Redemptive History is Redemptive Theology

“The essence of theology is the interpretaion of the history of redmeption,” writes Gordon-Conwell Professor, Richard Lints in his book, The Fabric of Theology. The structure of systematic theology, he argues, needs to be linked to the structure of Scripture, meaning “the dominant themes of redemptive revelation ought to be the dominant themes of systematic theology. The theological framework ought to be linked to the actual structure of the biblical text itself and not merely to the content of the Bible. The questions that the biblical text asks ought to be the primary questions of the theological framework.” (p. 268, 270-71)

The theological framework of any text, Lints argues as he builds on the work of Edmund Clowney’s book, Preaching and Biblical Theology, are the three horizons of . . .

• the immediate context of the biblical book or passage,
• the period of revelation in which the book of passage falls,
• the entirety of biblical revelation, from Genesis to Revelation. (p. 293)

The immediate context of the book or passage can be defined as the textual horizon, where the hermeneutical emphasis is on the relationships between words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs. This is the most basic and singular level of studying any text. Particular attention must be paid to what genre the biblical author is writing.

The period of revelation in which any book or passage falls is the epochal horizon, where the emphasis is on which covenant is the biblical author writing and living. Lints suggests asking each book or passage,

• What are the central covenantal terms of the period?
• What are the particular intentions of the author(s) in that epoch?
• Why are certain issues repeated time and again in particular periods?
• How do the central themes of one epoch relate to the central themes of another epoch? (p.303)

The last horizon, the canonical horizon, describes the entirety of biblical revelation. Here, the hermeneutical focus is on how God’s promises relate to their fulfillment, as seen in Scripture’s use of typology. “Typology is simply symbolism with a prospective refernece to fulfillment in a later epoch of bilbical history. . . . A ‘typical’ relation, then, links some event, person, or institution in one epoch to another event, person, or institution in another epoch in some fundamental and essential way.” (p.304) Typology is the means through which God’s previous relelation in the Old Testmant comes to fulfillment in the New Testament.

Each of these horizons permits the interpreter a full-orbed view of each biblical book or passage. We do not simply “mine the Scriptures looking for [theological] answers to a set of specific questions that arise uniquely in the modern era,” Lints concludes. “The Scriptures have an integrity of their own that must be respected.” (p.310) To serve the reader of Scripture in discovering the questions that Scripture asks itself, Lints encourages the church to ask,

1. What are the important issues in Scripture? The important issues in the work of a particular writer? A particular epoch? The entire canon?
2. What are the sttructural relationships between the issues? The issued raised by a particular writer? A particular epoch? The entire canon?
3. What is the significance of the relationships between issues in the Scriptures? The relationships between issues in each writer? A particular epoch? The entire canon?

Lints, based on Clowney, points us in a right, and often overlooked direction, when exegeting texts. Based off his work, I listed some questions that I’d like to ask each horizon. I’m wanting your thoughts, additions, or corrections to my questions.

The Textual Horizon

1. What genre is the author using? That is, in what way is he literarily communicating his message?
2. What is the historical situation of the author?
3. Are there cultural expressions I need to note?
4. Who is his audience?
5. What is the meaning behind this particular word in its context?
6. How does the author use this word elsewhere in his writings? How is it used in the author’s time period?
7. How do the phrases in the sentence relate to one another?
8. What is the purpose of this sentence?
9. How do the sentences in the paragraph relate to one another?
10. How do the paragraphs relate to one another?

The Epochal Horizon

1. What covenant is this book or passage under?
2. Do the authors that write during this particular covenant reference each other?
3. How does this particular covenant impact the text?
4. How does the covenant in question relate to the covenant that preceded it?
5. What promises / and or curses were made in this covenant? Have they been fulfilled?
6. What themes are prevalent in relation to the covenant promises / curses?
7. Who are the major figures, events, institutions (types) in this covenant?
8. How did the Old Testament anticipate this passage?
9. How did the New Testament fulfill / interpret this passage?

The Canonical Horizon

1. How does this passage relate to the promises / fulfillment (the type – antitype) for all of Scripture?
2. Where have the ideas in this passage been expressed in prospect & retrospect?
3. What does all of Scripture say about this individual, idea, event, and institution?
4. How has revelation concerning this individual, idea, event, and institution developed throughout all of Scripture?
5. What are the patterns latent from one covenant to the next? What are the nuances, differences?
6. In what way are the types repeated? What are the differences between the type and antitype?