The SBJT Forum: Biblical for the Church

Editor’s Note: Readers should be aware of the forum’s format. D. A. Carson, Ste- phen G. Dempster, A. B. Caneday, and Robert W. Yarbrough have been asked specifi c questions to which they have provided written responses. These writers are not responding to one another. The journal’s goal for the Forum is to provide signifi cant thinkers’ views on topics of interest without requiring lengthy articles from these heavily-committed individuals. Their answers are presented in an order that hopefully makes the forum read as much like a unifi ed presentation as possible.

SBJT: How does a thorough knowledge and the discontinuities between the old of biblical theology strengthen preach- and new covenants. Any systematic theol- ing? ogy of enduring value will not forget the D. A. Carson: Before attempting to answer sweep of the Bible’s storyline: creation, that question directly, it is important to fall, , consummation. Nev- gain agreement as to the commonalities ertheless, one of the aims of traditional and differences between biblical theology is to summarize, in and systematic theology. For otherwise, largely atemporal theological synthesis, the peculiar contributions of the former what the Bible actually says on this or that will not stand out. subject, taking into account how these Both biblical theology and systematic matters have been handled in the history theology ask questions about what the of the church, and framing our theologi- Bible means. Typically, however, system- cal synthesis so as to interact with and atic theology asks questions in a more- address the contemporary world. or-less atemporal fashion, and generates By contrast, although biblical theology answers that are cast the same way: What is no less interested than systematic theol- D. A. Carson is Research Professor are the attributes of God? What is sin? ogy in asking and answering questions of New Testament at Evangelical What is the nature of the of about what the Bible means, in substantial Divinity School in Deerfi eld, Illinois. He grace? What does election mean? Who ways it operates on different principles, is the author of numerous commentar- are the people of God? And so forth. and achieves different results. Above ies and monographs, and is one of this Of course, if the systematician provides all, it operates with temporal categories country’s foremost New Testament the answers by using the Bible, and not never far from view. There are two conse- scholars. Among his many books are simply out of the categories of well-worn quences. First: typically biblical theology Matthew (Zondervan, 1982) in the , or even of philosophi- focuses on individual books and corpora. Expositor’s Bible Commentary, The cal theology, then he or she will inevitably For instance, it may not ask, “What are according to John (Eerdmans, introduce some temporal distinctions. attributes of God?”, but “How does the 1991) in the Pillar New Testament For instance, to answer the question book of Isaiah present God? What does Commentary, and (with Douglas J. “Who are the people of God?” in biblical the Johannine corpus contribute to what Moo) Introduction to the New Testa- terms forces the systematic theologian the Bible says about God? What is the ment (2nd ed., Zondervan, 2005). to wrestle with the both the continuities structure of the thought of Chronicles, 88 compared with Samuel-Kings?” Second: such a way that the reader is told that the biblical theology is equally interested in different books and corpora of the New tracing the principle strands of thought Testament represent competing, irrecon- through the biblical corpora. There are cilable . Inevitably, that means about twenty of these—such things as there is no attempt at synthesis; equally kingship, creation/new creation, temple, sadly, although it studies each book and sacrifi ce, priesthood, rest, election, grace, corpus closely, it refuses to track out the faith, people of God—plus many minor trajectories that tie the Bible together. In strands. Such tracing of strands demands other words, it squanders half the heri- not only an awareness of time (for these tage of biblical theology, while refusing strands or trajectories develop with time) to confess that the Bible is the “norming but also a resolute sensitivity to literary norm.” Second, in the interests of full dis- genre (for these strands show up in very closure, I should acknowledge that the different ways in the different forms that kind of biblical theology that interests me, make up the biblical books). The compe- the kind that preserves Scripture as the tent biblical theologian will want to be “norming norm,” is something in which I aware of the history of the discipline, of have invested a fair bit of energy in recent course, and speak to the contemporary years: I am one of the consulting editors of world (as does the systematician), but New Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Inter- on the whole biblical theology is not as Varsity, 2000), and I edit the series New resolute in its address of the contemporary Studies in Biblical Theology. world as is systematic theology. So I turn to the question set me, and This discussion could be teased out at suggest fi ve ways in which this kind of length, but I shall restrict myself to two biblical theology may strengthen preach- further qualifying statements before try- ing. ing to answer the question set me. First, (1) Biblical theology is more likely than for the purpose of this discussion, I am systematic theology to pay close attention concerned only with those forms of sys- to the immediate biblical context. That tematic theology and biblical theology for should be obvious simply by comparing which Scripture is the “norming norm.” books: although some systematic theolo- There are plenty of examples of systematic gies burst with biblical references, many, theology which use the Bible as a selective even by orthodox writers of great gift, quarry to ground structures of thought display only the sketchiest effort to handle not essentially Christian or biblical— biblical texts (e.g., Kevin Vanhoozer, The structures the systematician may well use Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical-Linguistic to weed out biblical notions and texts that Approach to [Westmin- he or she fi nds offensive, or at least out of ster John Knox, 2005]). That option is step with the system. Similarly, there are simply impossible to the biblical theolo- many instances of “biblical theology” in gian. Biblical theology is necessarily more which all the focus is on tightly inductive as it reads biblical texts. theology or New Testament theology, but Moreover, it is less likely to appeal to a not on “whole Bible” biblical theology. distant biblical “context” (i.e., the “con- Worse, even New Testament biblical the- text” of one’s entire systematic theology, ology (for instance) may be organized in determined by other texts) to explain a 89 diffi cult passage, before carefully explor- Whether or not you take the time to ing what light the immediate context of sketch in, say, the theft of the Ark of the the book and corpus might shed on the Covenant by the Philistines, or the list of diffi culty. Along these lines, then, biblical different locations where the tabernacle theology encourages the serious reading was pitched, or the frequent corruption of the best commentaries. All of this is of its attending priests (e.g., Eli’s sons), very important in the regular preparation will depend on your larger purposes. of expository sermons. But you will not fail to mention the (2) Biblical theology is more likely than Glory that descended on the tabernacle. systematic theology to explore the trajec- Nor will you fail to mention how, under tories of Scripture, and thus teach people King David, royalty and priestly function one of the most important lessons about come together in the city of Jerusalem, how to “read” the Bible. with the temple replacing the tabernacle An illustration may help. Suppose you under King Solomon—and once again, are preaching from Ezekiel. You have the Glory descending with such awesome arrived at the great passage, Ezek 8-11, splendor that the priests had to vacate where Ezekiel is “transported” in Spirit the premises. The tragedy, of course, was to Jerusalem, seven hundred miles away. that in the days of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, He witnesses the horrendous idolatry many people thought the temple was bit of the city, and he sees the glory of God like a talisman: God could not possibly abandon the temple, and ride the mobile let pagans destroy the city of Jerusalem throne chariot (the imagery is picked up and its temple, they thought, and so they from Ezek 1) outside the city to park on were “safe.” The temple functioned, in the Mount of Olives, overlooking the city. their imagination, far too much like a At some point or other it might well be powerful good-luck charm. But God was worth taking fi ve minutes or so to remind showing Ezekiel, in his vision, that God the congregation where this description himself was abandoning the city. When of what happens to the temple fi ts into the Nebuchadnezzar tore the place down entire trajectory of the temple theme. You four and a half years later, God wanted may not have to unpack all of that trajec- it to be known that Nebuchadnezzar’s tory (on which see Greg Beale, The Temple success was not the result of his superior and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology strength, but the result of God’s judgment. of the Dwelling Place of God [InterVarsity, Meanwhile, in Ezek 11, God tells the exiles 2004]), but you might mention the care that he himself will be a “sanctuary” for with which God designs the tabernacle them: in other words, the real “temple” is in Exodus, the signifi cance of the Holy of where God is, not where the stonework Holies and of the sacrifi cial system, the and masonry are. role of the priests and especially of the When the exiles return, then of course High Priest on the Day of Atonement, and they are encouraged to rebuild the temple, the signifi cance of the tabernacle for the as they are still under the old covenant corporate worship of Israel under the old that requires it. Yet there is no record of covenant as they assembled three times a the Glory descending on it again, as in year. The tabernacle was the great meet- days of old. But centuries later, the one ing-place between God and his people. who is the Word-made-fl esh calmly says, 90 “Destroy this temple, and in three days I faith in Christ turns on. will raise it up” (John 2). Neither his oppo- (3) One of the great strengths of such nents nor his own disciples understood preaching is that it avoids atomism. Sadly, what he meant at the time: John admits a great deal of contemporary evangelical it. But after his resurrection, they remem- preaching is “biblical” in the sense that bered his utterance and understood the it picks up on some themes from the Scriptures: Jesus himself is the temple, chosen passage and applies them to life the great meeting-place between God within a grid that is largely personal, psy- and human beings. There are derivative chological, relational—but with almost antitypes in the New Testament, of course: no connection to God himself, and only the church is the temple of God, even the accidental connection to the gospel. In Christian’s body is the temple of God. other words, the themes in the sermon are Yet the account drives on further: in the “biblical” in the atomistic sense that they culminating vision of the last book of the surface in this one text somewhere, but Bible (Rev 21-22), the people of God gather the passage itself is not adequately tied to in the “”—and it is shaped the book, the corpus, the canon—and as a like a cube. There is only one cube in the result, the deepest links of these themes Old Testament, from which the imagery are entirely missed. How this passage is is drawn: it is the Holy of Holies. In other tied to God and his gospel are lost to view. words, all of God’s people are forever in The sermon is “biblical” in only the most the Most Holy Place, always in the sheer superfi cial ways. I wish there were space unmediated Glory, forever with . to catalog a long list of guilty examples. Small wonder John testifi es that he saw But I am sure of this: preachers who no temple in that city, for the Lord God understand how the themes of biblical Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. theology tie the Bible together are much All of this can be sketched in five less likely to fall into atomism than are minutes. But to do this once in a while, preachers who are not so disciplined. when the temple theme comes up, is to (4) The habit of thinking through fi x in the minds of the congregation one the magnifi cent diversity of the biblical of the twenty or so great trajectories that books—which of course is so much a part tie the Bible together. The believers are of responsible biblical theology—is likely not only being edifi ed by the prospect of to help the preacher devote time and care the new Jerusalem, they are being helped to the way the genres of Scripture should to understand their Bibles, to read their affect his preaching. How do I handle Bibles more intelligently, to worship the lament, oracle, proverb, apocalyptic, wisdom of God in bringing these things narrative, fable, parable, poetry, letter, to pass to make a cohesive whole and enthronement psalm, , dramatic prepare his people for the Glory. When the epic? Not to think about such things, of preacher undertakes this discipline from course, may still leave you orthodox: you time to time along all the major trajectories may fi nd principles and truths in all of of the Bible, and many of the minor ones, these kinds of texts, incorporate them into believers are greatly edifi ed by the Word your atemporal systematic theology, and of God, and unbelievers are helped to preach them. Yet God certainly had good understand what the Bible is about, what reasons for giving us a Bible that is shaped 91 the way it is: not a systematic theology a careful and critical understanding of handbook, but an extraordinarily diverse the culture in which we preach, and we collection of documents, with one Mind will have the rudiments of the training behind the lot, traversing many centuries of a faithful minister who does not need of writing, in many different forms. The to be ashamed as he rightly handles the fact that one Mind is behind all of the Word of truth. documents makes systematic theology both possible and desirable, but not at the SBJT: Why has the discipline of biblical expense of fl attening out and domesticat- theology experienced a resurgence in ing the documents that still remain the recent years, and why is it so important “norming norm.” In other words, good for the church? biblical theology will not only help you Stephen Dempster: Although biblical handle more responsibly the trajectories theology has been a neglected fi eld of that drive through Scripture, but it will for quite a while, it has also help you focus appropriately on the experienced quite a resurgence in recent message, genre, focus, and thrust of each years. This has happened for a variety of biblical document. It will help to keep reasons. The historical critical paradigm your preaching fresh, and value affective for the analysis of biblical texts, with elements as much as logic, and proverbs its microscopic concern for background and laments as much as discourse. detail, sources, philology, and grammar (5) Ironically, for all of these reasons the frequently led to a fragmentation of the preacher who genuinely understands the biblical text. It was as if the text was fi rst four points is likely to become a better filtered through an interpretive sieve systematic theologian—and that, too, will constructed for the discovery of bits and enrich his preaching. One of the things pieces of historical information. Theo- that makes Calvin’s Institutes the rich logical matters were seen as unimportant repository that it is, is the fact that Calvin or even irrelevant to this quest. The result was himself as much a commentator as was a loss of unity and coherence to the a systematician. If one uses the biblical overall biblical message. Even to speak of books as a mere proof-texting quarry for an overarching biblical message seemed systematic theology, one is likely not only like a contradiction in terms. At best there to end up abusing the texts, but to produce were only “messages,” which were largely an impoverished systematic theology. unrelated to one another. Stephen G. Dempster is Professor But if the preacher reads, re-reads, and Part of the problem with this approach of at Atlantic Baptist teaches and preaches the biblical books, is that the method determined the results. University in New Brunswick, Canada, remembering the priorities of biblical If you look at the painting of a beautiful where he teaches Old Testament, An- theology, his grasp of Scripture—not to landscape with a microscope, it is no won- cient Near Eastern History, and Hebrew. say the grasp of Scripture enjoyed by the der that you won’t be able to appreciate He has published a number of scholarly congregation—will be richly enhanced. the beauty and the grandeur of the entire articles and is the author of Dominion If Scripture remains the “norming norm” image. That only comes by putting aside and Dynasty: A Biblical Theology of the for that biblical theologian, then the move the microscope and stepping back to see (InterVarsity, 2003) in toward systematic theology will also be the complete picture. Similarly, reading the New Studies in Biblical Theology enriched. Tie that in as well to a grow- a book by proof reading each word for series. ing grasp of historical theology, and to possible error is a very different activity 92 from reading a book for meaning. Differ- and to the nations (Gen 12:1-3; Exod 19:5- ent methods produce different results. 6; Isa 5:1-7). Losing this perspective led For a number of reasons, which now to their radical judgment. seem obvious, the historical critical It was the same in Jesus’s day. Losing paradigm has lost its dominance in the themselves in the forest of scripture, the fi eld of biblical studies and this has led biblical scholars of that time saw only to a renewal of interest in biblical theol- the many individual trees, and thus ogy. Biblical theology at its core assumes they lost perspective and became lost. that while there is much diversity in the They majored on minors and minored biblical message, nonetheless there is on majors. They scrupulously tithed the also a fundamental unity. This diversity smallest herbs of their gardens, while and unity can be shown in the statement neglecting the “weightier matters of the which begins the book of Hebrews: “In law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness” the past God spoke to our forefathers (Matt 23:23). Individual scriptures were through the prophets at many times and important but somehow a sense of the in various ways, but in these last days he whole was missing. Consequently Jesus has spoken to us by his Son, whom he excoriated them for such a distortion of appointed heir of all things, and through the truth. whom he made the universe” (Heb 1:1-2 Similarly when Jesus was asked about NIV). These verses capture succinctly divorce, he put the Mosaic legislation both the diversity (“In the past . . . in which permitted divorce, in the context of many times and in various ways”) and the entire sweep of Scripture and argued the unity of the Bible (“in these last days that the divine ideal in Gen 1-2 in which God has spoken to us by his Son”) (See R. a man and woman were joined perma- Rendtorff, The Canonical Hebrew Bible: A nently as one psycho-physical unity was Theology of the Old Testament [Tools for Bib- the governing paradigm against which lical Study 7; trans. D.Orton; Leiden: Deo the Mosaic legislation needed to be evalu- Publishing, 2005], 752.). There is a goal to ated (Matt 19:1-12). Thus the latter was a which the revelation of God points and concession to the evil of the human heart, this goal provides a unifying principle an evil that had entered history as a result for the whole. of the fall. To switch the metaphor, biblical theol- Paul also worked with the larger canvas ogy is concerned not to lose sight of the of scripture when he showed the place of big picture of scripture. Losing sight of the law in the context of the divine plan of the big picture has serious implications salvation. It came after the promise made for Christian believers. If you doubt it, to Abraham, in order to demonstrate the consider for a moment ancient Israel. The need for salvation by radically exposing prophets had to tell the people repeatedly human sin (Gal 3:15-29). The understand- that they had distorted the faith by mag- ing of both Jesus and Paul was the result nifying the importance of sacrifi ces and of a profoundly engaging meditation on minimizing the importance of ethics (Isa the entire sweep of scripture, so much so 1; Amos 5:21-24; Mic 6:1-8). They had lost that they were able to see its main goal sight of the entire sweep of scripture: they and they were able to make their decisions were called out to be a light to each other based on this understanding. Jesus and 93 Paul were biblical theologians! enculturated that it is marginally different Plato once said that without knowledge from the world around it; when baptismal of the Good, one cannot act with wis- fonts are transformed into waterslides; dom either in his own life or in matters when marriage vows become trivial- of state (The Republic 7.517). The Good ized through their repeated violation by allows one to see everything in its proper church members; when a leading sociolo- place. Similarly without knowledge of gist claims that western the entire range of the biblical story, it is is “the quintessential adaptation to a very diffi cult to be wise as a Christian. I society dominated by the marketplace am convinced that most in the Church do and consumerism . . . [that believers] not have a sense of the Bible as a whole buy heavily into the therapeutic culture but rather see it as a manual for personal of feel-good-ism, and are caught up in individual devotion which offers advice a cycle of overspending and consump- for private, spiritual development. This tion like everyone else” (R. Wuthnow, leaves the church open to the distortion “Review of Mark Noll, The Scandal of the of the truth, which is so widespread in Evangelical Mind,” First Things 51 [1995]: contemporary Christianity. 41), a large part of the problem is that Numerous issues clamor for the the biblical story has been supplanted church’s attention today and often by modern and postmodern ones. Why? responses are made by well meaning This is because Christians just do not Christians with chapter and verse in know their Bibles. They certainly know hand. Is homosexuality a legitimate chapters and verses but these have been lifestyle? Is capital punishment still a integrated into other pagan stories in the biblical mandate? What about the eco- same way polytheists can make a place logical problem? “Illegal” immigration? for Jesus in their pantheon. A recovery of Abortion? Women in ministry? The Sab- the entire biblical story, which brooks no bath? Economics? War? To cite a biblical alternatives, can help provide an antidote chapter and verse as an answer to these to such cultural captivity. questions will just not do. It is true that Systematic theologies are often written answers to these questions often fall in in such a manner that the Bible seems the domain of systematic theology. But like an abstract repository of information there must fi rst be an understanding of about God. A more static and abstract the whole to be able to provide a bibli- understanding of God may be the result. cal response. This can only come from To read in a systematic theology about a reading and rereading of the biblical the love of God is one matter but to see story—biblical theology—along with a that love acted out in the story-line of radical dependence on the Holy Spirit. Scripture is another: the Creator getting Biblical theology will also help the his hands dirty with the creation of , church to deal with other issues, perhaps the grace extended to creation at the time more insidious ones such as the encroach- of the fl ood, the call of Abram after the ments of culture upon the biblical mes- debacle of the Tower of Babel, the divine sage in which the various story-lines of response to the groaning of Israel in culture become more central than that Egypt, the incredible patience shown with of the Bible. When a church becomes so Israel in the following centuries—even in 94 its judgment. This love is fi nally “fl eshed Garden, agonizing in prayer for a world out” in the coming of Jesus and his cru- that had become like Sodom. What kind cifi xion, resurrection, and ascension. It is of person is this who now gives his one this story-line which provides the basis righteous life for a world of sinful people? for description of the love of God, a love Who could have believed such a thing which will never give up on his creation. would happen (Isa 53:1)? Everyone—any- Even, ethics are based on the story and its one—who believes is now spared the jus- signifi cance. Paul urges the Philippians to tice of God. They can be made righteous have the mind of Christ, but this itself is because of one person! But it is not as if embodied in the plot-line of scripture, in the fi re and brimstone disappear. They which the second Adam did not grasp for come down upon the righteous Son of power, but humbled himself even to death God whose death upholds both divine on the cross, and is now highly exalted mercy and justice. (Phil 2:1-11). What is this but a précis of In conclusion, in some ways the fi nal the entire narrative of the Bible! chapter of biblical theology has not been An understanding of the larger scope written. It is true that the story-line of of Scripture also imparts significance Scripture has a conclusion depicted in the to the individual events and their place indicating that the outcome within the story. For example, when Abra- of God’s actions is not in doubt. At the ham argues with God over the judgment same time this conclusion is open-ended of Sodom in Gen 18, issues of justice and and the church is mandated with writing mercy are in the foreground. God fi nally the last chapter. N. T. Wright compares says that he will not destroy Sodom if the church’s situation with that of a there are ten righteous people in the city. playwright who discovers a lost play of The subsequent destruction of Sodom Shakespeare in which only four of fi ve establishes God’s righteousness and the scenes have been recovered (N.T. Wright, moral order of the universe, but there The New Testament and the People of God lingers the truth that the city could have [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992], 140. See The been spared if it had had ten righteous Drama of Christian Scripture: Finding Our individuals. Later during the judgments Place in the Biblical Story [Grand Rapids: of Samaria and Jerusalem, which became Baker, 2004]). To complete the play, a fi fth like Sodom, one cannot help but refl ect on chapter will have to be produced. But Gen 18. Prophetic intercession was also how can this be done? The playwright not able to save these cities. Did these must immerse him/herself in the content places not even have ten inhabitants who of the fi rst four acts in order to produce a kept God’s covenant? And why was not completed work, faithful to the original. this the end? Why did Israel experience Similarly, there is a need for a fi nal chap- a resurrection from the exile of death? ter of biblical theology: Creation (Act 1), Because in God’s mercy there was the Fall (Act 2), Confl ict (Act 3), Climax (Act announcement that there was going to 4: Messiah’s Death and Resurrection) are be one righteous covenant keeper whose fi nished. Scene fi ve has started in the intercession would save many sinners book of Acts but we now have the task (Isa 53). The New Testament rachets up of fi nishing this chapter while waiting this truth when one man appears in a for the consummation of all things. The 95 only way we can do this faithfully is can only lead to the goal of all true theol- to immerse ourselves in the story-line ogy—doxology! In such a spirit we can of scripture—and thus become part of faithfully write the fi nal chapter. the Story. Then we will write that fi nal chapter with our lives, the very chapter SBJT: Can you discuss the signifi cance of Christ Himself, written not with pen or of typology to biblical theology? word processor, but with the Holy Spirit A. B. Caneday: Doing the work of bibli- (2 Cor 3:3). cal theology requires careful attention to As we write chapter fi ve, we need to types in the Bible. Excesses and abuses pray for the desire conveyed by George that regularly accompany teaching and Herbert in his sonnet, “The Holy Scrip- preaching concerning types cause con- tures,” fusion. Fanciful interpretations of the Bible that dubiously identify types have Oh that I knew how all thy lights combine, prompted suspicion for many Christians And seeing the confi guration of to remain suspicious of discussions of thy glorie! biblical types. Some suppose that the Seeing not onely how each verse doth shine. Bible’s types are restricted to a few on the But all the constellation of thy principle that unless the New Testament storie (G. Herbert, “The Holy Scriptures,” expressly identifi es something from the cited in C. H. H. Scobie, The Ways Old Testament as a type it is not a type. of Our God: An Approach to Biblical Many textbooks on biblical interpretation Theology [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003], 80). tend to confi rm suspicion about types. Some have little or no discussion concern- It is biblical theology that will help ing them. Other textbooks routinely show achieve this aspiration. The Bible will insuffi cient caution to distinguish biblical not be seen as merely a deposit of laws, types from what they call “typological stipulations, maxims, and historical infor- interpretation,” an interpretive method mation, but it will be the all-encompassing associated with “symbolic interpretation” Narrative of our lives. Then we will be and “allegorical interpretation.” Talk of able to see the overall signifi cance of the “typological interpretation” is misguided incredible events it describes as well as and misguiding because this elevates the the part we have yet to play. The stupen- reader’s role over the author’s role con- dous event of the incarnation, cross, and cerning types, symbols, and allegory. resurrection as the central turning point To speak of “typological interpreta- of history will lead to worship and praise. tion” is to confound interpretation and The immense privileges of the believer revelation. We rightly say that God’s A. B. Caneday is Professor of New will astonish: the gift of the Spirit; the revelation is typological, but to speak of Testament Studies and Biblical Theology access to the Father; the ability to address “typological interpretation” is to admit at Northwestern College in Paul, the eternal Creator as “Abba”; the fact to a form of “reader response hermeneu- Minnesota. He is the co-author (with that the least person in the Kingdom is tics.” Interpreters of the Bible do not cast Thomas R. Schreiner) of The Race superior to the greatest individual in the biblical types. God, who reveals himself Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Old Testament ; the call to bring and his deeds in Scripture, casts the Perseverance & (InterVarsity, this incredible message to the ends of the Bible’s types. God invested things with 2001). earth! Thus in the end, biblical theology foreshadowing signifi cance—institutions 96 (e.g., the Levitical priesthood), places (e.g., Bible entails recognizing biblical types Eden, the tabernacle), things (e.g., the ark, cast by God, this presupposes that Scrip- sacrifi ces, kingship), events (e.g., creation, ture is the result of God’s activity of rev- the fl ood, the exodus, events in the wilder- elation, albeit through human agents. The ness, entry into the land), and individu- apostle Paul embraced this view of Scrip- als (e.g., Adam, Abraham, Melchizedek, ture when he said, “For as many things Moses, David). God invested these with as were written before were written for our signifi cance to prefi gure corresponding instruction, in order that through the per- features of the coming age. severance and through the consolation of Consider a couple of biblical types. scripture we should have this hope” (Rom God’s Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who 15:4). For Paul, then, God authorized holy preceded Adam (1:17) also formed Adam men of old to write the Old Testament for (1:16) “in his own image, in the likeness us who believe in Jesus Christ. of God” (Gen 1:7) as a prefigurement, To believers in Rome, Paul writes a type (Rom 5:14), of the Coming One, concerning Gen 15:6, “Now it was not Jesus Christ, who “is the image of the written on account of him alone that ‘it invisible God” (Col 1:15). Likewise, the was reckoned to him,’ but also on account tabernacle in the wilderness functioned of us to whom it will be reckoned” (Rom as a “copy” (hypodeigma) and “shadow” 4:23-24). Paul’s use of “for us” requires that (skia) of “heavenly things” (Heb 8:5). The we recognize that he is not simply applying tabernacle and priestly service are types the text to us. Paul insists that the words not because the New Testament writer “it was reckoned to him” were actually interprets them typologically but because “written down for us.” Two things stand the Lord revealed these things to Moses as out. First, Paul does not feature the event shadows of the heavenly sanctuary when when God spoke the words “it was reck- he said, “See that you make everything oned to him.” Paul does not write, “it according to the pattern that was shown was spoken for us.” Paul features Scrip- you on the mountain” (Heb 8:5). The ture as authoritative. The locus of divine tabernacle with its earthly and shadowy revelatory authority is Scripture, what is sacrifi ces repeated annually, was but a written. Second, Paul announces, “it was shadow of the true and heavenly sanctu- written for us.” That these words—“it was ary. As a copy of the authentic sanctuary, reckoned to him”—were “written down” the tabernacle in the wilderness was signals that Scripture discloses that God not merely a shadow of the sanctuary in intended that his reckoning Abraham’s . The tabernacle and priestly ser- faith for righteousness should be under- vice was also a prefi gurement of the good stood as bearing signifi cance far beyond things to come with Christ (Heb 9:11; 10:1). Abraham himself. It “was written down Thus, after Jesus Christ, the true and great for us.” Even though he does not expressly high priest, offered himself as the once for identify Abraham as a type, Paul’s state- all time sacrifi ce at the end of the ages, he ment and all of Rom 4 requires that we entered the authentic sanctuary to present recognize that Abraham bears a prefi gur- himself before God on our behalf (Heb ing signifi cance that fi nds fulfi llment in 9:23-26). Jesus Christ. Given that our act of interpreting the To the Corinthians Paul writes, “Now 97 these things happened to them typologi- ment Scriptures, despite being an apostle. cally, and they were written down for our Though his insight seems keener than admonition, unto whom the ends of the ours, he only recognizes divinely autho- ages have come” (1 Cor 10:11). Paul distin- rized fi gural embedding in Scripture. He guishes the events themselves from their cannot forge types, for to try is to coun- being written down. Paul has no authority terfeit Scripture. Types or foreshadows to assign typological importance to the are not forged by interpreters of Scripture events that Israel experienced. Instead, but by the God of Scripture who saw to he recognizes that God brought about it that the things that he invested with those events and stamped them with typological signifi cance were written down typological significance and that God on account of the latter day people of God, authorized their inscripturation “for our not just for those long ago of whom Scrip- admonition.” God brought those events ture speaks. We rightly speak of typologi- about in a typological manner (typikōs). Ear- cal revelation but we should not speak of lier in the context Paul says, “Now these typological interpretation. This is because, as things took place as types for us lest we be Paul leads us to understand, the casting cravers of evil as they also craved” (typoi of types does not belong to the one who egenēthēsan; 1 Cor 10:6). Israel’s experi- reads; it belongs alone to the one who ences under the cloud, passage through originates the text. In the case of Scripture, the sea, eating food the Lord provided in it belongs fi nally to the God of Israel, who the wilderness, and drinking water from reveals himself through his prophets. The the rock took place as types for us. Twice Paul same is true of every fi gure, whether a explains that when the events themselves type, an allegory, a parable, a metaphor, occurred, they took place typologically an anthropomorphism, etc. Authors cast because God impressed those events fi gures and embed them into their texts, as types. God made sure that all these investing them with signifi cance. Readers events, including Israel’s repeated acts of discover types and the things they signify, unfaithfulness (1 Cor 10:7-10), were written but readers do not forge those fi gures or down “for us as admonitions” (Paul refers types. If readers forge types for the texts to Exod 32:6; Num 25:9; 21:5, 6; 14:2, 29-37). they read, are they not forgers? Paul’s expressions in Rom 4:25; 15:4; and 1 Robert W. Yarbrough is chair of Cor 10:6-11 show that the Old Testament SBJT: Why is biblical theology of criti- the New Testament Department and read correctly is God’s Scripture for the cal importance for both academic and Associate Professor of New Testament last days’ people of God. Paul expects church life? at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School Christians to read the Old Testament as he Robert W. Yarbrough: Scholars debate in Deerfi eld, Illinois. He also serves as does, for if we are to embrace his gospel, how “biblical theology” (BT) should be editor of Trinity Journal. Dr. Yarbrough we need to be able to trace his reasoning defi ned. One attractive defi nition comes is the author of The Salvation-Historical and his arguments that demonstrate that from the German scholar Theodor Zahn: Fallacy? Reassessing the History of what God has done in Christ Jesus is the BT presents the religious doctrine and New Testament Theology (Deo, 2004) fulfi llment of the types and foreshadows knowledge present in the Bible in its and (with Walter Elwell) Encountering of the Old Testament. historical development. Both parts of the New Testament: A Historical And As a reader of Scripture, Paul has no this defi nition should be underscored: Theological Survey (2nd ed., Baker, authority to confer typological import the religious doctrine or “knowledge”; 2005). upon events recorded in the Old Testa- and its course of progressive unfolding, 98 or “development,” in history. Doctrine twentieth century), you can pore over doz- without history risks becoming gnostic. ens of his essays and grind through a few History without doctrine is a denial of of his commentaries . . . or you can peruse God’s redemptive presence in the world his New Testament theology, where he he created and sustains. puts it all together. Academic approaches BT is of critical importance for both aca- to Old Testament BT are helpfully epito- demic and church life. Numerous reasons mized in the successive, and frequently for this could be given, but I will confi ne contrasting, volumes by, say, Eichrodt, myself to three on each score. von Rad, Jacob, and Walter Brueggemann. BT is important in academic settings I am not suggesting that summaries like colleges and seminaries because of its of BT should replace careful . function. As theology was “the queen of But too often exegesis proceeds with an the sciences” in the medieval university, inadequate awareness of any overarching BT rightly serves as “the queen of the sub- whole. Works on BT can provide a sense of disciplines” in Old and New Testament this whole in its various shapes through studies. All aspects of biblical studies are the generations of scholarship. important—biblical archaeology, textual A third reason why BT is important lies criticism, exegesis, Pentateuch or Gospels in the corrective guidance it is frequently or Pauline studies—but BT is where it able to furnish. Zahn’s defi nition (above) all comes together. Without an ordered refers us to what the Lord revealed to the sense of the whole, analysis of the parts biblical writers in their respective his- generates merely disconnected details. torical settings regarding God, humans, BT furnishes the synthesis within which and sin. Receiving their writings as the the parts make sense. Most biblical schol- product of God’s own self-disclosing ars will readily confess that their work, activity—divine inspiration—BT discov- however specialized, has been aided by ers and surveys the foundation of our the overarching understanding afforded own Christian confession and practice. by a BT standard like Eichrodt or House Not that BT can replace the ethics and in Old Testament, or like Ladd, Guthrie, theology that each generation must ham- or (recently) Marshall and Thielman in mer out afresh. But it can and must be New Testament. the starting point, and ongoing reference BT is important in academic settings, point, for all of our ethical and theologi- secondly, because of its history. Today cal formulations. These formulations are it is a truism that responsible biblical prone to drift in directions contrary to interpretation must proceed with a com- Scripture. BT can guard us against sloppy petent grasp of its heritage. For over 200 proof-texting, remind us of the distinctive years now, since “biblical theology” in its contributions of individual biblical writ- modern sense began with a lecture by J. ers, and aid us in responsible articulation P. Gabler in 1787, works on BT have sum- in “what the Bible says” when we wish to marized and steered the labors of Old and summarize what God’s Word taken as a New Testament scholars. To understand whole affi rms. the hermeneutical synthesis of Rudolf But this leads us to the critical impor- Bultmann (by common consent the most tance of BT, not only in the academy, but infl uential New Testament scholar of the also for the church. 99 First of all, BT furnishes pastors with ruts. It soaks us continually with the giant a fruitful framework for preaching. Some splash that God’s gospel truth fi rst made frameworks are by comparison fruit- in the epochs that Scripture narrates. less—a pastor can fritter away his years We are carried forward by the historical bounding along on some giddy hobby- waves that continue to surge through the horse. But preaching that grows out of nations around the globe. a strong sense of the Bible’s historical This leads to a third and fi nal reason unfolding, and its world-changing gospel for BT’s critical importance in the church: truths, centers on what Scripture affi rms. it is a springboard for missions. Parochial, Congregations grow each week in their agenda-driven, and piecemeal exploita- sense of the Bible’s story line. Old and tion of Scripture may work at the local New Testaments are seen in their organic or even national level by pandering to oneness. Like dense grass crowds out folk’s selfi sh religious expectations. But unwanted weeds, the tightly interwoven ministry gripped by BT calls preachers whole counsel of God displaces the imbal- and hearers out of themselves and unites anced renderings of Scripture that abound them with the God who reigns over all in every age. The pastor preaches the Bible, the ages and all the earth. Such scriptural the Word of God, not some derivative theme exposition, pointing to that God and his or topic (however true or worthy) that fails reconciliation of the world to himself in to capture Scripture’s more central and Christ, transcends geography and ethnic- abiding truths. ity to produce and sustain faith worthy Moving from the macrocosmic level of the adjective Christian. What else is of pastoral preaching, we can look at the missions, whether we are talking about matter from the bottom up: BT encour- the ends of the earth or the souls of our ages more productive personal Bible teenagers and children, who like the study. I take it as an urgent need for every nations must discover for themselves the church to have as many people as possible truth of the gospel in their distinct and engaged in such study, both on their own dynamic settings? But God sent forth that and in small group settings. One sure truth in particular times and places and way to discourage this is to fail to equip people. BT inventories and recounts those God’s people with a grounded and grow- days and verities. In doing so it proclaims ing sense of BT. Then, at best, they limp them afresh for regions and generations along trying to sustain daily study on the that have yet to hear. slender basis of “devotional” reading. The problem is that too much of Scripture is not, in fact, about “me” and my devotional needs. BT frankly recognizes this. Those grounded in it experience that as the light goes on and illumines “the big picture” of Scripture’s message, and the amazing his- tory of God’s work among his people mak- ing them sons and daughters of Abraham down to this very hour, personal Bible reading lifts us out of narrow personal 100