‘Word for the Week: Whole Life, Whole Bible’, from London Institute for Contemporary Christianity, is a series of fifty emails designed to look at the main milestones of the biblical story, seeking to show how whole-life discipleship is woven through Scripture as a whole, from beginning to end. Here is the thirteenth of the fifty emails, written this week by Helen Parry.
Be strong and courageous, because you will lead these people to inherit the land I swore to their ancestors to give them. Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the law my servant Moses gave you; do not turn from it to the right or to the left, that you may be successful wherever you go.
Joshua 1:6-7
‘Guide me, O Thou great Jehovah’, we sing, ‘Pilgrim through this barren land’; and reach a climax of hope:
When I tread the verge of Jordan,
Bid my anxious fears subside:
Death of death and Hell’s destruction
Land me safe on Canaan’s side.
The Old Testament narratives have been a rich source of imagery and inspiration to the church through the ages, none more so than the account of the Exodus. Interestingly, the New Testament church didn’t spiritualise them in this way. Rather, they are referred to as historical events which lay the foundations for the Gospel, or (as in 1 Corinthians 10) serve as examples and warnings.
It may be comforting to think of Jordan as death, and Canaan as heaven, but the arrival of the Israelites in the promised land was not an end but a beginning – the beginning of the establishing of a ‘people’, God’s covenant people who, in the midst of pagan nations, were to live according to God’s law.
Moses had warned them that God’s blessing would remain with them only as long as they obeyed him. The law, with its emphasis on personal and communal holiness, was given to them for their flourishing, and to make them into a community committed to justice, generosity and stewardship, in a land where each one could live ‘under his own vine and under his own fig tree’.
Now, with Canaan in sight on the other side of the Jordan, God encourages Joshua to be strong and courageous. ‘As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will never leave you nor forsake you.’
Does this have any relevance for us? Surely, yes. As God’s new covenant people, playing our own part in God’s unfolding drama, the church is called to be God’s new community. Redeemed by Christ and empowered by the indwelling Spirit, in the midst of our own godless culture, with its particular temptations and dilemmas, we too are to live righteously, strong and courageous, encouraged by the promise ‘I will never leave you nor forsake you’.
Helen Parry
For further reflection and action:
1. What similarities may we see between the Canaanite culture in the promised land and the culture of our own day?
2. Even though Western culture is thoroughly – and sometimes aggressively – secular, there are many good people in it, living by many of the values of the Bible. How should we relate to them?
3. How can we, in our own circumstances, not by military might, be strong and courageous in upholding and maintaining the uniqueness and sovereign claims of God?
Monday, 29 June 2009
Rescuing Darwin
[A version of this article was first published in eg 22 (June 2009), a publication of the London Institute for Contemporary Christianity.]
My wife is adamant we first met outside the laundry at college, whereas I know it was outside the Italian restaurant on Green Lane. Of course, our disagreement on this point is friendly and poses no threat to our relationship; somewhat ironically, it’s even a source of celebration, since what really matters to both of us is that we met, not how we met. Likewise, where there are disagreements in the Christian family – over spiritual gifts, the end of the world, the nature of church leadership – it’s crucial to remember what unites us rather than stumble over matters of secondary importance.
2009 sees the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin and the 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species. The milestones have provoked considerable discussion in the press, books, and TV – with many pundits giving the impression that religion (and Christianity is usually in the line of sight) is either under threat or has already been made redundant. It has also provided an opportunity for Christians to engage with others on the topic, to reflect together on what’s at stake and what’s not at stake, and remind ourselves that we have too much invested in our relationship with each other, not to mention with our Creator God, to trip up on this dispute.
As part of a larger project on Darwin, Nick Spencer of Theos (a public theology think tank) and Denis Alexander of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion have written a report – Rescuing Darwin: God and Evolution in Britain Today – in which they seek to argue that Darwinian evolution does not necessitate atheism, and that Christianity and evolution are compatible. In ‘rescuing’ Darwin from what they see as false charges, their report prompts reflection on four related areas.
The significance of Darwin
The report plots Darwin’s faith from before the Beagle expedition to the publication of Origin and beyond, and his struggles with suffering (not least personally, with the death of his eldest daughter). Although he had lost whatever Christian faith he had by the time he wrote Origin, and became an agnostic towards the end of his life, he rejected the view that evolution entails atheism. Moreover, the initial reception of his theory, though not without criticism, was generally positive, and was accepted even by leading Christian thinkers – scientists and theologians – who did not see it as a threat to faith.
Disciples of Darwin are not always faithful to him in this respect when they argue that evolution essentially equates with atheism; Darwin would not have agreed with them. When faced with the choice of ‘creation or evolution’, many Christians feel compelled to say ‘creation’, and don’t question whether they might have been subjected to a false antithesis of the ‘Who do you love – your husband or your son?’ sort.
Part of the problem is that Darwinism has been encountered wearing various philosophical, social or political outfits. Darwin himself has been hijacked for views in which humans are merely machines or collections of chemicals, accidents of a random process, subject to blind forces, with morality reduced to self-interest. It should come as no surprise that it’s not just Christians who have problems with this kind of ‘hard’ Darwinism propounded by Richard Dawkins and his ilk. According to the report, none of this reflects Darwin’s own position.
The interpretation of Scripture
The report includes a helpful section on Scripture, showing that many of the early church fathers exercised considerable flexibility in their reading of the opening chapters of Genesis, and that figurative readings have continued through church history. Even theologically conservative scholars embraced a range of opinions on the issue of evolution. B.B. Warfield (still highly esteemed and appealed to by supporters of biblical inerrancy) was happy to accept that God had guided the process, stating: ‘I do not think that there is any general statement in the Bible or any part of the account of creation, either as given in Genesis 1 and 2 or elsewhere alluded to, that need be opposed to evolution.’ Warfield’s high view of Scripture was not stymied by the possibility of evolution.
Faithfulness to Scripture requires reading it in appropriate ways. When biblical writers speak of the earth not moving (Psalm 93:1; 96:10; 104:5), we understand that has to do with God’s oversight rather than physical immovability. Interpretations of such references as evidence that the earth is at the centre of the universe, though sincerely and strongly held, were misinformed. That we now know this does not cast doubt on the authority of Scripture, but reminds us to be wise readers of it, open to correction by greater light.
We do less than justice to Genesis 1 if we make the category mistake of reading it as one thing rather than another. This may mean recognising it has been shaped as a piece of literature to show how God first forms the world (on days 1-3) and then fills the world (on days 4-6). Moreover, in its context, it engages with alternative worldviews to inculcate a particular view of God, the world, and the place of human beings in it. That it is not a scientific account of origins does not make it inferior or any less truthful. Again, none of this is to deny the inspiration of the account; it is to ask what kind of inspired account we are reading.
The nature of science
The rise of modern science was nursed in the arms of a Christian worldview. Although it has become a victim of the sacred-secular divide, science and religion need not be seen as rival descriptions of the way the world works. Christians may work in science, as elsewhere, serving Christ through their research, seeing it as part of their discipleship to explore God’s world on behalf of others. Christians need not fear careful, honest scientific investigation, and we all benefit from its results. But we also recognise the limits of science – that where it might be helpful in answering the ‘how’ questions, it might not be the most appropriate place to look for answers to the ‘why’ questions, particularly if those questions relate to ultimate issues of identity, purpose and hope.
Christians of all people should know that human experience is larger than science alone can describe, and will be cautious of scientism, where science itself becomes a belief system, where evolution is elevated from a theory (albeit in the technical sense of a coherent, well-ordered model that explains some part of the natural world) to an all-encompassing worldview.
The report maintains that we do not have to choose between ‘creation’ or ‘evolution’, since the two words describe different but complementary levels of discourse. Just as the Christian historian may acknowledge the ‘natural’ cause of an event in history and not thereby deny God’s providential oversight of history, so the Christian scientist might affirm God’s sovereignty in evolutionary history. The one form of explanation is complemented and completed, not necessarily contradicted, by other forms of explanation.
The doctrine of creation
Of course, significant questions about evolution remain, not least from a Christian perspective. The authors of the report try to answer charges that evolution is too wasteful, depends on chance, and involves suffering and death – arguing that these aren’t as problematic as has sometimes been claimed. But issues like this rightly stay on the agenda for debate.
Christians will want to set that discussion in a wider context of an affirmation that creation is not an accident of nature, but an act of God the Creator (however the mechanism of creation is understood). Along with creation goes an understanding of God’s providence, that he is the one who oversees and directs the created order. From a broader biblical perspective, creation and providence are not so much a claim about the processes by which the universe came into being, and more a claim about how everything depends on God, and of his commitment to restore it when it goes awry. It reminds us that though we are creatures of the earth, we are made in his image, and thus live differently in the world and in relation with others as a result. And reflection on creation leads us, as it does throughout Scripture, to praise and worship of our great God.
Further reading
Denis Alexander, God and Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? (Oxford: Monarch, 2008).
A sustained case for a complementary reading of the ‘book’ of God’s word and the ‘book’ of God’s works.
R.J. Berry and T.A. Noble (eds.), Darwin, Creation and the Fall: Theological Challenges (Nottingham: Apollos, 2009).
A collection of essays from key scholars exploring the interface between science and theology.
C. John Collins, Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2006).
A careful and reverent exposition of Genesis 1-4.
Daniel M. Harrell, Nature’s Witness: How Evolution Can Inspire Faith (Nashville: Abingdon, 2008).
An engaging study of how we might rethink our theology and what the Bible says if evolution accurately describes how life came about.
Andrew S. Kulikovsky, Creation, Fall, Restoration: A Biblical Theology of Creation (Fearn: Mentor, 2009).
An interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis as a ‘straightforward historical account of the creation of the universe’.
Ernest Lucas, Can We Believe Genesis Today? The Bible and the Questions of Science, 3rd edn. (Leicester: IVP, 2005).
Very helpful on issues of interpreting the early chapters of Genesis.
Mark Pallen, The Rough Guide to Evolution (London: Rough Guides, 2009).
An accessible, well-illustrated treatment from a secular, scientific perspective.
Nick Spencer, Darwin and God (London: SPCK, 2009).
Seeks to clear misconceptions about Darwin’s religious views by telling Darwin’s story, drawing on his autobiography as well as manuscripts, notebooks and letters.
David Wilkinson, The Message of Creation (Leicester: IVP, 2002).
Reflection on biblical passages looking at the beginning of creation, the songs of creation, the Lord of creation, the lessons of creation, and the fulfilment of creation.
My wife is adamant we first met outside the laundry at college, whereas I know it was outside the Italian restaurant on Green Lane. Of course, our disagreement on this point is friendly and poses no threat to our relationship; somewhat ironically, it’s even a source of celebration, since what really matters to both of us is that we met, not how we met. Likewise, where there are disagreements in the Christian family – over spiritual gifts, the end of the world, the nature of church leadership – it’s crucial to remember what unites us rather than stumble over matters of secondary importance.
2009 sees the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin and the 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species. The milestones have provoked considerable discussion in the press, books, and TV – with many pundits giving the impression that religion (and Christianity is usually in the line of sight) is either under threat or has already been made redundant. It has also provided an opportunity for Christians to engage with others on the topic, to reflect together on what’s at stake and what’s not at stake, and remind ourselves that we have too much invested in our relationship with each other, not to mention with our Creator God, to trip up on this dispute.
As part of a larger project on Darwin, Nick Spencer of Theos (a public theology think tank) and Denis Alexander of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion have written a report – Rescuing Darwin: God and Evolution in Britain Today – in which they seek to argue that Darwinian evolution does not necessitate atheism, and that Christianity and evolution are compatible. In ‘rescuing’ Darwin from what they see as false charges, their report prompts reflection on four related areas.
The significance of Darwin
The report plots Darwin’s faith from before the Beagle expedition to the publication of Origin and beyond, and his struggles with suffering (not least personally, with the death of his eldest daughter). Although he had lost whatever Christian faith he had by the time he wrote Origin, and became an agnostic towards the end of his life, he rejected the view that evolution entails atheism. Moreover, the initial reception of his theory, though not without criticism, was generally positive, and was accepted even by leading Christian thinkers – scientists and theologians – who did not see it as a threat to faith.
Disciples of Darwin are not always faithful to him in this respect when they argue that evolution essentially equates with atheism; Darwin would not have agreed with them. When faced with the choice of ‘creation or evolution’, many Christians feel compelled to say ‘creation’, and don’t question whether they might have been subjected to a false antithesis of the ‘Who do you love – your husband or your son?’ sort.
Part of the problem is that Darwinism has been encountered wearing various philosophical, social or political outfits. Darwin himself has been hijacked for views in which humans are merely machines or collections of chemicals, accidents of a random process, subject to blind forces, with morality reduced to self-interest. It should come as no surprise that it’s not just Christians who have problems with this kind of ‘hard’ Darwinism propounded by Richard Dawkins and his ilk. According to the report, none of this reflects Darwin’s own position.
The interpretation of Scripture
The report includes a helpful section on Scripture, showing that many of the early church fathers exercised considerable flexibility in their reading of the opening chapters of Genesis, and that figurative readings have continued through church history. Even theologically conservative scholars embraced a range of opinions on the issue of evolution. B.B. Warfield (still highly esteemed and appealed to by supporters of biblical inerrancy) was happy to accept that God had guided the process, stating: ‘I do not think that there is any general statement in the Bible or any part of the account of creation, either as given in Genesis 1 and 2 or elsewhere alluded to, that need be opposed to evolution.’ Warfield’s high view of Scripture was not stymied by the possibility of evolution.
Faithfulness to Scripture requires reading it in appropriate ways. When biblical writers speak of the earth not moving (Psalm 93:1; 96:10; 104:5), we understand that has to do with God’s oversight rather than physical immovability. Interpretations of such references as evidence that the earth is at the centre of the universe, though sincerely and strongly held, were misinformed. That we now know this does not cast doubt on the authority of Scripture, but reminds us to be wise readers of it, open to correction by greater light.
We do less than justice to Genesis 1 if we make the category mistake of reading it as one thing rather than another. This may mean recognising it has been shaped as a piece of literature to show how God first forms the world (on days 1-3) and then fills the world (on days 4-6). Moreover, in its context, it engages with alternative worldviews to inculcate a particular view of God, the world, and the place of human beings in it. That it is not a scientific account of origins does not make it inferior or any less truthful. Again, none of this is to deny the inspiration of the account; it is to ask what kind of inspired account we are reading.
The nature of science
The rise of modern science was nursed in the arms of a Christian worldview. Although it has become a victim of the sacred-secular divide, science and religion need not be seen as rival descriptions of the way the world works. Christians may work in science, as elsewhere, serving Christ through their research, seeing it as part of their discipleship to explore God’s world on behalf of others. Christians need not fear careful, honest scientific investigation, and we all benefit from its results. But we also recognise the limits of science – that where it might be helpful in answering the ‘how’ questions, it might not be the most appropriate place to look for answers to the ‘why’ questions, particularly if those questions relate to ultimate issues of identity, purpose and hope.
Christians of all people should know that human experience is larger than science alone can describe, and will be cautious of scientism, where science itself becomes a belief system, where evolution is elevated from a theory (albeit in the technical sense of a coherent, well-ordered model that explains some part of the natural world) to an all-encompassing worldview.
The report maintains that we do not have to choose between ‘creation’ or ‘evolution’, since the two words describe different but complementary levels of discourse. Just as the Christian historian may acknowledge the ‘natural’ cause of an event in history and not thereby deny God’s providential oversight of history, so the Christian scientist might affirm God’s sovereignty in evolutionary history. The one form of explanation is complemented and completed, not necessarily contradicted, by other forms of explanation.
The doctrine of creation
Of course, significant questions about evolution remain, not least from a Christian perspective. The authors of the report try to answer charges that evolution is too wasteful, depends on chance, and involves suffering and death – arguing that these aren’t as problematic as has sometimes been claimed. But issues like this rightly stay on the agenda for debate.
Christians will want to set that discussion in a wider context of an affirmation that creation is not an accident of nature, but an act of God the Creator (however the mechanism of creation is understood). Along with creation goes an understanding of God’s providence, that he is the one who oversees and directs the created order. From a broader biblical perspective, creation and providence are not so much a claim about the processes by which the universe came into being, and more a claim about how everything depends on God, and of his commitment to restore it when it goes awry. It reminds us that though we are creatures of the earth, we are made in his image, and thus live differently in the world and in relation with others as a result. And reflection on creation leads us, as it does throughout Scripture, to praise and worship of our great God.
Further reading
Denis Alexander, God and Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? (Oxford: Monarch, 2008).
A sustained case for a complementary reading of the ‘book’ of God’s word and the ‘book’ of God’s works.
R.J. Berry and T.A. Noble (eds.), Darwin, Creation and the Fall: Theological Challenges (Nottingham: Apollos, 2009).
A collection of essays from key scholars exploring the interface between science and theology.
C. John Collins, Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2006).
A careful and reverent exposition of Genesis 1-4.
Daniel M. Harrell, Nature’s Witness: How Evolution Can Inspire Faith (Nashville: Abingdon, 2008).
An engaging study of how we might rethink our theology and what the Bible says if evolution accurately describes how life came about.
Andrew S. Kulikovsky, Creation, Fall, Restoration: A Biblical Theology of Creation (Fearn: Mentor, 2009).
An interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis as a ‘straightforward historical account of the creation of the universe’.
Ernest Lucas, Can We Believe Genesis Today? The Bible and the Questions of Science, 3rd edn. (Leicester: IVP, 2005).
Very helpful on issues of interpreting the early chapters of Genesis.
Mark Pallen, The Rough Guide to Evolution (London: Rough Guides, 2009).
An accessible, well-illustrated treatment from a secular, scientific perspective.
Nick Spencer, Darwin and God (London: SPCK, 2009).
Seeks to clear misconceptions about Darwin’s religious views by telling Darwin’s story, drawing on his autobiography as well as manuscripts, notebooks and letters.
David Wilkinson, The Message of Creation (Leicester: IVP, 2002).
Reflection on biblical passages looking at the beginning of creation, the songs of creation, the Lord of creation, the lessons of creation, and the fulfilment of creation.
Monday, 22 June 2009
Word for the Week: Whole Life, Whole Bible (12/50) – Holy, Holy, Holy
‘Word for the Week: Whole Life, Whole Bible’, from London Institute for Contemporary Christianity, is a series of fifty emails designed to look at the main milestones of the biblical story, seeking to show how whole-life discipleship is woven through Scripture as a whole, from beginning to end. Here is the twelfth of the fifty emails.
The LORD said to Moses, ‘Speak to the Israelites and say to them: “I am the LORD your God. You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. Keep my decrees and laws, for whoever obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD…”’ The LORD said to Moses, ‘Speak to the entire assembly of Israel and say to them: “Be holy because I, the LORD your God, am holy.”’
Leviticus 18:1-5 and 19:1-2
The life of the people of God is to reflect God’s own character. ‘Be holy, because I, the LORD your God, am holy.’
The sheer range of regulations in Leviticus reminds us that the holiness in view touches all areas of life, not just the ‘religious’ ones; that holiness does not entail removal from the world, but presupposes daily living in the world, as part of the rhythm of the week, of the months, of the cycle of the seasons; that holiness is not the preserve of the privileged few, but for all God’s people; that holiness is not a privatised experience, but is bound up with living and working in community.
Nor is holiness about floating free in some ethereal existence untouched by the messiness of life, but is earthed, quite literally sometimes, on the ground, in everyday life: in working crops, maintaining soil, buying and selling goods; in looking after parents, observing sabbath rests, providing for the poor; in how one works, what one eats, who one sleeps with – consciously countering cultural norms in the process, living in the world but not living like the world.
And all carried out as an integral part of our worship of a holy God.
Lest we reduce this to an abstract system of laws, ‘I am the LORD your God’ reminds Israel that redemption comes before regulations, relationship before rules. The law is bound up with a commitment to serve their covenant Lord, to be a distinctive people, and to order their lives with each other appropriately. And all of this for the greater end of fulfilling God’s promises to Abraham and their calling to be a priestly kingdom, for the sake of the world.
And lest we despair that they will never be able to manage it, Leviticus assumes the reality and consequences of sin and makes provision for restoration through sacrifice.
Of course, the new covenant necessarily changes the dynamics and the specifics; but the vocation to be a people set apart for God remains (1 Peter 1:13-16; 2:9-10), and with it the call to do things differently from those around us. As we do so, we can expect that the laws will still shape our moral vision, because they arise out of God’s holy character, and express his mind for his people as they live in the face of the world for the sake of the world.
For further reflection and action:
1. Read through the so-called ‘Holiness Code’ (Leviticus 18-20) and make a summary of the laws contained in it. Perhaps make a note of any surprises, and reflect on them further or in conversation with others.
2. What are some of the implications of the Old Testament law for a biblical worldview? Perhaps think personally about the implications for your own family life, business partnerships, leisure time, etc.
3. How would you respond to someone who claimed that the laws in Leviticus are so buried in the culture of the time that they should be seen of little or no value for today?
4. Follow up the echoes of Leviticus in 1 Peter 1:13-16 and 2:9-10. How does Peter ‘translate’ holiness for the Christians to whom he writes?
The LORD said to Moses, ‘Speak to the Israelites and say to them: “I am the LORD your God. You must not do as they do in Egypt, where you used to live, and you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow their practices. You must obey my laws and be careful to follow my decrees. I am the LORD your God. Keep my decrees and laws, for whoever obeys them will live by them. I am the LORD…”’ The LORD said to Moses, ‘Speak to the entire assembly of Israel and say to them: “Be holy because I, the LORD your God, am holy.”’
Leviticus 18:1-5 and 19:1-2
The life of the people of God is to reflect God’s own character. ‘Be holy, because I, the LORD your God, am holy.’
The sheer range of regulations in Leviticus reminds us that the holiness in view touches all areas of life, not just the ‘religious’ ones; that holiness does not entail removal from the world, but presupposes daily living in the world, as part of the rhythm of the week, of the months, of the cycle of the seasons; that holiness is not the preserve of the privileged few, but for all God’s people; that holiness is not a privatised experience, but is bound up with living and working in community.
Nor is holiness about floating free in some ethereal existence untouched by the messiness of life, but is earthed, quite literally sometimes, on the ground, in everyday life: in working crops, maintaining soil, buying and selling goods; in looking after parents, observing sabbath rests, providing for the poor; in how one works, what one eats, who one sleeps with – consciously countering cultural norms in the process, living in the world but not living like the world.
And all carried out as an integral part of our worship of a holy God.
Lest we reduce this to an abstract system of laws, ‘I am the LORD your God’ reminds Israel that redemption comes before regulations, relationship before rules. The law is bound up with a commitment to serve their covenant Lord, to be a distinctive people, and to order their lives with each other appropriately. And all of this for the greater end of fulfilling God’s promises to Abraham and their calling to be a priestly kingdom, for the sake of the world.
And lest we despair that they will never be able to manage it, Leviticus assumes the reality and consequences of sin and makes provision for restoration through sacrifice.
Of course, the new covenant necessarily changes the dynamics and the specifics; but the vocation to be a people set apart for God remains (1 Peter 1:13-16; 2:9-10), and with it the call to do things differently from those around us. As we do so, we can expect that the laws will still shape our moral vision, because they arise out of God’s holy character, and express his mind for his people as they live in the face of the world for the sake of the world.
For further reflection and action:
1. Read through the so-called ‘Holiness Code’ (Leviticus 18-20) and make a summary of the laws contained in it. Perhaps make a note of any surprises, and reflect on them further or in conversation with others.
2. What are some of the implications of the Old Testament law for a biblical worldview? Perhaps think personally about the implications for your own family life, business partnerships, leisure time, etc.
3. How would you respond to someone who claimed that the laws in Leviticus are so buried in the culture of the time that they should be seen of little or no value for today?
4. Follow up the echoes of Leviticus in 1 Peter 1:13-16 and 2:9-10. How does Peter ‘translate’ holiness for the Christians to whom he writes?
Friday, 19 June 2009
Richard C. Gamble on The Whole Counsel of God
I read the following essay by Richard Gamble when it first came out…
Richard C. Gamble, ‘The Relationship Between Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology’, in Andrew T.B. McGowan (ed.), Always Reforming: Explorations in Systematic Theology (Leicester: Apollos, 2006), 211-39.
It’s slap bang in the middle of an issue, possibly the issue, that interests and excites me most – the relationship between biblical theology and systematic theology.
In it, Gamble refers several times to his forthcoming multi-volume work – The Whole Counsel of God – and my appetite was whetted for a full-scale treatment of the theme.
That was 2006.
At last, in June 2009, the first volume of a projected trilogy is now out:
Richard C. Gamble, The Whole Counsel of God, Volume 1: God’s Mighty Acts in the Old Testament (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2009), 864pp., ISBN 9780875521916.
Some sample pages are available here.
Gamble devotes a few introductory pages to outlining what he sees as the ‘exegetical foundation’ and ‘historical background’ to the whole project.
The ‘exegetical foundation’ is found in the scene from Acts 20:25-28, where Paul says to the Ephesian elders that he has not hesitated ‘to proclaim to you the whole counsel [or will] of God’ (20:27). Gamble holds that the elders are to do as Paul had done, and that the same task continues today.
Under ‘historical background’, he situates himself squarely in the Reformed tradition, particularly Calvin and developments of Reformed theology, notably John Owen’s Biblical Theology (1661), Herman Witsius’ The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man (1685), and (more recently) Geerhardus Vos’ Biblical Theology (1948).
The first volume in the trilogy focuses on God’s self-revelation in the Old Testament, the second volume will deal with the New Testament, and the third promises to trace the theological development in the church’s understanding of Scripture through the centuries.
Gamble summarises:
‘The Whole Counsel of God is written to continue discussions of the relationship between exegesis and hermeneutics, and the interrelationships of biblical, systematic, and historical theology. The Whole Counsel of God will attempt to meet the need for a comprehensive theology that is attuned to the methodological advantages of biblical theology, but will also combine that advantage with the strengths of historical and systematic theology’ (xxxiii).
I look forward to seeing how the project plays out.
Richard C. Gamble, ‘The Relationship Between Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology’, in Andrew T.B. McGowan (ed.), Always Reforming: Explorations in Systematic Theology (Leicester: Apollos, 2006), 211-39.
It’s slap bang in the middle of an issue, possibly the issue, that interests and excites me most – the relationship between biblical theology and systematic theology.
In it, Gamble refers several times to his forthcoming multi-volume work – The Whole Counsel of God – and my appetite was whetted for a full-scale treatment of the theme.
That was 2006.
At last, in June 2009, the first volume of a projected trilogy is now out:
Richard C. Gamble, The Whole Counsel of God, Volume 1: God’s Mighty Acts in the Old Testament (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2009), 864pp., ISBN 9780875521916.
Some sample pages are available here.
Gamble devotes a few introductory pages to outlining what he sees as the ‘exegetical foundation’ and ‘historical background’ to the whole project.
The ‘exegetical foundation’ is found in the scene from Acts 20:25-28, where Paul says to the Ephesian elders that he has not hesitated ‘to proclaim to you the whole counsel [or will] of God’ (20:27). Gamble holds that the elders are to do as Paul had done, and that the same task continues today.
Under ‘historical background’, he situates himself squarely in the Reformed tradition, particularly Calvin and developments of Reformed theology, notably John Owen’s Biblical Theology (1661), Herman Witsius’ The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man (1685), and (more recently) Geerhardus Vos’ Biblical Theology (1948).
The first volume in the trilogy focuses on God’s self-revelation in the Old Testament, the second volume will deal with the New Testament, and the third promises to trace the theological development in the church’s understanding of Scripture through the centuries.
Gamble summarises:
‘The Whole Counsel of God is written to continue discussions of the relationship between exegesis and hermeneutics, and the interrelationships of biblical, systematic, and historical theology. The Whole Counsel of God will attempt to meet the need for a comprehensive theology that is attuned to the methodological advantages of biblical theology, but will also combine that advantage with the strengths of historical and systematic theology’ (xxxiii).
I look forward to seeing how the project plays out.
David K. Naugle on Solomon the Scholar
David K. Naugle, ‘Solomon the Scholar’ (DBU Scholars’ Luncheon, 7 April 2009).
In an address to Christian scholars, Naugle begins with the question, What would you ask the Lord to do for you if you could ask Him for anything at all?
He takes his cue from 1 Kings 4:29-34…
29. Now God gave Solomon wisdom and very great discernment and breadth of mind, like the sand that is on the seashore. 30. Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the sons of the east and all the wisdom of Egypt. 31. For he was wiser than all men, than Ethan the Ezrahite, Heman, Calcol and Darda, the sons of Mahol; and his fame was known in all the surrounding nations. 32. He also spoke 3,000 proverbs, and his songs were 1,005. 33. He spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even to the hyssop that grows on the wall; he spoke also of animals and birds and creeping things and fish. 34. Men came from all peoples to hear the wisdom of Solomon, from all the kings of the earth who had heard of his wisdom.
He highlights what he sees as several pertinent features…
1. Solomon the scholar’s wisdom, discernment and breadth of mind/heart were God-given gifts (1 Kings 4:29)
Not just the accumulation of data, but the ‘capacity to understand all aspects of life in its mysterious, depth dimension from God’s point of view’ (4). Our intellectual capacities are gifts of God’s grace, and we must be faithful stewards of them, work hard to develop them, as well as recognise that God gifts others, believers or not.
2. Solomon the scholar’s superior intellect and wisdom (1 Kings 4:30-31)
The leading scholar of the day ‘was a religious man, a Jew, an Israelite, a man of God’ (5), whose wisdom was greater than the leading lights and centres of learning of his era.
3. Solomon the scholar’s encyclopedic knowledge and his work as a writer and composer (1 Kings 4:32-33)
Solomon committed his research, knowledge and wisdom to writing – in wise sayings and songs. In addition to dendrology and botany, the second part of verse 33 indicates he was a student of the four principal families of the animal kingdom. According to Naugle all this presupposes ‘the original and ongoing importance of the cultural mandate that God gave to the human race…, the continuation of the original Adamic vocation of naming and explaining the animal kingdom…, the communal nature and institutional character of Solomon’s scholarship, for it is highly unlikely he undertook this kind of vast research alone…’, and that the wisdom had shalom as its goal (as 4:25 indicates, with everyone living in safety, ‘every man under his vine and fig tree’) (8-9).
4. Solomon the scholar’s fame and appeal (1 Kings 4:31b, 34)
Internationally famous for his knowledge and wisdom.
5. Someone greater than Solomon the scholar has come (Matthew 12:42)
Even in his great wisdom, discernment and breadth of mind and heart, Solomon is ‘a type, a foreshadowing, an anticipation of Jesus Christ’ (10-11), and ‘He is the One we serve as Christian scholars through our contributions to the broader arena of knowledge’ (12).
In an address to Christian scholars, Naugle begins with the question, What would you ask the Lord to do for you if you could ask Him for anything at all?
He takes his cue from 1 Kings 4:29-34…
29. Now God gave Solomon wisdom and very great discernment and breadth of mind, like the sand that is on the seashore. 30. Solomon’s wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the sons of the east and all the wisdom of Egypt. 31. For he was wiser than all men, than Ethan the Ezrahite, Heman, Calcol and Darda, the sons of Mahol; and his fame was known in all the surrounding nations. 32. He also spoke 3,000 proverbs, and his songs were 1,005. 33. He spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even to the hyssop that grows on the wall; he spoke also of animals and birds and creeping things and fish. 34. Men came from all peoples to hear the wisdom of Solomon, from all the kings of the earth who had heard of his wisdom.
He highlights what he sees as several pertinent features…
1. Solomon the scholar’s wisdom, discernment and breadth of mind/heart were God-given gifts (1 Kings 4:29)
Not just the accumulation of data, but the ‘capacity to understand all aspects of life in its mysterious, depth dimension from God’s point of view’ (4). Our intellectual capacities are gifts of God’s grace, and we must be faithful stewards of them, work hard to develop them, as well as recognise that God gifts others, believers or not.
2. Solomon the scholar’s superior intellect and wisdom (1 Kings 4:30-31)
The leading scholar of the day ‘was a religious man, a Jew, an Israelite, a man of God’ (5), whose wisdom was greater than the leading lights and centres of learning of his era.
3. Solomon the scholar’s encyclopedic knowledge and his work as a writer and composer (1 Kings 4:32-33)
Solomon committed his research, knowledge and wisdom to writing – in wise sayings and songs. In addition to dendrology and botany, the second part of verse 33 indicates he was a student of the four principal families of the animal kingdom. According to Naugle all this presupposes ‘the original and ongoing importance of the cultural mandate that God gave to the human race…, the continuation of the original Adamic vocation of naming and explaining the animal kingdom…, the communal nature and institutional character of Solomon’s scholarship, for it is highly unlikely he undertook this kind of vast research alone…’, and that the wisdom had shalom as its goal (as 4:25 indicates, with everyone living in safety, ‘every man under his vine and fig tree’) (8-9).
4. Solomon the scholar’s fame and appeal (1 Kings 4:31b, 34)
Internationally famous for his knowledge and wisdom.
5. Someone greater than Solomon the scholar has come (Matthew 12:42)
Even in his great wisdom, discernment and breadth of mind and heart, Solomon is ‘a type, a foreshadowing, an anticipation of Jesus Christ’ (10-11), and ‘He is the One we serve as Christian scholars through our contributions to the broader arena of knowledge’ (12).
William Cobbett on the Evils of Drink
I came across this yesterday, from William Cobbett, an early 19th-century writer in England, in a short work called Cottage Economy:
‘It must be evident to every one, that the practice… must render the frame feeble and unfit to encounter hard labour or severe weather… Hence succeeds a softness, an effeminacy, a seeking for the fireside, a lurking in the bed, and… all the characteristics of idleness… [Drinking] fills the public-house and makes the frequenting of it habitual, corrupts boys as soon as they are able to move from home, and does little less for the girls, to whom the gossip of the [drinking place] is no bad preparatory school for the brothel. At the very least, it teaches them idleness.’
The surprise is that Cobbett is not writing about the evils of drinking alcohol, but the evils of drinking tea! In fact, he is at this point discussing how to make home-brewed beer, which is clearly perceived as a morally superior drink to tea.
[I found this in Richard Keyes, Chameleon or Tribe? Recovering Authentic Christian Community (Leicester: IVP, 1999), 52.]
A brief Google search reveals that Cobbett’s Cottage Economy, first published in 1821, has been described as the original classic of self-sufficiency, which he viewed as the foundation of family happiness. It was written to instruct country labourers in the arts of brewing beer, making bread, keeping cows, pigs, bees, ewes, poultry, rabbits, and other matters.
Born in Farnham in 1763, and known for his wit and bulldog curmudgeonliness, Cobbett traveled between England and America preaching the virtues of practical self-sufficiency.
‘It must be evident to every one, that the practice… must render the frame feeble and unfit to encounter hard labour or severe weather… Hence succeeds a softness, an effeminacy, a seeking for the fireside, a lurking in the bed, and… all the characteristics of idleness… [Drinking] fills the public-house and makes the frequenting of it habitual, corrupts boys as soon as they are able to move from home, and does little less for the girls, to whom the gossip of the [drinking place] is no bad preparatory school for the brothel. At the very least, it teaches them idleness.’
The surprise is that Cobbett is not writing about the evils of drinking alcohol, but the evils of drinking tea! In fact, he is at this point discussing how to make home-brewed beer, which is clearly perceived as a morally superior drink to tea.
[I found this in Richard Keyes, Chameleon or Tribe? Recovering Authentic Christian Community (Leicester: IVP, 1999), 52.]
A brief Google search reveals that Cobbett’s Cottage Economy, first published in 1821, has been described as the original classic of self-sufficiency, which he viewed as the foundation of family happiness. It was written to instruct country labourers in the arts of brewing beer, making bread, keeping cows, pigs, bees, ewes, poultry, rabbits, and other matters.
Born in Farnham in 1763, and known for his wit and bulldog curmudgeonliness, Cobbett traveled between England and America preaching the virtues of practical self-sufficiency.
Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Donald Wiseman on 1 and 2 Kings
Donald J. Wiseman, 1 and 2 Kings: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Nottingham: IVP, 2009).
IVP have been reissuing the Tyndale commentaries (Old and New Testament) in a new format. IVP USA make available the (not insubstantial) Introduction to the volume on 1 and 2 Kings, written by Donald Wiseman (first published in 1993).
The blurb on the UK website reads:
‘The book of Kings is a unique source for understanding the history of Israel from the last days of the united kingdom under David to the eventual fall of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Presenting Israel’s national history from a divine viewpoint, these narratives measure the kings of Israel and Judah, not by the mark they leave on secular history, but by their ‘doing what is right in the Lord’s sight’. Embedded in this story are enduring lessons of the ways of God with his people in every age.’
The Introduction covers the following areas:
• The value of the books of Kings
• Themes and theology
• Chronology
• Archaeological evidence
• Sources
• Literary Form
• Composition and authorship
• Text
Given Wiseman’s expertise in the history, archaeology, languages and documents of the ancient Near East, the commentary is most helpful in providing an accessible and concise treatment of historical and related issues.
Not that theology is totally absent… Wiseman notes the following theological emphases in the books of Kings:
• God in history
• God in judgment
• God as deliverer: hope and restoration
• God’s promise to David
• Prophecy
• Other themes – models, the centrality of worship, kingship
IVP have been reissuing the Tyndale commentaries (Old and New Testament) in a new format. IVP USA make available the (not insubstantial) Introduction to the volume on 1 and 2 Kings, written by Donald Wiseman (first published in 1993).
The blurb on the UK website reads:
‘The book of Kings is a unique source for understanding the history of Israel from the last days of the united kingdom under David to the eventual fall of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Presenting Israel’s national history from a divine viewpoint, these narratives measure the kings of Israel and Judah, not by the mark they leave on secular history, but by their ‘doing what is right in the Lord’s sight’. Embedded in this story are enduring lessons of the ways of God with his people in every age.’
The Introduction covers the following areas:
• The value of the books of Kings
• Themes and theology
• Chronology
• Archaeological evidence
• Sources
• Literary Form
• Composition and authorship
• Text
Given Wiseman’s expertise in the history, archaeology, languages and documents of the ancient Near East, the commentary is most helpful in providing an accessible and concise treatment of historical and related issues.
Not that theology is totally absent… Wiseman notes the following theological emphases in the books of Kings:
• God in history
• God in judgment
• God as deliverer: hope and restoration
• God’s promise to David
• Prophecy
• Other themes – models, the centrality of worship, kingship
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)