May 29, 2010
I must confess that I have been a bit uncomfortable with how the Bible is sometimes being used in the current immigration debate. Here is an article by Jason Poling at the Washington Post website that exposes just some of the problems.
May 28, 2010
“The chuch as the body that lives under—or indeed on—the cross is expressing in its disciplined and triumphant life the very nature of its Lord; and this is not in any sense peripheral.”
C. K. Barrett, Church, Ministry, and Sacraments in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 26.
The latest issue of Review of Biblical Literature is out. Reviews that may be of interest from a Bible Exposition perspective include:
Charles B. Cousar
Philippians and Philemon: A Commentary
Reviewed by Eduard Verhoef
E. A. Judge
The First Christians in the Roman World: Augustan and New Testament Essays
Reviewed by Everett Ferguson
Der Sühnetod des Gottesknechts: Jesaja 53 im Lukasevangelium
Reviewed by Christoph Stenschke
William D. Mounce
Basics of Biblical Greek: Grammar
Reviewed by Laurence M. Vance
Jacques van Ruiten and J. Cornelis de Vos, eds.
The Land of Israel in Bible, History, and Theology: Studies in Honour of Ed Noort
Reviewed by Hallvard Hagelia
William A. Simmons
Peoples of the New Testament World: An Illustrated Guide
Reviewed by James Riley Strange
A Syriac Lexicon: A Translation from the Latin, Correction, Expansion, and Update of C. Brockelmann's Lexicon Syriacum
Reviewed by H. F. van Rooy
Juden und Christen im spätantiken Palästina
Reviewed by Peter J. Tomson
May 27, 2010
“I am arguing that, at crucial points, Luke gives evidence that he maintains an ethic which transcends Torah (and hence may overturn it): (a) the enthroned Messiah, Jesus, places new demands on humankind; (b) the recipients of salvation (and hence, the people of God) are not determined by Mosaic law, but by faith in Jesus; (c) the Mosaic law is not the criterion which determines the modus vivendi of the Gentile believers; (d) the Mosaic law need not govern the conduct of Jewish believers either.”
M. A. Seifrid, “Jesus and the Law in Acts,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30 (1987): 40.
May 26, 2010
May 25, 2010
Second Peter 1:20 is well known as crux interpretum. Bill Mounce has a good discussion of the issues here. For what its worth, I happen to agree with Mounce's conclusion. I offer the following four reasons for the the "origins" view (I prefer inspiration view).
(1) This view fits the context of authentication (v. 19). Peter never states how one is to properly interpret the Scriptures.
(2) Grammatically, v. 20 goes with v. 19 rather than v. 21 Thus, Peter is not talking about interpretation but authentication (Green, 2 Peter and Jude, 90).
(3) The conjunction ga,r is often used inferentially to indicate the basis of or conclusion for something previously stated. It is easier to see how the logic fits this view (Scripture is inspired → how inspiration occurs) rather than the other (Scripture must be properly interpreted → how inspiration occurs).
(4) While the term evpi,lusij can be translated as “interpretation,” it is never used this way elsewhere to refer to the interpretation of Scripture (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 230–31).
May 24, 2010
I have been working through Jonathan Bayes, The Weakness of the Law: God’s Law and the Christian in New Testament Perspective, Paternoster Biblical Monographs, ed. I. Howard Marshall et al. (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000). Here is a section in which Bayes discusses the end of the ceremonial aspects of the Mosaic Law in Luke-Acts.
"There are indications already in Luke’s Gospel that the coming of Jesus as the Christ who must suffer (Lk. 9:20, 22), heralds the displacement of the ceremonial law by the new reality of fulfillment in Him. It is noteworthy that five references to the law are clustered in 2:22–39, but the word occurs only four more times in the Gospel thereafter. For this reason the authenticity of Luke 1–2 has been doubted, but this view has been compellingly refuted. More likely, the phenomenon is symbolic of the fact that a transition to something new has begun with the event described in chapter 2. Luke notes that, for the angels, it was more important that the One who had been born was the Christ than that His name was Jesus (2:11). Later, Jesus twice pronounces “Woe” on the lawyers (11:46, 52): this again may be an indication of the approaching demise of the law. In 22:37, in connection with the fulfillment in Him of the Scripture prophesying His identification with the transgressors (avno,mwn), Jesus says: “The things concerning Me have an end (te,loj).” Perhaps there is a deliberate double entendre here: the te,loj (goal) of what was prophesied about Jesus, and the life which He lived, was this identification in his death with the lawless, but that very death spells the te,loj (termination) of the law which thus pointed forward to Him.
Bayes, The Weakness of the Law, 72–3.
May 23, 2010
Andreas J. Köstenberger and Peter T. O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A Biblical Theology of Mission, ed. D. A. Carson (Downers Grove, IL, 2001), 151.