Here’s the title:
The abstract reads:
Angelomorphic Christology and the Exegesis of Psalm 8:5 in Tertullian’s Adversus Praxean explores the reluctance of Tertullian of Carthage (160-220 A.D.) to predicate angelic properties of the Lord Jesus Christ. This fresh and insightful work suggests that one reason for this aversion to angelic or angelomorphic Christology was his hermeneutical approach to Psalm 8:5.
I just received information from a book wire about a new Brill title (so start applying for a loan):
Bogdan Gabriel Bucur, Angelomorphic Pneumatology: Clement of Alexandria and Other Early Christian Witnesses
Here’s the Brill abstract:
This book pursues the occurrence of angelomorphic pneumatology in early Christian literature—that is, the use of angelic imagery in early Christian discourse about the Holy Spirit—by taking as its entry-point Clement of Alexandria’s less explored writings, Excerpta ex Theodoto, Eclogae propheticae, and Adumbrationes. Clement’s angelomorphic pneumatology occurs in tandem with spirit christology, within a theological framework still characterized by a binitarian orientation. This complex theological articulation, supported by the exegesis of specific biblical passages (Zech 4:10; Isa 11:2-3; Matt 18:10), reworks Jewish and Christian traditions about the seven first-created angels, and constitutes a relatively widespread phenomenon in early Christianity. Evidence to support this claim is presented in the course of separate studies of Revelation, the Shepherd of Hermas, Justin Martyr, and Aphrahat.
The clear mention of binitarianism leads me to believe this would be a worthy contribution to two powers research . . . but I think I’ll wait till SBL to even think about buying it.
The book is that of Simon Gathercole: The Preexistent Son: Recovering the Christologies of Matthew, Mark, And Luke
Obviously, the focus of the work is the New Testament’s Christology, but there is a good deal of interaction with Second Temple material. Not much on tracing the two powers idea into the Old Testament and Israelite religion, but no one does that (which is why I had a good dissertation topic). I really need to get those articles out this year!
Here’s another article that delves into Jewish Binitarian monotheism, though not as deeply as Hurtado (with whom the article interacts) or myself: Paul A. Rainbow, “Jewish Monotheism as a Matrix for New Testament Christology: A Review Article,” NovTest 33:1 (1991): 78-91
I just purchased this book:
After flipping through the Scripture and Author indexes (a habit of mine with anything related to Two Powers in heaven or the divine council), I have mixed feelings. On one hand, Dr. Garrett interacts with Alan Segal, Charles Gieschen, and Darrell Hannah, all of whom have written important books related to the relationship between “exalted mediators” in Judaism and high Christology. That’s the good news. But there’s an amazing oversight that mars this “plus factor.” Incredibly, the work of Larry Hurtado is cited ONCE in the entire book. I can’t understand how anyone can write a book like this and leave Hurtado off the radar. Good grief.
The (additional) bad news is that Dr. Garrett (and she’s not alone here) seems to never have entertained the notion that Jewish binitarianism / the Two Powers in Heaven / exalted mediator figures might have something to do with Israelite religion and it’s binitarian divine council structure. I can’t really say I’m surprised here, since that was my dissertation focus, and up to that point (2004) I’d never seen anyone address this. But the oversights here are (again) glaring:
This book proves once again how insular scholarship in this area is. Dr. Garrett is a NT specialist, and so I can’t expect her to know anything about the divine council. What I DO expect is that she would have surmised that the exalted angel motif MIGHT have an antecedent in Israelite religion, and then to go looking. Doesn’t seem like she did that at all.
I know these remarks are critical, but I still recommend the book (and will read it with interest) because it is evident that she does address the NT side of the coin. Half a treatment is better than none. I just have to wonder if her work really adds anything to Gieschen, Segal, and Hannah. For their books (in case you are unfamiliar with them) are:
Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports About Christianity and Gnosticism
