Book Reviews

No book is perfect of course. H istory and theology are handled very well in this volume, b u t it
ihe literary structure of each book received m ore discussion. 'I'ypically
would
this be
section
helpful
'
of the book is quite brief and is followed by an outline of the book and a survey o fits contents ']
. book
is already quite long, and so one can understand ihai ] .authors did n o t w ant to lengthen it further
Perhaps, hough ], history section could be abbreviated and ] authors could tackle m ore profoundly
.the literary arrangem ent of each book
I was a bit surprised that in the discussion of eschatology in T^essalonians th at the w riters affirm
th at pmmilh-nnialism is supported by ] teaching ] church will suffer near ]
end (p. 455). W hatever
ng why this argum entones fits onlyw
view on
iththe
premm illennium
illennialism
, it .isVirtually
mysffy
all amillennialists think ] church will suffer greater persecution before C hrist returns as well. I also
found the discussion on how faith and worl<s cohere in Paul and James a bit thin 7 21-22
(pp(..
Certainly
h everything
no one willinagree
a book
w] is so comprehensive. W e can be hanldul
for
] scholarship], reverence
) C o d s word, and y of this volume. I suspectaitc cwill
^ sbl
.be adopted as a text in m any classes
Thomas R. Schreiner
The Southern Baptist Theological Sem inary
Louisville, Kentucky, USA

Philip B. p . M an a n d Woman, One in Christ: A n Exegetical a n d Theological Study ofP a u ls Letters.

G rand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009. 511 pp. $29.99.

bas studied and worked on Pbilip p issue of role of w om en in

hom e and the church ) thirty-six .
be said
, that this W(r< is the ,
culm ination of a lifetime of study and represents his m agnum opus. Those who
are amiliar w ith P a c e 's W(r< will kn(w th at he is and
, he
argues forcefully ) f a d in g of all the m ajor texts in Paul. Paynes
approach differs rom W illiam W ehhs, for the latter endorses a com plem entaran
reading of the m ajor texts b u t argues on the hasis of his trajectory herm eneutic
C V h i C h k i j
th at the application of the biblffal text m ust go .the ^ scriptural w ord
never m entions W ehh and contends instead that the biblffal text rom the p
beginning supports egalitarian reading. In P a c e 's view ,
, is no
to go heyond the Bibh'. In th at se^se he is old-fashioned egalitarian ), he thinks a straightforw ard
reading
)'
.Bible supports his interpretation
says in the M uch of w hat p ) )is> ) , representing argum ents that he and others have
m ade for m anyyears. O n the other hand, a m ultitude of argum ents are given in support of the proffered
thesis. It ) surprising , ,concludes th at the evidence supporting his view "is as sr(ng as that p
an avalanche (p. 462). A sampling of som e of the argum ents presented should be helpful. In contrast to
the Hehe^isffc and Jewish culture ofhis day Pauls view of w om en was m ore progressive. Therefore, Paul
appropriated, ax;ord ng to ^ the egalitarian vision enunciated in G en 1 -2 ,^ the f s of the Old
Testam ent Scriptures. Galatians 3:28 proclaim s the equality of m en ^ w om en in C hrist, and the text
cannot be restricted ology. to
Social
soqr ^ cultural m implications
Pauls bold ((w
d t l a ron
a)
fi
in Galaffa^s ']
. fundam ental equality of m arried couples is confirm ed] Cor 7. Ephesians5:22-331
 Themelios

in no way contradicts this since the text teaches m uiual subm ission (Eph 5:21). Furtherm ore, the word
kephal is understood to m ean "source instead ) auihoriiy" )
."
Probably the m ost significant contribution of the book centers on Paynes study of 11:2-16
1 Cor
and 14:34-35. W hat stands out is Paynes long discussion on w hether Paul refers to a veil/shawl
the need for w om en to w ar their hair bound up on their beads. Payne supports the latter opiion with
an array of argum ents. W hen it comes ).Cor 14:34-35 Payne m aintains ihai it is an interpolation 1
According )Payne, the text m ust he interpolated because the W estern text tradition would noi
placed the ^ after ^ if they were p a rt of the original text. Furtherm ore, the distigme ("two 40
horizontally aligned dois in the margin, p. 232) in Codex Vaticanus support an interpolation. Payne
a s detects support for an interpolation from Codex Fuldensis and MS 88 .
Paynes reading of 1 Tim 2:11-15 d es not break new ground, though he again rebearses som e of
his fm m er w ' ] >. present tense 1 do n ot perm it in 2:12 refers to a tem pm ary prohibition ']
. Hide)
linking "teach and authentein signifies a single coherent idea. Paul prohibits w om en rom wrongly
assum ing authority tb at was n o t delegated to tb em '
. for in 2:13 d" es n ot provide a reas<m that
^should n o t teacb b u t is illustrative. M ost im portant, Eves deception is related )the w om en in
Ephesus w w purveying the false teaching (2:14). Pauls restrictions on w om en w intended
) he com prehensiveMbdr u>
t prom ulgating ss a particular situation in which w om en w ^ ' .
p ^ m is e of salvation through childbirth refers )the salvation th at is ours through the incarnation
2:15)(.
valianily defends the p cause. M uch of w hat be says could he accepted
m plem entarians. For instance, com plem entarians also believe^ m en and w om en in Christ
and fully share the divine image (). could ) ) notion that ) social implications )Cal
though com plem entarians would r rom
regarding
dIVym>
,3:28
)fi

nature
)
)(' implications. I
found P a c e 's long defense of a reference to "b ah ratber tban a sbawl a veil in 1 Cor 11:2-16 quite
fascinating. On<A view on that m ar)^ , w ) sa^s no(hn g, ) w ) is a com plem entaran

) ) Com plem entarians could . agree th at 1 Cor 14:34-35 is interpolation ((h(ugh
,see below) and derive their view of m ale/fem ale les fm other texts
p hopes th at b is )) ng consensus
will hr,>
tb at is highly doubtful, His "avalanche approach )
som etim es bas ) feel of (hrow ng everything >)
tbe
) sink) support bis view. I suppose
all of us in the debate partisans, Paynes) listing of all the reasons th at support bis view )
often smacks of overkill, par(hularly som e of the ) given )) terribly strong, p
falls prey to lexical, gram m a(hal, and interpretive m istakes in bis interpretation of 1 Tim 2:11-15, s it
seem s to me that the <^)ecfi<ms raised against ) reading in my earlier essa^ sfill h a n1)" d
m o(hy 2:9-15: A' ( ) w )h Scholarship, in W omen in the Church: A n Analysis a n d Application
o f l Timothy 2:9-15, p p 2835-57
5-120(.,.
Perbaps) )) iss^e should be addressed hrfi'fiy. Readers m ight (h )n
> tbe evidence )

suppm ting interpolation is quite impressive after reading Paynes discussion 14:34-35 of 1 Cor .
But the evidence is^ suggests as strong as p '
. unw ary ^ m ay ) recognize

th at t h e not missing in of the m anuscripts. Peter Head has recently suggested at SBL
hew)(( 2009) th at the distigmai were added in the sixteenth century. In ^, case, the ses
e
included in Codex Vaticanus. P a c e 's reading of Fuldensis and MS 88 is ) 1 W hatever) . makes
w) of such evidence, it is hardly m .
n< it is impossible andth at
others
scribes
(h would
p

89
Book Reviews

move! verses , I would argue ! a serlBe m ay have done this very ihing to >the discussion
.on prophecy together
Payne is to he ihanked ) the tone of his book, for he is fair and respectful (even hough he feels
very strongly abou this matter!) w ith those w ith w hom he disagrees. f'urherm()re, com plem entarians
will he gratified to see his high view ofscripture. I suspect that Paynes ) ).will
> n o t have a great im pact
M ost of w hat he says is not new, and his egalfiarian readings unpersuasive. Surely he will convince
some, for m any in our culture ()day ardently desire egalitarianism to he Bu it will n o t hit!.
scholarly world
> .an avalanche. It is closer to being another drizzly day in Porland, O regon
Thomas R. Schreiner
The Southern Baptist Theological Sem inary
Touisville, Kentucky, USA

c. Kavin ^owe. W orld Upside Down: ReadingActs in the Graeco-Roman Age. Oxford: Oxford University
p ess, 2009. BOO pp. $65.00.

c. Kavin Rowe, A ssistant Professor of N ew Testam ent at l)ul University l)X KR O

j I
Divinity School and recent w inner of the 101m Tem pleton PUze for Theological
,Promise, continues to dem onstrate an unusual display of ty'ological w isdom
wide reading in ! vast ! o fse c o n d a ry r s h and
e w da sense
raty ,
regarding ! complex issues surrounding ! Use of Uhriuianity. These
com petencies are on ull display in his ^ work. W orld U pside a > ()()
th at is, am ong )(! things, as m uch about ! early Christians as ! Romans
saw them as well as ! Romans as seen by h e ,Christians. f'undam m ally
however, World Upside )own "is about h e inextricable connection betw een an
irreducibly particular way ()'knowing and a total way )(' " .))p. B
W h at characterizes ! work is its refusal to 1 into ! gullies of sullied
and fraudulent dichotom ies. Rowes "cr cally constructive reappraisal of A cts ecclesiological vision
follows neither ! dom inant m nd of seeing Acts as a tract or harm onious existence w ith the imperial
m acbinery of Rome, nor ! currently in vogue counter-im perial readings. Instead, Rowe reads Acts
as Lukes "attem pt to orm com m unities ! witness to C o d s apocalypse and "construction of an
alternative total way of life ! runs counter to" ! )(' ! ,Graeco-Rom an world." A cts
life-patterns
for Rowe, is thus a "culture-forming narrative (p 4(..
After n th
anatinr()duc
situates()
! project ("Reading A!cts (,first substantive chapter is

ng Divine Identity. Rowe entitled,
suggests "Collision:
Tbe clasb bxpl
ca
of
! gods
maUy
ul
determ ined the shape of the collision betw een (emerging) Christianity and paganism (p. 17). The
ng" in Acts o fth e earlier claim established narrative ouw in Lh<e
ork " "! the salvation of G od comes
through les^s C hrist as an apocalypse to the gentiles would have been viewed as a rival vision by tbose
the Graeco-Rom an world. Rowe h ig h lig h t Acts 14, f 6 , 17, and 19 as dem onstrations )('" profound

incom m ensurability betw een the life-sbape of C h rih a n ity in the Graeco-Rom an world and the larger
p attern of pagan religiousness50 (p(..
Dikaios: Rejecting ' builds upon !
" findings of ! previous chapter w!
h

perspective of outsiders and their construal of C hristianity as seditious treasonous. By sampling

90


Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATT,AS subscriber agreement.

No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s) express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission
from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ajourna!
typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, tbe author o fth e article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use covered by the fair use provisions o f tbe copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initia funding from Liiiy Endowment !).

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property o fthe American
Theological Library Association.