Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey by Craig Blomberg

This is a useful resource for the pastor or lay reader.  While expansive in its breadth, it is suggestive in its depth.  Blomberg does not (or better, could not have in a single volume) delve deeply into any of the topics covered in "Jesus and the Gospels", but his bibliographies at the end of each chapter and the excellent footnotes give the curious reader a very firm direction to head in for further study.

The book is divided into five parts.  The first two are largely historical in nature covering the world of the first century (political, social, and religious climate), and the historical/critical approach to the Gospels themselves.  Part three is an overview of each of the Gospels highlighting their themes and structure.  Part four reads like a cross between the notes one would find in a study Bible and popular level commentary, but arranged more or less chronologically across all the Gospels (almost like a commentary on the Diatessaron?).  This is an excellent section, to be sure, and he well highlights (or reminds the reader) of the distinct approach of each Gospel writer.  The book concludes with two shorter chapters addressing the historical reliability of the Gospels and the Theology of Jesus.

This is really an excellent book, and I'm sure I will be pulling it off of my shelf as a reference tool.  Perhaps only the serious student or most voracious of lay leaders will plow through it cover to cover, but it is a great starting place for almost any topic related to the Gospels.  Again, the bibliography and foot notes give solid direction for further study from a wide range of scholars in the field.  All of the information in the book can be found in other places, but Blomberg has done anyone interested in Jesus, Christian or not, a great service by pulling it all together into a coherent, (relatively) concise (it is a 500 page book), readable volume.  For anyone interested in the study of Jesus, I say "tolle lege."

"Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere."

"Woman" in Luke 13.12 and God's Long Nose

This morning as I was eating breakfast, I read an article about the use of "woman" in Luke 13:12: "When Jesus saw her, he called her over and said to her, 'Woman, you are freed from your disability.'" The article was written in response to a blog post by Bill Mounce (author of Basics of Biblical Greek) who claimed that "woman" was essentially untranslatable into English in this case.  The response claimed that it should just be translated "literally" and the reader should be left to her own means (study Bibles, commentaries, sermons, etc.) to determine the meaning of γύναι (gunai) in its original context.  While "woman" as a vocative in English seems, at best, an unkind form of address today, is it so far culturally removed that translating it as such does more harm than good?


This discussion, I'm sure, may make some nervous.  If it says "woman" why not translate it "woman?"  To do otherwise would seem to conceal what the Bible actually says.  But that is not how translation works.  Take, for example, Exodus 34:6.  Here are a few translations:


NIV: And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness


ESV: The LORD passed before him and proclaimed, “The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness,


NASB: Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, "The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth;


KJV: And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,


NET: The LORD passed by before him and proclaimed: "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, and abounding in loyal love and faithfulness,


I doubt that anyone would claim that these translations are being unfaithful by translating the highlighted phrase as "slow to anger" or "longsuffering," but that is not what the Hebrew says.  In Hebrew we learn that God has a long nose.  Translated in a woodenly literal fashion, these versions would say that God is "long of nose."  In Hebrew, one is angry when they are "red of face," so if one has a long nose it takes a long time for that redness to travel to ones face.  Thus, it is used to indicate that one is patient. 

I don't think that we have been done a disservice when the translators have taken this Hebrew idiom and translated it in a way that we can easily understand on a surface reading.  Of course, it could be left as is and we could see the footnotes, study Bibles, commentaries or so forth, but the above translations are actually more faithful as they translate the meaning, not the words, of this phrase.  To do otherwise would make this famous and important passage unintelligible for the English reader.


There are many similar examples.  One of my personal favorites is the storm in the book of Jonah which was "walking and storming" (Jon 1.11, 13- most translations render it as "growing worse" or other similar phrases).  The question that Mounce asks, then, is not a worrisome or strange question.  He simply asks if translating  γύναι (gunai) as "woman" places unnecessary barriers to understanding in our culture.  If translators are not asking these questions, it would be cause for concern.


I'm not convinced that Mounce is correct, and I'm not sure leaving it untranslated or translating it as "friend" is helpful (Mounce says as much himself).  Nor is this passage and the possible misunderstanding as critical as that in Exodus 34.6.  What it does show, though, is that pastors and vocational students of the Bible should be making an effort to study and use the original languages.  If we don't change the way we render "woman" our pastors must be able to answer the questions that arise from it's use.  Secondly, it should also give us some appreciation for the difficult task of translating.  We must appreciate that it is neither straightforward nor easy.  It's not an exact science in which each word has a precise corollary in the target language.  Our translators are not just translating from one language to another, but from one culture to another as well.  This takes outstanding sensitivity, care, and erudition.  Praise God for the many faithful students of His Word who have the skill and ability to make the Bible accessible in many different languages.

"Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere."

Reading the Old Testament: Method In Biblical Study by John Barton

This book is a useful and beneficial read, but for a relatively specialized audience. I would not recommend this book to anyone who does not have a solid background in hermeneutics. I certainly would not recommend it for a lay reader. It will make little sense without some background in Biblical interpretation. Taken straight and without a context, it will prove ponderous at best, and damaging to one's faith at worst. Without a background in some of the issues and history, it can feel as if reading the Bible to gain any insight is a hopeless pursuit.

I would definitely recommend it for the seminary student who is looking for a solid introduction to the various methods of Biblical, and specifically, Old Testament, criticism. The book is, to be generous, uninterested in what we might call a conservative hermeneutic. While Barton does not land on a specific method and seeks to demonstrate the options, a conservative view of, say, Mosaic authorship is, for Barton, not possible. Where Barton is helpful is in taking us through the development of various methods of reading the Bible. For each, he suggests some background reading on the subject. After a discussion of each method, he applies these methods to a specific text (Ecclesiastes) to show how each works in practice. The methods he works with include Form, Redaction, Canonical, Structuralists, "New," and Reader Response Criticism.

What, you may ask, is the benefit for the conservative pastor or seminary student to be gained from reading a book that is somewhat antagonistic to the way we read the Scriptures while being agnostic on the rest? First, it helps one to see how the various methods of reading the Scripture developed. Secondly, it helps prevent a straw-man view of the various approaches. Given the presuppositions and what each movement is reacting against, one can see why and how they developed. Third, it makes one think about how the various methods can be appropriated in positive ways while rejecting the negative outcomes. This, of course, will take some serious engagement and thought, but if conservative Christians are to have a voice in the Scholarly world of Biblical Studies (which, I submit, we must), it is incumbent on us to understand the discussion and the methods applied to the Bible. This is hard work, and there will be much temptation to compromise, but we must be involved in these discussions, even if our voice largely falls on deaf ears. Fourth, it helps in engaging commentaries from a wide variety of perspectives. One could, of course, only read conservative commentaries, but there are excellent exegetes and linguists outside of Evangelical realm. This book gives one categories with which to engage such works and better helps the Evangelical pastor or student sift through the chaff to find the wheat. Finally, knowing the ways of reading the Bible that are current in scholarship will help us to engage those in our congregations who come from outside of Evangelicalism, and our children who engage these issues in university settings.

For some, Barton's book will be frustrating, but if the purpose of the book is kept in mind, I think it will prove beneficial. This is not meant to propose a method of biblical study, but to provide a survey of current opinion. For the student or pastor familiar with the issues and who would like to get a feel for the development, method, and application of the various approaches, Barton's book will prove beneficial and helpful.

Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere.

Tolle Lege

At the outset I want to be quite clear.  This blog post is not intended to be normative.  This is not a prescription  nor is it some sort of magical key to one's devotional life.  My intention is to relate my own experience in the hopes that those who have personality similar to mine might benefit.

 There are many excellent Bible reading plans available to the Christian.  If one were to read 3 chapters of the Bible each day, and 5 on Sundays, one could read through the entire Bible in a year.  Most Bible reading plans are meant to accomplish this goal.  Many are designed to allow the reader to read through the Psalms, Proverbs, and Gospel's twice, and the rest of the Scriptures once.  One of the better plans is the reading plan by Robert Murray McCheyne which has you read through various types and genres of Scripture simultaneously.

These sorts of reading plans work for many people, and many people derive great benefit from them.  I, however, am not one of them.  For me, these plans make the goal of reading through the Bible more important than reading the Bible.  When I follow one of these plans, I tend to read to finish the section, rather than for understanding.  I recognize that the problem is not with the plans themselves, but with me.  However, I also think that the way I read does not lend itself well to using these methods.  Put simply, it is too fast for me to dig into the text, and too slow for me to synthesize my reading.  Recently, I've found a method that works much better for me, and which has made Bible reading a joy.

Get the Big Picture:
I stumbled across this quite by accident.  For class here at Covenant Seminary (which has a fancy new website) we are required to read the Bible (a more obvious sentence may never have been written!).  Due to the pace of the schedule, this often requires reading large sections of the Bible in one sitting.  Recently, I read Genesis over the course of two days, and Matthew's Gospel in one.  Last semester, I read the majority of Paul's letters in a few days.  I learned two things from this:

1.  "Books" in the Bible are much shorter than we think them to be.  When I opened Genesis in the past I would see the "book" as containing 50 "chapters."  Just the terminology that we use caused me to think of Bible reading as a daunting task.  The 66 books of the Bible are described with terminology similar to a novel.  It gives the perception that they are longer than they really are.  Likewise, "chapter" sounds similar to what you would find inside of a book that you would pick up at Barnes and Noble (...or download on your eReader).   I recognize that this sounds obvious, but reading a "book" or three "chapters" sounds like a difficult task.  In reality, though, reading a whole book of the Bible is not unlike reading a chapter in a "normal" book.  Matthew was, I think, about 35 pages.  Not insurmountable in a single sitting by any means, and it is a fairly "long" book, especially by New Testament standards.

2.  When reading a whole book of the Bible in one or two sittings, you see things that you would have otherwise missed.  At the end of Matthew, the authority and magnificence of Christ are poignant having read the Gospel from start to finish.  One finishes the book and cannot help but to worship, such is the rhetorical force of the book read cover to cover.  This is something that I did not "get" when reading a few chapters a day.

I should mention that I do not read a book of the Bible every day or even every week.  I might do something like this every other week or so.  In the intervening time I think about the book that I read, and reflect on the major themes that it put forth.

Dig Deep:
This likely looks quite different for me than it might for other people.  This daily aspect of my devotional reading was also discovered by accident.  After I finished Greek in exegesis last year, I purchased a Reader's Bible and decided to try to read from it everyday.  Recently, having just finished Hebrew II, I read a Hebrew's reader Bible as well.  Basically, I choose a book (John in the NT and passages from Numbers in the OT), and I read anywhere from a few verses to paragraph (depending on how complicated the section or vocabulary is).  While my "big picture  reading helps me grasp the flow and argument of the book, this allows me to dig deeply into the text and notice minutia that I too easily skip when reading more quickly in English.

As an example, the other night I was reading in Numbers.  I was reading about Caleb encouraging Israel to enter the land despite the presence of mighty people occupying the land because God had promised it to them. The very next verse says that the Israelites picked up stones to stone him. Surely I read that wrong, I thought. But no, that's what it said. When I read that passage in English I read so quickly that I blow right by the enormity of the situation. "Yeah I know," I think, "they don't go into the land." But slowing down and reading the Hebrew, it struck me in a new way. The slavery, the plagues, the Red Sea, the promise to Abraham... The goal is right there, and when Caleb says as much, they pick up stones to stone him.  Wow.

Now, many of you who read this might not be able to read the original languages, but that does not mean you can't intentionally slow down and focus on a few verses.  A good book or two on hermeneutics (how to read) might not be a bad investment of your time.  Learning to read the Bible well is not a skill that we are born with, it is something that we learn.

As I said at the outset, there is no "right" way to read the Bible, but we must read it.  We must be a people of the Book who hear the voice of God and allow it shape, change, and mold us.  I have found a method which allows my Bible reading to be refreshing and exciting, but it might not work for you.  That is okay, but you must, as was famously said to Augustine, "Take up an read." Tolle lege.

"Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere."

How a Book Ends Up on My Shelf

While my sister was here at Christmas she mentioned that she told a friend of hers at work about how I catalog and manage my books.  Her friend, a librarian, thought it was a pretty cool.  I thought I'd write a pictorial blog about how I go about cataloging and arranging my books, as it could potentially be a help for those with moderate to large libraries (mine is about 900 volumes).  (n.b. I realize that the "screenshots" are pretty poor.  I took them with my cellphone instead of doing a real screenshot and re-sizing it, mostly due to ignorance).

Step 1:

Step 1, for me, is to use the immensely cool book seal that my good friend bought me as a groomsman's gift.  You may skip this step, but your books will be much less cool than mine are.


Step 2:

This is a wonderful app for managing one's library with a program called Zotero (zotero.org). it is a free program, and this app saves, quite literally, hours.  I didn't start cataloging my library until it was already pretty big, so the initial set up took awhile (it was a summer project), but this app made the process very easy.  Basically, for $1.99, you get a tool that scans the bar code on your book, searches Worldcat or Google books and fetches the information then sends it to your Zotero database.  Really a must have.


 Step 3:

This is a look at my Zotero home page.  The column on the left is your "libraries."  You can place books (as well as articles, websites, pictures, etc.) in different categories.  Items can be in more than one category as well.  The center column is sortable by title, author, type, call number, etc.  The column on the left will display information about the selected book.  You can add "notes" and "tags" to each book (more on that in a second).  One of the really neat features of Zotero is its bibliography creator.  Basically, select your book you want to cite, and it will export the info into the desired format (Turabian, MLA, APA, etc.)


Step 4:

Once a book is scanned and sent to Zotero, it goes in the "unfiled items" section.  Once it is there, I go to loc.gov (the Library of Congress website), copy the ISBN, and search for the book in the LOC catalog.  There are two pieces of information that I grab from LOC (or worldcat, if LOC doesn't have an entry).  The first is the call number, found on the "Brief Record" page seen above.  LOC call numbers are extremely handy because professional librarians have already thought through where to put a book on your shelf.  My shelves are well organized with similar books in close proximity to others because of the LOC call numbers.  Before deciding to do this, I had rearranged my shelves twice because I didn't like the order they were in.  Now, I don't even have to think about it.

Step 5:

The other tab that I look at on the LOC website is the "subjects" tab.  From here I add the LOC subjects as tags in Zotero.  Zotero has a good search feature, and the LOC tags let me quickly see books from similar categories (say, for instance,  "Theology, Doctrinal").  Selecting that tag will bring up all the books in that category.  Pretty nifty.  You can, of course,search for title, author, ISBN and other things as well.  Tags can be used for things other than LOC subjects.  I tag books that are gifts and add another tag with the name of the person who gave it to me.  You can tag books for certain classes or semesters, or books that are on your "to read" list.  I also use tags to keep track of the books which I lend out.  If I lend a book I add the tag "checked out."  Next, I add a "note" with the name of the person I lent it to.  A very handy thing for me.  Once I get the book back, I just delete the note and tag.


Step 6:

After all of the data is in Zotero, it's time to actually tag the book with its LOC call number.  I use mailing address labels cut into thirds.  For cloth bound books, packing tape may be necessary to keep the tag from falling of.  That was honestly a tough decision to come to, as I like to keep my books "clean."  But, books are to be read and used, and I have no qualms with outlining or note taking in a book, so why would I have a problem with making it easy to find?  This may be the single most time consuming part of the whole process at the outset.  As I was getting starting, I would put on a movie or podcast and get down to it.  Now, I just do it for each new book, and it takes very little time.


Step 7:

Once the call number is attached to the book, it's ready to go up on the shelf.  This book, which is for a class I'm taking in the Spring semester, is labeled BR.  B is the general category for religion and philosophy, BR is "Christianity," and 115 is "Christianity in relation to special subjects."  You don't have to know all of that, of course, and when you see the book on the shelves it makes good sense.

Step 8:

The only thing left to do is put the book up on the shelf.  Back in November, we moved across town.  Taking the time during the summer to label my books was a huge blessing.  I was able to pack them in order and know exactly where they went when we got to the new house.  My "office" is quite a bit smaller than our previous house (where I basically had the entire basement), so quite a few book stayed boxed up.  This system is great for that as well, though, because on the outside side of each box I wrote the call number range (say D805-E302.6).  Now, if I need a book from that section, I just look up the call number, head to the storage room, and I know just which box to look in.



So that's it.  It really has been a great system.  It takes seconds to find a book I'm looking for, and it helps me to stay organized.  I know exactly which books I have, I can easily keep track of books I've lent to others, I can create quick bibliographies, and it saved a lot of time unpacking from our move.  I'm sure other ways to set up a library, and I'd love to hear them in the comments below.

The Message of Acts in the History of Redemption by Dennis E. Johnson

This was my favorite book that I read for class in the Fall semester this year (2012).  If you are teaching or preaching on Acts, stop reading and go buy it now.  It really is worth having, and at 250 pages, it won't take you too long to read.  If that wasn't convincing...

Dennis Johnson's The Message of Acts in the History of Redemption is a bit tough to pigeon hole.  It's not really a commentary, though it is quite valuable exegetically.  Nor is it an introduction, as it goes deeper into the text than such a book would.  I think it is best to view it as a theology of Acts.  It looks at the major themes and traces those through the book by means of detailed and learned exegesis.  In short, it is an excellent work.  It is relatively short, and not an ounce of ink was wasted in its production.  Every page contains insightful and valuable observations.  

It is in the pastor or seminary student's hand that this will be most beneficial.  There is a fair amount of discussion of the original language (though, annoyingly, without accents in Greek or pointing in Hebrew).  The (must read) end-notes are a cornucopia of historical, grammatical, and referential information.  Johnson uses the Septuagint extensively, placing Acts firmly in "the History of Redemption."  The amount and profundity of Luke's Old Testament references was something I gleaned from reading this book.   His applications and pastoral challenges are insightful and clearly derived from the text.  His hermeneutic is also instructive.  It is easy to over or under apply Acts, and the nature of the apostolic calling makes application to today tricky.  Johnson navigates these waters well, and is lucid as he discusses issues of interpretation and application.  Given the books length, he does not interact too extensively with scholarly opinion as a commentary would, but this serves the pastor well.  You need not wade through this text to find the meat, because all of the fat has been trimmed.

I am less inclined to recommend this book outright for the lay person.  Each chapter is framed with probing application questions and contextualization that will prove helpful in thinking through Acts, and Johnson's discussion of how Acts relates to the present day is one of the valuable contributions of this work.  However, the fine detail and work in the original languages makes this less likely to be a home run as an introductory work, even if much of this detail is buried in the end-notes   Each chapter is well organized, though, and will benefit all readers in some way.  If you know Acts well and are looking to dig deeper, this is a good book, but it is not a good introduction.  Let me put it this way, I would not use this as a book to read together in a Bible study on Acts, but I would not go without it as a reference if I were teaching such a Bible study.

There are a few drawbacks to this work.  While there is an extensive Scripture index, I do wish a subject index would have been included (but that is something every book of this sort needs).  The editorial decision regarding the original language font (see above) is truly regrettable, and will likely cause some to take this work less seriously than they should.  It feels to me as though the book was written to a seminary level, then edited to be accessible to a wider audience by placing much of the detail work in the end-notes.  The chapters also feel a bit disconnected from each other.  It reads like 13 essays on different aspects of Acts.  By the end, you gain a full understanding of Luke's second letter to Theophilus, but the major themes (or "bridges" as he refers to them) of promise leading to fulfillment, Jew and Gentile relations, and the Apostolic events and our day are mentioned in the in preface, but don't form the organizing structure of the book. Indeed, he begins with the last and these themes are often mixed together within the chapters themselves.  A clearer meta-structure would be appreciated.  Finally, the cover is hideous.

Those drawbacks, though, do not detract from the benefit one will gain in reading this book.  Acts is not just a history lesson of how the Gospel expanded after Jesus left town.  It is a theologically deep explanation of the place of the Church in "the History of Redemption."  At under $15, Johnson's book is well worth a purchase.

"Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere."

Taking the Bait

I know that Ann Coulter is just out to get attention.  I also know that writing about her plays into her scheme to get attention.  I can relate to that.  My own public disappointment with her comments about those among us with Down Syndrome was equally narcissistic (I wouldn't want anyone to think that I thought so lowly of others, or that I could be so intensive, even though I do both of those things).  What initially upset me was that her comments hit a bit too close to home (I have a son with a neurological disorder), but I wonder if I was too quick to make sure everyone knew what she did wrong without first thinking of how I do the exact same thing.  What she said was terrible.  I know that any reasonable person will see her comments for what they are: rude, insensitive, cruel, and, let's be honest, evil.  But in looking back, I wonder if my attitude towards her wasn't the exact thing as her attitude towards those among us with special needs?

A Special Olympics athlete wrote an excellent open letter to Ann Coulter.  It is worth your time to read it.  Hopefully, through responses like John's, the struggles and the value of the special needs community will gain a deserved moment in the national spotlight.  God can and does use that which was intended for evil for good. John has said it well enough, so I'll add no more criticism.

What I really wonder, though, is how I can be so ungracious in telling others that they need to demonstrate more grace.  I'm not saying that what she said doesn't matter.  What she did and said was wrong on several levels (belittling the special needs community, speaking poorly of the President who is, as Paul says, God's servant [διακονς]).  But my reaction to her was just as rude and unloving as her attitude towards both our President and the special needs community.

In 1 Corinthians 5:10ff Paul tells the the church that when he said not to associate with sinners (specifically, with sexually immoral people) in his previous letter he did not mean the sinners "of this world...since then you would need to go out of the world...For what have I to do with judging outsiders?  Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?  God judges those outside."  It seems that in responding to Ann Coulter that I, like the Corinthians, forgot the Gospel.

What if my first thought would have been, "there's a person who needs Jesus" instead of "what a terrible person!"  What if my first reaction would have been to pray for her, instead of posting about how terrible she is.  What if I would have realized that I need God's grace every bit as much as she does.  I've been a Christian for a long time, and I have proven once again that I still forget the Gospel.  

Ann Coulter is a sinner, but guess what, I am too.  Praise God that He is gracious to sinners.  Praise God for taking my sins of arrogance, judgmentalism,  hostility and all the rest upon Himself out of shear, unbounded, eternal love.  I pray that I remember that next time I see someone else acting just like me.

"Cor meum tibi offero, Domine, prompte et sincere."