Main Story

Sundoulos: New Testament studies covers a very wide range of subjects, some rather esoteric. What areas of current scholarship do you think have potential to benefit the church? Which are really going to help us understand Scripture better?

Clinton Arnold: Well, the first thing I think about—and I suppose it reflects my own research interest—is historical cultural context. What historical cultural context does, I believe, is help the Scripture seem closer to real life. People can better understand what life was like back then, and make connections with their own lives. We realize that life isn't so different now from what it was then. We struggle with a lot of the same issues today that they struggled with back then, and we see Scripture addresses these issues. I think if there is anything I have really enjoyed, in immersing myself in the 1st Century cultural context and using that when I teach, is seeing people realize, "Wow—Scripture is far more relevant to my life in our church situation than I ever realized."

Sundoulos: After two thousand years, don't we know about everything there is to know about the 1st Century culture? Can we really keep learning more?

Arnold: There are a lot of ancient sources that are available that have not been mined. One of the key areas is inscriptions. I have worked in that area, and so have some of my colleagues. Joe [Hellerman] has a big contribution coming on how the inscriptions help us understand the cultural setting of Philippi. This is tangible, raw material that really gives us great insight into the social, cultural, political world of the 1st Century. A lot of biblical scholars just haven't made use of that material. They have been swept away by different kinds of fads of critical methods and ideas, and have really neglected the hard work of exploring things like inscriptions and other literary sources.

Alan Hultberg: Also, there are new ways of looking at old evidence through sociological theories and methods. Some are rather avant garde, but it is helpful to go over some of the old evidence again through different eyes and get different insights.

Michael Wilkins: I would like to add that these things show us a different way of reading Scripture—to look at it as real literature instead of some kind of book dropped down from heaven. Instead of reading two or three verses to get your devotional insight, we see we should instead read a book as a whole book to understand the argument of an author, to get into the author's mind and to hear the author's voice. That is a whole different approach to reading, and it plunges you back into the cultural setting.

Victor Rhee: I am specializing in the book of Hebrews, and when you study the background of Hebrews, everybody disagrees on every issue...

Wilkins: That's why we are waiting for your commentary! [laughter]

Rhee: Because of that, the historical study is very difficult. Even with disagreement about the cultural setting and the dating, the message is so clear. That is, the Christology, the supremacy of Christ and in light of the superiority of Christ, the author exhorts the readers not to lose their faith in Christ. What I see is that no matter what kind of cultural background a person holds to, the message is clear to us. So, I find that applying the supremacy or superiority of Christ to our context is very important to the church. And in that regard, I try to apply the superiority of Christ to Buddhism, and try to set forth the theme that Christ is superior to Buddha and try to apply the message of Hebrews to our modern context.

Sundoulos: There are far more commentaries than any pastor or library can ever own. Why do we need to keep adding more commentaries? Is that really going to help the pastor who is preparing his sermon every week? Why do we keep telling him that he's got to buy this newest one or that latest series?

Moyer Hubbard: I think that there is a need for each generation to speak to its own generation, and so new commentaries are important. New, younger, scholars in each generation need to put forth their understanding of Scripture, bringing insights that have come through their own research and speak to their generation. So I think there will always be a need for new commentaries.

Sundoulos: I'm interested, Mike, in your experience writing the NIV Application Commentary on Matthew. It seems to have hit a significant niche.

Wilkins: Well, I've told others that this was one of the hardest things I've ever done in that it was really like writing three commentaries at one time. Some commentaries (and I hope mine won't be accused of this) gloss over the original meaning, they gloss over doing good exegesis, and they hurry very quickly to give contemporary applications. But I think that if we're doing a good job, good exegesis is really important for pastors so that they can get as accurate a read of the text as possible so they're not jumping to applications too quickly. They're forced to deal with the original meaning of the text, then to deal with biblical theology, and only then to deal with contemporary significance.

Arnold: Mike, that's one of the things I like about your NIV application commentary, that it shows the church how to go about moving from the details of exegesis through biblical theology to application, which a lot of commentaries don't do.