What do you think?
Rate this book
Goldsworthy Trilogy #1
Gospel and Kingdom
Gospel and Kingdom is concerned with finding the gospel principles inherent in the Pentateuch and historical books of the Old Testament
152 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1981
18 people are currently reading
499 people want to read
About the author
Graeme Goldsworthy
32 books86 followersGraeme Goldsworthy is an Australian Anglican and Old Testament scholar. Now retired, Goldsworthy was formerly lecturer in Old Testament, biblical theology and hermeneutics at Moore Theological College in Sydney, Australia. He is the author of "According to Plan" (IVP, 1991), "Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture" (Eerdmans, 2000) and "Proverbs: The Tree of Life" (CEP, 1993). Goldsworthy has an MA from Cambridge University and a ThM and PhD from Union Theological Seminary in Virginia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 82 reviews
August 14, 2021
Dans ce live, l'auteur veut aider le lecteur à mieux comprendre et appliquer l'Ancien Testament, en saisissant l'unité de la Bible et le lien qui existe entre l'Ancien et le Nouveau Testament. Bon livre de théologique biblique, mais pas forcément le premier livre sur le sujet que je recommanderai (un peu complexe par moment).
February 12, 2025
My favorite kind of book - one that sharpens the saw so you can better understand the Bible.
Highly recommend - Gospel and Kingdom is very short and accessible.
At the time of writing (1981) the author complained there's "hardly a book to be found on the subject of biblical theology." This book changed that, catalyzing a wave of great books and seminary classes on Biblical theology.
Biblical theology connects the dots between Moses and the prophets and Jesus and us. It shows how "the Bible is not a collection of isolated…verses to be used at random" but a "single story of salvation."
This unity of the Bible "is not an academic question, but one in which even our children" need to understand.
Goldsworthy's chief concern is "the recovery of the Old Testament as part of the Christian Bible."
"The most compelling reason for Christians to read and study the Old Testament lies in the New Testament. The New Testament drives us back to the Old Testament because it everywhere presupposes the Old Testament as the basis of the gospel."
Particularly helpful is G&K's explanation that the "kingdom of God" is THE key to reading the bible through the lens of Christ.
Goldsworthy points out that if moderns read the Bible at all, we tend to only read the parts that we feel apply directly to us, that are from our same church age; so we limit our reading to the epistles. That inevitably, though unintentionally, makes the Bible all about us. Instead of rooting ourselves in the millennia-long story of God's reconciliation with humans, we are cut off in self-absorption.
Because of our lack of understanding of the unity of Scripture we tend to read the OT "as if they were a mere succession of events from which we draw little moral lessons for life. Paradoxically [this] may even lead us away from the basic foundations of the gospel."
"Is it in fact true that if God took care of baby Moses, God will take care of me? But why should [we] be privileged to identify with Moses rather than with other Hebrew children at the time who may not have escaped Pharaoh’s wrath?"
Incredibly helpful book for understanding the Bible.
Highly recommend - Gospel and Kingdom is very short and accessible.
At the time of writing (1981) the author complained there's "hardly a book to be found on the subject of biblical theology." This book changed that, catalyzing a wave of great books and seminary classes on Biblical theology.
Biblical theology connects the dots between Moses and the prophets and Jesus and us. It shows how "the Bible is not a collection of isolated…verses to be used at random" but a "single story of salvation."
This unity of the Bible "is not an academic question, but one in which even our children" need to understand.
Goldsworthy's chief concern is "the recovery of the Old Testament as part of the Christian Bible."
"The most compelling reason for Christians to read and study the Old Testament lies in the New Testament. The New Testament drives us back to the Old Testament because it everywhere presupposes the Old Testament as the basis of the gospel."
Particularly helpful is G&K's explanation that the "kingdom of God" is THE key to reading the bible through the lens of Christ.
Goldsworthy points out that if moderns read the Bible at all, we tend to only read the parts that we feel apply directly to us, that are from our same church age; so we limit our reading to the epistles. That inevitably, though unintentionally, makes the Bible all about us. Instead of rooting ourselves in the millennia-long story of God's reconciliation with humans, we are cut off in self-absorption.
Because of our lack of understanding of the unity of Scripture we tend to read the OT "as if they were a mere succession of events from which we draw little moral lessons for life. Paradoxically [this] may even lead us away from the basic foundations of the gospel."
"Is it in fact true that if God took care of baby Moses, God will take care of me? But why should [we] be privileged to identify with Moses rather than with other Hebrew children at the time who may not have escaped Pharaoh’s wrath?"
Incredibly helpful book for understanding the Bible.
May 6, 2012
Another gift thanks to Matt Pitts.
'Gospel & Kingdom' is one of the best introductions to Biblical Theology that I have ever seen, even with it's absolutely repulsive book cover.
Goldsworthy doesn't use overly complicated language and writes to lay Christians to help them understand the purpose of the OT for Christians. He manages to skim across the general narrative of the OT in under a hundred pages and then focuses on how various OT passages point to the coming Christ.
There wasn't anything particularly new for me and the book doesn't pretend to be a full Biblical theological treatment, but I really haven't yet found a more concise and clear intro to Christians as to how to read the OT. I will be recommending this book to Christians who need help understanding the OT from the perspective of the NT.
...and really, the book cover is one of the worst.
'Gospel & Kingdom' is one of the best introductions to Biblical Theology that I have ever seen, even with it's absolutely repulsive book cover.
Goldsworthy doesn't use overly complicated language and writes to lay Christians to help them understand the purpose of the OT for Christians. He manages to skim across the general narrative of the OT in under a hundred pages and then focuses on how various OT passages point to the coming Christ.
There wasn't anything particularly new for me and the book doesn't pretend to be a full Biblical theological treatment, but I really haven't yet found a more concise and clear intro to Christians as to how to read the OT. I will be recommending this book to Christians who need help understanding the OT from the perspective of the NT.
...and really, the book cover is one of the worst.
January 13, 2015
An academic exposition of the Old Testament
18 July 2012
Well, it seems as if I am the only person on Goodreads that has given this book less than four, though I do notice that a couple of people have given it a three. I do expect to get some nasty comments to my commentary here, however I assure you that I have no intention of getting into an argument with anybody over my position on Christianity. First of all, at this stage of my life I am loathe to call myself an evangelical, particularly since to me evangelical seems to suggest arrogance, stubbornness, and a refusal to acknowledge that one has actually done wrong. To some evangelicals that I know the concept of salvation by grace simply means that they do not and cannot sin and anybody who dares criticise them is either wrong or misguided. In a way, the most skillful tactic that evangelicals have developed today is the skill of obfuscation, especially when it comes to their own failures.
Before I continue I believe that it is best to outline my position of Christianity. I believe in one true God as outlined in the Bible, and that Jesus is God in the flesh, fully human and fully divine. I believe that he came to Earth no only as a sacrifice for our sins but also to teach us about God and to teach us how God created us to live. I believe that the Bible is the revelation of God and that it is inerrant. However I also believe that the Bible is much more than a dry, academic, ancient text, but that it is a living, breathing, spiritual book shrouded in myth and mysticism, and to me, modern academic Christianity has discarded the living element of the Bible to chain in up in their own humanist philosophy.
I do believe that Gospel and Kingdom is useful and helpful in understanding the Old Testament, however the problem that I had with this book, having only recently read it, is the same problem that I had with Don Carson's A Call to a Spiritual Reformation, and that is that I have heard it all before. In his introduction, Goldsworthy laments that at the time there was a lack of literature that people could use to help them understand the Old Testament, so he set out to write a book and laid down one way of reading the Old Testament. However, the problem that has arisen is that because the book became so popular (and because the book came out of a major Australian theological college) that it has pretty much become the only way of reading the Old Testament. While I agree with him that a hit and miss interpretation does not get the best of the Old Testament, I will argue that neither does a rigid academic approach, and that is the problem that I have found with modern Christianity:t it has become way too academic.
Christianity has become dominated by the theological colleges, and the interpretation and understanding of scripture has been hijacked by a very rigid method. Terms like Biblical Theology, Systematic Theology, and Hermeneutics (just to name a few) have arisen to describe a number of ways of reading the Bible. I remember that churches have constantly said that when we read the Bible we should always ask God to speak to us as we read the scriptures, however my concern is that while we may ask God to speak to us, we will only let him speak to us out of the rigid restrictions that we have created. There are a number of Christians out there that attack the concept of humanism, however this academic approach to Christianity that I see coming out of a lot of universities to me reeks of humanism. Further, the theological college has created what is termed as a barrier to entry. Unless you have a theology degree (and sometimes higher) then you are not qualified to speak on the Bible, and in a way, God is not allowed to speak to you unless he follows the rules set down by the colleges.
I will give an example of how I find academic Christianity destroying the Bible. Since the 19th Century scholars have struggled over the fact that the book of Isaiah predicts events that happened hundreds of years after the book was written, and this caused such a concern that the scholars decided to create Deutero-Isaiah (or second Isaiah) to write the parts of Isaiah after the events that they predicted. The same was done with the book of Daniel, being taken out of its Babylonian context and shifted two hundred years into the future after the appearance and death of Antiochus Epiphanes. I have been to evangelical Bible colleges that have then accepted this rendering of these two books, thus undermining what I consider to be the sovereignty of God and his prophetic nature.
I shall now spend some time criticising Goldsworthy's methodology, namely because this methodology is what many evangelical churches have taken on board. First, he describes the Old Testament not as a religious history, because that is from the people, but as theological history. This reminds me of something that I used to be taught: Christianity is not a religion because a religion is defined by earning our way to heaven, whereas Christianity offers salvation as a free gift. So, when a friend said that I was religious, I proudly stood up and said 'I am not religious, I am a Christian'. My friend then looked at the others with an odd look on his face and replied by saying 'so, you are not religious because you are religious? Do you believe in God?' I said 'yes', and he replied, 'so you are religious?'. If we go any further, I will assure you that you will descend into an argument that will simply result in you losing friends. Okay, to other Christians, sure, kid ourselves, and tell each other that we are not religious, but when we are talking with non-Christians, the best thing to do is to simply nod and smile.
Now, I want to talk about Goldsworthy's use of grammar. Honestly it is atrocious. In one spot he says 'God's people is … now this may sound like bad grammer but I assure you it is not'. My response to that it 'I assure you that it is. It is bad grammar, very bad grammar'. Personally I do not care how the Hebrew writes that phrase, we are not reading Hebrew we a reading English, and to be blunt, unless the noun is a collective noun, you do not use 'is' you use 'are'. There is no two ways about that. You simply cannot change grammar to suit your own purpose. I don't even care if you consider the noun 'people of God' as being a singular, it is not, it is a plural, and it will always be a plural. If you wish to use that phrase in the singular, find an English word that is singular, such as nation.
Another thing he does a couple of times is to tell us about the literal interpretation of a passage, that being from John 1, 'and he dwelt among us'. Goldsworthy then goes on to say that the Greek literally means 'tabernacled'. Personally, there are two problems with that. The first being that you do not, and never, literally translate a language. Why? Because it makes no sense whatsoever. When you translate, you read the language, get the idea that the language is expressing, and then write the same idea down using English. Take for instance this German phrase 'werden sie mit mir einkaufen gehen'. Translated into English it says 'will you go shopping with me?' Literally it says 'will you with me shopping to go?' Okay, we understand the meaning, but translating it literally is impossible because the rules of English do not allow us to do that. Isn't it funny that when it comes to moral and civil laws we are not allowed to break them, but when it comes to grammatical laws, all bets are off.
I also notice that in some places it is okay for them to talk about the literal meaning of the Greek, and other places we completely ignore it, and even try to explain it away. Romans 1:1 says 'Paul, servant of Jesus Christ'. The Greek uses the word doulos, which translated into English, means 'slave'. When I confronted a pastor about this he said (despite knowing that I knew Greek, but then because he had a Theology degree and I didn't, my opinion was worthless) 'it can also mean servant'. Actually, no it can't. The Greek word for servant is oikonomos. Simply put you cannot pick and chose that which you want to transliterate and that which you do not.
Now, let us consider the word tabernacled. Okay, a mature Christian will know that the tabernacle was the tent that the Israelites built in the desert to remind them of God's presence. Actually, I just checked the Greek translation of John 1:14, and the word that is used for dwelt is eskenosen. I am not going to go for a translation, however we must also remember than Jesus did not speak in Greek but in Aramaic, and as such many parts of the New Testament are the Greek translation of the Aramaic (including the entire book of Matthew). Here I go, I am criticising academic Christianity and I am being academic myself. Anyway, as I have indicated above, while we can use the English language, and push it to its limits (as Shakespeare did), we are still bound by the rules, namely that it has to make sense. George Orwell once posed a number of simple rules, and finished it off by saying, follow these rules unless what you are saying makes no sense, then happily butcher it. In relation to this discussion, some have even suggested that the word 'tented' is a better translation. My response is no it is not. Tented is not a word, and the noun tent cannot be turned into a verb. Anyway, if you want to use a word with that meaning then we have a perfectly good word to use, and that is 'camped'.
I said said quite a lot so far, and there are still two more books in his trilogy to read, so I think I will leave it there, except to finish off by saying that my position, the major theme that runs through the Bible is that of the fall and redemption of humanity, and the question that the Bible goes out of its way to answer is 'how then shall we live'. Actually, there is one more thing that I want to discuss so I will finish it off with that, and once again it involves Goldsworthy manipulating and butchering the English language. In his book he talks about the reason for Christ coming to Earth, but during this discussion he says that we focus too much on Christ's good works and his divinity. While his works are important they are not the focal point, and while his divinity is important it is not the focal point. In doing this he has effectively pushed this into the background and we no longer think about Christ's good works or his divinity, because despite him saying that it is important, we do not think of it as important. The focal point, he says, is the resurrection. Now, in saying this I am probably going to make quite a few enemies amongst evangelical circles, but I will go out on a limb and say that outside of Christ's good works and divinity (as well as his humanity) the resurrection is meaningless. I am then going to suggest that he is not the only figure in mythology (just because it is mythology does not mean that it is not true, that is not the nature of myth) that is a dying resurrecting God-king. Okay, you may ask, name ten. I will: Odysseus, Aeneas, Mithras, Osiris, Heracles, Orpheus, Dionysius, Theseus, Persephone, Aidonis, and Attis, and they are just the ones (and not all of them) from the Eastern Mediterranean. To be honest, they are permeated throughout the cultures of Earth (even Odin gets a mention).
No, my position is that Christ's resurrection is only important because of the context in which it exists. If it was only the resurrection that was important, God could have done that during Herod's massacre. Instead, while Christ's journey in this world was always focused on the cross, it was the path that took him there that makes his death and resurrection so important. In his journey he teaches us about God, about himself and his mission, and most importantly, how then do we live. In fact, it is the how then do we live as redeemed, reformed, evolved, human beings that is the central aspect of the Bible. The resurrection is simply the method that God uses to redeem us, once redeemed, we are to live as redeemed human beings, and that, my friend, is what the Bible tells us.
18 July 2012
Well, it seems as if I am the only person on Goodreads that has given this book less than four, though I do notice that a couple of people have given it a three. I do expect to get some nasty comments to my commentary here, however I assure you that I have no intention of getting into an argument with anybody over my position on Christianity. First of all, at this stage of my life I am loathe to call myself an evangelical, particularly since to me evangelical seems to suggest arrogance, stubbornness, and a refusal to acknowledge that one has actually done wrong. To some evangelicals that I know the concept of salvation by grace simply means that they do not and cannot sin and anybody who dares criticise them is either wrong or misguided. In a way, the most skillful tactic that evangelicals have developed today is the skill of obfuscation, especially when it comes to their own failures.
Before I continue I believe that it is best to outline my position of Christianity. I believe in one true God as outlined in the Bible, and that Jesus is God in the flesh, fully human and fully divine. I believe that he came to Earth no only as a sacrifice for our sins but also to teach us about God and to teach us how God created us to live. I believe that the Bible is the revelation of God and that it is inerrant. However I also believe that the Bible is much more than a dry, academic, ancient text, but that it is a living, breathing, spiritual book shrouded in myth and mysticism, and to me, modern academic Christianity has discarded the living element of the Bible to chain in up in their own humanist philosophy.
I do believe that Gospel and Kingdom is useful and helpful in understanding the Old Testament, however the problem that I had with this book, having only recently read it, is the same problem that I had with Don Carson's A Call to a Spiritual Reformation, and that is that I have heard it all before. In his introduction, Goldsworthy laments that at the time there was a lack of literature that people could use to help them understand the Old Testament, so he set out to write a book and laid down one way of reading the Old Testament. However, the problem that has arisen is that because the book became so popular (and because the book came out of a major Australian theological college) that it has pretty much become the only way of reading the Old Testament. While I agree with him that a hit and miss interpretation does not get the best of the Old Testament, I will argue that neither does a rigid academic approach, and that is the problem that I have found with modern Christianity:t it has become way too academic.
Christianity has become dominated by the theological colleges, and the interpretation and understanding of scripture has been hijacked by a very rigid method. Terms like Biblical Theology, Systematic Theology, and Hermeneutics (just to name a few) have arisen to describe a number of ways of reading the Bible. I remember that churches have constantly said that when we read the Bible we should always ask God to speak to us as we read the scriptures, however my concern is that while we may ask God to speak to us, we will only let him speak to us out of the rigid restrictions that we have created. There are a number of Christians out there that attack the concept of humanism, however this academic approach to Christianity that I see coming out of a lot of universities to me reeks of humanism. Further, the theological college has created what is termed as a barrier to entry. Unless you have a theology degree (and sometimes higher) then you are not qualified to speak on the Bible, and in a way, God is not allowed to speak to you unless he follows the rules set down by the colleges.
I will give an example of how I find academic Christianity destroying the Bible. Since the 19th Century scholars have struggled over the fact that the book of Isaiah predicts events that happened hundreds of years after the book was written, and this caused such a concern that the scholars decided to create Deutero-Isaiah (or second Isaiah) to write the parts of Isaiah after the events that they predicted. The same was done with the book of Daniel, being taken out of its Babylonian context and shifted two hundred years into the future after the appearance and death of Antiochus Epiphanes. I have been to evangelical Bible colleges that have then accepted this rendering of these two books, thus undermining what I consider to be the sovereignty of God and his prophetic nature.
I shall now spend some time criticising Goldsworthy's methodology, namely because this methodology is what many evangelical churches have taken on board. First, he describes the Old Testament not as a religious history, because that is from the people, but as theological history. This reminds me of something that I used to be taught: Christianity is not a religion because a religion is defined by earning our way to heaven, whereas Christianity offers salvation as a free gift. So, when a friend said that I was religious, I proudly stood up and said 'I am not religious, I am a Christian'. My friend then looked at the others with an odd look on his face and replied by saying 'so, you are not religious because you are religious? Do you believe in God?' I said 'yes', and he replied, 'so you are religious?'. If we go any further, I will assure you that you will descend into an argument that will simply result in you losing friends. Okay, to other Christians, sure, kid ourselves, and tell each other that we are not religious, but when we are talking with non-Christians, the best thing to do is to simply nod and smile.
Now, I want to talk about Goldsworthy's use of grammar. Honestly it is atrocious. In one spot he says 'God's people is … now this may sound like bad grammer but I assure you it is not'. My response to that it 'I assure you that it is. It is bad grammar, very bad grammar'. Personally I do not care how the Hebrew writes that phrase, we are not reading Hebrew we a reading English, and to be blunt, unless the noun is a collective noun, you do not use 'is' you use 'are'. There is no two ways about that. You simply cannot change grammar to suit your own purpose. I don't even care if you consider the noun 'people of God' as being a singular, it is not, it is a plural, and it will always be a plural. If you wish to use that phrase in the singular, find an English word that is singular, such as nation.
Another thing he does a couple of times is to tell us about the literal interpretation of a passage, that being from John 1, 'and he dwelt among us'. Goldsworthy then goes on to say that the Greek literally means 'tabernacled'. Personally, there are two problems with that. The first being that you do not, and never, literally translate a language. Why? Because it makes no sense whatsoever. When you translate, you read the language, get the idea that the language is expressing, and then write the same idea down using English. Take for instance this German phrase 'werden sie mit mir einkaufen gehen'. Translated into English it says 'will you go shopping with me?' Literally it says 'will you with me shopping to go?' Okay, we understand the meaning, but translating it literally is impossible because the rules of English do not allow us to do that. Isn't it funny that when it comes to moral and civil laws we are not allowed to break them, but when it comes to grammatical laws, all bets are off.
I also notice that in some places it is okay for them to talk about the literal meaning of the Greek, and other places we completely ignore it, and even try to explain it away. Romans 1:1 says 'Paul, servant of Jesus Christ'. The Greek uses the word doulos, which translated into English, means 'slave'. When I confronted a pastor about this he said (despite knowing that I knew Greek, but then because he had a Theology degree and I didn't, my opinion was worthless) 'it can also mean servant'. Actually, no it can't. The Greek word for servant is oikonomos. Simply put you cannot pick and chose that which you want to transliterate and that which you do not.
Now, let us consider the word tabernacled. Okay, a mature Christian will know that the tabernacle was the tent that the Israelites built in the desert to remind them of God's presence. Actually, I just checked the Greek translation of John 1:14, and the word that is used for dwelt is eskenosen. I am not going to go for a translation, however we must also remember than Jesus did not speak in Greek but in Aramaic, and as such many parts of the New Testament are the Greek translation of the Aramaic (including the entire book of Matthew). Here I go, I am criticising academic Christianity and I am being academic myself. Anyway, as I have indicated above, while we can use the English language, and push it to its limits (as Shakespeare did), we are still bound by the rules, namely that it has to make sense. George Orwell once posed a number of simple rules, and finished it off by saying, follow these rules unless what you are saying makes no sense, then happily butcher it. In relation to this discussion, some have even suggested that the word 'tented' is a better translation. My response is no it is not. Tented is not a word, and the noun tent cannot be turned into a verb. Anyway, if you want to use a word with that meaning then we have a perfectly good word to use, and that is 'camped'.
I said said quite a lot so far, and there are still two more books in his trilogy to read, so I think I will leave it there, except to finish off by saying that my position, the major theme that runs through the Bible is that of the fall and redemption of humanity, and the question that the Bible goes out of its way to answer is 'how then shall we live'. Actually, there is one more thing that I want to discuss so I will finish it off with that, and once again it involves Goldsworthy manipulating and butchering the English language. In his book he talks about the reason for Christ coming to Earth, but during this discussion he says that we focus too much on Christ's good works and his divinity. While his works are important they are not the focal point, and while his divinity is important it is not the focal point. In doing this he has effectively pushed this into the background and we no longer think about Christ's good works or his divinity, because despite him saying that it is important, we do not think of it as important. The focal point, he says, is the resurrection. Now, in saying this I am probably going to make quite a few enemies amongst evangelical circles, but I will go out on a limb and say that outside of Christ's good works and divinity (as well as his humanity) the resurrection is meaningless. I am then going to suggest that he is not the only figure in mythology (just because it is mythology does not mean that it is not true, that is not the nature of myth) that is a dying resurrecting God-king. Okay, you may ask, name ten. I will: Odysseus, Aeneas, Mithras, Osiris, Heracles, Orpheus, Dionysius, Theseus, Persephone, Aidonis, and Attis, and they are just the ones (and not all of them) from the Eastern Mediterranean. To be honest, they are permeated throughout the cultures of Earth (even Odin gets a mention).
No, my position is that Christ's resurrection is only important because of the context in which it exists. If it was only the resurrection that was important, God could have done that during Herod's massacre. Instead, while Christ's journey in this world was always focused on the cross, it was the path that took him there that makes his death and resurrection so important. In his journey he teaches us about God, about himself and his mission, and most importantly, how then do we live. In fact, it is the how then do we live as redeemed, reformed, evolved, human beings that is the central aspect of the Bible. The resurrection is simply the method that God uses to redeem us, once redeemed, we are to live as redeemed human beings, and that, my friend, is what the Bible tells us.
November 18, 2025
3.5 ⭐
Este libro nos recuerda la necesidad de estudiar el Antiguo Testamento pero desde una mirada cristológica. Las piedras que usó David para matar a Goliat no deberían estar relacionadas con características como la obediencia y el servicio; los nombres de las puertas de la ciudad de Jerusalén reconstruída por Nehemías no deberían tener una aplicación directa a nuestras vidas. Toda la interpretación bíblica debe realizarse teniendo su contexto en la historia del reino y desde ahi relacionándolo con el Evangelio.
Luego de hacernos reflexionar en la importancia del estudio del Antiguo Testamento y de los errores más comúnes que tenemos al hacerlo, el autor nos presenta la perspectiva del Reino de Dios y como este fue revelado durante la historia bíblica. Los últimos capítulos nos brindan principios y ejemplos para poner en práctica todo esto. El libro contiene un par de apéndices útiles tanto para estudio en grupos como para poder profundizar con ejemplos prácticos en aplicar lo leído a nuestra lectura de la Biblia.
Este libro nos recuerda la necesidad de estudiar el Antiguo Testamento pero desde una mirada cristológica. Las piedras que usó David para matar a Goliat no deberían estar relacionadas con características como la obediencia y el servicio; los nombres de las puertas de la ciudad de Jerusalén reconstruída por Nehemías no deberían tener una aplicación directa a nuestras vidas. Toda la interpretación bíblica debe realizarse teniendo su contexto en la historia del reino y desde ahi relacionándolo con el Evangelio.
Luego de hacernos reflexionar en la importancia del estudio del Antiguo Testamento y de los errores más comúnes que tenemos al hacerlo, el autor nos presenta la perspectiva del Reino de Dios y como este fue revelado durante la historia bíblica. Los últimos capítulos nos brindan principios y ejemplos para poner en práctica todo esto. El libro contiene un par de apéndices útiles tanto para estudio en grupos como para poder profundizar con ejemplos prácticos en aplicar lo leído a nuestra lectura de la Biblia.
September 6, 2025
How should we interpret the Old Testament? Goldsworthy calls for a Christological approach & I agree with him. This is a short book explaining how we should understand the Old Testament. His basic framework is God’s people in God’s place under God’s rule. It started out a little slow but the 2nd half of the book was really good.
January 3, 2025
So good! I read through this quickly in preparation for teaching a Sunday School class on Biblical Theology, so I didn't have time to soak in it, but I can tell this will be a wonderful resource for anyone seeking to understand how Christ is the most important interpretive key of the entire Bible. Very easy to read.
April 1, 2025
I’m on a hot streak of 5 stars. This was phenomenal!
February 8, 2020
This is an excellent introduction to biblical theology, and it lays out a very accessible and clear outline of the coherency and unity of Scripture.
I’m appreciative of the way Goldsworthy delves sufficiently into the recurring themes and types of scripture without becoming too immersed in all the complications that invariably exist.
Does this leave the reader wanting more of his analysis? Certainly, but that’s why this is merely an introduction.
This book is a foundational text for the growth of any Bible-believing Christian.
I’m appreciative of the way Goldsworthy delves sufficiently into the recurring themes and types of scripture without becoming too immersed in all the complications that invariably exist.
Does this leave the reader wanting more of his analysis? Certainly, but that’s why this is merely an introduction.
This book is a foundational text for the growth of any Bible-believing Christian.
May 5, 2019
I think i need to reread this 3 more times. So well written for such a huge topic on approaching the OT. It is so concise and well structured and its easy to read. But i think for me to get full use out of the book i need to spend more time dwelling on the ideas and truly fleshing out every statement he says. Eager to reread!
August 31, 2019
An amazing overview of biblical theology. I am going to use this in discipleship groups as a basis for understanding the old testament and new.
December 29, 2023
A great introduction to Biblical Theology / OT interpretation for anyone at any level of familiarity.
August 9, 2023
If you want to brush up on reading the entire story of the Bible as one unity through a Christological lens, this is for you. A must-read for anyone reading biblical theology. Easy to understand.
January 7, 2024
"What man cannot do in order to be accepted with God, this God himself has done for us in the person of Jesus Christ"
January 13, 2024
This reading was much heavier than my brain has been used to lately, so I had to take it slowly, but it was worth the brain power. This is a fantastic book for anyone seeking to understand the unity of the Bible.
Read
April 18, 2020The theology in this book is sound. Goldsworthy explains how the Old Testament points towards the coming of Christ in the New Testament. Goldsworthy clearly demonstrates the importance of seeing New Testament teaching in the Old Testament scriptures. What is written in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms is not obsolete because of the New Testament but is relevant for the 21st century. Jesus himself said he had come to fulfil what was written in the Old Testament. "Don’t think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfil. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass away from the law until all things are accomplished" (Matthew 5:17-18). Goldsworthy also encourage us to see Jesus and the gospel in the Old Testament. Appendix A contains a basic list of Bible readings so you grasp the salient features and themes of the Old Testament; I found this tough going but a worthwhile exercise on completion. Appendix B has questions linked to each chapter which help me to embed my learning from the book. Appendix C provides ten passages from the Old Testament for you to interpret asking yourself three questions:
1) What did the text mean to the original writer?
2) What does the text mean in the light of the Gospel?
3) What is its specific meaning to me or my hearers now?
I commend this book to anyone wanting to build a good theological knowledge of the Bible.
1) What did the text mean to the original writer?
2) What does the text mean in the light of the Gospel?
3) What is its specific meaning to me or my hearers now?
I commend this book to anyone wanting to build a good theological knowledge of the Bible.
January 27, 2017
"Underlying [this book] has been the conviction that twentieth century evangelical Christians have experienced a radical loss of direction in handling the Old Testament."
I know of no other book of 150 pages that introduces the reader to grappling with the Old Testament in such a masterful way. In fact, it was a easy read for me only because his ideas have permeated without measure the current Neo-Calvinism/resurgence of Reformation-hermeneutics that I have been well acquainted with them already. Christ is the key of all biblical interpretation, and he unifies and fulfills all of biblical history. In him all the stories, prophetic writings and (even) wisdom literature come alive and have real and final meaning.
His approach is nothing new, but merely an attempt to lay out in simple fashion many of the ideas of Luther and the Reformers (and many of the church fathers) concerning the role of Christ as the center-point and key of biblical interpretation. It's short, yet amazingly comprehensive. This is a book I will gladly re-read for the sake of refreshment.
Can't believe it's taken me so many years to finally read this book after it's been recommended to me 1,000 times. Excited to dig into the remainder of his trilogy.
I know of no other book of 150 pages that introduces the reader to grappling with the Old Testament in such a masterful way. In fact, it was a easy read for me only because his ideas have permeated without measure the current Neo-Calvinism/resurgence of Reformation-hermeneutics that I have been well acquainted with them already. Christ is the key of all biblical interpretation, and he unifies and fulfills all of biblical history. In him all the stories, prophetic writings and (even) wisdom literature come alive and have real and final meaning.
His approach is nothing new, but merely an attempt to lay out in simple fashion many of the ideas of Luther and the Reformers (and many of the church fathers) concerning the role of Christ as the center-point and key of biblical interpretation. It's short, yet amazingly comprehensive. This is a book I will gladly re-read for the sake of refreshment.
Can't believe it's taken me so many years to finally read this book after it's been recommended to me 1,000 times. Excited to dig into the remainder of his trilogy.
February 10, 2019
Gospel and Kingdom is a helpful entry-level work on the structure of the Bible, primarily focusing on the nature and meaning of the Old Testament. Through the unifying principle of the kingdom of God, in which God's people are meant to dwell in God's place under God's rule. The successive covenants God makes under Abraham, through Moses, and to David, are all developing this theme. Ultimately, Goldworthy argues, the Old Testament promises have their fulfillment and consummation in Christ Himself. Therefore, one must return to the Old Testament with the facts of the gospel as keys to the meaning of Old Testament types and shadows-- indeed, as the key to the whole Old Testament. In this way, a primary purpose of Gospel and Kingdom is to provide an interpretive template for Old Testament. This is achieved by showing the unity of the whole Bible as one great plan of God unfolding through successive ages of human history. For a more thorough and detailed exposition on the interpretation of the Old Testament, see Goldsworthy's Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics.
The book is well written and easy to follow, and a lot is packed into its 150 pages. It is a useful guide to Biblical Theology for laymen and teachers, especially if you have limited time to study this issue. Recommended.
The book is well written and easy to follow, and a lot is packed into its 150 pages. It is a useful guide to Biblical Theology for laymen and teachers, especially if you have limited time to study this issue. Recommended.
Read
December 28, 2023Helpful summary of hermeneutics and outline of primary biblical themes. Useful in presenting a clear, non-dispensational approach to what the Bible teaches. Easy to see where some of NT Wright has been influenced in his writing on the 'big picture' elements of what God seeks to accomplish in redemption.
My main quibble sits with his lack of clarity over covenant theology as regards the Sinaitic covenant - he sets the record straight in that this is not a covenant with Israel to keep law and attain salvation, but fails to appreciate that the Mosaic Covenant is a restatement of the Covenant of Works that shows the inability of sinners to keep that law and point to Christ. He fails to account for Galatians 4: 26 or 2 Corinthians 3:7 as he suggests it is inconceivable to see the Old Covenant as bringing Israel into bondage after her deliverance from Egypt.
On the whole, this was a helpful re-read and would be useful, with caveats, for new believers, dispensationalists seeking to learn a better way, or those beginning to explore hermeneutics. Even his incomplete understanding of covenant theology is a great place to begin in presenting a foil to Darbyism...
My main quibble sits with his lack of clarity over covenant theology as regards the Sinaitic covenant - he sets the record straight in that this is not a covenant with Israel to keep law and attain salvation, but fails to appreciate that the Mosaic Covenant is a restatement of the Covenant of Works that shows the inability of sinners to keep that law and point to Christ. He fails to account for Galatians 4: 26 or 2 Corinthians 3:7 as he suggests it is inconceivable to see the Old Covenant as bringing Israel into bondage after her deliverance from Egypt.
On the whole, this was a helpful re-read and would be useful, with caveats, for new believers, dispensationalists seeking to learn a better way, or those beginning to explore hermeneutics. Even his incomplete understanding of covenant theology is a great place to begin in presenting a foil to Darbyism...
July 22, 2018
Solid little read about the importance and relevance of the Old Testament not only to the entirety of the Scriptures but also to the Christian's faith and overall understanding of the Christian doctrine. Goldsworthy argues that the OT is often overlooked and/or ignored in favor of the New Testament and as such, many believers have developed (i.e. been taught) the wrong interpretation about what the OT actually is and what it means. The author also strongly makes the point that the Bible in its entirety points to the same thing - the Gospel - in a unified and purposeful manner. You cannot separate out the OT and claim that it is simply a historical "relic" of an ancient time. No. Rather, the NT cannot, and would not, exist without the OT, and vice versa. The entirety of Scriptures all point towards the same thing - the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ - whom God pre-ordained to send to earth as fully man and fully divine to reconcile us with God.
December 15, 2019
A book that is basic, principled and hugely edifying in raising up an understanding that the God of the Old testament is indeed the God of the New Testament. If you ever wished to see how to read the scriptures, with Christ in mind, then this is the best primer that I have yet read on this topic.
The treatment of prophecy as God's promise is remarkably well-led and it is the ground upon which faith is founded. Faith is believing and trusting in God's promises and Graeme writes lucidly, with the odd sagacious opinion, that is not out of line with God's view on salvific history.
There is also a priming section on exegesis, hermeneutics and application which is of great relevance for any one wishing to read the Bible afresh and mine it of its depths.
All in all, a helpful and instructive book on how to read Jesus as the fulfilment of the Old Testament and how we are now to look at Jesus' promises with his Second impending coming.
The treatment of prophecy as God's promise is remarkably well-led and it is the ground upon which faith is founded. Faith is believing and trusting in God's promises and Graeme writes lucidly, with the odd sagacious opinion, that is not out of line with God's view on salvific history.
There is also a priming section on exegesis, hermeneutics and application which is of great relevance for any one wishing to read the Bible afresh and mine it of its depths.
All in all, a helpful and instructive book on how to read Jesus as the fulfilment of the Old Testament and how we are now to look at Jesus' promises with his Second impending coming.
February 7, 2023
This little book basically looks at the importance of the Old Testament, and the importance of correct interpretation. I give it a 5-5-8 or 3/5
He basically shows where the kingdom of God is seen in the Old Testament starting with Eden and working his way through until he gets to Jesus where he says the Kingdom is revealed. Then he proceeds to explain how based upon this structure and different stratum of the Kingdom is how you then interpret the Old Testament.
It is , I judge, a helpful way of studying the Old testament, although it does seem to give of the vibe that we use the New testament in interpreting the Old. I cant say that I am to thrilled with this idea as it can lead to fairly paltry understanding of things like types, and often can produce this forced continuity that I am not so happy assent to.
He basically shows where the kingdom of God is seen in the Old Testament starting with Eden and working his way through until he gets to Jesus where he says the Kingdom is revealed. Then he proceeds to explain how based upon this structure and different stratum of the Kingdom is how you then interpret the Old Testament.
It is , I judge, a helpful way of studying the Old testament, although it does seem to give of the vibe that we use the New testament in interpreting the Old. I cant say that I am to thrilled with this idea as it can lead to fairly paltry understanding of things like types, and often can produce this forced continuity that I am not so happy assent to.
September 6, 2023
"It (the Bible) is more than a collection of holy books in that it contains a single story of salvation."
"...he (Christ) must interpret all Scripture."
"...the coming of the Christ transforms all the Kingdom terms of the Old Testament into gospel reality...Jesus is depicted as the true Adam (or last Adam)...Jesus is the seed of Abraham...Jesus is the true Israel...where old Israel was tempted and failed, Jesus (the true Israel) overcomes...Jesus is the Son of David...Jesus Christ is the head of the new race. All who are united to him are members of that race, but only because he is that race. Thus whoever is 'in Christ' is a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17), that is, he belongs to the new order of which Christ is head."
"...devotion to study of the Old Testament is an important means of preserving the historicity of the gospel."
"...he (Christ) must interpret all Scripture."
"...the coming of the Christ transforms all the Kingdom terms of the Old Testament into gospel reality...Jesus is depicted as the true Adam (or last Adam)...Jesus is the seed of Abraham...Jesus is the true Israel...where old Israel was tempted and failed, Jesus (the true Israel) overcomes...Jesus is the Son of David...Jesus Christ is the head of the new race. All who are united to him are members of that race, but only because he is that race. Thus whoever is 'in Christ' is a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17), that is, he belongs to the new order of which Christ is head."
"...devotion to study of the Old Testament is an important means of preserving the historicity of the gospel."
January 2, 2025
I skim-read the entirety of this work hoping for a concise apologetical work focused on the unity of the Bible. Gospel and Kingdom was more didactic than apologetical, and ultimately pretty surface-level, so I'm still looking for a good resource of this character to give to modern skeptics of a rationalist stripe. Nevertheless, it was one of the better introductions to biblical theology I've encountered, though I wish the author had spent more time upon the Person of Christ as the underlying unity of the Bible, instead of placing his focus upon the ground-level facts of the Bible's historical narrative, along with some core themes. I was also irked by some language that placed our modern moral presuppositions in judgment over parts of the Old Testament, which is very regrettable to find in a work like this.
December 18, 2018
Un ouvrage essentiel et toujours autant d'actualité pour la sphère évangélique.
Le lecteur initié n'apprendra pas grand chose de nouveau, mais la clarté et la concision avec laquelle l'auteur présente la grande histoire biblique est absolument remarquable. C'est un excellent outil pour tout chrétien désirant clarifier de nombreux éléments de l'écriture et de comprendre leurs fonctions tels que la loi, les patriarches, Israël etc...
Sa lecture éviteraient bien des écueils dans les prédications basées sur l'ancien testament, et fournit également un cadre à chacun pour mieux comprendre la parole. Enfin Goldsworthy nous permet de nous émerveiller toujours plus devant l'œuvre parfaite de Christ en nous aidant à en saisir la pleine mesure.
Le lecteur initié n'apprendra pas grand chose de nouveau, mais la clarté et la concision avec laquelle l'auteur présente la grande histoire biblique est absolument remarquable. C'est un excellent outil pour tout chrétien désirant clarifier de nombreux éléments de l'écriture et de comprendre leurs fonctions tels que la loi, les patriarches, Israël etc...
Sa lecture éviteraient bien des écueils dans les prédications basées sur l'ancien testament, et fournit également un cadre à chacun pour mieux comprendre la parole. Enfin Goldsworthy nous permet de nous émerveiller toujours plus devant l'œuvre parfaite de Christ en nous aidant à en saisir la pleine mesure.
December 15, 2020
I've read a few of the classic bigger works on Reformed Biblical Theology. Goldsworthy's classic will be my first recommendation as an introduction to the OT from hereafter! He begins by pointing out a few of the challenges for reading and applying the OT to Christians today, then spends the bulk of the book reviewing the OT history through the lens of the Kingdom theme. He defines the kingdom as 1) God's people, 2) in God's place, 3) under God's rule. He then traces the development of these concepts from the Garden, to Abraham, to Sinai, to David, to the Prophets, and finally to Christ himself! The final chapter takes 5 examples from the OT and shows how they rightly should help us see the person and work of Christ.
This one is clearly a classic for a reason!
This one is clearly a classic for a reason!
March 9, 2019
"The gospel is not simply 'forgiveness of sins' and 'going to heaven when you die.' The gospel is a restoration of relationships between God, man, and the world." This is an excellent summary statement of Graeme Goldsworthy's work on explaining the continuity and relationship of the Old and New Testaments. We can no more "unhitch" ourselves from the Old Testament than we can detach ourselves from life and breath itself. All of Scripture is interpreted in light of the coming kingdom of Jesus Christ, and His ushering in the Kingdom of God, foreshadowed brilliantly in the pages of the Old Testament scriptures.
July 18, 2018
To weigh this book properly, one must understand not only the subject matter handled, but also a bit of the long history of the biblical theology movement. Written in 1981, this text seems a bit dated given the massive influx of new material in the field that has surfaced since. While seminal, this work holds its own, even so early in the shift of emphasis within evangelicalism. As a primer, this text remains appropriately brief while handling all pertinent material. I give it a well-earned 4 stars.
March 1, 2019
This is a good book in its central thesis of interpreting the Old Testament in light of the Gospel. This is generally a good overview of biblical theology. The kingdom is certainly a prominent theme throughout scripture we must be aware of when looking at smaller portions. His view of the kingdom is not entirely in line with Scripture, though quite consistent with reformed dichotomous covenant theology and the over realized eschatology of amillennialism. It turns as you would expect in certain places. This is still a good resource for seeing Christ in the Old Testament.
January 30, 2025
El Antiguo Testamento no siempre es sencillo de leer y entender, pero es importante hacerlo puesto que también es la Palabra de Dios y tiene un mensaje importante para nuestras vidas, para poder hacerlo de forma efectiva es de ayuda conocer el tema que subyace y une todas las escrituras. Evangelio y Reino es un libro que brinda una guía para comenzar a interpretar correctamente el Antiguo Testamento.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 82 reviews