The New Interpreter's Bible: 10 [Hardcover]

The list of contributors, editors, and consultants on the project is a veritable Who's Who of biblical and theological scholarship, representing all major traditions and schools of thought liberal and conservative. Leander Keck, of the Yale Divinity School, is the primary editor of the series.

The volumes were published individually, and can be purchased individually, which is a good thing, given that they are a bit expensive. But for any serious biblical scholar, preacher, student, or enthusiast, they are invaluable.

--Volume X--

The tenth volume of the New Interpreter's Bible continues the New Testament, containing the books of Acts, Romans and First Corinthians, including an introductory essay on Epistolary Literature (i.e., letters). This was the final volume to be published. The series is now complete.

Robert Wall of Seattle Pacific University provides both the commentary on Acts as well as the essay on Epistolary Literature. The introductory article on Acts includes maps and drawings of archaeological sites, and looks at Acts from the standpoint of composition and conversation. Thus, Acts can serve as a story, as theology, or as historical framework.

In the essay on Epistolary Literature, Wall looks at both the Pauline collection and the letters attributed to other apostles. He examines the issues of dating and sequencing, the controversies over authorship on some letters, and the literary issues and features of letters versus other types of literature.

N. Thomas Wright, theologian of the Church of England, examines the Letter to the Romans. Looking at the structures and the themes of Romans, Wright argues against the idea of pulling out a few verses here and there as representative of the whole. `One might as well try to get the feel of a Beethoven symphony by humming over half a dozen bars from different movements.'

J. Paul Sampley of Boston University looks at First Corinthians. Sampley explores the city of Corinth, the church in the community there, Paul's relationship with the Corinthians, particular themes that appear in the letter as representative of early Christianity.

High praise goes to the general editorial staff for working with such strong authors/scholars, that their work fits together well as part of this set while retaining the individual characteristics (much like the writers of the Bible itself!).

--Other volumes available--

The following is a list of each volume in this twelve-volume set, and the contents of each.

Volume I: General Articles on the Bible; General Articles on the Old Testament; Genesis; Exodus; Leviticus

Volume II: Numbers; Deuteronomy; Introduction to Narrative Literature; Joshua; Judges; Ruth; I & II Samuel

Volume III: I & II Kings; I & II Chronicles; Ezra, Nehemiah; Esther; Additions to Esther; Tobit; Judith

Volume IV: I & II Maccabees; Introduction to Hebrew Poetry; Job; Psalms

Volume V: Introduction to Wisdom Literature; Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; Song of Songs; Book of Wisdom; Sirach

Volume VI: Introduction to Prophetic Literature; Isaiah; Jeremiah; Baruch; Letter of Jeremiah; Lamentations; Ezekiel

Volume VII: Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature; Daniel; Additions to Daniel; Hosea; Joel; Amos; Obadiah; Johan; Micah; Nahum; Habakkuk; Zephaniah; Haggai; Zechariah; Malachi

Volume VIII: General Articles on the New Testament; Matthew; Mark

Volume IX: Luke; John

Volume X: Acts; Introduction to Epistolary Literature; Romans, I Corinthians

Volume XI: II Corinthians; Galatians; Ephesians; Philippians; Colossians; I & II Thessalonians; I & II Timothy; Titus; Philemon

Volume XII: Hebrews; James; I & II Peter; I, II & III John; Jude; Revelation

Although the volumes are large and you'll need to dedicate 28 inches of shelf space if you intend to acquire the entire series (and you should), you'll appreciate the large, easy-to-read typeface and the inclusion of two English translations of every passage of the Bible (NRSV and NIV for the 66 books used by both Protestants and Roman Catholics; NRSV and NAB for the Deuterocanonical Books read primarily by Catholics). Besides verse-by-verse commentary, each book has a general introduction, "Overviews" to large sections within the books, and periodic "Reflections" (intended, I presume, to help kick-start many a pastor's sermon preparation). In addition, there are occasional Excursuses on a variety of fascinating topics (although there are none in Volume X, there are 4 in Volume VIII on the Gospel of Matthew). On the off chance that these commentaries won't answer every question you may have, the detailed footnotes and thorough bibliographies will direct you to all the right sources.

My only gripe is that the series does not cover ALL the books of the Apocrypha as represented in the NRSV translation. There is nothing, for instance, on 1 and 2 Esdras or 3 and 4 Maccabees. My copy of Volume X came with an announcement that in Spring 2003, Abingdon Press would be coming out with the New Interpreter's Study Bible. I plan to pre-order it as soon as I can. My only hope is that this Bible will include the Apocryphal books they neglected in the Commentary. The announcment also stated that an index volume would be issued in Fall 2003. Can a CD-ROM be far behind?

Now for the comments on the topic:

Let me suggest to the reader that they do their own investigation into NT Wright before they simply assume someone else's view is correct. NT Wright certainly has some different interpretations of Romans and Paul, but a couple of points need to be made.

First, have you that have criticized him actually read his work? And that is, not parts of a couple of books and some reviews online, but have you read and studied his work? This common courtesy should be offered to any author.

Second, The comment is made that Wright's views depart from those of the Reformers: from Luther, Calvin, etc.. Let us not forget that these are merely Christian scholars too. We must compare an authors work against scripture and not be so taken with a particular theological camp that we are in danger of lifting tradition higher than it ought to be. That was what the reformers themselves were concerned about and fighting against: bringing back to scripture the significance that was being placed on tradition. Sola Scriptura was the cry and it should be the cry still today.

Concerning Wright's view of Paul, and while I am not completely sold on it yet, it seems plain after having read his work (and spoken with him) that he does not tear down that which was established at the Reformation, but he builds upon it. Through all of this he appeals with passion and sincerity to scripture, therefore, let your criticism be born of scripture also.
The above review reads almost verbatim the numerous criticisms online from Reformed pastors and theologians. Of all those criticisms that I have read (and I have read over a dozen conservatively) some make some valid points but most if not all of them discredit themselves with ignorant, or defensive or simply unwarranted accusations.

Concerning justification (this is a major simplification), it should be clear from the vocabulary what the word justification means. When justice is served, then someone has been found guilty or not guilty of something. When someone is justified they are declared righteous (the verdict is declared). They are not righteous because they are declared righteous. They are declared righteous (justified) when/because they have been found to BE righteous. A defendant is not declared innocent (or justified in his actions or lack thereof) because someone declared him so, but someone declared him so because the evidence demonstrated he was innocent. We are to be judged; Christ speaks the evidence on our behalf; due to the righteousness of Christ awarded us because of our faith in Jesus, God (or the judge) declares us innocent! With God, justice must be served -- He must make a decision one way or the other -- will He declared us unjust or just? Are we "unjustified" or are we "justified"? Because of Jesus and our faith in Him we are declared at JUSTIFIED! And the gavel slams down!

Bottom line is that you are not justified by faith because you believe in justification by faith. You are justified (declared just) because of the righteousness (the condition) that you received in faith in Christ. From the other side, if you 1)did not have faith in Christ, you would 2)not receive Christ's righteousness, therefore you would 3)not be declared just (or be "justified") by God.

There is a great deal more to this and I certainly do not claim to speak for Wright. I am simply suggesting that you investigate for yourself. There are plenty of resources available. And for goodness' sake, don't agree or disagree with something because it agrees with or does not agree with the Reformation. The Reformers would not. Sola Scriptura!