Paul's Apocalyptic Gospel: The Coming Triumph of God

by Johan Christiaan Beker (Editor)

"J. Christiaan Beker faces a major can the genuine power of Paul's truly responsible apocalyptic be recovered in our time ― so that we are actually addressed by the gospel of God's coming cosmic triumph ― without falling victim to readily available forms of sheer speculation, paranoid polarization, and romantic futurism? Beker responds to this question with uncommon honesty and insight as he shows that the passion for God's coming triumph can serve ― and in fact does serve ― as the generating source of our compassion for our needy world."
― J. Louis Martyn, Edward Robinson Professor Emeritus of Biblical Theology Union Theological Seminary, New York "The great Christian word hope has fallen on hard existential theologians have redefined it as openness to a vague future; Apocalyptic sensationalists have reduced it to a time table of escapism. In his study of Paul's Apocalyptic Gospel Beker has recaptured the meaning of hope. To a church fettered to her past or consumed by her present, no perspective is more helpful than Beker's conclusion that the Gospel embraces the future and that the future's clearest feature is the victory of God. Preaching will come to life and Bible study take on new vigor for all who walk through Paul's letters with Beker as a guide."
― David Allan Hubbard, Former President, Fuller Theological Seminary

Genres: Theology

Paperback

First published September 1, 1982

Reviews

[Caleb Rolling · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is unsure of what it wants to be. At the end of the day, I think it's a mostly unsuccessful distillation of Beker's lengthier treatment of Paul aimed at a broader audience. The book lacks a strong sense of direction and feels disjointed--even random at times. It definitely lacks a "so what" factor.
I also have a methodological quibble, which hurts the overall effectiveness of the book. This book is really about the apocalyptic gospel of the "authentic" Pauline letters. Now, I grant that this is standard fare for the time (it was published in 1982), but Beker is actually attempting to describe the apocalyptic of the reconstructed historical Paul, not the "Paul" of the Pauline corpus as we have in the New Testament. To describe the apocalyptic gospel of Paul, one must deal with the canonical shape of the Pauline corpus as we have it--with all its coherence *and* diversity.
Beker does a good job at stressing the need for rediscovering the apocalyptic dynamic of Paul (and the rest of the NT), even if he is mostly unsuccessful at describing those dynamics himself. There are other helpful nuggets throughout, but there are numerous factors at play here that hurt the effectiveness of the book.

[Michael Walker · Rating 1 out of 5]

Late Princeton professor of Biblical Theology Beker labels popular Christian books by apocalyptic sects (he names Hal Lindsey as one of the "sect's" prominent writers) "pseudo-Christians" and accuses them of more interest in calculating the timing of the End-time "than on the central tenets of the gospel of Christ." Beker believes Paul's apocalyptic is the polar opposite of popular "neo-apocalypticism" and the latter is "a false Christian movement" that is neglected by the "established church." Beker makes full use of this dichotomy to chastise the latter for not paying more notice of Paul's apocalyptic gospel.

Beker defines apocalyptic as "the product of a severe contradiction between legitimate expectations and reality." Popular books like Lindsey's filled the void left by the established church's failure to take up Paul's apocalyptic gospel. If they had, there would be no need of such popular apocalypticism.

I cannot recommend this book, sadly. Beker is a top-notch communicator, but I disagree with his attacking style just to make what may be a valid point.

[Zach Waldis · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm still not exactly sure who the "apocalyptic Paul" is after reading this. Of course I'm familiar with apocalyptic material in the Bible like Daniel and Revelation, but it's hard to understand what makes an "apocalyptic" reading of Paul distinctive.

[Nicholas Quient · Rating 4 out of 5]

A compelling and condensed version of his Paul the Apostle. I think this one is worthwhile if you aren't interested in reading PtA, but it isn't a great substitute for that largely excellent work. Just my thoughts. Read Paul the Apostle, but if you can't read, then read this.