Antiquitopia

Finally, in what seems to me an appendix in the chapter, albeit not without foreshadowing in terms of “pan biblical theology,” Bauckham exegetes three NT passages’ allusions to the Shema: Rom. 3:28-30; 1 Cor. 8:1-6; and John 10:30. He begins by noting, contra Margaret Barker, that there is no evidence for non-monotheistic forms of pre-exilic Israelite religion to survive into the Second Temple period to be available for early Christians. Early Judaism is “uniformly” monotheistic and NT writers presuppose Jewish monotheism and do not intend to depart from it. The widespread allusions to the Shema in the NT militates against Barker’s point. Outside of the three passages he analyzes, he cites Matt 22:37; Mark 12:21-30, 32, Luke 10:22, Gal. 3:20; 1 Tim 2:5; and James 2:19. So, it appears in all of the corpora of the NT, excepting Revelation. I am fascinated that for the bulk of the chapter on the OT, we barely glimpsed a text, and now in what feels like an appendix, it is all exegesi...

I am still in chapter 1 of Bauckham's Jesus and the God of Israel. See my previous remarks on the Introduction and C hapter 1A (monotheism). The second third of chapter 1 is about Christological Monotheism in the NT or Monotheistic Christology. In this section, Bauckham reiterates his (problematic) position that worship (monolatry) is the recognition of unique divine identity, and that there is no blurring of the boundaries with exalted angels or patriarchs, who do not participate in terms of creation or sovereignty—except for the exceptions which prove the rule (Enoch, and all the figures I listed last time like Melchizedek, Adam, Moses (although Bauckham directly denies this) and the anonymous self-enthroned figure from 4Q491c). There is no blurring with wisdom and word because they are already intrinsic in God’s own identity. From here, he moves into the Christology of the New Testament. He forewarns that it is not an exhaustive investigation of NT texts regarding Christol...

I am continuing my review of Richard Bauckham's Jesus and the God of Israel . I am dividing the rather lengthy first chapter into three posts (and they themselves are a bit long). You can see my introductory remarks here . Chapter 1 consists of a barely revised version of his booklet from ten years ago, also from Eerdmans (and even with the same cover design), entitled, God Crucified . In the first third of this chapter, he discusses ancient Jewish "monotheism," something that will be elaborated in chapters 2 and 3. He argues that the key issue for understanding New Testament Christology is Second Temple monotheism. He gives two views of monotheism among modern scholars: “strict” and “revisionist.” In the former, Jesus cannot be divine in a Jewish context—Jesus’ divinity threatens monotheism. In the latter, there is a denial of any strictness to monotheism: categories of being between human, angelic, and divine are all blurry (blurred by principle angels, exalted...

Since I blogged about the controversy that had surrounded the choice of Rick Warren giving the inaugural invocation, I guess I should comment on the actual prayer. First, the controversy surrounded having someone who gave some rather ridiculous comparisons to gay marriage (like comparing it to pedophilia). Then the issue was whether or not he would mention Jesus or not. Would he represent his particular brand of religiosity, or in an event for all Americans represent all Americans. On that issue, I came down on the side that the most "American" thing to do is just be yourself and not try to water things down to vague generalities. If it were a Hindu giving the invocation, I would expect an invocation of Vishnu, Siva, or whatever god or goddess to which that particular person was devoted. If an imam, I would expect something on Allah. And so on... One objection was what would happen if Warren completed the prayer by "in Jesus' name we pray," in which the ...