# Craig Blomberg's "Jesus and the Gospels" -- question



## reaganmarsh (Mar 25, 2011)

Anyone have any info on whether or not Craig Blomberg's "Jesus and the Gospels" (2nd edition) is helpful? I have an opportunity to purchase it for a little over 60% off and would love any input on whether you've found it helpful, heretical, or somewhere in-between. If unhelpful, what would be a better resource? 

We read his "From Pentecost to Patmos" at SBTS. Apart from some minor details and the egalitarian view proffered therein, I found it helpful overall. 

I thank you in advance for your input.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (Mar 25, 2011)

I would get the book, but I havn't read it. I found his commentary on matthew very helpful.


----------



## Marrow Man (Mar 25, 2011)

Blomberg's book was a required textbook for NT 1 at seminary. Other than the references to Q, it's a decent read.


----------



## reaganmarsh (Mar 27, 2011)

Thank you, gentlemen! I appreciate your time and input.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Mar 27, 2011)

We were required to read it in seminary too. I found it helpful, especially with a lot of the cultural and hisotrical background it provided for the Gospels. I still refer to it once and a while.


----------



## DMcFadden (Mar 27, 2011)

I have always found his writings helpful for taking an "evangelical" and "conservative" position. He was associated with most of the translations on the market today (e.g., translation committees or as a consultant for the New Living Translation, the English Standard Version, the Holman Christian Standard Bible and the updated New International Version). He has a reputation for pushing the comfort zone of evangelicals by his dialog with Mormons, critical re-examination of liberation theology, and the like. People I have known who went to Denver seminary consider him a great scholar and teacher.

However, he is certainly NOT Reformed or Calvinist. As one of that breed of biblical scholars who argue that the "systems" of theology do not reflect the full testimony of scripture, he considers himself a "Calminian" and cites Middle Knowledge as a way of resolving the issue of sovereignty and free will.

He writes: "So in this month of honoring one great Reformer, let’s not forget his counterpart a generation afterwards. I give thanks to God for Cal but want also to be one of Jacob’s minions, which, I guess, adds up to Calminianism!"

Broad evangelicalism just loves "splitting the difference" when it comes to theological systems. Why be a Calvinist or an Arminian when you can say that the Bible affirms BOTH?


----------

