search for an evangelical consensus on Paul and the law, The

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Dec 1997 by Karlberg, Mark W

Over against this reading it is my contention that Israel's retention of the land was contingent upon her own compliance with the law of Moses. The grounds for the temporal reward was legal obedience.40 To paraphrase Scripture: "Do this and you, ancient Israel, will live and prosper in the land I have given you. Otherwise, I, the Lord your God, will bring a curse on the land." In the period from Moses to Christ theocratic Israel was placed on probation, subject to the stipulations and sanctions of the covenant established at Sinai.41

III. CONCLUDING REMARKS (AN APOLOGETIC APPEAL)

As we draw this study to a conclusion, a brief word about the typological significance of the land of Canaan in Biblical times is in order. To be sure, our understanding of this issue plays a decisive role in Biblical hermeneutics. No system of theology-no theological interpretation of the Bible-can avoid the subject. And of course one's position on this matter bears directly upon the millennial question. In this century the Biblical theology of Geerhardus Vos has shown convincingly the centrality of eschatology, the doctrine of last things, within the pages of the OT and NT. Reformed covenant theology, more generally speaking, has viewed typology as an essential ingredient in the Christological interpretation of the Scriptures. The pattern of teaching is already found in the teachings of Jesus and in the apostolic writings. It is left to subsequent Christian interpretation to extend the typological reading to all of redemptive revelation, not just those persons, events and institutions explicitly identified in the NT. The Law, the Prophets and the Writings all speak of Christ, his person and work. Both Biblical symbolism and prophetic idealism-that is, the premessianic vision of the future age entertained by the OT prophets-require us to view the land of Canaan as a temporary sign depicting the eternal kingdom, the promised land, which has already begun to manifest itself in this present, preconsummation epoch of inaugurated eschatology.42 (Thus e.g. the temple of God is now the postPentecost, Spirit-filled people of God.) The crucial questions that remain unanswered in modern-day dispensationalism are these: What is the relationship between the purported, future millennial reign of Christ in Palestine and the everlasting kingdom? What is the proper understanding of the original promise to Abraham regarding the land as an eternal possession? Are believing Jews to be granted special status among the one people of God in the eternal state? These questions have largely been skirted in the current debate.43

I began this three-part study of Paul and the law asking the question: Is it naive optimism to hope that the Christian Church today can fully recover the evangelical doctrine of law and gospel, that which was part of the Protestant theological consensus at the time of the Reformation? To be sure, the future of evangelicalism remains uncertain. James Montgomery Boice has rightly observed: "The evangelical church is in a perilous condition, even to the point of abandoning the gospel which brought it into being."44 In the opinion of Charles Spurgeon, "he who understands the covenant has reached the very core and marrow of the Gospel."45 On the one hand, historic Reformed theology has something important to say in current discussions. On the other, many modern-day exponents (or, rather, detractors) of Reformed theology have much to rediscover in the orthodox Protestant heritage. As we prepare to enter the twenty-first century we stand at a critical threshold, a watershed in the history of the Church. As I see it, one of the tasks of the Evangelical Theological Society is to clarify issues relating to what is, after all, the heart of the gospel: justification by faith alone.