“The Great Commission to the Church does not end with simply witnessing to the nations. Christ’s command is that we disciple the nations—all the nations. The kingdoms of the world are to become the kingdoms of Christ. They are to be discipled, made obedient to the faith. This means that every aspect of life throughout the world is to be brought under the lordship of Jesus Christ: families, individuals, business, science, agriculture, the arts, law, education, economics, psychology, philosophy, and every other sphere of human activity. Nothing may be left out. Christ “must reign, until He has put all enemies under His feet” (1st Cor. 15:25). We have been given the responsibility of converting the entire world. . . .

“What would you say if you hired a worker, gave him detailed instructions, and all he did was to sit around wondering when the quitting bell will ring? Would you regard him as a faithful worker? Does God regard you as a faithful worker for His Kingdom? I repeat: the purpose of prophecy is ethical. It is God’s assurance that history is under His control, that He is working out His eternal purposes in every event, and that His original plan for His creation will be fulfilled. He has placed us into the great war for world history, with the absolute guarantee that we will win. Even if He has to make the whole universe stand still for us (Josh. 10:12-13), the day will last long enough for us to achieve victory. Time is on our side. The Kingdom has come, and the world has begun again. Now: Get to work” (David Chilton, Paradise Restored).

Here are a couple of good reads.

This article has some very thoughtful ending comments regarding conservative scholarship. And this article comments on the fragmentary nature of contemporary source criticism.

“…I would argue that the Old Testament functions within Christian scripture as a witness to Jesus Christ precisely in its pre-Christian form. The task of Old Testament theology is, therefore, not to Christianize the Old Testament by identifying it with the New Testament witness, but to hear its own theological testimony to the God of Israel whom the church confesses also to worship. Although Christians confess that God who revealed himself to Israel is the God and Father of Jesus Christ, it is still necessary to hear Israel’s witness in order to understand who the Father of Jesus Christ is. The coming of Jesus does not remove the function of the divine disclosure in the old covenant” (Brevard Childs, Old Testament Theology in a Canonical Context, p. 9).

The Old Testament is exactly that, an Older Testament. God really did reveal himself to Israel (Heb. 1:1), and as Christians we should seek to understand that witness, for it too glorifies Christ, the Messiah (Acts 18:28).

In the past (in history), the Lord spoke through the prophets, he really did, and we should endeavor to understand the testimony of the prophets. And now the Lord speaks through Jesus Christ, he really does, and we should endeavor to understand the testimony of Jesus Christ. However, to affirm that Christ is the heart of the Scriptures does not mean that we should collapse the witness of prophets into the witness of Christ the Prophet. As Childs states, Jesus did not remove the function of the divine disclosure of the OT.

In the NT, Christ tells us that he fulfils the witness of the prophets. To fulfil does not mean to obliterate (Mat 5:17). And here is the rub: If you separate the OT from the NT or collapse the OT into the NT, then you are not taking the historical fact that God spoke to the prophets seriously, and when you do this you are attacking their witness. And since that very witness corresponds by figure to Heavenly events (Heb 8:5), in reality what you are doing is attacking Jesus Christ. (Leithart makes this very point: Knowledge of the Scriptures equips us to live in the world as it truly is, and I would go on to clarify that this knowledge includes knowledge of the Older Testament. So, knowledge of the Scriptures is knowledge of Christ; and that knowledge, which is grace from God, allows us to live in the world as it truly is. Christ truly is King, and when we do not attack him, that is, when we submit to him and bow our knees to him, then we are actually living in the world as it truly is. And not only living, but through prayer, the sacraments, worship, etc., we are also meaningfully participating in the world as it truly is.)

It is Easter. Please, do not be like the pagans and the hypocrites; please do not attack Christ. If you separate the OT and NT, then you are attacking Christ. If you collapse the OT into the NT, you are attacking Christ. You are not, however, attacking Christ if you hold the OT and NT in union, for their unity is in Christ.

Is Skeptical Scholarship contrary to the Word of God? If so, then it is sin and folly.

Is Skeptical Scholarship contrary to the Word of God? If so, then it is to be hated.

Easter is almost here. Think about Easter; go ahead and think about the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Why did Christ die? Was it necessary for him to die in order to redeem sinners, or could God have redeemed men by an alternative method? Some Christians have said, ‘Yes, God could have saved men by alternative methods.’ Other Christians, however, have argued for the necessity of the atonement. John Murray, for example, argued for the ‘consequent absolute necessity’ of the Atonement: ‘The only righteousness conceivable that will meet the requirements of our situation as sinners and meet the requirements of a full and irrevocable justification is the righteousness of Christ. This implies his obedience and therefore his incarnation, death, and resurrection. In a word, the necessity of the atonement is inherent in and essential to justification. A salvation from sin divorced from justification is an impossibility and justification of sinners without the God-righteousness of the Redeemer is unthinkable. We can hardly escape the relevance of Paul’s word: “For if a law had been given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been by the law” (Gal. 3:21). What Paul is insisting upon is that if justification could have been secured by any other method than faith in Christ, by that method it would have been’ (Redemption – Accomplished and Applied, pp. 16-17).

Easter is almost here. Think about Easter; go ahead and think about the necessity of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

It was necessary. It occurred. Sinners, therefore, were redeemed.

Here is a very interesting article by John Cox. Abilene Christian University has been issuing mobile devices to faculty members and students for their Mobile Learning project. “The goal, in effect, was to eventually turn the entire campus into a laboratory for mobile learning research, experimentation and analysis.” That is an exciting goal. For me, however, the most interesting portion of the article is buried on the third page.

Christian Scholar’s Review has published my book review of Peter J. Leithart’s Deep Exegesis: The Mystery of Reading Scripture.

“The point of Nevin’s sacramental hermeneutics is that the spiritual and the ideal must clothe itself, must embody itself, in the medium of human expression. Consequently, language is neither an end in itself (analytical philosophy; literary hermeneutics), nor a circular system of signs and symbols with no entrance or no exit (deconstructionism), but a bridge to reality and a gateway to being. To say anything less would reduce the Incarnation and the sacraments to nominal abstractions or magical singularities at best (p. 77).”

“In allegory, the historical level of the text plays only a minor role in interpretation. In typology, however, history is taken more seriously. It is regarded as the external medium of God’s redemptive plan. The object of typology is to uncover the Christological correspondence between the two testaments in order to demonstrate the historical continuity of this plan. Typology, then, differs from allegory by accenting the historical, that is, one historical figure is regarded as the prophetic type of another (William DiPuccio, The Interior Sense of Scripture: The Sacred Hermeneutic of John W. Nevin, p. 91).”

“Skeptical scholarship views the plagues as greatly exaggerated accounts of a perfectly understandable, albeit unusual, natural phenomena. But a serious appraisal of the narratives will not permit such cavalier dismissal of the catastrophic dimensions of the plagues. They must be understood for what they were–unique but genuinely historical outpourings of the wrath of a sovereign God who wished to show not only Egypt but his own people that he is the Lord of all of heaven and earth, one well able to redeem his people from the onerous slavery they knew under Pharaoh and to make them, by covenant, his own servant people (Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, p. 65).”

“The interior sense of the Bible is not behind, beyond, or even before the word, but in the word (William DiPuccio, The Interior Sense of Scripture: The Sacred Hermeneutics of John W. Nevin, p. 91).”