» » Introduction to the New Testament (New Testament Library)

Download Introduction to the New Testament (New Testament Library) eBook

by Werner G. Kummel,H.C. Kee

Download Introduction to the New Testament (New Testament Library) eBook
Werner G. Kummel,H.C. Kee
Bible Study & Reference
Scm-Canterbury Press; Revised edition (November 25, 1975)
640 pages
EPUB book:
1150 kb
FB2 book:
1283 kb
1729 kb
Other formats
docx mbr doc txt

Abstract views reflect the number of visits to the article landing page.

Abstract views reflect the number of visits to the article landing page.

What is New Testament Theology? That discipline that works to clearly articulate the beliefs, practices and teachings of the apostolic Christian faith, derived primarily from the canonical writings of the New Testament as they expound Gods salvation in and through His Son, Jesus Christ. Why Study New Testament Theology?

Testaments F. Festschrift Fuller-Reginald H. Fuller, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament (London

Book by Kummel, Werner Georg, Kummel, Werner . Werner Georg Kummel was Professor of New Testament,, Marburg, Germany

Book by Kummel, Werner Georg, Kummel, Werner . Text is still easily readable. Werner Georg Kummel was Professor of New Testament,, Marburg, Germany. Author of Promise anf Fulfillment. The Eschatological Message of Jesus (Studies in Biblical Theology, 23); Man in the New Testament; The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of It's Problems and The Theology of the New Testament According to it's Major Witnesses.

You may be interested in. An Introduction to the New Testament Manuscripts and their Texts. Whether you've loved the book or not, if you give your honest and detailed thoughts then people will find new books that are right for them

You may be interested in. File: PDF, . 1 MB. An Introduction to the New Testament. D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo. Год: 2005. Introduction to the New Testament, Vol. 1: History, Culture, and Religion of the Hellenistic Age. Helmut Koester. Whether you've loved the book or not, if you give your honest and detailed thoughts then people will find new books that are right for them. 1. An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testament.

The New Testament consists of 27 separate books, written mainly, though not exclusively, by Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ. These books teach and testify of the ministry and Atonement of Jesus Christ and the rise of the early Christian Church. The Bible-the Old and New Testaments-has influenced more people than any other book ever written. Elder L. Tom Perry (1922–2015) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles stated that the New Testament is the centerpiece of scriptural history, just as the Savior Himself should be the centerpiece of our lives.

Introduction to the New Testament. ~ Akin, Daniel L. Building a Theological Library: The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Kmmel, Werner G. Introduction to the New Testament. H. C. Kee. enlarged ed. n. 1894; n. na). Godet, Frederic L. The Collection of the Four Gospels and the Gospel of St. Matthew. 1899; n. na; na). ~ Beeke, Joel R. A Reader's Guide to Reformed Literature: An Annotated Bibliography of Reformed Theology. 1995; na). ~ Calvin Theological Seminary.

A former New Testament colleague was once asked by a student how he could learn to do exegesis, intending that his . The closest to the kind I have tried to write is by Otto Kaiser and Werner G. Kiimmel, Exegetical Method: A Student’s Handbook, rev. ed. (Seabury Press, 1981).

My colleague answered, You will just have to take a course. That answer is the tacit admission of what all of us who teach NT know to be true: There simply is no book that serves either as a textbook or a guide for students to learn the exegetical process, from the opening of their Bibles to the writing of the paper. But these are essays, not student guides.

Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Browsing Библиотека СПбХУ Shelves, Shelving location: Абонемент Close shelf browser. Holdings ( 2 ). Title notes. 22. 1 G88 New Testament Introduction.

American Libraries Canadian Libraries Universal Library Community Texts Project Gutenberg Biodiversity Heritage Library . Includes bibliographies and indexes. some content may be lost due to the binding of the book.

American Libraries Canadian Libraries Universal Library Community Texts Project Gutenberg Biodiversity Heritage Library Children's Library.

  • showtime
Werner Georg Kümmel (1905-1995) was professor of New Testament at Marburg University for many years.. A well-known member of the International Society of New Testament Studies, he lectured in both the United States and Great Britain, and wrote The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of Its Problems, as well as many other books that have not been translated from the German.

He states in the first chapter about the “Synoptic Problem”: “How can one explain the remarkable, complicated interrelationship of agreement and difference between Mk, Mt, and Lk? The situation is all the more striking in that Jn does not share in it… The sayings of Jesus in the Synoptics are very similar, too, as distinct from Jn: there are no long discussions, but only short, sharply etched sayings, short speeches, and fragments of speeches, in addition to numerous parables… In many sections which are found in all three of the Gospels, two Gospels are in broad agreement while the third is divergent… the convincing conclusion seems to be that the Synoptics are in some way literarily dependent on one another. The situation is complicated, however, by the fact that the Gospels differ sharply in both form and content. The infancy stories in Mt and Lk contradict each other in essential features… Nor do the resurrection stories represent a unified tradition: Lk knows only the appearances of Jesus in Jerusalem; Mt reports them in Jerusalem and Galilee; Mk has no resurrection account at all… The special material of Mt and Lk is, however, closely tied in with material that they share in common…” (Pg. 42-44)

He notes that “Decisive… for the recognition of the priority of Mk over Mt and Lk is the comparison of language and content. The strict agreement between the synoptists in the text that they share with Mk… proves in the first instance only that a literary relationship exits. But when the word usage of Mt and Lk is compared with Mk, it is apparent either that Mt and Lk have in large measure changed the colloquial or Semitic text of Mk into better Greek… More decisive are the indications of substantive changes… In Mt 9:2, the reason for the remark ‘Jesus saw their faith’ cannot be discerned; Mk 2:4, however, reports the most unusual undertaking of bringing the sick man to Jesus by digging a hole in the roof, a detail which Mt has obviously omitted… instead of the ambiguity of the subject in Mk 2:15, ‘As he sat at table in his house,’ Lk 5:29 has the clarification ‘Levi arranged a great feast in his house.’ In Lk 23:18 it is incomprehensible why the crowd suddenly asks for Barabbas to be freed, especially since he is not even identified until the following verse, but Lk has omitted the information given in Mk 15:6 about Pilate’s custom of releasing a prisoner. On the basis of all these facts it may be inferred from a comparison of the material common to all three Synoptics that Mk has been used by Mt and Lk as a common source.” (Pg. 60-61)

He argues, “Luke is eager to prove the political innocence of Jesus in the eyes of the Romans, especially of Pilate (Lk 23:4, 14, 20, 22; 23:47, ‘This man was innocent’), while the Jews appear as those who sanction the disturbance and seek unjustly to condemn Jesus as a political insurrectionist (20:26, 26; 23:2, 5, 18f, 23, 25)… here we face a political apologetic, which exonerates the Romans from guilt for the crucifixion of Jesus … and thus is prepared the defense of the Christians against political suspicion in Acts.” (Pg. 140) He observes, “in Acts… the aim of defending the Christians against the charge of enmity toward the state is unmistakable… Thus Luke shows again and again that the Roman officials must attest to the complete lack of guilt of the Christians and, above all, of Paul… and that they do not hinder Paul from preaching the gospel while he is being detained in Rome (28:30 f). The apologetic aim of this and related texts is as unmistakable here as the same feature is in Lk.” (Pg. 162-163)

He adds, “The expectation of the nearness of the End was shunted from its dominant position… In place of the promise ‘Some of you who are standing here will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God having come in power’ (Mk 9:1), we find (Lk 9:27) ‘Some who stand here will not taste death until they have seen the kingdom of God.’ … Indeed, the question ‘When is the kingdom of God coming?’ is rejected… because ‘the kingdom of God is among you.’” (Pg. 142-143) He rejects a pre-70 date for Luke, because “in Lk 21:20, 24 there appears an apocalyptic prediction which has been reworked from the ‘abomination of desolation’ (Mk 13:14 ff) into a prediction of doom on Jerusalem that has been formulated ex eventu: presupposed are the events of the year 70, including the siege and destruction of the city by the Romans, the slaughter of innumerable Jews, and the carrying off of the survivors into Gentile prisons. The same is true of the portrayal in 19:43 f: the wall which the enemies throw up around the city, the siege and blockade, the delivery of the conquered city and its inhabitants to the victors, the complete destruction of the city---all correspond exactly to the descriptions which contemporary accounts offer of the action of Titus against Jerusalem. Accordingly Lk was in any case written after 70.” (Pg. 150)

He observes that “Acts is wrong in saying that Paul had been in Jerusalem twice before the Apostolic Council (Acts 15=Gal 2). Yet Paul attaches great importance in Gal 2:1 to the fact that the visit to the Apostolic Council was the second he had made to Jerusalem… Paul says nothing of this so-called ‘Apostolic Decree’ [Acts 15] in Gal 2… The Apostolic Decree in the form reported in Acts cannot have been decided upon with Paul as participant… There can be no doubt that, on the three essential points that have been mentioned concerning the information about Paul’s activity, the author of Acts is so misinformed that he can scarcely have been a companion of Paul on his missionary journeys.” (Pg. 180-181) He adds, “the author of Acts does not know of Paul’s emphatic claim to the title of apostle… there is a sufficient base for inferring that the author of Acts was not a missionary companion of Paul, so that the ‘we’ in Acts 16 ff cannot be expressing his participation in the missionary journeys of Paul.” (Pg. 182-183) Later, he further adds, “The trial of Paul in Phil 1-2 cannot be the same as that described in Acts 23… in some way Paul’s preaching of the gospel had become the occasion for his legal prosecution, but according to Acts 21:28; 25:7 ff; 28:17 ff the issue was that of alleged offenses of Paul against the Jewish law in connection with the desecration of the temple.” (Pg. 330)

He states, “The conclusion of Acts 28:30 does not clearly indicate what happened to Paul after his two-year imprisonment and his unhindered preaching in Rome… the apologetic goal of Acts was obviously reached by 28:30 and we cannot postulate what the author had to write or omit. In addition, Acts 20:25, 38 indicate clearly that in the understanding of the author of Acts Paul was no longer able to return to his churches in the East. Thus the conclusion of Acts leaves open the possibilities that, after two years of Roman imprisonment, Paul was either released or executed, but excludes the possibility of another journey to the East.” (Pg. 376-377)

Of 2 Peter, he says, “this letter cannot have been written by Peter… The literary dependence on Jude rules this out… This material shows, therefore, that it is II Pet which is the dependent factor. It is further to be observed that the quotation from a noncanonical writing (Jude 14 f = The Apocalypse of Enoch 1:9, 60:8) is lacking in II Pet … From this it may be concluded that II Pet is already reluctant to use this literature whereas Jude has a naïve attitude toward it… Consequently it is almost universally recognized today that II Pet is dependent on Jude and not the reverse.” (Pg. 430-431) He adds, “Also indicative of the second century is the appeal to a collective of Pauline letters from which ‘statements that are hard to understand’ have been misinterpreted by the false teachers, and to further normative writings which include not only the OT bus also the developing NT (3:16)… Accordingly we find ourselves without doubt far beyond the time of Peter and into the epoch of ‘early Catholicism.’” (Pg.. 432-433) He also points out, “In spite of its heavy stress on Petrine authorship, II Pet is nowhere mentioned in the second century… Even down to the fourth century II Pet was largely unknown or not recognized as canonical.” (Pg. 433-434)

This is an excellent, detailed, well-argued summary of “mainline” scholarship about the New Testament, and will be of great value to students of the New Testament (whether or not they agree with every statement herein).
  • Rolling Flipper
Kummel's work is vast in scope, deep in research and precise in detail. While this book is not as readable as other NT intros, its intent is more to be used as a reference than a cover-to-cover read. Kummel's method is thorough--he presents the major schools of thought among scholars on a given topic, then offers his own view. It is notable that Kummel holds several opinions that go against the majority view on several issues (e.g., that Acts wasn't written by a companion of Paul and thus not by Luke the physician). Whether he agrees with the leading opinions or not, he formulates his arguments meticulously. This is a great resource for the serious NT student. Highly recommended.