Ridley Hall, Cambridge

Resources: Biblical Studies Bulletin 25

Issue 25: Sept 2002

Special Report

The Tyndale NT Conference

For much of the following material I am grateful to Dr Peter Head, Tyndale Research Fellow, part-time lecturer in New Testament for Cambridge University and a member of the Grove Biblical Group. Most of the language and the facts are his; the opinions and any errors are mine!

About fifty international evangelical New Testament scholars gathered at Tyndale House in Cambridge for the annual NT Study Group conference from July 8^th-10^th. This year we focused on contemporary views of the Gospel of John, and heard nine papers, set within the context of shared meals, and prayers each morning.

Dr Peter Ensor (Presbyterian Theological Seminary in Cameroon) began with a study of the Johannine sayings of Jesus, responding to the denial by the Jesus Seminar and by other modern scholars that Jesus said such things. Acknowledging that the form, vocabulary, and emphases of many of the sayings differ from the Synoptics, Ensor noted that discussions need to be nuanced to take account of different levels of authenticity (from the exact words of Jesus in Aramaic, through translated sayings, to general paraphrasing and re-expressing themes and motifs in new ways); he then discussed Johannine material which represented the different levels, arguing that there was very little in the Johannine sayings material that couldn't be understood as representing the ipsissimae sententiae (i.e., the very opinion, thought, or meaning) of Jesus. The examples Ensor chose to discuss were persuasive, but the debate on this one will of course roll on; John's purpose holds the key.

Professor Richard Bauckham (University of St Andrew's) next made a detailed, sustained case that John's evidence for Jewish Messianic expectation (seen in, e.g., 1.19-21, 25; 6.14; 7.40) is fully consistent with what we know of first century Judaism, (thus suggesting the author's concern to set his story in the past with historical realism [not in allegorical reference to his supposed present concerns]). The three eschatological figures of 1.19-21 probably echo the three roles of king (Messiah), high priest (Elijah) and prophet (the prophet). Other material in John reflects contemporary Palestinian perspectives on the prophet like Moses (including the so-called sign prophets). John's use of messianic designations'the Messiah', 'Son of God', 'king of Israel/the Jews'echoes Jewish thoughts about the origins of the Messiah, the messianic signs, and the Messiah's eternal reign. Typically brilliant, thorough, and valuable.

Tuesday was a busy day with five papers. Revd Dr Mark Stibbe (vicar of St Andrews, Chorleywood), began our day with 'Telling the Father's Story: Narrative Theology in the Fourth Gospel'. Stibbe argued that since Jesus recounts the story of his Father (John 1.18), we must give weight to John's theology proper and not let it be swallowed up in his Christology. He discussed the Johannine characterization of God the Father in terms of Robert Alter's five-level approach to narrative characterization; concluding that John's narrative theology is intrinsically 'father-shaped'. John downplays the legal/judicial side of the Father's character and emphasizes the relational: '...he is a living Father who has reached out in love to his fatherless children through the person of his Son'. Fascinating and full of insights.

Revd Dr Andrew Gregory (Chaplain and Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford) next presented the paper, 'The Third Gospel? The relationship of John and Luke reconsidered'. Gregory introduced recent monographs (by Shellard and Matson) which make 'a surprisingly strong case' that Luke knew John's Gospel. Citing Luke 24.12 // John 20.3-10 as evidence supporting this view, Gregory urged that the debate was ongoing, and outlined a series of consequences for an evangelical approach if John's Gospel were to be written third, rather than fourth. Bold, but unpersuasive to me.

Our third paper before lunch was from Dr Charles E. Hill (Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando, Florida) on The Fourth Gospel in the Second Century: the Myth of Orthodox Johannophobia. In a wide-ranging tour de force Hill critiqued the commonly held view (springing from W Bauer & J N Sanders and represented in a number of recent works), that John's Gospel received its warmest early welcome among the heterodox and that orthodox Christians in the second century shied away from it for that reason (hence 'orthodox Johannophobia' and 'heterodox Johannophilia'). The primary evidence shows that John's Gospel was known and valued throughout the Christian world between 170-200, and that explicit opposition to John is limited to Gaius of Rome and one or two other groups because of controversy about the promise of the Paraclete, not because it was tainted by association with gnosticism. Indeed relatively few Gnostics used John, and those that did often adopted an openly critical and adversarial approach to John. Knowledge of John can be traced among orthodox leaders before 170, such as Melito, Tatian, Justin, Hermas, Aristides and Papias. A devastating, well-written critique.

In the afternoon session the group discussed a previously-distributed paper from Dr. Andreas Köstenberger (Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, NC) who was not able to attend the conference. In 'The Destruction of the Temple and the Composition of the Fourth Gospel' Köstenberger argues that John's gospel is best understood against the backdrop of the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, rather than the common hypothesis of the community members' late first-century expulsion from synagogues with the introduction of the benediction against heretics in Jewish liturgy. When read with the Temple's destruction in mind, a number of features in the Fourth Gospel take on new significance (especially 1.14; 2.14-22; 4.19-24; 7.1-8.59; 10.22-39; 11.48-52). Clear, convincing and insightful.

In the evening, our own Dr Peter Head gave the annual Tyndale NT Lecture, surveying the very earliest NT manuscripts (P52 & P90), the substantial texts from around AD 200 (P66 & P75) and a wide range of third-century manuscripts of John. In his illustrated lecture, Peter reminded us that John's Gospel has the earliest and best attestation among the extant Greek texts of the NT. He concluded that the primary purpose of the mss was the communication of the gospel rather than the preservation of the text, that this intention to communicate has made an impact on the scribal habits and the text itself, that evidence does emerge of the development of an internal Christian scribal movement, and that during this period John was circulating predominantly in single gospel codices. Interesting and typically 'Petrine'.

On Wednesday morning two sessions tackled issues of Johannine theology from a narrative standpoint. Revd Dr Steve Motyer (London Bible College) gave a fine paper entitled 'Narrative Theology in John 1-5'. Motyer critiqued several versions of narrative criticism. Focusing initially on the 'we' passages (1.14, 16; 21.24) and then on the verbs of seeing and knowing, Motyer argued, among other things, that 1.14 reflects the fulfilment of the promise of 1.51, that Jesus' disciples who see his glory (2.11; alluding back to 1.12, 14) ultimately stand behind the witnessing 'we' of the prologue. Steve is a superb teacher.

Finally, in 'Revelation and Discipleship in St. John's Gospel', Dr Gary Burge (of Wheaton College) argued that revelation is the normative mark of discipleship in John's gospel. He explained how the gospel functions as a literary drama, in which participants in the narrative have differing levels of misunderstanding (e.g. Nicodemus) and understanding; chapter 12:37-40 is a key passage and watershed in the gospel. The reader is confronted with the challenge to understand, with John 'mentoring' us through the story. The gospel looks forward to 'the hour' of Christ's glorification when the Paraclete will come and bring clarity and 'hermeneutical relief'. John as narrator speaks from a position of Spirit-inspired knowledge, and holds this out to his readers (14.26; 16.12f). My energy was flagging by this point...

Questions and discussions followed all of the papers, and overflowed into coffee times and meal times. The lively and informed discussions were a highlight of the conference. I hope the papers will ultimately be published (papers from the 1999 Study Group have been published under the heading of Rome in the Bible and the Early Church, edited by Peter Oakes, available from August 2002 from Paternoster). Next year the NT group will meet as part of the Triennial for 30^th June - 3^rd July 2003 with the main theme of 'Covenant(s)'.

Letters to the Editor

Christopher Webb, Renewal Officer for the Church of Wales, writes:

Thanks for the interesting and helpful piece on Bible reading in BSB 23. Here are two other reading approaches I've experienced and found very striking:

Memorised Reading can be direct and arresting. I once heard a reading from Ecclesiastes delivered from memory with no warning or introduction. For a few moments it seemed the preacher was simply giving a talk - a very straight and gloomy one at that - until the penny dropped. The text became a living story rather than a book reading. This method is fabulous with gospel readings.

'Rabbinic Style' Comment (dropping a moment of commentary into the reading), used often, is annoying; used sparingly, it's brilliant. In one reading of the 'walking on water' story, the reader related how Peter said, 'If it is you, Lord, tell me to come out onto the water with you.' Then he looked up from the Bible and simply said, 'And regretted it immediately ...' Everyone laughed - and suddenly the story was ours.

Thanks, Christopher. Obviously the value of the Rabbinic Style depends on the degree of formality in the service; it certainly has a place within sermon delivery.

Comments on Commentaries

An assessment of commentaries and other works on books of the Bible to keep you up to date with what will help in preaching and teaching in the local church.

OT: Joshua

L Hoppe (OT Message; Michael Glazier, 1982) 'tries to explain why the land of promise was lost and why that nation freed by God from slavery in Egypt now faces exile in Babylon.' It is very readable with simple explanations and minimal comment. J Gray (NCB; Eerdmans, 1986) provides some good analysis in the introduction followed by comments on the text. He considers chapters 2-11 to derive from the period of the early monarchy and chapters 13-21 to be due to a Priestly redactor. Like the majority of commentators he considers the hand of the Deuteronomist compiler to be unmistakable, believing that Joshua is of limited value as a historical work. A G Auld (DSB; The Saint Andrew Press, 1984) is concise and readable. This treatment of Joshua, Judges and Ruth also expresses skepticism regarding historicity but is insightful and theologically sensitive. J M Miller & G M Tucker (CBC; CUP, 1974) includes the NEB translation along with criticisms of it. The authors view the purpose of Joshua as to interpret the disaster of the Babylonian exile in terms of the past, the writer justifying God's judgment by pointing to what is understood as a history of sin. They provide a good introduction to literary problems, historical problems and theological issues.

E J Hamlin (Inheriting the Land; ITC; Eerdmans, 1983) suggests understanding the Joshua story as 'a recurrence of the Exodus pattern of salvation in the Promised Land: liberation, covenant bonding, and training'. The Joshua Story is treated as remembered, condensed and structured history. Hamlin is attuned to historical, social and interpretative issues, making good use of his cross-cultural experience in Thailand and Singapore, and producing an interesting read. J Harris (NIBC; Paternoster Press, 2001) takes a canonical-historical approach and is eager to discover what the text tells us about God. He includes a short excursus on Holy War (pp 45f) which is descriptive rather than discursive. Likewise, herem (the complete destruction of life and booty) is stated as a divine ordinance to be obeyed, without any discussion of what that might mean to contemporary readers. The overall emphasis appears to be on decisive leadership, obedience to God, and never underestimating the enemy. There are many thought-provoking comments but insufficient material for sermon preparation.

J A Soggin's volume (OTL; SCM, 1972) with its emphasis on historical and archeological issues has been superseded by R D Nelson (OTL; WJK, 1997) who asserts that Joshua is fundamentally a theological and literary work. This an up-to-date and detailed study of the text with reference both to the versions and to literary analyses. M H Woudstra (NICOT; Eerdmans, 1981) makes it clear that the extermination of the Canaanites by Joshua and the Israelites was at the LORD's behest. 'The sins of the Canaanites demanded an exemplary punishment and such prophecy cannot be explained away as an utterance of reprehensible nationalism.' He reminds us that our God is a 'consuming fire'. Joshua is seen as neither theological propaganda nor an exact scientific description of the sequence of events. This is another very good exegesis of the text. R C Boling & G E Wright (AB; Doubleday, 1982) also provide a thorough treatment of textual, literary, archeological and historical issues. T C Butler (WBC; Word, 1983) is packed full of philological, textual and exegetical information. The canonical form of Joshua is seen to represent the mature reflection of Israel upon her own identity, the final stage of a journey from oral tradition, through the transformation into material for worship, and the compilation of the Deuteronomist.

G Mitchell (Together in the Land: A Reading of the Book of Joshua; JSOTS; Sheffield, 1993) looks at the war narratives. He concentrates on the important themes of the gift of the land and the necessity for obedience. He contrasts the dream of a land free from foreigners with the reality that the foreigners remain, rejecting the traditional solution of layers of redaction and preferring narrative techniques to examine the use and repetition of Hebrew words.

M D Coogan in The New Jerome Bible Commentary (1990, pp 110-131) pays particular attention to literary and archeological issues. He is acutely sensitive to the problems of placing the book within its historical perspective. G McGonville in The Oxford Bible Commentary (OUP, 2001, pp 158-176) provides both a good overview of the book and a good summary of key issues.

In summary, Hoppe is ideal for introducing people to the concept of Deuteronomistic History whereas Harris is probably the best intermediate level commentary with Hamlin providing a thought-provoking read and Nelson or Woudstra being the most informative and accessible for those embarking on detailed exegesis of the text.

Revd Sue Groom
Priest-in-Charge of St Matthew's, Viewsley and author of the forthcoming book, Linguistic Analysis of Biblical Hebrew

Humour, etc

PSALM 23 FOR THE CYBER-AGE (from the Web)

The Lord is my programmer, I shall not crash.
He installed his software on the hard disk of my heart;
all of His commands are user-friendly.
His directory guides me to the right choices for His name's sake.
Even though I scroll through the problems of life,
I will fear no bugs, for He is my backup.
His password protects me.
He prepares a menu before me in the presence of my enemies.
His help is only a keystroke away.
Surely goodness and mercy will follow me all the days of my life,
and my file will be merged with His and saved forever. Amen.

Computer Corner

Bible Study Software Newsletter (http://www.swcp.com/~kfapa/Bible/index.html ) offers online news and reviews of available Bible study software. Most of the information is about what's out there for PCs, but it also features a recent review of Accordance 5.5 for the Apple Mac. In addition, it gives some tips for users of particular programmes, and looks like a good starting point for beginners and for people considering upgrading to something different.

Grove Biblical Series

This month's booklet is The Problem of War in the Old Testament by Philip Jenson, who teaches Old Testament at Trinity, Bristol. A timely study for the anniversary of September 11th, addressing an issue many Christians find problematic.