Review *seifrid Mark a The Second Letter to the Corinthians Pillar Nt Commentary

Seifrid, Marker A. The Second Letter to the Corinthians. Pillar New Attestation Commentary; G Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2014. 569 pp. Hb; $l.   Link to Eerdmans

Seifrid's new commentary on Second Corinthians arrived near the same time as the 2d edition of Ralph Martin's classic WBC commentary from Zondervan. Seifrid is known for his piece of work on Pauline theology and more than specifically Justification in the Pauline literature. His Christ, Our Righteousness: Paul's Theology of Justification (IVP 2001) built on the foundation of his Justification by Organized religion: The Origin and Development of a Cardinal Pauline Theme (Brill, 1992). As i of the editors of Justification and Variegated Nomism (Baker, 2004), Seifrid is besides well-known as a defender of the traditional view of Paul over against the New Perspective. This theological background often comes through clearly in his commentary on 2 Corinthians.

In the cursory twelve-page introduction to the commentary, Seifrid first discusses the situation both before and after the writing of the 2d letter to the Corinthian church. Here he traces the sometimes confusing menstruum after the reception of 1 Corinthians, a cursory fourth dimension which included a "painful visit" and later "bawling letter" delivered by Titus.

2d, the introduction examines the various suggestions for the identity of Paul'southward opponents in the letter, which naturally leads Seifrid to the purpose of the letter. He advocates a minimal "mirror-reading," resulting in a Jewish-Christian opponent who appeared in Corinth between the two canonical letters. Since these new arrivals were considered apostles by the Corinthian church, they have made a bad state of affairs worse. But for Seifrid, there is cypher in the letter which tin be used to conspicuously describe a theology of the opponents. They preach another Jesus (2 Cor eleven:4) and for Paul, this is the real threat to the church.

Since at that place are a number of complex theories regarding the composition of 2 Corinthians, the third section of the introduction deals with the integrity of the letter. Afterwards a short synopsis of the usual divisions suggested in scholarship, Seifrid concludes the alleged incoherence and inconsistency is "more credible than real (xxxi). Paul's defence of his mission "constitutes the thematic unity" for the letter.

Finally, Seifrid offers a few comments on the theology of the alphabetic character. Despite the fact 2 Corinthians is a securely personal alphabetic character, Paul's concern is to lay out clearly the marks of a true apostle. For the Corinthians, there is "jarring contrast betwixt his powerful letters and his pitiful presence" (xxxii). Seifrid sees this as a hermenutical problem, and the whole of Scripture is at stake. For those who are outsiders, a veil covers their face and prevents them from seeing God and his saving work. The opponents have been blinded by the god of this world and are therefore "unbelievers" by definition. Merely those who are "in Christ" are free in see the truth of the Gospel as revealed now past Paul, God'south representative.

In my view, Seifrid's introduction is as well brief. While I agree at that place is little or no merit to many of the division theories for the letter, I would have liked more engagement with contemporary scholarship on the literary issues, whether in the introduction or the appropriate places in the commentary. While I idea his section on 6:xiv-7:1 was excellent, there is no hint this department is sometimes seen every bit a not-Pauline insertion. In that location is no interaction with Betz'due south theory that chapters 8-9 are authoritative messages, he simply states that chapters eight-9 are "integral to Paul'south larger purpose in the alphabetic character of binding the Corinthians to the other churches and to Christ" (317). Possibly including a detailed word of these literary issues would have distracted from Seifrid's overall goal of explaining the text of the letter as we have it, but given the stiff objections to the unity of the letter in New Testament scholarship, I am surprised the issue is not addressed.

The commentary follows the same pattern the other Colonnade commentaries. After a translation of the text, Seifrid briefly introduces the pericope, usually setting the section into the context of the letter as a whole. The commentary proper gain poesy by verse, commenting primarily on the English text, although occasionally he comments on a transliterated Greek discussion. Greek and Hebrew untransliterated in the footnotes. In that location are less exegetical comments on the Greek text than other PNTC commentaries. In fact simply rarely does he comment on the text. Comparing this to D. A. Carson's Matthew or Colin Kruse'due south Romans in the same series, in that location is very petty exegetical cloth indeed.

Seifrid'due south comments on ane Cor 5:21 are an example of the more theological nature of the commentary. For Seifrid, "not reckoning the trespasses of the earth" is a "forensic effect" and reconciliation and justification refer to the same result, the cantankerous and resurrection (260-261, and note 539). This verse offers Seifrid the opportunity to write more than than eight pages on justification from a decidedly Lutheran perspective (citing Luther and Melanchton at length in the notes). His word is first-class and the theology presented in this section certainly reflects the "traditional view" of Paul and justification, only there is fiddling discussion of the exegetical details in the text itself. For instance, a word of the meaning of γενώμεθα in the ἵνα-clause is missing. Nor does Seifrid discuss the potentially rich innuendo to Isaiah 53. But this is the fashion of the commentary and this criticism should not detract from the value of the commentary.

Interaction with other commentaries is minimal in the body of the commentary, merely Seifrid is obviously well-informed by a wide spectrum of scholarship. It is not surprising that Luther is ane of the most cited commentaries in the notes (co-ordinate to the index), merely simply 1 reference to Ralph Martin'south WBC commentary is strange. (Ironically, Barack Obama is also cited one time as well!) Another divergence betwixt this commentary and others in the PNTC serial is Seifrid use of High german scholarship. Seifrid ofttimes cites the piece of work of the Lutheran systematic theologian Oswald Bayer.

There are iii excurses embedded in the commentary. For example, after Paul'southward reference to himself every bit a "government minister of the New Covenant" in 2 Cor three:6, Seifrid offers 4 pages on "Paul's Understanding of 'Covenant.'" This brief overview of a monograph-worthy topic is a kind of biblical theology of Covenant," beginning with Galatians and concluding with Hebrews. Seifrid concludes Paul's contrast between the New and Erstwhile Covenants in 3:vi and 3:14 is consistent with both Galatians and Hebrews.

Conclusion. Seifrid's commentary on 2 Corinthians is another excellent contribution to the study of this oft-neglected letter of Paul. While it is certainly more theological than exegetical, it will nevertheless be a valuable resource for Bible teachers and pastors for many years.

NB: Thanks to Eerdmans for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

blackwellacesturod.blogspot.com

Source: https://readingacts.com/2015/05/28/book-review-mark-a-seifrid-the-second-letter-to-the-corinthians/

Share this post