This is part II of an earlier post.
In these two posts, I'm trying to see if we can come up with some sort of an initial framework for doing (systematic) theology in a way that is more integrally connected with salvation-history as revealed in the Bible's plot-line, using the discussion generated in Carson's Gagging of God (GOG) chapters 5 and 6 as a base. The earlier post was an initial stab after reading chapter 5, where Carson considers 'opening moves' in the bible's plot-line consisting of Creation, Fall, and (only very briefly) election and history of Israel.
First, a summary of his chapter 6: 'What God has spoken: Climatic Moves in the Bible's Plot-line', before an attempt to synthesise things together.
Carson in this chapter considers the next few key climatic moves in the Bible's plot-line, found in the NT. He rightly highlights that 'some of the features of the New Testament's plot-line have already been introduced by running them from their base in the Old Testament' (p.253), but many of these features and themes 'are sharpened or heightened in the New Testament segment (e.g. God's love, wrath, and his personal triune being). Yet, continuity is not the only name to the game. There are also some other themes 'cast up by the New Testament plot-line which though they have their roots in the Old Testament, play a far larger part in the unfolding drama than did their roots in the earlier stage - and, correspondingly, some prominent features in the Old Testament plot-line now fade away, or, more commonly, are transposed, as it were, to a new key'. So, as Carson states, '[...] Kingdom, Christology, eschatology, church, gospel, become dominat terms of themes. Temple, priest, sacrifice, law, and much more are transposed; national and tribal outlooks gradually fade from view'. (p.254) This point, I think, is Carson's underlying conviction as he works through the rest of the chapter.
He then explores the following elements in the NT plot-line. His first sub-heading is Jesus and the Gospels, where he explores the incarnation; the kingdom that Jesus brings in, and the unity of the canonical Gospels in 'telling the story of Jesus so that the rush of the narrative is toward the cross' (p.263). The second heading is The Coming of the Spirit, where he traces out the person of the Spirit; how the Spirit is integrally linked to the heirs of the new covenant (as a guarantee of the consumation and in terms of his life transforming work in the believer), and the Spirit's work of illumination and conviction. The third heading is The Contribution of the Epistles, where Carson makes three points, of which only one is related to our discussion -that the themes introduced into the Bible at an earlier stage of the story-line are further developed in the epistles (the other two are related more to matters on pluralism, which is the aim of Carson's book). The fourth heading is The Climax, where Carson describes the final state of things as shown in Revelation (though his discussion is slanted more towards denying universalistic salvation). Carson concludes (at least for what is of interest to us) with this statement:
"All of these elements, and more besides, constitute the Bible's story-line. Together they establish what the gospel is, that from which we are saved, the nature of the One to whom we must give an account, the relative importance of this world and the next so far as the focus of our hopes and investments is concerned, the desperate plight in which we find ourselves as we reject the grace of God, the wonders of God's grace along with the ineffable brilliance of his holiness, and much more." (p.277)
So the big question is - is there more light at the end of the tunnel after reading this chapter for how we might come up with a framework for theology that is more sensitive to salvation history? I'm not too sure. But here are some initial thoughts on the whole matter:
1. I think there is some truth in saying that this way of thinking about theology is more 'time-sensitive' and 'worldview-oriented' than the traditional systematic theology approach, which tends towards an atemporal framework. While my personal belief is that both are needed (hence I'm not pitting one against the other), there's some wisdom in what Carson says about preaching the gospel in our increasingly puralistic 'unchurched' culture, where he advocates this approach over the 'purely atemporal' systematic theological one.
"In short, the good news of Jesus Christ is virtually incoherent unless it is securely set into a biblical worldview. [...] To establish [a systematic theological] framework while simultaneously tracing out the rudiments of the Bible's plot-line strikes me as wiser, more strategic. One is simultaneously setting forth a structure of thought, and a meta-narrative; one is constructing a worldview, and showing how that worldview is grounded in the Bible itself. One is teaching people how to read the Bible." (p.502)
2. The second point flows from the first. Because such a way of doing theology is more sensitive and integrally connected to the whole of salvation history found in the Bible's plot-line, there are more 'controls' and guides over the traditional systematic theological approach, which tends to be in the danger of 'stringing' together bible passages isolated out of their salvation-historical context, with the result that some particular doctrines may be emphasised at the expense of others, or worse still, pitted against the other (e.g. God's personal nature pitted against his sovereignty, as perhaps shown most clearly in the case of Open Theism). Biblical theology in some sense help guards against this danger by doing two things. Firstly, any doctrine raised is passed through the salvation historical plotline to see how it develops (e.g. the love of God - love for the world shown in his providential care TO God's love to the world with salvific intent TO God's particular love for his elect, while not excluding other themes like the love the Father has for the Son within the Godhead). Secondly, any doctrine raised is interacted with others as it passes through the salvation historical plotline (e.g. the love of God is interacted with the wrath of God and does not end up diminishing wrath and exalting love, or the love of God is understood in the context of his transcendence, hence excluding the notion that God's love for the world must thus mean he must open himself to what the world experiences).
3. The third point (flowing on from the 2nd) is that because of this interaction between the different doctrines or themes raised, the framework of such a way of doing theology will inevitably ensure a greater interaction and a greater need to define connections between the 7 topics of the 'systematic theology' approach. For e.g., one cannot start to consider the Doctrine of God without considering Christology; or doctrine of church without considering doctrine of man (afterall, we who are in Christ are in the 2nd Adam, and in the true and new humanity defined by Christ); or doctrine of the work of Christ and application of salvation without a serious consideration of the doctrine of sin (and for that matter of fact, doctrine of creation, which grounds accountability for sin), or the doctrine of creation without considering the doctrine of eschatology! In another words, the 7 topics cannot sit so aloof from one another as they can in some traditional systematic theological considerations.
4. And frankly, I have to admit, here is the difficulty. Because of these interactions, it is hard to present things in a systematic presentation or according to major themes and topics when attempting to come up with a framework for theology which is more sensitive to biblical theology.
Perhaps the best that can be suggested at this point is something like this?
The opening moves of Creation and Fall in the Bible's plot-line establishes the key doctrines of God, man and the problem of sin. The points raised under these doctrines are then developed (with an emphasis on either contiunuity or discontinuity) as they pass through the turning moments of Israel's election and history into the coming of Christ and God's new Kingdom in which we as Christians live in this present age. Along the way, the doctrines of Christology, Application of Salvation, and the Church, while having their beginning roots in the OT, will only be fully heightened or sharpened at this point. The climax move of the consumation spells out most clearly the doctrine of eschatology and provides us with a fitting view of the end.
While this sounds almost like the standard layout of the topics in traditional systematic theological textbooks (!), the difference is in the three earlier points seen above.
That's all I've got to at this point. Definitely, more work and thinking needs to be done. I hope to blog on this again after reading the related essays in ed. McGowan's Always Reforming, and Charles Scobie's The Ways of Our God: An Approach to Biblical Theology, where he has a more thematic approach to doing biblical theology, than a strictly systematic or historical one.
No comments:
Post a Comment