Reviews of

Archive for the ‘Tuomas RASIMUS’ Category

Stoicism in Early Christianity

In Baker Academic, Early Christianity, Ismo DUNDERBERG, New Testament, Samuli Siikavirta, Stoicism, Troels ENGBERG-PEDERSEN, Tuomas RASIMUS on August 1, 2013 at 5:01 pm


2013.08.17 | Tuomas Rasimus, Troels Engberg-Pedersen and Ismo Dunderberg (eds.). Stoicism in Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010. 320 pages. (PB) ISBN 9780801039515.

Review by Samuli Siikavirta, University of Cambridge.

Many thanks to Baker Academic for kindly providing us with a review copy.

Stoicism in Early Christianity is a collection of essays on a variety of topics suggesting that Stoicism rather than Middle Platonism was the predominant philosophical influence on early Christian texts. The emphasis on Stoic influence is seen as a neglected area in New Testament scholarship, which the book wants to change. Nearly half of the book’s thirteen essays are written by Nordic scholars (as one may expect of a book edited by two Finns and a Dane), but other authors range from universities in the USA, the Netherlands, Japan and South Africa. Read the rest of this entry »


The Legacy of John: Second Century Reception of the Fourth Gospel

In Brill, Charles E. HILL, Dan Batovici, John, New Testament, NT reception history, Second century, Tuomas RASIMUS on January 17, 2011 at 8:37 am

2011.01.02 | Tuomas Rasimus, ed. The Legacy of John: Second Century Reception of the Fourth Gospel. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 132. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2010. Pp. xi + 406. ISBN: 9789004176331. Hardback

Reviewed by Dan Batovici, University of St Andrews.

The book is a fine collection of twelve essays on several second-century texts and their relation to the Fourth Gospel. The editor mentions in the very dense introduction the need to ‘abandon the old division between “orthodox” and “heterodox” forms of Christianity as misleading and anachronistic.’

It is commendable, indeed, to seek for the early reception of John beyond such a distinction, and this fresh view stands well in a context in which the two most recent major contributions on the early reception of John tend to focus on either the “orthodox” or the “heterodox” reception. Read the rest of this entry »