This thesis attempts to provide a reason for Paul’s seemingly inconsistent financial policy, insofar as he accepts monetary aid from the Philippians (and others) but refuses it from the Corinthians. After outlining and critiquing a variety of approaches to the quandary of Paul’s financial policy (Chapter 1), we then contextualise Paul in his ancient socio-economic background (i.e., the context of patronage, benefaction, reciprocity, and various other gift-exchange relationships in antiquity) and also place him in ideological comparison with Seneca’s De Beneficiis, the major gift-giving treatise of the first century (Chapter 2). This chapter serves as a reference point, adding argumentative support to subsequent chapters by situating Paul in his ancient context. In Chapter 3, we provide an exegetical analysis of the positive gift-giving relationship between Paul and the Philippians, teasing out the particular relational features that comprised their intimate bond. What appears is a three-way relational pattern with God as the source of Paul’s gift-exchange relationship with the Philippians. In Chapters 4 and 5, we turn to investigate Paul’s negative relationship with the Corinthians, primarily 1 Cor. 9 and 2 Cor. 10-12 but incorporate 1 Cor. 1-4, 11:17-34, and 12:12-31, in order to highlight the absence of the particular features found in the apostle’s relationship with the Philippians. We then propound a socio-theological reason for Paul’s refusal of Corinthian gifts. By placing the social context of gift-exchange in dialectical relationship with Paul’s theology of gift-giving (or grace), we conclude that he refused Corinthian support, not because they desired to patronise him as a dependent client (which has become commonplace among NT scholars), but because they sought to be under Paul as their superior, an act that neglected God as the superior source of all gifts in the divine economy. Paul therefore refuses their support to avoid two-way relationships of gift so prevalent in ancient society (i.e., the social aspect) and to underscore the source of the gift of the gospel, the one from whom and through whom and to whom are all things – God (i.e., the theological aspect). Thus, a socio-theological reason for Paul’s financial policy will emerge.

The traditional belief that Christ will come again to judge both the quick and the dead has been subjected to severe criticism in recent times. It has been regarded as part of Tesus inheritance from his situation as the misunderstanding of the disciples falsely attributing to their Lord their own expectations and as something to be demythologized. This thesis suggests that the belief in Christ's return to the world at the End belongs to the very fabric of the early church's life and thought, and (as far as this can be reconstructed) it belongs to Jesus’ own teaching. By far the greatest problem presented by the New Testament's Parousia hope is the insistence on its imminent fulfilment. This imminence is often understood as due to the disciples. Sometimes it is regarded as an error, albeit relatively unimportant, on Jesus' part. These views are examined and found unsatisfactory. The thesis then reviews the relevant New Testament material and suggests that the early church certainty did hold an imminent hope, but that this was not delimited (that is, the church did not think that the Parousia would certainly occur within a certain defined period of time) The imminence is rather to be understood as the conviction that since Christ had come, the revelation of the Kingdom of God in power could not be thought of as far off. Likewise, it is suggested, Jesus himself awaited the revelation of the Son of Man in glory as an imminent event, but refused to delimit its occurrence. The thesis suggests that the New Testament’s insistence on the nearness of the Parousia is because undelimited valid for the church today, and should encourage her to urgent mission and to patient watchfulness.

The Corinthian correspondence reveals that the apostle Paul was deeply engaged in polemics with his opponents and critics in Corinth, who questioned his modus operandi and challenged his apostolic authority. Paul's response, which was both ironical and paradoxical, was based on his own understanding of the cross of Christ, in which divine power was demonstrated through apparent human weakness. This thesis attempts to show that Paul's response, which involved many kinds of "body language", was nothing less than a drastic inversion of the social ethos of his time. Unlike his Corinthian critics who apparently followed the current Greco-Roman ethos, Paul was operating on a world view which was diametrically opposed to it. This thesis consists of three Parts. Part I is on crucifixion in antiquity, which was a most powerful "body language", compared with the ancient idea of "noble death" in both Greco-Roman and Maccabean traditions, according to which the crucifixion of Jesus could only be a most vivid and terrifying symbol of extreme human suffering, weakness, degradation and shame. Part II is devoted to the study of Greco-Roman rhetoric, with special emphasis on the orator’s delivery as "body language”. Paul’s intention to invert the current social ethos was again clear when he deliberately chose "to proclaim the gospel...not with eloquent wisdom" (1 Cor. 1.17), and that he came to Corinth "in weakness and in fear and in much trembling" (2.3). Part in is a study of the peristasis catalogue (or the list of tribulations), especially its positive use by philosophers and moral teachers in the Greco-Roman tradition, to demonstrate manly virtues such as courage and endurance. However, this was only one side of the coin. "The other side of the coin" showed that the peristasis catalogue, especially through the "body language" it contained, could also signify shame, humiliation, and human degradation rather than manly virtues. The thesis takes the view that it was this negative side that Paul had in mind when he provided lists of his own suffering. In the end, the crucifixion of Christ, Paul’s unconventional manner of proclamation and his view on peristasis, all combined to turn the current Greco-Roman social ethos up-side-down. And "body language" has provided the vital link between the three: crucifixion, rhetoric and peristasis.

The oracle concerning Moab in Jeremiah 48 is one of the 'hard texts' of the OT. This thesis seeks to find a means of reading the oracle in a way that does justice to the text both in its ancient context and in a Christian frame of reference. The opening chapter reviews existing scholarship on this text (and related texts). The two chapters which then follow preface and contextualise the main discussion; they focus, respectively, on the differing textual traditions in MT and LXX, and on the parallel material in Jeremiah 48 and Isaiah 15-16. It transpires that MT Jeremiah 48 contains a more marked note of lament than LXX Jeremiah 31 and that Jeremiah 48 has a broader purview than Isaiah 15-16. Chapters Four and Five then examine how US and UK Christian interpreters have dealt with the text; those from the US are Fretheim, Miller and Brueggemann, while those from the UK are Jones and Clements. The US scholars in particular bring out some key elements of the oracle: the tone of lament (Fretheim), God's sovereignty (Miller), and Moab's pride and plays for power (Brueggemann).The last two chapters offer a fresh reading. Chapter Six proposes that the problematic 48:10 was inserted by a scribe who longed to see the words of Jeremiah 48 brought to completion. Chapter Seven considers Jeremiah 48 as a whole, noting rhetorical features that suggest Moab’s history has a cyclical nature in which Moab's sin leads to her destruction, but then she is restored again. Finally, two film-like imaginative readings explore the possible continuities and differences between Jeremiah 48 in its ancient context and in a Christian frame of reference

Recent scholarship on Second Temple Judaism and Paul has maintained that both held “salvation” to be through God’s grace not human obedience. This study challenges this claim. Based on Josephus’ portrayal of the Jewish schools, the Second Temple period appears more diverse than recent scholarship has claimed. One of the key distinguishing factors, according to Josephus, is the relationship between divine and human action. This diversity is revealed in Sirach, the Hodayot, and Paul’s claims in Romans 7.7–8.13. Ben Sira argues that the divine-human relationship revolves around human obedience to the law. He utilises the two-ways tradition to develop his view. He describes God as re-acting to human obedience in judgment. The Hodayot, by contrast, emphasise God’s initiative and his saving actions. Humans are immeasurably corrupt creatures, but God, through his Spirit, predestines some, gives knowledge to them, and purifies them. These divine acts lead to human obedience. The study of Paul’s view on divine and human agency is extremely complex. Romans 7.7–8.13 is used as the way into Paul’s thought. In Romans 7.7–25, Paul portrays the speaker as the human agent of the two-ways tradition. He argues that this view fails to explain the problem of Sin. In Romans 8.1–13, he contends that obedience becomes possible because God has acted in his Son to condemn Sin. Through the Spirit, God empowers believers to fulfil the righteous requirement of the law. This study challenges the idea that all of Judaism can be explained under a single view of salvation. Recognising the diversity allows one to situate Paul firmly within a Jewish context without distorting either the Jewish texts or Paul.

Many biblical and ancient Jewish traditions make reference to Israel and the nations jointly participating in or being united in Israel’s covenantal blessing or eschatological heritage. Moreover, an initial survey reveals that most such traditions also reference worship or describe a liturgical or doxological setting, with worship being somehow instrumental in the joining of Israel and the nations. This raises the question, How do ancient Jewish traditions relate the worship of God to the unification of Israel and the nations? Biblical traditions that reference Israel-nations unification—including Exodus 12:37–38; 1 Kings 8:41–43; Isaiah 2:1–4; 56–66; Micah 4:1–5; Zechariah 8:18–23; and Psalms 46–48—consistently employ the constellation of salient features of creation or eschatological New Creation, unification, worship and shalom. Such traditions, however, presuppose without explaining or arguing for the relationships between these features, and instead employ the constellation in support of their respective primary theological concerns. In so doing, they seem to make use of theological frameworks of temple cosmology that perhaps map onto that outlined in a plausible reading of the creation accounts of Genesis 1–2. Relevant Non-Christian Second Temple traditions—including 1 Enoch 10:20–11:2; Tobit 14:3–11; Sibylline Oracles 3:772–95; 1 Enoch 90:28–38; and Josephus’ Antiquities 8.116–117—follow suit, often employing one or more of the above biblical traditions. These early Jewish traditions describe Israel-nations unification in terms of worship and shalom, and as intrinsic to the eschatological New Creation, despite that their application of this common scriptural starting point diverges widely. Consequently, these traditions also presuppose that Israel-nations unification is a primary element of a theological framework of temple cosmology. Finally, the Pauline traditions of Romans 15:7–13 and Ephesians 2:11–22 depict Israel-nations unification in a manner consonant with both biblical and the above (other) Second Temple traditions. In both instances, Israel-nations unification signals the eschatological realization of the scriptural hope for the restoration of Israel, that is, the restoration of humanity, as the climax of Paul’s gospel. These Pauline traditions specify that God’s purposes have been inaugurated in the present age, and only add the innovation of a uniquely christocentric interpretation.

This thesis is the articulation of a doctrine of creation centred on the concept of creation’s praise. It aims to make care for the environment a habitual expression of Christian faith by fostering a kinship between human and non-human. The thesis attempts to achieve this by developing the claim that non-humanity and humanity are united in a joint project of praise. This argument is developed through bringing biblical texts into conversation with voices from the Christian tradition and, in so doing, trusting that Scripture might allow us to know the presence of God in our own context. Creation’s praise consists in its ontological relationship to God, the source of all being and sustainer of the cosmos. In the diverse particularity of each thing the glory of God is actively displayed as an offering of praise and there is no created thing in the cosmos which does not participate in this symphonic worship. Yet suffering and death are intrinsic to the character of living things and God actively resists natural evil which God did not will. Creation joins God in this resistance and suffering and death are transfigured into ever-greater flourishing which deepens creation’s praise. Evil, however, remains a painful mystery and its final resolution awaits the Eschaton. Creation’s praise, therefore, looks to a heavenly fulfilment. Such fulfilment will be found in Christ and be characterised by the final unity of all creation, a unity which will not dissolve its particularity. Anticipating this fulfilment, humanity act as priests of creation, summarising and uniting creation’s praise in themselves and presenting it to God. Humanity’s priesthood is a task of service which does not mask but rather highlights the particularity of non-human praise.

'A Theology of Disgust' is a personal journey through the bodily experience of physical impairment and the social oppressions of sexism and disabilism. This journey has highlighted the extraordinary power of the emotion of disgust to distort relations throughout the natural order. Utilising the phenomenological approach of Maurice Merleau-Ponty and the theological critique and insights of feminist theologies as well as the resources of contextual theological reflection, a new appreciation of the human body and body of the earth is sought by engaging more viscerally with the fears (and hopes) of flesh which have troubled the Christian tradition. It is claimed that the effects of human disgust have compromised Christianity’s life giving message of divine love and God given power of relationality throughout creation. It argues for a deeper consciousness of the need for pyschic and social change in our human relationships, with each other and with the whole earth, believing this can be achieved through renewed ecomystical liturgy in the church, labelling and uncovering paralyzing fears so that the church could be seen as a beacon of hope and knowledge for all sentient life. A variety of methods to revitalise and empower liturgy are considered as pointers to enable the church to become an ‘ecclesial spa’ which would lead to deeper engagement with the often neglected physical realities within creation. The aim is also to help all those who suffer, to become theological agents of their embodied lives. The overall goal is to love at a deeper level those constitutive elements of the earth which sustain the world, before the disabled earth founders due to human indifference to both the joys and suffering of creation which, it is believed, are captured and held in tandem at the heart of the gospel of the incarnation and resurrection of Christ.

No description available.

The thesis is a work in constructive Christian theology, and it asks what is happening in theological terms, when the Bible is being read. The answer for which it argues comes in the form of a doctrine of illumination, a metaphorical way of interpreting the soteriological efficacy of Scripture. Inquiring into the meaning and usefulness of a doctrine of illumination opens up a set of larger questions, such as the identity of the reader of the text, the nature of the Bible itself, and the character of the community in which the text is interpreted.  I argue that illumination requires as its backdrop a certain theology of the reader, the text, and the church.  The thesis falls into two major parts: the first dealing with a fourth century church father, Basil of Caesarea, and the second bringing Basil into dialogue with five important voices in the contemporary debate on theological interpretation of Scripture.  Part I outlines Basil’s theological analysis of reading, and the presuppositions necessary to sustain it, and Part II makes a case that these insights constitute a helpful contribution to the discussion of theological interpretation.