472 Volume th e Number

119 e x p o10
s iPages
tor y times
472480
Copyright 2008 SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore)
DOI: 10.1177/0014524608093738
http://EXT.sagepub.com

New Testament Theology Since Bultmann

Y
By robert morgan
Oxford

Textbooks bearing the title New Testament Theology (or similar) are a small part of the sub-discipline, but
can clarify its problems and summarize conclusions. This article refers to earlier work before considering
the textbooks published over the past forty years.It appends a list of commentaries and series which also
contain much New Testament Theology and refers to other writings which show something of the character
of the discipline.
Keywords
New Testament theology, Theological interpretation, Commentaries, Bultmann

N
ew Testament Theology (NTT) covers a large
proportion of scholarly and popular writing
on the New Testament (NT). This article
will focus on a small part of that, the textbooks
usually called NTT or the like. That must include
reference to the historical Jesus research found in
most NTTs (arguably its only proper context for
those who understand him in accord with the NT
witness).1 It does, however, unfortunately exclude
NT theologians like Ksemann and Bornkamm
who never published a NTT2 but who were clearly
doing theology in and through their historical and
exegetical research.3
Whether writing NTT is doing theology,
and whether theology is performance as well as
critical analysis of the tradition, can be debated.
Few doubt that even historians of early Christian
thought need some understanding of theology, but
NTT is rarely explicitly confessional. For all their
admiration of Barths Romans, neither Ksemann
1
See A. Lincoln and A. Paddison (eds.), Christology and
Scripture (London: Continuum, 2007), 4884.
2
Ksemanns lectures on NTT were cyclostyled and
circulated among his students, and his polemical best-seller
Jesus Means Freedom (London: SCM Press, 1969) (German
19725) is almost a miniature NTT.
3
Ksemann spoke of the thoroughly misplaced modesty
of exegetes who suppose that they merely do the historical
donkeywork for the systematic theologian. New Testament
Questions of Today (London: SCM Press, 1969), 7 (original
1957).
nor Hoskyns nor Barrett imitated that by writing
explicit theological interpretations. Their convictions
no doubt influenced their questions and perspectives
but these were sufficiently close to those of the New
Testament Christian writers to allow their historical
descriptions to correspond roughly to their own
unstated beliefs. There was no need for apologetic
distortion of historical research.
Other leading British New Testament scholars
such as Dodd, Moule, Caird, Evans and Hooker
also lectured on NTT, but it was German lecture-
courses which yielded the major textbooks from G.
L. Bauer (1800) to Schelle (2007).4 These provide an
overview of the conceptual content of the twenty-
seven canonical writings, usually set in a historical
framework. That requires a knowledge of other texts
too, and a few of these were sometimes included.
The constraints of a one-semester lecture course
and the disciplinary subdivision that separates
dogmatics and ethics in modern theology have often
led to the ethics of the New Testament being treated
separately, but they are part of NTT. Richard Hays
The Moral Vision of the New Testament (1996), for
example, can be read as a short NTT.
The institutional context of NTT in theological
faculties largely concerned with clergy training
assumes that most teachers and students will see
4
See the admirable survey by H. Risnen, Beyond New
Testament Theology (London: SCM Press, 1990, 20002).
 the expository times
the religion of these early Christian texts as their
own (however passionate or ambivalent about it
any individual might be). It is assumed that the
canonical texts have a central significance for their
own contemporary Christianity. In such a context
all New Testament teachers worth their salt (and
ideally all clergy) have a NTT in their heads, even
though few are published. When scholars die before
completing their NTTs, a devoted student sometimes
completes the magnum opus.5 Only Schlatter is on
record as writing one in a few weeks, and it shows in
his style,6 but many share his minimalism with regard
to footnotes. These syntheses presuppose a mass of
detailed work but that does not need rehearsing in
overviews.
The advantage of deferring most NTT to an
annotated bibliography and limiting our survey to the
textbook overviews is (apart from practicality) that
these raise most clearly the central problems of NTT,
especially the unity of the New Testament (a necessary
theological postulate) in face of the evident historical
diversity, and the question of the relationship of NTT
to contemporary theology. The former can be evaded
in less synthetic studies, but not in a NTT. The latter
has been the hidden engine driving NTT. Both issues
arise from the churchs use of scripture as a source
and norm of Christian faith and theology.
Questions of definition include the relationship
of NTT to the histories of early Christianity that
modern biblical scholars rightly engage in. Here too
scholars and teachers have overviews in their heads,
but few are published. The books that dissertations
and research grants yield are inevitably restricted
in scope. For many, NTT can be identified with the
history of early Christian thought, concentrating on
the religious ideas contained in the texts (and perhaps
their pre-history), allowing the broader histories to
concentrate on the mission and expansion of early
Christianity and the development of its institutions.
That close association of NTT with the early
history of Christianity has its roots in F. C. Baurs
Hegelian fusion of history and theology.7 It also
5
E.g. Roloff completed Goppelt, Hurst reconstructed Caird,
Horn completed Strecker, Sding edited Thsing, etc.
6
W. Neuer, Adolf Schlatter (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1996),
46480.
7
Best seen in his Paul (1845, Eng. trans. 187375) and
Church History (1853, Eng. trans. 187879) which are both
as much NTT as his posthumous lectures bearing this title
(1864).
473
stands behind William Wredes celebrated critique
of H. J. Holtzmanns NTT for being insufficiently
historical and retaining too many eggshells from the
disciplines earlier relationship to dogmatics.8 The
two projects are conflated in some contemporary
presentations and accounts of the discipline, notably
those of Klaus Berger,9 W. Schmithals10 and Heikki
Risnen (n. 4).
A more nuanced view was that of Bultmann, who
insisted on a rigorous historical investigation of these
documents of the history of religion but claimed
that this might be guided either by an interest in
reconstruction of past history or (in) interpretation
of the New Testament writings.11 He insisted that
neither exists without the other and that they always
stand in a reciprocal relationship, but he asked
which stands in the service of the other. His own
presentation emphasized the interpretation of the
New Testament writings under the presupposition
that they have something to say to the present.12
That further remark has been a dominant, though
usually unstated factor in NTT. People do it because
these texts are not only historically foundational,
but are a source and norm of most Christians
contemporary faith.
How NTT can serve that theological purpose
is not obvious. Its historical exegesis does not
necessarily (if at all) yield normative talk of God.
In Bultmanns theological exegesis of Paul and
John, historical and theological interpretation
coincided, but his reducing the theological meaning
of the texts to their anthropological dimensions
underestimated other aspects. His new synthesis
depended on an existentialistic account of history,
indebted to Dilthey and Heidegger, but this failed
to penetrate biblical studies. It may yet prove more
suggestive for the future of NTT than the positivistic
historiography which has dominated much biblical
8
W. Wrede Concerning the Task and Method of So-called
New Testament Theology (1897) Eng. trans. in R. Morgan
(ed.), The Nature of New Testament Theology (London: SCM
Press, 1973; revised translation forthcoming).
9
The subtitle of Theologiegeschichte des Urchristentums
(Tbingen: Francke, 1995 2 ) is Theologie des Neuen
Testaments.
10
Theologiegeschichte des Urchristentums (Stuttgart:
Kohlhammer, 1994) Eng. trans. The Theology of the First
Christians (Louisville, KY: WJK, 1997).
11
Theology of the New Testament, Vol. 2 (London: SCM
Press, 1955), 251; and (Waco, TX: Baylor, 2007), 251.
12
Ibid.
474 the expository times
scholarship. Some subsequent German NTT
followed Bultmanns existential(ist) interpretation,
but most backpedalled the philosophical input
which had allowed him to speak of God in a modern
and challenging way through his NTT. Most work
in this field limits itself to what can be said about
the texts by historians and exegetes, without much
philosophical or theological underpinning. The
disciplines theological aims are usually implicit,
or present in the minds of modern interpreters
and their readers, but not articulated in the actual
interpretations proffered.
Bultmanns emphasis upon interpretation could,
however, be taken against his own training in
the history of religions school in a more literary
direction. Interpretation implies texts which are
appreciated in their integrity, not treated merely
as sources for getting at what lies behind them.
Reconstructing the history of our religion once
seemed the best way to disclose its meaning and
truth, but that has now yielded to a greater diversity
of approaches, especially more literary paradigms.
This diversification has not yet made its full impact
on NTT, but may be seen in the return to a focus
on each discrete canonical text, contrary to Wredes
prescription (n. 8), and away from frameworks
which require more history of traditions research on
the pre-history of the texts.
Bultmann himself and his pupils retained the old
history of religion framework of NTT, improving it
as Wrede had advocated, and finding fresh theological
uses for history of traditions research in their new
kerygmatic theology. Seeing how the traditions
about Jesus were actualized by being interpreted
in new contexts provided a model for modern
theologian-preachers, but that was only attractive in
churches where both scripture and preaching were
highly regarded. Like all NTT it presupposes a close
relationship between church, theology and critical
scholarship, and requires better theological education
of clergy than most countries consider important
or can afford. Where the theological dimensions of
form and redaction criticism were not appreciated
these approaches to the gospels gradually lost their
allure and were replaced by a more modern literary
sensibility.13
13
The turn is brilliantly described by Stephen Moore in
Literary Criticism of the Gospels (New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press, 1989).
Bultmanns immense prestige and the sheer
brilliance of his Theology of the New Testament
(194852, Eng. trans. 195155) discouraged
alternative textbooks for almost twenty years prior to
the period reviewed here. Even then Hans Conzelmann
wanted his Outline Theology of the New Testament
(1967, Eng. trans. 1969) only to supplement his
teachers classic, adding in the theologies of the
synoptic gospels and giving more prominence to
the historical components of Bultmanns account of
Pauline and Johannine theology, which had tended
to abstract the theology from the history.
Conzelmann deplored the new historicism which
was already driving hermeneutical theology out
of biblical studies, and he had no more time than
Bultmann for the Cullmannian salvation history
theology that he attributed to Luke. Like Bultmann
he in principle excluded reconstructions of the
historical Jesus from NTT, but paid more attention
to the synoptic kerygma. His theological aims
and convictions are evident in the prominence of a
Lutheran account of Pauls theology and the total
exclusion (even from the index of biblical references)
of the Book of Revelation, surely one of the major
NT witnesses, however problematic.
The 1960s also saw the regeneration of
Roman Catholic biblical studies in and after the
Second Vatican Council. The standard-bearers
(Schnackenburg, Vgtle, Schrmann, Brown,
Fitzmyer) did not publish NTTs, but academic
textbooks14 had already been published by Meinertz
(1950) and Bonsirven (1951). The four-volume NTT
of K. H. Schelkle (196876, Eng. trans. 197178)
was organized thematically. This was practical for
the non-specialists who form part of the readership
of NTTs. It gathers material together under familiar
headings, but contributed less to the interpretation
of the texts than its generous scale promised.
The tendency of textbook NTTs to become
compendia of the biblical material is always present
in conservative or Biblicist presentations whose
authors assume that saying what the Bible says is
sufficient, or is all that biblical scholars can offer.
But to repeat in a new historical situation what was
said in an old one is inevitably to say something
different. The problem of interpretation cannot be
evaded, especially when reading religious texts still
14
Lemonnyer (1928) and Kuss (1936) and subsequently
F.Porsch (1982) were short and popular.
 the expository times
considered authoritative in a changed intellectual
milieu. All NTTs are interpretations, though some
modern theologians stand closer to the letter of
scripture than others. The main question for them
all is how the biblical material is aligned with the
interpreters own understanding of the subject-
matter. The older textbooks had answered this by
organizing the conceptual material according to
the framework supplied by traditional dogmatics.
Conservative NTTs retain more of this than more
critical ones do.
Doctrinal themes can provide a language for
historical descriptions. After all, these topics
emerged in large part from the churchs engagement
with scripture. But NTT needs to distinguish the
historical descriptions provided by biblical theology
from the accounts of modern belief constructed
by dogmatics.15 Conservative NTTs which make
extensive use of dogmatic vocabulary have been
suspected of minimizing the distinction. They react
against NTTs which exaggerate the gap between
the New Testament and modern Christianity, but
themselves underestimate it. Among these G. E.
Ladd (1974) especially, but also D. Guthrie (1981)
and L.Morris (1986) have served their evangelical
market well, not least by making room in it for
a cautious historical criticism, but they have not
significantly advanced the discipline.
Oscar Cullmanns 1940s salvation history
alternative to Bultmanns human existence-oriented
NTT was presented in monographs,16 not a NTT.
Like Schlatters conservative classic NTT, revived
by translation in the 1990s,17 Cullmann offered a
theologized vision of history which few historical
critics are willing to share, even when they too want
to question Bultmanns theology at that point. It was
less effective than the critique of Bultmann by the
younger group around W. Pannenberg,18 but it had
some influence on the more critical NTTs of Kmmel
and Goppelt which followed.
15
As prescribed at the start of the modern discipline by
J. P. Gabler On the proper distinction between biblical and
dogmatic theology ... (1787).
16
Especially in Christ and Time (1946, Eng. trans. London:
SCM Press, 1951, revised 1962). Salvation in History (1965,
Eng. trans. London: SCM Press, 1967).
17
Vol. 1: The History of the Christ (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker, 1997). Vol. 2: The Theology of the Apostles (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker, 1999).
18
See W. Pannenberg (ed.), Revelation as History (London:
Sheed & Ward, 1969). (German 1961).
475
W. G. Kmmels accessible The Theology of the
New Testament According to its Main Witnesses
(1969, Eng. trans. 1973) was published as the
so-called new quest of the historical Jesus was
running out of steam, having carried its point that
NTT could not neglect this topic or relegate it to a
presupposition of the discipline, as Bultmann (not
without reason) had proposed. Kmmel makes Jesus
(as understood by the modern critical historian rather
than as by the evangelists) a main witness alongside
Paul and John. He had earlier insisted on both a
future (against Dodd) and a present (against J. Weiss
and Bultmann) dimension to Jesus preaching, and
now emphasizes the significance that Jesus ascribed
to his person . .. in the context of his proclamation
of salvation (p. 58). His reconstruction draws Jesus
closer to Christian faith than Bultmanns quotation
of Wellhausens tag, Jesus was not a Christian; he
was a Jew had done. He achieves this mainly by
accepting the historicity of more synoptic traditions
than most critics. This way of minimizing the distance
between Jesus and the gospels finds its most extreme
form in Schlatter (n. 17) but is also present in the
historical Jesus of N. T. Wright,19 and the NTT of
U. Wilckens (2002), and (more subtly and creatively)
J. D. G. Dunn.20 Kmmels claim that Jesus himself,
like his followers later, envisaged a time between
his death and the parousia, found agreement in
J. Jeremias NTT (1971, Eng. trans. 1971). That
summation advanced no further than Volume 1: The
Proclamation of Jesus (i.e. the historical Jesus) which
Jeremias, against the Bultmann school, including its
new questers, thought decisive for NTT and for
Christianity.
Jeremias greatest pupil, Eduard Lohse, published
a short outline NTT in 1974. As befitted the future
presiding bishop, it balanced the different theological
tendencies and best critical scholarship of German
NTT. From Switzerland Eduard Schweizers
Theological Introduction to the New Testament
(1989, Eng. trans. 1991) is comparable, despite its
modest title.
L. Goppelt identifies his posthumous NTT
(197475, Eng. trans. 198182) with the salvation
19
Jesus and the Victory of God (London: SPCK, 1996).
20
Dunn does not see either Jesus Remembered (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003) or his early masterpiece Unity
and Diversity in the New Testament (London: SCM Press,
1977) as parts of a NTT, but both could be so classified.
476 the expository times
history tradition of Schlatter, von Rad and Cullmann,
but distances himself from the less sophisticated
positive historical trend of Kmmel and Jeremias.
He rightly argues that New Testament talk of God
is so rooted in the faith of Israel that a NTT needs
to say more about the Old Testament than has been
customary. His attempt to bring his theological
perspective into critical dialogue with historical
criticism offers a reasoned alternative to Bultmann,
refusing to abandon either modern critical methods or
the quasi-historical narrative components in biblical
talk of God. Volume 1: Jesus Effect (Wirken) in its
Theological Significance exposes the limitations of
a purely historical reconstruction and integrates
the results of that quest into Christian reflection, as
is surely right if the earthly activity of Jesus is to be
part of a NTT. Volume 2 on The Variety and Unity
of the Apostolic Witness to Christ is incomplete and
unfortunately lacks a chapter on Mark.
George Ladds impressive conservative textbook
(1974) was influential in America. It discusses critical
judgments but rejects them. Apart from a short Part
3 on the primitive church it is more canonically
than historically organized, but the synoptic gospels
are homogenized to create a synoptic Jesus who is
taken to correspond to the historical reality. Even
more conservative, Donald Guthries NTT (1981) is
organized thematically and so does even less justice
to the historical diversity. George Caird died in 1984
but his resurrected lectures and notes and work begun
became in 1994 a rich but idiosyncratic book, also
thematically arranged, but ending with the historical
Jesus who is recoverable and able to be seen as the
starting-point and goal of NTT (p. 144). Polemic
against the bodiless grin of existentialism (p. 242)
spices the presentation without adding depth.
In the 1990s a fresh crop of large NTTs emerged,
starting with Hans Hbner (199095) whose first
of three volumes contains prolegomena. This work
is mainly concerned with the relationship between
the Old and New Testaments and is too lopsided to
be much use as a textbook. Hbners revival of the
nineteenth-century phrase biblical theology of the
NT (corresponding to that of the Old Testament)
is adopted by Peter Stuhlmachers more significant
and usable textbook (2 vols: 1992 and 1999, Eng.
trans. forthcoming). Like Goppelt he brings modern
historical scholarship into conversation with the
biblical writers own understanding of their subject-
matter which he assumes he himself shares, because he
is open to the revelatory claims of the texts. He thinks
in terms of a historically reconstructed continuum
of tradition embracing both Testaments in a curious
mix of criticism and Biblicism partly indebted to von
Rad. The Apocalypse almost sinks out of sight in
the Johannine school tradition, reflecting standard
Lutheran unease, but this work ranks among the
major contributions to the discipline. His strong
emphasis on the atoning death of Christ appeals
to more conservative Christians, and the work can
expect a wider readership in America than it has
found in Germany.
Georg Streckers posthumous NTT (1995, Eng.
trans. 2000) reflects German 1960s scholarship in
a theologically serious and historically stringent
presentation which starts with Paul and the Gentile-
hellenistic influence and earlier Christian tradition
that Paul presupposes. When as here NTT starts
from the Christ event witnessed to in the kerygma,
the discontinuities between the Testaments are
emphasized and a unitary biblical theology rejected.
The apocalyptic prophet Jesus life and teaching
are included but in the section on early Christian
tradition prior to the gospels, i.e. as part of NTT,
not independently, as in much American historical
Jesus research.
Placing Paul first can be historically justified but
it also suits Lutheran preferences. This structure is
shared, however, in the admirable and readable NTT
of the leading second generation Roman Catholic
scholar, J. Gnilka (1994). There is no historical Jesus
section here, but that is not a matter of Bultmannian
principle for him. Rather, he had already published
in 1970 Jesus According to the Early Witnesses of
Faith, which could be seen as Volume 1 of a NTT.
His more popular NTT of 1989 did contain a Jesus
section. Non-canonical material is not discussed but
a historical emphasis is visible in the attention paid
to the hypothetical document Q and pre-Markan
passion narrative. The unity of the New Testament
is found in the kerygma of the death and resurrection
of Jesus, the ground of our redemption (p. 463), a
phrase which reflects the Christian standpoint of all
genuine NTT. Another Roman Catholic textbook
contains only Volume 2 by A. Weiser (1993) on the
theology of the evangelists (and more), sadly because
H. Merklein died before writing Volume 1.
A theologically most profound contribution from
a Roman Catholic is W. Thsings incomplete work
(3 vols: 199669, and a fourth exists in fragments
 the expository times
[vol. 1 originally 1982]). Too abstract, and indebted
to Rahner to appeal to most biblical scholars it
aims to anchor the diversity of the New Testament
witness in the historical reality of Jesus, and ranks
in profundity alongside the NTT reflections on Jesus
by H. Schrmann.21
Supreme among NTTs begun around 1960 and
published after a rich career in research and teaching,
is that of Ferdinand Hahn (2002). Two volumes and
1,576 pages of text without footnotes (excluding
bibliographies) could daunt, but it discusses in
some depth the issues that have confronted NTT
in the twentieth century and significantly advances
the discipline at several points. Volume 1 offers a
history of the theology of early Christianity from
the Baptist to the Apostolic Fathers, and Volume 2
clarifies the unity in this diversity through a more
thematic synthesis. This starts with 104 pages on the
Old Testament as the Bible of early Christianity, and
then sums up the revelatory action of God in Jesus
Christ, its soteriological, ecclesiological (including
ethical), and eschatological dimensions. Clear and
concise comment and measured judgment make this
a resource to savour over many years.
Ulrich Wilckens NTT will be even larger by the
time it achieves completion. He had in 1961 argued
for a more truly historical structure in a NTT (n. 18
Eng. trans. p. 115) and episcopal retirement has given
time to write at length. Two part-volumes appeared
in 2002 and a further two in 2005, corresponding
to Hahns first volume, a history of early Christian
theology. Whereas Hahn, like his predecessors,
provided a synthesis of Pauls theology and included
the deutero-johannine epistles and appendix (John
21) with the gospel, Wilckens is more canonical in
treating each epistle separately. More than any other
NTT, Volume 1, parts 3 and 4 of Wilckens consist
largely of a careful and insightful working through
the texts, and is on the way to becoming a one-volume
commentary. The history in Volume 1, parts 1 and
2 takes a generous view of the historicity of the
synoptic tradition and so minimizes the distance
between a historical reconstruction and Christians
faith-images of Jesus. Volume 2 is awaited.
Gerd Theissen does not consider his A Theory of
Primitive Christian Religion (1999) a NTT, but it is
deeply theological and represents one direction that
21
E.g. Jesus Gestalt und Geheimnis (Paderborn: Bonifatius,
1994).
477
a creative liberal NTT may take, namely, giving an
account of this religion which is open to modern
Christian belief and practice, as those based on
more reductive theories of religion are not. He is
too modest in denying that his work is useful for
... building up religious identity, even though it is
not the kind of NTT which he calls a normative
exposition of a religion through an interpretative
summary of its canonical texts, done by people
with a Christian identity and aiming to facilitate
Christian belief.22 This work is not confessional
but it is open to being read as theology and is itself
a kind of implicit theology, like most NTT. The
American sub-title Creating a Symbolic World
reflects Theissens genius in combining a historical
and social-scientific analysis with a possible modern
theological perspective.
A more traditional NTT is that of Kurt
Niederwimmer (2003) which proceeds from
the three-fold grounding of Christian faith (the
proclamation of Jesus; Easter experience and Christ
cult; the experience of the Spirit) to the beginnings
of Christian theology (Paul, John, Hebrews) and on
to its existence and stabilization in the early catholic
church. The absence of sections on the synoptic
evangelists and the Apocalypse is as striking as
the attention paid to the history of exegesis while
excluding the Reformers.
British and American New Testament theologians
have rarely written NTTs and much of their
material may be found in Introductions better
suited to American universities and seminaries,23
but John Reumanns brief Variety and Unity in New
Testament Thought (1991) deserves mention, and
there are now three larger NTTs written in English.
I.Howard Marshalls (2004) is more canonically than
historically organized, starting (after an Introduction
asking How do we do NTT?) with Mark, Matthew,
LukeActs, and then treating each Pauline epistle
separately, in what he thinks (probably wrongly)
was their chronological order. The Pastoral epistles
form a single chapter in the Pauline Part 3 and their
theological themes are taken together. The Johannine
literature forms Part 4, followed by Hebrews, James,
22
This is Theissens definition of NTT in C. C. Rowland and
C. M. Tuckett (eds.), The Nature of New Testament Theology
(Oxford: Blackwell, 2006), 20708.
23
The best (in my view) are by L. T. Johnson, The Writings
of the New Testament (1986, 19992), Raymond Brown (1997),
and especially Carl Holladay (2005).
478 the expository times
12 Peter, and Jude, and a conclusion discussing
diversity and unity in the New Testament. The
theological story and theological themes of
nearly every text are considered in turn and each
new section is related to what has preceded in a
cumulative way.
A larger, conservative, canonically organized
NTT is by Frank Thielman (2005). Each writing
except Acts (regarded as part of Luke) gets a separate
chapter. But the best of the latest bunch written in
English is by the Roman Catholic scholar Frank
Matera (2007). This is again fairly canonical in shape,
with Part One on The Synoptic Tradition consisting
of separate chapters on Mark, Matthew, LukeActs.
Each text (or group of two or three or four texts)
is characterized neatly, but perhaps misleadingly,
as a theology of ... and most writings are taken personally prefer to move beyond (or behind) them
separately. The Book of Revelation is separated from
The Johannine Tradition and relegated to Other
Voices. A conclusion explicates the diverse unity
of the New Testament. The structure of this work
is admirable but it is the quality of each discussion
which places it with Hahns among the best, and the
one I would choose to give to my vicar for Christmas,
on the grounds that a NTT should never be far from
a preachers desk.
Our remit excludes total biblical theologies such
as Brevard Childs Biblical Theology of the Old
and New Testaments (London: SCM Press, 1992),
Charles Scobie The Ways of our God (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 2003), and James Mead Biblical
Theology (Louisville, KY: WJK, 2007). It also
excludes theoretical treatments of the discipline, such
as A. K.M. Adam Making Sense of New Testament
Theology (Macon, GA: Mercer, 1995), Dan Via
What is New Testament Theology? (Minneapolis,
MN: Fortress Press, 2002), P. F. Esler New
Testament Theology: Communion and Community
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005), and such
collections as C. Breytenbach and J.Frey Aufgabe und
Durchfhrung einer Theologie des Neuen Testaments
(Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007). The relationship
of historical critical NTT to new post-critical
developments in theological interpretation is also
subject for a separate article. Much of the best NTT
has always been done in scholarly commentaries,
and that has become more true of late. These and
some representative monographs and articles cannot
be ignored without distorting the picture. They are
therefore added to this survey of the mostly German
textbooks in an annotated Anglophone bibliography
which is inevitably selective.
In view of the theological as well as educational
aims of the larger textbooks we conclude by
underlining the need for more explicit attention
to what Hahn calls their Gegenwartsbezug or
relation to contemporary Christianity. All academic
disciplines now are more aware of the practitioners
standpoints. What distinguishes NTT from the rest
of New Testament studies is surely their (usually
implicit) relationship to the religious practices and
belief systems within which (whether loosely or
with commitment) their authors stand. So long as
Christian churches need critical theological readings
of their scriptures NTTs will continue to be written,
however legitimately some leading scholars might
(n. 4), or even wish to erase the phrase from their
academic discourse.24
Further reading
Some new commentary series aim to give more
practical theological help than those with a linguistic
and text-critical emphasis, not least by being more
compact without dropping scholarly standards. The
New Interpreters Bible (Abingdon, 1995), NT vols
812, edited by L. E. Keck, improves on the old
with overviews of large sections and Commentary
followed by Reflections on smaller units. For those
who have a problem with the Book of Revelation,
Christopher Rowland offers here the best of his
many excursions into those depths, and Tom Wright
is at his brilliant best on Romans. Eerdmans Two
Horizons NT Commentaries make the contemporary
concerns of NTT more explicit without neglecting
scholarly exegesis. The early volumes of M. M.
Thompson on Colossians and Philemon (2005), and
Stephen Fowl on Philippians (2005) set a promising
standard.
Less explicitly theological but equally practical
for theological students and clergy are the Abingdon
NT Commentaries and the Westminster Bible
Companion. In the former I would single out L.E.
Keck on Romans (2005) and Beverley Gaventa on
Acts (2003), and in the latter David Rensberger
on the Johannine Epistles (2001) and Gail ODay
and S. Hylen on Johns Gospel (2006). For anyone
24
Wayne Meeks Why Study the New Testament? New
Testament Studies 51 (2005), 15570.
 the expository times
in the UK wishing to up-date a commentary shelf,
the exchange rate makes this a good time to buy
the best of American NTT, and all these are short
enough to read or work through as wholes, rather
than merely refer to when puzzled. Larger tomes
remain indispensable for reference, from U. Luz
(now Hermeneia) or W. D. Davies and D. Allison
(ICC) or D. Hagner (Word) or R. T. France (NICNT)
on Matthew, through J. Marcus (Anchor) or A. Y.
Collins (Hermeneia) on Mark, J. Fitzmyer (Anchor),
or I. H. Marshall (NIGTC) on Luke, R. E. Brown
(Anchor) on John and on the Johannine Epistles,
C.K. Barrett (ICC) or J. Fitzmyer (Anchor) on Acts,
J. D. G. Dunn (Word) or J. Fitzmyer (Anchor) or
R.Jewett (Hermeneia) on Romans, G. Fee (NIC) or
A. Thiselton on 1 Corinthians, M. E. Thrall (ICC) on
2 Corinthians, J. L. Martyn (Anchor) on Galatians,
P. Achtemeier (Hermeneia) on 1 Peter, A. Lincoln
(Word) on Ephesians, H. Attridge (Hermeneia)
on Hebrews to D. Aune (Word) or S. Smalley on
Revelation to mention only some of the best
available in English.
Where time is limited smaller and medium scale
commentaries are indispensable. In the A. & C.
Black series, volumes such as J. D. G. Dunn on
Galatians (1993) and M. Bockmuehl on Philippians
(1998), J.Muddiman on Ephesians (2001), and
more recently A. Lincoln on John (2006) maintain
the standard set by Barrett a generation ago. The
Roman Catholic Sacra Pagina series is notable for
its theological sensitivity including D. Harrington on
Matthew (1991) and L. T. Johnson on Luke (1991)
and Acts (1992), F. Moloney on John (1998) and
B. Byrne on Romans (1996). On the same medium
scale C. F. Evans Luke (1990) is being reprinted and
in the WJK NT Library Commentary series L.T.
Johnson on Hebrews and Matera on 2 Corinthians
have recently appeared. The more conservative
commentary series also contain plenty of NTT: the
New International (NICNT), Eerdmans Critical
Commentary, Eerdmans Pillar NT Commentary, and
Baker Exegetical Commentary. Among one-volume
commentaries A. E. Harvey A Companion to the New
Testament (2nd edn. using NRSV, 2004) stands out.
After commentaries most NTT still appears in
monographs and articles on Paul or on individual
NT writings. The CUP series of short introductions
on The Theology of ... provides orientation for
students, including those who remain students after
a patchy university course. M. J. Gormans Apostle
479
of the Crucified Lord (2004) and J. M. Bassler
Navigating Paul (2007) count as NTT, as do some
discussions of Pauls use of scripture, notably R.B.
Hays Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul
(1989) and F. Watson Paul and the Hermeneutics of
Faith (2004)
NTT is found in some literary and social-scientific
study of the NT, such as N. R. Petersen Rediscovering
Paul (1985), P. F. Esler Conflict and Identity in
Romans (2003), T. H. Tobin Pauls Rhetoric in
its Contexts (2004), also on Romans, and Ben
Witheringtons socio-rhetorical commentary on
Romans (2004). Even books on Paul that try not
to be NTT are often unsurprisingly theological
in potential, such as Daniel Boyarin A Radical
Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity (1994), T. L.
Donaldson Paul and the Gentiles (1997), Troels
Engberg-Pedersen Paul and the Stoics (2000), John
Ashton The Religion of Paul the Apostle (2000), and
the now classic works of E. P. Sanders. Others, such
as C. Beker Paul the Apostle (1980) were always
intended to be NTT.
Any selection from the mountain of recent mono-
graphs will be subjective, but on John I would
single out David Rensberger Overcoming the World
(American title, more helpfully Johannine Faith
and Liberating Community, 1988) as short and
sparkling, Andrew Lincoln Truth on Trial (2000) as
perhaps the best work on NTT written in England
for a generation, and the new and greatly revised
edition of John Ashtons classic Understanding the
Fourth Gospel (2007). For theological sophistication
in historical Jesus research it would be hard to beat
Gerd Theissens hermeneutical reflections in each
chapter of The Historical Jesus(with A. Merz; Eng.
trans. 1998), or L. E. Keck Who is Jesus? (2000).
Work on christology is more obviously central to
NTT. Textbook presentations include M. de Jonge
(1988), F. Matera (1999), C.M. Tuckett (2001). L.W.
Hurtados history of devotion to Jesus, Lord Jesus
Christ (2003) is also constructive.
Reception history is now becoming an important
conduit for NTT. J. L. Kovacs on 1 Corinthians
(2005) in the series The Churchs Bible (Eerdmans)
demonstrates the abiding value of some patristic
exegesis, and the Blackwells commentary series
contains some great successes, most recently (among
the NT volumes) John Riches on Galatians.
Among collections of essays those of N. A. Dahl
reprinted in Jesus the Christ (1991) are justly famous.
480 the expository times

The three volumes on Pauline Theology (199198)
from the SBL group on the subject struggle with
NTT, and one of the Festschriften for J. L. Martyn,
The Conversation Continues: Studies in Paul and
John (1990), is notable. Paul W. Meyer The Word
in this World (2004) shows what NTT is about, as
does Robin Scroggs The Text and the Times (1993)
and (despite his disclaimers) Wayne Meeks In Search
of the Early Christians (2002). The Face of New
Testament Studies, edited by S. McKnight and G. R.
Osborne (2004), contains further pointers to NTT.
The list could continue (cf. John 21:25) but these
are some of what one reader in NTT has found most
helpful. Tolle, lege!

GOD HELPS THOSE WHO CANT HELP THEMSELVES

Paul A. Barker, The Triumph of Grace in Deuteronomy (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2004. 19.99. pp. xxi
+ 269. ISBN 9781842272268).
Barker is senior minister at Holy Trinity Anglican Church in Doncaster, Australia, and a regular visiting
lecturer at Ridley College in Melbourne. He completed his Ph.D. in 1996 under the tutelage of Gordon J.
Wenham. Wenham has written a foreword to this book, which is a largely unchanged version of Barkers
dissertation.
Besides an introduction and conclusion there are three chapters. Chapter 1 (Faithless Israel, Faithful
Yahweh in Deuteronomy 13) combined with chapter 2 (Faithless Israel, Faithful Yahweh in Deuteronomy
810) total less than half the length of chapter 3 (Faithless Israel, Faithful Yahweh in Deuteronomy
2930). In his introduction Barker points out that these chapters of Deuteronomy ground hope in Yahwehs
faithfulness to the promise to Abraham and notes that the Abrahamic covenant is significant throughout the
eight Deuteronomic chapters. For example, he illustrates how Deuteronomy 1:10; 10:22; 30:6 harken back
to the pledge of progeny at Genesis 15:5. His major hypothesis, however, is that Yahwehs grace establishes
Israels ability to obey.
Chapter 1 begins by reviewing interpretations of the entire Deuteronomistic History but also of
Deuteronomy itself and its first chapters themselves. Barker believes Deuteronomy 13 introduces
Deuteronomy rather than the Deuteronomistic History. He continues by looking at Israels faith-lessness in
Deuteronomys opening chapter. An awkwardness surfaces because his introduction indicates he will treat the
biblical book as is; yet without explaining why, he omits verses 918 when treating the chapters structure.
Regardless, he then turns to Yahwehs faithfulness in all three chapters. Barker may omit mention of Israels
faithlessness in Deuteronomy 23 because here Israel does obey! Perhaps we may wonder whether including
the nations faithfulness in the chapter title might have been worthwhile.
Foreshadowing later comment on chapters 2930, discussion about chapter 8 spends some time on Israels
heart which knows God and which God knows. While handling chapter 9, Barker asks but does not answer
the question why Yahweh would command an incapable people to keep the covenant. Further deliberation
on the subject could have been valuable.
Barker esteems Deuteronomy 30:110 the most important passage for his study, and he devotes forty pages
to it. Unfortunately, he prefers to read temporally when Israel acts, then Yahweh acts over conditionally if
Israel acts, then Yahweh acts at verses 13, 910, without adequately describing the substantive difference.
On the whole, chapter 3 of the book argues that the Moab covenant neither replaces nor supplements but
instead equals the Horeb covenant. In comparing the Sinai covenant with the Abrahamic covenant, Barker
claims most consider the latter unconditional, although the only sources he cites consider Genesis 17
conditional which would in fact appear presumptive given the stated requirement there to walk blamelessly.
Happily, Deuteronomy 30:1114 evinces that Israel will return and obey Yahweh since, as the conclusion
says, God helps them when they cannot do it alone. Barker ends his detailed and stimulating volume on this
high note.
EDWIN HOSTETTER
Asbury Theological Seminary