THE VOICES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT:
A Conversational Approach to the Message of
Good News
By Derek Tidball
IVP. 287 pages. £17.99
ISBN 978 1 783 594 139
How to tackle the diversity of the New Testament while honouring its unity?
That is the task Derek Tidball sets himself here, and he approaches it by creating an imaginary conversation between the NT’s authors – all of them. It’s mediated by a neutral chair and aided by an observer, who has the privilege of knowing how NT theology has developed over the past 2,000 years. It’s an intriguing idea (credited to George Caird) that in my view doesn’t quite come off.
Tidball begins with an overview of more familiar approaches to summarising NT theology. The ‘common thread’ running through the NT writings is then identified as the gospel. The remainder of the book then compares the various NT ‘voices’ as they describe this good news from different angles, such as: the identity of Jesus; what he offers; how we should live in response; and what the future holds. By the end we have covered pretty much everything.
Widely accessible
The book is written at roughly the level of a commentary in the Bible Speaks Today series, so it’s widely accessible. It’s written well, and clearly, and by a highly experienced author. So what’s wrong with it? I think there are at least three pitfalls.
One is that the premise of overhearing a conversation between the NT writers is so artificial. Inevitably (and rightly!) they spend an awful lot of time heartily agreeing with each other. This takes up a quite a bit of space.
Disputed issues
A second issue is that Tidball, despite his best intentions declared in the introduction, gives away his own position on various disputed issues. Any of us would probably do the same. In his case, it means that his egalitarian position on church life is placed on the lips of Paul (‘Yet make no mistake about it: in serving they [women who hosted house churches] exercised leadership’, p.207). Paul is also heard propounding elements of the ‘New Perspective’ on himself !
Thirdly, there are places where an unnatural ambiguity survives. For instance, we may not wish to be too dogmatic about the Millennium (personally, I don’t think we should), but it’s odd to find in this book that John as the author of Revelation 20 doesn’t seem to be too sure either!
Nor is Matthew able to tell us whether or not ‘on this rock…’ (in Matthew 16) refers personally to Peter. More seriously, the discussion of judgment leaves annihilationism as a legitimate view alongside the orthodox view of hell.
Doesn’t do the job?
Some people will enjoy this book and find it useful in seeing how the different perspectives of the NT authors come together. It certainly has value there. It didn’t really do the job for me, even though I wanted it to; and I’d give it a bit of a health warning, for the reasons I’ve cited.
