A few years ago, when Richard Hays was in Durham (UK) for a special lecture, he told a group of us that he is knee-deep in a Gospels book and has basically turned down further offers to talk about Paul – he has spent decades studying Paul (to all of our benefit!) and is excited about researching the use of Scripture in the Gospels.

Well, I was also pleased to see the soon-coming release (July 2012) of a book he has edited on another non-Pauline text: Revelation and the Politics of Apocalyptic Interpretation (Baylor Press; edited with Stefan Alkier). Don’t forget to wipe the drool off of your face as you read this table of contents:
1  What Has the Spirit Been Saying? Theological and Hermeneutical Reflections on the Reception/Impact History of the Book of Revelation
Michael J. Gorman
 
2  Models for Intertextual Interpretation of Revelation
Steve Moyise
3  The Reception of Daniel 7 in the Revelation of John
Thomas Hieke
 
4  Faithful Witness, Alpha and Omega: The Identity of Jesus in the Apocalypse of John
Richard B. Hays
 
5  God, Israel, and Ecclesia in the Apocalypse
Joseph L. Mangina
 
6  Revelation and Christian Hope: Political Implications of the Revelation to John
N. T. Wright
 
7  Witness or Warrior? How the Book of Revelation Can Help Christians Live Their Political Lives
Stefan Alkier
 
8  The Apocalypse in the Framework of the Canon
Tobias Nicklas
 
9  Reading What Is Written in the Book of Life: Theological Interpretation of the Book of Revelation Today
Marianne Meye Thompson
I WANT THIS BOOK! Where did I put that SBL wishlist…?

link to Tyndale website.

I just came across the advertisement for a FS for Jerome Murphy-O’Connor called Celebrating Paul (CBQMS; ed. P. Spitaler, 2011). After scouring the internet I finally found the table of content with the list of contributors and it is really impressive – a testament to the legacy of JMOC’s scholarship (esp on 1-2 Corinthians).

I have set in bold the essays I am seriously interesting in reading.
The significance of the Pauline writings / Joseph A. Fitzmeyer —
Divisions are necessary (1 Corinthians 11:19) / Jerome Murphy-O’Connor —
In search of the historical Paul / James D.G. Dunn —
“I rate all things as loss” : Paul’s puzzling accounting system : Judaism as loss or the re-evaluation of all things in Christ? / William S. Campbell —
Paul and the Jewish tradition : the ideology of the Shema / Mark D. Nanos —
Paul, a change agent : model for the twenty-first century / John J. Pilch —
Paul’s four discourses about sin / Stanley K. Stowers —
Adam and Christ in the Pauline Epistles / Pheme Perkins —
Living in newness of life : Paul’s understanding of the moral life / Frank J. Matera —
Ecocentric or anthropocentric? : a reading of Romans 8:18-25 / Jan Lambrecht —
“Set apart for the gospel” (Romans 1:1) : Paul’s self-introduction in the letter to the Romans / Ekkehard W. Stegemann —
Adam, Christ, and the law in Romans 5-8 / Brendan Byrne —
[Nomos, agapē], and [charismata] in Paul’s writings / Helmut Koester —
Interpreting Romans 11:14 : what is at stake? / Jean-Noël Aletti —
Reinterpreting Romans 13 within its broader context / Robert Jewett —
“To the Jew first” (Romans 1:16) : Paul’s defense of Jewish privilege in Romans / Gregory Tatum —
Paul, ritual purity, and the ritual baths south of the Temple Mount (Acts 21:15-28) / David E. Aune —
Where have all my siblings gone? : a reflection on the use of kinship language in the Pastoral Epistles / Raymond F. Collins —
Augustine’s Pauline method : 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 as a case study / Thomas F. Martin.
If you’d like to order the book, it is a very reasonable $25 ($20 for members of CBA).

1. Socializing

2. Soaking in sun (remember, I live in Seattle)

3. Vacationing-ish (my family is coming too!)

4. Browsing books I cannot afford to buy!

As far as papers are concerned, I will be “giving” two presentations.

I was invited by my friend Craig Keener to be a respondent in an Institute for Biblical Research session on “Global Readings of Scripture.” I will respond to a paper given by another friend David deSilva on Sri Lankan readings of Galatians. That should be fun!

Secondly, I was invited to give a paper in the section “Ethics, Love, and the Other in Early Christianity” where I will be a reviewer in a session focusing on the book: Among the Gentiles by Luke Timothy Johnson. I am VERY excited to meet Prof. Johnson – I am a huge fan.

What sessions will you find me at? I don’t tend to “frequent” the sessions. I prefer scheduling some personal conversations with folks who have similar research interests. However, these sessions caught my eye:

S20-316

Exile (Forced Migrations) in Biblical Literature
11/20/2011
4:00 PM to 6:30 PM
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Canonical Consciousness: Israel’s Witness in the New Testament

John Ahn, Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Presiding
Lee McDonald, Acadia Divinity College
Debating Canon Formation: Why and Where Scholars Disagree (25 min)
Gregory Sterling, University of Notre Dame
Creating a “Canon within the Canon”: Genesis in the Biblical Commentaries of Philo (25 min)
Helmut Koester, Harvard University
Early Christianity is Israel (25 min)
Urban C. von Wahlde, Loyola University of Chicago
Some Reflections on the Use of the Jewish Scriptures In the Gospel of John (25 min)
N. T. Wright, University of St. Andrews
Israel’s Scriptures in Pauline Theology (25 min)
Adela Yarbro Collins, Yale University
Rewritten Prophets: The Use of Older Scripture in Revelation (25 min)

S21-148a

Theological Hermeneutics of Christian Scripture
11/21/2011
9:00 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Theological Interpretation and Jesus-Studies
This session will explore the significance of two recent attempts at identifying Jesus: Beverly Roberts Gaventa and Richard B. Hays, eds., Seeking the Identity of Jesus: A Pilgrimage (Eerdmans, 2008); and Darrell L. Bock and Robert L. Webb, eds., Key Events in the Life of the Historical Jesus: A Collaborative Exploration of Context and Coherence (Eerdmans, 2010).

Michael Gorman, Saint Mary’s Seminary and University, Presiding (5 min)
Michael Bird, Crossway College, Panelist (15 min)
Amy Plantinga Pauw, Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Panelist (15 min)
Murray Rae, University of Otago, Panelist (15 min)
Robert Wall, Seattle Pacific University, Panelist (15 min)
Break (5 min)
Beverly Gaventa, Princeton Theological Seminary, Respondent (10 min)
Richard Hays, Duke University, Respondent (10 min)
Darrell Bock, Dallas Theological Seminary, Respondent (10 min)
Robert Webb, McMaster University, Respondent (10 min)
Discussion (40 min)

Second Corinthians: Pauline Theology in the Making
11/19/2011
4:00 PM to 6:30 PM
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: 2 Corinthians 5:14-21 and the Broader Context

Dominika Kurek-Chomycz, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Presiding
Troels Engberg-Pedersen, Copenhagen University
The Unity of 2 Corinthians as Reflected in the Account of Paul’s and Titus’ Travels Between Ephesus, Macedonia and Corinth and the Theology of 2:14-7:4 (30 min)
Reimund Bieringer, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Love as That Which Binds Everything Together? The Unity of 2 Corinthians Revisited (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Paul B. Duff, George Washington University
Israel’s Hardened Minds: 2 Cor 3:14a and the Development of a Theological Idea. (30 min)
Scott J Hafemann, University of St. Andrews
The New Creation (2 Cor 5:17) as the Cross-Shaped Life: The Development of a Pauline Theme (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)

S20-139

Second Corinthians: Pauline Theology in the Making
11/20/2011
9:00 AM to 11:30 AM
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: 2 Corinthians 5:14-21

Thomas Schmeller, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Presiding
Sean F. Winter, Melbourne College of Divinity
Who and What are ‘Ambassadors for Christ’?: The Identity and Role of Paul’s Audience in 2 Corinthians 5.16–21 (30 min)
Matthew Forrest Lowe, McMaster Divinity College
Pleading and Power: The Missional Theopolitics of Paul’s Ambassadorial Soteriology in 2 Corinthians 5:16-21 (30 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Edith M. Humphrey, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary
Manifest in the Body— Deeds, Sin, Righteousness and Glory (30 min)
Steven Kraftchick, Emory University
Transformation, Change and Pauline Thought (30 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Business Meeting (10 min)

S20-245

Theological Hermeneutics of Christian Scripture
11/20/2011
1:00 PM to 3:30 PM
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Reading Revelation as Christian Scripture

Richard Cornell, Spring Arbor University, Presiding
Edith M. Humphrey, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary
Mixing Wine with Water: Enjoyment and Expectation through the Style of the Apocalypse (25 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Frank D. Macchia, Vanguard University
Worthy Is the Lamb: The Christology of Revelation in the Context of Christian Worship and Dogma (25 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Break (5 min)
Carl Mosser, Eastern University
The Deification of Humanity in the Revelation of Jesus Christ (25 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Leslie Baynes, Missouri State University
Reading Symbolism in John’s Apocalypse Now and Then: The Case of the Millennium (25 min)
Discussion (15 min)

What sessions are you excited about?

At the end of May, J.R. Daniel Kirk posted his thoughts on an oft-repeated reflection of Soren Kierkegaard: “The function of prayer is not to influence God, but rather to change the nature of the one who prays.”

Kirk found this to be a “cop out”: “It transforms prayer from a dangerous act in which we summon the God of all the earth to act now upon the earth over which God is sovereign into something that’s just for shaping our little hearts.” He goes on a bit later by arguing that prayer is about praying in such a way that God transforms this world.

I think this is an important discussion, and I think Kierkegaard’s quote is worth giving attention. I think, at first blush, it would be quite easy to call this a “cop out” – not expecting God to work powerfully. However, there are a number of reasons to give some more thought to this matter.

Let me start off by saying that Kirk softens his sharp edge by saying that it is both…and – what he would be frustrated with is a one-sidedness that emphasizes only relationship. However, he is so castigating towards the thinking behind the quote above, I want to respond in some defense to the “prayer is meant to change me view” while also agreeing it is both…and. I think my post could help restore some balance.

1. Personal-transformation prayer is focused on humans as agents of God’s powerful redemption on earth. To pray for world needs and sit and wait for God to act – to me, that is a cop out! Personal-transformation prayer is a good model of incarnational ministry. God did not send an angel to defeat the problem of sin and evil. He sent his Word-become-flesh. Too often, in my experience, when we come together to ask God to do something in response to world needs, we say it (in true belief), and then go home and have a snack, put our feet up, and read the paper. This is an epiphany that C.S. Lewis had. In his book Letters to Malcolm, Chiefly on Prayer, Lewis reflects on his struggle with prayer. For a long time, when he prayed the Lord’s prayer, he felt a cold resignation: “Thy will be done…” Then he came to a realization – the line of the prayer means…”Thy will be done…by me…now” (p. 26)! In the words of Jon Foreman, “Get up, get up, Love is moving you now.” To have a changed nature in prayer is to become shaped for the task of fulfilling kingdom goals. That is more powerful to me than praying for “big things” to change and waiting.

2. Personal transformation prayer is important because it focuses the daily life. Bonhoeffer wrote about this in Life Together. We often think of prayer as about asking, but Bonhoeffer focuses on the important of meditative prayer on God’s Word. Morning prayer, then, is a way of focusing on God and communing with him and to be shaped and transformed in daily living by that encounter (like Moses having the radiance of God’s glory, which fades over time). Bonhoeffer writes, asking about the impact of prayer, this: “”Has prayer transported him [the one in morning prayer] for a few short moments into spiritual ecstasy that vanishes when everyday life returns, or has it lodged the Word of God so soberly and so deeply in his heart that it holds and strengthens him all day, impelling him to active love, to obedience, to good works? Only the day will tell” (Life Together, Fortress, p. 92). Is not Bonhoeffer quite close to Kierkegaard in this? Kirk refers negatively to a low expectation of God only shaping “our little hearts” – that may be everything in Tegel.

3. Personal transformation prayer is exemplified by Paul. While the apostle Paul did pray for “things to happen” (Philemon 6), the highlight of Paul’s prayer life (I would suggest) comes in 2 Corinthians 12 when he asks God to remove the thorn in his flesh. He prays 3 times – why 3? Apparently, it is to say: he prayed enough. God said no. Instead of being free from the thorn, which may have been an enhancement to certain aspects of his ministry, he was changed by God’s negative answer to identify through participation with the weakness of Christ. In a sense, in that experience, his nature was changed (from triumphalism to cruciformity?) for the good of all who read Scripture.

4. Personal transformation prayer is probably part of a wider activity of prayer, though it may be the foundation. C.S. Lewis, again, in his Letters to Malcolm talks about Mark 11:24 and the work of believing prayer that can enable you to ask for amazing things (in tune with God’s will) and receive it – like removing mountains. This reminds me of what Kirk is talking about –we need to be praying in faith for God to bring his kingdom in specific ways that reveal his awesome power. However, Lewis processes this in a unique way. Someone (Malcolm?) suggests that Mark 11:24 seems naive, who could really pray like this, asking for something and receiving it? Lewis responds in this way:

We had better not talk about the view of prayer embodied in Mark XI, 24 as “naïve” or “elementary.” If that passage contains a truth, it is a truth for very advanced pupils indeed. I don’t think it is “addressed to our condition” (yours and mine) at all. It is a coping-stone, not a foundation. For most of us the prayer in Gethsemane is the only model. Removing mountains can wait (p. 83)

Lewis processes this “asking” prayer as the prayer of the advanced, mature believer who is fully in tune with God. Yet, he includes himself in the category of believers that stick to the “Gethsemane” model (“your will be done”). I think Lewis is siding with Kierkegaard on this one! What might be useful in Lewis’ ruminations is that the personal transformation aspect of prayer is necessary and foundational and…”removing mountains can wait.”

5. The Gospel of John may help us process the dialectic between personal-transformation prayer and divine-action prayer. Paul N. Anderson talks about the tension between “signs faith” and “blessed faith” in John. The former involves the miraculous, visible miracles in John that show readers and would-be disciples his Messiahship and glory. However, at the same time, John upholds the importance of “blessed faith” – the idea that faith in what one sees can become selfish, faith in the tangible idolatrous. While signs-faith is called for in the Fourth Gospel, the climactic scene with Thomas and the resurrected Jesus places blessed (unseen) faith as the hallmark of “true” belief in the easter era. I think there is an analogy with “blessed” faith and personal-transformation prayer. This is a prayer that changes us inside out, in an unseen way. The external divine-action prayer, while not unholy is still fixated on (usually) the seen. It is a triumphant prayer. John works the opposite way. The victory and glory is in the cross. That is not something anyone was going to pray for. People tried to stop Jesus. The pattern of the cross is previewed in the footwashing. This reminds me of personal-transformation prayer – accepting the call to be shamed and to stoop down low as a way of “despising the shame of the cross” so to speak. Is external divine-action prayer good? Certainly. Is the prayer that changes ones nature in order to invest in a cruciform transformation good? I would say it is more blessed.

In the end, I agree with Kirk that it is both-and, not either-or – however, I am with Lewis. I am still young enough and simple enough to stick with the Gethsemane prayer – Thy will be done in me. Use me.

The new Zondervan Exegetical Commentary volume by Thomas Schreiner has probably been hotly anticipated by many as he is a leading conservative NT scholar and a strong voice in the debate over the legitimacy of the New Perspective on Paul. This particular commentary on Galatians allows Schreiner to engage in major issues related to Paul’s theology and especially his doctrine of law and salvation.

On introductory issues, Schreiner maintains standard positions, such as a Southern Galatia approach and Jewish, Torah-centered opponents who also have faith in Christ. In terms of distinctives of the commentary itself, even the backcover of the book claims that Schreiner endorses a “Reformation reading of the text” which places justification by faith at the center of his soteriological message.

Let’s start with the good. I think Schreiner, throughout the commentary, consistently focuses on the importance of the cross as the work of God in loving sinners through Christ. Secondly, one of the major themes of Galatians that Schreiner rightly picks up on is eschatology – we cannot accept circumcision as necessary because Christ has inaugurated the new age. The Judaizers were “turning the clock back” (p. 75). I also think Schreiner is right to adhere to the objective genitive reading of pistis Christou – faith in Christ. Finally, Schreiner gives good space to drawing out the importance of the Holy Spirit. Finally, he underscores the hostility and defeat of the cosmic powers of sin and death.

On the other hand, I found a number of concerns with this commentary. There are several exegetical weaknesses:

Gal 1:15 – “to me” or “in me” – Schreiner goes for “to me” because of the Damascus road experience. But what about the idea that Paul displayed to them the crucifixion of Jesus? (Gal 3:1 – Schreiner dismisses this interpretation here as well).

Sonship = pre-existence – Schreiner makes this argument (Gal 1:15). While I am all for pre-existence, there is no absolute connection between sonship and pre-existence. David was covenantally the “son” and so was Israel. We can find pre-existence in a number of other places, so no need to forcefully defend it here, I think.

– “righteousness should not be defined as covenant faithfulness” (p. 156). Does anyone really define it as that, or do they make a strong association between the two? I think the latter, but I could be wrong. Anyway, Schreiner seems to deny the connection, but Wright (et al.) only makes that connection when the language of the “righteousness of God” is used, not righteousness/justification language in general. So also Kasemann, I think.

Looking at 3:22, Schreiner sees “a polarity here between the law versus faith, between doing versus believing” (p 245). He draws this idea into 6:14 as well. Truly a Lutheran reading! I am speechless! All I can say is that the “presenting issue” in Galatians is circumcision, as Schreiner himself concedes. How can circumcision be about boasting in “doing” when someone else “does” it to you? Is it not about covenantal membership? I simply do not see Schreiner’s interpretation as viable in this context.

Finally, I was disappointed in the key theme of unity missing from his reading of Galatians. I understand he doesn’t like the New Perspective, but it seems he has gone too far away from some NPP distinctives. How can the one-ness and unity motifs be simply brushed aside? The key themes he discusses are justification by faith, the full divinity of Christ, freedom from the power of sin through the death/resurrection of Jesus, and dependence on the Holy Spirit (so stated on the back cover of the book). No unity of God’s people? How could he have missed this?

My personal opinion is that Schreiner needed to write a commentary on Galatians, because the “Lutheran” reading needs a good strong post-NPP advocacy, but this seemed to me to be a rather weak attempt. While I am criticizing Schreiner, I am also saying I fully believe he is capable of writing a cogent and critically-engaging commentary. I think the Zondervan Exegetical format did not allow him the space and platform for this. I think he needed something like a two volume WBC update or something heftier than ZECNT. Also, I felt he did not follow through on the ZECNT expectations either. My favorite part of the ZECNT is the “Theology in Application” section at the end of every passage discussion. While Osborne’s ZEC on Matthew handled this section marvelously, Schreiner seemed to have given this section little thought. At one point he almost comes right out and says, I don’t have much to say here! (see pg 113).

Another concern is that Schreiner engages in a wide number of key exegetical cruxes and asserts his own viewpoint only superficially – the main text of the commentary gives basic concerns with alternative positions and the footnotes point to more detailed studies that defend his position. My problem is that this commentary almost turns into a reference work for a non-NPP reading. While that is not a problem in and of itself, it could hardly be labelled “exegetical.” When I think “exegetical,” I think “inductively studied and defended.” Schreiner’s commentary seems to me to be a deductive approach – he says it himself – a “Reformation” reading. OK, it is true that it is impossible to be without presupposition and also people like NT Wright come to the table with an agenda as well. My disappointment is when a commentary becomes predictable. In a good commentary, an exegetical commentary, I want to see more weighing of options, and once in a while a commenter says, “As ugly and complicated as it may seem, the text points to this idea.” While Schreiner “weighs” options sometimes (though I don’t feel like it is a real weighing), I can always predict where he is going to “land.” While it makes the reading systematically comprehensible, it also becomes a bit more suspicious.

I am still waiting for a strong defense of a Lutheran/Reformation reading of Galatians. Westerholm – take the challenge! Well, actually slated to write Galatians commentaries in the future are Don Carson (Pillar), Douglas Moo (Baker Exegetical) and Brian Vickers (New Covenant). Carson and Moo (because of space-allowances) are sure to be substantial contributions. I trust both to be fair, accurate, and critically-engaging.

On the other hand, it will be interesting to see the Galatians commentary (Two Horizons) by N.T. Wright and the NTL one by de Boer (coming this fall!). Also, I am looking forward to seeing where deSilva (NICNT) and Peter Oakes (Paideia) land on NPP/Reformation questions.

Last thing – I still think that the ZECNT has potential, as Osborne’s contribution was quite good and I am excited to read Clint Arnold’s Ephesians volume. More to come!

I am looking forward, in mid-May, to the Pacific Northwest SBL meeting. I will be involved in two sessions. First, I was excited to have my paper accepted. The Title and Abstract are below:

Door Locks Only Stop Mortals: The Isaianic Key That Unlocks the Mystery of the Johannine Resurrection House Appearances (John 20:19-29)

Only Luke and John recount resurrection appearances of Jesus to his disciples in a home (Luke 24:36-44; John 20:19-29). John’s account is more vivid, twice mentioning that the doors were locked when Jesus miraculously came into their midst, and only John recounts the audacious demand for physical proof from Thomas (20:24-25).

In this paper, we will explore the serious possibility that John draws from the prophetic-eschatology of Isaiah 26, a text strongly focused on the Day of the Lord and the coming of peace, divine vengeance, life from the dead, judgment, and victory. Drawing such connections allow the reader of the fourth Gospel to be further attentive to such key features of this narratives in terms of irony, faith, human agency, new life and the righteousness and faithfulness of the God of Israel. Ultimately, reading John 20 with Isaiah 26 helps the Gospel interpreter to understand how a crucified and risen Jesus could fulfill the hopes of restoration and peace promised to the people of God.

Also, I will be participating in a review panel discussion of Paul N. Anderson’s soon-coming book on the Gospel of John entitled Riddles of the Fourth Gospel (Fortress Press). While it is not out yet, Anderson has furnished me with a copy and I am about 3/5 through it. So far, it is very impressive: carefully thought out, very accessible for students, and contains a cogent argument (thus far) regarding how he thinks the various “riddles” can be penetrated. I will certainly have some words to say about the book, but by far it will be positive.

So, if you are coming please do drop in on one or both of these and say hello afterward.

The very helpful commentary website “bestcommentaries.com” lists 75 commentaries on Romans written in the last 100 years (and I am sure that list is not exhaustive). It also lists almost another twenty that are contracted for the future (Porter, Gaventa, Longenecker, etc…). Do we really need more and more and more on Romans?

Certainly this huge interest in Romans is a testament to the importance of the book. And, we Paul scholars can’t help ourselves – when a new commentary comes out -we grumble…and then buy it.

Well, I am happy to concede that Frank Matera’s new PAIDEIA Romans commentary (Baker, 2010) is a good read and will be very useful for classroom use. Here is a note about the series

This series is aimed squarely at students…who have theological interests in the biblical text

Sometimes scholars have trouble remembering how difficult it is for uninitiated students to break into the study of Paul and make sense of debates and key discussions. Matera steps in and offers a very lucid treatment of the text in a way that makes Romans-scholarship accessible.

Certain elements of the series itself facilitate this: a critically-important aspect of the volume is the focus on the “flow of the text” -where is the argument going? What is the big picture? Too often, students (and scholars!) lose the forest, not just for the trees, but for a deep desire to obsess over the tiniest piece of bark on one tree! Matera follows the route of argumentation well (enough) and leaves a wide path for students to follow. The section-by-section analysis is pretty standard, general, and he does not promote “new” or controversial ideas. He sticks to standard viewpoints (which is not a bad thing).

Another important aspect of this series is that each section discussion ends with a discussion of “Theological Issues” and Matera carefully selects appropriate topics of reflection. I will find myself returning to these as well.

Now, having 380 pages to write a commentary might sound generous, but Matera has an almost impossible task given the complex history of debate in Romans scholarship and also the sheer depth and importance of the letter. However, he makes the most of it. There are even pictures and charts sprinkled throughout which offer clarity and richness.

Here are some points of conversation in Matera’s commentary that may be of interest

– 9:5 – certainly at least on some occasions Paul knew Christos as a title (i.e., more than just a fixed name)

– Beyond just in Romans 5, Adam Christology is in the subtext of the whole letter

– The dikaiosyne of God is his “saving righteousness”

– One should take “obedience of faith” as an appositional genitive

– In 1:18-32, theories that the “golden calf” incident is alluded to are tenuous (I disagree with Matera here)

– identity of interlocuter in chapter 2 is generally not in need of scholarly reconstruction (see p. 60)

– Bassler is right that Paul’s focus esp in chs 1-3 is on the impartiality of God

– Rhetorically Matera likes Thomas Tobin’s work, theologically Matera likes Wright.

– Overall emphasis on “sin” as evil “power”

– prefers subjective genitive reading of pistis christou

– the hilasterion is probably the mercy seat

– Romans 7 – the “I” is not a Christian

-Romans 9-11: “if the apostle cannot explain the continuity between God’s saving righteousness manifested to Israel in the past and God’s saving righteousness manifested in Jesus Christ, there is no continuity between what God has done and what God is presently doing. If this is so, Paul’s gospel calls into question the faithfulness and reliability of God. In a word, there is a festering wound between synagogue and church” (p. 212)

-The importance of the Jerusalem collection – “it could never be…a minor issue for Paul since it pointed to the purpose of God’s saving righteousness in Christ: the unity of all people – Gentiles as well as Jews — in the human being who has already entered into the fullness of God’s glory” (p. 348)

– Matera’s commentary ends with three words: “SOLI DEO GLORIA”
CONCLUSION

The scholar will probably not be wowed by new insights and controversial remarks in this commentary. It is a solid and fair reading of the text of Romans and should be helpful in instruction and student learning.

I left the Wheaton NT Wright conference with a few more books than I intended, but there were some really good deals.

Classics

I picked up three classics from Eerdmans.  First, Gordon Fee’s Philippians commentary from the NICNT series.  It is a marvelously detailed treatment which offers plenty of fresh readings and sane and competent advice on older cruxes.  I have numerous Philippians commentaries (O’Brien, Bockmuehl, Fowl, Cousar, Hooker, Reumann, Thielman, Hawthorne/Martin), but I have been waiting for a good time to get Fee – truly deserving of the title “magisterial.”

Also, not an old book, but an instant classic, is Marianne Meye Thompson’s The God of the Gospel of John, which seeks to fill in the theological gap that Nils Dahl wrote about regarding the lack of reflection on “God” as a subject in NT theology.  Thompson remedies this in the fourth Gospel.  I have heard nothing but good things and since I am trying to break into Johannine studies, this seems like a great place to start.

Finally, I saw it fit to pick up a Wright book (also Eerdmans): The Lord and His Prayer.  I have always been fascinated by the Lord’s prayer, exegetically and liturgically, so I have often desired to acquire this short exposition.  I hope to preach and teach regularly on the Lord’s Prayer and I appreciate the Bishop’s guidance!

Freebies

The conference saw fit to offer two free books to the first 400 people to register on site (both from IVP): A biography on John Wyclif and also Mark Goodacre and Nick Perrin’s highly regarded Questioning Q.  I look forward to dipping into the latter when I begin work on my Gospels lectures.  Also, for free we received a booklet (from the Wheaton College bookstore) on the Gospel and Culture written by Wright.  A nice keepsake for those of us in attendance.

New Books

Two new books made it into my already heavy backpack.

1. Anthony Thiselton’s The Living Paul (IVP, 2010) – this introduction to Paul is not necessary because there is nothing like it.  In fact, I am pleased with other intros to Paul (Bird, Horrell, Gorman, Hooker, Wright, etc…).  But, in light of Tony’s influential commentaries on 1 Corinthians and his mastery of all things hermeneutical, I think this would be very useful and interesting to read.  I will certainly blog on it soon!

2. Volume 2 of IVP’s Ancient Christian Doctrine series: this volume is on “We Believe in One Lord Jesus Christ” of the Nicene-Constantanopolitan creed and works through the thoughts of many patristic writers in an orderly fashion.  I will also give more thoughts on this, but let me say that this is a remarkable series that will allow NT researchers like me access to very important dimensions of the reception of the NT and early Christian beliefs.  Many cheers to series editor Thomas Oden and book editor J.A. McGuckin.

These are some quick highlights from the SBL (provisional) Program for November (see http://www.sbl-site.org/meetings/Congresses_ProgramBook.aspx?MeetingId=15)

Theological Hermeneutics of Christian Scripture
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Romans as Christian Theology
Without denying the obvious occasional character of Romans or its particular features (rhetorical, political, etc.), this session considers Romans as both an example of and a source for Christian theology.

A. Grieb, Presiding (5 min)
Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Princeton Theological Seminary
Reading for the Subject: Conflict and Lordship in Romans 14 (25 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Richard B. Hays, Duke University
Spirit, Church, Eschatology: The Third Article of the Creed as Hermeneutical Lens for Reading Romans (25 min)
Discussion (10 min)
Michael J. Gorman, Saint Mary’s Seminary and University
Romans: The First Christian Treatise on Theosis (25 min)
Discussion (45 min)

Theological Hermeneutics of Christian Scripture
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: The “Rule of Faith”: Relic, Refuge, or Resource?
As advocates for theological and canonical methods of biblical interpretation have gained a greater hearing, the ancient church’s “rule of faith,” variously elaborated by early theologians such as Irenaeus and Tertullian, has received increased attention. What can be learned from this “rule” for those engaged in theological interpretation of Christian Scripture?

Joy Moore, Duke University, Presiding (5 min)
Dr. Tomas Bokedal, Aberdeen University
The Rule of Faith: Tracing its Origins (15 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Kathryn Greene-McCreight, St John’s Episcopal Church, New Haven, CT
A Chord of Three Strands Is Not Easily Broken: Three Functions of the Rule of Faith (15 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Joel B. Green, Fuller Theological Seminary
The Rule of Faith as Conversation Partner and Prism (15 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Ephraim Radner, Wycliffe College
Applying the Rule of Faith: Herbert Thorndike and the Scriptural Church (15 min)
Discussion (15 min)

SBL Presidential Address
11/22/2009
7:00 PM to 8:00 PM
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBDVincent Wimbush, Claremont Graduate University, Presiding
David Clines, University of Sheffield
Learning, Teaching, and Researching Biblical Studies, Today and Tomorrow (45 min)

Christian Theology and the Bible
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: What is “Historical Criticism?”

Kathryn Greene-McCreight, Presiding (10 min)
Alan Cooper, Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Panelist (25 min)
Peter Machinist, Harvard University, Panelist (25 min)
Francis Watson, Durham University, Panelist (25 min)
Michael Legaspi, Creighton University, Panelist (25 min)
Discussion (40 min)

Cross, Resurrection, and Diversity in Earliest Christianity
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: The Passion Narrative and Diversity in Earliest Christianity

James Ware, University of Evansville, Presiding
Adela Yarbro Collins, Yale University
The Passion Narrative Before and After Mark (25 min)
Joel Marcus, Duke University, Respondent (15 min)
Discussion (30 min)
Break (10 min)
James D. G. Dunn, Durham University
Unity and Diversity in Earliest Christianity (25 min)
Karen King, Harvard University, Respondent (15 min)
Discussion (30 min)

Early Christianity and the Ancient Economy Consultation
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: The Ancient Church and the Ancient Economy

David Hollander, Iowa State University, Presiding
John K. Goodrich, University of Durham
Institor of the Gospel: The Commercial Context of Paul’s Oikonomos Metaphor in 1 Corinthians 4 and 9 (30 min)

Intertextuality in the New Testament Consultation
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Neglected Echoes: Philippians and Intertextuality

Rodrigo Morales, Marquette University, Presiding
Nijay Gupta, Durham University
A Methodological Reconsideration of Paul’s Use of Scripture in Philippians (25 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Erik Waaler , NLA School of Religion, Pedagogics and Intercultural Studies
Use of Israel’s Scriptures in Philippians 2:5-11 – How Faint May an Intertextual Link Be? (25 min)
Discussion (5 min)
James A. Waddell, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
The Greek Life of Adam and Eve and the Carmen Christi of Phlippians 2: Evidence of Competing Jewish Soteriologies (25 min)
Discussion (5 min)

Mark
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Book Review: Joel Marcus, Mark: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (Anchor Bible: Doubleday).

Rikk Watts, Regent College, Presiding
Craig Evans, Acadia Divinity College, Panelist (20 min)
James W. Voelz, Concordia Seminary, Panelist (20 min)
Morna Hooker, Cambridge University, Panelist (20 min)
Joel Marcus, Duke University, Respondent (30 min)
Discussion (60 min)

Matthew
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Where From, Where To? In Matthean Studies
Participants’ papers will be published prior to the session on the SBL website.

Joel Willitts, North Park University, Presiding
Andries van Aarde, University of Pretoria
Matthew Studies Today – A Willingness of Suspect and a Willingness to Listen (15 min)
Craig S. Keener, Palmer Theological Seminary of Eastern University
Some Possible Directions to Explore in Matthew’s Milieu (15 min)
Ben Witherington, Asbury Theological Seminary
Wise and Sagacious Vistas: The past and future of a sapiential reading of Matthew (15 min)
Roland Deines, University of Nottingham
From the Center to the Margins: German Speaking Scholarship on Matthew’s Gospel as a Case Study for Matthean Scholarship as a whole (15 min)
Break (5 min)
Discussion (35 min)
Discussion (50 min)

New Testament Theology: Status and Prospects
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBDPheme Perkins, Boston College, Presiding
James Dunn, Durham University, Panelist (25 min)
Udo Schnelle, Panelist (25 min)
Frank Matera, Catholic University of America, The, Panelist (25 min)
Donald Carson, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Panelist (25 min)

Paul and Scripture
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Beyond the Hauptbriefe

Christopher Stanley, St. Bonaventure University, Presiding
E. Elizabeth Johnson, Columbia Theological Seminary
Paul’s Reliance on Scripture in 1 Thessalonians (10 min)
Discussion (60 min)
Break (10 min)
Stephen E. Fowl, Loyola College in Maryland
The Use of Scripture in Philippians: How Deep Should We Dig? (10 min)
Discussion (60 min)

Papers will be summarized, not read. Papers will be posted in advance on the seminar’s Web site at http://paulandscripture.blogspot.com.

Paul and Scripture
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: The Disputed Paulines

Christopher Stanley, St. Bonaventure University, Presiding
Jerry L. Sumney, Lexington Theological Seminary
Writing “In the Image” of Scripture: The Form and Function of Allusions to Scripture in Colossians (10 min)
Discussion (60 min)
Break (10 min)
Gordon D. Fee, Regent College
God`s Sure Foundation: “Paul`s” Use of Scripture in 2 Timothy (10 min)
Discussion (60 min)

Papers will be summarized, not read. Papers will be posted in advance on the seminar’s Web site at http://paulandscripture.blogspot.com.

Pauline Epistles
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: After the First Urban Christians: The Social Scientific Study of Pauline Christianity Twenty Five Years Later

Alexandra Brown, Washington and Lee University, Presiding
David Horrell, University of Exeter, Panelist (15 min)
Todd Still, Baylor University, Panelist (15 min)
Wayne Meeks, Yale University, Panelist (20 min)
Break (5 min)
Steven Friesen, University of Texas at Austin, Panelist (20 min)
Margaret MacDonald, St. Francis Xavier University, Panelist (20 min)
Discussion (55 min)

Pauline Epistles
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Pauline Epistles Open Session

Terence Donaldson, Wycliffe College, Presiding
Matthew V. Novenson, Princeton Theological Seminary
Iesous Christos in Paul: Proper Names, Titles, and Other Ancient Ways of Naming (25 min)
Leif E. Vaage, University of Toronto
Paul’s Singleness (25 min)
Mark D. Nanos, Rockhurst University/University of Kansas
Did Paul Observe Torah in Light of His Strategy ‘to Become Everything to Everyone’ (1 Corinthians 9:19-23)? (25 min)
Beth M. Sheppard, Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary
Drinking the Spirit: Potions, Medicine, Healing and 1st Corinthians 12: 12-26 (25 min)
David Briones, Durham University
Paul’s Intentional ‘Thankless Thanks’ in Philippians 4:10-20 (25 min)

Pauline Epistles
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Pauline Epistles Open Session

Emma Wasserman, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick Campus, Presiding
Brigitte Kahl, Union Theological Seminary and Brigitte Kahl, Union Theological Seminary
Jewish Torah, Roman nomos, and the hazard of Galatian foreskin : A critical re-imagination (25 min)
George H. van Kooten, University of Groningen
Paul Among the Stoic Martyrs: Romans 13 in the Context of Contemporary Philosophical views on the Divinity of the Emperor (25 min)
Luca Marulli, Andrews University
‘Strive to Keep Quiet’: 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12 and Socio-Political Quietism (25 min)
John K. Goodrich, University of Durham
Institor of the Gospel: The Commercial Context of Paul’s Oikonomos Metaphor in 1 Corinthians 4 and 9 (25 min)
Suzanne Nicholson, Malone University
Predicting Heresy: Paul’s Rationale in 1 Cor. 15:24-28

Pauline Soteriology
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Book Review Session: *The Deliverance of God*
Douglas Campbell, *The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul* (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009).

Ann Jervis, Wycliffe College, Presiding
Michael Gorman, Saint Mary’s Seminary and University, Panelist (20 min)
Alan Torrance, St. Andrews University (Scotland), Panelist (20 min)
Douglas Moo, Wheaton College, Panelist (20 min)
Douglas Campbell, Duke University, Respondent (20 min)
Break (10 min)
Discussion (60 min)

Second Corinthians: Pauline Theology in the Making
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: 2 Corinthians 3

Reimund Bieringer, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Presiding
Carl N. Toney, Fuller Theological Seminary
Paul’s Illiterate Reference Letter in 2 Cor 3 (20 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Colleen Shantz, Toronto School of Theology
Experiencing Transformation that Was already Underway (20 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Ben C. Blackwell, Durham University
Becoming ‘Gods’?: 2 Corinthians 3:18 and Theosis (20 min)
Discussion (5 min)
Break (10 min)
Respondent (15 min)
Discussion (20 min)
Business Meeting (25 min)

The papers of this seminar will be available starting on October 20, 2009 at https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0007546/sbl

Synoptic Gospels
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: Reading Gospels for Character Formation
“Reading Gospels for Character Formation.” This session will to ask how the gospels may be used, or are being used, as either models for or mechanisms of character formation. What is at stake, then, is the product of the gospel reading act – seen as an effect on readers.

Mark Matson, Milligan College, Presiding
Charles H. Talbert, Baylor University
Matthew and Character Formation (25 min)
Richard A. Burridge, King’s College – London
Biographical Genre as the Key to Reading the Gospels for Character Formation (25 min)
John A. Darr, Boston College
High Anxiety: Reading Martha, Mary, and Jesus in Luke 10:38-42 (25 min)
A. K. M. Adam, Duke University
“Too Much Study Is Driving You Crazy”: Growth, Formation, and Gospel (25 min)
Ann Jervis, Wycliffe College, Respondent (10 min)
Stephen Fowl, Loyola College in Maryland, Respondent (10 min)
Discussion (30 min)

Society for Pentecostal Studies
Date TBD
Time TBD to Time TBD
Room: Room TBD – Hotel TBD

Theme: A Celebration of and Engagement with James D. G. Dunn’s “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” Forty Years On

Blaine Charette, Northwest University, Presiding
John Christopher Thomas, Church of God Theological Seminary, Panelist (15 min)
James Dunn, Durham University, Respondent (30 min)
Discussion (15 min)
Discussion (30 min)