I like G. E. Ladd. In fact, I find myself very “Laddian” on some issues. Reading through his A Theology of the New Testament today, I happened upon this gem (one of many) concerning form criticism, the criterion of dissimilarity and the Gospels:
It is incredible that Jesus as a Jew would not have made use of tieas current in Judaism that in turn rested squarely upon the Old Testament. It is incredible that Jesus would have interpreted the Old Testament at complete variance with the scribes. It is incredible that the early church, looking back to Jesus and remembering his words, would not have made use of his teachings in their interpretations of him. – p. 172
Αυτω η δοξα
A Reader’s Lexicon of the Apostolic Fathers, edited by Daniel B. Wallace, Brittany C. Burnette, and Terri Darby Moore
Thanks to the kind folks at Kregel for this review copy! I received this book free of charge in exchange for an unbiased review.
Dan Wallace (and his associates) have embarked on an ambitious trek, namely to provide students of the Apostolic Fathers a lexicon that serves to aid readers as they read and/or translate works of the Fathers. Having used the first in this series, Burer and Miller’s A New Reader’s Lexicon of the Greek New Testament with great benefit, I had the same expectations for Wallace’s addition. In short, if you’ve used Burer and Miller’s lexicon, you already know what to expect here.
First, a few preliminary notes of interest from the preface. This lexicon provides all vocabulary in the AF that occurs thirty times or less in the NT, thus serving not only to strengthen one’s vocabulary in the AF but also assisting with vocab from the NT as well. Also of note are the various lexical data provided. For example, the AF corpus is roughly half the size of the GNT, exactly 4,966 different words occur thirty times or less in the NT while the same list for the AF is 4,052, and the AF vocabulary “stock” is nearly eighty percent of that of the NT. A couple of other interesting facts: the most common word in the lexicon is πυργος, which occurs 148 times and the verse with the most vocabulary in the lexicon is Diognetus 7.2, which has thirty-four words. Obviously these are not the reasons one would purchase the lexicon. This lexicon’s value lay in the subsequent pages, which provide the necessary information to aid one in the task of translating the Greek fathers.
One of the aspects of this lexicon that I appreciate is the fact that the glosses provided are contextually derived. This, of course, does not obviate the need for further lexical work in order to determine the meaning in a more precise manner (when such is possible), but it serves as a more stable starting point. Rather than just providing a possible meaning, the editors have gone to great lengths to provide at least a more probable meaning. Naturally, many of their choices some will find disagreeable, and this is to be expected; however, their extra efforts will serve the reader/translator well.
Perhaps the only negative that becomes readily apparent is that which can be said for any reader’s lexical aid–it’s simply not practical to arrange all such data on a page in a way that makes simple reading more easily accomplished. By that I mean it’s rather tedious, at least initially, to have to stop and jump over to the lexicon in order to see what a word means. At the same time, one must bear in mind that such a lexicon should eventually serve as a minimally-used tool, assuming the reader will eventually possess such a vocabulary that only occasional consultation will be necessary. The layout, then, is not necessarily a fault or hindrance–it’s simply the nature of this kind of work. However, students of Greek who consult BDAG or LSJ know what a cumbersome task that can be and will likely rejoice that this volume has nowhere near the bulk of those volumes (understanding that those volumes serve a different purpose).
Without question, this volume will help readers of the AF bolster their Greek vocabulary, which in turn helps them in their work with the Greek NT. It will serve not only as aid to reading and translating, but also (hopefully) as a boon to further studies in the field. One can only hope that with two reader’s lexica under their belts, Kregel has more in the works.
Αυτω η δοξα
No comment necessary.
Αυτω η δοξα
I found this thought by Krister Stendahl worth sharing. I shared here because it’s too long for Twitter and no one like multiple tweets that try to communicate a single thought or comment.
“The believer has the advantage of automatic empathy with the believers in the text—but his faith constantly threatens to have him modernize the material, if he does not exercise the canons of descriptive scholarship rigorously.” Krister Stendahl, The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1:422.
Αυτω η δοξα
We usually read church signs. They’re big, bright, and meant to be read. So, out of a habit formed over the years, we read church signs if we’re able. The other night, on the way home from my daughter’s basketball practice, I noticed a church sign that caught my eye. What did it say?
Before I comment, let me offer a disclaimer of sorts. The fact that “educated” is set in quotes gives me a little pause. I don’t know what prompted this particular thought, nor do I know to whom the sign may be referring–all I have is speculation. However, regardless of the referent, the comment is offensive in a couple of ways.
First, even if a particular person, institution, etc, is in view here, it surely would offend anyone who has either pursued education beyond what is required to finish high school and/or those who have committed themselves to teaching others. My wife has been teaching for 12 years and has earned her master’s degree, so she would fit both categories. Also, this church is located only a few blocks from the school district’s central headquarters!
Second, as readers here likely know, theological education has been a major component of my own life. As I am about halfway through the PhD program at DTS, this sentiment is very offensive to me and others who have walked this path.
There is a notion in the minds of many Christians that is, sadly, all too common, namely that all we need is the Bible and the Holy Spirit to understand the Scriptures. Again, I don’t know if seminarians or biblical studies/theology students are in mind on this sign, but I can’t shake the suspicion this is so. Admittedly there are always seminary grads who parade their achievement in the face of others who have not received the same education and/or use it to prop themselves up as the authoritative arbiter of biblical interpretation. Such attitudes are indeed deplorable. However, many (perhaps most) PhD students in biblical/theological studies are not there to bolster their own knowledge in order to lord it over others; rather, they pursue knowledge in order to serve God by helping others sort through the numerous difficulties one faces when reading the Bible.
Whatever the referent, it is simply ignorant to claim that education (of whatever sort) moves a person farther away from God. Yes, knowledge that is built up for its own sake can certainly achieve that end, but knowledge also serves to help us know God better. Because I don’t know what prompted this particular statement, I realize I may be wrong; however, such a blanket statement about being educated is simply wrong. Education is a virtuous thing, one that many people do not have the opportunity to pursue. I have devoted my life to this and it hasn’t been easy on my family or me, so to read such a statement on a church sign, well, bothers me to say the least.
Αυτω η δοξα
Wow–I haven’t posted anything in quite a while (now that inexplicable void in your life is explained!). What have I been up to?
That’s about it. Maybe I’ll post something more substantial another day. Until then…
Αυτω η δοξα
Thanks to the kind folks at Kregel for this review copy!
The number of books concerning Paul are seemingly without end. So, when a book of this sort is published, we may ask, “Do we really need another one?” I, for one, am typically glad that numerous books on on a particular subject are published because no one person can say all that needs to be said.
Harvey’s book is a helpful volume that combines the task of digging into the world of the text and making the text understandable to us, the text of an alien culture. It’s divided into eight sections:
- The Genre of Paul’s Letters
- The Historical Background of Paul’s Letters
- The Theology of Paul’s Letters
- Preparing to Interpret Paul’s Letters
- Interpreting Passages in Paul’s Letters
- Communicating Passages in Paul’s Letters
- From Text to Sermon: Two Examples
- Selected Resources
In general, the book is well done and very informative. The first chapter discusses a number of issues concerning the genre of Paul’s letters, a helpful chapter that helps orient the reader to ancient letter writing and why it matters to interpretation. The second chapter on Paul’s historical background is not exactly light reading. Harvey meanders through the historical data in an effort to reconstruct a timeline on which to place Paul’s life and mission. This is a task that has occupied the pursuits of biblical scholars for centuries and Harvey ably navigates the difficult terrain. While some will doubtlessly disagree with some of his conclusions, but he is to be commended for the attention to detail he has given.
The chapter on Paul’s theology is more thematic than anything. Harvey makes no attempt to construct the theology of Paul, but rather a method, which he proposes to be antithetical in nature, particularly as it is conveyed through the Adam-Christ paradigm. He then spends a few pages discussing various themes that show up throughout the Pauline corpus. This is a helpful section in that it is concise enough to whet the appetite and (presumably!) prompt further study, yet does not pretend to answer all the questions that arise in such a study.
Chapter four primarily concerns textual issues–text criticism, grammar and syntax, and translation(s). Essentially, this chapter follows the dictum that before we can exegete the text, we must establish the text. As some of you may/may not know, I am not a big fan of doing textual criticism, but I acknowledge its importance and am glad to see Harvey has given it a place of importance in the process of interpretation.
Chapter five delves into other necessary elements to exegesis: historical background, geography, and literary and theological analysis. Here Harvey shows the same skill as with the construction of a Pauline timeline–he ably guides the reader on a necessarily truncated survey of Paul’s world and the events that led to its shape.
The next two chapters put wheels on the work that the previous chapters have helped create. Harvey guides the reader through the process of crafting a sermon based on the hermeneutical process detailed in the preceding pages.
The final chapter is essentially an annotated bibliography, offering readers a snapshot of the numerous tools available for the work of interpretation.
In sum, Harvey has written a very helpful book that will be of benefit to all who read it, though it is aimed at interpreters who have had less formal training.
Αυτω η δοξα