Re: We have to go back, but not to square one

All we have left, as far as the content of his activity is concerned, is a prophetic witness and a focus on creation backed up by a very contentless and anarchic biblical hermeneutic.

Peter, I’ll ignore the insult and simply quote what I wrote in the comment:

When that victory has been achieved, the testimony of the New Testament is that they reign with him over God’s people throughout the coming ages. That is the fulfilment of the kingdom of God expectation. So we now exist as God’s ‘new creation’ people under the lordship of Christ, under the sign of redemptive grace.

OK, it’s not the way you’re accustomed to seeing things, but to my mind it takes the biblical narrative and its relation to history very seriously - much more seriously than modern evangelicalism does - and I fail to see how it can possibly be dismissed as ‘existential’. It makes the whole Bible, and not just the New Testament, which is where you rather end up, relevant for the life and mission of the people of God today. It recognizes that the New Testament makes Christ pre-eminent, but it also recognizes, as the New Testament does, that the story of Jesus constitutes a decisive and transformative episode in the history of the family of Abraham.