Trinity, Revelation, and Reading: A Theological Introduction to the Bible and its Interpretation 9780567660473, 9780567255259, 9780567265401

Citation preview

To My Parents

9780567265401_FM_Finals_txt_print.indd vi

5/13/2011 1:05:08 PM

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

A number of people deserve thanks for the influence they have had on the writing of this book. David Puckett piqued my interest in all things hermeneutical over 15 years ago in a year-long elective on the history of biblical interpretation. Andreas Köstenberger, another former teacher, introduced me to redemptive-historical interpretation and initiated the present project. As I note in the introduction, my Doktorvater Kevin Vanhoozer has shaped my perspective on many of the issues discussed in this book considerably. Thanks are also due to my friends Mike Allen and Dan Treier. Both read the entire manuscript and made a number of helpful suggestions about how to improve it. Mike also introduced me to Tom Kraft at T & T Clark who shared his enthusiasm for the manuscript and provided expert guidance throughout the process of bringing it to publication. Jennifer Redd graciously prepared the index. The Board of Trustees and the Faculty of Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, Florida, granted me a sabbatical in the Fall 2009 semester, during which most of the writing was completed. Over the past couple of years, students in my hermeneutics classes at RTS have read various redactions of the manuscript. Not only have they pointed out a number of typos (hopefully we’ve caught them all!). They have also helped me think more clearly about its contents. Jonny Dyer deserves special mention in this regard. I am daily graced by the presence and wisdom of my wife Leigh and by the joy of our children: Carly, Sophie, Josiah, and Micah. This book is for them as much as anyone (Ps. 145.4). Finally, it is with enormous gratitude to God that I dedicate this book to my parents, Bill and Lynn Swain. The foundations vii

9780567265401_FM_Finals_txt_print.indd vii

5/13/2011 1:05:08 PM

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

for the present work, and indeed for my theological vocation, were laid as they daily taught me the Holy Scriptures which are able to make one wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus (2 Tim. 3.15). This book is the fruit of their labors as well. Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

viii

9780567265401_FM_Finals_txt_print.indd viii

5/13/2011 1:05:08 PM

INTRODUCTION

I. A Theological Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Interpretation The present study seeks to provide a theological introduction to the Bible and its interpretation. The focus is not so much upon the theology that is in the Bible (i.e., “biblical theology”),1 though much of the argument will be biblical-theological in nature. The focus instead is upon the theological nature of the Bible and of biblical interpretation. If theology is concerned with “God and all things in relation to God,” then a theological reflection upon the Bible and interpretation must focus on these twin themes “in relation to God.” More specifically, it must consider how these themes relate to the triune God and to the unfolding economy of salvation. 2 What roles do Holy Scripture and the reading of Holy Scripture play within the unfolding drama of the commerce and communion between God and humanity? That is the question which this book seeks to answer. Answering such a question requires that we bring a host of doctrines into the discussion. We must concern ourselves not simply with the doctrine of Scripture, but also in one way or another with the doctrines of the Trinity, covenant, revelation,

1

2

For a helpful introduction to the discipline of biblical theology and a compendium of its fruits, see T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, ed., New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2000). In the New Testament, and in later theological discourse, the divine “economy” (Gk. oikonomia) refers to the “administration” of God’s sovereign plan for history (e.g., 1 Cor. 9.17; Eph. 1.10; 3.2, 9).

1

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 1

5/13/2011 1:06:15 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

providence, anthropology, salvation, sanctification, the church, and eschatology. Because biblical interpretation is one dimension of the relationship between God and humanity, sin and redemption, the individual and the church, we cannot properly understand biblical interpretation without considering these topics as well. Our aim in surveying this wide array of topics, however, is not comprehensiveness but coherence. The point of a theological introduction to our twin themes is to articulate a brief but coherent vision of how these themes fit together within the larger evangelical reality of God’s relation to his people. It is hoped that such a vision may function in turn as a framework within which students can integrate the broad range of knowledge, attitudes, and skills that are requisite to becoming faithful and competent readers of Holy Scripture. The present book, then, is something of a theological foyer to the much larger house of biblical interpretation. The purpose of this introductory chapter is to provide a doorway to that foyer. To this end, we will discuss the rationale behind a theological introduction to the Bible and biblical interpretation; three of the major doctrinal concepts that will occupy us in this study— Trinity, revelation, and reading; and the stance and context of the present work. The introduction will conclude with an overview of the chapters that follow.

II. Why Is a Theological Introduction to the Bible and Biblical Interpretation Necessary? It should be obvious that the doctrine of Scripture calls for theological analysis and exposition. It is perhaps less obvious, however, that the practice of reading and interpreting the Bible should call for theological analysis as well. One can easily imagine the kinds of questions that might be raised in objection to such an approach. Shouldn’t theology be the result of biblical interpretation and not its presupposition? Do we not poison the interpretive well when we introduce doctrinal concerns at the beginning of the interpretive process? Aren’t the church and the world best served when readers are free to read the Bible like any other book, apart from doctrinal 2

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 2

5/13/2011 1:06:16 PM

INTRODUCTION

constraints, letting the interpretive chips fall where they may?3 Each of these questions deserves an at least partly affi rmative answer. However, a simple “yes” to any of them is ultimately insufficient. The remainder of this study will hopefully demonstrate why this is the case. For the time being, a couple of points can be made. First, the Bible is not an ordinary book. From a certain vantage point of course, the point is not debatable. No other book has had a comparable influence upon Western culture to that of the Bible. However, when Christians affi rm the extraordinary nature of the biblical writings, they usually intend to say more than simply that these writings constitute a great literary “classic.” According to common Christian confession, the Bible is the unique product of divine action and oversight. Although theologians continue to debate the exact nature of God’s active relationship to this text, most Christians regard the Bible as the preeminent textual embodiment of divine selfcommunication. That is to say, they consider the Bible to be the Word of God. Thus, according to the Nicene Creed, one of Christianity’s most widely acknowledged standards of belief, the Holy Spirit “spoke by the prophets.” It is the Bible’s status as God’s word that accounts for its extraordinary nature and for the church’s treatment of the Bible as a sacred book, as Holy Scripture. This observation leads to a second: Because the Bible is an extraordinary book, the reading of the Bible is an extraordinary enterprise. To be sure, there is more than an ounce of wisdom in the counsel to read the Bible in an ordinary manner, “like any other book.”4 The Bible is neither a fortune cookie nor a cup of divination. It is a book. And, as such, the Bible is in many respects like any other book. It claims to tell a coherent 3

4

For further discussion of the concerns underlying questions such as these, see John Barton, “Historical-Critical Approaches,” in The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation, ed. John Barton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 9–20. For an examination of the social and historical contexts that animate such questions, see Michael C. Legaspi, The Death of Scripture and the Rise of Biblical Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). This counsel is offered famously and forcefully by Benjamin Jowett in his 1861 essay, “On the Interpretation of Scripture.”

3

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 3

5/13/2011 1:06:16 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

story, with a beginning, middle, and end.5 It is written in different human languages and literary forms that must be translated and understood if its message is to be grasped. It is written in different historical and cultural contexts, and these contexts must be appreciated if we are to read the Bible with competence. Nevertheless, the counsel to read the Bible like any other book is ultimately inadequate because it fails to take into account the extraordinary nature of this book. If rationality consists in treating objects in accordance with their natures, then this must go for a rational treatment of the Bible as well. What it is must determine how we approach it and how we use it. As this study shall argue at length, because the Bible is one of the primary means of God’s covenantal self-communication in Christ, we must engage the Bible as creatures redeemed and covenanted to God in Christ if we are to engage the Bible truly and profitably. As Matthew Levering argues, “Christian biblical exegesis” should “accord with the Christian and biblical understanding of reality.”6 Biblical interpretation therefore is an inescapably theological venture.

III. Trinity, Revelation, and Reading The title of the present work, Trinity, Revelation, and Reading, calls our attention to three doctrinal concepts that must be operative in a theological account of the Bible and interpretation. Because these three concepts play an important role in the discussion that follows, it is worth introducing them briefly.

5

6

The reading of Scripture as a unified story has been subjected to serious criticism since the Enlightenment. For two modest defenses of this approach, see Martin Hengel, “ ‘Salvation History’: The Truth of Scripture and Modern Theology,” in Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom: Scripture and Theology, ed. David F. Ford and Graham Stanton (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 229–44; and Richard Bauckham, “Reading Scripture as a Coherent Story,” in The Art of Reading Scripture, ed. Ellen F. Davis and Richard B. Hays (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 38–53. Levering, Participatory Biblical Exegesis: A Theology of Biblical Interpretation (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2008), 1.

4

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 4

5/13/2011 1:06:16 PM

INTRODUCTION

III.a.

Trinity

The eternal life of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is a life of perfect communication and communion. In the Holy Trinity, there is perfect communication (i.e., “making common”) of one divine life and perfect communion (i.e., “sharing, holding in common”) in one divine life. The Father eternally communicates his life to the Son (Jn 5.26), who is his perfect Word, radiance, and image (Jn 1.1; Heb. 1.3; Col. 1.15). And the Father with the Son eternally communicates this self-same life to the Spirit, breathing him out in their perfect, mutual love and fellowship. We come to know of this perfect triune life of communication and communion because God graciously unveils it to us in the gospel. In the gospel God reveals his triune name to us: “the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 28.19). And in the gospel God relates to us in accordance with his triune name: the Father sends the Son in order that we might become his sons and daughters (Gal. 4.4–5); the Father and the Son send the Spirit, who sheds abroad in our hearts God’s love for us in Christ (Rom. 5.5) and who awakens in us the Son’s own filial address to the Father (Gal. 4.6). The Trinity is thus the ultimate mystery of salvation, the secret hidden in ages past but now unveiled to us (cf. Mt. 11.25–27). It is important to emphasize that God’s triune life of perfect communication and communion exists before us, apart from us, and without any need of us. In and of himself God is the blessed Trinity, completely sufficient unto himself as “the everlasting well of all good things which is never drawn dry.”7 Indeed, it is a matter of sheer wonder that this glorious and blessed Trinity would desire anything beyond and outside of his own inherently blissful life.8 And yet, Scripture assures us that he does desire something beyond and outside of himself and, more than that, that he desires to communicate his own glorious and blessed life to us—in a manner appropriate to our creaturely status9 —in 7

8

9

Heinrich Bullinger, The Decades of Heinrich Bullinger: The First and Second Decades (Cambridge: The University Press, 1849), 216. Karl Barth, Dogmatics in Outline (New York: Harper & Row, 1959), 53–54. Dionysius, The Divine Names, 1.1–2, in Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works, trans. Colm Luibheid (New York: Paulist, 1987),49–50.

5

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 5

5/13/2011 1:06:16 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

order that we too might have communion and fellowship with him, that we might become friends of God. The wonder of the gospel is that, in accordance with the divine good pleasure (cf. Mt. 11.26), we too have fellowship with the Father and the Son in the Spirit (cf. 1 Jn 1.3; 2 Cor. 13.14).10 As the preceding paragraphs suggest, the triune life of communication and communion must be considered from two vantage points, one internal to God (the divine life ad intra) and one external to God (the divine life ad extra). The triune life of communication and communion ad intra is necessary, fully actualized, and eternal—the triune God always is who he is in the full splendor of his blessed life (Exod. 3.14; Ps. 102.26–27; Heb. 13.8). The triune work of communication and communion ad extra, however, is contingent, in the process of being completed, and temporal—it is “an economy for the fullness of time” (Eph. 1.10). A lot hangs on the distinction between these two modes of divine self-communication. Fail to preserve the distinction and one fails to honor the deity of God and the creatureliness of the creature.11 But a lot hangs on the relation between these two modes of divine self-communication as well. Fail to consider the relation and one fails to appreciate the wonder of the gospel: that the one who is “the eternal Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” is also “for the sake of Christ his Son my God and my Father.”12

10

11

12

On the accommodated nature of divine self-revelation as understood by Protestant scholastic theologians (both Lutheran and Reformed), see Willem J. van Asselt, “The Fundamental Meaning of Theology: Archetypal and Ectypal Theology in Seventeenth-Century Reformed Thought,” Westminster Theological Journal 64 (2002): 319–35. The classic study on the topic of communion with the triune God remains that of John Owen, originally published in 1657. For a recent edition, see John Owen, Communion with the Triune God, ed. Kelly M. Kapic and Justin Taylor (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2007). See also the rewarding discussion of Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, trans. George Musgrave Giger (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1994), 2:179–84. See Paul D. Molnar, Divine Freedom and the Doctrine of the Immanent Trinity: In Dialogue with Karl Barth and Contemporary Theology (London: T & T Clark, 2002). The Heidelberg Catechism, Question 26, in Philip Schaff, ed., The Creeds of Christendom: With a History and Critical Notes, 3 Vols., 6th ed. (repr. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996 [1931]), 3:315, emphasis mine.

6

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 6

5/13/2011 1:06:17 PM

INTRODUCTION

The relation between God’s fatherly self-communication ad intra and his fatherly self-communication ad extra brings us to one of the most important themes of this book, namely, that of “covenant.” Covenant is one of the most important means whereby the triune God communicates his life to us and whereby we hold communion with him. God’s gracious work in the gospel is a covenantal work. In the Covenant of Grace, God the eternal Father gives himself to be our Father in and through his incarnate Son.13 “I will be a Father to you” (2 Cor. 6.18) is the central promise of this covenant. And the gospel is the exclusive means of this promise’s realization: “for all the promises of God find their Yes in . . . the Son of God, Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 1.19–20). Moreover, our Spirit-enabled communion with the Father through the Son is a covenantal communion. In this spiritual communion, God continually communicates the blessings of the covenant to us, preeminently himself (cf. Eph. 2.11–22), even as we render to him “that which he requires and accepts,”14 preeminently ourselves (cf. Rom. 12.1–2). The central thesis of this book is that we may best appreciate the theological significance of the Bible and biblical interpretation if we understand these two themes in a trinitarian, covenantal context. The Bible is one of the preeminent means whereby the triune God communicates himself to us and holds communion with us. And biblical interpretation is one of the preeminent means whereby we draw upon the riches that God has covenanted to us in Christ and whereby we hold communion with him. To put the matter in more conceptual idiom: In dealing with the Bible interpretively, we are not rational subjects dealing with an inert object; we are instead rational subjects addressed by the divine Subject and called to loving attention and fellowship.15 The entirety of this book is devoted to tracing

13

14 15

Johannes Wollebius, Compendium Theologiae Christianae, XXI, in Reformed Dogmatics, ed. and trans. John W. Beardslee III (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009 ), 117. John Owen, Communion with the Triune God, 94. Cf. the remark of Jens Zimmermann: “theological hermeneutics at its best has always been based on a relationship to the Divine, a ‘walking and conversing with God,’ as the Puritans called it” (Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An Incarnational-Trinitarian Theory of Interpretation [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004], 28).

7

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 7

5/13/2011 1:06:17 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

the place of Holy Scripture and its interpretation within the economy of trinitarian, covenantal self-communication and communion.

III.b.

Revelation

We should conclude from the preceding discussion that “communication,” theologically understood, involves much more than simply the exchange of words. Communication in its deepest sense is a matter of self-giving, a “making common” of one’s life. As such, it is the basis of interpersonal fellowship and communion. Nevertheless, communication, theologically understood, is never less than an exchange of words.16 Because God eternally communicates himself as “the Word” (Jn 1.1), his communicative action in the Covenant of Grace is also characteristically verbal and informative. The divine self-giving is always “eloquent and radiant.”17 Revelation,18 then, refers to this eloquent and radiant dimension of God’s covenantal self-communication ad extra. When God gives himself to us in Christ, he gives to us a true and reliable knowledge of himself through the word of Christ. According to John, the knowledge of the Father revealed through the Son is “eternal life” (Jn 17.3). While the concept of revelation is broader than that of Holy Scripture, Scripture is nevertheless a vital dimension of God’s self-revealing work. More specifically, Scripture is the supreme literary expression of God’s self-revelation in history. Therefore, in order to understand the Bible’s role within the economy of 16

17

18

As Vanhoozer observes, “The process” of communication “often involves discourse: someone saying something in some way about something to someone” (Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Remythologizing Theology: Divine Action, Passion, and Authorship [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010], 212). Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, trans. G. W. Bromiley (London: T & T Clark, 1961), IV.3.i, 81. We should note that Christian theology often distinguishes between “general revelation” (i.e., that which God makes known about himself in creation to all creatures) and “special revelation” (i.e., that which God makes known about himself in redemption, preeminently through Jesus Christ, to his peculiar people). Our focus in this section, and in this book as a whole, is upon special revelation. For an insightful discussion of general revelation, see Colin E. Gunton, A Brief Theology of Revelation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995), 40–63.

8

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 8

5/13/2011 1:06:17 PM

INTRODUCTION

divine self-communication, we will have to reflect upon its relationship to God’s self-revealing work, more broadly considered.19 Accordingly, we will discuss themes such as the historical form of revelation, the mediation of revelation through prophets and apostles, and the inscription of revelation in the sacred writings. The latter two topics especially mandate reflection upon the Holy Spirit, whose special work within the economy of divine revelation is to create a “communicative fellowship” between the Word of God and his human spokespersons. As we will see, Holy Scripture is the consequence of this communicative fellowship and therefore stands as the perfect textual vehicle of God’s word ad extra: authoritative, true, sufficient, and clear.

III.c.

Reading

According to Benedict Pictet, the duty of reading Scripture follows from the “end . . . for which the scripture was given,” namely, “the salvation of all men, which it could not effect, unless it were perused.”20 Because God’s covenantal Word is textually inscribed, the reading and interpretation of the Bible is an integral element in the unfolding drama of covenant fellowship between God and his people. The Spirit’s work of establishing communicative fellowship between God and his people does not end therefore with the production of Holy Scripture but extends to his acts of regenerating and renewing readers, gathering them into the church, and instructing them by the church’s hand. Moreover, because the Spirit seeks to create communicative fellowship between God and readers, the Spirit’s work does not suppress the intelligent activity of human beings but instead awakens, sustains, and governs that activity to its blessed end. Spiritual reading is truly something that we do. Spiritual reading is an act of “covenant mutuality.”21

19

20

21

Cf. Stephen E. Fowl: “Scripture needs to be understood in light of a doctrine of revelation that itself flows from Christian convictions about God’s triune life” (Theological Interpretation of Scripture [Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2009], 13). Benedict Pictet, Christian Theology, trans. Frederick Reyroux (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1847), 58–59. John Webster, Holy Scripture: A Dogmatic Sketch (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 71.

9

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 9

5/13/2011 1:06:17 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

For this reason, a theological account of biblical interpretation must consider the doctrines of humanity, sin, salvation, sanctification, the church, and eschatology. Each of these doctrines shapes the way we think about the reader as God’s covenant partner, awakened and enabled by the Spirit within the context of the Christian community. These doctrines also serve to remind us that, while God’s self-communication in Holy Scripture is perfectly suited to accomplish its revelatory purposes (cf. 2 Tim. 3.16), our interpretations of Scripture remain imperfect. As is the case with all human knowledge of God short of Christ’s return, so too with the human interpreter’s knowledge of God: “we see through a glass darkly” (1 Cor. 13.12, KJV). Biblical interpretation is the work of those who have not yet reached their homeland, not of those who have arrived. As a work of theological pilgrims, therefore, biblical interpretation is a dependent and humble work, pursued not with self-confidence but with confidence in the God who so graciously reveals himself to us in Jesus Christ and who has appointed various means, both personal and corporate, for assisting readers of his Holy Word until we reach the place where reading is replaced by faceto-face communication and communion with the triune God (cf. Rev. 22.1–5).

IV. The Stance and Context of the Present Study Before proceeding to an overview of the chapters that follow, a few words regarding the stance and context of the present study are in order. First, the present study is in many regards an attempt at Reformed ressourcement. That is to say, it is an effort to retrieve the habits of theological thought and argumentation belonging to an older confessional dogmatics, 22 and to the 22

For an extensive introduction to the Reformed wing of Protestant Orthodoxy, see Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, ca. 1520 to ca. 1725, 4 Vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003). Volumes 1 and 2, which are devoted to theological prolegomena and to Holy Scripture respectively, are particularly relevant to the issues addressed in the present study.

10

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 10

5/13/2011 1:06:17 PM

INTRODUCTION

broad churchly tradition of biblical interpretation upon which it depends, in order to renew the theology and practice of biblical interpretation in the present. I do not suppose for a second that a distinctly Protestant voice on many of the matters discussed in this book is necessarily antithetical to a Roman Catholic or Orthodox voice. Indeed, the arguments of this book resonate at a number of points with the recent proposal of Matthew Levering, 23 one of the most inspiring Roman Catholic theologians writing today. This being said, a perusal of the footnotes will indicate the wells from which I have drawn. I have found in these old (and often maligned!) wells a tradition of theological scope and spiritual breadth that I hope readers from other ecclesial traditions will appreciate. Second, although the present study is in many ways quite traditional in stance, it will be clear to many readers that its arguments are unimaginable apart from the recent development in academic theology known as “Theological Interpretation of Scripture.”24 My own thinking about the Bible and interpretation has been shaped significantly by this movement, especially one of its major representatives, Kevin J. Vanhoozer. The triple focus of Trinity, revelation, and reading, for instance, is certainly traceable to Vanhoozer’s influence, as are a number of other material judgments. John Webster’s recent spate of publications on theological interpretation has also influenced me considerably. 25 While it is too early to tell what the future holds for this (sometimes difficult to defi ne) trajectory within the scholarly guild, we

23 24

25

See his, Participatory Exegesis. For an introduction to this movement, see Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “Introduction: What is Theological Interpretation of the Bible,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005), 19–25; Daniel J. Treier, Introducing Theological Interpretation of Scripture: Recovering a Christian Practice (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008); and Stephen E. Fowl, Theological Interpretation of Scripture. John Webster, Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2001); Holy Scripture; “Reading Eschatologically (1),” in Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom: Scripture and Theology, ed. David F. Ford and Graham Stanton (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 245–56; Confessing God: Essays in Christian Dogmatics II (London: T & T Clark, 2005); and “Biblical Reasoning,” Anglican Theological Review 90 (2008): 733–51.

11

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 11

5/13/2011 1:06:18 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

may be sure that that the theological interpretation of the Bible will continue to be a topic of more than momentary academic significance, and this for reasons which transcend the winds of scholarly fashion. Third, the present study does not operate on the assumption that a theological approach to biblical interpretation stands in an inherently contrastive relation to critical interpretive methods. The choice between a theological reading of Holy Scripture and a responsible, scholarly reading is a false one. 26 In my judgment, there is much room for exploring what methodologies might or might not be consistent with the approach to biblical interpretation presented here. This book, however, has very little counsel to offer those who would explore such a question except to say that the nature and goal of the job should determine the legitimacy of the tool. Abiding by this rule, I believe that the theological interpretation of the Bible may welcome a plurality of methodologies. 27

V.

Overview of Chapters

The argument of this book will proceed as follows. Chapter One sets the stage for much of the ensuing discussion by providing a survey of what Heinrich Bullinger calls “the history of the progression of the word of God.” As we will see, the unfolding drama of creation, redemption, and consummation is one

26

27

That is, unless we assume that a responsible reading of the Bible is one that precludes Christian faith from the outset. Unfortunately, many leading Bible interpreters and interpretive theorists in the modern era have assumed a contrastive understanding of the relationship between Christian faith and exegetical reason. For an introduction to this tradition of inquiry, see Roy A. Harrisville and Walter Sundberg, The Bible in Modern Culture: Baruch Spinoza to Brevard Childs, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002). For an instructive discussion of the relationship between Christian confession and critical methodologies, see Al Wolters, “Confessional Criticism and the Night Visions of Zechariah,” in Renewing Biblical Interpretation, ed. Craig Bartholomew, Colin Greene, and Karl Möller (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 90–117. See also Joel B. Green, Seized by Truth: Reading the Bible as Scripture (Nashville: Abingdon, 2007), chap. 4: “Methods.”

12

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 12

5/13/2011 1:06:18 PM

INTRODUCTION

wherein the Divine Rhetor exercises his kind and kingly sovereignty by means of his covenantal Word. Chapter Two considers more directly the role of Holy Scripture, God’s written Word, within God’s unfolding purpose for creation. Considering Scripture’s role in this regard will require us to reflect upon two important concepts: “double agency discourse” and “covenant discourse.” These concepts will in turn help us construe Scripture’s role within God’s saving economy as one of transmitting and communicating the discourse of the covenant. Chapter Three discusses Scripture’s fitness to carry out its role within the economy of salvation. Here we treat both the inspiration and perfection of Holy Scripture. The latter topic includes Scripture’s authority, truth, sufficiency, and clarity. This chapter also discusses some of the interpretive implications that follow from Holy Scripture’s perfection. In Chapter Four, we turn from the Bible to biblical interpretation. The primary focus in this chapter is upon the Spirit’s work of regenerating and renewing the interpreter and upon the role of the church as a community invested with the spiritual gifts and authority to aid the process of biblical interpretation. Chapter Five discusses the more practical side of Bible reading and interpretation. Here we will consider the role that both public and private reading practices have to play in developing interpretive competencies. We will also discuss the “shape” of biblical interpretation under the traditional scheme of lectio divina, which involves prayer, explication, meditation, and application. The Conclusion briefly summarizes the interpretive vision presented in this book.

13

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 13

5/13/2011 1:06:18 PM

9780567265401_Intro_Finals_txt_print.indd 14

5/13/2011 1:06:18 PM

CHAPTER 1 THE TRINITY, THE KINGDOM, AND THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

I.

Introduction

Speech is not merely adventitious to God. In contrast to mute idols, the true and living God is a speaking, commanding, promising, and pledging God (cf. Ps. 115.5, 7; 135.16). Indeed, before all ages God is a communicating God: “In the beginning was the Word” (Jn 1.1). Before God created the world, the Word was “with God,” reposing at his side in active fellowship (cf. 1.18), and this Word “was God,” the radiant self-communication of the Father’s being, his “only-begotten Son” (Jn 1.1, 14; Heb. 1.3). According to Holy Scripture, the eternal fellowship of the Father and the Son is shared by the Holy Spirit, who searches the “depths” of God’s intelligent and adorable life (1 Cor. 2.10). The one true God thus ever lives a life of communication and communion as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 17.5, 24).1

1

In terms of classical Reformed theology, God’s intratrinitarian life of knowledge and love is the principium essendi, or ontological foundation,

15

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 15

5/13/2011 12:53:45 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

In his unfathomable kindness, the blessed Trinity has determined to share his life of communication and communion with us. To be sure, “we cannot fully comprehend his incomprehensible being.”2 The being and ways of the triune God are “past finding out” (Rom. 11.33, KJV). Nevertheless, because it is the triune God himself who personally undertakes to reveal himself to us, “we can truly taste and see his goodness.”3 The unfathomable God can reveal himself to finite humanity in a manner that is sufficient for creating, sustaining, and perfecting an intelligent, saving fellowship with humanity. To this end, the Son was sent to reveal his own unique knowledge of the Father: “No one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him” (Mt. 11.27; cf. Jn 1.18).4 Moreover, the Spirit was sent “that we might understand the things freely given us by God” (1 Cor. 2.12; cf. 2.7; Jn 16.13–15).5 In all of God’s words to us, and supremely in Holy Scripture, God wills to include us in the blessed life of communication and communion that he is. 1 Jn 1.3 is thus a kind of mission statement for God’s word: “that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ” (cf. 1 Jn 4.13). Communication from the triune God is a means to communion with the triune God. “God’s purpose in revelation is to make friends with us.”6

2

3 4

5

6

of theology. Our creaturely knowledge of God is ultimately rooted in and patterned after God’s knowledge of himself. Peter Martyr Vermigli, “Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed,” in The Peter Martyr Reader, ed., John Patrick Donnelly, Frank A. James III, and Joseph C. McLelland (Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 1999 [1544]), 8. Peter Martyr Vermigli, “Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed,” 8. Again, in terms of classical Reformed theology, God’s self-revelation through his Word represents the principium cognoscendi externum, the external cognitive foundation for our knowledge of God. The Spirit’s work, whereby we are enabled to understand and receive God’s self-revelation, is the principium cognoscendi internum, the internal cognitive foundation for our knowledge of God. For further discussion of the ontological and cognitive foundations of theology, see Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 1:210–14. For a recent articulation of this approach, see John Webster, “Principles of Systematic Theology,” International Journal of Systematic Theology 11 (2009): 56–71. J. I. Packer, God Has Spoken: Revelation and the Bible, 3d ed (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 50, italics in the original.

16

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 16

5/13/2011 12:53:45 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

The goal of the present chapter is to trace in broad strokes the role played by God’s word within his sovereign, friend-making purpose. As we will see, this kind and kingly purpose of God toward his creatures is an unfolding purpose, a purpose with an historical shape and progression. Understanding the role of the Word within this purpose—what Heinrich Bullinger calls “the history of the progression of the word of God”7—will enable us to appreciate better the roles of Scripture and interpretation within God’s covenantal economy of salvation.

II. The Trinity, the Kingdom, and the Historical Progression of the Word of God II.a. The Triune God Relates to his Creation as Sovereign King and Exercises His Rule by Means of His Covenantal Word The specific manner in which God reveals himself to his creatures is determined by the more general manner in which God relates to his creatures. According to Scripture’s unanimous testimony, God relates to creation as its Almighty Lord and King: “Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and you are exalted as head above all” (1 Chron. 29.11). The triune God is “the blessed and only Sovereign” (1 Tim. 6.15), who alone possesses the fullness of divine perfection in and of himself and who, as such, is the sole fountain from whom every good and perfect gift freely flows to his creatures (Ps. 36.9; Rom. 11.33–36; Jas 1.17). This full and fecund Lord reigns in sovereign supremacy over all things in heaven and on earth, the seas and all their depths, working all things in accordance with the counsel of his good will (Ps. 135.6; Eph. 1.11). God’s kingship in this regard is truly cosmic in scope. In a narrower sense, however, God’s kingdom refers to the extension of his blessed and benevolent reign through a people

7

Heinrich Bullinger, The Decades of Heinrich Bullinger: The First and Second Decades (Cambridge: The University Press: 1849), 49, translation altered. Cf. John Webster, Confessing God: Essays in Christian Dogmatics II (London: T & T Clark, 2005), 43–44.

17

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 17

5/13/2011 12:53:46 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

and throughout a place.8 The extension of God’s kingdom in this narrower sense takes time. The kingdom, in other words, has a history. In order to grasp the role of the Word of God within the kingdom of God, therefore, it is necessary to trace the progressive communication of God’s word in history, the historical form of the Word which corresponds to the historical form of the kingdom. We will trace this progression across the three major “acts” of the unfolding kingdom drama: creation, redemption, and consummation.

II.b.

The Drama of Kingdom and Covenant

II.b.1. Creation and fall II.b.1.a. Kingdom through covenant in creation God created the world by an act of majestic sovereignty: “By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and by the breath of his mouth all their host . . . He spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood fi rm” (Ps. 33.6, 9). As Walter Brueggemann observes, the imagery in Psalm 33 is that “of a powerful sovereign who utters a decree from the throne, issues a fiat, and in the very utterance the thing is done.”9 The divine king exhibits his almighty eloquence in creating the heavens and the earth through his Word and Spirit. God speaks in a variety of ways and for a variety of purposes in creating the world. His word is multifaceted and multifunctional. God “says” (Gen. 1.3, etc.), “calls/names” (Gen. 1.5, etc.), and “blesses” (Gen. 1.22, etc.). God’s word constructs the cosmos as a holy habitation for himself and his creatures and fills that habitation with manifold forms of life (cf. Gen. 1.2; Ps. 104.24–25; Prov. 24.3–4). His words commission human beings to their royal vocation (Gen. 1.28) and command them regarding their priestly duties in the Eden sanctuary (Gen. 2.16).10

8

9

10

For a fi ne exposition of this theme, see Stephen Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible, New Studies in Biblical Theology 15 (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2003). Walter Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute, Advocacy (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 146. Allen Ross, Recalling the Hope of Glory: Biblical Worship from the Garden to the New Creation (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2006), 105–108.

18

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 18

5/13/2011 12:53:46 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

This rich variety of words together serves one overarching purpose, namely, covenant.11 By means of covenant, God binds himself to creation in a relationship of sovereign care and commitment and binds creation to himself in a relationship of obedient service.12 According to Jeremiah, God made a “covenant” with the “fi xed order” of creation in the beginning (see Jer. 33.20, 25; cf. Jer. 31.31–37). When God commanded the orders of creation into existence (day and night, the seasons, etc.), he committed himself to the preservation of those orders. God’s word is his bond.13 Similarly, God’s words to Adam in Genesis 2 are covenantal in form.14 The Sovereign Creator does not merely reveal himself to Adam indirectly through his work in creation (cf. Ps. 19.1–6; Rom. 1.20). He also condescends to communicate with him verbally, in a direct and interpersonal manner.15 God issues a generous invitation to Adam, authorizing him to “eat of every tree of the garden” (Gen. 2.16), and then adds a single prohibition: “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat” (Gen. 2.17). To this commandment, God attaches the sanction of death for disobedience and the promise of eternal life (signified in the tree of life) for obedience.16

11

12

13 14

15

16

Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts: The Covenant of Discourse and the Discourse of the Covenant,” in Craig Bartholomew, Colin Greene, and Karl Möller, eds., After Pentecost: Language and Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 36. According to Bruce Waltke, a covenant is “a solemn commitment of oneself to undertake an obligation” (An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007], 287). Vanhoozer, “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts,” 17. The present claim is debated among biblical scholars. For a recent defense of the claim, see Peter J. Gentry, “Kingdom through Covenant: Humanity as the Divine Image,” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 12 (Spring 2008): 16–42. For a thorough defense and discussion, see Herman Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man (repr. Kingsburg, CA: den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1990 [1822]), 1:41–161. Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1996 [1948]), 19–23. See Waltke, Old Testament Theology, 254–60. For a fuller discussion of God’s covenant with Adam, which Reformed dogmatics calls “the Covenant of Works,” see Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 2:564–71.

19

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 19

5/13/2011 12:53:46 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

The glorious divine King thus governs his relationship with his human counterpart by means of covenant.17 As this portrait makes clear, the sovereign Lord of creation is not an aloof monarch, who stands at a distance from creation in executing his sovereign purpose. Though he absolutely transcends all that he has made, God is a benevolent, fatherly King. By his Word, he binds himself to his creatures in a relationship of solemn commitment. By his Spirit, he lovingly guides creation to its appointed destiny (Gen. 1.2; cf. Deut. 32.11). Within the context of his covenantal relationship with his creatures, the sovereign king of creation displays his glory and dispenses his blessings. This portrait of creation reveals what Graeme Goldsworthy calls “the pattern of the kingdom”: God’s people living under God’s blessing and rule in God’s place.18 Moreover, the presence of God’s covenant relationship, with its divinely appointed goal of entering God’s rest, reveals that this pattern is not a static picture. It is more like the setting of a story. If Adam is to fulfi ll his role as God’s creaturely vice-regent, serving the spread of God’s glory to the ends of the earth, and if Adam is to inherit everlasting rest in God’s presence, then he must take the hand of his wise and generous Father and walk in obedience to his commands.19 Adam will not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God (cf. Deut. 8.3, 5). Covenant thus charts a course for the unfolding kingdom drama, 20 focusing its action on “the commerce and communion between God and man.”21 Both the means and the end of the kingdom are covenantal, and therefore communicative, friendship with God. II.b.1.b. Kingdom revolt Though human beings were created to be the friends and covenant partners of God, the opening act of the covenant drama 17

18

19

20 21

According to Meredith Kline, “covenants function as administrative instruments of God’s kingly rule” (Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview [USA: Two Age Press, 2000], 4). Graeme Goldsworthy, According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2002), 99. For the connection between “image” and “sonship,” see Gentry, “Kingdom through Covenant,” 29, 31–32. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty, 73. Karl Barth, The Humanity of God (USA: John Knox, 1960), 11.

20

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 20

5/13/2011 12:53:46 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

tells of an intruder’s entrance into God’s well-ordered, wellspoken world. As a consequence of his entrance, God’s good creatures despise God’s gift of friendship, regard him as a tyrant, and throw his law behind their backs, leading to their expulsion from God’s blessed presence. The precipitating factor in this stunning sequence of events is the serpent’s cunning strategy to undermine God’s covenantal Word. 22 The serpent fi rst questions God’s prohibition: “Did he say that?” (cf. Gen. 3.1). Because God’s word is an expression of his generous character, the questioning of God’s word involves a questioning of his character. The serpent’s incredulity toward God’s prohibition effectively rips that prohibition out of its original context and thereby changes its significance. Formerly, God’s prohibition was but a single restriction, one that followed an unbounded invitation to enjoy all the fruits of God’s good garden (2.16–17; cf. 1.29). Now, it is a sign of his curmudgeonly nature, his unwillingness to give his children the best of his blessings (cf. 3.5).23 Only after placing the liberality of the divine author in doubt does the serpent directly contradict his word, denying the sanctioned consequence of disobedience: “You will not surely die” (3.4). Though created upright (cf. Eccl. 7.29), Adam and Eve believe the serpent’s lies—they trust his words—and act in accordance with the reality that he has projected: “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate” (Gen. 3.6). As a result of their actions, the human family inherits the serpent’s hidden agenda in disputing God’s word, the severing of covenant fellowship. God the generous Father appears on the scene as the righteous Judge, pronouncing a series of maledictions upon the serpent, the woman, and the man. Nevertheless, in what is perhaps the most surprising turn of events in the opening act of the covenant drama, Adam hears 22

23

For an insightful discussion of the hermeneutical implications of the serpent’s temptation, see Markus Bockmuehl, “Reason, Wisdom and the Implied Disciple of Scripture,” in Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom: Scripture and Theology, ed., David F. Ford and Graham Stanton (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 64–66. Walter Brueggemann, Genesis (Atlanta: John Knox, 1982), 46–48.

21

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 21

5/13/2011 12:53:47 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

within God’s curse upon his rebellious children a promise of hope, the so-called protoevangelium or “fi rst gospel.” God’s dire word to the serpent bears glad tidings for the human family through the seed of the woman: “he shall bruise your head” (Gen. 3.15). “Leaning on God’s promise” of the seed’s victory over the serpent, Adam names his wife Eve, the mother of all living. 24 Death is not God’s fi nal word for humanity. The birth pangs of death will ultimately yield to life. God’s purpose for creation will prevail through the seed of the woman. But this triumph will come at great cost to that seed: the serpent “shall bruise his heel” (Gen. 3.15). As the rest of Scripture makes clear, it is only because the promised seed will bear the divine curse that he will be able to bestow the divine blessing.

II.b.2. Kingdom through covenant in redemption As with God’s work of creation, God’s work of redemption is an act of majestic sovereignty. In the exodus, the initial phase of God’s redeeming work, the divine warrior-king engages Pharaoh in royal combat, rescues Israel from his tyrannical clutches, and settles Israel under his own liberating rule (see Exod. 15.1–18; Ps. 47). This initial act of redemption provides more than just a discrete example of how God redeems his people. It is the normative exemplar of God’s redemptive work, the pattern after which all future acts of redemption are modeled:25 The work of redemption is a work whereby God sets creation free from the curse of slavery for its consummation under his kingly blessing. Thus, after Israel fell under God’s covenant curses due to its own Adam-like covenant infidelity (cf. Hos. 6.7), Jesus appeared to usher in the long promised “new exodus” through his incarnation, death, resurrection, and enthronement. In and through Jesus Christ, God’s purposes for creation are thus realized. Moreover, this realization of God’s kingly purpose is an eloquent event. Jesus comes proclaiming “the good news of the kingdom of God” (Lk. 4.43; cf. Isa. 52.7). As in creation, so

24

25

Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, trans. John Vriend (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 3:200. Vern S. Poythress, God-centered Biblical Interpretation (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1999), 139–40; Goldsworthy, According to Plan, chap. 13.

22

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 22

5/13/2011 12:53:47 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

in redemption: the triune king executes his redemptive rule by means of his sovereign word. II.b.2.a. God’s redemptive revelation is a progressive revelation As our initial summary of redemption indicates, the redemptive word proclaimed by God to Adam and Eve is a word that grows. That which begins in seminal form in Genesis 3.15 matures to become a full grown body of revelation in the gospel of Jesus Christ. This aspect of God’s self-communication is called “progressive revelation.” Before tracing more fully the progress of God’s redemptive revelation, it will be helpful to discuss the nature of this reality. Why does God’s redemptive self-revelation take time? We may mention two reasons, 26 though these are by no means exhaustive. First, the infi nite riches of God’s triune life and purpose can only be communicated to finite creatures in a fi nite manner. As Geerhardus Vos observes: “that part of the knowledge of God which has been revealed to us is so overwhelmingly great and so far transcends our human capacities, is such a flood of light, that it had, as it were, gradually to be let in upon us, ray after ray, and not the full radiancy at once.”27 Second, and more importantly, God’s mysterious plan to sum up all things in Christ itself requires a long, historical process in order to be realized. 28 It is “an economy for the fullness of time” (Eph. 1.10, trans. mine). Because God’s redemptive economy takes time to unfold, his revelation of that economy takes time to unfold as well. Progressive revelation, we must observe, is an organic progress. While God slowly unfolds the secret of his triune being and purpose to his creatures, unveiling the fullness of his revelation in the gospel, each new dimension of God’s self-revelation grows out of the former dimensions of God’s self-revelation. This is not because the truths of revelation emerge from realities that

26

27 28

Here I follow Geerhardus Vos, “The Idea of Biblical Theology as a Science and as a Theological Discipline,” in Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos, ed. Richard B. Gaffi n, Jr. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1980), 3–24. Vos, “Idea,” 7. Vos, “Idea,” 7–15.

23

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 23

5/13/2011 12:53:47 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

are immanent within history but because God’s historical works of redemption and revelation are known to him from all eternity (Isa. 41.4; 46.10; Acts 15.17–18; 2 Tim. 1.9–10). Thus, for all the surprises that the history of revelation brings—chief of all the crucifi xion of God’s beloved Son—these surprising developments occur as the necessary conclusions of the Lord’s story with his people: “Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” (Lk. 24.26; cf. Rom. 16.25–26). 29 For this reason, the progressive nature of revelation does not suggest an evolution from more “primitive” to more “sophisticated” stages in humanity’s knowledge of God, of redemption, and of itself. Nor do earlier stages of revelation require correction or augmentation by later stages of revelation. Contrary to every form of Marcionism that has plagued the history of Christianity, it is the same God who makes himself known to Israel and to the church.30 Moreover, Jesus, God’s supreme self-revelation and fi nal Word (cf. Heb. 1.1–4), did not come to abolish earlier revelation but to fulfill it (Mt. 5.17–19). Even those institutions that are abrogated in the New Covenant (e.g., the Levitical priesthood, the temple cult, etc.) serve as tokens, promissory notes of the fi nal institutions that Christ came to establish, and therefore function as paradigms—indispensable models—for understanding those institutions.31 As such, they are never truly left behind but are rather incorporated into the brilliant mosaic of New Covenant revelation. Each stage of God’s revelation thus represents God’s wholly reliable redemptive truth, tempered to that stage of redemption by the Divine Rhetor, and therefore profitable in its own right for imparting the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Jesus Christ and to a life that is pleasing to God (2 Tim. 3.15–17).32 29

30

31

32

The necessity spoken of here follows from the infallibility of God’s decree, not from the events themselves, which are contingent. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Ante-Nicene Fathers 1: Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus (Repr. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 3.10.5. For a fi ne exposition of the temple’s role in this regard, see G. K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God, New Studies in Biblical Theology 17 (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004). For further discussion of the ideas presented in this paragraph, see Vos, “Idea.” See also Vos, Biblical Theology, 5–9.

24

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 24

5/13/2011 12:53:47 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

It is important to note at this point the reason why progressive revelation constitutes a unified Word of God. The unity of progressive revelation does not lie in the historical, cultural, or literary features of that revelation. In fact, when it comes to these features, God’s self-revelation exhibits a vast diversity. The reason that progressive revelation is a unified word lies in the fact that ultimately God speaks the same Word fi rst through the prophets and later through the apostles, the word of Christ (cf. 1 Pet. 1.10–11).33 From age to age, in various ways, both through figures and plain speech, God communicates Jesus Christ, who is “the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb. 13.8). Above all others, it is this reality that accounts for the unity of God’s saving self-revelation. Moreover, it is only in grasping this reality by faith that we are able to apprehend the unity of God’s saving self-revelation. As Henri de Lubac states, a true understanding of scriptural unity “is not separable from ‘the sight through which Christ is recognized.’ ”34 The unifying principle of progressive revelation also accounts for the fi nality of that revelation’s form in Jesus Christ. God’s utterance through his Son in these last days (see Heb. 1.1–4) “has inaugurated a new era of fulfillment, in which the divine Word is present with unambiguous clarity, definition and completeness.”35 In Jesus, God’s full story has been told (cf. Jn 1.18). To be sure, we only grasp this revelation now by faith and not by sight. Because ours is the “theology of pilgrims” and not yet the “theology of the blessed,” our understanding of God’s defi nitive Word is far from complete.36 Nevertheless, when faith turns to sight, it will behold nothing other than “this

33

34

35

36

Robert W. Jenson, “A Second Thought about Inspiration,” Pro Ecclesia 13 (2004): 397–98. Scripture in the Tradition, trans. Luke O’Neill (New York: Crossroad, 2000), 153. Cf. 2 Corinthians 3.14–18. John Webster, “One Who Is Son: Theological Reflections on the Exordium to the Epistle of the Hebrews,” in The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology, ed., Richard Bauckham, Daniel R. Driver, Trevor A. Hart, and Nathan MacDonald (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 71. It is important, in other words, to distinguish God, the subject of revelation, who gives revelation its fullness and reliability, from human beings, the recipients of revelation, who in this life never fully comprehend that revelation. For fuller discussion of this important distinction as it was

25

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 25

5/13/2011 12:53:47 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

same Jesus” (Acts 1.11 KJV): “The passage from faith to vision will not consist in a change of the object of our knowledge, but in a different mode of perception of the same object which gives himself to us already now.”37 Given the climax of God’s self-revelation in Jesus Christ, it is wrong therefore to suggest that our understanding of God, 38 or of God’s requirements for his people, 39 might progress “beyond” that of the apostolic era. There is no standpoint beyond the apostolic age that might provide a “deepened moral [or theological] sensitivity” or that might make the revelation of God in Christ look “immature and outgrown.”40 N. T. Wright’s lucid explanation of the matter is worth quoting at length: We who call ourselves Christians must be totally committed to telling the story of Jesus both as the climax of Israel’s story and as the foundation of our own. We recognize ourselves as the direct successors of the churches of Corinth, Ephesus and the rest, and we need to pay attention to what was said to them as though it was said to us. We cannot relativize the epistles by pointing out the length of time that has passed between them and us, or by suggesting any intervening seismic cultural shifts which would render them irrelevant or

37

38

39

40

developed among Protestant scholastics, see Richard A. Muller, PostReformation Reformed Dogmatics, 1:263–67. Luigi Gioia, The Theological Epistemology of Augustine’s De Trinitate (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 77. For an example of such a claim, see I. Howard Marshall, Beyond the Bible: Moving from Scripture to Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 63–69. See also Kevin J. Vanhoozer’s response to Marshall’s claim in Beyond the Bible, 81–95. William J. Webb’s “redemptive movement” model is problematic in this regard because it does not take into account the fi nality and fullness of God’s self-revelation in Jesus Christ and, through him, the apostles. See his, Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2001). For a more helpful discussion of the relationship between progressive revelation and the Bible’s ethical teaching, see Oliver O’Donovan, Church in Crisis: The Gay Crisis and the Anglican Communion (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2008), esp. chaps. 4–5; and more fully his, Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline for Evangelical Ethics, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994). O’Donovan, Church in Crisis, 62.

26

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 26

5/13/2011 12:53:48 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

misleading. It is an essential part of authentic Christian discipleship both to see the New Testament as the foundation for the ongoing, still open-ended [drama of the kingdom] . . . and to recognize that it cannot be supplanted or supplemented.41 II.b.2.b. God’s covenant with Abraham With these points in place, we may turn to God’s covenantal word to Abraham. If Genesis 3.15 is the seed of the gospel, then God’s various utterances to Abraham represent that seed’s DNA. The body of communication that follows Genesis 3.15 grows according to the program charted in God’s words to Abraham. In his sovereign initiative and undeserved kindness (cf. Josh. 24.2), God promises to Abraham the fulfillment of his original kingdom purpose. God calls Abraham out of Ur to a land yet to be seen (place). He promises to make him a blessing to the nations and to grant him a multitude of offspring (people), from among whom kings also will arise (Gen. 17.6; cf. 49.10). God solemnly commits himself by oath to Abraham (Gen. 15.7–21) and his descendants and commands them to keep his ways (Gen. 17.1) (relationship). As in creation, so with Abraham, covenant is the glue that binds this diversity of divine speech acts together in a meaningful whole. Rest, however, will not come to Abraham and his descendants during his lifetime (cf. Heb. 11.13). According to divine prophecy (Gen. 15.13–21), the children of Abraham will fi rst sojourn in a foreign land under foreign oppression before God conquers their enemies, brings them out of slavery, and plants them in his holy presence. II.b.2.c. God’s covenant with Israel through Moses The Lord builds upon his covenant with Abraham through a series of further covenants, which in turn house further redemptive words. These covenants form the “backbone” of the unfolding kingdom drama,42 linking together a broad spectrum of events, institutions, and persons. The first of these is the Mosaic Covenant.

41

42

N. T. Wright, Scripture and the Authority of God (London: SPCK, 2005), 92. Gentry, “Kingdom through Covenant,” 19.

27

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 27

5/13/2011 12:53:48 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

After delivering Israel from Egypt according to promise, God assembles her at Sinai, where he enters into a new phase of relationship with the newly formed nation (see Exod. 19–24). There God solemnly rehearses the name he revealed to Moses (Exod. 3.14) and the events whereby he took Israel to be his people (cf. Exod. 6.7): “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (Exod. 20.2). Through a series of seven words that parallel the act of creation,43 God unveils the pattern that must guide the construction of the tabernacle, the place that will serve as the focal point of communion between a priestly people (cf. Exod. 19.4–6) and her redeemer King (Exod. 25–40). The reason God brought Israel out of Egypt was so that he might dwell in her midst (Exod. 29.46).44 By means of his royal act (redemption) and royal speech (covenant), and in his royal dwelling (temple), God will communicate himself to Israel in abundant glory and grace (cf. Exod. 32–34; 40.34–38). Under the Mosaic Covenant, God’s word expands into a vast corpus of legal stipulations designed to govern the life of his people and the service of his sanctuary. This expansion is celebrated by Israel, each new ray of light providing a new reason to rejoice. According to Psalm 19, God’s word is a perfect “law,” able to revive the soul (19.7a). It is also a sure “testimony,” able to make wise the simple (19.7b). His words are right “precepts” that rejoice the heart and pure “commandment[s]” that enlighten the eyes (19.8). His “rules” are “true and righteous altogether,” more desirable than fine gold and the drippings of the honeycomb (19.9–10). No nation is privileged like Israel. God dwells in her midst and teaches her his laws (cf. Deut. 4.6–8; Ps. 147.19–20). But, as Psalm 19 also relates, the good law that God delivered through Moses also exposes Israel as unfathomably sinful. “Who can discern his errors?” asks the psalmist in verse 12. The psalmist clearly grasps the severity of his predicament: the law pronounces a curse upon all who do not keep its stipulations (cf. Lev. 26; Deut. 28.15–68), echoing the curse pronounced upon Adam in the Garden (Rom. 5.20). The psalmist therefore begs

43 44

See Ross, Recalling the Hope of Glory, 87–88. Brueggemann, Theology of the Old Testament, 211–12.

28

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 28

5/13/2011 12:53:48 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

God in his mercy to justify the ungodly—“declare me innocent from hidden faults” (19.12b)—and to preserve him from sin’s dominion (19.13). He prays that his words will be acceptable to his Rock and Redeemer (19.14), that his words will glorify God as the words of creation (19.1–6) and of the law (19.7–11) glorify God. Psalm 19’s meditation on God’s glory in creation and in the law thus inevitably turns into an invocation for God’s work in the gospel. The psalmist knows that if he is to offer an acceptable sacrifice of praise, his heart must be cleansed by God’s word of absolution and his lips must be opened by God’s creative power (cf. Ps. 51.14–15; Rom. 10.10). God’s word and Spirit must effect a new creation through pardon and renewal if the psalmist’s words are to stay in sync with creation and the law in glorifying the Lord. II.b.2.d. God’s covenant with David The predicament of the psalmist is the predicament of Israel as a whole. Though creation and the law manifest God’s word and serve God’s kingdom, Israel struggles to do so. Consequently, her initial settlement in the Promised Land is plagued by a continuous cycle of disobedience, exile, and deliverance. Within this context, self-rule is the name of the game: “Everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 21.25). To the problem of Israel’s stubborn rebellion God provides a royal cure. He installs David—a man after his own heart (1 Sam. 13.14)—as king to shepherd his habitually straying people (cf. Ps. 78). According to Scott W. Hahn, the Davidic Covenant brings about a “reconfiguration” of God’s relationship with Israel through the Mosaic Covenant: “The demands of the Mosaic law remain valid, but are now focused particularly on the person of the Davidide, who functions as covenant mediator (see 1 Kgs 2:1–4).”45 In David (and his progeny), God’s kingdom purpose is thus fi nally realized. God solemnly binds himself to David and his sons in a perpetual, fatherly relationship: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sam. 7.14 NIV). By the hand of Solomon, God orders the construction of his temple, the 45

Hahn, Kinship by Covenant: A Canonical Approach to the Fulfillment of God’s Saving Promises (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009), 121.

29

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 29

5/13/2011 12:53:48 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

place of his holy rest. And thus, under the rule of God’s earthly son and assured of God’s holy presence in the temple, God’s people inherit God’s blessing in God’s place. As in the case of the law, so in God’s promise of an eternal kingdom to David, Israel saw in God’s good word a reason to sing and to celebrate. This celebration is voiced preeminently in the Psalms. In Israel’s praise, the Davidic king is the sign of humanity’s restoration to its original God-given dignity (Ps. 8)—and beyond (Ps. 110; cf. Dan. 7.13–14). The Davidic king is the means whereby God’s glory will reach the ends of the earth (Ps. 72; cf. Isa. 11.1–9). The Davidic king is the object of irresistible beauty that will draw the Gentile nations to himself (Ps. 45). The glory of the Davidic kingdom therefore makes the rebellion of his house all the more appalling and the ensuing divine scourge which falls upon king and temple all the more perplexing. Indeed, the severity of divine judgment that comes to Israel and its king raises the lament that God has “cast off and rejected” his earthly son and “renounced” his eternal covenant (Ps. 89.38–39). If David is not spared God’s hot wrath against sin, what hope has Israel? What hope have the nations? And what hope has creation? II.b.2.e. God’s promise of a new covenant God’s prophets prosecute the terms of the Mosaic Covenant against Israel and her kings in poetic word and parabolic act. But as in the Garden of Eden, God’s word of curse hides a promise of blessing. God’s prophetic word not only tears down, it also builds up (cf. Jer. 1.10). Through the prophets, God promises a dazzling renewal of his kingdom purpose. This renewal will result in a new David, a new temple, a new people (comprising Jew and Gentile), and, finally, a new creation. The Sabbatical year of God’s favor will come in all its eschatological fullness (Isa. 61.2ff). This eschatological renewal is guaranteed by an “everlasting” (Isa. 55.3; Ezek. 37.26) or “new” covenant (Jer. 31.31). God promises in this covenant to remove all obstacles to covenant fellowship. Sin will be fully and fi nally forgiven and the human heart will be fully and fi nally renewed (Jer. 31.33–34). The triune king’s solemn pledge will thus be realized: “I will be your God and you will be my people” (Jer. 31.33). Covenant communication will be realized in covenant communion. 30

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 30

5/13/2011 12:53:48 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

II.b.2.f. God’s kingdom and covenant are fulfilled in Jesus the Christ At the time of Jesus, the history of Israel is “a story in search of a conclusion.”46 Israel has returned from exile, but they dwell in the land under foreign rule. They have a Jewish king, but he is no David. They have a temple, but it does not match the prophetic vision. And so Israel continues to cry: “Save us, O Lord our God, and gather us from among the nations, that we may give thanks to your holy name and glory in your praise” (Ps. 106.47).47 God resolves Israel’s predicament and answers her prayer by sending his beloved Son (Mk 12.1–12; Jn 3.17; Rom. 8.3; Gal. 4.4). According to promise, God’s Son is born of a woman (Gen. 3.15; cf. Gal. 4.4), and also of Abrahamic (Gen. 22.18; cf. Gal. 3.16) and Davidic descent (2 Sam. 7.12–13; cf. Rom. 1.3). Where all previous covenant partners failed to fulfill God’s purpose, God’s divine Son succeeds, for his single ambition is to do his Father’s will (Lk. 3.23–4.15; Jn 4.34; 5.30; 6.38; Rom. 5.12–21; etc.). By his obedience, Jesus inaugurates the long promised, long awaited kingdom.48 The mission of Jesus is the means whereby God’s promised kingdom comes. Jesus not only accomplishes the coming of the kingdom, he also announces its blessings. He is the fi rst “evangelist” sent to preach the good news of eschatological forgiveness and restoration (Lk. 4.16–21; cf. Isa. 61.1–2).49 He is the Prophet Greater than Moses (Lk. 9.35; cf. Deut. 18.15) and the Apostle of our confession (Heb. 3.1). He unveils mysteries hidden from the foundation of the world through his parables (Mt. 13.35) and proclaims the fulfillment of the Law in his teaching (Mt. 5.17). He is God’s fi nal Word to his people, and he is God’s fi nal Word because he is God’s fi rst and eternal Word, God’s beloved Son (Heb. 1.1–4; cf. Jn 1.15).

46

47 48 49

N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God 1 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 217. Wright, New Testament, 216–17. Wright, Scripture and the Authority of God, 31. Charles E. Hill, “God’s Speech in These Last Days: The New Testament Canon as Eschatological Phenomenon,” in Resurrection and Eschatology: Theology in Service of the Church: Essays in Honor of Richard B. Gaffi n, Jr., ed. Lane G. Tipton and Jeffrey C. Waddington (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2008), 213.

31

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 31

5/13/2011 12:53:49 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

The path whereby the Son inaugurates the kingdom is, strangely enough, a path of humiliation and suffering (cf. Phil. 2.6ff). In contrast to the expectations of his contemporaries, including his own disciples, Jesus knows that his mission must culminate in death (Mk 8.31; 9.31–32; 10.32–33, 45; etc.). Only by following the path of the cross will he fulfi ll his calling and bring all of God’s good words to pass (Lk. 24.26–27; cf. Heb. 10.7). He is not only the beloved Son of God. He is also the Lamb of God, God’s costly sacrificial provision for the sins of his people (Jn 1.29, 36; 13.1; 19.36; 1 Pet. 1.19). Jesus must bear the covenant curse pronounced upon Adam and Israel before he can dispense the covenant blessing promised through Israel to the nations (Gen. 12.3; Gal. 3.13–14; 4.4–7). “God sent forth his Son . . . to redeem” (Gal. 4.4–5). His coming unveils the full and fi nal revelation of God’s full and fi nal redemption. Having completed the mission given him by the Father, Jesus thus proclaims: “It is finished.” (Jn 19.30). All is fulfilled. Jesus therefore appears on Easter morning as the fi rstborn of the new creation (1 Cor. 15.20; Col. 1.18; Rev. 1.5), who ascends to his Father’s right hand to reign as Lord of heaven and earth, and also as Head of his church (Jn 20.17; Acts 2.36; Eph. 1.20–21; Phil. 2.9–11). From his sovereign throne, he announces eschatological “peace” to those who are far off and to those who are near (Eph. 2.17; cf. Jn 20.19) and pours forth the promised Spirit of eschatological regeneration and renewal (Jn 20.22; Acts 2.33; Tit. 3.5–7). The dispensing of the eschatological Spirit signals that the blessing of the New Covenant has come (cf. Isa. 54.10; 59.21; Ezek. 34.25). The ultimate aim of God’s covenantal self-communication—“I will be a father to you” (2 Cor. 6.18)—fi nds its full and fi nal “Yes” as Jesus’ Father becomes our Father (Jn 20.17) and its “Amen” (cf. 2 Cor. 1.20) as Jesus’ Spirit enables us to participate in his own filial cry to the Father (Gal. 4.6; Heb. 2.12). The exclusive life of communication and communion that exists within the triune God thus comes to include us through the gospel.

II.b.3. Kingdom and covenant in consummation Ultimately, God’s work of consummating creation will be an act of majestic sovereignty as well, as the kingdoms of this world 32

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 32

5/13/2011 12:53:49 PM

THE HISTORICAL PROGRESSION OF THE WORD OF GOD

become the kingdom of the Lord and of his Messiah (Rev. 11.15). God’s fi nal kingdom design is to renew and perfect his fallen creation so that it may become a holy dwelling place of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (see Rev. 21.1–22:5). In that cosmic sanctuary, God’s purpose of solemn self-commitment will be realized completely, as he declares: “The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son” (Rev. 21.7). The Father’s face will shine in radiant splendor upon his children and the river of the Spirit’s delights will flow from his throne (cf. Ps. 36.8). These blessings of light and life will ever descend upon God’s people because the one who sits at the Father’s right hand is the once slain now reigning lamb (Rev. 22.1–5; cf. 5.1–14).

III. Conclusion As we have seen, God’s word plays a vital role in the unfolding drama of the kingdom. By his covenantal Word, God creates, redeems, and consummates the world. Nevertheless, we have only begun to appreciate the multifaceted role of God’s word within the economy of salvation. It is time, then, to turn to the subject of the next chapter, the role of God’s written Word, Holy Scripture, within God’s sovereign purpose of making friends with us.

33

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 33

5/13/2011 12:53:49 PM

9780567265401_CH01_Finals_txt_print.indd 34

5/13/2011 12:53:49 PM

CHAPTER 2 THE ROLE OF HOLY SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

I.

Introduction

In the previous chapter we traced the progression of God’s Word within the unfolding economy of God’s kingdom. It is now time to focus more directly on the role of the written Word within the Father’s sovereign purpose and plan. The present chapter will demonstrate that the Bible is not only about God’s kingdom and covenantal purpose but that the Bible is itself a servant of the triune king and a means of his covenantal self-communication. Holy Scripture is itself one of God’s “redemptive acts, having its own part to play in the great work of establishing and building up the kingdom of God.”1 In order to appreciate the role of Holy Scripture in the drama of the kingdom, we must look at two topics. Together these two topics provide crucial concepts for grasping the function of the Bible in God’s sovereign purpose and plan. The fi rst topic concerns double agency discourse. The history of God speaking is the history of God speaking through authorized agents or representatives, preeminently his prophets and apostles. As the following discussion will make clear, God himself communicates 1

B. B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948), 161.

35

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 35

5/13/2011 12:54:19 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

through his authorized spokesmen. Prophets and apostles do not simply bear witness to what God has said. Because they speak in God’s name and on God’s behalf, God speaks when they speak. The second topic concerns covenantal discourse. It is not only the case that God himself communicates through his authorized agents. When God speaks through his prophets and apostles, God communicates himself. God’s authorized spokesmen deliver God’s covenantal word, the word whereby God gives himself as Father to his people and whereby God binds his people to himself as his children—and both through Jesus Christ, who is the sum and substance of the prophetic-apostolic word (cf. Jn 5.39; Rom. 1.1–5; etc.). Covenantal discourse has the person and work of Christ at its center.

II. II.a.

The Role of Holy Scripture in Kingdom and Covenant

Double Agency Discourse

II.a.1. The trinitarian fittingness of double agency discourse That God speaks through creaturely spokespersons is not an absolute necessity. When God gathered Israel at Sinai to consecrate the recently redeemed nation as his people, his own voice thundered from the mountain (Exod. 19.9, 19; 20.1; Deut. 5.4; cf. Heb. 12.19). As a result, the people begged that God would not speak directly to them, but that he would speak through his servant Moses (Exod. 20.18–19; Deut. 5.24–28). Later, at Jesus’ baptism, and then again on the Mount of Transfiguration, God spoke a direct word of heavenly approbation concerning Jesus: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt. 3.17; 17.5; cf. 2 Pet. 1.17). Though he infi nitely transcends his creatures, the sovereign king can stoop and speak to his creatures in their language and cause himself to be understood, for he is himself the Creator of human speech and understanding (cf. Exod. 4.11–12). Nevertheless, God ordinarily speaks to his creatures through the speech of other creatures (Heb. 1.1–2). God unveils his glory through the “speech” of the created world (Ps. 19.1–3; 36

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 36

5/13/2011 12:54:20 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

cf. Rom. 1.20). He also speaks to his creatures through heavenly beings, the angels. 2 Ultimately, God’s speech through his creatures corresponds to and serves his speech through his Son, who is at once the personal agent of God’s word (he is sent by God to speak) and the personal embodiment of God’s word (he is God’s speech). 3 For this reason, we must conclude that the form of communication whereby one person communicates by means of another person is not a diminished form of communication. God’s authorized creaturely speech agents (angels, prophets, apostles) are swept up into the mission of God’s incarnate Word.

II.a.2.

The nature of double agency discourse

When God speaks to creatures through creatures, it is not a diminished form of communication. God’s authorized speech agents are fitting ministers of the Word that he is and fitting instruments of the mission that he fulfi lls. It is time to explore this manner of communication in greater depth. Nicholas Wolterstorff terms the manner of communication whereby one person speaks through the speech of another “double agency discourse.”4 In double agency discourse, one person authorizes or deputizes another person to speak on his behalf, in his name. The result of this act of authorization is not simply that the authorized agent delivers the message of the one who sent him. The result is that the sender himself communicates by means of the speech of his authorized agent. Wolterstorff explains: “to deputize to someone else some authority that one has in one’s own person is not to surrender that authority and

2

3

4

Even at Sinai, angels were somehow involved in delivering God’s covenant to his people (cf. Gal. 3:19) (Waltke, Old Testament Theology, 806). For further discussion of this point, see Andreas J. Köstenberger and Scott R. Swain, Father, Son and Spirit: The Trinity and John’s Gospel, New Studies in Biblical Theology 24 (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2008), 113–16. See Nicholas Wolterstorff, “Authorial Discourse Interpretation” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005), 78–80. Wolterstorff develops this argument more fully in his, Divine Discourse: Philosophical Refl ections on the Claim that God Speaks (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).

37

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 37

5/13/2011 12:54:20 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

hand it over to that other person; it is to bring it about that one exercises that authority by way of actions performed by that other person acting as one’s deputy.”5 An “ambassador” is a good example of this form of communication.6 When a president sends a message to another country by means of an ambassador, the authoritative communication is that of the president, even though the message is delivered by the mouth of an ambassador. The ambassador may be given more or less freedom about how he phrases the message and so forth. But only to the extent that he communicates the message of his president does he faithfully execute his ambassadorial office, for his office consists in his being the voice of the president abroad. The president himself speaks by the ambassador’s mouth. The ministries of prophets and apostles exemplify this concept of double agency. According to Bruce Waltke’s defi nition, a prophet is “a person called and designated by God to be his spokesperson” (see Jer. 1.5; 23.21).7 When the prophet speaks in his office as prophet, he characteristically announces, “Thus says the Lord” (Exod. 4.22; etc.). When the prophet speaks, God speaks (cf. Rom. 1.2; Acts 28.25). Similar is the case of the apostle. According to Herman Ridderbos, the apostles were “uniquely empowered to represent Christ” and to be “Christ’s instruments and organs in the continuation of revelation” (see Lk. 24.48–49; Jn 20.21–22).8 Christ speaks by means of his authorized witnesses, the apostles (2 Pet. 3.2). Whoever receives their word, receives his word (cf. Mt. 10.40; Jn 13.20). The prophets and apostles are thus the divinely authorized emissaries of the covenant Lord,9 his “human mouth.”10 In this regard we may understand the designations “holy prophets” (Lk. 1.70; Acts 3.21) and “holy apostles” (Eph. 3.5; cf. Jn 17.18–19). To be “holy” is to be, among other things, “set apart” for God’s 5 6 7 8

9 10

Wolterstorff, Divine Discourse, 42. Wolterstorff, “Authorial Discourse Interpretation,” 79. Waltke, Old Testament Theology, 805. Herman Ridderbos, The Authority of the New Testament Scriptures, trans. H. De Jongste (Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1963), 15; cf. 27. Wolterstorff, “Authorial Discourse Interpretation,” 79. Waltke, Old Testament Theology, 805. Cf. the analogy of Moses and Aaron in Exodus 4.16 and 7.1.

38

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 38

5/13/2011 12:54:20 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

service and use. God’s prophets and apostles are “holy” in that they are uniquely “set apart by God as a means of divine selfcommunication.”11 God himself addresses his people by means of their divinely consecrated lips (cf. Isa. 6.1–8). These emissaries are uniquely qualified to fulfi ll their commission by virtue of their unique access to God’s council (Jer. 23.18, 22)12 and by virtue of their unique anointing with God’s Spirit (Isa. 61.1). (We will discuss the latter reality in the next chapter when we discuss the inspiration of Holy Scripture.) Moses, the “supreme” Old Testament prophet,13 was distinguished from all other prophets by the fact that the Lord spoke with him “face to face, as a man speaks to his friend” (Exod. 33.11; cf. Deut. 34.10). On Mount Sinai, Moses beheld the Lord’s glory and heard him proclaim his name; Moses was thereby enabled to reflect the Lord’s glory and to reveal his name to his people (see Exod. 33.12–34.9, 29–33; cf. 3.13–14). Similarly, on the Mount of Transfiguration, the apostles beheld the glory of Christ and heard the Father identify him as his beloved Son (Mt. 17.1–9; cf. Jn 1.14). Their special access to Christ enabled them to bear authorized witness on his behalf (Acts 10.41; 2 Pet. 1.16–18).14 Ultimately, both prophets and apostles enjoy access to the same divine council, for they both behold—from different redemptive historical vantage points to be sure—the glory of the same Lord, appointed in eternity by the Father to redeem his people (Jn 12.41; 1 Pet. 1.10–12, 20). The prophets and apostles are thus fitted to bear the eternal Word of God, who ever lives at the Father’s side (access) and who comes forth into the world in the fullness of the Spirit’s power (anointing) to make the Father known (Jn 1.1, 18; 3.34; cf. Isa. 55.10–11). Prophets and apostles serve the mission of the eternal Word incarnate. Together, they bear “the word of truth,” which is the good news of our salvation (Eph. 1.13; cf. 2 Tim. 3.15).

11 12

13 14

John Webster, Holy Scripture, 9, italics mine. R. W. L. Moberly, Prophecy and Discernment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 9, 73–75. Waltke, Old Testament Theology, 808. Ridderbos, Authority of the New Testament Scriptures, 15. See also Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimonies (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006).

39

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 39

5/13/2011 12:54:20 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

II.b.

Covenant Discourse

God himself communicates through his prophets and apostles. They are divinely commissioned emissaries, who enjoy special access to the divine counsel and who are specially endued with divine power in order that they may carry out their task. But it is not only the case that God himself communicates through his authorized agents (double agency discourse). God also communicates himself through his authorized agents (covenantal discourse): “I will be your God.” By means of his prophetic and apostolic word, God binds himself to his people and his people to himself. It is time to discuss in greater depth the covenantal nature of divine discourse.

II.b.1. Covenant discourse, Part One: the covenant formula The oft-repeated formula “I will be your God and you will be my people” (Exod. 6.7; Lev. 26.12; Jer. 30.22; 2 Cor. 6.16; Rev. 21.3) represents “the substance” of the covenant relationship.15 As Rolf Rendtorff observes: “the same, or comparable, statements about the relationship between God and Israel as it is expressed in the covenant formula can be made with reference to entirely different epochs of Israel’s history.”16 This goes as well for the epoch of eschatological fulfillment, the New Testament era (see Jn 20.17; 2 Cor. 6.16; Rev. 21.7). According to Rendtorff, “God laid the foundation” for this relationship in his promise to Abraham in Genesis 17.7: “I will . . . be God to you and to your offspring after you.”17 He “extended” this relationship to Israel when he took them from the midst of Egypt that they might become his treasured people and possession (Exod. 29.45–46; Lev. 26.12).18 Even after Israel broke the covenant through her obstinate infidelity and idolatry, God—“who keepeth covenant and mercy” (Deut. 7.9 JPS)— promised to make this relationship “indestructible through

15

16 17 18

The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998), 15, 88. Rendtorff, Covenant Formula, 79. Rendtorff, Covenant Formula, 81, 83. Rendtorff, Covenant Formula, 16, 46, 83.

40

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 40

5/13/2011 12:54:21 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

the renewal of Israel’s heart” and everlasting forgiveness (Jer. 31.33–34).19 Through Jesus Christ, this promise is fulfilled as both Jew and Gentile inherit the blessing of having God as their God and Father (Jn 20.17; 2 Cor. 6.16), thus realizing God’s eternal divine plan to bless the nations through Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 12.3; 22.18; Acts 3.25–26). God’s ultimate covenantal purpose, which unfolds through time by means of various covenant administrations and which fi nds its fulfillment in Christ, is to communicate himself to his redeemed and renewed people in a relationship of love and fellowship. To know the only true God as Father, through the Son, in the Spirit is the ultimate covenant blessing (Jn 20.17; cf. Jer. 31.34). According to Jesus, this knowledge is “eternal life” (Jn 17.3). As we have already seen at length, this goal of divine selfcommunication and fellowship is brought about by means of God’s multifaceted word. God’s self-communication is thus both simple and complex. The relationship expressed in the basic covenant formula (“I will be your God and you will be my people”) is enacted by means of a multiplicity of communicative actions over the course of a long period of time. In order to better grasp the role of God’s word in establishing and sustaining fellowship with his people, it will be helpful to discuss both the force and the forms of covenantal discourse.

II.b.2. Covenant discourse, Part Two: speech acts, the force of covenantal discourse God’s covenants house a rich variety of words. When speaking to his people, God pronounces judgment and proclaims his name. He makes promises and issues commands. Philosophers of language call these various types of communication “speech acts,” for by speaking a speaker not only conveys information, he also performs a host of actions. 20 Speakers, in turn, perform

19 20

Rendtorff, Covenant Formula, 87; cf. 59. For a good introduction to speech act theory by one of its chief proponents, see John Searle, Mind, Language, and Society: Philosophy in the Real World (New York: Basic Books, 1998), chap. 6. For fuller discussions of the relationship between speech acts and covenants, see Anthony C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992),

41

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 41

5/13/2011 12:54:21 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

various speech acts for various purposes. In the case of God’s word, he proclaims his name in order that we might know him. He makes promises in order that we might trust him. He issues commands that we might obey him and threats that we might fear the consequences of disobedience and unbelief. Speech act theorists distinguish between what a speaker does in communication, an illocutionary act (for example, a promise), from what a speaker accomplishes as a result of his communication, a perlocutionary act (for example, trust). We should also note that perlocutionary acts may be intended or unintended. A promise may result not only in trust; it may also result in skepticism. 21 John 6.35 provides a concrete example of how God’s word works. There, Jesus exclaims: “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” In this utterance, Jesus explicitly performs two speech acts and implicitly performs two others.22 First, Jesus makes an assertion about his identity: “I am the bread of life.” He wants his hearers to understand that he eternally satisfies the deepest needs of sinful humans—not simply that he is the source of satisfaction, but that he personally is the divine provision that satisfies. Second, Jesus issues a promise: “whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.” By means of this promise, Jesus assures his hearers that, due to his utter sufficiency as the bread of life, all who come to him will never again experience lack. Third, Jesus’ word implies a summons: “Come to me! Believe in me!” Jesus implicitly directs his hearers to forsake all other objects of satisfaction and to flee to him. Fourth, Jesus’

21 22

304–307, 598–601; and Vanhoozer, “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts.” For a discussion of the ways speech act theory may be judiciously applied to biblical interpretation, see Richard S. Briggs, Words in Action: Speech Act Theory and Biblical Interpretation: Toward a Hermeneutic of Self-Involvement (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2001); and Vern S. Poythress, “Canon and Speech Act: Limitations in Speech-Act Theory, with Implications for a Putative Theory of Canonical Speech Acts,” Westminster Theological Journal 70 (2008): 337–54. See Searle, Mind, Language, and Society, 136–37. On the significant role of “implication” in communication, see Jeannine K. Brown, Scripture as Communication: Introducing Biblical Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 35–38.

42

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 42

5/13/2011 12:54:21 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

word implies a warning: “Whoever does not come to me/believe in me will suffer everlasting hunger and everlasting thirst.” As should be clear from the preceding example, Jesus’ multifaceted speech act is designed to establish fellowship with those given to him by the Father (see John 6.36–40). In establishing this fellowship, each word has an important role to play. Jesus’ claim informs our mind, revealing to us his true identity as God’s all-sufficient heavenly provision for eternal life. Jesus’ promise informs our will, causing us to trust Jesus’ intention to bless. Jesus’ command informs our feet, directing our paths to his person. Ultimately, Jesus’ word opens our lips to confess his praise: “You have the words of eternal life . . . You are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6.68–69). Working together by the Spirit’s power (Jn 6.63), these words bring us into the fellowship of God’s Son (cf. 1 Cor. 1.9). These words are effectual, spiritual means for establishing covenant relationship. It is worth noting at this point that speech act theory also helps us grasp one of Christian doctrine’s most important distinctions with respect to the word of God, the distinction between “law” and “gospel.” As we have seen, different speech acts perform different actions (illocutions) and seek to bring about different results (perlocutions). It is also important to observe that different sorts of speech acts create different sorts of obligations. Most relevant to the present discussion: A promise obligates the speaker to a certain course of action, whereas a command obligates the hearer to a certain course of action. Thus, if I say, “I’ll meet you at the coffee house at 4 o’clock,” that is, if a make a promise, then I have obligated myself to do something. Alternatively, if I say to one of my children, “Clean up your room,” that is, if I issue a command, then I have obligated my child to do something. We will discuss the full significance of this point shortly. For now, we must only observe that, when it comes to God’s covenantal way of saving sinners, God’s word is wholly promissory. His word does not obligate us to save ourselves by our own “works.” By his promises, God obligates himself to save us; we are saved by his work (cf. Eph. 2.8–10). Indeed, the gospel is fundamentally the announcement that God has performed the work of fulfilling his ancient promises in Jesus Christ: “Christ has died . . . Christ has risen!” (cf. 1 Cor. 15.1–4; Rom. 1.1–4), coupled with the promise of eternal life and forgiveness to all 43

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 43

5/13/2011 12:54:21 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

who believe “in his name” (Jn 20.31). Of course, this is not to reduce God’s word to promises and announcements, nor is it to deny that he issues commands. It is to say that, in the discourse of God’s gracious covenant, God’s laws are not designed to provide a way of salvation (Gal. 3.21). Such a scenario is not only impossible for those who are “children of wrath” (Eph. 2.3) and slaves of sin (Jn 8.34). Such a scenario is also irreligious, making human and not divine action the cause of salvation and therefore the object of boasting (Rom. 3.27; 4.2; Eph. 2.8–9).23 God’s law reveals our guilt (Rom. 3.19) and exposes our utter inability to do that which is pleasing in his sight (Rom. 8.3, 7–8). God’s law does not instruct sinners concerning the way they may achieve redemption. It points sinners to their need for God’s work through his Son’s perfect obedience and righteousness (Rom. 5.12–21; 8.103; Gal. 4.4–7). But that is not the only function of God’s law. God’s law also instructs those who have been redeemed concerning the way they should walk in Christ, by the Spirit’s power, to the glory of God the Father (Mt. 22.37–39; Rom. 8.1–14; cf. Eph. 2.10; 6.1–4). The law reveals God’s fatherly character and thus sets the standard of being and conduct for his redeemed children, children who are called to refl ect their Father’s character (Eph. 4.22–24; 5.1; 1 Pet. 1.15–16). God’s law in this regard is a “law of liberty” (Jas 1.25; 2.12), the path upon which liberated sinners walk as God reforms and renews them according to the image of his Son through the Spirit (Rom. 8.4; cf. Eph. 4.21–6.9). 24

II.b.3. Covenant discourse, Part Three: the forms of covenant discourse and their fulfillment in Christ In order to grasp the full significance of the preceding discussion it will be helpful to look at some of the various forms of covenantal communication and to the fulfillment of these various forms in and through Jesus Christ. 23

24

Geerhardus Vos, “The Alleged Legalism in Paul’s Doctrine of Justification,” in Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation, 391–92. For a very instructive discussion of the relationship between “law” and “gospel,” see J. van Genderen and W. H. Velema, Concise Reformed Dogmatics, trans. Gerrit Bilkes and Ed M. van der Maas (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2008), 771–779.

44

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 44

5/13/2011 12:54:21 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

II.b.3.a. The forms of covenant discourse Covenant relationships in the Ancient Near East were often (though not always)25 ratified and regulated by means of various forms of covenantal communication. Such forms were not “fi xed,” “even within one society at a particular time.”26 They were instead routinely modified to serve the different needs of different sorts of personal relationships, 27 much in the same way that today we regularly modify different types of legal contracts to facilitate different types of personal relationships and transactions (e.g., marriage, adoption, real estate transactions, etc.) in different contexts (e.g., political, religious, economic, etc.). 28 Though it is difficult if not impossible to establish a relationship of influence or dependence between Israel and other cultures when it comes to these specialized forms of communication, 29 God’s covenant relationship with Israel takes verbal form in ways that bear striking family resemblances to other Ancient Near Eastern treaties. As we will see, the particular setting and circumstance of God’s unfolding relationship with his people determines the various forms of covenantal communication that he employs. For all their differences, however, these forms together serve the Lord’s ultimate goal of self-communication through Christ: “I will be your God and you will be my people.”30 The following elements were commonly employed in Ancient Near Eastern treaties between kings and their vassals: 1. The name of the king 2. Historical review of the king’s kindness toward his vassal

25

26

27 28 29

30

Dennis J. McCarthy distinguishes covenant from covenant form. The former “can refer to any agreement or union among parties, and it need not have any verbal expression at all.” The latter “is used to describe the manner of expressing or recording in words a covenant (Treaty and Covenant: A Study in Form in the Ancient Oriental Documents and in the Old Testament [Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963], 10). Noel Weeks, Admonition and Curse: The Ancient Near Eastern Treaty/ Covenant Form as a Problem in Inter-Cultural Relationships (London: T & T Clark, 2004), 174. So Hahn, Kinship by Covenant, 31. Weeks, Admonition and Curse, 152–53, 165, 174, etc. I am indebted to Jonathan Dyer for this analogy. For fuller discussion and defense of this point, see Weeks, Admonition and Curse. Vanhoozer, “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts,” 36.

45

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 45

5/13/2011 12:54:22 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

3. Stipulations that enjoin and direct the vassal’s loyalty to his king 4. Promised blessings for the vassal’s loyalty to the king 5. Threatened curses for the vassal’s disloyalty to the king 6. Instructions to inscribe a written record of the treaty and to read it on a regular basis These different elements could be rearranged, excluded, or emphasized in varying configurations depending upon the context. For example, we see nearly all of the aforementioned elements in Joshua 24, where Israel renews its covenant with the Lord at Shechem.31 We see element one in verse 2, which identifies the name of Israel’s king, “the Lord, the God of Israel.” Continuing in verses 2–12, we see element two, where the Lord recounts the long history of his benevolence toward Israel. The record of the Lord’s kindness in turn motivates element three, “the demand for service and loyalty,”32 which appears in verses 14, 15, and 23: “put away the foreign gods that are among you, and incline your heart to the Lord, the God of Israel.” Element five appears in verses 19–20, where a curse is threatened on those who “forsake the Lord and serve foreign gods.” Finally, in verses 25–27, Joshua makes a written copy of the covenant and sets up a stone as a witness against Israel should they deal falsely with God and break the covenant. This perpetual witness to the covenant in script and symbol fulfills the function of element 6. Note that element 4 is absent from this covenant renewal ceremony, perhaps because the emphasis at this point in Israel’s history is upon God’s faithfulness in bringing all of his promises to pass (cf. Josh. 21.45; 23.14). This emphasis also explains the extensive attention devoted to element 2. Compare the covenant renewal in Joshua 24 with the covenant we fi nd in Genesis 15. There, Abram questions God about two yet to be fulfilled promises, promises concerning offspring and land (cf. Gen. 12.1–2, 7). After responding to Abram’s query about offspring (Gen. 15.1–6), God goes on to confi rm his

31 32

For what follows, see Weeks, Admonition and Curse, 153. Weeks, Admonition and Curse, 153.

46

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 46

5/13/2011 12:54:22 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

promise regarding the land of Canaan by means of a covenantal oath and rite (Gen. 15.7–21): And he said to him, “I am the Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess.” But he said, “O Lord God, how am I to know that I shall possess it?” He said to him, “Bring me a heifer three years old, a female goat three years old, a ram three years old, a turtledove, and a young pigeon.” And he brought him all these, cut them in half, and laid each half over against the other. But he did not cut the birds in half. And when birds of prey came down on the carcasses, Abram drove them away. As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram. And behold, dreadful and great darkness fell upon him. Then the Lord said to Abram, “Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years. But I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. As for yourself, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age. And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.” When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces. On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.” God’s word of confi rmation begins with clearly recognizable examples of elements 1 and 2, an identification of the king and a rehearsal of his kindness toward his vassal: “I am the Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess” (Gen. 15.7). This introductory statement bears remarkable similarities to God’s self-introduction in the covenant at Sinai: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery” (Exod. 20.2). The parallel is all the more striking because the covenant at Sinai 47

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 47

5/13/2011 12:54:22 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

announces the fulfillment of the events promised to Abram in the covenant of Genesis 15, namely, God’s rescue of Abram’s offspring from a foreign land (see Gen. 15.13–14, 16). Nevertheless, there is an important dissimilarity between the covenant form of Genesis 15 and those of Exodus 20 and Joshua 24. Following his self-introduction in Exodus 20 and Joshua 24, the Lord gives stipulations, obligating Israel to loyalty and obedience. However, following his self-introduction in Genesis 15, God does not give stipulations to Abram but instead performs a solemn rite (15.9–11, 17–21). In light of a clear scriptural parallel (Jer. 34.18–19), as well as other Ancient Near Eastern examples, 33 the meaning of this rite is evident. By means of this solemn action, God takes a “self-maledictory oath.” With this oath, the Lord declares: “May what has happened to these torn animals happen to me if I do not keep my promise and give your offspring the land of Canaan.” In other words, rather than following his self-introduction with obligations and sanctions for Abram, God follows his self-introduction with obligations and sanctions for himself. Abram can therefore be certain (cf. Gen. 15.8: “how am I to know that I shall possess it?”) that this promise will come to pass because God has bound himself, “under the punishment of death,” to fulfi ll it.34 That which God has begun (Gen. 15.7), he pledges to complete (Gen. 15.9ff). As Meredith Kline states: “The promised kingdom blessings would unfailingly be realized to the full extent of the divine commitment.”35 The fact that God solemnly obligates himself to fulfill his promises in no way suggests that God cannot obligate Abram and his descendents to loyalty and obedience. Indeed, as Kline observes, “righteousness and justice were the fruits” God “sought in entering into special covenant relationship with Abraham.”36 Accordingly, two chapters after his self-maledictory oath, God imposes obligations on Abram and his descendants. And he does so by means of a covenant form that closely parallels those found in Exodus 20 and Joshua 24: “I am God Almighty [element 1]; walk before me and be blameless [element 3], that I may make 33 34

35 36

Weeks, Admonition and Curse, 150. Allen Ross, Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of Genesis (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997), 312. Kline, Kingdom Prologue, 309. Kline, Kingdom Prologue, 311.

48

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 48

5/13/2011 12:54:22 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly [element 4]” (Gen. 17.1–2). God’s solemn self-obligation does not negate his ability to demand loyalty and obedience from his covenant partners. But, as we will see more clearly in the next section, it does obligate him to make sure that his covenant partners are ultimately capable of bearing the fruits of loyalty and obedience which his covenant demands. II.b.3.b. The forms of covenant discourse and their fulfillment in Christ We may summarize the significance of the preceding analysis as follows. (1) The covenant relationship (i.e., “I will be your God and you will be my people”), which is the goal of all of the Lord’s ways with his people, is rooted in unilateral divine initiative (Gen. 12.1ff; Neh. 9.7) and guaranteed by unilateral divine self-obligation (Gen. 15.7ff). That which God began with Abram and his family he guaranteed to complete under the sanction of his own death. (2) Nevertheless, though rooted in and guaranteed by unilateral divine initiative and obligation, the covenant relationship is destined to become bilateral (cf. Gen. 17; Exod. 20; Josh. 24). God engages Abraham, and later Israel, in grace and salvation in order that they might respond to God in gratitude and service. Thereby they would enjoy the fullness of the covenant blessing, which was ultimately to have the Lord alone as “their God” (cf. Ps. 16). These two points help us grasp the relationship between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant and the way in which Christ the Mediator fulfills all of God’s covenantal ways. As many scriptures make clear, there was a problem with the covenant God made with Israel at Sinai (i.e., the “Old Covenant”). It was “weak” (Rom. 8.3) and provisional in nature (Gal. 3.23–25; Heb. 8.13). Therefore a new covenant was needed (Jer. 31:31). The problem, however, was not with the form of the Old Covenant. As we have seen, the obligations imposed upon Israel at Sinai, and at later covenant renewals throughout Israel’s history (e.g., Deuteronomy; Joshua 24; etc.), were not given so that Israel could procure the promised blessings. Had they been, they would have been opposed to God’s gracious oath to Abraham in Genesis 15. As Galatians 3.17 states: “The law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void” (Gal. 3.17). These 49

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 49

5/13/2011 12:54:23 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

later obligations were given to guide Israel in the enjoyment of the blessings procured single-handedly by God through the exodus/conquest on the basis of his own faithfulness, power, and mercy.37 The problem, then, with the Old Covenant was not its form. The New Covenant, after all, internalizes the laws of the Old Covenant (Jer. 31.33; Mt. 5.17; Jas 2.8; etc.). The problem with the Old Covenant was with one of its covenanting parties—Israel. From her birth as a nation, Israel showed herself to be a stubborn and stiff-necked people, prone toward idolatry and rebellion (Deut. 9.6–13; 31.27). Because of her innate sinfulness, Israel was unable in large measure to receive and respond to the Lord and his saving mercy (cf. Deut. 29.4). Indeed, Israel’s sinfulness rendered weak even the Old Covenant’s divinely instituted means of atonement and forgiveness (Lev. 10.1–3; Heb. 7.11–28). And so, due to her sinfulness, Israel invited the curses for covenant disloyalty upon her head (Deut. 28.15–29.28). The need for the New Covenant, then, was not due to a weakness in the form of the Old Covenant. The need for the New Covenant was due to the weakness of Israel, the sinful covenant partner, and the weakness of her covenant mediators. The Law was “weakened by the flesh” (Rom. 8.3). If the covenant relationship was to be realized, therefore, God would have to deal with the sinfulness of his human covenant partner in a decisive way. And God would have to provide a superior Mediator. And this is what he did. Despite Israel’s infidelity, God remained faithful to his promise to Abraham and the fathers (Lev. 26.42–45; Deut. 7.7–9; cf. Exod. 33.19; 34.6–7).38 To remedy the problem of Israel’s infidelity, God promised in the New Covenant a double cure: everlasting forgiveness for all of the sins committed under the Old Covenant (Heb. 9.15) and everlasting renewal of the human heart (Ezek. 36.26–27). Together these blessings would serve the realization of the relationship whereby the Lord would be “their God” and Israel would be “his people” (Jer. 31.33–34). Moreover, as God’s self-obligating oath in Genesis 15 and Israel’s history of infidelity demanded 37

38

Cf. Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, trans. George Musgrave Giger (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1994), 2:189; Witsius, Economy of the Covenants, 1:289. Rendtorff, Covenant Formula, 59.

50

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 50

5/13/2011 12:54:23 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

(cf. Jer. 31.31), the blessings of the New Covenant would have to come by means of a unilateral divine action. As the Lord declares through Hosea: “I will have mercy on the house of Judah, and I will save them by the Lord their God. I will not save them by bow or by sword or by war or by horses or by horsemen” (Hosea 1.7). And so, at the fullness of time, God sent his own lordly Son to be his new and true human covenant partner and the ultimate Mediator of his promised blessings (cf. Gen. 12.3; 22.18; Ps. 72.17; Acts 3.25–26; Gal. 3.16, 29). God’s Son came to redeem us from the curse of the law and to secure by his obedience the right to the promised inheritance (Pss. 1–2; Rom. 5.12–21; Gal. 3.10–14; 4.4–7; Heb. 9.15–17). Furthermore, as a consequence of the Son’s saving work, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts to awaken faith in his promises, obedience to his commands, and to conform us to the image of his incarnate Son, the new and true human being (Jn 6.44–45; Rom. 8.1–17; 2 Cor. 3.18; Gal. 4.6). “What the Law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfi lled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit” (Rom. 8.3–4 NASB). And thus we see the defi ning difference between the Old Covenant (i.e., the Mosaic Covenant) and the New Covenant. Despite the fact that the Mosaic administration was a divine gift (Jn 1.17), full of glory in its own right (2 Cor. 3.7), and formally structured as a gracious covenant, it was unable to lead Israel beyond the curse pronounced upon Adam’s offspring into the fullness of God’s eschatological blessing. Due to Israel’s exceeding sinfulness, the Mosaic Covenant was destined to preside over Israel’s funeral (cf. 2 Cor. 3.6, 9) and, like Moses its mediator, to view the promised new age only from a distance (cf. Num. 27.12–14). It was destined to remain in the old age, an old covenant. The realization of God’s ancient covenant with Abraham could only be achieved by a divine act far more gracious than the gift of the Mosaic Covenant. The realization of God’s ancient covenant could only be achieved by the gift and condescension of the Son of God to assume human nature, to live a life of perfect obedience, to fully and fi nally bear the curse of the Old Covenant, and, having passed through death, to rise 51

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 51

5/13/2011 12:54:23 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

again in the age of eschatological fulfillment as the fi rstborn Son of the new creation (cf. Rom. 1.1–4). Only in and through him could the promised New Covenant be fulfilled. The coming of the Son of God in the flesh and his exaltation in the Spirit thus marks the difference between the Old Covenant and the New, for in him humanity passes from the curse of the old age into the blessing of the new (Rom. 1.1–4; Gal. 1.4; 1 Pet. 3.18). Before Christ’s coming, God’s grace was experienced in shadows and types. But Christ is the substance (Col. 2.17; cf. Jn 1.17). In and through the Mediator, God becomes our God and we become his people.39 In light of this perspective, we may appreciate at once how all of God’s covenantal words in Holy Scripture (tota Scriptura) are profitable and how they are only so in and through Jesus Christ (solus Christus). The various forms of God’s word bear the force of a blessing to us because they are ultimately fulfi lled in Jesus Christ through his incarnation, death, resurrection, enthronement, and bestowal of the Spirit. Christ alone is the Mediator of every covenant blessing. Consequently, it is only the faith that receives, rests, and relies upon Christ alone that is able to respond to God’s multifaceted covenant word: acknowledging its truth, obeying its commands, trembling at its threats, and embracing its promises.40 By embracing the Christ graciously offered to us in the gospel, we are enabled to respond in gratitude to the full scope of God’s covenantal word.

II.c. The Role of Scripture in the Kingdom of God: By Means of Holy Scripture, God Transmits and Communicates his Covenantal and Christological Discourse We are now in a position to appreciate the role of Holy Scripture in the triune king’s saving and sanctifying work of self-communication, to grasp what motivated God to communicate Christ and covenant to us in writing. By means of his written Word,

39

40

For fuller discussion of the relationship/distinction between the Old and New Covenants, see Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 4:451–55. Westminster Confession of Faith, 14.2; cf. Vanhoozer, “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts,” 39.

52

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 52

5/13/2011 12:54:23 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

God transmits and communicates his covenantal-Christological discourse to his people.41

II.c.1. God transmits his covenantal-Christological discourse by means of Holy Scripture The consummation of God’s sovereign design for history is summarized in Habakkuk 2.14: “The earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea” (cf. Num. 14.21; Ps. 72.19; Isa. 11.9). This consummation fulfills God’s original purpose for creation. In the beginning, God made Adam and Eve in his image in order that they might reflect his glory (Gen. 1.26; cf. 1 Cor. 11.7) and he appointed them to spread his glory through time (“be fruitful and multiply”) and space(“and fi ll the earth”) (Gen. 1.28). By parenting a race of God-glorifying image bearers, Adam and Eve would serve the generational expansion of God’s glory. By fi lling and ruling the earth, the human race would serve the geographical expansion of God’s glory.42 Though the fall despoiled this dual vocation, God restored and renewed his plan through the family of Abraham. At the time of the exodus, the children of Israel were appointed to bear the Lord’s glorious name “forever . . . throughout all generations” (Exod. 3.15)—generational expansion. According to Psalm 72, the ultimate completion of this plan would come through the exaltation of the Davidic king (see esp. verses 17–19), which according to Isaiah’s vision of the latter days, would prompt the going forth of God’s word “from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2.3) to distant nations (Isa. 66.19)—geographical expansion. In the Book of Acts, Luke assserts that the fulfillment of this ancient vision began with the apostolic mission, as Jesus’ authorized emissaries proclaimed the word of his glorious exaltation from Jerusalem throughout Judea to the end of the earth (Acts 1.8).43 41

42

43

Ridderbos, Authority of the New Testament Scriptures, 14–16. Ridderbos’ concepts are further developed in Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), chap. 4. The language of “generational and geographical expansion” comes from my former colleague, Richard Pratt. For a fuller discussion of this dual theme, see Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty. Hill, “God’s Speech in These Last Days,” 237.

53

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 53

5/13/2011 12:54:23 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

It is within the context of God’s sovereign plan to fill the world with his radiant splendor, by means of the exaltation of his anointed king and the generational and geographical expansion of his covenant people, that we come to appreciate the role of Holy Scripture in God’s unfolding kingdom: The need to put God’s word into writing arises from the unlimited scope of the triune God’s sovereign purpose to manifest his glory through space and time coupled with the mortal limitations of God’s authorized speech agents, his prophets and apostles. A closer look at the writing ministries of Moses and the apostles will help us grasp the significance of the present point. II.c.1.a. Moses on the plains of Moab The Book of Deuteronomy derives its name (deutero-nomos, literally a “second law”) from the fact that it represents Moses’ proclamation of God’s covenant (i.e., the “law”) to Israel as she gathers in the plains of Moab prior to entering the land of Canaan. It is law because Moses’ sermon rehearses the word delivered by God to Israel at Sinai. It is a second law because Moses’ sermon consists largely in the application of the law delivered at Sinai to Israel’s new situation as she approaches the conquest and settlement of Canaan. In Deuteronomy, Moses brings God’s self-same covenantal word to bear on a new generation facing new challenges as they enter a new place.44 In Deuteronomy, Moses not only applies God’s word to his people in a new day and a new place. He also applies it to future generations of Israelites yet to be born: “It is not with you alone that I am making this sworn covenant, but with whomever is standing with us here today before the Lord our God, and with whomever is not with us here today” (Deut. 29.14–15). As the concluding sections of Moses’ sermon make clear (see Deut. 27ff), God’s blessing holds promise for thousands of generations of those who love him and keep his commandments (cf. Exod. 20.6). Conversely, his curse threatens the children of those who hate him to the third and fourth generation (cf. Exod. 20.5; 34.7). According to Moses, the rule 44

See J. Gordon McConville, “Metaphor, Symbol and the Interpretation of Deuteronomy,” in After Pentecost: Language and Biblical Interpretation, ed. Craig Bartholomew, Colin Greene, and Karl Möller (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 329–51.

54

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 54

5/13/2011 12:54:24 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

of God through his covenantal word will extend from Sinai, beyond Moab, and into Canaan to successive generations of Israelites, bringing blessings to the faithful and curses to the unfaithful. As Moses draws his sermon toward its conclusion, he announces his imminent death. He nevertheless makes provision for Israel after his departure. First, Moses assures Israel that the Lord will go before her and with her to give her the land of Canaan (Deut. 31.1–6). Though God’s great servant must die, God’s promised kingdom will come. Second, Moses also appoints Joshua in his place to lead Israel into the possession of the land (Deut. 31.7–8). Though Moses dies, Israel will not lack a faithful leader. Finally, Moses “wrote this law and gave it to the priests,” commanding that it be read to the people “at the end of every seven years . . . at the Feast of Booths” (Deut. 31.9–11). The purpose for writing this law and commanding its reading is that Israel “may hear and learn to fear the Lord your God, and be careful to do all the words of this law, and that their children who have not known it, may hear and learn to fear the Lord your God, as long as you live in the land that you are going over the Jordan to possess” (Deut. 31.12–13; cf. Ps. 78.5–8). Though Moses goes the way of all flesh, the word of the Lord delivered through Moses will abide forever, because it is written (cf. Isa. 40.6–8).45 In this regard, the writing of the law serves a function in the Mosaic Covenant similar to that of the rainbow in the Noahic Covenant (Gen. 9.12–17) and of circumcision in the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 17.11). As the rainbow and circumcision served as symbolic testimonies to the perpetuity of God’s promise to future generations,46 so the written word of Moses would serve as a perpetual verbal testimony to God’s promise (and curse!) to future generations (cf. Deut. 31.26). Moreover, because this text provides a perpetual covenantal testimony to God’s promises,

45

46

As we have already seen, it was common in Ancient Near Eastern treaties to provide public documentation of the treaty and to obligate the vassal to read that document on regular occasions. See Meredith G. Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority (South Hamilton, MA: M. G. Kline, 1989), 37; Weeks, Admonition and Curse, 144. Weeks calls the rainbow and circumcision “non-literary reminders of the transaction” (Weeks, Admonition and Curse, 144).

55

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 55

5/13/2011 12:54:24 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

God’s commands, and God’s threats, it will call for “continual decision, for or against its illocutions.”47 The writing of the law thus provided an enduring means whereby God’s covenantal word through his authorized agents could reach endless generations of his people. And this is exactly how later generations of God’s people received his written word, not simply as a record of past acts of revelation, but as the divinely authorized literary means whereby the living God continually speaks to his people (see esp. Heb. 3.7ff; also Rom. 15.4).48 What Bavinck says of Holy Scripture in general applies to the Old Testament in particular. It “is not an arid story or ancient chronicle but the ever-living, eternally youthful Word of God, which God, now and always issues to his people. It is the eternally ongoing speech of God to us.”49 The scriptures are the viva vox Dei, the living voice of God. II.c.1.b. The apostles and the New Testament What we have said regarding the Old Testament writings may be said of the New Testament writings as well. As Charles E. Hill argues, the writing of the New Testament documents was in a very real sense “inevitable.” The Old Testament not only predicted the coming redemptive reign of the Messiah, it also predicted an accompanying announcement of that redemptive reign to the ends of the earth (once again, see Isa. 2.3; 66.19; Lk. 24.44–47). This announcement of “such a great salvation” was fi rst made by the Lord himself and then by the apostles, his authorized emissaries (Heb. 2.3; cf. Acts 10.38–43; 13.47).50 Given the quick geographical expansion of the church, it became immediately necessary for the apostles—the “ministers of a new covenant” (2 Cor. 3.6)—to communicate to the churches in writing.51 Through the Gospels, the apostles and their companions provided an enduring testimony to the coming of the kingdom through Jesus and to the promise of “life in his name” (Jn 20.31).52 Through their epistles, the apostles exercised 47 48 49 50 51 52

Vanhoozer, “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts,” 33. Vanhoozer, Drama of Doctrine, 177. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:384. Hill, “God’s Speech in These Last Days.” Cf. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:433. See now Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses.

56

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 56

5/13/2011 12:54:24 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

pastoral care and discipline over churches scattered throughout the Graeco-Roman world, 53 applying the message announced in the Gospels to different needs in different circumstances. Consider, for example, the “prison epistles” of Paul. These writings provided the occasion whereby the good news of the risen Christ could go forth “unchained” despite the fact that the apostle was himself bound in chains (2 Tim. 2.9). Writing served as a means of communicating the gospel despite the apostle’s spatial limitations. The example of 2 Peter is also instructive in this regard. As the prospect of his imminent death approached, Peter assured his churches that he would provide them with a continual reminder of God’s “precious and very great promises” (2 Pet. 1.4): “I will make every effort so that after my departure you may be able at any time to recall these things” (2 Pet. 1.15). Tradition suggests that this promise was fulfi lled through the writing of Mark’s Gospel. 54 Whatever the relationship between Peter and the Gospel of Mark may have been, there can be no doubt regarding the importance he assigned to the apostolic writings in carrying the apostolic word forward beyond the time of the apostles’ death. Not only does he commend his churches to the Old Testament writings, as “a lamp shining in a dark place” until Christ returns (2 Pet. 1.19), he also commends the writings of Paul as a reliable account of the Christian hope concerning which Peter writes (2 Pet. 3.15–16). More than that, he acknowledges the writings of Paul to be in a class with “the rest of the Scriptures” (2 Pet. 3.16 NASB). 55 According to Peter, then, his mortality will pose no barrier to conveying the apostolic testimony to future generations. Though he too must go the way of all flesh, the word of the Lord—which is the word of the gospel (1 Pet. 1.24–25)—will abide forever, because it is written. 53

54

55

As Robert W. Wall notes, “Letters were sometimes written as literary substitutes for personal (or even ‘official’) visits” (“Introduction to Epistolary Literature,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume 10 [Nashville: Abingdon, 2002], 379). Moreover, the internal evidence of Mark’s Gospel indicates “that Peter was its main eyewitness source” (Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, 155ff). On the possibility that Paul published a collection of his letters during his lifetime, see David Trobisch, Paul’s Letter Collection: Tracing the Origins (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994).

57

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 57

5/13/2011 12:54:24 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

Consider, fi nally, the Book of Revelation, the last book of the New Testament and “the climax of prophecy.”56 The book is a circular epistle addressed to seven churches in Asia Minor. It begins with a blessing for its reader (Rev. 1.3) and concludes with a curse for anyone who would detract from its vision (Rev. 22.18–19; cf. Deut. 4.2). With the rest of the scriptures, its message stands as an abiding testimony to the church at all times and in places: “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches” (Rev. 2.7, 11, 17, 23, 29; 3.6, 13, 22).57 The scriptures of the Old and New Testaments thus serve as the literary instrument whereby God transmits his covenantal, Christological word throughout all generations and all geographical locations. As the perpetual, verbal testimony to “the gospel of the glory of Christ” (2 Cor. 4.4; cf. Rom. 1.2–3), Holy Scripture is the preeminent means whereby God unveils his unfathomable glory in the face of Christ (2 Cor. 4.6) and thereby transforms his people into the same image (2 Cor. 3.18), hastening the day when the earth will be filled with the glory of the Lord as the water covers the sea (Hab. 2.14). 58

II.c.2. God communicates his covenantal-Christological discourse by means of Holy Scripture It is now time to make explicit something that was only implicit in the preceding discussion: Scripture transmits the discourse of the covenant by communicating the discourse of the covenant. In contrast to other means of perpetuating the covenant (e.g., the rainbow, circumcision, etc.), the Bible is a verbal witness to the covenant. Moreover, Scripture’s literary form corresponds to its particular covenantal function. Through Scripture God communicates his multifaceted covenantal word—its claims, promises, threats, and commands. And he does so in service of his singular covenantal end, that of self-communication. No other 56

57

58

Cf. Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993). Richard Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 12–17. The present point is developed more fully in Abraham Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, trans. J. Hendrik De Vries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968), 405–10.

58

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 58

5/13/2011 12:54:24 PM

THE ROLE OF SCRIPTURE IN KINGDOM AND COVENANT

literary form is more suitable to the service of this communicative activity and this communicative end than what we have in Holy Scripture, the Word of God written. 59 Although the present study cannot provide an adequate discussion of the various literary genres found in the Bible, it is appropriate to note in this context the fitting correspondence between the various forms of God’s covenantal word and the various literary forms of Holy Scripture. Our comments at this point are only meant to be suggestive, not exhaustive.60 Certain elements that appear in biblical covenants, though never limited to any single genre, nevertheless have greater affi nities with some genres than others. For example, the fi rst two elements of the covenant, the name of the king, and the historical review of his kindness toward his vassal, naturally comport with biblical narrative. Indeed, the introduction to the Ten Commandments—“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (Exod. 20.2)—is from one perspective nothing but a summary of the fi rst 15 chapters of the Book of Exodus, which narrate the events whereby God redeems Israel (element 2) and reveals his name (element 1). In similar fashion, the Gospel narratives place their primary emphasis on the identity of Jesus (element 1)—“Who do people say that I am?”—and on his saving mission (element 2). Martin Kähler famously described the Gospels as “passion narratives with extended introductions.” The second element common to God’s covenantal discourse, stipulations, obviously matches up with the large tracts of legal discourse that we fi nd in the Pentateuch, but also with the Sermon on the Mount, where we fi nd moral vision and instruction for Jesus’ disciples living in the age of eschatological fulfi llment (Mt. 6.33). Note in both of the aforementioned instances how the Lord’s instructions regarding his people’s loyalty and obedience come within the context of the narratives that recount his great redeeming acts on their behalf. Here too literary form corresponds to theological reality (cf. Eph. 2.8–10). 59

60

John Owen, Biblical Theology, trans. Stephen P. Westcott (Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1996), 639–40. For much of the following, I follow Kline, Structure of Biblical Authority.

59

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 59

5/13/2011 12:54:25 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

Prophecy deals extensively with the application of God’s covenant blessings and curses, the fourth and fifth elements, rendering in literary form many of the oracles of judgment and salvation that God’s prophets delivered to his people throughout their history. In a similar fashion, the epistles apply the blessings secured by Christ to the churches (e.g., Eph. 1.3ff) and warn of the danger that must overtake any who would drift away from so great a salvation (e.g., Heb. 2.1–4; 10.26–31). As we have seen, the Book of Revelation represents “the climax of prophecy” (Bauckham)—the triune God’s fi nal oracle of salvation and judgment and the ultimate revelation of his glory short of Christ’s return (cf. Rev. 22.4).

III. Conclusion The various literary forms of Holy Scripture together constitute a harmonious witness to the glory of the Word made flesh. “He is the sun; the individual words of God are his rays.”61 Jesus Christ is the goal of the Old Testament (Lk. 24.44–47; Jn 5.39; Rom. 1.1–3) and the substance of the New (Mk 1.1; Jn 20.31; 2 Cor. 4.5). He fulfills every biblical promise (2 Cor. 1.20), awakens obedience to every biblical command (Rom. 6.1–14), and leads his people in singing every scriptural song (cf. Ps. 22; Heb. 2.12), even as he is the shared object of every singer’s delight (cf. Ps. 45). He is “the word of life,” who was with the Father in the beginning and was made manifest at the fullness of time (1 Jn 1.1). As the Word incarnate ultimately came that his Father might become our Father (Jn 20.17; Gal. 4.4–7), so too, Holy Scripture was written that this sovereign, saving purpose of the incarnate Word might be achieved. God communicates his incarnate Word (Jesus Christ) through his inscribed word (Holy Scripture) for the sake of covenantal communication and communion. These things are written that we might have fellowship “with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ” (1 Jn 1.3–4). Through Holy Scripture, the Holy Trinity makes friends with us.

61

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:402.

60

9780567265401_CH02_Finals_txt_print.indd 60

5/13/2011 12:54:25 PM

CHAPTER 3 THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

I.

Introduction

In the previous chapter, we discussed God’s gracious purpose to communicate Christ and covenant to his people through Holy Scripture. As we discovered, Holy Scripture is the divinely authorized literary instrument whereby God communicates Christ and covenant to his people at all times and in all places. It is the high and holy textual vehicle whereby the exclusive fellowship of the triune God comes to include us. In the present chapter, we will discuss Scripture’s “fitness” for this divinely appointed task. How does it come about that God’s own Christological and covenantal Word is communicated to us in this creaturely form? As we will see, the Bible is God’s inspired Word, a book “produced by the creative breath of the Almighty.”1 As such, the Bible is God’s authoritative, true, sufficient, and clear Word, the supreme rule of faith and life for God’s covenant people. Our discussion will proceed as follows. First, we will look at what it means to say that the Bible is God’s inspired Word. Second, we will consider the perfections of God’s inspired Word (authority, truthfulness, sufficiency, and clarity), including some of the implications for biblical interpretation that follow from 1

Warfield, Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, 296.

61

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 61

5/13/2011 12:58:09 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

these perfections. It is vital to the task of biblical interpretation that we come to appreciate Scripture’s status as the Word of God, because only then will we be able to respond to it with the reverent attention that it deserves as Holy Scripture. The way we approach and handle Scripture must be determined by the identity of the one whose word Scripture is. Otherwise we will approach and handle Scripture inappropriately.

II.

“All Scripture Is God-Breathed”2

It is one thing to assert that God authorizes prophets and apostles to communicate his word through their writings. It is another thing to explain how he enables them to do so. The question is: How does it come to pass that God enables these fallen and fi nite creatures to speak his infallible and unfathomable word? As we shall see, the question is not merely academic.

II.a. Initial Statement of the Doctrine of Inspiration II.a.1. The doctrine of inspiration is not a statement about the inherent capacities of prophets and apostles When God commissioned his prophets and apostles to speak his words he commanded them to speak all that he told them to say and forbade them from withholding anything that he told them to say (Deut. 4.2; Jer. 1.7, 17; Mt. 28.20; Jn 15.27; 16.13–14; 2 Pet. 1.20–21; Rev. 22.18–19). In their office as God’s authorized emissaries, they were charged to speak his words—“no more, no less.”3 However, Scripture repeatedly draws our attention to the fact that those who were appointed to fulfill this task were inherently incompetent to do so. Indeed, the Bible often highlights the

2

3

For an excellent recent discussion of the doctrine of inspiration that is complementary to the discussion provided here, see Timothy Ward, Words of Life: Scripture as the Living and Active Word of God (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2009), 78–89. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:391.

62

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 62

5/13/2011 12:58:09 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

shortcomings of these men in the very context of their calling and appointment to serve as God’s spokespersons. For example, when God called Moses to his prophetic ministry, he is revealed to be a reluctant prophet, full of excuses (Exod. 3.1–4:16). Similarly, Isaiah is by his own confession a man of “unclean lips” (Isa. 6.5) and the prophet Jeremiah is a coward (Jer. 1.6–8). These limitations apply not only to those God called to serve as prophets but also to those called to serve as apostles. The Gospels portray Peter as someone characterized by fluctuating degrees of spiritual discernment. At one moment he expresses heaven’s perspective upon Jesus, at the very next Satan’s (Mt. 16.16–19 vs. 16.21–23). He is further characterized as rash (Mk 9.5–6) and deceitful (Mk 14.66–72). Peter’s apostolic brothers do not appear in any better light. The New Testament describes them as fearful (Jn 20.19) and doubting (Lk. 24.38), and this even after the announcement of Jesus’ resurrection by those who had seen him. The problem, it seems, is that God’s self-revelation through word and deed is insufficient in and of itself for overcoming humanity’s inherent spiritual blindness and creating spiritual understanding. We see this in the case of those who opposed God’s saving purpose. Pharaoh observed the Lord’s mighty works and heard the Lord’s authoritative words, and yet he did not believe. The Jewish authorities saw Jesus’ miraculous signs and wonders and were audience to his teaching, and still, for the most part, they did not receive him. The marvel is that this was also the case for those who were included in God’s saving purpose. Even the Lord’s own prophets and apostles repeatedly stumbled over his self-revelation, perceiving divine things in a merely human way (cf. Mt. 11.2–3; 16.23).

II.a.2. The doctrine of inspiration is a statement about the Spirit’s power to enable spiritual understanding and utterance How then did it come to pass that those charged to speak on the Lord’s behalf were actually enabled to do so? What brought about the transition from blindness to sight? What transformed foolish and unstable disciples into faithful and sure witnesses? The answer does not come from the inherent capacities of prophet and apostles. The only explanation for their success lies in the 63

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 63

5/13/2011 12:58:10 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

almighty power of God the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth and understanding: “We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words” (1 Cor. 2.12–13, NIV). By his Spirit, God enabled his chosen spokesmen both to “understand” and to “speak” the great truths of the gospel to us. And he enabled them to do so “in words taught by the spirit,” that is, “in language appropriate to the message.”4 From conception in true understanding to birth in fitting utterance, prophetic-apostolic discourse is the sovereign work of God the Holy Spirit. Thus we see that, in response to Moses’ reluctance to serve as prophet, the Lord of human speech and understanding (Exod. 4.11) pledged to be with Moses’ mouth and to teach him what to say (Exod. 4.12, 15; cf. 9.35). In similar fashion, he cleansed Isaiah’s unclean lips before commissioning him with a message (Isa. 6.6–13) and he declared to Jeremiah, “I have put my words in your mouth” (Jer. 1.9), thereby equipping his youthful prophet to fulfill his charge: “whatever I command you, you shall speak” (Jer. 1.7; cf. 37.2). 2 Pet. 1.21 well summarizes the dynamic at work: “Men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Pet. 1.21, NASB). The Spirit’s triumph over human frailty is evidenced in the case of the apostles as well. Jesus “opened” the minds of the eleven “to understand the Scriptures” and then appointed them to be his “witnesses,” promising to send “power from on high” that they might fulfill their mission (Lk. 24.45, 48–49). This power came in the personal presence of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit came to “teach” the apostles “all things,” bringing to remembrance all that Jesus said to them (Jn 14.26) and also declaring to them “the things that are to come” (Jn 16.13). Through his true and reliable witness, the Spirit enabled the apostles to bear their true and reliable witness (Jn 15.26–27; cf. Acts 1.8). The Spirit’s work in this regard naturally extended to the prophetic and apostolic writings as well, their writings being an extension of their ambassadorial ministry. Paul thus characterizes the Old Testament writings as “God breathed” (2 Tim. 3.16). 4

Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 105.

64

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 64

5/13/2011 12:58:10 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

Whether by direct command to “write these words” (Exod. 34.27; cf. Deut. 31.19; Isa. 30.8; Jer. 30.2; 36.2, 28; Hab. 2.2; Rev. 1.11, 19; 2.1, 8, 12, 18; 3.1, 7, 12, 14; 14.13; 19.9; 21.5) or by internal impulse to write in response to pastoral necessity, 5 the Spirit sovereignly directed the production of the writings that have been handed on to us through his authorized emissaries.6 We have in these writings “words taught by the Spirit” (1 Cor. 2.13, NIV). And this is how these writings have been received by the church, “not as the word of men” but as “the word of God” (1 Thess. 2.13; cf. Rom. 3.2)—“what the Spirit says to the churches” (Rev. 2.7; cf. Mt. 1.22; 2.15; 22.43; Heb. 3.7). Indeed, Peter regarded not only the Old Testament (2 Pet. 1.19–21) but also Paul’s letters as belonging to “the Scriptures” (2 Pet. 3.16).7 To say that Scripture is “God breathed” is therefore to say that, in the writings of these divinely appointed prophets and apostles, and by virtue of the Spirit’s power to awaken spiritual understanding and utterance, we have God’s own covenantal and Christological Word. J. I. Packer’s trinitarian defi nition of biblical inspiration is apropos: Scripture in its entirety is “God the Father preaching God the Son in the power of God the Holy Spirit.”8 “All Scripture is God breathed” (2 Tim. 3.16), the almighty utterance of the triune king.

II.b. Further Explication of the Doctrine The inspiration of Holy Scripture is the work of God the Holy Spirit. By his enlightening and enabling power, the glory of Christ comes to shine in and through the otherwise darkened minds and mouths of divinely appointed ambassadors. But the production of Holy Scripture is not merely a work of the Spirit. 5 6

7

8

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:432–33. The “occasional” nature of epistolary writings in no way diminishes the authority of these writings. Their authors characteristically identify themselves as writing in their offi ce as an “apostle” or “servant” of Jesus Christ and thus, by implication, under the promise of the Spirit’s assistance (cf. 1 Cor. 7.40): Rom. 1.1; 1 Cor. 1.1; 2 Cor. 1.1; Gal. 1.1; Eph. 1.1; Col. 1.1; 1 Tim. 1.1; 2 Tim. 1.1; Tit. 1.1; Jas 1.1; 1 Pet. 1.1; 2 Pet. 1.1; Jude 1.1. For further discussion of the “absolute identification” of “Scripture” with “the word of God,” see Warfield, Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, chap. 7. Packer, God Has Spoken, 91, emphasis mine.

65

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 65

5/13/2011 12:58:10 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

While God is the primary author of Holy Scripture, prophets and apostles are secondary authors. In order to gain deeper insight into the nature of biblical inspiration, we must reflect at greater length upon the person and work of the Spirit and upon the role of the Bible’s human authors in its production. As we will see, the Bible is both a fully divine and fully human book, specially designed to serve the incarnate Word’s ministry of establishing, sustaining, and perfecting covenant fellowship with the Father.

II.b.1. “No one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2.11) “Who has understood the mind of the Lord?” Paul asks (1 Cor. 2.16). God’s ways are higher than man’s ways; his thoughts are higher than man’s thoughts (Isa. 55.9). The answer according to the apostle is that “no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2.11). According to Holy Scripture and the church’s common confession, the Spirit of God is God (cf. Acts 5.3–4; 2 Cor. 3.18; etc.), the Third Person of the Trinity. From all eternity, the Spirit is audience to—literally, “one who hears,”—all that the Father in and with the Son is and does (cf. Jn 16.13–15). The Spirit “searches everything, even the depths of God” (1 Cor. 2.10). Therefore, to say that “all Scripture is God breathed” is to say that, in and through Scripture, the Spirit who by nature shares the eternally rich and radiant fellowship of the Father and the Son in accordance with his own infi nite understanding, has by his sovereign grace and power provided a way for us to share in that fellowship according to our limited understanding (cf. Eph. 3.14–19). The Spirit of God’s communicative fellowship creates communicative fellowship. And he does so fundamentally through the agency of the prophetic and apostolic writings: “we speak . . . in words taught by the Spirit” (1 Cor. 2.13). By the Spirit’s abiding presence (cf. 1 Jn 4.13), a presence made eloquent through the prophetic-apostolic word, we too have fellowship “with the Father and with his Son” (1 Jn 1.3).

II.b.2. The Spirit of creation, providence, and sanctification and the reality of dual authorship Some worry that such an emphasis on the Spirit’s power in the production of Holy Scripture overrides or ignores its human 66

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 66

5/13/2011 12:58:10 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

authorship. The more the Spirit’s responsibility for this book is stressed, the more the intelligence, freedom, and personal activity of the Bible’s human authors are suppressed—or so it is argued. But this worry is unfounded, because the One who is “the Spirit of the Father and the Son” is also “the Lord and Giver of Life” (the Nicene Creed). The presence and operation of the Spirit’s sovereign lordship in the production of Holy Scripture does not lead to the suppression or overruling of God’s human emissaries in their exercise of authorial rationality and freedom. Rather, his sovereign lordship leads to their enlivening and sanctified enablement. The Spirit who created the human mind and personality does not destroy the human mind and personality when he summons them to his service. Far from it. The Spirit sets that mind and personality free from its blindness and slavery to sin so that it may become a truly free, thoughtful, and selfconscious witness to all that God is for us in Christ. He bears his lively witness and therefore prophets and apostles also bear their lively witness (Jn 15.26–27). The Spirit creates a divine-andhuman fellowship—a common possession and partnership—in communicating the truth of the gospel (Jn 16.13–15). In other words, the worry that the Spirit’s sovereignty undermines human agency is based upon a misunderstanding of God and of his relationship to his creatures. This worry reflects the fallacy of the “zero-sum game”: either God is active or human beings are active, but never both. But this is a game that Scripture forbids us to play, not only in our doctrines of creation, providence, salvation, and sanctification, but also in our doctrine of biblical inspiration as well. The truth is that because the Spirit is fully active in the production of Holy Scripture therefore its human authors are fully active as well. The Spirit of the Lord who created the human mind and human speech is also the one who sustains and enables human thought and communication by his active presence (Exod. 4.11–12; Ps. 94.9–13; cf. Gen. 2.7; Ps. 104.29–30). Moreover, as the one who calls his prophets and apostles from their mothers’ wombs into his service (Jer. 1.5; Gal. 1.15), the Spirit prepares and providentially governs all the details of their lives (cf. Ps. 139) so that, when in time he does summon them to their sacred service, he summons them not apart from but in and with the full depth and breadth of their humanness. Consider, for example, how Moses’ training in Pharaoh’s court and Paul’s training under Gamaliel 67

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 67

5/13/2011 12:58:10 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

ultimately contributed to their prophetic and apostolic ministries. Bavinck helpfully summarizes the proper perspective on this issue: “Their native disposition and bent, their character and inclination, their intellect and development, their emotions and willpower are not undone by the calling that later comes to them but, as they themselves had been already shaped by the Holy Spirit in advance, so they are now summoned into service and used by that same Spirit.”9 Furthermore, the Spirit’s sanctifying work in his spokesmen, the work whereby he increasingly overcomes their innate spiritual darkness and trains their minds to comprehend spiritual light, does not overrule or suppress their thought and activity. The Spirit’s sanctifying work causes their thought and activity to be “fully alive” (Irenaeus).10 The more he sanctifies and purifies, the more active, the more fully human they become (cf. 1 Cor. 15.10). Accordingly, “the Spirit of holiness” incorporates seemingly every facet and dimension of human understanding and communication into the writing of Holy Scripture. Bavinck again is a helpful guide: the human authors “retain their powers of reflection and deliberation, their emotional states and freedom of the will. Research (Lk. 1.1), reflection, and memory (Jn 14.26), the use of sources, and all the ordinary means that an author employs in the process of writing a book are used.”11 There is no reason, moreover, to doubt that this authorial process included the work of amanuenses and scribal editors as well. The doctrine of biblical inspiration affi rms that the resulting product of this variegated process, i.e., the writings themselves, is God’s holy Word: perfect, sure, right, pure, clean, true, and righteous altogether (Ps. 19.7–9). The doctrine of inspiration therefore is not so much a claim about the manner whereby the Spirit produces Holy Scripture— the means he employs are seemingly infi nite.12 The doctrine of 9 10

11

12

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:432; cf. also 438. Cf. John Webster: “The Spirit so moves creatures (in common with the Father’s originating and the Son’s forming acts) that they come to have and exercise a movement of their own, to be animated, alive” (“Trinity and Creation,” International Journal of Systematic Theology 12 [2010]: 18–19). Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:433. Cf. Archibald A. Hodge and Benjamin B. Warfield, Inspiration (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979 [1881]), 25. Contrary to the charge that such a position implies a “dictation theory” of inspiration.

68

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 68

5/13/2011 12:58:11 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

inspiration is simply the claim that the Spirit, through a seemingly endless number of means, has produced a book that in the fi nal analysis constitutes God’s word in human form. “Scripture is totally the product of the Spirit of God, who speaks through prophets and apostles, and at the same time totally the product of the activity of the authors.”13 The fact that Scripture is wholly God’s word does not undermine its wholly human form, for its human form is the result of the Spirit’s creative, providential, and sanctifying presence in, with, and through the activities of Scripture’s human authors. Moreover, the fact that Scripture comes to us in fully human form does not undermine its full divine authorship. Indeed, Scripture is the external and visible sign of its own invisible divine authorship—its existence is ultimately impossible to explain apart from his hidden, sovereign work.14 Scripture is the visible and audible proclamation of the invisible God to all peoples and to the ends of the earth (cf. Rom. 10.18). In Holy Scripture God “speaks to his people, not from afar but from nearby.”15

II.b.3. The result of inspiration: Scripture is God’s word in “servant form.” God speaks to us in our language in this book as a consequence of his covenantal purpose. God desires to be our God and to make us his people. The one who dwells in a high and lofty place, who inhabits eternity, has been pleased to dwell with lowly men and women (Isa. 57.15). God condescends to us in covenant communication because God condescends to us in covenant friendship. And friends must speak the same language. The humble form of Scripture is closely related to the humble form that God assumed in the incarnation,16 for prophets and apostles are swept up in the mission of God’s incarnate Word. As the Second Person of the Trinity assumed “the form of a servant” (Phil. 2.7) in order to accomplish our redemption, so God’s speech has assumed a “servant form” in Holy Scripture

13 14 15

16

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:435. Cf. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics 1:443. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:385; Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 364. For the following, see Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 479ff.

69

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 69

5/13/2011 12:58:11 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

in order to communicate redemptive revelation.17 “He had no form or majesty” (Isa. 53.2), and yet he was “the Lord of glory” (1 Cor. 2.8) in the flesh. Similarly, Holy Scripture communicates “the unsearchable riches of Christ” (Eph. 3.8) through the humble lips of prophets and apostles. Though we only see “through a glass darkly” in Holy Scripture (1 Cor. 13.12, KJV)—scriptural revelation is designed for humble pilgrims and not for those who have arrived at their promised rest (cf. Deut. 8.3)—we do truly see. God’s written Word is “a lamp shining in a dark place” until Christ returns and we see his face (2 Pet. 1.19). We should note in this regard that God’s condescension to speak to us by human mouths in human language no more compromises the divine glory of his speech than his condescension to assume human form in the incarnation compromises the divine glory of his person (cf. Col. 2.9). According to the traditional Protestant view of divine accommodation, “God does not accommodate his truth to human sin—rather he accommodates his truth to human ways of knowing.”18 To be sure, the comparison between incarnation and inspiration is only an analogy. Jesus is God’s Son in the flesh. Scripture is God’s word in human form. The incarnation involved the personal union of God with humanity. Inspiration only involves a productive union between God and humanity.19 Nevertheless, because it is the self-same Spirit who prepared a body for God’s Son who also prepared a body of discourse for God’s word, the analogy is not inappropriate. Because incarnation and inspiration are both enlivening works of the self-same Spirit we may expect to see the Spirit’s characteristic fingerprint in both works. In the former he creates a holy and sinless fellowship between two natures in one person. In the latter he creates a holy and infallible fellowship between two authors in the production of one work. And, therefore, just as Jesus is God’s word incarnate, the Bible is God’s word inscribed. 17

18

19

For the development of this theme in the theologies of Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck, see Richard B. Gaffi n, Jr., God’s Word in Servant Form: Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck on the Doctrine of Scripture (Jackson, MS: Reformed Academic Press, 2008). Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, 1:262; cf. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, 2:305. For this sentence and the preceding two, compare with Warfield, Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, 162.

70

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 70

5/13/2011 12:58:11 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

Nor is this the only correspondence between the form of redemption and the form of revelation. Just as the Father’s plan of redemption unfolded progressively over a long period of time, fi nally reaching its climax and conclusion in the person and work of his incarnate Son, so too the written communication of that redemption unfolded progressively over a long period of time, fi nally reaching its climactic and conclusive form in the God-breathed scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (cf. Heb. 1.1–4; 2.1–4). The diversity of authors, literary forms, and audiences that characterizes Holy Scripture, a diversity spanning many centuries and many cultures, does not therefore compromise Scripture’s claim to divine origination but rather serves as an expression of Scripture’s divine origination. Scripture’s multifaceted form is its divinely designed form, that which makes it the perfect vehicle for communicating the Father’s “plan for the fullness of time” (Eph. 1.10). As God’s redemptive word, Scripture bears in writing the imprint of God’s redemptive-historical purpose. Its form fits its function of communicating the unfolding drama of Christ and covenant. And therefore while it is sometimes suggested that we must balance the Bible’s “unity” over against the Bible’s “diversity,” the present discussion suggests a different way of viewing the matter. The issue is not whether one should emphasize Scripture’s unity or its diversity. The issue concerns the sort of diversity we have in Holy Scripture. Our present discussion suggests that, given the unity of its divine author (Heb. 1.1; 2 Tim. 3.16) and of its redemptive message (Jn 5.39; Lk. 24.44–46; Rom. 4), we should understand the diversity of Scripture as a harmonious, symphonic diversity. Holy Scripture is the richly textured expression of God’s immeasurable and manifold wisdom (Rom. 11.33; Eph. 3.10), of what God has spoken “at many times and in many ways” (Heb. 1.1). Scripture’s diversity does not therefore stand in tension with its unified message and purpose but rather serves it. And what else would we expect from the Spirit who is “the Lord and Giver of Life” than that the one who filled God’s wellordered cosmos with an innumerable variety of living creatures would also fi ll his inspired Word with a panoply of revealed riches? For the one who traces Scripture’s origin to the Spirit’s mouth, the diversity of Scripture is an embarrassment of riches. And so we confess: “The law of your mouth is better to me than thousands of gold and silver pieces” (Ps. 119.72; cf. Mt. 13.52). 71

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 71

5/13/2011 12:58:11 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

III. The Perfection of Holy Scripture There remains one further topic to consider in our discussion of the Bible’s status as God’s inspired Word. That topic concerns the perfection of Holy Scripture. As God’s covenantal and Christological Word, delivered to us by his authorized emissaries in the power of the Spirit, Scripture bears the perfections of the God who speaks therein and is thus perfectly equipped to accomplish its divinely ordained purpose. As a consequence of inspiration, the Bible is the supreme source and unimpeachable standard for knowing and loving the triune God as he has revealed himself to us in the gospel. It is the authoritative, true, sufficient, and clear rule of covenantal faith and life as we make our way to God’s eternal kingdom. 20 A discussion of Scripture’s perfections will not only round out our treatment of biblical inspiration, it will also afford us the opportunity to draw some initial implications regarding biblical interpretation, implications upon which we will build in the following chapters.

III.a.

Authority

III.a.1. The nature of biblical authority Scripture stands as the supreme authority for faith and life. The Bible is not simply the vehicle through which God issues his authoritative Word in the church. It is the supreme enunciation of God’s authoritative Word in the church, short of the Lord’s return.21 In Holy Scripture God provides the authentic 20

21

Often, the doctrine of Scripture’s “necessity” is included in a discussion of Scripture’s perfection. Because we covered the main substance of that doctrine in Chapter 2, we will not rehearse it here. As Oliver O’Donovan observes, depicting the authority of Scripture as simply shorthand for “the authority of God exercised through Scripture” (as for example N. T. Wright does in Scripture and the Authority of God, 17ff) is insufficient. His explanation of why this is the case is worth quoting at length: “God’s authority authorizes; and it is through authorized persons and activities that we see the effective exercise of God’s authority in the world. There is nothing wrong in speaking of the authority of bishops, of councils, of preachers or of the community of the faithful; and at the other end of the spectrum, there is nothing wrong in speaking of the authority of Jesus of Nazareth. Neither is it inexact, then, to speak

72

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 72

5/13/2011 12:58:11 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

self-presentation of his name, issues his authoritative declaration of the gospel, and publishes his will for Christian life, ministry, and worship. Because God not only speaks through Scripture but in Scripture, Scripture bears intrinsic authority and warrants our absolute submission. Scripture’s claims are God’s claims, and thus command our assent (Rev. 19.9). Scripture’s promises are God’s promises, and thus command our trust (Tit. 1.2–3). Scripture’s instructions are God’s instructions, and thus command our obedience (Mt. 15.3–4). The one who trembles at God’s word honors God and receives his favor (Isa. 66.2). Conversely, the one who despises God’s word despises God and incites his wrath (Mt. 15.1–9; cf. Isa. 29.13). Biblical authority is uncompromising and absolute. But it is not tyrannical. God’s fi rst command in the Garden of Eden was a command that authorized freedom: “freely eat” (Gen. 2.16, KJV). The restriction placed upon Adam only served to guard and protect that freedom (Gen. 2.17). Even after Adam’s revolt plunged the human race into slavery to sin, God’s authoritative word retained its liberating force. Indeed, God’s authoritative word in the gospel sets us free from the tyranny of the world, the flesh, and the devil. And it does so because it announces the truth about the fulfi llment of God’s saving good pleasure in Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 8.31–32). For Christianity, therefore, divine authority and human freedom are happy correlates, not hostile enemies. The former grounds and governs the latter. 22 In a general sense, authority is the right or dignity of a person “to have a voice in some matter” based upon that person’s

22

of the authority of apostles and prophets, called out by God to write with clarity and sufficiency of the events surrounding Jesus of Nazareth, their context in the history of Israel, and their universal meaning for mankind. These writings are God’s chosen means, together with the sacramental acts of the church, of making his self-announcement known to all ages. Scripture is not the fi rst moment of God’s self-announcement; that is the historical deeds themselves by which he raised up Israel and Jesus. But neither is it a moment after God’s self-announcement, a retrospective commentary that could be peeled away, leaving the core intact. Scripture is, we may say, God’s administration of his self-announcement, the record he has authorized to it and the seal he has set on it to confi rm that it is true” (Church in Crisis, 54–55). For further discussion of the nature and relationship of authority and freedom, see Oliver O’Donovan, Resurrection and Moral Order, Part Two.

73

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 73

5/13/2011 12:58:12 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

identity, experience, or knowledge. 23 Scripture bears the supreme right and dignity to have a voice in matters related to Christian faith and life because it is the ultimate source for our knowledge of the triune God and for the knowledge of human beings as those created, fallen, redeemed, and yet-to-be-consummated through the gospel. If God had not graciously stooped down to speak to us in his Word, then his name would remain unknown to us (cf. Acts 17.23), and his way of salvation would remain hidden from us (cf. Jn 14.6). But because God has spoken here—in this book—the Bible shines as the lodestar of Christian thought, life, and worship. As the ultimate source of God’s saving self-revelation, Holy Scripture “speaks for itself and proves itself.”24 Because Scripture is the supreme and irreplaceable fountain of the saving knowledge of God, it needs no other authorities to establish its authority. Just as light “is immediately most certainly known to us by its own brightness” and “food by its peculiar sweetness,” so Scripture’s true dignity and authority are known to us by its own intrinsic radiance (Ps. 119.105) and its own intrinsic sweetness (Ps. 19.10). 25 Indeed, what higher authority could there be to authenticate God’s word and will than God’s own voice?26 Because Scripture is God’s own Word, it authenticates itself. In the Bible the Lord’s sheep hear his voice and follow his lead (cf. Jn 10.3, 14). Because its authority is self-authenticating, Holy Scripture does not depend upon the church to validate its status as God’s word. “A law does not derive its authority from the subordinate judges who interpret it or from the heralds who promulgate it, but from its author alone.”27 Neither does Scripture depend upon reason to validate the authority of its teaching, the historian to validate the accuracy of its claims, or experience to validate the 23 24 25 26

27

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:463. van Genderen and Velema, Concise Reformed Dogmatics, 84. Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:89. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 Vols., trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960), 1.7.4. Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:89. The present point holds significant implications for how we understand the church’s act of canonization. See John Webster, “The Dogmatic Location of the Canon,” chap. 1 in Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2001); and Hill, “God’s Speech in These Last Days.”

74

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 74

5/13/2011 12:58:12 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

authenticity of its prescribed way of life. To be sure, Scripture’s authoritative teaching will always fi nd confi rmation and affi rmation in the faithful teaching of the church, the right functioning of human reason, the responsible work of the historian, and the well-formed conscience of the believer. But these subordinate authorities do not establish or judge the authority of Scripture— any more than science establishes or judges the laws of nature! Scripture establishes and judges these subordinate authorities. Scripture is norma normans non normata—“the norming norm that is not itself normed.” Of course, we must acknowledge that it is the Holy Spirit who enables us to acknowledge and respond to God’s authoritative Word in Holy Scripture (Jn 3.3, 5; 2 Cor. 3.14–18; 4.3–6; 1 Thess. 1.5; 2.13). The Spirit enables us to perceive Scripture’s inherent brightness and to taste its inherent sweetness. The light of the sun does not illumine the eyes of a blind man. Nevertheless, the Spirit’s work of “illumination,” the work whereby he enables us to see and to receive Scripture as God’s word (cf. 1 Cor. 2.12, 14), does not add light to Holy Scripture any more than the healing of a blind man adds radiance to the sun. The Spirit, by his illuminating work, enables us to see the light and to savor the sweetness that belong to Scripture in and of itself as God’s divine Word. As Bavinck states: “The illumination of the Holy Spirit is not the cognitive source of Christian truth. It does not disclose to us any material truths that are hidden from the ‘natural’ person. It only gives us a spiritual understanding of these same things, one that is different and deeper.”28

III.a.2. Biblical authority and biblical interpretation The fact that God speaks his authoritative Word in a book means that submission to God’s word is mediated through the act of reading.29 Because divine authority is transmitted textually, divine authority is appropriated interpretively. This is true whether one gains access to scriptural teaching through one’s own reading or through the reading of another. Consequently, a proper notion of biblical authority must insist that it is Scripture rightly interpreted that bears supreme authority for Christian faith and life. 28 29

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:594, emphasis in the original text. Webster, Confessing God, 60.

75

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 75

5/13/2011 12:58:12 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

We will reserve a full discussion of the act of reading until chapters four and five. For now the following points may be made: 1. The perfections of Scripture set our interpretive agenda. The appropriateness of a given approach to reading Scripture is determined by the reality of Scripture. 2. Accordingly, the authority of Holy Scripture elicits a particular interpretive stance in relation to Holy Scripture. We do not stand over it as interpretive lords. We do not sit beside it as interpretive equals. We kneel beneath it as interpretive servants. The Lord looks upon the one who trembles at his Word. Therefore, the stance of biblical interpretation is humble attentiveness and the goal of biblical interpretation is obedience: “speak, Lord, for your servant hears” (cf. 1 Sam. 3.9ff). 3. As the supreme norm of Christian faith and life, Holy Scripture is the fi nal standard for Christian theology, life, and worship. Consequently, any mode of interpretation that relativizes scriptural teaching in these areas, whether on the basis of a supposedly clearer source of light or on the basis of a “deepened moral sensitivity,” is an illegitimate mode of interpretation, a denial of Scripture’s supreme and fi nal authority.30 4. The authority of any particular text of Scripture can only be comprehended in light of scriptural teaching as a whole. Sola Scriptura, the Bible’s status as supreme authority, functions properly only in relation to tota Scriptura, the Bible’s teaching in its entirety. In this regard, Scripture must be read in light of its progressively unfolding form and in light of its Christological climax. Moreover, Scripture must be read in relationship to its own stated aim of promoting the love of God and the love of neighbor.31 5. The fact that the Bible is our supreme authority does not mean that the Bible is our only authority when it comes to biblical interpretation. Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”) is not solo Scriptura (“Scripture only”). The Bible, God’s supremely authoritative Word, authorizes subordinate authorities and, as we shall see in the next chapter, these subordinate authorities have a role to play in biblical interpretation. 30 31

See O’Donovan, Church in Crisis, 61–63. We will discuss this point more fully in Chapter 4.

76

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 76

5/13/2011 12:58:12 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

6. Nevertheless, because Scripture is the supreme font of saving knowledge for pilgrims traveling the path of faith, it remains the source to which we as readers must continually return “if we are to stay on the right track.”32 As the ever new, ever renewing fountain of divine wisdom, Scripture never becomes redundant.

III.b. III.b.1.

A True and Trustworthy Word “The sum of your word is truth” (Ps. 119.160)

The triune God is the God of truth. The Father’s Word is truth (Jn 17.17). The Son is the Father’s true Word (Jn 1.1; 14.6). The Holy Spirit is “the Spirit of truth,” the one who hears and declares the true Word of God (Jn 16.13). According to Scripture, the triune God of truth entrusted his true Word to his appointed emissaries and speaks his true Word in the speech and writing of his appointed emissaries (Jn 15.26–27; 16.13–15; Tit. 1.2–3; Rev. 19.9; 21.5; 22.6). For this reason, the Bible is the wholly true and trustworthy Word of God. Indeed, because the Bible is the Word of the God “who cannot lie” (Tit. 1.2, NAS; cf. Num. 23.19; 1 Sam. 15.29), “it cannot but be true.”33 “Scripture cannot be broken” (Jn 10.35). The truthfulness of Holy Scripture is as extensive as its divine authorship. Because “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3.16), everything written therein is worthy of our belief and trust (Acts 24.14). We can believe everything that Scripture teaches about God, about the unfolding history between God and his creatures, and about ourselves. As the psalmist declares: “The sum of your word is truth” (Ps. 119.160). Of course, to say that the Bible is wholly true and trustworthy is not to say that the Bible speaks exhaustively on every topic about which it speaks. The Bible only gives us a limited picture of Jesus’ life and ministry (Jn 21.25). Moreover, many of the Bible’s main teachings inherently preclude exhaustive description—“the love of Christ” quite literally “surpasses knowledge”

32 33

O’Donovan, Church in Crisis, 79. Packer, God Has Spoken, 93; contra McGowan, The Divine Authenticity of Scripture: Retrieving An Evangelical Heritage (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2007).

77

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 77

5/13/2011 12:58:13 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

(Eph. 3.19; cf. Rom. 11.33). If exhaustive description were the criterion for truth, however, the possibility of any truth on the human plane would be ruled out completely.34 To say that the Bible is wholly true and trustworthy is to say that the Bible is neither deceived nor deceiving when it speaks on any of the topics about which it speaks. If we are to understand this claim rightly, we must acknowledge that the compass of scriptural teaching, the topics about which it speaks, is determined by the purpose of scriptural teaching, which is to communicate Christ and covenant. And so, while the Bible will certainly inform the Christian’s engagement with a wide variety of topics, including science, mathematics, and automobile mechanics—after all, the Bible reveals the one who is Lord of all these things; and the Bible is the supreme means whereby the Lord renews a people who will engage all these things for his glory—nevertheless, the Bible makes no claim to give exhaustive, or even sufficient, teaching on such topics. The Bible speaks truly on all topics about which it speaks. But its concern with many topics is only tangential to its central communicative purposes. Therefore we should not expect either exhaustive or sufficient description when it alludes to such topics. 35 With these qualifications in place, we must nevertheless affi rm that, as the Word of God written, the Bible speaks truth and only truth when it speaks (cf. Jn 16.13) and that the Bible is therefore completely without error (or “inerrant”) with respect to everything it speaks. God’s word is wholly true. In his Word, God does not hide anything from us that would cause us to be misled. Moreover, God’s word is only true. In his Word, God does not include anything that would lead us astray. His words are perfectly pure words, “like silver refi ned in a furnace on the 34

35

The recent work of Kenton L. Sparks fails to take this fact into account sufficiently. See his, God’s Word in Human Words: An Evangelical Appropriation of Critical Biblical Scholarship (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008), esp. p. 55, where he assumes that inerrancy means that the Bible speaks from God’s infi nite divine viewpoint. But this is not what the best Protestant theology has taught historically. Scripture is ectypal revelation, not God’s own archetypal self-knowledge. See Muller, PostReformation Reformed Dogmatics, 2:299. See Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:445–47. See also the discussion of the sufficiency of Scripture below.

78

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 78

5/13/2011 12:58:13 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

ground, purified seven times” (Ps. 12.6). As God’s true Word, Scripture possesses the right to command our assent to all that it affi rms, our trust in all that it promises, and our obedience to all that it requires (Ps. 19.7; Prov. 30.5). The truth and trustworthiness of God’s word is fundamental to our faith.

III.b.2. Biblical truth and biblical interpretation How does the truth and trustworthiness of Holy Scripture set our interpretive agenda? Several comments are in order: 1. Because Holy Scripture is a word spoken by the God who cannot lie, we may always expect to fi nd truth and only truth therein. We need not read Scripture the way we listen to politicians or watch the evening news—with a healthy dose of suspicion, or at least caution (cf. Ps. 116:11; Rom. 3:4). We may read Scripture with confidence that it will never mislead us. In a world of darkness and deception, Holy Scripture shines forth the clear light of truth. “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Ps. 119.105). 2. The truth of Holy Scripture is closely related to the authority of Holy Scripture. As we have seen already, the supreme authority of Scripture is rooted in the fact that it supremely reveals the truth about God, about ourselves, and about God’s saving work in Jesus Christ. For this reason, any challenge to the absolute trustworthiness of Holy Scripture is also a challenge to biblical authority. Augustine’s discussion of this point is worth quoting: I think it is extremely dangerous to admit that anything in the Sacred Books should be a lie; that is, that the men who have composed and written the Scriptures for us should have lied in their books . . . If we once admit in that supreme authority even one well-intentioned lie, there will be nothing left of those books, because, whenever anyone finds something difficult to practise or hard to believe, he will follow this most dangerous precedent and explain it as the idea or practice of a lying author.36 36

ep. 28.3.3, cited in Eric Plumer, Augustine’s Commentary on Galatians: Introduction, Text, Translation, and Notes (Oxford: OUP, 2003), 48.

79

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 79

5/13/2011 12:58:13 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

Our humble stance as servant-interpreters of Holy Scripture is closely tied to our confidence in the truthfulness of Holy Scripture. 3. As the true Word of God, Holy Scripture bears a unified message. Moreover, the unity of the biblical message corresponds to the form of the biblical message. As we have seen, Holy Scripture is multifaceted by its very design, with teaching that spans many centuries, employs a variety of literary forms, and bears a multitude of diverse emphases and purposes. Because scriptural diversity is part of its divinely authored design, scriptural diversity is symphonic and harmonious. Scripture is light and only light, and it is light shed abroad in its full spectrum of colors. Accordingly, the Bible cannot contradict itself. Its diversity is a complementary diversity, a resplendent rainbow of divine truth. 4. The preceding claims are perfectly consistent with the fact that readers often perceive contradiction in Scripture. Throughout the history of faithful biblical interpretation, and not only since the rise of modern critical scholarship, Christians have often puzzled over the relationship between the different accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry in the four Gospels, the different genealogical lists that appear in both testaments, the seeming conflict between some of Scripture’s commands, as well as a host of other biblical conundrums. Several factors shape the way we should handle these puzzles. (a) First, we should remember that, alongside the difficulties that Scripture presents to us, Scripture presents the overarching, consistent, and widespread claim to be the written Word of the God who cannot lie.37 The difficulties we perceive in Holy Scripture must be viewed in proportion to the massive weight of scriptural teaching concerning its divine authorship and perfection.

37

This point is emphasized throughout Warfield’s, Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. See also Wayne A. Grudem, “Scripture’s SelfAttestation and the Problem of Formulating a Doctrine of Scripture,” in Scripture and Truth, ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 19–59.

80

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 80

5/13/2011 12:58:13 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

(b) Second, given the inherent and divinely designed complexity of Holy Scripture, and given our own inherent limitations due to fi nitude and sin, we should be ready to doubt our perceptions, especially those which seem to contradict clear scriptural teaching about itself. It is important to remember the question which occasioned humanity’s apostasy: “Did God actually say?” (Gen. 3.1). If the Bible is God’s true Word and human beings are sinners by nature, then the potential for confl ict between the Bible and the reader will always remain. 38 Therefore, because we understand that the Bible is a complex book and that we are fallen, fi nite creatures, we will face apparent contradictions in Holy Scripture with the knowledge that it is “wiser to acknowledge our own ignorance than to suppose any contradiction.”39 Also in this regard, an awareness of our own limitations will keep us from forcing shallow harmonizations upon Scripture. It is one thing to affi rm that Scripture does not contradict Scripture and quite another to insist that Scripture does not contradict our own limited understandings of Scripture. (c) Third, because we are confident in the truth of Holy Scripture, we will seek to resolve perceived contradictions patiently and to fi nd harmonizations that are natural to Scripture on its own terms. We will seek to understand better the historical and literary forms of biblical teaching, the scope and manner of biblical teaching, and the church’s general consensus on biblical teaching, knowing that such avenues of understanding have often caused perceived contradictions to evaporate. It is amazing how unaware we can be of our own blind spots as readers and it is equally amazing how easily those blind spots can be exposed through careful research and study. Confidence in the Bible’s truthfulness will encourage us to endure in our interpretive endeavors rather than to give up prematurely on a coherent understanding of God’s holy Word. Inerrancy is both a perfection of the text and a promise for the interpreter.

38

39

See Bavinck’s discussion of the present point in Reformed Dogmatics, 1:439ff. Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:73.

81

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 81

5/13/2011 12:58:13 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

Here too, therefore, our labor is not in vain (2 Tim. 2.7; cf. 1 Cor. 15.58). (d) Fourth, familiarity with the history of critical biblical interpretation (whose “assured results” change from one generation to the next!), with Scripture’s track record of overcoming charges of error, and with the philosophical and religious impulses that often lie beneath such charges, will guard us from too quickly yielding to the critical hermeneutical fashions of our age. (e) Fifth, an awareness that in this life “we know in part” (1 Cor. 13.9) will help us accept that the fact that many of our interpretive puzzles will not be resolved in the present age. This awareness in no way compromises the truth of scriptural revelation. After all, every field of knowledge faces its own seemingly irresolvable difficulties.40 We may humbly acknowledge that even the things that have been revealed to us in this life await full comprehension in the next. Ours is a pilgrim knowledge of God and his Word, not yet the knowledge of those who have arrived at their fi nal homeland. We live by faith and not by sight (2 Cor. 5.7).41 5. The preceding discussion suggests that, as with biblical authority, so with biblical inerrancy, it is Scripture rightly interpreted that speaks truth and only truth. The truthfulness of Holy Scripture thus calls for and motivates the hard work of biblical interpretation. 6. The absolute truthfulness of Holy Scripture provides the foundation for what is the most fundamental rule of biblical interpretation: “Scripture interprets Scripture.” Because God speaks a coherent, true, and unified message in Holy Scripture, we interpret individual passages of Scripture in light of Scripture as a whole. Because Scripture is ultimately one divinely inspired book, Paul illuminates Moses and Isaiah illuminates John. Scripture constitutes its own most direct, relevant, and illuminating interpretive context.

40 41

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:442. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:441.

82

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 82

5/13/2011 12:58:14 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

III.c. The Sufficiency of Scripture III.c.1.

The meaning of the sufficiency of Scripture

Through his prophets and apostles, God has revealed “all things that pertain to life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1.3). Consequently, the God-breathed writings of his authorized spokesmen are “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3.16). These two verses encapsulate the fundamental claim regarding “the sufficiency of Scripture.” In Holy Scripture, God has revealed all things necessary to know him in a saving way and to serve him in a pleasing way, both in our individual lives and in our corporate worship. In other words, Scripture is sufficient for communicating Christ and covenant. Whereas confessional Protestants and Roman Catholics may fi nd much agreement on the inspiration, authority, and truthfulness of Holy Scripture, the doctrine of Scripture’s sufficiency (and Scripture’s clarity) is a topic of longstanding disagreement and dispute between these groups.42 The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture received its clearest articulation at the time of the Reformation, as Protestants were compelled to counter Rome’s claim that the church bears authority to promulgate articles of faith—articles that must be believed for salvation—beyond what is written in Holy Scripture. Article Six of the ThirtyNine Articles offers a representative statement of the Protestant doctrine: “Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.” A similar, if slightly more comprehensive statement, appears in the Westminster Confession of Faith (Chapter 1, Paragraph 6): “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” 42

For a recent attempt at rapprochement, see Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus, ed., Your Word is Truth: A Project of Evangelicals and Catholics Together (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002).

83

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 83

5/13/2011 12:58:14 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

In affi rming the sufficiency of Scripture, Protestants have been careful to make certain important qualifications. First, the sufficiency of Scripture does not exclude “the ecclesiastical ministry (established by God for the setting forth and application of the word).” As Turretin states: “A rule is not . . . imperfect because it requires the hand of the architect for its application.” Indeed, the Bible itself authorizes the ministry of the Word (Eph. 4.11ff). Second, the sufficiency of Scripture does not exclude “the internal power of the Holy Spirit necessary for conversion.”43 Again, the Bible itself teaches the necessity of the Spirit’s work of regeneration and renewal (Jn 3.3, 5; Tit. 3.5). As in the case of the Bible’s authority, so with the Bible’s sufficiency, sola Scriptura does not mean solo Scriptura. What the sufficiency of Scripture does rule out is the notion that Scripture requires an external supplement to revelation from the church’s teaching office, or even from the Holy Spirit, if we are to know God and his gospel in an adequate and reliable manner.44 Another important qualification concerns the fact that the Bible’s sufficiency lies primarily in its purpose of communicating Christ and covenant, and that the Bible’s sufficiency only secondarily relates to other issues such as politics, global warming, or dieting. To be sure, Scripture speaks to all of life, for it teaches us that God made all things and that we are called to do all things to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10.31). Nevertheless, Scripture does not speak to all of life in the same way. Scripture speaks primarily and directly to the nature of God the Holy Trinity, to his saving plan and purpose, and to his moral will for our lives and worship (again, see 2 Tim. 3.15–17). Scripture speaks only secondarily and indirectly to a host of other issues, providing a framework or a lens through which we may view these issues in a biblical way. On such matters, however, the Bible does not legislate but instead shapes our minds that we may discover the God-given design, order, and law that exist within the relevant spheres of creation in order that we might in turn subdue the earth to the glory of God. Another way of making the point is to say that Holy Scripture is a sufficient deposit 43

44

Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:141. On the latter point, see also the Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.6. See Timothy Ward, “Scripture, Sufficiency of,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, 730–31.

84

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 84

5/13/2011 12:58:14 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

of special revelation, but not of general revelation. Scripture shines forth with the light of the former and Scripture shines forth upon the light of the latter. In so doing, Scripture also serves to illumine both the miseries (Gen. 3.14–24; Ecclesiastes) and the mysteries of the created order (Job 38–41).45 Finally, as discussed above under inerrancy, even when it comes to subjects the Bible directly addresses, the Bible’s purpose is only to shine a light that is sufficient to guide our paths to everlasting glory. Only then will we know as we are known (1 Cor. 13.12). With these qualifications in view, we may appreciate the true nature of Scripture’s claim to sufficiency. God has not hidden his will in heaven above or beyond the farthest sea (Deut. 30.12–13). Although “the secret things belong to the Lord,” he has revealed to us all that we need for faith and life (Deut. 29.29). Scripture in and of itself is able to make us “wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 3.15). And it is profitable for living unto God (2 Tim. 3.16–17). And so, while the scriptures do not exhaust the glorious treasures held in promise for all the saints (Rom. 8:18), the foretaste they do provide proves more precious to the sanctified taste than the wisdom of the world in its entirety (1 Pet. 1.3–9). “I rejoice at your word like one who fi nds great spoil” (Ps. 119.162; cf. Mt. 13.52).

III.c.2. The sufficiency of Scripture and biblical interpretation What implications for biblical interpretation follow from the sufficiency of Holy Scripture? We mention briefly four. 1. It is a source of great comfort to the minister of the gospel that all one needs for equipping the saints with faith and godliness is contained in Holy Scripture. This is the immediate application which Paul draws for Timothy from the sufficiency of Scripture (see 2 Tim. 3.17). 2. The sufficiency of Scripture for the life of faith awakens in the reader a desire to search Scripture’s vast plains, to savor 45

The discussion in the present paragraph is largely dependent upon Robert Letham, “Applying God’s Word to All of Life? The Use and Abuse of the Bible,” Modern Reformation (January/February 2001): 40–43.

85

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 85

5/13/2011 12:58:14 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

its numerous delicacies, and to follow its wise paths. If the narrow way that leads to life has indeed been found, there is nothing else to do but to set our feet to traveling. Because Scripture bears the words of the Lord, which are “the words of eternal life,” where else would we go (cf. Jn 6.68)? 3. The sufficiency of Scripture does not rule out the use of helps in biblical interpretation, but it does determine how we use those helps. (a) First, with respect to the church, we do not seek supplemental revelation that goes beyond what has been revealed in Holy Scripture. Instead, we seek the church’s aid in pointing us to that which has been fully and fi nally revealed in Holy Scripture. The church’s common wisdom and interpretive guidance is a great aid in this regard, as we shall see more fully in the next chapter. (b) Second, with respect to the Holy Spirit, we do not seek a supplemental revelation that goes beyond what has been revealed in Holy Scripture. The sacred writings themselves contain all that is necessary for all of God’s people at all times and in all places until Christ returns. Therefore, we seek from the Holy Spirit the power to comprehend the things that have been revealed and the wisdom to apply those things to our lives. And we have the promise that, due to his abiding presence and anointing, those who seek will indeed fi nd (cf. 1 Jn 2.20, 26–27). (c) Third, with respect to other sources of interpretive assistance—from linguistic aids, to historical background information, to parallel literatures, commentaries, specialized studies, and other scholarly tools. Such sources may truly benefit us so long as they function as interpretive assistants and not as interpretive lords. God has richly blessed his creatures with all sorts of extra-biblical knowledge and skills that can aid the interpretive process. Indeed, Scripture does not teach us how to read! Nevertheless, these aids do not add anything to the teaching of Holy Scripture that is not already there, for the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are not hidden anywhere other than in the Christ exhibited in Holy Scripture (Bavinck). Such aids only help us uncover that which God has generously revealed in his Word. They 86

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 86

5/13/2011 12:58:14 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

can neither predetermine nor preclude the possibilities of scriptural meaning, for scriptural teaching flows from higher fountains than these. 4. Holy Scripture is sufficient for developing a coherent system of Christian doctrine, a “body of divinity.” Moreover, Scripture contains the principles, norms, goals, and examples necessary for the exercise of Christian ethical reasoning. However, Scripture does not contain the secret to a better diet or to a more efficient exercise routine—though it does have something to say about gluttony! Put simply, the goals of biblical interpretation must be consistent with the nature of Holy Scripture. We may only expect interpretive success when we read according to scriptural promise. The use of Scripture for something other than its God-given design is an abuse of Scripture.

III.d.

The Clarity of Scripture

III.d.1. Scripture is clear “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1.5). Therefore, God’s word in Scripture is clear. It is light and not darkness, a revelation and not a riddle. Through the writings of prophets and apostles, and by the illuminating power of the Holy Spirit, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ shines the light of his countenance upon his children, transforming them into the image of his incarnate Son (cf. 2 Cor. 3.1–4.6).46 In his light, we see light (Ps. 36.9). “The clarity of Scripture” refers to the fact that Scripture so clearly reveals the central truths of Christianity, the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the path of godliness, that the regenerate mind can, under the Spirit’s tutelage, perceive and receive that revelation. Scripture shines in the darkness as a lamp to our feet and a light to our path (Ps. 119.105; 2 Pet. 1.19). And Scripture shines as a light to all of God’s children: the young and the old, men and women, the simple and the wise (Deut. 6.7; 31.10–13; Ps. 19.7; etc.). The prophets addressed the nation of Israel as a whole, not only to their teachers (Jer. 2.4; etc.). “Jesus speaks freely and 46

Webster, Confessing God, 40.

87

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 87

5/13/2011 12:58:15 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

frankly to all the crowds” (Mt. 5.1; etc.) and “the apostles wrote to all those called to be saints” (Rom. 1.7; etc.).47 Scripture is God’s clear Word to the church as a whole, not only to its welltrained teachers. As with the sufficiency of Scripture, the clarity of Scripture found its sharpest exposition at the time of the Reformation. In his debate with Erasmus over the nature of human freedom, Luther rigorously defended the clarity of Scripture’s teaching. In contrast to Erasmus’ claim that Scripture is ambiguous on many central Christian truths and therefore that the safest course of action often consists in deferring to the church’s authoritative tradition, Luther argued that God plainly reveals the great mysteries of the faith in Holy Scripture and that Scripture’s status as the supreme judge in all controversies of faith presupposes that Scripture speaks clearly on such matters.48 Luther carefully distinguished two senses in which Scripture is clear. The fi rst sense, Scripture’s “external perspicuity,” “relates to the ministry of the Word”49 and makes it possible for the minister to defend the central truths of the faith.50 The only reason such a defense is possible, Luther argues, is because “the Holy Scriptures are a spiritual light far brighter than the sun, especially in what relates to salvation and all essential matters.”51 The second sense, Scripture’s “internal perspicuity,” concerns our ability to understand Scripture’s clear teaching. According to Luther, Scripture’s internal clarity is only possible because of the Spirit’s work: “the truth is that nobody who has not the Spirit of God sees a jot of what is in the Scriptures . . . The Spirit is needed for the understanding of all Scripture and every part of Scripture.”52 The latter fact also explains why Scripture’s external clarity does not result in the immediate and universal reception of Scripture’s teaching.53 Because “the good Gospel brings the world’s wickedness to light,”54 God’s revealed Word 47 48

49 50 51 52 53 54

Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:477. Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, trans. J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston (Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell, 1957), 71, 125. Bondage of the Will, 73. Bondage of the Will, 73–74, esp. 124–25. Bondage of the Will, 125. Bondage of the Will, 73–74. Bondage of the Will, 132–34. Bondage of the Will, 94.

88

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 88

5/13/2011 12:58:15 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

throws the world into confusion: “The world and its god cannot and will not bear the Word of the true God, and the true God cannot and will not keep silent. Now these two Gods are at war; so what else can there be throughout the world but uproar?”55 Unfortunately, this war is waged not only between God and the world, but even within the church, as “the Word of God and the traditions of men fight each other in implacable opposition.”56 For Luther, the clarity of Scripture is not simply a formal affi rmation about the status of Scripture, an affi rmation that one might bring to Scripture without knowing the contents of Scripture. Rather, the confession of Scripture’s clarity follows as a consequence of having come to acknowledge the subject matter about which Holy Scripture clearly speaks. 57 Luther confesses the clarity of Scripture because “the entire content of the Scriptures has now been brought to light”: “the seals are broken, the stone rolled away from the door of the tomb, and that greatest of all mysteries brought to light—that Christ, God’s Son became man, that God is Three in One, that Christ suffered for us, and will reign forever.”58 One cannot separate the confession that Scripture is clear from the confession concerning what Scripture clearly teaches: the trinitarian mystery of salvation. The clarity of Scripture remains hidden to the one blinded to the light of Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 3.14–16). Neither, for Luther, is the clarity of Scripture necessarily a claim about every passage of Scripture. Although “the entire content of the Scriptures has now been brought to light,” there are some passages “which contain unknown words” and “remain obscure.”59 The main contours of scriptural teaching are clear because God has “brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1.10). In the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, we have the interpretive key to the rest of Holy Scripture (cf. Lk. 24), for these events constitute

55 56 57

58 59

Bondage of the Will, 91. Bondage of the Will, 93. As John Yocum observes: “Luther’s view of the clarity of Scripture goes hand in hand with a set of doctrinal commitments derived from the text of the Bible” (Yocum, “Scripture, Clarity of,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, 729). Bondage of the Will, 71. Cf. Webster, Confessing God, 43ff. Bondage of the Will, 71.

89

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 89

5/13/2011 12:58:15 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

the great dénouement of the scriptural drama. Nevertheless, many passages of Scripture remain difficult to understand, as Peter acknowledges with respect to some of Paul’s teachings in his letters (2 Pet. 3.16). Moreover, certain topics discussed in Scripture are inherently difficult and complex (cf. Heb. 5.11). Holy Scripture has its “heights and depths.”60

III.d.2. The clarity of Scripture and biblical interpretation As with the aforementioned perfections of Holy Scripture, the clarity of Scripture bears important implications for biblical interpretation. 1. Because God has clearly revealed his plan of salvation in a text, God’s clear revelation is appropriated through the act of reading. The clarity of scriptural revelation does not rule out the hard work of reading but rather elicits it (cf. 2 Tim. 2.7).61 2. Textual revelation is just that—revelation. For this reason, Holy Scripture is not a riddle to be solved only by a special caste of interpreter savants. Holy Scripture is an open book for all of God’s people (Deut. 29.29; cf. Rev. 22.10). It is to be read by all, to the extent this is possible, and to be translated into the languages of all people.62 3. Scripture’s overarching message is plain, marked by definite contours and a clear purpose. Nevertheless, to say that Scripture’s overarching message is plain and clear is not to say that a given passage’s meaning is self-evident or immediately obvious. It is one thing to grasp the basic saving message of Scripture as a whole and quite another to grasp the full meaning of Scripture’s many passages. The former is a blessing to be enjoyed by all the saints. The latter is a goal to which we may aspire, but one which we may never expect to reach. 4. Furthermore, the fact that Scripture addresses all of God’s people does not mean that it speaks of mundane things in a 60 61

62

Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:143, 146. According to Turretin, the clarity of Scripture “does not exclude the means necessary for interpretation . . . For we hold these means not only to be useful, but also necessary ordinarily” (Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:144). Westminster Larger Catechism, Q 156.

90

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 90

5/13/2011 12:58:15 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

mundane manner. Scripture reveals the mysteries of God in literary form. Thus, grasping these mysteries calls for patience, attentiveness, and a basic facility with the rules of reading, for it is God who addresses us in this book; and it is God who addresses who addresses us in a book. 5. The meaning of a given passage of Scripture becomes clear in the context of the overarching teaching of Scripture as a whole. This is because the Bible is ultimately one book, written by one author (God), concerning one central subject (Christ and covenant), serving one central purpose (the love of God and neighbor). The present point has numerous implications. (a) We should interpret the more ambiguous passages of Scripture, especially passages rich in symbolism and imagery, in light of the clearer passages of Scripture. (b) The meaning of a scriptural text becomes clearer to us as we understand that passage not only in light of its immediate context but also in light of the broader scriptural landscape and its redemptive historical peak in the gospel of Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 5.39). (c) Along these lines as well, clarity as a formal principle is intrinsically related to the claim that certain material doctrines are clearly taught in Scripture—to say that Scripture is clear is to say that this particular teaching in Scripture is clear. (d) Holy Scripture shines its light in a twofold form, that of the Old and New testaments. Because the New Testament is concerned with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past (Mt. 13.35; Rom. 16.25–26; 1 Pet. 1.10–12), its teaching is relatively clearer than that of the Old Testament. Consequently, the full significance of many Old Testament passages only comes to light in relation to the New Testament and the main contours of its teaching, as summarized in the rule of faith.63 (e) Nevertheless, much of the Old Testament is clear in its own right and is appropriated as such in the New Testament (cf. Mk 10.5–9; 12.29–31). Moreover, the New Testament 63

We will discuss “the rule of faith” in Chapter 4.

91

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 91

5/13/2011 12:58:15 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

cannot be understood except as the fulfi llment—and not the displacement—of the Old Testament, which it presupposes in every place (Mt. 5.17; Lk. 24.44–47; Rom. 1.2). (f) Because the New Testament proclaims the full flowering of God’s redemptive purpose in Christ, we should not seek a vantage point beyond the New Testament—whether in church tradition, another holy book, or supposed cultural progress—to shed further light upon biblical teaching. God has spoken his final word in these last days in the person of his Son (Heb. 1.1–4; cf. 2.1–4). Short of the beatific vision itself, God has no further light to shine than what he has revealed through his prophets and apostles (2 Pet. 1.19; Rev. 22.18). Our task is to walk joyfully in this light. 6. Scripture’s clarity does not warrant an individualist anthropology—a “me and my Bible” approach to biblical interpretation and theology. Unfortunately, this implication has often been drawn by many modern readers of Holy Scripture. The clarity of Scripture is perfectly consistent with an appropriate role for the church in general and of its teachers in particular in biblical interpretation, as we will see in the chapter that follows. However, given the clarity of Scripture, the role of the teacher in relation to biblical interpretation cannot be to “solve” mysteries but rather to enable others to follow Scripture’s plain teaching, defi nite contours, and clear purpose. This involves both removing obstacles to understanding and teaching others to trace the plain sense of Scripture. Faithful teaching indicates Scripture’s inherent clarity. It does not make an otherwise muddy word clear.64 7. A profitable understanding of scriptural teaching is possible only by the Spirit’s illuminating power. Scripture’s teaching is not fi nally clear to unaided natural reason. While its teaching is clear enough to make humanity culpable, a spirit of docility before Scripture’s clear teaching comes only through the Holy Spirit’s regenerating and renewing work. We should therefore approach God’s clear Word with the humble petition: “Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law” (Ps. 119.18). 64

John Webster, Confessing God, 55.

92

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 92

5/13/2011 12:58:16 PM

THE INSPIRATION AND PERFECTION OF SCRIPTURE

IV. Conclusion In this chapter we have discussed what it means to confess that the Bible is the Word of God. By now, it should be clear that this confession is of more than merely theoretical significance. Because the Bible is the word of God, we must approach it with trembling and humility (Isa. 66.2), confidence (Lk. 1.4) and trust (Jn 20.31), devotion (Ps. 119.97) and diligence (2 Tim. 2.15). In the next two chapters, we will discuss in greater detail the practice of reading that follows from Scripture’s status as the Word of God and from its role in the triune king’s covenantal purpose.

93

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 93

5/13/2011 12:58:16 PM

9780567265401_CH03_Finals_txt_print.indd 94

5/13/2011 12:58:16 PM

CHAPTER 4 READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY, PART ONE: REGENERATION, RENEWAL, AND THE ROLE OF THE CHURCH

I.

Introduction

The commerce and communion between God and his people is an inherently textual phenomenon. The eternally eloquent God has stooped to speak a word of saving consolation to us. He has covenanted to be our God and he has guaranteed his covenant through Jesus Christ his Son (cf. Heb. 9.15). In Holy Scripture, we have God’s own Spirit-inspired testimony to his covenant and to his Christ. Because Scripture is the supreme locus of God’s self-communication in the world, Christians are “people of the book.” The Lord gathers, nourishes, defends, and guides his people through this book; and his people assemble around, feed upon, fi nd shelter in, and follow after the words of this book. The words of Scripture dwell richly in our hearts and flow freely from our lips. Scripture is prayed and sung, studied and proclaimed. Because God communicates Christ and covenant to us in Holy Scripture, Christians read. To this point, we have spoken a great deal about God’s establishment of covenant friendship by means of his self-revelation and scriptural inspiration. However, God’s work of making 95

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 95

5/13/2011 12:58:34 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

friends with us is not complete with revelation and inspiration. This work is only complete as he awakens human covenant partners from the sloth and slumber of sin, causing them to hear, grasp, and follow after his holy Word. Covenant friendship is ultimately a mutual enterprise. And thus God’s self-revelation in Holy Scripture evokes creaturely acts of reading, acts enabled and governed by God’s Spirit. To the blessing of biblical inspiration, the Spirit adds the gift of creaturely illumination, the “strength to comprehend . . . the love of Christ” (Eph. 3.18–19). For this reason, reading must be understood as one moment within God’s work of restoring fallen creatures to friendship with himself.1 It is time therefore to give an account of the Christian act of reading. As we will see, reading Scripture is an act of “covenant mutuality,”2 enabled and sustained by the Spirit, who regenerates and renews our fallen minds. Furthermore, this act of covenant mutuality is aided by the church, the community divinely authorized to minister the Word in a variety of ways. The Spirit who strengthens us to comprehend the love of Christ does so within the context of “all the saints” (Eph. 3.18). The purpose of the present chapter is to expound this understanding of Bible reading as an act of renewed, communal covenant mutuality.

II.

Regeneration, Renewal, and Reading3

Just as the Spirit laid the foundation for the church in the writings of prophets and apostles, so he builds upon that foundation through, among other things, the reading of the saints. The same Spirit who publishes God’s word through inspiration and writing creates an understanding of God’s word through illumination and interpretation (1 Cor. 2.14–16). The reading of Holy Scripture is a creaturely activity that corresponds to, and is also sustained and governed by, the Spirit’s work of regeneration and renewal. 1 2 3

Webster, Holy Scripture, 70–71. Webster, Holy Scripture, 71. For much of what follows, I am indebted to John’s Webster’s discussion of the nature of “reading in the economy of grace.” See Webster, Holy Scripture, Chap. 3; and idem, “Biblical Reasoning,” Anglican Theological Review 90 (2008): 733–51.

96

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 96

5/13/2011 12:58:35 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

The Christian life begins with regeneration (Jn 3.3, 5; Eph. 2.5; Jas 1.18; 1 Pet. 1.3, 23–25). When the Spirit brings the gospel effectually to bear upon the sinner’s heart, he breaks our relation to the Old Man and creates a relation to the New Man (Rom. 6.1–7; Gal. 5.24). In so doing, he also implants a new principle of life (1 Jn 3.9). This new principle of life enables a new vision. Apart from this new vision, the gospel of Jesus Christ—and therefore the ultimate meaning of Scripture—remains hidden from us (2 Cor. 3.14–18). However, being born again, we are enabled to “see the kingdom of God” (Jn 3.3). This new principle of life not only enables new vision, it also issues forth in new desires, new thirsts, and new hungers. Chief among these is a longing for the word of truth (see 1 Pet. 1.22–2:3). God’s word is “sweeter than honey” to the regenerate taste (Ps. 19.10; 119.103). The awakening of spiritual organs of perception and taste is essential to a profitable reading of Scripture. “He who is deaf must fi rst be healed from his deafness in order to be placed in true touch with the world of sounds. When this contact has been restored, the study of music can again be begun by him.”4 This goes for biblical interpretation as well. The point is not that the “natural man” is unable to understand anything that Scripture says. The point instead is that a profitable reading of Holy Scripture, one that receives Scripture’s words as the words of God, that ponders Scripture’s words as a way of pondering God, and that reveres Scripture’s words as a way of revering God, this sort of reading is only possible where the Spirit has caused the eyes of our hearts to be enlightened (Eph. 1.18; 1 Cor. 2.14). Regeneration enables the act of reading as covenant friendship. The Christian life begins with regeneration and continues along the path of renewal (Rom. 12.1–2; Eph. 4.21–24; Col. 3.10; 2 Pet. 3.18). Because the regenerate life begins as the Spirit breaks our natural bond to the Old Man and forms a spiritual bond to the New Man, the growth and renewal of this life unfolds as a battle between the remaining impulses of our fallen human nature and the new reign of Christ through the Spirit. “The desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh” (Gal. 5.17). In this battle, we are summoned to put to death the deeds of the body by the Spirit’s

4

Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 580.

97

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 97

5/13/2011 12:58:35 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

power and to put on the New Man, Jesus Christ (Rom. 8.13; Eph. 4.22–24). In this battle, we are commanded not to be conformed to the pattern of this world but to be transformed, and this by the renewing of our minds (Rom. 12.2). God renews and restores the whole man in sanctification, including the mind (cf. Rom. 12.2). The mind darkened by sin (Eph. 4.17–18) is made alive with Christ (Eph. 4.20–24). The Spirit who searches the depths of God, and who sheds abroad the knowledge of God, gives us “the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2.16). By the “unified saving action and presence of Word and Spirit, reason’s vocation is retrieved from the ruins: its sterile attempt at self-destruction is set aside; its dynamism is annexed to God’s self-manifesting presence; it regains its function in the ordered friendship between God and human creatures.”5 Within the context of this “ordered friendship between God and human creatures,” reason plays what is fi rst and foremost a receptive role. Reason is not the fountain of saving wisdom. As Benedict Pictet states: “reason cannot and ought not to bring forth any mysteries, as it were, out of its own storehouse; for this is the prerogative of scripture only.”6 Instead, reason is an organ for receiving saving wisdom. Reason, regenerated and renewed, understands “the things freely given us by God” (1 Cor. 2.12). However, in this receptive activity, reason is not wholly passive. God’s word “evokes the works of reason”7: “Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything” (2 Tim. 2.7). God’s living Word animates and answers the humble, suppliant work of reason. Because God’s word unfolds itself in writing, one of the principal ways in which renewed reason fulfi lls its calling is through reading. John Webster’s description of “exegetical reasoning” is worth quoting at length: Exegetical reasoning is, most simply, reading the Bible, the intelligent (and therefore spiritual) act of following the words of the text. Scripture is not an oracular utterance but an instrument through which divine speech evokes the 5 6

7

Webster, “Biblical Reasoning,” 742–43. Benedict Pictet, Christian Theology, trans. Frederick Reyroux (London: Henry G. Bohn, 1847), 54. Webster, “Biblical Reasoning,” 749; see also 741–47.

98

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 98

5/13/2011 12:58:35 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

unselfish, loving, and obedient tracing of the text’s movement which is the work of exegesis. This is the theologically primary act; the principal task of theological reason is figuring out the literal sense, that is, what the text says. This would be an absurdly naive claim if the literal sense were thought of merely as information to be retrieved from an inert source in which it had been deposited. But the prophets and apostles are alive, their texts are their voices which herald the viva vox Dei. “Following” these texts is, as it were, a movement of intellectual repetition, a “cursive” representation of the text, running alongside it or, perhaps better, running in its wake. To be taken into this movement is the commentator’s delight, tempered by the knowledge that we cannot hope to keep pace, because the prophets and apostles always stride ahead of us. This is why following these texts involves the most strenuous application of the powers of the intellect, demanding the utmost concentration to resist habit and to ensure that the text’s movement is not arrested in our re-presentation.8 We shall have much more to say about the work of exegetical reason in the next chapter. For now, several elements of Webster’s description deserve comment. First, because it is an instance of Christian reasoning, reading is receptive. Reading does not invent meaning, but instead attempts to follow “the determinate, authoritative” words of the text.9 The text is not a wax nose, inviting willful manipulation at the hands of the creative reader, but “a given to be received afresh.”10 Second, because the words of this text are the living words of God—“what the Spirit says to the churches” (Rev. 2.7; etc.)—reading is an act of “unselfish, loving, and obedient” attentiveness. Reading requires single-minded focus (cf. Mt. 5.8). As Webster elsewhere explains: “The Christian act of reading Holy Scripture is to be characterised by a certain exclusiveness, a deliberate directing 8 9 10

Webster, “Biblical Reasoning,” 749. Webster, “Biblical Reasoning,” 749. Webster, “Biblical Reasoning,” 749, emphasis ours. On this point, see especially Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Is There A Meaning in This Text? The Bible, the Reader, and the Morality of Literary Knowledge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998).

99

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 99

5/13/2011 12:58:35 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

of attention to the text and an equally deliberate laying aside of other concerns.”11 In the words of Calvin: “we ought to reflect that ‘Truth has only one voice’—that which proceeds from the lips of our Lord. To him alone ought we to open our ears when the doctrine of Salvation is in question, while to all others we should keep our ears shut.”12 Third, because reading involves attentively following the words of Holy Scripture, which are the words of God, reading is arduous, involving “the most strenuous application of the powers of the intellect.” The Spirit’s work of sanctification does not suppress reason, but enlists reason to exert itself with all its might (cf. Phil. 2.12–13).

III. Reading Holy Scripture with the Church The Spirit who enables and sustains our reading of Holy Scripture also provides a community to aid us in our reading. Renewed reading comes alive and is cultivated in the context of a renewed covenant community, the church. Christian reading is therefore never an isolated endeavor. It is time to discuss some of the ways in which the church aids biblical interpretation.13

III.a. The Authority of Scripture in Relation to Subordinate Ecclesial Norms For Christians, reading is an inherently communal enterprise. And reading is a communal enterprise for the same reasons that Christianity is a communal enterprise. God’s purpose through Christ and covenant is not simply to reconcile individual believers to himself. When God reconciles individuals to himself, he also binds those individuals to one another, creating a new humanity and an interdependent body (Eph. 2.16; 1 Cor. 12.12ff).14 In God’s design, this body’s growth in the knowledge of God is not 11 12 13

14

Webster, Holy Scripture, 90. Cited in Webster, Holy Scripture, 74. We will have a bit more to say about this topic in the next chapter when we discuss the church’s public reading and exposition of Scripture. Stephen R. Holmes, Listening to the Past: The Place of Tradition in Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 22–26.

100

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 100

5/13/2011 12:58:35 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

caused by God alone (Col. 2.19). Rather, the Lord nourishes his body and causes it to grow by means of the body’s own proper agency and work. The church “edifies itself” (Eph. 4.16). The knowledge of the gospel’s God is a knowledge obtained and sustained “with all the saints” (Eph. 3.18; cf. 2 Tim. 3.14–15).15 For this reason, the Christian reader of Holy Scripture finds his place as a reader among the company of those who have been brought from death to life by the Word of God, gathered together in a common fellowship under the Lord’s guidance and teaching, and equipped by the Lord to instruct and edify one another in the shared faith. The Christian reader “is no isolated worker, but . . . is in his way the organ of restored humanity.”16 Christian reading is thus a communal enterprise. As a reader in community, the Christian reader of Holy Scripture stands in a particular relation to the authority that Christ has established to build up that community (see Eph. 4.7–16). The Lord who liberates sinners from a state of lawless alienation from God and from one another also binds them to himself and to one another in a community that is authorized to serve Holy Scripture in various concrete ways. It is important of course to emphasize that this community in no way authorizes or establishes Holy Scripture. The church is a “creature of the Word.”17 Nevertheless, to say that Holy Scripture is the supreme and self-authenticating authority for the faith and life of God’s people is not to say that it is the sole authority for the faith and life of God’s people. Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”) must be distinguished from solo Scriptura (“Scripture only”) when it comes to interpreting and understanding the Bible. Though Reformed Protestants have diligently defended the supreme authority of Scripture over the church, they have—at least historically—also articulated an understanding of the church’s 15

16 17

For a fuller discussion of the various activities by which the Spirit enables the church to serve the sanctification and growth of its members, see Reinhard Hütter, Suffering Divine Things: Theology as Church Practice (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 128–30. Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 581. Christoph Schwöbel, “The Creature of the Word: Recovering the Ecclesiology of the Reformers,” in On Being the Church: Essays on the Christian Community, ed. Colin Gunton and Daniel Hardy (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989), 110–55.

101

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 101

5/13/2011 12:58:36 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

subordinate or ministerial authority for serving Scripture. The church is an ordered and orderly organism, divinely authorized to serve Holy Scripture in various ways. William Whitaker provides a representative summary of four ways in which Christ has authorized the church to serve his sacred Word.18 According to Whitaker: (1) “First, the church is the witness and guardian of the sacred writings, and discharges, in this respect, as it were the function of a notary.” God has delivered his Holy Scriptures to his people and authorized her to keep them (cf. Deut. 31.9; Rom. 3.2). Nevertheless, Whitaker insists, the authority of Scripture is not established by its guardians, “but on account of” Scripture’s “own trustworthiness.” (2) “The second office of the church is, to distinguish and discern the true, sincere, and genuine scriptures from the spurious, false, and supposititious” (Cf. 1 Cor. 14.37; 2 Thess. 2.1–2).19 According to Whitaker, “for the performance of this function,” the church “hath the Spirit of Christ to enable it to distinguish the true from the false: it knows the voice of its spouse; it is endued with the highest prudence, and is able to try the spirits” (cf. 1 Thess. 5.20–21; 1 Jn 4.1). As the goldsmith is trained to detect gold by its weight on the scales but has no power to make gold, so the church is gifted to discern the Shepherd’s voice in Holy Scripture but has no authority to make Holy Scripture. (3) “The third office of the church is to publish, set forth, preach, and promulgate the scriptures; wherein it discharges the function of a herald, who ought to pronounce with a loud voice the decrees and edicts of the king, to omit nothing, and to add nothing of his own” (cf. Isa. 40.9; Rom. 10.16; 2 Cor. 5.19). (4) “The fourth office of the church is to expound and interpret the scriptures; wherein its function is that of an interpreter.

18

19

For what follows, see William Whitaker, A Disputation on Holy Scripture, trans. William Fitzgerald (repr. Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 2000 [1588]), 283–84. Cf. Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:90. On the oft-neglected communal dimension of this enterprise, see Roger Nicole, “The Canon of the New Testament,” in Standing Forth: Collected Writings of Roger Nicole (Fearn, Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2002), esp. 97–101.

102

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 102

5/13/2011 12:58:36 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

Here it should introduce no fictions of its own, but explain the scriptures by the scriptures” (cf. Mt. 13.52; Rom. 12.6; 1 Cor. 14.3, 29; Eph. 4.11 2 Tim. 2.15). By way of summary, then, the church is that community created and authorized by the Word of God in order that it might obediently guard, discern, proclaim, and interpret the Word of God.

III.b.

The Church’s Teaching Authority

The four aforementioned mandates are fulfilled in a variety of ways in the life of the church. Parents instruct children in the sacred writings from their youth (Deut. 6.7; Eph. 6.4; 2 Tim. 3.15). Neighbor edifies neighbor by “speaking the truth in love” (Eph. 4.15; cf. 1 Thess. 4.18; 5.11; Heb. 10.25). The scriptures are read aloud, prayed, proclaimed, and sung in public worship week after week (Col. 3.16; 1 Tim. 4.13). Alongside and in service of these avenues for receiving and spreading the Word of God, the Spirit also sets apart certain individuals within the church to serve as publicly authorized ministers of scriptural teaching (Eph. 4.11; 1 Pet. 4.10–11; 1 Tim. 5.20; 2 Tim. 4.2; Tit. 2.15; cf. Jas 3.1). The Spirit who laid the foundation for the church’s knowledge of God through his work of inspiring the prophetic and apostolic scriptures, builds upon that foundation through his work of calling, instructing, and commissioning the church’s “accredited leaders” (Eph. 2.20; 4.11–12; 1 Cor. 3.10ff; 12.28).20 Such leaders are, among other things, commissioned to proclaim “the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20.27; cf. 20.32), their commission being accompanied by the Spirit’s gifts of teaching and discernment (Rom. 12.6–7; 1 Cor. 14.3, 29; 1 Thess. 5.21).21 These teachers bear a ministerial authority. On the one hand, theirs is a true authority: Jesus commanded the Jews of his day to acknowledge the authority of the scribes and 20

21

Wright, Scripture and the Authority of God, 100–104. Note the order in 1 Corinthians 12.28: “God has appointed in the church fi rst apostles, second prophets, third teachers.” Confessional Protestants differ on the nature and number of teaching offices. The present point nevertheless remains valid for most positions one might take on this spectrum. For fuller discussion of the relationship between the public teaching office and the private right of all believers to interpret the Bible, see Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics, 2:468–69.

103

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 103

5/13/2011 12:58:36 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

the Pharisees (Mt. 23.1–3). Likewise, the author of Hebrews instructs his audience to submit to their leaders (Heb. 13.17). Accordingly James Bannerman states: “When the Church through its appointed organs declares the truth, it is to be heard not only because it is truth, and because it is in accordance with the Word of God as revealed in the Bible, but also because the Church is an ordinance of God appointed to declare it.”22 On the other hand, because such authority is a ministerial authority, it is accountable to God’s word in Holy Scripture. And so Jesus also rebuked the scribes and Pharisees for undermining God’s word by teaching things that did not comport with it but rather hindered others from heeding its commands (Mt. 15.1–9). Similarly, Paul pronounced a curse on anyone— including apostle or angel—who would teach another Christ or another gospel than that which had been revealed by God to and through him (Gal. 1.8–9). For these reasons, the church’s accredited teachers fulfi ll their ministries faithfully when they demonstrate that their teaching is nothing other than the teaching of the Holy Spirit speaking in Holy Scripture. 23 As Dietrich Bonhoeffer states, “Genuine authority knows that it can only exist in the service of the One who alone has authority. Genuine authority knows that it is bound in the strictest sense by the words of Jesus, ‘You have one teacher, and you are all brothers’ (Mt. 23.8).”24 The teacher in Christ’s church thus exhibits a brotherly exercise of authority when he shows “the reasons and bases of his interpretation so clearly and certainly that also others who themselves do not have the gift of interpretation may be able to understand and grasp them.”25 In other words, because they serve Christ’s sovereign self-revelation in his prophetic-apostolic Word, teachers may never simply say, “Because we say so,” to authorize their teaching. Instead they must always say and show, “thus says the 22

23 24

25

Bannerman, The Church of Christ: A Treatise on the Nature, Powers, Ordinances, Discipline and Government of the Christian Church (New York: Westminster Publishing House, 2002 [1869]), 1:282. Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1.10. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Life Together and Prayerbook of the Bible, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works 5 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005), 107. Martin Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, trans. Fred Kramer (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1971), 1:216.

104

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 104

5/13/2011 12:58:36 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

Lord.” In doing so, the church’s teachers may hope to gain the Spirit-enabled “Amen” of the hearing church. 26 To be sure, demonstrating “the reasons and bases” of interpretation is not a matter of facile proof-texting. Nor does the work of demonstration demand that the church only speak in a biblical idiom. The Reformers learned very quickly that the latter restriction would only undermine rather than serve the ministry of the Word. 27 The church is free to use a conceptual idiom different from that of Holy Scripture—indeed, within Scripture itself we fi nd a different idiom in John than we find in Paul. However, the church is responsible for demonstrating the transparency of its idiom to the teaching of the sacred writings. It is responsible for demonstrating that its teaching is truly a faithful re-presentation of biblical doctrine. 28 It is important to acknowledge the presence of the church’s teaching authority when it comes to biblical interpretation because God has appointed this authority as an aid to reading Holy Scripture. Just as the Spirit sent Philip to help the Ethiopian eunuch read Isaiah (Acts 8.30–35), and just as Paul charged Timothy to teach those who would be able to teach others also (2 Tim. 2.2), similarly God has provided his church not only with a supreme standard for faith and life in Holy Scripture, he has also through Holy Scripture generated an authorized sphere of ecclesial reality that is charged to assist us in reading the scriptures. The church’s teaching authority does not exist in order to exclude others from interpreting and understanding God’s word. Rather, the church’s teaching authority exists in order to communicate (i.e., “make common”) the treasures of God’s word to all of God’s people so that they too might have full communion (i.e., “share as equals”) in those treasures. For this reason, biblical interpretation flourishes when it operates within and according to the authorized sphere of ecclesial reality created and governed by the Spirit of God through the Word of God. 29

26 27 28 29

Thus Chemnitz. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1.13.3. Vanhoozer, Drama of Doctrine, 340–44. Francis Watson fruitfully deploys Gadamer’s concept of a text’s Wirkungsgeschichte (“history of effects or influences”) to describe the

105

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 105

5/13/2011 12:58:36 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

III.c.

The Rule of Faith and the Rule of Love

Historically, the church has acknowledged two servants as particularly trustworthy aids when it comes to interpreting the Bible: “the rule of faith” and “the rule of love.”30 These servants are not teachers per se, but instead function as extensions of the church’s teaching authority.31 The rule of faith and the rule of love provide normative summaries of common biblical teaching and, as such, serve as important aids in biblical interpretation. These two aids are found in various expressions throughout the life of the church, from the informal summaries of evangelists to the more formal statements of synods and general assemblies. The latter forms possess greater authority than those expressed in the teaching of individual ministers, for they are usually products of a collective body of ministers, drawn in humble deference to the church’s historic creeds and confessions, and endorsed by deliberating bodies of the church as a whole.32

III.c.1. The rule of faith In his fi rst epistle to Timothy, the Apostle Paul charged his young protégé to avoid “myths and endless genealogies” and instead to pursue an exposition of the sacred writings that accords with “the economy of God that is by faith” (1 Tim. 1.4, trans. mine; cf. 4.6–16). There is, according to Paul, a kind of biblical interpretation that is absorbed with mythology and that promotes speculation, and there is a kind of biblical interpretation that accords with God’s overarching economy of salvation and that promotes faith. It is the latter type of interpretation, as opposed to the former, that the rule of faith aids us in pursuing. In the broadest sense, “the rule of faith” refers to any shorthand summary of “the faith once delivered to the saints”

30 31

32

ways in which Holy Scripture “generates” a community that understands and confesses the Word of God. See his “Hermeneutics and the Doctrine of Scripture: Why They Need Each Other,” International Journal of Systematic Theology 12 (2010): 118–43, esp. 135–37. See, for example, The Second Helvetic Confession, Chapter 2. Cf. The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 31, “Of Synods and Councils.” Cf. Abraham Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 576; also 591.

106

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 106

5/13/2011 12:58:37 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

(Jude 3).33 We see examples of such summaries within Holy Scripture itself. Deuteronomy 6.4–5, the Shema, summarizes the more extended presentation of the divine name revealed in the Pentateuch to that point: “Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one” (NASB). It also summarizes God’s law, which has been expounded at length in previous chapters of the Pentateuch: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” Similar confessional summaries appear in the New Testament as well. 1 Corinthians 8.6 is a Christological elaboration of the Shema: “For us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.”34 In Ephesians 4.4–6, Paul grounds his call to Christian unity in a trinitarian confession related to God and to his saving work in the church: “There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.” The expansion of these and other biblical summaries (e.g., Mt. 28.19; 1 Cor. 12.4–6; 15.3–4; 1 Tim. 3.16) beyond the time of the New Testament therefore represents the faithful extension of an inner-biblical impulse. Indeed, confessional summarization—whether in praise, proclamation, or official confessional promulgation—is one of the most inherently appropriate responses to biblical revelation: “I will recount all of your wonderful deeds” (Ps. 9.1). The biblical canon, we might say, naturally gives birth to ecclesial confession.35 The rule of faith is a natural sign of Holy Scripture’s regency.36 The use of trinitarian creedal summaries beyond the New Testament era likely originated with the need to provide baptismal candidates with a fi xed form for confessing their faith 33

34

35

36

See John Behr, The Way to Nicaea, The Formation of Christian Theology 1 (Crestwood, N. Y.: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001), chap. 1; and Greene-McCreight, “Rule of Faith,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, 703–704. Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 26–30. Frances Young, The Making of the Creeds (London: SCM, 2002), 12–13. Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 570.

107

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 107

5/13/2011 12:58:37 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

in obedience to the Lord’s command to baptize “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 28.19).37 “Two elements” that “remain constant” in these early summaries of the faith are (1) the triune name of “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”; and (2) the gospel narrative of “the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.”38 Such summaries have since come to fulfill various functions within the church, including their function as subordinate standards to which the church’s officebearers subscribe and in accordance with which they pledge to teach in fulfillment of their ordination. One of the earliest and certainly most enduring examples of the rule of faith is the Apostles’ Creed, which confesses: I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth. And in Jesus Christ his only-begotten Son, our Lord: who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary; suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into Hades; the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy Catholic Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.39 Though not stated in so many words in Scripture, the Apostles’ Creed is nevertheless a faithful re-presentation of scriptural teaching. The creed faithfully represents scriptural teaching in at least two senses. First, it summarizes the plain teaching of Holy Scripture. As Augustine observed long ago, the rule of faith is drawn from the clearer passages of Scripture, not from its more 37 38

39

Young, Making of the Creeds, 6. Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100–600) (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971), 117. This version of the Apostles’ Creed is found in the Heidelberg Catechism, Q 23 (Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 3:314).

108

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 108

5/13/2011 12:58:37 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

obscure ones.40 Second, the creed is a faithful representation of scriptural teaching because it summarizes that teaching in a way that reflects Scripture’s own purpose and proportions. The rule of faith sets Scripture’s most recurring themes or “common places” in their proper relations to one another and in relation to Scripture’s overarching purpose. To speak of “proportion” suggests that biblical interpretation has an aesthetic dimension and that the rule of faith serves to train our senses to perceive Scripture’s inherent order, structure, and beauty.41 According to Irenaeus’ famous analogy, the rule of faith functions like the pattern for a mosaic, helping us see how all the various tiles fit together to form the picture of a handsome king.42 Thus, for example, the Apostles’ Creed presents the splendor of biblical truth in biblical proportions by confessing: (1) Scripture’s main subject matter, the Holy Trinity, “from whom and through whom and to whom are all things” (Rom. 11.36); (2) the overarching shape of the divine economy in creation, redemption, and consummation; (3) and, at least by implication, a host of other essential doctrinal themes, including: the goodness of creation (God made it and assumed it in the incarnation—“our Lord . . . was conceived by the Holy Ghost”; God will raise it—“I believe in . . . the resurrection of the body”); the centrality of the evangelical events in redemptive history; as well as doctrines such as the church, the forgiveness of sins, and everlasting life. Moreover, by orienting its confessors to Scripture’s main subject matter, the triune God, and to the scriptural record of his wonderful works, the rule of faith also orients them to the supreme purpose of Scripture, “which is to give all glory to God.”43 To use Irenaeus’ analogy, the rule of faith helps us

40

41 42 43

See Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 2: St. Augustin’s City of God, Christian Doctrine (Repr. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 2.9.14. According to William Perkins, the rule of faith “is a summary of the Scriptures, drawn from its well-known and clear parts” (The Art of Prophesying [Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1996 {1606}], 26–27). Cf. Jens Zimmermann, Recovering Theological Hermeneutics, 307–16. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1.8.1. Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.5. See Second Helvetic Confession, chap.2, and Barth’s brief but helpful discussion of this scriptural impulse, following Polanus, in Church Dogmatics, 1.2, 721–22.

109

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 109

5/13/2011 12:58:37 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

appreciate the central role of the messianic king in the divine economy and thereby helps us perceive his preeminent status as the radiance of God (cf. Heb. 1.3). The rule of faith aids doxological reading. The rule of faith thus equips us to read the various parts of Scripture in light of the whole and with an eye to Scripture’s ultimate communicative goal—both good strategies for reading any book. Here we may invoke Calvin’s famous image: As spectacles help the reader follow the letters on a page, so the rule of faith helps us follow “the pattern of sound teaching” (2 Tim. 1.13, NIV) contained in Holy Scripture. As is the case with the church’s teaching authority in general, the rule of faith always stands in a relation of dependence upon the scriptural source and fountain of truth. For this reason, its authoritative status may never be reckoned as “self-evident” but must always be established by way of interpretive “demonstration and argument.”44 Each generation is charged not only with the task of defending the faith once delivered to the saints but also with the task of demonstrating the biblical foundations of that faith through exegesis (cf. Acts 17.11). When this exegetical task is ignored or forsaken, theology quickly degenerates into an arid repetition of dogmatic symbols. Furthermore, because the church can and has erred in its confession,45 its various expressions of the rule of faith are always subject to revision and reform in light of the clear teaching of Holy Scripture. As the Westminster Confession of Faith states, Holy Scripture remains “The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined.”46 Scripture is the supreme source of revealed teaching. The rule of faith is only a channel through which that revealed teaching flows.47 However, this does not mean that the rule of faith is

44 45

46 47

O’Donovan, Church in Crisis, 79. According to Anthony N. S. Lane, “sola Scriptura is the statement that the church can err” (“Sola Scriptura? Making Sense of a Post-Reformation Slogan,” in A Pathway into the Holy Scripture, ed. Philip E. Satterthwaite and David F. Wright [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994], 324). Chapter 1.10. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:493.

110

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 110

5/13/2011 12:58:37 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

open to endless revision, as many modern understandings of sola Scriptura—and of semper reformanda—have supposed. “Christianity is one and not many and is not capable of continuous radical reinterpretation.”48 God has spoken in Holy Scripture; and the church by God’s grace has made a faithful confession. In this regard, “dogmas”—the church’s public and binding summaries of scriptural truth49 —stand as “irreversible” expressions of the rule of faith, expressions with which all later summaries of the rule of faith must cohere and which all further summaries of the rule of faith must exhibit. 50 Church dogma, we might say, is a sign of Christ’s victory through Word and Spirit within the common mind of the church. It is for this reason an ancient landmark that should not be moved. 51 To the extent, therefore, that the church’s dogmatic deliverances are indeed faithful summaries of the scope, shape, and substance of scriptural teaching, their use in interpretation does not constitute the imposition of an external burden or alien standard upon the interpreter of Holy Scripture. Church dogmas provide instead a divinely authorized interpretive key for unlocking the treasures of God’s word, a blessed pathway into Holy Scripture. In terms of more recent hermeneutical parlance, the rule of faith offers an entry point into what Grant Osborne calls the “hermeneutical spiral,” that fruitful interplay of preunderstanding, reading, and growth in understanding that characterizes all acts of reading.52 As a horizon of interpretive preunderstanding, the rule of faith is not simply a truth that the interpreter thinks about as he reads Holy Scripture; it is also a truth that the interpreter thinks with

48

49

50

51

52

Bernard Ramm, The Evangelical Heritage: A Study in Historical Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 140. For this understanding of dogma, see Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:28–34. Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology, Volume 1 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 36. Protestant confessions acknowledge as much in their affi rmations, both explicit and implicit, of the ecumenical creeds. Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 2d ed. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2006). On the nature of preunderstanding, see also Anthony C. Thiselton, Hermeneutics: An Introduction (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 13–16.

111

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 111

5/13/2011 12:58:38 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

as he reads Holy Scripture.53 This at least is one of the ways that church dogmas and doctrines have functioned historically in biblical interpretation. Whether in Cyril of Alexandria’s translation of the Nicene dogma into the interpretive directive that we read the Gospels in such a way that we ascribe every action and suffering of Jesus to one subject, the Word made flesh,54 or whether in the Reformed (and Lutheran) confessional classification of the Word of God into the categories of “law” and “gospel,”55 the rule of faith has functioned historically not only as a standard for measuring the faithfulness of one’s exegetical results but also as a means for producing faithful exegetical results. According to Zacharias Ursinus, the “highest” purpose for studying church doctrine is to prepare us “for the reading, understanding, and exposition of the holy Scriptures. For as the doctrine of the catechism and Common Places are taken out of the Scriptures, and are directed by them as their rule, so they again lead us, as it were, by the hand to the Scriptures.”56 Doctrinal preunderstanding enables reading. Nevertheless, doctrinal preunderstanding does not wholly determine the reading of a text before it is read. Such a scenario would actually foreclose the act of reading itself. For the reader of God’s unfathomably rich Word, “There can . . . be no fi nal act of reading in which everything is uncovered, in which the mine of gold has yielded all its treasure or the fish pool has been emptied of fish.”57 As Charles P. Arand states, “dogma is no substitute for 53

54

55

56 57

Cf. George Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Postliberal Age (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1984), 33. See the “Third Letter of Cyril to Nestorius,” Anathema 4, in Edward R. Hardy, ed., Christology of the Later Fathers (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1954), 353. See also Cyril’s further elaboration of this point in his “Explanation of the Twelve Chapters,” 12–14, in John McGuckin, Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy: Its History, Theology, and Texts (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2004), 286–87. Thus Zacharias Ursinus: “The chief and most important parts of the fi rst principles of the doctrine of the church . . . may be divided . . . into the law and gospel” (Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, trans. G. W. Williard [repr. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, n.d. {1852}], 13). Ursinus, Commentary, 10. Griffiths, Religious Reading, 41.

112

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 112

5/13/2011 12:58:38 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

reading and studying the Scriptures themselves . . . The purpose of dogma is to ‘send us back into the Scriptures with more reader competence.’ ”58 Furthermore, as Augustine recognized long ago, it is possible to arrive at an interpretation of Scripture which, though formally corresponding to the rule of faith, is nevertheless exegetically “mistaken.”59 The rule of faith does not obviate reading. Nor does it validate every orthodox reading. These qualifications notwithstanding, the rule of faith offers a promising orientation or starting point for the reading of Scripture, an orientation within which our understanding of Scripture can grow. Moreover, because it summarizes scriptural teaching on God and God’s unfolding economy of salvation, the rule of faith not only provides readers with a starting point for exegesis, it also identifies the ultimate horizon of exegesis, which is to expound each particular text of Scripture within the context and purpose of the whole counsel of God. By orienting the exegesis of individual texts to the broad horizon of biblical teaching as a whole, the rule of faith serves as a benchmark for canonical exegesis. In this regard, the rule of faith also helps readers guard against a theologically reductionistic exegesis which would turn every text into the occasion for teaching a favorite doctrine—or for engaging a favorite controversy. The question for the biblical interpreter therefore is not whether or not we will read Holy Scripture in light of the rule of faith. The question is whether we will read Holy Scripture with a right faith (i.e., orthodoxy), oriented toward the triune God, drawn from the main contours of biblical teaching, and confessed by Scripture’s faithful servant the church (cf. 1 Tim. 3.15), or whether we will read Holy Scripture with a wrong faith (i.e., heterodoxy), drawn from some other purported fountain of wisdom and knowledge, and governed by the ends of some other community. Reading Scripture in light of the rule of faith is a way of acknowledging that, when it comes to biblical interpretation, sola Scriptura (Scripture’s status as the sole supreme authority for faith and life) cannot function appropriately as an interpretive norm apart from tota Scriptura 58

59

Charles P. Arand, “The Church’s Dogma and Biblical Theology,” in A Confessing Theology for Postmodern Times, ed. Michael S. Horton (Wheaton: Crossway, 2000), 20. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 1.37.41.

113

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 113

5/13/2011 12:58:38 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

(Scripture’s teaching in its entirety). And Scripture’s teaching in its entirety includes teaching about divinely authorized, subordinate authorities which have a role to play in biblical instruction and interpretation. The sacred script not only announces the saving drama that has unfolded “behind the text,” it also directs the ecclesial drama that unfolds “in front of the text.”60 Reading Scripture in light of the rule of faith is also a way of acknowledging that submission to biblical authority is never a purely formal issue (i.e., “I believe that the Bible is the Word of God”) but always involves submission to Scripture’s subject matter, supremely, the triune Creator, Redeemer, and Consummator. As Herman Bavinck says, “Faith . . . reaches out in a single act to the person of Christ as well as to Scripture.”61 Reading Scripture in light of the rule of faith thus involves reading Scripture from within the context of our trinitarian faith, aided by the church’s good confession, for the sake of the church’s continuing growth in this trinitarian faith. To read Scripture in any other way is to read against the grain of its authority. For all of the reasons outlined above, we should receive the rule of faith as part of the Spirit’s rich bounty for the church, grateful that he has provided us not only with a supreme and authoritative fountain for our faith in Holy Scripture, but that he has also provided us with a confessional standpoint toward Scripture from which we may profitably draw upon Scripture’s “pure spring of living water.”62 As Edmund Schlink states: “If the Confession is exposition of Scripture, that is, doctrina evangelii, a Confession, like all hearing and proclamation of the Gospel, does not result from human ability, but from the operation of the Holy Spirit who is given through Word and sacrament.”63

III.c.2

The rule of love

The rule of love is closely related to the rule of faith. Whereas the latter summarizes the main contours of biblical doctrine (that 60 61 62 63

This is one the major theses of Vanhoozer, Drama of Doctrine. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:569. Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 1:493. Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions (USA: Augsburg Fortress, 1961), 15.

114

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 114

5/13/2011 12:58:38 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

which is to be believed), the former summarizes the main contours of biblical law (that which is to be done).64 Jesus himself summarized this rule in response to a question regarding the main point of Old Testament teaching. When asked about “the great commandment in the Law,” Jesus quoted the Shema: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind,” to which he then added a second commandment: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mt. 22.36–39). The rule of love is not only the sum of Old Covenant teaching, it is the sum of New Covenant teaching as well. Paul accordingly declares in 1 Timothy 1.5: “the goal of our instruction is love” (NAS; cf. Jn 3.34; Rom. 13.9; Gal. 5.14; Jas 2.8; 1 Pet. 1.22). In light of biblical statements such as these, Augustine concludes: “The whole temporal dispensation for our salvation, therefore, was framed that we might know this truth and be able to act upon it.”65 As the sum of God’s revealed will in his two-testament Word, the rule of love helps us further understand the goal of all that God does and says in Holy Scripture. Why does God redeem us and reveal himself to us? Why does God give us neighbors outside the church and brothers and sisters within? What is the ultimate aim of all that God commands us? That we might love him and that we might love others in, with, and for him. Any interpretation of the Bible that fails to appreciate this overarching goal is a failure of interpretation. Any interpretation of the Bible that serves this goal, even though erring at certain points, is nevertheless on the right track.66 Not only does the rule of love instruct us regarding the goal or end of biblical interpretation, it also functions as a means of biblical interpretation. There is a real sense, in other words, in which our capacity for understanding Scripture grows 64

65 66

In classical Reformed divinity, the belief that Holy Scripture primarily teaches “that which is to be believed” and “that which is to be done” reflects its distinctly covenantal understanding of Scripture’s contents. See Wilhelmus à Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, trans. Bartel Elshout (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 1992 [1707]), 1:34. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 1.35.39. The classic discussion of the present point is to be found in Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 1.36.40–41.

115

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 115

5/13/2011 12:58:39 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

along with our capacity for obeying Scripture. Stephen Fowl explains: Given that Christians are called to interpret Scripture as part of their ongoing journey into ever-deeper communion with God, it is not surprising that those who have grown and advanced in virtue will tend to be masterful interpreters of Scripture. This is not to deny that the novice or the outsider will sometimes offer superior interpretations of any particular text. Rather, it simply stands to reason that those who have advanced in the Christian life will tend to offer the best interpretations for those whose primary aim is to advance in the Christian life.67 To recall an earlier discussion, it is not only the rule of faith that contributes to the ever-growing “spiral” of hermeneutical understanding. The rule of love contributes to this spiral as well. The more our minds, wills, and affections are conformed to the love of God, through the gospel and within the context of a well-ordered Christian community, the better we will be able to recognize and heed God’s voice in Holy Scripture (cf. Rom. 12.1–2; Phil. 1.9–11).68 The rule of love thus underwrites the call to a host of interpretive virtues. According to Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “An interpretive virtue is a disposition of the mind and heart that arises from the motivation for understanding, for cognitive contact with the meaning of the text.”69 Vanhoozer enumerates four virtues in particular that aid reading: Honesty: “Honesty in interpretation means, above all, acknowledging one’s prior commitments and preunderstandings . . . A dishonest interpreter is less likely to be receptive to those texts that appear to challenge one’s most cherished beliefs or habits or desires.” Openness: “The openminded reader is willing to hear and consider the ideas of others, 67

68

69

Stephen E. Fowl, “Virtue,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, 838. Cf. idem, Theological Interpretation of Scripture, 64–70. A point emphasized by Stanley Hauerwas, Unleashing the Scripture: Freeing the Bible from Captivity to America (Nashville: Abingdon, 1993). Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning in This Text?, 376.

116

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 116

5/13/2011 12:58:39 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY I

including those in conflict with his own, without prejudice and without malice” Attention: “The virtuous reader, far from being self-absorbed, is rather focused on the text. Paying attention to the text is a form of respect and involves a number of related virtues, such as patience, thoroughness, and care.” Obedience: “The obedient interpreter is the one who follows the directions of the text rather than one’s own desires.”70 As should be clear, neither the rule of love nor the interpretive virtues are a license to eschew the hard work of interpretation for sloppy sentimentality. Nor do these interpretive guides provide warrant for rejecting and/or muting large swaths of biblical teaching that might at fi rst glance appear “unloving” to us. Love, biblically understood, is rooted in the truth, measured by the truth, and willing to conform to the truth.71 Indeed, the rule of love presupposes the rule of faith, for a rightly ordered love flows from a right faith (cf. Gal. 5.6). As Augustine states: “he cannot love what he does not believe to exist.”72 I cannot love God truly and sincerely unless I fi rst know him as “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor. 1.3), who has freely reconciled me to himself through Jesus Christ.73 In a similar way, I cannot love my neighbor truly and sincerely unless I know him as he truly is— whether as a creature made in God’s image (Jas 3.9–10) or also as a fellow child of God in Christ (Eph. 4.25). Furthermore, it is only the faith that raises its hands to receive the free bounty of God’s grace toward us in Christ that is free to open its hands in generosity toward its neighbor.74 Indeed, the faith that lays hold of the truly inexhaustible gifts of God is compelled to share those gifts with others (cf. 2 Kgs 7.9).75 Because the rule of love is explicitly stated in Scripture, its warrant as an interpretive norm may require less explanation and 70 71

72 73

74

75

Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning in This Text?, 377. Consequently, it is never legitimate to leverage a “virtuous reading of Scripture” against Scripture’s own teaching about virtue, as is done when readers act and interpret as if the morality of their own contemporary community has reached a higher level than that of Holy Scripture. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 1.37.41. This point is repeatedly emphasized by John Calvin. See Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.6.4; 3.11.1. This is one of the main themes of Martin Luther’s treatise, On Christian Liberty (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2003). Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 1.1.1.

117

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 117

5/13/2011 12:58:39 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

defense than that of the rule of faith. Nevertheless, a few further comments are in order. First, just as the rule of faith is derived from scriptural teaching as a whole, so is the rule of love. Therefore, second, we must always submit our understanding of this rule to the whole counsel of God. We must allow our understanding of love to be expanded, corrected, and enriched as we come to better appreciate scriptural teaching. Only to the extent that we have an informed understanding of the rule will we have a well formed use of the rule. Third, like the rule of faith, the rule of love is learned in the context of the Christian community. As Daniel J. Treier observes, “communally shaped character traits influence our practices of interpretation considerably.”76 Fourth, because this rule is derived from Scripture’s own teaching, to employ it in biblical interpretation is not to impose an external standard upon the biblical text but is instead to approach the text in light of its own stated purpose. Indeed, the failure to orient our interpretive actions and ends to the love of God and neighbor must be regarded as a fundamental failure in biblical interpretation.

IV. Conclusion In conclusion, to say that we are called to read Scripture in light of the rule of faith and the rule of love is simply to say that we are called to read Scripture from within the context of our covenant relationship with the triune God: a relationship that is rooted in the revelation of God’s name, secured through his mighty acts of salvation, enabled by his regenerating and renewing work, received in the context of a confessing community, and aimed at a loving response. Moreover, because they are intrinsic to Scripture, submitting to the rule of faith and the rule of love in interpretation is a way of submitting to the fundamental rule of biblical interpretation, namely, that Scripture must interpret Scripture. To expound Scripture in a manner that agrees with “the articles of our faith” and “charity towards God and our neighbor” is to expound Scripture “by the very word of God itself.”77 76

77

Treier, Introducing Theological Interpretation of Scripture, 92. This point is also emphasized by Fowl, Theological Interpretation of Scripture, chap. 3. Bullinger, Decades, 80.

118

9780567265401_CH04_Finals_txt_print.indd 118

5/13/2011 12:58:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY, PART TWO: THE PRACTICE OF READING AND THE SHAPE OF INTERPRETATION

I.

Introduction

In the previous chapter we considered the implications of the doctrines of regeneration, sanctification, and the church for our understanding of the act of reading. In the present chapter, we will reflect more directly upon the practical dimensions of Bible reading and interpretation. As we will see, the Christian act of biblical interpretation has a characteristic shape. That shape is determined by the nature of the God who speaks to us through Christ and covenant, the nature of Holy Scripture, and the nature of Christian renewal in the church. The shape of Christian reading is not, strictly speaking, a method. Nor is it a fi xed sequence. Instead, the four “phases” of interpretation—prayer, explication, meditation, and application, constitute one multidimensional act.1 Before turning to a discussion of these four 1

Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, 1.2, 722, 727. Eugene Peterson explains the dynamics of this multidimensional act, which historically has been called “spiritual reading” (lectio divina): “Reading (lectio) is a linear act, but spiritual (divina) reading is not—any of the elements may be at the

119

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 119

5/13/2011 1:00:02 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

phases, however, it is important to discuss the broader context of scriptural reading practices within which these four phases of interpretive action can excel. Too often, we think about biblical interpretation apart from the ways in which churches, families, and individual Christians regularly use the Bible. 2 The present chapter hopes to remedy this situation, at least in part, by drawing attention to the public and private practices of Bible reading which enable and sustain interpretive excellence.

II.

Reading Scripture: Public and Private

It seems too simple to say, but the best way to become a good reader of the Bible is to become a reader of the Bible. The challenges we face in becoming skilled interpreters are enormous. Scripture’s literary forms and figures of speech are diverse. Biblical history covers multiple millennia and its teachings are too numerous to count. Consequently, just as those who would become faithful guides must know their territory, so too, those who would gain interpretive competence must acquire an extensive familiarity with the vast terrain of biblical teaching. Two

2

fore at any one time. There is a certain natural progression from one to another, but after separating them in order to understand them we fi nd that in actual practice they are not four discrete items that we engage in one after another stair-step fashion. Rather than linear the process is more like a looping spiral in which all four elements are repeated, but in various sequences and configurations. What we are after is noticing, seeing the interplay—elements not marching in precise formation but one calling forth another then receding to give place to another, none in isolation from the others but thrown together in a kind of playful folk dance . . . Each of the elements must be taken seriously; none of the elements may be eliminated; none of the elements can be practiced in isolation from the others. In the actual practice of lectio divina the four elements fuse, interpenetrate. Lectio divina is a way of reading that becomes a way of living” (Eugene H. Peterson, Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of Spiritual Reading [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006], 91). For an historical introduction to the practice of lectio divina within the context of monasticism, see Jean Leclercq, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture, trans. Catharine Misrahi (New York Fordham University Press, 1982), chap. 5. See, however, the exceptional discussions of Ward, Words of Life, 171– 74; and Fowl, Theological Interpretation of Scripture, chaps. 2–3.

120

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 120

5/13/2011 1:00:02 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

important means for acquiring such familiarity include the public and private reading of Scripture.

II.a. The Public Reading and Exposition of Scripture Historically, the public reading and exposition of Scripture has played a major role in Judaism and Christianity (cf. Acts 15.21; 1 Tim. 4.13). According to Hughes Oliphant Old, this activity “was a cardinal characteristic of Jewish worship.”3 Moses commanded the priests and the elders of Israel to read the law when they gathered every seven years to celebrate the Feast of Booths (Deut. 31.9–11). Men and women, young and old, citizen and sojourner were to be included in this assembly in order that they might “hear and learn to fear the Lord your God, and be careful to do all the words of this law” (Deut. 31.12). When Israel returned to the Promised Land after the exile, Ezra the scribe read the scriptures to the people, interpreting their meaning so that the people might understand (Neh. 8.1–8). The Gospels tell us that Jesus participated in this activity as well (Lk. 4.16). Given the fi rm roots of this practice in Judaism, it is no surprise that, when instructing Timothy regarding his duties in public worship, Paul encouraged him to devote himself “to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, and to teaching” (1 Tim. 4.13). The public reading and exposition of Holy Scripture is important for a variety of reasons.4 First, when we consider the fact that “only a tiny minority of Christians have been literate or are so now,”5 it is clear that for many the public ministry of the Word is the most vital means of exposure to the Bible and its teaching. Second, when the reading and exposition of the scriptures are performed by someone who has taken care to 3

4

5

Hughes Oliphant Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church, 1: The Biblical Period (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 20. For a recent theological reflection on this topic, see Stephen H. Webb, The Divine Voice: Christian Proclamation and the Theology of Sound (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2004), esp. chap. 8. Paul J. Griffiths, “Reading,” in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible, 662.

121

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 121

5/13/2011 1:00:02 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

study the text, and who is therefore able to read and explain the text in light of its own cadences, rhythms, and emphases, we gain a better appreciation for the scriptures’ status as “the living and active” Word of God (Heb. 4.12). Third, by providing us with a continuous, orderly exposure to the Word of God in all its parts and portions, and by providing us with a regular opportunity for assembling around that Word as a community, the public reading and preaching of the Bible can help nurture in us the habits of attentiveness.6 And in visual cultures that seem to foster inattentiveness, this is a precious provision indeed. Fourth, by depending upon the skilled reading and exposition of another, our horizons of biblical understanding are broadened beyond the limitations that characterize a merely individual reading of the Bible.7 Fifth, and most importantly, the public reading and exposition of Scripture is among the “outward and ordinary means of grace,” i.e., those divinely appointed ecclesial practices by which God communicates the spiritual gifts of Christ and covenant to his people. The scriptures pronounce a special blessing upon those who publicly read and hear their message (1 Tim. 4.16; Rev. 1.3). The Westminster Larger Catechism (Q 155) summarizes the matter as follows: The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preaching of the word an effectual means of enlightening, convincing, and humbling sinners; of driving them out of themselves, and drawing them unto Christ; of conforming them to his image, and subduing them to his will; of strengthening them against temptations and corruptions; of building them up in grace, and establishing their hearts in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation. Clearly, therefore, the significance of the public ministry of the Word cannot be overemphasized. 6

7

According to Hans-Georg Gadamer, in interpretation “what one has to exercise above all is the ear” (cited in Anthony C. Thiselton, Hermeneutics: An Introduction [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009], 2). Hughes Oliphant Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church, 3: The Medieval Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 167–68.

122

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 122

5/13/2011 1:00:03 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

II.b.

The Private Reading of Scripture

Along with the public reading and exposition of the Bible, private reading also has a vital role to play in the formation of interpretive competence. In order to fully appreciate this point, we must note that the contrast between “public” and “private” reading is not equivalent to the contrast between “communal” and “individual” reading. Rather, the contrast concerns that which happens within the church’s official gathering for public worship and that which happens outside of that gathering. Beyond the bounds of the assembly (though not beyond the bounds of its being, order, and purpose), both individuals and groups are called to engage in the private reading, memorization, and study of Holy Scripture. Both testaments bear witness to the mandate and the blessing associated with teaching Scripture in the context of the family (Deut. 6.6–9; 2 Tim. 3.14–15). Familiarization and facility with the Bible is a lifelong process and many of the skills requisite to interpretation are learned at an early age under the tutelage of parents and other teachers. However, these skills must be appropriated and exercised by individuals as well. The duty of reading, memorizing, and familiarizing oneself with the Bible is therefore incumbent upon everyone who would gain proficiency as an interpreter. In On Christian Doctrine, perhaps the most influential text on biblical interpretation ever written, Augustine provides an instructive discussion of some of the ways in which we may attain a greater proficiency as readers of the scriptures. According to Augustine, the “fi rst rule” for becoming a skilled reader of the Bible is “to know these books” and “to read them so as to commit them to memory.”8 Though scriptural memorization ultimately serves a number of sanctifying ends (cf. Ps. 119.11),9 it 8 9

Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.9.14. Indeed, for Augustine, the fundamental reason for memorizing Scripture is that we might know “the will of God” (On Christian Doctrine, 2.9.14). This fits with the broader patristic-medieval synthesis regarding the goal of biblical reading and interpretation, which was not simply to know the divine text but to know the divine teacher through the text. This point is emphasized by Matthew Levering, Participatory Biblical Exegesis: A Theology of Biblical Interpretation (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 2008), esp. chap. 3.

123

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 123

5/13/2011 1:00:03 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

also serves the process of reading. Scripture is characterized by a rich intertextuality. On almost every page, the Bible either quotes or alludes to other biblical passages. Closely related to this phenomenon, the Bible projects an internally coherent symbolic world. Accordingly, symbols in one text shape the way we interpret symbols in another text.10 Given this fact, much of the biblical message will be lost on us if we are not intimately familiar with the symbolic and allusive features of its textual reality. Memorization is one of the best ways of establishing such intimate knowledge. For similar reasons, Augustine also encourages us to become familiar with the languages, idioms, chronologies, and customs of the Bible,11 including even the labor customs exhibited therein, inasmuch as a familiarity with the latter will help us appreciate how Scripture “employs figures of speech derived from these arts.”12 The Bible is in many ways a foreign country. Those who travel abroad are willing to learn the dialects, customs, and etiquette of foreign countries. So too should the reader of the scriptures be willing to learn the “local color” of the Bible’s idiomatic, social, and cultural landscape. Beyond matters of form, which are by no means incidental, Augustine also counsels us to study with great diligence the doctrinal substance of Holy Scripture, its “rules of life” and “rules of faith.”13 As we will read a novel with greater understanding if we have some grasp of its main characters, plot, and themes, similarly, we will read the Bible with greater understanding if we have some grasp of its theological and ethical subject matter. John Calvin inherited this Augustinian insight regarding the hermeneutical function of Christian doctrine and wrote his Institutes of the Christian Religion in order “to treat the chief and weightiest matters comprised in the Christian philosophy” and thereby to provide “a key to open a way for all children of God into a good

10

11 12

13

See the classic discussion of Northrop Frye, The Great Code: The Bible and Literature (San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983). See Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.11.16–2.29.46. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.30.47. According to Augustine, learning to distinguish between the Bible’s literal and figurative forms of speech is one of the reader’s most important tasks. It is Augustine’s attention to this distinction that ultimately gives birth to the medieval fourfold sense. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.9.14.

124

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 124

5/13/2011 1:00:03 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

and right understanding of Holy Scripture.”14 Augustine’s counsel is repeated in Puritan handbooks of interpretation as well.15 Unfortunately, many modern biblical interpreters found little use and even contempt for Christian doctrine’s hermeneutical function. Thankfully, however, the tide seems to be changing.16

III. Four Phases of Biblical Interpretation With these observations in place, it is time to consider in a more formal sense the work of biblical interpretation. The necessity and nature of interpretive work is helpfully described by Abraham Kuyper: In Holy Scripture God the Lord offers us ectypal theology in an organically connected section of human life, permeated by many Divine agencies, out of which a number of blindingly brilliant utterances strike out as sparks from fire. But the treasures thus presented are without further effort not yet reflected in and reproduced by the consciousness of regenerated man. To realize this purpose our thinking consciousness must descend into this gold mine, and dig out from its treasure, and then assimilate that treasure thus obtained; and not leave it as something apart from the other content of our consciousness, but systematize it with all the rest into one whole.17 This prayerful work of digging and assimilating the treasures of Holy Scripture determines the characteristic shape of biblical interpretation. To that characteristic shape we now turn.

III.a.

Prayer

It is striking how many times in Psalm 119—an extended meditation on God’s written Word, the Torah—the psalmist begs for

14 15 16

17

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 6–7. See Perkins, Art of Prophesying, 23–25. For a recent attempt to retrieve Augustine’s interpretive approach, see Jason Byassee, Praise Seeking Understanding: Reading the Psalms with Augustine (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007). Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, 567.

125

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 125

5/13/2011 1:00:03 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

divine assistance in order that he might understand and obey God’s word. The following list is merely representative, not exhaustive: Oh that my ways may be steadfast in keeping your statutes (v. 5). Let me not wander from your commandments (v. 10). Blessed are you, O Lord, teach me your statutes (v. 12). Deal bountifully with your servant, that I may live and keep your word (v. 17). Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law (v. 18). Put false ways far from me and graciously teach me your law (v. 29). I will run in the way of your commandments when you enlarge my heart (v. 32). Teach me, O Lord, the way of your statutes; and I will keep it to the end (v. 33). The psalmist prays for an obedience that is steadfast (v. 5) and consistent (v. 10), that excels (v. 32) and perseveres (v. 33). He also acknowledges his dependence upon divine grace for spiritual perception (v. 18), receptivity (v. 32), and understanding (vv. 12, 29, 33). Prayer is the most rational possible course of action for the Christian reader of Holy Scripture. After all, in Holy Scripture we face a grand and glorious terrain of revealed truth, so wonderful that the possibility of taking it all in is immediately ruled out. And yet, we are called to meditate on this Word (Josh. 1.8; Ps. 1.2), to walk in it (Ps. 119.1), and to praise it (Ps. 56.4, 10). The sheer magnitude of scriptural teaching alone makes our calling impossible apart from divine assistance. Add to this our innate blindness, our fallen will and passions, and our tendency toward sloth in this calling and the desperate nature of our situation as readers becomes quite clear. If there is to be any possibility of success in reading Holy Scripture, the Spirit of truth and light must shine upon us: opening our eyes, renewing our wills, and awakening us to action. The good news is that God has promised to bless our reading. Thus Paul encourages Timothy: “Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything” (2 Tim. 2.7). 126

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 126

5/13/2011 1:00:03 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

This is perhaps the most precious promise that exists for the reader of Holy Writ. We may confidently apply ourselves to this otherwise impossible task because God has promised to grant us success—“the Lord will give you understanding.” According to Whitaker: “He that shall be content to make such a use of these means, and will lay aside his prejudices and party zeal, which many bring with them to every question, will be enabled to gain an understanding of the scriptures, if not in all places, yet in most; if not immediately, yet ultimately.”18 In prayer, exegetical reason takes its proper place and, like Mary, sits at the feet of Jesus (cf. Lk. 10.39). And because it is confident in God’s fatherly generosity, exegetical reason asks, seeks, knocks—and fi nds (Lk. 11.10–13).

III.b.

Explication

Whereas prayer gives voice to the Christian’s longing for the pure milk of the word (1 Pet. 2.2), explication represents “the descriptive moment” of biblical interpretation.19 Each text of Holy Scripture says one thing and not another. Moreover, each text says what it says in a fi xed grammatical and literary shape and within a specific historical context. In explication, the reader gives “reverent attentiveness to the particularity of the texts in all their detail.”20 According to David Yeago, “The first mandate of faithful ecclesial reading” is “Pay attention, meticulous attention, to what the scriptures say; strive to do justice to the way the words go in the text.”21 As Eugene Peterson observes, this “meticulous attention” that we give to following the words of the text in their grammatical, literary, and historical contexts— “exegesis” in the strict sense of that term—“is the farthest thing from pedantry.” According to Peterson, “exegesis is an act of love. It is loving the one who speaks the words enough to get the words right. It is respecting the words enough to use every

18 19

20 21

Whitaker, Disputation, 473. David S. Yeago, “The Bible,” in Knowing the Triune God: The Work of the Spirit in the Practices of the Church, ed. James J. Buckley and David S. Yeago (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 66. Yeago, “Bible,” 66. Yeago, “Bible,” 66.

127

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 127

5/13/2011 1:00:04 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

means we have to get the words right. Exegesis is loving God enough to stop and listen carefully to what he says.”22 Explication calls for a host of related skills if it is to be done with excellence—and love needs no motivation for excellence in relation to the beloved! To the extent that giftedness and opportunity allow, therefore, reverent attentiveness to the way the words go requires: (1) That we learn the original languages of Holy Scripture (Hebrew and Greek—and Aramaic if we dare). (2) That we familiarize ourselves with the nature of figurative language, and that we gain competence in distinguishing figurative language from literal language. (3) In the case of particular texts, that we attend to the author, occasion, scope, and structure of a given text, and that we familiarize ourselves with what comes before and after a text in order to appreciate its place within the flow of an author’s argument. (4) That we compare our texts with parallel texts, whether texts by the same author, within the same genre, within the same canonical corpus, or texts bearing similar themes. (5) That we compare a given text with dissimilar texts for, given Scripture’s unity, when teaching from one passage seems to contradict another, this may indicate a misunderstanding on our part with respect to either passage.23 As we have seen already, the development of interpretive skill is always a communal enterprise. It is expedient therefore for the reader of Scripture to seek assistance from more seasoned and trustworthy readers as he or she seeks to develop exegetical skill and to nurture sound exegetical judgment. Whitaker explains: “since the unlearned know not how to make a right use of these means, they ought to have recourse to other persons better skilled than themselves, to read the books of others, to consult the commentaries and expositions of learned interpreters, and to confer with others.” Whitaker’s counsel remains quite relevant, as individualistic approaches to biblical interpretation have achieved nearly normative status in many Christian circles. Nevertheless, he goes on to add an important qualification: “But, in the meanwhile, care must be taken that we do not ascribe too much to them, or suppose that their interpretations are to be received because they are theirs, but because they are 22 23

Eugene H. Peterson, “Caveat Lector,” Crux 32 (1996): 6. These five examples are drawn from Whitaker, Disputation, 468–72.

128

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 128

5/13/2011 1:00:04 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

supported by the authority of scripture or by reason, so as to allow them no weight in opposition to the scripture. We may use their labours, advice, prudence, and knowledge; but we should use them always cautiously, modestly, and discreetly, and so as still to retain our own liberty.”24 In other words, our dependence upon the aid of teachers should not become a surrogate for biblical authority, nor should it prevent us from improving the exercise of our own exegetical reason.

III.c.

Meditation

Meditation represents “the reflective moment” of biblical interpretation. 25 In meditation, we seek to understand a given text of Scripture in light of Scripture’s overarching message. Ultimately, Scripture is a single book, written by one divine author, concerning one central subject matter (Christ and covenant), and with one ultimate aim (the love of God and neighbor). Therefore, if we wish to understand what God is saying in a given text, we must attend to the ultimate context of his self-communication, Scripture as a whole. Jesus reprimanded the Pharisees for searching the Law of Moses to find eternal life while failing to see that the Law of Moses bore witness to his person and work (Jn 5.39). When he appeared to the two disciples on the Emmaus Road, and later to the eleven, Jesus rebuked their failure to understand the prophets and “interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself” (Lk. 24.25–27; cf. 44–47). Meditation, then, is not an option for the Christian reader of Holy Scripture. Because Christ has come, “the seals are broken, the stone rolled away from the door of the tomb, and that greatest of all mysteries brought to light—that Christ, God’s Son became man, that God is Three in One, that Christ suffered for us, and will reign forever.”26 In the light of these gospel realities—the unveiling of the triune God, Christ’s incarnation, atonement, and enthronement—the whole of scriptural teaching is illumined (cf. 2 Cor. 3–4).We may 24 25 26

Whitaker, Disputation, 473. Yeago, “Bible,” 66. Luther, Bondage of the Will, 71.

129

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 129

5/13/2011 1:00:04 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

not therefore assume that we have understood any text of the Bible properly until we have considered how it pertains “to Jesus Christ and his messianic dominion.”27 As Yeago observes, meditation has both “diachronic” and “synchronic” dimensions.28 The diachronic dimension of meditation requires us to reflect upon the redemptive-historical context of a given passage of Scripture, the way in which a text relates to and communicates the unfolding economy of redemption. In order to better appreciate the redemptive-historical context of a text, we may ask ourselves the following questions related to God’s kingdom, covenants, and Christ.29 (1) With respect to the kingdom of God: Where does this text stand in relation to the unfolding drama of the kingdom?30 Specifically, to which of the following epochs of God’s unfolding kingdom does this text primarily attend?31 If ours is an Old Testament text, does its subject matter primarily concern: 1. The pattern of the kingdom: God’s good design for creation in the beginning 2. The perished kingdom: Humanity’s revolt and God’s curse 3. The promised kingdom: God’s promise in the protoevangelium and the extension of that promise to the patriarchs

27 28 29

30

31

Yeago, “Bible,” 72. Yeago, “Bible,” 66 n 23. Note: These three themes are organically related in the scriptures and are separated here only for heuristic purposes. For a helpful approach to analyzing the unfolding kingdom of God, see Graeme Goldsworthy, According to Plan; and idem, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture: The Application of Biblical Theology to Expository Preaching (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), esp. chap. 8. Adapted from Vaughan Roberts, God’s Big Picture: Tracing the Storyline of the Bible (Downers Grove: IVP, 2002), 22–25. Compare this with Wright’s “five-act model” of redemptive history, discussed in The New Testament and the People of God, 139–44; more briefly outlined in, Scripture and the Authority of God, 89–93.

130

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 130

5/13/2011 1:00:04 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

4. The partial kingdom: The initial fulfillment of God’s redemptive promises in the exodus, wilderness wanderings, conquest, and kingdom under David and Solomon 5. The prophesied kingdom: The history of decline in the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, exile, and return; visions of Israel’s restoration and the fulfillment of God’s promised kingdom? If ours is a New Testament text, does its subject matter primarily concern: 6. The present kingdom: The Father fulfills and establishes his kingdom through the incarnation, death, resurrection, and enthronement of his beloved Son, Jesus Christ 7. The proclaimed kingdom: Following the outpouring of the promised Spirit, the apostles announce the fulfillment of God’s kingdom in Christ, gather and build the church, and anticipate Christ’s return 8. The perfected kingdom: The consummation of the kingdom in a new heaven and new earth? Having identified our text’s epochal focus, we may ask: What are the relationships between this text and earlier and later moments in the unfolding story of the kingdom? What common patterns and/or surprising developments are there between this text and earlier/later kingdom events and epochs? How does this text anticipate and/or announce the kingdom that has come and is coming? (2) With respect to covenant: Under what covenant administration does this text operate (e.g., Adamic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, New)? How are the divine name and the history of divine benevolence on display in this text? What covenant promises, stipulations, and sanctions are in view? How do the various characters in this text (God, individual members of the covenant community, the covenant community as a whole) demonstrate faithfulness or unfaithfulness with respect to the covenant(s)? What is the relationship between the covenantal themes on display in this text and the covenants that 131

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 131

5/13/2011 1:00:04 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

precede and follow this text in redemptive history? As Scott Hahn observes, the various biblical covenants are Janus-like: they look backward to earlier covenant administrations and forward to future covenant administrations. 32 (3) With respect to Christ: Where does this text fit in relationship to the climax of redemptive history, the gospel of Jesus Christ? If it is an Old Testament text, what patterns in this text (including persons, events, institutions, and themes) anticipate (either by way of positive comparison or by way of contrast) the Christ who comes to fulfill those patterns?33 If it is an Old Testament text, does Christ’s fulfi llment of the Old Testament require a transformation in the way that we apply the instruction of this text?34 If so, what transformation does it require? If it is a New Testament text, how does it announce that Christ has indeed come and/or how does it spell out the implications of his coming? In what ways does this text present Jesus Christ as the ultimate fulfillment of all God’s kingdom and covenantal purposes? If a diachronic reading considers a given scriptural text in relation to the unfolding economy of redemption, a synchronic reading considers a given scriptural text as a slice of the canonical whole. The synchronic dimension of meditation involves reflecting upon a given passage in light of Scripture’s status as a unified literary and thematic work. We must therefore ask: What recurring canonical motifs and symbols does our text display? And how does its distinctive presentation of these motifs and symbols enrich our understanding of God’s word? In synchronic analysis, we contemplate the ways in which a specific text contributes to our overall understanding of Scripture’s theological and ethical teaching as summarized in the rule of faith and the rule of love. How does our text contribute to the knowledge of God? What 32 33

34

Kinship by Covenant. See Edmund P. Clowney, Preaching Christ in All of Scripture (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2003); and Sidney Greidanus, Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999). For an especially helpful treatment of this theme in relation to the Law of Moses, see Vern Sheridan Poythress, The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991).

132

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 132

5/13/2011 1:00:05 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

does it reveal about the life that God requires of his people? And how does our text communicate the glory of the Mediator, who manifests the fullness of God’s grace and invests us with all that is needed for life and godliness? The best approach to meditative understanding will seek to make both diachronic and synchronic connections to Scripture’s overarching message in light of the distinctive thematic emphases and literary shape of the text being analyzed. The question of meditative understanding is: What and how does this text refract the light of Christ and covenant in its own particular way? A common error in the “meditative phase” of biblical interpretation occurs when we draw interpretive conclusions about Christ and covenant from a particular text which are true as a matter of general theological principle but which are not as such addressed in that particular text.35 Mature biblical interpreters will seek instead to wed an increasingly rich and sophisticated understanding of Scripture’s overarching message with an increasingly attentive appreciation of the particularities of a given text.

III.d.

Application

God’s fi nal purpose in the gospel is to transform his redeemed children, according to the image of his beloved Son, so that they might offer themselves freely and fully in service to God and neighbor (Rom. 8.29; 12.1–2; 2 Cor. 3.18; Rev. 22.1–5). All Scripture is profitable for accomplishing this end (2 Tim. 3.16–17). Consequently, the reading of Scripture is not complete until we have considered application, “the appropriative moment” of biblical interpretation. 36 As Karl Barth states, “Without this” phase of interpretation, “observation can be only a historically aesthetic survey, and reflection only idle speculation, in spite of all the supposed openness to the object in both cases. The proof of our openness to the object is that our observation and reflection on what is said leads to assimiliation.”37 35 36 37

See Clowney’s discussion in Preaching Christ, 32ff. Yeago, “Bible,” 66. Barth, Church Dogmatics, 1.2, 738.

133

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 133

5/13/2011 1:00:05 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

Because biblical interpretation is an act of covenant mutuality, a living engagement with the living God through his living Christ, biblical interpretation is always personal. As interpreters, we are always making decisions either for or against the truths, promises, and commands of a given text. There is no neutrality here. We are either in the process of further embracing Scripture’s truths, promises, and commands or we are in the process of distancing ourselves from them. We are either bringing ourselves into further conformity to God’s word or we are slowly drifting away from that which we have read and heard (cf. Heb. 2.1–4). The timing of biblical application therefore is always “Today” (see Heb. 3.7–4.13). It is important to emphasize, therefore, that the appropriative moment is not simply a matter of turning the message of Scripture to my needs and ends. It is instead a matter of having myself, my needs, and my ends turned to and by God’s word in Scripture. Commenting on Karl Barth’s approach to the Bible, Eugene Peterson says: Barth insists that we do not read this book and the subsequent writings that are shaped by it in order to find out how to get God into our lives, get him to participate in our lives. No. We open this book and find that page after page it takes us off guard, surprises us, and draws us into its reality, pulls us into participation with God on his terms.38 The reason for this is that the One who speaks in Holy Scripture always issues the lordly summons: “Follow me.”39 Understanding the Bible is never simply a matter of following its words. Understanding the Bible is ultimately a matter of following the One who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (Jn 14.6).40 The process of understanding is, in other words, “identical to the process of conversion.”41 Because application always emerges as a response to the triune Lord of the covenant, application requires us to ask: Who is God 38 39 40

41

Peterson, Eat This Book, 6. Barth, Church Dogmatics, 1.2, 740. Vanhoozer: “To understand the Bible is ultimately to begin walking its way” (Is There a Meaning in This Text?, 438). Henri de Lubac, Scripture in the Tradition, 21.

134

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 134

5/13/2011 1:00:05 PM

READING AS AN ACT OF COVENANT MUTUALITY II

according to this text and what does he promise to be for us as “our God” (i.e., the God of the covenant)? What has God done in the past and what does he promise to do in the future? Having addressed these questions, we may ask: What is the requisite response to God and to his covenantal actions? What negative examples of covenant infidelity does this text exhibit (cf. 1 Cor. 10.1–11; Heb. 3.16–4.10)? What positive examples does it give us to follow (cf. Rom. 4.1–12; Heb. 11)? And how do we help each other get there (cf. Heb. 3.13; 12.15)?42 As an aspect of our ongoing conversion to Jesus’ lordly summons in the scriptures, application involves considering what a given text requires of the whole person. How does the text inform, encourage, and console our faith, hope, and love in the various dimensions of those virtues (cognitive, volitional, affective, and active)?43 What thoughts, attitudes, and actions does our text require us to “put off”? What thoughts, attitudes, and actions does our text require us to “put on” (Rom. 13.12–14; Eph. 4.21–24)? Application involves considering what our text requires of all people in general (e.g., repentance, faith, endurance, etc.) and also what it requires only of some people in particular (e.g., believers and unbelievers, the teachable and the stubborn, men and women, married and single, husbands and wives, parents and children, ministers and congregants, young and old, rich and poor, etc.).44 Furthermore, application requires us to consider how a given text proclaims Christ, presenting him both as the guarantor of all that God is for us and as the one through whom God grants all that he requires. There is no true application of Holy Scripture apart from a living embrace of the Christ freely offered to us in the gospel. Through Holy Scripture, God communicates Christ to us. In application, we receive him and respond to him. For this reason, one of the most fitting corporate modes of scriptural application is the sacraments. Through the sacraments,

42

43

44

For further discussion of what it means to “apply” the Covenant of Grace, see Brakel, Christian’s Reasonable Service, 1:449–51. Cf. Daniel M. Doriani, Putting the Truth to Work: The Theory and Practice of Biblical Application (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2001), chap. 5; Perkins, Art of Prophesying, chap. 8. William Perkins’ discussion remains a wise and helpful resource on this topic. See his, Art of Prophesying, chap.7.

135

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 135

5/13/2011 1:00:05 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

Christ visibly and personally communicates himself and all his benefits to those who by faith receive them. And, through the sacraments, faithful recipients express their gratitude to God and extend their witness to the world.45 The community that with the Word faithfully receives the water, the wine, and the bread will be a community that renders glory to God and that reveals the gospel to the world. The ultimate end of application is adoration. As John Webster states, the exercise of exegetical reason brings us “to apprehend, cleave to, and obey God—to ‘contemplate’ in the sense of intelligent adoration.”46 “My soul keeps your testimonies; I love them exceedingly” (Ps. 119.167). The God who knows and loves himself makes himself known to us in Holy Scripture that we might know and love him as well (Jn 17.3). To this end, application invokes the Spirit’s presence, who sheds abroad the love of God in our hearts (Rom. 5.5) and who sanctifies our self-offering to God (Rom. 12.1–2; 15.16): “Let my soul live and praise you, and let your rules help me” (Ps. 119.175).

IV. Conclusion It is fitting to conclude the present chapter with Heinrich Bullinger’s summons to all faithful readers of Holy Scripture: Let us therefore in all things believe the word of God delivered to us by the scriptures. Let us think that the Lord himself, which is the very living and eternal God, doth speak to us by the scriptures. Let us forevermore praise the name and goodness of him, who hath vouchedsafe so faithfully, fully, and plainly to open to us, miserable and mortal men, all the means how to live well and holily. To him be praise, honour, and glory for evermore. Amen.47

45 46 47

Ursinus, Commentary, 351–54. Webster, “Biblical Reasoning,” 743. Bullinger, Decades, 57.

136

9780567265401_CH05_Finals_txt_print.indd 136

5/13/2011 1:00:05 PM

CONCLUSION

Biblical interpretation is a human activity ordered by and to the knowledge of the triune God. As such, it is bound and shaped by realities common to every dimension of the scientia Dei.1 The possibility of theological knowledge is grounded ontologically in the intratrinitarian knowledge and love of God himself. “No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son” (Mt. 11.27). The possibility of theological knowledge is grounded epistemologically in the fact that God, in his sovereign good pleasure, has condescended to reveal himself to babes (Mt. 11.25–26). “No one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him” (Mt. 11.27). To know and adore the blessed Trinity is not our possession by natural right. Here we are dealing with a knowledge that is natural only to God, a knowledge that is ours therefore only because God has freely “granted” us to know “the mystery of the kingdom of God” (Mk 4.11). In acquiring this knowledge, we are like the one in Matthew 13.44 who stumbles upon a treasure hidden in a field. We did not mean to fi nd it. Our possession of this treasure is not the conclusion to our skillful quest. Nevertheless, though the fi nding of this treasure does not result from our intelligent action, its fi nding does result in manifold forms of intelligent activity. The lucky day laborer of Matthew 13.44 becomes the skillful scribe and wise householder of Matthew 13.52. The gift of theological knowledge awakens and energizes the work of theological reason. This work of theological reason, like all regenerated energies, is in turn a work 1

Vos, “Idea,” 4.

137

9780567265401_Concl_Finals_txt_print.indd 137

5/13/2011 1:02:55 PM

TRINITY, REVELATION, AND READING

characterized by mortification and vivification. In terms of mortification: There is a selling of all that we have to lay hold of this hidden treasure—a kind of intellectual and affective divestment, an ascesis, that follows from our fi nding this gift. We do not know God. But, in God’s kindness, we have come to know him. And therefore we forsake all that we think we know in order more fully to know him. In terms of vivification: There is a new manner of mindfulness that corresponds to the riches freely received. This new mindfulness is characterized by confidence, corresponding to the promise of divine assistance that accompanies our study: “Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything” (2 Tim. 2.7). It is also characterized by a holy diligence, corresponding to the gravitas of our study’s object and end. Moreover, as is the case with every labor carried out under the banner of the risen Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 15.58), this work is continually characterized by hilaritas: “I rejoice at your word like one who fi nds great spoil” (Ps. 119.162).2 As a mode of theological reasoning, biblical interpretation is concerned directly and specifically with the textual mediation of God’s self-revelation in the sacred writings of his authorized emissaries, the prophets and apostles. Whether the object of concern is the sacred writings taken as a whole, as in dogmatics, or with the sacred writings in their distinctive portions and places (cf. Heb. 1.1), as in biblical commentary, the interpreter acknowledges that the Bible affords us with an embarrassment of riches and is therefore devoted to identifying and appreciating each treasure of Holy Scripture in its distinctive beauty and worth, attending to the particular words of particular texts in their particular historical and literary settings in order to provide a faithful representation of their particular message. This attentiveness to particularity is preserved from myopia and atomism because it attends to the various words of Holy Scripture under the promise of fi nding the Word made fl esh therein. “If any one . . . reads the Scriptures with attention,” Irenaeus assures us, “he will find in them an account of Christ, and a foreshadowing of the new calling. For Christ is the treasure which was hid in the field.”3 This assurance follows from 2

3

Karl Barth, Evangelical Theology: An Introduction, trans. Grover Foley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), 155–56. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.26.1.

138

9780567265401_Concl_Finals_txt_print.indd 138

5/13/2011 1:02:55 PM

CONCLUSION

the fact that the principle of scriptural unity is not simply a literary hypothesis that the commentator, as rational subject, brings to the text, which is his object, but that the Word made flesh is the lively subject of scriptural revelation4 who communicates himself in and through the words of his Spirit-inspired ambassadors, thus enabling us to appreciate their fundamental unity and coherence in him (Lk. 24.44–47; 1 Pet. 1.11; Rom. 10.17). Reading is therefore a living conversation between an eloquent Lord and his attentive servants, a conversation in which the reader is summoned to hear what the Spirit of Christ says to the churches (Rev. 2.7). Answering this summons, biblical interpretation is the work of scribes “trained for the kingdom of heaven” (Mt. 13.52), who labor diligently in the field of the Word’s self-communication and who, like wise householders, freely distribute the fruits of their labors, “both enriching the understanding of men, and showing forth the wisdom of God.”5 Such labor is both pleasing to God (2 Tim. 2.15) and (quite literally) salutary in its ends (1 Tim. 4.13–16). Such labor therefore requires no further warrant.

4 5

Cf. Vos, “Idea,” 4–5. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 4.26.1.

139

9780567265401_Concl_Finals_txt_print.indd 139

5/13/2011 1:02:56 PM

9780567265401_Concl_Finals_txt_print.indd 140

5/13/2011 1:02:56 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, T. Desmond and Brian S. Rosner, eds. New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2000. Arand, Charles P. “The Church’s Dogma and Biblical Theology.” In A Confessing Theology for Postmodern Times. Ed. Michael S. Horton, 15–27. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2000. Augustine. On Christian Doctrine. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 2: St. Augustin’s City of God, Christian Doctrine. Repr. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993. Bannerman, James. The Church of Christ: A Treatise on the Nature, Powers, Ordinances, Discipline and Government of the Christian Church. New York: Westminster, 2002 (1869). Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics. Trans. Geoffrey Bromiley et al. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1956–1969. —. Dogmatics in Outline. New York: Harper & Row, 1959. —. Evangelical Theology: An Introduction. Trans. Grover Foley. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1963. —. The Humanity of God. Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1960. Barton, John. “Historical-Critical Approaches.” In The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation. Ed. John Barton, 1–20. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Bauckham, Richard. The Climax of Prophecy: Studies on the Book of Revelation. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993. —. Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006. —. Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008. —. “Reading Scripture as a Coherent Story.” In The Art of Reading Scripture. Ed. Ellen F. Davis and Richard B. Hays, 38–53. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003.

141

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 141

5/13/2011 12:53:17 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bauckham, Richard. The Theology of the Book of Revelation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics. 4 vols. Trans. John Vriend. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker: 2003–2008. Beale, G. K. The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the Dwelling Place of God. New Studies in Biblical Theology 17. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2004. Behr, John. The Way to Nicaea. The Formation of Christian Theology 1. Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2001. Bockmuehl, Markus. “Reason, Wisdom and the Implied Disciple of Scripture.” In Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom. Ed. David F. Ford and Graham Stanton, 53–68. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004. Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Life Together and Prayerbook of the Bible. Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works 5. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005. Bowald, Mark Alan. Rendering the Word in Theological Hermeneutics: Mapping Divine and Human Agency. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2007. Brakel, Wilhelmus à. The Christian’s Reasonable Service. 4 vols. Trans. Bartel Elshout. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 1992–1995 (1707). Briggs, Richard S. Words in Action: Speech Act Theory and Biblical Interpretation: Toward a Hermeneutic of Self-Involvement. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2001. Brown, Jeannine K. Scripture as Communication: Introducing Biblical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2007. Brueggemann, Walter. Genesis. Atlanta, GA: John Knox, 1982. —. Theology of the Old Testament: Testimony, Dispute Advocacy. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997. Bullinger, Heinrich. Decades of Heinrich Bullinger: The First and Second Decades. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1849. Byassee, Jason. Praise Seeking Understanding: Reading the Psalms with Augustine. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007. Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. 2 vols. Trans. Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960. Chemnitz, Martin. Examination of the Council of Trent. vol. 1. Trans. Fred Kramer. St. Louis: Concordia, 1971. Clowney, Edmund P. Preaching Christ in All of Scripture. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2003. Colson, Charles and Richard John Neuhaus, eds. Your Word Is Truth: A Project of Evangelicals and Catholics Together. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002. de Lubac, Henri. Scripture in the Tradition. Trans. Luke O’Neill. New York: Crossroad, 2000.

142

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 142

5/13/2011 12:53:17 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Dempster, Stephen. Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible. New Studies in Biblical Theology 15. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2003. Dionysius. Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works. Trans. Colm Luibheid. New York: Paulist, 1987. Doriani, Daniel M. Putting the Truth to Work: The Theory and Practice of Biblical Application. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2001. Fee, Gordon D. God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994. Fowl, Stephen E. Engaging Scripture. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1998. —. Theological Interpretation of Scripture. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2009. —. “Virtue.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 837–839. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. Frye, Northrop. The Great Code: The Bible and Literature. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983. Gaffi n, Jr., Richard B. God’s Word in Servant-Form: Abraham Kuyper and Herman Bavinck on the Doctrine of Scripture. Jackson, MS: Reformed Academic Press, 2008. Gentry, Peter J. “Kingdom through Covenant: Humanity as the Divine Image.” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 12 (Spring 2008): 16–42. Gioia, Luigi. The Theological Epistemology of Augustine’s De Trinitate. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Goldsworthy, Graeme. According to Plan: The Unfolding Revelation of God in the Bible. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2002. —. Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture: The Application of Biblical Theology to Expository Preaching. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000. Green, Joel B. Seized By Truth: Reading the Bible as Scripture. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2007. Greene-McCreight, Kathryn. “Rule of Faith.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 703–704. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. Greidanus, Sidney. Preaching Christ from the Old Testament: A Contemporary Hermeneutical Method. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999. Griffiths, Paul J. “Reading.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 661–663. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. —. Religious Reading: The Place of Reading in the Practice of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

143

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 143

5/13/2011 12:53:17 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Grudem, Wayne A. “Scripture’s Self-Attestation and the Problem of Formulating a Doctrine of Scripture.” In Scripture and Truth. Ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge, 19–59. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994. Gunton, Colin E. A Brief Theology of Revelation. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995. Hahn, Scott W. Kinship by Covenant: A Canonical Approach to the Fulfillment of God’s Saving Promises. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009. Hardy, Edward R., ed. Christology of the Later Fathers. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1954. Harrisville, Roy A. and Walter Sundberg. The Bible in Modern Culture: Baruch Spinoza to Brevard Childs. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002. Hauerwas, Stanley. Unleashing the Scripture: Freeing the Bible from Captivity to America. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1993. Hengel, Martin. “ ‘Salvation History’: The Truth of Scripture and Modern Theology.” In Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom: Scripture and Theology. Ed. David F. Ford and Graham Stanton, 229–244. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004. Hill, Charles E. “God’s Speech in These Last Days: The New Testament Canon as Eschatological Phenomenon.” In Resurrection and Eschatology: Theology in Service of the Church: Essays in Honor of Richard B. Gaffi n, Jr. Ed. Lane G. Tipton and Jeffrey C. Waddington, 203–254. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2008. Hodge, Archibald A. and Benjamin B. Warfield. Inspiration. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979 (1881). Holmes, Stephen R. Listening to the Past: The Place of Tradition in Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002. Horton, Michael S. Covenant and Eschatology: The Divine Drama. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2002. Hütter, Reinhard. Suffering Divine Things: Theology as Church Practice. Trans. Doug Stott. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000. Irenaeus. Against Heresies. Ante-Nicene Fathers 1: Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus. Repr. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Jacobs, Alan. A Theology of Reading: The Hermeneutics of Love. Boulder, CO: Westview, 2001. Jenson, Robert W. Canon and Creed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2010. —. “A Second Thought about Inspiration.” Pro Ecclesia 13 (2004): 397–398. —. Systematic Theology. Vol. 1. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

144

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 144

5/13/2011 12:53:18 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Kline, Meredith G. Kingdom Prologue: Genesis Foundations for a Covenantal Worldview. Overland Park, KS: Two Age Press, 2000. —. The Structure of Biblical Authority. South Hamilton, MA: M. G. Kline, 1989. Köstenberger, Andreas J. and Scott R. Swain. Father, Son and Spirit: The Trinity and John’s Gospel. New Studies in Biblical Theology 24. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2008. Kuyper, Abraham. Principles of Sacred Theology. Trans. J. Hendrik De Vries. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1968. Lane, Anthony N. S. “Sola Scriptura? Making Sense of a PostReformation Slogan.” In A Pathway into the Holy Scripture. Ed. Philip E. Satterthwaite and David F. Wright, 297–327. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994. Leclercq, Jean. The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture. Trans. Catharine Misrahi. New York: Fordham University Press, 1982. Legaspi, Michael C. The Death of Scripture and the Rise of Biblical Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Letham, Robert. “Applying God’s Word to All of Life? The Use and Abuse of the Bible.” Modern Reformation (January/February 2001): 40–43. Levering, Matthew. Participatory Biblical Exgesis: A Theology of Biblical Interpretation. Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 2008. Lindbeck, George A. The Nature of Doctrine: Religion and Theology in a Postliberal Age. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1984. Luther, Martin. The Bondage of the Will. Trans. J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston. Grand Rapids, MI: Fleming H. Revell, 1957. —. On Christian Liberty. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2003. Marshall, I. Howard. Beyond the Bible: Moving from Scripture to Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2004. McCarthy, Dennis J. Treaty and Covenant: A Study in Form in the Ancient Oriental Documents and in the Old Testament. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1963. McConville, J. Gordon. “Metaphor, Symbol and the Interpretation of Deuteronomy.” In After Pentecost: Language and Biblical Interpretation. Ed. Craig Bartholomew, Colin Greene, and Karl Möller, 329–351. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001. McGowan, A. T. B. The Divine Authenticity of Scripture: Retrieving an Evangelical Heritage. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2007. McGuckin, John. Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy: Its History, Theology, and Texts. Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2004.

145

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 145

5/13/2011 12:53:18 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Moberly, R. W. L. Prophecy and Discernment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Molnar, Paul D. Divine Freedom and the Doctrine of the Immanent Trinity: In Dialogue with Karl Barth and Contemporary Theology. London: T & T Clark, 2002. Muller, Richard A. Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, ca. 1520 to ca. 1725. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2003. Nicole, Roger. “The Canon of the New Testament.” In Standing Forth: Collected Writings of Roger Nicole, 91–101. Fearn, Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus, 2002. O’Donovan, Oliver. Church in Crisis: The Gay Crisis and the Anglican Communion. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2008. —. The Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots of Political Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. —. Resurrection and Moral Order: An Outline of Evangelical Ethics. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994. Old, Hughes Oliphant. The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church. 1: The Biblical Period. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998. —. The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church. 3: The Medieval Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999. Osborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2006. Owen, John. Biblical Theology. Trans. Stephen P. Westcott. Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 1996 (1661). —. Communion with the Triune God. Ed. Kelly M. Kapic and Justin Taylor. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2007 (1657). Packer, J. I. God Has Spoken: Revelation and the Bible, 3rd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998. Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100–600). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971. Perkins, William. The Art of Prophesying. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1996 (1606). Peterson, Eugene H. “Caveat Lector.” Crux 32 (1996): 2–12. —. Eat This Book: A Conversation in the Art of Spiritual Reading. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006. Pictet, Benedict. Christian Theology. Trans. Frederick Reyroux. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1847. Plumer, Eric. Augustine’s Commentary on Galatians: Introduction, Text, Translation, and Notes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

146

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 146

5/13/2011 12:53:18 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Poythress, Vern S. “Canon and Speech Act: Limitations in Speech-Act Theory, with Implications for a Putative Theory of Canonical Speech Acts.” Westminster Theological Journal 70 (2008): 337–354. —. God-Centered Biblical Interpretation. Phillipsburg: P & R, 1999. —. The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses. Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1991. Ramm, Bernard. The Evangelical Heritage: A Study in Historical Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2000. Rendtorff, Rolf. The Covenant Formula: An Exegetical and Theological Investigation. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998. Ridderbos, Herman. The Authority of the New Testament Scriptures. Trans. H. De Jongste. Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1963. —. When the Time Had Fully Come: Studies in New Testament Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1957. Roberts, Vaughan. God’s Big Picture: Tracing the Storyline of the Bible. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2002. Ross, Allen. Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of Genesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1997. —. Recalling the Hope of Glory: Biblical Worship from the Garden to the New Creation. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2006. Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom: With a History and Critical Notes, 6th ed. 3 vols. Repr. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1996 (1931). Schlink, Edmund. Theology of the Lutheran Confessions. Philadelphia: Augsburg Fortress, 1961. Schwöbel, Christoph. “The Creature of the Word: Recovering the Ecclesiology of the Reformers.” In On Being the Church: Essays on the Christian Community. Ed. Colin Gunton and Daniel Hardy, 110–155. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1989. Searle, John. Mind, Language, and Society: Philosophy in the Real World. New York: Basic Books, 1998. Sparks, Kenton L. God’s Word in Human Words: An Evangelical Appropriation of Critical Biblical Scholarship. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2008. Tanner, Kathryn. Jesus, Humanity and the Trinity: A Brief Systematic Theology. Minneapolis/Edinburgh: Fortress/T & T Clark, 2001. Tate, W. Randolph. Biblical Interpretation: An Integrated Approach. Rev. ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000. Thiselton, Anthony C. Hermeneutics: An Introduction. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009. —. New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992. Treier, Daniel J. Introducing Theological Interpretation of Scripture: Recovering a Christian Practice. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2008.

147

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 147

5/13/2011 12:53:18 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Trobisch, David. Paul’s Letter Collection: Tracing the Origins. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994. Turretin, Francis. Institutes of Elenctic Theology. Trans. George Musgrave Giger. 3 vols. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1992–1997. Ursinus, Zacharias. Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism. Trans. G. W. Williard. Repr. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, n.d. (1852). van Asselt, Willem J. “The Fundamental Meaning of Theology: Archetypal and Ectypal Theology in Seventeenth-Century Reformed Thought.” Westminster Theological Journal 64 (2002): 319–335. van Genderen, J. and W. H. Velema. Concise Reformed Dogmatics. Trans. Gerrit Bilkes and Ed M. van der Maas. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2008. Vanhoozer, Kevin J. The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2005. —. “From Speech Acts to Scripture Acts: The Covenant of Discourse and the Discourse of the Covenant.” In After Pentecost: Language and Biblical Interpretation. Ed. Craig Bartholomew, Colin Greene, and Karl Möller, 1–49. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001. —. Is There a Meaning in This Text? The Bible, the Reader, and the Morality of Literary Knowledge. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998. —. Remythologizing Theology: Divine Action, Passion, and Authorship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Vanhoozer, Kevin J., ed. Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. Vermigli, Peter Martyr. “Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed.” In The Peter Martyr Reader. Ed. John Patrick Donnelly, Frank A. James III, and Joseph C. McLelland, 7–51. Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 1999 (1544). Vos, Geerhardus. “The Alleged Legalism in Paul’s Doctrine of Justification.” In Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos. Ed. Richard B. Gaffi n, Jr., 383–399. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1980. —. Biblical Theology. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1996 (1948). —. “The Idea of Biblical Theology as a Science and as a Theological Discipline.” In Redemptive History and Biblical Interpretation: The Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos. Ed. Richard B. Gaffi n, Jr., 3–24. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1980. Wall Robert W. “Introduction to Epistolary Literature.” In The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. 10, 369–391. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2002.

148

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 148

5/13/2011 12:53:18 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Waltke, Bruce K. An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007. Ward, Timothy. “Scripture, Sufficiency of.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 730–731. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. —. Words of Life: Scripture as the Living and Active Word of God. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2009. Warfield, B. B. The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1948. Watson, Francis. “Hermeneutics and the Doctrine of Scripture: Why They Need Each Other.” International Journal of Systematic Theology 12 (2010): 118–143. Webb, Stephen H. The Divine Voice: Christian Proclamation and the Theology of Sound. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2004. Webb, William J. Slaves, Women, and Homosexuals: Exploring the Hermeneutics of Cultural Analysis. Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2001. Webster, John. “Biblical Reasoning.” Anglican Theological Review 90 (2008): 733–751. —. Confessing God: Essays in Christian Dogmatics II. London: T & T Clark, 2005. —. Holy Scripture: A Dogmatic Sketch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. —. “One Who Is Son: Theological Reflections on the Exordium to the Epistle of the Hebrews.” In The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology. Ed. Richard Bauckham, Daniel R. Driver, Trevor A. Hart, and Nathan MacDonald, 69–94. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009. —. “Principles of Systematic Theology.” International Journal of Systematic Theology 11 (2009): 56–71. —. “Reading Eschatologically (1).” In Reading Texts, Seeking Wisdom: Scripture and Theology. Ed. David F. Ford and Graham Stanton, 245–256. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004. —. “Trinity and Creation.” International Journal of Systematic Theology 12 (2010): 4–19. —. Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2001. Weeks, Noel. Admonition and Curse: The Ancient Near Eastern Treaty/Covenant Form as a Problem in Inter-Cultural Relationships. London: T & T Clark, 2004. Whitaker, William. A Disputation on Holy Scripture. Trans. William Fitzgerald. Repr. Morgan, PA: Soli Deo Gloria, 2000 (1588). Witsius, Herman. The Economy of the Covenants Between God and Man. 2 vols. Repr. Kingsburg, CA: den Dulk Christian Foundation, 1990 (1822).

149

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 149

5/13/2011 12:53:19 PM

BIBLIOGRAPHY Wollebius, Johannes. Compendium Theologiae Christianae. In Reformed Dogmatics. Ed. and trans. John W. Beardslee III, 29–262. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009. Wolters, Al. “Confessional Criticism and the Night Visions of Zechariah.” In Renewing Biblical Interpretation. Ed. Craig Bartholomew, Colin Greene, and Karl Möller, 90–117. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000. Wolterstorff, Nicholas. “Authorial Discourse Interpretation.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 78–80. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. —. Divine Discourse: Philosophical Refl ections on the Claim that God Speaks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Wright, N. T. The New Testament and the People of God. Christian Origins and the Question of God 1. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. —. Scripture and the Authority of God. London: SPCK, 2005. Yeago, David S. “The Bible.” In Knowing the Triune God: The Work of the Spirit in the Practices of the Church. Ed. James J. Buckley and David S. Yeago, 49–93. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Yocum, John. “Scripture, Clarity of.” In Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible. Ed. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, 727–730. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2005. Young, Frances. The Making of the Creeds. London: SCM, 2002. Zimmermann, Jens. Recovering Theological Hermeneutics: An Incarnational-Trinitarian Theory of Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2004.

150

9780567265401_Bib_Finals_txt_print.indd 150

5/13/2011 12:53:19 PM

INDEX

covenant with Abraham 27 and creation 19 with David 29–30 as divine discourse 40–52 of grace 7 with Moses 27–9, 52, 55 with Noah 55 see also New Covenant, Old Covenant creation 18–20, 26, 53 creeds 107–14 cultural contexts 4, 124

Abraham 27, 48–9 Adam 19–22, 53, 73 adoration 136 Ancient Near Eastern treaties 45–6, 55n.45 angels 37 apostles 37–40, 56–8, 62–3 Apostles’ Creed 108–9 Arand, Charles P. 112–13 Augustine 79–80, 108, 113, 115, 123–4 Bannerman, James 104 baptism 107–8 Barth, Karl 133–4 Bavinck, Herman 56, 68, 114 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich 104 Brueggemann, Walter 18 Bullinger, Henrich 12, 17, 136 Calvin, John 100, 110, 124 church authority of 74–5, 103–5 dogmas of 111–14 early communication of 56–60 interpretive guidance of 86, 105–18 reading Scripture in 100–3 tradition of 11, 92 confessions 107–14

death 19, 22, 32, 49, 55, 89, 131 de Lubac, Henri 25 diachronic reading 132–3 dictation theory 68n.12 diversity 25, 27, 71, 80 divine accommodation 70 divine authorship 62–71, 77, 80 divine life ad extra 6–9 divine life ad intra 6–8 double agency discourse 36–40 eternal life 5, 8, 19, 41, 43, 86 ethical reasoning 87 Eve 21–2, 53 exegesis 99, 110, 113, 127–9

151

9780567265401_Index_Finals_txt_print.indd 151

5/13/2011 1:05:59 PM

INDEX faith 12n.26, 72, 74, 85–6 fall 18–20 family 123 Fowl, Stephen 116 general revelation 8n.18, 85 God communication of 15–16, 40–52, 56 as Creator 18–20 fellowship with 6, 9, 16, 20, 41, 43, 96, 118 knowledge of 16n.4, 73–4, 137–9 promises of 55 as righteous Judge 21 self-revelation of 8, 16n.5, 23–6, 63, 74, 95–6, 138 speech of 36–40, 69–71 triune communion of 5–8, 32, 60 wrath of 30 see also divine accommodation, divine authorship, kingdom of God Goldsworthy, Graeme 20 gospel 5–7, 22, 27, 29, 43–5, 57, 73, 84, 108, 133 Hahn, Scott 132 Hill, Charles 56 historical background 86 historical contexts 4 Holy Spirit anointing with 39 communion in the Trinity 5–9, 66 illumination of Scripture 75, 92 work of 16n.5, 32, 51, 63–9, 84, 96–100 human authorship 62–71 human freedom 73–4 human reason 98

illocutionary act 42 imagery 91 incarnation 69–71 inerrancy 78–9, 82 inspiration 62–71 interpretive preunderstanding 111–12 Irenaeus 109–10, 138 Israel 22–3, 27–9, 36, 40–1, 50 Jesus establishing covenant relationship 42–3 as God’s supreme self-revelation 24–6 as inaugurating the kingdom of God 31–3 knowledge of 16 as Mediator 49–52 as Son 5–8, 36, 39 see also incarnation Kähler, Martin 59 kingdom of God 17–33, 130–1 Kline, Meredith 48 Kuyper, Abraham 125 law 27–9, 43–5, 54, 107 lectio divina 119n. 1 Levering, Matthew 4, 11 linguistic aids 86, 128 Luther, Martin 88–9 Marcionism 24 means of grace 122 meditation 129–33 memorization 123–4 New Covenant 24, 30, 32, 49–52, 115 Nicene Creed 3 oaths 48–9 obedience 116–17

152

9780567265401_Index_Finals_txt_print.indd 152

5/13/2011 1:05:59 PM

INDEX O’Donovan, Oliver 72n.21 Old Covenant 49–52, 115 Osborne, Grant 111 Packer, J. I. 65 parallel literatures 86 perlocutionary act 42 Peterson, Eugene 127–8 Pictet, Benedict 9, 98 prayer 125–7 private reading 123–5 progressive revelation 23–7, 76 prophets 37–40, 62–3 protoevangelium 22, 130 public reading 121–2 redemption 22–7, 32 redemptive history 71, 130–3 Reformed theology 15n.1, 16n.4, 115n.64 regeneration 84, 96–100 Rendtorff, Rolf 40 Ridderbos, Herman 37 rule of faith 106–14 rule of love 114–18 salvation 5, 39, 44, 90 sanctification 98, 100 Schlink, Edmund 114 Scripture application of 133–6 authority of 72–7, 100–3 clarity of 87–93 contradictions in 80–2 interpretation of 9–10, 75–7, 105–18 literary forms in 58–60, 128 sufficiency of 83–7 truth of 77–82 unity of 25 virtues that aid reading 99–100, 116–17

as Word of God 3, 63–6 see also inerrancy, inspiration, sola Scriptura, tota Scriptura serpent 21 sola Scriptura 76, 84, 101, 111, 113 sovereignty 22, 32 Sparks, Kenton L. 78n.34 special revelation 8n.18, 85 speech act theory 41–4 symbolism 91 synchronic reading 132–3 teaching offices 103–5 Thirty-Nine Articles 83 tota Scriptura 76, 113 Treier, Daniel J. 118 Turretin, Francis 84 Ursinus, Zacharias 112 Vanhoozer, Kevin J. 11, 116 Vos, Geerhardus 23 Waltke, Bruce 38 Webster, John 11, 98–101, 136 Westminster Confession of Faith 83, 110 Westminster Larger Catechism 122 Whitaker, William 102–3, 127–9 wisdom 3, 64, 77, 86, 98 Wolterstorff, Nicholas 37–8 worship 76, 103, 121, 123 Wright, N. T. 26 Yeago, David 127, 130

153

9780567265401_Index_Finals_txt_print.indd 153

5/13/2011 1:05:59 PM