This thesis primarily addresses one question: “To what extent can Romans be heard and understood by a readership in Rome within its religio-economic, socio-political, and ethnic context, especially by non-Judeans?” To address this question, certain presuppositions regarding the audience are re-examined. This first is how the epistle’s audience, as residents of Rome, may have understood their ethnic identity, and how they constructed and negotiated that identity as Greeks, Romans, and Judeans. Chapter 1 focuses on this question for Greek and Roman identity formation and negotiation, since both groups are integral to reading Romans in Rome. The chapter concludes that Hellenization and Romanization were simultaneously shaping life in Rome prior to and during the time the initial hearers interacted with the Roman epistle. The second chapter concurrently tests two presuppositions. The first is whether Judean treatment in Rome was any different from the experience of any other ethnic minority – whether Rome was anti-Semitic. This is tested by developing a comparative review of Judean life in relation to contemporaneous Egyptian treatment in Rome, in conjunction with Appendices 2 and 3. The second presupposition tested in this chapter is a tangent of the first – that is whether Wiefel’s hypothesis is a valid foundation for assumptions regarding the audience experience in Rome, prior to and at the time of the epistle’s reception. The chapter concludes that Judean and Egyptian ethnicities were in competition in Rome, and based upon ongoing change in circumstances experienced a range of acceptance and rejection. It also concludes that Wiefel’s hypothesis – the eviction in 49 CE of all Judeans and Judean Christ-followers from Rome – does not reflect the reality of the Judean situation. Chapter 3 tests the presupposition, that the epistle received in Rome was interpreted by listeners primarily through an oft-assumed Judean lens – that of Judean tradition and the LXX. The chapter reexamines a sample of key ethnic semantics of the epistle – the interaction of honor, faith, piety, and righteousness in Rome’s way of life. It concludes that honor was a key driver in the Roman socio-cultural experience. Faith-making and faith-keeping were integral frameworks for human and divine relationships, and piety and righteousness were enmeshed in faith and faithfulness in the Roman way of life as the foundation of right relationship between humanity and deity. Chapter 4 integrates these ideas in reinterpretation of Romans as an audience recipient, by “sitting in the audience,” primarily as a non-Judean listener. It follows the flow of the discourse, noting the ethnic interplay, and the use of honor, faith, and righteousness as key Roman language to engage in ethnic reconstruction. This re-hearing of the sampled terms in Romans 1:1-17 is only an example of future work to examine extended readings of Romans in Rome, re-viewing the text through a Romanized lens.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the leadership roles of women within the model of mutuality in Pauline churches as specified in Romans 16:1-16. The three major issues focussed in this study are the leadership roles of women in the Pauline churches (Romans 16:1-16), the nature of mutuality reflected in the greetings to men and women, and the way in which the greetings to men and women in Rom 16 relate to the ethos of mutualism in Rom 12-15. Starting from the premise that Romans 16 is an integral part of the letter, the study begins with an overview of previous research in the areas of major focus (Chapter 1). It is followed by the analysis of the form of greetings in the Pauline letters against the backdrop of the Hellenistic use of greetings to understand the significance of the specific form of the greetings in Rom 16:1-16 and its purpose of encouraging mutual relationship (Chapter 2). The analysis of the leadership of women in the Greco-Roman world shows that women’s leadership roles in the Pauline churches were not countercultural; rather they were part of the culture of the Greco-Roman world, where some women of wealth or higher social status exerted some independence (Chapter 3). The women named (Rom 16:1-16) and greeted with descriptive phrases perhaps draw our attention to Paul’s acknowledgment of some women, who worked as his associates, and point to relationships of mutuality in the greetings (Chapter 4). The study of Romans 12-13 helps to clarify the model of mutuality in the body metaphor and the repeated term ‘a0llh/louv’, signifying that Christian experience is not only an individual experience but also has social and ethical aspects (Chapter 5). The contextual application of mutuality in the community as mutual welcoming and mutual up-building (Rom 14-15) is the focus of Chapter 6. The final attempt is to draw together the peculiarities of the Pauline ethos of mutuality which encourages the leadership roles of women in the greetings (Chapter 7). Mutuality of relationships in Romans transcends gender discrimination as Paul accepts and appreciates men and women for their toil with regard to the church and to himself. The women named and greeted with specific roles (Rom 16) are Phoebe, Prisca, Junia, Persis, Mary, Tryphaena and Tryphosa, Rufus’ mother, Nereus’ sister and Julia. The leadership of women in the church is placed within the structures of mutuality in Romans. Mutuality is the model of relationship Paul wants to urge on Roman Christians and the ethical obligations are guided by the dynamic relationships of ‘love mutualism’, which are evident in Romans 12-15. Love mutualism works as mutual service to the other that works within the hierarchies and is dynamic.

How may a reader who wishes to read the Christian Bible as scripture well today be formed; and how may interpretations of scripture inform such concern? The present work is an exploration of this under-considered question in the field of contemporary biblical scholarship via sustained exegetical engagement with three biblical texts, namely Nehemiah 9:6 – 37, Ezekiel 20:5 – 32 and Acts 7:2 – 60, which offer three different inner-canonical readings of scripture in the form of three distinctive recitals of Israel’s story. The purpose is to consider how these retellings read scriptural traditions in relation to the wider context of the Christian canon; and to reflect on their enduring and formative significance as scripture for readers seeking to appropriate the scripture faithfully today. Chapter one will indicate that the concern of the present work is not a recent one, but rather one that is integral to a Christian practice of reading scripture. This chapter will also consider how such a concern once under-explored in biblical scholarship is now receiving some renewed attention in the field of theological interpretation of scripture. An overview of selected works pertaining to such concern will be considered in chapter two as a means to set a context for articulating the approach and rationale of the present work. In chapters three through to five, each chapter will be devoted to each of the three biblical texts, Nehemiah 9:6 – 37, Ezekiel 20:5 – 31 and Acts 7:2 – 60, to consider how scriptural traditions are interpreted in these three texts in relation to the wider context of the Christian canon. The next step is to reflect on the implications of these three biblical texts as Christian scripture for readers seeking to interpret scripture faithfully today. For such concern, the three texts will be considered individually at the end of chapters three, four and five respectively and then in concert in chapter six.

The present research is divided into two main parts. In the first one the history of the studies on the Septuagint translation of the book of Proverbs is addressed; particular attention is given to the recent works by Johann Cook, and by David-Marc d'Hamonville. In the second part long doublets found in the translation are dealt with (Prov. 2.21; 3.15; 14.22; 15.6). These doublets have been traditionally seen as additions inserted by an early Jewish Revisor or via the hexaplaric recension in order to drive the version closer to the so-called Proto-Masoretic Text. The study aims to show that in 3.15 (where both the qere and the ketiv readings are preserved by the two renderings), 14.22, and 15.6 the translation technique of the first translator of Proverbs can be detected. He seems to be interested in preserving the polysemy of the Hebrew text by means of the double translation. However, in verse 2.21 the translation technique of Theodotion has been recognised in the doublet, and this addition has been tentatively ascribed to an early contact with the καίγε recension rather than to a late insertion from the Hexapla. Thus, if in most of the cases the doublets do not seem to stem from an early Jewish Revisor, in a few instances they may depend on an early exposure to the Jewish recension identified by modern scholars with the name καίγε.

The thesis consists of a commentary on the so-called "Opus historicum" of Hilary of Poitiers, together with relevant introductory sections, appendices end conclusion. This work of Hilary has been recovered only within comparatively recent times, and, in its present mutilated form, contains 17 documents covering the period from the synod of Sardica to the death of the bishop of Poitiers. It represents the first attempt by a Western historian to combat the Arian heresy not only by the broken word but also by written testimony and authentic documents of the period. The thesis opens with an Introduction dealing with the historical background and authenticity of the work, the motives and method of its author, and its editors. This is followed by a section on Hilary and the Arian Controversy where short sketches are given of the early history of the Church in Gaul, the life of Hilary, and the course of Arianism to c.367. Then comes the actual Commentary in which every document is treated as a separate unit and provided in most cases with an introduction and conclusion. Two appendices have been attached, one on the so-called Ad Coast. I, which is now recognised to be a constituent part of B II, and the other on the warmly debated Liberius letters. Finally, there is the Conclusion which contains the various theories pro pounded on the original form of the collection and in which a verdict is passed on Hilary as a historian. So far as is known, this the first commentary on the work in English and it is presented in the hope that it may dispel much of the uncertainty, which surrounds the work, by assembling from many sources the material necessary to its understanding and use and by resolving many difficult problems of detail; and so may gain for it proper acknowledgment as the primary source for the history of Arianism in the West.

No description available.

The aim of this thesis is to determine the relationship between the individual and the community in Pauline theology, focusing the investigation specifically on these motifs in Romans. Previous Pauline scholarship has for most of the twentieth- and twenty-first centuries failed to recognize the integral connection between these two dimensions of Paul’s thought, wrongly pitting either the individual or the community against the other. This investigation will present a typology of individuals in Romans in order to highlight the diversity of ways in which Paul thinks of individuals, as well as the necessarily communal location of these individuals. Chapter one surveys recent Pauline scholarship on the question of individuals and community, noting that the dominant tone of this research is anti-individual in its fundamental orientation. This chapter concludes with an outline of the entire dissertation. Chapter two provides a detailed analysis of the debate that developed between Rudolf Bultmann and Ernst Käsemann over the role of the individual in Paul’s letters. This debate set the agenda for the scholarship surveyed in Chapter one, and thus warrants a thorough treatment. Chapter three brings the Stoic philosopher Epictetus into the conversation in order to provide a contemporary example of a thinker who, like Paul, attempted to do justice to both individual and communal/societal themes in his philosophical output. While Epictetus’ way of relating the individual and the community is different from Paul’s, it shows clearly that this is not an anachronistic question in antiquity, contrary to the claims of much Pauline scholarship. The comparison between Epictetus and Paul illuminates our understanding of Paul’s theology even (perhaps especially) when it shows the different ways in which the two thinkers answered the same basic question, that of how to relate individuals and community/society. Chapter four is the first half of the typology of individuals in Romans. It looks at four different types of individuals as they are found in Romans 2, 3 and 4: characteristic, generic, binary and exemplary individuals. Definitions of each type are offered as they are discussed. Chapter five presents the second half of the typology of individuals in Romans, looking at four other types of individuals in Romans 5, 7, 12 and 16: representative, negative exemplary, somatic and particular individuals. While the communal nature of Pauline theology is evident in Chapter four, it becomes especially clear in Chapter five. Finally, Chapter six summarizes the findings of the entire investigation, while also pointing to other Pauline texts that could be used to fill out the typology of individuals. Two main conclusions are enumerated. First, that both Paul and Epictetus place great emphasis on the individual and the individual’s place within community or society, although Epictetus’ concern for emotional invulnerability (seen in his prioritizing of individual, cognitive action) is in marked tension with Paul’s more foundationally communal way of thinking. Second, filling out the second part of the point just mentioned, it is maintained that although Paul’s theology must be understood as retaining a vital place for individuals, these are necessarily individuals-within-community, and that the prevalent scholarly antitheses between these two categories (on either side of the debate) are fundamentally misleading.

This thesis seeks to elucidate the nature of Paul’s apostleship and apostolic authority by investigating how Paul portrays himself as an oikonomos of God in 1 Corinthians (4.1-5; 9.16-23). Modern studies on the metaphor have failed to ascertain what apostolic attributes are implied by the image and how Paul utilised the metaphor to meet his rhetorical and theological objectives, largely because they neither identify the appropriate source domain of Paul’s metaphor nor conduct the necessary socio-historical research to illumine its application. Utilising a host of ancient sources to reconstruct the characteristics of the regal, municipal, and private administrators bearing this title, this study seeks to identify the metaphor’s source domain and to interpret the relevant Pauline discourses accordingly. Part 1 surveys the three administrative contexts from Graeco-Roman antiquity in which oikonomoi are most frequently attested: Hellenistic kingdoms (Chapter 2), Graeco-Roman cities (Chapter 3), and private estates and enterprises (Chapter 4). While minor variations existed within these administrative contexts, a general profile is discernable in and constructed for each. Moreover, although the profiles of the oikonomoi serving in these contexts share certain similar social, structural, and disciplinary characteristics, these administrators are also shown to have significant differences. Part 2 engages 1 Corinthians 4 and 9 seeking to identify and interpret Paul’s metaphor in both discourses. Chapter 5 demonstrates that, of the three source domains examined in Part 1, private commercial administration functions as the most plausible context in which to interpret Paul’s metaphor. Chapters 6 and 7 then utilise the profile of the private commercial administrator as a model to illumine Paul’s apostleship in 1 Cor 4.1-5 and 9.16-23 respectively and explains how Paul employs the image to meet his rhetorical and theological objectives in both passages. Chapter 8 summarises the argument of the thesis and draws out the implications of Paul’s metaphor for understanding Paul’s theology of apostolic authority.

The aim of this thesis is to demonstrate that Matthew and those who first received and transmitted Matthew's Gospel during the late first century believed that Jesus was the righteous and royal Shepherd-Messiah of Israel, the Son of David. Matthew also believed that Jesus was the true teacher and interpreter of the law who could give definitive leadership and guidance to Israel in the aftermath of the Jewish war. Matthew's Gospel was written sometime during the last quarter of the first century, during the formative period of early Judaism. In this context, Matthew presented Jesus as the defining figure for the future of Israel. Jesus, as the righteous royal shepherd, will provide the authoritative understanding of Judaism and her traditions. Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of David, and fulfils the promises of the Hebrew Scriptures. Therefore, as God's choice, he is the one to be turned to during this time of transition and change. As the Son of God and Messiah, he has been given God’s authority and is personally present with the community to give this guidance. One of the ways the evangelist demonstrates this is in his use of the shepherd metaphor in regard to Jesus. The ancient metaphor of shepherd was an image for leadership in the history of the tradition. The shepherd metaphor was often associated with the spiritual and national leaders in Israel, for example, Moses and David. According to Matthew qualities of this kind of shepherd leadership are now revealed in their fullness in Jesus, the Son of God. Jesus as Shepherd-Messiah is revealed both explicitly and implicitly in Matthew. He is revealed explicitly in the shepherd texts of Matthew and implicitly in the Gospel through the literary and typological correspondences in the history of Israel. The shepherd metaphor has a long history both inside and outside Israel’s tradition. Kings and rulers of many types were referred to as shepherds. In the thesis, the metaphor IS explored in the Ancient Near East generally, the biblical tradition, second Temple Judaism, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Philo. The shepherd metaphor was also used to describe evil, false or abusive rulers and leaders. In Israel's tradition this false shepherd metaphor became especially prominent in the exilic and post-exilic prophets. After the time of the exile, messianic hopes grew. The shepherd metaphor became associated with these messianic expectations. Other relevant texts from Rabbinic Judaism and Greco-Roman sources are also considered. In light of this social and historical background, the intertextual and narrative implications of Matthew's use of the shepherd motif will be investigated in relation to his christological concerns. Finally, the shepherd metaphor as it is applied to 'Jesus as shepherd' is thoroughly examined in regard to the Gospel of Matthew. It is the intention of this thesis therefore to make a contribution concerning Matthew's use of the shepherd metaphor in the wider context of Matthean Christology.

Augustinian interiority is a way of deifying ourselves in order to attain true happiness(i.e., teleology). Augustine approaches deification chiefly in terms of the ‘image of God’, from the perspectives of ontology and teleology. Ontologically, we are created inthe image of God and this image is indestructible as long as God sustains our life. Teleologically, the image has been deformed (and true happiness has become a remote reality for us) due to the Fall. Humanity therefore needs to be restored. How, then, can we renew the image? Augustine observes that the more we know and love God, the more we become like Him. How, then, can we get to know who/what God really is? This is what Augustinian interiority concerns: its intellectual dimension (i.e., knowing God) cannot be separated from its ethical dimension (i.e., loving God. The desire for true happiness, which is God, is universal among us. Since we cannot strive for what we do not know, we must know something about happiness before we pursue it, and the knowledge must be innate in our memory. In addition, learning/knowing a thing is refreshing our latent memory of that thing. Eventually, our endeavour to understand God is, in fact, an attempt to recall wholly what we have already known about Him. Why, then, do we remember so little about God – especially His immaterial nature? This is because we are preoccupied with material and worldly things. Thus, passing beyond the world of senses, we must make an effort to grasp the reality of the soul, which is, like God, incorporeal and rational: the soul is the best clue to knowledge of God. Then, we will be able to perceive correctly God’s immanence, omnipresence, and transcendence. Faith is crucial for making progress in our intellectual and ethical ascent to God. However, it is not enough just to believe revealed truths, but we must try to understand them by all means possible. In this way, we can cling to God with our mind and heart, be deified, and move closer to true happiness. Yet, we need to bear two things in mind. One is that without divine grace nothing is possible for us. The other is that, although we cannot know God completely in this life, we must hope for it and love to increase our theological knowledge.