Biblical Theology Discussion: Kingdom Through Covenant vs. God's Glory In Salvation Through Judgment

Here is a great video that discusses biblical theology at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The people in the video are Dr. Gentry, Dr. Wellum, and Dr. Hamilton. They are all biblical scholars and professors at my seminary. It is impressive to know that my professors are putting out sound biblical theology and contributing to the evangelical church a wealth of God-centered literature. In this video, they discuss their most recent published works on biblical theology. Very informative!

G.K. Beale: New Studies In the Old & New Testaments

If you want to learn about biblical theology of the OT and NT in depth, then biblical scholar G.K. Beale is the guy you want to read. I have two of his largest works (both books in the picture on the left). Contained inside these two recent volumes are biblical theology and exegesis in its finest form. It is remarkable how much this man knows about the Bible, and the connections he has discovered through relentless research. He has definitely advanced the future discussions and academic interests regarding the usage of the OT in the NT. All Christians are in debt to him for his work to establish the correct theological interpretations of the redemptive-historical narrative of the Bible, and how that needs to be taught in churches because it is the gospel.

I have learned that it is that meta-narrative (i.e. redemptive-historical storyline) that the Apostles' preached, the Reformers proclaimed, and the Revivalists programmed into their church ministries. In the recent resurgence of biblical theology, Mark Dever has mentioned teaching biblical theology as the second mark of a health church in his book "Nine Marks of a Healthy Church." Hence, I personally agree with Dever that a healthy Christ-centered church will teach biblical theology undiminished  I believe biblical theology is too important to ignore and must be taught in order to properly understand how the Bible unfolds and interconnects with diversity and unity throughout the canonical books from Genesis to Revelation.

Below is a link to a remarkable lecture hosted at my seminary, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. This lecture emphasizes the challenges in biblical theology that are confronting the integrity and inspiration of the Scriptures. Some scholars are doing injustice to biblical theology and emphasizing only the thematic elements of the Bible, not the authoritative verbal-plenary inspiration of Scripture. The lecture is very informative, and if you have not heard an academic lecture on Christian theology before, this exposure will be riveting and exciting because of the biblical connections that are identified in biblical theology that are not necessarily emphasized on the pulpit. Click on the link below to watch and listen an this lecture regarding new studies in the OT and NT biblical theology.

http://www.sbts.edu/resources/lectures/gheens/recent-developments-in-old-testament-in-new-testament-studies-that-challenges-the-organic-integrity-of-the-testaments/

The "I am" of the Old Testament In the New Testament

Since the day I became a Christian, the perplexing "I am" statements of Jesus in John’s gospel have always interested me. I always had a hard time trying to understand what Jesus meant by his unique references, but I knew without a shadow of a doubt he was referencing he was in some way he was “God in the flesh” (cf. John 1:18). 

As I grew stronger in the grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, I began to understand the theological significance of the claims of Christ. I understood the “I am” statements to reference Jesus as the all satisfying providential caregiver for all who believe in him, and only through faith in his gospel can anyone be saved.

Once I started Bible teaching on a regular basis at my church and later went to school to be educated in the Scriptures, I began studying the topic of the "I am" statements from an exegetical and canonical approach. As a result, I was exposed to the massive context of references in the OT. It became apparent that Jesus used the OT references and applied them to himself because he is God in the flesh, the self-revelation of God the Father. 

The "I am" of the Old Testament In the New Testament
All of the “I am” statements fundamentally teach us what Jesus does for those who believe in him. Yet, the purpose of the “I am” statements is to teach us who Jesus is in the gospel of John.

In John’s gospel, there are multiple “I am” sayings. For sake of clarity, distinguishing them into two categories helps constructive interpretation and minimizes confusion. For that reason, John’s gospel reveals there are primary “I am” statements, and secondary “I am” sayings. Categorizing does not in any way minimize the importance of the sayings because all of them are equal in significance, meaning, and purpose. The statements are theological and exegetical referents to OT themes (i.e. bread/light/door/shepherd/vine). The sayings are biblical referents to OT titles of God (i.e. Pentateuch/Isaiah passages). There are seven primary "I am" statements, and seven secondary "I am" sayings in John. Nevertheless, both the “I am” statements and “I am” sayings directly reference OT theological titles and themes in the Pentateuch, and servant-oriented messianic functions in Isaiah to showcase a glorious literary rendering of the promises of God fulfilled in the Messiah Jesus.

The "I am" Revealed In the Pentateuch
Genesis is where the "I am" is revealed as the creator of the heavens and the earth, and the covenant maker with Abraham for all nations. Beginning with the John 8:58 "I am" reference in John's gospel, the theological titles in Pentateuch begin with God speaking to Abraham as his “I am.” Thus, God is the “I am” to Abraham and his sons in throughout the patriarchal narrative in Genesis:

Genesis 15:1, "I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.”

Genesis 15:7, “I am the Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess."

Genesis 17:1-2, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.”

After the “I am God Almighty” reference, the Pentateuch uses this as a referent to remember the “I am” as the God of Abraham (just as Jesus alluded to in John 8:58):

Genesis 26:24, “I am the God of Abraham your father. Fear not, for I am with you and will bless you and multiply your offspring for my servant Abraham's sake.” 

Genesis 35:11, “I am God Almighty:1 be fruitful and multiply. A nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall come from your own body.”

Genesis 46:3, “I am God, the God of your father. Do not be afraid to go down to Egypt, for there I will make you into a great nation.”

Exodus reveals God himself as the “I am who I am.” Thus, God revealed himself as the "I am" of Israel:

Exodus 3:6, “And he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.

Exodus 3:14, “God said to Moses, “I am who I am.”1 And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

Exodus 6:2, “God spoke to Moses and said to him, ‘I am the Lord’” (cf. 6:6, 7, 8, 12, 29; 7:5, 17; 10:2; 12:12; 14:4, 18; 15:26).

Exodus 16:12, “I have heard the grumbling of the people of Israel. Say to them, ‘At twilight you shall eat meat, and in the morning you shall be filled with bread.’ Then you shall know that I am the Lord your God.”

Exodus 20:2, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.”

Exodus 29:34, “And they shall know that I am the Lord their God, who brought them out of the land of Egypt that I might dwell among them. I am the Lord their God.”

Leviticus speaks in covenantal language and references the nature, work, and commandments of the “I am” during the exodus/wilderness period. The references do not allude to the “I am” sayings in John, but rather echo the “I am” sayings in the Pentateuch as a whole, and teach God’s people must be holy as he is holy (cf. Lev. 11:44; 18:2, 5, 6, 21, 30; 19:3, 4, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 25, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 37; 20:7, 8, 24; 21:12, 15, 23; 22:2, 3, 8, 9, 16, 30, 31, 32, 33; 23:22, 43; 24:22; 25:17, 38, 55; 26:1, 2, 13, 44, 45).

Numbers does the same thing as it refers back to the work and commandments of God during the exodus/wilderness period to remind Israel why they are in judgment and what lays before them if they keep the covenant with the “I am” (cf. Num. 3:13, 41, 45; 10:10; 15:41).

Deuteronomy recounts the history of the exodus/wilderness period and how the “I am” was faithful to his covenant. There are only a few references that are explicit:

Deuteronomy 5:6, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.”

Deuteronomy 29:5-6, “I have led you forty years in the wilderness. Your clothes have not worn out on you, and your sandals have not worn off your feet. You have not eaten bread, and you have not drunk wine or strong drink, that you may know that I am the LORD your God.”

The Pentateuch ends with the words of the “I am” which definitely translate to the words of Jesus in the secondary “I am” sayings in John:

Deuteronomy 32:39, “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.”


Isaiah is deeply rooted in the Pentateuch’s revelation of God as the "I am." The nature, works, and commandments of the “I am” are revisited yet reinterpreted for Israel to experience a new exodus by a promised Messiah who is of the "I am." The major passages are in the servant songs of Isaiah 40-66.

Isaiah 41:1-20 revisits the “I am” in the Pentateuch: “Listen to me in silence, O coastlands; let the peoples renew their strength; let them approach, then let them speak; let us together draw near for judgment. Who stirred up one from the east whom victory meets at every step? He gives up nations before him, so that he tramples kings underfoot; he makes them like dust with his sword, like driven stubble with his bow. He pursues them and passes on safely, by paths his feet have not trod. Who has performed and done this, calling the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he. The coastlands have seen and are afraid; the ends of the earth tremble; they have drawn near and come. Everyone helps his neighbor and says to his brother, “Be strong!” The craftsman strengthens the goldsmith, and he who smooths with the hammer him who strikes the anvil, saying of the soldering, “It is good”; and they strengthen it with nails so that it cannot be moved. But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend; you whom I took from the ends of the earth, and called from its farthest corners, saying to you, “You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off”; fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God; I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand. Behold, all who are incensed against you shall be put to shame and confounded; those who strive against you shall be as nothing and shall perish. You shall seek those who contend with you, but you shall not find them; those who war against you shall be as nothing at all. For I, the LORD your God, hold your right hand; it is I who say to you, ‘Fear not,I am the one who helps you.’ Fear not, you worm Jacob, you men of Israel! I am the one who helps you, declares the LORD; your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel. Behold, I make of you a threshing sledge, new, sharp, and having teeth; you shall thresh the mountains and crush them, and you shall make the hills like chaff; you shall winnow them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the tempest shall scatter them. And you shall rejoice in the LORD; in the Holy One of Israel you shall glory. When the poor and needy seek water, and there is none, and their tongue is parched with thirst, I the LORD will answer them; I the God of Israel will not forsake them. I will open rivers on the bare heights, and fountains in the midst of the valleys. I will make the wilderness a pool of water, and the dry land springs of water. I will put in the wilderness the cedar, the acacia, the myrtle, and the olive. I will set in the desert the cypress, the plane and the pine together, that they may see and know, may consider and understand together, that the hand of the LORD has done this, the Holy One of Israel has created it.”

The "I am" Revisited In the Book of Isaiah.
This text clearly indicates God as the “I am” of the Pentateuch and will restore Israel by a new exodus (cf. Isa. 45:8, 18, 19, 22). In Isaiah, however, there is a more direct antecedent that are grounded monotheism reserved only for God. These Isaiah passages go back to Deuteronomy 32:29 where describes God saying, “I am he.” Isaiah writes in this fashion and emphasizes that the phrase serves as a divine title:
Isaiah 43:10, “‘You are my witnesses,’ declares the Lord, ‘and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.’”

Isaiah 43:13, “Also henceforth I am he; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work, and who can turn it back?”

Isaiah 43:25, “I, I am he who blots out your transgressions for my own sake, and I will not remember your sins.”

Isaiah 46:3-4, “Listen to me, O house of Jacob, all the remnant of the house of Israel, who have been borne by me from before your birth, carried from the womb; even to your old age I am he, and to gray hairs I will carry you. I have made, and I will bear; I will carry and will save.”

Isaiah 48:12, “Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I called! I am he; I am the first, and I am the last.
Isaiah 51:12, “I, I am he who comforts you.”

Isaiah 52:6, “Therefore my people shall know my name. Therefore in that day they shall know that it is I who speak; here I am.”

The biblical data in the Pentateuch and Isaiah passages suggest John's message is to declare Jesus as the "I am" of the OT in the NT. The fulfillment of God's saving promises in the NT have come through the Messiah, who personifies divine equality and eternality of the "I am" in the OT.

The "I am" Statements In John's Gospel Point to the Messiah Jesus
Using all of the hermeneutical and biblical data, the "I am" statements and sayings of Jesus have a greater theological significance and meaning. The primary and secondary "I am" allusions all point to Jesus as God in the flesh. In John's gospel, the primary "I am" statements are pronouncements by Jesus to claim equal authority of God from the OT, when the "I am" sayings are pronouncements by Jesus to claim divine authority as the Messiah. This chart helps map out the connections Jesus makes to claim he is the “I am” of Scripture:

Old Testament Allusions To the seven “I am” Statements In John’s Gospel

I am the bread of life (John 6:35)	Manna From Heaven (Exod. 16:1-36)
I am the light of the world (John 8:12)	Light of nations (Ps. 27:1; Isa. 9:2-7; 49:6; 60:19)
I am the door [gate] (John 10:9)	Gate of salvation (Ps. 118:19-24)
I am the good shepherd (John 10:11)	The true shepherd (Ps. 23; Isa. 40:11; Ezk. 34:1-25)
I am the resurrection and the life (John 11:25)	Valley of dry bones (Ezk. 37:1-14)
I am the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6)	Salvation references (Ps. 139:24; Isa. 40:3, 65:16; Gen. 2:7, Job. 33:4; Ps. 56:13)
I am the vine (John 15:5)	Vineyard song (Isa. 5:1-10/Ps. 80:1-19)

Note: Also notice the OT canonical motif among the sayings (i.e. bread/manna; light/pillar of fire; shepherd/Moses-Joshua; Vine/David). I will post another blog entry on the new exodus/wilderness motif among the literary structure of John and the placement of the "I am" statements to declare Jesus equal to YHWH, and point to the new exodus he has come to fulfill.

It is interesting to note the secondary “I am” sayings are pronouncements by Jesus to claim divine authority as the Messiah as self declarations of Jesus' identity in John's gospel. There are implicit and explicit, primary and secondary ways John uses the "I am" statements and sayings. The secondary "I am" sayings are directly referencing his messiahship in conjunction to his authoritative teaching and miracles, pointing to his true identity (John 4:26, 6:20, 8:24, 8:28, 8:58, [9:9?], 13:19, 18:5). These sayings of Jesus are reminiscent of the Isaiah passages where God says “I am he” because Jesus declares the same identity for himself as the Messiah.

The Abrahamic Reversal of the Adamic Curse Fulfilled In the Messiah Jesus

I was totally caught off guard starting my NT Theology class in the OT since it is a class about the NT in general. In a Spirit led way, my first lecture ministered to me as I closely analyze the OT historical-salvation timeline through the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 12) and its promised reversal of the Adamic curse (Gen. 3) which is fulfilled in the Messiah Jesus. I find this fascinating, and cannot wait to read up on it more in Thomas Schreiner's new theology book this summer called, The King and His Beauty: A Biblical Theology of Old & New Testaments. Another great book that makes these connections is T. Desmond Alexander's theology book called, From Paradise to the Promised Land: An Introduction to the Pentateuch, which provides a great picture of how God fulfills his saving promises in the Pentateuch through the Messiah in the NT. Below are some thoughts on this topic that I had to post in a forum for my course.

The Adamic Curse
In Genesis 3, Adam and Eve sin. They violated the creation covenant God made with him in the garden and ate what was forbidden. They were cursed and ushered out of the Garden of Eden (i.e. removed from God's presence). The Fall of Adam and Eve brought distinct curses upon the earth:

1. The Curse of the serpent (Gen. 3:14-15)

2. The Curse of the woman (Gen. 3:16)

3. The Curse of the man (Gen. 3:17-19)

Three so-called battles emerged because of the Fall. These conflicts are revisited throughout the rest of the OT meta-narrative of Scripture until the fulfillment of the Jesus the Messiah in the NT:

A. The battle of the seed beginning with the curse against the serpent. God promised to put enmity between the offspring of the serpent and the offspring of the woman. Thus, from the offspring of the woman will be "one" who will rise up and crush the serpent. The relationship between man and woman is stressful now because of their shame. There is tension between the male and female relationship both physically and spiritually. The loss of harmony between the man and the woman started because of the Fall, which is ironic because only through a relationship of one man and one woman could a seed exist. This conflict intensifies through the barrenness of many women in the Scriptures, from which offspring were suppose to come through them to reverse the curse and bring harmony for Israel and all nations.

B. The battle of the land beginning with the curse of the ground against Adam. God's presence was associated with sacred space throughout the Bible, and began in the Garden of Eden. Man was suppose to manage it, but instead dishonored the garden by not subduing the serpent. God ushered man out of the garden to authorize their removal from his presence because of sin. This theme is revisited also as God promises land to Abraham-Israelites called the Promised Land of Canaan, where God will rule and his people will follow him. The land is blessed and preserved wherever God's presence is among his people as along as they are without allowing wickedness to reign in the land. Israel rebels multiple times and God removes his presence from them because of their sinfulness. God's people are called to rule the land with him, but the curse distorted that reality.

C. The battle of the blessing beginning with the curse of childbearing against Eve. The offspring of the woman is in constant distress throughout the OT narratives. All of the Patriarchs face the death of their firstborn. Moses faced death as an infant just as Jesus did when he was born. The prophetic nature of this curse is continuously revisited through the generations of Adam-to-Abraham-to-David. The prophetic fulfillment of Genesis 3:15 speaks of victory and utter defeat over the serpent to relieve all suffering, pain, and anguish for all nations who bless Abraham's descendants.

The Abrahamic Covenant

Abraham was promised three things: seed, land, and blessing. From Genesis 12-17 the covenant is outlined and defined. Nevertheless, the initial unconditional promises evoke a reversal of the Adamic curse. The Covenant was given to Abraham unconditionally, but it was to obeyed conditionally by him and his descendants.

Abrahamic covenant is revealed and is promises are ready to be fulfilled. The promises consistently faces tension during the Patriarchal narratives and is revisited throughout the OT because of disobedience (e.g. Israel, Saul, David, Solomon, wicked kings, etc.). All of the failures mimic the same failure and curse of Adam and Eve all over again in which the covenant would reverse if fulfilled. Sometimes in the OT only two of the promises are partially fulfilled, but disobedience enters the narrative and breaks the covenant in order to fulfill all that was promised to Abraham.

Seed, Land, Blessing 
The promise of seed overcomes the cursed difficulty of childbearing and the loss of harmony between the man and the woman. The promise of land hints at a place where God will once again dwell with his people. The promise of blessing heralds the triumph of the seed of the woman over the seed of the serpent, which would result in salvation. None of these promises were realized until the coming of the Messiah, Jesus Christ the Lord!

What Are the Reversals of the Adamic Curses of Seed, Land, and Blessing?

1. The reversal of the curse of seed between serpent and woman is promised to end the conflict and disunity between the relationships between man and woman and eventually God - this is realized in the Messiah. The defeat of the seed of the serpent preserves a nation of many people who are of the same seed of promise.

2. The reversal of the curse of land is promised to Abraham and realized in the Messiah. Jesus, who was God in the flesh, dwelt among his people in the land, and signified the eschatological meaning of land as the final and new restoration of the Edenic state through the second coming of Jesus Christ. This promised grants all believers to once again reign and dwell with God in the garden (i.e. heaven, paradise, eternal life).

3. The reversal of curse of childbearing is promised to Abraham and realized in the Messiah. The battle of seed is victorious and triumphant in the birth of Jesus Christ, who came to forgive sin, reconcile sinners, relieve pain and suffering, redeem lives, and reign over all things as the Savior of all nations as the seed of Abraham (the seed of promise).

The NT Showcases the Reversal of the Abrahamic Covenant Fulfilled in the Messiah Jesus 

Jim Hamilton, author of God's Glory In Salvation Through Judgement: A Biblical Theology, does a great job explaining the NT perspective on the Abrahamic reversal of the Adamic curse fulfilled in the Messiah Jesus:

"Paul interprets what has taken place in Jesus as the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham given in Genesis 12:3. He writes in Galatians 3:8, ‘But the Scripture, having foreseen that God would justify the nations from faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham that "all the nations will be blessed in you.”’ Paul returns to this idea in 3:14, making the connection between Jesus and the promise to Abraham explicit with the words, ‘in order that the blessing of Abraham might come to the nations in Messiah Jesus, in order that we might receive the promise through faith.’ It would seem, then, Paul interpreted the promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3 that all nations of the earth would be blessed in him as being fulfilled in Jesus. 

The many statements in the NT that the enemies of Jesus will be placed under his feet might also reflect imagery from Genesis 3:15 through the lens of Psalm 110 [Jesus crushes the serpent/Satan, blesses all who are in him, and rules as Savior and Lord of all nations] (Matt. 22:44 and parallels; Acts 2:35; 1 Cor. 15:25; Eph. 1:20-22; Heb. 2:5-9, 14-15; 10:13)."

I also like the way Walter Kaiser, Jr. put it in his biblical theology called, The Promise-Plan of God: A Biblical Theology of Old & New Testaments, regarding Abraham's covenant and the realized fulfillment in the Messiah Jesus:

"[The Promise-Plan of God] The Promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say 'and to seeds,' meaning many people, but 'and to your seed,' meaning one person, who is Christ' (Gal. 3:16). Paul's gospel, as it turns out, was no different than what God had originally given for persons to be saved in the OT. Paul was not introducing something that was brand-new! God's promise-plan was the same original plan still be advocated by Paul [and fulfilled in the Messiah, Jesus Christ]."

Jesus is the true seed of Abraham who crushes and defeats the serpent. As the Abrahamic covenant was intentional to reverse the Adamic curse, the new Adam came to fulfill the reversal with finality. Jesus as the seed harmonies all relationships through his dominion over the seed of the serpent. He grants future dominion over a new promised land that is not of this world, and blesses all nations in him with eternal life. God fulfills his saving promises through Jesus Christ!

Why Teach Biblical Theology In the Church and Home - Graeme Goldsworthy

Graeme Goldsworthy ended his lectures at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary with the intention to create a culture in the listeners to motivate believers to become students of the Scripture at church and at home. He concludes that all believers should use biblical theology for their advantage in the Christian life and ministry. Believers should apply theological principles to their family and lifestyle in order to properly display the gospel-centered worldview of the Bible. As Justin Taylor once said, "As goes the academy, so goes the church," it is up to good biblical scholarship to educate and train leaders in the areas of biblical theology so they can equip the body of Christ with a greater understanding of the mission of God revealed in the Scriptures. I cannot agree more!

Here is a section of his last lecture on biblical theology in the church and home:

"In this series of lectures I have tried to do several things. First of all, I wanted to give attention to the nature of biblical theology and the necessityfor it to be part of every Christian’s equipment for life and ministry in the world. In my second lecture I turned attention to the academy, particularly to those seminaries and colleges concerned with ministerial training. For whatever reason, and however it is justified, the lack of introductory courses in biblical theology in, so it would seem, the majority of such institutions is to be regretted. It may betray in some cases tardiness in facing the realities of our modern and postmodern societies and in changing our understanding of necessary curriculum in order to address those realities. In other cases it may show that the theoretical aspects of the essence and method of biblical theology is still so diffuse that it gets left in the ‘too hard’ basket.  

In this third lecture I have tried to address the matter of ministry in the front line: preaching and pastoral care, Christian education, and one of the most important of all, the ministry of Christian parents to their children. These three aspects, the theoretical foundations, the formal instruction in the Christian academy, and the ministry in the church and in the Christian home, are all inter-related. If ministry in the local church is mediocre, it will breed mediocrity in those that seek to enter ministry. It will encourage mediocrity in the home ministry. The evangelical academy is more likely to have entry requirements that go beyond the academic ability of the applicant. Indications of ministry gifts and of spiritual maturity will also be taken into account. One advantage of a denominational structure is that it is likely to have resources to facilitate the business of encouraging interest in full-time ministry and in laying down criteria for acceptance into the seminary. However, non-denominational organizations can also make effective contributions to the promotion of ministry training.Thus because what one ‘feels’ about the Bible and God is now culturally supported it can easily be wedded with one’s subjective experience as the primary source  of certitude for liberals and the growing source of certitude for evangelicals. 

I believe it is true to say that that what starts in the academy may take a generation or more to filter to the level of the layperson in the local church. The tragedy of this is when Bible-believing Christians find themselves at the mercy of a rampant liberal in their pulpit. However, the seminary and Bible college can also influence things for reform and for an increase in biblical ministry. The task is not easy, especially if the youth of our churches are imbibing a culture and world-view that is alien to Christianity. Wells is right to see the problem as a clash of world views. But if he and Hafemann are right in their analysis, the task is great. It is not only introductory courses in the seminary that we need. The need is also great for the biblical theologians to work with the historians and dogmaticians to hammer out the viable methods and procedures so that biblical theology will have some recognizable theoretical basis that stems from divine revelation in Scripture.  

I conclude on this note: The gospel is about objective historical events, not about subjective experience and ideals. Subjective experience, to be valid, must be the fruit of the gospel. The gospel is about the transcendent God of creation doing something to rectify the corrupted history of mankind, not about a self-centered technique of personal self-improvement. The good news is that the Man from heaven has re-written our personal histories so that what counts before God is that when we were dead in our trespasses and sins, God made us alive with Christ, raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in heavenly places. The cancer of subjectivism that threatens the very existence of true biblical religion is not new; it is as old as Adam’s rebellion. But, the remedy must at the very least involve a determined return to the historic and objective gospel as the only basis for a true spiritual subjectivity. I see biblical theology as a vital part of that return to a gospel-centered world view."

Why Teach Biblical Theology - Graeme Goldsworthy

Here is a great conclusion to Graeme Goldsworthy's argument for teaching biblical theology (specifically in seminary and Bible college for future preachers and teachers in the church). I hope to lead a future Bible study that will emphasis biblical theology because I believe it helps readers of the Bible make more sense of the overarching theological narrative of salvation-history throughout all 66 books. The more people learn about biblical theology, the more application will flow out of their reading of the Word of God. And the more application that flows out of their reading will transform them into the image of Christ. Goldsworthy is spot on in his analysis and encouragement  The more people study the Scriptures theologically, the more people will see the glory of Christ.

This post is from his lectures at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:

"The first is that I  think it is important for people to understand how a particular emphasis  arose and why there is a bit of a crusade going on to promote biblical theology. The second is related, in that I am still on a mission. That mission  is to try to remove some of the ambiguity and uncertainty about the pursuit of biblical theology as a distinct discipline in its own right. I wish that every seminary and Bible college would take up the challenge to provide an introductory course in ‘big picture’ biblical theology and then strive to keep the vision alive in the way biblical studies are conducted.   

I believe that it is doubly important that evangelical colleges teach biblical theology, deliberately, intentionally, and not just hope that the biblical studies teachers between them will get the message across. One reason why it is not done is specialization. Another is that academic deans and registrars are understandably shy of one more course on top of the large number already clamouring for attention as necessary in ministerial training.  

A third is perhaps the main reason for the neglect of biblical theology. Even among evangelicals there is no real consensus about what biblical theology is and how it should be done. Because of these difficulties, I recognise that the approach to biblical theology in individual seminaries and bible colleges may differ from what I have suggested. I certainly do not want to imply criticism of situations of which I have no knowledge or do not understand. These are my personal convictions born of my experience as a Christian minister living in one of the most secular of western societies.   

I will close on this note: I believe that, if we begin with Christ clothed in his gospel and work out from there, not only is biblical theology possible, but it is an absolute necessity if we are to be consistent with the gospel. At a time when everything seems to conspire to convey a sense of the diversity ofScripture, we need to recover its unity. Biblical theology provides the Trinitarian and Christological perspective of unity and diversity. I can think of no better way to make the great Reformation dicta become realities as we proclaim salvation that is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, grounded on the Scriptures alone,  and all this to the glory of God alone."

The Necessity and Viability of Biblical Theology - Graeme Goldsworthy

I have been reading through archived lectures at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS) and came across Graeme Goldsworthy's lectures on how important it is to preach, teach, study, and converse about biblical theology. As I have been studying the history of theological interpretation, it appears biblical theology has resurfaced in recent times after being neglected for many years. This approach to understanding Scripture has seriously develop a greater hermeneutical process and emphasis on the meaning of the text for me personally. I appreciate studies like this and believe it is very healthy, intelligent, and essential for the body of Christ to be equipped with the topic of biblical theology. Due to biblical theology, I can see the Scriptures with more vividness than ever before. Graeme Goldsworthy's lectures on biblical theology are spot on, and below are four reason I completely agree with for the necessity and viability of biblical theology (why it matters) in the pastorate and church.

Here are four reasons for the necessity and viability of biblical theology:

1. The dynamic of redemptive-history from creation to new creation,
with Jesus Christ at the centre, points to a distinctly Christian view and
philosophy of history. The course of world history, according to the Bible,
serves the rule of the Lord God as he moves all things inexorably to the
conclusion that he has determined from before the foundation of the world. 

2. The reality principle in the incarnation demands that every dimension
of reality that the Bible expresses be examined. The reality principle in Jesus
is that he is shown to be God incarnate; the new creation; the last Adam; the
new temple; the new Israel; the new David; and the true seed of Abraham.
We could extend the list, but I think the point is made. The essential thing is
that he is the Immanuel; God amongst us in perfect relationship to humanity
and to all the dimensions of reality that the Old Testament presents as the
typological antecedents to his coming.

3. The conviction of faith from the apostles onwards is that in Scripture
there is not a confusion of conflicting testimonies but a variegated testimony
to the one saving work of God in Jesus Christ. The sense of a redemptive
plan coming to fruition in Christ can be seen from the beginning of the
apostolic church. Both Peter, in Acts 2, and Paul in Acts 13 proclaim a
pattern of events in Israel leading to David and then to fulfilment in Christ.
Stephen’s apology in Acts 7 could also be called a mini-biblical theology. In
all the New Testament epistles there is a sense of a narrative that lies behind
and is implied by the theologizing and pastoral comment.

4. The discipline of biblical theology is required by the ‘big picture’ of the
canon of Scripture as God’s word to mankind. It is the one word given to
us so that men and women may be saved and, standing firm in the assurance
of their free justification in Christ, may press on with confidence towards the
goal of their high calling in Christ, emboldened by the blessed hope of Christ’s
return in glory to judge the living and the dead, and encouraged by the vision
of the new heaven and new earth in which righteousness dwells for eternity.

"Promise-Plan of God" In Romans

How did the Christian church originate in Rome? The most popular answer is based on Acts 2.  On the Day of Pentecost, Luke records that people traveled from all over Asia Minor to meet in Jerusalem:

"Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. And they were amazed and astonished, saying, “Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? And how is it that we hear, each of us in his own native language? Parthians and Medes and Elamites and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians—we hear them telling in our own tongues the mighty works of God." (Acts 2:5-11)

The "visitors from Rome" were Jews coming to Jerusalem for the Pentecost festival, which was "a sacred festival of the Jews observed 50 days after the Passover." Luke later records after the preaching of Peter, the Holy Spirit was poured out on these visitors and some three thousand souls were saved (Acts 2:41). Within these three thousand souls were now Jewish Christians who must of journeyed back to Rome and started Jewish Christian groups where they would repeat the preaching of Peter about "the promise-plan
of God" they learned in Jerusalem:

"Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing." (Acts 2:33) 

"For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” (Acts 2:39)

It is very possible this is why Paul decided to begin Romans with a theological affirmation of the promise-plan of God throughout the Scriptures:

"Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 1:1-4)

I have been teaching on Romans for several months for the The Group Bible study at church. Recently, I read about the Promise-Plan of God in Romans. Throughout Paul's letters he references the "promise-plan of God" as the covenant given to Abraham fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Rom. 4:1-3, 9, 12-13, 16; 9:7; 11:1). This promise is from the seed of Abraham (cf. Gen. 12), and thus all who are of that seed are blessed. Jesus Christ is the seed of Abraham, and all those in Christ are blessed. Therefore, Paul wants to make sure his gospel is based on the "promise-plan of God" because it is upon that promise is the power of God for salvation to the Jew and the Greek (Note: Paul wanted to make sure that his gospel was not mistaken because the word "gospel" occurs six times in chapter one, Rom. 1:1, 2, 9, 15, 16, 17).


From the beginning of Romans, Paul began teaching his readers the promise-plan of God is based on OT truth, "Which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures" (Rom. 1:2), and seemingly ended his letter affirming that truth, "For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God's truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs" (Rom.15:8). Below is four ways the book of Romans reveals the promise-promise plan of God.

The book of Romans reveals to us the gospel as the promise-plan of God in several ways:
1. The gospel as the promised positional righteousness of God (Rom. 1-4)
(This is a result of the covenant and faith of Abraham that is fulfilled in Christ)

2. The gospel as the promised redemption/renewal of God (Rom. 5-8)
(This is a result of the work of righteousness fulfilled in the new Adam)

3. The gospel as the promised reconciliation of God (Rom. 9-11)
(This is a result of the unifying faith of Jews and Gentiles in message from the beginning)

4. The gospel as the promised practical righteousness of God (Rom. 12-16)

(This is the result of the transformed life by the power of the Holy Spirit)

This is awesome! The gospel is "the promise," and in no other book is "the promise" so magnificently outlined. Paul wanted the gospel to be understood correctly. He explains the gospel as the promised positional righteousness, redemption/renewal, reconciliation, an practical righteousness. The Roman believers did not seem to understand the implications of the gospel. Paul dug down deep and taught these believers as if he was there in a Roman synagogue, and in doing so, he explained how "the promise" was fulfilled in Christ and has brought a new ethical, moral, theological, and practical lifestyle that must correspond to that message. Therefore, I think the "Promise-Plan of God in Romans" can be understood as an in depth scriptural analysis of "the promise" fulfilled through Jesus Christ with past-present-future soteriological and ecclesiological effects. The heart of the promise is saving and changing societal lives for the glory of God.

The Promise-Plan of God

During Cyber Monday, I was looking for good deals online for some books that I have been wanting to get as resources. Since I am trying to save some money, I looked for used books on Amazon and found some good copies that were in "just-like-new" condition! One of those books was by Walter Kasier Jr. called, The Promised-Plan of God: A Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments. The book is a very easy to read biblical theology of every book in the Bible. It breaks up the OT and NT and lists them in the canonical order to showcase the "unity of Scripture." I love this book, and the more I read it, I end up loving it more and more because of its academic approach and simple explanations so all readers can understand the content. The thesis of the book reveals how Scripture needs to be hermeneutically interpreted and read with an overarching and unifying promise-plan of God. The book argues for a textually derived "center" of Scripture that simultaneously parallels the case for the "unity of the Bible" (i.e. all 66  books), and how this case was the rubric of studying the Bible during the Reformation era, but was disengaged during the Enlightenment era. Therefore, this book aims at restoring the study of biblical theology as it once was in the Reformation, yet at the same time reveal how their is a promise-plan of God that needs to be taught in our world today.

At the beginning of the book, Kaiser defines the promise-plan of God:

"The promise-plan is God's word of declaration, beginning with Eve and continuing on through history, especially in the patriarchs and the Davidic line, that God would continually be in his person and do in his deeds and works (in and through Israel, and later the church) his redemptive plan as his means of keeping that promised word alive for Israel, and thereby for all the nations so that all the families of the earth might come to faith and to new life in the Messiah" (p.19).

I believe Kaiser correctly identifies the harmonious "scarlet thread" of the gospel throughout the OT and NT. However, he further and more accurately explains how to interpret and read the Bible through God's covenant to Abraham originating in Genesis and eschatologically fulfilled by Jesus Christ. His main point is to interpret and read the Bible with "this covenant" in mind because it all stems from it: "God gave a promise to Abraham, and through him to mankind; a promise eternally fulfilled and fulfilling in the history of Israel; and chiefly fulfilled in Jesus Christ, he being that which is principal in the history of Israel."

Kaiser presents scriptural generalizations to defend his purpose of the book. I think they are pretty simple and healthy generalizations, knowing there are some really confusing and unhealthy generalizations about the Bible. Here are ten characteristics of the Promise-Plan of God Kaiser wants reads to consider:

1. The doctrine of the Promised Messiah is found throughout all the Scriptures and not just in isolated or selected passages as understood by the Promise-Fulfillment Scheme (cf. Luke 24:44).

2. The Old Testament Messianic teaching was regarded as the development of a single promise (Greek word, "epangelia"), repeated and unfolded through the centuries with numerous specifications and in multiple forms but always with the same essential core. (cf. Acts 26:6-7)

3. The New Testament writers equate this single, definite promise as the one made to Abraham when god called him from Ur of the Chaldeans. (cf. Rom. 4:13-14, 20; Heb. 6:13-14, 17; 11:9, 39-40; Gen. 22:17)

4. While the New Testament writers occasionally speak of promises, using the plural form of the word, the manner in which they do so does not weaken the case for a single definite promise in the Scriptures. (cf. Rom. 9:4, 15:8-9).

5. The New Testament writers regard this single, definite promise, composed of many specifications, to be the theme of both the Old and New Testaments. (cf. Acts. 7:2-3, 17)

6. The promise made to Abraham is represented as both being partially fulfilled in the events of the exodus and yet still to be fully fulfilled in the distant future. (cf. Acts 13:22-23; Luke 1:69, 73)

7. The New Testament writers not only declare that the promise-plan of God is seen through the whole Old Testament, but they adopt the Old Testament phraseology as part of their own way of expressing God's revelation to them. (cf. Gal. 3:29; Eph. 2:12)

8. The New Testament writers teach that the promise of God is operating eternally and is irrevocable. (cf. Rom. 11:29; Gal. 3:15-18; Heb. 6:13, 17-18)

9. The New Testament writers make a strong connection between the promise and a number of other doctrines. (cf. Gal. 3:6-8, 14; Eph. 1:13, 3:6; Heb. 9:15; 2 Pet. 3:10)

10. The culmination of all the specifications (i.e., the individual predicted doctrines that support the one unifying promise-plan) are wrapped up in the one promise doctrine, or promise-plan, which focuses on Jesus Christ. (cf. Matt. 5:17; Rom. 1:1-6)

With all of these scriptural generalizations, I think it proper to suggest the NT use and reference of the OT "promise" is undeniable. I appreciate Kaiser's his approach to show how all of the Bible works together to theologically disclose Christ as the Messiah (as he goes genre-by genre and book-by-book to show how it unfolds). I wrote on this because I am always interested how the NT uses the OT in order to point to Jesus as God and Savior of all nations, and at the same time point to the Word of God as truth. What a perfect topic to reflect upon during Christmas!

Aristotle vs. Apostle Paul - The Literary Structure of Romans

As I have been studying the book of Romans, it is easy to notice Paul's style resembles the normality and functionality of a Greco-Roman letter in the first century. Even though his Christian letter is unique and delivers its own particular theological-practical structure compared to all other Greco-Roman literature (as NT scholar Douglas Moo suggest, NICNT Commentary: The Epistle to the Romans), the book of Romans follows a very similar and distinct structure that is familiar to what is known as "logos protreptikos," which means "a persuasive discourse." Christopher Bryan convincingly writes on Romans and points out in the book, Theological Interpretation of the New Testament, that Paul used a "protreptic" style when writing his letter to Rome: 

"In the philosophical tradition, such discourse was associated with the choice of a particular school, or with the choice of philosophy itself." He explains how there are three elements to writing in protreptic in which Paul uses: (1) [apelegmos] dissuasion or refutation, (2) [endeiktikos] demonstration, (3) [parainesis] personal appeal and exhortation (p.84).

The tradition of protreptic was used by philosophers to strengthen their arguments and convert outside followers. It is pure speculation, but it could be possible this was one of the argumentative methods Paul faced or embraced when he visited Athens preached the gospel in the Areopagus (cf. Acts 17:16-34).

Aristotle vs. Apostle Paul
Bryan briefly mentions how Aristotle's Protrepticus and other ancient philosophical literature was written in this tradition, so I studied this subject and found some interesting connections. Aristotle's Protrepticus was a very lengthy discourse about trying to find any plausible means for true happiness. Aristotle uses his greatest pupil, Eudemus of Rhodes, as an example and fellow philosopher seeking wisdom. However, the main protreptic argument revolves around intellectual wisdom as the chief virtue and only basis of reality for happiness. He boldly writes with dissuasion or refutation for philosophy [apelegmos], using many different metaphors of demonstration [endeiktikos], and presents a personal appeal and exhortation to conclude without philosophy, life and happiness are vanity [parainesis].

Paul uses a similar type of method. He argues from Scripture for faith in Christ [apelegmos] (1:1-4:25), demonstrates the out-workings of new life in Christ  [endeiktikos] (5:1-11:36), and ends by encouraging his hears to live righteously in Christ  [parainesis] (12:1-16:27).

In Romans 1:1-4:25, Paul uses dissuasion or refutation [apelegmos] through the use of Scripture. He uses the Scriptures to convince his hears of a correct perspective of the non-religious man (Gentile) and religious man (Jew) as equally guilty sinners facing judgment, and apart from the mercy and grace of God in Christ, no man could be justified. Therefore, he ends his scriptural argument by explaining how Abraham and David had faith in God, and righteousness was accounted to them; and whosoever has faith in Jesus Christ will have God's righteousness accounted to him through the work of the cross.

In Romans 5:1-11:36, Paul uses many examples to demonstrate [endeiktikos] how faith in Jesus Christ brings about justification, sanctification, and promised redemption. He especially demonstrates from Scripture how the Messiah initially came to save Israel, but Israel rejected the Messiah, and God fulfilled his promise to save the Gentiles as well. His use of metaphors and examples defend his message and provide a egalitarian gospel for all people groups to believe and partake in the out-workings of new life in Christ.

In Romans 12:1-16:27, Paul uses his last words with exhortatory measures. He encourages his hears with a personal touch and authoritative voice to live transformed and renewed in conformity to the image of Christ and not the image of the world. He encourages his hears to live pure, moral, and righteously with neighbors,  governing authorities, and fellow believers. As Aristotle sought to protreptically explain the only real basis for true happiness and meaning was found in philosophy (i.e. through knowing how things work in the world), the Apostle Paul sought to protreptically explain the only real basis for true happiness and meaning was found in Jesus Christ (i.e. through knowing the work of Christ). Paul confirms this in 1 Corinthians 1:21, "For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe." And continues to explain where true wisdom is found in 1 Corinthians 1:30-31, "And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, 'Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.'"

This was a theological interpretation of the literary structure of Romans. I believe it is very plausible and most likely reasonable to believe Paul used a type of protreptic style to convince his readers that his gospel was the truth, but not entirely based his literary structure off of one literary device during the first century. Maybe this is why his doxological praise at the end of his letter is packed with theological realities of assurance in Romans 16:25-27, "Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith—to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen."

The New Testament Use of the Old Testament in Matthew's Gospel

Since I have been studying NT biblical theology on my own, I wanted to balance myself to personally dig deeper one gospel, one Pauline letter, and a general epistle (i.e. Matthew, Romans, 1 John). I have been studying Matthew because of the dominant usage of the Old Testament in his gospel, and find it fascinating how much more explicit Matthew's Gospel polemically argues and reveals that Jesus is indeed the Messiah through OT references.

New Testament scholar Craig Blomberg points out in his explanation of Matthew in the outstanding book, Commentary On the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, "The Hebrew Scriptures - or Christian Old Testament - permeate Matthew's Gospel. Approximately 55 references prove close enough in wording for commentators typically to label them 'quotations,' compared to about 65 [references] for the other three canonical Gospels put together. About twenty of these texts are unique to Matthew. Twelve times Matthew speaks explicitly of a passage or theme of Scripture being 'fulfilled.' In addition to explicit quotations, numerous allusions and echoes of Scripture may be discerned in every part of this Gospel, roughly twice as often as in Mark, Luke, or John. Virtually every major theological emphasis of Matthew is reinforced with Old Testament support, often by the addition of segments of texts to the sources Matthew employed."

I love this stuff! It goes to show you that there is no mistake in Matthew's Gospel to argue and reveal the correct scriptural and soteriological identity of the Messiah. I will post some things about Romans and 1 John later because there are some really cool OT connections in those NT books to assure their audience of the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Read the Bible for Life: Scholar Series (on Biblical Hermeneutics) Part 7

I think the Prophets of the OT are some of the most misunderstood books of the Bible. Ever since I have become a Christian, I have struggled to understand what the authors meant by their distinct symbolism and apocalyptic style of writing. Once I went to school and studied the OT Prophets at CBU, I learned there is a wealth of knowledge regarding prophecies of the Messiah, and the NT quotes most of the Major Prophets to showcase Jesus Christ as the Suffering Servant (Isaiah) and Son of Man (Daniel), all to validate his identity as the Son of God in the gospels. NT scholars J. Daniel Hays and Tremper Longman III put together an interactive survey on the message of the Prophets. In The Message of the Prophets: A Survey of the Prophetic and Apocalyptic Books of the Old Testament, the resources are printing all over the pages with articles, pictures, quotations, and maps. The book is written in such a way to help you experience living in the times of the Prophets. This biblically educates the reader to properly understand the Prophets messages and why they were preaching to Israel. I have been checking this book out from CBU library, so I cannot wait to buy it around Christmas time for my library.

Below are a series of videos that help make sense of the Prophets and how to read them, brought to you by OT scholar Gary Smith. I find these videos so insightful. Enjoy!

"And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."

(2 Peter 1:19-21)

Read the Bible for Life: Scholar Series (on Biblical Hermeneutics) Part 6

I love learning about the NT. There are so many new "fresh" insights I learn when reading new books on biblical theology. I am waiting for Christmas to get this book, so reading it on Google preview is the way I have been going through it. One of my favorite NT scholars, Darrell Bock, has put together the second installment in the Zondervan's Biblical Theology series on the book of Luke and Acts. In A Theology of Luke & Acts: God's Promised Program, Realized for All Nations, the exhaustive information can get overwhelming. Yet, the information does bring a refreshing perspective on the truth of the gospel from the Luke/Acts perspective. Enjoy the videos below that discuss how to read Luke/Acts, and how we can read the Gospels with more excitement. I was really encouraged by this!

"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught." 

(Luke 1:1-4)