David A. deSilva, Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul: A Visual Guide (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2025)

“The ruins of Rome are a constant reminder not only of Rome’s greatness but of the fact that no empire forged by human beings endures . . . The archaeological remains remind us—as Paul would remind his audiences—to look to the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ if we are ever to fine a truly stable homeland” (281–82).

The goal of this volume is to introduce students of St. Paul to pertinent archaeological discoveries in the Greek and Roman cities associated with him for the purpose of better understanding the apostle’s letters through contextualizing the situations that preempted him to compose them and his responses to these situations in the epistles in question (xii). To accomplish this goal, deSilva divides his work into four parts: (1) a short introduction, (2) chapters devoted to cities connected to St. Paul’s early life and ministry, (3) chapters focusing on the cities in which the apostle established Christian congregations on his missionary journeys, and (4) chapters examining the cities he visited on his final trip to Jerusalem and journey to Rome.  

In the “Introduction” (xi–xiv), deSilva lays out the above-mentioned goal, notes the temporal limitations of his work, for whom he has composed it, and summarizes the volume’s contents. Because deSilva desires to contextualize the letters of the Pauline corpus that were composed to congregations in which St. Paul planted churches, he mostly focuses on archaeological materials that the apostle would have seen and encountered, although sometimes he draws on materials that postdate St. Paul’s lifetime. To this end, the work is not a comprehensive introduction to the cities associated with the apostle, but only a snapshot of what they looked like in the mid-first century AD (xii). 

DeSilva’s intended audience are those who have yet or who are unable to visit the sites covered in the book or those who can and wish to learn more about these cities and their relation to the apostle before their trip (xii). He divides Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul into three unequal parts related to St. Paul’s life and ministry that generally follows his chronology and movements from Acts of the Apostles.

The first part focuses on sites associated with the beginnings of the apostle’s life and ministry, which covers his early life in “Tarsus” (3–6), his time in “Damascus and Arabia” (7–14) and “Antioch-On-The-Orontes” (15–20), and his trip to “Paphos” (21–26) with St. Barnabas. 

The second part, which is the longest, examines the cities in which St. Paul and his apostolic colleagues established congregations in various cities in modern-day Türkiye and Greece: “Perge and Pisidian Antioch” (29–50), “Roman Philippi” (51–77), “Thessalonica” (78–99), “Beroea” (100–7), “Athens” (108–25), “Roman Corinth” (126–56), “Roman Ephesus” (157–88), and “Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis” (189–205).

In the third and final part, deSilva treats the cities connected to the last years of the apostle’s life as recorded in Acts, his final trip to Jerusalem, his imprisonment, and his journey to Rome: “Miletus” (209–18), “Rhodes” (219–24), “Jerusalem” (225–30), “Caesarea Maritima” (231–42), “Malta” (243–48), “Puteoli” (249–53), and “Rome” (254–82).  

For the most part, deSilva begins each chapter by noting the connections of the city in question to St. Paul’s ministry. Then, he devotes the bulk of each chapter to discussing the archaeological and literary evidence of the site and how it illuminates the apostle’s letter(s) to the church in that city.

Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul is a welcomed addition to Pauline studies for three reasons. First, it is a thoroughly comprehensive treatment of the cities that St. Paul visited and missionized during his life and ministry bringing them together in a single volume. To this end, pastors and parish priests will find this work helpful as they prepare their homilies and Bible studies for their parishioners.

Second, deSilva mostly bases his work on up-to-date scholarship on the various sites from archaeologists and specialists who are working on them and students of the apostle can mine his bibliography to dig deeper, if they wish. This means that many incorrect assumptions that plague earlier studies about various archaeological data and St. Paul are not present in this volume. For example, deSilva has a balanced treatment of the Erastus Inscription from Corinth (147–48) (which is not the Erastus mentioned in Romans 16:23, if the latest archaeological findings are correct, see my podcast on the topic by clicking here) and of the Tiberius Inscription from Caesarea Maritima (242).

Third and finally, Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul fulfills its title as A Visual Guide, incorporating over 250 beautiful color pictures of the sites that St. Paul visited and their artifacts, which appear to be from deSilva’s own travels. To this end, not only does deSilva deserve praise but also Baker Academic for the layout of the book, the type of paper on which it was printed, and the high quality of its photographs: Bravo!  

In sum, I highly recommend Archaeology and the Ministry of Paul: A Visual Guide and you can purchase your copy directly from Baker Academic or from Amazon! 

Nijay K. Gupta, Erin M. Heim, and Scot McKnight, eds., The State of Pauline Studies: A Survey of Recent Research (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2024)

The purpose of this work is to provide readers with a “snapshot” of recent scholarship on St. Paul’s letters and some aspects of his theology. To accomplish this goal, the editors, Gupta, Heim, and McKnight, have divided this volume into two parts. The first consists of chapters 1–7 and explores various topics related to recent Pauline Studies and the second part, which encompasses chapters 8–17, examines current trends in scholarship on every letter of the Pauline corpus. 

In chapter 1, “Paul and the Messiah” (7–22), Joshua W. Jipp examines recent scholarship related to Jesus’s Royal Messiahship. Chapter 2, “Paul and Judaism” (23–41) by Kent L. Yinger, explores the state of the place of Judaism, Israel, and Torah and their connections to St. Paul’s congregations in the apostle’s thinking. In chapter 3, “Paul and Salvation” (42–60), Ben C. Blackwell lays out various approaches of salvation in St. Paul’s theology—the Reformational Perspective, the New Perspective, the Paul within Judaism Perspective, the Apocalyptic Perspective, and the Participationist Perspective—and “how these perspectives articulate forms of coherence in his theology” (42). 

Chapter 4, “Paul and the Spirit” (61–75) by Kris Song, examines key debates in Pauline studies as they relate to the Holy Spirit and then reviews recent studies in Pauline pneumatology. In chapter 5, “Paul and Gender” (76–102), Cynthia Long Westfall explores mostly evangelical Pauline studies “involved in the ongoing debate about the theology and practice of men and women in the home, the church, and society” (76). Chapter 6, “Paul and Empire” (103–19) by Peter Oakes, investigates recent scholarship on the place of empire in the apostle’s letters and theology. And in the last chapter of Part 1, chapter 7, “Feminist, Postcolonial, and Womanist Approaches to Paul” (120–35) by Angela N. Parker, lays out these current approaches to Paul and how they are “interested in evaluating uneven and complex power relations” in the ancient and modern world as it relates to racism, sexism, colonialism, and imperialism (120).

Chapters 8–17 examine recent interpretative trends in each letter of the Pauline corpus with Jennifer Strawbridge exploring Romans (“Romans,” 139–62), John K. Goodrich 1 Corinthians (“1 Corinthians,” 163–83), B. J. Oropeza 2 Corinthians (“2 Corinthians,” 184–202), Erin M. Heim Galatians (“Galatians,” 203–32), Timothy G. Gombis Ephesians (“Ephesians,” 233–48), Nijay K. Gupta Philippians (“Philippians,” 249–63), Scot McKnight Colossians (“Colossians,” 264–79), Sydney Tooth 1–2 Thessalonians (“1–2 Thessalonians,” 280–97), T. Christopher Hoklotubbe the Pastoral Epistles (“1–2 Timothy and Titus,” 298–316), Dennis R. Edwards reviewing the current state of scholarship on Philemon (“Philemon,” 317–30). 

This work is too large and diverse to discuss every contribution so I will limit myself to interacting with four observations that Gupta, Heim, and McKnight highlight about recent Pauline scholarship in the work’s introduction. First, the current state of scholarship on the apostle has moved away from its traditional roots in the Western Church to the point that the historical-critical method is “no longer . . . the default approach to studying Paul” (1) and the study of St. Paul has become a more global and diverse field (2). I am thrilled at the field’s recent diversification, a diversification that reminds me of the early Church, which witnessed the gathering together of peoples of all colors, nations, and languages in and outside the Roman Empire for God’s glory! I think that this variety of perspectives on the apostle will only increase if the Church continues her slow decay in the West and expansion in the Global South. 

Second, recent Pauline scholarship is trending away from the modern, and in my opinion false, categories of Pauline letters as authentic and pseudonymous (2). More and more scholars understand that our modern conception of an author was not operative in the first century AD and that most individuals in the Roman Empire, St. Paul included, employed the services of a scribe to compose most of their correspondences. This rightly calls for the need to reevaluate the supposed scholarly consensus that the so-called Disputed Letters—Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians—and the Pastoral Epistles—1–2 Timothy and Titus—are not Pauline and the premises on which the arguments supporting this so-called consensus are built, which is an enterprise that I am currently pursuing (when I have the time). 

Third, current Pauline scholarship realizes the complexity of St. Paul’s world. The editors note that based on our current knowledge “it is irresponsible to talk about Paul versus Judaism or Paul against empire” (3). I wholeheartedly agree. This is an area that my own research, the use of inscriptions and material culture to build contextual profiles of St. Paul’s letters and the theology within them, has underscored. Moreover, the more I study archaeological materials, inscriptions, and then read ancient literary sources in light of the former two datasets, the more I am convinced that St. Paul’s world was even more complex than we could ever hope to imagine. 

Finally, recent trends among scholars focusing on St. Paul has moved beyond the Reformation Protestant-Catholic debates and into more fruitful territories with the New Perspective on Paul, the Apocalyptic Paul, Paul within Judaism Perspective, modern Jewish interpretations of the apostle, and John Barclay’s “Gift” reading of St. Paul. These so-called schools have informed my own reading of the apostle to the point that I espouse an Apocalyptic “Gift” filled Paul with influences from the Old and New Perspectives and some nuances gleaned from the Paul within Judaism Perspective. However, I continue to see little to no evidence in St. Paul’s letters or in Acts of the Apostles supporting two of the major tenets of the Paul within Judaism Perspective: that the apostle conceived of two tracks of salvation, one for Jews, the Torah, and one for Gentiles, Jesus the Messiah, and that his letters are written exclusively to Gentiles. 

In sum, this work is an indispensable resource for any student of St. Paul who wants to familiarize himself or herself with the current state of Pauline scholarship on any letter in the corpus or on the seven areas of Pauline theology on which Part 1 of The State of Pauline Studies focuses. Therefore, I recommend purchasing your a copy! 

I am grateful to Baker Academic for providing me with a review copy of this book, which is no way influenced by review of it! 

Review of Crispin Fletcher-Louis, The Divine Heartset: Paul’s Philippians Christ Hymn, Metaphysical Affections, & Civic Virtues (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2023)

Divine Heartset is the largest book ever written on Phil 2:6–11, the so-called “Philippian Christ hymn,” just shy of half a million words. Because of that and Fletcher-Louis’s bold claims in it, this volume is too big to describe and discuss in detail, as is my habit in book reviews. Therefore, I will provide only a short summary of the work and interact with Fletcher-Louis’s main theses about the passage. 

Divine Heartset’s goal is to provide a “comprehensive interpretation” of Phil 2:6–11 (1), a goal that Fletcher-Louis attempts to accomplish by walking the reader through his intellectual journey of his interpretation of the passage (xix). In the first chapter, “Philippians 2:6–11 in Modern Scholarship: Agreements, Uncertainties, Questions and Possibilities” (1–59), he explores in detail the current state of scholarship on Phil 2:6–11 not only among English speaking scholars but also among those on continental Europe. The second chapter, “Christ the Ideal ‘Divine’ Ruler and Emperor?” (60–105), examines the argument, popular today, that the “hymn” draws on language from imperial divine honors, more commonly but erroneously known among New Testament scholars and clergy as “the imperial cult.” Fletcher-Louis concludes that Phil 2:6’s reference to Jesus having equality with God and his exaltation to the heavenly throne in Phil 2:9–11 do not reflect an adoption of divine honors for rulers.   

Chapters three–nine, “Popular Religion and the Hymn’s Primary Narrative: Divine and Human Transformation” (106–64), “Τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ “The Being (That Is) in a Manner Equal to God” (Phil 2:6c) (165–205), “The Divine Being That Has Become: Christ and Philosophy” (206–64), “Against the Behavior of Sexual Predators (Phil 2:6b: οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν) (265–316), “Divine Desire and Love after Christ (Phil 1:8–10, 23; 2:6–8; 3:12–14; and 4:1), including a long excursus on the interpretation of ἁρπαγμός (317–412), “The ‘Name above All Names’: Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς (Phil 2:9–11) (413–57), and “LORD Jesus Christ”: Divine Cult Name with ‘Biographical’ Epithets” (458–517), are the book’s load-bearing technical chapters in which Fletcher-Louis provides a comprehensive interpretation of Phil 2:6–11 focusing on its syntax and meaning and providing linguistic and historical evidence supporting his arguments. 

In these chapters, he sets forth three bold proposals. First, the language of equality with God (τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ) in Phil 2:6 is taken, not from the Bible or Hellenistic and Roman propaganda about kings and emperors, but from Greek and Roman philosophical language about the nature of the divine. To this end, Phil 2:6 speaks of the preincarnate Messiah’s equality with God in an absolute, ontological sense, demonstrating its true meaning by the Messiah becoming a fully human obedient slave who suffered death on the cross (Phil 2:7–8). 

Second, Fletcher-Louis translates the term ἁρπαγμός in Phil 2:6, which the NRSV renders, “as something to be exploited,” the NIV as “something to be grasped,” and the ESV as “a thing to be grasped,” as “erotic abduction,” “kidnap marriage,” or “bridenapping.” Thus, according to Fletcher-Louis, “Christ, before his self-transformation, reckons that the God-equal manner of being is not one defined by such an aggressive means to erotic satiation or conjugal union” (315). His justification for this translation is the lexical use of the term, ἁρπαγμός, in Greek texts. For Fletcher-Louis, it is the preincarnate Messiah’s rejection of bridenapping, which he contends was a popular pagan belief, that demonstrates his “servant-hearted disavowal of the usual mechanisms of power [of the pagan gods], in the gift of himself” (315). 

Third, the name that is above every name in Phil 2:9–11 is not “Lord” or “Jesus” as many scholars claim, but “Lord Jesus Messiah,” which identifies the human Jesus with the divine king of the cosmos, YHWH the Lord. 

Returning to the summary of Divine Heartset, in chapter ten, “Genre and Source: A Traditional, Para-Philippians, Hymn” (518–79), Fletcher-Louis explores the genre of Phil 2:6–11 and the issue of whether St. Paul is quoting some kind of liturgical text with which his audience is familiar. He concludes that Phil 2:6–11, along with Phil 3:20–21, is a “hymn” that dates to St. Paul’s Christian lifetime. He does not attempt to speculate on its origins, however.  

Chapters eleven–thirteen as well as nine, “Glory, Honor, and Praise: Celebrity Life in This Metaphysic” (580–751), “Incarnation and Empathy” (752–88), and “Persons: Divine and Human” (789–818), investigate the passage’s place and function in the letter to the Philippians and offers Fletcher-Louis’s own proposals about them as well as discussing the divine nature of the Messiah in Phil 2:6–11. In short, Fletcher-Louis argues that the “hymn” is didactic and provides believers in Philippi with a reminder of the true way of life grounded in the ontology of the empathetic incarnate, crucified, resurrected, and ascended Messiah Jesus. Moreover, St. Paul’s original audience would have understood the passage to reveal that the God of Israel exists in two divine persons, the Father and the Son. 

Chapter 14, “Conformity to Christ and Salvation” (819–55), serves as the capstone of Fletcher-Louis’s book contending that the “hymn’s” purpose is to explicate the divine identity of God as two persons, the Father and the Son, and it is this God to whom St. Paul and the Philippian Christians are being conformed. Hence, the letter’s purposes are to reveal the “complete formation” in the Philippians of an “identity,” a “spirituality,” and “virtuous mortal facilities” that are “conformed to the divine and human person who is (the incarnate, crucified, resurrected, and exalted) LORD Jesus Christ” (854; emphasis his). 

In the Postscript, “On the Origins of the Hymn,” (856–60), Fletcher-Louis argues that Phil 2:6–11 + 3:20–21 is not a pre-Pauline “hymn” but one that is most probably para-Pauline in that it was composed during St. Paul’s Christian lifetime. Fletcher-Louis sees its composition as arising from what he calls a “creative Christological development” from the engagement of Christians with Greco-Roman culture for the purpose of evangelism, what he refers to as a “missiological accommodation.” Thus, the “hymn” “tells an existing and settled story of Christ using language and concepts that its author was at home with and to which the [Christian] young movement found itself exposed, as it moved out from its birthplace in Palestine and Jerusalem . . . [and it exists because] some Greek-speaking Christ-follower(s) decided . . . to tell their Savior’s story in ways intelligible to family, friends, and neighbors” (858). 

Fletcher-Louis provides three appendices: one on translating the hymn “Translating the LORD Jesus Christ and God the Father Hymn” (861–62) (for his translation see the end of this review), one on the use of the concept of divine equality in ancient Greek texts, “An Inventory of Divine-Equality Texts, from Homer to the Third Century CE” (863–82), and one on statistics related to the second appendix, “Statistical Observations on the Six Syntactic Types of Divine-Equality Statement” (863–82). Finally, he provides a complete bibliography and indices, the latter of which is available in a downloadable PDF. 

This work is big and bold. Regardless of whether one agrees with Fletcher-Louis’s conclusions, it is clear that he has conducted a great deal of research and included it in this volume. For that alone, one should give thanks to him! 

Fletcher-Louis has convinced me that the name that God bestows upon the ascended Jesus is “LORD Jesus the Messiah” (Phil 2:9–11). Thanks for your hard work there and for pointing out that for ancient Greeks and Romans more names are better in that they demonstrate more honor!

I am sympathetic with his argument that the background of equality with God in Phil 2:6 is found in ancient Greek myths about the pagan gods. As readers can see, I agree with Fletcher-Louis that Phil 2:6’s framework cannot be divine honors for ancient Greek kings and Roman emperors.^[i] Therefore, this alternative is compelling and one that I will continue to think with and that scholars should explore. If Fletcher-Louis is correct about the concept of equality with God in Phil 2:6, then I see no way around the conclusion that Phil 2:6–11 presents the divinity of Jesus as ontological, not functional, as many scholars claim today. 

Fletcher-Louis makes a compelling case for the translation of ἁρπαγμός as “erotic abduction,” “kidnap marriage,” or “bridenapping.” To be honest, for some reason I find myself pushing back against this proposal. It may be my faith and my conservative Anglican theological perspective, or it may be my modern Western sensibilities. I don’t know. I will have to consider this point further. 

Finally, I too contend that Phil 2:6–11 is not Pauline, and I agree that it could easily be para-Pauline, or composed after the apostle was called to be a Christian. However, I am uncomfortable with the conclusion that the passage is a “hymn” because it does not look like any ancient Greek or Jewish hymn that we possess.^[ii]

In sum, this work is a necessary tool for anyone conducting research on Phil 2:6–11. My hope is that Fletcher-Louis will publish his findings in a shorter, abridged, and more accessible version so that non-scholars and clergy can read and interact with it!

Fletcher-Louis’s translation of Phil 2:5–11:

“Think this way among yourselves, which also you think in Christ Jesus, 

            who being in God’s form,

            considered not bridenapping

            the God-equal mode of being,

            but emptied himself,

            taking a slave’s form,

            in human likeness becoming

            and in human figure found,

            he humbled himself, 

            becoming obedient unto death

            –death, even, by a cross.

            Wherefore God also highly exalted him

            and gave him the name

            that is above every name, 

            that at the name of Jesus 

            every knee should bend

            in heaven and on earth and under the earth,

            and every tongue confess 

            ‘LORD Jesus Messiah!’

            for the glory of God, the Father” (Phil 2:5–11).

I am grateful to Cascade Books for this gratis copy of Divine Heartset, which in no way prejudiced my review of it.

---

^[i] D. Clint Burnett, Paul & Imperial Divine Honors: Christ, Caesar, and the Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2024), 62–63.

^[ii] D. Clint Burnett, Christ’s Enthronement at God’s Right Hand and Its Greco-Roman Cultural Context, BZNW 242 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2021), 113–16.

In this book, Najeeb T. Haddad explores and critiques the scholarly trend of reading St. Paul and his letters in light of “empire criticism,” which he defines as “how” St. Paul “engages with the presence of Rome,” “how” he “offer[s] arguments for and against empire, and how Greco-Roman religion, especially imperial cult, could have influenced” him (2).

In the first chapter, “Paul, Politics, and Empire” (1–27), Haddad places “empire criticism” into its modern social context, the numerous military engagements and forever wars in which the United States of America remains embroiled. He, then, contextualizes Rome’s first century AD power structures and how she integrated and/or suppressed foreign peoples and their cults. Haddad concludes that Rome’s main goal with regard to her power and her attitude toward foreign peoples and their cults was to maintain her hegemony. He demonstrates that if any cult threatened that power, Rome suppressed it. One of these cults was Judaism, which gave birth to Christianity. Therefore, Haddad is adamant that one must understand St. Paul as a Second Temple Hellenistic Jew and the history of Roman-Jewish relations to understand the place of empire in the study of the apostle.

The second chapter, “Methods of Empire Criticism in Paul” (28–51), explores and critiques three non-exclusive “sections” of empire criticism: “polemical parallelism” advocated by Adolf Deissmann and N. T. Wright, “imperial cult” advanced by Karl P. Donfried, Richard Horsley, and Bruce Winter, and “hidden criticism” endorsed by Wright and Horsley. Concerning the first, Haddad proposes that parallelism does not necessarily equal a polemic. With regard to the second, he contends that these scholars work with an improper understanding of “imperial cult” and he agrees with Colin Miller that the “imperial cult” did not have a central place in most cities in which St. Paul established nascent Christian congregations. Finally, Haddad picks apart the underlying assumptions of “hidden criticism,” which he says stems from a failure of the first two “sections” to produce a convincing “empire critical” reading of St. Paul.

In the third chapter, “Goals and Techniques for Empire Criticism in Paul” (52–78), Haddad attempts to nuance the discussion of empire criticism in St. Paul by providing methodological clarity. He pushes readers to consider data outside written texts and then explores two facets of antiquity, the polis or city-state in Greek and the place of ancient associations in the civic landscape. Haddad examines what a polis meant for first century denizens of the Greco-Roman world: an entity in which families strive together to meet their civic and cultic duties. In this context, Haddad places St. Paul whom he says knew that civic authority was necessary for civil and economic stability of the empire, despite the occasional tyrant. As far as ancient associations are concerned, he notes that they provided stability to society and encouraged the worship of an associational patron deity. St. Paul’s congregations resembled ancient associations save for the offering of members participation in the resurrection and a new heaven and new earth.

The fourth chapter, “The Theological Significance of Pauline Empire Criticism” (79–107), tries to produce a more nuanced empire critical reading of one Pauline letter, Philippians. In the process, Haddad reads the missive in light of the apostle’s understanding of the new creation that has dawned in the Messiah event. On the one hand, St. Paul’s converts were adopted children of God, they were filled with God’s Holy Spirit, and they were “in Christ.” On the other hand, this new existence does not result in antagonism, but in believers’ “willful and voluntary obedience” to God just like Jesus, as the so-called Philippian hymn (Phil 2:5–11) underscores.

In the final chapter, “Conclusion: Paul and Empire Criticism” (108–10), Haddad summarizes his work and highlights what he considers two main points: St. Paul was a Hellenistic Jew, which means that from his Jewish upbringing the apostle already had a vision of the relationship between political authority and Judaism; and the lack of empire criticism being founded upon the traditional historical-critical method.

Haddad’s work is careful and nuanced and I appreciate his main emphasis on reading St. Paul’s letters in light of the new creation that has dawned in the Messiah event, his desire to move the empire critical discussion to more methodological clarity by exposing some of flaws in its current “sections,” and his use of material culture to interpret Philippians. However, there is one area in which this volume that is deficient and which I must push back: Haddad’s understanding of the role of the so-called “imperial cult” is inadequate, which stems from his reliance upon Colin Miller’s earlier, flawed work. Miller’s contention that “the imperial cult” was not particularly important for the cities in which St. Paul established congregations was built upon his misguided understanding of imperial divine honors, a term that I prefer, as a monolith religious movement instead of a complex, contextual series of divine honors that individuals, associations, cities, provinces, and Rome established to show appreciation for imperial benefaction. Moreover, as I show in my recent book, numismatic, archaeological, and inscriptional evidence demonstrates conclusively that imperial divine honors were a major part of the civic landscapes of Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth.

In short, if readers understand this one area of deficiency of Haddad’s work, then his Paul & Empire Criticism: Why and How? is a great introduction to empire criticism and some of the methodological problems!

I am grateful to Cascade Book for providing me with a copy of this work, which in no way prejudiced my review of it.