Integrate: 1: to form, coordinate or blend into a functioning or unified whole: UNITE (Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 11th edition).
“Integrated Theology”-what’s that? It’s a realization which came too late but I think needs to be incorporated into what we’re doing here. Obviously, I don’t want to change the name of the web-site from “simplifiedtheology.org” as there is too much time already invested in it. The goal is still to simplify theology, since there’s too much clutter in the theological space today.
However, one of our goals is to create an integrated whole. The “Old Testament” is the foundation for the “New Testament”. The “New Testament” cannot be used independently of the “Old Testament”. There is a line of thought today operating on the belief that, no longer practicing some of the ritual food laws, sacrificial practices, etc. somehow implies the “Old Testament” is largely invalid. It’s nice as a set of historical documents, but has little value for anything else, especially, for our “modern day” faith. NOTHING-could be further from the truth!
Unfortunately, too many religious adherents claim they are, “New Testament Christians”. What does that mean? If you really think about it, that statement devolves into incoherent gibberish. Are these same individuals saying Paul and the other apostles were not “New Testament Christians”? What about all of those who came to faith as a result of them during that time? The Bible they had at the time consisted of the Law, the Prophets, the History Books and the Poetry and Wisdom books-the “Old Testament”. That was it! It was sufficient for them at that time. It is sufficient for us today (for the most part). Yes, we must have the Gospels to show the completion of the “Old Testament” books, but the “Old Testament” is in no way invalidated in principle.
The “reason” the “Old Testament” is not sufficient for us today, is the same reason it wasn’t sufficient for the religious leaders of the first century. It’s a result of their unwillingness or inability to realize it is sufficient. This lack of acknowledgement of its sufficiency is probably related to the fact the “Old Testament” is very clear on a lot of things. As society, and religious organizations fall farther away from the faith, the natural delusion to be accommodated is the mistaken belief we have “outgrown” those “old” beliefs. Naturally, it will be argued, the “New Testament” is vague or ambiguous about certain practices therefore we can’t (and shouldn’t claim to be) clear about them; therefore, “live and let live”, unless someone espouses objective conservative principles. In which case-scorched earth on the heretic!
The goal here is overwhelming. It’s to bring it all together and show its interconnectedness. We will not be referring to the “Old Testament” as such, but rather, the Law, the Prophets, the History books, the Wisdom and Poetry books. The “New Testament” will be referred to as, the Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles and Revelation. This is to counter the silliness of today’s hipsters. The “Old Testament” is perceived to be “old, outdated, archaic” and the “New Testament” is “new”, progressive, etc. This is a lie cultural revolutionaries and pseudo-intellectuals who’ve been (mis)-educated beyond their intelligence by “modern” academia tell themselves to justify their blasphemy of the Spirit.
The “Old Testament”, per se will be treated as the textbook for the course called life and the “New Testament” will be the professors’ commentary on the core text. I believe this to be the proper framing.