Benjamin Sargent

Awaiting reviews…

‘In much postmodern discourse it has become usual to argue that the biblical text has many meanings (as many as there are interpreters). Benjamin Sargent shows, in this tightly-argued book, that many readers in the past believed it had a single, determinate meaning. The New Testament writers thought that Old Testament texts had a single meaning (usually a Christological one); later writers believed the same about the New Testament. This is a book that will challenge many assumptions, on the basis both of detailed examination of many texts and of a wide knowledge of secondary literature about biblical interpretation down the centuries.’ The Revd Prof John Barton, Emeritus Oriel and Laing Professor of Biblical Interpretation, University of Oxford.

‘The interpretation of Scripture lies at the heart of Christian theology and its meaning determines our confession of faith. In this timely book, Benjamin Sargent takes us through the history of the church to show that in every age, Christians have maintained that there is one reading of the text that is valid above all others. Dr Sargent does not ignore the complexities of hermeneutics but demonstrates how, in spite of the many different avenues that interpreters have explored, this fundamental assertion has continued to assert itself right up to the present day.’ Prof Gerald Bray, Research Professor of Divinity, Beeson Divinity School.

‘This work is thoughtfully written and clear in its expression. It breaks new ground in Petrine studies and interacts with most relevant literature…this work will be a “must read” for commentators on 1 Peter.’ Peter Davids,  Catholic Biblical Quarterly 78 (2016).

‘This book is notable for its helpful discussions of so many passages in the text and for the attempt to relate Peter’s approach to the theology underlying his exposition. Sargent himself is cautious and conservative, as is seen, for example, in his ambivalence on the question of Petrine authorship, which, he insists, cannot be ruled out any more than can the alternative. It is obviously better scholarship to defend a traditional solution to a crux than to offer a novel one that is wrong.’ I. Howard Marshall, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38.5 (2016).

‘Sargent’s treatment is crafted well. He exhibits dexterity in bringing together key conversation partners and demonstrates awareness of past and current scholarship on the use of Scripture in 1 Peter. He engages other scholars critically and shapes his argument carefully. His definition and extensive treatment of the quotations and allusions are helpful contributions. He is aware of thepotential areas of weakness in his argument and attempts to address them. He has succeeded in his endeavor to offer a detailed study of the use of Scripture in 1 Peter.’ Anton Joseph, Review of Biblical Literature (2016).

‘This work addresses important issues related to historical research surrounding biblical texts. Sargent’s approach and conclusions are marked by cautious exegetical humility, sometimes to a fault, especially when addressing subjects of great controversy. Nevertheless, the book will be of value to those engaged in researching the New Testament’s use of scripture and those interested in hermeneutical questions’. Review of Biblical Literature, July (2015)

‘Sargent’s piece is a thoughtful and intelligent study of the church’s calendar, as expressed in the collects, lectionary and psalter of the BCP’, Anaphora 7.1 (2013).

‘Whether you are an Anglican or would merely like to learn more about that strand of Protestant Christianity, reading and digesting this book is a worthwhile and edifying use of your time’. Goodreads.

‘There’s a whole lot to like about this little book: Sargent is concerned with helping us see how various parts of the prayer book (especially the calendar, collects, lectionary, and psalter) all work together to draw us into the life of God through the Scriptures.’ Goodreads.

‘Sargent’s book is particularly welcome. It is short, peppered with direct applications to the current evangelical Anglican context, and while due to the subject matter is unavoidably dense, his simple overriding structure and ruthlessly efficient argumentation make it one of the best and most accessible introductions to hermeneutical philosophy that this reviewer has read’. Churchman 127.4 (2013), 371.