No description available.

Thesis advisor: Christopher Matthews / Thesis advisor: Matthew Monnig / Thesis (STL) — Boston College, 2022. / Submitted to: Boston College. School of Theology and Ministry. / Discipline: Sacred Theology.

Thesis (MTh)--Stellenbosch University, 2013. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Both Jesus and his Apostles, the main characters of Luke-Acts, cannot be identified as having the general features of prophets of the first century Mediterranean world, but nevertheless Luke elaborates on them in such a way so as to portray them as prophets. In this thesis, I have dealt with the matter of Luke’s characterization of Jesus and his Apostles, particularly the matters of how they are portrayed, and why they are portrayed as such. To answer the above questions, I have used the methodology derived from Darr’s “pragmatic reader response approach” (1992). In chapter 3, the narrative world of Luke-Acts, I have investigated the extra-textual as well as the literary context of the given text. I have defined (1) Second Temple Judaism as the hierocratic symbolic empire within the [Roman] Empire, and (2) the prophets par excellence, Moses, Samuel and Elijah, as extraordinary prophets who performed the priestly task, as well as the legislative task of making and renewing the Covenant. Such extra-texts became the background of the characterization of Jesus and his Apostles. The characterization of Jesus is developing along the narrative sequence and geographical movement in Luke-Acts. The importance of Jerusalem in Luke’s narrative and in his characterization of Jesus is noteworthy. It indicates that the ministry of Jesus and his Apostles is confronting the current hierocratic symbolic empire, which was centred around a high priest and the Jerusalem Temple. I have tried to prove this point through my exegesis in chapters of 4 and 5. I have examined Luke 4:16 and Acts 2 in terms of (1) Hellenistic conventions, typical situations and rhetoric of comparison, and (2) the inter-textual linkage, especially Old Testament quotations and typology, in Ch. 4 and 5. In terms of the Hellenistic convention, both passages can be classified as public speeches confronting the whole house of Israel which was the hierocratic symbolic empire at that time. In addition, it can be understood as the dispute of honour and shame over the status of Jesus and his Apostles as a prophet. By appealing to the OT quotations and allusions including typology, Luke portrays Jesus as the prophet par excellence in Luke 4:16-30, and identifies him as Lord and Messiah in Acts 2. Using a similar strategy, Luke portrays Jesus’ Apostles as the prophets par excellence like Moses in Acts 2. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Beide Jesus en sy apostels as die hoofkarakters kan nie in Lukas-Handelinge geïdentifiseer word met die algemene kenmerke van profete in die eerste-eeuse Mediterreense wêreld nie, maar tog verbeeld Lukas se uitbreiding oor Jesus en sy apostels hulle as profete. In hierdie tesis handel ek met die saak van Lukas se karakterisering van Jesus en sy apostels, veral die sake van hoe hulle uitgebeeld word, en waarom hulle as sodanig uitgebeeld. Om hierdie vrae te beantwoord, het ek die metodologie uit Darr se "pragmatiese leser-reaksie benadering" (1992) gebruik. In hoofstuk 3, die narratiewe wêreld van Lukas-Handelinge, het ek die ekstra-tekstuele sowel as die literêre konteks van die gegewe tekste ondersoek. Ek het die volgende posisies ingeneem (1) Tweede Tempel Judaïsme was ‘n hierokratiese simboliese ryk binne die [Romeinse] Ryk, en (2) die profete par excellence, Moses, Samuel en Elia, het as buitengewone profete ‘n priesterlike taak uitgevoer, sowel as die wetgewende taak van die maak en vernuwing van die verbond. Sulke “ekstra”-tekste het gedien as die agtergrond van die karakterisering van Jesus en sy apostels. Die karakterisering van Jesus vind plaas volgens die ontwikkeling in terme van die narratiewe volgorde en geografiese beweging in Lukas-Handelinge. Die belangrikheid van Jerusalem in Lukas se narratiewe en in sy karakterisering van Jesus is opvallend. Dit dui daarop dat die bediening van Jesus en sy apostels die huidige hierokratiese, simboliese ryk, wat om 'n hoëpriester van die Jerusalem Tempel gesentreer was, gekonfronteer het. Ek het probeer om hierdie punt te bewys deur my eksegese in hoofstukke 4 en 5. Ek het Lukas 4:16 en Handelinge 2 ondersoek aan die hand van die volgende temas (1) Hellenistiese konvensies, tipiese situasies en die retoriek van vergelyking, en (2) inter-tekstuele skakeling, veral met Ou Testamentiese aanhalings en tipologie in hoofstukke 4 en 5. In terme van Hellenistiese konvensie, kan beide gedeeltes geklassifiseer word as openbare toesprake wat die huis van Israel as hierokratiese, simboliese ryk gekritiseer het. Daarbenewens kan dit verstaan word as ‘n saak van eer en skaamte oor die status van Jesus en sy apostels as 'n profeet. Met 'n beroep op OT aanhalings en sinspelings insluitend tipologie, verbeeld Lukas vir Jesus as die profeet par excellence in Lukas 4:16-30, en identifiseer by hom as Here en Messias in Handelinge 2. Deur 'n soortgelyke strategie, word Jesus se apostels uitgebeeld as die profete par excellence (soos Moses) in Handelinge 2.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

In this thesis I examine some of the major contributions to current historical Jesus research, now commonly known as the third quest of the historical Jesus. As most of the participants in the third quest define their work primarily as historiography, in Chapter 11 situate these reconstructions in the landscape of present-day historiography, with special attention to the reaction of the authors in question to the challenge of postmodernism. In view of the methodological diversity of the third quest as well as the lack of consensus about the criteria to be used in the reconstructions or in their evaluation, after a brief survey in Chapter 2 of the history of "criteriology" in life-of-Jesus research, I found It necessary to devise my own list of evaluative criteria in Chapter 3. The general criteria are to do with the overall shape and style of the reconstructions, while the criteria of historical reasoning evaluate them in terms of their presentation as historiography. Finally, a modified version of the "traditional" criteria of the historical-critical method is designed to evaluate the text-related arguments within the reconstructions. In chapter 4 I analyse some selected contributions from the standpoint of the most hotly debated issue within the third quest, eschatology.

The argument of this thesis is two-fold in nature— the target of the argument of Colossians is a Judaism dismissive of the Gentile Colossian Christians and the recognition of that fact casts new light on the paraenesis of the letter and its integration into the argument of the epistle as a whole. The argument is set up in the introduction analyzing and critiquing recent dissenters to the Jewish nature of the philosophy and then the argument of the thesis is set in sequence. Several arguments are made in the thesis in support of these claims. Significant parallels between Colossians and Galatians suggest similar concerns in both letters relating to Israel's identity as the people of God and how that relates to the Gentile believers in the church at Colossae and the churches of Galatia, and how those Gentile believers are to live. The writers of Colossians, while sharing a similar Jewish perspective with the Colossian philosophers on there relationship between identity and way of life, admonish the Gentile Christians to live in a way consistent with who they are. Nevertheless Paul and Timothy differ with the philosophers as to what constitutes the identity of the Colossian Gentilesas the people of God. In addition to the parallels drawn further themes are present in Colossians which strongly suggest the Jewish character of the philosophy— wisdom, election, death of Christ as the final return from exile. Moreover, the apocalyptic background of 3:1-6, the Jewish moral concerns of the ethical lists (3:5-17), and the christological orientation of the Haustafel not only bolster the claim that the Colossian philosophy is Jewish in nature (this is less true of the house-codes explicitly, though there may be some implicit connections), but recurring themes in the paraenesis seen in the preceding argument lend support to the contention that the paraenesis is an integral part of the argument of the letter.