- About
-
The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers
to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is
provided by the
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
Search results
Showing 1 to 10 of 10 (0.049 seconds)Spelling suggestions: "subject:"2 corinthians"" "subject:"2 korinthians""
| 1 |
Pauls Paradigm for Ministry in 2 Corinthians: Christs Death and ResurrectionEvelyn_Ashley@iinet.net.au, Evelyn Ashley January 2006 (has links)
The Christian congregation in Corinth found Pauls weak presentation of the gospel
and his approach to ministry to be scandalous. Recently arrived apostles reinforced
and accentuated attitudes the congregation had already imbibed from contemporary
Corinthian culture. As a result many in the congregation were less than satisfied with
Pauls manner of speech, his apparent lack of charismatic qualities, his refusal to
accept money from them, his lack of commendatory letters, and his lifestyle that was
characterised by suffering, affliction, opposition and weakness.
However, Pauls criteria for evaluating ministry, and by implication Gods criteria,
were significantly different from those of the Corinthian congregation. Key verses
such as 2 Cor 1:9; 3:5; 4:7; 6:7; 12:9 and 13:4 indicate that Paul maintained that
Christian life and ministry generally, and apostolic ministry in particular, must be
carried out through divine power, not human power. His apostolic ministry was valid
because it was exercised as Gods representative, in Gods presence (2:17), with God
as judge (5:10) and as a result of Gods mercy (4:1), not as a result of his own power,
authority, eloquence or charismatic presence.
The theological underpinning for Pauls approach to ministry is found in 13:4 where
Christ who was crucified as a result of weakness, but lives as a result of Gods
power is the model for Paul who shares in his weakness, but in ministry to the
Corinthians, also lives as a result of Gods power. Pauls model for ministry was
one of dependence on God. This is most clearly demonstrated in the affliction he
experienced in Asia where he despaired of life itself, but in the process learned to rely
on God who raises the dead. Thus his suffering, weakness and affliction, far from
being disqualifiers for ministry, were in fact, demonstrations of his authenticity as a
minister whose competency came from God and not from himself (3:6).
|
| 2 |
Behind Kind Words: Sarcasm (and Related Devices) in Second Corinthians 10–13Pawlak, Matthew 11 1900 (has links)
This thesis takes as its subject Paul’s use of sarcasm, using 2 Corinthians 10–13 as a case study. While there has been some work done on the related subject of irony in the Pauline corpus, scholarship has not addressed the issue of sarcasm specifically. For this reason, not only is a dedicated work on sarcasm useful for its own sake, but it also has the potential to nuance previous work on irony, as it can be difficult to generalize when dealing with such a broad rhetorical category. Due to the paucity of previous work on sarcasm – or related subjects – in Paul, the second major contribution of the study will be methodological. The goal of this discussion is to generate a working definition of sarcasm and to develop techniques for sarcasm recognition in ancient texts. To this end, I will survey ancient and modern thought on sarcasm so as to benefit from the insights of contemporary research while grounding the work in categories relevant to a Pauline context. Following the question of method, the final task will be an analysis of 2 Cor 10–13. Here the aim is threefold: to identify and analyze sarcastic statements, to address instances where the presence of sarcasm can contribute to the discussion of exegetical issues, and finally, to draw broader conclusions about the rhetorical effects of Paul’s use of sarcasm. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA) / This thesis analyzes Paul’s use of sarcasm in 2 Corinthians 10–13. To this end, the first two chapters seek to answer the questions: What is sarcasm? And, how do we find sarcasm in ancient texts far removed from our own culture? We approach these questions by surveying both ancient and modern thought on sarcasm. The goal at this point is to draw as straight a line as possible from classical to contemporary discussions, so that our analysis of Paul can benefit the insights of recent work while remaining grounded in terms current to Paul’s day. With this background, it is then possible to address Paul’s use of sarcasm in 2 Corinthians 10–13. The primary aims of this chapter are to identify sarcastic statements and analyze how they contribute to Paul’s overall argumentation. Additionally, instances where our analysis can contribute to scholarly debates over certain passages are also addressed.
|
| 3 |
The Integrity of 2 Corinthians from a Linguistic Perspective: Is There a Text in These Meanings?Land, Christopher D. January 2013 (has links)
<p> After surveying previous language-related claims about the integrity of 2 Corinthians, this study develops a definition of "text" using Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). According to SFL, a text is the structured realization of a context of situation involving: (1) a particular activity together with its concomitant interpersonal roles and relations; (2) a particular sphere of human experience; and (3) a particular mode of conveying information. Moreover, because each of these contextual parameters correlates with specific linguistic systems, a general linguistic analysis can be used to assess whether or not an apparant text does or does not encode a plausible context.</p> <p> Employing an analysis of progressive moves to explore what is being done and an analysis of semantic domains to explore what is being talked about (as well as some additional analyses of conjunctive relations, identity chains, and cohesive harmony), the present study proposes that the body of 2 Corinthians consists of five segments wherein leadership in enacted within the sphere of the Christian church. First, after expressing a positive disposition towards its readers, 2 Corinthians addresses Paul and Timothy's controversial behaviour, especially Paul's handling of Corinthian immorality (1:3-2:13). Second, it teaches the Corinthians how to respond when people criticize the Pauline mission (2:14-5:21 ). Third, it appeals for communal purity while also acknowledging some recent progress in this area (6:1-7:16). Fourth, it reports an unexpected development in Macedonia and explains the task to which its bearers have been appointed (8:1-9: 15). Fifth, it warns that discipline will be enacted upon Paul and Timothy's arrival if the Corinthians do not continue to maintain the purity of their congregation, and it attempts to shut down distracting leadership debates by denigrating the worldly leadership standards that are operative in those debates ( 10:1-13:10).</p> <p> Inasmuch as that these behaviours can be plausibly regarded as the sequential stages of a single, unfolding context of situation, this study concludes that 2 Corinthians is a single letter. Moreover, a number of exploratory suggestions are made with regard to the interpretive and historical implications of reading 2 Corinthians in light of this overarching context of situation.</p> / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
|
| 4 |
Domination or Empowerment? A Critical Discourse Analysis of 1 and 2 CorinthiansCen, Esther G 11 1900 (has links)
In response to the argument that Paul seeks to dominate his audience through his discourse, I join the current conversation about Paul and power by exploring language and power in the Pauline Epistles. By analyzing Paul's use of power embodied in his use of language, I argue that Paul seeks to empower the Corinthians to think and act according to Jesus Christ's cruciform authority.
I work within a postmodern hermeneutical paradigm of diversity. My study acknowledges the personal interest and subjectivity of any interpreter but seeks to avoid subordinating the notion of understanding to that of self-interest. Thus, it approaches the topic as a dialogue with the author-other Paul and, at the same time, a conversation with other interpreters of Paul. To achieve a dialogic interpretation, I begin by reflecting on my social location and personal interests concerning power and authority and then complete the circle by reflecting theologically on using power in my context. At the core of the dissertation, I appropriate a socio-linguistic approach to analyze, first, the power structure embedded in Paul's discourse and, second, the influence enacted via Paul' s discourse- i.e., power in words and power via words. I present my argument in this way owing to my conviction that social structure and power relationships shape linguistic behaviour, and conversely, discursive practices influence social (and personal) formation.
After a thorough analysis and comparative study of 1 and 2 Corinthians, I critically evaluate Paul's use of power, engaging in dialogue with diverse perspectives on various power-related issues, and theologically reflect on ethics of power.
Overall, Paul represents himself as a leader authorized and empowered by God and also as a steward accountable to his Lord Jesus Christ. Although he shows little interest in changing unjust social structures, his discourse indicates an effort to foster a culture of empowering less privileged members within Christian communities. When handling unjust criticisms against him, he stands firm to defend his apostleship and mission. But I suggest that his defense should not be regarded as selfish but as a means to a better end, namely, the protection and upbuilding of the community. Moreover, Paul represents himself as having long-term responsibility to care for the congregations he (and his team) has planted without necessarily seeking permanent control over them. In conclusion, I argue that given his social context, Paul, as God's accountable
steward, seeks not to dominate the Corinthians but to empower them to mature in their understanding and to conduct themselves appropriately under the cruciform authority of Jesus Christ.
|
| 5 |
A Trickster in Disguise: Reading a New Type of Satan in 2 CorinthiansRutherford, Miranda Julia 28 July 2015 (has links)
No description available.
|
| 6 |
The Transformative Presence of the Theotokos: Aid in Our Suffering, Illness, and HealingJudge, Rebecca 09 August 2021 (has links)
No description available.
|
| 7 |
Flee from the Worship of Idols: Becoming Christian in Roman CorinthByler, Dorvan 18 May 2015 (has links)
No description available.
|
| 8 |
Die Kreuzestheologie des Corpus Paulinum: Perspektiven aus dem Neuen Testament und aus der Wirkungsgeschichte / The Theology of the Cross in the Pauline Corpus: perspectives from the New Testament and from its receptionBurgi, Martin 11 1900 (has links)
Text in German with summaries in German and English / Die Kreuzestheologie erlebt seit Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts eine anhaltende
Renaissance. Die vorgelegten Beiträge gehen zwar von gemeinsamen Wurzeln aus,
verzweigen sich jedoch in vielfältige, teilweise disparate Entwürfe. Deshalb ist neu zu
fragen, was Kreuzestheologie ist. Die Antwort wird in sieben Schriften des Corpus
Paulinum gesucht, welche auf ihren kreuzestheologischen Gehalt befragt werden.
Dabei zeigt sich trotz unterschiedlich häufiger Verwendung der kreuzestheologischen
Begriffe durchwegs die entscheidende Bedeutung des Kreuzes Jesu in den
theologischen Grundlinien. Kreuzesaussagen erscheinen immer im Zusammenhang mit
den zentralen Thesen der paulinischen Briefe. Der exegetische Befund führt zum
Schluss, dass bei der paulinischen Kreuzestheologie von einem theologischen Ansatz
zu sprechen ist, der zurecht umfassenden und kritischen Anspruch auf christliche
Theologie und kirchliche Praxis erhebt. / The “theology of the cross” has seen a remarkable come-back since the beginning of
20th century. While the various contributions share similar roots, they differ widely in
their approaches and constructions. Therefore, the simple question regarding the nature
of a theology of the cross has to be raised again. This study seeks answers in seven
writings of the Corpus Paulinum, which will be examined for their use of references to
Jesus’ death on the cross. Although these letters differ significantly in their use of crossrelated terminology, they consistently testify to the crucial significance of the cross of
Jesus in their theological paradigm. Statements about the cross are always an essential
ingredient in the argumentation of these letters. The exegetical survey leads to the
conclusion that Pauline theology of the cross is an all-encompassing and critical
approach and principle for Christian theology and ecclesial practice. / New Testament / M. Th. (New Testament)
|
| 9 |
Monotheistic discourse and deification of Jesus in early Christianity as exemplified in 2 Corinthians 3:16-4:6Bernard, David Kane 12 1900 (has links)
One of the central issues of early Christianity was the identity of Jesus Christ. Paul and other early Christians discussed this question within the framework of traditional Jewish monotheism and used the language of deity to describe Christ. This thesis explores how and why they integrated the two concepts of monotheism and the deity of Jesus. As a window into this process, it particularly examines Paul’s discourse in 2 Cor 3:16–4:6, employing grammatical-historical exegesis with insights from rhetorical criticism and Oneness Pentecostal Christology.
We consider three fundamental questions: (1) What does the exalted language concerning Christ in this text represent? (2) How did Paul reconcile the deification of Jesus with his monotheistic heritage? (3) Why did Paul deify Jesus? What interests were served, and what were the practical consequences?
The conclusion is that early Christians, prior to and including Paul, worshiped Jesus within a Jewish monotheistic context and not as a result of Hellenization. They viewed Jesus as the revelation of the one God, not as a second deity or a different personage. Although they reinterpreted their core beliefs in light of Jesus, they did not see their worship of Jesus as violating their core beliefs. The evidence from Paul’s Corinthian correspondence does not require an explicit binitarian or trinitarian model, but it reveals that many early Christians viewed God as both transcendent and immanent and worshiped Jesus as the God of Israel manifested in human identity.
We identify four significant socio-rhetorical factors in the monotheistic deification of Jesus: (1) In a context of rapid social change it enabled Christians to combine Hebrew monotheism with Greek longing for universals, thereby claiming both traditional heritage and Christocentric distinctiveness. (2) It gave them a unique social identity and cohesiveness. (3) It affirmed their soteriological experiences, beliefs, and outreach. (4) It positioned the movement to attract all people, moving the new faith beyond Jewish ethnicity and traditional boundary markers so that it became a universal monotheism with a missiological focus. The socio-rhetorically constructed identity of Jesus Christ defined the identity of the early Christians. The result was a distinctively Christian faith. / New Testament / D. Th. (New Testament)
|
| 10 |
Monotheistic discourse and deification of Jesus in early Christianity as exemplified in 2 Corinthians 3:16-4:6Bernard, David Kane 12 1900 (has links)
One of the central issues of early Christianity was the identity of Jesus Christ. Paul and other early Christians discussed this question within the framework of traditional Jewish monotheism and used the language of deity to describe Christ. This thesis explores how and why they integrated the two concepts of monotheism and the deity of Jesus. As a window into this process, it particularly examines Paul’s discourse in 2 Cor 3:16–4:6, employing grammatical-historical exegesis with insights from rhetorical criticism and Oneness Pentecostal Christology.
We consider three fundamental questions: (1) What does the exalted language concerning Christ in this text represent? (2) How did Paul reconcile the deification of Jesus with his monotheistic heritage? (3) Why did Paul deify Jesus? What interests were served, and what were the practical consequences?
The conclusion is that early Christians, prior to and including Paul, worshiped Jesus within a Jewish monotheistic context and not as a result of Hellenization. They viewed Jesus as the revelation of the one God, not as a second deity or a different personage. Although they reinterpreted their core beliefs in light of Jesus, they did not see their worship of Jesus as violating their core beliefs. The evidence from Paul’s Corinthian correspondence does not require an explicit binitarian or trinitarian model, but it reveals that many early Christians viewed God as both transcendent and immanent and worshiped Jesus as the God of Israel manifested in human identity.
We identify four significant socio-rhetorical factors in the monotheistic deification of Jesus: (1) In a context of rapid social change it enabled Christians to combine Hebrew monotheism with Greek longing for universals, thereby claiming both traditional heritage and Christocentric distinctiveness. (2) It gave them a unique social identity and cohesiveness. (3) It affirmed their soteriological experiences, beliefs, and outreach. (4) It positioned the movement to attract all people, moving the new faith beyond Jewish ethnicity and traditional boundary markers so that it became a universal monotheism with a missiological focus. The socio-rhetorically constructed identity of Jesus Christ defined the identity of the early Christians. The result was a distinctively Christian faith. / New Testament / D. Th. (New Testament)
|
Page generated in 0.0581 seconds