When I arrived home (Saturday, after some travelling), I was greeted by some new books in the mail that were showcased at SBL – it was nice not to have to lug them home in my suitcase. Here are some of the books I am excited to dig into over the next few months.
C. Keith and L. Hurtado, Jesus Among Friends and Enemies (Baker) – looks like a narrative-critical approach to the study of Jesus that focuses on how “friends and enemies” perceived and interacted with him. A great host of contributors!
G. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology (Baker). While I don’t agree with some things that Beale writes, he has a good grasp on the relationship between the OT and the NT and broader theological themes in Scripture. This book is a behemoth (1000+ pages)! Based on Beale’s legacy at Gordon-Conwell (my alma mater), I immediately turned to the appendix to see if Meredith Kline was cited in this book. Not only does Beale work extensively with Kline’s work, he dedicates the book to Meredith Kline and Gordon Hugenberger. Beale works with classic evangelical salvation-historical themes: inaugurated eschatology, kingdom imagery, and new creation. He also infuses it with his own work on the themes of idolatry and temple. Personally, I appreciate this story-form approach that Beale takes to the book over the “book-by-book” version of some NT theologies. There are disadvantages to the story/thematic approach, but I find it preferential. I probably won’t read this cover-to-cover, but I will try and give it enough of a deep reading to review it fairly.
James W. Thomson, Moral Formation According to Paul (Baker). You may know that Pauline ethics is a serious interest of mine. While the theoretical work has been done by a number of good scholars (Rosner, Hays, Furnish, etc…), Thompson’s work seems to bring a bit of a fresh view with his work on the ethics of Hellenistic Judaism in comparison/contrast with Paul.
John Drane, Introducing the Bible (2nd Ed; Fortress). I have the first edition on LOGOS and I have consulted it numerous times and I have used an excerpt in class before (which students really enjoyed). I will say the second edition is stunningly beautiful – full color. At 600+ pages it comes across as substantial, but from my experience the longer the textbook, the less time students have to read the Bible itself! Nevertheless, I look forward to seeing how this edition improves upon an already excellent first one.
J. Todd Billings, Union with Christ: Reframing Theology and Ministry for the Church (Baker). Why did it take someone so long to write a book so needed for our time?! Thanks Todd for blessing the Church by retrieving this key theme. I honestly feel that if the Church would truly understand what it means to be united with Christ (in death and resurrection), we could be an unstoppable source of vitality, reconciliation, holiness, and love. Billings provides the Reformed perspective on this, which I am eager to read. I learned this theme from Methodists like Mike Gorman (cruciformity), Richard Hays (community in Christ), Jimmy Dunn (participation), Vic Furnish, and Morna Hooker (interchange). I guess we can share it…
Luke Timothy Johnson, Prophetic Jesus, Prophetic Church: The Challenge of Luke-Acts to Contemporary Christians (Eerdmans). I think the back cover text says enough for my brain to salivate:
In this and every age, the church desperately needs prophecy. It needs the bold proclamation of God’s transforming vision to challenge its very human tendency toward expediency and self-interest — to jolt it into new insight and energy. For LTJ, the NT books Luke and Acts provide that much-needed jolt to conventional norms. To read Luke-Acts as a literary unit, he says, is to uncover a startling prophetic vision of Jesus and the church — and an ongoing call for today’s church to embody and proclaim God’s vision for the world.
Is this a sermon or an academic text? I love it! Can’t wait to read it! Two of my colleagues, Jack Levison and Rob Wall, endorsed the book.
Kenneth Bailey, Paul through Mediterranean Eyes (IVP). Bailey gives his take on how the study of Mediterranean cultural issues shed light on Paul. He uses 1 Corinthians as his text of study. It weighs in at 500+ pages. When have you ever seen Mike Bird, Clifton Black, John Ortberg, and Lamin Sanneh endorse the same book?
Edward Adams, Parallel Lives of Jesus: A Guide to the Four Gospels (WJK). I have already read about two dozen pages and Adams offers a good, basic introduction to the Gospels for undergrads that sees the Gospels as four “lives of Jesus” (using Burridge’s research on the Gospels as ancient biographies). The two best things: it is short, and it is bottom shelf. Also, while Adams is a good critical scholar, he does not dwell on issues of authorship and original community. He also uses lots and lots of examples, mapped out with synoptic charts. This is truly a “textbook.” If I ever teach a course on the Gospels (alone), I might consider this.
Undoubtedly like many of you, I just finished a great weekend at SBL SF! Great to catch up with friends, old and new, like Durham friends Ben Blackwell, John Goodrich, and Kristian Bendoraitis.
Ben’s brand new dissertation was available at the Mohr Siebeck stall: Christosis. Congrats Ben!
I felt that the Institute for Biblical Research put on a very good program on Friday night and Saturday morning on the theme of “Global Readings of Scripture,” featuring a special lecture and response by M. Daniel Carroll R. and K.K. Yeo. I was given the privilege of giving a short response to a paper by David deSilva on Saturday morning. David is such a gifted scholar and speaker – it was hard not to simply praise his work for the entire response!
This year I was so busy catching up with friends that I did not make it to many sessions, but I did get to participate as a reviewer in a panel discussion on Luke Timothy Johnson’s award-winning book Among the Gentiles. It was very humbling and also very exciting to respond to the book and have a lively and engaging discussion with such an eminent scholar. Johnson is energetic, funny, and a quick-thinker! “Meet Luke Timothy Johnson” – I can scratch that one off of my bucket list!
On Friday, I took part in a planning session for a new set of working groups for Institute for Biblical Research (IBR). I have the honor of co-chairing a new group (launching next year) on “The Relationship Between the Old Testament and the New Testament.” We had a brainstorming session and our group had a great turnout. I got to meet some great folks working within this subject and I finally got to meet one of my favorite scholars – Brian Rosner. In a month or two, I will post what we will be up to next year for this group – whatever we decide, I think it will be very interesting to a wide group of people! Stay tuned. If you are a member of IBR and you are interested in this subject, send me a note in the comments and I will add you to our mailing list.
What about books? As I have transitioned from my PhD study to full-time teaching, I spend more time in the book stalls looking for good textbooks, rather than specialized (and expensive!) monographs. I picked up a few potential textbooks, but nothing new or especially noteworthy. I don’t think there were any “WOW”-worthy books to mention, except perhaps the Dictionary of Scripture and Ethics from Baker. Also a big thanks to Baker for supplying IBR members with a copy of Joel Green’s new book Practicing Theological Interpretation.
If you went to the Eisenbrauns booth, you may have seen both of the first two volumes of the Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters which Mike Bird and I edit. So far we have been blessed with a good start and some excellent contributions. If you work in Paul, please do submit your articles manuscripts for consideration. We have a very fine editorial board and Eisenbrauns does a very good job producing the journal.
What about the location – SF? My wife and I stayed at the Best Western which was not in a nice part of town, so that dampened my experience. Also the Hilton and Marriott were a bit too far for running back and forth in the rain. Still, it was warm enough that I preferred it over Boston (from a few years back)! Wiley-Blackwell was kind enough to give me, as a free gift, a Frommer’s guide to Chicago in view of next year. Yeah!
There were a few folks I sort of randomly got to know better this year, and I think all three of them are young(er) scholars who will eventually become major players in their various sectors of NT studies: Joey Dodson, Chris Skinner, and Joel Willitts. That is, in fact, my favorite part of SBL. Just finding opportunities to connect with like-minded people, encouraging one another, and dreaming about projects to work together on!
Receptions? I had a good time at King’s College London’s fine evening bash, with an entertaining MC-spiel by the ever-jovial Richard Burridge. I popped into the Asbury reception as well. David Bauer has a new shaven-head look – lookin’ good Dean! I did not make it to Durham’s Sunday evening reception, but I had spent plenty of time with the Durham crew anyhow, so missing a little wine and cheese was not too much of a loss.
What did I buy? Not much. I picked by P.B. Payne’s Man and Woman: One in Christ which is actually from 2009, but I have had an interest in getting it. On a whim I also picked up from Hendrickson a collection of excerpts from the writings of Dietrich Bonhoeffer called Reflections on the Bible (2004). I nice short little book that caught my interest. Because I teach a little course on Christian Formation, the third edition of Alister McGrath’s Theology: The Basics (2011?) caught my eye and I snatched it. Finally, since I got Bauckham’s Jesus: A Short Introduction a short while ago and enjoyed it thoroughly, I ordered at the conference Luke Timothy Johnson’s volume on The New Testament: A Short Introduction (2010) for a potential textbook.
Next year – Chicago. Should be fun, though it was nice to not change time zones going from Seattle to San Francisco.
Discussion of Acts 7:58, the Shema in 1 Samuel 1-15, and lots of reviews.
Eerdmans just announced that Joel B. Green has become the fourth general editor for the New International Commentary on the New Testament, following Ned Stonehouse, F.F. Bruce, and Gordon Fee. Joel is a great choice and I am sure he will lead the series well. Congrats Joel!
He makes some comments here.
You may have heard the news that Kevin Vanhoozer is returning to Trinity next year. Probably in order to cut off rumors before they spread, the wheatonblog offers some reflection on this move. Check it out. Too bad for Wheaton, but it sounds like the right thing to do.
Whenever I read a book, I like to try and ascertain what the take-away ideas of the book are. Wright, though he obviously has a brilliant mind, does not always make this crystal clear. He writes like he lectures – it is fascinating, but in the end, I am not exactly sure what I learned. This could be my own poverty of mind, but it is my impression. So, I spent some time trying to reflect on what Wright spends his 200+ pages getting at. I think, at the risk of being problematically reductive, there are six “big ideas.”
1. NEW EXODUS: To understand Jesus, you need to understand Exodus typology and the expectation that history would repeat itself in a greater way with the Messiah. Jesus speaks in code, but it is code that Jews would catch immediately.
2. KINGSHIP OF GOD IN JESUS: this motif is rather obvious in the book, as Wright repeats it numerous times and the next book in this series is actually called How God Became King. The idea here is that God intended humans, as his image bearers, to live under his kingship (as the Creator), but also to have co-reign or viceregency under his authority to rule on his behalf in the world. When sin came into the picture, this vocation of humanity got all screwed up. Moreover, somehow God’s kingship over the earth became contested. Israel came to expect, one day, that God would reinstate his full rule again, and perhaps it would involve the direct work of a human ruler. The “trick” with Jesus was that he was the means through which God reclaimed his rule (hence the “kingdom of God”). This concept could use more clarification and working out how it runs through Scripture, but I presume Wright will cover this ground in the next volume.
3. VIOLENCE: While it does not feature centrally in this book, it certainly plays its part when we look at Wright’s assessment of failed messiahs of Israel. They demonstrated zeal for the Lord, but through violence. Wright insists that the power of the cross, in part, comes from Christ’s love-filled, hatred-accepting, non-violent solution. This is not Wright being a hippie as much as his reading of the significance of the cross and the failure of violence to actually end violence.
4. HEAVEN: One of my favorite chapters was on Easter and the Ascension because he does a good job of summarizing Surprised by Hope. Wright is insistent that God has not set a countdown for the abandonment of this earth, in view of a new life in heaven. The vision of God is to bring heaven and earth back together at last, so that what we do now on earth really does matter. It is still God’s creation. We are not just biding our time until heaven. Wright regularly appeals to the Lord’s prayer where the will of God is for his ways to permeate earth just as it is followed perfectly in heaven. I think this emphasis is well-grounded and timely.
5. HUMAN AGENCY AND MISSIONAL ECCLESIOLOGY: Wright persistently argues that humans are not just spectators in the story of redemption, but key characters – partners with the Hero of the story. Christianity is not a passive thing (receiving divine benefits like peace with God and heaven), but something active. Wright wants each Christian, as a member of the church, to know a sense of calling and purpose to contribute to God’s wider plan.
6. IMAGE BEARING: This emphasis really only comes in the last couple of chapters, but Wright tries to bring together the oft-separated passions of evangelism and social justice. Wright advocates for both, but wants to help Christians to fit them into the same thing called image-bearing. We herald because we are a transformed people. We serve because we are doing the work of God to infiltrate this earth with God’s rule. Sadly, too many Christians (even pastors and professors) see social justice as a minor role of the Church, something optional, while evangelism is essential. Wright, again, tries to set them within a broader category of “being human” in a way that supports all the ways we reflect and imitate God.
In this new work from N.T. Wright (HarperOne, 2011), he tries to articulate his vision of who Jesus was and is and what he was all about according to the Gospels (and somewhat from the rest of the NT). In this initial post, my goal is simply (!) to summarize, briefly, the shape of Wright’s story of Jesus and his significance. In later posts I will offer more critical analysis.
For Wright, there is so much confusion today over Jesus, partly because of culture and historical distance, partly because what Jesus actually did and said was peculiar. Thus, scholars and pastors and others have taken their turns trying to capture the “real Jesus.” Early on in the book, Wright challenges both liberal skeptics and conservative crusaders by urging them to set down their weapons of war and, instead of dwelling on questions only of “did it happen or didn’t it,” press on to ask “what about meaning?” (p. 19). [This is exactly the kind of concern I take up in my courses!] Wright rightly (!) points out how deeply symbolic phrases, acts, rituals, words, and certain ideas were in Jesus’ own time.
So, Wright tries to take us into the “perfect storm” of Jesus’ own situation to help us to see with first-century eyes. He refers to three storms that collide to make up the furious “perfect storm” of what we see in Jesus in the Gospels. The Roman storm was the wind of Caesar’s imperial power and good news (i.e., “gospel”) that followed as he brought pax. The Jewish storm was building expectation of a new exodus that would usher in the judgment of the Gentiles and the re-instatement of the honor and power of Israel and her God. These clashing tempests would be trouble enough, but we see the “wind of God” (as Wright calls it) coming in Jesus himself – “as he came to Jerusalem he was embodying, incarnating, the return of Israel’s God to his people in power and glory” (p. 38). Wright, early on (and frequently), connects the coming of Jesus with the promise of YHWH that he would rule as king again, solely, over his people and his creation. Even with David, while this man was “king,” it was actually God reigning as king through David (p. 42). However, no Israelite, it appears, was capable of predicting that Jesus would combine in himself “both the Davidic king and the returning God” (p. 54).
Wright observes just how important the repeated remembrance of the exodus (and its typology) was for Israel. It was a story about a wicked tyrant, a special leader, the victory of God, rescue by sacrifice, new vocation, the presence of God, and a promised land. Jesus fits quite well into this when he starts a new campaign: “He was the one in whose presence, work, and teaching Israel’s God was indeed becoming king” (85).
So why was Jesus’ teaching so cryptic, parable-driven, and enigmatic? It is because the kingdom/kingship of God was coming in a special and unpredictable way. Israel had tried out the militaristic/violent way of being messiah – it didn’t work (see chapter 9). Jesus was engaged in battle, but not with Romans or Greek. It was a cosmic war, a “clash of kingdoms” (p. 125).
Before venturing into more of the significance of Jesus, Wright takes a detour to talk about space, time, and matter from a Biblical perspective. He cuts through the heaven-obsession of many Christians by pointing out that heaven wasn’t “detached, wasn’t a long way off, but was always the place from which ‘earth’ was to be run” (p. 145).To align heaven and earth was to bring earth under the same kind of total God-ruled kingdom as heaven. This is precisely why Jesus is so unique and so uniquely suited to be the messiah. He embodies the place where heaven and earth meet. This is not escaptist theology. Jesus’ agenda was not to plan a retreat from earth to heaven, but rather a desire that “God’s kingdom would come on earth as in heaven” (so the Lord’s prayer, see p. 148).
So, a natural question would be, if Jesus is God’s King, why did he die? This time, Wright’s answer is actually quite simple: love.
When the power of Rome and the betrayal of Israel’s leaders meets the love of God, the great whirlpool that results will bring about God’s kingly victory, the victory of the kingdom of God over the kingdoms of the world (p. 182).
To defeat “the tyrant” (death), a death was necessary to exhaust death itself of power. The substituted life of the loving other-centered, innocent one had the capacity to turn the tides of the cosmic war, indeed to win it. But this would require not just Jesus’ death, but also his resurrection. Resurrection does not simply bring Jesus back to life, but establish the new age.
If Easter is about Jesus as the prototype of the new creation, his ascension is about his enthronement as the one who is now in charge. Easter tells us that Jesus is himself the first part of new creation; his ascension tells us that he is now running it (p. 195).
This fits well within how Wright explains the relationship between heaven and earth. Heaven isn’t the distant paradise of our final salvation. By proclaiming that Jesus is enthroned now in heaven somehow means he is present everywhere on earth (p. 196) through his Spirit. What is heaven? “Heaven is God’s space, God’s dimension of present reality, so that to think of Jesus ‘returning’ is actually…to think of him presently invisible, but one day reappearing” (p. 202).
The final chapter of the book, perhaps the most important chapter after all, raises the question, “What on earth does it mean, today, to say that Jesus is king, that he is Lord of the world? (207)” It should be no surprise to you that Wright argues for a renewed sense of human vocation – “humans are to be God’s image-bearers, that is, they are to reflect his sovereign rule into the world. Humans are the vital ingredients in God’s kingdom project” (p. 212). This is not meant to be conceived of as an individualistic thing, but a corporate one. God calls the Church “to be the means through which Jesus continues to work and to teach, to establish his sovereign rule on earth as in heaven” (p. 220).
For “Further Reading” on Jesus, Wright restricted himself to a few items from more recent years from scholars like Allison, Bauckham, Dunn, Fisk, Keener, McKnight, Perrin, Pitre, and Vermes.
In the next part of the review, we will offer the “top 6 ideas” from Simply Jesus.
A series of explanatory and introductory videos on the Common English Bible translation is online, and one explains their choice of translating the tradition literal phrase “Son of Man” with “The Human One.” The explanation is helpful, especially for anyone who thinks it is a distortion of the meaning of the phrase.
Check it out here. Other videos available as well.
At some point when you decide to do advanced study in the New Testament (esp at the PhD level), you realize that you have signed on to study at least half a dozen languages. Its not just Greek. It is also Hebrew (to engage with the OT and do OT/LXX comparison in questions regarding, e.g., the vorlage of a NT quotation/allusion), Latin (to work in textual criticism, history of interpretation, and to make sense of phrases like curriculum vitae and imago or missio dei), French and German, and sometimes Aramaic, Syriac, Coptic, Italian, and Spanish. How can anyone keep up?
Well, like Jenny Craig would tell you, there are no short cuts or quick solutions. It takes time, desire, and discipline. Thank goodness for the vision and work of my friends Dr. Fredrick Long and soon-to-be-doctor Michael Halcomb for their Hexapla: A Parallel & Interlinear New Testament Polyglot: Luke-Acts. Basically, it offers side-by-side six translations of Luke-Acts: Hebrew, Latin, Greek, English, German, and French. My Greek is pretty good. I can get away with my Latin. Everything else has turned to goo in my brain, so I really need to spend time in this book.
One of my favorite parts is the inclusion of Hebrew. My BHS is pretty much neglected 365 days a year. It scares me. But taking a stab at a NT text in Hebrew? That’s worth a short. Maybe it will give me the courage to reconcile with my BHS. I really do want to…
So, if you are a PhD student, a young professor, a pastor or former seminary student that wants to “brush up” on the Biblical languages, or an older professor who wants to continue to sharpen his or her language proficiency, consider checking this out. A sample can be viewed here. Yes, it is available from Amazon for a reasonable $18.00. And, yes, they do plan on producing more volumes. Scholars everywhere who want students and pastors of the NT to have better use of their Biblical and research languages are in Long and Halcomb’s debt (thanks, gentlemen!).
I have had a chance, in the past few years, to get my hands on most of the new Paideia commentaries (Baker), which seek to give “contemporary students a basic grounding in academic NT studies by guiding their engagement with NT texts” (xi). The series tends to have a literary-analytical focus, and also an ultimate interest in theological and moral formation. They have existing volumes on Hebrews, Acts, Matthew, Romans (Matera), and Ephesians/Colossians (Talbert). I have read those on Romans and Ephesians/Colossians and found them very well written. Talbert’s is certainly one of the best among Colossians commentaries.
So, what about Jo-Ann Brant’s new work on John? Firstly, she clearly knows her way around the study of John as well as the ancient world. She had to face quite a challenge because she had to squeeze a commentary on the 21 chapters of John into a 300-page text (which is a bit unfair because Talbert also works with about the same book length with much shorter material!).
Brant’s approach to John is essentially an ancient theatrical/dramatistic and rhetorical reading. She brings great wisdom from studying Greco-Roman literature, including social values, history, and the arts. No wonder some of her sidebars deal with things like “Diction,” “The Rhetoric of Exhortation,” “Proofs,” “Maxims,” “The Jab-and-Punchline-Joke”, etc…
What I appreciated about the commentary is that she brings something fresh to the table of study. It is like the Gospel of John is treated as a play and she sits next to you as you watch and coaches you on how plays work in the GR world and what you are supposed to “get” as you watch it. She is your guide to the ins and outs of symbols, coded language, dramastic technique, and the identification of types in these settings.
At the end of each section of commentary, there are short discussions of key themes and some pointers towards application. She does quite well here, dealing with thorny issues like (anti)sacramentalism in John, so-called supersessionism, and the role of signs in the Gospel.
Sometimes she might be accused of getting too deep into methodological jargon, as with her discussion of Mikhail Bakhtin and “chronotope” and the “spatiotemporal matrix in narrative” (67). Overall, though, she keeps it accessible.
She definitely gave me food for thought on a number of assumptions. She argues, for example, that we jump too quickly to the conclusion with the Samaritan woman that she is living with her lover when all Jesus says is that the person she is living with is not her husband. Brant finds it possible that she was living with a close relative like a brother and the issue is one of shame from not being married, not shame from being promiscuous (p. 85).
She also takes a rhetorical/dramatistic reading of John 5-6 to help support the idea that the given sequence of chapters may be original ( 115).
I thought her discussion of Anti-Judaism in John was helpful.
Demonizing one’s opponent when one is powerless, as early Christians were, is a protest against one’s status, but demonizing them when one stands in a position of power or when one knows that such words can incite violence is considered a hate crime in many modern nations (p. 149)
I think Brant shows a welcome bit of humor by pointing out that the Johannine Jesus, in John 17, violates the Matthean Jesus’ principle regarding prayer: “Keep it simple because God knows what you need before you ask for it” (224)! Ha!
And what about the mysterious catch of 153 fish? Why this number? Brant entertains the possibility that the BD was showing his true knowledge of the event by giving the exact number. But she also notes the opinion of Jerome (citing poet Oppianus Cilix) who urged that there were 153 types of fish in existence (p. 282).
So, what can we say about Brant’s commentary? It is learned and heavily (though not exclusively) weighted on the side offering insight into the Greco-Roman social and literary context. If this is your main John commentary, I am not sure it would be the most useful for preaching and teaching. I would suggest, comparing the type of commentary, Smith’s ANTC commentary or perhaps Lincoln’s BNTC volume. Nevertheless, if you love all things Johannine (as I do!), this won’t disappoint. So many things in this book I never knew and it opens a window of study (the theatrical perspective) that is rather appropriate to this Gospel in particular.