This last week I have been doing a lot of study on the book of Revelation. I would argue that Revelation is one of the most untouched books in the Bible merely because people don't really know what to do with it. If anything the use of Revelation has been limited to apocalyptic and eschatological ones. Throughout my reading and research I forced myself to disregard all of the apocalyptic fluff that is often the basis for understanding Revelation. Revelation has become a one issue book, but in all reality it has much more to offer the Church.
I recognized the passages of judgment and the over arching theme of God's judgment in the "end," but even more so I recognized the relationship between judgment and redemption. In the book of Revelation the judgment of God and the redemptive act of God in Christ are inseparable. Judgment is the punishment and destruction of all creation that opposes the Kingdom of God and redemption is the salvation and establishment of a “new creation.” The act of judgment on the part of God is by no means evil or unjustified, but deserved (Rev. 16). And, the redemption of God is not deserved, but given by grace to those who have stayed faithful to the Lord. The judgment of God is a necessary act, which rids creation of all sinfulness as preparation for the final redemptive work of God.
It is important that the theme of judgment in Revelation not be ostracized from redemption. Judgment is often a hard theological theme to talk about, but Revelation gives us the comfort of redemption. Judgment is the necessary precursor for the redemptive purpose of God and even in light of judgment, it is a sweet thing to look forward to the redemption of the Lord.
Recommended Books:
Stephen H. Travis, Christ and the Judgment of God. (Colorado: Hendrickson Publishers, 2009); The last two chapters of this book are very helpful for understanding "judgment" in Revelation.
George Eldon Ladd, A theology of The New Testament. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993); This is a timeless NT theology classic
Richard Bauckham, The Theology of The Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Bauckham does a great job of analyzing and engaging the theology of Revelation
Both Halden at, Inhabitatio Dei, and Kent at, Theology Forum, have very interesting posts concerning a quote by J.I. Packer and the legitimacy of blogging. Check them out! There is some good discussion happening.
I celebrated Thanksgiving in an old-fashioned way. I invited everyone in my neighborhood to my house, we had an enormous feast, and then I killed them and took their land.
This is a thesis for a paper that I will be writing. I will be blogging through this paper and would appreciate any feedback and criticism's that you deem appropriate. Thanks
Andrew
Kuyper, Barth, and the Religions
A Theological Dialogue on “Common Grace” and its Implications
Karl Barth’s theology is often interpreted in the shadow of his debate with Emil Brunner on “Natural Theology.” For some Kuyperian’s this has led to the rejecting of Barth on the grounds that his theology has nothing to contribute to Kuyper’s doctrine of “Common Grace.” This is an unfortunate misconception that has created much tension between these two traditions. The purpose of this paper is to closely examine the doctrine of “common grace” as it relates to Abraham Kuyper and Karl Barth and to bring these two theologians into dialogue. I will do this by arguing that there are strong continuities between Abraham Kuyper’s doctrine of “Common Grace” and Karl Barth’s work on Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. I will argue that although Barth never considered the category of “Common Grace,” his work on Mozart gives some indication of this doctrine and that we must make sense of this. My primary argument is not that Barth has been misinterpreted, but that his work on Mozart can serve as a sufficient resource and starting point for a new dialogue between Barthian’s and Kuyperian’s. This paper will serve to show Karl Barth’s theology as being compatible with the Kuyperian doctrine of “Common Grace” and present the theological implications of both traditions for inter-faith dialogue.
Gorman begins Reading Paul by asking the question why read Paul? Because, Paul speaks on behalf of God to humanity. For Gorman it is essential that Paul be read as scripture, contextually and contemporarily.
Chapters 2-4
Gorman examines Paul by looking at his apostleship, his letters, and his gospel. Gorman understands Paul pre-conversion, to be a product of Jewish zealous nationalism, and on the other hand Paul’s post-conversion life to be the antithesis of zealousness. Gorman views Paul’s apostleship as informing his letters, which are examples of his ministry built on his missionary work and continued through his pastoral letters. Gorman then makes an impressive argument that Paul’s gospel is theo-political in nature. He argues that Paul’s gospel conveys the story of salvation from Israel to the eschaton, that Jesus is sufficient and “if Jesus is Lord, Caesar is not,”[1] and that Christians are called to live a life of cruciformity.
I will now examine the next eight chapters, by number, individually and briefly.
5 Gorman sees Paul as having an apocalyptic vision with an overlapping of the present age with the “age to come.” Gorman emphasizes that in the overlapping of ages Christians are to live their new life in Christ and are to look back at the incarnation, death, and resurrection, but also to look forward to the future return, resurrection, and renewal. 6 Gorman shows that Paul understood God in terms of Old Testament scripture. For Paul God is eternal, loving, holy, just, faithful, relational, etc. Gorman believes God’s work in Israel and Paul’s experience of Christ and the Spirit are what influence what Paul is proclaiming as God’s gospel. Gorman then argues that Paul presents a gospel enabling a three-in-one, (Trinitarian), experience of God and His gospel. 7He then argues that the cross is more than a symbol; it is the definitive revelation of God. He believes that we must see Christ crucified as a sacrifice and the fulfillment of covenant. This is essential to Gorman’s understanding of Paul because it supports his view of the cross as “horizontal” and “vertical.” Gorman sees Paul as presenting Christ’s sacrifice as having human implications in relation to Christ and neighbor.
8 Gorman expounds on the necessity of the resurrection as completion of the crucifixion. He interprets Paul as qualifying the acceptance of the Gentiles in light of Jesus, the “one” resurrected human. Gorman emphasizes the resurrection not as “resuscitation,” but as resurrection to life. Gorman once again presents Paul’s view of Jesus theo-politically as the replacement of the pax Romana.9 Chapter 9 is the sequel to 8 where Gorman emphasizes the efficaciousness of the cross. Gorman compares the government as a means for order, but for Christians the cross is the means for order amongst human chaos, it is true justice. He argues that for Paul justification is by faith and allegiance to Christ, not to Caesar, and our justification is embodied in our crucifixion in and with Christ.
10 Here Gorman expands on the idea of being “saints”. Christians are called to be the Church, which for Gorman is in a multicultural and countercultural sense, the body of believer’s universal. Gorman understands Paul’s view of the Church to be formed by the cross and lead by the Spirit. 11 Gorman argues for the “Cruciform” Christian life. Although this is not language used by Paul, it is language created after the model of Paul’s theology. He believes that the cross is not only the means for salvation, but a model for being. Cruciformity is humanity’s existence in Christ, the formation of the individual and community in faith, hope, and love. Gorman argues that this is the model for Paul’s spirituality, which exists in life with God through the Son and by the Spirit.
12Gorman now presents the fullness of Paul’s eschatology. For Paul this is the anticipation of the future glory of God. Gorman notes misinterpretations of Paul’s eschatology in relation to politics, violence, and war. Rather this is the culmination of the “new age” and inauguration of judgment and salvation, the resurrection of believers, and renewal of creation. 13Lastly, Gorman revisits the question why Paul? Gorman’s answer is that Paul speaks about God, about the gospel, about the mission of the Church, and the living of the Church in faith, hope, and love. Paul calls his readers to employ his gospel and to live his message of cruciformity in God, through Christ, and by the Spirit.
In Reading Paul I appreciate Gorman’s ability to accomplish the intended task of the book. He gives a practical and applicable framework for reading and understanding Pauline literature and theology without using overly academic language, which welcomes the academy, the pastorate, and the laity.I greatly appreciate his views on justification and feel that he presents a middle ground between the “New Perspective” and the “traditional perspective.” He emphasizes the faith of the individual, but also the communal and horizontal aspects of faith, justification, and cruciformity. One area of Gorman’s work that I must criticize is his over emphasis on the theo-politcal message of Paul. Gorman presents sufficient evidence for his claims, but I am afraid that if Paul’s message is viewed as too theo-political in nature it creates a bias framework for interpreting Paul’s theology. Paul has much more to offer the Christian community than a theo-political message. Paul’s gospel may have theo-political overtones and implications, but the heart of his message is the cross. It is important that we understand Paul’s implications for public life and non-violence, but Paul’s readers must first understand the cross. Apart from this criticism I affirm Gorman’s representation of Paul and his gospel. Gorman gives sufficient evidence for his arguments and presents a well-informed robust view of Paul’s letters, apostleship, and theology. I would recommend Gorman’s book as a precursor to any person interested in the letters of Paul.
[1] Michael J. Gorman, Reading Paul. (Cascade: Eugene, 2008) 44
