Five Most Influential Books for My Thesis

I was not tagged for the five-books meme (as far as I know), but since my thesis viva (defense) is only a couple of weeks away, I thought it might be a good time to reflect on the five most influential books for my thesis (or in my thinking during the writing of my thesis).  This list is in no particular order.

1. Conversion of the Imagination (Richard Hays, Eerdmans, 2005).  Hays is most well-known for his Echoes book (1989), but I read this one first and in its entirety (for a book review).  In a word – transforming.  His collection of essays in Conversion covers important issues in intertextuality, hermeneutics, epistemology, eschatological, the law, and much more.

2. Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (J.L. Martyn).  I sort of stumbled upon his essay ‘Epistemology at the Turn of the Ages’ and I was blown away.  Once you see this entire list, it will come as no surprise that I found a home in the ‘Paul and apocalyptic’ camp and Martyn is one of the patrons of the house.  FYI – I consider the ‘apocalyptic’ godfathers to be Kasemann, Martyn, and Beker.

3. Paul, Judaism, and Gentiles (Francis Watson, Eerdmans).  I did not read the original version (Cambridge monograph), but the revised and expanded 2007 version.  The sophisticated sociological and theological approach that Watson takes largely inspired the methodology of my own thesis.  I probably would not have bothered to read this book if Watson had not moved down to Durham (and I said to myself, ‘I know he’s admired in Pauline scholarship; I want to know why.).  He convinced me that the objective genitive of pistis Christou is right.  His work on human and divine agency is excellent.  It is my great pleasure, then, that he is my internal thesis examiner.

4. Theology and Ethics in Paul (V.P. Furnish, Abingdon).  Though now over 40 years old, it is a refreshing read.  He intertwines Paul’s theology and ethics so nicely that it is a wonder to me that it is still treated as two separate disciplines.  Furnish is an honest, but passionate intepreter of Paul.  He focuses greatly on the theme of belonging to God and coming under his Lordship.  This, perhaps, was by influence of Kasemann.  I don’t know.  But Furnish’s focus on the lordship of Christ encouraged me to understand Paul’s temple, worship, holiness, and sacrificial language in terms of being slaves to God (see 1 Cor. 6.19-20).

5. Theology of Paul the Apostle (James Dunn, 1998, Eerdmans).  There is not one thing that led me time and time again to this magnus opus.  It is Dunn’s patient and careful research on Paul, his interpreters and his setting that made this a reference work of which I have worn the pages.  I have the pleasure of knowing Dunn personally and he is a fun-loving, gracious person.  That makes all the difference for me in a scholar.  There are a few scholars, quite brilliant, whom I have encountered in person and I found each of them brash, arrogant, and unwilling to listen to and respect others.  I have a hard time reading their work with appreciation.  Not so with Dunn.  I certainly like his interest in both history and theology.  He reads all the relevant sources, especially the German ones.  He isn’t afraid to talk about the Holy Spirit!  He blends salvation-historical, apocalyptic, forensic, participationistic, and other theological paradigms masterfully.

Well, that makes five.  If space permitted, I would have liked to have added Kasemann and Barth.  Stephen Fowl’s excellent Philippians commentary and Joel Green’s very stimulating 1 Peter (both in the new Two Horizons series) come to mind as formative for me.  Beverly Gaventa’s Our Mother Saint Paul helped some things to click for me in terms of Paul’s use of metaphors.  I spent a lot of time in David Horrell’s works, especially Solidarity and Difference and his many journal articles.  John Barclay’s work on Galatians (Obeying the Truth) set the standard for me of what a really good thesis-turned-monograph looks like.  His articles on Paul have been precious resources.  He is one of those kinds of scholars where he does not try to publish much because he wants what is there to be weighty.  He has succeeded.  I would also like to make brief mention of NT Wright’s Romans commentary and also Cranfield’s.  On 2 Corinthians, Hafemann and M. Harris were very significant for my own perspective (as well as L. Ann Jervis’ brief-but-insightful At the Heart of the Gospel).  Ok, I went well over five, but it goes to show you how indebted we all are to those who have gone before us and those who walk alongside of us.  Who said doing a Phd is lonely?  Well, not at Durham (come one, come all!).