This thesis seeks to further the scholarly debate about the relationship between powers of evil and idols in 1 Corinthians 8:4-5 and 10:18-22 by proposing the “co-optative view” in which evil powers can be seen as “co-opting” sacrifices intended for idols. In I Cor 8:4-5; 10:18-22 evil powers are personal supernatural evil beings.  The <i>daimonia</i> in 10:20f may possibly be classified under the rubric of the principalities and powers, the angels of the nations, and the spirits of the dead giants.  For Paul, idols are the lifeless and spiritually unreal cult images of the pagan gods and, in some cases, the non-existent pagan gods themselves. The relationship between <i>daimonia</i> and idols can be considered under the “co-optative view”, which has three interlocking aspects. First, the <i>daimonia are powerful</i> and enslave humanity into idolatry. By doing the will of the <i>daimonia</i>, idolaters serve them.  Secondly, the <i>daimonia deceive humanity into sacrifices to idols</i>. The <i>daimonia</i> inspire idolatry, and possibly change their forms in to the pagan gods. Thirdly, the <i>daimonia stand or hide behind the idols, receive and co-opt the sacrifices </i>consciously intended for the idols. The recognition and invocation of an idol brings the worshipper under the sphere of influence of <i>daimonia</i> because the <i>daimonia </i>divert the invocation or prayer intended for the idol.  Therefore, Paul’s views that <i>daimonia</i> are personal supernatural evil beings, the spiritual lifelessness of idols, and the relationship between <i>daimonia</i> and idols stands, are continuous with some views attested in early Judaism (as seen in Deut 32; I Enoch, Jubilees and Revelation).  Where Paul does redefine his heritage is in seeing the holy opponent of the <i>daimonia</i> and idols as being Christ “the Lord” and in exhorting the Church to express exclusive loyalty to Christ.

This dissertation describes the results of an investigation into why and how Paul uses Scripture in Phil. 2:10-16. The purpose of the study has been to test the suggestion that a cluster of tacit references to specific books of the OT embedded by Paul in Phil. 2:10-16 functions as a group of literary allusions that are integral or foundational to his epistolary argument. Hence, in chapter one we outline the need for our investigation and critique representative views of how Scripture’s presence and function in Paul’s letters have been understood in recent scholarship. In chapter two we investigate an appropriate foundation for our own analysis by examining several theories from the field of literary and rhetorical criticism. We explore Lloyd Bitzer’s model of rhetorical situation for its suitability in interpreting Philippians as functional argumentation, written to correct a specific issue. We also analyse the intertextual theory advanced by Michael Riffaterre as a convention for reading texts containing successive, embedded fragments of other texts. His theory accounts for a text and its embedded fragments as a transformation of a pre-existent determinate structure – the matrix. We will use Bitzer’s and Riffaterre’s theories as the framework for constructing the matrix or rhetorical situation for Philippians and explicating the presence and function of successive fragments of OT texts in Phil. 2:10-16. Then we investigate Ziva Ben- Porat’s four-stage process of actualising a literary allusion. We will use her theory to distinguish the denoting and connoting functions of allusion, and adopt her typology for the interpretation of literary allusions in Phil. 2:10-16. In chapter three, we conduct a rhetoricalexegetical analysis of Phil. 1:27-3:21 with a view to constructing the rhetorical situation and propose a hypothetical historical situation which prompted composition. We interact with several NT scholars, challenging the dominant interpretations of key passages, before offering our own. In chapter four, we build on chapters two and three by using the theories of rhetorical situation, intertextuality and allusion to test for the presence and functioning of Scripture in Phil. 2:10-16. We propose a writing convention for Paul and conclude that he uses Scripture because he is addressing a recurring rhetorical situation which shares “world components” with Philippians.

This dissertation explores Paul's approach to the social conflicts involving Christian identity in 2 Corinthians. In order to grasp the dynamics of 'social identity' in the world of the .New Testament, this study examines the significance of the concept of persona and the Roman stress on persona for denoting a person's identify in the Graeco-Roman world in the first century CEo In addition, this study examines Paul's critique of social identity in light of two other figures - Epictetus and Valerius Maximus - and their critiques. All three social critics react against a conventional (or popular) view of persona, which is a preoccupation with its superficial features. In the case of Paul, 2 Corinthians is investigated to show Paul's reaction against the Corinthian Christians' adoption of the conventional values of persona that were prevalent in Roman Corinth. Paul's conflict with the Corinthians is clearly seen in their superficial assessment of his persona as lacking the appropriate credentials for an apostle. Throughout the letter, Paul denounces the conventional values of persona by rejecting the external elements of the outer person and emphasising instead the inner person. Furthermore, in contrast to the Corinthians' conventional values of persona, Paul promotes a subversive Christ-like identity, which is a visible embodiment of the dying and life of Jesus Christ.

Despite a broad consensus within Pauline scholarship that Paul develops certain aspects of his apostolic self-understanding and argument with reference to the OT prophetic tradition, there has been little systematic analysis of the ways in which the material in canonical 2 Corinthians contributes to this facet of Pauline studies. The present study seeks to elucidate the prophetic dimensions of both Paul’s self-presentation and rhetoric in this portion of the Corinthian correspondence. An initial attempt is made (chapter two) to define the parameters of the OT prophetic tradition through an examination of prophetic material in the OT and its relationship with the prophetic material in Second Temple Judaism, Hellenistic prophetic traditions, and the prophetic dimensions of the early Christian movement. The subsequent analysis of material in 1 Corinthians (chapter three) constitutes an investigation of the effect of the OT prophetic tradition on Paul’s selfpresentation in 1 Cor 9:15-18 and rhetorical framework in 1 Cor 14:20-25 as a methodological foundation for the exegetical analysis of 2 Corinthians. The study then turns to an extensive exploration of the influence of the OT prophetic tradition on both Paul’s apostolic self-presentation (chapter four) and rhetoric (chapter five) in 2 Corinthians. The analysis of Paul’s self-presentation examines the apostle’s relationship with particular prophetic figures (Moses, the Isaianic servant, and Jeremiah) in order to define Paul’s position with regard to the preceding prophetic tradition. The analysis of Paul’s argument at certain points of the epistle (2 Cor 2:14-16; 4:1-6; 6:14-7:1; 12:1-10) then seeks to examine the influence of the OT prophetic tradition on the formation of Paul’s rhetorical framework. The intention within this argument is to provide support for the notion that the particularly prophetic nature of Paul’s apostolic persona affects both his self-presentation and rhetorical agenda in 2 Corinthians.

No description available.

Much historical-critical work on the opponents in the Pastoral Epistles has resulted in sweeping generalisations concerning their Jewish and/or Gnostic nature. Literary analyses have been somewhat more promising in focusing on the stereotypical nature of the polemic but either fail to do justice to the urgency of the language in the Pastorals or fail to provide a convincing description of the opponents. This thesis approaches the problem of the opponents from a social-scientific perspective. Utilising labelling theory and social control theory from the sociology of deviance, the thesis argues that the Pastorals function as a literary version of a status degradation ceremony whereby previously influential insiders within the communities addressed are transformed into outsiders. Following a survey of approaches to the problem of institutionalisation, the thesis argues that the scholarly consensus (that the Pastorals reflect the institutionalisation of initially charismatic Pauline communities) needs to be revised. It suggests a developmental model for charismatic communities which involves both the process of institutionalisation and the simultaneous, thaumaturgical subversion of that process. This model arises out of the sociological analysis of the development of a contemporary charismatic community and it is argued that developments in the second century CE church, particularly the rise of Montanism, yield results which are consistent with this model. The thesis examines the Pastorals in the light of this developmental model and argues that they reflect a power struggle within the communities between those who advocate an ecstatic spirituality rooted in the memory of a thaumaturgical Paul and the author, who appeals to Pauline tradition and sees Paul as primarily a great teacher.

Following a critical examination of the history of the disputation of the authenticity of II Thessalonians (Chapters 1 and 2), Chapter 3 examines the life and epistle of the earliest external witness, Polycarp, to show that the terminus ad quem of II Thessalonians is about A.D.90. Chapter 4 demonstrates that 'tradition' (II Thess. 2:15; 3:6) is not a post-Pauline development but a characteristic of the undisputed letters of Paul. By examining the terminology of tradition in the New Testament and Apostolic Fathers, and by a fresh identification the traditions in I Corinthians, I Thessalonians, and II Thessalonians, it is shown that II Thessalonians displays the same form, terminology, function and volume of tradition as are found in the undisputed letters of Paul. Chapter 5 shows that the doctrinal content of the traditions, eschatology and imitation, is Pauline. The eschatology does not present a theology of delay, but rather the Thessalonians can know that the day of the Lord has not arrived because the Lord Jesus has not yet returned to gather his people (the katechon) and defeat Satan ('the lawless one'). Nor does the letter show a post-Pauline exaltation of the apostle, for the exemplary behaviour of the missionaries is shown to be part of Paul's regular evangelistic practice. The christology and soteriology of the letter are seen to be entirely consistent with Paul's teaching. Chapter 6, a literary analysis with particular reference to the traditions in II Thessalonians, shows that II Thessalonians is an actual letter and not literarily dependent on I Thessalonians. The style of the non-tradition portions of the letter is shown to be characteristically Pauline. Thus the external attestation, the use of tradition, the theology and the literary style all show II Thessalonians to be an authentic letter from Paul.

The present tendency in study of the Gospel source 'Q' is to assume that it is a document composed in several stages which reflect the varying theological biases of a developing community. Accordingly Q has its own idiosyncratic view of Jesus and his message which differs to such a significant extent from Mark that it can be dubbed 'heretical'. In a fresh examination of the evidence, the thesis challenges this 'critical orthodoxy' and demonstrates that Q stands in close harmony with Mark and is essentially based on the teaching of the historical Jesus. The thesis shows that many characteristic themes of Q (wisdom, prophecy, the Son of Man) are present equally and in similar ways in Mark. The primary theme of both Q and Mark, the Kingdom of God, is examined in detail and seen to be treated in ways that are fully compatible. The undeniable differences in content and emphasis between Q and Mark are minor in regard to the overall harmony between the two sources. The juxtaposition of the categories of wisdom, prophecy, apocalyptic and eschatology in Q is shown to have a historical precedent in the Book of Daniel, which contains the same agglomeration of ideas and which almost certainly influenced Jesus. This opens up the way to claiming that these themes in Q have their origin in a combination of ideas taught by Jesus, and that therefore the hypothesis of successive layers of Q redaction is redundant. The thesis further brings to light several fresh areas of agreement between Q and Mark and offers new insights into the early church's understanding of the mission of Jesus.

Each generation la called to re-examine the Church's Proclamation in the light of the Biblical record. This study is an attempt to investigate one phase of the Christian Gospel, its character of newness as presented in the New Testament. Such an investigation has peculiar relevance today in view of the attempt of Rudolf Bultmann to de-mythologize the New Testament message and to interpret it in a philosophical framework more acceptable to modern man. While this study is not primarily aimed at supporting or challenging Bultmann's position, its conclusions are presented by way of a brief critique of his demythologized Gospel.

This thesis represents an attempt to identify the ultimate authority by which, or by whom, we are to be guided in making moral, decisions. It tries to engage this question: Who has the right to determine how man, socially and individually, should behave Following an introductory chapter, we present a description of the foundation, nature, and task of the discipline known as Christian social ethics. In the third chapter, after noting some of the contemporary attitudes regarding authority, we look at the nature of Jesus' moral authority. In the next two chapters we discuss the authority of conscience in terms of its traditional, critical and Creative roles, and then ask whether the Christian understanding of the gift of Holy Spirit is relevant to our present confusion concerning authority. We suggest that the least misleading and most promising Name for our ultimate Authority in Christian ethics is Holy Spirit. That is to say, Christians are free to consider all authorities in making ethical decisions: such guides to conscience as reason, law and love are authoritative for us as they are interpreted in the Spirit of Jesus to whom we are responsible as the ultimate Authority in social ethics as in all of life and who is living and leading, present and personal, powerful and patient, compassionate and holy, Spirit.