The book moves in four parts. In the first and briefest part, Wright suggests that his missional hermeneutic is built into the framework of the Bible itself. Part two focuses on “The God of Mission” which amounts to his theology via salvation history. He begins with a chapter on God’s revelation to Israel (chap 3) focusing on Exodus and Exile as two key components of Israel’s experience with God. Next, he moves to Jesus as the incarnation of Yahweh (chap 4). The last chapter of part two focuses on distortions of God in idolatry (chap 5). Part three moves from the God with a mission to his chosen people –“the people of mission”. This is the longest section of the book which focuses on how God works through particular people (Abraham, Israel, Jesus), paradigms (Exodus [redemption], Jubilee [restoration]) and covenants (Noah, Abraham, Sinai, David, New) to reach his universal creation. Part four is dedicated to “The Arena of God’s Mission” which is nothing less than the whole earth and all of humanity. The last two chapters (14 & 15) in the fourth part of the book would probably be better bracketed as their own section providing the key texts through which the missional hermeneutic is shaped. The book moves well with nice internal summaries and reminders of the overarching argument.
Christopher Wright has been quipped as the “OT Wright” counterpart to the wildly popular N. T. Wright. The description is a play on the fact that while Nicholas “Tom” Wright is one of the most admired NT scholars in the world, Chris Wright is his OT scholar complement. The two scholars are both British, Cambridge trained, popular among evangelical Christians, active in the church and fairly good writers. Oh, and they have the same last name. The most fruitful similarity, however, is that they are both “big picture” readers of scripture. They are looking for the overarching Story that shines through the radically diverse stories, songs, poems and letters that make up Scripture. The difficulty with this sort of approach is that it is easy to ignore the stories that don’t quite fit the bigger Story that they’ve written. Their widespread popularity and subsequent contempt among the guild of biblical scholarship is due to the fact that while they are susceptible to ignoring the small stories, their versions of the larger Story are pretty good. That and the biblical scholars can be surprisingly petty and proud.
No comments:
Post a Comment