Constance M. Furey, et al., eds. <i>Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception</i>

Volume 1 of this series appeared in 2009. With the current volume, the series is two-thirds complete and has the finish line (volume 30) in sight. The value of this encyclopedia can hardly be overestimated. As volume 1 stated, EBR goes about its mission under five main rubrics: Hebrew Bible/OT, NT, influence of the Bible in Jewish spheres, influence of the Bible in Christian traditions, and finally “biblical reception and influence in literature, art, music, and film, as well as in Islam and in other religions that do not ascribe exclusive authority to the Bible but in some way draw upon its traditions” (p. xi). Volume 21 remains true to that program. It contains the fruit of about 400 writers, translators, and editors from numerous countries, a measure of the daunting scale of operation.Biblical books that receive treatment are Nehemiah, Numbers, and Obadiah. The extra-canonical Odes of Solomon are analyzed by a world expert on this NT Apocryphal work, Michael Lattke (cols. 1190–91). He dates it to the early second century. But he notes that besides drawing on several OT books, “the influence of the NT is felt throughout,” especially John’s Gospel and 1 John, but also most of the rest of the NT books, especially Colossians, Ephesians, and 1 Timothy. Since Lattke regards these as pseudo-Pauline, he adds that the date for the Odes “should not be put too close to the beginning of the 2 century ce.” Those who do not view the books as pseudepigraphic might favor the earlier side of that chronological conjecture.Both specialists and generalists will appreciate the coverage of a wide range of biblical themes that few of us have time to research so extensively ourselves. Examples include neighbor, nest, nether world, nevi’im (the OT prophets), new commandment, new covenant, new heaven and new earth, new Jerusalem, oaths and vows, obedience/disobedience, obscenity and euphemism, odor, and offspring, to name prominent examples. These are not simply Bible dictionary–type discussions but follow the themes across the centuries in Christian, Jewish, and Islamic thought, including where relevant the appearance of these themes in art and culture up to the present day. Not only scholars but pastors seeking to preach sermons of substance will find much new insight into seemingly timeworn topics. Many articles conclude with substantial bibliographies often majoring on works in non-English languages.Articles on topics more properly theological than biblical are numerous. The volume opens with thirty-one columns on negative or apophatic theology. Martin Bauspieß traces this motif in NT writings but says nothing about the direct effect of the OT on NT writers as they assert God’s unknowableness, tracing this conviction rather to Hellenistic-Jewish theology. In fact, the entire thirty-one columns lack treatment of the OT except insofar as Philo or rabbinic sources reference it. Some compensation for this appears later in a substantial treatment of nihilism. There Arthur Keefer identifies at least five forms of nihilism in the HB/OT: moral, political, epistemological, cosmic, and existential. Nihilism and negative theology are not the same thing, but the OT recognition of and divine connections with both do overlap.Other theological topics include neo-Chalcedonianism, neo-orthodoxy (deemed by Marco Hofheinz to be a pejorative term that needs rebranding in line with Hans Frei’s reading of Karl Barth, in which case neo-orthodoxy would mean post-liberalism), neo-Thomism, and Nicene creed (more properly the Nicene-Constantinopolitan creed [col. 393]). The concise treatment of “neologian theology” traces the rise of important eighteenth-century developments asserting that revelation is subservient to reason by claiming the authority of the Bible while simultaneously rejecting the doctrine of Scripture’s divine inspiration (col. 107). By definition, this makes the interpreter the arbiter of what in the Bible should be regarded as God’s word. A succession of thinkers like Semler, Eichhorn, Griesbach, and Ernesti founded “Neology” and “laid the foundation for modern, historical-critical scholarship of the Bible” (col. 108).Sometimes the value of EBR lies in clearing up confusion. Offhand, most of us might be hazy on the distinctions between Nicholas of Cusa (cols. 404–6), Nicholas of Lyra (cols. 407–8), and Nicholas of Myra (cols. 408–10). Cusa (1401–1464) was a clerical scholar who turned down academic appointments to advance ministry and reform in the church. He was deeply attached to the study of Scripture. Philip D. W. Krey calls Lyra (1270–1349) “the greatest biblical interpreter of the Middle Ages,” adding the trivium that at his death, “the Queen of France gave him a keg of wine.” Peter Gemeinhardt does the service of tracing Myra, “one of the most elusive Christian saints” about whom “nearly nothing is known.” The report that he slapped Arius in the face at the Council of Nicaea may or may not be true. He is, however, the root of our well-known St. Nick, better known as Santa Claus. The uncertainty and “fluidity” of traditions associated with him may be why he has “kept triggering new imaginations . . . for more than 1,500 years.”Biblical scholars will gravitate not only to the piece “New Testament” itself (cols. 324–356) but also to separate treatments of Eberhard Nestle, the New Revised Standard Version, and the Novum Testamentum Graece. The NRSV piece unwisely trivializes concerns about its fidelity to the original, chalking them up to “a theory of male headship in the church and the home, which the Bible’s own patriarchalism was believed to support” (col. 323). D. A. Carson is styled “gatekeeper for American evangelicalism” and James Dobson is a “media mogul” (cols. 321–22). For treatment of the New International Version, EBR readers will have to await the volume containing “Versions and Translations of the Bible” (col. 278). A fairly recent listing of best-selling Bible translations in the United States1 puts seven English and one Spanish translation of the Bible ahead of the NRSV, with the NIV in first place. So, it is not obvious why editors singled out the NRSV as worthy of privileged treatment and defense.Theologians or biblical scholars of note include Jacob Neusner, John Henry Cardinal Newman, Isaac Newton (obsessed with the Trinity, and dedicated to showing it to be a false doctrine), William Robertson Nicoll, Eugene Nida (who affected Bible translation theory far more than any other person in the twentieth century, according to S. E. Porter [col. 429]), H. Richard Niebuhr, Reinhold Niebuhr, Martin Niemöller, David Nieto (who “privileged scripture and rabbinic tradition over other forms of science, philosophy, or new religious movements” [col. 441]), Carl Immanuel Nitsch (credited with writing the first systematic practical theology [3 vols.; 1847–1867; col. 546]), Arthur Darby Nock, Martin Noth, Henri J. M. Nouwen, Anders Nygren, and others. Jewish biblical scholar André Neher (1914–1988; cols. 72–75) modeled an innovative and erudite theological interpretation “under the sign of Moses and not under the sign of Wellhausen.” The center of his hermeneutic and theology was the covenant. Here is a scholar whose life and works (all in French) would likely bear an English-language doctoral dissertation.Lengthy articles on biblical interpretation in North Africa, North America, Nubia, and Oceania, respectively, are highlights of this volume. So is a breakdown of the history of the Oberammergau passion play, a sizable treatment of Jesus as New Legislator (cols. 311–20), featuring work by Roland Deines, and coverage of nomina sacra in Christian writings through the centuries. Readers should also not overlook the nearly 10 percent of the volume dedicated to Noah, his ark, his wife, and his sons (cols. 549 –670), not to mention coverage of “Noahides, Noahide Commandments” (cols. 672–88), a piece that concludes with a helpful in-depth survey of the contemporary Children of Noah Movement, one of this volume’s several treatments (see also “New Age Movement” and “New Apostolic Reformation Movement”) of contemporary attempts to find justification for heartfelt causes in the Bible.Occasionally articles are poignant (or perhaps infuriating). This is the case in the account of Samson Occom (1723–1792), a Mohegan spiritual leader who converted to Christianity at age sixteen through New Light missionaries in the Great Awakening. He advanced teaching of the Bible among Native peoples and eventually opened a missionary and ministerial school. He raised money in a two-year fundraising tour in the United Kingdom for educating his people. Upon his return, the white pastor who had mentored him appropriated the money for a different purpose: the founding of a college “open mainly to white students” (col. 1158). And thus was founded Dartmouth College.