I just finished "Jesus and the Reign of God," by C.S. Song.
A summary of my summary: i hate Song's low Christology; though he has moments of brilliance.
Even his preface has some good lines:
"In a world of injustice, oppression and greed, Jesus is held as a liberator who brings God's justice, life, and freedom to the suffering multitudes," p ix.
His preface sets his methodological approach: rather than the biographical approach (working out of the Gospels and specifically the synoptics) and the philosophical approach he is saying that his will be a message based approach: dissect his message to land on the proper Christology. In this light he states that one must ask what is Christs central message?--the Kingdom [reign] of God.
I find it quite interesting that every time he runs across scripture which concludes with or points to a high Christology he implies it to reflecting the view of the Apostolic Church (Matthew and John thus far). Maybe he should affirm a high Christology rather than cherry pick which text is legit for him. In his previous book he did this to make Christ less central/important and God (as a bit of a generic God) more so, so that he could introduce a wide open pluralism. I disagree.
Songs approach seems to focus on "what did the synoptics say," more pointed "what does Mark say," and I would guess he would go so far as to ask "what did Q say" when picturing Jesus words. For instance, in his low(er) Christological approach (and low hierarchical approach) he questions if the statement in John "no one comes to the Father except through me" is placed on the lips of Jesus by the Apostolic church. He does this in other places with Matthew. It makes me wonder what is his scriptural epistemological ground?--a mental image of Jesus by his own construct? This is reverse dignum Deo leaning to the relational rather than the deistic at the cost of scripture.
I am a bit tough on Song because of his Christology but I do want to mention that he is very good at carrying Jesus' teachings to story or narrative. For instance he places the reader in the shoes of the poor for the teachings of Jesus. He does so with an eye on first century Jews, yes, but also "what would a twentieth century, poor and exploited Thai hear in this teaching?" And that is a gift.
"Sickness is an enemy of Gods Reign," p 267.