<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: A Good look at the most ignored NT books
Review: This book is difficult to review because it not only includes different authors and texts, but texts which seemingly bear little relationship to one another. James has little or nothing to do with 1 Peter which has little to do with Jude and 2 Peter. This collection is a hodgepodge and indeed represents the most neglected of the NT books (as though one just decided to lump them altogether since they are all outcasts together).Chester's treatment of James is very thorough (more so than the other three). He does a good job addressing conventional issues like James' relationship to Paul but does not make that the essence of his discussion. Chester uncovers a surprising amount of "theology" in James and elucidates its usefulness quite nicely. Given his space and goal Chester does a great job but for a more in-depth treatment see R. Bauckham's "James: Wisdom of James, Disciple of Jesus the Sage." Martin is forced to survey three very different books and he does so adequately. Jude gets a great treatment compared with the relative interest in it and one could not really ask anything more of such an introductory book. 1 Peter's coverage was fine but it was tantalizingly short for a book that has links to Pauline Christianity, 2 Peter, James (?), and the apostolic fathers. I found everything discussed insightful and worthwhile but desired more background, esp. since 1 Peter depends so much on its literary style as opposed to its historical setting or personality (like Paul's letters). The other disappointment, despitre my disdain for the cookie cutter set up of most of these books, is that there was little "1 Peter for today" discussion. So 1 Peter was a mixed affair. 2 Peter had better treatment considering how much it is ignored. Much time was discussed looking into its setting and placement in the development of Christianity while it still had some development of its theological themes. I guess with both it and 1 Peter a discussion on the nature of testamentary writings (as these both seem to be) and a contrast with Pauline letters would have helped the understanding of these books. Overall, both authors did the best they could with such overlooked NT material and their contribution is both significant and meaningful.
<< 1 >>
| 
