Forthcoming posts

Later today (or tomorrow morning) I shall announce the winner of the Chris VanLandingham (Judgment and Justification in Early Judaism and the Apostle Paul) competition. Tomorrow I shall post another ‘Bauckham responds’ – he e-mailed me today to clarify his thoughts in relation to the generated discussion on my last post in the Jesus and the Eyewitnesses series. Oh yes, and I will get round to doing that Christian Zionism podcast soon, honest!

In the next post, I will publish my review of Scott J. Hafemann’s work, Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3 (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2005) which shall later (bar editorial changes) appear in the European Journal of Theology. Those involved in the debates surrounding Paul’s view of the law, justification, the ‘New Perspective’, and his scriptural hermeneutic will find this book to be of interest.

My summary of the review for the journal runs as follows:

In this reissued 1995 monograph, Hafemann, with extensive knowledge of the secondary literature and detailed attention to the primary texts, argues that the letter/Spirit contrast in 2 Cor 3:6 should not be confused with a law/Gospel contrast. The Apostle does not seek to criticise the Law at all and the contrast is best understood in ‘salvation-history’ terms. Further, while many suggest 2 Cor 3 is evidence of Paul’s christological hermeneutic, Hafemann maintains that Paul’s argument proceeds in dependence on Exod 32-34 without altering the original intention of the Pentateuchal text. These arguments necessitate a noteworthy reinterpretation of the meaning of Moses’ veil, and the Greek words katargew and telos. The review ends with a few critical reflections on this learned work.