<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Useful material pressed into the service of evangelism
Review: At first glance this book looks like it might be a treasure which builds and expands on the important work of the Context Group (a body of scholars who have for years been developing excellent social-science and anthropological models to help understand the bible). It promises to "unlock New Testament culture" and hints at some good applications of the honor-shame, patron-client, kinship, purity, and challenge-riposte models. But it doesn't take long before the reader smells a bad stink. While thoroughly educated in the social sciences, David deSilva uses his knowledge selectively by pressing it into the service of Protestant evangelism.For instance, the author draws a parallel between the persecutions of the early Christians and the "subtle pressures being exerted on [us modern evangelicals] to soften our commitment to 'one faith, one Lord' in the name of toleration, pluralism, and multiculturalism" (p 84). The parallel is ridiculous, of course, but deSilva goes on bemoaning the evils of modern liberalism as if they're terribly relevant to the subject at hand: "Desire to make room at the table for everyone's beliefs has made it very unpopular to claim to have the Truth and try to win others from their traditions to one's own... Religion is declared out of place in public spaces like businesses and schools..." This sort of rhetoric crops up throughout the book, and it's enough to hurt one's stomach. In discussing the phenomenon of challenge-riposte, deSilva claims that the Christian movement sought to cultivate a specific Christian riposte over and against much of Judaism and the Greco-Roman world. "Followers of Jesus overcame challenges to honor not through using the same currency of insult or violence that the outside world threw at them, but rather they met hostility with generosity, violence with courageous refusal, curse with blessing from God's inexhaustible resources of goodness and kindness." (p 71) This is only half correct. While it's true that the early Christian movement was characterized by non-violence and (depending on the situation) generosity and kindness, that's certainly not the whole picture. Jesus himself was extremely foul-mouthed when engaged in challenge-riposte. "Brood of vipers" (snake bastards), "hypocrites", "blind guides", "whitewashed tombs" (beautiful on the outside, full of bones and decay on the inside), and "offspring of the devil" were among his favorite insults -- nasty name-calling which the author treats rather evasively (pp 62, 163, 282). Likewise, the apostle Paul enjoyed heaping curses and diatribes on friend and foe alike -- on the "circumcision dogs" at Philippi, on his friend Peter the "hypocrite", on his "foolish" and "bewitched" converts in Galatia (and on those "accursed" people who were influencing his poor converts), and many more. DeSilva hardly does justice to early Christianity as part of an agonistic milieu. Save for a brief allusion to The Testament of Joseph (p 171), deSilva devotes no attention to the phenomenon of honorable lying -- which is hardly surprising, since an evangelical would have no use for such a concept. But in collectivist cultures like the ancient Mediterranean, lying could be very honorable. Outsiders and enemies had no right to the truth, which is why, for instance, Jesus lied to his brothers who "did not believe in him" (Jn 7:5), saying that he would not go to the festival in Jerusalem (Jn 7:8), yet doing exactly that as soon as they walked away (Jn 7:10). By the same token, insiders and friends preferred (and expected) to be lied to, if the truth would otherwise have offended their feelings. Lying in order to (a) deceive or degrade outsiders, or (b) preserve harmony among insiders, were both equally honorable. But deSilva has nothing to say about this phenomenon. For a book that promises to "unlock honor-shame culture", this omission is a serious shortcoming. One strong point in deSilva's favor is that he cites a lot of primary source material, which is helpful. And he does make some good points, here and there. The book is definitely worth reading, despite being marred by an evangelical agenda. But those who are really interested in "unlocking the culture of the New Testament" should stick to material written by deSilva's betters -- Bruce Malina, Richard Rohrbaugh, Jerome Neyrey, and other members of the Context Group.
Rating: 
Summary: Context Group?
Review: One must be an IDIOT to think that books that write about New Testament background builds on the work of any modern group. People have been writing this sort of books for CENTURIES. This alone undermines the previous STUPID review. And who says a book shouldn't be written for the purpose of evangelism? WHO SAYS? Who is the Context Group or anyone else to dictate to people in what context one may present New Testament background, especially this one does it in the context of presenting the very message of the New Testament? Also, the previous review says that this book make ridiculous claims and parallels, but ridiculous according to whom? The Context Group?! The point needs to be argued. People are so STUPID, it's amazing.
<< 1 >>
| 
