Abstract
This article examines what it is possible for Christians to say about the nature of hope. Speaking of hope is possible for Christians insofar as we attend to God’s action in time which is filled full by God with the promise of his presence. The first part of the article explores what it means to read Scripture hopefully, that is ‘around’ the Christ-event. Hopeful reading of the biblical text is alert to the kind of text it is, and the context in which it is most faithfully placed. The main body of the essay looks to God’s shaping of history through specific foci: creation; Israel; and Jesus. To speak of the world as creation is to look to the world as ‘gift’ and graced with the promise of a future in the purposes of God. The election of a people, Israel, invites us to imagine hope as irreducibly social and so political. Finally, the hope spoken of by Christians has a name – Jesus. Risen from the dead Jesus has a future that he promises will incorporate those who follow him.
1. Introduction
All Christian speech, Nicholas Lash invites us to consider, must endeavour to be a kind of word-care. 1 In a similar construction Rowan Williams remarks that, ‘[t]he right to be heard speaking about God must be earned’. 2 For preachers such statements imply a non-negotiable accountability for the words they use, words that refer to God and words that offer an account of how this God has promised to be active within our world.
What follows is a brief attempt to speak of hope, a topic of Christian attention which involves us in thinking about nothing less than the ‘origin, essence, and goal’ of all time. 3 Like ‘justice’ or ‘love’ hope is one of those words that needs located in its fitting context so that we might imagine what it is to live responsive to a world charged with the promise of God’s presence. 4 Talk of hope therefore finds itself in the same situation as all talk related to God. Words must be found commodious, spacious, and transformative enough to keep up in some way with their referent. Such language of discipleship is not possessive but rather expansive, generous, and promissory. Hope possessed is no longer hope. 5 Our very language about hope must itself be hopeful.
How can we speak of hope? We can speak of hope only by attending to God’s action in time. If we live in time hopefully we can do so only because God has filled our time full with the promise of his presence. Put differently, what is told in the Bible is not a series of events ever receding into the past but a set of realities with the capacity ‘to illumine permanent structures of life’, the ability to sustain hopeful lives. 6 Before we turn to a fuller account of how such hope might be articulated I first need to say something about the nature of reading Scripture hopefully.
2. Reading Scripture hopefully
To read Scripture hopefully is a response to the question: what kind of text is the Bible and for what purpose are we to read it? Christians read the various texts of the Bible as Holy Scripture, which means something roughly like this:
To attest the texts of the Old and New Testaments as ‘Scripture’ is to make specific claims about this text: that it is drawn into the activity of the God of Israel who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; that its ultimate destination is the worshipping church; and that it has a ministry in shaping Christian thinking and acting. Scripture is not first a source for historical inquiry, nor a text that delights our literary sensitivities; calling these collected texts ‘Scripture’ points to its appointed role in the saving purposes of God.
7
This is a long way of saying that Scripture is not to be read ‘like any other book’. Just as we read all sorts of different texts in a manner responsive to the kinds of texts that they are, so too Holy Scripture demands that its readers orientate their minds and wills and hearts to the particular kind of text it is. To read Scripture well we need to adjust ourselves to what it is, a historical source certainly, but for the church something very much more than this. Most basically, Scripture speaks – it is a living text. Lest this become a rather predictable platitude it is vital to insist that a living text, precisely because it is energised by the risen Christ’s presence, is free and so capable of surprising its readers. 8 Were the text not alive in this way the church would be better advised not reading Scripture week after week. If Isaiah’s meaning (to take a text whose voice will be heard frequently in what follows) was confined to the centuries in which it was written then along with the rest of the Old Testament it would be a redundant text for Christian life and worship. 9 Christian reading of the Old Testament is sustained by the conviction that there is a meaning beyond what the author could have intended in his original context. A text like Isaiah also has a meaning within the history superintended by the triune God. This is what we might term the text’s super-abundance. The promise of the text’s surplus is the basis of reading Scripture hopefully.
There is a right and proper reading which pursues Second Isaiah’s 6th century BCE exilic context. Readings attentive to the text’s (always) reconstructed context permanently recall us to the God who works in and through history, not above our heads. If the ascription ‘biblical Christian’ has any enduring value it is surely as an insistent reminder of ‘the human, historical, creaturely means by which God has chosen to communicate his life-giving word’. 10 In other words, historical work has a properly theological home in communities alert to the vulnerable ways God reveals himself in time. But too often our historical imaginations are limited solely to the genesis of the text, forgetting that history itself is patient of theological and spiritual expansion. Quite properly then there is a kind of astonished Christian reading which asks in the light of Christ – what meaning does this text bear now in the context of Christ? Christians have no option but to read Scripture around the centre of history, the one who is Alpha and Omega. Scripture gathers magnet-like around him. Jesus speaks of this attraction of all Scripture towards him when he says to those challenging him, ‘You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that testify on my behalf’ (Jn 5.39). Yet surely we speak of reading Scripture around Christ as a way of coaxing our minds away from supposing that the Old Testament is a series of texts headed in a straight line for Jesus, and once there and so fulfilled can be ‘crossed off’. 11 To read around Christ is a dynamic invitation to read again, to see how we can learn anew from the relationship between the text and the risen One. 12 Hopeful readers do not allow their commitment to fulfillment to squeeze out the promise that, ‘The Lord has yet more light and truth to break forth from his holy Word’. 13
When reading the Old Testament Christians are therefore reading the Scriptures of Israel – those Scriptures Jesus read around his ministry in Luke 4. Christians confess that all texts in the Old Testament have the capacity to be read around Christ (Luke 24.27). As ungracious as this claim may initially seem to Jews, the people we have been grafted into by God’s grace (Rom. 11.20), it is a necessary claim if Christians are to know who they are. 14 Coordinating our lives and action in relation to the history constituted by God is a vital skill for hopeful people, 15 as we shall see later. Being forgetful of Israel, and forgetful of the ways in which Jesus gathers Scripture around him, is only a way of forgetting the God we Christians follow in Jesus Christ. Christians are called to pursue the claim that the one whom they follow, Christ, is king of the Jews, the people called by God to be a blessing for all nations. This king graciously calls those who are not part of the story of Israel into the story of Israel. We need to read the Old Testament around Christ then to know that we are ‘guests in the house of Israel’. 16 The tensions involved in these series of claims are plain, but we must be careful not to loosen them too hastily. Confessing, as we do, in the Nicene Creed that God has spoken through the prophets, that the Old and New Testament present a unified witness, ‘does not so much solve the problem of what Scripture means as supply the context in which the quest for that meaning may take place’. 17
Space remains for me to say just one more thing about the nature of hopeful scriptural reading. Hopeful readers are aware that no text in the Bible can be isolated from the canonical company it keeps. Precisely because there is a momentum and energy to biblical texts not wholly captured in the contexts they were first written in, to plumb the depth of one text we are required to range across the whole of Scripture. Christian reading of the Bible is characterised by a cheerful hope that the text will speak to us when read in company with the other voices of the canon.
And so let us now turn to the principle question of this essay: how can we speak of hope?
3. Hope: Creation, Jesus, and Israel
How best to sketch the nature of hope in a Christian register? The working assumption of this meditation is that talk of hope is sustained by fixing attention on history, which people of hope know and see as ‘God’s economy’. 18 The reasons for such an assumption are two fold. First, by calling to mind the particular ways in which God has shaped the history in which we dwell hope has the best chance of acquiring its proper specificity. To be hopeful is not the victory of wishful thinking but is a response to a series of promises made by God that punctuate time. Second, to say that history is punctuated by God’s promises is to recognise that moving into the future hopefully is sustained by calling to mind the ‘gracious’ deeds of the one in whom we hope (Isa. 63.7). It is these deeds that provide the necessary orientation for hope. That Israel could worship her God even while suffering the crisis of exile is, Robert Jenson tells us, explicable because ‘the future that moves a story must somehow be available within it if we are to live the story while it is still in progress’. 19 The God who we hope for reveals himself in time so that our hope for the future may not be without definition. Such definition of hope is what Christians practise in worship when they confess, ‘Christ is Dead, Christ is Risen, Christ will come again’.
In summary, speaking about hope is sustained by attending to three series of God’s actions within the history of the world: creation; Israel; and Jesus.
3.1. Creation
The hope that pulsates through Second Isaiah is nestled within copious references to creation, as if to reinforce the bond between created reality and redemption. Isaiah 51 for example speaks of the Lord, ‘who stretched out the heavens and laid the foundations of the earth’ (Isa. 51.13). Elsewhere we hear that ‘[t]he Lord is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth’ (Isa. 40.28). Such references prompt us to ask: how does the confession that we live in a created world sustain hope?
Creation is a source of hope because creation is gift – we are strictly unnecessary, here only by the loving turn of the God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit outwards. Creation is the excess of the love that flows among and within the everlasting fellowship of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Yet, as we are invited to see, in creating God does not wind up the world and let it go. God is involved in the world: he elects a people, Israel; he pitches up in the flesh of a first-century Jew; and he sends the Spirit to bring creation to its intended goal. All of this we can say is ‘the plan that is planned concerning the whole earth’ (Isa. 14.26). Robert Jenson renders this verse from Isaiah in more theological terms which are nonetheless helpful – if history has the kind of direction we have been indicating then history is not a byproduct of creation, rather God ‘creates a history that is a world, in that it is purposive’. 20 In continually calling to mind creation Isaiah is therefore recalling the past works of God as a source of hope for the future. Hopeful action is intelligible in a world determined by God’s action. So we find that Isaiah 51 asks us to recall what God did at the Red Sea: ‘was it not you who…made the depths of the sea a way for the redeemed to cross over? So the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come to Zion with singing’ (Isa. 51.10-11, see also Isa. 63). The one who has created the world and elected Israel is the same one who will save. 21 Hope for salvation and God as creator of heaven and earth are frequently placed together in the Old Testament, and can be found not least in the Psalms. ‘Our help is in the name of the Lord, the maker of heaven and earth’ (Ps. 124.8). It is this very creator who promises a future in which ‘the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea’ (Isa. 11.9).
Creation, as the excess of God’s love, recalls us to the eternal love in which we are privileged to have a share. Of the love that is the cause of our being here rather than not here Augustine writes, ‘it is not after we were reconciled to him through the blood of his Son that he began to love us. Rather, he loved us before the world was created, that we also might be sons along with his only-begotten Son’.
22
To look to this kind of eternal love is to be beckoned to see the love of God as Alpha and Omega, beginning and end. Creation is a source of hope because in the beginning is promised the end. Or in the biblical language, God has declared ‘the end from the beginning’ (Isa. 46.10). God as creator, reconciler, and redeemer is both the truth of our genesis and the truth of our end: Listen to me, O Jacob, And Israel, whom I called; I am He; I am the first And I am the last. My hand laid the foundation of the earth, And my right hand spread out the heavens. (Isa 48.12-13)
Very similar language is picked up in Revelation where the risen Christ speaks, ‘Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living one. I was dead and see, I am alive for ever and ever, and I have the keys of Death and of Hades’ (Rev. 1.17). Precisely as creator, God summons into existence those things that did not exist, he gives life to the seemingly barren Sarah, he promises restoration to the exiled, he raises Jesus from the dead-end of death, and he offers a share in his life to all willing to follow. ‘I came that they may have life, and have life abundantly’ (Jn 10.11). Looking to God as creator is to remind ourselves that, ‘[o]nly the God who gave life in the beginning can give new life in the end’. 23
3.2 Israel
God’s presence with creation is made visible in his election of a particular people. The love of the ‘one who formed all things’ (Jer. 10.16) has a history with Israel. To look to this people is to be reminded that hope is irreducibly social (and so political) in direction.
24
Writing in the context of the exile from Jerusalem Isaiah 51.2 beckons readers to look to Abraham ‘your Father and to Sarah who bore you; for he was but one when I called him, but I blessed him and made him many’. This reference to Abraham calls to mind the promise made to Abraham in Genesis, ‘Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed’ (Gen. 12.1-3). God calls the inauspicious figure of Abraham so that through him all peoples and all nations might be blessed. But this election was not an elevation to a cosseted life. Far from it. Abraham’s life is so afflicted that we are moved to say that it was possible only by hope, hoping in what he could not see (Rom. 8.24). In the most unpromising of circumstances God promises Abraham that he will be the father of all nations.
25
In a passage worth quoting at length for its rhetorical force John Calvin brings out the trials of Abraham’s tumultuous life, and so points to the hope it ran on: Now what could be more absurd than for Abraham to be the father of all believers…when he is first called by God’s command, he is taken away from his country, parents, and friends…as if God deliberately intended to strip him of all life’s delights. As soon as he has reached the land in which he has been bidden to dwell, he is driven from it by famine. Seeking aid, he flees to a place where he has to prostitute his wife to save his life…When he has returned to the land of his abode, he is again driven from it by famine…when he has reached a worn-out old age, he finds himself childless….. beyond all hope, he begets Ishmael…Finally, Isaac is born, but with this condition, Ishmael, the first born, is to be driven out and forsaken almost like an enemy. When Isaac alone is left, in whom the weary old age of the good man may repose, he is shortly after ordered to sacrifice him…In short, throughout life he was so tossed and troubled that if anyone wished to paint a picture of a calamitous life, he could find no model more appropriate than Abraham’s!
26
Whatever we say about hope, the kind of hope that made Abraham’s life explicable is far from saccharine. The hope of Abraham can be understood as a type of the faith displayed by Jesus in the darkness of Gethsemane ‘acting in obedience despite the lack of evidence that obedience would “work”’. 27 Equally, the hope that runs through the Hebrew Scriptures in the midst of exile from Jerusalem is a defiant refusal to see present conditions of suffering or torment as definitive, placing the present into the whole sweep of God’s promises to his people. Christian hope rests upon the promises of God to his people. On the bond between hope and faith John Calvin offers this insight: ‘hope is nothing else than the expectation of those things which faith has believed to have been truly promised by God…faith believes that he is our Father, hope anticipates that he will ever show himself to be a Father toward us’. 28
If hopefulness is resourced by looking to what God has promised in history, no account of Christian hope can wander far from the promise God made with the people he rescued from Egypt (Haggai 2.5). Yet, the constancy of Israel’s election is assured not by their works but by the ‘steadfast’ love of God (Isa. 54.10). It is not, Deuteronomy 7.7-8 tells us, because Israel is more numerous than other people but because God loves Israel that its election is ‘irrevocable’, to adopt the words of Paul (Rom. 11.29).
29
It is this election which Isaiah speaks of in chapter 41: [Y]ou whom I took from the ends of the earth, And called from its farthest corners, Saying to you, ‘You are my servant, I have chosen you and not cast you off’ Do not fear, for I am with you, Do not be afraid, for I am your God (Isa. 41.9-10)
Yet Israel’s election has a purpose. Israel’s election ‘is good news even for those not chosen, because the elect are chosen for the blessing of others’. 30 Universal blessings flow from the election of a particular people – it is this impulse that is made flesh in Jesus the Jew from Nazareth. There is no bypassing particularity, for the hope is that a good shared by all may be found through the sheer particularity of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, through Israel, and through the Israelite, Jesus. 31 One people are called out to be a blessing for all people. God becomes incarnate in the flesh of first-century Jew so that his Spirit may be poured out on all flesh (Acts 2.17). The promise made to Israel was always willing to burst out and reach the ends of the earth. For this reason we read, ‘[i]t is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes to Jacob, I will also make you to be a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth’ (Isa. 49.6).
3.3 Jesus
In what has been said to this point readers will have noted a certain pull towards Isaiah, hardly surprising given that part of what makes for Christian identity is a desire to read this text’s promises around Christ. The hope spoken of in Isaiah 51.4, ‘Listen to me, my people, and give heed to me, my nation: for a teaching will go out from me, and my justice for a light to the peoples’ is read by Christians in the context of the Gospels’ core conviction: Jesus is the enfleshment of God’s hopes for Israel, the light of the world (Jn 8.12). Simeon’s words at Jesus’ circumcision are significant here, ‘Master, now you are dismissing your servant in peace, according to your word; for my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel’ (Luke 2.29-32). In a ministry that restores sight to the blind, allows the deaf to hear, raises the dead, and brings good news to the poor Jesus is the incarnation of his people’s hopes: Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen in whom my soul delights; I have put my spirit upon him; He will bring justice to the nations. (Isa. 42.1)
The hope that cries out in Isaiah has for Christians a name – Jesus. Jesus embodies Israel’s ministry – something that becomes clearer the more we listen out for the echo of Isaiah 42 in the New Testament. We hear this text’s echoes in the accounts of Jesus’ baptism (Matt. 3.16-17; Jn 1.32-33), in the Transfiguration accounts (Matt. 17.5), and then again in 2 Peter, ‘for he [Jesus] received honour and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory saying, ‘This is my Son, my beloved, with whom I am well pleased’ (2 Peter 1.17). 32 As the one from whom the light of Israel has shone forth Jesus calls into fellowship with God those who were ‘aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenant of promise, having no hope’ (Eph. 2.12). To receive salvation through Israel is to enter into fellowship with the creator who draws his creatures to himself, who in Jesus Christ says now to all people what he said to Israel in Leviticus 26: ‘I will place my dwelling in your midst …I will walk among you, and will be your God, and you shall be my people’ (Leviticus 26.11-12). These words take on new resonance when read alongside John 1.14, ‘the Word became flesh and dwelt among us’.
Recall the words of Isaiah 41.10 that we cited earlier, ‘do not fear, for I am with you, do not be afraid, for I am your God’. Very similar words are heard again from the mouth of the angel at the entrance to Jesus’ tomb, ‘Do not be afraid; I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified…tell his disciples, “He has been raised from the dead, and indeed he is going ahead of you to Galilee”’ (Matt. 28.5, 7). What does it mean to place our hope in the risen Christ? Three things stand out from these words of the angel at the empty tomb. First, hope can be narrated. Hope is located in a series of actions: Jesus’ crucifixion; Jesus’ risenness; and Jesus’ procession ahead of us. This attempt to place hope in a narrative is evident too in texts we have previously encountered from the Hebrew Scriptures, 33 ‘Our help is in the name of the Lord, the maker of heaven and earth’ (Ps. 124.8). Psalm 105 would be another extended example. Second, to hope in the risen Jesus is to follow one who goes ahead of us. Because this one is alive he has a future he promises will involve us. 34 ‘I am with you always to the end of the age’ (Matt. 28.20). Third, because Jesus is alive he is capable of surprising us with his future. That Jesus has the capacity to surprise is what lies behind the New Testament call to be vigilant for the returning Jesus. ‘[T]he day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night’ (1 Thess. 5.2), Paul tells the Thessalonian Christians. Hope is not ours to possess. Craig Hovey, picking up a cue from Robert Jenson, has written powerfully on Jesus’ ability to surprise us precisely because he is alive. ‘The resurrected Christ must be attested by a people who expect him to exercise the freedom that comes with living.’ 35 With the help of Hovey we can say that hopeful people will be found following Jesus. Such followers of Jesus are headed towards an end which they hope for yet do not control. People who follow are necessarily ‘longsighted’ and open to have their imaginations stretched by the fullness of Jesus. 36 By resisting the urge to collapse promise into fulfilment (here the question of whether we read Scripture in the manner we sketched above is key) Christians are drawn towards a hope that calls forth praise. It is no pious embellishment that at the end of Romans 11, after wrestling with God’s enduring promises to Israel in the context of the fulfilment that is the Christ event, Paul ends with a doxology.
4. Conclusion
How can we speak of hope? Christian speech about hope can say no more and no less than the name, Jesus. In Jesus, those who were not a people (1 Peter 2.10) have been brought near (Eph. 2.13). This Jesus is a ‘living’ hope (1 Peter 1.3) who bids us to be vigilant for his promised coming again. This hope, Jesus, has a history, for the love made visible in him is the love of the one through whom all things came into being. Edward Irving points to the pastoral succour to be drawn from the hope that our individual lives can be participants in the love that moves the world: What an exalted birthplace and most noble stock doth it give to every creature, to me, to you, dear brethren, to think that we were seen of a long time, yea from the beginning of days, yea from all eternity…and were loved and beloved of the Father before all time, as a part – an essential part of His own dear Son…how comforteth it my soul to know that the Son Himself…should bring us back again into that most sure and perfect blessedness which he had, and which in Him we had, before the world was!
37
Footnotes
1
Nicholas Lash, ‘Ministry of the Word or Comedy and Philology’, New Blackfriars 68 (1987), pp. 472-83.
2
Rowan Williams, On Christian Theology (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), p. 40.
3
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics, trans. Reinhard Krauss, Charles C. West and Douglas W. Stott (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009), p. 263.
4
See Charles Mathewes, A Theology of Public Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 214-17, for the importance of such robust hope to political action.
5
See Gerhard Sauter, What Dare We Hope? Reconsidering Eschatology (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1999), pp. 20-21.
6
Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology, Volume II (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 8.
7
Angus Paddison, Scripture: A Very Theological Proposal (London: T&T Clark International, 2009), p.1, elucidated throughout this book.
8
See Craig Hovey, Bearing True Witness: Truthfulness in Christian Practice (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), pp. 22-23, and John Webster, ‘Resurrection and Scripture’, in Andrew T. Lincoln and Angus Paddison, eds, Christology and Scripture (London: T&T Clark International, 2007), pp. 138-55.
9
For a similar claim see Stephen E. Fowl, ‘The Role of Authorial Intention in the Theological Interpretation of Scripture’, in Joel Green and Max Turner, eds, Between Two Horizons: Spanning New Testament Studies and Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), pp. 71-87 (80).
10
J. Todd Billings, The Word of God for the People of God: An Entryway to the Theological Interpretation of Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), p. 38.
11
Sauter, What Dare We Hope?, p. 46.
12
On this see R.W.L. Moberly, ‘Christ in all the Scriptures? The Challenge of Reading the Old Testament as Christian Scripture’, Journal of Theological Interpretation 1 (2007), pp. 79-100.
13
The words of John Robinson to the Mayflower ‘pilgrims’ in 1620, quoted in John Howard Yoder, For the Nations: Essays Public and Evangelical (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), p. 88. For a discussion of Yoder’s eschatological vision see Jonathan Tran, ‘Laughing With the World: Possibilities of Hope in John Howard Yoder and Jeffrey Stout’, in Peter Dula and Chris K. Huebner, eds, The New Yoder (Eugene: Cascade, 2010), pp. 253-70 (267-70).
14
See Stephen E. Fowl, ‘Learning to be a Gentile: Christ’s Transformation and Redemption of our Past’, in Lincoln and Paddison, eds, Christology and Scripture, pp. 22-40.
15
For another elaboration of a proposal related to the one I adopt here see John Webster, ‘Hope’, in Gilbert Meilaender and William Werpehowski, eds, The Oxford Handbook of Theological Ethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), pp. 291-307.
16
Clark M. Williamson, A Guest in the House of Israel: Post-Holocaust Church Theology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993).
17
James Kugel and Rowan Greer, Early Biblical Interpretation (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986), pp.198-99. Cited in Kathryn Greene-McCreight, ‘He Spoke through the Prophets: The Prophetic Word Made More Sure’, in Christopher R. Seitz, ed., Nicene Christianity: The Future for a New Ecumenism (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2001), pp. 167-75 (173).
18
Webster, ‘Hope’, p. 295.
19
Robert W. Jenson, Systematic Theology, Vol. I (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 67.
20
Jenson, Systematic Theology, Vol. II, p. 14.
21
Jenson, Systematic Theology, Vol. II, p. 13.
22
Cited in John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960), II.xvi.4. See Michael S. Horton, Lord and Servant: A Covenant Christology (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), p. 191.
23
Murray Rae, ‘Salvation and History’, in Ivor J. Davidson and Murray A. Rae, eds, God of Salvation: Soteriology in Theological Perspective (Farnham: Ashgate, 2011), pp. 89-103 (92).
24
See Duncan Forrester, Christian Justice and Public Policy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 247.
25
See Jenson, Systematic Theology, Vol. I, p. 68.
26
Calvin, Institutes, II.x.11.
27
Yoder, For the Nations, p. 149.
28
Calvin, Institutes, III.ii.42.
29
For the dynamics of what it is to be ‘elect’, see Douglas Harink, 1 & 2 Peter (London: SCM, 2009), pp. 28-31.
30
Phillip Cary, Jonah (London: SCM, 2008), p. 57.
31
See R.R. Reno, Genesis (Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2010), p. 138, and John Howard Yoder, The Priestly Kingdom: Social Ethics as Gospel (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1984), p. 62: ‘The particularity of the incarnation is the universality of the good’ (emphasis original).
32
See Harink, 1 & 2 Peter, p. 154.
33
Alert readers will have spotted that I alternate between speaking of the ‘Old Testament’ and the ‘Hebrew Scriptures’. Perhaps this alternation is a way of keeping promise and fulfilment in live contact with one another.
34
Jenson, Systematic Theology, Vol. I, p. 198.
35
Hovey, Bearing True Witness, p. 23. See Jenson, Systematic Theology, Vol. I, p. 198.
36
See John Howard Yoder, The Royal Priesthood: Essays Ecclesiastical and Ecumenical (Scottdale: Herald Press, 1998), p. 152.
37
Cited in Edward Irving, The Trinitarian Face of God, ed. Graham W.P. McFarlane (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew’s Press, 1996), pp. 27-28.
