Holly Beers and Craig Keener: We love the Bible, and at heart we want to understand it well and help others understand it also. That’s how we see our scholarship – as a way to serve the church. We both have our specific areas of interest and specialty, including how Craig works with ancient Greek and Latin texts which help us better understand the New Testament, and Holly studies the way that the Old Testament is incorporated into the New Testament, but we both simply love to study and teach more generally. We are both very involved in our local churches: teaching, preaching, and offering our gifts in a variety of ways.

PneumaReview.com: If they asked, what would tell this leader about your experience with the contemporary ministry of the Holy Spirit?

Beers & Keener: Both of us are Pentecostal and desire to deeply know and be led by the Spirit. We regularly practice the gifts of the Spirit both individually and in (church) community. Craig especially has traveled extensively and observed and participated in the Spirit’s work around the world. Holly teaches at a college where most students come from non-charismatic/Pentecostal backgrounds, and she regularly exposes interested students to the Spirit’s contemporary work and trains them to engage in it.

PneumaReview.com: Where did the idea for the Word & Spirit Commentary on the New Testament series originate?

Word and Spirit Commentary on the New Testament Series from Baker Academic (as of July 2025)

Beers & Keener: We noticed that there have not been very many biblical resources authored by scholars from Pentecostal/charismatic traditions. When researching for projects or preparing for classes, we had difficulty finding those voices. The need for a series like this was even more apparent because of the documented growth of Spirit-filled movements around the world. In conversations with an editor at Baker Academic we suggested this series, and Baker was happy to support us as editors and publish it.

PneumaReview.com: How were the various contributors selected?

Beers & Keener: We wanted to be intentional about including scholars from across the global Pentecostal and charismatic spectrum, so we recruited accordingly. The range of voices includes denominational Pentecostals, Reformed charismatics, charismatic Methodists, and others. They also reflect a range of cultures, including Spirit-filled voices from multiple continents.

PneumaReview.com: In what ways is the importance of the Word emphasized in these commentaries?

Beers & Keener: They are, at their core, biblical commentaries; in that sense the Word is central. They explain the best of what biblical scholars know about the original context of the books as they work through the entirety of each. They also highlight the Spirit’s inspiration of the biblical texts.

PneumaReview.com: How is the work of the Holy Spirit highlighted in these volumes?

Beers & Keener: This series focuses on how the same Spirit who inspired the text speaks and works today. Our authors “preach” their way through the texts, emphasizing how we listen alongside the ancient audiences for the Spirit’s voice in our time and contexts.

PneumaReview.com: What is the most unique aspect of this commentary series?

Beers & Keener: The authors engage the biblical text in both its ancient setting and its message for Spirit-filled Christians today. The commentaries do not separate the exegetical and application sections, as readers in Spirit-filled traditions tend to integrate and move naturally between these categories. In other words, Spirit-filled readers traditionally blend the ancient and modern horizons so as to read themselves within the continuing narrative of salvation history—that is, as part of the ongoing biblical story (not culturally but theologically/spiritually/eschatologically). Particularly distinctive of this approach, then, will be observing how God works in the biblical texts and how Christians can expect God to be working today, even if in new and/or culturally surprising ways. The commentaries are written with distinctives of the tradition(s), including testimony, a conversational style (“preaching”), and sidebars that feature connections to Spirit-filled history and interest, such as healing, exorcism, spiritual gifts, etc.

PneumaReview.com: In your opinion, is the divide in the church regarding the Word and the Spirit declining?

Beers & Keener: Yes, we see a growing interest in and commitment to keeping the Word and Spirit together. We find this to be very encouraging, and are convinced that the Spirit’s own prompting is the main reason.

PneumaReview.com: What factors are contributing to this?

Beers & Keener: Beyond the Spirit’s own initiation, it seems due to our increased global awareness and connectedness. More and more Christians have contact and even relationships with Christians from different traditions in our neighborhoods, our workplaces, and online. We hear about what the Spirit is doing around the world.

PneumaReview.com: Can you tell us about some of the forthcoming volumes and who is writing them?

Beers & Keener: This summer Craig’s co-authored volume with Robert P. Menzies on Acts will be published, and this fall Craig’s volume on 1-2 Peter and Jude will also be released. In the next couple of years you will see commentaries on 1-3 John by Jamal-Dominique Hopkins, 1-2 Timothy and Titus by Amy Anderson and Gordon Fee (revising Fee’s earlier contribution), Matthew by David Instone-Brewer, and Galatians by Roji George.

PneumaReview.com: What do you hope the lasting legacy of this commentary series will be?

Beers & Keener: Although the series naturally welcomes all readers, we especially hope to serve those who identify as Spirit-filled (broadly defined) leaders: pastors, seminarians, theology and ministry students, youth leaders, and Bible study leaders. We pray that the series testifies to the creative work and restorative goodness of the triune God.

PneumaReview.com: When will the series be complete?

Beers & Keener: The goal is 2030; at this point the date appears realistic, as authors are very excited about and committed to the series.

Craig S. Keener (PhD, Duke University) is F. M. and Ada Thompson Professor of Biblical Studies at Asbury Theological Seminary. He is author of thirty-seven books, with some 1.4 million copies in circulation. The books have won fifteen national or international awards, including six in Christianity Today; together the books take up 19,000 pages. He has also authored roughly one hundred academic articles; seven booklets; and roughly two hundred popular-level articles. In 2020 Craig was president of the Evangelical Theological Society. He is ordained with the Assemblies of God. His YouTube channel is: www.youtube.com/c/CraigKeenerPhD; his blog site is www.craigkeener.com/.

Learn more about this series and series co-editor, Holly Beers:

Dr. R. T. Kendall has been preaching for over sixty years. He has also personally experienced the power of the Holy Spirit. For twenty-five years he served as the pastor of Westminster Chapel in London. He is the author of many books and now ministers internationally. He is a strong advocate for bringing together in the church the exposition of the Word and the power of the Spirit.
An updated version of his book, Word and Spirit: Truth, Power, and the Next Great Move of God was released in October 2019.

PneumaReview.com: In Word & Spirit you have written about a great divorce in the church. Please tell our readers what you mean by that.

R. T. Kendall: I call it a silent divorce because nobody knows precisely when it occurred nor has it been officially announced – except that I have been saying it for nearly thirty years. That said, it is obvious that the evangelical wing of the church has been divided into two emphases – those who stress the Word – sound doctrine, historical Protestant theology and expository preaching, and those whose emphasis has been the gifts of the Spirit, signs and wonders and the need to be as the church was in the book of Acts. Both are exactly right. But it seems that nearly wherever I go in the world it is either one or the other. In the book of Acts they had both. But to find a church where both are truly carried out is exceedingly rare.

PneumaReview.com: What are some of the key factors that have contributed to this divorce?

R. T. Kendall: I don’t know for sure, but possibly because those who have assumed that signs and wonders ceased way back in the early church have espoused cessationism and have turned it into a dogma. If you believe in the gifts of the Spirit you are not very welcome in some churches. They are suspicious of those who uphold the possibility of signs and wonders today. I will say that this is not everywhere. In England the Charismatic Movement is mainstream; in America it is often regarded as the lunatic fringe. Cessationism has helped polarize these two movements. There should not be a divide, but there is. The word churches think they believe in the Holy Spirit because they are Trinitarian. The truth is, they believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Bible. Many are fearful of the Holy Spirit. At the same time many (thankfully not all) have little or no deep theology. For example, a robust view of the sovereignty of God is largely absent.

PneumaReview.com: You have said that there is a lot of biblical illiteracy in the church, even among Evangelical and Charismatic Christians. What are some of the main reasons for this?

Which one is God’s Word? Are all three equally Scripture? Let’s take a closer look to see what sets each one apart from the other two.

The United Bible Societies’ compilation, now in its fifth edition, is the base-text of several modern translations, such as the New International Version, the New Revised Standard Version, and the English Standard Version.  Occasionally the translators deviated from this base-text, but such instances are exceptions.

It has been said that the Byzantine Text is a more accurate version of the Textus Receptus. Though this statement is imprecise, it may help the average person get some idea of the similarities between the two. After the Textus Receptus was compiled in the 1500’s, many more manuscripts became available. In 1982, when Hodges and Farstad published the Majority Text, their compilation provided the text represented by the consensus of known Greek manuscripts, thus setting aside minority-readings contained in the Textus Receptus.

Why are there two editions of the Byzantine Text, with differences between them?  In Matthew through Jude, there are some textual differences where the evidence is closely divided, and occasionally (especially in John 7:53-8:11) textual differences involve more than two alternative readings; in some cases, no single reading can claim support from a majority of the manuscripts.   In the book of Revelation, the number of differences between the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text and the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform is especially high, mainly because Robinson and Pierpont took identifiable manuscript-families into consideration, rather than simply printing whatever reading had more manuscripts in its favor.

About 1,500 minor differences occur between any edition of the Textus Receptus and either edition of the Byzantine Text. All three major compilations – the Textus Receptus, the Byzantine text (whether represented by the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text, or by the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine Textform), and the UBS/Nestle-Aland text – agree over 95% of the time. Many readings within the remaining 5% have no discernible impact on translation.

However, some disagreements strongly impact translation – including readings in the Alexandrian tradition which appear to express errors, or which diverge from very early patristic testimony, or which do not support the deity of Christ to the same extent as the Byzantine alternative. Where such readings occur – such as in Matthew 27:49, Mark 6:22, Mark 10:24, Mark 16:9-20, Luke 22:43-44, Luke 23:34, John 7:8, John 7:53-8:11, First Timothy 3:16, and First John 4:3 – even some of the English translations that are mainly based on the UBS/Nestle-Aland text adopt the Byzantine reading, or mention it in a footnote, to compensate for the Alexandrian manuscripts’ shortcomings.

Some of the deeper issues at stake involve the question of the origin of the Byzantine Text.  The manuscript-evidence for the Alexandrian Text is older, but that may be merely an effect of the low-humidity climate of Egypt, which allowed manuscripts made of papyrus to survive longer there than in other areas.  Patristic and versional evidence demonstrates the use of an essentially Byzantine form of the text of the Gospels in the 300’s – the same century in which the two most important Alexandrian manuscripts, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, were made.  Were those patristic writers and early translators using a novel form of the text, or a form that had been handed down to them from yet more ancient times?  In addition, because most Greek manuscripts (over 80%) tend to agree at any given point, some might say that this shows that if any text has a special claim to have been providentially preserved for the church, it is the Byzantine Text.

With this brief introduction to the issue at hand, we encourage students of God’s Word to weigh the evidence as they build, or test, their convictions on this subject.
 

The mother and son team of Verna and James Linzey wrote this article together.

God is speaking today and Pastor Loren Sandford urges all of us to pursue biblical discernment.

With so many questionable prophetic words circulating these days, concerning both the wider world and personal prophecies, wouldn’t it be a good thing for the body of Christ to sharpen its discernment? I fear that to fail to do this will ultimately result in a tragic disillusionment with prophetic ministry at a time in history when accurate plumb line prophetic ministry is desperately needed. What are some ways to sort true words from false?

#1: Does this supposed word from God stand the test of Scripture?

Colossians 2:18 warns against the one who takes his “stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind.” It can be supposed revelatory visions we believe reveal a truth or it can be receiving a vision for some ministry you want to do or a position you’re convinced you hold that fills you with an energy that isn’t the Lord. In any case, it must square with the eternal Word. The apostle Paul wrote: “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!” (Galatians 1:8)

#2: Does this word reflect the revealed nature and character of God?

Begin this test with I John 4:8: “The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love.” God is love. His love may take many forms, ranging from tenderness to discipline and even anger, but it will always be love for our sake – love in the content of the word and love in the spirit of the word.

#3: Does this word line up with what God is already doing and with what the Bible tells us God wants to do? 

Question words that lead us in different directions than those already in evidence, bearing fruit in our lives and ministries. For instance, we founded the church I pastor on a vision for mercy—that we would be a place of refuge and healing. But for a time, we allowed ourselves to be side-tracked by those who called for a spiritual warfare emphasis. The result was predictably wounding. Until God brought about a cleansing, removed the competing voices and restored us to the original vision, warfare nearly destroyed us. We should have known. There have been others who called for a primary emphasis on prophetic ministry as our foundation. It resulted in deception and harm because God had dictated and confirmed a different foundation.

Pastor Vreeland offers a defense, analysis, and refinement of the theology of the Word of Faith Movement.

“O, when it comes to faith, what a living, creative, active, powerful thing it is. It cannot do other than good at all times. It never waits to ask whether there is some good work to do…”

 Martin Luther, Preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans [1]

The Debate over Word of Faith Theology

The independent charismatic movement has struggled to form an ecclesiastic identity amid its mosaic of churches, ministries, theological systems, and points of biblical emphasis. It surged onto the Pentecostal landscape in the fury of post World War II healing revivalism under the leadership of spiritual enthusiasts who were dissatisfied with established denominational Pentecostalism. They received the loose classification “independent charismatics” to distinguish them from the denominational charismatics or neo-Pentecostals of the late 20^th century charismatic renewal. Their self-imposed isolation from traditional denominational structures created an opportunity for theological innovations. This freedom has also allowed an array of voices to rise up and speak to the issue of theology often with less than accurate methodologies and piece meal constructs that in part have hindered the work of the Holy Spirit. No other movement has been more pervasive in the independent charismatic tradition than the word of faith movement[2] and none other has been as persuasive.

Researchers and Pentecostal historians have difficulty finding any independent charismatic church or ministry that has not been exposed to the word of faith movement to some degree. Tenants of word of faith theology, such as positive confession and prosperity, have become the caricatures of the entire independent charismatic tradition. The spread of the word of faith movement over the last 25 years has not been without opposition. Critics have spoken out from reformed, evangelical, classic Pentecostal backgrounds and from within the independent charismatic tradition itself. Some critics decry the movement as cultic and the theology as heresy.[3] Much to the detriment of the word of faith movement, this has been a rather one-sided debate. Many of the predominate word of faith proponents choose not to respond to the critics in an attempt to heed the Pauline warning to not “quarrel about words.”[4] While some substantial books have been published in response to some of the critical extremes[5], a thorough reconstruction of word of faith theology has not been attempted. A reconstruction of word of faith theology requires redeeming the word of faith movement from the “heresy junk pile” that it has been heaped on by answering the question, “Do the theological weaknesses within word of faith doctrines constitute an anathemaic condemnation or is there sufficient orthodoxy in word of faith theology to apply correction?” This will be a partial response to D. R. McConnell and other word of faith critics. The remaining process of reconstruction includes an explanation of four distinctives of word of faith theology – the nature of faith, positive confession, healing and prosperity. The final step to reconstruction will be to refine those tenants by answering the question, “Can each word of faith distinctive be reconstructed on a solid theological foundation and still retain its word of faith identity?”

Condemnation or Correction?

The integrity of the gospel is a primary concern in the Pauline letters. However, Paul’s injunctions do not fall into rigid categories, but differ depending upon the context. To the Galatians, he writes,

I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel — which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned![6]

Paul emphatically states that the response to those who preach a different gospel is anathema esto. The verb esto is a third person singular, present active imperative form of eimi implying a command. This command becomes weightier as Paul repeats his instructions in verse 9. Anathema refers to a person or thing that is consecrated and devoted to God for destruction in that it is alienated from God spiritually by sin.[7] If word of faith theology breaks the boundaries of orthodoxy and is indeed preaching a different gospel, then we should apply the Pauline injunction to declare it anathema. This has been the direction taken by some word of faith critics. In his summary remarks, McConnell concludes,

This analysis of the Faith movement has characterized the Faith theology as “a different gospel.”…Is the charge justified that the Faith theology constitutes a different gospel? I think that it is, for three reasons: (1) its historical origins; (2) its heretical doctrines; and (3) its cultic practices.[8]

Christian Research Institute President Hank Hanegraaff writes, “The Faith movement has systematically subverted the very essence of Christianity so as to present us with a counterfeit Christ and a counterfeit Christianity. Therefore standing against the theology of the Faith movement does not divide; rather, it unites believers.”[9] In 1980, Charles Farah brought the debate to the Society for Pentecostal Studies where he concludes, “The (Faith) movement uses Gnostic hermeneutical principles and displaces contextual scientific exegesis. It shares many of the goals of present day humanism, particularly in regards to the creaturely comforts. It is in fact, a burgeoning heresy.”[10] Nearly ten years later, H. Terris Neuman adds to the debate upon the SPS platform. He writes, “…this paper is a call to the wider evangelical community also to engage in an apologetic that will distinguish the gospel of Jesus Christ from those who indeed propagate a “different gospel”[11] (i.e. the proponents of word of faith theology). However, anathema is not the only option.

The Rightly Understanding God’s Word series, with a new introduction, by Craig S. Keener.

Editor’s Note: Craig Keener created this introduction to his course of biblical interpretation to appear before Chapter 1: Context (Spring 2003). However, Pneuma Review editors did not receive it in time to publish it in the print edition of the journal. We include it now, twelve years later, to introduce this excellent series and link to all of the chapters in their new digital format.
Raul Mock
February 25, 2015

Take a course on biblical interpretation with New Testament scholar, Professor Craig S. Keener.

All chapters from the Rightly Understanding God’s Word series

Introduction — Follows immediately (Winter 2015)

Chapter 1: Context — Part 1 (Spring 2003)

Chapter 1: Objections to Context — Part 2 (Winter 2015)

Chapter 2: Learning Context — Part 1 (Summer 2003)

Chapter 2: Learning Context — Part 2 (Fall 2003)

Chapter 3: Whole-Book Context — Part 1 (Winter 2004)

Chapter 3: Whole-Book Context — Part 2 (Spring 2004)

Chapter 4: More Principles of Context (Summer 2004)

Chapter 5: Bible Background — Part 1 (Fall 2004)

Chapter 5: Bible Background — Part 2 (Winter 2005)

Chapter 6: Context of Genre: Narrative — Part 1 (Spring 2005)

Chapter 6: Context of Genre — Part 2 (Summer 2005)

A study of laws in the Bible, Biblical prayer and songs, proverbs, and romance literature.

Chapter 6: Context of Genre — Part 3 (Fall 2005)

A study of the type of inspired literature found in the teachings of Jesus, the gospels, letters to churches and individuals, and prophetic passages.

Editor Introduction: Context of Genre: Revelation (Winter 2006)

Chapter 6: Context of Genre: Revelation — Part 4 (Winter 2006)

What can we learn from this book that so many Christians have disagreed about?

Chapter 7: The Reader’s “Social Location” (Spring 2006)

Part of the Rightly Understanding God’s Word series by Craig S. Keener.

Take a course on biblical interpretation with New Testament scholar, Professor Craig S. Keener.

Editor’s Note: Craig Keener originally intended for this portion of his course on biblical interpretation to appear at the end of Chapter 1: Context (Spring 2003), and before Chapter 2: Learning Context (Summer 2003). However, Pneuma Review editors did not receive it in time to publish it in the print edition of the journal. It is our pleasure to include this revision, twelve years later, to complete this excellent series in its new digital format.
Raul Mock
February 24, 2015

Objections to Context

I should deal here with one objection to context that arises in some circles. Some people quote Scripture out of context and then claim they are right because they have special authority or a special revelation from God. But they should be honest in claiming that this is a special revelation rather than the Scripture. All revelations must be judged (1 Cor 14:29; 1 Thess 5:20-21), and God gave us a Bible in part so we could test other revelations. No one has the right to short-circuit hearers’ rights to evaluate their claims from Scripture by claiming a revelation about Scripture’s meaning which the hearers cannot evaluate by studying it for themselves. Otherwise anyone could claim that Scripture means anything! Any view can be supported based on proof-texts out of context; any theology can make its reasoning sound consistent; Jehovah’s Witnesses do this all the time. We dare not base our faith on other people’s study of the Bible rather than on the Bible itself.

Preaching has always been central to the life of church life, and especially following the Reformation of Luther and Calvin. However, preaching can take on a different hue in the Pentecostal revival that has and continues to bring about change to the entire church world-wide.

In his book Preach the Word: a Pentecostal Approach, 2004 Aldwin Ragoonath makes the assertion, “Pentecostal and Charismatic preaching is a type of preaching that is different from all other forms of preaching.” He links this form of preaching back to Jesus and his apostles and in this book seeks to convince the reader of the uniqueness of the kind of preaching instinctive to the Pentecostal world and experience.

Aldwin Ragoonath

His definition of Pentecostal is a classic view: those who have what he calls “a Spirit worldview that includes ‘dreams, visions, revelations, curses demons roaming the world, spiritual guidance, angels guiding us, people speaking in tongues, miracles, exorcisms and things we cannot explain.'” For him it is important that Pentecostals understand the difference this form of preaching is to other forms for it is “through preaching that their doctrines and emphases are communicated.”

The book covers a rather wide selection of topics meant to encourage those of Pentecostal persuasion. He begins with what is called “Theology of Pentecostal Preaching” in which he moves from the preacher and message to the traditional feature—especially of older Pentecostal churches—the altar service.

In his chapter on the History of Pentecostal Preaching, the author takes us back into the lives and sermons of those who were instrumental in the early beginnings of the Pentecostal movement, at the Azusa Street revival in Los Angeles of the early 1900s. He provides an analysis of the way Parham and Seymour preached and how they handled the Biblical text in their preaching. As well he provides suggestions on how to go about building a sermon from a text.

In preparation for preaching at healing and deliverance services he offers his logic as to the value of such services along with organization of the services. From there he provides counsel on outlining sermons and their delivery.

Throughout his writing, the author asserts that Pentecostals are not traditionally from educated classes: “Pentecostalism was born from working class people and reflects a simple view of the Word of God.” With this in mind then, his material may best refer to those Pentecostals who preach to people with limited education.

Aldwin Ragoonath has obviously spent much time considering the importance of preaching to those who serve within the Pentecostal and Charismatic community. As a world force, it is important that preachers from this community be equipped so as to impact this wider world with the power of Gospel of our risen Lord.

I am grateful for this opportunity of reading and reviewing Preach the Word.

Reviewed by Brian C. Stiller.

In the Beginning Was the Word: Language—A God-Centered Approach, authored by Vern Sheridan Poythress, intends to articulate a Christian understanding of language and demonstrate how language reflects God’s character (9).

In the Beginning is organized into six parts. The first part addresses the relationship between God and language. Here Poythress states that language reveals the divine attributes. For example, the beauty of God is revealed in language because it allows for beauty in communication such as through the medium of poetry (75).

In part one, Poythress also notes the significance of the existence of language prior to creation, emphasizing it was not created, nor did it evolve (25–28). Language existed eternally and was a part of God’s being. People have language because it is part of being created in the image of God—it is not a human construct or cultural phenomenon as is often argued (29–30). Language is a gift of God through which God himself can speak.

Part two of the book discusses language in the context of history. Some of the topics covered in this section include the implications of the fall on language. People often use language to deceive and manipulate others (103). From a biblical perspective, Poythress also looks at the diversity of languages among the many cultures of the world.

Part three is about discourse. Here Poythress acknowledges the imprecision that is present in communication and the variation in the meaning of words and sentences (169). However, the author asserts that the existence of impreciseness does not negate the stability of language and our ability to communicate with others with some level of effectiveness. Poythress also includes in this portion of the text a discussion on biblical interpretation. He offers some principles for biblical Interpretations such as using the clear parts of Scripture to interpret the unclear ones (182). He also allows for some level of creativity in adducing meaning if that meaning is not in tension with other clear passages of the Bible.

Part four is about stories. The author discusses the value of biblical narratives, to communicate God’s work of redemption, even noting that myths are mini-stories of God’s work of redemption. Part five of the work analyzes the smaller units of language, sentences and words. For Poythress, even the smaller units of language are derived from God (256).

Part six addresses application. Poythress concludes this section of the book by moving beyond the study of language to discussing its relevance for living. God requires truthfulness and moral responsibility in a person’s use of language. The author stresses that moral standards with respect to language need to be embraced; otherwise, communication would be useless and untrustworthy. The book concludes with many appendices engaging various modern and postmodern concerns related to philosophy of language, including speech-act theory and deconstruction.

The primary weakness of In the Beginning is the topics it does not address in relation to language and speech. First, Poythress discusses phonemes, which would have been an opportunity for the author to address the sound-meaning relationship associated with words. However, this area of study is not even mentioned. Second, the author emphasizes the role of the Spirit as both “hearer” of the divine message and as the “breath,” thereby serving as carrier of the message to recipients. Here would have been an occasion to deal with the neglected study of how the Spirit takes the ancient sacred text and generates its meaningfulness for the present day reader. This topic is only briefly mentioned (22).

David G. Firth and Jamie A. Grant, eds., Words and the Word: Explorations in Biblical Interpretation and Literary Theory (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2008), 317 pages, ISBN 9780830828982.

Prior to the post-modern period, many of the critical methodologies used in biblical studies such as redaction criticism, form criticism and source criticism were used in biblical interpretation in order to aid the critic in the interpretation of a text’s pre-history. In contrast, literary theory focuses on the final form of the text. The editors of this collection seek to expose the reader to many of the multiple methods of literary theory as they relate to biblical interpretation.

Eight essays are included in Words and the Word and they fall into two parts: First, two general articles. Grant Osborne lays out the components of narrative theory, focusing specifically on how this can be used with the Gospels. Fanie Snyman provides a “responsible” and “non-technical” approach to exegesis of Old Testament narrative (61). Both Synman’s and Osborne’s discussions are clear and comprehensive.

Part two of the book is comprised of six essays, which discuss specific literary approaches to interpretation. First, Richard Briggs offers one of the most helpful explanations on speech-act theory I have encountered, including well-defined key terminology that is necessary for comprehending this concept. Speech-act theory understands that language has the ability to govern significant aspects of human life. Briggs claims the biblical writers were very cognizant of the profound power of words (85).

Jeannine Brown’s chapter on genre criticism is characteristic of all the essays in this collection—the methodologies all aim at discovering authorial intention. Brown reminds us that even genres were tools that biblical authors employed to communicate a specific message (143).

Many literary scholars assert that at certain times in their writing authors of the Bible intentionally employed ambiguity and willfully invited “readers to enjoy and play with the text” (183). David Firth argues for this practice as his contribution to the collection of articles. In an interesting piece, Firth attempts to show how William Empson’s taxonomy of ambiguity is a useful tool in which to explore biblical narrative. While Firth’s explanation and presentation is thorough and includes plenty of examples, I remain unconvinced (but open) that any ambiguity in the text is anything but unintentional.

Jamie Grant contributes an essay on poetics. The bulk of the essay deals with the significance of editorial shaping within anthologies like Proverbs and the book of Psalms. Grant demonstrates the importance of discerning a passages’ theme based on its placement by the editor within a particular thematic section of the book. Plenty of examples help to clarify this form of analysis. His chapter also includes a section on poetic parallelism and an even smaller discussion about New Testament poetry.

Peter Phillips explores the philosophical development of rhetoric, the art of persuasion. Although his essay contains some biblical examples to demonstrate his approach, this chapter and the next are two of the more theory-laden of the collection.

The final piece on discourse analysis, written by Terrance Wardlaw, might be one of the least known of the literary approaches discussed in the book. Wardlaw’s definition of discourse analysis is “the analysis of language and its use beyond the sentence. Moreover, one may describe ‘discourse’ as a unit of speech (either oral or written) treated by interlocutors as a complete utterance” (268). Wardlaw applies his analysis to both an Old and New Testament passage in order to help illuminate this theory.