Review of Dean Deppe's All Roads Lead to the Text: Eight Methods of Inquiry into the Bible

Dean B. Deppe. AllRoads Lead to the Text: Eight Methods of Inquiry into the Bible. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011. Pp. xvi + 411. ISBN 978-0-8028-6594-6. $25.00 paper. 

 

Dean Deppe, professor of NT at Calvin Theological Seminary, contends that the eight different routes proposed in this book will lead to the same place, “a clearer and more profitable understanding of the meaning of the biblical text” (p xii). While he provides the reader with a full complement of examples for the way this might happen (especially with the use of Logos Bible Software), one is sometimes left wanting further justification for some of his conclusions, which follow a “conservative Reformed perspective” (p. 247).

Chapter one wrestles with issues associated with passage delimitations, genre, and literary techniques that influence textual meaning (e.g., chiasm and inclusio). Chapter two provides guidelines and instructions for using tools from Logos that allow the interpreter to analyze words, phrases, and clauses.  Deppe also looks into the importance of sentence structure and word order when recognizing emphasis. He concludes by pointing out the importance of comparing translations of the biblical text. Chapter three offers a discussion of structural analysis. He begins by focusing on entire biblical books and then moves to their constituent paragraphs, and then finally to the clausal level. The centrality of discourse analysis, as practiced by Steven Runge, is evident here.

Chapter four focuses on the literary context. Deppe argues that the material that comes before and after the passage under study is crucial. The force of this claim is supported with examples in which biblical writers put similar content in different literary contexts. He concludes that redaction criticism may be a more helpful interpretive strategy than simple harmonization. Chapter five surveys the field of historical and cultural background. Deppe suggests that interpreters should draw on the findings from the material culture. He recognizes the centrality of the OT for understanding the NT, and he provides a discussion of intertextuality. Finally, he discusses the need to come to reasoned conclusions concerning issues of authorship, date, provenance, and addressees.

Chapter six argues for reading current commentators as well as listening to interpreters from Church history. The primary reason for studying the history of interpretation is to become aware of interpretative options that were not considered in the original engagement with the text. Chapter seven discusses theological exegesis, an approach that brings to the fore theological themes and concepts. Deppe begins with examples of the way theological presuppositions may overly influence one’s interpretation. Because of this, he argues for the interrogation of one’s presuppositions in order to reduce the likelihood of textual prejudgment. He suggests that readers make their theological assumptions explicit and reflect on their cultural and psychological profile. This chapter concludes with a discussion of biblical theology and a call to organize the canonical meaning along the lines of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation.

Chapter eight introduces spiritual exegesis and opens with a survey of precritical, critical, and postmodern exegetical assumptions. This gives rise to an argument for the insufficiency of the historical-critical approach. Before offering several skills needed when doing spiritual exegesis, Deppe addresses several dangers likely to occur when practicing it. He concludes the chapter with the way his eight routes work when interpreting Mark 6:45-51. Deppe has written a useful guide to biblical exegesis and those looking for ways to integrate Logos Bible Software into their biblical language research will benefit from the step-by-step instructions he provides, while others will find his numerous biblical examples thought-provoking.

Review of Larry L. Welborn's An End to Enmity: Paul and the 'Wrongdoer' of Second Corinthians

Welborn, L. L. An End to Enmity: Paul and the‘Wrongdoer’ of Second Corinthians. (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche Band 185) Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011. xxviii + 570 pp. £129.95 (hardback), ISBN 978-3-11-026327-5.

 

Larry L. Welborn, Professor of New Testament and Early Christian Literature at Fordham University in New York, explores Paul’s Corinthian correspondence in its Greco-Roman context and uncovers the identity of the shadowy figure known as the wrongdoer. This fascinating monograph brings together key aspects of Welborn’s approach to Paul that draws on ancient politics, friendship discourse, and the material remains of Roman Corinth. With these, he provides a social and rhetorical analysis of the Corinthian correspondence that brings to the fore the relational dynamics between Paul and the Corinthians in a densely argued tour de force.

The preface starts out with a survey of the textual features that led New Testament scholars to hold to some form of partition theory for 2 Corinthians (and to a lesser degree 1 Corinthians). It then goes on to cover the compositional history of Paul’s Corinthian correspondence. After a brief chapter that introduces the key aspects of the book, chapter 2 provides a history of scholarship with regard to the identity of the wrongdoer mentioned in 2 Cor 2:5 and 7:12. Welborn rejects the hypothesis that it is the same person as the immoral brother mentioned in 1 Cor 5. He does, however, provide a profile of this individual that also summarizes the findings of scholars who have likewise argued against the connection with 1 Cor 5: ‘The wrongdoer was a member of the Corinthian church; he was influenced by Jewish-Christian opponents of Paul; his offence took place on the occasion of Paul’s second visit to Corinth; the wrong was an injury in which money was somehow involved; the context of the injurious action was the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem; the Corinthians were somehow complicit in the wrong done to Paul’ (22). This profile is still not sufficiently determined, so Welborn proceeds. Recognizing that a control is needed to provide parameters for determining more closely and concretely the wrongdoers’ identity, Welborn suggests that the following have been missing in previous attempts to answer this question: first, ‘the social and rhetorical conventions in which Paul and the Corinthians participated, and by which their relationships were governed’; and second, key textual data possibly overlooked from 2 Corinthians (22).

Chapter 3 provides an exegetical basis for Welborn’s understanding. He demonstrates the nature of the offence, i.e. Paul has been publically accused of embezzlement in relation to the collection for the saints in Jerusalem. He elucidates the identity of the wrongdoer: He was an individual of high status and significant social distance from Paul, though possibly a former friend, dignified, committed to reason, appreciative of aristocratic values and of cultured tastes. Third, in regard to the wrongdoer’s relationship to Paul and others within the Corinthian congregation, he was a Christ-follower who had a deep sense of belonging to Christ. He was one whose Christological understanding differed from Paul’s but aligned closely with expressions of Hellenistic Judaism (Psalms of Solomon 17-18; 2 Cor 10:7). He had strong theological convictions and was likely responsible for the comparison of Paul with his rivals. He made these comparisons, however, not for invidious reasons but out of a sincere desire to understand the differences in theological orientation. He likely functioned as a/the patron for the Corinthian congregation and had an overbearing influence within the broader group. He was able to articulate his theological convictions clearly, and his powers of persuasion likely contributed to the Corinthians’ complicity in the communal problems described in these letters.

In chapter 4, Welborn builds on Marshall’s (1987) work recognizing that, in the undisputed Paulines, Paul never names his enemies. The example of Augustus’ Res Gestae is mentioned as an instance of the social convention in which enemies remained unnamed. Welborn extends this by drawing on literary parallels that are closer in terms of genre to Paul’s letters (Cicero and Dio Chrysostom). He furthers Marshall’s work by addressing the convention, especially in conciliatory letters, of not naming one’s friends. The reason? Today’s friends may be tomorrow’s enemies (219). At this point, Welborn foreshadows what is to come—the wrongdoer was previously Paul’s friend. In a search for this person’s identity, Welborn limits his focus to nine individuals who are named in 1 Corinthians and Romans. Several are quickly set aside, with four receiving significant attention: Crispus, Gaius, Stephanas, and Erastus. Stephanas is precluded based on his secondary social status, and Erastus is dismissed since he is likely a recent convert. Crispus and Gaius are both possible candidates, but one emerges as slightly more plausible based on the social convention of hospitality that governed the successful conclusion of reconciliation. Welborn sees Paul following this social ritual in Rom 16:23, where he sends greetings from ‘Gaius, my host, and the host of the whole church’. Thus, Gaius is to be identified as the wrongdoer in 2 Corinthians.

Chapter 5 sets out to create a social profile of Gaius’ personality. This is based on prosopographic data and a close reading of 1 Cor 1:14; Rom 16:23; 2 Cor 10-13; 1:1-2:13; and 7:5-16. Welborn draws on the resources of onomastics, epigraphy, and the archaeology of Roman Corinth to round out the picture of Gaius, his role within the Christ-movement, and his relationship to Crispus and Erastus. After discussing Paul’s onomastics and setting aside the idea that Gaius is to be associated with Titus Justus, Welborn, while not claiming that the epigraphic and numismatic data from Roman Corinth relates directly to the Gaius who hosted the ekklesia in Corinth, draws on this material to uncover the social profile of a mid-first century person with this praenomen. He provides extensive excursuses on Corinthian persons and houses that provide key and often difficult to locate information on the archaeology of Corinth. After setting aside numerous Gaii, he surveys four that can be plausibly situated in the mid-first century: Gaius Julius Syrus, Gaius Novius Felix, Gaius Julius Polyaenus, and most importantly Gaius Julius Spartiaticus who provides an intriguing image of the kind of person Paul’s Gaius might have been. Next, Welborn sets out to uncover a domestic structure large enough to include the approximately 100 people he thinks were part of the Christ-movement in Corinth. He acknowledges that the villa at Anaploga would not have been large enough to include the group, but he does point to the Casa del Menandro in Pompeii as an example of a domus that would have been more than spacious enough for this purpose. Not content with “archaeology-hindered interpretation” (334), Welborn provides an intriguing survey of Corinthian houses: the one adjacent to Temple E, the mosaic house, the Anaploga villa, the Shear villa, and the house of the Opus Sectile Panel. This final example is the house that Welborn suggests for the type of domus, located in the kind of neighborhood, in which someone like Gaius could plausibly host ‘the whole ekklesia’ (355). This also provides a more concrete context for Welborn’s reconstruction of the problems associated with the Lord’s supper, including differing expectations of patronage. The chapter concludes with a summary of Gaius’ portrait and a brief discussion of the relationships between Gaius, Crispus, and Erastus (who was likely Gaius’ client). Gaius is described as a former God-fearer, and this accounts for his relationship with Crispus. Importantly for Welborn’s argument, these two were also likely responsible for the Apollos faction (371-72).

Gaius of Corinth was a man worthy of Paul’s friendship (in the ancient sense of the word); he was also one capable of enmity, but open to reconciliation. That is Welborn’s argument in chapter 6, which provides a retelling of the asymmetrical relationship between Paul and the wrongdoer. Paul, however, did not leave the accepted Roman practice of friendship untouched; he sought to transform it from within, and his interaction with the wrongdoer reveals the various ways he accomplished that (391). Welborn’s expansive reconstruction of the friendship between Paul and Gaius builds on the canonical narrative, supported by the archaeological, numismatic, exegetical, and literary-critical findings of the earlier parts of this monograph and summarized here in a single account. Welborn details the three ways in which Paul sought to transform the paradigm of Greco-Roman friendship: (1) He took the initiative in reconciliation, even though he was the one injured (449). (2) By writing a therapeutic letter (2 Cor 1:1-2:13; 7:5-16) he sought to rearrange the power structures and social relations (466). (3) He insisted on extending forgiveness to the wrongdoer (476). Welborn concludes his story by pointing out that in the winter of 56 Paul arrived at the house of Gaius (Rom 16:23) and publically reconciled with his formerly alienated friend. There in his residence he penned Romans: ‘Paul’s reconciliation with the wrongdoer Gaius created the psychological conditions for the last and most productive period in Paul’s life as an apostle of Christ’ (481). With that, the story of Paul and the wrongdoer comes to a close with an end to their enmity.

A few brief critiques are in order. The primary weaknesses in Welborn’s argument, ones of which he is well aware, include: (1) The identification of 2 Corinthians 10-13 as the ‘letter of tears’ mentioned in 2 Cor 2:3-4—if one rejects this identification, then much of Welborn’s exegesis is weakened. (2) The heavy reliance on the presence of singular pronouns and third-person singular verbs in 2 Corinthians 10-13 as a way to argue for an individual wrongdoer—this can also be construed as a general reference to a group of wrongdoers. Cranfield (1982) warned about basing crucial exegetical decisions on these since Paul is rather inconsistent in his use of person and number. (3) The complex partition theory developed by Welborn in support of his reconstruction and rhetorical exigency—though densely argued and quite plausible, if rejected, it casts doubts over his broader argument. However, he is right to point out that those who wish to counter his claim are obliged to put forth their own accounting of the literary history of 2 Corinthians and Paul’s relationship with the Corinthians (xxvii). This landmark monograph in 2 Corinthians scholarship deserves in-depth engagement and will not likely soon be surpassed as a resource for the social history of Corinth. It is an important contribution to Pauline scholarship and provides a thorough accounting for the identity of the wrongdoer along with the complex, difficult, and strained relationship that is evident between Paul and the Corinthians.

 

References:

 

Cranfield, C. E. B. 1982. “Changes of Person and Number in Paul’s Epistles.” In Paul and Paulinism: Essays in Honour of C. K. Barrett, edited by M. D. Hooker and S. G. Wilson, 280-89. London: SPCK.

Marshall, P. 1987. Enmity in Corinth: Social Conventions in Paul's Relations with the Corinthians. WUNT, 23. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.

 

 

News Story for Honorary Research Fellowship

Here is a link to a news story that was recently published describing my appointment as an Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Wales Trinity Saint David.

RBL review of Remain in Your Calling

H. H. Drake Williams III has just published a review of my book, Remain in Your Calling. You can read it on the RBL website here.

Review of Jack Barentsen's Emerging Leadership in the Pauline Mission

Emerging Leadership in the Pauline Mission: A SocialIdentity Perspective on Local Leadership Development in Corinth and Ephesus. By Jack Barentsen. Princeton Theological Monograph Series 168. Eugene, Or: Pickwick, 2011, xviii + 378 pp., $44.00 paper. 

 

Jack Barentsen, Assistant Professor of Practical Theology and New Testament at Evangelische Theologische Faculteit in Leuven, Belgium, concludes that “Paul instituted uniform patterns of leadership for those levels of leadership, which sustained the consistent communication of Paul’s gospel in each community in alignment with other churches in the Pauline network” (p. 15). In this revised Ph.D. dissertation, researched under Martin Weber at ETF-Leuven, Barentsen studies 1-2 Corinthians, Ephesians, and 1-2 Timothy through the lens of social identity theory and discerns patterns of leadership in Paul’s mission among those in Corinth and Ephesus.
 

Chapter 1 covers key definitions, surveys the plan of the book, and provides an explanatory rationale for his choice of texts and the social identity model of leadership. Barentsen’s research question serves as a helpful introduction: “what were the leadership patterns in these early Christ-following communities, and how did the communities as well as Paul influence the development of these patterns?” (p. 6). Chapter 2 provides a history of research on early church leadership. Barentsen rightly notes that denominational commitment heavily influenced these studies. The Holtzmann-Sohm hypothesis represented the consensus until the middle of the 20^th century, when Post-Weberian social scientific studies, disconnected from denominational ties, brought more diversity into the discussion (p. 20). However, this new approach simply replaced denomination ideology with sociological models. Thus, more integrative work still needed to be done. Barentsen situates his study at the intersection of the denominational approaches that were driven by prior institutional commitments and the social approaches with their focus on group dynamics evident in the Mediterranean cultural context. In many ways, Barentsen’s work builds on and seeks to further the work of Andrew Clarke by integrating rather than juxtaposing the social and ideological components of leadership. He also brings further refinement to the model-based approach to social identity theory evident in the work of Philip Esler.
 

Chapter 3 delineates Barentsen’s “three-stage” social identity model of leadership (SIMOL) that guides the exegetical discussions that follow (p. 32). This chapter analyses the way social identity approaches (SIA) conceive of issues related to leadership. It begins with a brief history of SIA and then covers the basic concepts important to this study, i.e., social identity hierarchies, social identity definitions, and group prototypes and stereotypes. Barentsen points to Esler’s influence in the use of social identity theory within biblical studies, discusses some of the criticisms leveled against scholars using these tools, and introduces his case study approach (p. 42). His model begins with a description of the processes of social identification within groups, processes that will be applied to the situations in Corinth and Ephesus (p. 52). The second stage focuses on the way leaders manage these processes, relating the way Paul engaged leaders and the way the communities negotiate their social identity. The final stage looks at the way a leader’s identity-based management leads to the “emergence, maintenance, and succession of leaders,” providing a substantial discussion of the latter aspect since it has been somewhat under theorized in the literature (pp. 58, 62).
 

Chapter 4 discusses the impact that cross-cutting social identities (and comparative fit) had within the Corinthian Christ-movement. Barentsen rightly notes that Paul’s rule that members should maintain, where possible, existing social identifications (1 Cor 7:17-24) brought a certain added level of complexity in these identity negotiations (p. 82). One of the significant contributions from this chapter is that it brings to the fore the role of local leaders in the (mis)management of Christian social identity. Thus, paying attention to the way social identity is formed emphasizes details in the text that traditional approaches have overlooked (p. 86 n. 43). Next, Barentsen discusses Paul’s agency with regard to the formation of social identity in Corinth. He provides an excellent overview of the way Paul relies on processes that are also found in SIA; what results is a leader who empowers the Corinthians “to strong identity performance” (p. 100). The final part of the chapter outlines the patterns of leadership that emerged from his SIMOL analysis of 1 Corinthians.
 

With regard to 2 Corinthians, which is the focus of chapter 5, Barentsen defines the problem as Jewish Christian leaders who have come to Corinth with a different vision for the way Jewish social identities continue to be relevant within the church. These intruding Jewish teachers were able to influence the community because Paul’s social engineering in 1 Corinthians had been ineffective. This group also relied on more culturally acceptable leadership discourses (patronage and recommendation letters). Paul’s initial approach to this problem included a painful visit, a tearful letter, and the agency of Titus, who functioned as a temporary delegate (p. 137). He ultimately was reconciled to the Corinthians, and 2 Corinthians records the way in which the negotiation of identity occurred. In reasserting his position, Paul focused on his position as the ingroup prototype and emphasized the centrality of suffering in mission (p. 138). However, this resolution had not yet taken place so there is no discussion of a leadership successor, and based on the evidence from 1 Clement, initial success in appointing local leaders fossilized and “further succession faltered” (p. 139).
 

Chapter 6 surveys Ephesians, which Barentsen understands as Paul’s attempt to manage the identity of a stable leadership group by focusing on a universalistic Christian social identity, in contrast to his focus on nested, cross-cutting identities in 1-2 Corinthians. Ephesians is a legitimating document designed to provide necessary organizational structures for a “city-wide church that had outgrown the small network of house churches” (p. 183). Barentsen navigates many of the traditional arguments raised against Paul’s authorship of this letter. For example, Barentsen accounts for the exalted persona of Paul in this letter, which scholars often note is not congruent with the way he presents himself in the undisputed Paulines, as a function of “the normal processes of charismatic leadership attribution” (p. 180). Thus, attention paid to SIA provides plausible solutions for scholarly debates. Barentsen contends that the apostles and prophets were foundational leaders who embodied the ingroup prototype and are joined by local leaders in the formation of Christian social identity, though this latter group “has not yet been shaped into the full-fledged form of church office” (p. 179).
 

Chapter 7 analyzes 1 Timothy as a communal structuring document. Barentsen provides a series of arguments for an orthonymous understanding of the Pastoral epistles, an important point in his approach. Although he recognizes the problem in approaching a personal letter with a hermeneutic of social identity, he suggests that the community was reading over the shoulder of Timothy. Issues of deviance are brought to the fore in this form of a mandata principis letter, and Paul writes to Timothy in order to instruct him on the way to maintain local leadership (p. 249). He does this through the use of stereotypes, gendered prototypes, succession chains, and the construction of an identity narrative that reinforces beliefs and values (p. 226).  Chapter 8 then examines 2 Timothy as a leadership succession letter. Paul defends Timothy’s ecclesial position in the letter by reshaping key attributional processes. He is presented as a leader similar to Paul, which should in turn encourage the community to accept him as they had earlier accepted Paul (p. 274). Chapter 9 provides key implications from this study, especially as they relate to contemporary leadership practices in the church. Barentsen makes the similarities of Paul’s processes in each of the letters clear; the differences that are present are to be explained by the divergent local contexts and stages of leadership development within each community (p. 302).
 

Barentsen set out to provide a more comprehensive interpretation of the leadership patterns evident in the Pauline communities in Corinth and Ephesus than has been possible using traditional interpretive methods; in this he has succeeded. For those who find themselves in religious contexts that identify closely with Pauline Christianity, Barentsen offers new and fresh insights for leaders seeking to fulfill their missional calling in a way that coheres closely to the scriptural witness. This recommended study provides groundbreaking insight into the way social identity theory can inform contemporary ecclesiology rooted in the consistent leadership practices of the Apostle Paul.

 

Review of Charles A. Anderson's Philo of Alexandria's Views of the Physical World

Charles A. Anderson, Philo of Alexandria’s Views of the Physical World. WUNT 2 309. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011. Pp. xii + 299. 978-3-16-15640-6. $147.50 paper.

Charles A. Anderson, Lecturer in New Testament and Biblical Languages at Oak Hill College in London, examines “Philo of Alexandria’s ambivalent, seemingly contradictory claims about the ethical status of the sensible world” (p. 1). This revision of his Cambridge University Ph.D. thesis, written under the supervision of Markus Bockmuehl, contends that the solution is to see his views multiperspectivally. This approach positions Philo’s views of the physical world in-between those evident in Israel’s scriptures and those of the ancient philosophers, ultimately seeing them as negative. This lexical-semantic reading of the Philonic corpus is quite convincing with regard to the way it establishes the presence of both positive and negative discourses concerning the physical word. Furthermore, Anderson’s exhaustive treatment of φύσις represents a key contribution from this densely and convincingly argued monograph.

Chapter 1 notes the deficiencies in previous attempts to address this question and concludes with brief discussions concerning the socially-conditioned nature of cosmological reflection and the contextualized methodological approach used in this study. Chapter 2 sets the context by surveying the genre and organization of Philo’s writings in which Judaism and Hellenism interpenetrate. Anderson contends that the “Allegory of the Law” and the “Exposition of the Law” had two different audiences (p. 18). The former was for advanced readers, while the latter was for beginners. These disparate audiences account for the different perspectives on the sensible world (p. 22). With regard to Hellenism and Judaism, Philo sees them as compatible with ideological precedence given to Judaism, though with regard to the physical world, Philo diverts from both in significant ways. Chapter 3 lays out the study of Philo’s negative terminology for the physical world by analyzing οὐσία, ὕλη, γένεσις, and γενητός; here the world is hostile and alienated from God. However, in chapters 4-6, Anderson’s study of κόσμος and φύσις indicate that when Philo used these terms he linked the sensible world closely to God.

Chapter 7 addresses the implications of such seemingly contradictory views. Philo’s understanding of the differing ways humanity seeks God accounts for this divergence. For those seeking God in the higher way, the world is an obstacle and no longer serves a positive purpose; however, for those seeking God through the lower approach, “the sensible world has genuine value—it is the means by which they come to know God” (p. 167). Chapter 8 organizes Philo’s multiperspectival view of the ethical status of the physical world and coheres closely to the lexical findings of the earlier chapters: οὐσία, ὕλη, γένεσις, and γενητός, with their focus on the material world present a pessimistic view, while κόσμος and φύσις point to God as creator and ruler over the same domain. Anderson ultimately concludes, however, that Philo’s view prioritizes “the pessimistic outlook” (p. 185). Chapter 9 provides a conclusion to the study by highlighting its findings and noting the ways Philo’s negative views compare with the views of other ancient writers. Particularly helpful here is the discussion of Paul’s cosmological discourse. As noted by Anderson, this was one of his original interests (p. 2). One hopes that he will soon revisit this topic, since his work has profound relevance for understanding the context of Paul’s cosmological discourse. Anderson has provided a thoroughly convincing argument, though some may be unconvinced by his reliance on Alan Mendelson’s multiperspectivalism. That minor point aside, Anderson offers a plausible solution to the problem of Philo’s apparent contradictory perspectives on the physical world.

Running Heads: A Blog from the Editors of Wipf and Stock Publishers

The editors at Wipf and Stock have launched a new blog entitled, Running Heads. It looks like it is going to be an interesting introduction to what goes on behind-the-scenes in a publishing house. The editorial team consists of Charlie Collier, Chris Spinks, K. C. Hanson, Robin Parry, and Rodney Clapp. My guess is they'll talk about the ins and outs of the publishing process and at some point one of them might mention the unacceptability of two spaces between a period and the first letter of the next sentence! I think www.runningheads.net will be an entertaining and informative blog for those interesting in what's involved in the publishing process.