book review


Series: Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Volume: 1
By: Grant R. Osborne
General Editor: Clinton E. Arnold
List Price: $49.99 (USD)

ISBN: 0310243572,

ISBN-13: 9780310243571

Special thanks to the folks at Zondervan for a review copy!

Grant Osborne’s commentary on Matthew is part of the new “Zondervan Exegetical Commentaries on the New Testament.” The series has a nice level of technical detail. It assumes some Greek knowledge without assuming knowledge of intricate details. I’ve yet to feel lost in the commentary, though there were some rhetorical terms I wasn’t too familiar with (perlocutionary, illocutionary, etc). For the most part, Osborne writes clear prose and is not difficult to follow.

A few words are due on the physical layout of the commentary. The volume is a chunky one (1154 pages including indices), but considering that many commentaries on Matthew are split across two or three volumes, it’s rather compact by comparison. In the beginning of the commentary, there is a series introduction and approximately 30 pages of introduction to the commentary. The commentary proper runs around 1000 pages, and at the end of the volume, in addition to the indices (scripture, subject, and author), there is a section on the “Theology of Matthew” that runs around 30 pages.

The commentary itself flows nicely. Each section is broken down into “Literary Context,” “Main Idea,” Translation,” “Structure and Literary Form,” “Exegetical Outline,” and “Explantation of the Text.” Finally, there is a “Theology in Action” section that offers food for though for those preaching from the section. The translation is actually diagrammed like they teach in Exegesis classes (so I’m told, I’ve yet to attend Seminary). The diagramming looks like it would be quite helpful for those who are helped by visuals. I’m not one of those people usually, but I like that it’s there.

In the body of the commentary, the English translation is given for a phrase and then the Greek follows. Osborne refers to the Greek text where it’s relevant, but doesn’t overdo it. One inconsistency I found was in the body of commentary. Sometimes Greek text is written in Greek, sometimes it was transliterated. If there was a pattern to it, then I missed it. This didn’t bug me much, but it would be nice to see it consistent. Footnotes too are used appropriately. They don’t dominate but are present. Overall, I like the layout and think it will be quite useful for both students and pastors.

Concerning the quality of the commentary itself, I found plenty of things to like and some things to quibble with too. I liked his take on the Sermon on the Mount. He acknowledges that perfect fulfillment of the commands there is generally out of our reach this age, but they remain the τελος, or goal, of every Christian. Thus, they are eschatological, in that though we strive now to fulfill them, they will only be fulfilled perfectly in Christ’s return.

Likewise, he sees the importance in Jesus’ healings and exorcisms. These are not just a stage for his teaching, but an important part of Jesus’ mission. This mission is passed on to his Church. His own position on the charismatic gifts is that “they are available today but are only meant for those for whom the Spirit intends.” (158).
I also enjoyed his take on Old Testament fulfillment in Matthew. He proposes typology as a way to understand the OT fulfillment passages. Corporate Identity allows Jesus to relive Israel’s experience in an analogous manner. An extended quotation illustrates this:
“The problem is that few if any of the fulfillment passages were intended originally as messianic prophecies. So in what way were they fulfilled? The answer is typology. Typology is “analogous fulfillment,” not direct prophecy but indirect centering on Jesus as the Messiah reliving or ‘fulfilling’ the experience of Israel. With respect to this another concept is crucial – corporate identity. As Ellis says, ‘the individual ‘male’ may be viewed as extending beyond himself to include those who belong to him. Thus, the husband (at the family level) and the king ( at the national level) both have an individual and corporate existence encompassing, respectively, the household and the nation.”

There were a few quibbles. His explanation of the genealogy seemed a bit far-fetched. Matthew arranges his genealogy into 3 sets of 14, so the question is what does 14 mean. He argues that it is “gematria,” where letters are used to represent a number. The Hebrew letters in the name David add up to 14, so Osborne sees it as a coded reference to David. I didn’t see enough argumentation here to be convinced.

In commenting on 12:15, he says that “But Jesus knowing this departed from there” hints at omniscience. Certainly Matthew does tone down the difficult passages from Mark, but I don’t know that we can see a hint at omniscience there. The OT prophets knew things they weren’t supposed to know, and they were not omniscient. I’d propose instead that Jesus knew this because the Spirit revealed it to him, not because of his own omniscience.

Finally, I found some the “Theology in Application” sections helpful, but others not so much. Particularly in the birth narrative Osborne emphasizes God’s sovereignty much more than I would. Perhaps I’m just too biased against anything that sounds like Calvinism (probably the case… ελεησον με κυριε!), but I didn’t find that helpful. On the other hand, he makes several statements that don’t line up with TULIP. He asserts that God loves the whole world, and even counts himself as one who accepts the possibility of apostasy. So there’s plenty to like and quibble with no matter what side of the Calvinist/Arminian debate you find yourself on :-P.

Osborne was quick to note the importance of Jesus’ miracles, and his care for the poor in the application. I found him spot on there. So too I like his view that discipleship and not merely evangelism is crucial. Sometimes, though, the application sections were thin and didn’t do more than suggest areas to explore. I guess that’s okay, but I would’ve liked a little more meat in this area.

All in all, Osborne’s work is quite helpful. He is a careful reader of the text, and has spent much time laboring in Matthew. He care and devotion shows in his work. I ended up enjoying this work much more than I expected. I think the series has a fantastic layout, and I’m grateful to have this work going into my Gospels class in the Spring. Anyone with a little background in NT Studies will benefit from the work, though those who have at least a little Greek will benefit most.


The Best Kept Secret of Christian Mission

  • Hardcover: 240 pages
  • Publisher: Zondervan
  • ISBN-10: 0310328632
  • ISBN-13: 978-0310328636
  • Amazon

Special thanks to the folks at Zondervan for a review copy!

I first heard about this little book on Michael Bird’s blog. When Zondervan announced on their blog that they would be doing a blog tour for this book, I eagerly threw my name into the hat. After reading the book, I’m glad that I did.

My thoughts on the book are largely positive. As a would-be budding scholar, I loved the care Dickson took with scripture and other sources. It’s clear that he has spent a great deal of time immersed in the literature of early Christianity. Perhaps the greatest expression of this is his definition of the word “gospel.” The Gospel is not merely the syllogism: Man is sinful + God is Holy = God sent Jesus, a savior. Rather, Dickson comes at the matter from a different angle. He lets monotheism drive his argument. If the God Jesus proclaims is the one true God, then people everywhere owe him their allegiance. The people of God, then, must promote this reality wherever they go. The gospel thus becomes the events of Jesus’ (the lord of all) life: his birth, healings, exorcisms, teachings (etc.), culminating in his death on the cross and his resurrection. This is a refreshing change from the aforementioned formula, and much more faithful to the NT’s logic. That’s not to say that Dickson thinks man isn’t sinful, or that we don’t need a savior, it just doesn’t play the absolutely central role for him that it does in other formulations of the Gospel.

One could comment more on the “scholariness” of the work. Dickson interacts with Greek directly where it’s appropriate, in ways that show he has a command of the language. More intricate details are handled in the end-notes, which is I think is appropriate for a wider audience. References to the original languages certainly don’t cloud or muddy up the work. Likewise, the work is full of references to well-respected scholars of the period. Martin Hengel is referenced several times. The end-notes contain references to everyone from Timothy Keller to Scott McKnight. Dickson is clearly well-read! One can easily see that he’s devoted much of his life to studying early Christianity.

Of course, Dickson is far from being a “stuffy scholar,” or as some like to say, an “ivory tower academic.” Dickson comes across more as passionate pastor and evangelist than an academic. The scholarly care is evident for those like me who notice such things. Most will notice instead his warmth and candor on the subject. The pages of the book are laced with stories from his own life (and the lives of others) that illustrate the point he’s trying to make. When discussing the importance of prayer in evangelism, he recounts his own story of coming to faith. This came about through a lady named Glenda, his scripture teacher from high school. The year that Dickson and several of his friends became Christians was marked by a renewed fervor for harvest in Glenda’s prayer group.

Dickson is also candid about his experiences as a pastor and evangelist. He is quick to tell stories from his own life, even embarrassing stories that illustrate “what not to do.” No less than the scholarly care, I enjoyed the many stories told in the book.

As with any book, there were a few quibbles. The charismatic in me wants to reserve a more “charismatic” definition for prophecy in 1 Cor 14. Dickson believes it merely refers to “intelligible speech.” On a different note, the book in a few places offers the common “religion = bad, Jesus = good” (to way oversimplify things) viewpoint that I’ve become frustrated with recently. Still, these are but minor quibbles. I’d heartily recommend this book to anyone interested in evangelism, or even those who have been “turned off” to evangelism by previous teaching or systems. Dickson’s book is a great antidote to the discomfort and fear many of us have concerning evangelism. It’s a timely read for me as I start back to classes at a secular school.


I got a few books from the library today. Among them was a sources chrétiennes edition of Origen’s Commentary on Romans. This is a critical text with French translation, and loads of helpful commentary. I’m pleasantly surprised at my French. I’m able to follow along quite nicely and get the gist of what’s being said. Reading in a foreign language can be a mystical experience at times… Now, if only I could read Greek like I do French ;-).

Oh, and I must say, the “source chrétiennes” series is phenomenal, if this work is any indicator. I hope to get my hands on more.

This is the second part to a two part review. Part One can be found here.

In the first part of the review, I briefly summarized Part One of Wright’s Paul in Fresh Perspective. This part was entitled ‘Themes.’ This post deals with the second half of the book, which Wright calls ‘Structures.’ ‘Structures’ refers (I think) to the structures of Paul’s thought. This part of the book deals primarily with how the three key Jewish doctrines (monotheism, election, and eschatology) are redrawn by Paul around Jesus and the Spirit. Hence, the chapters entitled, “Rethinking God,” “Reworking God’s People,” and “Reimagining God’s Future.” The final chapter deals with the relationship between Paul and Jesus in the light of the rest of the work: “Jesus, Paul, and the Task of the Church.”

Wright begins, appropriately enough, by exploring Paul’s understanding of monotheism. His argument is Paul’s primary polemical target is not Judaism (or even Jewish Christianity), but Paganism. Wright notes the varieties of monotheism that existed in Paul’s period and defines Paul’s as “covenantal and creational monotheism.” The thrust here is that God is passionately involved with the events of the world, but different from the world (against both stoic pantheism and epicurean deism/atheism). This God of Paul’s has created the world and is working toward putting it to rights. This is a typically Jewish understanding of God, but then Wright shows how Paul’s understanding was different than historic Judaism: it had been redrawn around Jesus and the Spirit.

Beginning with Jesus, he cites several passages where Jesus has been put in places reserved for God in the OT. These include Romans 10:5-13 (where Jesus is the Lord in Paul’s OT exegesis), Philippians 2:5-11(where Jesus is the name at which every knee should bow, though this is Yahweh in Isaiah), and 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 (where Jesus is inserted into the schema, the classic monotheistic confession of Israel). In light of these, he thinks Romans 9:5 should be understood as Jesus being called “the one is God over all.” People often claim that Paul couldn’t possibly be calling Jesus God here, but this a priori dismissal doesn’t hold in light of these other passages. Next, Wright discusses the Spirit. He examines several passages, including Galatians 4:1-8, Romans 8, Romans 10:3, and 1 Corinthians 12:12-14. Wright notes that the Spirit and Son are working together to fulfill God’s promises. The Spirit is instrumental in bringing about the “new exodus.” Additionally, the Spirit marks us for the age to come as members of God’s family. 1 Corinthians 12, while referring to the unity and diversity of the church, serve as a way to understand the complex interactions for Paul of Father, Son, and Spirit. Wright then closes the chapter by examining how this played out in Paul’s churches.

The next chapter deals with the theme of election, “Reworking God’s People.” Election exists to deal with Sin and Death, it calls “a people from, and for, the whole world.” Wright sees Paul as both affirming Israel’s election (as in Romans 9), but redefining it as well (as in Galatians 2:11-21). Here Wright builds off his understanding of justification by faith. For Wright, Paul’s doctrine of justification is not a description of “how people get saved,” but rather “how you know who your family members are.” The question is not one of “getting in,” but rather, “how can I tell who is in?” He cites Gal 2:11-21, where justification deals with a conflict over table fellowship. He then proceeds to discuss Jesus and the Spirit in relation to Election.

Beginning again with Jesus, Wright argues that election is now by the “faithfulness of the Messiah” and not by Torah. Jesus is both the end and fulfillment of Torah. Faith functions as a marker by which we tell who our fellow brothers and sisters are. He discusses the constitution of God’s people in the Messiah, referring both to 1 Cor 10 and especially Eph 2:11-3:13. He cheekily notes when discussing Ephesians that even if Paul didn’t write Ephesians, he would have heartily endorsed it as a statement of his theology. God’s family is now Jew+Gentile and depends on the Messiah, not on Torah. When discussion turns to the Spirit, Wright notes passages like 2 Cor 3. Here, The Spirit stands over against Torah. It is not Torah which marks out God’s people, but the seal of the Holy Spirit. Not only does the Spirit mark God’s people, but he also empowers them to be God’s people, to be who they are.

This brings us to eschatology, “Reimagining God’s Future.” Wright starts here by tracing out the eschatological hopes common in Second Temple Judaism. He maintains that the “return from exile” played a big part here. He discusses several other themes, like Renewal, Resurrection, and Judgment. When discussing Jesus, Wright notes especially that through Jesus, “these are the last days. “ In the resurrection, God’s future has broken into the present (of course noting the now/not-yet dimension of eschatology). The final judgment is redrawn as a resurrection and judgment with Jesus in the middle of things. Likewise, with the Spirit, the Spirit’s coming denotes the “last days,” using Joel 2 has a basis for this. Wright is quick to note that the Spirit’s work links present justification with final justification. By the Spirit, we anticipate in the present our final vindication, the final verdict where God will declare us as ‘righteous.’ Likewise, the Spirit’s work in us and through us assures us that God will have firm grounds to make this declaration.

This brings us at last to the final chapter, “Jesus, Paul, and the Task of the Church.” Here Wright focuses on the relationship between Paul and Jesus. The problem is that Paul doesn’t seem to refer to Jesus’ teachings much. He doesn’t mention the Kingdom of God often, nor does he refer to his ethical rules like the Sermon on the Mount very much. Wright claims that we see a problem because we have reduced them both to “expounders of universal ethical truths.” In doing so, we hopelessly misunderstand them. He argues that when we recover them as “historical people,” we can understand their relationship much more easily. Wright likes the metaphor of “composer and conductor,” or “architect and builder.” (cf. 1 Corinthians 3). Basically, Paul is not out to reproduce Jesus’ teaching verbatim, but to implement the much larger project that Jesus inaugurated. The Kingdom of God ‘discrepancy’ is simply a change in audience. “Kingdom of God” talk resonated deeply with a Jewish audience. It conjured up images of the Messianic Kingdom and the rule of God. This wouldn’t have made much sense to a pagan though, so Paul used different language. “Gospel” and “Lord” were perfectly comprehensible to pagans, so Paul’s announcement of the “real Gospel” of the “real Lord” would have been entirely understandable for pagans. In talking about ethics, Wright argues that Paul is teaching his churches to think Christianly, and not simply giving them a list of rules. This is why he spends much more time grounding his practical instruction in “first principles” rather than giving a laundry list of Jesus’ sayings.

That rounds out the book. This section got quite a bit longer than I anticipated, so my apologies for that. This is a terrific little book from Wright. There’s all sorts of fine details that he doesn’t address, but he does a terrific job of highlighting the “big picture” concerns for Paul. I’d recommend the book to anyone who’s interested in Paul. The book isn’t overly technical, nor is it terribly long, but the content is thought-provoking and worthy of attention!


This is part one of a two part review. The second part may be found here.

In preparation for the Paul class I’m taking this fall, I’m looking back through N.T. Wright’s Paul in Fresh Perspective. The book is based of the Hulsean Lectures he did at Cambridge, and was published in 2005. The work contains a wonderful, short outline of Paul’s work. The first part deals with themes. Here, Wright addresses, “Creation and Covenant,” “Messiah and Apocalyptic,” and “Gospel and Empire” in successive chapters. The second part addresses structures, where the chapters are entitled, “Rethinking God,” “Reworking God’s People,” “Reimagining God’s Future,” and then “Jesus, Paul, and the Task of the Church.” I will address Part One in this post, and Part Two in a second.

Wright begins with an introduction that briefly locates Paul in the three worlds: Second Temple Judaism, Hellenistic Culture, and Roman Imperial dominance. It is against this backdrop that Wright works throughout the book. He deals cursorily with some of the interpretative movements over the course of the past 100 years, locating all within historical situations (and noting how this affected the exegesis). For instance, he notes that suspicion over Pauline authorship in Colossians and Ephesians arose “when the all-dominant power of New Testament scholarship lay with a particular kind of German, existentialist Lutheranism for whom any ecclesiology other than a purely functional one, any view of Judaism other than a purely negative one, any view of Jesus Christ other than a fairly low Christology, and view of creation other than a Barthian ‘Nein’, was deeply suspect.” (18). Of course, he also notes the “situatedness” of the movements he sees as helpful, understanding it as a providential grace of God and not a postmodern “deconstructive nihilism.”

Following the introduction, Wright jumps into the themes of “Creation and Covenant.” He locates these first within their Old Testament context. Psalm 19 functions paradigmatically here, where God is extolled in the first half for his creation and in the second for the covenant, the giving of Torah. Wright draws on themes from Genesis, the prophets, and the Psalms. Basically, Covenant should be understood as the solution to the problems in Creation (namely Sin and Death). Abraham is naturally quite important here. God’s promises to Abraham are the basis for God redeeming the cosmos. Particularly, through Abraham, the seed will come through whom “all nations will be blessed.” According to Wright, this is encoded in the phrase δικαιοσυνή θεού (righteousness of God). Wright understands God’s righteousness as God’s faithful fulfillment of the promises made to Abraham. This climaxes in Jesus, the Messiah, who is “the seed to whom the promise referred.” Wright looks at three passages here Colossians 1:15-20 (he notes the controversy of including Colossians), 1 Corinthians 15, and Romans 1-11. He traces creation and covenant through these 3 passages from a “bird’s eye view.”

Proceeding, Wright moves on to “Messiah and Apocalyptic.” Here, he notes the notoriously slippery meaning of the word “apocalyptic.” He argues that term, as it has often been used, is misguided. He takes issue in particular with the idea that Second Temple Jews expected an impending end to the space time universe, which has often been the assumption of “apocalyptic.” Rather, he argues that “apocalyptic” in Paul should be understood in terms of revelation. God has revealed his plans for the world. These include a “new heaven and a new earth,” not simply a destruction of the present world and a “whisking away” to Heaven. This revelation has taken place supremely through Jesus the Messiah. Wright spends a good deal of space debunking the claim that “Christ” functioned merely like another name by Paul’s time. He argues instead that the title “Christ” has royal and messianic connotations, and needs to be understood as such. This locates Jesus more easily within the OT themes which Wright explored in the prior chapter.

This brings us to the final pair of themes, “Gospel and Empire.” Whereas the prior two chapters locate Paul largely within Second Temple Judaism, this chapter pits Paul against the Greco-Roman society, especially the imperial Roman Empire. He warns readers that is all too easy to impose “post-Enlightenment” divisions of “religion and politics” back onto first century texts. The political situations which Paul faced are significantly different than those encountered in modern, Western democracies. Wright then proceeds to show the implicit imperial critique in Paul’s writing. He notes that Paul draws on imperial language quite often to explain the Gospel. Some of these words include ευαγγελιον(gosepl, or good news), κυριος (lord), σωτερ (savior), and παρουσια (royal appearing). For Wright, it is implicit that whenever Paul says “Jesus is Lord” he also means “Caesar is not.” He treats Philippians 3:20-21 in some detail here, and also briefly addresses 1 Thessalonians 4-5. The crux of the chapter is that Jesus’ gospel stands over against the “good news” of Caesar.

That wraps up the first section of the book. I’ll work through the second part of the book in a second post.



Special thanks to Jesse Hillman at Zondervan for a review copy of this fine volume!

After reviewing the 5th volume of the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary, the folks at Zondervan were kind enough to send me another volume to review. This volume (volume 4) covers the major prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, and Daniel.

Many of the comments I made regarding the fifth volume also apply to the fourth. The work is full of background from the literature of the Ancient Near East (ANE). We have ANE citations by everyone from the Egyptians, to the Babylonians, and Akkadians. The shear amount of literature we have from the ANE is astounding, and the editors put it to good use in elucidating the Biblical texts.

In addition to the normal commentary on individual verses, the volume is full of helpful articles on a given topic. One interesting article I came across in Isaiah was on “Dating Methods.” I’ve always wondered how we were able to get such precise dates for events hundreds of years before Christ. One extraordinarily useful method is astronomy. When ancient chronologies record events in relation to an astronomical event, we can usually calculate an exact date and assign dates with that as a starting point. It makes perfect sense!

Some other articles include, “Substitutionary Rites,” “Utopian Paradise, and, “Siege Ramps.” A very broad spectrum of background material is presented. The introductory articles are also quite detailed and helpful. The introduction to Isaiah offers a brief history of Israel during the 200 years covered by the book. This is vitally important to understanding the text. The introduction to Daniel is very well written. From what I can tell, it handles the issue of genre quite well, giving explanations of the various types of literature contained in Daniel and providing parallels to other ANE works. However, the commentary doesn’t take some suggestions to their full conclusion. The author doesn’t outright state that Daniel may have been written much later than the events portrayed in the text. It is suggested that the author of Daniel may have taken a well known literary medium (crafting history in the form of prophecy) and adapting it to his own means. But it isn’t stated outwardly that perhaps the work was written much later than the events it portrays. The reader is left to make the connection for themselves.

In sum, I heartily recommend these volumes to anyone seeking historical and cultural background knowledge for the world behind the Old Testament. They reveal to us the world into which God spoke his scriptures, and they help us better understand the message of these scriptures we have received. We not only have words, but also hundreds of pictures of artifacts to help the more visually minded place themselves there. There will always be cultural distance between a 21st century reader and the world of the Old Testament, but these works go a long way in bridging that distance. Pastors, students, and scholars (what a bibliography!) alike will find much to love about this series.


Invitation to the Septuagint
Authors: Karen Jobes and Moisés Silva

This book has been an absolute joy to read. It offers a fantastic introduction to the Septuagint (the ancient translation of the Hebrew bible into Greek, also known as the LXX), giving both the history of the text itself and the scholarship surrounding it. Considering the complexity of the field, it is rather impressive that the authors have managed to communicate the intricacies of the topic so well. After reading through most of the book, I have been deeply impressed by the many difficult aspects of the Septuagint studies. On the other hand, understanding the Septuagint is crucial to understanding the development of the early Christian Church, and so the research will ultimately be quite rewarding.

The book is split into three parts: History of the Septuagint, The Septuagint in Biblical Studies, and the Current State of Septuagint Studies. The History gives the overview of the history of the Septuagint and its reception, so far as we can construct it. The narrative begins with the original translation of the Mosaic books in the 3rd century BC all the way up to the printing press and critical editions of today. Along the way, we see why Septuagint research is so difficult. The Old Testament was translated by various groups of people over several hundred years. These different scribes employed different translation techniques, so the Greek text of Isaiah may be drastically different from that of Leviticus. In addition, nearly as soon as the translation appeared, recensions of the text appeared to improve it. A particularly important update was made by Origen in the 3rd century. It was so important that nearly all subsequent manuscripts show its influence. In some cases, we have what looks like competing translations circulating: this definitely happens during the early Christian era, as Jewish translators offer new translations and Christians refine their own. Sometimes the Septuagint differs from the Hebrew quite substantially. The Greek text of Jeremiah is much shorter than the Hebrew version now preserved in our Hebrew manuscripts. How does one account for these differences? Were they simply the translator taking liberties with the text? Or did they have a different Hebrew text than the one we now have? Both likely happened, but it’s not always easy to tell what happened in a particular case.

After giving a terrific introduction to the history of the LXX as a document, the authors jump into some intermediate level issues associated with the Septuagint. They caution that the difficulty here is greater than part 1, and that only intermediate Greek knowledge will allow one to get the fullest sense of the book. I’m a Greek newbie and was able to get along with respect to the Greek. However, I have zero knowledge of Hebrew, which did hurt me when the Greek text was put beside the Hebrew. The authors cover a wide range of topics in this section. They look at the use of the Septuagint for textual criticism of the Hebrew text. They also examine the usefulness of the Septuagint for New Testament studies, among other topics like the impact of the Dead Sea Scrolls on the Septuagint. These chapters, while they could get rather technical, were still informative. I’m particularly interested in how the Septuagint shaped the early Church. They had a fascinating bit that discussed Septuagint allusions in Philippians. Even when Paul wasn’t quoting scripture directly, it is evident that it had completely shaped the way he thought, and that it oozed over into his writing, perhaps even unintentionally. May we strive to the same goal!

The last chapter of the second part contains detailed analysis of two passages, Genesis 4:1-8 and Isaiah 52:13-53:12. For students researching and writing about the Septuagint, these will no doubt be extraordinarily useful. I found them interesting, though I only skimmed since I don’t know any Hebrew.

The final part gives an overview of modern Septuagint scholarship. Brief bios are given for the important individuals, from Tischendorf, to Lagarde and Ralhfs. Though this portion is largely anecdotal, it enables you to get a good grasp on how the discipline has progressed since the 19th century. Several ongoing areas of inquiry are addressed, like lexicography (meanings of words in the LXX) and syntax (how different or similar is the Greek compared to other Greek literature?). The book finishes with an overview of the current text critical work being done on the LXX (or current as of the writing of this book, around 2000).

Overall, the book has been a fantastic read. If I had to nitpick, I would pick at the vocabulary. Some linguistic terms were used without definition (like apodosis and protasis). As a newbie, it would be nice to have those defined at least once, though that was in the “intermediate section,” and a quick wikipedia search yielded the answer. Another concern is the background knowledge required. The book has been written with the seminary student in mind, or even as an intro book for a doctoral course (that was, in fact, what inspired the book in the first place). If you’re moderately familiar with biblical studies, then you won’t have a problem with a lot of it. Greek and Hebrew are definitely helpful for part two though.

With that said, I heartily recommend this book to anyone interested in this very important subject. I don’t know of a better introductory book, and it’s a fantastic way to acquaint oneself with the amazing document that is the LXX.


Update: I incorrectly stated that the book ended with a chapter on textual criticism. I was wrong! After reading a little bit farther, I realized that the final chapter was actually on theological developments in the Hellenistic Age.

Next Page »