BibleExposition.net exists to share ideas related to the exposition of God's Word and explore topics related to the Bible in general, theology (both biblical and systematic), archaeology, ministry, and life.
Craig Blomberg and Mariam Kamell, James, Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008), 254–61, identify the following as major theological themes in the book, moving from “the most central to the most peripheral,”
Wealth and Poverty Trials and Temptations Wisdom and Speech Prayer Faith and Works Law and Word God Christology Eschatology Other Themes (e.g., sin, salvation, growth in maturity, mercy, community, grace, repentance)
Blomberg and Kamell go on to take a stab at the unifying theological motif. To this end, they suggest that “when we examine the attribute of God’s simplicity or single-mindlessness and the way in which Christians ought to imitate it, we discover potentially unifying motif or subtheme running throughout the epistle. Because God never wavers in his allegiance and obedience to Christ an emulate God’s trustworthy consistency. In short, they should become people of integrity.”
“Acts 15 forms the center of the book, structurally and theologically. The First half traces the movement of the gospel from a Jewish to a universal context. Following the Jerusalem Council, the Progress of the gospel concerns primarily geographical boundaries rather than ethnic or relational ones.”
David Peterson, “Luke’s Theological Enterprise,” in Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts, ed. I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 527.
Some readers might be interested to know that Christian Book Distributors is offering the ESV Study Bible for $24.99 as part of its Fabulous Friday Specials. There are also other books on sale. You can access the sale here.
See this link for free audio to SBTS’s Thursday chapel discussion in which R. Albert Mohler moderates a panel discussion on N. T. Wright’s views on justification with Denny Burk, Tom Schreiner, Mark Seifrid, Brian Vickers.
While there are many aspects that I appreciate about Michael V. Fox’s commentary on Proverbs 1–9, I found myself disagreeing with the following quotation from the introductory section on social setting.
“The social setting of the book of Proverbs is open to dispute, but it is clearly a secular work. It makes no pretense to an origin in divine revelation or inspiration. God is never quoted or addressed. It never had a role in the ritual life of Israel, in neither temple nor synagogue. In fact, it never was, and still is not, a subject of deliberate study in the rabbinic academies. With the exception of a few passages, it treats everyday life, not the grand affairs of state, history, cult, or law. It gives guidance in challenges we all face: how to get along with people, how to be a good decent person, how to make the right choices in personal and business affairs, how to win God’s favor and avoid disaster–all issues of great importance, but still modest and prosaic ones” (Michael V. Fox, Proverbs 1–9: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible, ed. William F. Albright and David Noel Freedman [New York: Doubleday, 2000], 7).
My disagreement with Fox is at least fourfold. First, I do not think that this conclusion really squares with the numerous occurrences of the “Fear of YHWH” passages in the book (1:7; 2:5; 3:7; 9:10; 10:27; 14:2, 27; 15:16, 33; 16:6; 19:23; 22:4; 23:17; cf. also 1:29; 8:13; 14:26; 24:21; 28:14; 29:25; 31:30). Second, Fox’s statement does not appear to acknowledge the close connection between Proverbs and Torah both in terminology used and content (see Tremper Longman, III, Proverbs, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms, ed. Tremper Longman III [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006], 80–1). Third, the association of Proverbs with Solomon would seem to undermine a purely secular document. While Scripture presents Solomon as a mixed character spiritually, the reason that he is a mixed character is that he should have been a king obedient to Torah. Fourthly, I think it unlikely that a book as secular as Fox suggests would have made it into the Hebrew Canon.
See David Miller's interesting post on the death of Jesus in Acts. Miller concludes that, "the missing references to the significance of Jesus' death in Acts are found in the portrayal of Jesus' followers, who suffer like he did." You can read the entire post here.
“The council handed down its decision: Non-Jews entering the Church should not have the Jewish rite of circumcision imposed on them. In its decision the council emphasized the principle of God's free grace in Christ. Gentiles were to know that to stand in the liberty of Christ meant no preconditions or potentially entangling qualifications. So stated, the council ruled out any ‘theological necessity of circumcision for righteousness’ Gentiles should be clear on this point: Salvation was a gift of God; one could not procure or obtain it by mere conformity to any ceremonial ritual.” ”While Gentiles were not subject to the ceremonial law, the council did request that they support Jewish-Gentile fellowship in the Church, that is, that they respect and honor the conscience of their Jewish brothers and sisters. Accordingly, the Jerusalem apostles specified four areas- most of which were associated with pagan or idolatrous practices- Gentiles should avoid: (1) food polluted by idols, (2) eating blood or meat from which the blood had not been drained in a kosher manner, (3) the meat of strangled animals (a guideline similar to the preceding), and (4) fornication- that is, pagan standards concerning sex (see Acts 15:20, 29). Furthermore, in the apostolic declaration it is probably correct to see ‘a form current in the first century.’ The rabbis defined the Noachian commandments as seven commandments binding on the descendants of Noah (Gentiles), that is, on all mankind.”
Marvin R. Wilson, Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 48–9.
