Um einen kleinen Eindruck davon zu kriegen, was ich hier so alles schreibe und einreiche fuer die Seminare, folgt hier eine Kostprobe. Fuer das Fach "Theologische Methoden" muss ich alle zwei Wochen eine Zusammenfassung und Kritik dieser laenge ueber ein anderes systematisch theologisches Werk schreiben.
A Theology for the Church: Biblical, Historical, Coherent, Practical?
A Theology for the Church, edited by Daniel L. Akin, is a compiled systematic theological work, written and edited by Southern Baptist theologians. One may rightly assume that his work is penned from a distinctive evangelical, free-church, and Baptist perspective. This does not mean, however, that some sort of ignorance toward other non-Baptist theological contributions are at work. This work attempts first of all to be biblical, historical, systematic, and practical. Although authored by different theologians, each chapter shares the same outline. Frist, the biblical contribution to each topic is summarized. Second, an outline of each doctrine throughout history is provided. Third, the authors attempt to picture the unity and coherence of each doctrine in light of the whole biblical canon. Finally, each chapter closes with highlighting the significance of each doctrine for the church today.
Since the volume to be discussed is compiled by various authors, it may be difficult to discuss coherences and incoherencies having the whole work in view. This is due not only to the fact that each author has his own way of writing and arguing. One also has to consider that compared to each other the contributing authors may even have slightly different theological viewpoints. Instead of discussing coherences and incoherencies, therefore, this author chose to summarize and analyze chapter one, which is dealing with the role of theological prolegomena, at first. Then, chapter seven, which treats the doctrine of the church, will be summarized and analyzed, as well.
Gregory Alan Thornbury: Prolegomena
Gregory Alan Thornbury, Dean of the School of Christian Studies at Union University, authored the first chapter of the book. Naturally, this chapter deals with the issue and task of theological prolegomena.
Summary
Since prolegomena is mainly about the issue of epistemology, Thornbury begins his chapter with highlighting the inseparability of truth and theology. In his view, the pursuit of truth cannot end anywhere other than in theology (2-16). It is impossible to know creation without coming to the quest for the creator. Even atheism and relativism are not able to shake of this quest (7-10, 13-15).
The author then turns to the issue of truth in Scripture (16-21). Taking general and specific revelation into consideration, he states, “The Bible makes a radical claim about the nature of reality. It asserts that apart from the acknowledgment of its divine origin, the universe remains an unsolvable puzzle” (18). The believer, in turn, has to worship God, the creator, not only with all his heart but with his entire mind, as well. Thus, spiritual and intellectual devotion are the right answer to knowledge (20).
Coming to the second step, Thornbury develops a historical sketch of the church’s handling of the issue of truth (21-52). He clarifies, “Worldview assumptions are always at work in an individual or culture’s thought” (21). It is therefore imperative for the Christian theologian to study history in order to find out what has been thought and taught before him so that he can be aware of his own epistemological roots (21). The author then covers the early church fathers, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and Occam, the Enlightenment with its crucial philosopher Immanuel Kant, Liberalism and Neoorthodoxy, and current evangelical endeavors in prolegomena. In general, Thordbury provides an adequate and balanced historical overview about the quest for truth in theology. He claims that among evangelicals, especially Henry, Lewis and Demarest, Erickson, and Grenz made influential contributions to the issue of prolegomena.
The third part of the chapter is a systematic treatment of the issue of truth (52-64). It is here that Thurnbury finally turns to the issue of prolegomena per se. He holds that for Christian theology nothing other but divine self-revelation should form the primary source and foundation. However, the act of God revealing himself to his creation should not be taken for granted. Rather, it should “cause for the Christian to fall down on his face and worship” (53). He continues, “Theology, therefore, is the study of God organized in an orderly manner that seeks to portray accurately the divine reality in the light of revelation” (54). In this sense, theology should be coherent, accurate, faithful to Scripture, aware of historical developments, logically sound in judgment, and not neglecting experience (55). “The goal in theological endeavors remains not novelty in theology but an ongoing faithfulness to the ‘faith that was once for all delivered to the saints’ (Jude 3). Attempts at ‘creative theology’ must therefore be met with extreme caution until a thoroughgoing biblical examination of the approach can take place” (55). The theologian should also be aware of his own limitation conditioned by his cultural and historical location (56).The author finishes the third part by simply pointing to Erickson’s ten-step method as a sufficient pattern for systematic theology (63-64).
The last part of the chapter deals with the impact of prolegomena on the church today (64-70). Since theology “should be written with church and congregational life in mind” the issue of prolegomena is essential for the church (65). Especially the relatively new postmodern challenge is too important to be ignored. Facing this challenging task, the Christian academy may be of great help and support for the church. Thurnbury holds, “Old paradigms should be challenged if they are not faithful to the Bible’s radical claim to knowledge. . . . New proposals that challenge secularism deserve ongoing
reflection. . . . The task of staying committed to the truth of the Bible over and against the philosophies of men requires constant vigilance” (69-70).
Evaluation
First of all, Thurnbury rightly points to the fact that the issue of truth cannot be ignored by the church. Current postmodern challenges are too significant to be disregarded by theology and church. Thurnbury also rightly infers that considering the issue of truth also means to face the question of religion. He correctly states that truth is interrelated with religion. In fact, debating the question of truth one may assume that religion is somewhere near. Even atheism and relativism cannot get rid of the issue of religion. Religion is where truth is. Therefore, even in times where truth is seen relatively and religion not significant in matter—this view itself is part of a certain religion.
Thurnbury is also right by lamenting the fact that only in the last few decades the issue of prolegomena has become part of evangelical and specifically Baptist theological endeavor (50-51). Lack in specific prolegomena results in a certain unsteadiness of the own denomination. It is to be appreciated that attempts like this work as a whole are made in order to close this gab. We as Baptists must engage in epistemology in order to be able to answer the questions current cultural settings are posing.
However, while reading through Thornbury’s chapter, certain question may arise. First of all, considering the fact that the length of the chapter is seventy pages, the biblical evaluation of the issue of truth, which takes only five pages (!), might appear a little short. This author suggests that Scripture, claiming to be true and authoritative, certainly has to say more about truth. For instance, Thurnbury does not touch Jesus’ claim to be the truth in person. Furthermore, John 14:6 is not considered at all! Merely in passing the author mentions Colossians 2:3, John 1:3, and Hebrews 1:3, where Christ is portrayed as the center of creation (17-19).
Second, coming to Barth’s neo-orthodox epistemology, the author accuses him of affirming Kant’s distinction between the noumenal and phenomenal world. Supposedly, the distinction is seen in Barth’s argument that the human mind by itself cannot know anything about God. Further, Barth’s concept of God’s threefold revelation in word, proclamation, and sacraments as the only way of getting to know something about him is part of this supposed dualism, as well. While Barth’s neo-orthodox epistemology might have some similarities with Kant’s dualism, this author suggests that the roots of this epistemology lie in Barth’s chosen dialectical and existential method rather than in Kant’s dualism.
Moreover, while criticizing Barth’s lack of affirmation of biblical inerrancy, evangelical and especially the Baptist scholars have to hold the following issue in mind: The major theme for Barth is revelation, not the inerrancy of Scripture. Instead of beginning with criticizing his lacking inerrancy-affirmation, it would make more sense to evaluate critically his view of revelation, first. Since inerrancy does not play a major role in Barth’s theology, one cannot treat this topic as if it were the only thing Barth had to say at all. Before criticizing a theologian one has to evaluate the exact location of the issue criticized. Only after considering the major theme of a theologian, one may criticize a certain aspect of it. And even then, if the criticized issue plays only a minor part in the questioned theological concept, one has to let it be that way, even if one may not agree with him or her. After all, even in criticism one has to remain fair to the person or concept that is questioned.
Another general weakness is the point that it is difficult to develop a prolegomena which has to be adopted coherently by all subsequent authors. Due to the authorial multiplicity of the work it might be even unsafe to speak of a common prolegomena. It cannot be excluded that there may be different prolegomena at work in the following chapters. Thus, the attempt to develop a prolegomena in an edited work is somewhat risky.
The criticism mentioned in the last paragraph may be the reason for another weakness. The outline, prescribed to all contributors, is definitely not suitable for the development of a prolegomena. A prolegomena is not a doctrine like those treated in the subsequent chapters of the book. The suggested fourfold pattern may be appropriate in order to explore those doctrines treated in the subsequent chapters of the work. For the development of a sound prolegomena, however, the fourfold pattern may be inadequate. It would have been more beneficial for the work if the editor would have allowed the author of the chapter on prolegomena to develop his own outline.
Last but not least, this author cannot escape the suspicion that the term prolegomena, used in the title of the chapter, does not reflect the content of the chapter. Most of the time, Thurnbury is talking about the issue of truth instead of prolegomena. While truth certainly forms a major part of it, a prolegomena is more than this. As Thurbury himself claims, a prolegomena is a discussion of the “presuppositions in play, that guide the theologian’s work” (52). What comes most near to a prolegomena is the third part of the chapter, a systematic treatment of the issue truth. As already has been stated, if the author were to have the freedom to use his own outline, he may have been able to meet the goal of a true prolegomena more successfully.
Mark E. Dever: The Doctrine of the Church
Mark E. Dever, the author of chapter seven, is Senior Pastor at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington D.C. In this chapter, Dever reflects on the doctrine of the church. As he himself points out, in a work titled A Theology for the Church the chapter on the actual doctrine of ecclesiology is of special importance (766).
Summary
Like all other participating authors of the current work, Dever subdivides his chapter on the doctrine of the church into four parts: biblical teaching, historical development, systematic treatment, practical application. He defines the church, saying, “The church is the body of people called by God’s grace through faith in Christ to glorify him together by serving him in this world” (768).
After emphasizing the need for studying ecclesiology (766-67), the author turns to the biblical teaching of the doctrine (768-816). This subchapter forms the largest part of the chapter. Beginning with a supposed continuance of the OT concept of God’s chosen people and the NT church, Dever explores some of the biblical illustrations of the church (building, body of Christ, new creation) (768-75). The author then explores the biblical material through the lens of the Niceno-Constantiopolitan Creed, which developed the four attributes of the church (one, holy, catholic/universal, apostolic) (775-78). After that, the activities of the church along the two marks of a true church, being right preaching and the right administration of the Sacraments, are delineated (778-815). The subchapter ends with a reference to the church’s culmination, forming God’s people in heaven at the consummation (816).
The second subchapter covers historical thoughts on ecclesiology (816-45). The author mentions that until the Reformation, there was no specifically developed concept of the church. Instead, the church was simply a given. Starting with the Reformation, different groups developed different ecclesiological patterns. The main difference here is the distinction between a Free Church and State Church. This distinction determines how each denomination treats issues like criteria of membership, church discipline.
In the third subchapter, Dever wraps up the biblical and historical discussion in a short but well summarized treatment (838-45). A truly biblical church should be Protestant in its attitude towards the supremacy of Scripture, gathering on a regular basis, congregational in polity, and Baptist in its administration of the Sacraments.
The fourth subchapter closes Dever’s treatment of the doctrine of the church (845-56). The author reminds the church of its importance to reflect God’s glory in today’s society, to be organized solidly and biblically, to develop a biblical character, and to pay attention to current cultural questions.
Evaluation
In general, Dever does a great job in summarizing all essential issues of the doctrine of the church in ninety pages. Especially remarkable is the second part of his chapter, containing a draft of biblical teaching on the issue of the church. Of course, as it may be the case in the other chapters of the work, a whole book or even a multivolume work could be written about ecclesiology. Covering the biblical teaching, historical development, systematic ordering, and practical application of the doctrine of the church in but ninety pages has to be respected.
Another strength of the chapter is its introduction. Dever rightly points out that the reason for ignoring the doctrine of the church lies in some sort of ignorance toward Scripture (766-67). “The enduring authority of Christ’s commands compels Christians to study the Bible’s teaching on the church” (767). He therefore encourages Christians to study the doctrine of the church because Christ himself regards it as important, or has he puts it, “The church should be regarded as important to Christians because of its importance to Christ” (767). It is sadly the case that too often the doctrine of the church is put aside because of its divisive potential. A biblical theology of the church is essential for those Christians who wish to be obedient to Scripture.
Although a little short, Dever’s systematic treatment is also recommendable (838-45). Here he highlights four crucial biblical ecclesiological issues for the church today. First, a biblical church should be Protestant, affirming the sufficiency of Scripture. Second, a biblical church should be a gathering church. Third, in its polity a biblical church should be a congregational church. Fourth, affirming Jesus’ commandment of baptism, a biblical church should be a Baptist church. For an evangelical Baptist biblical ecclesiology, this is a well summarized statement.
This being said, questionable issues should not be ignored either. One issue that remains somewhat indeterminate is the relation between Old Testament Israel, being God’s people, and the New Testament church, also being God’s people. Right at the beginning of the section on the biblical development of the doctrine of the church, Dever states that he sees “a clear continuity—though not identity” in both kinds of groups (768). Highlighting the aspect of a gathered people in the OT and NT, he again states that “though Israel and the church are not identical, they are closely related, and they are related through Jesus Christ (Eph. 2:12-13)” (770). However, nothing is mentioned about this topic further. Observing Dever’s short touching of this issue, one may infer that he is alluding to a dispensationalist view of the church. However, the reader remains in the dark concerning the relationship between God’s people in the OT and the NT on to nowadays.
It is also surprising that coming to the attributes of the Church, which is also part of the biblical ecclesiological treatment, Dever sets the motto of the church as being one, holy, universal, and apostolic (775-78). This perspective may be criticized as being anachronistic, for these attributes stem from the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD. Since the second part of the chapter intends to focus and explore biblical material only, using this pattern may appear somewhat anachronistic. Surely, it must be pictured and defended in the section dealing with historical development. Yet putting this pattern upon biblical observance may result in forcing it unknowingly into the biblical teaching on the church. The same criticism may be expressed concerning the two marks of a supposedly biblical church (right preaching and proper administration of the Sacraments), which Dever also introduces in the part of biblical treatment of the church. These two marks clearly stem from the Reformation period, which Dever is aware of (819-20). While one can find both marks in Scripture, the Bible does not say that a church is a true church where these two issues are at work. As it is the case with the afore-mentioned criticism, these two marks may be displayed and defended in the historical section. Yet it appears somewhat premature to press the biblical teaching into this pattern.
A minor issue is that claiming that the church cannot be joined by nations, or even families, but only by individuals, the provided Scripture passages (Mark 3:31; Matt. 10:37) do not support this claim. One may even see a hint of western individualism in this statement. Why, then, did the Centurion Cornelius believe in Christ and be baptized afterword including his whole household (Acts 10)? Current theologians should be aware of the massive influence of Western individualism on biblical interpretation.
Conclusion and Personal Notes
As has been stated above, an edited systematic theological work has some benefits and difficulties. On the one hand, one has a multitude of theological contribution from theologians sharing the same denominational values. On the other hand, prescribing the same outline to each contributed chapter might result in some serious difficulties. As stated above, a development of a prolegomena is problematic in the prescribed fourfold pattern. It is also challenging to develop a prolegomena which then has to be applied by all the other contributors of the work. Therefore, it is almost impossible to look for continuities and discontinuities in epistemological matters in an edited work. For this reason, this author chose to picture and evaluate separately the two contributors. One nevertheless has to come to the conclusion that both contributors share the view of the authority of Scripture, the importance of historical developments, the necessity to summarize the two in a systematic treatment, and the inevitability of practical application by the church today.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen