First and Second Letters to Timothy: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, The

Trinity Journal, Fall 2002 by Yarbrough, Robert W

Johnson's independence of judgment and relatively sparing interaction with other commentators has the advantage of enabling him to focus on the text, but it has the disadvantage of creating the impression that he does not always appear to have read very closely the scholars to whom he so briefly alludes. An example here would be his curt but not particularly wellinformed dismissal of B. B. Warfield and a view of Scripture that ought to be regarded respectfully, not summarily dismissed with a few dogmatic pronouncements (pp. 422-23). This is also a juncture where Johnson's focus on ancient moral teaching may lead him astray; his view that 2 Tim 3:16-17 is a pragmatic, not ontological, statement about Scripture gives short shrift to the decidedly non-Greco-Roman convictions of the very Hebrew and Jewish writers who produced both Testaments. It also overlooks how Jesus regarded Scripture, if the gospels quote him accurately. Warfield's Revelation and Inspiration makes the point at great length and with prodigious learning.

The translation of pistos as "faithful" rather than "believer/s" in 1 Tim 4:3, 10, 12; 5:16 is open to debate, particularly when Johnson renders it as "believers" in 1 Tim 6:2 and states that "hoi pistol stands for members of the believing community (4:3, 10, 12; 5:16)" (p. 283). Then why translate it "faithful" in these passages? To do so obscures a key Pauline emphasis -the efficacy of grace through faith-that Johnson is elsewhere keen to uphold.

It is not clear to me why Johnson opts for "supervisor" as the term for pastoral leader in 1 Tim 3:1 (cf. Titus 1:7), nor why he wishes to present this leader's office as bereft "of any theological legitimation" (p. 213). The explanation he gives-that "bishop," for example, smacks of later ecclesial "pomp and ceremony" (p. 212)-may be true, but "supervisor" conjures up the image of Pauline churches being run like a business or maybe a union shop. Some improvement is surely possible here.

Back to the positive side, the vastly complex issue of Paul's treatment of women gets far more nuanced and sympathetic discussion by Johnson than by any number of other contemporary commentators (see especially pp. 20811, 411-14). Yet even here the last word has not been said, and it is gratifying that Johnson urges interpreters to "recognize that contemporary assumptions concerning family structures and power relationships are not themselves absolute, but are relative and culturally conditioned in ways not unlike Paul's own assumptions" (p. 211). "We may not like what Paul says in [1 Timothy] about the household, but we have learned, to our regret, what happens to civilization when the household is neglected" (p. 154). Johnson is committed to a hermeneutic in which Scripture, while read critically, is given free rein to address God's people with the force that it properly bears as God's word.

Despite all these strengths, it must be pointed out that editors and proofreaders dropped the ball when it comes to German words and titles. To make the point, here are some examples: p. xiii, after BWANT: Testaments should be Testament; p. 42, n. 87: Senschreiben should be Sendschreiben; p. 44, line 14: Neuen should be Neue; p. 44, last paragraph: Kuerze (3x) does not agree with Kurze in n. 91 (see also p. 107); p. 45, n. 93: bearbeiteit should be bearbeitet; Tubinger should be Tubingen; p. 46, n. 96: Briefe in line 3 should be Brief; dasselben in line 4 should be desselben; p. 48, n. 106: "Die Hirtenbrief" should be "Die Hirtenbriefe" (as on p. 117); p. 50, n. 134: Die Brief should be Die Briefe (this same error occurs on p. 73, n. 201); p. 51, n. 145: geschichtlichen in line 6 should be geschichtlichem; this typo is repeated on p. 125; p. 52, n. 151: neuerer should be neueren; p. 57, n. 157: Grundstrucktur in line 10 should be Grundstruktur; Studien in line 17 should be Studies p. 58, n. 165: Formuler, Beitrage, lehre, and antike should be, respectively, Formular, Beitrag, Lehre, and antiken; p. 59, n. 167: die in the last line should be das. Errors of this nature abound, some of them so bumbling as to be laughable: "Zu den personlichen Notizen den [sic] Pastoralbriefe" (p. 66, n. 181); "Eine Textvariante Mart [sic] die Entstehung der Pastoralbriefe auf" (p. 67, n. 185); "Zum sprachlisher [sic] Problem der Pastoralbriefe" (p. 69, n. 195); "Gerechtikeit" [sic] (p. 113, line 3 from bottom); "Neutestamentliche [sic] Forschungen" (p. 123, line 11 from bottom); Ein [sic] Studie zu Ethick [sic] (p. 127, lines 10-11 from bottom). Frequently the mistakes in footnotes are duplicated in the bibliography (pp. 103-31), though I have not made a comprehensive comparison.