I have nothing whatever to say against historical criticism. I recognize it, and once more state quite definitely that it is both necessary and justified. My complaint is that recent commentators confine themselves to an interpretation of the text which seems to me to be no commentary at all, but merely the first step towards a commentary. Recent commentaries contain no more than a reconstruction of the text, a rendering of the Greek words and phrases by their precise equivalents, a number of additional notes in which archaeological and philological material is gathered together, and a more or less plausible arrangement of the subject matter in such a manner that it may be made historically and psychologically intelligible from the standpoint of pure pragmaticism. Jülicher and Lietzmann know far better than I do how insecure all this historical reconstruction is, and upon what doubtful assumptions it often rests. Even such an elementary attempt at interpretation is not an exact science. Exact scientific knowledge, so far as the Epistle to the Romans is concerned, is limited to the deciphering of the manuscripts and the making of a concordance. Historians do not wish, and rightly do not wish, to be confined within such narrow limits. Jülicher and Lietzmann, not to mention conservative scholars, intend quite clearly to press beyond this preliminary work to an understanding of Paul. Now, this involves more than a mere repetition in Greek or in German of what Paul says: it involves the reconsideration of what is set out in the Epistle, until the actual meaning of it is disclosed. It is at this point that the difference between us appears. There is no difference of opinion with regard to the need of applying historical criticism as a prolegomenon to the understanding of the Epistle. (6-7)

Here’s a link to the entire 2010 program (WordDoc), but I have also listed belong the relevant sessions on NT, HB, early Christianity, and archaeology:

FRIDAY, March 5

6:00-8:00 pm (SESSION I)

SBL: Hebrew Scriptures/Old Testament I

Brian Alderman, Lee University, Presiding

Brandon J. Simonson, Vanderbilt University

• Was Sarai a naditum? Examining the Sexuality of Sarai in an Ancient Near Eastern Milieu

Kristen L. Cox, University of Georgia

• Moses and the Motif of Water: From the Nile to the Jordan River

William L. Lyons, Regent University

• The Forgotten Casualty: Children and War in the Hebrew Bible

Joseph F. Scrivner, Samford University

• Wisdom as Cultural Capital: Socioeconomic Interests in Proverbs 1-9

SBL: New Testament I

Theme: New Testament Themes

Mark Proctor, Lee University, Presiding

Alexander Stewart, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

• Eschatology and Soteriology in 1 Peter

Kevin Larsen, Mid-Atlantic Christian University

• Neglected Considerations in Understanding the Structure of the Book of Revelation

Ricky Shinall, Vanderbilt University

• One Saturday in Capernaum: Mark’s Gentile Appropriation of the Sabbath

John Daniels, Flagler College

• Gossiping Jesus Into Being: The Oral Processing of a Social Personage in the Gospels

AAR: History of Christianity I

Theme: Early Christianity

Michael Simmons, Auburn University, Presiding

Ryan T. Woods, Emory.

• Providence, Punishment, and Perfection: Clement and Basilides on the Suffering of Martyrs

Annie Tinsley, University of Birmingham, U.K.

• Response to Harold O. Maier’s ‘A Sly Civility — Colossians and Empire’

Jonathan Schwiebert, Lenoir-Rhyne University.

• The Meaninglessness of Baptism

Alan Knox, Southeastern Theological Seminary.

• Theological Sources of Ignatius of Antioch

John Stokes, Auburn University Montgomery

• The Cult of Mithras and the Early Christians: Conflict and Competition in the Second and Third Centuries

8:15-9:30 pm

Presidential Addresses:

AAR: Michelle Tooley, Berea College

• Beyond the Peace Dividend in Guatemala: Re-membering Women’s Bodies

SBL: Jodi Magness, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

• Truth and Fiction: The Talpiyot Tomb in Context

SATURDAY, MARCH 6

9:00-10:45 am (SESSION II)

ASOR/SBL: Archaeology and the Ancient World I

Theme: ASOR Presidential Address

Greg Linton, Johnson Bible College, Presiding

James Riley Strange, Samford University

• Economics and the Archaeological Field School: Some Thoughts on the Production and Consumption of Education in the 21st Century

SBL: Hebrew Scriptures/Old Testament II

Robert Wallace, Shorter College, Presiding

Douglas Watson, Emory University

• The Rhetoric of Lament in the Book of Joel

Callie Plunket-Brewton, University of North Alabama

• Aesthetics and Architecture: The Rebuilding of Zion in Isaiah 49-55

Todd Hibbard, University of Tennessee, Chattanooga

• From Name to Book: Another Look at the Composition of the Book of Isaiah

Jerry Gladson, Columbia Theological Seminary

• The Deus Absconditus in Lamentations and in Postmodern Life

SBL: New Testament II

Theme: The Gospels

Kavin Rowe, Duke University Divinity School, Presiding

James W. Barker, Vanderbilt University

• John’s Use and Disuse of Matthew

David Moffitt, Duke University

• Jonah, Jews, Jesus, and Gentiles: Matthew’s Appropriation of the Sign of Jonah Saying in Light of the Gentile Mission

Tim Wardle, Wake Forest University

• Mark, the Jerusalem Temple and Jewish Sectarianism

Jason Robert Combs, UNC Chapel Hill

• Locating Luke 6:5d: Toward a Social Context for the Sabbath Worker

2:30-4:15 pm (SESSION III)

ASOR/SBL: Archaeology and the Ancient World II

Theme: Jesus and the Galilean Economy

Ralph K. Hawkins, Kentucky Christian University, Presiding

Mordechai Aviam, The Institute for Galilean Archaeology — Kinneret College, in Collaboration with the Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic Studies,

University of Miami

• Socio-Economic Conditions in Galilee at the Time of Jesus

SBL: Hebrew Scriptures/Old Testament III

Bryan Bibb, Furman University, Presiding

Theme: Emerging Technologies that Enhance Biblical Scholarship and Teaching

Panelists: TBA

SBL: New Testament III

Theme: Theological Issues in the Interpretation of the New Testament

Richard Vinson, Salem College, Presiding

Jason Staples, UNC Chapel Hill

• Lord, Lord: Jesus’ Use of the Divine Name in the Synoptics

Douglas A. Hume, Pfeiffer University

• The Economics of Friendship: An Interpretation of the Narrative Summaries in Acts 2:41-47 and 4:32-35

Michael Zolondek, Florida International University

• And They Threw Him Out of the Vineyard: An Analysis of the Parable of the Wicked Tenants

Alan Knox, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

• A Theology of Mutuality

4:30-6:00 pm (SESSION IV)

ASOR/SBL: Archaeology and the Ancient World III

Theme: Jesus and the Galilean Economy

Ralph K. Hawkins, Kentucky Christian University, Presiding

Panelists: Tom McCollough, Centre College

David Fiensy, Kentucky Christian University

Doug Oakman, Pacific Lutheran University

Mordechai Aviam, The Institute for Galilean Archaeology — Kinneret College, in Collaboration with the Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic Studies, University of Miami

SBL: Hebrew Scriptures/Old Testament IV

Nancy L. deClaissé-Walford, McAfee School of Theology, Mercer University, Presiding

Steve Cook, Independent Scholar

• The Biblical Hermeneutics of Margaret Walker: The Case of “Girl Held Without Bail” and Jephthah’s Daughter

B.J. Parker, McAfee School of Theology, Mercer University

• The Sublime, Terrible and Ezekiel 16

Jackie Wyse, Emory University

• A Book of Daniel(s): Characterization in Bakhtinian Perspective

Joshua Vis, Duke University

• The Sacrificial System of Leviticus in the Book of Hebrews

AAR: History of Judaism II

Theme: Second Temple Judaism

Gilya Schmidt, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Presiding

Edmund Gallagher, Heritage Christian University

• The Greek Bible among Ancient Jews

Bennie Reynolds, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

• Lost is Assyria: Locating ’svr on the Maps and the Lexicons of Jewish Writers from the Hellenistic Period

David Stark, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

• mvrh tzdqh as a Hermeneutical Functionary in the Qumran Sectarian Manuscripts

Kenneth Henson, University of Central Florida

• Prophetic “Light” Versus Qumranic “Darkness”: Isaiah’s Audacity of Hope

SUNDAY, MARCH 7

8:30-10:15 am (SESSION V)

ASOR/SBL: Archaeology and the Ancient World IV

Theme: Archaeological Investigations and Reports

Terry W. Eddinger, Carolina Evangelical Divinity School, Presiding

Dan Warner, The Virtual Bible Project

• A Re-Assessment of Canaanite Cultic Structures Based Upon a Functional/Utilitarian Approach

Sharon Lea Mattila, University of North Carolina at Pembroke

• Was There an Economic Crisis under Antipas? Revisiting the Questions of Royal Estates and Taxation in Herodian Galilee

Jeff Hudon, Andrews University

• Judahite Expansion into Philistia during the Early Eighth Century BCE: What is the Historical and Archaeological Evidence?

John Wineland, Kentucky Christian University

• A Report on the 2009 Season at Khirbet Mudaybi

AAR: History of Judaism III and Hebrew Scripture/Old Testament V (joint session)

Theme: The Handwriting on the Wall and Other Tales of Old

David Garber, McAfee School of Theology, Mercer University, Presiding

Cameron B. R. Howard, Emory University

• A Basic Conceptual Metaphor in the Serek ha-Yahad

Michael Fuller, Lee University

• Divine Intervention and Israel’s (”History’ of) Passivity in Josephus and Other Early Jewish Documents

Marian Broida, Emory University

• Textualizing Divination: The Writing on the Wall

SBL: New Testament IV

Theme: Reception History of the New Testament

Doug Hume, Pfeiffer University, Presiding

Diane Lipsett, Wake Forest University

• Stones, Scandal, and Seeing God: John Donne in the Reception History of Matthew

Wayne Coppins, University of Georgia

• Paul’s Juxtaposition of Freedom and Positive Servitude in 1 Cor 9:19 and its Reception by Martin Luther and Gerhard Ebeling

Ben White, UNC Chapel Hill

• How to Read a Book: Irenaeus and the Pastoral Epistles Reconsidered

Jeremy Barrier, Heritage Christian University

• The Earliest Christian Novels: An Analysis of the Manuscript and Literary Evidence for Christian Novel Writing in the Pre-Constantinian Era

10:30 am-12:15 pm (SESSION VI)

ASOR/SBL: Archaeology and the Ancient World V

Theme: Archaeological Method and Theory

Sharon Lea Mattila, University of North Carolina at Pembroke, Presiding

Ted Carruth, David Lipscomb University

• A Sculpture Fragment from Iron II Moabite Khirbet Mudaybi’: A Case Study of Inter-Disciplinary Inquiry for Interpretive Purposes

Robert Darby, University of Missouri-Columbia and Erin Darby, Duke University

• “Re”-Covering the Past: How Do We Protect and Study Jordan’s Threatened Ancient Sites? Approaches at “Ayn Gharandal”

Frederick L. Downing, Valdosta State University

• When the Center Cannot Hold: A Paradigm for Reading Near Eastern Archaeology

SBL: New Testament V

Theme: Paul

Diane Lipsett, Wake Forest University, Presiding

Mark Proctor, Lee University

• If Christ Has Not Been Raised — The Inefficacy of a Qualified Gospel in 1 Cor 15:17

Thomas Whitley, Gardner-Webb University

• From Qumran to Philo: Precedence for Paul’s Use of “Israel”

Annie Tinsley, University of Birmingham (UK)

• “Colossians and Empire”: A Response to Harold O. Maier

Presian Burroughs, Duke University

• Why Await the Apocalypse of the Sons of God? Reflections on Creation’s Liberation in Romans 8:18—22

I picked up LTJ’s book but haven’t had the opportunity to read through it thoroughly. From what I have read, I think it will be a great contribution to anyone studying Greco-Roman religion. Johnson seeks to dispel notions that early Christian religion was wholly different from that of pagan religion. “The heart of the book, ” Johnson writes, “is a close and (I hope) careful comparison between the ways of being religious among Gentiles and in Christianity” (ix-x). He emphasizes that his book is written from the perspective of religious studies and not theology.

Johnson develops four ways or types of being religious in Greco-Roman religion. These four categories are (1) religion as participation in divine benefits, (2) religion as moral transformation, (3) religion as transcending the world, and (4) religion as stabilizing the world. Johnson then uses these categories to describe how early Christians understood religion in similar ways to other religions in the ancient Mediterranean. This book should be useful for patristic scholars as well as students of the New Testament since his discussion of ancient religion spans from the New Testament to the post-Constantine era.

I roomed in the Marriott with Pat and Kevin; it was nice to stay at the Marriott because it was one of the two main hotels and host to the book exhibit.

I also enjoyed a number of entertaining sessions and panel discussions, especially the following:

1. HarperOne sponsored a session with Michael White, Pamela Eisenbaum, Jonathan Reed, and Bart Ehrman. Rather than discussing his book Jesus, Interrupted, Ehrman indicted scholars and pastors for not making the findings of biblical scholarship accessible to greater public. If we were doing our jobs as scholars, he argued, a book such as his would have never been successful as a best seller.
2. New Testament Theology: Status and Prospects with James D. G. Dunn, Udo Schnelle, Frank Matera, and D. A. Carson. It ended up being mostly a critical review session of Schnelle’s recently translated Theology of the New Testament. I would have liked to have heard more on the prospects of NTT, but it was fun to see Dunn and Schnelle spar a little bit.
3. Pauline Soteriology Group: Review of Douglas Campbell, The Deliverance of God. This session featured papers by Michael Gorman, Doug Moo, Alan Torrance, and a response by Douglas Campbell. Both Tom Wright and Richard Hays asked questions from the audience. Thanks to Andy Rowell for uploading the audio here.
4. Corpus Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti Section: Hans Dieter Betz’s Commentary on Galatians, Thirty Years Later. Here, Helmut Koester, Udo Schnelle, Richard Longenecker, and Margaret Mitchell all read papers and Betz responded to them. Mitchell’s paper was clearly the best and hinted at new directions and uses of rhetoric in NT scholarship. Koester did (facetiously) encourage Betz to write a second edition, which Betz said he’d do if only he could have a thousand pages to interact with recent scholarship and another twenty years to do it. Betz also teased us with a forthcoming article on the rhetoric of retirement in Paul.

There were also a number of other papers worth mentioning, but I’ll refrain. I had a few good meetings as well. One meeting was the Student Advisory Group of SBL of which I’m the new Southeastern representative. We discussed future SAG sessions and regional meetings among other things. A large percentage of SBL members are students, and so it’s good to have group dedicated to the needs of students. Fellow bloggers Pat and Michael also serve as SAG members.

As for the book exhibit, I purchased the following:

1. The two-volume edition of Koehler & Baumgartner, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Brill, 2001), aka HALOT. Since I’m taking a Daniel seminar, I thought it wise to have a good Aramaic lexicon in addition to BDB and Holladay.
2. Douglas Campbell, The Deliverance of God (Eerdmans, 2009). It was much cheaper at SBL than at Amazon and it seems like it will continue to be an important volume for many years to come.
3. Joseph Fitzmyer, The Letter to Philemon (Anchor Yale Bible). Yale was selling books half off and plus they gave you a nice tote bag.

There were many other books that tempted me, but money was short this trip. It was great meeting other bloggers at both the bibliobloggers dinner (at Cafe Giovanni) and the Biblioblogs.com dinner (at the Deutsches Haus). I occasionally had my camera with me and so here are some photographs from the trip. Click on the image below to enlarge it.

A sign on a Canal-Street light post.	View of the river from our hotel room.
Another view from the hotel room.	View of the Casino at night.
Pat and Kevin: roommates.	Michael Bird in front of a sign for one of his fifteen new books for 2009.
Mike Bird and Jim West.	Michael Fox at the Biblioblogs.com dinner.
John Hobbins.	Bourbon Street.
Jazz band on Bourbon Street.	James McGrath on the piano.

Can’t wait till it will be here in Atlanta next year!

Since the canon consists of a disparate collection of writings, with both the Old Testament and New Testament forming the Christian Bible, it resists reduction to any single unifying principle imposed from without as much as it lacks any explicit unifying principle within. If it excludes by its nature any “canon within the canon,” it certainly also resists any conceptual mold that either relativizes or removes the texts themselves in all their hard particularity. The resistance applies as well to any “biblical theology.” In all its forms, biblical theology is simply another attempt to reduce the many to one by means of some abstract unifying principle, whether it is denominated salvation history or justification or liberation or kerygma or regula fidei or narrativity or existential decision. All such principles demand the selection of some texts as a priori more central and governing than others. All fit the writings themselves to frames of greater or lesser abstraction. The canon resists such attempts precisely because it is made up of multiple and irreducible writings which cannot without distortion be shaped into a static symbolic system.

Luke Timothy Johnson, Scripture and Discernment: Decision Making in the Church (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 37.

Congrats to Loren for five years of excellent blogging. Is it coincidental that four of the authors listed are also bloggers (Stephen Carlson, April DeConick, James Crossley, and Scot McKnight)?

I just got my hands on the library copy of Douglas Campbell’s new book on Paul (The Deliverance of God). DOG—as its being called—is a massive tome of over 1,200 pages and for that reason I won’t be able to give it a thorough reading until the semester is over. Nevertheless, just browsing the table of contents, which you can do at Amazon, shows how wide-reaching this volume is. Whether one ultimately agrees with Campbell’s rereading of Romans (particularly 1.18-3.20), Campbell’s work offers a very valuable history of scholarship, at least in the sections I’ve read. Loren Rosson has, as usual, written a superb and detailed review of DOG. So buy the book and read Rosson’s review. Hopefully Eerdmans will have them on massive discount at SBL, since it retails at $60. My one complaint so far is: why the end notes, Eerdmans?

NB: Is “Deliverance of God” a subjective or objective genitive? ;-)

George Bradford Caird (1917-1984) published six major monographs and commentaries in his lifetime. The most notable of his publications were his commentary on Revelation (London, 1966) and his book on The Language and Imagery of the Bible (Essex and London, 1980). Caird also embarked on what would have been his magnum opus, his New Testament Theology, yet its publication was never realized during Caird’s life; he passed away with the book less than halfway complete. Lincoln D. Hurst (1946-2008), Caird’s literary executor and former student, took on the task of finishing the volume. In order to carry out his completion of the book in Frankenstein-like fashion, Hurst used Caird’s unpublished papers, published articles, lectures, private conversations between Caird and Hurst, Hurst’s own contributions, and sections from Caird’s books. His role, therefore, was somewhere between coauthor and editor. The book was finally published in 1994, ten years after Caird’s death.

There are countless books in the New Testament theology genre, so what made Caird’s approach stand apart from the rest? Caird identified the nature of New Testament theology as being historical; it is a descriptive endeavor which is void of both dogmatics and apologetics (1). He is optimistic about the historian’s ability to move beyond the subjectivity of their own time and attain some level of historical accuracy, which is “the product of free discussion, honest criticism, and constant revision” (4). Nevertheless, despite his appeal for New Testament theologians to be historians, Caird also argues that this person is also accountable to the church: “the ultimate test of a New Testament theology rests not in intellectual criteria but in the contribution it makes to the life of the Christian community” (22).

Though there is no such thing as a platonic form of New Testament theology, many have undertaken the task of writing such books. Yet the attempts have been flawed, which brings about the need for a new approach—Caird’s approach. But before he describes what his own attempt looks like, Caird discusses four other ways of doing New Testament theology, all of which fall short in one way or another. These include the dogmatic approach, the chronological approach, the kerygmatic approach, and the author-by-author approach.

Caird refers to his own method as the conference table approach. To write a New Testament theology is to sit at a conference table with all of the contributors to the New Testament present. Every voice will be given the opportunity to speak, as long as they have something to contribute to the discussion. The presider is the New Testament theologian. Since the person presiding is from an entirely different culture and era (i.e., sitting at a table with a bunch of dead guys) he or she must traverse “a descent into the world of the dead” (19). Not only does Caird have in mind some metaphorical visit to the underworld, but he draws on the stories of Odysseus and Aeneas with the result of convoluting the various images he uses to present his method. Adding an underworld descent to the conference table image is one thing, but developing it further with the blood sacrifices and gates of truth is another. The way he presents his argument is not necessarily confusing, but it does come off as stylistically confused.

Caird bases his method on the model of the first apostolic conference in Jerusalem. According to Galatians 2.1-10, the apostles agreed to disagree with Paul. They did not declare any sort of common creed or statement of faith. Though difference of opinion persisted, there was not a radical division between Paul and the Jerusalem apostles. Given this information, Caird argues that “the New Testament itself provides a criterion for judging its own unity” (24). When we put all the independent voices of the New Testament in dialogue with one other, we should expect differences, but they all testify of the same Jesus.

When we look back at the four previous approaches to New Testament theology (i.e., dogmatic, chronological, kerygmatic, and author-by-author) we see that they all have something to contribute to Caird’s program. It is dogmatic in the sense that the presider is responsible for setting the agenda at the conference table. It is chronological since his task involves being an historian. It employs a kerygmatic approach because he finds core theological premises present in all or most of the New Testament writers. Lastly it is like the author-by-author approach since he seeks to let eat author speak at the table.

But is his approach really much more than a slightly nuanced thematic approach, or, by introducing us to this conference table approach, does Caird achieve something truly novel in the way he does New Testament theology? The answer lies somewhere in between the two. He does take us systematically topic by topic through many important themes, yet these themes are discussed within the contexts of traditional historical-critical exegesis. Does the presider dictate the progression of the dialogue (top down) or do the texts speak for themselves and guide the discussion along (bottom up). It is not always clear.

The middle chapters (2—8) address various topics of New Testament theology as they relate to “salvation.” The second chapter outlines “The Divine Plan” which is mostly concerned with how the New Testament reads its scriptural authorities. Following that is “The Need for Salvation” (Chapter 3), which discusses sin and evil characters and the corruption of what is good. The fourth chapter, “The Three Tenses of Salvation,” explores the nature of salvation as “an accomplished fact, an experience continuing in the present, and a consummation still to come” (118). Caird more narrowly focuses on the three tenses in the following three chapters. “The Fact of Salvation” (Chapter 5) looks at the facets of salvation already accomplished. “The Experience of Salvation” (Chapter 6) pursues the present aspects of salvation. “The Hope of Salvation” (Chapter 7) deals with eschatology. In Chapter 8, Caird/Hurst describe “The Bringer of Salvation” which centers on the figure of Jesus, his humanity, and the Christological titles.

Chapter 9, “The Theology of Jesus,” is where we find Caird’s second great innovation (the first being the apostolic conference). Whereas Bultmann relegates Jesus to a presupposition, Caird reserves a special seat for him at the conference table. One might find it odd that Jesus speaks at an apostolic conference (that surely didn’t happen in Galatians 2 or Acts 15), but Caird justifies this move by arguing that “the historical Jesus is a deeply theological figure in the same sense as Paul, John, and the others” (x). This relies on the presupposition that we can get at Jesus’ historical teaching and that the authors of the New Testament are in dialogue with it. Yet if Caird compares the theology of Jesus with that of Paul or John, why give him his own chapter? Why not place Jesus’ own theology in direct dialogue with the others (i.e., in chapters 2—8)?

In Chapter 10, “Summary and Conclusions: Jesus and the Apostolic Conference,” Hurst gives helpful summaries of the preceding chapters. Then Hurst leaves the reader with six conclusions about New Testament theology drawn from this book: 1) the ‘gospel’ did not start out as a new religion, began as a political challenge to Israel; 2) Jesus saw Israel at a cross-roads and rather than promoting the traditional ideals of a Jewish nationalist Messiah, he came as the Messiah of self-negating sacrifice; 3) the invitation to enter God’s Kingdom meant to put oneself under God’s sovereignty and by doing so, one fulfills the Law of Moses; 4) in addition to expressing interest in the nation of Israel’s preservation, Jesus also cared for the individuals, that is, those who are children of Abraham; 5) Jesus used ambiguous categories to promote his agenda; 6) the notion that Paul obstructed the Jewish Jesus must be done away with and by looking at Paul as a Jew, we might better understand the Jewishness of Jesus.

Throughout the volume, Caird/Hurst offer a fresh, but sometimes overdone critique of certain scholars and some scholarly methods or fads. In the foreword, Hurst tells us that though Caird admired Rudolf Bultmann, he held him with Adolf Schweitzer and Johannes Weiss responsible “for much that is wrong today with New Testament theology” (viii). He shared no interest in form criticism or redaction criticism. This skepticism is summed up nicely in what is possibly a jab at Conzelmann’s negative reading of Luke:

The question is thus bound to be asked in the name of Redaktionsgeschichte how much we should attribute to Luke, and how much to Jesus. But behind this legitimate question may lie the latent, less legitimate and even sinister assumption that to interpret is to misinterpret. It is a matter of professional prudence on the part of interpreters of literary texts to allow for the possibility that an interpreter may occasionally be right. And it is certainly conceivable that Luke, in interpreting his sources, has shown that he actually understood both the teaching of Jesus and the eschatological language in which it came to him. (416, italics original)

Perhaps more valuable is critical stance of Caird/Hurst against theories of chronological developments in Christology. We must not rely on distinctions such as “late,” “secondary,” and “theological” over against their counterparts “early,” “primitive,” and “historical” when talking about the way the New Testament authors thought of Jesus (281). Developments from a low to a high Christology are not present in the New Testament as one of the highest Christological claims about Jesus’ preexistence appears in one of the earliest writings (cf. Philippians 2.6-7; cf. 343).

We also must ask how well the presider of this dialogue did in engaging everybody who contributed to the New Testament. Certainly some authors were given preference over others. Matthew and Mark remain the shadows of Luke and John. James and Jude had very little to contribute, or perhaps were not called upon as much by the moderator. Yet Caird/Hurst score points for giving the pride of place to Jesus who is so often marginalized in the discussion, even if we might disagree with the avenues that they took to get at Jesus’ teaching.

I think the authors of this volume accomplished the book’s goal insofar as it was conceived by Caird. It was an imaginative effort that could have turned out stylistically tacky, but the authors were able to use the conference table metaphor rather than abuse it.