NT Scholars Research Articles

Was Paul Within Judaism, Within Israel or Within Israel’s Messiah?

In NT scholarship, the Paul Within Judaism approach has gained considerable momentum. In this approach to Paul’s discourse on identity, a distinction is drawn between “Jewish” and gentile followers of Christ. “Jewish” followers, including Paul, are considered those that remain fully Torah-observant, whereas gentile followers are regarded as not fully Torah-observant, especially with respect to circumcision. In this contribution, Paul’s identity in relation to first-century “Judaism” and/or historical Israel is reconsidered. The main question that is asked in this regard is whether the Paul Within Judaism approach is a viable position in light of the hermeneutical difficulties surrounding first-century “Judaism”, as well as Paul’s own rhetoric around the Ἰουδαῖοι (“Jews”/“Judaeans”). Another question that is asked is whether Ἰσραήλ (“Israel”) and the Ἰουδαῖοι point to the exact same entity. Would it be more accurate to see Paul as being within Israel as one of God’s covenant people than as remaining a Ἰουδαῖος (“Jew”/“Judaean”)? Or did Paul leave his identity as a Ἰουδαῖος or as part of Israel behind for a new identity to be defined around Israel’s Messiah only? Lastly, it is considered whether Paul’s discourse on identity leaves room for an identity in Christ that is inclusive of an identity as a Ἰουδαῖος or as being part of Israel, or whether the identity in Christ excludes the latter.

The Concept of Canon in the Reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews by David Young

Reviewed by: The Concept of Canon in the Reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews by David Young Bryan R. Dyer david young, The Concept of Canon in the Reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews (LNTS 658; London: T&T Clark, Zed Books, 2022). Pp. xiii + 176. $115. David Young’s volume sets out to challenge many of the assumptions of NT scholarship regarding how and when a particular text was considered “canonical.” Resisting the urge to find a straight line from a text’s composition to eventual canonical status, Y. argues that the typical evidence used to identify this trajectory—canon lists, citations, manuscript reproduction, and so on—must be examined within the text’s own social context without assuming the result of acceptance into the canon. Further, finding support within this evidence that a particular text was accepted or rejected as canonical proves to be simplistic and unhelpful. As Y. notes, it may well be the case that a book’s availability accounts for its appearance or quotation in patristic sources and that one should not necessarily read too much into that author’s view of the book’s canonicity. Y. chooses to focus his attention on the Epistle to the Hebrews, which proves to be an excellent test case as he explores these ideas. The first chapter offers a history of research on Hebrews’ reception history with an emphasis on issues of canon. Y. challenges the common view that Hebrews was accepted early in the East and initially rejected in the West. Instead, Hebrews’ reception among early Christians demonstrates a more varied and nuanced engagement. Y. sets out to demonstrate this in the remaining chapters of his study. In chap. 2, Y. examines fourth-century discussions pertaining to what books should be accepted as Christian Scriptures. The argument throughout this chapter is that these early Christians reasoned much like other Greek and Roman bibliographers of their era. Y. demonstrates that, like earlier Greek authors, Christians were concerned with the issue of authorship and used this as a means of attaching authority and legitimacy to a written work. To aid in making this determination, Christian writers, like their Greek predecessors, argued in terms of “reports of previous bibliographers, one’s own judgments about a work’s style, and any biographical data that could be assembled” (p. 18). Taking their cue from Greek and Roman bibliographers, the early Christians saw a connection between authorship and authority—eventually adding their own concern with a text’s coherence to developing orthodoxy. These concerns play out in the treatment of Hebrews in the writings of Eusebius, Athanasius, Augustine, and others. In chap. 3, Y. treats citations of Hebrews in patristic sources of the second and third [End Page 171] centuries. Y. argues that the appearances of Hebrews in these patristic writings are often explained by the rhetorical function they contribute rather than by a working understanding of the text’s canonicity. Some writers, such as Origen and Clement, understand the epistle to be Pauline while others, such as Tertullian, attribute it to an associate of Paul. Either way, there is little attention to the epistle’s acceptance or rejection within the canon since these authors are more concerned with the utility that quotations from Hebrews provide within their discourses. Y. goes to great lengths to demonstrate how these patristic authors quote from Hebrews using ancient practices of citation and composition. The fourth chapter examines the placement of Hebrews among editions of the corpus Paulinum in the third through sixth centuries. Generally, Y. shows that Hebrews was consistently included within the Pauline corpus in Greek manuscripts, while more hesitancy was apparent in Latin manuscripts. According to Y., this hesitancy had less to do with concerns over Hebrews’ place in the canon and more to do with questions of its authorship and whether it should be included among Paul’s letters. Further, where the epistle was placed within a Pauline corpus was often influenced by whether its attribution to Paul was assumed, in doubt, or denied. Thus, in Greek manuscripts Hebrews was often placed within the corpus according to common editorial practices, while in Latin manuscripts it appeared at the end (or was...

Jesus in Context: Making Sense of the Historical Figure by David Wenham

Reviewed by: Jesus in Context: Making Sense of the Historical Figure by David Wenham Glenn B. Siniscalchi david wenham, Jesus in Context: Making Sense of the Historical Figure (Cambridge Studies in Religion, Philosophy, and Society; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021). Pp. xii + 249. Paper $29.99. David Wenham’s evenhanded, concise, and accessible book is dedicated to the basic themes of contemporary research on the historical Jesus. It is strongly recommended for introductory-level college courses that are related to historical approaches to the NT writings. One of the best aspects of Jesus in Context is the comprehensive coverage of most of the pertinent subjects in the current state of historical Jesus research. Whether it is the broad contours of the Roman Empire or the Jewish matrix from which Jesus and his first followers emerged in ancient Israel, there is plenty of informative and digestible material in this book. Wenham’s impartial coverage of the current findings of Jesus research is both ecumenically sensitive and consistent with the presuppositions of Christian theology. In this way, W.’s text subtly reports that christological orthodoxy and many well-established conclusions about the historical figure of Jesus can now be seen as comrades-in-arms. W. is keen on informing the reader where the consensus of NT scholars stand with respect to Jesus and his self-understanding; his teachings, actions, and miracles; and the immediate impact that he made on his followers. One might profit from understanding the political and socioreligious contexts in which Jesus lived (part 1) and some of the major themes that characterized his sayings and ministry (part 2). Toward the beginning of Jesus in Context, W. discusses the literary sources that ancient historians commonly use to study Jesus, the geographical and archaeological discoveries that seem pertinent for the relevant contemporary studies, and the history of ancient Israel and the Roman Empire up to and including the first century of the Common Era. [End Page 168] Wenham’s text is also excellent with regard to the fundamental reliability of the canonical Gospels. He rightly reports that form criticism, redaction criticism, the fascination with the second-century apocryphal Gospels, and the notion of oral traditions in ancient Palestine are not relevant enough concerns to lead one to conclude that the Christian Gospels are unreliable. Moreover, the current state of NT scholarship is not on the side of the revision-ist views of Rudolf Bultmann (who was known for separating the theology of the canonical Gospels from whatever history might lie behind them) or the older nineteenth-century scholars who saw the Gospels as fabricated myths. In the words of W., “The skepticism that ends up with scholars concluding or implying that much gospel tradition is the creation of the early Christian church rather than Jesus is curious, to say the least. It is much more likely that the main creative genius reflected in the gospel stories and teaching was the person who inspired the Christian movement, rather than . . . his followers” (p. 76). Rather, most of the newest questers in the guild endorse the historicity of Jesus and his various teachings about the reign of God, his baptism by John the Baptist, his wondrous miracles, and his resurrection from the dead. Recognizing that Paul’s letters were not understood as inspired texts by the original recipients, W. pointedly brings home the relevance of the apostle Paul for Jesus studies: “Both these early letters and others that followed, . . . give a lot of evidence about what the first Christians said and believed about Jesus. The letters are not telling the stories of Jesus, but are dealing with issues that had arisen in the churches; their references to Jesus are all the more revealing for being incidental” (p. 47). One of W.’s areas of special interest is that the apostle Paul and the four Gospel writers were not literarily dependent on one another. Despite that barrage of technical publications on early christology and historical criticism, W.’s book should be warmly welcomed as one of the best introductory texts on the current state of the basic questions on the historical Jesus and the reliability of the NT. In terms of accessibility and depth of...

Jihye Lee. A Jewish Apocalyptic Framework of Eschatology in the Epistle to the Hebrews: Protology and Eschatology as Background

Jihye Lee. <i>A Jewish Apocalyptic Framework of Eschatology in the Epistle to the Hebrews: Protology and Eschatology as Background</i>

Volker Rabens, Jacqueline N. Grey, and Mariam Kamell Kovalishyn, eds. Key Approaches to Biblical Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue

Volker Rabens, Jacqueline N. Grey, and Mariam Kamell Kovalishyn, eds. <i>Key Approaches to Biblical Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue</i>

Pondering, Praying, Preaching Romans 8 by Bonnie Thurston

Reviewed by: Pondering, Praying, Preaching Romans 8 by Bonnie Thurston Frank J. Matera bonnie thurston, Pondering, Praying, Preaching Romans 8 (Fairacres Publications 183; Fairacres, Oxford: SLG, 2021). Pp. 70. Paper £6 Chapter 8 plays a central role in Paul's Letter to the Romans as well as in the life of the church. In terms of the letter, it concludes the first part of Paul's presentation of the gospel he is preaching to the Romans through this letter. In terms of the life of the church, it is the most important chapter in the NT about the Spirit in the Christian life. It is not surprising, then, that Bonnie Thurston, who has written commentaries on the Pauline epistles as well as works that mediate NT scholarship to a wider audience, has focused her attention on this chapter. This brief volume, however, is not a monograph or exegetical study of Romans 8, although it is keenly aware of the exegetical challenges the chapter presents. Rather it is meant for a wider audience, especially those charged with preaching the gospel. After a brief historical and literary introduction that deals with the letter's background, T. divides Romans 8 into six units (vv. 1–11, 12–17, 18–23, 24–25, 26–30, and 31–29), which she studies in terms of their background and dominant theme, concluding with points for prayer and reflection. Themes she examines are the contrast between the Spirit and the flesh, the Trinity, the role of suffering in the Christian life, the hope that Christians have in the Spirit, the help the Spirit provides believers, and the promises of God. T.'s reflection and comments are pastoral and theological in nature and informed by exegetical acumen. Consequently, this volume is not so much an exegesis of the text as it is a theological reflection on Romans 8 in the light of contemporary exegesis. [End Page 514] This work is clearly written, and T. does a fine job of highlighting the role of the Spirit within the cosmic scope of Paul's theology. It will be most useful to preachers and those who want to know more about Paul's understanding of the role of the Spirit in the Christian life. Given the work T. has done in researching this volume, I hope she will dedicate herself to a full exegetical study of this passage that will benefit scholars as well as the church. Frank J. Matera 465 Middle Rd. # 67, Farmington, CT 06032 Copyright © 2022 The Catholic Biblical Association of America

"To Recover What Has Been Lost": Essays on Eschatology, Intertextuality, and Reception History in Honor of Dale C. Allison Jr. ed. by Tucker S. Ferda et al.

Reviewed by: "To Recover What Has Been Lost": Essays on Eschatology, Intertextuality, and Reception History in Honor of Dale C. Allison Jr. ed. by Tucker S. Ferda et al. Olegs Andrejevs tucker s. ferda, daniel frayer-griggs, and nathan c. johnson (eds.), "To Recover What Has Been Lost": Essays on Eschatology, Intertextuality, and Reception History in Honor of Dale C. Allison Jr. (NovTSup 183; Leiden: Brill, 2021). Pp. xx + 450. $159. One of the household names in NT studies, Dale C. Allison Jr. is presented with a remarkable volume. The twenty essays are arranged in three groups reflecting "areas of Allison's scholarship" (p. 2). Part 1 is devoted to "Eschatology"; part 2 to "Intertextuality"; and part 3 to "Reception History." Of course, these research areas are not the only building blocks in Allison's still growing legacy. Both the collection's list of contributors and the topics they have chosen frequently reflect other principal areas of Allison's academic impact. One of Allison's major contributions to NT scholarship is his and W. D. Davies's monumental ICC commentary on Matthew's Gospel (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988–1997), which, more than two decades after the closing volume's publication, remains a standard reference in the field. It is no surprise that a number of fellow Matthean specialists contribute to the present collection (Foster, Gundry, Konradt, and Evans). Overall, a quarter of the volume's essays direct the readers' attention to Matthew's Gospel: Paul Foster, "The Eschatology of the Gospel of Mathew"; Mark Goodacre, "The Orthodox Redaction of Mark: How Matthew Rescued Mark's Reputation"; Robert H. Gundry, "Topographical Christology in Matthew's Narrative of Jesus' Birth and Infancy"; Chris Keith, "The Book of the Genesis of Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:1)"; and Lidija Novakovic, "Matthew and Paul on Torah Observance: Is Matthew's Gospel Anti-Pauline, Pro-Pauline, or Un-Pauline?" Two more essays focus on Synoptic texts that have parallels in Matthew: Brant Pitre, "From Reimarus to Allison: The Quest for Jesus and the Christological 'Thunderbolt' (Matt 11:25–27 // Luke 10:21–22)"; and Rafael Rodríguez, "Your Will Be Done: Remembering Jesus' Submission [End Page 536] to the Father." Gundry's essay develops a proposal introduced in his own commentary on the First Gospel. Another major building block of Allison's legacy, one for which he is equally well known, is his work on the historical Jesus. This broad area is engaged by seven contributions: James Hamilton Charlesworth, "Clarifying the Background of Jesus' Eschatological Parables (4Q541)"; James Crossley, "Jesus and John Ball: Millenarian Prophets"; Paula Fredriksen, "Al Tirah ("Fear Not!"): Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology, from Schweitzer to Allison, and After"; Stephen J. Patterson, "Bultmann's Jesus in America"; Pitre (see above); Rodríguez (see above); and Gerd Theissen, "The Peril of Modernising and De-modernising Jesus: A Cognitive Perspective." Highlighting the volume's elegant design, its bookends connect Allison to towering figures in twentieth-century biblical research: Albert Schweitzer (Fredriksen) and Rudolf Bultmann (Patterson). Fredriksen's contribution opens by juxtaposing Allison and N. T. Wright: "Much is gained when Second Temple Jewish apocalyptic is denied, redefined, or quietly discarded" (p. 17). She concludes her essay with a quotation from Allison (p. 33): "To do history is not to do theology" (Dale C. Allison Jr., Constructing Jesus: Memory, Imagination, and History [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2010] 462). These two statements capture well what Allison's work is and is not like, what elevates him to the level of Schweitzer and Bultmann, what will require future scholarship to interact with his work. That interaction will not be limited to Jesus and the Gospels. Further prominent areas of Allison's research include the epistle attributed to James of Jerusalem, the brother of Jesus (ICC commentary; London: T&T Clark, 2013), and the Testament of Abraham (CEJL commentary; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2003). Four of the volume's essays address James and the Testament of Abraham: Alicia J. Batten, "The Letter of James and the Divine Liturgy"; Craig A. Evans, "James and Paul on the Works of the Law and the Pure Food of 4QMMT"; John S. Kloppenborg, "Verbatim Citations in James"; and Jared W. Ludlow, "Untimely Death: Is There a...

Reflections on Reflections

Abstract This essay responds to those of Darrell Bock, Craig Blomberg and Mark Strauss looking back on Howard Marshall’s Luke Historian and Theologian after over 50 years. It first highlights the impact of Marshall’s work on the growth in confidence among evangelicals in engaging in NT scholarship, the development of evangelical biblical theology, and (within that) a focus on the message of Luke-Acts. It then sketches four areas for future scholarship which Marshall’s work opens up: further work on the message of Acts; reflection on the place of Judaism and the Jewish people in Acts; fuller engagement with Luke’s theological contribution post-Conzelmann; and a broader and deeper understanding of salvation through a Lukan lens.

A Theology of Forgiveness: Theosis in Matthew 18:15–35

Jesus’s discussion of the discipline of the church (Matt 18:15–35) shows an example of theosis. While there has been growing interest in theosis among NT scholars, little work has been done on theosis in Matthew’s Gospel. Moreover, scholars who do recognize theosis in Matthew’s Gospel do not attend to how God and the human are united. This article seeks to fill the lacuna. The purpose of this study is to offer a theological exegesis of forgiveness in Jesus’s church discipline. I aim to demonstrate that forgiveness as an embodied way of life is a hermeneutical key to theosis, namely, our transformative participation in God’s life. Forgiveness as an embodied way of life requires the cultivation of particular practices, such as prayer and repentance. This study shows that embodying forgiveness through the practices of prayer and repentance is to take part in the nature and will of the Father in heaven who desires love and mercy (7:21; 12:50; 18:19, 35).

What if it were True? Why Study the New Testament

AbstractThis article argues for a renewal of the discipline of New Testament studies through a focus on the question of truth. To make the argument, the article first engages a recent essay that is highly critical of mainstream NT scholarship and subsequently works with the thought of Søren Kierkegaard, Stanley Cavell, Cora Diamond and Hans-Georg Gadamer to pursue the interpreter's implications in the NT's assertions of truth. The article also briefly exegetes five passages from the NT to illustrate the way the NT makes claims that require judgements about truth. Along the way, the article also engages contemporary NT scholars who argue vociferously against ‘theological’ readings of the NT and others who argue for their inherent necessity.

Volker Rabens, Jacqueline Grey, and Mariam Kamell Kovalishyn, eds. Key Approaches to Biblical Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue. BINS 189.

Volker Rabens, Jacqueline Grey, and Mariam Kamell Kovalishyn, eds. <i>Key Approaches to Biblical Ethics: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue</i>. BINS 189.

The Many Faces of Metaphor in Colossians 2:15

Abstract Due to numerous lexical, syntactical, and historical problems, the interpretation of almost every word in Col 2:15 is contested. In the debate, there is a tendency to argue for one or two possible metaphors, while discarding, ignoring, or relegating the other options to a footnote. But this is not how metaphors work. Therefore, this article surveys images often associated with the participles απεκδυσάμενος and θριαμβεύσας in Col 2:15 and then argues that scholars should not pick one single image over another in the verse. Rather, based on scholarship surrounding metaphors, NT scholars should consider how the multiple metaphors might inform and transform each other.

Kritiker und Exegeten: Porträtskizzen zu vier Jahrhunderten alttestamentlicher Wissenschaft.

Kritiker und Exegeten: Porträtskizzen zu vier Jahrhunderten alttestamentlicher Wissenschaft.

Roman Port Societies: The Evidence of Inscriptions

Roman Port Societies: The Evidence of Inscriptions

The First Biography of Jesus: Genre and Meaning in Mark’s Gospel

The First Biography of Jesus: Genre and Meaning in Mark’s Gospel

A Postmodern Riddle? Gaps, Inferences and Mark’s Abrupt Ending

It is widely acknowledged that Mark’s abrupt ending (16.8) is best understood as a deliberate narrative device. Despite this ‘new consensus’, a number of scholars continue to assert that this approach is not only problematic but also depends on a postmodern perspective that overemphasizes the reader/audience. This article argues that Mark’s ending has been crafted in order to invoke a predictive inference that encourages the interpreter to imagine events beyond the concluding scene of the narrative. In dialogue with the cognitive sciences, it is argued that the inferential processes that govern this activity have been shaped by evolutionary developments. Although the new consensus has often been articulated in conversation with modern literary theory, there is an underlying, cognitive basis for the approach that has seldom been appreciated by NT scholars.

Translations and interpretations of baptizontes (Mt 28:19–20) in some Ghanaian mother tongue translations of the Bible

Scholars have written on Jesus’ command to make disciples, but little work has been done on the translation of baptizontes. Using the mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics approach, this article analyses the translation of baptizontes in 12 Ghanaian mother tongue Bibles. The findings are that the various Ghanaian mother tongue translations of Matthew 28:19 render baptizontes variedly, to suit the indigenous Bible readers. Translators sometimes use religiocultural words and phrases that express a similar idea in their contexts to translate the word. Thus, Bible translation always involves interpretation. Translators sometimes coin their own words or consult mother tongue speakers for information in order to render words and phrases that are difficult to translate. This article has added an African (Ghanaian) interpretation of baptizontes in Matthew 28:19. This fits into the overall aim of the journal to promote African theology.Contribution: This article makes a contribution to the Special Collection ‘Africa Platform for NT Scholars’ on the Ghanaian (African) interpretations of baptizontes in Matthew 28:19–20.

The New Testament in Comparison: Validity, Method, and Purpose in Comparing Traditions

The New Testament in Comparison: Validity, Method, and Purpose in Comparing Traditions

Paul and the Ancient Celebrity Circuit: The Cross and Moral Transformation

Paul and the Ancient Celebrity Circuit: The Cross and Moral Transformation

Methodology in the Use of the Old Testament in the New: Context and Criteria

Methodology in the Use of the Old Testament in the New: Context and Criteria