Joseph A. Marchal, ed., Studying Paul’s Letters: Contemporary Perspectives and Methods (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 248 pages, ISBN 9780800698188.

Introduction: Asking the Right Questions by Joseph A. Marchal.

This provocative book has been formatted by Joseph Marchal to make available the latest and most relevant critical perspectives on Paul to students in seminaries, small liberal-arts colleges, and universities. To achieve this goal, he has put together a remarkable group of outstanding Pauline scholars, and begins by posing and addressing the question of why anyone would study Paul. Traditionally, people have sought answers from Paul to questions about widespread issues such as women in leadership, slavery, gays, Jews, foreigners, pagans, the poor, children, and even the government. Marchal proposes to challenge readers to think in different ways about how to approach Paul, not only within the context of his own time, but in relation to our own world. According to Marchal, these critical perspectives can make us more savvy about the dynamics of our world and our application of Paul’s letters to it (2).

Marchal limits his study of Paul to what he calls the “authentic” letters of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon (3). Thus, he does not address why these are authentic and the others are not. He also accepts these letters as reflecting the linguistic influences of Hellenization with its widespread cultural practices, rhetorical presentations, and argumentation (4). Also assumed is that Paul’s letters were written at specific times, in response to particular situations, rather than being theological treatises or historical records (4-5).

Marchal’s goal is not simply to pass along information, but “to encourage a more critical and creative formation and even a transformation in how people negotiate their contexts” (8). This book certainly includes the latest trends in Pauline studies (9). Some approaches overlap, resonating and conversing with one another. Taken together, they clearly present the relevant issues, concepts, and practices for the various methods, and at the end of each chapter, include a demonstration of the application of amethod to a particular Pauline passage. Each chapter concludes with annotated selections for further reading.

Each chapter is written by a scholar who is both an expert in a selected method and an excellent teacher.

The individual essays begin with Melanie Johnson-Debaufre’s Historical Approaches: Which Past? Whose Past? She considers the nature of current biblical studies as characterized by “multiplicity and possibility,” and frames three basic principles which help to “reorient how we might approach history in relation to the letters of Paul” (15):

1. “Language does not describe or reflect reality, it creates and shapes reality” (15).
2. “What we see depends on where we stand” (16).
3. “History is an interpretation of the past, not the past itself” (17).

Johnson-Debaufre also suggests three corrective trends in Pauline studies which should be taken into account:

1. Paul should be de-Christianized, that is, he should be considered as a Jew within Judaism (18) rather than a convert to Christianity.
2. Paul should be politicized, that is, he should be read in terms of politics and economics rather than religion (20).
3. Paul should be de-centered, that is, he should be seen as only one part of the history of the early church rather than as the center of the movement (22-3).

In Chapter 2, Rhetorical Approaches: Introducing the Art of Persuasion in Paul and Pauline Studies, Todd Penner and Davina C. Lopez show the significance of understanding rhetorical strategies of ancient times when reading Paul: rhetoric pervades every aspect of our lives as well as those of ancient times. Arguments are persuasive depending on their relationships within the contexts and world-views of the times in which they were written. Hence, only by understanding how Paul’s arguments operated in the broader philosophical, social, and cultural environments of his time can the reader hope similarly to engage and apply these arguments to our world (49). Studying Paul is ultimately not about recovering a theology or an ideology, rather it is about “studying ourselves”, about using rhetorical analyses to better understand our world, not his. (50).

Ajith Fernando, The Call to Joy and Pain: Embracing Suffering in Your Ministry (Wheaton: Crossway, 2007), 192 pages, ISBN 9781581348880.

The Call to Joy and Pain by Ajith Fernando is a provocative analysis of the issue of pain and suffering. While he does not treat the cosmic problem of the reason for suffering in the world, he does consider at some length the concurrently difficult problem of suffering for the believer. He rejects the pervasive notion that Christians should not suffer; that indeed something is wrong when they do. In contrast, he strongly advocates that “something is seriously wrong not when Christians suffer but when they do not have the joy of the Lord” (p. 10). His main theme is just that—both suffering and joy are essential to the Christian life (p. 15).

Fernando interweaves exegesis of the New Testament texts with personal experiences and anecdotal situations, thus creating a strong position. This little book is laid out in four main sections, entitled: (1) “Suffering and Joy are Basic to Christianity”; (2) “Suffering Brings Us Nearer to Christ;” (3) “Our Suffering Helps the Church;” and (4) “Servants of the Church.” Each of these is further broken down into subsections, which provide ideal elements for devotional or meditational study. This is not to imply that Fernando’s work lacks scholarly analysis or contribution to this field. Indeed, his exegesis is noteworthy for scholars and pastors alike. This fine little book goes beyond platitudes or ‘bon mots’ and tackles with a solid hermeneutic the problem of joy in the face of pain and suffering. Ajith Fernando’s viewpoint is largely based on a theology, anthropology, and even soteriology, derived from the Pauline tradition, without yielding to the temptation to proof text. Fernando’s thesis is aptly condensed into a thought he expressed early in the book, “So, according to the Bible, joy and pain can coexist. Christians don’t talk about suffering unless they also talk about the joy of suffering. It is the joy that makes the cross worthwhile, for it gives us the strength to bear it” (p. 19; cf., Neh. 8:10).

Fernando calls God’s people to put into practice a well-rounded and comforting evangelism.

The author explores the three things he sees as being needed to experience joy in the midst of pain: lament, consideration of our trials to be joyful, and surrender. Of these, the one we find most poignant is the last. Fernando writes, “If we cling to anything in life, even a good thing, that thing will surely take away our joys” (p. 43). This harkens back to the message of many, if not almost all, spiritual masters, not the least of which is St. Ignatius in his Spiritual Exercises (cf., SE, 23)¹. We all know these things on something of a cloudy level, but Fernando brings home the point cogently and convincingly. Incidentally, although Fernando’s scope is primarily the Pauline tradition, his thesis is also supported by the Petrine tradition (cf., 1 Peter).

Reviewed by Thomas Doyle and Rebecca Skaggs

¹ “Therefore, we must make ourselves indifferent to all created things, as far as we are allowed free choice and are not under any prohibition.”

About the Authors

Thomas Doyle, M.Div., did his studies in theology at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific. He is a long-standing participant in the Charismatic Renewal of the Catholic and Episcopal Churches. He is presently Director of The Metanoia Ministry, an evangelically-based counseling ministry in the San Francisco Bay area.

Rebecca Skaggs with Thomas Doyle lead us into a biblical and thoughtful look at the reality of suffering.

The Issue

Why is there suffering in the world? Further, why does it appear that often “good” people suffer when the “wicked” often thrive? Where is God when people suffer individually and collectively? For centuries, both philosophers and theologians have sought to analyze the issue and suggest a coherent and reassuring response to it. In the face of actual suffering, however, these philosophical and theological concepts often fall short.

Believers have a particularly difficult task in understanding suffering since they firmly believe that God cares and is able to alleviate suffering yet he often does not. C. S. Lewis, who himself cried out in anguish when his beloved wife died a painful death from cancer,¹ frames the dilemma for believers as follows: “If God were good, he would wish to make his creatures happy, and if God were almighty, he would be able to do what he wished.” The logical conclusion follows then that since the creatures are not happy, either “God lacks goodness or power or both.”² This perspective causes a seemingly irreconcilable paradox.

The problem of suffering is so difficult, that some choose to avoid the issue altogether. Oliver McMahan in his study of the Pentecostal view of suffering provides evidence that “unfortunately, the Pentecostals and charismatics in the United States have not historically allowed the world to observe its grief. [they have] neglected, avoided and even worked hard to deny the experience of pain and grief.”³ He makes the point that an emphasis has been made on miracles, healings, signs and wonders leading to “a parade of power without penance or pain.” According to McMahan, “a painless Pentecost” leads to power struggles, pride, and “puritanical doctrinal disputes.” He notes the obvious absence of accounts of those who were not healed, miracles which did not happen.⁴ Of course, there have been some Pentecostal scholars through the years who have called for the consideration of the issue of suffering, pain and grief.⁵