In Defense Of Theology As Gospelizing: Michael Bird’s Responses -- By: Michael F. Bird

Journal: Southeastern Theological Review
Volume: STR 06:2 (Winter 2015)
Article: In Defense Of Theology As Gospelizing: Michael Bird’s Responses
Author: Michael F. Bird


In Defense Of Theology As Gospelizing:
Michael Bird’s Responses

Michael F. Bird

Ridley College, Australia

Introduction

I want to begin by thanking the steering committee of the Reformed Theology group for hosting a review session on my Evangelical Theology (henceforth EvTh) and for the organization that has gone into it. Let me say that I am also deeply appreciative of the efforts of the four speakers for taking the time to read and constructively interact with EvTh, particularly because I know that they have expertise in many of these areas that far exceeds my own. I can honestly say that I’ve learned a lot by listening to them and my mind is churning over with ideas and corrections for a second edition should it ever happen. Before I make my response to the various evaluation of EvTh, let me first explain why I wrote it. People might wonder what would possess a New Testament scholar to make a foray into Systematic Theology. I mean, you don’t wake up one day and decide to write a book about neurobiology. I want to say that this project was not dreamed up off the cuff, done ad hoc, on the QT, or pursued on the basis a passing thought bubble.

First, I have been consumed with the question of how to believe, think, and live as an evangelical since my seminary days. It was my theology professor, Jim Gibson, who imparted to me the idea of theology as gospelizing, the consistent application of the gospel to all areas of doctrine and discipleship. Over ten years ago Jim and I co-authored an essay on constructing an evangelical prolegomena to theology and since then my mind has been abuzz with the question of how to construct such a consistent evangelical theology.1 EvTh is my preliminary effort at completing this task. Yes,

there are some good theology books out there by evangelical theologians whose evangelical convictions infuse their work. But in many cases, the gospel is nowhere defined and nowhere does it become programmatic for the organization and texture of their volume. Such a lacuna is something that has always baffled me because I had been under the impression that at the core of evangelicalism was the evangel, so the evangel should be at the forefront of any theological project. Therefore, in constructing a theology where the evangel would be the beginning, center, and boundary for theology, my goal was to make programmatic what others had erstwhile assumed. Lest I sound like a lone and deranged prophet crying out in the wilderness, “Make evangelical theology more evangelical,” I’d like to point out that a similar perspective has been argued in recent article by Jeremy Treat where—quite inde...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()