Biblical studies

Review: The Challenge of Acts

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Image of "The Challenge of Acts" by N.T. Wright

The Challenge of Acts, N.T, Wright. Zondervan Academic (ISBN: 9780310167990) 2024.

Summary: An overview of the book of Acts in four chapter sections, developing the major themes of the book.

The book of Acts is a long book. A commentary on such a book is no mean undertaking as Craig Keener’s four-volume work on Acts shows. Now N.T. Wright has shown himself capable of massive projects but takes a different approach in this study of Acts. Instead of verse-by-verse commentary, he offers an overview of the narrative that develops what he sees as major themes of the book. The plan of the book is to take the book in four chapter blocks, apart from a chapter on the opening of Acts, and a chapter devoted to Paul’s Mars Hill address.

The sections develop themes that will run through Acts. Beginning with chapter 1 on Acts 1, we see the command to take the gospel of the kingdom from Jerusalem and Judea to Samaria and to the ends of the earth, forming the plan of Acts. And then the resurrected King and Lord ascends into heaven, to rule at God’s right hand, present in his full authority as the church advances and faces adversity in its witness. Chapters 2-4 build on this news that in the risen Lord, God has raised up a new temple, a message the authorities immediately oppose. The Spirit empowered apostles persist in witness, determining to obey God when his command overrides that of human authorities. In chapters 5-8, believers are imprisoned, experiencing both deliverance and martyrdom. And the gospel spreads to Samaria (and Ethiopia).

Then chapters 9-12 serve as a bridge to the rest of Acts. On the Damascus road Saul encounters Jesus and finds his zeal redirected. Subsequently, with the church at peace, Peter accepts an invitation from a Roman centurion. And lo and behold, the Spirit of God falls upon the household, and the Jews conclude that god has granted the Gentiles ‘repentance that leads to life.’ Finally, after other persecution refugees testify in Antioch, with many Gentiles believing, brother Barnabas goes, affirms the grace of God and fetches Saul to help him.

The stage set, Antioch sends Barnabas and Saul out. And quickly, two things happen. People believe. And opposition arises. It becomes a pattern throughout Paul’s ministry. However, we also see authorities repeatedly acquit Paul. In Philippi, they receive a public apology for the beating off Paul, the Roman citizen. Then in Corinth the proconsul dismisses charges as a dispute about words, names, and laws, giving Paul legal cover for ministry. In Athens, the religious council at the Areopagus laugh at his ideas but do not charge him. And in Ephesus, the town clerk dismisses a rioting crowd. This will be important for what follows.

Chapters 21-24 cover Paul’s troubles in Jerusalem. Wright’s account struck me with the odd response to the offering and reports of the kingdom’s advance among Gentiles. Instead of jubilation, Paul is asked to pay for a cleansing rite to verify he is a true blue Jew. Then despite his diligence, a mob falsely accuses him. His defense is a proclamation of the risen Jesus. Then, in 25-28, we see his speech in Caesarea before Agrippa, once again speaking of the resurrection, that Festus and Agrippa can find nothing with which to charge him. But off to Caesar he will go, and after shipwreck will proclaim Jesus as Lord in Rome.

Two major themes come through. One is the proclamation of Christ as risen Messiah and King, the new temple and fulfillment of of the broadest hopes of Israel, that the nations would come to Yahweh. The other is the vindication of those who witness to the risen Christ, from Gamaliel in the Sanhedrin to Festus and Agrippa. Wright proposes that Acts may even have been a kind of “legal brief” for Paul’s defense before Caesar. In one respect, at least, the challenge of Acts is whether this movement is overturning the established order. Wright makes the case in his treatment of the defense on the Areopagus, that it was rather a setting of things to rights.

Wright offers a number of interesting insights. Sometimes, I wished for more evidence for some of his assertions. That is also the challenge of an overview of Acts. But Wright offers a resource for both personal study and for pastors and others who will teach this. He makes it clear that those engaged in gospel witness will face opposition from both human and spiritual powers. But in life and death, the risen Christ is with his people.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Hebrews

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image of "Hebrews" by Amy Peeler.

Hebrews (Commentaries for Christian Formation), Amy Peeler. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802877383) 2024.

Summary: A commentary for Christian formation focused on the greatness of Christ, Christian faithfulness, and Christian community.

The Epistle to the Hebrews alternately inspires, puzzles, and sometimes alarms. It’s portrayal of Christ’s greatness ands great saving work leaves us in awe and wonder. Yet we don’t know who wrote it and the discussions of sacrifices and covenant takes some background understanding. Meanwhile, the warnings for those who drift away are alarming, especially to those of tender conscience. Amy Peeler, in this contribution to the Commentaries for Christian Formation, addresses all these aspects and more.

The series focuses on Christian formation, the fostering of growth in faith, holiness, and Christian discipleship that ought to be the aspiration of every believer. Peeler does this, albeit at a level of scholarship that is accessible, but will probably stretch many lay readers. The commentary takes sections of the text and first gives a brief overview and then walks through the text verse by verse, using Peeler’s translation. What is striking is her readable prose, which is not simply notes elaborating the biblical text. In addition, she offers an introduction to the book, thoroughly covering the ground, but not excessively. Finally, there is a concluding section, framed in the form of ten questions that both offer a thematic summary of the commentary and address pastoral concerns in Christian formation. The final question focuses on how one might prepare to teach Hebrews.

There were three great themes I noted running through her commentary. First, was her development of the superior character of the person and work of Christ, greater than angels, greater than the levitical priesthood, ushering in a new and greater covenant through the greater sacrifice of himself as high priest of the order of Melchizedek. Yet his greatness embraced humility and learning obedience.

Second is the theme of Christian faithfulness and the warnings to “sluggish” Christians not to drift, not to harden their hearts, and especially not to apostatize. In this regard, Peeler addresses both the tender conscience wrestling with sin, and the complacent, who need to be concerned lest they presume upon God. Rather, Hebrews offers this vision of the race of faith, inspired by the cloud of witnesses who have run ahead of us, foremost being the Lord Jesus himself.

Finally, Peeler emphasizes that this is a sermon to a community. Already we have our solidarity with those who ran before us. But in addition, there are those who run with us and the call to instruct and encourage one another. We are to continue in love, and to imitate the way of life of our leaders.

Peeler, in her concluding summary, addresses the “liminality” of Hebrews. She notes the parallel between the audience of Hebrews and being a Christian in the present time. What does it mean to live faithfully in this “in between” space? How do we neither retreat from nor accommodate the culture? What does it mean to keep confessing Jesus and our great salvation in him alone? These are questions that arise because of the portrait of the person and work of Christ in Hebrews, and its call to Christian faithfulness. These are questions I will continue to ponder….

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Jesus, Contradicted

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image for "Jesus, Contradicted" by Michael R. Licona.

Jesus, Contradicted, Michael R. Licona. Zondervan Academic (ISBN: 9780310159599) 2024.

Summary: Addresses the discrepancies in gospel accounts drawing upon the conventions of ancient biography.

One of the challenges that comes with reading the gospels closely is that we notice discrepancies in the accounts. Not in the major facts but in the details. It is enough, though, that it raises questions about the reliability of the gospel accounts. And some of the efforts to “harmonize” the accounts just seem forced. In Jesus, Contradicted, Michael R. Licona, meets these objections head on without resorting to forced harmonization.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke raise a number of these questions. Most scholars believe Matthew and Luke used much of the material in Mark. Part of what is called “the Synoptic Problem” arises from the discrepancies between the very similar accounts. Some is grammatical, with Matthew and Luke improving on Mark’s rough grammar (does our doctrine of inspiration allow for that?). Licona goes into all of this, inviting us, first of all, to allow for the variations that often occur in eyewitness accounts.

More than this, Licona’s main argument is that we should not base our case for gospel reliability on modern historical accuracy. Rather, we should assess the gospels for what they are: first century biographies. Such biographies permitted the biographer greater freedom in reporting. While they did not invent events, they may not meet standards of exactitude required in a legal deposition. Wording may vary and minor details in an account may vary and yet the biography is accepted as true, especially if other accounts broadly confirm what is written.

Furthermore, biographers used various compositional devices that contribute to variation including paraphrasing and editing, compression displacement, transferal, conflation, simplification, and spotlighting. Licona discusses these various devices and where they may have been employed in gospel accounts.

But this may be troubling for some who hold to a commitment to the inerrancy of scripture. Licona observes that often, this view results in preconceptions of what scripture must be like that lead to the efforts in forced harmonization. Rather, he argues that “our view of scripture should be consistent with what we observe in scripture.” In other words, scripture rather than some standard external to it ought determine our understanding of its inspiration and trustworthiness. Licona takes several chapters ar the end of this work to elaborate this idea. He contrasts what he calls traditional inerrancy with flexible inerrancy. In his apologetic work, he reports that his approach has helped people return to faith who had turned away because traditional approaches to inerrancy had proven unsustainable.

I believe Licona makes an important contribution not only to our apologetic work around discrepancies in scripture. This will be helpful to many raising questions as they begin reading the gospels. And he offers a robust response to the “new atheist” who belittle the scriptures. But this is not all. He moves our discussion of inspiration and inerrancy beyond abstract terminology to the data of scripture itself. Instead of trying to conform scripture to the Procrustean bed of traditional inerrancy, he proposes a bed that follows the contours of the scriptures.

Furthermore, Licona presents this material in a highly readable form, reflecting experiences of presenting the material to the front office staff of a sports team and an adult Sunday School. This is a great text for teachers, apologists, and anyone who has not found satisfying responses to discrepancies in scripture.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Remarriage in Early Christianity

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment
Cover image of "Remarriage in Early Christianity" by A. Andrew Das

Remarriage in Early Christianity, A. Andrew Das. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. (ISBN: 9780802883742) 2024.

Summary: A study of both NT texts and early church fathers offers no basis for remarriage after divorce.

Not unlike the contemporary West, where divorce is often followed by remarriage, both Jewish and Greco-Roman culture permitted writs of divorce, after which both parties were free to remarry. The only exception was in the early imperial period, that upheld the ideal of the univira, the woman who never remarried, even after the death of her husband. This, however did not bar divorce or remarriage.

A. Andrew Das asserts that the early Christians stood in marked contrast to these cultural norms, permitting divorce only in the case of unchaste behavior, or a divorce initiated by an unbelieving spouse, and remarriage in no case. Das begins with the relevant gospel texts. He notes the categorical ban of divorce and remarriage in Mark and Luke, affirming God’s intention for marriage until death parts husband and wife. Das then does a more detailed study of the Matthean passages, which seem to allow for some form of exception. He considered the various possible interpretations. On the basis of the textual grammar, he concludes that Jesus, in Matthew permits divorce in the case of sexual sin, but this permission does not extend to remarriage, even for the innocent party. Such remarriage, while the spouse lived, would constitute adultery

Turning to the relevant material in 1 Corinthians 7, he maintains that Paul affirmed marriage and marital relations, limiting abstinence. He addresses widows and widowers, encouraging singleness but permitting marriage. He then turns to divorce, affirming the Lord’s command for believers, urging Christian spouses in mixed marriages to remain, unless the unbelieving spouse initiates divorce. No remarriage is permitted. Paul urges the advantages of singleness, but affirms the propriety of betrothed coupes to marry. Again, Das finds no basis for the remarriage of the divorced.

But was this how the early Christians read these passages? Surveying the Ante-Nicene fathers, he shows them to be unanimous. The only matter on which they differed was whether widows and widowers may remarry. Some prohibited even this. All this argues strongly that they would not even countenance the remarriage of the divorced. And there is no evidence that they went beyond Matthew and Paul regarding the circumstances in which divorce was permitted, nor that the “innocent” party could remarry.

I’ve summarized in a few paragraphs Das’s careful textual work, with ample documentation. Understandably, this is work may evoke strong emotions, which the author acknowledges. His approach is one that focuses on the evidence of the biblical texts and first centuries of Christian interpretation. He acknowledges interpreters as diverse as Craig Keener and David Instone-Brewer who adopt more expansive interpretations of the exceptions. He addresses those who have remarried as being in actual marriages and that adultery is not the unforgiveable sin. Das recognizes that scholars may try to mitigate the understanding he has argued. He simply hopes that when they do so, they will reckon with the early Christian witness.

Admittedly, Das promotes an unpopular position in this book. Perhaps it was beyond his remit, but I would have liked him to address the “hardness of heart” behind the OT permission to divorce. He does not address the issue of violence in marriages. Nor does he address why it is better for the widowed to marry rather than burn but why burning is preferable to the adultery of remarriage for the divorced.

That said, he underscores the high call of marriage for Christians. In turn, this emphasizes the high need for God’s empowering grace in the lives of couples. The evidence from of the early church calls into question the ease with which we accept divorce and remarriage. I hope that this study results not only in scholarly discussions but also in discussions among pastor-theologians. They are the ones who must consider the implications of this evidence for the church’s life and witness.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: The Lost World of the Prophets

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Cover image for "The Lost World of the Prophets" by John H. Walton

The Lost World of the Prophets (Lost World Series), John H. Walton. IVP Academic (ISBN: 9781514004890) 2024.

Summary: How understanding the ancient Near East context of the prophets can shed light on their message for us.

There is good reason to take prophecy seriously and seek to understand it. Prophets often prefaced their words with “thus saith the Lord” or “this is the word of the Lord.” We wonder, is there a message for us to heed, trust, and obey? Unfortunately, this instinct can go awry when we fail to understand the primary role of the prophet, the nature of prophetic literature, and its theological significance then and now. In The Lost World of the Prophets, John H. Walton, as he has done with other “Lost World” books, takes us back to the ancient Near East backgrounds of prophetic and apocalyptic literature. Building on this background, he helps us understand the message of the prophets and its relevance to us.

As in other works in this series, Walton unpacks the lost world of the prophets through a series of propositions. Perhaps the simplest way to summarize the content of this work is to list these propositions as Walton outlines them in the book:

Part 1: Ancient Near East
1: Prophecy Is a Subset of Divination
2: Prophets and Prophecy in the ANE Manifest Similarities and Differences When Compared to Israel

Part 2: Institution
3: A Prophet Is a Spokesperson for God, Not a Predictor of the Future
4: Prophecy in the OT Is Not Monolithic but Developing
5: The Classical Prophets Are Champions of the Covenant in Times of Crisis
6: Prophecy Takes a Variety of Different Shapes After the Old Testament

Part 3: Literature
7: Recognition of the Categories of Prophetic Message Help Us Be More Informed Readers
8: Prophets Were Typically Not Authors
9: The Implied Audience of the Prophetic Books Is Not Necessarily the Audience of the Prophet

Part 4: Methodological and Interpretive Issues
10: Distinction Between Message and Fulfillment Provides Clear Understanding of Prophetic Literature
11: Fulfillment Follows Oblique Trajectories
12: The NT Use of OT Prophecy Focuses on Fulfillment, Not Message
13: Prophecy Carries Important Implications for Understanding God and the Future, but Our Ability to Forge a Detailed Eschatology with Confidence Is Limited

Part 5: Apocalyptic
14: Apocalyptic Prophecy Should Be Differentiated from Classical Prophecy
15: In Apocalyptic Literature, Visions Are Not the Message but the Occasion for the Message
16: New Testament Apocalyptic Operates by the Same Principles as Old Testament Apocalyptic

There were several aspects of Walton’s treatment that I felt were of great importance. Firstly, he focuses on prophets as spokespersons for God rather than predictors of the future. When we focus on the latter, we miss the strong focus on the warnings the prophets brought as God’s people violated his commands.

Secondly, the focus of their condemnations was how they breached God’s covenant relationship with them. The primary message of the prophets was to warn of God’s impending judgment because the people had not kept faith with God.

Thirdly, Walton emphasizes that the prophetic books as we have them reflect a process from initial message to transcription to compilation that may have involved more than one person over a period of time. Likewise, the original audience of the prophet may not be the audience of the prophetic book.

Fourthly, Walton’s distinction between message and fulfillment is so valuable when considering New Testament “fulfillments” that seem at variance with the plain meaning of the original message. Specifically, he pleads the authority of the New Testament interpreters and the fact that the fulfillments are things that have occurred. On the same basis, he argues against attempts to predict particular fulfillments of eschatological passages that have not occurred. We, unlike the apostolic witnesses, are not inspired. Instead, we should focus on the broad message of God’s purposes and promises to those who persevere through suffering.

Fifthly, I will just note the very helpful distinction Walton draws between prophetic and apocalyptic writings, summarized in the table on p. 130. I found particularly intriguing the distinction of prophecy originating as spoken word whereas apocalyptic is literature-based.

Finally, and perhaps most significant for our reading, Walton provides a rubric of four types of messages we will encounter in prophecy: indictment, judgement, instruction, and aftermath. In his conclusion, he offers guidance about how we might appropriate each in our present day.

As in other contributions to this series, Walton offers clear and concise explanations that summarizes a vast amount of recent scholarship for the serious lay student of scripture. in notes and recommended further reading, he points the interested reader to more in-depth scholarship. Finally, he gently corrects our misreading of prophetic and apocalyptic literature, encouraging us to keep the main thing the main thing, and not to lose ourselves in speculative schemes.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Into the Heart of Romans

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment
Cover image of "Into the Heart of Romans" by N.T. Wright

Into the Heart of Romans, N.T. Wright. Zondervan Academic (ISBN: 9780310157748), 2023.

Summary: A close reading of Romans 8, focusing on the purpose, presence, and profound love in Christ for all who believe meant to assure them of not only their ultimate destiny but of God’s favor even as they share in the sufferings of Christ amid a groaning creation.

N.T. Wright has been studying the book of Romans for fifty years, publishing both scholarly and popular commentaries on Paul’s masterpiece, as well as drawing extensively on Romans in his Pauline scholarship. This book reflects both the culmination of this scholarship as well as changes in his thought through discussions with his students.

The focus of the book is on the majestic culmination in Romans 8 to Paul’s arguments in Romans 1-7. Romans 8 is indeed the heart of Romans as central in the text of the letter and key as a transition from the argument of the first seven chapters to the discussions on the calling of Israel in 9-11 and the applicatory material of chapters 12-16. But what is Paul’s conclusion and how did Wright’s thinking about it change.

We have traditionally read this chapter is one of assurance of our salvation in Christ, as those not under condemnation, as those for whom God works good in all things, and for whom nothing can separate us from God’s love in Christ. Wright would not disagree with these things, but has come to see something equally rich–the presence, power, and profound approval of God in Christ for us in the present moment. For many of Paul’s readers, even as is the case for many in the present day, the present is a time of suffering. Paul’s message is that this, in fact is their vocation, and it is one of sharing in the sufferings of Christ, that the spirit (Wright uses the lower case throughout) groans, intercedes, and empowers, and that Christians can be assured of God’s approval (and not condemnation) and God’s protection in life and death.

After introductory material setting Romans 8 in its context, Wright breaks the book into eight sections. For each section, Wright asks what the opening and closing reveals about the theme. He then looks at Paul’s connecting words to unpack the logic of his argument. He then looks at the contexts in Paul’s wider world, both Jewish and Greco-Roman, that provides resonances for what Paul is saying. A few insights I appreciated out of the wealth of material here:

  • Romans 8:1-4. There is no condemnation because God condemned sin in the flesh of Jesus, fulfilling what Torah could only anticipate.
  • Romans 8:5-11. The spirit of the risen Christ enables God’s people in the present time to please God in our bodies.
  • Romans 8:12-17. Wright challenges the moralizing anthropology of our Platonic notions of heaven with the idea of our vocation in the new creation, already begun in which we are God’s spirit-empowered agents. That vocation is as fellow heirs with Christ, crying “Abba” even as we share in suffering, with the hope of resurrection.
  • Romans 8:17-21. “The primary meanings of ‘glory’ in this passage are, simultaneously, the glorious presence of God himself dwelling within us by the spirit, and the wise, healing, reconciling rule of God’s people over the whole creation. These two — God’s presence and human rule — are made for each other. They fit together” (p. 110).
  • Romans 8:22-27. We enter, perhaps most deeply into our vocation, as we enter into the world’s suffering, the groaning creation, enabled by God’s spirit to pray with lament and longing.
  • Romans 8:28-30. Wright challenges the traditional “all things work for good” translating it rather “God works all things together for good with those who love him,” particularly in calling, justifying, and glorifying us.
  • Romans 8:31-34. An interesting side note in this chapter is Wright’s questioning of the Feast of Christ the King, contending that it takes away from the idea of the Ascension as Christ’s installation as King.
  • Romans 8:34-39. The theme of our vocation makes sense of all the “bad” things of vv. 35-36 with the assurance that none of these will separate us from the love of God in Christ.

Wright’s situating of the assurance of God’s love, approval, and protection within the vocation of Christians as sharing in Christ’s sufferings in a groaning creation profoundly deepens our reading of this powerful chapter. This is not “happy-clappy” Christianity insensitive to the world’s struggles. It is not prosperous and privileged Christianity by the standards of the world. This is a profound word for Christians who have entered into the groanings of our world and for those whose faithfulness has led to suffering, that this is not their fault, that God is with them, and even praying with them in their laments. This is a profound word that there is nothing that the world or the powers can throw in their face or their lives to part them from God. Even as God said to Israel, “I will be your God” so God says to the larger human family in Christ.

Wright is not an easy read. It was a gift to read this with a local book group, particularly one with a member deeply familiar with Wright’s work (not me) who supplemented our discussions with background material from Wright. Thanks, Dan, and all my friends, who labored to dig out the wealth of insight in this book!

Review: Eve Isn’t Evil

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

Eve Isn’t Evil, Julie Faith Parker. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2023.

Summary: Feminist readings of biblical texts involving women, mostly from the Hebrew Bible. with one chapter on the New Testament.

I’ve benefited enormously in recent years from scholarship from women re-assessing the ways mostly male interpreters have interpreted passages about women, often allowing those passages to be used to the harm of women. While I haven’t agreed with everything in these works, I’ve also been convinced in numerous instances that I’ve read and and taught these passages wrongly. That was the case for me with this new work by Julie Faith Parker. She takes a number of Old Testament stories and offers feminist interpretive insights arising from close exegetical reading and unpacks this in a highly engaging fashion, combined with stories ranging from work with prisoners in Sing-Sing to encountering sexism in pastoral circles.

The title chapter offers a good example of the kind of insights arising from her work. She observes how Eve is often vilified in scripture in ways she believes unwarranted in the biblical account. She observes that Eve had yet to be created when the man had received the instruction not to eat of the tree (her response to the serpent might have reflected how he passed this along). Adam was with her (Genesis 3:6) accounting for the serpent’s use of the plural for “you” and Eve’s “we” in response. She notes that while the man blames both God and the woman, Eve tells the truth about the serpent and her own culpability, not blaming the man. Intriguingly, she observes that only the man (Genesis 3:23-24) is said to be banished from the garden–something that all the art I’ve seen of the expulsion of the first couple had obscured (she may well have left the garden to have children with Adam but only he is explicitly banished). Plainly, we vilify Eve more than the writer of Genesis does.

At the same time, I think Parker valorizes Eve more than is warranted in the text when she writes:

“She is a pioneering theologian who wrestles with the words of God. She is a thoughtful decision-maker who thinks before she acts. She is a curious seeker of knowledge who yearns to understand ethics so she can make her way in the world. She is the mythical mother of all discerning people” (p.22).

I think this goes too far, and supports a narrative that her and Adam’s partaking of the fruit is a triumph rather than a tragedy, something to be celebrated rather than lamented. I also wonder how “discerning” it is to credit the words of a talking serpent more than what God has said, or Adam, who had apparently passed on God’s instruction, even if he stood mutely by. But Parker makes the case for me that Eve (and other women) should not be singled out as evil. Adam’s part in the story, if anything, is far more problematic. The tragedy is that through this episode, we all learned the evil of breaking trust and disobeying God, and all of us are implicated.

Parker goes on to look at the family line of Abraham, the messed up character of this family, and how God affirms the worth of the women in these stories including Sarah and Hagar, Rebekah, Rachel and Leah. She challenges the ways we valorize Rahab, the sex worker, not unlike we do in Disney’s version of Pocahontas when both are faced with male conquest and slaughter. She notes the many women who function as prophets, although I would take exception to her valorizing the medium at Endor and including her in this company of women who speak for God. She challenges our understanding of Job’s wife and the statement “Curse God and die” when the Hebrew translated as “curse” is barak or “bless.” Could it be that this is a word of support rather than contempt?

She mixes feminist reading of the Psalms (including wondering about all the others sinned against when David claims to have sinned against God alone in Psalm 51) with an account of hitch-hiking in Central America, getting a ride with a truckload of soldiers, and their own interpretation with guns drawn of “I lift my eyes to the hills.” She recounts her love of prisoners as she teaches the Bible in Sing Sing and her restrained approach to teach the Song of Songs in a room full of male prisoners.

Her one chapter on the New Testament focuses on Jesus, her favorite feminist Jew. She notes the company of women who supported Jesus and ‘learned,” a word for disciple. We are reminded of Mary who gave him birth, who followed, and was with him at his death. We often disparage Martha but she is a diekonei or “minister” to Jesus. And, of course, women were the first witnesses to the resurrection. He also questions our portrayals of Mary Magdalene, observing that “Magdala” could mean “great.”

“Curious, Like Eve” is a chapter of “excurses” from previous chapters. A number are fascinating, raising intriguing ideas. I do question the exegesis of Genesis 1 to support non-binary sexuality based on the use of merisms throughout the account (“evening and morning,” for example, include everything in between) to offer warrant for male and female also including everything in between. This seems to be an argument from silence whereas the so-called “clobber verses” do proscribe certain forms of sexual behavior, which include incest and bestiality, although they say nothing about sexual orientation or gender identity. Can we not affirm what scripture affirms without “clobbering”? Might we not tread carefully where scripture remains silent? I would affirm with the author that in all things, we emulate “the love, generosity, courage, compassion” we find in scripture.

The book closes with two appendices. One on Bible Basics is a help to those trying to make sense of the Bible, and evidences the author’s deep love of the Bible. The other is an annotated bibliography for further study. Each chapter also includes reflection/discussion questions for personal or group use.

I loved reading this author for her ability to translate textual study for the lay reader. I bet she is a great teacher. She continued my education as a white, cisgender male on reading scripture through women’s eyes. Even in the places where I wasn’t convinced or where I took exception, she made me think–always a gift.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Abraham’s Silence

/ rtrube54 / 4 Comments

Abraham’s Silence, J. Richard Middleton. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2021.

Summary: Challenges the traditional reading of the binding of Isaac that valorizes Abraham’s silence as unquestioning obedience and faith, contending that God wanted more than silent obedience.

Abraham is held up as an exemplar of faith, who believed God and was reckoned righteous. Perhaps nowhere is this view of Abraham held up more than in the binding of Isaac in Genesis 22, known to Jewish readers as the Aqedah, from the Hebrew “to bind.” Abraham’s unquestioning obedience is upheld as a model of faith, that “God would provide the lamb,” that Abraham believed that he and Isaac would return to the servants. and the testimony of Hebrews 11:17-19 that Abraham believed “God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.”

Yet many thoughtful readers find this narrative disturbing. The idea that God would command such a sacrifice, even as a test, disturbs (although it must be noted that God prevents the act, subsequently forbidding all child sacrifice, in contrast to the gods of surrounding peoples.) Yet the images of the bound Isaac, and the raised knife shake us. What also disturbs J. Richard Middleton is the silence of Abraham. The narrative record does not record Abraham saying anything to God. He rises early the next morning (perhaps to avoid Sarah?), packs up the donkey with wood, and leaves with Isaac and two servants. No plea to spare his son for the sake of the promise. No plea to take him rather than the child of the promise. No nothing. Middleton proposes that part of the test is whether Abraham would talk back to God.

Middleton makes the case that there is a strong element running through scripture of “lament with an edge.” This is seen throughout the Psalms where God’s people cry out to God in pain and suffering that it doesn’t seem that God sees or hears, wondering how long he will permit this. Moses challenges God, convincing God to spare Israel despite their idolatry, pleading God’s reputation among the nations. He refuses to settle for less than God’s presence with him. And God accedes to all this and reveals himself as the God of steadfast love and faithfulness.

Much of the book, Part Two, is devoted to the exemplar par excellence of talking back to God–Job. He contends that Job’s vigorous protest is approved by God, in contrast to the counsel of his “comforters.” The fact that God speaks twice indicates he wants Job to speak back

Against this Old Testament backdrop, Middleton contends Abraham stands out in his silence. He acknowledges the scholarship of Walter Moberly and Jon Levenson that rules out criticisms of Abraham because these are external to the text. Middleton credits this precept but contends there are subtle textual cues to suggest that God wanted more than silent obedience. He notes the shift from YHWH to elohim, suggesting the test involved whether Abraham would perceive something different about the God of the covenant from the gods (elohim) of surrounding peoples. He notes the early departure, perhaps to avoid discussion with Sarah, and the three-day silent journey to a location that should have taken a day (Abraham doesn’t want to do this, but says nothing, just drags his feet), And there are the words to Isaac, “God will provide the lamb, my son.” Middleton says we assume the comma but what if this was not in Abraham’s mind? Middleton includes an amusing comic here to make the point.

Perhaps most striking is that afterward, Isaac parts from Abraham, returning only to bury Abraham. Sarah is also recorded as living apart from Abraham. Isaac’ life in many ways is a parenthesis between Abraham and Jacob. Middleton wonders how different this would have been if Abraham advocated for his son. For example in Jacob’s eyes, the God of Abraham is the fear of Isaac. Middleton wonders if the family dysfunctions of this family began at this time.

Middleton proposes that Abraham barely passes the test, maybe a “C”–he obeys–but that God wanted more. He wanted to see if Abraham would actively speak back, to advocate for the son and for the promise. Sadly, he did not, and also failed to see the richness of God’s mercy.

There is much to be said for this proposal. There is a pattern of Abraham’s willingness to put others at jeopardy–Sarah, Ishmael, and Hagar. In each instance God bales them out, as he does with Isaac. The exception seems to be Lot and Sodom, in Genesis 18, where Abraham pleads from fifty to ten righteous to save the city. Middleton notes that even here, he stops, though Lot and his family number less than ten. Fearing to anger God (although God showed no anger with his pleading), he fails discover how far God’s mercy would go. All he sees is the destruction of the cities, not knowing of Lot’s rescue…and he just moves on. Would Abraham go further in pleading for “his only son, the son he loved”? He doesn’t.

There is also the fallout of the binding in the fracturing of the family, and the likely trauma to Isaac. God works redemptively over the generations, but was this what God intended? Middleton raises profound questions that make us look afresh at this narrative.

Yet I find Middleton unconvincing on several counts. There are Abraham’s utterances to Isaac and the servants. Middleton treats these as brave but unbelieving when in fact they prove out. There is the specific approbation of the angel of the Lord and the restatement of the promise of blessing. Middleton notes subtleties in the language that in his mind qualify this approbation. I found them unconvincing.

I also looked for a discussion of Hebrews 11:17-19 in the text. Christians “valorize” (to use Middleton’s term) Abraham at least in part because of this text, taking our cue for how we read the story from the inspired writer of Hebrews. Middleton’s discussion was not to be found in the text but only in a footnote (59) on page 213-214. He writes:

“The New Testament also seems to validate Abraham’s attempt to sacrifice Isaac. In Heb. 11:17-19, Abraham is praised for his faith in the resurrection (he believed God could raise Isaac), which is the reason why he went ahead with the sacrifice of his son. Beyond noting that the explicit doctrine of the resurrection did not arise until after the exile. I would point to Heb. 11:32, which list none other than Jephthah as a hero of faith (in contrast to his portrayal as an unsavory character in Judg. 11). This is clearly based on extra-biblical tradition and not on the biblical text itself.“

Middleton’s argument is to find one questionable element (Jephthah) in the Hebrews 11 account to throw shade on the account of Abraham. This, to me is not an adequate argument for why Christians should not heed the testimony of Hebrews 11 concerning Abraham, and placing such an argument in a footnote reflects to me a reluctance to address evidence that contradicts his argument.

What Middleton does for me is make me look afresh at this challenging text. Along with him, I find myself wondering at Abraham’s silence toward God. I’m less certain than Middleton that Abraham barely passed the test but I do find myself wondering “what if?” I find myself wondering about the “cost” of this test to Abraham’s family. Yes, God did provide the sacrifice but Abraham, at least in a relational sense, lost a son (and, it seems, Sarah as well). What Middleton does is offer a challenge to address these costs for traditional views that valorize Abraham. He also offers the examples of vigorous prayers that take God seriously enough to lament and to contend with God. Whatever my questions about his reading of Abraham, this is a contribution I can wholeheartedly affirm.

Review: The Prophets and the Apostolic Witness

/ rtrube54 / 1 Comment

The Prophets and the Apostolic Witness, Edited by Andrew T. Abernethy, William R. Osborne, and Paul D. Wegner. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2023.

Summary: An exploration of how Christians should read Old Testament prophets in light of the work of Christ and of how the apostolic witnesses read them.

In my Jesus movement days, we read prophecy in one hand and the newspaper in the other, looking for how prophets were speaking to our day. In seminary, I learned hermeneutic principles and historico-critical methods that sought to understand the prophets in their own historic context and in terms of what the prophets would have meant for their intended readers to understand.

But in reading the gospels, I became aware of another way of reading the prophets. Both Jesus himself, and the apostles whose witness constitute the New Testament, saw the prophets fulfilled in Christ. There is the sense that the prophets spoke of more than they knew, that there was a fuller sense (sensus plenior) to their testimony that the apostles understood in the light of Christ. The question is, is it legitimate for us to read the prophets this way, and if so, what safeguards protect us from idiosyncratic interpretations that depart not only from the Old Testament text but legitimate readings in light of the apostolic witness? It is with this question that this book deals.

The approach the authors take is to focus on the major prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. For each prophet, there are five chapters focused on these topics, each from a different contributor:

  • How the Apostles Read the Major Prophets as Christian Scripture
  • Limits on Reading the Major Prophets as Christian Scripture
  • Reading the Major Prophets in the Footsteps of the Apostles
  • The History of Interpretation of the Major Prophets as Christian Scripture
  • Preaching the Major Prophets as Christian Scripture

Because all these prophets are long books, the contributors focus in on one key text, cited in the New Testament, addressing it in terms of their topic. The passages are the Servant Song of Isaiah 42:1-4, the New Covenant passage in Jeremiah 31: 31-34, and the valley of dry bones passage in Ezekiel 37:1-14.

The authors differ in approach. A number favor following the apostles in reading the prophets in a fuller sense in light of the work of Christ. Some are more cautious, willing to endorse the apostles readings but careful about going further. A basic principle they follow is that while a passage may mean more than the prophet intended, it can never mean less–the prophet’s intent is always the starting point. All, in varying degrees, support interpreting passages Christologically.

One of the most valuable aspects of the book are the chapters on the history of interpretation. Understanding this history and why certain approaches were later rejected is instructive to our own interpretive readings and the differences among us. One of the editors, William R. Osborne, observes, “In fact, if we believe the Word of God has been given to the people of God, communal reading and interpretation is foundational to the humble pursuit of truth” (p. 313). The strength of this work is not only the communal reading among the fifteen contributors but also their inclusion of the history of interpretation of these texts, include in the bibliographic references provided.

I also appreciate that the authors differentiate from a reader-oriented approach that asks “what does this prophet mean for our community?” by taking a redemptive-canonical approach that asks that asks “what does this prophet mean in light of our crucified, risen, and ascended Lord Jesus?” (cf. p. 317). The fuller reading of the prophets doesn’t mean anything goes (as could be the case in my Jesus movement days) but a fuller reading guided by the New Testament itself.

This is a valuable reference for those who would teach or preach these prophets (there is even advice on this) as well as those concerned with the apostolic and historic interpretation of these texts. The scholars contributing to this volume are experts in the material on which they write (John N. Oswalt in Isaiah, for example). Since these three major prophets are so often quoted or alluded to throughout the New Testament, working through the issues of interpretation in this book will enhance our reading of the New Testament. Place this alongside your best commentaries on Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Treasuring the Psalms

/ rtrube54 / 2 Comments

Treasuring the Psalms, Ian J. Vaillancourt. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2023.

Summary: An orientation to both lay readers and churches to how to read and appropriate the Psalms, approaching them canonically, Christologically, and personally.

I will say flat out at the beginning of this review that this is one of the most helpful books for reading the Psalms that I have read. Ian Vaillancourt helps us to both understand the forest, making sense of the canonical form in which the Psalms come to us, and to appreciate the trees, the individual Psalms and how they bear on our lives and how they may be used in Christian worship as prayers of the church.

Vaillancourt begins by orienting us to two key words and three helpful insights. The first of the words is YHWH, translated as “The LORD.” Rather than the impersonal title, he commends using the untranslated name. The second word is hesed, used 130 times in the Psalms, often translated as “steadfast love” which emphasizes both the covenant and relational significance of the word. The three insights are that the Psalms are a book of praises–it’s Hebrew title, Tehillim, literally meaning “praises; that in the words of Luther, the Psalms are a “little Bible” encapsulating the whole of the teaching of scripture; and the Psalms, in the words of Calvin, are an “anatomy of the soul,” capturing the range of human emotion and the human condition.

The three sections of the book approach the Psalms canonically, Christologically, and personally. Canonically, the writer assumes there is intent in how the Psalms are organized as a whole. He urges that we pay attention to adjacent Psalms to see how they may relate thematically. Vaillancourt believes it important to read the superscriptions giving us hints about authors, genre, and context. He explores how Psalm 1 and 2 are “gateway” psalms, leading us into the whole book as the two lenses we use in reading the whole–the torah of YHWH and the anointed king of YHWH. He identifies themes for the five books: books one and two on the weeping king David, book three on exile, book four on YHWH’s rule even when the throne of David does not and book five of a new and better David.

The second part of the book considers what it means to read the psalms Christologically–how they point to Christ and gospel application. He teaches us to place the Psalms on a redemptive history timeline. We’re encouraged to look for promises fulfilled in Christ, typologies, direct prophecy (only Psalm 110) and typological prophecy. New Testament citations or allusions are an important clue and using a Bible that cross references to these is helpful. Before applying the Psalms directly and personally, Vaillancourt argues we need to apply them Christologically.

The third part, then considers how we apply the psalms directly in both personal and corporate settings. He believes imprecatory psalms may only be prayed against Satan and his forces, and that we don’t apply prophetic or typological material about Christ to ourselves. He offers detailed guidance on applying lament psalms of desperation, thanksgiving psalms of deliverance, and psalms of praise.

Vaillancourt illustrates his principles by detailed studies of representative psalms. While offering substantive material based on current biblical scholarship, he avoids deep dives into that scholarship. At places, he will offer brief excurses pointing to more extensive appendices that may be downloaded for free at the InterVarsity Press website for the book.

The author states in the conclusion that he has “written with the goal of equipping them [readers] to dig deeply in the bottomless gold (or treasure!) mine of the Psalms on their own. I believe he has succeeded in provided all the needed equipment and instructions for how to use it. Now, it is our turn to dig!

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher.