Abstract
The Kerux commentary series attempts an almost impossible feat, namely, to exegete and apply the biblical text in equal measure. Gregory S. MaGee and Jeffrey D. Arthurs are to be commended for making good on the promise. This commentary includes sections on exegetical, theological, and homiletical teachings of a given passage. The reader is expected to have some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek. The commentary offers a comprehensive argument for Pauline authorship and situates Paul in Rome at the time of the writing. Recipients included churches in the cities across Asia Minor.
The exegetical sections focus not only on grammar, syntax, and genre concerns, but also make helpful connections with other Pauline letters and the Old Testament. MaGee and Arthurs offer historical contexts from ancient Jewish texts and the wider Greco-Roman world. The theological sections center on the gnomic or transcendent claims made in the text. The homiletical sections emphasize the text’s big idea and offers several subsections that address contemporary contexts with a ‘now what?’ posture. The authors offer practical advice, often drawing on movies or historical vignettes. As with any attempt to make biblical teachings relevant, the authors reveal their own contexts in their practical suggestions; nevertheless, contextualization is a worthy goal, and this commentary sets an example of how it can be done. Each section closes with a handful of discussion questions that help readers dig deeper into the biblical text and better attend to their own contexts. The commentary is well written and concise, and the authors are well informed, drawing on numerous primary sources and modern commentaries. The page layout is exceptionally easy to follow, and the structure draws the reader into the text, and then back out into his or her own context. The partnership between exegesis and homiletics is of critical importance, and this commentary demonstrates how such structure benefits the church.
Key contemporary concerns that did not receive adequate attention, in this reader’s opinion, are racism and sexism. In the household codes section (5:22–6:9), the authors argue for a hierarchical ordering within the home with the subordinate groups—women/wives, children, slaves—being under the authority and leadership of the superordinate group, which is assumed to be (free) males. Strangely lacking is attention to patriarchy and the abuse that follows it, and the evils of the institution of slavery, and the racism on which it was built in the U.S. experience. Instead, the authors suggest that to contextualize the slave/owner passage, readers use the ‘from the lesser to the greater’ argument, drawing (limited) analogies to the employee/employer relationship.