Skip to main content

The Deliverance of God: Skipping a Few and the Road Ahead

I decided that I am going to skip blogging on chapters four through ten. It's certainly not because they're not interesting or important. Several chapters, like the discussion of sociological research on religious conversion, were absolutely fascinating. I'm making the decision purely on the basis of limited time. The issues I've already discussed on this blog are adequate for having serious concerns about the justification theory of salvation. The chapters I'm skipping either develop further concerns, seek to map out how we got this theory, or discuss methodology. I want to deal from this point on with his interaction with the Pauline texts.

Now that I have a good feel for his methodology and have read a little of his critique of the tradition exegesis of Romans 1-4, I think that I will attempt an independent interpretation of Romans 1-4 - actually I did 1-3 at the library today. Look for that soon (as well as a post on the first section of Song of Songs). After that I'll keep rolling along with the Deliverance of God. I will review his critique of the traditional reading of Romans 1-4 (chapter 11) and then his critique of other non-traditional interpreters (like those who are associated with the NPP) (chapter 12). Starting in chapter 13 Campbell will lay out his interpretation, first of Romans 1-4 and then of the rest of Paul. I will thoroughly dissect those sections posing my own readings of Paul alongside when I disagree, and we will see where we come out at the end.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Commentary Series Overview

When I write commentary reviews, one of my main goals is to assess how well the commentator hit the intended audience of the commentary and utilized the format of the commentary. This often necessitates cluttering up the post discussing issues of format. To eliminate that, I thought that I would make some general remarks about the format and audience of each of the series that appear in my reviews. Terms like liberal, conservative, etc. are not used pejoratively but simply as descriptors. Many of you are familiar with Jeremy Pierce's commentary series overview. If you don't see a particular series covered here, check out his post to see if it's reviewed there. I am making no attempt at covering every series, just the series that I use. Additionally, new series (such as the NCCS) have been started in the five years since he wrote his very helpful guide, so I thought that it might not be completely out of order to have another person tackle commentary series overviews. This…

Paul's Argument in Galatians 3:15-29

15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. 19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. 20 A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one. 21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! Fo…

Commentary Review: Daniel

In my opinion, Daniel is not the best covered Old Testament book as far as commentaries go. This isn't an uncommon phenomenon among Old Testament books. Though I've looked at them, I'm not going to review some of the older Evangelical Daniel commentaries (like e.g., Baldwin). They don't provide much that you can't get in either Longman or Lucas. If you're unfamiliar with the series that one or more of these commentaries are in check out my commentary series overview.

It was a very close call but my favorite commentary on Daniel is Goldingay's. While there were a few places where I disagreed with his interpretation, I found the commentary to be exemplary. If you're going to teach Daniel, especially the apocalyptic portions, you need a commentary that provides you with a lot of background material. Goldingay, while not as broad as Collins, certainly provides you with quite a bit. His exploration of the background to the apocalyptic symbolism is very helpfu…