Our Confidence in Preaching Christ and Tracing Themes
BRANDEN OBRERO
1/1/2025
From where do we find our confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture? What is the source of our certainty when we trace the development of redemptive-historical themes throughout God’s Word? It is important for Christians to understand the foundations to both these endeavors. I must state up-front that this discussion will presume a certain level of knowledge in its readers. I presume to be writing to an audience that embraces the authority, inerrancy, sufficiency, clarity, and necessity of God’s Word. I presume to be writing to an audience with a measure of familiarity with the discipline of biblical-theology, with the major redemptive-historical themes in Scripture, and with the mandate and methodology of preaching Christ from all of Scripture. Consequently, I refrain from re-tracing discussions had elsewhere. The source of Christians’ confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture and tracing redemptive-historical themes throughout Scripture will be shown by assessing the following: the nature of Scripture’s inspiration and Scripture’s commentary on its own structure and content. Subsequently, we will evaluate a position on this same subject which places greater emphasis on the human author’s authorial intent and describe four issues with this position.
What is the nature of Scripture’s inspiration? Who is the ultimate author of God’s Word? This is important as it impacts how one reads the Bible. Scripture attests that it is ultimately from God.
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” – 2 Timothy 3:16-17
The phrase “All Scripture is breathed out by God” could be translated as “all Scripture is exhaled from God”. All of Scripture comes from God; similar to the way every word I say in conversation comes from me. What about the human authors of Scripture? What is the extent of their involvement in the process? Second Peter provides an answer.
“knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” – 2 Peter 1:20-21
Human authors were very much involved in writing the initial autographs of Scripture. However, God was the ultimate author behind what was written. They were “carried along by the Holy Spirit” as they “spoke from God”. God used the background, style, and mannerisms of each human author of Scripture to produce the autographs which fully stated what God wanted them to state. The human author’s style is still visible in his writings – Paul’s letters are different from Peter’s letters. However, the divine author is still the ultimate author, fully in control of what was written.
To what degree did the human authors of Scripture understand what they were writing? Arguably to a great degree, as they cross reference their other writings and other Scripture written by contemporaries (Col 4:16, 2 Peter 3:15-16). However, Scripture makes clear that they didn’t understand everything.
“Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.” – 1 Peter 1:10-11
This verse makes clear that the human authors of Scripture didn’t understand every detail of what they wrote to the fullest degree. They “searched and inquired carefully” about details God put to paper through their efforts. The book of Daniel reveals that Daniel didn’t understand all the revelation which he saw and wrote down.
“When I, Daniel, had seen the vision, I sought to understand it.” – Daniel 8:15a
“I heard, but I did not understand. Then I said, ‘O my lord, what shall be the outcome of these things?’” – Daniel 12:8
Second Peter describes that as redemptive-history has progressed, prior prophecy has become more confirmed. This implies a lesser degree of confirmation, or certainty on details, earlier in redemptive-history.
“And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts” – 2 Peter 1:19
Therefore, though Scripture was written through a human author, God is the ultimate author over all of it. The human author didn’t necessarily understand every detail, but the divine author did. In various discussions on biblical-theology or preaching Christ, it is often remarked that the human authors of Scripture “wrote better than they knew”. This references the idea that the human authors didn’t fully understanding every detail of Scripture they wrote down.
After looking at the inspiration of God’s Word, we now turn our attention to what God has said in his Word, about his Word. Has God made clear the structure and content of Scripture, such that we have confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture and in tracing themes like kingdom, covenant, and eschatology? God himself has testified that all Scripture points to Christ, and our confidence comes from God’s proclamations about his Word, contained within his Word. This is how Jesus described the Scriptures:
“[Jesus] said to them, ‘O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?’ And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” – Luke 24:25-27
“Then [Jesus] said to them, ‘These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.’ Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, ‘Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.’” – Luke 24:44-47
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me…Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” – John 5:39, 45-47
In addition to Jesus’ testimony, the apostles also provide testimony to this reality:
“Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, ‘This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.’” – Acts 17:1-3
“For this reason the Jews seized me in the temple and tried to kill me. To this day I have had the help that comes from God, and so I stand here testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would come to pass: that the Christ must suffer and that, by being the first to rise from the dead, he would proclaim light both to our people and to the Gentiles.” – Acts 26:21-23
As God has made clear in his Word, all Scripture is ultimately about Jesus Christ. All Scripture is ultimately rooted in, pointing to, or fulfilled by the person and work of Christ. Because all Scripture is about him, it shouldn’t surprise us that God’s Word also makes clear that Christ should be proclaimed from all of Scripture.
“For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God” – 1 Corinthians 1:22-24
“And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.” – 1 Corinthians 2:1-2
“…the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ.” – Colossians 1:27b-28
In addition to the above verse which make clear the mandate to preach Christ from all of Scripture; all the sermons in the book of Acts and the sermon that is the book of Hebrews are also explicitly Christ-centered. Therefore, we have both mandates and examples in God’s Word which make clear that all Scripture is about Jesus and he should be proclaimed from all of it. Additionally, the sermons provide examples and principles to help establish the methodology.
The centrality of Christ in the Bible also connects to how we proclaim the major redemptive-historical themes in the Bible, such as kingdom, covenant, and eschatology. Put simply, the kingdom theme finds its fulfillment in the kingdom brought to bear through Jesus’ person and work; the covenant theme finds its fulfillment in Jesus, the lord and servant of the covenant; and the eschatology theme looks forward to the eschatology that Jesus effects through his person and work. (These are simply stated. See here for a fuller treatment of these themes: kingdom, covenant, eschatology). Redemptive-historical themes are intimately connected to the person and work of Jesus, and proclaiming Jesus from all of Scripture utilizes the themes contained within.
We can now produce an answer to the initial question. What is the source of Christians’ confidence in proclaiming Christ from all of Scripture and tracing redemptive-historical themes throughout Scripture? Our confidence is in the divine author of Scripture – God himself. Though the human authors didn’t fully understand every detail of the Scripture they wrote, the divine author did. And the divine author has made known in his Word that Scripture is all ultimately about the person and work of Jesus Christ, who should be proclaimed from all of it. Therefore, our confidence in proclaiming Christ and tracing themes throughout is in the divine author who has revealed his intention for and design of his Word. God has provided the mandates, principles, and examples for proclaiming Christ from all of Scripture. This is where our confidence lies. We shall call this the classic understanding of our confidence (in preaching Christ from all of Scripture and tracing redemptive-historical themes throughout Scripture).
With the preceding discussion in mind, we can now assess an idea that has gained popularity in the last 10 years. This idea is that to have confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture, or to confidently trace the development of redemptive-historical themes in Scripture, we must prove the human authors’ authorial intent in the Scriptures. One advocate for this idea is James Hamilton Jr., PhD, professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The following are a few quotes from one of his books:
“I am claiming that the biblical authors intended to communicate the types that will be discussed in this book…. When the biblical authors composed their writings, they intended to signal to their audiences the presence of the promise-shaped patterns…the Old Testament authors intended to draw attention to the recurring sequences of events, and they did so with a view to the future.”[1]
“The most important criterion for determining what a text means is determining the intent of its human author.”[2]
"To summarize: the key features of typology are historical correspondence and escalation, and historical correspondence is established by: (1) the re-use of key terms, (2) the quotation of phrases or lines, (3) the repetition of sequences of events, and (4) similarity in salvation-historical significance or covenantal import. These means for establishing historical correspondence provide us with criteria that can be used to determine when later biblical authors mean to signal typological relationships with material in earlier passages of Scripture. If we can establish that a later author meant to draw attention to a typological pattern, we have warrant for regarding the historical correspondences, as well as the escalations in significance and the resulting typological development, as intended by the human author of the passage."[3]
“What about the intent of the divine author of Scripture?…we can determine the intent of the divine author of Scripture by determining the intent of the human author of Scripture.”[4]
Now, I won’t be able to do full justice to Hamilton’s position through a few quotations. If you want a more thorough understand of his position, there is no substitute for reading his book. However, I do believe the preceding quotations represent well the position that to have confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture, or to confidently trace the development of redemptive-historical themes in Scripture, one must prove the human authors’ authorial intent in the Scriptures. Many of Hamilton’s typological conclusions in his book aren’t necessarily very different from my own. However, I perceive several issues with the idea of proving the human authors’ authorial intent in order to be justified in showing typological development – key in proclaiming Christ and tracing redemptive-historical themes.
The first issue with having to prove the human author’s authorial intent is that it conflicts with 1 Peter 1:10-11 and the statements in Daniel which show the human authors didn’t always fully understand the Scripture they wrote down. To attempt to prove something that Scripture already says wasn’t always the case (the human authors’ understanding or intent) seems misguided.
The second issue with having to prove the human author’s authorial intent is it fails to reckon with Scripture’s robust testimony that God is the ultimate author behind all of Scripture. Despite the human authors of Scripture not always fully understanding what they wrote, God breathed out every word of Scripture and guided the human authors in writing the original autographs. In addition to this, God has already revealed in his Word the Christ-centered nature of Scripture, and he has progressively revealed the fulfillment of many redemptive-historical themes in Jesus’ person and work. Consequently, trying to prove the human author’s authorial intent seems unnecessary, given the divine author has already revealed his intent and purpose.
The third issue with having to prove the human author’s authorial intent is that one may not proclaim Christ from all of Scripture if he doesn’t feel he has satisfactorily proved the human author’s intent. I fear this position could hold one back from proclaiming God’s Word as his Word has revealed it should be. Given the clear mandates and examples in Scripture, to not accurately proclaim all Scripture in light of Christ is to give a sub-Christian proclamation.
The fourth issue with having to prove the human author’s authorial intent is one’s methodology in doing this could increase the risk of erroneous interpretation. Many of the methodological tools Hamilton lays out, such as re-using key terms and quotes from earlier Scripture, do exist within the typological hierarchy within which we interpret all Scripture in light of Christ. However, Hamilton does advocate for using some tools with which I am a little weary. One such tool is looking for chiasms in the broader literary structure to inform how one interprets the biblical book or passage under consideration. In the final chapter of Hamilton’s Typology: Understanding the Bible’s Promise-Shaped Patterns he sketches out the chiastic structure he perceives in the book of Genesis. He then uses parallel parts of the various chiasms to inform his interpretation of those parts. Now, I have no problem with using chiasms to inform biblical interpretation. Additionally, I acknowledge there are many chiasms in the Bible, including the book of Genesis. My issue is that if one feels compelled to use chiasms to prove the human author’s authorial intent, and one feels obliged to prove that intent before proclaiming Christ from or tracing themes in Scripture, might this person then force chiasms where there aren’t any in an attempt to satisfy his desire to prove the human author’s intent? I’m not saying that Hamilton does this. However, I feel this tool could be liable to misuse. A misguided individual could force a very generic chiastic structure on a passage or book of the Bible, just to provide rational to then interpret one part of the passage in light of another, to reach a conclusion that is otherwise exegetically unsound.
In 2023, I attended a breakout session at a conference where James Hamilton, PhD, and Thomas Schreiner, PhD, were both speakers. They were both professors at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBTS). During the Q&A part of the session, a current student at SBTS asked how does Dr. Schreiner reconcile his statement that the human authors of Scripture “wrote better than they knew” (Schreiner appears to hold a more classic understanding on this issue) with Dr. Hamilton’s position on proving the human author’s authorial intent. There was a quick moment of awkward silence wherein neither professor seemed to want to contradict the other. Ultimately, a gracious non-answer was provided and they moved onto the next question. This exemplifies that there is a difference between the classic understanding of Christians’ confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture and tracing redemptive-historical themes throughout, and the newer idea / emphasis advocated by others, including Dr. Hamilton.
To Christians who advocate that one must prove the human author’s authorial intent to have confidence in preaching Christ from all of Scripture, or to confidently trace the development of redemptive-historical themes in Scripture; I must respectfully disagree. I freely acknowledge that those Christians would likely come to many similar conclusions as I, and use similar exegetically tools. However, I disagree with the emphasis in their methodology. I believe that their position to prove the human author’s authorial intent conflicts with Scripture’s testimony that the human authors didn’t always fully understand the Scripture they wrote (1 Peter 1:10-11; Daniel 8:15, 12:8); their position fails to reckon with the divine author’s authorial intent made obvious in Scripture (Luke 24:25-27, 44-47; John 5:39, 45-47; Acts 17:1-3, 26:21-23; 1 Cor 1:22-24, 2:1-2; Col 1:27-28); their position risks one giving a sub-Christian, non-Christ-centered, proclamation of God’s Word; and their position increases the risk of erroneous interpretation through misused or forced methodology. As made clear in the first half of this article, our confidence in proclaiming Christ from all of Scripture and tracing redemptive-historical themes throughout Scripture is in the divine author of Scripture – God himself. God has revealed his intention for and design of Scripture. He has provided the mandates, principles, and examples in Scripture for proclaiming Christ from all of Scripture. Let us do so and encourage others unto the same.
[1] James Hamilton Jr., Typology: Understanding the Bible’s Promise-Shaped Patterns (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2022), 4-5.
[2] Ibid., 18.
[3] Ibid., 24.
[4] Ibid., 28.