Two Testaments, One Story

THE CHALLENGE OF WRITING A PAN-BIBLICAL THEOLOGY

In this chapter, we begin planning our journey towards a pan-biblical theology. As a first step, we survey the terrain of biblical theology to familiarize ourselves with its pertinent and perennial issues, debates, and problems. We hope that this initial step helps us understand what we are letting ourselves in for when we take on this project and appreciate the challenges we face.

In our survey, we look at the nature of biblical theology and the relevant canon it works with. We also briefly discuss the relationship between the two Testaments, including the correspondence of Israel and the church. Another sensitive subject that we touch on is the question of the unity and the centeredness of Scripture. We close our overview with a brief look into the kaleidoscope of pan-biblical theologies.

Defining Biblical Theology

The controversies start with the question of what biblical theology is. In the introduction, our handling of the discipline obscures the reality that there is no consensus on defining the field. German scholar Gerhard Ebeling defines the discipline by calling it "the theology contained in the Bible, the theology of the Bible itself." Such a vague and open-ended characterization might explain some of the challenges biblical theology faces.

One way to understand its nature is by observing how scholars practice it. D. A. Carson, Edward W. Klink III and Darian R. Lockett pursue this venue to elucidate the field. In the following, we summarize their identified categories briefly and mention their main proponents. D. A. Carson isolates six different schools of biblical theology that distinguish themselves in nature and practice of the discipline. The first school he identifies either equates biblical theology and dogmatic/systematic theology or does not see the relevance of their distinctiveness. The former view prevails throughout church history until the 1700s. Karl Barth is a 20th century representative of this view, whereas Ben C. Ollenburger represents the latter in the 20th century. The second one he characterizes holds to the notion that "biblical theology is the theology of the whole Bible descriptively and historically considered." Carson describes three branches within this school: Johann P. Gabler, Philip Jakob Spener, and Johann Ch. K. Hoffmann are their respective protagonists. Geerhardus Vos, Willem VanGemeren, and Graeme Goldsworthy are this school's proponents in the 20th century. The third school Carson points out regards the discipline as an endeavor to construct "the theology of various biblical corpora or strata." This school has brought forth numerous works on the theology of one of the Testaments and sections within the Testaments. Modern representatives of this school are Hans Gese, Peter Stuhlmacher, and Hans Hübner. The fourth one pursues "the theology of a particular theme across the Scriptures-or at least across the corpora of a Testament." Works of Elmer Martens fall into this category. The fifth school he mentions understands the discipline as "the theology that arises out of 'narrative theology' or related literary-critical reading of the Bible." Carson mentions the works of Hans Frei and George Lindbeck as examples of this tradition. Finally, as the sixth school, Cason introduces the concept that "biblical theology is simply the result of serious study of any part or parts of the Bible."

Edward W. Klink III and Darian R. Lockett identify five "types" of practiced biblical theology ("BT"). They place them along a continuum marked by the poles of history and theology for their characterization. "BT1" sees biblical theology as a historical description. Represented by James Barr, this approach treats biblical theology as a purely historical enterprise. It solely aims to delineate the Scriptures' meaning in their ancient context, excluding their meaning for our contemporary world. Proponents of "BT1" treat the OT and NT as separate entities and rule out the possibility of a pan-biblical theology. "BT2" defines biblical theology as the history of redemption. Advocated by D. A. Carson, it historically traces the progress of redemption through the biblical record. This type endeavors to identify longitudinal themes and concepts that give coherence to the Scriptures, such as kingdom or covenant. "BT2" then traces their development in the Bible. This approach enables the construction of a pan-biblical theology. Further representatives of this type are Elmer Martens, Gerhard Hazel, and Geerhardus Vos. "BT3" looks at biblical theology as a "worldview-story" promulgated by scholars such as N. T. Wright and Richard Hays. Characterized by the primary lens of narrative, this type intends to organize the biblical material as a cohesive narrative that bridges the two testaments. "BT3" intends to overcome the seeming "what it meant – what it means" dichotomy by inviting the reader to join the story. This move allows Scripture to exercise a normative effect on the reader. "BT4" owes much of its prominence to Brevard Childs, who uses a canonical approach to embark on the practice of biblical theology. His work aims to reconcile the text's contemporary meaning with the meanings of the historically layered biblical text. According to Child's concept, what holds all parts of Scripture together is its subject matter, Jesus Christ. A canonical approach to Scripture yields a theology that exerts both a descriptive and prescriptive effect. Finally, "BT5," championed by Francis Watson, regards biblical theology as a purely theological undertaking that pursues a "theological construction" as its goal. For its workup, it applies a "theological hermeneutic." This technique comprises several related presuppositions, such as emphasizing "the divine authorship of the Bible "and "the final form of the Bible." "BT5" also insists that the field is solely the confessional church's domain. The resulting theology then can exercise a normative effect on the church.

Summarizing our observations, we can note that biblical theology consists of a hodgepodge of schools and movements while lacking a precise definition. For the remainder of our book, we work with Klink's and Lockett's categories when we deal with questions of the nature and practice of biblical theology.