Markus Bockmuehl Research Articles

Eschatological naturalism and ecological responsibility: Troubling some assumptions

Abstract The connection between ecological responsibility and differing conceptions of Christian eschatology is widely observed. It is often assumed that the necessary response to Christian environmental inaction is affirmation of a strongly this-worldly vision of new creation (so, influentially, N. T. Wright). However, recent systematic theology has seen retrieval of elements of eschatology that foreground discontinuity and transcendence (e.g. Hans Boersma). Moreover, there are exegetical challenges to continuationist claims (e.g. Markus Bockmuehl and Edward Adams) and doctrinal reactions to ‘eschatological naturalism’ (Katherine Sonderegger and Michael Allen). Where does this leave the connection between ecological witness and the content of Christian hope? Doubtless, continuationist accounts have some salutary emphases, but on exegetical, doctrinal and moral grounds I seek to disentangle the assumed compact of particular construals of this-worldly continuity and ethical commitment. Finally, drawing on James Cone's meditations upon black spiritual traditions, I explore how discontinuous interpretations of the life to come themselves need not undermine responsible action.

Beyond the Greco-Roman or Jewish Monocle: Reading Philippians and Paul ‘Kaleidoscopically’

Typically, scholars view/read the enigmatic apostle Paul monolithically—that is, through either a Greco-Roman or Jewish socio-cultural lens. The traditional Lutheran (Greco-Roman/Western) lens was criticized in the mid-/late-twentieth century by scholars highlighting Paul’s Jewishness—resulting in the so-called “New Perspective on Paul” and “Paul within Judaism” movements. This paradigmatic post-Shoah shift of Pauline interpretation begs the questions, “Should we abandon Greco-Roman readings of Paul?” and “Should we continue to read Philippians and Paul through a singular (Jewish) lens?” Building upon the work of Markus Bockmuehl, Abraham Malherbe et al., I argue for an “eclectic and pragmatic” approach. I explain how “monocular” (Greco-Roman or Jewish) and even “binocular” (Greco-Roman and Jewish) approaches flatten Paul’s complex thought world and Sitz im Leben as an in-Christ church-planting missionary. The purpose of this study is to read Philippians and Paul “kaleidoscopically”—considering the distinct Romanitas, juxtaposed and colliding cultures, worldviews, and religions that Paul likely encountered in the cosmopolitan colonia of first-century Philippi. This article transcends the Greco-Roman/Jewish debate surrounding Paul—highlighting the literary and archaeological evidence of competing pagan, Jewish, and Pauline Christ cults in first-century Philippi—and thus encouraging scholars to read Philippians and Paul through a “kaleidoscopic” rather than a monolithic lens.

The Ethical Challenge of Decolonisation and the Future of New Testament Studies

The challenge to decolonise academic disciplines has been pertinent for many decades, but it has recently come to a new level of prominence, with vigorous discussion of what responding to this challenge might entail. This article explores what it might mean as an ethical challenge in the discipline of New Testament studies, using examples to illustrate two key (and related) tasks: the ‘parochialisation’ of European approaches to the discipline, and the paying of attention to perspectives from elsewhere in the world. After a brief introduction to the decolonial challenge, there follows a brief survey of changing perspectives on the tasks of biblical studies, beginning with Johann Phillip Gabler's influential lecture from 1787, then C.H. Dodd's 1936 inaugural lecture, through to the more recent assessments of Markus Bockmuehl and Martin Hengel. This is followed by a survey of works of New Testament Introduction, moving from the classic work of Werner Georg Kümmel to the very recent Asian Introduction to the New Testament, edited by Johnson Thomaskutty. Finally, in light of these surveys, this article offers some reflections on decolonisation and the future(s) of New Testament studies. These reflections may suggest both parallels for the discipline of Christian ethics, and implications for the nature of the relationship between biblical studies and Christian ethics.

Intertestamental, Apocrypha, NT Use: Qumran

Intertestamental, Apocrypha, NT UseQumran Christopher T. Begg, Brian J. Meldrum, and Thomas Hieke 2382. [The DSS and Qumran Connection] Kenneth Atkinson, "Are the Dead Sea Scrolls from Khirbet Qumran?" QC 28-29 (2020-2021) 35-59 [see #2498]. A. discusses his title question—to which he gives a largely negative answer—under four headings: (1) The Nature of the Collection; (2) The Qumran Caves and Their Connection with Khirbet Qumran's Occupational Phases; (3) The Dead Sea Scrolls: A Library of Various Sectarian Communities; and (4) Are the Dead Sea Scrolls from Khirbet Qumran? In the course of his discussion, A. highlights what he sees as problematic scholarly uses of the Qumran materials, e.g., the distinction between "sectarian" and "non-sectarian" scrolls, and the attempt to reconstruct a "master text" of a given document, e.g., the Community Rule, by conflating elements from different copies of the document deriving from different caves and dating to different times. He concludes (pp. 58-59, adapted): The size of the DSS collection is unprecedented for an ancient library. Although there is a scribal focus to the collection, the presence of multiple copies of texts of different dates suggests that the Scrolls emanated from several communities. Khirbet Qumran appears to have been the location where a small number of residents practiced a form of animal sacrifice in relative isolation. Those who lived there had some relationship with earlier like-minded groups and shared many of the same writings. Each group, as evident in the multiple recensions of texts such as the Community Rule, shared certain documents, but interpreted them differently. Each was undoubtedly influenced by different historical experiences or understood the impact of their experiences differently. Because the scrolls are not from Khirbet Qumran, the site was likely not the center for a group of related sectarian communities. Nor was it the site of original thinking: most theological developments can be traced to the pre-Maccabean era. Because relatively few scrolls were produced in the period between 63 b.c.e. (the Roman conquest of Judea) and 68 c.e. (the Roman destruction of the Qumran site), the Scrolls communities seem to have largely died out during this period. Khirbet Qumran appears to have merely been the place where those who lived elsewhere but shared a similar ideology with its residents hid the contents of their libraries in the hope of retrieving them after the expected defeat [End Page 883] of the invading Roman army. Were it not for the tragic events of the First Jewish Revolt, relatively few scrolls would have been found at or near Khirbet Qumran.—C.T.B. 2383. [1QS] Melissa Sayyad Bach, "How Hard Is It to Get into the Community Rule? Exploring Transmission in 1QS from the Perspective of the Modes of Religiosity," SJOT 35 (2, 2021) 159-86. The Community Rule from Qumran (1QS) communicates its message to its recipients by employing a variety of genres (e.g., instructions, rules, rituals, myth, hymns). B.'s article attempts to explore some of the underlying cognitive mechanisms involved in the process of transmission by drawing on insights from cognitive science, Harvey White-house's Modes of Religiosity theory in particular. According to this approach, certain religious ideas and concepts are "cognitively optimal" (i.e., relatively simple and straightforward, often minimally counterintuitive) and therefore easy to remember, while others are "cognitively costly" (i.e., requiring greater conscious effort to be preserved and transmitted). Two different "modes" are the typical ways to preserve and transmit such contents: The "imagistic" mode relies on low-frequency and high-arousal rituals, whereas the "doctrinal" mode is associated with high-frequency and low-arousal rituals. Its use of different genres, each of which sheds light on 1QS's agenda, serves to highlight the costly and demanding nature of the 1QS content. Analyses of selected passages from 1QS show how elements of the doctrinal and the imagistic modes are employed in facilitating the transmission of the content. [Adapted from published abstract—B.J.M.] 2384. [DSS Research in Oxford] Markus Bockmuehl, "Introduction: Dead Sea Scrolls Research in Oxford," RevQ 32 (2, 2020) 165-69. In his capacity...

Regression in Galatians: Paul and the Gentile Response to Jewish Law by Neil Martin

Reviewed by: Regression in Galatians: Paul and the Gentile Response to Jewish Law by Neil Martin Jeremy Wade Barrier neil martin, Regression in Galatians: Paul and the Gentile Response to Jewish Law (WUNT 2/530; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2020). Pp. xvi + 308. Paper €84 This writing is a revised version of Martin's D.Phil. thesis submitted to the Faculty of Theology and Religion at Oxford University in August 2019, supervised by Markus Bockmuehl. Generally speaking, in this work M. takes up a critical issue of Galatians and effectively contributes to our understanding of the writing. In particular, he is interested in explaining the regression language (epistrephō, "return," Gal 4:9) that Paul emphasizes will take place if the Galatians implement Jewish ritual practices (Gal 3:3; 4:8–11; 5:1, 4, 7). The hermeneutical paradox under scrutiny is that Paul perceives the implementation of Jewish rituals as a "return" to paganism. The proposal is unfolded in seven chapters. The first chapter is an overview of the entire work. Methodologically speaking, M. writes from a historical-critical perspective, making use of epigraphical and literary resources associated with Asia Minor that serve as a backdrop for possible proposals and solutions (p. 5). The ingenuity of M.'s argument is understanding how religious rituals would have been perceived differently by the Galatians, Paul, and the Influencers, respectively. While the Influencers (and Paul himself) might have been able to implement Jewish religious practices without inhibiting their faith in Christ, the Galatians could not. In view of their pagan background, the implementation of Jewish practices constituted a regression into their former pagan "basic elements of religious practice," and this concerns Paul (p. 10; see also pp. 202–8). In the second chapter, M. summarizes his assumptions pertaining to Galatians, while also asserting that these assumptions are not essential to the overall argument. He assumes (1) that the audience is churches in southern Galatia; (2) that, generally speaking, Acts of the Apostles is a credible witness; (3) that the date of the letter is 50–52 c.e. Finally, he surveys the major characters that concern this project: Paul; a predominantly formerly pagan Galatian audience; and the Influencers, who are ethnic Jews (pp. 39–46). In chap. 3, "Galatians in the Pagan Religious Context of Asia Minor," M. surveys the relevant literary and epigraphic sources. A centerpiece of the chapter is an analysis of the aforementioned data through a "reciprocity model" that provides several ways of understanding reciprocity exchanges and gift giving between humans and the divine. This approach provides a useful framework for critiquing several of the current interpretations that assume an imperial and/or Anatolian context as the occasion of Paul's letter. This exposition of weaknesses within these theories thus allows room for M.'s interpretation. The information here pertaining to reciprocity gift giving will be essential in chap. 6. Chapter 4, "Paul and Returning to Paganism," expands the context for interpreting Galatians by considering how Paul dealt with gentiles on other occasions. Specifically, M. [End Page 503] applies Paul's discussion of the "strong" and the "weak" from 1 Cor 8:1–13 to Gal 4:8–11, while also offering an innovative interpretation of Rom 14:1–15:3 as possible support for his reading. In sum, when Paul pastors gentiles in the context of Jews, he realizes that there are some things that those who are unfamiliar with the rituals of Judaism (i.e., gentile converts) do not quite understand, and therefore as "weak" members will misconstrue and apply incorrectly. This is also the case in Galatia, M. argues. While connecting the rationale of 1 Cor 8:1–13/Rom 14:1–15:3 to Galatians is tenuous (Gal 5:11 and 4:8–9), M.'s analysis of the expression stoicheia tou kosmou is thorough. He analyzes the expression closely, with the conclusion that this should be understood to mean "fundamental elements of religious practice common both to that past and to the way of life advocated by the Influencers" (p. 139). In chap. 5, "Galatians in the Jewish Religious Context of Asia Minor," M. surveys the literary and epigraphical sources (cf. chap. 3), with special...

Repetition in Hebrews: Plurality and Singularity in the Letter to the Hebrews, Its Ancient Contexts, and the Early Church by Nicholas J. Moore

Reviewed by: Repetition in Hebrews: Plurality and Singularity in the Letter to the Hebrews, Its Ancient Contexts, and the Early Church by Nicholas J. Moore Scott D. Mackie nicholas j. moore, Repetition in Hebrews: Plurality and Singularity in the Letter to the Hebrews, Its Ancient Contexts, and the Early Church (WUNT 2/388; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Pp. xv + 276. Paper €94. Repetition and singularity are prominent themes in the Letter to the Hebrews and are most conspicuous in the author's comparison of the Levitical sacrifices with Jesus's selfoffering. Levitical sacrifices are "continuously offered, year after year," thereby providing a "reminder of sins, year after year" (10:1-3), while Jesus's self-offering is singular and conclusive, "once for all" and "for all time" (10:10-14). This revision of a dissertation supervised by Markus Bockmuehl at the University of Oxford (2014) analyzes occurrences of repetition and singularity in conjunction with three main topics—revelation, repentance, and ritual—and challenges the common scholarly appraisal of repetition as unequivocally negative. Moore provides a valuable survey of these themes as they appear in the Hebrew Bible (in the prophetic critique of sacrifice), Second Temple literature (Jubilees, Dead Sea Scrolls, [End Page 713] Philo), Plutarch, and early Christianity. Hebrews' apparent exclusion of post-baptismal repentance exercised massive influence on the theology of many early Church Fathers, and M. offers a fine discussion of such issues as repeating repentance, baptism, and sacrifices in Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Epiphanius, and Chrysostom, among others. Turning to Hebrews, M. first analyzes the role of repetition in relation to revelation. He convincingly demonstrates that the repeated and pluriform (πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως) speech of God "through the prophets" in Heb 1:1 is not negatively contrasted with the eschatological divine speech mediated by Jesus; rather, this text attests to their continuity, as the author's high regard for the multifaceted divine revelation "to the fathers" is evidenced throughout by the author's dependence on the LXX. In fact, "the very plurality of this speech is fundamental to enabling the audience to comprehend the full magnitude of the Son's character and achievements" (p. 105). Moreover, the two revelatory addresses stand in a dialogical relationship, creating a "hermeneutical circle whereby the OT explains the Christ event, and the Christ event in turn leads to a new understanding of scripture" (p. 107). Though many have interpreted Hebrews' harsh warnings concerning the unrepeatability of repentance as rhetorical hyperbole, an impassioned and exaggerated piece of exhortation, M. disagrees, contending that "Hebrews' extends the once-for-all character of Jesus' death to the appropriation of the benefits of his atoning act—Christian conversion or repentance—thus rendering it unrepeatable" (p. 116). An excellent discussion of repentance in Jewish/Christian and philosophic sources yields the conclusion that μετάνοια in Hebrews solely "indicates a change of mind at the very highest level," namely, "an initial and absolute repentance or even conversion experience" (p. 123). The decisive factor, however, is not the quality or degree of human remorse but a divine "renewal" that enables true repentance, as evidenced by Heb 6:6 and the bleak portrayal of Esau in 12:16-17 (pp. 124-27). The sin and apostasy that place a Christian in this irrevocable position probably involve a "persistent, drawn out … drifting away," which eventually leads to a definitive "single act of irremediable turning away"; though Hebrews is "deliberately vague about what might constitute such apostasy" (pp. 129-30). Furthermore, the "re-crucifying" (ἀνασταυρόω, 6:6) of Jesus would involve an attempt to repeat and double the shame Jesus suffered at the cross, and this represents the only truly negative instance of repetition in Hebrews (pp. 138, 211). M.'s discussion is problematized by the fact that Hebrews never directly contrasts Jesus's "once for all" sacrifice with "re-repentance," though he notes this difficulty and attempts to address it (p. 141). The final topic, sacrifice and ritual, looks closely at what is perhaps Hebrews' most important comparative critique of the tabernacle cult, in 10:1-18. M. contends that the "repetition and plurality" found in this section's portrayal of the Levitical cult carry "predominantly negative associations," yet "such repetition is an indication rather than...

Creation ex nihilo: Origins, Development, Contemporary Challenges ed. by Gary A. Anderson and Markus Bockmuehl

Creation ex nihilo: Origins, Development, Contemporary Challenges ed. by Gary A. Anderson and Markus Bockmuehl

Paul's "Works of the Law" in the Perspective of Second Century Reception by Matthew J. Thomas

Reviewed by: Paul's "Works of the Law" in the Perspective of Second Century Reception by Matthew J. Thomas Curtis J. Mitch Paul's "Works of the Law" in the Perspective of Second Century Reception by Matthew J. Thomas (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2018), xv + 230 pp. The present volume is a lightly revised doctoral dissertation written at the University of Oxford under the supervision of Mark Edwards, David Lincicum, and Jenn Strawbridge. It examines one of the most vigorously contested phrases of the New Testament ("works of the law" in the Pauline Epistles) from the standpoint of early patristic reception. Paul, in both Romans and Galatians, formulates a sharp antithesis between "faith in Christ" and "works of the law" (Rom 3:20, 28; Gal 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10). For the apostle, faith in Christ effects justification, while works of the law are denied a role in justification. But what are these works? What do they signify? On what grounds does Paul oppose them? According to M. J. Thomas, modern debates over Paul's "works of the law" have long been impoverished by inattention to the earliest patristic evidence. His dissertation aims to address this deficiency by ascertaining (1) how Paul's earliest readers understood "works of the law," and (2) how these ancient perspectives relate to modern debates among proponents of the Old and New Perspectives on Paul. The parameters of the study extend from the Didache to the death of [End Page 326] Irenaeus. The rationale for these endpoints is derived from the work of Markus Bockmuehl, who argues that New Testament scholars can profitably consider the first 150 years of Christian history as a privileged period of living memory in which a vital connection with the apostolic age remains. Methodologically, the author describes his work as a conceptual study of the Pauline phrase ἔργα νόμου, "works of the law," rather than a purely lexical one. Instead of restricting analysis to occurrences of the expression, which is not attested in early patristic literature before Irenaeus, he identifies texts that evince thematic overlap with Paul's discussions in Romans and Galatians, especially those that are marked by Christian–Jewish polemics and engage in parallel discussions of law, works, and justification. Evidence gathered on this basis is sorted into three categories, labeled A, B, and C. Works in category A ("direct evidence") show clear signs of Pauline influence and reference specific Pauline passages dealing with works of the law. Works in category B ("supporting evidence") have probable Pauline influence and engage Paul's letters, but not specifically passages about works of the law. Works in category C ("circumstantial evidence") show possible signs of Pauline influence and canvass debates that are similar to Paul's in Romans and Galatians, although without reference to Pauline passages about works of the law. Having set forth the scope and procedure of the study (part I), the author moves to examine the views of leading representatives of the Old and New Perspectives on Paul (part II). Once the contours of the debate are framed out, and their views on Paul's "works of the law" are identified, he proceeds in chronological order through the early patristic sources with the aim of discovering what he calls the Early Perspective on Paul (part III). Finally, he brings the ancient evidence to bear on the modern controversy, comparing and contrasting the Early Perspective on "works of the law" with the Old and New Perspectives (part IV). The Old and New Perspectives divide cleanly down the middle of Paul's "works of the law" formula. For the Old Perspective (OP), which is represented in the study by Martin Luther, John Calvin, Rudolf Bultmann, and Douglas Moo, Paul primarily denies works the power to justify. For advocates of the New Perspective (NP) such as E. P. Sanders, J. D. G. Dunn, and N. T. Wright, Paul primarily denies the law the power to justify. (1) What then is the meaning of Paul's "works of the law"? According to the OP, Paul is talking about any works that one might perform to earn favor with God and attain salvation. According to the NP, the apostle refers mainly to the...

Creation ex nihilo: Origins, Development, Contemporary Challenges. Edited by Gary A. Anderson and Markus Bockmuehl

Creation ex nihilo: Origins, Development, Contemporary Challenges. Edited by Gary A. Anderson and Markus Bockmuehl

Repetition in Hebrews: Plurality and Singularity in the Letter to the Hebrews, Its Ancient Context, and the Early Church

Repetition in Hebrews: Plurality and Singularity in the Letter to the Hebrews, Its Ancient Context, and the Early Church

Simon Peter in Scripture and Memory: The New Testament Apostle in the Early Church. By Markus Bockmuehl, Pp. xvi, 223, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2012, $26.00.

Simon Peter in Scripture and Memory: The New Testament Apostle in the Early Church. By Markus Bockmuehl, Pp. xvi, 223, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, MI, 2012, $26.00.

Simon Peter in Scripture and Memory: The New Testament Apostle in the Early Church.By Markus Bockmuehl.

<i>Simon Peter in Scripture and Memory: The New Testament Apostle in the Early Church.</i>By Markus Bockmuehl.

Reading Romans with St. Thomas Aquinas ed. by Matthew Levering, Michael Dauphinais

650 BOOK REVIEWS Reading Romans with St. Thomas Aquinas. Edited by MATTHEW LEVERING and MICHAEL DAUPHINAIS. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012. Pp. 336. $55.00 (cloth). ISBN: 978-0-81321962 -2. This volume comprises a collection of sixteen essays on diverse topics concerning Aquinas’s commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. With ten Catholic and seven Protestant scholars contributing to the book (one article is co-authored), it can be counted an ecumenical effort. In chapter 1, “Aquinas on Paul’s Flesh/Spirit Anthropology in Romans,” Bernhard Blankenhorn first dismisses the notion that Paul’s anthropology offers a simplistic dualism, explaining how according to Paul’s usage, pneuma “does not refer to the individual soul or a spiritual substance” and sarx often refers “to something other than an individual body” (2). Next, Blankenhorn reviews the major lines of Augustine’s interpretation of Paul’s flesh/spirit anthropology, noting the evolution of his exegesis, from which investigation he will be able to determine that Aquinas is strongly influenced for better and for worse by Augustine’s reading (37). Finally, focusing on Aquinas’s commentary on Romans and the Summa Theologiae but also briefly comparing the commentary on Galatians, Blankenhorn concludes that Aquinas’s treatment of Paul’s flesh/spirit anthropology accords with more general characteristics of his exegesis of Paul: that is, although Aquinas does not take note of the literary genre Paul employs, he grasps the essence of Paul’s intended teaching. Blankenhorn faults the Angelic Doctor for not interpreting Paul in his own historical context, concluding that at certain points in his works he misreads (15), misinterprets (16, 25, 37), and is not able to understand Paul (23), but is led astray (24), makes exegetical mistakes (32), takes false turns (38), and in one lectio offers a terribly unsatisfying exegesis (26); yet Blankenhorn recognizes as well that “the theologian’s aim is never simply a faithful historical analysis of the biblical text according to the human author’s original intention” (10 n. 31). Thus it seems that one could understand Aquinas to be engaging in a reverential reading, in which, whether fully aware of it or simply unconcerned, he might assist Paul to reach a true conclusion that Paul himself might not recognize. For readers not already devoted to Aquinas, it could be even more helpful to show his contribution than simply to establish that he was not wrong about the essence of Paul’s intended teaching despite not reading Paul in his own historical context. In the second essay, Markus Bockmuehl, considers “Aquinas on Abraham’s Faith in Romans 4.” He encourages biblical scholars, noting that once they look past the unfamiliar Aristotelian form of highly structured presentation, they will find a careful exegete at work who repeatedly allows his critical questions to be both generated and addressed by a close reading of the biblical text. Bockmuehl asks whether only the uncircumcised Abraham is the forefather of faith in Christ or whether the circumcised Abraham might also be BOOK REVIEWS 651 (39). He notes that in Genesis we can see that Abraham is the chief example of faith-based righteousness, because before he was ever circumcised, he believed in God, and God credited this to him as righteousness (40). Thus Abraham is the father of the covenant for both Jews and Gentiles (42). Bockmuehl suggests that Calvin might even have been able to approve of Aquinas’s explanation of faith and works where it is recognized that a man’s works are not proportioned to cause the habit of righteousness but rather a man must be justified inwardly by God first so that he can perform works proportioned to divine glory (42). Chapter 3 presents Hans Boersma’s contribution of “Ressourcement of Mystery: The Ecclesiology of Thomas Aquinas and the Letter to the Romans.” Boersma follows Yves Congar’s argument that Aquinas’s ecclesiology can serve as a trustworthy source to which we can return in order to find a bridge between Catholic and Protestant theology. Boersma quotes Congar’s assessment that Aquinas holds a happy medium between the Reformation and Jesuitical Romanism—the former neglecting the structure of the Church...

Studies in Matthew and Early Christianity. By GRAHAM STANTON. Edited by MARKUS BOCKMUEHL and DAVID LINCICUM.

Studies in Matthew and Early Christianity. By GRAHAM STANTON. Edited by MARKUS BOCKMUEHL and DAVID LINCICUM.

Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics – Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance

Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics – Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance

Paradise in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Views – Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Guy G. Stroumsa

Paradise in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Views – Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Guy G. Stroumsa

Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance

DialogVolume 51, Issue 1 p. 92-94 Book Reviews Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Alan J. Torrance David Balch, David Balch Pacific Lutheran Theological SeminarySearch for more papers by this author David Balch, David Balch Pacific Lutheran Theological SeminarySearch for more papers by this author First published: 06 March 2012 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6385.2011.00658.xRead the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Volume51, Issue1March 2012Pages 92-94 RelatedInformation

The Remembered Peter in Ancient Reception and Modern Debate – By Markus Bockmuehl

The Remembered Peter in Ancient Reception and Modern Debate – By Markus Bockmuehl

Paradise in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Views. Edited by MARKUS BOCKMUEHL and GUY G. STROUMSA.

Paradise in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Views. Edited by MARKUS BOCKMUEHL and GUY G. STROUMSA.

Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics – Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Allan J. Torrance

Scripture's Doctrine and Theology's Bible: How the New Testament Shapes Christian Dogmatics – Edited by Markus Bockmuehl and Allan J. Torrance