The Importance of Biblical Theology
Thursday, 28 July, 2005
Over the past couple of months I've been thinking about the way that I've been taught to read the Bible and whether that way is right. Isn't it just a product of Sydney Anglicanism? Aren't there many ways to read the Bible? Isn't it just all about interpretation anyway?
It's funny—no one sits down and says, “This is how you ought to read the Bible,” and then proceeds to show you how to do it. Instead, you are taught how to read the Bible while you are doing other things. You are taught how to read the Bible when you do Bible study in a small group by the way the leader structures the study, phrases the questions and gently nudges you in directions he thinks you should go. You are taught to read the Bible when you sit in church and are taught what it says in sermons—you are taught to read the Bible as the preacher explains why he thinks the Bible is saying what he thinks it is saying. You are taught to read the Bible when you read books by Christians about Christian things—in the way they argue their case for what they believe and exegete the passages in the Bible which teach what they say it's saying.
So, as I was growing up as a young Christian, I was always taught that when you read the Bible, there are certain things you should always keep in mind (where the passage occurs in the chapter, the genre it's been written in, where it occurs in the storyline of the Bible, who wrote it, who it might have been written to, when it was written, etc.) If a phrase or an idea keeps popping up, it's probably because the author thinks it's important and therefore you should too. Most questions about a passage can be answered from the passage itself. You should stick to the text as much as possible and not go off on your own flights of fancy about what you think it means. The Bible interprets itself; you do not have to interpret it.
On Tuesday Mark Baddeley talked about the four different ways of doing theology.
Exegesis
This is basically understanding what the text says—taking one bit, working out what it says, taking the next bit and working out what that says. Mark pointed out that, in a sense, exegesis isn't an easy skill because most people don't read well in the first place and the Bible tends to compress what it says, which means it often requires slightly better reading skills than, say, reading Harry Potter.
Biblical Theology
This is thinking about how the Bible holds together as a coherent whole. Biblical Theology doesn't tell you what to believe; it examines the story/narrative aspect of the Bible—the shape of it and the one-ness of this narrative which has, as its key, the person and work of Jesus Christ. Although the whole Bible is the word of God and is important, when you step back and look at the whole, you will see that some of the stories and passages are more important than others because of their relationship to the over-arching narrative. For example, within the book of 2 Samuel, the promises of God to David and his house are not hugely critical to the narrative of the book within the book but they are incredibly important to the later prophets and the New Testament.
Historical Theology
Historical theology is the attempt to try and understand how Christian teachers and theologians have understood the Bible throughout history. It's a way of looking at the exegesis and systematic theology of the last 2,000 years. Historical theology involves studying people like Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Barth, etc. and what they said about the Biblical text and how they pulled what they said together into a systematic whole. It helps you read the Bible better by taking you out of your narrow way of looking at the world and inviting you to consider what other people have thought and why they thought it. This is why we study church history at college.
Systematic Theology
Systematic theology is the discipline where you try to pull things together to create a coherent account of the key things you need to know as a Christian. It's the discipline where you ask questions like, “Who is GOd?”, “Who is Jesus?”, “What did Jesus' death accomplish?”, “What must I do to be saved?”, “What is the right way to pray?”, “What sort of worship honours God?”, etc. It's a way of showing what the Bible says on a topic. To do systematic theology, you have to use exegesis and bring together your exegetical insights. You also have to use Biblical theology because Biblical theology will show you that not all the passages you want to exegete have the same level of importance; some are more central than others and you will see this if you try to structure them in terms of the message that the Bible is on about.
Other
Are there other ways of reading the Bible without doing Biblical Theology but doing the same kind of thing? Yes there are. Mark says there are two main ways: dispensationalism and covenantalism.
Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism (which Mark Baddeley says is fundamentalist and Arminian) focuses on how different different parts of the Bible are (eg. Genesis 17:10-14 [circumcision is a sign that you are saved] and Galatians 5:2 [Christ is the fulfilment of the promises and circumcision is of no value to you]). Dispensationalism is a way of understanding how the Bible holds together by saying that there are two “dispensations” or systems—Abraham is under one system but when Christ comes, that changes things to a different system so that the rules on how God relates his people have been changed. The problem with dispensationalism is that there is too much stress on discontinuity for these things are not exactly true.
Covenantalism
Covenantalism (which Mark says is popular in Reformed and Presbyterian circles) is close to dispensationalism but the main difference between it and Biblical Theology is that it tends to downplay all differences, blurring distinctions between Israel and the church, the Old Testament saint and the New Testament saint, etc. It plays up the unity of the covenants and God's working in the world so that most differences tend to evaporate, eg. baptism is the New Testament circumcision. The problem is, this isn't entirely true either.
So what?
I don't want to reproduce the entire lecture. I just want to talk about why I've come to see Biblical Theology as the right way to read the Bible. It may seem very arrogant to say there's a “right” way and a “wrong” way to read the Bible but I'm hoping that, once you finish reading the rest of this, you won't see my assertion as arrogant but as true.
“Biblical Theology”, says Mark, is a term very particular to the Sydney evangelical context. Few scholars around the world use it and they would probably be puzzled as to what it means because the name is a bit deceptive (after all, isn't Doctrine “Biblical Theology”? It's biblical. It's theological). Mark did't explain how the discipline began but anyway you can't point to a particular individual as being the “inventor” of it because, if you read Calvin, you can recognise it there. (He wouldn't have though.) Biblical theology is just a formal way of showing what is already there in the Bible.
But you won't see it in the Bible if you do not already hold certain convictions about the nature of Scripture. If you do not believe that all 66 books that comprise the Bible is the work of one author (God), then you will not see that author's purpose in writing it. You will not see the shape of the work as it develops from Genesis to Revelation. You will just view it as a random collection of writings and sayings with no apparent correspondence or relevance to each other.
But if you do believe that the Bible is the word of God and that he had a purpose in writing it, then you will view all 66 books as one piece of work and you will try to reconcile the differences between, say, Genesis 17 and Galatians 5 and try to work out why there are seeming contradictions. Or you will try to understand how the first 39 books (the Old Testament) have the same message as the last 27 books (the New Testament). Wrestling with the very nature of the texts will bring you to Biblical Theology.
Perhaps the thing that most convinced me about the “right-ness” of Biblical theology is that the authors of the Bible engage in this discipline—particularly in the New Testament. As you read the writers of the New Testament, they point you to key points in the Old Testament and give you the interpretive keys for understanding the whole. For example, have a look at the way Paul talks about God's promises to Abraham. He uses the promises to understand how the law relates to Gentile Christians (Gal 3). It's not just Paul either; Jesus engages in Biblical Theology on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24) and so does Stephen in his speech just before he is stoned (Acts 7). The Bible itself gives you clues which show you that not all texts are “flat” but there is some shape to them—some texts have interpretive control over other texts (eg. the New Testament controls the way we read the Old Testament for the New Testament claims the Old is fulfilled in Jesus).
And so I think Biblical Theology is the right way to read the Bible. Feel free to disagree with me though.
Current:
Bible: 1 Chronicles (ESV) 28/10/2008 (0)
Bible: 2 Peter (ESV) 25/10/2008 (0)
seen: The Duchess 23/10/2008 (0)
Bible: 1 Peter (ESV) 22/10/2008 (0)
Bible: Jonah (ESV) 20/10/2008 (0)
Bible: James (ESV) 16/10/2008 (0)
Bible: Obadiah (ESV) 14/10/2008 (0)
Bible: Amos (ESV) 13/10/2008 (0)
read: Rapunzel's Revenge (Shannon Hale, Dean Hale and Nathan Hale) 12/10/2008 (0)
seen: Whisper of the Heart 10/10/2008 (0)
seen: My Neighbour Totoro 10/10/2008 (0)
Bible: Hebrews (ESV) 06/10/2008 (0)
Bible: Psalms (ESV) 03/10/2008 (0)
Bible: 2 Kings (ESV) 29/09/2008 (0)
Bible: Joel (ESV) 28/09/2008 (0)
Bible: Hosea (ESV) 24/09/2008 (0)
read: Pastoralia (George Saunders) 23/09/2008 (0)
listening: Kismet (Jesca Hoop) 23/09/2008 (0)
seen: Howl's Moving Castle 20/09/2008 (0)
read: On Chesil Beach (Ian McEwan) 20/09/2008 (0)
Bible: Philemon (ESV) 19/09/2008 (0)
Bible: 1 Timothy (ESV) 18/09/2008 (0)
Bible: 2 Timothy (ESV) 15/09/2008 (0)
read: The Game (Diana Wynne Jones) 14/09/2008 (0)
seen: Mr & Mrs Smith 13/09/2008 (0)
read: Make Like a Tree and Leave (Paula Danziger) 11/09/2008 (0)
seen: Hellboy II: The Golden Army 09/09/2008 (0)
read: Star Wars: A New Hope manga volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4 (George Lucas, Hisao Tamaki, Tom Orzechowski, Adam Warren) 06/09/2008 (0)
seen: Paris Je T'aime 05/09/2008 (0)
Bible: 1 Timothy (ESV) 03/09/2008 (0)
seen: March of the Penguins 25/08/2008 (0)
read: Persepolis (Marjane Satrapi) 25/08/2008 (0)
read: Fables Vol 1: Legends in Exile (Bill Willingham, Lan Medina, Steve Leialoha, Craig Hamilton, James Jean) 18/08/2008 (0)
seen: Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels 17/08/2008 (0)
read: The Nanny Diaries (Emma McLaughlin and Nicola Kraus) 16/08/2008 (0)
seen: Stranger Than Fiction 15/08/2008 (0)
Bible: 2 Thessalonians (ESV) 14/08/2008 (0)
seen: The Royal Tenenbaums 13/08/2008 (0)
Comment:
Bravo Karen. Superb writing and illustration (especially the high contrast frames).
And yes I noticed the transformers poster on the last page! Nice 
Thanks Bec!
Good job, all of you! It looks fantastic!
Heheheh ... Hello Kitty is my muse!
See! I told you they were cute stick-figures - especially when they’re angry!
Kawaiiiiii!
Heheheh ... H, it’s never going to happen! Carpe diem!
Kere: Yes, I own all three of Scott McCloud’s books on comics, but I’ve found Making Comics hard to get through—I guess because, as you say, his primary target audience is artists. But it’s very interesting and helpful all the same.
Very nice
I’ll put this, too, on my list of things to do when I have more time…
Any discussion of the purpose of art is going to huge and unwieldy. And in the end, I suppose, my question would be whether or not it truly matters or if it can be defined in a way that truly encompasses, rather than limiting, the possibilities of art and the roles of the artist. In the end, I don’t have to write (there is no compulsion) but nor do I write for any end purpose (which to me would still involve some form of compulsion). I write because it’s part of who I am, because I love it and would rather do it than not. The process is enough for me, is the enjoyment. It’s not the story or the characters or the theme or message - all of that is about the end product - but the work itself, the way it happens, the word choice and the way its chosen, the way each part works together and how I’m making that happen. It’s said that a work of art is never completed only abandoned and I think that’s true and that this is why: art is about the creation, not about the product.
But that’s just my point-of-view - it’s the importance of art for me - and there are no ends of artists and critics who would disagree with me and do so strenuously. And I don’t know that there is a right or wrong here. For me the end product is… very nice and I’m happy to do something with it. I’d like to think it can express something important to other people and that that message should be to God’s greater glory. Which, as you’ve pointed out, it cannot help but be. But for me it’s about the process which is, to some extent, a view of art for art’s sake.
Well, that was convoluted. I’m planning a wedding! I have an excuse! ;p Hope that made some sense. ^-^
Hihi. The book Jon recommended to me when I started my graphic novel is Scott McCloud’s ‘Making Comics’. I found it quite useful, though a lot of the stuff it says are things you would think of yourself given the moment to do so and he’s very much coming from an artist’s point-of-view and seems to assume that the drawing comes before the writing. Still, he had some interesting things to say and in an interesting manner.
I’m very glad you’ve done some drawing for this. I found it interesting to think in the right way for this kind of static visual form, unlike a form like film which is… *tries to find the word* based in action rather than having all the action happening between images. (Why sue one word when ten will do?! ;p ) It takes some getting used to, though I’ve been doing layouts as I write which helped no end.
Anyway, this is alll shiny. ^-^
Good discussion and reminder, and I’m looking forward to seeing more of this series
It’s something I think about from time to time, and should probably devote a bit more thought to, although I’m approaching art from the point of view of a profession/vocation more than as a vital form of self-expression. But I will often be among people who do, so shouldn’t ignore that aspect.
I wonder if there’s a name for that kind of creative/artistic circularity ...
George, one day I will come and borrow your collection ... once I get through my unread pile!
Kathleen: no, not yet. It’s sitting pristine in a ziplock bag ;P
Hee hee, yes I did! And today I found some blue pencils so I’m going to have a go at using them.
We will have to collaborate some time in the future ... I will keep thinking up more ideas for four-page comics ...
And that Copper tutorial was great - informative and funny. Did you hold the pencil the right way?
So glad you went for it! I was going through my notebook the other night and found my sketches and thought, I wish I had had time
It’s so lovely, like something made out of spiderweb! My “string” illustration was based on a sketch I made of you knitting it (although I didn’t know it at the time).
By the way, I have every Georgette Heyer book (all the romance ones). She’s one of my favourite authors.
That was such a funny, enjoyable read especially the thing about the knitting needles. Funny stuff and sad but true
I love going to Brizzy. I like how laid back the city is, there’s little aggro, and I love the weatherboard architecture. I have a friend who lives near St Lucia (actually Kenmore) and I always love going there… Ah! I miss it.
Yes, but there’s a difference between following the rules and trying to convince people they are reasonable
It was a very excellent chair, Karen - and your photos all turned out really well. I’ve got some sketches up on Flickr (but they don’t look like you!).
Used the sketchbook yet?
About the bamboo knitting needles, they follow rules as a requirement of their job. As with most people, keeping their job is most important so regardless of how silly the rules are, they must be followed as she would be well conditioned to do so.
Tea Inn! And freezer section of Asian supermarket.
Thank you again - it’s lovely!
the last spray bottle I got I got from woolies (in australia). I would be suprised if they have stopped selling them. Maybe you should try looking in the gardening bit? I can’t remember where it was.
you have inspired me to get a wii fit too! I am rubbish at the soccer heading game. but I like the ski jump!
alison 8-)
Ooh, where do you get dessert dumplings? Hang on, I think I might have had them in some Chinese restaurant. Not with the soup though.
1. Dessert dumplings!! Have you ever had them? White on the outside, filled with peanut sauce or black sesame on the inside. You have it with a sweet watery soup. Also, you can get ice-cream type dumplings (if that’s stretching the definition of dumpling a bit far 
)
2. Duck gyoza?? Yum! Wanna try that!!
Wow! That is amazing!!
Sorry about that! My blog must be rather hungry, eating comments like that ...
So glad you’re still reading Been praying for you.
Hi! *I’m* still reading your blog!
sounds like you had a nice time!
the last comment I left got eaten (i.e. never appeared) so better luck this time??
Alison P.
Thanks for this. I have it all sorted! I wonder why all that other html stuff comes up whenever I look at other rss feeds, when it’s that simple ...
Regarding Google Reader:
Click on “Add subscription” (LHS menu).
Copy and paste the relevant feed URL. My blog is complicated because there are four:
- If you want full posts, use http://hippocampusextensions.com/karen/rssfulltext/
- If you want full posts and my del.icio.us links, use http://hippocampusextensions.com/karen/rssfulldelicious/ (at the moment, however, the del.icio.us feed isn’t quite working because there’s this one thing I don’t know how to do).
- If you prefer just reading headlines and excerpts, and then clicking through to the full post if it’s interesting, use http://hippocampusextensions.com/karen/rssexcerpt/
- And I also have a feed for all the comments that get submitted to my site: http://hippocampusextensions.com/karen/rsscomments/
Click “Add” and you’re done!
This has nothing to do with your post, but I am clueless as to what to do with your feed things on here up there in the corner, and can no longer get this blog in google reader. So, can you enlighten me as to what I might do with that html stuff up there?
Everyone automatically gets copyright on work they produce and publish. You don’t need to (C) 2008 the work, its automatic law.
You can release that work under a license otherwise it defaults to the normal copyright law. A license can give certain permissions and apply certain restrictions in the use of the work.
Often people release works under more than one license, for say a commercial license and a free license where free may have some restrictions such as preventing re-sale of the item.
Patent law only applies if you obtained a patent, which only applies to inventions which are new and original. Unfortuantly people can patent too many things these days such as DNA and thereby own living organisms.
*struggles to express thought coherently* What Kathleen said. ;p If your enjoyment of the activity is suffering because of the pressure other people’s suggestions place on it, then perhaps you should cut back on accepting those suggestions. I now have a default response of “no” to most suggestions that I offer the things I do to relax or for my own enjoyment in the service of something or someone else. Not that this stops me offering to do things but I know it’s easy to feel like you should do something because people have suggested that it might help.
This is really lovely, Karen. I’m always in awe of people who can knit: it’s always been beyond me. This is just gorgeous.
I think it’s something you work out only by getting into that situation. I’ve been there, and learned to say - I’m not enjoying X anymore… why was I doing X and how important is X? And if the demands of other people’s wishes and suggestions and deadlines interfere with both that reason and other things that are more important, then I don’t agree to them in future. It sounds like you knit for relaxation and creativity, to rest and recreate for the rest of life, and the extra obligations imposed on knitting ruin both the r&r;and (therefore) hurt other areas of your life.
It’s the sort of thing you learn by trial and error. I’ve had to learn to make extra activities based on those things a default ‘no’, and then have a really good reason if I change that.
I agree with Nathan, I don’t think you can copyright the pattern, you’d have to get a patent. Sounds like wishful thinking on the pattern creators part.
No doubt people weren’t aware that others were selling stuff made from their patterns. But now that we have the internet, it’s easier to track these things.
From the brief reading I did, even if Australian copyright law were slightly different, because of how other countries subscribe to certain forms of international copyright law, they can still claim their rights even if you’re in Australia and they’re in the US.
Anyway, the problem come when you sell what you knit; if you give it away for free, it’s fine.
I’ve gone and asked for permission from the original designers of the patterns I used. One said a flat out no. I’m waiting to hear back from the other two.
I was wondering about this the whole time I was admiring your work. The thing is that it’s not clear cut in any way shape or fashion. Some patterns will say that you can’t sell any products from the pattern but some will say nothing at all. Nathan insists that the only thing that can be copyrighted is the paper/online pattern itself. If the designers didn’t want you to create and sell from the pattern then they should have patented it.
It’s very murky. Copyright australia website has some pdf helps but even then I’m unsure on the whole copyright vs patent issue.
I think this is only a very recent thing in the crafting world. Before it used to all be about sharing patterns and sharing ideas for the common good. But now it’s all about ‘gimme, gimme, gimme’.
If you made a derivative work of another, which all creative people do all the time anyhow, it is up to the copyright holder to prosecute you.
Or otherwise, you can ask the copyright holder for permission to use it as such in which case they can say yes sure, or the can ask you for money.
Blinks:
Serving breakfast to kids in the classroom boosts attendance, increases attention spans and helps kids ease into the school day as they get to socialise and relax before class begins.
Voice operated searches can now be conducted through Google on the iPhone. This service will soon be expanded to other mobiles.
Via Rod B. Sermon outline on how to think biblically about Facebook.
The Black Dog Institute's 5th annual writing competition. Deadline: 31 January 2009.
Studies in the UK shows that marriage is good for children, whereas family breakdown leads to poverty, personal debt, drug and alcohol addiction, failed education, unemployment and dependency.
Via Dave: build and buy your own muppet.
Services like eGuardian which have been set up to protect children may also sell their information to marketers and advertisers, prompting concerns about privacy.
Amusing article about how retail packaging is changing in the face of consumer complaints that they are too hard/dangerous to open.
Cory Tennis's advice to someone who wants to be more creative: just get out there and do stuff.
The impulse to create is interesting: "...I have these strange feelings all the time, like I want to sit down and write a song or a poem or create something, but I don't know where or how or what ... or why."
Print your own fabric--from photos, illustrations, etc.
|
|
Comments
I agree.
But my question is, how does the New Testament interpret the New Testament?
I have hitherto thought that the Epistles, especially letters like Romans and Hebrews, places the Gospel accounts of the life of Jesus in their theological and scriptural context.
But having looked at Mark again and again this year, I’m starting to suspect that the life, actions and teachings of Jesus actually informs our reading of the epistles. It certainly informs our reading of Revelation.
Whatchoo think?
There are certain NT writers who definitely have the gospels in the forefront of their minds as they write. James especially comes to mind—look at all the allusions he makes to Jesus’ teaching, especially the Sermon on the Mount. I would say that the gospels really shaped the rest of the NT.
I disagree.
That is a caricature of covenantalism.
Don’t disagree with Karen. She is always right.
Nahhh, Philip.
But I am rather troubled by the content with this post. I don’t really see how biblical theology is set up as an alternative to both dispensationalism and covenantalism - everything I have read describes both both of these as interpretations, based on use of the approach of biblical theology. Holders of dispensationalism and covenantalism would disagree vigorously with other (I am so surprised that they are described as comparable!), but I can’t imagine either party disagreeing with what’s been asserted here as biblical theology.
The approach of biblical theology is not particular to the Sydney evangelical context (which I think you mention in your introduction). The term comes up frequently in Presbyterian/Reformed circles, and in theological discussions in other denominational traditions. That’s how we derive our view of the covenants. Nothing described here would be disagreed with by someone holding to covenantalism.
For example, the view that baptism is the new circumcision is a lot more nuanced that how it is exemplified here - infant baptism is based on a lot more than that.
Perhaps I am (I mean, obviously we both agree about how the Bible should be read) splitting hairs, but I am personally annoyed at how covenantalism is being misrepresented. I was taught to read the bible under both Presbyterians and AFESers espousing these lines.
Also, fundamentalism and Arminianism are quite different things, I think.
Do a search for “covenant theology” and similar search terms at Peter Leithart’s site for some good commentary based on this interpretation.
Different note… why is the coathanger diagram NOT on the internet???
Why does Mark distinguishes between Covenantalism and Biblical Theology? (Most of my info comes from him and his lecture last Tuesday.) Since he’s from Queensland, I figure he is not ignorant of the Presbyterian/Reformed view. There must be a reason why he says what he says.
Yeah, do ask him.
The PCQ isn’t that big or influential (it’s not Anglican Diocese of Sydney). Most people you’d ask would say that the Presbyterian church is the Uniting Church these days.