneutic of suspicion leads to the conclusion that nothing is trustworthy (and this hermenutic is applied to more than just Scripture). But if we approach the Bible from one of two extremes (either everything is historical or nothing is historical) than we are going to miss the very paradox of Scripture itself. The task of interpreting scripture is not an easy one. We should not approach it with the sole purpose of deconstructing the Christian faith nor should we be afraid of probing it and allowing our presuppositions and our faith to be challenged. As Hagner says a few lines later:
"The believer need have no fear of the [critical] method itself, but need only be on guard against the employment of improper presuppositions." (p. 11)
Thanks to the folks at Baker Academic for sending me this review copy.