Receiving and Believing the Word of God

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

When was the last time you started your car and consciously thought about the internal combustion engine involved?  Or how often do you eat and enjoy a meal without knowing the way it was prepared or the origin of all its ingredients?  Or more technically, do you ever think about the processes involved to make Wifi work?  Probably not until the router goes down.  While each of these examples could be studied in great detail and are, it is not necessary to fully understand their intricate operations, to enjoy the experience of driving, eating, or surfing the web.  While ASE certified technicians, sous chefs, and computer hackers benefit from the advanced studies in these areas, knowledge is secondary to the faithful enjoyment of these things.

Similarly, Herman Bavinck remarks concerning the relationship between biblical studies and Christian belief, that faith precedes understanding (cf. 2 Pet. 1:6-8).  In a lengthy section defending the historic belief that the Triune God inspired the very words of the Bible, the faithful Dutch Reformer writes with wry wisdom,

Those who do not want to embark on scientific investigation until they see the road by which we arrive at knowledge fully cleared will never start.  Those who do not want to eat before they understand the entire process by which food arrives at the table will starve to death.  And those who do not want to believe the Word of God before they see all problems will die of spiritual starvation (Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena, vol. 1 [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003], 442).

Bavinck’s words, written in an age when science, historical-criticism, and the Enlightenment Spirit were fueling modernism and eroding faith (ca. 1900), remind us that to profit from the Scriptures we must believe they are God’s words (2 Tim. 3:16-17), given from God through his prophet and apostles (2 Pet. 1:19-21), to his church for the purpose of salvific wisdom, life, godliness, and grace that leads to repentance in Jesus Christ.  Arrogantly waiting for all the “cruxes” and inconsitencies to be resolved in the Scriptures will only lead to an impoverished understanding of the Bible and a wrath-inviting position before God.

Bavinck’s words and his whole treatment of the subject of the Scripture’s inspiration insist that to fully understand the Bible we must begin with faith (cf. Rom. 10:17).  Only then can can we labor over the texts as a spiritual service of worship that enables us to test and approve the good, perfect, and pleasing will of God (Rom. 12:2).  In coming to study the Bible we must do so as needy sinners standing under the judgment of God, and not intellectual zealots bringing finite and foolish judgments against the infinitely wise and eternal God.  For in truth, biblical understanding is a gift from God (cf. Prov. 2:1-7) and an ability not naturally possessed (1 Cor. 1-2). 

Such a position does not laud men and their schemas, but God and his grace.  Thus we must come receptive in order to believe, and this receptivity only occurs because God in his mercy sends his Spirit to prepare our hearts to receive his word.  From first to last, the revelation of God is supernatural and gracious, and must be considered as one of God’s greatest acts of kind condescension.  The human heart writhes under the pressure of this self-effacing position, but it preserves the pearls of God from being trampled by unbelieving swine.  

May those who have ears to hear, hear the Word of God and believe.

Soli Deo Gloria, dss

Herman Bavinck on Scripture’s Fuller Sense

/ davidsschrock

In volume 1 of his Reformed Dogmatics, Herman Bavinck reflects on the multiple ways in which the New Testament authors use and apply the Old Testament.  In the discussions that swirl today on this subject, it is noteworthy that he writes in favor of sensus plenior.  He says,

In the case of Jesus and the apostles, this exegesis of the OT in the NT assumes the understanding that a word or sentence can have a much deeper meaning and a much father reaching thrust than the original author suspected or put into it.  This is often the case in classical authors as well.  No one will think that Goethe, in writing down his classical poetry, consciously had before his mind the things that are now found in it.  “Surely that person has not gotten far in poetry / In whose verses there is nothing more than what he had [consciously] written into them.”

In Scripture this is even much more strongly the case since, in the conviction of Jesus and the apostles, it has the Holy Spirit as its primary author and bears a teleological character.  Not only in the few verses cited above [verses from the NT that employ the OT is various fashions] but in its entire view and interpretation of the OT, the NT is undergirded by the thought that the Israelitish dispensation had its fulfillment in the Christian.  The whole economy of the old covenant, with all its statutes and ordinances and throughout its history, points forward to the dispensation of the new covenant.  Not Talmudism [i.e. Judaism] but Christianity is the rightful heir of the treasures of salvation promised to Abraham and his seed (Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena, vol. 1 [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003], 396-97; Bavinck also includes a broad bibliography on this subject from Dutch, German, and English-speaking scholars).

Two things should be noted from his statement.  (1) While Bavinck  supports a view allowing for the expansion of meaning in the text as that ‘word or sentence’ is read in the light of later revelation, namely in the coming of Christ; his own theological method does not overdo this proposition.  He is rigorous, even ‘scientific’ (a term he uses positively), in his attention to the original meaning of the text in his doctrinal formulation.   Thus, it seems that in comparison with his own method interpretation, his sensus plenior is controlled by further biblical revelation (i.e. the canonical horizon) and not by spurious philosophies or extra-biblical ideas.  In fact, large sections of volume 1 are devoted to ardently rejecting theological methods that depend on such eisegesis.

(2) Bavinck’s appeal to Goethe does appear, at least today, to support a postmodern hermeneutic, namely that the reader can and should bring their own meaning to the text.  However, in Bavinck’s defense, it must be remembered that he is writing decades before the influence of postmodern literary theory with its influnence on theology. And again, the proof is in the pudding: Does Bavinck himself believe, encourage, or legitimate a reader-centered hermeneutic?  I don’t think so. 

In short, Bavinck’s quotation is helpful to reveal his own method of interpretation and to remind us of the organic unity and eschatological nature of the OT which finds its telos in Jesus Christ.  Likewise, this statement shows why the Reformed Dogmatics are so good; Bavinck recognized the progressive nature of revelation and undergirds his dogmatics with a biblical-theological framework that collects the sparks of doctrine of in the Old Testament and sets them ablaze as he moves into the New. (A great example see his section on the Trinity).

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

A Helpful Primer on Justification

/ davidsschrock

Trevin Wax has put together a helpful primer on the justification debate that has been raging between John Piper and N.T. Wright.  You can check it out at Christianity Today. 

The New Testament professors here at Southern Seminary also discussed this subject a few months ago.  You can hear the round table discussion between Drs. Tom Schreiner, Brian Vickers, and Mark Seifrid, facilitated by Denny Burk, the Dean of Boyce College online.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

(HT: Russell Moore)

The Theologian’s Task

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

What is the task of a Christian theologian?  Or more generally, what is the task of understanding Christian doctrine?

Herman Bavinck answers that question in the opening chapter of his four-volume Reformed Dogmatics.  He writes,

The imperative task of the dogmatician [or theologian] is to think God’s thoughts after him and to trace their unity.  His work is not finished until he has mentally absorbed this unity and set if forth in a dogmatics.  Accordingly, he does not come to God’s revelation with a ready-made system in order, as best he can, to force its content into it.  On the contrary, even in his system a theologian’s sole responsibility is to think God’s thoughts after him and to reproduce the unity that is objectively present in thoughts of God and has been recorded for the eye of faith in Scripture… (Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena, vol. 1 [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003], 44).

He continues later to describe the synthesizing and organizing work that theology entails to help understand and assemble God’s word,

dogmatics is not a kind of biblical theology that stops at the words of Scripture.  Rather, according to Scripture itself, dogmatics has the right to rationally absorb its content and, guided by Scripture, to rationally process it and also to acknowledge as truth that which can be deduced from it by lawful inference (45).

Whether you are a theologian or not, may you seek to absorb God’s word and think God’s thoughts after Him.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

The Ways of Our God: God’s People (3)

/ davidsschrock

In The Ways of Our God: An Approach to Biblical Theology, Charles Scobie moves in chapters 11-15 to speaks about God’s People.  Continuing to expound a multi-thematic approach to biblical theology, he shows how God has from the very foundation of the world worked in covenant relationship with his people and how he will continue to have a people to call his own forever and ever.  Scobie outlines his section under the following headings.

11. The Covenant Community.  Scobie lays out a well-argued case in this chapter depicting the kind of unity God intended for humanity to have with Him and with one another.  He begins in the first family, shows how sin splintered unity, and how a significant part of redemptive history has been to foster unity among God’s covenant community and ultimately to create one new humanity in Christ (Eph. 2:14; John 17).  He argues a case where union with Christ is not mystical, but ecclesial where God’s people, as they are brought into fellowship with God by Christ’s active and passive obedience, are simultaneously called to unity among the brethren.  Obviously in this chapter, the idea of covenant is essential.

12. The Nations.  Scobie contends that the OT hints at God’s universal purposes, whereas the NT commands the mission of the church to reach the end of the earth.  In the OT, Israel is to mediate blessings to its neighbors but consistently fails to do so.  There is evidence of Gentiles finding there way into the covenant community (Ruth, Rahab, Uriah the Hittite), but primarily this is an accident of history, rather than a program of international expansion.  In this way, the movement in the OT is centripital.  That changes in the NT, where God gives the command to go to the nations through the Great Commission of Jesus and the sending of the Spirit.  Thus in the NT, the movement is centrifugal, with every nation invited and commanded to bow the knee to Christ.  On the whole, the chapter is a well-balanced articulation of missions in the OT and NT.  However, Scobie’s theological predilections show that he is not comfortable with the Bible’s exclusive message of salvation in Christ alone.  For he argues that those who came before Christ could be saved without knowledge of his name, and those who did not believe in this life will get another shot after death to respond to the gospel.  Clearly, he is making up the rules as he goes.  His position strips the gospel of its grace and glory.  By minimizing the name of Christ, he is stripping Christ of glory and by offering the gospel in the eschaton, he is blunting the force of the gospel today and making God subservient to the needs of men.  The Lord is a Servant and he does humble himself to save, but he is not required to save us, and in fact the hearing of the gospel is a matter of sovereign grace.  Scobie’s appeal to post-mortem evangelism misconstrues the gracious and necessary proclamation of the gospel in this age.

13. Land and City.  In this chapter Scobie breaks his pattern of proclamation, promise, fulfillment, consummation by ending with a different idea/concept than he started.  For some reason he does not see Land as an eternal reality.  Instead, land is collapsed into city.  Instead of seeing the Garden bookends of the Bible, he seems to say that the OT is focused on land and life in the land, but in the NT, the New Age is focused more on spiritual realities and on the City of Zion, God’s dwelling place.  What he does not recognize is the way land is not shrunk, but expanded in the New Heavens and New Earth.  Whereas God promises the land to Abraham in Genesis, in Romans 4:13, Paul says God promised the Cosmos to Abraham.  Therefore, the promises are not truncated but expanded–to God be the glory!

14. Worship.  Scobie sets this chapter to discuss the When, Where, and How of Worship, but ironically not the What or Who.  Perhaps this is assumed, but in an age of mysticism and spirituality where worship is sold at Wal-Mart, the most important aspect of Worship is not form or function, but who is worshiping Whom.  More could be developed here, from the people who called upon the name of the Lord (Gen. 4:26) to the worshipers around the throne of God (Rev. 4-5).  More concurrently, Scobie’s discussion of baptism was disappointing because of the way that he did not defend his conclusion.  Though he asserted a paedobaptistic view, he defended it with the most minimal biblical support.  Instead, he seems to articulate that credobaptists believe assert human responsibility over divine grace/agency in salvation.  This dichotomy does represent the issue well at all.  I know few Baptists who deny God’s initiating work in salvation, as Scobie seems to paint it.

15. Ministry.  Finally, Scobie addresses ministry and service in the Bible. He lists four kinds of leaders in the OT–elders, priests, prophets, teachers–who he shows to find their ultimate and perfect expression in Jesus Christ.  Moving into the NT, he shows how much he is a product of his ecclesial tradition.  He makes the case for three NT offices, even while admitting that elder and bishop were originally synonymous.  Likewise, he argues for women in ministry, though he does not produce any solid exegetical evidence.  Instead, when coming to “proof texts” like 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 14, he inserts other proof texts like Acts 18:26 where “Priscilla taught Apollos” and 1 Cor. 11:5, 13 which showed women prophesying.  In all these cases, he argues that these historical situations should not be presented as normative representations of the church; this is said even after he concedes that Paul roots his argument in 1 Tim. 2 in the created order.

It is in these final two arguments–church government and women in ministry–that Scobie’s greatest weakness emerges.  He is not letting the text shape his theology.  Instead, in working out his BT grid, he is simply adapting it to fit his ecclesial traditions–beliefs that I would contend do not stand up to rigorous biblical considerations.   Likewise, in the way that he truncates certain areas (i.e. the proclamation and promise sections in the Servant’s Vindication), it looks like the weight of his BT model was for him to devote the time to every section.  There are areas in his book where he simply cites the biblical evidence, but does not wrestle with its meaning.  At other places, like here, he simply retreats to the position of his church–three offices for ministry and women as ministers in the church.

Scobie’s work reminds us that while biblical theology is helpful in painting with broad strokes the themes and ideas of the Bible, exegetical studies and systematic theology are absolutely necessary for working out doctrine and applying it to individual lives and local churches.  Scobie’s work is a helpful resource for tracing a doctrine through the Bible, finding places where a theme stands out in the text; however, it is not the place to find help in making decisions about doctrine.  In its articulation of doctrine, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

The Ways of Our God: God’s Servant (2)

/ davidsschrock

In the second section of The Ways of Our God: An Approach to Biblical Theology, Charles Scobie turns from the theology proper, creation, and the history of spiritual warfare in section one to the person and work of Jesus Christ in section two.  Instead of providing a thorough summary, let me point out some of the highs and lows.

6. The Messiah:  Scobie outlines five charateristic offices of the servant of God–namely Moses, prophet, priest, king, and sage.  These offices were first established in history before they were fulfilled in Christ.  Yet, before the advent of Jesus Christ and his ultimate fulfillment there seems to be a pattern of failure that escalated the hopes of the coming Messiah.  This idea of escalation is not unique to Scobie, but his recognition of this pattern is appreciable.   The high point for me in chapter 6 was Scobie’s edifying examination of the ways in which Jesus Christ fulfilled the OT figures in similar but superior ways.  One of the best chapters in the book.

7. The Son of Man: Whereas chapter 6 discussed some of the functional offices of the Christ, chapter 7 focuses on the usage of ‘Son of Man.’  Scobie picks up the Adamic referrences here showing how Jesus is the second Adam, and he shows how he is the fulfillment of the vision in Daniel 7.   Moreover, Scobie shows how Jesus comes to represent the true humanity of God.  Moving from Israel to Remnant to The Twelve Disciples to Jesus, he shows how history narrows to Jesus Christ as the single faithful Jew who is qualified to receive the promises of God.  It is worthy to note however, that Scobie misplaces the twelve, for they should probably go on the other side of Jesus.  In other words, the Twelve are as the reconstituted twelve tribes, function as the foundation of the New Testament, not the last vestige of Old Testament Israel.  So while they may serve a place in the narrowing process of history to point up Jesus as the one son of God, they should be more carefully placed after Jesus, as the firstfruits of the new creation.

8. Glory, Word, Wisdom, and Son:  This is a very illuminating chapter concerning OT adumbrations fulfilled in Christ.  Each of these four major themes (Glory, Word, Wisdom, and Sonship) prepares the way for the incarnation of the second member of the Godhead, Jesus Christ.  In truth, Jesus fulfills and exceeds each of these attributes/personifications of God in the OT.  It is worthwhile to meditate on how the presentations of glory, the word, wisdom, and sonship in the OT do and do not foreshadow Jesus Christ–and by ‘do not’ I mean that the Son’s incarnation outstrips all previous possibilities of hypostasis, or distinctions with God, in the Old Testament (cf. Dan. 7:13-14; Isa. 63:8-10).  Finally, I must say that this chapter did begin to evidence the prevailing weakness of this book, namely the unwillingness to examine theological issues at levels that go beyond the surface of the text. For instance, in response to the question, “Is Jesus God?” Scobie balks (395, 398ff).  His inability to affirm this metaphysical reality shows one of the weaknesses of his BT which sidesteps matters of critical theological debate.  He makes the evasive move to only say what Scripture says without defending the implications of what the Scriptures say.  There is a constant appeal to BT in Scobie’s work that he uses when he comes across a textual problem or divisive doctrine.  While I appreciate his ‘textuality,’ in this case the texts demand an answer.  Jesus is God. 

9. The Servant’s Suffering: Chapter 9 moves from the person of Christ to his work.  On page 403 Scobie writes, “In the OT there emerges what we may call a ‘profile’ of the ideal servant of God.  While embodied to varying degrees in specific historical individuals, the “Suffering Servant” is portrayed especially in certain psalms and in the “Servant Songs” of Isaiah.”  Scobie’s chapter helpfully outlines the common experience of God’s servants, showing that Jesus Christ is the ultimate servant, one who suffers and dies to ransom a people for God.  He bases his chapter not just on a limited word study but on a ‘servant pattern’ that emerges in the Bible where God’s servants, Jesus in particular, are “called and chosen by God and obedient, fulfilling his God-given mission.  He is misunderstood and mocked, suffers and dies; yet he is vindicated by God, and his death and resurrection have profound significance for Israel and for the naitons” (417).  This aspect of the chapter is very, very good.  So is Scobie’s multi-thematic understanding of Jesus’ atonement, where he defends propitiation and the substitutionary nature of the atonement.  However, the glaring abberation in this chapter is Scobie’s advocacy of ‘post-mortem evangelism.’   Scobie argues here (434) and later (540) that all people will get another chance to respond to the gospel after they die.  He bases this on 1 Pet. 4:6 and Rev. 14:6-7 (536), but fails to see the finality of death in verses like Hebrews 9:27 which reads, “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment.”

10. The Servant’s Vindication:  Finally, Scobie develops the pattern of vindication experienced by the servants of God in OT, in the life of Jesus, and in the life of believers who are united to Christ’s death and resurrection.  Unfortunately, Scobie spends little time developing the idea of vindication from the OT–only six paltry pages (441-46).  In the more substantial work on Christ’s resurrection he helpfully unpacks the fourfold meaning of Christ’s resurrection, ascension, session (being seated with Christ), and Lordship.  In this last section, he provides a helpful discussion of Christ’s Lordship in the lives of individuals, in the church, and in creation.  Unfortunately, like the discussion concerning Christ’s deity, Scobie again waffles on the evidential nature of the resurrection.  While he does not deny it, he is unwilling to affirm an evidential argument–based on eyewitness testimony–for the reality of the resurrection.  The resurrection, in Scobie’s view, is a matter of faith to be believed and less an event to be proved.  Sadly this splinters faith from history. Apparently, we are justified to believe in such an account, but we are not required to argue for its veracity. 

Overall, Scobie has some very helpful discussions on matters like the OT types that lead to biblical understanding of the Messiah and recognizing a servant pattern in the Scripture that helps develop a biblical understanding of what Christ accomplished in death.  Yet, in reading this section it becomes more apparent that Scobie and I do not share many biblical-theological convictions.  His work is to be commended for its breadth and synthesis of the biblical material.  However, in terms of analyzing and articulating many doctrines, The Ways of Our God shows itself to be theologically amiss.   Scobie does well in collecting and setting the biblical material; he just does not do equally well in explaining its theological difficulties.

We will pick up this point in the next post.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Biblical Theology for the Real World

/ davidsschrock

In The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Krister Stendahl defines Biblical Theology as what the Bible ‘meant,’ while Systematic Theology was defined as what the Bible ‘means.’  However, as it is shown in by James Hoffmeier in his recent book The Immigration Crisis: Immigrants, Aliens, and the Bible and Eric Schumacher in a recent associational sermon, Biblical Theology has everything to do with life today and for making biblical decisions in the church (Schumacher) and outside of it (Hoffmeier). 

With Goldsworthy-esque style, Pastor Schumacher defines a Biblical Theology of Cooperation in the church like this:  Biblical Cooperation happens when God’s people, under God’s rule, trust God’s promises and obey God’s commission in the pursuit of God’s glory.  His sermon follows 7 points that trace cooperation from Creation to the New Creation with application for today’s church.

Likewise Hoffemeier writes in the introduction to his book how we must move from the biblical text to the contemporary application following the pattern of creation, fall, redemption, and new creation if we are to rightly discern the biblical teaching on immigration.   Appealing to the example of C.J.H. Wright, Hoffemeier uses a “comprehensive approach” that moves from biblical theology to objective/subjective principles to practical ethical applications.  Mere analogy and principalization that fail to recognize historical differences, cultural settings, and situational incongruities are unhelpful, but a well-ordered biblical theology that recognizes these complicating factors lays the groundwork for ethical conundrums and modern-day decision-making.  (While I haven’t read his book, his proposed methodology is sound.  You can read the whole first chapter online to see where Hoffmeier is going.)

These are just two more examples of how reading the Bible with an eye to the storyline of Scripture helps us make sense of the world around us.  Really, we do not have a better option?  God has given us a book that makes us wise unto salvation and that helps us proceed in an ever-complicating world!

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

(HT: Jim Hamilton; Justin Taylor)

Will the real Jesus please stand up?!

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

Today Kevin DeYoung summarized his message from this year’s Next Conference. In his message on the “Life of Christ” he includes a thought-provoking and sadly revealing list of Jesus makeovers found throughout the bulging corridors of American evangelicalism.  Some of the false Jesuses on his list include Republican Jesus, Democrat Jesus, Therapist Jesus, Starbucks Jesus, Open-Minded Jesus, Touchdown Jesus… Hippie Jesus, Yuppie Jesus, and on it goes. 

In place of these extrabiblical examples, DeYoung turns to the language of biblical promise and fulfillment to describe who Jesus is.  Instead of painting a velvet Elvis, fad Jesus to enforce any number of partisan policies, DeYoung simply turns to the Bible to say that the Messiah is

the Son of David and Abraham’s chosen seed, the one to deliver us from captivity, the goal of the Mosaic law, Yahweh in the flesh, the one to establish God’s reign and rule, the one to heal the sick, give sight to the blind, freedom to the prisoners and proclaim good news to the poor, the lamb of God come to take away the sins of the world…

He embodied the covenant, fulfilled the commandments, and reversed the curse. This Jesus is the Christ that God spoke of to the serpent, the Christ prefigured to Noah in the flood, the Christ promised to Abraham, the Christ prophesied through Balaam before the Moabites, the Christ guaranteed to Moses before he died, the Christ promised to David when he was king, the Christ revealed to Isaiah as a suffering servant, the Christ predicted through the prophets and prepared for through John the Baptist.

Reading this catena of descriptions, I was reminded of the simple fact that apart from the Bible in general and the Old Testament in particular, we cannot know Jesus as the Christ.  Just to name the name of Jesus is not enough.  Even to simply quote an isolated verse, “Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life,” may not be enough, if this verse is removed from its canonical context and antecedent meaning.  The question that has to be asked then is, “Which Jesus are you talking about?”

In a world of competing Jesuses, Kevin DeYoung calls us back to a biblical portrait of Jesus, so that we might not confuse Jesus the Christ with Jesus the brand name, Jesus the salesman, or Jesus the talisman.  May we endeavor more to know the Christ of the Bible and the Bible which all points to Christ.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss


 

New Studies in Biblical Theology Index

/ davidsschrock

Andy Naselli has prepared an invaluable service for those committed to mining the biblical-theological depths of the Bible.  He has compiled a Scripture index for the twenty-four volume (and growing) New Studies in Biblical Theology series edited by D.A. Carson, with contributors like Andreas Kostenberger, G.K. Beale, Stephen Dempster, and others.  This is how Naselli describes it:

I recently prepared a master Scripture index for the New Studies in Biblical Theology series edited by D. A. Carson. I combined the Scripture indexes into a single spreadsheet and placed an asterisk by each page number where there is a discussion rather than merely a reference or brief comment. This is an especially valuable resource for those who are working on individual texts and would like to consult substantive discussions in the NSBT series.

Next time you need to research something in the Scriptures, this would be a great help.

Thanks, Andy.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss.

(HT: Garrett Wishall).

The Veracity and Violence of God’s Word

/ davidsschrock

I ran across a one-sentence commentary on the sometimes delayed, but always effective power of God’s Word (cf. Isaiah 55:8-9; Hebrews 4:12).  Consider it a word of hope about the veracity and violence of God’s Word.  Charles Scobie quotes E. Jacob saying,

“God’s word, ‘is like a projectile shot into the enemy camp whose explosion must sometimes be awaited but which is always inevitable.'”  Jacob continues to relate God’s word to God’s governance of history, “and these explosions are the events of history [i.e. the exodus and the cross of Jesus Christ]“ (E. Jacob, The Theology of the Old Testament [New York: Harper & Row, 1958], 131; quoted in Scobie, The Ways of Our God: An Approach to Biblical Theology [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003], 370).

May we pray for God’s word to explode in our world, and may our preaching, like the prophets of old, launch an arsenal of sin-defeating, Satan-assailing, captive-freeing, gospel missiles into enemy-occupied territory, until Christ returns as king.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss