Archives For NT

*via flickr.

Commentaries on Luke (and Acts)

May 15, 2013 — 2 Comments

I was recently asked what commentaries I am finding most helpful as I research the Gospel of Luke. Briefly, in a not-so-particular order, here are a few thoughts on Luke (and  a couple on Acts):

I. Howard Marshall on Luke (NIGTC) (1978), though its been around a while (!), nearly always hits the significant exegetical issues of a given passage. Marshall is also concise: Whereas some commentators need two volumes, Marshall is able to pack it into one. I always consult Marshall.

Joel B. Green on Luke (NICNT) (1997) is good especially for his narrative-critical sensitivities in the text. Like Marshall, Green is concise, but he is unable to cover near as much ground! I usually consult Green.

François Bovon on Luke (EKK in German and Hermeneia in English) (1989–2013) is a seasoned Lukan scholar. He has produced commentaries on Luke for more than two decades (though the latest works are essentially updated English versions of the EKK commentaries). Bovon is aware of a breadth of scholarship in more languages than most commentators know. I always consult Bovon. (I’m waiting to get my hands on the second and third volumes of the Hermeneia series, one of which was out just last year). Continue Reading…

Related Posts:

In Acts, Luke, Scholarship ,
permalink
carroll_joshuaLMann

John T. Carroll’s Commentary on the Gospel of Luke (pt 3)

May 7, 2013 — 2 Comments

For part one of my review, see here. Part two here. (Amazon link to the book.) I wanted to touch on a few issues before finishing up with Carroll. Continue Reading…

Related Posts:

In Acts, Luke, Misc., NT, Readings , ,
permalink
carroll1

John T. Carroll’s Commentary on the Gospel of Luke (pt 2)

April 12, 2013 — 4 Comments

For part one of my review, see here. (Amazon link to the book.)

Carroll’s introduction is succinct and adequate, not ground-breaking yet covering real ground. I give it a mark of ‘good’ on a scale of bad to excellent (that’s something like 7 out of 10), particular in view of a semi-technical audience.Luke-commentary-Joshua-Mann

On authorship, Carroll lays out the data but remains neutral, advocating for an understanding of the implied author, likely a Gentile of social status, perhaps a God-fearer. Carroll assumes the author has some amount of rhetorical training.

Regarding the date, he says the evidence only allows a date between 75 (allowing for the composition of Mark and the destruction of the Temple) and 125 AD (time for dissemination to Justin and Marcion). More precise dating relies on assumptions (4).

The audience, according to Carroll, is a diverse group (along side of Theophilus, the named recipient in Luke 1:1-4), likely in an urban center in the eastern Mediterranean (possibly broader than one city) (3). Carroll mirror-reads to gather information about the audience and their situation: “Information about the audience  . .  . only becomes evident as the Gospel unfolds . . .” (17). He suspects the readers already belonged to Christian groups, facing increasing Gentile membership, recent synagogue conflict, left wondering about its identity with the Israel of the Scriptures in the context of the Roman Empire (3–4, cf. 398 ff.). This supposed situation of the audience features prominently throughout the commentary. I will comment more at length on this in part three of my review (next week). Continue Reading…

Related Posts:

In Luke, NT , ,
permalink
carroll_joshuaLMann

John T. Carroll’s Commentary on the Gospel of Luke

April 9, 2013 — 4 Comments

Some time back I mentioned I would be reviewing a handful of books, one of which is John T. Carroll‘s Luke: A Commentary (The New Testament Library; Louisville: WJK, 2012). The following is part one of my review, having had the chance to thoroughly read the introduction and use a good portion of the commentary proper.

Luke-commentary-Joshua-MannI would classify Carroll’s commentary as semi-technical with a broad target audience, owing in part to the purposes of the series of which it is part. It comes in at just over 550 pages (including indices) which, for the Gospel of Luke, is about the right length for an adequate pericope-by-pericope analysis (but not verse-by-verse). Even so, Carroll is able to cover a lot of ground in a short space, and most of the time he does so without sacrificing his prose. The introductory and summary paragraphs that introduce units of text are especially well-written. The nitty-gritty commentary sometimes feels a bit clunky, as is the case with most commentaries.

Carroll is very sensitive to literary and theological issues, and this is perhaps the greatest strength of the commentary. A good example is a line from p. 15:

With regard to time, the web of prophecy (or promise) and fulfillment links the events of the Gospel to the OT and ‘Jewish antiquities,’ and the teleology of the story moves to divine vindication of the crucified Messiah ‘on the third day’ (Luke 24) and onward, through a period of witness under duress (prolepsis in 21:12–19, with realization in Acts) that will span the destruction of the temple, toward the triumphant return of the Lord Jesus in eschatological judgment and deliverance (Luke 21:25–36)

In spite of sparing interaction with secondary sources (I assume this owes again to the purpose of the series) Carroll makes room for brief commentary on text-critical issues. Noteworthy is that Carroll follows the Western non-interpolations of D in Luke 22 and especially 24 (Luke 22:19b­–20; 24:3, 6, 12, 36, 40, 51–52).

On Greek grammatical and syntactical issues I found the commentary wanting. I noticed two issues right off the bat: (1) Claiming the traditional view that the perfect tense indicates a past action with present results (this was applied to the substantival participle in Luke 1:1- τῶν πεπληροφορημένων); and (2) Applying the Granville Sharp rule (which states that an articular, singular noun followed by kai and an anarthrous noun share the same referent) to two plural nouns (“eyewitness” and “ministers of the word” in the preface of Luke). This is true of most commentaries coming off the press today. I am not sure if authors are simply not sure how to incorporate recent linguistic studies in exegetical discussions or whether they are just ignorant of the issues altogether.

Part two here.

Related Posts:

In Luke, NT , , ,
permalink
Taussig

Huggins on Taussig’s ‘Prostituting of Scholarship’

April 8, 2013 — Leave a comment

Ron Huggins recently critiqued Hal Taussig’s A New New Testament, and puts his finger on a problem that I believe plagues more popular-level publishing in our field:

 I am not sure of the exact number but I am quite certain I have at least ten other English translations of the Gospel of Thomas on my shelves in addition to this one. Do we really need another, when so many competent ones are already available?  Yet even then I do not object to someone producing another.  What I do object to is what I consider the prostituting of scholarship through the use of cheap sensationalistic packaging  of the sort employed on Taussig’s ”New” New Testament, which essentially seeks to peddle serious scholarship by reducing it to the level of sensationalistic rubbish.

Related Posts:

In NT , ,
permalink
Archbishop-Bergoglio-foot-washing

Maundy Thursday, Mandatum Thursday, and the Pope

March 28, 2013 — Leave a comment

More than a few blogs posted on the meaning of Maundy Thursday this morning. I here quote Witherington:

It actually comes from the phrase Mandatum Thursday, or loosely translated ‘mandate’ or ‘commandment’ Thursday. It refers to the commandment from John 13 which you see in the picture above. Unfortunately, it was assumed that John 13 is about what transpired on Thursday of Holy Week, but historically this is probably incorrect. There is not footwashing episode on Thursday according to all three earlier Gospels, and furthermore, the time reference at the beginning of John 13 suggests this event transpired earlier in the week.

Pope Francis plans to participate in a foot washing, as the BBC reports:

Pope Francis will wash the feet of prisoners in a youth detention centre near Rome on Maundy Thursday.

Even so, many (Protestant?) celebrations are not focused on the commandment. Witherington goes on:

Traditionally, Maundy Thursday (the English garbled form of the Latin), has been a day to remember the Last Supper, the prayer in the garden of Gethsemane, the betrayal with a kiss, the taking captive of Jesus, and his abandonment by the male disciples— betrayal, desertion, and a threefold denial are the coup d’grace. It is on any showing a somber season.

 

Related Posts:

In NT ,
permalink
461030

Brice Jones’ Review of Early Text of the NT and Kruger’s Response

March 26, 2013 — Leave a comment

Recently Brice Jones reviewed The Early Text of the New Testament (OUP 2012). His overall evaluation is positive, and he provides both helpful summaries and critiques. He is most critical of essays by Kruger and Charlesworth, concluding:

In sum, it seems apparent that there is a theological agenda behind both Kruger’s and Charlesworth’s articles. The conservative and apologetic undertones in their arguments are clear.

Kruger has responded at his blog, contending that Jones has misunderstand his argument and failed to indicate more specifically which parts of his essay reflect an agenda. Kruger closes by saying

In all of this, I don’t expect every scholar will agree with my arguments or my reading of the evidence.  It is understandable that people will view the evidence differently and will weigh it differently.  But I would hope that such disagreements can be just that, disagreements, without having to invoke claims that any particular individual has an agenda one way or the other.

Do read both Jones’ review and Kruger’s response in full.

Related Posts:

In NT, Text Crit , , , ,
permalink
Laurentius_de_Voltolina_Josh_Mann

Print vs. Digital: The Effect of Pagination on Interpretation

March 21, 2013 — 7 Comments

Yesterday evening I was reading a print edition of the Greek text of Luke 19:28–44 (NA28), and I realized at one point that the pagination effected me as a reader. The medium effects interpretation. Let me briefly explain.

Triumphal Entry in the Gospel of Luke

I am reading the story of the Triumphal Entry in the Gospel of Luke, following the disciples into a village where they find a colt just as Jesus had told them. A few lines later I am following Jesus who is descending down the slope near the Mount of Olives, riding on this colt, preparing to enter Jerusalem.

It is quite a dramatic scene in the narrative as the Gospel has anticipated Jesus’ arrival to the Holy City for nearly half its “run time” to this point (since 9:51; so much more I would like to say about this). Jesus is lauded by a crowd of disciples whose praise includes, it seems, the application of Psa 118:26 to the miracle-working rider. The Pharisees, seemingly ever-present at times like these, call on Jesus to rebuke these disciples. Jesus returns their serve forcefully, saying, “If they keep silent, the stones will cry out.”

At this point (v. 41), the NA28 has its first new paragraph since v. 29 marked by a new indented line. The new paragraph begins, “And as he [Jesus] came near, when he saw the city, he wept over it . . .” Complete sentence. No punctuation. End of line. End of page (of main text). Continue Reading…

Related Posts:

In Luke, NT, Readings, Technology , ,
permalink
csntm_sakeoftruth

CSNTM New Mss. including complete Greek NT Ms.

March 20, 2013 — Leave a comment

CSNTM reported yesterday:

In November of 2011 CSNTM traveled to the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana (BML) in Florence Italy. . . . Because of this trip, CSNTM is proud to announce the addition of new images of 28 manuscripts from the BML. This excellent collection contains papyri, majuscules, minuscules, and lectionaries. Among the many treasures we digitized was an eleventh-century lectionary, written entirely in gold letters (GA Lect 117). Another manuscript had Paul’s epistles after the book of Revelation—a very rare phenomenon GA 620). And we photographed a complete Greek New Testament manuscript—one of only sixty known to exist (GA 367). [bold original]

The list includes the following manuscripts: P35, P36, P48, P89, P95, 0171, 0172, 0173, 0175, 0176, 0207, 198, 199, 200, 362, 365, 366, 367, 619, 620, 1979, L112, L117, L118, L291, L510, L604, L2210.

(Picked up, too, by ETC Blog and Brice Jones).

Related Posts:

In NT, Scholarship , , ,
permalink
sakeoftruth_levenson

Jon Levenson on Writing Well

March 18, 2013 — Leave a comment

In an interview with Charles Halton at the Marginalia Review, Harvard Professor Jon Levenson shares writing advice he first received from his high school Latin teacher:

She said one should never underestimate the audience’s intelligence nor overestimate their knowledge. The best course, she thought, was to assume one is talking to a highly intelligent group who have no or minimal knowledge of the subject.

 

Related Posts:

In NT, Scholarship , , ,
permalink