|
|
Tyndale Bulletin |
 |
|
Summary
This article explores two related issues in Biblical
Theology: (a) the relationship between the testaments, and (b) the New
Testament belief that Jesus Christ fulfils Old Testament expectations
concerning a divinely appointed royal saviour or messiah. These issues are
discussed from the perspective of the books of Genesis to Kings which, as
a continuous narrative, form the backbone of the Old Testament. While many
contemporary writers view these books as providing an account of Israel's
history (the reality of which is debated), a careful reading reveals that
they are equally interested, if not more so, in the fulfilment of divine
promises centred on a future king through whom all the nations of the
earth shall be blessed. According to the New Testament, the realisation of
these promises, foreshadowed in the Genesis-Kings narrative, comes through
Jesus Christ.
Summary
Classical theism is in danger of being overthrown by the
current revolution in theological paradigms. The doctrine of the effectual
call affords a good case study of the broader God/world relation: if God's
call and divine action in general are interventions, then grace appears
ultimately to be a matter of efficient causality-an impersonal relation.
Panentheists argue that God need not intervene in the world because the
world is in God and, therefore, is open to his general call. On the
panentheistic analogy, God is to the world as the mind is to the brain,
and divine grace, like the mind, does not intervene but 'supervenes' on
the world, God's body. It is not clear, however, whether God's personal
agency can be preserved in this model. Rethinking the doctrine of the
effectual call in terms of 'speech acts' suggests a new picture for the
God/world relation, where the Spirit 'advenes' on the Word to bring about
not an impersonal but a uniquely personal effect: understanding.
Summary
This paper offers a new paradigm for understanding the
treatment of sin and Christology in 1 John that does not require
gnosticising or docetic-like opponents to account for its contours. Both
the ethical debate about sin (1 Jn. 1:6-2:11; 3:4-17; 4:20; 5:16-18) and
the confessional statements about Jesus (1 Jn. 2:22; 4:2-3,15; 5:1,5,6)
can be explained without reference to what the group that has left the
Johannine community (2:19) positively believes. The issues at stake focus
on the messiahship of Jesus, and the need to reinforce the limits of the
Johannine community, not only by right confession but also by right
conduct. Failure to keep either part of the dual commandment to believe in
Jesus and to love one another (3:23) amounts to apostasy and places
oneself outside the boundaries of Johannine Christianity. Confirmation of
this approach is found in John's Gospel.
Summary
The problems of unity in Deuteronomy 27 are usually treated
diachronically resulting in an impoverished theological appreciation of
the chapter. Rather than offering two equally possible options, blessing
and curse, the ceremony on Mt Ebal as instructed here is biased towards
curse. No blessings are recited, despite their announcement; the stones
are set up on the mountain of curse and the theme of curse brackets the
Pentateuch. Nonetheless there is an optimism about the chapter. However
this is a result of Yahweh's grace, not Israel's obedience. The provision
of an altar and sacrifices and the allusions to the Abrahamic covenant in
particular show that Israel stands under Yahweh's grace.
Summary
This article assesses the challenge postmodernism
constitutes for biblical interpretation via an analysis of Derrida's
reading of the Tower of Babel narrative. Derrida's setting of the text in
play is found to be an unhelpful model for biblical interpretation, but
his foregrounding of language in the narrative and the implications of
philosophy of language for interpretation are useful. The contours of
Derrida's Babelian philosophy of language are explored and its insights
noted. It is argued that the ultimate issues in philosophy of language are
theological and that Christian scholars need to articulate a Christian
view of language.
Summary
In a number of letters, Paul urges his readers to imitate
certain examples. The principal models are those of himself, Christ and
God, but he also directs the attention of his readers to the behaviour of
other individuals, and occasionally reminds them of the example of other
churches. In addition to these injunctions to be imitators, there are also
exhortations that his readers become 'models' for others to imitate. It
would seem that both to imitate appropriate examples and to be an example
to others are commendable characteristics of the Christian life. In recent
years, questions have been asked regarding the motivation behind Paul's
use of these injunctions. This article seeks to reconsider the relevant
Pauline texts and evaluate the author's use of the mimesis
motif.
Summary
Critical evaluation of the language of the New Testament has
been marked in the last two hundred years by conflicting view-points,
which can still be heard frequently today. In particular, two positions
can be identified: (1) The language of the New Testament is situated
within the context of the historical development of written Greek,
stretching over the period from Alexander the Great to the first century
A.D. Here one might mention contributions by A. Deissmann, J.H. Moulton,
A. Wifstrand, as well as my own and that of G.H.R. Horsley. (2) The
language of the New Testament is unique and must be viewed as an
independent phenomenon, outside of and concurrent with the normal
development of the Greek language. Some advocates of this view speak of
semiticising Greek (e.g., J. Wellhausen ), while others speak of a
special form of Christian Greek, an ad hoc language inspired by the
Holy Spirit (e.g., N. Turner ).
Summary:
In the middle of the genealogical survey of history in the
opening nine chapters of 1 Chronicles we encounter details of the
descendants of Reuben (5:1-10). At the very beginning of his genealogy
Reuben is described as the firstborn of Jacob. However, before his
genealogy proper commences, there is a brief note explaining in what sense
he may still be called 'firstborn', despite his misconduct recorded in
Genesis 35:22.
First paragraph:
This thesis examines (1) the identity of the coming
ruler who is given the name Zemah (tzmch, usually translated 'the
Branch'), the main character in the tzmch oracles (Zc. 3:8 and
6:9-15) in the visions in Zechariah 1-6, and (2) the nature of the
expectations set on this figure. It is argued that a wrong translation of
the word jmx is one of the factors that has led to flawed interpretation
of these oracles. The real meaning of jmx, 'vegetation, greenery, growth',
implies that the background for the interpretation of the tzmch
oracles in Zechariah should not be found in the plant imagery of
Isaiah 11:1 (where different terminology and different imagery is used).
The use of the tzmch imagery in Zechariah 3:8 and 6:12-13 is
analogous to that found in Jeremiah 23:5, where in a time of collapse of
the monarchy the same jmx imagery is used to evoke the idea of an
intervention by YHWH as the only means for guaranteeing the restoration of
the monarchy. In this scenario, 'David' will not contribute, but only
receive. The adjective tzdiq in Jeremiah 23:5 does not raise the
issue of legitimacy, as has often been claimed, but has the usual meaning
'righteous', an interpretation that can be supported from the context of
the passage. The claim that there are many examples of North-West Semitic
tzdq meaning 'legitimate' is tested and found seriously
wanting.
First paragraph:
The thesis conducts a historical investigation into
the status and functions of Jewish scribes during the Second-Temple
period. The author employs a new approach for the selection and
interpretation of the problematic evidence. Chapter One provides an
overview of the various strands of previous scholarship on scribes and its
major shortcomings. In general terms, the latter are identified as a lack
of distinction between evidence from different periods, the creation of an
artificial category of Schriftgelehrter/Torah scholar, and a strong
bias towards only one of the major sources. The imposition of an
artificial category on the ancient sources has led to a conflation of
evidence for scribes, sages, rabbis, sophists, and other teachers and
experts in the scriptures. The tendency to accept only one major source as
historically reliable results at least partly from several apparent
contradictions between sources with regard to the functions and status of
scribes. On account of differences in the portrayal of scribes in the New
Testament, Josephus' writings, and rabbinic literature and their functions
in non-Jewish contemporary society, many scholars have tended to accept
only one major source as historically reliable while others are neglected
or ignored. The contradictions are rarely explained and, in most cases,
not even mentioned.