Book review:

Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity: Unlocking New Testament Culture

David A. deSilva, 336 pages
IVP Academic
ISBN: 978-0-8308-1572-2
~$20.
Amazon
IVP Press
Half.com

David A. deSilva is Trustees' Professor of New Testament and Greek at Ashland Theological Seminary in Ashland, Ohio. He has published numerous books already, and in this book he attempts to "provide a concise guide to some of the more prominent and prevalent aspects of the culture that gave birth to the early church", that is honor, patronage, kinship, and purity. The book is divided into eight chapters, in which deSilva investigates one particular aspect in the world at large in one chapter, then follows up that chapter with a look at how that is then applied throughout the New Testament.

Chapters 1 and 2: Honor & Shame
deSilva does a good job here to help the readers encounter the honor and shame culture that was the 1st century world. He also looks into the language of honor and dishonor in the first-century Greco-Roman world (in which the first century Jewish world would be a subset). He also brings to light the fact that honor was also tied to group values; that individuals tried to display virtues that found approval from the group and simultaneously avoided vices that brought dishonor and shame from the group. The second part of this section is deSilva's look into how honor and shame was formulated by the early Christians.

Chapters 3 and 4: Patronage & Reciprocity
Personally, I think these chapters were the most intriguing part of the book, as patronage is a concept that is very foreign to our world today, and yet, it is a concept that continues to draw my interest. Here deSilva overviews some relevant material in the Greco-Roman world that well portrays this institution that so dominated the first century world. deSilva focuses most of his attention in the NT chapter (ch. 4) on how God is our benefactor and the proper response Christians are to display to that beneficience.

Chapters 5 and 6: Kinship
If chapters 3 and 4 were the most interesting, chapters 5 and 6 were the most fulfilling to read. I just recently wrote a paper that talked about elements of kinship language found in the Thessalonian correspondence, so these chapters were a good review again of this great aspect of NT culture. deSilva looks into how kinship is reconstituted in the Christian community and in his conclusion he states,

"Our churches will be better equipped to serve as vessels of God's love and favor as we adopt and help one another in the church keep before their eyes the "ethos of kin" that Jesus, Paul and the other New Testament voices instruct Christians to take up toward one another. Many Christians are less than kin and less than kind to one another. Violations of the spirit of unity and of the command to put the interests of the other ahead of a person's own interests need to be addressed gently but forthrightly in the context of the vision the New Testament gives us of what the church could be..."

Chapters 7 and 8: Purity
In these sections, deSilva looks into the concept of "pollution" and how the concept of "holy" and "pure" has been skewed in our post-Reformation, post-Enlightenment era. He does an excellent but brief survey of Jewish material that helps to understand how early Christians understood the concept of "sacred space" and how some lines regarding purity and holiness have been redrawn in the Christian community.


Final thoughts:
All in all, this is an excellent survey of four important aspects of NT culture that may be overlooked often in our readings of the NT. My only wish was that he included more primary sources in his book, but my guess is that he aimed this book to be semi-academic; so as not to be so esoteric that it is beyond the grasp of serious readers of the Bible, but not so elementary that it would be overlooked as a serious work of a scholar. Highly recommended!

Out of Africa

After getting on 10 planes on 4 different airlines, 3 continents, and unending security checks, I've returned from Kenya!

Some pictures:









I have so much more, but I guess this is it for now! I am very exhausted/jetlagged, so goodbye for now.

Off to Africa.

For a few weeks, I will be gone to: Kenya/Zanzibar! For those of you that are unfamiliar with where in the world that is:

















Very excited to spend some time in the Maasai Mara reserve:




So in the meanwhile, please read my other posts and talk to you all when I get back!

Paul and the Roman Imperial Order

Richard A. Horsley ed., ix + 198 pages
Trinity Press International
ISBN-13: 978-1563384219
About $30.
Amazon
Half.com
Continuum

Richard Horsley is the Distinguished Professor of Liberal Arts and the Study of Religion at the University of Massachusetts Boston. As the title would suggest, this book approaches Paul with the understanding that Paul was not merely concerned with religious systems (primarily Judaism), but that he was also concerned with the political-economic life. So here is a short overview of the book:
Introduction: Horsley lays out the shift from "standard NT scholarship" that have focused the bulk of its attention on Paul and Judaism toward the Roman Empire. The book is basically a publishing of the session at the 2000 annual SBL meeting with some additions.
Chapter 1: Robert Jewett, "The Corruption and Redemption of Creation", Reading Rom. 8:18-23 within the Imperial Context.
Jewett overviews Greco-Roman understanding of nature, looking at Hesiod, Virgil, Horace, etc. He then looks specifically at Romans 8 to discover the "implications of Paul's formulation against the foil of the imperial context." He does a pretty thorough job walking through the relevant section in Romans 8 to see Paul's view of fall and redemption of creation.
Chapter 2: Abraham Smith, "Unmasking the Powers", Toward a Postcolonial Analysis of 1 Thessalonians.
Having just finished working through 1 Thessalonians in my Greek exegesis class with Dr. Arnold, this chapter was particularly interesting to me. He believes that this book contains Paul's resistance to the empire and as such he has a section on resistance among Judean-Israelites and different philosophies, a section on the Pro-Roman elites, and a section on Paul's criticism of Thessalonian aristocracy to strengthen his argument.
Chapter 3: Neil Elliott, "The Apostle Paul's Self-Presentation as Anti-Imperial Performance".
Elliot argues that while the imperial imagery and cult were ritual representations of power, so was the performance of Paul's presence, through his language of triumph, afflictions, and war-imagery.
Chapter 4: Rollin A. Ramsaran, "Resisting Imperial Domination and Influence", Paul's Apocalyptic Rhetoric in 1 Cor.
Ramsaran argues that "how Judean apocalyptic traditions inform or possibly provide the backbone to Paul's argument have not been adequately examined." Here, Paul is seen as an 'apocalyptist' who uses Greco-Roman rhetoric in 1 Cor.
Chapter 5: Efrain Agosto, "Patronage and Commendation, Imperial and Anti-Imperial".
This was a good chapter that overviews various forms of patronage and commendation seen in the Roman world, especially making note of the "letters of recommendation" as one principal means by which this imperial patronage system was propagated. Agosto then focuses his attention on commendation in four of Paul's letters (1 Thess. 5; 1 Cor. 16; Phil. 2, 4; Rom. 16), concluding that Paul's commendations are "almost diametrically opposite" to the imperial system.
Chapter 6: Erik M. Heen, "Phil. 2:6-11 and Resistance to Local Timocratic Rule", Isa theo and the Cult of the Emperor in the East.
Heen focuses most of his attention on isa theo in Phil. 2:6b, seeing how such terms were used by Greek urban elites to honor the emperor and views the Christ hymn of Phil. 2:6-11 as direct resistance to the imperial cult.
Chapter 7: Jennifer Wright Knust, "Paul and the Politics of Virtue and Vice".
Knust sees Paul's rhetoric of virtue and vice as not just a typical polemic from a well-taught Hellenistic Jew, but even as a "pointed attack" toward outsiders, including the emperor himself. While others piled on virtue upon virtue in their description of emperors, Paul's description of outsiders as idolaters given up to impurity and dishonor cannot be ignored as mere stereotypical polemic.
Chapter 8: Simon R.F. Price, "Response".
Some final thoughts from whom Horsley deems as an important figure in opening up the discussion of the imperial cult and its relationships.

For 200 pages, this is definitely a good book to get started on the discussion of Paul and the Roman Empire.

φυσικὴν χρῆσιν?

Today, I read part of another chapter in J. Paul Sampley's Paul in the Greco-Roman World titled 'Paul, Families, and Households' by David L. Balch. So far it's been very interesting and good read overall, but I knew somewhere down the line I would run into something that would raise my eyebrows and today was it:

"Another key text for understanding Paul's attitude toward sexuality is Rom 1. Focusing on Greco-Roman philosophic and literary ways of conceptualizing sexual matters, Fredrickson concludes that 'in Romans 1:24-27 Paul points to the problem of passion without introducing the modern dichotomy of homo-hetero-sexuality.' Like his contemporaries, Paul writes about 'natural use' (φυσικὴν χρῆσιν) and 'unnatural use' (χρῆσιν … τὴν παρὰ φύσιν) of sexual desire (1:26, 27), which was thought to be analogous to the natural use of hunger. The pleasure of sex, then, is to be limited by satisfaction, just as a wise person with a full stomach limits eating. As we saw above, this use of 'natural' does not raise the question of the gender of either the subject or the object of sexual desire. Plutarch (Advice to Bride and Groom 144B) also refers to the wife's 'use' of the husband, to which Paul probably refers in Rom 1:26... which is not then a reference to lesbian sexual activity... Fredrickson agrees with Martin: by 'against nature', Paul means not 'disoriented desire' but 'inordinate desire.'" (Sampley, 277-278)

While the argument seems cogent enough, it seems to me that if we properly read Rom. 1:25 that establishes the Διὰ τοῦτο ("for this reason") in 1:26, it cannot be understated that the indictment found in this section is rooted in creation (e.g. serving the creation more than the Creator). Here's what a few people have said regarding this paragraph:

C.E.B. Cranfield, Romans: A Shorter Commentary, 35:

"By 'natural' and 'contrary to nature' Paul clearly means 'in accordance with the Creator's intention' and 'contrary to the Creator's intention', respectively. It is not impossible that Paul had some awareness of the great importance which 'nature' had in Greek thought for centuries; that he was aware of it use in contemporary popular philosophy is very likely. But the decisive factor in his use of it is his biblical doctrine of creation."

Douglas Moo, Romans (NICNT), 114-115:

"Paul generally uses the word 'nature' to describe the way things are by reason of their intrinsic state or birth, and in these cases there is no clear reference to divine intention. Some scholars in recent years especially, noting this, have argued that Paul does not here brand homosexuality as a violation of God's will... But Paul's use of the word 'nature' in this verse probably owes much to Jewish authors, particularly Philo... Sexual sins that are 'against nature' are also, then, against God, and it is this close association that makes it probable that Paul's appeal to 'nature' in this verse includes appeal to God's created order.

I'm just very skeptical that Balch is pushing for Paul's reference to Plutarch over against Philo and other Jewish writings...

What do you guys think?

Coincidence?

I'm currently working through C.K. Barrett's The New Testament Background: Selected Documents, and I have to say, it's been very good so far as he gives a very good overview of a lot of primary sources. Today I came across a section titled "Heretics," and here's what he said:

"A word commonly used to describe a heretic or sceptic is אפיקורוס ('appiqoros). The origin of the word is uncertain, but even if it was derived from a Hebrew root the coincidence of its sound with the name of the Greek thinker Epicurus must have played no small part in the development of its meaning."¹

Is this a coincidence?

While it may be a bit anachronistic and taking things out of context, Elie Wiesel once said, "In Jewish history, there are no coincidences."

¹C.K. Barrett, The New Testament Background: Selected Documents, (New York: Harper & Row, 1989), 210.

A Tale of One (Two) Poets?

Do you know these two famous poets:

I'm currently reading through Paul in the Greco-Roman World edited by J. Paul Sampley, and I'm in Chapter 7, "Paul and Greco-Roman Education" written by Ronald F. Hock. Pretty good so far, and I just noticed this last night:

A line from famous poet #1:
πρὸς δ' ἐμὲ τὸν δύστηνον ἔτι φρονέοντ' ἐλέησον
Have pity on me, the unfortunate one, while I am still alive. -- Homer the Greek

Awe factor: Greek scholiasts recognized that this line from the Iliad represented each of the eight parts of speech! πρὸς is a preposition, δ' is a conjunction, ἐμὲ a pronoun, τὸν an article, δύστηνον a noun, ἔτι an adverb, φρονέοντ' a participle, ἐλέησον a verb. I have not read up enough on Homer to know if this is accidental or intentional, but I am currently standing with the latter choice.

A line from famous poet #2:
I've always wondered if there was a god. And now I know there is -- and it's me. -- Homer the Simpson

Awe factor: In this one line, Homer succinctly sums up the core of humanity since the Fall.

Is Homer Simpson Ὅμηρος reborn?

PS: On a related note, does anyone know of any good textbooks to learn Classical Greek and Latin?