A Biblical-Theological Review of Michael Allen's Sanctification - Part 2: Chapter One
Chapter 1: Sanctification and the Gospel
In Chapter One, Allen outlines and argues for his four-part approach to sanctification. He first asserts that the Bible will serve as the source of his theologizing and the judge of its legitimacy.
A Christian
consideration of … sanctification seeks to do justice to ... the Holy
Scriptures. Exegetical reasoning, then, serves as a barometer of any claim
regarding sanctification. If an approach cannot pass muster as an exegetical
reflection upon texts like 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24, then it will not count as a
truly Christian approach to the subject (27-28).
Second, he identifies the common
inadequacies of merely exegetical doctrinal formulations:
Exegetical
reasoning can easily be construed [too] narrowly, … offering literary and/or
theological reflection upon those … passages … that employ the idioms of
holiness and sanctification alone (28). Such an approach offers “more of an
annotated lexical index of the terminology of sanctification than a full-dress
theology” (28).
Third, he
defines what dogmatic theology does and how he intends to locate the doctrine
of sanctification within the theological loci he’s chosen.
“Dogmatics … offer[s] an
orderly exposition of the gospel and its implications” (46). It shows “not only
what the Bible says about [a topic] but also about how to think regarding this
element of the Christian witness and its relation to other strands of
scriptural testimony: … God, creation, covenant, sin, incarnation, Spirit, and
church” (46).
Fourth,
he delimits from his study 1) attempts “to offer an encyclopedic account of
every biblical utterance regarding particular biblical terms,” 2) “the theology
of sanctification in the life of ancient Israel or of the earliest Christian
communities,” 3) “religious history” and 4) “scriptural excavation.” His goal
is to “expound the logic and shape of the gospel attested in [the] Scriptures,
inasmuch as it addresses the reality of the holy and the life of the holy”
(46). Sanctification attends, therefore, not to holiness in general but
to evangelical or gospel holiness.
Affirmation
In general, Allen sticks to his theological method and
offers some excellent exegesis along the way. Happily, Allen’s grounding in
scripture, as well as patristic, medieval, and modern theology guards his work
from flights of fancy or philosophy. I resonate with Allen’s complaint that BT treatments
can be too narrowly focused and just be an exercise in scriptural excavation. I
appreciate and affirm the value of bringing BT into productive conversation
with Systematic, or as he prefers, Dogmatic Theology.
Critique
In some cases, I would assign to Biblical Theology (BT)
features Allen reserves for Dogmatics. For example, Allen distinguished
dogmatic reason by saying it listens “to … exegetical reason, reflects on [the]
breadth, coherence, and emphases [of specific texts], taking in not only their
particularities but also their proportions” (146). I would assign these
features to exegetical reasoning or Biblical Theology.
Although Allen lists the Spirit as one of the theological
topics that relates to sanctification (46), he offers no sustained attention to the
Spirit’s role in sanctification. If Allen
gave less attention to tangential matters in dogmatic theology that don’t advance engagement
with sanctification, he would have space to engage this and other essential
topics.
Extension
The BT data on sanctification is so vast that selective
exegetical excavation will likely yield results that are at best partial. With
nearly every chapter I observed uncharted regions of BT whose exploration would
have enriched Allen’s work. By delimiting his study to evangelical holiness,
and thus excluding holiness of things, of unsaved persons, and of corporate
entities, Allen bypasses opportunities to enrich “thinking the holy”[1]
in gospel contexts. For example, the Torah teaches us that there are degrees of
holiness in things and people: the nation (Exod. 19:6) > the Levites (Num.
16:9) > Aaronic priests (Lev. 8:24) > High Priest (Lev. 8:12). If
positional holiness admits of degrees, we may arguably see degrees of personal
holiness. This line of thinking helps to see how holy people (1 Cor. 1:30) can
still need to “perfect” holiness in the fear of God (2 Cor. 7:1).
[1] Allen’s
idiolectic includes turning adjectives into substantive objects of the verb
“think”: “think the holy'” “think the human,” “think the gospel’s gracious
character”; etc. He occasionally reverts to standard syntax, such as “think about
holiness,” suggesting he was playing with language at the expense of clarity.
Comments