Book Reviews

John Sailhamer's book is a tome on understanding the Pentateuch as applicable for today's Christians. This book is written from an overtly evangelical perspective, almost to the point of being apologetic. His premise is that evangelicals read the Pentateuch as descriptive of Israel's religion long ago. Thus, he says they believe the Pentateuch is an account of the religion of ancient Israel, but it has no contemporary meaning for the church. Instead, his perspective is one of reading the Pentateuch as Scripture for the church, that is, with a contemporary application (p. 12). So, his book is not about what the laws meant to ancient Israel at Sinai, but what they mean to modern Christians. He says this is a main theme and perspective in his book; however, he never clearly lays it out. He says another theme of his book is that the Pentateuch is not a collection of Sinai's laws and covenant, nor were they the major themes of it but rather the Pentateuch shows “the great difficulty of living a life of faith under the Mosaic covenant and its law” (p. 13). He does not fully flesh this theme out either.

Sailhamer divides his book into three sections. In the first section, he has four chapters on approaching the text as revelation. This section is mostly about issues of doing Old Testament theology. The second section has three chapters on the composition of the Pentateuch within the Tanak (the Pentateuch's role, usage, or influence in the remainder of the Old Testament). The final section is about interpreting the theology of the Pentateuch. Here he presents four chapters on specific theological themes: covenant and blessing, Jesus in the Pentateuch, the purpose of mosaic law, and salvation.

The book is easy to read, but Sailhamer's arguments can be hard to follow. Although he does not say, I think it is written for a college level or perhaps an informed lay audience. Because it is written at this level, the work is not heavily documented against other sources. Sailhamer writes from his own perspective or slant with minimal consideration given to the work of other scholars, especially views counter to his own. Furthermore, his views are often not widely-held by scholars, such as Mosaic authorship of the vast majority of the Pentateuch, which he calls a “Mosaic Pentateuch” versus a later “canonical Pentateuch” (see pp. 48ff). One example will suffice here.

On p. 54, he says, “Moses used written texts that he gathered from various sources and provided them with commentary, much like a modern producer of a film documentary.” Sailhamer does not explain what these “gathered texts” were or how he knows Moses did this except to cite sources from 1857 and earlier (a precritical age of biblical studies). He simply assumes it. He spends valuable space later in the book defending this position (what he calls a compositional strategy, one which makes good sense if one acknowledges anonymous and multilayered authorship of the Pentateuch), citing mostly pre-critical scholarship (pp. 181ff) and rehashing the same arguments as earlier in the book. He admits many evangelicals no longer hold this position of Mosaic authorship, but unfortunately does not go into detail as to why (p. 181).

Interestingly, this argument concerning authorship is found in Chapter 4, entitled “Finding the Big Idea in the Final Composition of the Text,” where it seems to be out of place. This lack of balance of critical approaches is a major weakness in the work. Occasionally, he does cite the work of other scholars, but gives a detailed perspective of only a select few evangelical scholars (such as Geerhardus Vos and Walter Kaiser). Once away from the issue of Mosaic authorship, Sailhamer does present critical issues in an insightful way. For example, he notes that of the four major poems of the Pentateuch, three show “signs of composition and authorial shaping” (p. 325). Then, he discusses these in detail (pp. 324–41). These sections are the jewels of the book.

Sailhamer has some good ideas for his readers. His main emphasis that the Pentateuch should be read as having meaning for today's Christians is right on target. However, he never directly fleshes this out. Furthermore, he emphasizes the importance of knowing the broader context of a passage, that is, considering the overall message of the Pentateuch instead of looking solely at particular passages. He says, “I attempt to feel a way along a path laid out by the author of the Pentateuch as I attempt to formulate an understanding of its big idea” (p. 156). He spends much space showing connections between passages within and outside the Pentateuch, which are helpful. His compositional theory has merit, and elements of it are widely held by other scholars. However, this theory when meshed with the idea of single (Mosaic) authorship is for the most part counter-intuitive (see pp. 298–99 for an example of this contradiction).

In sum, Sailhamer sets out in his book to discuss how modern Christians can find meaning in reading the Pentateuch, but it ends up being more of an apologetic for a certain type of evangelical Old Testament theology. The book simply does not deliver what the title suggests, and Sailhamer often digresses on tangential issues. It is written from a very conservative perspective, even for evangelicals. As for usage of the book, I think it would fit in an undergraduate college class as a textbook about understanding the Pentateuch. However, it is too unbalanced for serious use as a seminary level textbook.

Terry Eddinger

Carolina Evangelical Divinity School Greensboro, NC 27413

Creation and Humanity: The Sources of Christian Theology. Edited by Ian A. McFarland. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2009. Pp. xxxiii + 460. Paper $39.95.

As Donald McKim notes in the Series Introduction at the beginning of this work, “There is no substitute in theological study for a return to the ‘sources.’” The Press is to be congratulated for launching this ambitious series and for producing a promising anthology of excerpts on the topics of “creation” and “humanity.” It will prove a useful resource for seminary and college courses and also be of value for private study.

Making the best selections from classical and contemporary writings was surely a daunting task for McFarland. I will quibble a little with what has been left out, but overall, noteworthy offerings are the standard in this volume. Added to them is an informative Introduction to the selections which serves as another impressive resource on the doctrine(s), taking the reader over key questions from anthropology to theodicy.

How to distinguish the “dimensions” of the wide-ranging subject was an initial challenge for the editor. He concluded with a fourfold division: “God as Creator,” “The Creature,” “Evil and Sin,” and “Providence,” a sequence which in his words “follows in rough fashion the narrative order of the Christian story” (p. xiii). He notes as well that the treatments of the sub-topics “bleed into one another” (p. xiii). Some might argue that the hemorrhaging obscures an important traditional division into the doctrines of God, creation and fall (Trinity, protology, harmatology), and that “creation” includes “humanity” rather than being partnered with it. Yet the actual texts included make a good case for the editor's judgment.

The following is a sampling of the authors that appear in each category: God as Creator with creation ex nihilo getting special attention (pro and con), includes Augustine, Bonaventure and Aquinas in the classical category, Schleiermacher as transition toward contemporary interpreters David Kelsey, Juergen Moltmann and Catherine Keller. The Creature_is represented by a strong delegation of the early church fathers—Irenaeus, Gregory of Nyssa up to Maximus the Confessor with Karl Barth, John Zizioulas and Rosemary Ruether doing point-counterpoint in a modern setting. Evil and Sin bring Augustine and Aquinas again into the conversation along with Origen, and includes, finally, an historic Reformer, John Calvin, with a repeat of Schleiermacher, and a modern range from Rauschenbusch to Barth, Reinhold Niebuhr and one of Niebuhr's critics, Valerie Saiving. Also appearing here are contemporaries James Cone, David Griffin, and others. Providence gives us Augustine and Aquinas again, also Julian of Norwich, a revisit of Calvin, process theologians John Cobb and Griffin, Wolfhart Pannenberg and Arthur Peacocke with their science/theology perspectives and a concluding essay by Kathryn Tanner. Supplementing the texts introduced are reading lists for each category.

The task of selecting just the right theologians and excerpts is so challenging that one hesitates to comment critically on the choices made. However, two omissions seem notable to this reviewer. Contemporary evangelical theologians have opined much in all the categories, indeed some being leading figures in the revival of systematic theology in the late 20^th century where these subjects are methodically addressed. Yet there is no evidence of any of this point of view either in the selections chosen or the accompanying reading lists. The diversity and balance sought by the editor would have been more evident if such as Donald Bloesch, Thomas Oden, Carl Henry, Alistair McGrath, Stanley Grenz or other prominent evangelical thinkers had been included. Hopefully, the editors of the books in this series yet to appear will have such in mind.

While passing reference is made to angelology in the texts and Introduction, there is no serious attention given to this subject; indeed, the editor acknowledges its absence in an early note. Yet a full doctrine of creation will attend to all three levels of creation—nature, human nature and “transnature”/principalities and powers/angels, fallen and otherwise. This should be especially so in a work emphasizing diversity and contemporaneity. On the latter count, Karl Barth's 160 pages on “the higher cosmos” in his Church Dogmatics III/3 brings the topic into current conversation, as does Mortimer Adler's widely regarded commentary, Walter Wink's important work on the powers and principalities in their psycho-social meaning, and Max Stackhouse's relation of “powers,” “authorities” and dominions” to globalization. Seminary and college students studying the doctrine of creation need to be exposed to classical as well as contemporary alternatives to a popular culture where New Age angels fix flat tires and skeptics dismiss “the higher cosmos” as one more fiction of an irrelevant Christianity.

Criticisms aside, with the need for supplementation in course usage, this book is a worthy contribution to the study of the early chapters in the “narrative of the Christian story.”

Gabriel Fackre

And over Newton Theological School Newton Centre, MA 02459

Judaism: The First Phase. The Place of Ezra and Nehemiah in the Origins of Judaism. By Joseph Blenkinsopp. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009. Pp. xiv + 262. Paper, $30.00.

Joseph Blenkinsopp's work on the origins of Judaism follows a long and remarkable career that has examined many issues in Hebrew Bible and the history of early Judaism. This book seeks to place the roots of Judaism in the Persian period, and thus is a response to those who would put these roots in the later Hellenistic period. In an attempt to understand the beginnings of Judaism, he examines when one may translate yehudim as “Jews” and not just “Judeans.” This difference is critical to understanding formative Jewish identity as well as sectarianism—two topics which he examines in detail in this book.

Blenkinsopp's book consists of six chapters as well as a “provisional” concluding chapter. The first chapter examines the issue of Jewish “origins” and how this is a complicated issue when one takes into consideration the different groups, movements, and beliefs that were present in the ancient world. Blenkinsopp explores the period from the fall of Babylon in 539 bce to the conquest of Alexander in 332 bce, which he argues, is the period in which Judaism emerged out of the “rubble” of a series of tragedies. He points to Ezra—Nehemiah as the important texts for understanding this period, particularly the community that returned from exile, namely the golah. Other claims for legitimacy, specifically those of Samaria or the Judeans who remained, are excluded.

Chapters 2 and 3 focus on the texts of Ezra and Nehemiah. Chapter 2 discusses the book of Ezra, opening with the positives and negatives of the sources. He then divides the book into sections: Ezra's mission (Ezra 7:1-8:34); reading and interpreting the law (Neh 7:73b [72b]-8:18); and finally the intermarriage crisis (Ezra 9-10). These three sections are then followed by a discussion of Ezra and the golah community. Chapter 3 focuses on the book of Nehemiah, particularly in relation to the Nehemiah memoir and its contemporary settings, Egyptian commemorative inscriptions, the genre and literary character of the memoir, the Nehemiah memoir in the context of the book, and finally the Nehemiah profile. Blenkinsopp concludes by summarizing the character of Nehemiah. He sees him as a person who supported good relations with the lower order of temple clergy (e.g., the Levites) by promoting them to prominent positions, thus countering the power of the priestly aristocracy.

In Chapters 4 and 5, Blenkinsopp ties together the roots of ideology and also history and ideology in the books of Ezra—Nehemiah. In chapter 4 he argues that the goals of Ezra and Nehemiah were “incubated in the Babylonian diaspora,” going back to the earliest deportations. By comparing the agenda of Ezra—Nehemiah with the temple law in Ezekiel 40-48, he sees a relationship between these texts with regard to boundaries, operation of cult, and the creation of a theocratic polity. In Chapter 5, he provides a historical and textual context to Ezra—Nehemiah. He compares these texts to Chronicles, 1 Esdras, Josephus, Ben Sira, 2 Maccabees, and early rabbinic writings in order to determine the lasting impact of Ezra—Nehemiah. He concludes that each found expression in later periods: Nehemiah as a patron of the Hasmoneans, and Ezra in the sectarian or quasi-sectarian groups that emerged in the Hasmonean and early Roman periods.

Chapter 6 concludes this inquiry by discussing the issue of the sectarian element in early Judaism. Blenkinsopp begins by defining what a sect and sectarianism are, and how they may be recognized. He also examines sectarianism in Ezra—Nehemiah, sectarianism in the Babylonian diaspora, and also legal interpretations and practice in Ezra—Nehemiah and late second-temple sects. He finishes his chapter by reflecting on the continuity between the “ambient described in Ezra—Nehemiah” and the “overt sectarianism of the late Second Temple period.” But he questions whether it is possible to see continuity with social realities, since there is no information on the later history of these groups.

Blenkinsopp presents a thought-provoking study of the roots of Jewish identity, set within the context of the Persian period. His work is at odds with that of scholars such as Shaye Cohen (The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties [Berkeley, University of California Press, 1999]), who would place the emergence of “Jewishness” in the Hellenistic Period, or Seth Schwartz (Imperialism and Jewish society, 200 bce to 640 ce [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001]) who places this in the Rabbinic period. It would have been helpful had Blenkinsopp addressed Cohen's interpretation of identity in a more straightforward manner, particularly the many facets that Cohen presents. But overall, Blenkinsopp's work is a well-thought-out presentation of a particularly intriguing period of history.

Deirdre N. Fulton

Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA, 16802

Antike Mythen: Medien, Transformationen und Konstruktionen. Edited by Ueli Dill & Christiane Walde. Berlin/New York: W. de Gruyter 2009. xii + 750 pp. Cloth. $238.00.

This impressive tome in honor of Fritz Graf contains forty essays in English, German, French, and Spanish by contributors from ten different countries. To avoid the problem of incoherence—so common in Festschriften—the editors focus on the transformation and construction of ancient myths. This decision is entirely to the benefit of the reader, who now gets a comprehensive volume demonstrating the multifaceted dimensions of ancient myth. Since the editors take the term myth in the broadest possible sense, in addition to the majority of essays on Greco-Roman antiquity one also finds contributions on Egyptian, Indian and Rabbinic literature. This breadth can also be observed in the range of periods covered; while the bulk of the chapters concentrate on classical antiquity, the medieval period and even modern Europe are also represented by individual contributions. The volume therefore shows the importance of the interdisciplinary study of myth and how such an approach to myth can highlight other aspects of culture such as history, science, philosophy and politics.

Needless to say this sort of review can hardly do justice to the broad variety of papers presented here; the following selection is arbitrary and guided solely by the interests of the reviewer. The contributions by P. T. Struck (“The Invention of Myth in Antiquity”) and V. Pirenne-Delforge (“Under Which Conditions Did the Greeks ‘Believe’ in Their Myths? The Religious Criteria of Adherence”) examine the nature of myth itself and how such myths were read critically in antiquity. N. Marinatos (“Metamythlogy of ‘Baetyl Cult’. The Mediterranean Hypothesis of Sir Arthur Evans and Fritz Graf”) alerts the reader to the pitfalls of a cross-cultural analysis and how 19^th and 20^th century thinking can influence the interpretation of myth.

E. Suárez de la Torre (“The Portrait of the Seer. The Framing of Divination Paradigms through Myth in archaic and Classical Greece”) surveys the evidence for Greek prophecy and divination. A. Mastrocinque (“Sacred Precinct: Cattle, Hunted Animals, Slaves, Women”) addresses the problems related to sacred precincts and asylia in Italy and Greece and relates his findings to the role of animals in such precincts. B. Lincoln (“In Praise of the Chaotic”) offers a careful cross-cultural analysis of the concept of chaos in Hesiod's Theogony and the Old Norse Edda. W. Doniger's contribution (“Dogs as Dalits in Indian Literature”) draws attention to the importance of cultural contexts in the interpretation of myth, when she is able to trace ideas of the lower castes in the classic Brahmin texts.

R. Bloch (“Orpheus als Lehrer des Musaios, Moses als Lehrer des Orpheus”) disentangles the fusion of biblical and classical myth in the (late) Hellenistic period, investigating the Jewish-Christian concept that much of Greek myth was simply copied from Moses. M. Lefkowitz in “Biographical Mythology” deals with one of the great problems facing classicists: that of interpreting accounts of the lives of the poets, which are replete with elements drawn from the poet's works or mythic features. W. Burkert (“Sardanapal zwischen Mythos und Realität: Das Grab in Kylikien”) in elegant fashion explores how memorial remnants of an Assyrain king became transformed into a Greek myth. R. Nünlist (“The Motif of the Exiled Killer”) provides a comprehensive set of data of the motif in classical literature beginning with Homer. F. Zeitlin in a most fascinating contribution (“Troy and Tragedy: The Conscience of Hellas”) explores how the events of the Trojan War are incorporated and reinterpreted within Attic Tragedy. A. Bierl (“Der griechische Roman—ein Mythos? Gedanken zur mythischen Dimension von Longos' Daphnis und Cloe”) investigates how mythic elements are incorporated and transformed in the erotic novels of the Roman period.

The price for a volume offering such riches and in-depth analysis is unfortunately prohibitive, and I doubt whether individuals will purchase the volume. However, as it provides up-to-date discussions on ancient myth every library should possess a copy. Highly recommended!

Anselm C. Hagedorn

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin, Germany

The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians. By Gordon D. Fee. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009. Pp. xxviii + 366. Cloth, $44.00.

Gordon D. Fee's The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians replaces the dated volume by Leon Morris on these Pauline epistles for the esteemed New International Commentary on the New Testament series, for which Fee also serves as the current editor.

With regard to particulars, Fee argues throughout that 1 Thessalonians was Paul's first epistle (i.e., not Galatians), and claims he wrote it ca. 49-50 ce (p. 5) from Corinth (p. 8). He attributes Pauline authorship to 2 Thessalonians as well, suggesting that Paul wrote it in response to the report that Timothy and Silas brought back to Corinth from Thessalonica, and thus a few month after 1 Thessalonians; i.e., approximately 50 ce as well (p. 241). Although not eliminating it completely, Fee downplays the degree of eschatological fervor that many interpreters see in the Thessalonian situation. For example, he places a heavier emphasis on the Thessalonians' concern over the fate of the dead at the parousia than on the delay of the parousia itself. Fee translates “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessalonians 3:3 as “the Rebel” (p. 280) and appropriately notes that Paul's description of this figure borrows heavily from prophetic texts concerning Antiochus Epiphanes and the destruction of the temple. Noting that one cannot be sure, Fee speculates tentatively that Paul was likely here “simply using well-known ‘anti-Christ’ events to describe the Rebel's self-deification” rather than expecting another destruction or desecration of the temple (p. 284).

Particular highlights of Fee's treatment of the Thessalonian correspondence are his argument that “holy ones” in 1 Thessalonians 3:13 is a reference to angels (pp. 134-36) and his convincing defense of the minority position that skeuos (“vessel”) at 1 Thessalonians 4:4 is a euphemism for the male sex organ (pp. 145-50). Also worth note is his careful explication of Paul's division of the shema between God and Jesus in 1 Thessalonians 3:11, so that it includes Jesus within the identity of the one God of Israel (pp. 129-32). Fee presents the information in a manner that allows his target audience (see below) to understand the significance of Paul's statement without burdening them with a lengthy tradition-history of the shema.

I also note briefly two criticisms. First, Fee's insistence that 1 Thessalonians was Paul's first epistle raises a significant methodological problem that goes unaddressed in the volume. On several occasions, Fee appeals to other Pauline epistles in order to explain, or expand upon, Paul's thoughts or terminology in 1 Thessalonians (e.g., pp. 84, 87 n 8, 88, 93, 222). Yet one may ask whether it is methodologically sound to assume that Paul's thinking in later letters automatically illuminates his thinking in an earlier letter. If 1 Thessalonians was Paul's first epistle, moreover, as Fee insists throughout, how can readers be certain that Paul's thoughts or terminology meant initially what they came to mean in later epistles? Surely the apostle continued to develop his thoughts, particularly on debated issues that appear in multiple epistles. The criticism offered here, however, is not that one should avoid this procedure altogether. It is inevitable that exegesis of one Pauline text will—and should—consider the language and thought in other Pauline texts. My criticism is rather that Fee fails to warn his readers of the need to proceed cautiously in this manner. Such a warning is needed, since Fee elsewhere argues against reading later Pauline texts into 1 Thessalonians (e.g., pp. 115 n 37, 116).

Second, and minor, Fee's suggestion that Paul likely wrote 1 Thessalonians 1:27 himself is unwarranted, although not impossible in light of the fact that Paul elsewhere explicitly states that he has done so, including 2 Thessalonians 2:17 (see also, e.g., 1 Cor 16:21, Philemon 19).

Overall, Fee provides an excellent critical commentary on the Greek text that is perhaps most beneficial to pastors and graduate students. Several aspects of the volume suggest that accessibility to this audience was its primary goal. For example, Fee often explains jargon terms like “subjective” and “objective” genitive (p. 88 n 11) or “anarthrous” (p. 173) and provides sections on application to the modern church at the end of each main unit. He also provides something of a running commentary on the accuracy of a variety of modern English translations (taking the TNIV as his own base), and Greek appears only in the footnotes, with transliteration appearing in the main text. Of course, scholars too will benefit from Fee's comments, especially his detailed exegetical discussions.

Chris Keith

Lincoln Christian University Lincoln, IL 62656

Hermeneutics: An Introduction. By Anthony C. Thiselton. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2009. Pp. xiv + 409. Paper, $30.00.

This book represents both the breadth and the depth of knowledge we would expect from one of the leading voices in the field of biblical hermeneutics. Thiselton's wide ranging coverage of two thousand years of interpretational approaches is breathtaking in its scope, but also admirable for its balanced coverage.

Thiselton's work proceeds in three movements. The first section of the monograph introduces readers to the field of hermeneutics, and is helpful particularly in its description of the importance of pre-understanding as an essential starting point for the hermeneutical spiral. Thiselton rejects the fallacy of presuppositionless interpretation while naming the significance of pre-understanding (along with the equally essential the ability to hold final understandings open). This opening section also includes a meta-reflection on the disciplinary location of hermeneutics in philosophy, biblical studies, and literary theory. Finally, Thiselton uses Jesus' parables as a test case against which to apply a number of hermeneutical approaches. In this introductory material, Thiselton manages a welcome introduction for those new to the field, yet without leaving more sophisticated conversations behind. Those conversant in the field will note Thiselton's unique contributions and positions.

The second section is a treatment of hermeneutical approaches that extend from the late Second Temple period up until the nineteenth century. With regard to early hermeneutical strategies, Thiselton examines Rabbinic, Greek-speaking, and apocalyptic Judaisms, as well as Stoic interpretation. Tracing the movement from specifically Jewish to discernibly Christian approaches to the text, Thiselton also traces both inner-biblical hermeneutics (the approaches of the biblical authors) and the earliest Christian hermeneutics evident in the work of second-century interpreters. The final two chapters of this section address hermeneutical approaches from the third century all the way up to Schleiermacher. If there is a criticism to be made of this book, it is that this section attempts to cover such a broad sweep of the history and theory of biblical hermeneutics in fewer than fifty pages. The result is that figures and movements are treated seriatim and not as deeply as one would hope. One must acknowledge, however, the constraints of length in a project like this. Thiselton does give helpful reading lists at the end of each chapter; so one could certainly take these sections as merely pointing the curious toward deeper engagement.

The final section of the text, from Schleiermacher until contemporary times, is clearly Thiselton's area of greatest concentration. This section accounts for nearly half of the book. Thiselton here engages with key figures, locating significant turning points in the work of Schleiermacher and Gadamer, but treating also Dilthey, Bultmann, Barth, Barr, and Ricoeur. More generally, the author discusses hermeneutical strategies or movements including Structuralism, Post-Structuralism, Liberation, Postcolonial, Feminist, Womanist, Reader-Response, and Postmodern readings. This section of the book is the most comprehensive, and the treatment of key figures alone is worth the price of the volume. Here Thiselton gives helpful introductions, asks important questions, and engages some alternative viewpoints on the characters in view. Anyone searching for a useful and sensible introduction to the key figures in twentieth-century hermeneutics will find this section of the book to be a real boon.

In sum, there is little to criticize in Thiselton's work. It would seem that this text is sure to become the standard introduction to the field of biblical hermeneutics, serving as a primer for students as well as a helpful resource for those more advanced in the field. Anthony Thiselton's decades of work in this field are impressively leveraged in service of providing a hospitable survey of a complex field in a way that is accessible, but never pedantic. The writing is lucid and engaging and, save for the sections that, for this reader, moved too quickly at the expense of depth, the introductions are thorough. This text is recommended for those seeking a point of entry to the field of biblical hermeneutics, and for students engaged in courses that move beyond exegesis to the task of hermeneutics. Because hermeneutical theory has been at the center of so much philosophical debate in the twentieth century, Thiselton's text likely will be of interest beyond its own field of hermeneutics proper and the cognate field of biblical studies, extending perhaps to those interested in the intellectual history of the twentieth century.

Aaron Kuecker

Trinity Christian College Palos Heights, IL 60803

Manifold Witness: The Plurality of Truth. By John R. Franke. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2009. Pp. xvi + 151. $18.00.

This study comes in a series dedicated to asking professional theologians to think and write in ways approachable to a much wider Evangelical audience. It has taken its instruction well, and is thus a popular treatment of the large range of questions surrounding the issue of religious pluralism, especially in light of Hebraic and Christian traditions of the singularity of Truth. It is accessible but with a scholarly elegance.

Franke, representing and largely addressing the Reformed tradition, sets out to demonstrate that the Christian tradition itself, at its core, is a plurality of witnesses that conspire to give the sense of a truth that eludes the mastery of the “fallen” mind. The book's central argument is that for human beings, truth is essentially pluralistic: comes into human ken and is sifted as human insight and value in diverse ways because we are diverse creatures with limited (yet potent) ways of processing any truth that matters. Franke clearly sets his course against a type of pluralism that rounds off corners, and smoothes away distinctions in a kind of soft postmodernistic discourse that argues that since all things are relative there can be no fixed truth.

Such a “pluralism” is easily set up as a shibboleth against which more simple Christians can rage; but Franke presses the analysis further than this. He argues that the hyper-elevation of Euro-centric points of view in the Western Christian tradition have falsely led the wider consciousness of American Christians (among others) to think that the Tradition is more monolithic than it actually is. Such a belief can then masquerade as a “defense of the singularity of truth” when actually it is self-servingly a turning away from the variegated nature of Christianity's original “call to arms”: the seeking of truth where truth (surprisingly and innovatively) reveals itself.

In this, Franke's book has the merit of raising deep issues of what the Transcendental Imperative means within Christian tradition, and sets out to save Evangelical religious discourse from parochialism and the too ready dismissal of the religious experience of others. But always, throughout the book's progress, while the author stresses that we must listen to the “Other” because the other can well reveal fundamental aspects of the variegated Christ-Revelation, it is abundantly clear that this “Other” is a denominational other within the Church. The alien is an ancient Christian, or an Eastern Orthodox Christian, or a Roman Catholic (basically someone not “Evangelical”). The pluralism one needs to imagine, so it seems, is actually an ecumenism that can stretch itself to admitting other Christians as authentic.

The book hardly addresses the fact staring the Church in the face that “Pluralism” in this day and age means more than this: it demands an answer from the Church as to the validity of religious claims that are not specifically Christian at all. This element was not this book's concern. Maybe it was a bridge too far for the envisaged readership? And yet the author's central premise can surely be pressed further.

If Truth, understood as perfectly mediated in Christ, is multiform and surprisingly revelatory beyond our imagined limits, does it not push us beyond an internal ecumenical debate immediately? I might sum it up this way: if a Christian were to confess, with unquestioned “orthodoxy,” Jesus to be the “Way, the Truth and the Life” (John 14:6) or even to be the locus of the very “fullness of God” (Col 1:19), this would surely not mean that we had actually experienced the terminal limit of what that confession meant (on the premise that we cannot exhaust fullness, only progress into it). Nor that some of the ways that initially appear contradictory to it (others apparently positing different ways to divine truth) were necessarily opposing that central Christian affirmation—ways being by nature open to horizons? The treatment the author gives to this fundamental question (pp. 117-19) is central to his own profession, I would have imagined, as Professor of Missiology, but there is hardly a beginning of an answer sketched out here about Enculturation and Christian Truth.

So, those choosing this book, from its title and truly “cosmic” book jacket, might be puzzled when they put it down, for it is, essentially, meant as an encouragement to faithful Bible-Christians to take more seriously the historical and cultural diversity of their own religion: but it is not in any significant sense a book about pluralism as that word is more commonly understood. Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism feature nowhere at all in the Index.

J. A. McGuckin

Union Theological Seminary New York 10027

A Reader's Hebrew and Greek Bible. Edited by A. Philip Brown II, Bryan W. Smith, Richard J. Goodrich, & Albert L. Lukaszewski. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010. Pp. 2256. Leather, $74.99.

A Reader's Hebrew and Greek Bible effectively combines Zondervan's previously published A Reader's Greek New Testament (2003 and 2007) and A Reader's Hebrew Bible (2008) into a single large volume. This combined volume does not include any changes to the original two publications, and as such, there is no advantage or improvement over the source texts except for the convenience of having them together in one volume. The Greek text begins on the left while the Hebrew text begins on the right. They both end in the middle, separated by eight pages of maps.

Richard J. Goodrich (Gonzaga University) and Albert Lukaszewski produced A Reader's Greek New Testament (RGNT). They used the eclectic Greek text originally developed by Edward W. Goodrick and John R. Kohlenberger III for the Portland Index Project, subsequently modified by Gordon D. Fee, and underpinning the TNIV. Every Greek word that occurs fewer than 30 times in the Greek New Testament is defined in a footnote, while words occurring more than 30 times are defined in a short lexicon at the end. The definitions are primarily derived from Warren Trenchard's Complete Vocabulary Guide to the Greek New Testament, which Goodrich and Lukaszewski checked in loco and revised when necessary in consultation with standard New Testament lexica. Footnote definitions provide different sets of information depending on the part of speech under consideration. Nouns are provided with the lexical form, genitive ending, article, and definition. Adjectives are provided with the lexical form, alternative nominative endings, and definition. All other forms are simply provided with the lexical form and definition. An abbreviated secondary apparatus appears underneath the lexical footnotes and indicates where the RGNT deviates from the United Bible Societies (UBS). This minimal textual apparatus also includes the selection of variants found in the footnotes to the TNIV and the source citations for Hebrew Bible and Apocryphal quotations. Textual variants are noted in the Greek text with a dagger (†).

A. Philip Brown II (God's Bible School and College), and Bryan W. Smith (Bob Jones University Press) created A Reader's Hebrew Bible (RHB). They employed the text of the Westminster Leningrad Codex 4.10, which is nearly identical to the text of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS). Appendix B provides a list of the known differences between the two texts (42 differences are noted). Footnotes provide context-specific glosses for all Hebrew words, excluding proper nouns, that occur fewer than 100 times and Aramaic words that occur fewer than 25 times. Footnotes are numbered consecutively within each chapter, and Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT) and Brown, Driver, Briggs (BDB) serve as the primary sources for the glosses. Footnote glosses for verbs include the Hebrew lemma along with its homonym number, the stem, and the lexical gloss (the footnote pattern is the same for non-verbs except that verb stem information is not included). Brown and Smith screen proper names (used fewer than 100 times for Hebrew and 25 times for Aramaic) in gray print that does successfully set them apart from the surrounding text, but unfortunately looks like the printer was low on ink. Appendix A includes a glossary for all Hebrew words that occur more than 100 times. Unfortunately, no Aramaic glossary is included. Unlike BHS, both the Kethib (vowelless) and Qere readings appear in the text. The paragraph breaks of the fifth revised edition of BHS are employed.

A Reader's Hebrew and Greek Bible provides a valuable resource for students and teachers. The text is quite readable and it allows students to save the time normally spent consulting a lexicon, to study vocabulary in its literary context, and more fully to employ and consult the original languages in both public and private worship contexts. Additionally, it provides instructors with ready-made gloss lists for the various sections of the Protestant Bible. The glosses are adequate, but must not become a student's only lexicographic source. This volume will greatly help students progress in their original language reading proficiency, but because of the lack of a detailed textual critical apparatus, will not replace the standard critical texts and research tools. The convenience of having two important pedagogical tools bound together in a single leather volume will make A Reader's Hebrew and Greek Bible a popular text for years to come.

Alexander E. Stewart

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Wake Forest, NC, 27588

Ecclesiastes. By Craig G. Bartholomew. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic Press, 2009. Pp. 448. Cloth, $39.99.

With the publication of Ecclesiastes, Baker has moved closer towards the completion of its Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms series edited by Tremper Longman III. Only Job, to be written by the series editor, remains to be published and is expected in late 2011. This series is focused for clergy and, seminary, although scholars and laymen could also greatly benefit from its pages (9).

Bartholomew's commentary begins with a long introductory section (82 pages) covering the usual topics of title, canonicity, history of interpretation, authorship, date, social setting, genre, structure, biblical context (including the New Testament), and the overall message and structure of Ecclesiastes. The history of interpretation section provides an excellent overview of how readers from the Intertestamental period to the present decade have understood the meaning of the book. His treatment on the issue of authorship follows its development from the Targum and Origen to views of contemporary scholars. He provides internal evidence from statements made about Qohelet and external evidence from word use and concepts as he moves through this process of investigation. Bartholomew interacts with proposals of others before presenting the conclusion regarded by most scholars today that the book was written by some unknown Jewish author in the late third-century bce (p. 46).

The entire introductory section is extraordinary in one great sense. As I was reading I got caught up in the text. Before I knew it I was three-fourths through the section. It flowed like a good history and was not dry and uninviting as are most introductions to biblical commentaries sitting on my shelves. The introduction is alone worth the price of the book, but there is much more that one receives for the investment.

Bartholomew divides the sections of the biblical text into three parts: Frame Narrative: Prologue (1:1-11), Qohelet's Exploration of the Meaning of Life (1:12-12:7), which is divided into twenty-one different segments, and finally Frame Narrative: Epilogue (12:8-14). Each of these sections and segments begins with Bartholomew's own translation including textual observations and comments concerning the original language placed in footnotes. Following the translation is the “Interpretation,” in which he provides a clear verse-by-verse discussion of the text. That is followed by “Theological Implications,” in which he brings the thoughts of the text to the present day and provides quotes from a variety of sources like Barth, John Paul II, Bonhoeffer, Nouwen, and Gilkey to amplify the ideas.

Bartholomew follows the tension between the concepts of vanity and faith, allowing that conflict to be crucial to understanding the wisdom provided by the sage Qoheleth, a man of insight into the world, and also the life of faith, as he reflects on observations and experiences while searching for meaning in life.

The book ends with a Postscript in which Bartholomew touches on postmodernism, psychology, spiritual formation, and preaching. He provides much to ponder as one looks at the wisdom of Qohelet, who explains how to find meaning and joy in a world filled with vanity.

This is an excellent commentary which will enhance the library of pastors and theological students who are working through this unique book of the Bible.

Darryl A. Bodie

Carolina Graduate Divinity School Greensboro, NC 27403

Jesus and Marginal Women: The Gospel of Matthew in Social Science Perspective. By Stuart L. Love. Cambridge, UK: James Clarke & Co, 2009. Pp. x + 259. Paper, $42.50.

It seems appropriate that I note up front that Love and I approach the Gospel of Matthew rather differently. He seems to be a positivist in terms of biblical and scholarly work. I tend not to be. I am able to learn from and appreciate social-scientific contributions to our field, however; so I attempted to read both to learn from and to critique this book.

The primary premise of the book stems from Love's sense that gender analysis seems to be applied on its own without being integrated with handling the greater cultural context. Love claims to be in line with Antoinette Clark Wire's macrosociological engagement of gender in Matthew (p. 22). His move beyond her is found as he delves into four encounters between Jesus and women: the hemorrhaging woman and the ruler's daughter, the Canaanite woman and her daughter, the woman who anoints Jesus, and the women at the cross and tomb.

Setting the groundwork for his analyses, Love discusses three types of marginality (Introduction), the household in Matthew (chapter 2), and the social-scientific models that he employs throughout the book (chapter 3). His discussion of marginality covers three types: structural, which is involuntary; ideological, which is voluntary; and cultural, which is intended to refer to those who are in between two cultures, and thus have “status incongruence.” This typology is succinct and helpful. Most poignantly, the women associated with Jesus' mission are ultimately marginalized in every way (though Love's chart at the end of the book's conclusion neglects his own claim that as Jesus-followers the women would be culturally marginal as well).

Love asserts that Matthew's Jesus calls for a radical “alternative household structure” or “new surrogate family” (p. 23). Love sees that calling each other “brother,” “sister,” or “mother” creates a community based on non-gendered roles, with God the Father as head of this household. I fail to see how addressing one another according to a patriarchal family structure, using gendered labels (surely they were not calling males “sister”) with a male God as head of the household, gets us away from gendered roles and expectations. Many scholars before me have argued that rather than this new surrogate family promoting a gender-free community, having a deity with a penis running the show only reinforces the priority of males over females. The same feminist critical critiques of traditional male-stream theology continue to apply here: if God is male, then Male is god, and the subsequent playing out of this reality will empower males more than females within the community.

The handling of the hemorrhaging woman represents my next overall resistance to Love's claims. The purposes of this chapter are to “provide an assessment of the historicity of Matthew's account of the woman's healing” (p. 115), and to see how her story and that of the ruler's daughter might have functioned for Matthew's community. What is striking, though, is not that the historicity itself is assessed or probed, but that it is asserted: “We will demonstrate that Matthew's redaction of the woman's story, because it is located entirely in public open space, originated in the time of Jesus' activity” (p. 115).

Love bases his assertion on the idea, taken from Bruce Malina, that “if an activity or statement attributed to Jesus in the healing story ‘makes direct and immediate political sense, then it is authentic’” (pp. 100, 119; see also pp. 138, 150, 158). One might want to note the distinction between saying that an event originated with Jesus' activities and saying that the version of it as told in Matthew is historically accurate. It is difficult to tell which it is Love wants us to understand. What this allows Love to do is to assert, then, that Matthean redaction is actually closer to the “real Jesus” than Mark often is. This is a strikingly circular argument. What is worse, regardless of whether it is Matthew or Mark that more accurately reflects the “real” Jesus, Love's move has powerful implications for the authoritativeness of this interpretation of Jesus and his work.

I do agree, however, with Love's conclusion that the members in Matthew's community were most likely more wealthy and urban than the communities of Mark and possibly Luke. Thus, Love's suggestion that Matthew was trying to guide the community “back” to an ideal that Jesus spoke of resonates (pp. 128-32). A significant component of that ideal, pointed to in several chapters of this book, is to embrace impure people as Jesus himself did.

Most unsettling of all are the final conclusions Love draws. For example, while the chapter on the hemorrhaging woman highlights the importance of the story unfolding in public space, Love summarizes the woman's importance as due to her great faith. The woman who anoints Jesus, handled entirely with a patronage model, is ultimately appreciated for her prophetic action. Neither of these conclusions is drawn from social-scientific models.

According to Love's way of reading, Matthew uses these women and their stories to make a point rather than to empower women within this community. The irony is that Love does the very same thing. Apparently the marginal women of Matthew are simply means to an end.

Jennifer Bird

Greensboro College Greensboro, NC 27455

Paul in Ecstasy: The Neurobiology of the Apostle's Life and Thought. By Colleen Shantz. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Pp. viii + 267. Cloth, $85.95.

This pioneering monograph presents a wealth of knowledge about the human mind accumulated by neuroscientists to provide a fresh understanding of Paul's religious experience. Religious experience in antiquity, let alone in early Christianity, had been a neglected area of research until about a decade ago, which Shantz (pp. 27-33) describes as the “cognicentric” attitude of New Testament scholarship. The first systematic attempt to address religious experience in the New Testament was Luke Timothy Johnson's 1998 monograph, Religious Experience in Earliest Christianity. Inspired by the phenomenological approach of comparative religion (famously articulated by Rudolf Otto and Mircea Eliade), Johnson argued that religious experience played a central role in the life of early Christians. Heikki Räisänen and Larry W. Hurtado were among the few scholars who studied religious experience in earliest Chritianity. Whereas Hurtado (“Religious Experience and Religious Innovation in the New Testament,” The Journal of Religion 80 [2000]: 183-205), influenced by the phenomenology school, proposed that “powerful revelatory experiences” drove innovation in earliest Christianity, Räisänen (“Tradition, experience, interpretation” in T. Ahlbäck, ed, Approaching Religion [Stockholm, 1999]: 215-26; Beyond New Testament Theology [London, 2000]) suggested that any study of religious experience needs to take into consideration social realities, pre-existing interpretative frameworks, as well as “profane,” everyday experience.

In light of the long-standing neglect of the subject of religious experience, the renewed interest in the phonomenological tradition is understandable. However, almost a century after Otto's Das Heilige (1917) and half a century after Eliade's Le Sacré et le Profane (1959), the methodological repertoire of dealing with experience needs to be updated, and this is what Shantz undertakes in her study. Yet Shantz's basic stance is recognizably similar to that of the phenomenological school: she calls for an appreciation of subjective experience as a crucial element of religious tradition (p. 13). This raises questions about the ontological status of personal, subjective experience as such: arguably, the feeling of our subjective experience being special and individual should not be taken as evidence of the primacy of such experience in our thoughts and actions. Religious beliefs and practices are often governed by cognitive (and social) mechanisms that are seemingly irrelevant, unimportant, or otherwise unavailable to conscious reflection, rather than what we consider as pivotal religious experiences.

Chapter 2 of the book provides the reader with a wealth of useful information about brain anatomy and details of fascinating empirical work in neuroscience. This scientific background, together with case studies from Zen meditation and other traditions, enables Shantz to suggest that religious experience has a cross-cultural, universal core component (pp. 69-79). The programmatic tone of this methodological suggestion cannot be overestimated. In an academic environment where cultural relativism is the mainstream, emphasizing human universals is a courageous and remarkable intellectual venture. At the same time, the last chapter of the book (pp. 204-14) ensures that the author appreciates the “nondeterministic complexity” of religious traditions. In her efforts to establish a cross-cultural matrix for understanding religious experience, Shantz's program strongly parallels the persuasion of the so-called cognitive science of religion, which uses insights about the architecture of the human mind to explain religion. Although this affinity is not explicitly addressed by the author, one can see tremendous future potential in combining the best of both scholarly programs.

Pioneering works always take greater risks than scholarship based on established paradigms. The following remarks are meant as positive stimuli to carry on the project. Although Shantz reviews much interesting neuroscience research, she relies particularly on Andrew New-berg and Eugene d'Aquili's explanation of religious experience. However, proceeding from Newberg and d'Aquili's rather idiosyncratic and speculative theory (which focuses on how mystics achieve one particular kind of religious experience) might not be the best methodological choice. In fact, Newberg's more recent brain-imaging research renders many of those earlier speculations obsolete and lends itself to a more direct and fruitful application to biblical literature. Further, in describing religious experience in Paul's writings, Shantz (pp. 1-19) identifies motifs of “trance,” “ecstasy,” and “altered states of consciousness.” The concept of “ecstasy” used by Shantz, referring to phenomena as diverse as “signs and wonders,” heavenly journeys, and ecstatic prayer, is problematic in the same way as the notion of altered states of consciousness in the social-scientific exegetical tradition. These concepts arguably cover a variety of phenomena that have diverse neural correlates. A more nuanced consideration of these neural correlates, as identified by recent brain-imaging studies, and their use for developing a complex explanatory framework, are tasks to be undertaken in the future.

This highly innovative book is a must-read for Pauline scholars and interested non-experts as well as for readers looking for fresh approaches to the classical topic of religious experience.

István Czachesz

Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg and University of Helsinki Helsinki, Finland 00014

Jesus, the Bible and Homosexuality: Explode the Myths, Heal the Church. By Jack Rogers. Revised and Expanded Edition. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2009. Pp. xxiii + 228. Paper, $19.95.

This book reads like a “page turner,” the reader thrillingly anticipating parts of the mystery that might be revealed on the next page or in the next chapter. Indeed, one can imagine a person who comes to the end of any particular chapter feeling as though the case can be closed, stating, “okay, but what about …” and there in the next chapter Rogers addresses that very counter argument that remains in question. Thus, chapter after chapter, Rogers opens another window through which a reader can view more clearly the full picture of how the Presbyterian Church has addressed homosexuality.

Rogers begins the book with a personal story about his faith journey in theology and biblical interpretation. Though not everyone who reads the book shares his scholarly and theological training, Rogers's personal story implicitly encourages readers to “make it real, make it personal”—to ask each reader what is her or his faith journey to date as each embarks with Rogers on an adventure through church history about a controversial topic, namely homosexuality.

For anyone who has stated, “this is the way it's always been” in the Presbyterian Church, Rogers challenges that person to consider his research into the reality of church history. On the issues of the status of slavery and of people of African history and the status of women, Rogers shows that the church not only “got it wrong,” but also how the church “changed its mind.”

Rogers examines 19^th and early 20^th-century Presbyterian theologians who used a literalist interpretation of the Bible, claiming the Bible is clear in its witness against the full inclusion and equality of slaves, people of African descent, and women. From a literalist's perspective, the Bible reveals the sins—which are often sexual—of anyone in these categories and confirms their subordinate position to free, Caucasian males. For these reasons, slaves, people of African descent and women were excluded from full participation, including leadership positions in the Church. As time passed, Presbyterian theologians of the late 19^th and 20^th centuries applied a more broad view of biblical interpretation that focused on the principles of Jesus' life and ministry. Based on these principles, theologians argued for the inclusion and equal status of slaves, people of African descent, and women within the Church community.

After this sweeping review of Presbyterian history, Rogers then takes up specific official documents of the Church that have had bearing on the debate about homosexuality. He reproduces the guidelines for interpreting scripture adopted in the early 1980s to give direction to the Presbyterian Church in times of controversy. While none of the guidelines names any specific issue, Rogers demonstrates what an application of those guidelines would look like when typical biblical texts used to denounce homosexuality are examined. Subordinate to the Bible as a source of authority and guidance, the Book of Confessions and the Book of Order comprise the Presbyterian Church's Constitution and function to interpret and apply Scripture. Rogers discusses in detail how flaws in both standards emerged that generated mistaken beliefs against people who are lesbian or gay.

The second edition of this book includes a brief description of the status of the debate about homosexuality in several other mainline Christian churches. The second edition of the book also includes a useful study guide, previously available only online, for church groups reading and discussing the book.

People who have a college education will be able to read this book easily; it is intended for a general, educated public. Even so, the book is perhaps best understood and appreciated by Presbyterians who have familiarity with the discussed documents and standards unique to that Church. However, this does not diminish for other Christians or people of other faith traditions the inspiring effects this book can have, including investigating the issue of homosexuality in the history of one's own faith and official documents, appreciating more deeply when and how faith communities change their views on important issues like homosexuality, and becoming more aware of the interpretation of Scripture as people of faith seek sincerely to understand and apply it to their individual and community lives.

Holly Toensing

Cincinatti, OH

The Dead Sea Scrolls on Sexuality. By William Loader. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009. Pp. ix + 439. Paper, $44.00.

Loader's investigation of attitudes towards sexuality in the Dead Sea Scrolls is the second volume of a larger research project on approaches to sexuality in Hellenistic Judaism and Christianity. Sexuality is treated as a more general topic in this volume:

By sexuality I mean all matters pertaining to sexuality, rather than the narrower sense of sexual theory and gender formation, on the one hand, and acts of sexual intercourse, on the other [p. 1].

This comprehensive approach allows Loader to attend to a variety of topics and questions related to sexuality (though an index would have been helpful for more easily locating these topics), as well as to address a complex collection of material: the Temple Scroll, 4QMMT, and the Damascus Document are treated in individual chapters, while chapters four to seven are organized according to genre, though Loader acknowledges that these categories are rather flexible (legal texts, liturgical material, biblical exposition, and wisdom texts). Loader brings together his findings on individual texts in a “Concluding Assessment,” focusing on contexts of conflict in more explicitly “sectarian” discussions of sexual wrongdoing (Loader's translation of zěnût; see for example pp. 98, 362), intermarriage, and the place of sexual relations in sacred space and sacred time.

The strength of Loader's text is his detailed examination of individual texts, particularly in his focus on philology. Discussion of each document begins with a brief introduction to its provenance, contents, and major interpretive concerns, followed by an in-depth treatment of passages that might reflect attitudes towards or approaches to sexuality or sexual behavior. The inclusion (most often) of both Hebrew text and English translation, together with careful reflection on the grammar and syntax of discrete lines and phrases, makes the volume an excellent, accessible resource and model for students wishing to study the language of the Qumran literature. For example, in his chapter on the Damascus Document, Loader spends some time unpacking the reference to the “three nets” of Belial and sexual wrongdoing in 4.12b-5.19. He translates 4.20a-21a as “They are caught in two (of them) in sexual wrongdoing by taking two wives during their (masc.) lifetime.”

Loader then offers multiple interpretive options for each element of the phrase; “in two” could refer to two nets or to two kinds or two instances of sexual wrongdoing. The reading of this single word, “in two,” impacts the meaning of the phrase as a whole, and therefore the interpretation of the allegation concerning the taking of a second wife (pp. 110ff.). Loader debates these alternatives through thoughtful and extensive reference to recent scholarly literature. This meticulous investigation of individual statements and phrases then allows the author to draw out issues and themes that seem to receive special attention in the text as a whole; the “three nets,” for example, are read as indicative of the main issues of the Damascus Document, with sexual wrongdoing, specifically polygyny, sexual intercourse with menstruants and marrying nieces, as the dominant concerns.

Loader's effort to bring together the diverse themes and issues relating to sexuality expressed in the Qumran literature in his “Concluding Assessment” is not as helpful as his treatment of individual texts. The author acknowledges the difficulty of undertaking this assessment: a text's presentation or construction of an attitude or issue may have differed from the way in which an issue was played out in the actual existence of a community; texts were read over time in different contexts, opening up possibilities of textual revision and development; and the immense group of texts the author has chosen to examine in this volume (putting aside the texts discussed in the first volume of this series, Jubilees, the Enoch literature and the Aramaic Levi Document, can also be considered as constituent elements of the Dead Sea Scrolls literature) can be overwhelming in their diversity.

This concluding assessment does offer some helpful topics and questions for further study (the role of women in these texts and constructions of gender; the “place” of sexuality and ideas about celibacy), but it is most interesting in its presentation of sexuality and “sin”; Loader is very careful to demonstrate that sexuality, according to the Qumran texts, is “bad” only when located in the wrong space, time or order. Nakedness, for instance, is not shameful in and of itself: “the concern is nakedness in the wrong place” (p. 364). This view of nakedness might be held in contrast with other ancient notions of the body. Overall, Loader's volume is an excellent resource for study of the scrolls, and offers some stimulating questions for further discussion.

Erin Vearncombe

University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, M5R 2M8

Walking in Their Sandals: A Guide to First-Century Israelite Ethnic Identity. By Markus Cromhout. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2010. Pp. xvi +128. Paper, $18.00.

Chapter One sets out Markus Cromhout's general model of ethnicity. He contends “that the ‘House of Israel’ as it existed in the first century must be understood and approached as an ethnic identity, not as a form of ‘religion’” (p. 1). Contemporary ethnicity theory informs this book, with Richard Jenkins, Dennis Duling, and Philip Esler serving as key guides in Cromhout's proposed hybrid theological and social-scientific ethnicity model (pp. 7, 24, 35). He also, surprisingly, sees a distinctive primordial element to Israelite identity in the first century—an element that Paul opposed (pp. 28, 84). Cromhout's model views ethnicity as (1) a form of social identity, (2) requiring processes of socialization, (3) communicating similarity and difference, (4) relying on cultural context, (5) fixed or fluid depending on setting, and (6) resulting from a dialectic between collectivistic and individualistic discourses.

Chapter Two provides a description of Cromhout's model applied to first-century Israelite ethnic identity and filtered through the findings of the New Perspective on Paul. He begins by describing the Israelite symbolic universe, which includes ordering principles such as kinship, honor and shame, and patronage. Other components include the legitimation of epistemic concerns, a land-focused interpretation of history, and societal ordering structures such as purity and hierarchy, the latter reified by circumcision (p. 54). Protection for this symbolic universe was provided through the framework of “deviance, diagnosis, and cure” (p. 57). These discursive resources drew from Israel's scriptural tradition, while relying on collective memory to address communal issues in the present. Cromhout then explains the way his socio-cultural model of Israelite ethnicity works as it interacts with Israel's symbolic universe (p. 64). The results are an eco-system of ethnicity encircled by a sacred canopy and a habitus that approximate the debated knowledge and values of Israel's ethnic identity.

Chapter Three discusses ethnicity and Paul through the lens of the New Perspective. Cromhout follows Dunn with regard to covenantal nomism, the boundary function of the law, the creation of a new inclusive ethnos, and the social dimension of Paul's argument. For both Dunn and Cromhout, emblematic Israelite performances embodied an ethnic identity, i.e., participation in the covenant community. However, Paul opposes the idea that God's grace extended only to those who observed the works of the law. He offers, instead, an alternative sacred canopy and habitus. God is the divine patron, who distributes grace and expects obedience in return; this constructs an alternative symbolic universe that applies equally to Israelites and gentiles.

Cromhout does not provide a univocal New Perspective reading; he parts ways with Dunn by rejecting the necessity of individual faith, opting for a robust understanding of the faithfulness of Jesus. Faith, for Cromhout, is “an alternative way of life and social conduct, and righteousness is something attained by an identity based on faith” (p. 93). His approach to identity is universalistic and follows closely Esler's transcending view. Cromhout sees Paul as one who “no longer views his traditional ethnicity as ‘gain’ or ‘advantage.’” Interestingly he later qualifies this claim by noting that Paul eventually came to the conclusion that “he should not seek to erase the subgroup identities of Judeans and non-Judeans” (pp. 99, 101).

Cromhout provides a helpful introduction to Israelite ethnic identity that builds on the work of The Context Group and the New Perspective on Paul. Thus, this book would serve as a useful primer for those studying the social context of the New Testament. However, a few critical comments are in order. First, Cromhout overlooks the significance of 1 Corinthians 7:17-24 for the way Paul understands ethnicity in Christ. The continuation of the circumcision calling in Christ weakens his claim that Paul sought to form a new, inclusive ethnos (p. 97). Second, Cromhout rightly recognizes the connected nature of ecclesiology and soteriology (p. 88); however, a variegated ecclesiology is slightly more probable. Third, by describing Christian identity as a new ethnicity, Cromhout confuses the categories with regard to Israel. Though Paul may draw on ethnic discourse to describe aspects of the transformation of identity in Christ, it does not follow that a new ethnic identity is formed thereby. These assessments aside, Cromhout's work deserves further critical engagement and represents a step forward by integrating social-scientific and theological concerns in the identity formation of the earliest Christ-followers.

J. Brian Tucker

Moody Theological Seminary Plymouth, MI, 48170

Joshua. By J. Gordon McConville and Stephen N. Williams. Two Horizons Old Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2010. Pp. xii + 257. Paper, $20.00.

As the goal of the THOTC is to bring together biblical studies and theology, this volume places a biblical scholar (J. Gordon McConville) and a systematic theologian (Stephen N. Williams) in dialogue with each other regarding the exegesis and theology of the book of Joshua. The book is divided into four major sections, with an introduction, and two responses. McConville's brief introduction to the book of Joshua discusses issues such as audience, dating, and historicity; more details are provided during the commentary section with regard to specific passages.

The introduction is followed by McConville's passage-by-passage commentary on the text of Joshua; however, no full text or translation of Joshua is provided. The Hebrew (with English transliteration) for some of the key terms and phrases is provided throughout the commentary, accompanied by a literal translation and/or some mainstream English translations (e.g., NRSV, RSV). Where appropriate, McConville briefly addresses the tension between the story of the conquest of Canaan as told in Joshua and the archeological evidence that may support or contradict the biblical account. McConville also does a nice job of relating the passages to other biblical passages and Ancient Near East (ANE) texts.

McConville's commentary is followed by Williams's chapter entitled “Theology in the Book of Joshua.” Williams addresses theological issues related to the book of Joshua, specifically questions regarding land, genocide, idolatry, covenant, and miracles/mystery. The discussion is not limited to Joshua, the Pentateuch, or even the Deuteronomistic literature; all parts of the Bible are “fair game,” Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) alike.

The third chapter is “Joshua and Biblical Theology” by McConville, who discusses Joshua in relation to each book of the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy) individually. McConville also places Joshua in the larger context of the narrative from Genesis—Kings, the entire OT, and eventually the NT.

In his response to McConville, Williams expresses “considerable agreement” with McConville's work overall. Much of this response focuses on the validity (or lack thereof) of distinctions between biblical studies and theological studies. The final contribution of Williams to this book is a chapter about “Reading Joshua Today.” Key issues addressed include whether the historicity of Joshua matters, the portrayal of the God of Joshua, God as a personal god, God's power, God's character, and divine lordship.

The book concludes with McConville's response to Williams. McConville again discusses the historicity question in particular.

It is interesting that both scholars keep coming back to the historicity question even though McConville indicates in the introduction that “the question of historicity is not primarily in view” (p. 7). In the end, McConville seeks “room for the judgment … that parts of the Old Testament's ‘historical books’ may not be factual in the way that modern history is normally required to be” (p. 234). This room that McConville seeks has already been found; McConville himself noted in the introduction that the prevailing scholarly view is that “Joshua is not a factual account of historical events” (p. 4) and Joshua fits an ANE genre of writing known as the “conquest account” (p. 5). Objectivity was not a concern when composing ancient conquest narratives, exemplified in the fact that rivals Ramesses II and Muwatallis II each claimed victory at the Battle of Kadesh (ca. 1275 bce).

The final editing of the book could have been more consistent; McConville's sections often include the Hebrew script as well as transliteration and translation of key terms, while Williams' sections only include a transliteration and translation. Another inconsistency is the use of “Reed Sea” (p. 22) versus “Red Sea” (p. 84) in the commentary section without providing any explanation of the linguistic issue. The bibliography is not very impressive, except perhaps in its diversity (including Abraham Lincoln, John Calvin, Paul Tillich, Tertullian, and William F. Albright) for a commentary on Joshua.

McConville's commentary section might be useful for those who know little, if any, Hebrew but who want to be aware of some of the important Hebrew words; only a few basic key Hebrew terms are provided. Overall, this book would be of interest primarily to someone who: (1) is interested in Christian hermeneutical readings of Joshua that relate it to the NT; (2) may need a gentle nudge toward the “room” that McConville seeks with regard to historical accuracy (or lack thereof) in Joshua; or (3) is curious to see how Williams brings together Harry Potter, Paul, the OT, and NFL Superbowl highlights in a single page (p. 169).

Jamie A. Banister

Catholic University of America Washington DC 20064

The Bible and the Environment: Toward a Critical Ecological Biblical Theology. By David G. Horrell. London, UK: Equinox Publishing, 2010. Pp. x + 161. Paper, $26.95.

David Horrell presents a study focused on the ecological implications of various biblical texts. He seeks to reshape Christian theology and ethics in a way that produces human action in order to foster peace and well-being for the world. Part I discusses interpretive issues related to Scripture in light of the ecological crisis. Chapter One summarizes the question of climate change and introduces the way scholars have implicated the Christian worldview, with the doctrines of creation and eschatology of particular concern. Horrell offers an ecological hermeneutic that reorients the way Scripture is read in light of these issues. Chapter Two offers a brief survey of three different environmentally-focused readings: (1) a positive “green” message; (2) a resistance to the environmental agenda; and (3) a mix of positive and negative, i.e., a positive message in some points, and resistance at other points.

Part II, the longest section, surveys the texts that impinge the most on the ecological debate. Chapter Three surveys interpretive options with regard to the dominion language of Genesis 1:26-28. Horrell concludes that these texts have an “ambivalent legacy” (p. 35). They can be taken to support principles of eco-justice but also claims for humanity's unique position over nature. Chapter Four discusses the fall and flood texts from Genesis 3 and surveys their problematic nature for both resistance and recovery readings. Particularly insightful is Horrell's recognition of the inclusive nature of the covenant made with humanity and the earth in Genesis 9:8-17. Chapter Five focuses on the interconnectedness of the earth's community as seen in Psalm 104, the way creation is involved in praise in Psalm 148, and the way God's speeches in Job 38:1-41:34 de-center humanity. However, Horrell rightly notes that only interpretive creativity can make these texts meaningful for a “contemporary ecological theology” (p. 55).

Chapter Six discusses the ecological perspective of Jesus' teaching. Horrell is not convinced that specific texts (e.g., Matthew 6:25-34) can be successfully leveraged for an eco-theology, although principal structures combined with prophetic material may prove instructive. Chapter Seven investigates whether or not Romans 8:19-23 and Colossians 1:15-20 support an eco-theological agenda. God's salvific focus does include creation; however, Horrell warns against a direct application of these texts in an environmental theological and ethical system. Chapter Eight considers eschatological texts from Isaiah, Joel, and Revelation, in which creation is viewed as renewed and at peace. Horrell doubts that there is much positive eco-theological use in these texts. There is too much discontinuity in the transformation, and God's agency is required. Chapter Nine surveys eschatological texts in which cosmic destruction is in view (e.g., 2 Peter 3:10-13). Horrell sees in these texts examples of uncertainty with regard to the various eschatological perspectives in the Bible. One option, however, is clearly not acceptable: “that the exploitation of earth should simply continue apace in view of God's imminent rescue” (p. 114).

Part III lays out Horrell's suggested ecological hermeneutic, one that allows biblical diversity to remain while offering a rationale for preferring one text over another. Chapter Ten builds on Conradie's idea of using doctrinal lenses as a heuristic framework for developing an ecological hermeneutic. This re-reading includes (1) historical and exegetical work; (2) engagement with Christian traditions; and (3) dialogue with the scientific community (pp. 125-26). Chapter Eleven surveys the appearance of ecological re-readings. Horrell's theological lens, with the exception of its anthropocentric focus and theological language, coheres closely to the “Earth Bible Team's ecojustice principles” (p. 137). He concludes by offering an eschatological vision of reconciliation and peace as motivation for current ethical practice and other-regard relative to the environment.

Although Horrell's book is hermeneutically important within the emerging field of ecological hermeneutics, I am slightly more convinced by Hilary Marlow's “ecological triangle.” However, Horrell's robust consideration of the non-human in the dialectic may suggest a set of interpretive bi-focals building on both Marlow and Horrell as a way forward. Now that the ethical transgressions of a few have called theories of climate change into question, Horrell's balanced approach is a welcome contribution to the larger debate concerning the way the biblical tradition may join this vital conversation on human-caused climate change at the beginning of the third millennium.

J. Brian Tucker

Moody Theological Seminary Plymouth, MI 48170

Echoes of Friendship in the Gospel of John. By Martin M. Culy. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2010. Pp. xii + 226. Cloth, $95.00.

Echoes of Friendship is a revision of Culy's doctoral thesis completed in 2001 at Baylor University. It is written in a clear and accessible style that should make it useful for general readers as well as Johannine specialists.

The starting-point for Culy's thesis is Jesus' announcement to his disciples that they are no longer servants but friends (John 15:13-15). Culy believes that “ideal friendship” is a neglected but central motif in the Gospel of John, and that this has important implications for understanding both the relationship between Jesus and the Father and the relationship between Jesus and his followers.

He begins by surveying existing work on ideal friendship in the Greco-Roman world, the New Testament, and the Gospel of John. He then sets out his own literary-critical approach, which emphasizes “audience criticism” and the use of literary motifs. (Alan Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel [Fortress Press, 1983] is a frequent discourse partner throughout the book.) Culy is concerned with how the Gospel of John's intended audience would have responded to its friendship language. His approach is to read “the text in its final form” (p. 23) and he skirts round the contentious issue of a specific Johannine community. Indeed, he sees the audience of the Gospel in broad terms and is interested in “how the Gospel of John would have been understood once it began circulating in the first- and second-century Mediterranean world” (p. 24).

Culy provides a thorough analysis of Greco-Roman, Jewish, and Christian writings on friendship that may well reflect the “conceptual field” of those who first read the Gospel of John. He concentrates on the Greco-Roman concept of ideal friendship, characterized by the key components of unity, mutuality and equality, and traces the influence of this concept on Jewish and Christian writings contemporaneous with the Gospel of John. He concludes that “typical notions associated with ideal friendship, like unity, mutuality, and equality, were part of the sociolinguistic world that the author of the Gospel of John would have both assumed and utilized” (p. 86).

He then proceeds to examine Jesus' relationship with the Father in the Prologue and the first half of the Gospel of John. He argues that this relationship would have been understood by the Gospel's intended audience in terms not just of family, but of ideal friendship. Notably, he uses the components of unity, mutuality and equality to provide an explanation of how Jesus as Logos could both be with God and be God.

Finally, Culy examines the relationship between Jesus and his followers in the second half of the Gospel of John. He sees many examples of unity and mutuality in the Farewell Discourse, and he also sees in the footwashing how the ontological inequality between Jesus and his followers is bridged by Jesus' words and actions.

Culy concludes that the notion of ideal friendship was “a feature of the social fabric of the ancient Mediterranean world” (p. 180), and as such it provides an appropriate way of examining relationships in the Gospel of John. Indeed, this friendship motif is “theologically revolutionary in terms of its startling claim about human-divine relationships” (pp. 187-88).

This well written and coherently argued volume offers interesting insights in a rather overlooked field within Johannine scholarship. Culy's proposal that “Jesus and the Father enjoy a relationship of ideal friendship in which perfect unity, mutuality, and equality prevail” (p. 127) is particularly compelling. However, while a detailed exploration of a particular motif does indeed open new and helpful insights into a familiar text, there is the danger that such a motif is given undue prominence. Indeed, Culy himself acknowledges that other metaphors such as “family, sonship, and even slavery all provide insights into Jesus' followers' relationship with both him and the Father” (p. 165).

A number of other issues could also have been usefully considered. The relationships among Jesus' followers receives almost no attention. And it would have been helpful to have more on the implications of ideal friendship for a theological and ethical understanding of church life today. Finally, given that the Greco-Roman notion of ideal friendship is essentially a male one, this may be an inappropriate metaphor for understanding the comparative prominence of women and their relation to Jesus in the Gospel of John.

David Lamb

The University of Manchester Manchester, UK

The Surprising Election and Confirmation of King David. By J. Randall Short. Harvard Theological Studies 63. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010. Pp. xvi + 244. Paper, $25.00.

J. Randall Short based this monograph on his Harvard dissertation directed by Jon D. Levenson. It argues that the biblical account of David's rise to kingship in the books of Samuel was composed and transmitted to shape and reflect on the identity of yhwh's “beloved son,” understood as David and those who inherit his throne. For Short, the king embodies the people of yhwh collectively. For example, the song in 2 Samuel 22, the first verse of which relates to a specific episode in David's career, calls the people of yhwh to identify with David collectively as they take up this song as their own (cf. Psalm 18).

Short's thesis differs significantly from some of the well-known arguments by P. Kyle McCarter, Steven McKenzie, and others, who argue that the history of David's rise to power served as propaganda that helped to answer some of the challenges against David as a ruler. Instead of providing a self-justification that exonerates the individual king, Short claims that the narrative aims to shape the identity of yhwh's people. For Short, the story of King David's surprising election and confirmation by yhwh becomes a story through which the people of yhwh can understand their own surprising election and confirmation by yhwh.

The book has five chapters in addition to a brief introduction and conclusion. The first three chapters provide a rather selective discussion of scholarship that views the history of David's rise to power as a political apology for the legitimacy of the Davidic throne. These chapters include a sustained engagement with McCarter's work and comparisons between the biblical account and Hittite apologies with the aim of exposing certain interpretative assumptions about the historical situation and agenda of David and his supporters. In the fourth and fifth chapters, Short argues from a close reading that yhwh's election and confirmation of David provides the narrative framework for David's rise and kingship. The book's concluding paragraph summarizes Short's argument well when it states that

the accounts of people and events contributing to, and impeding, David's rise to the throne are not protestations of, or apology for, David's innocence … Rather, they depict for yhwh's people, whom David represents and embodies, the mercies, burdens, obligations, privileges, and sufferings that are constitutive parts of David's divine election, and thus of theirs” [p. 199].

This very readable book provides a fresh perspective on a biblical text that has received a great deal of scholarly attention. Yet Short could have made a stronger case for his very intriguing thesis with a more sustained engagement of scholarship on the history of David's rise to power over the last few decades instead of focusing so heavily on McCarter. Short acknowledges more recent developments in scholarship on this issue, but mostly in the footnotes.

Although McCarter remains influential, the main text of this book could leave the reader with the impression that McCarter and to a lesser extent McKenzie represent the current consensus on the question of the history of David's rise to power. If a significant aspect of Short's project aims to expose interpretative assumptions that inform historically orientated scholarship on this question, more engagement with scholarship since McCarter seems appropriate. This would prevent his treatment of McCarter from coming across as an easy foil for Short's theological reading, which is the major payoff of this project. Nonetheless, this book will find an audience with readers interested in biblical theology. I imagine that it will make a greater contribution to theologically orientated discussions of the David story than to a rethinking of the assumptions of historically oriented reading strategies of the history of David's rise to power. I would recommend it to all readers with theological interests.

Jeremy Schipper

Temple University Philadelphia, PA 19122

Writing and Literacy in the World of Ancient Israel: Epigraphic Evidence from the Iron Age. By Christopher A. Rollston. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2010. Pp. xix + 171. Paper, $21.95.

The ability to read and write is increasingly taken for granted in modern society. But in the ancient world these skills were far from widespread, reserved primarily for trained professionals and members of the elite classes. A number of recent studies have approached the topic of “literacy” in Iron Age Israel from various cross-disciplinary perspectives; this book comprises the contribution of one of the world's leading epigraphers. Through an analysis of the evidence supplied by epigraphic remains, Rollston affirms the social location of “literacy”—which he defines as “the possession of substantial facility in a writing system, that is, the ability to write and read, using and understanding a standard script, a standard orthography, a standard numeric system, conventional formatting and terminology, and with minimal errors of composition or comprehension” (p. 127)—among the elite classes. The ability to read and write at a high level of comprehension was gained over years (not days or weeks!) of training, and limited primarily to professional scribes, royal officials, and cultic personnel (esp. pp. 88-90, 128-129).

After a brief introduction laying out some basic principles of epigraphic, especially paleographic, method (pp. 1-7), the book is structured through an intuitive, bipartite division. Part One deals with the material aspects of the epigraphic record from the southern Levant. These aspects include a history of the early alphabet's development in the 18^th century bce and its development into the various basic alphabetic systems (linear vs. cuneiform) of the ancient Near East (chapter 1, pp. 11-18); the development, distribution, propagation, and adaptation of the linear Phoenician script into the various “national” scripts (Hebrew, Aramaic, etc.; chapter 2, pp. 19-46); and a survey of the basic types of epigraphic evidence uncovered by archaeological excavations (chapter 3, pp. 47-82).

Part Two includes a more theoretical discussion of “the scribe and literacy.” Here, Rollston treats subjects such as the high status of scribes—at least, according to scribal ideology—in the ancient Near East (chapter 4, pp. 85-90); the infrastructure required to support (or, conversely, ancillary to) the formal training of scribes, as well as material indications of that training, both epigraphic and archaeological (chapters 5-6, pp. 91-113, 115-26); “the extent of literacy in ancient Israel” (chapter 7, pp. 127-35); and—somewhat ancillary to the book's central thesis—the position of forgeries in the modern epigraphic corpus (pp. 137-44). A glossary (pp. 145-48), bibliography (pp. 149-59), and subject, scripture, and author indices (respectively, pp. 161-64, 165-67, 169-71) round out this slim volume.

One of the most consummate paleographers currently working, Rollston has provided a convenient, relevant, and informative discussion of the “tangibles” of Israelite literacy with this book. Despite taking what might be considered the minutiae of epigraphic study as its point of departure, this book is targeted towards a broad audience of students, general biblicists, and interested, informed readers. Rollston brings to bear on the current “literacy” debate his epigraphic observations made elsewhere in more detailed and technical format (e.g., I recognized arguments made by Rollston in Maarav 10-11, BASOR 344, and other venues). Although this presentation for an audience of non-epigraphers provides an easily accessible entry into the evidence supplied by epigraphy, sometimes I wished that Rollston had been less modest about citing his own work: other than a few scattered citations, there is little indication that the author has written extensively and deeply on some of the subjects handled more broadly here. Interested readers who want to engage further would be well-advised to check the bibliography for Rollston's own more detailed studies.

This same criticism applies to other elements handled in the book: for my own part, I was left wondering at pp. 73-74 how I could find more sources on “ductus” (i.e., the mechanism of letter-formation), since Rollston lists there only one other study (which does not have ductus as its primary focus). An additional desideratum would have been a fuller discussion of the tolerances between diagnostic script features and scribal slips of the hand or habitual peculiarities.

Despite these observations, this is an informative, accessible volume that both provides a solid overview of paleographic methodology (and thus, would serve nicely as a supplemental text in graduate courses), and enters constructively into the debates concerning literacy in antiquity.

Jeremy M. Hutton

University of Wisconsin—Madison Madison, WI 53706

Jesus, Paul, and Power: Rhetoric, Ritual and Metaphor in Ancient Mediterranean Christianity. By Rick F. Talbott. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2010. Pp. xxiii + 194. Paper, $24.00.

Talbott's book is an exercise in comparison between the power structures advocated by Jesus and those advocated by Paul. He sets out to utilize a number of methodologies such as the social sciences, feminist criticism, post-colonialism, and rhetorical criticism. In terms of feminist criticism, he uses Schüssler Fiorenza's model of kyriarchy, but he also coins his own term, “kyriodoularchy” as a means of addressing Paul's power/servant imagery. With the use of social scientific methodology as his base, Talbott deftly combines these methodological concerns. Most helpful in his first chapter is his discussion of various theories of power in the works of Weber, Arendt, Parsons, and Foucault. With these methodologies in mind, Talbott poses the question of reinscription of power by Jesus and Paul. My only criticism of the methodological discussion is the absence of a definition or model for ritual, given the term's prominence in the title. Talbott does not discuss what rituals do until page 152. Moving this discussion forward would have been helpful.

In chapters 2 and 3, Talbott turns to the Jesus movement in Galilee. Using social-scientific analysis, Talbott notes that the Jesus movement was one of downward social mobility. Using Oakman and Hanson, he notes that, if one became marginalized from family and patron/client groups, one would have to join another fictive kin group for support or become destitute in the world of first-century Palestine. Talbott concentrates on Luke 4:16-29 to demonstrate the use of power in a first-century context and compares this to the passage in Deuteronomy 21:18-21. He utilizes labeling theory and degradation rituals and the economic impact they had on individuals and groups in Jesus' time. Because Jesus was a deviant, and a rebellious son, those who followed him were also labeled as deviants because they threatened community stability. Looking at the call scenes of the fishing disciples, Talbott notes that these sons abandoned their families and became ostracized for bringing dishonor and an economic hardship on them.

In chapter 3, using his understanding of power relationships set out in Chapter 2, Talbott analyzes the anti-kyriarchical nature of the Jesus movement in Matthew's narrative. He specifically concentrates on the gender implications in the saying concerning “eunuchs for the kingdom” in Matthew 19:11-12. He notes that the power structures set up by Matthew's Jesus deconstruct traditional Greco-Roman household codes in order to bring in an egalitarian, gendered set of power constructions. For the Matthean community, the eunuch saying represents equality between men and women within the alternative kingdom of God. Furthermore, he notes that Jesus breaks down the patron/client structure by calling patrons to help the poor with no expectation of reciprocation. Talbott even goes so far as to claim that the poor about whom Jesus was concerned were only those within the in-group of Jesus followers and these were predominantly those who volunteered for downward mobility by joining the group. While it is agreed that ancients were group-oriented peoples, it is an overstatement to claim that Jesus called for his followers to pay no mind to the poor outside the group. This takes both the model and the data to an extreme neither can uphold. Minus this criticism, Talbott's work on Jesus is an important improvement on prior understandings of power and Jesus.

In chapters 4 and 5, Talbott concentrates on the work of Paul and on the kyriodoularchy that he represents. For Talbott, kyriodoularchy is “the use of power to serve others made vulnerable by kyriarchal power structures” (p. 161). He notes that many scholars have painted Paul as domineering and that others see Paul as benevolent. Talbott convincingly argues that both positions are correct and that Paul is a conflicted figure who employs a kyriodoularchy that calls the powerful in the community to empower the lower in status while also engaging in kyriarchy when it comes to controlling group unity and cohesion. He specifically utilizes examples from 1 Corinthians 7 and 9 to demonstrate Paul's handling of marriage and meals.

Talbott's call for a more balanced view of Paul is entirely convincing. Furthermore, Talbott examines Jesus' anti-kyriarchal teachings and notes that one cannot presuppose that Paul is the same way or vice versa. He successfully shows that a critique of each figure in his own right is important in combating modern understandings of a kyriarchal Jesus or Paul and the justification that gives people to act accordingly in a modern context.

Jason T. Lamoreaux

Brite Divinity School Fort Worth, TX, 76129

Did the First Christians Worship Jesus? By James D. G. Dunn. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2010. Pp. viii + 168. Paper, $19.95.

In this latest contribution to the field, James D. G. Dunn responds to the work of Richard Bauckham and Larry Hurtado on the title-question. While expressing agreement with Bauckham and Hurtado on many points, Dunn feels that some texts have been neglected in the discussion (particularly 1 Corinthians 15:28, p. 112) and intends to bring all the evidence to bear (p. 4). The book is divided into four chapters. The first two chapters focus on the definition and practice of worship (what and how), while the last two chapters focus on the object of worship (whom) in Second Temple Judaism and earliest Christianity.

In the first chapter, Dunn attempts to define worship in relationship to Jesus by examining the relevant Greek vocabulary for worship. This chapter provides a useful survey of the data, but most non-specialist readers will find it tedious. Dunn concludes by noting the caution or reserve in the use of the language of worship with reference to Jesus, but that the invocation of Jesus in prayer was also common. Jesus is consistently seen as sharing in the glory of God and as being “on both sides of the worship relationship—as in at least some degree the object of worship, but also as the enabler or medium of effective worship” (p. 28).

In the second chapter, Dunn discusses the practice of worship and explores the topics of prayer, hymns, sacred space, sacred times, sacred meals, sacred people, and sacrifice. Dunn concludes that there is very little evidence of explicit worship of Jesus, yet he was central to early Christian worship because entry into the divine presence was possible not only because of him but also through and in him (p. 57).

In the third chapter, Dunn clarifies what is meant by “Jewish monotheism,” and explores Second Temple Jewish understandings of angels, the divine Spirit, Wisdom, and the Word, and the exaltation of human beings (apotheosis; Moses, Elijah, and Enoch). He concludes that the “oneness” of Judaism's monotheism could not be limited to numerical oneness, and the angel of the Lord, the Spirit, divine Wisdom, and the Logos were “used as ways of speaking of God's immanence without infringing on his transcendent otherness” (p. 90).

In the fourth chapter, Dunn begins by asking if Jesus was a monotheist (yes), and proceeds by exploring the significance of the Christian confession of Jesus as Lord, particularly in regard to Yahweh texts from the Hebrew Bible applied to Jesus, and how Second Temple Jewish understandings of Word (Logos), Wisdom, and Spirit were adapted and applied to Jesus. Dunn also covers the evidence of the Apocalypse of John, the texts that refer to Jesus as god/God, and the presentation of Jesus as the last Adam, mediator, and heavenly intercessor. Dunn concludes by emphasizing the both/and nature of the evidence and that early Christians did not worship Jesus in and for himself but rather held that “God is most effectively worshipped in and through, and, in some real but finally unquantifiable sense, as (revealed in) Jesus” (p. 146).

Dunn critiques Hurtado's argument that Paul likely persecuted Christians because of their Jesus devotion (pp. 113-16), and he critiques Bauckham's re-expression of the issue in terms of “divine identity” because such a reformulation brings more confusion than clarity and diminishes the paradoxical “both/and” (both divine and human) suggested by the New Testament evidence (pp. 61, 141-44). Dunn concludes with a qualified “no” to the central question of whether the first Christians worshiped Jesus but critiques the question itself as inadequate in light of the data (pp. 150-51). In the broad scheme of things, Dunn is not far from Hurtado and Bauckham; the differences reflect a desire on his part to nuance the argument in order to avoid a “Jesusolatry” that draws worship away from the Father, the one, true God (p. 147).

Dunn's latest contribution to the dialogue is a must-read for any individual interested in Christology. He provides a clear, succinct, and nuanced presentation of the data and cogent argumentation to support his conclusions.

Alexander Stewart

Southeastern Theological Seminary Wake Forest, NC 27588