More on the Drama: Triangulating my Position

I mentioned previously that I'd try to post some things that I enjoyed/benefited most from Drama of Doctrine; here's my first shot:

Vanhoozer makes the observation on p. 301 regarding Knowledge in the Theodramatic Perspective "Getting knowledge is more like plotting one's position with a set of maps, than it is building a house on a foundation or catching a fish in a net." This metaphor was groundbreaking fore me in the sense of it's contribution to my own self-awareness. I feel like over the last 5-7 years, my theology is constantly being revised, reinvented and/or jettisoned. About the only thing that has held is a reformed understanding of God, the Bible and the Gospel. I've been thinking more in terms of the foundation metaphor and thus felt like I was constantly tearing down and rebuilding the foundation. Or perhaps, more accurately, the foundation is a reformed understanding of these things but I keep having to clear out the first floor and never think I'll get to setting the trusses, let alone sheeting the roof. It felt like there was little continuity.

Enter Vanhoozer's helpful metaphor; now I can see continuity. I've been thinking in terms of constructing and deconstructing the house often leading to a hermeneutic of suspicion (i.e., I assume what I've been taught is wrong). Instead, I have been constantly trying to find my location using a series of maps. Each lesson learned helps to more precisely triangulate my position. Not only was this breakthrough incredibly encouraging, such a perspective gives more hope and less pessimism about the future.

Another One Bites the Dust

Last Friday night, prior to leaving for NH, I finished Vanhoozer's Drama of Doctrine. Yes, I have silenced the mouths of all ye who slander me...at least until you hit the comments section. Nevertheless, its' been quite a journey. I started back in March and I can honestly say it's been the weightiest book I've read in a loooong time. Forget the prospect of a book review from me; I'm not even going to try. Read it for yourself - it's worth it. I may post some of the most significant lessons learned in coming weeks, but that remains to be seen.

One more thought: I'd like to conduct an informal pole in the comment section. Thought it's presumptious to think there are very many people reading this still, as my blogging has been sporadic at best, google reader gives me hope. Were you more suprised that 1) I got a tattoo or 2) I finished a 400 plus page book by Vanhoozer? I figured I'd post these two dramatic (yes the pun is intended) posts back to back.

Review of Drama

Finally! No, not mine, but Kostenberger's. I'm still stuck just past the half-way point, but I always love reading reviews on heavy duty books, especially when they're written by someone smarter then I am. I haven't read it yet (looks long enough to print) but offer it here.

Sola Scriptura

I'm still plodding through The Drama of Doctrine and loving every minute of it. Granted, I can go several pages at a time withouth knowing what Vanhoozer's saying, but when I hit the occaisional page I do understand, it makes it all worth while. He has some interesting things to say about the idea of sola scriptura, particularly as it relates to authorial intention (i.e. the intention of the reformers who coined [Luther] and used the phrase).

"Sola scriptura is not the answer to the question 'How many sources should one use in doing theology?'" (p. 232).

Instead,

"Sola scriptura is the answer to the question 'Where can we find the supreme norm by which to measure Christian deeds and Christian doctrine?' Construed positively, sola scriptura indicates how the church is to practice divine authority. Stated negatively , 'sola scriptura is the statement that the church can err'" (p. 232-233).

"Sola scriptura is not a protest against tradition as such, but against the presumption of coincidence between church teaching and tradition" (ibid).

"The Reformation emphasis on the priesthood of all believers has mutated in modernity into the notion that individuals can interpret the Bible for themselves, without the benefit of church tradition. The danger in such individualism, however is pride, yet another 'presumption of coincidence,' this time between one's own interpretation and the word of God. What one discovers in tradition is that Christianity is far rich than one's own personal and ecclesiastical experience" (ibid).

"The Reformation was not a matter of Scripture versus tradition but of reclaiming the ancient tradition as a correct interpretation of Scripture versus later distortions of that tradition. The Reformers regarded the early church councils by and large as true because they agreed with Scripture, not because they had authority in and of themselves" (ibid).

The last two quotes in particular still ring true today in somewhat of a parallel scenario. One could substitute Calvinism in for 'tradition' and the false dilemma masquerading in the name of Biblicism could be equally undone by Vanhoozer's critique. I hope I haven't worded that too subtly.

Vanhoozer Does it Again

While some of my friends are freezing in the windy city this weekend rubbing shoulders with the man himself, I'm stuck here in VA Beach reading his latest. My wonderful wife blessed me this past Valentine's Day with a TNIV and Drama of Doctrine:

After all, nothing says luvin' like dynamic equivalence and an orange theology book (no sarcasim here either; I couldn't ask for a better gift - she knows me well). Anyway, I'll be wrapping up Longenecker's book this week (still no sarcasm here, I'm really planning on finishing it - even ahead of schedule), so I thought I'd take a peak at Drama of Doctrine this morning and I was not dissappointed. Just a few pages into the preface and I was hooked. Listen to these words:

"Theological competance is ultimately a matter of being able to make judgments that display the mind of Christ" (p. 2).

Vanhoozer writes at the highest level of scholarship, yet never seems to lose his relevance.