The Act 3 Biblical Forum presents “Reading the Old Testament as Jesus Did” with Dr. Peter Enns, October 30-31, 2009, at the Holiday Inn, Carol Stream, IL.

Read more >>>

Such a biblical theology will not demand formulations expressed only in the categories and images of the Bible itself; as we have said, it clearly affirms the place and role of the contemporary communicator. From a redemptive-historical perspective the interpreter affirms not only that he or she stands in the same continuum of the presence of the kingdom as, for example, the apostle Paul; the interpreter also affirms that, just as biblical theology demands fullest justice to the cultural context of redemptive history, so the commentator too must look to his or her own situational content with care. Our contemporary setting is part of that flow of redemptive history that is addressed by the Scripture. (EWCW, pp. 227-28).

The realization of that place of tension should create humility and patience with ourselves and with one another in the work of theologizing in context. it reminds us of the ease with which our perceptions of the gospel can be deeply influenced by unconscious impositions of cultural and socio-structural perspectives on the biblical data. Contrary to Alfred Krass’s opinion, biblical theology does not pride itself on its “objectivity,” its “presuppositionlessness,” its “value-neutrality” [Alfred C. Krass, Evangelizing Neopagan North America (Scottsdale, Pa.: Herald, 1982), 95]. The “not yet” of biblical theology should make us “pervasively suspicious” about our ideas, our ideologies, our value judgments. (EWCW p. 226).

At the same time, that history of special revelation is organic in character. The Bible is not merely a heterogeneous collection of oods [sic] and ends, nor a symposium of biblical theologies. Biblical theology seeks to do justice both to the diversity of the divine testimony within the diversity of human settings and to the underlying unity of that testimony. It studies the data of revelation given in each period of cultural history in terms of the stage to which God’s self-revelation progressed at that particular time and place. But this unifying element is always the end point of the process, not the process itself. Its wisdom is always defined in terms of the administration of the mystery hidden in ages past, revealed in Christ, made known among all the world’s cultures, and consummated at his return (Eph. 3:8-10; Rom. 16:25-26; Col. 1:25-27). (Eternal Word and Changing Worlds, pp. 225-26).

“All the misery of the Presbyterian Churches is owing to their striving to consider the Reformation as completed, and to allow no further development of what has been begun by the labor of the Reformers…. Calvinism wishes no cessation of progress and promotes multi-formity. It feels the impulse to penetrate ever more deeply into the mysteries of salvation and in feeling this honors every gift and different calling of the Churches. It does not demand for itself the same development in America and England [and the author of this volume adds, Africa, Asia and Latin America] which it has found in Holland. This only must be insisted upon, that in each country and in every Reformed Church it should develop itself in accordance with its own nature, and should not permit itself to be supplanted or corrupted by foreign rule.” (pp. 221-22)

But, during my teaching years at Westminster, I began turning more and more to Harvie’s writings, for various reasons. Mainly, I wanted to make sure that current students would be exposed to one of the most creative and eclectic theological minds WTS has ever produced.

As I began rereading his works, especially Eternal Word & Changing Worlds, I began to realize something else, namely the extent to which Harvie’s mature reflections on the nature of Reformed theology and theological education overlapped with my own developing thoughts.

I would like to believe that my thinking reflected Harvie’s direct influence, and that may be the case, although if so, it would have been more through osmosis. More likely, my own spiritual/academic track forced me to do some synthetic thinking of my own. Harvie’s development as a thinker grew in no small measure out of his 20 years as a missionary in Korea and his work with prostitutes.

My own “trial by fire” at Harvard—which parallels that of many, many other evangelicals over the last few generations—was far less memorable, but no less personal and meaningful. What I share with Harvie is an experience of being forced to do synthetic, creative thinking by watching my own theological formulations leave a rather insulated world and interact with humanity. To put it more positively, EWCW is an example, too few and far between, in my opinion, of the WTS tradition moving beyond its defensive boarders and bringing its perspective to much-needed arenas—not to “correct” others but to engage them and so be more Reformed and Christian in thought as a result.

There are numerous literary high-water marks in the WTS tradition, and EWCW is one of them. In my opinion it is the single most penetrating and insightful theological work the WTS tradition has ever produced. One of the things that distinguishes this book from any other written by a WTS professor is the book’s missional (or as Harvie called it in the lingo of the day, “missiological”) focus, and how missional concerns should and in fact invariably do affect our theological constructs and how, as a result, we need to rethink the task of theological education.

The general point of EWCW is expressed in the subtitle: Theology, Anthropology, and Mission in Trialogue. Harvie’s goal was to produce a piece of synthetic, cross-disciplinary theology. His method is to look at the dialogue between cultural anthropology and theology in the past (18th-19th centuries), how present challenges affect the nature of that dialogue, and, Harvie’s vision for the future of theology and theological education. One of things I so appreciate about this synthesis is Harvie’s recognition that theology is not an isolated discipline, but should, and in fact invariably is, affected by general developments and progress in human thought. Harvie’s work was focused on the social science, but the same tenor of dialogue and mutual interaction is also relevant for theology and the physical sciences. (For example, see my review of The Bible, Rocks, and Time)

The book is divided into three parts, each part containing three chapters. Parts one and two, which Harvie entitles “Shaped by the Past” and “Challenged by the Present,” form the context within which his programmatic statements in part three (“Reaching for the Future”) are to be understood.

Parts three is where the money is. Parts one and two form the theoretical basis. My quotes will come from part three, and I will leave it to you who are interested to see how he supports his observations from parts one and two.

From time to time, I will post some quotes from EWCW. I won’t comment on them; I don’t need to. I hope it will encourage students of theology especially to familiarize themselves with Conn’s work and to be challenged in their own thinking about the task of theology.

I have a lot of back-logged ideas for posts here, but I just got back from a week long trip to Seoul. Now, my intention remains to keep this website as a place for biblical theological reflections in our contemporary world, and a post like this might appear to be somewhat off topic. In my view, however, it is not.

First, I should say that this was not my first trip to Korea. I had the privilege of visiting twice before, in 1998 and 1999. Both were a week long and both times I was accompanied by my friend, and former professor/colleague, Tremper Longman III (plus I needed someone to hold open the doors for me). It’s been nine years since my last trip, so when I got the invitation in February, I was very eager to accept.

My main host was Torch Trinity Graduate School of Theology (TTGST) and the invitation came through the chair of the Biblical Research department, Dr. Yoon-Hee Kim. (Dr. Kim’s father is the founder of Campus Crusade for Christ, and has a rather harrowing story about survival in Japanese occupied Korea.). TTGST is the only theological school in Korea where English is the language of instruction (although accommodations are certainly made for Korean speakers in certain situations). TTGST is an interdenominational school with students from all over the Far East and elsewhere with a wonderful faculty educated in a variety of schools, many of them western. They are celebrating their 10th anniversary and I am honored to have been asked to speak.

I stayed on their campus for the entire week while, in addition to speaking at TTGST, I made excursions to lecture at: International Theological Seminary, Seoul Presbyterian Seminary, and the Korean Bible Society (all in Seoul). I was also one of three keynote speakers at the 51st annual meeting of the Korean Evangelical Theological Society (KETS). I also gave a second paper at KETS in their Old Testament section.

Accompanying me for much of the week was Professor Bernard Combrink, NT professor from the University of Stellenbosch. He has quite the Reformed pedigree, with a wonderful Afrikaans accent to boot. He gave papers on salvation in Mark as well as Socio-Rhetorical Criticism and Reformed Theology. (The man knows his Ridderbos, by the way.)

My lectures were on Ecclesiastes and the Gospel, Exodus and Historiography, Theological Exegesis, and (stop me if you’ve heard this one) the NT’s Use of the OT. All told I lectured six times, spoke in chapel at TTGST, and preached at a church on Sunday before returning home. I was also treated to a wonderful day of sightseeing and shopping by members of the WTS Korean Alumni Association, topped off with a dinner at Outback Steakhouse. (Don’t laugh: Australia is closer to Korea than it is to Philadelphia. Plus I had mistakenly eaten eel the day before and I figured I needed a worry-free dinner.)

How does all this link up with BT and the contemporary world? Mainly, in terms of the latter. If I may state the obvious, the world is far bigger than suburban Philadelphia. Call me a slow learner, having taught at WTS for 14 years with a significant international population, but there was something about this trip that drove the point home much more so than in the past. Even in my previous two trips this did not hit home, but perhaps I am a different man than I was 10 years ago (let’s hope).

This trip I felt like the foreigner, not coming to grace the Koreans with my presence, but permitted, so to speak, to be a part of something very wonderful that will—and you may want to sit down for this—continue regardless of whether I or anyone else from the west comes to speak. Korean theological education is a multinational, sophisticated, and Christ-honoring movement. I keenly felt that I had no right to address their gatherings apart from their gracious invitation. Moreover, my words were spoken into a context where the same types of hermeneutical and theological questions many of us in the west are involved in have already been addressed and wrestled with significantly. The interaction was nothing less than stimulating and eye opening for me.

Simply put, I was struck by how the questions that engage me as I try to be a responsible biblical interpreter in a changing world are the same ones others face around the world. It stands to reason that we can learn from each other, because we face many of the same questions, even if we address them from and for different contexts. We in the west do not hold an automatic edge in the task of theological education. It was a good reminder to me of how big God is and that he is at work in places and ways I cannot understand.