What do you think?
Rate this book
The Fabric of Theology: A Prolegomenon to Evangelical Theology
After showing that today's evangelicals have not fared well in the crucible of modern pluralism, Lints argues that in order to regain spiritual wholeness, evangelicals must relearn how to think and live theologically. He provides a provocative new outline for the construction of a truly "transformative" evangelical theology in the modern age.
372 pages, Paperback
First published December 1, 1993
17 people are currently reading
198 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
November 20, 2019
Grounding systematic theology in biblical theology, Lints looks to the unfolding plan of redemption for all his theology. A bit dense at points, but I really enjoyed this book!
January 10, 2023
3.5/5 stars
There's a lot of important and insightful content in this book. Lints offers a keen overview and evaluation of evangelicalism's historical landscape and grounds the theological project in biblical theology, arguing that a proper theological framework must be shaped by both Scripture's content and structure.
However, the book is rather dense, and I'm convinced Lints could have easily trimmed down about 50-100 pages' worth of content without hampering his thesis and arguments.
There's a lot of important and insightful content in this book. Lints offers a keen overview and evaluation of evangelicalism's historical landscape and grounds the theological project in biblical theology, arguing that a proper theological framework must be shaped by both Scripture's content and structure.
However, the book is rather dense, and I'm convinced Lints could have easily trimmed down about 50-100 pages' worth of content without hampering his thesis and arguments.
August 3, 2025
Lints does a great job of articulating a confessional Presbyterianism in the postmodern context.
I do have a few misgivings. I’m not totally sure I agree with his assessment of the horizon of the biblical writers. It seems to me that he makes their horizon a bit too absolute in his articulation. Nevertheless, I can appreciate his challenge to do theology in conversations with God’s horizon.
I do have a few misgivings. I’m not totally sure I agree with his assessment of the horizon of the biblical writers. It seems to me that he makes their horizon a bit too absolute in his articulation. Nevertheless, I can appreciate his challenge to do theology in conversations with God’s horizon.
February 7, 2024
Longer than it needs to be, but still a must read.
January 23, 2018
Written in 2007:
“The Fabric of Theology,” by Richard Lints, is a book with an important message for evangelicalism today. Seeing the current problem of fragmentation, he wants to see theology move from being a “patchwork quilt” to a “whole piece of fabric.”# He seeks to construct a theological structure upon which to drape a theological vision that understands our place in God’s redemptive history and can prophetically speak to contemporary culture. Admittedly, that is a bold undertaking, and his goal is more to stimulate deep thinking and writing in others rather than solve the problem alone. He sees himself as part of a larger community, and is laying the groundwork for others to build on.
The first chapter is dubbed “preliminaries to prolegomena” and the purpose of it is to define various terms that the author will be using and to enlighten the reader as to the author’s underlying assumptions. He gives two: 1. the realism principle and 2. the bias principle; the realism principle being that truth is objective and knowable, and the bias principle being that no one understands that truth apart from their own biases.# This leads him to discuss briefly the evangelical movement and its historical interaction with these two assumptions. He then examines modernist thinking and post-modern relativist thinking and shows how they have each over-emphasized the opposing truths and are no better off than the other. He writes prophetically about the need for the evangelical community to be more “critically self-conscious” and to fully recognize both the realism principle and the bias principle in order to more accurately construct a theological vision.#
In chapter two, Lints explores evangelicalism in more detail, and specifically the effect that culture has had on evangelical theology throughout its history. He makes several observations about the contemporary evangelical scene. In order to explain the contemporary scene, he goes back through the last two centuries and exposes how the Second Great Awakening moved the evangelical scene from being segmented by denominationalism to being more unified and united. Lints continues through the pages of history and shows how this changed evangelical community maintained unity by combating a common enemy: the theological liberalism of the early 20th century. He explains how this combat against modernism affected evangelicalism: the unity was not built on a common theology but on a common enemy and so when the conflict was over, the unity did not last. Also, the emphasis on the preaching of the simple gospel led to the loss of theological richness: “Embattled evangelicals now set themselves to the task of protecting the doctrinal message of Scripture rather than exploring it.” Continuing through the scene until the present day, Lints concludes by offering his own diagnosis of and prescription for the weaknesses of the current situation. One of the things he returns to time and again throughout the book is the need to acknowledge the fall of man and the effects of the sinfulness of humanity on everything we do. Thus he argues that evangelicals must admit and reflect on their own cultural biases more seriously.
This emphasis on the marring effects of sin is also his starting point in discussing the foundation of theology in chapter three. In this chapter, Lints explores how God reveals himself to us, how we respond to that revelation, and how that affects the construction of a theological vision. One of the many aspects he discusses is that all of us hear God’s revelation through a series of filters such as “our culture, our religious tradition, our personal history, and so on.”# Lints stresses the point here and elsewhere in the book that such filters can distort our theological framework. He also calls the Church to reject the artificial distinction between doctrine and life but to “seek to understand the entirety of life … in the larger framework of God’s purposes in history.”# This is followed by an eloquent discussion of the hermeneutical challenges which arise from trying to discern the message of a book with two authors. Unlike some other authors I have read, he dealt adequately with the question of balance between overemphasizing human authorial intent and divine authorial intent. He concludes the chapter by emphasizing the need for an understanding of the progress of redemption, and finally he rightly calls theologians to feel and love the truths they teach, not simply to know them.
Chapter four is a long and dense chapter. It isn’t easy reading. In it he deals with the various filters that he mentioned in chapter three. The first he discusses is tradition. Lints shows how various groups have treated tradition differently throughout history and how often it has been over or underemphasized. He suggests finding a middle ground. Next, he explores the role of culture in the formation of a theological framework. He spends many pages introducing the concept of culture, defining it, and discussing the nature of our modern culture. Afterwards, he turns to the use of reason in theology. I found this section hard to understand as it was quite philosophical and abstract. He divides reason into two parts and from what I gather he is making the point that our intrinsic rationality is what plays a foundational role in understanding the Bible. It also sounded like he argued against the post-modernist position of relative truth in this chapter.
In the fifth chapter, Lints turns to the pages of history once again to learn about the methodological methods of great theologians who have gone before us. He considers Luther, Calvin, the reformed scholastics, Edwards, and the more recent Vos. This chapter was not nearly as intellectually demanding to read as the previous one and it was clear by reading it that the author had done his research exceptionally well. He understood these men’s theologizing intimately. In Edwards and Vos he seems to have found kindred spirits. Edwards wanted to introduce a revolutionary new method to theology by presenting it as a history of God’s redemption in “regard to all three worlds, heaven, earth, and hell.”# Vos introduced the methodological concept of Biblical theology, arguing like Lints that the shape and structure of the Biblical revelation should determine the shape and structure of the theology.
Chapter six is the longest chapter in the book, but it is not tiresome. In it, Lints dissects post-modern theology and lays it bare for the reader to look at and understand. For myself, it was very enlightening. Where other authors I have read would dismiss the entire post-modern theology movement as liberal heresy, Lints stays levelheaded and critiques it but still gives credit where credit is due. He explains the difference between pre-modern, modern, and post-modern thinking, and shows how this shift has affected theology. Objectivity and has been replaced by subjectivity, human experience has triumphed over authority, and scientific, and analytical theology has been dethroned by a subjective, reader-response theology. The analysis is too lengthy to even partially summarize here but his application for the evangelical community is worth noting: he warns that we should not dismiss post-modern theology as simply liberalism, and that “evangelicals have a lot to lose by abandoning conversation with the post-moderns altogether.”#
The last three chapters of “The Fabric of Theology” are what Lints has been meaning to say all along. The first six chapters have been laying a groundwork upon which he wants to propose a theological structure and vision. Having dealt with all the preliminaries, he finally turns to discuss the methodology he has been hinting at for 250 pages. In chapter seven, he deals mainly with seeing the Bible in terms of redemption – in its history, revelation, and theology. What stands out in this discussion is his strong conviction that classical systematic theology is simply inadequate. He argues that, in view of the Bible’s fundamental redemptive-historical nature, the resulting theology must reflect that reality (in this he is simply building off of Edwards and Vos). After some discussion about what that looks like, he presents his own tentative attempt at an “interpretive matrix of Scripture.”# He encourages further discussion within the community of evangelicalism in order to refine the proposed structure.
In chapter eight, Lints develops principles for practically forming this theological framework on redemptive-historical lines.# He does this by borrowing the concept of three interpretive horizons from Edmund Clowney: the textual horizon, the epochal horizon, and the canonical horizon. The author then explores all three horizons, dealing with symbols in the text, allegorizing, typology, and more. He argues, contra what I have been taught here at school, that typology is not restricted to those typologies that have an explicit antitype in the New Testament, but that typology is “much richer than this, as are the relations of the epochs of redemptive history.”# That comment alone has made me think deeply about typology again.
The last chapter deals with forming a theological vision – that is, a framework that engages culture, confronts it, and “enables modern people to understand anew their own world.”# To accomplish this, Lints says evangelical theologians need to be in conversation with three audiences: the Church, popular culture, and academia. The author speaks convincingly about the need for such conversation, as well as the inherent difficulties that will arise. He believes strongly and argues that theology must be a public study, if not to convince the universities of our beliefs, then at least to have them engage our theological ideas so that they might be tested vigorously and refined in the fires of academic review.
He concludes the book with an afterword (strange, considering he neglected to include a prologue or a pre-word) in which he recaps briefly his purpose and calls the Church onward and upward, theologically. I felt cheated that he waited until the last page to tell me that “in many ways [his] book is actually a prolegomenon to prolegomena.”# And here I thought we were breaking new ground. [sarcasm]
I have had a love-hate relationship with this book. The moment I laid eyes on the title, I felt intimidated by the fact that I had no idea what prolegomenon meant, and I feared reading the book was going to be a like trudging through a thick swamp of incomprehensible intellectual verbosity. To a certain degree, I was right – but I am glad to say that I have come to love and appreciate this book a lot. It has stimulated me to think much more deeply about methodology. To his credit, Lints managed to keep the book reasonably readable. However, I still think chapter four was far too philosophical, at least for me, and he could have defined more of the terms he used for those of us not constantly immersed in academic writing – which brings me to my next point, namely, identifying the target audience. From a marketing standpoint, it seems foolish to use a word like prolegomenon in the subtitle of the book when something like “a preliminary study” conveys the idea just as well if not better. It seems to me that it will scare away a large number of people automatically, but that is perhaps exactly the point. Having read it, I realize that it was addressed more to the theological community, and not so much to the layperson. All in all, the book was informative, stimulating, challenging, and prophetic. I recommend it to anyone seriously reflecting on the doing of theology.
“The Fabric of Theology,” by Richard Lints, is a book with an important message for evangelicalism today. Seeing the current problem of fragmentation, he wants to see theology move from being a “patchwork quilt” to a “whole piece of fabric.”# He seeks to construct a theological structure upon which to drape a theological vision that understands our place in God’s redemptive history and can prophetically speak to contemporary culture. Admittedly, that is a bold undertaking, and his goal is more to stimulate deep thinking and writing in others rather than solve the problem alone. He sees himself as part of a larger community, and is laying the groundwork for others to build on.
The first chapter is dubbed “preliminaries to prolegomena” and the purpose of it is to define various terms that the author will be using and to enlighten the reader as to the author’s underlying assumptions. He gives two: 1. the realism principle and 2. the bias principle; the realism principle being that truth is objective and knowable, and the bias principle being that no one understands that truth apart from their own biases.# This leads him to discuss briefly the evangelical movement and its historical interaction with these two assumptions. He then examines modernist thinking and post-modern relativist thinking and shows how they have each over-emphasized the opposing truths and are no better off than the other. He writes prophetically about the need for the evangelical community to be more “critically self-conscious” and to fully recognize both the realism principle and the bias principle in order to more accurately construct a theological vision.#
In chapter two, Lints explores evangelicalism in more detail, and specifically the effect that culture has had on evangelical theology throughout its history. He makes several observations about the contemporary evangelical scene. In order to explain the contemporary scene, he goes back through the last two centuries and exposes how the Second Great Awakening moved the evangelical scene from being segmented by denominationalism to being more unified and united. Lints continues through the pages of history and shows how this changed evangelical community maintained unity by combating a common enemy: the theological liberalism of the early 20th century. He explains how this combat against modernism affected evangelicalism: the unity was not built on a common theology but on a common enemy and so when the conflict was over, the unity did not last. Also, the emphasis on the preaching of the simple gospel led to the loss of theological richness: “Embattled evangelicals now set themselves to the task of protecting the doctrinal message of Scripture rather than exploring it.” Continuing through the scene until the present day, Lints concludes by offering his own diagnosis of and prescription for the weaknesses of the current situation. One of the things he returns to time and again throughout the book is the need to acknowledge the fall of man and the effects of the sinfulness of humanity on everything we do. Thus he argues that evangelicals must admit and reflect on their own cultural biases more seriously.
This emphasis on the marring effects of sin is also his starting point in discussing the foundation of theology in chapter three. In this chapter, Lints explores how God reveals himself to us, how we respond to that revelation, and how that affects the construction of a theological vision. One of the many aspects he discusses is that all of us hear God’s revelation through a series of filters such as “our culture, our religious tradition, our personal history, and so on.”# Lints stresses the point here and elsewhere in the book that such filters can distort our theological framework. He also calls the Church to reject the artificial distinction between doctrine and life but to “seek to understand the entirety of life … in the larger framework of God’s purposes in history.”# This is followed by an eloquent discussion of the hermeneutical challenges which arise from trying to discern the message of a book with two authors. Unlike some other authors I have read, he dealt adequately with the question of balance between overemphasizing human authorial intent and divine authorial intent. He concludes the chapter by emphasizing the need for an understanding of the progress of redemption, and finally he rightly calls theologians to feel and love the truths they teach, not simply to know them.
Chapter four is a long and dense chapter. It isn’t easy reading. In it he deals with the various filters that he mentioned in chapter three. The first he discusses is tradition. Lints shows how various groups have treated tradition differently throughout history and how often it has been over or underemphasized. He suggests finding a middle ground. Next, he explores the role of culture in the formation of a theological framework. He spends many pages introducing the concept of culture, defining it, and discussing the nature of our modern culture. Afterwards, he turns to the use of reason in theology. I found this section hard to understand as it was quite philosophical and abstract. He divides reason into two parts and from what I gather he is making the point that our intrinsic rationality is what plays a foundational role in understanding the Bible. It also sounded like he argued against the post-modernist position of relative truth in this chapter.
In the fifth chapter, Lints turns to the pages of history once again to learn about the methodological methods of great theologians who have gone before us. He considers Luther, Calvin, the reformed scholastics, Edwards, and the more recent Vos. This chapter was not nearly as intellectually demanding to read as the previous one and it was clear by reading it that the author had done his research exceptionally well. He understood these men’s theologizing intimately. In Edwards and Vos he seems to have found kindred spirits. Edwards wanted to introduce a revolutionary new method to theology by presenting it as a history of God’s redemption in “regard to all three worlds, heaven, earth, and hell.”# Vos introduced the methodological concept of Biblical theology, arguing like Lints that the shape and structure of the Biblical revelation should determine the shape and structure of the theology.
Chapter six is the longest chapter in the book, but it is not tiresome. In it, Lints dissects post-modern theology and lays it bare for the reader to look at and understand. For myself, it was very enlightening. Where other authors I have read would dismiss the entire post-modern theology movement as liberal heresy, Lints stays levelheaded and critiques it but still gives credit where credit is due. He explains the difference between pre-modern, modern, and post-modern thinking, and shows how this shift has affected theology. Objectivity and has been replaced by subjectivity, human experience has triumphed over authority, and scientific, and analytical theology has been dethroned by a subjective, reader-response theology. The analysis is too lengthy to even partially summarize here but his application for the evangelical community is worth noting: he warns that we should not dismiss post-modern theology as simply liberalism, and that “evangelicals have a lot to lose by abandoning conversation with the post-moderns altogether.”#
The last three chapters of “The Fabric of Theology” are what Lints has been meaning to say all along. The first six chapters have been laying a groundwork upon which he wants to propose a theological structure and vision. Having dealt with all the preliminaries, he finally turns to discuss the methodology he has been hinting at for 250 pages. In chapter seven, he deals mainly with seeing the Bible in terms of redemption – in its history, revelation, and theology. What stands out in this discussion is his strong conviction that classical systematic theology is simply inadequate. He argues that, in view of the Bible’s fundamental redemptive-historical nature, the resulting theology must reflect that reality (in this he is simply building off of Edwards and Vos). After some discussion about what that looks like, he presents his own tentative attempt at an “interpretive matrix of Scripture.”# He encourages further discussion within the community of evangelicalism in order to refine the proposed structure.
In chapter eight, Lints develops principles for practically forming this theological framework on redemptive-historical lines.# He does this by borrowing the concept of three interpretive horizons from Edmund Clowney: the textual horizon, the epochal horizon, and the canonical horizon. The author then explores all three horizons, dealing with symbols in the text, allegorizing, typology, and more. He argues, contra what I have been taught here at school, that typology is not restricted to those typologies that have an explicit antitype in the New Testament, but that typology is “much richer than this, as are the relations of the epochs of redemptive history.”# That comment alone has made me think deeply about typology again.
The last chapter deals with forming a theological vision – that is, a framework that engages culture, confronts it, and “enables modern people to understand anew their own world.”# To accomplish this, Lints says evangelical theologians need to be in conversation with three audiences: the Church, popular culture, and academia. The author speaks convincingly about the need for such conversation, as well as the inherent difficulties that will arise. He believes strongly and argues that theology must be a public study, if not to convince the universities of our beliefs, then at least to have them engage our theological ideas so that they might be tested vigorously and refined in the fires of academic review.
He concludes the book with an afterword (strange, considering he neglected to include a prologue or a pre-word) in which he recaps briefly his purpose and calls the Church onward and upward, theologically. I felt cheated that he waited until the last page to tell me that “in many ways [his] book is actually a prolegomenon to prolegomena.”# And here I thought we were breaking new ground. [sarcasm]
I have had a love-hate relationship with this book. The moment I laid eyes on the title, I felt intimidated by the fact that I had no idea what prolegomenon meant, and I feared reading the book was going to be a like trudging through a thick swamp of incomprehensible intellectual verbosity. To a certain degree, I was right – but I am glad to say that I have come to love and appreciate this book a lot. It has stimulated me to think much more deeply about methodology. To his credit, Lints managed to keep the book reasonably readable. However, I still think chapter four was far too philosophical, at least for me, and he could have defined more of the terms he used for those of us not constantly immersed in academic writing – which brings me to my next point, namely, identifying the target audience. From a marketing standpoint, it seems foolish to use a word like prolegomenon in the subtitle of the book when something like “a preliminary study” conveys the idea just as well if not better. It seems to me that it will scare away a large number of people automatically, but that is perhaps exactly the point. Having read it, I realize that it was addressed more to the theological community, and not so much to the layperson. All in all, the book was informative, stimulating, challenging, and prophetic. I recommend it to anyone seriously reflecting on the doing of theology.
April 5, 2012
This was a great read. He shows how and why theology in the Church has been put on the back burner by analyzing the culture and the effects of the Fundamentalism and Liberalism debates in the 20th century. For example, one of the effects is a Methodist and Presbyterian on the pew are essentially believe the same (and admits it's a generalization but an accurate one). Lints then prescribes going back to Biblical Theology; finding our placing in the Drama of Redemption. Also, he would like to see more of an emphasis on theology in all church traditions, with the hope of meaningful discussion. An insightful prolegomenon that I heartily agree.
May 28, 2015
Though written two decades ago, this is the single best one volume treatment on evangelical prolegomena I have yet read. Making use of sound evangelical historiography and the best of the evangelical theological tradition, this book crosses disciplines in the best way possible.
March 23, 2018
Excellent. Lints argues for a theological reading of Scripture that leads to a theological vision: i.e., seeing the world and our place in the word in light of God's redemptive revelation. Some minor disagreements over certain specific points, but overall highly recommended.
February 27, 2018
This book was pivotal. Lints is striving to create a prolegomena (first word) for evangelical theology. How are we to orient ourselves to Scripture, theology, confessions, and culture before we undertake the task of doing theology? How do we travel from exegesis to doctrine? This book provided an opportunity to reflect and critique the presuppositions we bring to Scripture and how the very framework of Scripture offers us an Archimedean point to shift our biases. He looks extensively at the “theological vision” (the application of the theology to our current culture) of several Reformed doctors throughout church history and how their understanding of the framework of Scripture provided the grounds for their vision. He also spends a great deal of time on the postmodern vision of theology and how it has greatly influenced (and been influenced by) our culture. Lastly, he paints a picture of what it looks like for an evangelical to develop a theological framework from Scripture (via redemptive-historical hermeneutics) and then how that should be turned into a theological vision that interacts with our culture today. Lints is critical of the Evangelical tendency to isolate itself from culture and the academy, and to divorce theology from the Church. He wants the Church to reunite with the professional theologians, and professional theologians to come back under the guidance and service of the Church (and its confessions).
I found his discussion in hermeneutics and epistemology to be especially helpful. He admits that much of the postmodern critique of modernism is correct (especially in regards to hermeneutics), even if he disagrees with their conclusion. Modernism (fueled by the Enlightenment) saw the sciences and our rationality as fool-proof methods to arrive at absolute truth. It also led to viewing the Scriptures nothing but a mere “storehouse of facts”, divorced from any kind of narrative. Postmodernism sees this as hopelessly naive and reductionistic. This is especially true when it comes to finding meaning in a text. One cannot simply employ a scientific method of interpretation to derive meaning from an isolated text, like a mathematical formula (he uses Warfield and Hodge as prime examples of this). Our own situated-ness, our biases, necessarily influence how we will interpret the data we see in Scripture, and Scripture is much more (not less) than a collection of facts: it is an unfolding narrative of redemption - and to be ignorant of those realities is to be doubly blind. However, unlike the PoMo hermeneutic, this doesn’t mean that finding genuine, real meaning in the text is impossible, or meaning can only be created by a reader’s response to the text. Instead, Lints makes an argument based on the divine revelation of God, the redemptive focus of revelation, the image of God in man, the incarnation of Jesus, and the illumination of the Holy Spirit to say that objective meaning can be found and truly (even if imperfectly) be grasped by the reader. For example, he refers to Jesus’ incarnation as “epistemological grace” because in it we see the union of the two natures: God and man. Thus, Lints argues, it is possible for true communication (from God) and true understanding (from man) to happen. What isn’t clear though is the reality that Christ’s human nature isn’t marred with sin, which is what noetically affects us, preventing us from being able to interpret Scripture apart from incorrect biases. However, without explicitly addressing that, Lints continues with the fact that we are made in God’s image, and though we are marred with a sin nature, this doesn’t mean that we have lost all ability to receive truth or perceive reality as it really is. God has so constituted us to be able to discern and receive truth - even with a fallen mind in a fallen world. More could be said about Christ being “the image of the invisible God” and our progressive “putting on the image of Christ”, but I don’t remember him addressing that directly.
All in all, this was a foundational book that gave me a good (and needed) balance humility and confidence as I interpret God’s Word.
I found his discussion in hermeneutics and epistemology to be especially helpful. He admits that much of the postmodern critique of modernism is correct (especially in regards to hermeneutics), even if he disagrees with their conclusion. Modernism (fueled by the Enlightenment) saw the sciences and our rationality as fool-proof methods to arrive at absolute truth. It also led to viewing the Scriptures nothing but a mere “storehouse of facts”, divorced from any kind of narrative. Postmodernism sees this as hopelessly naive and reductionistic. This is especially true when it comes to finding meaning in a text. One cannot simply employ a scientific method of interpretation to derive meaning from an isolated text, like a mathematical formula (he uses Warfield and Hodge as prime examples of this). Our own situated-ness, our biases, necessarily influence how we will interpret the data we see in Scripture, and Scripture is much more (not less) than a collection of facts: it is an unfolding narrative of redemption - and to be ignorant of those realities is to be doubly blind. However, unlike the PoMo hermeneutic, this doesn’t mean that finding genuine, real meaning in the text is impossible, or meaning can only be created by a reader’s response to the text. Instead, Lints makes an argument based on the divine revelation of God, the redemptive focus of revelation, the image of God in man, the incarnation of Jesus, and the illumination of the Holy Spirit to say that objective meaning can be found and truly (even if imperfectly) be grasped by the reader. For example, he refers to Jesus’ incarnation as “epistemological grace” because in it we see the union of the two natures: God and man. Thus, Lints argues, it is possible for true communication (from God) and true understanding (from man) to happen. What isn’t clear though is the reality that Christ’s human nature isn’t marred with sin, which is what noetically affects us, preventing us from being able to interpret Scripture apart from incorrect biases. However, without explicitly addressing that, Lints continues with the fact that we are made in God’s image, and though we are marred with a sin nature, this doesn’t mean that we have lost all ability to receive truth or perceive reality as it really is. God has so constituted us to be able to discern and receive truth - even with a fallen mind in a fallen world. More could be said about Christ being “the image of the invisible God” and our progressive “putting on the image of Christ”, but I don’t remember him addressing that directly.
All in all, this was a foundational book that gave me a good (and needed) balance humility and confidence as I interpret God’s Word.
February 10, 2020
Great book! Probably could’ve been 50-100 pages shorter. Would love to see an updated version given the rapidity of the technological revolution.
In essence, Lints provides evangelicalism with tools to do theology well. Grounding systematic theology (and everything else!) in biblical theology; drawing liberally from the deep well of church history; identifying the “filters” through which the Bible goes in it’s way to and through your understanding.
One interesting note: Lints exemplifies exactly what he espouses in this book. This book is grounded in Biblical Theology; it relies heavily on church history; and it reflects critically on the “filters” of culture, tradition, and reason, all while being very relevant to his present moment. He quite clearly and effectively follows his own advice... not something you see in every theology book!
In essence, Lints provides evangelicalism with tools to do theology well. Grounding systematic theology (and everything else!) in biblical theology; drawing liberally from the deep well of church history; identifying the “filters” through which the Bible goes in it’s way to and through your understanding.
One interesting note: Lints exemplifies exactly what he espouses in this book. This book is grounded in Biblical Theology; it relies heavily on church history; and it reflects critically on the “filters” of culture, tradition, and reason, all while being very relevant to his present moment. He quite clearly and effectively follows his own advice... not something you see in every theology book!
February 23, 2024
This book is a slow burn. It was sometimes challenging to take in because I was trying to take it all in at once. For this was a good book. One thing I noticed with this work is explaining the thought, history, and process of how we arrived at our modern Evangelical Thought or theology. When I could grasp how to read this book, I could begin to understand the insight LINTs had for his arguments. Honestly, this was the first book that explained post-modernism to me in layperson's terms while explaining how we arrived in our evangelical culture. Lastly, one thing I thought was surprising was how relevant this book was today despite being published in 1993. In many sections of this book, I told myself this man must be a prophet because he is talking about today's culture climate. IIn reality, what he was writing about was the spawn of what we dwell on today.
November 2, 2019
A helpful book in understanding how to exegete well in order to systematize well. I found certain jargons unhelpful (theological framework, theological vision, etc) but this book is good at helping readers see that the Bible is written within human history, by one Divine authors, and for one redemptive purpose. This should be read by many seminarians.
March 28, 2023
Lints does a good job identifying problems with the movement, not the least of which is defining it. In addition he gives a number of solutions that are helpful well beyond simply solving evangelical problems.
March 2, 2021
Excellent!
February 25, 2024
It’s dense, but it’s worth it. Some things were over explained and took a minute to get to the crux of the content but I enjoyed it. Great resource to have in my library.
July 12, 2024
Dr. Lints' work has not aged well in very aspect but it still worth a perusal.
June 1, 2013
Read for a class on Biblical and Systematic Theology. Lints' chapters that review the history of theology through the Reformers (Luther and Calvin) up through Edwards and Vos were really good. Additionally, his critiques of postmodern thought and theology were quite helpful (and pretty prophetic about the results in the church considering the book was written back in 1993).
The theological framework proposed by Lints (the textual, epochal, and canonical horizons of interpretation) are very good and I believe they result in a much fuller understanding of the Bible. It lets the Bible "speak on its own terms," as he puts it. When this is carried over to Systematic Theology ("Theological Vision" in Lints' terms), the results are much more robust than simply compiling and summarizing all the "biblical data" on any given topic.
The theological framework proposed by Lints (the textual, epochal, and canonical horizons of interpretation) are very good and I believe they result in a much fuller understanding of the Bible. It lets the Bible "speak on its own terms," as he puts it. When this is carried over to Systematic Theology ("Theological Vision" in Lints' terms), the results are much more robust than simply compiling and summarizing all the "biblical data" on any given topic.
September 30, 2012
There is much pack into this 372 pages...much history we as evangelicals have forgotten, as well as a harsh reminder of how much we have forsaken in the face of modernism. very dense. my brain hurts.
October 11, 2013
Every theology student, pastor, a thinking Christian must read this book. While a bit dense at times, it is almost prophetic in its evaluation of the state of evangelicalism and it's relationship with the Bible, and what has actually come to pass.
July 19, 2012
A must read for all beginning Theological studies!!!
December 20, 2016
Great overview of the methodology behind constructing an evangelical theological framework and vision.
January 16, 2016
A critical and necessary book in sorting through the varying worldviews and coming up with a strategy and structure to theology.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews