Fake Reviews by Historian

BBC News reports how a leading historian who wrote anonymous reviews on the Amazon website praising his own work and criticising rivals is to pay libel damages and costs. I wonder how this could affect reviews in biblioblogdom, especially anonymous reviews of books.

Review of Saving Righteousness

Somewhat late in terms of book releases, but nice all the same, James Miller of Glasgow has a positive review of The Saving Righteousness of God.

Review: Jesus and the Origins of the Gentile Mission

Over at RBL, Andreas J. Kostenberger provides a review of my first book Jesus and the Origins of the Gentile Mission which is quite sympathetic, though Kostenberger critiques my lack of salvation-historical focus in the book. I have no problem with a salvation-historical view on the part of the Evangelists or Paul to the effect that salvation comes to the "Jew tirst and then the Gentile". Yet my reservation in applying this scheme to Jesus has always been (and which typified E.P. Sanders' critique of Joachim Jeremias) is that on such an approach you can too easily end up with Jesus offering salvation to Israel, knowing that they will reject it, so that the real mission and the real offer of salvation can then be given to the Gentiles. Instead of viewing Jesus' mission to Israel as the bottleneck which must be traversed before the real mission to the world can proceed, I prefer to see Jesus as focused on Israel so that the Gentiles get "in" but only on the back of a restored Israel. Following T.W. Manson, I have always contended that it was probably Jesus' view that a restored Israel would transform the world. On either account, Andreas offers some cogent remarks worth digesting and he himself has written a great deal on mission in relation to the Gospel of John and the New Testament in general.

Latest Issue of JETS

The latest issue of JETS is now out with an important article by Dan Wallace on NT Text Criticism titled "Challenges in New Testament Textual Criticism for the Twenty-First Century". The article was his address this past year at the ETS annual meeting in Boston. 

Also, this issue includes reviews of both my book Matthew's Messianic Shepherd-King (154-56) and Michael's SROG (173-75). 

In addition, I reviewed an important book titled Elements of Ancient Jewish Nationalism by David Goodblatt (129-32). 

RBL Reviews

Out of the latest cohort of RBL reviews I draw to your attention:

Justin K. Hardin
Galatians and the Imperial Cult: A Critical Analysis of the First-Century Social Context of Paul's Letter
Reviewed by Wilhelm Pratscher

Daniel M. Gurtner and John Nolland, eds.
Built upon the Rock: Studies in the Gospel of Matthew
Reviewed by J. Christopher Edwards

Ephraim Radner
Leviticus
Reviewed by Leigh Trevaskis

Book Notice: Seyoon Kim, Christ and Caesar

Seyoon Kim
Christ and Caesar: The Gospel and the Roman Empire in the Writings of Paul and Luke
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008.
Available at Amazon.com

Political readings in Paul are in vogue at the moment whereby Paul's theology (and indeed much of the NT including Luke and Revelation) are said to be deeply subversive to the Roman political edice in general and directly opposed imperial propaganda in particular. Seyoon Kim responds to some of these readings with a powerful critique that has some measure of validity. I think Kim raises some good points about the parallelomania that endemically permeates these studies, the inability of these scholars to do full justice to Romans 13.1-8, and Luke's attempt to show that the Church and Roman society are not entirely incompatible does not fil well with their thesis, and (I would add) some commentators make Paul out to be some kind of liberal college arts professor who is anti-American and anti-Bush to the enth degree.

Even so, I am not convinced by Kim's handling of Acts 17.1-9 (pp. 44-45) that opposition to Caesar is not implied by Paul's gospel as Paul meant something very different to the offence that his gospel actually caused. Second, Kim declares that this counter-imperial message was essentially absent in the early church, but the narrative of the Acts of Paul shows that this is patently false and the two kingdoms were regarded as incompatible. Third, counter pagan propaganda is implied in Israel's national religion which long saw Yahweh as defeating pagan nations and de-throning their Gods (e.g. Isaiah). Fourth, the older studies of Adolf Deissman and William Ramsay I think capture correctly how Paul's epistles have to be situated in the context of the Roman political world. Ramsay wrote: "A universal Paulinism and a universal Empire must either coalesce, or the one must destroy the other". Ramsay is also not cited once by Kim either.

Credit to Kim, he does make some genuinely good criticisms and shows how the pendulum needs to swing away from a Paul who looks like a left-wing political activist. He also argues in the conclusion that we should not expect Christians living in countries under hostile regimes to take up arms in the cause of revolution in order to prove their discipleship, nor should we fear to politically engage the world around us (Kim commends Luke over John the Seer as a model here). Even so, I would urge against pushing Paul and Luke in the direction of a political quietism.

Those wanting more should read Denny Burk's article in JETS (2008): "Is Paul's Gospel Counterimperial? Evaluating the Prospects of the "Fresh Perspective" for Evangelical Theology" for an approach similar to Kim.

Review: How Did Christianity Begin?

Loren Rosson has a review of How Did Christianity Begin? written by myself and James Crossley. I think it's a fair review and Loren takes issue with both James and myself over various matters.

Book Notice: Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church

James W. Aageson
Paul, the Pastoral Epistles, and the Early Church
Library of Pauline Studies (ed. S.E. Porter)
Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2008
Available at Alban Books in the UK
Available at Amazon.com in the USA

In this volume James Aageson tries to place the Pastoral Epistles (PE) in the context of the reception of Paul and development of the Pauline tradition in the early church. He declares in his intoduction that that the PE show that Paul and his theology can be represented in new contexts and they foreshadow important issues confronting the church in the first two centuries. In chapter two he establishes the particular theological pattern in each of the PE (rather than analyzing their theology as a single corpus). Then in chapter three he compares and contrasts them in order to position the PE in the symbolic and theological context of early Pauline tradition. Aageson believes that evidence from 1 Timothy, Titus, and the undisputed letters suggests that these two letters represents a more conservative and conformist social strand in the development of Pauline tradition than does 2 Timothy which includes (analogous to Philippians) a non-conformist ethos. In chapter four, Aageson maintains that the PE are pregnated with a Pauline concept of scripture as a precursor to a Pauline canon. He thinks that Ephesians and Colossians stand at a closer distance to Paul than the PE which would make the PE a third generation document. Then, in chapters five and six, Aageson looks at how the PE contributed to the image and reception of Paul in the post-apostolic church (Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement) and the later church (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement, Origen). He finds that the theological worlds of the PE reflect and intersect with the development of Christian orthodoxy. Chapter seven covers the PE and the Acts of Paul and Thecla and Aageson contends that both represent extensions of Pauline tradition and community needs have reshaped the tradition. In the conclusion, Aageson surmizes that the PE were written after Paul's death but before Ignatius wrote his letters (I think some such as H. Koester date the PE to the 150s!). He believes that they reflect only a modest concern for the matters raised in the undisputed letters such as Jew-Gentile relations in the church but show an acute concern for issuees related to Christian life in the late first-century empire. Importantly, he finds the PE crucial for understanding the transformation of Paul's theology and the development of Paul's legacy in the early church.

This is an interesting and well-written volume on the development of Pauline tradition. For me the main benefit was the way that Aaegeson shows the relevance of the reception of Paul for the theology of the later church. I'm more sanguine about Pauline authorship of the PE (through a secretary or close disciple at least; see L.T. Johnson's contribution to the subject) but I admit that the language, situation, and theology of the PE has both continuities and discontinuities with the undisputed letters (I think I have a footnote on this in Bird's Eye-View of Paul). So there is development in the PE and the question is whether it can be placed at the end of Paul's life time. Aageson's thesis could still work, in some respect, even if Paul is closer to the PE than what the scholarly consensus would allow.

Book Review: Struggles for Power in Early Christianity

Elsa Tamez
Struggles for Power in Early Christianity: A Study of the First Letter to Timothy
Trans. Gloria Kinsler
Maryknoll, New York: 2007.
Available from Alban Books in the UK
Available from Amazon.com in the USA

Tamez examines 1 Timothy in light of its clear "prejudice" against women and slaves (p. xvii), but she also notes that it has much that a feminist/liberation theologian can affirm about wealth and its misuse (e.g. 2.9, 6.9). She proposes not abandoning 1 Timothy, but a critical re-reading of the text. Tamez proceeds in four chapters looking at the historic context of the Greco-Roman empire and the Christian community behind this text. Attention is given to struggles in social position, power relations between the genders, the author's intolerance of other theological views, and she proposes a new criteria for election to positions of leadership. In the end, she confesses to studying 1 Timothy with "openness" but ultimately distances herself from the author. In the conclusion she writes: "The rereading of the text has been too revealing for us to continue blindly affirming in a fundamentalist manner all that the text says. We have understood the complexity o the historical moment and the diverse reasons for the affirmations of the text. Upon understanding the context behind teh text and teh text itself. we can dissent from all those affirmations that exclude women, the poor without a roof, and slaves. We can also dissent from teh hierarchial posture that is imposed and excludes, withotu entering into a debate with those who thik otherwise" (p. 111). This book is an interesting read and it gives a good example of reading against the grain of the text, but in the words of the great British philosopher and international man of mystery, Austin Powers, "it's not my bag baby"! What I found more valuable was the appendices that included a diagram on the socioeconomic structure of the Roman empire, an introduction and translation of The Acts of Paul and Thecla, a curious diagram on plurality on the primitive churches cited from Gerd Theissen's The Religion of the Earliest Churches (which I should blog on some time), and a translation of 1 Timothy.

SROG Reviewed at SBL

Over at RBL, Martin Meiser gives a very generous review of my book Saving Righteousness of God. I think I owe him some 'rotwein und pumpernickel'!

Book Review: Francis Watson, Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles

I found Francis Watson's revised monograph Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles: Beyond the New Perspective to be a stimulating read with much to think about it. I think this book proves (as do others, e.g. Jewett on Romans) that we are entering a post-NPP phase. It also makes a good synthesis of Luther and Baur on Paul and demonstrates that social readings and theological interpretation are not mutually exclusive. My review can be uploaded here (seven pages).

Book on Marriage and Family

In a few weeks I will be teaching a week long intensive course at North Park Theological Seminary on Ministry with Families. In preparation for the course I have read some good books on the issue and I would recommend a couple.

Marriage and Family in the Biblical World

Edited by Ken M. Campbell

Published by IVP

.

The book is comprised of four chapters dealing with the topic of Marriage and Family in the various historical contexts relevant for biblical studies as well as two chapters on the Old and New Testaments teaching.
.

1. Marriage and Family in the Ancient Near East by Victor H. Matthews

2. Marriage and Family in Ancient Israel by Daniel Block

3. Marriage and Family in Ancient Greek Society by S. M. Baugh

4. Marriage and Family in Roman Society by Susan Treggiari

5. Marriage and Family in Second Temple Judaism by David W. Chapman

6. Marriage and Family in the New Testament by Andreas Köstenberger

.

The book provides a solidly researched and accessible presentation of the topic of marriage and family in the ancient world. While some will no doubt notice the complementarian bent with Daniel Block and Andreas Köstenberger's contributions, the other essays reflect no overt interpretive agenda since they are primarily descriptive in nature. Block and Köstenberger provide useful summaries in one place of the two testament's teaching on marriage and family. This resource could be useful for pastors and seminary professors.

Book Notice: 1-2 Thessalonians by V.P. Furnish

Victor Paul Furnish
1 and 2 Thessalonians (ANTC)
Nashville: Abingdon, 2007.
Available at Alban Books in the UK
Available at Amazon.com in the USA

Furnish is well known from his work on 1 and 2 Corinthians and he turns here to the Thessalonian correspondence. He regards 1 Thessalonians as Paul's first letter and essentially as a pastoral letter. He contests the view that Thessalonica had a sizeable Jewish population (contra the impression in Acts 17) since there is little literary and archaeological evidence for a sizeable Jewish presence in Thessalonica and 1 Thessalonians itself does not deal with Jewish issues like circumcision and food sacrificed to idols. Instead, the Thessalonian converts were mostly Gentiles and probably from the artisan class. The letter is thoroughly theocentric and the predominant themes in Furnish's view include election, faith, love, and hope. 1 Thessalonians is a theological-ethical writing. He accepts the integrity of 1 Thess. 2.13-14. Furnish regards the "word of the Lord" in 1 Thess. 4.15 as a piece of "prophetic speech authorized by the Lord" and stems from either the Christian prophetic tradition or as Paul's own prophetic word. He regards the "peace and security" of 1 Thess. 5.3 as a reference to the pax et securitas of the Roman imperial cult and that: "There is good evidence that this slogan reflects the poltiical ideology of the imperial cult in Thessaonica, which accorded lavish honors to Rome and Caesar . . . Paul forsees the ultimate destruction for those who, living in the darkness of unbelief, place their trust in the poltical might of Rome rather than in the saving power of God" (p. 108).

Furnish regards 2 Thessalonians as a deutero-pauline letter which exhibits features of deliberative or advisory rhetoric. The letter aims to persuade about certain views of the end time and dissuade certain attitudes and behaviours in the community. The main themes of the letter are indebted to the eschatological traditions of formative Judaism and early Christianity and explicates the ideas of election, salvation, and there is a deliberate futurizing of eschatology. Furnish regards the "man of lawlessness" as a false prophet and suggests that 2 Thessalonians has a bleaker view of non-Christian pagans than the authentic Pauline letters.

This is not a bad commentary, it is brief, often insightful, and offers sound and straight forward judgments. It is not in the league of Malherbe, Best, or Morris, but is useful nonetheless.

Book Notice: Meet the Rabbis by Brad H. Young

Brad H. Young

Meet the Rabbis: Rabbinic Thought and the Teachings of Jesus

Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007
Available from Alban Books
Available from Amazon.com

When I teach on NT backgrounds, the content and relevance of rabbinic literature is often hard to impart to students. There's a lot of material to cover such as the Mishnah, the two Talmuds, Midrashim, Tosefta, etc. Brad Young has done a good job of showing the relevance of alot of this literature to the Gospels through his study of rabbinic teachings. One of the good things about Young's book is that he approaches the subject as a devout Christian but is willing to listen to these texts on their own terms and without pre-judging them as inferior to his own religious tradition. He gives a sympathetic treatment of the Pharisees and goes so far as to say that: "The church has at times read the Gospels as if Jesus were a Christian pastor attacking the leaders of a synagogue" (p. 35). The best parts of Young's book are: his discussion on the Pharisees, his introduction to Jewish literature, and his description of Jewish piety.

An outline of Young's book includes:

Part I: Introduction to Rabbinic Thought
1. Introduction to Rabbinic Thought
2. Masters Teachers and Their Disciples
3. Torah Is More than Law
4. The Great Sanhedrin
5. Parallel Rabbinic and New Testament Texts

Part II: Introduction to Rabbinic Literature
6. Introduction to Early Jewish Writings
7. Ethics of the Fathers
8. The Amidah Prayer
9. Maimonides Third Principles of Jewish Faith
10. Hillel's Seven Principles of Bible Interpretation

Part III: Introduction to the Rabbis
11. Meet the Rabbis
12. Both Torahs Were Revealed at Mount Sinai
13. Utopia or Actions Plans

Part IV: Study Helps

One place where I'd disagree with Young is that I'd be somewhat more cautious about how far back alot of these rabbinic traditions go and we have to avoid parallelomania in tracing the relevance of rabbinic materials for the New Testament.

New Books that I've Noticed

While surfing the RBL "books for review" the following stood out:

Timothy: Paul's Closest Associate
Malina, Bruce
Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical, 2008

The Pastoral Epistles: First Timothy, Second Timothy, Titus
Fiore, Benjamin
Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical, 2007

The Psalms of Solomon: A Critical Edition of the Greek Text
Wright, Robert, editor
New York: T&T Clark, 2007

The New Testament in Greek IV: The Gospel According to St. John: Volume Two: The Majuscules

Schmid, U. B., editor
Leiden: Brill, 2007

Die Eucharistie ist Jesus: Anfänge einer Theorie des Sakraments im koptischen Philippusevangelium (NHC 113)

Schmid, Herbert
Leiden: Brill, 2007

Diversity in Paul's Eschatology: Paul's View on the Parousia and Bodily Resurrection

Sobanaraj, S.Delhi
ISPCK, 2007

Holiness and Ecclesiology in the New Testament
Brower, Kent and Andy Johnson, editors
Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2007

Incarnate Word, Inscribed Flesh: John's Prologue and the Postmodern
Nutu, Ela
Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007

2 Peter & Jude
Reese, Ruth Anne
Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2007

Book Review: The Bible Canon - L.M. McDonald

Lee Martin McDonald

The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority

3rd ed.; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007.

Available from Alban Books

Available from Amazon.com

At SBL last year I had the pleasure of sitting down with Lee Martin McDonald for a few minutes for a chat about various things. McDonald is former President of Acadia Divinity School, current President of IBR, and soon to be adjunct at Fuller Seminary in California. His expertise has been in the history and reception of the Christian canon and the third edition of his The Biblical Canon is an excellent analysis of the issues relating to the canon (OT and NT but mainly with a focus on the NT). As a seminary instructor he is also cognizant of providing a readable and accessible treatment of the primary sources for students.

My favourite quote from the book is this one:

"No credible person today seriously believes that the Bible fell out of heaven fully bound in its current state with guilded edges and with a highly precise interpretation from God in it. The human dimension of the origin and production of the Bible, as well as how the divine message is conveyed through human words and ideas, cannot be ignored. Human beings were involved in the origins and production of hte Bible, and all of the words and ideas in the Bible are also reflective of human involvement. How the Bible is the word of God and yet comes to us in human form continues to be a mystery to Christians of every generation. This is not only an important part of the church's understanding about the Bible, but also about God's involvement in the human activity of Jesus, whom the church continues to confess as Lord and Christ.

Some of us were taught in seminary that the early church received from Jesus a closed biblical canon, our present OT, that was later expanded by the Catholics to include noncanonical (and thereby uninspired) apocryphal writings. In regard to the Hebrew Scriptures (or the OT), we were often taught that Jesus, the church's final authority, cited or referred to a closed canon of Hebrew Scriptures and that his authentication of them (he cited verses from teh three major parts of the OT: Law, Prophets, and Writings) was th echurch's mandate for accepting them as authoritative Scripture. In other words, the church simply adopted the canon of Jesus. In regard to the NT writings, man of us were taught that the early church simply recognized (as opposed to determined) its own inspired NT Scriptures that were believed to be apostolic, that is either written by or authorized by an apostle within general proximity to the time of Jesus and the apostels or at least written in the first century. We were further taught that these NT writings were unified in their teaching (i.e. they were orthodox) and for these reasons they were recognized by the majority of the churches to be inspired by God" (pp. 5-6).

McDonald's book reminds be of Craig Allert's A High View of Scripture with the exception that McDonald is far more detailed and methodological in his approach to the historical circumstances surrounding the canonization of the Christian Bible. But both are a good example as to why we cannot propagate the myth that the church simply recognized the inspired writings that became our New Testament. The Church was more active in the creation of the Scriptures than being a passive receptacle. However, McDonald certainly does not think the Scriptures any less divine or any less authoritative in the early church because of this. He still writes as an ordained Baptist minister and as a seminary lecturer.

An outline of McDonald's book runs:

1. Introduction

2. The Notion and Use of Scripture

3. The Notion and Use of Canon

4. Origins of the Hebrew Bible

5. Early Jewish Scriptures

6. Stabilization of the Hebrew Bible

7. Rabbinic Tradition

8. The Scriptures of Jesus and Early Christianity

9. From Story to Scritpure: Emergence of the New Testament Writings as Scripture

10. From Scripture to Canon: Tracing the Origins of the New Testament Canon

11. Influence of "Heretics"

12. Books, Texts, and Translations

13. Collections and Citations of Christian Scriptures

14. The Criteria Question

15. Final Reflections

The Evangelical Universalist?

Mark Casserley of SPCK forwarded me the announcement of the publication of the following volume: The Evangelical Universalist by Gregory MacDonald (this is a pseudonym based on Gregory [as in 'of Nyssa'] and MacDonald [as in 'George']). The book addresses several questions: Can an orthodox Christian, committed to the historic faith of the Church and the authority of the Bible, be a universalist? Is it possible to believe that salvation is found only by grace, through faith in Christ, and yet to maintain that in the end all people will be saved? Can one believe passionately in mission if one does not think that anyone will be lost forever? Could universalism be consistent with the teachings of the Bible? The author's answer of course is "yes". You can find discussions of it at blogs associated with Maggi Dawn, Chris Tilling, and Jason Clark. No doubt this will prompt much discussion and debate. Imagine me saying in my Yoda voice: "Beginning it is of the Universalist wars."

I have three comments:

1. As for myself, I'm pretty much an exclusivist but with inclusivist leanings on some areas (see Jason Clark's blog for definitions).

2. I'm not a universalist. I side with Dale C. Allison: "I do not know what befell Mother Theresa of Calcutta when she died, nor what has become of Joseph Stalin. But the same thing cannot have come upon both. If there is any moral rhyme or reason in the universe, all human beings cannot be equally well off as soon as they breathe their last and wake again" ("The Problem of Gehenna," in Resurrecting Jesus [London: T&T Clark, 2005], 99).

3. As a comical point, I must include the infamous Dr. Peter Williams' reply to Mark Casserly's email:

Dear Mr Casserley,

Thank you for the information. I hope that SPCK will also be paying for body guards and for safe housing for 'Gregory'. It is very important to keep him safe from all those evangelicals who might take the law into their own hands...

Best wishes,

Pete

(Used by permission).

A High View of Scripture Part 5: Inspiration and Inerrancy

We come now to the end of my review of Allert's book A High View of Scripture and find the juicest and most controversial part of the entire book.

Allert contests the widely held conclusion that inspoiration was the only criterion for the inclusion of books in the New Testament. Inspiration was not the criteria used and what was regarded as inspired referred to more than the New Testament and also included the offices and ministries of the church.

He devotes a significant amount of time to discussion of theopneustos in 2 Tim. 3.15-17 where he notes: (1) the passage is more concerned about the function than the origin of Scripture; (2) the passage emphasizes soundness of life and doctrine which one may learn through Scripture and tradition; (3) Allert understands 'sacred writings' not as all Scripture but as all relevant passages in that body of religious authoritative writings known as Scripture, not necessarily the OT and NT; and (4) He warns against etymological errors in that take 'God-breathed' as a mechanically literal description of how Scripture was produced. Allert emphasizes that this phrase could be a pauline neologism and it indicates that the authority of Scripture is from God and it contributes to the plan of salvation; thus, the main point is the usefulness of Scripture. I would accept most of this with a few qualifications and a slight objection. Most pressing of all is that Allert never really tells us what 'God-breathed' actually means. Surely it has connotations of origin, source, authority, and spirit-givenness-by-God-givenness or something like that!

In the next major section, Allert covers, "Inerrancy - A Necessary Evangelical Definition". He takes issue with the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and he objects specifically to articles # 4 and # 5 on the grounds that they appear to be denying that a critical examination of the phenomenon of Scripture can inform a doctrine of Scripture. Here I would slightly disagree. The Chicago Statement does not actually deny this as much as it fails to incorporate the phenomena of Scripture in the early church. Allert further points out that the problem with this definition of inerrancy (i.e. Chicago) is that it assumes modern standards of precision for truth and error.

Allert then has a juicy section on the case of R.H. Gundry, ETS, and the Gospel of Matthew. In sum, Gundry argues that elements of Matthew 1-2 were midrash and were fictitious stories based on patterns from OT narratives. Midrash itself is a slippery term and I think Matthew 1-2 is perhaps midrashic given the constant flow of OT quotes (so too D.A. Hagner) but not actually midrash! Allert contends that when Gundry's approach is measured against the Chicago Statement it is clear that he has tried to understand Matthew in terms of the literary conventions of his day just as the Chicago Statement advocates. This is why Gundry said that he could in good faith affirm inerrancy. What is the problem then? The problem is, Gundry regards the genre of Matthew 1-2 as making it unhistorical whereas most of his peers regarded it as historical. Allert notes correctly: "If the logic of Gundry's critics is followed, then a failure to agree with a group's interpretation of a particular passage of Scripture may leave one open to the charge of failing to hold inerrancy because one does not see what the Bible says, that is, does not a agree with that group's interpretation of the Bible". The problem here is that one's view of genre can be regarded as a litmus test of inerrancy which I take to be problematic. Let me give two examples:

1) Luke 16.19-31 is a story about the rich man and Lazarus. Now I take this to be a parable and not a literal description of the afterlife. Nonetheless, some interpreters have argued (including a former Professor of mine) that the word 'parable' is not used in the story and thus it is a literal description of the intermediate state! If I regard this as a parable, would I be denying inerrancy?

2) Tremper Longman's NICOT Ecclesiastes commentary argues that much of Ecclesiastes is written in a genre similar to the speeches of Job's friends. In other words, it is indicative of the perspective that one should not have about God and hard times. I think Tremper is wrong on this (and several other persons I'm told think the same), but is this a denial of inerrancy by getting the genre wrong.

Now some might object that these two examples do not refer to historical events in the life of Jesus. But why priviledge history in this way? (For what it's worthy Gundry's Mark commentary is one of the best defences of the historical material in Mark available). History matters and the Gospels are undoubtedly rooted in testimony and history, but how does history have to be told and can multiple genres be used? Does the Chicago Statement allow for this? If not why not?

In sum, Allert's book argues sucessfully for taking into account the phenomenon of Scripture for developing a doctrine of Scripture and not relying on theological inferences about what Scripture should look like. Though many details are contestable, it is worth reading. Next week I'll start a series on reading Markus Bockmuehl's Seeing the Word.

Book Review: Following God Through Mark

Ira Brent Driggers
Following God through Mark:
Theological Tensions in the Second Gospel
Louisville/London: WJK, 2007.
Available in the UK via Alban Books for £13.99
Available in the US via Amazon.com for $ 18.96.

In this volume Ira Driggers examines the portrait of God in the Gospel of Mark. In sum, Driggers is concerned with how the Gospel depicts God and what significance this has for a believing audience. His methodology is a narative critical reading that focuses not only on highlighting theological propositions but on the experience that the Gospel creates. He begins by noting a number of tensions based on the disciples who initially follow Jesus and yet misunderstand Jesus, they resist the passion and yet find themselves amidst the passion.

In chapter one Driggers looks at Mk. 1.1-15 and notes a tension in that God acts through Jesus, but God also acts directly as well (e.g. voice from heaven and via Scripture). In chapter two, he shifts to Jesus' relationship with his disciples where in 1.16-20 he argues for two mutualy exclusive explanations about the event on how the disciples choose to follow Jesus of their own volitional will and how they are also "fished by God". Then in chapter three Driggers examines the first half of the Marcan Gospel and identifies how the identification of Jesus with his disciples are thwarted by the disciples' own fear and misunderstanding and God also hardens the disciples directly. This highlights the tension of the Gospel and highlights the mystery of God. Coming to chapter four, he focuses on the second half of Mark and the necessity of the passion. He (again) points out two divergent facts that the passion is due to the blindness and sin of the world and yet it is also grounded in God's ancient promises in Scripture. The disciples' abandonment of Jesus is due to their own self-protection but also part of the divine script. Then in chapter five, Driggers examines the Gospel's conclusion and he suggests that Mark's Gospel jeopardizes the very promises that the narrative itself creates. The tension of the Gospel (created by the failure and fear in 16.8) means the story must carry over into the story of the implied audience whom themselves must break the silence of the women and continue to follow Jesus' teachings on discipleship which the disciples failed to do. It also underscores the fallibility of all disciples and the desperate need for merciful empowerment from a transcendent God. In sum: "The Gospel ends on a note of responsibility and impossibility, pointing hearers not only to the mystery of God but also to the mystery of discipleship" (p. 3). The final paragraph of the book is worth noting: "Given God's action within the narrative often sets the disciples at odds with their commission (if only for the purpose of Jesus' passion), such an assertion of divine fidelity is crucial, particularly for the audience outside the narrative. Although hearers will naturally question their fortitude in the face of opposition, they need not worry about God's faithfulness. Indeed, the opposition itself is, as an emulation of Jesus' own path, a sign of that faithfulness. In this sense the very promise of divine empowerment fosters obedience to the impossibie discipleship task: God and follow the path of Jesus, for God will be with you" (pp. 105-6).

All in all this is a good book on a neglected topic: God in the Gospel of Mark and the tension between divine sovereignty and human responsibility in Mark too (M.M. Thompson has written a good book on God in John's Gospel and D.A. Carson wrote his Ph.D thesis on divine sovereignty and human responsiblity on John as well - but it is high time that someone covered in it Mark). The only thing that I don't like about this book is that the apparent tension and the purported contradictions in the story may be due to either (1) paradoxes created by the mystery of God, (2) instances of the complexity that transpires when God intervenes in human affairs, or (3) exist only in the mind of Driggers.

Book Review: John, the Maverick Gospel

Robert Kysar
John, the Maverick Gospel
Third Edition
Louisville/London: Westminster John Knox, 2007.
Available from Amazon.com in the USA
Availabe from Alban Books in the UK

Robert Kysar's update of his well known introduction to John is much welcomed (first published in 1976) and it attests to a lifetime of learning in the Fourth Gospel. The Introduction covers the usual matters including the language of the Fourth Gospel, relationship to the Synoptics, structure, purpose, destination, and date. Then Kysar examines Johannine Christology which focuses on the Father-Son relationship (chapter one). What is covered next is the Johannine Dualism where Kysar is concerned mainly with John's Gospel and the problem of evil (chapter two). Johannine concepts of faith (chapter three) comes up for discussion as does John's eschatology which takes into account also views of the Spirit, Church, and Sacraments (chapter four). Finally, in the conclusion Kysar looks at the "Future of the Maverick Gospel" including modern and postmodern interpretations.

This is a good introduction to John's Gospel. I appreciate the way that Kysar has changed his mind and he rejects reading John in light of the so-called birkhat ha-minim and he acknowledges the weight of Bauckham's Gospels for All Christians perspective. Some parts I cannot embrace as I do not share Kysar's enthusiasm for postmodern perspectives on John. Kysar is right that John is maverick Gospel but I would hardly call it a "heterodox form of Christianity" since its reception was very positive (with a few exceptions) in the early church. The only way this volume could be improved is with a chapter on the reception-history of John. If you're teaching on John or preaching on John this is a user friendly book (with many diagrams) that can help.