Wright, N. T. The New Testament and the People of God. 1st ed. Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1992.

Superb! What a great introduction to 2nd Temple Judaism and 1st century Christianity! N. T. Wright first lays out his epistemological presuppositions and then works through different elements of Israel’s worldview in order to understand Christianity’s self-understanding.  He maps out the worldview of first-century Judaism (or Judaisms), considering its symbols: Temple, Land, Torah, and racial identity. This worldview is explained in terms  of creational monotheism, election, and eschatology. The result is a highly enjoyable and challenging read that lays the foundation for his other volumes.

“The great story of the Hebrew scriptures was… inevitably read in the second-temple period as a story in search of a conclusion. This ending would have to incorporate the full liberation and redemption of Israel, an event which had not happened as long as Israel was being oppressed, a prisoner in her own land. And this ending would have to be appropriate: it should correspond to the rest of the story, and grow out of it in obvious continuity and conformity” (Wright 1992: 217).

Wilson, Marvin R. Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989.

This is a balanced look at the Jewish roots of Christianity (the best I have read so far) and an excellent book for someone who knows little about Judaism and is wondering what it means to say that Christianity has Jewish roots. He traces the history of the synagogue and the Church touching on their theological conflicts. Wilson also takes some time to talk about Hebrew thought and why it is foundational. A few selected studies cover subjects like marriage, Passover and the last supper, the land and learning.  This would be a great book to read before Levine’s The Misunderstood Jew. Both books will show different perspectives and concerns and will raise important questions for both Jews and Christians.

“The Protestant tradition, especially Lutheranism, has tended to see the leitmotif for Paul’s understanding of the Gospel in the emphasis on justification by faith as opposed to the works of the law. Though this theme is certainly important to Paul, we are in essential agreement with Davies, who finds the locus of Paul elsewhere, namely, in his ‘subordination of the Law to Christ as in Himself a new Torah—new not in the sense that He contravened the Old but that He revealed its true character, or put it in a new light.’” (Wilson 1989: 28-9, quoting W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, p. xxxiv).

There is at least one thing in common between Christianity and Judaism: monotheism. However, not everyone will agree with that. To many, Christianity’s claim that it is a monotheistic religion is at the very least a mix-up of categories. You cannot say that you worship only one God, but then define it in such a way that strains the definition to the max. The doctrine of the Trinity seems to be a way that Christians found to have their cake and eat it too.

But when we talk about monotheism, what are we really referring to? Are we certain that the way we’ve come to understand monotheism is the same way Jews and Christians understood it in the 1st century? That’s the main question James McGrath, associate professor of Religion at Butler University (see his blog Exploring our Matrix), poses to us in his book The Only True God. Simply assuming that the way we define monotheism today and the way it was defined two thousand years ago is a huge fallacy. We need to set aside our understanding of monotheism and let the texts that we have from that period define the term for us.

At first, I thought this was going to be a defense of Christian monotheism, showing that what people thought about the one true God was in line with later Christian doctrine. But what McGrath wants to remind us is that the worldview of the Jews and early Christians allowed for certain things that were later extrapolated (my word, not McGrath’s) in Christianity and suppressed in Judaism as a way to contain its new definition of monotheism. The result is that neither quite formulated its understanding of the oneness of God as was perceived early on.
Read more »

Heine, Ronald E. Reading the Old Testament with The Ancient Church: Exploring the Formation of Early Christian Thought. Grand Rapids, Michigan: BakerAcademics, 2007.

Although I am not particularly interested in the Church Fathers (CFs), there is something about their interpretation of the Bible, and in particular the OT, that fascinates me. Sometimes reading the CFs on particular issues or passages helps us understand the shape of our own hermeneutics. I also find quite interesting that people who value the contribution of the CFs tend to pick and choose the portions that they find helpful and almost ignore all the other things they have to say on other passages (often less palatable to our modern sensitivities). I will be honest, I haven’t read any complete work of any of the CFs, but I have read many of their sermons and commentaries on specific passages. Although I value their contribution to the development of Christendom and fight against heresies, I do not find them to be very helpful. This is especially true of their reading of the OT. That’s one of the reasons why I picked up this book.

Ronald Heine wrote a very readable book on the CFs’ attitude and interpretation of the OT. I thought it was brilliant of him to start by outlining the Christian attitude and disagreements over the role of the OT in the Reformation, Enlightenment, Romantic and Modern periods. By doing this, it was obvious that there was a huge contrast between these periods and the CFs who never questioned its central role in the life of the church.
Read more »