Biblical theology is the study of the unifying storyline of the Bible. It arises from the belief that the Bible is the inspired word of God and though written by human authors, the great Author behind it all is none other than God himself. Seeing as there is one author, it is a logical conclusion that there is a unifying element to each of the parts of the Bible.
Another way we arrive at the thinking behind the Bible as an unfolding story is from the point of exegesis (getting the meaning out of Bibles passages). From an exegetical standpoint, the announcement of Jesus in Mark 1:15 "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel" causes us to look back in time and especially into the Old Testament. We are forced to ask, what is being fulfilled? What was expected?
These words off the lips of Jesus send us back into the Old Testament thinking specifically upon the theme of 'Kingdom'. As it turns out, 'Kingdom' is one of, if not the most important unifying themes of the Bible. This framework is most identifiable through the works of Graeme Goldsworthy who traces the idea of Kingdom through the Scriptures with the three-fold idea of God's people, in God's place, under God's rule (People, Realm, Reign).
One of the debates surrounding a Biblical-Theological framework of understanding the Bible, is in the ability of one theme to adequately capture the different aspects of Scripture. Or is 'Kingdom' the theme which captures the most? Some scholars (that means they have lots of letters after their name) suggest that perhaps a better unifying theme is the idea of 'Covenant'. But Goldsworthy is a 'Kingdom' man.
Giving the Biblical Theology lecture today was head of the Moore College Department of Missions, Greg Anderson. Someone asked Greg what his personal opinion was. He indicated that 'Kingdom' works for him, as long as it encapsulates enough of the concept of 'mission' - that God is acting to save. We were left in no doubt that Greg is a 'mission' man.
Another godly man with a peculiar interest is John Piper. John Piper is famous for being a 'joy' man.
As Greg used this question as another opportunity to spruik his favourite subject of mission, an unexplained vision entered my head which I can only assume was from the Lord. If anyone can interpret this vision I would appreciate it. The vision was of a question time at a large Christian conference where sitting on the stage were Graeme Goldsworthy, Greg Anderson and John Piper*. No matter what question was asked, the microphone would be gradually passed down the line with each preacher giving a single word answer; "Kingdom". "Mission". "Joy".
* I deeply value the ministry of each of these men.
great post, zac.
ReplyDeletei really liked the progression, tone and especially your point.
my question is - after learning about all the different models in a summarised version first, and then being directly taught & given a diagram of a particular model - will the diagram version be the 'right' answer in an exam?
I imagine it depends on if YOU think it is right. If you can adequately argue that 'covenant' is a better summary then go for it. It could be worth reading Tim Keller on this if you're interested (I've heard him highlight covenant in a few sermons so assume he sympathises with that emphasis).
ReplyDeleteWhat they are attempting to do at college is give us enough of the debate for us to know there is a debate, and then attempt to use a specific example to show us the method. The example they choose to work through is the one they think is most helpful (in this case Biblical Theology through Kingdom) which kind of makes sense seeing as it would be less beneficial to take us through Bib Theol by 'covenant' and then in the final lecture tell us, but actually 'kingdom' is a better way to understand it.
I much prefer them teaching us kingdom and then saying "Covenant could also work, but we don't think it works as well."
ON a related matter, is it kosher to draw pictures in essays?
it's an important issue, hey?
ReplyDeleteThere is definitely a risk of imposing these grids over everything isn't there?
It's not blatantly obvious that kingdom is a driving theme... unless you define it so broadly that it basically means: God's dealing with people (which could equally well be a broad definition of covenant!)
It's the problem with ALL summaries - they never cover everything.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that it isn't blatantly obvious that kingdom is a driving theme, however the part of this Biblical Theology lecture which got me thinking the most was the announcement of Jesus in Mark 1:15, when Jesus frames the expectation of the Old Testament as waiting for the Kingdom of God. It's there again in Acts 1 with the apostles "Will you at this time restore the Kingdom to Israel."
So you're right in saying it requires a broad definition of Kingdom, however as we investigate Jesus' announcement in Mark 1, we are going backwards actively looking for references to the Kingdom. To arbitrarily seek Kingdom as an overarching theme would seem misguided but seeing as we are going on that journey at Jesus insistence is one of the biggest things in favour of 'Kingdom'. Especially seeing as you discover there's so much there conceptually.
That said, I'm interested to hear more on 'covenant'. Have you heard Keller pushing this more?
I've heard Keller speak very favourably of Goldsworthy's biblical theological method. But I haven't heard him speak of covenant as the overarching theme (but I haven't heard him speak of any main theme actually.)
ReplyDeleteI've heard plenty of other Presbyterians, mind you.
I'm happiest with Kingdom. That's probably because I know Mark's gospel the best and Kingdom is pretty big in there. But I would want to make sure that "presence" is part of the solution. i.e. God's people in God's place, under God's rule, with God's presence.
Thanks Al,
ReplyDeleteAt present I too for a variety of reasons sit most comfortable with Kingdom.
The idea of 'God's presence' to me is heavily wrapped up with the concept of rest. Perhaps this is coming at Kingdom from the angle of purpose. That is, what's the end result of this kingdom, it is the final rest in the presence of the Lord.
Mind you, including presence seems also like a very Presbyterian thing to do. The chief end of man...
:)
Hey Al,
ReplyDeleteWhat do you see as the distinction between God's place and God's presence? I think I can see what you're getting at, but at many points the one is covered by the other and holds many of the same implications. (Ie, at many points in Scripture there are points of unity) So in Ezekiel, they become separate, but up until that point, they are quite unified, particularly in Deuteronomy. I'd be interested in your thoughts.
Hey everyone else,
How would you feel about 'return to blessing' as the overarching theme of the Bible? Just throwing in another spanner for you to chew on.
[rant]
Lastly, I can't help but thinking that as much as 'Kingdom' or 'Covenant' is taught, what should be taught just as, or possibly more, strongly is Graeme's real catch-cry: unity and distinction.
The key to avoiding incorrectly imposing your grid over something and committing Incorrect Totality Transfer (thank you Leigh Travaskis) is recognising where the situation that you're dealing with has points of unity with your schema and also points of distinction. (The next key then is not to understand the points of distinction in terms of your schema every time but to recognise both the explanatory power of your schema, and also the limits of its explanatory power.)
[/rant]
Whats do youse think? Am I mad?
Thanks Kutz. I feel that "place" is not quite relational enough. And that "presence" helps us to take into account the closeness of the Holy Spirit.
ReplyDeleteIn the tabernacle and temple worship "presence" was a pretty big deal. In the coming of Christ, God tabernacled among us. And in the giving of the Holy Spirit, God is again present with his people.
You are right, though, about the "place" and "presence" appearing to be indistinct. Goldsworthy says that God's place is now "The New Temple where Christ Dwells." And it naturally follows that the new temple is indwelt by the Holy Spirit.
But I want to emphasise the closeness of God to us now. Just as he walked with Adam and Eve in the garden before the fall, so now he is present with us in a very real way.
*nods*
ReplyDeleteSo for you it's about something that the word doesn't communicate to us, despite it being the picture that God used to communicate to that particular culture? If so, gotcha.
Perhaps one place where the synonimity (if that's not a word, it absolutely should be) of the two is shown, it's in Revelation 21:3.
"And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God."
Which to me encapsulates how the biblical image of place is really getting at the 'presence' idea that you're pushing. In a very cool way, too.
Hi Kutz.
ReplyDeleteThat's it.
Rev 21:3 is exactly where my thinking takes me.