Theology and the Mirror of Scripture: A Mere Evangelical Account

366 book reviews Kevin J. Vanhoozer and Daniel J. Treier Theology and the Mirror of Scripture: A Mere Evangelical Account (Downers Grove: ivp Academic, 2015), 298 pp., $ 26.00, isbn 9780830840762. Vanhoozer and Trier, two American evangelical theologians, propose a reconstruction and renewal of evangelical theology that will not merely be a prooftexting of biblical texts or textbook discussions of propositions, but rather, an evangelical theology that will be broadly cognizant of the patristic heritage and the “Great Tradition,” more seriously engaged with mainstream and ecumenical scholarship, and which exemplifies a wisdom orientation that is pastorally effective in forming disciples of Christ in the fellowship of the church. The authors succeed in various areas of what is admittedly a very ambitious and broadly conceived theological project. The authors write that the gospel is not primarily about “going to heaven,” but rather about “heaven [i.e., the Kingdom of God] arriving on earth” (55). In this “mere evangelical” account, the “Gospel is not intelligible apart from the Trinity” (56); the “Good News” is not merely about the believer’s private relationship to Jesus, but about the communion of the whole Body of Christ with the Triune God: coming to the Father, through the Son, in the Spirit. The Trinity is the “… necessary framework for preserving the integrity of the gospel” (78). In this “strong” version of Trinitarianism, the ontological and economic Trinity, together constitute the “… structure, substance and summary of the gospel” (78; emphasis original). The authors’ emphasis on these matters is consistent with the renaissance of the doctrine of the Trinity in systematic theology begun in the groundbreaking work of Barth and Rahner. Vanhoozer and Trier recognize that ecclesiology has traditionally been an under-developed locus in evangelical theology, and propose that the church should not be seen as an “accident” or “appendix” to the divine plan of salvation, but rather as its “apex” (77). The church is both “… part of the economy and one of its chief dividends” (77). Evangelical theologians, while continuing to believe that the gospel precedes the church, must more fully realize that the gospel includes the church (134). In their discussions of scripture and Christian doctrine, the authors suggest that the biblical text can be thought of as a “verbal icon” that mediates the “… divine personal presence that shines through it” (105). I welcome this recognition that scripture, illuminated by the Spirit and read in faith, mediates not merely information about God, but the actual presence of God to the believer— a point that I have emphasized in my book, Meditation and Communion with God (ivp Academic, 2012). This notion of scripture as “verbal icon” can comple© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi: 10.1163/15697312-01004003 book reviews 367 ment and balance traditional evangelical understandings of the sacred texts as (primarily) repositories of propositional truths. The authors rightly point to the limitations of a “two-step hermeneutics” (151) in which the exegetical and theoretical stages are completed without serious engagement in praxis and matters of virtue and habitus formation. Such a method of studying scripture can result in fragmentation and further the isolation of the academy from the church. There are, however, some significant limitations in this proposal. An examination of the rather extensive bibliography (263–287) seems to indicate that the conversation partners for this “mere evangelical” project are predominantly and almost exclusively white, male, middle class North American and European evangelicals. Very few women and people of color are engaged; and, given the changing demographics of global evangelicalism and the Majority World churches, this is a regrettable omission. It is true that the authors reference the works of J. Kameron Carter (African American) and Sarah Coakley, Kathryn Tanner, and Ellen Charry (249), but the latter three are White middle-class American women, and even their inclusion constitutes only one paragraph in a 262 page book. In many areas of discussion in this book the reader could wish for more specificity and detail in application of the theological and hermeneutical issues being raised. For example, in discussions of the doctrine of the Trinity, no reference is made to current evangelical intramural debates on the questionable teaching of the “eternal subordination of the Son”, and of different models of the Trinity—Social vs. anti-Social. Hotly debated hermeneutical issues in science and scripture such as the historicity of the biblical Adam and the hominid fossil record are passed by in silence. The discussion of the “catholicity” of the church and ecumenical relations does not address the practical missiological question: Should evangelicals regard Roman Catholics as proper objects of evangelization? How does a ‘Theological Interpretation of Scripture’ interface with historic patristic readings of scripture, e.g., the ‘fourfold sense’? Nevertheless, despite these limitations, evangelical scholars can garner valuable insights from Theology and the Mirror of Scripture. It is to be hoped that the authors and others will continue this work with greater specificity and contextual applications. John Jefferson Davis Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, South Hamilton (usa) jdavis@gordonconwell.edu Journal of Reformed Theology 10 (2016) 361–387