Paul Manata says:

This is a great book. Alexander starts with Revelation 21 and 22’s teaching on the new heavens and earth and the temple-city that comes down from heaven. He shows that this is simply the culmination of what God planned on from the beginning—the institution of an Arboreal temple-city from which God reigns and lives with his people. So Alexander (a highly regarded Biblical Theology scholar) lays out what he calls the biblical meta-story by focusing on the bookends of Genesis 1 and 2 and Revelation 21 and 22.

Alexander’s notion of the earth’s purpose as God’s garden temple-city is a popular theme (laid out rigorously in Beale’s The Temple and the Church’s Mission, for example) and he pulls from many sources to establish this. Man was to extend the garden over all the earth. Adam and Eve’s descendents would populate the earth as God’s holy image bearers (in the ANE kings would place their images in all their domain to show that they owned it and were sovereign over it). He then points out that from the beginning the plan went astray. From then on, Alexander argues, we read of God’s plan to bring about what he initially planned from the beginning. Alexander traces this theme of a temple-city with holy inhabitants from Abraham to the New Testament church. Along the way in this fascinating study (which he calls an introduction to thematic Biblical Theology) Alexander discussion such themes as God’s sovereignty, Satan and the world’s warfare against God, the slaughter of the lamb, redemption and sanctification, and assurance in living as a citizen of the kingdom as opposed to Babylon. This last theme is interesting. While Alexander certainly doesn’t endorse any form of theonomy or theocracy, he does seem to say some things that might be at odds with the popular “dual citizens” view. Christians are called to flee Babylon, not participate as citizens of it (he shows this from Revelation and also pulls from Bauckham’s commentary on Revelation on precisely this matter). Yes, we have to live in particular cities that are not the New Jerusalem, and we are “citizens” of it. But the sense the Bible understands “citizens of the city” wouldn’t seem to apply. So, while it is true that we are “citizens” of our respective countries it is uninteresting as a theological point given how the Revelation is using this term. Call the uninteresting sense “citizen 1″ and the Revelation sense “citizen 2.” This means that we Christians are dual citizens 1 but not dual citizens 2. The latter invokes more Van Tillian worldview antithesis themes.

In this illuminating study Alexander notes that John’s vision in Revelation of a temple wasn’t some esoteric vaporous abstraction but is rooted in the Old Testament, thus serving to unite the testaments into a coherent storyline. Alexander also touches on issues not the main subject of his book. For example, though the book deals with eschatology broadly, it does not look at the millennial position. But Alexander takes views of some of the “golden age” passages not in accord with postmillennialism. He places them in the new heavens and earth. He also intimates that the next time Jesus returns bodily will be at the consummation, thus denying premillennialism. As an Amillennialist, though, he doesn’t seem too pessimistic. For example, he claims that “By living in obedience to Christ, his disciples participate in the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth. This kingdom is not restricted to national boundaries, but is gradually expanding to fill the whole earth. Yet as this divine kingdom continues to grow, with more and more people acknowledging the supreme sovereignty of God, many of the earth’s inhabitants defiantly refuse to enthrone God as Lord” (96).

Yet, while this brief detour indicating millennial affinities is worthwhile (as are many other ones), Alexander takes some weird detours too. For example, he spends three pages taking some shots at capitalism. While I agree with the basics of his discussion here, he seems to simply rest on anti-capitalist caricatures of capitalism. He engages in the common mistake of confusing capitalism with capitalists. He also falls for the fallacy that the “rich” and the “poor” and the world’s “wealth” are static categories and the “rich” have a large portion of the “total wealth” while the poor are left fighting over the scraps. These categories are not static. Furthermore, “wealth” isn’t a static pie that is cut up into pieces. In fact, capitalism (broadly, though I understand some forms of capitalism are not capitalist) is the cause of building wealth so that the world is moving upward in a linear fashion in terms of things like wealth and life expectancy [...]. He also confuses self-interest with greed, taking his understanding of capitalism more from Gordon Gekko than a Hayek, a Friedman, a Sowell, a Mankiw, a Richards etc., though I realize these thinkers have their deficiencies). I felt this digression was unhelpful and would have rather the three pages been spent elucidating his main points some more. Anyway, I guess I shouldn’t be too hard, Alexander is a theologian and not an economist, after all.

All in all, this was a very good book. It inspires as well as well as illuminates by looking at some of the great biblical themes Christians love. Alexander shows a tight unity pervading the Bible and shows how all the themes have their fulfillment in Christ and their end in the arboreal temple-city of the New Jerusalem.

Rating: 5 / 5