What do you think?
Rate this book
The Interpretation of the New Testament, 1861-1986
To bring this widely acclaimed book completely up to date, the late Bishop Neill's colleague N.T. Wright has revised and expanded the entire contents and added a new chapter covering New Testament scholarship of the last twenty-five years. This masterful survey describes the historical development of New Testament criticism, the contrasting personalities of scholars, and the permanent contributions made by various schools, ending with an assessment of the current status of the field.
480 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1964
3 people are currently reading
92 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
January 31, 2020
The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861–1986 appears at first glance to be a rather boring work. Quite the contrary. First published by Oxford University Press in 1964, the initial edition of the book, authored by the missionary-scholar Bishop Stephen Neill covered a century of New Testament interpretation (1861-1961). This second edition covers an additional 25 years of history, offered by N. T. Wright. Both authors possess a firsthand account of this material, making for a very lively telling. Coupled with their direct knowledge of the field is a deep commitment to the task and discipline of New Testament interpretation, as is evident in the following incredible, and seemingly offhand, statement by Bishop Neill: “Not long ago, I read through the New Testament in Greek in three months at the rate of three or four chapters a day” (161).
The book is comprised of nine chapters, each taking a thematic approach, all while moving chronologically through the time period. The approach of the work is to examine specific scholars as well as their various publications, and to unpack how these have inaugurated or contributed to various movements within the field. The initial chapter, “Challenge to Orthodoxy” traces the origins of Germany higher criticism the late 18th century, and its eventual application to the Bible. In the second chapter, our time period in question begins, kicked off with the publication of Essays and Reviews in 1860 in English by a team of Oxford scholars who were reporting on the state of New Testament studies throughout Europe. With their work came the lasting question: ‘Is the Bible to be treated like any other book or not?” (32-33). It is here that three highly revered heroes emerge, “men of the hour”, born to stem the rising tide in Germany (see pgs. 34–36) the English scholars, F. J. Hort, B. F. Westcott and J. B. Lightfoot.
The life and work of Hort, Westcott and Lightfoot is painted is such clear colour by Neill (albeit veering towards hagiography at times), serving to give the reader a deep sense of the incredible combined effort of the three men. After this is a fascinating examination on the text of the New Testament in chapter 3, undoubtedly fueled by bishop Neil’s love of exploration. The authors, as historians, have written a history book, which contains within it an element of suspense, and a sense that the reader is living in that active, unfolding history. At the end of the chapter on text criticism, they write, “The principle lesson to be learned from this [text-criticism] history is that you never know what may turn up” (111). One is left feeling very much as a participant in this unfolding history.
After a brief survey of gospel studies, a study of the Greek background of the New Testament is offered (aided by the massive excavations at Oxyrhynchus). In chapter 6, we are introduced to four key figures from the early-mid 20th century: Albert Scheitzer, Karl Barth, Edwyn Hoskyns, and Rudolph Bultmann along with their attempts to “re-enter theology” into the discussion of Jesus of Nazareth. Chapters 7 and 8 focus on the synoptic problem, form and redaction criticism, as well as the discover of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The final chapter (9) is the longest, penned by Wright. Here he attempts to cover a great deal, particularly the areas of NT backgrounds, the historical Jesus, as well as Pauline studies.
Throughout the work, as new methods are employed, and as new discoveries emerge, Neill/Wright’s approach remains consistent. It is the “scientific study” of the New Testament on the basis of the careful “weighing” of the “evidence” to arrive at assured “results.” Indeed, early on Neill writes, “…as we shall see again and again in this study, what matters is not so much the particular views that any scholar holds as the validity of the methods which he uses, and the integrity of his devotion to them” (6). The emphasis here is on the consistent application of one’s methodology to the task at hand.
An unfortunate weakness of the book is that it is now quite dated. In a field that has grown exponentially since 1986, and continues to proliferate, the book is now badly in need of updating. There is no mention of more recent criticisms such as narrative and literary, sociological, or feminist. Readers looking for a survey of these areas will need to look for a more up-to-date treatment.
The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861–1986 is a unique firsthand account of this history, bolstered by the field-mastery which both scholars possess. The general attitude of the work is that higher criticism is something to utilize and celebrate, albeit with caution. The strength of Neill’s judgements has been born out not only in his ongoing recognized mastery of several different fields (see his works on Missions and Anglicanism), but also in his selection of the chosen scholar to update his work. N. T. Wright, who in 1988 was only a young scholar, with few publications to his name, has had an incredible career, and has left an indelible mark on the field of New Testament studies, already having cemented his own place in any such future study. Neill and Wright’s Interpretation remains a terrific overview of these 125 years of New Testament scholarship.
The book is comprised of nine chapters, each taking a thematic approach, all while moving chronologically through the time period. The approach of the work is to examine specific scholars as well as their various publications, and to unpack how these have inaugurated or contributed to various movements within the field. The initial chapter, “Challenge to Orthodoxy” traces the origins of Germany higher criticism the late 18th century, and its eventual application to the Bible. In the second chapter, our time period in question begins, kicked off with the publication of Essays and Reviews in 1860 in English by a team of Oxford scholars who were reporting on the state of New Testament studies throughout Europe. With their work came the lasting question: ‘Is the Bible to be treated like any other book or not?” (32-33). It is here that three highly revered heroes emerge, “men of the hour”, born to stem the rising tide in Germany (see pgs. 34–36) the English scholars, F. J. Hort, B. F. Westcott and J. B. Lightfoot.
The life and work of Hort, Westcott and Lightfoot is painted is such clear colour by Neill (albeit veering towards hagiography at times), serving to give the reader a deep sense of the incredible combined effort of the three men. After this is a fascinating examination on the text of the New Testament in chapter 3, undoubtedly fueled by bishop Neil’s love of exploration. The authors, as historians, have written a history book, which contains within it an element of suspense, and a sense that the reader is living in that active, unfolding history. At the end of the chapter on text criticism, they write, “The principle lesson to be learned from this [text-criticism] history is that you never know what may turn up” (111). One is left feeling very much as a participant in this unfolding history.
After a brief survey of gospel studies, a study of the Greek background of the New Testament is offered (aided by the massive excavations at Oxyrhynchus). In chapter 6, we are introduced to four key figures from the early-mid 20th century: Albert Scheitzer, Karl Barth, Edwyn Hoskyns, and Rudolph Bultmann along with their attempts to “re-enter theology” into the discussion of Jesus of Nazareth. Chapters 7 and 8 focus on the synoptic problem, form and redaction criticism, as well as the discover of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The final chapter (9) is the longest, penned by Wright. Here he attempts to cover a great deal, particularly the areas of NT backgrounds, the historical Jesus, as well as Pauline studies.
Throughout the work, as new methods are employed, and as new discoveries emerge, Neill/Wright’s approach remains consistent. It is the “scientific study” of the New Testament on the basis of the careful “weighing” of the “evidence” to arrive at assured “results.” Indeed, early on Neill writes, “…as we shall see again and again in this study, what matters is not so much the particular views that any scholar holds as the validity of the methods which he uses, and the integrity of his devotion to them” (6). The emphasis here is on the consistent application of one’s methodology to the task at hand.
An unfortunate weakness of the book is that it is now quite dated. In a field that has grown exponentially since 1986, and continues to proliferate, the book is now badly in need of updating. There is no mention of more recent criticisms such as narrative and literary, sociological, or feminist. Readers looking for a survey of these areas will need to look for a more up-to-date treatment.
The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861–1986 is a unique firsthand account of this history, bolstered by the field-mastery which both scholars possess. The general attitude of the work is that higher criticism is something to utilize and celebrate, albeit with caution. The strength of Neill’s judgements has been born out not only in his ongoing recognized mastery of several different fields (see his works on Missions and Anglicanism), but also in his selection of the chosen scholar to update his work. N. T. Wright, who in 1988 was only a young scholar, with few publications to his name, has had an incredible career, and has left an indelible mark on the field of New Testament studies, already having cemented his own place in any such future study. Neill and Wright’s Interpretation remains a terrific overview of these 125 years of New Testament scholarship.
December 23, 2015
Yeesh, again.
August 22, 2018
A masterful, yet demanding, survey on the state of New Testament theology over the course of one of the most significant centuries in that field of study, Stephen Neill's solid, even at times comforting, voice serves to guide the reader from F.C. Baur to J.B. Lightfoot on through to E. Käsemann and R. Bultmann and onward, even when those lines get increasingly complex and hard-t0-follow. The book is a must for the student (especially new and unfamiliar with the significant names and ideas) of the New Testament, but also a must for those with serious critical questions on the same: at least, as N.T. Wright notes in the concluding chapter: "[The Enlightenment] wanted to throw off the shackles of authoritarian Christianity, and developed historical tools for the purpose: but the Church has taken up those tools and used them... in the service of its theology and proclamation." (p. 444)
Leaving The Interpretation of the New Testament in preparation for further study along similar lines, I am overwhelmed by a sense of the sheer daunting task of doing historical, philological, cultural, and exegetical work in order to even begin to understand the least of the sayings of Jesus, or the least of Paul's turns-of-phrase. Neill's standards of academic quality are of such an exalted (but generous and open-hearted) level, that the would-be scholar is given pause before even considering to pass on something of subpar standard to a journal for review. Perhaps he or she would even give pause before bringing something of poor standard to a seminar for discussion.
Even now, though, having finished such a monster of a book (and I am not a slow or weak reader!), I do question a little the work I still need to go to fulfill the needs of the course that assigned it; and, yet, I am also encouraged: I feel an added spark of interest by Neill and Wright's ardent engagement with such diverse minds as Schweitzer and Hoskyns and Westcott. Having read such a thorough overview, I look forward to, rather than feel off-put by, continuing my studies in this field by pursuing primary sources. My only issue now is, given the plurality of sources presented here, who should I read next? Neill and Wright provide so much bibliographic information, and so little time to read it all.
My one major regret is that this book breaks the law of indexes in works of nonfiction. Ah! Such a bibliographic work should have itself contained a bibliography rather than relegate the necessary information to footnotes. One hopes a third edition of the book eventually appears and that Oxford University Press makes the necessary adjustment.
Leaving The Interpretation of the New Testament in preparation for further study along similar lines, I am overwhelmed by a sense of the sheer daunting task of doing historical, philological, cultural, and exegetical work in order to even begin to understand the least of the sayings of Jesus, or the least of Paul's turns-of-phrase. Neill's standards of academic quality are of such an exalted (but generous and open-hearted) level, that the would-be scholar is given pause before even considering to pass on something of subpar standard to a journal for review. Perhaps he or she would even give pause before bringing something of poor standard to a seminar for discussion.
Even now, though, having finished such a monster of a book (and I am not a slow or weak reader!), I do question a little the work I still need to go to fulfill the needs of the course that assigned it; and, yet, I am also encouraged: I feel an added spark of interest by Neill and Wright's ardent engagement with such diverse minds as Schweitzer and Hoskyns and Westcott. Having read such a thorough overview, I look forward to, rather than feel off-put by, continuing my studies in this field by pursuing primary sources. My only issue now is, given the plurality of sources presented here, who should I read next? Neill and Wright provide so much bibliographic information, and so little time to read it all.
My one major regret is that this book breaks the law of indexes in works of nonfiction. Ah! Such a bibliographic work should have itself contained a bibliography rather than relegate the necessary information to footnotes. One hopes a third edition of the book eventually appears and that Oxford University Press makes the necessary adjustment.
April 10, 2021
The Interpretation of the New Testament 1861-1986 by Stephen Neill and Tom Wright is an interesting history of the progression of New Testament history. Even though I would not hold to the methods of interpretation discussed in this work, the history behind the movement and the characters involved are interesting. Do not be fooled by the boring cover and dull font set, it is a fascinating history at told by Neill and Wright.
June 12, 2018
Well written, informative, and even entertaining.
May 1, 2020
This is a good history of NT research, Wright does a decent job updating as well. A little more prosaic and narrative than some others.
August 20, 2022
2022 reads: 16
Superb introductory survey. Neill is a joy to read.
Superb introductory survey. Neill is a joy to read.
September 6, 2022
Engagingly written
August 3, 2011
Interesting, though not in my opinion very well written. Neill presents his case, or rather dozens of cases, from a legion of commentators, scholars and theologians that seem to have little to do with each other, rendering the book into a rather convoluted mass of theological observations. It did however whet my appetite for more reading on the subject
March 20, 2008
If you want a comprehensive approach to the scholarship of the New Testament for the last 150 years, this here is your book. Balanced criticism of the various schools of thought in America, Germany, France, Britain, etc. Pretty good stuff if you care about this crap, which I obviously don't.
September 27, 2013
I read the earlier edition... 1861 - 1961 during undergraduate school days sometime around 1974. I'm reading it again in 2013 and enjoying it like a brand new book. Neill knows his stuff and it is essential reading to understand where much of contemporary NT interpretation comes from.
April 7, 2012
I need to read this again more carefully some other time. At times it seemed I liked the book more, and at other times I didn't. Why? I don't even want to take the time to think about it. I'm tired.
June 3, 2014
An essential resource for the New Testament scholar.
April 28, 2020
You'd think it would be boring, but the writing makes it so compelling!!!
May 20, 2016
As an excellent supplement to the information in a contemporary theology course, it helped me understand the writings of key players in interpretation in the 20th century.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews