I. The Nature of Biblical Theology#

What is biblical theology? A simple definition would be the following:

In other words, biblical theology is not our own theology, or that of our church or denomination; it is the theology of the biblical writers themselves.

• Old Testament theology is the theology of the Old Testament writers

• New Testament theology is the theology of the New Testament writers

• Pauline theology is the theology of Paul

• Johannine theology is the theology of John

At the same time, there is divine continuity, since the various theologies of the biblical writers are ultimately unified and not in contradiction with one another, as they express the unitary purpose of God in biblical revelation. We will not only construct our theology on a biblical foundation, but we will place our focus on the writers of Scripture and their beliefs and contributions as they expressed them under divine inspiration in the Old and New Testament writings.

The biblical authors themselves engaged in biblical theology, which means that we do not just get our content from Scripture, but our method as well.

• Later Old Testament writers referred back to earlier Old Testament books

• New Testament writers used the Old Testament in a variety of ways

The Scripture themselves set the standard for what biblical theology is and how it ought to be done, similar to the way in which they exhibit a certain set of hermeneutical principles (providing a framework for hermeneutics), or the way in which they deal with various moral issues (setting the stage for how the church today should engage in ethical decision-making).

Biblical and Systematic Theology#

The relationship between biblical and systematic theology is best conceived as a collaborative enterprise between two related and adjacent disciplines. The image of a relay race comes to mind, where one runner - biblical theology - hands off the baton to the next - systematic theology.

Since biblical theology is grounded in introductory matters such as authorship, date, provenance, audience, occasion, and purpose for writing - not to mention the exegesis of specific texts - as part of a four-person relay team.

Introductory Matters
-> Exegesis
-> Biblical Theology
-> (complemented by historical theology)
-> Systematic Theology

On the one hand, we should recognize that we all approach exegesis with a kind of systematic theology already in place, whether we relaize it or not and regardless of how sophisticated suhc a systematic theology is. On the other hand, we should make every effort to be cognizant of our own theological system and presupposition and critically distance ourselves from these, so that we can approach our exegesis and biblical-theological work as inductively as possible.

One helpful way of differentiating between biblical and systematic theology is recognizing that:

• Biblical theology is primarily about establishing theological connections (connecting biblical texts not merely literarily and intertextually but also along historical line)

• Systematic theology is primarily about theological construction (organizing the biblical material methodically and comprehensively, topic by topic).

Biblical theology relates the theology of a given biblical book or writer to that of other books in a given Testament and ultimately the entire canon, though a certain amount of arrangement and organization is inevitable even in biblical theology.

D. A. Carson distinguishes between four levels of biblical and theological exploration:

1. The exegesis of scriptural texts in historical contexts and in terms of their literary features (including genres), in an attempt to discern the underlying authorial intent as much as this is feasible

2. The interpretation of a given text within the scope of biblical theology in its entirety, in an effort to determine its contribution to the biblical metanarrative

3. The quest understand theological structures in a given text in conjunction with other major theological themes in Scripture

4. The subjection of all teachings derived from the biblical writings to the interpreter’s larger hermeneutical proposal

While interpreters have traditionally operated mostly on levels 1 and 2, most recent practitioners of the theological interpretation of Scripture operate on levels 3 and 4.

Biblical Theology and the Theological Interpretation of Scripture (TIS)#

On a methodological level, TIS tends to be more deductive, while biblical theology aims to be more inductive.

• TIS builds a picture of theology of the Bible using broad categories derived from systematic theology

• Biblical theology works with specific observations found in the biblical material itself

This is not a case of competition or incompatibility, for biblical theology and TIS each have their legitimate aims and methods.

Biblical Theology and Hermeneutics#

While biblical theology is predicated upon hermeneutics, biblical hermeneutics itself is properly grounded in the nature (ontology) of Scripture.

In the ultimate analysis, the Bible’s unity is grounded in the unity of the one, triune God.

• The Father is the Creator and self-revealing God

• There is a sense in which Christ is both the agent and the telos (ultimate point of reference) of biblical revelation

• The Spirit is the agent of inspiration

On the human side, what corresponds to divinely inspired revelation is Spirit-illumined interpretation.

Biblical theology is more than mere Spirit-filled interpretation - it involves connecting the dots between different strands of divine revelation in Scripture. One way to do this is by way of intertextuality.

II. The Practice of Biblical Theology#

How can one ascertain what the theology of the biblical writers is? What is the most appropriate method when engaging in biblical theology? These are valid and vital questions.

It is true that anyone aiming to discover the theology of a given writer of Scripture faces the inescapable reality of their own subjective viewpoints. At the same time, presuppositions are not necessarily a problem, much less an insurmountable one.

If presuppositions are well grounded, such presuppositions can serve as the vital foundation for one’s biblical-theological work.

Method in Biblical Theology#

A method needs to include the following three essential components.

First, such a method should be historical#

Unlike systematic theology, which is primarily abstract and topical in nature, biblical theology aims to understand a given passage of Scripture in its original historical setting.

For example, when studying the biblical theology of tithing, we need to interpret references to tithing in Malachi or Matthew in such a way that we take into account the specific salvation-historical situation in which those passages of Scripture are to be placed.

Seconf, biblical theology will seek to study Scripture inductively, on its own terms#

Pay specical attention, not merely to the concepts addressed in Scripture, but to the very words, vocabulary, and terminology used by the biblical writers.

Rather than investifating “sanctification” as a broader topic, the biblical theologian will study the individual words that are used in the Bible to express what may be called the subject of Christian growth - words such as “set apart” (hagiazo) or “grow” (auxano).

There is also the reverse danger of being limited to word studies, for a theme, issue, or concept can be present even when a key word is not.

This is the purpose of biblical theology:

Synthesizing in biblical theology essentially involves the topical or thematic grouping of insights still in keeping with biblical terminology and within the framework of the original historical setting in which a given teaching was given.

Third, biblical theology, properly conceived, is primarily descriptive#

The primary goal in biblical theology is to listen to Scripture and to accurately describe the contributions made by the various biblical writers themselves.

Unity, Diversity, and the Quest for a Single Center#

Whether is there only one right way of engaging in biblical theologyr or whether is there a range of legitimate options?

There are essentially four major complementary ways of engaging in biblical theology:

1. An investigation of major themes in Scripture book by book (the “classic” approach)

2. An examination of central themes throughout Scripture

3. The identification of a single center of Scripture

4. A metanarrative approach that focuses on discerning the Bible’s major storyline

Let us look briefly at each of these approaches.

First, scholars and students of Scripture have studied the theology of a given book or corpus of Scripture#

Focusing initially on the investigation of the theology of a given writer of Scripture one book or corpus at a time has the virtue of respecting the integrity of that book as a holistic discourse unit.

This may be considered the “classic approach”. Not only is this the way in which scholars have traditionally conceived of and practically engaged in biblical-theological study, but this is also how we should continue to think of and pursue biblical theology.

Second, some have utilized a central themes approach#

Rather than looking at the theology of individual books of Scripture, such scholars seek to discern major themes throughout Scripture - such as God, Messiah, salvation, and so forth - and attempt to trace the way in which these themes integrate progressive biblical revelation. This can be a very valuable enterprise, as it showcases the unity and coherence of Scripture.

At the same time, it is preferable to start with a study of the theology of individual books of the Bible before moving on to connecting the dots in the form of central themes. In this way, we will not lose sight of the distinctive teaching of each individual book of Scripture.

Third, some biblical theologians have sought to identify the center of Scripture#

Ironically, those who have tried to do so have come up with different results, which makes one wonder whether there is such a single center in the first place. Not every book of Scripture focuses on the same topic. Thus, most scholars in the field have rightly abandoned the quest for a single center.

To elaborate on the limitations of a single-center biblical theology a bit further, quite clearly there are multiple themes in Scripture. For example, there is the creation/new creation theme. Yet creation theology is not the only significant, pervasive theme in Scripture. Another such theme is that of covenant. Both creation/new creation and covenant are vital themes in Scripture.

All this is to illustrate the point that a single-center approach is demonstrably reductionistic and therefore inadequate.

Fourth is utilizing a metanarrative approach to understand the teachings of Scripture#

Those who utilize this approach take a close look at the story of the Bible - the overall storyline - to describe its theology in all its unity and diversity.

It is possible to study the theology of the Bible book by book, and then to sketch a composite picture based on the study of individual books and their theology, and still not to get the big picture totally right. In this regard, a metanarrative or story approach to biblical theology may well constitute an improvement.

However, it is easy to see that if looking at the big picture is all one does, there are mutiple ways to connect the dots. It is also possible that by looking at the grand narrative, one will overlook some of the plot twists, minor themes, and characters in the biblical storyline. If one is not careful, one may well end up with what scholars call “a canon within a canon” - a collection of one’s favorite biblical books or the books that best fit one’s preferred overal construal of the biblical storyline - while neglecting or even subconsciously avoiding lesser voices.

For these reasons, we recommend a metanarrative approach as the final step in a biblical-theological investigation but not as substitute for a classic approach.

Detecting and Analyzing Themes#

As we engage in biblical-theological study, we propose the following four general guidelines:

1. Read through the book multiple times and take notes or mark up your Bible as you try to identify significant themes and emphases. This may surface on either a key word or a conceptual level.

2. In so doing, identify key passages where the biblical theology of a given book or corpus is most prominently enunciated, such as a preface, prologue, or introduction, summary and purpose statements, or conclusion.

3. Identify prominent themes and distinctive theological emphases. In so doing, draw on literary analysis and consider important literary features such as strategic placement, repetition, structure, and/or emphases.

4. Develop a hierarchy of themes. Determine which of the prominent themes that you identified in the previous step are foundational themes that provide cohesion to the biblical story (e.g., love) and which are specific instantiations (e.g., the cross).

Case Study 01: Letters to Timothy and Titus#

In view of these general guidelines, let us now look at the first case study: Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus (the “Pastoral Epistles”).

Our biblical-theological approach: inductive, historical, and descriptive.

The question is not “How would we outline these books or come up with theological categories?” but “How did Paul himself, judging by the texts we have, articulate his theological thinking in these letter?”

Historical context#

These letters were most likely the final letters Paul wrote, toward the end of his life. That is clear especially in 2 Timothy, where Paul is suffering imprisonment that would soon lead to his martyrdom.

Many scholars argue that these letters were written by someone other than Paul, after his death, primarily because they exhibit some significant differences from his earlier letters.

• The author of these letters, when speaking of the church, does not use Paul’s favorite metaphor (the church as the body of Christ) but instead depicts the church as God’s household.

• The author uses a different term for Christ’s second coming - epiphaneia rather than parousia

• The author calls on his apostolic delegates to emulate a series of virtues - such as godliness (eusebeia) - rather than speaking of the fruit of the Spirit or other Christian graces as in his earlier letters

• Many note the pronounced interest in church structure and leadership which reflects an “early Catholicism” such as what we see in the writings of the second-century church fathers

While none of these differences justifies the conclusion that Paul cannot be the author of these letters, it is imperative to recognize that these three letters are distinct and unique in the Pauline corpus. These letters do exhibit a distinctive set of biblical-theological themes.

The question becomes “How do we explain these differences?” One way is to say that these letters were written by someone other than Paul. Or, one might argue that the author is the same but Paul expressed himself differently. Paul contextualized his message to the respective locales to which he wrote, something we see clearly in the approach Paul uses in Athens (Acts 17:16-34).

Biblical theology#

In the general guidelines above, we suggest that the first thing to do when engaging in biblical-theological study is to read through a given book multiple times and to take notes or mark up one’s Bible in an attempt to identify significant themes and emphases.

The letters to Timothy and Titus are rooted in the idea of mission, or more specifically, in the apostolic mission of Paul and his associates. The first major theme in these letters - the foundational theme - is that of mission.

Second, a careful study of these letters reveals that closely related to mission is the theme of teaching, the kind that flows from Paul’s apostolic preaching - the kerygma - and is passed on to his apostolic delegates as they guard it against false teachers. The wide range of vocabulary and the prominence of the teaching motif in these letters underscore that Paul placed immense value on right doctrine, or as he regularly calls it, “sound” or wholesome teaching (e.g., 1 Tim. 1:10).

Third, when it comes to repeated and prominent references, the “salvation” word group is rather conspicuous, both the noun soteria and the verb sozo and related terms. Christ is featured in these letters primarily in his role as divine Savior. Salvation, like teaching, is integrally related to mission. Salvation being a prominent theme also makes sense in that all people are sinners and need salvation, a foundational reality in, and incentive for, mission.

In conjunction with salvation, there are several references to God and Christ, which is why it is best to treat salvation, God, and Christ together under one and the same over rubric. A plausible argument can be made that salvation is in fact the main theme, and God and Christ - as well as the Holy Spirit - are subthemes in that God and Christ are the source and providers of salvation.

Paul typically focuses on mission, teaching, and salvation, and in that context makes clear that the salvation he teaches and preaches about in his missionary practive has God as its source and Christ as its provider. Regarding the Holy Spirit, it is apparent that He is less prominently featured than either God or Christ. In fact, these letters contain only a handful of reference to the Spirit, primarily in conjunction with Timothy’s appointment to ministry, though there is one remarkable passage on the Spirit in Titus 3:4-7.

Fourth, rather than speaking of the church as the body of Christ as he does in several of his earlier letters, Paul here sets forth the metaphor of the church as God’s household.

• The main passage in this regard is 1 Timothy 3:14-15

• Beyond explicit references to the church as God’s household, the concept is implicit in substantial portions of these letters, especially in 1 Timothy and Titus

These letters in their entirety are extended “household codes” which provide instructions on how God’s people are to conduct themselves in the church. A conception of the church as God’s household also has important implications for how we conceive of the pastoral office. They are to love and care for God’s people in all their diversity, complexity, and neediness.

Fifth, Paul talks in these letters prominently about Christian life, especially in terms of virtues believers are to pursue. In this regard, Timothy and Titus, as his apostolic delegates, are to serve as moral examples. As a result, they are frequently charged with emulating Christian virtues such as love, righteousness, faithfulness, godliness, or self-control. We dare not neglect our personal lives for the sake of service in the church. As Paul tells Timothy:

“Watch your life and doctrine closely” - 1 Tim. 4:16

and

“Let no one despise you on account of your youth, but rather set believers an example in speech, conduct, love, faith, and purity” - 1 Tim. 4:12

Sixth and finally, Paul speaks in these letters repeatedly about the last days. Some have argued that these letters date to a time when the expectation of Christ’s return has largely faded from view and the author is more interested in the church as a permanent institution than in spiritual gifts or eschatological expectation (the theory of “early Catholicism”). This view is demonstrably mistaken, as it overlooks the connection with the mission of the early church in Acts, where we see that Paul and others appointed church leaders from the very beginning (e.g. Acts 14:23; cf. Phil. 1:1).

Also, the letters to Timothy and Titus display a keen interest in the end times, including the workings of Ssatan, demons, and angels, and the second coming of Christ. In particular, Paul sees the end times as already present in the sense that the devil is actively at work through the false teachers who try to infiltrate and subver the church and lead it away from the apostolic gospel. Perhaps most distinctively, Paul sees the present age as the time between Christ’s first and second comings, both of which he describes in similar terms (i.e., by using the epiphaneia word group).

Comparing to Systematic Theology#

How is this understanding of the biblical theology of these letters different from the standard treatment in systematic theology?

1. Starting with mission is very different, as systematic treatments virtually never start with mission and some systematic theologies do not include the topic of mission at all.

2. Putting salvation in a preeminent place and subordinating God and Christ to salvation is also different, as systematic theology typically treats God and Christ prior to salvation, moving from theology proper to Christology and soteriology.

3. The depiction of the church as God’s household may in many systematic theologies pale in comparison to the more prominent metaphor of the church as Christ’s body.

4. Viewing eschatology and ecclesiology jointly as we have done is also different from systematic theology, which typically treats ecclesiology and eschatology separately.

Biblical theology can give interpreters and independent pair of legs to stand on that allows them to get closer to the Bible and enables them to critique, and at times even correct, standard systematic theology treatments, especially when looking at a given Old or New Testament book or corpus.

• Systematic theology endeavors to bring Scripture closer to our day by trying to find answers to questions we have today.

• Biblical theology tries to bring us closer to Scripture by helping us see what the biblical writers themselves believed, so tha we can conform our beliefs to theirs.

Case Study 2: The Holy Spirit#

There are several legitimate ways in which to engage in biblical theology. One is to study all the themes in one book or corpus of Scripture. Another legitimate way of engaging in biblical theology is to study one major theme throughout Scripture.

As we study the Bible’s teaching on the Spirit historically, inductively, and descriptively, we start with individual references to the Spirit in both Testaments.

Old Testament#

There are about 400 references to “spirit” (ruah) in the Old Testament, but only about 100 of these relate to the person of the Holy Spirit; the rest refer to the human spirit or breath or to the wind (which at times serves as an emblem for God’s judgment). Remarkably, the expression “Holy Spirit” occurs only twice in the Old Testament (Ps. 51:11 [disputed by some]; Isa. 63:10-11). Most commonly, the reference is to the “Spirit of YHWH” or simply “the Spirit”.

One fascinating challenge when studying the Holy Spirit throughout Scripture is that there is only a limited amount of material on the Spirit in the Old Testament.

The Pentateuch#

There are three references to the Spirit in Genesis and ten more in the remainder of the Pentateuch.

• The Spirit is first mentioned in the Bible as hovering over the waters at creation (Gen. 1:2)

• In Genesis 6:3, just prior to the universal flood, it is said that God’s Spirit will not remain with humanity forever

• In Genesis 41:38, none other than Pharaoh recognizes the Spirit’s presence with Joseph

• In the rest of the Pentateuch, the Spirit is depicted as coming on, or being with, various individuals

  • The craftmen building the sanctuary (Bezalel and Oholiab; Ex. 31:2; 35:34-35)

  • The seventy elders (Num. 11:17, 25)

  • Balaam the prophet (Num. 24:2)

  • Joshua, Moses’s successor (Num. 27:18; Deut. 34:9)

In the Pentateuch, the Spirit is shown in three primary functions:

1. as an agent of creation

2. as an agent of judgment (in the sense that withdrawal of the Spirit leads to weakness and death)

3. as an agent of empowerement for God’s service

The Historical Books#

In the days of the judges, the Spirit is said to have come upon national deliverers such as Othniel, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson.

During the early days of the monarchy, the Spirit came first on Saul (1 Sam. 10:6) and later on David his successor (1 Sam. 16:13)

In both time periods - the judges and the monarchy - the Spirit is shown to mediate God’s presence and to empower national deliverers and leaders.

In addition, the references to the Spirit in Kings, Chronicles, and Nehemiah all involve his activity in conveying God’s words to his people through prophets - or inspired individuals - such as Elijah, Elisha, or Zechariah.

In the Historical Books, the Spirit’s work is essentially twofold:

1. raising up and equipping national deliverers and rulers

2. empowering God’s spokespersons to prophesy

The Wisdom Literature#

Overall, wisdom theology is more focused on God’s powerful, effective word as the ground of everything that exists. The Spirit takes on foundational importance for how God’s creation works and is to be inhabited, utilized, and enjoyed. The Spirit is also shown to teach God’s will and to examine a person’s inner being (Ps. 143:10; Prov. 20:27)

The Prophetic Books#

The Spirit is mentioned repeatedly in the Prophetic Books, especially Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah.

In Isaiah, the operation of the Spirit is linked with the coming of the servant of the Lord.

• In Isaiah 11:2, the prophet says that “the Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him [the servant], the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD”

• In Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah prophesied, “Behold my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen, in whom my soul delights; I have put my Spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice to the nations”

• Finally, Jesus cited a passage in his hometown synagogue at Nazareth from Isaiah 61:1-2

The Spirit is also frequently mentioned in Ezekiel, while being virtually absent from Jeremiah. Ezekiel prophesies that God will provide his people with a new heart and a new spirit (Ezek. 36:25-27; cf. 39:39) and links the Spirit with restoration from the exile (Ezek. 37:12-14)

Perhaps the most important passage on the Spirit in the Twelve (the “Minor Prophets”) is Joel 2:28-29, the well-known passage cited by Peter at Pentecost (Acts 2:16-21), which speak a universal outpouring of God’s Spirit on “all flesh” regardless of ethnicity, gender, or social status.

New Testament#

In the New Testament, not every reference to pneuma, “spirit”, refers to the person of the Holy Spirit. Many references are to the human spirit or the wind. What is more, sometimes the Holy Spirit is referenced apart for the word pneuma.

We see the Spirit actively at work in strategic salvation-historical individuals such as John the Baptist, Mary, Elizabeth, Zechariah, and Simeon in anticipation of the coming Messiah, Jesus, through whom God would be present with His people in an unprecedented manner (Luke 1-2).

During his earthly ministry, Jesus is shown to possess the Spirit to an unlimited degree (John 3:34), and the Spirit is depicted at Jesus’s baptismas descending and resting on him. John the Baptist, and later Jesus himself, indicated that the Messiah would baptize not merely with water but with the Holy Spirit.

At this future giving of the Spirit (John 7:38), both Jesus and His Father would make their home with believers by the Spirit, who would be with them forever.

Jesus’s promise is realized following his ascension at Pentecost, when believers are filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4) in fulfillment of the promise of Joel 2. Now it was not only the leaders of God’s people who experienced the presence of the Spirit but everyone who called on the name of the Lord. Soon it became clear that the same presence of the Spirit was available to Gentile believers in Jesus as well (Acts 10:44-47), in keeping with John the Baptist’s prophecy (Acts 11:15-17). Throughout Acts, the Spirit is shown to empower and direct the early church’s mission to the ends of the earth.

The New Testament letters, especially the writings of Paul, reinforce the notion that every believer now enjoys the Spirit’s indwelling presence.

• Paul writes that believers have “received” the Spirit who has been given to them (Rom. 5:5; 8:15)

• The Spirit is “in” believers (see 1 Cor. 6:19) and has come to “dwell in” them (Rom. 8:9, 11; 1 Cor. 3:16)

• They possess the Spirit as “firstfruits” (Rom. 8:23) and as a “guarantee” (2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5) and are to “be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18)

In terms of his activity, the Spirit is shown in Paul’s letters to mediate God’s presence, to impart life, to reveal truth, to foster holiness, to supply power, and to effect unity (see eps. Eph. 4:1-5).

In the non-Pauline letters, the Holy Spirit is featured in three warning passages in the letter to the Hebrews. The author issues warnings:

1. Not to disregard the witness borne by God through the Holy Spirit

2. Not to disregard manifestations of the Holy Spirit as the people of Israel did in the wilderness during the exodus

3. Not to disregard the Son of God and the blood of the covenant, thus enraging the Spirit of grace (Heb. 2:4; 6:4; 10:29)

The Spirit is also featured as the author of the sacred Old Testament writings through which God still speaks “today” (Heb. 3:7; 9:8; 10:15-16).

Peter, in his first letter, highlights the Spirit’s role in sanctification (1 Pet. 1:2). He reminds his readers that they are blessed if and when they are persecuted, because the Spirit of God rests on them (1 Pet. 4:14). Peter also underscores the Spirit’s role in the minsitry of Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles (1 Pet. 1:10-12; 2 Pet. 1:21) and features the Spirit as an agent of Christ’s resurrection.

John, in his first letter, speaks of believers having an “anointing from the Holy One”, namely the Holy Spirit (1 John 2:20, 27). John also identifies the Spirit as God’s “seed” and agent of regeneration (1 John 3:9); as one of three witnesses to Jesus together with Jesus’s baptism and crucifixion (1 John 5:6-8); and as the one who bears internal witness to believers (1 John 5:10).

In Revelation, the Spirit is associated with each of John’s four visions. The phrase “in the Spirit” is found at or near the beginning of each of these visions. The Spirit is also repeatedly featured in Revelation as the “seven spirits of God” (Rev. 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6) and the letters to the seven churches in chapter 2-3 contain the consistent refrain. Finally, the Spirit is shown to be actively involved in the church’s witness and mission amid persecution, and at the end of the book of Revelation, the Spirit and the church both plead with Jesus to return soon (Rev. 22:17)

The Holy Spirit mediates God’s presence, reveals truth, fosters holiness, effects unity, and is life-giving, life-empowering, and life-transforming.

The Storyline of Scripture#

What kind of document is the Bible?

1. The Bible is “the greatest story ever told”

While there may be similarities between the Bible and the corpus of a prolific writer such as William Shakespeare, there are also important differences as to its nature and message.

2. The Bible is a true story

While the Bible contains multiple genres, it is based on historical characters and events. It tells the story of God’s historical creation, His historical dealings with the people of Israel, and God invading history through the historical virgin birth, crucifixion, burial, and resurrection of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.

3. The Bible cannot be reduced to a series of propositions

The fact that the Bible is a story - a grand narrative - implies that it cannot simply be reduced to a set of declarations about who God is or what to believe. There is a surplus of meaning in telling and interpreting a story that must be kept intact and preserved.

4. The Bible contains multiple genres

Each genre sets its own ground rules for interpretation. The multiplicity of genres in Scripture poses great challenges - as well as opportunities - to the enterprise of biblical theology and calls for considerable nuance, interpretive skill, and hermeneutical sophistication.

5. The Bible is a canon

Each book has integrity and contains its own distinct discourse, yet the books are all interconnected by way of common themes and a common metanarrative. Out of respect for the integrity of each individual book of Scripture, and in the recognition that each book has its own distinctive contribution to make to the canon, we will initially engage in a book-by-book study, seeking to discern individual themes and characteristic ethical teachings before attempting to place a given book within the overall storyline of Scripture.

6. The Bible is inspired

It is revelation, divine self-disclosure - not merely a human word but the word of God. This is taught explicitly in Scripture. It is also implied in many statements in the New Testament by Jesus (John 10:35) and several of the New Testament writers. Thus, the author of Hebrews would cite a given Old Testament passage and introduce the quote by saying, “the Holy Spirit says” (Heb. 3:7; 10:15).

7. The Bible is authoritative

Scripture is not onyl inspired; it is also authoritative. It contains divine speech acts that call for human actions (ethics). This requires a stance of obedient submission to God’s word. We come to the Bible not merely seeking information or intending to increase our knowledge about its content. We come to the Bible to find out what it is God wants us to do (James 1:22-25; cf. Matt. 7:21-29). God gave us His word to call us to obedience - “the obedience of faith” (Rom. 1:5; 16:26)

8. The Bible is a love story

It tells the story of redemptive love - how “God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son” (John 3:16a). The story of the Messiah’s cross is a story about God’s perfect love. This is at the heart of the metanarrative of Scripture. Love will emerge as being at the very heart of the biblical storyline and of biblical revelation about who God is, why He created humanity, and what He expects of His people.

9. The Bible is a story of salvation

God is not merely love; His is a love that will not let people go without going to extreme lengths in order to save them (though peple are of course free to reject that love if they so choose). Thus, there is a redemptive thread that runs through the entire metanarrative of Scripture.

10. The Bible is a story with many twists and turns

It is a story with many characters - some major, some minor. Thus, the Bible reflects both diversity and unity. This is the weakness of a central-themes approach; while the effort to ground the biblical metanarrative in the unity of God and of Scripture is commendable, such a model insufficiently accounts for the “story” nature of Scripture. The Bible covers many topics and features a plotline that is not always linear but includes many twists and turns. This calls for engaging reading, creative imagination, and hermeneutical, interpretive, and literary sophistication.

11. The Bible is the story of God calling out a people

The Bible’s thrust is not merely individual but communal. It connects God’s call of Abraham with His calling out a people, the nation of Israel, and later the church, made up of believing Jews and Gentiles. This has important thematic, ethical, and interpretive implications.

12. The Bible is a dramatic story

A theo-drama, the story of a cosmic battle beetween God and Satan. The Bible teaches that God created both humans and angels, and that just as humanity rebelled against Him, the highest angel (Satan) and many other angels (demons) rebelled against God as well. Thus, the backdrop of the entire biblical narrative is a supernatural battle between God and evil forces, which seek to pull sinful humanity to their side and away from God. The mission of Jesus is a spiritual rescue operation of sinful humanity, and Satan is the main antagonist of the scriptural theo-drama. This creates enormous suspense and drama throughout the biblical narrative, which comes to a head at the cross, and ultimately at the second coming. Yet there is little suspense about the final outcome: God wins!

III. The Significance of the Canonical Forms(s) of Scripture for Biblical Theology#

The Bible is an inherently theological book, for it claims to describe and explain God, His character, His ways, and His purposes, and on that basis a theological reading of the text is demanded by its contents. The Bible tells us what is important to know about God and how humans are to behave if God is who He is revealed to be. Believers read Scripture with the aim of understanding God’s nature, actions, and motivations and what this means for who they are and how they should live.

In line with this agenda, the biblical anon is being treated with new theological seriousness as a sacred collection providentially preserved for the church for instruction in doctrine and ethics, and biblical book order is an obvious and important aspect of the canonical presentation of the biblical material.

Biblical Book Order and Hermeneutics#

It is necessary to consider what status is to be given to the phenomenon of book order in the reading of the Bible. The sequential ordering of the books according to the contours of the historical canons (Hebrew and Greek) is a component of the paratext of Scripture.

The term “paratext” refers to elements that are adjoined to the text but not part of the text per se. The scriptural paratext also includes books titles and the internal partitioning of books.

The order of the biblical books is a paratextual phenomenon that cannot be put on the same level as the text itself, for it is a product of ancient readers of the text rather than of the biblical authors themselves. It is a post-authorial interpretive frame around the biblical text, generated by early readers as they sought to grapple with the meaning of the various Bible books and as a result placed them in what they deemed appropriate canonical settings as a hermeneutical guide to later users, on the principle that juxtaposed books are related in some way and illuminate each other.

A prescribed order of books is a de facto interpretation of the text. We must approach the issue of book order as part of the history of the interpretation of the Bible. A study of biblical book order uncovers an early stage in the reception history of Scripture, preserving for posterity the insights and convictions of ancient readers.

To reiterate the gist of the preceding paragraph, the ordering of the biblical books should not be put on the same level of authority as the text itself, for it is readers rather than authors who are responsible for the ordering.

• Authors generate the biblical text and are the makers of meaning

• Readers, by putting the book in a particular canonical order, provide a paratextual frame for the text, reflecting their understanding of the meaning of the text

The placing of books in a certain order is putting an external constraint on the text of Scripture, albeit an inescapable one when texts of diverse origin are collected into a literary corpus.

Some have claimed too much significance for a particular way of ordering the books. Others view the order of the biblical books as a mechanical phenomenon of little or no interpretive consequence. Both extremes are to be avoided. We do not assume or argue that this paratextual feature always has to be purposeful; however, where a book is placed within the canonical collection seldom if ever appears haphazard. Its position usually does seem to represent an interpretive evaluation of the book’s meaning and function by those responsible for placing the books in order.

A Missing Factor in Recent Efforts at Theological Interpretation?#

Practitioners of the theological interpretation of Scripture, which has biblical theology as an essential first step and foundation, though not rejecting academic rigor and critical tools, view their task as primarily serving the church rather than the academy. In line with an interpretation is the fact of the liturgical context of the use of ancient biblical manuscripts, whether in Israelite assemblies, synagogue worship, or early Christian gatherings. Given that usage, the resultant forms of the Old Testament canon - and the subsequent New Testament canon - are likely to reflect the reading habits of believing communities and fundamental theology as understood by these groups. It is plain that more than one reading community (communio lectorum) has been involved in the process of producing the canon in its different historic forms.

Any biblical theology that ignores the resultant shape(s) of the canon is likely to be theologically lacking for its failure to take seriously the insights of these earlier readers.

Downplaying canonical arrangements is only one manifestation of a larger intellectual movement in the wake of the Enlightenment. By contrast, the exercise of theological interpretation includes, or should include, taking seriously the form of the biblical canon - including the ordering and juxtapositioning of books - bequeathed by earlier generations of believers.

How Theological is Biblical Book Order?#

To demonstrate the potential of considering biblical book order, we will explore some of the theological implications of the canonical orders settled upon by different communities of faith, with a focus on the book of Ruth.

The differing positions assigned to Ruth in Hebrew and Greek canons suggest alternative ways of viewing its content.

Greek Old Testament#

It is found after Judges among books classified as Histories in the Greek Old Testament, for it tells the story of God’s providential care of the family that produced David, and the books of Samuel that follow plot the rise of David to the throne. God’s direct involvement is stated by the narrator only once (enabling Ruth to conceivel; 4:13), but God is repeatedly referred to by characters within the story.

Ruth 1:1 locates the action of the book in the period of the judges, and the Ruth narrative forms a sharp contrast with the story of the Levite from Bethlehem (Judg. 17:8-9) and that of the Levite’s concubine who comes from Bethlehem (19:1-2).

• Judges 21 concerns the drastic measures taken to secure wives for an Israelite tribe (Benjamin) threatened with extinction (Judg. 21:6)

• The book of Ruth depicts God’s providence in preserving the Bethlehemite family of Naomi that eventually produces the great King David (Ruth 4:5, 10, 18-22)

In what amounts to a record of the historical background of the Davidic house, the author shows that the workings of divine providence on behalf of David began during the lives of his ancestors, giving hope for the future of the Davidic house, a family line that will eventually produce the Messiah. The propriety of a salvation-historical reading of the book of Ruth is confirmed for the Christian reader by the inclusion of the heroine Ruth in the genealogy of Jesus (Matt. 1:5).

Hebrew Bible#

The book of Ruth appears to be read from a wisdom perspective in the Hebrew Bible, in which it is found immediately after the portrait of the “woman of worth” (’ēšet-ḥayil) in Proverbs 31.

The phrase “woman of worth” occurs only once elsewhere in the Old Testament, namely Proverbs 12:4 (“A good wife is the crown of her husband”). The description in Proverbs 31:31 fits the woman Ruth, for in Ruth 3:11, Boaz, in praising Ruth, says “all my fellow townsmen know that you are a woman of worth”, and the people at the gate and the elders who meet there are recorded as praising Ruth (4:11-12). The canonical placement next to Proverbs suggests that Ruth the Moabitess is to be viewed as a real-life example of the piety taught in Proverbs and embodied in the exemplary woman of Proverbs 31.

The book of Ruth is not usually thought of as a wisdom work, and certainly none of the dramatis personae (characters in the narrative) are identified as “wise”; also, the story makes no use of what may be said to be exclusively wisdom terms.

The narrative provides in the person of Ruth an ethical paradigm, namely a pattern of behavior worthy of emulation by readers.

Baba Bathra#

In the listing of books in Baba Bathra, Ruth precedes the Psalter and can be read as a prehistory of David the chief psalmist, who is shown in Psalms to be one who “takes refuge” in God just as did his ancestor (e.g., Pss. 2:12; 7:1; 11:1; 16:1). This suggests that the heroine Ruth is being viewed by the ancient readers responsible for this canonical order as an embodiment of the implied ethic of the Psalter, in which David turns to God in times of distress.

This way of ordering the books highlights the connection of Ruth with David the psalmist, and Ruth personifies the implied ethic of total reliance on God as taught in the Psalter. The conjoining of Ruth and the Psalter helps to bring to light the thematic links between the two books that include the key terms “refuge”, “wings”, and “kindness”.

• Just as Ruth embodies and experiences God’s “kindness” (ḥesed), so also David praises God as the one who “shows [kindness] to his anointed, to David and his offspring forever” (Ps. 18:50).

• In Ruth 2:12, Boaz evokes the image of the protecting “wings” (kānāp) of YHWH, the God of Israel, a metaphor that apparently is in no need of explanation or elaboration, with its meaning immediately understood, and indeed this motif is found a number of times in the Psalter

The ancestor of the chief psalmist anticipates the piety of David, who calls on God to defend and help him in his troubles. The noted thematic links present Ruth the Moabitess as a model of the piety of the Psalter.

Summarize#

The different canonical orders - Ruth after Judges, Ruth after Proverbs 31, and Ruth preceding the Psalter - each have a logic, and arguably no one order of books is superior to the other two. There is more than one possible principle of organization for the ordering of the Old Testament books, and it is left to the reader to surmise what rationale is at work.

These alternate placements suggest the compatibility of the wisdom ideal (exemplified in the figure of Ruth) and the salvation-historical focus of the narrative book of Ruth (given the David linkage). Certainly, there is no evidence that these are irreconcilable ways of interpreting the canonical book. This affirms the essential relation between ethics and biblical theology, and the theological appreciation of Scripture includes an exploration of the ethical implications of Old Testament narratives as a resource for Christian formation. Indeed, properply understood, the study of ethics comes under the umbrella of theology.

The significance for theology of the relationship between narrative and poetry is affirmed by the placing of Ruth and Psalms next to each other, one lesson being the compatibility of the history of God’s dealings with his people (the story of Ruth) and theology (expressed in the lament, doxology, and prayers of the Psalter). The Ruth-Psalter collation also shows that beliefs about God enshrined in the pious expressions of the Psalter are not arbitrary but can be viewed as valid conclusions drawn from Israel’s historical experience of God’s “kindness” (e.g., as epitomized in the story of Ruth).

IV. Biblical Theology and Ethics#

It is right to distinguish between theology (what we know about God and His ways) and ethics (how humans are to behave as a result), but these two aspects of biblical revelation should not be separated. It is for this reason - conforming to what the Bible says about itself - that the present volume explores both biblical-theological themes and ethical teachings on display in the storyline of Scripture.

The Relation of Biblical Theology to Ethics#

In applying the Old Testament to Christian living, we are not only to think of the Ten Words (Ex. 20:1-17; Deut. 5:1-21), which the New Testament clearly takes up and endorses (Matt. 19:18-19; Rom. 13:8-10; 1 Tim. 1:8-11) - with the exception of the Sabbath command (though it may indeed endorse the general principle of rest) - or even of the instructional sections of the Old Testament more widely. Wisdom literature is another source of moral instruction upon which Jesus and the authors of the New Testament draw in such portions as the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7), Romans 12, Ephesians 4, and the epistle of James. The social conscience of the prophets has been a source of guidance and rebuke to the church down through the centuries.

The importance of the Old Testament story for Paul’s theology and ethics can be readily demonstrated. The apostle assumes that his Roman and Corinthian readers are well versed in the Old Testament, including its stories, and they they recognize their authority and relevance. The other New Testament writers expect similar things of their readers.

• The author of Hebrews makes use of the story of the rebellion of the Israelites under the leadership of Moses (Heb. 3:7-19)

• James finds examples of good works in the lives of Abraham and Rahab (James 2:21-25) and cites the prophets and Job as exemplars of steadfastness in the face of suffering (5:10-11) and Elijah of persevering prayer (5:17)

The same principles apply to the ethical use of the narrative portions of the New Testament.

There are a number of common difficulties that need to be acknowledged and addressed if the ethics of the Old Testament is to have its proper place in molding Christian attitudes and behavior.

• First, it is not necessarily the case that the Old Testament presents a leeser ethical demand than does the New Testament, though there are instances where this is the case

• Second, there is the fear that use of the Old Testament for ethical instruction may lead to legalism, an ethic separated from its gospel basic.

However, there is no legalism in the Old Testament itself, as the preface to (and so the context of) the Ten Words serves to show (Ex. 20:2), for the presupposition behind the prohibitions is the exodus deliverance, so that the Ten Words are meant to be understood as outlining how saved people are to behave. The ethics of the Old Testament, like that of the New, has a gospel dynamic and motivation, though it is of course also true.

• Third, many wonder whether the ethics of the Old Testament is useful, after the many centuries that have elapsed, or whether it is even appropriate to make application from the stories and teaching of the Old Testament after the provision of the New Testament.

However, the stories encourage “global virtues” that are easily transferable to the present, such as faith, hospitality, modesty, prayerfulness, perseverance; or they warn against stereotypical sins such as sexual immorality, greed, and idolatry. Behind the plethora of instructions provided in the Pentateuch and the Wisdom Books are certain basic moral principles that have no use-by-a-certain-date label (e.g., the fear of God). In addition, the new creation is not yet complete, Christian still live in a world where sin, selfishness, and violence are endemic, and not dissimilar moral choices face every generation of believers.

• Fourth, the supposed “moral difficulties” attached to the extermination of the Canaanites, the breakup of families by Ezra and Nehemiah, and the curses on enemies found in the Psalmsare seen by some as proof that the Old Testament is sub-Christian

However, the answer of John Bright is apposite: “I find it most interesting and not a little odd that although the Old Testament on occasion offends our Christian feelings, it did not apparently offend Christ’s ‘Christian feelings’!”

There is less controversy about using the warnings and injunctions of the New Testament as a moral guide to Christian living, though that does not mean that expositors and commentators have always been careful to demonstrate the essential connection between the doctrine and ethics of the New Testament writings, the first being the ground of the second. For example, the Sermon on the Mount has often been lifted from the Gospel of Matthew that has as its climax the death and resurrection of Jesus, with the result that its ethic is turned into a “social gospel” rather than viewed as an essential part of our submission to the risen Christ who claims the obedience of the nations.

Discerning the Ethical Import of Narrative and Poetry#

Another problem is the difficulty in trying to find ethical models - positive and negative - in Old Testament narrative, seeing that it is reductionistic to think in terms of heroes and villains.

• The complexity of the David of the books of Samuel does not allow such easy categorization, though he is not the same David in Kings

• Naomi is not necessarily the nice character that readers would like her to be, though Ruth appears uniformly noble

• Jonah is not a false prophet, only a very bad one, such that the reader has a love-hate relationship with him

To preach moralistic sermons from biblical texts is to pay insufficient attention to the ambiguity of its characters, so that sometimes we do not know whether to praise or blame them. While our sermons should provide moral application, crude moralizing is to be avoided.

The biblical narrators seldom preach, and in their committed non-didacticism they neither approve nor disapprove of the conduct of their characters. The reader is not always meant to supply this lack, and it is easy to make wrong judgments. Close attention to the text will prevent the reader from falling into such an error. The Old Testament author gives clues

• Putting an ethical judgment in the mouth of a character (e.g., 2 Sam. 13:13: “you would be as one of the wanton fools in Israel” [RSV]);

• By the way an act is described (e.g., Gen. 16:6: “Sarai ill-treated her” [our translation])

• By a (rare) moral comment by the narrator (e.g., 2 Sam. 11:27: “But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord”)

• By the reaction of other characters to an action (e.g., 2 Sam. 13:22)

• By the detrimental consequences of an action (e.g., Gen. 16:4)

• By the same trait being shown in a series of scenes (e.g., the positive attitude of the patriarchs to foreigners).

In other words, the poetry of the Psalter is not just a vehicle for the verbalization of heartfelt thoughts and feelings to God; its effusion of religious sentiments also provides instruction for God’s people as to what they should be feeling, what they should be doing, and what they should be saying in prayer.

V. An Analogy: Biblical Theology as a Moderated Family Conversation#

Think of biblical theology as a moderated family conversation. In a family, there are parents, and there are older children who might tend to be given more weight than younger children who might at times have a hard time being heard. The persons moderating the discussion should ensure that everyone’s voice is heard and every person’s right to speak is respected. In this analogy, the moderators are the biblical theologians, and the various family members are the writers of Scripture and the individual books they wrote. The moderators seek to involve each of these writers and books in canonical conversation as appropriate.

The moderators’ role is primarily that of listening to the various contributions made by the participants in the family conversation, in keeping for a listening “hermeneutic of perception” that focuses on “seeing what is there”. They are also concerned that the ethical rights of the biblical authors are respected. The moderators (i.e., the biblical theologians; in our case the present authors) will at times summarize the findings thus far. They will draw certain connections, point out commonalities, weave various individual contributions into larger themes, and connect them to the grand biblical metanarrative. But they will do so, not heavy-handedly, or even autocratically, but humbly, in full submission to biblical authority and a commitment to the diversity of Scripture in the context of its underlying unity.

As with a good family discussion, at the end of this book our goal will be that every biblical author will walk away, so to speak, with the feeling that they have been heard and accurately represented and appreciated. In such a scenario, there will be family unity amid diversity of individual contributions. There will also be a sense that the whole is greater than its parts, and that it is only in diversity that the full-bodied truth of scriptural revelation can be adequately expressed. There will hopefully also be a sense that, when we walk away from this canonical conversation, the work has only just begun.