This is just a quick list of some of the best Biblical-Theology and related books that I've actually read. I tried to limit this only to ones that I've actually read a good deal of and not just ones that I know about and want but don't actually have yet. It was these books that sparked my recent deep interest in Biblical Theology, trying to understand how the Bible puts itself together, as well as trying to understand the hermeneutics of the biblical authors and instilled in me an even stronger desire to be able to exegete every text of the Bible properly (which was already like the main goal of my life anyway, so I hope that puts into perspective how strong the desire is now). I'm actually currently working on a post on the Song of Songs that combines insights from the last two books on this list (I actually didn't even know Rydelnik cites Hamilton's book until I decided to create this new post that I'm currently working on because I had read Rydelnik's book before I knew who Hamilton was, but once I decided to write something on the Song using what I remembered from Rydelnik, I saw he was actually citing Hamilton's book, which I bought because I had a good idea of what Hamilton was going to do and thought it would match up with what I had read from Rydelnik; but come to find out, Rydelnik was just working off Hamilton in the first place).
At the end, I'll also include some articles that helped me and led me to where I'm at today.
https://www.amazon.com/Temple-Churchs-Mission-Biblical-Theology/dp/0830826181 (I'm not exaggerating when I say that this is one of the greatest books I've read in my life).
https://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Prologue-Foundations-Covenantal-Worldview/dp/1597525642/ref=asc_df_1597525642/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312674999652&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=17732806379775178206&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9030097&hvtargid=pla-571241626941&psc=1 (I've recently looked into Kline and I've found him to be an absolute genius. Reading this book was almost surreal how close his thought on multiple biblical-theological issues is to mine. There is a chapter in "Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ" that critiques some of what Kline says in here that I believe is largely misguided. Kline is correct to link circumcision "cutting off" with the covenantal curses (thus the Isaianic Servant in Is. 53:8 suffers the covenantal curse by being "cut-off"; Abner Chou has mentioned this before. He is correct in linking this to baptism (identification with Christ, who was "cut off" for us, Colossians 2:11 (though I am less confident about this specific verse), when we died with Him through the destruction of His body), so the criticism in that book is misguided on this point. Kline gets the connection correct but fails to see the difference between circumcision being a works principle where a curse is called down on you and the covenant community you represent in taking it so that those who transgress the covenant receive the curses, and baptism, where the curse was already taken for you, meaning the nature of the covenant can only be one of grace. This is where Kline should have gone with this. The criticism of Kline's interpretation of baptism as a "water ordeal", while perhaps slightly valid, still fails to see the basic truth in baptism often symbolizing judgment; thus, Noah's flood, and even the Red Sea, while being a salvation of the Israelites, is still a "salvation through judgement" (Jim Hamilton's book), in fact, I don't think the idea of "God's glory in salvation through judgement" is any clearer than in the Red Sea account (thus, Paul speaks of Pharaoh in Romans 9 when he also gives that account of Romans 9:22-23, which is the heart of the idea). Christian baptism obviously holds the same symbolism of judgment (identification in God's judgment upon Christ, by which we rise, saved), and plenty of commentaries on 1 Peter 3:21 see this (Tom Schreiner's for example). So the basic idea of what Kline was saying is still there. So, I thought that chapter on Kline in "Believer's Baptism" was horrible and really weakly argued, but it doesn't mean Kline was correct on baptism; as that chapter pointed out near the end, Hebrews 8 is sufficient enough to prove Kline was wrong, but the best criticisms of infant baptism are still found elsewhere such as in "Kingdom Through Covenant", "The Distinctiveness of Baptist Covenant Theology", and the chapter by Stephen Wellum in the same book). See too "Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?" pg. 51 for the Red Sea as picturing death. In fact, that entire opening of the book explains where Peter is getting his reasoning from, see for example pg. 66-67.
Articles that helped me:
https://d3h3guilcrzx4v.cloudfront.net/uploads/images/files/WTJ/Beale%20Inaugural%20Lecture-2014.pdf (see also the video here: https://vimeo.com/75801356)
Along with the above link, this: https://covenantconfessions.com/dismantling-dispensationalism-it-is-inconsistent-on-sensus-plenior-and-new-testament-interpretave-priority/ and this https://founders.org/2016/05/26/hermeneutics-new-testament-priority/ helped lead me away from Abner Chou's approach and toward Beale's (especially after reading Beale's "Handbook"). I love Dr. Chou, but a lot of his arguments for confluence didn't even make sense to me back when I agreed with him and I thought his total confluence view seemed really problematic and led to weird interpretations I often saw with Walter Kaiser who Chou agrees with. I found later that Beale even mentions the same exact strangeness of Kaiser's approach in his "Handbook" (pg. 24). For Chou, I think this can be seen in his interpretation Amos 9:11-12 in Acts 15:15-17 on page 148 of "Hermeneutics", where he interprets "when I return" as referring to Christ's second coming; another example would be his thesis that he did on Joel where he follows a similar approach as Kaiser's . Compare Dr. Chou's interpretation with Beale's (also found in his "New Testament Biblical Theology", but I wanted to link his video lectures which were also a massive help for me) and see which one seems more likely. Poythress also has a good article on this, and here's the article Beale mentions on pg. 24 of his Handbook. Matthew Barrett's book on Covenant & Christology, which I want but haven't got yet also discusses this.
Kommentare