Review of Paul and the Second Century

Paul and the Second Century. Edited by Michael F. Bird and Joseph R. Dodson. Library of New Testament Studies 412. London: T & T Clark, 2011, xii+270 pp., $140.00, hardcover.

Paul and the Second Century, edited by Michael F. Bird and Joseph R. Dodson, provides its readers with key content in order to discern the earliest interpretive trajectories for the Pauline discourse. Joseph R. Dodson, in the “Introduction,” discusses the context of the second century churches. He introduces four convictions that are endemic of proto-orthodoxy and discusses the various ways Paul’s letters and person influenced the development of Christian identity. Paul’s letters were pliable enough to be used in diverse contexts to support divergent viewpoints.

          Stanley E. Porter supports the theory that the Pauline epistles were gathered together as copies were made when the original letters were written. Since an original collection of thirteen letters is evident from the mid-60s in Rome, the second century was not specifically germane. Carl B. Smith looks at the way Paul’s teaching, not just his life, formed the basis of Ignatius’s theology. Smith recognizes Paul’s influence in four areas: “Christology, Jewish practices among followers of Jesus, the role of the bishop in the Christian church, and suffering and martyrdom” (41). However, in some places Ignatius closely follows the teaching of Paul (e.g., rejecting false teaching that impacts church unity), while in other places he extends his teaching (e.g., by developing a robust doctrine of the role of the bishop in securing church unity). One significant exception to this should be noted; Ignatius sees in Paul a level of discontinuity with Judaism that is not explicit in his original letters (45, 47-48).

          Michael W. Holmes’s concise essay relies on Daniel Marguerat’s categories to survey Polycarp’s use of Paul and his letters. Drawing from the discursive resources of Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians, he is seen as a significant, early witness to the circulation of Paul’s letters. Paul’s ethical exhortations are recontextualized with a synergistic understanding of salvation not evident in Paul (66). Michael F. Bird’s essay on The Epistle to Diognetus (ED) seeks to advance the work of H. G. Meecham with regard to the rhetorical function of the Pauline parallels in the treatise. Bird uses the standard categories for uncovering intertextures to provide clarity for the way ED uses the existing Pauline discourse. Bird finds only one convincing citation, though Paul’s use is significantly recontextualized in ED (75). In the end, Bird views the author of ED as a Paulinist, though one who, unlike Paul, incorporates platonic discourse and disavows Israel’s continued election (88). His anti-Judaism is not as explicit as Marcion’s, and while approaching proto-orthodoxy at certain points, much of his discourse resonates with what was to become Gnosticism. Bird is correct to note that ED 1.1 is a clear example of the development of Christianity as a tertium quid (75, 83). However, it is not likely that this discourse can be traced to Paul in 1 Cor 10:32, where the ascensive use of kai would result in a definition of Christian identity in the context of existing identities, rather than in their erasure or “negation” (84).

          Todd Still provides an assessment of Marcion and his reception of the Pauline tradition. Marcion’s theological dualism is not found in Paul, nor is his way of reading Israel’s scriptures comparable. However, there is significant continuity between Paul and Marcion with regard to worship practices and ecclesial structures. Overall, Still views Marcion as one who sought to read Paul closely, though he ultimately misunderstood him significantly (107). Paul Foster argues that Justin was not influenced by Paul to any significant degree. He suggests that Justin and Paul built on the same passages from Israel’s scriptures, though for differing rhetorical purposes. However, it would seem that, contrary to Foster, Justin’s use of ta ethnē is similar to Paul’s (1 Apol. 53) (116). Foster offers a couple of possibilities for the silence of Paul in Justin: (1) Justin may not have known of Paul’s letters; (2) he may have been reacting to Marcion’s use of them; and (3) he may not have considered them authoritative (124). If we only had Justin’s writings extant, then we would have to conclude that Paul had very little impact on the development of Christianity in the second century.

          Nicolas Perrin shows that Paul is viewed by Valentinus and Theodotus as the “ideal believer” who could function as a bulwark against the emerging proto-orthodoxy of early Christianity (127). So, while other movements within the second century drew widely from the Pauline tradition, “for Valentinus and his followers, Paul was ‘the’ apostle” (139). Joel Willitts provides an important essay on Paul and Jewish Christians in the second century. He begins by drawing the reader’s attention to the difference between “Jewish Christians and Christian judaizers” (167). This distinction is particularly important when addressing the putative rejection of Paul by some Jewish Christ-followers (149). Willitts then considers only texts addressed to groups that are clearly Jewish. What emerges is a view of the reception of Paul in the second century different from the traditional view that affirms widespread animosity between Paul and Jewish Christianities (168). Andrew Gregory shows the way the Acts of Paul is generally consistent with canonical Acts and Paul’s letters. Furthermore, Paul is presented as a pastor seeking to instruct local assemblies, rather than primarily as a miracle-working church planter. In this way, the Acts of Paul aligns more closely to the image of Paul revealed in his letters rather than in canonical Acts (188). 

          Ben Blackwell shows the way Irenaeus follows Greco-Roman rhetorical conventions as he redeploys Paul’s letters to address the central theological concerns of his time, thus providing “one important voice for understanding Paul within the second century” (206). Andrew M. Bain contends that, while there are numerous Pauline references in Tertullian’s writings, they are relatively sparse when looked at in proportion to his total output. Paul’s writings are used primarily to teach gentile Christians for life within the church and in those contexts Tertullian uses Paul’s writings with felicity. Pauline Nigh Hogan surveys the reception of Paul in the second century with regard to women. Galatians 3:28, 1 Cor 7:34-40, and Eph 4:13 were interpreted to indicate that traditional roles and structures had been set aside. Thecla, Mary, Blandina, and Perpetua are examples of women who were transformed “in Christ” to the degree that existing gender identities were no longer thought to be relevant. Alternately, similar Pauline discourse was redeployed by church leaders to restrict the various expressions of female “in Christ” social identities (cf. Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria). Mark W. Elliott concludes the volume by describing the triumph of Paulinism in the work of Irenaeus, Clement, Tertullian, and Origen, each of whom engaged Paul’s writings in different ways, but all of whom sought to bring to the fore ethical requirements for those who claimed to follow Christ.

          Paul and the Second Century is a work that provides university and seminary students unfamiliar with the first interpreters of Paul with an entrée into early Christian hermeneutics. This material, while often difficult and unfamiliar, provides a roadmap for the various ways Paul was understood in the second century – and beyond. This advanced work provides an up-to-date resource for those studying the church fathers and Pauline reception history. It is a welcome addition to New Testament studies and is recommended particularly for those engaged in the theological interpretation of scripture.

The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies

Michael F. Bird and Preston M. Sprinkle eds. The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies. Milton Keynes, U.K., and Peabody, Mass.: Paternoster and Hendrickson, 2009. Pp. xix + 350. ISBN: 978-1-84227-606-8. $19.95 paper.

These essays present the range of arguments that have shaped the debate over whether to construe the phrase pistis christou as an objective genitive, i.e., “faith in Christ,” or as a subjective genitive, i.e., “the faithfulness of Christ.” James Dunn, a long-time proponent of the objective interpretation, provides an insightful forward that notes the continuing influence of Richard Hays’ work. Michael Bird’s introduction delineates the purpose of the volume and provides a helpful survey of each chapter.

Part 1 begins with Debbie Hunn who gives a valuable history of interpretation in order to determine which construal of the phrase is most plausible. Next, Stanley E. Porter and Andrew W. Pitts provide a lexical and syntactical analysis and conclude, based on lexis and case function, “that Christ was the proper object of faith” (p. 53).

Part 2 opens with Douglas A. Campbell’s analysis of Rom. 3:22 in which he argues for the subjective reading, as well as a messianic reading of Hab. 2:4 in Rom. 1:17b. Next R. Barry Matlock concludes that there is sufficient warrant for the objective reading. He rightly recognizes that this debate is part of the larger discussion over the juridical versus participationist readings of Paul. Paul Foster concludes that a subjective reading is most appropriate in Phil. 3:9 and Eph. 3:12. The faith of Christ is in view, and righteousness is imputed based on Christ’s work. Richard H. Bell contests Foster’s reading and interprets Phil. 3:9 and Eph. 3:12 objectively.

Part 3 starts with Mark A. Seifrid, who seeks to answer the question: what does it mean to believe in Christ? His answer is, “to be acted upon by God in his work in Jesus Christ” (p. 146). Francis Watson rejects the subjective reading based on hermeneutical grounds and dispenses with the messianic reading of Hab. 2:4 (p. 162). This view allows for faith as part of God’s broader work of grace. Preston M. Sprinkle argues for a third-way, i.e., “Christ-Faith”, which is understood as the gospel and its contents. Ardel B. Caneday assesses the way Christ’s faithfulness is central to the argument of Galatians. He emphasizes discontinuity between Christ and the Law and concludes that Christ’s faithfulness ends the curse of the Law (p. 203).

Part 4 begins with Peter G. Bolt, who argues that when the synoptic gospels are considered, the subjective reading becomes an increasingly viable option. Willis H. Salier contends that John’s gospel provides a balanced portrait of Jesus as a model of faithfulness while at the same time as the object of faith. Bruce A. Lowe concludes that in Jam. 2:1 the subjective reading of the phrase means “nothing other than trust in God” (p. 256). David A. deSilva convincingly asserts that neither pistis or pisteuō are employed in Revelation to indicate trust or faith in Christ; rather, he is presented as a faithful witness (p. 274).

Part 5 opens with Mark W. Elliott, who argues that the objective reading predominated among the church fathers, and throughout the history of Christian theology. Benjamin Myers assesses Karl Barth’s understanding of God’s faithfulness revealed in Christ.

Bird and Sprinkle have gathered key perspectives within the ongoing debate without arguing for any particular one. The book admirably reaches its stated goal (p. xiii). One omission in the collection is the lack of interaction between theological and social-scientific approaches, which could provide both methodological clarity and enhance the interpretive potential of the disputed phrase. Bird and Sprinkle, however, provide both scholars and graduate students with a useful resource on this important debate.

Crossing Over Sea and Land

Crossing Over Sea and Land: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period. by Michael F. Bird. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010, xvi + 208 pp. $24.95 paper.

Michael F. Bird, lecturer in theological studies at Crossway College in Toowong, Australia, offers a densely argued and convincing case that Judaism during the Second Temple Period should not be described as a missionary religion. Bird’s work is part of the ongoing debate concerning the way scholars understand the emergence of the Christ-movement in the context of Second Temple Judaism. Bird extends the work of Scot McKnight’s A Light among the Gentiles and Martin Goodman’s Mission and Conversion, both of whom were strategic in arguing that “postexilic Judaism cannot be properly characterized as a missionary religion” (p. 9). Crossing Over Sea and Land should be of interest to those concerned with the Jewish context of the Christ-movement as well as those looking for an accessible resource for primary documents central to the scholarly discourse dealing with both internal and external perspectives on Jewish proselytizing activity during the Second Temple Period and slightly beyond.

In chapter 1, Bird takes as his point of departure the fact that Christianity was a mission-oriented movement that crossed various cultural and geographical barriers in proclaiming its message throughout the Mediterranean basin. He is interested in determining whether Judaism during this period could be described in a similar manner, and if so, whether that accounts for the mission focus of the earliest Christ-movement, or whether this focus emerges de novo as a distinctive characteristic. Bird is aware that this line of research could be seen as Christian triumphalism or supersessionism; thus he clearly notes that he is “not trying to argue for the superiority of Christianity over Judaism” (p. 7). Rather, he is interested in the varying expressions of proselytizing activity evident in these two closely related religious movements with regard to gentiles. After discussing the significance of John Dickson’s Mission-Commitment in Ancient Judaism, Bird lays out his argument, which is “that the Christian Gentile missions, however indebted to their Jewish background, are not directly attributable to an on-going Jewish mission”; rather they “arose principally out of a concoction of eschatology and Christology and reading the Jewish Scriptures in light of new perspectives in these areas” (p. 12).

Chapter 2 provides Bird’s definition of the terms mission and conversion. He is aware of the potential for anachronistic descriptions of these concepts; however, he provides an extensive sociologically-informed definition of conversion which he then summarizes: “conversion to Judaism involves monotheism, Torah, and synagogue” (p. 24). As one reads the book, it is clear that the conditio sine qua non of Jewish conversion, at least for men, is circumcision. This separates a convert from an adherent and also serves as the primary marker of Jewish identity. Bird defines mission as “the diverse array of activities that attempts to draw, recruit, or persuade persons into conversion consisting of ideological, axiological (ethical), and social transformation” (p. 43). Bird’s construal of conversion and mission serves as the interpretive framework by which he assesses the level of missionary activity in Second Temple Judaism.

Chapter 3 evaluates the evidence for Jewish missionary activity in Palestine. Bird examines first the phenomena of forced conversions during the Hasmonean period, concluding that these activities fall outside the parameters of his stipulated definition. Next, he assesses the evidence from Qumran, and not surprisingly he finds a lack of evidence for proselytizing activity among the Qumran sectarians. He discusses Matthew 23:15 and offers positive support for this verse referring to Pharisees who sought to “recruit God-fearers into the cause of Jewish resistance to the Roman Empire” (p. 69). Thus, he does not find evidence of a concerted effort to proselytize gentiles. Inscriptional evidence is briefly surveyed and shown to be inconclusive with regard to the presence of a significant number of proselytes in Palestine. Finally, rabbinic literature is outlined, and though there is evidence of increased openness to gentiles (e.g. Numbers Rabbah 8.3; Canticles Rabbah 1.15.2), there is still a lack of evidence for widespread proselytizing activity during the rabbinic period.

Chapter 4 provides an extensive discussion of whether or not there is evidence of Jewish missionary activity in the Diaspora. Bird begins by discussing religious pluralism in the Roman Empire and then turns to the various ways that pagans are described as being attracted to Judaism. This is important for Bird’s argument because he sees in Second Temple Judaism openness to gentiles but not necessarily an intentional program of proselytizing them. Next, Bird reviews Josephus’ writings which reinforce the idea of openness without overt religious recruitment. Philo, who presents Judaism in a manner cognizant with Greek philosophy, is likewise not seen as one seeking to do anything other than present Judaism in an attractive way. He is open to outsiders but does not seek them out (p. 109). Jewish apologetic writings in Greek are surveyed, and not surprisingly at this point, Bird finds no evidence of a sustained mission to convert gentiles in these propagandistic writings. These writings, Bird contends following Tcherikover, were actually written for Jewish audiences and were designed to address issues of enculturation and the maintenance of Jewish identity in the context of Hellenism. Finally, this chapter surveys Greco-Roman authors, some of whom discuss Jewish proselytizing activity in passing; however, these disparate references lack the level of specificity necessary to determine whether intentional proselytizing was occurring rather than simply the phenomenon of gentile attraction to the Jewish way of life.

Chapter 5 presents evidence of Jewish missional activity as found within the New Testament. Bird determines that the Colossian heresy is evidence for intentional Jewish proselytizing activity as are the Jewish Christians in Galatia who were arguing for circumcision in order to substantiate the conversion of gentiles. Next, Bird quickly outlines other canonical texts that impinge on this debate and mentions a few early Christian writings that reference Jewish proselytizing activity (e.g., Epistle to Barnabas, Ignatius, and Apocalypse of Peter). He concludes that “outright competition between Christians and Jews for Gentile converts is scant”; however, he rightly recognizes that challenges were “inevitable” as these two closely associated movements continued to develop along differing ideological lines (p. 148).

The conclusion brings together the findings of Bird’s research. He supports the contention that there is no evidence for an organized program of proselytizing gentiles within Judaism during the Second Temple Period. However, he provides a few qualifications for this finding. First, the stipulated definitions of conversion and mission are open to debate and could influence the interpretation of the findings. Second, the diversity of Judaism during this period must be kept in view. Bird concludes with thoughtful reflections on the lack of proselytizing activities within Judaism and the significance of this for the extensive mission to the gentiles evident within the emerging Christ-movement. The most useful summative concept from this section is Bird’s idea of “inclusive sectarianism,” a descriptor that warrants special scholarly attention (p. 154). Crossing Over Sea and Land concludes with an appendix that provides a generous sampling of primary sources, often with the original languages included, and extensive indices that reinforce the widespread scope of Bird’s argumentation in this thoroughly accessible introduction to the nature and extent of Jewish missionary activity in the Second Temple Period.

Review of How Did Christianity Begin?

How Did Christianity Begin?: A Believer and Non-Believer Examine the Evidence. By Michael F. Bird, James G. Crossley, Scot McKnight, and Maurice Casey. London: SPCK; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2008, xviii, 206 pp., $19.95, paper.

Michael F. Bird, lecturer in Theology and Bible at Crossway College, in Queensland, Australia, Scotland and James G. Crossley, lecturer in New Testament Studies at the University of Sheffield in England; set out to write a description of the emergence of Christianity as a separate religious movement from the perspective of a believer (i.e. Bird) and a non-believer (i.e. Crossley). What results is an engaging study into some of the most contentious issues in New Testament studies including: the historical Jesus, the resurrection, the apostle Paul, the Gospels, and earliest Christianity. The book is structured as an ongoing dialogue in which one author presents his argument and the other author provides a counter-argument designed to show the weaknesses in the previous author’s argument. Each chapter then concludes with a brief response from the author who began the chapter. Additionally, each chapter ends with an informative bibliography designed for further reading. This is an important part of the book because often Bird and Crossley are only addressing or responding to aspects of arguments that have been developed more fully in the writings of other scholars. After the above mentioned five areas are discussed, the next chapter provides a critique of Crossley’s overall argument by Scot McKnight and likewise an assessment of Bird’s approach by Maurice Casey. McKnight and Casey, as senior scholars in the field, provide a broader context for the arguments that Bird and Crossley offer and also make comments as to the way they would approach these issues. The book ends with a short reflection on the nature of scholarly discourse and then includes an index of biblical and ancient authors as well as modern authors.

The introduction orients the reader to Bird’s evangelical approach and Crossley’s secular approach. Chapter one begins with Crossley arguing “that Jesus and Christianity were the product of broader social, economic and historical trends” (1). He concludes that most everything that is recorded concerning Jesus is also found in the various expressions of Judaism during the Second Temple Period. Bird, on the other hand, argues that what is recorded about the historical Jesus is accurate and quite exceptional. Moreover, Crossley’s “materialist” framework, misuse of sociological methods, and “cross-cultural” analyses which rely heavily on parallels result in findings that are not convincing (32). Crossley rightly notes that his cross-cultural comparisons are contextually sensitive and that Bird is too strong on this critique (33).

Bird begins chapter two with a defense of the bodily resurrection of Jesus and concludes that the resurrection accounts for the emergence of the earliest Christ-movement. Crossley contends “that in terms of conventional historical reconstruction the bodily resurrection should be dismissed as a historical event” (51). Here it is clear that even scholarly dialogue has its limits and that these competing positions are mutually exclusive though Bird does suggest that possibly he and Crossley can agree that a least they can acknowledge that the early Christ-followers “believed that Jesus rose from the dead” (65).

Chapter three discusses the apostle Paul and Crossley argues that Paul’s preoccupation was with issues related to the correct interpretation of the Law within Judaism and not with high Christological formulations. Thus, it would be too bold to argue that Paul equated Jesus with God in a manner similar to that of the Gospel of John (84). Bird relies on Philippians 2:5-11 to support his contention that language which had been limited to the God of Israel was now being applied to Jesus (96). Furthermore, Bird’s approach to Paul’s understanding of the Law is that the Law was fulfilled in Christ. Bird and Crossley, however, agree that Paul’s major concern was with “those who wanted to impose Law-observance on Gentiles” (94).

Bird begins chapter four, which discusses the Gospels, by arguing that the Synoptic Gospels and John evidence more continuity than is often concluded by scholars. Bird makes it clear that he follows the consensus dating for the Gospels. This is important because much of Crossley’s argument relies on a dating of Mark in the early 40s (106, 173 n.4). Bird also offers a sustained argument for the historicity of the Fourth Gospel, a viewpoint that is critiqued later in the book by Casey (184). Crossley understands Mark to be promoting continued observance of the Law and that the community to whom he writes was still within Judaism. Crossley provides a rather extensive discussion of Mark 7:19, one in which he concludes that the issue in this verse was hand-washing and not a declaration by Jesus that all foods are clean. Bird concludes by noting Crossley has failed to grasp the differentiated manner in which Law-observance would have been expressed within the Christ-movement and that a “high Christology…belongs to the earliest decades of the early Church” (136).

Chapter five begins with a discussion of the development of earliest Christianity. Crossley connects the concepts of pagan monotheism with empire as key ordering principles in earliest Christianity. Also, he argues that existing social networks were used by leaders of the Christ-movement in order to foster growth and expansion. Bird relies on an understanding of the gentile mission that was implicit in the ministry of Jesus as a key ordering principle for the emergence and continuation of earliest Christianity. Bird offers nine reasons for the ‘parting of the ways’ that seek to combine the political as well as the religious reasons for the separation of Christianity and Judaism (154-59).

Chapter six begins with a critique of Crossley by Scot McKnight who suggests that Crossley downplays the impact of his own presuppositions while elevating Bird’s evangelical bias. Furthermore, McKnight notes that Crossley’s methodological approach is not consistent and thus his conclusions are far from compelling. McKnight offers a brief outline of his preferred approach to early Christian origins, which is highlighted by his focus on “Anawim theology (i.e. the lost and forgotten ones)” and a key recognition that Christianity consisted of “linguistic[ally]-shaped communities” (173, 181). Maurice Casey’s critique of Bird focuses on Bird’s evangelical bias, his commitment to the historicity of the Fourth Gospel, his definition of the miraculous, his commitment to the Christ of faith rather than the Jesus of history, and his anachronistic readings of the Gospel witness. Finally, chapter seven briefly summarizes areas with Bird and Crossley agree and disagree while calling for future historical research to be “anchored in evidence” and practiced “in a spirit of learning” (196).

The structure of the book, with its reliance on a brief presentation and rebuttal may lack the rigor necessary to address in a substantial manner issues as complex as early Christian origins. The book lacks sustained exegetical argumentation and scholarly support is kept to a minimum. This gives the impression that a line of argumentation has been answered by means of a brief rebuttal that may overlook further implications and possibilities with regard to the critiqued position. Moreover, with a topic as broad as early Christian origins, it is unlikely that the chosen format can do little more than orient or introduce the reader to a few scholarly debates. The impact of the Roman Empire, though discussed in chapter five is not given its full consideration as a over-arching factor in the development of the earliest Christ-movement and the findings of Christian identity scholars are overlooked. None of these weaknesses should dissuade one from reading this book. It is a helpful introduction to many of the current issues in the study of early Christian origins and provides a useful starting place for students and newcomers to the issues it explores.

A slightly different version of this review appeared as:
Review of Michael F. Bird, James G. Crossley, Scot McKnight, and Maurice Casey. How Did Christianity Begin?: A Believer and Non-Believer Examine the Evidence. (London: SPCK, 2008). Criswell Theological Review, N.S. volume 7, no. 1 (Fall 2009): 106-08.

Review of Introducing Paul

Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message. By Michael F. Bird. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008, 192 pp., $20.00, paper.

Michael Bird sets out to provide an introductory book on Paul’s life, thought, and writings in a way that is relevant and stimulating without being overly-distracted by “scholarly debates and complex technicalities” (p. 6). This is quite a challenge; however, Bird, who is a lecturer in Theology and Bible at Crossway College, in Queensland, Australia, admirably accomplishes this task in Introducing Paul. Chapter 1 is a fast-paced discussion seeking to answer the question, What is Paul? Bird’s answer is that he was “a servant of Jesus Christ” (p. 29). Furthermore, this chapter introduces the reader to various contested issues within Pauline studies, all structured around the image of Paul as a “persecutor, missionary, theologian, pastor, martyr, and maverick” (p. 28). Bird understands Paul’s greatest accomplishment to be his successful mission to include gentiles within the transformed understanding of the people of God. Chapter 2 briefly highlights the implications of Paul’s Damascus road experience, referred to as a conversion “to a messianic sect within Judaism” (p. 35 emphasis original). Bird provides a traditional Pauline chronology and then a description of the way Paul’s identity and theologizing were discontinuous with his Pre-Damascus road Jewish self-understanding and Pharisaic theology.

Chapter 3 presents a narrative substructure for a Pauline biblical theology. Bird’s topical review of salvation history provides the reader with key intersecting narratives that inform his epistolary discourse. His discussion of Adam and Christ is quite theological while his discussion of Israel argues the viewpoint that, for Paul, the church has replaced Israel as the people of God (p. 50). Chapter 4 gives a brief summary of the argument, structure, and framework of all the canonical letters attributed to Paul. Bird is a maximalist with regard to Pauline authorship of these letters (but see pp. 70-71 n.5). Chapter 5 provides a narrative-critical reading of the Gospel. Bird contends that for Paul, the Gospel is concerned with both the person and work of Christ. Furthermore, the Pauline stories in Rom. 1.1-4, 1 Cor. 15.1-5, and 2 Tim. 2.8, function as theological narratives designed to inform their auditors about God, salvation, and humanity (83). Bird draws from historic empire studies and the work of N.T. Wright to provide an informative discussion of the way the gospel was heard in the context of Roman imperial ideology.

The death and resurrection of Christ, which Bird understands as the center of Paul’s theological thought, is expressed through images and metaphors designed to explicate the significance of the Gospel. These concepts are introduced by Bird in chapter 6 and, when taken together provide a contingent discursive understanding of Pauline soteriology. The expressions covered by Bird include: righteousness, sacrifice, reconciliation, redemption, adoption, renewal, and victory. Chapter 7 offers a brief discussion of Paul’s eschatology and its importance for New Testament theology in general. Bird presents the “already” and “not yet” scheme, while also considering it plausible, based on 1 Cor. 15.23-25, that Paul expected a “messianic or millennial reign of Christ upon the earth” (p. 121). In Chapter 8, Bird presents Paul as a “messianic” monotheist who understands Christ as one “participating in the divine identity” (pp. 126, 128). This is an excellent of example of the way an introductory book can discuss important and relevant but often challenging conceptual material. The subject of Pauline ethics is the focus of chapter 9. Bird relies on the traditional Pauline “indicative” and “imperative” interpretive framework as a way to organize some of Paul’s teaching on the social implications of the Gospel (p. 136). Chapter 10 discusses Paul’s approach to discipleship and spiritual formation, which Bird refers to as “gospelizing”. In “gospelization”, individuals are formed in the shape of the cross and empowered by Christ’s resurrection (p. 162). The epilogue provides a reminder concerning the fragmentary nature of the Pauline discourse, the significance of his legacy within church history, and a clarion call to emulate Paul by living a missional life.

Bird has written a useful entry-level book for undergraduates, informed laypersons, and for ministers seeking to stay current within Pauline studies. His book sometimes presents only one side of rather disputed and contentious issues (e.g. the relationship of the church and Israel) and the influence of N.T. Wright is evident throughout the work. This book is recommended for those seeking to understand the contours of Paul’s thought in a way that is engaging, relevant, and highly readable.


Originally published as:
Review of Michael F. Bird, Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008), Criswell Theological Review, N.S. volume 7, no. 2 (Spring 2010): 119-20.