Baker, 2008. (Available in Australia at Koorong Books)
This is certainly the newest and perhaps most comprehensive New Testament theology to come from the conservative/Evangelical camp. Other recent volumes include those by Achtemeier, Green and Thompson, (Introducing the New Testament, 2001); Marshall (New Testament Theology, 2004); and Thielman (Theology of the New Testament, 2005).
Older but still helpful volumes include those by Ladd (1974); Hasel (1978); Guthrie (1981); Morris (1986); and Caird and Hurst (1994). Of all these volumes, Schreiner’s is certainly the most extensive, reaching nearly 1,000 pages.
Most NT theologies approach the task in a book by book examination. Some take a more topical/thematic approach. Schreiner combines the best of both worlds. He looks at major NT themes, such as God, the Kingdom, Christology, sin, salvation, eschatology, and so on, but does so by focusing on main author clusters, such as the Synoptics, or Luke-Acts, or Paul, or John, etc.
New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christby Thomas R. Schreiner (Author)
Thus all the main themes of the NT are capably dealt with, but the canonical structure to the NT is not lost. As to the centre of NT theology, Schreiner states his view in the opening lines: “NT theology is God-focused, Christ-centered, and Spirit-saturated, but the work of the Father, Son, and Spirit must be understood along a salvation-historical timeline; that is, God’s promises are already fulfilled but not yet consummated in Christ Jesus.” Indeed, the subtitle of this book is Magnifying God in Christ.
Schreiner is of course a leading NT scholar, and relatively youngish (54). He lectures at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and has penned a number of helpful volumes in the past, including an important volume on Pauline theology (2001), a major commentary on Romans (BECNT, 1998), and various volumes on issues in Pauline thinking.
Indeed, like Frank Thielman, he has written much on the place of the law in Pauline thought. His The Law and its Fulfillment: A Pauline Theology of Law (1993) is an important contribution to this debate, as is Thielman’s 1994 volume, Paul and the Law.
Thus his understanding of the place of the law in the whole of the NT is quite helpful, and his discussion on this vital topic – like that of other topics in this volume – is informed both by the latest scholarship, as well as pastoral concerns. Indeed, his examination of NT ethics is also very useful, dealing with how the NT writers inform us of how God’s people are to live in God’s world.
Theologically, Schreiner is conservative and moderately Reformed. But he is judicious in handling varying points of view, and does a good job of allowing the NT writers themselves to determine the flow of theology in this volume.
That he is not a hard-core Calvinist is evident in various ways, including his treatment of the warning passages in Hebrews. For example, he takes it that those being warned about falling away are in fact actual believers, and that they can indeed turn away from their salvation.
His conservatism is seen in various places, for example, in his treatment of women in the church and in the home. He takes the complementarian (or traditional) position here, as opposed to the egalitarian (or liberationist) view. Of course such controversial issues will result in differing opinions, but as mentioned, Schreiner is fair to his debating partners in these various discussions.
Altogether, this is really an outstanding volume, covering all the bases, and providing both theological detail as well as the big-picture framework. It is a solid work by a solid NT scholar, and well worth a careful read. Pastors, students and scholars alike will benefit greatly from this tremendous work.
15 Replies to “A review of New Testament Theology. By Thomas Schreiner.”
This sounds a very worthwhile volume, and from your comments would appear to be very much in line with my thinking after 41 years of asking questions and seeking the truth.
Incidentally, a new rendering of the Gospels, by my late wife, is expected to be published before the end of the year. It is aimed at helping young people to get a good grip of the life of Christ and who He is. The title is “The Light of the World” It is a need we felt had never been addressed.
Tom Wise
We should all take great care in ever assuming that new is better in any way.
Bill, I am sure you don’t necessarily subscribe to this idea however when wording “Older but still helpful” while framing the “Latest scholarship” positively runs a danger of worldly ‘Newer is better’ ideas.
Carefully, I do not premise that everything new is bad either, however we must take great care in unconsciously slipping into pagan thought of evolutionary advancement. Scripture seems to clearly promote continued depravity in the thoughts of man and not an assent.
Bill your comment “turn away from their salvation” is not clear. Are you suggesting a born again Child of God, purged of all sin and bought with the blood of Christ and given the indwelling spirit of God can sin so badly he can loose that which he did nothing to attain?
You obviously know where I am headed here; does Schreiner believe such a person can “lose his salvation”? Does Schreiner believe a born again man, a man who has a new heart, a man with the very infinite God indwelling (note: scripture teaches of all three persons of the triune Godhead indwelling the born again man), can actually commit sin to such a degree that breeches the flesh nature/Spirit struggle of Romans 7?
Incredibly the very word “Salvation” speaks of the END of man’s earthly abode, how can one even make the statement to ‘lose your salvation’? Either a person is saved or he is not saved, he simply cannot BE saved if he is lost! Salvation is an end, not a journey, salvation is of hell, no man is in Hell (pratical) until his end, therefore he is either saved or he is not saved. When you think deeply of the wording that one can ‘lose their salvation’ you will find a tremendous contradiction, a category mistake in fact.
I am only making a logical query on a term, not a theological argument here, however, there are so many theological problems with the idea of temporal salvation. In fact, if Schriener believes that idea, I am not exactly sure how he can reconcile it theologically without having to abrogate or allegorize scripture!
I Have not read his NT Theology but, if he can’t reconcile this important issue, I can’t see how he could have a ‘Good’ theology if indeed your statement of ‘turning away’ means ‘Lose’.
PS thanks for providing such information, it’s a genuine blessing to have men bring issues, topics and writings such as these to the fore.
Edi Giudetti
Thanks Edi
Thanks for your thoughts. Yes, I am aware of the arguments and counterarguments for issues like the believer’s assurance, eternal security, perseverance of the saints, and so on. The various names to the idea of ‘once saved, always saved’ are backed up by dozens, if not hundreds, of scripture passages. But those on the other side of the debate can also muster dozens, if not hundreds, of passages in support of their position.
It is a long standing debate within the Christian community, going back at least to Calvin and Arminius, if not to Augustine and Pelagius. Where one stands on the theological spectrum will inform one as to the weight and selection of supporting passages.
All Schreiner is trying to do is take seriously the many warning passages in Scripture. The more Reformed one is theologically, the more those passages on assurance will be emphasised. The more Arminian one is theologically, the more those passages which seem to argue that believers can fall away will be emphasised.
Either theological system, if taken consistently and rigidly, may seem to rule out the other side. But many prefer instead to let both sets of passages speak in all their fullness, and allow for some sort of tension or compatibalism. That presumably is what Schreiner is simply seeking to do here, and that does not mean he is therefore to be dismissed as a heretic or a substandard theologian. It simply means those with a stronger Calvinist bent will disagree with him here. Which is fine. But on some of these issues there is room to move, depending on one’s theological preferences. Thanks again for sharing.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Thank you so much Bill
Every where I turn these days I hear of arguments for and against certain ideas. In this postmodern age it should perhaps be expected, but I guess what disturbs me most is when I hear theologians enter into the same spirit as that of the postmodern. The arrangement of the arguments are always the same and leads one to the idea that there is no way to settle a doctrine, a doctrine that I am sure God only has one perspective of. Sadly this leads the laity to abandon their study of scripture before they even begin, relying again on the scholar and personal preference as their final authority.
The argument for assurance of salvation does go back a long way, but that does not give us the right to leave it at that, surly they cannot both be correct, Theologians not willing to commit one way or the other are no better that PAN-millennialists (saying of Eschatology “it will PAN out”)!
Please don’t misunderstand, I am not suggesting that there are no paradoxes in scripture, one only has to consider the doctrine of Election/Accountability to see God does not intend to settle this issue this side of eternity, as both are clearly taught in scripture, unless one determines to allegorize the areas disagreed with, as you indicated.
But that does not give us permission for theological preferences on what the Bible teaches taken as a whole. The doctrine of assurance is not like Calvin/Arminian, Augustine/Pelagius, yes it is a part of it, but this sovereignty/accountability Paradox God CLEARLY INTENDS to keep obscure (see Romans 9), yet the doctrine of assurance Scripture clearly makes clear. But I hear the post modern preferentialist say, ‘clear to you but not to me’ Well scripture says it has the capacity to make wise the simple (Psalm 19:7) perhaps this is why a small child has better capacity to respond to Christ.
God teaches assurance clearly, we are elected clearly and we are accountable (the paradox) clearly. The Word of God wonderfully comes together teaching us both humility and joy in our salvation, it weaves its thread teaching Gods sovereignty as well as our personal accountability. But damnation to one bought by the blood of Christ, it does not teach.
I believe a Theologian who cannot provide one with an AWE of the perfect word of God does a disservice to the Body of Christ.
One potential answer may be that today we have a number of Catholic doctrines making their way into the Reformed/Baptist church, it does so via a modern scholarship which has rejected the traditional Greek text and exalted the Alexandrian as their final authority, hence the many verses today which give indication of ‘works salvation’. Notably, if saved by works then we will obviously be damned by the same.
Thereby the beautiful assurance we once had, is today a matter of “Theological preference”.
Sorry again for waffling, but my concern is so great for the modern church and the solid rock we once had.
Edi Giudetti
Hi Bill and Edi.
My previous entries prove that a theological expert I ain’t – just a guy doing his best and asking questions of everyone and everything, including myself.
But I personally take issue with the notion of “once saved, always saved”. It is closely related to the bumper sticker: “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven”.
My concern is that many Christians fail to realise their potential in Christian living because of this philosophy. It can be misinterpreted to mean: “I have received God, I am saved and going to Heaven – no matter what I do in the meantime.” Hence, in a moment of weakness and facing temptation, I might as well sin, because it is of no consequence in the end. It’s a ready-made excuse for habitual sin, and almost makes a mockery of Christianity.
I think it is better that we believe we can lose our salvation – it is a much stronger incentive to avoid sin and stay on track.
My father withdrew several promised rewards because I failed to uphold my part of the deal. I soon learned that receiving the gift or achieving the goal took commitment, dedication, sacrifice, self-control … And I realise now that made the journey more worthwhile and the reward far more meaningful – blessings for which I am grateful.
Cheers
Trevor Putland
Thanks Edi
As I say, there are differing theological positions one can take on this issue. For every biblical passage a Calvinist can cite on assurance, there is a passage of warning which an Arminian can cite. While they are certainly important issues, I believe we must be gracious enough here as believers to perhaps agree to disagree with others on this. Those who take a different view on some of these matters are not all of a sudden heretics needing to be rejected, but fellow Bible-believing Christians who love Jesus and who may take a different view on some of these matters.
Those who know me certainly are aware that I rate theology very highly indeed. But I have learned over the years to recognise that I may not have it all together theologically speaking, and I have adjusted my views over time on some issues. It is tricky to be both gracious and faithful to sound theology, but that is what we are called to do.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Thanks Trevor
We obey out of love for Christ, a recognition that our salvation is not of ourselves provides a humble joy in the Lord.
The born again man may fall into apostasy, hence fall away, loss of reward, but not loss of soul is declared. Speaking to believers Paul states;
(Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
1 Co 3:13).
A true soul born of God will never give himself excuse to sin and continue therein. Scripture rejects licentiousness.
(What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Romans 6:1,2)
Scripture reckons us dead to sin, we rejoice in newness of life
(Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Romans 6:3-7)
We don’t need the threat of disobeying the Law anymore, Acts 15 is all about that, think of what Peter meant when defended the Gentile freedom from the Law.
(Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ WE SHALL BE SAVED, EVEN AS THEY. Acts 15:7-11)
My brother, this is our blessed assurance, this is our hope and our joy. Romans 7 tells us that at times we will fall into sin, for we will not do that which we want, but that which we do not want, this tells us that in this current tabernacle we maintain a flesh nature yet indwelt by the Holy Spirit which gives us the guarantee of our inheritance.
You will sin (Adamic) from time to time, but it will not be as before, we can no longer enjoy the Adamic nature like a ‘pig in mud’, continuous sin for one indwelt by God leads him to misery, this is our cross and this is our burden till we are present with the Lord.
Thanks again Bill for your words, I agree that we all have different views but perhaps a recognition that scripture only has ONE view is what I wanted to emphasize, let us never dare to bestow a ‘relative’ nature on Gods word, either one can lose his salvation or he cannot (I pick this as the current topical doctrine we are discussing, aware there are a number of others we could choose).
Please do not transfer our confusion and wretchedness to God not making his word clear.
Edi Giudetti
Thanks Edi.
I must confess your knowledge of Scripture humbles me.
Perhaps the secret to all this lies in a couple of your statements:
1. “A true soul born of God will never give himself excuse to sin and continue therein.” A “true soul” – someone who is fully committed, totally devoted, completely immersed in the Truth – someone accepting of Universal Law – someone who is honest with him / herself and God, accepting of responsibility and blame in sin, and is truly repentant … This is the true Christian who learns from mistakes (and therefore is not condemned to relive them) and follows the path to Salvation. For this “true soul”, Salvation is guaranteed, for the 11 Commandments will be held dear.
2. “The born again man may fall into apostasy…” “Born again”? I admit to being unsure of the full definition and implications of this term (I was fortunate to be raised within a Christian family), but my experiences suggest it generally identifies people who, from despair, were “sold” Christianity by church salespeople, on the basis of some artificial promises of what they would receive beyond their Salvation in the Holy Spirit. These people seem more inclined to seek gifts rather than humbly serve the Lord, become disillusioned when the artificial promises fail, fall into patterns of repeated sin, and subsequently fuel atheist and agnostic arguments through perceived hypocrisy in the Christian Faith. They are , in effect, “Christians of Convenience”. For the “born again”, perhaps Salvation is not guaranteed, because they have never fully, consciously, and of their own free will, committed themselves to the Truth and all (and nothing more) it stands for – they have been deceived.
Edi, does this correlate with your concern for the modern church? I know the Bible warns us to be wary of the great deceiver – surely he has much to gain by dividing Christians, deceiving people into believing they are saved, and having the Church perceived as hypocritical?
As a teacher, I encourage my students to stay out of trouble by asking themselves a simple question before they do something questionable: “Is this the right thing to do?” I guess, as a Christian, the trick is to know what is questionable behaviour, and to know what the measure of right is. It should be a no-brainer! Salvation should never be in doubt.
Cheers
Trevor Putland
Thanks Trevor
your points:
1) The ’10’ commandments are held dear to a child of God, but we are never free from sin, you need to read Romans, better still Galatians is only about 25 minutes long, if your still convinced salvation is “earned” after reading these two books, then we have nowhere left to go.
2) Those born again can fall into apostasy as deception hinges on their knowledge and trust (or lack of) Scripture. But nowhere do i see clearly stated salvation is ‘lost’ but reward only. Keeping in mind there are multitudes of FALSE BRETHREN, some have thought they where Christians all their lives because they where bought up in “Christian” homes and where never evangelized themselves, just led to believe they are “Christians”.
Some say they are Christian because they are Italian (Roman Catholics) some are English (Church or England) etc, this is NOT a Christian by Biblical definition.
Read John 3. If your still determined to believe you can be good enough, I’m not sure if you’ve tried hard enough. But it is then we come to realize that Scripture is true when it states;
“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Ro 3:20).
and
“If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?” (Heb 7:11).
Good question I think, if the Law makes us perfect why bother with Christ? and then this;
“For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God” (Heb 7:19).
Why is that true? We will need SCRIPTURE to shed the Light rather than our own;
“Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 5:20-21)
“Christianity IS what the Bible teaches, Christianity is NOT determined from the beliefs held by those who say they are Christians” John Robbins.
Edi Giudetti
Sorry Trevor; in re reading your text i note your concern, i read your first few statements as sarcastic and may have been a little harsh on my reply, my apologies.
Your points of “seaking gifts” and “Christians of convenience” are very true of today apostate superficial Christians that are never given “the Gospel proper” and understood their sin nature, not told clearly of the doctrine of Hell spoken of by Bill in another section.
Indeed we have a popular church is a sick state, but the truth on Salvation should be made clear from any who profess to be Theologians.
My sincere question was how can one profess a knowledge of scripture enough to write a book on it, yet not know where to stand on matters the Bible itself was given for? Soteriology is fundamental to our faith not some side issue we can accept all sides of.
Edi Giudetti
Thanks again Edi – more so for you second post than the first!
I suspect we actually agree on the issue of salvation – ie. True Christians are saved – period. Pretend Christians are not saved, because they were never truly Christians from the beginning – no matter what they call themselves. Your John Robbins quote is the crux of the matter.
I refer to 11 Commandments – the original 10 plus the one Christ gave us: “Love one another as I have loved you.”
I am also aware that while there was once perfection on earth, it no longer exists – in anyone. But for those who have accepted “the Gospel proper” and welcomed the Holy Spirit into their lives, there is a renewed hope and a reinforced God-inspired conscience that acts as a powerful thought and action checker. And when we slip up, and say “sorry”, we really mean it.
I guess, my question is: Is much of the modern “Christian” Church actually based on humanistic principles?
I have recently had reason to research the history and philosophy of a particular modern church through seeing its influence on people dear to me. It is startling to read that a declared primary incentive for the formation of that church movement was to give the people what they wanted – which can only occur by neglecting many of God’s intentions for His followers. The people wanted gifts, promises and signs, so the church leaders incorporated these into their doctrine. The people wanted to bring with them their familiar habits and beliefs, so the church welcomed (but cleverly disguised) traditions and practices founded in paganism, occult and voodoo. The people wanted the freedom to sin without regret, so the “Once saved – Always saved” mentality along with a narcissistic “blame and forget” escape clause were introduced. (Sadly, it was the church which offered the original salvation, not God.)
Humanistic Christians?!? Now there’s an oxymoron! Is it any wonder these deceived individuals struggle with their faith, seek self-edification, frequently fall off the wagon, and reek of hypocrisy?
This is an enormous world-wide movement which has misled well-intentioned people through the manipulation of the Word and the misrepresentation of Christianity. I fear that these people fervently believe they are soldiers of the Lord, but in reality they are conscripts for Satan.
The Bible provides many warnings for Christians to beware the great deceiver:
2 Thessalonians 2:9 “The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders,”
2 Timothy 4:3-4 “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth, and turn aside to myths.”
Matthew 24:24 “For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect …”
The message is clear. We have been warned. But fear not if you follow the Truth as described in sound doctrine.
Trevor Putland
Trevor reading your last post almost made me weep, i too have dear friends that are trapped in a “church” which is becoming cult like, a place where the ‘faithful’ do not walk by faith but by sight, they chase signs and wonders, miracles and healings to determine if God is in a thing, ignoring the passages of scripture that warn of lying signs and wonders, and the comments of Christ stating that it is “a wicked and evil generation that seeks after a sign”.
The answer to your question is yes, according to scripture, the Church will eventually become like the world, the warnings of 2 Timothy are warnings of that which will prevail in the Church in the last days, the WORLD always had men that were
“…lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof:…” (2 Timothy 3:2-5)
But this passage speaks of the state of the CHURCH in the “last days”. Schaeffer stated a few decades ago that the Church is about seven years behind the world, i think today its almost running neck and neck.
Trevor, I was a part of this type of Church for eleven years, blinded by iniquity and perverse doctrines, until I began to study the scriptures for myself and allow them only to speak truth, I began to only listen to the teachings of men after comparing what they said to the scriptures. (Acts 17:11 is the wise verse for this matter). It was then my eyes where opened to the extremity of the perversion of the Charismatic/Pentacostal movements that where beginning to also mix with the emergent teachings of Rick Warren, Brian McLaren et al.
I did all I could to warn the congregation where this was headed, I came up against the entire church (bar a handful), I called on the blinded elders and pastor to stand down, I then washed my hands of it and removed my family from the midst and came out. Today i am in a faithful Biblical independent Baptist Church that actually believes the Bible means what it says and says what it means.
But that time was the most difficult time of my life, yet one of the greatest decisions I have ever made. It took six months and countless time in the word and on my knees before determining I had little choice but to warn those I thought were my friends.
Today a few more have left this church’s influence meanwhile this place of worship has drifted further and further from biblical truth to the point where the Pastor is considering going to the US to be anointed by Todd Benley and his demonic church.
Sadly when most of today’s theological institutions reject the very Bible they are called to hold dear (they don’t say that publicly but you know it is true after a couple of lectures) eventually the pastors are corrupted, the word has no effect and motivational sermonettes for christianettes are all the go.
Man soon begins to look into himself again for spiritual fulfillment, this is recieved through the same pagan ways you mentioned in your post, the occult, voodoo etc.
John Bunyan said “The egg’s no chick by falling from the hen; Nor man a Christian, till he’s born again.” I am afraid many, many who profess Christ are not born again, these will be the subjects of Mathew 7:21-23 to which Christ clearly states “I NEVER knew you”
The scriptures are our only source of truth, the spirit of God can only work in the heart of one born of God…. on bended knee.
The philosophies of man, through much writing, are often I’ll at ease with Truth, so narrow, so dogmatic is Truth, so stubborn so solid is Truth, so obscene and so intolerant is Truth……so unpopular!
God Bless you
Edi Giudetti
Thank you for your excellent review Bill. It was very helpful.
I am planning on doing some pre seminary reading and wanted one go to new testament theology book. It’s in between this and GK Beale. Which one of the two do you recommend more?
Thank you for your gracious attitude. Some people major on minors. I appreciate Shreiner’s approach of showing other views but then clarifying his own.
Thanks
Steven
Thanks Steven. I assume you are referring to Beale’s 2011 volume, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. As his title indicates, his is more of a volume on biblical theology, as opposed to a NT theology. The two are a bit different. Beale, as with other writers on biblical theology (eg, Vos, Goldsworthy or Dumbrell), is looking at the entire biblical storyline and its theological dimension, and in this case he examines how the OT storyline is featured in and develops in the NT. That is a bit different from your standard NT theology (as by Ladd, or Guthrie, or Marshall, etc). And a bit different again are NT surveys, and NT introductions.
So they are sort of two different types of books. Having said that, I of course greatly appreciate Beale’s volume (and his other works as well), and it is certainly worth getting. But if you will be taking a NT theology course at seminary, they may well be more inclined to run with a volume such as Schreiner’s.
But for your own personal edification, I would get both! And Beale will always be useful for any seminary education.
Than you for your quick response. This clears up a lot for me. Getting both seems like a good idea. I’ll start with Shreiner.
This sounds a very worthwhile volume, and from your comments would appear to be very much in line with my thinking after 41 years of asking questions and seeking the truth.
Incidentally, a new rendering of the Gospels, by my late wife, is expected to be published before the end of the year. It is aimed at helping young people to get a good grip of the life of Christ and who He is. The title is “The Light of the World” It is a need we felt had never been addressed.
Tom Wise
We should all take great care in ever assuming that new is better in any way.
Bill, I am sure you don’t necessarily subscribe to this idea however when wording “Older but still helpful” while framing the “Latest scholarship” positively runs a danger of worldly ‘Newer is better’ ideas.
Carefully, I do not premise that everything new is bad either, however we must take great care in unconsciously slipping into pagan thought of evolutionary advancement. Scripture seems to clearly promote continued depravity in the thoughts of man and not an assent.
Bill your comment “turn away from their salvation” is not clear. Are you suggesting a born again Child of God, purged of all sin and bought with the blood of Christ and given the indwelling spirit of God can sin so badly he can loose that which he did nothing to attain?
You obviously know where I am headed here; does Schreiner believe such a person can “lose his salvation”? Does Schreiner believe a born again man, a man who has a new heart, a man with the very infinite God indwelling (note: scripture teaches of all three persons of the triune Godhead indwelling the born again man), can actually commit sin to such a degree that breeches the flesh nature/Spirit struggle of Romans 7?
Incredibly the very word “Salvation” speaks of the END of man’s earthly abode, how can one even make the statement to ‘lose your salvation’? Either a person is saved or he is not saved, he simply cannot BE saved if he is lost! Salvation is an end, not a journey, salvation is of hell, no man is in Hell (pratical) until his end, therefore he is either saved or he is not saved. When you think deeply of the wording that one can ‘lose their salvation’ you will find a tremendous contradiction, a category mistake in fact.
I am only making a logical query on a term, not a theological argument here, however, there are so many theological problems with the idea of temporal salvation. In fact, if Schriener believes that idea, I am not exactly sure how he can reconcile it theologically without having to abrogate or allegorize scripture!
I Have not read his NT Theology but, if he can’t reconcile this important issue, I can’t see how he could have a ‘Good’ theology if indeed your statement of ‘turning away’ means ‘Lose’.
PS thanks for providing such information, it’s a genuine blessing to have men bring issues, topics and writings such as these to the fore.
Edi Giudetti
Thanks Edi
Thanks for your thoughts. Yes, I am aware of the arguments and counterarguments for issues like the believer’s assurance, eternal security, perseverance of the saints, and so on. The various names to the idea of ‘once saved, always saved’ are backed up by dozens, if not hundreds, of scripture passages. But those on the other side of the debate can also muster dozens, if not hundreds, of passages in support of their position.
It is a long standing debate within the Christian community, going back at least to Calvin and Arminius, if not to Augustine and Pelagius. Where one stands on the theological spectrum will inform one as to the weight and selection of supporting passages.
All Schreiner is trying to do is take seriously the many warning passages in Scripture. The more Reformed one is theologically, the more those passages on assurance will be emphasised. The more Arminian one is theologically, the more those passages which seem to argue that believers can fall away will be emphasised.
Either theological system, if taken consistently and rigidly, may seem to rule out the other side. But many prefer instead to let both sets of passages speak in all their fullness, and allow for some sort of tension or compatibalism. That presumably is what Schreiner is simply seeking to do here, and that does not mean he is therefore to be dismissed as a heretic or a substandard theologian. It simply means those with a stronger Calvinist bent will disagree with him here. Which is fine. But on some of these issues there is room to move, depending on one’s theological preferences. Thanks again for sharing.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Thank you so much Bill
Every where I turn these days I hear of arguments for and against certain ideas. In this postmodern age it should perhaps be expected, but I guess what disturbs me most is when I hear theologians enter into the same spirit as that of the postmodern. The arrangement of the arguments are always the same and leads one to the idea that there is no way to settle a doctrine, a doctrine that I am sure God only has one perspective of. Sadly this leads the laity to abandon their study of scripture before they even begin, relying again on the scholar and personal preference as their final authority.
The argument for assurance of salvation does go back a long way, but that does not give us the right to leave it at that, surly they cannot both be correct, Theologians not willing to commit one way or the other are no better that PAN-millennialists (saying of Eschatology “it will PAN out”)!
Please don’t misunderstand, I am not suggesting that there are no paradoxes in scripture, one only has to consider the doctrine of Election/Accountability to see God does not intend to settle this issue this side of eternity, as both are clearly taught in scripture, unless one determines to allegorize the areas disagreed with, as you indicated.
But that does not give us permission for theological preferences on what the Bible teaches taken as a whole. The doctrine of assurance is not like Calvin/Arminian, Augustine/Pelagius, yes it is a part of it, but this sovereignty/accountability Paradox God CLEARLY INTENDS to keep obscure (see Romans 9), yet the doctrine of assurance Scripture clearly makes clear. But I hear the post modern preferentialist say, ‘clear to you but not to me’ Well scripture says it has the capacity to make wise the simple (Psalm 19:7) perhaps this is why a small child has better capacity to respond to Christ.
God teaches assurance clearly, we are elected clearly and we are accountable (the paradox) clearly. The Word of God wonderfully comes together teaching us both humility and joy in our salvation, it weaves its thread teaching Gods sovereignty as well as our personal accountability. But damnation to one bought by the blood of Christ, it does not teach.
I believe a Theologian who cannot provide one with an AWE of the perfect word of God does a disservice to the Body of Christ.
One potential answer may be that today we have a number of Catholic doctrines making their way into the Reformed/Baptist church, it does so via a modern scholarship which has rejected the traditional Greek text and exalted the Alexandrian as their final authority, hence the many verses today which give indication of ‘works salvation’. Notably, if saved by works then we will obviously be damned by the same.
Thereby the beautiful assurance we once had, is today a matter of “Theological preference”.
Sorry again for waffling, but my concern is so great for the modern church and the solid rock we once had.
Edi Giudetti
Hi Bill and Edi.
My previous entries prove that a theological expert I ain’t – just a guy doing his best and asking questions of everyone and everything, including myself.
But I personally take issue with the notion of “once saved, always saved”. It is closely related to the bumper sticker: “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven”.
My concern is that many Christians fail to realise their potential in Christian living because of this philosophy. It can be misinterpreted to mean: “I have received God, I am saved and going to Heaven – no matter what I do in the meantime.” Hence, in a moment of weakness and facing temptation, I might as well sin, because it is of no consequence in the end. It’s a ready-made excuse for habitual sin, and almost makes a mockery of Christianity.
I think it is better that we believe we can lose our salvation – it is a much stronger incentive to avoid sin and stay on track.
My father withdrew several promised rewards because I failed to uphold my part of the deal. I soon learned that receiving the gift or achieving the goal took commitment, dedication, sacrifice, self-control … And I realise now that made the journey more worthwhile and the reward far more meaningful – blessings for which I am grateful.
Cheers
Trevor Putland
Thanks Edi
As I say, there are differing theological positions one can take on this issue. For every biblical passage a Calvinist can cite on assurance, there is a passage of warning which an Arminian can cite. While they are certainly important issues, I believe we must be gracious enough here as believers to perhaps agree to disagree with others on this. Those who take a different view on some of these matters are not all of a sudden heretics needing to be rejected, but fellow Bible-believing Christians who love Jesus and who may take a different view on some of these matters.
Those who know me certainly are aware that I rate theology very highly indeed. But I have learned over the years to recognise that I may not have it all together theologically speaking, and I have adjusted my views over time on some issues. It is tricky to be both gracious and faithful to sound theology, but that is what we are called to do.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Thanks Trevor
We obey out of love for Christ, a recognition that our salvation is not of ourselves provides a humble joy in the Lord.
The born again man may fall into apostasy, hence fall away, loss of reward, but not loss of soul is declared. Speaking to believers Paul states;
(Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
1 Co 3:13).
A true soul born of God will never give himself excuse to sin and continue therein. Scripture rejects licentiousness.
(What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Romans 6:1,2)
Scripture reckons us dead to sin, we rejoice in newness of life
(Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Romans 6:3-7)
We don’t need the threat of disobeying the Law anymore, Acts 15 is all about that, think of what Peter meant when defended the Gentile freedom from the Law.
(Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ WE SHALL BE SAVED, EVEN AS THEY. Acts 15:7-11)
My brother, this is our blessed assurance, this is our hope and our joy. Romans 7 tells us that at times we will fall into sin, for we will not do that which we want, but that which we do not want, this tells us that in this current tabernacle we maintain a flesh nature yet indwelt by the Holy Spirit which gives us the guarantee of our inheritance.
You will sin (Adamic) from time to time, but it will not be as before, we can no longer enjoy the Adamic nature like a ‘pig in mud’, continuous sin for one indwelt by God leads him to misery, this is our cross and this is our burden till we are present with the Lord.
Thanks again Bill for your words, I agree that we all have different views but perhaps a recognition that scripture only has ONE view is what I wanted to emphasize, let us never dare to bestow a ‘relative’ nature on Gods word, either one can lose his salvation or he cannot (I pick this as the current topical doctrine we are discussing, aware there are a number of others we could choose).
Please do not transfer our confusion and wretchedness to God not making his word clear.
Edi Giudetti
Thanks Edi.
I must confess your knowledge of Scripture humbles me.
Perhaps the secret to all this lies in a couple of your statements:
1. “A true soul born of God will never give himself excuse to sin and continue therein.” A “true soul” – someone who is fully committed, totally devoted, completely immersed in the Truth – someone accepting of Universal Law – someone who is honest with him / herself and God, accepting of responsibility and blame in sin, and is truly repentant … This is the true Christian who learns from mistakes (and therefore is not condemned to relive them) and follows the path to Salvation. For this “true soul”, Salvation is guaranteed, for the 11 Commandments will be held dear.
2. “The born again man may fall into apostasy…” “Born again”? I admit to being unsure of the full definition and implications of this term (I was fortunate to be raised within a Christian family), but my experiences suggest it generally identifies people who, from despair, were “sold” Christianity by church salespeople, on the basis of some artificial promises of what they would receive beyond their Salvation in the Holy Spirit. These people seem more inclined to seek gifts rather than humbly serve the Lord, become disillusioned when the artificial promises fail, fall into patterns of repeated sin, and subsequently fuel atheist and agnostic arguments through perceived hypocrisy in the Christian Faith. They are , in effect, “Christians of Convenience”. For the “born again”, perhaps Salvation is not guaranteed, because they have never fully, consciously, and of their own free will, committed themselves to the Truth and all (and nothing more) it stands for – they have been deceived.
Edi, does this correlate with your concern for the modern church? I know the Bible warns us to be wary of the great deceiver – surely he has much to gain by dividing Christians, deceiving people into believing they are saved, and having the Church perceived as hypocritical?
As a teacher, I encourage my students to stay out of trouble by asking themselves a simple question before they do something questionable: “Is this the right thing to do?” I guess, as a Christian, the trick is to know what is questionable behaviour, and to know what the measure of right is. It should be a no-brainer! Salvation should never be in doubt.
Cheers
Trevor Putland
Thanks Trevor
your points:
1) The ’10’ commandments are held dear to a child of God, but we are never free from sin, you need to read Romans, better still Galatians is only about 25 minutes long, if your still convinced salvation is “earned” after reading these two books, then we have nowhere left to go.
2) Those born again can fall into apostasy as deception hinges on their knowledge and trust (or lack of) Scripture. But nowhere do i see clearly stated salvation is ‘lost’ but reward only. Keeping in mind there are multitudes of FALSE BRETHREN, some have thought they where Christians all their lives because they where bought up in “Christian” homes and where never evangelized themselves, just led to believe they are “Christians”.
Some say they are Christian because they are Italian (Roman Catholics) some are English (Church or England) etc, this is NOT a Christian by Biblical definition.
Read John 3. If your still determined to believe you can be good enough, I’m not sure if you’ve tried hard enough. But it is then we come to realize that Scripture is true when it states;
“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Ro 3:20).
and
“If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?” (Heb 7:11).
Good question I think, if the Law makes us perfect why bother with Christ? and then this;
“For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God” (Heb 7:19).
Why is that true? We will need SCRIPTURE to shed the Light rather than our own;
“Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 5:20-21)
“Christianity IS what the Bible teaches, Christianity is NOT determined from the beliefs held by those who say they are Christians” John Robbins.
Edi Giudetti
Sorry Trevor; in re reading your text i note your concern, i read your first few statements as sarcastic and may have been a little harsh on my reply, my apologies.
Your points of “seaking gifts” and “Christians of convenience” are very true of today apostate superficial Christians that are never given “the Gospel proper” and understood their sin nature, not told clearly of the doctrine of Hell spoken of by Bill in another section.
Indeed we have a popular church is a sick state, but the truth on Salvation should be made clear from any who profess to be Theologians.
My sincere question was how can one profess a knowledge of scripture enough to write a book on it, yet not know where to stand on matters the Bible itself was given for? Soteriology is fundamental to our faith not some side issue we can accept all sides of.
Edi Giudetti
Thanks again Edi – more so for you second post than the first!
I suspect we actually agree on the issue of salvation – ie. True Christians are saved – period. Pretend Christians are not saved, because they were never truly Christians from the beginning – no matter what they call themselves. Your John Robbins quote is the crux of the matter.
I refer to 11 Commandments – the original 10 plus the one Christ gave us: “Love one another as I have loved you.”
I am also aware that while there was once perfection on earth, it no longer exists – in anyone. But for those who have accepted “the Gospel proper” and welcomed the Holy Spirit into their lives, there is a renewed hope and a reinforced God-inspired conscience that acts as a powerful thought and action checker. And when we slip up, and say “sorry”, we really mean it.
I guess, my question is: Is much of the modern “Christian” Church actually based on humanistic principles?
I have recently had reason to research the history and philosophy of a particular modern church through seeing its influence on people dear to me. It is startling to read that a declared primary incentive for the formation of that church movement was to give the people what they wanted – which can only occur by neglecting many of God’s intentions for His followers. The people wanted gifts, promises and signs, so the church leaders incorporated these into their doctrine. The people wanted to bring with them their familiar habits and beliefs, so the church welcomed (but cleverly disguised) traditions and practices founded in paganism, occult and voodoo. The people wanted the freedom to sin without regret, so the “Once saved – Always saved” mentality along with a narcissistic “blame and forget” escape clause were introduced. (Sadly, it was the church which offered the original salvation, not God.)
Humanistic Christians?!? Now there’s an oxymoron! Is it any wonder these deceived individuals struggle with their faith, seek self-edification, frequently fall off the wagon, and reek of hypocrisy?
This is an enormous world-wide movement which has misled well-intentioned people through the manipulation of the Word and the misrepresentation of Christianity. I fear that these people fervently believe they are soldiers of the Lord, but in reality they are conscripts for Satan.
The Bible provides many warnings for Christians to beware the great deceiver:
2 Thessalonians 2:9 “The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders,”
2 Timothy 4:3-4 “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth, and turn aside to myths.”
Matthew 24:24 “For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect …”
The message is clear. We have been warned. But fear not if you follow the Truth as described in sound doctrine.
Trevor Putland
Trevor reading your last post almost made me weep, i too have dear friends that are trapped in a “church” which is becoming cult like, a place where the ‘faithful’ do not walk by faith but by sight, they chase signs and wonders, miracles and healings to determine if God is in a thing, ignoring the passages of scripture that warn of lying signs and wonders, and the comments of Christ stating that it is “a wicked and evil generation that seeks after a sign”.
The answer to your question is yes, according to scripture, the Church will eventually become like the world, the warnings of 2 Timothy are warnings of that which will prevail in the Church in the last days, the WORLD always had men that were
“…lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof:…” (2 Timothy 3:2-5)
But this passage speaks of the state of the CHURCH in the “last days”. Schaeffer stated a few decades ago that the Church is about seven years behind the world, i think today its almost running neck and neck.
Trevor, I was a part of this type of Church for eleven years, blinded by iniquity and perverse doctrines, until I began to study the scriptures for myself and allow them only to speak truth, I began to only listen to the teachings of men after comparing what they said to the scriptures. (Acts 17:11 is the wise verse for this matter). It was then my eyes where opened to the extremity of the perversion of the Charismatic/Pentacostal movements that where beginning to also mix with the emergent teachings of Rick Warren, Brian McLaren et al.
I did all I could to warn the congregation where this was headed, I came up against the entire church (bar a handful), I called on the blinded elders and pastor to stand down, I then washed my hands of it and removed my family from the midst and came out. Today i am in a faithful Biblical independent Baptist Church that actually believes the Bible means what it says and says what it means.
But that time was the most difficult time of my life, yet one of the greatest decisions I have ever made. It took six months and countless time in the word and on my knees before determining I had little choice but to warn those I thought were my friends.
Today a few more have left this church’s influence meanwhile this place of worship has drifted further and further from biblical truth to the point where the Pastor is considering going to the US to be anointed by Todd Benley and his demonic church.
Sadly when most of today’s theological institutions reject the very Bible they are called to hold dear (they don’t say that publicly but you know it is true after a couple of lectures) eventually the pastors are corrupted, the word has no effect and motivational sermonettes for christianettes are all the go.
Man soon begins to look into himself again for spiritual fulfillment, this is recieved through the same pagan ways you mentioned in your post, the occult, voodoo etc.
John Bunyan said “The egg’s no chick by falling from the hen; Nor man a Christian, till he’s born again.” I am afraid many, many who profess Christ are not born again, these will be the subjects of Mathew 7:21-23 to which Christ clearly states “I NEVER knew you”
The scriptures are our only source of truth, the spirit of God can only work in the heart of one born of God…. on bended knee.
The philosophies of man, through much writing, are often I’ll at ease with Truth, so narrow, so dogmatic is Truth, so stubborn so solid is Truth, so obscene and so intolerant is Truth……so unpopular!
God Bless you
Edi Giudetti
Thank you for your excellent review Bill. It was very helpful.
I am planning on doing some pre seminary reading and wanted one go to new testament theology book. It’s in between this and GK Beale. Which one of the two do you recommend more?
Thank you for your gracious attitude. Some people major on minors. I appreciate Shreiner’s approach of showing other views but then clarifying his own.
Thanks
Steven
Thanks Steven. I assume you are referring to Beale’s 2011 volume, A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. As his title indicates, his is more of a volume on biblical theology, as opposed to a NT theology. The two are a bit different. Beale, as with other writers on biblical theology (eg, Vos, Goldsworthy or Dumbrell), is looking at the entire biblical storyline and its theological dimension, and in this case he examines how the OT storyline is featured in and develops in the NT. That is a bit different from your standard NT theology (as by Ladd, or Guthrie, or Marshall, etc). And a bit different again are NT surveys, and NT introductions.
So they are sort of two different types of books. Having said that, I of course greatly appreciate Beale’s volume (and his other works as well), and it is certainly worth getting. But if you will be taking a NT theology course at seminary, they may well be more inclined to run with a volume such as Schreiner’s.
But for your own personal edification, I would get both! And Beale will always be useful for any seminary education.
Than you for your quick response. This clears up a lot for me. Getting both seems like a good idea. I’ll start with Shreiner.
Thank you
Steven