Recently I had another opportunity to preach on a Sunday morning. I took the opportunity to preach again on the Temple theme in Scripture, using 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1 as my text. I had preached on the Temple before, but this time I wanted to flesh out what it means that the church is the Temple today.
If you don’t have time to listen to the entire sermon (37 minutes), please do look over my notes. May God bless this sermon to all who hear it, for His glory and by His grace.
Book Details:
• Author: John D. Harvey
• Category: Biblical Studies
• Book Publisher: Kregel (2012)
• Format: softcover
• Page Count: 211
• ISBN#: 9780825427671
• List Price: $22.99
• Rating: Recommended
Review:
The life of a pastor is busy. Hectic may be a better word. And in the 21st Century, the pace of life has quickened for everyone, while the expectations for what a pastor must do have only increased. Fortunately, there are an abundance of books and resources designed to give the pastor or teacher a helping hand. Interpreting the Pauline Letters by John D. Harvey, will prove not only helpful but indispensable in the study of the Pauline Epistles.
The book is an exegetical handbook designed to prepare the pastor, teacher or student for an intensive study through Paul’s letters. But it doesn’t stop there. Harvey’s intent is not merely to educate about the historical background of these treasured NT epistles. He aims to facilitate a pastoral application of the Word for today’s hearers. To that end, the book includes a section on how to craft an expositional sermon as well as two examples where Harvey walks through all the steps in preparing a sermon on a text from one of Paul’s letters.
The book begins with a study of the genre of Paul’s letters, comparing Paul’s writing with formal and informal letter styles from the ancient world. Harvey draws careful, balanced conclusions from a comparison of the structure of all of Paul’s letters and explains the function of various sub-units of Paul’s letters. In this chapter, I was introduced to the terms “apostolic parousia” and “apostolic apologia” which play an important role in Paul’s letters and have commonalities with other ancient letters. He also looks at the role rhetoric plays in Paul’s letters. I found his thoughts on the genre to be instructive and not overblown: a helpful survey to keep in mind as one approaches Paul’s letters.
Next Harvey surveys the historical background of Paul’s writings. This section was perhaps the most fascinating. The conservative pastor will be appreciative that the arguments for and against Paul’s authorship of all the traditional Pauline epistles are briefly surveyed and a defense of Pauline authorship – even of the pastoral epistles, is presented. He defends Pauline authorship well but in a cursory manner. He then argues for the integrity of the epistles as we find them in Scripture – 2 Corinthians and Philippians in particular are discussed. He then attempts to build a chronology of the historical background for Paul’s letters from a study of just the letters themselves. He compares this with what we find in Acts and finds complementarity not disharmony. He presents an interesting argument for Philippians being the last of Paul’s letters, but presents the traditional view as well. He is careful not to base too much on historical reconstructions where the evidence is slim. Harvey shines in this section as he navigates the reader through the ins and outs of Pauline scholarship.
The handbook continues with a section on Paul’s theology, which emphasizes “the great transfer” from darkness to light, from being in the world to being in Christ, from Satan’s dominion to the power of God. He traces a theology of each of the letters as well. He only briefly discusses “covenantal nomism” and the New Pauline Perspective, arguing for a traditional view. This in my view is the book’s biggest weakness. By only briefly surveying that issue, and by brief I mean about a half page, the handbook is perhaps more acceptable by a wider audience, but it is less helpful for the busy pastor who wants to know more about this important Pauline question.
The book then moves away from a laser focus on Paul’s epistles to a more generic approach to studying Scripture. Textual criticism and translation are discussed, with several approaches for busy teachers – from comparing translations to doing you own translation from the Greek text (advocated as the best approach). In this section I was pleased to see the Majority Text view of Byzantine priority given equal treatment with the prevailing preference for Alexandrian manuscripts. Most works of this scholarly nature hardly give the Byzantine perspective any mention at all. It is almost a certainty that for conservative pastors, the question of Byzantine priority will come up. Harvey attempts to be even-handed even while ultimately siding with the majority scholarly opinion. After focusing on translation and defining the text to be studied, he gives a general study of how to interpret passages synthetically. He focuses on historical, lexical/linguistic, and theological analyses in a brief but helpful way. The historical analyses were redundant for this book and a bit distracting in my perspective, but everything else was quite useful.
In the next section, Harvey focused on homiletics and how to build a sermon using deductive or inductive patterns. Like the previous sections on translation and interpretation, the examples were from Paul’s epistles but the content was broad and applicable to all of the New Testament. It is here that he also focuses on applying the text to the 21st Century.
In the final section he provides two case-studies applying all the tools, starting with textual criticism and translation of the text, to historical study, literary/linguistic analysis, syntactical study, theological analysis, appropriation, and homiletical packaging. Walking the reader through his method helps bring the whole book together.
I was impressed with how useful and accessible this handbook was for the average reader. It will benefit lay teachers and pastors alike. While it doesn’t cover everything I would like, it is a fine resource which stays faithful to a conservative approach to Scripture. This book is one of a series produced by Kregel Publications: the “Handbooks for New Testament Exegesis.” There is also an OT set of handbooks as well. I’ll be wanting to collect the entire set after my time spent reading through this example. I encourage you to check out this helpful series as well.
Author Info: John D. Harvey is Professor of New Testament and Dean of the Seminary and School of Ministry at Columbia International University in Columbia, SC. He earned his Doctor of Theology degree from Wycliffe College at the University of Toronto. His previous books include Listening to the Text: Oral Patterning in Paul’s Letters, Greek is Good Grief: Laying the Foundation for Exegesis and Exposition, and Anointed with the Spirit and Power: A Biblical Theology of Holy Spirit Empowerment. He is an ordained teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America and is actively involved in pulpit supply. He has served cross-culturally in Europe and Africa.
The Last Temple (Tyndale House, 2012) is the conclusion of a three-part fiction series based on the NT book of Revelation from Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer. The series presents a competing vision for what the literal fulfillment of Revelation looks like. In Hanegraaff and Brouwer’s interpretation, Revelation speaks to the immediate future realities facing the city of Jerusalem and the persecuted church in Rome and throughout the Roman empire.
The tale follows the adventures of Gallus Sergius Vitas, Roman general and one-time member of Nero’s inner circle, as he continues his quest to understand the mystery behind his release, a mystery that is tied up with the symbolism in the treasonous letter of Revelation. After meeting John the Beloved himself, Vitas faces his own torturous death and survives. He then aims his political clout toward revenge and even insurrection against that beast of a man, Nero. Along the way, the continued struggles in Judea finally come to a head in Jerusalem’s terrible fall at the hands of Titus.
This book brings to an end a saga which perfectly captures Roman and Jewish life in the 60s (A.D.). What Hanegraaff and Brouwer were able to accomplish was truly breathtaking. As historical fiction goes, this series was top notch. They brought you inside the gates of Jerusalem to witness intrigue, rebellion and outright slaughter. You were whisked into the maze of tunnels under Jerusalem to witness secret trysts and the concealment of priceless Jewish treasures. The dark terror that inhabited Nero’s mansion and plagued those closest to him was almost palpable. And the forlorn suffering of those condemned to die in the arena is something I won’t easily forget. The author’s attention to detail bring the years before A.D. 70 to life as we follow the characters around the Roman world, from Rome to Alexandria, on sea and over land, to dungeons, arenas, and even to the cross itself on a hillside in Judea. We are inside and outside Jerusalem in the years leading up to its devastation, and the story is believable yet mysterious and keeps you guessing until the end.
With this title, I had to go back and read the first two books in the series first. I wasn’t sure what to expect and was pleased to find it wasn’t a polemic against other end times positions so much as it was a very well conceived story in its own right that does follow a partial preterist interpretation of the Book of Revelation. It’s a rewarding tale which also serves to show how the Book of Revelation may have been understood in its own day. Even if you are skeptical of a preterist view of Revelation, this series will still prove inspiring as it brings to life a story of struggle that both the early church and the people of Israel endured. I highly recommend it.
Disclaimer: This book was provided by Tyndale House Publishers. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.
About Book Briefs: Book Briefs are book notes, or short-form book reviews. They are my informed evaluation of a book, but stop short of being a full-length book review.
Reformation Gems are excerpts from selections contained in the Reformation Commentary on Scripture, a new commentary series from IVP which gathers the best Reformation-era comments on the text together all in one set. The volumes in this commentary series resurrect long-forgotten voices from the Reformation age and in so doing they recover the piety and vivacity of that era. I hope that by sharing some excerpts from this series, I will edify my readers and promote this important commentary series. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Today’s selection comes from the Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Volume XII (Ezekiel, Daniel). In perusing the comments on Ezekiel, I was surprised to see quite a bit about the prophesied conversion of the Jews and their return to the Promised Land. Most of the comments in that vein came from William Greenhill or Matthew Meade (one of his fellow non-conformist ministers). While many today herald the formation of the modern nation of Israel in 1948 as evidence that God has kept this promise, most still hold to a future conversion of Jewish people to Christianity. Many Reformed theologians, amillennialists and the like, understand the return to the land to be fulfilled already historically, and ultimately that it points to Christ and the greater inheritance that His Church experiences. In this vein, see my “Understanding the Land Promise” series. But I found it insightful to see this same question wrestled with in the 1600s soon after the Reformation by Greenhill, Matthew Meade and others.
Here are some excerpts from Greenhill’s comments, as well as evidence that he wouldn’t quite fit the mold of a standard dispensationalist, when it comes to his thoughts on other aspects of Ezekiel’s prophecy. He takes a literal view of the land in some passages, and in others, he sees a spiritual fulfillment:
Literal interpretation of a future “conversion of the Jews” and “return to the land.”
Ezekiel 37:21-22
…The conversion of the Jews we may with warrant expect and pray for. God has promised to gather the children of Israel and to bring them to David their king, that is, Christ…. Seeing God has promised to do it, we may believe and pray for the same. (pg. 185)
Ezekiel 37:26-27
Some look on this promise of David to be king over the Jews as accomplished in the reign of Christ the Messiah when here on earth because he gave out his commands then and required obedience to them…. Others are of a different judgment and believe that this great promise made here to the two houses of Judah and Israel remains yet to be performed: (1) Because the two houses are not yet united into one…. (2) Because the Jews do not own Christ; neither one house nor the other do it; neither Judah nor Israel acknowledged Christ to be the Messiah…. (3) The Jews have been, and are still, under many kings and shepherds…. (4) They shall then walk in the ways of Christ, not the ways of Moses….
From Ezekiel 37:26-27 I shall only give you this observation that there are great and precious promises that concern the Jews, yet unperformed. The everlasting covenant of peace, Christ being their king and temple, with many others, the Jews expect the fulfilling of. And so may we, for God is faithful and will make good his word. (pg. 187)
Ezekiel 39:25-29
God hid his face seventy years from them in Babylon; and since their crucifying of Christ, he has hid it from them sixteen hundred years. But he has a time to let them see his face again, and never more to hide it from them. They shall have his favor, his counsel, his help and protection. They shall not be under severe judgments but enjoy sweet mercies. (pg. 193)
Spiritual interpretation of Ezekiel’s temple.
Ezekiel 41:1-7
“Of the signification of this temple.” Some make the court belonging to it to represent the world and the temple to represent heaven. It may be considered whether the porch does not point out the common professor of the faith, the temple, the true saints, who are temples of the Spirit, and the holy of holies, the saints in glory, the condition of those made perfect. The true representation of this temple, I take it, is the body of our Lord Jesus Christ; both his body natural and his body mystical, namely, the church. (pg. 207)
Ezekiel 45:1-6
Having laid down the platform and measures of the temple, he comes now to the division and measuring of the land, wherein things are dark, difficult and deep, not to be attempted by human strength but by the help of Christ’s Spirit, which makes dark things, light, difficult things easy and sounds the greatest depths.
…There was a distinction of the land of Canaan in Moses’ and Joshua’s days (Num 34, 35; Josh 13, 21). But this division differs much from the same, and when the Jews returned from Babylon, there was no such division made of the land. Had it been, Ezra or Nehemiah would have made mention of it. This division, therefore, is not to be understood literally but spiritually, and the completing of it to be looked for in the church of Christ, not in the Jewish state or temple. Here, then, seems to be a spiritual lotting, and bringing people out of Judaism and heathenism into the kingdom of Christ and fellowship of the gospel…. The work of grace, and bringing of people into the church, is free; nothing in people, or from people, procures it. (pg. 220)
Ezekiel 47:13-23
Having given you the literal sense of the words… now let us see what may be the spiritual sense of them. Indeed, according to the letter, they were not fulfilled after the return from Babylon, but mystically under the gospel they were.
1. Then here is held out to us the great extent and largeness of the church under Christ and the gospel. The land mentioned signifies the church’s state; and the bordering of it out, north, east, south, west, the extent of it into all parts. The Christian church is larger than the Jewish, that was shut up in one nation; now it reaches to all nations (Mt 28:19), neither Asia, Africa, Europe or America is excluded (Mt 24:14; Lk 24:47; Rev 15:4). The church under the gospel is universal and invisible.
2. Those who are subjects or members of this church are not hypocrites but Israelites. Those who were not Israelites, and true Israelites, were not to be in this church…. true Israelites, such as Nathaniel was (Jn 1:47); of Jews inwardly, such as are circumcised in heart and spirit (Rom 2:29); of such as are enrolled in heaven (Heb 12:23); of sealed ones (Rev 7), and these stood with the Lamb on Mount Zion (Rev 14:1). These made up the church and body of Christ. (pg. 227-228)
About the Reformation-era author: William Greenhill (1591-1671). English nonconformist clergyman. Greenhill attended and worked at Magdalen College. He ministered in the diocese of Norwich but soon left for London, where he preached at Stepney. Greenhill was a member of the Westminster Assembly of Divines and was appointed the parliament chaplain by the children of Charles I. Oliver Cromwell included him among the preachers who helped draw up the Savoy Declaration. Greenhill was evicted from his post following the Restoration, after which he pastored independently. Among Greenhill’s most significant contributions to church history was his Exposition of the Prophet of Ezekiel. (pg. 434-435)
I’ve been thinking about the relative merits of approaching the book of Revelation with the aim of taking all the visions and judgments literally as opposed to symbolicly. Rev. 1:1 does say that John has a message for us to know, but it says more than this. This message was “signified” to John (this is the alternate reading in the footnote of the NASB, the main text has “communicated”). The word for “signified” is semaino, which means to “communicate by symbols.” So John in effect is answering our question: he is telling us his book communicates via symbolism.
For more help on the question of how to approach Revelation I turned to Invitation to Biblical Interpretation by Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson for help. Their book is endorsed by a wide assortment of conservative evangelical scholars and is the best work on hermeneutics I’ve ever read. (Read my reiew here.) I found their comments on this question insightful.
What could be wrong with interpreting apocalyptic literature such as Revelation literally? The main problem with such an approach is that it inadequately considers that the literary genre of a given text establishes the rules for how it should be interpreted. Meaning is intrinsically bound up with genre.119 It follows that genre provides a context assigned by the author to communicate meaning. We have already shown that the genre of Revelation is prophetic-apocalyptic. The apocalyptic genre, by definition, is highly symbolic and not intended to be interpreted in a literal manner. For this reason, a rigid literal interpretation or literalism may actually obscure the author’s intended meaning rather than expose it. Kevin Vanhoozer correctly poses a distinction between the literal sense and literalism.120 If the interpreter is concerned with authorial intention, the literal sense must not be reduced merely to letters, langue, or locutions. Vanhoozer contends that “literalistic reading is less than fully ‘literal’–that it is insufficiently and only ‘thinly’ literal–insofar as it ignores the role of authorial intentions and communicative acts.”121 What Vanhoozer means by this is that the literal–but not the “literalistic”–sense is what the author intended to convey by a given text; this, in turn, is especially true for figurative and symbolic language. In other words, if Revelation is prophetic-apocalyptic in nature, ascribing literalism to its numbers, proper nouns, and other images may actually prevent a proper understanding of John’s intended meaning.122 A more profitable hermeneutical approach is to reverse the interpretive order by placing the symbolic in the foreground while shifting the literal into the background. Thus, rather than positing the dictum “When the literal makes sense, seek no other sense,” we suggest that a better maxim in interpreting apocalyptic is “Start out with the assumption that a given statement or image is figurative rather than literal.”
G.K. Beale makes a strong case for the primacy of the symbolic over straight one-to-one literal correspondence.123 He argues that semaino in Revelation 1:1 conveys the idea of “communication by symbols,”124 noting that the normal usage of semaino in Scripture implies some type of “symbolic communication.”125 Since Revelation is a symbolic means of communication, the literal approach for interpreting the “plain sense” of the image may actually distort the intended meaning of the text. Beale maintains, “Of course, some parts are not symbolic, but the essence of the book is figurative. Where there is lack of clarity about whether something is symbolic, the scales of judgement should be tilted in the direction of a nonliteral analysis.”126 For reasons such as these, the symbolic plane should be considered primary while care should be taken not to reduce the meaning of symbols to something exclusively spiritual.
(pg. 550-551)
Footnotes 119 Hirsch, Validity in Interpretation, 236. 120 Vanhoozer, Is There a Meaning in This Text?, 310. 121 Ibid, 311. 122 Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 90. 123 Beale, Book of Revelation, 50-55. 124 Ibid, 52. 125 Ibid, 51. See the discussion of the allusion to Daniel 2:28-30 (LXX) in Revelation 1:1. 126 Ibid, 52.
The authors go on in their book to explain how Revelation itself, through John’s extensive use of the Old Testament (quoting and alluding to OT Scripture, as well as making use of well known OT symbols), helps us when it comes to discerning when and where symbolism exists and how to interpret it.
For my part, knowing that the author intended his book to “communicate by symbols” (Rev. 1:1) as an apocalyptic book, requires me to take this into account as I approach this great book.
Recently I had another opportunity to preach on a Sunday morning. I took the opportunity to preach again on the Temple theme in Scripture, using 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1 as my text. I had preached on the Temple before, but this time I wanted to flesh out what it means that the church is the Temple today.
