Blog of James Jordan, Minister and Instructor of Religion in the Piedmont Triad of North Carolina USA.
Showing posts with label New Testament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New Testament. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
On the 500th Anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, I say...
“God is not trying to drive us to despair by his demands, in order to take us from the 'Law' to the 'Gospel,' as if they were two different messages.” The God of Promise and the Life of Faith: Understanding the Heart of the Gospel, Scott Hafemann, p.216
Monday, August 3, 2015
Review of "Paul's Message and Ministry in Covenant Perspective" by Scott J. Hafemann
This
is a small collection of previously published essays which, although
varying in length, are consistently rich in content and challenging
in their clarity. The stated hope of the distinguished author is to
make the three fold covenant structure (which in his view is the
overall covenant and salvation historical backdrop that is
consistently elaborated by Paul) more apparent. He does so
indirectly (even stealthily) by means of the ever-important 2
Corinthians 3, its Biblical-historical backdrop, and its textual
companions. Readers will recognize the confluence of themes and
hermeneutical issues in this locus. The uniqueness of this
collection is the remarkable application of Hafemann's basic approach
(which is significant in its implications for Biblical
interpretation, Biblical Theology, and Pauline Studies) to divergent
Pauline issues, key Biblical texts and ecclesiastical contexts, in
one attractive small volume.
For
clarity the volume is divided in two roughly equal parts, Paul's
Message, and Paul's Ministry. Because the articles are arranged this
way, rather than chronologically, the reader can see the conceptual
unity of Paul's revelatory thought, as the reader (perhaps
surprisingly!) sees the presumption of the three fold covenant
structure tested across the various examples of related but diverse
scholarship. For a thoroughgoing and practical outworking of this
motif, see Hafemann's Biblical-theological primer, The God of
Promise and the Life of Faith: Understanding the Heart of the Bible
(Wheaton: Crossway, 2001). Although a detailed examination of
each article is surely deserved, here we will highlight only a few of
interest, bearing in mind the volume is designed for total effect
rather than individual reference per se.
Chapter
2 is the recently published “Reading Paul's DIKAIO-Language:
A Response to Douglas Campbell's 'Rereading Paul's DIKAIO-Language.'”
This is a most valuable chapter due to the unique interaction
between scholars of widely divergent approach. Hafemann begins by
arguing that a thoroughly eschatological response that says both “I
am” and “I do” is needed because of God's action of invading
(and continuing to invade) the lives of his people. Hafemann
demonstrates that Romans 2:13 and 6:7 are consistent and therefore
Paul's goal of creating covenant keepers and the determining
apocalyptic role of the Spirt are unified interpretive keys to Paul's
overall argument. The author shows how Paul's eschatological
view actually not only rejects the transactional component that
Campbell argues against, but also that this is literally consistent
with the argument of Romans itself! Hafemann shows via the Psalms
that in Romans 2, 4 and 6 (and 2
Corinthians 3 as the hinge between Galatians and Romans) there is a
conceptual-theological link between keeping the law, faith, and
obedience that is readily apparent (once one cleans the lenses of the
prevailing paradigm). However, Hafemann warns that in order to avoid
synergistic conceptions of justification one must keep the creative,
electing and liberating role of the Spirit in view.
“The covenant relationship between God and his people is not
legalistic at its inception, nor is it a synergistic contract in its
continuation. Every aspect of the
covenant is apocalyptic, since the covenant relationship is
wholly dependent on God invading and continuing to invade the
believer's lives to deliver them.” (p. 38)
Here Hafemann once
again lays the groundwork for a new paradigm for Paul because “what
matters in the new age of the new covenant is the new creation
brought about by Christ” and also “what matters is actually
keeping the law by the power of the spirit” (p. 41). This
biblical-theological analysis goes beyond the traditional view (with
it's emphasis on an implied legalism solved by imputation) and
strives “to recover the biblical category of an apocalyptically
understood, thoroughly monergistic, yet conditional covenant
relationship between God and his people.” (p.43). This essay is
concluded with Douglas Campbell's response, in which the differences
in approach are seen to remain.
One of Hafemann's
programmatic essays is “Paul's 'History-of-Redemption' Use of the
Old Testament in 2 Corinthians” which contends that in 2
Corinthians Paul's careful and contextual use of the scriptures
reveal that he was convinced that Jesus was already inaugurating a
Second Exodus by which God was now dwelling among his new
creation/new covenant community. The author clearly sees in Paul's
straightforward (!) exegesis of the Old Testament the authentic
foundation for the apostle's life and ministry which is expressed and
confirmed in his appeals to the church. “Thus to encounter Paul is
to encounter one whose life and labors were an extension of the
scriptural worldview from which he understood his universe.”p. 61
The exegesis and Biblical-theological evaluation here demonstrate
that the framework for Paul's thought, the basis of Paul's confidence
in ministry, and Paul's self understanding of his suffering are all
thoroughly Biblical (and not merely circumstantial) in their origin.
The
two following works trace the argument of 2 Corinthians 1-3, with the
latter devoted to 2 Corinthians 3:7-14 as an example of Paul's
“contextual Exegesis of the Old Testament.” These are informed by
Hafemann's earlier works Suffering and Ministry in the Spirit
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990) and Paul, Moses, and the
History of Israel (Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1996). Thus they demonstrate forcefully that the
backdrop for 2 Corinthians 3:7-14 is Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Exodus
34:29-35 as taken seriously and carefully interpreted by Paul. This
of course runs counter to the various presuppositions of Paul's
modern interpreters, most of which reinforce the idea of a diverse
evolutionary trajectory for scripture (not only Paul's thought) and
thus rendering salvation historical concerns artificial at best.
Contrary to this, Hafemann demonstrates in clear systematic fashion
how intra-Biblical exegetical methods, respecting a multitude of
disciplines, can reveal a more plausible interpretation free from
esoteric conjecture. Given the critical importance of 2 Corinthians
3:7-14 in Biblical Theological perspective, it is as if the author is
in some way giving the Bible back to the Christians as much as he
offers persuasive corrective direction to Pauline theologians in
academia!
“Paul's
'Jeremiah' Ministry in Reverse and the Reality of the New Covenant”
posits that Paul's
ministry is one of apocalyptic covenantal declaration and mediation,
as is shown by the context and content of 2 Corinthians 10:7-8. For
a variety of reasons scholarship in the late 20th Century
saw a contrast between “the apocalyptic Paul” and “the
covenantal Paul,” including the postulated structural and
functional disunity of 2 Corinthians. The author convincingly
demonstrates by examination of 2 Corinthians 10:7-8 that the purpose
of the ministry of the gospel for Paul is to call people to
repentance in light of the fulfillment of Jeremiah's ministry in
Paul's mission. Christian ministry today experiences this
eschatological reality by “establishing new communities of new
covenant believers.” Modern evangelical ministry (always groping
for a foothold in the surf of opinion) would benefit greatly if it
were informed by this more Biblical-theological understanding of
ministry, especially if it is clearly demonstrated by Paul himself.
The brevity of this article may conceal its significance.
“'Because
of Weakness' (Gal 4:13): The Role of Suffering in the Mission of
Paul'” argues exegetically that Paul's ministry is legitimated not
by only strict theological reasoning but also by the experience of
his own suffering. Since this is actual evidence (within the flow of
his argument) for his appeals to Christians, Paul “presupposes a
theological perspective and follows an apologetic pattern that is
pervasive throughout Paul's letters.” (p.117) This article
contains a detailed discussion of the key underrated section of
Galatians 4:12-20, arguing that Paul's mission and thought were
inextricably linked, and that Paul was a “theologically driven
missionary and a missiologically driven theologian.” (p. 132) This
essay explores many key interpretive issues, and thereby concludes
that Paul's words and actions brought about the Glory of God in
Christ in direct contrast to the cultural norms of his day.
“The
'Temple of the Spirit' as the Inaugural Fulfillment of the New
Covenant” concludes that “The Jerusalem temple provides a
template for understanding the covenant blessings and curses that now
pertain to the church as God's temple, since the spirit of the
living God now dwells within/among her.” (p. 151) Hafemann
shows again from another angle a prevailing “unity of theological
rationale” within Paul's thought. (p. 152) The focus once again is
the author's presentation of Jeremiah 31:31-34 as the interpretive
key for understanding the New Covenant context of 1 and 2
Corinthians. Of special interest is the assertion that this passage
“looks forward to what we now call a 'believer's church.'” (p.
156) Hafemann shows how the unconditional indicative acts of
provision work together with the imperative stipulations to empower
covenant keeping for the believers in Corinth. As Paul's argument
is carefully examined one can see how the convenantal structure
advocated here has profound application even with regard to the
themes of ethics and judgment and the presence of the Spirit!
The
main two parts of the volume have two corresponding summaries,
freshly penned by the author as he reflects on the totality of Paul's
message. These are well worth the price of the volume itself.
Hafemann sees sum of Paul's message as perseverance, and praise is
its goal. A deduction is that believers are to examine themselves in
light of their present perseverance, not in light of their past
efforts to be united to God. Therefore, the path to true
perseverance is a reliance on the practice of prayer and a commitment
to a reliance on the presence of the Spirit in one's life. As for
the second major division, the goal of Paul's ministry is the
proclamation of the clear necessity of Christ for all people.
Believers are called by Paul's letters to affirm God's faithfulness
to his promises in spite of all circumstance and opposition. These
two summaries work together with the overall arrangement of the
articles to present a deeply exegetical and Biblical-Theological
presentation of the unity of Paul's message and ministry which is
very accessible and encouraging to busy pastors and other Christian
workers.
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Moses & Me
Moses is inextricably linked to the New Testament, and to our experience of Jesus. We think of his miraculous rescue from persecution as an infant, the result of Pharaoh's daughter and Miriam cooperating. We learn from Stephen about how Moses was rejected by his true people, the Hebrews, as their leader, way before the burning bush. Moses' ministry was a miraculous epic of contrasts between God and the ancient Hebrews, mediated by the life-giving law and intervention of Moses. Yet Moses didn't enter the land of Promise, but was buried by God outside of its bounds.
So how are we linked to this ministry? Why is it important that Moses is mentioned about 85 times in the NT? We are his spiritual descendants, in that Moses said there would be a prophet like him raised up from the descendants of Israel. Jesus was that great prophet, that second Moses, who fulfilled the life-giving law of Sinai. Jesus is the great redeemer to which Moses pointed.
We are like babies in baskets, set in the weeds at the edge of the river. But we don't have to stay that way. God can draw us out of the waters, can get us out of the weeds.
We are like those who see the smoke on the mountain but want the Golden Calf. But we don't need to be. The true and living God is speaking in the hearts of people today, echoing the Song of Moses through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The mission is the same: to make it plain that God rules, and so salvation has come to the people.
John 1:16-17 "And of his fullness we have all recieved, and grace upon grace. For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ."
So how are we linked to this ministry? Why is it important that Moses is mentioned about 85 times in the NT? We are his spiritual descendants, in that Moses said there would be a prophet like him raised up from the descendants of Israel. Jesus was that great prophet, that second Moses, who fulfilled the life-giving law of Sinai. Jesus is the great redeemer to which Moses pointed.
We are like babies in baskets, set in the weeds at the edge of the river. But we don't have to stay that way. God can draw us out of the waters, can get us out of the weeds.
We are like those who see the smoke on the mountain but want the Golden Calf. But we don't need to be. The true and living God is speaking in the hearts of people today, echoing the Song of Moses through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The mission is the same: to make it plain that God rules, and so salvation has come to the people.
John 1:16-17 "And of his fullness we have all recieved, and grace upon grace. For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ."
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
The Faulty Default
Jesus cannot be properly known apart from the saving work of God in the Passion (suffering, crucifixion, death, resurrection). Why is this important? Does anyone actually assume to know Jesus while simultaneously ignoring the passion? I believe this is much more common than you'd think; I believe it is not only the easy thing to do, it is the "default" view of Jesus.
In Matthew 16:13-23 the main point is that Jesus "began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day." This point is common to the synoptics. We may read this and *yawn* because everyone knows this, silly.
Yet Peter became Satan over this. Some early versions of Christianity tried hard to explain this away. The Epistle of Barnabas denies the whole scenario for Islam's sake. People have claimed Jesus' goodness, virtue, and divinity while jettisoning the miraculous from the NT texts. Many great & good call Jesus the good man who said great things we all should follow. Even Sam Harris points to the Jesus "as revealed in the Sermon on the Mount" and urges all to follow him.
But Jesus is clear in Matthew 16:21, and He understood this was God's agenda (23) that would not be popular for his disciples. So we may agree with Peterson on the point, "Jesus is not a god of our own making and He is certainly not a god designed to win popularity contests."
Do we embrace Jesus' suffering, crucifixion, death, and resurrection as the saving work of God? Or do we agree with Peter who said, "God forbid it"? May we pause, consider, and believe that Jesus' life was as he said, that his sacrificial work was the work of God, and so realize that to truly know Jesus we must know his sufferings on behalf of the world. And that is the beginning.
In Matthew 16:13-23 the main point is that Jesus "began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day." This point is common to the synoptics. We may read this and *yawn* because everyone knows this, silly.
Yet Peter became Satan over this. Some early versions of Christianity tried hard to explain this away. The Epistle of Barnabas denies the whole scenario for Islam's sake. People have claimed Jesus' goodness, virtue, and divinity while jettisoning the miraculous from the NT texts. Many great & good call Jesus the good man who said great things we all should follow. Even Sam Harris points to the Jesus "as revealed in the Sermon on the Mount" and urges all to follow him.
But Jesus is clear in Matthew 16:21, and He understood this was God's agenda (23) that would not be popular for his disciples. So we may agree with Peterson on the point, "Jesus is not a god of our own making and He is certainly not a god designed to win popularity contests."
Do we embrace Jesus' suffering, crucifixion, death, and resurrection as the saving work of God? Or do we agree with Peter who said, "God forbid it"? May we pause, consider, and believe that Jesus' life was as he said, that his sacrificial work was the work of God, and so realize that to truly know Jesus we must know his sufferings on behalf of the world. And that is the beginning.
Friday, August 15, 2014
Did Jesus Google the Passion?
"Is it reasonable to think that Jesus could have predicted the details of his passion only if he read about them somewhere? This is not to question the applicability of some of the OT allusions to him; it is rather to question the historical reductionism of some Gospel research."
- D. A. Carson, "Matthew" in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, p. 376, 1984
- D. A. Carson, "Matthew" in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, p. 376, 1984
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
