Journal: Southeastern Theological Review
Volume: STR 04:1 (Summer 2013)
Article: Vanhoozer Responds To The Four Horsemen Of An Apocalyptic Panel Discussion On "Remythologizing Theology"
Author: Kevin J. Vanhoozer

STR 4:1 (Summer 2013) p. 67

Vanhoozer Responds To The Four Horsemen
Of An Apocalyptic Panel Discussion On
Remythologizing Theology

Kevin J. Vanhoozer

Trinity Evangelical Divinity School

Introduction

There is no higher academic compliment than sustained critical attention, so I must begin by thanking my four interlocutors, not only for their willingness to persevere to the end (of my book, that is), but also for the way in which they have engaged its argument. I am also pleased by the evangelical diversity of the panel: from Trinitarian and analytic to Southern Baptist and emerging theologians. The lot of a respondent is not always a happy one. One can either summarize the argument, and risk boring those who have read the book (no danger of that here, I think!), set out systematically to expose the nakedness of the author (and risk losing a friend), or simply use the opportunity to talk about something else in which one is more interested. All four panelists have avoided these common pitfalls. Even more remarkable: I do not feel the need to spend most of my time correcting misrepresentations of my position. This is an encouraging sign. For years I have taught my students first, to interpret people as charitably as they can, and only then to interpret them as critically as they see fit. The panelists have largely succeeded in doing just that, which means that I can give most of my attention to their important substantive questions.

This conversation is all about bearing faithful witness: to what I have written, yes, but more importantly to what I have written about: “the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God” (1 Tim. 1:17). I therefore refer to my conversation partners as the “four horsemen of the apocalypse” (c.f., Rev. 6:1–8) not because they are harbingers of the Last Battle, but because what is ultimately at stake in this discussion is God’s self-revelation. To speak well of God is the theologian’s most important mandate, and also the most difficult. I have therefore prayed over this book more than any other. Even so, I do not for a moment think that I have mastered the territory. On the contrary: “I came, I saw, I stammered...”

Fortunately for me, this is not a court session. I am not officially on trial (as far as I know). At the same time, one who seeks to give faithful witness in word and deed to the living God is, in one sense, always on trial, for it is the theologian’s vocation to give sound and discerning testimony to God’s works of love and words of truth (2 Tim. 2:15).

STR 4:1 (Summer 2013) p. 68

Fred Sanders